Free Grace Theology - The theology that allows devil worshippers into heaven

[FreeGrace2]

If sanctification is not necessary for salvation (in the eyes of free-grace supporters), then it is optional.

"Optional" isn't the operative word for salvation. Faith is. One is saved by grace through faith. Not "sanctificaton".

Even if a free-gracer preaches that sanctification results in blessings, eternal rewards, and prevents divine discipline ... those "secondary things" do not greatly matter to those who hear and take to heart the free-grace message (in my experience).

Do you mean that blessings and eternal rewards doesn't matter? And why do you call them "secondary things"? For the believer, they are PRIMARY. That is what believers have been called to:
Eph 4:1 - Therefore I, the prisoner of the Lord, implore you to walk in a manner worthy of the calling with which you have been called

1 Pet 2:21 - For you have been called for this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His step

To "follow in His step" is a reference to progressive sanctification and being holy and blameless, or Christ-like.

For spiritual growth, sanctification is NOT optional, but mandatory.

They focus virtually exclusively on the most important point: salvation, which you've guaranteed to them.

Not I, but the Bible guarantees salvation.

As long as they possess the prize at the end of the rainbow, everything else drops to the wayside, and they'll do what they want to do.

If that's the type of believer that you've had experience with, they are idiots and are missing out on what's the most important thing in life: spiritual growth. And whoever is pastoring them will answer for his totally and abject failure to communicate the Word of God properly to the family of God.

Please don't blame lousy pastors for what you may see among those who claim "free grace".

The thrust of free grace is the emphasis on HOW one is saved. In contradistinction to Lordship salvation, which teaches that one doesn't have "saving faith" unless one has works to prove that their faith actually saved them.

If you searched the Grace Evangelical Society - Faith Alone in Christ Alone website, I challenge you to find any teaching anywhere that sanctification isn't necessary for spirutual growth and blessings and eternal rewards.

I've given many verses so far, and you haven't commented on any of them. Do they support what I've posted, or not? If not, could you please take them one by one and explain specifically how and why they don't?

They don't care to "spiritually grow", as long as they have salvation.

That's a failure to understand Scripture and their pastor is a jerk, if that's what they've been taught. But don't blame free grace theology on jerk pastors or jerk congregations who aren't paying any attention.

Again, if the verses I've given do not support what I've claimed, please elaborate.

And the OP failed to provide any Scriptural support for its claims, because it was designed only to attack a theology that the poster hates, apparently. Though it is clear he doesn't understand it at all.

 

[FreeGrace2]

The problem here is with the translation, in my opinion.

Yes, most mainstream translations of this verse (Jn 20:31) says something similar to "But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name."

The problem is, the Greek word πιστεύω/πιστεύσητε/πιστεύοντες means more than "believe/believing". According to the lexicons, the word also means "to comply with/obey" or "trust/be faithful to".

So, the mainstream translations are not wrong per se, but it's just that they do not completely convey the fuller and additional meaning(s) of the Greek.

I wish you would have spelled the Greek words in English so I could know what Greek words you are using. I know that apeitho is often translated "believe" but can also mean "obey", such as Jn 3:36. The first occurrence of "believe" is the familiar "pisteuo", and the second occurrence is "apeitheo".

 

[ananda]

For spiritual growth, sanctification is NOT optional, but mandatory. ...I challenge you to find any teaching anywhere that sanctification isn't necessary for spirutual growth and blessings and eternal rewards.

Again, you are stating exactly what I am saying about "free-grace theology":

This is what I am hearing you say:
Sanctification is NOT optional .... for "spiritual growth", blessings, and eternal rewards. Thus, spiritual growth, blessings, and eternal rewards are based on sanctification. Salvation, however, is not based on sanctification.

You repeated back to me what I claimed about free-grace theology

I've given many verses so far, and you haven't commented on any of them. Do they support what I've posted, or not? If not, could you please take them one by one and explain specifically how and why they don't?

I've commented on John 20:31.

 

[ananda]

Yes, this is the key to everything ... insufficient translations. What single word should they have used instead of "believe"? There is none.
.

"faithful" is a word I might suggest to be used in place of "believe" ...

"But these are written, that ye might be faithful that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that being faithful ye might have life through His Name"

... but then again, it does not cover all possible meanings of the Greek.

 

[ananda]

I wish you would have spelled the Greek words in English so I could know what Greek words you are using. I know that apeitho is often translated "believe" but can also mean "obey", such as Jn 3:36. The first occurrence of "believe" is the familiar "pisteuo", and the second occurrence is "apeitheo".

pisteuo/pisteuete/pisteuontes were the words I was referencing.

Yes, John contrasted pisteuon with apeithon (those who do not obey) in Jn 3:36, which is another witness to the fact that pisteuo also encompasses the idea of obedience as necessary for salvation.

 

[guuila]

The problem is not free grace theology. It is pastors who have FAILED to properly teach that sanctification is a command for all believers and that failure to obey and grow spiritually, which is what progressive sanctification is about, will result in loss of blessings during our life, and loss of eternal rewards, and facing divine discipline from God's hand. These are crucial doctrines that have been largely ignored and replaced with the error that all believers will persevere, which basically dismisses those who have believed, and for whatever reason (2nd and 3rd soil conditions) fail to persevere.

But at the end of the day, none of it makes any difference because people who are taught Free Grace theology know that no matter how sinful they are, even to the point of denying Christ altogether, they will still be saved. Aw heck it may cost 'em some rewards, but oh well. Heaven is still heaven!

 

[FreeGrace2]

Actually I do.

The OP totally failed to convey that you do.

The difference between you and me is I believe active, ongoing faith is required to be saved. The verb in John 3:16 "believes" is a present tense active participle. All the believing (present tense) have eternal life. You believe faith at one time in the past is required to be saved.

Why don't you accept all the times "believe" is used in the aorist tense, which has NO time aspect to it? Such as Jesus' use of it in Luke 8:12? Even in v.13, He used the present tense of "believe" and followed it with "for a while". So much for your on-going active faith notions.

And Paul's answer to the jailer was to believe in the aorist tense, NOT present.

So you have no point.

So logically, you believe a person with ZERO faith can be saved, thus the OP.

The logic here is totally twisted. How can a person have no faith and be saved? Weren't you paying any attention to the verses I provided? Jn 5:24 tells us that one HAS eternal life WHEN they believe.

False. Anyone who wants to be saved can be saved.

But we know that Calvinism claims that only those God choose to believe will be saved. So it ain't "anyone" can be saved. That's not true according to Calvinism. Only the "elect" can and will be. So the statement isn't the "whole truth" here.

If a person makes a profession of faith and then renounces that profession, all it does is prove they didn't have biblical faith to begin with.

Oh, so now you're changing the rules, huh. The OP acknowledged that a person believed, then quit believing. Now you've changed from "believed" to "only SAID they believed". A totally different scenario.

Never once have I stated this means they "can't still be saved". Hopefully that clears up your confusion.

Well, you've certainly changed the OP.

At any rate, thanks for agreeing that devil worshippers can go to heaven as long as they believed as a child. Good to know my understanding of Free Grace theology is correct.

All you've done here is deny God's grace, as if you deserve to go to heaven AS LONG AS you persevere in the faith, when another believer doesn't.

Those who persevere don't deserve salvation any more than those who don't.

Regardless of how bad a child of God may turn out. Just shows how little respect for GRACE some people have. It's all about grace, but some seem to resent that fact.

The OP didn't provide any verses to support it. I did to support mine. And you haven't even tried to explain why or how my verses don't support what I believe.

It's very easy to throw out claims and charges. It's quite another thing to provide any evidence or proof for thosea claims or charges.

 

[guuila]

The part I bolded was the point I was trying to make regarding free-grace theology:

If sanctification is not necessary for salvation (in the eyes of free-grace supporters), then it is optional.

Even if a free-gracer preaches that sanctification results in blessings, eternal rewards, and prevents divine discipline ... those "secondary things" do not greatly matter to those who hear and take to heart the free-grace message (in my experience). They focus virtually exclusively on the most important point: salvation, which you've guaranteed to them. As long as they possess the prize at the end of the rainbow, everything else drops to the wayside, and they'll do what they want to do. They don't care to "spiritually grow", as long as they have salvation.

Exactly.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Again, you are stating exactly what I am saying about "free-grace theology":

This is what I am hearing you say:
Sanctification is NOT optional .... for "spiritual growth", blessings, and eternal rewards. Thus, spiritual growth, blessings, and eternal rewards are based on sanctification. Salvation, however, is not based on sanctification.

You repeated back to me what I claimed about free-grace theology

Sorry. It seemed you were criticizing it. Still not sure.

 

[ananda]

To really "believe" demands some serious adherance to God's commands, etc. However, this apparently is not obvious to some ... especially our pastors, many of whom apparently are people-lovers and not God-lovers, and interested in paying off their mortgages..

Yes, if one really believes, then one will follow (aka obey). I don't know why this is not obvious.

Most so-called "pastors" are false!

 

[guuila]

Again, you are stating exactly what I am saying about "free-grace theology":

This is what I am hearing you say:
Sanctification is NOT optional .... for "spiritual growth", blessings, and eternal rewards. Thus, spiritual growth, blessings, and eternal rewards are based on sanctification. Salvation, however, is not based on sanctification.

You repeated back to me what I claimed about free-grace theology

I've commented on John 20:31.

In Free Grace theology, sanctification isn't optional in the sense that it is commanded by God, but with respect to salvation, it is optional.

 

[FreeGrace2]

pisteuo/pisteuete/pisteuontes were the words I was referencing.

Yes, John contrasted pisteuon with apeithon (those who do not obey) in Jn 3:36, which is another witness to the fact that pisteuo also encompasses the idea of obedience as necessary for salvation.

No, pisteuo doesn't encompass the idea of obedience. It has to to with believing, trusting. If you want to go the route of "committing", fine. But it doens't mean to commit your life to Christ, as LS teaches. It means to commit your soul to Christ for salvation, which is just another way to say "believe/trust" in Him.

In effect, we are trusting our souls to Him to save us.

Any reference to obedience follows salvation is commanded of all of God's children. But one must become a child of God FIRST before any commands to obey are in play.

There is no works, deeds, etc that any unbeliever can do to be saved. Only by faith is one saved. Following that, one must obey to be blessed and rewarded.

 

[ananda]

Sorry. It seemed you were criticizing it. Still not sure.

Ok, let's break it down.

I'm not against this idea (in fact, I support it):

Sanctification is NOT optional .... for "spiritual growth", blessings, and eternal rewards.
​

I am against this free-grace idea:

Sanctification is not necessary for salvation.
​

Hopefully this is clearer?

 

[FreeGrace2]

In Free Grace theology, sanctification isn't optional in the sense that it is commanded by God, but with respect to salvation, it is optional.

Please provide some evidence that sanctification not optional for salvation.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Ok, let's break it down.

I'm not against this idea (in fact, I support it):

Sanctification is NOT optional .... for "spiritual growth", blessings, and eternal rewards.
​

I am against this free-grace idea:

Sanctification is not necessary for salvation.
​

Hopefully this is clearer?

Yes, thanks. Now, do you have any verses that clearly teach that sanctification is necessary for salvation?

And, along the way, could you provide a definition of "sanctification", so that I know exactly what you mean, since I believe the Bible has 2 meanings or uses.

Thanks.

 

[ananda]

In Free Grace theology, sanctification isn't optional in the sense that it is commanded by God, but with respect to salvation, it is optional.

Exactly!

In my experience, the average disciple of free-grace theology thinks along these lines: "I'll consider doing some things the Bible commands regarding sanctification, as long as it doesn't prevent me from doing what I really want to do and achieve in this life. It's not really that important, because, after all, I have the security that I'm forever saved because I simply believe!"

 

[guuila]

I wonder if this person will be saved according to Free Grace theology:

1. Bob is a nine year old boy. Bob has decided to follow Jesus.
2. Ten years later, after having faith, being active in church, praying, evangelizing, repenting of sin, striving to live a Godly life, etc. Bob goes off to college and becomes "enlightened" by his Philosophy 101 class and decides Jesus is stupid. He still believes Jesus exists, but this class made him believe Jesus is a megalomaniac and he wants nothing to do with Jesus anymore.
3. Bob spends the next 60 years persecuting Christians and worshipping Satan. He even sets a church on fire and kills 200 Christians because he hates them so much and he hates Jesus so much.
4. Bob goes to prison and gets the death penalty for the crimes he has committed.

Did Bob go to heaven?

 

[guuila]

Please provide some evidence that sanctification not optional for salvation.

So everyone who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven, but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven. (Matthew 10:32-33 ESV)

 

[ananda]

No, pisteuo doesn't encompass the idea of obedience. ...

Yes, it does. Look it up in a lexicon

 

[extraordinary]

Please provide some evidence that sanctification not optional for salvation.

So everyone who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven, but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven. (Matthew 10:32-33 ESV)

Positional sanctification is one being set apart by God for Him to "work on".
Progressive sanctification is one being "worked on" until he reaches holiness.
.