Tuesday, February 9, 2010

What does it mean to be "Reformed"?

There is some debate going on in our theological circles over what it means to be "Reformed." Scott Clark has offered up a confessional definition in his book, Recovering the Reformed Confession. John Frame offers a response in this review of Clark's work. Both are probably worth reading. When you read a mainly negative review it's usually important to also read the book under review to make sure that the reviewer rightly understood what the writer had to say.

In the interests of full disclosure I do tend to side more with Professor Frame on this issue than with Dr. Clark. I think that Clark makes some good points in his book though I question or disagree with a lot of his conclusions. That said, it does need to be emphasized that "Reformed" means more than just believing in the five points of Calvinism but involves a worldview and practice of how we "do church" that goes deeper. Anyway, I'm sure you'll see more on this from both men and in the blogosphere.

1 comment:

richard said...

A layman such as I is overwhelmed by the level of detail in these arguments. I refer to this sort of thing as academics throwing stink bombs at each other over the transoms. I really wish these academics could keep these arguments within academia. I think they only serve to confuse the rest of us and in this case make the Reformed community look like a bunch of squabblers to others. I enjoy J. Frame's work, especially "Salvation Belongs to the Lord," but this stuff is not helpful. I haven't read any of Dr. Clark's works but it would appear that a good part of his book is intended as an attack on Frame's work. Corrosive petifoggery that should be kept behind closed doors.