Grace Rules by Gary Wilkerson

We have all been blessed in Christ BEFORE we were even born.
This blessing can not be the result of our faith, belief, surrender, repentance or any work at all.

Have I got this wrong? It seems to me that (after listening to Gary's preaching for a couple of month) that the son of David Wilkerson has shifted his focus concerning the preaching towards a message predominantly about grace (with a so to speak Joseph Prince-ish type of message). I hope I am wrong about this. I also felt that the style of worship in Garry's congregation was too contemporary/progressive (a kind of rock n roll/pop worship)..

Sincerely Magnus

Thanks for the answer tuc. Was getting concerned there for a bit and getting ready to put on my heresy hunting hat, just kidding ;) I would have tried to be as respectful as possible though strongly disagreeing.

I would like to know why you disagreed with my statement.

Yes Christ died for ALL sinners! Every single one of them.
This is a Divine Fact that is unchangeable. Even if someone never repents or believes, Christ died for them.

1. Do you believe Christ Died on the Cross?
2. If a person does not believe that, does not mean He did not die on the Cross?
3. Did Christ die for every single person or were some excluded?
4. If some were excluded please explain how and why they were excluded.

Thanks

https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=53416&forum=36&19

"When it comes to the atonement, I lean toward both a limited atonement and general atonement.

By limited atonement I mean that Christ paid the full penalty for the sins of His elect, thus eternally saving them from God's ultimate wrath because Christ took that ultimate wrath on Himself.

By general atonement I mean that Christ also paid partially for the sins of the non-elect and therefore they are able to live temporarily in this life without immediately being thrown into hell when they commit a sin. Because of this general atonement God can bestow temporal blessings on the non-elect here on earth. Without this general atonement there would be no forbearance of God toward the non-elect.

Respectfully, the view of a full atonement for the whole world doesn't make sense to me. If it was true that Christ actually paid fully for the sins of the non-elect, to me it would have to follow that they shouldn't perish in hell because their sins have been paid for...."

In that thread brother Greg asked, "Where do we see this view in Scripture brother?" to which I replied,

"Sure. First I'd point out 1Timothy 4:10 which says that Christ is "the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe."

I'd also point out the clear teaching of the scriptures that the soul that sins will die (Ezek.18:4)and that the wages of sin is death(Rom.6:23), meaning not only physical but also spiritual and eternal damnation. Apart from the mercy of God and benefits of the cross of Christ, every person would be thrown into hell immediately when they sinned.

I'll share a piece from John Piper's ministry website(MacArthur also holds this same two-fold view of the atonement btw):

"We do not deny that all men are the intended beneficiaries of the cross in some sense. 1 Timothy 4:10 says that Christ is "the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe.” What we deny is that all men are intended as the beneficiaries of the death of Christ in the same way. All of God’s mercy toward unbelievers ”” from the rising sun (Matthew 5:45) to the worldwide preaching of the gospel (John 3:16) ”” is made possible because of the cross.

This is the implication of Romans 3:25 where the cross is presented as the basis of God’s righteousness in passing over sins. Every breath that an unbeliever takes is an act of God’s mercy withholding judgment (Romans 2:4). Every time the gospel is preached to unbelievers it is the mercy of God that gives this opportunity for salvation.

Whence does this mercy flow to sinners? How is God just to withhold judgment from sinners who deserve to be immediately cast into hell? The answer is that Christ’s death so clearly demonstrates God’s just abhorrence of sin that he is free to treat the world with mercy without compromising his righteousness. In this sense Christ is the savior of all men.

But he is especially the Savior of those who believe. He did not die for all men in the same sense. The intention of the death of Christ for the children of God was that it purchase far more than the rising sun and the opportunity to be saved. The death of Christ actually saves from ALL evil those for whom Christ died "especially.”

There are many Scriptures which say that the death of Christ was designed for the salvation of God’s people, not for every individual. For example:

John 10:15, "I lay down my life for the sheep.” The sheep of Christ are those whom the Father draws to the Son. "You do not believe, because you do not belong to my sheep.” Notice: being a sheep enables you to become a believer, not vice versa. So the sheep for whom Christ dies are the ones chosen by the Father to give to the Son."

Source: http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/what-we-believe-about-the-five-points-of-calvinism#Atonement

"Another scripture that came to mind is 2Peter 2:1, "But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Lord who bought them, and bring on themselves swift destruction."

So that scripture says that there were false teachers whom the Lord "bought". I'd take that to mean a partial, temporal purchase, if those false teachers never repented and trusted in Christ while on earth."

Hope that helps explain where I am on this topic. I know this is one of those "non-essential" issues among Christians so there is no need to divide over it. In other words, whether one believes Christ died fully in the same exact way for all sinners both elect and non-elect, or whether one believes in a limited atonement as I explained is not a salvation issue.

But I was glad to hear that you don't believe in universalism (meaning that everyone is going to heaven). Clearly one must repent and trust in Christ in this life for the forgiveness of their sins. That is an essential, salvation issue.

The concept of election does a great disservice to the understanding of the atonement. May I speak of my own early exposure to Christianity?

John Calvin's theology still underpinning much of evangelical Christianity held that God was free to elect from the men and women He'd created some to be saved and some to be lost. Since they were all triple damned in the first place- Adam's sin, their sinful nature, and their own sin- none has a claim to the Grace of God anyway. God alone has the right to choose the ones that will be saved.

When I was taught all this in my Presbyterian church upbringing, I was also instructed to wait for God to call me and only then would I know I was one of the elect. He was "the author and finisher" of my faith, my will had little or nothing to do with it. Who was I to tell God who should be saved, who to be damned. "Shall the clay say to the potter??" And verses like that.

So it made sense that the punishments inflicted on Jesus at the cross were in exact proportion to the volume of sins being paid for, the exact sins for the exact number of souls God would be saving. It was called "retributive justice," just like old testament "an eye for an eye."

Oh what a dilemma this presents. No wonder a strong movement of universalism developed, men who saw this as so unjust- many refused to serve a God with such an arbitrary attitude toward men! They concluded that if Christ paid the price of one sinner, He paid the price of all. Nothing less could qualify as justice.

The error in all this goes back to Calvin's foundational presupposition that all men are so constitutionally depraved that God has no obligation to save any of them. A God of love would not put Himself in that position, and His character never gets to a place where some men are meaningless to Him.

Powerful words of Scripture, "God is not willing that any should perish, but that all might come to repentance." That is His eternal attitude, and comports easily with the true explanation of Christ's atoning work.

Jesus did not die under the weight of a certain number of individual sins. He died for just one man's sins without respect to numbers. He took the sins of one man, of many men, of all men- who repent! His sacrifice is sufficient to save any and all men who ever existed and sinned, but- and this is important- it does not obligate Him to save anyone!

If all men repented and believed, all would be saved. But if no man repented and believed, Christ's death would still stand before God as the Holy provision for man's redemption, preserving His eternal love and honor.

Of course, we live in the midst of this. We know people who are repentant members of the body and unrepentant sinners for whom the blood avails nothing. And this is the beacon light of our evangelistic mission, to convince men at home and abroad to acknowledge their sin, to repent, and to receive that mighty forgiveness in the blood of the savior. Nowhere in the scripture are we advised to determine whether anyone is elect before declaring the gospel, rather we have a field ripe for harvest and way too few laborers!

This view of atonement is called public justice, and it destroys both the evangelistic hesitation of election, and the anarchy of lawless universalism.

By whatever happened in your life you came to Christ with a humbled heart and asked for forgiveness- He did not hesitate to give it to you. Nor will He hesitate to give forgiveness to anyone else who asks for it, there is nothing in the gospel that excludes any man from His Grace.

Would that all men see Him for what He is, and bow before Him while they still have breath!

I have had great reluctance to post some of the devotionals written by Gary Wilkerson on their email list of David Wilkerson's devotions. Many things I agree with but overall there was a sense of the modern grace gospel message that has no fear of God, holiness of God, repentance of sin, etc.

Essentially the modern grace teachers are saying that 1950 years of Church history was wrong, legalistic and command keeping and not grace living, etc.

Initially I had similar reservations too about Gary Wilkerson's devotionals. Later I realized that it was my understanding of the New Covenant that was defective. And once I began to see the truth of the gospel and experience its reality, my life changed and I am determined to never go back.

Gary Wilkerson's preaching on grace and sanctification by faith are not new doctrines. Many speakers on this website have expounded on them, including Hudson Taylor, Andrew Murray, Watchman Nee... It's part of the
Reformed tradition, and goes all the way back to Luther and Calvin. Of course, you can trace this further back to the Bible, and that's the only thing which matters.

This excerpt from the Belgic Confession (1561) captures the truth beautifully:

"We believe that this true faith, being wrought in man by the hearing of the Word of God and the operation of the Holy Spirit, regenerates him and makes him a new man, causing him to live a new life, and freeing him from the bondage of sin. Therefore it is so far from being true that his justifying faith makes men remiss in a pious and holy life, that on the contrary without it they would never do anything out of love to God, but only out of self-love or fear of damnation. Therefore, it is impossible that this holy faith can be unfruitful in man; for we do not speak of a vain faith, but of such a faith which is called in Scripture a 'faith working through love', which excites man to the practice of those works which God has commanded in His Word... We would always be in doubt, tossed to and fro without any certainty, and our poor consciences would be continually vexed if they relied not on the merits of the suffering and death of our Saviour."

In Gary Wilkerson's carefully polished article he references Luke and tells of the many thousands of people who had come to Jesus to be healed of their diseases and to be set free from demons. He emphasizes how each and every one was healed because Jesus brought grace instead of law.

The reality of the event was probably not quite so rosy. Not to argue with Luke, and I was not there- but other passages indicate that not all were healed everywhere Jesus went. The edge of the pool at Bethesda was teeming with sick people, but apparently only one came into Jesus' grace there, the man with the miserable 38 years.

In Mark 6:5 it is noted that the unbelief among his local countrymen prevented Him from doing great works, He was only able to lay a healing hand on very few. Jesus depended on finding faith to work with the grace He had to offer! He often concluded a work of healing with these words, "Your faith has made you well."

I was considering a snide remark that maybe Gary Wilkerson is listening to too much Joel Osteen, but I am not going to go there.

Initially I had similar reservations too about Gary Wilkerson's devotionals. Later I realized that it was my understanding of the New Covenant that was defective. And once I began to see the truth of the gospel and experience its reality, my life changed and I am determined to never go back.

Amen, the truth of the New Covenant is the most liberating and sin-destroying truth of the Bible. Yes, some have run with it in the wrong direction, into licentiousness, but a true understanding of this truth sets men free.

The secret of the LORD is with them that fear him; and he will shew them his covenant.
(Psalms 25:14)

In Christ,

Ron

Amen, the truth of the New Covenant is the most liberating and sin-destroying truth of the Bible. Yes, some have run with it in the wrong direction, into licentiousness, but a true understanding of this truth sets men free.

However, the truth is that - "Antinomianism and Legalism are not opposites of one another; they are both opposites of the grace of God in the gospel." (Sinclair Ferguson)

So the truth of God is not between both ends, but it transcends the entire spectrum! That's not something which human minds can conceive, and thus requires revelation from God.

Indeed, it is only through revelation that the gospel of God can ever be known - "the mystery which has been hidden from ages and from generations, but now has been revealed to His saints. To them God willed to make known what are the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles: which is Christ in you, the hope of glory." (Colossians 1:26-27)

I do have a real problem with your belief on this subject and even disagree with it completely and even vehemently disagree that this is "non-essential" issue among Christians.

So if I get this the meaning of this teaching here is what I would have to say if asked to talk in front of a church to proclaim the Good news of the gospel.

------------------------------------------------------------

"I am here to tell you the good news of the gospel and that Christ died for you, opps ”“ wait, I forgot that Christ only died for some of you and if you are not one of God’s elect you are doomed forever to hell. You have been excluded and there is absolutely nothing that you can ever do anything about it.”

"None of the promises of God apply to you and since Christ did not die for you, you can not believe or repent. You will continue to sin daily without any hope whatsoever and then spend eternity in hell.”
---------------------------------------------------------

This is NOT the gospel and if you teach this, someone could get the idea that they are not one of the "elect” and as a result do nothing because they feel rejected by God Himself.

It is impossible to be saved if you if you do believe that Christ died for you. If you are excluded then there is no hope at all!

It also seems that there is a misunderstanding on the gospel message that has been and is still preached by Calvinistic preachers. We do not preach that sinners must passively wait for God to save them. That is "Hyper-Calvinism" and is heretical. Rather, we preach that God calls all men everywhere to repent now, today, for tomorrow is promised to no man. We preach that man is responsible for his sinfulness and continual rebellion against God. We preach Christ crucified and risen to save sinners; whoever will call on the name of the Lord shall be saved. Whosoever will may come; Christ bids all to come to Him and promises He will by no means cast out anyone who comes to Him in humble repentance and faith. The gospel call and invitation is given to all without respect of persons.

We understand that God chooses to save His elect through the preaching of the biblical gospel. Our duty as witnesses of Christ is to preach the gospel and plead with sinners to repent and trust Christ now. God takes that preached message and uses it with the unction of His Spirit to bring conviction of sin, righteousness and judgment, and to bring sinners to saving repentance and faith and regeneration.

Even if one believes in man's free will when it comes to salvation, you still must believe in predestination because that is clearly taught in the Word. You still must accept the fact that God already knows who will and will not be saved in the end, because He is omniscient. So even if you are Arminian in your theology there is still this element of God's sovereignty (His omniscience) which you must acknowledge.

So we don't know who is or isn't predestined for salvation as we preach the gospel. That's not for us to know when preaching the gospel. Again, our duty us to faithfully scatter the seed and leave the results with God. This knowledge frees us from trying to be manipulative or watering down the gospel, and from being too discouraged. We can go out spreading the gospel with full assurance that God's Word will not return to Him void but will accomplish everything He designs for it to accomplish, whether it is a savor of life unto life for some, or of death unto death for others. In both cases God will be glorified.

Oracio! You express yourself well, and I find it interesting that your sense of the urgent call to sinners to repent is unhindered by the Calvinist lean of your theology! Your love for the kingdom and those who will fill it is evident in the grace with which you write.

Better to be a Calvinist with a passion for the lost than an Arminian sitting in hopeless gloom!

We know that some men hear the gospel and respond, and many hear it and do not. Jesus' parable of the sower and the seeds lays that out very well. But whether Calvinist or Arminian, we are to sow good seed! We do not have any part of the final accounting this side of the fulness of the kingdom.

I have never read any of the works of Gary Wilkerson. David Wilkerson was one of my heros. But never attracted to read any of this man's work. Read this article and found that it is deception carefully wrapped up with some truth. So from outword it looks like great truth but inside it is deception.

And so Christ urges us, "Why don’t you take that scale of your own making and lay it down at the foot of the cross? I NEVER CALLED you to APPEASE me. I have called you to do one thing: receive my blessing of grace.

Probably he has to tell this saying of Jesus to Paul who writes in 2 Cor 5:9 & 10 that we (saved Church going people) should have an attitude to PLEASE God because we have to appear before his judgment seat.
Therefore we also have as our ambition, whether at home or absent, to be pleasing to Him. For we all should appear before the judgment seat of Christ,...

You have nothing to bring to him because he has already spoken his blessing over you. Receive it ”” and enter every good work he has prepared for you by grace

If I have nothing to bring or offer to God then why did Jesus say give to God what God deserved, which is our Body that is created in the image of him. Why did Paul is asking us to submit our body as a pure sacrifice which is worship (Romans 12:2).

He is taking the people who were healed when they touched Jesus in Luke 6:19 as an example of Grace. Momentary Healing is different from Salvation. I believe most of them who touched Jesus that day would have ended up in Hell though they were physically healed. Only those who repented and endured till the end, on hearing the apostles would be saved. The physical healing is different from spiritual healing. Take the case of 10 Leppers only the Samaritan turned to follow Jesus and thank him. Others went on their way. It is clear that the base of this article it self is ERROR in understanding the scripture.

It is true that we should not press on to perfection ourselves by our strength to appease God, but we should let God work in us by submitting our Body to him, else we would be resisting his grace. Workout what God's grace is working inside us.

And so Christ urges us, "Why don’t you take that scale of your own making and lay it down at the foot of the cross? I NEVER CALLED you to APPEASE me. I have called you to do one thing: receive my blessing of grace.

Probably he has to tell this saying of Jesus to Paul who writes in 2 Cor 5:9 & 10 that we (saved Church going people) should have an attitude to PLEASE God because we have to appear before his judgment seat.

There is a difference between APPEASE and PLEASE, one seeks to pacify, the other to satisfy.

It is true that we should not press on to perfection ourselves by our strength to appease God, but we should let God work in us by submitting our Body to him, else we would be resisting his grace. Workout what God's grace is working inside us.

Isn't that the gist of the article?

Also, you mentioned the physical healings as being only momentary, and that is true, physical healing is temporary, ephemeral, like a shadow of something else that is more real than it. Physical healing is like a sign-post pointing the way towards spiritual healing. The healings were a physical sermon that would hopefully teach the lesson that "Jesus saves" in an eternal sense.

In Christ,