Martin Luther

[AndOne]

After finishing Calvin's "The Institutes..." a few weeks ago I have jumped into reading Luther again. I think I love reading his stuff more than any of the reformers out there. One thing I have noticed and wanted to mention - to see what others here think - is that Luther was more "Calvinist" than John Calvin was! I came to this conclusion after reading his "Bondage of The Will" last fall - but now that I am reading other works by him it confirms that sentiment and is very obvious. Anyone else out there notice this...

 

[rnmomof7]

Luther was a double predestinaniarn

 

[cygnusx1]

Luther was a double predestinaniarn

and I am a 'triple' one

(one for the angels of course)

 

[rnmomof7]

I happen to agree.. all that is is ordained of God or none of it is

 

[Reformationist]

After finishing Calvin's "The Institutes..." a few weeks ago I have jumped into reading Luther again. I think I love reading his stuff more than any of the reformers out there. One thing I have noticed and wanted to mention - to see what others here think - is that Luther was more "Calvinist" than John Calvin was! I came to this conclusion after reading his "Bondage of The Will" last fall - but now that I am reading other works by him it confirms that sentiment and is very obvious. Anyone else out there notice this...

I felt the same way when I read Bondage of the Will.

Once, in the Lutheran forum, I mentioned that Lutherans do not seem to hold to the same beliefs as Luther did. They told me that they were aware of this. I said that it was odd then that they would call themselves Lutherans. They simply stated that Luther was wrong about many things regarding God and the Lutheran denomination has corrected his errors in the faith they believe today.

I personally think that Luther would be highly displeased to have his name affiliated with views that he did not espouse.

Anyway, good observation.

God bless

 

[Reformationist]

and I am a 'triple' one

(one for the angels of course)

LOL! I've never heard that before. Guess I am one too. That's going to go over well on this forum.

God bless

 

[HiredGoon]

My understanding is that the Lutheran church went with Philipp Melanchthon's understanding of the will rather than Luther's.

Maybe they should be called Melanchthonians.

 

[Jon_]

Luther was a double predestinaniarn

You mean he affirmed both election and reprobation, right?

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

 

[Reformationist]

My understanding is that the Lutheran church went with Philipp Melanchthon's understanding of the will rather than Luther's.

Maybe they should be called Melanchthonians.

Well, I think Melanchthon was real close to Calvin on most issues as well so I don't know how accurate that is. Could be wrong though. I'd say they went more the way of the Roman denomination and seem to be steadily progressing away from their reformed roots.

God bless

 

[Reformationist]

You mean he affirmed both election and reprobation, right?

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

That's right. The Lutherans are fond of saying that he affirmed active election but left the issue of reprobation, or as he called it, "the horrible decree of God," to God. They believe that Luther left untouched what God did not reveal but the problem is that God did reveal it and Luther did address it, quite regularly, in fact.

God bless

 

[rnmomof7]

You mean he affirmed both election and reprobation, right?

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon

Correct .

I am out of town but I believe I have a copy of his position at home which I can post when I get back there

 

[AndOne]

Once, in the Lutheran forum, I mentioned that Lutherans do not seem to hold to the same beliefs as Luther did. They told me that they were aware of this. I said that it was odd then that they would call themselves Lutherans. They simply stated that Luther was wrong about many things regarding God and the Lutheran denomination has corrected his errors in the faith they believe today.

That was going to be my next question. Do Lutherans hold to the teachings of Luther the way we Calvinists do? Sad that they apparantly don't. I wonder if there are any Calvinist Lutherans though. I know very little of that particular denomination. Interesting....

 

[Tertiumquid]

One thing I have noticed and wanted to mention - to see what others here think - is that Luther was more "Calvinist" than John Calvin was! I came to this conclusion after reading his "Bondage of The Will" last fall - but now that I am reading other works by him it confirms that sentiment and is very obvious. Anyone else out there notice this...

Hi There,

I don't know about "Lutheranism" in terms of creed, but I am tempted to say many of its members have a "watered down" version of Predestination/election from dialogs I have had with Lutherans. They seem to believe differently from what Luther taught. Perhaps it can be traced back to the disputes between the Philippists and the Gnesio-Lutherans after Luther's death.

Especially interesting is when I enter into discussions comparing Luther and Calvin. Modern-day Lutherans I have spoken with get really heated up.

Most Lutherans I've encountered (not all though) think very little of Calvin and Calvinism in general. Some will even get quite animated when they find out I'm not a Lutheran. One Lutheran said to me once,

Your theology is reformed, not Lutheran. I believe you cannot view Luther through the same lens as Lutherans because of this. Your theology and Luther's are different. So, there is a automatic mistrust of what you have to say on the basis of where you are coming from...If you truly loved Luther's theology, you would embrace the Sacraments as Luther did...you could not help yourself.

I am Reformed- in the fullest sense: a 5-point Calvinist. Now I have to be careful when reading Martin Luther, because Luther was not a 5-point Calvinist. Luther does though say many things “harmonious” with those 5 points, but I would be doing him injustice if I declared that he was a 5-point Calvinist. Luther’s theology is not Reformed theology. I have to always remind myself of this. When I read his comments on the will, or predestination, I get a warm fuzzy feeling: “That’s what I believe!” Yet, there are some major differences in how Luther expresses himself on these issues. If I don’t take into account Luther’s underlying presupposition of the hidden and revealed God, I will make some blatant errors against his theology. I could make all sorts of web pages proving Luther was a 5-point Calvinist. I could even find a lot of secondary sources to prove it. But, I would be doing injustice to Luther’s work. I would be manipulating his material to prove something that is untrue.

Luther was distinctly Luther. He’s extremely difficult to pigeon-hole. It’s one of the reasons I enjoy reading and studying him. Now, since I’m Reformed, I really don’t have an agenda. I try to let Luther be Luther. Thus, it doesn’t matter if I agree with him or not. I can still study him accurately, in the same way some of the best scholars on Jonathan Edwards aren’t even Christian! But I have to be careful. I have to continually remember my presuppositions. I have to continually remember I’m a Reformed person reading a non-Reformed theology.

Regards,
James Swan
http://www.ntrmin.org/rccorner-reformation.htm

 

[Reformationist]

Hi There,

I don't know about "Lutheranism" in terms of creed, but I am tempted to say many of its members have a "watered down" version of Predestination/election from dialogs I have had with Lutherans. They seem to believe differently from what Luther taught. Perhaps it can be traced back to the disputes between the Philippists and the Gnesio-Lutherans after Luther's death.

Especially interesting is when I enter into discussions comparing Luther and Calvin. Modern-day Lutherans I have spoken with get really heated up.

Most Lutherans I've encountered (not all though) think very little of Calvin and Calvinism in general. Some will even get quite animated when they find out I'm not a Lutheran. One Lutheran said to me once,

Your theology is reformed, not Lutheran. I believe you cannot view Luther through the same lens as Lutherans because of this. Your theology and Luther's are different. So, there is a automatic mistrust of what you have to say on the basis of where you are coming from...If you truly loved Luther's theology, you would embrace the Sacraments as Luther did...you could not help yourself.

I am Reformed- in the fullest sense: a 5-point Calvinist. Now I have to be careful when reading Martin Luther, because Luther was not a 5-point Calvinist. Luther does though say many things “harmonious” with those 5 points, but I would be doing him injustice if I declared that he was a 5-point Calvinist. Luther’s theology is not Reformed theology. I have to always remind myself of this. When I read his comments on the will, or predestination, I get a warm fuzzy feeling: “That’s what I believe!” Yet, there are some major differences in how Luther expresses himself on these issues. If I don’t take into account Luther’s underlying presupposition of the hidden and revealed God, I will make some blatant errors against his theology. I could make all sorts of web pages proving Luther was a 5-point Calvinist. I could even find a lot of secondary sources to prove it. But, I would be doing injustice to Luther’s work. I would be manipulating his material to prove something that is untrue.

Luther was distinctly Luther. He’s extremely difficult to pigeon-hole. It’s one of the reasons I enjoy reading and studying him. Now, since I’m Reformed, I really don’t have an agenda. I try to let Luther be Luther. Thus, it doesn’t matter if I agree with him or not. I can still study him accurately, in the same way some of the best scholars on Jonathan Edwards aren’t even Christian! But I have to be careful. I have to continually remember my presuppositions. I have to continually remember I’m a Reformed person reading a non-Reformed theology.

Regards,
James Swan
http://www.ntrmin.org/rccorner-reformation.htm

James, for the benefit of us all, you need to post on this MB more often.

God bless,
Don

 

[rnmomof7]

Good post Jim, Thanks and do not be a stranger!

Hi There,

I don't know about "Lutheranism" in terms of creed, but I am tempted to say many of its members have a "watered down" version of Predestination/election from dialogs I have had with Lutherans. They seem to believe differently from what Luther taught. Perhaps it can be traced back to the disputes between the Philippists and the Gnesio-Lutherans after Luther's death.

Especially interesting is when I enter into discussions comparing Luther and Calvin. Modern-day Lutherans I have spoken with get really heated up.

Most Lutherans I've encountered (not all though) think very little of Calvin and Calvinism in general. Some will even get quite animated when they find out I'm not a Lutheran. One Lutheran said to me once,

Your theology is reformed, not Lutheran. I believe you cannot view Luther through the same lens as Lutherans because of this. Your theology and Luther's are different. So, there is a automatic mistrust of what you have to say on the basis of where you are coming from...If you truly loved Luther's theology, you would embrace the Sacraments as Luther did...you could not help yourself.

I am Reformed- in the fullest sense: a 5-point Calvinist. Now I have to be careful when reading Martin Luther, because Luther was not a 5-point Calvinist. Luther does though say many things “harmonious” with those 5 points, but I would be doing him injustice if I declared that he was a 5-point Calvinist. Luther’s theology is not Reformed theology. I have to always remind myself of this. When I read his comments on the will, or predestination, I get a warm fuzzy feeling: “That’s what I believe!” Yet, there are some major differences in how Luther expresses himself on these issues. If I don’t take into account Luther’s underlying presupposition of the hidden and revealed God, I will make some blatant errors against his theology. I could make all sorts of web pages proving Luther was a 5-point Calvinist. I could even find a lot of secondary sources to prove it. But, I would be doing injustice to Luther’s work. I would be manipulating his material to prove something that is untrue.

Luther was distinctly Luther. He’s extremely difficult to pigeon-hole. It’s one of the reasons I enjoy reading and studying him. Now, since I’m Reformed, I really don’t have an agenda. I try to let Luther be Luther. Thus, it doesn’t matter if I agree with him or not. I can still study him accurately, in the same way some of the best scholars on Jonathan Edwards aren’t even Christian! But I have to be careful. I have to continually remember my presuppositions. I have to continually remember I’m a Reformed person reading a non-Reformed theology.

Regards,
James Swan
http://www.ntrmin.org/rccorner-reformation.htm

 

[oworm]

Hi There,

I don't know about "Lutheranism" in terms of creed, but I am tempted to say many of its members have a "watered down" version of Predestination/election from dialogs I have had with Lutherans. They seem to believe differently from what Luther taught. Perhaps it can be traced back to the disputes between the Philippists and the Gnesio-Lutherans after Luther's death.

Especially interesting is when I enter into discussions comparing Luther and Calvin. Modern-day Lutherans I have spoken with get really heated up.

Most Lutherans I've encountered (not all though) think very little of Calvin and Calvinism in general. Some will even get quite animated when they find out I'm not a Lutheran. One Lutheran said to me once,

Your theology is reformed, not Lutheran. I believe you cannot view Luther through the same lens as Lutherans because of this. Your theology and Luther's are different. So, there is a automatic mistrust of what you have to say on the basis of where you are coming from...If you truly loved Luther's theology, you would embrace the Sacraments as Luther did...you could not help yourself.

I am Reformed- in the fullest sense: a 5-point Calvinist. Now I have to be careful when reading Martin Luther, because Luther was not a 5-point Calvinist. Luther does though say many things “harmonious” with those 5 points, but I would be doing him injustice if I declared that he was a 5-point Calvinist. Luther’s theology is not Reformed theology. I have to always remind myself of this. When I read his comments on the will, or predestination, I get a warm fuzzy feeling: “That’s what I believe!” Yet, there are some major differences in how Luther expresses himself on these issues. If I don’t take into account Luther’s underlying presupposition of the hidden and revealed God, I will make some blatant errors against his theology. I could make all sorts of web pages proving Luther was a 5-point Calvinist. I could even find a lot of secondary sources to prove it. But, I would be doing injustice to Luther’s work. I would be manipulating his material to prove something that is untrue.

Luther was distinctly Luther. He’s extremely difficult to pigeon-hole. It’s one of the reasons I enjoy reading and studying him. Now, since I’m Reformed, I really don’t have an agenda. I try to let Luther be Luther. Thus, it doesn’t matter if I agree with him or not. I can still study him accurately, in the same way some of the best scholars on Jonathan Edwards aren’t even Christian! But I have to be careful. I have to continually remember my presuppositions. I have to continually remember I’m a Reformed person reading a non-Reformed theology.

Regards,
James Swan
http://www.ntrmin.org/rccorner-reformation.htm

James, for the benefit of us all, you need to post on this MB more often.

 

[Beoga]

James, for the benefit of us all, you need to post on this MB more often.

God bless,
Don

I am going to second what oworm said and say:

 

[5solas]

I felt the same way when I read Bondage of the Will.

Once, in the Lutheran forum, I mentioned that Lutherans do not seem to hold to the same beliefs as Luther did. They told me that they were aware of this. I said that it was odd then that they would call themselves Lutherans. They simply stated that Luther was wrong about many things regarding God and the Lutheran denomination has corrected his errors in the faith they believe today.

I personally think that Luther would be highly displeased to have his name affiliated with views that he did not espouse.

There are even people out there who call themselves Christians and.........

 

[Qoheleth]

One thing I have noticed and wanted to mention - to see what others here think - is that Luther was more "Calvinist" than John Calvin

I suggest you read

Theologia Germanica

This work was discovered and published in 1516 by Martin Luther, who said of it that;

“Next to the Bible and St. Augustine, no book has ever come into my hands from which I have learnt more of God and Christ, and man and all things that are.”

then read

"Union with Christ"---Braaten, Jenson

and then

On Christian Liberty--Martin Luther


and after these, ask yourself if Luther is a Calvinist. I prefer not to debate this, Ive been down this road and wanted only to share a few resources.

In any case

What you hear from Luther that sounds Calvinistic are echoes of St Augustine. Both men were influenced heavily by him (as were nearly all theologians in the west). The difference is that Calvin is more consistently Augustinian than Luther. In other words, Luther clearly rejects some of Augustine’s thought, while Calvin runs Augustine to his logical conclusions (sometimes in ways that Augustine, himself, would likely disapprove). To read Calvin’s double predestinationism back into Luther is an academic fallacy. The better way is to read Luther on his own terms—not trying to squeeze him into Calvin’s mindset.

The passages where it seems as if Luther is speaking of double predestination are actually him speaking clearly in terms of Law and Gospel; or, better, the wrath of God and the mercy of God. Furthermore, in the Bondage of the Will, Luther’s chief argument (against Erasmus) is to show that, in spiritual matters, the will is bound to reject the Lord’s mercy; and that as that rejection hardens, God gives a man over to his base desires. This, however, is not God predetermining the man to hell.


Q

 

[Reformationist]

I suggest you read

Theologia Germanica

This work was discovered and published in 1516 by Martin Luther, who said of it that;

“Next to the Bible and St. Augustine, no book has ever come into my hands from which I have learnt more of God and Christ, and man and all things that are.”

then read

"Union with Christ"---Braaten, Jenson

and then

On Christian Liberty--Martin Luther


and after these, ask yourself if Luther is a Calvinist. I prefer not to debate this, Ive been down this road and wanted only to share a few resources.

In any case

What you hear from Luther that sounds Calvinistic are echoes of St Augustine. Both men were influenced heavily by him (as were nearly all theologians in the west). The difference is that Calvin is more consistently Augustinian than Luther. In other words, Luther clearly rejects some of Augustine’s thought, while Calvin runs Augustine to his logical conclusions (sometimes in ways that Augustine, himself, would likely disapprove).To read Calvin’s double predestinationism back into Luther is an academic fallacy. The better way is to read Luther on his own terms—not trying to squeeze him into Calvin’s mindset.

The passages where it seems as if Luther is speaking of double predestination are actually him speaking clearly in terms of Law and Gospel; or, better, the wrath of God and the mercy of God. Furthermore, in the Bondage of the Will, Luther’s chief argument (against Erasmus) is to show that, in spiritual matters, the will is bound to reject the Lord’s mercy; and that as that rejection hardens, God gives a man over to his base desires. This, however, is not God predetermining the man to hell.


Q

I appreciate the post and the good advice and references.

God bless