Home Fellowship Unity and the Dead Horse of Repentance
With all the oceans of ink expended by Protestant hacks, no study has been done on the definitions of all biblical definitions concerning the Bible’s defining of itself. That is part of the vast uncharted frontier of truth in the present Protestant Dark Age. This will be undertaken by a layman if it happens at all because such a study would undermine Protestant orthodoxy. Nevertheless, these biblical terms present a complete picture of God’s salvific plan and consummation of human history.
Fundamentally, the Bible has two uses by the Spirit: to convict the world of sin and to warn of the judgement to come, and to sanctify (set apart) God’s children from the world which is under the Bible’s condemnation. However, it is not the purpose of the Spirit to inflict condemnation on the world, but only to warn of it through the Bible. The primary purpose of the Bible is to inflict sanctification. Hence, “the righteousness of God has been revealed (manifested) apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it…”
The Bible gives testimony to law’s condemnation and a righteousness apart from it obtained by the new birth. This is an infused righteousness obtained by being born from above by God the Father. This is why He is referred to as our Father—the name possesses life-giving family connotations. The new birth changes a person’s relationship to the law: one Bible, two relationships; condemnation, and sanctification. However, Andy Young said well in one of our conferences, “The Bible is for sanctification, not justification.” Yes, the Bible informs us of a righteousness obtained by the new birth, but applies itself to sanctification (the life of the believer).
Application of the Bible to life does not justify, it only informs mankind of the onetime event of new birth that infuses God’s righteousness within us. It informs us of justification, but applies sanctification. The application of salvation to life via the Bible (Protestantism) is an overt denial of biblical new birth. It claims family membership by legal decree only, and not “God’s seed within us.”
The contrast of my former Protestant life has therefore made me indifferent to “reconciliation” with others. Yawn. So, for years, when you had a falling out with other Protestants who are not called “fighting fundies” for no reason, reconciliation was always a big courtroom drama decorated with Matthew 18 placards. Whenever someone wanted to prove how spiritual they were, they would “own their sin” by rehearsing all the Bible laws they broke in “sin against relationship” blah, blah, blah, gag, gag, gag, ad nauseam on steroids.
Ok, so perhaps the pushback this ministry experiences for totally rejecting the Protestantism that defines this culture has immunized me from being offended, but I think that is but a small part of it. The big difference is an increased understanding of what it is to be under the standard, law, wisdom, direction…however you want to state it, of love and not law. People don’t break the law when they offend me, they fall short of loving me.
And, love looks forward and not backward. I think love encompasses a broad spectrum of wisdom that has a forward look that doesn’t count the days but makes the best of them. It realizes that love is the only reward we will take with us into eternity. Love is a wisdom and a law that is freeing in so many ways; it is the “law of liberty.”
Even though being a nurse’s aide is one of the best professions in the world, there is no other profession marked more by backbiting, politics, gossip, slander, cliques, and outright treachery among peers. Striving to define my life by love has greatly aided me in keeping a positive perspective regarding this reality. I do not go to work to be liked, I go to work with a goal to define my trade to the best of my ability. I can’t control what others think of me, but I can control what I do. I have resolved to focus on what I can change and ignore what I can’t change. I am there for what is good about my trade, not the negative. True, I distance myself from those who are hateful towards me, but for the following reason: they are a hindrance to making the best of the days God has gifted to us. All in all, as God’s children, “we are called to peace.” We are not obligated to participate in any negative drama that disrupts our life purpose.
I have said a lot here to say this: unity is the result of sharing the common purpose and truth of love. Where the core value is truth and love; where that is the true motive, unhealthy introspection, Protestant sin-sniffing, and “being accountable”…to the law of sin and death is not only unnecessary, but should be avoided like a ghastly plague.
So, in regard to home fellowships where there is a leadership that models love in contrast to “authority” as a unifying factor, how is unity obtained? Protestantism’s unity, as with all church institutions, is defined by obedience to authority. If everyone picks an authority and obeys it, you have unity…right? Also, if you obey the authority that everyone else is obeying everyone will like you…right? Well, like communism and socialism, that’s one of those ideas that humanity is hellbent on making successful without any success so far. It’s a commitment to an idea that will save the world if someone would just come along and do it right. So far, the historical trial and error has compiled an innumerable body count.
But hang on to the two major points thus far: unity through obeying a central authority, and acceptance by the group through like obedience. Everyone agreeing to think the same will result in a group lovefest.
Likewise, church will not give up the ideology of unity through authority. In order to obtain this unity, people must think the same and obey the same. Next point: that’s not a body. Instead of a healthy body that has many members performing different roles for homeostatic function, the church version of a body is to abandon individual thinking and think the same thoughts leading to a single function. This defines the body as having one single focus: mindless obedience to some authority. This denies a multiplicity of gifts given to those born of the Spirit and makes obedience to authority the only relevant gift. Love is defined as obedience to authority and not one of many gifts granted to the body of Christ. Job-one is obeying authority for the sake of “unity” and group acceptance, not the discovery of one’s role in the body of Christ. Be sure of this, any independent thinker in church will feel the burn of otherization without exception.
So, how does unity happen in a home fellowship where leadership, freedom, and individualism without authority is emphasized? Answer: it’s the core value of love. Part and parcel with love which is many-faceted is a love for truth. We are talking about a body of free members held together with the ligaments of love and truth. This should be defined biblically as the body common, the expression of many local bodies, and the function of individual members. As far as the universal body, Christ is the only head. “Only” means just that, ONLY. Locally, we have been given “the mind of Christ.” Unity is achieved by seeking out the one mind of Christ and individual members discovering their roles in the body. As this happens, a healthy body emerges which impacts the world in Christ’s name.
Now, obviously, there will be disagreement as to what the mind of Christ is, and that’s ok. With the exception of core values, the Bible states that everyone should be convinced in their own minds with, at times, the persuasion of those gifted with leadership. Elders are merely those gifted with discernment that oversee (as in keeping watch) the body and warn against anti-love doctrines and philosophies. Yet, individual members are to discern for themselves regarding the biblical accuracy of their oversight (think…“Bereans”).
It should be safe to assume that anyone objecting to the core values in a local body is gifted with eldership. Therefore, there is no reason for drama, they simply need to start their own home fellowship. This is not a bad thing at all, and they should be granted God’s speed in doing so. If they indeed share the same core values of biblical love, the differing groups will eventually reunite in fellowship. Therefore, those who possess the same core values will actually increase the body through periodic separation. The mutual seeking of Christ’s mind will occasionally have to take separate routes to the same destination. Paul and Silas are probably an apt example that could be cited.
In contrast, an institution can never take the place of family, is authority-driven by definition, and can only achieve unity through the eradication of free thinking according to individual conscience. Authority has no need for leadership or love, just the abandonment of free thinking that is accountable to God alone and not mere men. Again, Christ is the only head of the body. New creaturehood assumes an affection for the Father’s core values and ideology. That core value of love will carry the day.
The law of love supplies a personal purpose and focus that does not enslave one to the acceptance of others, looks to the future and not the past, and is free to love aggressively without fear of the law’s condemnation. If these core values exist in a temporary separation of routes in the journey, reconciliation does not need to be an excessive Protestant mourning in a ceremony covering the subjects with sackcloth and ashes.
Christ died on the cross to end the law’s condemnation and set us free to serve another law—the law of the Spirit of life. This is the law that liberates us to love. Any theology that keeps us at the foot of the cross misunderstands Christ’s command to take up the cross and follow Him…
…the cross was the consummate act of love to free us from condemnation, not to keep us under it. Hence, unity and reconciliation is not the flogging of the law’s dead horse, but a proper acknowledgment of wrong that quickly moves on to the purpose of love.
paul
Why I Hate Protestantism: Revised and Updated
Though I wasn’t in the best frame of mind when I wrote this yesterday and it seems to have gone over like a lead balloon with readers, I have reread it and pretty much stand by it 100%. Learning to interpret life through love and not law in contrast to Protestantism is a daunting task, but one that is critical to achieving true happiness. Yes, love is a standard and a work, but it is not the work of condemning self and others with an expectation of joy in return. Also, the comments posted yesterday make very good additional points.
I suppose I should start by clarifying that I hate Protestant orthodoxy and not Protestant people. However, I want to also make sure that I don’t make myself better than God by saying that I don’t hate anyone because the Bible is clear that God does hate certain people. Moreover, I once heard someone wisely say that loving everybody is often an excuse not to love anyone in particular. And lastly on this point, love and hate are really defined by action and not words to begin with. In my profession one thing always holds true: the aides that throw around the “love” word the most deliver the lesser care; talk, as the saying goes, is cheap. When I hear an aide tell a resident that they love them, that aide is totally suspect in my mind and I don’t want them on my hall. Likewise, if you are still misinformed enough to still be attending church and within the first couple of weeks of attending a new one members are telling you that they love you, run like hell and don’t even think about looking back.
Susan and I are recovering Protestants. That means we still struggle with seeing life through the prism of law and not love. Of all the doctrine of demons, Protestantism is the cleverest because it makes a works salvation from “faith alone.” It’s predicated on the misconception that doing nothing is not a work. To the contrary, doing nothing is a decision and a decision is an action. Thinking is a work. Wrong thinking is a wrong action; right thinking is a good work. In reality, work is the waters that humanity swims in. Man is created and designed to work in a work reality, and therefore, work is unavoidable. A non-work theology is a metaphysical impossibility; therefore, the true gospel separates law and love. Please be reminded; “faith WORKS through love.” Faith, like everything else in reality, works. Hence, as James states in his biblical epistle, faith that doesn’t work is like a body without a spirit…it is dead. The work of faith is love, not law. As an aside, let me mention that lazy people are very unhealthy in every way because they are rejecting the reality we were created to operate in. Fish are created to function underwater, the lazy person jumps out of the water and is flopping around on dry land.
So, returning to my original purpose for this post, let me recite a good example of this in my life and Susan’s. A year ago, Susan and I decided that I would vacate retirement and go back to work. Yet, we strongly believe that there is nothing in our lives that should be put on the back burner because of that decision. Here is what should have been anticipated: the motive of love would be demonstrated less in certain areas of our lives and more so in other areas.
What does law do? It focuses on one area where something is different and launches a full press condemnation. In regard to less action in a given area of life, the love taking place in another area is not considered and the lesser becomes… “you are sinning against me and you love me less.”
For example, why does moving an aging parent into the household of a married couple put so much pressure on a marriage? There are more people to love in the household and the love experienced in the marriage changes. How does law respond to that? It assumes the worst about others in the midst of changing circumstances while “love believes all things” and “dwells on what is lovely, good, and honorable.”
Instead of trusting the core value and essence of love while experiencing its peace and thankfulness, and assuming the core values of love will eventually carry the day in a new, perhaps difficult situation, the law and its heavy gavel of assumed motives come into play. Unfortunately, every word and action will now be brought into court to stand before a judge and jury.
Folks, look at the metaphysical video of any divorce situation; any questions? It’s one big law-fest smothered in condemnation and the attachment of ill-motives to every existing moment.
This can be exemplified in the following dynamic that took place in my and Susan’s life just yesterday. This week has been tense for us; note that, while also noting that I am not big on the recognition of “special” days. To the contrary, Susan is. This is a dynamic that we mutually accept about each other with no reservations, but I note it to say this: I am not a person who often buys gifts for people except on special days and then my gifts are far from being delightfully anticipated by others. In contrast, my son-in-law is totally different; he is constantly buying gifts for people. Susan is somewhere in-between.
So, my ability to attend a special event yesterday without Susan who couldn’t escape work added to tensions, but had absolutely nothing to do with what I saw at the event; there were specialty retail booths that sold stuff that is totally her. This is stuff that you don’t ordinarily see, so I dropped some significant dollars to surprise her. I was meeting her someplace afterward, and couldn’t wait to surprise her with the gifts.
Then the Protestant law showed up. Upon announcing that I had brought gifts, she responded, “Is this a peace offering?” Seriously, the “silly” truism of the pop-culture movie Love Story,…“Love means never having to say you’re sorry” may be more biblical than what we think. In regard to her question to me, it’s not that we had offended each other in some way, but rather tension over the idea that something is wrong with our marriage because circumstances are different. Instead of assuming the same love is present and merely mitigated by circumstances, the law shows up demanding some sort of performance and the constant unhealthy introspection of motives. Law never assumes an act simply flowing from love, but the tainting of ill motives in some way which excludes love altogether. In fact, because Protestantism defines love as perfect law-keeping, the reality of love in a marriage is completely denied to begin with. This is why, despite pretense to the contrary, the vast majority of Protestant marriages either end in divorce or are defined by miserable coexistence. The rest are creepy relationships that rejoice in evil and define marriage as, “two sinners living together.”
Accordingly, the simple bringing of a gift that flowed from love was made to be an alter call at a Protestant Sunday morning lawship service. Be sure of this: because I am no longer a Protestant, no gift to my wife is a “peace offering” offered at the church alter; that’s not love, that’s law.
Instead of moment to moment thankfulness for what is right and good about our lives, Protestantism sucks the life out of our existence with a moment to moment focus on what’s wrong with everything about life. Seeing something good in life is, “friendship with the world [being]… enmity against God.”
In contrast, an assumption of love and the focus thereof displaces lovelessness (sin) to begin with. “Sin” is not the problem because we “are not under sin” which is a synonymic phrase for being under law. Whenever condemnation is present in a marriage, love is not present. Condemnation and love are mutually exclusive. Condemnation is the consummate enemy of love and its lifeblood is the law. You want to “live by the gospel”? Then act like Christ’s sacrifice was an act of love that ended the law. Be like Christ; do love, not law.
In every case where there is strife in a marriage, the Bible is not being used to apply love, but to punish another with the condemnation of the law because of the desires that battle within us; the desire for a perfect law-keeping life as defined by Protestant justification, and a desire to define love by “perfect motives.” In reality, love spends little time questioning motives.
Often, in marriage counseling that involves Protestants, you find the core problem with the marriage to be perspective. A detailed inquisition will often reveal times of mutual enjoyment at some point in the marriage albeit diminished. Times that flow naturally from love. But how do they define their marriage when they come to counseling? With two law-driven condemnation lists backed up with a long list of scriptures. Yes, it’s almost hilarious; it’s two married people in a sword drill to prove who is the worst spouse. In the midst of the counseling, it is a raging battle with Bible verses flying everywhere intending to inflict as much condemnation as possible.
But love “does not keep a record of wrong,” and marriage is not about law—it’s about love. If it’s not too late, it is a simple matter of redirecting their focus on what is right about their marriage and not sin sniffing. All in all, Protestantism teaches us how to sin-sniff, not love.
In conclusion, when circumstances threaten to displace love in a relationship, the answer is to be inventive in regard to displacing lovelessness. It calls for the wisdom of ingenuity. Necessity is the mother of invention, and in marriage the law is not necessary and only good for condemnation, not the wisdom of love.
This is why I hate Protestantism. It defines righteousness as perfect law-keeping and uses its condemnation to suck the happiness out of life while replacing it with the lie that true happiness is found in sin-sniffing and the condemnation of self and others. Please note: I am not saying that love has no standard or work, but the question is; what law and what work? You are either under condemnation or the wisdom of love.
True happiness is found in “love that covers a multitude of sin.”
paul
4 comments