Best lutheran christianity books according to redditors
We found 64 Reddit comments discussing the best lutheran christianity books. We ranked the 39 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.
We found 64 Reddit comments discussing the best lutheran christianity books. We ranked the 39 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the top 20.
Well there was a correspondence between the ecumenical patriarch and the lutherans. Basically, they essentially agreed on principles of ecclesiology, but disagreed on a lot of doctrine regarding faith, salvation, and sacraments.
Brad Gregory, The Unintended Reformation
Louis Bouyer, The Spirit and Forms of Protestantism
Heiko Oberman, Luther: Man Between God and the Devil
Eamon Duffy, The Stripping of the Altars
Dominic Erdozain, The Soul of Doubt
My top suggestion would be the Book of Concord and exploring the Just and Sinner Podcast archive. You will get a fair, balanced, and orthodox take on Lutheranism.
As others have said, Spirituality of the Cross is one of the better, single serving overviews of what Lutherans believe, as well.
​
Here is a list of other Lutheran resources:
Lutheran Theology Books
​
Websites
​
Journals
​
Podcast
​
YouTube
​
Apologetics
​
Courses
I posted this before when someone asked about Law and Gospel:
>I've been reading Law & Gospel: How to Read and Apply the Bible by CFW Walther (Walther's the guy who basically founded the Missouri Synod, pretty big deal). Truth be told, it's a little dry. But it's a book about theology, and it's from the 1800s, so what can I expect? If you want a concentrated 10000 proof injection of Law'n'Gospel and all of the ways it can go wrong, there you go.
>I also liked The Theology of the Cross by Gene Edward Veith (of bloggy fame), though it's maybe a little low level where Walther was too high. Lots of stuff about vocation and just Lutheranism on a broad scale, so that's where Law and Gospel come in.
>I've also heard good stuff about Broken - Seven "Christian" Rules That Every Christian Ought to Break as Often as Possible by Jonathan Fisk (of Worldview Everlasting fame, check out that link for a nice Law/Gospel bit too), though I haven't read it myself. Funny_original_name has and liked it. And I cannot say enough how Fisk kicks butt, at least in WE.
>Lastly, if you want a weird way to approach it, Hammer of God by Bo Giertz (he of Scandinavian Lutheran Church fame), is basically Law and Gospel in novel form. Part of the idea is that the Law is this hammer that cracks us because it needs to crack us, that it might fashion us into something kewl.
Theology of the Cross by Veith would probably be my best recommendation for the average reader. If you have a library close by, you might also try The Conservative Reformation and Its Theology by Krauth (doubles as excellent doorstop), or On Being a Theologian of the Cross: Reflections on Luther's Heidelberg Disputation, 1518 by Forde.
Yes it is, and you're the first person in four years to recognize that!
As far as the work of the Fathers, I think we need to do more to incorporate it. Luther and Melanchthon were both university professors who interacted with those texts on a regular basis. Luther himself cited the Fathers frequently when arguing that he didn't do away with anything that was authentically Catholic. I have a huge appreciation for Eastern theology and the work of Finnish theologians (who interact often with the Russian Orthodox due to geography) to understand Luther in light of Eastern ideas. The idea of salvation by theosis is one that I feel the Western church desperately needs in order to survive, and I think the Finns make a good case for Lutheran incorporation of that concept.
There was actually significant dialogue between the early Lutheran reformers and the Orthodox patriarch in Constantinople. The Lutherans sent a Greek translation of the Augsburg Confession and asked the Orthodox to, essentially, proof read it, as they believed that the Orthodox had maintained the Christian faith as set forth by the Apostles and would match quite nicely with the Lutheran beliefs. This book contains the letters and responses translated into English, and it's a really interesting read. You used to be able to find the letters translated online, but I can't find them for the life of me.
I haven't read this book but have been recommended to read it, I'm not sure how much it covers ancient heresies but it takes the objective of scripturally confessing the reality of the Holy Trinity.
https://www.amazon.com/Confessional-Lutheran-Dogmatics-Holy-Trinity-ebook/dp/B01HFORPNI/ref=sr_1_fkmr3_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1494871037&sr=8-1-fkmr3&keywords=lutheran+confessions+holy+trinity
Like others, I'm not completely sure what you want. Could you list the confessions you want? For what it is worth, I don't think the subreddit affirms specific confessions - it just lists some common Reformed confessions, some of which contradict each other. It does affirm some modern statements, but that's a separate discussion.
I think you should find everything you are looking for and then some (including Baptisty stuff) in the third volume of Schaff's Creeds of Christendom. You'll even get both the original languages and English translations. It is a three-volume set, but all of the Reformation creeds are in the third volume. You should keep the first two though - volume one has all of Schaff's commentary/analysis and volume 2 is the Greek and Latin Creeds. If you don't need a physical copy you can get a free e-book from CCEL.
Personally, I don't think a single-volume collection is that useful. There's no harm in having things split over multiple volumes. Here's my hard copy collection:
A big benefit to my approach I think is that I get the modern translation of all of the confessions, which I see as a big benefit.
A while back I actually asked if anyone knew of any books on this dialogue, and a redditer suggested this book. I'm just now getting around to reading it, but I'm really enjoying it so far, and would suggest it to anyone interested on the topic.
This is a long reply but I do hope you read all of it:
I am convinced that Roman Catholics are far too optimistic about reconciliation (believing it is just a few discussions away), and Eastern Orthodox Christians are far too pessimistic (believing it could never happen).
I am absolutely convinced that natural compromise is impossible. The Orthodox cannot accept Papal infallibility or supremacy (correctly I think; see my flair). More importantly, the Orthodox cannot accept the Filioque, and in addition to that all of the doctrine/thinking leading up to and surrounding the Filioque. The Filioque (and all surrounding doctrine) really is the thing that has been and will be the greatest impediment to reconciliation. If you are interested in reading just how seriously the Orthodox take it, I recommend two books: The Mystagogy of the Holy Spirit and Augsburg and Constantinople.
The former work is St. Photius yelling at some unfortunate recipient about the Orthodox view of the Filioque (do not expect a charitable attitude, unfortunately). The latter work is a verbatim, chronological compilation of letters between some early Lutherans seeking communion with the East, and the then-contemporary Patriarch of Constantinople. Interestingly, the greatest source of debate between the two is the Lutheran acceptance of and support for the Filioque. I initially thought that it would boil down to the sacraments or saints, but no, it devolved into the same basic argument the Christian East has had with the Christian West for centuries, with some Protestant flavor. The latter work contains an actual back-and-forth debate on the matter, whereas the former work, being a single letter, is wholly one-sided. If you're wondering how the Lutheran arguments for the Filioque are relevant to the Roman Catholic arguments for the same, know that the Lutherans essentially copied and pasted Roman Catholic arguments into their letters, so the Patriarch is not really answering Lutheran arguments at that point, but Roman Catholic arguments with Protestant support.
I do think reading the former work is critical to fully understanding the language used in the latter, though I again warn that any Roman Catholic reader will find the former work condescending at least. Even I, while agreeing with St. Photius' points, wondered why it was necessary to take the tone he does. Regardless, if you read both works (the first is very short, the second is very much not), you will have a full appreciation for just how impossible the situation is, on either side. I really want to throw both books at anyone who asks "what's preventing reconciliation?" Even if one does not find the Orthodox arguments convincing, the question will be answered in full.
So again, I am convinced that no amount of dialogue will heal the Schism. I am also, however, most absolutely convinced that Christ desires the healing of the rift (why would He not?), and that as Christ is not a liar, all things are possible through Him. It really is not the responsibility of the laity to work out reconciliation, and attempts at doing so almost always result in behavior that should be brought to confession. We can, however, pray. Christ is not a liar, and says that if two or more are gathered in His name, what they ask will happen. What would happen if not just two or three came together, but rather all the laity on both sides of this painful situation cried out to God for intervention?
It's a bit complex, but I can recommend some sources. The greatest Luther scholar of the 20th century, Heiko Oberman, has a few books which may be helpful, though I disagree with his interpretation of Nominalism. The first is his, The Harvest of Medieval Theology and second, Luther: Man Between God and the Devil.
Now, Oberman thinks Luther's nominalism is a positive thing - indeed, a necessary thing to preserve against Pelagianism. This is, frankly, nonsense and sounds like Oberman's just trying to protect Luther's reputation.
You could also read this short post by a friend of mine. If you want books specifically on late medieval nominalism, I can recommend some too.
Edit: Just to balance things out, I'll recommend:
Louis Dupré, The Passage to Modernity: An Essay in the Hermeneutics of Culture
Etienne Gilson, The Unity of Philosophical Experience
"Recently, a group of Finnish scholars has suggested that Luther shares much in common with the Orthodox Church."
That really isn't the impression one gets from reading about the theological exchange between some Lutheran theologians and the Patriarch Jeremiah II that took place in the late 16th century.
What motivated the Lutheran theologians is, I think, the same thing that motivates protestants today to claim some affinity with the churches of the east. But the fact is that Orthodox theology is, for all intents and purposes, Catholic theology. There are a couple of major points of disagreement on doctrine (the "filoque" and the precise role of the papacy) but most differences and disagreements are on matters of discipline (priestly (I do not say "clerical") celibacy, the dating of Easter, etc.)
This book is well worth reading and though it seems one should be able to, I can't find these correspondences for free online anywhere.
http://www.amazon.com/Augsburg-Constantinople-Correspondence-Theologians-Confession/dp/0916586820
Also, maybe it's an honest oversight on the part of OP, but Luther categorically denied the freedom of the human will to choose the good EVEN AFTER conversion and baptism. Something later theologians stepped away from.
http://www.amazon.com/Discourse-Free-Will-Continuum-Impacts/dp/0826477941/ref=pd_sim_b_8
http://www.amazon.com/Bondage-Will-Martin-Luther/dp/1434440656/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1368813064&sr=1-1&keywords=on+the+bondage+of+the+will
EDIT: I'm a convert from Lutheranism and had to wade through all these issues for myself not too long ago.
Here it is in book form. Not sure if it is online somewhere as well.
Since you mentioned both Calvinism and Orthodox, I have two recommendations if you want to read two books where each of these debated and discussed their differences. That said, I do recommend the more 'basic' suggestions first as this isn't light reading. Not in the sense that these two will be hard to read. Rather they are theologically DENSE.
Lutheranism vs. Calvinism: The Classic Debate at the Colloquy of Montbeliard 1586
Augsburg and Constantinople: The Correspondence between the Tubingen Theologians and Patriarch Jeremiah II of Constantinople on the Augsburg Confession
Book of Concord.
And, because it's an awesome resource to be available, bookofconcord.org.
HOLY CRAP!! MY DAD HELPED WRITE THIS BOOK!! I'm not even joking! He's an ordained Lutheran pastor and a professor of religion and philosophy at an ELCA college. Look at the second page of the preview on the Amazon page and scroll down to "Contributing writers." My dad is the second-to-last! And the last is the guy who wrote this specific page, and my family has spent New Years with his family at a cabin in northern Minnesota every year since I was a little kid! My dad is even leaving tomorrow to go to the International Luther Congress in Helsinki with the guy who wrote this page! AAAAH OMG IS THIS REAL LIFE?!
If you're interested in theosis you might like these two books that display how theosis is compatible in both a Lutheran and an Orthodox framework.
For my summer class:
The Rise of Evangelicalism by Mark Noll
The Emergence of Evangelical Spirituality by Tom Schwanda
Book I'm still reading:
A Modern Exposition of the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith by Sam Waldron
Summer Goals:
Faith Alone by R.C. Sproul
A Little Book on the Christian Life by John Calvin
The Christian Sabbath by Robert Paul Martin
The Legacy of Luther edited by R.C. Sproul and Stephen Nichols
If I can I'd also like to read RBAP three book series on Divine Impassibility. I doubt I'll have the time though.
Toothpaste: anything that's approved by the American Dental Association.
Cookie: Chocolate chip.
Cereal: Honey Bunches of Oats, specifically the cinnamon kind.
Reading: On Being a Theologian of the Cross: Reflections on Luther's Heidelberg Disputation, 1518 by Gerhard Forde.
Here is the mobile version of your link
You might like to read these books on the relationship between Lutheranism and the theme of theosis in Orthodoxy:
So, I'm obviously biased, but I like Dr. James Bollhagen's commentary linked here https://www.cph.org/p-7386-Ecclesiastes-Concordia-Commentary.aspx, as well as Luther's own study of the book found in Volume 15 of Luther's Works
https://www.amazon.com/Luthers-Works-Vol-15-Ecclesiastes-ebook/dp/B0039QGJ1Q
If Lutheranism isn't your thing though, you can rarely go wrong with NICOT https://www.amazon.com/Book-Ecclesiastes-International-Commentary-Testament/dp/0802823661
I prefer this
I wish it had been this one.
well... At least the Lutherans like the Orthodox and the reformation had nothing to do with us....
> I believe that Jesus can be all things to all people and that there is something deeply nourishing about the things he is trying to point to.
How dare you be open minded, reasonable and rational!!! /s
> I am starting to wonder whether Jesus is in fact as divine as the theistic Christians make out.
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and the knowledge of the Holy One is insight.
If you haven't read them, or haven't read them recently, you might really enjoy the Poetry section of the Old Testament (Psalms, Job, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Song of Songs, and Lamentations). The poetry of the Bible is beautiful and powerful.
Also, reading the Sermon on the Mount in historical and theological context can be extremely profound and inspiring. I would recommend Luther's exegesis on the Sermon on the Mount and the Magnificat.
God bless your search and journey!
I was hoping to find, essentially, those two books in one hardbound volume. But that is the content I'm looking for. I already had this version of the Book of Concord on my list.
Edit - Actually, given my general distrust of anything officially PC(USA) I might go for this instead.