The Reformers Didn’t Go Far Enough

The magisterial Reformers of the Protestant Reformation, men like Calvin, Luther, and Knox, were used mightily by God to restore the preeminence of Scripture and to declare every precept and doctrine taken directly from the Word of God which itself stands as the supreme and final authority in all matters of faith, morality, and praxis.

But many don’t realize, particularly today’s Reformed, that the Reformers, as important as they were, had a fatal flaw whose effects have carried down through the centuries to the present day.

That fatal flaw is that they didn’t fully heed their own motto of Semper Reformanda (Always Reforming). Specifically they failed to reform three areas of theology which they inherited from the Apostate Roman church. The Reformers should have rejected every last doctrine associated with Rome which could not be derived purely from studying the Scriptures!

Tragically, the Reformers erred in 3 main ways:

1. They kept infant baptism which they inherited from Rome. Infant baptism has sent more souls to Hell than any other tool of Satan! It is truly a Satanic and diabolical man made doctrine. There is absolutely ZERO support for infant baptism in Scripture. The biblical position on baptism is credobaptism (believer’s baptism).
2. Eschatology. The Reformers adopted and carried on with the amillennial and postmillennial eschatological positions. Rather than the biblical position which dominated the Early Church era – premillennialism.
3. Covenant Theology – This was developed in the late 16th century. It was based largely on Roman Catholic theology. There is no covenant theology taught in Scripture. The Church Fathers didn’t affirm it either. I think it makes some good points, but I believe dispensationalism does a better job of weaving one cohesive narrative from Scripture. Looking at Scripture from a position of meta-analysis the favored hermeneutic of mine of contextual literalism (a historical grammatical hermeneutic that interprets Scripture in the real and literal sense, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise) produces a system of interpretation which divides the events of Scripture into 7 main dispensations. This works far better than covenant theology, which I find too limited, and which employs things like New Testament priority that are clearly ad hoc additions of man and not derived natively from Scripture. The promises to Israel in the OT have not been cancelled or overridden and replaced by the Church. God made unconditional covenant with Israel and He will fulfill every single promise which He made. Sadly also one can connect the deplorable rise in antisemitism with covenant theology and particularly amillennial eschatology. Dispensationalism doesn’t have those problems. By the way dispensationalism (in its full fledged modern form) is less than 100 years younger than Reformed covenant theology. But you can find many of the dispensational doctrinal distinctives present in the Early Church. So dispensationalism is actually much older than covenant theology.

We must remember that the Reformers were not perfect. They did not leave us an infallible magisterium, there is no such thing as an infallible confession of faith. The confessions such as the Westminster and the Second London Baptist were very useful documents. I applaud them for containing and defending much theological truth. But if one locks onto them and turns off their mind, and believes every jot and tittle of their preferred confession is the apotheosis and summit of purified theology then they err greatly.

Some Reformed will latch onto the teachings of the Puritans as their gold standard. The Puritans wrote much that is edifying, but it’s unhealthy to only view theology through Puritan colored glasses! Much has developed since the time of the Puritans. To reject it all summarily because it doesn’t conform to Puritan theology is a fatal mistake.

I’ve named 3 main areas where the Reformed confessions simply did not reflect biblical truth. That doesn’t mean we should discard the entire confession. But it does mean we should always be Bereans, searching, studying, and ever reforming and comparing a given doctrine with Scripture with Sola Scriptura as our guide.

Sadly, in my nearly 50 years of life experience (40 years of that being a born again Christian), I’ve noticed most Christians, the Reformed included, are not very good at critical thinking. They do not possess the capacity for originality of thought. They want to be spoon feed theology. And once they master the Reformed confession of choice, they are locked into that one static set of doctrinal positions for the rest of their entire lives! It’s shocking and truly sad. This is not what Christ wants from His children. We are commanded to be Bereans. Interestingly I notice the similarity with the vast majority of Reformed and Roman Catholics. Catholics have locked onto the combined opinions of the Early Church Fathers and don’t deviate or change doctrine. And most Reformed lock into the Reformers’ beliefs and one of the Reformed confessions, and they don’t deviate or change doctrine in their lifetimes! This is very sad and unacceptable. God wants us to use our minds and think for ourselves for His glory! Scripture exhorts us to “study to show thyself approved”! Study is an active and ongoing lifelong process.

I’ve also noticed in numerous discussions and debates with most Reformed: I will make a logical, reasoned argument fully rooted in Scripture and their counter-argument will invariably be, “Well that’s not what the Reformers taught.” or “That’s not what the Westminster confession states.” I feel like facepalming when this happens. I actually don’t believe it’s even dawned on most Reformed that the Reformers could have gotten an area of theology wrong, and that God might have risen up people who give us even better theology. I also think this applies to Reformed confessions. Most Reformed view their confessions in a very unhealthy and unbiblical way as if it was the last and final word, the penultimate gospel truth! This is shocking and it’s actually a cult-like behavior. And no, I’m not saying most of my fellow Reformed are in cults! But it’s very apparent and very disturbing.

I have also noticed that many Reformed will get angry and extremely aggressive, hostile, and their tone will become acerbic and confrontational, if you challenge even one single area of theology that the Reformers held to, or that the Reformed confessions contain. It’s apparent, from a psychological analysis, their identity has become so wrapped up with the confessions they cannot imagine how any Reformed could think differently. In other words, they are highly emotionally invested in their confessions. This behavior is unhealthy and unbiblical.

Another thing I’ve noticed and experienced first hand numerous times is that if you challenge one single point of theology in a confession (in my case it would be the 1689 Second London Baptist confession of faith) they will denigrate you and assert you are not a true Reformed Baptist. Even if the point of doctrine in contention has nothing to do with baptism, they still feel confident in making such obnoxious and false assertions.

I urge my fellow Reformed to keep reforming and reject these 3 erroneous theological positions inherited from Rome! SEMPER REFORMANDA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!