Louisville Missionary Trip Update
Thank you for the input we are receiving on the booklet being developed for our missionary trip to Louisville, KY (Calvin False Gospel Revised). The additional changes we are going to make have not yet been implemented. We will be evangelizing Calvinists at the upcoming Cross Conference (December 27-30, 2013). The following tri-fold tract is also in the works: 3 Pillars and input on that would be appreciated as well.
Your prayers and financial support are greatly appreciated (TANC PO Box 583 Xenia, OH 45385 or PayPal email address: mail@ttanc.com).
paul
PPT Top 10 Gnostics of the American Church
The present day New Calvinism movement is a return to the exact same viral Gnosticism that plagued the New Testament church. New Calvinists proudly claim St. Augustine who was an avowed Neo-Platonist. Platonism later became various forms of Gnosticism. Martin Luther’s theology of the cross laid the foundation for the functioning Platonism that has plagued the church sense the 16th century. Luther, in his endeavor to define Augustinian philosophy for the Reformation, made the cross a Platonist hermeneutic that transcends the material world and the five senses. This was Luther’s definition of a true theologian. Said Luther:
That person does not deserve to be called a theologian who looks upon the »invisible« things of God as though they were clearly »perceptible in those things which have actually happened« (Rom. 1:20; cf. 1 Cor 1:21-25).
This is apparent in the example of those who were »theologians« and still were called »fools« by the Apostle in Rom. 1:22. Furthermore, the invisible things of God are virtue, godliness, wisdom, justice, goodness, and so forth. The recognition of all these things does not make one worthy or wise.
He deserves to be called a theologian, however, who comprehends the visible and manifest things of God seen through suffering and the cross.
The manifest and visible things of God are placed in opposition to the invisible, namely, his human nature, weakness, foolishness. The Apostle in 1 Cor. 1:25 calls them the weakness and folly of God. Because men misused the knowledge of God through works, God wished again to be recognized in suffering, and to condemn »wisdom concerning invisible things« by means of »wisdom concerning visible things«, so that those who did not honor God as manifested in his works should honor him as he is hidden in his suffering (absconditum in passionibus). As the Apostle says in 1 Cor. 1:21, »For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe.« Now it is not sufficient for anyone, and it does him no good to recognize God in his glory and majesty, unless he recognizes him in the humility and shame of the cross. Thus God destroys the wisdom of the wise, as Isa. 45:15 says, »Truly, thou art a God who hidest thyself.«
So, also, in John 14:8, where Philip spoke according to the theology of glory: »Show us the Father.« Christ forthwith set aside his flighty thought about seeing God elsewhere and led him to himself, saying, »Philip, he who has seen me has seen the Father« (John 14:9). For this reason true theology and recognition of God are in the crucified Christ, as it is also stated in John 10 (John 14:6) »No one comes to the Father, but by me.« »I am the door« (John 10:9), and so forth.
~ The Heidelberg Disputation to the Augustinian Order of 1518: Thesis 19, and 20.
Hence, the visible is evil, and man is visible. Like Plato’s theory of the pure forms, the invisible is the true, good, and beautiful. The material is the world of shadows. Any wisdom connected to the material world is the “theology of glory.” Luther stated it in no uncertain terms:
The manifest and visible things of God are placed in opposition to the invisible…
John Calvin then articulated Luther’s theology of the cross by developing a full-orbed philosophical application in his Institutes of the Christian Religion. Calvin also affirmed the foundations of Augustinian Neo-Platonism by citing Augustine, on average, on every 2.25 pages of the Institutes.
Like certain Platonic disciplines that were immutable gateways to the immutable true ideas in the mutable shadow world, Luther merely made such the cross. Plato’s philosopher kings were able to transcend the five senses enslaved to the material world and extract the ideas of the true forms for the betterment of the Republic. Luther’s “true theologian” is the present-day philosopher king dressed in biblical garb. The top ten follow:
#10 Elyse Fitzpatrick
#9 Albert Mohler
#8 Mark Driscoll
#7 Phil Johnson
#6 John MacArthur Jr.
#5 Mark Dever
#4 Michael Horton
#3 Tullian Tchividjian
#2 Tim Keller
#1 John Piper
“The New Calvinists are not worried; they don’t believe the American church has the intellectual wherewithal to grasp the fact that John Calvin was a Platonist philosopher. It is time for that theory to be vigorously tested. Even if that theory is believed, it can be attributed to Reformed orthodoxy predicated on the incompetence of the human race wondering about in the shadow world while rejecting the idea that the new birth makes a difference. The new birth is not the mere experience of a changed realm; it is the reality of a changed person, a person that is not only justified positionally, but changed into a just person living for God’s glory. Christians don’t merely “reflect” the glory of God, they are not merely “transformed into an image” of God’s glory, they are new creatures who glorify God with their own actions. The Spirit does not merely manifest Christ in a realm, he colabors with the new creature in the truest sense.”
John Piper’s Works Salvation Via Gospel Contemplationism
“’Preaching the gospel to ourselves every day’ and ‘living by the gospel’ are not cute little truisms for sanctification help, they are the prescription for keeping your salvation.”
In the following video excerpt, John Piper explains how you keep your salvation through riveting YOURSELF to the works of Christ seen in the whole Bible. I have posted before on Piper’s view of how Christians continue to be saved by the same gospel that saved us. According to Piper, and the Calvinistic gospel in general, moving on to maturity in sanctification is works salvation. We have to keep our salvation by an ambiguous definition of what is not works in sanctification and what is works in sanctification. “Preaching the gospel to ourselves every day” and “living by the gospel” are not cute little truisms for sanctification help, they are the prescription for keeping your salvation.
Notice that he presents Romans 10:9, a clear onetime event that saved us (a justification verse), as something that we have to continue to confess in order to have assurance of salvation (a perpetual believing and confessing). This is works salvation and heresy of the first order.
John Piper’s Gospel of Begging for Salvation and Hoping for the Best
The Reformed gospel is really a begging for salvation and then hoping for the best. “Election” only qualifies you for the drawing where “final justification” is determined at a one, final, justification judgment. Calvinist views on assurance are shrouded in an ambiguous “already not yet” terminology. You’re for sure saved, but it will be “confirmed” at the final judgment. By the way, there is clearly more than one judgment and one resurrection in the Bible. This is just another example of Calvinists interpreting the Bible any way they please.
One way of confirming this assertion is an examination of John Piper’s Christian Hedonism theology. In his book, Desiring God, Piper makes joy absolutely synonymous with salvation:
“Could it be that today the most straightforward biblical command for conversion is not, ‘Believe in the Lord,’ but, ‘Delight yourself in the Lord’?” (Desiring God page 55).
“The pursuit of joy in God is not optional. It is not an ‘extra’ that a person might grow into after he comes to faith. Until your heart has hit upon this pursuit, your ‘faith’ cannot please God. It is not saving faith” (Desiring God page 69).
“We are converted when Christ becomes for us a Treasure Chest of holy joy” (Desiring God page 66).
“Something has happened in our hearts before the act of faith. It implies that beneath and behind the act of faith which pleases God, a new taste has been created. A taste for the glory of God and the beauty of Christ. Behold, a joy has been born!” (Desiring God page 67).
But then, Piper continually prefaces that with the idea that joy is strictly a gift from God. He is adamant that we can do nothing to obtain the experience of joy. For those who can’t find joy, all they can do is pray and hope all turns out well because where there is no joy, there is no assurance of salvation. Just one of many examples is in Piper’s book, When I Don’t Desire God:
In obedience to God’s word we should fight to walk in the paths where he has promised his blessings. But when and how they come is God’s to decide, not ours. If they delay, we trust the wisdom of our Father’s timing, and we wait. In this way joy remains a gift, while we work patiently in the field of obedience and fight against the weeds and the crows and the rodents. Here is where joy will come. Here is where Christ will reveal himself (John 14:21). But that revelation and that joy will come when and how Christ chooses. It will be a gift.
Throughout the book, on nearly every page, Piper describes methods for seeking the joy that is in fact our salvation:
Heaven hangs on having the taste of joy in God. Therefore, it might not be so strange after all to think of fighting for this joy. Our eternal lives depend on it.
So, those who want to keep their salvation fight for joy. It is all incredibly ambiguous. In contrast, the apostle John wrote that we can “know” that we are saved. “Fighting for joy” is conspicuously missing in John’s instruction. The good John, not Piper.
paul
NT Wright Has Two Things Right, Plus One
“Now, in what time I was able to invest in this, I find two challenges by NT Wright against the traditional Reformed narrative absolutely exquisite and dead-on.”
I haven’t jumped into the whole fray between the minions of Plato’s Protestant Reformation and NT Wright. At the behest of some PPT friends I have perused some of NT Wright’s stuff and find him a little more philosophical than I prefer. Furthermore, he seems to be coming from the European mindset that discusses systematic theology from the viewpoint of a linear gospel or the “golden chain” construct.
Once again, his name came up to me in regard to Al Mohler et al having their panties in a bundle over this guy. I was sent a couple of videos and one in particular incited me to dig a little deeper. The second video, seething with pompous Platonist arrogance, made me wonder what exactly it was about NT gramps that worries these guys so much, so I downloaded the book that irritates them the most on my Kindle and read the chapters on justification.
Let me pause here to remind you of something. These guys that are on the Southern video know how to present themselves in a way that makes everyone listening to them feel small. But be sure of this: when they stand before the Lord to give an account of their false doctrine we will be reminded in no uncertain terms that they sit down on the toilet and take a dump in the exact same way we do. Moreover, if you listen carefully, much of what they espouse is not even worthy of toilet paper. Mohler, in the video, is incredulous that NT has the “audacity” to question an anti-Semitic murdering mystic despot; namely, Martin Luther. Mohler then describes Plato’s Protestant Reformation as “the gospel.” At the end of this post, I have embedded a video that speaks to this aptly in my opinion.
Here, I will focus on what seems to irritate these guys the most about NT gramps. Doctrinally that is, their displeasure that NT takes away from the number of people they can control notwithstanding. When I watch the Southern video, I just see nicely dressed and well-spoken wolves whining about the mutton that they are being deprived of. Then there is a cub that they always have tagging along for training in the form of Denny Burk.
Now, in what time I was able to invest in this, I find two challenges by NT Wright against the traditional Reformed narrative absolutely exquisite and dead-on.
First, the idea of Christ’s righteousness being perpetually/progressively imputed to the believer for justification. NT is not dogmatic about this, but the wolf pack cannot even tolerate any semblance of this idea because it is the core of their false progressive justification gospel. They find a challenge here by a scholarly heavyweight most threatening.
Secondly, one of the elements of NT’s New Perspective on Paul; ie., the Reformers read Paul wrong in regard to the Pharisees; specifically, their idea (supposedly from Paul) that the Pharisees were “legalists.” Oh my. If not for the width of the Atlantic and my precious Susan, I would kiss this guy right on his bearded face. In the video, Mohler, shifting around in his throne-like chair because his panties are in a bundle (probably pink), reiterated the Reformed idea that the Pharisees were the legalistic personification of mankind’s fetish for “justifying themselves.”
This is not true at all. First of all, “legalism” is a word that does not appear anywhere in the Bible. It’s not a biblical concept. I have eradicated the concept from my mind because it is not a biblical concern. The Bible is primarily concerned with the traditions of men and antinomianism. That’s God’s truth replaced with the traditions of men in an anti-truth endeavor. And that’s exactly what the Pharisees were. They weren’t professionals at attempting to obey the truth of God’s word for justification as posited by the Reformers, they were rank antinomians inside and out who replaced God’s truth with their traditions.
The Reformers, past and present, have replaced that fact with their own narrative because they are the Pharisees on steroids. Luther was constantly accused of being an antinomian by medieval theologians, and the likes of John Piper (among others) have stated that the accusation of antinomianism is an indication that you are preaching the true Reformation gospel. The Reformation coined the term “orthodoxy” which is Reformed creeds, confessions, and councils that have replaced the truth of God’s word. The Reformed crowd is the epitome of the Pharisees and NT Wright is dead-on in his assertion that the Reformers misrepresent the Pharisees (see chapter 2 of “The Truth About New Calvinism” available on Amazon and this ministry).
NT is right about one more thing in my book. Though I wonder about his concept of “final justification” and what seems to be the “golden chain” approach to justification, I work hard at this ministry and deserve a few sinful pleasures accordingly. Therefore, I like him because he annoys the wolves and causes them to howl irrationally. The video and the screaming thereof like alley cats in the night was music to my ears. When justification is a chain with sanctification links in the middle, the wrangling over what is works and not works are inevitable. NT’s approach to that seems to be novel and not Catholic or Reformed.
Beats me, I choose to like him for now because of the reasons stated. And though I am on a diet, I am eating pizza tonight, and at least one slice will be in NT’s honor.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
2 comments