Great video to clarify some misnomers about limited atonement and the opposing Arminian view which actually limits it more dangerously in another way.

Refuting the misconception of biblical election, commonly labeled “Calvinism.”

This through the bible in a year reading plan bookmark is double sided and fits in the smallest of small bibles.  Print it out on cardstock for durability and keep it in your bible as a place mark.

No need to be legalistic: the reading plan allows for 15 spare weeks which can be used to either take two days a week off or as a buffer during your busy schedule.

Do not fit to page when printing otherwise it will be too big.  It’s 3.4 x 4.8 inches once trimmed.

DOWNLOAD: Through the bible in a year bookmark

Daniel Robbins asked in response my previous post “Why I Embraced Reformed Theology”:

What personally showed you the importance of reformed theology? No need to go into extreme detail (like sharing information about specific events, etc.) but it would be nice to understand what led you to view reformed theology as being so necessary for the modern church. If everyone had perfect theology, then there wouldn’t be a need for an emphasis on reformed theology or any other theological movement, so you must be seeing things in today’s church that you feel needs to be addressed. Would be cool to hear your opinion on this and how you feel that a refocusing on reformed theology could help correct this.

Daniel,

In short reformed theology addresses the rampant misunderstanding of the gospel throughout the modern church. Reformed theology begins and ends at the gospel and strives to get it right not only in its preaching but also in its application.

Of all the doctrines of reformed theology the one that most are convicted of first is the doctrine of salvation (soteriology). Realize that the reformers were coming out of the Roman Catholic Church. The Roman church did not accept the biblical concept of the imputation of Christ’s righteousness in justification. They believe that though sins were forgiven on the Cross (and continually through the sacraments)- righteousness and holiness needed to be worked for in order to enter heaven. What we couldn’t complete on earth could be finished in purgatory.

Using the scriptures alone, sola scriptura, the reformers contended that salvation was by grace alone, through faith alone in Christ alone. They recognized that while justification was not of works, sanctification and glorification were part of the package and were inseparable.

So far you might not recognize anything different than what the majority evangelical church adheres to. But the reformers in their biblical analysis of the doctrines of salvation also recognized something that modern evangelicalism denies. Modern evangelicalism parts from the reformers in the following area which I will argue compromises the holy character of God, the unending measure of his grace, the understanding of our fallen nature and finally the gospel message.

What the reformers recognized that modernism denied was the total depravity of man. Modern evangelical’s will agree in the semantics but not in its definition. According to reformed theology: the fall put man at enmity with God. We are dead in trespasses and sin, incapable and unwilling to desire, seek or please God apart from His sovereign intervention, regeneration.

In opposition to this, modern evangelicals hold to a semi-pelagian view, a view much closer to Roman Catholicism than biblical Christianity. Pelagius was a heretic who denied original sin in the early fourth century. While modern evangelicals do not entirely deny original sin they DO deny its extent. Rather than concluding that man is dead and helpless, they would much rather describe him as sick. According to modernism, man is in control of his destiny, he is not hopelessly dead in need of a miraculous resurrection, he is sick and can take his medicine.

Because modern evangelicals would place man in a hospital sick bed rather than in a casket, they must also deny that salvation was fully accomplished for us on the cross. In their view the cross of Christ did not literally save anyone, it merely brought the possibility of salvation, or the medicine for salvation. In the final analysis man must complete the final step of salvation and take his medicine. They limit the atonement in its saving POWER and assign man one last work in salvation to complete. Essentially the reason you are saved and someone else is not, is not because God was more gracious to you as the scriptures teach, it is because YOU made the right choice… and unfortunately that leaves YOU something to boast about.

Reformed theology states that the atonement of Christ was unlimited in POWER and did accomplish salvation for ALL of whom it was intended. Christ had a specific people in mind when he went to the cross and no work was left for man to complete. My repentance and apparent choice of God was not my doing but it was in fact God drawing me. As water takes no part in being drawn from a well, so too we take no part in being drawn to Himself in regeneration. Instead of limiting the atonement in POWER, as modern evangelicals do, it’s limited in SCOPE as the scriptures do (John 17:9; Matthew 1:21).

Modern evangelicals raise the complaint, why evangelize and why pray if God has already chosen? We do so because we really believe God is the one who works in salvation. If a modern evangelical did not live in a world of theological contradictions he would have a hard time answering the question himself, “why pray?” If you were to believe that God does not change peoples minds and that men must ultimately make the right decision- then prayer is hopeless because God does not intervene. Reformed theology holds at its very core that GOD DOES INTERVENE. That’s why we pray!

The doctrines associated with salvation in reformed theology are also referred to as the Doctrines of Grace because it really puts man in his rightful place as depraved. With that black and dirty backdrop of mans depravity the grace of God is made so much clearer and amazing because He not only died to make salvation possible for me but He also lifted me out of my wretched condition and saved me! My salvation was 100%, completely, in His hands. Now you see why those puritan hymn writers could write such amazing songs.

Those who hold to the semi-pelagian view see man in need to partner with God in the work of salvation (it takes two). This false view is called synergism. Granted, while some truly strive to give God the glory and honor: many change the gospel message in attempt to reach those who may want the carnal benefits of salvation but not God Himself. Why? Because if man must partner with God to save himself the “evangelist” is forced to make appeal to sinful flesh and present fringe benefits as the gospel in order to render a “decision”. It’s no longer a requirement that God be doing a work: the stance is that all men have the capacity to make the right choice and whatever the “evangelist” can do to move them- whether right or wrong motivation- all the better.

Followed in the same train of thought comes the false belief that Jesus can be Savior but not Lord (separation of justification and sanctification). Since the effectual call of the Holy Spirit is rejected by semi-pelagians men are lured into accepting some sort of “Jesus” who brings only fringe benefits and a free ticket out of hell. Many of these “converts” have no desire to be reconciled to God. Repentance from their rebellious life towards God is an optional second step. They accept the “Jesus” of their imaginations and go on hating God with a false assurance of post-mortem salvation. Those who don’t bear fruit are thought to be “carnal christians”: no present work of sanctification is going on in their life because regeneration was replaced with an experience of “accepting Jesus into their heart”. See my post on the False Gospel vs. the True Gospel.

Reformed theology frees me to pray and preach the true gospel of reconciliation knowing that God has chosen to accomplish His will through man. We then approach it #1) humbly- knowing by the grace of God I am what I am; #2) humbly- knowing any fruit is on account His sovereign will.. and #3) with the understanding that I will be successful in the endeavor. It frees me from the fear of rejection or lack of numbers because God in His sovereignty does the work! I don’t have to modify it, I don’t need eloquence or cultural relevance. I just preach it the way the apostles did.

Soteriology (doctrine of salvation) only scratches the surface of reformed theology. When a church could get something so central and basic as the gospel wrong, it only follows that there must be more as well.

Confusing the two will bring condemnation and distance us from the Lord… but separating the two… perhaps just as bad.

Justification refers to my status; sanctification to my state.

Justification is about God’s attitude to me changing; sanctification is about God changing me.

Justification is about how God looks on me; sanctification is about what he does in me.

Justification is about Christ dying for my sins on the cross; sanctification is about Christ at work in me by the Holy Spirit changing my life.

The Reformers were careful to distinguish the two—but not to separate them. One cannot have the one without the other—as with the heat and light of the sun. The sun gives out heat and light. These two cannot be separated. When the sun shines there is both heat and light; yet they are distinct and not to be confused. We are not warmed by the sun’s light nor illuminated by its heat. To use a modern illustration, justification and sanctification are like the two legs of a pair of trousers, not like socks which may well become separated and, in the author’s experience, too often do become separated.

Anthony N. S. Lane from Justification by Faith in Catholic-Protestant Dialogue: An Evangelical Assessment 

I remember a time ago when I looked down on those who embraced reformed theology.  I suppose it is natural for us to despise what we do not understand.  I had preconceived notions as to what reformed theology was and in my circle there were negative connotations tied to those who were part of it.

When it comes to evangelical Christianity, its roots are found in the soil of the sixteenth-century Protestant Reformation.  Just as the Reformers protested the corrupt teaching of the Roman Catholic Church, so today evangelicalism itself is in need of a modern reformation.  Simply put, it is the theology of the Protestant Reformers and the heart of historical evangelicalism.  As C.H. Spurgeon once said, Reformed theology is nothing other than biblical Christianity.

These two messages by R.C Sproul are the first two in a series entitled “What is Reformed Theology?”  Perhaps they will answer some questions:

• What is Reformed Theology (Introduction) 20min
• What is Reformed Theology (Catholic, Evangelical & Reformed) 20min
  

Get the full series here: http://www.monergismbooks.com/What-is-Reformed-Theology-CD-Series-p-16743.html
And so you ask:

Doesn’t reformed theology mean that you no longer pray, worship or exhibit emotion for God?  Isn’t it dry intellect study of God and the scriptures?
NO!  While i’m sure there are those in any circle of Christianity who approach God with a mere intelect-only approach: the bible commands us to love the Lord our God with all our HEART, SOUL and MIND.  We are to worship God with 100% (all) of our emotions, 100% (all) of our character and 100% (all) of our intelect.

Doesn’t reformed theology reject the gifts of the Holy Spirit and Miracles?
Nope.  The reformers did not seem to address this at all.  What you will find however is that those who embrace both reformed theology and the gifts of the spirit do so within biblical reason.  That is to say you won’t find barking, “holy” laughter or slaughterings in the spirit.

I heard people in reformed circles don’t believe in evangelism, is that true?
Many of the faithful men I know who consistently share their faith or have heavy hearts for missions are reformed.  The bible commands us to make disciples of all nations.  Evangelism is an essential part of the Christian faith and those who hold to a reformed understanding of the doctrines of salvation have historically been at the frontlines of prayer, missions and evangelism.

Aren’t reformed folks also Calvinists?
It depends.  If your understanding of calvinism matches my understanding of it three years ago then no.  Actually this topic both amuses me and saddens me all at the same time.  God used both Luther and Calvin to challenge the Roman Catholic church’s unbiblical doctrines.  Both Calvin and Luther contended for the faith and set the church off in reformation.

The controversy between Arminianism and Calvinism arose in Holland in the early 1600’s (after Calvin’s death). The founder of the Arminian party was Jacob Arminius (1560-1609).  He studied at Geneva and became a professor of theology at the University of Leyden in 1603.  Gradually Arminius came to reject certain teachings of the Christian faith including original sin and total depravity.  Why this is still in debate or why Christians aren’t sure where to side I don’t know!  Having once been there myself I can say from experience: the lack of understanding and mis-conceptions transferred from Arminians and fatalists (hyper-calvinists) leaves men afraid to accept the biblical teachings of depravity and election.

The so-called Five Points of Calvinism were not chosen by the Calvinists as a summary of their teaching. They emerged as a response to the Arminians who chose these five biblical points to oppose.

For more details see John Piper’s desiring God website on Calvinism.

What about the end-times?
Reformed theology makes no real distinction.  Some are pre-trib, some post-trib… Others reject modern dispensationalism entirely.  Biblically: we should be in expectation of the Lord’s coming at any given moment of time.

I’ve posted a lot of articles speaking against the anti-lordship / no-lordship campaigns.  I have attempted as best as possible to scour the new testament scriptures in order to find verses that clearly refute the teaching that Jesus can be savior but not Lord.  Because there are so many I have attempted to eliminate some duplicates and focused mostly on the epistles.  The following hundred or so should suffice.  To view them click to continue reading…

continue reading » »