The New Calvinist Wide Road to Hell: “Your” Doesn’t Mean, “Your”; Matthew 5:20
As posted yesterday, accepting any rewriting of history is a very dangerous precedent, especially in regard to the gospel, and the New Calvinist crowd works hard at rewriting history. The Resolved series of conferences sponsored by John MacArthur Jr. focused heavily on rewriting history, often representing Puritans as martyrs when many were executed for political intrigue. The Fox’s Book of Martyrs is a shameful and egregious rewriting of history; specifically, it omits the fact that Protestants were guilty of the exact same persecution towards those who disagreed with them. The book has no credibility whatsoever.
This brings us to the rewriting of history in regard to the Pharisees by New Calvinists. The narrative goes like this:
The Pharisees were really, really good at keeping the law, but at the end of the day, Christ said that you need a righteousness that exceeds theirs! What to do? Answer: cling to faith alone which imparts righteousness to us not our own. When Jesus said “your” righteousness must exceed that of the Pharisees, he was really talking about His own righteousness imputed to us.
So, saving faith is defined as knowing you are wicked. The unregenerate are defined as those who think they possess righteousness. The new birth is therefore defined as a different knowing—not a different person. If you think you are a different person who possesses a righteousness that is part of you, well, you don’t “need a physician.”
Hence, you must see Christ’s role in justification as ongoing and not finished, and you must continue to appropriate the imputation of His righteousness by simply believing and not “anything we do.” The New Calvinists of our day use the exact same lingo as the Australian Forum did, and that is why they are running from that history:
Christ’s doing and dying—not ours.
This truism was uniquely Forum, as well as many other truisms authored by them and used by the New Calvinists of our day. However, let us not miss the fact that this idea of an ongoing need for a justification physician is fundamental Calvinism whether the theologians of our day know it or not. If you are going to call yourself a Calvinist, you really ought to read Calvin for yourself.
So, in Matthew 5:20, when Christ referred to “your” [our] righteousness, “your” really doesn’t mean “your,” He meant “His” [my]. Therefore, according to New Calvinists, a better rendering would be:
For I tell you, unless you have my righteousness which exceeds that of the Pharisees who are really, really good at keeping the law, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.
Supposedly then, only those who know they are wicked inherit eternal life. Hmmmmm, really? Actually, there are a couple of huge problems here, and what is at stake is the true gospel. First, the Pharisees were not really, really good at keeping the law—they were horrible at keeping the law. Christ said they were “lawless” on the inside and the outside. They also edited the law with their own traditions. This whole, the Pharisees were really, really good at keeping the law is a rewriting of history.
Secondly, the Bible states in many, many places that Christians possess righteousness that is part and parcel with their being. We are not only declared righteous, we are righteous, and only the righteous will inherit the kingdom. Pastors, I warn you: when you hear a fellow Christian say they “have no righteousness of their own,” you better qualify that. Righteousness, albeit a gift, is ours because it is gifted to us, and certain attitudes about works in sanctification reveal what we believe about justification; e.g., the Parable of the Talents.
The reason we are considered righteous, and are righteous regardless of the fact that we still sin is a matter of proper understanding about law and gospel. Suffice to say for purposes of this post that we have this treasure in jars of clay, but yet, that doesn’t take away from the value of the treasure—it is still a treasure. In 1John, we are told God’s seed is IN us. End of argument. Moreover, Paul uses a double emphasis to state the fact that Christians possess a goodness that is part and parcel with their being:
Romans 15:14 – I myself am satisfied about you, my brothers, that you yourselves are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge and able to instruct one another.
What part of “you yourselves” do we not understand? When Christ said “your” righteousness, he meant “your.” Christ said, “You must be born again.” This isn’t a rebirth of mere awareness that James railed against; this is a rebirth of your being.
Another reason New Calvinism wants to separate itself from the Forum is because they lacked the same nuance that New Calvinists like John Piper and Al Mohler have mastered. The Forum wrote an article titled, “The False Gospel of the New Birth” footnoted by one of its participants and leading authority on New Calvinist hermeneutics, Graeme Goldsworthy, who was invited to lecture at Sothern Seminary in 2009. The clear argument of the article was that the new birth was true (as are shadows, but do not have the sun’s life-giving source), but any emphasis on it would take away from the “best thing” which is Christ. In other words, the new birth is true, but irrelevant—even damaging because it puts the focus on us and not Christ. This gets into the whole subjective gospel versus objective gospel that there is no room for here.
I fear that New Calvinism is one of the wide roads that lead to hell that Christ warned us of. It redefines the new birth as a mere awareness devoid of new creaturehood. It is a movement that heralds the total depravity of the saints and denies the new birth.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
Reblogged this on Clearcreek Chapel Watch.
LikeLike
[…] The New Calvinist Wide Road to Hell: “Your” Doesn’t Mean, “Your”; Matthew 5:20. […]
LikeLike
“First, the Pharisees were not really, really good at keeping the law—they were horrible at keeping the law. Christ said they were “lawless” on the inside and the outside. They also edited the law with their own traditions. This whole, the Pharisees were really, really good at keeping the law is a rewriting of history.”
Yes, I am hearing this all over the place even in suppposed Non Calvnist venues. It has seeped in and few are taking this interpretation to its logical conclusion. It is the road to hell. In effect, it is teaching people Jesus thought the Pharisees were good but that we cannot even be as good as them! But nevermind because now Jesus is obeying for us.
They are basically teaching a totally different Jesus. And teaching people they cannot know themselves and cannot help but sin. It is ridiculous and we need to be wary of people who beleive this. They cannot be trusted. They are not “safe” to trust.
LikeLike
I keep saying this: your position comes from a linear gospel, or the “golden chain of salvation” that puts us in the middle links. Justification is not finished; there is a beginning justification, ongoing justification, and an ending justification that necessarily includes the law as a standard. I will not continually repeat myself on this and debate you from your own fixed position. Comment more on this if you will, your comments will be deleted.
LikeLike
Which is the most important?
Jesus was asked twice, by two different men, the same basic question about which is the most important or greatest commandment in the Law. Here is how Jesus answered that question:
#1
“One of the teachers of the law… asked him [Jesus],
‘Of all the commandments, which is the most important?’
“The most important one,” answered Jesus, “ is this: ‘Hear, of Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one. Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.’ The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ There is no commandment greater than THESE.” [Mark 12:28-31, Deuteronomy 6:4-5, Leviticus 19:18]
#2
…an expert in the law, tested him [Jesus] with this question: ‘Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?’”
Jesus replied: “’Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the Law and the Prophets hang on these TWO commandments.” [Matthew 22:36-40, Deuteronomy 6:5, Leviticus 19:18]
But in contrast with Jesus, Paul the Pharisee didn’t know the greatest, most important, first commandment according to Jesus. Paul made up his own rule. Paul wrote:
“The entire law is summed up in a SINGLE command: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’” [Galatians 5:14, Leviticus 19:18]
And again, Paul wrote:
“He who loves his fellowman has fulfilled the law. The commandments, “Do not commit adultery, Do not murder, Do not steal, Do not covet, and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this ONE RULE: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ Love does no harm to its neighbor. Therefore love is the fulfillment of the law.” [Romans 13:8-10, Leviticus 19:18]
Jesus said it’s TWO commandments, with the greatest, most important, first command to
.1) first, love God with everything you’ve got, and
.2) second, love people.
Paul said no, it ONE commandment- to love people.
This is very similar to The Beatles- “All you need is love. Love is all you need. Love, Love, Love.” (In other words, the second commandment, the love of man, without the love of God. Love as me, myself and I define love to be, and continuously redefined by sinful men.)
In essence, it is also the same principle as what Eve did in the Garden of Eden, forgetting about the Tree of Life, which is the first tree in the middle of the Garden, and instead referring to the second tree as “the tree that is in the middle of the garden.” [Genesis 3:3 & 2:9 2:17, 3:24]
Kind of like the Pharisees with Jesus, who were pushing the false idea that we can consider ONE commandment in the Law, alone in isolation, to be “the greatest commandment in the Law.”
Or like today, false teachers in the Chrislam – Purpose Driven – Seeker Sensitive – Emergent – Liberal – Ecumenical – New Age – world church movement pushing the false idea that the ONE RULE is “Loving God and Neighbor together.”
The Lord God Jesus the Jewish Messiah, Son of Yahweh the Most High God of Israel, said:
“All the Law and the Prophets hang on these TWO commandments.”
Not one. TWO.
Sometimes, Paul was wrong. Jesus is always right. I’m following Jesus.
Here are answers to 2 common objections:
.a) What about the so-called “Golden Rule”?
Jesus spoke the 3 chapters of the Sermon on the Mount, Matthew 5-7, including 7:12. Jesus didn’t make PART of this one verse out of context into “The Golden Rule” or “one rule.” Jesus did not use the term “Golden Rule,” it’s simply a tradition of men. The sentence begins with “So” in the NIV and Amplified Bibles, and “Therefore’ in the NASB and King James Bibles, which ties 7:12 to the previous sentences. So 7:12 cannot stand alone as One Commandment.
.b) What about the so-called “Great Commission”?
Jesus spoke the words recorded in Matthew 28:18-20, including “make disciples of all nations.” Jesus never used the term “Great Commission,” it’s simply a tradition of men. Yes I agree it’s a commandment given by Jesus, it’s not optional, and it applies to us today. We need to carry this out, with our own God-given abilities and talents, using the skills, and circumstances we have. But we don’t need to put words in the mouth of Jesus, we can let Jesus speak for himself, and we can listen to Him – and obey Him.
Evangelism is part of the Second Commandment given by Jesus, to Love people. Evangelism is not the most important commandment, and it isn’t the entire Second Commandment. So if our priorities are “The Great Commission and the Great Commandment,” we have our priorities upside down and confused, and we are not listening to the voice of Jesus. Never mind what Paul said. Let’s listen to the voice of Jesus first, and get our priorities straight.
The people who will protest most loudly against this truth are the modern “Pauls:” traveling evangelists, speakers, writers, abusive absentee mega-church pastors, Crusaders, and self-appointed “apostles” like Paul, who find it “profitable” to “be like Paul” rather than follow Jesus the Jewish Messiah.
LikeLike
Matthew,
I think you are full of it, but yet, this is a view I see popping up on PPT now and then. Is this some kind of Jesus/Synoptic Gospels only thing? What do we have here? Is it a new movement/trend? Is there a recognized fellowship? Always looking to educate my readers.
LikeLike
I wish I understood Matthew’s comment but I don’t. I really do not get the tree/Eve comment, either.
With that said, People do not realize Paul was dealing almost always with a diaspora Jew/Gentile dichotomy. Ignoring that plays into a lot of problems when interpreting Paul. Especially Romans.
I have to admit, I get sick of Paul myself. Mainly because he is constantly twisted to prop up whatever spiritual abuse people can think of. And without the historical context, he is easy to twist.
LikeLike