Paul's Passing Thoughts

Advocate for the Spiritually Abused? Then Wade Burleson Should Denounce Election in Sanctification

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on March 11, 2013

ppt-jpeg4“This is because Western culture has never adequately exposed Reformed theology for what it really is. As long as Protestantism clings to the Reformation myth, it will never completely break free from its bondage to anemic sanctification.”

 “If Burleson wants to be an advocate for the spiritually abused he should denounce his Reformed gospel of spiritual tyranny. While he may help some people heal from abuse, he will go back to his pulpit and produce twice as many abusers.”  

Last night at our evening Bible study we discussed election. Not election for justification (salvation), but election in sanctification (our Christian life). This is the Reformed idea that God sovereignly elects all of our good works in our Christian life in the same way that he elects some to be saved and passes over others. This leaves them to the choice that is inevitable if God doesn’t intervene; man will never choose God on his own. In the same way concerning sanctification, man is still totally depraved, and unless God intervenes will only do works that are filthy rags before God. In salvation, God only changes man’s position, not his nature. Therefore, in sanctification, God imputes His own good works to our life via intervention and leaves us to our own total depravity in the rest. Choice in justification; works in sanctification; God completely sovereign in both.

Though the application of this is somewhat complex, it boils down to the Reformation’s definition of double imputation: Christ’s righteousness was imputed to us positionally by His death, and the perfect obedience He demonstrated in His life is imputed to our sanctification as a way to keep our justification intact until glorification. Hence, to not believe in sanctified sovereignly elected works in our Christian life is paramount to works salvation. “The same gospel that saved us also sanctifies us.” Sanctification must be a continual revisiting of salvation by faith alone in order to maintain our justification. This is the very heart of Calvinism. Yes, we do something in sanctification: we continually revisit our need for the gospel, and as we do that, the works of Christ are imputed to us by faith alone in sanctification. This is the theses of the Reformation’s magnum opus, Luther’s Heidelberg Disputation to the Augustinian Order, and articulated by John Calvin in the Institutes of the Christian Religion. This opposes Biblicism which sees double imputation as our sins imputed to Christ and God’s righteousness imputed to us and sanctification being an entirely different consideration.

We discussed how this authentic doctrine of the Reformation has wreaked havoc on the church. When God is seen as completely sovereign in sanctification, ideological conclusions are then drawn from what actually happens in real life. Rape is God’s will, and the perpetrator is seen as one who is acting out expected behavior where God has not intervened. “But for the grace of God, there go I.” We have all said it. No? All of grace in salvation—all of grace in sanctification. The only difference between you and a rapist is grace; therefore, who are you to judge? Even if you are the victim. Luther and Calvin thought righteous indignation a joke, and Calvin called justice, “mere iniquity.” Luther’s theology of the cross deemed suffering as the most valuable asset of the Reformation’s inner-nihilist theology:

He, however, who has emptied himself (cf. Phil. 2:7) through suffering no longer does works but knows that God works and does all things in him. For this reason, whether God does works or not, it is all the same to him. He neither boasts if he does good works, nor is he disturbed if God does not do good works through him. He knows that it is sufficient if he suffers and is brought low by the cross in order to be annihilated all the more. It is this that Christ says in John 3:7, »You must be born anew.« To be born anew, one must consequently first die and then be raised up with the Son of Man. To die, I say, means to feel death at hand (Heidelberg Disputation: Theses 24).

Note that this constant seeking after suffering and self-deprivation leads to being “raised up” in the Christian life. This constant seeking after death leads to joyful rebirths when Christ’s obedience is imputed to us. This is the basis of John Piper’s Christian Hedonism which also implements Theses 28 of the Disputation. As you can see, it’s what they call the new birth. The new birth is something that continually reoccurs in salvation when Christ’s obedience is imputed to us.

The indifference towards suffering that this theology breeds cannot be overstated. It is such that Calvin’s beseechment of the Geneva counsel to have a detractor beheaded rather than burned with green wood is a supposed act of compassion that is Reformed folklore. And be absolutely positive of this: the roots of authentic Calvinism are %99.99 responsible for the spiritual tyranny in the contemporary church—especially among New Calvinists.

This is why I have a problem with Pastor Wade Burleson being postured as a spiritual abuse advocate. I realize that he is a well-known pastor and therefore a valuable advocate for a cause, but promoting him as a defender of the spiritually abused separates logic from consequences.  It encourages a hypothetical idea that because all Nazis didn’t execute Jews, Nazism doesn’t necessarily lead to the persecution of Jews. Right, not in all cases, but for every person Burleson helps his doctrine will produce twice the indifference and abuse in other people. Many members of the present-day Nazi party are seemingly quality people who could be utilized in good causes, but the possibility is remote because Western culture has been properly educated in regard to Nazi ideology. Such is not the case with Reformed theology. While a Nazi might make a good carpenter you would likely not hire one as an advocate for the Anti-Defamation League. There are Nazis who would do a fine job in that role but the ideology would do more harm than good in the long run.

We also discussed how authentic Calvinism dies a social death from time to time because of the tyranny that it produces and then experiences resurgence paved by the weak sanctification left in its wake. This is because Western culture has never adequately exposed Reformed theology for what it really is. As long as Protestantism clings to the Reformation myth, it will never completely break free from its bondage to anemic sanctification.

Reformation History

Burleson strongly endorses one of the core four individuals who helped found the present-day New Calvinist movement, Jon Zens:

One of my favorite theologians is Jon Zens. Jon edits the quarterly periodical called Searching Together, formerly known as the Baptist Reformation Review. Jon is thoroughly biblical, imminently concerned with the Scriptures …. The best $10.00 you will ever spend is the yearly subscription to Searching Together (

Zens, who has also been known as an advocate for the spiritually abused, was a key contributor to the Reformed think tank that launched present-day New Calvinism (The Australian Forum) of which some Burleson promoters refer to as the “Calvinistas.” It’s not meant as a compliment. But yet, Burleson’s theology is one and the same with them:

Those who have read Grace and Truth to You for any amount of time know that this author is persuaded the Bible teaches that the eternal rewards of Christians are those rewards–and only those rewards–which are earned by Christ. It is Christ’s obedience to the will and law of the Father that obtains for God’s adopted children our inheritance. It is Christ’s perfect obedience which brings to sinners the Father’s enduring favor and guarantees for us our position as co-heirs with Christ (

Those who have faith in Christ will never appear at any future judgment of God, or be rewarded for their good behavior. Our sins were judged at the cross, and the behavior for which we are rewarded is Christ’s behavior (Ibid).

Obviously, other than the previous points made, Burleson’s statement proclaiming Zens as “thoroughly biblical” and his outright rejection of 1COR 3:10-15 and 2COR 5:9-10 are troubling to say the least. Burleson also holds strongly to the exact same method of interpretation that makes elected works in sanctification possible among the “Calvinistas.” That would be the Bible as gospel meta narrative approach. It uses the Bible as a tool for gospel contemplationism which results in the works of Christ being imputed to our sanctification when we “make our story His story.” Luther got the concept from Pope Gregory the Great who believed that meditating on Christ’s works in the Scriptures endears us to Him romantically and thus inspires joyful obedience. It’s all the same rotten mysticism propagated today by John Piper and Francis Chan. It’s a mystical (actually Gnostic) approach to the Bible that makes elected works in sanctification possible.

As a cute way of propagating this nonsense, Burleson has named his para-church ministry “Istoria Ministries Blog.” His blog subheading noted that istoria is a Greek word that combines the idea of history and story:

Istoria is a Greek word that can be translated as both story and history. Istoria Ministries, led by Wade and Rachelle Burleson, helps people experience the life transforming power of Jesus Christ so that their story may become part of His story.

This ministry called him out on the fact that the word istoria does not appear anywhere in the Scriptures which led him to change the subheading a couple of days later. He then changed the subheading to a citation (GAL 1:18) that is the only place in the Bible where the word appears. Only thing is, even then, it’s not “istoria,” it’s “historeo”:

g2477. ιστορεω historeo; from a derivative of 1492; to be knowing (learned), i. e. (by implication) to visit for information (interview):— see.

This citation has nothing to do with his original point of naming his ministry as such. It’s simply the only reference he could find that proves that the word is in the Bible. Kinda, as I said, even then the word is not “istoria.” Istoria is a more contemporary Greek word that in fact can be used as “history” or “story.” But the earliest use of the word seems to be circa 1300, and is most prevalent in referring to the “story paintings” of medieval times. It’s just a lame, almost adolescent attempt to argue for this approach to the Bible.

If Burleson wants to be an advocate for the spiritually abused he should denounce his Reformed gospel of spiritual tyranny. While he may help some people heal from abuse, he will go back to his pulpit and produce twice as many abusers.


102 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. gracewriterrandy said, on March 15, 2013 at 10:58 PM

    What I am saying is that any answer I could give you would be meaningless apart from an agreement as to what “righteousness” is. If righteousness is eating ice cream, for example, then no, eating ice cream probably is probably not put to our account. Definition is essential to an understanding of the gospel.


    • paulspassingthoughts said, on March 15, 2013 at 10:59 PM

      Ok Randy. Righteousness is perfect obedience to the law. There, now answer the question.


  2. gracewriterrandy said, on March 15, 2013 at 11:00 PM

    Tell me your definition of “Christ’s obedience.” Obedience to what?


  3. trust4himonly said, on March 15, 2013 at 11:02 PM

    hey Paul do you think we could “speed talk” that last paragraph of mine- it would be fun.
    i am a little tired of having to say the same thing over and over again- I feel for you with this blog. I am going to bed this is my last comment on this post.

    Good night GWR- no hard feelings?


  4. gracewriterrandy said, on March 15, 2013 at 11:02 PM

    There can be no declaration of righteousness that is not defined as obedience to that Law. “The doers of the Law will be declared righteous.” If anyone is declared righteous before God, it must be based on obedience to the Law. Whose obedience to the Law do you think is put to our account? It was not God, the Father’s righteousness since he was not made under the Law. It clearly was not ours. Paul wrote, “Christ has been made “righteousness” to us.”


    • paulspassingthoughts said, on March 15, 2013 at 11:05 PM

      That’s good Randy, now answer the question.


      • gracewriterrandy said, on March 15, 2013 at 11:16 PM

        If we are made the righteousness of God in him and he is made to us “righteousness” then it only follows that his righteousness is imputed to us. There can be no declaration of righteousness apart from imputation of that righteousness that we have agreed is a perfect conformity to God’s Law. Such righteousness must be imputed since God declares ungodly ones to be righteous.


      • paulspassingthoughts said, on March 15, 2013 at 11:28 PM

        Randy: this is why you are a heretic.

        1. We were declared righteous and justified before Christ became a man and went to the cross (Romans 8:29, 30). Therefore, there was no need for His perfect life to be imputed to our justification. His obedience to the cross and His resurrection was all that was needed.
        2. We are justified APART FROM THE LAW.
        3. We are presently righteous because God’s seed is in us and we have righteous/good desires.
        4. We are not perfect because our body is not yet redeemed, but that doesn’t exclude the fact that we are righteous.
        5. The part of us that isn’t righteous is not under the law but under grace.
        6. Christ’s obedience IS NOT imputed to our sanctification.
        7. NO one is justified by the works of the law. I would assume that would mean Christ didn’t have to keep the law for our justification. Why would he if we are not justified by the law to begin with?
        8. Our sin was imputed to Christ, and God’s righteousness was imputed to us. We were justified by Christ’s one act of obedience to the cross, not the obedience of His life. That one act resulted in the righteousness of God being put to our account.

        A. Repent.
        B. I’m going to bed.


  5. gracewriterrandy said, on March 15, 2013 at 11:03 PM

    We are made the righteousness of God IN HIM.


  6. trust4himonly said, on March 15, 2013 at 11:06 PM

    By the way GWR a good article on Puritans to read

    Coercing Morality in Puritan Massachusetts

    Mises Daily: Tuesday, May 01, 2012 by Murray N. Rothbard


    • paulspassingthoughts said, on March 15, 2013 at 11:12 PM

      t4h got a link?


  7. gracewriterrandy said, on March 15, 2013 at 11:19 PM

    It is for this reason justification cannot be progressive. It is complete in Christ. It can’t get any better.

    I’m going to bed. Perhaps we can talk more later. Nite.


  8. lydiasellerofpurple said, on March 15, 2013 at 11:30 PM

    “You seem bitter and angry”

    Classic response. You forgot “emotional”. :o)

    You don’t have the power to make me bitter or angry because I don’t allow you that sort of power in my life. It is just a blog, Randy. It is not an ecclesiastical court and you are not a magistrate. Get a grip, buddy.


  9. Anonymous said, on March 16, 2013 at 8:10 AM…/Coercing-Morality-in-Purita…

    Sorry about that Paul….


  10. trust4himonly said, on March 16, 2013 at 8:15 AM

    Here ya go Paul- sorry about that:…/Coercing-Morality-in-Purita…


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s