Paul's Passing Thoughts

In case you haven’t noticed, the American Protestant church is a cauldron of nonstop drama. Literally, it is something new every week. If some celebrity pastor didn’t get caught with both hands in someone’s cookie jar, some kerfuffle over doctrine or something else is always readily available. And in-between, you have the massive online bantering and debate over thousands of issues. Then, Sunday church is the end-of-week grand finally where you are reminded of your failures and given opportunity to repent.

Meanwhile, no one can understand why Joel Osteen is so popular. I believe Osteen’s popularity is directly connected to the over-the-top negativity of church culture. People who want to go to church can find some relief there. Yes, it’s a pie-in-the-sky feel good project, but I think there is another side to that: it’s also about what isn’t going on at Osteen’s church; i.e., a bunch of negative drama, incessant sin sniffing, and one scandal after another.

Have you ever thought about a focus on something that is neither of these two extremes? What about a focus on love? Whatever happened to that? I would argue that the Bible states love as our primary focus, not prosperity or a “lifestyle of repentance” or a faith that is “confessional” (“proclaiming the gospel only, not trying to be the gospel”…blah, blah, blah).

This post is about why church is the way it is, but we will touch on what Begg did wrong because it will bolster my overall point.

Alistair Begg, a Scottish pastor ministering in America, recently caused controversy over pastoral advice given to a grandmother invited to attend her grandchild’s wedding to a transgender person. He said it was matter of wisdom. Many have criticized him, and he has been cancelled from some ministry opportunities.

In an episode of his ‘Truth for Life’ podcast, Begg gave this advice: “Well, here’s the thing: your love for them may catch them off guard, but your absence will simply reinforce the fact that they said, These people are what I always thought: judgmental, critical, unprepared to countenance anything”. He added that, as long as the grandson knew she was not “affirming” his life choices, “then I suggest that you do go to the ceremony, and I suggest that you buy them a gift.”

After Begg refused to retract his opinion or apologize for the advice given, broadcaster American Family Radio said they would no longer air his program. 

http://www.premierchristianity.com/17184.article

So, we have three sides of this controversy. One side says that going to the wedding is sinful advice. The other argument sides with Begg, except a more middle ground argues that one should go without showing as much enthusiasm. You will search the internet high and low and find no other advice except should I go or not go?

Look, church is NOT about the Bible. Regardless of the fact that the Bible is very clear on this matter, real Bible counsel is nowhere to be found in church drama, per the usual. The mediating factor is that the grandmother called a Protestant expert for advise because she was torn by the question, or otherwise conflicted. Again, the Bible is very clear on this. If you can’t do something with a clear conscience, don’t do it because the decision is not of faith (Romans 14). Begg’s advise to her should have been, “no” based on the fact that she had to ask to begin with. Furthermore, let me state why there is so much “quarreling over disputable matters” in the church: Churchians are not free to follow their own conscience. Due to the fact that the church all but ignores the principles in Romans 14, Q and A panels occupied by celebrity pastors are all the rage. Note that the principles outlined in Romans 14 threaten the authority of the church.

Why does the church behave like it does? That’s what this post is about. This is not my opinion; the church leaders of our day openly state what I am about to write in this post.

First of all, per Protestant orthodoxy, righteousness is defined by perfect law-keeping and not the new birth. The law is not ended, it is retained. The Protestant under law gospel goes something like this: Christ came to live a life of perfect law-keeping so that his perfect law-keeping can be imputed to the Christian life for purposes of being declared righteous. Christ then died for our past, present, and future sins. God then resurrected Christ to confirm that he was the acceptable sacrifice for sin, or in other words, to confirm that Christ kept the law perfectly.

The whole idea turns the true biblical gospel upside down beginning with the idea that Christ came to keep the law perfectly. The renowned Protestant scholar RC Sproul even claimed that Christ obtained his righteousness through perfect law-keeping. We believe Christ has always been righteous by virtue of who he is. We are also incredulous that such an idea doesn’t give people pause to rethink the Protestant gospel.

Secondly, regarding Christ’s death, Protestantism teaches that our past sins are ended, but Christ’s death must be reapplied to present and future sins when they become present through a repentance process. This process is referred to as “The same gospel that saved us also sanctifies us.” Protestantism conflates justification and sanctification and makes them both part of the salvation process. John Calvin called this a “twofold grace.” Read, “twofold salvation.” So, to make their under law gospel work, they conflate some concepts while dichotomizing others. Justification and sanctification are conflated into a twofold salvation process in which justification and salvation are dichotomized. It is said that justification is a “one time declaration” while salvation “is a process.” Incredibly, we have another Protestant concept that doesn’t give people pause; the idea that salvation is a process. We could also ask how a “legal declaration” is a righteousness “apart from the law.”

So, according to Protestantism, Christ died to establish a means for which his death can be perpetually reapplied to pay for future sin through a church repentance ritual known as the Protestant doctrine of mortification and vivification, which redefines the new birth as a perpetual event that re-justifies us and moves the salvation process forward.

Thirdly, according to Protestantism, it is not enough that your present sins are forgiven until you sin the next time (in other words, you are still under the condemnation of the law), but you also need to be made righteous through the substitutionary works of Christ during his ministry. Hence, his perfect law-keeping is applied to your sanctification as well. This is the Protestant doctrine of double imputation; Christ’s active saving works was his perfect law-keeping during his ministry, and his saving passive work was his death on the cross. According to Protestantism, simply having your sins forgiven does not make you righteous…righteous acts have to be added to your account or in essence, a salvation installment plan. Keep in mind, in all of this, according to Protestantism, you are NOT righteous as a state of being, but this process only enables you to remain under a righteous declaration. In other words, instead of being either under law or under grace…grace is a covering for remaining under law through church ritual.

The results of this gospel are apparent when you observe the fruits of the Protestant tree. These are the fruits to be expected from people who are under the law and its condemnation. The Bible states that the power of sin is the law. Furthermore, if you are under law, you are still enslaved to sin. If you are under grace, you are enslaved to righteousness. You are one or the other. Nevertheless, a cursory observation of Protestantism shows that it hardly teaches that its parishioners are enslaved to righteousness. Far from it. Protestantism teaches that you are both under law and under grace, or what Martin Luther called “simul justus et peccator,” one who is simultaneously just and a sinner. Of course, technically, only declared righteous. Here is how one Lutheran scholar states it:

Luther calls Christians “simultaneously saint and sinner” because he redefines “saint” as a forgiven sinner. We are called saints not because we change into something different but because our relationship with God changes as a result of God’s grace. Luther said: “The saints are sinners, too, but they are forgiven and absolved.”

http://www.livinglutheran.org/2005/04/saints-sinners/

This is stated perfectly, and echoed by the who’s-who of Protestantism constantly. Protestantism’s under law gospel rejects the idea that we are transformed into new creatures by the new birth; we remain unchanged, while it is only our relationship to God that changes. So, if unchanged people wallow around in the law, they are empowering even more sin in their lives. Hence, what we see in the church constantly.

What is the real biblical good news? Christ came to free us from the enslavement of sin and the fear of death. Righteousness is determined by the new birth, not perfect law-keeping (1John 3). Christ didn’t come to merely declare us righteous, he came to MAKE us righteous presently. He didn’t come to cover our sins, he came to end our sins. When we believe, we are baptized with Christ into his death and resurrection by the Spirit (Romans 6). We literally become God’s offspring, and this changes our relationship to the law. We are no longer under its condemnation, but now the Spirit uses the law to teach us to aggressively love God and others with no fear of condemnation (Romans 7, 8). Sure, we fail to love as we should because of weakness, but that doesn’t mean we are still “under the righteous demands of the law” (Phil Johnson). God deals with us as a loving Father, not as those still under the law.

Protestantism is a false gospel with the expected fruits following. Come out from among them and be separate.

paul