Paul's Passing Thoughts

PPT Top 5 Posts of 2015

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on January 2, 2016

The Biblical Emphasis on Pastors and Their Authority: Where is It? Romans 15:14

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on April 11, 2015

Blog Radio LogoListen to the show audio or download the video file here. 

Welcome to Blogtalk Radio False Reformation this is your host Paul M. Dohse Sr. Tonight, “The Biblical Emphasis on Pastors and Their Authority: Where is It?” If you would like to add to our lesson or ask a question, call (347) 855-8317. Remember to turn your PC volume down to prevent feedback. Per the usual, we will check in with Susan towards the end of the show and listen to her perspective.

If you would like to comment on our subject tonight, you can also email me at That’s Tom, Tony, Alice, Nancy, cat, I have my email monitor right here and can add your thoughts to the lesson without need for you to call in.

We are going to begin tonight by surveying the present landscape. The church invests billions in the education and accreditation of pastors. Of course, this is all made possible by the working class laity. Pastorate authority is expressed in church polity, and they are seen as the gatekeepers of orthodoxy. Never before in history have so many willingly paid so much for the privilege of being subservient.

Let me just pull the rabbit out of the hat right now. Let me go ahead and reveal where I am going with all of this tonight, and then I will make my case. We know that America was the first idea in human history that rejected the marriage of faith and force, and the results speak for themselves. We also know why some people deny what America has done for the world because of their ancient presuppositions concerning mankind; i.e., if mankind is allowed to self-govern, chaos will ensue.

There is that crowd, then there is the crowd that thinks mankind is just outright evil, and the American idea emphasizes life and liberty, so America is the antitheses of this whole idea that mankind is evil. And remember, this is not just a religious idea. No, no, no. This is also very prevalent among secular ideas. Some environmentalists would be included among them.

In the minds of the framers of the American Constitution, the marriage of faith and force always leads to tyranny, and history would agree. It all starts with those who are specially gifted to know truth that the masses are not able to understand, and for their own good, the masses that is, or the “great unwashed” if you will, the great seers call on the state to enforce their wisdom for the good of mankind and its overall survival. It is a striving for social justice leading to utopia.

We know that this basic presupposition about man’s ability to self-govern always leads to tyranny, and it now begs the question: culturally, in the church, if truth is married with pastoral authority, is the same tyranny inevitable? We think the answer is “yes.” The marriage of faith and authority in the church will yield the same results as the marriage of faith and force among governments. The problem is the injunction of truth on the majority by the few.

Without getting into another body of study altogether, let me answer some anticipated objections. A couple of weeks ago while Charlie Rose was interviewing the president of Syria, here is a paraphrase of what he said: “Society in general doesn’t accept the use of chemical weapons.” Interesting. What was he in essence saying albeit probably unwittingly? Answer: Romans chapters one and two. The law of God is written on the hearts of every man and his God-given conscience passes judgement on his actions. Why do we need government? For people who are deficient in regard to their faculties of conscience—that’s why.

Let’s note something important moving forward. The behavior evidenced in the church in our present day is consistent across all religions and denominations. Why? Because they all have one thing in common: they marry faith and authority. This is just another institutional church elephant in the room; the question of pastoral authority. And how churches get around this is soooo smooth:

“As pastors, our only authority is in the word of God.”

Well, that’s just wonderful because the Bible covers every nuance of life. While that answer usually assumes the Bible is boss and pastors only point people to its authority, what is really being said is the Bible determines the parameters of their authority which is without bounds if determined by the Bible.

What does this across-the-board authority look like regardless of the particular breed of church? What does it mean when we say that pastors “have authority”? It all starts with a same presupposition concerning mankind. Basically, mankind in general is not able to properly understand reality in a way that brings about social justice resulting in utopia. Man needs to be ruled over for his own good, and those who believe man can self-govern must be neutralized for the good of the many.

This is why the line between churches and liberal leftwing politics is often blurred. Why did some church, I think in New York, recently sue Walmart to ban their gun sales? Because in their mind, you just can’t have people in general running around with guns. In their minds, that’s a disaster waiting to happen.

So, it starts with that philosophy. Now, how does it seek to implement this philosophy? What system dictates the application for the greater good? Again, in ALL religions and denominations it’s the same: mediation, authority, orthodoxy, progressive justification, polity, political collectivism, resulting in the EXACT same results and behavior. This is the technical definition of “the church.” Take note of how often you hear “the church” in the everyday white noise of churchianity.

Mediation. The Bible makes it clear that there is one mediator between God and man: Christ, period. All institutional churches have a concept of what Protestants call the “power of the keys.” This is the idea that the institution represents the body of Christ on earth. Hence, institutional membership is synonymous with salvation. The institution represents Christ’s mediation on earth by proxy. Whatever the church binds on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever the church looses on earth will be loosed in heaven.

Authority. Vested in the elders/pastors of the church regardless of the fact that Christ clearly stated that ALL authority in heaven and earth has been given to Him. Pastors are men who have been preordained and specially gifted to know things that the common Christian does not know. Therefore, God has supposedly given them authority on earth for the collective good of mankind. Every institutional church has its own breed of popery.

“But Paul, I am a Southern Baptist and our churches are” …and this is so adorable… “independently autonomous.”

OK, now try to be a pastor of a Southern Baptist church without a degree from a Southern Baptist seminary. Good luck with that. If you are not credentialed, if you do not speak according to authority given you by the church, if your words do not carry authority by the aping of those credentialed, you are nothing but a little yapping mutt that will be ignored. If you tithe enough, people will put up with you and that’s about it.

For the time being, file this away: this is the exact same system Christ was up against when he came. How did He deal with it? Confirming miracles. Remember the paraplegic He healed so that people would know that the Son of Man has authority to forgive sins on earth?

Orthodoxy. This is the extra-biblical authoritative body of teaching that is developed by those in authority. Since the great unwashed cannot understand truth, orthodoxy takes the higher knowledge of truth and puts it in story form for the spiritually adolescent masses. It’s exactly like story books written for children that explain reality via narratives that they can understand. In church culture, orthodoxy is synonymous with truth itself. This is why in seminary you are told straight up that the knowledge you are learning there is not anything you will be teaching at local churches—they can’t understand it. However, you will learn a lot about being a good spiritual cowboy who keeps the herd from being spooked resulting in a stampede. You will also be taught how to deal with those who think they can know truth, also known as Mad Cow disease.

Progressive justification. All religions and denominations have some form of progressive justification. This soteriology is the necessary gospel that must go hand in hand with mediation, authority, and orthodoxy. It is the teaching that salvation progresses from point A to point B, and the institutional church is the overseer of that progression. This is a hard-fast rule. The church cannot function or survive by propagating the true gospel—it’s impossible and we will look at why this is the case tonight. Why are there so many different religions and denominations? It’s all disagreement on how you get from point A to point B.

Polity. Or “church polity.” This is a soft term for “church government.” All churches have church government. It’s different levels of authority and an epistemological pecking order. In contrast, biblical contra church assemblies are based on fellowship with the Father and His Son—not authority. Historically, churches enforce polity by getting into bed with the government, but post America, the emphasis is control over your salvation.

In pre-American history, if you didn’t believe the church had the authority to take away your salvation, they would simply hang you, drown you, cut you in half, or burn you, not necessarily in that order. So, in our day, the heavy emphasis is authority and control over your eternal destiny. Why do people obey the outrageous notions that flow from the traditions of men? Because their eternal salvation depends on it, and “faith believes all things,” right? One of the favorite truisms vomited out by the clergy is this whole Lutheresque idea that “knowledge puffeth up” and makes people proud.

The real problem is that informed people are very difficult to control. Let me pull another rabbit out of the hat right now. I will make the case tonight that cultism goes hand in hand with elder authority. It is absolutely impossible to separate horizontal authority among God’s people and cultism. Religion plus horizontal authority ALWAYS equals cult. This is an unavoidable and hard-fast rule.

Political collectivism. Here is the dirty little secret: ultimate control is really in the hands of the populous. Why? It’s simple; they outnumber government. In China, if the people decide to rise up, the Chinese government is totally screwed. There are particular things common to people that the framers of the American constitution recognized such as those things that are “self-evident.” All in all, the church has merely stuck its nose in the debate over who owns truth: mankind in general or the state?

This necessarily demands a conversation about the church’s dominion theology. Is God’s kingdom presently on earth, or is it presently in heaven? If it is presently down here, then obviously the church has a dog in the fight. Therefore, since populous rule is the real power in the world, power is determined by how many people you have effectively brainwashed. The church cannot avoid being a political animal seeking to gain control by numbers and infrastructure because it believes it is a nation builder on earth.

This includes all of the trappings of doing good works to endear numbers, and formal education for the purposes of indoctrinating people. Most church hierarchies openly admit that their agenda is to take over every aspect of culture; i.e., education, the arts, etc, etc. The specific quotations abound and are not the least bit ambiguous.

Also, watch out for the “Oh my, missionaries are being persecuted for the gospel in this country, that country, or the other country.” No, many countries are more privy to the dominion aspirations of the church than their own missionaries. In many cases, it is feared that missionaries will incite an insurrection. A cursory observation of history confirms this as a valid concern. Traditionally, church missionaries not only want to get people saved, they want to quote, “transform the culture.” They say it all the time!

Let me stick this idea in here. Do you know how home fellowships could do world evangelism? We could find people gifted to be elders in other countries and bring them stateside to live for a while in the home fellowship network. They would live with a sponsoring family and learn/experience the New Testament model. As they learn and experience, they could be feeding the information back to their country of origin. This would be dirt cheap and very effective.

Do you know how expensive and ineffective world missions are in the institutional church? It’s horrific, and mostly predicated on Western arrogance. I have heard missionaries say it: “Without our academic wherewithal, effective ministry is impossible.” Behold the arrogance: after hundreds of years of trial and error and oceans of ink used in the pontification of orthodoxy, 1600 people a day leave the church and become Nones or Dones. 1500 pastors per month leave the ministry for good. But yet, the church continues to export this failed model overseas on the financial backs of the laity. It’s beyond insane.

Behavior. The results are all the same. Spiritual abuse in the church is just a symptom of the specific problem, church. Stuff happening in the church is not the problem—church is the problem. Thanks to the internet, we now know that the church produces the exact same behavior over and over and over again. We now know that the institutional church is nothing more or less than a super-cult.

Let’s begin to look at the evidence.

Yes, once again, Calvary Temple of Sterling, Va. is back in the news. Let’s listen to the recent news report by MRC TV titled “Sexual Abuse, Broken Families, and Race Cars: The Story Of An Alleged D.C.-Area Cult” dated 4/2/2015/. As you listen to this clip, make a list of the elements such as “authority,” “broken family relationships,” “control,” “divorce,” etc.

Listen, whether the HBO documentary I mentioned last week on Scientology, or my wife’s testimony in regard to her experience in the Baptist church, or what my son shared with me the other night about a Jehovah Witness that he works with and what that guy is going through with his church, or my own testimony, or myriads of testimonies that you can read via the internet discernment blogs, it is all the same basic elements in regard to behavioral outcomes.

Sure, John MacArthur Jr. isn’t going to marry a twenty-year-old and buy a dragster and a race car, he just oversees an in-house police station at Grace Community Church that will escort you out to your car if you ask too many questions in Sunday school. I know from firsthand testimony that MacArthur rules that church with an iron fist. I rubbed shoulders with some of his elders for years. In addition, accusations from relatively sound people that Grace Community Church is a cult abound. One such site is The Watchman Wakes .com / John MacArthur’s cult. Google that and the exact link should come up. Look, all one needs to know for purposes of confirming these allegations is MacArthur’s own words from last week’s sound bites; the inevitable result of the belief that elders have authority on earth is cultism.

Let’s also look at the obvious manifestation of well-behaved tyranny. Even though some church pastors would not engage in some of the more outrageous behavior, by and large, the well-behaved tyrants of the church turn a blind eye to the behavior and even cover for it. MacArthur is absolutely notorious for turning a blind eye to the atrocities committed by the institutional church. Why? The obvious answer is the church’s authority to forgive sins on earth. Without the institutional church, there is no means of salvation for anyone so the church must be saved at all cost. I am not sure what is more obvious.

Look, for example, Jack Hyles could have been shut down years ago. All it would have taken is twenty-five IFB pastors walking down the isle of First Baptist Church of Hammond, Ind. and rebuking the guy publically on a Sunday morning. Game over. Why doesn’t that ever happen even though it is the exact biblical prescription? Because the institution has to be preserved as God’s authority on earth by proxy—that’s why.

I am not going to rehearse the outrageous details of the ABWE scandal, but in reaction to ABWE refusing to deal with the situation, not one GARB church withdrew from the association in protest, and as far as I know, not one church withdrew support from ABWE. One GARB pastor that I know who was mortified by the scandal nevertheless allowed Michael Loftis, at that time the president of ABWE to speak at their church.

Why?!!!! because there is only one name under heaven by which man is saved—the institutional church and its authority on earth by proxy. This isn’t complicated. Support the church if you will, but also know that you are supporting the divine right of kings to rape, pillage and steel at will.

“But my pastor isn’t like that!” Yes he is—he turns a blind eye to it!

It’s all the same, and they all operate by the same principles; for example, let’s just take one, orthodoxy. For Baptists, what is it? The First and Second London Baptist Confessions. For Presbyterians, what is it? The Westminster Confession. For Jehovah Witnesses, what is it? The Watchtower. For Mormons, what is it? The Book of Mormon. For Islam, what is it? The Quran. It’s all the same stuff resulting in the same behavior. Read history for yourself—none of these religions acted any differently until America came along.

At any rate, the church invests billions in the education and accreditation of pastors. Their authority is expressed in church polity, and they are seen as the gatekeepers of orthodoxy. When one surveys the emphasis on pastors in the church, certainly we should expect to easily find abundant information about them in the Scriptures. A cursory observation of Scripture should reveal their purpose, scope of authority, and a description of their duties.

But in reality, the lack of biblical emphasis on pastors and elders is stunning when compared to the emphasis experienced in the institutional church. If a pastor has authority, where does that authority begin and end? While the idea of elder authority is common, any discussion of the parameters is extremely uncommon and such ambiguity can lead anywhere, and it does. Furthermore, their assumed authority is nowhere to be found in holy writ.

In regard to their importance in general, the specific gift of elder/pastor is mentioned a meager four times in Scripture.

In the most vital portions of Scripture where elders would be prevalent according to their assumed authority, they are not mentioned. In the corrective letters to Corinth where Christianity was completely off the reservation, elders are not mentioned once. In the book of Romans, the magnum opus of soteriology, again, elders are not written about.

In Paul and Peter’s mini-treatises regarding submission starting in the home, to the workplace, and society in general, again, no mention of elders (Eph 5:22-33, 1Pet 2:13-3:7).

In the protocol for solving conflict among believers in Matthew 18, the same. If a person finally refuses to repent of what he has done to a fellow brother, the passage doesn’t say to go tell the elders, it says to go tell the assembly. The process in Matthew 18 is commonly thought to be a process under the control and auspices of the elders, but if that’s the case, where are they?

Sure, when the Greek widows were treated unfairly as documented in Acts 6:1ff, the people appealed to the apostles, but who was given the responsibility to choose what I think were the first Deacons? Right, the saints in general. Not only that, notice that the solution offered by the apostles met the approval of the people. They did not go to the apostles for an edict—they sought their counsel and leadership in the situation, but it obviously needed the approval of the people.

In Philippians 4:2,3, Paul entreats the whole congregation to reconcile the two women who were in some kind of rift, and this is the same pattern found in Matthew 18 as well. Listen, we could go on and on and on and add Acts 17:11 as well, but is this sinking in? Where are the big bad elders? Where are they and their supposed authority? I do believe the apostles had authority, but clearly what they emphasized is the model that would follow after their departure; appeal to the one mind of Christ and not the dictation of authority.

Moreover, not only are elders conspicuously missing, the saints in general are told throughout the New Testament that they are qualified to do ministry that is normally attributed to elders exclusively. A good example is Romans 15:14.

I myself am satisfied about you, my brothers, that you yourselves are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge and able to instruct one another.

Another one is 1John 2:27.

But the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie—just as it has taught you, abide in him.

Clearly, when it gets right down to it, God’s people can do without elders. Eldership is a gift that is no more or less important to the body of Christ than any other gift. Yes, if God’s people are serious about furthering the testimony and deepening fellowship, they should seek out good elders. But eldership is not a horizontal authority granted by God. Eldership does not represent God’s authority on earth.

Indeed, the apostles did have some of God’s authority, and that’s why they will sit on twelve thrones judging Israel in the final days, but that authority was NOT passed on to the elders. This is why the apostles predominately appealed to the one mind of Christ and not authority.

So, what is in fact the biblical model? Let’s compare the biblical model point by point with the institutional model. Here we go.

Presuppositions concerning mankind. Simple, Romans chapters one and two. Man can know reality and is personally and individually accountable to God. Throughout history for the most part, society in general determines law and what is acceptable. But please do not underestimate the real debate underlying the more visible debates manifested in this question: does man understand the reality that he lives in. He most certainly does. Mankind does not need seers to rule over them who have special insight into a reality that the masses do not understand.

History is a vicious cycle of the masses buying into that philosophy resulting in revolts when the tyranny of it becomes more than they can bear. Life gets to the point where it is not worth living and there is an uprising. The framers of the American Constitution observed this vicious historical cycle of serfism, tyranny, war, freedom, serfism, tyranny, war, freedom, serfism, tyranny, war, freedom, and the lightbulb turned on. America is the greatest country ever because it is the first ever government by the people and for the people.

The Bible is clear, people stand before God at the judgement individually. Be sure of this: the church’s emphasis on pastors comes from the world’s debate on man’s ability to self-govern. According to the Bible, and more specifically 1John, God’s people are able to self-govern because all of them have the same anointing of the Holy Spirit. When it gets right down to it, we have no need for anyone to teach us.

Mediation. There is only one mediator between God and man—Christ. Clearly, the church posits elders as sub mediators. This does not pass biblical muster.

Orthodoxy. There isn’t any. God’s people do not need a dumbed down version of truth written by sub-mediators creating…watch it… here it is, “subordinate truth.” Really? This is absolutely nothing new and the very reason that the Bible is constantly drilling down on oneness: one truth, one mind, one mediator, one Spirit, one baptism, one anointing, one Lord, etc., etc., ect. There isn’t two minds, there is only one and one truth accordingly. And really? There is such a thing as a lesser truth? No, it is either true or it isn’t true.

Progressive justification. No institution or religious hierarchy is needed to get us from salvation point A to salvation point B. This is why we constantly hear, “We don’t believe the gospel and then move on to something else, we never leave the gospel.” “The gospel isn’t the ABCs of salvation, it’s the A-Z,” etc., etc., etc. If your salvation is finished, and you do move on to something else, guess who you no longer need?

The elements of the institutional church follow a logical progression: presuppositions concerning mankind; sub-mediation; orthodoxy or sub-truth; the gospel of progressive justification; church government (polity) because authority trumps fellowship; political activism because God’s kingdom is supposedly on earth (if it wasn’t authority would be absent), and the subsequent bad behavior ordinarily exhibited by the divine right of kings, mind control cults, and institutional ownership of truth.

Church polity (government). Christ’s assembly does not have a government structure. There is no church polity. There is a body made up of gifts that seeks to mature by “mutual edification” through fellowship under one head. There is no government, but rather organization. Here is the organization: gifted elders equip the saints for ministry, and deacons/deaconesses oversee need. There aren’t any bosses; it’s a cooperative striving for a common goal. It’s an organized body where every part is equally valued. It’s just this simple, and this is the exact same analogy seen throughout the New Testament: to the degree that your body is sound, you can accomplish work. Ephesians 4:1-16 spells it out point by point, and so does 1Corinthians chapter 12. That’s not a government—it’s an organized body.

Political collectivism. It is not the concern of Christ’s assembly to take over every aspect of culture. Our concern is to build up the body in love and let the world watch. And watch they will. Our kingdom is NOT on earth—it’s still up in heaven. That’s why we are called “ambassadors” in the Bible. What’s an “ambassador”? An ambassador doesn’t live in a country to…here it is, we hear this constantly…”take over the culture for Christ.” No, we are here to represent another kingdom that is not presently here.

Behavior. The goal is to think like our big brother Jesus Christ and do what He would do. And trust me, the world will take note.

Here are some references that you should read on your own: Matt 23:8, Psalm 133:1, Acts 4:32, Rom 12:16, Rom 14:19… Rom 15:5, 1Cor 1:10, 2Cor 13:11, Eph 4:3, Phil 1:27, Phil 2:2, Phil 3:16, 1Peter 3:8.

Elder authority, where is it? Where is the emphasis on body striving for unity in one mind? EVERYWHERE! Let’s now go to the phones.

SBC Expose: Roger A Moran’s Address to the 2010 MBC Worldview Conference

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on January 28, 2015

My Assignment for today was to share with you some thoughts I shared in a another conference earlier this year about the topics of Biblical authority and holiness –

…which are foundational to the issue of developing an authentically Biblical Worldview.

I want to start by going back about 1900 years ago —  early in the second century.  The year was about 125AD and there was a philosopher in the city of Athens by the name of Aristides.  And Aristides wrote a letter to the king – whose name was Caesar Titus Hadrianus Antoninus.  And in that letter, he laid out what he viewed as the obvious errors of the religious beliefs of his day.  But the Christians, he defended.

What follows is just a small portion of what he saw in those early 2nd century Christians – which he contrasted to the perversions of the culture in which he lived.  This is just a little bit of what he wrote:

But the Christians, O King… have come nearer to truth and genuine knowledge than the rest of the nations.

For they know and trust in God… from whom they received commandments which they engraved upon their minds and observe in hope and expectation of the world which is to come.

Wherefore they do not commit adultery nor fornication, nor bear false witness, nor embezzle what is held in pledge, nor covet what is not theirs. They honour father and mother, and show kindness to those near to them; and whenever they are judges, they judge uprightly…

[A]nd their women, O King, are pure as virgins, and their daughters are modest; and their men keep themselves from every unlawful union and from all uncleanness, in the hope of a recompense to come in the other world…

Falsehood is not found among them; and they love one another, and from widows they do not turn away their esteem; and they deliver the orphan from him who treats him harshly.  And he, who has, gives to him who has not, without boasting…

And if they hear that one of their number is imprisoned or afflicted on account of the name of their Messiah, all of them anxiously minister to his necessity, and if it is possible to redeem him they set him free.

And if there is among them any that is poor and needy, and if they have no spare food, they fast two or three days in order to supply to the needy their lack of food.

They observe the precepts of their Messiah with much care, living justly and soberly as the Lord their God commanded them.

Every morning and every hour they give thanks and praise to God for His loving-kindnesses toward them; and for their food and their drink they offer thanksgiving to Him…

And they do not proclaim in the ears of the multitude the kind deeds they do, but are careful that no one should notice them; and they conceal their giving just as he who finds a treasure and conceals it.

And they strive to be righteous as those who expect to behold their Messiah, and to receive from Him with great glory the promises made concerning them.

It is enough for us to have shortly informed your Majesty concerning the conduct and the truth of the Christians… [V]erily, this is a new people, and there is something divine (lit: “a divine admixture”) in the midst of them.

This was the testimony of the early church as seen through the eyes of a philosopher from Athens.

These were Christians whose love for Christ; whose commitment to the authority of God’s Word, and whose passion for holiness caused them to honor Christ not only with their lips, but with their lives.

But the testimony of the church today – the 21st century church – in contemporary America — is significantly different.

In fact, despite our hard fought battle for the Bible as Southern Baptists and all of our conservative theological rhetoric, we are increasingly looking more and more like the world than like our savior.

And if this is true – then the real question that we need to address is WHY….

That’s what I want to talk to you about today.

In authentic Biblical Christianity, Biblical authority and holiness are literally inseparable.

  • They are intrinsically woven together.

But tragically, they can be separated and in the Southern Baptist Convention, I would argue that we are becoming experts at doing just that.

But this is nothing new – Scripture is full of such examples.

Christ Himself quoted Isaiah when He addressed what He called the “vain worship” of the Pharisees:

“Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you:  ‘These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me.  They worship me in vain; their teachings are but rules taught by men.'”  Matt 15:7-9,     Isaiah 29:13

The Apostle Paul spoke of those having a form of godliness – but no power. (2 Tim 3:5)

Jesus spoke of those who were preaching and teaching and casting out devils and doing many wonderful works in His name —  but then declared “I never knew you.”

As Southern Baptists, we have developed an array of conservative, theological rhetoric around the topics of “Biblical Authority” and inerrancy.

And we have learned very well how to look Christian, act Christian and talk Christian.

We have boldly declared that we are “inerrantists,” and our slogans have been:

  • “We are a people of the book.”
  • And for us, “the Bible is our final ‘authority’ in all matters.”

But our love and commitment to the Bible is increasingly being clouded by a hyper-shallow – superficial form of Christianity that is losing its ability to distinguish the difference between the ways of the Lord and the ways of the world.

In recent years, we have witnessed in both the Missouri and Southern Baptist Conventions a growing infatuation for the things of this world and a growing carnality — which has produced a growing inability to discern the difference between the wisdom from above and the “wisdom” of the world.

And over the last few years we have also seen ample evidence pointing to the fact that there are two distinctly different groups of inerrantists within the conservative ranks of the SBC.

And these two distinctly different groups have distinctly different visions about the direction this denomination needs to go.

In 1979, conservative, Bible-believing Southern Baptists were universally united in our battles for the Bible.

The same was true in 1998 here in the Missouri Baptist Convention as we fought the battle against the liberalism of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship.

We believed that the Truth of God’s Word mattered supremely – because it did.

We understood with absolute clarity that theological liberalism could not take us to the place of authentic Biblical Christianity.

  • We understood that theological liberalism could not produce an authentically Biblical worldview – nor could it produce that kind of Christianity marked by a passion for holiness where the power of God would be upon His people.

But as we fought and won the battle for the Bible in the SBC, something significant happened:

We began to place so much confidence in our new theologically conservative leadership that for many of our people, “inerrancy” became virtually the only criteria for pastoral and denominational leadership.

We naively thought that right believing would automatically produce right living

  • that sound doctrine and holiness were inseparable — that orthodoxy & orthopraxy would automatically advance together.

But now, our conservative resurgence is behind us, and we have discovered the disappointing reality that our passion and commitment to “inerrancy” did not automatically produce all we had hoped that it would.

After twenty plus years of conservative domination at the SBC level and nearly a decade of conservative domination at the MBC level, we find ourselves still in spiritual disarray.

In fact, recent events in both the Southern Baptist and Missouri Baptist Conventions has left many of us as disillusioned and divided as we were during the days of our battle over the rank liberalism of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship.

The new liberalism: “Cultural Liberalism”

And rightly so.

In recent years, Missouri Baptists have been confronted and challenged with a new liberalism – they call it “cultural liberalism.”

But unlike the moral, social and theological liberalism of the CBF, this new liberalism is said to be SBC-friendly,

  • Why – because its advocates are said to be “inerrantists” just like us,
    • and its advocates, they say, have a passion for Evangelism and for planting new churches – just like us.

But this “new liberalism” (once it was discovered) quickly became the battleground and the dividing line between those two distinctly different groups of conservative, Southern Baptist inerrantists.

And now, the battle that so deeply divided the Missouri Baptist Convention has exploded at the SBC level.

Mark Driscoll and Acts 29

At the heart of this latest battle is the once obscure organization called the Acts 29 Church Planting Network…

  • This group was not only at the center of Missouri’s controversy,
  • …but its leader, pastor Mark Driscoll, personifies the spirit of this new liberalism that has spread across the entire SBC like a cancer.

Driscoll popularized the odd combination of being “theologically conservative” and “culturally liberal”…

  • …which also made him an icon among a multitude of young evangelicals.

(See Driscoll’s books: Confessions of a Reformission Rev., pg. 46 and Radical Reformission, pg. 22 as two examples)

(According to Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church, which hosted a conference with Driscoll in February, 2010  —   Driscoll’s church logged 4.4 million downloads of his sermons last year worldwide.) 

  • Driscoll’s fame and notoriety can be traced directly back to his pulpit antics, which first and foremost, earned him the title “the cussing pastor.”
  • His vulgarity in the pulpit and his self-professed R rated sermons on sex has brought him mountains of criticism…
  • In early 2009, one of the largest Christian broadcasters in the country banned any programming that featured Driscoll.
  • And at the 2009 SBC annual meeting numerous motions focused on Driscoll and growing concerns that some of our SBC leaders were encouraging Southern Baptists to embrace Driscoll’s “culturally liberal” approach to ministry.

SBC leaders like LifeWay Research president Ed Stetzer and Southeastern Seminary president Danny Akin have been among Driscoll’s strongest advocates.

  • Stetzer has served as an Acts 29 board member and refers to Acts 29 as the “inerrantist wing of the Emerging Church;”
  • Danny Akin has gone so far as to bring Driscoll to the seminary as a recruiter for potential new seminary students.
    • And earlier this year, he brought in Acts 29 vice president Darrin Patrick for three days as chapel speaker.
  • More recently, Southern Seminary president Albert Mohler has jumped on the bandwagon and is singing the praises of Act 29, referring to them as “the hope of the future.”
  • And just prior to the 2010 SBC annual meeting, SBC president Johnny Hunt was a featured speaker at an Acts 29 Boot camp meeting called “Contextualizing the Gospel in the South.”
  • There’s not enough time to deal with Lifeway and the North American Mission Board’s involvement with this movement.

Apparently, if you can draw a crowd and call yourself an “inerrantist,” then all these other issues are just secondary and tertiary issues that we have to ignore  or learn to tolerate, like…

  • Their obsession with alcohol
  • Their fascination with sex and the use of vulgarity in the pulpit
  • The use of secular R rated films on “film night” (some which were rated R for the repeated use of the F word)
  • Church sponsored secular rock concerts for under aged kids
  • “Men’s Bible and Brew nights” and “Men’s Poker night” ministries and so on…

All these things have been thoroughly documented and are available for anyone who wants to investigate for themselves.   (

But let’s not think that this “cancer” hasn’t affected our Missouri Baptist churches for it most certainly has:

In my own association, one of our largest conservative churches —  pastored by a prominent inerrantist —  recently had a minister of music who was introducing some of the kids in the youth department to an overtly demonic form of music called “Death Metal Music.”

He eventually left the church, but only because of serious financial improprieties.

At about that same time – at the same church, the youth minister wrote an article in the church newsletter promoting a “Bible study” on “the subjects of hotness and sexiness” for the younger girls in the youth department.  He wrote:

“Some might call it a study on modesty, but I just like to call it a study on HOTNESS!!”  (Oct. 7, 2009 Troy First Baptist Church newsletter)

At about that same time – and at the same church, the wife of one of the deacon’s attended a lunch with a group of ladies – several from her church.

Several of the ladies from her church ordered alcoholic drinks with their meal.

Some months later, that deacon left the church when some of the other deacons brought a motion to change the church policy on alcohol from abstinence to moderation.

And it’s not just SBC churches:

  • In the same town – a new church called the Journey – – whose pastor thinks we need more pastor’s like Mark Driscoll, has now hosted two “no limit” poker tournaments for the community —  $30 buy in.

Every Sunday night this church plays host to a poker night for church members and potential new members.

  • Also in the same town, the Methodist Church recently advertized a new Sunday School class called “Tongue Pierced.”

The promotional materials showed a guy with a pierced tongue and flames tattooed down both side of his tongue — with this statement:  “This ain’t your momma’s type Sunday School Class.”

While I could go on and on about the various “ministries” and “outreach” events both inside and outside the SBC, here’s the issue:

  • The Apostle Paul warned against those “who think that we live by the standards of this world.” 2 Cor 10:2
  • In James 4: the Bible say: “don’t you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God?  Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.”
  • The Book of James also tells us that “Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless” includes “keep[ing] oneself from being polluted by the world.” (James 1:27)
  • The Bible warns us in Col 2:8: “See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the basic principles of this world rather than on Christ.”
  • The Bible commands us in I John 2:15-16

“Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.”

  • The Apostle John warned of the false prophets and the “spirit of falsehood” when he wrote: “They are from the world and therefore speak from the viewpoint of the world, and the world listens to them.” 1 John 4:5
  • And then Jesus encouraged those who were serious about the Christian life when He said: “If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first.

John 15:18-19

But the world doesn’t hate this kind of “culturally liberal” Christianity.  No… They are fascinated by it.

They can drink, smoke, cuss, watch their secular “R” rated movies, hang out in the bars and hang out in the casinos, get some tattoos and body piercings – and still get the “good Christian” seal of approval.

But here is the problem:  The more the church looks like the world –

…the more the church acts like the world –

…the more the church talks like the world –

…the less the church has to offer the world —- But be assured:  the world loves it this way.

And here’s why  –  The offense of the gospel isn’t just in the preaching of “sound doctrine,” but in the convicting power of holy living.

“Culturally Relevant,” “Contexualization” and “Missional”

But some of our SBC leaders are now telling us that if we really want to “win people to Jesus,”  —  if we really want to grow big churches, we need to be open to this kind of stuff…

…we need to be “culturally relevant” —  as defined by the Acts 29 – emerging church-type inerrantists.

We need to look a little more like the world, act a little more like the world and talk a little more like the world — in order to win the world to Jesus.

But let’s be clear:  The calls for the church to be “culturally relevant” is nothing more than our latest attempt to soften the gospel and…

…to make it appear a little less offensive and a little less foolish to those who are perishing.

…and if our theologically conservative preaching makes them a little uncomfortable —  it will be OK, because our “culturally liberal” living will make them feel better.

What we are actually doing is stripping the gospel of its transforming power by legitimizing the very kind of carnal Christianity that is plaguing our churches.

But we’re also being told that we now need to “Contextualize the Gospel.”

Well, I would argue that God has provided us with all the context that is needed.

We have the 66 books of the old and New Testament canons – which we call the inspired, inerrant, infallible Word of God.

Throughout the history of Biblical Christianity, the Bible has provided all the “context” necessary for the conversion of the unregenerate soul and for the making of authentic disciples. 

But there’s more:  Once you master the modern evangelistic methodologies of being “culturally relevant” and “contextualizing the gospel,” then you qualify to be a “missional” Christian and your church can become a missional church.

In February, 2010, the Great Commission Resurgence Taskforce made their presentation to the SBC Executive Committee.  In that presentation, the taskforce chairman called on Southern Baptists to become a “missional movement” and to embrace a “missional vision” and to develop a “missional strategy.”

But you see, the problem with the word “missional” is that it is an intentionally vague term.

It is used by everybody from the Unitarian Universalist Association to the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship.

The far-left wing of the emerging church movement (Emergent Village – Brian McLaren’s group) —  they state in their materials that:

Emergent Village is a growing, generative friendship among missional Christians seeking to love our world in the Spirit of Jesus Christ.”

Acts 29, the so-called “inerrantist-wing of the emerging church movement” states that they are a “trans-denominational peer to peer network of missional church planting churches.”

Mark Driscoll’s new school of theology (called The Resurgence Training Center) states that it’s purpose is to “train missional leaders.”

I think it is also significant to point out that Driscoll’s professors at his new school include:

LifeWay Research president Ed Stetzer

Southern Seminary professor Bruce Ware and

Southern Seminary professor Gregg Allison

These things concern me… And I am of the opinion that they should concern every one of us…

But I have said all this to provide something of a backdrop – or a context – to make the point that an authentically Biblical Worldview must have as its foundation both a commitment to Sound Doctrine and a passion for holiness.   

When Sound Doctrine and Holiness do not advance together,

Back to my point:

When a commitment to sound doctrine and a passion for holiness do not advance together in the life of a believer, the end results are spiritually devastating.

The end results are Bible believing Christians who honor Christ with their lips but their hearts are somewhere else.

  • The end results are Bible-believing —   yet carnal – Christians infatuated with the things of this world

But let’s be honest:  living an authentic Christian life is difficult for everyone who professes the name of Christ because is it contrary to everything the flesh, the world and the devil wants me to embrace.

And it is far easier to fake the Christian life than it is to live it  —  because then, I don’t have to deal with what I really am.

Let me also say:  Holiness is not about perfection, but rather our passion to know Christ, to honor Him in all we do and in all that we are.

Six Consequences:

Beware:  When sound doctrine and holiness do not advance together in the life of a believer, the spiritual consequences to the body of Christ are significant:

Six things:   

  1. First and foremost: we become a people heavy on religious rhetoric and incredibly light on spiritual substance. 
  1. When sound doctrine and holiness do not advance together in the life of a believer, the result is a loss of our Biblical understanding of the seriousness of sin in the sight of God.
  • There is probably nothing else that can devastate the Christian life like this one thing.
  1. When sound doctrine and holiness do not advance together in the life of a believer, the result is a growing carnality and worldliness that continually lowers the spiritual standards for Christian living.
  • As one Christian writer has stated: “Worldliness is what makes sin look normal in any age and righteousness seem odd.”  (God in the Wasteland, by David E. Wells, page 29)
  • Bottom line: As carnality and worldliness expands, the distinctions between the things of the world and the things of the Lord become increasingly blurred.
  1. When sound doctrine and holiness do not advance together in the life of a believer, the result is that our works of righteousness (our missions, ministry and evangelism) are increasingly done in the power of the flesh rather than in the power of the Holy Spirit of God.
  • The power of God does not rest upon the carnal minded who are infatuated with the things of the world.

At the 2002 SBC annual meeting in St. Louis, I had the opportunity to address a large group of SBC leaders from across the country.  In that meeting, I address what I considered to be the most pressing issue of our denomination.

  • “As a Southern Baptist, one of my greatest concerns is that we have developed multitudes of programs, published reams of materials and spent millions upon millions of dollars to train and motivate our people to do in the power of the flesh, what you could not prevent them from doing if they were in the Spirit.”
  • We must understand: We can only pass on what we possess.
  • And we can only testify and witness about that which we have personally witnessed and experienced.
  1. When sound doctrine and holiness do not advance together in the life of a believer, the result is a growing tendency in such churches to settle for “professions” of faith rather than transformed lives in our new “converts”
  • Maybe this is the reason the issue of unregenerate church membership is now being debated at SBC annual meetings.
  1. When sound doctrine and holiness do not advance together in the life of a believer, the result is that our spiritual hypocrisy will become increasingly evident to those who genuinely love the Lord while a growing spiritual blindness will cause others to barely notice our spiritual decline.
  • The end result is a deepening divide within the body of Christ.
  • And ultimately, the calls for peace, unity and compromise causes us to cater to the lowest common denominator, as the standards of Christian living move lower and lower and lower.

Denominational Results:

But there are also significant ramifications for the denomination as well.

When sound doctrine and holiness do not advance together in denominational life, the end results are probably even more devastating —  because all these “things” become institutionalized.

  • And then they are downloaded into our SBC churches through our denominational agencies by the denominational bureaucrats.

When sound doctrine and holiness do not advance together in denominational life, the result is a spiritual environment where …

  • The praise of men slowly and gradually becomes preferred over the approval of God.
  • And the command to “seek first the Kingdom of God” gets lost in the passionate pursuit of the seats of honor.

Spiritual leaders who fall prey to such temptations quickly morph into religious professionals and religious bureaucrats…

For such men, creating and maintaining the appearance of pastoral success becomes the means of climbing the denominational ladder.

In SBC life, Pastoral success is measured by the false criteria of the infamous four B’s:

  1. The number of Baptisms
  2. Size of our Budget
  3. Size of our Church Buildings
  4. Number of warm Bodies we can continue to attract on a regular basis.

Tragically, our passion for numbers is largely replacing our passion for the much more difficult tasks of making disciples.

The Resurgence:  The First Critical Step

With that being said:  I want to make a very important point here:

Some of our SBC brethren have now discovered the harsh truth that our battle for the Bible was only the first step in a much larger and much more difficult battle.

  • A battle that can no longer be fought on a purely political level.

As the former Coordinator of Project 1000, let me state one more time for the record:  Our battle for the Bible here in the state of Missouri was never intended to be the final destination.

  • But rather, our battle for the Truth of God’s Word was a critically important effort intended to take us back to the spiritual “starting line” that we might then run the right race, in the right direction, according to the right rules of God’s Word.

The intended purpose of that battle was to re-focus the attention of God’s people on two essential areas in the Christian life:

  • First: A biblical understanding of the seriousness of sin
  • Second: And the necessity of holiness in the life of the individual believer.

For without these two things – the pursuit of authentic Biblical Christianity is not possible.

The SBC:  Making the wrong thing the “main thing”

Let me make one more observation:

I would argue that the greatest error of the SBC’s conservative resurgence was in its failure to emphasize with the same passion and tenacity the issue of holiness that we did the issues of inerrancy and evangelism.

In fact, I would further argue that these three things (inerrancy, holiness and evangelism) are so intrinsically woven together and so inseparable in authentic Christianity as to represent the three legs of the “three-legged stool of Christian living.”

  • The leg representing the truth of God’s Word must be in place and strong – for it is the revelation of God to man whereby we can know who He is and what He requires in all matters.
  • The leg representing the life of holiness and purity before God must be in place and strong – for it is the essence of the first and greatest commandment to love God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength.
  • And the leg representing our passion for evangelism and the making of disciples must be in place and strong – for this is the essence of the second commandment to love our neighbor as ourself.

And if any of these three legs are missing, or weak, or out of its proper proportion, the stool will not stand as intended.

As Southern Baptists, our commitment to the truth of God’s Word has been unquestionable:

And in the area of evangelism — nobody has talked about the Great Commission and reaching the lost for Christ like Southern Baptists.

But when it comes to the issue of holiness  —  it is barely on the radar screen.


For decades, our SBC leaders have been telling us about our commitment to the inspired, inerrant, infallible Word of God.

And for decades, we have been told about our passion to win the world to Christ:

  • “We have got to keep the main thing the main thing,” they tell us. “And the main thing is evangelism.”
  • But the “main thing” is not evangelism.
  • It’s not now, nor has it ever been the main thing.
  • Rather, evangelism flows naturally from what Christ Himself said is the “main thing:”
  • The “main thing” is what Christ called the First and Greatest Commandment.
  • And it is from this one thing that everything else in the Christian life flows.

And the degree to which we fail to get this one thing right,

  • To that same degree we will fail in all our attempts to live out the Christian life in faithfulness to all that God has called us to be and to do.

The First and “Greatest Commandment”

We find in Matt 22:34-40, one of the most profound passages of all the Bible regarding the Christian life.

34 Hearing that Jesus had silenced the Sadducees, the Pharisees got together. 35 One of them, an expert in the law, tested him with this question: 36 “Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law?”

37 Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’   38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’   40 All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

In this profoundly important passage, Christ goes back to Deut chapter 6, a passage the Jews called the Shema.  Here, the Lord Himself makes it profoundly clear exactly what the “main thing” is to be.

And the reason Christ identified the command to love God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength as the first and greatest commandment, is because it is from this commandment that everything else in the Christian life flows.

  • I would contend that this commandment can be summed up in the simple phase: The passionate pursuit of holiness. 
  • And it is through the pursuit of this commandment – and all that it means, that we enter through the doorway to authentic Biblical Christianity.

This is the starting point in the Christian life and if we don’t get this right, then ultimately, nothing else really matters.

Because all that remains to live the Christian life is the power of the flesh and the wisdom of man.

First Commandment Christians: A Passion for Holiness

As I mentioned earlier:  There are two distinctly different groups of “inerrantists” within the conservative ranks of the SBC.

  • And these two distinctly different groups have distinctly different visions about the direction this denomination needs to go.
  • With that being said, I would argue that the great battle that has raged in the Missouri Baptist Convention in recent years and the controversy that has now exploded at the SBC, is a conflict between two broad categories that I have called “First Command Christianity” and “Second Commandment Christianity.”

So, what is First Commandment Christianity?

Let me start with this:  First and foremost, First Command Christians understand that:

  • If it’s God who draws men unto Himself, (John 6:44 & 12:32)
  • And if it’s God who convicts men of sin and righteousness, (John 16:8)
  • And if it’s God who regenerates the individual and makes that person a new creation in Christ, (Titus 3:5, 2 Cor 5:17-18)
  • And if it’s God who then indwells the new believer and leads him into all truth, (1 Cor 3:16, John 16:13)
  • And if it’s the indwelling Holy Spirit of God who empowers the believer to carry out the good works we were saved unto, (Acts 1:8, Eph. 2:10)

…then what exactly does that leave for us  —   except to be faithful to the one commandment from which all else in the Christian life flows?

And how shall we live the Christian life in faithfulness and authenticity apart from the power of God, which comes only to those who are faithful to the First and Greatest Commandment  —  the command to love God with all our heart, mind, soul and strength?

  • And how can we be the salt of the earth and the light of the world except we understand what it means to “abide in Christ” and to be holy?

For the very essence of the First and Greatest Commandment is the command to be holy.

  • The Apostle Peter wrote: “be holy in all you do; for it is written: “Be holy, because I am holy.”   1 Peter 1:15-16
  • In Hebrews chapter 12, we are again commanded to be holy for “without holiness no one will see the Lord.” Hebrews 12:14

The apostle Paul summed it up well:  “Since we have these promises, dear friends, let us purify ourselves from everything that contaminates body and spirit, perfecting holiness out of reverence for God.”  2 Cor. 7:

So, what is holiness?

So what is Holiness?

Simply stated:  Holiness is the God-given passion inherent within every born-again believer to become outwardly what Christ has made us inwardly.

While holiness starts at the point of sound doctrine… 

  • …it is a life that must be pursued through intense spiritual training with an acute awareness of the conflict that rages between the “old man” and the “new man.”

It is the new man, born again of the incorruptible seed of God that longs for holiness and thirst after righteousness.  (not the old man)

It is the new man, born again of the incorruptible seed of God that worships God in Spirit and in Truth.    (not the old man)

It is the new man, born again of the incorruptible seed of God that the Spirit of God indwells and empowers to carry out the good works we were saved unto.  (not the old man)

We are commanded to crucify the old man – daily — for his passion is for the things of the flesh and the things of the world.

We are to crucify the old sinful nature – the old man – not put him in charge of our Christian life.

Those who desire to know Christ and experience the blessings of obedience must understand first and foremost that as Christians, we have two natures to contend with:

The old man and the new man. 

  • Whichever nature we nurture will become dominate in our lives.
  • When we feed the flesh, the flesh grows stronger.
  • When we nurture the new man, born again of the incorruptible seed of God, we will become more like Christ.

The battle for holiness is a battle that must be waged and won in the heart and mind of each and every individual believer  —  each and every day.

  • When this battle is not consciously waged, it is lost by default.
  • In the SBC, we fought the battle for the Bible
  • We have fought to keep the Great Commission front and center
  • But —  I would argue that we have not advocated for holiness with the same passion and tenacity that we did for inerrancy and evangelism.

Sin and Holiness

Now it is critically important that we understand one more thing:

There is only one inhibitor to holiness in the life of a believer, and it is sin. 

  • And the greatest threat to holiness among the people of God is where there is a low and diluted view of the seriousness of sin.

It is for this reason that the desire of “First Commandment Christians” is to live as far from sin as possible.

They recognize the truth in the old saying:  “Sin will take you farther than you want to go – keep you longer than you want to stay – and cost you more than you want to pay.”

  • It is for this reason that Hebrews 12 tells us to “throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles” and “run with perseverance the race marked out for us… fix[ing] our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfector of our faith…” (Hebrews 12:1-2)

First Commandment Christians understand the significance and context of God’s commands

  • We can never fully understand the command to “go ye therefore” until we understand the command to “Come out from amongst them…”
  • And we can never understand what it means to “Seek first the Kingdom of God and His righteousness…” if we can’t come to grips with what it means to:
  • “Take captive every thought, making it obedient to Christ…” 2 Cor 10:5
  • Or the command to… “Have nothing to do with the fruitless deed of darkness but rather expose them…”  Eph 5:11
  • Or to “not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths…” Eph 4:29
  • Or to “Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds…” Col 3:9
  • Or what about the Biblical command that “…there must not be even a hint of sexual immorality, or of any kind of impurity, or of greed, because these are improper for God’s holy people. Nor should there be obscenity, foolish talk or coarse joking, which are out of place…”   Eph 5:3-5

Bottom line:  For First Commandment Christians, sin is never viewed as a secondary or tertiary issue, but rather primary – because the issue of sin goes to the heart of what the gospel is about. 

Let me say one more time:  Holiness is not about perfection – it’s about our passion

– our passion to know Christ– and to honor Him– in all that I think — in all that I do — and in all that I am.

We are all sinners saved by the grace of God.  But there should be a passion in the life of every believer to be like Christ.

But let’s also point out that there are two sides of this issue of grace.  Not only are we saved by grace as the Bible says in Ephesians 2:8, but Titus 2:11-12 says this:

“For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men.  It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age,”

Now when a man says he was saved by the grace of God, but that same grace can’t seem to teach him the difference between right and wrong  —  between good and evil…

…then there’s good reason to question exactly what got hold of this guy  —  even if he is an “inerrantist.”

It is a perplexing thing to me when you contrast the boldness with which we declare the power of God’s grace to save the lost and our virtual silence regarding the power of that same grace to transform the lives of those same individuals.

Holiness: Character Traits of a First Commandment Christian

First Commandment Christians are those who have a passion for holiness.

And because of that passion to become outwardly what Christ has made us inwardly, certain character traits will begin to develop in the lives of such people.

You will begin to see things like:

  1. Godly character
  2. Integrity
  3. Honesty / a desire to tell the truth and to be honest
  4. Moral purity
  5. A passion to be obedience to all the commands of God
  6. Faithfulness
  7. A biblical Humility, compassion, mercy and a forgiving heart
  8. And a desire for the kind of fellowship where “iron sharpeneth iron.”
  9. A willingness to suffer for the cause of Christ, understanding that if Christ Himself learned obedience by what He suffered, how much more will that be true for us.
  • We need a deeper understanding and commitment to what the Apostle Paul said in Philippians 1:29: For it has been granted to you on behalf of Christ not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for him,   (Phil 1:29)

First Commandment Christians are recognized most clearly by their…

  1. Deep rooted love of God. (First and Greatest Commandment)
  1. A hatred of sin: (Ps. 97:10  Let those who love the Lord hate evil)
  1. A healthy fear and reverence of the Lord
  1. Their love for God’s people
    • ( “By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” John 13:35)
  1. Their longing for righteousness and a desire for the fruit of the Spirit to be evident in their lives.
  1. And lastly, First Commandment Christians are most clearly recognized by their passion to testify — as a witness to others — about the transforming power of the gospel of Jesus Christ — that they have personally experienced.

Second Commandment Christianity

So, if First Commandment Christians are those who have sought to be faithful to all that it means to Love the Lord our God with all our heart, soul, mind and strength,

Then what does it mean to be a Second Commandment Christian?

The Lord said that the Second Commandment is like unto the First, that we are to “love our neighbor as ourself.”

In SBC life, the essence of the Second Commandment can be summed up in our well-worn phrase:  “missions, ministry and evangelism”.

So, let me try to explain what I mean by “Second Commandment Christianity”

  • Second Commandment Christians are those who are best known for their commitment to the work of missions, ministry and evangelism rather than for their passion for holiness.
  • Second Commandment Christians are more interested in pursuing the latest evangelistic methodologies than they are in pursuing the favor and power of God.
  • Second Commandment Christians are those who have been most faithful in repeating the mantra: “We’ve got to keep the main thing the main thing and the main thing is evangelism.”
  • The problem isn’t in what they emphasize, but what is not emphasized with equal passion.

We can never love our neighbor as ourself until we love God as we should.

And we can never be truly faithful to the work of the Second Commandment until we are truly faithful to the First Commandment.

Let me state it as clearly as I know how:  The problem with what I have called “Second Commandment Christianity” is that it is nothing more than the old man masquerading as the new man.

  • It is the substitution of a right relationship with Christ — with conservative religious rhetoric and the doing of good deeds.
  • Second Commandment Christianity tends to be artificial, superficial and shallow. It is self-centered and self-serving because —  after all  —  it’s all about “self.”

Second Commandment Christianity is popular because it is easy  —  it is the religious path of least resistance.

  • It is what we become by default when we fail to consciously seek the Lord with all our heart.
  • It is what we become when we fail to deal with the all too often subtle passions of our old sinful nature.

Second Commandment Christianity is the results we get when we nurture the wrong nature —

  • …when we nurture the old sinful nature rather than sending him to the cross to be crucified daily.

Second Commandment Christianity has the form of godliness but there is no power…  because God does not empower the old sinful man – no matter how religious he might look or sound.

Second Commandment Christianity honors Christ with their lips but dishonor Him in their thinking, in their attitudes and ultimately, in their behaviors.

Second Commandment Christians are heavy on religious rhetoric but light on spiritual substance.

Second Commandment Christianity is more interested in the temporal than the eternal.

Second Commandment Christianity is more interested in the eradication of suffering than in the eradication of carnality through suffering.

Second Commandment Christianity is running rampant within the SBC and within American Evangelicalism.

Adrian Rogers summed up what I believe goes to the heart of our most pressing problem as Southern Baptists when he spoke of saltless preachers preaching a saltless gospel, producing saltless converts and building a saltless church.

Second Commandment preachers tend to preach more on evangelism than holiness: more on the love of God than on the seriousness of sin: and more on growing the church than on the making of disciples.

It was of such spiritual leaders that God spoke of:

Lam 2:14  The visions of your prophets were false and worthless; they did not expose your sin to ward off your captivity.

Jer 5:30-31   “A horrible and shocking thing has happened in the land:  The prophets prophesy lies, the priests rule by their own authority, and my people love it this way.”

Jer 23:13-14   “…among the prophets of Jerusalem I have seen something horrible:  They commit adultery and live a lie.  They strengthen the hands of evildoers, so that no one turns from his wickedness. 

Again, let me state it as clearly as I know how:  Second Commandment Christians are those who are passionate about their evangelistic efforts;  They are passionate about their mission trips;  They are passionate about their various “ministries;”  And they are  passionate about the planting of new churches (that will be passionate about the same things they are passionate about).

But Second Commandment Christians are passive about the two things that matter most to God:  They are passive about righteousness on the one side and they are passive about worldliness on the other side.

They are passive about holiness because they are passive about sin.

Second Commandment Christianity is the pathway of “lukewarm” Christianity.

So, the question for each of us today is this:  Which of those two categories best reflects what I am?

First Commandment Christian or Second Commandment Christian?

Where would I fall on that scale that runs from “authentic” on the one side to shallow, superficial and “lukewarm” on the other side.

You see, most of us aren’t completely one or the other  —  We are human  —  and sinners by nature  —  so each of us are at least a little bit of both…

So the real question is this: In the quiet and privacy of my home, when I look deep into my heart and life –

What is the testimony of my life?

What is the testimony of your life?

Is there any desire in my life to do better and to be more for Christ?

I am convinced that until the Southern Baptist Convention and the pastors of our churches give to the issue of holiness its rightful place along side our commitment to the Word of God and our commitment to the work of the Great Commission, we will continue our downward spiral.

1900 years after Aristides wrote his letter in defense of the Christians to the king, the French philosopher Alexis de Tocqueville saw something similar in the Christians of early America when he wrote this:

“I sought for the greatness and genius of America in her commodious harbors and her ample rivers, and it was not there; in her fertile fields and boundless prairies, and it was not there;  in her rich mines and her vast world commerce, and it was not there.  Not until I went to the churches of America and heard her pulpits aflame with righteousness did I understand the secret of her genius and power.” 

That’s the kind of testimony we need in the American Church today if we are to be truly relevant to this wretched and depraved culture that we live in.

And nothing short of a complete, total, sold out commitment to what Christ called the First and Greatest Commandment can take us there.

We need a “resurgence” of the “Great Commandment.”    May God Help Us.

Indicative of What Ails the SBC: Johnny Hunt Denies the New Birth at Ohio Men’s Summit

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on January 24, 2015

“Hunt’s confusion concerning the new birth was further exemplified when he stated, ‘Christ died for all of your past, present, and future sins.’ This also unwittingly denies the new birth. Christ did not die for sins we committed after we were born again. This makes sin in justification the same thing as family sin in sanctification. Christ did not die to save us from sin that does not condemn us; this denies that the old us actually died with Christ and was ‘under law,’ and where there is no law there is no sin.”

Not that I get paid for it, but I will inform any SBC pastor who cares to know why the SBC is a dying unregenerate cesspool. You can hide the fact by squeezing out the smaller churches and pointing to the emotional orgies at the megachurches, but the numbers do not lie. And listen, the praise and worship format that is presently redistributing the sheep will eventually get old—this ministry is already seeing sharp declines in megachurch attendance.

The present-day SBC Neo-Calvinist surge is the same movement that has come and gone exactly five times since the Protestant Reformation. My guess is that it will die again. Susan and I recently visited churches that were on the cutting edge of this movement back in the 80’s, and the deadness that we experienced was explained this way by our teenage son: “That place is just creepy.”  The energy once associated with the format is waning because there is no underlying substance and the novelty is passing. Yet, the format continues without the energy which projects an almost surreal creepiness experienced by those who visit. For the longtime members it’s a slow leak going unnoticed, for visitors it’s a blowout.

Aside: Was all of the recent Mark Driscoll drama just cover for the fact that the Mars Hill campuses were in decline? I wonder.

Another aside: The Catholic Church has bought the defunct Crystal Cathedral. It would seem that the Catholic Church is the only institution with the money to buy defunct Protestant campuses. Why does the Catholic Church have so much money? Answer: because it has always been upfront about its salvation by institution gospel. Will the Neo-Calvinist movement begin to be more out-of-the-closet about that approach in order to save the movement? It already is. People will pay big bucks to be saved by merely giving at the office (see, “Roman Catholic Church”).

Johnny Hunt would deny that he is a Neo-Calvinist and that is probably fair, but what I heard him say at last night’s Men’s Summit at Urbancrest Baptist church in Lebanon, OH is indicative of the problem. If there is confusion among Southern Baptists regarding the role of the Holy Spirt in Christian living, and there clearly is, that should explain everything, and it does.

Look, I don’t have the mp3 yet, but a slight paraphrase of a particular sentence spoken at the summit by Hunt goes like this: “The righteousness of Christ is the only thing that gets us into heaven.” Here we have a former president of the SBC, and a premier SBC pastor for something like thirty years, and that statement is just really bad theology if not an outright false gospel.

I keep saying it and will continue to do so: the Bible never states that the righteousness of Christ has been imputed to us. Though you can take a leap from one logical point to another on a few verses, why the steroidal emphasis on Christ’s righteousness when the Bible clearly states that it is the righteousness of God the Father that we possess? Is this emphasis important? It is if the Bible emphasizes the righteousness of the Father, and it does. Why not emphasize what the Scriptures emphasize?

But the concern goes way beyond semantics. In his Friday sessions, Hunt peppered that concept with the often heard idea that we don’t possess a righteousness of our own. Come now, would any of us still be working if we had a dollar for every time we heard that in SBC circles? But what is it saying?

First, if we ONLY possess the righteousness of Christ, fire insurance is the only gift and not righteousness. Follow? When you receive a gift, you take possession of it…no? Is the idea that we possess no righteousness of “our own” a backdoor way of saying we have not been made righteous and possess no personal holiness? Yes, I think it is. And by the way, forget all of the fuss about election—that idea is Calvinism in a nutshell.

Secondly, while one properly concurs that our sins were imputed to Christ because the Bible states that specifically, is it correct to say that righteousness has been “imputed” to us? I contend that this is NOT correct, and in fact is a denial of the new birth. Why? Because righteousness is not imputed to us, we are MADE righteous through the new birth. The whole “our own” business is a red herring deliciously favored at the table of demons. We don’t tell people we have no life of our own because we were born of parents. That’s just plain silly. “I have no life of my own; it was imputed to me by my parents.” No, you are alive just like your parents because they gave birth to you. In the same way, we ARE righteous because we were given life by a righteous Father through the Holy Spirit.

Hunt’s confusion concerning the new birth was further exemplified when he stated, “Christ died for all of your past, present, and future sins.” This also unwittingly denies the new birth. Christ did not die for sins we committed after we were born again. This makes sin in justification the same thing as family sin in sanctification. Christ did not die to save us from sin that does not condemn us; this denies that the old us actually died with Christ and was “under law,” and where there is no law there is no sin.

The idea that Christ died for our sin post salvation, at the very least denies the death part of the Spirit’s baptism and keeps the “believer” under law (see Romans 7:1ff). In not sparing any confusion in his lame presentation of the gospel, Hunt concurred that God chastises us for sins we commit as Christians which means God chastises us for sins Christ already died for. Hence, why wouldn’t God also chastise us for sins committed before we were Christians?

Therefore, Hunt, like most SBC pastors, flirts with John Calvin’s double imputation. This is the idea that Christ died for our justification, and lived a perfect life to fulfil the law so that His perfect righteousness can also be imputed to our sanctification. This is exactly why the “righteousness of Christ” is so strongly emphasized. The Bible is clear: this is a justification by the law that leads to antinomian living (see “a typical life in the SBC”). Why? Because we only have the righteousness of Christ and no righteousness of our own which is nearly a verbatim quote by Calvin from his Institutes of the Christian Religion (3.14.11).

This is an outright denial of the new birth and keeps the “Christian” under law. It doesn’t matter who keeps the law, even if the law was kept by Christ in our stead, it is not another seed that can give life (Galatians 3:15-21). We are like Christ because He is our brother by birth, righteousness was not imputed to us—we are MADE righteous by the new birth. We are literally new creatures, and ALL things are new.

But, if we have no ownership of righteousness through the new birth, if only our standing is exchanged and not our lives, Christ’s righteousness must be perpetually imputed to our “Christian” lives because we are still under law and not under grace. This would require a return to the same gospel that saved us in order to receive perpetual forgiveness for sins committed under the law, and this is exactly what is behind the viral mantra of “We must preach the gospel to ourselves everyday” running amuck in the SBC. Forbid that we would lose our gratitude for salvation and only limit its remembrance to the Lord’s Table for we still supposedly need that forgiveness.

And this is exactly what John Calvin believed; that new sins committed as saints removes us from grace and perpetual forgiveness must be sought which can only be found in the institutional church where we continually “revisit the gospel afresh.”  Yet, the who’s who of the SBC continually affirms that the issue with Calvinism in the SBC is a secondary issue unworthy of parting fellowship. It’s cluelessness on steroids. Calvin advocated the belief that necessarily goes hand in glove with progressive justification; and,  sanctification is the Old Testament Sabbath rest. If we do any works on our sanctification Sabbath, it’s the eternal death penalty. As a result, Christ’s perfect obedience to the law must be imputed to us. This is where antinomianism and justification by law are the same thing; a perfect keeping of the law, which we of course can’t obtain so we must let Jesus obey for us lest we have a “righteousness of our own” becomes another seed other than Christ.

At the end of one session Hunt suggested that those who made a profession of faith follow up with the elders at Urbancrest concerning their “new relationship” with Christ. New relationship? Really? It’s not just a new relationship—it’s literal death and rebirth. We don’t just add Jesus to our still under the law lives for fire insurance or as Hunt put it, in essence, daily rescue. It’s not a daily rescue because we long for the one future rescue by Christ from this mortal body where sin still resides, but our inward man has been literally raised with Christ and free to love God and others through obedience to the same law that once condemned us.

It has been suggested to me that institutional religion and the new birth mix like oil and water: “Paul, if believers are truly born again and endowed with the power of the Holy Spirit, why would they need an evangelical industrial complex?” Indeed, that may well be the money question. I have been at two institutional church gatherings this week, and in both cases pastors were held up as upper strata of spiritual caste. At Urbancrest, the emphasis was totally over the top and downright shameful. Other than handing out freebies to the pastors who attended, the senior pastor at Urbancrest talked of a program of sorts through which parishioners could show their pastor that, “I have your back.”

So, is the new birth a threat to religious institutions? Can Holy Spirit empowered ministries thrive in an institutional setting? We will not know until pastors stop denying the new birth. But nevertheless, this is a gut check for every SBC pastor and Hunt in particular. What would be the result of a poll in most churches where the following question is asked?

“Are you only positionally holy in Christ, or are you a holy person?” I fear most would answer, “I am only positionally holy because I still sin.” Yet, pastors who continually wax eloquent about Christians not having any righteousness of their own somehow expect decent behavior from their parishioners.

To his credit, Hunt did advocate obedience, but anyone who was listening closely would have found that confusing. Hunt also emphasized “finishing strong.” He even said that all of his accomplishments in ministry would be worthless if he didn’t finish well. Here is what pastors need to understand: finishing well may mean you end up pastoring a church of 25 people because you stood for the truth. It is high time that pastors draw a line in the sand and definitively define the new birth in no uncertain terms. Please tell your parishioners who they are—are they positionally holy, or are they personally holy?

Did they exchange one “standing before God” for another one, or did they exchange their old life for a new one through the baptism of the Holy Spirit?



The Problem with Church: Your Pastor Doesn’t Think You’re Righteous

Posted in Uncategorized by Paul M. Dohse Sr. on December 16, 2014

“We are saved by the new birth, not the blind following after confused scholars. Why are you submitting yourself to people who declare you unrighteous in practice when God states otherwise? Why are you submitting to people who deny your literal kinship to God?”

Most Christians, and more pastors than we would like to think, don’t even know who we are. However, in our day, the vast majority of pastors view justification as a forensic declaration only while the individual remains fundamentally unchanged, or unrighteous after “salvation.”

So, did salvation make us righteous, or are we only declared righteous? Most Christians don’t know, and even if they think they know, they can’t defend it from the Bible. If your defense is the words “new birth,” those with the prevailing view can cite a plethora of Bible verses that will seemingly prove you wrong because said verses are not defined in context of sanctification or justification, two subjects that Christians have little or no knowledge of to boot.

Why is it ok that the debate regarding justification rages in conservative evangelical circles? In his review of the book Justification: Five Views, Matthew Barrett states,

This review has only touched the surface of the debate, which is not likely to stop anytime soon. The ongoing centrality of the debate also demonstrates Luther’s maxim, namely, that justification is the doctrine on which the church stands or falls. This being the case, it is essential that we think hard about the biblical text lest we fail to understand properly how we are made right before a holy God.[1]

Barrett is a Southern Baptist scholar, and posits a comfortable mentality in Christian circles: how we are saved is such an important topic that we should continue to debate it. Why is this acceptable? Because deep down, most Christians think they are saved by showing faithfulness to a Christian institution of their choice. Secondly, the laity, per what they have been taught for decades, don’t think they are responsible for knowing the truth because they aren’t capable of knowing what the spiritual elite know (as if they have come to any conclusions after 500 years of post “Reformation”).

Therefore, “Christians” en masse, follow those who offer nothing definitive regarding the gospel we claim to be saved by without even blinking an eye. And we think Eastern mysticism is illogical? Renowned Southern Baptist pastor Paul Washer has even said that the truth of the gospel has an eternal depth that we will never fully know[2] which brought objection on that point from likeminded Calvinist Joel Taylor[3].

One of the views of justification offered in the aforementioned book is that of Dr. Michael Horton. He is the host of a Reformed radio show titled The White Horse Inn. In one show, he critiqued the position of scholar NT Wright regarding justification, and remarked that his show continues to discuss the question “What is the gospel?” In the critique, even though it concerned justification, Horton pointed out the positive aspects of Wright’s teachings, even though one must conclude that Horton was complementing the use of perceived facts in the commission of theological felony. It’s befuddling to say the least.[4]

In regard to justification, Barrett stated his agreement with Horton in the review. And what is that view of justification according to Barrett?

Horton shows that the righteousness imputed is not a substance or commodity but a legal status. Additionally, Wright has neglected a third party, namely, Christ the mediator. It is the active and passive obedience of Christ, not “the essential divine attribute of righteousness” in God that is credited to believers…

Third, Horton gives a needed defense of imputation, reminding us that this doctrine is indispensible since it is the way “God gives this righteousness or justice to the ungodly through faith.” Horton shows that while the exact term may not be used, the concept of imputation infiltrates Paul’s letters at every turn. I leave it to the reader to take an in-depth look into the passages Horton examines, but Horton is correct when he writes, “These passages unmistakably teach that the righteousness by which the believer stands worthy before God’s judgment is alien: that is, belonging properly to someone else. It is Christ’s righteousness imputed, not the believer’s inherent righteousness—even if produced by the gracious work of the Spirit.” If Horton is right, and I think he is, then the other views need some serious adjustment.

This confusion regarding the gospel is unacceptable and there is only one answer: the laity must retake their rightful position as God’s priests in his called out holy nation. In that nation, we must be unequivocal in our understanding of the gospel; we are not only declared righteous, WE ARE RIGHTEOUS born again beings after the nature of God. His attribute of righteousness is imputed to us because we are born of Him and His seed resides IN US (1John 3:1-10). When we were saved, we were made the righteousness of God (2Corinthians 5:21).

We are justified by faith alone, but that faith includes believing that something has actually happened that we desire: the death of the old us with Christ and the resurrection of a new us with Christ. The old us was under the law of sin and death, the new us loves that same law because it guides us in loving God and others. We are saved by the new birth, not the blind following after confused scholars. Why are you submitting yourself to people who declare you unrighteous in practice when God states otherwise? Why are you submitting to people who deny your literal kinship to God?

The contention always presented is that of present sin. This, in and of itself is a smoking gun. This argument makes NO distinction between justification and sanctification. Therefore, it makes no distinction between sins against justification and sin against family relationship. This is a denial of the new birth. It also makes perfect law-keeping justification’s standard.

The apostle Paul spent most of his ministry refuting that idea from many different angles.