When people outside of the Reformed churches think about Reformed theology, they often think of the so-called “Five Points,” or TULIP. As it turns out, there is a lot more to the Canons of Dort (1619) than the five points or horticulture.  Read More...
​

Yes and yes. No, it’s not in the Scofield Reference or Ryrie Study Bibles. It seems that some of our dispensational friends have yet to read the memo. See this example sent to me a by a friend. This writer, whom I do not know, claims that folk such as we talk about the apostolic hermeneutic and claim to be able to replicate it but never say what it is.
One throws up one’s hands in amazement and wonder.
It’s isn’t that complicated. Pay close attention here:
​Read More....

We would expect those outside the Augustinian mainstream of the Western church to object to the teaching of doctrine of predestination (i.e., the doctrines of election and reprobation) since they reject the doctrines. The reader might be surprised, however, to learn that there have been those within the Reformed tradition who have held that the should not be taught. In On The Bondage of the Will (1525) Luther stoutly defended the doctrine of predestination against Erasmus. Calvin wrote a treatise defending the doctrine of predestination in 1543 against Albert Pighius in The Liberation and Bondage of the Will and in 1555 Beza defended the propriety and spiritual usefulness of teaching the doctrine. Of course the Remonstrants did not think that the doctrine should be taught, even though they made their case from within the Reformed church, because they no longer believed it. We have already seen that the Remonstrants rejected the doctrine of unconditional election. They also rejected the doctrine of reprobation as it was taught in the Reformed churches. In the Opinions of the Remonstrants (13 December 1618). In their “Opinion Regarding the First Article Dealing With Predestination” they confessed,

1.1 God has not decided to elect anyone to eternal life, or to reject anyone from the same, prior to the decree to create him, without any consideration of preceding obedience or disobedience, according to His good pleasure, for the demonstration of the glory of His mercy and justice, or of His absolute power and dominion.

1.2 Since the decree of God concerning both the salvation and perdition of each man is not a decree of the end absolutely intended, it follows that neither are such means subordinated to that same decree by which the elect and the reprobate are efficaciously and inevitably led to their final destination.

To be sure, the Remonstrants clouded the issue by addressing only the minority Supralapsarian position (that the elect and reprobate are considered as potentials and not as created and fallen) and not the majority infralapsarian position (that the elect and reprobate are considered as created and fallen) among the Reformed. Clearly they rejected unconditional election. When they say the decree of perdition (reprobation) is “not a decree of end absolutely intended, they rejected both the infralapsarian and supralapsarian positions. Remember, Arminius himself rejected both in favor of so-called middle knowledge. On this see the earlier essays in the series.

The delegates to Synod however, who came from across Europe (the French delegates were forbidden by the French crown to attend) and the British Isles reflected the consensus that, indeed, it is encouraging to believers to know that God has loved and chosen them, not for anything in them or done by them, and therefore he will not abandon them. This is a great comfort in the midst of spiritual trials, doubt, and struggle.

READ MORE HERE!

Given the contrast between Jews and (mostly Jewish) Christians in the first century, it is not surprising that the Protestant Reformers referred to the millenarian concept of a revived theocracy as”A Jewish error.” In our day, classic dispensationalism teaches that the millennium will consist of a renewed theocracy with a rebuilt Temple and sacrifices. According to Lewis Sperry Chafer and John Walvoord, “a millennial temple is described in Ezekiel 40–46.” ” In this temple sacrifices are offered which differ somewhat from the Mosaic sacrifices…. 

Read More Here​

R. Scott Clark was educated at the University of Nebraska (BA), Westminster Seminary California (MDiv), and St Anne’s College, Oxford University (DPhil). He was a minister in the Reformed Church in the United States (1988–1998) and has been a minister in the United Reformed Churches in North America since 1998.
He is Professor of Church History and Historical Theology. He has taught at the undergraduate and graduate level since 1997. In that time he has also served as Academic Dean (1997–2000) and the host of the Office Hours broadcast (since 2009). He has taught at Wheaton College, Reformed Theological Seminary, Jackson, Concordia University, Irvine, and Westminster Seminary California.