Matthew 18 and Family Harmony
As I have said before and will say again: Matthew 18 is not about so-called “church discipline.” Matthew 18 is about reconciliation and keeping the peace in ALL relationships. These are principles set forth by Christ that make us successful in our Christian endeavor for peace and harmony at work, home, and church. The only instruction regarding the church performing THE actual discipline on a believer is when an elder sins. The church is to rebuke him before all so that the other elders will fear. Other than that, there is self-discipline, and the Lord’s discipline which takes place within the church; and when a congregation breaks fellowship with a professing believer that is committing blatant public sin and is obstinate about it—outside of the church where Satan is used to destroy the flesh so the soul can be saved on the day of redemption.
This letter is posted with permission because I think it can be helpful to others. It is a letter to a son by a (step) father who is using the wisdom of Matthew 18 to resolve family conflict. Other spiritual issues that often occur in mixed families are addressed as well. This is from an actual real-life situation, and I suspect, not all that unfamiliar to many.
Son,
Though you profess to be a Christian, you continue to display an utter indifference to godly counsel. This is at the root of many problems in your life right now, and affects the lives of others as well. The Scriptures not only distinguish believers and unbelievers by what they profess/believe, but also by what they do. James challenges Christians to show their faith by what they do, and I would like to follow James’ example and challenge you in the same way.
Not only do you show an indifference to the finer details of biblical counsel, you become agitated when confronted, and make the imperfections of the messenger the issue—complete with a long list of how your fragile sensitivities have been violated. Your problem is with God. He tells you many things that you do not want to hear or follow. We all struggle with this at times, but you continually throw the gauntlet down at God’s feet as a lifestyle.
The latest episode is no exception, and we must now address it accordingly. You sat at more than one family devotion here where Matthew 18 was taught. You know the procedure and God’s wisdom behind it. Yet, when you had a problem with your mother and me, you did not come to us “alone,” you went to your brother who was in no wise involved. The Bible calls this, “gossip.” Furthermore, you later went to your mother without me present when you clearly had ought with both of us. This propagated further sin, as your mother entertained the conversation without me present. Again, your problem was with both of us.
Your assumption is that God winks at such things. I assure you that he doesn’t, and the results of not doing things God’s way continues to wreak havoc in your own life coupled with a refusal to recognize how it affects others. In regard to others, you are astonished that they protest this reality; apparently, because you are worth the trouble in your own eyes. Though the mother of your child has issues to say the least, this is even the case in regard to her at times, and I implore you to consider that in her case—God has a purpose for her being involved in your life. We all need to remember this. She is NOT the enemy! I say this to my own indictment: she is a ministry. Where has the gospel been shown to her in all of this?
Moreover, after doing everything in this latest situation your way, and not God’s way, what you did do at the end was also anti-biblical. Unbelievable. If I didn’t know better, I would say that you actually make an effort to do things the wrong way. But I do not think this is the case; I believe you unwittingly think that you know better than God. Though you would say that is ridiculous, your life states a contrary claim.
So what did you do wrong when you finally got done with your wrong procedure? Four things, lest it only be one more. First, you failed to remove the log from your own eye before you removed the splinter from your mother’s eye. The events surrounding this situation alone, starting back at the hospital when your son was born, supply ample data alone without mentioning the rest of your life.
Secondly, disregarding all of the time and money that your mother has invested in your son, and for that matter, you as well, you harshly disregarded all of it and judged her on one event. The Apostle Paul angrily addresses this kind of judgment towards others in the second chapter of Romans.
Thirdly, you have always expected a full investment of emotional capital into your son regardless of the uncertain future that you have created in this situation that would prevent such investment from ending in heartbreak. I have watched from afar as your mother has poured her heart into this child, while your indifference to the possible discontinuance of that and her subsequent heartbreak looms on the horizon like an ugly beast.
Fourthly, because you know more about raising children than God, your son throws temper tantrums and screams/cries/yells at will, and at the behest of every environmental change that he is able to detect. Regarding your son’s mother, it’s not all her fault—own your part. In this case, your mother and I driving away to make an appointment prompted such response, and you used that to accuse your mother and I of heartlessly driving away from your son after supposedly refusing to say goodbye to him while he cried in the street. In light of what your mother has done for that child, I find this accusation disgusting, deplorable, and evil. Let there be no doubt in your mind—I will not tolerate your heartless/ evil manipulation in our household.
The Scriptures make it clear; we will all have a propensity to not honor our parents. Even at my age, I confess that I struggle with this in my relationship with my own mother. Though I love her, I often make other things a higher priority that shouldn’t be. With the exception of your younger brother of late, you and your older brother do not recognize this biblical warning in the least. Your older brother I understand, his honestly in regard to rejecting God’s counsel is worrisome, but more honorable than your profession of Christ and subsequent disregard for His lordship in your life—further rejecting His name of “Savior AND LORD.”
Your mother has endured this dishonor in many ways, and for many years for fear that she would lose the closeness she so longs for with her sons. She loves you so much, that your dishonor is a small price to pay for the privilege of relating to you which you hold over her head as a ransom for getting your own way with her. She is not stupid, she knows this is the case, but again, sees it as a small price. But the price is much larger than she realizes. People who love to the degree that your mother does— have difficulty assessing such cost. Let me be brutally honest; I do not have her gift of love to that degree, and as her lover and protector, the cost to her is easy for me to assess.
Your mother has laid her very life on the alter for you boys, and it is high time that all of us contribute to a blessed, peaceful, happy, environment for her in these latter years that should be a retirement from the 20+ year (brutal) war she has fought to hold this family together.
But no, in your book, all bets are off because she was less than perfect in her utter emptying of herself for you. How dare her not serve your “needs” perfectly! While right now I am fairly disgusted with you, I see your gargantuan selfism as an opportunity for God to be abundantly glorified. I see a hope for a time when you and I are closer than true brothers in the unity of Christ. But unless you awaken to reality, this will not be possible, and I refuse to let your mother continue to pay the price.
Lastly, this is where we are at. You have been confronted, and we are not obligated to grant forgiveness if it hasn’t been requested along with a commitment to change. You are unreconciled to your family. This by no means states that you will be ostracized, for our intentions towards you have always been, and always will be love, but it does mean that this unresolved issue may come up in every conversation that we have with you in the future if we do not choose to cover your offence with love.
Nevertheless, let me clarify what is expected beyond a case where you fail to see the need to ask our forgiveness resulting in reconciliation. As an emancipated “adult,” you will honor our commitment (though at times lame) to do things God’s way in this household, and you will not hinder those efforts via your disregard for God’s ways of doing things. You will not display your unwillingness to honor your mother in this household or by other means of communication outside of this household. If you will not at least respect the direction that this family has chosen, recognizing in the very least that we have a right to do so, separation may indeed be necessary.
Life is a gift from God. Christians are called to peace. Though we have allowed your poor choices to constitute emergencies on our part, even emergencies that were predicted, your disregard for us choosing to accept that with little confrontation, and your expectation for more of the same, with no remembrance of the former or thankfulness thereof, will no longer take place.
Make an appointment for purposes of reconciliation, or duly note the last two paragraphs. Your response or non-response will be applicable. I have received word that you are “sorry” for what happened, and I don’t doubt that, but the past 20 years are fraught with “I’m sorry” with little result or change of behavior. Why is that? Again, go figure, God has the answer: mere “I’m sorry” without repentance is what the bible calls “worldly sorrow.” Repentance shown forth by a determination to change for the sake of the gospel is what pleases God and yields results. This requires a renovation of how we think, as well as what we do.
Dad.
Cluelessness Saves Southern Baptist Pastors From New Calvinist Heretic David Platt
New Calvinism is a resurgence of authentic Calvinism. Since its conception during the so called “Reformation,” authentic Calvinism dies a social death from time to time because of the spiritual tyranny that its basic philosophy produces. Most of the rediscovery/resurgence movements of the past since authentic Calvinism died out after the Reformation have made little impact on Christianity. However, Calvinism Light (sanctified Calvinism) is left behind to live on after these movements die. When resurgence happens, the sanctified Calvinists actually take offence, not realizing that they are not really authentic Calvinists. Authentic Reformation theology in the vein of Augustine, Luther, and Calvin, is gross heresy. It is a works salvation with Gnosticism as its practical application. This also contributes to its eventual demise, but this takes a while because Augustine, Luther, and Calvin were masters of nuance and using familiar terms to articulate their doctrine.
The rediscovery movement that has become New Calvinism is different. Robert Brinsmead, the father of contemporary New Calvinism, argued that the recovery movements of the past failed due to a lack of systemization. Three other Reformed theologians agreed, and they started a theological think tank (the Australian Forum and its theological journal, Present Truth Magazine) to prepare the doctrine for a proper launching. That was in 1970, when the doctrine was originally known as the centrality of the objective gospel completely outside of us and New Covenant Theology. NCT took a brutal beating in Reformed Baptist circles and caused a split in at least one convention. Eventually, the doctrine was only represented by about twenty churches in those circles. However, the doctrine found new life in Presbyterian circles as Sonship Theology. Nevertheless, Sonship experienced a severe pushback by sanctified Calvinists in Presbyterian circles and was forced underground in circa 2000. It was renamed, “Gospel Transformation” and experienced massive growth between 2000 and 2004.
In 2004, the fallout from its tyranny became more evident, but no one could identify the doctrine. It was coined “Gospel Sanctification” by a small group of protestants including Dr. Jay E. Adams. But its influence and controversy continued to expand and the whole world started taking note when it was dubbed “New Calvinism” in 2008. Like the prior rediscovery movements, it has spawned a massive wave of spiritual abuse in the church under the auspices of several different sub movements such as Patriarchy and the Shepherding Movement. New Calvinists have also reached back into history and revived movements that were based on authentic Calvinism and brought them back into the fold. The whole thing is a perfect storm of mystical despotism dressed in orthodoxy. Robert Brinsmead was right; the movement needed the systematic touch.
In 1981, a Presbyterian started an organization for the sole purpose of taking over the Southern Baptist Convention with this doctrine, and today that organization is known as Founders Ministries. Until last week’s controversy concerning one of the speakers at the annual SBC Pastors Conference, authentic Calvinist heretic David Platt, I was convinced that the SBC was doomed to be taken over by this doctrine. But the response by 80% of the pastors who attended has given me great comfort. Per the normal, my beloved Southern Baptist brethren are too theologically illiterate to be led astray by a false doctrine. Their utter incompetence is demonstrated by the fact that heretics such as Platt could even be invited to speak at such a conference, and the additional fact that the flagship seminary of the SBC is run by New Calvinist “Big Al” Mohler.
Platt dissed the Sinner’s Prayer in his message, calling it “superstitious and unbiblical.” His particular beef with the prayer is the concept of “accepting Jesus into our hearts.” Platt’s message was full of nuanced and peculiar use of the English language, including the misidentification of subjects and objects, and turning verbs into adjectives, which should have begged the question: “What is this guy’s particular beef with the Sinner’s Prayer?” But my beloved Southern Baptists didn’t even blink, and did what I can always count on them doing lest they think below the surface of anything leading to possible deception; they focused on the ridicule of one of their sacred traditions. Thank goodness for that ole time religion. My dumbed down faithful brethren moved quickly to submit a resolution to the convention to confirm the validity of the Sinner’s Prayer. The resolution passed by more than 80%. Whew, that was a close one! Platt, apparently amazed at his inability to deceive them, responded to the clamor by saying that he wished he would have presented it differently. In other words, I think he meant that he wished he would have simplified it more. Platt need not worry; it wouldn’t have made any difference. I am now totally assured that my brothers are safe.
Actually, Platt’s problem with “asking/accepting Jesus in our hearts” is directly related to authentic Calvinism’s rejection of the new birth. Classic: one of the rising stars in the SBC, like Big Al, rejects the new birth, but how dare them diss the Sinner’s Prayer! You see, authentic Calvinism borrows the Platonist concept of emphasis. Though shadows are true, they are only a result of the sun’s true reality. Therefore, to emphasize shadows is to reject the only thing that can truly give life—the sun. Shadows can’t give life, only the sun’s light can. Since authentic Calvinism believes that life only comes from meditating on the works of Christ outside of us, an emphasis on the new birth, which is inside us, is to emphasize the result of Christ’s works and not Christ himself. So, to the degree that we focus on regeneration, we take away from the only thing that gives life: the personhood of Christ and His works. That is exactly what Platt’s beef is in regard to “accepting Jesus in our hearts.”
The crux of what Platt is really after was articulated by the Australian Forum. They dedicated a whole issue of their theological journal to The False Gospel of the New Birth. One article was titled as such. I will quote two members of the Australian Forum on this wise and throw in other quotes by contemporary New Calvinists as well:
“The false gospel of the new birth” imagines that the new birth refers primarily to what happens in the believer and that this is the greatest news in the world. This is classical Roman Catholicism. It teaches that a good thing is the best thing, that the work of the Spirit is greater than that of the Son. It takes the fruit of the gospel and elevates it over the root, which is the gospel. It confuses the effect of the gospel with the gospel itself.
~Geoffrey Paxton: Present Truth; The false Gospel of the New Birth Volume Thirty-Seven — Article 4
How can my life, my doing, be fruit and not root? The fruit of the tree of justification and not the root of justification? The fruit of God being on my side rather than the root of making God be on my side? How can it be the fruit of the Holy Spirit so that I’m acting in the power of another and not in my own power?
~John Piper: http://marshill.com/media/guests/be-killing-sin-or-sin-will-be-killing-you
Bultmann’s existential gospel led him inevitably to a negative view of the Old Testament. And the new-birth oriented “Jesus-in-my-heart” gospel of evangelicals has destroyed the Old Testament just as effectively as has nineteenth-century liberalism.1 [Goldsworthy’s footnote #1] (1 See Geoffrey J. Paxton, “The False Gospel of the New Birth,” Present Truth Magazine 7, no.3 (June 1978): 17-22).
~Graeme Goldsworth: Present Truth; Obituary for the Old Testament Volume Forty-One — Article 2
It robs Christ of His glory by putting the Spirit’s work in the believer above and therefore against what Christ has done for the believer in His doing and dying.
~ Geoffrey Paxton (Australian Forum)
But to whom are we introducing people to, Christ or to ourselves? Is the “Good News” no longer Christ’s doing and dying, but our own “Spirit-filled” life?
~ Michael Horton
As my lovely wife said in her first session at last week’s conference on spiritual tyranny:
By glazing over the finer details of Christianity and focusing on more moderate doctrines he [Billy Graham] made evangelism enticing, non-threatening, and easy to swallow, and in a lot of ways gave definition to easy believeism.
His mission to present the “gospel” and get people saved and on their way to heaven permeated the focus of many fundamental churches thereafter, particularly the Southern Baptist denomination with which Billy Graham was associated.
As a result of the success of Billy Graham, many other evangelists and pastors adopted and adapted his mode of operation in order to” bring in the sheaves.” This is often referred to as the first gospel wave that swept over America in the 50’s and continued on into the early 70’s.
Please do not misunderstand my opening remarks. The biographical remarks were taken from an article written of Billy Graham. We all believe that people were genuinely saved as a result of the ministry of Billy Graham; but I want to also say that many thought they were saved as a result of his ministry as well. Here’s the dilemma his type of evangelism created: a) genuine salvation experiences occurred and b) professions of salvation made but no outward change in living or life-style and c) lack of assurance of salvation as a result of poor follow-up and discipleship.
In my neck of the woods the “At least he is saved mentality” which the Billy Graham Association innocently created, helped people rationalize sinful lifestyles, make valid emotional experiences and equate them with regeneration, and issued “fire insurance” policy mentality amongst church going people. Just say the sinner’s prayer and you are guaranteed a home in heaven.
So, at least some people get saved, and they’re too doctrinally illiterate to be taken over by a movement that is completely of the devil.
Maybe it’s not all bad!
paul
If New Calvinists….
If New Calvinists ever succeed in marrying the government, church discipline will be traded in for the guillotine. The headless don’t talk.
From Notes for Saturday’s Conference
“Hence, biblical doctrine cannot save the church because the American parishioner has conceded that they are unable to comprehend doctrine. While striving to obtain engineering degrees in the secular realm, most parishioners see the same academic striving in the spiritual real as futile.”
New Calvinist Hoplessness
When the doctor comes to us and says, “I’m sorry, there is nothing we can do,” that is interpreted as hopelessness with a capital “H.” But somehow, among Christians, the idea that we can’t do anything supposedly gives hope. No wonder that the world will not come to us for answers to life’s deepest problems. Somehow, we think the world will believe that God can save a soul when He can’t even teach His children to save a marriage. In fact, the church is indifferent to solutions because after all, “God has preordained it.” No wonder churches are dying. True, there are confused ones that believe God hasn’t preordained hopelessness, but still say there is nothing we can do. That is where New Calvinists offer a more doctrinally sound hopelessness.
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
2 comments