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.
This Week’s Sinner Saved by Grace Sinning and in the News: RC Sproul Jr.
This week’s Reformed leader who got caught is RC Sproul Jr. The scandals are now commonplace and beginning to lose their news worthiness. Commonness doesn’t excite; it’s uncommonness that gets people’s attention. This is why the Super Bowl only takes place once a year; it’s an uncommon event.
Sproul will be suspended for eleven months (without pay?) for…well…being who he is…a “sinner.” And if the Protestant leaders are dropping like flies, what’s going on among those they are leading? I can answer that. Lots of totally depraved stuff. Don’t let the resurgence of church discipline fool you. Church discipline, a concept NOT found in the Bible, is only for those who ask questions and do things that could involve the outside world in “family matters.”
You might want to understand the following: making RW Glenn, Mark Driscoll, Doug Phillips, Josh Duggar, Tullian Tchividjian, Bill Gothard, etc., resign from ministry for being who they are and being scandalous while preaching the “scandalous gospel” is not inconsistent if you really understand Protestant doctrine more than Protestants do. Their fall is merely a manifestation of God’s will. The Lord is “sovereign,” and the Lord giveth, and the Lord taketh away.
Let me just boil everything down and make it real simple. Protestantism was founded on the idea that all of reality is a salvific metaphysical narrative written by God who created the narrative and all of the characters to complete himself. For the sake of his own glory and self-love which apparently was lacking, God wrote history as a metaphysical redemptive narrative. Stop right where you are now and consider: what you are presently experiencing is part of the prewritten narrative which is all about redemption. The story, and everything about it, brings glory to God.
Consequently, yes, God is supposedly the creator of evil, predetermines who goes to heaven and who goes to hell, and well-being comes from rejoicing in what gives God glory for the sake of his self-love; whatever is in the narrative that he pre-wrote might even include your own damnation. Of course, this makes the most excellent piety an expression of hyper altruism. It is the practical application of John Calvin’s Worm theology.
So, since everything is predetermined for God’s glory, and God is glorified by damnation and salvation alike which are eternal, every verse in the Bible is about salvation, or what we call “justification.” In the final analysis, in accordance with the least common denominator, you MIGHT be saved in the end by living by faith alone in the gospel of sovereignty. To at least have a chance, you must enter the “race of faith” in which the reward is salvation. When you hear folks talk about “sovereign grace,” and the “sovereign gospel,” and the “gospel of sovereignty,” this is what it boils down to. When good Protestants say, “God is in control,” they are not kidding—God is in TOTAL control.
This is why institutional Christians have always lacked wisdom in regard to everyday wisdom and solving the more difficult questions of life (what we call sanctification), because every verse in the Bible is about justification, ie., “what Jesus has done, not anything we do.” As one pastor told me, “I am not going to be distracted from the gospel by counseling people.” Good Protestant pastors farm out counseling to the ACBC where the counseling is “gospel-centered.” And this counseling will give people peace; after all, there is nothing you can do about anything, so stop fighting what God has predetermined. Relax, be happy, everything is predetermined for God’s glory. Got tragedy? Praise the Lord for his glory. Rejoice and be happy for this is the day he has made.
Let’s apply this to what we see on the Christian hillsides littered with dead bodies. According to what I was told by Clearcreek Chapel elder Greg Cook some time ago, counseling guru Stuart Scott is no longer an elder at John MacArthur’s church because Scott’s children were sinners saved by grace acting like sinners. This is the crux: obedience, like every other reality, is determined and delivered by God, not us. So yes, we are in fact sinners, but anything that we do that is good is performed by God, not us. Couple this with what I have heard MacArthur say on the radio: (paraphrase) “Saved obedient children are God’s mark on a man confirming his calling to the ministry.” See how this works?
Now let’s apply this to Sproul et al. Their punishment is not inconsistent with the idea that they are punished for being what they preach because their fallenness or unfallenness is determined by God. What they did is who they are, and God did not prevent what they did, but regardless, they deserve the punishment. Why? Because God is the potter and we are the clay, and all clay pots are made for his glory whether pots of wrath or pots of glory. Look, read Sproul’s statement about what he did and his suspension, this is written all over it if you know what to look for.
Yes, yes, yes, I know, I can hear the screaming Protestant denials like alley cats in the night while in heat. But what they say reveals the foundations of their Protestant mindset: “It’s God’s will,” or “Lord willing,“ “I didn’t do it, it was the Holy Spirit,” “God is in control,” etc., etc., etc. These statements are NEVER qualified. What’s God’s will? Everything, or just certain categories? If we didn’t do it and the Holy Spirit did it, what do we do, if anything as opposed to what the Spirit does? If we drive somewhere to do a good work, does the Spirit drive the car, or do we drive the car? And if we drive the car, does that qualify as participation in the good work? To what extent is God in control? Not only that, an orientation towards solutions is hardly ever observed, but rather, “we will pray for you.” This is because solutions are irreverent in regard to what God has supposedly predetermined. Our prayers serve to display our “perplexity” as set against God’s omniscience which also gives him glory. Regardless of the circumstance, we don’t pray for a good ending, but for God’s glory, ie., whatever happens.
The hard determinism of Protestantism’s gospel of sovereignty is deluded over the years leaving behind anemic sanctification which causes people to look for a solution. This results in, “Eureka! Here is the problem: we have strayed away from our original gospel!” Hence, enter the New Calvinist movement.
Common sense tells us that this doctrine will lead to, at least, a relaxation of the law, or better stated, a relaxation of love (“If you love me, keep my commandments”), but there is no contradiction in these leaders paying consequences for living out the gospel that they preach…
…whether they obey/love or not is God’s doing which confirms God’s mantle upon them. If anyone loves, it is really God loving himself through the individual. As the Christian song states, “We are empty vessels waiting to be filled.” Wellbeing is defined as seeing yourself as a mere character in God’s prewritten metaphysical narrative and plying whatever predetermined role that gives him glory. If you believe that anything you do is your own choice, you are playing god and writing your own reality.
Now, apply this construct to Sproul’s post and see if it makes any sense. Will any of these guys return to ministry? Only the future reading of God’s narrative will tell…the Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away.
paul
The Confused Gospel: Sinners Saved by Grace Disgraced when they Sin
I continue to be amazed at how “Christian” leaders with national visibility are disgraced when they get caught with their fingers in the cookie jar. What is amazing about this is for the most part their ministries are predicated on the idea that Christians are just “sinners saved by grace.” This is how it is stated: “I’m just a sinner saved by grace.” That’s in the present tense, and that’s good news because humbleness hath no greater friend than a guy named Zero, as in, Zero Accountability.
Woe is me, “I can do nothing.” Christians shrink back in horror in regard to thinking that they would get credit for doing something good. Tullian Tchividjian once tweeted that he knows he is going to heaven because he couldn’t remember one good work that he had ever done. There is a lot of confusion on this point in regard to the authentic Reformed view of mortal sins versus venial sins. Luther taught that Christ performs all righteous works through us and these works are experienced subjectively. In other words, we really don’t know whether we are doing the work or Christ is doing the work. But, to think that we actually did the work, or were a part of it beyond the mere experience of it, is apart from justification by faith alone and is a mortal sin. But, if we ask forgiveness for doing the good work or “attend the good work with fear” just in case it was actually us doing it, that is only venial sin. Every time you hear Baptists say, It wasn’t me who did it! It was the Holy Spirit! –that’s the Lutheran in them.
This isn’t terribly difficult to understand. If you are standing in the rain, you are experiencing the rain, and anthropomorphically, you have the inner ability to experience the rain. But you can take no credit for the rain; it is being done to you instead of you doing the action to someone else. And just because the experience is in you, does not mean the good work of the rain is in you—you are only experiencing it. The human heart has the ability to experience good works, but not to perform them. The belief that the heart can generate a good work is not of faith and mortal sin. That’s Reformed metaphysics 101.
Take the homeschool icon Doug Phillips for example. It has come out, by his own admission, that he had a long-term inappropriate relationship with a woman that was not biblically sexual [enter pause here for laughter]. In his disgraceful fall, he actually presented himself as a righteous person who slipped up a little bit, but has such high standards that he voluntarily resigned from his immense gravy train to recalibrate his life. After all, everyone knows that a man can have a crush on a female that is just a friend, a “woman” right?
Well, as it turns out, it was the nanny, and a very young nanny, and he denies the nonsexual inappropriate behavior that she is claiming. Apparently, it was less inappropriate than she claims. Phillips denies her allegations, but refuses to specifically cite what the behavior was, that would be gossip [enter another pause here for more laughter]. Apparently, the nanny isn’t up with how this is all going down and is going to get everything on the record in court. And of course, he must be telling the truth because if it was as bad as the evil nanny tells; his wife wouldn’t be supporting him. In fact, in interviews sanctified as ungossip, they claim that God has used the evil nanny to make their marriage better than it has ever been! This is not funny at all; it is a classic example of an elitist throwing away a peasant that he is done using for his own pleasure.
But now my point: Phillips, in his glory days as a Christian icon routinely introduced himself as a “sinner.” Sooooo, what’s the big deal? He is a sinner acting like a sinner, but he can’t keep his job as a sinful leader among sinners? Gee whiz, even the apostle Paul said he was the “Chief of sinners,” and Phillips didn’t even penetrate! So, why can’t he keep his job? Perhaps lack of penetration, the “biblical” definition of sex, disqualified Philips from being a Chief among sinners.
Pardon the sarcasm, but the world is watching this mess play out time and time again while Christians chalk it up to… you got it… “We are all just sinners saved by grace.” “Judge not, lest you be judged.” Newsflash: for the most part, the who’s who of Evangelicals remain silent regarding these scandals other than to say…you got it…”We are all just sinners saved by grace.”
Got church mess? Got church deadness? Got church a mile wide and an inch deep? Go figure, we don’t even know who we are. The Bible never, never, never, never, never, identifies Christians as wicked in the present tense. Usually, Romans 7:24 is cited to make the case that Christians are still “wretched,” but the word actually means to persevere in the midst of affliction. I could point to many other Scriptures that are taken out of context in this way, but the fact is that the Bible refers to Christians as “righteous,” “holy,” “full of goodness,” and “able.”
So, who are we? Don’t you think that it would be a good idea if we knew? Evangelize if you will, but if you don’t know whether we are saints or sinners, good luck with that. But this brings me back to the strange silence of other leaders when one “falls from grace.” That is, other than…well…you know. For the most part, leaders do believe Christians only change positionally and not personally. I have documented the quotations en masse on this blog and will not belabor the point here.
But the fact is, most Christian leaders of our day believe that we should get rid of the whole, “living out our testimony” routine and have said so in no uncertain terms. The likes of Michael Horton have said that living by our testimony is an attempt to “be the gospel rather than preaching the gospel” which supposedly destroys the whole point of the gospel to begin with because, “it’s not our doing—it’s Christ’s doing and dying.” Notice that doing in sanctification is the same thing as doing in justification. James MacDonald stated that he has “resigned from fixing people” because they can’t be fixed. John MacArthur has stated that his ministry no longer requires people to “jump through hoops.” He has also suggested that Christians don’t apply the word of God to their lives; the Holy Spirit does the application for us. He then suggested that Christians therefore often obey unawares. And, we know when the Holy Spirit is obeying for us when the obedience is experienced as “always sweet, never bitter.”
This comes from Luther’s Simul iustus et peccator – “At the same time righteous and a sinner.” Luther believed we are only saints positionally, and are still sinners personally. We don’t change, only our status changes. So, it’s not even like Facebook where a status change means a personal change. This is the reason for the silence. Like John Piper has stated, most Christians are not ready for the real Reformation gospel of Simul iustus et peccator. We are all sinners, and nothing more or less should be expected. Away with all of this “behaviorism” and “moralism” in Christianity; viz, the idea that we do righteousness rather than righteousness being something that is done to us instead of by us.
Who are we? Are we saints or sinners? If my cat, Coaster, had a Facebook page, he could change his status because he just learned how to walk through a cat door. If a door is not shut completely, he can open it with his paw, but it took him awhile to figure out vertical swing versus horizontal swing. It’s the paw for normal doors, but you have to head-butt the cat door. So, is that our message? If we can do more than a cat without Jesus we are going to hell?
When we evangelize, which isn’t often to begin with, do we get a blank stare because the listener hasn’t been sovereignly illuminated, or do they just simply think we are stupid? It would be hard to tell because we don’t even know who we are.
paul
The Divine Right of Calvinist Kings and Lourdes Torres-Manteufel
How can the Catholic Church still be in business and stronger than ever? The fruits of this institution are well documented. Nevertheless, the likes of people such as Sean Hannity who represent everything goodie two-shoes proudly proclaim themselves to be Catholics. Hannity, a contemporary warrior for individualism, liberty, and the American way identifies himself with an institution rivaled by none in regard to oppression, torture, and tyranny.
How can this be?
In case anybody hasn’t noticed recently, in regard to sex scandals and other questionable behaviors, Protestants of all stripes are looking a lot like the Catholics complete with cover-ups and the same lame excuses. The same excuses are absent from the secular realm; Penn State threw icon Joe Paterno to the dogs without hesitation because he knew of child rape that was going on with the football program, reported it, but did not pursue the issue far enough. And, his knowledge of it wasn’t even firsthand. His memorial was torn down from Penn State’s football stadium, and was rescued from being melted down into disremembrance by some supporters who will install a new one in front of a local tavern two miles from the Penn State campus. Not only that, the removal location, at least until recently, seemed to be deliberately unfinished for purposes of a memorial of disdain. As someone who has been in commercial construction, I know that some kind of masonry veneer on that location is no more than a one-day job. Seems to me somebody wanted to send a very strong message.
How can “church” have such demonstrably lower humanitarian standards than secular institutions?
Philosophy; logic if you will. The Bible is like a two-part epoxy; it has no significant bonding power without a proper understanding of reality. Protestantism is not a biblical worldview; it’s a Protestant worldview. A proper grounding in world philosophy and the Bible makes it abundantly clear why people act like they do.
Point in case: one of the most recent of a plethora of Protestant scandals to hit the blogosphere is a lawsuit brought against Patriarchy/homeschool icon Doug Phillips by Lourdes Torres-Manteufel, his former nanny. Instead of Phillips being thrown to the dogs by his peers, the focus is now Manteufel’s supposed complicity in the “affair.” Of course, this is an attempt to defend Phillips by default. If there are two inconvenient “truths,” emphasize the one that you want people to function by for your own purposes. It isn’t exactly rocket science. This enables people to function anyway they want to, while acknowledging inconvenient truth as truth but making the “emphasis” most important. It wouldn’t be right to just emphasize Phillips’ failure because someone else is involved, but because the someone else is more expendable, we will emphasize the latter. This helps the former inconvenient truth to be minimized or even forgotten. In fact, Phillips and his wife are now claiming that the affair was a good thing because their marriage is now stronger than ever: http://www.kens5.com/news/KENS-5-Exclusive-Religious-leader-speaks-out-after-allegations-he-kept-a-woman-as-a-sex-object-255556621.html
Manteufel bad—Phillips good. God used the evil Manteufel to bring about good for his faithful servant Doug Phillips. Ahhhhmen.
But this is where we get into Sean Hannity contra reality. Even in the blogosphere, and by those who deem Manteufel a victim, and are grievously offended by those who accuse her of being complicit and unmanipulated, Phillips is never called a Calvinist Protestant. In the exact same way that Catholics separate the institution from the behavior, Protestants are following suit.
Why is this? To understand this madness you must not separate the Bible from true world philosophy and its true history. Let me give you an example: the large-scale promotion of the Puritans as spiritual heroes in our churches and Christian schools is totally unmerited. History shows clearly that they were superstitious murdering tyrants. And please spare me the excuse that they were not all equally murderous; excuse me, the rest were at least tacitly complicit. If I receive one more John Owen, Hey guys, I don’t think you should burn heretics, but who am I to argue with the Westminster Divines? quote, I am absolutely going to puke. Really, am I here right now?
I don’t know anything about Lourdes Torres-Manteufel or her motives, but her lawsuit is important. It is important because it demonstrates that the only recourse Christians have against Calvinists practicing the divine right of kings is the secular courts. Obviously, Protestant kings stick together. When it is all said and done, John MacArthur allowed himself to sit in the front row of the 2014 T4G conference with CJ Mahaney. Just how clueless are we? When is the lightbulb going to come on? Was MacArthur’s acceptance back into the T4G circuit contingent on him accepting Mahaney? Not only that, Mahaney was supposed to separate the controversy surrounding himsef from T4G by not showing up or speaking. This is probably an indication that criminal charges will not be forthcoming and the recoronation process of Mahaney has begun.
Unless you understand true world philosophy, it is impossible to make heads or tails of this madness. Logic drives history—people just don’t do things for no reason. The divine right of kings is an ancient concept and lustfully embraced by the Catholic/Protestant tradition. But what is it?
It all starts with predestination. Now look, I don’t know exactly where I stand on election as yet, but I do know this: predestination is the foundational doctrine of every tyrant whether secular, mystic, or religious. That should incite some pondering. Think Islam as one example. Next, enter in the idea that only the invisible is good. Matter is evil, and material man is evil, and gee, that’s why he likes material things. So, we are all in this evil boat together; anything that can be perceived with the five senses is evil. Now back to predestination. Whether by a personal God, or the universe, or the force, or some other kind of higher power, a select few able to transcend the five senses and obtain wisdom for social justice (=s unity) are predestined/chosen to lead the masses. In some cases, law is a concept that is perceived by the five senses, so you do the math. In other cases: “Hey, we are all just sinners saved by grace.” “Hey, forgive the way you were forgiven.” “Hey, God gave us the law to show that we can’t keep it, so what’s your point?”
Now, since some are predestined to lead the masses in social justice (defined by unity at all cost), of course, God has given them the right to rule. And of course, they are subject to sin in this totally fallen world inhabited by the material totally depraved and all of their material girls like Madonna. But to throw them to the dogs because they sinned would be a huge mistake because they are the gifted ones. Yes, as a whole, we are much worse off without their leadership. “Condemning” them because of their sin is “throwing the baby out with the bathwater.” And remember, their “right” to rule is from God. Who are you to judge God’s anointed? Sound familiar?
Ok, so what’s the point? Why does everyone get up in the morning and do life? This is ALSO part and parcel with EVERY doctrine held by the tyrants of the world: Dominionism. If the enlightened few can indoctrinate everyone with the right ideas, and eliminate those with contrary beliefs, or bad predetermined genes, more and more social justice evolves until utopian social justice is achieved. The goal is the same for all of humanity: utopia; “If you will just obey us, we and our predecessors and successors can lead the world to utopia!” It’s a marriage made in heaven; without a leader to lead us, chaos will ensue. Ever been in a Protestant church that lost its pastor? Then you know what I am talking about. Job-one is keeping everything together until the coronation of the new philosopher king.
It is love understood in any language, or belief system. Hence, the doctrine is not the issue; A doctrine of unity is the issue. Unity =s utopia. Does it seem at times that unity is more important to the church than justice, or truth? Well my friend—go figure.
Aside: quiver full =s more numbers =s more of the same ideas =s more collectivism =s closer to utopia.
And in the final analysis, fighting for justice as a Protestant is an oxymoron. Even the discernment bloggers have bought into this collectivist ideology that leads to the very tyranny that they fight. Calvinism represents stability to them—they are trying to salvage Calvinism/Protestantism. The root is good, we just need to get rid of the bad fruit.
No, it is the root that is bad, Christians need to seek another tree altogether.
paul
Discernment Blogosphere Cover-up? Doug Phillips being Called Everything but a “Calvinist”
There is an interesting trend emerging from the articles being written about the fall of Doug Phillips. I have read several, and there will be many more to come as that beagle puppy is just beginning to learn how to hunt.
The expected came today with this post. Everyone knew there is way more to this story, but everyone continues to be dismayed that a “sinner saved by grace” would act this way. Apparently, unlike the testimony of Webster’s Dictionary, we don’t expect “sinners” to sin very much. Doug Phillips, the sinner who “needs grace just as much as he did the day he was saved,” isn’t getting much. No one gave it a second thought when the guy continually introduced himself as a “sinner,” until he acted wickedly, now he is “narcissistic,” “cultish,” “a hireling,” “a hypocrite,” “a control freak,” “an abuser,” etc., etc., etc.
This is a total disconnect between doctrine and behavior, and the idea that the new birth is strictly an experience and people really don’t change is uniquely Calvinistic. Doug Phillips continually referred to himself as a sinner because that’s what Calvinists believe. According to Calvinists, biblical imperatives serve as guardrails to restrain our total depravity, but more than anything speak to what Jesus has done for us—not anything we do. Keep in mind: a lot of discernment bloggers sit under this same hyper-grace nonsense every week at their own churches.
Nevertheless, this blogger makes a big point of the fact that Phillips covered for a “cougar” that was on the prowl in the church he pastored. For certain, other bloggers will follow with this same point, while themselves covering for the fact that Phillips was first, and foremost a C-A-L-V-I-N-I-S-T.
Why the cover? Answer: many “discernment” bloggers are themselves Calvinists, associate with “respectable” Calvinists, are completely ignorant of Reformed history, and have no idea what Calvin really believed. As far as the appalling abuse of church discipline practiced by Doug Phillips, that’s right out of Calvin’s playbook. Abuse? Calvin routinely burned women at the stake, executed adolescents for disrespecting their parents, had people jailed for talking in church, executed two men for fighting in the street, and according to Martin Luther, all disagreements in Geneva were “settled by sentence of death.”
Yet, what was the evil idealism that Phillips was associated with? The patriarchy movement. Again, this is just a symptom of Calvinist ideology—discussing that issue apart from Calvinism is disingenuous. The whole movement is intrinsically connected to Reformed tradition…
…and the fruit never falls far from the tree.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
4 comments