Bridge-Building or Compromising with Heresy? - Michael Brown

In response to my article on my meeting with Pastor Joseph Prince, I was flooded with words of support and encouragement, commending us for getting together. Others were quite critical, posting comments like this: "I am so disappointed! Why are you cozying up to that cheap grace teacher Prince? Why?" (I imagine Pastor Prince heard from critics who were upset that he met with me, perhaps branding me a legalist or worse.)

An old friend wrote to me after reading the article and said, "it's so clear that God has put an anointing and even a mantle on your life to be a bridge-builder." Conversely, another old friend of mine was challenged by a supposed spiritual watchdog website (which I will not publicize here), urging him to confront me on my embrace of allegedly heretical preachers.

The comments on my Facebook page reflected polar perspectives as well, including posts like this, on the positive side: "As a Pentecostal/Charismatic Pastor I have to say that I was blessed by your article on your meeting with Pastor Prince. It was an amazing story of what can happen when we get together and share our hearts with each other." And, conversely, on the negative, posts like this: "The church cannot function properly in the context of the social issues we face today with people like Joseph Prince in its midst. He's a false teacher, and, as Paul did with false teachers in the New Testament, we need to place him outside godly fellowship if or until God grants him true repentance."

So, which is it? Was my meeting with Joseph Prince an act of godly bridge-building, for the glory of Jesus and the edification of His people, or was it an act of compromise?

When I wrote Hyper-Grace, I emphasized "that those I'm differing with in this book are brothers and sisters in the Lord—at least, to the best of my knowledge—and with rare exception, I find much in their writings and messages that thrills my soul and blesses me deeply. Often, as I would be reading their books, I would be shouting amen on one page, only to groan on the next page as a verse was misused or a key truth overlooked or a falsehood stated as if it were true."

When I mentioned Pastor Prince's book Unmerited Favor, I said that, "I found much in his book that was excellent." I also stated that, "He writes like a man who knows the Lord and has experienced God's goodness, like a man who takes delight in God's Word and who knows what it is to worship and love Jesus." And I affirmed that "My heart resonated with much of what he wrote."

So, even while expressing my strong differences with a number of Pastor Prince's positions, I did so recognizing him as a brother who loved the Lord and who had many good things to say. On the flip side, Pastor Prince always recognized me as a brother in the Lord.

This, then, begs the question: How can it possibly be wrong for two well-known leaders to sit face to face, in humility and respect, and discuss their theological differences? How can this be compromise (on either side), especially if we agree on the essentials of the faith?

To be perfectly clear, the last thing I'm looking for is human approval. (If you know me at all, that's self-evident.) Rather, I write this to help other believers (and especially leaders) who have differences to follow our lead and sit face to face for dialogue and discussion.

Perhaps, when you meet with that brother or sister, your views will be closer than you realize, or perhaps you'll discover there are some serious misunderstandings between you. Or maybe one of you can help the other see the light, or maybe one of you needs to be warned about major error.

This much is sure: It is better to come together with humble and open hearts before the Lord, talking face-to-face, than to ignore each other or attack each other from a distance.

If Pastor Prince does have some serious errors in his teaching, I'm now in a position to help him directly. Conversely, if I have some serious errors in my teaching, he's now in a position to help me directly. Again I ask, how can this be wrong before the Lord?

Ironically, some of those who criticized me for meeting with Pastor Prince and posting my article (which, again, was edited by him until we came to agreement on the final text) belong to camps whose leadership refuses to meet with me to have theological dialogue.

Not only so, but some of those attacking me for interacting with Pastor Prince hide behind anonymous websites and identities, so we have no idea who we're dealing with, no idea of whom they're submitted to (or with whom they're connected in the Body), no idea of their own spiritual and moral history.

As one who loves truth and has sought to confront error for decades, I find this anonymous, self-appointed spiritual policing to do more harm than good.

Some readers will say to me, "We have no issue with you getting together with Joseph Prince. We take issue with you embracing him as a brother and proclaiming your areas of agreement. That's where you're deceived."

The fact is that he is a brother, he does love the Lord, he is a serious student of the Word, he does have a burden for the lost, and he truly wants to confront counterfeit grace. (Note carefully that I chose the term "hyper-grace" in writing my book rather than "counterfeit grace," since I never believed that Joseph Prince or most of the leaders I critiqued in my book taught "counterfeit grace." I also chose the term because some of those I identified as hyper-grace preachers embraced the term, saying, "Yes, God's grace is hyper!")

In Hyper-Grace, I wrote, "Without a doubt, many believers have been transformed listening to Joseph Prince and others teach about grace, and it is because much of what they are saying is biblical. I affirm that part of the message wholeheartedly, and I wish I could recommend their material without reserve. The problem, I believe, is that he and other hyper-grace leaders sometimes teach about grace in exaggerated form or, worse still, mixed with serious errors, and that's why there are all too many casualties and divisions among the listeners and readers."

Pastor Prince stressed in our meeting (and in my article) that those who listened to his message and then lived in compromise and complacency had really not heard or understood the message of grace. I stressed my conviction that there were errors in his message that produced the bad fruit, while the biblically-accurate content of the rest of his message produced the good fruit. Which of us is right?

In my view, by emphasizing our very important areas of agreement, it will be more difficult for people to misunderstand either of us, and the door is now open for honest dialogue about key verses and truth, with both us expressing a desire to follow the Lord and His Word wherever that leads. And we both want to expose what we do agree on: the very real dangers of counterfeit grace, some of which is growing in the midst of the hyper-grace camp.

Again I ask: In our heavenly Father's sight, how can that be wrong?

I have no desire to placate my critics, nor do I have any interest in a broad-based, theologically-loose, skin-deep unity. I am running after God's heart and mind with all my might, and I know that truth-based unity is of great importance to Him. That requires honest dialogue and interaction with others in the body with whom we have differences.

Dr. Michael Brown (www.askdrbrown.org) is the host of the nationally syndicated Line of Fire radio program. His latest book is Breaking the Stronghold of Food. Connect with him on Facebook or Twitter.

My Meeting With Pastor Joseph Prince - Michael Brown

On Friday, Jan. 20, while ministering in Singapore, I had the pleasure of spending two and a half hours with Pastor Joseph Prince, delving into the Scriptures in Hebrew and Greek, discussing the points on which we differed and highlighting the points on which we agreed. Without a doubt, the points on which we agreed far outnumbered and outweighed those on which we differed.

When I wrote the book Hyper-Grace: Exposing the Dangers of the Modern Grace Movement, I reached out to the main authors I quoted in the book, asking them for permission to quote their writings if I went beyond the normal publishing guidelines, also asking them if they would like to reconsider any of their positions.

But I did not reach out to Pastor Prince, wrongly assuming he would not be interested in dialoguing with me based on my experience with some previous leaders who refused to interact. I apologized to him for my failure to do so, and he graciously received that apology.

He also wanted to make clear that he strongly differed with the positions of some of the others I quoted in my book, and what grieved him was not that I misrepresented his position when citing him but rather that he was cited side-by-side with some others whose views he strongly rejected.

Additionally, Pastor Prince felt that I have not accurately represented those who follow his Bible teachings regularly and how this has helped many around the world lead disciplined, holy, victorious and Christ-centered lives. He explained that his ministry office regularly receives testimonies from people who have been set free from the destructive bondage of sin, from those who have been liberated from the shackles of pornography and from those set free from severe drug addictions through his preaching of the gospel of grace.

Although I gladly acknowledged those testimonies and said I also heard similar stories from those who follow his teachings (because of the wonderful truths he delivered) I reiterated that I had also heard opposite stories from those who had become complacent and fleshly (because of what I believed were errors in his teaching).

Pastor Prince maintains clearly that those who have become complacent and fleshly do not understand the gospel of grace, and he would be the first to warn them that they are not living under God's grace and to share with them Romans 6:14: "For sin shall not have dominion over you, for you are not under the law but under grace." He believes beyond a shadow of a doubt that people who have an accurate revelation of God's grace have the power to lead holy and victorious Christian lives. For Pastor Prince (and of course, for me as well), grace is not the license to sin; it is the power to break free from the bondage of sin.

Our principal area of disagreement remains his teaching that the moment we are saved, our future sins are already pronounced forgiven (in contrast with the idea that our future sins are paid for but sin is not pronounced forgiven until it is committed and brought to the Lord). But to repeat, our areas of strong and vibrant agreement are much greater than our areas of disagreement, and I want to shout out those areas of agreement to the world.

First, we both agree that it's all about Jesus. He must be central. He must be the focus of our lives. We must draw all people to Him and His atoning work on the cross. Pastor Prince also said that, rather than just say, "Jesus, Jesus" all the time, we should get back to the biblical emphasis: Lord Jesus. And I say Amen to exalting Jesus as Lord.

Second, we both agree that many (if not most) believers often struggle with guilty consciences, failing to realize the depth of God's love for them and failing to understand what Jesus did on their behalf, and so it is essential to ground them in grace. I also shared with Pastor Prince that whenever I teach on the errors of hyper-grace, I begin by extolling God's true grace, seeking first to open us that glorious revelation. And I told him that, at FIRE School of Ministry, in the first semester, we do our best to ground our students in the love of God and in their identity in Jesus.

Third, we both agree that God calls us to holiness, sin is terribly destructive, and true grace will be manifest in a holy life. Prior to our time together, he sent me a compilation of video clips in which he stated plainly that if a man in his congregation claims to be a believer and is living in adultery, he will tell that person plainly he is not living under grace (otherwise sin would not have dominion over him) and needs to repent, drop that other woman and go back to his wife. He said he would also question whether that man was a real believer, since a true believer may fall into sin but will not practice sin.

In his own words (from a forthcoming chapter he wrote for a joint compilation on grace), "If you hear of any 'grace' teaching that tells you it is all right to sin, to live without any regard for the Lord, and that there are no consequences to sin, my advice to you is to flee from that teaching. You have just been exposed to counterfeit grace. Genuine grace teaches that believers in Christ are called to live holy, blameless and above reproach. It teaches that sin always produces destructive consequences and it is only through the power of the gospel of Jesus Christ that one can be set free from the dominion of sin."

He then asks, "So how do we know if someone is truly living under the grace of God?"

His answer: "We look at their lives."

And so, "If someone is leaving his wife for his secretary and tells you he is under 'grace,' tell this person that he is not under grace but under deception! ... Genuine grace doesn't compromise God's holy standards and condone sin; it is the answer that gives people power to live glorious lives zealous for good works."

Fourth, we both agree that sanctification is progressive, meaning the moment we are saved, we are forgiven, declared righteous, and set apart as holy, but now we must grow in holiness. To quote his own words again, "true grace does teach progressive sanctification," and, "As believers, we cannot become more righteous, but we can become more sanctified or holy in terms of how we live our lives. ... The more one grows in grace—the more one is washed again and again by the water of the word of God's grace—the more one grows in sanctification and holiness."

He rejected strongly the idea, put forth by another "grace teacher," that progressive sanctification is a "spiritually murderous lie."

Fifth, we both agree that the Lord corrects us, and even disciplines us, and we both agree that included in the preaching of grace is the calling to "exhort, and rebuke with all authority" (see Titus 2:15). We agree that true born-again believers will feel uncomfortable in their sins (because of their born-again spirits and because of the Holy Spirit) and will have a genuine desire to find a way out of sin. We agree that the only way out of sin is to point people to Jesus.

Pastor Prince believes the primary role of the Holy Spirit is to remind us we are the righteousness of God in Christ (see 2 Cor. 5:21, John 16: 10) and that this understanding is critically important in helping people to turn from sin. While I also believe that this is an important role of the Spirit, I believe His primary role when we sin is to lovingly reprove and correct us, thereby pointing us back to the Father (see Rev. 3:19, 22). Obviously, these two emphases go hand in hand.

Sixth, we both agree that God's Law is glorious and holy and beautiful and that, in Pastor Prince's words, "True grace teaching upholds the moral excellencies, values and virtues espoused by the Ten Commandments." But we understand that, "The Ten Commandments are so perfect in [their] standard and so unbending in [their] holy requirements that Galatians 3:11 states that no man can be justified by the law in the sight of God. Justification before God can only come by faith in Christ."

The Law, as designed by God, exposes our sin and brings us to the end of ourselves, thereby bringing us to the foot of the cross where grace and mercy flow. Not only so, but "when God's people are under grace, not only do they fulfill the letter of the law, but they also exceed it or go the extra mile."

Seventh, we both agree that any form of universalism or any denial of future punishment for the lost must be categorically rejected, and we agree that as recipients of grace, we share a burden for the lost, wanting to reach everyone with this glorious message, also believing in Romans 1:16, to the Jew first.

Eighth, we both agree on the importance of commitment to the local church and the authority of the local church, recognizing how many so-called grace preachers have broken away from both, to the harm of their own souls.

In our meeting, we shared our mutual love for the people of Israel and our desire for them to be saved, we shared our abhorrence of counterfeit grace, and we each lovingly challenged the other to consider certain points before the Lord. And, in the midst of our current differences, we agreed to do our best to expose what we both believed were counterfeit grace errors.

It is my prayer that these errors will continue to be exposed and that God will use us to point His people to His glorious grace that has appeared in Jesus, which "teaches us to say 'no' to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age" (Titus 2:12, NIV). And where I have a blind spot or a misunderstanding of God's Word, may the Lord give me grace to see it, and where my brother has a blind spot or a misunderstanding of God's Word, may the Lord give him grace to see it.

I'm sure Pastor Prince will come under attack for meeting with me and welcoming me warmly as a brother, and I'm sure I will come under attack for doing the same with him. And so, to each of you who find fault with us for having this dialogue in the Lord, I encourage you to pray for us and, more importantly, to ask yourself if you too agree with our points of agreement here. If so, join us in shouting them out to the rest of the church.

May God's true grace be exalted; may counterfeit grace be exposed.

Dr. Michael Brown (www.askdrbrown.org) is the host of the nationally syndicated Line of Fire radio program. His latest book is Breaking the Stronghold of Food. Connect with him on Facebook or Twitter.

Joseph Prince Gets It Right and Wrong on the Day of Atonement - Dr Michael Brown

On October 11th, which marked the beginning of Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement on the biblical calendar, a friend sent me Joseph Prince's Daily Grace e-devotional entitled, "ONLY CHRIST'S ATONEMENT SATISFIES GOD."

In his email message, Pastor Prince rightly pointed us to the shed blood of the Messiah for our atonement, stating, "Because of His sacrifice, all our sins have already been perfectly atoned for. That is why, should we sin, we know that 'we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous'. And He Himself is the propitiation for our sins."

Pastor Prince also emphasized that it is not our acts of self-mortification that bring us forgiveness – not whipping ourselves or beating ourselves or fasting for days or praying for hours — but rather what Jesus did on our behalf.

He writes, "My friend, there is no need to climb the Himalayas or whip your back bloody to atone for your sins. No amount of self-punishment or crying can atone for them. Your sins have already been punished fully in the body of Jesus. Only His finished work satisfies God."

This is a life-giving, life-transforming message, and it is one that can deliver us from a legalistic, work-righteousness, earn-your-salvation mentality that plagues many believers.

We are saved by Jesus' righteousness, not our own righteousness! May we never forget that as long as we live.

Unfortunately, as is common with the hyper-grace message, there is a mixture of beautiful truth with potentially dangerous error.

Citing 1 John 2:1-2, Pastor Prince writes, "Now, it does not say that if anyone repents, we have an Advocate with the Father. It says that if anyone sins, we have an Advocate with the Father. The moment a child of God sins, straightaway, his Advocate, Jesus Christ, goes into action to pray for and protect him."

Does that mean, then, that I can continue in sin without consequence? Does that mean that, the more I rebel and the more I turn away from God, the more Jesus forgives me?

You might say, "But that's not the point Pastor Prince was making. He's teaching believers not to get caught up in fleshly efforts of 'repentance' and rather to find forgiveness in the cross."

Of course, I understand that, and I applaud that. Shout that from the rooftops, Pastor Prince. (I know you already do.)

But since he never once says in the article that it's important that we turn from sin to be in right relationship with God (something taught throughout the entire New Testament), and since he wrongly defines repentance (more on that in a moment), how is someone to know that it's important that we do not continue in sin?

Perhaps Pastor Prince could have added in even one line to the effect?

After all, why quote 1 John 2:1-2 without also quoting the next two verses? John continued, "And by this we know that we have come to know him, if we keep his commandments. Whoever says 'I know him' but does not keep his commandments is a liar, and the truth is not in him" (1 John 2:3-4). Would this undermine one of Pastor Prince's points?

And how about some of these other verses from 1 John? Would the reader of Pastor Prince's e-devotional realize that this, too, was John's message?

1. If we say we have fellowship with him while we walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth (1 John 1:6).

2. Whoever says he is in the light and hates his brother is still in darkness. (1 John 2:9)

3. Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness. You know that he appeared in order to take away sins, and in him there is no sin. No one who abides in him keeps on sinning; no one who keeps on sinning has either seen him or known him (1 John 3:4-6).

4. Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil. No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God's seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God. (1 John 3:8-9).

5. Whoever keeps his commandments abides in God, and God in him (1 John 3:24a).

6. By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and obey his commandments. For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments. And his commandments are not burdensome (1 John 5:2-3).

Yes, it is absolutely true that Jesus paid for our sins and our atonement is found in Him alone. And it is equally true that He saves us out of sin, calls us out of sin, and as our Lord and King, commands us and empowers us to turn from sin.

That is also an essential part of the gospel message, and in a devotional that misrepresents repentance and states that, "The moment a child of God sins, straightaway, his Advocate, Jesus Christ, goes into action to pray for and protect him," this is a potentially fatal omission.

With regard, then, to repentance, Pastor Prince rightly states that, "Bible repentance is not this idea of hitting or punishing yourself to atone for your sins." But he wrongly states that, "The word 'repentance' is metanoia in the Greek, which means to change one's mind."

Not so (although this a very common error).

"Repentance" in the Bible means a change of mind, heart, and direction. It means the recognition that you are heading the wrong way on the highway, then making a complete about face — with God's help and grace — and heading in a brand new direction. But if you recognize you're heading in the wrong direction — in other words, you have a change of mind — but you don't turn around, you have not repented in the biblical sense of the word.

And how important is repentance for the believer?

According to Jesus, very important.

That's why, five separate times, he told congregations in Asia Minor (to paraphrase), "If you want to be in right relationship with Me, repent and change your ways" (see Rev 2:5, 16, 21-22; 3:3, 19).

To quote the Lord's own words, "Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline, so be zealous and repent. Behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in to him and eat with him, and he with me" (Rev. 3:19-20).

And so, as we celebrate the atonement we enjoy in Jesus the Messiah, let us always remember that He sets us free from sin, not to sin, and that forgiveness and repentance go hand in hand.

So, we look to the cross, where our sins were paid for in full, and, empowered by the Spirit of God, we confess our sins (see 1 John 1:9, which is primarily written to believers, not the lost), we renounce those sins, and being washed and cleansed by His blood, we turn away from those sins.

As expressed so powerfully by Peter, "He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed. For you were straying like sheep, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls" (1 Pet. 2:24-25).

That is the message of atonement.

The Wrath of God Is Coming

MICHAEL BROWN



The Bible speaks of the day in which Jesus will "tread the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God the Almighty" (Rev. 19:15), a day when He will come "in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus" (2 Thess. 1:8).

Almost all the writers of the New Testament spoke of this day when the wrath of God would be poured out on the earth. Why is it that so few of us speak about it today? Why aren't we sounding the alarm?

When Paul exhorted believers to live holy lives and to abstain from sin, he reminded them that wrath was coming on the disobedient and ungodly.

To the Ephesians he wrote, "Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience. Therefore do not become partners with them" (Eph. 5:6-7).

To the Colossians he wrote, "Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry. On account of these the wrath of God is coming" (Col. 3:5-6).

Did Paul know something we don't know? Was there a reason he wanted to remind the godly about the fate of the ungodly? Did he feel it would help us not play games with sin?

Paul actually wrote about God's wrath one-fourth as many times as he wrote about God's grace. Do we follow his lead?

In his short little book, Judah (Jude) found it important to quote this prophecy from Enoch, "Behold, the Lord comes with ten thousands of his holy ones, to execute judgment on all and to convict all the ungodly of all their deeds of ungodliness that they have committed in such an ungodly way, and of all the harsh things that ungodly sinners have spoken against him" (Jude 1:14-15).

Why did he emphasize this? Why not just speak about the love of God (which he does as well; see v. 21)? Why remind the righteous about the coming judgments on the unrighteous?

Some teachers today try to downplay this theme by claiming that the verses that speak of Jesus coming in flaming fire and wrath referred to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. Are they right?

Certainly, Jesus did warn about the coming destruction of Jerusalem both directly and in parables (see, for example, Matt. 23:37-39; Luke 19:42-44; Matt. 21:33-45).

But it is the height of absurdity to reinterpret all these wrath-related Scriptures to fit that singular event, especially in light of Paul's frequent references to the coming wrath, as if he was saying to believers in Ephesus, "Don't play games with sin, because Jerusalem will soon be destroyed." Hardly!

Worse still is the tendency in some hyper-grace circles to eliminate the wrath of God by simply removing it from the Scriptures, as the Mirror Bible does at times.

As I pointed out in my book Hyper-Grace: Exposing the Dangers of the Modern Grace Message, in the ESV, Romans 1:17 reads: "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth." In the Mirror translation, it becomes: "The righteousness of God that is endorsed in the heavens is in such contrast to the counterfeit earthly reference that blindfolds people in their own unrighteousness." What happened to God's wrath?

Or consider Colossians 3:6, which we quoted earlier: "On account of these the wrath of God is coming." In the Mirror translation, it becomes, "These distorted expressions are in total contradiction to God's design and desire for your life." Yes, "wrath" has completely disappeared once again!

But most teachers and preachers today have not gone so far as to eliminate God's wrath from their Bibles or to interpret it away. They simply ignore it. Why?

Revelation 6 presents this shattering, overwhelming account: "Then the kings of the earth and the great ones and the generals and the rich and the powerful, and everyone, slave and free, hid themselves in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains, calling to the mountains and rocks, 'Fall on us and hide us from the face of him who is seated on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb, for the great day of their wrath has come, and who can stand?'" (vv. 15-17)

Do we just ignore this because Revelation is hard to understand? Shouldn't this rather shake us to the core because, as surely as God is God, His wrath will one day be poured out on a sinful and rebellious world?

Peter, like Paul, told us that this should affect the way we live today.

First, he describes what is coming: "But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a roar, and the heavenly bodies will be burned up and dissolved, and the earth and the works that are done on it will be exposed."

Then he makes application: "Since all these things are thus to be dissolved, what sort of people ought you to be in lives of holiness and godliness, waiting for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be set on fire and dissolved, and the heavenly bodies will melt as they burn!"

And he adds this promise: "But according to his promise we are waiting for new heavens and a new earth in which righteousness dwells. Therefore, beloved, since you are waiting for these, be diligent to be found by him without spot or blemish, and at peace" (2 Pet. 3:10-14).

The wrath of God is coming, and a new heaven and earth are coming.

How then should we live, and what then should we preach?

Michael Brown is the author of Can You Be Gay and Christian? Responding With Love and Truth to Questions About Homosexuality and host of the nationally syndicated talk radio show The Line of Fire on the Salem Radio Network. He is also president of FIRE School of Ministry and director of the Coalition of Conscience. Follow him at AskDrBrown on Facebook or at @drmichaellbrown on Twitter.