# What Would You Reform First?



## biblicalthought

The question is simple. If we were to survey the condition of the church as it is today, what would you say we should reform first?


----------



## biblicalthought

BTW, my personal answer is Sola Scriptura.


----------



## tellville

biblicalthought said:


> BTW, my personal answer is Sola Scriptura.



Why didn't you put _Sola Scriptura_ as an option?


----------



## biblicalthought

Gotta leave some room for the "other" option!  Besides, from my interaction with Christians of the 21st century, many do not believe that they have veered from historic Sola Scriptura. I have pointed out outright abandonment of SS to some, only to get that wierd stare that says, dude, you're a radical fundie!


----------



## Grymir

Other: 

#1 Throw the libs and barthians out!! 
#2 Sola Scripura!! 
#3 Bring the KJV back!! (It's an abomination to the LORD doesn't compare the modern watered down versions which say the Lord does not like.  ) 
#2.5 Demand adherence to the WCF! 
#4 Make R.C. Sproul the Protestant Pope!
#5 No more grape juice.
#6 The new #1 show on TBN - Law & Order: Theological Victims Unit
#7 Blow up Christianity Today's headquarters and put up a billboard that reads "Thus saith the LORD!"
#134 Demand Reformed Presidents!!


----------



## biblicalthought

I would love to see #'s8-133. Barthians for sure gotta go, along with the Libs. Not sure about the KJV, WCF would certainly be a step in reform (best summary of Biblical doctrine bar none), wouldn't vote 4 Sproul, firing the Welch's delivery man is good, love the show idea - wait, isn't it already TVU? Rather than blowing up CT, why not name it as it really is: Christianity Astray? And a Reformed President could change national day of prayer to International life of prayer! Not a bad #134!


----------



## ANT

I chose other ...

All of the choices are so closely related to one another ... as in ... in order to understand fully about one, you must understand the other three and vice versa ... I'm gonna have to say ...

All of the above!


----------



## ANT

In order to know salvation ...
You must know Christ.

In order to know Christ ...
You must know the Attributes of God.

Once you know Christ and the attributes of God ...
You can understand Salvation ...

Once you understand Salvation ...
You need to know what role the church plays ...

That's kind of what I'm thinking ... 
I hope that clarifies my post above better.


----------



## AV1611

I would argue that the biggest failing is twofold:

*1.* The failure to grasp the decalogue as a rule of life and to see each law as synedoche.
*2.* A complete lack of fear for Jehovah.


----------



## N. Eshelman

The great revivals of history begin with men crying out for salvation! The others flow from justification. Only the justified church cares about Christ, God's character, the Bride, etc.


----------



## Timothy William

Christology first. The fastest way to a false Gospel is to believe in a false Christ. Overall, the Christology of modern Protestantism is reasonable, compared to, for example, its soteriology, but any errors in this regard should be remedied first. Soteriology should be next, and by the time it is covered, the attributes of God should also be covered.


----------



## Herald

I selected soteriology which means I selected christology as well. A proper soteriology must include a proper christology.


----------



## Me Died Blue

ANT said:


> I chose other ...
> 
> All of the choices are so closely related to one another ... as in ... in order to understand fully about one, you must understand the other three and vice versa ... I'm gonna have to say ...
> 
> All of the above!



Exactly. The Gospel true and the Church healthy that we know will be forever maintained and furthered will never be kept and made so by means of picking one horse to temporarily focus on somewhat more than the rest, ever how important and even misunderstood and neglected it might be in one's day. The Church and her ministers need to simply focus on preaching, administering, worshipping and counseling from the Word as the whole counsel of God, and her members living the same.

Look at Calvin as an example - he is most well-known today for predestination, yet one of his life's chief focuses was the glory of God in all things, and he called the proper worship of God at least as foundational to the whole Christian system as the source of salvation, and he was often nicknamed "the theologian of the Holy Spirit." As can similarly be seen from the balanced nature and content of his _Institutes_, commentaries and other works, even while leading a large part of the Protestant Reformation in its earliest times, amidst the very specific errors and extremes of the Romanists, the Anabaptists and others, he did not do so by putting emphasis on reforming one doctrine more intently than another, either in his preaching or his writing. And look at what that helped to produce, for centuries afterward.


----------



## Dr Mike Kear

We need another Great Awakening ala Edwards and Whitefield. This would include all of the above and turn our hearts back to our first love. God help us. I fear that in this country our only two options are true revival or the judgment of God. (Let's pray that He gives us option #1).


----------



## jawyman

Grymir said:


> Other:
> 
> #1 Throw the libs and barthians out!!
> #2 Sola Scripura!!
> #3 Bring the KJV back!! (It's an abomination to the LORD doesn't compare the modern watered down versions which say the Lord does not like.  )
> #2.5 Demand adherence to the WCF!
> #4 Make R.C. Sproul the Protestant Pope!
> #5 No more grape juice.
> #6 The new #1 show on TBN - Law & Order: Theological Victims Unit
> #7 Blow up Christianity Today's headquarters and put up a billboard that reads "Thus saith the LORD!"
> #134 Demand Reformed Presidents!!



I agree with most of the above, but I have to say I am an ESV man. I speaketh not the english of the King.


----------



## Southern Presbyterian

joshua said:


> Would the proper understanding of the holiness of God in effect make all the others trickle down?



Yes, I think this is the place to start. Cultures are a reflection of the god they serve.


----------



## Philbeck

I put the attributes of God.... it seems if you get that right then the rest will naturally follow.


----------



## Sonoftheday

With all of theology tied so closely together as it is it is hard to pick just one. I chose the attributes of God because the reformation in my own life followed from this. Once I began to understand that God was more than a lovey-dovey teddy bear I grew greatly. An understanding of God's Holliness, Justice, Righteousness, Wrath, and Mercy let us to the understand the true Love of God in that he does simply look at us and forget our sins, but an atonement was made for them. 

In my own personal journey once I began to better understand who God is, it made me understand who I am in comparison. This led to a reformed Sotieriology, and from there led to reforming all the -ology's that make up my theology. 

Josh pointed out the Holliness of God, I believe this was actually the attribute of God that began the process in my life.


----------



## JBaldwin

ANT said:


> In order to know salvation ...
> You must know Christ.
> 
> In order to know Christ ...
> You must know the Attributes of God.
> 
> Once you know Christ and the attributes of God ...
> You can understand Salvation ...
> 
> Once you understand Salvation ...
> You need to know what role the church plays ...
> 
> That's kind of what I'm thinking ...
> I hope that clarifies my post above better.



I would agree with you, but for me it's a toss up between knowing God or knowing Christ first. Jesus said that if you know the Father, you know Him. So in my mind, an understanding of who God is comes first. But then Jesus said I and the Father are one. So does that mean you must know them at the same time? 

I realize I am hair splitting here, but so often I run across people who say they know Christ, and when I find out what they believe about God the Father, it's total confusion. Also, after the fall, it seems that we see Christ being revealed as God was revealing Himself, so perhaps it is two things going on at the same time?


----------



## etexas

Going with Christology, knowing and focusing on the Christ of Scripture is paramount but it also would bring the other vital issues into play with a vengance! Sola-Scriptura (Christ said Scripture CANNOT be broken) to me it would "line up" all the essentials. Just my


----------



## Thomas2007

jawyman said:


> Grymir said:
> 
> 
> 
> Other:
> 
> #1 Throw the libs and barthians out!!
> #2 Sola Scripura!!
> #3 Bring the KJV back!! (It's an abomination to the LORD doesn't compare the modern watered down versions which say the Lord does not like.  )
> #2.5 Demand adherence to the WCF!
> #4 Make R.C. Sproul the Protestant Pope!
> #5 No more grape juice.
> #6 The new #1 show on TBN - Law & Order: Theological Victims Unit
> #7 Blow up Christianity Today's headquarters and put up a billboard that reads "Thus saith the LORD!"
> #134 Demand Reformed Presidents!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with most of the above, but I have to say I am an ESV man. I speaketh not the english of the King.
Click to expand...



I think the gentlemen would rightly hold 2 and 3 as a unity. Simply, one cannot hold to the principles of Trent on one hand and then consistently claim Sola Scriptura on the other hand, it requires more than nominal affirmation.

If the true text of Scripture was properly represented by the Latin Vulgate and it's English counterparts like the ESV, then the Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura cannot stand.


----------



## biblicalthought

> I think the gentlemen would rightly hold 2 and 3 as a unity. Simply, one cannot hold to the principles of Trent on one hand and then consistently claim Sola Scriptura on the other hand, it requires more than nominal affirmation.
> 
> If the true text of Scripture was properly represented by the Latin Vulgate and it's English counterparts like the ESV, then the Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura cannot stand.



Thomas, I have read your reply several times over, and I am not following you. Would you please explain what you mean?


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon

I voted for the Attributes of God, as I believe that so much of what is wrong, or lacking in many circles is the sure and certain knowledge of the God of Scripture. People look for a god who is their buddy, a church that is "seeker sensitive, and "user-friendly" (whatever that means). In much of modern "churchianity" there is no fear of God. The reverence and piety of our our puritan fathers is sorely lacking.


----------



## NaphtaliPress

**Moderator.** Let's cool it on the blowing up buildings stuff. Some get the hyperbole, some don't.


----------



## Presbyterian Deacon

NaphtaliPress said:


> **Moderator.** Let's cool it on the blowing up buildings stuff. Some get the hyperbole, some don't.



Sorry.


----------



## markkoller

Agree that Scripture is first....we know nothing of Christ, justification or the holiness of God without it. Sure, most Christians have a form of reverence for Scripture but this is usually confined to superstition. If Christians don't know they have abandoned it, this is our first priority of Reformation. Most people I know (outside of the Reformed faith) who love Scripture are horrified to hear about the sovereignty of God and the inability of man. We can't return these principles to the proper place in the church unless Scripture comes first.


----------



## mshingler

I voted soteriology. After reading through some of the other posts, I would agree that most of the options are so inter-related that it's hard to single one out. Also, perhaps starting with the attributes of God would lead to right soteriology. As I recall, it was reading Pink's "Attributes of God" in my early Christian life that helped set me on the path to understanding and embracing Calvinism as the clearly biblical soteriology. (Of course, reading the Bible kind of helped too.) 
I think ecclesiology is an immensely important topic for the 21st century church, but I don't think ecclesiology will be helped much without a corresponding return to reformed soteriology and a high view of the holiness and majesty of God.


----------



## Thomas2007

biblicalthought said:


> I think the gentlemen would rightly hold 2 and 3 as a unity. Simply, one cannot hold to the principles of Trent on one hand and then consistently claim Sola Scriptura on the other hand, it requires more than nominal affirmation.
> 
> If the true text of Scripture was properly represented by the Latin Vulgate and it's English counterparts like the ESV, then the Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura cannot stand.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thomas, I have read your reply several times over, and I am not following you. Would you please explain what you mean?
Click to expand...


The gentlemen said he affirmed the statements in reference excepting the Authorized Version revealing instead that he stood upon the updated Revised Standard Version (e.g., ESV). Hence, I was pointing out that one cannot affirm the historical Reformed doctrine of Sola Scriptura while holding to a dialetical presupposition inherit in Biblical criticism and it's textual redactions. Which gets to the bottom of the issue that you pointed out in the very first thread, that Sola Scriptura is the most important doctrine that needs to be defended and reformed.

One can, following Warfield, redefine the meaning of Sola Scriptura into "Solo" Scriptura, if you will, holding autographs and apographs in a form/matter dialetic, but then the issue of Authority which is the entire foundation of the doctrine is undermined. Once a dialetical philosophy is set up to filter Scripture through then the concept of Sola Scriptura is only, and can only, be nominally affirmed. One can't receive it, rest in it and stand on it with both feet, it's much like a pogo stick, as long as one can continue bouncing up and down then some type of balance can be maintained, but one simply can't keep that up forever. All dialetical philosophies wane back and forth between their opposing concepts.

This is discussed at length in the translations & manuscripts forum in several threads, you may want to start here to dig deeper into it.


----------



## Gesetveemet

biblicalthought said:


> The question is simple. If we were to survey *the condition of the church* as it is today, what would you say we should reform first?






> Article 29: Of the marks of *the true Church*, . . .
> 
> . . . The marks, by which the true Church is known, are these:
> 
> 1. if the pure doctrine of the gospel is preached therein;
> 2. if she maintains the pure administration of the sacraments as instituted by Christ;
> 3. if church discipline is exercised in punishing of sin: . . .
> 
> .




I choose soteriolgy. 



.


----------



## Stephen

Thomas2007 said:


> jawyman said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Grymir said:
> 
> 
> 
> Other:
> 
> #1 Throw the libs and barthians out!!
> #2 Sola Scripura!!
> #3 Bring the KJV back!! (It's an abomination to the LORD doesn't compare the modern watered down versions which say the Lord does not like.  )
> #2.5 Demand adherence to the WCF!
> #4 Make R.C. Sproul the Protestant Pope!
> #5 No more grape juice.
> #6 The new #1 show on TBN - Law & Order: Theological Victims Unit
> #7 Blow up Christianity Today's headquarters and put up a billboard that reads "Thus saith the LORD!"
> #134 Demand Reformed Presidents!!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with most of the above, but I have to say I am an ESV man. I speaketh not the english of the King.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> I think the gentlemen would rightly hold 2 and 3 as a unity. Simply, one cannot hold to the principles of Trent on one hand and then consistently claim Sola Scriptura on the other hand, it requires more than nominal affirmation.
> 
> If the true text of Scripture was properly represented by the Latin Vulgate and it's English counterparts like the ESV, then the Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura cannot stand.
Click to expand...


The doctrine of Sola Scriptura does not stand or fall based on a translation of Scripture. As Protestants we believe that the original autographs are preserved free of error and that God in His providence has preserved His word.


----------



## Amazing Grace

AV1611 said:


> I would argue that the biggest failing is twofold:
> 
> *1.* The failure to grasp the decalogue as a rule of life and to see each law as synedoche.
> *2.* A complete lack of fear for Jehovah.



Richard, I disagree slightly becasue this becomes too Law focused. I hope never to go to Sinai to look for grace there. 

I vote for grace. A proper understanding of the Grace of God is the heart of the Gospel In my humble opinion. Not a cheap grace, but the grace that flows from the veins of our Lord Jesus. That is the nectar that is lacking in the church today. 

Free unadulterated pure grace to undeserving sinners. Without it no man can do anything. 

--Octavius Winslow, "Christ, Our Righteousness"

"Those He predestined, He also called;
and those He called, He also justified;
and those He justified, He also glorified."
Romans 8:30

The justified sinner stands the closest to God,
of any created being in the universe. Nearer
to the throne of the Eternal, he cannot stand.

What marvelous love!

Who will dare assert that salvation is not,
from first to last—of free, sovereign grace!

Let your eye pierce the veil which falls between
earth and heaven. Behold that shining, worshipping
being, standing so near to the throne of glory,
bathed in the overpowering effulgence of its rays!

Who is he?

He was once a sinner upon earth, the vilest
of his race, the dishonored of his generation,
forsaken by man—and abhorred of God.

But Jesus met him, and divine love drew him, and
sovereign grace rescued, pardoned, and saved him!
And now washed from all his guilt by the blood,
freed from all condemnation by the righteousness
of Christ—he stands before the throne "blameless,"
a "king and a priest unto God." *Such is the great
love of Jesus! And all this grace, and all this
glory, and all this bliss—flows from the free,
sovereign grace of God!*


----------



## ChristopherPaul

I like the _Sola Scriptura_ answer and believe this is one area that needs attention/reformation within confessional churches as well as the balance of Protestant churches. I find many within the confessional churches still think of this _Sola _in the Broad Evangelical, Anabaptist manner that any and all can simply go to the bible and decide for himself what it means. Whereas the right understanding of _Sola Scriptura_ is that the Scriptures are to be interpreted in and by the church according to the _Regula Fidei_. Phillip did not tell the eunuch to keep reading Isaiah until the meaning came to him. Instead he sat with him and _guided_ him through the scriptures. Which is what the eunuch expected (and gives a clue as to the cultural expectations of the laity in the OT church) answering Philip when asked if he understood what he was reading by responding "How can I unless someone _guides_ me?" God gives His church Pastor-Teachers who are gifted with the calling to study and explain the text of Holy writ to the church. I believe the 'every man for himself' philosophy is at the core of all problems within broad evangelicalism and even within confessional churches.


----------



## Pilgrim

Me Died Blue said:


> ANT said:
> 
> 
> 
> I chose other ...
> 
> All of the choices are so closely related to one another ... as in ... in order to understand fully about one, you must understand the other three and vice versa ... I'm gonna have to say ...
> 
> All of the above!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly. The Gospel true and the Church healthy that we know will be forever maintained and furthered will never be kept and made so by means of picking one horse to temporarily focus on somewhat more than the rest, ever how important and even misunderstood and neglected it might be in one's day. The Church and her ministers need to simply focus on preaching, administering, worshipping and counseling from the Word as the whole counsel of God, and her members living the same.
> 
> Look at Calvin as an example - he is most well-known today for predestination, yet one of his life's chief focuses was the glory of God in all things, and he called the proper worship of God at least as foundational to the whole Christian system as the source of salvation, and he was often nicknamed "the theologian of the Holy Spirit." As can similarly be seen from the balanced nature and content of his _Institutes_, commentaries and other works, even while leading a large part of the Protestant Reformation in its earliest times, amidst the very specific errors and extremes of the Romanists, the Anabaptists and others, he did not do so by putting emphasis on reforming one doctrine more intently than another, either in his preaching or his writing. And look at what that helped to produce, for centuries afterward.
Click to expand...


I agree. The whole counsel of God needs to be emphasized. Now, one could certainly say that soteriology is more important, but overemphasis on that is what leads to the phenomenon of ministries that do nothing but harp on the doctrines of grace to the extent that every sermon ends up with them as the topic. 

This brings us back to the question of what it means to be Reformed. Is it just the 5 points or is it the full orbed confessional Reformed faith?


----------



## VirginiaHuguenot

Me Died Blue said:


> ANT said:
> 
> 
> 
> I chose other ...
> 
> All of the choices are so closely related to one another ... as in ... in order to understand fully about one, you must understand the other three and vice versa ... I'm gonna have to say ...
> 
> All of the above!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly. The Gospel true and the Church healthy that we know will be forever maintained and furthered will never be kept and made so by means of picking one horse to temporarily focus on somewhat more than the rest, ever how important and even misunderstood and neglected it might be in one's day. The Church and her ministers need to simply focus on preaching, administering, worshipping and counseling from the Word as the whole counsel of God, and her members living the same.
> 
> Look at Calvin as an example - he is most well-known today for predestination, yet one of his life's chief focuses was the glory of God in all things, and he called the proper worship of God at least as foundational to the whole Christian system as the source of salvation, and he was often nicknamed "the theologian of the Holy Spirit." As can similarly be seen from the balanced nature and content of his _Institutes_, commentaries and other works, even while leading a large part of the Protestant Reformation in its earliest times, amidst the very specific errors and extremes of the Romanists, the Anabaptists and others, he did not do so by putting emphasis on reforming one doctrine more intently than another, either in his preaching or his writing. And look at what that helped to produce, for centuries afterward.
Click to expand...


This is well said. All of these things are bound up with each other, but when we consider that man's chief end is to glorify God and to enjoy him forever, the words of Calvin written almost 500 years ago ring true to me today:



> If it be inquired, then, by what things chiefly the Christian religion has a standing existence amongst us, and maintains its truth, it will be found that the following two not only occupy the principal place, but comprehend under them all the other parts, and consequently the whole substance of Christianity, viz., a knowledge, first, of the mode in which God is duly worshipped; and, secondly, of the source from which salvation is to be obtained. When these are kept out of view, though we may glory in the name of Christians, our profession is empty and vain. After these come the Sacraments and the Government of the Church, which, as they were instituted for the preservation of these branches of doctrine, ought not to be employed for any other purpose; and, indeed, the only means of ascertaining whether they are administered purely and in due form, or otherwise, is to bring them to this test. If any one is desirous of a clearer and more familiar illustration, I would say, that rule in the Church, the pastoral office, and all other matters of order, resemble the body, whereas the doctrine which regulates the due worship of God, and points out the ground on which the consciences of men must rest their hope of salvation, is the soul which animates the body, renders it lively and active, and, in short, makes it not to be a dead and useless carcase. -- John Calvin, _The Necessity of Reforming the Church_


----------



## Craig

I like all the options...and I don't know if I would chose one over the other since they're closely tied together.

After being part of the church my family is in now, I'd have to say there is a sort of "glue" that would make all this stick and create a powerful movement: Patriarchy.


----------



## jawyman

Stephen said:


> Thomas2007 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jawyman said:
> 
> 
> 
> I agree with most of the above, but I have to say I am an ESV man. I speaketh not the English of the King.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think the gentlemen would rightly hold 2 and 3 as a unity. Simply, one cannot hold to the principles of Trent on one hand and then consistently claim Sola Scriptura on the other hand, it requires more than nominal affirmation.
> 
> If the true text of Scripture was properly represented by the Latin Vulgate and it's English counterparts like the ESV, then the Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura cannot stand.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The doctrine of Sola Scriptura does not stand or fall based on a translation of Scripture. As Protestants we believe that the original autographs are preserved free of error and that God in His providence has preserved His word.
Click to expand...




I believe we should have some liberty with regard to translation. I personally feel it is a slippery slope to push or state that only one translation is the correct translation. The RC for years would only allow the Vulgate. Are we saying that the KJV is the only translation we should use and all others are inferior?


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

Amazing Grace said:


> AV1611 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would argue that the biggest failing is twofold:
> 
> *1.* The failure to grasp the decalogue as a rule of life and to see each law as synedoche.
> *2.* A complete lack of fear for Jehovah.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Richard, I disagree slightly becasue this becomes too Law focused. I hope never to go to Sinai to look for grace there.
Click to expand...



AG,

I think your definition of Grace might be lacking. Please tell me you don't think that Charis is just unmerited favor? Please. 



> (Tit 2:11) For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
> 
> (Tit 2:12) Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;



The law of God expressed in the decalogue from that dreaded Mount is blessed. You need to read what the Confession says about it and how it readily applies to the life of the believer today. 

I suggest you sit down with your confession and examine it closely. 



> Chapter 19:
> Of the Law of God
> 
> 19:1 God gave to Adam a law, as a covenant of works, by which He bound him and all his posterity to personal, entire, exact, and perpetual obedience; promised life upon the fulfilling, and threatened death upon the breach of it: and endued him with power and ability to keep it (Gen_1:26, Gen_1:27 with Gen_2:17; Job_28:28; Ecc_7:29; Rom_2:14, Rom_2:15; Rom_5:5, Rom_5:12, Rom_5:19; Gal_3:10, Gal_3:12).
> 
> 19:2 This law, after his fall, continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness, and, as such, was delivered by God upon Mount Sinai, in ten commandments, and written in two tables (Exo_34:1; Deu_5:32; Deu_10:4; Rom_13:8, Rom_13:9; Jam_1:25; Jam_2:8, Jam_2:10-12): the four first commandments containing our duty towards God; and the other six our duty to man (Mat_22:37-40).
> 
> 19:3 Besides this law, commonly called moral, God was pleased to give to the people of Israel, as a church under age, ceremonial laws, containing several typical ordinances, partly of worship, prefiguring Christ, His graces, actions, sufferings, and benefits (Gal_4:1-3; Col_2:17; Heb 9:1-10:1); and partly holding forth divers instructions of moral duties (1Co_5:7; 2Co_6:17; Jud_1:23. All which ceremonial laws are now abrogated, under the new testament (Dan_9:27; Eph_2:15, Eph_2:16; Col_2:14, Col_2:16, Col_2:17).
> 
> 19:4 To them also, as a body politic, He gave sundry judicial laws, which expired together with the State of that people; not obliging any other now, further than the general equity thereof may require (Gen_49:10, with 1Pe_2:13, 1Pe_2:14; Ex 21:1-22:29; Mat_5:17, with Mat_5:38, Mat_5:39; 1Co_9:8-10).
> 
> 19:5 The moral law doth for ever bind all, as well justified persons as others, to the obedience thereof (Rom_13:8-10; Eph_6:2; 1Jo_2:3, 1Jo_2:4, 1Jo_2:7, 1Jo_2:8); and that, not only in regard of the matter contained in it, but also in respect of the authority of God the Creator, who gave it (Jam_2:10, Jam_2:11); neither doth Christ, in the Gospel, any way dissolve, but much strengthen this obligation (Mat_5:17-19; Rom_3:31; Jam_2:8).
> 
> 19:6 Although true believers be not under the law, as a covenant of works, to be thereby justified or condemned (Act_13:39; Rom_6:14; Rom_8:1; Gal_2:16; Gal_3:13; Gal_4:4, Gal_4:5); yet is it of great use to them, as well as to others; in that, as a rule of life informing them of the will of God, and their duty, it directs, and binds them to walk accordingly (Psa_119:4-6; Rom_7:12, Rom_7:22, Rom_7:25; 1Co_7:19; Gal_5:14, Gal_5:16, Gal_5:18-23); discovering also the sinful pollutions of their nature, hearts, and lives (Rom_3:20; Rom_7:7); so as, examining themselves thereby, they may come to further conviction of, humiliation for, and hatred against sin (Rom_7:9, Rom_7:14, Rom_7:24; Jam_1:23-25); together with a clearer sight of the need they have of Christ, and the perfection of His obedience (Rom_7:24, Rom_7:25; Rom_8:3, Rom_8:4; Gal_3:24). It is likewise of use to the regenerate, to restrain their corruptions, in that it forbids sin (Psa_119:101, Psa_119:104, Psa_119:128; Jam_2:11): and the threatenings of it serve to show what even their sins deserve; and what afflictions, in this life, they may expect for them, although freed from the curse thereof threatened in the law (Psa_89:30-34; Ezr_9:13, Ezr_9:14). The promises of it, in like manner, show them God’s approbation of obedience, and what blessings they may expect upon the performance thereof (Lev_26:1, Lev_26:10, Lev_26:14 with 2Co_6:16; Psa_19:11; Psa_37:11 with Mat_5:5; Eph_6:2, Eph_6:3); although not as due to them by the law, as a covenant of works (Luk_17:10; Gal_2:16). So as, a man’s doing good, and refraining from evil, because the law encourageth to the one, and deterreth from the other, is no evidence of his being under the law; and not under grace (Rom_6:12, Rom_6:14; Heb_12:28, Heb_12:29; 1Pe_3:8-12 with Psa_34:12-16).
> 
> 19:7 *Neither are the forementioned uses of the law contrary to the grace of the Gospel, but do sweetly comply with it (Gal_3:21); the Spirit of Christ subduing and enabling the will of man to do that freely and cheerfully, which the will of God, revealed in the law, requireth to be done (Eze_36:27; Heb_8:10 with Jer_31:33)*.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

No Sola goes alone.


----------



## DMcFadden

jawyman said:


> I believe we should have some liberty with regard to translation. I personally feel it is a slippery slope to push or state that only one translation is the correct translation. The RC for years would only allow the Vulgate. Are we saying that the KJV is the only translation we should use and all others are inferior?



As a long time user of the critical text (NASB, NIV, ESV, HCSB), I was taught in '71 (while learning Greek), that the critical text was superior to the Byzantine tradition and the TR. Those arguing for the KJV (cf. the various threads on translation here) do not hang their hats on the translation of the KJV with its archaic words, but the superiority of the text behind it. It is contended that the Lord preserved the text providentially in the TR (or MT). After all, the Byzantine text was the one Luther used to translate his German Bible and the one the other Reformers used in forming their Reformational doctrines. Further, they suggest that the Reformed confessions were all based upon the "preserved" text of the TR. 

If we allow textual critics to cast uncertainty upon the "real" text behind the New Testament, the KJV folks argue will only vitiate the meaning of sola scriptura. How can we say that the NT is THE Word of God if we can't even show that God preserved it for us (they say). In fact, if you read agnostic Bart Ehrman's _Misquoting Jesus_, he makes much of textual criticism and disagreements among the extant mss. as a powerful argument against the conservative views of inspiration of Scripture.


----------



## Amazing Grace

PuritanCovenanter said:


> Amazing Grace said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AV1611 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I would argue that the biggest failing is twofold:
> 
> *1.* The failure to grasp the decalogue as a rule of life and to see each law as synedoche.
> *2.* A complete lack of fear for Jehovah.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Richard, I disagree slightly becasue this becomes too Law focused. I hope never to go to Sinai to look for grace there.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> AG,
> 
> I think your definition of Grace might be lacking. Please tell me you don't think that Charis is just unmerited favor? Please.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Tit 2:11) For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
> 
> (Tit 2:12) Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The law of God expressed in the decalogue from that dreaded Mount is blessed. You need to read what the Confession says about it and how it readily applies to the life of the believer today.
Click to expand...


Randy, I am not saying the Law is useless. My answer to the poll was honest. We do not need more Law preaching, but more pure sovereign grace preaching.

May I ask what else it means in your understanding and what the 2 verses you posted are supposed to show me?


----------



## DMcFadden

My heart tells me to go to Christology (including soteriology). Jesus IS Christianity. However, I just had a frustrating experience lurking on another forum where the Baptists were crowing about an internet belief-o-matic test. Several of them were delighted that they scored 100% mainline to liberal Protestant. It seems to me that _sola scriptura _is a critical place to work for reform, especially since we have witnessed so much drift in this area.


----------



## Kevin

I chose other. I would vote that we need to reform our view of EVANGELISM. 

Not to be unkind brothers, but all other options are things we want *other people* to reform. By virtue of your participation on this board you already hold to the orthodox view of all of the above.

The one area I have been repenting of recently is my lack of evangelism. It is so easy to read another old book, to re-read a favorite passage in Calvin/WCF/Gill/Dabney, it is comfortable to debate EP/Bible translation/RPW with my reformed brothers, but to speak the gospel of Christ to an unbeliever...that is hard.

Today I ate dinner with a (RC) lady from Korea who has only been in Canada for a few months. She came to a new Sunday night outreach (that I started with a few friends). Next week the Muslem family from across the street may come. Please pray that I will reform my view of evangelism, by practicing it.


----------



## moral necessity

I voted "other." Reformation of doctrine alone will not restore the health of the church. The Spirit must remove our hearts of stone and give us hearts of flesh so as to "receive the word inplanted, which is able to save our souls."

"For this reason, because I have heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus and your love toward all the saints, I do not cease to give thanks for you, remembering you in my prayers, that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give you a spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of him, having the eyes of your hearts enlightened, that you may know what is the hope to which he has called you, what are the riches of his glorious inheritance in the saints, and what is the immesurable greatness of his power toward us who believe,..." - Eph. 1:15-19a

"For this reason I bow my knees before the Father, from whom every family in heaven and on earth is named, that according to the riches of his glory he may grant you to be strengthened with power through his Spirit in your inner being, so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith - that you, being rooted and grounded in love, may have strength to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled with all the fullness of God." - Eph. 3:14-19


----------



## Zenas

I chose the attributes of God.

When one begins to understand that God is Holy, above all else, as well as just, wrathful, merciful, and loving, then one's understanding of Christology and Soteriology will correct themselves.

The bankrupt Arminian soteriology cannot withstand the awesome Holy sovereignty of the True God of the Scriptures. It cannot bear the Yaweh who is not a gentleman; who cares not for your God-hating nature.


----------



## Grymir

O.K. all you KJV dislikers out there. If the KJV is not superior, why waste all your time defending the modern versions?? The so called 'archaic' words? What all 20 of them? The text behind it is superior. The updates that are applied to the newer versions can be applied to the KJV as well. All 3 or 4 of them. yip yip ya hoo. It written at a 12th grade reading level. The newer ones are written at a 6th through 9th grade level. Some of the precision is lost. I, as an uneducated dweeb, not knowing Greek or Hebrew, (except how to find out what the words mean when heathen try to wrangle with "well, what does that word mean?"), can go up against theologians who don't know squat about the Bible, and show them the error of their ways? Liberals and Barthians are idiots when it comes to the Bible.

That's why I said to bring the KJV back. It will cause theologians to think about what they are doing and help get rid of the fluff that I hear so much of. (Can you say Charles Stanley?) We very rarely hear of "abominations unto the LORD" anymore. The gay stuff? Why, it's an alternate lifestyle in the culture. They don't hear about it being an abomination. It's them that need to hear that to help convict them of their sin and turn unto God. I would alway bring a gay person to Christ because the Holy Spirit will change them and make them straight!! How will they be helped by modern fluff? The lost need to hear the KJV as much as the Church needs it.

Y'all have good Church's and people that understand and teach reformed doctrine. When the modern versions are lacking, you have a good pastor to fill in abomination, or thus saith the Lord. But what about the Anglicans, or Episcopalians, or gosh, what if the Disciples of Christ even heard the word abomination? There ears would fall off and they would be in the corner in the fetal position!!

This thread was what would you reform in the Church. The church at large. We reformed folk are in the minority in our country. All that theology is wasted on the mainstream church because they can't even handle milk, let alone solid meat. If it wasn't for the word of God, I could join a mainstream church and continue in my sins and go my happy way (oh yea, I am in a mainstream church, but my trusty KJV says my sins are an abomination unto the Lord. If He was not sore displeased with them, I too would just think they were little peccadillo's and could go on my merry way. Plus, how could I tell the so-called leaders in my church that what they are doing is 'questionable' then. Some of us have to be modern day reformers. Sigh, I only wish I had a cool church like y'all have. Then I could sit down and be feed. And get fat and lazy. But I digress). I am not a KJV only person either.

O.K. Now its y all's turn to wax eloquent (ESV - rant)


----------



## jawyman

Grymir said:


> O.K. all you KJV dislikers out there. If the KJV is not superior, why waste all your time defending the modern versions?? The so called 'archaic' words? What all 20 of them? The text behind it is superior. The updates that are applied to the newer versions can be applied to the KJV as well. All 3 or 4 of them. yip yip ya hoo. It written at a 12th grade reading level. The newer ones are written at a 6th through 9th grade level. Some of the precision is lost. I, as an uneducated dweeb, not knowing Greek or Hebrew, (except how to find out what the words mean when heathen try to wrangle with "well, what does that word mean?"), can go up against theologians who don't know squat about the Bible, and show them the error of their ways? Liberals and Barthians are idiots when it comes to the Bible.
> 
> That's why I said to bring the KJV back. It will cause theologians to think about what they are doing and help get rid of the fluff that I hear so much of. (Can you say Charles Stanley?) We very rarely hear of "abominations unto the LORD" anymore. The gay stuff? Why, it's an alternate lifestyle in the culture. They don't hear about it being an abomination. It's them that need to hear that to help convict them of their sin and turn unto God. I would alway bring a gay person to Christ because the Holy Spirit will change them and make them straight!! How will they be helped by modern fluff? The lost need to hear the KJV as much as the Church needs it.
> 
> Y'all have good Church's and people that understand and teach reformed doctrine. When the modern versions are lacking, you have a good pastor to fill in abomination, or thus saith the Lord. But what about the Anglicans, or Episcopalians, or gosh, what if the Disciples of Christ even heard the word abomination? There ears would fall off and they would be in the corner in the fetal position!!
> 
> This thread was what would you reform in the Church. The church at large. We reformed folk are in the minority in our country. All that theology is wasted on the mainstream church because they can't even handle milk, let alone solid meat. If it wasn't for the word of God, I could join a mainstream church and continue in my sins and go my happy way (oh yea, I am in a mainstream church, but my trusty KJV says my sins are an abomination unto the Lord. If He was not sore displeased with them, I too would just think they were little peccadillo's and could go on my merry way. Plus, how could I tell the so-called leaders in my church that what they are doing is 'questionable' then. Some of us have to be modern day reformers. Sigh, I only wish I had a cool church like y'all have. Then I could sit down and be feed. And get fat and lazy. But I digress). I am not a KJV only person either.
> 
> O.K. Now its y all's turn to wax eloquent (ESV - rant)



I am not trying to be difficult here. The KJV is the official translation used by my seminary and I find certain areas of it superior to other more "_modern_" translations. I will only point out the word "abomination(s)" that was cited. The ESV uses the word "abomination(s)" 122 times versus the 186 times used in the KJV. I also would like state that of the 186 times the word appears in the KJV 16 of those times are in the apocrypha.

"The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord, but the prayer of the upright is acceptable to him." - Proverbs 15:8(ESV)

"The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the LORD: but the prayer of the upright is his delight." - Proverbs 15:8(KJV)

"The LORD detests the sacrifice of the wicked, but the prayer of the upright pleases him." - Proverbs 15:8(NIV) 

The text behind the Vulgate was superior too, but the common man could not read it. This is just my  and not a rant.


----------



## markkoller

Christology, attributes of God, etc. These are all wonderful things, but not the most important things in Reformation. We believe these things properly because we have a proper view of Scripture. The people who are distorting things like Christology do so because they don't know how to interpret the Bible properly. Along with false hermeneutics, they allow things outside of Scripture to influence their development of (or lack of) theology. An Arminian isn't an Arminian because they learned it from the Bible, they're born Arminian and never seem to see that the Bible radically rejects this heresy. A proper view of Scripture will destroy all the things that infect the church. Reformation hinges on Scripture.

Luther didn't rediscover justification in a vacuum. He pointed the world back to Scripture. From there he was able to reform the church.


----------



## Grymir

Jawyman - I wasn't directing my waxing eloquent in your general direction. It's good to know some seminary's still use KJV. Gotta go to work. I'll wax eloquent later after I'm finished. Have to cooketh for Rotary tonight.


----------



## jawyman

Grymir said:


> Jawyman - I wasn't directing my waxing eloquent in your general direction. It's good to know some seminary's still use KJV. Gotta go to work. I'll wax eloquent later after I'm finished. Have to cooketh for Rotary tonight.



You may call me Jeff and I didn't think anything was being directed at me I am really enjoying the posts. 

My father-in-law is a past District Governor and he is very actively involved with the Rotary International's Polio Eradication efforts. He leads teams to India and countries in Africa all the time. His name is Dave Groner. Google him if you want to know more about the work Rotary is doing with polio.


----------



## Answerman

1. Sola Scriptura
2. Teach what it means to love God and love their neighbor.
3. Teach parents to raise a Godly seed through a truly Christian education.
4. The rest should be self-correcting.


----------



## R Harris

I have to vote ecclesiology because of the deplorable condition that the "Church" is in.

Although my study and knowledge of historical theology is not exhaustive (though fairly extensive), I am of the opinion that Christianity has never been in worse shape since the beginning of the post-apostolic age as it is right now.

At last count (about 6 months ago, so the number could already be higher now), there are @ 3,000 denominations with tens of thousands of "independent, non-denominational" churches out there. Pretty much everyone believes whatever they want to believe (sadly, even in "reformed" churches) and do whatever they want to do. What we have is anarchy and chaos.

The "Dark Ages" could at least make the excuse that the Word was not in the hands of the common person very much if at all. Today, the average household in the U.S. probably has 2+ Bibles on bookshelves or tables, yet, even of those polled to be "evangelical Christians", almost _one-third_ cannot name the four Gospels. Anybody seeing a problem here?

The Scriptures know nothing of denominationalism - meaning believers are to be of _one mind._ Anytime divisions, schisms, or factions are mentioned in the Scriptures, they are always condemned.

It is sad to hear people say "well, we are all sinners," and then just walk away from the discussion. Believers are at least to _try_ and work out their differences, though rarely is that ever seen. 

Denominations that have been around for centuries simply pass on their beliefs from generation to generation without ever seriously examining what they believe. Are we in tune with the Scriptures, or is it just possible that our forefathers did miss the boat on a number of issues? Because of pride, arrogance, or other things, no one wants to ask the question or consider the possibility of error. But the duty is to examine afresh what we believe with each new generation, and not fall into complacent dullness.

Hermeneutics are considered only for the professional priesthood (i.e. seminary graduates), yet every believer should be trained in this. How often do you know of churches that have EVER offered a Lord's Day class in hermeneutics?

This is one reason why a lot of the 16th and 17th century reformers pushed establishmentarianism and a national church. While you may not agree with it, the anarchy and chaos that we see today is a powerful argument for it.

While abuses exist with a national church, do we not also see multiple abuses with ecclesiology as it is now? So, if you do not like the concept of a national church, and you think the present situation is horrendous (I hope that you do), then what is your solution?

It is past time lamenting the situation - we need solutions, and in a hurry. Time is running out for the U.S. - and the Church, with a properly preached and DISCIPLED Gospel, is the only hope.


----------



## shackleton

Since all liberal theology seems to start out by saying the bible is not inspired, is not inerrant and is just a book about god written by men, this should be the first thing to restore. 

They have a low view of God's sovereignty and majesty ( he is so much a god of love that he overlooks sin, they seem to live like god has put us incharge and he will love us no matter what), and of Christology (he was prophet, a good one, but still only a prophet who set a good example for us), these should also be restored and if these things were fixed maybe ecclesiology would fall into place. 

Ban the reading of all books except the bible for about a year and just read it and reread it and study it until it is a part of them, then once a firm foundation is laid allow them to read other material but only under supervision.


----------



## Grymir

Two thumbs up Shackleton!!! Yeah! I'll supervise. No Barfth for them!! Really good idea too. It would work.


----------



## MW

For reformation today one must stress the sovereignty of God. If Scripture is not regarded as the revelation of the Almighty then it is read as if it is nothing more than a suggestion box of spiritual helps. If Jesus Christ is not the Prince of the kings of the earth and the only Head of the Church, all profession of His Name is reduced to the acknowledgment of a mere invisible friend. If salvation is not altogether of sovereign grace, then the gospel preached is merely God's wish to help people help themselves. And if the church is not the kingdom of the One who rules over all then it is a mere voluntary society established in the faint hope of furthering the well-being of humanity.


----------



## Craig

Does no one else believe a vital Reformation must, in a certain sense, be based within the home? 

The sovereignty of God, dominion, father rule, all of these are undergirded in the home (or, the last 100 years or so, undermined in the home).

Americans/average Christians despise a sovereign God because they despise biblical fatherhood...so many fathers abrogate their role in the home and prepare their children to view God in an emasculated fashion...wives undermine their husband's authority, and all authority goes to pot with that...I see a direct correllation between our homes and the state of Christianity.

With the Reformation, it was about *rightful authority*...today, we hate any authority. It's difficult to argue about exegesis with anyone that is bred to hate something so imposing as the Scriptures, what the Word says about us and how powerful God is....culture needs a solid spanking.


----------



## dcomin

VirginiaHuguenot said:


> If it be inquired, then, by what things chiefly the Christian religion has a standing existence amongst us, and maintains its truth, it will be found that the following two not only occupy the principal place, but comprehend under them all the other parts, and consequently the whole substance of Christianity, viz., a knowledge, first, of the mode in which God is duly worshipped; and, secondly, of the source from which salvation is to be obtained. When these are kept out of view, though we may glory in the name of Christians, our profession is empty and vain. After these come the Sacraments and the Government of the Church, which, as they were instituted for the preservation of these branches of doctrine, ought not to be employed for any other purpose; and, indeed, the only means of ascertaining whether they are administered purely and in due form, or otherwise, is to bring them to this test. If any one is desirous of a clearer and more familiar illustration, I would say, that rule in the Church, the pastoral office, and all other matters of order, resemble the body, whereas the doctrine which regulates the due worship of God, and points out the ground on which the consciences of men must rest their hope of salvation, is the soul which animates the body, renders it lively and active, and, in short, makes it not to be a dead and useless carcase. -- John Calvin, _The Necessity of Reforming the Church_


[/QUOTE]

That's exactly the quote from Calvin that came to my mind as I pondered this excellent question and read through the variety of thought-provoking posts. It must begin with WORSHIP and SALVATION [i.e. Justification]. But Calvin [rightly] ranks worship first. The deplorable state of worship within the evangelical church today perpetuates all of the other errors of thought and practice. What we do in the presence of God each week cannot but profoundly effect how we think of Him and how we understand ourselves and our mission. Look at the history of the Church (beginning in the Old Testament) and you cannot help but see that all of her backslidings and declensions have their root in the corruption of God's worship. Since the central focus of worship is Christ and the Gospel itself, the corruption of worship leads to the adulteration of Christology and Soteriology as well. When will-worship prevails, God's sovereignty is undermined. When the traditions of men predominate, Sola Scriptura is abandoned. 

My vote is WORSHIP! (I hope I didn't surprise anyone)


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

> What Would You Reform First?



Our own lives would be a good place to start.


----------



## dcomin

Daniel Ritchie said:


> What Would You Reform First?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Our own lives would be a good place to start.
Click to expand...


 Thank you, Dan. What a well-placed reminder of my tendency to focus on what needs to be fixed "out there" before (or instead of) what needs to be remedied in my own heart.


----------



## CDM

W O R S H I P


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

Amazing Grace said:


> PuritanCovenanter said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Amazing Grace said:
> 
> 
> 
> Richard, I disagree slightly becasue this becomes too Law focused. I hope never to go to Sinai to look for grace there.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> AG,
> 
> I think your definition of Grace might be lacking. Please tell me you don't think that Charis is just unmerited favor? Please.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> (Tit 2:11) For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men,
> 
> (Tit 2:12) Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The law of God expressed in the decalogue from that dreaded Mount is blessed. You need to read what the Confession says about it and how it readily applies to the life of the believer today.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Randy, I am not saying the Law is useless. My answer to the poll was honest. We do not need more Law preaching, but more pure sovereign grace preaching.
> 
> May I ask what else it means in your understanding and what the 2 verses you posted are supposed to show me?
Click to expand...


AG,
How do you define grace? I would like to understand what you are saying? 

I do believe we need a good dose of law preaching. It was in the the law of God that King David encouraged us to delight in. It is meditating upon it that keeps us in the way and cleanses us. It is the law of the Lord that converts (revives) the soul. 

Just for reference 
(Psa 1:2) But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.

(Psa 19:7) The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.
(Psa 19:8) The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.

(Psa 94:12) Blessed is the man whom thou chastenest, O LORD, and teachest him out of thy law;

(Psa 119:1) Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk in the law of the LORD.

(Psa 119:9) Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to thy word.
(Psa 119:10) With my whole heart have I sought thee: O let me not wander from thy commandments.
(Psa 119:11) Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee.
(Psa 119:12) Blessed art thou, O LORD: teach me thy statutes.

(Rom 7:7) What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

(Rom 7:12) Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
(Rom 7:13) Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.


The reason I mentioned the Titus text in reference to grace is that grace leads us into obedience. It uses the law to reveal God's will for the life of the Christian. We are free from the condemnation of the law but not our obligation as creatures to obey it. We please God by doing his will. And we need the light of the law to keep His will in focus. We still have indwelling sin to combat. We still have the world, the devil, and the flesh trying to keep us blinded and snared. We need good law preaching by the Grace of God.


----------



## Pergamum

Grymir said:


> Other:
> 
> #1 Throw the libs and barthians out!!
> #2 Sola Scripura!!
> #3 Bring the KJV back!! (It's an abomination to the LORD doesn't compare the modern watered down versions which say the Lord does not like.  )
> #2.5 Demand adherence to the WCF!
> #4 Make R.C. Sproul the Protestant Pope!
> #5 No more grape juice.
> #6 The new #1 show on TBN - Law & Order: Theological Victims Unit
> #7 Blow up Christianity Today's headquarters and put up a billboard that reads "Thus saith the LORD!"
> #134 Demand Reformed Presidents!!




Wow, let me finish up my year's subscription to CT before you do anything drastic.

Also, DEMAND? adherance to the WCF? How would you propose this? Roving patrols?

No more grape juice? Does it have to be fermented for the Lord to be pleased? 

Demand Reformed presidents? Now...would that be a person who is "reformed" in the sense of following the WCF (1788 revision), the original,or the 3 forms of unity? Would this president be a hymn singer or an EPer? WOuld his wife wear a headcovering? Just who would speak for the "reformed" as a whole?


Throw the libs and the Barthians out? Why not throw everyone out and only let a select few in?



Ha....quite a fiery post there brother. We need a hyperbole smiley!


----------



## Amazing Grace

PuritanCovenanter said:


> Amazing Grace said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> PuritanCovenanter said:
> 
> 
> 
> AG,
> 
> I think your definition of Grace might be lacking. Please tell me you don't think that Charis is just unmerited favor? Please.
> 
> 
> 
> The law of God expressed in the decalogue from that dreaded Mount is blessed. You need to read what the Confession says about it and how it readily applies to the life of the believer today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Randy, I am not saying the Law is useless. My answer to the poll was honest. We do not need more Law preaching, but more pure sovereign grace preaching.
> 
> May I ask what else it means in your understanding and what the 2 verses you posted are supposed to show me?
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> AG,
> How do you define grace? I would like to understand what you are saying?
> 
> I do believe we need a good dose of law preaching. It was in the the law of God that King David encouraged us to delight in. It is meditating upon it that keeps us in the way and cleanses us. It is the law of the Lord that converts (revives) the soul.
> 
> Just for reference
> (Psa 1:2) But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.
> 
> (Psa 19:7) The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.
> (Psa 19:8) The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.
> 
> (Psa 94:12) Blessed is the man whom thou chastenest, O LORD, and teachest him out of thy law;
> 
> (Psa 119:1) Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk in the law of the LORD.
> 
> (Psa 119:9) Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to thy word.
> (Psa 119:10) With my whole heart have I sought thee: O let me not wander from thy commandments.
> (Psa 119:11) Thy word have I hid in mine heart, that I might not sin against thee.
> (Psa 119:12) Blessed art thou, O LORD: teach me thy statutes.
> 
> (Rom 7:7) What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.
> 
> (Rom 7:12) Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.
> (Rom 7:13) Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.
> 
> 
> The reason I mentioned the Titus text in reference to grace is that grace leads us into obedience. It uses the law to reveal God's will for the life of the Christian. We are free from the condemnation of the law but not our obligation as creatures to obey it. We please God by doing his will. And we need the light of the law to keep His will in focus. We still have indwelling sin to combat. We still have the world, the devil, and the flesh trying to keep us blinded and snared. We need good law preaching by the Grace of God.
Click to expand...




Randy, as I have stated in another thread not to digress this one regarding Law, I do heartily disagree that Law converts/revives the soul. 

I define grace as exactly what you said, unmerited favor to wrath deserving sinners. Grace makes alive, Grace keeps alive by grace alone. And until one rightly understands Grace, they will be tossed to and fro in life.

Do you, O sinner! need the Holy Spirit . . .
to awaken you,
to convince you of sin, righteousness and judgment,
to enlighten and teach you,
to lead and guide you in the everlasting way,
to cleanse you,
to comfort you?
Here you may find Him in the covenant of grace!

O sinner! Do you need grace, all grace, great grace,
abundance of grace, multiplied grace? Here you may
find it in the covenant of grace!

O sinner! Do you need peace, or ease, or rest, or
quiet in your conscience? Here you may find it in
the covenant of grace!

O sinner! Do you need contentment, or comfort,
or joy, or satisfaction? Here you may have it in
the covenant of grace!

O sinner, sinner! whatever your soul needs are—they
may all be supplied out of the covenant of grace!
God, in His infinite wisdom and love, has laid into
the covenant of grace, as into a common storehouse,
all those good things, and all those great things, and
all those suitable things—that either sinners or saints
can either desire or need! 

Thomas Brooks...


----------



## DMcFadden

Pergamum said:


> Ha....quite a fiery post there brother. We need a hyperbole smiley!



You mention hyperbole for a guy who sports a Rush Limbaugh avatar??? Isn't that a tautology.


----------



## Jim

Thanks for all the great replies. It seemed like such a simple poll at first.

I think you have to begin with God (include sola scriptura and Christology)
Then man and sin
Then salvation

I think modern Evangelicalism lost it when they shifted the beginning from God to man.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

Amazing Grace said:


> Randy, as I have stated in another thread not to digress this one regarding Law, I do heartily disagree that Law converts/revives the soul.
> 
> I define grace as exactly what you said, unmerited favor to wrath deserving sinners. Grace makes alive, Grace keeps alive by grace alone. And until one rightly understands Grace, they will be tossed to and fro in life.



I am convinced your definition of grace is very lacking. Although grace is unmerited it is not just unmerited favor. 

I quickly refer you to this post I made a few years ago.



PuritanCovenanter said:


> I believe most of modern day Christendom has a deficient understanding of Grace based upon some some old definitions and scripture. If we had a better understanding of God's grace no one could conclude anything to be cheap concerning it. The cost of imparting it was paid by Christ.
> 
> In Titus Grace teaches us.
> (Tit 2:11-12) For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, *Teaching us * that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
> 
> In 2 Corintians grace is used synomously with Christ's power working in us.
> 
> (2Co 12:8-9) For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me. And he said unto me, My *grace* is sufficient for thee: for my *strength* is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the *power of Christ * may rest upon me.
> 
> The Greek word charis is translated grace. In the old Strongs greek dictionary there is a definition given which says, "especially the divine influence upon the heart, and it's reflection in the life."
> 
> The Puritans didn't believe grace meant just unmerited favor. God's grace is unmerited but it is much more than that. Charismata is the operation of God's Spirit working through man.
> 
> Grace is monergistic as it is also synergistic. It isn't both at the same time. Salvation by Grace is monergistic. Monergistic Grace is the Holy Spirit breathing life into our souls and quickening us into New Creatures in Christ. It is unmerited but it isn't just unmerited favor. *That is where the semi Pelagians (Independent Baptists or Free Will advocates) greatly err. There definition of Grace is faulty. That is why their Grace is truly no grace at all.*
> 
> Synergistic Grace is what Phi 2:12,13 is about.
> 
> (Phi 2:12-13) Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.
> 
> Just my two cents on the topic.



The grace of God is never void of the law of God. Go back and read the Westminster as I asked you to do. Please.


----------



## Romans922

I voted for Attributes of God, I think many people need to figure out what it means for God to be Holy --> I believe this would change everything dratically.


----------



## Grymir

Hello Pergamum! And everyone else too!

It's taken me a few days. I've been busy at work, now it's time to serve humanity just by showing up.

Yes, It has to be fermented. Catering to the culture before catering to God. Grape juice communion is wrong. (there y'all, I didn't say heretical)

About the WCF thing, So many give lip service, and then do the man centered Church worship routine. They rely on the exception clause. about everything practically.

And yes, Throw the Libs and Barthians out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Of office i meant, not the common church goer. But yes, any in office should be dumped on the street!! I asked the reform group why we couldn't just throw the people out of the assembly because anybody who endorses gay or women pastors doesn't know their bible nor follow God. They spent the next 20 minutes defending women pastors.

And yes, a president's wife should wear a headcovering...Tinfoil...to protect her from the Illuminati mind control...

Anyway, that's what I would reform in the church if I was the Protestant Pope!


----------



## Amazing Grace

PuritanCovenanter said:


> Amazing Grace said:
> 
> 
> 
> Randy, as I have stated in another thread not to digress this one regarding Law, I do heartily disagree that Law converts/revives the soul.
> 
> I define grace as exactly what you said, unmerited favor to wrath deserving sinners. Grace makes alive, Grace keeps alive by grace alone. And until one rightly understands Grace, they will be tossed to and fro in life.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am convinced your definition of grace is very lacking. Although grace is unmerited it is not just unmerited favor.
> 
> I quickly refer you to this post I made a few years ago.
> 
> 
> 
> PuritanCovenanter said:
> 
> 
> 
> I believe most of modern day Christendom has a deficient understanding of Grace based upon some some old definitions and scripture. If we had a better understanding of God's grace no one could conclude anything to be cheap concerning it. The cost of imparting it was paid by Christ.
> 
> In Titus Grace teaches us.
> (Tit 2:11-12) For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, *Teaching us * that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world;
> 
> In 2 Corintians grace is used synomously with Christ's power working in us.
> 
> (2Co 12:8-9) For this thing I besought the Lord thrice, that it might depart from me. And he said unto me, My *grace* is sufficient for thee: for my *strength* is made perfect in weakness. Most gladly therefore will I rather glory in my infirmities, that the *power of Christ * may rest upon me.
> 
> The Greek word charis is translated grace. In the old Strongs greek dictionary there is a definition given which says, "especially the divine influence upon the heart, and it's reflection in the life."
> 
> The Puritans didn't believe grace meant just unmerited favor. God's grace is unmerited but it is much more than that. Charismata is the operation of God's Spirit working through man.
> 
> Grace is monergistic as it is also synergistic. It isn't both at the same time. Salvation by Grace is monergistic. Monergistic Grace is the Holy Spirit breathing life into our souls and quickening us into New Creatures in Christ. It is unmerited but it isn't just unmerited favor. *That is where the semi Pelagians (Independent Baptists or Free Will advocates) greatly err. There definition of Grace is faulty. That is why their Grace is truly no grace at all.*
> 
> Synergistic Grace is what Phi 2:12,13 is about.
> 
> (Phi 2:12-13) Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling. For it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.
> 
> Just my two cents on the topic.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> The grace of God is never void of the law of God. Go back and read the Westminster as I asked you to do. Please.
Click to expand...




Actually I need not reread westminster Randy. Ill take my stand here. You asked me a question, I gave you the root. You did not ask me what grace produces. It is not cheap, nor is it mixed with Law. If you are saying what I think you are saying, then I heartily disagree. Every scripture you presented proves my point. I could not have strengthened my conviction that we need pure unadulterated grace preaching from the pulpit. Now again do not take my words to mean Law is useless, becasue I never said that. But I am saying if you believe in a 'glawspel', well it is an impossibility. 

let me explain with the words of Paul.

20Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances,

21(Touch not; taste not; handle not;

22Which all are to perish with the using after the commandments and doctrines of men?

23Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body: not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh.


When I try to live under the law it only frustrates me becasue of my inability to please the One I want to please most. I can not respond with love to a God who appears to be continually pointing out every wrong action or thought. Instead, I am left with a guilty conscience and sense of fear in approaching God. But I am thankful becasue :

1There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

2For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

3For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

4That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

5For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit. 


Pilgrim posted words from Watson that coincides with my thought too.

"Therefore, if any man is in Christ, he is a new
creature; old things are passed away, behold
all things are become new." 2 Corinthians 5:17

The new creature has a new life.

*Grace alters a man's walk.* (not grace mixed with Law)

Before he walked proudly(fruit of Law)—now he walks humbly.(fruit of grace)

Before he walked loosely(fruit of law)—now he walks holily.(fruit of grace)

Before a man sailed hell-ward (law)and, all of a sudden, the
Spirit of God comes upon him and blows him heavenward.(grace)

He makes the Word his rule, and Christ's life his pattern.

"Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did."
1 John 2:6

"So that you may walk worthy of the Lord, fully pleasing
to Him, bearing fruit in every good work and growing in
the knowledge of God." Colossians 1:10


Again, I did not think I had to explain my answer on this thread. A question was asked and I answered. I just cannot figure out why when grace is highly elevated, that people cry antinomian or ask me to clarify.


----------



## ServantofGod

Grymir said:


> Other:
> 
> #1 Throw the libs and barthians out!!
> #2 Sola Scripura!!
> #3 Bring the KJV back!! (It's an abomination to the LORD doesn't compare the modern watered down versions which say the Lord does not like.  )
> #2.5 Demand adherence to the WCF!
> #4 Make R.C. Sproul the Protestant Pope!
> #5 No more grape juice.
> #6 The new #1 show on TBN - Law & Order: Theological Victims Unit
> #7 Blow up Christianity Today's headquarters and put up a billboard that reads "Thus saith the LORD!"
> #134 Demand Reformed Presidents!!




#4 sounds good to me.

But I believe that knowing the pure, unadulterated truth of the attributes of God, will effect EVERYTHING in Christianity(Christology, Soteriology, ect...).


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

> Randy, as I have stated in another thread not to digress this one regarding Law, I do heartily disagree that Law converts/revives the soul.



Just a note Nicholas, but in Psalm 19 - which you seem to be referring to - the word "law" means the word of God in Scripture. The psalm is about God's revelation in creation (general revelation) and in Scripture (special revelation); thus when it talks about the law reviving/converting the soul, it means that it is a means of grace through which sinners are converted.


----------



## Amazing Grace

Daniel Ritchie said:


> Randy, as I have stated in another thread not to digress this one regarding Law, I do heartily disagree that Law converts/revives the soul.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just a note Nicholas, but in Psalm 19 - which you seem to be referring to - the word "law" means the word of God in Scripture. The psalm is about God's revelation in creation (general revelation) and in Scripture (special revelation); thus when it talks about the law reviving/converting the soul, it means that it is a means of grace through which sinners are converted.
Click to expand...



Daniel, I did not have 19 in mind at all. Perhaps Randy did. THis is not talking about OT Law here. For it cannot have the mosaic law in mind. I agree the word, the Gospel is the means of converting / reviving the soul


----------



## Reformed Covenanter

Amazing Grace said:


> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Randy, as I have stated in another thread not to digress this one regarding Law, I do heartily disagree that Law converts/revives the soul.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Just a note Nicholas, but in Psalm 19 - which you seem to be referring to - the word "law" means the word of God in Scripture. The psalm is about God's revelation in creation (general revelation) and in Scripture (special revelation); thus when it talks about the law reviving/converting the soul, it means that it is a means of grace through which sinners are converted.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel, I did not have 19 in mind at all. Perhaps Randy did. THis is not talking about OT Law here. For it cannot have the mosaic law in mind. I agree the word, the Gospel is the means of converting / reviving the soul
Click to expand...


Sorry, maybe it was Randy. Hopefully he can clarify if necessary.


----------



## Amazing Grace

Daniel Ritchie said:


> Amazing Grace said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel Ritchie said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just a note Nicholas, but in Psalm 19 - which you seem to be referring to - the word "law" means the word of God in Scripture. The psalm is about God's revelation in creation (general revelation) and in Scripture (special revelation); thus when it talks about the law reviving/converting the soul, it means that it is a means of grace through which sinners are converted.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Daniel, I did not have 19 in mind at all. Perhaps Randy did. THis is not talking about OT Law here. For it cannot have the mosaic law in mind. I agree the word, the Gospel is the means of converting / reviving the soul
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Sorry, maybe it was Randy. Hopefully he can clarify if necessary.
Click to expand...




I agree that clarification is needed from Randy. In post 61 he stated:

I do believe we need a good dose of law preaching. It was in the the law of God that King David encouraged us to delight in. It is meditating upon it that keeps us in the way and cleanses us. *It is the law of the Lord that converts (revives) the soul.*

Just for reference
(Psa 1:2) But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.

_(Psa 19:7) The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.
(Psa 19:8) The statutes of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes._

Oh Randy, where art thou Randy.....

"I'm in the bushes, the ladder broke." 

Just a tad of humor in the midst....


----------

