What does it mean to be “Reformed”?

[donadams]

I provided links to everything. The questions shows you are being obtuse.

The two are not mutually exclusive. False dichotomy.

That is correct. He did not establish the Church to teach men Roman Catholicism.

Yes, and as Pope Francis stated, there are churches other than the RCC.

Yep. The problem is the history of the RCC is filled with errors NOT occurring by the Holy Spirit and directly contradicted by both the written word and the precedents it reports. Hence the Reformation. You do not get to judge others without first cleaning up your own house and that begins with an honest and forthcoming acknowledgment of RCC error. You've been in the forum for eight months now and discussed these matters with multiple posters and not once been honest and forthcoming about the RCC's mixed history with God's truth.

Sola scripture does not mean scripture is the "ONLY" authority. I have discussed this with you multiple times. The first time your lack of knowledge might have been a simple mistake but because I and others have told you what sola scriptura teaches and its doctrinally stated limits we know you know. When you post falsehood you know to be false that is called lying. Stop lying.

Sola scriptura applies solely to the authority of scripture and its sufficiency for understanding salvation and the Christian life. An atheist stranded on a deserted island could find salvation if a Bible washed up on the shore and s/he read it. S/he does not need the RCC.

ROTFLMBO!!!

YOU JUST APPEALED TO SCRIPTURE TO PROVE YOU POST AUTHORITATIVE!!!

When people practice things they report not to value that is called hypocrisy. Stop being hypocritical.

The two are not mutually exclusive. Your argument leaves the deserted island individual incapable of salvation. That is a bad doctrine.

None of which precludes scripture from being authoritative and sufficient. Nice red herring.

Sure they did. They did not use that label but everyone, including the RCC, believed the Bible authoritative and sufficient. The Church is built on the word!





So lets' review. I've received two posts in this thread (a multitude of them in other threads) and in those two posts the matter of Catholic error, Catholic abuse of scripture, Catholic leaders' sinfulness, Catholic doctrinal and practical malfeasance and the need for reform and the history of reforms the RCC made because the early Reformers were correct has been ignored and instead the posts contain multiple red herrings, multiple false dichotomies, multiple factual falsehoods, along with a pair of false equivalence, a straw man, and one outright lie.

The Roman Catholic Church would not approve if they'd read those posts. I suspect they'd ask you to stop because you're not helping them and the fallacious content is foolish, fruitless, wholly unscriptural, and avoidant. You are not a very good apologist for the RCC and, as a consequence you are wasting everyone's time because one of the reasons the forum exists is so that its members can improve and refine their arguments.





The history of the Roman Catholic Church is filled with ungodly and unscriptural practices and that history cannot be changed. That history includes the selling of indulgences, which is the impetus for the Protestant Reformation. That too is a fact of history that cannot be changed. So too is the persecutorial, prosecutorial, torturous and murderous history of the RCC's handling of what is more often than not sound, just, valid, and scriptural inquiry and calls for reform. Those are facts that cannot be changed. The Roman Catholic Church did eventually respond to the internal and external calls for reform by making changes within. That is a fact of history. It cannot be changed. The Pope himself apologized for the Roman Catholic Church's abuse of those in other Churches. That is a fact of history. It cannot be changed.

No, you cannot.

The Roman Catholic Church cannot change its history. Neither can you change the last eight month's history of lying. Stop lying. Acknowledge the RCC's errors.

No there is only one church! Matt 16:18 Jn 10:16 one mystical body of Christ!

 

[donadams]

I provided links to everything. The questions shows you are being obtuse.

The two are not mutually exclusive. False dichotomy.

That is correct. He did not establish the Church to teach men Roman Catholicism.

Yes, and as Pope Francis stated, there are churches other than the RCC.

Yep. The problem is the history of the RCC is filled with errors NOT occurring by the Holy Spirit and directly contradicted by both the written word and the precedents it reports. Hence the Reformation. You do not get to judge others without first cleaning up your own house and that begins with an honest and forthcoming acknowledgment of RCC error. You've been in the forum for eight months now and discussed these matters with multiple posters and not once been honest and forthcoming about the RCC's mixed history with God's truth.

Sola scripture does not mean scripture is the "ONLY" authority. I have discussed this with you multiple times. The first time your lack of knowledge might have been a simple mistake but because I and others have told you what sola scriptura teaches and its doctrinally stated limits we know you know. When you post falsehood you know to be false that is called lying. Stop lying.

Sola scriptura applies solely to the authority of scripture and its sufficiency for understanding salvation and the Christian life. An atheist stranded on a deserted island could find salvation if a Bible washed up on the shore and s/he read it. S/he does not need the RCC.

ROTFLMBO!!!

YOU JUST APPEALED TO SCRIPTURE TO PROVE YOU POST AUTHORITATIVE!!!

When people practice things they report not to value that is called hypocrisy. Stop being hypocritical.

The two are not mutually exclusive. Your argument leaves the deserted island individual incapable of salvation. That is a bad doctrine.

None of which precludes scripture from being authoritative and sufficient. Nice red herring.

Sure they did. They did not use that label but everyone, including the RCC, believed the Bible authoritative and sufficient. The Church is built on the word!





So lets' review. I've received two posts in this thread (a multitude of them in other threads) and in those two posts the matter of Catholic error, Catholic abuse of scripture, Catholic leaders' sinfulness, Catholic doctrinal and practical malfeasance and the need for reform and the history of reforms the RCC made because the early Reformers were correct has been ignored and instead the posts contain multiple red herrings, multiple false dichotomies, multiple factual falsehoods, along with a pair of false equivalence, a straw man, and one outright lie.

The Roman Catholic Church would not approve if they'd read those posts. I suspect they'd ask you to stop because you're not helping them and the fallacious content is foolish, fruitless, wholly unscriptural, and avoidant. You are not a very good apologist for the RCC and, as a consequence you are wasting everyone's time because one of the reasons the forum exists is so that its members can improve and refine their arguments.





The history of the Roman Catholic Church is filled with ungodly and unscriptural practices and that history cannot be changed. That history includes the selling of indulgences, which is the impetus for the Protestant Reformation. That too is a fact of history that cannot be changed. So too is the persecutorial, prosecutorial, torturous and murderous history of the RCC's handling of what is more often than not sound, just, valid, and scriptural inquiry and calls for reform. Those are facts that cannot be changed. The Roman Catholic Church did eventually respond to the internal and external calls for reform by making changes within. That is a fact of history. It cannot be changed. The Pope himself apologized for the Roman Catholic Church's abuse of those in other Churches. That is a fact of history. It cannot be changed.

No, you cannot.

The Roman Catholic Church cannot change its history. Neither can you change the last eight month's history of lying. Stop lying. Acknowledge the RCC's errors.

Reformation:
What was reformed?
When was the time for reformation according to scripture? Heb 9:10

 

[donadams]

I provided links to everything. The questions shows you are being obtuse.

The two are not mutually exclusive. False dichotomy.

That is correct. He did not establish the Church to teach men Roman Catholicism.

Yes, and as Pope Francis stated, there are churches other than the RCC.

Yep. The problem is the history of the RCC is filled with errors NOT occurring by the Holy Spirit and directly contradicted by both the written word and the precedents it reports. Hence the Reformation. You do not get to judge others without first cleaning up your own house and that begins with an honest and forthcoming acknowledgment of RCC error. You've been in the forum for eight months now and discussed these matters with multiple posters and not once been honest and forthcoming about the RCC's mixed history with God's truth.

Sola scripture does not mean scripture is the "ONLY" authority. I have discussed this with you multiple times. The first time your lack of knowledge might have been a simple mistake but because I and others have told you what sola scriptura teaches and its doctrinally stated limits we know you know. When you post falsehood you know to be false that is called lying. Stop lying.

Sola scriptura applies solely to the authority of scripture and its sufficiency for understanding salvation and the Christian life. An atheist stranded on a deserted island could find salvation if a Bible washed up on the shore and s/he read it. S/he does not need the RCC.

ROTFLMBO!!!

YOU JUST APPEALED TO SCRIPTURE TO PROVE YOU POST AUTHORITATIVE!!!

When people practice things they report not to value that is called hypocrisy. Stop being hypocritical.

The two are not mutually exclusive. Your argument leaves the deserted island individual incapable of salvation. That is a bad doctrine.

None of which precludes scripture from being authoritative and sufficient. Nice red herring.

Sure they did. They did not use that label but everyone, including the RCC, believed the Bible authoritative and sufficient. The Church is built on the word!





So lets' review. I've received two posts in this thread (a multitude of them in other threads) and in those two posts the matter of Catholic error, Catholic abuse of scripture, Catholic leaders' sinfulness, Catholic doctrinal and practical malfeasance and the need for reform and the history of reforms the RCC made because the early Reformers were correct has been ignored and instead the posts contain multiple red herrings, multiple false dichotomies, multiple factual falsehoods, along with a pair of false equivalence, a straw man, and one outright lie.

The Roman Catholic Church would not approve if they'd read those posts. I suspect they'd ask you to stop because you're not helping them and the fallacious content is foolish, fruitless, wholly unscriptural, and avoidant. You are not a very good apologist for the RCC and, as a consequence you are wasting everyone's time because one of the reasons the forum exists is so that its members can improve and refine their arguments.





The history of the Roman Catholic Church is filled with ungodly and unscriptural practices and that history cannot be changed. That history includes the selling of indulgences, which is the impetus for the Protestant Reformation. That too is a fact of history that cannot be changed. So too is the persecutorial, prosecutorial, torturous and murderous history of the RCC's handling of what is more often than not sound, just, valid, and scriptural inquiry and calls for reform. Those are facts that cannot be changed. The Roman Catholic Church did eventually respond to the internal and external calls for reform by making changes within. That is a fact of history. It cannot be changed. The Pope himself apologized for the Roman Catholic Church's abuse of those in other Churches. That is a fact of history. It cannot be changed.

No, you cannot.

The Roman Catholic Church cannot change its history. Neither can you change the last eight month's history of lying. Stop lying. Acknowledge the RCC's errors.

Scripture yes
Scripture alone no
Scripture and your private judgement no
Acts 8 the eunuch had scripture Hod sent and the apostle to teach him

 

[donadams]

I provided links to everything. The questions shows you are being obtuse.

The two are not mutually exclusive. False dichotomy.

That is correct. He did not establish the Church to teach men Roman Catholicism.

Yes, and as Pope Francis stated, there are churches other than the RCC.

Yep. The problem is the history of the RCC is filled with errors NOT occurring by the Holy Spirit and directly contradicted by both the written word and the precedents it reports. Hence the Reformation. You do not get to judge others without first cleaning up your own house and that begins with an honest and forthcoming acknowledgment of RCC error. You've been in the forum for eight months now and discussed these matters with multiple posters and not once been honest and forthcoming about the RCC's mixed history with God's truth.

Sola scripture does not mean scripture is the "ONLY" authority. I have discussed this with you multiple times. The first time your lack of knowledge might have been a simple mistake but because I and others have told you what sola scriptura teaches and its doctrinally stated limits we know you know. When you post falsehood you know to be false that is called lying. Stop lying.

Sola scriptura applies solely to the authority of scripture and its sufficiency for understanding salvation and the Christian life. An atheist stranded on a deserted island could find salvation if a Bible washed up on the shore and s/he read it. S/he does not need the RCC.

ROTFLMBO!!!

YOU JUST APPEALED TO SCRIPTURE TO PROVE YOU POST AUTHORITATIVE!!!

When people practice things they report not to value that is called hypocrisy. Stop being hypocritical.

The two are not mutually exclusive. Your argument leaves the deserted island individual incapable of salvation. That is a bad doctrine.

None of which precludes scripture from being authoritative and sufficient. Nice red herring.

Sure they did. They did not use that label but everyone, including the RCC, believed the Bible authoritative and sufficient. The Church is built on the word!





So lets' review. I've received two posts in this thread (a multitude of them in other threads) and in those two posts the matter of Catholic error, Catholic abuse of scripture, Catholic leaders' sinfulness, Catholic doctrinal and practical malfeasance and the need for reform and the history of reforms the RCC made because the early Reformers were correct has been ignored and instead the posts contain multiple red herrings, multiple false dichotomies, multiple factual falsehoods, along with a pair of false equivalence, a straw man, and one outright lie.

The Roman Catholic Church would not approve if they'd read those posts. I suspect they'd ask you to stop because you're not helping them and the fallacious content is foolish, fruitless, wholly unscriptural, and avoidant. You are not a very good apologist for the RCC and, as a consequence you are wasting everyone's time because one of the reasons the forum exists is so that its members can improve and refine their arguments.





The history of the Roman Catholic Church is filled with ungodly and unscriptural practices and that history cannot be changed. That history includes the selling of indulgences, which is the impetus for the Protestant Reformation. That too is a fact of history that cannot be changed. So too is the persecutorial, prosecutorial, torturous and murderous history of the RCC's handling of what is more often than not sound, just, valid, and scriptural inquiry and calls for reform. Those are facts that cannot be changed. The Roman Catholic Church did eventually respond to the internal and external calls for reform by making changes within. That is a fact of history. It cannot be changed. The Pope himself apologized for the Roman Catholic Church's abuse of those in other Churches. That is a fact of history. It cannot be changed.

No, you cannot.

The Roman Catholic Church cannot change its history. Neither can you change the last eight month's history of lying. Stop lying. Acknowledge the RCC's errors.

Church leaders are not impeccable anymore than their predecessors in the authority of the kingdom Matt 23:1 those who were the successors of Moses

The church does not teach anyone to sin sorry!

 

[donadams]

I provided links to everything. The questions shows you are being obtuse.

The two are not mutually exclusive. False dichotomy.

That is correct. He did not establish the Church to teach men Roman Catholicism.

Yes, and as Pope Francis stated, there are churches other than the RCC.

Yep. The problem is the history of the RCC is filled with errors NOT occurring by the Holy Spirit and directly contradicted by both the written word and the precedents it reports. Hence the Reformation. You do not get to judge others without first cleaning up your own house and that begins with an honest and forthcoming acknowledgment of RCC error. You've been in the forum for eight months now and discussed these matters with multiple posters and not once been honest and forthcoming about the RCC's mixed history with God's truth.

Sola scripture does not mean scripture is the "ONLY" authority. I have discussed this with you multiple times. The first time your lack of knowledge might have been a simple mistake but because I and others have told you what sola scriptura teaches and its doctrinally stated limits we know you know. When you post falsehood you know to be false that is called lying. Stop lying.

Sola scriptura applies solely to the authority of scripture and its sufficiency for understanding salvation and the Christian life. An atheist stranded on a deserted island could find salvation if a Bible washed up on the shore and s/he read it. S/he does not need the RCC.

ROTFLMBO!!!

YOU JUST APPEALED TO SCRIPTURE TO PROVE YOU POST AUTHORITATIVE!!!

When people practice things they report not to value that is called hypocrisy. Stop being hypocritical.

The two are not mutually exclusive. Your argument leaves the deserted island individual incapable of salvation. That is a bad doctrine.

None of which precludes scripture from being authoritative and sufficient. Nice red herring.

Sure they did. They did not use that label but everyone, including the RCC, believed the Bible authoritative and sufficient. The Church is built on the word!





So lets' review. I've received two posts in this thread (a multitude of them in other threads) and in those two posts the matter of Catholic error, Catholic abuse of scripture, Catholic leaders' sinfulness, Catholic doctrinal and practical malfeasance and the need for reform and the history of reforms the RCC made because the early Reformers were correct has been ignored and instead the posts contain multiple red herrings, multiple false dichotomies, multiple factual falsehoods, along with a pair of false equivalence, a straw man, and one outright lie.

The Roman Catholic Church would not approve if they'd read those posts. I suspect they'd ask you to stop because you're not helping them and the fallacious content is foolish, fruitless, wholly unscriptural, and avoidant. You are not a very good apologist for the RCC and, as a consequence you are wasting everyone's time because one of the reasons the forum exists is so that its members can improve and refine their arguments.





The history of the Roman Catholic Church is filled with ungodly and unscriptural practices and that history cannot be changed. That history includes the selling of indulgences, which is the impetus for the Protestant Reformation. That too is a fact of history that cannot be changed. So too is the persecutorial, prosecutorial, torturous and murderous history of the RCC's handling of what is more often than not sound, just, valid, and scriptural inquiry and calls for reform. Those are facts that cannot be changed. The Roman Catholic Church did eventually respond to the internal and external calls for reform by making changes within. That is a fact of history. It cannot be changed. The Pope himself apologized for the Roman Catholic Church's abuse of those in other Churches. That is a fact of history. It cannot be changed.

No, you cannot.

The Roman Catholic Church cannot change its history. Neither can you change the last eight month's history of lying. Stop lying. Acknowledge the RCC's errors.

Francis is probably invalid if benedict was forced to resign

And it’s not exactly an official statement on faith and morals with full apostolic authority by the supreme Roman pontiff since he refuses that title and authority it’s just an opinion!

 

[Josheb]

Francis is probably invalid if Benedict was forced to resign

The pope was invalid. Benedict may have been forced to resign. Post says nothing about the fact remorse was expressed for Protestant persecution. That simply and solely means the RCC was wrong and needed reform. What would decide who or what was "invalid"? A bunch of men acting in accordance with scripture, or a bunch of men acting with lack of accord with scripture?

And it’s not exactly an official statement on faith and morals with full apostolic authority by the supreme Roman pontiff since he refuses that title and authority it’s just an opinion!

No cop outs.

I signed back in and went to my Notifications page and discovered you've posted nine posts to me. Every single one of them avoids the fact the RCC erred, needed reform, and reformed. Not a single one of those posts acknowledged the fact the reforms were precipitated both internally and externally.

Stop lying. Acknowledge the RCC's errors.

I meant what I said.

Titus 3:9-11
But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

I meant what I said. I went well beyond the first, second, and third attempts. You have plenty of opportunity to simply acknowledge the facts of history and did not do so. I do not know what the Roman Catholic Church calls that, but scripture calls it warped and sinful. You do NOT get to ask me "What was reformed?" or "When was the time for reformation according to scripture?" when you have so profoundly refused to acknowledge the unchangeable facts of history.

No Luther was excommunicated for the five false sola’s and rejecting authority

Completely incorrect.

Luther was excommunicated because Pope Leo X (who practiced nepotism, murdered his competing Cardinals, was promiscuous, and started an unnecessary war) wanted Luther to recant 41 of the 95 theses Luther had posted on the doors of the Wittenburg Cathedral. Fifty charges were brought against him, only one of which pertained to any of the five solas (sola scriptura). In the case of at least 14 of the original 50 charges the RCC has since amended their views and/or changed their practice. Reform was warranted.

From Wiki:

"The war of Urbino was further marked by a crisis in the relations between the pope and the cardinals. The sacred college had allegedly grown very worldly and troublesome since the time of Sixtus IV, and Leo took advantage of a plot by several of its members to poison him, not only to inflict exemplary punishments by executing one (Alfonso Petrucci) and imprisoning several others, but also to make radical changes in the college."​

• A worldly sacred college
• A plot to poison the Pope
• Reforms
• A corrupt Roman Catholic Church run by a host of corrupt leaders.

The history of the Medici family is filled with corruption and depravity. Those are the facts of history. Can't change the facts of history. You said it. Everyone here agrees.

"Leo failed to fully comprehend the importance of the movement, and in February 1518 he directed the vicar-general of the Augustinians to impose silence on his monks."​

Luther was of the Augustinian Order. The requests for reform came from within the RCC and Leo X ignored them and then set His own against his own. Worse than that, he set the Church against the Church; he set the Church on itself! It was a godless and depraved act and no matter how hard you might try to justify it or explain it away it necessarily and inescapably speaks to a need for reform. ALL of this information is easily found and verified in Catholic, RCC approved sources.

Stop lying. Acknowledge the RCC's errors.

I meant what I said. Repeated opportunities to do the right thing have availed you and the falsehood persist. Don't bother with my posts further (and if you do, do not expect a reply).

What does it mean to be “Reformed”?

Do not let @donadams hijack your op. RCCism has nothing to do with what it means to be Reformed today. We're 500 years away from the Reformation and centuries of scriptural examination has tempered Reformed thinking, doctrine and practice. Ironically, one of the remaining areas of reform among the Reformed has to do with vestiges of RCCism (like clerical garments and the way we practice the Lord's supper). There isn't a single line in the entire op that requires a sentence of reply to protests and off-topic inquiries from RCs.

If they want to correctly understand what it means to be Reformed they'll stick to the op. It's a good op, btw. A few areas of clarification (such as the solas being predominantly soteriological in nature and therefore limited in scope) could be added but it's a fine op and anyone wanting to know more about what it means to be Reformed need only ask. A plethora of great information was provided. Well done.

 

[donadams]

The pope was invalid. Benedict may have been forced to resign. Post says nothing about the fact remorse was expressed for Protestant persecution. That simply and solely means the RCC was wrong and needed reform. What would decide who or what was "invalid"? A bunch of men acting in accordance with scripture, or a bunch of men acting with lack of accord with scripture?

No cop outs.

I signed back in and went to my Notifications page and discovered you've posted nine posts to me. Every single one of them avoids the fact the RCC erred, needed reform, and reformed. Not a single one of those posts acknowledged the fact the reforms were precipitated both internally and externally.

I meant what I said.

Titus 3:9-11
But avoid foolish controversies, genealogies, dissensions, and quarrels about the law, for they are unprofitable and worthless. As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is warped and sinful; he is self-condemned.

I meant what I said. I went well beyond the first, second, and third attempts. You have plenty of opportunity to simply acknowledge the facts of history and did not do so. I do not know what the Roman Catholic Church calls that, but scripture calls it warped and sinful. You do NOT get to ask me "What was reformed?" or "When was the time for reformation according to scripture?" when you have so profoundly refused to acknowledge the unchangeable facts of history.

Completely incorrect.

Luther was excommunicated because Pope Leo X (who practiced nepotism, murdered his competing Cardinals, was promiscuous, and started an unnecessary war) wanted Luther to recant 41 of the 95 theses Luther had posted on the doors of the Wittenburg Cathedral. Fifty charges were brought against him, only one of which pertained to any of the five solas (sola scriptura). In the case of at least 14 of the original 50 charges the RCC has since amended their views and/or changed their practice. Reform was warranted.

From Wiki:

"The war of Urbino was further marked by a crisis in the relations between the pope and the cardinals. The sacred college had allegedly grown very worldly and troublesome since the time of Sixtus IV, and Leo took advantage of a plot by several of its members to poison him, not only to inflict exemplary punishments by executing one (Alfonso Petrucci) and imprisoning several others, but also to make radical changes in the college."​

• A worldly sacred college
• A plot to poison the Pope
• Reforms
• A corrupt Roman Catholic Church run by a host of corrupt leaders.

The history of the Medici family is filled with corruption and depravity. Those are the facts of history. Can't change the facts of history. You said it. Everyone here agrees.

"Leo failed to fully comprehend the importance of the movement, and in February 1518 he directed the vicar-general of the Augustinians to impose silence on his monks."​

Luther was of the Augustinian Order. The requests for reform came from within the RCC and Leo X ignored them and then set His own against his own. Worse than that, he set the Church against the Church; he set the Church on itself! It was a godless and depraved act and no matter how hard you might try to justify it or explain it away it necessarily and inescapably speaks to a need for reform. ALL of this information is easily found and verified in Catholic, RCC approved sources.

I meant what I said. Repeated opportunities to do the right thing have availed you and the falsehood persist. Don't bother with my posts further (and if you do, do not expect a reply).

Do not let @donadams hijack your op. RCCism has nothing to do with what it means to be Reformed today. We're 500 years away from the Reformation and centuries of scriptural examination has tempered Reformed thinking, doctrine and practice. Ironically, one of the remaining areas of reform among the Reformed has to do with vestiges of RCCism (like clerical garments and the way we practice the Lord's supper). There isn't a single line in the entire op that requires a sentence of reply to protests and off-topic inquiries from RCs.

If they want to correctly understand what it means to be Reformed they'll stick to the op. It's a good op, btw. A few areas of clarification (such as the solas being predominantly soteriological in nature and therefore limited in scope) could be added but it's a fine op and anyone wanting to know more about what it means to be Reformed need only ask. A plethora of great information was provided. Well done.

The apostolic church cannot be in error!

Matt 16:18-19 shall not prevail
Jn 8:32 Jn 16:13 all truth
Lk 10:16 church in error christ would be in error!

 

[Josheb]

The apostolic church cannot be in error!

Matt 16:18-19 shall not prevail
Jn 8:32 Jn 16:13 all truth
Lk 10:16 church in error christ would be in error!

Another red herring.

The facts in evidence repeatedly show the leaders of the RCC, the doctrines of the RCC, and the practices of the RCC were undeniably corrupt and in need of change. The fact a need for reforms were eventually recognized and reforms subsequently occurred has also been documented. The facts prove the Reformers were correct in multiple ways, beginning with the sale of indulgences and their unjust persecution and murder. There are two possible conclusions: either the RCC stopped being the "apostolic Church" at some point or reform can justly, correctly, and scripturally come from outside the RCC. You cannot say the Church (apostolic or otherwise) cannot be in error when there is so much proof, not just evidence, they were in error. Neither can you draw any equivalence between the "apostolic" Church and the RCC when there is so much error in the latter.

The phrase "apostolic Church" is an invention of the RCC. In the Bible there is only the Church, the ecclesia, those called out by God from the world into His service in Christ. There is no "apostolic" version of the Church separated from any alternative. Every single time you use that phrase you're proving the RCC was/is corrupt. They added to scripture things not stated in God's word.




And, your entire contribution to this thread has been off-topic. This op is specifically and explicitly about what it means to be "Reformed." If you have no interest in learning and knowing what it means to be Reformed, then ignore the thread. If you'd like to learn then ask op-relevant questions and open your mind to learning something and better understanding.

 

[Mr GLee]

Reformation . . the continuing work of learning, coming to new truth, new confidence to walk together with God

Philippians 1:5-6 For your fellowship in the gospel from the first day until now; Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:

In that way he is finishing reforming a work in all believers . Some are slower learners like myself. Others are given different kinds of gifts Jesus started at 12

 

[donadams]

Another red herring.

The facts in evidence repeatedly show the leaders of the RCC, the doctrines of the RCC, and the practices of the RCC were undeniably corrupt and in need of change. The fact a need for reforms were eventually recognized and reforms subsequently occurred has also been documented. The facts prove the Reformers were correct in multiple ways, beginning with the sale of indulgences and their unjust persecution and murder. There are two possible conclusions: either the RCC stopped being the "apostolic Church" at some point or reform can justly, correctly, and scripturally come from outside the RCC. You cannot say the Church (apostolic or otherwise) cannot be in error when there is so much proof, not just evidence, they were in error. Neither can you draw any equivalence between the "apostolic" Church and the RCC when there is so much error in the latter.

The phrase "apostolic Church" is an invention of the RCC. In the Bible there is only the Church, the ecclesia, those called out by God from the world into His service in Christ. There is no "apostolic" version of the Church separated from any alternative. Every single time you use that phrase you're proving the RCC was/is corrupt. They added to scripture things not stated in God's word.




And, your entire contribution to this thread has been off-topic. This op is specifically and explicitly about what it means to be "Reformed." If you have no interest in learning and knowing what it means to be Reformed, then ignore the thread. If you'd like to learn then ask op-relevant questions and open your mind to learning something and better understanding.

Leaders yes they are men “human” and not impeccable

The doctrine of Christ.
The practices of Christ.
Faith and morals? Never they are from God and are with the church it-reformable

No sale of indulgences only an accusation

They were attached to a voluntary donation but that is not “selling”

Murder? The state has the duty to execute justice! The church has the duty to proclaim the truth revealed by Christ and to condemn all errors and those who spout them!

 

[Josheb]

Leaders yes they are men “human” and not impeccable.

And therefore in need of reform, along with the institution they doctrinally and behaviorally corrupted with their corrupt ways.

The doctrine of Christ.
The practices of Christ.

Completely off-topic.

Faith and morals? Never they are from God and are with the church it-reformable

Pay more attention to you what you post because that is nonsensical. Faith and morals are from God. Then entire epistolary is about reforms in the Church. Not only is that sentence nonsensical, it is also 100% completely incorrect.

No sale of indulgences only an accusation

Proof to the contrary from RCC sources was provided. When you make false claims that are not known to be incorrect that's an honest mistake. The minute that proof was posted so ANYONE could objectively verify the fact that claim became a lie. Stop lying to us and yourself. Furthermore, the Protestant Reformation began over Luther's 95 Thesis, the most prominent being the sale of indulgences. You'd have us believe a century of persecution, prosecution and murder began over a lie.

That would make the selling of indulgences the least of the RCC's problems and need for reform.

They were attached to a voluntary donation but that is not “selling”

Even were that the case the RCC stated no money was to be received.

Murder? The state has the duty to execute justice!

Murder is never just. Murder is not execution and execution is not murder. Conflating the two not only commits the logical fallacy of false equivalence, it is also intellectually lazy.

The church has the duty to proclaim the truth revealed by Christ and to condemn all errors and those who spout them!

Yes, it does and the sale of forgiveness from sins is not a truth revealed by Jesus. It is an error that should be condemned along with those who teach and practice it. The same holds true for wrongful persecution, wrongful prosecution, and unjust murder. There is a record of these things being discussed in scripture.

Acts 5:27-39
When they had brought them, they stood them before the Council. The high priest questioned them, saying, "We gave you strict orders not to continue teaching in this name, and yet, you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching and intend to bring this man's blood upon us." But Peter and the apostles answered, "We must obey God rather than men. The God of our fathers raised up Jesus, whom you had put to death by hanging Him on a cross. He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand as a Prince and a Savior, to grant repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. And we are witnesses of these things; and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey Him." But when they heard this, they were cut to the quick and intended to kill them. But a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the Law, respected by all the people, stood up in the Council and gave orders to put the men outside for a short time. And he said to them, "Men of Israel, take care what you propose to do with these men. For some time ago Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody, and a group of about four hundred men joined up with him. But he was killed, and all who followed him were dispersed and came to nothing. After this man, Judas of Galilee rose up in the days of the census and drew away some people after him; he too perished, and all those who followed him were scattered. So in the present case, I say to you, stay away from these men and let them alone, for if this plan or action is of men, it will be overthrown; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them; or else you may even be found fighting against God."

The Pope and the Magisterium did NOT follow the biblical precedent. They did exactly the opposite, and they did so under the guise of purity when they themselves were thoroughly corrupt (and had more fruitful alternatives). 1500 years later the Pope finally expressed remorse and asked for forgiveness on behalf of both sides. None of the early reformers wanted to leave the Church and start a new denomination. None of them.

The facts of history cannot be changed.

No, they cannot. But wherever the facts prove ungodly thought, doctrine, and/or practice the three should be reformed. That a Church would allow a sodomizing leader to murder folks over fallacious appeals to purity and genetics makes them complicit. It is not okay to sit silently for fear of one's own death and let others do wrong. It is proof reform is needed.

 

[donadams]

Nothing of course about all the thousands of Catholics martyred in the English so called reformation by the bloody witch Elizabeth etc.
crickets double standard as usual!

No I’ll never agree to your false premises and accusations regardless of what any modernist say’s especially one named Francis for Saint Francis gave a prophecy of a future uncannonical imposter! Could he have taken that name as indicative of His own invalidity?

The so called reformers and their so called reforms were condemned by the holy apostolic church!

Since when do Christians listen to excommunicated heretics?

Never!

 

[Mr GLee]

Reformation:
What was reformed?
When was the time for reformation according to scripture? Heb 9:10

The time of reformation, the restoring the government of faith unseen Holy Father reigning in the hearts of sons of God (Christians) restored like that of the period of Judges . . men and woman prophets sent out as apostles from all the nation

The unbelieving Jew spoken of in 1 Samuel 8 in thier jealousy of worldly foundation of the surrounding pagan nation (out of sight out of mind) As in. . who in their right mind believes in a unseen King of kings . God told the apostle Samuel its not you they reject as King but me. Our Holy Father gave them over to do that which they should of til the time of the first century reforma when the shadows as ceremonial laws became sight. Some still worship the shadows calling them sacred sacraments as if the reformation had not come

 

[Ghada]

What does it mean to be “Reformed”?​

Historically Reformed
– Affirm the great “sola’s” (Latin for “only”) of the Reformation.
Sola Gratia…Grace Alone
Sola Fide…Faith Alone
Solus Christus…Christ Alone
Sola Scriptura…Scripture Alone
Soli Deo Gloria…To the Glory of God Alone
To summarize, salvation by Grace Alone, through Faith Alone, in Christ Alone, according to the Scriptures Alone, to the Glory of God Alone.

Christ and Scriptures alone is Sola Scriptura and Jesus only.

And when they had lifted up their eyes, they saw no man, save Jesus only.

Faith alone is not Scripture nor Jesus only.

Salvation by faith alone is only of another gospel and christ, condemned and cursed only by Scripture:

Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

Unrepented sinners naming the name of Christ preach only faith alone to justify themselves.

 

[Ghada]

​

– Affirm and promote a profoundly high view of the supremacy and sovereignty of God in all things and sees God as actively involved in His creation, governing and overseeing all the affairs of men. cf. Psalm 115:3; Job 34:14-15; 37:6-13; Daniel 4:35.

He oversees all affairs of heaven and earth, but is not governing the wicked, that govern themselves.

The risen Lord will return to govern all nations on earth with a rod of iron and scepter of righteousness.

– Affirm the utter dependence of sinful man upon God in all things, especially concerning salvation.

No sinful man is depending upon God, except for longsuffering mercy to repent before death and destruction.

Depending on His longsuffering is tempting the Lord to die without repentance.

Or despisest thou the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?

– Affirm the Doctrines of Grace (commonly referred to as Calvinism), which display God as the author of salvation from beginning to end.

Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.

There is only one Bible grace: help to repent and obey God.

The doctrinal grace of unrepented sinners is the great delusion of the ages: That grace covers sins and trespasses from the righteous judgment of God.

The acrostic TULIP (which is a summation of the Canons of Dort) is the most familiar way of delineating the doctrines of Grace. TULIP is made up of 5 points, which are:
* T – Total Depravity

Lust consumes the hearts of unrepented sinners.

Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

Purity of the Spirit shines in the hearts of sons that repent for Jesus' sake.

Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently: Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever

* U – Unconditional Election

The only thing unconditional with Jesus Christ's gospel and covenant, is repenting of all sins and trespasses in unconditional surrender.

Unconditional love is of depraved man without righteous judgment.

My little children, let us not love in word, neither in tongue; but in deed and in truth.

* L – Limited Atonement

If you mean limited space of grace to repent, then this is true.

And I gave her space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not. Behold, I will cast her into a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation, except they repent of their deeds.

* I – Irresistible Grace

Unrepenting sinners throughout the world are daily resisting His grace to repent.

The 'irresistible' grace waited for by unrepented sinners to repent, is just euphemism for waiting to repent when feeling like it.

Not by feeling, but by faith do we obey God and do His will.

* P – Perseverance,

Enduring temptation and tribulation unto the end, without falling to disobedience.

But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved.

And he that is overcoming, and keeping my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the nations: And he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a potter shall they be broken to shivers: even as I received of my Father.

and Preservation, of the Saints

Enduring temptation blamelessly, and being preserved righteous inwardly and outwardly unto the end.

And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.

 

[Ghada]

– Creedal – To affirm the great creeds of the historic, orthodox church.
The Apostles’ Creed
The Nicene Creed
The Definition of Chalcedon

Traditions are fine, so long as they are Bible traditions written by prophets and apostles of God.

Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

– Confessional – To affirm AT LEAST ONE of the great confessions of the historic orthodox church.

Confessing sins and trespasses with godly sorrow to God, is all that matters to Jesus Christ.

For godly sorrow worketh repentance unto salvation not to be repented of:

* The Westminster Standards
– The Westminster Confession of Faith
– The Westminster Longer Catechism
– The Westminster Shorter Catechism
* Reformed Baptist Standards
– 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith
– The Baptist Catechism
– Orthodox Catechism

The only standard of God is written in His Book. And it's one standard only: righteous and holy altogether.

Blessed are they that keep judgment, and he that is doing righteousness at all times.
But as he which hath called you is holy, so be ye holy in all manner of conversation; Because it is written, Be ye holy; for I am holy.

* The Three Forms of Unity
– The Belgic Confession of Faith
– The Heidelberg Catechism
– The Canons of Dortrecht

Father, Son, and Holy Ghost are one unity of the eternal Godhead.

Other than man's own form, there is no other form of the Godhead, nor of His godliness.

– Covenantal – To affirm the great covenants of Scripture and see those covenants as the means by which God interacts with and accomplishes His purposes in His creation, with mankind. The Scriptures contain numerous examples of God “covenanting” with man, establishing and ordaining a variety of covenants.

Covenant of the rainbow. Covenant of circumcision. Old Covenant of natural blood and law of Moses. New Covenant of eternal blood and law of Christ.

How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

– A high view of Scripture, in it’s necessity, infallibility, sufficiency and internal consistency, and our dependence upon it to learn what God has revealed about Himself, His commands, and His way of salvation.

A perfect view is better.

The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.

– A high view of the church in preaching (the exposition and application of God’s Word), the ordinances, discipline, prayer, worship (Regulative Principal), fellowship, and evangelism,

The exercise of our faith is not alone only, but also within the churches of God.

all encompassed in the keeping of the Christian Sabbath, commonly called the Lord’s Day.

Commonly called the Christian sabbath of man, not the Lord's Sabbath of old.

– A distinctly Biblical, Christian worldview that permeates all of life, a life lived in the world, but at the same time, a life not oriented to the world and it’s standards, but oriented to God’s Word.

Any worldview of unrepented sinners, is dead in sins and trespasses.

Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

– A clear understanding of the distinction between, and relationship of, Law and Gospel.

The law of Christ is within the Scriptures and gospel of the NT. Those transgressing His law are not within His law nor covenant.

He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:

Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?

The Law has Three Uses:
1) The civil use. The law serves the commonwealth or body politic as a force to restrain sin. The law restrains evil through punishment.

The law of Christ has no force on earth, except where His law is enforced by local gvt of men.

The law of sin and death is enforced by God upon all unrepented sinners dead to Him.

Though the law cannot change the heart,

The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.

Traditional teaching that contradicts the Bible is traditions of man that subvert the law of the Lord.

The law converts the soul by commanding repentance and obedience to God at all times.

The law alone without obedience, only condemns the transgressors.

it can inhibit sin by threats of judgment,

Called the conviction of the Spirit of Christ now upon all men everywhere.

And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:
And when He is come, He will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:

2) The pedagogical use. The law also shows people the perfect righteousness of God, and their sinfulness which deserves punishment, and points them to mercy and grace outside of themselves, found in the Gospel alone.

The law of Christ now defines sin and transgression against God.

For where no law is, there is no transgression.

It commands repentance unto salvation.

3) The moral, normative, sanctifying use. The moral standards of the law provide guidance for believers as they seek to live in humble gratitude for the grace God has shown us.

It gives distinct points, at which obedience is forsaken for disobedience.

But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.

For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.

The guidance of the Spirit is to grow in obeying the law in every point.

This use of the law is for those who trust in Christ and have been justified by grace alone,

By His law Christ judges the guilty by their works. Whether naming Christ or not.

through faith alone, apart from works.

Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
Man's law of no condition is for unrepented sinners, that are seek to justify themselves by what they like to believe about themselves.

But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinning, is therefore Christ the minister of sin? God forbid.

The 2nd use of the Law and its perfect requirement points us to the Gospel (good news)

The law of Christ commands us to repent of transgressions for Jesus' sake, to receive the promised new heart and life of Christ.

The law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple.

once applied by the Holy Spirit, then points us back to the third use of the Law in delight to obey its commands to the glory of God as a new creation in Christ Jesus.

The law of the Spirit moves and compels us forward in Christ Jesus, to now only delight in doing His law, rather than transgressing it.

Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.

 

[Ghada]

What does it mean to be “Reformed”?​

Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.

The reformation of Christ is to cleanse within the soul by the Spirit, so that our righteousness in Christ Jesus is greater than the Pharisees, being both inward first as well as outward by law.

Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.

For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

The reformation of the churches is to cleanse ourselves of all traditions and commandments of men, that are not that of the apostles of Christ.

But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

This witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith; Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men, that turn from the truth.

The Jews do it with their Jews religion, and Christians do it with their Christians religion.

 

[QVQ]

Sola scriptura applies solely to the authority of scripture and its sufficiency for understanding salvation and the Christian life. An atheist stranded on a deserted island could find salvation if a Bible washed up on the shore and s/he read it. S/he does not need the RCC.

Exactly
Been there, done that!
Sola Scriptura