I’m sad to say there is a lot of “fake news” about GES online, where people have made outlandish claims about what we believe. Frankly, I think much of it counts as bearing false witness against GES. However, despite the fake news, there are some areas of genuine disagreement between GES and our critics in the Free Grace movement (many of whom I count as friends). We should be open about these disagreements, recognize them, and seek out the Biblical truth about them. In this blog, I summarize some of those disagreements as I see them.
What Is the Nature of Faith?
GES: We believe that faith is mental and propositional. You believe with the mind/heart. To believe a proposition means that you both understand it and are persuaded that it is true. For example, what did it mean for Abraham to believe? Paul put it this way: “He did not waver at the promise of God through unbelief, but was strengthened in faith, giving glory to God, and being fully convinced that what He had promised He was also able to perform” (Rom 4:20-21). Abraham was convinced that God’s promise was true, i.e., that God would do what He said. Put technically, we take faith to include understanding (notitia) and assent (assensus), but deny that faith includes trust (fiducia) if trusting means a separate, non-propositional element. To trust in Christ is simply to believe the proposition, “Jesus will do as He promises,” or “Jesus always keeps His word,” or “Jesus is trustworthy.”
A related issue is the role of the will in faith. We deny that you can directly choose your beliefs. If you constantly had to choose your beliefs, you would go insane. (Imagine having to spend all day self-consciously choosing to believe that you are you, and not Napoleon Bonaparte). However, we affirm that the will is involved in belief formation in the sense that you can choose to do things that will influence your beliefs. For example, if you are in a dark room, you cannot simply choose to believe that the lights are on. However, you can choose to walk over to the light switch, and after you flip it on, you will form the belief, “The lights are on.” Likewise, when it comes to Christian faith, someone must choose to look for the truth, seek out evidence, read the Bible, pray to God, and hear out arguments in favor of Jesus being the Messiah. In choosing to do that, they can come to believe in Jesus. If they choose to avoid all the evidence for Christianity, they may never come to faith. Technically, that position is called “indirect doxastic voluntarism.”
Critics: Various. Many critics reject what they call “mere mental assent,” and add other elements to faith such as trust (where trust means more than being persuaded); a personal encounter; an emotional sorrow for sin; or a volitional desire to change your life. Many critics think that beliefs are chosen, a position known as “direct doxastic voluntarism.”
What Is the Nature of Saving Faith?
GES: We believe the difference between ordinary faith and saving faith depends on what you believe, not how you believe it. There is only one “how”—being persuaded. But there are many “whats”—many different things you can believe. We all have millions of beliefs (e.g., Canada is north of Mexico; NBA players are taller than pygmies; winter is colder than summer, etc.). But not every belief results in the new birth. Only believing in Jesus’ promise of eternal life will save you. What makes faith “saving” is believing the saving message, i.e., Jesus’ promise of eternal life. To believe in Jesus as Savior is shorthand for believing what He promises to accomplish for the believer. That promise can be expressed in different ways, but we think John 3:16 puts it in a nutshell.
Critics: Various. Since different critics have different definitions of faith, they also have different ideas about the nature of saving faith. For example, if they believe saving faith includes a desire for a transformed life, they would deny it is enough to simply believe in Jesus’ promise of salvation—you must believe plus desire to live a better life. Other critics say that saving faith is simply faith “in Christ,” but you can do that without necessarily believing in Jesus’ promise of salvation. Others say you must believe in certain facts about the person of Christ (e.g., His deity, sinlessness, virgin birth, etc.), as well as facts about the provision of Christ (e.g., that He died, rose again, post-resurrection appearances, coming again, substitutionary atonement). And other critics say you must believe in all three—the person, provision, and the promise of Christ (though almost always without insisting on believing in the eternality of the salvation Jesus promised).
Do You Need to Believe that Jesus Is God to Be Saved?
GES: We believe that Jesus is God, the Second Person of the Trinity. Consequently, we believe that Jesus’ deity is a powerful reason to be persuaded that He can give believers everlasting life. We absolutely preach that Jesus is God incarnate, but (and this is controversial) we say it is hypothetically possible that someone could believe in Jesus for eternal life before coming to understand Jesus’ deity and the Trinity. Why do we say that? Because no Scripture makes believing in Jesus’ deity a condition to be born again. Moreover, during Jesus’ ministry, many people believed in Him for eternal life and were born-again without believing that He is God (still less that He was specifically the co-equal and co-eternal Second Person of the Trinity). Hypothetically, that can still happen today—people can come to faith in Jesus for eternal life and only learn about the Trinity later on. That probably happens with children and many adults. (In my experience, most people have only a vague idea of what the Trinity is. Virtually no one outside of having a graduate theological education with a specialty in the Trinity actually understands or believes the “ecumenical” definition of the Trinity.)
Critics: Various. Most critics say you must believe that Jesus is “God” to be born-again. However, they disagree about what that means. Some are clear and say you must be fully Trinitarian at the point of faith to be saved (e.g., accepting both Nicaea and Chalcedon). Others deny that you need to be fully Trinitarian, but fail to explain what specific understanding of Christ’s deity is necessary to salvation. Other critics say it is enough to believe in sub-Trinitarian views of Jesus’ deity to be saved (e.g., modalism, binitarianism, adoptionism).
Is Jesus’ Evangelism Obsolete?
GES: In many ways, GES’s primary mission is to reform evangelism. We believe that John’s Gospel was written with an evangelistic purpose (cf. 20:30-31). Moreover, we hold that John’s Gospel was written during, and for, the Church age. John’s Gospel describes how Jesus evangelized people by talking about Himself and inviting them to believe in Him for eternal life (e.g., John 3:15-16, 36; 5:24; 6:47; 11:25-26). Notably, Jesus did not call people to repent, to believe in the cross and resurrection, or to believe in His deity to be born again. However, in his Gospel, John uses those facts as apologetic evidence to persuade people to believe in Jesus for eternal life (i.e., they are “signs” to lead you to believe in Jesus). We think that Jesus and John’s model of doing evangelism are how we should evangelize today.
Critics: Various. Some critics imply that Jesus’ (and John’s) evangelism is obsolete. They say that believing what Jesus promised during His earthly ministry is not enough to be born-again today because there has been a Dispensational change that has resulted in a change in the content of saving faith. Believing in John 3:16 is no longer enough. Critics disagree over the details of those other requirements. Many point to 1 Cor 15:1-8 as listing the things you must believe now to be born again (instead of taking those beliefs as necessary for the Corinthians’ spiritual growth). However, in 1 Cor 15:1-8, Paul does not mention justification, eternal life, or the deity of Christ, creating a problem for the critics who would otherwise say those beliefs are required for salvation.
Do You Have to Believe in Jesus “for” Salvation?
GES: We believe that Jesus is the Savior. To believe that Jesus is the Savior implies you believe He gives you salvation. But what kind of salvation did Jesus promise? Jesus promised nothing less than everlasting salvation. “And this is the promise that He has promised us—eternal life” (1 John 2:25). There is no Biblical justification for thinking you can be saved by believing a false gospel or by believing no gospel. Hence, we insist that you must believe in Jesus for eternal salvation to be saved. As Paul said, “However, for this reason I obtained mercy, that in me first Jesus Christ might show all longsuffering, as a pattern to those who are going to believe on Him for everlasting life” (1 Tim 1:16). If someone has believed in Jesus for a chance to save themselves by their works, they have not yet believed in Jesus as their Savior.
Critics: Various. Some critics deny you need to believe in Jesus “for” anything. Others insist you must believe that He is your Savior, but you do not need to know what kind of salvation He gives (e.g., everlasting). Some critics think that it is possible to be saved even if you believe Jesus saves you on the basis of your works.
Do You Have to Believe in Eternal Security to Be Saved?
GES: We believe that Jesus promised eternal salvation, not probationary salvation. Eternal security is not an extra benefit of salvation, but the very nature of salvation itself. Almost every conceivable way of describing salvation includes the idea that it is irrevocable. Jesus gives ever-lasting-life, not temporary life. Believers are born-again with no chance of being aborted, and adopted without the risk of being disowned. Believers are justified and will never come under judgment. Believers are regenerated and will never die. Believers who drink the water of life will never thirst, and whoever eats the bread of life will never hunger. Whoever is in God’s hand will not be snatched away, and so on. The only kind of salvation that Jesus promises is eternal, therefore, you must believe in eternal salvation to be saved. Moreover, denying the eternality of salvation indicates a failure to understand both the one condition of salvation (i.e., a single act of faith in Christ, apart from works) and the nature of the salvation itself (i.e., everlasting life). If you deny eternal security, you deny Jesus’ promise of salvation, and likely believe in some form of works salvation.
Critics: Various. Some critics say that eternal security is a side benefit that you can be ignorant of and still be saved. Others say that while you can be ignorant of eternal security, you cannot deny it and be saved. And others say you can be saved even if you think eternal security is heretical and hold to works salvation.
Do You Have to Believe in the Death and Resurrection of Christ to Be Saved?
GES: We believe the death and resurrection of Christ are two of the most powerful signs to lead one to faith in Christ for eternal life and two of the most important truths to grow to spiritual maturity. Hence, GES holds it is crucial to preach Christ and Him crucified. It is likely that most people have come to faith in Christ only after believing in His death, burial, and resurrection. However, since many people during Jesus’ ministry believed in Him for eternal life without believing in the cross and resurrection (cf. John 2:11; Matt 16:21-23), we say it is hypothetically possible for people to still be saved in that way today. To say that something is “hypothetically possible” means it might never happen, but since it has happened before, and since God is sovereign, it could happen again. In any case, GES believes it is crucial to preach the cross and resurrection, not only because it is true, but because it is powerful evidence to the unbeliever to persuade him to believe in Jesus for eternal life.
Critics: Various. Critics say it is no longer hypothetically possible to be saved without believing in the death and resurrection of Christ. They deny that God can sovereignly choose to save people that way again. Belief in the death and resurrection of Christ (variously defined and understood) is absolutely necessary to be saved today.
What Is the Basis of Assurance of Salvation?
GES: We believe that assurance is based entirely on believing Jesus’ promise of everlasting life. Jesus promised that believers have that life as a present possession. Therefore, if you believe His promise, you believe you have everlasting life, which is what it means to be assured (see here). Assurance is the essence of saving faith, based on Christ’s promise, and not on our behavior.
Critics: Various. Many critics deny that assurance is of the essence of saving faith. Owing to their different definitions of what it means to believe, they think it is possible to both believe in Jesus for salvation and doubt that He will save you. Other critics think that assurance is based on your behavior. For example, they testify they know they were born again before believing in Jesus for everlasting life because they saw changes in their behavior at an earlier point in their faith journey. They will say they know they were saved by believing a works salvation message because at that point they stopped smoking, drinking, or swearing, or saw positive changes in their life such as being more loving to their family or developing a hunger to read the Bible. Other critics will say that while behavior change provides an adequate basis for assurance, the better foundation is Jesus’ promise of eternal life itself.
What is the Source of Doctrine?
GES: We believe that doctrine should come from Scripture. The Bible is inerrant and is our highest and final authority in doctrine. If the Bible contradicts tradition or experience, then tradition or experience should be corrected or rejected, not the other way around. We are happy to consult the arguments made by theologians throughout history, but what matters is whether their arguments agree with Scripture. We disagree with the historic liturgical and Reformed churches on issues such as sola fide, believer’s baptism, a believer’s church, Dispensationalism, pre-millennialism, eternal security, sola Scriptura, and so on. We are not threatened by that, because our authority is Scripture, not tradition. In sum, we try to be consistent Biblicists.
Critics: Various. Some critics think that Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, or Protestant traditions are sources of theological authority that can and should override Biblical arguments. They think those traditions form the basis for what constitutes the difference between heresy and truth. Other critics think that experiences override Biblical authority (e.g., they know when they were saved based on their experience, not based on believing in Jesus for eternal life). Some critics are suspicious of new conclusions from Scripture that cannot already be found in the writings of Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, or Protestant theologians.
Summary
I think these give you a good idea of the kinds of conversations and debates that have been going on within the Free Grace movement, especially between GES and our critics. There are other areas of disagreement that I could have discussed, but these are the big ones. I have presented the views of our critics as I have encountered them. Since our critics disagree with each other you will have to ask them directly what they believe about these points. Always go to the source.
*I will be updating this post as new differences emerge or as current differences become better defined. Currently, 8/20/21
