What About 'Free Grace' Theology?

AllOfGrace

Member
Not too long ago, during a Kindle Book shopping spree, I came across this swath of books about 'Free Grace' Theology. I had never even heard about this position before. They aren't Arminian. They strongly emphasize the Believer's Eternal Security and that A truly born again/saved believer will never lose their salvation. But they are not Calvinist either. The reject Unconditional Election and Limited Atonement.

I'm Just curious if anyone here has delved into the Free Grace theology view and what their thoughts are on that position.

Personally, I have some books from those who hold that view and I must say, I really do feel that they make a very strong case for the Eternal Security of believers. Dennis Rosker's book - Shall Never Perish Forever - Kindle edition by Rokser ... - is one of my favorite books, even though I disagree with His view on the Calvinist position. He states that the Calvinist/Reformed view doesn't truly provide assurance of Salvation because it holds that the believer must persevere in faith until the end of life, and if one doesn't persevere, they are lost. Hence they can never be truly assured of salvation until they persevere until the end. I think that assessment has flaws in it, because Calvinists believe that every one of God's Elect WILL persevere to the end because Jesus will preserve them.

Nevertheless, I agree with a lot of the Free Grace view. I guess I must have been under a rock, but I had never heard of this view before and it came as a kind of refreshing shock to find that there was a view that wasn't Arminian or Calvinist, yet held so firmly to Eternal Security.
 

ReverendRV

Well-known member
Not too long ago, during a Kindle Book shopping spree, I came across this swath of books about 'Free Grace' Theology. I had never even heard about this position before. They aren't Arminian. They strongly emphasize the Believer's Eternal Security and that A truly born again/saved believer will never lose their salvation. But they are not Calvinist either. The reject Unconditional Election and Limited Atonement.

I'm Just curious if anyone here has delved into the Free Grace theology view and what their thoughts are on that position.

Personally, I have some books from those who hold that view and I must say, I really do feel that they make a very strong case for the Eternal Security of believers. Dennis Rosker's book - Shall Never Perish Forever - Kindle edition by Rokser ... - is one of my favorite books, even though I disagree with His view on the Calvinist position. He states that the Calvinist/Reformed view doesn't truly provide assurance of Salvation because it holds that the believer must persevere in faith until the end of life, and if one doesn't persevere, they are lost. Hence they can never be truly assured of salvation until they persevere until the end. I think that assessment has flaws in it, because Calvinists believe that every one of God's Elect WILL persevere to the end because Jesus will preserve them.

Nevertheless, I agree with a lot of the Free Grace view. I guess I must have been under a rock, but I had never heard of this view before and it came as a kind of refreshing shock to find that there was a view that wasn't Arminian or Calvinist, yet held so firmly to Eternal Security.
Eternal Security must be true, even if there was only one verse that teaches it. When people say that a Doctrine is true because the Character of God demands it to be true, Eternal Security would like-wise be true because it's a good Doctrine; who wouldn't want it to be true? But we don't have to sweat the issue because there are a multitude of verses that teach Eternal Security...
 

ReverendRV

Well-known member
I'm familiar with it. I agree it is logically more secure than Calvinism, because it eliminates evanescent grace.

However, we should not simply gravitate to doctrines that make us feel more secure; the Bible warns against that.

I think this doctrine is antinomian, or in other words, it promotes sinful behavior and gives false assurances.
Eternal Security must be true, even if there was only one verse that teaches it. When people say that a Doctrine is true because the Character of God demands it to be true, Eternal Security would like-wise be true because it's a good Doctrine; who wouldn't want it to be true? But we don't have to sweat the issue because there are a multitude of verses that teach Eternal Security...
THE compromise is the Perseverance of the Saints...
 

Oldsaint24

Well-known member
Not too long ago, during a Kindle Book shopping spree, I came across this swath of books about 'Free Grace' Theology. I had never even heard about this position before. They aren't Arminian. They strongly emphasize the Believer's Eternal Security and that A truly born again/saved believer will never lose their salvation. But they are not Calvinist either. The reject Unconditional Election and Limited Atonement.

I'm Just curious if anyone here has delved into the Free Grace theology view and what their thoughts are on that position.

Personally, I have some books from those who hold that view and I must say, I really do feel that they make a very strong case for the Eternal Security of believers. Dennis Rosker's book - Shall Never Perish Forever - Kindle edition by Rokser ... - is one of my favorite books, even though I disagree with His view on the Calvinist position. He states that the Calvinist/Reformed view doesn't truly provide assurance of Salvation because it holds that the believer must persevere in faith until the end of life, and if one doesn't persevere, they are lost. Hence they can never be truly assured of salvation until they persevere until the end. I think that assessment has flaws in it, because Calvinists believe that every one of God's Elect WILL persevere to the end because Jesus will preserve them.

Nevertheless, I agree with a lot of the Free Grace view. I guess I must have been under a rock, but I had never heard of this view before and it came as a kind of refreshing shock to find that there was a view that wasn't Arminian or Calvinist, yet held so firmly to Eternal Security.
All God's childten are eternally secure concerning eternal life.......just not secure concerning age lasting life. In other words, not all God's children are going to receive the promised inheritance ie. the millennial kingdom. Many are going to miss it. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
 

AllOfGrace

Member
All God's childten are eternally secure concerning eternal life.......just not secure concerning age lasting life. In other words, not all God's children are going to receive the promised inheritance ie. the millennial kingdom. Many are going to miss it. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.
It's interesting that it was by searching out that very question about the outer darkness/Weeping and gnashing of teeth...that I ran into these free grace theology books which take up the topic at length
 

Oldsaint24

Well-known member
It's interesting that it was by searching out that very question about the outer darkness/Weeping and gnashing of teeth...that I ran into these free grace theology books which take up the topic at length
Do not know about the free grace theology......but do know about the gospel of the kingdom theology Matt. 24:14. It begins with the Gentiles and will progress to the Jews. God the Father is long suffering and merciful.
 

zerinus

Well-known member
Not too long ago, during a Kindle Book shopping spree, I came across this swath of books about 'Free Grace' Theology. I had never even heard about this position before. They aren't Arminian. They strongly emphasize the Believer's Eternal Security and that A truly born again/saved believer will never lose their salvation. But they are not Calvinist either. The reject Unconditional Election and Limited Atonement.

I'm Just curious if anyone here has delved into the Free Grace theology view and what their thoughts are on that position.

Personally, I have some books from those who hold that view and I must say, I really do feel that they make a very strong case for the Eternal Security of believers. Dennis Rosker's book - Shall Never Perish Forever - Kindle edition by Rokser ... - is one of my favorite books, even though I disagree with His view on the Calvinist position. He states that the Calvinist/Reformed view doesn't truly provide assurance of Salvation because it holds that the believer must persevere in faith until the end of life, and if one doesn't persevere, they are lost. Hence they can never be truly assured of salvation until they persevere until the end. I think that assessment has flaws in it, because Calvinists believe that every one of God's Elect WILL persevere to the end because Jesus will preserve them.

Nevertheless, I agree with a lot of the Free Grace view. I guess I must have been under a rock, but I had never heard of this view before and it came as a kind of refreshing shock to find that there was a view that wasn't Arminian or Calvinist, yet held so firmly to Eternal Security.
From the Wikipedia article on Free Grace Theology:

“Free grace is a Christian soteriological view that anyone can receive eternal life the moment they believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God (John 20:31). Free Grace advocates believe that good works are not the condition to merit (as with Catholics), maintain (as with Arminians), or to prove (as with Calvinists) eternal life, but rather are part of discipleship and the basis for receiving eternal rewards.

“The grace (gift) of eternal life is said to be free as the only condition for receiving it is initial faith. This view distinguishes between salvation and discipleship – the call to believe in Christ as Savior and to receive the gift of eternal life, and the call to follow Christ and become an obedient disciple, respectively.”


A Google search for “Free Grace Theology” also produced a couple of short video clips on the subject by Wayne Grudem, who is a well-known and trusted theologian in evangelical circles, and are interesting and worth watching.
 

AllOfGrace

Member
From the Wikipedia article on Free Grace Theology:

“Free grace is a Christian soteriological view that anyone can receive eternal life the moment they believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God (John 20:31). Free Grace advocates believe that good works are not the condition to merit (as with Catholics), maintain (as with Arminians), or to prove (as with Calvinists) eternal life, but rather are part of discipleship and the basis for receiving eternal rewards.

“The grace (gift) of eternal life is said to be free as the only condition for receiving it is initial faith. This view distinguishes between salvation and discipleship – the call to believe in Christ as Savior and to receive the gift of eternal life, and the call to follow Christ and become an obedient disciple, respectively.”


A Google search for “Free Grace Theology” also produced a couple of short video clips on the subject by Wayne Grudem, who is a well-known and trusted theologian in evangelical circles, and are interesting and worth watching.
Yeah. Personally, I have enjoyed the things I’ve read by most of them. I still question some of the ideas I’ve read, but that doesn’t bother me. I still question aspects of Calvinism as well. Honestly, I can see how both Calvinists and Arminians arrive at the conclusions they do. I have friends from both camps...I love them to pieces and consider them beloved brethren. I’ve got way more problems with the Arminian position though.
 

eternomade

Well-known member
Not too long ago, during a Kindle Book shopping spree, I came across this swath of books about 'Free Grace' Theology. I had never even heard about this position before. They aren't Arminian. They strongly emphasize the Believer's Eternal Security and that A truly born again/saved believer will never lose their salvation. But they are not Calvinist either. The reject Unconditional Election and Limited Atonement.

I'm Just curious if anyone here has delved into the Free Grace theology view and what their thoughts are on that position.

Personally, I have some books from those who hold that view and I must say, I really do feel that they make a very strong case for the Eternal Security of believers. Dennis Rosker's book - Shall Never Perish Forever - Kindle edition by Rokser ... - is one of my favorite books, even though I disagree with His view on the Calvinist position. He states that the Calvinist/Reformed view doesn't truly provide assurance of Salvation because it holds that the believer must persevere in faith until the end of life, and if one doesn't persevere, they are lost. Hence they can never be truly assured of salvation until they persevere until the end. I think that assessment has flaws in it, because Calvinists believe that every one of God's Elect WILL persevere to the end because Jesus will preserve them.

Nevertheless, I agree with a lot of the Free Grace view. I guess I must have been under a rock, but I had never heard of this view before and it came as a kind of refreshing shock to find that there was a view that wasn't Arminian or Calvinist, yet held so firmly to Eternal Security.
Free Grace is common among the IKJVO Baptists, such as Steven Anderson. I believe the theology of "Sovereign Free Grace" is much more Biblical than Free Grace and Lordship Salvation. Typically, Sovereign Free Grace will hold to TULIP and either the Westminster Confession or the 1689 LBC.

Sometimes we are called "Hyper-Calvinists" but I reject that.
 

ReverendRV

Well-known member
Free Grace is common among the IKJVO Baptists, such as Steven Anderson. I believe the theology of "Sovereign Free Grace" is much more Biblical than Free Grace and Lordship Salvation. Typically, Sovereign Free Grace will hold to TULIP and either the Westminster Confession or the 1689 LBC.

Sometimes we are called "Hyper-Calvinists" but I reject that.
Grace is Free, or it's not Grace; right?

"Mercy there was great and Grace was Free..."


Oh, how we have deviated from Grace Preaching. If we are not accused of being Hyper, we're doing something wrong...
 
Last edited:

eternomade

Well-known member
Grace is Free, or it's not Grace; right?

"Mercy there was great and Grace was Free..."
Yes although the theology behind "Free Grace" and "Lordship Salvation" I can't fully get behind. Free Grace seems to deny God's sovereignty while Lordship Salvation seems to introduce works. This is why I believe Sovereign Free Grace is most Biblical.
 

ReverendRV

Well-known member
Yes although the theology behind "Free Grace" and "Lordship Salvation" I can't fully get behind. Free Grace seems to deny God's sovereignty while Lordship Salvation seems to introduce works. This is why I believe Sovereign Free Grace is most Biblical.
Why does Free Grace deny God's Sovereignty but Sovereign Free Grace doesn't?

What's the difference?
 

Theo1689

Well-known member
Free Grace is not Reformed in the sense that they believe EVERYONE can believe, where Sovereign Free Grace would argue that ONLY the elect, or remnant will believe.

This is a confusion that I see quite a bit.

Arminians think of "free" as in "available to everyone".
That's not what it means.

If something is "free", it simply means that the person you GIVE it to doesn't have to pay anything for it.

I can give a free gift to my son, but just because it's free, doesn't mean that anyone in the world can take it, or that I'm obligated to give free gifts to others.
 

eternomade

Well-known member
This is a confusion that I see quite a bit.

Arminians think of "free" as in "available to everyone".
That's not what it means.

If something is "free", it simply means that the person you GIVE it to doesn't have to pay anything for it.

I can give a free gift to my son, but just because it's free, doesn't mean that anyone in the world can take it, or that I'm obligated to give free gifts to others.
Yep.

Do yo lean more Lordship Salvation or Sovereign Free Grace?
 
G

guest1

Guest
Yes although the theology behind "Free Grace" and "Lordship Salvation" I can't fully get behind. Free Grace seems to deny God's sovereignty while Lordship Salvation seems to introduce works. This is why I believe Sovereign Free Grace is most Biblical.
Lordship salvation is not works but evidence or proof of ones salvation that results in good works as per Ephesians 2:8-10 and Jesus teaching on discipleship and counting the cost . You will know them by their fruits. You cannot have Jesus as your Savior apart from Him as your Lord. Does Christ rule ones life or self?

Jesus would say why do you call Me Lord and do not do what I say .

hope this helps !!!
 

AllOfGrace

Member
Lordship salvation is not works but evidence or proof of ones salvation that results in good works as per Ephesians 2:8-10 and Jesus teaching on discipleship and counting the cost . You will know them by their fruits. You cannot have Jesus as your Savior apart from Him as your Lord. Does Christ rule ones life or self?

Jesus would say why do you call Me Lord and do not do what I say .

hope this helps !!!
Exactly. I really feel like Free Grace authors that I've read use a couple of bogue strawman arguments against the Calvinist position. One of them is the one you just pointed out. They argue that the Lordship position leads one to endlessly wonder if they have enough works/fruit to know they are saved. How much is enough? What if there's not enough? etc... While it's true that our works merit nothing...at the very least, they give evidence that one has been born again. IN that case...Love is one of those fruits...and John in his epistle states flat out that if one doesn't have love, or hates a brother...they lack evidence of belonging to God. Bottomline...they could accuse John of the same thing they accuse Calvinists of.

The other strawman is the argument that the Perseverance of the saints negates assurance of salvation because, they assert...if one must persevere in the faith to the end, one can't know that they have persevered until the end of their life...so how can they have assurance? They cant' (they argue). I feel like this is a bonehead argument against the Calvinist position. They left out the part about Preservation...namely that the Calvinists hold that every born again believer WILL persevere to the end because Christ will never lose them. Jesus will lose NONE of His sheep.
 
G

guest1

Guest
Exactly. I really feel like Free Grace authors that I've read use a couple of bogue strawman arguments against the Calvinist position. One of them is the one you just pointed out. They argue that the Lordship position leads one to endlessly wonder if they have enough works/fruit to know they are saved. How much is enough? What if there's not enough? etc... While it's true that our works merit nothing...at the very least, they give evidence that one has been born again. IN that case...Love is one of those fruits...and John in his epistle states flat out that if one doesn't have love, or hates a brother...they lack evidence of belonging to God. Bottomline...they could accuse John of the same thing they accuse Calvinists of.

The other strawman is the argument that the Perseverance of the saints negates assurance of salvation because, they assert...if one must persevere in the faith to the end, one can't know that they have persevered until the end of their life...so how can they have assurance? They cant' (they argue). I feel like this is a bonehead argument against the Calvinist position. They left out the part about Preservation...namely that the Calvinists hold that every born again believer WILL persevere to the end because Christ will never lose them. Jesus will lose NONE of His sheep.
Ditto
 
Top