...Before the cross one had to forgive others in order to be forgiven.
After the cross one should forgive others because God has already forgiven you.
This is but one difference in what some call a "two gospel heresy" even though it is scripturally based.
...I have confidence in the good reader that they can discern which is false teaching (heresy).
What changed was the ministration of the gospel, but it is still the same gospel, (grace through faith) what remains after the New Covenant is this glorious truth.
(2 Corinthians 3:5) Not that we are sufficient of ourselves to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God;
(2 Corinthians 3:6) Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
(2 Corinthians 3:7) But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:
(2 Corinthians 3:8) How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?
(2 Corinthians 3:9) For if the ministration of condemnation be glory, much more doth the ministration of righteousness exceed in glory.
(2 Corinthians 3:10) For even that which was made glorious had no glory in this respect, by reason of the glory that excelleth.
(2 Corinthians 3:11) For if that which is done away was glorious, much more that which remaineth is glorious.
The OT people could never have been saved by their obedience (Heb 10:4) but were saved by their belief/faith alone, by God’s grace alone.
Yet, we have the word “heresy” flying around by an over ambitious debater trying to pin you on Millennial Exclusion (ME), or Open Theism, or anything else through a play on words and possibly get you kicked off the board for disagreeing with him while he preaches something that amounts to another gospel (two gospels) himself by changing the meaning of “repentance” into a “work” of turning from sin. Now, if I started to label him as a heretic, gave him some of his own medicine, for preaching this LS dogma you can bet he wouldn’t like it one bit, the squealing would begin, and the rule about calling one a “heretic” would soon have to be addressed. Could be interesting for some…but NAH…
You see HankD very thoroughly, gracefully and directly addressed the Op-er and yet he evades “those posts” which I would love to see his responses to, apparently avoided, in order to pick on someone he feels more “inclined” to challenge. Personally, every time I was going to step into this...debate... HankD addressed it more gracefully than I would of, he’s pretty good at that, so I will sit back and observe/learn….thanks Hank.