My Conversion to Lutheranism
Never did I
expect to enter the Lutheran faith; I honestly expected to die in the
Reformed faith. What follows in this post is simply my “conversion
story”, and how I came to embrace the Lutheran faith, and why I believe,
by God’s grace, that this is where I will stay.
What follows is not meant to be an exhaustive description of Lutheran theology, which I embraced and to which I converted, nor is it meant to be an exhaustive or scholarly critique of Calvinism, which I abandoned after 20 years spent therein. What follows is simply my “conversion testimony” and the way I now see things.
FROM EVANGELICAL, TO REFORMED, TO EVANGELICAL CATHOLIC (LUTHERAN)
Being raised in the evangelical faith, I desired something of more substance. Although I can appreciate our non-denominational brethren’s desire for more unity, unfortunately this desire is usually at the expense of doctrine. I desired clarity and wanted to know what I believed. At the time, 20 years ago, that is when I discovered Calvinism and its doctrines.
I spent 20 years in Calvinism, and my time can be described as ups and downs, but more spiritual “downs” than “ups”, to be honest. I had a very philosophical mindset, and Calvinism satisfied that mindset. In the theology of Geneva (Calvinism), you have an airtight and rigorously logical system. Everything that happens on earth is an outworking of God’s sovereign decree, including the Fall of Adam, and including the decree of reprobation and who is predestined to be lost. Although orthodox Calvinism will speak of God desiring in some sense to save everyone, what is prominent is His sovereign decree. The Cross is an outworking of election, and God therefore atones only for the sins of the elect, and for no one else–although orthodox Calvinism admits that there is “a sense” in which Christ died for all “in the sense that” He desires their salvation–“in a sense.”
We can see from the above that Calvinism qualifies its language very much, almost to the nth degree. Whether Calvinism speaks of the extent of the atonement, the days of creation, the presence of Christ in the Supper, Baptism being efficacious for salvation, etc.–one has to ask our Calvinist brethren what they mean when they use language. This qualifying is very much connected to a lack of certainty and clarity, in my humble opinion. I desired certainty and objectivity, and I found it in Lutheranism.
CALVINISM: A SYSTEM WHICH CANNOT ESCAPE BEING LAW-ORIENTED
Connected to the above, my time spent in Calvinism was one of constant battles with assurance of salvation. I am now convinced that this is because Calvinism, even in its better forms that seek to keep law and Gospel distinct, nonetheless cannot get away from or escape the fact that it must inevitably keep election and predestination as primary in its theological thought. It starts with the covenant of redemption, where the Father makes a covenant with the Son and Spirit to atone for and apply salvation to the elect alone. It then plays itself out in history in the covenant of works and the covenant of grace, and therefore the Cross becomes the place where election is displayed, since Christ atones only for the elect and no others.
Likewise, many Calvinists will correctly speak of Scripture needing to interpret Scripture, which is a good hermeneutic, but nonetheless they still impose the categories of election upon the Scriptures primarily, and therefore Scripture *still* does not simply speak for itself in Calvinistic thought. Limited atonement, for example, is simply *not* something that can be arrived at through allowing the Scripture to speak for itself, because Scripture clearly teaches in numerous places that Christ atoned for the sins of all who have ever lived–even for false prophets and false teachers. It clearly teaches that God’s disposition is one of *mercy*–“God has bound all men over to disobedience that He may have mercy on all.”
To be sure, many Calvinists will speak of there not being a central dogma in Calvinism, such as Dr. Michael Horton, for whom I have high respect. However, as it is said, saying so doesn’t make it so. We can demonstrate that this is simply not so, and that Calvinism simply cannot avoid making election the primary motif, especially because of doctrines such as limited atonement. And we can prove that Calvinism cannot avoid being law-centered, especially because of its iconoclasm, its doctrine of the regulative principle of worship, and its view of the Sabbath, etc. And, many of our Calvinist friends still may not be convinced and feel like it is not so. But, by analogy, one can tell a Mormon friend *why* and *how* Mormonism is simply not Christian doctrine, but our Mormon friends will continue to insist that Mormonism is Christian. But of course, just because a Mormon says that Mormonism is Christian does not make it so. Especially after one can prove why and how Mormonism is not Christian. In the same way, one can easily prove that Calvinism cannot avoid being law-centered and election and predestination-centered, even though many Calvinists will try and claim that they have no central doctrine. Them saying that there is no central dogma in Calvinism does not make it so.
And, I am convinced that this is why even in its better forms, Calvinism cannot continue keeping law and Gospel distinct. In fact, it has to put them on the same economic plane. Related to this, Dr. Martin Luther speaks of the hidden god vs the Revealed God in Christ. To place the hidden god apart from Christ on the same economic plane as the Revealed God in Christ is to confuse law and Gospel. Gospel must always be God’s final Word, and Gospel always has the highest authority.
BLESSED ASSURANCE, JESUS IS MINE, AND I KNOW THAT BECAUSE OF GOD’S PROMISES IN THE SACRAMENTS
For 20 years, I was told that Christ was mine, but I was also told that Christ died only for the elect. I was also told that the Spirit *might* be present in the Sacraments, and that if I have *faith* that I am receiving the Body and Blood of Christ at the Supper. But I was also being told that it is possible that my faith may be a false faith, given that I may or may not be one of God’s elect. When I was Reformed Baptist, I was told to look to Christ, but then to look to my fruit. As the Anglican preacher J.C. Ryle sadly said, “Sin forsaken is evidence of sin forgiven.” The fact is, we cannot look to our fruit to find assurance, given that we all have besetting sins, and given that even unbelievers “forsake” outward actions of sin. As my pastor rightly says, if we were to follow anyone around 24 hours a day for a week, we would *all* conclude that they were “not saved.”
No wonder the Puritans struggled with assurance of salvation so much!
But then I entered a better form of Calvinism that didn’t tell me to “check my fruit.” With that form, I was told to look to the sacraments, which was correct in practice, but wrong in its sacramentology. After my Reformed pastor began denying the law/gospel distinction in sanctification, that was the catalyst that caused me to begin questioning. Why does Calvinism struggle so much with keeping the law and the Gospel distinct? And I realized, it’s because it separates the Spirit from the sacraments. In Calvinism, the Spirit “might” be present at Baptism, but only for the elect, and that not even at the moment of administration. At the Supper, He is only present to the faith of the believer, but not for the unbeliever. So, although Calvinists will speak of the sacraments being “efficacious” and the “real presence” and “objectivity”, it nonetheless boils down to *subjectivity* and “yes, but.”
I needed “Yes” and “Amen.” I needed objectivity.
How could I know that I had a gracious God? How could I know that Christ died for me? How could I know I was one of the elect?
“Look to the sacraments,” I was being told. But by their own definition, Christ was not always present in the sacraments!
Then I recognized correctly that Kim Riddlebarger correctly said the main difference between Calvinism and Lutheranism is particular grace vs universal grace.
I began to see that Calvinism cannot get away from the hidden god.
How did I know that God was *for us*? *For me*?
I then began to see why Luther went berzerk over Zwingli and Bullinger and all non-sacramental thought. For Luther–and for Scripture–to take the Spirit out of the Sacraments–even in a “sometimes” or “qualified” sense, was to mess with the Gospel and objective assurance.
I then began to see that Scripture *clearly* teaches that Baptism saves, that the Spirit is always present at Baptism, and that Christ’s Body and Blood are truly present in the Supper.
I also began to see that Scripture clearly teaches universal grace. “God has bound all men over to disobedience that He may have mercy on all.”
I appreciated how Lutherans let paradox be paradox.
After that, the icing on the cake was I recognized that the Church, for 1,500 years, *always* taught that Holy Baptism regenerates, and that Christ is physically and objectively present in His Supper.
Calvin and Zwingli started from scratch. Their doctrines were not taught for 1,500 years.
Luther and his followers cared very much for the catholicity of the Church, and did not desire to create any new doctrines.
LOOK TO CHRIST, AND FIND HIM WHERE HE HAS PROMISED TO BE FOUND *FOR YOU*
We do not look to creation to find God for us. Otherwise, we will give up when terrible things happen. We do not look within to find God for us. How do we know it is not our own thoughts? In fact, God hides Himself from being found by our feeble human attempts. God desires us to look for Him in Christ.
But this begs the question, “Where do I find Christ?” Especially since Christ is in heaven, can I climb the ladder to reach Him there? No. Of course not. All man-made theology is what is called “ladder theology.” Man tries to climb the ladder to reach God, to create his own Tower of Babel. The truth is, God must always come down.
Christ comes to us all the time, *for us*, in His Word and in His Sacraments. This is where we will find God *for us*, God as *gracious* for us. We will not find God gracious in creation, because creation dies. We will not find God gracious in His law, because His law shows us our sin.
If we want to find the gracious God, we must find Him in Christ on the Cross, and Him brought to us and for us in His Word and in His Sacraments.
We never get past the forgiveness of sins.
You see, this is down-to-earth. We all need a God Who is down-to-earth. When I was a Calvinist, I was philosophy-minded, bouncing from one theological idea within Calvinism to the next, never able to fully arrive, because it is idealistic and high-minded. It is “head-in-the-clouds.” Luther calls it “heavenly prophets.”
Lutheranism, on the other hand, is real, down-to-earth, physical, and right in front of me. It is where strivings truly cease. It keeps Jesus Christ at the center.
ONE FINAL THOUGHT
To my friends and family reading this, do I desire you to convert to Lutheranism? Of course I do. But don’t convert because of merely intellectual reasons. That would be treating it like another philosophy. Theology is not for the high-minded, or the philosophers. Theology is for pastoral care. Theology is *Christology*. It is about Christ, and about forgiveness of sins. We all need forgiveness. We never get past forgiveness. That is our greatest need. Christ is our Greatest Need.
In fact, Lutheranism is only a nickname. Lutheranism is the Gospel, and nothing else.
It is the Gospel of God’s universal saving grace in Christ, to the world, and for the world.
For me.
For you.
What follows is not meant to be an exhaustive description of Lutheran theology, which I embraced and to which I converted, nor is it meant to be an exhaustive or scholarly critique of Calvinism, which I abandoned after 20 years spent therein. What follows is simply my “conversion testimony” and the way I now see things.
FROM EVANGELICAL, TO REFORMED, TO EVANGELICAL CATHOLIC (LUTHERAN)
Being raised in the evangelical faith, I desired something of more substance. Although I can appreciate our non-denominational brethren’s desire for more unity, unfortunately this desire is usually at the expense of doctrine. I desired clarity and wanted to know what I believed. At the time, 20 years ago, that is when I discovered Calvinism and its doctrines.
I spent 20 years in Calvinism, and my time can be described as ups and downs, but more spiritual “downs” than “ups”, to be honest. I had a very philosophical mindset, and Calvinism satisfied that mindset. In the theology of Geneva (Calvinism), you have an airtight and rigorously logical system. Everything that happens on earth is an outworking of God’s sovereign decree, including the Fall of Adam, and including the decree of reprobation and who is predestined to be lost. Although orthodox Calvinism will speak of God desiring in some sense to save everyone, what is prominent is His sovereign decree. The Cross is an outworking of election, and God therefore atones only for the sins of the elect, and for no one else–although orthodox Calvinism admits that there is “a sense” in which Christ died for all “in the sense that” He desires their salvation–“in a sense.”
We can see from the above that Calvinism qualifies its language very much, almost to the nth degree. Whether Calvinism speaks of the extent of the atonement, the days of creation, the presence of Christ in the Supper, Baptism being efficacious for salvation, etc.–one has to ask our Calvinist brethren what they mean when they use language. This qualifying is very much connected to a lack of certainty and clarity, in my humble opinion. I desired certainty and objectivity, and I found it in Lutheranism.
CALVINISM: A SYSTEM WHICH CANNOT ESCAPE BEING LAW-ORIENTED
Connected to the above, my time spent in Calvinism was one of constant battles with assurance of salvation. I am now convinced that this is because Calvinism, even in its better forms that seek to keep law and Gospel distinct, nonetheless cannot get away from or escape the fact that it must inevitably keep election and predestination as primary in its theological thought. It starts with the covenant of redemption, where the Father makes a covenant with the Son and Spirit to atone for and apply salvation to the elect alone. It then plays itself out in history in the covenant of works and the covenant of grace, and therefore the Cross becomes the place where election is displayed, since Christ atones only for the elect and no others.
Likewise, many Calvinists will correctly speak of Scripture needing to interpret Scripture, which is a good hermeneutic, but nonetheless they still impose the categories of election upon the Scriptures primarily, and therefore Scripture *still* does not simply speak for itself in Calvinistic thought. Limited atonement, for example, is simply *not* something that can be arrived at through allowing the Scripture to speak for itself, because Scripture clearly teaches in numerous places that Christ atoned for the sins of all who have ever lived–even for false prophets and false teachers. It clearly teaches that God’s disposition is one of *mercy*–“God has bound all men over to disobedience that He may have mercy on all.”
To be sure, many Calvinists will speak of there not being a central dogma in Calvinism, such as Dr. Michael Horton, for whom I have high respect. However, as it is said, saying so doesn’t make it so. We can demonstrate that this is simply not so, and that Calvinism simply cannot avoid making election the primary motif, especially because of doctrines such as limited atonement. And we can prove that Calvinism cannot avoid being law-centered, especially because of its iconoclasm, its doctrine of the regulative principle of worship, and its view of the Sabbath, etc. And, many of our Calvinist friends still may not be convinced and feel like it is not so. But, by analogy, one can tell a Mormon friend *why* and *how* Mormonism is simply not Christian doctrine, but our Mormon friends will continue to insist that Mormonism is Christian. But of course, just because a Mormon says that Mormonism is Christian does not make it so. Especially after one can prove why and how Mormonism is not Christian. In the same way, one can easily prove that Calvinism cannot avoid being law-centered and election and predestination-centered, even though many Calvinists will try and claim that they have no central doctrine. Them saying that there is no central dogma in Calvinism does not make it so.
And, I am convinced that this is why even in its better forms, Calvinism cannot continue keeping law and Gospel distinct. In fact, it has to put them on the same economic plane. Related to this, Dr. Martin Luther speaks of the hidden god vs the Revealed God in Christ. To place the hidden god apart from Christ on the same economic plane as the Revealed God in Christ is to confuse law and Gospel. Gospel must always be God’s final Word, and Gospel always has the highest authority.
BLESSED ASSURANCE, JESUS IS MINE, AND I KNOW THAT BECAUSE OF GOD’S PROMISES IN THE SACRAMENTS
For 20 years, I was told that Christ was mine, but I was also told that Christ died only for the elect. I was also told that the Spirit *might* be present in the Sacraments, and that if I have *faith* that I am receiving the Body and Blood of Christ at the Supper. But I was also being told that it is possible that my faith may be a false faith, given that I may or may not be one of God’s elect. When I was Reformed Baptist, I was told to look to Christ, but then to look to my fruit. As the Anglican preacher J.C. Ryle sadly said, “Sin forsaken is evidence of sin forgiven.” The fact is, we cannot look to our fruit to find assurance, given that we all have besetting sins, and given that even unbelievers “forsake” outward actions of sin. As my pastor rightly says, if we were to follow anyone around 24 hours a day for a week, we would *all* conclude that they were “not saved.”
No wonder the Puritans struggled with assurance of salvation so much!
But then I entered a better form of Calvinism that didn’t tell me to “check my fruit.” With that form, I was told to look to the sacraments, which was correct in practice, but wrong in its sacramentology. After my Reformed pastor began denying the law/gospel distinction in sanctification, that was the catalyst that caused me to begin questioning. Why does Calvinism struggle so much with keeping the law and the Gospel distinct? And I realized, it’s because it separates the Spirit from the sacraments. In Calvinism, the Spirit “might” be present at Baptism, but only for the elect, and that not even at the moment of administration. At the Supper, He is only present to the faith of the believer, but not for the unbeliever. So, although Calvinists will speak of the sacraments being “efficacious” and the “real presence” and “objectivity”, it nonetheless boils down to *subjectivity* and “yes, but.”
I needed “Yes” and “Amen.” I needed objectivity.
How could I know that I had a gracious God? How could I know that Christ died for me? How could I know I was one of the elect?
“Look to the sacraments,” I was being told. But by their own definition, Christ was not always present in the sacraments!
Then I recognized correctly that Kim Riddlebarger correctly said the main difference between Calvinism and Lutheranism is particular grace vs universal grace.
I began to see that Calvinism cannot get away from the hidden god.
How did I know that God was *for us*? *For me*?
I then began to see why Luther went berzerk over Zwingli and Bullinger and all non-sacramental thought. For Luther–and for Scripture–to take the Spirit out of the Sacraments–even in a “sometimes” or “qualified” sense, was to mess with the Gospel and objective assurance.
I then began to see that Scripture *clearly* teaches that Baptism saves, that the Spirit is always present at Baptism, and that Christ’s Body and Blood are truly present in the Supper.
I also began to see that Scripture clearly teaches universal grace. “God has bound all men over to disobedience that He may have mercy on all.”
I appreciated how Lutherans let paradox be paradox.
After that, the icing on the cake was I recognized that the Church, for 1,500 years, *always* taught that Holy Baptism regenerates, and that Christ is physically and objectively present in His Supper.
Calvin and Zwingli started from scratch. Their doctrines were not taught for 1,500 years.
Luther and his followers cared very much for the catholicity of the Church, and did not desire to create any new doctrines.
LOOK TO CHRIST, AND FIND HIM WHERE HE HAS PROMISED TO BE FOUND *FOR YOU*
We do not look to creation to find God for us. Otherwise, we will give up when terrible things happen. We do not look within to find God for us. How do we know it is not our own thoughts? In fact, God hides Himself from being found by our feeble human attempts. God desires us to look for Him in Christ.
But this begs the question, “Where do I find Christ?” Especially since Christ is in heaven, can I climb the ladder to reach Him there? No. Of course not. All man-made theology is what is called “ladder theology.” Man tries to climb the ladder to reach God, to create his own Tower of Babel. The truth is, God must always come down.
Christ comes to us all the time, *for us*, in His Word and in His Sacraments. This is where we will find God *for us*, God as *gracious* for us. We will not find God gracious in creation, because creation dies. We will not find God gracious in His law, because His law shows us our sin.
If we want to find the gracious God, we must find Him in Christ on the Cross, and Him brought to us and for us in His Word and in His Sacraments.
We never get past the forgiveness of sins.
You see, this is down-to-earth. We all need a God Who is down-to-earth. When I was a Calvinist, I was philosophy-minded, bouncing from one theological idea within Calvinism to the next, never able to fully arrive, because it is idealistic and high-minded. It is “head-in-the-clouds.” Luther calls it “heavenly prophets.”
Lutheranism, on the other hand, is real, down-to-earth, physical, and right in front of me. It is where strivings truly cease. It keeps Jesus Christ at the center.
ONE FINAL THOUGHT
To my friends and family reading this, do I desire you to convert to Lutheranism? Of course I do. But don’t convert because of merely intellectual reasons. That would be treating it like another philosophy. Theology is not for the high-minded, or the philosophers. Theology is for pastoral care. Theology is *Christology*. It is about Christ, and about forgiveness of sins. We all need forgiveness. We never get past forgiveness. That is our greatest need. Christ is our Greatest Need.
In fact, Lutheranism is only a nickname. Lutheranism is the Gospel, and nothing else.
It is the Gospel of God’s universal saving grace in Christ, to the world, and for the world.
For me.
For you.
Thanks for sharing. I cross posted this at the CARM forums so someone might come over and call you an unregenerate Christian ;-)
ReplyDelete