Baylor University

George W. Truett Seminary

Introduction to Christian Theology THEO 7345
Eli Gutierrez Briseño

The Salvation Debate

All evangelical Christians agree that we are saved by grace through faith. Also, they agree that a

personal conversion experience is necessary for salvation. However, there is not a complete

agreement on the details of this salvation. Who is saved and who is not? How does God’s grace

work? What is the role of humans in salvation? Two main views have been developed within the

evangelical theology to answer these and other questions about salvation. The Calvinist view,

defined by the five points of the acronym TULIP. And the Arminian view, developed by Jacob

Arminius against the theology of John Calvin. Both views have roots in previous Christian

theologians, and both views claim to be supported by the Scripture. In this essay, I will support the

Arminian view.

The Calvinist view maintains that since the fall all humans are incapable to respond to God

positively (Total depravity). We are “dead in sin” (Ephesians 2:1, 5). Which means, absolutely

unable to obey God. Therefore, salvation must be exclusively God’s work. He saves those who he

chooses due to his own sovereign will and not in accordance with their works (Unconditional

election). This election was made before the ages began (2 Tim 1:9). Thus, while the death of

Christ is sufficient for all the sins of the world it was intended only to save those whom God

predestined to be saved (Limited atonement). Since humans are totally depraved they will always

reject God, unless he changes their hearts. God is the one that regenerates the hearts of the elect

and makes them possible to believe (Irresistible grace). Therefore, all the elect will prevail saved
until the end (Perseverance of the saints). For Calvinists, this is the only way to believe that

salvation is by grace alone. Otherwise, the ultimate reason for a person’s salvation would not be

God's work.

In my opinion, the Calvinist view has several problems. The most serious problem of this

view is that it stands against the biblical teaching that God is love and that he loves the world. The

idea that God could save the whole world but he chooses not to do it is simply contrary to the idea

that he is love and just. If anyone had the cure for a deadly disease, and he had enough for many

but he chooses to save only some of them, it would be a monstrous act, even if none of them

deserves it. The Bible teaches that the essential attribute of God is love. It is not only that he loves

but that he is love (1 John 4:8, 16). Nevertheless, Calvinists affirm (although they may not

recognize it), against Scripture, that God does not love the world (John 3:16), that he shows

partiality (Romans 2:11), that he does not desire all people to be saved (1 Timothy 2:3-4; Titus

2:11), and that he does not want that the wicked reach repentance (Ezekiel 33:11; 2 Peter 3:9).

I find that the Calvinist view misinterprets the Scripture. I cannot address all the passages

that they use to support their arguments. Suffice it to say that the Calvinist view is rooted on a

partial reading of the Scripture. While some passages of the Bible seem to affirm the ideas held by

Calvinists, they ignore completely the overwhelming scriptural evidence that stands against their

points. They affirm the sovereignty of God and the salvation by grace alone, which truly are

biblical teachings. Nevertheless, they ignore the love of God without partiality, the death of Jesus

for the sins of all the world, and the invitation to everyone to accept his grace. As I will show,

these are biblical teachings as well.

The Arminian view maintains that the grace of God is offered to everyone and that humans

are free to accept or reject such grace. Defenders of this view find in the Scripture that God loves
the whole world, and that he does not show his love partially (Deuteronomy 10:17-19; 2 Chronicles

19:7; Job 34:19; Acts 10:34; John 3:16; Romans 2:11; Galatians 2:6; Ephesians 6:9; 1 Peter 1:17).

Moreover, the Scripture states clearly that God wants everyone to be saved (Ezekiel 18:23,32;

3311; 1 Timothy 2:4; 2 Peter 3:9), and that he died for all the world (John 3:16; Hebrews 2:9; 1

John 2:2). Furthermore, throughout the Scripture God calls people to make decisions, which would

be nonsense if they are not free to take them. Arminians argue that while humans are unable to

respond to God, his grace works in every heart to produce the ability to believe in him. This work

of the Holy Spirit is called prevenient grace. Every human being accepts or rejects the grace of

God to believe in him, but even such faith is a gift from him.

The Arminian view agrees with the Calvinist view that God is sovereign and that salvation

is by grace through faith. Salvation is God’s work, and all the credit is for him. However, the

Arminian view also considers in its model of salvation the love of God. Which is a biblical teaching

as important as his sovereignty. The objection that in the Arminian view we get credit four our

salvation is simply nonsense. It is true that salvation is a gift and that we do nothing to earn it.

However, it is also true that gifts may be accepted or rejected. In no way, the fact of accepting a

gift gives credit to the recipient. The Bible is clear about what humans must do in order to be

saved, they must believe (e.g. Mark 16:16; John 3:15, 18; Act 16:31; Romans 10:9). Nevertheless,

it is also clear that believing is not a work of which you can boast (Romans 4:5). Moreover, it is

untrue that the Arminian view rejects the doctrine of election. First, God foreknows who are going

to accept his grace. And second, all the things that he predestined for his elect apply to those who

believe in him. In that sense, he predestined his elect. The Arminian view is consistent with the

love of God. He loves us and he wants that we love him too. But in the Calvinist view, believers
love God only because of his irresistible grace. They had no choice. I would say that a love that is

not free is not true love.

I support the Arminian view because it is consistent with the Scripture. The gospel is the

good news that God is near and available (Isaiah 55:6). But Calvinism says to most of human

beings “God does not want to save you”. The gospel is a gracious invitation to all who are heavy

laden (Matthew 11:28). But Calvinism says to the non-elect “you cannot and you will not have

rest”. The gospel proclaims that God wants the wicked to repent and that he is willing to forgive

(Micah 7:18). But Calvinism says to the sinners “remain in your sin because you have no choice”.

That is why I support the Arminian view, because it embraces both sides of the doctrine of

Salvation. On one hand, God is sovereign and salvation is by grace alone. And on the other hand,

God is love and he wants everyone to be saved. He died for making salvation possible and works

on every heart to let them accept his grace. But he has decided, in his sovereignty, not to oblige

anyone because true love is free.