Merits/Demerits of Reformed Theology VS. Jehovas Wittnesses.

[dacristoy]

What qualifies one and disqualifies the other as mainstream Christianity?

[KingsGambit]

Why are these two groups in particular being singled out for comparison? You might as well ask "what qualifies Baptists as evangelicals but not Hindus?"

But as for your specific question, some of the most basic reasons JW's are considered outside are their denial of the Trinity and their repeated false claims regarding dates of the end of the world. Are there any problems in particular you are thinking of with the Reformed?

[themuzicman]

What qualifies one and disqualifies the other as mainstream Christianity?

Historical creeds of the Church.

[dacristoy]

Why are these two groups in particular being singled out for comparison? You might as well ask "what qualifies Baptists as evangelicals but not Hindus?"

My first response is "Why Not?"
Because I have problems with both...
But if you would like to start with Baptists VS Hindus, OK...

[KingsGambit]

My first response is "Why Not?"
Because I have problems with both...
But if you would like to start with Baptists VS Hindus, OK...

Well, okay, I disagree with how Methodists conduct baptism, so that's considered a problem, but I don't consider them outside orthodoxy. It's certainly not a problem on the level of denying the Trinity or the incarnation.

[dacristoy]

Well, okay, I disagree with how Methodists conduct baptism, so that's considered a problem, but I don't consider them outside orthodoxy. It's certainly not a problem on the level of denying the Trinity or the incarnation.

Firstly, I do not feel that orthodoxy has been sufficiently defined and agreed upon by the Christian Community to establish a standard to establish ones acceptance as Christian or not...

I understand and agree with your evaluation of Jehovah’s Witnesses, but when I evaluate the validity of Reformed Theology’s T.U.L.I.P, I find errors that are just as troublesome…

[Bill the Cat]

Firstly, I do not feel that orthodoxy has been sufficiently defined and agreed upon by the Christian Community to establish a standard to establish ones acceptance as Christian or not...

I understand and agree with your evaluation of Jehovah’s Witnesses, but when I evaluate the validity of Reformed Theology’s T.U.L.I.P, I find errors that are just as troublesome…

Why are they just as troublesome as denying the full divinity of the Lord Jesus? There is a huge difference between error and heresy, and I think you are unnecessarily blurring that line.

[dacristoy]

Why are they just as troublesome as denying the full divinity of the Lord Jesus? There is a huge difference between error and heresy, and I think you are unnecessarily blurring that line.

Would you defined that difference for me from your perspective....

Definition of heresy (n)
Bing Dictionary
her·e·sy
[ hérrəssee ]

1.unorthodox religious opinion: an opinion or belief that contradicts established religious teaching, especially one that is officially condemned by a religious authority
2.holding of unorthodox religious belief: the holding of, or adherence to, an opinion or belief that contradicts established religious teaching, especially one that is officially condemned by religious authorities
3.unorthodox opinion: an opinion or belief that does not coincide with established or traditional theory, especially in philosophy, science, or politics

synonyms: dissent · deviation · unorthodoxy · profanation · sacrilege · heterodoxy

[Bill the Cat]

Would you defined that difference for me from your perspective....

Definition of heresy (n)
Bing Dictionary
her·e·sy
[ hérrəssee ]

1.unorthodox religious opinion: an opinion or belief that contradicts established religious teaching, especially one that is officially condemned by a religious authority
2.holding of unorthodox religious belief: the holding of, or adherence to, an opinion or belief that contradicts established religious teaching, especially one that is officially condemned by religious authorities
3.unorthodox opinion: an opinion or belief that does not coincide with established or traditional theory, especially in philosophy, science, or politics

synonyms: dissent · deviation · unorthodoxy · profanation · sacrilege · heterodoxy

Source: http://www.equip.org/perspectives/heresies-and-aberrations-what-is-the-difference/

RELIGIOUS HERESY- Definition
The word “heresy,” in its most common usage, refers to false teachings that destroy. They are destructive because they overturn the basic elements which make up the historic Christian faith, substituting in their place doctrines which distort or contradict the teachings found in the Bible.

RELIGIOUS HERESY- The Essentials
The doctrines of the Trinity, the unique deity of Jesus Christ, and the resurrection are among the essentials of Christianity. They represent the core of Christian belief as contained within the pages of Scripture, and they compose what is commonly called “orthodox theology.” And thus, heresies are teachings which openly deny any one of these fundamental doctrines. Examples of heresies include the Mormon doctrine that there are many gods, and that you may become one, as well as the Jehovah’s Witnesses, who clearly deny the Trinity.

RELIGIOUS HERESY- Heresy Vs. Aberration
It may be the case, however, that a particular teaching does not overtly deny basic biblical theology, but is nevertheless dangerously inconsistent with an orthodox confession of faith. A good example of this would be the “prosperity” teachers who are growing like wildfire within Christian denominations — doctrines of this variety are referred to as aberrations. Thus, a group may be orthodox in its central theology while at the same time maintain teachings and practices that are clearly at odds with essential Christian theology.

© Copyright Original Source

Basically, an individual in error is to be corrected by the leadership while one in heresy is to be rejected from the congregation.

[tabibito]

Why are they just as troublesome as denying the full divinity of the Lord Jesus? There is a huge difference between error and heresy, and I think you are unnecessarily blurring that line.

I don't think that denying "Christ came that all men might be saved" is mere adiaphora. Of course, I could be wrong about that, but it seems to me that the teaching critically undermines the message of the gospel.

[dacristoy]

I don't think that denying "Christ came that all men might be saved" is mere adiaphora. Of course, I could be wrong about that, but it seems to me that the teaching critically undermines the message of the gospel.

Have to agree with you on that one.
What, if anything, do you find egregious or troubling with Reformed Theology's T. U, L. I. P...

[Bill the Cat]

I don't think that denying "Christ came that all men might be saved" is mere adiaphora.

IMHO, It's not a core doctrine disagreement as much as a "what do you mean by ALL men"

Of course, I could be wrong about that, but it seems to me that the teaching critically undermines the message of the gospel.

I disagree. I think it relies too much on specific verses, but, again, this would be best corrected from within the body of Christ. It's never been declared heretical by an ecumenical council.

[dacristoy]

I don't think that denying "Christ came that all men might be saved" is mere adiaphora. Of course, I could be wrong about that, but it seems to me that the teaching critically undermines the message of the gospel.

I believe that denying a literal interpretation of the phrase "all men" attacks the veracity of many other passages of scripture.

[hedrick]

Historically it's a combination of date setting, rejection of the Trinity, legalism, and cultish behavior such as demanding that members cut off contact with relatives who offend the JWs.

You can find each of these things elsewhere, but the combination is troubling. Reformed, Arminian, Pentecostals, Catholics differ in significant ways, but none of them has the kind of attitudes and behavior that would cause me to classify them as cults (though some come close).

[tabibito]

I believe that denying a literal interpretation of the phrase "all men" attacks the veracity of many other passages of scripture.

It does come down to interpretation. Perhaps provision of a few compelling verses would help. All that I have seen so far are questionable (to put it politely) interpretations of verses that sometimes aren't even on topic.