Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.0 AVERAGE
4.0 AVERAGE
I purposed to read this book because I read Dr. Brown referring (with this title or in an article, I don't remember) to something called hyper-grace. Hyper-grace? It pretty clearly wasn't taught by my Southern Baptist church or in any of the books I read, or extolled by any Christian friends I interact with, because (similarly to some other reviewers) I had never heard of it or heard of the major preachers or writers who apparently teach it. Being inquisitive, I immediately wanted to know what hyper-grace is, preferably from perspectives both for and against. So I first read The Naked Gospel by Andrew Farley, whose book I saw suggested at Amazon among the pro-hyper-grace books; then this book.
Hyper-grace, as described by Dr. Brown (with heavy quotation from hyper-grace teachers themselves) and interpreted by me, is fairly easy to understand and avoid, because much of it sounds so absurd as to insult the intelligence of Christians who have received salvation and spent much time reading the Bible. Hyper-grace teaches that under grace, you don't need to (and shouldn't, even) pay attention to the Ten Commandments or confess sins to God after being saved (because all future sins are forgiven, per hyper-). Although, in comparison the hyper-grace teachers don't seem to emphasize ignoring the Ten Commandments, but they particularly insist that confessing sins is wrong--a sin, even.
In short, hyper-grace is simply the opposite extreme from legalism. Had I been in the position of Dr. Brown or some other Bible teacher, I would have regretted needing to dignify hyper-grace with a response. But substantial numbers of Christians have received this teaching and believe it. When I read this, in exasperation I stopped reading the book very closely, ignoring most of the pro-hyper-grave quotations (or even Dr. Brown's deflations of them).
More interesting than the obnoxious tenets of the doctrine itself are the comparisons with legalism and also ancient Christian heresies. Dr. Brown gives a quotation from some hyper-grace teacher fervently opposing confession and offering an alternative prayer that pointedly refuses to confess; Dr. Brown then opines that the prayer sounded "extremely legalistic." (Also patronizing to God, I thought.) I interpreted Dr. Brown's remark as a hint that despite purporting to counter legalism, militant hyper-grace (not necessarily all hyper-grace teaching) may itself be a new, clever repackaging of legalism. Brown outright states that the strongest hyper-grace teaching (again, not necessarily the more subtle forms) approach Gnosticism in their willingness to ignore sin. Also, a few hyper-grace teachers teach that the Old Testament is irrelevant and believers in Christ can ignore it.
Brown devotes a chapter to observing that this approximates the Christian heresy of Marcionism, which rejects the OT and even much of the NT. (I wanted to note that Marcionism otherwise is dead and buried, but it's actually not. I didn't know what it was until Brown explained it; but then I immediately recognized that hyper-grace aside, Marcion's idea that the OT God is not the NT God is common enough among contemporary Bible critics.) Anyway, hyper-grace teachers' rationalization for ignoring much of the NT is that much of Jesus' teachings, and Jesus Himself, were "under the old covenant." Excuse me? ...This represents why I had stopped taking the idea of hyper-grace seriously once I understood it. Jesus under a covenant? He made the covenant, you clowns. It's somewhat like the Pharisees demanding that Jesus observe Sabbath regulations.
And my copy of The Naked Gospel, which I bought because local libraries didn't carry it, is now sitting in a receptacle waiting to be recycled.
Hyper-grace, as described by Dr. Brown (with heavy quotation from hyper-grace teachers themselves) and interpreted by me, is fairly easy to understand and avoid, because much of it sounds so absurd as to insult the intelligence of Christians who have received salvation and spent much time reading the Bible. Hyper-grace teaches that under grace, you don't need to (and shouldn't, even) pay attention to the Ten Commandments or confess sins to God after being saved (because all future sins are forgiven, per hyper-). Although, in comparison the hyper-grace teachers don't seem to emphasize ignoring the Ten Commandments, but they particularly insist that confessing sins is wrong--a sin, even.
In short, hyper-grace is simply the opposite extreme from legalism. Had I been in the position of Dr. Brown or some other Bible teacher, I would have regretted needing to dignify hyper-grace with a response. But substantial numbers of Christians have received this teaching and believe it. When I read this, in exasperation I stopped reading the book very closely, ignoring most of the pro-hyper-grave quotations (or even Dr. Brown's deflations of them).
More interesting than the obnoxious tenets of the doctrine itself are the comparisons with legalism and also ancient Christian heresies. Dr. Brown gives a quotation from some hyper-grace teacher fervently opposing confession and offering an alternative prayer that pointedly refuses to confess; Dr. Brown then opines that the prayer sounded "extremely legalistic." (Also patronizing to God, I thought.) I interpreted Dr. Brown's remark as a hint that despite purporting to counter legalism, militant hyper-grace (not necessarily all hyper-grace teaching) may itself be a new, clever repackaging of legalism. Brown outright states that the strongest hyper-grace teaching (again, not necessarily the more subtle forms) approach Gnosticism in their willingness to ignore sin. Also, a few hyper-grace teachers teach that the Old Testament is irrelevant and believers in Christ can ignore it.
Brown devotes a chapter to observing that this approximates the Christian heresy of Marcionism, which rejects the OT and even much of the NT. (I wanted to note that Marcionism otherwise is dead and buried, but it's actually not. I didn't know what it was until Brown explained it; but then I immediately recognized that hyper-grace aside, Marcion's idea that the OT God is not the NT God is common enough among contemporary Bible critics.) Anyway, hyper-grace teachers' rationalization for ignoring much of the NT is that much of Jesus' teachings, and Jesus Himself, were "under the old covenant." Excuse me? ...This represents why I had stopped taking the idea of hyper-grace seriously once I understood it. Jesus under a covenant? He made the covenant, you clowns. It's somewhat like the Pharisees demanding that Jesus observe Sabbath regulations.
And my copy of The Naked Gospel, which I bought because local libraries didn't carry it, is now sitting in a receptacle waiting to be recycled.