The New Calvinist Mega-Lie: Obedience and Truth are Separate
“Therefore, Christians don’t obey for the purpose of maintaining our just standard; it is a finished work by Christ that needs no further maintenance. We obey for other reasons….”
Have you ever noticed? The Scriptures NEVER call “obedience” works salvation. We are never told that people are trying to earn their way into heaven through “obedience.” Obedience, in the Scriptures, is ALWAYS associated with the truthful application of God’s word to our lives in how we think and what we do. It is the truthful application of our role in sanctification which is putting off the old self and putting on the new creature (Ephesians 4:20-24). In the Scriptures, truth is always assumed in obedience.
This is New Calvinism’s greatest deception, the idea that one can sincerely seek to apply God’s word to their lives in a truthful way, and at the same time do so to maintain a just standing before God without realizing they are doing so. This invokes a dependance on them, a don’t try sanctification at home mentality. Though they claim that obedience is motivated by fear within the evangelical community, their sanctification formula propagates an unfounded fear that obedience is nothing more than works salvation, in and of itself. The fact of the matter is that works salvation is always based on falsehood.
Unlike the Bible, New Calvinists don’t associate obedience with truth, a love for the truth, and faith. They separate the two, specifically by separating “law” and “gospel.” Law is obedience, whether practiced in truth or not, and gospel is truth. There are many examples of this, but here is the best one I have seen of late:
This is fundamentally no different than Islam! The Gospel offers us freedom from our sin-stained hearts and our obedience-stained garments and bids us rest in the finished work of Christ which is better than us being better!!!” (Jean F. Larroux, III, Green Grass of Grace Southwood blog).
Notice: obedience is obedience whether it is Christian or Islam. Truth isn’t the issue. But the apostle Paul clearly unites the two:
They have become callous and have given themselves up to sensuality, greedy to practice every kind of impurity. But that is not the way you learned Christ!—assuming that you have heard about him and were taught in him, as the truth is in Jesus, to put off your old self, which belongs to your former manner of life and is corrupt through deceitful desires, and to be renewed in the spirit of your minds, and to put on the new self, created after the likeness of God in true righteousness and holiness (Ephesians 4:19-24).
Obviously, Paul is calling on Christians to learn truth, and put off what we learn to put off, and put on what we learn that is to be put on. The Bible calls this “obedience” when it is done as biblically prescribed. If I tell my son to take the trash out to the curb, but instead he leaves it halfway down the driveway, that’s not obedience. Unless you’re a New Calvinist. With them, truthful obedience is neither here nor there because it is impossible for Christians to accomplish anyway:
The bad news is far worse than making mistakes or failing to live up to the legalistic standards of fundamentalism. It is that the best efforts of the best Christians, on the best days, in the best frame of heart and mind, with the best motives fall short of the true righteousness and holiness that God requires [notice that there is no distinction between this sentence and the one prior (legalistic standards verses true righteousness)]. Our best efforts cannot satisfy God’s justice. Yet the good news is that God has satisfied his own justice and reconciled us to himself through the life, death, and resurrection of his Son. God’s holy law can no longer condemn us because we are in Christ (Michael Horton, Christless Christianity p. 91).
It is also extremely important here to notice the crux of New Calvinist error in this statement; specifically, the supposed need to maintain justification: “….the best motives fall short of the true righteousness and holiness that God requires…. Our best efforts cannot satisfy God’s justice.” But in sanctification, God no longer requires a just standard to maintain salvation, that has already been accomplished as a finished work. God no longer “requires” perfection that maintains our just standing. Therefore, Christians don’t obey for the purpose of maintaining our just standard/standing; it is a finished work by Christ that needs no further maintenance. We obey for other reasons—to glorify God, to experience the reality of our new birth, to show others the abundant life, and to destroy evil works, to name just a few. And also, our God-given love for the truth compels us to apply it to our lives.
Therefore, New Calvinism fuses what shouldn’t be fused and separates what shouldn’t be separated, turning orthodoxy completely upside down. They fuse justification and sanctification, and separate obedience from truth, while fictitiously calling obedience “law” (whether Christian or Islamic), and encapsulating truth in the “gospel” which is supposedly distinct from “law.” But what would we know about the gospel apart from Scripture? Christ said man lives by every word that comes from the mouth of God. Wouldn’t that include the law? Paul told Timothy that we are fully equipped for every good work by ALL Scripture. Wouldn’t that also include the law?
This fusing of what shouldn’t be fused and separating what shouldn’t be separated is the basis of their Gospel Contemplationism. Law (any effort to obey, whether according to the truth or not) is separate from gospel and impossible for us to obey perfectly in order to maintain a salvation that doesn’t need to be maintained to begin with. The formula? Contemplation on the truth that results in a “Christ formation” within totally depraved, dead jars of clay. Doubt that? reread Larroux’s quote; our hearts are sin stained as well as any obedience we may perform.
The truth: we are declared righteous and are righteous, though hindered by the flesh. Though our striving falls short of perfection, we know that can’t affect our righteous standing that has already been declared based on the finished work of Christ. And that cannot be revoked. As we strive, we also long for the day when we can obey our Lord perfectly without hindrance. So like Paul, we cry out, “who will deliver me from this body of death?”
Our striving creates that thirst, experiencing both the blessings of that truth and the failures that prevent the full experience. Peter states clearly that we are to strive for a “rich entry,“ not the beggarly entry that comes from let go and let God theology.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
Paul, your replies seem bitter and when Randy offers a persuasive argument. Logical arguments gains no ground when we are agenda driven.
I am a Calvinist Minister in the PCA. I would agree and it concerns me that Jean L. is in danger of leading people to love grace more than the Holy One who gives grace. However, no NC that I am aware of does not stress obedience; they only stress the motive for that obedience. Of course that obedience is stained, if it wasn’t, we are living in a false realized eschatology like many in the Corinth church were.
Also Paul, did you know how arrogant your statement was about the Westminster Confession was? Your own statement concerning it should humble you concerning your own systematic statements you have made on this blog. You call Horton a heretic based on your understanding of Theology and yet you reject any Confession that systematically offers a theological answer. If you reject a Confession because it is infallible then you should reject all of your own conclusions that are systematic in nature.
LikeLike
Therickmister,
Yawn, everyone who contends against New Calvinism is “bitter” unless they say, “Well, gee whiz, I kinda disagree that, but this, but that, but the other, but here is were these guys are really swell!” Gag. So you admit that Jean L. is guilty of a little imbalance in the area of obedience? That’s mighty lookin’ out for the sheep of ya.
So you are a minister in the PCA? I know one who is 86 plus and who has done more for God’s people than most ministers of our day. But yet, the vast majority of PCA ministers stand by silent as Powlison and his water boys continually malign him and throw him under the bus. There are good PCA pastors (this ministry has given me great privilege to meet some good ones), but then a lot of them are cowards. Which camp are you in? The PCA’s indifference in dealing with its New Calvinist serial parishioner abusers is a disgrace.
Please, please, of course New Calvinists think obedience is just wonderful because Jesus does it for us! And yes, Horton is a heretic. So is: John Piper, Al Mohler, Ligon Duncan, Kevin Deyoung, David Powlison et al. This is the same type of antinomians that harass God’s people every 50-100 years. Different twist on antinomianism, same goal: anti-law. And no, all of our work for the Lord is not “sin-stained.” That’s a bunch of boloney: Well done faithful servant, because I’m really the one who did it. Now I think I will reward myself by entering into my Father’s joy. Don’t think so.
LikeLike
Randy, just a few weeks ago I came across Mark Dever who made a comment that he preaches to a depraved congregation. I dont have the link and not the time to find it now. I hear this stuff in implied all the time insurance in talks. the problem is if I show it to you there will be some reason why I misunderstood it. that is simply the way it works in new calvinism.
LikeLike
Amen sister.
LikeLike
insurance? I am using voice command…… iphone…….oh well.
LikeLike
Paul,
There is a difference between anomia and antinomia[n]. One is a DOCTRINE that may or may not manifest itself in lawless behavior , the other is a LAWLESS ATTITUDE that manifests itself in rebellious acts against God. In order for one to be truly an antinomian in the theological sense, he would have to declare that a believer has no duty to obey God’s eternal and universal righteous standard. The apostle Paul makes it clear that the Mosaic expression of that Law was neither universal nor eternal. Otherwise, he could not have spoken of the Gentiles who “do not have the Law,” and who “have sinned without the Law” and “will be judged without the Law.” It seems to me, that leaves us with two exegetical choices: 1. The Gentiles were without God’s law altogether, or 2. The Gentiles were without the Mosaic codified expression of that Law. Since the apostle also tells the Law entered at a specific point (“the Law came in alongside so that the offense might overflow” Rom 5 “It [the Mosaic Law] was added for the sake of transgressions” Gal. 3) and was given “til the Seed [Christ] came to whom the promises were made.” Gal 3), it could not have been eternal.
If a person argues that that covenantal expression of God’s eternal and universal righteous standard has been replaced by a new expression of the same standard, that does not mean he is against God’s Law or will encourage people to break God’s Law. Thus, the charge of antinomianism is an unfounded charge unless it is made against a person who argues that we are absolutely without obligation to obey God’s revealed will.
I cannot speak for New Calvinists. I am neither a New Calvinist nor an apologist for them. I can speak for New Covenant Theology, at least for the branch of it to which I have belonged. I do not know a single NCT who would not stress the need for obedience to God. What we really teach is that under the New Covenant, we have, in keeping with God’s New Covenant promise, received the regenerating Holy Spirit who enables us to do what the Old Covenant could only demand but not produce.
He motivates us to this New Covenant obedience by pouring out God’s love in our hearts by the Spirit he has given us (Rom. 5). And, how does the Spirit do that? The verses that immediately follow, connected to this verse by “for” or “because,” tell us that God’s love for us believers is demonstrated in the crucifixion of Christ while we were “without strength,” “ungodly ones” and “still sinners.”
Though justification is something that has been objectively accomplished for us believers in the redemptive work of Christ, and has been applied to us in God’s declaration that we are righteous in his sight, a “done deal” as you like to put it, it is not something we are to ever get beyond. I am sure your wife would love to hear that since you are now married and have a certificate on file at the Court House, [it is a done deal], you no longer need to think about her or express your love for her or contemplate how grateful you are that you met and married her. As long as she keeps the rules, all will be well. Tell me how you think that is gonna work out for you.
LikeLike
Lydia,
If you show me the quote, I will accept it at face value. I would, of course, like to see it in context. Who knows what he said or meant. If he said the believers in the congregation are still totally depraved, then he is wrong. If he is talking about a mixed congregation, then he is partially right.
One of the truths we emphasize in New Covenant Theology is that believers under the New Covenant are not left to do as we would if we did not have the Spirit’s indwelling and guidance. We are led by the Spirit so that the righteousness required by the Law might begin to be fulfilled in us as we walk not according to the flesh [that realm that is characterized by weakness and mere humanness] but according to the Spirit. This is one reason I contend that if NC teaches that believers are helpless in the battle against sin and temptation, it cannot be of a piece with NCT.
LikeLike
Paul,
There is a difference between a nomia and anti nomia [n]. One is a doctrine that may or may not manifest itself in lawless behavior , the other is a lawless attitude that manifests itself in rebellious acts against God. In order for one to be truly an antinomian in the theological sense, he would have to declare that a believer has no duty to obey God’s eternal and universal righteous standard. The apostle Paul makes it clear that the Mosaic expression of that Law was neither universal nor eternal. Otherwise, he could not have spoken of the Gentiles who “do not have the Law,” and who “have sinned without the Law” and “will be judged without the Law.” It seems to me, that leaves us with two exegetical choices: 1. The Gentiles were without God’s law altogether, or 2. The Gentiles were without the Mosaic codified expression of that Law. Since the apostle also tells the Law entered at a specific point (“the Law came in alongside so that the offense might overflow” Rom 5 “It [the Mosaic Law] was added for the sake of transgressions” Gal. 3) and was given “til the Seed [Christ] came to whom the promises were made.” Gal 3), it could not have been eternal.
If a person argues that that covenantal expression of God’s eternal and universal righteous standard has been replaced by a new expression of the same standard, that does not mean he is against God’s Law or will encourage people to break God’s Law. Thus, the charge of antinomianism is an unfounded charge unless it is made against a person who argues that we are absolutely without obligation to obey God’s revealed will.
I cannot speak for New Calvinists. I am neither a New Calvinist nor an apologist for them. I can speak for New Covenant Theology, at least for the branch of it to which I have belonged. I do not know a single NCT who would not stress the need for obedience to God. What we really teach is that under the New Covenant, we have, in keeping with God’s New Covenant promise, received the regenerating Holy Spirit who enables us to do what the Old Covenant could only demand but not produce.
He motivates us to this New Covenant obedience by pouring out God’s love in our hearts by the Spirit he has given us (Rom. 5). And, how does the Spirit do that? The verses that immediately follow, connected to this verse by “for” or “because,” tell us that God’s love for us believers is demonstrated in the crucifixion of Christ while we were “without strength,” “ungodly ones” and “still sinners.”
Though justification is something that has been objectively accomplished for us believers in the redemptive work of Christ, and has been applied to us in God’s declaration that we are righteous in his sight, a “done deal” as you like to put it, it is not something we are to ever get beyond. I am sure your wife would love to hear that since you are now married and have a certificate on file at the Court House, [it is a done deal], you no longer need to think about her or express your love for her or contemplate how grateful you are that you met and married her. As long as she keeps the rules, all will be well. Tell me how you think that is gonna work out for you.
LikeLike
Randy,
Christ included a “relaxing” of the “least” of His laws in that definition.
LikeLike
anybody home?
LikeLike
2 Corinthians 10:4-6
New International Version – UK (NIVUK)
The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds.We demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ.And we will be ready to punish every act of disobedience, once your obedience is complete.
LikeLike