More Extremes of “Crossless” Gospel Apologists

[Lou Martuneac]

Mike:

You wrote,

There is no mention whatsoever regarding Jesus dieing on the cross for Cornelius's sins, only that he was executed.

“And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree,” (Acts 10:39).

With the passage above in clear view, how can you state that Peter, in his preaching to Cornelius, did not mention Jesus died on the cross?


LM

 

[HankD]

The issue is not scoring on a quiz. The issue is that Crossless advocates insist that the lost do not have to understand or believe anything about who Jesus is (deity) and what He did to provide salvation. The lost man can openly reject the deity of Christ and men like da Rosa say this is a "misconception" that in no way hinders him from being born again. That is their position and the crux of the controversy.

The issue perhaps could/should be the scoring on a quiz as long as it is a scriptural quiz. Not so much for the hearer of the gospel but for the one who presumes to speak in His name.

The Scipture (especially 1 John gives many tests concerning a person's supposed postition in the Lord).

Both the talk and the walk must agree.

When the Gospel is presented, the Christ who is presented must be the Christ of revelation.

The Scripture is very strong concerning the Gospel.

Galatians 1

8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.​

Whether God can or will regenerate a man beyond the age of accountability without the Gospel is debatable.

Since He can do all things I would say yes and it would be an exception to His rules, however when the Gospel is preached it must be preached correctly.

A crossless Gospel is no Gospel no matter to whom it is given.


HankD

 

[D28guy]

Lou,

"“And we are witnesses of all things which he did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree,” (Acts 10:39).

With the passage above in clear view, how can you state that Peter, in his preaching to Cornelius, did not mention Jesus died on the cross?"

That is not what I stated.

In the post you are referring to I said there was nothing said regarding "Christ dieing for our sins on the cross", only that he was executed. Peter simply told Cornelius that Christ was "hung on a tree and killed". Nothing was stated about our sins being placed on Christ, Christ taking our death penalty upon Himself and making atonement for our sins.

Yet Cornelius was clearly born of the Spirit. Saved.

And there was information left out with the jailer as well, regarding Christs Diety and dieing for our sins, yet he was given the promise of eternal life if he "believed".

Mike

 

[HankD]

Lou,



That is not what I stated.

In the post you are referring to I said there was nothing said regarding "Christ dieing for our sins on the cross", only that he was executed. Peter simply told Cornelius that Christ was "hung on a tree and killed". Nothing was stated about our sins being placed on Christ, Christ taking our death penalty upon Himself and making atonement for our sins.

Yet Cornelius was clearly born of the Spirit. Saved.

And there was information left out with the jailer as well, regarding Christs Diety and dieing for our sins, yet he was given the promise of eternal life if he "believed".

Mike

Cornelius might have already been justified in the faith that he possessed of the God of Israel and the promise of the Messiah:

And they said, Cornelius the centurion, a just man, and one that feareth God, and of good report among all the nation of the Jews, was warned from God by an holy angel to send for thee into his house, and to hear words of thee.

Acts is a transitional book. Cornelius was probably chosen by God to be received/translated into the church upon the receiving of the Holy Spirit and then to take the gospel back as a witness to the gentiles in Italy.

In addition we can see from the four gospels that the human authors of the gospels often gave varying accounts of the same incident. Not in opposition to each other but each gave in part what he thought and/or was moved by the Holy Spirit to write. We probably are not given every detail of Peter's disertation and we don't really know what happened with Cornelius after Luke's account in Acts chapter 10.

However, one thing we do know: We in this age (after the completion of the full revelation given by Jesus Christ and His apostles) have very clear instructions as to the preaching of the gospel and the teaching of the persona of Christ.

Let's face it, the preaching of the cross is offensive to this world and those who want to justify self through religion.

And why so? Because (take the case of circumcision), I make the decision to be circumcized. I "do" something to make myself right and pleasing in God's eyes.

The cross says we can do nothing, Jesus Christ had to do it all because not only do we sin, we are sinners by nature and unable to please Him as such.

The offense of the cross also involves a horrible death and the shedding of the life's blood of which we ourselves are worthy in our unregenerate condition. Thus the death of the cross declares what we "deserve" from God.

It is no surprise that this is offensive to the world.

However, there will always be a few who will accept the reproval of the Spirit and come to the light.

John 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.​

There is no "crossless gospel". There is no salvation apart from the Christ of Scripture.​

If Christians want to have religious and/or philosophical conversations with their unregenerate friends, fine, it can lead into an opportunity of witness.​

But when the opportunity does arise and the Spirit leads to speak in His name:​

1 Corinthians 1:23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness.​

HankD​

 

[D28guy]

Hank,

"Let's face it, the preaching of the cross is offensive to this world and those who want to justify self through religion.

And why so? Because (take the case of circumcision), I make the decision to be circumcized. I "do" something to make myself right and pleasing in God's eyes.

The cross says we can do nothing, Jesus Christ had to do it all because not only do we sin, we are sinners by nature and unable to please Him as such.

The offense of the cross also involves a horrible death and the shedding of the life's blood of which we ourselves are worthy in our unregenerate condition. Thus the death of the cross declares what we "deserve" from God.

It is no surprise that this is offensive to the world.

However, there will always be a few who will accept the reproval of the Spirit and come to the light.



John 1:13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."

I agree completly. And the GES folks being vigorously slammed and accused of being heretics do as well. I found abundant evidence on their web-site that they hold to those very foundational truths.​

There is no "crossless gospel". There is no salvation apart from the Christ of Scripture."

I know! And thats why I dont understand why these people are being slammed so vigorously.​

"If Christians want to have religious and/or philosophical conversations with their unregenerate friends, fine, it can lead into an opportunity of witness.

It most certainly can.​

But when the opportunity does arise and the Spirit leads to speak in His name:



1 Corinthians 1:23 But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness."

I agree 100%​

When I witness it is normal for me to bring up the cross, Christ taking our sins upon Himself, substitionary atonement, Christs Diety,etc etc. But I dont have a checklist that I go through. I dont have things memorized. I dont witness like a robot. I witness conversationally, and casually...as the Holy Spirit leads.​

And there could very well have been times over the course of my 26 years as a christian when I....just because of how the conversation flowed...might have not shared something that I usually share. I might not have, in some cases, specificially mentioned that Jesus is God...but everything else is there. Other times, maybe I didnt share that our sins where placed on Christ....but everything else was in place.

And yet ALWAYS, the importance, and exclusivity of Christ is ALWAYS at the forefront. Christ is always lifted up as the seekers only hope for eternal life, and a truly meaningfull life here on earth.​

Usually I cover all the bases, but if I miss something...our God is a BIG GOD and He can handle His part of the encounter just fine. :thumbs:

God bless,​

Mike​

​

 

[D28guy]

Lou,

Dont you think that if someone is encouraged to "believe on" Jesus Christ, and to "place their faith" in Christ for salvation, and in doing so they will recieve the gift of eternal life....but without the specific mention of Christ being God....dont you think it is obvious that Jesus Christ is being presented as God, and that the one believing on Him implicitly understands that?

I mean...who can dispense eternal life to someone other than God Himself?

And who would expect someone other than God Himself to be able to do that?

Mike

 

[HankD]

Lou,

Dont you think that if someone is encouraged to "believe on" Jesus Christ, and to "place their faith" in Christ for salvation, and in doing so they will recieve the gift of eternal life....but without the specific mention of Christ being God....dont you think it is obvious that Jesus Christ is being presented as God, and that the one believing on Him implicitly understands that?

I mean...who can dispense eternal life to someone other than God Himself?

And who would expect someone other than God Himself to be able to do that?

Mike

It certainly will become an issue when the ordinance of baptism is covered which in the Scripture almost always immediately followed a profession of faith.

Baptism is a picture of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Baptism is done in the Trinitarian formula:

Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Certainly the phrase "teach all nations" must contain within it an explanation of why the "name" of God is singular yet there are three distinct persons encompassed within that name, one of them being the Son.

This is exactly why He was crucified, His claim to deity.

John 8
58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
59 Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.

Later in John 10 they tried again to stone Him

32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?

33 ... For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.


HankD​

 

[D28guy]

HankG,

"It certainly will become an issue when the ordinance of baptism is covered which in the Scripture almost always immediately followed a profession of faith.

Baptism is a picture of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Baptism is done in the Trinitarian formula:

Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:​

Certainly the phrase "teach all nations" must contain within it an explanation of why the "name" of God is singular yet there are three distinct persons encompassed within that name, one of them being the Son.​

This is exactly why He was crucified, His claim to deity.​

John 8
58 Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.
59 Then took they up stones to cast at him: but Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple, going through the midst of them, and so passed by.​

Later in John 10 they tried again to stone Him​

32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?​

33 ... For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God."

I agree with all of that.​

And from what I have seen the GES does as well. From what I have seen on their site they are straight up, died in the wool, card carrying, full fledged 100% gospel preaching evangelicals.

The diety of Christ. Substitutionary atonement. The exclusivity of Christ. The triune nature of God. Justification by faith alone, sola scriptura, etc etc etc.​

They are as straight up, scriptural, evangelical as one can be.

And yet they are being accused of being heretics, apostates, false teachers, etc.

I just dont get it.​

God bless,​

Mike​

​

 

[HankD]

HankG,

I agree with all of that.​

And from what I have seen the GES does as well. From what I have seen on their site they are straight up, died in the wool, card carrying, full fledged 100% gospel preaching evangelicals.​

The diety of Christ. Substitutionary atonement. The exclusivity of Christ. The triune nature of God. Justification by faith alone, sola scriptura, etc etc etc.

They are as straight up, scriptural, evangelical as one can be.​

And yet they are being accused of being heretics, apostates, false teachers, etc.​

I just dont get it.​

God bless,​

Mike​

​

OK Mike, there has probably been a misunderstanding along the way.

In any event these are current issues and perhaps some have come to unwarranted conclusions concerning these men/organization(s).

Please note I carefully stated that my posts were not an indictment against such in particular but against the concepts of a "crossless" gospel and a Savior who could not be called "Christ" and ANY who teach the same.

HankD

 

[Lou Martuneac]

More Absurdity from GES

Mike/All:

I'd rather not copy and then paste the two articles from my blog that further substantiate the extremes coming from advocates of the Crossless gospel.

The two articles I am going to link you to below address how the GES/Hodges/Wilkin and their followers insist there is no message called “the gospel” the lost must believe in order to be saved.

See- The Fatal Flaws of Crossless Gospel Advocate Jim Johnson’s Criticism.

At the end of that article you will be linked to its companion titled, Jim Johnson and the GES Dismiss, “THE GOSPEL”

These are follow ups to the series that thoroughly documents the radical view of the Grace Evangelical Society (Zane Hodges & Bob Wilkin) that there is no message called the Gospel that the lost must hear and believe to be born again.

This series primarily is dedicated to showing from the Bible that there is a message called “the Gospel” that must be believed by the lost man to be born again. That series is titled, The Technical Meaning of the Term, “THE GOSPEL”.

My purpose in exposing these radical departures from the Scriptures by GES is to alert believers in Baptist circles of the dangerous extremes coming from these men were once more balanced in their theology. It would be another tragedy of the Crossless gospel if even one more unsuspecting believer were to fall into the trap of the teachings of Zane Hodges, Bob Wilkin and their followers.


LM

*These articles are written by Greg Schliesmann who is a contributor at my blog.

 

[Lou Martuneac]

GES ReDefined Theology

I am going to provide direct documentation from GES. Before you begin please understand: Hodges, Wilkin, GES insist there is no message called “the gospel” the lost must believe in order to be saved.

Until August 2005 the GES Affirmation of Belief 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 has been revised. Following is the current and revised GES Affirmation:

“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 statement “Jesus Christ” is identified as Deity by use of the term, “God incarnate.” This reference to the Lord’s Deity has been deleted. Furthermore, the previous statement included, “any person who, in simple faith, trusts in the risen Christ... .” That simple statement summarizes Christ’s Deity, incarnation, death and resurrection. As it appeared then, the statement was perfectly consistent with Romans 10:9-10 in regards to trust (believing) in the resurrected Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. The statement also includes the word “trust.”

The revisions to the GES statement were made with purpose. In the new statement, the relative clause is parenthetical. When the GES says, “faith alone in the Lord Jesus Christ who died...” they do NOT mean that the lost person needs to believe Jesus died and rose again. They simply mean a lost man must believe in “Jesus” as the Giver of eternal life.

GES spells out their contents of belief in very next sentence, “To believe in Jesus...is to be convinced that He guarantees everlasting life to all who simply believe in Him for it.” This is not a paraphrase or roundabout way of stating their position. This is literally the GES definition of the only necessary content of faith for the reception of eternal life. According to the GES, understanding and or believing the cross, His resurrection and Deity are not necessary for salvation. These are the doctrinal truths that Zane Hodges refers to as “excess baggage” in an encounter with the unsaved.

You can note the phrase “faith…in the risen Christ” has been eliminated from the current affirmation. Because they view His resurrection as “excess baggage,” they will no longer use descriptive phrases such as that. You will also notice also that the word “trusts” has been removed.

Later I am going to link you to articles that discuss the attempt of Zane Hodges and the GES to remove Deity from the biblical concept of Jesus as “the Christ.” Hodges's fraudulent arguments regarding the Samaritans in John 4 are exposed.


LM

 

[John of Japan]

Lou, keep up the good work. I've just read most of the thread and you are still right on target.

This issue is especially important to those of us on the mission fields of the world. If we do not carefully explain the Gospel, it is quite easy here in Japan and many other countries to get people to acknowledge Christ as the (or just one) giver of eternal life. But the contrast here in Japan between Christian and non-Christian is so great that it is very evident sooner or later when salvation doees not occur because of an incomplete message.

I'm reminded of a young lady I heard about who heard about Christ minus any explanation of His resurrection. Referring to the ancestor worship occuring in almost all Japanese religions, she said, "Why should I worship another dead man?" The cross and resurrection are indispensible. :type:

 

[Lou Martuneac]

Lou, keep up the good work. I've just read most of the thread and you are still right on target.

This issue is especially important to those of us on the mission fields of the world. If we do not carefully explain the Gospel, it is quite easy here in Japan and many other countries to get people to acknowledge Christ as the (or just one) giver of eternal life. But the contrast here in Japan between Christian and non-Christian is so great that it is very evident sooner or later when salvation doees not occur because of an incomplete message.

I'm reminded of a young lady I heard about who heard about Christ minus any explanation of His resurrection. Referring to the ancestor worship occuring in almost all Japanese religions, she said, "Why should I worship another dead man?" The cross and resurrection are indispensible. :type:

John:

Good to hear from you again. I intend to keep addressing the twin errors of Lordship Salvation and the Crossless Gospel.

Having been a missionary in South Africa I can fully appreciate your note above. There were some missionaries in SA spreading the Lordship message. Regrettably, some unsuspecting nationals were swept up into those errors.

The last thing I want to see is the Crossless heresy gain any kind of foothold in Evangeical circles State-side or on foreign mission fields.

God bless you,


Lou

PS: Here is a short series I wrote when some Crossless advocates went to India last year.

The Tragedy of a "Crossless" Gospel in William Carey's Gold Mine of Souls

William Carey Refutes the "Crossless" Gospel

 

[John of Japan]

John:

Good to hear from you again. I intend to keep addressing the twin errors of Lordship Salvation and the Crossless Gospel.

Having been a missionary in South Africa I can fully appreciate your note above. There were some missionaries in SA spreading the Lordship message. Regrettably, some unsuspecting nationals were swept up into those errors.

The last thing I want to see is the Crossless heresy gain any kind of foothold in Evangeical circles State-side or on foreign mission fields.

God bless you,


Lou

PS: Here is a short series I wrote when some Crossless advocates went to India last year.

The Tragedy of a "Crossless" Gospel in William Carey's Gold Mine of Souls

William Carey Refutes the "Crossless" Gospel

Thanks brother Lou, I'll check out your articles.

The crossless Gospel will make it out here eventually. Fortunately though, heresies take awhile to make it into some mission fields including ours.

God bless.

John

 

[Lou Martuneac]

Thanks brother Lou, I'll check out your articles.

The crossless Gospel will make it out here eventually. Fortunately though, heresies take awhile to make it into some mission fields including ours.

God bless.

John

John:

The good news is that men like you will be better able to recognize, forewarn your people and refute it once it lands on your shores.

God bless you,


Lou

 

[D28guy]

Lou,

You say...

In the former statement "Jesus Christ" is identified as Deity by use of the term, "God incarnate." This reference to the Lord’s Deity has been deleted."

He is still referred to as the "LORD Jesus Christ in the revised statement.

"The revisions to the GES statement were made with purpose. In the new statement, the relative clause is parenthetical. When the GES says, "faith alone in the Lord Jesus Christ who died..." they do NOT mean that the lost person needs to believe Jesus died and rose again. They simply mean a lost man must believe in "Jesus" as the Giver of eternal life."

And you say this in spite of the fact that their revised statement of beliefes says...

""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).

But then...you do it again!....

"According to the GES, understanding and or believing the cross, His resurrection and Deity are not necessary for salvation. These are the doctrinal truths that Zane Hodges refers to as "excess baggage" in an encounter with the unsaved."

IN SPITE OF the fact that their REVISED statement of belief says...

""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).

Again, I believe you are nit picking, and "straining out a gnat to swallow a camel". You are making a mountain out of a microscopic molehill.

I have no problem with these brothers and sisters whatsoever. They are proclaiming the true gospel of Jesus Christ...and much of what is convincing me is material that YOU...a staunch critic...are linking to and posting!

God bless,

Mike

 

[John of Japan]

John:

The good news is that men like you will be better able to recognize, forewarn your people and refute it once it lands on your shores.

God bless you,


Lou

I'll certainly be on the lookout for it. Also, on furlough missionaries sometimes get ambushed with new doctrines, so I'll be ready then, too.

God bless.

John

 

[Lou Martuneac]

I'll certainly be on the lookout for it. Also, on furlough missionaries sometimes get ambushed with new doctrines, so I'll be ready then, too.

God bless.

John

Yes, I remember deputation and furlough ministry. Every so often you'd be in a meeting and hear something that got your spiritual antennas up.

My hope and prayer is that the heretical views of Hodges, Wilkin and GES remain isolated to their shrinking cell of extremist followers. It would be a genuine tragedy if even one more unsuspecting believer were to fall into the trap of the Crossless gospel.

In case I did not link you to this series before, visit the Grace Family Journal and download the series by Tom Stegall, The Tragedy of the Crossless Gospel.

The series fully documents the egregious errors of Zane Hodges, Bob Wilkin and other Crossless gospel advocates.

Yours faithfully,


Lou