A: Free Grace is the view that "salvation is by grace through faith in the finished work of Jesus Christ". 1 Cor 15:3-4. Good works and discipleship ought to follow salvation but are separate and distinct from salvation itself. This is contrasted with Lordship Salvation which views good works as essential to "final salvation". John MacArthur, arguably Lordship Salvation's best known modern proponent, has gone so far as to reduce God's omniscience and say:
"God looks at a person's works. If He sees manifestations of righteousness, He knows that the person is regenerated. If He sees no such manifestation of righteousness, He knows that the person is unregenerate. Therefore God's final judgment can be rendered on the basis of works." here
God, who sees the heart, doesn't know if we're saved until He sees our works? Yes, Lordship's demands are that ridiculous when taken to their logical conclusion.
Q: I've heard a lot about the Grace Evangelical Society (GES). Are they really free grace or not?
A: GES seems to have had a good start and was perhaps at one time a vocal advocate of the Free Grace position. They have since drifted into an error that removes Jesus' atonement from the content of saving faith. Jesus' atonement is a vital and historic element of Free Grace's content of saving faith; by relegating Jesus' atonement to the status of "optional knowledge" GES has abandoned a legitimate claim to the "Free Grace" label. GES' error is no small thing, organizations like the Free Grace Alliance have officially distanced themselves from GES due to GES' current view being grossly incompatible with genuine Free Grace.
Q: But the Grace Evangelical Society is adamant that they still present those elements in their preaching as powerful reasons to believe, isn't that enough?
A: This reasoning is both logically inconsistent and conflicts with scripture. Paul is clear in 1 Cor 1:22 that "we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness". Paul did not preach Christ crucified because it was a reason to believe, he did it knowing full well that such "foolishness" would in fact often be seen as a very reason NOT to believe.
Q: I've seen GES' position called "The Crossless Gospel", but they do preach the cross in their gospel presentations, so isn't this label misleading?
A: Though GES advocates make much fuss about this label it is an accurate summary of precisely what is so wrong with their present soteriology. The label calls attention to the well established fact that GES' soteriology (doctrine of salvation) is crossless in terms of what the lost need to believe. No GES advocate even remotely disputes the fact that their content of saving faith is in fact crossless. They in fact go to great length and have written many articles to affirm and defend precisely why they say belief in the atoning work of Christ is not necessary for everlasting life, going so far as to write articles and even tell child workers that they do not need to mention the atoning work of Christ. This very same article, which clearly leaves out any specific mention of the atoning work of Christ, says it's a perfectly legitimate way to share the gospel with adults as well. The GES Gospel is sadly and quite obviously "crossless" despite their loud protestation of the label.