Revised: Seven Points of Protestantism’s Anti-Gospel
1. Progressive Justification
John Calvin’s fourteenth chapter of book three in the Calvin Institutes is entitled, “The Beginning of Justification. In What Sense Progressive.” He then proceeds in sections 9, 10, and 11 to explain how Christians are still under the law, and helpless to obey it for any merit before God; i.e., any attempt at works in sanctification is works salvation (his Sabbath Rest Sanctification CICR 2.8.29,30). He then propagates sanctification by faith alone for the remedy.
2. Redemptive Historical Hermeneutics
This interpretive method reduces the Bible to a gospel narrative only. It’s not about anything that God wants us to do, but rather “what He has done.” “It’s not about our doing, but His doing and dying.” “Jesus isn’t a precept, He’s a person,” ad nauseam. This circumvents learning and doing (the very definition of a disciple), and replaces it with gospel contemplationism. It also circumvents love on the part of believers because anything short of perfect love according to the law is worthy of God’s condemnation according to orthodoxy. This is because the law is the justification standard rather than the new birth. Hence, one does not read the Bible to learn how to love God and others more, but to search for salvific truth in every verse that adds to one’s progression in salvation. In no uncertain terms, Protestant orthodoxy propagates “beginning justification,” “progressive sanctification” (really, progressive salvation/justification), and “final justification.” In Protestantism, the Bible is a tool for the progression of salvation, at least according to authentic orthodoxy.
3. Double Imputation
This is the idea that Christ not only died for our justification, but lived a perfect life on earth for the purpose of imputing that obedience to our sanctification. This view of double imputation goes hand in hand with progressive justification. Not to be confused with the correct view that God’s righteousness is INFUSED within us via the new birth while our sins were imputed to Christ. However, more accurately, all sin is imputed to the Old Covenant law of sin and death and Christ died to end that law. Double imputation is a staple Protestant doctrine, and obviously, if it was necessary for Christ to live a perfect law-keeping life so it can be imputed to our lives, we are still yet under law and thereby unsaved.
4. Gospel Sanctification
This propagates the idea that regeneration is powered by justification, and regeneration is a “process” or “progressive” instead of a one time act through Spirit baptism. Supposedly, Christians “reflect” godliness by continually “revisiting the gospel afresh.” This is a gospel contemplationism that focuses on the same things that originally saved us: Christ’s death for our sins and our own sinfulness. We supposedly “preach the gospel to ourselves every day” to keep ourselves saved. In this “process,” we obtain a greater and greater gratitude for our original salvation which glorifies God and not us. A greater view of the cross is the goal, not an increase of godly character among God’s people.
5. Mortification and Vivification
This is another undeniable staple doctrine of Protestant orthodoxy. By returning to the same gospel that saved us to receive forgiveness of “present sin,” (mortification), we also experience “vivification” which is a “reliving of our original baptism.” Hence, the baptism of the Spirit, or new birth, occurs over and over gain instead of just once. Again, this is stated Protestant orthodoxy. And of course, this is a process that can only be obtained through formal church membership. This is what qualifies Protestantism as one of the most unimpressive religions of the world because most Protestants don’t even know what a true Protestant believes. At least Catholics know they are saved by church membership and most other religions possess participants that are educated according to their religion’s true tenets.
6. The Total Depravity of the Saints
Obviously, if we need the gospel every day, it is for good reason; we remain in need of the same gospel that originally reconciled us because our status as “sinners” does not change. For all practical purposes this denies the new birth regardless of the fact that Christ stated, “You must be born again.”
7. Law Determines Justification
In Protestantism, Justification is not apart from the law; law is still the standard and therefore must be kept by Christ for us in sanctification. A perfect keeping of the law is required for us to be declared righteous; otherwise, it would supposedly be “legal fiction.” However, the apostle Paul made it clear that the “righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law” (Romans 3:21). Justification does not have to be maintained via a perfect keeping of the law by anyone; we are justified by the infusion of righteousness within us via the new birth. We still fail to love perfectly because our weak humanity has not yet been redeemed.
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
So the focus is always on sin….
Paul, I was just thinking as I was reading this that DEATH seems to be the center of all religions, plus even some “Christian” doctrines like Calvinism. Calvinism is focused on sin continually with the believer, but we know that sin results in death. Paul (the Apostle) stated that we have new life and our sin is washed away by the DEATH of Jesus Christ. He abolished DEATH and for those who put their trust in Him will have LIFE. This is where Paul was frustrated with believers because they were revisiting DEATH by going back to sin and the law. Paul was continually telling believers that they are to move on from that because now they are free and not a slave to DEATH (the law, sinful desires, etc.). Calvinism keeps revisiting DEATH by keeping their flock bound to obsession with their own sin. Keep them absorbed in thinking of their sin, and you will have glob of guilt ridden putty in your hands to control and manipulate- just like the Muslim, Catholic, Hindu religions etc.
We see where the Puritans used it to keep their flocks in check. Guilt and fear are very powerful motivators into getting what you want. Then when you get to the real brass knuckles of these religions we see that the author of them is Satan and he loves DEATH.
So I see where Calvinism is so destructive because of its veneer. The veneer shows that you must know Jesus Christ; that you must realize you are a sinner in need of God; that God is Sovereign (which we all agree that He is). Underneath, however, shows a different composition – it shows that one must continually focus on his or her sin daily to realize his or her need of a Savior. If one does not do this, then his or her salvation is in question. If I am right in my thinking and you can correct me, that Calvinism is an “intellectual” belief system? The quote “I think, therefore I am” comes into play. You must have the right thinking to know if your salvation is sure. So, if you are not thinking in the vein of a Calvinist and the right theological grounding, then you can’t quite be sure of whether or not your salvation is sure? Why I asked this is I noticed the same thinking at the church I use to go to. I am quite sure that this was the reason my husband and I felt so alone and isolated and came home with that hopeless feeling after church every Sunday.
Back to the DEATH part, though, this only pushes a believer into states of despair that they will never measure up to the standards of God and forever be in perpetual cycle of revisiting the cross or for the unbeliever that they CAN’T because they are not of the elect. I have yet to see effective witnessing coming from Calvinism.
Anyway my two cents worth- I hope my comments were not too confusing.
LikeLike
T4H
Not at all–very good points–I am going to repost some of it.
LikeLike
Anyway your post is a good precise description of Calvinism in a nutshell- will have to copy this.
LikeLike
When you are kept in this state of continually observing your sin, your salvation never seems sure, you keep searching for why, the pastor is necessary to help you sort out your sinfulness (so “they” say), you never really grow to maturity. You remain passive in the pews, hoping you will one day arrive at completion and be able to do something.
I don’t think that most of the people who preach this stuff really know the destruction it reaps. They actually believe it is good — because it comes from history and is tried and true. The problem is, they never stop to look at the fruit in history or currently. They don’t even see reality that Christendom is in now. They look everywhere else and blame it on all kinds of worldy happenings. Funny, isn’t it, they don’t seem to be practicing what they preach – examining themselves. Of course, if they are only looking at the cross, they won’t actually see what Scripture exhorts them “to do,” will they? Pastors and members alike are in a perpetual, unfruitful loop.
LikeLike
“Funny, isn’t it, they don’t seem to be practicing what they preach – examining themselves.”
Actually Bridget, this is not really necessary if you think about it. They redefine sin so that it is not necessary to examine themselves. One thing I have noticed for a long time is that NOT having their form of correct doctrine is the real sin. Since they do believe it is THE correct doctrine, it is not an issue with them. The correct form of doctrine can be anything from comp/pat roles to Sovereignty of God as they define it to obeying the leaders.
It really falls under several of Lifton’s points
1. Doctrine over people
2. Thought control
3. Loading the language
A lot of the younger YRR guys have not taken the time or perhaps do not have the ability to really think it out as in what the results are. I am constantly asking how they define the fruit. Does Jesus provide the fruit, too, so they don’t have to?
Correct doctrine is everything to them. More important than love, mercy, individuals, etc. It really is a form of totalitarianism. And many churches have turned into soft re-education camps.
LikeLike
trusthimonly,
I come from the seeker movement where sin was no big deal. Cheap grace all around. And I saw a lot of creepy evil in that movement. That is one reason I was attracted to Calvinism years back. Someone was finally talking about sin!
After years of study and looking at both groups, I have come to the conclusion they are on the same side of the coin. They just use different methods. Neither side believes in a real sanctification where we grow in Holiness and sin less and less in our walk here on earth. (Your will be done on EARTH as it is in heaven)
I was really convicted of this years back in my study reading Hebrews 10 and all of 1 John. How do I reconcile that I am a sinner and will always be a sinner even though saved? Most folks do not read all of 1 John because they love what chpt 1 says too much. I have been told by Reformed teachers/pastors that Hebrews 10:26-31 does not apply to us today.
The goal I saw was to keep people from feeling responsible for their words or actions by one group so they would feel good and keep coming back and the other to keep them focused on their wicked hearts in order to control them. both ways work to keep folks from being responsible. You even see this concept used by unbelievers in the world when you saw Clinton defenders say: he is only human. both groups who claim to be believers are saying the exact same thing but using different methods and words. Sin is normal in all groups from unbelievers to seekers to Reformed.
It is lawlessness. It is a belief that no matter what I am or what I do, I can remain saved because either Jesus obeys for us or we are expected to sin because we claimed once were were saved.
It is all over what calls itself Christendom and one reason churches are dying. They are just like the world’s systems by selling cheap grace or totalitarianism. More and more folks are burnt out on it. They want to see some transparancy so they are simply being Christians outside the institutions. Because most are corrupt. Not all, but more and more.
LikeLike
You are so right Lydia…..
I have also seen both sides- that of cheap grace and that of the legalist strain. What is mind boggling to me as a Christian is (if you are a believer) the absence of teaching of the Holy Spirit!! When I sin I know in my heart that I have done wrong- now of course when we are not regularly in the Word or prayer we can end up quenching the Holy Spirit so that we do not hear His voice; but I do get that convictional prick that I was displeasing to the Lord. Now I can either reject and choose to disobey ( which HEY! Calvinists this does happen to the believer!) and suffer the consequences of Gods chastening or I can choose to obey and reap the rewards of His blessings (which Barba stated that we should look forward to getting). These blessings come in whatever shape or form that the Good Lord decides to give us, but mainly they are the fruits of the Holy Spirit. But the easy cheap grace philosophy basically takes Gods gift of His Son and manipulates it to fit the package that will best sell to the cheapest bidder. The Legalist philosophy will try to sell its product by seducing one through his or her own self-righteousness or through guilty laden trimmings that one is always having to measure up in some way. Both are highly destructive.
Yes churches are dying- I hear stories all over of those either tired out or empty.
By the way, I read an interesting biography of Lord Byron. Come to find out he was a Calvinist at one point – began to feel that God would be always punishing him, that he turned to hedonism because he knew he would never measure up. Just an interesting side note of another lost soul who is the victim of a false doctrine.
LikeLike
(which Barba stated that we should look forward to getting)…….
I meant to say which Barba stated that we should NOT look forward to getting.
LikeLike
T4H
Right, rewards in this life for obedience is a concept most clear in the Bible. The fact that it will also bring difficulty doesn’t void the general principle. Obviously.
LikeLike
trust4himonly,
Please try to understand what I am really saying. I am not denying we receive blessings when we obey. My point is that often when we are most obedient, we have the most difficulties in the material and physical realm. For that reason, we should not judge whether we are successful in the Christian life by our life circumstances. The real blessing is in the obeying, not in some physical or material benefit we may reap.
LikeLike
Right Paul that is obvious, because most of us here are going through difficulty as we speak.
We did not leave our churches out of obedience (because of false teaching) and think we are in paradise on earth now. My husband and I have been living paycheck to paycheck, so the “word of faith” disillusionment is not what I am talking about.
Barba, my perspective on rewards is that the Bible promises that God will take care of our needs and that He also rewards us for our faithfulness. This can happen in any form- rewards can take place in meeting our physical needs, emotional or spiritual needs. I happen to look at the fruits of the Spirit as rewards/gifts to us by God when we follow Him in obedience. I look at the gifts He gives us to be of service in the church body; and yes, He does provide material needs, as well for our faithfulness. George Mueller certainly was provided in this way by God as a reward for his faithfulness in prayer by providing his orphanage with food. God delights in giving to His children when they serve Him. I think our biggest reward is what will await us in heaven- He promised us this reward for placing our faith and trust in Him for salvation.
LikeLike
Paul this is my frustration with Calvinism- they take simple concepts, like rewards (also salvation, etc. and etc.), and over analyze what Scripture states about it. They make these concepts bigger then what they are meant to be. This is what is confusing to poor Christians (and non-Christians)- at this I shake my head in bewilderment.
LikeLike