Reformation--or--Apostasy?

Bonnie

Super Member
Morning, Buzzard.

I read where a restoration was foretold:

Acts 3:21---King James Version
21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

"Reformation" doesn't fit the event, as the Reformers changed the theology of the day--and new denominations were formed.

What was reformed?
The Reformers did not change anything; they rediscovered the TRUE Gospel message in the pages of the Bible, which Rome had buried under man-made doctrines for many centuries, obscuring the truth and leading people astray into spiritual darkness...it is ROME that changed Biblical doctrines, adding to the word of God and making human "tradition" equal to what the Bible actually says--didn't it?
 

dberrie2020

Well-known member
The Reformers did not change anything; they rediscovered the TRUE Gospel message in the pages of the Bible, which Rome had buried under man-made doctrines for many centuries, obscuring the truth and leading people astray into spiritual darkness...it is ROME that changed Biblical doctrines, adding to the word of God and making human "tradition" equal to what the Bible actually says--didn't it?

How is that not changing anything? And what was "Reformed" in the Reformation?

Bonnie--you are aware that no such specific denomination as the Lutheran church existed before Luther's day?
 

Bonnie

Super Member
Nothing new was created by Luther and the Lutheran reformation
Nope--just the true Gospel message was rediscovered in the epistle of Romans, that Rome had buried for centuries under a mountain of man-made doctrines that offered no hope and no peace to anyone.
 

Tertiumquid

Member
Nope--just the true Gospel message was rediscovered in the epistle of Romans, that Rome had buried for centuries under a mountain of man-made doctrines that offered no hope and no peace to anyone.
What I find sort of ironic is that I've seen some of the defenders of Rome and some of the Schwärmer willing to grant the "new perspective of Paul" while at the same time saying the Reformation understanding of the gospel is a mistaken novelty with no precedent. What a weird sort of ironic contradiction.
 

Bonnie

Super Member
What I find sort of ironic is that I've seen some of the defenders of Rome and some of the Schwärmer willing to grant the "new perspective of Paul" while at the same time saying the Reformation understanding of the gospel is a mistaken novelty with no precedent. What a weird sort of ironic contradiction.
That reminds me of some who will quote the ECFs to bolster their position about one doctrine, even though the same ECFs disagree with them about OTHER doctrines.

Shouldn't that be Schwaermerei? :) (sorry, cannot make umlauts)
 

Bonnie

Super Member
Do you get a new face when you wash yours?
Actually, that is a pretty good analogy. The "face" is the true Gospel message from the Bible, that was buried for centuries under the "dirt" of all sorts of man-made doctrines and works-righteous add-ons, from the Roman Catholic church. Luther rediscovered the TRUE Gospel message in his study of Romans, which he did at Von Staupitz's urging. And the rest, as they say, is history. :)
 

Tertiumquid

Member
The church--isn't it obvious?
Maybe not to a Mormon. While I'm no expert, there is a significant difference between the concept of "reformation" and apostacy/restoration.

In the "reformation" the church needed to be cleaned up... to have significant error stripped away to behold the clarity of the gospel that's always been there.

In an apostasy, the essential nature of something is completely lost and needs to be restored.
 

Bonnie

Super Member
Maybe not to a Mormon. While I'm no expert, there is a significant difference between the concept of "reformation" and apostacy/restoration.

In the "reformation" the church needed to be cleaned up... to have significant error stripped away to behold the clarity of the gospel that's always been there.

In an apostasy, the essential nature of something is completely lost and needs to be restored.
Good answer, Tert. I like the "dirty face" analogy, too. When one washes the dirt off one's face, one is able to see what the face really looks like under the dirt...it was always there, just hidden by the dirt. It isn't as if the face got blown to bits and needed to be completely restored, starting from scratch!
 

jonathan_hili

Well-known member
Seeing that the Reformation resulted in a new denomination--with a different theology than the church of that day--why is it a Reformation, rather than an apostasy?

What did it reform?
It's principally called "the Reformation" because the majority of the history of the period was written by Protestants (though, admittedly, from their perspective the movement was reforming the Church back to the biblical model).
 

Septextura

Well-known member
If Roman Catholics or Eastern Orthodox Christians read the Book of Hebrews and understood its teachings without filtering them through sacerdotal dogmas, they would realize they need a very fundamental Reformation to go back to Biblical orthodoxy. Their whole empire of deception, wealth and blasphemy would crumble.

Hebrews 7
24 But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood.
25 Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them.
26 For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;
27 Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself.
28 For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore.

Hebrews 9
8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:
9 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;
10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.
11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;
12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:
25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;
26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.
27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:
28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

Christianity is the Reformation, led by Christ Himself. If your church is mimicking 2nd temple Judaism for salvation, you're in a false religion.
 
Last edited:

Tertiumquid

Member
It's principally called "the Reformation" because the majority of the history of the period was written by Protestants (though, admittedly, from their perspective the movement was reforming the Church back to the biblical model).
I've never done any sort of tally as to who wrote the most books on the Reformation period or who first coined the term. If I recall, Luther did not use the term often. The term itself gradually came to refer the events of the sixteenth century, but this took time. It's now the generally accepted term to refer to the upheaval of the period.
 
Top