Calvinism and Lutheranism

[BBAS 64]

Good Day,

I gave this a listen today, and thought I would share it, I found it most helpful.

http://www.issuesetc.org/ondemand.html

Tuesday, February 3rd, 2008
http://207.57.94.117/podcast/156020309H1p.mp3http://207.57.94.117/podcast/156020309H1p.mp3

http://www.issuesetc.org/sept08/sept18.htmlhttp://www.issuesetc.org/podcast/Show41082508H1.mp3

Calvinism & Lutheranism
Dr. Kim Riddlebarger of The White Horse Inn

Further Resources & Reading:



For His Glory Alone!!

Bil

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Hi, Bill...

I use to listen to the White Horse Inn a lot on the radio. Good stuff.

Maybe you'd summerize some of YOUR views about this (perhaps based on that link) and we can discuss that? I'd like that. I've had LOTS of discussions with Calvinists and about Calvinists. My "roots" are in a denomination that comes out of Calvinism. A friendly discussion would be good.


Blessings!




.

 

[Jim47]

Hello there my friend

sorry but I can't get the links to work for some reason

 

[RedneckLutheran]

I've just started podcast IE...that was the first thing I listened to this morning...really interesting stuff...

 

[Edial]

I've just started podcast IE...that was the first thing I listened to this morning...really interesting stuff...

I listened almost half of it ... It is a good point per point discussion how Calvinists and Lutherans address TULIP.
Agreements and disagreements.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

.


Here's a discussion of TULIP from the Calvinist and Lutheran position....

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=4191675



.

 

[DaRev]

.


Here's a discussion of TULIP from the Calvinist and Lutheran position....

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=4191675



.

Except that the Lutheran perspective offered isn't quite accurate.

Besides, friends don't let friends read GT.

 

[CaliforniaJosiah]

Here's a discussion of TULIP from the Calvinist and Lutheran position....

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=4191675

Except that the Lutheran perspective offered isn't quite accurate.

Besides, friends don't let friends read GT.

I'd be glad to copy the opening post to here, but perhaps we can complete Bill's thread here first.
OR, revived that thread there.

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=4191675 is an old thread, and the opening post (mine) was a copy and paste from - I don't remember (!), not original with me. I'd welcome a discussion of the Lutheran posts - they are over simplified but seem basically okay to me.





.

 

[Edial]

It appears to me the foundation of Calvinism (as per TULIP) is based on Limited Atonement.

One would figure that this foundation must be based on strong verses plainly stating that Christ died ONLY for church.
But there areen't any verses stating that exclusive purpose of Christ's death.
Instead, there are enough verses to sink a ship that say Christ died for "all" and "whosoever" believes.

I also know some quotes from advanced Calvinists (leaders, teachers) who plainly state that if one does not believe in a Limited Atonement, one believes in another gospel.
The difference between Christ died for few and Christ died fo all is indeed huge.
And by saying that others believe in a different gospel, such Calvinists are saying that they themselves believe in a gospel that is different from the rest of Christianity.

It looks like the more one intellectualizes that what is plain to understand one appears to somehow float away.

Thanks,
Ed

 

[Tofferer]

There are a handful of verses that make reference to "the elect" (along with the open paragraphs of Ephesians). Technically, these verses are in reference to all whom are of the church, that is to say believers. However, it does not take much imagination to twist those to create an inherently flawed and utterly false doctrine. Of course, that is a form of intellectualizing the gospel.

 

[Edial]

There are a handful of verses that make reference to "the elect" (along with the open paragraphs of Ephesians). Technically, these verses are in reference to all whom are of the church, that is to say believers. However, it does not take much imagination to twist those to create an inherently flawed and utterly false doctrine. Of course, that is a form of intellectualizing the gospel.

For some reason Calvinists take the verses that say that Christ died for the church and make it say that He died ONLY for the church and derive a Limited Atonement from it.
But the Bible presents plain verses stating that Christ died not only for us, but also for the rest of the world ... or that Christ even bought false teachers ... then we have a whole bunch of plain verses stating Christ died for all, the world, "whosoever" and so forth.

Calvinists sometimes take verses that say Christ died for many and use it as a support that if there are many there must also must be the few.
But "many" in these cases does not mean a part of a whole. but just an amount.
Example:
"There are 100 people in this room. This room has many people".
Many could be easily equated with all.

In my opinion, Calvinism is based on a combination of Scriptures and reasoning, with reasoning being the leading force of interpreting Scriptures.


I know that some Calvinists try to establish a dialogue with Lutherans in finding a common ground. OK.
In my opinion, our theological agreement rests on Jesus Christ.
But doctrinally speaking I do not see how an agreement could be reached.

Thanks,
Ed

 

[synger]

I listened to that podcast of Issues, Etc. yesterday on the way home from work, and I found it very interesting. The Reformed speaker clarified a few things for me. Specifically, I really appreciated him putting into words my frustration with so many of the Reformed discussions. He said that the problem is that so often TULIP, specifically Limited Atonement, is discussed in the abstract. That only leads to frustrations with questions of whether someone is or is not among the "elect". His point was that such discussion is never in the abstract. It always must be centered on Christ.

*sighs* I'm not saying it right. He was much clearer than I. I encourage you to listen to the podcast.

 

[RedneckLutheran]

I listened to that podcast of Issues, Etc. yesterday on the way home from work, and I found it very interesting. The Reformed speaker clarified a few things for me. Specifically, I really appreciated him putting into words my frustration with so many of the Reformed discussions. He said that the problem is that so often TULIP, specifically Limited Atonement, is discussed in the abstract. That only leads to frustrations with questions of whether someone is or is not among the "elect". His point was that such discussion is never in the abstract. It always must be centered on Christ.

*sighs* I'm not saying it right. He was much clearer than I. I encourage you to listen to the podcast.

that was what I got...the limited atonement in how many are saved...not in limiting Christ's work in the atonement himself...it was interesting...