Lon
Well-known member
Some Lutherans I know of, are fairly keen on disagreeing with you take issue with the narrow view.
toldailytopic: What is reformed theology? Generally, do you agree or disagree with re
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
- Status
Son of Jack
New member
assuranceagent
New member
It wasn't "correct theology" that was ultimately reformed.
...it was Catholic theology.
It's customary to start a "hello" thread in the Newbie Central forum before posting more broadly.
lain:
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Nope. Many, including Baptist Calvinists may appropriate the label "Reformed", but as my earlier post noted in its content, the Reformed faith is far more than TULIP. Thus the correct statement would be:
While all Reformed are Calvinists, not all Calvinists are Reformed.
But let's not derail the thread with a whole sideline discussion of what being truly Reformed means. Such is the topic of separate threads.
AMR
WandererInFog
New member
Because broadening terms beyond their traditional usage makes them meaningless and makes it harder for people to understand centuries of writings. Also, the theological errors of the Radical Reformation of the Anabaptists were rejected by the Magisterial Reformers every bit as strongly as they rejected those of the Roman Catholics.
Zwingli was one central Reformed Theologians of his age but had nothing to do with Anabaptists other than adamantly opposed them throughout his ministry.
Refractive
New member
I'd take offense at this but you have such a great icon, I kept laughing, instead!
Peace of Christ be with you.
wayofthespirit
New member
My belief is that ‘The Kingdom of Heaven’ that is hid in a field and can only be discovered by diligent unprejudiced search, is an unbroken thread that has always been extant within various forms of an apostacising ‘Outer Shell’.
Therefore it need not, and cannot, be re-formed by ‘man’.
It is a ‘perception’ based on ‘Faith’ (in the strictest understanding of the word) and cannot be defined even though such faith might arise out of ‘definition’.
Meaning that such perception must be allowed to differ between persons, even though some of the various perceptions might arise out of the same definition.
To me there is no ‘Reformation’…..only a holding fast to the unbroken thread that has never been lost or corrupted since the day Christ proclaimed that the Gates of Hades should not prevail against it.
Peace to all......Mike.
Therefore it need not, and cannot, be re-formed by ‘man’.
It is a ‘perception’ based on ‘Faith’ (in the strictest understanding of the word) and cannot be defined even though such faith might arise out of ‘definition’.
Meaning that such perception must be allowed to differ between persons, even though some of the various perceptions might arise out of the same definition.
To me there is no ‘Reformation’…..only a holding fast to the unbroken thread that has never been lost or corrupted since the day Christ proclaimed that the Gates of Hades should not prevail against it.
Peace to all......Mike.
does that rule out telling people that they are going to hell?
warren clark
New member
Theology doesn't consist of "churches". Theology consists of many religions and ideas that are forever growing and changing.
It was once exceptable to think that God was throwing lightning bolts from the sky before we understood the science of weather.
It was also exceptable to believe that sacfrices would make the gods happy and they would not curse us with misfortune.
But as we grow through the ages we become enlightened with new knowledge that changes our theological ideas.
But to play it even, the church did emerge out of reformed theology. :duh:
wayofthespirit
New member
I believe the default destiny of man is simply to perish unless he stretches forth his hand and partakes of the tree of life.
I sure wouldn't tell anybody about the medieval pagan concept of Hell.
There was no such word 2000 years ago.
Mike.
Refractive
New member
Actually, Mike, there was. Were. Those words were spelled differently, but there was a conception, in many cultures, of a place of final judgment that people went to after death as a punishment for the evil they did in life.
I believe Jesus described it most accurately when He referred to having your soul and spirit divided after death.
Lon
Well-known member
Just say "thanks for the correction" and move on...
Nang
TOL Subscriber
coulter4president
New member
Jesus said He would never leave us..
HIs real (tangible, physical) Presence abides in the Roman Catholic Church 24/7
you can't lose when you have that...
HIs real (tangible, physical) Presence abides in the Roman Catholic Church 24/7
you can't lose when you have that...
Krsto
Well-known member
Jesus said He would never leave us..
HIs real (tangible, physical) Presence abides in the Roman Catholic Church 24/7
you can't lose when you have that...
But what you have is a phyical presence (assuming that to be correct for the sake of discussion). There were many, many people for whom the physical presence of Christ meant absolutely nothing. But for those who had the spiritual presence of Christ, now those really had something, and that is not dependent on the physical presence. The physical presence of Christ is next to nothing compared to the spirtual presence, and Jesus said as much when he said he needed to go away so he could send the Holy Spirit. Saying this, he downplays the importance or efficacy of his physical presence compared to his spiritual presence.
zippy2006
New member
What makes you think that the physical and the spiritual are in conflict? Such an idea is far from Biblical. ...But I won't further derail the thread :e4e:
Krsto
Well-known member
Never said they were. Just making a distinction between the two. Why do you assume they are always "together"?
I don't mind hijacking threads . . . :banana:
wayofthespirit
New member
The word ‘Hell’ did not exist in the days when the scriptures were written.
It didn’t emerge until the KJV took three completely dissimilar words and loosely translated each of them to mean something that medieval paganism had invented and labelled as ‘Hell’
The Youngs Literal translation uses only the three original words.
The simple one to understand is the word Hades (Sheol in the Old Testament Hebrew) meaning the ‘Grave’ (used 11 times in the New Testament)
The one which is of greatest significance to us is ‘Gehenna (used 12 times in the new testament)
Of the twelve instances where Gehenna is used, one can discount James 3:6 (which is likening it to man’s tongue) and concentrate on the other 11 (all found only in the Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Gospels)
So I give them below so that readers can carefully consider what the writers were meaning when they likened something to Gehenna.
Each of the writers was Jewish.
Each of the writers knew perfectly well what Hades (Sheol in Hebrew) meant.
None had ever heard of ‘Hell’.
All they knew was the Jewish legend of a geographical site named Gehenna (or the Valley of Hinnom) which was one of the two principal valleys surrounding the Old City of Jerusalem, where idolatrous Jews sacrificed their children to the god Molech, and where the dead bodies of animals and of criminals, and rubbish, were all cast and consumed by a constant fire. (probably the combustive heat of decomposition)
So here are all of the eleven quotes.
Matthew 5:22
Matthew 5:29
Matthew 5:30
Matthew 10:28
Matthew 18:9
Matthew 23:15
Matthew 23:33
Mark 9:43
Mark 9:45
Mark 9:47
Luke 12:5
The odd man out is Tartarus, used only once in 2Peter 2:4
Eventually in Jewish tradition Gehenna became the image of the place of everlasting destruction with a 'gate' which led down to a molten lake of fire.
And that is what was referred to as Tartarus and is what John would have been remembering when he wrote Revelation
I submit that the Gospel writers were not talking of a Literal ‘Gehenna’ but had to be talking symbolically of something that they assumed existed without knowing of its details.
Do we accept the Pagan interpretation?
Or do we leave the unknown in the hands of God?
God to you, is how you see him.
Penal, vengeful, and barbaric, raising someone from the dead in order to torment them for eternity, if you must.
- Status