Wednesday, November 11, 2015

James White's Embarrassing Ignorance of Free Grace

        Dr. James R. White is the director of Alpha and Omega Ministries, author of over twenty books, an apologist who has done at least one-hundred-and-fifty formal, moderated debates, is the host of the radio show, The Dividing Line, and is a longtime proponent of Lordship Salvation. On The Dividing Line, on 8/13/2015,[1] Dr. White devoted an episode to critiquing a youtube video put out by Dr. Robert N. Wilkin of the Grace Evangelical Society, an organization that has been promoting the gospel of Free Grace for decades. In this article I will be responding to what I consider to be the most egregious errors made by Dr. White. In doing so I intend to demonstrate that Dr. White, though confident in his position[2], is woefully ignorant of what Free Grace actually teaches.  

Spellcheck

            The first thing I’d like to point out is that Dr. White misspells Dr. Wilkins’ name in the title of the episode. On youtube it reads, “Bob Wilkins, False Faith, Lordship, and Assurance”. But his name is “Wilkin”, not “Wilkins”. Considering that Dr. White has debated Dr. Wilkin I’d expect him to at least get his name right.

Deathbed Puritans

            Dr. White didn’t seem to like Dr. Wilkin’s reference to the Puritans fear and utter lack of assurance on their deathbeds. Dr. White simply sneered and scoffed and dismissed it as irrelevant, citing as a counter-example a personal friend of his who apparently did died with assurance.

            Can the Puritan’s crisis of faith really be brushed aside as irrelevant? Does Puritan lack of assurance still affect people today? Consider the following evidence. The November/December 2014 edition of Grace in Focus[3] contains an interview with Dutch Reformed scholar, and Old Testament professor at Protestant Reformed Seminary, Dr. David J. Engelsma.

Dr. Engelsma was interviewed by Shawn Lazar about his booklet, The Gift of Assurance.[4] According to Engelsma, the Puritans “went wrong by denying assurance of salvation is of the essence of faith itself. That is the crucial issue.”[5] This is a crucial issue because it causes doubts to fester, something Engelsma has seen personally. “For example, I have a large contingent of relatives who are, in fact, believing people, and godly in their lives. Some have never missed a church service in 80 years. Nevertheless, under the influence of this Puritan theology, they have lived all their lives doubting their salvation. And because they lack assurance, they never dare to take the Lord’s Supper. I have sat with them on their death beds, and watched as they died in terror, afraid of being damned. And after they were laid in the casket, their relatives were in terrible distress and despair over their loved ones.”[6] (Italics not in original)

As you can see this is not simply an issue about what the Puritans believed hundreds of years ago. Their theology continues to plague people today. Is the fact that people are so unsure of their own salvation that they forsake the Lord’s Supper and die in terror something that can be reasonably shrugged off? I think not. What would Dr. White say to the ongoing reality of Puritans dying with no assurance? Dr. White used to be a hospital chaplain, what would he say to one of Dr. Engelsma’s dying relatives?

Scapegoating

Dr. White is also guilty of a common Lordship tactic: blaming Free Grace for (just about) everything wrong in Christendom, specifically nominal Christianity. Lordship Salvationists love to claim that the reason people who profess faith in Christ, and yet live like the devil is because Free Grace punches their ticket to heaven, thereby giving them a license to sin. But is Free Grace really the culprit?

Well, according to a 2001 Barna Group survey, “Just three out of every ten Americans [who attend church] embrace the traditional Protestant perspective that good works cannot earn a person salvation.”[7] Seven out of ten Christians who attend church explicitly believe in works-righteousness! Considering these statistics which understanding of the gospel sounds like the root-cause of this phenomena: Free Grace, or Lordship Salvation? To pose the question is to answer it, and yet Lordship Salvationists continue to blame Free Grace with no evidence (that I’ve ever seen, at least) being cited. Pretty amazing stuff, folks.

We see from empirical data that Free Grace isn’t to blame for carnal Christianity, but what happens when Lordship Salvation is the proposed solution? Lordship Salvationists attempt to remedy this problem by promoting good works as necessary evidence of one’s salvation. What kind of discernable affect has this had on Christian culture?  According to another Barna study, “The findings reveal that most self-identified Christians in the U.S. are characterized by having the attitudes and actions researchers identified as Pharisaical.”[8] Hmm…so telling people to focus on their works causes them to act like Pharisees? Who’d a thunk it?

Though Dr. White blames nominal Christianity on Free Grace, citing his personal experience in a Southern Baptist church, empirical data (a bit broader than personal experience) contradicts that accusation.

Getting your ticket to heaven punched

             Another common accusation made by Lordship Salvationists, and repeated by Dr. White, is the claim that Dr. Wilkin, and other Free Grace people, think that people are saved by reciting a prayer, walking down an aisle, checking a box, etc. All of which are represented as people getting their tickets to heaven punched and receiving their license to sin. 

             This has been the consistent form of misrepresentation put out by Lordship Salvationists. Here’s two examples: John MacArthur writes, “Contemporary Christians have been conditioned to believe that because they recited a prayer, signed on a dotted line, walked an aisle, or had some other experience, they are saved and should never question their salvation.”[1] David Platt has likewise written, “Do not be deceived. Your relationship with Jesus and your status before God are not based on a decision you made, a prayer you prayed, a card you signed, or a hand you raised however many years ago.”[2]

              As you can see, this a common accusation made by Lordship proponents. If only they were actually familiar with Free Grace literature, and Dr. Wilkin’s literature in particular, they would know not to embarrass themselves with blatantly false accusations. Free Grace proponents in no way, shape, or form suggest that assurance of one’s salvation is based upon reciting a prayer, or going through any other motions. Here are three reasons as to why this is not the case.

1. Our assurance rests on the promises in God’s word, not our experiences. Dr. Wilkin devotes a whole chapter to this in his book, Secure and Sure,[3] a book I can only assume Dr. White has never read. At the end of that chapter Wilkin states, “Certainty comes from God’s Word. Stand on His promises to the believer. Then you will be sure and you will also be grateful to God and highly motivated to live for Him.”[4] As you can see, Wilkin does not place assurance on one’s past experiences, as is often alleged by Lordship Salvationists, but on the eternal promises of God’s word.

2. The basis for our assurance is not on any past experience, but on our present faith. Once again, Dr. Wilkin has a whole chapter about this in Secure and Sure.[5] This is how that chapter begins, “Have you ever met someone who was looking to some past experience as the basis of their assurance? They prayed some prayer and put the date in their Bible. They walked an aisle after a particularly moving sermon. They made a commitment to Christ around a campfire – all meaningful experiences as the time to be sure.”[6] (Italics not in original) This chapter opens with Dr. Wilkin directly addressing the topic that Lordship Salvationists so often falsely accuse Free Grace people of promoting. Does Dr. Wilkin promote basing our assurance on a prayer we once prayed?

                 He continues, “But there are some problems we encounter when we base our assurance on a past experience.”[1] Uh-oh, doesn’t sound like Wilkin’s a fan of past experiences! “The first difficulty”, according to Wilkin is, “that assurance comes from God’s Word, not from our experiences.”[2] Another problem is, “Since assurance is based on what I believe now, not on what I believed in the past, then if I am confused now, I lack assurance.”[3] He concludes that chapter by admonishing us to “Give up trying to figure out when you were born again.[4] (Italics in original)

3. We are saved by our faith, and reciting a prayer, etc. is NOT faith! In Dr. Wilkin’s work he explicitly rejects the “sinner’s prayer”, and anything other than a simple faith in Jesus Christ to receive the free gift of eternal life. For example, “It’s interesting to note that there is not one account in Scripture where Jesus or His apostles ever told anyone to pray a prayer for everlasting life.”[5] And, “That brings us to walking an aisle. I think it’s safe to assume that many people go forward at churches and evangelistic rallies without ever understanding and believing the saving truth of the gospel.”[6] (Italics not in original) One more example, “Contrary to popular understanding, none of the following are a part of or a synonym for saving faith: believing general Bible truth, promising to serve God, praying, walking an aisle, being sorry for your sins, turning from your sins, inviting Jesus into your heart, believing with a special kind of faith, doing good works, or having heart faith.”[7]

                   The reason that none of these activities count as saving faith, as stated earlier, is because they aren’t! As Wilkin puts it, “There is only one truth that will save: Jesus’ guarantee that anyone who believes in Him for eternal life has it.”[8] Therefore, as you can plainly see, the Free Grace position generally, and specifically as expressed by Dr. Wilkin, does not assure people of their salvation by telling them to place their assurance on a past experience of reciting a prayer, walking down an aisle, or any other meaningless activity. I would really appreciate it if Dr. White, and others would actually familiarize themselves with the Free Grace position stop grossly misrepresenting it.

False Faith

                    Another false accusation about Dr. Wilkin made by Dr. White on The Dividing Line is that Free Grace people have no concept of a false profession of faith. Dr. White baselessly asserts this because he’s laboring under the false impression that we believe that any kind of vague affirmation of Jesus is good enough to get out tickets to heaven punched. This accusation is false because we believe that people are saved by believing in Jesus alone for the free gift of eternal life. If someone says they believe in Jesus for eternal life, but also think they need to have good works, then they don’t have saving faith because they’re not believing in Jesus alone, to receive eternal life as a gift, they’re still trying to earn it by their works. As we saw earlier, according to Barna at least 70% of Christians are in this category! That’s a lot of false profession!

                   What does Wilkin say? Once again, in Secure and Sure, he devotes a whole chapter to this topic.[9] Here’s how that chapter begins, “Do you believe that there is such a thing as a false profession of faith in Christ? I do.”[10] Once again, another false accusation of Dr. White could have been avoided, if he was familiar with Dr. Wilkin’s work.

1 John

                      Dr. White attempted to demonstrate the biblical “truth” of Lordship Salvation from the book of 1 John, but the way in which he went about interpreting 1 John demonstrated his profound ignorance of the Free Grace interpretation, or that a Free Grace interpretation even exists.

                      Dr. White turned to 1 John 5:13, which reads, “These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.”[11] Dr. White argues that this verse is the purpose statement of 1 John, which means this verse is meant to communicate what the entire letter is about. This would mean that the entire letter is meant to tell us how we can know that we have eternal life. This would then function as a proof-text for Lordship Salvation since 1 John is admonishing us to love God, obey his commandments, love our brothers in Christ, etc., and if the whole letter is about how we can know we have eternal life we would have to fulfill all these requirements in order to have assurance, hence Lordship Salvation.[12]

                       The problem with Dr. White’s treatment of 1 John is that he simply asserts his interpretation as obviously true, and gives no “meaningful interaction”[13] to the Free Grace interpretation of 1 John. I can’t imagine why since I know Dr. Wilkin offered multiple ways to understand 1 John when he debated Dr. White, so he’s certainly aware that other interpretations exist.

                        There are, in fact, good reasons to reject Dr. White’s assertion that 5:13 is the purpose statement of 1 John. The phrase “These things I have written to you” is found in two other verses. 1 John 2:1 states, “My little children, I write these things to you so that you may not sin.” Why isn’t that the purpose statement of 1 John? Am I supposed to believe that John wrote this letter to tell people they can totally stop sinning? Of course not, because he goes on to say in the same verse, “If anyone sins, we have a Counselor with the Father, Jesus Christ, the righteous.” He likewise states in 1:8, “If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” And in verse 10, “If we say that we haven’t sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.” So that obviously isn’t the purpose statement, and yet John said, “I write these things to you so that…”

                          The other example is in 2:26, “These things I have written to you concerning those who would lead you astray.” These are three very different purposes, being told not to sin, being warned about those who would lead us astray, and being told how to know we have eternal life, are three very different statements, they can’t all be the purpose of the whole letter of 1 John, and yet they all say it’s why John has written to them. So, how do we find the right purpose statement?

                           There is another candidate. 1 John 1:3-4, “that which we have seen and heard we declare to you, that you also may have fellowship with us. Yes, and our fellowship is with the Father, and with his Son, Jesus Christ. And we write these things to you, that our joy may be fulfilled.” Dr. Wilkin points out, “Note that this time John refers to what we write. In the other three examples John used the first person singular…I believe John uses we in First John 1:3-4 to set it apart from the other three statements. Additionally, in 1:3-4 John is emphasizing that he is speaking for the entire band of apostles.”[14] (Italics in original)

                            1 John 1:3-4 makes better sense as the purpose statement of the letter since it’s distinguished from the other verses by speaking on the behalf of the other apostles, instead of from the first person singular perspective. Another good reason is, “It is found in the opening verses of the book, which is where purpose statements for letters were normally found in that day.”[15] If 1 John 1:3-4 is the purpose statement instead of 5:13 that makes a huge difference in how you read 1 John! Instead of being about how to know you have eternal life, it’s about how to gauge your level of fellowship with God.

                          I would also argue that taking 1:3-4 as the purpose statement makes much better sense of 5:13, whereas making 5:13 the purpose statement makes no sense with the rest of the book. Let’s look at that passage in context.

                          1 John 5:9-13, “If we receive that witness of men, the witness of God is greater; for this is God’s testimony which he has testified concerning his Son. He who believes in the Son of God has the testimony in himself. He who doesn’t believe God has made him a liar, because he has not believed in the testimony that God has given concerning his Son. The testimony is this, that God gave to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He who has the Son has the life. He who doesn’t have God’s Son doesn’t have the life. These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.”

                           So if we just walk through the passage, what does it say? We begin by seeing that since we receive the witness of men, we also need to receive the witness of God, since his witness is greater. In fact, not only is God’s witness greater, but anyone who doesn’t believe is to make God out to be a liar. So pay attention, because as Christians we don’t want to make God a liar. God’s testimony is that he has already given us eternal life, so it’s something that we presently possess. This life is in Jesus, therefore all who have Jesus, have eternal life, but all who don’t have Jesus don’t have eternal life. Okay, that’s simple enough, but for that to be meaningful we need to know how we can have Jesus and thereby have life. So John tells us how by telling us that it’s because of our faith in Jesus that we can know (right now!) that we have (also right now!) eternal life.

                      Here’s the point: if 1:3-4 is the purpose statement, then when John writes, “These things I have written to you…” in 5:13, the “these things” is referring not to the entire letter, but to the immediate context of what he’s talking about. This harmonizes perfectly with the letter as a whole. The letter is about how to have fellowship with God. What’s essential to having proper fellowship with God? Assurance of salvation! What does 1 John 5:9-13 do? Assures us that we can know we have eternal life right now by our simple faith in the name of the Son of God, thereby giving us a foundation for right fellowship with God! Makes perfect sense.

                   Now lets’ assume 5:13 is the purpose statement of the letter, and then compare it with the rest of the letter. 5:13 tells us that we can know we have eternal life because we believe in Jesus, but if the purpose of the whole letter is to tell me how I can know I have eternal life then what about the following verses?

2:15, “Don’t love the world or the things that are in the world. If anyone loves the world, the Father’s love isn’t in him.”

2:29, “If you know that he is righteous, you know that everyone who practices righteousness has been born of him.”

3:6, “Whoever remains in him doesn’t sin. Whoever sins hasn’t seen him and doesn’t know him.”

4:8, “He who doesn’t love doesn’t know God, for God is love.”

5:3, “For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. His commandments are not grievous.”

                According to these couple of verses, assuming that 1 John is trying to communicate how I can know I have eternal life, in order to know that I have to not love the world, practice righteousness, not sin, love (but not the world!), and keep God’s commandments. That’s a lot more than just believing in the name of the Son of God!

                 Do you see the problem? According to Free Grace 1 John is about fellowship. 5:13 grounds our fellowship with God in our assurance that we have eternal life right now by simply believing in the name of the Son of God. The rest of the letter gives us ways by which we can gauge our fellowship with God, such as keeping his commandments, practicing righteousness, loving, etc. Lordship Salvation turns 1 John into a self-contradiction by saying on the one hand we can know that we have eternal life by our faith, but we also have to love God, not remain in sin, practice righteousness, keep the commandments, etc. and if we’re not doing all of those things we have good reason to question our salvation. But that interpretation makes 5:9-13 contradicted by the rest of the letter!

                  Another glaring problem with Dr. White’s use of 1 John 5:13, is, as I already pointed out, that verse plainly states that we can know right now that we have eternal life, and we can know that simply by our faith in Jesus Christ. This is a perfect summary of the Free Grace position. As a Calvinist Dr. White doesn’t think that anyone can really know with 100% certainty that they’re saved in this life, because perseverance in the faith until the end of one’s life is a requirement for salvation. Therefore, for Dr. White to even cite this verse is to refute his own position.

                  Here’s just one more problem. 1 John 3:14, “We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brothers. He who doesn’t love his brother remains in death.” Here’s why this is a problem, this verse clearly says that I have brothers in Christ, because the only way that a person can not love his brother in Christ is if he has a brother in Christ. In this verse John is clearly assuming he’s talking to saved people telling them to love their brothers in Christ in order to have fellowship with God. This verse cannot be about determining one’s salvation, because if it was John wouldn’t assume that his readers are already in Christ. Therefore, this verse clearly contradicts Dr. White’s interpretation of 1 John.

                 For all those reasons Dr. White’s appeal to 1 John 5:13 to disprove Free Grace and vindicate Lordship Salvation utterly fails. I also shouldn’t fail to mention that, once again, Dr. Wilkin devotes a whole chapter to 1 John in, Secure and Sure.[16]

James 2:24

                 Dr. White also alleges that Dr. Wilkin, and Dr. Zane Hodges are incapable of interpreting James 2. He suggested to his audience that they look up youtube videos of Hodges and Wilkin to see for themselves how badly they interpret that passage. He never quoted them, or even attempted to demonstrate in what way his interpretation is any better. He simply asserted that their interpretation must be really bad. Though he also said that he might have to devote an episode to going over James 2 more in depth. I know Zane Hodges has a commentary on the Book of James, so if Dr. White does address this in a later episode I hope he familiarizes himself a little more with the Free Grace position, and quote from Hodges, or Wilkin accurately so I don’t have to do this again.

                  I have one question for Dr. White (or any Lordship Salvationist) when it comes to James 2, specifically James 2:24. According to the typical Lordship Salvationist his position does not constitute works-righteousness, because he does[17]believe in justification by faith alone, but after one is justified, made righteous, saved, etc. he will necessarily produce good works in his life. This is normally expressed in pithy catch-phrases such as, “faith is the root, but works are the fruit” and “you are justified by faith alone, but not by a faith that is alone”, etc.

                  You understand the distinction, yes? According to their position you are justified by faith alone, a part from works, but after, and only after you are justified you’ll necessarily produce good works. Okay? So, let’s say you’re talking to a Lordship Salvationist and he explains his position to you in like manner, so you ask him to show you a verse that proves his position from Scripture, and he takes you to James chapter 2. This confuses me, because what does James 2:24 say? “You see then that by works, a man is justified, and not only by faith.”

                   Do you see a problem? You ask the Lordship Salvationist to show you a verse that demonstrates that one is justified by faith, but after that works will necessarily follow. Instead he takes you to a verse that says man is justified by works and not by faith alone! This verse directly contradicts Lordship Salvation, and yet it’s every Lordship proponent’s go-to proof-text! Can someone please explain this to me?

The Great Debate

                   Many times throughout the episode Dr. White referred to his 2005 debate with Dr. Wilkin in haughty terms. He accused Dr. Wilkin of behaving childishly, and, as he typically does, assumed himself the victor. Seeing as Dr. White can hardly be considered an impartial observer of the debate, seeing as he was a participant, what do people who weren’t in the debate think?

                   According to Dr. Zane Hodges Dr. White seemed “unfocused” and “upset”.[18] According to one of Dr. White’s avid fans, “Again and again, I kept waiting for him to nail Dr. Wilkin’s hide to the wall with solid exegesis and straightforward argumentation. This did not happen as much as I felt it should. It appeared that Dr. White failed to sufficiently prepare for this debate, merely picking a couple of data-points and ‘winging it’ from there. Hardly indicative of the quality of his past work and impressive reputation.”[19] Another person says, “James White got flustered while Wilkin was confident and cheerful.”[20] Though Dr. White paints the debate as if he easily and obviously won hands-down, that version is not so obvious to everyone who’s seen it, including myself.

                    In conclusion, Dr. James White devoted an episode of The Dividing Line to reviewing a youtube video by Dr. Robert Wilkin. I appreciate him doing so, because I appreciate discussion on this topic. Unfortunately Dr. White displayed a shallow understanding of Free Grace. Having simply parroted common straw man arguments it seems to me Dr. White has developed his (mis)understanding of Free Grace from how it’s caricatured by Lordship Salvationists, rather than from original sources. This is especially embarrassing considering Dr. White’s reputation as a thoroughly prepared and well-researched apologist. What a shame. I can only hope that when Dr. White addresses this topic in the future, and we know he will, he’ll do a little more homework.
















[1] Ibid. Pg. 37.
[2] Ibid. Pg. 37.
[3] Ibid. Pg. 40.
[4] Ibid. Pg. 42.
[5] Ibid. Pg. 38.
[6] Ibid. Pg. 38.
[7] Bob Wilkin. Confident in Christ. Pg. 9.
[8] Ibid. Pg. 10.
[9] Chapter 10, “Will the Real Christian Please Stand Up?”. Pg. 81-92.
[10] Secure and Sure. Pg. 81.
[11] All Bible quotations are taken from the World English Bible (WEB).
[12] Did I base the name of my blog on a Lordship Salvation proof-text? OOPS!
[13] His favorite catchphrase.
[14] Secure and Sure. Pg. 125-126.
[15] Ibid. Pg. 125.
[16] Chapter 15: “Testing First John”. Pg. 121-129.
[17] No, he doesn’t.
[19] Ibid.
[20] http://www.christianforums.com/threads/james-white-vs-robert-wilkin-debate.1678293/ 


[1] John MacArthur. The Gospel According to Jesus. Pg. 38.
[2] David Platt. Follow Me. Pg. 24.
[3] Chapter 2, “God’s Word: The Source of Assurance”. Pg. 23-28. 
[4] Bob Wilkin. Secure and Sure. Pg. 28.
[5] Chapter 4, “Present Faith: The Basis of Assurance”. Pg. 37-42.
[6] Ibid. Pg. 37. 



[2] Though, oddly enough, not his salvation.
[3] The magazine of GES.
[5] Grace in Focus. November/December 2014. Pg. 11.
[6] Ibid. Pg. 11.
[7] Bob Wilkin. Secure and Sure. Pg. 92.

No comments:

Post a Comment