Creflo Dollar Speaks Out For Pastors Everywhere, and Like Many Forgets 1Timothy 5:19
I Timothy 5:19; Do not entertain an accusation against an elder unless it is brought by two or three witnesses. Those who sin are to be rebuked publicly, so that the others may take warning.
The Reformation False Gospel Denies the New Birth
“This can be plainly seen in one of the most well-articulated Reformed treatises on the subject of the new birth: it is an article endorsed by the Reformed icon Graeme Goldsworthy, and the article is entitled, The False Gospel of the New Birth. Any questions?”
“This Gnostic paradigm enables those of the Reformed tradition to affirm the truthfulness of the new birth, while denying its significance. The new birth is a mere shadow of the only important thing that can power our lives. Like their Gnostic parents, they are masters of deception in this way. It enables them to dismiss the plain sense of Scripture on a large scale while building their antinomian juggernaut.”
_______________________________________________________
Hopefully, the Reformation will one day take its proper place in history as one of the great cults. Like all cults, it utilizes familiar biblical terminology, but has assigned a different meaning to the terms. Though the Reformers and their offspring frame explanations of salvific elements in biblical plausibility, their words are carefully chosen to deceive those who are not “ready” for their deep Reformation “truth.”
Basic elements of Reformed ideology are a direct affront to the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. Christ said, “You must be born again,” and this the Reformers deny. The biblical meaning of the new birth is a total recreation of the saved person. The old self was put to death and no longer lives—we are new creatures. “Behold, all things are new.” The old man who was inflamed in temptation by the law is now dead, and the believer is now free via the new birth to pursue freedom in the law, though not perfectly. This is what the new birth does: it changes the relationship of the law to the saved individual. He/she is no longer under it for justification, but upholds it as a kingdom citizen and slave to Jesus Christ. Failure thereof temporarily disrupts the intimate family relationship with the Father and the Son, but can be restored through a repentance that is not a washing, for we are already washed.
This creates an abundance of difficulties for Reformed theology. An actual transformation of the individual that includes the efficacious union of Christ, rather than the life of Christ being the only life in a spiritually dead believer, is the Waterloo of Reformed theology. Are we alive with Christ? Or are we still dead with Christ? Is sanctification by faith alone because we are still dead, or are we creditable colaborers who are able to truly love our Lord through our actions?
In Reformed theology, there is no new birth that makes us new creatures with Christ, the “new birth” is “Christ for us.” Not just for forgivenessof sins, but for EVERYTHING. “You can do nothing without me,” is translated, you can’t do anything at all because you are still spiritually dead.
Reformed theology is a let go and let God doctrine on steroids. And in Reformed theology, to deny that Christians remain spiritually dead is paramount to works salvation because the law remains the standard for justification. Instead of being dead to the law for justification, we are still dead to law for sanctification as well—the relationship has not changed—Christ must keep the law for us to maintain our just standing. This is why, according to most Reformed theology, you can lose your salvation if you do not live the Christian life by, “faith alone.” Trying to obey the law in sanctification is supposedly insanity because the standard is still perfection—we are still under the law. Not only that, we are still spiritually dead to boot. Justification texts are deceptively applied to sanctification and vice versa. It’s all the same.
This is why Reformed theology turns truth completely upside down at every point. It is a gargantuan library of lies that cover for other lies. It started with a false premise, and has spent over 500 years building, refining and crafting its narrative. It uses the same metaphysics that Satan needed to be equal with God. To compete with God, Satan needed to be different—so he created the antithesis of God: evil. Therefore, in Satan’s book, the whole story, or the rest of the story, or the totality of “wisdom,” should have included his creation as well: the knowledge of good and evil. Knowledge of good alone is knowledge of God alone—Satan would have none of that.
Hence, the first sentence of the Calvin institutes describes wisdom as primarily the knowledge of God and us (who remain totally depraved). Therefore, according to the same garden metaphysics, we must remain evil in order to have a working epistemology. If we change, if we become more and more like God, the epistemological gateway is diminished. A deeper and deeper knowledge of our depravity can no longer be set against a deeper and deeper knowledge of God’s holiness—leading to more and more “wisdom.” Therefore, the idea of the new birth drives a stake through the heart of the first sentence of the Calvin institutes. The transformation of us just points more to knowledge about God and less about our former condition—this seems to upset Calvin’s epistemological apple cart.
But whether or not you buy my working theory on the deeper issue of metaphysics, the fact remains that Reformed theology clearly teaches that we remain totally depraved as Christians. The only argument is whether or not neo-Calvinism has distorted the original intent of the Reformers. I contend that they have not. And if they have, the Calvin purists can blame themselves because an apt treatise against the neo-Calvinists is nowhere to be found, but rather fellowship. If Calvinists don’t want to wear the shoe that fits, let them come out from among them.
In the Reformed mindset, to claim transformation through the new birth is to make salvation about us, and less about God. Such is not the truth because God doesn’t need evil to better define Himself, nor does He need evil as a contrast to magnify His glory. Therefore, pointing to our own evil does not glorify God. Becoming more like God glorifies God; Christ makes this clear in the Sermon on the Mount. But notable contemporary Reformers state the opposite, saying that emphasizing the enabling power of the new birth (as Christ did with the word, “must”) “eclipses” the glory of Christ:
It robs Christ of His glory by putting the Spirit’s work in the believer above and therefore against what Christ has done for the believer in His doing and dying.
~ Geoffrey Paxton (Australian Forum)
But to whom are we introducing people to, Christ or to ourselves? Is the “Good News” no longer Christ’s doing and dying, but our own “Spirit-filled” life?
~ Michael Horton
And the new-birth-oriented “Jesus-in-my-heart” gospel of evangelicals has destroyed the Old Testament just as effectively as has nineteenth-century liberalism. (footnoted to Paxton’s article with above quote).
~ Graeme Goldsworthy (Australian Forum)
In it [Goldsworthy’s lecture at Southern] it gave one of the clearest statements of why the Reformation was needed…. I would add that this “upside down” gospel has gone away— neither from Catholicism nor from Protestants.
~ John Piper
Another way those of the Reformed tradition explain away plain truth about the new birth is the Reformed Emphasis Hermeneutic which is based on Gnosticism. Truth is beyond what the five senses can ascertain. What the five senses can ascertain are shadows and forms of the vision of the good. So, to “emphasize” what the Holy Spirit is helping us do within is emphasizing what we sense, and what Reformers call “subjective experience.” The only true objective truth is “the objective gospel outside of us” which is a Reformed mantra (http://www.objectivegospel.org/). What they have done is reversed normal metaphysics in the same way Gnosticism does. What we observe is no longer empirical, but deemed subjective; only the true vision of the good is objective; ie, the gospel outside of us. Therefore, to emphasize the new birth is to emphasize the shadows and forms of the higher good, and not the higher good. It is “emphasizing a good thing, but not the best thing,” and, “emphasizing the fruit, and not the root.” This Gnostic paradigm enables those of the Reformed tradition to affirm the truthfulness of the new birth, while denying its significance. The new birth is a mere shadow of the only important thing that can power our lives. Like their Gnostic parents, they are masters of deception in this way. It enables them to dismiss the plain sense of Scripture on a large scale while building their antinomian juggernaut. This can be plainly seen in one of the most well-articulated Reformed treatises on the subject of the new birth: it is an article endorsed by the Reformed icon Graeme Goldsworthy, and the article is entitled, The False Gospel of the New Birth. Any questions?
Reformed theology is in no wise truthful on any point other than some facts that are used as coconspirators in their evil plot to take away from God’s objective truth, and also add to it. Their doctrine drives a stake through the very heart of the true gospel. They boldly deny the words of the Lord of Lords, the glorious Holy King: “You must be born again.”
And their desert will be just.
paul
Get Over It: “New Calvinism” and IHOP Have the Same Doctrine
For all of you Calvinists out there, I will soften the blow of this and make the comparison between the infamous International House of Prayer and “New Calvinism” (wink, wink). So, I am not going to discuss the progressive justification that Calvin taught, only the progressive justification that those rascally New Calvinists teach.
As we all know, New Calvinists emphasize the “gospel-centered life.” So, since words mean things, let’s analyze that. What is the gospel? Well, according to the kings of New Calvinism, CJ Mahaney and John Piper, the gospel boils down to, “Christ died for our sins.” So our life, that would be our sanctified life as believers, centers on the same gospel that saved us. Hence, the gospel-centered life. In fact, Piper and Michael Horton both state: to move beyond the gospel that saved us to applying our own efforts in sanctification causes one to lose his/her salvation. Therefore, mere gospel contemplationism as the primary means of the gospel growing, not us, is what maintains our justification. We don’t grow, but rather manifest the gospel by continually seeing our need for a savior in a deeper and deeper way; ie, progressive justification.
As the revelations are rapidly unfolding in regard to the International House of Prayer and its cultish behavior, one might take note that IHOP is predicated on progressive justification just like Calvinism New Calvinism. It’s the same doctrine with all of the special trimmings. We read the following on an IHOP website:
Hope – go deep in the good news of God’s love, and learn to live a gospel-centered life individually, in community, and in love for your neighbors and the nations through the lens of God’s mercy, justice, power and grace (http://nbihop.org/category/resources/).
In the IHOP University curriculum for 2012, we read:
Walking in the power of grace extends to all aspects of life, from how we relate to God and others to how we utilize our resources. Through this course, students develop a proper perspective on grace as the foundation of everyday Christian living.
They also hold to the typical New Calvinist doctrinal position on “Christ-centered justice”; ie, we are all totally depraved and don’t deserve justice. If justice was served, we would all be in hell. In the same curriculum:
Forming a biblical, Christ-centered message of justice in students and giving them practical training prepares them to engage in intercession-based works of justice on behalf of the needy and the oppressed in diverse settings….The human experience of suffering and God’s commitment to justice are two sides of one burning question in the human heart. Through the media, this generation is aware of immense injustice and suffering….Yet it is often difficult for Christians to give a bold account of what God’s justice is and how He will make wrong things right. Understanding this topic is crucial, as we anticipate a time when injustice will reach new heights and God will allow unprecedented global suffering. Students approach this two-sided question biblically as they focus on Jesus, the righteous Judge, who brings forth justice and comforts those who suffer.
Notice that we don’t do anything to affect justice; we merely “focus” on the righteous judge and are comforted thereby. Supposedly. We know exactly how this works in New Calvinist organizations like Sovereign Grace Ministries. Their “Christ-centered justice” is well documented. In the same curriculum, we see the New Calvinist Redemptive Historical hermeneutic that propagates the idea that the Bible is a gospel narrative to be used for contemplationism:
Students examine this teaching but also place it in the context of the grand narrative of God and His people, looking at what Christians have believed over the centuries and what they should believe in light of Scripture and history.
The curriculum is also peppered with the same worn-out New Calvinist truisms concerning the evils of “living by lists” and a “personal” relationship with Jesus because he is a “person not a precept” ad nauseam.
Like New Calvinism, Christ’s learn and apply is conspicuously missing. The Bible is a gospel narrative for contemplation. You can also read our free ebook on how the Emergent Church uses the exact same hermeneutic as well.
And that’s the point: progressive justification is the core doctrine that drives most of the control groups of our day.
paul
18 comments