Pedestrian Christian Weighs In on More New Calvinist Vomit
In the following article, Alex Guggenheim documents the shameless pandering to liberal race politics by the New Calvinists and why they do it. Also telling is his documentation of Al Mohler’s continuing struggle with speaking truth.
But let me throw in my two-cents worth before you read Alex’s astute observations: New Calvinism is Socialism dressed up in Bible verses. The historical process is always the same: religions founded on The Republic playbook always support totalitarian parties, and then once they help them obtain control, they bid for their piece of the pie; ie., “We can offer you control over this much of the population on a silver platter—we just need a little help with enforcing “truth.’” And if it happens, they might even let Julie Anne Smith pick out the color of her guillotine. I presume pink would be her preference.
This is how it always happens, and is behind the huge ecumenical movement of New Calvinism. People express surprise that a lot of these guys vote for liberal politics. It doesn’t surprise me in the least, but without further comment, here is Alex’s post:
“Pastor” Steve McCoy’s Tweet Begs the Question: Whatever Happened to the Bible?
Many American Protestants understand Calvinism is wrong, but they really don’t understand why. It’s hard for Protestants to figure out why Protestantism is wrong because the source of their information is Protestant orthodoxy and not the Bible.
Baptists are Protestants, and some don’t like Calvin. Really? If you would note, the name refers to those who protested something. That would be Luther and Calvin et al. And here we go again; a New Calvinist pastor has tweeted something that other Protestants think is outrageous:
Outrageous? That is merely Protestant theology to a “T.” Americans are ignorant in regard to church history other than the Protestant propaganda taught to all of our pastors in the seminaries, but let’s talk Bible.
Protestant theology is antithetical to Scripture in the extreme. McCoy’s tweet is just one example of that. The Achilles’ heel of Protestantism is its anti-biblical view of law. Few Christians understand the Pauline theology of under law versus under grace.
But let’s talk about total depravity; the “T” in the TULIP acrostic. Some 500 years later, Christians still don’t know, most Calvinists in particular, that this also pertains to the saints. Hence, McCoy’s tweet.
But if Christians knew Pauline theology like they should, they would know that unbelievers are not even totally depraved, much less believers.
First of all, everyone born into the world has the works of the law written on their hearts with a conscience that either accuses them or excuses them. Unbelievers are able to listen to their consciences and often do (ROM 2:12-16).
Secondly, the difference between the lost and the saved is the position of two dynamics: slavery and freedom. This denotes a life direction, not perfection. The lost are enslaved to sin, but free to do righteousness. That’s why lost people do righteous things; they are free to do such. But the overall direction of their life is enslavement to sin. On the other hand, Christians are enslaved to righteousness, but are free to sin. That’s why Christians still sin. So, the Christian is not perfectly righteous, and the sinner is not perfectly sinful; in both cases, it’s the direction and not the perfection. The apostle John calls it, “practice.”
Now, how this all results in Christians being truly righteous in the here and now takes an understanding of Pauline law/gospel; ie., under law versus under grace.
A. There is no room to get into all of that here.
B. Start studying your own Bible and stop listening to men.
paul
Why Does Appreciation of God’s Grace Always Have to be About Sin?
Someone shared a Facebook conversation with me today that resulted in a major lightbulb moment.
Per the usual, some “Christian” was spouting about how knowing who we are as Christians is directly connected to appreciating God’s grace and mercy. First of all, the Bible never posits appreciation for God’s mercy as a primary goal for the Christian life. Folks have taken something that is assumed and made a whole theology of it. Obviously, we should appreciate God no matter who we are. The Bible focuses on THANKFULNESS for ALL the things that God is. A singular focus on our identity as a Segway to appreciating God is NOT biblical.
The person who shared the conversation with me responded to the comment by stating what that biblical identity is: born again righteous believers who glorify God with their lives. That quickly brought a clarifying rebuttal. The commenter, without even addressing the fact that the Bible does describe us that way, proceeded to explain that he was speaking of a deeper and deeper realization of the Christian’s sinfulness. That gives us a deeper appreciation of God’s holiness and mercy. Hence, all works that come out of that appreciation are properly motivated and not dutiful.
Therefore, focusing on our sinfulness purifies all that we do by excluding duty. Supposedly, when we see how wretched we are as opposed to God’s holiness, we are motivated to good works by the appreciation that is invoked. However, this is not only completely absent in Scripture, it assumes that a totally depraved Christian is able to possess equitable appreciation!
But it also begs the money question: why can’t the appreciation come from a changed life as compared to our old life? Why can’t the appreciation come through CHANGE? “Because it will lead to boasting.” No, the Scriptures say to make sure it leads to THANFULNESS towards God instead. A deeper and deeper focus on sin promises to supply many, many, more stumbling blocks than a propensity towards boasting. Besides, wouldn’t the improved person be less and less prone to boasting and more inclined to humbleness? Why does the cause of humbleness have to be a deeper and deeper realization of our inability to be humble? Since when does the Bible state that sinners are able to be humble?
Why aren’t people being saved? Because the world is not endeared to stupidity. That’s why New Calvinists have to plunder what has already been built. That’s why they have to be covert. Only Christians who think that faith is a license to turn off our thinking would ever fall for such reasoning.
Susan and I appreciate God’s mercy more and more because of how He has changed our lives, not because we take joy in an inability to change.
paul
Sally Lloyd-Jones: The Wicked Witch of New Calvinism
“Basically, Jones is actively indoctrinating our children to see reality in a contra-normative construct, and teaching them salvation through perseverance in antinomianism. Christ is clear on this: for those who lead children astray, it would be better for them if they were never born. And that also goes for anyone who propagates her materials.”
It isn’t enough for the New Calvinists to lead adults into hell with a false gospel and let them have the blood of their own children on their hands. No, they have to take their false gospel directly to the children for fear that the parents cannot do the job themselves.
But targeting children with a false gospel is where I draw the line. Now that the New Calvinists have emasculated “Christian” fathers who now stand aside and give these tyrants unfettered access to their families, New Calvinist organizations are cashing in on repackaging the false gospel of progressive justification for children.
A reader sent me a post by Sally Lloyd-Jones in which she endorses her new children’s book that propagates the false gospel of progressive justification via Redemptive Historical hermeneutics; ie., the Bible as gospel metanarrative. Here, “meta” doesn’t mean “grand narrative,” but rather the interpretation of reality through narrative, or story. By seeing our wickedness as set against God’s holiness in the narrative, we experience the works of Christ that He imputed to our sanctification by His perfect fulfillment of the law while on earth. Hence, the Bible is not for instruction or rules. Its purpose is to show the works of Christ that we are unable to perform (though Christ plainly stated that we would do more than He did [JN 14:12]). It’s a formula for living by faith alone in sanctification. This is nothing new, it is primarily what James refuted in his epistle. That’s why Luther rejected the canonicity of said epistle—it contradicts the Reformed gospel that interprets ALL reality through Christocentricity. This also defies the metaphysical reality that all rules are not morally based. “Rules” make living life itself possible in many regards. The rules for baking a cake are morally neutral, but necessary if you want an edible cake.
According to this doctrine, the experience of our obedience, or better said, the experience of “obedient faith,” is subjective because we really don’t know what we are doing in our “own efforts” versus what the Spirit is manifesting in our realm. Anything done in our “own efforts” should be repented of as “self-righteous works.” I have heard elders offer up such prayers for the congregation firsthand. If we actually believe that we can learn God’s will and perform the work ourselves as born again believers, that is “mortal sin” of a false gospel that will condemn us to hell. If all of our good works are attended with fear that they could be perceived as our own works, that’s “venial sin” that doesn’t condemn us and can be forgiven by “repenting of good works” as propagated by the likes of Dr. Tim Keller. In fact, Keller, an in-your-face and in-broad-daylight Christian mystic is Jones’ pastor.
Jones, in the promo post for her children’s book entitled, “Teaching Children the Bible,” begins with this question:
Do you read the Bible like a rulebook? Do you look at the biblical characters as heroes to emulate? Or do you read Scripture as a Story with one great Hero?
This statement is indicative of the Redemptive Historical worldview; there isn’t more than one way to look at the Bible. But most importantly, the Bible is used as a tool for a worldview that is contra-normative to interpreting reality. In this construct, there are only two ways to look at reality: the cross story or the glory story. If it is about us (the glory story), rules and heroes are applicable. But if it’s about the cross story, only Christ and His works are to be seen, “not anything we do.” “It’s not about anything we do, but what Jesus has done.”
So, supposedly, there are two ways to look at reality, and in the correct way, the cross story, realty is only perceived in the difference between the following duality: our sinfulness as set against God’s holiness. Moreover, Jesus as hero is often presented by New Calvinists as Christ saving us from a wrathful God who still holds the law over our heads. That’s why rules are bad: we are still under the jurisdiction of the law and therefore unless we can keep the law perfectly, all bets are off—Jesus to the perpetual rescue. We are still under the law, so if we don’t keep it perfectly, we are guilty of violating all of it. To think we can keep the law in a way that pleases God is a mortal sin because when we break the law at any point, our basis for justification collapses. The basis of justification is a continued maintaining of the law. So obviously, a perpetual maintaining of the law is required to keep us saved; ie., the progressive imputation of Christ’s perfect works to our sanctification which is supposedly the road to “final justification.”
And this is clearly the problem with the Reformed gospel; the law is the standard for our justification and not the death of Christ alone. The one act of obedience is not the ground of our justification, but the perpetual and progressive imputation of Christ’s fulfillment of the law to our life by faith alone without works. This is a gospel that keeps Christians under law and redefines under grace as Christ keeping the law in our stead. But this is still, “under law.” Those under grace are justified “apart from the law.” Therefore, in the same way that we violated the law at every point when we were under it, we fulfill all of it when we love our neighbors because we are under grace and not under law.
The reader who sent me the link protested to a Facebook friend who endorsed the book on her page. Her response was that he was clueless because they were not advocating the unimportance of rules. Exactly, rules are extremely important to them because it is still the basis of our justification. The key is that Jesus keeps the law for us. But of course, this is a metaphysical sleight of hand that comes from Calvin himself and is an under law gospel. Basically, Jones is actively indoctrinating our children to see reality in a contra-normative construct, and teaching them salvation through perseverance in antinomianism. Christ is clear on this: for those who lead children astray, it would be better for them if they were never born. And that also goes for anyone who propagates her materials.
Unbelievably, Jones is given full access to our children by brain-dead shepherds. In the promotion, she brags about how she undermines what the parents in local churches teach their children:
When I go to churches and speak to children, I often start by asking them two questions:
First, How many people here sometimes think you have to be good for God to love you? They tentatively raise their hands. I raise my hand along with them.
And second, how many people here sometimes think that if you aren’t good, God will stop loving you? Almost without fail they raise their hands. These children think they have to keep the rules or God won’t love them. They think if they mess up God will stop loving them.
These children are in Sunday schools. They know all their Bible stories. And they have missed what the Bible is all about.
They are children like I once was.
On display here is the arrogant metaphysical sleight of hand that is indicative of mystic despots that believe they understand the high mysteries of God that the masses are unable to understand. If she is confronted about undermining the parents of the church, she will insist that she was referring to the children only when she said “people” and not the parents of the church. If she is confronted about law and love being mutually exclusive, she will assert that she was only talking about justification. Here we have the diabolical communication of the New Calvinist on full display. Law and love are mutually exclusive in justification, but NOT sanctification. However, that distinction is never made as these wicked false teachers talk about sanctification in a justification way because we are still under the law according to their gospel. They incessantly teach the fusion of justification and sanctification (which equals being yet under law), and only make the distinction when they are called on it. But even then, their “progressive sanctification” is really progressive justification as they play on the assumptions of those being deceived. This is deceptive communication that comes directly from the pit of hell.
Jones continues:
Even though I came to faith as a small child, I somehow grew up thinking the Bible was filled with rules you had to keep (or God wouldn’t love you) and with heroes setting examples you had to follow (or God wouldn’t love you).
I tried to be good. I really did. I was quite good at being good and keeping the rules. But however hard I tried, I couldn’t keep the rules all the time, so I knew God must not be pleased with me.
And as far as being a hero: I certainly couldn’t ever be as brave as Daniel. I remember being tormented by that Sunday school chorus “Dare to Be a Daniel.”
Notice how our love is completely excluded from the metaphysical construct of the argument. That’s because we cannot have any love, that’s the glory story. And if we have love, that enables a dichotomy between justification and sanctification. Hence, justification is the setting of God’s love on us without merit, and our love for God in sanctification is our fatherly love as His children that is not under law but under grace. Like all Calvinists, she makes the two the same. Any ability to love God points directly back to the standard of justification and is not separated from sanctification. And law is not the standard for justification to begin with; it’s the one act of Christ’s obedience to the cross.
In the second paragraph, the idea that perfection is a requirement to MAINTAIN our justification is clearly evident. I was really, really good at keeping the law, but God requires perfection in order to be pleased with us. Therefore, Christ must keep the law for us in sanctification in order to maintain our justification. This is clearly works salvation by persevering in antinomianism. Other Christians can’t inspire us to love God in sanctification by keeping His commands—that’s the glory story.
This doctrine also denies the new birth and the fundamental difference between being under law and under grace. When we are under law, we are enslaved to sin and free to do good (ROM 6:20). That means the overall direction of our life will be law-breaking and then we will be judged by that very law in the end. Under grace is enslavement to righteousness and the freedom to sin (ROM 6:18). In salvation and the new birth, slavery and freedom are switched resulting in an overall direction of life. But our justification will not be judged by our freedom to sin because we are no longer under it. The overall direction of our sanctified life will be righteousness because we are born of God and have His seed within us. Loving God by keeping His commandments is therefore the direction of our life and not the perfection. Per the Reformed false gospel of progressive justification, perfection is still the standard because we are still under law and not born again by the biblical definition:
At the end of the story there were no other teachers around, and I panicked and went into autopilot and heard myself—to my horror—asking, “And so what can we learn from Daniel about how God wants us to live?”
And as I said those words it was as if I had literally laid a huge load on that little girl. Like I broke some spell. She crumpled right in front of me, physically slumping and bowing her head. I will never forget it.
It is a picture of what happens to a child when we turn a story into a moral lesson.
When we drill a Bible story down into a moral lesson, we make it about us. But the Bible isn’t mainly about us, and what we are supposed to be doing—it’s about God, and what he has done.
Children don’t need to be told to try harder, believe more, or do it better. That just leaves them in despair. The moral code always leaves us in despair. We can never live up to it.
I knew it as a child—I could never be good enough or brave enough.
None of that is the point unless we are still under law. The point of sanctification is not moral law, but loving God and glorifying His name and wisdom through obedience. The Reformed gospel denies our ability to please God through obedience (ROM 8:7,8). The crux is perpetual re-salvation by faith alone apart from works in sanctification. Nothing could be clearer. The new birth is redefined by, “mortification and vivification” which is a perpetual reliving of our baptism to maintain our justification. Note Jones’ statement in the same promotion:
We don’t need a moral code. We need a rescuer. And that’s why I wrote The Jesus Storybook Bible and Thoughts to Make Your Heart Sing, So children could know what I didn’t: That the Bible isn’t mainly about me and what I should be doing. It’s about God and what he has done.
That the Bible is most of all a story—the story of how God loves his children and comes to rescue them.
Obviously, in context, one can only conclude logically that this is a perpetual “rescue” and not a onetime event. The New Calvinist Paul David Tripp calls this an “everyday rescue.” In a sermon at Southeastern Theological Seminary (Spring 2007), referring to Romans 7:24, he made it clear that Christians need to be rescued [saved] every day. That’s the crux.
It grieves my heart that these wicked satanic minions are given free access to our children. This is where Christians should be motivated to standup against these false teachers.
If we are not motivated by the eternal wellbeing of our children, we are a disgrace to the cause of Christ.
paul
Why the Christian Argument Against Abortion is Dead on Arrival
Age, thinking, study, and listening will eventually teach you some things. I am against abortion for obvious reasons; I am a Christian for crying out loud and obviously abortion is murder. I mean, how can anybody be for those late term abortions and what was going on at Dr. Gosnell’s abortion clinics? Can’t they see the end result of these anti-God belief aberrations?
While wondering in the woods of research I stumbled into the enemy camp. I was perplexed, so I figured I would stick around and listen because the path that brought me to this camp was named, “We Agree on this Issue.” There I was, stunned, and in agreement with murderers albeit on a single issue.
I am outraged that while the Steubenville, Ohio community screamed in protest like alley cats in the night that their community is now defined by the actions of two high school football players, they extended the contract of the football coach post-conviction while it is common knowledge that he knew about the rapes and didn’t report it. That’s a crime. And it wasn’t only rape. These guys hauled this passed-out minor from party to party to be raped by others. Furthermore, they were completely indifferent to the fact that you can die from alcohol poisoning of which the first stage is unconsciousness. In fact, some of the boys tweeted that they thought she may have been dead. While they hauled her from party to party.
So, when I saw the Ultra Violet .org petition demanding the coach’s firing, I readily signed it. They sent me a thank you by email along with a link to their Facebook page. I quickly jumped on the path to their Facebook page, entered the camp, and began looking around. Ooops. The subtitle states the following:
We’re an online community of women and men across the U.S. fighting sexism and expanding women’s right everywhere, from politics to pop culture. Equality at a higher frequency!
I asked myself : “Does that include abortion?” With a little poking around, the answer to that question was, “yes.” I quickly located the “Share” button and quarantined it. After I collected myself, I began thinking, an art I started practicing as a Christian about one year ago. But I have an excuse: I was never taught to do so by my Christian handlers. I was assured that Calvin had already done our thinking for us and documented everything. But since I no longer buy into that, I sniffed around and started practicing the art, knowing that no one would ever know I was there thinking. Brilliant.
But I discovered some things. Not everyone in the camp has a problem with God. Apparently, some are reserving judgment until they find His representation. And they would be just as horrified as the next person regarding Gosnell’s house of horrors. The primary concern seems to be the idea that women are property. So, if they let anybody tell them what they can do with their bodies, no matter what, the women are property gang will take an inch and make a mile out of it. Does that argument sound familiar?
I am not against the banning of fully automatic assault weapons. But if you give those liberals an inch, they will be coming for our muzzle-loaders next.
And so it goes, the Steubenville affair is the epitome of women as property; so Ultra Violet is on the case. And in regard to abortion, why would they listen to the church? Because we are not part of the women as property gang? Oh really? The response of the church to sexual assault is exactly, that’s e-x-a-c-t-l-y the same as the Steubenville mentally that Ultra Violet despises. I only need one example to make the point: the SGM class action lawsuit. Also, I have done massive research on the Steubenville event and the church speaks loud and clear with its silence on these crimes. I hear the outrage of feminists, but not even the roar of a church mouse from God’s people. In fact, where is the outrage within the Christian community in Steubenville? Well, I was able to find this:
From the David Gossett of the Steubenville Herald-Star:
STEUBENVILLE – Religious leaders from throughout the city called for unity and peace in a community that is embracing for national attention this week when two Steubenville High School students go on trial facing rape charges in Jefferson County Juvenile Court.
“Some of the media are here listening and waiting to hear something about the rape trial, the shootings and drug activity in our city. We can say the steel mills are long gone. There are shootings and rape. And we can say the last person to leave should turn out the lights. But we can say Lord we don’t have the answer, but Lord you know the answers,” stated Pastor Vaughn Foster of Christ’s Community Church.
“We as a city are in need of God’s hope. And we get that hope by being in God’s presence. We pray that God will invade our city,” Foster added.
Huh? Unity and peace? A God invasion? How do we think the world perceives this mambe pambe response to such outrageous behavior? But here is my bottom-line point:
An argument against abortion by those who turn a blind eye to sexual abuse is dead on arrival.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
7 comments