April 7, 2009

Free Grace Alliance Announces an Open Break from the Grace Evangelical Society and its “Crossless” Gospel

Dear Guests of IDOTG:

Today an e-mail from the FGA’s Executive Council was sent to its existing membership. Among other items of interest the following major announcement was included:

The Grace Evangelical Society
After much discussion and reflection, the FGA Executive Council has concluded that in the light of misunderstandings in our broader Christian community, it is important for us to issue the following statement:

The Free Grace Alliance is not associated with the Grace Evangelical Society and does not endorse the GES Gospel (also referred to as “crossless” or “promise only” by some). We invite those who share our heart for the Gospel’s clarity and declaration, of both the Person and Work of Christ, to join hands with us.
This a welcome, long anticipated and necessary announcement.

Any individual in the Free Grace community that does not align with, but has by default been perceived to be a member of or sympathetic to the GES will find the FGA announcement very welcome news.

There has indeed been a long held “misunderstanding in our broader Christian community.” As I put it “a serious misunderstanding across a broad cross section of Evangelical Christianity.” The misunderstanding is that the Grace Evangelical Society (GES) is the representative voice of the broad base of men and women who identify themselves with the Free Grace (FG) community. This is and has been a serious misnomer that has been in sore need of correction. The GES is in fact a shrinking cell of theological extremists that do not speak for or represent any Bible-believing Christian outside the GES leadership, membership and its sympathizers.

The GES propagates what has come to be known and accurately defined as the “Crossless Gospel,” “ReDefined Free Grace Theology” and the “Promise Only Gospel.” It is largely because of the GES reductionist assault on the content of saving faith; many men in the Free Grace community have separated from GES and do not want their name and/or ministry to be identified with the GES.

GES reductionist soteriology is the most egregious form of anti-biblical heresy ever introduced to the New Testament church by one of its own, namely the late Zane Hodges. This reductionist assault on the Gospel, i.e. the content of saving faith, is propagated solely by the Grace Evangelical Society and its Executive Director, Bob Wilkin.

The reductionism, originated by Zane Hodges, has long since rendered the GES irrelevant and impotent in any discussion of or debate over the Gospel of Jesus Christ. No advocate of the GES “Crossless” gospel can be taken seriously in any discussion of the Gospel, especially in the matter of justification by faith.

For those who may be unfamiliar with the Hodges, Wilkin “Crossless” gospel it can be boiled down to this cover statement.
The GES believes that a lost man does NOT have to be aware of, understand or believe in the deity, death and/or resurrection of Christ, but can still be born again. Only belief in the promise of eternal life by a man named Jesus, no matter who the lost man believes him to be, including the non-deity Mormon Jesus, grants to him (the lost man) eternal life.
It is my understanding that this major announcement from the FGA will very shortly appear at the Free Grace Alliance site.


LM


Visit the official FGA site for the announcement there.

12 comments:

  1. "No advocate of the GES “Crossless” gospel can be taken seriously in any discussion of the Gospel, especially in the matter of justification by faith."

    No argument there.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Wow this is big news. I wonder what kind of reaction there will be at the various GES sympathetic blogs.

    I also wonder how some will manage to accuse people such as myself as not being "free grace" now.

    There IS a graceful way for those blogs to respond, but time will tell if that's what we witness or not.

    Kev

    ReplyDelete
  3. Kev:

    IMO, the GES will ignore what has just happened to their shrinking movement.

    They are as impervious to understanding they have long since become irrelevant as they are impervious to fact that they have fallen into the most extreme form of reductionist heresy ever introduced to the NT church.

    Lord willing some will one day respond to the convicting work of the Holy Spirit, realize they are in error and repent of it.

    The Crosslessgospel of Zane Hodges is an offense to the cross and the Lord who died upon it in payment for the sins of the whole world.

    By the way, there is another major development that will be released in upcoming days. This will further isolate and shatter the GES as well as its Crossless heresy.


    LM

    PS: Both of these developments are receiving a great deal of attention well beyond FG circles. This will help guarantee the GES never has chance to gain any traction for its reductionist heresy outside its own small sphere of influence.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Everyone!
    God bless, first and foremost.

    Lou, just to be clear, I spoke with Wilkin not long ago, and asked this question about some nameless person or some random person named Jesus promising eternal life...He told me personally, "No Jason, You must believe that it is Jesus Christ, for nobody else has the authority to offer eternal life".

    I'm not sure what's been published, but I specifically brought this issue to light with Bob, and he made clear that the unsaved must believe the promise of Jesus Christ.

    God bless, all.

    Careful we don't get so bogged down in this issue that we forget to continue in a grace message (How better to preach grace than to exemplify it through our words and actions).

    -Jason

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hello Jason:

    Long time!

    I appreciate your input. There is a great deal of published material that proves beyond any shadow of a doubt that Wilkin and GES insist the lost do NOT have to be aware of the Lord’s deity, death or resurrection, but can still be born again.

    Much of what you noted from Wilkin is GES mantra speak. Please note what you attributed to Wilkin, “…he made clear that the unsaved must believe the promise of Jesus Christ.” It is the promise of eternal life that is the object of faith for the GES camp. Notice that he does not insist the lost know and believe that Jesus Christ is deity. That is by design and with purpose.

    You will also remember that (GES member and National Conference speaker) Antonio da Rosa has never retracted this extreme statement, The Mormon Jesus & Evangelical Jesus are One and the Same.” As far as the GES is concerned the lost man can believe the promise of eternal life coming from the Jesus Christ who is believed to be Mormonism’s half-brother of Satan. Antonio da Rosa, speaking for the GES position, says “no matter what misconceptions” a lost man has about who Jesus is and what He did to provide salvation does not hinder him (the lost man) from receiving eternal. GES believes these “misconceptions,” including a conscience rejection of the Lord’s deity, should be “put on the back-burner” in an evangelistic setting that should be addressed in a post-salvation discipleship lesson.

    There are number of public comments from GES people stating that even if a lost man believed the Lord is deity, that He died and rose from the dead, but did not understand or express belief in the “promise of eternal life,” then that man is still unsaved. BTW, I just heard that the latest GES publication (Grace in Focus) has an article by Wilkin stating this very thing.

    Definitely read the recent two part series, Christ’s Resurrection: Part of the Saving Message?


    LM

    PS: I appreciate the note on grace in our words and actions. These are difficult things we have to address. It is, however, necessary to inform to protect the brethren from being deceived by the teachers of this reductionist assault on the content of saving faith. God forbid even one more unsuspecting believer fall into the trap of the GES Crossless & Promise Only gospel.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Jason:

    Let me give you this question to ask Wilkin. Ask him, In the present dispensation, what is the content of saving faith?”

    and/or

    In the present dispensation, is a belief in Jesus’ divinity, His atoning death, and/or His resurrection necessary for faith in Jesus to constitute saving faith?”

    Ask Wilkin that question. Let us know if and how he responds to you.

    Thanks again for stopping by.


    LM

    ReplyDelete
  7. Jason/All:

    One more thought.

    The real issue here and the point of this article is that there is so much that is so wrong with the GES’s aberrant theology, that men who once had a kindred spirit with GES men have openly broke from them and did it publicly.

    Many FG pastors and teachers have quietly left the GES over the years. The need became such that non-GES men (FGA Executive Council) have had to make it public that they do not align or sympathize with the reductionist teachings that were originated by Hodges and are today being propagated by Bob Wilkin and the GES.

    I suppose the GES will always be around in some form. It is, however, my desire to do what I can to see to it that GES reductionism never gains any kind of foothold in Bible-believing circles.


    LM

    ReplyDelete
  8. Lou,

    I wish this kind of statement from the FGA had been unnecessary, but unfortunately it is necessary. So I am thankful that the FGA leadership has seen through the fog that so often accompanies these discussions.

    Jason,

    Thanks for posting here. Not too long ago, I "sort of" discussed this with Antonio (I say "sort of" because he didn't respond much), and have discussed this with Matthew some here at Lou's blog in the past. So I know what they have said, and I also know what Hodges taught. But before I describe those things, I want to say at the outset that it may be that Wilkin has a different view from those men. Although if he does, he has yet to make that public. But I do want to allow for that possibility.

    Also, I think we all agree that the GES does NOT teach that eternal life is possible through belief in "some nameless person". To my knowledge, GES has always maintained that the name of Jesus must be known - it's one of the items on their "checklist". :-)

    Otherwise though, GES advocates have made it very clear that the lost person is not required to know anything at all about this person named Jesus, except that he can/will give them eternal life if they believe he can/will. Antonio has said that what each person "needs" to know in order to get to the place where they believe that proposition is different, but such "needs" are only psychological/intellectual, and are not required by God.

    Hodges made it very clear in his "deserted island" scenario, that the man on the island had never heard a single thing about Christianity, the Bible, or Jesus. The only info the man had in Hodges' scenario was the snippets of verses on the papers that washed ashore, and neither of those verses said anything about "the Bible" or "Christ" or anything. They give NO info about Jesus whatsoever, except that he promises eternal life to all who believe him.

    So then, what it seems to me that GES adovcates are saying, is that the evangelist is required to be speaking of "Jesus Christ" or "the Jesus of the Bible", but the lost person is NOT required to know these things. If the evangelist were to say, "Believe in Jesus, my Mexican neighbor, he promised to give you eternal life", then even if a lost person believed that, they would still be lost because it's the wrong Jesus. However, as long as the evangelist is referring to the Jesus of the Bible, even if the evangelist never says that phrase and/or the lost person doesn't realize/know/understand that, the lost person can still be saved.

    As Lou indicated, Antonio has stated (and stood by his statement) that a person can be saved "no matter the misconceptions" they have about Jesus. While Antonio does not speak directly for the GES, he is affiliated with them, and his statements have never been publicly rejected or denied by anyone from GES, that I know of, certainly not these types of statements.

    Granted, GES folks hold that it is extremely unlikely that any person would believe just some person named Jesus can give them eternal life, without needing other reasons as to who such a one is and how he can be trusted to provide this eternal life. Nevertheless, their theology does allow for such a strange scenario... indeed, Hodges himself posited such a scenario with his "deserted island".

    ReplyDelete
  9. Here is an example of why the reductionist errors of the GES are also known as the Promise-Only] Gospel. This quote was posted by a GES gospel advocates at the pro-Crossless gospel blog, Rose’s Reasonings.

    By the way, faith means to be persuaded or convinced something is true--and that's ALL it means. Just like Abraham, the object of saving faith is the God's [sic] promise. God only wants the answer to ONE question: Is it true or not? Rom. 4:21, Jn 11:25-27, Jn. 20:31.”

    Earlier I offered this question to anyone who would like to ask Wilkin. Ask him, “In the present dispensation, what is the content of saving faith?” and/or “In the present dispensation, is a belief in Jesus’ divinity, His atoning death, and/or His resurrection necessary for faith in Jesus to constitute saving fait]?”

    *In 2007 Wilkin was clamoring for someone in Free Grace circles to debate him on the content of saving faith. In September 2007 a Free Grace theologian, Brother Ron Shea, agreed to debate Wilkin and propsoed that question above for the debate. Wilkin immediately lost his taste for the debate, declined and excused himself post-haste. See- Open Challenge

    Wilkin has never since called for a debate on his interpretation of the content of saving faith.


    LM

    * It was at this time and over Wilkin being challenged in the question he (Wilkin) did not want to debate that Antonio da Rosa under a false identity attacked Brother Ron Shea with a cirminal act of libel and defamation. To this day da Rosa refuses to apologize to and repent of with Brother Shea. See- OPEN LETTER to ANTONIO da ROSA, aka Mr. TRUTH DETECTOR

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hi Jason-

    I don't believe I have had the pleasure of interacting with you yet. I am kind of new around here.

    Regarding what Wilkin said to you:

    He told me personally, "No Jason, You must believe that it is Jesus Christ, for nobody else has the authority to offer eternal life.",

    what Lou said is correct:

    Much of what you noted from Wilkin is GES mantra speak. Please note what you attributed to Wilkin, “…he made clear that the unsaved must believe the promise of Jesus Christ.” It is the promise of eternal life that is the object of faith for the GES camp. Notice that he does not insist the lost know and believe that Jesus Christ is deity. That is by design and with purpose.

    Some time ago Lou posted an article on the change in the GES doctrinal statement. I don't know how to post a link, but the article is on November 28, 2008 and called "Grace Evangelical Society's Reductionist Affirmation of Belief. By comparing the original version with the revised version you can see that many orthodox doctrines have become casualties of the GES reductionist heresy.

    Lou begins with this:

    Until August 2005 the official Grace Evangelical Society (GES) Affirmation of Beliefs on the doctrine of salvation was stated as follows (*abbreviated form):

    “Jesus Christ, God incarnate, paid the full penalty for man’s sin when He died on the cross of Calvary. Any person who, in simple faith, trusts in the risen Christ as his or her only hope of heaven, refusing to trust in anything else, receives the gift of eternal life, which once granted, can never be lost. 



    The sole condition for receiving eternal salvation from hell is faith (trust) in the Lord Jesus Christ, Who died a substitutionary death on the cross for man's sin and rose from the dead (John 3:16-18; 6:47; Acts 16:31).”


    

 That previous statement was revised. Following is the current version of the GES Affirmation of Belief.

    “The sole condition for receiving everlasting life is faith alone in the Lord Jesus Christ, who died a substitutionary death on the cross for man’s sin and rose bodily from the dead (John 3:16-18; 6:47; Acts 16:31).

    Faith is the conviction that something is true. To believe in Jesus (‘he who believes in Me has everlasting life’) is to be convinced that He guarantees everlasting life to all who simply believe in Him for it (John 4:14; 5:24; 6:47 ; 11:26 ; 1 Tim 1:16 ).”


    In the former Affirmation, “Jesus Christ” is identified as deity by use of the term, “God incarnate.” This reference to the Lord’s deity has been deleted from the current Affirmation.

    End quote.

    Affirmations of Belief are not like furnished rooms that are redecorated just 'cause. One would only change it if a need was seen to do so, such as a doctrinal change that had occurred within the group that the existing Affirmation no longer reflected. This is what happened here. There was nothing wrong with the original Affirmation. They have changed their views. So they took a perfectly good statement and revised it to better reflect their new position, notably removing this clear orthodox statement "Jesus Christ, God incarnate paid the full penalty for man's sin when He died on the cross of Calvary" and not even replacing it. And notably changing this clear orthodox statement "The sole condition for receiving eternal salvation from hell..." and replacing it with "The sole condition for receiving everlasting life..." (thereby removing the consequences of not trusting Christ.)

    What they have done is cause their AoB to emphasis the promise of eternal life more than anything else, even to making the death of Christ on the cross secondary to faith in the person of Christ, removing reference to the consequences of not trusting Christ and greatly diminishing the understanding of Jesus Christ's deity (they did leave "Lord" in there.) There is no good reason to do this.

    On February 3rd and 9th Lou posted an article of mine where I took up the issue of Wilkin saying that some FG adherents

    “...limit the essentials about the Person and work of Christ-arbitrarily-to three points: Jesus’ deity, His death on the cross for our sins, and His bodily resurrection from the dead.”1

    He said this in the November/December issue of Grace in Focus.

    My article was about the need for preaching Christ crucified, but the point here is that Wilkin called the cross, the resurrection and the deity of Christ "arbitrary" points in the gospel.

    So with all this stuff in print, along with Antonio da Rosa (who is given a platform to speak at the GES conference even with his Mormon Jesus comment) I would say Wilkin's verbal answer to you was blowing smoke.

    There are many doctrinal casualties in the changed GES position. One of them is indeed the deity of Christ.

    JanH

    P.S. Maybe Lou has the link where Wilkin was visiting his dying mother and had concluded she was saved because she saw that Jesus gives eternal life, even though she didn't believe "all that other stuff."

    ReplyDelete
  11. Jan:

    You mentioned, "Maybe Lou has the link where Wilkin was visiting his dying mother and had concluded she was saved because she saw that Jesus gives eternal life, even though she (stated to him that she) didn't believe 'all that other stuff'."

    Yes, I have that archived and meant to post it earlier, but some of the other issues I have been addressing recently pushed that issue (with addtional supporting documentation from Wilkin) back down the publishing list for my blog.

    I'll put it up eventually.


    Lou

    ReplyDelete