Paul's Passing Thoughts

As human beings, we have desires of all kinds. In regard to some of those desires, society is a hindrance. If we are running late for work, a desire forms in our heart; a desire to arrive at work on time, and also, a desire to avoid repercussions for being late, but societal law calls for speed limits. Actually, this one event can lead to the formations of many desires; for example, a very strong desire for the car in front of you to move out of the left lane and into the right lane.

Desires often clash with societal norms and laws. The closest thing we can get to living out those desires without society objecting is a thing called, “fantasy.”

Suppose a culture announced the building of a new town with its own jurisdiction. Everyone in the culture is free to live there or not live there, it is purely a choice. The town is called Freedomville because there are no laws or cultural norms; everyone is free to live according to their own desires. The only law is the freedom to live out personal desires.

Initially, would the town be popular? What would be your thoughts about such a place?

paul

Don’t get me wrong, I think Prager U is a godsend. That’s why I was surprised at this video where they toe the line on traditional church orthodoxy. Secondly, regarding this view, they mange to contradict themselves with another viewpoint, which for them, is another anomaly.  First of all, I reject the premise of the question, “Is mankind basically good or basically sinful?” But, if you would have to choose one, “basically good” is the best answer. Perhaps I will present that argument in another post, but for time sake, this post is about the argument that Prager presents against its own view.

Overall, Prager U presents the idea that basically sinful people can create things that are basically good and teach people to be good. In addition, in the aforementioned video, Dennis Prager states,

Ok, then, are people basically good? As I will show, given humanity’s history, the answer should be obvious. Of course, human nature isn’t basically good. Now, this doesn’t mean that people are basically bad. We are born with real potential to do good. But we are not basically good.

This is why I say the question itself doesn’t have a proper premise. And, it wouldn’t be correct to say that Prager is totally onboard with church orthodoxy which is more consistent on this issue. In fact, church orthodoxy states that mankind cannot do any good work because mankind is basically evil or “totally depraved.” So, Prager is kind of half-pregnant on the issue.

Biblically, we find that the “works of the law” written into the being of everyone born into the world teaches us what is good and evil and either accuses us or excuses us. This is part of being created in the image of God.

Prager, in the video, offers the following point to prove his thesis: if man is basically good we wouldn’t need to create laws or teach children to be good. Plus, historically, people have done really, really, bad things. Well, historically, people have done really, really good things. And, children do good things that they have never been taught to do. And, laws created by men are often good, right?

However, Prager’s greatest contradiction is in this video that is otherwise profound. He states that America is an idea that has been a greater force for good than anything else in human history as far as governments are concerned. Hence, the idea that America needs “fundamental change” is an idea vigorously rejected by conservatives.

I contend that those who create something fundamentally good are not fundamentally sinful.

paul

FACT: New Calvinism is a return to authentic Protestantism.

FACT: Protestantism is another form of Catholic progressive justification and salvation by church authority.

FACT: Disagreement on the philosophy of Plato was the catalyst for the Reformation, NOT a biblical view of salvation. “Infused grace” is the scriptural cloak for the real issue.

FACT: The Reformers rejected all notions of assurance apart from the authority of the church over salvation.

FACT: The Reformers rejected all notions of a church apart from the state. Americanism is NOT a Protestant idea.

FACT: John Calvin believed in a temporary election of some resulting in a greater damnation for the glory of God.

FACT: The church does not appear in history until the 4th century. The church has no ties doctrinally or historically to the 1st century called-out assembly of Christ.

FACT: The problem with church is church.

One reason the election debate is never-ending follows: there are just as many verses in the Bible that seem to teach predestination as those that teach human choice. However, verses that speak to choice do seem more definitive.

So, if God is not a God of confusion, where are the statements in the Bible that end the argument? The opportunities for Christ and the apostles to end the argument during biblically recorded conversations would number into the hundreds, but they never seize on the opportunity.

For example, “And Jesus said to him, ‘Go your way; your faith has made you well.’ And immediately he recovered his sight and followed him on the way.” Technically, Jesus is telling the guy that it is his faith. At the very least, he is allowing the guy to assume it is his faith. Why not say, “Go your way, the faith I have given you has made you well.” Again, this is just one example among hundreds where the biblical authors pass on an opportunity to clarify the issue in no uncertain terms.

Verses that say salvation is impossible with man are often cited as proof texts, but of course, it is impossible for people to regenerate themselves like it was impossible for this guy to heal his own eyes. Of course, only the Spirit can baptize the believer into Christ through the death of the old self and resurrection unto all things being new. That doesn’t mean we can’t be persuaded to exercise our own faith.

Furthermore, it is curious how Peter exhorted the Jews: “With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, ‘Save yourselves from this corrupt generation.'”

How odd that Peter would put so much effort into persuasion if faith is nothing but a gift from God and beyond the ability of mankind. Peter seems to indicate the opposite by exhorting people to save themselves with their own faith. The faith of the individual precedes the supernatural act by God.  Again, Peter passes on saying something like, “You will save yourself from this corrupt generation if God gives you faith.” Statements like that would end the argument, but they are never said.

Here is the point: what is not said specifically is a hermeneutic, especially if it is something supposedly central to salvation and the gospel.

paul

“Having purified your souls by your obedience to the truth for a sincere brotherly love, love one another earnestly from a pure heart, since you have been born again, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God; for ‘All flesh is like grass and all its glory like the flower of grass. The grass withers, and the flower falls, but the word of the Lord remains forever.’ And this word is the good news that was preached to you.”

Someone posted this verse on our Facebook page this week and I am making good on my threat to post on it. Let’s jump right in.

If you have believed the gospel, you have “purified” your soul. This isn’t a substitution; this is a state of being. You are now holy as your Father in heaven is holy. You have been born of Him by His seed and through the Spirit. Some translations include, “through the Holy Spirit” which is fine. That isn’t saying our belief is brought about by the Spirit, it is saying that the purification of our souls, or the new birth, happens by the power of the Spirit. It is the same power that raised Christ from the grave. Church theologians want to interpret that as our faith coming from the Spirit because supposedly, faith, posed as an ability of man to choose, is a work. But clearly, the Bible states that we are saved by “faith, not by works” setting a demarcation between the two. Faith is not a work.

Secondly, we find out what the new birth is for: it is “for” love…not law. The new birth totally changes our relationship to the law. We don’t get up every morning with a goal to not sin against the law; we get up every morning with a goal to love. We don’t get up every morning to live a “lifestyle of repentance” because we are still under the condemnation of the law because we have no new nature and being transformed from death to life is only a manner of speaking, we get up every morning to live a lifestyle of love. That’s a meme: “Those born again live a lifestyle of love, not repentance.” Besides, you can’t sin when you are loving anyway. If you want to sin less, love more. If there is any atonement (covering) at all in the new birth, it is, “love each other fervently from the heart because love covers a multitude of sins.” Christ came to end sin, not cover it up. The true gospel is not a cover-up. That’s another meme. There is NOW…NO condemnation for those in Christ.

Thirdly, once saved always saved. You are born again by a what? Right, an “imperishable” seed. And, the seed is the word of God. That’s the seed. The seed is the word of God implanted by the Spirit and maintained by the life within itself, not some pastor, or a church. Pastors are not the Spirit, and the only temples are the bodies of those born again. The Spirit dwells in those temples, and the High Priest of those temples is the believer who possesses the individual body. Hence, how the body of Christ meets should reflect that in every shape and form. “Seed” has to do with family, not an authoritative institution. The gathering of saints together for God’s purposes, viz, love, should reflect that. If you go to meet with other Christians for purposes of repentance, you are still under law. We meet to encourage each other unto good works and love according to the wisdom of the law, not making the law another seed other than Christ: there is no life in a law that condemns you at any point or time.

Fourthly, our original birth into the world was with a seed that is like that which gives life to plants and flowers; and it withers away. When we are born again, the person who was born by that seed dies, and is reborn with the seed of God. According to Peter, that is the cardinal point of Isiah 40: 6-8.

That’s the good news. Salvation does not grow, those born with an incorruptible seed grow. We are enslaved to righteousness accordingly, not sin. Our wages are life, not death. We abide forever because the seed within us abides forever. We affirm infused grace by the seed of God within us. To deny infused grace is to deny the biblical new birth. “You must be born again.”

Church, therefore, is an under-law false gospel. The church train wreck is caused by a fundamental denial of the biblical new birth. Come out from among them and be separate.

paul