Why I Am Not Reformed (Outdated)

[@reespuffs6435]

Timestamps! 0:00 - Intro 0:35 - Definition of “Reformed” and Reason 1: TULIP 4:45 - Free Will? (a kind of comparison of Compatibilist freedom vs. Libertarian freedom) 11:17 - Fun idea about determinism (video game analogy) 12:18 - Comments about Molinism (middle knowledge, counter-factual knowledge) 12:54 - 2nd Peter, thoughts about our agency in building virtue, and Monergism/Synergism 18:21 - Reason 2: The Distance of God 29:00 - Reason 3: Eradication of the Distinction between Faith and Works 31:37 - Reason 4: Elevation of Human Reason/the Mind 36:17 - The Reformed idea of “Reason”, Evangelicalism, and Intellectual Individualism 37:40 - Reason 5: Practical Realities of Reformed Tradition (including how the Bible is the only regulatory principle) 38:44 - Example of instruments in worship, Biblicism vs. Traditionalism, and how Perspicuity actually works 39:52 - Ecclesiology and Polity 44:50 - Conclusion

[@redeemedzoomer6053]

Thanks for using my denomination seals haha!

[@zacharyglasgow5351]

How would you respond to him?

[@CYC_JP]

Looking forward to your conversion to Anglicanism.

[@MissingTrails]

The relationship between tradition and reason is part of why I am Anglican. I am just the sort of nutjob who would go off the rails theologically if left to my own devices for long enough. But the Anglican tradition, with its episcopal authority, liturgy, and especially in the day-to-day practical sense of the prayer book, places me within something greater than my own individual search for truth. That means stability, boundaries, and substantial means of living the faith in the everyday (and not just in the moral sense alone, as is all too common in the evangelical and reformed world).

[@kylerumer843]

Very helpful video. My diocese is definitely on the Reformed side of the scale, to the point that my parish priest has voiced his disdain for Anglo-Catholics and others who would attempt to read the Articles in a way contrary to Reformed theology. I was drawn to Anglicanism partly to find respite from the strict Hyper-Calvinism I had been exposed to previously, so it is gratifying to hear these ideas restated.

[@dracicidasempronius4754]

Came here from the redeemed zoomer i love that there are more and more gen z talking about theology. Tbh you guys have played a not insignificant role in my decision to work my way through discnerment to be ordained a deacon. (Im starting with confirmation and at least one year of EFM prior to openly starting the discernment process)

[@Young_Anglican]

I'm glad to hear it!

[@thoughtfulchristianity]

Excellent work as always!

[@Young_Anglican]

Thank you!

[@TheOtherCaleb]

Btw, Arminians also have no issue with total depravity. Arminius himself explicitly affirmed it. “The free will of man towards the true good is not only wounded, maimed, infirm, bent, and weakened; but it is also imprisoned, destroyed, and lost.” “Concerning grace and free will, this is what I teach according to the Scriptures and orthodox consent: Free will is unable to begin or perfect any true spiritual good, without grace.” -Jacob Arminius

[@guven_kulakcioglu]

thank you for helping debunk the myth

[@redeemedzoomer6053]

Very interesting point you made, I've thought through it myself. If both faith and works are the result of God's monergistic grace, what's the difference? Here's the best classic Reformed answer I can give - it's that they're part of 2 different Covenants. The Covenant of Works requires works, but we failed that. That's why Jesus needs to fulfill it on our behalf. The Covenant of Grace only requires faith, which we can do if God regenerates us. So the difference is that elect or not, we'll always fail the covenant of works, but by God's grace, we can fulfill the covenant of grace!

[@Young_Anglican]

But the Covenant of Grace doesn't really require faith from you, it really is just the idea that God fills you with Grace and you recieve it (you can do nothing else) and that happens to create faith in the same way that the grace creates works in you, no?

[@paulwoodhouse3386]

Hey Zoomer, maybe you could address molinism in a future video. Eager to hear your opinion.

[@peterxuereb9884]

More twisted theological gymnastics from redeemed zoomer

[@KnightFel]

@@peterxuereb9884or maybe from the Catholics.

[@LutheranIdentity-uj8yk]

Totally agree. 1-4 is basically the Lutheran critique of Calvinism. Number 5 also has some good points, but is more the result of unique historical processes in the English-speaking world; less relevant from a continental European perspective.

[@semperadiuvans]

As a traditional Reformed believer, I actually agree with an awful lot of your observations, I would merely point out that they largely apply to a particular stream of Reformed thought which derives from the hard-line of English Puritanism and Scottish Presbyterianism, filtered through the colonial American experience, and the post-independence developments of the American religious life, through the Young Restless & Reformed movement, then into the conservative side of the YRR split. TULIP is a 20th C summary of Calvinist disagreements with the Arminians, and a poor one at that, absent from the confessions. The Distant God phenomenon is a real problem, but totally alien to the devotional lives of the great Reformed divines. As for fear of theosis, I've seen that amongst some Reformed, but I'd recommend they look into John Calvin's understanding of Union with Christ from Bernard of Clairvaux. However I would of course defend Reformed aniconism/iconoclasm, the Pneumatic Presence of Christ in the Eucharist etc.

[@redeemedzoomer6053]

1. Bro all traditional Calvinists are comfortable with saying God died on the cross 2. We say the atonement of Christ does apply to the "creation" as a whole, but only the individual sins of the elect

[@Young_Anglican]

Totally agree that traditional Calvinist positions are often more careful than some modern characterizations. Perhaps I was unfairly projecting interactions with modern "Reformed" people I interact with, onto the entire tradition at times.

[@therighteousgoat5165]

I am somewhere in the middle between Calvinism and Arminianism. I believe humans have free will and make their own choices, but God has foreknowledge of the paths they will choose and therefore plans accordingly.

[@Young_Anglican]

This is the Molinist position, which I also hold 👍

[@therighteousgoat5165]

@@Young_Anglicangood to know! Thank you!

[@coltonross5414]

Based Molinist

[@Steve-wg3cr]

Well done, sir. Keep up the good work.

[@GreatKhanMatt]

The 39 articles are reformed tho...

[@ryanscott6742]

Also the BCP, Ordinal and Homilies. The King promised to maintain “the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law.”

[@ReArmApologetics]

Very informative video. I would push back just a little because Reformed Theology isn’t a monolith and should not be viewed as equalling Calvinism. I'm Reformed Arminian, and we share many same positions with you per your video: Unlimited/General Atonement, Total Depravity, Resistible and Prevenient Grace (the drawing of Christ of everyone to Himself). We hold the 5 Solas and the Reformed views on the Fall of man, original sin, and the condition of mankind (Total Depravity). Calvinism and TULIP, due to their popularity, has portayed themselves as the sole soteriological position of the Reformation and Reformed Theology. We know that Jacobus Arminius was aquited by the courts of his day and Classical Arminian views were common in that time. Also, many people claim Arminius, but very few outside the Free Will Baptist tradition affirm the Reformed positions of Arminius. Just my two cents. Love and prayers from your friendly neighborhood Reformed Arminian Free Will Baptist.😎

[@TheOtherCaleb]

Im Arminian but I’m undecided on baptism and church government. Arminius himself and his early pupils were paedobaptists, moderate presbyterians (in regards to church government), and covenantal theologians, who confessed the two forms of unity on baptism. That, technically speaking, is the reformed view. A pure Reformed Arminian would be confessing the two forms of unity just with an Arminian interpretation of soteriology. I wouldn’t call baptists fully reformed… and this is coming from as someone who’s currently Baptist. I suppose that’s an aside though.

[@Via-Media2024]

Love this video If you take requests I would love to see “why I’m not Catholic”

[@TheologyNerd777]

You will not find any of the TULIP in the early church fathers prior to Augustine. There was no TOTAL depravity/inabilty to respond to the gospel. The early fathers believed in free will and synergism not monergism. They also taught either Predestination based upon God's foreknowlege as individual or election as corporate (adoption in Christ), unlimited atonement, grace was resistible with our free will and we could walk away from the faith, apostatize, and "lose" our salvation.

[@wyattpruitt6965]

God in his most holy wise counsel has allowed him to determine all action and allow free will, not based on his foreknowledge. He actively chose everything, but allowed free choice. This is a divine mystery. We should not put free will in front of Weak or nonchristians, but we can put predestination in front of christians because it is a comfort for strong christians. This is how the bible presents predestination

[@harrygarris6921]

Correct. Yes the Bible presents a paradox (from a human perspective at least) but it is better to take the scriptures at their word rather than try to reconcile them to human logic.

[@gregw8976]

Interesting perspective, as a life long Anglican I’ve always consider myself Reformed. I would agree that tulip is almost never discussed in the pews of mainline Anglicanism, although I would argue that these concepts are ungirded in the 39 Articles. Did not King Charles swear allegiance to uphold the ‘Reformed Protestant’ faith during his coronation. Being that King Charles is the symbolic head of the CofE I think that Anglicism is Reformed. Exception would be our Anglo Catholic brethren of course.

[@jamesryan2227]

Hello there, also a life long Anglican :) You probably know more about this than I do but I think the word “reformed” meant something different 500 years ago then it does today. I think you have the classical definition right when the 39 articles were written and agree with everything you said. And I think @YoungAnglician has it right for what the word “reformed” means today. At least here in the United States (I’m not sure where you’re from:) the south reformed baptist have gotten a hold of reformed theology and combined it with Southern USA Grit, and it’s more like “super reformed” now 😂 it’s more like I’m reformed and God planned before the foundation of the world for me to verbally abuse my entire church and everyone on KZbin hahah😂 not to be tooooo Anglican myself here…but I think you’re both right :)

[@cormundum_o]

Video responding to GAFCON and GSFA’s decision to reject the CoE and the Archbishop of Canterbury?

[@wesmorgan7729]

These are the same reasons why I'm not Reformed, although I really like covenant theology and find that to be the best thing that came out of that tradition

[@Young_Anglican]

Agreed!

[@MattTheMethodist]

I’m Arminian (Methodist) but wouldn’t have an issue upholding Total Depravity. We would say that God provides prevenient grace which allows us to accept (or reject) the Gospel, not that anything in our human nature allows us to do that.

[@josephwolcott2544]

41:53 It's not accurate to say that the various conservative Reformed denominations aren't in the same communion. There are divides that are primarily in the nitty gritty of ecclesiology, but there are larger federations through which all of these Reformed denominations are in full communion with each other. In North America, that federation would be the North American Presbyterian and Reformed Council (NAPARC), which unites 13 conservative Reformed denominations. Furthermore, there's the International Conference of Reformed Churches (ICRC; 38 Reformed denominations) and the World Reformed Fellowship (WRF; 86 total denominations, mostly Reformed, though some Baptist and Anglican denominations are also included). There's overlap between these two federations.

[@anthonymount1275]

There's nothing wrong with using "seemings" as the starting point of philosophy. In fact I'd claim that likely all our philosophizing comes from doubt, which occurs when some belief we have no longer coheres with reality, or comes up against resistance, and we must square it somehow. Even if you take a revealed truth, whether you like it or not, you will likely test it against reality, which includes all your pre-conceived biases and habits of thinking. This is precisely why I'm Anglican. This hyper-rationalism of some confessional theology, particularly forms of calvinism, I see as overstepping epistemic warrant. I personally don't see the importance of, nor care whether God pre-determined everything or not. If belief is that which we are prepared to act on, and the meaning of a conception consists in the sum total conceivable consequences of the conception, then it's conceivable that God pre-ordained every one of my actions, but it doesn't cause me sincere doubt. It is merely paper doubt. To deny free will by an act of will is what i would call a performative contradiction. To deny it presupposes that you can freely do so. By all rights, we act AS IF we had free will, but even if we actually didn't, what difference would it make? You still act as if you did: you believe YOU can choose to take the shortcut to the grocery store rather than the longer scenic route, you act as if you chose the vicious rather than virtuous act, and you experience personal guilt as a result of your action or lack thereof. To make such a doctrine as determinism a litmus test of right theology, is to pretend to know what you do not, and what you yourself cannot even act on. I'm perfectly happy to let certain doctrines rest in mystery, or more accurately, vagueness, like the Orthodox do.

[@piemangamez8456]

As a molinist wouldn’t limited atonement align with your beliefs? If not how would you define the atonement.

[@Young_Anglican]

As with many other theological terms, it always depends on what is entailed by the term

[@TheJackoloco]

hey no disrespect but one small correction with the limited atonement part - you said limited atonement is the belief that Christ didnt die for all peoples but that is actually the belief of "peculiar grace" and not limited atonement itself, hypothetical universalism (which is the belief that Christ's atonement was sufficient for all but only efficient to those who believe) can fit under limited atonement

[@puremercury]

Also, Molinism is not closer to Calvinism that Arminianism. In fact, a Molinist can be an Arminian.

[@melvynmcminn9121]

That's the reason why you are a "young" Anglican. More study, especially in Ephesians; John and especially Roman's chapter 9...otherwise your videos are fairly well produced. God Bless. Rev. Dr. Mel McMinn ThD, DD +

[@harrygarris6921]

You brought up Augustine as an early teacher of predestination but I really don’t think he was in the reformed sense. Augustine defined predestination in the Romans 8:29 sense where God’s foreknowledge of the human will determines who is predestined. But the reformed view would reject that definition of predestination

[@Young_Anglican]

I definitely agree with that interpretation, as I am a Molinist

[@harrygarris6921]

@@Young_Anglican oh okay, thank you for helping me make that connection. I never quite understood what Molanism was.

[@Young_Anglican]

@@harrygarris6921 No Problem! God Bless

[@igregmart]

"Predestination" is Biblical because it is in the Bible. "Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will," (Eph.1.5).

[@peterxuereb9884]

When will you give us the 5 reasons of, why you are.........................

[@Young_Anglican]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/baDUoGiXlr2Jj5I

[@GustavoRendon-gy2dy]

Unfortunately, this video doesn't make justice to the reformed tradition, but presents kind of a straw man of the reformed name, that could be utterly misleading to other brethren through the internet. Have some time to consider thoroughly (at least) the most representative reformed confessions, such as the Three forms of Unity and the Westminster Standards (to name just a few). Blessings

[@르세라핌김가람]

Calvinism is of the devil.