Do New Calvinist Elders Believe They are Salvific Mediators Between Us and God?
While some continually comment here at PPT that they can’t understand a thing John Immel and I write, they understand more than they realize. And some advice: not understanding a teaching A-Z doesn’t = “don’t understand it.” Focus on the elements that you do understand and add it to your knowledge. Those are building blocks used to build something; specifically, knowledge.
Also, say that John and I are diving way deep to look for sharks, and you see one swimming around the boat. That’s the experience I had yesterday when it was brought to my attention that New Calvinist elders are now plainly stating that they = “local church” and the “authority” of the local church. But the way the reader explained it was simple and profound:
“I thought there is only one mediator between God and man?”
Bingo. “But Paul, can we really say that New Calvinist elders think they are salvific mediators between us and God?”
ABSOLUTLEY.
New Calvinism is a return to the authentic Reformed gospel. Because Augustine, Gregory, Luther, and Calvin were Platonists and didn’t interpret reality with the grammatical normative, Protestants migrate away from Reformed authenticity into a hybrid, or light form of the original. That is why today, you have historical grammatical Calvinists (Jay Adams et al), and historical redemptive Calvinists (John Piper et al). It all boils down to mystical (mystical doctrines are always married to tyranny because it presumes the masses cannot understand reality) Calvinism and objective Calvinism. The latter retains contradictory vestiges of the former; primarily, sound soteriology, combined with Augustinian eschatology. You don’t have to understand all of these terms; simply file the concept away in your mind. The concept is a simple one.
The Reformation was really nothing more than the same Gnosticism (Gnosis: secret or lofty knowledge) that has plagued God’s people from the cradle of civilization. The Catholic Church was born of the Gnosticism that wreaked havoc on the first century church. Much of the New Testament is written with Gnosticism as a backdrop. Augustine et al were always Catholics and never left the foundations of the Catholic Church. I believe the present-day landscape of the church is absolutely identical to what was going on in the first century except for the technology.
Part and parcel with Gnosticism is the idea of the spiritual elite mediating between the masses and God; in particular, the salvific part (because the masses cannot comprehend reality). Augustine believed that one could not know for certain if they were saved or not, but posited the idea that your best shot is obedience to the institutional church. This is deep within the psyche of Western thought, and why there is so much money in religion. The American landscape is saturated by churches with $500,000 yearly budgets because that is where salvation is found—no matter how you live. Give at the office, and live any way you want to during the week.
And that’s why the Reformation also distorts the Trinity. The Trinity is applicable truth. Sometimes we look at the Trinity as One for certain applications, and sometimes we make the separate distinctions for other applications. In regard to mediation, God must be Father and Son must be mediator. The Reformed gospel makes Father and Son the same and elders the mediators. But there is only “one” mediator.
Like I said, New Calvinism is a return to the authentic Reformed gospel. Calvin et al clearly believed in the authority of elders to forgive sins on earth in God’s behalf:
Wherefore, our initiation into the fellowship of the church is, by the symbol of ablution, to teach us that we have no admission into the family of God, unless by his goodness our impurities are previously washed away (20).
Nor by remission of sins does the Lord only once for all elect and admit us into the Church, but by the same means he preserves and defends us in it. For what would it avail us to receive a pardon of which we were afterwards to have no use? That the mercy of the Lord would be vain and delusive if only granted once, all the godly can bear witness; for there is none who is not conscious, during his whole life, of many infirmities which stand in need of divine mercy. And truly it is not without cause that the Lord promises this gift specially to his own household, nor in vain that he orders the same message of reconciliation to be daily delivered to them.
On the other hand, the Lord has called his people to eternal salvation, and therefore they ought to consider that pardon for their sins is always ready. Hence let us surely hold that if we are admitted and ingrafted into the body of the Church, the forgiveness of sins has been bestowed, and is daily bestowed on us, in divine liberality, through the intervention of Christ’s merits, and the sanctification of the Spirit.
22. To impart this blessing to us, the keys have been given to the Church (Mt. 16:19; 18:18). For when Christ gave the command to the apostles, and conferred the power of forgiving sins, he not merely intended that they should loose the sins of those who should be converted from impiety to the faith of Christ; but, moreover, that they should perpetually perform this office among believers. This Paul teaches, when he says that the embassy of reconciliation has been committed to the ministers of the Church, that they may ever and anon in the name of Christ exhort the people to be reconciled to God (2 Cor. 5:20). Therefore, in the communion of saints our sins are constantly forgiven by the ministry of the Church, when presbyters or bishops, to whom the office has been committed, confirm pious consciences, in the hope of pardon and forgiveness by the promises of the gospel, and that as well in public as in private, as the case requires. For there are many who, from their infirmity, stand in need of special pacification, and Paul declares that he testified of the grace of Christ not only in the public assembly, but from house to house, reminding each individually of the doctrine of salvation (Acts 20:20, 21). Three things are here to be observed. First, Whatever be the holiness which the children of God possess, it is always under the condition, that so long as they dwell in a mortal body, they cannot stand before God without forgiveness of sins. Secondly, This benefit is so peculiar to the Church, that we cannot enjoy it unless we continue in the communion of the Church. Thirdly, It is dispensed to us by the ministers and pastors of the Church, either in the preaching of the Gospel or the administration of the Sacraments, and herein is especially manifested the power of the keys, which the Lord has bestowed on the company of the faithful. Accordingly, let each of us consider it to be his duty to seek forgiveness of sins only where the Lord has placed it. Of the public reconciliation which relates to discipline, we shall speak at the proper place (Calvin Institutes 4.1.20-22).
In contrast, the apostle Paul said there is only ONE mediator, and made a clear distinction of terms between “mediator” and “teacher”:
1 Timothy 2:5 – For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all people. This has now been witnessed to at the proper time. 7 And for this purpose I was appointed a herald and an apostle—I am telling the truth, I am not lying—and a true and faithful teacher of the Gentiles.
When is the discernment blogosphere going to hunker down on this simple concept and demand that those who play both sides of the fence clarify their position on this? And why is it important? Because the idea of mediators other than Christ always leads to tyranny. Mysticism is the mother because it presupposes a truth/reality beyond the five senses that the masses cannot understand. It is anti-grammatical, and posits a redemptive stargate. Grammatical rules are merely guardrails, and empirically hinder orthodoxy on God’s behalf. Grammatical interpretation empowers the individual.
This was the forte of the first century Nicolaitans, which means, “power over the laity.” And this is exactly where we find ourselves today—history repeating itself.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
Reblogged this on Clearcreek Chapel Watch.
LikeLike
Diving Deep to find sharks… LOLOLOLOLOL….
No, that is not what I’m doing at all. I’m standing on solid rational ground pointing out that the dorsal fins are NOT attached to DOLPHINS.
Sharks in dolphin clothing . . . get it?
)snicker(
Sharks feed in shallows waters folks . . . and the sheeple keep chumming the waters with intellectual vacancy.
Daaaa dant . . .
Daaaa dant . . .
Daa dant daa dant . . .
Daa dant daa dant . . .
Dadant dadant daadant . . .
Dadant dadant daadant . . .
Dadantdadantdaadant Dadantdadantdaadant Dadantdadantdaadant . . .
Just call me Brody
LikeLike
John,
Would you please address this laughable nonsense: http://patriotdepot.com/1599-geneva-study-bible-bonded-leather/
LikeLike
John, I am not sure how more obvious it can get before it is total disaster for our country and too late to turn back. We are on the brink. (I think the YRR and Obama share the same DNA–micromanaging people because WE know what is best for you)
There was NOTHING of this sort of control in churches when I was a kid proportionally. You had a few wackos here and there but they usually made the paper at some point. Now it is the new normal. I have seen MAJOR changes in last 25 years that would have been unheard of such as these huge buildings in evangelicalism. Only the Catholics were throwing money around for Cathedrals. :o)
. And of course people in this country keep selling their soul for pottage. Literally giving away their rights to their own body. Today, I was amazed at how many people were interviewed on the street saying they were signing up for “free healthcare”.
But then the” educated” will give guys like CJ or James MacDonald their money thinking it is pious. Please tell me there are bright spots out there except for us few on the internet. Why are so many cowards now in speaking up?
LikeLike
Lydia,
I find the timing of your statement in line to what I wrote in Peter Lumpkins blog.
It seems the doctrinal strife has become so toxic among the Theologian Academics that is hard to Identify the kind Love among them that god values in 1 Corinthians 13:13.
This sin has to be rubbing off in churches and even in Gov’t.
How is it possible for local churches, the Senate and Congress to love one another, when by appearence many in leadership don’t love each other? This sin only exacerbates more sin.
No disrespect to my former Stealth New Calvinist Pastor, but in listening to his Methodolgy I failed to recognize Love in his preaching for 1 year before I dismissed myself.
I myself began to look at things more harsh lacking love myself after enduring this Methodology that I couldn’t embrace or become a part of.
I think this question needs to be asked by all in the SBC leadership, “if we can’t embrace and practice 1 Corithians 13:13 among each other, how is it possible for any of us to claim we are saved?”
LikeLike
Mark,
Unity and loves flows from TRUTH. That’s why we fight for it. And pray tell, how would love ever be possible among the totally depraved? The tone of your former pastor isn’t even in the ballpark–that’s a mere symptom of the whole total depravity of the saints motif. Your former pastor’s problem is not his tone, it’s what he believes.
LikeLike
We called that music “dead ant” music growing up! lol
And yes. Most people are bitten by sharks in just a couple of feet of water. Two. But then, that’s where most people hang out when they’re actually IN the ocean, right?
Same principle. Wolves in sheep’s clothing are going to HANG OUT IN CHURCH! I don’t think many pewsitters get this concept. That’s where the wolves ARE! Not somewhere else.
Lydia, educated doesn’t necessarily = smart. As a matter of fact, I don’t see much correlation anymore. Many more college grads, but the knowledge/smarts aren’t always there. And don’t get me started on wisdom, which doesn’t have to be tied to any type of formal education. I’m not knocking education, I strongly believe in formal education. I’ve just noticed knowledge doesn’t = wisdom or wise actions. Knowledge doesn’t automatically convert into wise actions. There’s still a choice to be made.
Paul, Can you give us an update on your youtube account? Do you have full privileges yet?
LikeLike
AM,
Getting ready to post on the update shortly.
LikeLike
Lydia …
I’m sure you’ve heard my commentary about why the intellectuals are attracted to Calvinism and the whole Platonist construct. Intellectuals tend to make a formal effort to integrate the whole scope of their rational life.
But Intellectual does not mean innovator. Most people are not intellectually independent thinkers so they gravitate to systematic ideas that have already been assembled. For intellectual pew sitters the turnkey solution for this is the Platonist/Augustinian/Calvinist construct. It is what most people have heard from the time their parents were talking about Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny so no one ever really has the nerve to challenge the traditions.
And intellectuals tend to assume they are superior — and for all intents and purposes they are superior in terms of their ability (just like some men are superior track runners) — but that superiority metastasizes into tyranny when combined with doctrines that affirms their superiority and insists that “Transcendence” empowers them to rule the “inferior” people’s lives.
This metastasized superiority is what we see in Obama. This is the same metastasized superiority coming out of the New Calvinist movement. The philosophy tells them that the correct expression of government is for the superior people to rule the inferior.
The cowardice comes from a lack of Philosophical confidence. Most people have a terrible time defending their own right to live. They have an impossible time saying that they are morally correct to live for their own sake; that their existence is morally justified to conduct their own rational life. And since this is the root conflict, they can’t possibly win any subsequent argument. The fight of the ages is who owns man: The state vs Man owns himself. Until a person can declare his own sovereignty without equivocation … there is no defense to be offered.
As for Bright spots?
Honestly … I don’t know. The pessimist in me thinks we are heading for another Dark Ages.
LikeLike
Mark, I hear ya!
I also “sat under” reformed teaching, failed to recognize love. I also looked at things more harsh lacking love myself. Both made me realize it/I was wrong. And with my roots being in 70s Baptist church, it was a departure from what I was taught early on.
You hit on something key. Do we take God seriously when he says He is love? Love is the ultimate expression of value. How can we, preachers, pastors, leaders, anyone know (value) God if we don’t love? If we don’t value ourselves & each other? Not a great way to live, right?
LikeLike
johnimmel,
I can’t say intellectuals are attracted to Calvinism. I’d say college-educated. I worked in Corp. America for almost 2 decades, with college grads (myself one) & I wouldn’t say we were a bunch of intellectuals!
And if you truly think about Calvinism, you realize total depravity/inability is a hoax. Especially if you have unbelieving friends. Some who may be more honest, trustworthy, & see clear differences between right & wrong than other believing friends.
I could go on with other examples of how one can figure out why Calvinism is a hoax. But basically, if you compare reality to what is taught, you’ll come up short with contradictions that won’t go away. Unless you explain it with the word “mystery”. lol
Intellectuals can be duped but figure things out eventually. Even if it takes time. Intellectuals will think when their ideas/beliefs are confronted. They aren’t afraid of it. I don’t see that with Calvinists. I see a total shut down of conversation. Hands on ears, lalalala.
HBC’s actions against Paul are another example of this.
LikeLike
Hey A Mom….
I understand what you are saying. TRUE intellectuals don’t tend to get sucked down a bad path as long as they are given tools to make better choices. I guess I divide up people into a few categories. The Unintentional Feeble Minded Soul. The Unfocused Passive Minded Pseudo Thinker. The Disenfranchised Cynical Intellectual. The Intellectual Visionary.
I wrote about these four kinds of people here: http://spiritualtyranny.com/foundational-thoughts/my-intended-audience/
I think you are describing the cynical intellectual… the person that is not dependent on group think but doesn’t understand how to advance their specific perspective/understand the whole scope of the philosophical picture. But this group is still very susceptible to getting pulled into the Reformed Construct. Most of the men in Neo Calvinist leadership are not stupid . . . but they have become true believers. A smart true believer is a formidable foe.
Of course agree that Calvinism is a hoax… but the power behind the hoax is the appeal to transcendence that I mention in my James MacDonald article… most smart people have a very hard time overcoming the presumptions imbedded in the Platonist/Augustinian construct. It takes a lot of work to unravel that mess.
Anyway… that is why I think smart people get sucked down this path.
LikeLike
A Mom,
Going through the torture of enduring a Preacher that taught his Stealth Reformed Theology that lacked any identifiable love for a year, caused me to dig into scriptures and research terms he constantly used.
I discovered a couple of major problems about myself. I was niave about the Doctrinal Strife within the SBC that has been combative lacking love and I wasn’t scripturally literate enough to know what was happening to me, our church or how to question his Methodology that by appearance lacked Love.
As a matter of fact 6 months into his tenure he openly rebuked the Congregation behind the pulpit of those who struggled to embrace his Sin Centered Methodology which was unlike any of us ever witnessed, going so far as saying he could “tickle ears” and preach on “Self-Love” but that is not what he is about or called to do.
I still struggle with bitterness, because on numerous occasions my attempt for him for him to be more specific about his doctrine he only identified it as “Truth”. When he left the church he didn’t fully disclose his Doctrine other than embracing TULIP.
2 years into his tenure, he attempted to conduct TULIP class when I revealed (after much research and shunning) to the board that I had suspected he was a some kind Calvinist. At that time nobody including myself even saw the Book of TULIP. He resigned when he realized TULIP wasn’t going to be embraced.
LikeLike
Hey Paul…
I went to look at that Geneva Bible thing and … Sigh… this madness rears its head about every five years.
I had an essay that I wrote some years ago for College that dealt with this at length but I can’t find it. I’ll keep plunking around but in the interim I will say … mostly the whole discussion of inspiration/authority/canonicity is just tiresome. Reality confirms virtually zero percent of our existing doctrines and as near as I can tell, there is nothing to be gained by pointing out the details of the evolution of cannon. People refuse to have a rational objective conversation about this specific discussion. Never mind the conceit of a bunch of 21st century English speaking American’s thumping their English translations and insisting—with a straight face—that they have THE only inspired “word of God.”
So … for the most part I say whatever . . . If people want to spend 49.95 on THE true word of God, then hey . . . I’m a capitalist. If it makes them feel better to spend the money then by all means … knock yourself out.
And I’ve got some rabbits feet that were the original ones that hopped beside Jesus on the Mount of Olives. That makes them valuable right? And the Government didn’t pass laws to prevent them from hoping. So … for 29.95 I’ll make sure everyone gets the authentic rabbit’s feet that will guarantee that Christians finally get their doctrine right. Well, it will guarantee that you feel better about the doctrine they hear taught at church.
LikeLike
Notice how he kinda forgets to mention that it’s a Calvin commentary. A symbol of liberty? Good grief.
LikeLike