Stuart Scott’s Joyful Fellowship With Spiritual Despots is a Microcosm of New Calvinist Reasoning
“Hence, and don’t miss this, justice is not the point. The concept of justice and fairness digresses from Reformed Calvinistic dualism.”
“….six months after Luther’s 95 Theses launched the Reformation, the true magnum opus of the Reformation was written by Martin Luther; his Heidelberg Disputation to the Augustinian Order. The document reflects Luther’s utter Platonist disdain for humanity.”
“Now, let’s take this information and evaluate why Scott et al are completely indifferent to suffering and injustice.”
Once again, Stuart Scott will break bread with the elders at Clearcreek Chapel (Springboro, Ohio) as he is the featured speaker at this year’s “Family Enrichment” Conference. Clearcreek Chapel having a family enrichment conference is like the Nazis sponsoring an endowment for Judaism. It’s a mockery; the Chapel has ravaged innumerable families and Christian lives since its orchestrated takeover by Russ Kennedy and aided by former Clearcreek elder Greg Cook. Cook brought in a group from another Baptist church which included present Clearcreek elders Chad Bresson and Dr. Dale Evans.
Their attempted takeover of the church they left failed, but their endeavor at the Chapel succeeded—the spiritual carnage notwithstanding. Cook, as the former (?) director of Clearcreek’s counseling program, was giving wives the green light to divorce husbands who had “ruined the family finances” while he himself was just under $200,000.00 in due and owing debt. It is unclear as to whether this revelation led to his stepping down as an elder, or not. Probably not since hypocrisy is a requirement for eldership in our day.
Other present Clearcreek elders have been forced to step down in the past, but have been reinstated; specifically, Mark Schindler who was re-baptized after his prior eldership. Apparently, not being sanctified by justification was the prior cause of his disgrace. Whatever it was specifically, his wife gave testimony that she never considered divorce and was determined to make the marriage work. It’s a pity that such wifely resolve that saved Schindler’s marriage is not encouraged among wives in the counseling rooms of the Chapel in this day. But one must remember that such resolve is only honorable in regard to saving the marriages of New Calvinist philosopher kings.
It all seems insane, until you realize that people act from their logic. Why would Scott give credence to such a camp? Why would he ignore the pleadings of the oppressed? Why is he, like all New Calvinists, utterly indifferent to justice? We get a clue from his book, The Exemplary Husband on page 72. He states the following:
God uses everything in our lives for His perfecting (growing) purposes (Romans 8:28-29; James 1:2-4). As we learned earlier, our growth as Christians toward Christ-likeness is a life-long process, often referred to as sanctification. Because God is so intent on sanctifying us, we know that He will certainly use our most important human relationships to do this.
Right. As I have worn out multiple keyboards emphasizing here on PPT, New Calvinism is a dualist philosophy. Let’s go over this again. Below is THEIR illustration, NOT mine:
Note first that regardless of their verbiage, they don’t believe we really grow, it’s the cross (what it represents) that grows. That’s obviously job one. The endeavor thereof requires a primary focus on two goals and two goals only: a deeper and deeper UNDERSTANDING of our sinfulness, and absolutely nothing else, as set against God’s holiness. Part and parcel with this is also the idea of worthlessness on our part.
The cross represents bigger and bigger salvation which must be manifested more and more until the day when our “final justification” is “revealed.” This occurs as we are sanctified the same way we are saved, by partaking in the realizing of our sinful worthlessness before God and His holiness. The more we understand the difference between the two, the more our salvation is manifested. We don’t change, only the greatness of our salvation changes in order to glorify God. Of course, this obviously redefines the new birth and denies it.
As prorogated in the satanic treatise, “How People Change” by Paul David Tripp, ALL tragic and sinful events in life serve the bottom of the cross chart, and ALL good that occurs in our lives serves the top of the chart. As we contemplate the gospel narrative, the goodness of God is manifested which contributes to more understanding at the top of the chart. Goodness is not our fruit, its God’s fruit only for the purpose of aiding us in understanding His goodness—not ours. Hence, and don’t miss this, justice is not the point. The concept of justice and fairness digresses from Reformed Calvinistic dualism.
The next point is that in the neo-Calvinist gospel schema, the Scriptures serve as a Cross narrative to help us see this dualism in a clearer way. In the mind of the neo-Calvinist, the Scriptures do not define what is right and fair; the Scriptures define Luther’s “cross story.” Here is what the vast majority of Christians do not understand: six months after Luther’s 95 Theses launched the Reformation, the true magnum opus of the Reformation was written by Martin Luther; his Heidelberg Disputation to the Augustinian Order. The document reflects Luther’s utter Platonist disdain for humanity.
In Luther’s Disputation, all reality must be seen through the cross story; i.e., the cross illustration at hand here, and ALL else is the “glory story” or anything at all to do with us—our glory, not the cross story that makes God bigger and mankind smaller. To any degree that we are in the equation, the cross story is diminished.
Now, let’s take this information and evaluate why Scott et al are completely indifferent to suffering and injustice. What did the Clearcreek elders do that is wrong? Nothing because the purpose of the Bible is not to judge the authority of Reformed elders, it is to show forth the cross story, not our story, and injustice is an Us Story kind of thing. Have former parishioners at Clearcreek suffered unjustly at the hands of the elders? Well, that’s a good thing! That suffering shows us the bottom of the chart. And besides, “justice”? If we got what we all deserved, there wouldn’t be any grace! Is this like Paul’s protest in Romans against propagating more evil that grace may abound? Yes, I think so. To the contrary in the minds of neo-Calvinists, we should bow down and thank God for bringing such abuse into our lives.
This is the gospel construct that rules the majority of biblical counseling in our day and is taking over the church in this country. It is a Platonist world view that set Europe on fire for hundreds of years with unspeakable horrors. And it is a story that is playing at a local church near you.
And this weekend, Stuart Scott brings his version of the show to Springboro, Ohio. A celebration of suffering in the name of Christ. But I have news for Scott: the sins of the Clearcreek elders does not cause grace to abound. And his appearance there has nothing to do with grace or love.
If there are any parishioners at Clearcreek (who may be reading this) who are presently there against their will for fear of public humiliation or things revealed in counseling —in your desperation, don’t slip Scott a note—he’s one of them.
paul
Stuart Scott of Southern Seminary is Just Another Wolf in the Pack
Integrity in pastoral ministry is caring about the one as much as the ninety-nine. It’s like the Jewish proverb: “He who saves one life saves the world.” James chastised Jewish leaders for treating a certain class of believers like they were expendable. Most leaders of our day don’t get that.
Once again, Stuart Scott, Director of “Biblical Counseling” at Southern Seminary will speak at Clearcreek Chapel’s (Springboro, Ohio) annual “Family Enrichment” Conference. Scott has been exhorted by me in the past to not lend the Chapel credibility in this way because they have never repented of a litany of unresolved conflict with many former members, some who fled the state of Ohio to get their families as far away from the Chapel as possible. The elders there are also on record in regard to preaching outrageous, cultish concepts.
Indifference to justice and spiritual abuse in the church is part and parcel with being a visible leader in our church culture today. The abused are expendable and underfoot. And unlike Hollywood where a few stars admit that they are Republicans, the spiritual rock stars of our day share no such intestinal fortitude, not even for what is right. Scott’s indifference is just another example among many. Whether Grace Community Church and their seminary in California, or his present tenure at Southern, Scott runs with the best of the wolf packs.
His former boss, John MacArthur, and his present boss, Al Mohler, both endorse /fellowship with CJ Mahaney. Regardless of being entangled in a lawsuit concerning various abuses by Mahaney’s ministry (SGM) including sexual abuse cover-ups, Mahaney will be a featured speaker at the next Together For The Gospel conference (T4G). Mohler, Mark Dever, Ligon Duncan, and CJ Mahaney are the “core four “ of these bi-annual conferences. Mohler, Dever, and Duncan continue to be staunch defenders of Mahaney. At the very least, Mahaney has never confessed his blackmailing of SGM’s co-founder in an effort to prevent him from leaving SGM for doctrinal reasons. Said co-founder tape recorded the attempted blackmail which involved counseling issues being made public. The transcript of the attempted blackmail has been made public.
Mahaney will also be a featured speaker at this year’s TGC conference (the bi-annual compliment of T4G) in April along with Al Mohler and the who’s who of the New Calvinist wolf pack. This conference includes many Emergent church speakers as well as the rankest of mystic heretics such as Tim Keller who propagates New Age spiritual contemplationism in broad daylight.
These people have zero pastoral integrity and absolutely no love for the truth. Scott, who undoubtedly lusts constantly to be a part of the bigger show, must settle for the smaller stages among the spiritual despots of our day; i.e., Clearcreek Chapel.
And that he will do. That is who he is. He is just another wolf in the pack.
paul
Kevin DeYoung Bagged by the New Calvinist Slither Police, Part1
Man! What a day for emails! Two weeks ago, Robert Brinsmead agreed to an interview via back and forth email. So, my morning started out with his return of my first ten questions. His answers were more help than I could have ever hoped for, and actually have some relevance here. This interrupted my intentions of returning two excellent emails I received from a couple of readers late last night that are very interesting as well. I couldn’t wait to get back from running errands in order to reply to the emails, but when I logged on, I noticed that I received another email with three links.
I began to read the first one, and thought, “Is this the beginning of the Great Slither?” What’s that? Well, New Calvinism (NC) is so nuanced that when (or if) God’s people catch on, I predict that many of the who’s who of NC will slowly slither back into orthodoxy and play dumb. Some keep themselves in a position where they can say, “Hey man, I only hung-out with those guys at conferences because they’re really cool—uh, I mean, nice guys. I never believed any of that stuff.” For example, Al Mohler already denies that he knows anybody who believes “we are sanctified by the same gospel that saved us” even though he is one of the “core four” of T4G. Nevertheless, I would welcome the Great Slither—am sure God would sort out all of the damage that has been done at a later date.
The first link was an article by Kevin DeYoung entitled, “Make Every Effort” ( http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevindeyoung/2011/06/07/make-every-effort/ ) The article is eight paragraphs and the first four are hardcore orthodoxy. Many biblically accurate statements are made, but these capture the gist: “Count the letters carefully: effort is not a four letter word”; “It is the consistent witness of the New Testament that growth in godliness requires exertion on the part of the Christian.”
Of course, like all good New Calvinist, DeYoung then uses the last four paragraphs to “qualify” those statements. For example: “Obviously, even when we work, it is never meritorious. Our effort can never win God’s justifying favor. In fact, whatever we manage to work out is really what God purposed to work in us (Phil. 2:12-13; cf. Heb. 2:11). The gospel is truly the A-Z of the Christian life.”
Note that our (that would be us Christians) work is never meritorious, and cannot win God’s justifying favor. This statement subtly synthesizes justification and sanctification. As Christians, the legal declaration and imputed righteousness of Christ in justification is a onetime, done deal. It is also an act of God alone, and by faith alone. But our work in sanctification is to please God with the help of the Holy Spirit—not an attempt to be justified by our own merits, that’s impossible. But in the process, rewards and blessings are promised. DeYoung doesn’t qualify any of this in his statement, and for a reason. Note that he says, “The gospel is truly the A-Z of the Christian life.” The “gospel” as he uses it here concerns justification; so, if we can’t work in justification, and the gospel is the “A-Z” of the Christian life, how can we rightfully work in the sanctification process without doing violence to justification? This statement contradicts everything he says in the first four paragraphs. What DeYoung really means by the “effort” he talks about in the first four paragraphs is reflected in the title of a follow-up article: “Gospel-Driven Effort.” That’s effort driven by the gospel; in other words, “Christians live by the same gospel that saved us,” and works (they rarely say “our works”) flow from that. I address this fundamental error of sanctification by justification here: http://wp.me/pmd7S-Jh .
All in all, DeYoung’s article was a typical nuanced, double-speaking masterpiece. I was literally close to the monitor, sipping my McDonalds coffee, and muttering, “Awesome— #%@* this guy’s good, maybe the best I’ve seen yet.” Yes, this is the kind of article people send me with accusations that I “slander” New Calvinist: “See, he believes in exertion in the sanctification process—pull it down right now! Pull it down!” But, whose exertion? And exertion in what? Believing and deep repentance only? An exertion that has no moral value without joy?
No, no, this article was not slithering. But the New Calvinist Slither Police wanted to make sure. Officer Tullian Tchividjian (TT) is on the case, calling out DeYoung for sounding too orthodox. TT filed the following police report here:
( http://www.christianpost.com/news/work-hard-but-in-which-direction-51115/ ).
DeYoung himself acknowledged in his follow-up article that TT wrote the article to “pushback” against what he wrote. TT’s article was an unabashed reaffirmation to the Koolaid drinking faithful that all is well.
TT’s article was full of the more blatant forms of what DeYoung said NC isn’t in his first article: “let go and let God” theology. Despite TT’s deceptive affirmations throughout the article, at one point he says this: “Many conclude that justification is step one and that sanctification is step two and that once we get to step two there’s no reason to go back to step one. Sanctification, in other words, is commonly understood as progress beyond the initial step of justification. But while justification and sanctification are to be clearly separated theologically, the Bible won’t allow us to separate them essentially and functionally.” Got that? They are theologically separate, but not functionally separate. Huh? Nevertheless, again, this contradicts TT’s claim that he believes in effort being exerted by believers in the sanctification process. As a matter of fact, he clarifies what NC are really talking about when they speak of hard work: “Sanctification is the hard work of going back to the certainty of our already secured pardon in Christ and hitting the refresh button over and over,” and, “It is in this context that I’ve said before how sanctification is the hard work of getting used to our justification.” Got that? Let there be no doubt: this is the NC idea of hard work in the sanctification process; be not deceived.
Furthermore, TT puts the icing on the cake by saying the following: “Christ’s subjective work in us is his constantly driving us back to the reality of his objective work for us. Sanctification feeds on justification, not the other way around.” This statement should give you a clue as to who NC think is really doing the work, but not only that, if sanctification “feeds on justification,” one only needs to remember that justification is by faith alone apart from works. In future posts, based on my correspondence with Robert Brinsmead, I will be illustrating how the centrality of the objective gospel (reread TT’s quote above) created by the Australian Forum is the embryo from which NC has developed into what it is today.
Can Kevin DeYoung be Saved From the Dark Side?
DeYoung’s response to TT’s report was truly pathetic. It is a tortured exercise in not appearing as one corrected, while trying to avoid a possible indictment by the NC district attorney. Not only that, in his introduction, he shares the deep subjects he will be considering while on his forthcoming sabbatical (go figure, another NC taking a sabbatical):
- Can the justified believer please God with his obedience?
- Is the justified believer displeasing to God in some way when he sins?
- Is unbelief the root of every sin? Or is it pride? Or idolatry? Should we even both trying to find a root sin?
- How are justification and sanctification related?
- Can we obey God?
- Can we feel confident about our obedience, not in a justifying way but that we have done as we were commanded?
- How does Scripture motivate us to obedience?
- Are most Christians too hard on themselves (thinking they are filthy scum when they actually walk with the Lord in a way that pleases him)?
- Or are most Christians too easy on themselves (thinking nothing of holiness and content with little progress in godliness)?
- What is the role of union with Christ in sanctification? And how do union with Christ and sanctification relate to justification?
Any believer worth their salt should know the answers to those questions; and this guy is one of the NC big dogs? He needs a sabbatical to figure out those questions?! And didn’t he just answer most of those questions in his first and second articles? Could this be a cry for help? Could it be a ploy? Is he going to skip bail?
Paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
1 comment