The Theology Behind the Altar-Call

There is a definite theology which drives the practice of the altar-call. Though many may argue today that theology and methodology are separate issues; yet, the truth is, we only practice what it is we believe. Thus how we "do ministry" is determined by our doctrinal convictions. And the method of altar-call evangelism is no different in this respect.

So, for the early Methodists and the evangelist Charles G. Finney, it was essentially their theology of salvation which inspired them to use this novel method of calling people to come forward and be saved. For Finney, it was the heresy of Pelagianism (circa 412 A.D.) which moved him to comfortably embrace the altar-call. For the Methodists, it was their affirmation of the aberrant teaching of Arminianism (circa 1618). However, what is peculiar in both cases, is that it was their belief in man's will being the determining factor in salvation which really formed the core doctrine behind the altar-call.

Thus, whether you're considering Arminianism or Pelagianism, what both of these doctrines share in common is that man's will is sovereign in salvation. Albeit, Pelagianism denies the necessity for God's grace in Christ to save (hence, it is heretical teaching), while Arminianism contends that without God's grace man will not be saved - yet in the end, both the Pelagian and the Arminian reward the will of man with the credit for why he is saved; rather than the sovereign grace of God.

This is the fundamental reason why so many people have attributed their salvation to "walking an aisle", "praying a prayer", or "making a decision for Christ." The sole object and reason for their salvation is centered in the exercise of their will to choose. And should we be surprised that this would be where they give the credit for being saved? If you've grown up all your life in church hearing that, "If you take the first step God will do the rest" - then it is only inevitable that under this teaching you will believe that it was your decision which initiated salvation. In other words, God has provided salvation and made the offer, but without man making his move to saved, God is left helplessly wondering if anyone is going to be accept what He has done. Why? Because the theology behind the altar-call is a man-centered view of salvation. God's will is impotent while man's will is omnipotent. Is this biblical?

No, the truth of Scripture is that man by nature is sinful to the core (Psa.51:5; Jer.17:9; Rom.3:9-18). He cannot save himself nor does he want to be saved (Mk.10:27; Jn.5:40; Rom.3:11; Eph.2:1-3). Left to his own decisions, bound up in his sinful nature, man will run at breakneck speed and bust hell wide open. For there is no natural affection for Christ iin the lost sinner (Jn.3:19-20; Rom.8:5-8). Moreover, when he hears the gospel, his natural understanding reasons that it is foolish and stupid (I Cor.1:18a; 2:14). In this condition, we cannot look to the sinner to "take the first step" for salvation - for no such "step" will ever come!

How then is man to be saved? It can only be by the sovereign mercy and grace of God (Rom.8:30; 9:15-18; Eph.2:8-10). God must take the first step! God must work in the sinner a new life, recreating a new heart, a new nature (Ezk.36:26; Jn.3:3-8; Eph.2:5) which brings about new desires that cry out, "Lord, save me and make me right with you!" God must give the faith to believe on Christ and the repentance to flee from sin (Eph.2:8; II Tim.2:25). In short, salvation, from first to last, is of the Lord (Jonah 2:9; Eph.1:3-14; II Thess.2:13). This is the theology of the Bible: God ALONE saves sinners by His grace and for His glory!

The History behind the Altar-Call

How and why did the altar-call ever become a part of mainstream evangelism? The actual history behind the altar-call began in the late 1700s with the first generation of American Methodists in America. Being concerned not to admit anyone prematurely into church membership, the Methodists began to "count" the number of their converts. The system they came up with for securing this knowledge of true conversions was what they called "the invitation to the altar." The Methodists referred to the "altar" as the end of the building in front of the communion table, which was derived from their roots in the Church of England. Their intial practice of this method was simply bringing individuals to identify themselves publicly to be prayed for and given instruction as new converts to Christ. No one, at first, claimed the altar-call as a means of salvation. However, very soon, and inevitably, "coming to the altar" came to be confused with actual conversion to Christ. Methodist preachers would be heard calling people to "come to the altar and be saved."

It wasn't until the 1820s though, that this innovative practice of American Methodism would become the mainstream of American Evangelicalism. And the introduction of the altar-call to the rest of Protestant America would not come from a Methodist - but a lawyer from New England who was ordained in the Presbyterian church. His name was Charles G. Finney (1792-1875). Finney has been hailed as "America's Greatest Revivalist" and "the premier evangelist of the nineteenth-century." It is beyond dispute that his methods and theology changed the whole course for how evangelicals in America would approach the meaning of revival and the techniques of large-scale evangelism. But what should be in dispute is if following the methods and theology of Charles Finney is conforming to the wisdom and truth of Scripture concerning conversion and evangelism.

You see, for Finney, hijacking the altar-call from the Methodists needed no adjustments for his doctrinal position. Calling people to come forward and giving them immediate assurance of salvation for their public response, was a logical fit for what Finney believed to be a true conversion to Christ. In his theology, all that a sinner needed to be saved was a decision of the will, rather than a regeneration of his nature. In other words, Finney did not believe in the necessity of the new birth (Jn.1:13; 3:1-8) because he did not believe in the reality of the sinner's depraved nature (Jer.17:9; Eph.2:1-3).

Charles Finney was in fact a Pelagian at heart. His entire theology of salvation embodied the fifth-century heresy known as Pelagianism (412 A.D.). Therefore Finney denied the biblical doctrines of original sin, salvation by grace alone, justification by faith alone, and even, the penal substitution of Christ's death. Needless to say, Finney was a bona fide heretic - who dazzled his generation with persuasive arguments that pitted reason over revelation, emotional tactics to manipulate the crowds, and quick conversions - which were documented over a period of several years and proven false by the apostasy of most people who "came to the altar" in his meetings.

Sadly though, "Finneyism" is still alive and well in many churches today. Conversions to Christ are still counted as people answering the altar-call, rather than seeing the evidence of genuine spiritual fruit (Gal.5:22-23). And the determining factor for salvation is still attributed to man's will rather than God's sovereign grace (cf. Rom.8:30). Finney would be proud. But what should matter most for us is this: is God glorified by a method not sanctioned by His Word in which man is given the credit for salvation? We know the answer...but will we obey?