The Dangers of Reformed Theology

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Scripture tells us to "prove all things [test all things by the Word of God]; hold fast that which is good" (1 Thess. 5:21). As believers in the Lord Jesus Christ it is our responsibility to test and examine what men teach in light of the inerrant Word of God. We will attempt to do this with respect to the teachings of Reformed Theology. May the Lord grant that this critique would be fair and accurate, and most of all true to His Word.

A brief paper such as this can hardly do justice to the great Biblical and theological issues that are involved. Realizing this, we have referred the reader to other books and/or literature which deal with these issues in more detail. Links are provided throughout this paper to refer the reader to other pertinent studies. With the exception of books written by other authors, the literature mentioned in this paper may be ordered from: The Middletown Bible Church 349 East St. Middletown, CT 06457 Tel. (860) 346–0907

Before exposing some of the doctrinal dangers of Reformed Theology, let us consider some of the positive aspects of this movement. Consider the following strong points:

The Bible (66 Books) is considered the only rule of faith and practice. Those in the Reformed tradition have a great reverence and respect for the Word of God and they generally hold to a high view of inspiration, insisting that the Bible is totally without error of any kind. May we all be counted among those who tremble before the Word of our God (Isaiah 66:2)! The Inerrancy of the Bible

Justification by faith is given its proper place as well as the other great Reformation doctrines such as the Universal Priesthood of Every Believer and the Sole Authority and Supreme Authority of the Scriptures. We can only thank God that these great truths were re–discovered and brought to light by the early reformers.

The GRACE OF GOD is rightly exalted. Knowing the depravity of the human heart, Reformed men have expressed deep gratitude for the amazing and super–abounding grace of God which can reach to the chief of sinners. Every believer needs to join with them in boasting in our merciful and gracious Savior and exulting in His sovereign grace. Saved By Grace Alone

Because of their emphasis on the depravity of man and the glory and sovereignty of God, those in the Reformed tradition tend to have a GOD–CENTERED emphasis rather than a man–centered, humanistic emphasis which is so common today, even in the evangelical world. Their theology tends to abase sinful man and exalt the God of all glory. It is fitting to do so "for of HIM, and through HIM, and to HIM, are all things: to whom be glory for ever. Amen" (Rom. 11:36). The Glory of God--God's Priority

Those in the Reformed tradition often have a healthy fear of God and a strong abhorrence for sin. They also have a reverential respect for God’s absolute moral standards, especially as they are set forth in the ten commandments. "But as He which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conduct; Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy" (1 Pet. 1:15–16).

Reformed Theology, to its credit, can claim for itself numerous men of God–of the past and present–who obviously demand our respect. They have been diligent in the study of the Word of God and their scholarship is exceptional. Many have lived godly in Christ Jesus and their devotion to the Savior is evident to all. We could mention J. C. Ryle, John Calvin, John Bunyan, Jonathan Edwards, B. B. Warfield, J. G. Machen, R. Baxter, M. Lloyd–Jones, J. Murray, A. W. Pink, Jay Adams, R.C. Sproul, John MacArthur, just to name a few. These men and countless others like them have made great and significant and substantial contributions to the cause of Christ. May we so imitate them, even as they have imitated Christ.

[Note: John MacArthur is dispensational in some respects (especially in the area of prophecy) but reformed in many respects. Reformed theologian, John Gerstner, described him as being as far away from dispensationalism as anyone can be and still be called a dispensationalist (from a taped message given at Geneva College, September 27, 1986). See our notes on The Teachings of John MacArthur with respect to Dispensationalism.]

Those in the Reformed tradition have been very successful in making their views known. They have done this not so much through local church outreach, but through literature. Reformed writers have permeated the Christian book market. A great majority of theology books and Bible commentaries are written from a Reformed perspective. Early dispensationalists such as Darby, Kelly and Ironside used the pen in a mighty way and produced volumes of Christ–exalting books, but later dispensationalists have failed to pass on the torch in quite the same way. For example, no present day dispensationalist has come even close to the quantity and quality of work done by Reformed writer William Hendriksen (now with the Lord) in his New Testament Commentaries [although D. Edmond Hiebert, a dear servant of Christ, has made significant contributions in this area]. R.C.Sproul seems to come out with a new book every month! Most people who are converted to Reformed Theology will admit that they were led to embrace this position as a result of reading certain books1. Though we do not agree with all that they write, we acknowledge that they have been diligent in making their positions known through the printed page. [It is interesting that many Reformed men were converted to Christ as a result of dispensationalists and later converted to Reformed Theology as a result of Reformed writers. For example, John Gerstner wrote a book attacking dispensationalism but he admits, "My conversion came about, I believe, through the witness of a dispensationalist" (Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth, page 1).] Certainly there is much that is commendable in the Reformed movement. These seven points (and more could be added) are much to their credit. In general it has been a God–honoring movement which has preached Christ, detested sin, acknowledged that God rules on His sovereign throne and proclaimed the glorious doctrine of justification by grace through faith according to the Scriptures. May these very things be said of us!

With all due respect for this movement, the men of this movement and the fruits of this movement, it is our purpose to alert believers to the doctrinal problems and dangers of Reformed Theology. In doing this, however, we want to stress that we do not count reformed men as enemies, but as brothers in Christ, and in many ways esteem them highly. It is hoped that this will be ever kept in mind as the reader considers the following points where we would differ with those of the reformed tradition.

Believers are ever in a danger of failing to keep God’s truth in balance. Christians often err when they seek to confine God’s truth by locking it in to man–made systems of theology. C. H. Mackintosh made the following observation:

God has not confined Himself within the narrow limits of any school of doctrine–high, low or moderate. He has revealed Himself. He has told out the deep and precious secrets of His heart. He has unfolded His eternal counsels, as to the Church, as to Israel, the Gentiles, and the wide creation. Men might as well attempt to confine the ocean in buckets of their own formation as to confine the vast range of divine revelation within the feeble enclosures of human systems of doctrine. It cannot be done, and it ought not to be attempted. Better far to set aside the systems of theology and schools of divinity, and come like a little child to the eternal fountain of Holy Scripture, and there drink in the living teachings of God’s Spirit. [From C.H.M.’s Miscellaneous Writings in the article entitled "One Sided Theology."]

Dear friend, your difficulty is occasioned by the influence of a one–sided theology [extreme Calvinism]–a system which we can only compare to a bird with one wing, or a boat with one oar. When we turn to the sacred page of God’s Word, we find THE TRUTH, not one side of the truth, but the whole truth in all its bearings. We find, lying side by side, the truth of divine sovereignty and human responsibility. Are we called to reconcile them? Nay, they are reconciled already because they are both set forth in the word. We are to believe and obey. It is a fatal mistake for men to frame systems of divinity. You can no more systematize the truth of God than you can systematize God Himself. Let us abandon, therefore, all systems of theology and schools of divinity, and take the truth. [C. H. Mackintosh, Short Papers on Scripture Subjects, Vol. 2, p. 267.]

By God’s grace may we wholly follow the Word of God, not the frail and faulty systems of men. In the following few points we will see some examples of how Reformed Theology has strayed from the simple and balanced teaching of the Bible, especially regarding the atonement and saving faith.

This is commonly known as a belief in a "limited atonement" (some Reformed men prefer to call it "definite atonement"). It is the teaching that Christ died on the cross and paid the penalty only for the sins of the elect. He did not die for the ones who eventually will be in the lake of fire. Often it is worded as follows: "Christ died for all men WITHOUT DISTINCTION but He did not die for all men WITHOUT EXCEPTION." This is a subtle game of semantics which makes it possible for them to say that He died for all without really meaning that he died for all. What they really mean is that Christ died for all kinds of people and all classes of people, but He did not die for every single person. That is, He died for Jews and Gentiles, rich and poor, slave and free, male and female, etc., but it is understood that He died for only elect Jews and Gentiles, only elect rich and poor, etc.

Dr. Paul Reiter has clearly and simply summarized the Scriptural teaching on this issue. FOR WHOM DID CHRIST DIE?

1. For all (1 Tim. 2:6; Isa. 53:6). 2. For every man (Heb. 2:9). 3. For the world (John 3:16). 4. For the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:2). 5. For the ungodly (Rom. 5:6). 6. For false teachers (2 Peter 2:1). 7. For many (Matt. 20:28). 8. For Israel (John 11:50–51). 9. For the Church (Eph. 5:25). 10. For "me" (Gal. 2:20).

One believer who was not committed to the belief that Christ died for all men made this remarkable concession: "If Christ really did die for all men then I don’t know how the Bible could say it any clearer than it does." How true!

Sir Robert Anderson, in the preface to his book Forgotten Truths, said this: "In the early years of my Christian life I was greatly perplexed and distressed by the supposition that the plain and simple words of such Scriptures as John 3:16; 1 John 2:2; 1 Timothy 2:6 were not true, save in a cryptic sense understood only by the initiated. For, I was told, the over-shadowing truth of Divine sovereignty in election barred our taking them literally. But half a century ago a friend of those days—the late Dr. Horatius Bonar—delivered me from this strangely prevalent error. He taught me that truths may seem to us irreconcilable only because our finite minds cannot understand the Infinite; and we must never allow our faulty apprehension of the eternal counsels of God to hinder unquestioning faith in the words of Holy Scripture."

It is evident that the extreme Calvinist must ignore the clear language and obvious sense of many passages and he must force the Scriptures and make them fit into his own theological mold. Limited atonement may seem logical and reasonable, but the real test is this: IS IT BIBLICAL? "What saith the Scriptures?" (Rom. 4:3). In child–like faith we must simply allow the Bible to say what it says.

Those who promote this erroneous doctrine try to tell us that "world" does not really mean "world" and "all" does not really mean "all" and "every man" does not really mean "every man" and "the whole world" does not really mean "the whole world." We are told that simple verses such as John 3:16 and Isa. 53:6 must be understood not as a child would understand them but as a theologian would understand them. That is, we must re–interpret such verses in light of our system of theology.

Richard Baxter, one highly esteemed in reformed circles, recognized that the language of the Bible must be understood in a normal and natural way. Over three hundred years ago he wrote the following:

Now I would know of any man, would you believe that Christ died for all men if the Scripture plainly speak it? If you would, do but tell me, what words can you devise or would you wish more plain for it than are there used? Is it not enough that Christ is called the Saviour of the World? You’ll say, but is it of the whole World? Yes, it saith, He is the propitiation for the sins of the whole World. Will you say, but it is not for All men in the World? Yes it saith he died for All men, as well as for all the World. But will you say, it saith not for every man? Yes it doth say, he tasted death for every man. But you may say, It means all the Elect, if it said so of any Non-Elect I would believe. Yes, it speaks of those that denied the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And yet all this seems nothing to men prejudiced.

[Richard Baxter, Universal Redemption of Mankind, pages 286-287. The verses alluded to in this quote are John 4:42; 1 John 2:2; 1 Tim. 2:4-6; Heb. 2:9; 2 Pet. 2:1].

The true doctrine of the atonement could be stated as follows: The Scriptures teach that the sacrifice of the Lamb of God involved the sin of the world (John 1:29) and that the Savior’s work of redemption (1 Tim. 2:6; 2 Pet. 2:1), reconciliation (2 Cor. 5:19) and propitiation (1 John 2:2) was for all men (1 Tim. 4:10), but the cross–work of Christ is efficient, effectual and applicable only for those who believe (1 Tim. 4:10; John 3:16). We could even say it in a simpler way: "Christ’s death was SUFFICIENT FOR ALL but EFFICIENT only for those who believe." The cross–work of Christ is not limited, but the application of that cross–work through the work of the Holy Spirit is limited to believers only.

The extreme Calvinist would say that the cross was designed only for the elect and had no purpose for the "non–elect" (persistent unbelievers). But the death of God’s Son had a divine purpose and design for both groups. For the elect, God’s design was salvation according to His purpose and grace in Christ Jesus before the world began (2 Tim. 1:9; 2 Thess. 2:13). For unbelievers, God’s purpose and design is to render the unbeliever without excuse. Men are CONDEMNED because they have rejected the Person and WORK of Jesus Christ and refused God’s only remedy for sin (John 3:18; 5:40). Unbelievers can never say that a provision for their salvation was not made and not offered. They can never stand before God and say, "The reason I am not saved is because Christ did not die for me." No, the reason they are not saved is because they rejected the One who died for them and who is the Savior of all men (1 Tim. 4:10). They are without excuse.

This issue is not merely academic. It is extremely practical. It affects the very heart of the gospel and its presentation. The gospel which Paul preached to the unsaved people of Corinth was this: "Christ died for our sins" (1 Cor. 15:3). Do we really have a gospel of good news for all men (compare Luke 2:10–11)? In preaching the gospel, what can we say to an unsaved person? Can we say, "My friend, the Lord Jesus Christ died for you. He paid the penalty for your sins. He died as your Substitute"?

But counselors, as Christians, are obligated to present the claims of Christ. They must present the good news that Christ Jesus died on the cross in the place of His own, that He bore the guilt and suffered the penalty for their sins. He died that all whom the Father had given to Him might come unto Him and have life everlasting. As a reformed Christian, the writer believes that counselors must not tell any unsaved counselee that Christ died for him, FOR THEY CANNOT SAY THAT. No man knows except Christ Himself who are His elect for whom He died [emphasis mine]. [Jay Adams, Competent to Counsel, p. 70.}

As C.H.Mackintosh has said, "A disciple of the high school of doctrine [extreme Calvinist] will not hear of a world–wide gospel–of God’s love to the world–of glad tidings to every creature under heaven. He has only gotten a gospel for the elect."

If the Reformed preacher were really honest about it, he would need to preach his doctrine along these lines: "Christ may have died for your sins. If you are one of God’s elect, then He died for you, but if not, then you have no Savior. I cannot tell you that Christ died on the cross for you because I don’t know this for sure. If you believe the gospel then this proves that you are one of God’s elect, and then it is proper to speak of Christ dying for you." What an insult to the God "who will have all men to be saved and to come unto the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim. 2:4). The Apostle Paul was not so handicapped when he preached the gospel to the unsaved Corinthians. He clearly proclaimed that "Christ died for our sins [yours and mine!]." If Paul could preach that message, so should we and so must we!

For a much more detailed study of the the extent of the atonement see For Whom Did Christ Die?--A Defense of Unlimited Atonement and The Cross-Work of Christ - Is It Limited or Unlimited?

The doctrine of man’s total depravity has been abused by the extreme Calvinist resulting in a wrong understanding of man’s inability. The Philippian jailer once asked, "WHAT MUST I DO TO BE SAVED?" (Acts 16:30–31 and compare Acts 2:37–38). Some extreme Calvinists, if they had been in Paul’s place, would have answered as follows: What must you do to be saved? Nothing! Absolutely nothing! You are spiritually DEAD and totally unable to respond to God until you are regenerated!

Thus the extreme Calvinist teaches that regeneration must precede faith. A person must be born again before he can believe. A person must have eternal life before he can believe because a person dead in sins is unable to believe. They teach that faith is impossible apart from regeneration. Such teaching seems logical and reasonable to them based on the theological system which they have adopted. But WHAT SAITH THE SCRIPTURES?

The Bible clearly teaches this: BELIEVE AND THOU SHALT LIVE! "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life" (John 6:47) "That whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have eternal life" (John 3:15). The extreme Calvinist says, "LIVE AND THOU SHALT BELIEVE!" Please notice that John 1:12 does not say this: "But as many as have been regenerated, to them gave He the power to believe on His Name, even to those who have become the children of God." Notice also that John 20:31 says, "believing ye might have life." It does not say, "having life ye might believe." In his helpless and hopeless condition the sinner is told to LOOK to the Lord Jesus Christ AND LIVE (John 3:14–16)! [We sing the hymn "LOOK AND LIVE." The extreme Calvinist should change the words to "LIVE AND LOOK"].

For a moment, let’s assume that what the extreme Calvinists are saying is true. If regeneration precedes faith, then what must a sinner do to be regenerated? The extreme Calvinists have never satisfactorily answered this. Shedd’s answer is typical. Because the sinner cannot believe, he is instructed to perform the following duties: (1) Read and hear the divine Word. (2) Give serious application of the mind to the truth. (3) Pray for the gift of the Holy Spirit for conviction and regeneration. [See W. G. T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, Vol. II, p. 472, 512, 513.]

Roy Aldrich’s response to this is penetrating: "A doctrine of total depravity that excludes the possibility of faith must also exclude the possibilities of ‘hearing the word,’ ‘giving serious application to divine truth,’ and ‘praying for the Holy Spirit for conviction and regeneration.’ The extreme Calvinist deals with a rather lively spiritual corpse after all." [Roy L. Aldrich’s article is highly recommended. It is found in the July, 1965 issue of Bibliotheca Sacra and is entitled, "The Gift of God" (pages 248–253).]

The tragedy of this position is that it perverts the gospel. The sinner is told that the condition of salvation is prayer instead of faith. How contrary this is to Acts 16:31. The sinner is not told to pray for conviction and for regeneration. The sinner is told to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.

For a more detailed analysis of this issue see Does Regeneration Precede Faith [PDF Version]

This teaching is based on a wrong interpretation of Ephesians 2:8–9 which says, "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast." Many Reformed men wrongly conclude that the pronoun "it" refers to "faith." What Paul is really teaching is that SALVATION is the gift of God. The IFCA Doctrinal Statement says it clearly: We believe that salvation is the gift of God brought to man and received by personal faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. Salvation is the gift; faith is the "hand of the heart" that reaches out and receives the gift which God offers.

The fact that SALVATION (ETERNAL LIFE, RIGHTEOUSNESS) is the gift of God is taught repeatedly throughout the New Testament (see John 4:10; Rom. 5:15,16,17; 6:23). In the New Testament the word "GIFT" never refers to saving faith, though we certainly recognize that apart from God’s mercy and gracious enabling and enlightenment, saving faith could not be exercised (John 6:44,65; Matt. 11:27; 16:16–17; Acts 16:14; etc.).

The teaching that faith is the gift of God has some very practical implications and it will affect the way a person presents the gospel. If faith is the gift of God, then how do I get this gift? If it only comes from God, then how can I get saving faith? WHAT MUST I DO TO BELIEVE? How can I get this gift from God? Do I do nothing and hope that God will sovereignly bestow it upon me? (Do I hope that I am one of God’s elect?) Or, do I cry out to God and pray that He will give me the gift of saving faith?

John MacArthur holds to this second option. He teaches that faith is the gift of God and he recommends that the sinner pray to God in order to obtain it:

Faith is a gift from God . . . it is permanent . . . the faith that God gives begets obedience . . . God gave it to you and He sustains it . . . May God grant you a true saving faith, a permanent gift that begins in humility and brokenness over sin and ends up in obedience unto righteousness. That’s true faith and it’s a gift that only God can give, and if you desire it, pray and ask that He would grant it to you." [Transcribed from John MacArthur's tape GC 90-21 dealing with Lordship Salvation].

Notice carefully what MacArthur is doing. He is telling the sinner not to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 16:31) but to pray and ask God to grant the gift of faith. This perverts the gospel of Christ by making the condition of salvation prayer instead of faith. Sinners are commanded to believe on Christ. They are not commanded to pray for the gift of faith. [We recommend the article by Roy L. Aldrich entitled "The Gift of God," Bibliotheca Sacra, July, 1965, pages 248-253].

For a detailed study of THE GIFT OF GOD (Ephesians 2:8) see What is the "Gift of God"?--A Study of Ephesians 2:8-9 [PDF Version]

In recent years many Reformed men have been strongly promoting what has been called "Lordship Salvation." Essentially Lordship salvation teaches that simple faith in Jesus Christ is not enough. Something else is needed. A solid commitment to Christ is needed. A person needs to surrender to the Lordship of Christ. A willingness to obey Christ’s commands is a necessary condition. Also the sinner must fulfill the demands of discipleship or at least be willing to fulfill them.

We must never forget that a person is saved because he throws himself upon the mercy of a loving Savior who died for him. It is not our COMMITMENT that saves us, it is our CHRIST who saves us! It is not our SURRENDER that saves us, it is our Savior who does! It is not what I do for God; it is what God has done for me.

We need to avoid the dangerous error of taking what should be the RESULT of salvation and making it the REQUIREMENT of salvation:

It is because I am saved that I surrender to His Lordship. It is because I am saved that I follow Him in willing obedience. It is because I am saved that I agree to the terms of discipleship. It is because I am saved that I submit to His authority over every area of my life. Behavior and fruit are the evidences of saving faith but they are not the essence of saving faith. Don’t confuse the fruit with the root. Because we are justified freely by His grace we measure up to the full demands of God’s righteousness in Christ (2 Cor. 5:21); because we are frail we often fail to measure up to the full demands of discipleship (Luke 14:25–33, etc.). The requirements of discipleship are many; the requirement for salvation is simple faith and trust in the Savior.

My commitment to Jesus Christ does not save me. CHRIST SAVES ME BY HIS GRACE. My surrender to His Lordship does not save me. CHRIST SAVES ME BY HIS GRACE. My obedience to His Word does not save me. CHRIST SAVES ME BY HIS GRACE. My love for the Savior does not save me. CHRIST SAVES ME BY HIS GRACE. My ability or lack of ability to fulfill all the demands of discipleship does not save me. CHRIST SAVES ME BY HIS GRACE. My behavior (conduct) does not save me. CHRIST SAVES ME BY HIS GRACE.

God’s saving grace is to be found in the Person of the Lord Jesus Christ WHO ALONE CAN SATISFY GOD’S HOLINESS AND RIGHTEOUSNESS and be to the believing heart God’s "so great salvation"! "He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life" (1 John 5:12; all verbs are in the present tense).

Have you been justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus? Is your hope built upon what you have done or is your hope based upon Jesus’ blood and righteousness? "I dare not trust the sweetest frame, but WHOLLY LEAN ON JESUS’ NAME!" May we be standing fully on Christ the solid Rock, not upon the sinking sand of our own fragile commitment.

For a more detailed and exhaustive study on Lordship Salvation see Saved By Grace Alone--A Clarification of the Lordship Salvation issue. Other documents related to this issue are The Glorious Gospel of the Blessed God--What is the True Gospel and Charles Spurgeon and Lordship Salvation [PDF Version]

Not all Reformed men hold to this position, but many do, including John MacArthur, M. Lloyd–Jones, and David Needham. It was Needham who brought this "one nature" position to the forefront by publishing his book Birthright– Christian, Do You Know Who You Are? [Note: John MacArthur follows the Reformed tradition in many of his positions. In his two books on Lordship salvation he attacks dispensationalism while at the same time claiming to be a dispensationalist. It is probably fair to say that he is a dispensationalist when it comes to eschatology. Reformed scholar John Gerstner once said in a lecture to students at Geneva College in 1986 that John MacArthur is as far away from dispensationalism as anyone can be who is still called a dispensationalist.]

John MacArthur may be used as a spokesman for those who hold this position as seen in the following quotes:

Salvation is not a matter of improvement or perfection of what has previously existed. It is total transformation. At the new birth a person becomes "a new creature; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come" (2 Cor. 5:17). It is not simply that he receives something new but that he becomes someone new. The new nature is not added to the old nature but replaces it. The transformed person is a completely new "I." Biblical terminology, then, does not say that a Christian has two different natures. He has but one nature, the new nature in Christ. The old self dies and the new self lives; they do not coexist. It is not a remaining old nature but the remaining garment of sinful flesh that causes Christians to sin. The Christian is a single new person, a totally new creation, not a spiritual schizophrenic. The believer as a total person is transformed but not yet wholly perfect. He has residing sin but no longer reigning sin. He is no longer the old man corrupted but is now the new man created in righteousness and holiness, awaiting full salvation. [The MacArthur New Testament Commentary–Ephesians, p. 164.]

The relation of the old self and the new self has been much disputed. Many hold that at salvation believers receive a new self but also keep the old self. Salvation thus becomes addition, not transformation. Such a view, however, is not precisely consistent with biblical teaching. At salvation the old self was done away with. [He then cites 2 Cor. 5:17 and Rom. 6:6.] Salvation is transformation–the old self is gone, replaced by the new self. [The MacArthur New Testament Commentary–Colossians and Philemon, p. 148.]

Holding such a view has some very practical significance. If the believer only possesses a new nature in Christ, then we should expect the believer to be remarkably free from sin. We would expect the believer to exhibit a quality of life which is truly exceptional. John MacArthur, for example, teaches the following:

1) Christians will never be ashamed before the judgment seat of Christ. [Marks of a True Believer (Moody Press), pages 34,37. See also The MacArthur Study Bible under 1 John 2:28.]

2) Christians always have fellowship with God and nothing, not even sin, can break this fellowship. [Confession of Sin, Moody Press, pp. 12-14,55. See also The MacArthur Study Bible under 1 John 1:3.]

3) Christians are in the light and cannot walk in darkness. [Confession of Sin, pages 28,32,33,34 and Faith Works, p. 167. See also The MacArthur Study Bible under 1 John 1:7].

4) Christians do not need to confess their sins in order to be forgiven. [Confession of Sin, pages 48,52,55. MacArthur fails to distinguish between the two aspects of forgiveness. See Two Aspects of Forgiveness.]

We have available a lengthy and detailed critique of the this ONE NATURE position (31 pages), $2.00. A very helpful book dealing with these issues is The Complete Green Letters by Miles Stanford (Zondervan).

The early reformers never totally freed themselves from the allegorical method of Origen and from the church/kingdom concept of Augustine. Most Reformed theologians are still entrapped and crippled by these approaches to the prophetic word. In contrast, the dispensational approach insists that Biblical prophecies be interpreted in their plain, obvious and normal sense.

A Comparison and Contrast Between Our Present World, the Millennium and the Eternal State

Reformed theologians also teach a general resurrection at the end of the age and also a general judgment. This means that all men, saved and unsaved are raised up at the last day and all are judged. In contrast to this the Bible teaches that there are several different judgments and two resurrections separated by a thousand years. See the following study: Discerning Between the Two Comings of Christ, the Five Judgments and the Two Resurrections. Harry Bultema (1884-1952) pastored Christian Reformed churches in Iowa and Michigan. He was a reformed theologian but in his study of prophecy he came to realize that the Bible, in both the Old and New Testaments, did not teach one general resurrection. He published his findings in his book Maranatha--A Study of Unfulfilled Prophecy. This book was re-published by Kregel Publications in 1985 (it was originally published in the Dutch language). His discussion on the first resurrection is very insightful and more detailed than most of the writings of dispensationalists who treat this subject. Bultema also has a fascinating chapter entitled "From the Reformation to the Present" where he identifies the men who were Chiliasts (or Premillennialists), including many of the Reformed persuasion.

Recommended books: The Greatness of the Kingdom (Alva McClain), The Theocratic Kingdom (George Peters), The Basis of the Premillennial Faith (Charles Ryrie), Millennialism (Charles Feinberg) and The Interpretation of Prophecy (Paul Lee Tan).

Those in the Reformed tradition generally embrace covenant theology. This system of theology evolved after the Reformation. It explains all relationships between God and man from the beginning to the end of time under the Covenant of Works, the Covenant of Grace, and (sometimes) the Covenant of Redemption. [In contrast to this, dispensationalists emphasize the covenants that are mentioned in the Bible, such as the Abrahamic Covenant, the Mosaic Covenant, the Davidic Covenant and the New Covenant.] Reformed/covenant theologians teach that Old Testament Israelites and New Testament believers are one people and that the church is but a continuation and successor of Israel. The CHURCH is usually understood as including the saints of all the ages. They teach that the church, as the successor of Israel, has now absorbed and appropriated Old Testament prophecies and promises. According to their thinking, the promises which God made to Israel are now being fulfilled by the church or they have been forfeited because of Israel’s unbelief (but see Jeremiah 31:31–37). This system of theology is directly opposed to dispensationalism which makes a clear and Biblical distinction between God’s program for Israel and God’s program for the church (Acts 15:13–18; Rom. 11:25–26).

The following accurate and helpful statement has been formulated by the men of the New England Bible Conference. It is called, "A Clarification Regarding Dispensationalism."

When God’s Word, the Bible, is taken in a consistent, literal manner it will result in dispensationalism. Dispensationalism is the result of a consistently literal, normal interpretation.

A dispensation is a unique stage in the outworking of God’s program in time, whereby some or all of mankind are to have a believing response, being responsible to be good stewards of the particular revelation which God has given (Eph. 3:2,9; Col. 1:25; Exodus 34:27,28; Gal. 3:10–12; 1 Tim. 1:4; Eph. 1:10; etc.).

We believe that in order to be "rightly dividing the Word of truth" it is essential to distinguish things that differ and to recognize certain basic Biblical distinctions, such as the difference between God’s program for Israel and God’s program for the Church (Acts 15:14–17; Rom. 11:25–27), the separation of 1000 years between the two resurrections (Rev. 20:4–6), the difference between the various judgments which occur at various times (2 Cor. 5:10; Matt. 25:31–46; Rev. 20:11–15), the difference between law and grace (John 1:17; Rom. 6:14–15; Rom. 7:1–6) and the difference between Christ’s present session at the right hand of the Father as the Church’s great high Priest and Christ’s future session on the restored Davidic throne as Israel’s millennial King (Heb. 1:3; 10:12–13; Acts 15:16; Luke 1:32).

We believe the Church is a distinct body of believers which was not present on earth during the Old Testament period and which was not the subject of Old Testament prophecy (Eph. 3:1–9; Col. 1:25–27). In accord with God’s program and timetable, the Church is on earth between the two advents of Christ with the beginning of the Church taking place after Daniel’s 69th week (on the Day of Pentecost, Acts 2) and with the completion of the Church’s ministry on earth taking place at the rapture before the commencement of Daniel’s 70th week (Dan. 9:24–27). During this interval of time God is visiting the nations to call out a people for His Name (Acts 15:14–16; Eph. 3:1–11; Rom. 11:25). Indeed, the Church is God’s called–out assembly.

We believe God will literally fulfill His covenant and kingdom promises to the nation of Israel just as the prophets foretold (Gen. 12:2–3; 15:18–21; Deut. 30:3–10; 2 Sam. 7:4–17; Jer. 31:31–37; 33:15–26). We believe that the promises of the Abrahamic Covenant (Gen. 12,15, 17), the Palestinian Covenant (Deut. 30), the Davidic Covenant (2 Sam. 7) and the New Covenant (Jer. 31) were made unconditionally to national Israel and that the thousand–year kingdom will include the literal fulfillment of these covenant promises to ethnic Israel (Jer. 31:31–37; 33:14–26; Ezek. 36:25–28; 40–48; Rom. 11:23–32). The church is not the "new Israel" or the "spiritual Israel," but rather "one new man" created of two groups, saved Jews and saved Gentiles (Eph. 2:15; 1 Cor. 10:32). The terms "Israel," "Israelite," and "Jew," are used in the New Testament to refer to national ethnic Israel. The term "Israel" is used of the nation or the people as a whole or the believing remnant within. It is not used of the Church in general or of Gentile believers in particular. Saved Gentiles of this present age are spiritual sons of Abraham who is the father of all who believe (Rom. 4:12,16; Gal. 3:7,26,29), whether Jews or Gentiles; but believing Gentiles are not Israelites [that is, they are not the sons of Jacob]. The Israelites are carefully defined by Paul in Rom. 9:4–5.

We believe that in every dispensation God’s distinctive programs are outworked for His great Name’s sake and that in every dispensation persons have always been saved by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8; Gen. 15:6; Heb. 11:4–7; Rom. 4:1–8). We believe that the glory of God is the determining principle and overall purpose for God’s dealings with men in every age and that in every dispensation God is manifesting Himself to men and to angels so that all might redound to the praise of His glory (Eph. 1:6,12,14; 3:21; Rom. 11:33–36; 16:27; Isa. 43:7; 1 Tim. 1:17).

For further study, see Shedding Light on Dispensations. Recommended books: It Really Makes a Difference (Renald Showers) and Dispensationalism Today (Charles Ryrie).

Just as extreme Calvinism attacks the very essence of the gospel, so Reformed Theology attacks the very essence of the Christian life and the rule by which it should be lived.

Reformed men would never say that a person is justified by the works of the law. They rightly insist that justification is by faith and not by works. "Justification by faith" was the faithful cry of the reformation. The problem does not relate to justification but to sanctification (the Christian life and how it is to be lived). Reformed theologians consistently teach that believers are under the law as a rule of life. Usually they say that the believer is not under the ceremonial law (the sacrificial system, etc.) but that he is under the moral law (the 10 Commandments, etc.). The overpowering characteristic of all Reformed theologians is their doctrine of the believer’s relationship to the law. They would say that the believer is "under the law" as a rule of life.

Miles Stanford, author of The Complete Green Letters (in the Clarion Classics series published by Zondervan), has given the following list of pro–law Calvinist or Reformed authors whose theology permeates the thinking of vast numbers of believers:

Many of these mentioned above could and should be considered as great and godly men. Their contribution to the cause of Christ ought not be minimized. However these men were not dispensational in their theology and they err whenever they insist that the believer is under the law as a rule of life. For sanctification the believer must be directed to Mt. Calvary, not to Mt. Sinai. It is at the cross that true freedom is found.

W.J.Berry in his preface to William Huntington’s classic work on The Believer’s Rule of Life well summed up the problem:

It is a divine fact that Christ has delivered absolutely, the "redeemed" from all bondage to, and consequences of all coded law with penalty. This truth was at first denied by the Pharisees and by some believing Jews. This denial of the truth might have prevailed, had not the issue been immediately settled forever by the apostles. The essentials of this work is recorded of the conference in Jerusalem (Acts 15:1–35); in Paul’s correction of Peter; of the apostle’s rebuking the Galatian Judaizers (Galatians); his exposition in the Roman Epistle, and the final clarification in the letter to the Hebrews. But in spite of these clear declarations from heaven, certain men came into the churches and persisted in teaching the same coded law of Moses. At the Council of Nicea, called by the Roman Emperor Constantine, his bishops began the first "system" of Judao–Christian coded laws, to be expanded through the dark ages by Popes and their hierarchy of bishops; then modified and continued by the Protestant Reformers, –thence in all Christendom to the present day.The issue is not a question of right or wrong doing, but of the relationship under which we serve. All under every coded law serve sin to condemnation; all who are freed from the law now serve as free sons to righteousness and true holiness (Rom. 6:15–23).

I learn in the law that God abhorred stealing, but it is not because I am under the law that I do not steal. All the Word of God is mine, and written for my instruction; yet for all that I am not under law, but a Christian who has died with Christ on the Cross, and am not in the flesh, to which the law applied. I have died to the law by the body of Christ (Rom. 7:4). –JOHN DARBY

Some good men who in grievous error would impose the law as a rule of life for the Christian mean very well by it but the whole principle is false because the law, instead of being a rule of life, is necessarily a rule of death to one who has sin in his nature. Far from a delivering power, it can only condemn such; far from being a means of holiness, it is, in fact, the strength of sin (1 Cor. 15:56). –WILLIAM KELLY

We are fully convinced that a superstructure of true, practical holiness can never be erected on a legal basis; and hence it is that we press 1 Cor. 1:30, upon the attention of our readers. It is to be feared that many who have, in some measure, abandoned the legal ground, in the matter of "righteousness," are yet lingering thereon for "sanctification." We believe this to be the mistake of thousands, and we are most anxious to see it corrected.It is evident that a sinner cannot be justified by the works of the law; and it is equally evident that the law is not the rule of the believer’s life.As to the believer’s rule of life, the apostle does not say, To me to live is the law; but, "To me to live is Christ" (Phil. 1:21). Christ is our rule, our model, our touchstone, our all.We receive the Ten Commandments as part of the canon of inspiration; and moreover, we believe that the law remains in full force to rule and curse a man as long as he liveth. Let a sinner only try to get life by it, and see where it will put him; and let a believer only shape his way according to it, and see what it will make of him. We are fully convinced that if a man is walking according to the spirit of the gospel, he will not commit murder nor steal; but we are also convinced that a man, confining himself to the standard of the law of Moses would fall very short of the spirit of the gospel. [C. H. Mackintosh, The Mackintosh Treasury–Miscellaneous Writings, p. 628, 653–654.]

Most of us have been reared and now live under the influence of Galatianism. Protestant theology is for the most part thoroughly Galatianized, in that neither the law or grace is given its distinct and separate place as in the counsels of God, but they are mingled together in one incoherent system. The law is no longer, as in the divine intent, a ministration of death (2 Cor. 3:7), of cursing (Gal. 3:10), or conviction (Rom. 3:19), because we are taught that we must try to keep it, and that by divine help we may. Nor does grace, on the other hand, bring us blessed deliverance from the dominion of sin, for we are kept under the law as a rule of life despite the plain declaration of Rom. 6:14. –C.I. SCOFIELD

When the sinner is justified by faith, does he need the law to please God? Can obedience to the law produce in him the fruit of holiness unto God? What is the relation of the justified believer to the law? Is he still under the dominion of the law or is he also delivered from the law and its bondage? These questions are answered in this chapter [Romans 7]. "Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to Him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter" (Rom. 7:4,6). [Arno C. Gaebelein, Gaebelein’s Concise Commentary on the Whole Bible, p.907.]

Believers today are not under law, either as a means of justification or as a rule of law, but are justified by grace and are called upon to walk in grace. Primarily here [in Rom. 7:14–25] we have a believing Jew struggling to obtain holiness by using the law as a rule of life and resolutely attempting to compel his old nature to be subject to it. In Christendom now the average Gentile believer goes through the same experience; for legality is commonly taught almost everywhere. Therefore when one is converted it is but natural to reason that now one has been born of God it is only a matter of determination and persistent endeavor to subject oneself to the law, and one will achieve a life of holiness. And God Himself permits the test to be made in order that His people may learn experimentally that the flesh in the believer is no better than the flesh in an unbeliever. When he ceases from self–effort he finds deliverance through the Spirit by occupation with the risen Christ. [H. A. Ironside, The Continual Burnt Offering, see under September 18; and Romans, p. 89.]

The Word of God condemns unsparingly all attempts to put the Christian believer "under the law." The Holy Spirit through the Apostle Paul gave to the church the book of Galatians for the very purpose of dealing with this heresy. Read this Epistle over and over, noting carefully the precise error with which the writer deals. It is not a total rejection of the gospel of God’s grace and a turning back to total legalism. It is rather the error of saying that the Christian life, having begun by simple faith in Christ, must thereafter continue under the law or some part of it (Gal. 3:2–3). [Alva McClain, Law and Grace, p. 51–52. This book in its entirety is highly recommended. It is published by BMH Books, Winona Lake, IN 46590.]

The key to living the Christian life is not found at Mt. Sinai. It is found at Mt. Calvary. The law came forth from Sinai, but GRACE flowed forth and gushed forth from Calvary, and it is the grace of God that teaches us "that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world [age]" (Titus 2:11–12). The foolish Galatians abandoned Mt. Calvary in favor of Mt. Sinai even though Jesus Christ had been evidently and openly set forth before their eyes crucified among them (Gal. 3:1). "But God forbid that I should glory, SAVE IN THE CROSS of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world" (Gal. 6:14).

See the following studies: What is The Believers Rule of Life? The Christian Life and How it is to be Lived Romans-Verse by Verse

Recommended Books: Law and Grace (Alva McClain), The Complete Green Letters (Miles Stanford), Romans (William Newell, especially his discussion of Romans 6–7) and There Really Is A Difference (Renald Showers).

Some in the Reformed tradition tend to over–emphasize the earthly life and ministry of Christ and to de–emphasize His heavenly life and ministry. For example, they often teach that the Sermon on the Mount is the "Magna Carta" of Christian living. John MacArthur is typical of this approach when he insists that the Sermon on the Mount’s "primary message is for Christians" and must be considered "truth for today." [The Gospel According to Jesus, p. 27 footnote. MacArthur is critical of those who want to consign this Sermon to another age (see p. 214).]

We fully recognize the value of "all Scripture" (2 Tim. 3:16). Certainly the Gospels are profitable to us and of immense value to the believing heart. The Sermon on the Mount is rich with truth and applications and lessons for the child of God. But to find God’s revelation which was directly given to the CHURCH, we must go to the Epistles, not to the Gospels. May we not neglect the very books which were given to the churches. It is there that we find our heavenly Lord, ascended and glorified and seated, and we find ourselves seated with Him there.

Carefully consider the words of Paul: "Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we Him no more" (2 Cor. 5:16). The Epistles were given, not so that we would know Christ after the flesh, but so we would know our Great High Priest who having finished His perfect work on the cross is now seated at the right hand of the Majesty on high.

If you take a trip through the New Testament beginning with Acts, continuing through all the Epistles and ending with Revelation, you will find the following:

183 verses speak of Christ’s death. 97 verses speak of Christ’s resurrection. 162 verses speak of Christ’s heavenly life and ministry. 203 verses speak of Christ’s return (as King, as Judge, etc.).

Acts 20:35, where Paul mentions one of the sayings of Christ. Acts 2:22 which speaks of our Lord’s earthly ministry and miracles. Acts 10:38 which summarizes His earthly ministry. 1 Tim. 3:16 where the life and witness of the Lord Jesus forms a pattern for the life and witness of the church. [see the following study: The Mystery of Godliness] 1 Tim. 6:13 which speaks of Christ before Pilate prior to His death. 2 Pet. 1:15–18 which speaks of the transfiguration (which was really a preview of the kingdom and could be listed under the category of the second coming). Heb. 4:15 which speaks of Christ having been tempted (see also 2:18), yet without sin. But the emphasis of the passage is upon His High Priestly ministry. Heb. 5:7 speaking of His agony in the garden prior to His death. Another possible reference might be Hebrews 12:3. If the reader is aware of any other passage which speaks of His earthly life and ministry which I have omitted, let me know.

Thus, in the New Testament Epistles the great emphasis is upon the heavenly life and ministry of our exalted Lord, the Head of the church, the Life of the body, the Vine of the branches. Indeed God has given us an entire book, one of the longest Epistles (Hebrews), which has as its main theme our Lord’s present ministry in heaven on our behalf.

May we never forget that our Lord Jesus is on the resurrection side of the cross. He is risen, ascended and glorified and exalted. A careful and prayerful reading of John chapter 17 shows that the great emphasis of this prayer is upon our Lord in heaven ("I have finished the work" "I am no more in the world" "I come to Thee").

"If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth" (Col. 3:1–2).

The early pioneer dispensationalists (Darby, Kelly, Mackintosh, etc.) were thrilled because of their position in Christ. Though walking on earth, they saw themselves as seated in heaven. They understood their high, heavenly, upward calling. They understood their IDENTIFICATION with Christ, not only in His death and resurrection, but also in His ascension and present session. While most Reformed men encourage us to "keep looking up," the dispensationalist who is aware of His exalted position has a better word: "KEEP LOOKING DOWN" [slogan send to this writer from Miles Stanford] Why? "For ye died, and your life is hidden with Christ in God" (Col. 3:3). May we not lose perspective!

"And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 2:6). "For our conversation [citizenship] is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ" (Phil. 3:20). "I press toward the mark for the prize of the high [upward] calling of God in Christ Jesus" (Phil. 3:14). "Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus" (Heb. 3:1).

We find no such statements ever made in the Gospels. We find no such statements in the Sermon on the Mount. We find no such statements ever made to the Israelites in Old Testament times. God is doing a marvelous and unique thing in this present age!

In spite of its many strong points, Reformed Theology errs in some very crucial areas. Its extreme Calvinism forces it to have a gospel only for the elect. Its deadly legalism permeates its teaching on the Christian life and sanctification and adds unbiblical requirements to the gospel. Add to this its confused teaching with regard to the true nature of the church, the covenants, the future of Israel, the millennial kingdom, the nature of saving faith, the exalted position of believers, etc., and you have a system of theology that is crippled and defective in certain vital areas of God's truth. With an open Bible and with a poor and contrite heart and with an attitude of trembling before the written Word of God, may we continue in those things which are fitting for sound doctrine!

We could even say it in a simpler way: "Christ’s death was SUFFICIENT FOR ALL but EFFICIENT only for those who believe." The cross–work of Christ is not limited, but the application of that cross–work through the work of the Holy Spirit is limited to believers only.

Ah ha!!! So you do limit the atonement! Now if you will go one step further and finally admit that those who believe only do so because of God's Grace that enables them to believe because He chose them to believe - we will be on common ground. Well, that's settled, Next!!

We had a discussion on this a few weeks ago and xzins liked the Bottner defination ..sufficent for all effective for the elect (saved)

But once taken to its natural conclusion that was the end of the aggreement:>)

The Dangers of Reformed Theology

I think I will get grief from both sides on this one! :>)

This article is an EXCELLENT READ!

Thanks!

(bookmarked and printed out!)

Maranatha!
m

......................................................................BTTT

At the Council of Nicea, called by the Roman Emperor Constantine, his bishops began the first "system" of Judao–Christian coded laws, to be expanded through the dark ages by Popes and their hierarchy of bishops;

Whew...I had to read this deep into the article to discover an attack on the Catholic Church that Jesus established Matt16:18.

Do you ever run across Theological pieces in your Communion that don't attack The Pillar of Truth or is that the sine qua non of protestant theology?

He makes it sound as though the Catholic Church ususrped authority at Nicea. He is wrong and unBiblical in his criticism

Matt 16:18,19 "And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdo, of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoeer thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven.

The power of binding is exercised by :

1. refusing to absolve 2. enjoining penance for sins forgiven

3. excommunication, suspension, interdict

4. making rules and laws for the government of the Church

5. determining what is of faith by the judgements and definitions of the Church.

The author errs by ignoring the words of Jesus in the New Testament.

I'm going to have to re-read that section in context. I believe you are grasping at your conclusion from that sentence.

I'm starting to wonder if you see attacks on the RC church in all corners.

But in spite of these clear declarations from heaven, certain men came into the churches and persisted in teaching the same coded law of Moses. At the Council of Nicea, called by the Roman Emperor Constantine, his bishops began the first "system" of Judao–Christian coded laws, to be expanded through the dark ages by Popes and their hierarchy of bishops; then modified and continued by the Protestant Reformers, –thence in all Christendom to the present day.The issue is not a question of right or wrong doing, but of the relationship under which we serve. All under every coded law serve sin to condemnation; all who are freed from the law now serve as free sons to righteousness and true holiness (Rom. 6:15–23).

Here is that entire section from which you sniped. Notice it goes on to say that these coded laws were continued and modified by the Protestant Reformers. Seems to me he is not only criticizing the RC, but also the Reformers for keeping these coded laws. He is in fact calling all those wrong, not the RC exclusivly.

Do you ever run across Theological pieces in your Communion that don't attack The Pillar of Truth or is that the sine qua non of protestant theology?

No wonder you are able to swallow all that Catholic twaddle.

What in the world do you think Protestants protest? Of course it's a central subject to all protestant teaching. It was the indentification of Catholic Heresy that was the Protestant reformation.

This pillar your talking about is one of the five, isn't it? We don't have those in the Christian religion.

(This is a thin-skin test.)

Hank

Bump for read. I think I will get grief from both sides on this one!

Well, this won't beat you up, because you didn't write it (did you)?

Actually, it started out very good, but it ended up pretty bad. So, we'll eat the fish, and through out the bones.

Thanks for the post.

Hank

This article is an EXCELLENT READ!

Thanks!

(bookmarked and printed out!)

Maranatha!
m

......................................................................BTTT

Your#14)........

I don't know Woody Allen,...But, 'The Truth has almost Set him free'.............:-)

"You are not paranoid if they really are after you." - Woody Allen

You are a funny person.

:-)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.