God Loves… Himself

Last time we looked at a quote from a sermon on Regeneration from John 1:12-13 by a man named Asahel Nettleton. Prior to his conversion he was deeply convicted of his sin and “diligently applied himself to the means of grace, often praying for hours. After ten months of spiritual agony, God miraculously changed his heart.” He was thoroughly Reformed in his theology and evangelism. He also greatly opposed Charles Finney and the new ways of evangelism that he brought into the church. I will continue on with another quote from Nettleton:

The fundamental truth of the Pelagian and Arminian scheme, (for they are in substance the same) are these:
(1). That God not only proclaims the offers of grace and salvation to all men alike, but that the Holy Spirit is equally and sufficiently distributed to all men to insure their salvation, provided they duly improve the benefits bestowed upon them.
(2). That the precepts and promises of the gospel are not only good and desirable in themselves, but so suited to the natural reason and interests of mankind, that they will of course be inclined to receive them, unless overpowered by prejudice, and an habitual course of sin.
(3). That the consideration of the threatenings and promises of the gospel is sufficient to remove these prejudices and reform that course.
(4). That those who thus seriously reflect and amend their lives have the promise of the Holy Spirit, and are entitled to the benefits of the new covenant.

Here is the heart of what Nettleton saw as so dangerous to evangelism in his time and he deemed it as rooted in principles that were Pelagian in principle. We must not miss this if we are going to see the dangerous way of evangelism being practiced in our day. If you look at the four points given by Nettleton above, you might not think of these things as being all that dangerous or bad. After all, it might be said, if they are preaching Christ and His cross they are not far from being wrong. That is one point that needs to be brought out. One can teach and preach an orthodox understanding of the Person of Christ and, to a degree, His work on the cross and still preach a false Gospel. In one sense this is the genius of Nettleton in the way he puts it. The outward information for the most part might actually be the same between certain forms of Pelagianism and orthodoxy. Nettleton is getting at how the information is given, which determines what is trusted in by the sinner. In fact, he says that “the very life and soul of the gospel truth is taken away.” Why would he say that? Let me give some more of the thoughts of Nettleton in order to make the matter clear:

Under this specious statement of fundamental principles which is apt to strike an inconsiderate mind in a favorable manner, the very life and soul of gospel truth is taken away. On this scheme, all men are regenerated alike, originally; all having an equal measure of the Spirit, and the difference between one man and another is to be ascribed wholly to himself; to the improvement he has made of the blessings vouchsafed. And regeneration is a reformation of life, induced by moral persuasions, or commenced in consequence of the understanding being enlightened and the affections being moved by divine truth alone. If you ask, how does salvation proceed from divine grace on this plan, the answer is that all the means of improvement are bestowed by God and herein is the grace.

The whole scheme is simply this, God gives faculties and grace to all, and to all alike and thus furnished, they work out their own salvation, being persuaded to do this by the promises and threatenings of the gospel. The dreadful mischief which this extensive and popular scheme has caused spring from its plausibility-from such an appearance of truth, mixed with so many great and dangerous errors.

In the next BLOG we will continue in Nettleton’s thinking. It is much the same as has been presented in earlier BLOGS as it has to do with the application of salvation to the sinner. But Nettleton puts it in a different way and applies it to regeneration. If you have eyes to see and have been looking around in our day, you will quickly see that what Nettleton was saying is happening in our day. Regeneration is not seen in the same way as it used to be.

In 1783 a man named Asahel Nettleton was born in Connecticut. He was deeply convicted of his sin and “diligently applied himself to the means of grace, often praying for hours. After ten months of spiritual agony, God miraculously changed his heart.” Thus was the work of God in the soul of a man greatly used by God from when he began his ministry as an itinerant evangelist in 1812 until he died in 1844. He was Reformed in theology and in his practice of evangelism which he learned from Scripture and the writings of Jonathan Edwards and the Puritans. As such, he opposed with all of his might the new measures brought in by Charles Finney. It has been commented that Nettleton “spoke almost prophetically about the consequences of churches adopting these measures.” Interestingly enough, many of those measures are practiced today and are at the root of turning from the sober pursuit of God to many of the ways that people use to fill buildings in the name of Christ. He believed and practiced the accepted practice of evangelism by Reformed people in his day. The following quote is from his sermon on Regeneration from John 1:12-13:

“Pelagius in the 4th century first invented and advocated a scheme of regeneration which, with a few modifications, sometimes in the phraseology, and sometimes by partial additions or diminutions, has been the scheme of the great body of all sectaries, who have dissented from orthodox evangelical sentiments.-Authors have appeared in different periods and in various countries, who have brought forward this specious scheme of the new birth, as principally illustrated, or defined by themselves; and many whose reading is superficial have been deceived into this supposition. The fact is, that almost the whole system of vague and inadequate notions on this great subject is only the heresy of Pelagius, so universally condemned by the ancient Church, which has now been newly dressed up, after the modern fashion, to secure a better reception.”

We must carefully note the claims that Nettleton is making (interestingly enough) in his sermon. He sets out that the scheme of regeneration set out by Pelagius was in fact practically the same scheme set out by all those over the centuries, though they may have differed with some additions and diminutions, who differed from the Reformed or orthodox view. It is necessary to remember the background of Nettleton on this. He opposed the theology and evangelistic measures of Charles Finney who was his contemporary. In effect, then, he is saying that Finney was a Pelagian in one way or another. This charge would then come to our day and show us that Nettleton would teach that anyone who evangelized like Finney should also be seen as guilty of the heresy of Pelagius. In Nettleton’s time, men took their theology and evangelism seriously. The things that we shrug off as differences today were thought of as heresy by him and others in his day. He thought that the heresy of Pelagius was simply given a new dress after the modern fashion to secure a better reception. His words should warn us today about the same thing. Could it be that many in our day have swallowed down the poison of Pelagius simply because it is in a different dress that makes it look modern and more palatable? Could it be that we no longer think of Pelagianism as really all that bad and so we don’t see it dressed up as Arminianism and even in some Reformed circles?

If we give this but a few moments thought, and that without naming names, we can see where some of these things are in the modern day. We see people believing that infants and adults are saved in some way as a result of baptism or that baptism is applied because a child being the child of a believer must also be a believer. What has happened to the demand of Christ that a person must be born from above in this case? The sovereign work of the Holy Spirit has been set aside for a ritual or a rite that cannot change the hearts of sinners. What is the theology that can tell a sinner to come forward at the end of a service and pray to receive Christ? They believe that salvation is contingent upon what they do rather than the regenerating work of the Holy Spirit in applying what Christ has earned for His people. What is the theology that drives one to tell people that if they make a commitment to Christ and make a moral reformation of some sort that they are saved? What is the consistent theology of the practice of getting people to raise their hands or sign a card? What is the theology that drives a person to entertain people enough to get them to a building they call a church? What is the theology that drives people to set aside sound theology and just get people to meet together? All of those things have something in common at the root and it is Pelagianism in one form or another. We must be very careful in this as well, as Pelagianism can also be dressed in a Reformed cloak, which makes it doubly dangerous. Just because one accepts a creed intellectually does not mean that it is the creed of that person’s heart. We must all check our own hearts in this.

I will continue with several quotes from a sermon of Ebenezer Pemberton. Notice in these quotes that He is striving to convince people to be convicted of sin and not just a little conviction, but enough conviction to drive them out of themselves and to give up on anything that they can possible do. He thinks of the conviction of sin as that which drives a person to utter despair of self and of utter despair of any help in self and so that they will fall on their faces in utter helplessness before the throne of a sovereign God and ask for grace without any expectation of receiving if based on anything within themselves. His concept of conviction is again typical of the Puritans and of the early Americans, but is far removed from what we see today in Reformed circles. The distinctive differences between his views and that of modern Arminians and Calvinists is that he believed that men were totally depraved and totally in the hands of a sovereign God who shows grace as He pleases or not. His view was the Reformed view from Luther until Finney. While Reformed people today may blast Finney, they are still using his methods which were developed from a bankrupt theology. Pemberton gives us the true Reformed view.

This is that conviction which is preparatory to conversion, by which the sinner is disposed to give a joyful entertainment to the glad tidings of salvation. Here I wish to show the necessity and importance of this conviction. This conviction is necessary so that the sinner may be awakened out of a state of sin and security, and brought to a serious concern for his eternal welfare….This is that melancholy state of security which has invaded a sinful world and, till they are awakened out of it, it is impossible that they should ever obtain salvation. Their eyes must be opened to see their misery; their hearts must be affected with a sense of their danger before ever they will be persuaded to flee from the wrath to come, and in good earnest engaged to pursue their future welfare.

It is therefore indispensably requisite that there be a separation made between sin and the soul before any man will accept Christ the Savior or submit to the unalterable terms of mercy. To this end God opens the eyes of His people to see the deadly malignity of sin so that they may detest and abhor it…Now there is a destructive principle of pride in the hearts of unhumbled sinners who oppose these self-denying terms. They imagine that there are so many good dispositions in their souls, so many amiable virtues in their lives and conversations, that it would be unjustifiable severity in God to everlastingly cast them off and appoint them their portion with devils and damned ghosts…And while men entertain this fond opinion of their own sufficiency, and vainly imagine that they have anything of their own to entitle them to the divine favor and acceptance, they never truly humble themselves before God and resign themselves as prisoners of his justice. Therefore, the Most High God, who from eternity designed to save a remnant of the fallen race of men and make them the everlasting monuments of His victorious grace, sends His Spirit into the hearts of His elect to convince them not only of their sin and misery, but also of their inability to help and deliver themselves. He destroys the presumptuous opinion of their own strength and power, levels with the dust the carnal confidence in which they formerly trusted, and shows them that nothing which they can do will appease the wrath of an offended Deity or procure them a title to His favor…And when they are thus emptied of themselves, they will apply to the overflowing Fountain of benignity and goodness.

This shows why the preaching of the gospel is so generally unsuccessful, and so few in good earnest seek after eternal salvation…Multitudes under the gospel are so fond of carnal ease and pleasure that they delight to be flattered in their sins, and say to the seers, “See not,” and to the prophets, “Prophesy not unto us right things; speak unto us smooth things, and prophesy deceits.”…Nevertheless, the foundation of the gospel stands sure; the doctrines of deep and sincere conviction for sin, of man’s utter impotence to save and deliver himself, and the absolute necessity of almighty and unmerited grace to the conversion of a sinner will remain unalterable truths.

Pemberton sets out the typical Puritan view. The sinner must be stripped of any hope and confidence in self and the abilities of self in order to be saved. Until the sinner is stripped of all hope and trust in his own ability, the sinner is not ready for God to work grace in him. Sinners do not want to be stripped of all hope in self because of their pride and self-sufficiency. But how can a sinner look to God for grace alone to be saved if the sinner is still looking to his own ability or worth even a little? The Arminian method is to tell the sinner to look to himself in order to come up with the faith or the decision to be saved. This is devastating to the Gospel of grace alone where the sinner must not look to self for anything at all. Until the sinner is stripped of all of his or her ability, strength and power, there is no hope for the sinner. Until the sinner is stripped of his own worth, he cannot look to grace alone. Until the sinner is stripped of all of his own power, he cannot look to the power of God alone. Until a sinner is stripped of his own sufficiency, he cannot trust in the sufficiency of God alone. Until a sinner despairs of self, the sinner will never hope in Christ alone. These things are self-evident. Until the sinner is turned and becomes like a child, that sinner will never enter the kingdom of heaven (Matthew 18:3).

The Arminian method of evangelism is completely opposite of the Puritan and older Reformed practices. The problem, however, is that the modern people who are Reformed in profession are practicing evangelism just like the Arminians. Is the Gospel that was preached by Luther, Charnock, Alleine, Edwards and Pemberton the same Gospel that is being preached today? Not if one looks at the promises of the Gospel in terms of the application of it by the Spirit rather than just a decision or choice to be made. The outward message of Christ may have close resemblances; the rest does not. The inward breaking of the sinner by grace to make room for the application of grace is the missing part of the Gospel today. The sinner is left to his own devices rather than instructed to forsake all hope in himself. This is to leave the power of salvation in the hands of unbroken sinners rather than leaving sinners in the hands of a sovereign grace as the older Reformed theologians did. The difference is truly staggering.

In this BLOG I will give several quotes from Ebenezer Pemberton. He was a pastor from 1727 to 1777 (the latter being the year of his death) in a few churches in the Boston area. He is again representative of what Reformed evangelism and preaching look like. Notice the things that he does in calling to sinners and what he does not do. He does not leave salvation in their hands and up to the choices of their wills.

Third, to conclude, cry mightily unto God to enable you to come to Christ by faith, and receive Him with your whole heart. Faith is the gift of God; no man can come to Christ except the Father draws him. Renounce therefore all confidence in yourselves; depend entirely upon almighty grace to produce within you the work of faith with power; and never cease your importunate supplications till all your difficulties are removed, till your prejudices are conquered, and you are enabled to open the everlasting doors to your souls to receive and entertain the King of Glory, to whom be all honor, blessing, and praise forever and ever, Amen.

The first work of the Spirit is to convince men of their sins, whereby they have offended the eternal Majesty of heaven; to alarm their guilty fears by a discovery of their infinite danger…that the sentence of the law is pronounced against them, and there is but a step between them and eternal death; that they are in subjection to the tyranny of sin and Satan, and have no strength or power to knock off their captive-chains…When they find that they are utterly unable to help themselves, and that it exceeds the power of the whole creation to deliver them from so deplorable a ruin-then their hearts will be filled with distressing fears and they will anxiously inquire, “What shall I do to be saved?”

I now proceed to show that this is a work of almighty grace and is performed in the day of God’s power. Sinners will never come to Christ if left to follow their own inclinations and desires. The human nature was universally depraved by the first apostasy so that, while in an unregenerate state, we are insufficient for any good thing and are entirely destitute of spiritual strength…To come to Christ is to deny ourselves under every form and to renounce all our carnal confidence. To fly to the righteousness and atonement of our great Redeemer for justification and life requires a humble acknowledgement of our inability to help ourselves, and an entire dependence jupon the victorious power of His grace to mortify our corruptions and subdue our rebellious inclinations, to sanctify and save our souls. This is so contrary to the pride of man, so disagreeable to the appetites of flesh and blood, that degenerate nature will forever cry out. “These are hard sayings, and who can hear them?”

But this conviction further implies an utter despair of any deliverance in themselves from those dark and disconsolate circumstances. This aggravates the misery of the sinner, and gives the most bitter accent to their grief and sorrows. In the days of their security they imagined that they could at any time repent of their sins, and by a few importunate addresses for mercy secure a title to the divine favor; but they are now convinced that that they have offended an infinite God and stand exposed to the demands of inflexible justice….Thus they find that they are lost in themselves; and it is beyond the power of the whole creation to deliver them. They have not to flee to but that God whom by their iniquities they have so grievously offended; nothing to depend upon but unmerited mercy, which they have times without number forfeited.

Surely the difference between this approach and the modern approach can be seen. There were no pleas to the free-will and no pleas to make a decision to come to Christ on the people’s own power. Instead what we see is a driving home to the conscience that people must be broken from any hope in themselves and to recognize that they have no power or anything to come to God with. Here we see a man who was thoroughly acquainted with the depravity of man and the Gospel. He knew that for a person to come to Christ that person had to depend entirely on grace to produce faith within him. His call was not to look to themselves and to do something, but to renounce all confidence in self and what it could do. His call was to sinners to call upon God and ask Him for grace in order to come to Him. This was the way that the Puritans called people to Christ and this was the way men like Jonathan Edwards did it. They saw Arminian ways as dangerous to the Gospel and opposed them vehemently.

The doctrine of free-will in terms of being able to receive Christ at any point the will decides to make a choice has some insidious ramifications. The sinner thinks that since it is all up to him, that he can go on in his sin and simply make a choice when he is too old to have fun or when he is ready to die. This helps the sinner go on in his sin and flatters himself with the lie that God is simply waiting on him to make a choice and be saved. But the other ramification is that many people will think that because they have made a choice then they are necessarily converted. I have seen several people like this. They will be confronted with Scripture and see what it says about them, but they go back and say that they asked Jesus to come in or that they made their choice in the past. Either way the people are trusting in themselves to apply salvation and not seeing the Gospel that is all of grace.

Jonathan Edwards dealt with the vain self-flatteries of sinners in a sermon that he preached in New England. William Nichols, in his book of some sermons of Edwards (Seeking God), in an introduction sets out some of the main points of this sermon of Edwards (The Vain Self-Flatteries of the Sinner) in a helpful way. I will try to apply this to the teaching of free-will.

Several of the ways which Edwards believes men flatter themselves are,

1. That they “lead moral and orderly lives and therefore they shall not be damned.” This is very common. It is a common tendency of men to compare themselves with others who are far worse.
2. “Some flatter themselves that death is a great way off.” Edwards makes a profound statement that which should be pondered by any and all who do evangelism. “Men will believe that things will be as they choose to have them.”
3. “Some sinners flatter themselves that they are already converted.” This is one of the greatest difficulties we face in the church today. Arthur W. Pink believed that over 90% of the professions of faith in his day were spurious and it is doubtful things have improved much since then.

We can see how this is exasperated by the teaching of free-will. Men think that they have made the decision for Christ and see proof of that by leading moral and orderly lives. The teaching of free-will exasperates the issue of men flattering themselves in thinking that death is a long way in the future. Indeed man in his pride thinks that things will be as he chooses or wishes for them to be. But think of the ramifications of the truth of that statement. If men believe that things will be as they choose to have them, then think of the errors that free-will leads men into. If they want to believe that salvation is fully provided and all they have to do is to make a choice, then that is the way things are for them. From the Arminian perspective they will never hear of anything that will make them think any differently. So men choose to believe that if they make a choice for Christ (in some way that they choose) and lead a moral life (that they decide on what is moral and what is not) then they believe that they believe and that they shall not be damned. Others simply choose to believe that they will have plenty of time and so since their beliefs constitute reality for them they will always have time to repent.

Still others (as in #3) simply flatter themselves that they believe. Since they believe that all things will be as they choose to have them, if they believe that they believe then they will flatter themselves into thinking that they are converted when in fact they are not. Here we can see the intrusion of the teaching of free-will into the biblical teachings of the bondage of the will, justification by grace alone through faith alone, and then the application of redemption. It is so clear that the teaching of free-will fits with the pride of man in thinking that he is under control and the free-will teaching does leave man in control to some degree. It fits with the part of man that wants to be out of the control of a sovereign God.

What we must notice is that the teaching of man’s free-will fits in with man’s propensity to pride and self-sufficiency and self-deception. I would make the argument that the teaching of free-will is itself one of the deceptions of man that leaves man thinking that he is control of certain things and not God. It is itself a form of self-flattery that deludes man into thinking that he can control his life and death and even his own salvation. It is itself an act of rebellion against the sovereign God of this universe. Man was never created to be moral or do good works in a way apart from the power and grace of God. He was created to be an empty vessel that God would manifest Himself and His glory through. Free-will can never glorify God since He alone can do that.

As we continue thinking through the differences between Arminian theology and Calvinistic theology, we need to look at the issue of faith. Here is a huge difference between the Arminian conception and the Calvinistic one. The Arminian view is again based on free-will and so faith is an exercise of the will. If the will is truly free in this regard, then the will is self-determined and makes its choice on its own power. While that may be disputed, if it is granted that it is grace that moves the will then the person is no longer an Arminian. If a person professes Calvinism and still leaves the sinner to his own devices, at that point the person is a practical Arminian.

What we want to look at in this BLOG is the idea or concept of faith. In a general way all people know what faith is, that is, they know that to have faith is to believe and trust in the object of faith. However, that is usually thought of in more of a man-centered way. The illustrations given are that of having faith in a chair and getting in the wheelbarrow of a man going across a tightrope stretched across Niagra Falls. Yet, what we have in those illustrations is the person deciding to trust based on his own information and then either sitting down or getting in the wheelbarrow. In Scripture men and women are dead and cannot sit in a chair or get in the wheelbarrow. In Scripture a person must be made alive in order to sit down or get in the wheelbarrow.

The Arminian picture is that God has done it all and it now depends on you to make the choice. It is said, at least by some, that God has done all that He can do and it is all up to you now. The sinner is told that s/he must exercise faith and s/he will then be saved. It is true that Scripture tells us that he who believes will be saved. We are told that God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son so that whoever believes will not perish but have eternal life (John 3:16). Clearly, and without any real question, salvation comes to a person in some way through faith. However, we must be very careful at this point or we will allow or make faith out to be a human work apart from the Gospel itself.

Is true faith the free-will grabbing Christ and His benefits and applying Christ to myself? When Scripture says that salvation comes through faith, does it mean that man has a free-will to exercise that faith and so bring the benefits of the Gospel to himself by his own action? As we saw a few BLOGS ago, that is not in line with Titus 3:4-7 at all. Sinners are justified by grace alone because the Father is the source of salvation and He carried it out through the Son and applied it by the Spirit. We are again left at that same point. Is faith from the human being that which applies salvation or is faith something else?

If we look at John 1:12-13 we see something different: “But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.” In this text receiving Him and believing in Him are synonymous. Unbelief, as seen in verses 10-11, is Christ coming to His physical people and they did not receive Him. Receiving Christ, then, is to believe who He is and what He has done. These are the ones that tell us (as in verse 13) that the new birth happens to human beings because of the will of God. Arminians would agree to this, but what they cannot agree with is that the text tells us about what does not cause the new birth. The new birth is not caused by the blood of a person (physical descent), nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man. In other words, the new birth is decidedly and specifically said to happen because of the will of God and specifically not the will of man.

What then is this receiving Christ if it is not by a free-will? The human person must reach an end of the efforts and abilities of his or her own will and soul if s/he is to trust in Christ alone. Receiving Christ is to reach an end of our own ability and strength and to receive Him based on what He has done and is doing. It is to receive Christ and His promise of the Spirit. It is to trust Him to fulfill and keep His promise in me. Throwing a person on his or her own devices is not the Gospel. Presenting a message to people and telling them they must choose is not the Gospel. The Gospel is that people must be broken from their own effort and then the benefits and blessings of Christ would be applied to them by the Holy Spirit. To believe the promises of Christ is to believe that He will do it all. To believe the promises of Christ is to believe that He will apply it all through and by the Spirit. To believe the promise, therefore, is to flee from anything like the Arminian conception of free-will and to be broken from all of our abilities and powers and to receive Christ according to His grace provided and applied. Faith is never apart from the work of the Holy Spirit. When we see a person that has true faith, the Holy Spirit has already been there and worked it in the person. After all, faith unites to Christ and all faith is in Him as He is in us.

Acts 6:5 – and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit,

Acts 11:24 – for he was a good man, and full of the Holy Spirit and of faith.

Galatians 3:14 – in order that in Christ Jesus the blessing of Abraham might come to the Gentiles, so that we would receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

Galatians 5:5 – For we through the Spirit, by faith, are waiting for the hope of righteousness.

aIn previous BLOGs we looked at the teaching of the Trinity in order to show that the Gospel is fully Trinitarian and must be applied by grace in order to be fully of grace. I quoted George Smeaton regarding the Trinity and will do so again: “And as to the divine works, the Father is the source FROM WHICH every operation emanates (ex ou), the Son is the medium THROUGH WHICH (di ou) it is performed, and the Holy Ghost is the EXECUTIVE BY WHICH (en wi) it is carried into effect.”

Arminian teaching is not, at its best and in the kindest way I can say it, a full Gospel. If a person had perfect theology (the Reformed too) and presented a theologically perfect message of what Christ had done but left the person to his or her own devices, that person would not have presented the whole Gospel message (and so not truly perfect). Not only would that be true, but the person presenting the message would not have told all that Christ had done. Christ did not just provide enough to save sinners as long as they finished the work themselves, but His work was enough to guarantee the application of His merits to sinners by the work of the Holy Spirit. Christ purchased the Holy Spirit for His people and the Spirit will be applied to them.

We must not leave it in the hands of sinners to bring themselves to Christ as that is not a full Gospel at all. John 6:44-45 tells us the reality of this: “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up on the last day. 45 “It is written in the prophets, ‘AND THEY SHALL ALL BE TAUGHT OF GOD.’ Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father, comes to Me.” Here is the reality. No one (in the text “can”) has the ability to come to God unless the Father draws him. But, one might argue, the Father draws all men and it is up to the person to come that last step. Apart from that not being found anywhere in Scripture, let us look at the text before us. The text did not make that distinction about degrees of ability or the last step being in the power of the human will. It simply says that no one can (word of ability) come to Christ unless the Father draws that person. The text then goes on to show in part how that is done. Those who have heard (inner call) and learned from the Father will come to Christ and all the way to Christ. Who is it that teaches people inwardly? That is the Spirit.

Now let us go back and imagine what it means to call people to Christ. The Arminian method, though used by many that call themselves Reformed, is to tell people the message of Christ and then tell the person that s/he needs to believe. But notice that by believe it is usually thought of as a cognitive belief or to pray a prayer. But Scripture tells us that a person must be born again, that a person must repent, a person must love God and a person must be humbled and broken to do those things. But we must always remember that the sinner is dead in sins and trespasses and hates God. The Arminian message is really telling the person to go against his or her nature of enmity with God and just decide to love Him. In other words, it is a version of crass works no matter the way it is given and no matter the terminology of it. I John 4:7-10 and then 11-21 give us a different picture. No one loves God or anyone else until that person is born of God and knows Him. No one can love God until the wrath of God is removed from that person and the love of God is living in that person. It is God giving love that draws us to Christ.

We know from Romans 5:5-8 that the love of God is given to a person through the Holy Spirit. We know from Ephesians 3:16-20 that our inner man must be strengthened by the Spirit in order that we may have Christ dwell in us and then being grounded in love we can be filled to the fullness of God. The demands of the Gospel are so high that no one can meet them in his or her own power. This is the work of the Spirit and His alone. The Arminian view of the Gospel (practiced by many professing Reformed people too) is that man must do something in his own power to be saved. Again, the very best we can say is that is reducing the Gospel and reducing the demands of the Gospel. The sinner is not to be left with anything to do in order to be saved, but is to seek the Lord alone who can save him or her. The sinner must be taught that s/he can do nothing to save him or herself. Instead, the sinner must be taught that s/he must be humbled from the acts of the will and from any power or ability to save self and look to His grace alone. When we tell people what they must do, we must never tell them that they have the ability to do it or we will not have taught them the Gospel. The New Covenant is that God will be in them and that God will work in them all that is needed. What the sinner must do is to be broken from any hope or ability in him or herself and even that cannot come from his own strivings. In order to trust in Christ alone one must leave the workings to the Holy Spirit who was purchased by Christ. True faith in the triune God will only come when a person has no trust in self or its abilities. That is one reason why the Arminian message is so opposed to the true Gospel.