The Reformation: Dead, Dying or Unnecessary?
Comments
-
Heritage influence in my background would include some Anabaptist views. Anabaptists see themselves as part of the Reformation, but were pretty much-branded heretics by most Reformationsists, mainly due to views on rebaptizing those baptized as infants (which is very offensive to Covenental theologians), and to their stand on non-resistance. They got widely tortured and killed by the Reformers for their different views. Some Anabaptists today still carry strong feelings about that. Curiously most Anabaptists are not Dispensational.
If I think of "Reformation" generically rather than as a theological construct, then I think it is necessary and alive today and not dying. If "Reformation" is a theological construct, then I would say the same, even if there are some tenet to which I object.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@Dave_L said:
This error is in the Matthew 5 group of notes in the original version.So I just pulled out my original Scofield (I'm sure you think I'm a heretic since I actually own one) and looked up Matthew 5 and read the notes on the Kingdom of Heaven. Nothing you have suggested is found there. What specifically in those notes are you referencing?
I'm sorry, it is the notes on Matthew 4:17 I refer to. Matthew 5 involves Scofield in even worse heresy as he says the Sermon on the Mount is for Jews in the Millennium and not for the church. The Sermon on the Mount = the doctrine of Christ. And John says we are to reject any who do not embrace it.
But for Charles' sake, in remaining on topic I'll close by saying all of the millenarian schemes are missing from Paul's preaching.
-
@C_M_ said:
Dave,
Please review the OP for this thread.To keep us from going down rabbit holes, review the main factors and players that led to the Reformation. Again, Is this 500th-year event something that demands diligence? If we are not Protestants, what are we? We need to be true to one. This being said, interpretation of Scripture and authority will play a role in the life and practice of the believers.
Notwithstanding, you need to slow down a bit, to see where you are going. The terms thrown out for others to respond must be defined. If you would allow me to identify some of the terms to understand what you want to say or where you're taking this discussion.
If you want to discuss Dispensationalism-- its history, main supporters, and promoters, its doctrinal teachings or apparent spiritual bankruptcy-- May I suggest starting a new thread.
If you want to discuss the 1,000 years ("Millennium") of Rev 20: 1-7, again, a new thread would be the recommendation. We can drill down into the text to see if it's literal or figurative. Above it will help us to understand the justice of God. Everything in the Bible is for our learning and admonition. The two things are connected, but better handled in a separate thread. I hope you see light in what I am trying to say here?
Of course, the key aspects of the Reformation are, surely, welcomed here.
As the terms, you threw out, my general understanding is this?
@Dave_L said:
How in the world do they present a different Jesus?
This could become involved. But for starters let me say the Jesus of Dispensationalism, Post Millennialism, Preterism, or Dominion Theology is not even close to the same Jesus of non millenarianism (Amillennialism).
Dispensationalism -- considered by some to be a man-made doctrine, that goes against the gospel principle. Namely, its teaching shows two different saving gospels by denying that the gospel of forgiveness of sins provides the way of salvation in all periods of history. God would take the church out of the world before the time of tribulation.
Millennialism: derived from the one-thousand-year period of Rev 20 when Satan is bound, millennialism holds that a period of good times is coming. There are now three rival interpretations:
Premillennialism holds that the second coming of Christ will precede the millennium.
Postmillennialism-- holds that the return of Christ will follow the millennium.
Amillennialism holds that the thousand years in Rev 20 is symbolic of the present gospel age.
Preterism-- It's one of the three schools of prophetic interpretation. The hermeneutical principles are:
- Preterism, the belief that the major portion of the book of Revelation was fulfilled long ago.
- Historicism-- the belief that the events of Revelation have been fulfilling all through history, with some having been fulfilled, others being fulfilled, and still others yet to be fulfilled in the future.
- Futurism-- the belief that what is predicted from Rev 4 onward is yet to take place; nothing has been fulfilled, nor will it be fulfilled until just before the end of this age.
Dominion Theology-- The world is not getting worse. Christians will take over the world; so said, David Chilton. This theology holds to the Preterist view in reading the Book of Revelation. It focuses on past fulfillment.
Millenarianism-- It overlaps with apocalypticism. Joseph Wade, with his Clavis Apocalyptica, was viewed as the father of English millenarianism. A millenarian didn't always believe in Christ's imminent return, but many carefully gave attention to the millennium. CM
See "Chiliasm," NIDNTT (1975), 1:52.
See Rodney L. Petersen, Preaching the Last Days: The Theme of ‘Two Witnesses’ in the 16th & 17th Centuries (New York: Oxford University Press, 1993), 239–47.Thanks for the outline. I suppose I can remain on topic by saying Reformed Eschatology has been under attack since the prophecy outbreaks of the 1800s where millenarianism has refocused the gospel onto a different Jesus and a different Kingdom of God. So yes, the herd is being thinned.
-
millennium
The period of 1,000 years referred to in Revelation chapter 20, during which Satan is bound and believers reign with Jesus Christ. This millennium is understood in different ways: as a period of unparalleled peace and prosperity for the church and the gospel at the end of this age, after which Christ will return (postmillennialism); as the time following Christ’s return when he will reign on earth (premillennialism); as a symbolic reference to the period between Christ’s first and second comings (amillennialism).
Characteristics of the millennium
Satan is bound Rev 20:1-3 “the Abyss” is the subterranean place of confinement for Satan and evil spirits. See also Lk 8:31 pp Mt 8:29 pp Mk 5:7Martyred believers are raised to reign with Jesus Christ Rev 20:4-6 Those who have suffered for the gospel receive their promised reward. See also Ro 8:17; 2Ti 2:11-12; Rev 2:10
Satan’s release and final overthrow Rev 20:7-10 See also Eze 38:1-4,15-16,18-22; 39:2-5; Zec 14:2; Ro 16:20
The millennium will be a golden age on earth
Isa 2:2-4 pp Mic 4:1-3 The OT looks forward to a period of universal peace and prosperity on earth. Both pre- and postmillennialists see this as a reference to Jesus Christ’s future earthly reign. See also Isa 11:6-9; 51:4-5; 65:25The premillennial interpretation
The premillennial order of events Rev 19:11-13 Jesus Christ’s return. Premillennialists understand the events of Revelation chapter 19 to precede those of Revelation chapter 20; Rev 20:2-3 Satan bound for 1,000 years; Rev 20:4-6 a “first resurrection” of believers to share Jesus Christ’s reign over the earth; Rev 20:7-10 Satan’s release and final overthrow; Rev 20:11-15 the general resurrection of all people to face God’s judgmentA first resurrection of believers 1Co 15:22-25 This passage allows the idea of a gap between the resurrection of believers and the eternal age. See also 1Th 4:16-17
God’s future earthly reign Zec 14:9 See also Da 2:44; Zep 3:11; Zec 14:16-21
Believers will reign with Jesus Christ Mt 19:28 Premillennialists take this to refer to an earthly reign. See also Lk 22:29-30; 1Co 6:2; Rev 5:9-10
Difficulties with premillennialism
Scriptures that depict a single resurrection of both the righteous and the wicked: Da 12:2; Jn 5:28-29
Jesus Christ’s parables of the kingdom depict a single occasion of separation and judgment: Mt 13:40-43,49-50; 25:31-32The postmillennial interpretation
The rapid spread of the gospel Mt 24:14 pp Mk 13:10 See also Mt 13:31-33 pp Mk 4:31-32 pp Lk 13:18-21A future turning to God Ps 22:27-28; Isa 19:19-24; Zec 2:11
Difficulties with postmillennialism
The fortunes of the gospel and the church appear to be at a low ebb before Jesus Christ returns: Mt 24:9-12 pp Lk 21:12-17; 2Ti 3:1-5,12-13
Jesus Christ’s reign is not postponed to some future era; it has begun already: Mt 28:18; Ac 2:33-36; 7:55-56The amillennial interpretation
Satan was defeated at Jesus Christ’s first coming Jn 12:31 See also Mt 12:29 pp Mk 3:27 pp Lk 11:21-22; Lk 10:18-20; Col 2:14-15Interpreting the “first resurrection”
As a reference to the soul entering heaven after death: Lk 23:43; 2Ti 4:7-8
As spiritual resurrection to new life in Christ: Ro 6:5; Eph 2:6; Col 3:1Dangers of the amillennialist view
The future hope of believers is not only a spiritual reality: Ro 8:19-21; Rev 21:1
Though defeated, Satan should not be underestimated: 1Pe 5:8; 1Jn 5:19; Rev 12:17Manser, M. H. (2009). Dictionary of Bible Themes: The Accessible and Comprehensive Tool for Topical Studies. London: Martin Manser.
-
T'is nice but, each millennial position offers a different Christ, a different gospel of the kingdom, and is totally absent from Paul's or any other writing in the Gospels, Acts, and the Epistles.
-
@Dave_L said:
Thanks for the outline. I suppose I can remain on topic by saying Reformed Eschatology has been under attack since the prophecy outbreaks of the 1800s where millenarianism has refocused the gospel onto a different Jesus and a different Kingdom of God. So yes, the herd is being thinned.
The Eschatological attack was long before the 1800s and on more than just prophecy. Call it "the Counter-Reformation." Happy reading! CM
-
@C_M_ said:
@Dave_L said:
Thanks for the outline. I suppose I can remain on topic by saying Reformed Eschatology has been under attack since the prophecy outbreaks of the 1800s where millenarianism has refocused the gospel onto a different Jesus and a different Kingdom of God. So yes, the herd is being thinned.
The Eschatological attack was long before the 1800s and on more than just prophecy. Call it "the Counter-Reformation." Happy reading! CM
True, but protestantism had a common enemy until the 1800's millenarianism outbreaks. Now splintered into many groups. Each having a different gospel of the Kingdom and consequently a different Christ.
-
@Dave_L said:
T'is nice but, each millennial position offers a different Christ, a different gospel of the kingdom...Dave,
What seems apparent, could it be that every theological system is based on the presuppositions of their favorite theologian or group of theologians?
Regardless, all groups believe that their presuppositions (assumptions or conclusions) are valid according to some standard, whether it be the Bible or the prevailing philosophical system such as Existentialism, Platonic Objectivism, or Subjective Rationalism, etc. If it is the Bible, then still the presupposition must be examined before its theological system should be given validity.
This is why the Anti-trinitarian Tag Team says what it does when it comes to the Trinity (a word not found in the Bible), Jesus-the Christ, or the Holy Spirit—Presuppositions. It's like herding sheep through an oil refinery and expecting its wool to remain snowy white.
I concur with John Hannah who said: “In our day, theology is regarded as an irrelevant, even destructive topic for the health of the church. Parishioners are more attuned to quick, easy solutions to their questions—the gratification of felt-needs and slick and easily grasped answers—instead of the pain of reflection and mental exertion. Pastors, not desiring to bore the flock of God or unnecessarily divide them, seem to view theology as a subject to be broached with extreme caution, even embarrassment, while waxing eloquent on topics that are hardly the central focus of God’s revelation to us. Though perhaps a cruel judgment, it can be argued that contemporary sermonic fare deals far more frequently with self-help and psychological issues than with the knowledge of the character of God, leading to behavior that is the fruit of sound theology” (“The Place of Theology in the Postmodern World: Is the Study of Theology and History an Antiquated Discipline?” Reformation and Revival 11:1 [2002], 12).
Like the winds of a nor'easter (a macro-scale cyclone), the Bible has been surrounded by a wide variety of traditions and traditional interpretations. The exegete may be tempted to read the text in light of his/her own tradition without critical judgment or without letting the text speak afresh on its own. “Bringing out from the text what is already there is called exposition; the technical name is exegesis. Reading into the text one's opinions, ideas, or assumptions is known as imposition; the technical term is eisegesis.” We must give close attention to our presuppositions when we come to explore the meaning of the text.
The bottom line is that the use of Preterism and Futurism, which largely come out of the Counter-Reformation, as well as Idealism, a development based on Origen’s allegorization [“anything could be arbitrarily made to mean anything else”], are going to put one on the wrong side of truth. CM
Source: “1.1 From Jesus to the Middle Ages,” The Use and Abuse of Prophecy, pp. 13-17.
-
@C_M_ said:
@Dave_L said:
T'is nice but, each millennial position offers a different Christ, a different gospel of the kingdom...Dave,
What seems apparent, could it be that every theological system is based on the presuppositions of their favorite theologian or group of theologians?
Regardless, all groups believe that their presuppositions (assumptions or conclusions) are valid according to some standard, whether it be the Bible or the prevailing philosophical system such as Existentialism, Platonic Objectivism, or Subjective Rationalism, etc. If it is the Bible, then still the presupposition must be examined before its theological system should be given validity.
This is why the Anti-trinitarian Tag Team says what it does when it comes to the Trinity (a word not found in the Bible), Jesus-the Christ, or the Holy Spirit—Presuppositions. It's like herding sheep through an oil refinery and expecting its wool to remain snowy white.
I concur with John Hannah who said: “In our day, theology is regarded as an irrelevant, even destructive topic for the health of the church. Parishioners are more attuned to quick, easy solutions to their questions—the gratification of felt-needs and slick and easily grasped answers—instead of the pain of reflection and mental exertion. Pastors, not desiring to bore the flock of God or unnecessarily divide them, seem to view theology as a subject to be broached with extreme caution, even embarrassment, while waxing eloquent on topics that are hardly the central focus of God’s revelation to us. Though perhaps a cruel judgment, it can be argued that contemporary sermonic fare deals far more frequently with self-help and psychological issues than with the knowledge of the character of God, leading to behavior that is the fruit of sound theology” (“The Place of Theology in the Postmodern World: Is the Study of Theology and History an Antiquated Discipline?” Reformation and Revival 11:1 [2002], 12).
Like the winds of a nor'easter (a macro-scale cyclone), the Bible has been surrounded by a wide variety of traditions and traditional interpretations. The exegete may be tempted to read the text in light of his/her own tradition without critical judgment or without letting the text speak afresh on its own. “Bringing out from the text what is already there is called exposition; the technical name is exegesis. Reading into the text one's opinions, ideas, or assumptions is known as imposition; the technical term is eisegesis.” We must give close attention to our presuppositions when we come to explore the meaning of the text.
The bottom line is that the use of Preterism and Futurism, which largely come out of the Counter-Reformation, as well as Idealism, a development based on Origen’s allegorization [“anything could be arbitrarily made to mean anything else”], are going to put one on the wrong side of truth. CM
Source: “1.1 From Jesus to the Middle Ages,” The Use and Abuse of Prophecy, pp. 13-17.
Interesting...thanks.
-
The historical dimension of the doctrine of the Trinity, in light of its development, from the first to the sixteenth centuries; one must acknowledge that these times witnessed the unwarranted import of unbiblical concepts from Greek philosophy into theology.
During the Early and Medieval periods of church history, the doctrine of the Trinity may have been altered. The doctrine because of its philosophical connotations acquired in the Early, Medieval, and Reformation periods of Christianity, how should it be viewed by 21st Century Christians?
In reflection, Trinitarianism is the orthodox belief that there is but one living and true God. Nevertheless, this one God is a unity of three persons, who are of one substance, power and eternity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Should all Protestant Churches abandon the doctrine of the Trinity? If not, why not? Think soberly. CM
