By Mark W. Christy, PhD
Among many Southern Baptists, a sort of popular theology has taken root which persists in affirming a salvific role for what is known as an autonomous/libertarian free will. Whereas classical Arminianism affirms the bondage of the will due to sin and the role of prevenient (coming before) grace in a person’s heart (their inner person including mind, will, desires, and emotions), this view supports a more semi-Pelagian view of will whereby a person can, in their own power apart from the Holy Spirit, respond savingly to the gospel. Regardless of this difference, both views are commonly found among Baptists who support the idea that Jesus died for all in such a way that His death covered the sins of all people and therefore all people need only to respond in repentance and faith. It is at this point that both views begin the journey toward universalism.
Since these positions contend that Christ’s death atones for the sins of all people, both must posit all people as no longer being under the curse of the law. Given this, none of their sins could be brought under condemnation of the Law because Jesus has fulfilled the Law on their behalf. As Paul writes in Galatians 3:13, “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us.”[i] Here, Paul is addressing Christians (see endnote) because he discusses the indwelling of Holy Spirit in v.14, but if Paul’s meaning is expanded to incorporate all peoples, then one could rightly conclude that all are redeemed.[ii]
Besides freeing all people from the curse of the law together with its condemnation, these views completely eliminate the personal nature of the atonement. Specifically, they maintain that Jesus died so that all people might choose to savingly respond to the gospel, but He did not personally die for anyone in particular. Affirming the impersonal nature of Christ’s atonement, one may find it odd that these views still maintain the need for a personal response. This reality becomes even more apparent when one considers that God’s love for people, according to these views, was made available through Christ but not made complete in Christ on the behalf of anyone. Such love, despite the display on the cross, remains impersonal and fits well into a universalistic understanding of salvation where ultimately no response is necessary.
In response, adherents to Arminianism and Libertarianism attempt to prevent themselves from coming under the charge of universalism by positing unbelief (i.e., not responding to the gospel in faith) as the one sin that leads to condemnation. This condemnation, however, may prove elusive because they themselves have already declared that Jesus died for the sins of all people. One wonders how they can arbitrarily select one sin out of many unless their only goal is to maintain their theological system irrespective of sound biblical exegesis. Since there seems to be no justification for excluding unbelief from their clear teaching on the universal atonement of Christ’s death, then it would seem that the next step may indeed be universalism.
Within this discussion on whether or not unbelief is the only condemnable sin, another major conundrum arises for the proponents of Arminianism and Libertarianism. To put it directly, how can this view address the eternal reality of those who die without ever responding one way or another to the gospel. One could easily argue, using these views, that such people died with their sins covered and never committed the one sin that could send them to hell. Such an argument certainly ends in a universalistic outlook for those who have not heard.[iii] In conclusion, those who hold to Arminianism and Libertarianism have announced a universal atonement even while they arbitrarily try to restrain it by postulating a free will response of faith to the gospel. Though advocating the need for a personal response, they fail to show the gospel message of the atoning sacrifice to be a personal offer to anyone. Despite their efforts to label a non-response as a sin, it seems that their efforts end up bringing their position on the atonement back under examination. Finally, their non-personal gospel which labels non-responsiveness as the only condemnable sin leads to universalistic salvation for anyone who never hears the gospel and potentially everyone since Christ’s death is said to have been for all sins.
[i]All Scripture references are taken from NASB1995.
[ii]Paul discusses the indwelling of Holy Spirit in Galatians 3:14 for those mentioned in v.13. Further evidence is found in Galatians 1:2 where Paul says that his epistle is being written to the “churches of Galatia”.
[iii]Proponents of Arminianism and Libertarian among Baptists frequently attack Calvinism because they feel it undermines the call to mission. This present discussion, however, demonstrates that they themselves are open to this charge.