ℹ️ Disclaimer: As a Protestant who holds to the five solas, I believe justification is by grace through faith alone, we developed it from scripture first in history. I also believe that grace is free just like all true Christians do, but this 80s movement brings with it a dangerous set of unbiblical doctrines.

Contents

  1. Not the “Faith Alone” of the Reformation
  2. No Call To Repent Of Sins
  3. Giving False Assurance to Thousands
  4. Underemphasizing Trust in Christ
  5. Bad Interpretations of Scripture
  6. Antinomian Carnal Christianity
  7. Dallas Theological Seminary Distanced Itself From Them
  8. Artificial Intelligence Analysis
  9. Summary & Conclusions



🚶📜 1. The 80’s version of the Gospel DOES NOT teach the Reformation doctrine of justification by faith alone

The 80’s “Free Grace” movement does not teach the Reformation doctrine of justification by faith alone, because it holds a historically unusual view that is based on a misunderstanding of alone in the historic Protestant insistence on “justification by faith alone.” They’ve mysteriously removed the second part of the doctrine of faith alone.

We are justified by faith alone (Eph 2:8-10; Gal 2:16,21; 3:10-12; 5:4; Ro 3:20,28), but the faith that justifies is never alone (1Jn 2:3-6; 3:6-10; 5:3-4 Jn 14:15,21; 15:10).

Justification is by faith alone (Eph 2:8-10; Gal 2:16,21; 3:10-12; 5:4; Ro 3:20,28), but the faith that saves is never alone in the person justified (1Jn 2:3-6; 3:6-10; 5:3-4 Jn 14:15,21; 15:10).

— True Definition Of The Historic Protestant Sola Fide or Faith Alone.

The second half of the sentence, “We are justified by faith alone, but the faith that justifies is never alone,” means that other things always accompany saving faith. Namely, saving faith is always “followed by” changes in a person’s conduct of life. That is to say, saving faith is never alone in a person, for some good works (fruits) will always accompany saving faith in a person’s life and will be seen “after” a person comes to faith.

I believe saving faith will result in obedience… We must guard jealously the fact that faith alone is what saves us, not faith plus obedience. … No historic Protestant confession says that saving faith includes obedience. — Dr. Wayne Grudem (Ph.D., University of Cambridge), Historic Protestant Position.

While the Reformers always took “faith alone” to mean that faith is the only thing that God responds to, historic protestant teaching has never taken “faith alone” to mean “faith that occurs by itself in a person, unaccompanied by other human activities”

Protestant leaders throughout history have consistently defined faith alone as being only about justification and then as resulting in obedience by the transformative power of the Holy Spirit. I think it should be obvious, that if someone were to tamper with the reformation doctrine of “faith alone,” that it would destabilize the soundness of the doctrine.

The second half of “We are justified by faith alone, but the faith that justifies is never alone” protects us from the heresy of antinomianism.2 While the first half protects us from legalism.1

  1. Verses against legalism (Eph 2:8-10; Gal 2:16,21; 3:10-12; 5:4; Ro 3:20,28)
  2. Verses against antinomianism (1 Jn 3:6-10; 5:18; Jd 4 NET; Ro 6:1-2,15; 3:8,31; Heb 10:26-31; 6:4-6; Lk 9:62)
  3. Verses for obedience “after” salvation (1Jn 2:3-6; 3:6-10; 5:3-4 Jn 14:15,21; 15:10)
  4. Verses for Godly dispositions of Love (1 Jn 2:9-11; 3:10; 4:8,20; Jn 13:34-35)
  5. Verses for Godly and Holy lives (Heb 12:14; 1 Tim 6:3-4; 2 Tim 3:12; Titus 2:11-12; Gal 5:22-23)
  6. Verses for good works “after” salvation (James 2:14-26; Eph 2:10)

❌ Misguided teachers will attempt to convince you that the statement, “We are justified by faith alone, but the faith that justifies is never alone” is contradictory, politely inform them that they are mistaken, and that both logic and English grammar disagree with their assessment. Then explain the following to them politely:

✔️ There are two different verbs in the two halves of the sentence, which makes it clear that “faith alone” in the first half of the expression is functioning in a different way from “faith alone” in the second half. In the first half “faith alone” modifies “justified,” and in the second half it modifies “is.”

Justification is by faith alone (Rom 3:28), but a faith that does not grow the fruit of obedience by the power and indwelling of the Holy Spirit, is not true faith; it is a dead faith, and James rejects salvation by a dead and superficial faith (James 2:14-26). Genuine faith always “results” in the fruits of the faith (Ga 5:22-23 NLT; Jn 15:4-5; 1Cor 3:6-7), denying this, denies His transformative power.

Genuine Saving Faith  
Legalism
The Pharisees
Works = Justification
Violates: Eph 2:8-10; Gal 2:16,21; 3:10-12; 5:4; Ro 3:20,28		 False
Synergism
The Judaizers, most Catholics, most Witnesses, Mormons, some Lordship salvation
Faith + Works = Justification
Saving faith includes obedience.
Violates: Eph 2:8-10; Gal 2:16,21; 3:10-12; 5:4; Ro 3:20,28		 False
Monergism
Historic Sola fide, Protestant Christians & Moderates, most Lordship Salvation, some moderate free grace
Saving faith “results” in obedience “after” justification. Faith Alone = Justification. Resulting in Fruits
Defends: Eph 2:8-10; Gal 2:16,21; 3:10-12; 5:4; Ro 3:20,28
Reconciles: Jn 14:15,21; 15:4-5,10 1 Jn 2:3-6; 5:3-4; James 2:14-26; Eph. 2:8-10; 1 Jn 3:6-10; 5:18; Jd 4 NET; Ro 6:1-2,15; 3:8,31; Heb 10:26-31; 6:4-6; Lk 9:62		 True
Antinomianism
Extreme 80’s “Free Grace” Heresy, Hyper-Grace Heresy (Antinomianism), Woke Theological Liberalism.
Faith Ignoring Regeneration & Sanctification = Justification - Fruits
Violates: Jn 14:15,21; 15:4-5,10; 1 Jn 2:3-6; 5:3-4; James 2:14-26; Eph. 2:8-10; 1 Jn 3:6-10; 5:18; Jd 4 NET; Ro 6:1-2,15; 3:8,31; Heb 10:26-31; 6:4-6; Lk 9:62		 False

Salvation is by grace through faith alone (Eph 2:8-9; Gal 2:16,21; 3:10-12; 5:4; Ro 3:20,28), but the faith that saves is never alone in the person justified (James 2:14-26; Eph 2:10). Sola fide.

Those who accept my commandments and obey them are the ones who love me. And because they love me, my Father will love them. And I will love them and reveal myself to each of them.” — John 14:21 NLT (cf. Jn 14:15).

While works definitely do not save us, they do spring forth from a true and lively faith.

  • Saving faith “results” in (not “includes”) obedience to God (1Jn 2:3-6; 3:6-10; 5:3-4 Jn 14:15,21; 15:10), and good works that “follow after” (not “merits”) justification (James 2:14-26; Eph 2:10). This has been the teaching of Historic Christianity for hundreds of years. It is not legalistic. Necessarily follows is not meritoriously contributes.
  • Christians do not “practice” sin, abuse grace as a license to sin, or remain in a lifestyle of sin (1 Jn 3:6-10; 5:18; Jd 4 NET; Ro 6:1-2,15; 3:8,31; Heb 10:26-31; 6:4-6; Lk 9:62).
  • The practice of unrepentant sin was not tolerated by the Apostles (1 Cor. 5:12-13; Luke 17:3-4)
  • Those who practice lifelong habitual sin are likely self-deceived (James 1:22; 2 Pe 2:21-22) and will not inherit the kingdom of God (Mt 18:3; Gal 5:19-21; 1 Cor. 6:9-10; Eph 5:3-5 … + Rev 21:8; 22:15; Ro 1:29-32)
  • Christianity is a call to discipleship (Mt 10:38; 16:24; Lk 9:23,62; 14:27; Mk 8:34… Mt 3:10; 25:30; Jn 15:8 ESV)
  • True Christians love God by obeying him (Jn 14:15,21; 15:10; 1 Jn 2:3-6; 5:3-4).
  • True Christians love other believers (1 Jn 2:9-11; 3:10,14; 4:8,20; Jn 13:34-35).
  • The Bible teaches us to live Godly and Holy lives (Heb 12:14; 1 Tim 6:3-4; 2 Tim 3:12; Titus 2:11-12; 2 Pe 2:21-22).
  • The teaching of obedience to God after justification is not burdensome, in fact it’s a reason for joy (1 Jn 5:3-4; Jn 15:10-11).

The 80’s version of the Gospel diminishes sound doctrine (2Tim 4:3-4 NLT) and is possibly leading hundreds of innocent men, women, and children into debauched lifestyles (2Pe 2:1-2 NET) and antinomianism. We need to combat this by maintaining the true definition of faith alone.

🚶📜 2. Does The 80’s version of the Gospel teach against Christ’s repentance?

The 80’s “Free Grace” movement weakens the gospel message by avoiding any call to unbelievers to repent of their sins. We do not repent to merit or earn our salvation, we repent because our faith is genuine and we have not made a false profession of faith (Ac 17:30; 1Jn 2:4), we repent because our love for God is not superficial (Jn 14:15,21). The result is that some followers of “Free Grace” teaching have never repented of their sins, and are not saved, because the Holy Spirit works repentance in the hearts of those with genuine faith.

Now after John was arrested, Jesus came into Galilee, proclaiming the gospel of God, and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.” — Jesus in Mark 1:14-15 ESV preaching and proclaiming that repentance is part of the gospel.

Anyone who can read English can verify that repentance does not simply mean a “change of mind.” All one has to do is inspect the world’s most authoritative Greek lexicons to find that the true meaning of metanoéō falls under the second meaning of “feel remorse, repent, be converted in a (religio-)ethical sense.” metánoia also falls under the second meaning of “repentance, turning about, conversion” as taught by Christ & The Apostles (Ac 3:19,26; 26:20; Mt 3:8 NLT; Rev 2:5).

Many understand repentance to mean simply a “change of mind.” The weakness of this position is that, for the New Testament, this meaning finds no support in any authoritative Greek lexicon or in any modern English translation, none of which translate metanoéō and metánoia as “change of mind” for New Testament passages. It is a definition unique to Free Grace supporters, without scholarly support from the academic community or any standard Greek reference works. It also lacks support from any English translation of the Bible.

— Dr. Wayne Grudem (Ph.D., University of Cambridge; D.D., Westminster), “Free Grace” Theology: 5 Ways It Diminishes the Gospel. p. 70. Endorsed by 9 leading Biblical scholars.

Repentance

The true meaning of repentance is a heartfelt sorrow for sin, a renouncing of it, and a sincere commitment to forsake it and walk in obedience to Christ. Repentance is the immediate fruit of a genuine non-superficial faith.

Justification is by faith alone (Eph 2:8-10; Gal 2:16,21; 3:10-12; 5:4; Ro 3:20,28), but the faith that saves is never alone in the person justified (1Jn 2:3-6; 3:6-10; 5:3-4 Jn 14:15,21; 15:10).

The message that ‘There is forgiveness of sins for all who repent.’ should be preached to the entire world in the name of Jesus Christ (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31).

  • Not justifying (Rom 3:28; Eph 2:8-10).
  • Imperfect (1Jn 1:8–10; 2:1-2).
  • Taught alongside faith by Christ Himself (Mark 1:14-15).
  • One of the reasons Jesus came (Lk 5:32).
  • Taught as an inward resolve to turn from sin (Ac 3:19; 26:20; Mt 3:8 NLT; Rev 2:5).
  • An immediate fruit of genuine saving faith resulting in good works and righteous behavior (Mt 3:8 NLT; Ac 26:20; Rev 2:5).
  • Will happen in genuine believers (1Jn 3:6-10). logically (Ac 17:30; 1Jn 2:4).
  • Commanded by God (Ac 17:30; Mt 4:17).
  • Granted by God (Ac 11:18; 2Tim. 2:25).
  • Growth given by God (1Cor 3:6-7; Ga 5:22-23 NLT; Jn 15:4-5).
  • Preached for the forgiveness of sins (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31).
  • Produced from Godly sorrow (2 Cor. 7:10; Matt. 11:21-22; Job 42:6).
  • Leading to salvation and eternal life (2 Cor. 7:10; Acts 11:18).
  • Described as needed and necessary (Lk 15:7).
  • Repent or Perish (Lk 13:3; Mt 3:10).
  • Unrepentant sin not tolerated by the Apostles and not a one time event (Lk 17:3-4; 1 Cor. 5:11-13).

🚶📜 2.1 How C.S. Lewis Helped Bob Wilikin Repent Of His Mistaken View On Repentance

Bob Wilkin (ThM, PhD, Dallas Theological Seminary) has served as an evangelist on the staff of Campus Crusade for Christ, a hospital chaplain, a pastor, and a college professor of Greek and Bible. He is the founder and Executive Director of Grace Evangelical Society (GES).

Some Free Grace people hold to the change of mind view of repentance, which I advocated in my doctoral dissertation at DTS in 1985. (I repented of that view in 1998. — Dr. Bob Wilikin, C. S. Lewis Said Repentance Is a Condition for Everlasting Life

As one who has held both views, I now see that the idea that the change-of-mind view is easy to explain is not quite right. It is hard to convince someone that repentance is a change of mind about Christ when so many (actually all) NT passages clearly contradict that definition. Actually the view of repentance advocated here is much easier to explain and is much simpler. — Dr. Bob Wilikin, Does Your Mind Need Changing? Repentance Reconsidered.

I have received a number of letters and calls from people who are upset that I have abandoned the change-of-mind view. To all such people I wish to say that I personally understand their angst. I held the change-of-mind view for years, even writing a doctoral dissertation defending it. When confronted with the view that I now advocate, I was skeptical. However, I have always considered Acts 17:11 to be a vitally important attitude to have: “These were more fair-minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.” After following that admonition, I changed my thinking about repentance — Dr. Bob Wilikin, Does Your Mind Need Changing? Repentance Reconsidered.

I’m happy to see people waking up from this error, especially from the very camp that is wrongfully propagating it. Here is the excerpt from “The Perfect Penitent” in Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis that opened Wilikin’s eyes.

… Now what was the sort of “hole” man had got himself into? He had tried to set up on his own, to behave as if he belonged to himself. In other words, fallen man is not simply an imperfect creature who needs improvement: he is a rebel who must lay down his arms. Laying down your arms, surrendering, saying you are sorry, realising that you have been on the wrong track and getting ready to start life over again from the ground floor—that is the only way out of a “hole.” This process of surrender—this movement full speed astern—is what Christians call repentance. Now repentance is no fun at all.

It is something much harder than merely eating humble pie. It means unlearning all the self-conceit and self-will that we have been training ourselves into for thousands of years. It means killing part of yourself, undergoing a kind of death. In fact, it needs a good man to repent. And here comes the catch. Only a bad person needs to repent: only a good person can repent perfectly. The worse you are the more you need it and the less you can do it. The only person who could do it perfectly would be a perfect person—and he would not need it.

Remember, this repentance, this willing submission to humiliation and a kind of death, is not something God demands of you before He will take you back and which He could let you off if He chose: it is simply a description of what going back to Him is like. If you ask God to take you back without it, you are really asking Him to let you go back without going back. It cannot happen. Very well, then, we must go through with it. But the same badness which makes us need it, makes us unable to do it. Can we do it if God helps us? Yes, but what do we mean when we talk of God helping us? We mean God putting into us a bit of Himself, so to speak. He lends us a little of His reasoning powers and that is how we think: He puts a little of His love into us and that is how we love one another. When you teach a child writing, you hold its hand while it forms the letters: that is, it forms the letters because you are forming them. We love and reason because God loves and reasons and holds our hand while we do it.

— An excerpt from “The Perfect Penitent” in Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis (University of Oxford)

🚶📜 2.2 Did Chafer Diminish The Gospel Message Surrounding Repentance?

The True Meaning Of Repentance is a heartfelt sorrow for sin, a renouncing of it, and a sincere commitment to forsake it and walk in obedience to Christ. A new group has emerged in the 80s that has diminished this 2,000 year old truth and attempted to teach that it is only assent or “change of mind.” Beware this teaching! It’s not a Biblical or scholarly conclusion.

Many understand repentance to mean simply a “change of mind.” The weakness of this position is that, for the New Testament, this meaning finds no support in any authoritative Greek lexicon or in any modern English translation, none of which translate metanoéō and metánoia as “change of mind” for New Testament passages. It is a definition unique to Free Grace supporters, without scholarly support from the academic community or any standard Greek reference works. It also lacks support from any English translation of the Bible.

— Dr. Wayne Grudem (Ph.D., University of Cambridge; D.D., Westminster), “Free Grace” Theology: 5 Ways It Diminishes the Gospel. p. 70. Endorsed by 9 leading Biblical scholars.

Certain names & titles have been redacted to protect my audience from possible dangerous teachings by Chafer and the Free Grace community. You can always refer to the source yourself as I’ve supplied it at the end of each text. It should be stated that I do not think that 80s “Free Grace” Theology is a false gospel, only an incomplete, weakened, or diminished one. I recommend moderate forms of protestantism instead.

6. The Relationship between Dispensationalism and the Free Grace Movement

Historically, the initial source of the Free Grace view of the gospel was apparently not [redacted], its primary advocate in the 1980s and 1990s, but Lewis Sperry Chafer, the first president of Dallas Theological Seminary, especially in his Systematic Theology, where he says, “The New Testament does not impose repentance upon the unsaved as a condition of salvation.” However, Chafer’s main concern was to deny that repentance had to include “sorrow and heart-anguish,” so that “the way of salvation has thus been made impossible for all who do not experience the required anguish.” According to Chafer, because of this mistake, people are led “to measure the validity of their salvation by the intensity of anguish which preceded or accompanied it. It is in this manner that sorrow of heart becomes a more subtle form of meritorious work, and to that extent a contradiction of grace…. To imply, as preachers have done so generally, that God must be mollified… by human agony is a desperate form of unbelief.”35

Although my definition of repentance (p. 865) includes “a heartfelt sorrow for sin,” I would agree with Chafer that we should not tell people to “measure the validity of their salvation by the intensity of the anguish which preceded or accompanied it.” Therefore I have some sympathy with Chafer’s opposition to this pastoral mistake, which he apparently thought was too prevalent in his day. But I think he over-corrected the mistake by insisting that repentance only required a change of mind.

Chafer was a leading proponent of dispensationalism (see pp. 656, 1054) and the president of Dallas Theological Seminary from 1924 to 1952, but not all Dallas Seminary faculty or all who advocate Dispensational theology would hold a Free Grace view A controversy over this point erupted in American evangelicalism in 1988 when John MacArthur, himself a Dispensationalist, published The Gospel according to Jesus. This book, which features enthusiastic forewords by J. I. Packer and James Montgomery Boice, strongly criticized the views of writers like Chafer and [redacted] on evangelism and the nature of saving faith. MacArthur argued (I think convincingly) from many New Testament passages that one cannot truly accept Christ as Savior without also accepting him as Lord or, in other words, that there can be no true saving faith without genuine repentance in the sense of a commitment to forsake sin and walk in obedience to Christ as well. He said that any other view preaches a cheap gospel that offers unconverted people false security, telling them they are saved simply because they agreed that the facts of the gospel were true or prayed a prayer, but they had no true repentance and no real change of life. MacArthur argued that such unbiblical evangelism has never been the teaching of the church through history and that the weakened gospel heard so often as a result of Free Grace teaching has led to a whole generation of professing Christians whose lives are no different from the surrounding culture and who are really not saved at all. [redacted] quickly responded to MacArthur with another book,

[redacted]. As I have argued in this chapter, it seems clear that MacArthur was right to maintain that true saving faith in New Testament terms is more than mere intellectual assent to facts; it must include a heartfelt coming to Christ in personal dependence on him for salvation, combined with a heartfelt repentance from sin. It is misleading to brand this teaching “Lordship salvation” as if it were some new doctrine or as if there were any other kind of salvation—MacArthur is teaching what has been the historic position of Christian orthodoxy on this matter. This position is not salvation by works but simply states the gospel of free grace and salvation by grace through faith in all its biblical fullness. The change of life that will result from genuine conversion does not save us, but it will certainly result if our faith is genuine, for “faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead” (James 2:17).

— Dr. Wayne Grudem (Ph.D., University of Cambridge; D.D., Westminster), Systematic Theology 2nd ed., Chapter 35: Conversion (Faith and Repentance). pp. 875-6.

🚶📜 2.3 Every English Bible translation and 1,000s of Biblical language scholars chose “repentance, turning about, conversion” to represent metánoia, and not the false teaching of assent.

The academic community is made up of thousands of scholars who created all the English Bible translations, lexicons, dictionaries, and interlinears. When a theologian who doesn’t understand Greek tells you that repentance is only a “change of mind” they are teaching error and on a subject they are not educated on.

The world’s most authoritative Greek lexicons show that the true meaning of metanoéō falls under the second meaning of “feel remorse, repent, be converted in a (religio-)ethical sense.” metánoia also falls under the second meaning of “repentance, turning about, conversion” as taught by Christ & The Apostles (Ac 3:19,26; 26:20; Mt 3:8 NLT; Rev 2:5).

There is yet another significant argument against the common Free Grace definition of repentance as a mere “change of mind”: the definition “change of mind” differs from all widely known English Bible translations.

Take, for example, the first instance of metanoeō in the New Testament, which reports John the Baptist preaching and saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand” (Matt. 3:2). This verb is translated as “repent” in the following Bible versions: KJV, NKJV, ESV, NASB, NIV, NET, HCSB, NLT, RSV, and NRSV. I know of no Bible translation that translates this verse as, “Change your minds, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” And for good reason; the English word repent does not mean merely “change your mind” but has the following meanings:

  1. To feel remorse, contrition, or self-reproach for what one has done or failed to do; be contrite.
  2. To feel such regret for past conduct as to change one’s mind regarding it: repented of intemperate behavior.
  3. To make a change for the better as a result of remorse or contrition for one’s sins. 38

38 American Heritage Dictionary, 4th ed. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2006), s.v. “repent.”

Those are three related but slightly distinct meanings for repent. Of those three senses, the meaning that would most naturally come to mind for English-speaking readers of the New Testament would be the one connected to “sins,” or meaning (3), or perhaps a combined sense of (2) and (3), including making a change for the better, or resolving to make a change for the better, “as a result of remorse or contrition for one’s sins.” That is the sense that is best suited to the New Testament contexts where English translators have used this word, and that is naturally the sense in which they expected it to be understood. 39 This is significant. It means that all the verses in the New Testament that use the word repent in English are also arguments against the Free Grace position, that repent means “to change one’s mind.” For example:

Repent [not: Change your mind], for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. (Matt. 3:2)

From that time Jesus began to preach, saying, “Repent [not: Change your mind], for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”

(Matt. 4:17) and that repentance [not: a change of mind) and forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. (Luke 24:47)

And Peter said to them, “Repent [not: Change your mind] and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ

39 Even meaning (2) by itself, “To feel such regret for past conduct as to change one’s mind regarding it: repented of intemperate behavior,” implies not merely a change of opinion but a change in thinking so that one is resolved no longer to continue that pat- tern of behavior.

for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.” (Acts 2:38)

Repent [not: Change your mind] therefore, and turn back, that your sins may be blotted out. (Acts 3:19)

The times of ignorance God overlooked, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent [not: change their minds]. (Acts 17:30)

[Paul says that he]… declared first to those in Damascus, then in Jerusalem and throughout all the region of Judea, and also to the Gentiles, that they should repent [not: change their minds] and turn to God, performing deeds in keeping with their repentance. (Acts 26:20)

These verses and others like them with the English word repent give further evidence that no committee of English Bible translators has agreed with Bing’s definition, “change of mind.”

— Dr. Wayne Grudem (Ph.D., University of Cambridge; D.D., Westminster Theological Seminary) “a distinguished Research Professor of Theology and Biblical Studies. He graduated Harvard, Westminister Seminary, and Cambridge. Member of the Translation Oversight Committee for the English Standard Version of the Bible, the general editor of the ESV Study Bible, and the author of over twenty-five books.” from “Free Grace” Theology: 5 Ways It Diminishes the Gospel. p. 64. Endorsed by 9 leading Biblical scholars.

🚶📜 3. Is The 80’s version of the Gospel indoctrinating innocent children into lifestyles of sin and false assurance, causing them to apostatize?

The 80’s “Free Grace” movement gives false assurance of eternal life to many people who profess faith in Christ but then show no evidence in their pattern of life or even in continuing to say that they believe in Christ. The result is that many people have been assured that they are saved, but they are not.

Do not be deceived, if you are walking after the flesh and involved in the things of the flesh, you have no assurance of being in the Kingdom of Heaven — Chuck Smith (YouTube Short)

It will help you to make the distinction between (1) justification, which is by faith alone (Eph 2:8-10; Rom 3:28), and (2) assurance of salvation, which is predicated upon an evidence-based faith (1Jn 2:3-6 NLT; Jn 14:15,21). “we can be sure that we know him if we obey his commandments.… That is how we know we are living in him.”†

Biblical faith is evidence-based.… Real faith in Christ shows itself by its fruit in the lives of those who profess it. It is not a superficial thing…. — Dr. John C. Lennox (DPhil, Emeritus Professor of Mathematics at the University of Oxford; PhD, University of Cambridge; DSc, Cardiff University)

If you are unrepentant (Lk 13:3) and you pursue lifestyles of sin (1Jn 3:6-10; Gal 5:19-21) the only assurance you have, is no assurance. This is your wake up call (Re 3:3). You should be told to test to see if your faith is genuine (2Cor.13:5), to see if you really are trusting in Christ, because if you were, you’d be repentant, you’d carry your cross daily (Mt 10:38; Lk 9:23), you’d be bearing the fruits of obedience (John 15:1-17; James 2:14-26; Jn 14:15; 1 Jn 2:4), and you’d have the assurance of being foreknown (Mt 22:14). These are divine enablements.

🚶📜 4. Does The 80’s version of the Gospel teach against Christ’s “believing trust” by falsely teaching “assent to facts” as salvific?

The 80’s “Free Grace” movement leads its supporters to overemphasize one necessary component of genuine faith (mental assent to the Bible’s propositions about Christ’s atoning work) and to underemphasize another necessary component of genuine faith (namely, heartfelt trust in the living person of Jesus Christ as my Savior and my God). The result is that some followers of the Free Grace movement intellectually agree with the right doctrines, but they have never trusted in Christ as a person, and they are not truly saved.

❌ Misguided teachers teach against the lexicon definition of “believe,” by attempting to teach “assent to facts” as salvific, which the Apostle James was clearly against (James 2:19 NLT).

✔️ Christ taught “trustful belief” (pisteuō) as salvific: (Jn 3:16; 11:25-26). True teaching emphasizes heartfelt trust in the person of Christ, whereas false teaching overemphasizes agreement with facts. We can verify this by inspecting the worlds most authoritative Greek lexicons and dictionaries.

2 to entrust oneself to an entity in complete confidence, believe (in), trust, w. implication of total commitment to the one who is trusted. In our lit. God and Christ are objects of this type of faith that relies on their power and nearness to help, in addition to being convinced that their revelations or disclosures are true. — Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (BDAG), the worlds most authoritative Greek lexicon

4. pisteúō means “to trust” (also “to obey”), “to believe” (words), and in the passive “to enjoy confidence” (cf. the later sense “to confide in”). — The Theological Dictionary of the New Testament: Abridged in One Volume (TDNT “Kittel”)

🚶📜 5. The 80’s version of the Gospel promotes numerous highly unusual, highly unlikely interpretations of Scripture

The 80’s “Free Grace” movement promotes numerous highly unusual, highly unlikely interpretations of the New Testament because of their need to defend a mistaken understanding of the word alone in the phrase “faith alone.” They use this misunderstanding to diminish Christ’s call to repentance and His fruit-bearing metaphor. Below you will see proof that scripture goes against the 80’s movement.

⚠️ Under construction - I will update this with examples in time. You could refresh the page in a week or every so often. I will likely make a list of links to future articles here, that expand upon these bad interpretations.

🚶📜 6. Does The 80’s version of the Gospel teach against Christ’s fruit-bearing metaphor and against the warnings of the Apostles?

ℹ️ Disclaimer: there are some moderates within the 80s group that do teach correctly on fruit-bearing, namely, Ryrie, see link; however, there is an extremist faction within the sect that is reminiscent of the hyper-grace antinomians. This section addresses these extremists.

As Charles Ryrie correctly observed, “every Christian will bear fruit; otherwise he or she is not a true believer.” For ‘fruit, then, furnishes evidence of saving faith. The evidence may be strong or weak, erratic or regular, visible or not. But a saving faith works,” — Dr. Norman Geisler, Four Views On Eternal Security. p. 105.

ℹ️ Disclaimer: Everyone has sin (1 Jn 1:8–10), but not everyone pursues lifestyles of indulgent sin (1Jn 3:6-10). Though we may stumble, make mistakes, and God forbid backslide, there is no such thing as a born again Christian that “practices” sin (habitually and continually pursuing a lifestyle of sin).

Justification is by faith alone (Rom 3:28), but a faith that does not grow the fruit of obedience by the power and indwelling of the Holy Spirit, is not true faith; it is a dead faith, and James rejects salvation by a dead and superficial faith (James 2:14-26). Genuine faith always “results” in the fruits of the faith (Ga 5:22-23 NLT; Jn 15:4-5; 1Cor 3:6-7), denying this, denies His transformative power.

Because I already addressed the heresy of antinomianism multiple times, I’m going to briefly cover the topic here:

1 But false prophets arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. These false teachers will infiltrate your midst with destructive heresies, even to the point of denying the Master who bought them. As a result, they will bring swift destruction on themselves. 2 And many will follow their debauched lifestyles. Because of these false teachers, the way of truth will be slandered. — 2 Peter 2:1-2 NET

  1. The Apostle Peter reveals that false teachers would infiltrate the church, lead many into debauched lifestyles, slandering the way of truth with their destructive heresies. In 2 Peter 2 he describes them as, “brute beasts, creatures of instinct, born only to be caught and destroyed” (v. 12), “springs without water and mists driven by a storm” (v. 17), and “slaves of depravity” (v. 19). These statements showcase that the subjects were unregenerate professors of the faith.
  2. The Apostle John[1] [2] completely obliterates antinomianism in 1 Jn 2:3-6 when he says, “Whoever says “I know him” but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him.” He later states, in 1 John 3:7-9, “Little children, let no one deceive you. … Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, … No one born of God makes a practice of sinning …” proving, without a shadow of a doubt, that a true born again has undergone regeneration by the power and indwelling of the Holy Spirit. They no longer “practice” and pursue lifestyles of sin.
  3. The Apostle Jude in Jd 4 NET calls the church to defend the truth aggressively against this infiltration of dualistic antinomianism when he says, “For certain men have secretly slipped in among you—men who long ago were marked out for the condemnation I am about to describe—ungodly men who have turned the grace of our God into a license for evil and who deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.”
  4. The Apostle Paul conquers this extremism in Romans 6:1-2,15 when he says, “What then? Shall we sin because we are not under law but under grace? Absolutely not!” Paul also debunks dispensational antinomianism when he says, “Do we then nullify the law through faith? Absolutely not! Instead we uphold the law.” (Rom 3:31 NET; 1 Cor 6:9–11; 9:21).

The Apostle Paul thoroughly warned New Testament Christians (You & Me). These warnings were written to people who would be listening to the New Testament epistles as they were read aloud in New Testament Churches (cf. 1 Cor. 6:9-11; 2 Cor. 13:5; Heb. 3:12; 1 Jn 2:3-6; 3:6, 9-10; 14).

19 Now the works of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity, depravity, 20 idolatry, sorcery, hostilities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish rivalries, dissensions, factions, 21 envying, murder, drunkenness, carousing, and similar things. I am warning you, as I had warned you before: Those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God! — Galatians 5:19-21 NET

Practice in this sense means a lifelong continual pattern. It speaks of the pursuit of a lifestyle of indulgent sin. This does not mean that you will not have sin or that you will be perfect, in fact you may struggle with sin, make mistakes, and even backslide. A true Christian will undergo decreasing patterns of sin (1 John 3:8–9; cf. Rom. 6:14–18) in their progressive sanctification. They will not remain in their old way of life (2 Cor. 5:17; 1Jn 3:31).

9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived! The sexually immoral, idolaters, adulterers, passive homosexual partners, practicing homosexuals, 10 thieves, the greedy, drunkards, the verbally abusive, and swindlers will not inherit the kingdom of God. 11 Some of you once lived this way. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. — 1 Cor. 6:9-11 NET

The Apostle Paul calls on us to examine or test our faith, to see if it is genuine, to see if Jesus is really living in us. If he is, well, then you have a living faith, if not, then you have a dead faith and are disqualified, or fail the test of genuine faith.

Examine yourselves to see if your faith is genuine. Test yourselves. Surely you know that Jesus Christ is among you; if not, you have failed the test of genuine faith. — 2 Cor. 13:5 NLT

Chuck Smith is a well respected moderate and basic protestant that is not a part of this particular 80s movement. The 80s “free grace” movement would not pass the Chuck Smith test. We also recommend his topical study on repentance.

6 No one who abides in him keeps on sinning; no one who keeps on sinning has either seen him or known him. 7 Little children, let no one deceive you. Whoever practices righteousness is righteous, as he is righteous. 8 Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil. 9 No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God’s seed abides in him; and he cannot keep on sinning, because he has been born of God. 10 By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother. — 1 John 3:6-10 ESV

The following excerpt from Chuck Smith’s C2000 also blasts antinomianism out of the water.

1Jn 3:6 Whosoever abides in him does not practice sin: and whosoever practices sin has not seen him, neither known him. Pretty powerful words. It should cause us to examine our own lives. If I am living a life of practicing sin, I really don’t know Him. I really haven’t seen Him. If I really know Him, then I’m gonna be free from the practice of sin.

1Jn 3:8 He that is practicing sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning. And for this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. So again, don’t deceive yourself. If you are practicing sin, living in sin, you are not of God; you are a part of that rebellion against God, led by Satan.

— Chuck Smith (C2000)

🚶📜 7. Dallas Theological Seminary Distanced Itself From The 80s “Free Grace” Movement

Dallas wanted Dr. Grudem to emphasize that the 80s free grace movement, which got it’s start at this particular seminary, does not represent this educational institution. Dallas is distancing themselves from this 80s movement.

I’m doing a presentation here on a critique of the free grace gospel and some people haven’t heard of this but in the one hand of course all Protestants believe in free grace, were not saved by works but by faith, by faith alone, and it’s by God’s grace alone but there is a movement in some parts of the Christian world it’s called the free grace gospel movement if it actually had its origins in the modern age from a man named Zane Hodges who taught at Dallas seminary for many years now the people of Dallas want me to emphasize of course that this isn’t the view of the whole faculty but it was a view of this professor and some people who followed him.

— Dr. Wayne Grudem (Ph.D., University of Cambridge)

🚶📜 10. Artificial Intelligence Analysis Of My Article

What is the tone of the article?

The tone appears to be authoritative and instructive. It emphasizes certain theological points with clarity and conviction, aiming to teach and guide readers in understanding the importance of repentance in the Christian faith. The language used is direct and assertive, indicating a strong stance on the topic being discussed.

–

Is any of it legalistic?

The text you provided doesn’t seem to promote legalism. It appears to be emphasizing the importance of obedience and good works as fruits of genuine faith, rather than as a means to earn salvation. It’s highlighting the biblical teaching that while salvation is by grace through faith alone, true faith results in a transformed life marked by obedience and good works. Legalism, on the other hand, typically involves the belief that strict adherence to religious laws or moral rules is necessary for salvation.

–

Interpretation

Your interpretation captures key elements of Jesus’ teachings on salvation, repentance, and obedience. Here’s a breakdown:

  1. Trustful belief as salvific: Jesus emphasized belief in Him as essential for salvation, as seen in verses like John 3:16, where belief leads to eternal life. Similarly, in John 5:24, Jesus emphasizes that those who hear His word and believe in Him have eternal life. This theme is consistent in other passages you mentioned.

  2. Repentance alongside faith: Jesus indeed taught repentance alongside faith. Mark 1:15 records Jesus’ proclamation to “repent and believe in the gospel.” Luke 13:3 emphasizes the need for repentance, warning that without it, one will perish. This aligns with the understanding of repentance as a turning away from sin and toward God.

  3. Resulting fruit-bearing: Jesus frequently used the metaphor of fruit-bearing to describe the outcomes of genuine faith. In John 15:1-17, He speaks of believers abiding in Him, which results in bearing much fruit. This is often interpreted as the outward manifestation of a transformed life.

  4. Resulting obedience: Jesus also emphasized the importance of obedience as a natural outgrowth of true faith. In John 14:15, He says, “If you love me, you will keep my commandments,” highlighting the link between love, faith, and obedience.

Your interpretation aligns well with these aspects of Jesus’ teachings, showing a comprehensive understanding of His message regarding salvation, repentance, and the Christian life.

🚶📜 11. Summary & Conclusions

Unfortunately, the 80’s “Free Grace” movement deviates from scripture, the academic community, and centuries of sound doctrine because of a mistaken understandings. I do not think that 80s “Free Grace” Theology is a false gospel, only an incomplete, weakened, or diminished one. Because of the concerns In this article, I cannot recommend 80s “Free Grace” version of the gospel, or movement, as a legitimate option for evangelicals to accept and follow.

“The so-called Free Grace version of the gospel of Jesus Christ is unbiblical, anti-evangelical, and sub-Christian, …” — J.I. Packer (Ph.D., University of Oxford) Time magazine top 25 evangelical.

Instead, I recommend moderate forms of Protestantism, like, Amyraldism, the original Calvary Chapel distinctive, or Reformed Wesleyanism where there is safety in scripture, the academic community, and centuries of sound doctrine.

  • The Bible is against the heresy of legalism, but supports Christ’s fruit-bearing metaphor of resulting obedience to God.
    • Justification is by faith alone (Eph 2:8-10; Gal 2:16,21; 3:10-12; 5:4; Ro 3:20,28), but the faith that saves is never alone in the person justified (1Jn 2:3-6; 3:6-10; 5:3-4 Jn 14:15,21; 15:10).
    • Saving faith “results” in (not “includes”) obedience to God (1Jn 2:3-6; 3:6-10; 5:3-4 Jn 14:15,21; 15:10), and good works that “follow after” (not “merits”) justification (James 2:14-26; Eph 2:10).
    • True Christians love God by obeying him (1Jn 2:3-6; 3:6-10; 5:3-4 Jn 14:15,21; 15:10).
    • Obedience does not merit salvation, the Holy Spirit produces obedience (1Cor 3:6-7; Ga 5:22-23 NLT; Jn 15:4-5, Ac 17:30; 1Jn 2:4).
    • Faith is not a work (Romans 4:5), and repentance is a fruit (Mt 3:8-10 NLT).
  • Repentance is the immediate fruit of a genuine non-superficial faith.
    • Repentance is the “resulting” fruit of genuine saving faith. Repentance is a heartfelt sorrow for sin, a renouncing of it, and a sincere commitment to forsake it and walk in obedience to Christ (Acts 26:18,20; 3:19; Mt 3:8 NLT; Rev 2:5).
    • Repentance is produced from a Godly sorrow and leads to salvation and eternal life (2 Cor. 7:10; Acts 11:18).
    • The message that ‘There is forgiveness of sins for all who repent.’ should be preached to the entire world in the name of Jesus Christ (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31).
  • The Bible is against the heresy of antinomianism.
    • We are set free from sin, but not set free to sin (1 Jn 3:6-10; 5:18; Jd 4 NET; Ro 6:1-2,15; 3:8,31; Heb 10:26-31; 6:4-6; Lk 9:62).
    • Christians do not “practice” sin, abuse grace as a license to sin, or remain in a lifestyle of sin (1 Jn 3:6-10; 5:18; Jd 4 NET; Ro 6:1-2,15; 3:8,31; Heb 10:26-31; 6:4-6; Lk 9:62).
    • Everyone sins (1 Jn 1:8–10), but not everyone pursues lifestyles of indulgent sin (1Jn 3:6-10). Though we may stumble, make mistakes, and God forbid backslide, there is no such thing as a born again Christian that “practices” sin (habitually and continually pursuing a lifestyle of sin).
    • We are no longer under the law (Ro 6:1-2,14-15; Gal 3:23-25; Gal 5:18; Col 2:14), but we still uphold the law (Romans 3:31).
  • Christianity is a call to discipleship (Mt 10:38 NLT; Mt 16:24; Lk 9:23 Lk 9:62; Lk 14:27; Mk 8:34… Jn 15:8 ESV; Mt 3:10; 25:30).