Public Debates Declined!

The readers of Free Grace Theology Blog know that there has been an emphasis here lately on clear and simple appeals to faith in our evangelism. Some have taken great offense to this position and have vocally expressed their objections in writing. Two of these men are Tom Stegall (of Word of Grace Bible Church) and Dennis Rokser (of Duluth Bible Church). Serious allegations have been made against the doctrine of the Grace Evangelical Society (of which I am a member) by these pastors. Tom Stegall through the venue of Dennis Rokser's medium (The Grace Family Journal) has publicly launched a pre-emptive strike with an untamed war of words, misrepresenting and caricaturing consistent and biblical Free Grace Theology.

Bob Wilkin, Executive Director of Grace Evangelical Society, has invited Dennis Rokser and anyone else Rosker wants to two public debates, one in Duluth, and one here in Texas at the GES National Conference. Dennis wrote back later and said he was “praying” about it. He said he was not sure he wanted to debate Bob publicly, but would like to meet privately. Bob responded by saying that a private meeting would have been fine if Tom and Dennis hadn’t written their public articles attacking Bob, Zane, and GES. But since those are now public, the debate (if it happens) should be public as well.

I emailed Dennis for some clarification on a charge that he made toward Bob that discussions with him were "stonewalled". If Dennis' assertion would be interpreted with the common and prevalent usage of this term, it would be false, as Bob has always been willing to dialogue with anyone. In his reply to me Dennis forwarded a portion of an email he addressed to Bob Wilkin, where he wrote, "After prayer and discussion with other godly leaders whom I respect, I have decided to decline your written offer to publicly debate you at Duluth Bible Church and at the upcoming GES national conference in Ft. Worth regarding our doctrinal disagreements of your teaching of the 'crossless gospel.'" Furthermore, in the same email, I find out that Bob also formally invited Tom Stegall to a debate, unto which he declined promptly.

I reported this exchange on Lou Martuneac's blog (he promptly deleted it) and included a bit of my commentary. Lou is another outspoken opponent of the Grace Evangelical Society. I wrote that I wondered why these men would decline to debate this issue. Was it that they did not want their flocks to be persuaded by the biblical, consistent, and simple arguments of the GES? Was it that they did not want to answer the multitude of examining questions that the GES conference attendees would barrage them with? Or was it because they did not want their forceful mischaracterizations to be exposed?

Dennis Rokser was made aware of my comment by Lou Maruneac and emailed me this one-liner, "I'm very disappointed that you have reported the material I sent you inaccurately and negatively." To which I responded:

Dennis,

The whole thing makes me disappointed. It is one thing to discuss theology like Christian brothers. It is another thing altogether to coin an inaccurate, pejorative, disingenuous, and misleading label of a theology that shares a rich heritage with your own. This same label is then applied ad naseum. What kind of poisoning of the well is it to include the designation 31 times in only 8 pages of Tom Stegall's second article? It is a debate tactic that betrays a weak position. Furthermore, it is childish and bad form. The tone is adversarial and demeaning.

I believe it shows a lack of character on your part and that of Tom Stegall to refuse Bob's invitation to debate in both your forum and his. Your ministry has sounded the alarm and has proceeded to go publicly to war. Did you suppose that you were going to persuade Bob with your correspondences with him? Why the surprise that he didn't "repent"? The reactionary rhetoric coming from your side is at times vicious. We are supposed to be Christian gentlemen. Now, when given the opportunity to flesh these things out in a public forum, you and Tom retreat to the safety of your written devices. Did it not occur to you that you could continue to publish Tom's articles and have a reasonable, equitable, agreed upon, and moderated debate at the same time?

Your charges are very strong. You fault the GES with heresy and heterodoxy. Now you wish to retire to the loft of your refuge, continuing to merely toss your grenades our way. You are thus placed in a position of public unaccountability free from the direct cross-examination of those brothers in Christ who you vehemently oppose with the constant barrage of theological name calling.

I don't know what exactly I have reported inaccurately. About the 'negatively', I found [this situation] negative and relayed it as I saw it.

Antonio da Rosa

In my comment I left on Lou Martuneac's blog, I asked him if he or Greg Schliesmann (who is also an opponent of the GES and has written against it on Lou's blog) would like to take the place of Dennis and Tom in a debate with Bob Wilkin. I am sure that it could be arranged. I don't know what the fear on their part is. Do their arguments look better on paper where they can use their pejorative term, 'crossless gospel' 31 times in the span of 8 pages? Or does the thought of operating on an equal playing field give them second thoughts?