paulspassingthoughts said, on January 20, 2014 at 8:29 PM
And what does all of this simply lead to? Things like Calvin saying that sins committed as Christians continually separate us from grace, and therefore, we must continually return to the gospel to remain saved. And moreover, that perpetual forgiveness can only be found through Reformed elders in the church–indefensible.
You said: “Sin in the life of a Christian is reckoned to the person we were who is dead. That person was enslaved to sin and free to do good.” I contend our sin is reckoned to Christ, and no one does good prior to salvation.
as it is written: “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.” (Romans 3:10-12 ESV)
You said: “Reformed theology denies the new birth by saying that the Christian is still enslaved to sin by virtue of the fact that he/she cannot keep the law perfectly.” You have said many untruthful things about the reformed faith that I have passed by, but I’m going to call you on this one. I have read Calvin’s Institutes, many of Luther’s works and many other reformed theologians and I’ve never read or heard any teach enslavement to sin after regeneration. Romans 6 clearly teaches otherwise.
I don’t even know where to start with your last paragraph so I’ll just say that I choose to know nothing but Christ and him crucified.
Lastly, can you point me to some theologians and writings that teach the theology you adhere to?
paulspassingthoughts said, on January 21, 2014 at 8:09 AM
Jon,
You are playing word games. The old man would not be dead without the cross. My point was obviously that the former man is no longer under the law accordingly. And obviously, you are taking Romans 3:10-12 out of context. If no one does good, it wouldn’t be more bearable for some than others in the eternal judgement. This fact must take human merit into account. No one does anything good in regard to earning justification–that’s the point of that passage–read the context.
” You said: “Reformed theology denies the new birth by saying that the Christian is still enslaved to sin by virtue of the fact that he/she cannot keep the law perfectly.” You have said many untruthful things about the reformed faith that I have passed by, but I’m going to call you on this one. I have read Calvin’s Institutes, many of Luther’s works and many other reformed theologians and I’ve never read or heard any teach enslavement to sin after regeneration. Romans 6 clearly teaches otherwise.”
Jon, are you kidding me? Where would I even start to list the documentation that refutes your state of denial? How about this: “We must strongly insist on two things: that no believer ever performed one work, which, if tested by the strict judgement of God, could escape condemnation; and, moreover, that were it granted to be possible (though it is not), yet the act being vitiated and polluted by the sins of which it is certain that the author of it is guilty, it is deprived of its merit. This is the cardinal point of the present discussion.”
And of course you know nothing other than Christ and Him crucified–that’s how you keep yourself saved. That and going to your local Reformed church to obtain absolution according to Calvin. Do you want me to cite that one as well?
Your last sentence says it all; viz, the following of men and tradition thing. but I will mention the fact that Dr. Jay Adams agrees with my contention in regard Sonship Theology; ie., the Christian life is powered by regeneration and not justification. So yes, I can point to a notable scholar who agrees with me. The statement that the Christian life is powered by regeneration and not the cross is a good Cliff note for what I believe. Justification is a finished work, regeneration is progressive and we do not merely experience it, we participate in it. Only problem is, Sonship Theology is exactly what Calvin believed.
If rejection of a theology that affirms “sonship only” is the test for being in your camp then count me and Calvin in too. If you are actually interested in the truth check out this post and the citations. I suspect you know this already but it doesn’t fit your anti-reformed agenda. Be anti-reformed, that is fine. I respect many including my Godly father who are; however, don’t propagate falsehoods in your argument against.
paulspassingthoughts said, on January 21, 2014 at 11:48 AM
Jon,
Here at PPT, we are not idiots as you assume. I guess one thing that does amaze me is the weird assumption that your very words carry some sort of authentication just because you said them. I understand this coming from the who’s who of satanic minions like Kevin DeYoung, but I also see this coming from the lower order of Calvinists as well. You guys truly live in another reality. The reality is Jon that the father of Sonship Theology coined many of the truism’s worn-out by the contemporary who’s who of the present-day Calvinist resurgence. You cite the link above that propagates the idea that the Reformers didn’t believe that all sanctification flows from justification, and then the doctrine of the vital union is offered as the “balance.” That doctrine states the same thing in another way. Furthermore, you offer the link while stating yourself that you know nothing but Christ and Him crucified.
Jon, you have served your purpose here, but now you are treating us like idiots, and that I will not tolerate.
Yeah. Funny. These Calvinists claim they don’t know anything and then proceed to bludgeon and savage everyone who does not accept their utterly impossible ideas. I’ve never seen the like of their hypocrisy. They claim complete epistemological impotence and then judge the whole friggin world according to their “sound doctrine”.
Paul, you rightly and refreshingly point out the tyranny, hypocrisy and madness spawned by their rational inbreeding.
paulspassingthoughts said, on January 21, 2014 at 1:33 PM
Argo,
Right, the guy says that I misrepresent Calvin by stating that Calvin believed that all sanctification flows from justification, then he gets on here and starts up with the “I know nothing but Christ and Him crucified” stuff. I guess its the “big lie” idea that if you plainly contradict yourself in broad daylight people won’t believe that it’s a contradiction because it’s so blatant. No one would tell a blatant lie that big–it must not be a lie. “Gee, it couldn’t be a contradiction that blatant, this guy must understand deep things I don’t understand.” Hence, when you confront Reformed leaders with blatant contradictions, they well often just look at you with a smile on their face and say, “Well, I think I just need to leave you in God’s hands.” Sometimes I grieve that there is a hell and that people are going there, other times I understand why.
And using “know(ing) nothing but Christ and Him crucified” as an excuse for their epistemological failure is taking the Apostle’s statement utterly out of context. They ALWAYS fall back on “well…what can mere mortals understand, really? But for the grace of God go I”.
This is code for “shut the hell up and submit to your elders”.
Paul,
There was much ego and pride mixed with my responses here. I apologize for that. I hope nothing but blessing for you. I don’t think you or your readers are idiots at all; quite the contrary.
God bless.
I have been reading your discussion with Jon. I also read the article he suggested. It looks like what the guy in the article wrote is completely different from what you said Reformed people believe. Also, could you explain “sonship theology” and tell me if it is that or Reformed theology you don’t like. It looks like they are not the same thing.
paulspassingthoughts said, on January 21, 2014 at 7:01 PM
Anon,
It’s not different. Vital Union is just another consonant buffer that attempts to reduce Reformed cognitive dissonance. Also, read the comment thread = total confusion. I am working on a post in regard to said article, and one of my points is the author’s deliberate attempt to deceive by inferring Calvin believed that Christians “work out” their own salvation (see 3.2.23 first sentence). I quote Calvin from the same context that the author does, and I show from 3.2.22ff that Calvin is saying exactly what he states that Calvin isn’t saying. One of the joys of my ministry is provoking the laity to read the Institutes for themselves. These guys probably need to stop assuming that people will not follow up on what they are claiming. No, I will not explain Sonship Theology to you. In “False Reformation,” I cite numerous sources to show that the soteriology of Sonship is exactly what the Reformers taught. I use the book Adams wrote in 1999 against Sonship and show that Calvin and Luther taught the same soteriology. Buy the book.
So you think “reformed theo” and “sonship theology” are the same? I am confused. Are you saying a person’s union with Christ has nothing to do with sanctification?
paulspassingthoughts said, on January 21, 2014 at 7:27 PM
Of course they are the same. They both teach that justification is progressive. And Who doesn’t know that the Reformers redefined almost every theological concept? Sorry, I don’t enter into discussions framed by Reformed presuppositions; viz, Reformed “sanctification” is really progressive justification.
At the end of DeYoungs article, he leaves the reader with this quote from Calvin.
“Not only does he cleave to us by an indivisible bond of fellowship, but with a wonderful communion, day by day, he grows more and more into one body with us, until he becomes completely one with us” (Institutes, 3.2.24)”
Christ grows more and more into one body until he becomes one with us??
The scripture I read says we have been made one with him at rebirth and as we are sanctified we become more like him. I am the one who does the changing. I am already one with Him.
How can anyone read that article through and get to this last quote and not see that the quote from Calvin does not agree with what DeYoung wrote? Does anyone else find that quote creepy and backwards? The quote most certainly makes justification a process “DAY by DAY, he (Christ) grows MORE and MORE into one body with us.”
According to this, I will be united more with Christ tomorrow and the next day than I am today, which makes the work of Christ sound ineffective (not able to redeem NOW.) Jesus had something different to say to the man on the cross next to him.
paulspassingthoughts said, on January 21, 2014 at 9:35 PM
Bridget,
Just finished our Acts study tonight and I am going to bed as I stayed up till 10 last night (2 hrs past my bedtime) and I am wiped out, but I want to revisit your point in the morning.
paulspassingthoughts said, on January 22, 2014 at 6:32 AM
Bridget,
What you have hit on is something that we have learned lately. We always thought that Calvinism was guilty of fusing justification and sanctification together making sanctification, for all practical purposes, progressive justification. And that is true, Calvin redefined sanctification as progressive justification (CI 3.14.ff). BUT, what we failed to see until recently is the fact that he also fused glorification into the mix as well. You are saved by the gospel, justification by faith alone, and you must continue to EXPERIENCE the new birth by focusing on your sin and continued need for the gospel. As Ligon Duncan states in the video, you must increase you affections for the gospel by focusing on the gospel. However, note that he states that even those affections are “alien.” So, sanctification is redefined as progressive justification, and the new birth is redefined as…and here it is…”mortification and vivification.” Mortification is a deeper and deeper recognition of our sin (“deep repentance”) leading to a deeper and deeper EXPERIENCE of resurrection (vivification). Our original new birth is redefined as a perpetual deeper and deeper EXPERIENCE of our original salvation rather than a onetime event. As you have so aptly stated: “The scripture I read says we have been made one with him at rebirth and as we are sanctified we become more like him. I am the one who does the changing. I am already one with Him.” So, to your point, instead of the new birth making us one with Him at conversion, oneness is progressive via the perpetual rebirth and can only be EXPERIENCED by faith alone in sanctification. As long as we do that as a way to remove kingdom works from sanctification because sanctification is the growing part of justification, we remain in the vital union; ie., we “get used to our justification.” This also fuses glorification with justification and sanctification. The progressive oneness increases to the ultimate oneness. Instead of being transformed in a twinkling of an eye at redemption, we are gradually glorified until the day of glorification. They are saying we can EXPERIENCE our future resurrection in the here and now in increased lesser degree. Hence, “DAY by DAY, he (Christ) grows MORE and MORE into one body with us.” In the following well traveled “Cross Chart,” the bigger cross is vivification, or more oneness, and the chart construct is the vital union: https://paulspassingthoughts.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/gospelgrid11.jpg Here is what happens when you focus on your doing rather than Christ’s doing and dying: https://paulspassingthoughts.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/shrinking-cross.jpg
By the way, this also coincides with their Dominion theology.
Really excellent points.This is why it is important that people read the Institutes for themselves, as Paul says. Imagine if legions of laity could so quickly see the unbiblical ideas and contradictions as you can.
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
db2….I was using Paul’s term to try and make a point. The words credited, counted or reckoned are scriptural and synonymous with imputed.
LikeLike
Jon,
And righteousness being imputed to us through Christ’s perfect obedience to the law; ie., His “doing AND dying” is NOT “apart from the law.”
LikeLike
And what does all of this simply lead to? Things like Calvin saying that sins committed as Christians continually separate us from grace, and therefore, we must continually return to the gospel to remain saved. And moreover, that perpetual forgiveness can only be found through Reformed elders in the church–indefensible.
LikeLike
You said: “Sin in the life of a Christian is reckoned to the person we were who is dead. That person was enslaved to sin and free to do good.” I contend our sin is reckoned to Christ, and no one does good prior to salvation.
as it is written: “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one.” (Romans 3:10-12 ESV)
You said: “Reformed theology denies the new birth by saying that the Christian is still enslaved to sin by virtue of the fact that he/she cannot keep the law perfectly.” You have said many untruthful things about the reformed faith that I have passed by, but I’m going to call you on this one. I have read Calvin’s Institutes, many of Luther’s works and many other reformed theologians and I’ve never read or heard any teach enslavement to sin after regeneration. Romans 6 clearly teaches otherwise.
I don’t even know where to start with your last paragraph so I’ll just say that I choose to know nothing but Christ and him crucified.
Lastly, can you point me to some theologians and writings that teach the theology you adhere to?
LikeLike
Jon,
You are playing word games. The old man would not be dead without the cross. My point was obviously that the former man is no longer under the law accordingly. And obviously, you are taking Romans 3:10-12 out of context. If no one does good, it wouldn’t be more bearable for some than others in the eternal judgement. This fact must take human merit into account. No one does anything good in regard to earning justification–that’s the point of that passage–read the context.
” You said: “Reformed theology denies the new birth by saying that the Christian is still enslaved to sin by virtue of the fact that he/she cannot keep the law perfectly.” You have said many untruthful things about the reformed faith that I have passed by, but I’m going to call you on this one. I have read Calvin’s Institutes, many of Luther’s works and many other reformed theologians and I’ve never read or heard any teach enslavement to sin after regeneration. Romans 6 clearly teaches otherwise.”
Jon, are you kidding me? Where would I even start to list the documentation that refutes your state of denial? How about this: “We must strongly insist on two things: that no believer ever performed one work, which, if tested by the strict judgement of God, could escape condemnation; and, moreover, that were it granted to be possible (though it is not), yet the act being vitiated and polluted by the sins of which it is certain that the author of it is guilty, it is deprived of its merit. This is the cardinal point of the present discussion.”
And of course you know nothing other than Christ and Him crucified–that’s how you keep yourself saved. That and going to your local Reformed church to obtain absolution according to Calvin. Do you want me to cite that one as well?
Your last sentence says it all; viz, the following of men and tradition thing. but I will mention the fact that Dr. Jay Adams agrees with my contention in regard Sonship Theology; ie., the Christian life is powered by regeneration and not justification. So yes, I can point to a notable scholar who agrees with me. The statement that the Christian life is powered by regeneration and not the cross is a good Cliff note for what I believe. Justification is a finished work, regeneration is progressive and we do not merely experience it, we participate in it. Only problem is, Sonship Theology is exactly what Calvin believed.
LikeLike
If rejection of a theology that affirms “sonship only” is the test for being in your camp then count me and Calvin in too. If you are actually interested in the truth check out this post and the citations. I suspect you know this already but it doesn’t fit your anti-reformed agenda. Be anti-reformed, that is fine. I respect many including my Godly father who are; however, don’t propagate falsehoods in your argument against.
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevindeyoung/2012/01/05/the-missing-factor/comment-page-1/?comments
LikeLike
Jon,
Here at PPT, we are not idiots as you assume. I guess one thing that does amaze me is the weird assumption that your very words carry some sort of authentication just because you said them. I understand this coming from the who’s who of satanic minions like Kevin DeYoung, but I also see this coming from the lower order of Calvinists as well. You guys truly live in another reality. The reality is Jon that the father of Sonship Theology coined many of the truism’s worn-out by the contemporary who’s who of the present-day Calvinist resurgence. You cite the link above that propagates the idea that the Reformers didn’t believe that all sanctification flows from justification, and then the doctrine of the vital union is offered as the “balance.” That doctrine states the same thing in another way. Furthermore, you offer the link while stating yourself that you know nothing but Christ and Him crucified.
Jon, you have served your purpose here, but now you are treating us like idiots, and that I will not tolerate.
LikeLike
Yeah. Funny. These Calvinists claim they don’t know anything and then proceed to bludgeon and savage everyone who does not accept their utterly impossible ideas. I’ve never seen the like of their hypocrisy. They claim complete epistemological impotence and then judge the whole friggin world according to their “sound doctrine”.
Paul, you rightly and refreshingly point out the tyranny, hypocrisy and madness spawned by their rational inbreeding.
LikeLike
Argo,
Right, the guy says that I misrepresent Calvin by stating that Calvin believed that all sanctification flows from justification, then he gets on here and starts up with the “I know nothing but Christ and Him crucified” stuff. I guess its the “big lie” idea that if you plainly contradict yourself in broad daylight people won’t believe that it’s a contradiction because it’s so blatant. No one would tell a blatant lie that big–it must not be a lie. “Gee, it couldn’t be a contradiction that blatant, this guy must understand deep things I don’t understand.” Hence, when you confront Reformed leaders with blatant contradictions, they well often just look at you with a smile on their face and say, “Well, I think I just need to leave you in God’s hands.” Sometimes I grieve that there is a hell and that people are going there, other times I understand why.
LikeLike
And using “know(ing) nothing but Christ and Him crucified” as an excuse for their epistemological failure is taking the Apostle’s statement utterly out of context. They ALWAYS fall back on “well…what can mere mortals understand, really? But for the grace of God go I”.
This is code for “shut the hell up and submit to your elders”.
LikeLike
Paul,
There was much ego and pride mixed with my responses here. I apologize for that. I hope nothing but blessing for you. I don’t think you or your readers are idiots at all; quite the contrary.
God bless.
LikeLike
Mr. Dohse,
I have been reading your discussion with Jon. I also read the article he suggested. It looks like what the guy in the article wrote is completely different from what you said Reformed people believe. Also, could you explain “sonship theology” and tell me if it is that or Reformed theology you don’t like. It looks like they are not the same thing.
LikeLike
Anon,
It’s not different. Vital Union is just another consonant buffer that attempts to reduce Reformed cognitive dissonance. Also, read the comment thread = total confusion. I am working on a post in regard to said article, and one of my points is the author’s deliberate attempt to deceive by inferring Calvin believed that Christians “work out” their own salvation (see 3.2.23 first sentence). I quote Calvin from the same context that the author does, and I show from 3.2.22ff that Calvin is saying exactly what he states that Calvin isn’t saying. One of the joys of my ministry is provoking the laity to read the Institutes for themselves. These guys probably need to stop assuming that people will not follow up on what they are claiming. No, I will not explain Sonship Theology to you. In “False Reformation,” I cite numerous sources to show that the soteriology of Sonship is exactly what the Reformers taught. I use the book Adams wrote in 1999 against Sonship and show that Calvin and Luther taught the same soteriology. Buy the book.
LikeLike
So you think “reformed theo” and “sonship theology” are the same? I am confused. Are you saying a person’s union with Christ has nothing to do with sanctification?
LikeLike
Of course they are the same. They both teach that justification is progressive. And Who doesn’t know that the Reformers redefined almost every theological concept? Sorry, I don’t enter into discussions framed by Reformed presuppositions; viz, Reformed “sanctification” is really progressive justification.
LikeLike
At the end of DeYoungs article, he leaves the reader with this quote from Calvin.
“Not only does he cleave to us by an indivisible bond of fellowship, but with a wonderful communion, day by day, he grows more and more into one body with us, until he becomes completely one with us” (Institutes, 3.2.24)”
Christ grows more and more into one body until he becomes one with us??
The scripture I read says we have been made one with him at rebirth and as we are sanctified we become more like him. I am the one who does the changing. I am already one with Him.
How can anyone read that article through and get to this last quote and not see that the quote from Calvin does not agree with what DeYoung wrote? Does anyone else find that quote creepy and backwards? The quote most certainly makes justification a process “DAY by DAY, he (Christ) grows MORE and MORE into one body with us.”
According to this, I will be united more with Christ tomorrow and the next day than I am today, which makes the work of Christ sound ineffective (not able to redeem NOW.) Jesus had something different to say to the man on the cross next to him.
LikeLike
Bridget,
Just finished our Acts study tonight and I am going to bed as I stayed up till 10 last night (2 hrs past my bedtime) and I am wiped out, but I want to revisit your point in the morning.
LikeLike
Bridget,
What you have hit on is something that we have learned lately. We always thought that Calvinism was guilty of fusing justification and sanctification together making sanctification, for all practical purposes, progressive justification. And that is true, Calvin redefined sanctification as progressive justification (CI 3.14.ff). BUT, what we failed to see until recently is the fact that he also fused glorification into the mix as well. You are saved by the gospel, justification by faith alone, and you must continue to EXPERIENCE the new birth by focusing on your sin and continued need for the gospel. As Ligon Duncan states in the video, you must increase you affections for the gospel by focusing on the gospel. However, note that he states that even those affections are “alien.” So, sanctification is redefined as progressive justification, and the new birth is redefined as…and here it is…”mortification and vivification.” Mortification is a deeper and deeper recognition of our sin (“deep repentance”) leading to a deeper and deeper EXPERIENCE of resurrection (vivification). Our original new birth is redefined as a perpetual deeper and deeper EXPERIENCE of our original salvation rather than a onetime event. As you have so aptly stated: “The scripture I read says we have been made one with him at rebirth and as we are sanctified we become more like him. I am the one who does the changing. I am already one with Him.” So, to your point, instead of the new birth making us one with Him at conversion, oneness is progressive via the perpetual rebirth and can only be EXPERIENCED by faith alone in sanctification. As long as we do that as a way to remove kingdom works from sanctification because sanctification is the growing part of justification, we remain in the vital union; ie., we “get used to our justification.” This also fuses glorification with justification and sanctification. The progressive oneness increases to the ultimate oneness. Instead of being transformed in a twinkling of an eye at redemption, we are gradually glorified until the day of glorification. They are saying we can EXPERIENCE our future resurrection in the here and now in increased lesser degree. Hence, “DAY by DAY, he (Christ) grows MORE and MORE into one body with us.” In the following well traveled “Cross Chart,” the bigger cross is vivification, or more oneness, and the chart construct is the vital union: https://paulspassingthoughts.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/gospelgrid11.jpg Here is what happens when you focus on your doing rather than Christ’s doing and dying: https://paulspassingthoughts.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/shrinking-cross.jpg
By the way, this also coincides with their Dominion theology.
Good call sis.
LikeLike
Bridget,
Really excellent points.This is why it is important that people read the Institutes for themselves, as Paul says. Imagine if legions of laity could so quickly see the unbiblical ideas and contradictions as you can.
My gosh. That would be wonderful.
LikeLike