The neo-Gnostic spirit of New.Modern.Hyper Grace

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
M

Mitspa

Guest
These are all just red herrings that you're throwing out. They have nothing to do with the topic under discussion, which is what he wrote about the gnostics. Your attempts to discredit what he wrote about them because he was in error about one thing (possibly. I can't even decipher what he said in your quote) and because you have associated him with the evils of the RCC is laughable.
You have bent over backwards to establish this man ..or the letters prescribed to him as having authority .... do you now agree these letters have no real bearing on the issue you brought up?
 
Feb 7, 2015
22,418
413
0
I don't care one way or the other, but we do have to admit that Irenaneus' writings have turned out to be quite unreliable concerning numerous events.
Here is just the first one I found for you... Irenaeus: The Most Dangerous Heretic?

Scroll on down, it goes on for quite awhile. (a little over 14,000 words) One of the first things I learned in Bible School decades ago was that this was one of the most unreliable of the Early Church Fathers.
 
Last edited:

BenFTW

Senior Member
Oct 7, 2012
4,834
981
113
34
This thread got ugly but then again that's where it started. Accusations, defamation, allegations and pure speculation. Hyper-grace is not Gnosticism in disguise.
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
692
113
...the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also [by pointing out] the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the tradition has been preserved continuously by those who exist everywhere.


anyone doubt this guy what promoting the RCC? and its a lie that Peter or Paul established the church in Rome
What's sad is that you are so blinded by your bigotry, that you can't see that succession of authority was necessary for the preservation of the faith.
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
692
113
This thread got ugly but then again that's where it started. Accusations, defamation, allegations and pure speculation. Hyper-grace is not Gnosticism in disguise.
It didn't really turn ugly until a bigot showed up.

New.modern.hyper grace is neo-gnosticism.
 
Nov 22, 2015
20,436
1,431
0
Wow!

So, Irenaeus claimed to have seen Polycarp when he was a youth. But that does not mean he embraced, or even knew, all of Polycarp's teaching.

While I have not seen any major other treatise explaining why Irenaeus was a major heretic (actually, outside of Church of God circles, I have little that specifically considers him to have been a heretic, though groups like the Jehovah's Witnesses probably do), it appears to me that he may have been the most dangerous heretic.

Why?

Because, Irenaeus' heresies were not obvious to those outside the true Church of God. His heresies and false statements were less numerous and less obvious than Justin's, thus have been missed by nearly all scholars (though some have noticed one or two errors he made).

What were his most important heresies?

Irenaeus heard Polycarp, yet made deals with Rome that disagreed with Polycarp's teachings. Irenaeus knew that Justin did not agree with Polycarp, yet he approved of Justin--and sadly seemed to prefer to be influenced more by him that by Polycarp.

Irenaeus knew that Polycarp condemned heretics such as Marcion and Valentinus, but failed to mention that they were still allowed to be Roman Catholic until at two decades later. Irenaeus supported the Roman Church even though Irenaeus knew they tolerated heretics that had earlier been condemned by Polycarp (and eventually by Irenaeus himself).

And..it gets worse as you continue to read that link...good find Willie..

Here is just the first one I found for you... Irenaeus: The Most Dangerous Heretic?

Scroll on down, it goes on for quite awhile. (a little over 14,000 words) One of the first things I learned in Bible School decades ago was that this was one of the most unreliable of the Early Church Fathers.
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
692
113
You have bent over backwards to establish this man ..or the letters prescribed to him as having authority .... do you now agree these letters have no real bearing on the issue you brought up?
He did have authority to write about the gnostics. He knew them and wrote what he knew.
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
692
113
Here is just the first one I found for you... Irenaeus: The Most Dangerous Heretic?

Scroll on down, it goes on for quite awhile. (a little over 14,000 words) One of the first things I learned in Bible School decades ago was that this was one of the most unreliable of the Early Church Fathers.
I saw that earlier and dismissed because it looked like Church of GOD nonsense.
 
Nov 22, 2015
20,436
1,431
0
Amen..it's called "kicking against the goads "

This thread got ugly but then again that's where it started. Accusations, defamation, allegations and pure speculation. Hyper-grace is not Gnosticism in disguise.
 
Feb 7, 2015
22,418
413
0
C'mon, Guys. Prove one another wrong all you want, but can we ease up a little on the blows below the belt?
 
S

sydlit

Guest
What's sad is that you are so blinded by your bigotry, that you can't see that succession of authority was necessary for the preservation of the faith.
Succession of AUTHORITY? Authority over who? Given by who? Are you now going to go against what you said earlier, and trace this 'authority' to and through the RCC?! Or do you make a left somewhere...
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
692
113
.
Oh my! Can you post nice juicy stuff so I don't have to read the whole thing. I tried a few days ago and couldn't get through it all because it seemed so weak, and I realized the writer is a COG sabbatarian.

Wow!

So, Irenaeus claimed to have seen Polycarp when he was a youth. But that does not mean he embraced, or even knew, all of Polycarp's teaching.

While I have not seen any major other treatise explaining why Irenaeus was a major heretic (actually, outside of Church of God circles, I have little that specifically considers him to have been a heretic, though groups like the Jehovah's Witnesses probably do), it appears to me that he may have been the most dangerous heretic.

Why?

Because, Irenaeus' heresies were not obvious to those outside the true Church of God. His heresies and false statements were less numerous and less obvious than Justin's, thus have been missed by nearly all scholars (though some have noticed one or two errors he made).

What were his most important heresies?

Irenaeus heard Polycarp, yet made deals with Rome that disagreed with Polycarp's teachings. Irenaeus knew that Justin did not agree with Polycarp, yet he approved of Justin--and sadly seemed to prefer to be influenced more by him that by Polycarp.

Irenaeus knew that Polycarp condemned heretics such as Marcion and Valentinus, but failed to mention that they were still allowed to be Roman Catholic until at two decades later. Irenaeus supported the Roman Church even though Irenaeus knew they tolerated heretics that had earlier been condemned by Polycarp (and eventually by Irenaeus himself).

And..it gets worse as you continue to read that link...good find Willie..
 
Sep 4, 2012
14,424
692
113
Succession of AUTHORITY? Authority over who? Given by who? Are you now going to go against what you said earlier, and trace this 'authority' to and through the RCC?! Or do you make a left somewhere...
Brother, how do you think you have the faith and bible you have now? It's because godly men preserved the faith by handing it down to trustworthy men to lead the church. The church would have evaporated without them. Sure that got corrupted because that's what men do.
 
Feb 7, 2015
22,418
413
0
.
Oh my! Can you post nice juicy stuff so I don't have to read the whole thing. I tried a few days ago and couldn't get through it all because it seemed so weak, and I realized the writer is a COG sabbatarian.
Give me a break. That is weak. Are you going to go to the Mormon site to find out problems with Joseph Smith?
Or to the JW site to see the errors of the New World Translation?
Or the Vatican to find out if the Pope is anything but perfect?

We're not talking denominational positions here, but rather plain, raw, factual reporting.
 
M

Mitspa

Guest
Neither am I and I'm not a bigot.
Well with all the PC nonsense in the world ...im not sure that bigot really means anything other than someone who believes in right and wrong ... I also call sin..sin and criminals ..criminals If a bigot tells the truth? then I accept the title ... I don't play the PC game very good...sorry :(
 
M

Mitspa

Guest
Brother, how do you think you have the faith and bible you have now? It's because godly men preserved the faith by handing it down to trustworthy men to lead the church. The church would have evaporated without them. Sure that got corrupted because that's what men do.
How can you claim a group that killed people for having a bible and reading it ..are some way godly? You cant believe the propaganda the RCC has past down about how they preserved the bible ..when its clear they have never tried to do so.