Anyone have a short and simple way to define it?

I believe Reformed Theology holds to five points of Calvinism:


Total Depravity,
Unconditional election,
Limited atonement,
Irrestistible Grace,
Perseverance of the Saints.

I believe Reformed Theology holds to five points of Calvinism:


Total Depravity,
Unconditional election,
Limited atonement,
Irrestistible Grace,
Perseverance of the Saints.



Thanks. But is that it? I thought maybe there was more to it. I had heard about the TULIP part but I figured that was just part of it.

I believe Reformed Theology holds to five points of Calvinism:


Total Depravity,
Unconditional election,
Limited atonement,
Irrestistible Grace,
Perseverance of the Saints.



This might put me in the minority of theologians, but I disagree that one needs to ascribe to the 5 points of Calvinism in order to be reformed. For instance, Jacob Arminius was reformed, but as we all know he didn't exactly hold to the 5 points. :)

A better distinction might be Reformed and reformed. Reformed theology would be a very distinct system that does include the 5 points. A reformed theology, however, would hold more to the tenets of the reformation without accepting the 5 points of Calvin. For instance:

1) Scripture as the final authority
2) Salvation by faith alone
3) Salvation by faith through grace
4) Salvation finalized by Christ alone
5) All for the glory of God

Now, some might say, "Well isn't this anyone who claims the name of Christ who isn't Catholic?" Truth be told, most Charismatics and Protestants wouldn't fit within the above 5 solas, either due to a denial in eternal security, that all things are done for the glory of God, or that Scripture is the final authority.

However, the above would define one part of a general reformed theology. The other aspect is the belief that God is redeeming Creation, thus all vocations are equally important. A reformed theology looks at the pastorate and says, "Wow, good that he's called there, but he's no more spiritually important than the janitor." It elevates the priesthood of all believers, stating that all of us have equal access to God.

Those two concepts (5 Solas and God's redeeming of culture) tend to mark the reformed worldview. Granted, the 5 points of Calvin are often attached to the 5 solas, but this isn't necessary in every case.

Thank you for all that info AK. That gives me a bit more understanding. I appreciate it.

God did not set up a system for salvation that involves a priesthood that will give forgiveness for a certain amount of money.
The reformers saw this practice as a corruption of the Gospel and wanted to change how the Church operated. They experienced a ferocious push-back that caused them to take a step back and rethink the whole basis that the priesthood had established, that had given them so much power.
The reformers decided that a legitimate church needs to have a basis in the Bible. They started on a path of restoration of theology but it is something that needs to be ongoing and does not end, back at some definable point in history.

I recently saw the movie Luther so I know what you're talking about. Lots of corruption in his time.

This might put me in the minority of theologians, but I disagree that one needs to ascribe to the 5 points of Calvinism in order to be reformed. For instance, Jacob Arminius was reformed, but as we all know he didn't exactly hold to the 5 points. :)

A better distinction might be Reformed and reformed. Reformed theology would be a very distinct system that does include the 5 points. A reformed theology, however, would hold more to the tenets of the reformation without accepting the 5 points of Calvin. For instance:

1) Scripture as the final authority
2) Salvation by faith alone
3) Salvation by faith through grace
4) Salvation finalized by Christ alone
5) All for the glory of God

Now, some might say, "Well isn't this anyone who claims the name of Christ who isn't Catholic?" Truth be told, most Charismatics and Protestants wouldn't fit within the above 5 solas, either due to a denial in eternal security, that all things are done for the glory of God, or that Scripture is the final authority.

However, the above would define one part of a general reformed theology. The other aspect is the belief that God is redeeming Creation, thus all vocations are equally important. A reformed theology looks at the pastorate and says, "Wow, good that he's called there, but he's no more spiritually important than the janitor." It elevates the priesthood of all believers, stating that all of us have equal access to God.

Those two concepts (5 Solas and God's redeeming of culture) tend to mark the reformed worldview. Granted, the 5 points of Calvin are often attached to the 5 solas, but this isn't necessary in every case.

I'm with AK on this one.

I am a Reformed Arminian.

This might put me in the minority of theologians, but I disagree that one needs to ascribe to the 5 points of Calvinism in order to be reformed. For instance, Jacob Arminius was reformed, but as we all know he didn't exactly hold to the 5 points. :)

A better distinction might be Reformed and reformed. Reformed theology would be a very distinct system that does include the 5 points. A reformed theology, however, would hold more to the tenets of the reformation without accepting the 5 points of Calvin. For instance:

1) Scripture as the final authority
2) Salvation by faith alone
3) Salvation by faith through grace
4) Salvation finalized by Christ alone
5) All for the glory of God

Now, some might say, "Well isn't this anyone who claims the name of Christ who isn't Catholic?" Truth be told, most Charismatics and Protestants wouldn't fit within the above 5 solas, either due to a denial in eternal security, that all things are done for the glory of God, or that Scripture is the final authority.

However, the above would define one part of a general reformed theology. The other aspect is the belief that God is redeeming Creation, thus all vocations are equally important. A reformed theology looks at the pastorate and says, "Wow, good that he's called there, but he's no more spiritually important than the janitor." It elevates the priesthood of all believers, stating that all of us have equal access to God.

Those two concepts (5 Solas and God's redeeming of culture) tend to mark the reformed worldview. Granted, the 5 points of Calvin are often attached to the 5 solas, but this isn't necessary in every case.


True Reformed doctrine is more than T.U.L.I.P. To be truly Reformed one will submit to the biblical doctrine of Scripture alone, salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, of Christ alone, to the glory of God alone. Most true Reformed Churches will also subscribe to three forms of unity; Canons of Dort, Heidelberg Cathechism, and the Belgic Confession of Faith. You will also find they teach Ecumenical Creeds; Apostles', Nicene, and Athanasian. In Presbyterian Reformed Churches you will usually find the Westminster Confession of Faith. All of these creeds and confessions were written in an attempt to refute error. Though they are man made documents Reformed Christians are fully persuaded that they do indeed align with the doctrines of the Holy Bible. The last thing you will find in truly Reformed Christians is the desire to be always reforming...in other words the desire to protect and defend truth against all error coming through false doctrine, false teachers, and false practices coming into the church.

Truly AK I don't recognize this picture of being Reformed that you have presented.

Many Blessings,
RW

Thanks. But is that it? I thought maybe there was more to it. I had heard about the TULIP part but I figured that was just part of it.
You asked for a short,simple answer..That's what I gave you.:D

You asked for a short,simple answer..That's what I gave you.:D

Greetings Karenoka,

I wasn't pickin on you honest! :kiss:

Many Blessings,
RW

True Reformed doctrine is more than T.U.L.I.P. To be truly Reformed one will submit to the biblical doctrine of Scripture alone, salvation by grace alone, through faith alone, of Christ alone, to the glory of God alone. Most true Reformed Churches will also subscribe to three forms of unity; Canons of Dort, Heidelberg Cathechism, and the Belgic Confession of Faith. You will also find they teach Ecumenical Creeds; Apostles', Nicene, and Athanasian. In Presbyterian Reformed Churches you will usually find the Westminster Confession of Faith. All of these creeds and confessions were written in an attempt to refute error. Though they are man made documents Reformed Christians are fully persuaded that they do indeed align with the doctrines of the Holy Bible. The last thing you will find in truly Reformed Christians is the desire to be always reforming...in other words the desire to protect and defend truth against all error coming through false doctrine, false teachers, and false practices coming into the church.

Truly AK I don't recognize this picture of being Reformed that you have presented.

Many Blessings,
RW

How is any of that different from what I said? :confused

In fact, I stated that being reformed goes well beyond TULIP and doesn't necessarily have to include it.

To be truly Reformed one will submit to the biblical doctrine of Scripture alone.....

Most true Reformed Churches will also subscribe to three forms of unity; Canons of Dort, Heidelberg Cathechism, and the Belgic Confession of Faith. You will also find they teach Ecumenical Creeds; Apostles', Nicene, and Athanasian. In Presbyterian Reformed Churches you will usually find the Westminster Confession of Faith. All of these creeds and confessions were written in an attempt to refute error. Though they are man made documents Reformed Christians are fully persuaded that they do indeed align with the doctrines of the Holy Bible.
These two statements seem contraditory to me.

These two statements seem contraditory to me.

Well said my friend.

How is any of that different from what I said? :confused

In fact, I stated that being reformed goes well beyond TULIP and doesn't necessarily have to include it.

Greetings AK,

If a reformed theology does not include T.U.L.I.P it is NOT a reformed theology.

Here is some of what you stated regarding what reformed theology is.

A better distinction might be Reformed and reformed. Reformed theology would be a very distinct system that does include the 5 points. A reformed theology, however, would hold more to the tenets of the reformation without accepting the 5 points of Calvin. For instance:

1) Scripture as the final authority
2) Salvation by faith alone
3) Salvation by faith through grace
4) Salvation finalized by Christ alone
5) All for the glory of God

A reformed theology that teaches (2) salvation by faith alone is not reformed theology. Reformed theology teaches that salvation is by grace alone through faith alone that is not our own, but the gift of God. Your point (3) is again not reformed theology. Salvation is by grace through faith, but what you have done is made faith the instrument of salvation rather than grace. Point (4) is also not an accurate portrayal of reformed theology. Reformed theology teaches that salvation from beginning to end is of Christ alone.

This is quite different than how I understand reformed/Reformed theology.

Many Blessings,
RW

These two statements seem contraditory to me.

Not until you can prove that the creeds and confessions do not align perfectly with all of Scripture. Since I believe they do, there is no contradiction of Scripture alone.

Many Blessings,
RW

Not until you can prove that the creeds and confessions do not align perfectly with all of Scripture. Since I believe they do, there is no contradiction of Scripture alone.

Many Blessings,
RW

How is that different from the Roman Catholic view?

How is that different from the Roman Catholic view?

I don't know! Can you show me how its the same?

Many Blessings,
RW

I don't know! Can you show me how its the same?

Many Blessings,
RWBecause they too, believe their list of rules and beliefs line up with scripture.

What I don't understand is...why do we have to have any creeds of men when we have the Bible?

all the best...

I don't see how you can be 'Reformed' if you don't believe in that beautiful Dutch flower.

You asked for a short,simple answer..That's what I gave you.:D

Of course. And I thank you for it.

Greetings AK,

If a reformed theology does not include T.U.L.I.P it is NOT a reformed theology.

Here is some of what you stated regarding what reformed theology is.

A better distinction might be Reformed and reformed. Reformed theology would be a very distinct system that does include the 5 points. A reformed theology, however, would hold more to the tenets of the reformation without accepting the 5 points of Calvin. For instance:

1) Scripture as the final authority
2) Salvation by faith alone
3) Salvation by faith through grace
4) Salvation finalized by Christ alone
5) All for the glory of God

A reformed theology that teaches (2) salvation by faith alone is not reformed theology. Reformed theology teaches that salvation is by grace alone through faith alone that is not our own, but the gift of God. Your point (3) is again not reformed theology. Salvation is by grace through faith, but what you have done is made faith the instrument of salvation rather than grace. Point (4) is also not an accurate portrayal of reformed theology. Reformed theology teaches that salvation from beginning to end is of Christ alone.

This is quite different than how I understand reformed/Reformed theology.

Many Blessings,
RW



I'd have to say that your understanding is off. Most reformed and Reformed theologians pride themselves on following the 5 Solas, so you have that contention to deal with. :)

Now, most Reformed people will say that TULIP is a part of being Reformed. But being reformed (lower case "r") doesn't require a belief in TULIP. Again, Jacob Arminius was reformed, but certainly didn't accept the 5 points. Lutherans are reformed, but don't accept the 5 points.

Because they too, believe their list of rules and beliefs line up with scripture.

Ah yes...but can they prove it using Scripture alone?

Many Blessings,
RW

What I don't understand is...why do we have to have any creeds of men when we have the Bible?

all the best...

Greetings Kay-gee,

How do you feel about teachers, preachers, evangelists? Certainly it is necessary to make sure the creeds and confessions can be proven through Scripture...I believe the creeds and confessions of true Reformed Churches are found to be faithful to the Word of God. So what I have at my finger tips are the works of faithful Christians who have gone before me. This is indeed helpful. Do they replace the Bible, or are they to be upheld as the Bible? By no means! However they, like a concordance or dictionary can be of trememdous help when seeking to understand the doctrines of Scripture.

Take for example the doctrine of total depravity. I could use the Bible alone and search to find every single passage, and believe me this is commenable and a good thing to do. But using the Canons of Dort, I have at my finger tips many of those passages of Scripture already. Faithful men of God, from the past have already done much of the work for me. Will I simply assume they have drawn the correct Biblical interpretation? Not at all. Now I can use the verses they have already provided, and search the Scriptures myself to see if what they have taught is true to Scripture. Is this not what the noble Bereans did when they "heard" Paul? Didn't they search the Scriptures to see if what Paul said was true? This is how Biblical creeds and confessions can be of great value, and why true Reformed Churches use them.

Many Blessings,
RW

I don't see how you can be 'Reformed' if you don't believe in that beautiful Dutch flower.

My sentiments exactly!

Many Blessings,
RW

I'd have to say that your understanding is off. Most reformed and Reformed theologians pride themselves on following the 5 Solas, so you have that contention to deal with. :)

Now, most Reformed people will say that TULIP is a part of being Reformed. But being reformed (lower case "r") doesn't require a belief in TULIP. Again, Jacob Arminius was reformed, but certainly didn't accept the 5 points. Lutherans are reformed, but don't accept the 5 points.

AK, the Synod of Dordrecht (1618-1619) would not agree with you. The Synod convened for the purpose of condemning Arminius' theology, and declared it and its adherents anathemas. They also defined the five points of Calvinism, against the Remonstrants, and expelled Arminian pastors from the Netherlands.

Jacob Arminius may have started out under good teaching, but clearly somewhere along the line he went very far astray.

Many Blessings,
RW

I would like to know who exactly gets to define 'Reformed'?

Greetings family.

I think most of us are trying to represent reformed theology properly, but I can see we’re running into some usual and not unexpected difficulty. We might encounter the same difficulty if trying to define Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Protestantism, or even Christianity – there’s such a diversity that “a short and simple way to define it” quickly becomes complex in the details.

I’m very appreciative of the Synod of Dort (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synod_of_Dort) which gave us a more narrow, flowery definition in specific response to those aspects of the reformed faith from which the Remonstrants (including the Arminians) had departed. I and those Dortly Dutchmen would agree that both Calvinism and the Reformed faith is quite a bit broader than the TULIP of which we are enamoured. As a more recent and American Calvinist, I’m even inclined to believe that TULIP doesn’t quite smell as lovely as it perhaps ought, and that the aroma can sometimes be distracting. With all due respect to a masterful acrostic, the finer theological detail of those five points might better be scented as radical depravity (or total inability), sovereign election, particular redemption, efficacious grace, and preservation of the saints.

In light of the OP, the important distinction again is that there is a broadening out from TULIP to Calvinism to Reformed theology, even though often the terms are somewhat equated. It perhaps goes without saying that we could further broaden to Protestanism to Western Christianity to Christianity in general. I’m going to throw in another modernism as a basic Sproulinianianian. :smile: Even though I side a bit more with Gordon Clark, I think R. C. Sproul does an admirable job of giving definition to Reformed theology. He’s careful to denote the five solas as others have done here, throw in a good dose of Covenant theology, and he’s careful to note that Luther, while certainly being reformed and jump starting the process, is generally to also be distinguished from Reformed theology, in that he and Calvin had important differences. And, bless his heart, Calvin sort of became the poster-child for a lot of what gravitated to both the Reformed movement and Calvinism from other well-renowned men other than John Calvin, even including Luther.

Anyway, Sproul, in his book What is Reformed Theology? (a tweaked and repackaged Grace Unknown), lists five foundation stones to Reformed theology:
1) Centered on God
2) Based on God’s Word alone
3) Committed to faith alone
4) Devoted to Jesus Christ
5) Structured by three covenants (Covenant of Redemption, Covenant of Works, Covenant of Grace)

That's it in a nutshell. Is there such a thing as either a GWFJC nut? How about a RSPEP nut? Oh well...

AK, the Synod of Dordrecht (1618-1619) would not agree with you. The Synod convened for the purpose of condemning Arminius' theology, and declared it and its adherents anathemas. They also defined the five points of Calvinism, against the Remonstrants, and expelled Arminian pastors from the Netherlands.

Jacob Arminius may have started out under good teaching, but clearly somewhere along the line he went very far astray.

Many Blessings,
RW


This doesn't mean he wasn't reformed.

Furthermore, you still have to deal with Luther, Zwingli, and a whole host of others who disagreed with points that Calvin brought up. Does this mean that they too are not reformed?

Again, it's Reformed (what you're preaching) vs. reformed (what you say isn't reformed at all).

To be reformed simply means one accepts the 5 Solas of the Reformation. Reformation = reformed.

Sort of like the difference between catholic, which Reformed theology is, and Catholic, which it is not. ;)

I wonder why reformed theology is as important topic for so many>? Anyone know?

I wonder why reformed theology is as important topic for so many>? Anyone know?

It was predestined to be so.

It was predestined to be so.

...or do the adherents to reformed theology simply choose to be?

...or do the adherents to reformed theology simply choose to be?

Perhaps God chose to allow them to chose to believe that they cannot choose to believe?

I think my warped sense of humor was predestined... or did I choose it? I'm no good at these theological dilemmas!

Perhaps God chose to allow them to chose to believe that they cannot choose to believe?

I think my warped sense of humor was predestined... or did I choose it? I'm no good at these theological dilemmas!

You and I both must have chosen our warped sense of humor... the Lord would not elect anyone to be bear such a burden... (or should I say inflict?)...

I wonder why reformed theology is as important topic for so many>? Anyone know?

Well when I asked this question and started this thread LAST year I was very curious and knew very little about it.

What makes Reformed theology rise? Well, for some it's heavenly mindedness and for others it's simply hot air. :yes:

http://i266.photobucket.com/albums/ii269/theogrit/Clips/4clip014Katie.gif

Well when I asked this question and started this thread LAST year I was very curious and knew very little about it.

And what have you learned/concluded over this past year?

And what have you learned/concluded over this past year?

Well I'm honestly still learning and I can't honestly say I've come to a conclusion yet.

MOD NOTE:

Since there are already 2 other threads on RT I'm gonna close this one.