• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Martin Luther's Teaching on Predestination.

Edward65

Well-Known Member
Feb 11, 2013
729
18
✟965.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
It all comes down to this ... Lutherans, using scriptural theology, can proclaim the Gospel with certainty to any given person on earth - Jesus Christ died for you.

Calvinists, if they are honest about their theology, simply cannot do the same.

Whilst I agree with you that Christ died for everyone as the Scriptures teach: ("For to this end we toil and strive, because we have our hope set on the living God, who is the Saviour of all people, especially of those who believe". 1 Timothy 4:10 ESV) and that this was Luther's position, I can't agree with you that through the Gospel the Father tries to draw everyone to Christ by the Holy Spirit and that the reason why people are damned is because they resist the Holy Spirit's attempt to convert them. This just isn't the teaching of Scripture and nor was it Luther's position.

With respect to Luther I’ve read all of his sermons edited by Lenker, and other sermons and most of “What Luther Says” by Plass amongst other things, and Luther doesn’t teach what the Formula teaches. Yes with respect to God’s revealed will Luther teaches that people are damned through resisting the Word and in that sense are resisting the Holy Spirit, but not that they resist the Holy Spirit’s attempt to convert them. For instance Plass quotes Luther in WLS saying:

“As Paul was converted so others are; for all of us resist the Word. But the Holy Spirit draws us through the ministry of the Word when He pleases” 1024

“Christ here says: Only he comes to Me and only he receives faith whom the Father draws to me” 1023

“But working on the will of him who resists He moves the will to consent” 1025 (i.e. irresistible grace)

“Whoever comes to faith can only say that the Holy Spirit comes when and where and to whom He pleases at the time He pleases”. 2057

“We do not learn with the heart; there God alone is the Master, revealing the Word to whom He pleases, how and when He pleases” 4736 (i.e. the Holy Spirit doesn’t try to convert all who hear the Gospel but only those He wills to)



Also there’s a revealing passage in Luther’s Table Talk which teaches the same things:


“Some few divines allege, that the Holy Ghost works not in those that resist him, but only in
such as are willing and give consent thereto, whence it would appear that free-will is only a cause
and helper of faith, and that consequently faith alone justifies not, and that the Holy Ghost does
not alone work through the Word, but that our will does something therein.

But I say it is not so; the will of mankind works nothing at all in his conversion and justification;
Non est efficiens causa justificationis sed marerialis tantum. It is the matter on which the Holy
Ghost works (as a potter makes a pot out of clay), equally in those that resist and are averse, as in
St Paul. But after the Holy Ghost has wrought in the wills of such resistants, then he also manages
that the will be consenting thereunto.

They say and allege further, That the example of St Paul’s conversion is a particular and special
work of God, and therefore cannot be brought in for a general rule. I answer: even like as St Paul
was converted, just so are all others converted; for we all resist God, but the Holy Ghost draws the
will of mankind, when he pleases, through preaching.

Even as no man may lawfully have children, except in a state of matrimony, though many
married people have no children, so the Holy Ghost works not always through the Word but when
it pleases him, so that free-will does nothing inwardly in our conversion and justification before
God, neither does it work with our strength—no, not in the least, unless we be prepared and made
fit by the Holy Ghost.

The sentences in Holy Scripture touching predestination, as, “No man can come to me except
the Father draweth him,” seem to terrify and affright us; yet they but show that we can do nothing
of our own strength and will that is good before God, and put the godly also in mind to pray. When
people do this, they may conclude they are predestinated.” CCLXIII.Hazlitt


We can see that in the quote above that Luther teaches irresistible grace in that the Holy Spirit makes us willing when we are all unwilling to believe, and that the Holy Spirit doesn’t attempt to convert all who hear the Gospel because He only converts those He pleases and not everyone who hears the Gospel. Luther likens the Holy Spirit’s operation to married couples who don’t all have children, so just as men don’t always beget children through their wives, so the Holy Spirit doesn’t always convert through the Word. And this isn’t because men resist the Holy Spirit’s attempt to convert them but because the Holy Spirit wills not to convert them (i.e. He “works not always through the Word “). This is Luther’s teaching because he affirms that the reason why not all are saved is because of predestination i.e.“No man can come to me except the Father draweth him,” So everything is dependent on whether the Father draws a person through the Holy Spirit to Christ. And this is the teaching of Scripture because in John 6 it says:

[64] But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) [65] And he said, “This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father.” (John 6:64-65 ESV)

So we can see from this Scripture passage that Christ is teaching that the reason men don’t believe is because the Father hasn’t drawn them to Christ through the Holy Spirit and that the Holy Spirit has consequently made no attempt to convert them. So this passage in itself shows that the doctrine of the Formula that men are damned through them resisting the Holy Spirit’s attempt to convert them is false doctrine. And Luther would have agreed. So only those predestined to be saved will be irresistibly converted by the Holy Spirit. The rest the Holy Spirit makes no attempt to convert because they are predestined to be damned. This is a general statement. I’m not denying that there may be some exceptions in that some may be converted only to eventually fall away and be damned. I don’t believe in once saved always saved. (Also Luther in The Bondage of the Will teaches irresistible grace. See for instance Packer & Johnston, page 311; Luther's Works, Vol. 33, pages 285, 286; Cole, section 162).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

MarkRohfrietsch

Unapologetic Apologist
Site Supporter
Dec 8, 2007
30,973
5,800
✟1,004,721.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

Edward65

Well-Known Member
Feb 11, 2013
729
18
✟965.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Thanks Albion, sometimes we (I:blush:) use too many words.:)


Originally Posted by MarkRohfrietsch
You are correct albion. Single predestination to salvation; free-will to reject it.:)
Originally Posted by Albion
Given that this thread seems to have produced a lot of unexpected confusion, your answer here strikes me as clear cut. I like it.
This is ridiculous. Agreeing with both Luther and Erasmus is not just confusing it's completely absurd. Luther and Erasmus were theological adversaries over the subject of free will and predestination such that Luther ruled out all free will and came down exclusively on the side of predestination. The subject of free will and predestination is an either or situation. They're mutually exclusive - if you believe one it rules out the other. You can't believe in both and be regarded as a sensible individual. And to believe that God teaches logical contradictions in His Word is nonsense.

So what you actually believe then is that you can only be saved if God predestines you from eternity to be saved, but the only way you can be damned is if you decide yourself not to be saved? That's a contradiction and can't possibly be true.
 
Upvote 0

Rick Otto

The Dude Abides
Nov 19, 2002
34,112
7,406
On The Prairie
✟29,593.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Originally Posted by MarkRohfrietsch
You are correct albion. Single predestination to salvation; free-will to reject it.:)
Originally Posted by Albion
Given that this thread seems to have produced a lot of unexpected confusion, your answer here strikes me as clear cut. I like it.
This is ridiculous. Agreeing with both Luther and Erasmus is not just confusing it's completely absurd. Luther and Erasmus were theological adversaries over the subject of free will and predestination such that Luther ruled out all free will and came down exclusively on the side of predestination. The subject of free will and predestination is an either or situation. They're mutually exclusive - if you believe one it rules out the other. You can't believe in both and be regarded as a sensible individual. And to believe that God teaches logical contradictions in His Word is nonsense.

So what you actually believe then is that you can only be saved if God predestines you from eternity to be saved, but the only way you can be damned is if you decide yourself not to be saved? That's a contradiction and can't possibly be true.
I agree with you on this, Edward.
 
Upvote 0

squint

Well-Known Member
Jul 23, 2007
16,182
903
Mountain Regions
✟20,405.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
No, it's universally agreed that Luther was a predestinarian. The debate is over certain secondary issues. BTW, I didn't notice any Lutheran here calling him a freewiller, so I'm wondering who you had in mind?

Well, obviously there are LUTHERANS here who are freewillers and presumably they would, as LUTHERANS, believe LUTHER was such or maybe they shouldn't put his name on their beliefs.

?

Lutheranism is more segmented than is popularly believed. They are in fact a very independent lot. And I happen to like that approach myself.

Unfortunately many of them are constantly embroiled in various forms of 'little bickering' which sometimes winds up in little branches in the outskirts of Minnesota and Wisconsin called the 'freewill evangelical' church.

s
 
Upvote 0

squint

Well-Known Member
Jul 23, 2007
16,182
903
Mountain Regions
✟20,405.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I acknowledge that, at some point, Luther may have been in support of Roman doctrine. However, it is quite clear by his renunciation of many of their core beliefs, as well as a vast amount of writing affirming his support of man's inherent bondage, that he rejected such concepts as "free will," at least in the sense that the Roman Catholics use it today. I mean, does it get any clearer than titling your most prolific piece of writing "The Bondage of the will?"

God bless

Personally I have no doubt that Luther was a freewiller as I was born, raised and confirmed in a Lutheran church that taught freewill, and yes, they were LUTHERANS.

But obviously Lutheranism is also rather fragmented on this issue. Some of my family bewailed the various disputes that started over in Norway with predestination.

s
 
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,127
33,262
✟583,992.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Originally Posted by MarkRohfrietsch
You are correct albion. Single predestination to salvation; free-will to reject it.:)
Originally Posted by Albion
Given that this thread seems to have produced a lot of unexpected confusion, your answer here strikes me as clear cut. I like it.
Originally Posted by Edward65

This is ridiculous. Agreeing with both Luther and Erasmus is not just confusing it's completely absurd. Luther and Erasmus were theological adversaries over the subject of free will and predestination such that Luther ruled out all free will and came down exclusively on the side of predestination. The subject of free wiSingle predestination to salvation; free-will to reject it.ll and predestination is an either or situation. They're mutually exclusive

Wow. Something as straightforward as this: "Single predestination to salvation; free-will to reject it" is "ridiculous" to your mind...or is it just that someone saying it's "clear cut" is what's ridiculous? Sayyyyyy. I just thought of a third contender for the award. ^_^
 
Upvote 0

PaladinValer

Traditional Orthodox Anglican
Apr 7, 2004
23,587
1,245
43
Myrtle Beach, SC
✟30,305.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
For full disclosure this should have been posted at the beginning of the OP for this thread ...





This poster's thread was closed in the Lutheran area, Theologia Crucis - Lutherans, because he teaches against Lutheran theology, as noted by DaRev, a rostered and called LCMS pastor.

This poster claims to represent Lutheran theology while in truth he does not. Please take this into consideration if you choose to read his posts.

The closed thread by this poster, referred to above, can be found here, along with thorough refutation by several very knowledgeable Lutheran contributors. There are actually two posters in that thread claiming falsely to represent Lutheran theology regarding predestination: Edward65 and sturt678.

I'm glad this was posted. I am "bumping" it to make sure people don't miss this, as there are too many people who skip context and this is a post that is too important to miss.

And don't worry; I wasn't fooled :)
 
Upvote 0

Edward65

Well-Known Member
Feb 11, 2013
729
18
✟965.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Wow. Something as straightforward as this: "Single predestination to salvation; free-will to reject it" is "ridiculous" to your mind...or is it just that someone saying it's "clear cut" is what's ridiculous?

My comments were directed at Mark's view of single predestination and free will. Sorry I should have made that clear. I didn't mean to imply that your comment was ridiculous.
 
Upvote 0

squint

Well-Known Member
Jul 23, 2007
16,182
903
Mountain Regions
✟20,405.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I'm glad this was posted. I am "bumping" it to make sure people don't miss this, as there are too many people who skip context and this is a post that is too important to miss.

And don't worry; I wasn't fooled :)

I certainly would NOT consider the LCMS as 'official' Lutheranism.

NO way.


They are merely another sect with an entirely different set of constructs.

Lutheran? Yes, in the independent fashions of same only.

s
 
Upvote 0

PaladinValer

Traditional Orthodox Anglican
Apr 7, 2004
23,587
1,245
43
Myrtle Beach, SC
✟30,305.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
I certainly would NOT consider the LCMS as 'official' Lutheranism.

NO way.


They are merely another sect with an entirely different set of constructs.

Lutheran? Yes, in the independent fashions of same only.

s

Excuses...
 
Upvote 0

PaladinValer

Traditional Orthodox Anglican
Apr 7, 2004
23,587
1,245
43
Myrtle Beach, SC
✟30,305.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
The LCMS is a LUTHERAN SECT and nothing more than that, [period.]

I know Lutherans. I also know that a lot of the Pastors are stubborn Scandinavians and Germans.

...excuses...

Tanglible, I will be happy to "bump" your post every once in a while :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tangible
Upvote 0

Edward65

Well-Known Member
Feb 11, 2013
729
18
✟965.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I'm glad this was posted. I am "bumping" it to make sure people don't miss this, as there are too many people who skip context and this is a post that is too important to miss.

The quotes from Luther I've used on this forum and on the Lutheran forum show that Luther taught predestination to hell. If people aren't willing to accept the evidence then that's their affair. To say that I was refuted is simply untrue. (sturt678 by the way sometimes agreed with me and sometimes didn't and I found it difficult to understand him).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Albion
Upvote 0

Tangible

Decision Theology = Ex Opere Operato
May 29, 2009
9,837
1,416
cruce tectum
Visit site
✟67,243.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
We can preach the Gospel.. For we know not whom God will draw. This is why we therefore go into all the world preaching the Gospel. Jesus spoke of Himself and only those to whom the Father drew to Him could come to Him.
You can preach the Gospel, but as Ref admitted below, under Calvinism you simply cannot consistently (truthfully?) say to any specific person, or to yourself for that matter, that Christ died for you. You can say that Christ died for sinners, for the elect, etc., but you cannot say that any individual is one for whom Christ died.

However, scripture says ...

And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.(Mark 16:15-16, ESV)

Everyone should be cautious about defining his religion on the basis of what sounds the most appealing.
And everyone should also be cautious about setting human reason to rule over God's revealed word in scripture.

Which is more appealing to the sinful mind: Folding and trimming God's word to fit neatly into your box of logic, or pouring the whole word of God out onto the table of your comprehension, letting it lie as it falls, even when it runs off the edges?

Well, that is, in fact, quite true.
Yes, thank you. :)

Then again, it's important to note that THE Gospel isn't that Christ died for everyone without exception so that doesn't present a problem for those who acknowledge the specific nature of the atonement.
Well, I don't know what gospel you are referring to as THE gospel, but the Gospel of Jesus Christ is that he died for the sins of all men for all time.

Somehow, it doesn't seem to be very good news to say to someone, in effect ...

"Christ might have died for you! That is, if you turn out to be one of his elect, which you can never know for sure until you die."

"So good luck. I hope you're elect. Ya pays yer money and ya takes yer chances, but in the end, buddy, no tickee no laundry."

What we don't face is a problem that you do face if you make the claim that Jesus Christ died for someone who ultimately never believes, unless you espouse universalism. You either make His death of no significance in the lives of those who are ultimately condemned or, to be consistent, must submit that their salvation wasn't the end goal.
You're falsely conflating universal atonement with universal salvation.

The sins of those who will be in hell are just as forgiven as those who will be in heaven. They just don't believe it, and thus have no saving faith in Christ alone that receives the salvation given freely by God.

To say that Christ died FOR someone is to contend that He died FOR a purpose for the person. If it was not to ensure their salvation, for what, pray tell, did He die? :confused:
If your father leaves you a million dollars, yet you refuse to ever access the account or participate in your family you have effectively disinherited yourself and prevented yourself from benefiting from family membership.

Likewise, Christ died for the sins of all and rose for their justification, but those who reject his gifts and promises do not and cannot enjoy the benefits they bring.

Those in heaven will only have God to thank for their salvation. Those in hell will only have themselves to blame for their damnation.

“Hear then the parable of the sower: When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart. This is what was sown along the path. As for what was sown on rocky ground, this is the one who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy, yet he has no root in himself, but endures for a while, and when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately he falls away. As for what was sown among thorns, this is the one who hears the word, but the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and it proves unfruitful. As for what was sown on good soil, this is the one who hears the word and understands it. He indeed bears fruit and yields, in one case a hundredfold, in another sixty, and in another thirty.” (Matt 13)

God bless
And you. :)
 
Upvote 0
C

crimsonleaf

Guest
You can preach the Gospel, but as Ref admitted below, under Calvinism you simply cannot consistently (truthfully?) say to any specific person, or to yourself for that matter, that Christ died for you. You can say that Christ died for sinners, for the elect, etc., but you cannot say that any individual is one for whom Christ died.

However, scripture says ...

And he said to them, “Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.(Mark 16:15-16, ESV)

And everyone should also be cautious about setting human reason to rule over God's revealed word in scripture.

Which is more appealing to the sinful mind: Folding and trimming God's word to fit neatly into your box of logic, or pouring the whole word of God out onto the table of your comprehension, letting it lie as it falls, even when it runs off the edges?

Yes, thank you. :)

Well, I don't know what gospel you are referring to as THE gospel, but the Gospel of Jesus Christ is that he died for the sins of all men for all time.

Somehow, it doesn't seem to be very good news to say to someone, in effect ...

"Christ might have died for you! That is, if you turn out to be one of his elect, which you can never know for sure until you die."

"So good luck. I hope you're elect. Ya pays yer money and ya takes yer chances, but in the end, buddy, no tickee no laundry."

You're falsely conflating universal atonement with universal salvation.

The sins of those who will be in hell are just as forgiven as those who will be in heaven. They just don't believe it, and thus have no saving faith in Christ alone that receives the salvation given freely by God.

If your father leaves you a million dollars, yet you refuse to ever access the account or participate in your family you have effectively disinherited yourself and prevented yourself from benefiting from family membership.

Likewise, Christ died for the sins of all and rose for their justification, but those who reject his gifts and promises do not and cannot enjoy the benefits they bring.

Those in heaven will only have God to thank for their salvation. Those in hell will only have themselves to blame for their damnation.

“Hear then the parable of the sower: When anyone hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what has been sown in his heart. This is what was sown along the path. As for what was sown on rocky ground, this is the one who hears the word and immediately receives it with joy, yet he has no root in himself, but endures for a while, and when tribulation or persecution arises on account of the word, immediately he falls away. As for what was sown among thorns, this is the one who hears the word, but the cares of the world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and it proves unfruitful. As for what was sown on good soil, this is the one who hears the word and understands it. He indeed bears fruit and yields, in one case a hundredfold, in another sixty, and in another thirty.” (Matt 13)

And you. :)

Do you believe that Christ's death bought forgiveness of all sins?
 
Upvote 0

Tangible

Decision Theology = Ex Opere Operato
May 29, 2009
9,837
1,416
cruce tectum
Visit site
✟67,243.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Do you believe that Christ's death bought forgiveness of all sins?
If someone is in prison, and you unlock the door and tell them they are free - yet they do not believe you and stay in the cell until they die, have they been released? Yes. Have they benefited from being released? No.

The sacrifice of Christ was sufficient payment for all sin for all time.

All will not benefit from Christ's atonement, however, not because the atonement was insufficient or limited, but because they do not believe that the atonement was sufficient for them, or they believe that they are not under condemnation and do not need what the atonement gives.

Do you believe that Christ's death was somehow insufficient or limited?
 
Upvote 0
C

crimsonleaf

Guest
If someone is in prison, and you unlock the door and tell them they are free - yet they do not believe you and stay in the cell until they die, have they been released? Yes. Have they benefited from being released? No.

The sacrifice of Christ was sufficient payment for all sin for all time.

All will not benefit from Christ's atonement, however, not because the atonement was insufficient or limited, but because they do not believe that the atonement was sufficient for them, or they believe that they are not under condemnation and do not need what the atonement gives.

Do you believe that Christ's death was somehow insufficient or limited?
Yes, it was limited. I can't believe that there will be people in hell whose sins Christ forgave. I don't think the atonement was potential, but actual.
 
  • Like
Reactions: squint
Upvote 0

squint

Well-Known Member
Jul 23, 2007
16,182
903
Mountain Regions
✟20,405.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If someone is in prison, and you unlock the door and tell them they are free - yet they do not believe you and stay in the cell until they die, have they been released? Yes. Have they benefited from being released? No.

The sacrifice of Christ was sufficient payment for all sin for all time.

All will not benefit from Christ's atonement, however, not because the atonement was insufficient or limited, but because they do not believe that the atonement was sufficient for them, or they believe that they are not under condemnation and do not need what the atonement gives.

Do you believe that Christ's death was somehow insufficient or limited?

You present that.

You think you don't, but you do.

One can not have sufficiency without benefit or it was...INsufficient.

For the record EVERY Lutheran sect presents LIMITED ATONEMENT regardless of whether they think they do or not.

s
 
Upvote 0