Elyse Fitzpatrick, The Antinomian, Out With New Book About Let Go and Let God Parenting
Elyse is at it again. She has published a new book on parenting that is the feminine version of Paul Tripp’s “Age Of Opportunity.” I can’t wait to buy it for Bob and Jane (names changed). They have a rebellious teen to deal with. How bad is the situation? Bob removed the firing pins in all of the guns in the house, and they lock their bedroom door at night. So, I can’t wait to tell them that Elyse can instruct them how to show forth the gospel to their son which will result in a miraculous transformation. That’s their only hope according to Elyse because parents are bad, and bad parents can do nothing to raise bad children. I mean, duh, hasn’t everybody seen the John Piper video, “John Piper Is Bad”?
I will be writing a review on EF’s new book after I get done with Mr. Holland’s opus. The title is: Give Them Grace: Dazzling Your Kids with the Love of Jesus. I have read one review, and other than what I mentioned above, there is even more good news for Bob and Jane: not only will they be able to dazzle their violent teen, but guess what? Their teen is really not any worse than well behaved teens! In fact, well behaved teens are worse because they are just little Pharisees! Wow! Hope is on the way for Bob and Jane.
For now, I conclude with a comment that “Anne” wrote regarding the book review on her.meneutics about EF’s new book:
“*Sigh* I get that burying your kids under a pile of rules can set up the expectation that holiness is completely predicated on one’s behavior rather than grace and one’s heart attitude. But what’s wrong with having compliant children? Can’t we teach them manners and good behavior, AND teach them that manners and good behavior don’t save them?
Because I can just hear it across churches and the blogosphere now: My kids are terrors, but I’m a “grace-based parent” and therefore better than you because you make your kids obey the rules like a good little Pharisee.
Please tell me the book addresses potential misinterpretations of its point, like I’m bringing out here.”
Don’t hold your breath Anne.
paul
Why I Doubt The “Old Covenant” Has Been Completely Eradicated At This Time
Certainly, the covenants are a complex issue and one should always be open and teachable accordingly, but though the New Covenant is definitely superior to the old, even to the point of its glory being insignificant because of the glory of the new, I can’t buy into an ending to the old covenant and all of its attributes altogether prior to the Lord’s return. The following is my eight reasons why:
1. Because the “OC” includes the law. And the “law” includes all Scripture (Matt. 5:18). Two choices there: Law of Moses, or “law” as all of Scripture. Either way, nothing passes away till all is accomplished.
2. When Paul speaks of the OC’s uselessness and its ministry of death, I think this is in regard to justification and not sanctification. If the OC has no more use, what is Paul’s point in Ephesians 6:1-3?
3. As an aside for additional thought: I know “Decalogue” is not a biblical term, but is “Old Covenant” a biblical term? I can’t find that specific term anywhere in the Bible. We have to be careful that language not used in the Bible doesn’t suggest ideas that aren’t in the Bible. For instance, “church” which suggests a special and particular distinction between the Gentiles and the Jews. And “legalism” which suggests that there is an abuse of the law that is separate from anti-law. All abuses of the law are against the law. I don’t think I am belaboring a mute point here because many foul doctrines are afoot due to a distinction between the so-called “ten commandments” and the rest of the law as if the fact that there are ten is some kind of monumental purpose intended by God to set it apart from the rest of Scripture. Just because there are ten. I’m not buying that. The Hebrew writer referred to a “first covenant.” John referred to an “old commandment.” So, if we are going to refer to it, let’s refer to it in biblical language: the “first covenant” (which of course raises some questions at that point). With all of that said, this may be a simple case of missing that term in Scripture, but I’m still looking.
4. I am uncomfortable with a grammatical tense contradiction between total eradication and total replacement verses what Paul and the Hebrew writer say: they seem to be saying that the OC is in the process of passing away, rather than being totally eradicated. Kenneth Wuest’s expanded translation presents those passages in that tone as well.
5. Jeremiah said the NC is specifically a covenant with Israel, and implies that the consummation is future. I mean, I’m just saying; not everybody from the least to the greatest knows the Lord right now. There is no need for anybody to be taught about the Lord at this present time? Paul writes in 1Cor. 13 that only love will endure, but knowledge will pass away in the future. What knowledge is he talking about? NCT teaches that the “old law” has been replaced with the law of Christ, or the single law of love. That seems to be what Paul is saying in 1Cor. 13, except it’s future.
6. And hearkening back to my third point, “OC” implies that there is only one significant covenant other than the New Covenant. The term “OC” carries that implication with it, but nothing is farther from the truth: there are many other covenants in the OT. Are they eradicated as well?
7. All of the OT covenants had “promises.” The “OC” is certainly no exception. The “OC” also had “blessings and cursings.” If those are not still valid, what do you do with James 1:25 and Ephesians 6:1-3?
8. Because the OC is part of “All Scripture” (2Tim.3:16) and “every word that comes from the mouth of God” (Matt. 4:4). We still live by it and it is still profitable that the man of God will be equipped for every good work. “All” means “all” and “every” means “every.”
New Calvinism’s Gospel Sanctification Hasn’t Fooled Everybody
The following letter received by PPT is indicative of why we’re here. Not everybody is buying into this doctrine, but when it comes to getting answers—good luck. Also noted in the reader’s letter is the fact that many know something’s not right about the doctrine, but, “Where else is there to go?” This is the result of two factors: New Calvinist churches deliberately instill that mentality into their people because the movement is cultish, and in fact, this movement has all but totally infested Christianity. As the reader indicates: “And she is right…there is no church here in (a large US city) that does not have the infiltration of these doctrines.” The following letter is published with permission. The reader begins with a quote pulled from a PPT post:
“In fact, I would probably be conceding myself, thinking, ‘Everyone else, and now MacArthur? It must be me—I’m missing something on this,’ if not for a few souls like Walter Chantry and Dr. Jay Adams.”
Your comment above was also my thoughts for along time. I have been researching, and sending emails to various Pastors (omitted), wanting to know: “Exactly what is the New Calvinism?” I knew it had ties to “Sonship Theology” and NPP and Vision Forum, but I could not pull it all together and find the common denominator, that is until I found your blog by typing in “Jerry Bridges and Sonship Theology” into Google.
I started to think that I was what I have been accused of being, “unloving” “attacking my own”, “having evil intent”, etc., etc. I have so much to say and share with you in the bittersweet understandings of the knowledge of just what those teachings are; how they lead to a life devoid of joy and assurance in our hope and faith in Jesus Christ [exactly what New Calvinism promises to the contrary: go figure]; and the sadness of knowing my friends who have denounced fellowship with me are still under the influence to the doctrines mentioned. However, as one of those friends mentioned to me when I was warning her of those doctrines in the church she still attends (it is under the leadership umbrella of SGM), “Where else is there to go?” And she is right…there is no church here in (a large US city) that does not have the infiltration of these doctrines.
It is hard to point out the problems, without also providing the solutions.
I know now that at least I am not alone in thinking as I have been. Thank you, so very much for the time and effort you put into your blog!! I also thank your wife, who obviously is your best encourager! What a blessing!
Thank You!
Blessings,
(Omitted)
~Be clothed in the Lord, and wear Him well!
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
2 comments