What distinguishes a theology as “Reformed”?

This is not a simple question to answer.

It is a collection of great thought, build on our founding fathers. People hold different points of view of different things for different reasons.

Calvin believed that some are chosen for election and some for damnation.

Heinrich Bullinger disagreed. He believed in predestination, but was not convinced, as Calvin was, that God destined some to damnation. Although not nearly as well known as Calvin now, he was enormously influential in the sixteenth century, especially in the British Isles. Some claim that it is actually Bullinger’s version of Reformed theology that is prominent in most places today.

The syndics at the Council of the Synod of Dordt (1618-1619) in their deliberations over what made Reformed theology reformed, gave rise to a mnemonic: the Gospel in a TULIP — Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace and the Perseverance of the saints.

The simple acronym was formed in response to a radical theologian who opposed the orthodox Calvinistic idea of predestination and election, namely Jacobus Arminius. Many see the TULIP as emphasizing the things that Calvin (for example) believed to be supporting — not leading — concepts in his theology. TULIP was a response to try and help the common man not slip into heresy, not a heresy started by Calvin to draw people away from the church

The Assembly at Westminster (1643-1652) presents yet another approach to Reformed theology . Meant to regularize the English reformation, Parliament commissioned the Assembly to bring the English church closer to the doctrines and practices of the Calvin-inspired Scottish church.

For the Westminster divines, Reformed theology meant a strong commitment to a high view of Scripture, along with an uncompromising stand on predestination and the immutable nature of God’s Covenant of Grace.

Friedrich Daniel Ernst Schleiermacher (1768-1834), often recognized as the “father of modern theology” was the son of a Reformed pastor, and claimed the designation of “Reformed” for himself as well.

If pressed to make generalizations, one might sum up the common elements in most Reformed theologies like this:

1. Reformed theology is not some new revelation, or new brand of theological thought, it is what the church has believed throughout its history.

2. Reformed theologies take seriously the idea of God’s sovereignty over all things.

3. Reformed theologies traditionally base their convictions on the Word of God in the Old and New Testaments. Most Reformed theologians would go on to say that the Word of God is, first and foremost, Jesus Christ, and theology must always find itself in Him and aligned with Him.

4. Reformed theologies affirm that Jesus Christ is God’s witness to the world in terms of love, grace, mercy, and justice. Reformed theology has always affirmed that God’s salvation, offered in Jesus Christ is always granted without regard to merit, works or self righteousness

5. Reformed theologies have upheld the importance of the two sacraments, baptism and the Lord’s Supper.

6. Reformed theologies have always instructed Christians that the proper response to God’s provision for all creation is fervent gratitude that shows itself in devout thought, speech and action. Therefore, Reformed churches and pastors have always been involved in reforming their communities.

7. Reformed theologies take the ministry potential of the laity very seriously and believe in the need of all christians to be engaged in ministry with in there calling.

———————

Copyright 2010.

www.provokeblog.org

1) My theology is Reformed and my experience is Pentecostal.

What is “Reformed”?

Generally, all the churches that grew from the Sixteenth century revolt against the Roman church can be called reformed.

The leaders of this branch of the church understood themselves to be “reformed” in two ways:

First, they were “reformed” from what they believed to be the defective practice of Christianity promulgated by the corrupt Roman Catholicism of the day.

Sometimes this position is summed up in the phrase “Ecclesia Reformata, semper reformanda,” which means “the Reformed church, always to be reformed.” In the context of the Sixteenth century (and the mind of the Reformers) this phrase does not mean that the church is always morphing into something new with the passage of time (a common misconception in our own day).

Instead, this Seventeenth-century motto is consistent with the Reformers’ idea that they were not innovating, but “turning again” to the form of the church and belief originated by Jesus Christ, lived out by the first disciples and early church, and born witness to in the writings of the Old and New Testaments shorn of later additions.

Second, as implied above, Reformed means rejecting the idea that tradition can provide a sufficient form for matters of belief. Instead, the Reformers insisted that the Word of God was the only ultimate source of appeal in matters of faith, and that all other sources of knowledge, including a church’s tradition, had to appeal to this central source.

Where did Reformed theology originate?

John Calvin, perhaps the greatest theologian of the Reformed tradition, did not see himself as creating a new “school” of theology. He saw himself, and other Reformed pastors, as carrying on the work of the apostles. Even his own work as a sixteenth-century reformer was, in his view, derived from that of Martin Luther, who he termed, “most respected father.”

Reformed theology is, then, first and foremost a Christian Theology, not meant to cast away the ancient learning of the church, but to draw it close and renew appreciation and allegiance to it. No one should assume that Calvin either began the Reformed Tradition or that Calvinist perspectives constitute the totality of Reformed thought. Calvin is sometimes made to be the exemplar of Reformed theology, but Reformed theology is, by no means, limited to him. So, rather than tracing Reformed theology to Calvin as the sole source, Reformed theology is better imagined as a river into which many sources flow and from which many streams originate.

————-

Copyright 2010.

www.provokeblog.org

6)   I do not believe that the “5 points of calvinism” are all that there is to be known about the word of God:

The so called 5 points were not “highlighted” by Calvinists at all but by Dutchman Jacob Arminius who lived in 17^th Century Holland, 200 hundred years after Calvin. Arminius challenged the truthfulness of these doctrines, and subsequently, it is here the theological battles have raged.

If you hear people talk, they talk like these two had a rigorous debate going on between each other – that was simply not the case.

Arminius was not some great crusader fight for the faith against the evil John Calvin.

John Calvin simply wrote and summarized what the church had believed for 1500 years.

He put into words what the Apostles taught and what the puritans wrote down.

Someone put it like this… we should not be taken up just with the 5 buttons, but preach the whole garment. There is a lot of balance and wisdom in that comment.

Since the 5 points controversy followed nearly over 150 years after Calvin’s death, obviously we cannot find any reference to it in his writings.

In fact, TULIP (Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace and the Perseverance of the Saints), was written by The syndics at the Council of the Synod of Dordt 1618-1619  to try and help the common man not slip into the heresy that was being taught by Arminius.

TULIP is not a heresy started by Calvin to draw people away from the church, but rather an acronym for what they felt where fundamental truths that needed to be remembered and retained by ‘the common man’

7) I do not believe that once you are saved, you can live as you like because you cannot be lost:

Again a good doctrine has been abused and the abuse is held up as the genuine article.

I believe that once a man is saved, the evidence will be holiness in the life.

Christ saves His people from their sins (Matthew 1:21), He did not save them so they could go on sinning.

A man who professes to be saved but insists on living like  hell is only evidencing how deluded he is and how false his profession.

8 ) I do not know who the elect are:

CALVIN: As we cannot distinguish between the elect and the reprobate, it is our duty to pray form all who trouble us, to desire the salvation of all men. (Commentary on Psalms)

Preach to all, like none know, and believe that they will all come to know.

Pass no judgment and hold nothing back.

Give it your all and let God do His work.

LORRAINE BOETTNER

“The decree of election is a secret decree. And since no revelation has been given to the preacher as to which ones among his hearers are elect and which are non elect, it is not possible for him to present the Gospel to the elect only. It is his duty to look with hope on all those to whom he is preaching, and to pray for them that they may each be among the elect. In order to offer the message to the elect, he must offer it to all; and the Scripture command is plain to the effect that it should be offered to all. Even the elect must hear before they can believe and accept, (Romans 10:13-17)

————-

copyright

www.provokeblog.org

God is not a divine butler-therapist.

The majority of people today seem to think that God is primarily concerned with making people happy, bailing them out when they are in trouble and providing for them all the necessities of a stress free existence.

People have recreated Him so that now apart from His totally preoccupation with YOUR life, He really is uninvolved in the world. In other words, God is basically a nice, permissive dad with a big wallet.

When we try and recreate God we do so in our own image, fallen, frail, broken and the fact of the matter is that it doesnt matter how we try and redraw God, you can not move Him.

Many hope that if they are partial in there obedience, He will be partial in His judgment…that is a very dangerous assumption.

————

www.provokeblog.org

What does the bible say?  (ie What Did Jesus Do?)

and

What Would Jesus Do?

Are not the same thing.

The first is based upon a clear understanding of doctrine, the second is based upon the current interpretation of social and cultural preoccupations.

The first is theology, the second is morality.

The first is fact, the second is a feeling.

The first is what Christ said and what Christ did, the second is me role playing what i might do if i was God….and that friend is dangerous ground to be walking on.

—————

www.provokeblog.org

Nearly every household in America owns a bible, the majority, more than one.

In a survey entitled Exploring Religious America, it reported that over 84% consider the bible ‘very’ or ’somewhat’ important..

Yet in a recent Gallup poll, it tells us that only half can name even one of the four gospels, only a third are able to identify who delivered the sermon on the mount, and most are not able to identify Genesis as the bibles opening book.

The bible seems to be America’s favorite unopened text.

————–

www.provokeblog.org

“Religion is man searching for God; Christianity is God seeking man, manifesting Himself to him, drawing Himself unto him.”
- Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones

———

www.provokeblog.org

It is just as much a Christians duty not to take offense as it is not to give offense

————-

www.provokeblog.org

“While assurance in Roman Catholicism was presumption, and in Protestantism a privilege, it was, in the New testament a fact.”

Dr James Denney

———-

www.provokeblog.org