"Why Dominion and Kingdom Now Theology Leads The Church Down The Same Road To Apostasy As Pursued By Rome" click here to read it
that this new movement is actually another work of Jesuits or some other Catholic counter-reformation influence, to weaken the position of protestant Christianity and therefore bring them back into the submission to Rome? For example, John Piper (one of the leaders of this movement is heavily involved in the VERY Catholic influenced ecumenical Lausanne Movement.
I have found out some information on the above. This new movement has "emerged" as one of 4 roads branching from the emerging church. It seems to be extremely popular (especially amongst the youth) and is led by leaders like Mark Driscoll and John Piper. Although called new Calvinism it is a very liberal version of Calvinism. It is ecumenical and extremely worldly. This is what Mark Driscoll of New Calvinism (former Emerging Church Pastor) has to say.
John Piper of Desiring God Ministries
The above list was obtained from another blog article entitled "New Calvinisms Personality Driven Life". You can see the same list presented there by clicking this shortcut link: New Calvinist Leaders List
Francis Chan of Cornerstone and founder of Eternity Bible College
Paul Washer? Not sure if he should belong on this list as a NC (certainly his message is not typical NC, although, it is said that PW preaches Lordship Salvation and is a hyper Calvinist and ministers to the youth)
Note: I think John McArthur has been included on that list because of his associations with John Piper, especially because he participates at John Piper's "Desiring God" conferences.
What Does New CalvinismTeach
The biggest cause for concern is their emphasis on “a-millennialism” (rushdoony) and “post-millennialism” (NAR) because its roots are basically Catholic and therefore ecumenical and will eventually turn into a dominionised united global apostate church – even uniting with ALL religions.
It seems that everything they do/believe mostly emanates under the 5 main points of Calvinism = TULIP. Here is a simplified version, so that you can see that it is a theology based on theory (Augustinian theory) and NOT based on the overwhelming teachings of the WHOLE Bible. Although it includes much truth and uses scripture passages, it deliberately twists the majority of scripture verses to FIT IN this theology into the Bible, i.e. they superimpose this theology into the Bible rather than determine their theology based upon the Bible direct.
T stands for Total depravity. The theory that man CANNOT and will not choose God because of his/her total depravity and incapacity to do so. We are warped and DEAD in trespasses and sins, i.e. only God raises the dead, so it is impossible for us to come to God in repentance unless God has chosen us.
P stands for Perseverance of the saints. The theory that the perseverance of the saints UNTIL THE END proves that they are the Elect. They take the verse “He who began a good work in you will bring it to completion” to mean that God works in the elect until the very end, i.e. those who fall away proves that they were not of the elect
Why Is Calvin’s Teaching Dangerous
From the above description of TULIP it is clear that there is much error in their thinking which is theoretical rather than Biblical. I will go on to ONLY focus on the more serious issues of their heresy (which tends to lead to ecumenism) without getting caught up on the minors.
Here is an excellent book which exposes reformed theology as false: (if you have any difficulties opening it, please email me and I will send it to you as a pdf attachment)
Why Is Dominion Teaching Dangerous
However, during the process of putting this article together, I also came across Rushdoony in the process. He was the forerunner of the "reconstructionist" version of Dominionism which also the NAR super apostle Peter Wagner is promoting. The differences between Rushdoony and NAR are only superficial. Where Rushdoony followers are looking to a Dominionised Christian world controlled by “reconstructed” Mosaic Law, NAR are seeking to “restore” all things, ie restoration movement. Both seek the church to have dominion over all the Earth BEFORE Jesus returns.
This is why Paul encouraged us to "walk in the Spirit and you will not gratify the desires of the flesh" because it is clear that at times we fail!!! The Catholic Institution exercised Dominionism. Just consider how quickly it turned into the flesh. It became something satanically inspired.
John warned us that the "whole world (ie world system) lay under the control of the evil one" This means that THIS AGE (before Jesus returns) has governments influenced and controlled by demons. This is why we pray for Governments so that the influence of satan will be weakened somewhat. However, our main prayer should be "maranatha" because ONLY then will the kingdoms of this world belong to Christ AND NOT UNTIL THEN!
Jesus NEVER stated that the role of the church was to have dominion. He simply stated that we should preach the gospel and making disciples throughout the Earth.
The whole doctrine of Dominionism is taken from a few isolated and vague verses (out of context). For example in Genesis it is referring to ruling over the animal kingdom and taking care of the planet. Then Jesus said to "make disciples of all nations". It is really making excessively great leaps to suggest Jesus meant ruling the World. Again the context would show it means we should make disciples FROM the nations.
The danger of Rushdoony and NAR is that TOGETHER the ultimate result is exactly the same i.e. an attempt to set up God's kingdom rule throughout the Earth which is contrary to our real purpose. Philippians 2 tells us that our attitude should be the same as Christ "although He was in the form of God did not count equality as SOMETHING TO BE GRASPED but EMPTIED HIMSELF and took on the form of a SERVANT ....." We are told to do the same thing! HUMILITY and servitude is the bottom line, until Jesus returns!!! Our role is simply (in humility and love) to preach the gospel throughout the World seeking to save PEOPLE (not nations or governments) from their sins
How Does New Calvinism fit into the Ecumenical, Rushdoony and NAR Dominion scheme of things
Firstly, here is a link which is a good description of dominionism:
He has ecumenical leanings and has recently had strong associations with the ecumenical "New Apostolic Reformation" inviting Rick Warren (who is also on the LM council) to speak at his "Desiring God" conference 2010. He also has invited C Peter Wagner (Main “super” apostle of NAR) to speak at meetings.
The fact that those who participate in New Calvinism are linking themselves to NAR (New Apostolic Reformation) leaders, is quite telling. There is overwhelming proof and evidence to prove that NAR are working with the Vatican to bring about their ecumenical mandate of the 1960’s. I have also written a number of articles showing how apostate and ecumenical the NAR are. Therefore, if New Calvinist leaders are working together with the NAR then it means they are also ecumenical.
From what I have read they have MANY similarities. The differences are only superficial. The deep underlying doctrines are actually from the same ilk of age-old Catholic dominionism, i.e. that Jesus will not return until the Church reigns on Earth. It carries the belief that we are actually now in the "allegorised" Millennium and therefore have the authority to reign.
New Calvinism is ecumenical because many of the main leaders are associated with ecumenical groups and promote Catholic ecumenism.
I had (many years ago) spent some time reading up on some of the teachings of Calvinism, especially as presented from Romans 8. If we read Romans 8 in isolation from the rest of the Bible it would be easy to conclude that Calvinists are correct. However, we need to compare the whole Bible with Romans 8 to get the correct context of that chapter. If we take Romans 8 in isolation we would come to the conclusion of "fatalism". I mean, if man does not have freewill and God DOES EVERYTHING and "all things work out together for the good" for the elect, then it stands to reason that Toronto Blessing. Lakeland, Pensacola etc. MUST be of God and ecumenism is okay because God is Sovereign! In the Calvinists thinking, nothing happens without God planning it or because He permits it. Bear in mind that the background of reformed theology comes from the Catholic Augustine and much of RT comes from vasts amount of older Catholic teaching. Therefore, this fatalistic thinking WILL lead to a re-uniting with the Catholic Church and accepting all sorts of error.
Anyway, based on the above study, I can now see how even the "pure in heart" true disciples can still preach reformed theology because they simply HAVE to defend their theological position which they sincerely believe to be right.
Before I state why New Calvinism is apostate, I will just give some important reflections:
God has gradually awakened the church out of the dark ages and exposed error by providing the Bible to us all. Because Romany so entrenched everything it became extremely difficult to escape from the affects. Although Luther, Calvin, Arminias etc. were still confessed Catholics, God used them as a starting point to expose SOME serious errors. In time God brought newer revelation through those awakened by God, to restore old truths long ignored by Rome. Wesley (although still influenced by old Catholic ideas including a "works" theology of Arminias) was shown further revelations.
Here is an excerpt taken from Jacob Prasch Report
“The pre-Nicean Church Fathers (for all of their faults) maintained the contention the Apostolic tradition was pre-millennial. the spiritualization of the Millennial Reign of Christ is the invention of Augustine of Hippo and his ilk (who copied the influences of the Alexandrian Gnostics in his hermeneutics) when they needed to Hellenize the church away from its biblical Judaic root (Romans 11:18 ) in order to accommodate Constantine’s making it a state religion and state church which of course laid the foundation for Roman Catholicism and the Roman papacy. Like most people deceived into the errors of Calvinism, they are simply too ignorant to realize it.
Why The Calvinistic Method Of CollectingTheology Is Wrong Compared To The Biblically Correct Way
The scriptures are clear (to me) that those God saves are eternally kept by Him, so I cannot agree with Arminianism either. The conclusion SURELY must be that God HAS given us free will to choose or reject Him, but if we choose Him, He then enables us to receive Him and then empowers us to be kept by Him eternally. When the bible discusses predestination and election I understand it to mean that God knew in advance who would receive or reject Him. He knew from the very beginning of time! Therefore, effectively the elect are predestined, chosen because God sees the end from the beginning.
"I use a systematic approach by studying the WHOLE Bible to understand the whole counsel and eternal plan of God with all its micro and macro parts BEFORE I formulate my theology. First I formulate FROM SCRIPTURE the essential starting points of my position
Why Is Reformed Theology Not Biblical Theology
Defamation Of God’s Character
The Bible teaches us that God is full of Love, Compassion, Mercy, He is Just and Righteous in all His ways. Calvinism’s reformed theology defames God’s character by (effectively) teaching that God creates some humans for the sole purpose of sending them to an eternal torment of hell. This actually teaches something about God which is NOT true!
Regarding election, I believe that means that God knows the end from the beginning, so He knows in advance ALL those who will choose Him. They are therefore all (pre) destined to become children of God and therefore effectively are the elect. In the same way that God foreknew "before the foundation of the Earth" of His redemption plan in Jesus. "the lamb that was slain before the foundation of the Earth", i.e. He knew the end from the very beginning
History and Information Behind Dominionism Within Reformed Theology
The Reformation started as a "protest" against the "indulgencies" within the Catholic Organisation. The indulgencies were "payments" to absolve sins. Rome became very rich because of these indulgencies. Basically they were teaching that you could pay to be absolved for doing specific sins, basically you can sin as much as you like as long as you pay for it. Luther was the first to appeal against this around 1515 (16th century). He did not appeal against most of the other false pagan teaching and practices - only this idea of payment and hence "works" salvation. Calvin (soon after Luther) took the teaching of "grace" further and brought in Augustine’s theology of election. Calvin also introduced the unbiblical doctrines of TULIP.
Anyway, as the laity were still for centuries later (in most part) trusting the leaders for their theology (which included the “dominion” teaching of “a-millennialism”), rather than studying the Bible direct for their own theology, it took a long time for the old truths of the Bible to be restored to the church. The Anabaptists were such a group who DID read the Bible for themselves and were put to death by the Calvinists because they disagreed with Calvinism.
I haven't found any article that specifically stated Spurgeon or Whitfield rejected Dominionism (if you can find it please show me). In reality Dominionism (it appears) was not a doctrine specifically taught until recent times. It may well have been implied and practiced but not specifically taught (at least, not like it is today). In fact, Whitfield illustrated his “dominion” viewpoint in practice, through his pro slavery activities. Please check out http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Whitefield which includes a section entitled Advocacy of slavery in which it says:
Therefore, the theory/teaching of:
As far as I can tell, post-millennialism developed much later AFTER the Reformation, which is a belief that the church has responsibility NOW to set up God's kingdom and work tirelessly to prepare the church as a glorious "dominionistic" bride who would usher in the return of Jesus to set up the thousand years.