Lutheran doctrine

[Phoebe]

I still have alot of reading to do.

As far as the original post is concerned, a difference in the Sacrament of the Altar is that both elements are distributed to the laity of the church.

 

[Flipper]

Lutherans believe in predestination?

 

[theseed]

your birthday is the same day as mine what college did you go to?

Carson-Newman Collge in Jefferson City, TN

 

[JVAC]

Lutherans believe in predestination?

The beauty of the Lutheran Church is it doesn't get in your face. The Lutheran Church doesn't have an official, this is how you must believe, stance on predestination.

Luther did hold firm to a form thereof, however, it does predate calvinism and it is not near calvinism for a couple reasons.

1. Humans are inherently evil and thus they are bound/predestined to evil
2. Yet a person can make a decission to follow Christ
3. Thereupon does the Holy Spirit activate inside the Christian and let the Christian abound in Good Works.

This is the Lutheranian view of "Bondage of the Will". Now the people of the Church may differ on how much "free will" we have and how much we don't have.

For more on this subject please pick up: "The Bondage of the Will" by Martin Luther, Illustrated by Dr. Seuss Analagous readings: "Freedom of the Christian Man", "Book of Concord"

-James

 

[JVAC]

Here is some more of Luther quote regarding scripture.
In a word, St. John's Gospel and his first Epistle, St. Paul's Epistles, especially Romans, Galatians and Ephesians, and St. Peter's first Epistle are the books that show you Christ and teach you all that is necessary and good for you to know, even though you were never to see or hear any other book or doctrine. Therefore St. James' Epistle is really an epistle of straw, compared to them; for it has nothing of the nature of the Gospel about it.
(Jacobs, ibid., 443-444)

This refference comes from the first edition of Martin Luther's preface to the New Testament. Now mind you first of all that it was ONLY in the first edition, meaning that Luther decided to take it out, and secondly that there is no such thing as the "Innerrant Luther".

Now it is important to grasp why he said these things...

If I were ever compelled to make a choice, and had to dispense with either the works or the preaching of Christ, I would rather do without the works than the preaching; for the works are of no avail to me, whereas His words give life, as He himself declared.

Martin Luther, Preface to the New Testament (first edition only)

Luther wanted it to be stressed, further that we aren't to get caught up in the works more than the Word of God, the message of Salvation. For this purpose there are certain books that expound this principle better than others. This was his way of educating the masses, for they weren't to well learned. This would avoid mass confusion.

Hopefully this explained it somewhat well,

-James

 

[orthedoxy]

A couple things.
1.) Quoting one sentence from Luther most likely completely takes it out of the context and changes the meaning of the sentence.
2.) If you have read any of Luther's works, you will see that he often writes in such a way to make points.
3.) No one denys that he did make some anti-semetic statements.

here is a jewish site that quotes Luthers work

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/anti-semitism/Luther_on_Jews.html

It seems whatever i quote you try to make an excuse for Luther.
Are you saying it was ok for Germans at that time to treat jews like that?

Later in his life Luther changed his mind on the subject. I'm on my way out, but I'll find the quote later.

I'm really intrested to see your quote.

Lutherans believe in predestination and freewill. We are much closer to Calvinism than Arminianism.

Quote:7. GOD'S ELECTION OF GRACE

We confess that those in this life who, through the Gospel, have been called, enlightened,
sanctified, and preserved in the true faith, have from eternity been elected according to
God's unmerited love to this adoption as His children, and have been chosen in Christ
"before the creation of the world" to be heirs of everlasting life. Therefore Christians can
and should be sure of their salvation, since God's promise is steadfast and His gracious
election to salvation stands firm. We reject the teaching that there is an eternal election to
damnation (double predestination) and that the offer of salvation which God makes
through the Gospel is not earnestly intended for all people. In faith we accept the teaching
of Scripture that those who are saved are saved by the grace of God alone, and that those
who are lost are lost because of their own unbelief and hardness of heart. See Rom. 8:26-
39, Eph. 1:3-6, 2 Thes. 2:13-14, 1 Tim. 1:15, 2 Tim. 1:12, Ezek. 33:11, Hos. 13:9.
http://www.evluthsyn.org/

Quote:10. We teach that conversion consists in this, that a man, having learned from the Law of God that he is a lost and condemned sinner, is brought to faith in the Gospel, which offers him forgiveness of sins and eternal salvation for the sake of Christ's vicarious satisfaction, Acts 11:21; Luke 24:46, 47; Acts 26:18.

11. All men, since the Fall, are dead in sins, Eph. 2:1-3, and inclined only to evil, Gen. 6:5; 8:21; Rom. 8:7. For this reason, and particularly because men regard the Gospel of Christ, crucified for the sins of the world, as foolishness, 1 Cor. 2:14, faith in the Gospel, or conversion to God, is neither wholly nor in the least part the work of man, but the work of God's grace and almighty power alone, Phil. 1:29; Eph. 2:8; 1:19; -- Jer. 31:18. Hence Scripture call the faith of men, or his conversion, a raising from the dead, Eph. 1:20; Col. 2:12, a being born of God, John 1:12, 13, a new birth by the Gospel, 1 Pet, 1:23-25, a work of God like the creation of light at the creation of the world, 2 Cor. 4:6.

12. On the basis of these clear statements of the Holy Scriptures we reject every kind of synergism, that is, the doctrine that conversion is wrought not by the grace and power of God alone, but in part also by the co-operation of man himself, by man's right conduct, his right attitude, his right self-determination, his lesser guilt or less evil conduct as compared with others, his refraining from willful resistance, or anything else whereby man's conversion and salvation is taken out of the gracious hands of God and made to depend on what man does or leaves undone. For this refraining from willful resistance or from any kind of resistance is also solely a work of grace, which "changes unwilling into willing men," Ezek. 36:26; Phil. 2:13. We reject also the doctrine that man is able to decide for conversion through "powers imparted by grace," since this doctrine presupposes that before conversion man still possesses spiritual powers by which he can make the right use of such "powers imparted by grace."

13. On the other hand, we reject also the Calvinistic perversion of the doctrine of conversion, that is, the doctrine that God does not desire to convert and save all hearers of the Word, but only a portion of them. Many hearers of the Word indeed remain unconverted and are not saved, not because God does not earnestly desire their conversion and salvation, but solely because they stubbornly resist the gracious operation of the Holy Ghost, as Scripture teaches, Acts 7:51; Matt. 23:37; Acts 13:46.

14. As to the question why not all men are converted and saved, seeing that God's grace is universal and all men are equally and utterly corrupt, we confess that we cannot answer it. From Scripture we know only this: A man owes his conversion and salvation, not to any lesser guilt or better conduct on his part, but solely to the grace of God. But any man's non-conversion is due to himself alone; it is the result of his obstinate resistance against the converting operation of the Holy Ghost. Hos. 13:9.

15. Our refusal to go beyond what is revealed in these two Scriptural truths is not "masked Calvinism" ("Crypto- Calvinism") but precisely the Scriptural teaching of the Lutheran Church as it is presented in detail in the Formula of Concord (Triglot, p. 1081, paragraphs 57-59, 60b, 62, 63; M. p. 716f.): "That one is hardened, blinded, given over to a reprobate mind, while another, who is indeed in the same guilt, is converted again, etc. -- in these and similar questions Paul fixes a certain limit to us how far we should go, namely, that in the one part we should recognize God's judgment. For they are well-deserved penalties of sins when God so punished a land or nation for despising His Word that the punishment extends also to their posterity, as is to be seen in the Jews. And thereby God in some lands and persons exhibits His severity to those that are His in order to indicate what we all would have well deserved and would be worthy and worth, since we act wickedly in opposition to God's Word and often grieve the Holy Ghost sorely; in order that we may live in the fear of God and acknowledge and praise God's goodness, to the exclusion of, and contrary to, our merit in and with us, to whom He gives His Word and with whom He leaves it and whom He does not harden and reject...And this His righteous, well-deserved judgment He displays in some countries, nations and persons in order that, when we are placed alongside of them and compared with them (quam simillimi illis deprehensi, i.e., and found to be most similar to them), we may learn the more diligently to recognize and praise God's pure, unmerited grace in the vessels of mercy...When we proceed thus far in this article, we remain on the right way, as it is written, Hos. 13:9: `O Israel, thou hast destroyed thyself; but in Me is thy help.' However, as regards these things in this disputation which would soar too high and beyond these limits, we should with Paul place the finger upon our lips and remember and say, Rom. 9:20: `O man, who art thou that repliest against God?'" The Formula of Concord describes the mystery which confronts us here not as a mystery in man's heart (a "psychological" mystery), but teaches that, when we try to understand why "one is hardened, blinded, given over to a reprobate mind, while another, who is indeed in the same guilt, is converted again," we enter the domain of the unsearchable judgments of God and ways past finding out, which are not revealed to us in His Word, but which we shall know in eternal life. 1 Cor. 13:12.

16. Calvinists solve this mystery, which God has not revealed in His Word, by denying the universality of grace; synergists, by denying that salvation is by grace alone. Both solutions are utterly vicious, since they contradict Scripture and since every poor sinner stands in need of, and must cling to, both the unrestricted universal grace and the unrestricted "by grace alone," lest he despair and perish.
http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=569

can you show me from any of Luthers work that he never believed in double predestination?
I see point 12 contradicting point 13 if we are free to resist Gods grace then to remain in Christ is synergism.
If God only saves some and he saves unconditionaly wouldn't this be the same as limited atonement since he didn't plan on saving all?

So? As I quoted above, he later came to believe that it was wrong to do so.

Can you tell me who told you Luther changed his mind about praying to Mary?

 

[Lotar]

here is a jewish site that quotes Luthers work

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/anti-semitism/Luther_on_Jews.html

It seems whatever i quote you try to make an excuse for Luther.
Are you saying it was ok for Germans at that time to treat jews like that?

Was it okay? No it wasn't, and I never said it was. I am defending him because his actions were a product of the time. During his time he was critisized for being too nice to the Jews, now people critisize him for being anti-semetic. This is constantly brought up, like it proves that Luther was an evil man. He was just a man, and capable of sin, just like the rest of us.
BTW, it was more than the just the Germans, it was everybody.

Have you ever read Jews and their Lies? I have, and it's not nearly so offensive when you read it in context. I'm sure that most people would still find it offensive, though I'm sure most wouldn't if the word Jew was replaced with Muslim.

Have you read his many works advocating allowing Jews to trade freely, and to give them other rights?

I'm really intrested to see your quote.

I'm searching for it online. I read it in a book, but my father is borrowing it at the moment.

can you show me from any of Luthers work that he never believed in double predestination?

Correction, can you show me that he did?

I see point 12 contradicting point 13 if we are free to resist Gods grace then to remain in Christ is synergism.
If God only saves some and he saves unconditionaly wouldn't this be the same as limited atonement since he didn't plan on saving all?

It's not exactly an easy to understand doctrine. Whoever is saved is saved solely by the work of God, and whoever is lost is lost because of the hardness of their own hearts. God wishes for everyone to be saved. If it seems contradictory, it is because of our inability to fully understand God.

Can you tell me who told you Luther changed his mind about praying to Mary?

You have a notorious habit of not reading posts. I've quoted both Luther and the Augsburg Confessions, what else do you want?

 

[ByzantineDixie]

It's not exactly an easy to understand doctrine. Whoever is saved is saved solely by the work of God, and whoever is lost is lost because of the hardness of their own hearts. God wishes for everyone to be saved. If it seems contradictory, it is because of our inability to fully understand God.

Lotar puts it well. Luther made it a point to teach that predestination was to be a comfort for believers and nothing more than that. In other words as believers we could be assured that we were predestined to salvation but we are never to presume that this means there are "others" among us who are predestined to damnation. One should not be the logical extention of the other.

Luther was great with what I term "one-sided coin" explanations. For example...we can reject the grace of the Holy Spirit but there is no "other side of the coin" or logical extension that we can "accept" that grace. Our only action can be one of rejection. As humans we tend to look for "balanced equations"...if we can reject, then surely we can "accept" but that is not necessarily how things work with God. He has no law of equal and opposite reactions. If he did...we'd all be lost.

This understanding or freedom from automatically catering to human logical extensions was one of the single most influencial aspects in my appreciation of Luther. Ya...I wasn't always a Luther fan...until I started studying the doctrine.

Rose

 

[SpiritPsalmist]

*MOD HAT ON*

THIS IS THE P/R/E FORUM. THERE IS TO BE NO DEBATING BY ANYONE WHO IS NOT PROTESTANT, REFORMED, or EVANGELICAL. . .PERIOD!!!!!!

 

[Phoebe]

Bumping for tigersnare.