A New Reformation or Rebuilding the Ekklesia

[VoxVeritas90]

For a long time now I have been discussing the topic of a new Reformation with those closest to me. I've wanted to see this even from the days that I've read the Trinity Review and publications like it. Clearly to me there is a drive amongst true gospel believers to rebuke and separate from churchianity, even to the point of calling them apostate publicly. While I am all for this, I'm wondering what will become of such a movement. I firmly believe that we ought to separate ourselves from the rank heresy that calls itself Christianity today, and I think we ought to do so as proudly and publicly as possible. God has taught us the gospel, and we are to tell that to everyone so that God will call our brothers and sisters home by that gospel. But by driving for a new Reformation are we saying:

That the first Reformation got it right? Are we following in their steps?

Do we reform apostasy or do we call it out? Is this a rescue operation or a declaration of war?

Can we unite the true gospel believers under a banner of gospel unity? Are we not seeing the same struggle that plagued Corinth? Can we do what the apostles failed to do??

Is this a godly goal? Ought we to be striving for this reformation and unity or is there another way we should go about this?

I know that is alot to ask, but I hear this idea come up often. I want your take on it guys, and give me your best.

May God be the Judge

[Bob Higby]

Many thanks, VoxVeritas!

I once published a short article as to why I don't believe the Trinity Foundation and similar think tanks will ever truly step up to the task of advancing a 'New Reformation'. This is because they are committed to a SECTARIAN new reformation like the Lutherans, Baptists, Charismatics, and others. The expression 'Reformed and always Reforming' has lost its luster. I was once part of an organization called 'the Australian Forum' that claimed it had the answers as to how a New Reformation could be started, however, that movement failed as did all others in this regard. The last remaining well-published theologian who was in that organization (Graeme Goldsworthy), now in his 80's, was extremely committed to the 'cause' but you can find many websites damning the whole movement (and this includes historic 'Reformed' churchmen primarily).

Yes, it is a godly goal and something we should be committed to still. As I have often stated, when men and women truly discover the apostolic gospel and all of its implications, they will have discovered fire for the first time since the apostles. And I'm not talking about charismania!

Bro. Bob

[Bob Higby]

Btw, I intend to answer all of VoxVeritas' questions as time and opportunity permits!

[Razor]

Hello VoxVeritas90,

I am reminded of what Christ said in that "I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it". He orders and establishes. Would we deny Him and take to ourselves? If so, I think that our quarrel would be with Him in the matter.

All is well!

[VoxVeritas90]

I see what everyone is getting at. I guess that my question is more to the point of focus. I feel that the first Reformation did not 'reform' anything. Rome was already too far gone at this point. So in attempting g to reform the church as we see it today (what calls itself Christendom) are we focusing on the right goal?

May God be the Judge

[Bob Higby]

I see what everyone is getting at. I guess that my question is more to the point of focus. I feel that the first Reformation did not 'reform' anything. Rome was already too far gone at this point. So in attempting g to reform the church as we see it today (what calls itself Christendom) are we focusing on the right goal?

May God be the Judge

Brethren,

I stated that I would get back to this so here it goes!

If reformation is defined as merely an improvement to the doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church or Eastern Orthodoxy, the whole notion and idea of a reformation would be nonsense of course. It is a given that the notion of ‘Reformation’ assumed the ekklesia (body, community, fellowship, congregation, assembly) of Christ still existed at the dark time of the 16th century. But what needed to be ‘reformed’ was not Roman Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy (which both could NEVER be ‘reformed’), but the broad regenerate body of Christ which had become very deficient in its understanding of the apostolic gospel.

The ‘pure’ understanding of the apostolic gospel did not exist in 16th century nonconformity to any greater extent than in the Roman Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy of the 16th century. A study of Michael Sattler’s Schleitheim Confession will bear this out clearly, the confession has little to do with restoring the gospel at all. So we might call the need for ‘reformation’ a restoration instead. In any case, if there is not a restoration of the apostolic gospel in all of its glorious truth, we are headed for another dark ages of a thousand years at least.

Gospel restoration has to do with the entire visible elect body of Christ in this present world, whatever form that takes in any generation.

Bro. Bob