[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The poster sent us ‘610588601 which is not a hashcash value.

IMO, the most egregious heretical statements coming from advocates of the GES’s “Crossless/Deityless” interpretation of Gospel can be found and are compiled in this article.

Also see the companion article, Heresy of the “Crossless” Gospel: Verified & Affirmed!

Thanks for your patience; nothing further to add at the moment.

LM

At my blog and various other sites I have posted this question to Hodges, Wilkin, & Myers.

Can a lost man be born again while consciously denying the Deity of Jesus Christ if he believes in Jesus for eternal life?

Thus far only a young man named Antonio da Rosa, a very passionate apologist for Hodges and the GES, with a poor reputation at many sites, has responded.

What da Rosa does, however, is answer the question with a question. He is obviously trying to redirect away from an issue that they are very reluctant to address. He would have done better by not acknowledging the question at all.

You can view the article and brief thread here…

http://indefenseofthegospel.blogspot.com/2007/08/deity-of-christ-defining-question-to.html

Furthermore, da Rosa posted a very reckless and irresponsible piece at his blog in whuch he reveals what are primarily private communications between Wilkin and two other pastors in the “Crossless” debate.

You can view his reckless article here…

http://free-grace.blogspot.com/2007/08/public-debates-declined.html

It is a shame that this young man, (who is unofficially speaking for the GES) is acting in ways that bring the GES, his personal testimony and integrity under legitmate scrutiny.

LM

The section you are asking about in the top left hand site of the site is titled “Latest Comments”. It is a listing of the 7 most recent comments submitted to BibleStudy.net and who posted them.

So when it says “Ken Wilson on I lose Zane Hodges: Spring of 2005″ that means that Ken Wilson posted a comment on the article titled “I lose Zane Hodges: Spring of 2005″. You may notice that your name now appears on that list, and mine as well.

The names are linked because when you submit a comment you have the option to provide a link back to your own web site. If you opt out, it simply links back to the article that you are commenting on.

The discrepancy of the dates (Aug 2007 vs Spring 2005) is because this email exchange took place in August of 2005, after the first GES conference John attended. However, John posted that email conversation as an article on BibleStudy.net on Aug 2, 2007.

I hope that clears things up a bit.

Is the paper that you wrote for Chafer available for circulation? I am interested in reading it.

Dan

I just spoke at the 2007 Grace Conference at Quentin Road Baptist Church. I met several men in the Free Grace Alliance (FGA), including Charlie Bing, who I have been interacting with on line for about 10 years.

The FGA seems to be a good alternative to the GES for men in the Free Grace community who have departed the GES.

I never joined the GES because I had some sense that it was headed where it has landed in recent years.

Yours in Him,

LM

I appreciate your article, “I Lose Zane Hodges.” A companion of mine (Pastor Tom Stegall) in the debate over what has come to be known as the “Crossless” gospel largely propagated by Zane Hodges and the GES linked me to your site.

I have been largely involved on the debate to refute the Lordship Salvation interpretation of the Gospel. In recent months I was drawn into the debate over the “Crossless” gospel.

In both camps I have seen, just as you have, that in open venues advocates of these egregious errors will not speak in clear, unvarnished terms about exactly what they believe. I might not have disclosed private e-mails, but your interaction with Hodges is most enlightening.

If you have any interest in my work on Lordship Salvation and/or the GES, Hodges/Wilkin position on the Gospel, please visit my blog. The site address is: http://www.indefenseofthegospel.blogspot.com

I would be interested in any new developments you might uncover and share on this issue.

Kind regards,

Lou Martuneac

I am writing regarding the quotation on your site from last week concerning my 2005 GES talk.

“After that discussion, I spoke very briefly with a young man who attended the second workshop, held by Ken Wilson, “Is Faith in Christ’s Deity Required for Eternal Life? – ‘Son of God’ in John’s Gospel.” I told him, “Just give me the short answer: was it ‘yes” or ‘no.’” He said the answer was that Wilson wasn’t sure one way or the other, but that most of the attendees thought it was a requirement.”

John, I presented that paper with the explicit purpose of proving that belief in Christ’s Deity is necessary for eternal life. Lopez monopolized the subesquent discussion and confused people. I have since left GES and published the paper in the Chafer Theological Journal under the title, “Is Belief in Christ’s Deity Necessary for Eternal Life in John’s Gospel?” I believe you will find the answer to be an unapologetic “YES!,” as well as exposing the errors of GES (Wilkin and Niemela) on this very issue. I am now a member of the Free Grace Alliance which meets this October in Irving, Texas.

In His Grace and Truth,
Ken Wilson