I printed out two articles about Luther/Lutheranism from the Internet for my father GB, for continuity’s sake with his Lutheran past. (GB hails from a Lutheran family, where his father, uncles, and grandfather were godly pastors.)
The headings according to which the article is organised are:
- Luther Discovers the Book
- The Pathway to the Professorship
- Why Should Pastors Listen to Luther?
- He was more a preacher than any of us pastors.
- 2. Like most pastors, Luther was a family man – at least from age 41 until his death at 62.
- 3. Luther was a churchman, not an ivory tower theological scholar.
- Luther at Study: The Difference the Book Made
- 1. Luther came to elevate the Biblical text itself far above all commentators or church fathers.
- 2. This radical focus on the text of Scripture itself with secondary literature in secondary place leads Luther to an intense and serious grappling with the very words of Paul and the other Biblical writers.
- 3. The power and preciousness of what Luther saw when he beat importunately upon Paul’s language convinced him forever that reading Greek and Hebrew was one of the greatest privileges and responsibilities of the Reformation preacher.
- 4. This reference to “indolence” leads us to the next characteristic of Luther at study, namely, extraordinary diligence in spite of tremendous obstacles.
The second is A Lutheran Response to Arminianism by Rick Ritchie.
Here are some excerpts:
The reason Lutheranism has never been presented according to a five-point scheme is not that it lacks the doctrines that would allow that, but that the Arminians never issued to the Lutherans a five-point refutation of their supposed errors. . .
At first glance, Lutheranism might appear to be an amalgamation of Calvinism and Arminianism because, with regard to the five points, it seems to agree with Calvinism on some points and Arminianism on others. We must be careful, however, to look at the underlying principles that motivated the positions. When we do this, we will find that Lutheranism is not in fundamental agreement with the Remonstrants on any of the five points.