The Christocentric Redemptive Historical Hermeneutic and “Touchdown Jesus”
When you are Reformed, you have to get to heaven by faith alone. It’s easy being saved by faith alone, but how do you live the Christian life by faith alone? It would seem that there is stuff in the Bible that God tells us to do. But if we obey, that’s works salvation. What to do?
So the Reformers came up with a way to get to heaven by faith alone via being continually/perpetually saved by faith alone. Hence, we must “preach the gospel to ourselves every day.” Self-serve perpetual salvation. So, that necessitated making the whole Bible about salvation. Instead of reading the Bible for instruction on kingdom living, the Bible became a way to live by the same gospel that saves us until the end.
How do we pull that off? Well, we make every verse in the Bible about Jesus’ “personhood.” Hence, “He’s not a precept, He’s a person.” “It’s His-story.” “It’s not about what we do—it’s about what Jesus has done” etc. So, how do we make every verse in the Bible about Jesus? Just “look to Jesus.” There is no better example of how this works than the infamous “Touchdown Jesus.” I explain in another article:
The Bible is full of symbolism and rich imagery—more so than most literature. And that presents a grave danger. We don’t have the liberty to go into the Bible with the bull of our imagination in a china shop. Imagery and ambiguous verbiage can become idols that are a god of our own making because variances of interpretations are myriad. You merely pick the one of your own imagination and preference, or the same from the musings of others. So here is the point: we can make passages like Exodus 25-27 a tool for creating truth of our own making. In fact, whole denominations are formed based on interpretations of the imagery in these chapters.
What better example than the infamous “Touchdown Jesus” that was an icon of a church in Monroe, Ohio. The statue of Jesus was 60ft. high and was merely a couple of hundred ft. from I-75. That is, until it was struck by lightning. The flames could be seen for miles in the night and the pictures thereof can be best described as apocalyptic. The next day, it was the talk of the nation. But telling was the hundreds of testimonies recorded on the news and in newspapers; i.e., “what the image meant to me.” Yikes! The hundreds of different interpretations were staggering, and the statue never spoke one word! Most interesting was a comment by an unbeliever who worked in the Monroe area: “Obviously, God did it.” Often, there is a disconnect between the secular mindset and the Christian mindset which involves the disintegration of common sense that is a natural endowment; mysticism often abandons the matter and faith becomes a license for mindlessness.
The appeal of idols is the supposed objective prism that leads to subjective “truth.” That’s the appeal; we can make idols speak the truth of our own preference. When a verse of Scripture has to be about Jesus, whatever our imagination comes up with is correct because it’s about Jesus, and if it’s about Jesus, a Jesus outcome must be correct.
It’s a Touchdown Jesus approach, and is the taking away and adding to the word of God on steroids. Good luck to those who propagate it.
paul
Why SBC Infighting Will Never End
I have been a Southern Baptist since 1983, and I certainly don’t remember any significant tension between Calvinists and Arminians in the association until recently. That’s because most Calvinists in the SBC have been Reformed Light for the most part. Circa 1981 began a concerted effort to take over the SBC with the rediscovered Reformed authentic gospel. That’s Luther’s centrality of the objective gospel outside of us. Until maybe ten years ago, few Calvinists in the SBC held to that soteriology. They are now known as “aggressive Calvinists” in the SBC.
Right, because the authentic gospel of the Protestant Reformation comes part and parcel with spiritual tyranny and indifference to human suffering. So, do I think it’s a good thing that SBC notables are pushing back against the “aggressive” Calvinists? No, not really. One camp is dying a painless death akin to gangrene, and the leaders of the other camp make you feel the pain. At least in the latter, you know something is going on that needs attention. Then you hope you can figure out the cure.
Fact is, both camps are Protestants, and Protestantism is founded on weak sanctification. And when you have weak sanctification, there will always be infighting. The Reformers had a different doctrine than Rome, but it was predicated on the same philosophy: spiritual caste. It’s an ancient philosophy that believes in the enlightened few ruling over the unenlightened masses. Rome was terrified that the unenlightened masses would get their hands on God’s word. They thought that was like handing a four-year-old a loaded musket or a really sharp knife. The Reformers had the same attitude even though they partook in the printing of Bibles. But one, it is unclear as to whether mass production was intended, and two, it is clear that the Reformers believed that the ignorant masses needed a dumbed down explanation of truth called orthodoxy. Hence, Calvin started the study Bible thing that is all the rage in our culture. Don’t forget, Luther and Calvin both believed that saints remain totally depraved. And don’t forget that two Catholics helped start the Reformation and were revered by Luther and Calvin till the end.
The Reformation was really a fight among philosopher kings for the mutton. And this fight between SBC academics is no different. T4G/TGC verses the John 3:16 crowd is all the same song and dance: philosopher kings fighting for the mutton. How do we know? I will tell you.
Jerry Vines, et al are not stupid; they know that this authentic Calvinism taking over the SBC is progressive justification which is clearly an in-your-face false gospel. So why not tell it like it is? Why not express outrage that the president of Southern Seminary propagates a false gospel? The answer to that is fairly simple: they don’t believe that the average Southern Baptist is able to understand what progressive justification is. And sadly, they are probably right, but no thanks to them. Look, I’m a pastor, and I can tell you that the American pastorate is saturated with the idea that the average parishioner cannot understand doctrine. Therefore, at best, Southern Baptists will live by biblical generalities and whatever the philosopher kings think they might be able to understand. The doctrinal illiteracy of the American church knows no bounds and that is by design; it reflects the spiritual caste mentality that has dominated the pastorate in Western culture for centuries.
Therefore, New Calvinists can’t be called on their false gospel; the other philosopher kings have to rally the spiritual peasantry around issues like the sinners prayer. While the SBC’s flagship Seminary is overseen by a heretic, thank goodness that resolution passed by an “overwhelming majority.”
paul
LifeWay’s “Gospel Project” Will Keep Children From Entering the Kingdom
Proponents of New Calvinism’s false gospel of progressive justification are targeting children through LifeWay Publisher’s Gospel Project. The church now stands silent as this massive program will prevent untold thousands of children from entering the kingdom. And I have news for American pastors: your ignorance on this issue will not excuse you before Christ in regard to the eternal wellbeing of Children, especially if you are soliciting them to attend your VBS. Spiffy teacher’s manuals with the word “gospel” on them doesn’t equal truth-driven gospel.
Much could be said biblically about God’s preference for children, but it’s interesting to note that God made a specific covenant between Himself and children, and New Calvinism seeks to interfere with that covenant. The apostle Paul explains the covenant as follows:
Ephesians 6:1 – Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right. 2 “Honor your father and mother” (this is the first commandment with a promise), 3 “that it may go well with you and that you may live long in the land.”
The fifth commandment is the command with a promise, and the four after it are uncharacteristic of the first five in regard to being short statements. This means they probably relate back to the fifth commandment: children dishonor their parents by stealing, etc. New Calvinism circumvents this covenant (which is obviously still in force or Paul would not have referred to it), and thereby circumvents the promises to children associated with it, circumvents their ability to honor their parents, and circumvents their ability to love God.
How so? New Calvinism’s gospel-centered theology is progressive justification and sanctification by faith alone. The “big picture” method of “Bible learning” is the vehicle for enabling Christians to live by faith alone in their Christian lives. This is nothing new and is the mentality that James pushed back against in his epistle. The Bible becomes a tool for gospel contemplationism, and whatever we see in the “gospel story” is imputed to our lives. This imputation is always accompanied by gratitude (fueled by the “crosswork” that we see in the Bible), joy, and a willing spirit. All obedience out of duty is “obedience in our own efforts” which would include anything that we don’t feel like doing. Ya, teach that to kids. Brilliant.
Kids will be instructed to see all of the commands in the Bible as works that Christ accomplished for us while He lived on earth. That’s what the term, Christ for us means. We are still totally depraved and unable to keep the law in sanctification, so Christ lived for our sanctification and died for our justification. As we see all of the commands in the Bible that Christ kept for us, that obedience is imputed to our (justification) account by faith alone.
Note: we supposedly have a salvation account that needs continuing forgiveness and righteousness deposits to keep us saved. The Bible is then a tool that enables us to “see” what Christ has done, not anything we do. This is a supposed increase of faith that only perceives without any direct acts of love which would be deemed a “rightousness of our own.”
Instead of Christ obtaining our salvation by “one act” of obedience, we must contemplate his many “saving acts” (John Piper) in all of the Bible so that those acts will be continually deposited in our salvation account. Salvation is not a finished act according to this false gospel.
Worse yet, it makes the standard for justification a perfect keeping of the law; therefore, part of Christ’s salvific works was perfect obedience during His life on earth so that His works can be imputed to our sanctification by faith alone—the same way we were saved. This effectively keeps us “under the law” which is a designation for the lost throughout the New Testament. For all practical purposes, we are still under the law and that’s why Jesus must obey for us. Since sanctification finishes our justification (really progressive justification), if we don’t live the Christian life by faith alone—we are toast. Supposedly. Children will be taught that “making every effort” (2Peter 1:5-11) to obey mommy and daddy is works salvation.
Hence, there is really no choice to obey “in our own efforts” and therefore no way to love God and please Him. Supposedly, If we really love Jesus, it shouldn’t take effort. As Francis Chan states: “If it feels like work—it’s work. If it feels like love—it’s love.” There are just no words for the vileness that is behind the efforts to teach this to our children.
Moreover, it’s plainly a false gospel that denies the new birth. In the new birth, the “Helper” enables us to appropriate the fact that our minds are now enslaved to the law rather than sin (Romans 7:25). The ability to obey the law and please God is the very definition of a born again believer (Romans 8:7).
Of course, these doctrinal ideas will be assimilated into their minds by methods that teach on their level of understanding. The production is also top notch and designed to mesmerize children.
But this will be the result: the ability for our children to use the Bible to love God and others with all of their heart, soul, and minds will be circumvented. And our view of sanctification reveals what our view of justification is. We are either free from the law to serve another with our actual obedience, or enslaved to the law which necessitates a substitution for our loving acts using the Bible for the mere purpose of gospel contemplationism.
paul
My Answer to Justin Taylor and Pyro Blog Regarding the “Gospel-Centered” Take on “Gossip.”
“None of these videos will make sense for anyone who doesn’t follow this brand of blogging or this brand of gospel centrism. I admit that.”
~Frank Turk
“By the way, the term, ‘gospel-centered’ saturates the Pyro blog, and it means much more than you think it does. Understanding the meaning of this term is key to understanding why they think the crying out on behalf of raped children is gossip…. This is much more than just a common understanding of how we are saved—this is a radical worldview.”
“Susan also came from such circumstances and slept one night in contemplation with a gun under her pillow. ‘Survivor’ is a word that is only worthy of irony in the minds of New Calvinists like Frank Turk who have a twisted worldview. And one only needs to read the SGM legal brief to know exactly who Frank Turk is mocking.
As the New Calvinist cartel circles the wagons around CJ Mahaney, an abnormal number of blog posts concerning “gossip” have appeared on the Evangelical blogosphere. I checked my calendar to see if perhaps February 12 is Gossip Awareness Day. Hmmmm, not finding it on the calendar.
Dan Phillips is one of the authors of the Team Pyro blog along with Frank Turk. Phil Johnson, most prominent in the John MacArthur venquilitrist show, is a former author on the blog. Phillips posted the exact same article that Justin Taylor posted (and the same day) on the Gospel Coalition blog. The post insinuates that the survival of a local church is paramount to all else. “Gossip” is a “church-killer.” Bill Gates would be asking me for money if I had a nickel for every time we hear this from the who’s who of New Calvinism:
Yes, yes, what they did to you is horribly wrong! But exposing this under any circumstances could destroy that church, and whoever destroys the temple of God will be destroyed by God!
Per the normal, an exegetical argument from the Bible was not executed, but rather run of the mill Reformed orthodoxy. That brings us to the gospel-centered motif that drives almost everything in the American church in our day. By the way, the term, “gospel-centered” saturates the Pyro blog, and it means much more than you think it does. Understanding the meaning of this term is key to comprehending why they think the crying out on behalf of raped children is gossip. And it starts with orthodoxy. In the Reformed construct, elders receive the word from God, and then repackage it in a way that can be understood by the totally depraved unenlightened masses. Hence:
It is wholly an issue of whether or not authority comes from God through the Scripture to the elders and pastors of your church and is therefore the basis for their credibility and their exercise of spiritual responsibility.
This was a comment made by Frank Turk in the comment thread of a Post by Johnson entitled “Should Type-R Charismatics Get A Free Pass?” Type-R refers to Reformed Charismatics. And yes, according to Team Pyro, they should get a pass because….
I have warm affection and heartfelt respect for most of the best-known Reformed charismatic leaders, including C. J. Mahaney, Wayne Grudem, and Sam Storms. [Let’s call them “Type-R Charismatics.”] I’ve greatly benefited from major aspects of their ministries, and I regularly recommend resources from them that I have found helpful. I’ve corresponded with the world-famous Brit-blogger Adrian Warnock for at least 15 years now and had breakfast with him on two occasions, and I like him very much. I’m sure we agree on far more things than we disagree about. And I’m also certain the matters we agree on—starting with the meaning of the cross—are a lot more important than the issues we disagree on, which are all secondary matters.
Got that? ALL other issues apart from their “meaning of the cross,” i.e., gospel-centered are “secondary.” This is the tie that binds. “Cross-centered” and “gospel-centered” are often used interchangeably. This is much more than just a common understanding of how we are saved—this is a radical worldview. The uniqueness of it can be further demonstrated by this:
We are glad that you admit it Frank. Refreshing. But before we continue, let me interject an example of the kind of hypocrisy that comes part and parcel with this worldview. Here are the five points outlined in the post by Pyro and TGC blogs:
1. Ask, “Why are you telling me this?”
2. Ask, “What’s the difference between what you’re telling me and gossip?”
3. Ask, “How is your telling me that thought, that complaint, that information going to help you and me love God and our brothers better, and knit us closer together as a church in Christ’s love?”
4. Ask, “Now that you’ve told me about that, what are you going to do about it?”
5. Say, “Now that you’ve told me about that, you’ve morally obligated me to make sure you talk to ____ about it. How long do you think you need, so I can know when this becomes a sin that I will need to confront in you?”
But yet, consider this by Phil Johnson:
Shortly after that (in early 1992), John MacArthur, Lance Quinn, and I met with Paul Cain and Jack Deere in John MacArthur’s office at Jack Deere’s request. Deere wanted to try to convince John MacArthur that the charismatic movement—especially the Vineyard branch—was on a trajectory to make doctrinal soundness and biblical integrity the hallmarks of Third-Wave charismatic practice. He brought Cain along, ostensibly so that we could see for ourselves that Cain was a legitimate prophet with a profound gifting.
But Cain was virtually incoherent that day. Lance Quinn remarked to me immediately afterward that it seemed as if Cain had been drinking heavily. (In retrospect it seems a fair assumption that this may indeed have been the case.) Even Deere apologized for Cain’s strange behavior that day, but Deere seemed to want us to assume it was because the Spirit was upon Cain in some unusual way. They both admitted to us that Cain’s “prophecies” were wrong at least as often as they were right. When we cited that as sufficient reason not to accept any of their prophecies at face value, they cited Wayne Grudem’s views on New Testament prophecy as justification for ignoring the errors of prophecies already proven false while giving credence to still more questionable pronouncements (Ibid.)
If Johnson and Quinn confronted Cain about their concerns before they gossiped to Deere about it, they may have known exactly why Cain was acting the way he was. Furthermore, why was his demeanor relevant to what he specifically stated? Moreover, unbeknownst to Deere or anyone else for that matter, Cain could have been on medication for a medical problem. That is why Matthew 18 states that if you have a concern or issue with someone; first, go to them “ALONE.” This is only a grain of sand on the beach in reference to the kind of hypocrisy that is constantly vomited out of the Pyro blog and is indicative of their grossly distorted worldview.
What is that view? I have written on this extensively, but here I go again. Volumes could be written about this, but I am stating what coincides with the subject of justice. Luther’s Heidelberg Disputation was written about six months after the 95 Theses disputation. It is really the magnum opus of the Reformation. Calvin then took Luther’s HD worldview which he got from Pope Gregory/Augustine and developed it into a full orbed philosophical statement adorned with Bible verses. That would be the Calvin Institutes.
Reformed theology sees all reality from Luther’s Theology of the Cross. Basically, there is only two prisms from which to interpret the world: the glory story (existentialism), or the cross story (all reality is seen through objective redemption history outside of us). The cross story objectively categorizes all of life into two categories: God’s holiness and our sinfulness. Reality is the difference between the two and defines each more fully leading to greater and greater understanding. The first known counseling manual written by a clergyman was based on this concept; i.e., Gregory’s “Pastoral Care,” which is the model for most Reformed pastoral counseling in our day. Everything else is the glory story which is considered to be a gargantuan cesspool of subjectivism; specifically, anything at all about us.
….I think that the idea that Christians have been given The Truth, and The Truth is utterly embodied in Christ, and that we shouldn’t pretend like other explanations of reality have any worth because they have no eternal worth is, at its core, the only true monotheism. Its unquestionable that this is the reason we evangelize and not merely discuss our faith as if it was one of several viable choices (Frank Turk: Unleash the Response; Pyro blog).
It’s really a great gig if you want to believe in it. You can totally separate yourself from the realities of the world by focusing your whole mindset on our worthlessness, powerlessness, and hopelessness. All of our hope is in Christ and everything He has done—not anything we do. At all. To the degree that we are able to empty ourselves, we can detach ourselves emotionally from the world. This mindset enabled Puritan Christopher Love’s pregnant wife to write him a seemingly celebratory letter prior to his impending execution for meddling in English political affairs. Love could have escaped execution and not left his wife with a quiver-full to care for on her own by merely promising to mind his own business. He refused. Luther’s worldview, articulated by Calvin, spawned the most radical religious sect ever known to man—the Puritans, who are the envy of New Calvinists—particularity Phil Johnson.
Therefore, all of the misfortunes and tragedy of life serve to humble us. They eradicate the glory story, and lift up the cross story. Luther specifically states this idea in his HD. Life is about deathly humbling that brings about resurrections. These resurrections are experienced by joy in our deprivation for the clay vessel is being shattered and thereby allowing the glory of the cross to shine forth into the world. We have this treasure in earthen vessels; the glory of Christ, which can only be manifested when we suffer the way He did. All suffering is a cross event. Are we not to take up our cross and follow Him daily? Got cancer? Awesome! Another cross event! Been raped? What an awesome opportunity to show forth the forgiveness you have received! There aren’t any victims, just preordained cross opportunities.
This is why the Reformers were indifferent to suffering and didn’t take the concept of justice seriously. Calvin called justice, “mere iniquity” (CI 3.12.4). This is why New Calvinists disdain the idea of victims, justice, and “survivors.” They often preface these words in what we grammatically call scare quotes. Scare quotes preface the word with the idea of “supposedly,” or “so-called.” So, let me give you an example from Pyro blog:
OK: enough is enough. I’m opening this post and the comments below for one reason only: SGM “Survivors”.
Note the scare quotes utilized by Frank Turk. Interesting. You see, Susan and I counsel people who have left abusive church organizations, and when we asked one counselee to tell us about other families that left—this is what we heard:
Some turned their back on the faith. Some do church at home, and some committed suicide. Not many marriages survived.
Susan also came from such circumstances and slept one night in contemplation with a gun under her pillow. “Survivor” is a word that is only worthy of irony in the minds of New Calvinists like Frank Turk who have a twisted worldview. And one only needs to read the SGM legal brief to know exactly who Frank Turk is mocking.
This would also explain why Pyro continually defends the president of SGM, a defendant in the class action sexual abuse lawsuit filed against SGM. The following screen shots from Pyro illustrate this below, including Frank Turks indictment of SGM whistleblower Brent Detwiler:
This Reformed worldview is the reason for the present-day tsunami of spiritual/sexual abuse in the church. While the Reformed accuse dispensationalists of escapism their doctrine is a gnostic-like escape from the here and now. It has always appealed to intellectual elitists and run along the upper socio-economic paths. It avoids the messy, painful experience of fighting for the most vulnerable among us. Embracing pain and suffering as the gateway to joyful resurrections is the pastoral easy-button. This gives them time to blog about the “deep things” of God and supply cover for abusers.
The logic is the same, the mentality is the same, and the behavior is therefore the same: coldblooded, vindictive, and controlling.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
1 comment