# The Core of being "reformed"



## Grafted In (Jul 19, 2009)

I have had a few conversations with people recently where I made reference to reformed theology and/or reformed churches. In turn, this led my conversation partners to question what I meant by "reformed." 

While I feel that I can adequately answer this question by making references to history, theology and its various categories, and the confessions I felt that the conversations would have gone better if I had a more succinct and brief answer to the question: "what do I mean when I say 'reformed?'"

Could some of you share what you say to people when you are asked this question. How could I get to the core of what they are asking without going off on a long discourse?

Thanks!


----------



## Sven (Jul 20, 2009)

"Reformed" means:

First, it means a commitment to the foundations of theology: God and His Word.
Second, it means a commitment to the Sovereign God of Scripture.
Third, it means a commitment to the Covenantal hermeneutic of Scripture.
Fourth, it means a commitment to the Doctrines of Scripture Summarized in the Reformed Confessions.
Fifth, it means a commitment to the Scriptural Principle of Worship.
Sixth, it means a commitment to the Reformed understanding of Law and Gospel.
Seventh, it means a commitment to the Reformed understanding of the Word and Sacraments.
Eighth, it means a commitment to the Reformed understanding of the Church.


----------



## A.J. (Jul 20, 2009)

Grafted In said:


> I have had a few conversations with people recently where I made reference to reformed theology and/or reformed churches. In turn, this led my conversation partners to question what I meant by "reformed."
> 
> While I feel that I can adequately answer this question by making references to history, theology and its various categories, and the confessions I felt that the conversations would have gone better if I had a more succinct and brief answer to the question: "what do I mean when I say 'reformed?'"
> 
> ...



I would say that the Reformed are heirs of the historic Protestant Reformation. Like other orthodox Protestants, they hold to the five "solas" and are a confessional group of Christians. They follow the teachings of John Calvin and the theologians who have followed him. Their beliefs and practices are summarized in the Three Forms of Unity and/or the Westminster Standards. Most importantly, to be Reformed means being reformed (and reforming) according to the Word of God. The Reformed are Christians who are simply going back to the Christianity of the Bible.


----------



## Grafted In (Jul 20, 2009)

Thanks for your input guys. You can see how difficult that it is to provide a concise and meaningful definition of the word "reformed" without using the word reformed in the definition. 

Having this nailed down to the best of our ability will go along way in propagating historic orthodoxy into American Christianity, which in its mainstream version, is anything but historic (beyond the Second Great Awakening) or orthodox.


----------



## ewenlin (Jul 20, 2009)

Sven said:


> "Reformed" means:
> 
> First, it means a commitment to the foundations of theology: God and His Word.
> Second, it means a commitment to the Sovereign God of Scripture.
> ...


This reminds me of Dr. McMahon's lectures _Are you Reformed? Really?_ Wonderful set.

The succinct way for me was always "5 points + covenant theology + confessions."


----------



## pm (Jul 20, 2009)

*Does it have to be this complicated?*



Sven said:


> "Reformed" means:
> 
> First, it means a commitment to the foundations of theology: God and His Word.
> Second, it means a commitment to the Sovereign God of Scripture.
> ...



This seems to be a great list and all, I consider myself reform and don't understand half of what you are saying. Seems to me it does not need to be all this complicated.


----------



## Whitefield (Jul 20, 2009)

Sven said:


> "Reformed" means:
> 
> First, it means a commitment to the foundations of theology: God and His Word.
> Second, it means a commitment to the Sovereign God of Scripture.
> ...



This list seems to me to be more what "Presbyterian" means than what "Reformed" means. I would define "Reformed" more along the lines of the "Solas" and the "Doctrines of Grace".


----------



## TeachingTulip (Jul 20, 2009)

Whitefield said:


> Sven said:
> 
> 
> > "Reformed" means:
> ...



I agree.

"Reformed" is the term that should be used to describe Christians who defy and deny the Pelagianism/Semi-Pelagianism false gospel messages; taught in varying degrees and in various forms, as "works-righteousness" gospels in many visible church organizations.

"Reformed," means and depicts believers correctly reverting back to the authority of Holy Scripture alone, as well as humbly establishing dependence upon the grace and mercies of God, Who has provided righteousness and salvation through the works and grace of His Son sent; alone.


----------



## Sven (Jul 20, 2009)

pmkadow said:


> Sven said:
> 
> 
> > "Reformed" means:
> ...



The first point means that the foundation for our theology is not our reason, the physical universe, our traditions, or our experience. The only foundations for our theology are God, and what he says in his Word. Sola 

The second point means we believe that God is God. He is sovereign. He is who he claims to be in His Word.

The third point means that we interpret the Bible according to the Covenant of Works and the Covenant of Grace.

The fourth point means that we hold that the Reformed Confessions accurately summarize what the Bible teaches.

The fifth point means that the only way to properly worship God is according to what He prescribes in His Word and in no other way.

The sixth point means that we understand the proper distinction between law and gospel, and do not try to confuse the two.

The seventh point means that we have a high view of the preaching of the Word and that it is the primary means of grace. We believe that the Holy Spirit works with His Word and not in ways contrary to His Word. We believe that there are only two sacraments, baptism and the Lord's Supper, and that these are means of grace, not according to the work performed, but according to the Spirit of Christ working through them. We believe that baptism is for those who profess faith in Christ and for Children of believers; the Lord's Supper is a rite of confirmation, and is the table where Christ meets with His people, not in any physical way, but in a spiritual and mystical way. This Supper is to be performed in remembrance of Him and is a foretaste of that great wedding supper of the Lamb we will all enjoy when He comes again. Those who do not profess faith in Christ or live a scandalous life are not welcome at the table. 

The eighth point means that we believe that Christ alone is the head of His Church. The true Church is made up of the Saints both on earth and those in heaven. The Church on earth in its visible and militant form is a mixture of saints and sinners and will be so until the end of time when Christ will send His angels to separate the wheat from the tares. The true form of government which alone enjoys divine right is the presbyterian form of government. Pastors and elders are to rule the Church not in any coercive way, buit their authority is only ministerial and declarative. Deacons are ordained for the purpose of ministering to the physical needs of the Church. The marks by which we may know which Church is the true Church on earth are these three: the pure preaching of the Word of God, the pure administration of the sacraments, and the right practice of Church discipline.

This is not a complicated list. That being said, I understand that for many people this may be a bit more than what they want to hear. The temptation is to truncate the idea of being Reformed into something more palattable for the lazy mind. But the Reformed faith is not for lazy people. It is meant to be the kind of faith that Christ promoted, i.e., a faith that makes us work hard to understand and appreciate the beauty and intricacy of it. If you're looking for an easy faith to understand, the Reformed Faith is not for you. Know this though that if it is not the Reformed Faith it is a faulty version of Biblical Religion.

-----Added 7/20/2009 at 10:15:57 EST-----



Whitefield said:


> Sven said:
> 
> 
> > "Reformed" means:
> ...



Pastor Marshall,

Presbyterian is synonymous with Reformed. The list I offer is one that is agreeable to the understanding of Reformed by the Continental Reformers and the Reformers on the British Isles. You are making a false dichotomy here. The doctrines of grace and the five solas form only part of the whole definition of what it means to be Reformed. I would highly recommend you read what Dr. R. Scott Clark has been writing about what it means to be Reformed. Read his book Recovering the Reformed Confession.


----------



## Exiled_2_God (Jul 20, 2009)

ewenlin said:


> Sven said:
> 
> 
> > "Reformed" means:
> ...



what would "5 points - CT + confessions" be defined as? 

Would a Reformed So. Baptist be truly reformed if it doesn't adhere to CT?


----------



## Sven (Jul 20, 2009)

TeachingTulip said:


> Whitefield said:
> 
> 
> > Sven said:
> ...



So is it possible then to hold to a Lutheran view of the sacraments, hold to a Roman Catholic view of the Church, but hold to the five solas and the doctrines of grace and still be Reformed? I don't think so. The Reformed Faith is a packaged deal. It is not defined by merely an adherence to an Augustinian/Calvinistic system of grace over and against a Pelagian/Semi-Pelagian system of grace. It is much more than that.


----------



## Whitefield (Jul 20, 2009)

Sven said:


> pmkadow said:
> 
> 
> > Sven said:
> ...



I disagree that Presbyterian and Reformed are the same thing. Not all Reformed share the same idea of church polity with the Presbyterians.


----------



## Philip (Jul 20, 2009)

One member of the Biblical and Theological studies department at my college defined the Reformed Faith as "A prayer lived out to the glory of God."


----------



## ewenlin (Jul 20, 2009)

Point noted Derek. 

Although we might be straying from the OP's question and


----------



## Exiled_2_God (Jul 20, 2009)

ewenlin said:


> Point noted Derek.
> 
> Although we might be straying from the OP's question and



Oh, it was a question.  

And it's related the the OP... in the defining "Reformed" part... A lot of Reformed Southern Baptists don't agree with CT...


----------



## A.J. (Jul 20, 2009)

Exiled_2_God said:


> what would "5 points - CT + confessions" be defined as?
> 
> Would a Reformed So. Baptist be truly reformed if it doesn't adhere to CT?



Derek, this was discussed here: http://www.puritanboard.com/f15/who-defines-reformed-32093/


----------



## Sven (Jul 20, 2009)

> I disagree that Presbyterian and Reformed are the same thing. Not all Reformed share the same idea of church polity with the Presbyterians.



I would challenge you then to look through Calvin's Ecclesiastical Ordinances, the Church order of Dordt, and the Form of Presbyterian Government. As well as the forms of Government of the Reformed and Presbyterian Churches of today. They all agree on a presof byterian form of rule for Christ's Church. The differences are minor, but not enough to make Presbyterian and Reformed not synonymous. Those who held to the solas and the doctrines of grace but held to a prelatical form of Government were historically called Anglican or Episcopalian. Those held to the solas and the doctrines of grace but held to an Independent form of Government were historically called Independents or Congregationalists. Those who held to the solas and the doctrines of grace but held that only believers could be baptized were called historically Particular Baptists.


----------



## Lady of the Lake (Jul 20, 2009)

When someone asks me what Reformed means, I simply say that it's an organized way to look at the truth of God's Word. Sorry to be so unsophisticated.


----------



## Whitefield (Jul 20, 2009)

Sven said:


> > I disagree that Presbyterian and Reformed are the same thing. Not all Reformed share the same idea of church polity with the Presbyterians.
> 
> 
> 
> I would challenge you then to look through Calvin's Ecclesiastical Ordinances, the Church order of Dordt, and the Form of Presbyterian Government. As well as the forms of Government of the Reformed and Presbyterian Churches of today. They all agree on a presof byterian form of rule for Christ's Church. The differences are minor, but not enough to make Presbyterian and Reformed not synonymous. Those who held to the solas and the doctrines of grace but held to a prelatical form of Government were historically called Anglican or Episcopalian. Those held to the solas and the doctrines of grace but held to an Independent form of Government were historically called Independents or Congregationalists. Those who held to the solas and the doctrines of grace but held that only believers could be baptized were called historically Particular Baptists.



So by your definition, Anglicans, Independents, and Baptists cannot be Reformed. I guess that would be a shock to them ... oh, and since I'm not Presbyterian I can't be Reformed by your definition either.


----------



## KMK (Jul 20, 2009)

Personally, I don't use the word 'reformed' when talking to just anyone. The word has such a wide variety of meanings that it has basically become meaning_less_.

When describing what I believe and what my church believes I have adopted the phraseology of ARBCA: "We believe in a reeeaaallly big God."


----------



## Exiled_2_God (Jul 20, 2009)

A.J. said:


> Exiled_2_God said:
> 
> 
> > what would "5 points - CT + confessions" be defined as?
> ...



Thanks, I'll check it out...


----------



## pm (Jul 20, 2009)

*Reformed*

Response to Sven:


> This is not a complicated list. That being said, I understand that for many people this may be a bit more than what they want to hear. The temptation is to truncate the idea of being Reformed into something more palattable for the lazy mind. But the Reformed faith is not for lazy people. It is meant to be the kind of faith that Christ promoted, i.e., a faith that makes us work hard to understand and appreciate the beauty and intricacy of it. If you're looking for an easy faith to understand, the Reformed Faith is not for you. Know this though that if it is not the Reformed Faith it is a faulty version of Biblical Religion.



I am reformed, I work full time and raise a family, I am a layman. I don't have countless hours to read the books I want to. *I am not lazy and do not have a lazy mind. Please be carefull laying a charge at the feet of those you do not understand!* Enough said.


----------



## ewenlin (Jul 20, 2009)

Exiled_2_God said:


> A.J. said:
> 
> 
> > Exiled_2_God said:
> ...


I assumed it was rhetoric. 

What does reformed mean? Someone who reads his bible...


----------



## Sven (Jul 20, 2009)

pmkadow said:


> Response to Sven:
> 
> 
> > This is not a complicated list. That being said, I understand that for many people this may be a bit more than what they want to hear. The temptation is to truncate the idea of being Reformed into something more palattable for the lazy mind. But the Reformed faith is not for lazy people. It is meant to be the kind of faith that Christ promoted, i.e., a faith that makes us work hard to understand and appreciate the beauty and intricacy of it. If you're looking for an easy faith to understand, the Reformed Faith is not for you. Know this though that if it is not the Reformed Faith it is a faulty version of Biblical Religion.
> ...



I fully understand your position. I too am a husband and a father. I, too, work hard to raise my family. But this does not excuse us from making it our priority to come to a better, fuller knowledge of the faith we claim to hold. I did not mean to make the charge sound specific. I admit I could have used broader language to include all who want an easier faith to believe in rather than the one handed to us in the Bible and through the Reformed Confessions. However, I still stand by what I said. If this does not apply to you then I do not mean it to apply to you.


----------



## Sweaty Deacon (Jul 20, 2009)

Another quick hit that doesn't fully explain it but sort of opens the door is to say that Reformed Theology has a focus that is theocentric vs. being anthropocentric, and monergistic vs. synergistic. The Reformed view of how we look at God affects how we look at every other doctrine outlined above. With a man centered view, our view of God is weakened and the related doctrines are skewed to fit.

I recently used this approach in a conversation with a visitor that came from an Evangelical Friends church. The conversation continues but it was a door opener. The results of the Synod at Dort in regard to 5 points of Arminianism vs Calvinism will be next week's conversation I suppose.


----------



## KMK (Jul 20, 2009)

pmkadow said:


> Response to Sven:
> 
> 
> > This is not a complicated list. That being said, I understand that for many people this may be a bit more than what they want to hear. The temptation is to truncate the idea of being Reformed into something more palattable for the lazy mind. But the Reformed faith is not for lazy people. It is meant to be the kind of faith that Christ promoted, i.e., a faith that makes us work hard to understand and appreciate the beauty and intricacy of it. If you're looking for an easy faith to understand, the Reformed Faith is not for you. Know this though that if it is not the Reformed Faith it is a faulty version of Biblical Religion.
> ...



Settle down, big fella. I don't think he meant it the way you are reading it. However, you have a point. The Reformed faith certainly does not see itself as difficult to understand:



> LBC 1:7 All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all; yet *those things which are necessary to be known, believed and observed for salvation, are so clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of ordinary means, may attain to a sufficient understanding of them.*



Calvinism, in and of itself, is not difficult at all. It is the plain teaching of Scripture. What makes it hard to understand is all of torturing of Scripture that goes on with other systems. My children have had no problem understanding the Reformed faith whereas I struggled because I was brought up in the UMC. Therefore, the difficulty of the Reformed faith 'is in the eye of the beholder'.


----------



## ewenlin (Jul 20, 2009)

> Calvinism, in and of itself, is not difficult at all. It is the plain teaching of Scripture. What makes it hard to understand is all of torturing of Scripture that goes on with other systems. My children have had no problem understanding the Reformed faith whereas I struggled because I was brought up in the UMC. Therefore, the difficulty of the Reformed faith 'is in the eye of the beholder'.



This is exactly what I experienced in sharing the reformed faith. The biggest obstacle is the realization that everything they have been taught and held to be true was actually false.


----------



## Sven (Jul 20, 2009)

This has been said many many many many many many times by Dr. Clark and others, there is no disrespect meant to any who are baptists. I personally have several friends who are baptists, and I respect many baptists on the PB. I have learned a lot from baptists. I've read and appreciated many baptists. I just don't think "Reformed" is broad enough to include baptists. Dr. Clark and others have made the case for this. Again, no disrespect to my baptist brothers and sisters. You're all great; I love ya. I've said this before, but if a baptist were to write a book titled, Recovering the Baptist Confession, defining what it means to be a baptist excluding the Reformed from their definition of Baptist, you wouldn't get nearly an uproar as you are getting now with the Reformed defining Reformed. You'd probably get a lot of heat from those So. Baptists who want nothing to do with Calvinism, but the Reformed Churches would be fine with it.


----------



## Exiled_2_God (Jul 20, 2009)

ewenlin said:


> Exiled_2_God said:
> 
> 
> > A.J. said:
> ...



Not that I would never use such rhetoric, but I must admit, this time it was an honest question. 

It seems the terminology dies the death of 1000 qualifications.

-----Added 7/20/2009 at 11:25:00 EST-----



ewenlin said:


> > Calvinism, in and of itself, is not difficult at all. It is the plain teaching of Scripture. What makes it hard to understand is all of torturing of Scripture that goes on with other systems. My children have had no problem understanding the Reformed faith whereas I struggled because I was brought up in the UMC. Therefore, the difficulty of the Reformed faith 'is in the eye of the beholder'.
> 
> 
> 
> This is exactly what I experienced in sharing the reformed faith. The biggest obstacle is the realization that everything they have been taught and held to be true was actually false.



Yup, that was me too... I had to untrain myself from my Arminian lens (and as I did so I felt like I was lied to my whole life)... still have some untraining to do... but for the most part I'm over the hurdle.


----------



## Whitefield (Jul 20, 2009)

Sven said:


> This has been said many many many many many many times by Dr. Clark and others, there is no disrespect meant to any who are baptists. I personally have several friends who are baptists, and I respect many baptists on the PB. I have learned a lot from baptists. I've read and appreciated many baptists. I just don't think "Reformed" is broad enough to include baptists. Dr. Clark and others have made the case for this. Again, no disrespect to my baptist brothers and sisters. You're all great; I love ya. I've said this before, but if a baptist were to write a book titled, Recovering the Baptist Confession, defining what it means to be a baptist excluding the Reformed from their definition of Baptist, you wouldn't get nearly an uproar as you are getting now with the Reformed defining Reformed. You'd probably get a lot of heat from those So. Baptists who want nothing to do with Calvinism, but the Reformed Churches would be fine with it.



If the constricting of the term "Reformed" applies only to Presbyterian, then to avoid the confusion the term "Reformed" generates we should no longer use the term "Reformed faith" but use "Presbyterian faith" ... and no longer use "Reformed theology" but use "Presbyterian theology" in its place. And when you say "Reformed Churches" do you mean "Presbyterian Churches"?


----------



## Sven (Jul 20, 2009)

Whitefield said:


> Sven said:
> 
> 
> > This has been said many many many many many many times by Dr. Clark and others, there is no disrespect meant to any who are baptists. I personally have several friends who are baptists, and I respect many baptists on the PB. I have learned a lot from baptists. I've read and appreciated many baptists. I just don't think "Reformed" is broad enough to include baptists. Dr. Clark and others have made the case for this. Again, no disrespect to my baptist brothers and sisters. You're all great; I love ya. I've said this before, but if a baptist were to write a book titled, Recovering the Baptist Confession, defining what it means to be a baptist excluding the Reformed from their definition of Baptist, you wouldn't get nearly an uproar as you are getting now with the Reformed defining Reformed. You'd probably get a lot of heat from those So. Baptists who want nothing to do with Calvinism, but the Reformed Churches would be fine with it.
> ...



Again, Pastor Marshall, you have made a false dichotomy when you try to make a distinction between Reformed and Presbyterian. Presbyterian is used to describe the Reformed Churches of the British Isles. The two are synonymous terms. Every Presbyterian and every Reformed church will admit that these two terms are synonymous. I told you before, check out the sources I suggested, you will find that Presbyterian and Reformed are synonymous terms. Historically, too, you will find that Presbyterians call themselves Reformed. When I say Reformed I mean Reformed. When I say Presbyterian, I mean Reformed.


----------



## KMK (Jul 20, 2009)

Moderator's Note:

PB recognizes 3FU, WCF, and LBC as 'Reformed'. We have been down this road many times. Let us get this thread back on track.


----------



## ewenlin (Jul 21, 2009)

Sven said:


> This has been said many many many many many many times by Dr. Clark and others, there is no disrespect meant to any who are baptists. I personally have several friends who are baptists, and I respect many baptists on the PB. I have learned a lot from baptists. I've read and appreciated many baptists. I just don't think "Reformed" is broad enough to include baptists. Dr. Clark and others have made the case for this. Again, no disrespect to my baptist brothers and sisters. You're all great; I love ya. I've said this before, but if a baptist were to write a book titled, Recovering the Baptist Confession, defining what it means to be a baptist excluding the Reformed from their definition of Baptist, you wouldn't get nearly an uproar as you are getting now with the Reformed defining Reformed. You'd probably get a lot of heat from those So. Baptists who want nothing to do with Calvinism, but the Reformed Churches would be fine with it.


Oh yes, according to PB, I am reformed, seeing as the lbcf is listed as one of the Reformed Confessions.

Exactly.


----------



## Sven (Jul 21, 2009)

Ok Mr. Moderator, back to the original point.

Grafted In, if someone asks me what it means to be Reformed I begin by saying, "Reformed means taking God at His Word, believing what He asks me to believe, and doing the duty He calls me to do." Then I explain further by going down the list I gave.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Jul 21, 2009)

I think the question stated or implied in the title of the thread aims to get down to one, two, or three "most essential" things in our "reformational" faith.

We could possibly agree that there are more essentials than that, items that "belong" to the *title* of Reformed. But at the same time, we are different from Lutherans or Anglicans in ways that still show them to be closer to us than Pentacostals, RCC, or even ill-defined evangelicalism.

So, we are looking, It seems to me, for just a few items, if we can find them, that are "MOST" Reformed. How 'bout that?

1. Submission to the Bible. I believe God has made it plain enough to make sense of the most vital parts without much help. And with help, I can get hold of the other parts, for it was written so that people could understand it, not so that it would "wow" folks by its esoteric mysteries. I keep a firm resolution to let the Bible teach me how to think, and how to think about everything. If I have a difficult time understanding something, the problem is in me, and God will help me through my own problems, while his promises stay the same.

2. Let God be God. How can I think too high of God? The problem with so much religion today (especially in the churches) is that God cannot be allowed to be God. "No no," they say, "I'm certain that is unworthy of God, or he's not like that." Why? Well, its usually not because of what they have taken from the Bible, or they have taken half a cup of devotion, and mixed it with a gallon of human self-confidence. Let God be God, and a man is more than half-way to surrendering to Sovereignty in salvation, and everyplace else.

3. Christ as the key to everything. Put him first, and at some point I think a man will surrender to some version of a covenant theology. When he is at the center of your commitments, then he will be found at the center of your interpretation of all the Bible. When I quit looking into the Bible to find out what law I need to apply today in order to find fulfillment, quit reading the Bible to find out how Christ fits into my story--and instead, learn how I fit into his--then he will bring his law to life in my heart and mind, by that same Word and Spirit who urges me first to look at Christ.


In the midst of this, I believe about 85% or more of such people will become "Calvinist" in their soteriology. Or will just accept it as a matter of fact when they hear it. Because they already have it in the heart. And it moves up into their head, rather than being forced down in their hearts. Which is OK, too. After all, that's how so many people here can attest they came to it--kicking and screaming like little children.


The "most" of the Reformed faith:
submission to Scripture, to God, to Christ.


----------



## ewenlin (Jul 21, 2009)

Contra_Mundum said:


> I think the question stated or implied in the title of the thread aims to get down to one, two, or three "most essential" things in our "reformational" faith.
> 
> We could possibly agree that there are more essentials than that, items that "belong" to the *title* of Reformed. But at the same time, we are different from Lutherans or Anglicans in ways that still show them to be closer to us than Pentacostals, RCC, or even ill-defined evangelicalism.
> 
> ...


Actually Rev. Buchanan your post got me thinking, wouldn't most Christians be able to profess the three things you've mentioned? Although on a larger definition they would be miles away. Most pentecostals I know would say amen to that in a bat of an eyelid but Reformed? Really? They don't even know what it means.

We have come to a point, I think, that being Reformed now is most understood as simply the 5 points. I know its not what being Reformed is, but its just what the rest of evangelicalism sees. In light of this wouldn't it be easier to define the essentials more specifically?

I say this because most people (even in seminary) that I've encountered would align themselves with submission to Scripture, to God and to Christ. But if I use the 5 points + Covenant theology + Confessions, a line is clearly drawn. Evangelicalism has really eroded much nowadays I guess. 

What do you think?


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Jul 21, 2009)

Ewen,
I obviously question their commitments to those very things which they may profess. I'm convinced that if they really did submit, then I don't think they'd long be comfortable in their current places of worship and service. And to whatever degree they accept certain "Reformed" doctrines, they are inconsistent with key commitments in their present communions.

But your point is accurate in this way: to be "Reformed" is to be essentially Christian. Hence, while I agree there are many Christians outside our churches, I don't think they know what they're missing. I think we get "the most" out of those very things. I think we have "the most" faithful-to-the-apostolic-faith church.

If all it takes is "the five points" or a reasonable facsimile, as in "predestinarian", then I guess we have to admit Thomas Aquinas into our "Reformed band", Roman sacraments and all. But my problem is less accepting that TA might have (if he'd lived at a later time) rejected Rome's inventions, and clung to the Faith; but in so narrowing down the definition of Reformed to a soteriological question.

Calvin said justification by faith was absolutely vital--but second to one other thing. Salvation was a means to the end: right relationship leads to *right worship*. Right worship, at base, is knowing God for who he is, and rendering appropriate service with him in mind.

In the end, I would subsume the "5 points" largely under #2, but also in #3. I would put Covenant theology largely under #3, but also #1.

I would subsume Confessions largely under #1, being what we would term "summaries" of Bible teaching.

There are a lot of wonderful Christians in bad churches today. But rather than coming to them (if they haven't come to me first) and telling them to get grace, faith, and salvation right; adopt my covenant theology; and believe my confession,

"Let's study the Bible. See the Bible teaches this. Won't you submit to the plain Word of God? This is what God says about himself. Won't you let him define himself for you, rather than you him? What does that say about you? Why do you need a second or another focus in the Bible, beside Christ? Doesn't it strike you as odd, that as a professing Christian, you see other, parallel (or rival) issues?"

That is how I would approach it as a pastor. But, if I'm trying to just explain who I am to people who are simply curious, then OK, I am monergistic, covenantal, and confessional.


----------



## Brian Withnell (Jul 21, 2009)

Sven said:


> "Reformed" means:
> 
> First, it means a commitment to the foundations of theology: God and His Word.
> Second, it means a commitment to the Sovereign God of Scripture.
> ...



Only one problem ... the eighth is circular. You use "reformed" in defining "reformed."

Not bad, but I would possibly try:
The five solas
The five points of Calvinism
The sovereignty of God in everything.


----------



## ewenlin (Jul 21, 2009)

Thanks for that Rev. Buchanan. Although I did have a systematic theology lecturer who didn't know what monergism was and I had to explain it to her in class.


----------



## N. Eshelman (Jul 21, 2009)

I would say: 
1. Theonomy
2. Quiver Full Movement
3. Homeschool only
4. KJV and Psalms of David in Metre to the tune of 'The Directory for PublicK worship'

Just kidding.


----------



## ewenlin (Jul 21, 2009)

nleshelman said:


> I would say:
> 1. Theonomy
> 2. Quiver Full Movement
> 3. Homeschool only
> ...


that sounds about right.


----------



## KMK (Jul 21, 2009)

nleshelman said:


> I would say:
> 1. Theonomy
> 2. Quiver Full Movement
> 3. Homeschool only
> ...



"It's funny 'cause its true!" To many people, both inside the camp and out, numbers 1-3 are the basic definition of 'reformed' (Vision Forum)

Again, that is why I avoid the term altogether.


----------



## Scott1 (Jul 21, 2009)

You've got the answer here.

The Christianity of the Bible restored during the Reformation.

Doctrines of grace "five points" + covenant theology + confession (as was posted above)

Use their questions as an entry way into discussing any one of these topics!

(later you can get to a spiritual view of the sacraments, church discipline, church government, baptism, etc.)


----------



## JennyG (Jul 21, 2009)

Scott1 said:


> You've got the answer here.
> 
> The Christianity of the Bible restored during the Reformation.
> 
> ...



sorry to be simple minded, but please could anyone give a quick and simple definition of "covenant theology"
-I mean, just in very basic terms?


----------



## Scott1 (Jul 21, 2009)

JennyG said:


> Scott1 said:
> 
> 
> > You've got the answer here.
> ...



Covenant theology views the whole of Scripture as one continuous plan of redemption by God done by grace through faith in Christ. It began primarily through the covenant community of ethnic Israel with God's intention to expand salvation to people of every tribe, nation, kindred and tongue.

Salvation was, is and forever shall be based on God's grace, faith in Christ's righteousness alone. The Old Testament believers looked in faith toward a coming Messiah, Redeemer Jesus Christ. New Testament believers look back on a risen Savior, Redeemer, Jesus Christ.


----------



## christiana (Jul 21, 2009)

Teaching Tulip said:



> "Reformed," means and depicts believers correctly reverting back to the authority of Holy Scripture alone, as well as humbly establishing dependence upon the grace and mercies of God, Who has provided righteousness and salvation through the works and grace of His Son sent; alone.



I like this!! JUst look at all the different opinions present here! Unless we go to the total authority of scripture only it is then only man's opinion! Sola Scriptura!!


----------



## JennyG (Jul 21, 2009)

Scott1 said:


> JennyG said:
> 
> 
> > sorry to be simple minded, but please could anyone give a quick and simple definition of "covenant theology"
> ...


----------



## Sven (Jul 21, 2009)

Brian Withnell said:


> Sven said:
> 
> 
> > "Reformed" means:
> ...



I am not into Reformed = five solas, and five points. Calvin set the stage for what it means to be Reformed and he understood it in terms of everything I just stated. It is possible to retain points six through eight without using the word "Reformed," but it would get a little more lengthy then what I've written.
I should note that the queston was what is the core of Reformed, not the definition of Reformed. I didn't mean to get us off track by trying to define Reformed. Trying to find the core of Reformed is like trying to find the essence of Christianity or the central dogma of the Reformation. There is just too much there to make one thing stand out above the rest. There is a problem for example if we say the core of Reformed is the five points and the five solas, because these points and solas say very little about the Church, the distinction between Law and Gospel, worship, and sacraments; all of these things were very important historically in defining what it means to be Reformed. I like what Stephen Smallmen says in his pamphlet, What is a Reformed Church. He doesn't go for the usual five points and five solas; he rather begins with the historical roots, then goes into the doctrine of Scripture, the Sovereignty of God, the Covenant, the Law of God, the Church and Sacraments, and the kingdom of God. This is a more acceptable approach, I think, in getting at what it means to be Reformed.

-----Added 7/21/2009 at 12:11:23 EST-----



christiana said:


> Teaching Tulip said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If we actually take a look at what everyone is saying, there is not a whole lot of difference. Everyone, including myself, can agree that the five points and the five solas have something to do with being Reformed. We also all agree that the Scriptures are what must ultimately determine what it means to be Reformed. The various opinions are really not all that different.


----------



## Exiled_2_God (Jul 25, 2009)

*Article entitled "What is a Reformed Baptist"*

What is a Reformed Baptist

Comments??


----------



## ewenlin (Jul 25, 2009)

Some on the Pb would say Reformed Baptists are just people on the way to becoming Presbyterians. lol

As for a glossary, here you go

http://www.puritanboard.com/f15/glossary-reformed-acronyms-7758/


----------



## Exiled_2_God (Jul 25, 2009)

ewenlin said:


> Some on the Pb would say Reformed Baptists are just people on the way to becoming Presbyterians. lol
> 
> As for a glossary, here you go
> 
> http://www.puritanboard.com/f15/glossary-reformed-acronyms-7758/



that I've heard...ha.

I guess it's like the statements: define Republican, or define Conservative. 

If I was a Presbyterian, then they would be right...


----------



## CovenantalBaptist (Jul 25, 2009)

KMK said:


> Personally, I don't use the word 'reformed' when talking to just anyone. The word has such a wide variety of meanings that it has basically become meaning_less_.
> 
> When describing what I believe and what my church believes I have adopted the phraseology of ARBCA: "We believe in a reeeaaallly big God."




As you reference, brother Ken, Dr. Renihan's church has produced an excellent tract which has two points as an introduction to historic confessional Reformed Protestantism:
1) We believe in a really big God
2) He has written a great book

For beginners (and ESL folks), I think this is about as jargon-free as you can get. They then develop the Doctrines of Grace/Solas and Covenant theology in brief out of these statements.


----------



## Damon Rambo (Jul 25, 2009)

Sven said:


> > I disagree that Presbyterian and Reformed are the same thing. Not all Reformed share the same idea of church polity with the Presbyterians.
> 
> 
> 
> I would challenge you then to look through Calvin's Ecclesiastical Ordinances, the Church order of Dordt, and the Form of Presbyterian Government. As well as the forms of Government of the Reformed and Presbyterian Churches of today. They all agree on a presof byterian form of rule for Christ's Church. The differences are minor, but not enough to make Presbyterian and Reformed not synonymous. Those who held to the solas and the doctrines of grace but held to a prelatical form of Government were historically called Anglican or Episcopalian. Those held to the solas and the doctrines of grace but held to an Independent form of Government were historically called Independents or Congregationalists. Those who held to the solas and the doctrines of grace but held that only believers could be baptized were called historically Particular Baptists.



Apparently you are under the impression that "Reformed" is defined by John Calvin and his "line" of reformers. The reformation, and the "reformers" which catalyzed the protestant/reformed Church movement, came from a wide variety of backgrounds, and held a very diverse set of views. Lutherans could claim equally well, that they were "reformed", and Presbyterians were not. 

The fact is that many of the men who founded the Baptist movement were "reformers". The 1689 LBCF, is, in every book I have ever read, considered "reformed". It certainly is on this forum. In fact, it could be argued that those such as yourself, who dogmatically cling to certain traditions, are not truly "reformed", because they do not hold to the reformers most basic motto: "Reformed and ever reforming".


----------

