Does God Save People Against Their Will?

Does God Save People Against Their Will? A Response to R. Fowler White's "Review: The Gospel Under Siege: A Study on Faith and Works By Zane C. Hodges" (Heidelblog, September 7, 2023).

by Jonathan Perreault

* * *

A few years ago, R. Fowler White wrote a review of Zane Hodges' book The Gospel Under Siege. I would like to respond to just one statement that White made in his review. To give Mr. White's question some context, here's the statement he made leading up to his question. Mr. White says:

"Unfortunately, the ramifications of Hodges's theology are not as noble as he would hope. On the one hand, of concern to all evangelicals should be the necessary implication in Hodges's affirmations that God continually and finally applies his saving grace to people who do not continually and finally receive that grace by faith [i.e. they don't persevere in faithfulness to the end]. Does this not mean that God may continually and finally save some against their will?"

In reading White's review, I will say that he is a good writer. White writes with an air of sophistication that belies (hides) what is lacking in substance. Because in regards to actual substance, his arguments are unconvincing. He recycles the same worn-out and debunked Lordship arguments that have been regurgitated by his side for years. White's question quoted above is a case in point. Supposing that what Hodges says is correct, and Christians can turn their backs on God (i.e. not persevere in faithfulness to the end), does this not mean that God saves them against their will? That is essentially what Mr. White is asking. The problem with Mr. White's question is that it's based on a false premise: that God saves them against their will. Why is that a false premise? Because God didn't save them against their will if they believed in Him! That should be obvious. Otherwise White would have to say that believing in Christ is against a person's will, which is a ridiculous statement. Is not belief an act of the will? Of course. Even Calvinists teach that saving faith consists of three parts: intellectual (mind), volitional (will), and affective (emotions/heart). Which they label, according to the Latin terms: notitia, assensus, and fiducia. So even according to Calvinists, faith (belief) is an act of the will. But White's point is that those who don't persevere stopped believing. Aha! Therein is the answer! Because is God immutable even when man is not? In other words, is God unchangeable even when man is not? Yes! Of course! For what does the Bible say?

• "God is not man, that he should lie, or a son of man, that he should change his mind. Has he said, and will he not do it? Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it?" (Numbers 23:19)

• "For I the LORD do not change; therefore you, O children of Jacob, are not consumed." (Malachi 3:6)

• "So when God desired to show more convincingly to the heirs of the promise the unchangeable character of his purpose, he guaranteed it with an oath, so that by two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to hold fast to the hope set before us." (Hebrews 6:17-18)

• "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever." (Hebrews 13:8)

• "Every good and perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change." (James 1:17)

• "If we are faithless, he remains faithful, for he cannot deny Himself." (2 Timothy 2:13)

In response to Mr. White, we may well ask him a question in return: Didn't Jesus Himself say, "Whoever comes to Me I will never [Grk. ou mē] cast out!" (Jn. 6:35)? Does Mr. White expect God to cast out His dearly beloved children, erring though they may be? I dare say that Mr. White would not be so evil as to disown his own children, yet he expects us to believe that God would? In essence, what Mr. White is implicitly saying is that he is more righteous than God! Perish the thought!

So the core question that I am addressing is whether God saves people against their will? And the answer of course, is no! Because faith by definition is an act of the will. Calvinists will no doubt argue that a faith that doesn't persevere to the end is not true faith, or at least not saving faith. But that is not the question, is it? Mr. White's question is built on the false premise that faith is only an act of the will if it perseveres in faithfulness to the end. But obviously, initial "faith" (I'm using White's terminology) is at least initially an act of the will! A Calvinist might respond and say, "Well it wasn't true saving faith if it doesn't persevere in faithfulness until the end." But that's changing the terms of the question mid-way through! White is asking about "faith," is he not? That's the word he used. Therefore it is a "bait and switch" logical fallacy to all of a sudden say, "Oh, well, but I really didn't mean literally 'faith'. I was really asking about something else." How disingenuous! That reasoning is rightly rejected as a logical fallacy. Thus my point stands true: Initial faith (even if it doesn't persevere) is an act of the will and therefore God is not saving anyone against their will if they initially placed their faith in Him and then stopped believing. That is simply a logical fact. If Mr. White is not asking about "faith" then the burden of proof and the onus is on him to be more clear in his language and say what he really means, rather than ask questions and then redefine his terms to mean something else if he doesn't like the answer.