It’s Time for the Laity to Fish or Cut Bait, and Happy Anniversary Julie Anne
“Calvin believed the Reformers were given a mandate by God to rule the world; hence, the out-of-control tyranny in the American church.”
I will take this opportunity to wish Julie Anne Smith a happy anniversary. I received an email stating that she opened her blogshop one year ago today. She sent me a tweet from The Gospel According to Calvin blog (TGC). As Charles Surgeon said,
There is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else.
Wow. Really? Progressive justification is the gospel? Don’t think so. Otherwise known as The Gospel Coalition, the tweet promoted a new book. Books written by New Calvinists are the neo-orthodoxy of the day. And there are people in the world who insist that Hitler was really a good guy. They are called Neo-Nazis. Today, we have Neo-Calvinists. It’s really time for the laity to fish or cut bait; how much longer are we going to continue to allow the philosopher kings to treat us like idiots? After reading the link that Julie sent me, it begs the question: How stupid do these guys think we are?
For some time they have been trying to rewrite Reformed history. That’s what the Resolved conferences were all about. And now there is a new book out attempting to cover Calvin’s bloody tracks leading from the Geneva theocracy. TGC is promoting the work via a review by heretic Michael Horton who like Tim Keller, constantly gets a pass on promoting naked mysticism.
Calvin believed the Reformers were given a mandate by God to rule the world; hence, the out-of-control tyranny in the American church. I will keep saying it: I lay the present-day spiritual abuse tsunami at the feet of Calvinism. The arrogance that follows their delusional vision is seen in how stupid they think the average parishioner is, and Horton’s review is a typical example. He states the following in the review:
Manetsch sets the context by noting the early reformation of the Genevan church reduced the city’s clerics (including monks and nuns) from 500 to 15, turning the convent and two monasteries into a public hospital and school. He observes the Ecclesiastical Ordinances, drafted by Calvin in 1541, established a rotation of ministers in all the churches to avoid the impression the ministers were preachers, not pastors…. Few historical figures have suffered more in terms of rumors passing for fact. It’s long been observed by specialists (Roman Catholic as well as Protestant) that Calvin was far from the Ayatollah one typically finds in the paragraph devoted to him in high school textbooks. Manetsch dispels these rumors with close attention to primary sources.
Does Horton really think that we are not going to consult the Googleberg press on this? Literally fifteen seconds later, here is what I was reading from Calvin’s Ecclesiastical Ordinances written for Geneva:
Here follows the third order, or elders
Their duty is to supervise every person’s conduct. In friendly fashion they should warn backsliders and those of disorderly life. After that, where necessary, they should report to the Company [of pastors] who will arrange for fraternal correction…As our Church is now arranged, it would be most suitable to have two elected from the ‘council of 24’, four from the ‘council of 60,’ and six from the ‘council of 200’. They should be men of good repute and conduct…They should be chosen from each quarter of the city so that they can keep an eye on the whole of it.
And let there be no doubt about it: this is the vision that the New Calvinists have for the American church. As Southern Baptists, we call it, “aggressive Calvinism.”
I just call it Calvinism. Shorter, more to the point, and truer.
paul
TANC Prediction: The New Calvinists Are in the Process of Forming Their Own Denomination or the Completed Takeover of the SBC is Imminent
Some recent trends have tempted me to partake in a little prognostication. First, the primer for all of this is the brazen disregard for bad press in light of recent sex scandals among the “Gospel-centered” crowd. Look, I know “Gospel-centered” sounds spiritually generic but it’s not. “Gospel-centered” is indicative of a radical worldview that many in the church don’t comprehend. Two-thousand years later, even in the midst of the Information Age, they are propagating an, “underestimated,” “unadjusted,” “scandalous” gospel. That should be your first clue. And indeed, there is plenty of scandal.
This worldview disregards the concept of justice and has an antinomian pedigree. That is causing a significant pushback between this movement and others in the church. That is perhaps the primary catalyst that will provoke some kind of significant separation. Historically, spiritual tyranny ALWAYS follows this movement, and the chickens have come home to roost. Unfortunately, the church has done a poor job of pinpointing this logic and rejecting it beforehand, but the one thing everyone understands is when bad things start happening.
Again, justice isn’t even on the radar screen, but if you want to pay the bills you act like it’s important. The New Calvinists no longer portend that it is—so something is up in my book. ABWE, which has strong ties to the New Calvinist cartel and its four Dons, “Big Al” Mohler, Mark Dever, Ligon Duncan, and CJ Mahaney, just snubbed its nose up at the Evangelical world by firing the feel-good intermediating organization GRACE. The public facts surrounding this scandal, now ten years in the making, has destroyed GARB credibility in the minds of anyone who is not a consummate Kool-Aid drinker. Creditability in the GARB community may no longer be relevant; i.e., a merger with likeminded despots may be in the works. By the way, New Calvinist Dr. William Brown has been fired from GARB enclave Cedarville University. He was the president thereof, and has been temporarily appointed as chancellor to candy-coat the event as much as possible. But there is a serious catfight going on there that is difficult to sort out. Here is one example: http://cedarvilleproblems.com/index-1.htm . But at any rate, it’s not surprising; some kind of fight ALWAYS follows a New Calvinist beast. Always.
The business as usual motif in regard to CJ Mahaney, the Underboss of the Charismatic wing of the New Calvinist cartel, is also striking. As president of SGM, he has been besieged with controversy over sex scandal cover ups and basic run of the mill despot leadership style. His behavior was so outrageous that his cult following at SGM, including his own son-in-law, dismissed him. The cartel bosses in Louisville, Kentucky (home of their front organization, “Together for the Gospel”) partook in an image makeover and had Mahaney reinstalled as president of SGM. The outrageous event squeezed so hard that every bit of integrity oozed out of SGM and several of its member churches jumped ship. Regardless of all of this, including the fact that Mahaney is a defendant in a class action sexual abuse law suit, he is scheduled as the main act in all upcoming cartel conferences. Again, a total in your face- kiss our sanctified booties stance toward the rest of the Evangelical community. This is hard to miss as the Evangelical community at large has launched a petition for CJ to step out of the limelight while the trial flaunts itself in the mainline news media: http://www.causes.com/actions/1730803-an-appeal-to-national-leaders-regarding-c-j-mahaney
But beyond this snubbing of the Evangelical community, take note that Mahaney recently moved the corporate headquarters of SGM to Louisville, Kentucky. This is the home base for Big Al, president of Southern Seminary, and well known as “ground zero” for the New Calvinist movement (Collin Hansen: Young, Restless, Reformed; A Journalist’s Journey With The New Calvinists, chapter four, “Ground Zero: Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, Kentucky”). I mean, I know they are buddies and all, but you just don’t move a whole organization to another city for sentimental reasons. Something is up.
The New Calvinist movement has been hard at work to take over the SBC since 1981. A Presbyterian started Founders Ministries for the express purpose of that agenda. They even printed a manifesto accordingly. Scoff at the conspiracy theory if you must—but it is just plain fact. I document those facts in The Truth About New Calvinism: Its History, Doctrine, and Character. That’s why Southern is “ground zero” for the New Calvinist movement. It is also behind the attempted name change of the convention. If that goes through—it’s over—what the cartel has been working for since a small group of egomaniacs met at the Holiday Inn in Euless, Texas circa 1981 will be complete.
But the Southern Baptist faithful have proven to be a tuff nut to crack. To some degree, the doctrinal illiteracy of Southern Baptists has saved them. It is difficult to deceive people into changing their soteriology when they don’t even understand the difference between justification and sanctification. Southern Baptist New Calvinist heretics like David Platt only end up offending the faithful by dissing the concept of asking Jesus into my heart and reciting the sinner’s prayer. Hence, Southern Baptists don’t disdain New Calvinists because they propagate the false gospel of progressive justification, but because they offend their traditional sensibilities. Perhaps the greatest sin is the New Calvinist absence of Southern Baptist absolution: the alter call that replaced aggressive sanctification long ago.
So, this is down to the wire. The New Calvinist takeover of the SBC is at hand, or these guys are going to start their own gig. They have what’s left of SGM, they have the Passion Movement, they have the Emergent Church for the most part, the biblical counseling culture, and many Presbyterian churches as well. This is a gargantuan mass of time tested Kool-Aid drinking humanity. They no longer need to feed off of the Evangelical community. But what is immensely sad is the fact that we have ignorantly funded the cause while ignoring the muffled cries of those buried alive in the backyard.
I would also like to throw something else into my prognostic stew. John Piper recently “retired” from his pastorate at the Bethlehem temple. Do we really think he is going to retire to a life of seashell hunting in Florida? Yes, I know, he’s not beyond such hypocrisy, but it’s still highly doubtful. Trust me; he’s moving on to something bigger—much bigger. But what? I know where I would put my money if I had to.
This is all going somewhere because history always repeats itself. This movement has died five times since its conception in Geneva, and it will die again. It’s getting more and more difficult to suck the blood out of churches that the movement has covertly taken over because of the internet and those pesky discernment bloggers. For the first time since 1972, New Calvinists are being fingered in the pastoral interview process. The gig is up. There is not much more to pilfer in the Evangelical church at large, so they will separate.
But that will be the beginning of the end. Progressive justification always implodes. Progressive justification is like the lollypop knives Eskimos use to kill wolves. Fitting. Christians do not grow by staying at the foot of the cross. We do not grow by feeding on the gospel of first importance that saved us. Children in adult bodies will eventually devour themselves. It’s already happening: in all major wings of the New Calvinist movement there have been scandals that have made national headlines. It’s time for them to prove that bastard Semi-Pelagian evangelicals are to blame. If only they were not held back by the zombies of synergistic sanctification. If only they were not defiled by those who believe Jesus is a precept and unable to see His astounding personhood! Why, we don’t even know what Jesus’ favorite color is! Away with those who will not be wowed by what Jesus did rather than anything we can do! Ahhmen.
One way or the other, regardless of how wrong or right my prediction is, something is going to give. Every day, the Evangelical community is gaining a clearer picture of what’s going on. But if they do start their own denomination, the scene would be to die for. The Star Wars bar scene could not hold a light-sabre to it.
paul
Progressive Justification is the Catalyst for Spiritual Abuse in the Church
“But there is a bigger problem. If I understand the book of Romans correctly, unchanged people who come into the church will actually sin more than those who are of the world.”
In all of the rampant abuse going on in the church today, a common thread has emerged: progressive justification—the idea that the same gospel that saved you also sanctifies you; and, you must preach the gospel to yourself every day, etc. It’s uniquely Reformed, and as we are learning, transcends the lines of Arminianism and Calvinism via Gospel Sanctification. You can function the same way regardless of it being your choice or not being your choice. Both can strongly emphasize salvation and downplay sanctification.
What is sanctification? That’s the Christian life that strives towards godliness. It strives to put on Christ, and put off the old man through intelligent obedience. So, if you think about it; obviously, if that is downplayed, change is not going to be the order of the day. Basically, you have people coming into the church the way the church found them, and then they are going to stay that way, no? “NO! Jesus changes them by faith alone in sanctification!” Well, how is that working for us? Answer: ABWE, BJU, SGM, etc., etc., etc.
“Sinners saved by grace” don’t act any different than sinners not saved by grace. Who knew? Both are still, “sinners.” But there is a bigger problem. If I understand the book of Romans correctly, unchanged people who come into the church will actually sin more than those who are of the world. And boy howdy, it sure be lookin’ that way of late. Downplaying an aggressive sanctification is a huge problem because the book of Romans makes a strong distinction between the only two spiritual groups in the world: those under the law, and those under grace.
The first group, “under the law,” according to the book of Romans, cannot obey the law (they disregard God’s counsel), will be judged by the law in the end, and are actually provoked by the law to sin. The second group, “under grace,” is enslaved to the law; love the law; desire to please God with the law, and war against their mortality for the purpose of pleasing God. If the gospel is presented to people in a way that they are not aware of what they are signing up for; i.e., being made a slave to righteousness, they might be merely signing up for eternal fire insurance. And once they come into the church the way they are and unchanged, they aren’t going to sin less—they are going to sin more because of the prevalence of God’s word in the church. People who do church for fire insurance are going to be constantly provoked into sin by the law.
The fusion of justification and sanctification is going to be most prevalent in Reformed churches where Jesus supposedly obeys for us. I might mention that the infamous Westboro Baptist Church are staunch Calvinists. And though they are criticized for their harsh rhetoric, it differs little from many things that Luther said himself. I have also written about Joel Osteen and Joseph Prince being proponents of progressive justification here: http://wp.me/pmd7S-1Ho. And apparently, even hyper-grace antinomian Jack Hyles was of the progressive justification mindset:
He taught that “everlasting life” and “eternal life” are two different things and a believer can have everlasting life without having eternal life, which he defined as something the believer must receive from God every day (Hyles, “The Gifts of God Are Everlasting Life and Eternal Life,” April 28, 1985). He claimed that the rich young ruler had everlasting life and merely wanted to know how to gain eternal life or how to get rewards in Heaven (Pastor David Cloud: “The Two Jacks,” p.27).
Weak sanctification can play out in many different ways: false doctrine; compromise; man-pleasing; hatred; false testimony; sins of the baser sort; etc. But any doctrine that doesn’t emphasize radical change shouldn’t expect any. What it should expect is what we call ourselves….”sinners” and “totally depraved.”
paul
A Question On the Freewill/Election Debate
….which I usually stay away from, but the following quote did raise a question in my mind:
James White sums up the correct position well when he says: “Reformed Christians believe that men believe and choose. It is the order of events that is in dispute. Every Christian has chosen Christ, believed in Christ, embraced Christ, and even more, continues to do so. The question is not ‘must a person believe,’ but can a person believe while a slave to sin? Further, whose decision comes first: the decision of God to free the enslaved, dead sinner and give him the ability to believe, or the free-choice decision of the sinner that then makes him or her one of the elect?”
Just asking, and then I will quickly leave the debate again:
We are free to choose the flavor of ice cream we want, color of socks that we are going to wear today, and what we want for breakfast, but not God?
paul
The Death of Calvinism is All About the “T”
In an article recently written by Robin Schumacher on the Confident Christian blog, he addresses five misconceptions about the five points of Calvinism. And he is absolutely right; they are misconceptions and miss the point entirely. I will also grant him another point: Calvinism stands or falls on total depravity or the “T” in TULIP. He stated it this way:
It is no understatement to say that once a person fully understands the doctrine of total depravity, all other points in Calvinism are easy to accept. Get this teaching wrong, and you have a theological mess on your hands.
Of course, he then proceeds to get into to the whole pointless free will/election debate. Fact is, Calvinism is a “theological mess” because total depravity also applies to Christians. Calvinism and Reformed theology in general reject the new birth—regardless of the fact that Christ said, “You must be born again.”
Calvin’s concept of total depravity, articulated by the Synod of Dort, came from Luther’s foundational tenet: the centrality of the objective gospel outside of us. Christ does not work IN us. The Reformers called this “infused grace” and posited it as the primary contention with Rome.
So, what are the Reformers talking about when they refer to Christ in us? I’m glad you asked. They mean, Christ in us BY FAITH ALONE. All of the work Christ does is outside us and accomplished by Christ alone for justification and sanctification both. Let me make this point by reminding you of how often you also hear this in Reformed circles:
Christ for us.
Like total depravity: not only “for” salvation, but “for” sanctification as well. Christ “for us” in sanctification because they believe sanctification finishes justification. Sanctification is actually the progressive in progressive justification. They call it “progressive sanctification,” but this is deliberate deception. That’s why all grace must remain outside of us lest we are enabled to partake in the finishing of our justification which would not be a perfect work because we are involved. They don’t separate justification and sanctification; justification is not a finished work.
That’s why Calvinism falls dead on the “T.”
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
10 comments