The story of the young man in the video above is a very heartbreaking and extreme example of the damage that can be wreaked in people’s lives by Arminian decision theology. I have no problem agreeing with him that the sinner’s prayer only hurts people.
I spent most of my childhood and teenage years not really sure whether or not I was saved because 1) I initially didn’t remember ever having prayed the sinner’s prayer and 2) the multiple times I do remember praying the sinner’s prayer I wasn’t sure whether I was sincere enough when I prayed it. My experience with decision theology was not so extreme that I prayed the sinner’s prayer every night after crying for hours, as this young man did. But I certainly have my share of “dates I was saved” written down in one place or another, and lived in constant fear that I would be left behind if Christ were to Rapture His people off the earth.
So my concern is not with the much-needed critique of decision theology. My concern is that the answer that is presented – a very dramatic and emotional conversion experience – is just as subjective as the problem when it comes to finding assurance of salvation.
It’s obvious to me that this young man was a terrified sinner who was absolutely crushed by the Law. You can almost feel the despair as he says again and again, “I’m not right with God, I’m not right with God.” He is a perfect illustration of someone experiencing what the Augsburg Confession calls the first part of repentance:
Now strictly speaking, repentance consists of two parts. One part is contrition, that is, terrors striking the conscience through the knowledge of sin. The other part is faith, which is born of the Gospel [Romans 10:17] or the Absolution and believes that for Christ’s sake, sins are forgiven (AC XII:3-5).
And the Apology of the Augsburg Confession goes into more detail:
We say that contrition is the true terror of conscience, which feels that God is angry with sin and grieves that it has sinned. This contrition takes place when sins are condemned by God’s Word….In these terrors, conscience feels God’s wrath against sin. This is unknown to secure people living according to the flesh. The conscience sees the corruption of sin and seriously grieves that it has sinned. Meanwhile, it also runs away from God’s dreadful anger (Ap XIIa (V):29, 32).
Decision theology turns faith into a work you must do – “you need to sincerely ask Jesus to save you and to come into your heart.” So instead of giving the terrified sinner the comfort of the Gospel freely offered, the terrified sinner is thrown back onto the sincerity of his heart – which he knows is desperately wicked, even though he might not put it in those terms. The sinner’s prayer is always qualified by “if you really meant it.” And there are plenty of things that will make you question whether or not you really meant it.
The answer for the terrified conscience is the objective promise of the forgiveness of sins in Christ. The Apology continues:
As the second part of repentance we add faith in Christ. The Gospel, in which the forgiveness of sins is freely promised concerning Christ, should be presented to consciences in these terrors. They should believe that, for Christ’s sake, their sins are freely forgiven. This faith cheers, sustains, and enlivens the contrite, according to Romans 5:1, ‘Since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God.’ This faith obtains the forgiveness of sins (Ap XIIa (V):35-36).
My concern with this video is that the answer to a person’s feelings of contrition is not presented as the objective promise of the Gospel, but instead is presented as a subjective emotional experience. Salvation is presented almost as God reaching down out of the blue and giving someone an unshakeable feeling of being loved and forgiven and of having their sins washed away by Christ, and causing them to have affection and love for Him.
Can a Christian have such feelings? Absolutely. But faith is not having a subjective feeling. Faith is trust in a promise. Feelings may follow faith, but they are not themselves faith. Feelings come from objective reality, not the other way around. The danger of looking to an emotional experience for assurance of salvation is this: What happens when I once again feel like a horrible sinner who doesn’t love God? What happens when that subjective experience of God’s love and forgiveness wears off and I am left all alone with my sin and doubt? If your assurance that God has saved you is based on an emotional experience, it’s easy to conclude that maybe God didn’t want you after all.
Revivalism in general – no matter what the theology behind it – points you back to yourself for assurance of salvation. With Arminian revivalism – in which the sinner’s prayer plays an integral part – the burden is on you to know whether or not you have repented adequately or whether or not your prayer was sincere enough. With Calvinistic revivalism – promoted by the likes of Paul Washer (who was mentioned in the video) and John Piper – the burden is on you to know whether or not God has sovereignly saved you. So either way, you are driven to look to your experiences and inner life for assurance.
I am not questioning the experience of the man in the video – in fact, I can relate to him in many ways. Nor am I knocking conversion as such. The experience of someone moving from darkness to light might indeed be dramatic. But any experience in my heart that arises from hearing and believing the Word of God – the Word of forgiveness spoken into my ears that says “Your sins are forgiven for the sake of Jesus Christ” – is secondary to the objective reality of what that Word says. A person baptized as an infant who is not conscious of a day in their life when they did not trust in Christ is no less saved than a person who experiences a dramatic conversion after hearing the Word. It is the Word of Christ that is central. Feelings and experiences may come and go, but it is the Word of Christ that is truly unshakeable.




