Hi,
What makes someone Free Grace?
I have a few friend who are suggesting that I'm unfair in saying that GES is no longer in the Free Grace Movement because it disagrees with earlier Free Grace leaders. Of course, disagreeing isn't the issue...but disagreeing with a fundamental is. I put the gospel in as one of the fundamentals. In my Open Letter I mentioned the following from Lewis Sperry Chafer:
Preaching the gospel is telling something about Christ and His
finished work for them which they are to believe. This the simplest
test to be applied to all soul-saving appeals. The Gospel has not been
preached until a personal message concerning a crucified and living
Saviour has been presented, and in a form which calls for the response
of a personal faith. (Salvation, p. 101).
Naturally, this quote is quite at odds with what Zane Hodges and the GES Gospel maintain. Even though they might insist that they 'preach the cross'...Dr. Chafer would say that they MUST preach the cross. My argument is that the GES folks have cut themselves out of history by cutting historical leaders out on what the gospel is.
Though other disagree, I think what is at issue is the simple fact that if we can all disagree about anything 'free grace'---then there actually is not definition available.
What would you consider the essentials to be? Also, do you think I've been unfair in appealing to history?
Thanks much,
FRL
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
One of the last articles that Zane Hodges wrote before he went to be with the Lord was entitled The Hydra’s Other Head: Theological Legalism. In the article, he stated that some adherents of theological legalism use I Cor. 15:1-8 as a text summarizing Paul’s Gospel to the unsaved. Who might those theologians be? While not specifically stated in the article, Zane’s so-called theological legalists would include Bible scholars such as L. S. Chafer.
ReplyDeleteIn the article, Zane also wrote: “Theological legalism seeks to co-opt Free Grace theology. Indeed, it masquerades as this kind of theology. But this claim is false.”
In other words, according to Zane, men such as L. S. Chafer did not teach Free Grace theology. Since they taught that I Cor. 15:1-8 is Paul’s summary of the gospel to the unsaved, these Bible scholars could not be Free Grace theologians. Zane has narrowed down the definition of Free Grace theology to ONLY those who hold to his concept of the gospel which is “believing in Jesus for eternal life.” According to Zane’s limited definition of Free Grace theology, anyone who teaches that a person must believe that Jesus died on the cross for their sins is a promoter of Theological Legalism and does not teach Free Grace theology. In other words, Free Grace theology is the sole possession of Zane Hodges, Bob Wilkin and the Grace Evangelical Society. Anyone who does not buy in to their version of “the promise only gospel,” cannot be a Free Grace theologian.
It seems to me that Zane is the one who drew the “Free Grace circle” around his own theological bias. In his estimation, anyone not within his narrow circle does not hold to Free Grace Theology.
Of course, I disagree with his premise. Since he is the one who drew the line in the sand, then I would have to conclude that it was Zane who excluded himself and GES from the traditional Free Grace position. The traditional Free Grace position of men like L. S. Chafer demands that both the person and work of Jesus must be the object of faith.
At least that’s how I see it.
Bob
Bob,
ReplyDeleteI think you are dead on...in fact, I do think there is a temptation on GES's part to lay exclusive claim to Free Grace Theology. That, of course is indefensible. It is curious that the term itself is used exhaustively throughout the ages...indeed, Millard Erickson attributes the original 'coinaged' use to J. Wesley!
At any rate, understanding the history of our position (and minimally recognizing Chafer's role...and others) means that Zane's change merits and entirely different Movement Title.
At least that's how I see it today.
Grace,
FRL
Bob:
ReplyDeleteYou noted, "According to Zane’s limited definition of Free Grace theology, anyone who teaches that a person must believe that Jesus died on the cross for their sins is a promoter of Theological Legalism and does not teach Free Grace theology."
That last article Hodges, which is IMO his lasting legacy, removed any doubt that GES had become an isolated fringe movement unique unto itself. Hodges, himself, in his Hydra Head article isolated the GES camp.
Prior to his article, many in GES had already isolated themselves due to their advocacy of the Hodges reductionist assault on the cosf, but it was Hodges himself who nailed this down.
Movements and their labels aside, the GES reductionist message has not been known or taught by anyone at anytime in NT history (I am aware of) until Hodges forwarded it as what has come to be known as the Crossless and/or Promise-ONLY gospel.
LM
Hey Fred,
ReplyDelete"The History of the Free Grace Movement" would be a fascinating read! Do you (or anyone else) know of an article or book along this line?
I have collected a few quotes by L.S. Chafer, Harry Ironside, William Newell and Lance Latham that demonstrate clearly these men understood and taught free grace long before Dr. MacArthur & Dr. Ryrie brought the Lordship Salvation controversy into the spotlight in the 1980's.
I understand that L. S. Chafer and B. B. Warfield debated the Lordship Salvation issue back in the early 1900's. It was also debated later in Eternity Magazine by Everett F. Harrison and John R. W. Stott. I don't know much about those debates, but would love to read more on the history of Free Grace Theology.
I would love to see a thread on your blog called something like "Quotes from early Free Grace teachers." Anyone having a quote could post them there and we could write our own "History of the Free Grace Movement." :-)
Bob
Bob,
ReplyDeleteI don't know of such a work...which is why I posted the blog. I think a collection of quotes would indeed be great as well.
Grace,
FRL
I do too.
ReplyDeleteI think I have some books with a few good quotes of that sort in them.
JanH
Fred,
ReplyDeleteDo you want to start a new thread for "Quotes from early free grace teachers"? Or should we post them on this thread?
Bob