Paul's Passing Thoughts

It’s Not Complicated: Protestantism Denies the Biblical Definition of the New Birth

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on October 17, 2016

img_1699We hear it all of the time and have heard it for years: “Justification is a legal (forensic) declaration.” The ways in which this short statement alone is antithetical to the gospel is surprisingly simple. First, if righteousness, a synonym for justification, is “apart” from the law any idea that we are justified by a legal declaration has problems right out of the gate. We cannot say that we are NOT justified by the law and then say we are justified by a legal declaration. This would seem evident.

That is, unless you are a Protestant and buy into something else we hear constantly: “The gospel is a paradox.” This means the truths that make up the gospel contradict each other but are yet truth. In other words, reason or logic is not a valid epistemology except for the logic that makes us subordinate to authorities that make truth what it is by edict. “Leave the thinking to us” and be saved through obeying authority.

But what logic should one use to decide which authority saves? When it gets right down to it, I think people believe they are saved through the “humbleness” of submitting to any religious authority found upon the earth. Why would the Catholic religion be enjoying the popularity that it is in our day regardless of its absurd behavior and history? I don’t think it is complicated; it’s salvation by submission to Catholic authority.

Catholics, especially those who have left Protestantism for the Catholic Church have stated this to me in no uncertain terms. The reasoning used is that Catholicism was around hundreds of years before Protestantism. So, one uses that logic to select a mode of salvation, and then abandons reason/logic to keep their salvation. “By their fruits you will know them” becomes just another paradox. And we wonder why we get the vibes we get from people when witnessing to them. Go figure.

The above screen shot sent to me by a friend of PPT is Martin Luther’s Simul Justus et Peccator (simultaneously saint and sinner) and is a cardinal doctrine of the Protestant Reformation claimed by all strips of Protestantism including Baptists and Methodists. I challenge you to find one Protestant scholar or pastor who has ever denied or refuted this statement; you search in vain.

This is a prime example of Protestantism’s “paradoxical gospel” and the deliberate deceptiveness of its communication. The statement allows you (deliberately) to assume a state of being paradox when the statement is not really a paradox at all. Note that Protestants are unique in that they are often wrong about their own error in a sort of multifaceted confusion. Sometimes we call this, “doublespeak.” However, Protestantism often engages in orthodoxy that has several layers of doublespeak in regard to a single doctrine. Simul Justus et Peccator is taught as a paradox but it really isn’t a paradox.

Why would they do that? Here’s why: in the mind of the deceived Protestant a mere legal declaration can also be a state of being. When convenient, it’s nothing but a legal declaration while we remain “evil,” but when otherwise convenient, it is a state of being. You see here the multilevel contradiction in one truth. That’s Protestantism.

Clearly, the Protestant Reformation was predicated on the denial of the new birth as a literal state of being. This is critical because no biblical transformation of being happens in Protestant soteriology. This means that we are not really born of God while remaining in a weak mortal body. Rather than now needing grace for a help in overcoming weakness for the glory of God, “grace” is redefined as a continued covering (not an ending of sin) that prevents us from being condemned because we are still under the condemnation of the law. The cardinal point of 1John chapter 3 refutes these ideas with prejudice.

Let me explain. In the Bible, there are ONLY two groups of people: under law, and under grace. These are denoted by ONE thing and one thing only; and please do not miss this simple fact: they are differentiated by a change in state of being. “You must be born again.” The changes are the difference between salvation and damnation.

Here is where condemned Protestants get confused. “Under grace” does not mean that you are not under law per se, it means that the saved person’s relationship to the law is changed. When one is under law, the law can do nothing but condemn them. But after one’s state of being is changed by the new birth, the law can no longer condemn them; in regard to condemnation, they are said to be “perfect.” The law is now our guide to love God and others, not our condemner. And it is also said to set us free from our prior relationship to the law.

Don’t miss this: it’s a LIKE perfection (righteousness) that is Christ because we are born again into God’s family and Christ is our brother, but it is NOT exclusively Christ’s righteousness that only covers our unchanged state of being. According to the Bible that would be yet…”under the law of sin and death.” If we are still “sinners” at all, the definitive biblical definition of the unregenerate, we are still under the law of sin and death. Those who claim that they are “sinners saved by grace” are proclaiming themselves as unregenerate. Again, this kind of confusion is unique to Protestantism while it claims to be the intellectual stalwart of Western culture.

When the Bible calls us “holy” this is in regard to no longer being under condemnation. But this is far from being a mere legal loophole; it is a change in state of being. Now, we have always been taught that good motives will not get us into heaven and that is just plain wrong. The new birth changes who we are in our heart—it changes our motives while we fail to use the law “lawfully” for purposes of love because we are still weak. “Redemption” is the future salvation of our weak bodies but that makes us no less born again in the present.

“For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.”

This where many misread a verse like this; the word of God doesn’t do this to condemn us in order to lead us back to the cross again for more salvation because we are still under law, it rather guides us in discerning between the weakness of the flesh and our intentions which are now fitted for love via the new birth…NOT condemnation.

Sorry, but the fact is, church-going is the deliberate or unwitting advocating of a false gospel. I realize that this is a VERY inconvenient truth but it is what it is.

According to the Bible, we are to use our “members” for holy purposes and the Bible also states that this is our…“logical service” based on what Paul taught in Romans prior to that verse.

Come out from among them and be saved.

paul

 

Advertisements

6 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. John said, on October 17, 2016 at 10:28 AM

    Three words: multiple-personality disorder.

    Like

    • Andy Young, PPT contributing editor said, on October 17, 2016 at 10:39 AM

      That is what they would have us believe is the nature of the believer, thus the “paradox”. Yet the truth of the orthodoxy is that the believer is one of a state of perpetual depravity.

      Like

  2. Paul M. Dohse Sr. said, on October 17, 2016 at 10:46 AM

    In essence, the clarion call of the Reformation is that we are simultaneously regenerate and unregenerate. Good luck with finding biblical precedent for that.

    Like

  3. Paul M. Dohse Sr. said, on October 17, 2016 at 10:49 AM

    …but notice the word choices they use in order to nuance the point: “Saint” for regenerate, and “sinner” for unregenerate. This assumes a believer that sins at times and then of course “sin” is not properly defined either. Total chaotic confusion.

    Like

  4. Paul M. Dohse Sr. said, on October 17, 2016 at 10:52 AM

    But few will repent because they logically choose Protestantism as the saving authority which then demands that they abandon logic for gospel truth.

    Like

  5. Ken said, on October 18, 2016 at 7:48 AM

    I have always understood justification/being reckoned righteous to be forensic. The law only condemns, and we are not saved by works of the law. Christ provides a legal remedy for this. We are declared righteous by our faith in him.

    However, I get your point about the new birth. I would phrase it moreTherefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has passed away, behold, the new has come but I think we would come out at the same place. I do not believe total depravity ( = no part of the unregenerate life is untainted by sin) continues after conversion. I don’t believe you can ‘be a sinner’ and a believing Christian at one and the same time. You are a new man, not yet made perfect. If the old self, man, nature carries on as before except for now attending church, no conversion or new birth has taken place. I imagine you would agree here. The idea you could nevertheless be justified before God in these circumstances really would be a legal fiction.

    Take the analogy of marriage. This has a legal aspect, a piece a paper valid in law, but its real essence is two people living together, life. I see this with justification as legal and the new birth as conveying a new life, I wouldn’t set the two against each other.

    I’ve never come across the term progressive justification before, and my comment is not because I want to be awkward, I’m not entirely sure if I have understood what you are getting at. I wonder if you have seen something in traditional protestant thinking that I haven’t, or whether you are really only insisting that you cannot have justification without sanctification or a real change in your way of life.

    This manifests itself either in the worldly evangelical industrial ministry complex or the victims of such ministries (and I do not deny they do real damage) who insist on being ‘eternal victims’, for whom the new birth does not mean they can and should eventually move on from their experience of hurt.

    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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: