Paul's Passing Thoughts

Some Good “Right Hand” Information on Calvinism’s Death Knell

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on May 14, 2013

TANC LOGO“The Reformers take their place in human history as those who throw the gauntlet down at Christ’s feet when He warned to not take away or add to the word of God. Nothing affords the ability to do that like a meta-narrative. There has never been a more formidable onslaught against the truth of God than the Reformation’s meta-narrative.”  

Calvinist’s don’t often know their right hand from their left hand because Reformed theology communicates from an entirely different metaphysical construct than the norm. Calvinists live in a world that is comfortable with contradictions because Calvinists reject literal grammaticism as a tool for interpreting reality. Calvinists have replaced literal grammaticism with meta-narrative, and the central theme of the meta-narrative (reality as narrative) is “Christocentricity.” Luther laid all of the foundations for this in his Heidelberg Disputation. This is a really, really big deal because Christians are people of The Book. Christianity lives or dies based upon what method interprets the Bible. If we can’t properly interpret truth, there is NO abundant life.

This is my primary theme at this year’s TANC Conference. Christ called on us to interpret the Bible literally within a grammatical construct. Allegory, etc., are communication tools that aid us in understanding objective truth that is to be applied literally. We don’t apply elements of allegory (i.e., pluck out your eye or cut off your hand), but we do apply the literal applications. Christ gave us brains so that we can think for ourselves: “it would be better” should indicate the point Christ was making; God is extremely offended by sin.

Christ propagated grammaticism in no uncertain terms when He annihilated all arguments against a resurrection by pointing out the verb tense of “I am.” The exchange is well worth reading in the full context:

Matthew 22:23 – The same day Sadducees came to him, who say that there is no resurrection, and they asked him a question, 24 saying, “Teacher, Moses said, ‘If a man dies having no children, his brother must marry the widow and raise up offspring for his brother.’ 25 Now there were seven brothers among us. The first married and died, and having no offspring left his wife to his brother. 26 So too the second and third, down to the seventh. 27 After them all, the woman died. 28 In the resurrection, therefore, of the seven, whose wife will she be? For they all had her.”

29 But Jesus answered them, “You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God. 30 For in the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. 31 And as for the resurrection of the dead, have you not read what was said to you by God: 32 ‘I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob’? He is not God of the dead, but of the living.” 33 And when the crowd heard it, they were astonished at his teaching.

The Reformed method of interpretation is not that of Christ. The Reformers take their place in human history as those who throw the gauntlet down at Christ’s feet when He warned to not take away or add to the word of God. Nothing affords the ability to do that like a meta-narrative. There has never been a more formable onslaught against the truth of God than that of the Reformation’s meta-narrative. Hence, the Reformers of our day state that grammar is merely a “guardrail for communication” but actually “hinders” the Bible’s true meaning (propagated by John MacArthur confidant Rick Holland). Throughout the book How People Change, Paul David Tripp concurs that the Bible states many truths laterally, but to take those truths literally circumvents the “saving work of Christ” in the believer. As an aside, note also that Christians still need to be saved.

So, no wonder that contradictions abound within the Reformed community. The ONLY objectivity is the gospel narrative. But narratives are open to a plethora of interpretation. Instead, the apostle Paul called for the “one mind in Christ.”

The most notable contradiction is disagreement on double imputation. To effectively argue against double imputation is to drive a dagger through the heart of the Reformation. Because the Reformed definition of righteousness is a perfect keeping of the law to maintain our just standing, the idea that Christ’s perfect obedience was imputed to our sanctification (and continues to be on the basis of us living out our sanctification by faith alone) is efficacious to the Reformed gospel.

The meta-narrative is that Christ died for our justification and lived a perfect life for our sanctification so that we can secure our just standing by faith alone in sanctification. In contrast, the grammatical approach sees sanctification as totally separate from justification, and double imputation being: our sins imputed to Christ and God the Father’s righteousness being imputed to us. A two-way double imputation versus a one-way double imputation. In the latter, Christians remain totally depraved, in the former they are new creatures because they now bear God’s seed within them. Hence, they co-labor with God in sanctification completely separate from justification. In the latter, progressive justification is made possible by progressive imputation; in the former, all imputation is a finished work before the foundation of the world.

We inherited the fullness of the Godhead before creation; we appropriate its power in the present through obedience, and will be redeemed by God (when He comes to collect what belongs to Him) in our glorification.

Nevertheless, some in the Reformed camp lodge par excellent argumentation against Reformed double imputation; the right hand doesn’t know from the left. With all of the above said, I would like to present a right-handed apology against Reformed double imputation. In the classic tradition of orthodoxy, a Reformed term for academic truth repackaged for parishioner mantraism, the following articles are predicated on the opinions of men. Regardless, the quotes that argue against Reformed double imputation couldn’t be better stated. Without further ado, here is the list of links:

http://johngreenview.wordpress.com/2010/09/26/imputed-active-obedience-iao-a-must-or-a-misdirection/

http://johngreenview.wordpress.com/2010/10/04/imputed-active-obedience-iao-a-must-or-a-misdirection-2/

http://johngreenview.wordpress.com/2010/10/05/imputed-active-obedience-iao-a-must-or-a-misdirection-3/

http://johngreenview.wordpress.com/2010/10/06/imputed-active-obedience-iao-a-must-or-a-misdirection-4/

http://johngreenview.wordpress.com/2010/10/30/imputed-active-obedience-iao-a-must-or-a-misdirection-5/

http://johngreenview.wordpress.com/2010/11/01/imputed-active-obedience-iao-a-must-or-a-misdirection-6/

http://johngreenview.wordpress.com/2010/11/15/imputed-active-obedience-iao-a-must-or-a-misdirection-7/

http://johngreenview.wordpress.com/2010/11/17/imputed-active-obedience-iao-a-must-or-a-misdirection-8/

http://johngreenview.wordpress.com/2010/11/30/imputed-active-obedience-iao-a-must-or-a-misdirection-9/

http://johngreenview.wordpress.com/2010/12/01/imputed-active-obedience-iao-a-must-or-a-misdirection-10-2/

http://johngreenview.wordpress.com/2011/01/20/imputed-active-obedience-iao-a-must-or-a-misdirection-11/

http://johngreenview.wordpress.com/2011/02/15/imputed-active-obedience-iao-a-must-or-a-misdirection-12/

Page with all links:

http://johngreenview.wordpress.com/?s=IAO

2 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. paulspassingthoughts said, on May 14, 2013 at 1:32 PM

    Reblogged this on Clearcreek Chapel Watch.

    Like

  2. […] Some Good “Right Hand” Information on Calvinism’s Death Knell. […]

    Like


Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: