Monday, October 23, 2006

Funny Mix

I sometimes get surprized when I see some zealot Puritan Calvinist bloggers put the picture of Martin Luther along side the picture of John Calvin, Jonathan Edwards and Charles Spurgeon together in the same spot!

I think this is naive. This is not seriously dealing with the teachings of Luther and is fanciful. I believe the smelly monk Luther would have spewed out explatives upon seing his picture along side these men. For one thing Luther would have rejected Calvin's view of the Lord's Supper because it falls short, since it stems from a Nestorian view of Christ. He would have been upset with Edward's mysticism and would have lumped him with the Enthusiasts, and most of all, he would have anathematized the baptistic Spurgeon for being an AnaBaptist in his baptist doctrine.


Anonymous said...

Lito, that makes Luther sound like he thought that he knew God better than everyone else who disagreed with him. Praise God that we are called to follow Jesus, though, and not Luther. Luther was just another sinner like that rest of us, after all.

Would you agree?


L P Cruz said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
L P Cruz said...

Agree 100%. For that reason, they should not put Luther in the mix because it does not add to their cause no matter how they esteem him. He would have said "thanks, but no thanks".

The man was intolerant and dogmatic.

Anonymous said...

Yes Luther would have disagreed with Calvin in some areas but history shows that the two had much more in common, and a great deal of respect for one another in spite of their differences. Of course that is because both were united in opposing Zwinglism.

You are probably right about Edwards - although I do think that Luther was not quite as virtuolic as your post intimates.

Finally, I think personality wise Luthe and Spurgeon would have much in common - however you should know that the modern Baptists have no historical connection to the anabapists. Modern Baptists arose out of the English Reformation later. Anabapits theological heirs are the mennoties, amish, etc.

L P Cruz said...

I think it was more that Calvin respected Luther. Opposing Zwinglianism? Calvin never got rid of his mentor (Zwingli's) influence though. Luther would have not tolerated the redefinition of "real presence" of Calvin. Melanchton was scared to share Calvin's letter on this with Luther. The thing though is that although Calvin signed the Augsburg Confession, he did not line himself with the mainstream Lutherans but made some concessions towards Rome, an example was his definition of what faith is.

I can not say about personalities etc, that is too subjective. I can only analyze the doctrines they espouse so on Spurgeon...

I do not think that Luther would appreciate Spurgeon's refusal to baptize children. Luther believed in baptismal regeneration, and if Spurgeon believed that he would not have been a Baptists.
Luther would have considered Baptists to be AnaBaptist because they re-baptize formerly baptized people and both Baptist and AnaBaptist require the candidate to be adults with ability to profess, hence in that respect they are the same doctrinal connection or pedigree. Sure the Baptist may not believe as the AnaBaptist do about the body of Christ being prepared from heaven, but in as far as Baptist rebaptize they are Ana Baptist. They do have doctrinal connections in this respect.

I notice that Reformed folk pick and chose and even redefine Luther in their own eyes. I know Baptists admire Luther, but I doubt if Luther would have admired the Baptists.