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

[JGIG]

That's your interpretation and you're entitled to it. You also believe that sins committed by believers must be confessed to be forgiven and that God 'has His limits' - that someone can sin themselves out of salvation.

In a nutshell, this is what happened at the Cross:

Has God dealt with the sins of the world?

Yes.

How many times did He deal with it?

Once.

Have your sins been judged?

Yes.

Where were they judged?

At the Cross.

What was the verdict?

Guilty.

What was the punishment?

Death.

Who took it?

Jesus.

How much of it?

All of it.

How much is left for you?

None.

~ Bob George​

If you are in Christ, there is no more punishment for sin - that was dealt with at the CROSS.​

Source:

​

• 
  [*=1]The New Covenant Explained – Study notes available HERE. Video version (same teaching, different event) HERE.
  [*=1]God’s Solution to Man’s Problem – Life! – Study notes available HERE.
  [*=1]An excellent follow-up teaching which reinforces the above two teachings: Biblical Understanding of Law and Grace. Study notes available HERE.

1 John 4 gets to the heart of the matter:

13 By this we know that we abide in him and he in us, because he has given us of his Spirit. 14 And we have seen and testify that the Father has sent his Son to be the Savior of the world. 15 Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God abides in him, and he in God. 16 So we have come to know and to believe the love that God has for us. God is love, and whoever abides in love abides in God, and God abides in him.

17 By this is love perfected with us, so that we may have confidence for the day of judgment, because as he is so also are we in this world. 18 There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love.​

And John wrote elsewhere:

24 Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life. (from John 5)​

-JGIG

.
You're simply trying to patch together a defense of your gnostic theory by quoting completely unrelated ideas and verses. It's a non-sequitur fallacy.

So we can expect you to correct whatever error you see above?

What are the errors, specifically?

The Gospel is Gnostic theory? Really?

You don't seem to be able to articulate the errors you perceive, so you're just continually attaching scary labels to the simplicity of the Gospel.

I'm content to let the reader sort it all out and make their own decisions on the matter.

-JGIG

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

So we can expect you to correct whatever error you see above?

What are the errors, specifically?

The Gospel is Gnostic theory? Really?

You don't seem to be able to articulate the errors you perceive, so you're just continually attaching scary labels to the simplicity of the Gospel.

I'm content to let the reader sort it all out and make their own decisions on the matter.

-JGIG

What I meant by gnostic theory is your arcane theory that John was writing to gnostics. That is all.

 

[RickyZ]

Oops - hit post instead of 'Go Advanced' and needed to tend to something away from the computer - to be continued, ha!

I've oft asked if they couldn't separate those buttons a little. Made the same mistake myself many times

 

[Grace777x70]

Me too..hey..nice pic of you and your wife...bless you buddy ( and your food )...

I've oft asked if they couldn't separate those buttons a little. Made the same mistake myself many times

 

[kohelet]

Originally Posted by JGIG

Chapter 1 clearly is addressing Gnostic thought, while the balance of the letter is clearly addressing those who are truly in Christ.


But references to Gnostic thought are found throughout the epistle, JGIG, and also in the second and the third epistles (where Diotrephes is referenced, say some scholars).

For example, right after John has said that the heretics had left the church, "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us," he alludes to Gnostic thought with, "But you have been anointed by the Holy One, and you all have knowledge" (2:19.20). The Gnostics were about gnosis. He continues with more references to Gnosticism, with, "Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ?" (v.22 and see following verses). The Gnostics did precisely this.

The Gnostics separated Jesus from the Christ and as late in the epistle as chapter 4 John is correcting this misunderstanding: "Every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God" (4:3a). The Gnostics were therefore not from God. "This is the spirit of the antichrist" (3b).

Light and darkness figure in Gnostic thought and John provides a Christian perspective in chapters 1 and 2.

It's simply not right to say that 1 Jn. 1 addresses Gnostic thought, whereas the remainder of the epistle doesn't. 1 Jn. 1, 2, 3 and 4 are addressed to believers struggling with the teaching of these heretics. Accordingly, Christians are addressed in 1 Jn. 1:9.

As for your latest evidence, that Matthew Henry and others thought there were Gnostics in the church, you should perhaps have produced that instead of the stuff you did provide us with, none of which said any such thing.

 

[Grace777x70]

Hi JGIG,

I trust things are well with your son as I think you most likely still at St. Jude's Hospital.

I found 2 other sources that says that John was writing to combat gnostics in his time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerinthus

Apparently this Cerinthus character was a start of the gnostic type teaching in the apostle John's time.

Here are some quotes from the article..


Early Christian tradition describes Cerinthus as a contemporary to and opponent of John the Evangelist, who may have written the First Epistle of John and the Second Epistle of John to warn the less mature in faith and doctrine about the changes Cerinthus was making to the original gospel. All that is known about Cerinthus comes from the writing of his theological opponents

In portraying Christ as a spirit that came from heaven, undertook its divine task in the material world, and then returned, he anticipates the fully developed Christian Gnosticism in later decades.

One tradition maintains that John wrote his first two epistles to counter Cerinthus' heresy

Here is another source that talks about the 1 John being partly written to combat early gnostic teaching.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Epistle_of_John

It appears as though the author was concerned about heretical teachers that had been influencing churches under his care.

Such teachers were considered Antichrists (2:18–19) who had once been church leaders but whose teaching became heterodox. It appears that these teachers taught a form of docetism in which Jesus came to earth as a spirit without a real body of flesh (4:2) that his death on the cross was not as a true atonement for sins (1:7). It appears that John might have also been rebuking a proto-Gnostic named Cerinthus, who also denied the true humanity of Christ.

At the risk of reviving a thread that may have died a natural death, I will respond to the above.

Here was the issue in question:

Were there Gnostics in the Church that John was writing to? HRFTD posed the issue this way:

Originally Posted by HeRoseFromTheDead

That's just more contextual evidence against the notion that John wrote to the gnostics. I think Prince first came up with this idea in his book, Destined to Reign because his whole doctrine falls apart without it. That's why new.modern.hyper grace devotees are so desperate to defend it, even though they can't.

Is Joseph Prince's Radical Grace Teaching Biblical? — Charisma News"Although Prince acknowledges that this passage [1 John 1:9] refutes his teaching on radical grace, he tries to get around it by saying this passage was written to the gnostics in the church—something he states without citing any commentaries, sources or historical evidence".

Nor has anyone here. Nor can they.

Originally Posted by HeRoseFromTheDead

There is absolutely no evidence that John addressed unbelieving gnostics in 1 John 1:5-10. Nothing grammatical, contextual, historical, scriptural, or otherwise. That is an idea invented by Joseph Prince.​

In my posts 1143-1147, I cited several theological sources from different denominational streams that all pondered the influence and presence of Gnostic thought that had crept into the local Body to whom John was writing.

And if there was Gnostic thought influencing the local Body, it is not by any means a stretch to think that there were Gnostic unbelievers in the congregation (just as there are unbelievers of different stripes in congregations today).

In post 1203 I detail why this is a likely scenario.

In post 1234 I attempted to further clarify, as more questions were raised.

Then in post 1242, and using an outside source (that was asked for by HRFTD), I provided more clarification.

The point is that there ARE and HAVE BEEN other teachers that acknowledge the presence of Gnostic thought influencing the congregation to whom John was writing.

I encourage the readers here to click on the links above to sort it all out for themselves.

I'm content for them to make up their own minds about the matter.

Grace and peace to you,
-JGIG

 

[ladylynn]

Hi JGIG,

I trust things are well with your son as I think you most likely still at St. Jude's Hospital.

I found 2 other sources that says that John was writing to combat gnostics in his time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerinthus

Apparently this Cerinthus character was a start of the gnostic type teaching in the apostle John's time.

Here are some quotes from the article..


Early Christian tradition describes Cerinthus as a contemporary to and opponent of John the Evangelist, who may have written the First Epistle of John and the Second Epistle of John to warn the less mature in faith and doctrine about the changes Cerinthus was making to the original gospel. All that is known about Cerinthus comes from the writing of his theological opponents

In portraying Christ as a spirit that came from heaven, undertook its divine task in the material world, and then returned, he anticipates the fully developed Christian Gnosticism in later decades.

One tradition maintains that John wrote his first two epistles to counter Cerinthus' heresy

Here is another source that talks about the 1 John being partly written to combat early gnostic teaching.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Epistle_of_John

It appears as though the author was concerned about heretical teachers that had been influencing churches under his care.

Such teachers were considered Antichrists (2:18–19) who had once been church leaders but whose teaching became heterodox. It appears that these teachers taught a form of docetism in which Jesus came to earth as a spirit without a real body of flesh (4:2) that his death on the cross was not as a true atonement for sins (1:7). It appears that John might have also been rebuking a proto-Gnostic named Cerinthus, who also denied the true humanity of Christ.

Hey, glad you brought this thread up Grace777., I've been working some extra days and missed coming here the last time you guys were posting. It's hard to keep up with the many threads started but the topic of grace for walking the Christian life has been the essential missing key from my walk with Christ in the last 30yrs. Goes to show we are never too old to learn. Be back later after catching up. Blessings to you and JGIG.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

It appears that John might have also been rebuking a proto-Gnostic named Cerinthus, who also denied the true humanity of Christ.

Oh good grief! You're quoting an uncited statement in Wikipedia. Anyone can can write whatever they want in Wikipedia. If a statement doesn't have a citation, it's worthless. I could edit that page to say Cerinthus was a homeboy if I wanted to.

It appears that John might have also been rebuking a proto-Gnostic named Cerinthus, who also denied the true humanity of Christ.[citation needed]​

 

[Willie-T]

Oh good grief! You're quoting an uncited statement in Wikipedia. Anyone can can write whatever they want in Wikipedia. If a statement doesn't have a citation, it's worthless. I could edit that page to say Cerinthus was a homeboy if I wanted to.

It appears that John might have also been rebuking a proto-Gnostic named Cerinthus, who also denied the true humanity of Christ.[citation needed]​

Uh, Irenaeus wrote about Cerinthus.

 

[JGIG]

Hi JGIG,

I trust things are well with your son as I think you most likely still at St. Jude's Hospital.

I found 2 other sources that says that John was writing to combat gnostics in his time.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerinthus

Apparently this Cerinthus character was a start of the gnostic type teaching in the apostle John's time.

Here are some quotes from the article..


Early Christian tradition describes Cerinthus as a contemporary to and opponent of John the Evangelist, who may have written the First Epistle of John and the Second Epistle of John to warn the less mature in faith and doctrine about the changes Cerinthus was making to the original gospel. All that is known about Cerinthus comes from the writing of his theological opponents

In portraying Christ as a spirit that came from heaven, undertook its divine task in the material world, and then returned, he anticipates the fully developed Christian Gnosticism in later decades.

One tradition maintains that John wrote his first two epistles to counter Cerinthus' heresy

Here is another source that talks about the 1 John being partly written to combat early gnostic teaching.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Epistle_of_John

It appears as though the author was concerned about heretical teachers that had been influencing churches under his care.

Such teachers were considered Antichrists (2:18–19) who had once been church leaders but whose teaching became heterodox. It appears that these teachers taught a form of docetism in which Jesus came to earth as a spirit without a real body of flesh (4:2) that his death on the cross was not as a true atonement for sins (1:7). It appears that John might have also been rebuking a proto-Gnostic named Cerinthus, who also denied the true humanity of Christ.

Hey, glad you brought this thread up Grace777., I've been working some extra days and missed coming here the last time you guys were posting. It's hard to keep up with the many threads started but the topic of grace for walking the Christian life has been the essential missing key from my walk with Christ in the last 30yrs. Goes to show we are never too old to learn. Be back later after catching up. Blessings to you and JGIG.

Thanks for the thoughts, prayers, and blessings . Yes, at St. Jude's - a busy, busy week! I think we may actually have a couple of days 'off', though not going home. So I may have some time to catch up here. We'll see how it goes!

And thanks, Grace777x70 for bringing those other resources to light. It is now clear that Gnostic thought was an issue in the early Church and that it was addressed in the Apostolic writings of John. This is not a new theory promoted by modern 'Hyper-Grace' preachers at all, and certainly not an original theory of Joseph Prince.

What's so interesting about this thread is that the OP tries to pin Gnosticism on those who preach the Gospel of Grace, we say no, but 1 John is addressing the errors of Gnosticism, and we go on to agree with John in opposition to Gnostic thought, and the author of the OP tries (to no avail) to deny that John was addressing Gnostic thought in his letter (1 John).

All because we believe and proclaim this:

11 May you be strengthened with all power, according to his glorious might, for all endurance and patience with joy,12 giving thanks to the Father, who has qualified you to share in the inheritance of the saints in light. 13 He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, 14 in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins. (from Col. 1)​

Grace and peace to you,
-JGIG

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

And thanks, Grace777x70 for bringing those other resources to light. It is now clear that Gnostic thought was an issue in the early Church and that it was addressed in the Apostolic writings of John. This is not a new theory promoted by modern 'Hyper-Grace' preachers at all, and certainly not an original theory of Joseph Prince.

What's so interesting about this thread is that the OP tries to pin Gnosticism on those who preach the Gospel of Grace, we say no, but 1 John is addressing the errors of Gnosticism, and we go on to agree with John in opposition to Gnostic thought, and the author of the OP tries (to no avail) to deny that John was addressing Gnostic thought in his letter (1 John).

What's remarkable about 'grace' believers' teachings is that they are based upon the lie that the apostle John was specifically addressing gnostics in 1 John 1:9 instead of the church (everything collapses without this lie), yet their beliefs are virtually identical with what the gnostics believed.

Now you've shifted the argument to say that John was addressing the heresy of gnostic thought. Of course he was; no one is disputing that! The gnostic thought that he was warning about is the very thing you and other 'grace' believers are teaching. You've become snared in your own iniquity!