Dear Guests of IDOTG:
A fair amount of needless controversy developed over my previous article, Believing the Gospel: “May Indeed Frustrate Grace.”
In that article I demonstrated how Antonio da Rosa, the blogosphere’s most vocal apologist for the Grace Evangelical Society (GES) reductionist view of the Gospel, believes to call on the lost to believe the Gospel (the cross and resurrection of Christ) “may indeed frustrate (saving) grace.” This is da Rosa’s position, which has been thoroughly documented. Regrettably, as is his custom virtually any time he is held accountable for his reductionist teaching, he cries, “misrepresentation.” *His complaint appeared in an article at one of his Crossless Gospel blogs.
The driving force behind da Rosa’s (and GES members) baseless cries of “misrepresentation,” is they refuse to take ownership of their well-documented reductionist assault on the Gospel, i.e. the content of saving faith.
On Wednesday (3/11/09) da Rosa followed his having buried the comment thread were he was claiming he had been “misquoted” and “misrepresented” by deleting his article in its entirety. His charges that he had been “misrepresented” were, of course, indefensible as it was irrefutably demonstrated to him. In any event, the deleted thread was archived prior to Antonio’s burying it.
In any event, two of my partners in defense of the Gospel (Kev Lane and Phillip Evans) challenged da Rosa at one of his own Crossless gospel blogs over his claims of “misrepresentation.” Unfortunately, their questions to Antonio were at first essentially dodged. Kev pressed him further to clarify his position in unvarnished terms. Finally, Kev became the target of personal attacks by da Rosa for pressing toward and expecting a clear and transparent answer from him, which he refused to provide. Antonio finally closed and buried the blog thread where these exchanges were taking place.
Kev of the On My Walk blog devised a very clever way to finish the conversation with Antonio. Kev took snap shots of the Crossless gospel blog thread before Antonio deleted it. From the snap shots Kev exposes the absurdity of da Rosa’s claim and then refutes them. I like this approach because it is like a debate with a man (da Rosa) who refuses to appear. So Kev is continuing the debate with da Rosa voluntarily in abstentia using his (da Rosa’s) known and published views to represent him. Kev’s unique and compelling article is titled, The Grace of a Man: Discussion Disabled.
Brother Evans has also prepared his own continuation of the deleted discussion he began with Crossless gospel advocate Antonio da Rosa. Here is a sample from Brother Evan’s straight-shooting look at the theology and evasive nature of GES member Antonio da Rosa:
“Perhaps you could answer this question to help clear things up:This new article “(Far) Out on a Limb to Protest too Much” by Phillip Evans will be published on Monday here at IDOTG.
‘Can a lost person be saved while maintaining a denial of the Deity of Christ, His death on the cross for our sins, and resurrection?’
Apparently you are either fearful or unable to answer my question clearly and simply in your own words, after which we could both appeal to Scripture to justify our positions. Instead, you prefer to hide behind numerous Scripture passages you’ve fashioned into a cloak via your misuse of them. This method is right out of the cultists’ handbook of tactics.
I will now address your quotations of Scripture that you used as a reply to my question above. You said...”
*da Rosa posted his complaint here ignoring he has been banned for well over a year. Comment moderation kept his posts off this blog.