The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Marks of Heresy

Jason,

I hope you can appreciate the fact that the heresy being espoused is most serious yet also most subtle so as to lead men astray from the truth. Thus, you are not going to find a simple and direct statement such as, "We deny the doctrine of Sola Fide." Like all heretical teachings, there is an admixture of truth and error or at least the language of orthodoxy is used verbosely but has been redefined without saying as much. A good example of these two methods of presenting heresy are: 1) Roman Catholicism which professes to hold to salvation by grace alone. Yet, when it explains the details of the doctrine it is far different than what the Scriptures and the Reformers taught in regard to Sola Gratia. 2) The exponents of neo-Orthodoxy were "masters" of perverting terms so that when someone initially reads their heretical teachings, they do appear to be speaking the same language as the historic church. But in fact, they are far from it.

Now, in regard to the "Auburnites", Norman Shepherd, & Co., they use a combination of the two methods briefly given above. Thus, for one to discern what they are really teaching, one must carefully read their statements and notice how the terms are redefined throughout. The subtlety is found in their interjecting their statements with acceptable excerpts from the WCF, which clearly has convinced some, if not many, that they are stating that which has always been held by the Church. However, it was said by Wilson (sorry, can't immediately provide the quote), that the Church has erred for centuries, even the Reformation erred, in understanding the doctrine of justification and it is the goal of the "Auburnites" to "bring the Church back to the true biblical teachings, . . . etc." Thus, if these men are espousing the very same doctrine that has always been embraced, then what need is their for them to restate it and to correct it of any errors?

Much of what I have read has been written by those who accept the "Auburn Statement" and who have tried to expound on it in detail. Clearly, these individuals are denying Sola Fide, albeit all the while vehemently stating that they embrace it. Yet, their explanations of what they believe are incontrovertibly in opposition to the historic doctrine of Sola Fide. I offer but a few quotes from the "Auburn Statement", which taken as a whole are clear enough, IMHO, for one to see the heresy.

8. God has decreed from the foundation of the world all that comes to pass, including who would be saved and lost for all eternity. Included in His decree, however, is that some persons, not destined for final salvation, will be drawn to Christ and His people only for a time. These, for a season, enjoy real blessings, purchased for them by Christ's cross and applied to them by the Holy Spirit through Word and Sacrament.

12. It appears that the Bible speaks of salvation, more often than not, in relational and covenantal categories, rather than in metaphysical ones. "Salvation" is not a thing we possess that can be lost and found, like car keys. It is a matter of being rightly related to God through Christ. But relationships are not static, unchanging entities. They are fluid and dynamic. Our salvation covenant with the Lord is like a marriage. If we persevere in loyalty to Christ, we will live with Him happily ever after. If we break the marriage covenant, He will divorce us. It may not be wise to call this "losing one's salvation," but it seems contrary to Scripture to say that nothing at all is lost. To draw such a conclusion appears to deny the reality of the covenant and the blessedness that is said to belong even to those who ultimately prove themselves reprobate (Heb. 10:26ff).

Advocates of the "Auburn Avenue Statement" and particularly of the teachings of Norman Shepherd are bold to say that one is justified by faith, but justification must be secured by "keeping covenant", else you be found a covenant breaker and be cut off. This is what paragraph 12 is teaching, without any doubt. Again, the "Statement" is but a brief summary of the details which when considers, the heresy becomes increasingly clear.

Edit: In short, so that there is no mistake of the heresy that is being set forth, they are intermixing Justification and Sanctification, aka: synergism.

In His Grace,