The Errors Of HyperGrace Part 2

In Part 1, the Introduction to the Errors of Hypergrace Teachings, we covered the basics of some of the beliefs of some within the movement. We (at Redeeming Moments) are Grace-based Believers. We have no desire to accuse any of our brethren, but to clarify some issues with some of the teachings that we don’t see as Biblical. Error doesn’t mix with Truth. We also do not align with types like Michael Brown, who wrote a book on HyperGrace (an Arminian, and legalist himself). Nor do we hold with those who take it as a badge of honor are teaching some of these things. This is an identifiable doctrine with error that I believe will harm others (and already has). I will stress again, not all believe the same thing, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t deal with the doctrine itself.

Side note: As always, I try to link most all references. Please always ‘prove all things’ and ‘search the Scriptures’, for me or anyone else. His Word should speak, not us.

Are you insulting Grace-based believers?

As one friend mentioned, hyper is often like a curse word or insult towards those of us who understand God’s grace is free and abundant. Enemies of the cross often insult us with these terms. It’s meant to be derogatory. They ran with the term themselves, and say Hyper is huper in the Greek, so therefore they believe it is appropriate. As said before, we know He has given us abundant, hyper, mega Grace. Just not the kind they teach in their doctrine.

His gift of salvation (eternal life) is free, without strings. You cannot add works before, during or after salvation in attaining or keeping everlasting life. Salvation is a free gift, not of works, lest any man/woman or child, should boast (Romans 5:15-21; 6:23; Eph 2:8-9; Rom 4:1-6; 11:6; Ps 94:4)


These points of belief within certain hypergrace movements are gleaned from articles and statements by those who claim these teachings, (although they are not at all consistent all the way through). The point would be, prove/test all things (by that which is good) – 1 Thess 5:21; 1 John 4:1. 

These are some doctrinal points that some of them believe. As I said, it’s a wide range of error with not a lot of consistency. But I put the ones up front, that I believe most adhere to:

  • They deny progressive/practical or experiential sanctification. People like YouTuber David Benjamin say, (Comment: One of those that called seasoned Grace pastors like Tom Cucuzza and Yankee Arnold, ‘Galatianizers’).

there’s no such thing as progressive sanctification, Sanctification is a person not a thing…”

Read more about what Galatianism is on

  • Regarding those of us who teach practical sanctification they say: They mean ‘incrementally getting better at managing your behavior’, with the possibility of earning a blessing or a reward and avoiding punishment.”

Comment: You don’t need to know the ‘term’ progressive sanctification, in order to understand the process of growth in a believer’s life. We don’t look at it ‘quite’ the way they stated above. We believe we cooperate to abide in the Vine (for apart from Him we can do nothing!). And we are to continue in His Word, and in so doing, we become disciples indeed. And we will know the truth and the truth sets us free (Jn 8:31-32; 15:4-5). And yes, for some more than others (like me), it’s a moment-by-moment victory as I look to Him. Otherwise, I’m Peter, walking on water one minute, and sinking as soon as I realize what’s going on.

Who gets the glory when we keep our eyes on Him? Who is doing the work in us? But are we not to cooperate? To follow after Him? If we choose the good part, it is the one needed thing, that will never be taken from us (Luke 10:38-42).

We believe Jesus does that sanctifying (practical) work in us as we do as He asks in His Word which does so much to instruct us and give us wisdom. We also believe in rewards, as the Bible teaches that. And running a race. And fighting the good fight of faith. We also believe in God’s chastening and discipline for His children. Again, because the Word teaches this, but not to gain eternal life.

I think maybe some are thrown seeing a one-time sanctification in some places, so they seem to ignore the other Scriptures where clearly, we see another kind of sanctification. Or maybe they need to learn it’s a word just like salvation, where we need to ask, “what kind of sanctification?” — just as we should ask, “what kind of saving/deliverance is spoken of?” 

One thing they do not ask but should is, “does this verse/passage speak to our position, or our experience?” We see experiential sanctification as learning how to mature/grow/walk in the Spirit more often as we are instructed in His Word and actually ‘take heed’ to it.

  • As stated above, they do not feel you can become any more sanctified than you are today. They generally cite Heb 10:10-14 (which speaks to our positional sanctification. It’s not hard to see other passages that speak to eternal/positional vs. practical/experiential/progressive sanctifying. David Benjamin represents our position as. “God did His part and now I need to do mine.” Comment: Absolutely not. From apart from Christ, we can do nothing. However there are all sorts of instructions we are to take heed to, and we do all by abiding in Him.


  • Deny confession/admission of sin is for believers. There are varying takes within their group on 1 John 1:9 on whether confessing sin is spoken to gnostics for salvation, or other reasons. Basically they deny believers need to confess (agree with/admit) our sin to God. James 5:16 has us confessing to each other when we sin against others, why wouldn’t we do the same with Him? Some are very subtle, as one said, “Jesus is not forgiving you by sin daily, His forgiveness was once for all.” 

Comment: We agree yet disagree. His forgiveness for sin’s eternal penalty (death) is certainly done. We are perfected forever in His sight. But there is also practical forgiveness for fellowship and our joy (and others).

A former friend started believing this way and started a ‘grace’ group in which they taught this. He has many followers and was very easily angered if you disagreed with him. 1 John 1:9 was the passage we disagreed on.

The ‘grace’ websites the admins kept repeatedly posting, (to prove their point), had all sorts of error. One had the error of Universalism, another one had ‘namaste’ as its sign-off on the articles. I explained to him what it meant. They could not have a discussion back and forth, but needed to either copy/paste another’s words or link. They were angered instead of just being thankful that someone kept them from error. At the least, if you are secure in your position, there is no need to be angry. I had to leave because they were admins who were repeatedly unable to be discerning, or to vet before they shared with others. Much slandering was done by him more than once regarding me. I bring this up, not because I am bothered by it or don’t actually forgive him. I’ll explain why in the next paragraph which needs to be stand alone.

Because someone’s manner of life, doctrine, love, patience, longsuffering, aptness to teach, gentleness, lack of striving all matter (a paraphrased combo of 2 Tim 3:10-11; and 2 Tim 2:23-26). It is very important to deciding whether you should listen to their teaching or not. If they are verbally abusive, (a railer) or a slanderer and false accuser, should you listen to them? Do they stand the test of all that?

More Hypergrace doctrine

  • Hypergrace believers only see the book of 1 John as a test of whether you are believers or a non-believer (Just like the Calvinists/lordshippers do). They do not see it (as we do), as a test of whether believers are walking in fellowship/abiding, walking in the Light, or walking in the Spirit vs. walking in darkness. (Listen to this sermon on why 1 John was written)


  • They often are hyperdispensationalists (Also sometimes called Mid-Acts or Pauline — although not all agree with hypergrace). Some see Hebrews through Revelation as being spoken to Jews and only Paul’s epistles for the church. David Benjamin does not see it that way, he accepts Hebrews (not sure which other books) are for the church, although he often phrases things ‘Paul said’, and recommends Miles Stanford (Pauline dispensationalist). So unclear where he stands, as he adheres to some tenants of Pauline dispensationalism and breaks out in others.


  • They believe the King James Translation is the perfect preserved Bible (not the original manuscripts).


  • There is no priesthood within the church Since they believe Peter did not write to the church, they don’t accept his words regarding us being a Royal Priesthood (1 Pet 2:9), nor Kings and Priests to our God (Rev 1:6; 5:10), which I believe refers to the order of Melchizedek, the only King and Priest except Jesus. 


  • They say new hearts are for Israel only, they don’t see it as the same as the new creation. But most of that error can be seen on the Hyperdispensational Article.


  • Proof of whether you’ve ‘died to the law’, is you must NOT feel conviction for sin — if so, you’re still living by law (under the ministry of condemnation). Yes, you heard me right. They see sorrow for sin as the ‘ministry of condemnation’. They might want to read 2 Cor 2:1-7; 7:1-11.

This is the issue with not understanding progressive or practical/experiential sanctification. When you know your position in Christ, you understand you are not under condemnation, nor will come into judgment (John 5:24). But that does not mean in this lifetime we do not feel it. We can also experience temporal judgment here on earth for sin.

Tell me those of you who desire to be under the law, do you not hear the Law?

  • They teach Paul taught a different gospel than Peter, James, & John (along with whoever the author was of Hebrews). But Paul said he preached the same gospel which was promised before time by the Prophets (Romans 1:1-4). He also said he preached the same gospel as did >those who were before him< in the churches of Judea. The same gospel Paul >tried to destroy, the same church Paul persecuted (Gal 1:22-24). They’re just wrong, there is too much clear Scripture.



  • They do not see the New Covenant as the Everlasting/Eternal Covenant.


  • Hypergrace say those who speak of sanctification as ongoing, are lawkeepers or Galatianizers – As seems to be their pattern, they have slandered others, like Pastor Tom Cucuzza of, and Pastor Yankee Arnold of Again, we believe that no one is saved by works of the law (Gal 2:16; 3:10-13; Rom 10:4), yet we see commandments made by both the disciples and our Lord Jesus Christ. And because He loved us, we want to follow Him and also His commandments (and they are not grievous).



  • They accuse Grace-based/Free Grace believers of teaching false gospels


  • They either Deny Rewards or minimize them, saying Christ is our reward, they aren’t ‘greedy’ and they don’t need anything else from him. They again say we are ‘working’ for our rewards for ‘selfish gain’. We believe what is done by walking in His Spirit is the good that remains.


  • The Bema Seat is for the apostles and their ministries only. You read that right. One teacher explained how the foundation of 1 Cor 3, is found in 2 Cor 5:7-10, 2 Cor 4:8-12 and, again, only applies to the apostles and the workers and their ministries. BUT, the context of 1 Corinthians 3 is clear (if one will ask WHO is being spoken to). Firstly, it is to the entire church of Corinth. Speaking to the carnality they were experiencing. Let me share some of the verses from that chapter to the church — which is the temple of God, and let’s see if it is just to the apostles.

Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; every man’s work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is.  If any man’s work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.  If any man’s work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.  Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are. Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you (Who? The church first addressed), seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. 1 Cor 3:12-18

To the women on this teacher’s page who lauded him for ‘making this passage so clear’;

Dear friend, you need to be a Berean. You desperately need to look up His Word and read context and see if what this man is saying lines up with Scripture. It will save you and others so much trouble. We are to take heed to the doctrine (1 Tim 4:16). Praying for you in all sincerity.

  • Some of them do not think the flesh sins, (they explain because they are not under the law). Consequently, nothing they do wrong in the flesh is ‘sin’, since sin is the transgression of the law. Here is the irony. They actually argue a bit like the gnostics.The law was added because of sin, even though sin was already present in the world. Sin has been a problem since Adam. Adam and Eve sinned because they rebelled against what God told them not to do. Jesus also has commandments in the New Covenant/Testament, and His Word says they are not grievous to keep. We are supposed to put Adulterers, railers (verbal abusers), drunks (who are holding onto their sin), out of the church (fellowship with us). Paul said to flee fornication, (speaking of the adulterer in the church in 1 Cor 5. He said the one that commits fornication sins against >his own body – 1 Cor 6:18).

One hypergrace teacher said this in response to someone who said she still sinned in her flesh:

I strongly disagree, as does God’s word, that the flesh is capable of sinning. In order for someone to have sinned, there must be a conviction. God does not convict the “flesh” of sin, or the soul or the spirit. You cannot say “As if I never sinned” and also say “I still sin”. We cannot claim that the spirit is not under Law, but the flesh is under Law. Sin is lawlessness. You must violate Law in order to have a conviction.”

Comment: We see throughout His Word, that the believer’s flesh is most definitely capable of sinning. And since His Word is truth, it says we sin, so we sin… We realize we are not under any eternal consequences of breaking the law. Christ was our perfect Sacrifice — sin is not imputed to us (Rom 4:1-6). Sin was in the world before the law. And Adam sinned. Believers sin, see next point.


  • Deny the Holy Spirit will ever convict/convince believers of sin. Initially He convicted the entire world of sin (John 16:7-11), righteousness, and judgment. They say He only convinces us of righteousness (Comment: That is Christ’s, as He went to the Father). But Hebrews 12:5-8 is clear God convicts/rebukes/reproves/chastises us as His children and Revelation 3:19 testifies of the same for those He loves. The word or similar words used throughout the epistles. Evil deeds are reproved/convicted of (Eph 5:11-13). Sin is reproved/rebuked/convicted of and that, publicly before all (1 Tim 5:20). The Word is used to do the same (2 Tim 4:1-5), to keep believers in sound doctrine as well as rebuking them sharply so they may be ‘sound in the faith’ (Titus 1:13). 

But the Spirit is the Spirit of truth. He guides us into truth which means He lets us know when something we are doing is not of the truth — which is sin (John 14:17; 15:26; 16:13).

  • They deny someone ‘born of God’ can sin or walk in darkness (I guess that’s not the same as born again?)

       Comment: Wrong, someone who is born of God CAN:

I could go on, there are hundreds of admonitions to believers on how to walk worthily. But you get the idea.

  • They Deny believers are sinners – saying Paul was speaking in the past tense when he said,

This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am  1 Tim 1:15.

1 John 1:10 says we make God a liar by saying we have no sin. And 1 John 1:8 says they are deceived if they say they have no sin.

This is one Hypergrace teacher’s logic: “How can anyone, who has been cleansed of all sin, say “I have sin”?”

My Comment: Because John and the apostles said so, through the inspiration of the Spirit. As above, Paul said sinners, of whom I AM chief. The Greek parsing shows the verb is long present tense. Paul is not speaking in the past tense. We are not under the law. God does not impute sin to believers — this is our ‘position’ in Christ. But we can ‘continue in sin’ — but God forbid, we should not (Rom 6:1,15). We need to ‘reckon ourselves dead to it’ (Rom 6:11). That means we are dead to the law, married to another, serving in newness of spirit, not the letter of the law (Rom 7:4-6). We are freed from sin (the wages), but that we should not serve sin (Rom 6:6-7). We should not let sin reign in our body, nor obey its lusts, nor yield our members to sin (Rom 6:12-13). We are not under the law, (Rom 10:4), so we no longer under the dominion of sin since we are under grace (Rom 6:14), Christ condemned sin in the flesh (Rom 8:3). The sting of death is sin (sin causes death), and the strength of sin is found in the law, which is why it doesn’t have the same hold over us as it did before (1 Cor 15:54-58).

Believers are Not of This World

We are no longer of this world. We’ve already been delivered out of darkness into His Kingdom (Col 1:13). We know this has to do with our position, as practically speaking, we are here on earth until the day of redemption (even though seated in the heavenlies). But we still live and walk in this world, that is our practice. 

In Romans 7, we see that when we were under the law (its judicial penalty), those restrictions made us want to sin more. But the Law is good. It actually makes us aware of sin, right and wrong. Knowing what sin is and knowing our Savior more through time in His Word and prayer, makes it easier to avoid those things. Look at Rom 7:13. You’ll see ‘that which is good’ (the law), makes us realize how exceedingly sinful things are in His sight. I became far more aware of the grievousness of my past sins as I’ve gotten to know Him in His Word. This knowledge made me far more thankful for all He has forgiven me for (as time in His Word & His Spirit teaches me).

  • One man said if we confess our sins, in essence we’re denying Jesus was the propitiation for our sins and we are ‘an antichrist’. He says it’s not ‘confessing sin’ (according to him), he says 1 John 1:9’s meaning is ‘confessing that you have an advocate with the Father’. They are very clever in the way they twist the meaning. He is the same who says 1 John 1 is for non-believers and 1 John 2 for believers.


  • Like Lordship teachers, they deny Romans 7:15-25 speaks in the present tense – They say Paul would not cry out to be delivered from this body of death since he already has been delivered. Positionally yes, we have been delivered. However, I believe it is pretty apparent that practically speaking, none of us will be delivered from this physical body of death until the day of redemption of our corrupted body. (Eph 4:30; Rom 8:23; 1 Cor 15:50-58)

Paul not only said he sinned in Romans 7, but that he practiced it (prasso).

For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do (practice) Rom 7:19.

Who do they think Paul was talking about when he said, ‘what, shall WE sin that grace might abound?’ It was written to believers regarding our soul warring against our flesh as his fellow laborer Peter spoke of, as well as his other laborer in the same gospel, James in 4:1. I don’t think we are to place our identity as ‘sinners’, but as saints who recognize we still sin. That we still have evil present within us (Rom 7:21-25), and we will until we die or are translated at the rapture. James also said something similar, when he instructed believers to submit to God, resist the devil, cleanse their hands (and called them double minded James 4:5-8). 

  • They deny we can please God any more than the first moment we believed. But what does the Bible say?

Furthermore then we beseech you, brethren, and exhort you by the Lord Jesus, that as ye have received of us how ye ought to walk and to please God, so >>ye would abound more and more. 1 Thess 4:1


  • They see the book of 1 John with a hodgepodge of beliefs – I marveled the other day seeing several different viewpoints with three people who claim the same belief system. All agreed and loved each other’s posts with no disagreement about what the other said. Yet…they offered all these contradictory beliefs at the same time, that:
    • 1 John 1 is for non-believers, but 1 John 2 suddenly switches to believers.   (Comment: There were no chapters and verses, this was a letter.)
    • 1 John 1 is for believers to identify the tares among them             (Comment: Matthew 13 said to leave the tares, He would take care of them at the harvest)
    • 1 John is to identify believers vs. non-believers proven by whether they are walking in light or darkness
    • 1 John is to gnostics and believers throughout
    • Confessing sins is for non-believers to become believers               (Comment: then we’d be adding law to justification – Num 5:6-7) 
  • Walking in light, or walking in darkness, is not about how believers should walk, but about identifying whether someone is a believer or nonbeliever. They state a believer cannot ever walk in darkness.

Hypergrace teacher: “There is no verse in the Bible that declares that believers can walk in darkness. Not a single one. Those who have been told that have been lied to.

Comment: Believers would not be instructed to cast off the works of darkness, if they couldn’t actually walk in darkness.

The night is far spent, the day is at hand: let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and let us put on the armour of light. Let us walk honestly, as in the day; not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and wantonness, not in strife and envying. Rom 13:12-13

See also the warning for believers to not have communion or fellowship with darkness (2 Cor 6:14, Eph 5:11. Or 1 Jn 1:6, If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not the truth. Or 1 Jn 2:11 — the one that hates his brother is walking in darkness. I believe this is speaking of a spiritual brother in context. Romans 14:14-15 says if you grieve your brother over food, you are not walking in love (hate). Believers can walk in the lust of the flesh (Gal 5:16), that is most definitely darkness.


  • Deny chastisement or correction/discipline from Him for the child of God. Oddly, not all do this, again, they do not have consistent teachings. (They use inflammatory wording like ‘beatings’ and say ‘it’s sick’ or ‘child abuse’). But we do see discipline (sometimes serious) in 1 Cor 11:30-32; Heb 12:5-11; Rev 3:19; Job 5:17, Proverbs 3:11; 1 Pet 1:6; 1 Cor 5:5; 1 Tim 1:20. They seem to miss the discipline spoken to the churches in Revelation 2-3, likely because most deny Revelation is for the Gentile church, but again for Jews. A subtle reverse form of replacement theology.


  • They say we don’t repent after we believe since everything was already forgiven. But we see in 2 Corinthians 7, the believers there most definitively repented.
  • They teach we do not need to feel sorry for sin, as it was already forgiven.

Comment: I think on Paul chastising the church at Corinth (1 Cor 5) for not being sorry for what was going on with the incestuous adulterer. Paul was thankful when he made them sorry, because it made them clear themselves in the matter. Being sorry is not bad thing when we do wrong.

  • Some are Universalists.
  • Some promote Gay lifestyles or alternative lifestyles within the church. This is not to say that we are saying people cannot sin in these areas and be saved. But they will have to deal with His chastening if they are.
  • They say the Churches in Revelation are not the same as ‘the church’. Because remember, the Holy Spirit doesn’t convict believers of sin (according to their hypergrace teachings).
  • Some deny James and Paul spoke the same gospel – somehow Paul was ‘grace rest’ and James didn’t get it. They say book of James was grace plus works because he chastised believers for behaving badly with respect to persons. And because he was in error momentarily in Galatians (as was Peter), they use this to say they did not preach the same gospel. They forget about the council in Acts 15 it seems.

I wish they would just stop listening to David Benjamin et al. for a couple of weeks. Pray and ask the Lord to teach them in His Word (Pr 22:17-21). Maybe read and study through Acts, see how all the disciples presented the gospel and everyone’s method of being purified (the same). Read through John, Romans again, and definitely Galatians. Identify the difference between flesh and blood and the new creation in us. See my article on Feed that new man.  Get our necessary food (Job 23:12; Is 55:10-11), and the old man gets weak.


  • Speaking of which, they do not believe we are disciples. That is somehow a bad wordAs usual with hyperdividers they misconstrue certain words and twist Scriptures that are difficult for them to understand. Disciple simply means learner or student, to study. Their favorite verse on rightly dividing says study (2 Tim 2:15). And same with ‘follow’. We follow the apostles as they follow Christ.


  • They do not believe the old man is present with us since he was ‘crucified with Christ’ (Rom 6:5-7). He doesn’t exist” (as one emphatically said).

Comment: We wouldn’t be instructed to ‘put off’ the old man (Eph 4:22; Col 3:9) if we did not have him still in our lives. We are reminded of the crucifixion in dying to self, so we should not henceforth serve sin. (We are freed from it — the eternal penalty). If the old man is gone, who is dying to self, or crucifying the flesh with its passions? (Luke 9:23; 1 Cor 15:31; Gal 5:24)


  • Some deny any of Jesus’s words before His death have any applicability to the church and of leave out the Old Testament too. You really won’t see them using Scripture from the O.T. It’s a shame, there is so much wisdom there, and we need the whole counsel of God. And who do they think died for them? And who do they think Paul was following? 
  • Some deny that you can fall from Grace – has to be spoken to non-believers/law-keepers only. It makes sense since they also deny we can have less intimate fellowship with the Father.
  • Deny we can grieve the Spirit (Eph 4:30). You wonder how they explain this? They believe being ‘filled with the Spirit’ is only a one-time event that happens only when we believe. So only non-believers can grieve the Spirit. (And no, I am not speaking of a ‘second blessing’ or that we have any less of the Spirit.)
  • That we can’t be any more blessed than when we first believed. All throughout His Word, we are shown when we follow after the right way, we are blessed. Christians who are disobedient are hurting themselves, God’s name, and our testimony (or a demonstration of a working faith in front of others). The first thing that came to mind when I heard that was Revelation 1:3 and James 1:25.
  • Like Calvinists/Lordshippers*, they deny the two natures. They miss verses telling us to put off the old man. Or speak of the inner man. Or the flesh warring with our soul. (I recommend this series on Understanding the Two Natures).
  • They accuse others of not being saved if they have not ‘matured’ to their understanding that we don’t sin. Along the similar accusatory manner of lordship teachers. Once again, I marveled seeing some say that they sinned while the teacher tsk tsked that he had let her down, (she had not yet reached his ‘understanding’.)


  • Also interesting, they speak of not fruit-inspecting, yet have a list of ‘marks of maturity’ (which has to do with coming to their understanding of ‘rest’ in some cases.) And of course you know from what I wrote in Part 1 of their accusing others of not being saved (fruit-inspecting).


  • Pursuing Righteousness: In 1 and 2 Timothy, pursuing righteousness is used with a ‘man of God’ or believer. Hypergrace reframes the plain meaning and says it means ‘the need to pursue the understanding of Christ’s righteousness’. In both instances it is used, pursuing righteousness (or the right way), is contrasted to believers fleeing sinful things. 
  • They deny different kinds of justification. For example, we are justified when we believe on Jesus and His work. That is, we are declared righteous. They don’t understand James 2 as a justification before men (demonstration of faith) but see it as a different gospel for the Jews (faith + works). Oddly, very similar to Roman Catholicism, along with lordship doctrine. Again, justification is a word. What kind of justification?


  • They identify believers as ‘carnally minded’ who ‘work for rewards’ or ‘run the race’. They say “their focus is on their works,” therefore they are carnally minded. They try to label them as being justified by works by emphasizing the word ‘work’. This is a straw man argument or mischaracterization of others.
  • They call confessing or admitting sin; ‘sin consciousness’. They elaborate that this brings a lack of faith or understanding of what Christ has done. In many ways I agree with them about focusing on sin. We should not dwell on sin, we are to reckon ourselves dead to it, instead of letting it rule in our lives (Rom 6:11-13). But, when we are aware of sin, we need to keep short accounts with God, and others we have sinned against.


  • They again use the strawman that “we are ‘striving’ to cease from sin”. We see it obedience to His Word and fleeing sin, not ‘striving to cease’. We want to take heed to not making provision for the flesh. We understand it as keeping short accounts with the Lord when we recognize sin, or He brings it to mind. As I’m reading in His Word and see something that I may not be doing as well, I try to admit it to Him (confess it). I usually ask Him to help me do better in that area. To show me when I’m not, and I leave it with Him, understanding and trusting His faithfulness, and I move on. Likewise, we should do the same with other believers we’ve wronged or who have wronged us if it is possible (if they will allow it).

One hypergrace believer commented:

“The meat of the word is not striving to cease from sin. It is not getting busy. It is learning about Christ in you the hope of glory. It is learning what Gal. 2:20 really means… All the mystery revealed to Paul is the meat of the word. It was hidden in the Old Testament. It was beginning to be revealed by Jesus in John 17. And Paul revealed it in his epistles. We may not fully understand it all but we believe it by faith.”

Comment: Ironically, after Paul spoke of feeding the Corinthians with milk vs. being able to feed them with meat (1 Cor 1:10-17; 3:1-13), it was because they were carnal and doing the very thing the hypergrace/hyperdispensational movement is doing. They called themselves after Paul, Apollos, or Cephas. But Paul made it clear, it was Christ who was crucified for them all. He wanted no importance placed on himself, yet they do this very thing.

  • They have a bizarre understanding of the ‘meat of His Word’. But it short, to them, it means to agree with what they’re teaching.

The ‘meat of His Word‘ is found in the depth of understanding in the entire counsel of His Word. Discerning the difference between good and evil because their senses have been exercised by studying (with the right approval in mind), searching, loving and treasuring His Word (Acts 20:26-27; Heb 5:12-14; 2 Tim 2:15; Acts 17:11; Ps 119:140,162).

This is where it is important to know and love His Word. To place it ahead of men’s words. And to search it to see if what someone is saying is true.

Part 3 will be next, Lord willing.


6 Responses to “The Errors Of HyperGrace Part 2

  • Lois Tart
    1 year ago

    I really appreciate this series. Now I have something to compare with what they teach.

    • I was just thinking of you last night Lois and came to visit your page. I appreciate you taking the time to read. This was a hard one for me as a friend (more than one) I love is caught up in it, and teaching others about it. As I watch them become more and more fleshly in their responses to others, I marvel they can’t see. So we pray, share the Word, contrast what they say to what His Word says and pray some will be delivered from the error.

      thanks again Lois! God bless you and your family.

  • So just to get clarification after reading this, is your description of a Hyper Grace person is someone who thinks they are sinless after being saved?

    • They don’t believe in progressive sanctification. They don’t believe in confessing their sins. Since in some places, it is clear we are sanctified (past tense), such as Heb 10:10-14, they seem to only ‘see’ the past tense. To be fair, there are varying degrees within the ‘hypergrace’ category, and they themselves have coined the phrase. I do not think they all see themselves as sinless.

      • Ah ok I’m not super familiar with the term and reading the article was different than what my brain had thought it was. That makes sense though and I definitely agree with you on progressive sanctification. I have seen those who vary between the thoughts. Thank you!

        • Any time Jenny. Over the years it took time (many years in fact) to get why certain things didn’t align because it was kind of subtle. That’s why I’m not particularly fond of those who just talk, and don’t ask you (turn to this passage) and wait for you to see it, so you can also check it in context. But that’s my personal choice. I think most if not all of them do not believe in progressive/practical sanctification. Most do not believe in confessing/acknowledging/admitting sin (Ps 51:3-4; 1 John 1:8-9). Some cross over with the hyperdispensationalists, so they assign those Scriptures to Israel as if they ever were or would be saved by works. Anyways, that is what happens when people hyperdivide Scripture.

Leave a Reply