Introduction

In our church, we frequently use the word “Reformed” in sermons, Christian education classes, Bible studies and even casual conversation. Newcomers often do not quite understand what we mean by the term, and even those who have been in conservative, evangelical Presbyterian churches can be confused. I well remember an occasion, in a previous ministry, where we had a family move into our area. The husband had been a ruling elder in the (arguably) largest and most successful evangelical Presbyterian Church in America. After a couple of weeks, this man came to me and asked, “Pastor, I keep hearing you talk about ‘Reformed theology’ and ‘the Reformed faith.’ What does that mean?”

Strictly speaking, “Reformed” theology refers to that system of doctrine hammered out during the Great Reformation by the churches in Switzerland, Holland, England, Scotland and certain parts of Germany (the non-Roman and non-Lutheran parts anyway). These doctrines were then summarized in various Confessions and Catechisms; most notably, the Belgic Confession, the Heidelberg Catechism, the Synods of Dort and the Westminster Standards.

While for a full appreciation of Reformed theology requires a detailed study of the actual documents themselves, one can summarize the distinctions by examining the following emphasis. But please note that here, in this essay we will not attempt to PROVE the Biblical basis of these doctrines, we are simply trying to identify how Reformed theology differs from the theologies of other Christians.

The Distinctives of Reformed Theology

First, Reformed theology is first and foremost an attempt to be fully and thoroughly Biblical. The Bible, as the written Word of God always has final and ultimate authority over all matters. Those of us who call ourselves “Reformed” do not accept Reformed theology because some synod or council affirmed it, but because we sincerely believe that it accurately summarizes the Bible’s own message. This emphasis stands in distinction to those Christians who place the church, tradition, human reason or some other factor as their ultimate source of authority (such as Roman Catholicism which insists that the Scriptures are subordinate to the church, or Liberalism which believes that the human reason cannot accept the supernatural).

Secondly, Reformed theology emphasizes the glory of God. All of creation was made by Him and for Him to reveal His glory. Ultimately, and finally, all things exist for Him, and His purposes. This doctrine stands in distinction to those Christians who want to make Man the center of attention, such as theological Liberalism which is just another form of Humanism.

Thirdly, in contrast to a holy, just, wise and all powerful God, Reformed theology sees the nature of Man as “totally depraved.” Total depravity does not mean that each and every human being is as utterly wicked as he could be, but rather that sin affects the “totality” of Man’s being. In other words, every aspect of our lives has been stained by sin including our minds, wills and affections. Man’s sin extends outward from himself to stain and corrupt the perfect creation God made. The salvation of men is the first step in God’s comprehensive plan to redeem all of His creation (culminating in His new heavens and earth). This doctrine stands in distinction to those Christians who think Man might be morally or spiritually corrupt, but that his reasoning or will are able to choose what is right (called Pelagianism after the fourth century heretic, Pelagius).

Fourthly, Reformed theology emphasizes the sovereignty of God over all things. He is the One who declares the end from the beginning, because He is the Alpha and Omega, the first and the Last. Consequently, because of Man’s depravity, and God’s sovereignty, only He alone can save sinful men from their sins. Salvation is a sovereign act of God’s free grace wherein He regenerates the wicked hearts of sinful men, giving them faith to trust in Him. This doctrine stands in distinction to those Christians who believe that God only makes salvation a possibility and that somehow, sinful men with unregenerate hearts can choose God on their own (called “Arminianism” after the 16th century heretic Jakob Arminius).

Fifthly, Reformed theology sees an essential unity in the Bible’s message; the Old and New Testaments build upon one another, giving one coherent message from Genesis to Revelation. Jesus Christ, as the Word of God made flesh, is the subject of every page of the Bible. In the Old Testament, Christ was worshipped through signs and symbols, revealed in shadows and types. In the New Testament, He is fully revealed as the eternal Son of God, who came, as the Lamb of God slain before the foundation of the world to die for our sins, was raised on the third day, and now sits at the right hand of God the Father Almighty, from whence He shall one day come to judge the quick and the dead. Thus, rather than there being a radical disjuncture between the Testaments, there is one all embracing theme; the glory of God being revealed through His Son Jesus. What the Old Testament believers grasped only dimly, we now see clearly because the Lord Jesus has come to earth. In the Old Testament, men were saved by looking forward to and trusting in the promised Messiah who was coming. In the New Testament era and beyond, men are saved by looking back and trusting in the promised Messiah who came. This doctrine (“Covenant Theology”) stands in distinction to those Christians who see the Bible as a series of failed plans of God in history with no real relationship between the Old and New Testament (called Dispensationalism, a 19th century theological innovation developed by J.N. Darby).

Sixthly, in light of this essential continuity, Reformed theology has always given a high place to the Moral Law of God as summarized in the Ten Commandments. Rather than the Law being some peculiar, strange code given just the ancient Israel, the Moral Law reveals the unchanging righteousness of God, and thus demonstrates the sinfulness of men. No man was ever saved by keeping this law; but rather the Law served as a school-master to lead us to Christ. The Law reveals God’s glory and our depravity, convincing us that we cannot save ourselves and therefore driving sinful men to trust in Christ and Christ alone for their salvation.

However, for the regenerate man, the Law provides an objective, moral foundation to guide us in living a life pleasing to God. We are saved, purely by God’s grace through faith, but once saved, we have the law “written on our hearts.” And now, though we all sin and fall short of the glory of God every day, in the essence of our inner being, we want to live according to His ways and not ours. By bringing our lives into submission to God’s moral law, we are in effect saying, “not my will, but THY will be done.” This stands in distinction to those Christians who believe that there are no moral absolutes apart from what they think the Spirit is personally telling them (called “antinomianism” from the Greek, “against the Law”).

Finally, Reformed theology has always emphasized that sanctification is the ongoing process by which God works His will in our lives, to conform our character to His unchangeable moral standards. Thus Reformed Christians do not expect to be perfect, but rather that they need to grow in grace, wisdom, and holiness by learning how to subdue the flesh to the glory of God through the actions of the indwelling Holy Spirit. This doctrine stands in distinction to those Christians who believe that they can be instantly sanctified by God and become actually morally perfect (called “Second Blessing” theology and was developed by John Wesley in the 18th century).

Of course there is much more to Reformed theology than the simple outline provided above, these are just some of the ways that Reformed theology differs from many of the other forms that exist within the evangelical church today. As already noted, to in fact really BE “Reformed,” one must be in essential agreement with ALL of the doctrines of one of the great Confessional standards. But if nothing else, the above summary should give the interested Christian a place to start looking at his own beliefs about the Bible’s message.

Reformed Theology and Calvinism

While each of the original doctrinal statements were historically conditioned, written to specific groups of people, addressing specific concerns, they all stem in one way or another from the theological influence of John Calvin and his Institutes of Christian Religion. The Institutes was written for the Royalty of France, as an attempt to show that the new Reformation faith was no heresy or threat to European civilization, but instead, a faithful attempt to restore genuine Biblical Christianity. The Institutes was originally written as a pamphlet, but was revised and expanded over Calvin’s lifetime until it reached two bulky volumes.

Hence, many people equate “Reformed” theology with “Calvinism” which is not totally inaccurate but is a bit simplistic. Often, a system of doctrine gets named after the person who was its best known proponent. As we noted above in the distinctives, many of the other popular systems of doctrine are ALSO known, at least by theologians, by the names of certain men; i.e., Arianism, Pelagianism, Lutheranism, Arminianism, Wesleyism, Darbyism, etc.

However, the words “Calvinist” or “Calvinism” are often used as disparaging terms today because many Christians are concerned that Reformed people are in danger of elevating a theologian over Scripture. Sadly, when people make this accusation, they sometimes do not understand that their own system of doctrine is just as closely associated with certain historical figures as Reformed theology is associated with Calvin! Since church history is not well known to the average Christian, many simply do not understand that THEY interpret the Bible through certain filters, handed down to them by certain men in the past!

Though John Calvin was a profound thinker, an outstanding pastor, and his theological work will stand amongst the best throughout time, he was only a man, and therefore limited and imperfect. If Reformed theology is associated with his name, it is only because he was the first to provide a systematic exposition of Scripture. But if his exposition was wrong, it would have been revised or discarded because the men who came after him were committed to the Bible, and the Bible alone as the supreme authority. Those who accept Reformed theology do not venerate or elevate Calvin; the fact that Calvin’s Institutes is still highly regarded as a reliable and trustworthy theological treatise simply shows that he did his work well.

Furthermore, Reformed theology was not the product of one man; even an important man like Calvin. There were a number of great and godly men during the Reformation and after, who studied and debated the Scriptures diligently trying to arrive at a comprehensive understanding of God’s inerrant and infallible revelation. Calvin’s contribution to our understanding of the Bible was considerable, but in the end, he was just a man like any other. He himself would insist that his work must be evaluated by subjecting it to Scripture. And he would object that his work was innovative or radically new; a lot of his theological work was based on the great men who came before him. Calvin saw himself building on the theological foundations of Augustine from the fourth century, and Luther who was his contemporary (though unlike Calvin, Luther never wrote a systematic theology but left that to those who came after).

Many fine godly men came after Calvin who continued to work out the implications of a consistent, Biblical worldview. Hence, the preferred term for the work that Calvin and others did is better called “Reformed” theology rather than Calvinism. “Reformed” means ALL the work done by all the men who suffered and died to purify the Christian faith and return it to its Biblical foundation.

Why Have Creeds and Confessions?

However, some may well ask, “Why is it even important to identify one’s theology; isn’t it enough just to say we accept the Bible as God’s Word and leave it at that?” So what if Reformed theology is more than just the work of John Calvin; it is still the work of men. By writing up creeds and confessions, are we not in danger of elevating the wisdom or thoughts of men over God’s own revelation in Scripture? Why even bother giving labels such as “Reformed” when isn’t the only really important thing is that a person loves Jesus and believes His Bible?

Well, let’s take a step back for a moment and look at the above. First, every Christian, believes that the Bible teaches SOME things, and does not teach others. For example, every Christian believes the Bible teaches that there is one God, whose Son is the Lord Jesus, who came to earth, lived a perfect, sinless life, died on the cross in our place and was raised again on the third day. In fact, if a person does NOT believe these things, we wouldn’t even call him a Christian, would we? But in giving THIS summary of the Bible’s message, we have in fact written a theological statement. There are those who call themselves “Christians” who do NOT accept that the Bible is God’s Word, or that Jesus was God in the flesh, or that He died for our sins and rose from the dead! The system of theology developed to get rid of the supernatural aspects of Christianity is technically called “Liberalism.” The type of theology that WE believe is called “evangelicalism” because it insists that the gospel (Greek “euangelion” or “evangel”) is true and men must accept it to be saved.

So whether we like it or not, we already have at least TWO different “theologies” competing for men’s attention. Theological Liberalism is often seen in mainstream Episcopalian, Methodist, Congregational, Baptist and Presbyterian denominations (more about them later). Evangelicals however, represent all those who actually believe the Bible is God’s word and that men are saved by trusting in Christ’s death on the cross. (And for what it is worth, the term “Broad Evangelical” refers to Christians who accept the fundamentals of the evangelical faith but do not have agreement about what the Bible teaches in other areas).

So having some sort of theology is inescapable. Every godly pastor diligently tries to draw together various Scriptural principles, and teach his people what he thinks God wants them to believe and to do. Furthermore, every Christian sitting in the pew is also a theologian because like the Bereans, he wants to evaluate what he hears and test it against what he believes the Scriptures teach.

The only real issue is whether the Bible actually teaches, what we think it teaches; but that of course is the real question! How do you KNOW that the Bible teaches what you THINK it teaches? Well, by writing up a comprehensive doctrinal statement, we are able to test our opinions to see if in fact they really are in accordance with the Scriptures. Ideas have implications and as godly men debate and discuss the Scriptures, they can see whether or not their beliefs can be sustained. Eventually they arrive at certain conclusions.

For example, you believe that there is only one God, in three distinct persons, right? This belief is fundamental to Christianity; our God is not just one among many other gods, but the Living and True God. But He has revealed Himself as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Each person has all the glory, honor and power of God, yet there are not three Gods, but one. Furthermore, if you had to, you could probably do a little bit of study and point out a number of verses where this doctrine is taught in Scripture. But it would take a while wouldn’t it? And the doctrine of the “Trinity” is not always easy to understand.

Because of the doctrine of the “perspicuity” of Scripture, we believe that God has revealed Himself clearly enough in His Word, so that the average person can understand Who He Is, and what He requires. But it might take years of personal study on our own to arrive at the right conclusions about the nature of God. And along the way, if we did not have teachers, we might well get some things wrong (which many people did in the first three centuries of the Christian church). Hence, the doctrinal summary (or “creed”) that our God is Triune is helpful. But we do not just accept that doctrine because some man or even church counsel taught it; we believe that we can go back and find the doctrine clearly taught in the Bible itself.

Thus all of us go to the Bible to learn about God, and His will and then try to summarize what we have discovered. But once you start this process, by definition, you are doing theology; you are claiming that the Bible says THIS and not THAT!

Now comes the hard part; even though God has clearly revealed Himself in His Word, it takes time and diligent study to understand that revelation. And let us be honest, some men are brighter than others, some men are more godly than others, and some men are better prepared academically than others to understand what God meant. That is why God gave the church teachers, and warns us that not everyone should become one. Those who teach others are going to incur a “stricter” judgment (Jas 3:1) because getting it wrong has eternal implications. If the Bible is God’s Word, there are serious consequences to misunderstanding it. And let us be frank, most of us just do not have the TIME or the ABILITY to do the kind of personal study of God’s Word that would give us a comprehensive understanding of the faith. And even if we did, learning about God in His Bible would take many, many different life-times!

Hence, a good, Biblical systematic theology takes advantage of the fact that God has called different men to different tasks. Those who have the gifts, calling and time, labor to study the Scriptures and develop good, sound summaries of the Bible’s message, that the rest of us can use to grow in our own walk with Christ. However, the final authority is always the Bible. The doctrinal summary is SUPPOSED to be based on Scripture; if the theologians make a mistake in their study, or reasoning, then their summary can be corrected. However, each generation of Christians can build on the work of the previous one; giving us over time, a better and better understanding of God and His will.

Reformed Theology and American History

The Reformation is almost universally acknowledged as the high water mark of Christian scholarship in church history. Men were arrested, imprisoned, tortured and martyred for insisting that the Bible alone had the authority to bind their conscience. They died, because they believed the Bible required Christians to believe certain things, and to do certain things. Therefore, they had every incentive to ensure that what they were dying for was more than just a personal opinion or individual choice. Out of their suffering and scholarship, came these wonderful doctrinal summaries that were held almost universally in England, Scotland, Holland, Switzerland and parts of Germany right down into the 18th century.

These by the way, were the very same people who largely settled America from 1640-1776. Almost universally, American Christians during colonial times, were significantly Reformed in their theology, despite denominational differences. Anglicans (modern day Episcopalians), Puritans (modern day Congregationalists), and Presbyterians all accepted “Reformed” doctrine to one degree or another. Remember, Baptists and Methodists together made up less than 10% of the Christian population in 1780. Furthermore, (though we do not have time to go into this here), American culture was significantly influenced by Reformed theology; for example, the Constitution of the United States is largely an application of various aspects of Reformed doctrines about the nature of Man, civil magistrates and power applied to the social sphere.

But if the Reformed Faith was so faithful to the Scriptures, why do so few today understand it, let alone accept it? Maybe it couldn’t really stand the test of time? Well, to understand what happened, we need to do a little historical work.

As we just noted, from the Puritans in 1620 to the end of the 18th century, American Christians were largely Reformed in their theology. But the 19th century was a time of great religious revival and both Methodists and Baptists were aggressive in planting new churches, especially along the frontier. While the Methodists accepted a theological paradigm called “Arminianism,” most Baptists, in America anyway, were originally “Reformed” and had adopted a version of the Westminster Confession, (the London and Philadelphia Confessions) changing only a few small sections dealing with the sacraments.

However, during this time of revival and church planting, neither Baptists nor Methodists placed a high emphasis on formal theological training for their ministers, and though they were able to send out many times the numbers of church-planters than the older denominations, these men, though sincere, often had little better theological training than their new congregations. Baptists and Methodists thus started many churches (largely made up of Reformed congregations who had no Reformed church nearby to attend) but focused mostly on sharing the gospel, rather than on teaching a comprehensive theological system.

Meanwhile, the older Reformed denominations, largely because they insisted on academic accreditation for their ministers, were severely disturbed by heresies such as Deism, Unitarianism and later on, theological Liberalism. Men with false theology entered their seminaries, and weakened the faith of many new ministers. So, not only were Reformed churches not producing as many ministers as needed, many of the ones who graduated from seminary were tainted by bad doctrine. Hence, especially during the final years of the 19th century, Reformed churches suffered devastating losses to apostasy, even while Baptist and Methodist churches were exploding.

Eventually of course, the Baptists and Methodists were not immune to the same influences; they too began starting formal academic programs for their ministers, and they too, hired professors from prestigious academic institutions infiltrated by Deism, Unitarianism, Liberalism and Humanism. Both the Baptists and Methodists churches were weakened significantly by Liberalism, especially in the 20th century.

But in ALL churches, there were some who retained “evangelical” theology against the various forms of false doctrines. But in many cases, a lot of Christians became most disillusioned by the theological battles that the average laymen didn’t understand. Thus there was a tendency to focus on the lowest common theological denominator; if you believed the Bible to be God’s word, even if you disagreed with your brothers on what it meant, you still had more in common with them than with the theological Liberals who insisted that Jesus was just another “good man.” Thus people tended to drift towards places where the gospel was at least preserved in some form, and left those churches which had begun to compromise with Liberalism.

During most of the 20th century, evangelicals who remained within the old denominations spent most of their time and energy fighting to preserve the gospel against the Liberals. This was especially true of various Reformed groups, Presbyterians in particular. Thus, while evangelicals, Pentecostals and Charismatics were planting new churches, Reformed groups were battling the Liberals for the seminaries, universities, hospitals and churches THEY had originally built. Eventually though, they began leaving and forming new churches. In the 1930’s the Northern Presbyterian Church split and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church was formed. In 1973, the Southern Presbyterian Church was split and the Presbyterian Church in America was formed. Meanwhile, there were a number of smaller Reformed groups that had never been associated with larger denominations, or never joined a larger group so that they could remain pure. Often, these were churches that largely ministered to particular ethnic groups of immigrants such as Dutch Reformed, German Reformed, and a variety of Scottish Presbyterian churches.

So, while the Reformed churches fought to preserve their institutions, the “broad evangelicals” just went about planting new churches. Today, Reformed churches find themselves in the same position as Baptists and Methodists were in at the beginning of the 19th century; barely representing less than 10% of all the remaining Christians.

Yet, as we said earlier, ideas have implications. As Christians in “broad evangelical” churches start to think through the implications of their faith, many are rediscovering Reformed theology. The Southern Baptist Convention, the largest evangelical Baptist church in America, has experienced a wonderful rediscovery of Reformed theology over the past couple of decades and though still rejecting covenant Baptism, they are embracing all the distinctives we mentioned earlier. And they are not alone; after a hundred years of “lowest common denominator” theology, many other Christians are studying and debating the Scriptures, and discovering that the great Reformed theologians of the past have already addressed some of the most important issues facing us today; and the answers they found then are just as applicable.

Thus though to be “Reformed” technically speaking still means to adopt one of the great Reformation creeds; the system of theology behind those creeds is being reclaimed outside of the traditional denominations that supported it for five hundred years. The reason is simple; Reformed theology is the most Biblical and comprehensive system of doctrine ever developed. Reformed theology grows organically out of the Bible’s own message and has been subjected to the most rigorous scholarly analysis of the godliest men in history. This is not to say that the Reformed faith is perfect or that there is not more study that needs to be done; since all theology is a work of men, therefore undoubtedly our summary of the Bible is always going to be deficient. But it does remain a faithful and accurate summary.

As Christians, for the first time since the pagan tribes were converted in the 4th through 6th centuries, are once again a minority in the Western world, we can no longer take for granted certain cultural absolutes that we once did. For almost 18 hundred years, there was a Christian consensus in the Western world, a consensus now dismantled by Humanism. The Reformed Faith gives a comprehensive, Biblical answer to all the problems, trials and tribulations of modern man and thus provides the Church with a potent weapon in its war with Humanism.

Conclusion

In our post-modern age, it is widely assumed that there is no ultimate truth; and that each man can arrive at “truths” which are meaningful only to him, but irrelevant to his neighbor. The Bible however insists that there IS absolute truth, because God is true (Jn 17:17). In effect, post-modernism is simply the reappearance of the original heresy from the Garden of Eden where each man wants to determine good and evil for himself. The godly man however knows that God is true, and that he must submit himself to that God, and His truth. Therefore, he must study the Scriptures, and change his ways, to God’s. But once he begins that study, invariably he will end up with some sort of theological system or paradigm.

Sometimes, those who hold to a particular theological paradigm such as Reformed theology are accused of elevating their doctrinal standards above the Word of God. “No creed but Christ” is an old battle cry from some quarters. But as we hope we have seen, everyone believes the Bible teaches some things and not others. So in a way, such a claim is a bit self-deceived; every Christian already has SOME creed.

No Reformed pastor, elder, or theologian for a moment would consider their doctrinal standards to be anything BUT a good, reasonable, and hopefully accurate summary of the Bible. The Scriptures alone hold our allegiance and are our final authority. We believe the subordinate standards to have truth and authority, only in so far as they are in agreement with the Scriptures. In light of this, elders in Reformed churches take a solemn vow before God BEFORE they are ordained that they have studied the Scriptures diligently and conscientiously and are convinced BY SCRIPTURE that the church’s doctrinal standards are faithful summaries of His message.

The real issue, and the one most controversial, is whether men will be humble before God and one another. For sadly, the real reason why so many reject any kind of doctrinal standards is because they want to believe, what THEY want to believe. Like the people Paul warned about in 2 Timothy, there are times when men will not endure sound doctrine, but will gather to themselves teachers who will “tickle” their ears. And this means that sometimes, some men will reject the truth, not because it has not been proven, but because it might force them to be humble to God.

It is one thing to say, “This doctrine cannot be sustained by a rigorous study of the Scriptures” and another to say, “I don’t want to believe this doctrine because it makes me feel uncomfortable.” And isn’t that the real, underlying problem? In churches without definite doctrinal standards, we are never forced to submit our thoughts to God; we never have to change our opinions to suit His. We can believe what we want, do what we want, and somewhere, we can find a church that will pat us on the back and say, “God thinks you’re OK just as you are.”

But if our hearts have been regenerated, and our minds refreshed by the Holy Spirit, then we WANT the truth. We want to know God, as He truly revealed Himself in Scripture. We want to obey Him, as a demonstration of our love (Jn 14:21). We want to think His thoughts, and glorify HIS name by bringing our lives into conformity with His will. And therefore, the godly person will study the Scriptures, meditate upon them, listen to good teachers and read good books so that they can develop the best possible understanding of this Great God who saved us.

And if we do all the above, before we know it, we will be believing things very similar to what the great Reformers fought and died for so long ago. I know this is true, for you see; I came to the Reformed faith kicking and screaming. God in Christ changed my heart while a young man and saved me from my sins. Over the next decade, I read and studied His Word as diligently and conscientiously as I could because I wanted desperately to understand and love this wonderful God who had first loved and then saved me. I did not become “Reformed” by reading good books, or sitting under the spell-binding pulpit ministry of a great pastor; I became Reformed because I struggled for almost fifteen years with trying to put the Bible’s message together in a consistent and comprehensive manner.

And at the end, I discovered, to my surprise, that what I came up with was only a pale imitation of what godly men had already discovered five hundred years before. When I took my ordination vows before my brothers at Presbytery, I could honestly and sincerely state that I adopted the doctrinal standards of our church, because I KNEW what the Bible taught, and could clearly see that our Confession and Catechisms were in full agreement with that teaching.

But don’t just take me at my word; put the Reformed Faith to the test. Read through one of the great Confessions (we highly recommend the Westminster Standards). Examine carefully the Scripture references, jot down your questions and think through the implications. I am convinced, with every fiber of my being, that in the end, you will come to agree that Reformed theology is Biblical theology.