Why Joseph Prince is a Cancerous Growth within God's People

[Depleted]

I have had many people PM me and thank me for those videos and posts it has helped them to grow in the Lord they said. The way I look at it..people can choose whether to watch them or not.

The Holy Spirit within them can lead them to watch if He thinks they can be encouraged by them. The way I look at it..if it has helped one person - then it was well worth it despite the malice others have towards some particular teacher in the body of Christ.

Thanking you won't be on their minds when they figure out the truth, and honestly? I suspect most who thanked you are on the same rahrah wagon for Prince you're on, so it's just a circular back patting session with an inner circle, not real thanks.

As for what the Holy Spirit will use? I was saved through watching Jesus Christ Superstar. That doesn't mean Andrew Lloyd Webber is saved. God gets through despite the junk of others and yet in doing so, then he has to spend quite some time fixing us to get us away from the junk.

 

[notmyown]

Thats what I said is it not? (I pray that did not sound mean, I did not mean it to)

No, If God paid for every sin, He COULD OFFER salvation to everyone. and extend grace to all men, because he wishes that no one would be lost, but all would be saved, and he is seen throughout the universe as a fair and just god who loves all people.

Then not save those who reject him (blaspehmy of the spirit) Which he did not die for..

oh, and PS. Budman is not a universalist either, if you read his posts..

Love ya Mom!!

i love you, too, bro.

Christ's atonement for sin... certainly sufficient for all, but applied by the Holy Spirit for some.

 

[ember]

I must disagree. God does not have to forgive everyone to be perfect Grace, He is perfect grace because of what he did to mankind. Satan is the one who wants to humanize God. by saying he is not perfect love, he is not perfect Grace, he is not perfect Holiness.

Lets not buy into Satan's lie..

Gods perfect character must work in harmony, God is perfect love, But his love can not go against his justice, Justice demanded a payment for sin, And it must be carried out no matter how much or how perfect Gods love is.. God can not just say, I LOVE YOU so I will let you in even though you are guilty. (universalism teaches this) Justice must be carried out. But Love can find a way and perfect love did (the cross) that way Gods perfect Grace could redeem mankind to himself. But even then, Love is proven, by not forcing his grace on everyone, but allowing people to make a choice to recieve his gift, or reject it.

Gods character is so far and above our understanding, it may take a millennia of being in heaven seeing him as he is before we can comprehend it..

wow...you guys!

JGIG
eternallygrateful
ladylynn
Grace777
Cee (do post more often...I remember you from some months back)
undergrace

and everyone who has taken the time to patiently and 'gracefully' posted a better understanding of the scriptures and turned this thread around!



Some really great things going on in this thread now

Must be GRACE!!! I wish I had time to read it all..might tonight

 

[Depleted]

Maybe this is all semantics, or grammar or even logic.

But when you say something IS something else, it means they are one and the same.

I want to quote from Stanley Grenz's book "Theology for the Community of God." It is a awesome book, and I would highly recommend that everyone take a break from Internet videos from preachers with questionable theology, and spend a month or so, instead, reading this book. It really tells you not only about God, but about how we are to live in community but all the other "ologies" including where sin and repentance fit into the scheme of being a Christian and walking with God (and yes, we do need to continue to confess our sins, and that does not make us morose or miserable, but in fact acknowledges that we do still live in this sin filled world, and our sancitifcation is not yet finished). In fact, I am going to try and spend some time re-reading it today!

"The New Testament (specifically 1 John 4:7-21) suggest that the ontological unity which the [Father, Son and Holy Spirit] constitute and therefore which comprises the divine essence is agape (love). This does not mean, however that love itself is God. In the original Greek, John's construction is carefully written, so as to state that "God is as to character love." While God is love, love cannot be God. Love is a relational term which presupposes someone who loves and someone who is loved. Therefore, love has no objective existance apart from being the relation between the lover and the beloved."

So God is love (not equals). But love is not God. (Love does not equal God)


Once again, Jesus is NOT grace, but he does give grace. Jesus is a person, but he is also God. You cannot take an attribute and claim it is Jesus. That is heresy.

If one was going to "personify" grace, that would be making grace into a PERSON. However, that is not what is happening in this thread and in this forum.

In fact, grace is being deified, or made into deity. Again, because Jesus is deity. He is God. Another word for trying to make grace into Jesus, in the Bible is blasphemy. You simply cannot take the attributes of God, and make them into God. As others have said, that leaves out the other important attributes of the character of God, and makes God in fact, less than he is.

God gives us grace, but he is not grace. He is the giver of all things gracious, including salvation, but the giver is not the gift. And that is because the giver is so much more than the gift! Jesus is God. Grace is not!

Don't ever feel guilty about using semantics. Semantics is a good thing. It teaches how we use words. (Like the first rule of semantics is "The word is not the thing. The word is a symbol for the thing.")

You just explained the position of God to grace perfectly... and semantically. Thank you.

 

[notmyown]

i'm gonna go play with my grandbabies. (thank God for grandbabies!! )

play nice.

 

[Depleted]

Yes, Grace vs grace!

Grace -the deified attribute equal to God

Versus

grace - the undeserved blessing freely bestowed on humans by God. God's loving actions towards creation and towards humankind in particular.

I do remember a thread on hypergrace and I asked for the defintion. I got an answer, but I confess I did not see the ramifications and implications.

Because GRACE or Grace is really hypergrace! So I looked through the threads, and could not find the definition and googled one instead. Because I finally get what this discussion is all about!

"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.


Hyper-grace teaching is a good example of mixing truth with error. An emphasis on the beauty and power of God’s grace is good, but some teachers are neglecting what Paul called the “whole counsel of God” (Acts 20:27). For example, it is true that Christians have been forgiven by God. But that doesn’t mean we never have to confess our sin. James 5:16 says, “Confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed.” If we are to confess our sins to each other, why would we not need to confess them to God, since every sin is ultimately a sin against God (Psalm 51:4)?

Also, 1 John 1:9 gives clear instruction to believers about confessing sin. It begins with the word if: “If we confess our sin, He is faithful and just to forgive our sin and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” This is a cause/effect statement implying that we cannot have the second without the first. As blood-bought children of God, we do not continue to confess our sin in order to be saved from hell. We confess and repent in order to reestablish an intimate relationship with our Father. We are “positionally righteous” but “practically sinful.”

To counter this argument, hyper-grace preachers deny that John’s letters were written to believers. However, 1 John 2:1 begins with this: “My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have an advocate with the Father—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One.” John is clearly writing to believers whom he personally knew. He indicates that his believing friends may indeed sin, and that, when they do, they need to confess it.

Hyper-grace preachers also claim the Holy Spirit will never convict Christians of their sin. Mature Christians should recognize this fallacy right away. Every disciple of Christ has felt the overwhelming conviction of the Holy Spirit when he or she has sinned. Jesus calls the Holy Spirit “the Spirit of Truth” (John 15:26). Truth, by its very definition, will not tolerate anything false. When the Spirit of Truth abides in a believing heart (1 Corinthians 6:19), He brings conviction about anything that is not truth.

In summary, much of what the hyper-grace preachers teach is valid. We are indeed saved by grace, not our works (Ephesians 2:8–9). And God’s grace is marvelous, great, and free (1 Timothy 1:14). However, hyper-grace teaching is out of proportion to the rest of Scripture. Any time one doctrine is emphasized to the exclusion of the rest, we fall into error because we fail to “correctly handle” the Word (2 Timothy 2:15).

Jesus was full of both “grace and truth” (John 1:14). The two are in delicate balance, and a tip to either side can result in a false gospel. We must always compare any new teaching with the “whole counsel of God” and learn to disregard anything that veers even slightly from the truth (1 John 4:1)."

What is hyper-grace?


"Hyper-grace teaching is a good example of mixing truth with error. An emphasis on the beauty and power of God’s grace is good, but some teachers are neglecting what Paul called the “whole counsel of God” (Acts 20:27)."

Hypergrace is a good example of mixing truth with error indeed! So I am flipping from agreeing with the truth part of hypergrace (which is that grace is essential and saves us without respect to works and absolutely and uncompromisingly true!) - and standing against the error of this hypergrace teaching. Sorry it took me so long to figure this out!

Ha! I refused to get drawn into the grace v Grace v hypergrace v Grace-only threads specifically because the hypers keep doing what they're doing here -- belittling anyone who disagrees with them while boldly proclaiming they got all the goodies from God so are now free to ignore the rest of the church. Because of that, I never thought to do the research you have, so you just gave us all the teeth/sword to fight the heresy openly.

Added bonus: And those who are doing it even on this post are being fully exposed as fine examples of the heresy they believe.

Not much left to say, simply because we all know the only place it goes from here is they'll keep patting each other on the back for being so right, so perfect, so wonderful, while continuing to belittle those who aren't buying their grace-god.

Thanks. I never thought to research hypergrace. But that's it!

 

[Depleted]

You know, I just caught the thread title head on,
and realized how disgusting it really is.

The man is a human being, and despite how you feel about certain ways he teaches, he's obviously not deliberately trying to hurt people or run Jesus into the ground, or get some kind of evil delight out of sending people to hell,

I wonder how you'd feel if that was your dad that was being put on display on an international chat site being called a cancerous growth?!
A 'christian' chat site, no less!
One that's frequented by more pompous, arrogant, self-righteous
purveyors of false teaching and works-righteous-based salvation
than a shark has teeth.

Hebrews 13:1, Let brotherly love continue.

Think about it.

No, he's not out to hurt other people. Neither is cancer. He's out to make money preaching what people want to hear.

And you compare him to Dad. (No, I get that's not what you wer doing, but it kind of is like that, so I'm going with it.) He is like Dad. My dad isn't a Christian either. Therefore Dad isn't my brother (yet), and neither is Prince. I'm out to protect the herd from a wolf who may or may not be in sheep's clothing. I don't have enough time to check out the garb simply because I know the destructiveness of a wolf in the flock.

Equal to cancer in the body.

We need to know when heretics come!

 

[Depleted]

Unfortunately I have to agree with you and to some Christians this is very acceptable behavior too and then they cry about transgender bathrooms but neglect the very life of God in us to rip apart a fellow believer in Christ.

It's shameful and it is only malice that they have towards someone that is a teacher in the body of Christ - that they don't agree with in some doctrinal statement so it's ok behave like this. It is without a doubt ungodly behavior no matter how they try to mask it and make excuses for it.

More or less shameful than lying that we're into transgender bathrooms just because we're exposing a false teacher?

All other times you straddle the line between truth and lies. This time you crossed it!

 

[Depleted]

Thanks brother.
You know, it's funny, but the way I and alot of other folks have been demeaned, because some ppl don't like our 'tone of voice', (ha), ... they'll commit and allow false accusations, but if we call a liar a liar, they act like we've commited the unpardonable sin. But at least we can engage each other......A few unsavory words? Good gosh.
But they have no problem calling a pastor who's not even here to defend himself things like a cancerous growth? Anybody here ever had cancer?
Know a loved one who did?

B1?

Am I a liar?

And, Yes. My mother died of cancer. It started in her neck, took over her whole body, and by the time she died she looked like she had more freckles than skin. Except it wasn't freckles. It had already eaten away most of her organs too. She went from 165 pounds down to 65 pounds. It was cancer. YES! EXACT IMAGE of what I see with Joseph Prince!

 

[Budman]

All other times you straddle the line between truth and lies.

ALL other times?

Seriously?

Get a grip, Lynn. Stop making false accusations.

 

[Grace777x70]

ALL other times?

Seriously?

Get a grip, Lynn. Stop making false accusations.

She's ok brother..let her vent...no real harm is done....we love her....All is well! The Lord is faithful to us all!

 

[Depleted]

Well, look what I did!
Shame on me, I never looked first at WHO actually started the thread, or why, I just got caught off-guard by the calling JoePrince a cancer.

Okay, now Lynn, (Depleted) is a friend of mine, and a sister in Christ, so obviously my comments had nothing to do with her personally, and when I referred to the arrogant ones who preach works-righteousness on this site, I WAS NOT including Lynndepleted in that!
Still...I fully expect to get slapped in the head by her at her first opportunity, either in pm or public, it doesn't matter, I deserve it.
In fact, I'd be disappointed if she didn't, I'd think she doesn't love me anymore.
It goes to show I should get all the facts before responding, and I should know better, I'm sorry, however, it doesn't change the fact that 'cancerous growth' is really harsh, and the guy isn't here to defend himself.
I haven't heard him enough to make a full judgement...I think I lean away from his teaching, some of it, at least. But I think we're better served discussing scripture and Jesus, than using other peoples videos to either defend or argue against someone's opinions here.

All in all, I'm guessing JoePrince is a pretty decent guy...I know I could be wrong...but I wish he would come on this site himself and answer some of the charges directly so the rest of us could make a better judgement call.

There are far worse 'christian preachers' more deserving of the thread title, imo, but even then, if they're not here to talk to, I think I'd refrain from calling them that. Actually, I wish we could lift up our Lord Jesus Christ together because of the salvation He's purchased for us and the victory He gives to us, over sin and death, and sickness...even cancer. Praise the Lord! \/

Did I Jethro head-slap you? (I don't know how you took my response, so that's a real question. lol)

And are we to divide between better and worse or by truth or lie? By appearance and way of speaking one of the "worse" preachers ever was Jonathan Edwards. He was a pasty plump guy with a high-pitched monotone voice and his sermons lasted six hours with a one-hour picnic-lunch break in the middle. He was the worse by appearances but so full of truth a revival hit.

Joseph Prince is the opposite. He's a charming guy with a deadly message.

Read the link! He's a heretic! I don't go by appearances. I go by message!

 

[Depleted]

Hi. Forgive me if I'm mistaken, but I believe cee was addressing Angela53510 in regards to his earlier teaching, but hey, two Angelas is twice as nice. God bless you AngelaUnderGrace! \/

​Two Lynns too. Getting mighty confused myself. LOL

 

[Depleted]

i know you didn't mean it so, but that was a good laugh this morning.

Ummm, yeah. I meant it, and for a laugh!

It's also truth. I knew guys that really got into discussing articles from Playboy. But I also knew that's not why they bought the magazine.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Just thinking out loud here. That 'identity' biz is based on the concept that salvation derives from right thinking (believing). Right thinking is knowing (being aware of) one's true self. One's true self is a perfected spirit being. Salvation, then, is repenting of any thoughts that conflict with this identity. Basically, salvation by knowing self.

what?? this makes no sense at all. Can anyone interpret this for me, I do not want to misrepresent what he was trying to say..

 

[Jimbone]

Wow man, you just seem to skip right over what qualifies our salvation and turn a blind eye to it. Yes Jesus died so "the world" could be saved, for those "THAT BELIEVE". Let me show you from your own scripture.

"And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world." (John 4:42)

"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world." (1 John 4:14)

"For therefore we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe." (1 Timothy 4:10)

"For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the worldthrough him might be saved." (John 3:17)

"And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world." (John 12:47)

"And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world." (1 John 2:2)

So, there's the problem. You are wrong.

LOL and John 12:47 does seem to be saying what you want it to say when you RIP in out of context, lets see what the verse before and after say to get the fuller picture.

John 12:46 I am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness.

And John 12:48 The one who rejects me and does not receive my words has a judge; the word that I have spoken will judge him on the last day.

So you are wrong, He is not saying they will not be judged, just that it's His word that will judge they and not "him" so to speak. I'm sorry man, but it's YOU that are wrong here.

One last scripture to address 1 John 2:2, lets look at the next couple verses 1 John 2:3-6

3By this we know that we have come to know Him, if we keep His commandments. 4The one who says, “I have come to know Him,” and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him; 5but whoever keeps His word, in him the love of God has truly been perfected. By this we know that we are in Him:6the one who says he abides in Him ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked.

So every scripture you've posted does NOT back up what you're trying to say and believe, I'm sorry but everyone is not "automatically saved", only those that believe on the Son. Everything you've posted refutes you and backs her up. Anything else?

 

[Grace777x70]

what?? this makes no sense at all. Can anyone interpret this for me, I do not want to misrepresent what he was trying to say..

Not really...I do have a general idea of what he saying but I do know that trying to understand spiritual realities in Christ cannot be grasped with the human mind or by human reasoning.

 

[Depleted]

"And said unto the woman, Now we believe, not because of thy saying: for we have heard him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world." (John 4:42)

"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Saviour of the world." (1 John 4:14)

"For therefore we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe." (1 Timothy 4:10)

"For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved." (John 3:17)

"And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world." (John 12:47)

"And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world." (1 John 2:2)

So, there's the problem. You are wrong.

Definition of World --
G2889


κόσμος
kosmos
kos'-mos
Probably from the base of G2865; orderly arrangement, that is, decoration; by implication the world (in a wide or narrow sense, including its inhabitants, literally or figuratively [morally]): - adorning, world.
Total KJV occurrences: 187

If you'd like to start a post on "Basic Knowledge Believers are Supposed to Have," feel free. This is about Joseph Prince and his heretical teachings. Again. I'm not your tutor.

 

[Budman]

Definition of World --
G2889


κόσμος
kosmos
kos'-mos
Probably from the base of G2865; orderly arrangement, that is, decoration; by implication the world (in a wide or narrow sense, including its inhabitants, literally or figuratively [morally]): - adorning, world.
Total KJV occurrences: 187

If you'd like to start a post on "Basic Knowledge Believers are Supposed to Have," feel free. This is about Joseph Prince and his heretical teachings. Again. I'm not your tutor.

Yep. The world means exactly that - the world. It means everyone - all men. You can't twist it to suit yourself.

You've been proven wrong. At least have the honesty to admit it.

 

[Depleted]

ALL other times?

Seriously?

Get a grip, Lynn. Stop making false accusations.

You, on the other hand are lousy at semantics. Suddenly "whole" always means the same thing and "all" doesn't?

I hate to treat you like a kid, but whatever.