WOF is Heresy & Should be Avoided at all Costs!

[ember]

So now we have hunters who hunt heresy hunters but dress up like angels. Sheesh.
Confessing is fine, but it isn't a fix all. If we have sin we need to confess that too.

you go first

this should be good

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

Thanks for that link.I took the time to read it, and now I see how dangerous this hypergrace movement is!

Besides quoting part of a verse out of context (Romans 2:4b), quoting Watchman Nee, a heretic; and using false or twisted definitions for repentance (copied off an internet site with mistakes), the author has completely lost sight of the gospel.

Now you have some idea what we've been dealing with for the past 6 months. He has posted hundreds upon hundreds of links to, and copy/pastes from, that website. Reading that author enrages the spirit in me.

 

[ember]

Yes awesome. It's His Word. If you speak it in His Name it does what He sends it for.
Lol my dad who's not saved yet once said when he heard my mother and me pray:
That's not praying what you do. That's demanding!
Yup said my mom.
LOL
He just got healed btw. He may be glad he has those WOFfy family members.

Amen! It's got nothing to do with WOF and everything to do with having a form of godliness but denying the power of God

I don't know how some people believe in God...I mean He's INVISIBLE

 

[Grace777x70]

In fact, I am going to do a bit more study on repentance, and post it later. Because it is a total lie, according to Bauer (BAGD) that metanoia or metanoeo means "change of mind." That is never a use for repentance in the Bible. (Although it is translated that way in some early Christian llterature it is never used that way in the Bible.)

And certainly, there is a point concerning repentance meaning "turning about" but, in fact, it is more often "turning away."

The entire narrative of the Bible, from the Fall in Genesis 3, through to the coming of Jesus, is deliverance from sin! And yes, when we turn away from sin, we also turn to Christ. But that link totally misses this, and in fact repeatedly condemns "preachers" who somehow mix grace and law, But if we do not understand law, then what motive do we have to repent? I do believe God gives us the grace through faith to repent. But if we don't repent, and side step repentance, have we really received the grace of God, and are we truly saved?

Further, the link in that article to Bible Hub shows Bible hub is in fact slightly wrong, which makes a HUGE difference in understanding the meaning of the word. In fact, in BAGD, the Lexicon that scholars use, the passages where "metanoia"is found in the Bible do not start after "change of mind." In fact, there is not one Bible passage found after that definition. Instead, the references start after the definition:

"repentance, turning about, conversion; as in turning away."

(snip)

Anyway, I will try and do a separate post on this. I want people to understand what an untruth it is that repentance only means "turn to God," when in fact, the historical and Biblical meaning in the Greek is "to turn away from sin."

The point of all this was that the so-called hyper-grace believers do in fact believe in repentance and are in fact all for not sinning and to live holy lives in contrast to what has been falsely accused by some who mis-understood what was really being said.

Repentance is good and I for one believe in hyper-repenting as I see new truths about the Lord and our Father. I change my way of thinking to have my mind renewed to the truth as the Holy Spirit reveals more of Jesus to me.

But everyone is free to agree or disagree in these matters as in the end we all should believe Jesus saves us by grace through faith alone and we are safe in Him!


If interested here is a video that addresses the history of how the word "repentance" has been hi-jacked by our religious upbringing. Bless you and I hope you are feeling better after being stuck in that wheelchair after your surgery.

[video=vimeo;112172173]https://vimeo.com/112172173[/video]

 

[ember]

Anyway, I will try and do a separate post on this. I want people to understand what an untruth it is that repentance only means "turn to God," when in fact, the historical and Biblical meaning in the Greek is "to turn away from sin."

repentance means to change your mind...according to the actual Biblical use of the word

it's so simple really...no wonder the devil has gone out of his way to have folks thinking it means sorrow

God has a cure...we don't...our heads are full of nonsense and the only way out is to accept what HE says is true and ACT on it

no offense, but it is not going to take a 2 hour study

 

[Grace777x70]

Now you have some idea what we've been dealing with for the past 6 months. He has posted hundreds upon hundreds of links to, and copy/pastes from, that website. Reading that author enrages the spirit in me.

That brother preaches the gospel of the grace of Christ and I use that site because it tackles obscure scriptures and it also has a place where people can ask questions about the articles. I find that I learn more sometimes when I read the questions of the others at the bottom.

Of course people that believe in eternal security are considered heretics by some people too. In reality some doctrinal beliefs are not shared and thus to them they are some sort of a heretic..it's just the nature of the beast.

Here is another view from someone else about repentance.

Objection #3: Hyper-Grace Preachers Don’t Believe in Repentance

Not only do we believe in repentance, but we seek to understand and teach it thoroughly and accurately. In the New Testament, “to repent” is a translation of the Greek verb “metanoeo” meaning “to change one’s mind or perspective.” Obviously, when we receive Christ, we have repented in the genuine sense of the term – changing our minds about our need of a Savior and receiving Christ.

Before Christ, we lived as self-sufficiently as possible, thinking that God would probably grade on a curve and accept us at least partly on the basis of our own best efforts and self-generated goodness. When we came to understand our spiritual bankruptcy and our desperate need for Christ’s forgiveness and new life, we repented (had a change of perspective) and received Christ by trusting in Him alone to rescue us.

Beyond this initial experience of “getting saved” (as we often call it), repentance is a daily lifestyle in which an ongoing “renewal of the mind” process is taking place within us. As we grow in faith and in our understanding of God through His Word and our union with His Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 6:17), we begin to replace old thinking with new thinking and false thinking with true thinking.

This renewal of the mind (Rom. 12:1-3) is an integral part of the transformative process of the Spirit’s work in our lives. This is the essence of a lifestyle of repentance – taking false thoughts captive, making them obedient to (in conformity with) Christ (2 Cor. 10:5).

Paul affirmed in no uncertain terms that God’s kindness (His expressed grace toward us) is what leads to repentance (Rom. 2:4). Far from being anti-repentance, hyper-grace theology affirms repentance and the ongoing renewal of the mind as an integral part of what it means to follow Jesus under His New Covenant.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

The point of all this was that the so-called hyper-grace believers do in fact believe in repentance and are in fact all for not sinning and to live holy lives in contrast to what has been falsely accused by some who mis-understood what was really being said.

Not in the traditional sense. They have developed their own definition of repentance.

 

[Willie-T]

Not in the traditional sense. They have developed their own definition of repentance.

And, what, pray tell, is your "correct" definition of REPENT...... and where do you get that definition from?

 

[posthuman]

This website misses the point of grace. It misses the fact that God had grace in the Old Testament, because he is the same God, yesterday, today and forever!

like here, for example --

Who are you, O great mountain? Before Zerubbabel you shall become a plain.
And he shall bring forward the top stone amid shouts of ‘Grace, grace to it!’
(Zechariah 4:7)​

and even the law itself -- the blood of bulls and goats never actually cleansed from sin; they were offerings in keeping with faith in God, that if they obediently made this supplication, He would be true to His promise and show them mercy, looking over their sin.

sin was never "removed" by the sacrifices under Moses -- it was forgiven. He showed them grace, over and over and over!

 

[Willie-T]

Thanks for that link.I took the time to read it, and now I see how dangerous this hypergrace movement is!

Besides quoting part of a verse out of context (Romans 2:4b), quoting Watchman Nee, a heretic; and using false or twisted definitions for repentance (copied off an internet site with mistakes), the author has completely lost sight of the gospel.

What did Jesus come to save us from?

"But as he considered these things, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not fear to take Mary as your wife, for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.21 She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.” Matt 1:20-21

Jesus did not come to the earth, minister to people and die on the cross just so people could "change their minds."

In fact, I am going to do a bit more study on repentance, and post it later. Because it is a total lie, according to Bauer (BAGD) that metanoia or metanoeo means "change of mind." That is never a use for repentance in the Bible. (Although it is translated that way in some early Christian llterature it is never used that way in the Bible.)

And certainly, there is a point concerning repentance meaning "turning about" but, in fact, it is more often "turning away."

The entire narrative of the Bible, from the Fall in Genesis 3, through to the coming of Jesus, is deliverance from sin! And yes, when we turn away from sin, we also turn to Christ. But that link totally misses this, and in fact repeatedly condemns "preachers" who somehow mix grace and law, But if we do not understand law, then what motive do we have to repent? I do believe God gives us the grace through faith to repent. But if we don't repent, and side step repentance, have we really received the grace of God, and are we truly saved?

This website misses the point of grace. It misses the fact that God had grace in the Old Testament, because he is the same God, yesterday, today and forever! And God did establish the law for a reason - to help his people live better - to give them boundaries and rules which the capricious gods of the surrounding cultures never had. (Instead these gods never told people how to live, or what they did wrong - but just keep the sacrifices coming!)

Further, the link in that article to Bible Hub shows Bible hub is in fact slightly wrong, which makes a HUGE difference in understanding the meaning of the word. In fact, in BAGD, the Lexicon that scholars use, the passages where "metanoia"is found in the Bible do not start after "change of mind." In fact, there is not one Bible passage found after that definition. Instead, the references start after the definition:

"repentance, turning about, conversion; as in turning away."

So is Bible Hub at the root of some of this bad theology for slipping up where it put the definitions with respect to the Bible versus early church literature? And, does this mean that some of these early church writers were influenced by gnostics, who were only concerned with the mind, and not the body? (Just asking rhetorically right now!)

Anyway, I will try and do a separate post on this. I want people to understand what an untruth it is that repentance only means "turn to God," when in fact, the historical and Biblical meaning in the Greek is "to turn away from sin."

How is it, then, that the Bible speaks of God "repenting", 28 times, I believe it is? Did God turn from His sin?

 

[Grace777x70]

Not in the traditional sense. They have developed their own definition of repentance.

I understand and that's exactly what the catholics said about Luther when he said the "just shall live by faith". The religious establishment of the day said " we have been believing this way for 1,300 years."

To have some religious beliefs that are not founded on the scriptures shattered is a good thing. Jesus did it well to the self-righteous Pharisees and scribes of His day. My heart is for the Holy Spirit to shatter anything that is not the truth about our Lord and the heart of our Father.

Believers should be repenting when we see more truth about the awesomeness of what our Lord Jesus has already done for us!

We have a truly great salvation in Him!

 

[John146]

I was just reading in a completely unrelated way to cc today that the Muratorian canon is dated to 190 AD. So yes, maybe it was copied once or twice. But certainly not the hundreds of generations down the line like the 14th and 15th century manuscripts were, which KJV used for its translations.

You do realize, don't you, that the KJV is a translation? It had a committee of Greek and Hebrew scholars who TRANSLATED the Bible, to the best of their ability, and with the manuscripts that were available 400 years ago.

So you do understand that the KJV is a translation of Greek manuscripts that had been translated from copies of copies, etc?

So questioning the truth of a translation is not really questioning the Word of God, especially when that translation did not use the best manuscripts (because they were not available and had not yet been discovered) and adds things that are not found, for instance in the Muriatorian canon, which maybe was only copied once or twice.

Or perhaps you don't understand that the New Testament was written in Koine Greek, not 15th century Elizabethan English?

There's a reason why the Muratorian canon is dated to 190 AD. It's because it was rejected by the majority of believers and thought to have been corrupted so it was put on a shelf were it was kept.

Certainly the KJV is a translation. My point was to not elevate the Greek manuscripts above a translation. God promised to preserve His words and I believe He has done that in the KJV. I trust every word to be right. It's sad that most believers do not have a Bible they can trust.

 

[ember]

Originally Posted by HeRoseFromTheDeadNow you have some idea what we've been dealing with for the past 6 months. He has posted hundreds upon hundreds of links to, and copy/pastes from, that website. Reading that author enrages the spirit in me.

The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance. II Peter 3:9

The Holy Spirit does not get enraged and we are not supposed to sin when we get angry

what are you actually saying?

 

[Grace777x70]

like here, for example --

Who are you, O great mountain? Before Zerubbabel you shall become a plain.
And he shall bring forward the top stone amid shouts of ‘Grace, grace to it!’
(Zechariah 4:7)​

and even the law itself -- the blood of bulls and goats never actually cleansed from sin; they were offerings in keeping with faith in God, that if they obediently made this supplication, He would be true to His promise and show them mercy, looking over their sin.

sin was never "removed" by the sacrifices under Moses -- it was forgiven. He showed them grace, over and over and over!

Amen..God showed grace to Abraham and actually to the Israelites coming out of Egypt until the day the law was given at Mt. Sinai.

It's an interesting study to see how God treated them even when they murmured before the Law came. Not one time did God react to them in any way but through grace and not one person got harmed.

 

[Willie-T]

Now you have some idea what we've been dealing with for the past 6 months. He has posted hundreds upon hundreds of links to, and copy/pastes from, that website. Reading that author enrages the spirit in me.[/QUOTE]

It saddens me to say this, but I honestly DO believe what you just said.

 

[Ariel82]

from posthuman
[/COLOR][/U]of course, i'm just poking around and am not a "scholar" by any means. someone who has studied and been trained in this sort of thing may chime in to let us know better why this isn't in most translations, and why so many manuscripts don't include it.

[/SIZE][/FONT]

Not a scholar but there are two manuscripts.....


On used to translate into the KJV and other versions and another (found later but many claim is older and more accurate) used to translate the NIV and other versions...

Some phrases are missing from one text. Depending on which version you support, people will say it was either wrongly add or wrongly removed.


An example, the demon will not come out without prayer and fasting in kjv....with fasting not present in NIV...


ALSO translations are more accurate to keeping to the original words, while interpretation like the message makes it more user friendly but riddled wi8th the authors way of thinking.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

And, what, pray tell, is your "correct" definition of REPENT...... and where do you get that definition from?

What it's always meant in the bible as pertains to sinful man: changing the disposition of his self-seeking will towards GOD's will

John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. And there went out unto him all the land of Judaea, and they of Jerusalem, and were all baptized of him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins. Mark 1:4-5​

 

[posthuman]

ALSO translations are more accurate to keeping to the original words, while interpretation like the message makes it more user friendly but riddled wi8th the authors way of thinking.

good grief don't get me started about 'the message' -- i don't even like the NLT. all the subtlety of what the scripture actually says is lost in these things, and what you get from them is what some human thinks the scripture ought to say instead of what it genuinely says.

things like these have some place i'm sure, but you shouldn't consider them "scripture" and probably not even think of them as "Bibles" -- they're just not translations at all; they are interpretations. i think of them as being on par with 'devotionals' -- always well-meaning, sometimes insightful, but sometimes also quite misleading and mislead.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

I understand and that's exactly what the catholics said about Luther when he said the "just shall live by faith". The religious establishment of the day said " we have been believing this way for 1,300 years."

To have some religious beliefs that are not founded on the scriptures shattered is a good thing. Jesus did it well to the self-righteous Pharisees and scribes of His day. My heart is for the Holy Spirit to shatter anything that is not the truth about our Lord and the heart of our Father.

Believers should be repenting when we see more truth about the awesomeness of what our Lord Jesus has already done for us!

We have a truly great salvation in Him!

The problem with your definition of repentance is that there is zero biblical evidence to support it, and the gnostic heretics practiced it.

 

[Ariel82]

good grief don't get me started about 'the message' -- i don't even like the NLT. all the subtlety of what the scripture actually says is lost in these things, and what you get from them is what some human thinks the scripture ought to say instead of what it genuinely says.

things like these have some place i'm sure, but you shouldn't consider them "scripture" and probably not even think of them as "Bibles" -- they're just not translations at all; they are interpretations. i think of them as being on par with 'devotionals' -- always well-meaning, sometimes insightful, but sometimes also quite misleading and mislead.

But it explains why we have a hard time communicating...,lots of versions of the Bible that really are just man's take,on what God thinks and not really a translation of the original text and folks have to pray and ask God what is true.