I will leave all of my former Calvinist blogs up on the site and indeed I will stand behind much of what I have written in the past. If you're interested in where I stood on things as a Calvinist, just peruse my old blogs. I'll leave them there. For instance, as a Lutheran now, I remain a presuppositionist in the apologetics area. I'll still stack the late Dr. Greg Bahnsen up against anyone in an apologetics debate.
So why the conversion from Calvinism to Lutheranism? (LCMS to be precise) I'm not going to go into a ton of detail here, but I will offer up my main reasons for doing so. Without further adieu, here are my reasons; and no, I'm not going to just post a picture of Holy Scripture!
1. The Christocentric hermeneutic of Lutheranism. The hermeneutics of Lutheran theology I do believe to be correct in light of Scripture. It really is all about Jesus. I know this sounds snarky, and I certainly do not mean to imply that my Reformed brothers are not Christ-centered! But Lutheranism sees all theology through Christ, as opposed to Covenant Theology (which is a pretty solid system, for what it's worth).
2. The sacraments. I found Calvin's views on the sacraments to be untenable and not in-line with Scripture. I find the memorialist views on the sacraments to be crass and out of line with Scripture. The Lutheran views on them are simple, to the point, and take the words in Holy Scripture at face value. Not to mention, the Lutheran views on the sacraments have historical continuity to a much greater degree than the Reformed views.
3. Assurance of Salvation. Limited Atonement in Reformed Theology locates assurance in the individual, whether it intends to or not. Most Calvinists I know will cry foul on this one and I get that. I really do. But where else are you to look if Christ only died for some? You look to your fruits and your changed life. In Lutheranism, we look to objective monergistic gifts that God has given us that deliver Christ crucified to us. That is to say, we know Christ died for us and we know that He has given Himself to us in Word and Sacrament.
4. The Divine Service. I am a huge traditional liturgy homer. It's based in Scripture and centered on Christ, every week and every service.
I would also throw out that reading Scripture and studying church history are two other reasons. But for now, this will suffice.
Grace and Peace
These reason like like my own, except I am being drawn from a Baptist/Evangelical perspective. We still attend a non-denominational because my wife likes being there.
ReplyDeleteI was actually drawn from that perspective as well. I was a Reformed guy in thought and theology for a long time, but I attended a baptist church. Good people there, but eventually I had to leave; especially in light of the sacraments. We still go there, although I will not commune there. I am an LCMS member and attend there early in the morning before going to the baptist service. All 3 oldest children have been baptised in the LCMS and my baby girl who was born Monday will be baptised tomorrow, the 25th of August.
ReplyDeleteMove over a little brother as I kneel beside you at this altar!
ReplyDeleteI too recently completed my pilgrimage (August 4th) from the untenable "Crypto-Lutheran" within the Reformed Baptistic Minions to a Confessional Lutheran. I too am a presuppositionist in the honorable van Til/Bahnsen tradition. I too was drawn by the Christo-centric Theology of the Cross, the preaching of the Word and sacraments, the assurance verses the despair (of Genevan Rationalism), and the Divine Service as Incarnational!
On the Assurance side, let Herr Luther speak,
"Moreover, we should refrain from debates about predestination and from similar discussions. They are fraught with danger and mischief, because they inquire into the will and hidden counsels of God apart from the Word. They want to investigate and explore too inquisitively why God has revealed Himself in one way or another, and why He so earnestly endeavors to persuade our will to believe. The inquisitiveness of Adam is well known. In Paradise he sought God apart from the Word, just as Satan did in heaven. Both found Him, but not without great harm.
Therefore let us learn that God must be apprehended, not with our reason but as He has revealed Himself and has condescended to speak and deal with us in human fashion. Indeed, we should joyfully welcome the Divine Majesty, who comes down to us with such humility that He not only invites us to Himself with promises but by inserting an oath even compels us to accept what the Word offers."
Martin Luther
Luther's Works, AE 4:143,
Lectures on Genesis,
Genesis 22:16
In the Lamb,
Hello Andrew, if you don't mind answering some questions I have... here we go! lol
ReplyDelete1) What do you think is the hermeneutic method is for Calvinists? You mentioned Covenant theology but you said so yourself that it's a solid "system", which is not exactly hermeneutics, right? Hermeneutics leads to a system, doesn't it?
2) Are you implying that Calvin's view of the Supper is memorialist view?
3) Is there a place where I can read about how you make the case that limited atonement leads to viewing the assurance to oneself?
Thanks Andrew
1. Covenant Theology is logically solid, for what it's worth. I don't think we should have any other "hermeneutical method" than Christ at the center.
ReplyDelete2. No. I'm saying that it is unbiblical. Calvin tried (to his credit) very hard to deal with the Real Presence and the Ascension. But then came up with a theory of the Eucharist that nobody had ever even considered. "This is My body" does not mean "you ascend by the Spirit to heaven to partake of Christ's body." In effect, this is not a Real Presence at all. Real Presence means that Christ Himself (both natures - one person) is there.
3. I haven't really written on that I don't think, but it's pretty easy to see I think. If Christ only died for some - how do you know that Christ died FOR YOU? You can't point to Christ dying as objective assurance, because He did not die for everyone. The only other place you can look is to your own changed life. I know I am saved because of the Holy Spirit changing me, and so on.
I think I probably know you. Put your name on it. ;)
haha thanks for taking the time to respond. Would you answer couple more questions? I'll stop after this one :)
ReplyDelete1) Well, I just wanted to make sure that the Reformed hermeneutic is Christocentric. You did mention that the Reformed people are Christ-centered but that's different from saying that their hermeneutic is Christocentric. And Covenant Theology is certainly there but it's more of an architectural structure Reformed organizes Scripture (of course, because Scripture speaks in covenants and covenantal language--just like Christ is in the OT), not so much that CT is the hermeneutics.
3) I think you are drawing a conclusion Reformed theology does not make, thereby misrepresenting it. This is the same as whether I can know that I am an elect or not. Sure, it's possible to wonder whether Christ died for him or not. Sure, it's also possible that he would look to himself. I admit that it's easy to look within himself but I would also say that's a problem of humanity that is bent on work-based salvation, which is why we need the gospel. When a believer is struggling in assurance, no Reformed pastors wouldn't say "prove it" or "if your fruit is there". They (at least, the good ones) simply say, if you believe and trust in the gospel, then Christ died for you. There is no point in endless speculation in God's hidden will and you made it seem like that's Calvinistic thing to do. Sure the doctrine is there because it is revealed, beginning with election. But we don't say, now let's try to figure out whether you are an elect even though the immediate question would be "am I an elect?". Again, that's human problem in general, to pry into God's will, which is why I believe Lutherans guard against it and so do Calvinists.
Again, thanks for taking the time to read it and I hope I understood you correctly. And btw, for some reason, I am very skeptical of integration of accounts from different websites lol that's why I put anonymous but I found a way to put my name haha
Thanks for writing the posts. It's interesting to hear your journey although what you say about Reformed Theology is not quite what I've been taught (hence the questions). But I do appreciate your thoughts!
1. I would argue that the Reformed hermeneutic is more "Theocentric" whereas the Lutheran hermeneutic is more "Christocentric." We have a phrase we use once in a while: All Theology is Christology. We use this phrase precisely because Christ is what is revealed to us. It's unwise to peer into the hidden God (the Reformed Lapsarian discussion would be an example of this)
ReplyDelete3. I'm not so sure about that Jong. I've heard many Reformed theologians root their assurance in something other than the work of Christ outside of them.
I also think you're going to hear different perspectives when you hear Reformed Theology taught to you from a Reformed person as opposed to a former Reformed person who is a Lutheran now. That is pretty natural.
Although I heartily agree with everything you said about human nature and our need for the Gospel.
ReplyDelete