Wilkin Deletes All Trace of Articles and Discussion of the “Crossless” Gospel at GES Blog.
To All:
I am reporting the sudden disappearance from the Grace Evangelical Society's blog of all articles and comments on their “Crossless” interpretation of the Gospel.
There have been incremental steps leading toward today's deletion of the articles. Initially the GES staff would not answer questions on the deity of the Lord Jesus Christ, then the closing of comment threads, then moderating threads to intercept legitimate questions. Today a total and complete shut down of the discussion.
This move does not transcended the doctrinal debate, but this now additionally becomes a credibility and integrity issue for Wilkin, Myers, the GES and its board.
The only surprise is that Wilkin did not order the destruction of the on-line scrutiny and evidence of what they truly believe long before today. Today's action is another definitive indication that these men do not want to expose their interpretation of the Gospel to any further legitimate scrutiny, discussion and questions.
Incidentally, I did capture a snap shot from the GES blog of the Sept. 10 & 14 articles (in their entirety) titled, GES Board Turns Down Debate Offer & Where Do We Find the Saving Message respectively.
More to follow…
LM
I'm disturbed by this immature act on the part of GES. 1 Peter 3:15 says to be ready WITH an answer, not to be ready to DELETE your answer. :-)
ReplyDeleteWilkin was at our church earlier this year and left quite a stir in his wake. I and several other men saw red flags in what he taught and have since been researching Wilkin/GES. We have concluded that we should not endorse or affirm his brand of Free Grace in any way. We will soon be presenting our findings to our church leadership and ask them to recognize that GES teaching has seriously strayed.
Lou, your site and content (Greg, Naz, and others) have been a valueable resource while we've researched, thanks for your pointed questions and scriptural analysis. These resources will hopefully open the eyes of many who are or would be duped into aligning with GES without realizing the danger beneath the surface of what I believe started as a God-honoring organization.
Dear Stark:
ReplyDeleteThanks for checking in. Your experience is not unique; I have heard similar testimonies of what Wilkin has left in his wake.
I am pleased to know you have been helped in your research through what we are doing here. I trust readers understand our focus and concern is with the doctrine that is coming from Hodges, Wilkin & the GES.
I have noted elsewhere that the GES did begin with good intentions and purpose. Its leadership (including Hodges) has, however, drifted far from what most would consider sound doctrinal moorings.
Just as you have discovered we are hopeful many more will begin to see the danger that lies just beneath the surface of the GES doctrinal position on the Gospel and titles of the Lord Jesus Christ.
God bless you,
Lou
Dear Stark:
ReplyDeleteYou wrote, "I and several other men saw red flags in what he taught and have since been researching Wilkin/GES. We have concluded that we should not endorse or affirm his brand of Free Grace in any way."
I have made mention of this in various places, but I want to remind my readers that Zane Hodges is the orginator of the doctrinal positions that we see coming from Bob Wilkin, Jeremy Myers, John Niemela and seclect others in the GES faction of the Free Grace movement.
LM
Hey Lou,
ReplyDeleteI've been watching this from afar these last few days. The radio show is back in full production so my time is crunched again. :)
This is crazy.. hopefully they're are condensing the information they have removed and will release a full disclosure statement on their position and direction.
The Lord uses all things for the good of those who love Him.. I just wish we Christians would spend more time giving Him GOOD stuff to use for our good.. ya know?
It's terribly scary when you see leadership in the Church close the doors and go into secrete meetings - so to speak. If there's something to hide it's not of God.
Kev
Kev:
ReplyDeleteSince you are doing radio, how about the local time an current temp. ;-)
I don't think the men at GES want to reveal any more than what already came out of the discussions. We will likely see a few articles in print form, but IMO, they have buried this and want nothing more to do with having to disclsose and/or defend their "Crossless/Deityless" theology.
What I anticipate will happen is that at venues where Wilkin appears he is going to be dogged by well-meaning folks who want answers.
Lou
PS: I worked on-the-air for several years in my youth.
Since you are doing radio, how about the local time an current temp. ;-)
ReplyDelete< AM Radio voice >
Well Lou, this just in....
The time is late, and the average temperature today is "luke warm"
Get your Covering while it's still called today folks, the Reign is coming!
< /AM Radio voice >
;)
Lou, you wrote:
ReplyDeleteZane Hodges is the orginator of the doctrinal positions that we see coming from Bob Wilkin, Jeremy Myers, John Niemela and seclect others in the GES faction of the Free Grace movement.
I agree but Wilkin is the head of GES and is the one that spoke at our church. I hold him accountable for whatever views he and his organization choose to champion regardless of who presented them to him originaly.
What I anticipate will happen is that at venues where Wilkin appears he is going to be dogged by well-meaning folks who want answers.
Man, oh man, do I wish we had known then what we know now. He was welcomed and lauded at our church initially. Only afterward did more than a few people begin to ask telling questions. If he came back now he'd face a tougher audience though I'd hope our leadership wouldn't even let him speak in light of what we now know, unless of course he turns back to solid doctrine instead of this mess of oddly interpreted passages used to support their presupposition.
Perhaps it's just me, but it seems ironic that the "simple" GES gospel is very complex to actually explain.
Stark:
ReplyDeleteThe “simple GES gospel” is especially difficult to explain when they will not discuss and field questions on it.
I can boil it right down for you. The GES “Crossless” gospel teaches:
1) A lost man does not need to know, understand or believe anything about who Jesus is and what He did to provide salvation. In spite of this, he can be born again by believing in a promise of eternal life.
2) The lost man can object to and reject the fact that Jesus is deity and according to GES teaching he can still be born again and the deity issue can then be resolved after he believes the promise of eternal life.
Here is a sample of what “Crossless” advocates believe evangelism ought to be,
“In evangelism, we have a targeted goal. We are seeking to bring someone to believe that they have eternal life simply by believing in Jesus for it…. Jesus' promises in the gospel of John are far too universal and sweeping to invalidate simple trust in Him alone for eternal life, even if misconceptions about Him are present.”
The “Crossless” advocate goes on to say that if a lost man does not understand or even rejects the deity of Christ and/or His sacrificial death on the cross, “…the teaching of godly men…can clear up any misconceptions that the newly born again person may have.”
The “Crossless” advocate, therefore, simply tries to get a lost person to say he believes a man named Jesus gives eternal, and by stating belief in that promise, even while rejecting the deity of Christ, he is according to GES teaching born again. Then afterward, you can teach him that he is wrong about the deity of Christ, etc.
3) The GES teaches that a lost man does not even need to know or believe he is a sinner.
Some men have begun to label this egregious error as the “Amway” or “Abracadabra.” gospel.
4) The GES teaches that the Lord's titles, “Christ” and “Son of God,” do not mean or imply the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. This is an assault on the Lord’s deity.
The “Crossless/Deityless” advocates claim to believe in the deity of Jesus Christ. These men, however, are willing to tell the lost that His deity is irrelevant, allow it to be rejected and still push for a decision to believe in a promise. That kind of evangelism raises serious questions over just how committed they are to the doctrine of the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ.
The “Crossless/Deityless” gospel is an extreme departure from the faith once delivered (Jude 3). Their abuse and dumbing down of the Lord’s titles is a trampling of His name and Person.
If these men have not already had their conscience seared I am praying that they can be recovered from these unbiblical, heretical, blasphemous teachings, repent and then:
*Set out to undo the damage of false teaching they have introduced to unsuspecting lost people and Christians alike, and
*Correct the reproach they have heaped upon the Lord Jesus Christ and His Gospel.
Lou
Lou,
ReplyDeleteGood summary. You may want to turn this into an article for the front page of your blog.
-- Greg
Greg:
ReplyDeleteI was thinking of doing that.
BTW, I have until today refrained from using the specific terms, such as, "heretical."
With their obvious intent to dodge questions and discussion, and to propagate these errors, I am going to be more direct and blunt from here on out.
Lou
Yes, an excellent summary and concurs almost point for point with what we had begun to determine on our own, even before coming across your site. Tom Stegall's "Tragedy of the crossless Gospel" is what first began to open my eyes to the possible errors but I was very willing to hear the GES side as well. It was a real shocker to me when I eventually realized item 1, which logically implied and led to confirmation of item 2. By the time we realized 3 and 4 it was clear that GES used much of the same vocabulary we did but poured entirely different meanings into them. This is the scary thing and seems outright deceptive -- Surely they know that most Christians do not agree with their use of these key terms yet they continually use them without qualification. Yes, they've written papers about their views but the average church Joe has not read these papers and is unaware of them when speaking to or about GES'/Wilkin's/Hodge's views. The danger is that I think many have read their material and have concluded at face value that everything is AOK not realizing that "the Devil is in the details"
ReplyDeleteLou wrote:BTW, I have until today refrained from using the specific terms, such as, "heretical."
I have been hesitant to use heresy/hertic/heretical myself until just today. I wrote a post about it in our research group's blog earlier today, then came back here later and saw you said something similar. Nice to know I'm not alone though I'm still kinda numb from the realization that the term accurately applies to the current state of affairs at GES.
Another major point I would add is GES's distortion of the term "the gospel". Lou, I hope you'll add some comments on this if you turn the prior post into an article. There have been two ways GES has dealt with this:
ReplyDelete1) To claim the lost do need to believe "the gospel" but that there is a fuller version of the gospel (including Christ's death and resurrection) for sanctification and a mini version of "the gospel" that only includes the promise of eternal life which is all that the lost need to believe.
2) To claim that "the gospel" is just a word for "good news" and this word does not have a technical application in Scripture to the specific message the lost need to believe to be saved. BTW Lou, Myer's article that I pointed out to you was not just placed on his website but published in the latest Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society (Winter, 2006).
However, it sounds like they're officially leaning toward this second argument. Bob Wilkin recently gave a conference message in Omaha called "Gospel Means Good News". Obviously, that statement is true, but we all know the implication Bob drew from it in his conference message.
-- Greg
Thanks men, I am working on it.
ReplyDeleteLou