Tag Archives: heresy

Some Honest Questions for Joseph Prince

Dr Michael Brown is one of the most theologically astute polemicist in the charismatic community. He speaks with clarity and charity when thexposing the “hyper-grace” heresy. In doing so, he fulfills Jesus inspired imperative in the letter of Jude.

 “…contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints. For certain ungodly men… have crept into the church, perverting the grace of god by sanctioning unrestrained-unrepentant behavior which flagrantly denies the credibility of one’s confession in the Lordship of Jesus Christ”   [rghanner paraphrase]

Dr Brown is at his anointed best in his recent open letter which poses eleven penetrating questions to Joseph Prince, one of the chief proponents of the “hyper-grace “heresy. I’ve extracted a sampling so as to evoke further reading of the entire article.

>If God has pronounced your future sins forgiven in the same way He has pronounced your past sins forgiven, why do Paul and other New Testament writers address these very sins in their letters, and why does Jesus address them in Revelation 2-3? We know that God doesn’t bring our past sins up to us, since He has forgiven and “forgotten” them. Why then does He bring our present sins up to us in the New Testament, even warning us about the dangers of walking in those sins, if they have also been forgiven and forgotten in advance?

>A leading hyper-grace teacher claims that the doctrine of progressive sanctification is a “spiritually murderous lie.” Does that mean that grace preachers like Charles Spurgeon, who believed in progressive sanctification, taught this alleged lie? And if “progressive sanctification” simply means to walk out our holiness with the help of the Spirit, what is so dangerous about this teaching? Put another way, do you reject the concept that the one who made us holy now calls us to live holy lives in thought, word and deed, thereby “completing our sanctification in the fear of God” (2 Cor 7:1)? Doesn’t Paul say we are called saints (that is who we are) and called to be saints (that is how we live)? (See 1 Cor. 1:2.)

>Since you believe we are not to judge our salvation by our conduct, how can we avoid self-deception? I know that you are against certain types of self-examination lest you become “sin conscious” and take your eyes off the finished work of the cross, but what do you make of verses that state that we know we have passed from death to life only if we live a certain way (like 1 John 3:14)? If I understand you correctly, you would question the salvation of someone who demonstrated no change of life and continued to walk in unrepentant sin. But doesn’t this mean that, on some level, you are looking at your “performance” to verify your salvation?Do you see any possible danger in emphasizing that it is impossible for a believer to lose his or her salvation? Of course, we could debate whether the Bible teaches this at all, but simply as a matter of experience, many of us have encountered very lost people—drunkards, fornicators, without the slightest interest in God (see 1 Cor. 6:9-10)—who have then assured us that they were saved because it was impossible for them to lose their salvation. So on a practical level, do you feel it’s important to add any scriptural caveats to your teaching of eternal security and, if so, how can you do this without putting an emphasis on “performance”?




Joel Osteen is a Heretical Pelagian and Universalist!


English: Joel Osteen at Lakewood Church, Houst...

English: Joel Osteen at Lakewood Church, Houston, Texas (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Jennifer LeClaire, news editor at Charisma writes about Joel Osteen’s comments made to HuffPost Live host Josh Zepps about  gays this week. The interview is more than telling and confirms Osteen as a heretical Pelagian and Universalist. Carefully note that he frames Universalism in his “the wider mercy” doctrine.

It’s past time for high-profile, credible ministers to call out Joel and hold him biblically accountable for his flagrant heresy and pseudo gospel that eternally damns the unrepentant and unregenerate.

“…The mega church preacher, whom HuffPo describes as a “spiritual star,” was on the show to talk about his new book Break Out! 5 Keys to Go Beyond Your Barriers and Live an Extraordinary Life. Zepps read a line out of Osteen’s book: “It doesn’t matter who likes you or doesn’t like you, all that matters is that God likes you. He accepts you. He approves of you.”

Zepps then asked Osteen if that was true of homosexuals. “Absolutely,” Osteen said. “I believe that God breathed life into every person and that every person is made in the image of God, and you have accept them as they are on their journey. I’m not here to preach hate or push people down.”

Osteen also said, “We’re not trying to make this a little bitty narrow thing. Anybody’s welcome. We may not agree 100 percent on doctrine and theology, but the Catholic Church, our church, it’s open for everybody. … I believe God is big and His mercy is very wide.”

The Pelagian Heresy



Posted by on October 4, 2013 in anathema, antinomian, counterfeit, heresy


Tags: , ,

10 Ways To Hide Heresy In Plausiblity

Metal band Divine Heresy at gramercy theater 1...

Image via Wikipedia

Plausibility in this context  means that error  is being deceptively packaged so that it has the appearance of believability and worthy of approval.
Thanks to  SBC Voices, here are 10 functional ways heresy is made plausible today. 

1.Put your heresy in a song with a good beat It will be sung in churches all over the world.

2.  Put your heresy in a song with some sentimentality.  Many evangelicals like to sing about how mommies, babies, daddies, etc. are the glory of heaven.

3. Appeal to the sinful nature.  ”I want to hear how awesome I am; so, tell me how awesome I am.”

4. Appeal to the idolatry of your hearers. If you live in an entertainment-centered society, make sure you entertain while presenting your heresy.  If you live in a postmodern society, make sure you say nothing absolute while appealing to the only truth you know: “I’m not sure.”

5.Dress it up in new clothes.  Don’t present heresy how previous heretics presented it, instead dress up in new clothes.  Present the heresy like a politician does.  Use catch-phrases that sound biblical. Most people will walk away thinking, saying, and believing your catch-phrases.

6. Change definitions. If you change the definitions of words, you can sign any document or agree with any orthodox doctrine. You know what you mean, just make sure no one else does. Try to please everyone a little bit; for, after all, when it comes to doctrine and evangelicalism, you don’t have to be orthodox, you just need to sound orthodox.

7. Appear cool, sweet, metro, or simply different from other pastors. Spike your hair and dress cool. Say curse words from the pulpit occasionally. Be “edgy,” a type of “shock-jock.”  Be the “Howard Stern” of the evangelical world.

8. Get everyone to like your personality.  If everyone likes you, then you can almost say anything.  Always be positive and encouraging.

9. Grow the crowd numerically. If your methods produce visible numbers, then you can almost say anything.  In evangelicalism, numbers equal success; and success, not biblical obedience, is the goal.

10. Increase giving and baptisms. If you’re bringing in money and numbers, you can about do or say anything. Make sure the world thinks you’re a big deal.  If the world likes you, the evangelical church will like you as well.

Leave a comment

Posted by on November 5, 2011 in antinomian, Apostasy, counterfeit, heresy



Sanctified Fighting

a detail of a page from William Morgan's 1588 ...

Image via Wikipedia

Approximately three years ago, a couple of friends encouraged me to initiate a blog. After consideration, I selected a  term from greek that informs our english word   “contend”  in the book of  Jude. 

 My purpose was to focus upon the issues that are dismissed, neglected or ignored by the church in general but especially within the continuationist-charismatic stream in particular.

Wow! I certainly have not lacked for material nor has there been a shortage of vocal critics. Some find the posts to negative for their liking and have had no reservation in questioning my motives. With that in mind, Koinonia posted a scholarly article that seems to affirm the pressing need for our frail and imperfect attempt at developing the biblical art of “antagonizing”.

“Koinonia” is sponsored by Zondervan and the article is from William D. [Bill] Mounce who posts about the Greek language, exegesis, and related topics. He is the author of the bestselling Basics of Biblical Greek, and is the general editor for Mounce’s Complete Expository Dictionary of the Old and New Testament Words. He served as the New Testament chair of the English Standard Version Bible translation.

As you can see, this scholarly brother has earned the right to be heard. Now read his post concerning Jude and discover why “antagonizing” is an effort more ministers should embrace and with less concern for being winsomely gentle.

William Mounce says.” take the kids’ gloves off and duke it out. This is not the time for caution and reserve. It is war.”

Now you can understand the antagoniz picture with the gloves off! 



Fight for the Faith: Jude 3

“Jude writes to his church that they are to “contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.” He wanted to write to them about their common salvation, but because evil people had snuck into the church, he was forced to write a different kind of letter.

The description of these people is scathing. They were “shepherds feeding themselves” (v 12) instead of the flock, a clear allusion to the fact that they were in leadership (cf. the Pastorals). They were worldly people, causing divisions, and were “devoid of the Spirit” (v 19).

Can you imagine? Non-Christians in leadership positions in the church seeking the things of the world (perhaps like power and prestige)? I can, and so can many pastors with whom I have spoken over the last several years.

Specifically, they were teaching that sanctification did not matter, perverting “the grace of our God into sensuality,” and were in some way deficient in their Christology, denying “our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ” (ESV, v 4). In other words, they were denying some of the core doctrines of the faith “once for all delivered to the saints” (v 3).

Just as Timothy had learned in Ephesus, so also Jude’s church learned that Paul’s prophesy that “fierce wolves will come in among you, not sparing the flock” (Acts 20:29) is in a real sense paradigmatic of what can happen in any church. I find myself welcoming opposition from outside the church, because the spiritual warfare that exists inside all chuches is much more insidious and much more difficult to fight.

So what are we to do? Part of the answer is found in the word “contend” (v 3). You can see the NASB and NET struggling a bit with the relatively weak “contend” (ESV, NIV, RSV) when they write “contend earnestly” (“earnestly contend,“ KJV). NLT has “defend.” TEV has “fight.” NJB has “fight hard,“ which actually is the right translation.

Buried behind the English is the strong επαγωνιζομαι, which BDAG defines as “to exert intense effort on behalf of something, contend.” But “contend” can be so weak as in “to assert something.” Louw and Nida are closer when they give us, “to exert intense effort.”

Jude is telling the church that it is time to take the kids’ gloves off and duke it out. This is not the time for caution and reserve. It is war. Whenever I read Jude I think of John Piper’s admonitions to accept a war-time life style. It is war, and the battle is both within and without the church. For Jude and many churches, the fieriest battle lie within.

I first started thinking about Jude when I found that Preterism was being taught within the church where I was serving. I had never heard of it before, and the idea that all eschatological hope was fulfilled in 70 A.D. and that there was no necessary eschatological future for the church astonished me (Perhaps there are different flavors of Preterism, but this is what was being pushed in our youth group.)

The problem was that unlike Jude, the three people teaching this were good people and one especially had had a strong and positive influence on my oldest son. But in working through Jude and seeing when and how we deal with false teaching convinced me that this was a theological error that was too significant to ignore or even deal with gently.

I preached a three-part series on Jude, established the policy, gave the people a chance to talk with me and change their mind, and when they did not, they were released from service.

Was this too much? No, because the eschatological hope of Christ’ return and the effect that has on our lives is so central to the Bible that to remove it leaves us with a faith that does not agree with the faith once for all delivered to the saints. You can’t even take communion, which proclaims the Lord’s death “until he comes” (1 Cor 11:26).

I took no joy in this process, but Jude says that we must at times “fight” for the faith.”


Posted by on October 26, 2010 in Uncategorized


Tags: , ,

%d bloggers like this: