The Grace Evangelical Society Is Heretical

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Martin, May 26, 2008.

  1. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    I know that this has been mentioned on this board before, but Saturday I got the latest copy of the Grace Evangelical Society's "Grace In Focus" news letter. While it is not news to me that Bob Wilkin is a heretic, the boldness of his heresy is shocking. In an article he titled "Scavenger Hunt Salvation Without a List", Dr. Wilkin states:

    "To be born again, eternally saved, all one needs to do is believe that Jesus Christ guarantees everlasting life to all who simply believe in Him for it..(passage list)..What about the virgin birth, the Trinity, Jesus' bodily resurrection, Jesus' post-resurrection appearances, Jesus' substitutionary death on the cross, Jesus' sinless life, Jesus' miracles, the indwelling ministry of the Holy Spirit, the convicting work of the Holy Spirit, the hypostatic union, and on son? Knowing these things certainly makes it easier to believe in Jesus for eternal life. But does it follow that we must believe these things to be saved? No."

    While most of us would agree that one does not have to understand the hypostatic union, the theology of the Trinity, or things like that to be saved, it does not follow that such things can be rejected and a person still be saved. Bob Wilkin has set up a strawman by defending his position by asserting that "the apostles didn't believe these things when they were born again". Some of the things Wilkin is referring to were not yet revealed when the Apostles were saved. Yet, once those things were revealed, the Apostles believed them. To assert that a person can deny those things and still be saved is error. At salvation a person may not have a full grasp of those things, but a person who is truly coming to faith in Christ will not deny them (2John 9).

    Now, we come to the biggest error of all. In his article, as seen in the above quote, Bob Wilkin denies that a person must believe in the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus in order to be saved. He asserts that such belief is helpful, but not necessary. My friend, may I say up front, that his statement is nothing shy of soul damning heresy! The Bible is clear that in order to be saved we must "believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead" (Rom 10:9). In fact, when the Apostle Paul is defining the Gospel that saves he includes the death, burial, and resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ:

    "Now I make known to you, brethren, the Gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, by which also you are saved...for I delievered to you as of first importance what I also recieved, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the thrid day according to the Scriptures" -1Cor 15:1-4

    Bob Wilkin is stripping the Gospel of its very heart by denying that a person must believe in Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection in order to be saved. In fact, the Apostle goes on to chastise some of the Corinthians for not believing those things (1Cor 15:12-19). The results of denying the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus are tragic (we are still in our sins, we are false witnesses of God, our faith is worthless, we will perish, etc). In fact Paul stated earlier that we are only saved if we "hold fast" the Gospel he preached (1Cor 15:2). Therefore the people Bob Wilkin is "winning to the Lord" apart from the message that Paul preached are lost in their sins. Apart from faith in the death, burial, and resurrection of the Lord from the dead there is no salvation.

    I want everyone here to know that, as of this point, I consider the Grace Evangelical Society to be heretical and under the condemnation of God (Gal 1:6-10). In this group I put Bob Wilkin, Zane Hodges, and others who teach their blasphemous heresy. I pray that the rise Lord would open their eyes, and the eyes of their followers, before their error costs them their eternal souls.
     
  2. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,320
    Likes Received:
    786
    A grave problem it is.
     
  3. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have placed an expanded form of this article on my blog (see below). In the more expanded version I make clear that I don't consider those who are guilty of the crossless error to be Christians. I have, no doubt, drawn a line in the sand. It is rare for me to go this extreme in my language, but I think anyone who would gut the gospel should be viewed as a heretic.
     
  4. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,320
    Likes Received:
    786

    You cannot reach salvation without first kneeling at the cross.
     
  5. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    Amen to that :thumbs: .
     
  6. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    And why does he say "no" ?

    So, following your argument, you can say then that when you witness to someone about Christ, and that someone avers or professes that Christ is his Savior and that he or she believes that Christ saved him or her, that person's salvation is not really "there yet" until that person fully understands the life, death, burial and resurrection of Christ and believes them as well as believe that Christ is the Savior and no other ?

    Now let's take this same line of thought to the Arminian camp. So there you go, the invitation has been given, and the choir is singing "just as i am" (which by the way means the sinner is to come to Christ and be accepted by Him just as he is with everything he is: sin, guilt, wrong theology, wrong doctrine, wrong practices, falsities, lies, etc), and this sinner comes and sobs and wants to "accept Christ" and he is led into the "witness room" and someone shows him the Roman way and he professes Christ as Savior and prays the sinner's prayer, and when asked if he truly believes he is saved, he says "yes, on this date and time I was saved".

    But he doesn't know much about Christ yet !

    He doesn't know that he needs to follow Christ into the waters of baptism, he doesn't know about the absolute power of Christ's blood, he doesn't know about His resurrection (he has heard of it, but he doesn't yet really actually believes it, just like some of the apostles).

    So, until he understands, then he is to be "patronized" and called a "brother" and do we cross our fingers and hope he gets to understand and believe everything and then and only then can we actually say he is a brother and he is a soul for whom Christ also died ?


    So, when were they truly, truly, fully saved, then ? When did the blood of Christ actually become effective for them ? When were their names actually written with indelible, uneraseable attributes in the Lamb's Book of Life ?

    Before those things were revealed, (and I suppose, believed) by them, or after ?

    If they were actually bought by Christ with His blood, saved, redeemed, and purchased without merits of any shape or form on their part, why then should the same thing not be applicable for God's elect children today ?


    Error, yes. But which "saved" ? Romans 10:9 which you quoted refers to Jews who were in doctrinal error (verses 1 and 2). Now, what kind of "saved" is Paul talking about ? Is it eternally "saved", or is it "teachingly" and "doctrinallY" saved.

    Apparently, it cannot be the former, because Paul has constantly asserted that salvation is OF the Lord (just as you do), all of grace, not of works (if not of works, then I guess it will not be a strawman to say "not of doctrine or theology" either).

    If it is not the former, then it can only be the latter.

    And I think that is what Dr. Wilkin is saying.
    Christ saved you because HE WANTS TO. Christ saved you because THAT IS THE FATHER'S WILL. Christ saved you because HE LOVED YOU BEFORE YOU LOVED HIM. (Not yelling, just emphasizing. and I believe you agree there is there are Scriptures to back up these emphases).

    Doctrine comes later. That is the very purpose of the gospel. To teach correct doctrine. Doctrine does not save you from the fires of hell and the coming wrath of God. Christ is the one who does that, unconditionally, for those whom He loved and whom the Father gave Him.

    He sent out His apostles to teach and baptize, not to get souls eternally saved, but to get them saved from error, false theology, false doctrine, paganism, idolatry, witchcraft, and so on.

    Now, if having professed Christ, hearing the gospel, and receiving instruction, those whom the apostles (and today's preachers) reach with their limited presence, still insist on their own false practices and teachings and theologies or religions, then we can put a question mark and refuse to fellowship with them.

    You yourself said it "coming to faith" in Christ.
    What did Christ himself say ?
    "Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
    Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls". Matthew 11:28-29.
     
    #6 pinoybaptist, May 27, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: May 27, 2008
  7. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,320
    Likes Received:
    786
    That is quite the gymnastics there.
     
  8. skypair

    skypair
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well...

    I believe that the gospel has to include the facts 1) of sin, 2) of God's judgment of sin, and 3) of "Subsitutionary atonement." (John 16:8-11). How one could leave the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ out of that, I don't know.

    And it is just as "bloodless" and "crossless" IMO to tell someone that God will save you because He wants to, not because you want to be saved. In every biblical instance of "blood-for-sin," the sinner identified himself with the SUBSITUTIONARY sacrifice that he offered in place of HIS OWN sin. In most cases, he had to buy the sacrifice himself. Often, if he was too poor to offer one type sacrifice, another was permitted instead to make the substitutionary effect available to "whosoever willed."

    As to the Passover lamb --- it was chosen by the priests. It's sacrifice was applicable to all "elect Israel" even though all "the elect/God's chosen people" were not believers. And here's the key, Calvies --- the blood sacrifice only "perfected" those who were "sanctified," Heb 10:14. So who was "sanctified" in the OT? Those who believed on the God of the sacrifice, right? It's BELIEVERS who are "set aside"/sanctified unto the service, the "particular election," of God.

    skypair
     
  9. windcatcher

    windcatcher
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2007
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    0
    There is no need without the condemnation of sin. There is no Savior without the cross: There is no salvation without the resurrection. The accomplishment of God's son, Jesus Christ, is complete in this matter. The 'theology' for a soul to be saved is simple......
     
    #9 windcatcher, May 27, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: May 27, 2008
  10. nodak

    nodak
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,265
    Likes Received:
    15
    They are not heretics. They present the gospel "barebones" as to what is required for salvation: understanding Jesus will save sinners, that they are one, and trusting Him to save them.

    That is salvation.

    All this theology and understanding and scripture knowledge is for the disciple. That is, for the growing believer.

    The unbeliever needs only salvation.

    The BELIEVER needs to know the theology, the doctrine, the teachings.

    I will stake my life that there will be men in heaven who were told only the barebones of salvation while dying on some battlefield.
     
  11. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    ==What Wilkin and others are doing is far more than presenting the Gospel "barebones", they are stripping the Gospel of its very core (the work of Christ on the cross). The Scriptures are very clear, the Gospel is the death of Christ for our sins, His burial, and His resurrection from the dead (1Cor 15:1-4, Rom 10:9, Lk 24:46-47). Anyone who does not believe that, does not believe the Biblical Gospel (1Cor 15:2). Salvation through Christ is based on His death, burial, and resurrection. Our relationship to Christ is based on His death, burial, and resurrection. Everything is based on that. Therefore it is error to claim that a person can be saved without believing in their heart in the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ (Rom 10:9-10). It is wrong to preach that Jesus is the guarantor of eternal life for everyone who believes and leave out the cross and the resurrection. It is unBiblical and, I believe, it is a dangerous perversion of the Gospel.


    ==Yet the Scriptures teach that, in order to be saved, a person must believe in their hearts that "God raised Him from the dead" (Rom 10:9, 1Cor 15:1-4). Nobody is saying that in order to be saved a person must be a theologian. What is being said is that in order to be saved one must believe in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus. That is part of turning to Christ in faith. Trying to take the cross out of the salvation experience is very dangerous. Both to the listener and the preacher.
     
  12. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    ==Did I say anthing about "fully" understanding anything? No, so you are not following my argument. You are adding to it. I said, Scripture says, that a person must believe in the death and resurrection of Christ to be saved. They must have faith in it (1Cor 15:1-4). Everytime I preach the Gospel I preach the work of Christ on the cross and His resurrection. That is true if I am talking to one person or to ten.

    ==Again, nobody is talking about great understanding. We are just saying that, in order to be saved, a person must believe in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, by faith. That is what the Apostles taught and did, and that is what Biblical preachers teach and do. If Bob Wilkin believes that preaching the cross and resurrection is adding to the Gospel then he does not believe the Gospel nor does preach the Gospel preached by Paul and others (1Cor 15:1-4, Gal 1:6-9).


    ==The theological flips that people sometimes do amaze and sadden me. Paul wants the salvation of the Jews (vs1). Paul talks about the Jews trying to obtain a false righteousness and then he talks about the true righteousness (vss3-8) and then he gives them "the word of faith" that they preached (vs8). What is that? "That if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved" (vs9). He goes on to describe it even more (vss10-13, Acts 2:21). The verse is talking about eternal salvation, not just "doctrinally saved" (whatever that means). And what does that verse talk about? Believing in the death and resurrection of Christ.


    ==Of course that is true, but there is much more. The love of God resulted in something. What? His giving the Lord Jesus to die on the cross and be raised again for our salvation (Jn 3:16, 1Cor 15:1-4). Bob Wilkin is leaving out the basis and the heart of the Gospel.


    ==Actually He sent them out to preach the saving Gospel (Lk 24:45-49, Acts 26:18-23, Acts 17:26-31, 1Cor 15:1-4, etc).
     
  13. PilgrimPastor

    PilgrimPastor
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2007
    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, as long YOU think that they are heretical... then that is plenty good 'nuff for me! :laugh:
     
  14. Lou Martuneac

    Lou Martuneac
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    0
    Exactly!

    GES insists the lost man does not have know, understand or believe in the Deity, Cross or Resurrection of Christ, but can still be born again.

    Every passage you noted is dimissed or twisted by GES to disarm them because those passages refute the heresy of their Crossless/Deityless Gospel.

    Every one who views this thread needs to read an article I wrote about a week ago. If you think what Wilkin wrote is heresy, which it is, just wait until you read, Heresy of the "Crossless" Gospel: Verified & Affirmed!

    In that article I provide links to additional articles that further substantiate the egregious errors and heretical views of Hodges, Wilkin & GES. Drop a comment here, or at my blog.


    LM
     
    #14 Lou Martuneac, May 29, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: May 29, 2008
  15. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    Lou,

    Thanks for your reply. I know you have been pounding this drum for some time now. The seriousness of the situation did not hit me in the head until I got the newsletter with the article by Wilkin in it. It was then that I realized that there is a serious, serious problem with GES. I knew they were not all that orthodox, and I knew what you had said, but I suppose seeing it myself was what it took to get me to make a serious issue out of this. Unless you object, I want to link to your article from my blog (see below).
     
  16. Lou Martuneac

    Lou Martuneac
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    0
    Martin:

    You are welcome to link to my articles. I want this heresy made known to as wide a cross-section of evangelical circles as possible. Please link to both:

    Heresy of the Crossless Gospel: Verified & Affirmed

    Is “RE-DEFINED” Free Grace Theology- Free Grace Theology?

    I do not want people to think that Hodges, Wilkin, GES speaks for all the folks who identify themselves with the Free Grace movement. That is a serious misnomer.

    The GES is a shrinking, but vocal cell in the FG camp.


    LM
     
  17. pinoybaptist

    pinoybaptist
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2002
    Messages:
    8,123
    Likes Received:
    1
    Martin:

    Again, I ask, what kind of "saved" ? As I see it, you and yours' reaction to the GES' doctrines may be (note: MAY be) knee-jerk.

    Have you ever stopped to think that to say or teach "eternal salvation" requires belief in the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is tantamount to saying that the blood of the Lamb slain from before the foundation of the world had no real value until after the gospel was preached and believed in ?

    What I am trying to say, and which I think is similar to what the GES is saying, is that eternal salvation had no pre-requisites attached to it. It is entirely the will of God for the individual sinner, it is entirely the work of God for the individual sinner, it was accomplished by Jesus Christ for all His people (all meaning those born before, during, and after His time, both in and out of Israel, in and out of the Holy Land, and even to those in the farthest Gentile lands).
    Eternal salvation required nothing, nada, zilch, from the recipients and beneficiaries of this salvation.

    HOWEVER, when the gospel reaches the ears of an elect sinner, and the Spirit draws him to Christ thru the preaching of the gospel (which, of course means he is already a living soul, born again, if you will), then that sinner is REQUIRED to repent, he has the responsibility to repent, to turn from his sinful ungodly ways and creed, forsake his idol, and follow his Savior, in order for him to know the benefits of being a forgiven sinner, HERE IN TIME, and in order for him to be justified in his faith in Christ before man.

    I blame no one for calling the GES heretical in what they were saying, I am not really fully familiar with all their teachings.

    I would perhaps do the same, if I do not carefully distinghuish that the work of Christ for the salvation of His people required absolutely nothing from them, while those claiming Christ to be theirs (already believers as someone else pointed out) are required to present proof of such a salvation thru their faith, obedience, repentance and good work.
     
  18. psalms109:31

    psalms109:31
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2006
    Messages:
    3,600
    Likes Received:
    0
    Salvation

    We are saved by grace through faith.

    That is why we were chosen in Christ not apart from Him.

    Faith is required from us, which this faith is given to us by God through His word. We can walk away from thi9s faith just like the young rich ruler.

    It is Jesus Christ that was chosen before the foundation of the world, when we are in Christ we were chosen to.

    So God does want all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth.

    I believe in grace, but we are saved by grace through faith.

    The oportunity for salvation is for the world and we are messengers of this. We must remain in Jesus to be saved, becasuse He is our only hope.

    Who can save us from this body of death praise be to Jesus.

    Whosoever believes shall be saved, you were not elected until you were in Christ.

    Paul letters is written to a believing church who were in Christ, so yes they were elected before the foundation of the world.
     
  19. JDale

    JDale
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    Messages:
    494
    Likes Received:
    0
    It is a rare thing when I can say I agree with Martin -- but common that I disagree with PinoyBaptist!!
     
  20. JDale

    JDale
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2006
    Messages:
    494
    Likes Received:
    0
    It is a rare thing when I can say I agree with Martin -- but common that I disagree with PinoyBaptist!!
     

Share This Page

Loading...