Paul's Passing Thoughts

The day before yesterday, during a morning church service at First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs, Texas, a 26-year-old Devin Kelley entered the church and shot the majority of people attending the service.

Mass shootings have become almost commonplace of late, and our culture is frantically looking for answers and solutions. But this you should do: cross the whole “mental illness” reason off your list of possibilities.

Another reason you should cross off your list is, “evil.” That, like the following, are way too easy. “The devil,” “He was mentally ill,” “God’s will,” etc., etc., etc. Besides, which of these easy answers is the right one in each case? Especially when the blame is placed on God’s will and we don’t know why he allows such things, and to ask is the opposite of “trust.” Since we are talking about these incidents in context of church, and God is sovereign, why not chalk it all up to God’s will in every circumstance? If someone is mentally ill, isn’t that God’s will? Isn’t evil in the world God’s will?

But here is why I am somewhat perplexed by the infrequency of mass shootings in churches; it concerns what the church says it knows. It “knows” that it has the right and authority to rule over your personal life and everything in it. That’s stated orthodoxy, not my opinion.

Let’s pause to consider some simple answers if there are any: these events happen because of ideology, identity, hopelessness, and injustice.

Clearly, in some cases, ideology drives people to commit these acts. It is an ideology that leads to an intense hatred. Secondly, the church’s identity and function as an institution makes it vulnerable to such attacks, and furthermore, its function as a political institution in particular makes it game for the ire of other political parties and ideologies.
But surprisingly, unless the fact is hidden somehow, hopelessness and injustice are not driving forces resulting in many more of these horrific incidents. First, let’s identify specifically what I am talking about from personal experience and hundreds of hours counseling people who have been disillusioned by church.

Families are groups of people who are really, well, families. Herein, we touch on an essence of church being a time bomb, and we heard it from the pastor’s wife of First Baptist Church in Sutherland Springs; she said those lost were not just parishioners, but were family that ate together, cried together, rejoiced together, etc., etc. The way church defines family is very problematic, and has a tendency to stir up some pretty strong emotions in its ideological application.

Real families live together 24/7, and increase in oneness through thousands of different experiences and interactions. It’s a totally different dynamic than being a member of a group. Feelings generated by true family experience run deep and are the primary premise for hope in many people. Often, church leadership believes they rule over this deep well of life experiences (good and bad) that establish oneness between blood relatives. We have all heard the saying, “blood is thicker than water,” and that is demonstrably true. Let’s examine this whole notion that church members are “family.” Right, in the Olive Garden sense of the idea, “When you are here, you are family.” In a real family, members are forever wherever they are. Come now, let’s get a grip, in all my years in church, the sum of your “church family” was the last church you attended. Where to start with all of this nonsense? Think about everything that takes place in real families, and then compare that with the shallowness of church relationships painted with lofty rhetoric. Unbelievers have more contact and more respect for their former spouses in a divorce situation than the churched have for former members…hands down.

Enter the following into the record: contemporary churches are dominated today by a counseling organization known as the Association of Certified Biblical Counselors (ACBC). I have written extensively regarding their doctrines and policies, but suffice to write for this post that they claim absolute church authority over every aspect of a member’s life. They are the construct for so-called “formal church discipline” or “corrective church discipline” that occurs when a church member requests or is deemed in need of formal counseling. According to prominent Southern Baptist leaders, a denomination that has all but completely farmed its counseling out to the ACBC, every church member is already under “Formative Church Discipline” or “preventative” positive teaching, which can lead to “Corrective Church Discipline” (counseling) and ultimately “Church Discipline” in which the member is dismembered and therefore deprived of the “means of grace” (means of salvation).

In marriage counseling, any spouse who does not completely submit themselves to the authority of the pastoral counseling is often “declared an unbeliever” and the church reserves the right to declare that marriage mixed between an unbeliever and a believer. The believing spouse is then informed that the other spouse has no say in any family affair and said rights should then be taken over by church leadership. Often, as a result of this counseling, spouses will separate finances and the other spouse’s position in the family will be substituted by church leaders. Also, the green light for divorce is often given along with financial support. Moreover, church members will begin to “be a Father” or “brother” or “mother” to children who have relatives who are not “fulfilling their God-given roles.”

What’s going on at this point? I think you know; churches are messing around in very dangerous territory. They are messing with real families. When you start taking away a person’s family, regardless of how messy, you are swimming in very dangerous waters. Ask any police officer; when you intervene in a domestic disturbance, the family will often unite and become aggressive towards the officers. Real Families are often forgiving enough to treat each other any way they see fit, but if you are outside the fold, you better be careful. And in most cases, it goes without saying that the whole church is seen as complicit because in essence they are. The fact is, in the vast majority of cases, families have a way of overcoming difficulties while outside “help,” more than not, makes the situation worse.

I have experienced firsthand the arrogance of church leaders who think they can love your family members better than you. Where were they when you were up all night fixing your wife’s car in the rain? Where were they when you worked all week with a severe flu in order to support your family? Who are they to confiscate a book of memories and discard it in the trash? This will certainly invoke feelings of hopeless injustice on steroidal levels, and has on a wide scale.

While this church behavior is now commonplace, it seems to be a very rare reason, if at all, why church shootings take place, and my theory concerning the reason may surprise you: those who suffer under this despotism are probably true believers. Think about it, they have adopted enough of church to accept/trust the process until it is too late. Therefore, the majority of these shootings are probably going to be ideological in nature while the primary pushback against the church’s tyranny is going to be lawsuits. Along with the advent of the biblical counseling movement was the spawning of three large mediation organizations supported by churches that strive to keep churches out of court. One even specializes in cases involving pedophilia and child rape.

However, in light of some facts that have emerged, this most recent shooting may be what this ministry has expected to see a lot more of. Nevertheless, there may be another reason why so-called biblical counseling doesn’t create more of these events. In-house security in churches, especially those that emphasize counseling, has been the norm in contemporary churches since the mid-80s. Known as the “security team,” they are members who have conceal carry permits. In addition, many of these churches have in-house police departments that have jurisdiction on church property according to local law. Counselees are going to know this to be the case, and perhaps it is a deterrent.

In 2009, I was threatened by a security team member of a church that knew they had all but destroyed my life. Specifically, I was told, by email, that I would be shot on sight if I ever entered the church property “with bad intentions.” Who would be the judge of that? I took the threat seriously, and made different arrangements in regard to dropping my son off from weekend visits.

lastly, church shootings, as tragic as they are, hardly equate with “martyrdom.” Church, historically, has always been a political entity, and claims itself as an authoritative kingdom commissioned by God to take dominion over the earth. Historically, “spiritual warfare” has never excluded bullets.

So, we have no clue about what God is up to because that wouldn’t be trusting Him, but on the other hand, we know that He wants us to take dominion over the earth. Oh, and replace your spouse if necessary. Hmmmm, I see. And even though we don’t know why God preordained these shootings, we should do our best to prevent them, and when we do prevent them, that was God’s will also. Hmmmm, I see. So, churches should have security teams just in case it’s God’s will that casualties are reduced. I see.

Authoritative institutions are often the target of ideological warfare that strives for control. The church has carelessly chosen to identify with that venue. Therefore, the assembly of Christ meeting in homes as an organized body cooperating with one mind, the mind of Christ as understood by individual conscience, is going to be far less at risk and have fewer enemies. And among many other things, security is a far lesser issue.

If authority has less chaos and danger, and chaos is “trust,” where are the results except for the glory of more chaos celebrating a God that says he is “not a God of confusion” or for that matter, death itself?

paul

As a very busy person, I have come to appreciate low hanging fruit found on various and sundry Protestant websites. The various postings seem profound on their face, but a little thinking below the surface reveals the utter lack of common sense that Protestantism is adorned with. As a follower of some of these sites, the posts conveniently show up on my Face Book news feed beckoning for a response.

We begin with a meme inspired by a quote from Protestant superstar John MacArthur Jr. If one has actually read the official documents of Protestant orthodoxy, the question is begged: is MacArthur using assumption to deceive (meaning that he actually understands Protestant doctrine), or is he totally confused?

A No Repentance Gospel?

One time, or ongoing, as a way to return to the same gospel that originally saved you in order to keep yourself saved? The former is the assumption that keeps people in the fold until they are gradually indoctrinated into the latter, but the latter is the plain black print on white paper Protestant orthodoxy.

A No Holiness Gospel?

Whose holiness? The assumption is our holiness, but that is NOT Protestant orthodoxy. Per the Protestant doctrine of double imputation, our holiness has no merit because justification, according to orthodoxy, is clearly progressive. We only “experience” the works of Christ that are imputed to us during the “Christian” life. The former is assumed while people are slowly assimilated into orthodoxy, but the latter is the present orthodoxy and Protestant standard.

A No Submission Gospel?

Submission to Whom? The assumption is to God alone, but orthodoxy requires submission to guys accredited by the institutional church, for a fee, I might add, as a requirement for salvation. This was stated in no uncertain terms by Luther, Calvin, and Augustine.

A No Transformation Gospel?

The transformation of what in particular? The assumption is, the believer’s entire being resulting in good works performed by the believer and flowing from the reality of the new birth. But that’s NOT Protestantism—not even close. The new birth, as defined by orthodoxy, is a mere ability to “see,” or perceive the depths of our present depravity resulting in a deeper gratitude for our original salvation, or beginning salvation. That’s the “T” in TULIP. Hence, the cross, or the gospel, is glorified, or made bigger. Calvin and Luther both rejected the new birth as a state of being resulting in a personal ability to do works pleasing to God. This Protestant position is an utterly irrefutable fact. The T in TULIP is assumed to only be regarding the unsaved while folks are slowly indoctrinated into the total depravity of the saints. This is why we must, “preach the gospel to ourselves every day.” This is why Protestantism is an ongoing covering for sin found only in the church rather than an ending of sin, or a “taking away of sin” in a one-time finished work of new birth by the Spirit.

According to new birth justification, the baptism of the Spirit happens once; according to Protestant orthodoxy (justification by faith), the baptism of the Spirit is a repetitive act as a result of repenting of present sin against the law resulting in a re-justification baptism. This is the stated Protestant doctrine of “mortification and vivification.”

A False Security Gospel?

What security? Protestant orthodoxy rejects eternal security in exchange for “final justification” when the true children of God are “verified” at the “final tribunal.” This position is verified by John Calvin’s idea of temporary election; or in other words, only the saints that are granted the gift of perseverance were elected for salvation. That’s the “P” in TULIP. The temporary elect, those Calvin classified as “the called,” are only temporarily “illumined” resulting in a greater damnation. Can any self-respecting Calvinist deny that apostasy is preordained?

In addition, if we have present eternal security, why would we need to return to the same gospel that saved us every day?

A Gospel for Damned People?

Which group of damned people? According to Protestantism, “believers” remain under the “righteous demands of the law.” Biblically, that’s “under law” and not under grace; i.e., the biblical definition of the unregenerate. According to Protestant orthodoxy, “under grace” defines one who is still under law, but depending entirely on the ongoing imputed righteousness of Christ rather than a “righteousness of our own.” This is Luther’s “alien righteousness” which contends that all true righteousness remains outside of the “believer.” This is a denial of the biblical new birth that changes our relationship to the law and our state of being rather than a mere “legal declaration.”

The Unbelievable and Shocking Admission of the Institutional Church: No Clear Agreement on What the Gospel Is

In the ongoing newsfeed are other familiar themes that reveal just how dumbed-down church attendees are. In Dr. Al Mohler’s “The Briefing” program, he reminds us that the Protestant gospel is still an “argument.” I would ordinarily say, “Oh my, am I here right now,” but this is an ongoing theme that continues to trend. The transcript can be read here, but the following excerpt is the most telling:

“But of course that serves to underline the most important question for this generation. That question is not, do we really understand what Luther believed and Luther did 500 years ago today? But do we still hold fast to the gospel to faith alone, grace alone, Christ alone, Scripture alone, to the glory of God alone? That’s the real question, and one way or another this generation of Christians is going to answer it.”

Well, actually, it’s not true that present-day evangelicalism had a proper understanding of Luther 500 years later. In 1970, what Luther really intended was reintroduced to the hallowed halls of Westminster Theological Seminary by a Seventh-Day Adventist leading to the present-day New Calvinist movement of which Mohler is a key figure.

So, on the one hand, Mohler claims that evangelical pastors were ordained by God to “save His people from ignorance,” yet on the other hand, though thoroughly and clearly documented in Protestant writings, the haughty Protestant academics had it wrong for about 200 years after the American Revolution confused the religious/philosophical landscape. Moreover, the aforementioned SDA theologian rediscovered Luther’s original intent by actually reading Protestant orthodoxy for himself rather than depending on traditions passed down over several generations.

Yet, Mohler et al are in essence saying, “We were wrong for 200 years, but please trust us as God’s authority because we have it right this time!” Um, right, thanks to a Seventh-Day Adventist, but no thanks, I’ll pass.

Also, “One of the enduring Latin phrases of the Protestant Reformation is the impressive sounding ecclesia semper reformans, semper reformanda. In plain English, this means ‘the church is always reformed and always reforming.'” Get it? This is no different from the well-traveled cult doctrine of “increasing light.” It is a blank check diplomatic immunity from all error and discrepancy from reason. In addition, “paradox” is an actual theological category of the Reformation that gives license to every contradiction.

The shocking admission that Protestantism never left or departed from Catholicism.

In Phil Johnson’s sermon, “Korah’s Rebellion (another version less relevant here),” at about the 6 minute mark, Johnson refutes the argument that the Protestant Reformation itself was a rebellion against the Church’s authority, but was a mere attempt to “reform” the church. In all of the confusion that is church, this is one of the few things theologians agree on; Calvin and Luther who were both Augustinian theologians NEVER left the Catholic Church. And Augustine, who is a Catholic icon/fixture, is routinely claimed as the one who fathered Protestant doctrine. No surprise then that one of many kerfuffles in Protestant drama is ecumenism. But yet, Protestantism never left the Catholic Church.

Discernment Blogs?

Also not surprising is the massive number of discernment blogs “defending the faith and exposing error.” When there is no agreement on what the gospel really is, and reformation is ongoing, certainly, “discernment blogs” will have an endless supply and demand. Seriously though, in reality, dissecting Protestant truth is a fool’s errand based on the very statements of Protestant academia. In fact, Protestant orthodoxy itself is a theology of moving goal posts…by its very own admission.

So, how much of all of this is confusion versus deliberate deception? For the most part, religion in general would invoke the “noble lie.” Authority is truth because God’s appointed authorities understand that mankind has “total inability” in general, and an inability to understand reality specifically. God’s appointed authorities to “save His people from ignorance,” must teach us how to have our best life now through bedtime stories that the great unwashed can understand. We call that, “orthodoxy.” Confessions and Catechisms tell us what questions to ask, and then answer the questions for us. Obviously, the great unwashed don’t even know what questions to ask which also explains why we dare not ask challenging questions at church. Who are we to think that we even know what questions to ask?

Of course it is all paradoxical, mankind cannot know reality to begin with, and needs to shut up, obey, and support God’s kingdom that is slowly taking over the earth for God’s glory. Supposedly. At this point in history, you can choose your own authority because of the advent of Americanism, and it would seem the only agreement on salvation is loving and obeying the one you are with, or another authority of your choosing in the future. This is no new thing under the sun, and is the hallmark of every religion combining faith and authority/force since the deception in the garden.

Hence, the Protestant gospel seems to be submission for the sake of submission, and the correct authority that will usher us into salvation is anybody’s guess.

As I am often fond of saying, “good luck with that.”

paul

Have you heard about the latest church drama? Any confused gospel is going to produce one primary result: debate, and more debate, and debates about debating. The latest is the IFD (Interfaith Dialogue) debate. You may find the video below interesting.