Calvinism’s Platonist Rejection of the Trinity
How do Calvinists reject the Trinity? Basically, they make God the Father and the Holy Spirit lesser forms of Jesus Christ. Their rejection of the Trinity is based on Plato’s theory of forms. This shouldn’t be any big surprise as one of the forefathers of the Reformation, St. Augustine, was a Plato groupie. My wife Susan will address the Plato/Augustine love affair in significant detail at this year’s TANC conference.
Plato’s basic idea of forms led to the Reformed Emphasis Hermeneutic, also known as the Redemptive Historical Hermeneutic. Plato’s trinity was the good, the true, and the beautiful, and all other forms, or solid matter if you will, are lesser forms of the true form. In one sense, Calvin believed that Jesus Christ brought the two together, but that is a philosophical angle we will not pursue here because other manifestations of this heresy are more plainly and easily seen. Calvinists merely make Jesus Christ the full expression of the good, true, and beautiful while representing the other members of the Trinity as lesser forms.
Hence, Jesus Christ, and His works become the stargate to all understanding of reality. The “gospel” is a term that encompasses the personhood of Christ and His works—this is the gateway to understanding ALL reality. The saving act (singular) of Jesus Christ is not something done in history as part of the Trinity’s plan to reconcile them to mankind, but is the key to understanding all reality. Therefore, many Calvinists refer to the “saving acts” (plural) of Christ and His personhood as keys to understanding. The Bible is therefore 100% about the gospel i.e., the personhood and works of Christ. More on this further along.
This is abundantly evident via the everything Jesus mentality of today’s churchianity. The books, the sermons, and the music are everything Jesus. This is why; it is a Protestant family tradition set on fire by the Neo-Calvinist movement. And it all begins in a galaxy far, far away known as Western philosophy. Calvin notes the following in his Institutes of the Christian Religion:
For this reason Augustine [who he quotes on average every 2.5 pages in the Institutes], treating of the object of faith (De civitate Dei lib. 11 c. 2), elegantly says, “The thing to be known is, whither we are to go, and by what way”; and immediately after infers, that “the surest way to avoid all errors is to know him who is both God and man, It is God we tend, and it is by man we go, and both of these are found only in Christ.
Therefore, supposedly, the “only” sure way to avoid error is to focus on Jesus Christ only, the idea that spiritual reality and physical reality are only seen in Christ notwithstanding. A clearer way to see how this all fleshes out is in the first tenet of New Covenant Theology which is a spinoff of Neo-Calvinism:
New Covenant Theology insists on the priority of Jesus Christ over all things, including history, revelation, and redemption. New Covenant Theology presumes a Christocentricity to the understanding and meaning of all reality.
Considered to be the foremost authority on Reformed hermeneutics in our day, Graeme Goldsworthy stated the following on page 48 of Gospel-Centered Hermeneutics (InterVarsity Press 2006):
If the story is true, Jesus Christ is the interpretative key to every fact in the universe and, of course, the Bible is one such fact. He is thus the hermeneutic principle that applies first to the Bible as the ground for understanding, and also to the whole of reality.
Calvinism concurs. ALL reality is Chrsitocentricity. The gospel is a stargate to the pure form of the good. Geoffrey Paxton, an Anglican theologian and authority on the Reformation, stated the following on page 41 of The Shaking of Adventism (Baker Book House 1978):
Christ alone means literally Christ alone, and not the believer. And for that matter, it does not even mean any other member of the Trinity!
This statement is both shocking and representative of Reformed trinitarian thinking. Paxton is absolutely right, Solus Christus means just that. Another way of understanding this is via the solar eclipse. This is the most popular example of how Christ must be the gateway to pure understanding. Christ is the Sun, the life-giving rays of light. To let anything obscure that light, no matter what it is—is to deprive ourselves of wisdom and life to that degree. When we let objects, even objects that are factual and true obscure Christ, we are “living in the shadows.” This is the theses of longtime John MacArthur confidant Rick Holland’s book, Uneclipsing The Son. The book is a Platonist/Gnostic treatise that is not even ambiguous. On page 11, Holland writes that the book of James presents Christ as the “rule and standard of all spiritual instruction.” On the same page, Holland asserts that Christ is the “one true God” and then cites five Scripture references that say no such thing.
John MacArthur wrote the Forward to Holland’s book being presently considered, and made these statements:
Rick Holland understands that truth. This book is an insightful, convicting reminder that no one and nothing other than Christ deserves to be the central theme of the tidings we as Christians proclaim—not only to one another and to the world, but also in the private meditations of our own hearts.
The pastor who makes anything or anyone other than Christ the focus of his message is actually hindering the sanctification of the flock.
No greater subject exists than Jesus Christ–no greater gift can be given than uplifting His glory for another soul to see it and be changed by it. This book will be a wonderful help to anyone who senses the need to orient one’s life and message properly with a Christ centered focus. It is full of fresh, practical, and memorable spiritual insight that will show you how to remove whatever obstacle is blocking your vision of the Son and allow His light to blind you with joy.
Christ, while praying to the Father, referred to the Bible as “your word” and “your word is truth” (John 17:17). We pray to God the Father, not Christ, and we baptize in the name of all three Trinity members. The Bible is not Chrsitocentric. The Bible has many major themes. The father of our faith looked for “a city built by God.” This contradicts the plain sense of Scripture, which brings me to my next point.
The Redemptive Historical Hermeneutic calls for a contemplation on Christ and His works only, or the gospel, and a logical conclusion drawn from the formation of verbs, nouns, adjectives, prepositions, etc., must be disregarded for a Chrsitocentric conclusion or a “truth” that “shows forth the gospel.” In the aforementioned book, on page 39, Holland has the audacity to make the following statement under the heading “When Bad Grammar Makes Good Theology”: “The rules of grammar are intended to be guardrails for communication. But sometimes they prevent it.” Insinuated is the idea that Christ’s greatness transcends mere grammatical rules, and therefore, one must break those rules to communicate how consumed our life must be with Christ.
A good example of this is a statement by Paul David Tripp on page 27 of How People Change (Punch Press 2006). Tripp acknowledges that the Bible in-fact does state that we should apply biblical commands to our life, but to take that literally, and not in its “Christ-centered gospel context” (p. 26) is to “omit” Christ in our life as “Savior.” Therefore, a literal approach to the Bible harkens to works salvation. The results of this can be seen in this approach to preparing Bible lessons:
At this time, resist the temptation to utilize subsequent passages to validate the meaning or to move out from the immediate context. Remembering that all exegesis must finally be a Christocentric exegesis.
Look for Christ even if He isn’t there directly. It is better to see Christ in a text even if He isn’t, than to miss Him where He is (Biblical Theological Study Center: A Christo-Presuppositional Approach to the Entire Scriptures; Max Strange. Online source: http://goo.gl/5sGjP).
Another authority on the Reformation, Robert Brinsmead, states this perspective concisely:
That which makes the Bible the Bible is the gospel. That which makes the Bible the Word of God is its witness to Christ. When the Spirit bears witness to our hearts of the truth of the Bible, this is an internal witness concerning the truth of the gospel. We need to be apprehended by the Spirit, who lives in the gospel, and then judge all things by that Spirit even the letter of Scripture (Brinsmead, Robert D. ”A Freedom from Biblicism” in The Christian Verdict, Essay 14, 1984. Fallbrook: Verdict Publications. Pgs. 9-14).
In other words, the meaning of Scripture according to the letter [i.e., logical interpretations from the grammatical construction] must be judged by “that Spirit” which “lives in the gospel.” All bets are off concerning any interpretation that seems to be the plain sense of the text.
Moreover, New Calvinists take this concept dangerously close to disparaging God the Father. In the book here cited by Holland, he suggests that Christ saved the world from God. In fact, the heading on page 23 reads, “Saved—From God.” So, apparently, hell is a God the Father sort of thing. On page 43 and following, Holland presents God as “our most pressing problem.” And, “man’s greatest problem is God, God Himself.” And of course, it’s Christ to the rescue, right?
Though few would reject the idea that Christ saved us from God’s wrath, it’s hardly the whole story and promotes the subtle New Calvinist goal of making Christ more significant than God the Father. Holland gives no Scripture references for this concept of Christ saving us from God because there isn’t any. God was just as involved in the salvation solution as Christ was, and Christ is also a God of wrath just as much as the Father is (Rev. 6:16,17 and 19:11-16). This whole concept is a subtle, but dangerous distortion. At the very least, making a strict dichotomy that associates wrath with God and salvation with Christ is ill advised and smacks of Marcionism.
Holland is hardly alone in this approach among New Calvinists. Paul Washer suggested to an audience of European college students that the goodness of God is man’s biggest problem (Online source: http://wp.me/pmd7S-1A3). At any rate, a standalone dichotomy of wrath versus love associated with Christ and the Father that is unqualified, is a concept that should make Christians very uncomfortable.
Calvinism promotes a Platonist-like distortion of the Trinity. It shouldn’t surprise us as the Plato/Reformed love affair is well documented. New Calvinists in our day even sport ministry subtitles with Platonist themes: “Between Two Worlds,” “Between Two Spheres,” and in regard to Plato believing that pure truth is static, “Truth Unchanging.”
Like all cultic false religions throughout history, they distort and therefore reject the Trinity.
paul
ADDENDUM
Calvin presented the priority of Christ over the other two Trinity members in the following way as explained by Mark Driscoll associate Justin Holcomb:
According to Calvin, the object of faith’s knowledge is Jesus Christ. He defines faith by proceeding to the center of a series of concentric circles: God’s existence, God’s power, God’s truthfulness, God’s will “toward us” as revealed in Scripture, and finally Christ. All these circles are implied in faith, but only the last is properly understood as the object of faith. Calvin goes so far as to say that those who say that God is the proper object of faith “rather mislead miserable souls by vain speculation, than direct them to the proper mark” (Institutes III.2.i). Christ as mediator is necessary if humans are to know God. Christ is not set over against God. Rather, Calvin asserts, Christ is the means—the only means—by which we can believe in God (Online source: http://theresurgence.com/2009/07/10/calvin-on-faith-christ-and-his-gospel).
ADDENDUM
One might consider the ruckus that was created over my suggestion that salvation involves all members of the Trinity and not Christ alone. I think this is telling. The following is a reprint of the controversy on Pastor Joel Taylor’s blog that resulted from some comments I had made on that subject:
5 pt salt .com
JUSTIFICATION IS NOT OF CHRIST ALONE
POSTED BY JOEL TAYLOR ON DECEMBER 15, 2011 IN GENERAL | 24 COMMENTS
I’m not even sure I like the title of this post. Not because it’s not true, but because it’s confusing.
Let me explain.
A few days ago I posted this piece promoting the book by Paul Dohse entitled The Truth About New Calvinism: It’s History, Doctrine, and Character. It’s worth reading. In fact, I think his book is an important one, and yes, I highly recommend you get it.
But, of course, not everyone feels that way.
Yesterday, after reading that post of mine, one 5ptsalt reader left this comment to me regarding Dohse and his book:
I’m pretty shocked you are promoting this book. Taking a peak inside reveals some pretty far out stuff. Just one example:
“First, justification is not by Christ ALONE. If God didn’t elect Christ, elect the elect, and draw them to Christ, along with sacrificing His only Son, what Christ did would have been for naught. So, justification is not by Christ alone.”
Buyer beware. This is dangerous stuff.
Well brethren, don’t be shocked that I promote this book. Be glad. And for you buyers, no need to beware.
Dohse is Right
Fact is, Paul Dohse is spot on, and even though he doesn’t need me to defend his statements, this reader’s comment gives us the opportunity to look at Scripture and, hopefully, instruct all of us. As Martha Stuart is apt to say, “That’s a good thing.”
See, it’s always important to look at statements in their proper context, a practice often overlooked and disregarded in the heat of defending what one is doctrinally comfortable with. But we need more importantly to examine all things in light of Scripture, it being – yes, I’m saying it again – the final authority in all things.
This comment by Dohse can be found from this post [link] of his which itself is a response to a series of questions by one of his readers. Here’s the question of the reader, followed by Dohse’s response:
Q: You have raised many issues in the last post that would take a book to answer. If I may, I would like to ask a few questions that might help us to clarify the issues on which we disagree. First, I want to state a couple of points on which I think we agree. Incidentally, I am convinced Piper and others would also agree.
…….
2. Justification is based on the work of Christ alone and our works do not contribute to it at all.
…..
Dohse responds to the second point:
2. First, justification is not by Christ ALONE. If God didn’t elect Christ, elect the elect, and draw them to Christ, along with sacrificing His only Son, what Christ did would have been for naught. So, justification is not by Christ alone.
Now, as I said earlier, Dohse is right. In fact, spot on. Here’s why: In a nutshell, it took all three persons of the Trinity to accomplish our justification. Father, Son and the Holy Spirit. If one dogmatically asserts that the Son alone is responsible for our salvation, including our justification, such a statement is clearly, from the Biblical testimony, an error.
Yes, the basis of our justification is the finished work of Christ alone, apart from our own works. That is true. Yet Dohse is merely pointing out the fact that unless the Father had predestined some to salvation, there would be none. The Father sent the Son to redeem us. The Holy Spirit works in us to make us holy. So Dohse is pointing out the involvement of the Trinity in our complete salvation. Although the basis for justification is Christ alone, there would be no justification without the involvement of all three persons of the Trinity in our redemption.
First, let’s give a simple definition of what justification is. Be sure and learn this, I implore you. When this is learned, hopefully, much confusion will be dismissed altogether.
Justification Defined
Justification is a declaration from the throne of God the Father concerning our legal status before His law. It is a single act, occurs one time, is never again repeated and is definitely not a process.
God the Father is the Author and Origin of Our Justification:
since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one. – Romans 3:30
But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, – Romans 4:5
and these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified. – Romans 8:30
By the way, who predestination the elect unto salvation? Jesus Christ the Son? No! God the Father predestination us, according to Scripture. You see, it is God the Father who makes the declaration of justification, so to think justification is of Christ alone, well, that is simply not a biblical position.
Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him – Ephesians 1:3-4
Who will bring a charge against God’s elect? God is the one who justifies; – Romans 8:33
When anyone objects to statements like “Justification is not by Christ alone”, I would suggest one needs to pull back, calm down, and search the Scriptures and strive towards of a biblical understanding of precisely what justification is, a declaration from God the Father.
Brethren, I hear far, far, far too much praying for the Holy Spirit to “come down” and manifest Himself. I strongly object to such, and I would encourage pastors, and elders who are allowing such to continue to rethink what they are encouraging.
Listen. The Holy Spirit, third person of the Trinity, points us to Christ, not to Himself, and does not anywhere in Scripture ask us to ask more of Him! (John 16:13, 14).
Listen again, please. Christ Jesus points us to the Father! He is the way to the Father, not just to Himself! John 14:6.
Look at Ephesians 2:18, 19 brethren, and for all you New Calvinists, contemplate this:
for through Him we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father. So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God’s household
Now, why do so many focus only on the Son? For you to be redeemed, it took the entire Trinity, the triune Godhead, in perfect agreement together regarding a predestined, glorious plan of redemption of those given by the Father to the Son by the work of the Holy Spirit.
Sonship theology, indeed. Paul Dohse is right, because Paul Dohse is listening to God’s written Word, not the latest guru of truth.
Brethren, in love, I ask you not to ignore two members of the Trinity. Christianity is not wearing a Calvinistic t-shirt, boasting of your reformed views, and getting people to contemplate on the Gospel more.
That is utterly absurd. It is ignoring the whole counsel of God. This business of “Gospel sanctification” and Sonship theology is a dangerous – and exceedingly popular movement. And it is a movement that endangers souls.
So get that book, read it, be alert, and learn and be aware of anything and anyone who, in your heart, trumps the Word of God. May we all strive to better acknowledge the final authority of God’s Word, and rest our beliefs on its veracity alone.
24 COMMENTS
JOSHUA
DECEMBER 15, 2011
Did you believe this before Dohse made his statements or did he lead you to this understanding?
REPLY
ELLEN
DECEMBER 15, 2011
What then are we to think about the following scripture, relating to the reasoning in this post? In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word
was God. John 1:1
REPLY
JOEL TAYLOR, PASTOR-TEACHER POST AUTHOR
DECEMBER 15, 2011
You should think that Jesus was in the beginning, eternal, and was with God, with God the Father, God the Holy Spirit, and was/is God Himself, and created all things, and all things are upheld by Him, for Him and through Him.
REPLY
JOE
DECEMBER 15, 2011
I like John 3:16
REPLY
JOHNDUNNINGUK
DECEMBER 15, 2011
I believe that if we are to truly accept the doctrines of grace as being true, we cannot do so sincerely, and yet fail to understand the crucial role that all three Persons of the Godhead play in our salvation.
In covenant theology, there is a sense whereby that which we know as the covenant of grace, flows directly out of an agreement within the Godhead made before creation, known as the counsel of peace, and sometimes as the covenant of redemption.
It was in this coming together of the Godhead to form a plan of creation, redemption and salvation, that each Person of the Godhead took upon their role. (I realise this is a pretty poor description on my part, so please excuse me). Each Person of the Godhead being indispensible to the other, and the faithful work of each Person, utterly vital for the plan of salvation to succeed.
Although I can sort of understand peoples reaction to this post generally, I have to agree that I think it more emotional than intellectual. It is undoubtedly true to say that there is absolutely no sacrifice for sin that is acceptable to God, other than Christ. However it would also be true that without the sovereign election of the Father, giving a people to His Son to redeem through His own blood, His sacrifice would be for nought. And were it not for the Holy Spirit, sealing those who have been chosen and redeemed, acting as the deposit that guaranteed their inheritance in Christ, then none would be brought to glory anyway.
REPLY
MAY
DECEMBER 15, 2011
However it would also be true that without the sovereign election of the Father, giving a people to His Son to redeem through His own blood, His sacrifice would be for nought.
Why would His sacrifice be for nought? The Father knows that some will and some will not believe.
REPLY
JOHNDUNNINGUK
DECEMBER 16, 2011
Why would His sacrifice be for nought? The Father knows that some will and some will not believe.
If you read through John 6:37-44 you will see what I meant more clearly. Christ did not come to the earth to do His own will, but the will of the One who sent Him. Namely the Father.
It is the Father who elects those who are to be saved and gives them to His Son to raise up on the Last Day, and we are told that ALL those who are given by the Father shall come to the Son.
The willingness of Christ to lay down His life to save us as the redeeming price, can only redeem those the Father has given Him to redeem. Therefore without being given a people by His Father, His sacrifice would purchase nothing.
REPLY
TIM SCOTT
DECEMBER 15, 2011
I’m a little confused. I want to ask a clarifying question, just to make sure I have read your article correctly. Aren’t you denying a central tenet of the Reformation? I mean, yes, salvation involves all persons of the Godhead but how was that salvation accomplished? Through Christ right?
REPLY
JOEL TAYLOR, PASTOR-TEACHER POST AUTHOR
DECEMBER 15, 2011
What ‘central tenet’ of the reformation would I be denying? The Father is the one who justifies, according to Scripture.
REPLY
Pingback: God Making His Appeal Through Us. « Kevin Nunez
TIM SCOTT
DECEMBER 15, 2011
Solus Christus
REPLY
JOEL TAYLOR, PASTOR-TEACHER POST AUTHOR
DECEMBER 15, 2011
Tim, the Father elected those who would be saved, and gave them to the Son to be redeemed, which He did at the cross. That is the testimony of Holy Scripture. We must be careful not to make being ‘reformed’ more important than being biblical. Solus Christus is not about the doctrine of justification brother.
REPLY
TIM SCOTT
DECEMBER 15, 2011
Thanks. That is why I was making sure I understood what you were saying. Appreciate your answer bro.
JOHNDUNNINGUK
DECEMBER 16, 2011
It seems to me that this is the result of a sloppy question/statement followed by a precise answer. I’m not saying that to lay blame on anyone, but merely to say that where matters of doctrine are concerned, precision in our language is essential. All the JW’s do is add one little letter “a” to John 1:1 and it turns the whole Gospel on its head!
The statement made was: “2. Justification is based on the work of Christ alone and our works do not contribute to it at all.” To which the response made was bang on. The intent of the statement maybe obvious enough to some, but it is far from being accurate, and may well lead to wrong doctrine developing if left unchallenged.
REPLY
VINCEPLANETTA@GMAIL.COM
DECEMBER 16, 2011
It doesn’t seem to me the statement should be shocking at all (Jam 2:24). I think reformers have placed too much emphasis on “alone” and is so often misleading. Not that it is incorrect but can potentially detract from man’s response and action.
REPLY
GRACEWRITERRANDY
DECEMBER 16, 2011
The real issue is not whether all three persons of the Trinity are involved in the work of salvation, That should go without saying for anyone who has read the Scriptures. The question that I originally asked to Paul Douche concerned the basis of the sinner’s justification before God. Is it the work of Christ alone or is it the work of Christ’s work or Christ’s work plus our obedience. Whether you like it or not, the Father’s work in electing believers was not the basis of our justification; the Spirit’s work in regeneration was not the basis of our justification. Were those works necessary in order to justify us? Of course they were! Were they the basis of our justification? No way! The basis of our justification was the obedience of Christ alone.
REPLY
JOEL TAYLOR, PASTOR-TEACHER POST AUTHOR
DECEMBER 19, 2011
The basis of our justification is the finished work of Christ, absolutely. However, this post never mentions you, nor is it about you. it concerns a comment left on 5ptsalt in regards to PD.
REPLY
GRACEWRITERRANDY
DECEMBER 16, 2011
“Solus Christus is not about the doctrine of justification brother.”
If it is not about justification. what is it about?
REPLY
JOEL TAYLOR, PASTOR-TEACHER POST AUTHOR
DECEMBER 17, 2011
Salvation.
Acts 4:12 – and there is salvation in no other One, for neither is there any other name under Heaven having been given among men by which we must be saved.
1Ti 2:5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
1Ti 2:6 who gave himself as a ransom for all, which is the testimony given at the proper time.
REPLY
GRACEWRITERRANDY
DECEMBER 17, 2011
johndunninguk,
You stated that there is something inaccurate about the statement I made. I would be interested in knowing what part of that statement you find sloppy. Do you think it is inaccurate to say that God’s declaration is based on [not by] Christ’s finished work alone or do you think it is inaccurate to state that our works do not contribute to justification at all? If it is not based on Christ’s finished work, on what basis do you think an absolutely holy God could declare sinners righteous and remain righteous himself?
REPLY
JOHNDUNNINGUK
DECEMBER 17, 2011
Hello Andy,
Firstly I do fully believe that our justification is based upon the finished work of Christ on our behalf. I also believe that the very reason that God is willing to justify sinners, can only be because by faith we have accepted and put our trust in the only acceptable sacrifice that can be made for our sins, and that is the One who God sent as that sacrifice. Our own works have nothing to do with it, apart from maybe fighting against the process.
The thing I disagree with is your initial statement “Justification is based on the work of Christ alone”, which is not fully true. Our justification can only come through repentance and faith, both of which I would consider the works of Father and Holy Spirit, as opposed to Christ Himself.
I only object because unless we are elected by the Father, given the gift of faith and drawn by Him, and regenerated and convicted of our sin by the Holy Spirit; then the completed works of Christ alone do not justify us at all. To believe otherwise leaves pitfalls such as universalism wide open for us to fall into.
God bless you, and please excuse me if I have come across harsh in any way. John.
REPLY
GRACEWRITERRANDY
DECEMBER 17, 2011
John,
Thanks for your reply. I don’t think we disagree re: the statement I made. It seems our only areas of disagreement have to do with the difference between the basis of justification and how justification is received. Justification is clearly THROUGH faith which includes repentance, but we are never told that justification is BASED ON, that is on account of or because of the sinner’s faith.
It is important that we distinguish between redemption planned, redemption accomplished and redemption applied. Although the Father and the Spirit were both involved in the offering up of Christ’s obedience unto death, it was his obedience that formed the basis upon which the Father declares us righteous in his sight. It is his righteousness that is put to our account and forms the basis for the Father’s declaration that we are righteous before him. The Father’s primary work in the process of redemption occurred in the area of redemption purposed or planned. He is also involved in the application phase, i.e., effectual calling. The Spirit’s primary work occurs in the application phase. As essential as these works of the Father and the Spirit are, none of those activities on their part form the judicial basis upon which God justifies sinners.
Randy
GRACEWRITERRANDY
DECEMBER 17, 2011
John,
One additional thought. Part of Christ’s redemptive work is reconciliation that not only effects the putting away of the Father’s holy wrath toward the elect, but also guarantees the putting away of our unholy hostility toward God. It is this redemptive accomplishment that the Spirit applies to the elect in regeneration. If we are believers, we have now received the reconciliation (Rom. 5:11) that Jesus accomplished objectively on the cross. That is, Jesus’ accomplishment has now been applied.
Randy
Calvin’s Definition of the Regenerate is the Bible’s Definition of the Unregenerate
There is a slight problem with Calvinism. Calvin’s definition of a Christian is the Bible’s definition of a lost person. Calvin, the supposed genius that he was, therefore declared Christians everywhere to be lost. Brilliant.
It all starts with Calvin’s view of the Christian’s relationship to the law:
1. It is the standard for the Christian’s justification.
2. The law must be kept perfectly in order to be considered righteous presently.
3. Christians cannot please God through obedience to the law because we still sin.
Let’s establish these three points from the Calvin Institutes (3.14.9-11):
We thus see, that even saints cannot perform one work which, if judged on its own merits, is not deserving of condemnation.
Even were it possible for us to perform works absolutely pure, yet one sin is sufficient to efface and extinguish all remembrance of former righteousness, as the prophet says (Ezek. 18:24). With this James agrees, “Whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, is guilty of all,” (James 2:10). And since this mortal life is never entirely free from the taint of sin, whatever righteousness we could acquire would ever and anon be corrupted, overwhelmed, and destroyed, by subsequent sins, so that it could not stand the scrutiny of God, or be imputed to us for righteousness. In short, whenever we treat of the righteousness of works, we must look not to the legal work but to the command. Therefore, when righteousness is sought by the Law, it is in vain to produce one or two single works; we must show an uninterrupted obedience.
God does not (as many foolishly imagine) impute that forgiveness of sins once for all, as righteousness; so that having obtained the pardon of our past life we may afterwards seek righteousness in the Law. This were only to mock and delude us by the entertainment of false hopes. For since perfection is altogether unattainable by us, so long as we are clothed with flesh, and the Law denounces death and judgment against all who have not yielded a perfect righteousness, there will always be ground to accuse and convict us unless the mercy of God interpose, and ever and anon absolve us by the constant remission of sins. Wherefore the statement which we set out is always true, if we are estimated by our own worthiness, in everything that we think or devise, with all our studies and endeavors we deserve death and destruction.
We must strongly insist on these two things: That no believer ever performed one work which, if tested by the strict judgment of God, could escape condemnation; and, moreover, that were this granted to be possible (though it is not), yet the act being vitiated and polluted by the sins of which it is certain that the author of it is guilty, it is deprived of its merit.
Clearly, Calvin believed Christians are still under the law and its requirement of perfection. Once our past sins are forgiven, the law requires a perfect keeping thereafter:
God does not (as many foolishly imagine) impute that forgiveness of sins once for all, as righteousness; so that having obtained the pardon of our past life we may afterwards seek righteousness in the Law.
Notice that Calvin dismisses a future forgiveness of sins once we are forgiven of “our past life.” Apparently, at the point of salvation, past sins are forgiven but from there forward a perfect keeping of the law is required in order to be considered righteous. Since this is not possible, a perpetual forgiveness of sins is required to maintain our just standing:
For since perfection is altogether unattainable by us, so long as we are clothed with flesh, and the Law denounces death and judgment against all who have not yielded a perfect righteousness, there will always be ground to accuse and convict us unless the mercy of God interpose, and ever and anon absolve us by the constant remission of sins.
Calvin taught a need for the perpetual remission of sin in order to remain just, and a perpetual imputation of Christ’s righteousness as well:
Therefore we must have this blessedness not once only, but must hold it fast during our whole lives. Moreover, the message of free reconciliation with God is not promulgated for one or two days, but is declared to be perpetual in the Church (2 Cor. 5:18, 19). Hence believers have not even to the end of life any other righteousness than that which is there described. Christ ever remains a Mediator to reconcile the Father to us, and there is a perpetual efficacy in his death—viz. ablution, satisfaction, expiation; in short, perfect obedience, by which all our iniquities are covered (Ibid.)
Calvin believed that faith alone in sanctification, the same way we were saved, keeps this process of perpetual justification going. He posed the opposition as those who believed that the new birth enabled the Christian to participate in completing justification, and since the completion would not be a perfect keeping of the law, that it was a false approach:
They admit that the sinner, freely delivered from condemnation, obtains justification, and that by forgiveness of sins; but under the term justification they comprehend he renovation by which the Spirit forms us anew to the obedience of the Law; and in describing the righteousness of the regenerate man, maintain that being once reconciled to God by means of Christ, he is afterwards deemed righteous by his good works, and is accepted in consideration of them (Ibid).
Until this day, the Reformed misrepresent the new birth as a work inside the believer that enables them to participate in the completion of justification because they only recognize a “golden chain of salvation” in which sanctification finishes justification. That is why authentic Calvinism insists on “Christ 100% for us [IN sanctification and justification both]” and any and all works of grace being completely outside of the believer. What about “faith”? Faith must focus on the gospel OUTSIDE of us or it is irrelevant. Any recognition that faith is inside of us leads to subjectivism. So, true faith is that which focuses on another object, or it’s not faith. Whether or not it is inside of us is irrelevant. In fact, God Himself should not be emphasized as much as Christ and His gospel lest we “rather mislead miserable souls by vain speculation, than direct them to the proper mark” (Institutes III.2.i).
The primary contradiction is that Christians are no longer under the law for justification. There is NO law standard that must be maintained for our just standing. That is how unbelievers are biblically framed. Again, Calvin frames believers in the same way that the Bible frames unbelievers:
Romans 3:19 – Now we know that whatever the law says it speaks to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be stopped, and the whole world may be held accountable to God. 20 For by works of the law no human being will be justified in his sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.
Romans 3:21 – But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law, although the Law and the Prophets bear witness to it— 22 the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all who believe.
Romans 3:28 – For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law.
Romans 4:15 – For the law brings wrath, but where there is no law there is no transgression.
Romans 5:13 – for sin indeed was in the world before the law was given, but sin is not counted where there is no law.
Romans 7:6 – But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code.
Romans 7:8 – But sin, seizing an opportunity through the commandment, produced in me all kinds of covetousness. For apart from the law, sin lies dead.
We see that a perfect keeping of the law is completely unnecessary for the Christian. Who keeps it or doesn’t keep it for our justification is completely irrelevant for the standard of the law does not exist in justification: “But now the righteousness of God has been manifested apart from the law.”
Furthermore, if we are still under the jurisdiction of the law for our justification, we are technically, according to the Bible, unregenerate and still enslaved to sin:
Romans 6:14 – For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.
Because we died with Christ, the old us that was under the law is like a spouse that died; we are no longer under that marriage law and the new us is free to marry another:
Romans 7:1 – Or do you not know, brothers—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law is binding on a person only as long as he lives? 2 For a married woman is bound by law to her husband while he lives, but if her husband dies she is released from the law of marriage. 3 Accordingly, she will be called an adulteress if she lives with another man while her husband is alive. But if her husband dies, she is free from that law, and if she marries another man she is not an adulteress.
4 Likewise, my brothers, you also have died to the law through the body of Christ, so that you may belong to another, to him who has been raised from the dead, in order that we may bear fruit for God. 5 For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death. 6 But now we are released from the law, having died to that which held us captive, so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit and not in the old way of the written code.
We are no longer under the law for justification, and not of the nature that goes along with that: enslavement to sin. Nor are we any longer provoked to sin by the law, which is another characteristic of being under it:
Romans 7:5 – 5 For while we were living in the flesh, our sinful passions, aroused by the law, were at work in our members to bear fruit for death.
Those under the law cannot obey the law, but in direct contradiction to Calvin, those under grace can obey and please God with obedience accordingly:
Romans 8:1 – There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. 2 For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. 3 For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, 4 in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit. 5 For those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit set their minds on the things of the Spirit. 6 For to set the mind on the flesh is death, but to set the mind on the Spirit is life and peace. 7 For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God’s law; indeed, it cannot. 8 Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.
The law now informs our sanctification (ROM 3:21, GAL 4:21) and provokes us to obedience from our redeemed hearts:
Romans 6:1 – What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 By no means! How can we who died to sin still live in it? 3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. 6 We know that our old self was crucified with him in order that the body of sin might be brought to nothing, so that we would no longer be enslaved to sin. 7 For one who has died has been set free from sin. 8 Now if we have died with Christ, we believe that we will also live with him. 9 We know that Christ, being raised from the dead, will never die again; death no longer has dominion over him. 10 For the death he died he died to sin, once for all, but the life he lives he lives to God. 11 So you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus.
12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, to make you obey its passions. 13 Do not present your members to sin as instruments for unrighteousness, but present yourselves to God as those who have been brought from death to life, and your members to God as instruments for righteousness. 14 For sin will have no dominion over you, since you are not under law but under grace.
Slaves to Righteousness
15 What then? Are we to sin because we are not under law but under grace? By no means! 16 Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves,[c] you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed, 18 and, having been set free from sin, have become slaves of righteousness.
Calvin’s soteriology is utterly anti-gospel and the antitheses of truth. It must be rejected with extreme prejudice. It makes a mockery of biblical common sense—describing the regenerate as unregenerate.
paul
Confused in Denmark: Seeker of Truth Wants Answers to Seven Questions About Salvation
“I love you, but your thinking is fraught with Reformed morbid introspection that they want to use to control you. Stop reading John Piper.”
Busy and haunted. I received an email from a person in Denmark that is confused about all of the different positions on the gospel floating about today. Our commentary from the first eight chapters of Romans (compiled manuscripts from the Potter’s House) answer the questions in detail. Susan and I have received positive feedback regarding the book. At least one family is using it for their family devotions. So concerning the Denmark person, I offered to send the book and the offer was accepted. That was easy.
And haunting. I once talked to a Christian who was critical of an elder that she sought out for counsel. With an expression on her face somewhere between disgusted and hurt, she stated, “I came to him for help. Do you know what he did? He gave me a book!” Let there be no doubt about it: Christian books have gone way beyond teaching in our day, they are orthodoxy. And by the way, Neo-Calvinism all but completely owns Christian publishing. “Orthodoxy” is a Reformed term. It is the faith repackaged for the unenlightened masses by the preordained Reformed philosopher kings. For the most part, American Sunday Schools teach from Reformed writings and not the Bible. This is a complaint that this ministry hears constantly. These guys have effectively rewritten systematic theology and church history. They have created another standard of Christian reality altogether and speak from that reality as if there is no other reality.
And this is where the confusion comes in. But confusion is good. Confusion is very good. Concern that you are confused is even better. If you are letting other people think for you—you are not confused. Everything makes perfect sense to you even though it is completely illogical. Jesus warned us about letting other people think for us. He referred to it as the blind leading the blind. That rarely turns out well.
So, we may conclude that confused Christians who know they are confused, and are concerned about it, are the top of the crop among Christians in our day. They are the blue chip because they are thinking Christians. We must not merely hand them a book. Besides, others may have the same questions.
1. Who is a true Christian?!
Answer: Those who place all of their hope in God and believe in His way of being reconciled to Him. Remembering that God has promised to reward those who seek Him is also very helpful. Don’t be too concerned with your confusion at this time: He who has promised is faithful. In regard to your residual question, “Should I just then read the Bible and forget about every other theory and just rely on my Bible reading?” The short answer is, ABSOLUTLEY. I am not discarding the need for teachers, but they must bow to the authority of Scripture. The Bible must be your absolute authority for life and godliness.
2. What does a true Christian look like?
Answer: A true Christian doesn’t “look like” anything. That’s the wrong question coming from Reformed metaphysics where verbs are works salvation. The Hebrew writer framed the question this way: what do Christians DO? See Hebrews 11. Aggressive DOING in our Christian life reveals that we really believe that our salvation is a finished work that we cannot contribute to. Fear of doing in our Christian life reveals an attitude that our salvation must be maintained in some way by living a noun life instead of a verb life. Hence, “what does that look like” rather than “how do I do that?” “How do I please God” becomes, “What does that look like” because it really isn’t me doing it. If I am doing it, I am finishing my salvation in some way. Salvation is finished, and it can only be appropriated through faith alone. But the power imputed to us for Christian living must be appropriated through BOTH faith and obedience. In our Christian life, faith and obedience work together and enhance each other (James 2:22). Hence, assurance of salvation grows as our obedience and faith feed each other.
3. Is there such a thing as a wealthy (monetary terms) Christian?
Answer: Yes. Kingdom living is many faceted and full-orbed. God uses a variety of socio-economic types of people in His kingdom.
4. Does being a Christian mean having no money, no career ambitions.
Answer: Only if you are a follower of Martin Luther. We are free from the law and have incredible liberty to pursue the things we enjoy. However, though free from the law’s jurisdiction, we are “enslaved to righteousness.” The balance of liberty and what is pleasing to God is a complex issue, but that is why God gave us a miraculously designed and capable brain. Be patient and wait on the Lord as you prayerfully search the Scriptures for these answers. Even Daniel lived this way. He searched the Scriptures for answers. And many times, the answers we seek will determine the book where we look for the answers (Daniel 9:1,2).
5. How do I please God with my life? For example, how much Bible reading am I supposed to do? Should I wait for the Spirit to lead me? Can I continue reading romance novels or should I stop because Christians say it is wrong, yet I still want to read one?
Answer: No, as Christians, we NEVER wait to do anything that is within our power and abilities to do. To do otherwise is to rob blessings from our Christian life (James 1:25). Granted, we will continually rob ourselves of blessings because we are hindered by our mortality: “The Spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.” As Christians, we have new desires. But a remnant of the old sinful desires remain. HOWEVER, unlike when we were unsaved, their power to control us is broken because the old us died with Christ. HOWEVER, the old desires wage war against us through feelings, and the argument that we have to obey those desires can be pretty strong. But because of what we know from the Scriptures, those feelings are lying. The strength of the sinful desires’ argument is strengthened through disobedience.
Christians should listen to their conscience. The apostle Paul said to keep a clear conscience before God. However, as our conscience becomes more and more biblically trained, our consciences will give more freedom. Right now, if reading romance novels makes you feel guilty, I would encourage you to stop. Don’t violate your conscience. Don’t allow a desire to lead you into a watered down blessing that you cannot fully enjoy anyway. I know that there is a, well, for lack of a better way of stating it, “need” for Christian romance novels. Some of the content in the novels you are reading could be the issue. Christians are to “dwell” on what is honorable. That doesn’t exclude creative/interesting thoughts provoked by reading.
6. How do I know I am pleasing God from my heart and not as a result of my intellect?
Answer: Learn and do. ALL truthful obedience is from the redeemed heart. Obeying God when we don’t want to or don’t feel like it is the most self-sacrificial. If we have a desire not to obey a clear biblical imperative, it is probably a “desire of the flesh.” Often, when we obey when we don’t want to, we are merely refusing to obey a desire of the flesh. The Bible has much to say about obedience to desires (ROM 6:11,12). ALSO, this is a result of your biblical intellect which is a GOOD THING! I love you, but your thinking is fraught with Reformed morbid introspection that they want to use to control you. Stop reading John Piper.
7. Sanctification, justification, Grace being born again.. right now I am so confused by all of this I am doubting what I believe and whether I am on the right path or am I just lost and not aware.
Answer: I can tell you that you are not lost. Lost people don’t concern themselves with these things. You have great potential to please God because you are a thinker and not a mindless follower of men. A good example of the latter is your everyday Calvinist. There is hope for confused Calvinists. Here is Paul’s justification/sanctification construct in the book of Romans: the lost and saved fall under two categories:
1. Under the law. Definition;
A. Enslaved to sin and the obedience to sinful desires.
B. Provoked to sin by the law.
C. Will be judged by the law.
2. Under Grace. Definition;
A. Released from the law.
B. Enslaved to righteousness.
C. Provoked to please God by the law.
D. Will not be judged by the law.
E. Harassed by sinful desires.
Read Romans carefully line by line. Read it thoughtfully and prayerfully. Take the words at face value. I will mail the book today or tomorrow.
Stay the course. In all, stand immovable in the Lord Jesus Christ our beloved King.
Your brother,
paul
More Protestant Confusion: “If Everybody is Wrong, What is Right?”
The question has been posed to me thrice this week; twice in person and once by email: “If everybody is wrong, what is right? Can we even know truth if everybody is wrong?” I will answer the question with another one of the rhetorical sort: “Is there a better example of Protestant tradition than this question?”
Notice the link between “truth” and the pronoun, “everybody,” i.e., the most notable Protestant teachers of our day and the past. And with a few Catholics thrown in for good measure. This is classic Protestantism; while denying that truth is embodied in men, that is how we function because of orthodoxy. Orthodoxy is “truth” repackaged for the masses by the “Divines.”
So, let me properly rephrase the question in context: “If all of the Divines and those who cite them as authority are wrong, how can we know truth?” That would be primarily the Westminster Divines who directly and indirectly executed people for disagreeing with them. The Westminster Confession is the toast of Protestant orthodoxy.
But prior to this week’s threesome, another caveat has been added to this line of questioning as well: “So, you must be Catholic?” This is more Protestant tradition in our Western culture; you are either Catholic or Protestant. Supposedly, we were in a “Dark Age” under Catholicism and the Reformers started a “reformation.” Some historians even suggest that the Reformers were the historical segue to the Enlightenment Era which is an utterly absurd idea. The Reformers, like their Catholic mother, were vehemently opposed to free reasoning among the people—especially the common breed.
Furthermore, the Reformation credits most of its doctrinal construct to Augustine who was always a Catholic. Protestants are conditioned to be comfortable with these contradictions because of the value placed on the traditions of men. The ideology and spiritual caste mentality is the exact same which led to both having a linear gospel. By linear gospel I mean the idea that sanctification finishes justification. Catholicism, according to the Reformers, propagates the idea that the indwelling Holy Spirit aids the Christian in finishing justification. The Reformers believed that any work of grace inside the believer, even by Christ, made Christians participants in finishing justification because like the Catholic Church, they saw sanctification as links of a chain between justification and glorification.
Hence, the Reformers insisted that ALL grace must take place outside of the believer. The belief that any work of grace takes place inside the believer is, “making sanctification the ground of your justification.” This is why we are not EITHER Protestant OR Catholic: because both hold to a linear false gospel. The biblical gospel is a parallel gospel that radically separates justification and sanctification. Justification is a finished work completely separate from works and sanctification. In other words, sanctification can’t affect justification. This is what separates the biblical gospel from the Protestant/Catholic gospel.
Christ promised that the gates of hell would never prevail against His church. The truth of His word has always flourished somewhere in the world. And the propagation of truth has always been possible when a Spirit indwelled believer picks up a Bible and reads it with their own mind.
Paul warned Timothy that there would be a lot of people in our day who are wrong. Wrong people are not the measure of truth, nor can they contribute to it. Those who love truth more than the traditions of men must find like-minded groups. And if you can’t find one—start one.
paul
Tullian Tchividjian is Representative of New Calvinist Anti-Truth
I posted on an article referred to me yesterday written by Tullian Tchividjian. In the post Tchividjian praises his late father for his passive approach to raising Tullian which was dubbed “grace.” And apparently, as one of the premier heretics of our day, Tchividjian thinks he turned out well, thanks to his father’s grace-like rearing. An excerpt:
Years later he told me that he saw all those checks being cashed [checks that Little T-T stole from his father and forged], but he decided not to say anything about it at the time. It didn’t happen immediately (the fruits of grace are always in the future), but that demonstration of unconditional grace was the beginning of God doing a miraculous work in my heart and life. My dad’s literal “turning of the other cheek” gave me a picture of God’s unconditional love that I couldn’t shake…. Steve Brown once said, “Children will run from law and they’ll run from grace. The ones who run from law rarely come back. But the ones who run from grace always come back. Grace draws its own back home.” I ran from grace. It drew me home.
In yesterday’s post I addressed the fundamental misrepresentation of biblical law and grace in all of this. In this post I would like to address Tchividjian’s all-out assault on the plain sense of Scripture. But remember, Tchividjian is representative of New Calvinism and authentic Reformed doctrine in general. Tchividjian has a very strong grasp on what the Reformers believed and taught. And like T-T (pronounced “tee-tee”), they redefined many biblical concepts and realities in opposition to the common sense hermeneutic. In mysticism, common sense is for the common folk.
This isn’t particularly deep; God condemns the passive parenting T-T praises as commendable and supposedly based on grace versus law. As I addressed yesterday, there is no law in the grace of justification, but there is ample grace in the practice of law in sanctification. The fundamental heresy of Calvinism projects the grace of justification onto sanctification which makes law a part of justification. That’s the crux. Fear of law in sanctification reveals a belief that law is also the standard for justification. So, parents who fear law in parenting deprive their children of grace. If for no other reason, it cannot be denied that love is of grace and to deprive your children of discipline is to also deprive them of love:
Hebrews 12:7 – It is for discipline that you have to endure. God is treating you as sons. For what son is there whom his father does not discipline? 8 If you are left without discipline, in which all have participated, then you are illegitimate children and not sons. 9 Besides this, we have had earthly fathers who disciplined us and we respected them. Shall we not much more be subject to the Father of spirits and live? 10 For they disciplined us for a short time as it seemed best to them, but he disciplines us for our good, that we may share his holiness. 11 For the moment all discipline seems painful rather than pleasant, but later it yields the peaceful fruit of righteousness to those who have been trained by it.
Moreover, one can read of the unspeakable tragedy that fell upon the house of Eli and all of Israel because of his passive parenting of his sons Hophni and Phinehas (starting in 1Samuel 2:12). God also accused Eli of honoring his sons above Him because he would not discipline them.
Again, T-T is representative of the authentic Reformed doctrine sweeping the American church and covertly taking over its institutions. Hindering the needed alternative is Protestant propaganda that the average Christian father is not “qualified” to lead his family and others.
But we must ask ourselves: “We can’t do better than this? Really? We don’t know that Eli’s example is a bad idea? Protestant pastors are on such a higher spiritual plane than we are that the obvious really isn’t true?”
In our day, if you can discern reality—you’re qualified.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
5 comments