Lutheran and Reformed Differences on Justification

In this video, the question is answered: Are there differences between the Lutheran and Reformed views on justification? The uniquenesses of each tradition is explained and contrasted.

[JohanHauge]

It's quite true that modern reformed people tend to emphasize that justification is an event at one point in the past. But it is worth noting that there is elements in the reformed tradition that emphasize justification as a continual reality that is ever repeated again and again. I first came across this in Wilhelmus a Brakel's Systematic Theology (who seems to say that that is the standard view, and I think he criticises the opposite view). Personally I find both perspectives helpful and complementary.

[meganotofthisworld]

Nice beard, haircut and glasses, you are looking more and more like a true theologian... 😁

[daric_]

I'm a Reformed/Particular Baptist, so in the same vein as the Reformed, and would also agree that justification is a one-time event at conversion and the state of being "justified" is a continual, permanent state of the one being justified. But we aren't continually being declared as justified over and over again.

If we are declared justified, then we are innocent, once and for all. We don't need to be continually declared innocent. Since Paul uses clearly judicial/litigious language in his epistle to the Romans, it is like a court decision: we are declared righteous once and set free from bondage. But I would say this isn't an essential distinct view of justification, as long as we keep Sola Fide.

[steveempire]

The commonsense interpretation is that there is an initial justification whereby if someone were to perish immediately after baptism, we would expect that person to be saved. However, the scriptures appear to be pretty solid that as time goes on, the believer will face temptations, sin, heresy, and apostasy that the scriptures warn about and to be on guard about. Otherwise, the writings of the NT don't make a lot of sense nor does their canonization.

[Habackuk]

I think the differences that are due to the Reformed doctrine of limited atonement, and to the Lutheran doctrine of universal justification could be expanded on.

[JimiSurvivor]

I see justification as ongoing (continual) process (1 John 1:7-9)

[timothy]

I am a current Lutheran seminary student on track for my Mdiv. It's nice to see more Lutheran pastors actually speak about theological issues and debates. I mean this out of respect, but I disagree with your points. We are saved by grace alone, faith alone, Christ alone. At that time we are justified and begin the path of sanctification. We are not continully justified, but we are continually sanctified, until one day we are glorified. Romans 8. I believe the confusion happens when we embrace specifically Calvins or Luthers teaching and equate them to scripture.

[villarrealmarta]

As we read through scripture exegetically we see two continuing patterns. Salvation and judgement.

[sammy]

I would suggest that you study Walther’s Law and Gospel. A series of lectures to his students.

[zakasha]

Justification is not when you accept the Sacrifice of Christ on the Cross for your sins and repent of such sins, and then the process after that is not Sanctification?

[godtriunealonematters]

with respect, this video has helped me stay reformed in my theology. calling justification IN ANY SENSE a "process" differs nothing from rome. thanks for this video it helped me not buy expensive lutheran books on the topic (no disrepect intended)

[ver-ilpc]

Jordan Cooper:

Thanks for the video. A calvinist who I was debating with, told me in a facebook debate group that current lutherans deny some of the Tulip points due to that they departed from Luther's teachings. And that Luther would have agreed with all the 5 points of calvinism. How true is that? Are current lutherans a bit far from Luther's teachings?

One more thing That caught my attention:

Another calvinist told me that if it hadn't been by Calvin and the calvinists, lutherans would have gone back to roman catholicism. I really have my doubts about whether or not that info is historically right and accurate...

[sophianikolai]

so are you saying we can lose justification at any point?

[yvonnegonzales]

Lutheran reformed difference, thanks for the info

[miguelecheverriasalazar]

Hi! Which book or material would you recommend to learn about Lutheran views on soteriology ?
Thank you!

[Psalm.]

I'm Anglican (ACNA Denomination). As far as I can tell, Justification (Salvation by Grace, by Faith Alone) is essentially the exact same theology for Lutheran, Anglican, Presbyterian, and Baptist (Southern Baptist Convention), not the Fundamental Independent Baptist Churches that think Faith Alone means you don't have to repent. I never heard of any reformers discussing a "covenant of works." Anyone know of some famous reformers who taught that?

[spanellaful]

I’m so catholic that I don’t even understand what is this about... why do I have to be justified? For what? What I have done? Jesus just said to love each other... it shouldn’t be difficult to explain... but maybe it’s me...

[christianvictor]

perhaps Lutherans confusing the justification and the sanctification.... justification is one time event, meanwhile sanctification is a progressive event that goes on throughout our lives

[toobsterdude]

Genesis 15 and Romans 4 tells when Abraham's faith was "counted as righteousness". Hebrews 11 never says that he "was counted righteous." It just says Abraham had faith to go to the promised land but never says he was justified at that time. Also, James 2 is reaffirming Abraham's faith by his works and not changing when he was declared righteous but only demonstrating his faith had evidence as that was his point in saying "I will show you my faith by my works". I don't see the ongoing justification from those passages.

[TheDroc]

You guys have to have ongoing justification. Makes total logical sense ;)

Because if a regenerate justified non Elect can be cast away from Christ (even though Christ said He would never cast away those who come to them) then you must have an ongoing justification. Because if not then God would have a one time declaration of righteous in Jesus...and then at a later time change His mind and revoke your salvation. So yes this makes sense.

Remember guys I'm not being crass. Lutheran Reprobation is God casting away those He has regenerated. He regenerated the reprobate in order to display His glory (which im fine with ultimately) but just want to point out that distinction yet again.

Calvinist Reprobation is God justly and rightly by His own will and purpose PASSING OVER those whom are not decreed Elect unto salvation. God allows them a heavenly taste of the sacraments and of the church community but they are never really of us...but come on guys...to say that God REMOVES THE HEART OF STONE and declares a man righteous in His sight but intends to rip away such comfort and salvation. I can't get my mind around this Lutheran "mystery". Guess I gotta just accept it.

Calvinist Reprobation doesn't need all the publicity. Someone talk about you guys for once! Jk lol