Paul's Passing Thoughts

I was recently made aware of the astounding title of Jerry Wragg’s seminar at the 2014 “Shepherds” Conference: “The New Antinomianism, Evaluating the Implications of Cross-centered Sanctification.” I posted some preliminary thoughts on the title a few days ago, and I am waiting for the mp3 to be posted in the 2014 archives. The mp3 will be transcribed and evaluated in part 3.

It’s just a title, so what’s the big deal? The title is indicative of the unavoidable; more and more, Reformed cronies are going to have to explain away the severe problems with authentic Reformed soteriology. The crux of the problem can be seen in Wragg’s title and characteristic of what the seminar MO will have to be, viz, a lot of tiptoeing around the gators. Wragg couldn’t title the seminar, “The New Antinomianism, Evaluating the Implications of Sanctification by Justification” because as a Calvinist that’s what he believes.

As God’s people get  up to speed on the subject of law/gospel, Calvinism will be progressively exposed for the rank heresy that it is. For now, Calvinist lackeys like Wragg continue to employ various and sundry deceptive communication techniques. Their favorite technique is to portend that a singular idea is something different when they don’t want to be rightly identified with the singular idea. This is done by using synonyms of words that identify the main idea, and then associating the synonyms with different ideas that they supposedly disagree with.

Example: In part 2, I will be evaluating Wragg’s 2013 seminar that was on the same subject; A Biblical Response to Current Forms of Free Grace Theology. In that seminar, he affirms the well-traveled justification is the ground of our sanctification. But yet, the 2014 title implies that he is against Christ-centered sanctification. This is affirmed by the corpus of his 2013 message as well; i.e., “Gospel Sanctification” is errant. But it is the exact same thing as justification being the ground of our sanctification or “sanctification is grounded in justification.”  Do you see what he has done? “Christ” has been exchanged for “justification,” and “centered” has been exchanged for “grounded.” They also exchange “justification” for “grace” in order to blur distinctions between justification and sanctification.

So, one idea is identified with multiple synonyms, and then they make the synonyms different ideas. This enables them to call something error while continuing to teach the same as truth. Another example is “justification and sanctification are never separate, but distinct.” This is a staple mantra among the Reformed. They actually say it with a straight face. It enables them to suggest that justification and sanctification are separate while making applications that imply the two are the same thing…while saying they are different.

As I deconstruct Wragg’s 2013 and 2014 seminars in parts 2 and 3, I will clearly demonstrate that Calvin held to the same Gospel Sanctification that Wragg criticizes. I will use several citations from the Calvin Institutes. The Neo-Calvinist movement has Calvinism right despite ignorant protestations from the likes of Wragg and John MacArthur. Wragg, in the 2013 seminar, criticizes the idea that sanctification is a “rest.” John Calvin and his view of the Scriptures will be a main focus of the 2015 Shepherds conference; therefore, Wragg should get on board with Calvin as far as sanctification being a “Sabbath rest” in which Christians will die a spiritual death if they work. Calvin’s Sabbath rest theology will be cited numerous times in parts 2 and 3.

Sooner or later, the theological math is going to catch up with these charlatans. This is probably one of the reasons authentic Calvinism, which fuses justification and sanctification together, dies a social death every 100 years or thereabouts.

Meanwhile, as inquiring Christians want to know, the herd will have to be continually calmed by Reformed doublespeak, and apparently, that’s Wragg’s role among the theological felons of our day.

paul

Addendum:

In addition, in Wragg’s 2013 seminar he touts the Reformed the imperative command is grounded in the indicative event. This teaches that all obedience in the Christian life flows from justification (which is a finished work while sanctification is progressive). See how they change the word “justification” for “indicative” to nuance the point? I will be discussing the question, “What powers our obedience in sanctification, the new birth or justification?” We will see how the Reformers redefined the new birth as a realm and attributed the fruit of sanctification to justification through the “vital union.”