Denesh gives false assurance of future salvation to women who transgress by teaching men the Scripture. Yet, after tampering with Scripture to people-please and excuse unrepentant sin, he has the audacity to slanderously accuse me of being a false teacher for refusing to play along with these lies. The diabolos = devil.
(Denesh's words sent to me by email are in blue. My comments on his words are in black.) You preach a false good news of works, not grace. For many months now as we have been saying to you that the crux of the issue is not about the interpretation of 1 Cor 11 but something far more fundamental. You have made this issue of your views on women in ministry a salvation issue by saying to people that they will be under God's judgment and that their salvation could potentially be at stake if they do not conform to your views. For example, you have written: - Regarding women teaching mixed groups: “allow teaching mixed groups…is it loving to send our sisters and expose them to "potential" transgression with "potential" implications for their salvation?...I firmly believe this is transgression and there are implications on salvation.” - “And therefore, you can't continue not covering your head while claiming to be obedient…Furthermore, you have been taught all this, but you persist in disobedience. That in God's sight is being contentious…I love you and I don't want you to be sad or hurt, much less eternally punished!” - On 1 Tim 2:15 you have written: - "Here's the implication you need to realize: What if she doesn't repent of her transgression of doing a man's job? Yet she will be saved... if she repents and leads a godly life as woman. What if she doesn't? There are implications for her salvation!" - "I know there are many ways people try to apply this text to allow teaching mixed groups… I've heard them all and I'm not convinced. And given the stakes just mentioned, are you 100% confident these "reasons" will be accepted by Christ? In fact, complementarians who give these "reasons" always admit it's a grey issue. But even if it really is grey, given the stakes involved, is it loving to send our sisters and expose them to "potential" transgression with "potential" implications for their salvation? Do you stay in "grey" or do you intentionally move to clear-cut white? What's the meaning of blameless? What's a typical wise godly decision? Staying in a certain shade of "grey"? I firmly believe this is transgression and there are implications on salvation. So I will never ever send women into these kinds of situations no matter what shade of "grey" someone claims it is. How tragic it will be that in their act of "serving" God, they end up in fact sinning against God and endangering their soul!" Jeremy, that is to preach a false good news and it makes you a false teacher. It is one thing to hold differing views on secondary issues in the Bible but quite another to insist that people must conform to your views or risk damnation. In addition, having read your paper, you crucially rule out the possibility of discussing other issues that impact on the interpretation and application of the passage such as first century cultural norms, hermeneutics and your wider good news & theological framework, based on your erroneous understanding of Sola Scriptura. Thus your claim to be open to correction and discussion is false. In the light of this, passages like Titus 1:10-11 and Titus 3:10-11 very sadly apply to you: - "For there are many who are insubordinate, empty talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision party. 11 They must be silenced, since they are upsetting whole families by teaching for shameful gain what they ought not to teach." (Titus 1:10-11) - "As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, 11 knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned." (Titus 3:10-11)
Denesh rejects the point I’ve derived from 1 Tim 2v14-15, which shows that salvation is conditional upon: #1: women repenting from the transgression of teaching men or spiritually leading men #2: women continuing in… A) faith, B) love, holiness, self-control: summarized as godliness or good works. He has every right to reject this point if he provides evidence from Scripture to do so. But he does not even bother to give his own interpretation of v14-15. Clearly, he expects me to take his word as God’s word. No need to support your assertions from Scripture? Just cos Denesh says so, so it is so? Oh, forgive me Pope Denesh for contradicting your word. He rejects the point that women who refuse to stop teaching men or spiritually leading men are endangering their salvation, and that men and women who refuse to maintain the headcovering tradition likewise endanger their salvation. He rightly notes that the fundamental issue beneath 1 Cor 11 (headcoverings) and 1 Tim 2v11-15 (women teaching men) is one’s understanding of the good news. Which is why he accuses me of preaching a “false good news of works”. The fundamental issue is whether good works are necessary for salvation. Yes. Good works are necessary for a believer to be saved! 1 Tim 2v14-15 is just one text amongst many which teaches this truth. But he seems to think “grace” means confessing Christians can continue rejecting these commands in 1 Cor 11 & 1 Tim 2v11-15 without endangering their salvation. He accuses me of being a “false teacher”, “insubordinate, an empty talker and a deceiver… teaching for shameful gain what I ought not to teach”. This comes from his application of Titus 1v10-11 to me. - False teacher and deceiver?! Who is twisting the Scriptures and lying through his teeth? - Yes, I confess, I am extremely insubordinate. Guilty as charged. I am habitually and incorrigibly insubordinate to any church leader who is insubordinate to God’s word and refuses to repent. - Empty talker?! Who is the one accusing, yet failing to produce any substance? Where is your Scripture as evidence to support your accusations? In the 2 previous responses alone, I have uploaded slightly more than 53,000 words of explanation for why I taught what I taught.
What is your response? I asked you for a public debate. But you secretly excommunicate me over email in contradiction of Matt 18v15-19 and then announce to the church. Why no debate? You cannot bear to share with the church your overwhelming evidence regarding 1 Cor 11-14 (or any issue for that matter)?
- Teaching for shameful gain?! What have I gained from teaching these things? Loss of a job. Near depression. Excommunication. Not a single cent of profit. Loss of all Christian family and friends who refuse to stand by me and prefer to believe lies. Slander. Betrayal. Utter loneliness. Who is still drawing a salary, well-respected, surrounded by family and friends, all the while teaching things contrary to Scripture, surely things one ought not to teach?!
Furthermore, he regards me to be “divisive, warped, sinful and self-condemned”. This comes from his application of Titus 3:10-11 to me. 1 Tim 1 shows that those who correct false teaching are not considered divisive by the apostles. It is those who twist the Scriptures who are described as such.
So, what will you say to Yarbrough and Mounce who rightly define genuine faith as persevering faith that works good works? And what do you say to Schreiner who, commenting on v15, with regard to women’s roles, stated 6 times that perseverance in good works is necessary for salvation, including, “women will not be saved if they do not practice good works.” “Schreiner, you preach a false gospel of works, not grace”?
Aren’t these your top Reformed, complementarian scholars? Oh, but when a no name like me points out that Paul taught women to repent from the transgression of teaching men or spiritually leading men, return to their appropriate roles and continue in faith AND good works in order to be saved, then I’m a false teacher preaching works not grace. But when your own Reformed, complementarian scholars teach it, no problem eh? May God judge the hypocrites.
So once again, snakes lie and functionally censor God’s Word to fit their so-called, “gospel & theological framework”. This is the original 1 Tim 2v15: 15 Yet she will be saved through childbearing—if they continue in faith and love and holiness, with self-control.
This is their 1 Tim 2v15:
15 Yet she will be saved —if they continue in faith. You will not surely die… May God judge between me and you and all the other snakes out there.
The Crossing Church's spiritual forefathers, the St Helenites of London, are such double-tongued snakes that even though they call themselves complementarian, they somehow muster up enough hypocrisy to congratulate a female Bishop!
Now let me add in the quotes from the Reformed, complementarian scholars I mentioned above. Underlines mine for emphasis. Red font indicates Protestant errors.
Schreiner:
When Paul says that women will be saved by childbearing, he means, therefore, that they will be saved by adhering to their ordained role. Such a statement is apt to be misunderstood (and often has been), and thus a further comment is needed. Paul says that women will be saved “if they remain in faith and love and sanctification along with discretion.” Thereby Paul shows that it is insufficent for salvation for Christian women to merely bear children; they must also persevere in faith, love, holiness and presumably other virtues. The reference to “discretion” (σωφροσύνης) harkens back to the same word in v.9 and also functions to tie the entire text together. Paul does not imply that all women must bear children to be saved (cf. v.10). His purpose is to say that women will not be saved if they do not practice good works. One indication that women are doing good works is if they do not reject bearing children as evil but bear children in accord with their proper role.
Many will object that this boils down to salvation by works and contradicts Pauline theology. A contradiction with Pauline theology would only exist, though, if the text were claiming that one must do these good works in order to earn or merit salvation or that works constitute the ground of one’s salvation (e.g., Rom 2:6-10, 26-29; 1 Cor. 6:9-11; Gal. 5:21). Paul is not asserting in 1 Timothy 2:15 that women merit salvation by bearing children and doing other good works. He has already clarified that salvation is by God’s mercy and grace (cf. 1 Tim. 1:12-17). Paul uses the term σωθήσεται rather loosely here, without specifying in what sense women are saved by childbearing and doing other good works. Since Paul often argues elsewhere that salvation is gained not on the basis of our works (e.g., Rom 3:19-4:25; Gal. 2:16-3:14; 2 Tim. 1:9-11; Titus 2:11-14; 3:4-7), I think it is fair to understand the virtues described here as a result of new life in Christ. Any good works of the Christian, of course, are not the ultimate basis of salvation, for the ultimate basis of salvation is only the righteousness of Christ granted to us.
The same problem arises in 1 Timothy 4:11-16. There Paul exhorts Timothy to live a godly life - “be an example for believers in speech, in conduct, in love, in faith, in purity” (v.12) - and to keep instructing believers in the truth of the good news. Paul sums up these instructions to Timothy in v.16a: “Pay heed to yourself and to your teaching; remain in them.” In other words, Timothy is to keep practicing the virtues specified in v.12 and to continue instructing the church. In v.16b Paul supplies a reason as to why Timothy should be virtuous and keep teaching: “For by doing this, you will save both yourself and your hearers.” Once again Paul uses the verb σῴζω with reference to spiritual salvation. Paul certainly does not mean that Timothy and his hearers will be “physically preserved” if they live godly lives and continue in godly instruction. One could protest that Paul is teaching salvation by meritorious works here, since he says that Timothy and his hearers will be saved if they live godly lives and continue in right instruction. But this would be a mistake.
What Paul means is that abiding in godly virtues and obeying apostolic instruction are necessary for salvation; they are necessary because they function as the evidence of new life in Christ. Those who fall away have no assurance that they belong to the redeemed community (cf 1 Cor. 9:24-10:22). Indeed, the New Testament often teaches the necessity of doing good works or persevering to the end in order to realize salvation (cf., e.g., Heb. 2:1-4; 3:7-19; 5:11-6:12; 10:26-31; 12:25-29; James 2:14-26; 2 Pet 1:5-11; 1 John 2:3-6).
The parallel text in 1 Timothy 4:11-16 indicates that it is too simplistic to wave aside the reference to salvation by bearing children as salvation by meritorious works. Upon examining the context and historical situation carefully, we see that Paul selected childbearing because of his deep concern over the false teachers who denigrated marriage and the maternal role of women. He added other virtues in the conditional clause to prevent misunderstanding. The genuineness of salvation is evidenced not by childbirth alone but by a woman living a godly life and conforming to her God-ordained role. These good works are necessary to obtain eschatological salvation…
Women, Paul reminds his readers, will experience eschatological salvation by adhering to their proper role, which is exemplified in giving birth to children. Of course, adhering to one’s proper role is insufficient for salvation; women must also practice other Christian virtues in order to be saved.
Thomas R. Schreiner, Women in the Church: An Interpretation & Application Of 1 Timothy 2:9-15, 3rd Edition (2016), p222-225, Crossway
Yarbrough:
“If they continue” underscores perseverance as a sign that women are on a trajectory terminating in eschatological salvation. “Faith” is where the pilgrimage begins. It is the path women (like men) follow every day of their lives. It means personal and dynamic trust in God as he has revealed himself savingly in Christ. “Love” can be viewed as even greater than faith (1 Cor 13:13); certainly “faith” that does not result in love (and works that express love) falls short of the faith Paul has in mind, which is a faith that works (see v. 10; Gal 5:6; Phil 2:12–13; 1 Thess 1:3).
Yarbrough, R. W. (2018). The Letters to Timothy and Titus. (D. A. Carson, Ed.) (pp. 188–189). Grand Rapids, MI; London: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company; Apollos.
Mounce:
…Paul is saying that a woman’s salvation and the practical outworking of that salvation (cf. Phil 2:12) do not consist in altering her role in the church. Rather, she is to accept her God-given role, one of the specific functions being the bearing of children (synecdoche). Of course, her salvation—and man’s—ultimately is predicated upon perseverance; she must live out her salvation in all faith and love and holiness, with modesty. This is the standard Pauline thought that salvation requires continual perseverance (cf. 1 Tim 4:16), and good works, far from meriting salvation (cf. 1 Tim 1:12–17), are evidence of that salvation (cf. Rom 2:6–10, 26–29; 1 Cor 6:9–11; Gal 5:21; cf. T. R. Schreiner, “Did Paul Believe in Justification by Works? Another Look at Romans 2,” BBR 3 [1993] 131–58).
Mounce, W. D. (2000). Pastoral Epistles (Vol. 46, p. 146). Dallas: Word, Incorporated.
These statements by Schreiner are not precise enough:
if the text were claiming that one must do these good works in order to earn or merit salvation or that works constitute the ground of one’s salvation (e.g., Rom 2:6-10, 26-29; 1 Cor. 6:9-11; Gal. 5:21). Paul is not asserting in 1 Timothy 2:15 that women merit salvation by bearing children and doing other good works.
Note that I say "not precise enough" rather than "completely false". Why?
Because it is true that our pre-Christian works do not make us worthy of present salvation.
But it is also true that our sins are forgiven because of Jesus' propitiatory sacrifice on the cross AND our Christian works make us WORTHY of future salvation and eternal life in the Kingdom of God.
Explanation: Christian disciples get baptised and learn to observe ALL of Jesus' commands (Matt 28v19-20), not just some commands. No such thing as picking and choosing which commands you want to obey and which commands you want to disobey. A true Christian disciple takes his baptism vow seriously and learns to observe ALL of Jesus' commands. Not that Christians can live sinless lives yet. Otherwise Jesus would not need to teach us to pray, "Give us this day our daily bread and forgive our sins..." Clearly, Christians still sin daily in 1 way or another. But we seek forgiveness for those sins, we repent, we change. However, there are MANY who will not repent from their sins but still call themselves "Christian". They redefine the commands so that they can deceive themselves and others that they're still serious about obeying ALL of Jesus' commands. Or lots of them don't even bother to come up with lies to redefine the commands. They just ignore the commands like they don't exist. Now, Jesus warns such disciples in Rev 3v1-5 that they are actually spiritually dead because their works are incomplete, because they refuse to obey ALL his commands, because they choose to do SOME good works but reject other good works. How will Jesus deal with such unrepentant spiritually dead disciples? Jesus will visit them suddenly to punish them. On the other hand, there are Christians who are truly spiritually alive, whose works are complete, who truly seek to obey ALL of Jesus' commands, who don't pick and choose to do some good works and reject some good works, they are promised eternal life. WHY? Because they are WORTHY (Rev 3v4).
Rev 3v1-5: “‘I know your works. You have the reputation of being alive, but you are dead. 2 Wake up, and strengthen what remains and is about to die, for I have not found your works complete in the sight of my God. 3 Remember, then, what you received and heard. Keep it, and repent. If you will not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what hour I will come against you. 4 Yet you have still a few names in Sardis, people who have not soiled their garments, and they will walk with me in white, for they are WORTHY. 5 The one who conquers will be clothed thus in white garments, and I will never blot his name out of the book of life. I will confess his name before my Father and before his Messengers.
This is why I said earlier:
"But it is also true that our sins are forgiven because of Jesus' propitiatory sacrifice on the cross AND our Christian works make us WORTHY of future salvation and eternal life in the Kingdom of God."
Verses like Rev 3v4 prove that Christians must do good works to be WORTHY of future salvation and eternal life in the Kingdom of God.
Only the dishonest will deny it.
For more on God's unmerited favor versus merited favor OR God's unconditional love versus conditional love see: https://searchingscripture.wixsite.com/solascriptura/post/god-jesus-unconditional-conditional-love-favor
Next, this statement by Schreiner is completely false:
Any good works of the Christian, of course, are not the ultimate basis of salvation, for the ultimate basis of salvation is only the righteousness of Christ granted to us.
Critique of the man-made Protestant tradition of the "righteousness of Christ" can be found here: https://searchingscripture.wixsite.com/solascriptura/post/some-protestants-don-t-believe-iroc-too
Critiquing the St Helenite "gospel" in Rom2: https://youtu.be/tRV6tC6VEJ4
The Reformed Protestant "gospel" is only half true (at best).
But Denesh's "gospel of grace" is even less than half true!
You can find my critique on their very common Protestant-out-of-context handling of Eph 2v8-9 which results in their distorted "gospel of grace" here in this video: https://youtu.be/Vofm7BYrzRs
In the video, I specifically critique The Crossing Church's teaching on "grace" which is VERY deficient. For the majority of the video, I explain things step by step. But at times, I will be sarcastic towards those who INTENTIONALLY distort the text by ripping verses out of their immediate context. If it was accidental, apologise, change, and don't do it again. But these false teachers spread their lies far and wide to cover up their unrepentant sins and give people false assurance of salvation in the name of "grace". It's as if they never read Rom6: 1 What shall we say then? Are we to continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 By no means!
And they dare to call their lies the "gospel of grace"!
THEY DO NOT PREACH THE GOOD NEWS PREACHED BY JESUS OR HIS APOSTLES.
THEY PREACH A DIFFERENT "gospel of grace".
But SO MANY Protestants love this "gospel of grace". Of course, it gives them an excuse to continue walking in sins and refusing to repent from them. "Grace, grace, grace".
Gal 1v6-10:
6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the favour of Anointed-One and are turning to a different Good News— 7 not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the Good News of Anointed-One. 8 But even if we or a Messenger from heaven should preach to you a Good News contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be anathema! 9 As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a Good News contrary to the one you received, let him be anathema! 10 For am I now seeking the approval of man, or of God? Or am I trying to please man? If I were still trying to please man, I would not be a slave of Anointed-One.
Fuller critique of egalitarian and complementarian scholars who distort 1Tim2v11-15 can be found in here: http://tinyurl.com/1-Tim2-3-GodlyMenWomen
Videos on 1Tim2v11-15:
V11-12: https://youtu.be/oeaoO6yghCA
V14-15*: https://youtu.be/QJMSEBQRPBU
*Especially relevant for this post
Comentários