Church Doctrinal Statements that Deliberately Deceive: Roosevelt Community Church; Lancaster, California
Most evangelicals in America have a balanced view of their role in sanctification. By sanctification, I mean the Christian life. Couple that with the fact that America is in the midst of an authentic Calvinist Resurgence that started in 1970. Even though this movement has all but taken over the American church, most evangelicals are completely unaware of what they are really following. This is by design.
Authentic Calvinism makes the Christian life (sanctification) by faith alone. In other words, it holds to the idea that we are sanctified, or if you will, changed in the exact same way that we were saved: by faith alone. When we speak of salvation, we refer to justification. How were we justified? By faith alone. Most evangelicals believe that salvation (justification) is monergistic. What’s that mean? It means that salvation is a work of God alone and our role is faith alone. They also believe that sanctification is what we call synergistic. What’s that? It means that through the new birth, we are enabled to colabor with God in our change from what we used to be and what we are becoming. Also, the lynchpin of Evangelicalism is the idea that justification is a finished work while sanctification is a progression of personal change for God’s glory.
Stop right there. Authentic Calvinism (hereafter “AC”) rejects that idea as a false gospel and works salvation. Calvin rejected the idea that Christians change, and taught that the Christian life must be lived out by faith alone in order to get to heaven. Calvin’s very definition of perseverance was the idea that we persevere in living our Christian lives by faith alone while shunning good works that are of us. In fact, he believed that the Old Testament Sabbath Rest is New Testament sanctification. He got that idea from the Catholic mystic St. Augustine whom he quotes more than 400 times in the Calvin Institutes.
How in the world does a Christian NOT work in their Christian lives? Well, if you believe Calvin, you better find out or you’re going to hell. Maybe. You see, if you FUNCTION according to Calvin’s Sabbath Rest, and you are faithful to the “church,” you might unwittingly find yourself in heaven. Most AC pastors teach sanctification in a justification way. Out of sight—out of mind in regard to sanctification. So, even though you would intellectually articulate sanctification in a typical Evangelical way, your sanctification functions according to Calvin’s Sabbath Rest.
Let’s pause here and address motives. Do AC pastors partake in a deliberate deception by teaching sanctification in a justification way? Yes and no. It’s really a matter of arrogance. These are men who think they understand things that the average parishioner is unable to understand or accept. This is mythology’s noble lie. Therefore, they do deliberately word the church doctrinal statements to appear synergistic, and this is deliberate deception. Men are free to preach any gospel they want to and stand before the Lord and give an account accordingly, but what we are dealing with here is an unequitable and proverbial boiling of the frog on a massive scale. The parishioner is brought into the fold under false pretense via the church’s doctrinal statement, and then begins to function and think by faith alone in the Christian life.
This is by design. It utterly rejects the idea that a Christian can please God by obeying the Bible. Antinomianism (anti-biblical instruction) in justification is a good thing, but the negative aspect of antinomianism is the idea that the Christian is unable to obey the law in sanctification. Christ said that because of “anomia” (a = anti in the English), the hearts of many would be cold in the last days (Matthew 24:12). Principally, that is exactly what this doctrine is yielding nationwide.
Let me repeat that: this doctrine is producing a coldhearted church nationwide. I am not sure what is more evident in our day, love bombing notwithstanding. This doctrine continues to produce coldhearted beasts that use the word “love” more than they change clothes.
Psalm 119:70 – their heart is unfeeling like fat, but I delight in your law.
Now let’s answer the critical question at hand: How does a Christian live out their sanctification by faith alone? In addition, what do you do with all of the commandments in the Bible? Let’s start with how they use the Bible. This point begins to answer the first question: works are applied to the Christian life through mysticism, starting with how the Bible is utilized. How were you saved? By recognizing your sin and the need to put faith in Christ’s atonement, right? In other words, repentance. The doctrine holds to the idea that the Bible is a tool that aids us in returning to the same gospel that saved us in order to keep ourselves in the Sabbath Rest; i.e., salvation. There are many elements to this, but the primary one is the idea that biblical imperatives where written in order to remind us of “Christ’s doing and dying, not anything we do.” Imperatives represent our inability to do them, and what Christ has done for us.
This is the redemptive-historical use of the Bible. The Bible, and All life events, continually “show forth” Christ’s doing and dying and not anything we do. When we live this way, by faith alone in the gospel, Christ’s doing and dying are perpetually applied to our lives and we remain justified. “Are you saying they believe Christ obeys the law for Christians?” Yes. “How in the world does that work?!” It’s a Gnostic application. They believe that we merely EXPERIENCE the works of Christ being performed in our lives via our faith alone. It is like standing in the rain: you are experiencing the rain, but obviously, you can’t make it rain—you can take no credit for it at all. We live our Christian lives by the “subjective power” of the “objective gospel.” The Christian life is SUBJECTIVE. In other words, we have no idea when we are working or when Christ is working through us, but if we acknowledge that we can only sin, and that we are only EXPERIENCING the works of Christ imputed to our sanctification—it’s all good, we remain in the Sabbath rest. An example of this follows:
When we think, desire, speak, or act in a right way, it isn’t time to pat ourselves on the back or cross it off our To Do List. Each time we do what is right, we are experiencing [underline added] what Christ has supplied for us. In Chapter 11, we introduced some of the fruit Christ produces. We will expand the discussion here (Paul David Tripp: How People Change; Punch press 2006, p. 215).
Hence, nothing should ever be done in the Christian life out of “duty.” Also, and this is a key element as well, Christian “change” is defined as a mere capacity to experience our future glorification progressively. So, justification, sanctification, and future resurrection (glorification) are all fused together into one salvific progressive process. We are saved by the gospel, sanctified by the gospel, and progressively experience more and more of future glory until the day of glorification. This speaks to their take on assurance: the more we experience the joy of future glorification, the more we are convinced that we will be glorified. If we see ourselves as passive in His-[s]tory and the story of redemption (which defines all reality), we get to stay in the Sabbath rest. The new birth is redefined as a process of repentance, viz, using life and the Bible to see our depravity in a deeper and deeper way resulting in an increased capacity to experience future glorification. When “heart transformation” is spoken of, that speaks solely to the increased ability of the heart to merely experience future glory and the accompanied joy. Their actual title for this in Reformed systematic theology is mortification and vivification.
Accordingly; justification, sanctification, new birth, obedience, change, repentance, etc. are all redefined. However, eventually the idea is assimilated into the minds of the listeners and they begin to function this way because of what is emphasized, left out, and applied according to covert redefinitions.
This now brings me to the reason I want to use the doctrinal statement of Roosevelt Community Church in Lancaster, California. Their statement is worded in a way that conveys strong Evangelicalism. Evangelicalism is a movement that sought to bring extreme views of the Reformation closer to the center, and for all practical purposes covered for what the Reformers really taught. For instance, Calvin taught in no uncertain terms that sins committed in the Christian life separate us from salvation and need forgiveness in the institutional church. If one is not a member of a church, they cannot receive forgiveness for sins committed in the Christian life. Calvin also taught that elders have the authority to forgive such sins:
Nor by remission of sins does the Lord only once for all elect and admit us into the Church, but by the same means he preserves and defends us in it. For what would it avail us to receive a pardon of which we were afterwards to have no use? That the mercy of the Lord would be vain and delusive if only granted once, all the godly can bear witness; for there is none who is not conscious, during his whole life, of many infirmities which stand in need of divine mercy. And truly it is not without cause that the Lord promises this gift specially to his own household, nor in vain that he orders the same message of reconciliation to be daily delivered to them (The Calvin Institutes: 4.1.21).
To impart this blessing to us, the keys have been given to the Church (Mt. 16:19; 18:18). For when Christ gave the command to the apostles, and conferred the power of forgiving sins, he not merely intended that they should loose the sins of those who should be converted from impiety to the faith of Christ; but, moreover, that they should perpetually perform this office among believers (The Calvin Institutes: 4.1.22).
Secondly, This benefit is so peculiar to the Church, that we cannot enjoy it unless we continue in the communion of the Church. Thirdly, It is dispensed to us by the ministers and pastors of the Church, either in the preaching of the Gospel or the administration of the Sacraments, and herein is especially manifested the power of the keys, which the Lord has bestowed on the company of the faithful. Accordingly, let each of us consider it to be his duty to seek forgiveness of sins only where the Lord has placed it. Of the public reconciliation which relates to discipline, we shall speak at the proper place (Ibid).
…by new sins we continually separate ourselves, as far as we can, from the grace of God… Thus it is, that all the saints have need of the daily forgiveness of sins; for this alone keeps us in the family of God (John Calvin: Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles; The Calvin Translation Society 1855. Editor: John Owen, p. 165 ¶4).
Not only is this not lost on contemporary AC, the arrogance of it lags not far behind. And the need for perpetual resalvation is evident: new sins committed in the Christian life separate us from our salvation.
Roosevelt’s doctrinal statement is typical of AC churches that want to hide what they really believe and feed the AC gospel elephant to parishioners—a bit at a time. Words are used that are less specific to the point in order to deliberately nuance what is conveyed. For example, “salvation” will often be replaced with more generic words like “grace” which can pertain to salvation or the help we get from God in sanctification. This is deliberate nuance. However, with careful examination, some of the doctrinal anomalies can be spotted. But first, let’s examine an outright lie in Roosevelt’s doctrinal statement:
We teach the literal, grammatical-historical interpretation of Scripture which affirms the belief that the opening chapters of Genesis present creation in six literal days (Genesis 1:31; Exodus 31:17).
The grammatical-historical interpretation of Scripture takes sentence structure and the use of words at face value. It doesn’t pick and choose what is literal. True grammatical-historical interpretation not only holds to a literal view of creation, it holds to a literal view of biblical imperatives; i.e., that they are not merely written in a redemptive context. Hence, Christians can please God in sanctification via righteousness of their own gifted to them by God, and are indeed able to obey the commandments. On the “Web Links” page of Roosevelt’s website, the who’s who of “Evangelicals” that indorse a Christocentric view of the Bible are indorsed. Christocentric interpretation is a synonym for redemptive-historical. The fact that Roosevelt only mentions grammatical-historical is disingenuous at best and outright deception at worst.
Remember, AC have redefined nearly every term used in the discussion of the gospel. What seems to be stated is not what they mean and plays on the lack of theological education in the local church. Nevertheless, some of the real intent can be detected:
We teach that there is also by the work of the Holy Spirit a progressive sanctification by which the state of the believer is brought closer to the positional standing each believer enjoys through justification.
Notice that the believer is not personally changed, but their “state” is brought closer to their “positional standing” of justification. Notice also that ONLY the work of the Holy Spirit is mentioned in regard to sanctification, and not ours. We see that despite all of the other verbiage in the statement, it really boils down to progressive justification and the fusing together of justification, sanctification, and glorification and using sanctification to make justification an unfinished work.
Again, all in all, and regardless of the wording, Roosevelt’s statement must be confronted with who they endorse. Several people listed on the Web Links page were involved in writing a book of essays that honored Pastor John Piper. Piper, in an article on the Reformation, defined his understanding and beliefs in regard to the authentic Reformation gospel. It entails the belief that ALL righteousness remains outside of the believer, and in fact, Christ does not even work within us. Again, the inner workings of grace are by experience only. The Christian heart is still wicked, and its transformation is only an increased capability to experience a remnant of future glory. It’s purely passive, and not active.
The point of this article is to emphasize the meaninglessness of doctrinal statements and the reading thereof for purposes of choosing a church home. And Roosevelt Community Church in Lancaster, California is an excellent example. Read the statement, and then come to grips with what they really believe.
paul
A Free-Writing Theses: The Silent Identity Crisis of Western Evangelicalism
As Western Christians, what do we want to call ourselves? The assumption among evangelicals is that you are either Catholic or Protestant. There are Catholics, Protestants, and their denominational variances, and “cults.” This is the generally accepted motif due to the traditions of men and misinformation. If we understand a proper definition of each, a fourth category is needed. This is the silent identity crisis of Western Christianity; few of us know who we really are.
“Evangelicalism” sought to be that fourth option in the 18th and 19th centuries. The problem with that follows: the movement held fast to the basic premises of Protestantism. This middle of the road option sold big because of a fundamental en mass misconception of what the Protestant gospel states.
The fact is, you can scarcely slip a playing card in-between the gospels of Protestantism and Catholicism except for the fact that Catholics are more honest; they readily admit that justification is not a finished work and you need the church to help you finish the work. Luther and Calvin admitted that believers have to participate in the finishing of justification, but Calvin asserted that it is really not works salvation because God predetermines who is going to persevere and who isn’t. Wonderful.
However, this is all prefaced with a like caveat: Calvin’s “power of the keys.” Whatever the right pastors bind on earth will be bound in heaven. Being interpreted: if the church likes you, you’re probably going to make it. Have you ever wondered why religion is such a big business? Have you ever wondered why the church is preferred over justice? Clearly, Calvin believed in elder absolution in the exact same way that Catholics believe in priestly absolution. In no uncertain terms, Calvin stated that a perpetual forgiveness of sins needed to sustain justification can only be found in the institutional church.
Why does this surprise us? Luther and Calvin were Augustinians, and the three never repented of being Catholics. In fact, Catholics and Protestants both claim Augustine as the father of their orthodoxy. “Orthodoxy” is a more contemporary form of mythology. In ancient times, mythology was the catechism, creeds, and confessions of the first religion institutionalized by the kingdom of darkness: Spiritual Caste. Instead of ONE mediator between God and man, the enlightened are mediators of truth between God and the great unwashed unenlightened masses. The enlightened understand truth that the masses will never understand, but in order to guide them to the hereafter, they publish truth that can be understood by the unenlightened masses; ie., orthodoxy which is a more polished form of mythology. The latter is part and parcel with the earliest forms of Spiritual Caste. The former is historically attached to the Reformation. And from the very beginnings of civilization, Spiritual Caste is one and the same with state—the union of faith and force.
Cults were born with the advent of separation of church and state. Principles of cultism transcend all stripes of religion because cults replace the enforcement of orthodoxy by the state with mind control, manipulation, propaganda, and fear. Evangelical academia is the Catholic form of Popeism and a major tool of that propaganda. Cults are an 18th century phenomenon and the etymology of the word does not precede that era. Non-cults are Protestants that restrain themselves from their lust to control and be a mediator other than Christ; therefore, they are not cults, but cultism aways lingers in the Protestant heart.
A true and real fourth option must emerge. It will recognize that justification is a finished work and sanctification progresses separately. It will recognize that sanctification is powered by regeneration and not justification. Those who protest that some Protestants believe this should also insist that such people defer from calling themselves Protestants. Catholicism and Protestantism both are based on progressive justification.
An endeavor for the definition must come forth. This movement must reject Protestantism and all of its bastard children out of hand. It must recognize Protestantism for the false gospel that it is. It must throw out the Protestant baby with the bathwater. It must know that a “little leaven leavens the whole lump.” It must insist on individual responsibility regarding a relationship with the one mediator and reject the traditions of men. It must uphold the freedom of the individual to seek God on their own and reject religious collectivism. Though it recognizes the necessity of fellowship and unity in the truth, it will emphasize the individual and the gifts granted by God to every person born into the world. It will see every member as crucial to the functioning of the body.
This is where true revival for God’s glory will take place. This is where the fellowship of believers will see God working for themselves without a play by play interpretation by the spiritual elite. Yes, it is a call to fear God more than men.
Are You a Christian, a Catholic, or a Protestant?
Technically, according to the gospel you believe, you are a Christian, a Catholic, or a Protestant. Other religions may have different names, but the primary issues are the same. What’s the difference?
Catholics: Believe in infused righteousness, or a literal new birth. The believer is truly righteous, but must colabor with the church to make it to heaven. Justification is not finished.
Protestants: Reject infused grace—ALL righteousness remains outside of the believer. If the believer is righteous in any way, or possesses righteousness, he/she is a participant in justification. Again, justification is not finished; therefore, infused grace makes the “believer” a participant in the justification process. Original Protestantism would deem this works righteousness.
Christians: Literally born again into a new creature. The believer colabors with the Trinity and progresses in righteousness. Justification is a finished work and totally separate from the Christian life which is a progression of righteousness. Justification is finished, by faith alone, and accomplished by the Trinity alone. Sanctification is a progression in righteousness that pleases God.
paul
Self-Esteem, Calvinism, and the Mass Graves of Human History
Of course, it is no surprise that God’s creation is most fascinating and teaches us many things about Him. Creation teaches us that God is good, and is a God of order…and good ideas:
“It’s nature’s way of telling you something’s wrong. It’s nature’s way of telling you in a song… Something’s wrong, something’s wrong, something’s wrong.”
Such is creation and its order; hence, Dr. Phil asks the rhetorical question: “How’s that working for you.” God created the Earth to work well when good ideas are implemented. This is the order of creation. God said to multiply and subdue the earth; ie., make it work well with good ideas. In that, God is glorified—good ideas and good results verify that God is a God of order and goodness.
Spiritual abuse in the church is the hot topic of our day. Discernment blogs exploded in 2008 without anyone stopping to ask why. In that same year, a massive covert church subculture was dubbed, “New Calvinism.” Now, a truth is emerging that no one wants to deal with: New Calvinism is a resurgence of the original article of the Reformation. And the discernment blogosphere is a sandbox where we play with toys representing a reality that we would think is hell on earth if we didn’t know better. It is the same difference between a child playing with a toy tank in the back yard versus a tank commander on the ground in Afghanistan. The blogosphere is playing with issues that are better understood by those who were tied to two horses running in opposite directions.
I am presently working through a recent post by church historian John Immel, a much valued friend of this ministry. If you want to partake in relevant “deep repentance,” read his materials and then surf the discernment blogs as well as your own former take on contemporary church history. For certain, I am not charitable enough with some and forget my own former ignorance as a Reformed pastor. I was primarily duped on the issue of self-esteem. Like all good Reformed pastors, I was a proponent of self-death. I was a proponent of ALL love being an outward focus. Like all good Reformed pastors, I despised Dr. James Dobson.
As the saying goes, a clock that doesn’t work is right twice a day. There is some rightness to the idea that others are important. Luther’s self-death will work and free you from the emotional investments of this world—it is VERY effective…and cowardly. As I work through John’s post, I find my red pen underlining and writing, “Luther-Heidelberg Disputation, Luther-HD, HD theses 28,” over and over again. Calvin expanded Luther’s treatise in the Calvin Institutes and presented it to Francis 1 as a political document, a fact never mentioned in our day. The masses thinking well of themselves has never been good news for many governments. Those who think themselves worthless are much easier to control. And when you have a fancy to kill them, they will report to the gallows with joy. Of course, due to their powerful faith in God. Ahhhmen.
Let’s talk Bible. I believe the Bible is God’s full-orbed metaphysical statement to mankind; specifically, to the individual. It is His metaphysics, epistemology, ethic, and politics. It is written to the individual. I am not dismissing the need for teachers, but be sure of this: the you need me to help you understand what God is really saying ploy was first used on Eve in the garden and is the mainstay employed by the kingdom of darkness till this day.
Simply stated, the Bible teaches that we are wired to value ourselves. Wisdom is deep and a matter of Biblical balance. No man is “totally depraved.” Biblically, we are instructed to love others as much as we already love ourselves. That’s not a bad thing; that is how God created us. God even wants us to use that fact to “treat others as you yourselves would want to be treated.” The apostle Paul stated that NO man has ever hated himself—so treat your wife accordingly.
A goal of hating ourselves, the essence of Calvinism and Reformed doctrine in particular, is just a really bad idea with the results following. And it’s NOT Biblical. And it leads to all kinds of goofy ideas that have filled mass graves for centuries. And self-esteem is something we earn—it is a truthful evaluation of ourselves. The apostle Paul wrote: “Do not think of yourselves more highly than you ought.” The Bible calls for a truthful self-evaluation and assumes you are able to do so.
In fact, it gives us confidence that we can love others and help them. James Dobson still isn’t my cup of tea, but you will never find him presiding over a death panel. When I was a Reformed pastor, I despised James Dobson because I was in fact a dangerous person. My ideas were dangerous because I was of the Reformed tradition. Sure, nevertheless a good guy amongst that camp; I would have never manned the ovens at Auschwitz. I would have merely kept my silence and said, “But for the grace of God, there go I.”
What in the world prompted this post? Well, note carefully what a commenter wrote to me on another blog yesterday which is incredibly ironic given that I am still working thorough John’s article:
The problem is with the human heart. We think too highly of ourselves and not highly enough of those around us. Those with power tend to use it to dominate others. (Like males over females) Only through accurately understanding the Gospel can godly humility replace the ugliness of human pride. Boasting in oneself will then cease. We will begin to respect others enough to speak the truth in love and not in arrogance… I’m sorry PPT. I will try to be more careful in the future. However, by focusing on scapegoating Calvinism as the source of this problem (as you are doing), you miss the crucial point that because other groups are also guilty of this abuse, your premise is wrong. I get it that you hate Calvinism, but don’t let that bias blind you to the real cause: the prideful human heart that is not truly humbled by the Gospel. One must be convinced of and transformed by the Gospel in order to produce godly fruit. True humility cannot be faked. Boasting, arrogance, domination of others, are just a few characteristics of an unbelieving heart. It is dangerous to think that such deceitful pride can only affect others and never us.
Truly ironic. The commenter is anti-spiritual abuse, yet holds to the same self-worth = pride philosophy that is the crux of every “gospel” written to the likes of Francis 1. I close with a comment from another on the same stream:
We are missing each other, I think.
The question for me isn’t whether spiritual abuse can happen in any denomination or religion. It does. The REAL question is: Do certain doctrines attract abusers / evil perps? To say that since abuse happens across the board in all religions, so abuse could never be problematic to certain doctrines/religions is a logical fallacy.
The doctrine of total depravity teaches people they don’t have personal responsibility. It is God who orchestrates it all as the grand puppet-master. That is quite problematic, IMO.
Right. If you are worthless, if you haven’t been gifted by God, if you need someone else to interpret reality for you, it is the Staples easy-button of life. It is the easy road trodden by those that sing merrily on the way to the gallows…
…because we have so much faith in God.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
6 comments