Calvinist Gospel Sexy Time is a Longstanding Reformed Tradition
“Let me add one to the pile: Francis Chan has noted that Christ was his grandmother’s ‘lover.’ What did he mean by that? Well, he is paid millions to be a communicator—you be the judge. Is he overp…
Source: Calvinist Gospel Sexy Time is a Longstanding Reformed Tradition
The Unborn Charge Us From Heaven: It’s Not About Remembering; It’s About Honoring Life
As a former Reformed pastor, viz, a Protestant, viz, a Calvinist, viz, a Lutheran, viz, an Augustinian, and all other roots of the poisonous tree that make up the Institutional church, I had no comfort for those who suffered the loss of their unborn and infants. I usually let the more expert pastors speak in those situations; you know, the ones with the seminary degrees.
“Is my baby in heaven? ‘We don’t know, but we trust that God is righteous in all that He does.’”
“Why did God allow this to happen? ‘We don’t know, but perhaps to save the child from some worse death.’” That is, something worse than the toddler getting run over in the driveway by their best friend.
Have you ever noticed? Despite trillions of dollars invested in Protestant education, and over 500 years to get it right, Protestants don’t know a lot of stuff. Remember, Jay Adams’ biblical counseling construct introduced in 1970 was considered to be revolutionary. One well-known evangelical even asked, “Could the Bible really be this practical?” Think about it: 1970. That’s how many years after the supposed brilliance of the Reformation?
Not long after 1970, an Adventist theologian named Robert Brinsmead was invited to the hallowed halls of Westminster seminary to inform the who’s who of Protestantism in regard to what a Protestant really is. Now go to Westminster and pay $80,000 for a degree; ya, do that, brilliant. They didn’t even know what the true Protestant gospel was until Brinsmead came along, and they are the experts? Really? So, don’t give me any of that crap about “historical precedent.”
Shortly thereafter, Brinsmead’s revelation was repackaged into things like the Sonship Discipleship Bible Study program and “second generation biblical counseling.” The latter was hatched by Dr. David Powlison who was mentored by another Westminster hack, Dr. John “Jack” Miller. This was the beginning of the New Calvinist movement and launched a Calvinist theological civil war that ended up being won by the New Calvinists who now control Protestantism for the most part. The only holdouts are small Baptist churches that pride themselves on theological ignorance which by the way is a Lutheran Gnostic concept.
But of course, Baptists put a hillbilly twist on that: “We don’t know nuttin about none of that-thar thee-ology stuff. All you do is talk in them 50-cent thee-o-logical words.” Well, at least they know they are ignorant and profess it openly.
Anyway, don’t miss the point: over 500 years after the Reformation Calvinist scholars were arguing about what the true Protestant gospel is. New Calvinism has taken over the evangelical church because no one could ultimately deny that Brinsmead was right. In a presentation at Dr. John Piper’s church, David Powlison stated openly that the difference between first generation biblical counseling and second generation biblical counseling is two different gospels. You do the math. The church is supporting confused men who can’t even agree on what the gospel is.
By the way; babies, born or unborn, go to heaven because they are not under the law. They are born under the law, but they are not susceptible to its condemnation until their consciences are developed. It’s not rocket science, unless your mind is warped with “the gospel of sovereignty.” Don’t bother looking for that in your concordance; it’s not there.
Other than learning real truth from being faithful Bereans, live events teach us well. This week, between our annual TANC conference and the death of my 3rd grandson, I learned a lot more about death. Already in heaven his body was released from what was the comfort of his mother’s womb. His name is now Isaiah, and his short life has taught me much.
The procedure was performed at Kettering hospital in Dayton, Ohio named after Charles F. Kettering the inventor. John Immel spoke of him during this year’s conference. One would do well to read about this man’s astounding life. It is evident at Kettering that they strive to live up to the name for which their facility is named. That’s a very high calling.
But why do we do what we do? Although Isaiah only lived 13 weeks and made no appearance outside of his mother’s womb, Kettering supplies numerous services to honor the life of the unborn. They have a team that focuses on the stillborn exclusively. When Isaiah’s body was delivered, he was placed in a little knit baby crib made by volunteers. Kettering also has a memorial garden for the unborn where ceremonies are held.
Why am I a part of the medical profession where billions of dollars are spent to serve the severely disabled? After all, what can they contribute to others? Why are there so many cemeteries? Wouldn’t it just be easier and cheaper to cremate everybody? For some reason, cemeteries often have “memory” in their names, but I have learned this week from Isaiah that it is not about memory at all. It is rather about defending life and honoring it.
Those who we know and love cannot be forgotten. They become a part of our lives and being. When we lose family and friends, truly the part of our lives they contributed to is lost for the time being. We never completely get over any loss in this lifetime. With each new day we regain more of our happiness and begin functioning according to a new normal of wellbeing. Our mind will find balance, but not because we forget anything. Loss is part of overall homeostasis. There will never be complete closure until the final enemy of God is defeated: death. Christ defeated sin on the cross by ending the law, sickness will be defeated in the Millennial Kingdom, and death will be completely defeated at the new heaven and new earth.
We do what we do because we stand for life. That’s why I no longer think cremation is ok, because of what Isaiah taught me this week. Something is defective in our thinking when dad is sitting on a bookshelf with the family pets. Pets are important, but our lives are worth more than sparrows according to Christ. This is why some cultures have cemeteries, and others just have mass graves. But it’s not about memory, it’s about honoring life—nobody forgets the part of them that is gone.
May I be frank? This is why my knowledge of the Protestant Reformation has caused me to set my face completely against it. If you have followed my teachings on the founding documents of the Protestant Reformation, you know that it is an ideology of zero-sum-life and a doctrine of death. Martin Luther and Charles F. Kettering represent the antithesis of two ideologies in regard to state of being. One loved life so much that he only wanted to know about problems so he could solve them to make life better; the other cursed life and despised anything that improved the quality of it, calling such improvements “the glory of man story” as opposed to the “cross story.” When Christians come to me and Susan for counseling via the electric starter invented by Charles Kettering and end up lecturing us about how spiritual wellbeing only comes from suffering, where does this come from? It comes from the root of the tree. No matter how old a tree is, the fruit is determined by the roots.
We make much ado about the dead because they once lived. We don’t honor their memory—we honor their life. Their memory charges us that when times are good they would have us rejoice, but when times are bad, we are to consider because the creator of life is watching. In this way they speak from the grave.
Sin hates life and brought death. And its advocates despise the idea that man can choose life because they believe he has no right to it. As I walked through the hallways of Kettering Medical Center yesterday I thought about Martin Luther. I thought about how much he would hate that place if he were here today. I thought about how he would rail against it as the “glory of Charles Kettering story” and not the “cross of suffering story.” How he would despise the comfort my daughter received there and its subsequent circumvention of real knowledge in his Book of Concord. This is a vile misrepresentation of the true gospel of life.
But Isaiah and his horde speak of a better testimony…one of life and the upholding of it.
paul
TANC 2015: The Institutional Gospel in 7 minutes
Video post by @PaulMDohse.
Christians Behaving Badly Outside of Church and the Salvation Gas Station
Electronic communication is convenient yet faulty. Personal communication is much more accurate, and when communicating electronically judgments about what is being said should always be tentative.
So, often, especially when trying to explain a theological concept electronically, I end up telling people, “I will write a post about this in the morning.” So here it is.
As anyone who follows this blog knows, I am totally against any “Christian” assemblies otherwise known as “church” that are institutions. Why? Because God’s family is a family, not an institution. This is why the assemblies of Christ were in homes only and not purpose build institutional temples. Anyway, in all cases, institutionalized Christianity would have been against the law until the 4th century.
Home fellowships are about the unity of one body, the family of God, and the importance of individual members determining the health of each body. Members are defined by gifts granted by the Spirit. To the degree that each member is exercising those gifts determines the health of the body.
“Church” aptly called and coroneted by Constantine in the 4th century is about collectivism, franchised salvation issued on the installment plan, authority, caste, and infrastructure. Church builds buildings and not people because infrastructure speaks of authority. Come now, let’s be honest; the success of a church is judged by people numbers and infrastructure. Once I went to a Neo-Calvinist how-to pastor’s conference hosted by “successful” pastors. One pastor took us on a tour of his church. Did he wait till Sunday morning so he could introduce to us several members who have grown in their gifts? Nope, he took us there after dinner to give us a tour of their splendid building. Nuff said.
This also results in a dichotomy between church and home. Many people who go to church every time the doors are open wouldn’t tolerate the church building looking like their house. At home, the Spirit is powerless to help us be good housekeepers, but alas, it makes sense that He does so in the temple where He dwells. That goes for behavior as well.
Why are people guarded at church and so unguarded in their homes? Certainly, Susan and I hear this complaint from wives and husbands continually: “He/she is a totally different person at church.” First, church is where you go every week to get more salvation; so, obviously you can’t go to the salvation gas station and behave badly. If you do, you will be denied the “Means of Grace” (means of salvation) which is why you go there in the first place.
Full stop. That’s just the reality of black and white Protestant orthodoxy as articulated by Luther and Calvin. Protest if you will before I read for you from the Book of Concord and the Calvin Institutes. Please don’t waste your time; denying the salvation gas station is a denial that’s going nowhere. You behave differently at church because that’s where you go to get your salvation gas tank refilled lest your salvation car runs out of gas before you reach heaven. And don’t make the gas station attendants mad lest they refuse to refill your tank.
In fact, the Reformed research institute that began to bring Protestantism back to its original roots in 1970 stated the following in their theological journal which was the most widely published theological journal at that time worldwide:
From the beginning of civilization, progressive salvation obtained through institutions has been the norm and always will be; the two are inseparable. Those who assemble in homes show clearly that their trust is in Christ and in His word only, not an institution overseen by men full of control-lust. When you go to a place where men believe they have authority over your salvation, that is a temple of arrogance despite any humble pretense; this is inescapable. Those who assemble in homes apart from an institution also testify to the fact that their salvation is finished and they can aggressively love without fear of condemnation.
Furthermore, you may argue that your church is confused enough about its roots to not believe in progressive salvation, but with the institutional church returning to its roots at breakneck speed via the New Calvinist movement, it’s only a matter of time before your church is functioning according to authentic Protestantism.
And of course there are many other reasons temple-dwellers behave badly outside of church, but this is the root cause.
paul
When Christian Husbands Should Ask the Divorce Question
The Protestant church is returning to its medieval orthodoxy. This transition is very subtle but causing controversy and conflict. The transition is extraordinarily efficient because Protestantism is already primed for it. A misguided (from a true Protestant perspective) historical-grammatical interpretation of the Bible created a Protestant hybrid for about 200 years, but the rediscovered true Protestant gospel has returned.
And that means Protestant pastors claim all authority on earth over salvation and people’s lives. That’s just plain black and white Protestant orthodoxy. Before Protestants became confused between 1776 and 1970, they were just another warring faction among all the other church-states and pagan-states that ruled the world. Part of the confusion was integrating Americanism with Protestantism, but in reality, the two are mutually exclusive.
So, this is what our ministry deals with; contentious Protestant marriages over the authority issue. One spouse subscribes to pastoral authority while the other doesn’t. This post primarily focuses on husbands—probably because three out of the four situations we are presently dealing with involve husbands that are seeking counsel.
In these situations, the wife has a problem with the husband because he “doesn’t respect the elders” or “refuses to submit to the elders.” If a husband is guilty of this grave sin, he has lost all credibility as a husband and the right to be one…while in most cases he is yet paying the bills.
Even though the wife has completely stripped the husband’s status as leader of the home and given it to the elders of the church, we hesitate to counsel any husband to file for divorce, but we do think that it is time for the “divorce conversation.”
Due to the fact that the wife has ignored the clear teachings of Ephesians 5:22-33 and 1Corinthians 11:3, and has chosen to listen to mere men instead, she may be treated as if she is an unbeliever. Her authority is men, not Christ. This is when the husband needs to have the “divorce conversation” to ascertain whether or not the wife is pleased to remain married to said husband. The conversation could go something like this:
Husband: Do you want a divorce?
Wife: No, why would I want a divorce?
Husband: Because you have taken away my role as a husband and given it to the elders of the church, that is, except for paying all of the bills. This is an unacceptable existence.
Wife: But you should be willing to submit to the authority of godly men.
Husband: No, I will submit to Christ and no other, so what do you want to do?
Based on the outcome of this conversation, the husband may encourage the wife to put feet on her beliefs and file for divorce (1Corintians 7:15). This is because she will never respect her husband as a husband until he obeys men rather than God. That’s a huge problem, and frankly, not reconcilable.
This puts the wife in a position where she has to verbalize a position instead of having it both ways. “yes, I totally disrespect you because you will not obey the elders, but I still want the financial security that you supply and occasional sex.” If she will not admit it, verbalize it for her and let her present a case of denial. But at any rate, it can be pointed out that the elders get to be the boss while not putting their money where their mouth is. They and the wife are picking and choosing what role the husband is allowed to execute. It’s an absurd state of affairs.
As a ministry, we are treading new territory in regard to utterly rejecting the authority of Protestant orthodoxy. Christ’s assembly is a body that operates via organized gifts, not via the glory of arrogant men. There is ONE head of the body…period. Perhaps this “divorce question” conversation is a sound beginning to needed solutions.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
leave a comment