A Query for my Reformed Theologian and Pastor Friends:
July 5, 2007 — reformedwomen
In the “multitude of counselors” there is safety. We have had some encounters recently which greatly disturb us as Reformed believers and I am sure you have likewise encountered these things in your ministries. I was reminded recently that there are “many” who hold themselves out to be “teachers” but are rather “babes” in knowledge and doctrine and unfortunately the recipients of those teachings are the losers because of it. This is especially so with those in ministry who teach either literally in word or by example against the visible corporate church. We have seen this in the ministries of Harold Camping and others and we see a resurgence of this in the day of the internet. Thus, how would you respond to one who holds themselves out in the Reformed community as a “Reformed” theologian, teacher, missionary, in ministry, or Reformed believer, holding to Calvin’s Institutes and Reformed theology but they:
1. Personally only agree with a small percentage of Calvin’s theology and writings;
2. Do not subscribe to the Westminster Confession of Faith or like confessions and much of its teachings especially regarding the Sabbath (Lord’s Day); church government; worship;
3. Do not belong to a Reformed church or “have a church” and are not involved in the ministry of a local church and participating in its sacraments and discipline;
4. Do not agree with “church government” as espoused by Calvin and the Reformed community;
5. Do not believe they are to be under the authority of a church, pastor or elders;
6. Cannot espouse in their theology when asked “what they believe”;
7. Do not have a theological education or “training” and are “self-doctrinal” people;
8. Solicit funds from Christians for their “mission” ministries without giving answers to the above questions when asked.
These are just a few of the discrepancies we see so then, we are trying to work this “enigma” out in our minds and toss it out to you so that you can help us “sort out” the obvious discrepancies in thinking of one in this position. We are not questioning whether one has to hold to all tenets of the Reformed faith to be “Reformed” in theology nor seeking to bind one’s conscience but rather how can one hold to the above and yet say they follow Calvin, Calvin’s Institutes and are Reformed in theology? Our obvious concern is that those sitting under these teachings will “leave” the corporate church and/or substitute it and its biblical mandates for something less to their own detriment and spiritual life. We appreciate your discussion.
July 5, 2007 at 4:40 pm
for a person to say they are reformed and not believe any of the above is rather silly. i think there is a lot more of us who would call ourselves reformed who dont disagree with the major premises or theology, thus “reformed”. however, i think there is a growing number of people who are truly believe the reformed perspective with reformation of some points. but isnt that a premise of reformed theology? that we are constantly in need of reform in praxis and doctrine?
besides, being reformed doesnt mean blindly believing what calvin believed. that would be against what he would even say. all of us must understand that we try our best to have purely orthodox beliefs, but beliefs evolve over time.
for someone to say otherwise, they havent read church history or the Scripture. because people in the early church didnt necessarily care about the doctrine of Trinity. yet, we believe we have a more solid understanding now. so the church does reform, all the time. reformation didnt stop with calvin.
so is it ok to be reformed and not agree with calvin say on “Sabbath”? sure. i for one dont agree with the traditional “christian” position of the first day. there is much more evidence that Sabbath was saturday in the early church (many writers all say so) and was not changed until the 5th and 6th century by the Roman Bishop. even at that pt, there are christian theologians who wrote that they disagreed with Rome and Alexandria (the only two who held Sabbath on sunday in the 5th century, according to the authors) about Sabbath, and that the rest of the Church did as well. this doesnt however, make me unreformed. i just believe that calvin was a fallible being who didnt have EVERYTHING right.
sorry to go on so long. maybe this is helpful.
may the LORD bless you and keep you
peter
July 6, 2007 at 3:05 pm
These people, whoever you are describing, certainly do not sound very Reformed to me. Of course, that begs the question: what is Reformed? It has to be defined as including more than the 5 points, or even the 5 solas. Surely, it would have to include also a real adherence to the Reformed confessions.
July 10, 2007 at 9:20 am
Peter, thank you. What does make you “Reformed” for to call onself “Reformed” one must at a minimum have a certain statement of faith, standards and adhere to the principles of Scripture regarding God’s attributes and understand how in history this has been espoused by various Reformed theologians, including those who penned the confessions, Calvin and other “Reformed” scholars. It is a term to separate the differences in doctrine to those who are “not Reformed” in theology so then if one holds to several beliefs that are common to the Reformed community, i.e., various points of the TULIP, Reformed soteriology, etc., that does not make one “Reformed” as we see from history and with the many so-called “Reformed” churches, ministries (which by-the-way are what I would call “mixture” — a paperdoll theology which allows you to pick and choose which and what you will believe about God, His church and how we are to “think and act biblically.” We can’t have it both ways and still call ourselves “Reformed” and that is why so many churches/folks that hold to “some” of the doctrines of “Reformed” theology do not call themselves “Reformed” i.e., those so-called 4-point “calvinists” or “4-point solas” as I like to refer to them). As individuals we can call ourselves whatever we deem so appropriate for our beliefs but as those in the Christian and Reformed ministry arena, we have an obligation and duty to “be what we say we are” and not use the terms and “trigger points” to lull unsuspecting novices away to their error causing chaos within their own thoughts, life and practice as well as cause schisms in the body of Christ corporate. The recent “resurgence” of churches/ministries calling themselves “full grace” or “Reformed grace” or whatever, that do not have standards and can be changed at whim by the dictates of its leader are not Reformed but rather more “dictatorships” and “semi-Pelagian” mixing the works of men with the finished work of Christ. If one cannot meet certain criteria to call themselves “Reformed” then they should not do so. As Calvinists or Reformed people we are “Reformed and always reforming” but never to the exclusion or detriment of what those terms truly mean. This obviously is not inclusive of all that can be said but I am on travel and writing it online in a short space of time. Thanks again and I am sorry to hear you do not worship on the 1st day of the week as Scripture has so clearly taught in redemptive history but I wil pray for you that you will see the light of the 1st day of the week. Blessings!
July 10, 2007 at 9:43 am
Lane, thank you. I so agree. As I mention in my response to Peter, I have seen such a resurgence of this recently of everyone saying “I am reformed this or I am reformed that” but with no real understanding or belief in what those “I am’s” mean. I know the terms “Reformed” “Calvinist” and “Orthodox” can mean different things to different people in our arena, i.e., Reformed, Presbyterian, Reformed Baptist, etc., but as you say, they must be confessional and have standards that would speak not only of what we believe God’s Word teaches but also how we worship. It is true that these are documents penned by fallible men and are not perfect but they have served us well and have stood the test of time. God raises up teachers and godly men so that the Bible in its entirety can be taught and these creeds and confessions as well assist God’s people in doctrine and life. The sad state of affairs is not only as stated in my post or responses but also what about our children? If one does not subscribe to creeds or confessions then they also don’t catechize their children in doctrine and belief and this is surely a loss. The creeds and confessions are never to supplant the Scripture but serve as an excellent tool in training our children. Okay, I am going on a bunny trail here…but thanks again for your reply.
BTW, I was blessed by your sermon on Sunday evening! I am sharing it — hope you don’t mind. Blessings!
July 10, 2007 at 1:02 pm
reformedwomen
i think you may want to read calvin a little more closely. because calvin himself wasnt a 5 ptr. at least not as most people mean TULIP. i am not saying you have a wrong view of L, but most “calvinists” (growing up in a calvinist background, i think i can speak w/ some authority on that) dont understand the same L that calvin meant.
besides that, just to let you know, Luther is considered “reformed”. and Luther, while agreeing on many things, disagrees with calvin on much.
besides all that, the pt is very badly missed any time we follow a man. that is the whole pt of following Christ. we dont go astray following Him. we do by following a man.
peter
July 30, 2007 at 2:59 pm
Thank you Peter. I apolgize for the delay but we have been on travel and just getting back to work here. I have read Calvin and do read him and I can assure you that I do not have the “wrong view” of the “L” in limited atonement. The wonderful thing about Reformed theology and those that are true proponents of it, we do, without a doubt, adhere/subscribe to the Confessions and are strong exegetes of God’s Word and thus biblical in our interpretation and understanding of doctrine related to these questions. A true “Calvinist” or “Reformer” does not follow men only but as God Word so clearly states, he is a student of the Word of God and submits to it as their authority and in so doing, will support those teachers and theologians who best represent what God’s Word teaches in truth via the spoken, written word in books, sermons, or confessions. Thus, in so doing, they obey that important and careful rule “in the multitude of counselors there is safety” and thus apply biblical truths in practical application. Thus, my original points and following are on point.