The Higher Law of God?
In this post, I am not sure I adequately conveyed my thoughts so this post adds some clarification. If present-day calamities are God’s judgment against America prompting a call to “return to God,” how would America do so? So, when pastors call for America to “return to God,” how is the following assumption in anywise avoidable? “Do what the church says because we represent God’s authority on earth.” And consequently, if America refuses, calamities will occur. Is this not laying claim to a shadow theocracy? And if that theocracy becomes a reality, why wouldn’t evildoers be done away with to prevent natural calamities? Isn’t it better for one gay guy to die than thousands dying in an earthquake? And what would be considered ill behavior evoking the wrath of God? Here is the real point of the former post: the idea that God punishes countries with natural calamities because the people don’t listen to the church is merely one step from ISIS ideology.
And scarier yet is the idea that “God’s law” is a “higher law” than the American Constitution. And I will give you three wild guesses as to who they think the experts are in regard to God’s “higher law.” That would be the church (give me a break, the church doesn’t even have a proper understanding of justification). So, if the church oversees the higher law of God, and “man’s laws” should not have precedent, you do the math; everything would be good in the world if the church ruled on God’s behalf.
Christians consume everything labeled “Christian” that sounds good and pouring forth from the mouths of all who claim to be God’s anointed because they have been certified by puritanical seminaries. But if they would just read the Bible for themselves and have an original thought, they would see that all moral laws come from God. There is NO “higher law” of God, only more specific revelation, and in both cases, to be interpreted by every man, woman, and child according to their own consciences. Governments are God’s ministers to make sure they have the freedom to do so. As I stated in the other post, God’s kingdom is not presently on earth, and it is not the church’s role to rule here on God’s behalf.
The fact is, the works of God’s law are written on the hearts of every human being born into the world:
“For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them on that day when, according to my gospel, God judges the secrets of men by Christ Jesus.”
There is no “man’s law” as opposed to some higher law of God. We are not here to invoke God’s law on mankind via authority, we are here to appeal to the God-given consciences of men. Christians need to facilitate good governing as much as we are able. Good governments reward good and punish evil according to God’s purposes which does not include forced subservience because this is God’s kingdom—God’s kingdom is not here yet.
We are not here to promote a theocracy through the institutional church; we are “ambassadors” from a foreign country presently located in heaven. Our appeal is not an authority enforced by God through natural calamities. That notion is egregiously misguided.
paul
The Present Day Evangelical Theocracy
Did you know that evangelicals presently operate a theocracy in America? That’s right. In fact, according to them, the manifestation of it can be seen more and more in current events; namely, any and all natural and man-made calamities. Yep, whether tornadoes, earthquakes, floods, or terrorist attacks, God is judging America for not obeying His authority on earth, the church. And unless America “repents,” the Chief Shepherd will utterly destroy those who dare snub their noses at God’s anointed. Of course, it is framed in context of a direct insult to God, but who is the judge of that? Think about this: is not the assumption that any given calamity is an act of God’s vengeance utterly presumptuous?
Sure, it’s a theocracy only in their own minds constantly verbalized every time God smites America on their behalf because they are suffering under what many of them call the “satanic system of democracy,” but it is also a stark reminder of how these guys would govern if they were able to get in bed with the government. Let’s face it, 99.999% of all evangelicals think it would be absolutely wonderful if America was run by Christians as in the good ole’ days of colonial Puritanism. This displays a stunning ignorance of American history and biblical metaphysics.
And the beat goes on: they invoke the Bible, but in fact, the Bible states that “judgment begins in the house of God.” Sooooo, at what point in history did God judge the church? These guys never fail to make me think about jumping off of a bridge; if some guy goes into a church and shoots the place up, or if a church gets burned down, that’s “persecution,” or the devil’s work. But if the same happens to the world at large, it’s God’s judgment. Calgon take me away! We have a large evangelical church here in Xenia, Ohio that was recently flattened by a tornado and unfortunately rebuilt (as if we need yet another functioning Western style Hindu temple littering the landscape). What do you want to bet that not one soul in that place would disagree that terrorism is God’s judgment on America?
I will close this post with a thought. This thinking comes from the Reformation idea that God’s kingdom is on earth. If Christians would just thoughtfully read their own Bibles for themselves, they would undoubtedly be shocked to find out that God’s kingdom is not presently on earth. And this bad idea, actually false idea, is why evangelical leadership wants us to invest so much in the institutionalization of Christianity.
But it is all totally wrong-headed.
paul
Romans 12:17-21, More on Forgiveness and Enemies
I don’t know how many articles I have written for my ongoing attempt to slay the blank check forgiveness evangelical sacred cow, but I continue to chop away at him. Despite all of the blood, the stinkin’ thing still lives.
So, let’s keep trying, but first, where does this “offering grace” blank check forgiveness stuff come from? If you followed our Heidelberg Disputation series, you know. There are two kinds of Protestants: Calvinists, and functioning Calvinists. The former hold to predestination and the soteriology, the latter function according to the soteriology while denying the specific orthodoxy.
Blank check forgiveness comes from the Reformation doctrine of total depravity which results in moral equivalency and a single perspective on justice. Basically, due to the total depravity of man, and the idea that man saved or unsaved possesses no good or righteousness within (Luther’s Alien Righteousness), everybody deserves hell; including Christians regardless of their conversion; anything other than hell or lesser than hell is “grace,” and therefore, being wronged is only valuable for showing forth the same grace that we received. Few Protestants understand the doctrine of mortification and vivification. That’s “deep theology,” so instead, they teach and apply the applications of the doctrine that are too deep for them to understand. Blank check forgiveness is one of them.
Mortification and vivification is the perpetual revisiting of our spiritual baptism. In other words, the new birth doesn’t happen once, but is experienced numerous times throughout our Christian lives. Now, Baptists can moan and cry in denial like alley cats in heat, but that’s Protestant doctrine reflected in the Westminster Confession and London Baptist confessions as well. I will keep saying it; there is no religion more confused nor pathetic than Protestantism. At least even Muslims know what they believe for crying out loud.
But back to mortification and vivification which is the primary model for change in Protestant orthodoxy. The goal is to experience our baptism as much as possible via joy. That’s the vivification part that is totally out of our control—it is the resurrection part. But it begins with our part/role in the Christian life: “dying daily,” or mortification. This is how the whole taking up our cross and dying daily verses are interpreted. According to Luther and Calvin, God helps us out with the dying part by bringing tragedy into our lives. Look, if you are, for example, a rape victim that has been counseled by ACBC or CCEF, lightbulbs are starting to turn on right about now.
Enough of that for now, let’s go to Romans 12:
“17 Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everyone. 18 If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone.19 Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: ‘It is mine to avenge; I will repay, says the Lord.’ 20 On the contrary: ‘If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.’ 21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.”
This is one of the many love your enemies verses. I guess I will keep on saying it: why would Paul concede that we will have enemies in spite of our best efforts if we are to simply forgive everybody who offends us? This passage gives instructions for dealing with enemies. Furthermore, the Bible promises rewards for relating to our enemies in the biblically prescribed way; therefore, does blank check forgiveness deprive us of reward? I think it does. And moreover, there is NO forgiveness of enemies with God unless they repent. In the same way that God blesses His enemies who have not repented, we bless our enemies who have not repented, and this is what leads them to repentance (Romans 2:4). Now, I have some learning to do in regard to how this model works itself out, but that IS the model, NOT blank check forgiveness. It would appear that replacing revenge with blessings prevents bitterness and leads to repentance. It would also seem that the goodness unresponded to will lead to a greater judgment in the end by God.
So, all in all, do I think blank check forgiveness keeps people from repenting? Yes.
paul
Reality Itself Disproves the Church’s Doctrine
From the Huffington Post in 2013:
Citing the “serious sins” of its leader, a Texas-based ministry that promotes home schooling and “male patriarchy” has been shut down by its board.
Doug Phillips wrote on Oct. 30 that he would step down as president of Vision Forum Ministries and stop his speaking engagements after acknowledging an extramarital relationship.
His public admission proved to be a fatal blow for the ministry he headed. Vision Forum was geared for a segment of evangelical and fundamentalist Christians who profess a traditionalist understanding of Scripture, sexuality and gender roles.
“In light of the serious sins which have resulted in Doug Phillips’s resignation from Vision Forum Ministries, the Board of Directors has determined that it is in the best interests of all involved to discontinue operations,” according to a statement on the Vision Forum website.1
What happens in reality continues to disprove the doctrine of the Catholic Church and its offspring, viz, Protestantism and its various stripes thereof. Between the two, Protestantism offers the more glaring contradictions and confusion.
Let’s just take Vision Forum as a prime example. Doug Phillips was often fond of referring to himself as a “sinner.”2 Likewise, Tullian Tchividjian, who also recently resigned due to marital infidelity,3 once boasted that he has never done one good work and stakes his assurance of salvation on that fact accordingly.4
Just how insane is church? People give their whole lives to the church and its sinners saved by grace gospel. This is the message they come to hear week in, and week out; yet, when a leader sins, he must resign to save the ministry’s credibility and subsequent financial support. What in the world is going on?
What is going on follows: the institutional church has been trying to save humanity from reality for over 2000 years. The problem with reality is mankind is basically good. Now, please note: I didn’t say that man’s basic goodness will save him, but nevertheless, man is wired for basic goodness. Why does this surprise us? Perhaps because of our Christian insanity. On the one hand, we are created in the image of God, a fact that Christians verbally toss about frequently, but on the other hand we are totally depraved? Which is it?
The case for basic goodness is stated plainly by what’s trending of late: the lost nor the saved will ultimately tolerate sinning leaders in the church or politics. This is because the world pins its hope on basic goodness. That’s a problem for the institutional church; if man is basically good, he doesn’t need the institutional church to find God and have a relationship with Him, and the church needs to be needed. If man is basically able, he doesn’t need institutional religion as an additional mediator other than Christ. That’s bad for business.
Let’s pause for a reality check; clearly, there is evil in the world, but if man is basically evil, what would the world really look like? And in context of this post, if the function of parishioners was consistent with the message that they pay good money to support, no sinning leader would need to resign, and no ministry would lose support. There is a clear disconnect between reality and the “amen” echoed from the church pews.
And frankly, at pastors conferences and closed-door elders meetings, I think this disconnect is seen as the problem. The institutional church is trying to sell a difficult package, but nevertheless, it is a package they believe in. Resignations are primarily fiscal considerations that sometimes fail to save a given part of the institutional church industrial complex. Many church leaders, whether Catholic or Protestant, see resignations as indicative of the hard work that yet remains in striving for saints to really “understand grace.” However, progress is being made; one example would be the ministry of Pastor Jean F. Larroux, III5 in Presbyterian circles with perhaps the best example being Jack Hyles in Baptist circles:
“What better example than pastor Jack Hyles who remained in the pulpit till his death in 2001. Hyles pastored the largest Baptist church in the US, boasting a membership of 100,000 and Sunday attendance approaching 20,000. Till this day, the Sunday School operates 250 school buses. Hyles was the personification of the first gospel wave that emphasized getting people saved and had very little emphases on life changing discipleship. And then there is this:
‘Hyles had also become known for his alleged immorality, specifically his behavior with his secretary (the wife of a deacon in the church)…. Besides Hyles’ own church and schools being scandalized with immorality and pedophilic activity (numerous FBCH men have been charged or convicted of child molestation), Hyles spawned a number of “ministries” (there are approximately 200 independent Baptist churches nationwide that hold Hyles and his teachings in high regard) that have been scandalized in the same manner. For example, seven Hyles-affiliated churches from 1984-1993 were rocked by child molestation scandals.
David Hyles, Jack Hyles’ son, had affairs with at least 19 different women at Miller Road Baptist Church in Garland, Texas, during the time he pastored there. (He was dismissed when a janitor found photos of Hyles having sex with a deacon’s daughter.) Back in the Chicago area (Bolingbrook, IL), and after David’s divorce from his wife, David was cohabitating with a woman by the name of Brenda Stevens. Brenda posed for pornographic pictures in Adam and Chicago Swingers magazines (in an advertisement for group sex) during the time she and David were living together. After David married Brenda, Brenda’s 17-month-old son by a previous marriage was found battered and dead at the Hyles’ home. The police still consider the case a murder and continue to view David and Brenda as prime suspects.’”6
This post is an idea for TANC Ministries’ 2016 project and is not meant to be an in-depth look at this hypothesis, but I want to close with another thought that is related: ministries that are fed by the following of men. Vision Forum is one example among many. So goes the man, and so goes the ministry. In contrast, the Bible makes it clear that any ministry founded on the following of a man has no credibility whatsoever and is false on its face value. Yet, most Protestant denominations are founded on some man’s teachings. Baptists would seem to be the exception except for those who claim a “bloodline” to…you guessed it…John the Baptist.
Project 2016 seeks to explore the extreme cognitive dissonance of the institutional church, and we hope to have the final product of this research available at the TANC 2016 conference in August.
paul
2https://paulspassingthoughts.com/2013/10/31/the-doug-phillips-fall-and-the-new-calvinist-before-and-after-gospels/
5https://paulspassingthoughts.com/2015/03/02/controversy-among-the-dead-what-the-resignation-of-jean-f-larroux-iii-tells-us-about-the-institutional-church/
6Paul M. Dohse: The Truth About New Calvinism; TANC Publishing 2011, pp. 128, 129.
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
leave a comment