# Arminianism and Works



## steven-nemes (Mar 26, 2009)

If the Arminian asserts that man has to _will_ to trust in Jesus Christ for the atonement of his sins, is he not assert that man has to _do_ something? It seems his willing on his own to have faith (which is a topic altogether strange, but that is for another debate) means his _doing something on his own_. If faith comes and is given to us by God, then truly we haven't done a thing at all! But if we will our faith, it is us doing a thing on our own: namely, believing.

Thoughts? Care to expand on it?


----------



## MMasztal (Mar 26, 2009)

I don't really understand your question. Try parsing your terms a bit more. 

"that man has to _will _to trust"... Do you mean that man _has _the will to trust..


----------



## Skyler (Mar 26, 2009)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but as I see it the Arminian view of faith is the same as the Calvinist view with the exception that they deny the completeness of man's fallen nature and therefore his inability to exercise saving faith. The Calvinist, on the other hand, recognizes this and that God must regenerate a person before he will do anything to move towards God--including exercising faith.

I could be wrong, I haven't really studied this area, but that's the impression I've gotten.


----------



## steven-nemes (Mar 26, 2009)

I will return to this question I suppose another time.

Basically my question was regarding whether or not leaving it up to the individual person to believe _of his own will_ is leaving him to _work for salvation_.


----------



## Skyler (Mar 26, 2009)

steven-nemes said:


> I will return to this question I suppose another time.
> 
> Basically my question was regarding whether or not leaving it up to the individual person to believe _of his own will_ is leaving him to _work for salvation_.



I don't think so. Please, correct me if I'm wrong, but the impression I get from reading Paul is that faith is not a work; it is something we do, but only through the power and grace of God.

As I said, I could be wrong, so feel free to correct me.

edit: And if the prevenient grace of Wesley and Tozer is taken into account, technically(though not biblically) the Arminian is claiming that it's through the grace of God, at least to some extent.


----------



## Jon 316 (Mar 26, 2009)

steven-nemes said:


> I will return to this question I suppose another time.
> 
> Basically my question was regarding whether or not leaving it up to the individual person to believe _of his own will_ is leaving him to _work for salvation_.



I would say so. This, to me, seems to become apparent in the arminian understanding of foreknowledge. In the arminian school of thought, God looks into teh future and sees who will trust in Him. Therefore the elect are those whom God saved because of their faith in him. In calvinism God looks into the future and chooses to impart saving faith to those who he chooses according to His own good pleasure and purpose. 

In the arminian school of thought God is responding to something in the person who believes. In this sense faith becomes a 'work.' That is, people are saved by some merit of their own, in this case faith. The difference in Calvinism is that it is Christ alone. Christ not only makes salvation possible, he secures it. There is nothing in us that could warrant his favour. If I can believe of my own free will, and if his favour is based upon my choosing, then there is something in my that I am contributing to salvation. Faith is a work and not a gift.


----------



## cih1355 (Mar 26, 2009)

> In this sense faith becomes a 'work.' That is, people are saved by some merit of their own, in this case faith. The difference in Calvinism is that it is Christ alone. Christ not only makes salvation possible, he secures it. There is nothing in us that could warrant his favour. If I can believe of my own free will, and if his favour is based upon my choosing, then there is something in my that I am contributing to salvation. Faith is a work and not a gift.



This is the logical outcome of their beliefs. There are Arminians who say that faith is not a work and that faith does not contribute anything to their justification. They say that there is nothing in them that merits salvation. When Arminians say this they are being logically inconsistent with their beliefs.


----------



## Prufrock (Mar 26, 2009)

To the historic Arminian, faith plays a different role in justification than in the Reformed system; for the Arminian, "faith or the act of believing is the cause of our justification so that there is no other immediate and formal righteousness by which we are just before God than our faith" (from Turretin); whereas for the Reformed, faith is but the instrument which apprehends Christ's righteousness.


----------



## KMK (Mar 26, 2009)

Prufrock said:


> To the historic Arminian, faith plays a different role in justification than in the Reformed system; for the Arminian, "faith or the act of believing is the cause of our justification so that there is no other immediate and formal righteousness by which we are just before God than our faith" (from Turretin); whereas for the Reformed, faith is but the instrument which apprehends Christ's righteousness.





> LBC 14:1 The grace of faith, whereby the elect are enabled to believe to the saving of their souls, is the work of the Spirit of Christ in their hearts,1 and is ordinarily wrought by the ministry of the Word;2 by which also, and by the administration of baptism and the Lord's supper, prayer, and other means appointed of God, it is increased and strengthened.3



And yes, it is a works gospel.


----------



## CharlieJ (Mar 26, 2009)

steven-nemes said:


> If faith comes and is given to us by God, then truly we haven't done a thing at all! But if we will our faith, it is us doing a thing on our own: namely, believing.



First, faith is by definition not a work. Second, Calvinists and Arminians agree on the necessity of faith, and that the faith is exercised by the one believing (otherwise he could not be called a believer). Third, faith either is or is not a work regardless of the source, since the source of faith does not change the nature of the act of believing. Fourth, the Reformed have traditionally called faith an act, but not a work. So, no, faith is not considered a work in either system.


----------



## KMK (Mar 27, 2009)

CharlieJ said:


> steven-nemes said:
> 
> 
> > If faith comes and is given to us by God, then truly we haven't done a thing at all! But if we will our faith, it is us doing a thing on our own: namely, believing.
> ...



Does the Arminian 'system' agree with this statement?


> The grace of faith, whereby the elect are enabled to believe to the saving of their souls, is the work of the Spirit of Christ in their hearts...



If not, then what is it a work of?


----------



## A.J. (Mar 27, 2009)

The original five articles of Arminianism will be helpful here. 



> The Five Articles of the Remonstrants, 1610​
> Article 1.
> 
> [Conditional Election - corresponds to the second of TULIP’s five points, Unconditional Election]
> ...



Link: The Five Articles of the Remonstrants (1610)


----------



## moral necessity (Mar 27, 2009)

steven-nemes said:


> I will return to this question I suppose another time.
> 
> Basically my question was regarding whether or not leaving it up to the individual person to believe _of his own will_ is leaving him to _work for salvation_.



General arminianism of today makes salvation to by synergistic, like you say. Man must do something, and God must do something. But, scripture says, "I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules......I will deliver you from all your uncleanness.......It is not for your sake that I will act...." (Ezek. 36:27-32) Everything is "I....I....I", not "we....we....we." 

It is true that a person must believe, but that belief is a fruit of the already begun work of God in that person. Arminians fail to see that, and to distinguish between the primary cause and the secondary cause behind every choice we make. We will as God bends our wills with his Spirit.


----------



## Skyler (Mar 27, 2009)

I'm going to stop trying to defend inconsistent positions. It makes my head spin.


----------



## ZackF (Mar 27, 2009)

I like Dr. R.C. Sproul's analogy about the . Forgive my crude paraphrase of it.

Historically Calvinists and Arminians believe in sin _and_ sins. We are in a fallen state to some degree and all kinds of nasty sins follow. Such is the sea of human thought and behavior. However Arminians believe in an "island of righteousness." That "island" is the ability to believe in the Gospel. This ability transforms saving faith into the "one thing" you can do to be saved. Faith under such a system becomes a work. Rather the biblical (Calvinist) doctrine teaches we have no such island to wash up on. We must be rescued from the sea, really revived completely, by God entirely by His grace.


----------



## Confessor (Mar 28, 2009)

The typical defense for this is that faith is either an _acceptance_ or _application_ of salvation that was wrought completely by Christ. Almost always, this "defense" is presented in the form of an analogy: e.g., if a rich man were to offer you one million dollars, would it really be a _work_ for you to accept it?

This argument fails, as it is nothing more than an appeal to emotion. It does not avoid the fact that it's still a decision made because of some innate ability within the person that only a few people correctly utilize (free will), and it still brings about a benefit -- by definition, a work. Moreover, the Arminians fail to recognize that only believers are good or smart or fit enough to accept the offer (in their terms) in the first place.

The argument that saving faith is merely an _application_ of salvation still runs into the same problems, but it generally circumvents the hackneyed analogy argument. I was debating a Molinist on this issue and I got to him to admit that saving faith "is a non-meritorious work which brings about benefits to the believer." (!) His argument eventually began to sound suspiciously like the analogy argument above, for he started to stress the massive work done by Christ in the process; saying that He is the one who gains all the merit, while the believer is merely and humbly the one who _applies_ it, as if application is not by definition a work.

But I digress. Arminianism is necessarily a works-gospel, as you have pointed out.


----------

