In my opinion, the reformation became stagnant soon after it's inception, and a lot of error still remained. The reformation was never meant to stop reforming. To quote Banner of Truth...Writer I. John Hesselink ...
"It is rather audacious to claim that we are reformed. It can also be misleading when we call ourselves Reformed Churches. For this might imply that we believe that our denominations are truly reformed; or, even worse, that at some point in the past we were or became reformed and that the task of reform is basically finished. Whenever we imagine that the word “reformed” refers to an accomplishment rather than a perpetual obligation, we are presumptuous and deluded".
“Ecclesia reformata semper reformanda est” – “A reformed church must always be reforming itself.” Luther, Calvin, Knox, they gave us a lot, but they were not infallible. There was still huge chunks of the Bible missing from their theology. There was obvious error. This was a direct result of the Catholic church that they came out of. While their understanding of Scripture gave us a lot to be thankful for, that same theology had error in it. These theological errors continue to poison Bible translations and the church today. Elevating their writings to a status where they can never be corrected turns those theologians into the very type of unquestionable authority the Reformers sought to dismantle.
"always reforming" does not mean changing core doctrines to fit modern cultural trends. But we must consider things like the Reformers "flattened" the transition between the Testaments and minimized the New Covenant reality of the Holy Spirit, and this is one place of many where the 16th-century Reformation fell short. This needs to be fixed, not worshipped.
Do you think that the acronym T.U.L.I.P., as the fixture that it is today, would be counter productive to “A reformed church must always be reforming itself."? It's like a fixture that should not be one. Scripture is sufficient to interpret Scripture. Martin Luther would have considered infant baptism a fixture, so would Calvin, though not for justification. This is the problem with fixtures outside the Bible defining itself. They aren't Scripture. But most of todays Calvinists treat T.U.L.I.P. that way.
I wouldn't call todays reformers 'Sola Scriptura'. They are more 'Sola Systema'.
The system is the fixture that defines Scripture, and in my opinion, has become an idol in and of itself.
Try to get a Calvinist to see Scripture apart from using the systems interpretation of total depravity as a foundation to interpret it. They won't, and they can't, It just won't happen. Their definition of total depravity is off. This is simply replacing the Catholic church with the system. And that's not allowing for any reformation of the opinions of Scripture from the first reformers. It stonewalls any corrections.
Thoughts?
"It is rather audacious to claim that we are reformed. It can also be misleading when we call ourselves Reformed Churches. For this might imply that we believe that our denominations are truly reformed; or, even worse, that at some point in the past we were or became reformed and that the task of reform is basically finished. Whenever we imagine that the word “reformed” refers to an accomplishment rather than a perpetual obligation, we are presumptuous and deluded".
“Ecclesia reformata semper reformanda est” – “A reformed church must always be reforming itself.” Luther, Calvin, Knox, they gave us a lot, but they were not infallible. There was still huge chunks of the Bible missing from their theology. There was obvious error. This was a direct result of the Catholic church that they came out of. While their understanding of Scripture gave us a lot to be thankful for, that same theology had error in it. These theological errors continue to poison Bible translations and the church today. Elevating their writings to a status where they can never be corrected turns those theologians into the very type of unquestionable authority the Reformers sought to dismantle.
"always reforming" does not mean changing core doctrines to fit modern cultural trends. But we must consider things like the Reformers "flattened" the transition between the Testaments and minimized the New Covenant reality of the Holy Spirit, and this is one place of many where the 16th-century Reformation fell short. This needs to be fixed, not worshipped.
Do you think that the acronym T.U.L.I.P., as the fixture that it is today, would be counter productive to “A reformed church must always be reforming itself."? It's like a fixture that should not be one. Scripture is sufficient to interpret Scripture. Martin Luther would have considered infant baptism a fixture, so would Calvin, though not for justification. This is the problem with fixtures outside the Bible defining itself. They aren't Scripture. But most of todays Calvinists treat T.U.L.I.P. that way.
I wouldn't call todays reformers 'Sola Scriptura'. They are more 'Sola Systema'.
The system is the fixture that defines Scripture, and in my opinion, has become an idol in and of itself.Try to get a Calvinist to see Scripture apart from using the systems interpretation of total depravity as a foundation to interpret it. They won't, and they can't, It just won't happen. Their definition of total depravity is off. This is simply replacing the Catholic church with the system. And that's not allowing for any reformation of the opinions of Scripture from the first reformers. It stonewalls any corrections.
Thoughts?
