Some of the most extreme statements you will read anywhere on the Gospel come from Antonio. His views are examples of what the GES faction of the Free Grace community has spiraled down to by following the teaching of Hodges. Here is an example from Antonio, “The Mormon Jesus and Evangelical Jesus are one and the same.” Read it here…

http://indefenseofthegospel.blogspot.com/2008/01/can-biblical-jesus-mormon-jesus-be-one.html

Antonio da Rosa’s “Crossless” interpretation of the Gospel and extremism is NOT representative of the Free Grace community at large.

Scores of godly Bible-believing pastors, who would consider themselves in the Free Grace community, utterly reject the teaching of Zane Hodges, Bob Wilkin, GES on the Gospel. The Hodges faction in the FG community has become a rapidly shrinking group that tries to portray itself as the voice of the Free Grace community at large.

LM

“How shall we who died to sin, still live in it?” (Romans 6:2)

Romans is a tricky book to quote from. It is a legal arguement made by God’s Lawyer. Through Grace we are freed from the Law and live under Grace. We have died to sin, not in that we sin no more, in that we are no longer in it’s ownership.

Romans 7 particulary verses 14-25 :

We know that the law is spiritual; but I am unspiritual, sold as a slave to sin. I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. 17As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. 18I know that nothing good lives in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.

So I find this law at work: When I want to do good, evil is right there with me. For in my inner being I delight in God’s law; but I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? Thanks be to God—through Jesus Christ our Lord!

So then, I myself in my mind am a slave to God’s law, but in the sinful nature a slave to the law of sin.

When we give our lives to God we are still in sin and will be until we loose the earthy form.

That however does not seem to be the problem with FG. It seems that there is concern that one might be thought to recieve Jesus and then walk away and not follow him. It seems on the face of it pretty evident that this is true and happens a lot more frequent than one would like to think. The first one that comes to mind was Judas.

Grace is totally free. No stings are attached. Try it for three and if you do not like it, return it no questions asked.

I susspect that is a little to unstructured for you, but that is pretty much the way Paul lays it out. It is not suprising that this discussion exists however. James wrote is tract to correct what he and those arround him felt was a denial of works. Paul says that we are saved from the hold of sin by faith and faith alone, and there is no question about that from me, but James is correct that if a person yeilds to GOd, there will be works in his life.

In the passage here 6 : 38-40, it i sclear that God’s will is that all who come to Jesus will have eternal life. The trick here is that God’s will has been given over to a second will, free will. It is God’s will that all men come to him, but clearly God’s will is not done on earth.

Now I am not familiar with the Free Grace movement, but if they are saying that those who accept Christ and walk away will be raised up on the last day, I doubt it. I do not however second guess God.

Doctrine will smother the Love every time. Jesus says that he is the way. Church is not for creating a new “law” it is for scommunity and fellowship. It for building up each other and voluntarily holdong each other accountable for what we feel called to do.

Matt Waymeyer is right the scripture have all we need, there is no need or calling to add to or take away fron that.

For the FG view, click on the above.

Those who press for “faith” do so on the basis of theological preference rather than the text and context teaching.

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.” Eph 2:8-9 kjv

1. For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves:

2. [it is] the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.

To what in Point #1 does the word “it” in Point #2 refer: grace? saved? faith?

The word “it” is singular, not plural. Of the preceding things listed (grace, saved, faith), the word “it” can only refer to one of them - otherwise the passage would read “they are the gifts” rather than “it is the gift”. The wording requires that only one of the preceding can be considered the gift of God. If the word “it” refers to “faith”, so that we say faith is the gift of God referred to in these verses, then what is “saved”? “Saved” cannot also be the gift being referred to. If we let “faith” be the singular gift of God that these verses refer to, we cannot then use these same verses to support the notion that “saved” is a gift of God. Conversely, if we let “saved” be the singular gift of God that these verses refer to, we cannot then use these same verses to support the notion that “faith” is a gift of God.

On the other hand, the word “it” could refer to the entire process defined by the phrase “For by grace are ye saved through faith; …” Within this interpretation, “faith” would be part of the gift, as would “grace” and “saved”.

On the other hand, [it is] is in brackets, which tells us these two words are not part of the manuscript. To what then does “the Gift of God refer if we leave off [it is]?

In his 1-18-08 post, Donald Fahrenkrug’s states - “So, if like verse 8 plainly teaches, that faith is a gift, …” Hopefully my presentation above shows that it is not at all “plain” to many thoughtful folks that verse 8 refers to faith as the gift.

Any comments on the above? And one further question. I assume that “saved” in these verses refers to the salvation we shall experience at some future point when we are finally united with Christ forever (which places “faith” before “saved” in the sequence of things, gift or not). If that is correct, then is it also correct to state that these two verses are not discussing the process of regeneration - the point where the dead man is brought to life? Or is the act of regeneration assumed in the word “saved”?

Donald: I think you make a good point—in fairness to their view, FG teachers would say that the scenario I described is highly unlikely, and yet as you also said, still possible.

http://www.faithalone.org/journal/1994i/J12-94c.htm

So, if like verse 8 plainly teaches, that faith is a gift, it creates a problem for their theology. I think the point is well taken that they do the same thing with this Matthew passage.

Now, to be fair to their theology, while a person may believe, but 10 seconds later deny everything, they do say that is possible but highly unlikely.

I’ve read a lot of their theology and they do blast MacArthur all the time for his “Lordship Salvation,” theology.

All said and done, I’ll continue to use and love my MacArthur Study Bible. For me, FG theology has too many novel interpretations of scripture to suit me.

Thanks for taking the time on this article. This is a very important subject. For the last couple of weeks I have been disussing the article called “Hebrews 6 and the loss of salvation.” I think that our understanding of this passage will be dangerously swayed by a misunderstanding of the concept of Lordship salvation. Maybe you could take some time to comment on that article.

thanks,
Robert

As for the will of God, the Bible plainly states in 1 Thes. 4:2-4:
“For ye know what commandments we gave you by the Lord Jesus. For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication: That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour”

It is impossible to be sanctified (’separated’, ‘called out to be different’) to God from the world when you do and don’t do the same things it does.

Obedience to God is always a result of conversion.
(I hope I made sense).

God bless.
Bill