My primary concerns with Sean Anderson

by Danny Pelichowski

Titus 1: 5-9 (ESV)

“This is why I left you in Crete, so that you might put what remained into order, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you-if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. For an overseer, as God’s steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict.”

My primary concerns with Sean Anderson:

• Sean spends so much time trying to diffuse my comments and concerns while letting blatant heretical statements made by his churchgoers slide by without any correction. He even goes so far as thanking and praising them for their input.
• When challenged about Sarah’s statements about her husband he simply wrote the whole issue off because they are on a spiritual journey. He withheld a comment I had on the topic and said that I should respect their personal lives. Like I said before, I was simply responding to what had been written publicly and not prying into their personal lives.
• When I asked Sean the question dealing with Mormons and Muslims he simply referred me to his doctrinal statement and remained silent on the issue. Sean’s dismissal of my question about the necessity of personal faith in Christ for eternal salvation is very concerning and needs to be addressed. Towards the end of the discussion like I said he sent me his doctrinal statement which is absent from his church’s website in order to respond to my questions. Upon reading the statement of faith I am still not convinced of Sean’s beliefs about sola scriptura and salvation. Just because he has this statement doesn’t mean that he believes it. A doctrinal statement does not make a person exempt from questioning and does not give them a license to say whatever they want. The implication of his writing and refusal to communicate his beliefs on the topic publicly in his blog so that his churchgoers can plainly read it is very concerning.
• His belief that true knowledge comes from experience and engaging.
• The twisting of history and scripture to mislead people to believe that right thinking is not foundational to right living. Sean said that they are two sides of the same coin however I have documented that he clearly believes that right action is foundational to right belief. What are the implications when this is applied to salvation?

The phone conversation dealing with the above concerns:

After the blog discussion had been closed I spent a great deal of time praying, studying Scripture, and seeking advice and godly wisdom from mentors in my life. I thought long and hard reading the dialogue over in order to be prepared to call Sean Anderson to communicate my concerns and ask him these questions personally that were not answered in his blog. Like I said before Sean was my youth pastor and is a friend of mine. My goal in all of this is to be helpful as a Christian brother to him and those who were reading and participating in the blog discussion. Of course our phone dialogue was very cordial and anyone who knows Sean would expect that because he is a very nice guy. And if you know our relationship it did not take long to start off where we left off when he moved to Oregon to begin his ministry. He briefly shared about how his Church and family were doing in Bend, Oregon. I let him in on how my wife and I are doing in Louisville and my intention to begin Seminary in September of 2008. We spoke for over an hour and at times it admittedly got heated as we would both agree. But for the most part the conversation went quite smoothly. I tried to take a few notes while I was talking with him however it is obvious that in light of the above concerns not everything could have been clearly recorded.

A few words from Sean (not exact wording of course):

• A person is on a spiritual journey, who doesn’t know Christ in their mind and they have their own version of what it right.

• Community is important.

• Sean asked me: Have you ever had a Mormon try to lead you to faith? The Mormons do it with the basic approach; Jesus died for you…. The Mormon does not have faith in Christ but, Can a Mormon share the Gospel and a person be saved by the message if they get hit by a bus or if they continue to live and practice their religion? (I have actually been witnessed to by Mormon's. I went to Utah for a mission trip when I was at Biola. I told Sean that the Mormon missionary does not present the true Gospel message so this question was founded on a false assumption by Sean. He conceded and we moved on in agreement).
  

• A person can think right, try to abstain from continuing in sin, and go out and do nothing at all. That’s wrong as well. Inaction is also horrible. If we aren’t acting (doing good things like helping the poor, or loving your neighbor) at all it’s a bad thing. If we are not living out our calling its wrong. Sean says that 99.9 percent of Christians would agree that right living is important and they even make a list of what they do. Sean would ask them if that’s enough if we just tithe and go on a mission trip ext. He would challenge them if they are truly a disciple of Jesus.
  

In addition to these few side remarks and discussion with Sean and after a lot of prying on my part Sean did communicate that he did not believe that Mormons or Muslims can be saved by their good morals and works and that right belief in Christ was necessary for salvation. I wish he would have communicated this in the original blog discussion for everyone to see however this will do for now. You see, Sean admittedly highly values being ambiguous so our conversation went this way and that but in the end my questions were dealt with in one way or another. We both agreed that we have very different ideas about the Church and evangelism and have to come to a realization that we will have to agree to disagree. Although I am not completely satisfied with the discussion I had with Sean I am able to lie this to rest with a good conscience that I have communicated my concerns and challenged Sean in light of them. I do not know how Sean perceived our conversation but I hope that we will continue dialogging and that theological sharpening will be the result to all of this.

I want to conclude with a challenge that I brought up to Sean during our phone conversation in light of his above argumentation and his example of challenging people if their actions are enough, or if they are really truly disciples of Christ. I challenged him to be careful in how he communicated this to his people.

If our person and performance was the dividing line for who is going to merit God’s grace and who is going to merit his judgment, no one would pass the test and all would be under the just condemnation of God. For as we read in Romans, “all have sinned and fallen short of the Glory of God.” The only thing that we bring to the table is our sin. I question those professing Christians who are reading this at this point, “Do you believe that you are truly sinful and only deserving the just judgment and wrath of God because you have sinned and provoked the holy God to his face?” Or “do you believe that you are basically good and that God owes you his mercy and grace because of something you did or the way that you live?”

You see, I grew up with the false assumption that God owed me his grace because I “said the prayer” and that I was basically a good person. I did not understand the weight of the Gospel and while I was in the height of my sinfulness and depravity God was pleased to save me. God revealed Himself to me through the reading of Romans the summer after I graduated high school in 2003. I have nothing, and I mean nothing to boast about when it comes to the supposed “good that comes from me.” Anything God honoring that I do is a direct result of the grace of God and the Holy Spirit working in my life. I cannot boast for I know that I would be continuing in false assurance of salvation and gross sin had it not been for the grace of God saving me the summer of 2003 and continuing to preserve me in the Faith to this day. I am continually dependant on the grace of God in my life from now on to the day that I die.

The distinction that I do not think Sean was correctly making, and the errors that I observed from his arguments are the same errors found in Roman Catholic theology. Sean was failing to make a distinction between justification and sanctification. A man or woman's justification or right standing before God happens at the point of belief or faith in Christ. Sanctification is the process that begins from the time of conversion until the day that we die. In sanctification we are being matured in the faith and putting to death sin in our lives in order to be more like Christ. The process of sanctification has NOTHING to do with our acceptance before a holy God. Once a person is forgiven and justified before God he or she can then start to live for God and grow in maturity and obedience. Their obedience is not included or "added up" until the point of death and then weighed before God to determine whether they shall enter heaven or hell. Jesus Christ is our substitute and HIS obedience and death on OUR behalf is the heart and foundation of our right standing before God.

I want to leave you with the Romans lecture part 8 notes that I took from Dr. Robert Morey’s class that are available here on my blog in order to further highlight the doctrine of justification. I encourage you do download the lectures and follow along with the notes asking question or commenting on what you are learning. I pray that God would use this discussion of orthodoxy and orthopraxy that was started at the Sundeos blog to challenge our beliefs and glorify the living God. Once again, “let this be a place where good thinking and discussion happens about what we believe and how we then live. Let our theological beliefs and our lifestyle come from meditating on Scripture and Scripture alone! Let us sharpen one another, defend the faith, and bring Glory to the one triune God.”

Romans lecture part 8:

Romans 3:24-26 God’s provision to the problem of man

• Our problem is that we have sinned against God’s grace, provoked him to His face, and suppressed any light that we had and are without excuse.
• Man is incapable of self-salvation
• Autosoterism- The belief that man through his own efforts can arrive to a place of righteousness and holiness before the gods and goddesses. Example: Hinduism, Roman Catholicism, Islam, legalism, Mormonism et al.
• Romans 3:21- A righteousness from God has been revealed instead of man creating righteousness himself.
• Justification is a gift on the basis of grace. It cannot be earned for it is a gift motivated by God’s grace.
• The atonement was not necessary; it was a free gift that God chose to do on the basis of His grace. God did not have to save anybody but by His grace he saved His people through the atonement.
• Romans 11:5, 6- Grace and works cannot be mixed together! The mixing of grace and works in Roman Catholicism is contradictory to this passage and all of Biblical religion.
• God does not owe us anything. We must understand that God’s plan of salvation is a result of his grace toward sinners who do not deserve salvation at all.
• Since God has established the law he cannot contradict it and arbitrarily forgive sinners without full punishment for their sin that is rightfully due.
• The grace of God is the foundation but must have a meritorious cause through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus
• We are chosen by the Father, purchase by the Son, sealed by the Spirit blessed God three in one (see Ephesians 1)!
• The grace of God required the redemptive work of Jesus Christ
• Redemption: purchase with a price
• Galatians 4:2 Jesus was born under the law in order that he might redeem those under the law
• In order for man to go from being a slave to sin and Satan to sons of God, it required a redemption in which the demands of the law were paid off.
• We must be punished for our sin or a substitute provided by God must be punished in order that sin might be forgiven. God cannot simply arbitrarily forgive sinners without a punishment for their sin. God cannot lie or contradict the demands of His law.
1. Justification must be viewed as a gift and not an earned wage
2. Justification comes from God’s grace, thus it is free and is not something God had to do.
3. Justification is through redemption which is in Christ Jesus
4. Justification comes through faith

• Faith is unmeritorious and the empty hand that receives God’s free gift of grace
• Faith is the bridge that receives the redemption that is in Christ Jesus

• Propitiation: to give an adequate justification or price to avert the wrath of someone. It’s a word that changes someone’s attitude. To turn the anger of God away from us and look upon us with favor.
• Christ’s perfect life symbolized by the shedding of his human blood satisfied the demands of the law and brought about redemption
• Justification is through faith as the instrumental means by which we receive grace.
• The atonement is a demonstration of God’s righteousness because this is the only way that God can be just and the justifier at the same time!