What the Bible says about 'church' vs. what the man-fearers say

People assume the common notion of 'church' is biblical, yet most of it is not. It is really just tradition that has grown over time. Foundationally it is the 'fear of man' taking the place of the 'fear of God.'

Here are links that give both sides:

James White - a Reformed Baptist - represents the man-fearing position (and actually sounds very Roman Catholic in this post).

This article, on the other hand, is the most in-depth and fair for the other side.

(This is a great web site, by the way. Truly a great web site. They also link to 5solas.org which shows they value real biblical doctrine above all, so they're not just lukewarm liberal types [Phil Johnson puts 5solas.org in the 'bad theology' category because of some hyper-Calvinism, so I'm not saying I endorse the site completely, just the classical, biblical formula of the five solas themselves, and I'm sure the batteredsheep site is merely linking to them for being representative of plain, biblical five solas doctrine].)

This whole subject is very big. Read the short James White post above (and maybe also this article which gives the common position of the fear-of-man-exhalting James White types in very clear language). The fear God only side is not about disdaining authority at all costs (we recognize the authority of the Sovereign of the Kingdom of God, Jesus Christ), it's about not taking part in the coercive enforcement of the fear (and reverence) of man. A Christian is a king and a priest (and also a prophet in that he has the Word of God). Christian liberty is real. A real Christian will assemble naturally with other Christians, and will also yield himself to other Christians, in a natural, brotherhood, way. It just happens naturally. You accept a teacher naturally if he has the Spirit and you are drawn to that and actually learn from it. But 'church' is much bigger and majestic and real as the Bible describes it (read the batteredsheep site linked above). And Christianity IS about individual election and personal relationships -- with God above preeminently. A Christian is a king; and the priesthood of all believers, a biblical doctrine that was recovered at the Reformation, is the most difficult-to-accept biblical doctrine for the more carnal Christian types, even the most Protestant, ironically. 'Individual' is not a bad word for a Christian. It is not some 'American disease.' Christians born from above, effected by the Word and the Spirit, have fellowship with other Christians naturally, and they recognize leadership qualities in teachers and others with other gifts of the Spirit naturally. Christians don't need coercion, and all the tactics that enforce man-fearing in the world. A real Christian knows when he is in that kind of environment and very well will avoid it, and probably give you some good biblical advice in strong terms. A Christian fears only God.

Real category mistakes

Regarding the foundational biblical teaching of the four states of man:

1. Man in the state of innocence in the Garden;
2. man in the state of sin and corruption after the Fall;
3. man in the state of being re-born by God's grace; and,
4. man in the state of glorification after death.

Notice how you can see where unbelievers (and confused believers) make all their mistakes. The liberal - Christian or not - thinks man is still in a state of innocence (the 1st state above) and thus that man is inherently good and so on. The atheist often complains to God because man isn't in the 4th state above, of glorification, which happens only after death if one is justified. The atheist says: "Why do we suffer?" for instance, not taking into account the Fall from the 1st state above into the 2nd state.

Everybody wants to avoid the reality of the 2nd state above. Even believers. It's a constant struggle to recognize and accept and just remember that you have an inherently corrupt nature and corrupt heart which convicts you before God no matter what your actions may be (i.e. you're a poisonous snake, and you are convicted for having that poison in you, which is inherently part of your fallen nature, and so you're not convicted for whether you strike with your fangs or not (whether you act good or not).

Believing Christians, otherwise with a sound understanding of the Bible and biblical doctrine, often get messed up regarding the middle two states (the 2nd and 3rd states above). They often argue for things regarding a Christian as if the Christian hadn't yet entered the 3rd state of being re-born (regenerated) by God's grace (effected by the Word and the Spirit). This is where issues of active, progressive sanctification get confused if not just neglected (if not just lost).

Some further notes: antinomians (who say anything goes, or anything is allowed once you're saved, which basically means sex, drugs, and rock and roll, or whatever is currently passing for those things in their era) confuse the 3rd state with the 4th (the 4th state, i.e. glorification when man will no longer be even able to sin). Legalists, on the other hand, who fear so much the power of the 'old man' within (the old corrupt nature of the 2nd state -- which we also constantly struggle with when in the 3rd state until we physically die) that the faith becomes to them a set of restrictive laws, are not clearly seeing the difference between the 2nd and 3rd states and the liberty (and ability) that comes with entering the 3rd state -- liberty and ability to be and to develop as a true Christian (to make war on the flesh, the world, and the devil as a free and bold soldier - or better, knight - of Christ rather than as a fearful, reclusive moralist).

Churches tend to preach by default as if they are addressing '2nd state' audiences. And theologians as well tend to write as if they are addressing a mostly '2nd state' readership. This is a matter of practical necessity for the most part, yet it does add to the confusing of these categories in further, more subtle ways.

Holiness

Here is a bracing chapter from a good book.

Now seek to know how to provoke the fight and to develop in the faith. It begins when you fear God only.

Framing the truth - the Four States of Man

Having gotten my arms around classical covenant theology I can see in perspective now why it is a difficult to see subject: it's because it is really in the category of biblical theology in terms of how it is presented. I.e. it's presented 'organically' and from isolated and particular points-of-view, and always seemingly as something that is in the process of being proven and substantiated and so on, but never quite getting there. The old-fashioned name for Covenant Theology is Federal Theology. It's the same thing, yet Federal Theology presents the subject matter in a more systematic theology kind of way. The subject matter is presented from a point above giving perspective, and parallels are drawn (the first and second Adam) and it all is framed so that there is a foundational structure rather than just alot of data. There is a body for the clothes to hang on rather than merely clothes in a pile.

And here is something very valuable to know: that structure is best seen in the four states of man:

1. Man in the state of innocence in the Garden;
2. man in the state of sin and corruption after the Fall;
3. man in the state of being re-born by God's grace; and,
4. man in the state of glorification after death.

When you absorb the existence and fact and truth of these four states into your foundational thinking and understanding of biblical doctrine you have the 'frame' for everything else. You have the sweep of the history of redemption, even, as it is tied directly to all the topics of systematic theology and to the practical level as doctrine is lived in your daily life and internal being.

Then there is the matter of a lost work (generally lost, though not unknown), that was once a folk classic on a par with Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress, titled Human Nature in its Fourfold State, written by Thomas Boston. This is as elegant and on-the-mark a work of Federal Theology as exists.

The four states of man are the 'hook' - the frame - needed to sort out classical covenant theology (the three covenants: Covenant of Redemption, Covenant of Works, Covenant of Grace) -- Federal Theology; and to see the course of sacred history in plain terms; and to truly see how the doctrines of grace play out in between the Fall and glorification; and to see yourself and just where you are in it all.

It's a big realization for a Christian to truly 'see' that he is a sinner. Not a person who "does bad things" but a person who has a corrupt nature, a corrupt heart, no matter what he actually does. A poisonous snake who is condemned NOT because he strikes someone with his fangs, but because he has poison in him. And to realize that you can't get that poison out of you yourself any more than a leopard can change its spots. And to see just what occured in the Fall, how you are connected, justly, with its results; seeing what man was before the Fall so as to be able to see fully what man is now after the fall; then to see that you can't do anything about your condition but only God can effect the change from sinner to re-born saint. This is all Calvinism: five solas, doctrines of grace, all the anti-intuitive, difficult-to-accept, hardcore, unegotiated down to the demands of vanity, worldly pride, and self-will doctrine which when seen and accepted effects the necessary internal 'turning' in you from that vanity/worldly pride/self-will to faith/repentance/God's will - i.e. pure biblical doctrine that assaults man's wisdom - and seeing it all 'framed' by the four states of man ties it to sacred history and to yourself in a practical, clear, foundational way.

If you're inclined to reject it all no matter what you of course will continue to see nothing. But if you are able, by God, to see and know the truth to begin with then use the fact of the four states of man. Read Boston's classic work, and read this and this as a preface. (Don't underestimate Boston's work. If you think you already know the details of each state you likely still will be impressed with Boston if you give the book a fair reading. He is also actually Shakespearean in parts, but that may say as much about the foundational nature and truth of his subject matter and the striking aspect of seeing it all within the framework of the four states as it says about his own writing...)

+ + + + + + +

Usually the ultimate reason given for why God has chosen to work His plan the way He has is to manifest - or showcase, if you will (though there might be a better word I could find) - his justice and mercy to His elect.

That is biblical, yet it can also be stated that God had other things in view. He wanted to create beings that had real understanding, real conscience, and real will; and one could say that God wants his creatures to love Him in a real way rather than in some programmed way, and one could give this as the overall reason why his created beings need to have real understanding, real conscience, and real will. So how does God go about this? Putting these things in his created beings by fiat won't do it. They'd be merely created 'things.' So God has a plan. He creates Adam (and all men in Adam) figuratively and literally at a high level; then God allows man to fall. And it's in the fall and in the return that man develops real understanding, real conscience, and real will, and becomes more than a mere 'created thing.'

From the Mountain of God in the Garden of Eden to the spiritual Mount Zion you have a creation, fall, and a rising to a higher level. Even in the four states of man the first state of Adam before the fall is not the equal of the state of eschatological glorification. The fourth state is higher than the first state. Adam would have merited eschatological glorification if he'd been obedient during his probationary test, which he obviously wasn't. Yet man attains what Adam lost by having saving faith in Jesus who wins it for us.

I digress, but this overall pattern of creation on high, fall, re-connection and return by degree, then final state of eschatological glorification explains God's motive. He wants real beings who have real love for Him. He doesn't want created robots with robotic love for Him. (The parable of the talents should light a fire under all Christians, I say cryptically...referencing the subject of active, progressive sanctification, the big weak subject of all Christians who are yet able to know the truth otherwise...)

The reconnecting part is the internal 'turning' that has to take place. Repentance. Getting above the internal tyranny of vanity and worldly pride and self-will. Recognizing chain-of-command (recognizing and accepting that there is something higher than 'you'). The Doctrines of Grace, in all their anti-intuitive, seeming illogical nature (God's wisdom is foolishness to man) describe this internal turning, when they are seen and accepted and acted on.

And the fact of reprobation and hell just makes it all real. Real consequences. (The typical biblical mystery and tension between God's sovereignty in predestination and man's free agency aside...) If this element didn't exist none of the results would be real... Work out your salvation with fear and trembling...

Protestants and Roman Catholics Together 2

One thing Protestants do that is the same thing Roman Catholics do - and Protestants don't even realize it - is they confess they are sinners to man and not to God. Just as the Roman Catholic confesses to his devil-priest, the Protestant confesses to man in his church or among fellow church members or before another believer. This is considered, unthinkingly, part of the faith. It's encouraged by the leadership because it cultivates man-fearing.

No, when you confess you are a sinner you do it to God. And it's more an acknowedgment of your condition and an acceptance of it. "Yes, Father in heaven, I acknowledge and accept that I, in Adam, have a corrupt nature and heart and am dead in sin. I see this and I fully acknowledge and accept it as my condition. And I realize I can't change it any more than a leopard can change its spots."

It's a big moment when a Christian truly comes into the understanding (and acceptance) of the fact (the truth) that man's nature - man's heart, including his own - is corrupt after the Fall (and hence, then, is able to see where he is in the full sweep of the history of redemption: state of innocence in the Garden; state of corruption after the Fall; state of being re-born; state of glorification). And it's important to 'confess' this, as in truly state it and acknowledge it; but this is done to God, not man.

Seeing these rituals of man-fearing can be difficult because they are so ingrained in how the visible churches operate, and how popular ideas of the faith operate.

Josh, don't you know lying kills your soul?

I just read a post by a Lutheran basically justifying the fact that he isn't Reformed because Doug Wilson is a theonomist. Of course, in this Lutheran's convenient world Doug Wilson is an example of a 'Reformed theologian.' The writer knows better.

This dishonesty is everywhere in the Christian blogosphere. Roman Catholics do the same. You see their blogrolls and under "Reformed Blogs" you'll see a list of the most neo-orthodox and otherwise liberal or "Rome-tending" bloggers on the internet who get their thrills by self-identifying as Calvinist or Reformed, but never any blog by a real Calvinist.

The reason for this is real Calvinism - real five solas, doctrines of grace, biblical doctrine - is what is called the Truth. And the Truth is hated and mocked. It's OK for a Lutheran, or a liberal protestant, or a Roman Catholic to be dishonest in their representation of Calvinism and Reformed Theology because they are doing it in the service of the cosmic hatred of the Truth that courses through their currently hollow souls.

Doug Wilson finally discards the sheep sweater

I've been critical of 'Federal Vision' people not just for their poisonous doctrine but mainly because they dishonestly self-identify as Reformed and Calvinist when they are anything but. They do this to gain the attention the pure doctrine gives and to also do damage from within the camp, so to speak, in classic fifth columnist fashion. If they didn't do this no one would pay any attention to them, or they'd be seen as just another group with bad theology. Now Doug Wilson - basically their front man and lead singer - has decided to come out of the closet and declare what he really is (what he's really been all along) a cultic theonomist and a neo-orthodox - Barthian, Shepherdite - Reformed theologian. I.e., not Reformed at all. This eases the tension. Now I can just make fun of him without feeling like I have to kill him; like he's a Muslim now who merely smokes hashish and talks big rather than being a Muslim attempting to force his way through the Gates of Vienna...

Do Mega-Churches throw bigger rocks...?

'Fear of the Lord' and 'faith' are synonyms in the Word of God.

Fear of the Lord (not man).

When you have it -- the world marks you; and you are not of the world.

Why didn't Stephen run to a church? Maybe a 'mega'-church? They'd have stoned him there too. The world is the world. Where man congregates in the fear (and reverence) of man, that is the world. Stephen died: "calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." The church christians were scattered to the tall grass. They re-'congregated' and made up some new rules about how best to not 'upset' those who would throw rocks on them...they even threw out some 'suspect' individuals who they discerned had a little too much regard for the Word of God. I.e., they actually 'bought into it.' They were a danger to the safety of the 'group.'

Protestants and Roman Catholics Together...

In recent days I've been banned from Protestant and Roman Catholic sites for the same reasons. What reasons? My language? No. I only used the most carefully non-offensive language (and their limits for being offended are not great). They banned me because I convict them. I convict the Roman Catholic for his allegiance to the kingdom of Satan; and I convict the Protestant for his self-indulgent squatting in the miasmic Village of Morality and his refusal to get out on the Way where real Christians who fear only God are. In both cases they couldn't ban me for anything I wrote, so they had to appeal to the past. Notice the vindictive nature of this and the egregiously non-Christian nature of it in that they refuse to recognize any form of repentance or change. They refuse to recognize it because they are protecting their dead works, moralizing existence at all cost. When you consider yourself a Christian and a real, non-lukewarm Christian is a threat to you, you need to think about your situation... (Note: the Roman Catholic identified me by my using of the term regeneration, which is a no-no among Roman Catholics, and Roman-leaning Protestants like Federal Visionists and church-christian ritualists/man-fearing types. The Protestant banned me because I was bringing the Word of God to bear on a ridiculous statement made by one of his in-house scholars. These are the same Protestants who mock you when you demonstrate a high valuation for the Word of God, its supernatural nature and preservation, which clashes with their seminary-bred inane, vain intellectual approach where they are the judges of God's Word - which extends to them even determining corrupt manuscripts to be 'superiour' - rather than that which is judged by His Word.)

Plain like Ockeghem

Keep the faith plain (simple and complete). Pure, bold, practical, and plain.

Five solas.

The means of grace: the Holy Bible, prayer, and fasting.

Practice to think and act and speak from the Bible.

UPDATE:

>Wouldn't you consider the sacraments a means of grace as well?


Yes, but how often do you get baptised? See? So cut the two sacraments in half (only half a measure of grace from the sacraments now). Then, what do you actually do in the Lord's Supper? It's a visual parable.

I tend to associate the means of grace with the living Word and the intake and meditation upon it and the overal effort to conquer it in understanding; and with prayer and fasting (a deeper understanding of fasting provided by - or starting with - Isaiah 58:6) and also with the two great commandments of Jesus (they correlate, to me).

Practically speaking, any means of grace involves the taking in of the Holy Spirit, in lesser or greater measure, and the containing of it (not so easy as the flesh wars with the Spirit) so as to manifest the effect, or fruits, of it, to ever greater ability, with the aim of glorifying God.

Prayer and loving God requires a state of being (in the presence of God, watchfulness, awake in the moment) that is conducive to accumulating the Spirit. Fasting and loving your neighbor (especially enemy) as yourself is conducive to containing the Spirit (it involves inner control and separation from the world and the flesh, and even separation from the devil, in the moment).

It's difficult to call a one-time ritual a means of grace. And likewise it's difficult to consider a ritual as mechanical and loosely defined as the Lord's Supper (how many times do you observe it? do you use little plastic cups of grape juice or one big communal cup of wine?) a means of grace. They are rituals, they play a role regarding the visible church as visual parables (they speak to the senses), but to rely on them as the means of grace is to play games with common-sense. The Bible is clear about such things as the Spirit and prayer and fasting and the two great commandments, and grace is involved in all the wide meaning of that word.

Idolatry

The idolatry known as the fear of man is a strong idolatry.

It causes you to be a respecter of persons.
It causes you to live in the deathly Village of Morality.
It causes you to be and remain shallow (by disdaining and mocking and being fearful of influences that the men you fear and revere tell you to disdain and mock and be fearful of; the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, pilgrim -- the fear of the Lord).
It causes you to stumble at the stumblingblock of sacramentalism and clericalism.
It causes you to take the word of scholars (and any other worldly figure) over the still, small voice of conscience that your faith and the Holy Spirit give you.
It causes you to deny the supernatural regarding God's Word and its preservation so as not to be mocked by men.
It causes you to defend the faith using the approved language of the world, denying the pure, regenerating language of the Word of God and the bold, innocent, and powerful language of faith.
It keeps you from leaving the vanity and illusion and spiritual bondage of the devil's kingdom (yes, all you shallow back-slappers and yes-men I'm talking to you), and walking boldly onto the Way, making your way in the Kingdom of God, with God's full armour, as a priest, a prophet, and a king.

Sinead O'Connor - Song of The Vineyard

This is a good song, somewhat raw, live, but listenable. Lyrics by Isaiah...

Bonus: Sinead singing A Perfect Indian live. If you're not a fan you (a) havn't ever heard her really sing, or (b) don't have the discernment of the Holy Ghost...

Gold from the Archives

Read something that will actually tell you something new, maybe even shock you into action.

Wilhemus A'Brakel on fearing man

When you fear only God you don't fear man:

The third sin committed [by those who don't fear God only] is to fear man — a sin to which the godly are still vulnerable. If we have not yet fully denied ourselves in regard to honor, love, advantage, and pleasure, nor are much inclined to acknowledge the insignificance of man (that is, that man can neither stir nor move, can do neither good nor evil to us), and we have not accustomed ourselves to see the hand of the Lord in all things, thus perceiving that God alone does everything, and that all men are but instruments in His hand, being used either to do good or evil unto us—this will engender a looking unto man. In time of war we consider the multitude and courage of the soldiers and we stand upon our sword (Eze 33:26). “Who shall come down against us? or who shall enter into our habitations?” (Jer 21:13). If, however, we perceive that the might of the enemy supersedes ours, we are fearful and the heart is moved “as the trees of the wood are moved with the wind” (Isa 7:2). We fear man when in sickness, legal cases, business transactions, in the plying of our trade, in pursuing our desire which must be attained to by the instrumentality of men, etc.; we look to men and, in our thoughts end in them—as if it had to come from them. We vehemently seek to have them on our side, and we are fearful of losing their favor. In our association with men we fear the one for his wisdom (which is no match for ours), the other for his status and imposing personality, the third for his wickedness, and the fourth for his benevolence which we would not like to lose. Now if such a person has no desire for godliness and would become angry if you were to manifest the image of God and perform your duty, and if, out of fear for him, you were to hold back and accommodate him in the commission of sin, behold, then the fear of God is rendered inferior and must yield. There God is on the one side, and man on the other side. There the fear of God is on the one hand and the fear of man on the other hand. If, however, the fear of man motivates us to do something which is contrary to the fear of God, then we reject the fear of God because of the fear of man.

This is a dreadful sin, for first of all God has forbidden it. “Fear not them which kill the body” (Mat 10:28); “Who art thou, that thou shouldest be afraid of a man that shall die?” (Isa 51:12). Secondly, it is the greatest act of contempt toward God if He must yield to man for you. It is idolatry and a sin of the heathen. “Who...worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator” (Rom 1:25). Thirdly, it is a denial of the providence of God—as if God did not reign; as if the creature could function independently. Fourthly, it affects and troubles you continually. Fifthly, it causes you to fall from one sin into the next, and you ought therefore to be ashamed of your previous fear of man. Be warned and give heed to the exhortation of the Lord: “Cease ye from man, whose breath is in his nostrils: for wherein is he to be accounted of?” (Isa 2:22). Follow David in his noble courage. “The LORD is on my side; I will not fear: what can man do unto me?” (Psa 118:6).

—Taken from: The Christian's Reasonable Service by Wilhemus A'Brakel

Reformed church Christians so easily bedevilled by small time cultists

Read this post by a former member of Doug Wilson's 'church.'

This is what is so pathetic about Wilson's Federal Vision garbage: it's the typical garbage of a cult leader (and notice how his Federal Vision theology is merely a tactic to strengthen his cult activity, and yet he - outstripping all his initial expectations and surprising himself no doubt - so easily has inserted it into your theological world). Look how he and his followers and fellow travelers (mostly from the equally cultic theonomy movement) have so easily bedevilled Reformed denominations and churches and theologians, not to mention the weak members of those Reformed churches. The devil and his followers don't get this brazen unless they sense real weakness in their victims.

It's like if I went to CalTech with a novel set of formulas for testing the strength of materials, and it was all jabberwocky, and I got all the professors and students to get all active and upset and to write articles and books and give lectures and hold meetings confronting my views and denouncing me, all the while I'm laughing and playing games everytime they try to question me and just poking a stick into them, watching the reaction. Oh, and throw in going easy on child molestation within your own cult, because you're not a real cult leader until you can show that you are willing to do something truly satanic. And there you have it. This is what Wilson has been doing to Reformed Christians.

Yes, Reformed church Christians, you have a problem. You can't live the life of Bunyan's Village of Morality and claim to be Christians on the Way. You're as shallow as tv christianity and as worldly and dumb as the culture you grew up in (in for instance proudly claiming the Puritan heritage while bone-headedly denouncing the very thing Puritans were known for: their understanding and willingness to make efforts to effect active, progressive sanctification). The fact that a 3rd rate intellect, grinning clown cult leader like Doug Wilson can bedevil you so easily (the fact that he would even attempt it) says it all regarding your current condition.