An Appeal: Lift the ban on Hyper-Grace

[UnderGrace]

rom 5:20 is the only verse used to explain something so important about grace?

I was only posting information on how some have defended the slanderous term.

As most of the preceding posts demonstrate this is obviously a hot button issue which has a lot more to do with emotions and alliances than any possible rational discussion.

Is it really about false doctrine
When emotions surface best to not open the floodgate. IMHO

Not a fan of Got Questions but I think it outlines the division.

I especially like the "flirt with antinomianism." I have been searching for where Ryan Rufus preaches on the benefits of lying, stealing, rape and murder so far I have not found it.


Question: "What is hyper-grace?"

Answer: The term hyper-grace has been used to describe a new wave of teaching that emphasizes the grace of God to the exclusion of other vital teachings such as repentance and confession of sin. Hyper-grace teachers maintain that all sin, past, present, and future, has already been forgiven, so there is no need for a believer to ever confess it. Hyper-grace teaching says that, when God looks at us, He sees only a holy and righteous people. The conclusion of hyper-grace teaching is that we are not bound by Jesus’ teaching, even as we are not under the Law; that believers are not responsible for their sin; and that anyone who disagrees is a pharisaical legalist. In short, hyper-grace teachers “pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality” (Jude 1:4) and flirt with antinomianism.
https://www.gotquestions.org/hyper-grace.html

 

[7seasrekeyed]

It was "spall schneck" man!

The word, or term I was trying to espouse, were people who "promote" hyper grace, or, proponiters of hyper grace! I must apologize for my limited vocabulary.

I have read those posts. And, I do appreciate them! Well stated!

too funny

I have my spell check trained. it no longer forces itself upon me rendering my 'well thought out' responses comical. apparently, the little imp likes it when you pay it just enough attention to warrant it feeling like you value its opinion. feed it, but not too much

the really funny thing though, is that 'pronator' is a word (well I guess it would be if the master of word disguise thought you meant to use it).

have you heard this one? goes something like:

whoah! I just misspelled a word so bad that even spell check came back with "I ain't got nothin man"

 

[7seasrekeyed]

Excellent reply. Besides the fact that Romans 5:20 is taken out of context of Romans 5. What is Romans 5 about? It is an explanation of justification by faith and salvation history. I think this chapter is up there as one of the top chapters in the Bible, along with Romans 8, and Psalm 23! So much, that I memorized the first half of the chapter. (Of course, the 2nd half is also important, I just never managed to memorize it!)

"Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people. 19 For just as through the disobedience of the one man the many were made sinners, so also through the obedience of the one man the many will be made righteous.

20 The law was brought in so that the trespass might increase. But where sin increased, grace increased all the more, 21 so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." Romans 5:18-21

In no way is this talking about never confessing your sins again, and focusing on your blessings, instead of God. It is about justification, which is not sinless perfection (or pretending you don't need to confess your sins!). It is about the general picture, in which grace increased, or abounded in the church, but even more so, in the world. Grace abounded so more people would be saved! That grace would bring more people to eternal life. Not so the same group of people would get more and more, doing less and less! (As in, maturing in their Christian walk, of which confession of sins plays an important role!)

I would urge everyone to read all of Romans 5, in a modern version so you can actually understand what it means. The KJV was great 400 years ago, but today, too many obsolete words and the grammar is very different. Roman is difficult enough (profound enough??) without having to read it in a language which is not ours.

And after you read Romans 5 a few times, start in on Romans 1, and read through all of Roman a few times. Don't worry about the things you don't understand, God is going to show you a lot. And mostly, reading in context will show you what a foundationless bit of nonsense hypergrace truly is. Again, you can't base a doctrine, let alone a movement on one out of context verse, ever!

 

[Angela53510]

I was only posting information on how some have defended the slanderous term.

As most of the preceding posts demonstrate this is obviously a hot button issue which has a lot more to do with emotions and alliances than any possible rational discussion.

Is it really about false doctrine
When emotions surface best to not open the floodgate. IMHO

Not a fan of Got Questions but I think it outlines the division.

I especially like the "flirt with antinomianism." I have been searching for where Ryan Rufus preaches on the benefits of lying, stealing, rape and murder so far I have not found it.


Question: "What is hyper-grace?"

Answer: The term hyper-grace has been used to describe a new wave of teaching that emphasizes the grace of God to the exclusion of other vital teachings such as repentance and confession of sin. Hyper-grace teachers maintain that all sin, past, present, and future, has already been forgiven, so there is no need for a believer to ever confess it. Hyper-grace teaching says that, when God looks at us, He sees only a holy and righteous people. The conclusion of hyper-grace teaching is that we are not bound by Jesus’ teaching, even as we are not under the Law; that believers are not responsible for their sin; and that anyone who disagrees is a pharisaical legalist. In short, hyper-grace teachers “pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality” (Jude 1:4) and flirt with antinomianism.
https://www.gotquestions.org/hyper-grace.html

The question is, why does GotQuestions take this stance? Why is orthodox Christianity offended at this simplistic doctrine of hypergrace? It’s from the Bible, isn’t it?

It all comes back to what we have been discussing about context. You can’t take Romans 5:20 out of context, and extrapolate it to say things Paul never meant to say, and that Paul would be appalled about if he knew his words were being twisted this way.

Romans 5:20 does not stand alone! It is in the great chapter on justification by faith. Somehow Joseph Prince and others have taken a verse tied to the initial stage of our walk, justification and made it about a strange kind of sanctification. A sanctification which ignores all the statements about walking with Christ, obeying Christ, and obeying the workings of the Holy Spirit in our lives.

Because, like it or not, there are many verses instructing us on how to walk with God, which includes 1 John 1:9, written to Christians. And Gal 5, warning Christians how not to walk, but also what the fruit of the Holy Spirit is!

Again, my challenge is not to google hypergrace, looking for answers at GotQuestions as much as I totally agree with what you posted from that website.

My challenge is to read Romans 5 over and over. And then to read all of Romans, especially the verses after and before Romans 5. The answers are found right in the Bible!

 

[7seasrekeyed]

I would suggest reading the posts 101 and 102 for a very informative and insightful response to hyper grace and possibly checking out the link provided

somebody knew what they were talking about

I can't say 'God Questions' has all the answers myself even though I do use it from time to time

However, as the seriousness of this topic warrants, a deeper education on the subject providing the ability to make an educated decision is not even in question. it is imperative as this continues to spread and cause people to actually reject the very words of Christ

 

[UnderGrace]

A sanctification which ignores all the statements about walking with Christ, obeying Christ, and obeying the workings of the Holy Spirit in our lives.

Well it could be, it they do, they obviously do so to their own detriment.

There is real irony for me in all this discussion on here and on the internet since many years ago when under Calvin's doctrine I tended to view Calvinism as the truly abounding (hyper) grace

elects unconditionally
pregenerates
compels faith
limits the atonement
overthrows autonomy
gives license to resist God
results in automatic perseverance
puts confidence in God’s special favor

All a matter of perspective and interpretation I guess.

 

[Locutus]

all sin, past, present, and future, has already been forgiven

I believe this is true - I don't know enuff about "Hyper Grace" to critique the rest of what HG "preachers" promote.

 

[BenFTW]

Hi BenFTW,

this is a topic has turned into what I knew it would and that is why I asked the question " what does hyper-grace mean" or what is hyper Grace?
What I see is a place on words in the Greek yet the text used only covers one part from Rom 5

This is what I see as the main part of Rom 5:20 to build the term " Hyper-Grace". Guys this is not proper exegesis.

Rom 5 20-21 is not the end of the contextual authorial intent. the full context is finished in Rom 6 starting verse 1 with

"What shall we say then?" this question was asked from the writing in Chapter 5 they are unit chapters.

it reads like this :

Rom 5:19- 21

19For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. 20Moreover the law entered, that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound: 21That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord. (rom6) 1What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? 2God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? 3Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? 4Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. 5For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: 6Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. 7For he that is dead is freed from sin.

You can not even use the concept of hyper-grace because it's made up you have to interject other verses to create a support for it after ignoring the unit chapters of Rome 5, 6, and 7 and 8 .
Hyper-grace is not supported in Romes.

I am perplexed and aggravated (yes, aggravated). Have the facts not been established CS1? Do you remember the reason for the ban at the time? There is so much wrong with this, on so many levels.

1. No one is using Romans as the foundation to preach hyper-grace. Hyper-grace was a term used by Michael Brown and people who followed suite (as a derogative term) towards people who understood God's grace and the blood of Christ granting us the total forgiveness of sin. The use of Romans to "defend" the hyper in hyper-grace was in fact a rebuttal to people suggesting that God's grace isn't abounding. That is all, it is not the backbone to hyper-grace. It isn't even needed to defend God's grace as being sufficient. Again, no one is using one verse in God's word to defend the sufficiency of the blood of Christ, and God's grace towards us.

2. I shouldn't have to defend the so called doctrines of hyper-grace in order to lift a ban that wasn't about the topic but the people in the conversation. Many of such people having been banned or moved on. Oncefallen, another moderator, following your initial post in the supposed ban on hyper-grace thread specifically said that you guys never have prohibited people from either extreme from posting here, only that sometimes you have to crackdown. Why? Because, it became pervasive in every thread. Much like OSAS has since then. I don't see a ban on OSAS, do I? The ban served your purpose CS1, and it was a wise decision at the time. However if I were to follow the words of Oncefallen, I could if I so desired make a thread on hyper-grace (not that I really care to) because you guys don't prohibit such discussion.

3. Based upon premise two above, this ban is superfluous (unnecessary). First of all, its not even enforced (I just saw a hyper-grace thread yesterday), and for the hundredth time, this isn't about defending hyper-grace but free speech that Oncefallen himself has expressed about this platform. People may not wish to discuss hyper-grace and that's fine. They can stay out of the conversation and practice self-control. No topic beyond it being anti-Christ, anti-Gospel, or what have you, is hindered (and is appropriate, PG).

4. People with their agendas have already pushed back because they disagree with hyper-grace, but this would be equivalent to you banning OSAS, and the loss of salvation crowd then defends this decision. It is biased and one sided, it is unjust and wrong. They should be ashamed of themselves, an act of cowardice to not let the other side being able to openly express themselves.

I am genuinely bothered by this CS1. It makes no sense. The so called ban was a temporary time out on what was pervasive at the time. That was the purpose you used it for. To calm the waters, let people simmer down, and ease the contention. It by next month has been two years since your thread, banning hyper-grace. Two years. It has been way past due.

This isn't about me defending hyper-grace or doctrines (that are scriptural) found under that derogative term. This is about an unfair balance, an unjust one sided stance that hinders discourse. The forum would be in an uproar if such a ban was placed on certain topics that have sides. Yet, people accepted the ban because everyone knew that things were, indeed, wild. Yet again, time has gone by. It was a Band-Aid on a temporal problem, that has now healed. Every thread is not run over with the Law versus Grace debacle. You did it CS1! Good job. A wise decision. Now, take off the Band-Aid. It resolved a rampant problem that was sourced from particular individuals.

 

[Nehemiah6]

As most of the preceding posts demonstrate this is obviously a hot button issue which has a lot more to do with emotions and alliances than any possible rational discussion.

That's nonsense. This is not about emotions but about FALSE DOCTRINE.

There have been many "rational" discussions already (supported by Scripture) which have simply been water off a duck's back for those who persist in promoting the lies of the devil (which applies to all false teachings). And please note that Christ holds all Christians accountable for either promoting or resisting false teachers.

REVELATION 2
1 Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks;
2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:
3 And hast borne, and hast patience, and for my name's sake hast laboured, and hast not fainted.
4 Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love.
5 Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.
6 But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.
7 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.

 

[UnderGrace]

That's nonsense. This is not about emotions but about FALSE DOCTRINE.

There have been many "rational" discussions already (supported by Scripture) which have simply been water off a duck's back for those who persist in promoting the lies of the devil (which applies to all false teachings). And please note that Christ holds all Christians accountable for either promoting or resisting false teachers.

REVELATION 2
1 Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks;
2 I know thy works, and thy labour, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them which are evil: and thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars:
3 And hast borne, and hast patience, and for my name's sake hast laboured, and hast not fainted.
4 Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee, because thou hast left thy first love.
5 Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.
6 But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate.
7 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.

That's nonsense. This is not about emotions but about FALSE DOCTRINE.

When a person is insulted on a personal level that is emotion speaking.

Would you like me to go find examples...I am sure I will not have to go far?

 

[CS1]

I am perplexed and aggravated (yes, aggravated). Have the facts not been established CS1? Do you remember the reason for the ban at the time? There is so much wrong with this, on so many levels.

1. No one is using Romans as the foundation to preach hyper-grace. Hyper-grace was a term used by Michael Brown and people who followed suite (as a derogative term) towards people who understood God's grace and the blood of Christ granting us the total forgiveness of sin. The use of Romans to "defend" the hyper in hyper-grace was in fact a rebuttal to people suggesting that God's grace isn't abounding. That is all, it is not the backbone to hyper-grace. It isn't even needed to defend God's grace as being sufficient. Again, no one is using one verse in God's word to defend the sufficiency of the blood of Christ, and God's grace towards us.

2. I shouldn't have to defend the so called doctrines of hyper-grace in order to lift a ban that wasn't about the topic but the people in the conversation. Many of such people having been banned or moved on. Oncefallen, another moderator, following your initial post in the supposed ban on hyper-grace thread specifically said that you guys never have prohibited people from either extreme from posting here, only that sometimes you have to crackdown. Why? Because, it became pervasive in every thread. Much like OSAS has since then. I don't see a ban on OSAS, do I? The ban served your purpose CS1, and it was a wise decision at the time. However if I were to follow the words of Oncefallen, I could if I so desired make a thread on hyper-grace (not that I really care to) because you guys don't prohibit such discussion.

3. Based upon premise two above, this ban is superfluous (unnecessary). First of all, its not even enforced (I just saw a hyper-grace thread yesterday), and for the hundredth time, this isn't about defending hyper-grace but free speech that Oncefallen himself has expressed about this platform. People may not wish to discuss hyper-grace and that's fine. They can stay out of the conversation and practice self-control. No topic beyond it being anti-Christ, anti-Gospel, or what have you, is hindered (and is appropriate, PG).

4. People with their agendas have already pushed back because they disagree with hyper-grace, but this would be equivalent to you banning OSAS, and the loss of salvation crowd then defends this decision. It is biased and one sided, it is unjust and wrong. They should be ashamed of themselves, an act of cowardice to not let the other side being able to openly express themselves.

I am genuinely bothered by this CS1. It makes no sense. The so called ban was a temporary time out on what was pervasive at the time. That was the purpose you used it for. To calm the waters, let people simmer down, and ease the contention. It by next month has been two years since your thread, banning hyper-grace. Two years. It has been way past due.

This isn't about me defending hyper-grace or doctrines (that are scriptural) found under that derogative term. This is about an unfair balance, an unjust one sided stance that hinders discourse. The forum would be in an uproar if such a ban was placed on certain topics that have sides. Yet, people accepted the ban because everyone knew that things were, indeed, wild. Yet again, time has gone by. It was a Band-Aid on a temporal problem, that has now healed. Every thread is not run over with the Law versus Grace debacle. You did it CS1! Good job. A wise decision. Now, take off the Band-Aid. It resolved a rampant problem that was sourced from particular individuals.

BenFTW never mind what I have said in the above. I can show you in this thread where those have siad things that caused this topic to be banned. You like names too? LOl sorry, you feel that way. Why don't you start a thread on Gace? why is "hyper" so necessary You know if you want that is open to do. If you don't have bias why not speak on Grace ?

 

[Nehemiah6]

Would you like me to go find examples...I am sure I will not have to go far?

It would be more beneficial to closely examine the teachings of men like Paul Ellis, Joseph Prince, and all those who make a mockery out of properly and carefully interpreting Scripture in the light of Gospel Truth and Bible Truth.

They can take a Scripture out of context and MANUFACTURE a doctrine out of thin air. For those who are new to the faith, or do not have a solid foundation, or grasp, of Bible truth, that is very seductive. But it makes sport out of the grace of God and the finished work of Christ.

 

[7seasrekeyed]

all I can say is please read posts 101 and 102

we do not renew our minds with our emotions

and there is truly nothing new under the sun.

the question remains the same. 'has God really said?'

well yes He has and whether you like it or no, he has placed borders...or a hedge as scripture states...around us to protect us..that is the truth of His word

put on the helmet of salvation and the rest of the armor and plant your feet on the sure foundation which is the word we have received delivered once and for all

I don't know about anyone else, but I just brought it all up in prayer throughout the day yesterday and was at peace and I believe I was most likely not the only one who did so. to be truthful, I would have been at peace if the op had been allowed to proceed

everything in life is subjective and 3 people will interpret 3 different ways and each will be as sincere as they, as a person, believe themself to be

but the heart is deceitful and God knows this and He knows the thoughts and intents of the heart so I will trust in how this went down and I honestly believe it is for more good then is apparent because there was a force at work in this forum that is no longer here and it was causing great harm

 

[BenFTW]

all I can say is please read posts 101 and 102

we do not renew our minds with our emotions

and there is truly nothing new under the sun.

the question remains the same. 'has God really said?'

well yes He has and whether you like it or no, he has placed borders...or a hedge as scripture states...around us to protect us..that is the truth of His word

put on the helmet of salvation and the rest of the armor and plant your feet on the sure foundation which is the word we have received delivered once and for all

I don't know about anyone else, but I just brought it all up in prayer throughout the day yesterday and was at peace and I believe I was most likely not the only one who did so. to be truthful, I would have been at peace if the op had been allowed to proceed

everything in life is subjective and 3 people will interpret 3 different ways and each will be as sincere as they, as a person, believe themself to be

but the heart is deceitful and God knows this and He knows the thoughts and intents of the heart so I will trust in how this went down and I honestly believe it is for more good then is apparent because there was a force at work in this forum that is no longer here and it was causing great harm

My issue, as I told CS1, is that there are certain scriptural truths that could fall under "hyper-grace" and the ban paints a negative light on those truths. The total forgiveness of sin, for example. I am saddened that, from my perspective, CC has a ban on what I believe to be scriptural truths, and people will then see this ban and look down upon such truths.

I could care less about hyper-grace, or defending it. I care for the truth and it just so happens that certain truths fall under that umbrella term, and for that reason a ban will paint such truths in a negative light (in opposition to God's word). This is my concern, also.

It is what it is. I have already said to CS1 that he can close the thread. It is unfortunate, and hopefully the Lord doesn't let the ban mislead people away from the truth.

 

[7seasrekeyed]

Ben he said the same thing I did...which is really the only conclusion one can come to IMO

there is nothing from stopping anyone who desires to discuss the grace of God but let's do so without all the hoopla of copy/pastes by strangers to this forum, in order to override others and prove ourselves superior in our own eyes

there is enough in the Bible itself to keep our little minds occupied for millenia...even the angels don't quite get it (that's in scripture as I am sure you know)

discuss what you want that you think falls under 'hyper grace' but unless you wish to prove hyper grace a biblical doctrine, which I personally do not believe you can...and especially not from someone like Prince...then why the problem?

I could care less about hyper-grace, or defending it. I care for the truth and it just so happens that certain truths fall under that umbrella term, and for that reason a ban will paint such truths in a negative light (in opposition to God's word). This is my concern, also.

well I personally am more inclined to see a narrower and more unbiblical definition and as I have stated mind numbing times already, it was the evolving teaching that developed from one individuals posts (as Angela already posted with more acumen then I cared to describe but agree with) IMO, they were actual heresy and I am not one to throw that word around

if we just discuss terms then perhaps there is difficulty; but I actually do care about keeping people out of deception...very much in fact both for their sake and concern for them not blaming God further down the road when the 'ahem' hits the fan

most people do not know what goes on behind the scenes and the mods are not inclined, although CS is certainly not distant, to explain nor do they have to explain why some are banned.

I am positive that most here would benefit from actual study of scripture and not just 'take out' from whatever church they go to or the famous last words expressed by some here that go 'I don't go to church because God teaches me. alone. all by myself. I am a prophet. listen to me. '

thing is, because of being assured they no longer have to take all of scripture as counsel, they simply don't

what does that produce?

I'm sure I hear you saying 'balance' needed here but this is a discussion forum

trust me...I am sometimes frustrated by what I read from some here and have learned to move on

dunno. guess we each have to find our resolve in every situation to battle when we need to and just be at peace when we should.... and all in Christ

 

[BenFTW]

Ben he said the same thing I did...which is really the only conclusion one can come to IMO

there is nothing from stopping anyone who desires to discuss the grace of God but let's do so without all the hoopla of copy/pastes by strangers to this forum, in order to override others and prove ourselves superior in our own eyes

there is enough in the Bible itself to keep our little minds occupied for millenia...even the angels don't quite get it (that's in scripture as I am sure you know)

discuss what you want that you think falls under 'hyper grace' but unless you wish to prove hyper grace a biblical doctrine, which I personally do not believe you can...and especially not from someone like Prince...then why the problem?



well I personally am more inclined to see a narrower and more unbiblical definition and as I have stated mind numbing times already, it was the evolving teaching that developed from one individuals posts (as Angela already posted with more acumen then I cared to describe but agree with) IMO, they were actual heresy and I am not one to throw that word around

if we just discuss terms then perhaps there is difficulty; but I actually do care about keeping people out of deception...very much in fact both for their sake and concern for them not blaming God further down the road when the 'ahem' hits the fan

most people do not know what goes on behind the scenes and the mods are not inclined, although CS is certainly not distant, to explain nor do they have to explain why some are banned.

I am positive that most here would benefit from actual study of scripture and not just 'take out' from whatever church they go to or the famous last words expressed by some here that go 'I don't go to church because God teaches me. alone. all by myself. I am a prophet. listen to me. '

thing is, because of being assured they no longer have to take all of scripture as counsel, they simply don't

what does that produce?

I'm sure I hear you saying 'balance' needed here but this is a discussion forum

trust me...I am sometimes frustrated by what I read from some here and have learned to move on

dunno. guess we each have to find our resolve in every situation to battle when we need to and just be at peace when we should.... and all in Christ

May truth prevail.

 

[7seasrekeyed]

May truth prevail.

there has been more than one occasion in my life in which it did so much to my chagrin and actual pain

not always caused by my own actions either because sin has a ripple effect

but truth can be kicked down the road and when we get to the point where it landed after we kicked it, it will be there to greet us

but yeah

 

[Angela53510]

Ben, have you not paid attention to a thing that has been written here? It is not truth, when it is torn out of context. It is not truth, if it comes from the imagination, of someone who doesn't know the Bible but claims it is "prophetic." It is not truth, when it denies the fundamental of every branch of Christianity!

You have forgotten who God is! He is not a pushover parent, entitling his kids to do whatever they please. God loves us, for sure. But, he is also just and righteous. In fact, that is what Romans 5 is about! It is about God's justice. As in how we are justified! God doesn't let us run around, doing what we please with impunity. If you do that with children, they turn out to be spoiled, brats, who can't cope with life. And since God made us, and knows what is best for us, he did set down rules, to be followed because of God's love. And confession of sins, is a BIG part of it. That is how we change and grow! Hypergrace denies all of that!

When you deny those truths, which are fundamental to the gospel, to Biblical truths, you are NOT preaching the truth, a truth, or any truth! What is being taught in hypergrace is an outright lie! That is why I am on this thread, so people not only know the truth, but also have the tools to check it out for themselves. Instead of reading copy and pastes that are patently untrue, people need to read the Bible, to see the real truth.

 

[BenFTW]

Ben, have you not paid attention to a thing that has been written here? It is not truth, when it is torn out of context. It is not truth, if it comes from the imagination, of someone who doesn't know the Bible but claims it is "prophetic." It is not truth, when it denies the fundamental of every branch of Christianity!

You have forgotten who God is! He is not a pushover parent, entitling his kids to do whatever they please. God loves us, for sure. But, he is also just and righteous. In fact, that is what Romans 5 is about! It is about God's justice. As in how we are justified! God doesn't let us run around, doing what we please with impunity. If you do that with children, they turn out to be spoiled, brats, who can't cope with life. And since God made us, and knows what is best for us, he did set down rules, to be followed because of God's love. And confession of sins, is a BIG part of it. That is how we change and grow! Hypergrace denies all of that!

When you deny those truths, which are fundamental to the gospel, to Biblical truths, you are NOT preaching the truth, a truth, or any truth! What is being taught in hypergrace is an outright lie! That is why I am on this thread, so people not only know the truth, but also have the tools to check it out for themselves. Instead of reading copy and pastes that are patently untrue, people need to read the Bible, to see the real truth.

You are entitled to your beliefs Angela, as I am. I am not going to defend hyper-grace as much as some would try to pull me into that direction. I will discuss God's grace revealed in His Word, however. Also too, the sufficiency of Christ's work on the cross and work thereafter as our High Priest. Forgiveness is ours, justification ours, redemption ours. Reconciliation with the Father, ours.

I would say that all of us agree on progressive sanctification, but may we may differ on approach. We may also differ on why we commit certain actions (such as confession). Regardless, I hope that we continue to uphold the Gospel and give credence to all that Christ has accomplished for us through His sacrifice and resurrection.

 

[UnderGrace]

It would be more beneficial to closely examine the teachings of men like Paul Ellis, Joseph Prince, and all those who make a mockery out of properly and carefully interpreting Scripture in the light of Gospel Truth and Bible Truth.

They can take a Scripture out of context and MANUFACTURE a doctrine out of thin air. For those who are new to the faith, or do not have a solid foundation, or grasp, of Bible truth, that is very seductive. But it makes sport out of the grace of God and the finished work of Christ.

In my world one has to have examined all the evidence before making a judgement.

I have already read and listened to Farley, White, Rufus and others and know what they teach.

At least, I know where I disagree with them based on my own thorough readings and investigations not on my preconceived biases, prejudices, internal emotional need, irrational fear that is the end of the faith and its highly esteemed orthodoxy.