Zane Hodges: Free Grace Fracture

Greetings to All:

For the last 30+ days I have been focused almost solely on what I have come to conclude are the doctrinal errors of Zane Hodges. Earlier here at FFF I opened a thread on The Teaching of Zane Hodges.

I do, however, want to reiterate that where Lordship Salvation is concerned I am convinced that it is a false, works based, man-centered interpretation of the Gospel. John MacArthur is as far off-center on the Gospel at his extreme end of the theological pendulum swing as Zane Hodges is with his interpretation in the opposite direction.

I have more details at my site on the following article, but felt some here might like to view the article from here.

The article I have been and will direct you to is titled, THE TRAGEDY OF A CROSSLESS GOSPEL (Pt. 1) It is written by Pastor Tom Stegall from the Word of Grace Bible Church in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Pastor Tom Stegall would consider himself a member of what is known as the Free Grace movement.

In the opening paragraph of his article he states,

And a major problem it is! I had slowly been coming to the conclusions that Pastor Stegall articulates in his article. Stegall has done his homework and thoroughly documents the excesses, and extremes that have been adopted by key men in the Free Grace movement.

Pastor Stegall’s new article The Tragedy of the Crossless Gospel is in my opinion, a must read for believers on both sides of the Lordship Salvation/Free Grace debate.

Go to the Duluth Bible Church web site. Click on the article titled, The Tragedy of the Crossless Gospel.

There is more on the article at my site if you choose to visit.


LM

 

Links to Hodge's Areticle

Hi Lacy:

Below I am going to link you to my site's article on this, and there you'll see the links to the two part article by Hodges which has caused the controversy.

The article titles are:
How to Lead People to Christ, Pt. 1
How to Lead People to Christ, Pt. 2

Go to Wrapping the Series on Zane Hodges. The links are at the bottom of the article.

You wlli find that I open the article with this:

I have no axe to grind with Hodges. He has made some significant shifts in doctrine that have begun to alarm quite a few, even in the Free Grace camp.

Kind regards,


LM

 

Lacy:

I did not notice from what book/source your Hodges' quotes come from. Please let me know, with page numbers.

In any event, I really encourage you to visit the Duluth Bible Church web site. Click on the article titled, The Tragedy of the Crossless Gospel.

You will read for yourself from Hodges that he insists that while the death and resurrection of Christ can and should be presented it is totally unnecessary for a lost man to know, understand or believe any of it to be saved.

This is a gross departure from orthodoxy and the plain teaching of Scripture, such as:

“Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures,” (1 Cor. 15: 1, 3-4).

Paul preached the death, burial and resurrection (vv. 3-4) to the Corinthians when they were yet unsaved. They received it, were saved and stand in it.

“That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation,” (Romans 10:9-10).


LM

 

Lacy:

You might the following article helpful.

A Response to Hodges: How to Lead a Person to Christ, Parts 1 & 2.


LM

 

Checked Out on Scripture!

Lacy:

Actually Hodges totally eliminates anything to do with the death, burial and resurrection of Christ from what must be believed by a lost man to be born again/saved.

Hodges makes it clear that the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ is the normal context of his gospel presentation, but it is not a necessary part of the content of saving faith today. Following are a few excerpts from Hodges in the JOTGES 14:1, Spring 01.

These statements are clear in that Hodges says: Believing, knowing or understading the death, burial and resurrection of Christ plays NO ROLE in the salvation of a sinner.

Hodges has checked out on Scripture.

1 Cor. 15:3-4 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures.

Romans 10:9-10 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.​

Brother George Zeller wrote,

Visit The Teachings of Zane Hodges. Here you will find some teachings by Hodges that have a number of pastors/teachers concerned.


LM

 

There is no...

To All:

[I don't normally go for a long post. Take a moment, read it all, and then see the links at the end]​

Antonio de Rosa is mistaken on several levels in his previous post (See #12 above). He is badly mistaken, possibly confused, if he believes Hodges’ teaching on the “Crossless” gospel, for example, has been misrepresented or mischaracterized.

At my site there are thoroughly documented excerpts from Zane Hodges that irrefutably identify him with what has come to be known as the “Crossless” gospel. Furthermore I link to several sources that further documents and substantiates more of the doctrinal errors I have been addressing in regard to Zane Hodges. I provide those links at my site and will do so here as well.

Can lost men believe in Jesus ONLY for eternal life and be born again? Can a lost man be saved apart from any detailed knowledge of what Christ did on the cross to provide salvation for him? Can a lost man be saved if he has not come to an understanding of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ (1 Cor. 15:3-4; Rom. 10:9-10)?

During my discussions with Antonio, he wrote:

Is Antonio’s statement consistent with the Bible? Does it past the test of fidelity to the Scriptures? The Bible says,

In light of 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 Antonio has a big problem with Romans 10:9-10. Hodges and Antonio are teaching a "Crossless" gospel message. They believe and will preach the cross, but they find it not at all necessary for a lost man to understand this in order to be saved. Based on 1 Cor. 15:3-4 and Romans 10:9 I have to conclude Antonio, just as Hodges whom Antonio follows theologically, has gone into deep error!

I especially encourage readers to visit and read the two part series by Pastor Tom Stegall: The Tragedy of the Crossless Gospel. See Part 1 & Part 2. For Part 2 Go to: Duluth Bible Church. Click on the article titled, The Tragedy of the Crossless Gospel, Pt. 2. You will find this article under the SUMMER heading. Part 1 appears under the SPRING Heading.

You will find plenty of documentation from Brother Stegall in the two articles to conclude that Hodges has gone into gross error on the Gospel. Frankly, I would defer to Brother Stegall who is a member of the Free Grace camp and he has, by citing Hodges and Bob Wilkin (leadership of the Grace Evangelical Society), demonstrated the egregious errors that Hodges has slipped into with his “Crossless” interpretation of the Gospel. As subsequent articles in the series from Pastor Stegall appear I will provide links to them from my site.

From my site in the article titled, Wrapping the Series on Zane Hodges. At the end of that article I provide a link to the Hodges' article, which caused much of the current the controversy: How to Lead People to Christ, Parts 1 & 2. From these articles you can read for yourself how Hodges has gutted the Gospel of vital biblical truth for his new version of what he believes is the plan of salvation. One response to Hodges was written by Pastor Gregory P. Sapaugh and appears in the Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society. See link to this article below.

Has there been a “misrepresentation,” on the “Crossless” gospel as Antonio insists? Clearly, there has not! There is, however, more well-documented doctrinal error in the peculiar version of Hodges’ Free Grace theology.

Read the well-documented articles at my site under this heading: The Teaching of Zane Hodges. Be sure to note my comments on how Hodges views the doctrine of repentance. As it turned out, upon further study, my comment,

grossly understated the truth of how far Hodges had gone awry.

From George Zeller’s study:

These are shocking, irresponsible statements by Hodges that are antithetical to the Bible. There are many more examples like these from the writing of Hodges at Brother Zeller’s site. (See link to Zeller below)

Antonio means well, but he is speaking for and defending a man’s doctrine that at best he (Antonio) does not understand or never read himself. Or at worst, Antonio is defending the doctrinal errors that Hodges is stating. One might ask Antonio if he agrees with these shocking statements from Hodges.

This appears in my article Wrapping the Series on Zane Hodges.

I have no axe to grind, this is not a personality clash. Vital biblical truth has been compromised by Zane Hodges, and he appears to be spiraling into deeper errors as the years go by. In post #11 above, which I directed to Lacy, I provided several samples from Hodges to verify some of the doctrinal extremes he has gone to in his version of Free Grace theology.

I encourage every reader to visit Antonio’s site and read his articles, which he listed above. Decide for yourself: Has Hodges, and Antonio, who parrots Hodges almost verbatim, gone off to an extreme on the gospel.

There is no mischaracterization or misrepresentation when the doctrinal errors of Zane Hodges are documented from the source of the error, which happens to be Zane Hodges.

Incidentally, Antonio speaks of, “…the Free Grace theology…Free Grace thought” almost as though the “Crossless” gospel espoused by Hodges is widely accepted as representative of all those who would identify themselves in the Free Grace camp. Antonio is mistaken if he actually believes there is unanimous (or near unanimous) support for the “Crossless” gospel of Zane Hodges in the Free Grace movement. Antonio is mistaken if he believes Hodges is speaking for the Free Grace movement. This teaching by Hodges of a “Crossless” gospel has made a number of men in the Free Grace movement very uncomfortable.


LM

LINKS:

For a wide cross-section of errors with Zane Hodges visit, The Teachings of Zane Hodges by Pastor George Zeller.

To read how Zane Hodges has shifted on repentance to a new position that is antithetical to Scripture visit Wrapping the Series on Zane Hodges scroll to the bottom and read Harmony With God by Hodges. I provide links at the bottom of my article to the three part series by Hodges. I provide a synopsis of Hodges on repentance in my article titled, The Teaching of Zane Hodges.

For example, Hodges, which Antonio parrots, takes the position that the process of repentance may be a preparatory step in coming to salvation, and should be evident in the life of a believer, but a lost man can be born again without repentance. Hodges also said he no longer holds to the “change of mind” view of repentance.

Another penetrating article, not to be overlooked, is one I recently discovered titled, Sanctification : Understanding the Controversy Being Created by the Free Grace Movement by Mr. Lenny Demers. The article cites Hodges from numerous sources that substantiate much of what I have been sharing of late in regard to the teaching of Zane Hodges.

And there is more documented evidence for the “Crossless” gospel of Zane Hodges. A response was written by Pastor Gregory P. Sapaugh and appears in the Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society, A Response to Hodges: How To Lead A Person To Christ, Parts 1 and 2.

 

Have You Read…?

To All:

Would we all agree that Charles Darwin rejects the Bible’s account of Creation? Would we all agree that Darwin’s theory of evolution is antithetical to the Bible’s account of Creation?

I assume we are very likely unanimous in the position that Darwin teaches evolution, which is a repudiation of and contrary to what the Bible says on Creation.

Has anyone here read Darwin’s Origin of the Species, "from the front to the back?" Probably none of us. How then can any of us be certain Darwin is an Evolutionist and writing what is at odds with the Bible? Because:

1) It is widely reported and documented by many sources who cite and review Darwin’s work on the subject, and…
2) We have read portions of the reviews and/or Darwin himself.

Antonio made this statement in his post #12,

I have in my possession most of the books by Hodges from which his doctrine can be carefully examined. Since the late 80’s I have read on and perused the writings of Zane Hodges. I have read articles and critiques by other men of Hodges’ books and articles. Since 1989 to date, have I read any of his books/articles on the Lordship/Free Grace controversy “front to back?” We’ll see.

When you read Hodges you will find, (just as you will with John MacArthur on Lordship Salvation), that there is much truth in what they write, from their perspective, in their various books on the Lordship/Free Grace controversy. While some from both men on the Gospel is sound, they both contain gross doctrinal errors, which I have documented from my reading. They both make polarizing statements that are on the extremes in their respective spheres.

Here is he ironic part of Antonio’s problem with reading “from the front to the back.” The most outspoken defender of John MacArthur and LS my missionary co-worker and I had to contend with in South Africa raised the very same complaint about having to read MacArthur’s The Gospel According to Jesus cover-to-cover. We had probably read 70% just through study and examination of that book. The LS advocate was adamant that, in spite of the clear and careful documentation of MacArthur’s Lordship theology we must read the book cover-to-cover, as if this was going to somehow reveal that MacArthur is sound after all. Frankly, reading through The Gospel According to Jesus (cover-to-cover) only galvanized what we had already come to conclude about what we had concluded what Lordship’s false teaching on the Gospel.

The same is true with Hodges. Will reading him cover-to-cover reveal that he really doesn’t teach the “Crossless” gospel after all? The documented evidence of his departure from orthodoxy on the Gospel is widely reported and thoroughly documented from various sources.

That said I have read Harmony With God and How to Lead People to Christ Parts 1 & 2, “from the front to the back.”

Whether or not this satisfies Antonio I can’t say and I don’t especially care. Have I read Hodges “from the front to the back,” is as relevant as whether or not I have read Darwin’s Origin of the Species, “from the front to the back.” There is ample evidence from the writing of Hodges and the reviews of what he has written to conclude with confidence that he has adopted and advocates a strange and unorthodox position on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. What Hodges has written is plain, and it is wrong.

There are men in the Free Grace camp that are now speaking up and out against what Hodges is teaching by way of his “Crossless” gospel. I encourage Antonio to examine their documents, which I have linked to. I encourage Antonio to look at and read the men who are in the Free Grace movement, and writing to warn others about the doctrinal errors of Zane Hodges. I encourage Antonio to take these men on as well, claim they are misrepresting Hodges, and demonstrate just exactly how it is they are misrepresenting him.

Antonio is in doctrinal lock-step with Zane Hodges on the “Crossless” gospel. With the response to that position coming from a wide spectrum of evangelical Christianity, including from within the Free Grace movement, Antonio may want to re-examine his position in light of the whole counsel of God. He needs to reflect and ask if he has not been misguided and adopted the error of Hodges. I am hopeful that through, prayer, study and counsel from balanced Bible teachers Antonio can be recovered from the error of a "Crossless" gospel.

[Please refer back to the post above where I address the main subject of Antonio's concern.]​

LM

PS: I various places Antonio has commented on my book, In Defense of the Gospel. He has made some positive and negative statements.

At this point I am asking Antonio a question: Have you (Antonio) read my book, “from the front to the back?”​

If not, the link takes you to Amazon where you can secure a copy.

 

1) "Flustered?" I don't understand that comment, or why you would suggest that.
2) The various men who are writing about the "Crossless" gospel of Zane Hodges are filling their articles with "misconceptions?"

No it is not disingenuous. The label "Crossless gospel" was attached to the interpretation Hodges and you espouse before I ever got to it. I don't know who coined the label. You may not like the label, but it accurately defines what you men have done to the Gospel by gutting what must be believed for the reception of salvation.

I agree with what you say here and acknowledged it elsewhere. You are, however, not giving a full disclosure, which would reveal why your position has come to be known as the “Crossless” gospel. So, if there is any mischaracterization of your position, you are the doing the mischaracterizing by with holding vital information. So, I’ll include what you decided should be withheld. And let’s see what that is from the writing of Hodges and your own words.

You will preach the cross, but find it absolutely unnecessary for a lost man to believe or even understand its meaning and significance. This is contrary to the teaching of 1 Cor. 15:3-4 and Romans 10:9. This is why your position has been appropriately labeled the “Crossless” gospel.

Lurkers/Readers if you want to read through or even some of the 11 articles I have written to address this unorthodox teaching on the Gospel, please visit my site. You will find links to several other articles that document the doctrinal errors of the “Crossless” gospel. Visit The Teaching of Zane Hodges.

IMO what I have done at my site, not to mention the numerous comments I have posted on the subject at many different sites, substantiates I have interacted with Antonio and several others.

I appreciate Antonio’s desire to defend the “Crossless” gospel, but he has fallen into doctrinal error, and I do hope he can one day be recovered to a balanced position on the doctrine of salvation.


LM