“The cross, as many preach it today, receives whatever efficacy it has from the decision of the listener. This, of course, is not the cross of the New Testament at all. There cannot be any powerful preaching of the cross as long as our underlying doctrine is that the cross is impotent without the sinner’s contribution. The modern evangelist operates on the assumption that the cross is powerless to save until the listening sinner puts in his share, making a ‘decision’ or ‘commitment.’ Such an assumption is dishonoring to God, and it is not surprising when churches which tolerate such man-exalting puffery turn into a haunt for owls and jackals. But God is gracious and omnipotent; it is possible for dry bones to live, and for ruins to be restored. The prayer that this would happen is a prayer for reformation” (Douglas Wilson, Mother Kirk: Essays and Forays in Practical Ecclesiology, p. 79).
And Douglas Wilson is one such tolerant one. Such “man-exalting puffery” is all over the world. Specifically, this professing Christian pernicious puffery is seen in the wildly and wickedly popular doctrine of universal atonement which exalts man in Christ’s stead.
“For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect” (1 Corinthians 1:17).
“But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel” (2 Timothy 1:10).
Universal atonement sets forth the man-exalting puffery that the sinner is able to render the cross of Christ powerless, to make it “of none effect.” Its self-righteous plume is that the unbelieving effort of the sinner is able and powerful enough to abolish the efficacious atonement of Jesus Christ. Many more blasphemies follow from this demonic doctrine of universal atonement but I’ll add just one more: In this scheme the sinner is NOT the one who is has been “redeemed;” rather, it is the wicked self-righteous sinner who has “redeemed” the “Redeemer.” Theirs is NOT the Redeemer of Scripture but an idol of their blackened brains whom they vainly and irreverently call “Christ.”
Wilson had written this:
” … it is not surprising when churches which tolerate such man-exalting puffery turn into a haunt for owls and jackals.”
A “haunt for owls and jackals,” or a habitation of devils and a cage for every unclean and hated bird.
“And he cried in a strong, great voice, saying, Babylon the great has fallen! It has fallen, and it has become a dwelling-place of demons, and a prison of every unclean spirit, and a prison of every unclean bird, even having been hated, because of the wine of the anger of her fornication which all the nations have drunk, even the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her; and the merchants of the earth became rich from the power of her luxury. And I heard another voice out of Heaven saying, My people, come out of her, that you may not share in her sins, and that you may not receive of her plagues; because her sins joined together, even up to Heaven, and God remembered her unjust deeds. Give back to her as also she gave back to you, and double to her double, according to her works. In the cup which she mixed, mix to her double. By what things she glorified herself, and luxuriated, by so much give back to her torment and mourning. Because she says in her heart, I sit as a queen, and I am not a widow; and I do not see mourning at all. Because of this, in one day her plagues shall come: death, and mourning, and famine; and she will be consumed with fire, for the Lord God judging her is strong” (Revelation 18:2-8).
As we look around the world — and especially at geographical areas closer to where we live and may be more familiar with — is it not infested with doctrines of demons and damnable heresies taught by every unclean and hated bird (the theological “big birds” usually having the most weight, power, and insidious influence)?
Some tolerant Calvinists may be hypocritically INTOLERANT of allowing theological perverts into their pulpits (hypocritical since they allow themselves into the pulpit), while being quite promiscuous and tolerant in allowing spiritual fornication to take place with these same theological perverts. There are MANY tolerant self-righteous religionists professing all kinds of beliefs, but certain types of tolerant Calvinists stand out more due to being “closer to the truth” (relatively speaking of course) and seeming to understand much of the gospel and yet STILL continue to besot themselves with the Whorish wine of fornication.
With the theological world landscape being pretty much a dwelling-place of demons, unclean spirits, and prisons for unclean birds the options for worship and fellowship among true Christians seems a little bit slim wouldn’t you say? Many tolerant Calvinists perhaps would reluctantly acknowledge such things as church discipline and the possible situation where one may have to come out from the Great Whore whose residence is infested with demons — but “BE CAREFUL!” they would say about coming out of the Whore since that is “the road that leads directly to hyper-calvinism!” Or they might say be very cautious about coming out of the visible Whore Church since pretty soon you’ll end up a church of one.
“And this is the most disgusting thing: That this ‘cross,’ which ‘receives whatever efficacy it has from the decision of the listener,’ that ‘is impotent without the sinner’s contribution,’ is a cross that Douglas Wilson believes that TRUE BELIEVERS preach and that TRUE BELIEVERS confess belief in. Wilson and all those like him either consider this ‘cross’ to be part of the true gospel, or they think that belief in the true cross is not a common belief across all of his brothers. Talk about demonic, unclean, fornication – there it is” (Marc Carpenter).