Derek Ouellette: False Teacher (EXPOSED!!!)

Derek Ouellette —  October 19, 2013 — 11 Comments

 

Satire.False Teacher

Derek Ouellette is a false teacher. I knew it deep down in my gut! All I had to do was find the proof and expose him for the heretic that he is. So I sharpened my pitchfork, lit my lantern and went a hunting. Here’s what I found:

1. THE BIBLE AS PRIMARY

Derek believes that the scriptures are a Christian’s primary authority on all matters of the faith. But he also affirms John Wesley’s quadrilateral: “scripture,” “tradition,” “reason,” and “experience.” The problem is that this nearly amounts to a flat denial of the Protestant battle cry of sola scriptura! What does “reason,” “tradition,” and “experience” know of truth? Nothing! Scripture must be our only authority. No thinking! No reading (except the Bible)! And certainly no experience! As we’ll see, Derek’s slipper-slope heresies begin here.

2. NEW PERSPECTIVE ON PAUL

Derek has bought into the Devil’s lie which says that we must read and interpret the apostle Paul’s letters in their historical context. Wrong! Although Paul’s letters did not drop out of heaven on golden tablets, they are nonetheless “acontextual” and “ahistorical” because they are “timeless.” Every word in Paul’s letters float about in the air waiting to be plucked out and used according to their flat definition. As the revered John Piper said: “The definition of the word is what’s most important.” But Derek insists that the definition of every word Paul uses must be determined by their context. And what are the results of this thinking? Nothing less than an outright denial of the imputation of Christ! He says that what the doctrine of imputation is designed to do, Paul’s own category of Union with Christ already does. Furthermore Derek says that Paul’s phrase “righteousness of God” refers to “God’s faithfulness to his covenant” rather than the acontextual meaning that we’ve all agreed is orthodox: God’s general goodness.

3. FUNCTIONAL CREATIONISM

Derek’s relentless insistence on a historical and contextual reading of the Bible has led him to deny Young Earth Creationism and Old Earth Creationism (if you can believe that!). He doesn’t deny that the earth is either young or old. What he says is that the Bible itself does not even address the question. If this is true, it leaves people in the dangerous position of having to base their view of the age of the earth on science alone! Oh the horror! Can you imagine interpreting science without an agenda? What he says is that Genesis one is a poetic and literary text written against the ancient Egyptian, Mesopotamian and Canaanite ideas of God and creation. It is essentially about a God who brings order to chaos and causes the universe to function accordingly. He blatantly denies a literal, scientific reading of Genesis One.

4. OPEN THEIST SYMPATHIZER

Here’s a whopper! Though Derek claims to merely be a sympathizer, he’s practically an advocate. Either way, association with Open Theism closes the case on the question of Derek’s orthodoxy. Open Theism teaches that God does not know everything. Okay, it doesn’t teach that. But it sounds like it does. And any belief system with a name “Open Theism” has got to be a cult right out of the gate. Open Theism may not be a heresy, but it’s certainly not orthodoxy either. Okay, so neither was Dispensationalism (19th century), Postmillennialism (16th century) or Augustinian Predestination (5th century) either, when they were first invented. But that’s besides the point, we’re talking about Open Theism here!

5. SCRIPTURAL INFALLIBILITY

Derek plays fast and loose with the core Evangelical doctrine of inerrancy. He says he uses the term when it is convenient depending on his audience, but that he means “infallibility.” He says that the doctrine of inerrancy can’t be proven because we don’t have the original manuscripts any longer. As true as that is, inerrancy is the core doctrine of Fundamentalism. To deny it is nothing short of heresy as far as I’m concerned!

6. ECUMENICAL PASSIVITY

Derek claims to be a Protestant. A PROTESTANT FOR CRYING OUT LOUD! And what do Protestants protest by their very definition? The Roman Catholic Church! And guess what I found out? Derek thinks Roman Catholics can be just as saved as Protestants? WHAT! It’s true. He thinks people are justified by believing in Jesus Christ rather than believing in the doctrine of Justification. We all know that anyone who denies the doctrine of Justification is not saved. Just ask R.C. Sproul, he’s written on it many times. And don’t even get me started on the mysterious Eastern Orthodox Church! Derek’s even attended their services… TWICE!

7. HELL AND CONDITIONALISM

Though Derek says he affirms the “traditional view of hell” he clearly denies a literal Lake of Fire. He thinks Dante was off his rocker and he abstracts hell as if the Bible weren’t very clear about its nature. He concludes rather ambiguously that hell is “eternal separation from God,” as if that weren’t vague. By “traditional” he seems to mean in the sense of “conscious” eternal punishment, but he has said on more than one occasion that he leaves room for “conditionalism” which, in case you’re wondering, is eventual annihilationism.

8. GOD IS GOOD AND LOVING

Here’s another whooper! Derek rejects meticulous predestination. We all know that God is governed by his narcissistic raw power and stone cold predestinarian nature. As the old song goes, “what’s love got to do with it?” But Derek turns God into a sissy! He thinks God is most motivated by his love and moral character. History teaches that line of thinking leads to only one end: Pelagianism! Which, in case you need to be reminded, was condemned as a heresy in the Western Church.

9. GAY CHRISTIANS

Derek thinks that Christians can be gay. Now if ever there were an oxymoron, that it is. You can’t be both Christian and gay. Duh! But Derek has bought into the lie that says there is a difference between “orientation” and “action.” He says that gay sex is wrong, but not gay orientation. He says that some people may be born gay and that those who are, those who have an orientation toward homosexuality, cannot change. This is evidence of how depraved he has become! Sure the Bible condemns gay sex and says nothing about gay orientation. But that’s besides the point. If someone is born gay, that is Gods prerogative via his omnipotent predestinarian will which, in any case, needs candidates for hell if for no other reason than to glorify himself!

CONCLUSION

I could go on, but you get the point. Do we really need any more evidence? Just consider whom Derek’s influencers are: N.T. Wright who is basically the King Kong of all Straw Men False Teachers. But that’s not all. He loves Arminius’ story; follows the thinking of Richard Hooker, John Wesley and C.S. Lewis. He’s adopted ideas by John Walton, Greg Boyd, Clark Pinnock, Roger Olson, Bruce Waltke, A.T.B. McGowan, Tony Campolo and G.K. Beale. And that’s just for starters. Sure he’s well read. Sure most of those he follows closely are committed evangelicals. Sure none of his beliefs above diverge from the Evangelical Big Tent. But that’s not what’s important. Derek is surely a false teacher! And why? Because I disagree with his theology. There. I said it.

I disagree with his theology!

Who’s with me? Good! Now let’s go get him.

CONTEXT:

You might be wondering what the context of this satirical post is. On occasion I’ve discovered that people have found my website or the website of my friends by searching for the following terms: “Derek Ouellette False Teacher.” Usually I just laugh it off. Someone somewhere disagrees with me. And like the person who told me I was going to hell for getting a tattoo, ultimately they want a reason to hunt me down for teaching/writing/saying something that does not fall within their extremely narrow, self-appointed, and often anti-intellectual definition of true and false. I often wonder if they found what they were looking for. So I’ve decided to make it easy for these witch-hunters by putting all of my “edgier” convictions in one place. So hopefully the next time someone searches for “Derek Ouellette False Teacher” they’ll come across this purposefully satirical note exposing their foolishness.

Be Sociable, Share!

Derek Ouellette

Posts Twitter Facebook Google+

a husband, new dad, speaker, writer, christian. see my profile here.
  • http://classicalarminian.blogspot.com/ William Birch

    Great . . . I just found out I’m a heretic, too. Oy!

  • Holly

    Ahem. Before I got to the last paragraph (which lists your influencers,) I was going to say, “Derek is a Wesleyan Armenian who reads N.T. Wright, Greg Boyd and maybe Roger Olson.” (And probably Justin Lee.)

    • http://covenantoflove.net Derek Ouellette

      … and you’d be right.

    • http://covenantoflove.net/ Derek Ouellette

      And you’d be right..

  • http://www.faithmeetsworld.com/ Rob Grayson

    Brilliant! Love it! (And I’m probably a false teacher too…)

  • Jon Sellers

    Glad to see you have been “exposed” Derek. Now I will have to read you more closely and perhaps more consistently. 😉

  • http://nailtothedoor.com/ Dan Martin

    You only just figured out that you’re in the “h” camp? Wow … given your association with kooks like me, it should’ve been obvious long ago … ;{)

    Peace man!

    • http://nailtothedoor.com/ Dan Martin

      But I gotta ask … did you find any of this on Google, or did you *only* do the discernmentalists a favor by putting this together?

      • http://covenantoflove.net/ Derek Ouellette

        I thought I’d do them a favour….

  • PaulWilkinson

    If this be false teaching, count me in!

  • Chris C.

    Hey Derek,
    I am so similar to you that its scary :–) I want t add that I love church history, am a suspicious Protestant and meet with the Eastern Orthodox once a month for dialogue and friendship!