Lutheran?

[Greg Winegar]

In 1521 Pope Leo X excommunicated Martin Luther. Thank you Pope Leo!
Brandan shared this quote with me today:


Our purpose is that such men should rightfully be ranked with Martin and other accursed heretics and excommunicates, and that even as they have ranged themselves with the obstinacy in sinning of the said Martin, they shall likewise share his punishments and his name, by bearing with them everywhere the title "Lutheran" and the punishments it incurs.

Lately Brandan and I have been discussing Luther and a good many of the things he said. As a result I'm finding that I identify with Luther more than I do with Calvin.

This has caused me to change my profile from a Calvinist (Supralapsarian) to a Hyper-Lutheran-Nonconformist-Supralapsarian. How do you Identify yourself?

[Brandan Kraft]

I wonder how many so-called Lutherans today know WHY they're called "Lutheran." I found this quote while reading the Bull of Excommunication by Pope Leo X.

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo10/index.htm

[Dustin]

I've been reading a few books on Luther. His idea of having a Christ-centered approach to the "canon" is one that appeals very much to me. His ideas on the papacy were not historically new but were more openly and loudly proclaimed than many who thought the same before him. Luther could be clear as a bell on any certain teaching, but then he'd go off on tangents that make no sense whatsoever. I think he made more of an effort to defend things he was already teaching instead of developing the theology more. Sometimes he comes off very Roman Catholic, other times he almost seems like a dualist. It can be very frustrating trying to pull the jewels out of the muck, so to speak, but on the whole, I'd say I had a Lutheran (the man, not the denomination) view of the "canon".


One more thing of interest I found was that somewhat privately, Luther toyed with the idea of house churches, but he never got around to actually carrying it out.

[Dustin]

Luther also affirmed double predestination/equal ultimacy but Melanchthon limp-wristed at Ausburg.

[Brandan Kraft]

We stand on a lot of the revelation that was given to men like Luther, Calvin, Gill, Hoeksema, Clark, and Robbins. I have even been blessed by some false teachers such as Marc Carpenter even though I cannot in any good conscience support them or their organizations. The simple fact of the matter though is this: TRUTH IS TRUTH, no matter through whom God says it!

In my opinion the reformation was derailed in part due to man's inclination to identify with men rather than the TRUTH. At Predestinarian Network, I hope not to be known as a Lutheran, Calvinist, Higbyite or even a Paulinian. But I hope to be known as a LOVER OF TRUTH; and I call on all who love the truth to join me in this quest to learn the infinite riches of HIS ETENRAL GRACE! Amen!

[Brandan Kraft]

"the love and hate of God towards men is immutable and eternal, existing, not merely before there was any merit or work of ‘free-will,’ but before the world was made; [so] all things take place in us of necessity, according as He has from eternity loved or not loved ... faith and unbelief come to us by no work of our own, but through the love and hatred of God" (The Bondage of the Will, pp. 226, 228-229).

[Dustin]

"the love and hate of God towards men is immutable and eternal, existing, not merely before there was any merit or work of ‘free-will,’ but before the world was made; [so] all things take place in us of necessity, according as He has from eternity loved or not loved ... faith and unbelief come to us by no work of our own, but through the love and hatred of God" (The Bondage of the Will, pp. 226, 228-229).

I heartily agree.

[Craig kennedy]

"the love and hate of God towards men is immutable and eternal, existing, not merely before there was any merit or work of ‘free-will,’ but before the world was made; [so] all things take place in us of necessity, according as He has from eternity loved or not loved ... faith and unbelief come to us by no work of our own, but through the love and hatred of God" (The Bondage of the Will, pp. 226, 228-229).

The problem I have with such a quotation from Martin Luther is that it is so irreconcilable with the rest of his STATED THEOLOGY!

How does this quotation square with the fact that Martin Luther held to a UNIVERSAL ATONEMENT, for example, as well as the free universal proffers of grace to the unregenerate?

In Christ, Craig

[Brandan Kraft]

It's funny hearing that from you Craig! No offense, but you haven't exactly been this pillar of consistency.

[Craig kennedy]

We stand on a lot of the revelation that was given to men like Luther, Calvin, Gill, Hoeksema, Clark, and Robbins. I have even been blessed by some false teachers such as Marc Carpenter even though I cannot in any good conscience support them or their organizations. The simple fact of the matter though is this: TRUTH IS TRUTH, no matter through whom God says it!

In my opinion the reformation was derailed in part due to man's inclination to identify with men rather than the TRUTH. At Predestinarian Network, I hope not to be known as a Lutheran, Calvinist, Higbyite or even a Paulinian. But I hope to be known as a LOVER OF TRUTH; and I call on all who love the truth to join me in this quest to learn the infinite riches of HIS ETENRAL GRACE! Amen!

I loved this post by Brandon!

Brandon makes this profound statement:

"I hope to be known as a LOVER OF TRUTH..."

I can identify with this. I have repeatedly said in my posts on this forum that while, at this point in time, I cannot formulate my understanding of theology in the way you do...I have NEVER said "you are wrong". You may be right! Who is to know for sure?

What is important to me is that my salvation is based on Christ's Finished Work on the Cross, Jesus saved me by His grace (without works) and I am eternally secure in Him.

I am a LOVER OF TRUTH.

In Christ, Craig

[Craig kennedy]

It's funny hearing that from you Craig! No offense, but you haven't exactly been this pillar of consistency.

No problem at all, Brandon!

You have picked up on my point, viz: that Martin Luther's theology is "inconsistent", just as mine is.

I concede that on these "deep matters" of the faith my stated theology is not 'smooth and even'; this is because I go with the balance of scripture as the Holy Spirit reveals it to me. I struggle to give a COHERENT and WATERTIGHT systematic theology on these things because my understanding of scripture does not incline me to do this.

I have NEVER said that your stated 'take' on these things is "WRONG".

If I am ever proved wrong in my "verbal babblings" (and I am sure that many of them will be proved to be DUNG!) I will be manifested on the GREAT DAY as a sinner SAVED BY GOD'S GRACE ALONE! God will forgive me of my error and mistake.

If your stated theology is, in actual fact, proved to be correct then you will have been vindicated in your gospel efforts in a far greater way than mine.

In Christ, Craig

[Robert R. Higby]

I might add the worst example of Luther's inconsistensy with the gospel--his doctrine of the Supper and Sacraments.

The German Lutheran state-church manifested the absolute opposite of the brilliant teachings of Luther in "The Captivity of the Church" and "The Freedom of the Christian". I would even affirm that the liberty of conscience enjoyed by so many citizens in a multitude of nations in the last 400 years originated in the principles espoused by Luther (NOT by Talmudic Judaism, Mr. Netenyahu!).

There is no way that universal atonement, 'general' or 'objective' justification, justification that can be lost through neglect of the sacraments, or any other of a host of Lutheran doctrines can be harmonized with Luther's most basic teachings on the gospel and God's sovereignty.

[GraceAmbassador]

In 1521 Pope Leo X excommunicated Martin Luther. Thank you Pope Leo!
Brandan shared this quote with me today:



Lately Brandan and I have been discussing Luther and a good many of the things he said. As a result I'm finding that I identify with Luther more than I do with Calvin.

This has caused me to change my profile from a Calvinist (Supralapsarian) to a Hyper-Lutheran-Nonconformist-Supralapsarian. How do you Identify yourself?

As I told you guys on our pleasant phone call the other day: I am 98% Calvinist and 2% Lutheran, and THAT MIXTURE IS WHAT MAKES ME A NO-CONFORMIST! So, for people who know what I am talking about, when I tell them of my mix, they immediately know that I am an NO-CONFORMIST, especially when I tell them to what part of Luther the 2% pertains.
Perhaps it would be a good idea to for us to delineate what part of Luther we embrace! But that's next...
Milt

[GraceAmbassador]

If you want to know what a CURRENT real Lutheran thinks, read this article. Please, ignore certain doctrinal aspects which are still open for discussion. This guy has other articles, that I published in another thread, where he quotes people who, in my view "mock" the way Lutherans (not Luther) through the years have cheapened the doctrine of Baptism.

Warning: This guy sounds often as a hyper-Calvinist! If you listen to his audio lessons and don't know he is a Lutheran, you will believe he is a hyper-Calvinist in many aspects.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/55216252/Freed-From-the-Shopkeeper-s-Prison-Bible-and-Confessional-Study-on-Election-and-Evangelism

I also have been reading articles and I plan to publish in this thread in opportune times, where past and present Lutheran theologians (the real thing) prove that the terms "consubstantiation" is a derogatory term used by Calvinists to slander Luther's view of the "Real Presence" and the way some mock the Lutheran view that the Lord's Supper is not necessarily a means of Grace (although Luther teaches it is ), but its practice part of the annunciation of the Gospel (...every time you do this, you announce my death till I come...--Jesus). Of course the Lutherans are also to be condemned when they repay Calvinists with their own slanderous affirmation that Calvin was NESTORIAN when it comes to the Lord's Supper. Today, the Lutherans that I debate, tell me for sure that not only Calvin was Nestorians, but, some of his current apologists, such as Clark and even the Trinity Foundation! So, these accusations between jealous (not zealous) followers of these two giants, who want for their own particularly preferred hero the title of the "king of the reformation" have resisted any attempt to dispel slanders on both sides to the prejudice of the ecclesiastical unity and such slanders perdure even today; read the articles published by both camps at F.B. and you will see that there is no end for such cooperation with devils to destroy the unity of the Eklesia!

I believe most people who use the word "consubstantiation" should look to the Marburg Colloquy and a few others and note how bitter these differences really were, in spite of attempts from the "peacemaker" Bullinger to bring unity. They will notice when and how these slanders began. When someone asks me if I can answer Luther's position on the Lord Supper, I say, "He believes the real presence in the elements, but maintains that the bread remains bread and the wine remains wine."
Luther was so adamant on the importance of wine that he said that "if anyone cannot for any reason, health or otherwise, take the wine, EAT ONLY THE BREAD, so no one comes up with some strange invention" (not a direct quote). Anyway, if this discussion offers an opportunity to publish these articles, I will. It depends on how the discussion progresses. I've seen articles being posted that are off topic and although valuable, they end up being just "something off the topic".

If any of us here want an example of a no-conformist, willing to sacrifice his personal life, possessions and positions in to bring about something better than the status quo, Luther is this man!

Milt

[Craig kennedy]

As I told you guys on our pleasant phone call the other day: I am 98% Calvinist and 2% Lutheran, and THAT MIXTURE IS WHAT MAKES ME A NO-CONFORMIST! So, for people who know what I am talking about, when I tell them of my mix, they immediately know that I am an NO-CONFORMIST, especially when I tell them to what part of Luther the 2% pertains.
Perhaps it would be a good idea to for us to delineate what part of Luther we embrace! But that's next...
Milt

Milt writes:

"Perhaps it would be a good idea to for us to delineate what part of Luther we embrace! But that's next..."

A VERY GOOD IDEA, indeed, and I am sure many readers would profit from such a delineation.

Can you please ensure that this happens?

In Christ, Craig

[Craig kennedy]

If you want to know what a CURRENT real Lutheran thinks, read this article. Please, ignore certain doctrinal aspects which are still open for discussion. This guy has other articles, that I published in another thread, where he quotes people who, in my view "mock" the way Lutherans (not Luther) through the years have cheapened the doctrine of Baptism.

Warning: This guy sounds often as a hyper-Calvinist! If you listen to his audio lessons and don't know he is a Lutheran, you will believe he is a hyper-Calvinist in many aspects.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/55216252/Freed-From-the-Shopkeeper-s-Prison-Bible-and-Confessional-Study-on-Election-and-Evangelism

I also have been reading articles and I plan to publish in this thread in opportune times, where past and present Lutheran theologians (the real thing) prove that the terms "consubstantiation" is a derogatory term used by Calvinists to slander Luther's view of the "Real Presence" and the way some mock the Lutheran view that the Lord's Supper is not necessarily a means of Grace (although Luther teaches it is ), but its practice part of the annunciation of the Gospel (...every time you do this, you announce my death till I come...--Jesus). Of course the Lutherans are also to be condemned when they repay Calvinists with their own slanderous affirmation that Calvin was NESTORIAN when it comes to the Lord's Supper. Today, the Lutherans that I debate, tell me for sure that not only Calvin was Nestorians, but, some of his current apologists, such as Clark and even the Trinity Foundation! So, these accusations between jealous (not zealous) followers of these two giants, who want for their own particularly preferred hero the title of the "king of the reformation" have resisted any attempt to dispel slanders on both sides to the prejudice of the ecclesiastical unity and such slanders perdure even today; read the articles published by both camps at F.B. and you will see that there is no end for such cooperation with devils to destroy the unity of the Eklesia!

I believe most people who use the word "consubstantiation" should look to the Marburg Colloquy and a few others and note how bitter these differences really were, in spite of attempts from the "peacemaker" Bullinger to bring unity. They will notice when and how these slanders began. When someone asks me if I can answer Luther's position on the Lord Supper, I say, "He believes the real presence in the elements, but maintains that the bread remains bread and the wine remains wine."
Luther was so adamant on the importance of wine that he said that "if anyone cannot for any reason, health or otherwise, take the wine, EAT ONLY THE BREAD, so no one comes up with some strange invention" (not a direct quote). Anyway, if this discussion offers an opportunity to publish these articles, I will. It depends on how the discussion progresses. I've seen articles being posted that are off topic and although valuable, they end up being just "something off the topic".

If any of us here want an example of a no-conformist, willing to sacrifice his personal life, possessions and positions in to bring about something better than the status quo, Luther is this man!

Milt

A very informative post that was interesting, well thought out and provided definite "food for thought". I was greatly EDIFIED by this writing.

Milt offers:

"Anyway, if this discussion offers an opportunity to publish these articles, I will. It depends on how the discussion progresses."

Please DO publish these articles. I think many people will profit from them.

In Christ, Craig