September 3, 2007

Bob Wilkin (Alleged): Response to the Debate & Deity Question

To All:

It appears Bob Wilkin is not going to provide a direct answer or go on public record personally in regard to the doctrine of the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ or a debate over the "Crossless" gospel.

The "Crossless" gospel Debate:
It appears Wilkin is going to be speaking through one young man (Antonio da Rosa) who is not on the Grace Evangelical Society staff. The indication is that Wilkin is still interested in a debate, but Wilkin has not personally verified this. Until such time we can only assume it is genuine.

If Bob Wilkin comes out and will speak for himself it would go along way toward clearing up any confusion that may exist and is originating from the young man who is acting as if he speaking on behalf of Wilkin and the GES. If this young person has not been given the OK from Wilkin, he has overstepped boundries and has been irresponsible. Lacking the personal interaction from Wilkin we have a young man, who is spoiling for a fight, and has become the stumbling block in the way of a resolution of these issues. I encourage Bob Wilkin to speak for himself as soon as possible and/or state whether or not he is aware, and supportive of the non-GES staff young person speaking on his behalf.

If the report from the non-GES staff member is to be believed and genuine, Wilkin insists that if there is to be a debate he (Wilkin) must have control over whom he will face from the opposing position. I am not highly knowledgeable about the protocol of a formal debate, but I am quite confident that Wilkins’s demand is quite irregular. In my opinion, a fair debate and a question Wilkin must answer is: Will he agree to an open debate no matter who represents the opposing view of the "Crossless" gospel?

The Deity of Christ Question:
If the non-GES staff member's report can be believed it is plain that Wilkin has apparently decided not acknowledge or reply directly to my request for him to reiterate his desire for a debate on the "Crossless" gospel. It would be helpful if Wilkin were to at least go on his own blog and speak for himself.

In any event, Bob Wilkin has gone five days without replying to my three e-mails, but allegedly found time to speak to a third party about the debate. I am not under any further constraint to withhold his e-mail response to my open/public question to him on the deity of Christ.

This was my OPEN QUESTION to Bob Wilkin

Brother Bob:

You are the Founder & Executive Director of the GES. I am hopeful that a man of your character, reputation and desire to seek truth will respond with an honest, transparent answer to this simple to understand, direct question.

Can a lost man be born again, while consciously denying the deity of Christ, if he believes in Jesus for eternal life?

Following was Wilkins’ answer to the question:

“My post concerned the charge of a crossless gospel. Your question does not deal with that post. I have not replied to any of the posts, but when I do, I will probably not deal with off topic questions or posts.

Do you know of a passage in the Bible where someone ‘consciously denying the deity of Christ’ is said to ‘believe in Jesus for eternal life’? That would help me answer your question.”

What we have here from Wilkin was not unexpected. This is the same dodge that came from Jeremy Myers. Bob Wilkin is going to remain silent on the deity of Christ. Why do these men shrink from an open and frank discussion of the deity of Jesus Christ? It is impossible to disconnect the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ from the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Yet, Wilkin is determined to divorce the Lord’s deity from the Gospel; why is that? This is something that an open debate would bring out.

If any debate is to be organized, It is my firm belief, and I am speaking in an unofficial capacity:

1) Wilkin must agree to allow the opposing side to select the men who will represent their view. IMO, to dictate who will represent the opposing view is outside the bounds of accepted debate protocol.

2) Because the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ is a vital component in any discussion of the Gospel, His deity must be one of the subjects for open discussion. For Wilkin to shrink back from or refuse to openly discuss the importance of Christ’s deity in relation to the Gospel of Jesus Christ would be unthinkable.

There will, I am sure, be more to follow on this issue. Check back here for updates. Please feel free to post any comments, questions or concerns in the thread below.


{Regarding Antonio da Rosa: For consistently demonstrating a spirit of unrestrained aggression, unchristian like combativeness, agitating for and causing “divisions and offences” (Romans 16:17) da Rosa has forfeited the privilege to participate at my blog. For more on this see the thread that accompanies this article and the previous article: Snap Shot..., including the details in the thread that follows.}


  1. The “crossless” gospel is also a “godless” gospel. Jesus is not to be defined because to do so it to add to the gospel.

    They have people on their own website begging them to please define things and they are so on the run that they don’t know what to do.


  2. Naz:

    You are correct! This is the secret that Wilkin, Myers & Hodges do not want uncovered or discussed.

    A while back I said the title "Crossless" is not even close to fully identifying what has been eradicated from the Gospel of Grace by Wilkin, Myers, Hodges and all those who are sympathetic to the position Hodges orginated.

    This is why I noted to Wilkin that the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ is impossible to divorce from any honest discusssion of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

    Thanks for making the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ issue clear and noting the evasion of the deity question even at their own site, which I have also noted.


  3. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  4. Antonio/All:

    For your multiple reasons of your own doing, I am putting you (and the blog community) on notice.

    Basing my decision on the principle set forth in Romans 16:17, which states, “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.”

    Antonio, for demonstrating a spirit of unrestrained aggression, unchristian like combativeness, agitating for and causing “divisions and offences” you have forfeited the privilege to participate at my blog.

    Post whatever you please at your site, but you may not post here again.

    I will, of course discontinue my participation at your blog.


  5. Ok... taking the bait (sorta) from Bob and ask a follow-up to his response.

    If we are going to limit our discussion to questions found only in the Bible then I ask you this. Can you show me the single person in the Bible who was Eternally Saved by simply "believing in Jesus for Eternal Life."

    Where does it say, and So-And-So believed in Jesus for Eternal Life and it was accounted him for righteousness?


  6. Good point Kevl

    You said: “Where does it say, and So-And-So believed in Jesus for Eternal Life and it was accounted him for righteousness?”

    There is no such a place. In fact I would challenge anyone to find me a verse that says the GES mantra of “believe in Jesus as the guarantor of eternal life.” Just one verse that truly says this!

    Where is it?


  7. A MrGiggs on the GES site posed this question which has to do with the deity of Christ.

    You asked: Can a person be born again if they don't believe in Jesus' conception by holy spirit / virgin birth?

    He may or may not find this. We cannot even redirect the readers of that site here but this was to be my reply.

    Are you saying this person does not believe in Jesus conception by the Holy Spirit or are you saying they deny it? If they deny it and by that denial they are saying Christ is not God who died for their sins then they are not saved. 1 John 4:1-3 would confirm this fact. 1 John 5:1 confirms that those who are born of God believe that Jesus is the Christ. “Christ” means deity!

    For the doubters: The woman at the well in John 4:25 knew that the Messiah or the Christ would be “all-knowing”. Verse 29 confirms her belief that in the word Christ, Omniscience was implicit. No one is omniscient except God!

    Matthew 26:63-68 also shows that the word Christ and Son of God both meant that He was equating Himself with God. If not, why would they have so vehemently accused our Lord Jesus Christ of blasphemy? Don’t even try to disparage the word Christ to mean something less than deity.

    Those of you, who are crossless and deityless proponents, believe that the word “Christ” does not imply deity. Therefore you say it’s preferred to present a dumbed-down Jesus concept to people. You all actually believe that we are adding to the gospel to say that Jesus Christ is God, when we preach. Or, you may concede and say well, (talking about Diane, Jo and Alvin, Bill Fiess, and the other Mike etc. at GES) it’s okay but why muddy the waters with frivolous facts about who Jesus is.

    Am I wrong?