The Reformation False Gospel Denies the New Birth
“This can be plainly seen in one of the most well-articulated Reformed treatises on the subject of the new birth: it is an article endorsed by the Reformed icon Graeme Goldsworthy, and the article is entitled, The False Gospel of the New Birth. Any questions?”
“This Gnostic paradigm enables those of the Reformed tradition to affirm the truthfulness of the new birth, while denying its significance. The new birth is a mere shadow of the only important thing that can power our lives. Like their Gnostic parents, they are masters of deception in this way. It enables them to dismiss the plain sense of Scripture on a large scale while building their antinomian juggernaut.”
_______________________________________________________
Hopefully, the Reformation will one day take its proper place in history as one of the great cults. Like all cults, it utilizes familiar biblical terminology, but has assigned a different meaning to the terms. Though the Reformers and their offspring frame explanations of salvific elements in biblical plausibility, their words are carefully chosen to deceive those who are not “ready” for their deep Reformation “truth.”
Basic elements of Reformed ideology are a direct affront to the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. Christ said, “You must be born again,” and this the Reformers deny. The biblical meaning of the new birth is a total recreation of the saved person. The old self was put to death and no longer lives—we are new creatures. “Behold, all things are new.” The old man who was inflamed in temptation by the law is now dead, and the believer is now free via the new birth to pursue freedom in the law, though not perfectly. This is what the new birth does: it changes the relationship of the law to the saved individual. He/she is no longer under it for justification, but upholds it as a kingdom citizen and slave to Jesus Christ. Failure thereof temporarily disrupts the intimate family relationship with the Father and the Son, but can be restored through a repentance that is not a washing, for we are already washed.
This creates an abundance of difficulties for Reformed theology. An actual transformation of the individual that includes the efficacious union of Christ, rather than the life of Christ being the only life in a spiritually dead believer, is the Waterloo of Reformed theology. Are we alive with Christ? Or are we still dead with Christ? Is sanctification by faith alone because we are still dead, or are we creditable colaborers who are able to truly love our Lord through our actions?
In Reformed theology, there is no new birth that makes us new creatures with Christ, the “new birth” is “Christ for us.” Not just for forgivenessof sins, but for EVERYTHING. “You can do nothing without me,” is translated, you can’t do anything at all because you are still spiritually dead.
Reformed theology is a let go and let God doctrine on steroids. And in Reformed theology, to deny that Christians remain spiritually dead is paramount to works salvation because the law remains the standard for justification. Instead of being dead to the law for justification, we are still dead to law for sanctification as well—the relationship has not changed—Christ must keep the law for us to maintain our just standing. This is why, according to most Reformed theology, you can lose your salvation if you do not live the Christian life by, “faith alone.” Trying to obey the law in sanctification is supposedly insanity because the standard is still perfection—we are still under the law. Not only that, we are still spiritually dead to boot. Justification texts are deceptively applied to sanctification and vice versa. It’s all the same.
This is why Reformed theology turns truth completely upside down at every point. It is a gargantuan library of lies that cover for other lies. It started with a false premise, and has spent over 500 years building, refining and crafting its narrative. It uses the same metaphysics that Satan needed to be equal with God. To compete with God, Satan needed to be different—so he created the antithesis of God: evil. Therefore, in Satan’s book, the whole story, or the rest of the story, or the totality of “wisdom,” should have included his creation as well: the knowledge of good and evil. Knowledge of good alone is knowledge of God alone—Satan would have none of that.
Hence, the first sentence of the Calvin institutes describes wisdom as primarily the knowledge of God and us (who remain totally depraved). Therefore, according to the same garden metaphysics, we must remain evil in order to have a working epistemology. If we change, if we become more and more like God, the epistemological gateway is diminished. A deeper and deeper knowledge of our depravity can no longer be set against a deeper and deeper knowledge of God’s holiness—leading to more and more “wisdom.” Therefore, the idea of the new birth drives a stake through the heart of the first sentence of the Calvin institutes. The transformation of us just points more to knowledge about God and less about our former condition—this seems to upset Calvin’s epistemological apple cart.
But whether or not you buy my working theory on the deeper issue of metaphysics, the fact remains that Reformed theology clearly teaches that we remain totally depraved as Christians. The only argument is whether or not neo-Calvinism has distorted the original intent of the Reformers. I contend that they have not. And if they have, the Calvin purists can blame themselves because an apt treatise against the neo-Calvinists is nowhere to be found, but rather fellowship. If Calvinists don’t want to wear the shoe that fits, let them come out from among them.
In the Reformed mindset, to claim transformation through the new birth is to make salvation about us, and less about God. Such is not the truth because God doesn’t need evil to better define Himself, nor does He need evil as a contrast to magnify His glory. Therefore, pointing to our own evil does not glorify God. Becoming more like God glorifies God; Christ makes this clear in the Sermon on the Mount. But notable contemporary Reformers state the opposite, saying that emphasizing the enabling power of the new birth (as Christ did with the word, “must”) “eclipses” the glory of Christ:
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
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. (footnoted to Paxton’s article with above quote).
~ Graeme Goldsworthy (Australian Forum)
In it [Goldsworthy’s lecture at Southern] it gave one of the clearest statements of why the Reformation was needed…. I would add that this “upside down” gospel has gone away— neither from Catholicism nor from Protestants.
~ John Piper
Another way those of the Reformed tradition explain away plain truth about the new birth is the Reformed Emphasis Hermeneutic which is based on Gnosticism. Truth is beyond what the five senses can ascertain. What the five senses can ascertain are shadows and forms of the vision of the good. So, to “emphasize” what the Holy Spirit is helping us do within is emphasizing what we sense, and what Reformers call “subjective experience.” The only true objective truth is “the objective gospel outside of us” which is a Reformed mantra (http://www.objectivegospel.org/). What they have done is reversed normal metaphysics in the same way Gnosticism does. What we observe is no longer empirical, but deemed subjective; only the true vision of the good is objective; ie, the gospel outside of us. Therefore, to emphasize the new birth is to emphasize the shadows and forms of the higher good, and not the higher good. It is “emphasizing a good thing, but not the best thing,” and, “emphasizing the fruit, and not the root.” This Gnostic paradigm enables those of the Reformed tradition to affirm the truthfulness of the new birth, while denying its significance. The new birth is a mere shadow of the only important thing that can power our lives. Like their Gnostic parents, they are masters of deception in this way. It enables them to dismiss the plain sense of Scripture on a large scale while building their antinomian juggernaut. This can be plainly seen in one of the most well-articulated Reformed treatises on the subject of the new birth: it is an article endorsed by the Reformed icon Graeme Goldsworthy, and the article is entitled, The False Gospel of the New Birth. Any questions?
Reformed theology is in no wise truthful on any point other than some facts that are used as coconspirators in their evil plot to take away from God’s objective truth, and also add to it. Their doctrine drives a stake through the very heart of the true gospel. They boldly deny the words of the Lord of Lords, the glorious Holy King: “You must be born again.”
And their desert will be just.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
Hey Paul, did you fall asleep?
LikeLike
Barba –
I think that God’s love for us is just as resplendantly disayed in the fact that God raised Jesus Christ from the dead and he is now seated at the right hand of God interceding on our behalf. His love is also resplendantly displayed in the sending of the Holy Spirit to empower us to live a life pleasing to God, which is shown in many ways. Yes, we can be thankful for what our Lord did throughout his life and on the cross, and we might often remind ourselves of this throughout our life, but Jesus is not on the cross. The cross was not the completion of Jesus’ mission. It was only the completion of his earthly life. The cross reminds many people over and over of their sinfulnes, but does not remind them that, as Christians, they are now dead to sin and alive to Christ Jesus. The resurrection, and Jesus seated on the throne, should always follow the cross. He died to lead us into new life, not to keep us at the cross. Much teaching today is focused on only half of the Good News.
So much focus on the cross reminds me if Catholicism – a cross everywhere you look.
LikeLike
Paul,
I have no idea what you are talking about. You asked whether we merit anything by our obedience in sanctification. My response is the we don’t need to merit anything. We are already right with God. We don’t get any more right with God by our obedience. All the merit we will ever have is ours already, In Christ. That is why I quoted a verse on Justification. Obedience in sanctification adds nothing to our merit before God.
Of course, justification are separate. Lydia stated what I believe this morning, “One cannot have justification without sanctification and visa versa. But, they are two different things.”
Why would you tell me I don’t really believe something I clearly believe. I have not tried to impute anything to you that you don’t believe have I?
LikeLike
Barba,
Ok then, can we please God I-N S-A-N-C-T-I-F-I-C-A-C-T-I-O-N? Said another way: Can we obey the law to the pleasure of God IN SANCTIFICATION ?
LikeLike
Bridget,
I don’t recall saying that Jesus is on the cross. Perhaps you can show me where I said that. It does seem interesting that the apostle Paul refused to boast in anything other than the cross. Additionally, when he spoke of living his life for Christ, he referred to the one who loved him and gave up himself for him. His focus seems to be on Jesus’ sacrifice.
In my view, we must never separate Jesus work of sacrifice from the resurrection. One depended on the other. Apart from the success of his sacrificial work, the resurrection would never have been a reality. The resurrection and advent of the Spirit were applications of Jesus’ sacrificial work. Still, when the NT writers speak of the love of Christ for his people it is most often in the context of his cross work.
LikeLike
Paul,
Of course we can please God by our obedience. One would have to deny the NT Scriptures to say otherwise.
LikeLike
Barba,
So, as we grow in sanctification, you agree that sin in our life decreases and behavior that pleases the Lord increases. No? Yes?
LikeLike
Paul,
That seems like a lot of vitriol you are spewing on Murray. What was there about my quote from you disagreed with?
LikeLike
Barba,
Right, because he is a stinking antinomian heretic. This was my next question: So, as we grow in sanctification, you agree that sin in our life decreases and behavior that pleases the Lord increases. No? Yes?
LikeLike
Bridget,
“The cross reminds many people over and over of their sinfulnes, but does not remind them that, as Christians, they are now dead to sin and alive to Christ Jesus.” Why would you say the cross [mind you when I speak of the cross, I am not talking about the wooden instrument on which Jesus was crucified, but about his sacrificial work] does not remind us that as Christians we are now dead to sin and alive to Christ Jesus? In Romans 6, the apostle tells us that was precisely where our death to sin occurred, in union with Christ.
LikeLike
Who was a stinking antinomian heretic? Surely we grow in sanctification, and behavior that pleases The Lord increases. The Westminster Larger states, “Sanctification is a work of God’s grace, whereby they whom God hath, before the foundation of the world, chosen to be holy, are in time, through the powerful operation of his Spiritn applying the death and resurrection of Christ unto them, renewed in their whole man after the image of God; having the seeds of repentance unto life, and all other saving graces, put into their hearts, and those graces so stirred up, increased, and strengthened, as that they more and more die unto sin, and rise unto newness of life.”
LikeLike
Barba,
I thought you agreed with the cross chart? If our sin diminishes coupled with a growing awareness of ourselves being pleasing to God, how does the cross get bigger?
LikeLike
” I have no idea what you are talking about. You asked whether we merit anything by our obedience in sanctification. My response is the we don’t need to merit anything. We are already right with God. We don’t get any more right with God by our obedience. All the merit we will ever have is ours already, In Christ. That is why I quoted a verse on Justification. Obedience in sanctification adds nothing to our merit before God.”
You are right in the fact that we bring nothing to God at the moment of salvation, only our faith and trust in Him; but you are wrong on the merit part when it comes to sanctification. I also noticed how you carry this theme with the fact that one must always “focus on the cross”. Scripture tells us to pick up and carry the cross, not keep focusing on the cross. This is exactly what the Catholics do with the icon of Jesus on the cross- keep looking at and focus on it. This is not the way to live the Christian life! All through Scripture, God continually exhorts those that are His to keep His commands and they will receive blessings and rewards for it. You can tell me that I take Scripture out of context, but I think not when Scripture speaks loud and clear on how we are to live as believers. We know that we will not achieve perfection, but we are continually being sanctified through the Holy Spirit as we STRIVE to serve Him. The more we STRIVE to serve Him through studying the Word, prayer, loving God and others we will become more like Christ. The less we STRIVE then the less we will receive in blessings and rewards (here on earth and heaven). Obedience to Christ YES, does come with merit- you just have to read about all the heros of Scripture and the imploring Israel to live right to see that; you just have to read about Paul and “running the race to receive the prize of His high calling” to see that; you have to read about the rewards that we will recieve in heaven for those who so follow His commands. Progressive Sanctification is the joy of every believer, because we know now that we can serve our Savior without ever being afraid that our salvation will be revoked. When you can serve in freedom, there is no need for us to keep focusing on the cross- it is time for the believer to get busy, not keep wallowing in their sin as other religions love to do.
When you said that I took Scripture out of context, as far as, God desires all to be saved. Yes, God so desires all to be saved, but no where did I say that ALL would be saved. That would make me a Universalist -now wouldn’t it? Of course, He wants all to know him, but under our free will He knows not all would choose their Creator. Satan also had that choice, but turned his back on Gods love. Love cannot be forced, it has to be voluntary; so also with His creation of man, being a God who is love, He could not force love. Love that is forced would not be love then would it?
LikeLike
How could you ever conclude that Murray [I am talking about John Murray, not Andrew Murray], was an Antinomian? In his book “Principles of Conduct” he made it clear he believed New Testament believers are under the Law as a standard of conduct. How is that Antinomianism?
LikeLike
Barba,
Buy the book.
LikeLike