The following was my concluding note to Brother Fred Lybrand (former Free Grace Alliance [FGA] Executive Director) in the previous thread under, The FGA Executive Counsel’s Official Statement
After I posted my concluding note to Brother Lybrand I felt it was suitable to publish on my home page. I encourage every guest to return to the FGA article, which I link to above, and read through the thread. There are many excellent notes from my guests about the current official statement from the FGA.
I have listed that article in my Favorite Picks section of my blog.
Dear Fred:
I want to thank you for visiting my blog and interacting with my guests and me. I’m sure I can speak for all of us when I say that we genuinely appreciate it.
There are many good comments from my guests about the official statement just issued from the current FGA executive counsel. My guests have identified what are glaring problems with the statement in its present form.
It is impossible to pick just one of the many fine comments to reiterate, but I’ll go with Stephen from 3/13/2008 11:57 AM.
He wrote,
“How can defining the gospel not be part of our focus? Rachel rightly observed that we have said ‘believers are called to preach the gospel’ and our FAQ #1 says ‘The FGA is seeking to unite leaders, churches, and organizations which affirm the gospel of grace.’I trust the FGA’s official statement will be up for additional review and serious revision to include a clear, uncompromised Bible based definition of the Gospel, and that the Gospel must be believed for the reception of eternal life.
How can we unite anyone around ‘the gospel of grace’ if we don’t have a consistent definition of what that is to base that unity on? i.e. if I think ‘the gospel of grace’ is the saving message and someone else thinks it’s ‘the entire bible’ or ‘any good news’ then our unity would be in word only, but not practice.”
At present the FGA is asking believers to ignore a major doctrinal difference on the Gospel of Jesus Christ for the sake of an appearance of unity. There is no biblical precedent for such, which I consider an unholy alliance.
The following appears in my book, In Defense of the Gospel, which I believe captures a major component of what we are discussing.
“When people are converted and receive a love of the truth, they are baptized into a body that has an inherent organic unity. Jesus Christ prayed in John 17 for a unity that came to pass at Pentecost. And every person who is baptized into Christ is in union. The unity is God and Spirit created. There is no unity to be created, the unity is there. It is only a unity that is to be maintained. Those who teach contrary to the body of revealed truth that is the center of this unity, they are the ones who create the divisions and create the stumbling blocks.” (Dr. Mark Minnick: The Scriptural Response to Teachers of Doctrinal Error. A sermon recorded November, 1997. See p. 214.)As long as Crossless gospel advocates like Stephen Lewis, Jim Johnson and Antonio da Rosa (aka- Sock Puppet fg me) remain in FGA membership, which they joined by twisting the Covenant’s “obvious meaning” to suit their Crossless theology, there can never be genuine unity.
The “contrary doctrine” of the Crossless gospel is the reason for and cause of “divisions and offences” in the body of Christ and in the FGA. I am guardedly optimistic about and am praying for the advocates of the Crossless gospel to depart from the FGA so that the purity the Gospel and unity of like-minded believers will be restored and maintained.
With God’s help and direction I want to do all that I can to further the cause of Christ. I will do whatever I can to nurture and encourage the FGA to courageously state and stand for the truth of the Gospel, and resist all who are tearing it down through the reductionist methods of Zane Hodges & Bob Wilkin.
Finally, thank you for speaking to me on the phone yesterday afternoon. I enjoyed the fellowship around the Bible. In my opinion, it was profitable as we shared a time of iron sharpening (Proverbs 27:17).
God bless you and you seek to honor God, His Word, and the precious Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Lou Martuneac
NOTE: I will be posting some follow up articles for additional discussion of this issue in the days ahead. Please (Fred) consider yourself welcome to visit, read and comment at my blog whenever you like.
Lou,
ReplyDeleteMany thanks for your kind words and fine discussion.
Grace and Truth always,
Fred Lybrand
Fred:
ReplyDeleteGrace and Peace to you.
LM
Yes, Fred, thanks for your insights as well. I've kind of latched on to your "spirited but gracious" reference in the other thread as "words to blog by". I assume you've got other demands so I know I speak for Rachel and I when I say we appreciate the time you've taken to articulate your perspective as clearly as you have.
ReplyDeleteGrowing in grace,
Stephen
Pastor Lybrand, I just wanted to leave a note for encouragement for you as you work with the FGA. I believe I know what direction you want for them to take, and I hope they do very soon.
ReplyDeleteHowever, that body of men may fail. But we know there is a more important body - the body of Christ. Perhaps it is a necessary thing for FGA to fail, as it will clearly show to the body of Christ those that are approved and those that are not.
The Word of God is sharper than any two-edged sword. I would encourage you to boldly wield the Gospel message, and if need be sharply divide the FGA in order to reveal to the body of Christ those that are on His side and those that are opposed to Him.
God bless you,
Phil
Dear Guests:
ReplyDeleteIn an e-mail exchange with Fred Lybrand last night I was informed that he had just been officially named Vice President of the FGA for 2008.
I am hopeful Brother Lybrand's presence on the FGA's board will help the FGA find its voice an footing.
LM
We will pray for him and that word spoken here in these last two posts, both strong and rightly offensive at times and also sweet encouraging ones, will resonate by the power of the Spirit of God alone and that brother Lybrand will be equiped for every good work considering what has been said here. Brother Phillip Evans has said it all, may Gods work prevail and His kingdom come on earth as it is in Heaven.
ReplyDeleteGrace upon grace,
Brian
Also I prayerfully encourage all who have read the comments or made comments who are still thinking through this whole process of God making his salvation known...get to the cross to receive the salvation of God. Wherever you may be in your understanding of scripture and of God...get to the cross and receive the salvation of God before it is eternally too late.
ReplyDeleteGrace upon grace,
Brian
Amen Brian! The cross of Christ is precisely the only place one can go to receive eternal salvation and deliverance from the penalty of their sins.
ReplyDeletePhil
I wanted to leave this Charles Ryrie quote from His book So Great Salvation because I am noticing that there are some out here claiming to hold to his same position and even emphasizing some of his books but then retracting and twisting his postions. Rachel picked up on this habit from Dr Wilkins and I discovered this statement and I now see what is happening. It is a good statement, please note that it is in the context of the debate with the Lordships about intellectuall assent but the same quote can clearly be used here to clearly show that some of the free gracers that say they align with his position clearly do not. For whatever reason they call us to understand his position is unclear, but the point is that they are not agreement with the bedrock of what our faith and what the gospel is. Here is the quote:
ReplyDelete"Facts are essential. In describing the Gospel he preached, Paul said it was "that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures" (1 Corinthians 15:3-4). These historical and doctrinal facts are "of first importance" (v. 3) for without them there is no Gospel." Charles Ryrie, So Great Salvation
Nice quote Brian, I totally agree and plan to read SGS myself as soon as I can get my hands on it.
ReplyDeleteI'm getting the impression however that the Redefined Free Grace extremists would have us begin to doubt that Mr Ryrie was Free Grace at all. If they don't, quotes like these will only serve to demonstrate that it is they who are attempting to usurp the title of Free Grace. Perhaps they should break clean and adopt a new name that's more fitting of their actual views -- Free Gift Theology perhaps?
Snicker snicker,
Stephen
Ooh, I know!!! They could summarize their theology with the phrase "Trusting Unconditionally for
ReplyDeleteLife even in Ignorance of the Provider". Then they could usurp TULIP from the Calvinists and REALLY rub it in!!!
A moderate Calvinst with too much time on his hands... apparently.
Stephen
Hi Stephen,
ReplyDeleteI can see so much of how many of the redefined free gracers have misrepresented Ryrie. In fact looking back over the past three years I now see why I was getting so confused in dialoguing with them and being guilted often by them to doubt my salvation. It is a horrible thing that they are doing to people, but they are subtly trying to call us away from the Rock of our salvation. I greatly apprectiate these books by Dr Ryrie. His position is sound and I am in agreement with Him and can now see why many of the Free Gracers who were refined in this new skepticism had me doubting my salvation so often. All is well now. Boy is it ever true that one must needs flee this false doctrine, not try to sympathize with it. May the Lord continue to bless you brother and this blog in their discernment. I always sort of deep down knew something was wrong with some of these cynicalists, but I could never put my finger on it. In one sense they have done that for us. Praise be to our Almighty and caring God who works in such mysterious ways.
Grace upon grace,
Brian
Stephen:
ReplyDeleteSome of my somewhat Reformed leaning friends like to call themselves "Calminians."
Lou
Men:
ReplyDeleteI have So Great Salvation and quote from it several times in my LS book.
Ryrie’s book is probably the only book from that era in the LS debate that is left with any credibility. Hodges has gone off to such gross extremes he lost ALL credibility in the LS debate.
Furthermore, Hodges is a serious liability in the debate and detrimental influence to those of us who reject LS.
Seems we always have to start by advising men that we/I do not agree with the egregious errors of Hodges, Wilkin and GES.
Lou
Dear Guests:
ReplyDeleteI just had to copy and paste a comment from KnetKnight that he posted to a Crossless advocate at another blog. I trust you'll appeciate the tongue-in-cheek from Knet.
I came up with this the other day to help you all infiltrate and take over Calvinism in the next decade or so. As a sign of my overarching good will I submit that all you have to do is adopt the following mnemonic as a summary of your theology.
Trusting
Unconditionally for
Life everlasting, even in
Ignorance of the
Provider
See, then you can claim to be good "5 pointers" (wink wink) and infiltrate traditionally Calvinist organizations and slowly slip in your redefined TULIP. In a decade or two you'll be able to take over from the inside! IT COULD WORK!
Not,
Stephen