Archival Series: New Calvinism’s Upside-Down Gospel

Dr. Rob Congdon recently published a new book, New Calvinism’s Upside-Down Gospel. From the preface,

This booklet is the first in a series on New Calvinism that is intended to assist you in understanding the movement rapidly spreading throughout Christianity and dividing many churches and even families….

In light of New Calvinism’s impact and influence, especially on Christians between the ages of twenty and forty, it is hoped that a careful clarification and examination of the teachings and beliefs of New Calvinists will reveal why they are in error. After several years of studying this movement, the author desires to explain why New Calvinism appeals to the next generation of Christian leaders and how older men, such as John Piper and Al Mohler, are providing what appears to be deep biblical teaching, but what, in reality, is traditional Reformed/Covenant theology that has been repackaged in post-modern “wrappings.” Unfortunately, these new “wrappings” are cloaking the errors of traditional Calvinism as well as introducing some new doctrinal deviations.

You can read the preface in its entirety at the ordering page, link below.  Here are select excerpts from New Calvinism’s Upside-Down Gospel.

Instead of a gospel that leads individuals to salvation and spiritual growth, the gospel of New Calvinism is a distorted gospel that is setting a path to a mechanical, robotic, fatalistic, and corporate Christianity that offers only a false hope of salvation. Already, New Calvinism is creating a generation of twenty to forty year-olds that lacks a sense of direction, a sense of responsibility, a sense of holiness, a sense of God’s will, and a sense of God’s plan and purpose for creation. According to Time Magazine, New Calvinists are proclaiming a God who is a “micromanaging deity,” totally controlling a “sinful and puny humanity.” 

Because Calvinists do not fully comprehend or understand God’s plan to reveal characteristics of His nature through the redemption of human individuals who have the freedom to accept or reject His offer of salvation, they cling to and promote the doctrine of “Irresistible Grace” for the chosen or “elect” only. How can God be glorified for redeeming a pre-programmed “robot?” 

“Revelation History” as opposed to “Redemptive History” provides both the time and the “stage” necessary to reveal all of God’s attributes, not just His attributes relating to man’s redemption. To limit God’s purpose of history as New Calvinists do is to limit the revelation of God’s Person unnecessarily. 

The New Calvinist’s view of history is an outgrowth of a modified Reformed/Covenant theology called “Biblical Theology” or “redemptive historical hermeneutics,” first proposed in the 18^th century.Men like Anglican clergyman Geoffrey Paxton, Geerhardus Vos, and former Seventh-day Adventist, Robert Brinsmead, have clarified and refined it. New Calvinists have repackaged this view of history to make it culturally relevant and have given it various labels such as: “The Centrality of the Objective Gospel” (COG); “The Gospel-Centered Theology;” (GCT) or simply, “Gospel-Driven.”* 

New Calvinism’s “gospel-driven life” may sound biblical, but upon closer examination, one finds that it is not one that is based upon the… “faith [that] cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Romans 10:17). We are not talking merely about semantics, definitions, or a fad movement; we are talking about the eternal destinies of many for whom Christ died—Heaven or Hell! 

For those who are genuinely saved but have fallen under the teaching of New Calvinism, there is also concern. They, along with unsaved New Calvinists, are being led down a path that quite possibly is leading to a re-unification of Protestant churches with Roman Catholicism. Eventually, this union will spawn the worldwide religion described in Revelation. 

It is reasonable to wonder how earnest individuals can be deceived if leaders urge them to read their Bibles. This question leads to the second great danger of New Calvinism: it denies the power of the Word of God to change lives by relegating it to a minor mystic role…. What was going on is called Lecto Divina, which is a mystic Roman Catholic monastic practice of Scripture reading, meditation, prayer, and contemplation that supposedly promotes communion with God. The focus is “not a theological analysis of biblical passages but to view them [the Scriptures] with Christ as the key to their meaning.” In other words, this is Christo-centric meditation, now being practiced by both Emergent Church movement and New Calvinist leaders. 

To counter the “shifting sands” of today’s world and to provide authoritative leadership that young adults are seeking, New Calvinism offers a micromanaging God who controls every event, experience, or circumstance in a person’s life, down to the minutest detail, apart from any individual accountability for choices and acts. To a generation seeking stability, direction, security, and authority, a God who controls every aspect of life is welcome. 

John Piper, Al Mohler, Mark Dever, Mark Driscoll, and other New Calvinist leaders influence these young adults through their speaking, writing, and Internet blogs. They also encourage their followers to read the writings of past authority figures such as Augustine, Jonathan Edwards, and John Owens, as well as other influential Reformers or Puritans. While some of these writings provide useful spiritual insight, they also contain false biblical teaching. It is these and other writings that encourage mysticism, signs and wonders, and a continual looking back to the cross. Instead of complacent Christianity, New Calvinism seems to offer a sense of passion that is experienced through meditation on the majesty of God and the cross.

Dr. Congdon closes his book with a section of Suggestions for Countering New Calvinism. I encourage each of you to purchase this powerful and compelling exposure of, and biblical response to the dangers of the New Calvinism. Click on New Calvinism’s Upside-Down Gospel to order your copy.

Congdon Ministries International, Inc.

PO Box 1785, Greer, South Carolina 29652

*Note: “Gospel Driven” is a preferred term of Dr. Dave Doran. In 2009 Dave wrote, “My goal through these posts on gospel-driven separation has been to lay out what I believe are the biblical obligations regarding separation that are explicitly stated in or implied by clear biblical texts.” (Starting at the Right Spot, Nov. 2009) Just days later it was learned that Dr. Al Mohler compromised the gospel by signing the Manhattan Declaration (Nov. 2009) with Roman Catholic priests. Mohler had given Christian recognition to the deadly “enemies of the cross of Christ,” which he (Mohler) has never apologized for or biblically repented of. Instead of making an application of his “gospel-driven biblical obligations” Dave elected to excuse Mohler’s ecumenism. Dave Doran dismissed the incident as merely, “a wrong decision based on bad judgment.”  Kevin Bauder suggested it was nothing more than a, “single episode...an occasional inconsistency.”

For Further Reading: 
Al Mohler Signs the Manhattan Declaration: Is This  Clear Case for [Dave Doran’s] “Gospel-Driven Separation?”

Al Mohler Signs The Manhattan Declaration: Was This His First Time Foray Into Ecumenism?

John Piper, “I'm Going to Need Help to Know Why I Should Feel Bad About This Decision” [Rick Warren]

Al Mohler Joins Hands With the Mormon Church

Al Mohler: So Much for Sola Scriptura

“Dr. AbuJamra shares my complementarian conviction.” Not if She Has Anything to Preach About it.

Whether one calls it, “teaching, preaching or lecturing,” where the Bible is concerned it does not fit for a woman to teach or usurp authority over men. (1 Timothy 2:12).



Lina AbuJamra: NIU

On April 22, 2014 Dr. Lina AbuJamra preached a Bible sermon to the student body at NIU. See, A Woman Preaches in Northland's Chapel.

Reaction to having a woman preaching in the NIU pulpit was swift. In response, from his blog, NIU president Daniel Patz wrote,

“I am strongly complementarian in conviction, and I do not believe women should preach in Northland chapel…. Dr. AbuJamra shares my complementarian conviction as well.” (College Chapel and “Women Preachers” April 23, 2014)

Daniel Patz assured his readers that he personally, NIU and Lina AbuJamra are complementarian.1 That is to say they believe that although women can make contributions in a ministry setting, they are forbidden from teaching and usurping authority over the men. Within the Patz article Lina was never said to be sorry for the NIU chapel speaking. Mr. Patz, writing for her, assured readers that she is complementarian.

Under the title, Dan Patz Responds to a Woman Preaching in NIU Chapel I posted a review of the Patz article. For this writer the complimentarian issue was over with.

“Mr. Patz comes close to, but ultimately sidesteps admitting that this was ‘preaching.’ Mr. Patz at least knew her reputation as that of a preacher, and went forward with having her. He had to ask her not to preach. He knew and now he’s trying to do damage control.”

Lina AbuJamra: Taylor University, 05/02/2014

Over with, that is, until just 9 days later (May 2, 2014) when Dr. AbuJamra was preaching at Taylor University to a mixed audience. See video below.2

If Lina is complementarian, and in alignment with Daniel Patz’s official position, then how can she go to Taylor University and preach again to a mixed group? Is she committed to the biblical principle- complementarian?

From her website we can find an answer. At Lina’s website there is a Q&A section. One question is: Do you only speak to women…?

“No. I am open and willing to speak to any audience or event. I have had the privilege of speaking at colleges, women’s retreats and variety of conferences.”

Lina AbuJamra does not limit her teaching to women only. This is not the answer one would expect from a committed complementarian. There is, furthermore, a problem for Daniel Patz, his credibility in particular. He wrote,

“I am strongly complementarian in conviction, and I do not believe women should preach in Northland chapel…. Dr. AbuJamra shares my complementarian conviction as well.”

President Patz vouched for Lina, but at Taylor University she has done what is contrary to the NIU president’s official position on women usurping authority over men.

1. Lina AbuJamra was preaching at NIU, and again at Taylor University. Between the two engagements she attended Willow Creek CC and praised the church.3 Lina is a NIU board member. We now ask: Are claims that Lina AbuJamra is complementarian believable?
2. Can NIU president Daniel Patz maintain that NIU board member Lina AbuJamra is not teaching, usurping authority over the men (1 Tim. 2:12)?

Yours faithfully,

LM

Site Publisher's Addendum:
During her sermon at NIU Lina used a very inappropriate phrase. She does it again at Taylor. This time, however, different subject, and much more graphic. I will not cite here what she said. You will hear her remarks at 2:10 of the You Tube video below. It is disgraceful and pathetic. You will be disgusted with and for this woman who seems to know nothing of a “meek and quiet spirit.”

Footnotes:
1) Complementarianism is a theological view…that men and women have different but complementary roles and responsibilities in marriage, family life, religious leadership and elsewhere. (Source: Wikipedia)

2) NIU Board member, Lina AbuJamra preaching at Taylor University.

3) Lina AbuJamra (April 30) on her Twitter account, “Also had an Awe-some time worshipping King Jesus at Willow Creek tonight. My heart is soaring with praise. So grateful for the Church.”

NIU’s Thursday Night Live: CCM & Red Hot Chili Peppers, It’s All the Same to Them

Many of you may not be familiar with NIU’s “Thursday Night Live” (TNL).  I, only recently, was made aware of this event. What we can learn from viewing one of these TNL events is that NIU has gone well beyond singing Contemporary Christian music to singing music in honor of the Red Hot Chili Peppers, Lorde, Bob Marley, and more. The group in this video goes by the name Lukie V & the Wisco Kids. 



Here is an example of one line of lyrics from the cover song above called “Tennis Court” by Lorde, “How can I f*** with the fun again, when I’m known.” Of course during the live version on campus, they mumbled over the offensive lyric with “Yeah” to make it “acceptable.” Some of the other songs covered include:

• “Home” by Edward Sharpe & The Magnetic Zeros
• “Porcelain” by the Red Hot Chili Peppers
• “Skinny Love” by Bon Iver
• “Is This Love” by Bob Marley

In addition to the TNL events NIU is hosting the June 2014 Harmony by the Bay1 concert, which will highlight CCM/RAP entertainers.  This is Flame, a Rapper, one of three bands performing for NIU.



Today, I am reminded how former NIU president Matt Olson insisted, “Our Music Philosophy: Philosophically, it is unchanged. Let me say it again... unchanged.”2

The Thursday Night Live event is another example, in a long list of examples3, that demonstrates just how far away NIU has drifted from its “music philosophy,” and abandoned its biblically balanced, conservative fundamental Baptist Bible college foundation. We are witnessing a modern day tragedy!

Recently, I was asked, “Where does it all stop?” Some folks may be under the impression that, with Daniel Patz in the president’s office, the direction NIU was taken under Matt Olson might be slowed or even reversed in part.  There is, however, mounting evidence that Daniel Patz has not only continued the same trajectory that Matt Olson set the school on, but has mashed down on the gas pedal.

So, to answer the question, “Where does it all stop?” There is little doubt left that NIU’s on-going slide musically, and into the New Evangelical orbit, will not stop until NIU folds.


LM

Site Publisher’s Addendum:
In the TNL video there is a banner on the wall above and behind the students. That banner reads, “Nothing of Worth Comes Easily.” Some think that may be attributable to Les Ollila. It has become apparent that nothing of worth is coming from NIU any longer.

Footnotes:

1) Harmony by the Bay

2) Open Letter to Friends in the Ministry, (Fall 2010). The Matt Olson article has since been removed from the NIU website.  The selection above appears here in its full context.

“Our Music Philosophy: Philosophically, it is unchanged. Let me say it again... unchanged. What we have always been trying to do, and will continue to do into the future, is to make sure Northland’s practice of music (as with every aspect of the Christian life) is built principally on clear teachings from the Bible.” 

3) Is NIU Opposed to the “Modern Charismatic Movement?”

Furthermore, NIU has/had their own In-house CCM/Rock band. Previously NIU officially participated with the Big Daddy Weave concert. There was the blasphemous rendition of "Jesus Loves Me" RAP students did at the home of an NIU faculty member. Northland Waltzing Toward Extinction.

Northland Waltzing Toward Extinction

While Rome burned, Nero fiddled and while the campus of Northland is being abandoned the students learn to waltz away their troubles. In a place where prayer days and passionate lessons on Christ-centered great commission living were once the norm – students now learn to live for their next dance –

“One, Two, Three, and One, Two, Three – on the way to tragedy, and One, Two, Three....”

While there is very little shock-value in anything from NIU anymore, it’s still worth putting up some items as an added caution.

LM

For a companion report see, NIU's Thursday Night Live: CCM & Red Hot Chili Peppers, It's All the Same to Them

What is Truth? (Part 3)

This is the third article in a series on hermeneutics that demonstrates why the one biblical hermeneutic exposes errors of interpretation. I have been reading a number of wide-ranging articles particularly dealing with the doctrine of the Holy Spirit, the church, and church polity. Many of them illustrate how easy it is to insert personal presuppositions into a text. A partial hermeneutic is often responsible for this. Ignoring texts that clarify or failing to use grammar, context, or the historical setting of the text is a sure formula for theological disaster.

God, the author, in His wisdom gave the average believer a clear way to understand what He intended to convey in the text. The unlearned person, as well as the intellectual, has no trouble finding ways to corrupt the scripture. Sometimes this is done by adding to the text and other times by taking away from it. Every error you can think of has violated either some part of or the entire single biblical hermeneutic. Pride would make us think that our positions are pure and without flaw, but that is not true. Baptists are proud of their doctrinal distinctives, but few are able to give explanation for them without violating the text. Much of what we have adopted has come from culture or history and is only a reaction to the wrong interpretation others have used to build their error. That is not to say there is no truth in what they propose, but we tend to be selective in our use of scripture in order to build our own tower of Babel.

AN EXAMPLE
If I have any area of expertise at all, it is in the doctrine of the church and particularly church polity. Not a single one of us is infallible, and that is why we need to be willing to honestly challenge each other’s conclusions. I am amazed at how blatantly our own crowd will often make a “grammatical pretzel” out of the text, twisting it in an effort to insert a cultural polity into their position. God has given us clear tools to define congregational government, but those have to be ignored to arrive at a political structure. One reason this is done is in reaction to error. It is right to oppose the idea of the pastor’s acting as a despot or dictator, but the answer to this problem is to let the text speak. The interpreter does not have to destroy the office of the bishop/elder/pastor/shepherd to deal with that error. To relegate the office of pastor to one of a mere lackey who only serves as an example is desperately misguided. This is often done by tossing proof texts around and ignoring all the teaching on the subject. In the text, the whole of the teaching about this office gives a powerful picture of the function of a true under-shepherd.

Sometimes the office of pastor has been developed in response to cruel and despicable treatment of pastors by those who often are goats, and not sheep. Even this sinful practice does not give us leave to create an unbiblical style of pastoring. Both of these described errors rest on the ignoring of the context and the historical setting of the text. God gave us simple examples so we couldn’t possible miss what He wanted our polity to be. Can you imagine a shepherd who led only by his example? The answer is so elementary that even a child could tell you what sheep and shepherds do.

EXTREMES
We have already noted that a study of grammar, language, and words is the first task of the interpreter. Few believers are trained grammarians, but that does not mean we cannot know what the text says. The problem with language experts is that they too often tend not to observe their limitations. Let me say again that when we have done our best with the language, words, and meaning in the text, we are still left with a question; an accurate conclusion needs to be tested by a study of the full context and the historical setting of the text. This is where the average believer should begin to ask questions about an uneasy conclusion provided by the experts. The answer is not in just a part, but in the whole.

The sinful nature is prone to wander. When someone wants to be free to sin, he will even use selected scriptures to give credence to his unwarranted conclusions. This selectivity in choosing texts that agree with them is well illustrated in today’s rush for schools and others to approve the drinking of debilitating alcohol. Lust is a terrible thing, and it causes us to do what even common sense tells us is wrong. How could you possibly trust the conclusion of anyone who seriously believes in the Big Bang theory? I personally wonder how you can even trust the theology of anyone who says that the Bible does not condemn booze as a beverage.

In case you are wondering about these strong words, let me tell you that being this close to the Bema tends to discourage one from giving support to sinful practices. The crowd who reject plain words like “sodomy”, or “murder” for abortion, have tipped their hand. We are too close to the end to be nice to the devil and make sinners comfortable about the heinous moral error that God hates.

FINALLY
People who often say they believe in literal interpretation may not mean what you do when you use that term. Even Luther and Calvin claimed to use literal interpretation - and they did - but not when it came to eschatology (prophecy) and soteriology (the doctrine of salvation). Not all their teaching was bad, but that still is no excuse for giving them or anyone else a pass when it comes to the clear, normal, plain, consistent use of the Bible text. Go ahead - make my day!

Dr. Clay M. Nuttall

What is Truth, Part 2

What is Truth, Part 1

 

SHEPHERD’S STAFF – April, 2014

A communication service of Shepherd’s Basic Care, for those committed to the authority and sufficiency of the Bible. Shepherd’s Basic Care is a ministry of information and encouragement to pastors, missionaries, and churches. Write for information using the e-mail address, Shepherdstaff2@juno.com or visit The Shepherd Staff

 Shepherd’s Staff is prepared by Clay Nuttall, D. Min.

 

Dan Patz Responds to a Woman Preaching in the NIU Chapel: A Critical Review

Dr. Lina AbuJamra Preaching at NIU

Northland International University (NIU) president Daniel Patz posted an article at his blog on April 23.  His article is titled, “College Chapel and ‘Women Preachers’.”1 Apparently Mr. Patz was responding to concerns raised on the NIU FaceBook page and IMO the previous IDOTG article, A Woman Preaches in NIU’s Chapel. The issue was Dr. Lina AbuJamra in the NIU chapel preaching a Bible message to the student body.2 The Patz blog article attempts to clarify what happened at NIU.

Before publishing this response to the Patz article I consulted several pastors for their reaction to his article.  What follows is a compilation of their thoughts with mine in a critical review of the Patz article.

There are several points to debate with Mr. Patz:

1. NIU seeks to simultaneously to define their chapel music ministry as a time of gathered “worship” and their speaking time as a “convocation.”  Those who follow the regulative principle on worship universally recognize that a key element of New Testament “worship” is the exposition and declaration of God’s word.  If the 1st part of the chapel is “worship,” then it follows that the bible-teaching part is worship.  I Timothy 2 provides instruction for the assembling of believers when involved in worship.  It is spiritually cavalier to assume that a Christian college chapel’s “worship” time should not be governed by the regulative principles of worship.

2. A Christian College is a place where “life touches life” in order to disciple the next generation of Great Commission servants. What is modeled is what is molded!  Those who would have their daughters move into a life of service with a meek and quiet spirit, adorning the gospel would do well to beware of NIU.  Their chapel speaker was irreverent, “the sexy part,” less than lady-like and certainly not the model of a meek and quiet spirit one would expect to mold future evangelicals. 

3. The contents of the chapel message reflected a feel-good, Schuller-esque, experiential theology.  Dr. Lina actually told the students “God spoke to her.”  If this is a model of NIU’s new hermeneutic, it's frightening to say the least.

Further issues with the Patz article include:

1. Mr. Patz wrote, “I shared with Dr. AbuJamra my position on women and preaching; she agreed and told me that she would not preach.”  Why does someone have to tell a female about their position on female preachers if she does not preach? It’s clear that Dan Patz knew and recognized her as being a “preacher.” What pastor/Bible college president has to tell a single lady missionary “do not preach” when they invite a woman to present her mission field and/or ministry? This was not about Dr. AbuJamra presenting her ministry, very little of that was clearly given, only slightly mentioned.

2. Mr. Patz went on to note that her message did “bless many students and staff.”  With that claim we have New Evangelical pragmatism: the ends (blessings) justify the means (a woman preaching).

3. Whether teaching, presenting or preaching we have her stating, “...I work part time in the ER. The rest of the time I teach God’s Word, and I write. I didn’t see that coming, but ya know that’s kind of the sexy part of saying it…” Totally inappropriate and disgraceful, yet no mention of it by Mr. Patz.

The Patz article is a continuation of what the compromised evangelicals at Sharper Iron (SI) wrote to legitimize and/or excuse having a woman preaching in the NIU chapel service. Mr. Patz, for example, wrote, “I do agree that the tone and direction of her testimony was more than I anticipated and expected.” What was presented from the pulpit in chapel was far, far beyond a testimony. Dr. AbuJamra made a very brief mention of her testimony within the first three minutes of her sermon, but for the balance she was preaching to the student body. If this were a man, in those pants, instead of a female there would be no question, did “he” preach or not? “He” preached!

Mr. Patz comes close to, but ultimately sidesteps admitting that this was “preaching.”  Mr. Patz at least knew her reputation as that of a preacher, and went forward with having her. He had to ask her not to preach. He knew and now he’s trying to do damage control.

The article by Mr. Patz does not clear up what took place in chapel nor does it acknowledge the wrong, and there is no genuine repentance for it.  This was wrong and needs to be admitted as such.

LM

I encourage all guests to read Don Johnson’s We're Not Comfortable, So Here’s a Statement About Something in which he reviews the Dan Patz article.

Footnotes:

1) College Chapel and “Women Preachers”

2) Lina AbuJamra, Failure is Your Friend

Lina AbuJamra preaching Failure is Your Friend is now available at Sermon Audio.

Related Reading:

Is NIU “UnChanged?” The NBBC Position Statement on Contemporary Issue in Christianity

NIU’s Convergence with Evangelicalism: What Does It Mean for Impressionable Students?

NIU Takes a Giant Step Toward Closure