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?

Altar-Call Evangelism: Is it biblical?

"What mean these dispatches from the battle-field? 'Last night, fourteen souls were under conviction, fifteen were justified, and eight received full sanctification.' I am weary of this public bragging, this counting of unhatched chickens, this exhibition of doubtful spoils. Lay aside such numberings of the people, such idle pretense of certifying in half a minute that which will need the testing of a lifetime." This lamentation combined with sage counsel was given over a hundred years ago by Charles Haddon Spurgeon (1834-1892). It was communicated in a public lecture to his ministerial students and then published in his classic book, The Soul Winner. Spurgeon's grief was over a style of evangelism that was all the rage in his day because of how quickly so-called results could be counted, secured and then reported publicly as a mighty "gospel" success. We know this kind of evangelism today as "altar-call" evangelism. During Spurgeon's generation this type of evangelism was very novel, but in our day (a hundred plus years later) - its the norm.

But not only is it an accepted practice for churches in the 21st century, it is revered as the only sure and sacred means of aquiring conversions to Christ. Or, as one church-goer put it to me several years ago: "Without the altar-call no one will be saved." In fact, along this same line of thinking, there is even a local pastor I know, who recently said: "Without the altar-call no church will grow in the South Georgia." For me personally, over the past fourteen years, I have greatly questioned the legitimacy and even integrity of altar-call evangelism. Though for many years as an itinerant evangelist I too had faithfully practiced this manner of "getting people saved." However, in 1995, by a series of illuminating discoveries, I gradually abandoned altar-call evangelism for good.

The first great challenge to me over this practice was simply a question of its biblical warrant. Did Christ or the Apostles or the early church as a whole employ this method of calling people to come forward at the end of a worship service, make a decision for Christ by repeating a prayer, and then be given immediate assurance of their salvation? The answer is an emphatic - NO! Nowhere in Scripture is there either a model or sanction for the altar-call. Rather, what we see is an aggressive, clear, faithful proclamation of the gospel with God blessing His Word with conversions (e.g., Acts 2:14-47; 3:11-26; 17:16-34). To say it another way, biblical evangelism believes in the sufficiency of the gospel (Rom.1:16; I Cor.1:18-2:5). This means the gospel is enough for sinners to hear in order to be saved. Furthermore, it is the gospel alone which God has ordained as the means He uses to bring sinners to Himself (Rom.10:14-17; I Cor.3:5-7). Thus the mandate of the Great Commission is to go into all the world and preach the gospel to all people (Mark 16:15; Lk.24:47; cf. Matt.28:19). Nothing more, nothing less. The altar-call however imposes the church to do something more than what God Himself has ordained. In fact, it implies by its very method that the preaching of the gospel falls short as a means of bringing sinners to Christ. In short, the altar-call is nothing more than a man-made addition to the gospel and therefore a denial of its sufficiency.

But what if someone argues that Christ called people to publicly come to Him and believe in Him - would this imply that altar-call evangelism is simply following Christ's example? There are two important points we need to remember in answer to this assumption: first, believing on Christ is the result of being born again with a new nature that hungers and thirsts for Christ unto salvation (see Jn.3:1-8; 6:35; Eph.2:5; Tit.3:5), not with a physical act of going forward and publicly praying a prayer. When Jesus called people to come to Him in the context of salvation, it was not with the idea that they would physical come toward Him. It meant to believe on Him (e.g., Jn.6:35-37) Second, no one can come to Christ (thereby savingly believe on Him) unless they are "drawn" or "granted" this grace by the Father (Jn.6:44,65). Henceforth, true conversions to Christ are the result of God's sovereign power and good pleasure alone, not the methods induced by men (see Acts 2:47; 5:14; II Thess.2:13,14).

But there is a further reason why the altar-call is an unbiblical practice: it creates a false assurance of salvation. This is the most disturbing and dangerous aspect of the altar-call. Tens of thousands of people who have "walked the aisle" and "prayed the prayer" are given immediate assurance that they are saved. And the only evidence proffered for such assurance is the physcial act of walking to the front of a church building and repeating a prayer. What's worse, is that a local church will seal this false assurance through baptism and church membership - and the so-called new convert will be told "never to doubt your salvation again."

Now the problems with this are too numerous to disseminate for what my aim is in this article. Rather, I will offer three major propositions that should be considered carefully as a warning against this practice of giving immediate assurance, and employing the altar-call in general: First, nowhere in Scripture is the assurance of salvation attributed to a physical act. An atheist can "walk an aisle" and "pray the prayer" and still remain an atheist. The power of salvation and the assurance that would accompany it, is not in the sinner coming to the front of a church building and praying a prayer but God alone who saves.

Secondly, the assurance of salvation in Scripture is related to both an objective and subjective spiritual reality. The objective spiritual reality of assurance is Christ and His saving work (see Rom.3:21-4:5). Saving faith is not in what we have done but in Christ alone and what He accomplished to save us. The subjective spiritual reality of assurance is in the fruit of a holy life (see Gal.5:22-23; Heb.12:14). In fact, the entire book of First John is devoted to this biblical aspect of assurance. If you're saved your life will bear out that transformation in desires and conduct that are both righteous and holy. The altar-call produces no such fruit of this kind - only antinominians and legalists.

Finally, the assurance of salvation is given by the Holy Spirit's witness not a preacher who leads you in a prayer. Romans 8:14-16 affirms this truth. Therefore, it is sheer arrogance (though unintentional, I'm sure) for a preacher to confer salvation-assurance on a sinner because they have repeated a prayer. This is nothing more than the Protestant version of Roman Catholic sacramentalism. Only the Holy Spirit can give us the assurance of salvation as He gives us a new heart, reveals to us the truth of Christ in the gospel, and empowers us to live a holy life. The altar-call cannot grant this kind of assurance.

But sadly and tragically, many sinners are led into thinking they are saved because of their response to the altar-call, rather than being truly regenerated by the Holy Spirit and thus drawn to Christ (Jn.3:5; 6:44; Tit.3:5). Is it any wonder then that the greatest problem facing the local evangelical church in America is unregenerate church membership? The altar-call can increase a church-roll but it will never produce a new creation in Jesus Christ (II Cor.5:17-18a).

A Careful Approach to a Difficult Passage

Since November of 2006 I have had the great joy and pleasure of preaching through the book of Romans. This series has been a verse-by-verse study, taking in this entire New Testament epistle in its full context. For our church family, the study in Romans has been a mighty means of God's grace in grounding us more deeply in the Gospel. Furthermore, we have also come to have a full-orbed view of the biblical doctrine of salvation. In other words, the book of Romans really gives us a complete view of what is incorporated in God's act to save sinners.

Now one thing I love about preaching chapter-by-chapter in a book of the Bible, is that you come to face passages which are very challenging and difficult. Rather than preaching only on those verses we may all know and believe, "expository preaching" (the technical name for the kind of preaching I do) forces us to look at portions of the Bible that otherwise we might tend to avoid. So as we have been working through Romans we have come upon such passages that Christians would either ignore or explain away - because the passage is hard to understand or they don't like what it says.

One of these passages in Romans is 8:29-30. These verses say: "For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. And those whom he predestined he also called, and those he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified." I spent four weeks expounding these verses. But on the first Sunday we approached this text, I opened my sermon waving eight caution flags to help put us all in a right frame of mind and spirit that would be to the honor and glory of God. Each of these cautions could be applied to most any passage of the Bible which might be seen as difficult.

In the first place, we must see these verses in their proper context. Romans 8:29-30 is the exposition of God's purpose of salvation and His promise to work all things for the good of His people, in order to complete their salvation. In other words, these verses are sandwiched within the larger and greater context of Romans 8 - which is the assurance of final salvation. Paul the apostle is therefore bringing to every Christian in verses 29-30 the most profound doctrines to deepen the most lasting assurance that if God has saved you He will keep you saved. To be more precise, Romans 8:29-30 is explaining how God has determined to accomplish the purpose and promise of Romans 8:28 - which is the complete salvation of His people.

In the second place, we must realize the magnitude of the task we are undertaking. We are NOT musing over theories here! But we are considering the mind and will of Almighty God. This is a passage that we must therefore approach with reverence and godly fear. Commenting on this same approach to Romans 8:29-30, Martyn Lloyd-Jones (1899-1981) declared:

We, pigmy creatures of time, fallible creatures as we are, unworthy and sinful, are now going to look together into this particular revelation that God has been pleased to give of His own mind. There is no activity in which we can ever engage which is more solemn than this, or more holy.

In the third place, we must not approach these verses in a merely intellectual manner. We are not dealing here with a problem in philosophy. This is God's divine revelation of His will and purpose that is before us in Romans 8:29-30.

In the fourth place, we must not approach this passage with an argumentative or quarrelsome spirit. We would all do well to remember the counsel of Second Timothy 2:23-24, "Have nothing to do with foolish controversies; you know that they breed quarrels. And the Lord's servant must not be quarrelsome..." The word translated "quarrelsome" means to "wrangle" and "fight over words." Thus, taking this in application to Romans 8:29-30, we do not enter our study here to fight over words in this passage. Now I grant that we must define the words that are used so that we can understand them - and that may lead into controversy with certain people. But how we approach this passage should never be in a spirit to stir up controversy and argument over the words used in these verses. To do this is sinful and will accomplish nothing for the good of God's people.

In the fifth place, we must also never come to a passage like this in God's Word with the idea that we can fully understand and comprehend it. I believe this in one reason why so many Christians turn away from the teaching of Romans 8:29-30. They cannot fully understand and comprehend the doctrine of these verses, so they pass over them. Now in response to any believer who may do this, let me say plainly: not only is it foolish but even worse, it is arrogant to reject something just because you can't understand it - especially, when we are looking at God's Word.

The truth is, we are dealing here with the Mind of the infinite, holy, and sovereign God who will never be fully comprehended (see Rom.11:33-36). If I can fully understand and comprehend God and all that He does, then He is not worthy of either my worship nor my obedience at all! For in that instance, He has ceased to be God. However, thank God He is above and beyond all that we can understand and fully know because He is God! Furthermore, we have got to develop those categories in our mind for "mystery". In other words, we have got to develop categories for accepting all the counsel of God's Word, despite the fact that we will not be able to completely fathom everything the Bible teaches - like the Trinity, the Incarnation of Christ, and even predestination.

In the sixth place, we must approach these verses with absolute honesty by letting the Scripture speak for itself. Here again is another area where I see the greatest trouble generated over passages like Romans 8:29-30. I have seen more people in the church just simply deny what is plainly taught by these verses for the simple reason that they do not like what it says; or it doesn't fit their worldview; or most of all, they will just not accept that God can be like what this passage teaches. "My God", they retort, "would never do such a thing!" This is a common objection to the teaching of Romans 8:29-30. However, this objection is built upon a purely dishonest approach to the passage. They see what it says and they know what it says but they refuse to believe it. Therefore, they press upon the passage a meaning which is entirely contrary and foreign to what it actually teaches. It is nothing but sheer dishonesty.

In the seventh place, we must understand that the great doctrines of Romans 8:29-30 are meant only for the children of God. Who was the book of Romans written to? This letter was written to believers in Jesus Christ (see Rom.1:6-7). Henceforth, the doctrines of God's foreknowledge, predestination, and calling in particular, are all designed for the Christian to understand and embrace. These doctrines are not meant for anyone else but Christians. J.I. Packer called them, "The family secret of God's children." But admitting this means that such passages like Romans 8:29-30 should be preached and expounded to every Christian. Moreover, the setting of these verses are "pastoral" in nature, which means they are meant to comfort believers and give them greater assurance in salvation. It is therefore sad and disappointing that so many pastors choose to deny the Christians they shepherd, the comfort and assurance that Romans 8:29-30 would provide.

Finally, the greatest proof that we have approached these verses in the right spirit will be a greater urgency toward holiness and sanctification. To know that God has chosen me, set His love upon me, has marked me out to be like Jesus and has guaranteed that I will persevere to the very end - should only motivate me more to pursue holiness and be deeply humbled by the sovereign grace of God (see I Cor.15:10; Eph.1:4; Col.3:12). However, if the doctrine of predestination, for instance, should motivate me toward careless and loose living (since God has predestined my life to salvation and nothing can stop that plan); then not only am I putting myself in a very dangerous position, but I am also proving that I don't understand predestination. Humility, kindness, compassion, repentance, and love for Christ and my neighbor should all be the by-products of understanding in truth the teaching of Romans 8:29-30.