Tullian Tchividjian’s Grace Post Reveals His Fundamental Lack of Salvific Knowledge
“If children who have a proper view of salvation run to God, it will be from the condemnation of the law to the blessings of the law in sanctification, not grace apart from the law in both sanctification and justification.”
Tullian Tchivijian doesn’t understand the basics of salvation. This is revealed in a recent post in which he uses his late father’s demonstration of what Tullian calls “grace.” Like all New Calvinists, and for that matter, authentic Calvinists, law and grace are separated into a strict dichotomy. Because sanctification is seen as the horizontal maintenance and completion of vertical justification, the necessary separation of law and grace in justification is also extended to sanctification.
Unfortunately, this reveals an attitude about justification; specifically, that law is a standard for justification that must be maintained in sanctification. Since this is impossible for mortal Christians, law and grace must be kept separate in sanctification as it is in justification. It makes mortality and the new birth mutually exclusive because Christians still clothed in mortality don’t keep the law perfectly. Hence, according to New Calvinism, Christians must be sanctified apart from the law. That’s a huge problem because Christ stated in John 17:17 that God only sanctifies by the truth of His word. Exacerbating the problem is the confusion caused by traditional Protestant dichotomies concerning the Ten Commandments and God’s word. “Law” is a generic term for God’s full counsel contained in the Bible. This is very demonstrable, but I would mention Matthew 5:18 and 1Corithians 14:34. In both cases, more than the Ten Commandments are clearly in view.
The thesis of Tullian’s post is the idea that passive parenting demonstrates grace, while rules in parenting demonstrate law and the idea that children must earn favor with God for salvation. Tullian concludes the post with the idea that children will never return to law, but will always return to grace:
Years later he told me that he saw all those checks being cashed, 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.
This misrepresents law to our children in two ways. First, it denies children from experiencing the blessings of living life God’s way. This demonstrates the wisdom of God and the fact that He knows what He is talking about. Second, it implies that law and grace are mutually exclusive in justification and sanctification both. Instead of the gospel’s message concerning the different relationships to the law in justification and sanctification, it makes our relationship to the law the same in both. This is a major circumvention of the true gospel. There is no law in justification, and as unbelievers, that which is good (the law) provokes us to sin and threatens to be our judge in the end. But once born again, the law provokes us to righteousness (ROM 6:17-23, 8:3-8). “Grace” is not only unmerited salvation; it is the blessings of sanctification as well. But those blessings primarily come through the law (Matthew 7: 24, 25, James 1:25, Psalm 119). If children who have a proper view of salvation run to God, it will be from the condemnation of the law to the blessings of the law in sanctification, not grace apart from the law in both sanctification and justification.
An unmerited blessing apart from the law in sanctification shows clearly a belief that we did not receive righteousness apart from the law for our justification (ROM 3:21). “Under law” means we are enslaved to sin, provoked to sin by the law, and will be judged by the law. “Under grace” means we are enslaved to righteousness rather than sin, will not be judged by the law, and are provoked to righteousness by the law. Paul stated that his mind served the law (ROM 7:25).
Therefore, we are still under the law according to New Calvinism because law is separated from grace in sanctification. It is still a standard for justification. No relationship to the law has been exchanged from unregenerate to regenerate.
That’s why Calvinism is a false gospel. The saved are still “under the law.”
paul
Backdoor Justice for New Calvinists is a Good Start
Protestantism is predicated on confusion. It is no friend of thinking people or critical thinkers. The foundations of Protestantism are elitist, caste, and fraught with mysticism and superstition. The Reformers were murdering bigots. Martin Luther could not be a pastor in any American church upon the reading of The Jews and Their Lies. His statements concerning women would raise some brows as well. The problem would be the “upon the reading” part.
For revival to take place in the American church Protestantism must be scraped completely and the church must return to an emphasis on the priesthood of believers. We must rethink all of the traditions of men that are the American church. It’s called, “orthodoxy.” We must become Bereans and take back the church—the God-breathed word must be our authority and pastors must bow to its authority or be rejected as leaders. We should submit to leaders who submit to the authority of the word. They do not have the authority to be wrong.
New Calvinism is a return to authentic Protestantism amidst anemic Protestant Light that has plagued the American church since the unfortunate arrival of the Pilgrims on America’s shores with their European Calvinistic Puritan virus. They never made it far inland for lack of curiosity and vision. Spiritual tyranny soon followed and has always been repackaged as heroism by the traditions of men. As good Protestant anti-thinkers, we deem their behaviors like a bad hair day. Quakers and women hanging at the end of a rope, their only crime being the desire for some clarification, must not be relevant; our Protestant philosopher kings pat our little heads and tell us so—all is well, nothing here, return to the Protestant merry-go-round and commendable idiocy. Because it is “humble.” Proof? How about Reformed/Calvinistic anti-spiritual abuse bloggers? Where do they think the abuse comes from? Again, like the Puritan issue, behavior is separated from their ideology like the two are mutually exclusive. This is the acceptance of tradition over sound thinking.
Authentic Calvinism is so viral in reasoning and behavior that even the overseers of our present mental leprosy are beginning to reject it. New Calvinists are being fired from religious positions of authority from coast to coast. However, in many cases, it is not known that they are New Calvinists, and in most cases they are dismissed because, “something doesn’t seem right, but we don’t know exactly what it is.” I suppose this is a good start. It’s better to fire people if you can articulate their specific faults, but nevertheless, something is better than nothing. The Feds couldn’t indict Al Capone on what he was really guilty of, so they changed the standards in order to indict him on something else. This is sort of the same thing.
A disclaimer: I know little of the Baptist stripe that supports Northland International University, but they are among the latest evangelical organizations to fire someone in a position of authority; in this case, a university president. The name of this president is Matt Olson, and a cursory observation of his blog reveals the fact that he is a New Calvinist. Literally ten seconds into surfing his blog, I locked in on a post that touts the idea that we can eclipse the majesty of Christ as seen by the world through an emphasis on obedience. So what’s the alternative? What exactly do we emphasize over obedience that doesn’t obscure the “personhood” of Christ? He doesn’t say, and nobody asks—it sounds spiritual—and he is a philosopher king. And so it goes.
Par for the course: the university is not stating specifically why he was terminated, but nevertheless, also par, people will continue to donate money to the college because it is not their place to know what the controversy is. Thou in authority has spoken. Let it be written—let it be done. Besides, the donors probably wouldn’t understand.
But I wonder if those in authority even understand. Frankly, I doubt it, and in many cases those who have the authority to take such action simply don’t know what is really going on while using confidentially as a pious cover to conceal that fact. But it’s a good start.
paul
How Calvinism Turns Brave Hearts into Cold Hearts
I will post a video at the end of this article that elicited the following response from those who posted it on the social network where I watched it:
“Not sure what one could add to or take away from what we have just seen. I am reminded of Matt. 24 when Jesus says that because of lawlessness the hearts of many will grow cold. “Just do it” and laughter throughout the time is just beyond me. Heather was in tears. I wanted to throw up. Beyond disgusting.”
The key to understanding the cold-bloodedness that they observed is in their mention of Matthew 24:12, and the two key words are, BECAUSE, and, LAWLESSNESS. Christ said that “because” of “lawlessness,” love would “grow cold.” The source of this lawlessness is described by Jesus in the previous verse: “many false prophets.”
Now we would do well to examine what Christ meant by the word often translated “lawlessness” and “wickedness” in our English Bibles. These words posit the idea of bad behavior, but that’s not what the actual word that is used by Christ means at all. The word is “anomia.” The “a” is a negative article prefix that means “anti” and “nomia” or nomos, refers to God’s law specifically. The idea of sinful behavior is an entirely different word altogether. Among many used is “hamartia,” or “sin” and these two words are specifically contrasted in 1John 3:4. Sin is defined by any aberration of God’s standard.
In Matthew 24:12, as well as many other passages, an anti-Bible agenda is in view propagated by false prophets.
The world in general becomes cold-hearted by rejecting the law of God written on their hearts and administered by the conscience—either excusing or accusing their actions (ROM 2:15,16). The conscience can eventually be seared if continually violated and ignored (1TIM 4:2). Christians are to keep a clear conscience before God (Acts 24,16 1Peter 3:16, 1TIM 1:5, 3:9, 2TIM 1:3). Keeping a clear conscience before God is obviously behavior focused as judged by the Bible.
One of the monumental misnomers of all time is the idea of “legalism.” This term was formulated by false prophets who really want to steer us away from nomos. Misguided obedience has never been the church’s primary nemesis; it has always been anti-word of God. When the apostle Paul warned those who wanted to be justified by the law, “law,” is in a manner of speaking; Paul was referring to what false teachers purport to be the law, not an actual sincere love for truth and a desire to live by it. This is why James stated that anyone who wanted to be justified by the law had to keep all of it, not a standard of their own choosing (James 2:10). Supposed law-keeping is also often connected to salvation by mere ritual as well. This point cannot be better made than to cite what Paul wrote to the Galatians:
5:2 Look: I, Paul, say to you that if you accept circumcision, Christ will be of no advantage to you. 3 I testify again to every man who accepts circumcision that he is obligated to keep the whole law. 4 You are severed from Christ, you who would be justified by the law; you have fallen away from grace. 5 For through the Spirit, by faith, we ourselves eagerly wait for the hope of righteousness. 6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision counts for anything, but only faith working through love. 7 You were running well. Who hindered you from obeying the truth? 8 This persuasion is not from him who calls you.
We see here, clearly, that Paul was confronting a belief that being circumcised according to law excused them from a truthful obedience to the law. In other words, justification by law-keeping is ALWAYS a dumbed-down version of the law to make adherence for salvation feasible. Paul contrasts this with true obedience to the law in sanctification:
You were running well. Who hindered you from obeying the truth?
Justification by law-keeping is NEVER an endeavor to obey the truth; it is ALWAYS the replacement of God’s law with the traditions of men—making the law of God, “void.” The Pharisees, the supposed poster children for “legalism,” or “living by the law,” were not guilty of trying to obtain salvation by a sincere obedience to the truth, but rather replaced the law of God with their traditions and made that the standard for salvation (which has no law standard to begin with):
Matthew15:1 – Then Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem and said, 2 “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? For they do not wash their hands when they eat.” 3 He answered them, “And why do you break the commandment of God for the sake of your tradition? 4 For God commanded, ‘Honor your father and your mother,’ and, ‘Whoever reviles father or mother must surely die.’ 5 But you say, ‘If anyone tells his father or his mother, “What you would have gained from me is given to God,” 6 he need not honor his father.’ So for the sake of your tradition you have made void the word of God.
Matthew 23:16 – “Woe to you, blind guides, who say, ‘If anyone swears by the temple, it is nothing, but if anyone swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath.’ 17 You blind fools! For which is greater, the gold or the temple that has made the gold sacred? 18 And you say, ‘If anyone swears by the altar, it is nothing, but if anyone swears by the gift that is on the altar, he is bound by his oath.’ 19 You blind men! For which is greater, the gift or the altar that makes the gift sacred? 20 So whoever swears by the altar swears by it and by everything on it. 21 And whoever swears by the temple swears by it and by him who dwells in it. 22 And whoever swears by heaven swears by the throne of God and by him who sits upon it. 23 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cumin, and have neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness. These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others. 24 You blind guides, straining out a gnat and swallowing a camel!
25 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean the outside of the cup and the plate, but inside they are full of greed and self-indulgence. 26 You blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and the plate, that the outside also may be clean. 27 “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of dead people’s bones and all uncleanness. 28 So you also outwardly appear righteous to others, but within you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness.
And what were the Pharisees full of “within”? “lawlessness” which is the word “anomia.” The English translation is “anti-law” or “antinomianism.” That’s what the Pharisees were full of within—not “legalism” which is a concept not found in the Bible anywhere by idea or word. There is obedience to truth or anti-truth—no in-between.
“Legalism” fosters the idea that Christians can unwittingly try to please God by obeying the truth as a way to earn their justification. The idea was hatched by the Reformers and is a Neo-Calvinist doctrinal mainstay in our day. The favorite illustration is the Pharisees who supposedly were really, really good at keeping the law and obeying the Bible in an attempt to earn their justification. This is a ploy to create confusion in regard to the law’s relationship to justification and sanctification. The Reformers created immense fear among Christians by making the law’s relationship to justification the same as sanctification. In justification, law has no jurisdiction in regard to the Christian. The Christian is transformed from a status where the law is the standard to be justified (and impossible) to a status where the law informs our sanctification totally separate from justification. So, the law is a standard for sanctification, but in regard to the Christian, the law no longer has jurisdiction over his/her salvation. In Calvinism, the law remains a standard for justification IN salvation that must be maintained until the final judgment.
Because man is created to do works, this makes sanctification very tricky with our eternal destiny hanging in the balance. Calvinists therefore assure Christians that if they live their Christian lives by faith alone—they are playing it safe. As one New Calvinist told me: “If I let Jesus do all the work, He can’t fault me for anything when I stand before Him.” Of course, living in a way that imputes the works of Christ to our Christian walk is very complicated, but be assured; New Calvinists will teach us how to “practice obedient faith” so we can arrive at the final judgment covered by “what Jesus has done, not anything we do”….in our Christian walk. This confounding of the law’s relationship to justification and sanctification makes the Christian walk a minefield with constant danger of “making sanctification the ground of our justification.” We must therefore seek out the Reformed for their secret formula for living the Christian life by faith alone. “Sola Fide” is for justification and sanctification both—that’s the dirty little secret. The Reformed couch the language in terms like “obedient faith.” The Reformers saw faith as a neutral conduit that God uses to impute the perpetual works of Christ to the believer. In other words, Christ’s atoning work is not yet finished for salvation: though accomplished in one period of time, it must be continually appropriated to maintain our just standing. The maintenance of our salvation is in view. Hence, we must “preach the gospel to ourselves every day.”
But this brings us from fearful hearts to cold hearts. Reformed theology will heap its share of cold-hearted mentality on humanity “because of anomia.” It’s just more anomia dressed in religious garb. This brings my point back to the video that was posted. It is cold-heartedness on steroids regarding the abortion issue. Therefore, the following should make perfect sense to us:
According to the National Right to Life, the total number of abortions in the US is down-33% from its peak in 1980/81- and the greatest decrease is among adolescent girls and young women. Good News!
But if we look further into these statistics, we find disconcerting news for the Church: The abortion rates among professing Christians are commensurate with the rest of the population!
Approx. 560,000 for Protestants (43%)
Approx. 350,000 per year for Catholics (27%)
13% of abortions (approx. 170,000 per year) are performed on self-described “Born Again” or Evangelical Christians (Alan Guttmacher Institute and Physicians for Reproductive Choice, “An Overview of Abortion in the United States,” 2003 and 2008)
Even more disturbing is the fact that these percentages have NOT dropped, even though the number of abortions have in recent years!
These statistics reveal that actually MORE women who profess Christianity are having abortions.
This is what Reformed theology has always done to society. Despite the traditions of men that claim otherwise, the Reformation did not bring light to darkness, it brought more darkness. Post Reformation brought little more than chaos and turmoil to Europe—more than it had ever seen before. It brought tyranny to America in the form of the Salem witch trials, and its contemporary resurgence has resulted in an unprecedented level of abuses in the American church.
It is the epitome of a primary concern of Christ during His ministry: the replacement of the law by the traditions of men resulting in anomia. While waxing eloquent about the Pharisees, Neo-Calvinism is in fact a return to what plagued the apostolic church. To say that Calvinists vaunt the opinions of a litany of past Reformers as authority is an understatement of the most dramatic sort. Even Charles Spurgeon, “the prince of preachers” did little more than regurgitate Reformed tradition. Recently, one Reformed conference was based on the writings of twenty-five Reformed icons. The popular Resolved conferences hosted by John MacArthur highlighted the traditional teachings and legacies of Reformed men of years gone by.
With all of the harping about the Pharisees by Calvinists—they are the Pharisees, and they propagate the same kind of cold-heartedness with it.
Their heart is unfeeling like fat, but I delight in your law.
~Psalm 119:70
paul
A Typical New Calvinist Membership Covenant: People really Sign These Things?
Recognizing our responsibility to obey all the Scriptures and the need to distinguish ourselves from the world as a community of believers, all members shall affirm their commitment to please God in all areas of life by entering into this covenant:
Humbly depending on the Holy Spirit’s enabling and aiding us, and affirming The Truths We Treasure, we Covenant to Glorify God by striving:
To walk in obedience to the Scriptures by loving the Lord God with all our heart, all our souls, and all our minds;
To walk in harmony with our fellow Christians by loving them as we love ourselves;
To be faithful in our witnessing, to uphold our testimony, to defend the doctrines of the Word of God, and to expand the Kingdom of God;
To be faithful in edifying, exhorting, rebuking, discipling, encouraging, praying for, and meeting the needs of the Body of Christ;
To exercise our spiritual gifts to build up and to serve one another;
To be submissive to one another in Christian love;
To regularly attend the services of the church and not forsake the assembling of ourselves together;
To be submissive to the God-ordained elders as to those who give an account for our souls;
To give heed to the ministry of the Word;
To attend the ordinances of the church faithfully, approaching them in a serious, spiritual, and holy attitude;
To honor the Lord in our finances in all things including regular, proportionate giving to the church;
To be consistent in our own study of the Word;
To love our wives as Christ loved the church or to submit to our husbands and to teach and train our children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord;
To extend the Lordship of Christ into all areas of our lives;
To abstain from practices harmful to our physical bodies and injurious to our testimony;
To purpose that if we relocate we will, as soon as possible, unite with another church of like faith, where we can carry out the spirit of this Covenant and the principles of God’s Word. (Proverbs 13:24; 23:13; 29:15; Malachi 3:8-11; Acts 2:42, 47; Romans 8:3-4; 1 Corinthians 15; 16:2; 2 Corinthians 5:11-21; 12:13; Ephesians 4:11-14; 5:23-24; 6:1-4; Philippians 1:3-6; Colossians 4:2-4; 2 Timothy 3:16-4:4; Hebrews 10:24, 25; 13:17; James 2:12; 5:13-14; 1 Peter 2:5,9; 3:7; 1 John 2:19).
3. Requirements for Membership
Any person who desires to unite in membership with the Chapel must profess repentance toward God and faith in Jesus Christ as Savior, submit to Him as Lord and Sovereign, be Biblically baptized following this profession, and must not be under Biblically administered church discipline. Having met these requirements, this person shall joyfully enter into this Covenant with this people, expressing willingness to follow the beliefs and practices of this community, and evidencing willingness to submit to its Elders.
4. Admission to Membership
The Elders shall be responsible to receive applicants into membership. This shall include reviewing the application, conducting an interview, and evaluating their standing when coming from another church. Upon determining that the applicants meet the requirements, the Elders shall present them to the church as members.
5. Categories of Membership
Resident Membership is for those active, participating members who comprise the majority of the Chapel. Associate Membership, having all the privileges and responsibilities of membership except that of voting, may be extended by the Elders to those who will be absent for an extended period of time, or who are at the Chapel for a short period of time and wish to minister while maintaining membership in their home churches.
6. Congregational Voting Privilege
To be eligible to vote at congregational meetings, one must be a resident member on the day of the vote, at least sixteen (16) years of age, in attendance at the meeting and not have forfeited their voting privilege by being placed on the inactive list or being subject to discipline. The Chapel may permit absentee ballots in exceptional circumstances as requested of and granted by the Elders on a case-by-case basis.
7. Removal from Membership
Membership will end by physical death, transfer of membership to churches holding to Biblical doctrine, or by the process of corrective discipline ending in
Tim Hawkins is a Funny Guy, But His Gospel is False
See the problem? This is the crux; the fusion of justification and sanctification requiring a sanctification by faith alone. Works in sanctification is the same as works in justification. It’s maintaining your justification in sanctification by “resting.” Unfortunately, these anti-gospel ideas brought applause from the audience. We truly live in perilous times.
I have always enjoyed the comedy of the tremendously gifted Tim Hawkins and never made it a point to find out what he believes about the gospel. If a good comedian who doesn’t need smut to make people laugh sticks to comedy, what he believes about the gospel is between him and God.
But if he is going to use his act to spread a false gospel, that is a whole other matter, and unfortunately, that’s the case. Frankly, I don’t care if Hawkins has to be like most in our day that chase after every wind of doctrine as long as he keeps it to himself; but unfortunately, he doesn’t. In the following video he promotes the New Calvinist progressive justification that dominates the present-day church. Hawkins makes several statements while presenting the gospel in the following clip (end of post) that are blatant scriptural contradictions.
Hawkins presented the gospel to a Christian audience in the clear stated context of sanctification, or worded another way: our Christian walk. He began by saying that God always works first in our lives; i.e., everything we do is first initiated by God. Of course, that’s not true. Throughout the Bible God states that he will act if we do certain things first. In New Calvinist circles, the following is in vogue: teaching that Christians do works that they are unaware are in the Bible because it is Christ doing the work and not us. Even John Macarthur has been teaching this recently.
Hawkins followed by saying that being a Christian means resting in what Christ has done, and he prefaced several like remarks with, “that’s the gospel.” Is that true? Our Christian walk is resting in what Jesus has done, and that’s the gospel? Many citations from the Bible that refute this notion could be stated—here are a few:
1Thessalonians 4:9 – Now concerning brotherly love you have no need for anyone to write to you, for you yourselves have been taught by God to love one another, 10 for that indeed is what you are doing to all the brothers throughout Macedonia. But we urge you, brothers, to do this more and more,
Romans 12:10 – Love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one another in showing honor. 11 Do not be slothful in zeal, be fervent in spirit, serve the Lord.
1Peter 1:5 – For this very reason, make every effort to supplement your faith with virtue, and virtue with knowledge, 6 and knowledge with self-control, and self-control with steadfastness, and steadfastness with godliness, 7 and godliness with brotherly affection, and brotherly affection with love. 8 For if these qualities are yours and are increasing, they keep you from being ineffective or unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ.
This “rest” concept can certainly be applied to justification, but like all New Calvinists Hawkins applies it to sanctification as well. Christians not knowing the difference is a huge problem in our day. After promoting the idea that Christians should rest in their Christian walk, Hawkins verbalized the familiar New Calvinist truism that Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us. No, our sins were imputed to Christ, and the Father’s righteousness was imputed to us. That’s the gospel, that’s biblical double imputation, not the New Calvinist’s version of double imputation where Christ’s obedience is imputed to our sanctification as part of the atonement.
Then Hawkins espoused the all-familiar New Calvinist “Jesus didn’t come so you can get your act together and be a good person—the gospel and Christianity is not about behavior modification.” Really, do I have to cite Scripture references to refute this idea? Is that where we are at in all of this? Such statements are not rejected out of hand by Christians in our day? And why isn’t Christianity supposedly about behavior modification IN SANCTIFICATION? Because that would be the same as behavior modification IN JUSTIFICATION. See the problem? This is the crux; the fusion of justification and sanctification requiring a sanctification by faith alone. Works in sanctification is the same as works in justification. It’s maintaining your justification in sanctification by “resting.” Unfortunately, these anti-gospel ideas brought applause from the audience. We truly live in perilous times.
But where Hawkins drives the New Calvinist spear through the heart of the true gospel is in the following statement:
It’s about life transformation. He didn’t come to make bad people good he came to make dead people alive….You’re living by the law—you’re living by works and it’s killing you.
This is a fundamental rejection of the law’s relationship to the gospel. It makes the relationship of the law to justification the same as its relationship to sanctification. This must necessarily exclude works of the law in sanctification. Such exclusion of the law in sanctification shows us what one really believes about justification: it’s not a finished work and needs to be maintained by OUR passivity in sanctification which is supposedly not a work—regardless of its REQUIRMENT to maintain the continued imputation of Christ’s works to our sanctification in order to maintain justification. Many New Calvinists refer to this as the “saving works” (note the plural rather than the singular act of going to the cross) of Christ. James and the apostle Paul warn that this is grievous error and a false gospel. It shows this comedian’s basic lack of understanding in regard to the gospel.
The gospel is a call to those under the law to be born again under grace. Those under the law are enslaved to sin, provoked to sin by the law, and will be judged by the law. Those under grace are no longer in bondage to sin, are now provoked to righteousness by the law, and will not be judged by the law. Hawkins, like all New Calvinists, insists that we not live by the very law that provokes us to righteousness or more specifically, love.
In his New Calvinist ignorance of the true gospel, Hawkins continued his treatise by adding the idea that God uses the law to “crush US” and show us our continual need for a savior….to which I will add, IN SANCTIFICATION. Hence, justification is perpetual. Hawkins then stated that Christ came to “fulfill the law FOR US” in sanctification. Not true. When Christ said in His Sermon on the Mount that He came to fulfill the law, how He intends to do that is clarified by the apostle Paul:
Romans 8:1-4 – 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.
1 John 3:8-9 – Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. The reason the Son of God appeared was to destroy the works of the devil. 9 No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God’s seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God. 10 By this it is evident who are the children of God, and who are the children of the devil: whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is the one who does not love his brother.
Like all New Calvinists Hawkins defines Christians as unregenerate, as those unable to keep the law, and even if we could keep it, the standard is the same as before we were “released from the law (ROM 7:6)” as a standard for justification: perfection. Therefore, per New Calvinism, Christians are still under the law (and therefore defined as biblically unregenerate) because the old man that must meet the perfection of the law’s standard for those not under grace is still alive (ROM 7:1-3). They did not die with Christ and the penalty for all sin that died also with Christ. Instead of perfection being the GOAL in sanctification, it is the STANDARD for progressive justification; therefore, Christ must keep the law for us in sanctification. Again, this reveals what is really believed about justification by Calvinists: it’s an UNFINISHED work.
Hawkins completed his treatise by promoting the New Calvinist way to have assurance of salvation; i.e. look at what Christ states about our position in the Bible and not our behavior. Really? Again, do I have to give biblical citations here? Is our state really that bad to where I would have to point out biblical citations to refute this idea?
New Calvinists continually point to the agreed upon train wreck that is American Christianity and claim to have the cure in authentic Calvinism. But wait a minute here: they have had majority control of the House for ten years now—something isn’t adding up.
Like the blood lollipops with a knife blade as a stick that Eskimos use to kill wolves, the New Calvinists tell us to keep licking. It’s a trick that works so well on wolves that they are now using it on the sheep. They present the law to Christians in the exact same way that it is to be presented to the unregenerate. That’s why we supposedly need the gospel of the cross every day. Therefore, Tim Hawkins is no longer funny. Though his comedy is a wonderful work in Jesus’ name—he uses it to propagate works of anomia.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
4 comments