Pure Grace: A Review (Part 1)
[Editor's note: A few months ago, Brother Guy Dickinson gave me a book with the above title to read and respond to because it is written by Clark Whitten who "pastors" Grace Church in Longwood, Florida, which is part of our immediate vicinity. This book is being distributed in this area; thus, it needs to be challenged since it is full of false doctrine. The book was first published in 2012, but the author has been teaching the principles in it for decades. Please consider carefully what Whitten teaches that contradicts the Scriptures.]
Clark Whitten's book, Pure Grace: The Life Changing Power of Uncontaminated Grace, if believed, will lead an earnest soul desiring to be a Christian astray and cause him to be forever lost. This claim is not a mere assertion—but a fact which the following paragraphs will substantiate.
In the "Acknowledgements," Whitten thanks someone for his "relentless resistance to legalism." He shares that view to the extent that the word legalism is absent on only a few pages of his book. It becomes obvious early on that, according to the author, one either believes in grace—or he is a legalist! In his Foreword, he states unequivocally, "Grace with conditions that depend on humanity's performance to stay in it is no grace at all" (14).
For that reason, the reader will note an absence of any verse that requires obedience. Conspicuously absent is Hebrews 5:9, which declares that Jesus became "the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him." Obedience means that God expects certain conditions to be met, but Whitten says, if that is the case, it is not grace at all. The reader must decide if the Bible is true or the words of Whitten are true, which should not be a difficult decision. The reader of his book should give careful consideration to the following words from the Foreword of his book.
Yes, many a soul will respond to this work on grace with, "Wait a minute, does that mean that grace winks at sin, dilutes His moral expectations of humankind and forgets justice altogether? (By the way this is an acceptable question, not because the answer is yes but because the right answer clarifies the grace question (emph. GWS 14).
It is truly amazing that false teachers often directly contradict the Scriptures. Whitten wrote that grace winks at sin; the apostle Paul said, "And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent" (Acts 17:30, KJV). [Unless otherwise specified, all quotations are from the NKJV.] Whether idolatry or immorality, God expects people to turn from such practices. God does not dilute His moral standards; those who persist in immorality cannot inherit the kingdom of heaven (1 Cor. 6:9-10).
Changed Lives
While still in the introduction to his book, Whitten lists nine statements that he trusts will pique the reader's curiosity. The first one is certainly provocative: "Christians are way too conscious of sin and way too unconscious of God's grace. Listen, Jesus did not die to modify your behavior!" (19). Well, that will be news to most Christians—especially to those who take seriously what Paul wrote in Romans 12:1-2—that Christians should be transformed by the renewing of their minds. How many times have we heard it said that Jesus wants people changed from the inside out? The inspired apostle, Peter, wrote: "For we have spent enough of our past lifetime in doing the will of the Gentiles—when we walked in lewdness, lusts, drunkenness, revelries, drinking parties, and abominable idolatries" (1 Peter 4:3). Jesus didn't come to modify our behavior?
The author tries to backtrack on this statement somewhat by saying that Jesus' death on the cross was for our sins—past, present, and future. He did die to forgive us of our sins, but He also taught repentance: "I tell you, no; but unless you repent you will all likewise perish" (Luke 13:3). Yes, Jesus died for our sins with the expectation that we would modify our behavior. Peter taught the people to repent and be baptized for the forgiveness of their sins (Acts 2:38).
No Confession
The second point Whitten teaches is equally false: "Christians are not required to confess their sins to God in order to be forgiven, we are already forgiven" (20). He says only one verse provides a Biblical basis for such a claim—1 John 1:9—and that we misunderstand it. If Christians are already forgiven of their sins before confessing them to God, are we also forgiven before repenting of them? Confessing our sins before God is a humbling experience. Are not the poor in spirit who confess their sins to Him blessed? And why did those who came to John the Baptizer confess theirs?
John came baptizing in the wilderness and preaching a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. Then all the land of Judea, and those from Jerusalem, went out to him and were all baptized by him in the Jordan River, confessing their sins (Mark 1:4-5).
To whom were the Jews here confessing their sins? Were they doing so to one another? Were they confessing to John? Was he acting in the role of a priest? Or were they confessing their sins to God who would forgive them when they were baptized? 1 John 1:9 does teach confessing our sins to God. Why do we insist on that? Because God is the One doing the forgiving. Who can forgive sins except God alone?
Sin Management and Repentance
The third statement is: "Legalistic Christianity is in the sin management business full-time and failing miserably at the job…. Sin cannot be managed." Paul thought it could be when he wrote 1 Corinthians 5. The fourth point will leave the reader picking his jaw up off the floor; Whitten writes:
…New Testament repentance is not the Holy Spirit convicting of sin, me feeling sorry, confessing the sin, asking for forgiveness, and committing to stop doing it (20).
Yes, Whitten calls this practice "a grotesque misrepresentation of the gift of repentance" and "heathenish!" Such would probably be news to Peter and Simon the Sorcerer. The apostle told him to repent of his wickedness (his desire to have the ability the apostles had when God had not chosen him for that work) in order to be forgiven, which he did (Acts 8:22-24).
God Is Not Angry With Me
All of God's anger was poured out on His Son, is Whitten's fifth claim. "My bad works don't move God any more than my good works move Him" (20). Say what? If such were the case, why would anyone bother to do any good works? But is it true that bad works don't move God? Then why did Paul talk about the wrath of God being "revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness" (Rom. 1:18)?
In the same letter in which Paul talked about being saved by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8-9), he also taught, "Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience" (Eph. 5:6; cf. Col. 3:6). Even if the Father no longer intended wrath upon the ungodly (which He does), we would still need to consider the wrath of the Lamb, cited in Revelation 6:16.
A Problem with Obedience
Whitten's sixth assertion is that obedience is irrelevant. "'Do good, God is glad; do bad, God is mad' is the M.O. of legalistic Christianity." Such an oversimplification fails to take notice of God's patience, but, yes, if we persist in sin, He will not ignore it. Whitten says such theology smacks of Islam or Buddhism, and it is definitely heathenish.
He cites Galatians 3:1-3 as proof that being obedient to God, keeping His law, merits nothing because it pertains to the flesh, but he apparently does not realize that Paul's comparison is that of the gospel system to the Law of Moses. Paul never disparages the law of Christ—only the Law of Moses, which could not save anyone who did not keep it perfectly. The gospel requires obedience to it in order for a person to be saved; those who obey not the gospel shall be destroyed in flaming fire (2 Thess 1:7-9).
Under Law?
In his seventh statement, however, Whitten claims (correctly) that Christians "are not under the jurisdiction of the Old Testament law" (21). Yes, but that does not mean we are under no law at all. Paul affirms that he is not under the Law of Moses, but that he is "under law toward Christ" (1 Cor. 9:21). Amazingly, Whitten claims that, when Paul said "a little leaven leavens the whole lump," he "was referring to a little law leavening the whole lump of grace" (21).
Paul is talking about the false teaching of the Judaizers in Galatians 5:9. They could not be allowed to demand that the Law of Moses be kept in addition to the Law of Christ. False teaching usually spreads among church members. The problem was not law-keeping per se; it was their insistence on keeping the wrong law—the one that had been nailed to the cross. Paul never utters a word against New Testament law.
The other time Paul wrote that a little leaven leavens the whole lump (1 Cor. 5:6), he referred to a case of immorality that the congregation had not dealt with. Because they had not, it would be an encouragement to others to act immorally. They needed to withdraw fellowship from the offending brother to get him to repent (5:9-12).
Withdrawing Fellowship and Freedom
Eighth, Whitten says that some Christians imply that "God punishes or disciplines me for sin by withdrawing His fellowship. Some mental gymnastics are required to arrive at this conclusion" (21-22). No, all that is required is to understand what one reads. God has always disciplined those whom He loves (Pr. 3:11-12). Yet Whitten says there is "no withdrawing of fellowship as a means of punishment" (22). But the writer quotes from Proverbs 3:11-12 to teach: "For whom the Lord loves He chastens" (Heb. 12:5-6).
In the ninth of his teachings, Whitten claims that Christians are truly free to "read a novel or the Bible…attend church or stay home, tithe or give nothing—all without condemnation of God. There is no condemnation for those who are in Christ (see Rom. 8:1)…" (22). He should have read the rest of Romans 8:1—no condemnation for those "who do not walk according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit." Reading novels in place of the Bible is fleshly. Playing golf or fishing on the Lord's Day is worldly—not spiritual. Buying cartons of cigarettes or bottles of wine instead of giving to the Lord is fleshly.
It will avail a person nothing to speak of being obedient to the Scriptures because, in Whitten's mind, that immediately makes a person a Legalist, which he mentions repeatedly on page 23. He even refers to the obedient as being "in the pig pen of legalism" (23). But legalism was not the problem of the prodigal son; it was immorality and lawlessness. The Bible does teach God's grace, but it never authorizes the doctrine of grace only.