Traditionalists and the Gospel

Anthony W Brooks

I've said this plenty of times before. The Traditionalist Movement is a new movement. It doesn't matter when their teachings started... It is debatable whether or not their movement started in 2001 or 2012 but it is a new movement.

What the Traditionalists have done is create a sort of inconsistent Arminianistic theology. And they are more 4-point-arminians than anything else. The inconsistencies are in their affirmations of substitutionary atonement and eternal security.

The inconsistency of Eternal Security in the Trad Movement: eternal security is a preservative doctrine and is aimed at the very heart and intent of God. God saved you so HE preserves you. If you get yourself into it then you can get yourself out of it... That's at least the logical process. Of course, the Traditionalist sees this doctrine clearly presented so what is the real problem? Well, it's the denial of absolute sovereignty of salvation.

The inconsistency of substitutionary atonement in the Trad Movement: the Penal-Sub doctrine is one of 3 forms of atonement outside of the limited/unlimited Atonement controversy. Unlimited Atonement believers have normally accepted the Ransom theory which states that Christ's death was to buy our souls back from Satan (nowhere in Scripture) while the Penal-Sub theory states that his death was to propitiate the wrath of God for our sins off of us and onto him in our place... On one he is the ransom to satan, and in the other he is a ransom for us to the Father. Well, without a particular people to atone for, why would you adopt the latter? Confusing.

The Traditionalist Gospel is a Heterodox... That means it isn't heresy, but it is not Orthodox... I would only consider one well-known Traditionalist speaker a heretic... But that isn't the subject here. The Trad Movement's Gospel isn't consistent and this is why anyone who puts any major thinking and studying into their position is going to reject it.

Soli Deo Gloria!