Why Not "Reformed"?Brother Bob Ross posted this thought provoking essay today.
WHY NOT "REFORMED"?
Bob to Charles:
I have noticed, Charles, on the Timmy Brister blog that he has his bloggers testifying on the question, “Why are you Reformed?”
He asks for them to "Give me your top 5 reasons or influences that have lead to you embracing Reformed theology."
Notice -- not "Why are you a Christian?" nor "Why are you a Baptist?" but "Why are you Reformed?"
I noticed that "Tom Nettles" name was one of those referred to as being an influence. I also noticed that Pastor Scott Morgan of Buford, Georgia participated in the survey, and he gave a lot of credit to being influenced by an "Old School" Baptist (Hardshell).
Timmy's question provoked in my own mind five good reasons why I am NOT Reformed.
(1) I was not "born again" in accord with "Reformed" teaching, for my new birth was (a) neither before I was born into this world (b) nor as an infant soon after my birth -- as taught by the mainline "Reformed" theologians - and I would not want anyone to think I held to that heresy.
(2) As an adult, I was not "born again before faith," as taught by the mainline "Reformed" theologians.
(3) I understand the Bible to teach that the means of the Word is used by the Holy Spirit in regeneration -- which is denied by mainline "Reformed" theologians who teach that you must first be regenerated before you have faith. (See Shedd and Berkhof, for instance).
(4) I understand that the Confessions of faith are correct on the New Birth, and the mainline "Reformed" theologians and their disciples are wrong.
(5) I believe the mainline "Reformed" camps appropriate the name of "Calvin" to their "Calvinism," when in fact they contradict John Calvin when they teach the "born again before faith" heresy.
I think those are five rather good reasons, Charles, for NOT being "Reformed."