That Federal Vision Heretic, John Gerstner

John Gerstner has recently been exposed as an incipient Federal Visionary and a heretic. The evidence appears in footnote 798 on page 211 of this dangerous book.

Regarding Norman Shepherd's paper, "The Grace of Justification," Gerstner wrote these disturbing words: "This paper is very clear evidence of his sola fideism to which only an antinomian could take exception."

Only an FVer/heretic could make such a statement. Unfortunately, Gerstner actually read Shepherd's paper and came to his own conclusions. Apparently, he did not get the memo that Shepherd was to be lynched without a proper trial.

Of course, Gerstner did speak rather prophetically by predicting that only an antinomian would find Shepherd offensive. The entire Anti-Federal Vision movement could be summed up as antinomian. Our goal is to redefine sola fide as antinomianism.

Trust and DISobey: An AFVSB Book Review

Federal Visionists love Norman Shepherd, which, of course, automatically makes them all heretics. As everyone knows, Shepherd was fired with cause from Westminster Theological Seminary for the heresy of denying the biblical truth of Sola Fide.

Amazingly, Ian Hewitson has just published a book, Trust and Obey: Norman Shepherd & The Justification Controversy at Westminster Theological Seminary, that attempts "to remove suspicion from Shepherd and to restore to him that which is more precious to him than silver or gold - his good name." Of course, this would be tantamount to renouncing our faith in Luther. Me genoito!

Trust and Obey marshalls a ton of evidence to implicate WTS of injustice. The first half of the book proves that WTS "did not have adequate grounds to remove Shepherd." The second half of the book demonstrates that WTS "also had no grounds theologically to remove" Shepherd.

Whether or not the author is correct is irrelevant; expedience is our catapult. In the end, God's will was done, and the heretic was removed. Who cares about justice and integrity? The gospel is at steak! We are ordained to use whatever means necessary to preserve our theological paradigms.

Rest assured, we did not actually read Trust and Obey, as we need to guard ourselves against the schemes of Satan. Just a cursory skim of the book reveals an ungodly obsession with details and a constant footnoting of source documents. Do not let this pseudo-scholarly enterprise fool you into Sympathy for the Devil. God is not in the details.

Here's a howler from the conclusion to Trust and Obey: "Shepherd must be held in high esteem for his solid commitment to Scripture and for his insistence that every generation must continually revise dogmatic formulations in light of the Word of God."

Obviously, the FVers have learned from their godfather, as this is a classic FV ploy: suggesting that the Confession should be revised in light of the scriptures. Don't they know by now that an appeal to sola scriptura is never going to faze us? We read the scriptures in light of the Confessions, not the other way around. We are not interested in getting into a "whose bible interpretation is correct" debate.

Therefore, we at the AFVSB are issuing this grave warning: under no circumstances should you read Trust and Obey. We have worked hard at circulating half-truths and outright lies about Norman Shepherd. A dangerous book like this could undermine all of our efforts. Soli Deo Gloria!

James 2:24

"You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone" (James 2:24).

Federal Visionists love this verse because James allegedly says that justification is by works and not by faith alone. They talk about the "whole counsel of God" (whatever that is) and how this passage ought to inform our definition of justification. They babble on about "Biblicism." They love to appeal to Sola Scriptura and all that rot. Let me show you a more excellent way.

First, Biblicism is a dangerous error that threatens our Modern Reformation. Biblicists are the reckless sort of people who attempt to read the Bible and take it seriously. The Bible is holey book that can only be handled by men who have been trained how to escape the plain meaning of the text.

Second, while we Anti-Federal Visionists feel that Sola Scriptura is a decent slogan, we must warn against its abuse. Anyone who invokes Sola Scriptura is simply trying to appeal to the Bible as our highest authority. However, this grossly misunderstands what Sola Scriptura means. Historically, Sola Scriptura means that our highest authority is how the Reformed church has interpreted the Bible.

For this reason, the Truly Reformed have always favored Sola Fide over Sola Scriptura. No one could argue with the truth that Sola Fide is more foundational to our cause. In fact, if forced to choose, we would pick Sola Fide over and against Sola Scriptura. In all fairness, we would be fine if we just changed the slogan from Sola Scriptura to Sola Traditiona.

1 John 3:23

“This is His commandment, that we believe in the name of His Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, just as He commanded us” (1 John 3:23).

Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that we are “commanded” to “believe.” However, this turns faith into a work, which is a standard Pelagian mistake.

The Reformed faith has always insisted that faith is a resting, relaxing, and reposing in the finished work of Christ. In no way is faith a work. In no way is faith obeying a commandment.

If we ever view belief or faith as a commandment, then we are going to turn faith into obedience, which is a work. Faith is in no sense a work. Faith occasionally performs works, but faith is not a work itself.

Those who claim that faith is a commandment to be obeyed are preaching a different gospel, which is no gospel at all.

1 Peter 4:17

“For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God?” (1 Peter 4:17).

Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that the household of God obeys the gospel. However, this is the toxic cocktail formed by mixing law and gospel.

The Reformed faith has always insisted that law and gospel are mutually exclusive categories. They are as different as night and day. They are certainly not to be mixed.

Law is God’s demand for perfect obedience. Hence, obedience is only associated with the law.

Gospel is God’s free gift. It cannot be earned or merited through obedience. Obedience has nothing to do with gospel.

Thus, “obedience” and “gospel” are incongruous. Those who attempt to “obey the gospel” find themselves plunging towards Pelagius.

Rather, we appropriate the gospel by faith alone. This faith alone rests upon the gospel. In no way should we ever attempt to obey the gospel. This is turns gospel into law, which is not good news.

John 5:28-29

“Do not marvel at this; for the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth--those who have done good, to the resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation” (John 5:28-29).

Federal Visionists love this passage because they think that those who have done good will be resurrected to life, and those who have done evil will be resurrected to condemnation. However, this is does not comport with the solas.

How much good does one have to do to qualify for the resurrection to life? How much evil does one have to do to qualify for the resurrection to condemnation? Is one good deed enough to save? Is one bad deed enough to condemn? This quickly becomes a Pelagian game, in which no one is saved and no one is condemned.

Jesus was obviously having a little fun with the disciples, throwing out a blatantly Pelagian statement just to get their attention. Undoubtedly, the disciples had a good laugh when they realized that Jesus was just kidding.

John 14:1

“Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me” (John 14:1).

Federal Visionists love this verse because they think that we are saved by believing in Jesus, emphasizing that we must believe in the person of Christ, not merely propositions about Christ. Obviously, this puts Federal Visionists in bed with the neo-orthodox and other liberals.

Since the Reformation, the elect have cherished sola fide, the doctrine that we are saved by faith alone. Now, technically, the object of our faith alone is Jesus. However, Jesus is not merely a wax nose that can be shaped by anyone. The content of our faith alone is crucial. What do we believe (alone) about Jesus and God?

The Reformed faith has always insisted that the most fundamental doctrine of theology proper is that God justifies by faith alone. Justification by faith alone is the doctrine by which the church stands or falls. This is the doctrine that saves your soul. This is the doctrine that divides the sheep from the goats.

At the judgment, many will say to Jesus, “Lord, did we not believe in you?” But he will say, “You did not believe in justification by faith alone. Depart from me. I never knew you.”

Federal Visionists accuse us of making sola fide our god, but this is a baseless charge. We can only answer that we align ourselves with the Reformed tradition, trusting wholeheartedly in sola fide. Here we stand. We can do no other. So help us, sola fide.

Romans 9:31-32

“But, Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law. Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as though it were by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone” (Romans 9:31-32).

Federal Visionists love this passage because they think Paul is saying that Israel should have pursued the Mosaic Covenant by faith rather than by works. Paul allegedly argues that Israel could have “arrived” at the law through faith, but they did not “arrive” at the law because they pursued the law by works. If Israel could have “arrived” at the law through faith, then this would mean that the Mosaic Covenant was a Covenant of Grace rather than a Covenant of Works. Obviously, this is neo-Shepherdian-legalism.

The Reformed faith has unanimously insisted that the Mosaic Covenant was a republication of the Covenant of Works. The Mosaic Covenant did not require faith; it required absolute perfection. Thus, Israel was correct to pursue it by works rather than by faith. Israel failed because they were not perfect, not because they did or did not have faith. Faith has nothing to do with the Mosaic Covenant.

1 Corinthians 13:2

"If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing" (1 Corinthians 13:2).

Federal Visionists love this verse because it sounds as if Paul is saying that faith alone is not enough. However, this kind of exegesis is historically naïve.

The Reformed faith has always insisted that justification is by faith alone (sola fide). Love is not part of faith, and thus, love is not a requirement for salvation. Love is a work and cannot be included in salvation in any way without compromising the gospel of sola fide. So, Paul does not really mean that faith without love is “nothing.” He is just exaggerating to make a point about how we should obey from gratitude.

James 2:14

"What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him?" (James 2:14).

Federal Visionists love this passage because when James asks whether faith without works can save, he anticipates a negative answer (due to the presence of the Greek particle me at the beginning of the sentence). Thus, James is boldly declaring that faith alone cannot save, which seems like a blatant contradiction of sola fide.

However, there is no reason to ditch the historic Reformed faith. As the esteemed commentator Zane Hodges has pointed out, the word “save” probably refers to being “rescued” from trials. James is not speaking about eternal salvation but earthly deliverance, namely that faith without works cannot deliver us from earthly trials. Thank God for men like Zane Hodges who are committed to protecting sola fide!

Romans 6:17

"But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed" (Romans 6:17).

Federal Visionists love this verse because it sounds like Paul is saying that obedience can come from our hearts. This is sheer Arminianism.

Our hearts are “more deceitful than all else and desperately sick” (Jeremiah 17:9). This is total depravity. To suggest that our hearts can be obedient is to contradict historic Calvinism.

Notice that Paul does not say, “you became obedient from your heart.” He says, “you became obedient from the heart.” Obviously, this is referring to the heart of Christ because only Jesus’ heart can be obedient.

Romans 1:5

"Through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith among all the Gentiles for His name’s sake" (Romans 1:5).

Federal Visionists verses like this because they think that Paul is saying that faith can obey. This is sheer Romanism.

The Reformed faith has always insisted that faith is not a work. Faith does nothing but rest in the active obedience of Christ. If you try to get your faith to obey, then you are failing to rest in Christ. Christ has done it all so that you can do nothing!

James 2:24

“You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone” (James 2:24).

Federal Visionists love this entire passage in James 2 because it seems to teach justification by works. They love to point out that the only place in the Bible that says “faith alone” is here, where James says that justification is allegedly “not” by faith alone.

The Reformed faith has always taught that justification is by faith alone (sola fide). Now, the Bible never actually says this, but Paul comes close enough when he says, “a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law” (Romans 3:28).

Had James been aware of Paul’s writings, or even more importantly, had James known how the historic Reformed faith would have spoken of justification, James never would have written so carelessly. Then again, James has never been known as a systematic theologian. This drove Luther so nuts that he called James an epistle of “straw.”

While James is not much of a theologian, he is wonderfully practical and good to read for inspiration. However, when it comes to systematic theology, the Reformed faith has rightly looked to Paul rather than James.

2 Corinthians 5:10

"For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may be recompensed for his deeds in the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad" (2 Corinthians 5:10).

This is one of the favorite passages of the Federal Visionists because at face value, this seems as if Paul is saying that we will all appear before the judgment seat of Christ to be recompensed for our deeds, according to what we have done, whether good or bad. However, there is no reason to fall for this kind of clumsy exegesis.

First of all, no one does good (Romans 3:12), so half of this verse cannot apply to anyone except Jesus. Only Jesus can be recompensed for the good that he has done.

Second, the word "deeds" is not in the Greek manuscripts! This would be better translated as "things." Unfortunately, this does not help us that much because it still sounds like Paul is saying that we will be judged for what we do. However, we know that we are saved by faith alone (sola fide) through grace alone (sola gratia) in Christ alone (solus christus), so Paul cannot really mean that a person will be judged by any other standard. Thus, the elect will not be judged according to what they have done.

So, to sum up, we will all appear before the judgment seat of Christ where
1) Christ will be recompensed for the good things that he has done.
2) The reprobate will be recompensed for the bad things they have done.
3) The elect will have the best seat in the house.