Interesting thought

"The worth and excellency of a soul is measured by the object of its love, and the way to grow in holiness is to behold divine excellence."

Got it from this post: http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justintaylor/2014/05/30/a-summary-of-henry-scougals-the-life-of-god-in-the-soul-of-man/

The quote is saying, our actual worth and exellency - of our soul that is - can be measured by what we most love; and if that is God, His holiness and so forth, then that is the ultimate object to focus on and will in turn make God focus more on us.

Notice it's a difficult thought this making God the object of our love. We can respect and fear God, but as sort of 'up there' while we're going about our lives and interests in front of us.

I guess a practical thing to do would be to make a list of exactly what we DO make our object of love that is other than God. Then compare it to God. Is it worth it? Will it do anything for us in the long run? I don't think self-interest is a bad thing in pondering and calculating such things.

Tullian Tchividjian is our new doctrinal master

So, according to R. Scott Clark if you have any criticism of Tullian Tchividjian on law and gospel you are hanging out doctrinally with Norman Shepherd.

This is what Marxists do. In any major discussion they always take the option they don't want people to adopt off the table. During the 20th century, for instance, Marxists would tell you you have two options: Fascism or Communism (right or left). Well, what about the people who were fighting both fascism and communism? You know, those people who were for that thing called liberty? Oh, liberty was taken off the table. Same in economics. Marxists even today say you have a simple choice: totalitarian communism or socialism of one form or another. Well, what happened to free markets and free enterprise? Oh, they take that choice off the table.

So R. Scott Clark is taking something off the table too. You either side with him and Tullian Tchividjian and their radical grace, or you side with Norman Shepherd and the neonomian movements like Federal Vision. Clark has taken away the choice of the middle, historically where the power of Reformed Theology has resided.

They don't like tension, these people. Tough. On-the-mark biblical doctrine has a lot of tension in it.

* * * * * * *

A simple explanation also of why Tullian Tchividjian has received such a response from Reformed theologians is this: Reformed Theology has to be defended also against facile constructions and presentation. Tullian Tchividjian's construction of law and gospel is simply facile. And he's presented himself as unteachable. He's also called his critics stupid and angry. He's a bit of a juvenile delinquent in all this. Part of the juvenile aspect also is he is forcing his critics to feel like if they ever talk about grace then they are actually conceding influence from Tullian Tchividjian. "See, without Tullians' efforts they wouldn't even mention grace!" Tullian Tchividjian and his followers would shout. I.e. it's a ridiculous situation when a narcissistic celebrity who is a bit of a dim bulb regarding the finer yet very important distinctions of biblical doctrine has been let into the club mistakenly and now has had to be kicked out of the club but still carries with him the capital of that club.

The Tullians have arrived

Tullianism is officially here. The Tullians have arrived.

Tullians derive their theology from a Florida pastor named Tullian Tchividjian. He's become a staunch and driving force for his theological insights and has recruited an entire Reformed seminary to his movement: Westminster Seminary California. Professors at that seminary have been broadcasting the several mantras of Tullianism for a few years now.

The mantras of Tullianism:

1. "It's not about you!"

2. "You don't do anything!"

3. "You are not smart!"

Mantra #1 is to remind you that the Christian faith is not about you. Who are you to think the faith has anything to do with you? You are nothing. God is everything. God doesn't even know you exist. (Practical Deism is a necessary consequence of adopting Tullianism.)

Mantra #2 is a Tullian teaching that says attempting to live up to any standards is a quest for fools. Sin must be celebrated. Failure is the actual goal. Because Jesus has done everything. (Not understanding the relationship of sin to our ability/inability vis-a-vis regeneration is a major part of Tullianism. Just as the Federal Visionists don't understand (or pretend not to understand) the difference between the pre-fall and post-fall state, Tullians don't understand the difference between the regenerate state and the glorified state. Some of them also attribute unregenerate inability to the regenerate state because that works for them and their Tullian theology as well.)

Mantra #3 they've adopted from the cultural Marxists that took over the institutions of higher learning they all graduated from and that they've also picked up from the general culture. When you are a Marxist/leftist dhimmi it is necessary to constantly self-justify one's useful idiot state by calling everybody else an idiot.

On that last point it shouldn't surprise anyone that the followers of Tullianism currently defending their theological father on forums and in blog threads are for the most part theological and political liberals.

Ah, I got deleted again, by Westminster California this time

Here is a comment I left at R. Scott Clark's blog where he is defending his rascally former student (maybe not a former student, can't find a reference) Tullian Tchividjian.

There, unfortunately, is a lot of disingenuous bewilderment going on here among Tullian T.'s defenders. We saw/see this in Federal Vision types. "Oh, my, but I just can't see why there is such an uproar over Tullian! (O! that Tullian!) Whatever do people think he's saying?" Obviously he's on board with Westminster California's "It's not about you!" theological movement and the total objectifying of the faith. You don't do anything, you don't even matter. Who are you? It's all about God. Stop trying to think anything has anything to do with stupid little you. And our personal preference as academics is to really not like very much anything to do with the Holy Spirit, and our personal preference is what is most important, so let's knock off the talk of the Holy Spirit and any kind of active, progressive sanctification. Yeah, I know, we get called practical deists, but we'll take that hit. We need to cleanse Reformed doctrine of all this nonsense, and any notion that so-called 'Puritans' existed too.

Here's my take on Tullian:

What Tullian Tchividjian is preaching is an age old no-effort mantra which can be seen today in New Age environments. The fact of regeneration sets the divide. Once regenerated we are *able* to do. Like the new agers Tullian and his followers are wanting to - in effect - jump to the state of glorification where believers will be simply unable to sin. We are not yet glorified.

And R. Scott Clark is missing out on his favorite pass time: accusing people of having an over-realized eschatology. Which clearly Mr. Tullian T. has. But only tactically because at heart Mr. Tullian T. is an angry man. When people get close to the true school of biblical doctrine, Reformed Federal Theology, and they know they have not been regenerated by God, they can go one of two directions: 1) they can show real humility and fear of God, hence showing they are most likely on their way to potential regeneration by the word and the Spirit; or 2) they can, like Cain, get angry and desire revenge. The revenge in this case takes shape in an attack on Reformed Theology itself. An attempted subversion of it. Attacking the truth is akin to attacking God.

You're not allowed to criticize our village idiot!

Reformed seminary graduates are all in an uproar due to one of their own, one of their village idiots, teaching on law and gospel with no understanding of law and gospel, and really, seemingly, giving them all big problems. That they can't deal with a common village idiot speaks volumes. (Sample here, and here, and here. Other links can be found at those links.)

The village idiot is one Tullian Tchividjian. He is preaching the no-effort mantra that is common in New Age environments including Roman Catholicism (ha ha). Anyone who hasn't run into the no-effort mantra hasn't been around much.

What is interesting in Christianity is the fact that once you are regenerated by the word and the Spirit you *better* be able to do.

Here is a comment I left at the Gospel Coalition that they moderated into nothingness:

There's a common no-effort mantra in New Age circles as well. For a Christian, though, once regenerated you become *able* to do. Ability to sin, ability to not sin. Prior to regeneration we had ability to sin, inability to not sin. In the glorified state we will solely have inability to sin. That is a new state.

There are individuals who have a connection to Reformed doctrine who have yet to learn these categories and thus make endless category mistakes.

Simple enough comment, right? They deleted it. "Get taught by a nobody? Are you kidding? I'm a graduate of an elite seminary!!! How dare you!!!!!"

How about just getting taught by Reformed teachers that lived before you or your professors were born?

* * * * * * *

I'll add this note... By the way, just another incident showing how seminary type churchians just suck to no end. They never disappoint.

The true school

The school existed, the true school, throughout history, hidden, open, persecuted, flourishing. Waldensians were part of that continuing presence of the real school. They often had to hide in high valleys in the mountains of Europe. Look at this paragraph from a classic book on Calvinism:

“While writing the Seneca Commentary [Calvin's first book written prior to his Christian activity] Calvin lived in the house of a cloth merchant, Etienne de la Forge, a devout Waldensian from Piedmont. This man was an ardent reader of Luther and a fearless propagandist of Protestantism. He made a practice of distributing to the poor packages accompanied by tracts and passages of Scripture, and he kept open house for religious refugees from the Netherlands. Calvin must have observed these evidences of incautious zeal, for which de la Forge would later pay the penalty of death by fire. Who can say what influence Calvin’s host ultimately had upon his religious attitudes?”

From The History and Character of Calvinism by John T. McNeill

The Alps, Geneva, meant by God to be a counterpart to the seven hills of Rome.


You want the zeal of a false-religion-following Muslim? You have a human prophet of the mountain in Geneva. You have the true school of eternity coming down from that mountain. God's mountain of assembly, Eden, Sinai, Zion, mountain. He's worth a thousand Muhammads, if one needs that. Worth an infinity of Muhammads because like a true prophet he holds to the Word of God and points to the real Prophet, Priest, and King Jesus Christ, Son of God.


Scrape off the traditions of man and the false accretions of worldly and Satanic influence (churchianity). Flash the Sword of the Spirit when they try to intimidate you and lord it over you in their false communions. You don't have to hate them, you can teach them, inspire them by your very presence, but don't give in to them. What they offer is not the true school. Follow the Holy Spirit for the true school.

How to think of God's sovereinty and the playing out of His decree vs. man's responsibility and the effectiveness of effort

One area even the most sophisticated Reformed theologians are a bit shallow (not an insult) is the area of laws as they pertain to man and his will and responsibilty. Laws as in God being sovereign in creation, providence, and grace, as-well-as the playing out of His decree and His control of all that unfolds. Also first cause, or prime mover vs. secondary causes that are either determined, contingent, or free.

One can write a thousand nine-hundred page books, but what one gets from the Westminster Confession of Faith on this subject is about all one can get, and the WCF puts it very succinctly. God is the first cause, but He acts through secondary causes that are either determined, contingent, or free, and from the mix of all those interacting secondary causes there forms a matrix out of which God is sovereign yet man's responsibility is established and effort is meaningful.

Still, that matrix seems a bit two-dimensional, even though we can accept the conclusions above. Is there an element in it all that will make that matrix more than seemingly two-dimensional and hence more alive (in a not-deterministic-to-any-degree sense)?

I think there is, and it's level of being. The Bible speaks of level of being in different ways. It shows different levels of being, but it also blatantly speaks of different levels of being, for instance the apostle Paul speaking of different levels of being of individuals in heaven, implying that level of being is set in this world having to do with progressive sanctification and so on.

If you take accident for one category of laws. Accidents are going to happen, and mathematically they are going to happen to a certain number of people, but do they have to happen to a determined set of people, or just any people, and what makes the difference of being one of the people that the accident happens to and one that doesn't get involved in the accident? In other words can the law of accident be transcended by level of being? For instance how awake you are in your environment. It's a feature of a higher level of being to be more awake in your environment (especially when there are no perceived dangers in the environment) as opposed to being in a state of sleep-walking through your day and environment.

The above example of accident shows how scale and relativity (that level of being brings into play) can make that matrix described above more than two-dimensional.

Another category of law is will. The difference between self-will and ability to act from God's will. A mark of a higher level of being is the ability to act from God's will rather than merely acting from self-will. When one is able to act from God's will one is not simply allowing bodily fears or desires, and then emotion to control one's thoughts and decisions. That is bottom up will. Self-will. When one is able to act from God's will one is able to act top-down. God's commands, to thoughts, to emotions, to actions. When one is able to act in the latter sense it obviously puts one in a different relationship to the various laws that control us at this level. Self-will can get you into all kinds of problems that looking back you would rather not be in. Ability to act from God's will keeps you free from such outcomes. The biblical phrase wait on the Lord refers to how acting from God's will happens. It is a kind of descent-of-the-dove will or action. Yet to be able to wait on that descent-of-the-dove higher will to manifest, especially when you are in a difficult event or situation, requires a higher level of being. We aren't born with that. We have to develop it.

So just with the examples of the laws of accident and will we can see how the subject of first cause and secondary causes (determined, contingent, or free) and how they relate to God's sovereignty and His decree and being in control of everything that unfolds can be seen as very much more than a two-dimensional matrix when you add the scale and relativity that level of being brings to it all.

Means of grace

Is this a biblical string of words: means of grace? Probably, but not in the way those who default to an unregenerate priestcraft - Romanist or Protestant - use it.

Being filled with the Holy Spirit can be seen as monergistic prior to regeneration, and synergistic after regeneration. Like definitive sanctification and progressive sanctification.

If being filled with the Holy Spirit is grace (a part of, a type of) then we can say there are biblical means of grace.

Watchfulness, or being awake, is one.

Loving your enemy is another.

Prayer, obviously.

The Word of God itself, engaging it, meditating upon it is a means of grace, it goes without saying.

What about ritual water baptism and the priestcraft ceremony variously defined and called by different names, Lord's Supper, Communion, Eucharist, Mass, etc.? Are they means of grace, as in dispensing grace? Many Protestants actually claim they aren't, but secretly believe they are, through the back door. Romanists obviously teach full on priestcraft. Protestants are all over the board in how they try to define these rituals. They don't know what to make of them, but the ones most pining for the Beast Church of Rome know what they want them to be. Unregenerate clergy cling to these so-called sacraments for a host of reasons. I'm rambling here because to put succinctly what Protestants believe about these 'sacraments' would be like trying to put succinctly what Marxists believe about economic theory. They're all over the board, half dishonest to begin with, and more addled by the Devil than the fallen angels themselves.

It seems to me that Jesus strikes ritual of any kind from any notion of means of grace. He said it about prayer. Mindless repetition - part of the soul of ritual - is not what we are suppose to engage in regarding prayer. So it seems to me this recruiting of the visual parables of ritual water baptism and breaking of bread and drinking of wine into being the heart of the Christian faith is pretty much of the Devil. The Devil fears regeneration of God's elect the most. It lessens his time before the lake of fire. So anything to drive people away from the Word and the Spirit and into priestcraft ritual is his game.

Note the first two means of grace listed up there: watchfulness, or being awake; and: loving your enemy. But systematic theologies don't talk about those. Are they even in the Bible?

Obviously they are. And they're difficult to do. You have to be regenerate to begin with. Because to attract the Spirit into you by ever greater degree you have to already have the Spirit in you by an act of God. That's a catch-22, you have to have something in you before you can have something in you. God gets us around this catch-22 by regenerating us by the Word and the Spirit. By giving us the Spirit in a monergistic act. We don't do it. God does it. Once it's done we then can attract the Spirit to greater degree. Only Jesus could contain the Spirit "without measure", but we can potentially contain ever greater degree. If we provoke and extend our limits. Which we do by effort to be awake and to love our enemies. Two practices not understood at the church level because the Devil doesn't want it taught at the church level. (They correlate also to the two great commandments of Jesus to love God and to love your neighbor as yourself.) But to see the depth of the teaching requires a search guided by the Holy Spirit. I use the language of the Fourth Way from books such as The Fourth Way and Psychology of Man's Possible Evolution by Ouspensky, but to each their own. Note: the word evolution in that title doesn't refer to mechanical Darwinian evolution. Ouspensky was an effective debunker of the Theory of Evolution.) But if you are going to use the phrase means of grace, they - being awake, and loving your enemy, along with prayer and reading/meditating upon the Word of God itself - are your means of grace. And they are biblical. Taught to you by Jesus Christ Himself.

So be awake.

And love your enemy.

If you fear extra-biblical languages, a. you're probably too shallow to begin with, so, b. just at least make *some* effort with higher influences (art, music, history, philosophy, imaginative literature, science, religion). Don't be a typical no-effort dope. Such types unfortunately define church level leadership and attendance.

And read the Bible complete, the real thing, many times.

And pray.

The company of the giants

This is from Thomas Goodwin, a Puritan, from a work on Ephesians:

He's talking about death and one's destination.

At the end of the world, when Christ shall have taken out all of His own, all the rest shall be cast into the fire prepared for the devil and his angels. The expression in the Old Testament was that men were "gathered to their fathers," but the wicked were gathered unto coetus gigantum - that is, "the company of the giants," those wicked ones before the flood, from whom hell has its denomination, as the first inhabitants of it (Prov. 21:16). So the language of the New Testament is "gathered to the devil and his angels," to the fire prepared for them.

Pro 21:16 The man that wandereth out of the way of understanding shall remain in the congregation of the dead.