A Legacy Lost to the Reformed Imagination: Luther and Confessional Lutheranism on the Extent of the Atonement
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Particular Election and Gratia Universalis in Confessional Lutheranism
3. The Complexities of Martin Luther’s Views on the Extent of the Atonement
4. Luther’s Lectures on Galatians (1531/1535)
5. Luther’s Sermon on John 1:29 (1537)
6. Result: Christ Extra Nos as the Foundation
How can a person be sure that Christ died for him, if the Gospel promises, based on the atonement, are in reality only for the elect? Martin Luther thought that the reference to the [sic] God’s love for the world in John 3:16 was a greater guarantee of his own salvation than if his name were included on the sacred pages. If the passage read that “God loved Martin Luther,” he could never be sure that he was the “Martin Luther” referred to. Luther reasoned from John 3:16 that the Christian can safely and confidently conclude that God gave His Son for him personally. If God’s Son died for the world i.e., humanity, then He died for me since I without a doubt am part of humanity.
7. Conclusions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
1 | This religious and social trend was later highlighted in mainstream media, as reflected in a Time (magazine) article discussing “The New Calvinism” within an issue covering “10 Ideas Changing the World Right Now” (Van Biema 2009). |
2 | This simplistic equivalency is questioned by Reformed scholars themselves. For examples, see (Muller 1993, pp. 425–33; Stewart 2011, pp. 75–96; Thianto 2022, pp. 7, 56–60). |
3 | |
4 | Hansen’s brief references to Luther (Hansen 2008, pp. 34, 70, and 83) do not add any further historical elucidations. Scholars debate whether John Calvin himself consistently held to a strict “limited” view of the atonement (see Kennedy 2002; Rouwendal 2008; Hartog 2023). For comparisons of Luther and Calvin, see (Schaeffer 1920; Gordon 2017; Selderhuis 2017). |
5 | Both Veith and Preus were associated with the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod (LCMS) at the time of signing the Cambridge Declaration in 1996. |
6 | By “confessional,” the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals has historically meant theologians and movements that fully and strictly adhere to the historical frameworks of the theological system—a fixed commitment that requires “subscribing to all of the doctrines in the Confession and Catechisms” (Smith 1997, p. 185). In the focused perspective of the Alliance, “confessional Lutheran” designates those Lutherans who fully and strictly adhere to the detailed doctrine found in the 1580 Book of Concord and tend to affilate with the Confessional Evangelical Lutheran Conference, the Global Confessional and Missional Lutheran Forum, or the International Lutheran Council. The particular design of this present essay targets the fogotten legacy of “confessional Lutheranism” among the Reformed, especially those among the self-proclaimed “young, restless, Reformed”. Engaging with this specific segment of the ecclesial spectrum naturally entails the meticulous reading (and citing) of historical documents, in consideration of the mindset and confessional interests of the target audience. In full disclosure, as a non-Lutheran, I do not subscribe do the Book of Concord, nor am I a member of any “confessional Lutheran” denomination. My personal theological views, therefore, are not bound by the historic Lutheran confessions, although I find them of historical interest. |
7 | The Anglican Thirty-Nine Articles can reasonably be interpreted in a “hypothetical universalist” manner (see Arcadi 2023, pp. 185–98). |
8 | Christine Helmer contends that the received Lutheran traditon “must be historically and critically examined”and should engage with “diverse methodoogies, ideological commitments, ecclesial sympathies, and academic inquiries” (Helmer 2008, p. 114). She argues that contemporary scholarship must contribute to the “recontextualizing” and even “reconceptualizing” of Luther through dialogue and reorientation, including moving beyond the conservative/liberal divide (Helmer 2008, pp. 114–15, 120). In this regard, Helmer specifically mentions the doctrine of atonement on p. 116. Else Marie Wiberg Pedersen calls for the freeing of Luther studies from “parochialization”. She particularly seeks to broaden the discusson through engagement with subaltern and post-colonial readers and scholars (Pedersen 2019). Although my work here employs the “familiar jargon” of traditional Lutheran studies, it does engage with a neglected dialogue partner—the “young, restless, Reformed”. Admittedly, this targeted audience is a small segment of the ecclesial and global community, but broadening the scope of Luther reception by even one slice is a mathematical gain. |
9 | For moderated readings of some of these influential figures, see (Allen 2016). |
10 | See the similar argumentation in (Blacketer 2004, p. 313; George 2013, pp. 77–78). Cf., however, the countering quotations from Luther in George (2004, pp. 273, 275). |
11 | Many Calvinists prefer the designation of “particular redemption” or “definite atonement” rather than “limited atonement” (see Nicole 1967, p. 200). |
12 | For comparisons of Luther with Anselm, see (Mueller 1957; Peters 1972; Eckardt 1992, 2001). For Luther, Christ’s death as atonement was associated with such concepts as reconciliation, expiation, redemption, and satisfaction (Hagen 1997, pp. 252–54). Paul Hinlicky maintains that Luther understood atonement primarily through the three motifs of satisfaction, liberation, and imitation (Hinlicky 2018, pp. 80–96). In a mighty “duel” between life and death, Jesus was both sin-bearer and victor over the power of death (Hinlicky 2018, p. 87). Regarding the theme of reconciliation, Sibylle Rolf emphasizes that “God reconcilied the world with Himself once for all (2 Cor. 5:19), but this atonement event is reappropriated in faith and put into effect again and again” (Rolf 2017). On reclaiming “experience” (being rescued from the agonies of Anfechtung through the joy-elicting divine word of reconciliation) as central to Luther’s perspective (see Helmer 2015). On healing as an image for the atonement, see (Peterson 2015). |
13 | Some have also pointed to a glossal note in Luther’s early lectures on Psalms (1513–1515) that states, “Veruntamen pro electis suis ebibit, sed non pro omnibus [But even so, he will drink for his own chosen ones, but not for all]”. In his related comments on the text (Psalm 110), Luther had stated, “humiliabit per evangelium capita in terra multorum, licet non omnia [through the gospel he will humble the heads of many in the land, though not all’” (WA I.4, p. 227). As is customary in Luther studies, the abbreviation “WA” throughout this article references the Weimar edition (Weimarer Ausgabe): D. Martin Luthers Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe (Weimar: Hermann Böhlau, 1883–2009). See (Luther 1883–2009). The abbreviation “LW” throughout this essay references Luther’s Works (St. Louis: Concordia/Philadelphia: Fortress, 1955–2015). See (Luther 1955–2015). And the abbreviation “EA” references the Erlangen edition: Dr. M. Luthers sammtliche Werke (Erlangen/Frankfurt: Heyder & Zimmer, 1826–1857). See (Luther 1826–1857). |
14 | |
15 | The Thirteen Theses, which were adopted by the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod in 1881, combine unconditional election with a universal provision (theses 1, 2, 10–11). See (Stellhorn 1894). |
16 | For a summary of confessional Lutheranism’s evaluation of all five points of TULIP, see (Sweeney 2014). |
17 | On the role of election as an obstacle to American Lutheran unity in the nineteenth century, see (Meuser 1958, pp. 62–71; Haug 1968; Schmelder 1975). The focus of controversy was whether eternal, divine election was intuitu fidei (“in view of faith”) (Liefeld 2006; Brenner 2017, pp. 99–103). Refinements included “in view of the merit of Christ apprehended by faith,” a distinction between instrumental cause and meritorious cause, and a distinction between the consideration of faith and the foreknowledge of faith (Liefeld 2006, p. 11). The exact phrase intuitu fidei was not used until after the Formula of Concord had been adopted (Liefeld 2006, p. 12). |
18 | The terms “Calvinist” and “Calvinism” initially arose among opponents of Calvin, including among some Lutheran critics (Muller 2011b, p. 183; 2012, p. 54; cf. Billings 2009, p. 444). |
19 | English translations of the Lutheran Confessions come from Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod (2023). It should be noted that within the various translations quoted in this present article, terms such as “man,” “men,” and “mankind” are retained, although (ironically) the use of such gendered nouns may be acknowledged as infelicitous in light of the very argument of the article—the “unlimited” and “universal” nature of the atonement offered to all humanity. |
20 | Although Martin Luther was still living at the time, Philip Melanchthon was the primary architect of the Augsburg Confession. In 1551, Melanchthon declared, “In this sacrifice are to be seen God’s justice and wrath against sin, his infinite mercy towards us, and his love, in the Son, toward the human race” (Allen 2016, p. 237). |
21 | “Luther embraced unconditional election” (Allison 2011, p. 462). Consider this quote from Luther concerning election: “The human doctrine of free will and of our spiritual powers is futile. The matter does not depend on our will but on God’s will and election” (Plass 1959, vol. I, p. 461; italics original). |
22 | Within two decades of the Formula of Concord, some Lutheran theologians were teaching that eternal, divine election was based upon foreseen faith (Mayes 2011, p. 124). See also (Preus 1958; Söderlund 1983). |
23 | For a Lutheran exegesis of the relevant biblical materials, see (Scaer 1967, pp. 182–86). |
24 | The original English translation has “hath” for “has”. |
25 | On the role of Jesus Christ as the theanthropic man (via the hypostatic union) bearing the sins of the world, see (Maxfield 2011, pp. 108–9). |
26 | The Lutheran understanding of Christian faith is interwoven with the communicative nature of the Gospel (see Rolf 2010). |
27 | Francis Pieper claimed that “no one can have any assurance of eternal election so long as he in one way or another limits universal grace (gratia universalis)” (Pieper 1957, vol. III, p. 482). Pieper cited the Formula of Concord for support. |
28 | “It is the most ungodly and dangerous business to abandon the certain and revealed will of God in order to search into the hidden mysteries of God” (LW 54:249). |
29 | “We cannot explain this mystery. In the light of the facts clearly revealed in Scripture, that the grace of God is universal, and that all men are alike totally depraved, we cannot answer the question: Cur non omnes? Cur alii, alii non? Cur alii prae aliis? But Scripture directs us to hold our tongue. The question should remain unanswered. … It has therefore been well said that in the doctrine of election a theologian takes his final examination” (Pieper 1957, vol. III, pp. 502–3; cf. vol. II, p. 43). |
30 | John Theodore Mueller rejected the simplistic division of all Protestants into “Calvinists” and “Arminians,” arguing that one should not solve “the mystery of election” by denying sola gratia (as in Arminianism) nor by denying gratia universalis (as in Calvinism). Both solutions are “in direct conflict with the Word of God” (Mueller 1934, p. 610; cf. Pieper 1957, vol. I, pp. 32–33). In particular, Mueller lamented that William G. T. Shedd (the nineteenth-century Presbyterian theologian) ignored “the Lutheran position,” divided “all Christians into Calvinists (denial of universal grace) and Arminians (denial of the sola gratia)” and “left no room for the Scriptural doctrine of eternal election as the Luthern Church confesses it” (Mueller 1934, p. 606). |
31 | Luther clearly believed in the universal offer of the Gospel: “… for each absolution, whether administered publicly or privately, has to be understood as demanding faith and as being an aid to those who believe in it, just as the gospel itself also proclaims forgiveness to all men in the whole world and exempts no one from this universal context” (Luther and Melanchthon, Letter to the Council of the City of Nüremberg [18 April 1533], LW 50:77). See (Torso 2018, p. 94). |
32 | Rosenthal notes, “No date is fixed on this particular sermon, but according to the editor’s introductory essay (vol. 1, p. 4), the sermons from Epiphany to Easter (to which the Heb 9 sermon belongs) were first published in 1525” (Rosenthal 2002, p. 43n13). |
33 | In 1520, within a passage defending the serving of communion in both kinds to the laity, Luther explained, “The most important proof, and to me, a fully cogent one, is that Christ said, ‘This is my body, shed for you and for many for the remission of sins.’ Here you may see very plainly that the blood was given to all, and that it was shed for the sins of all” (from the Pagan Servitude of the Church, cited in Dillenberger (1961, p. 260); italics added). Cf. John Calvin’s reply to Heshusius, critiquing the Lutheran view of the Lord’s Supper (Calvin 1849, vol. II, p. 527). |
34 | Rosenthal also highlights Luther’s comments upon Genesis 22:17–18 (Rosenthal 2002, p. 41). One could frame this material within the “classical view” of the extent of the atonement, that “Christ died sufficiently for all and efficiently for the elect” (see Rouwendal 2008, pp. 325, 330, 333). Luther’s mentor Johann von Staupitz held this position, although Rosenthal does not differentiate between the “classical view” and “particular redemption” (Rosenthal 2002, p. 43n5; cf. Oberman 1957, p. 170). |
35 | The original translation has “whosoever believeth” for “whoever believes”. |
36 | “Luther was content to let this paradox or apparent contradiction stand: If a person is saved, it is completely to God’s credit; if a person is lost, it is completely that person’s own fault” (Brenner 2017, p. 17). For a summary of how the tension between these “two responsibilities” played out within Lutheranism up to the Formula of Concord, see (Kolb 2005, pp. 271–90). |
37 | In his comments on 2 Peter 2:1, Luther argues a similar point against those seeking forgiveness through a mixtum compositum of faith and a satisfaction through works. Such false teachers, by trying to add their own work to redemption, in effect deny the redemption Christ has provided for them (LW 30:171–72). |
38 | Contrast Rouwendal’s comments on Calvin in Rouwendal (2008, p. 329). |
39 | This work also declared, “Christ was slain from the beginning of the world for the sins of the whole world” (Plass 1959, vol. II, p. 605). |
40 | This does not mean, however, that Luther rejected logical precision (see White 1994). |
41 | Contrast Luther’s comments upon Isaiah 53:11, delivered in 1544 and printed in 1550, available in Plass (1959, vol. II, p. 608). |
42 | Many within the Reformed tradition have combined particularist readings of 1 Timothy 2:4 and/or Christ dying for “the many” with a form of universal atonement or unlimited redemption (Allen 2016, pp. 37n4, 38n9; cf. Foord 2009). |
43 | See the extended, relevant discussion in Bondage of the Will (Luther 1957, pp. 170–71). |
44 | While Rosenthal correctly distinguishes the power of the cross from its application (Rosenthal 2002, p. 42), he does not seem to employ a distinction between the divine provision of the cross and its divine application. |
45 | The original English translation has “thou wouldst not” for “you would not”. |
46 | Rosenthal quotes this passage, but he begins his citation with the material concerning “the will of Majesty” rather than the preceding material concerning the heart of God Incarnate (Rosenthal 2002, p. 38). |
47 | While commenting upon Ezekiel 18:21 and 1 Timothy 2:4 within On the Bondage of the Will, Luther contrasted the hidden will and revealed will of God (Luther 1969, pp. 200–2). For Luther’s varying interpretations of 1 Timothy 2:4 throughout his career (including differences found in student notes of his lectures), see (Ponter 2008b; Green 1996; cf. Green 1995). Luther could associate the verse with the revealed will of God (Green 1996, p. 68; cf. LW 28:262–63). Luther was also open to the verse speaking of God’s desire for all to be “saved” in the sense of extending temporal help rather than eternal salvation, as well as God’s desiring that they come to a knowledge of the general truth of his temporal blessings rather than a personal knowledge of saving truth (LW 28:261–64; cf. Green 1996, p. 71). Lowell Green also presents what he calls an “argument from synecdoche” attached to exclusivity, in which Luther spoke of Christ giving himself “for the redemption of all” in the sense that he alone is the exclusive mediator for all who should believe, so that all who are ultimately saved are saved by him alone (Green 1996, pp. 71–72; cf. LW 28:261). Luther’s Lectures on Genesis asserted, “The same thought occurs in John 1:9: ‘It enlightens every man,’ and also in 1 Tim. 2:4: ‘God desires all men to be saved’—not that all are enlightened, but that the universal blessing, scattered abroad among all nations, comes from this Seed. An exclusive rather than a universal principle is meant, as though one said: ‘Nowhere is there light, life, and salvation except in this Seed’” (LW 4:177). Luther was influenced by the Augustinian interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:4 (see Foord 2009, pp. 191–92; cf. LW 28:261). |
48 | “The doctrine of predestination was received into the Lutheran Confessions only with significant limitations” (Joest 1965, p. 1953). See also (Green 1996, p. 72n59; Matzat 1997; Block 2013). For a comparison of Luther and Calvin on predestination, see (Grosse 2011). |
49 | See Pieper’s materials from Luther’s Commentary on Genesis, in which the reformer reiterated this distinction (Pieper 1957, vol. II, p. 45n83; cf. the extended discussion in LW 5:42–50). Some confessional Lutheran theologians have also distinguished between God’s voluntas ordinate and a voluntas absoluta, and between God’s voluntas antecedens and his voluntas consequens (or his voluntas prima and his voluntas secunda) (see Pieper 1957, vol. II, pp. 34–49). However, see (Mayes 2011, p. 118). |
50 | Regarding Calvin, Rouwendal comments, “It is indeed a strange fact that Calvin sometimes interpreted ‘many’ as ‘all,’ and sometimes he interpreted ‘all’ as ‘many’” (Rouwendal 2008, p. 332). |
51 | For an alternate English translation, see (Watson 1953, pp. 268–92). |
52 | According to Luther, Christ himself (as the means of atonement) is “the most imortant and strongest fortress” (Vind 2019, p. 301). |
53 | Within developed Lutheranism one finds a unique emphasis upon “objective justification” (see Engelder 1933; Koehler 1945; Hardt 1985). The distinction between “objective justification” and “subjective justification” is used to make sense of the theology of the Apostle Paul but also of Luther (cf. Brenner 2017, p. 16; LW 40:366–67). “Dogmatically speaking, we may say that the doctrine of subjective justification stands or falls with that of objective justification” (Spitz 1950, p. 167). |
54 | Within his Lectures on Galatians, Luther repeatedly emphasizes the promise of the Gospel being for me and for us (Barnes 1989, p. 210). “Thus the whole emphasis is on the phrase ‘for us’” (LW 26:277). A complementary emphasis within Luther’s exposition of Galatians focuses upon “being in Christ” (Nüssel 2002). Anna Vind reminds that, for Luther, the believer accepts not only Christ’s atoning work and forgiveness of sins but also the very person of Christ himself, resulting in a union and real participation in Christ (Vind 2019, p. 296). |
55 | Note the misspelling of “world” as “word” in Luther (Watson 1953, p. 271): “the Lamb of God ordained from everlasting to take away the sins of the word”. |
56 | Rosenthal quotes from Plass (1959, vol. II p. 608). Rosenthal italicized offer, while Plass italicized yours and you (Rosenthal 2002, p. 42). One could as reasonably emphasize both bears/bear and offer, as I have done. |
57 | Cf. Luther’s 1528 letter to an unknown recipient, as excerpted in Pieper (1957, vol. II, p. 43). |
58 | On the “epistemology of the cross” (and not just the “theology of the cross”), see (Trelstad 2006). |
59 | These five passages have been chosen because they all appear within a single Fortress Press volume of materials selected from Luther’s writings (Johnson 2008). See also (Ngien 2018, pp. 31–32, 50, 194). |
60 | C. F. W. Walther said of confessional Lutheranism: “Her entire teaching is designed to keep man from seeking salvation within himself, in the powers of his nature and will, in anything he does or is, and to bring him to seek salvation outside of himself” (as found in Engelder 1934, p. 5). |
61 | “Hence, if we wish to be sure of our election and salvation, we must trust in the grace of God offered to all men in the Gospel and not confide in our own works or merits” (Mueller 1934, p. 590; italics original). “Again the believer cannot become sure of his election and salvation as long as he doubts or limits universal grace (gratia universalis)” (Mueller 1934, p. 595). “Wherever the doctrine is taught that the grace of God does not exist for the greater part of mankind, every hearer, particularly the sinner convicted by the Law, must remain in doubt whether there is grace for him. But such doubt absolutely destroys faith” (Pieper 1957, vol. II, p. 50). |
62 | For this reason, the 1575 translators of Luther’s commentary on Galatians addressed the English version “to all afflicted consciences, which groan for salvation” (Luther 1979, p. xi). |
63 | Furthermore, in confessional Lutheranism, the believer’s focus never leaves Christ, since the Christian is simul justus et peccator (see Joest 1955; Chareire 2018). |
64 | “Luther scored few things more scathingly than this ‘monster of uncertainty,’ for it struck at the very heart of Scripture. It was a ‘gospel of despair’” (Plass 1959, vol. I, p. 426; cf. Tomczak 2014). The reformer exclaimed that the “monster of uncertainty is worse than all other monsters” (LW 26:386; cf. the full context of LW 26:385–87 and its use of John 3:16). |
65 | Cf. Luther’s “A Sermon on Preparing to Die” (1519), cited in Lull (1989, pp. 644–45). See Luther’s letter to Barbara Lischner, who was troubled about her salvation (in Plass 1959, vol. I, p. 456). See also Calvin’s similar advice in his Institutes of the Christian Religion III.24.5: “But if we are elected in him, we cannot find the certainty of our election in ourselves; and not even in God the Father, if we look at him apart from the Son. Christ, then, is the mirror in which we ought, and in which, without deception, we may contemplate our election” (Calvin 1966, p. 244). |
66 | Regarding the cross and the “great exchange” being a manifestation of the seriousness of sin, see (Hoyum 2021, pp. 336–39). |
67 | Luther noted the thematic order developed in the Epistle to the Romans. The Apostle Paul used the law to confirm human condemnation, then explained justification by faith, then described living in the Spirit, and only then did he discuss the doctrine of divine election. On “the comfort of election,” see (Wengert 2006). On the Lutheran development of “justifcation by faith alone,” see (Nüssel 2000). |
68 | “Lutheran theologians in the Age of Orthodoxy were particularly concerned about distinguishing their doctrine from that of Calvinism” (Brenner 2017, p. 39; cf. Preus 1958). The “Age of Orthodoxy” stretched from the Book of Concord in 1580 through the death of Johann Gerhard in 1637 (Mayes 2011, p. 111). |
69 | “Here there is no other work of ours but that we do not reject the offered mercy but accept it by faith. And even this is a gift of the Holy Spirit, because ‘not all have faith’ (2 Th 3:2)” (Luther’s commentary on Psalm 51:13 from the year 1532, as quoted in Rosenthal 2002, p. 42). |
70 | For the sacramental emphasis, which is integral to confessional Lutheranism, see (Cary 2007, pp. 265–81; Maxfield 2011, pp. 99–100, 108–9). For an early summary of Luther’s own understanding of “the right use of the sacraments”, see “A Sermon on Preparing to Die” (1519) in LW 42:95–115. |
71 | The entire context of the passage is worth perusal. Cf. 2 Thessalonians 2:13. For Lutheranism, the divinely appointed means are Word and Sacrament (see Barnes 1989, pp. 209–22). Cf. the Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord II.48; Apology of the Augsburg Confession 18; and Table Talk 2631b in Letters of Spiritual Counsel 122, as found in Cary (2007, p. 275). |
72 | Carl Trueman (Reformed/Presbyterian), one of the representative authors in Perspectives on the Extent of the Atonement (Naselli and Snoeberger 2015), in a later volume co-authored with Robert Kolb (Lutheran) acknowledged that “the diverse influences shaping Reformed theology in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries have become clearer” and he recognized “the variations among the Reformed on the extent of the atonement” (Kolb and Trueman 2017, pp. 83–84; cf. Thomas 1997). Trueman highlighted the work of Richard Muller as “crucial” in this rethinking of the diversity of the Reformed tradition within early modernity (Kolb and Trueman 2017, p. 83n70; cf. Hartog 2023, pp. 120–23). Muller himself has noted that “there was a significant hypothetical universalist trajectory in the Reformed tradition from its beginnings” (Muller 2011a, p. 25). |
73 | For Beza, the Lutheran view of a universal atonement was “intolerable,” for then Christ would have died for those already damned, and thus failed in his atonement (Thomas 1997, p. 56). But Reformed movements of rapprochement also surfaced (Clifford 2017; Denlinger 2012). For instance, the Reformed statements found in the Confession of Thorn purposely paralleled Lutheran views (Thomas 1997, p. 213; Ponter 2014). Philip Schaff claimed that Amyraut’s theology was “an approach, not so much to Arminianism, which he decidedly rejected, as to Lutheranism, which likewise teaches a universal atonement and a limited election” (Schaff 1993, vol. I, p. 481; cf. Thomas 1997, pp. 187, 212–13; Harding 2013, p. 64; Clifford 2017). Nevertheless, see the critical assessment of Amyraldianism in Pieper (1957, vol. II, pp. 25–26). |
References
- Allen, David L. 2016. The Extent of the Atonement: A Historical and Critical Review. Nashville: B&H Academic. [Google Scholar]
- Allison, Gregg R. 2007. A History of the Doctrine of the Atonement. The Southern Baptist Journal of Theology 11: 4–19. [Google Scholar]
- Allison, Gregg R. 2011. Historical Theology: An Introduction to Christian Doctrine. Grand Rapids: Zondervan. [Google Scholar]
- Arcadi, James M. 2023. Unlimited Atonement: Anglican Articles and an Analytic Approach. In Unlimited Atonement: Amyraldism and Reformed Theology. Grand Rapids: Kregel Academic. [Google Scholar]
- Barnes, Robin Bruce. 1989. The Assurance of Salvation in Luther. Lutheran Quarterly 3: 209–22. [Google Scholar]
- Bickel, David R. 2023. Calvinistic Modification of Justification by Faith Alone: Does God Save All Who Believe the Good News of Christ Crucified? Available online: http://dawningrealm.org/papers/faith.pdf (accessed on 14 June 2023).
- Billings, J. Todd. 2009. John Calvin’s Soteriology: On the Multifaceted “Sum” of the Gospel. International Journal of Systematic Theology 11: 428–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blacketer, Raymond A. 2004. Definite Atonement in Historical Perspective. In The Glory of the Atonement: Biblical, Historical & Practical Perspectives. Edited by Charles E. Hill and Frank A. James III. Downers Grove: InterVarsity. [Google Scholar]
- Block, Matthew. 2013. Why Lutheran Predestination Isn’t Calvinist Predestination. First Things. October 2. Available online: https://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2013/10/why-lutheran-predestination-isnt-calvinist-predestination (accessed on 17 June 2023).
- Brenner, John M. 2017. The Election Controversy among Lutherans in the Twentieth Century. Milwaukee: Northwestern. [Google Scholar]
- Calvin, John. 1849. Tracts: Containing Treatises on the Sacraments, Catechism of the Church of Geneva, Forms of Prayer, and Confessions of Faith. Edinburgh: T&T Clark. [Google Scholar]
- Calvin, John. 1966. Institutes of the Christian Religion. 2 vols. Edited by Henry Beveridge. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. [Google Scholar]
- Cary, Phillip. 2007. Sola Fide: Luther and Calvin. Concordia Theological Quarterly 71: 265–81. [Google Scholar]
- Chareire, Isabelle. 2018. “Simul justus et peccator”: Luther et le Conflit entre le péché et la grâce. Théophilyon 23: 445–62. [Google Scholar]
- Clifford, Alan C. 2017. Amyraldian Theology and Reformed-Lutheran rapprochement. In From Zwingli to Amyraut: Exploring the Growth of European Reformed Traditions. Edited by Jon Balserak and Jim West. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. [Google Scholar]
- Commission on Theology and Church Relations of the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod. 1932. A Brief Statement of the Doctrinal Position of the Missouri Synod of the Election of Grace; St. Louis: Concordia. Available online: https://christian.net/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/mosynod/web/doct-14.html (accessed on 16 June 2023).
- Denlinger, Aaron Clay. 2012. “Men of Gallio’s Naughty Faith?”: The Aberdeen Doctors on Reformed and Lutheran Concord. Church History and Religious Culture 92: 57–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dillenberger, John, ed. 1961. Martin Luther: Selections from His Writings. New York: Doubleday. [Google Scholar]
- Eckardt, Burnell F., Jr. 1992. Anselm and Luther on the Atonement: Was It “Necessary”? San Francisco: Mellen Research University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Eckardt, Burnell F., Jr. 2001. Luther and Anselm: Same Atonement, Different Approach. In Ad Fontes Lutheri: Toward the Recovery of the Real Luther. Edited by Timothy Maschke, Franz Posset and Joan Skocir. Milwaukee: Marquette University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Engelder, Theodore. 1933. Objective Justification. Concordia Theological Monthly 4: 507–17, 564–77, 664–75. [Google Scholar]
- Engelder, Theodore, ed. 1934. Popular Symbolics. St. Louis: Concordia. [Google Scholar]
- Foord, Martin. 2009. God Wills All People to Be Saved—Or Does He? Calvin’s Reading of 1 Timothy 2: 4. In Engaging with Calvin: Aspects of the Reformer’s Legacy for Today. Edited by Mark D. Thompson. Nottingham: Apollos. [Google Scholar]
- George, Timothy. 2004. The Atonement in Martin Luther’s Theology. In The Glory of the Atonement: Biblical, Historical & Practical Perspectives. Edited by Charles E. Hill and Frank A. James III. Downers Grove: InterVarsity. [Google Scholar]
- George, Timothy. 2013. Theology of the Reformers, rev. ed. Nashville: B&H Academic. [Google Scholar]
- Gordon, Bruce. 2017. Martin Luther and John Calvin. In The Oxford Encyclopedia of Martin Luther. Edited by Derek R. Nelson and Paul R. Hinlicky. Oxford: Oxford University Press, vol. 1. [Google Scholar]
- Green, Lowell. 1995. Universal Salvation (1 Timothy 2:4) according to the Lutheran Reformers. Lutheran Quarterly 9: 281–300. [Google Scholar]
- Green, Lowell. 1996. Luther’s Understanding of the Freedom of God and the Salvation of Men: His Interpretation of 1 Timothy 2:4. Archive for Reformation History 87: 57–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grosse, Sven. 2011. Die frōhliche Schiffahrt: Luther und Calvin zu unfreiem Willen und Prädestination. In Johannes Calvin—Streiflichter auf den Menschen und Theologen. Edited by Sven Grosse and Armin Sierszyn. STB 5. Vienna: Lit. [Google Scholar]
- Hagen, Kenneth. 1997. Luther on Atonement—Reconfigured. Concordia Theological Quarterly 61: 252–54. [Google Scholar]
- Hansen, Collin. 2006. Young, Restless, Reformed. Christianity Today 50: 32–38. [Google Scholar]
- Hansen, Collin. 2008. Young, Restless, Reformed. Wheaton: Crossway. [Google Scholar]
- Harding, Matthew S. 2013. Atonement Theory Revisited: Calvin, Beza, and Amyraut on the Atonement. Perichoresis 11: 49–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hardt, Tom G. A. 1985. Justification and Easter: A Study in Subjective and Objective Justification in Lutheran Theology. In A Living Legacy: Essays in Honor of Robert Preus. Edited by Kurt E. Marquart, John R. Stephenson and Bjarne W. Teigen. Fort Wayne: Concordia Theological Seminary. [Google Scholar]
- Hartog, Paul. 2015. Review of Andrew David Naselli and Mark A. Snoeberger (eds.), Perspectives on the Extent of the Atonement: 3 Views (Nashville: B&H Academic, 2015). The Christian Librarian: Journal of the Association of Christian Librarians 58: 126–28. [Google Scholar]
- Hartog, Paul. 2023. Calvin on the Death of Christ: A Word for the World. Cambridge: James Clarke. [Google Scholar]
- Haug, Hans Robert. 1968. The Predestination Controversy in the Lutheran Church in North America. Ph.D. dissertation, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA, USA. [Google Scholar]
- Helmer, Christine. 2008. The American Luther. Dialog: A Journal of Theology 47: 114–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Helmer, Christine. 2015. The Experience of Justification. In Justification in a Post-Christian Society. Edited by Carl-Henric Grenholm and Göran Gunner. Cambridge: James Clarke. [Google Scholar]
- Hinlicky, Paul R. 2018. Luther for Evangelicals: A Reintroduction. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic. [Google Scholar]
- Hoyum, John W. 2021. Exchange, Atonement, and Recovered Humanity: Martin Luther on the Passive Obedience of Christ. International Journal of Systematic Theology 23: 333–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Joest, Wilfried. 1955. Paulus und das lutherische simul Justus et Peccator. Kerygma und Dogma 1: 269–320. [Google Scholar]
- Joest, Wilfried. 1965. Predestination. In The Encyclopedia of the Lutheran Church. Edited by Julius Bodensieck. Minneapolis: Augsburg, vol. 3. [Google Scholar]
- Johnson, Marshall D., ed. 2008. Day by Day We Magnify You: Daily Readings for the Entire Year Selected from the Writings of Martin Luther, rev. ed. Minneapolis: Augsburg. [Google Scholar]
- Kennedy, Kevin Dixon. 2002. Union with Christ and the Extent of the Atonement in Calvin. Studies in Biblical Literature 48. New York: Peter Lang. [Google Scholar]
- Kilcrease, Jack D. 2018. The Doctrine of the Atonement: From Luther to Forde. Eugene: Wipf & Stock. [Google Scholar]
- Koehler, Edward W. A. 1945. Objective Justification. Concordia Theological Monthly 16: 217–35. [Google Scholar]
- Kolb, Robert. 2002. Luther on the Theology of the Cross. Lutheran Quarterly 16: 443–66. [Google Scholar]
- Kolb, Robert. 2005. Bound Choice, Election, and Wittenberg Theological Method. Lutheran Quarterly Books. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans. [Google Scholar]
- Kolb, Robert, and Carl R. Trueman. 2017. Between Wittenberg and Geneva: Lutheran and Reformed Theology in Conversation. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic. [Google Scholar]
- Liefeld, David R. 2006. Saved on Purpose: Luther, Lutheranism, and Election. Logia 15: 5–16. [Google Scholar]
- Lioy, Dan, and Robert Falconer. 2019. Lutheran and Reformed Theology in Conversation. Conspectus 27: 192–223. [Google Scholar]
- Lull, Timothy, ed. 1989. Martin Luther’s Basic Theological Writings. Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress. [Google Scholar]
- Luther, Martin. 1826–1857. Dr. M. Luthers sämmtliche Werke. 67 vols. Erlangen and Frankfurt: Heyder & Zimmer. [Google Scholar]
- Luther, Martin. 1883–2009. D. Martin Luthers Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe. 72 vols. Weimar: Hermann Böhlau. [Google Scholar]
- Luther, Martin. 1955–2015. Luther’s Works. 75 vols. St. Louis: Concordia. Philadelphia: Fortress. [Google Scholar]
- Luther, Martin. 1957. The Bondage of the Will. Translated by James I. Packer, and Olaf R. Johnston. Grand Rapids: Revell. [Google Scholar]
- Luther, Martin. 1969. On the Bondage of the Will. In Luther and Erasmus: Free Will and Salvation. Edited by E. Gordon Rupp and Philip S. Watson Classics. Library of Christian. Philadelphia: Westminster. [Google Scholar]
- Luther, Martin. 1979. A Commentary on Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians. Reprint. Grand Rapids: Baker. [Google Scholar]
- Luther, Martin. 1983. Sermons of Martin Luther: The Church Postils. Edited by John Nicholas Lenker. Reprint. Grand Rapids: Baker, vol. 7. [Google Scholar]
- Luther, Martin. 1996. Sermons of Martin Luther: The House Postils. 3 vols. Edited by Eugene F. A. Klug. Grand Rapids: Baker. [Google Scholar]
- Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod. 2023. The Book of Concord. Available online: https://bookofconcord.org/ (accessed on 22 June 2023).
- Lynch, Michael J. 2021. John Davenant’s Hypothetical Universalism: A Defense of Catholic and Reformed Orthodoxy. OSHT. Oxford: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Masaki, Naomichi. 2008. Contemporary Views on Atonement in Light of the Lutheran Confessions. Concordia Theological Quarterly 72: 305–25. [Google Scholar]
- Matzat, Don. 1997. Martin Luther and the Doctrine of Predestination. Issues Etc. Journal 1. Available online: https://www.issuesetcarchive.org/issues_site/resource/journals/v1n8.htm (accessed on 14 June 2023).
- Maxfield, John A. 2011. Luther, Zwingli and Calvin on the Significance of Christ’s Death. Concordia Theological Quarterly 75: 91–110. [Google Scholar]
- Mayes, Benjamin T. G. 2011. Post-Reformation Lutheran Attitudes toward the Reformed Doctrine of God. Concordia Theological Quarterly 75: 111–34. [Google Scholar]
- Meuser, Fred W. 1958. The Formation of the American Lutheran Church. Columbus: Wartburg Press. [Google Scholar]
- Mueller, John Theodore. 1934. Christian Dogmatics: A Handbook of Doctrinal Theology for Pastors, Teachers, and Laymen. St. Louis: Concordia. [Google Scholar]
- Mueller, John Theodore. 1957. Luther’s Doctrine of the Atonement. Christianity Today 1: 10–14. [Google Scholar]
- Muller, Richard A. 1993. How Many Points? Calvin Theological Journal 28: 425–33. [Google Scholar]
- Muller, Richard A. 2011a. Diversity in the Reformed Tradition: A Historiographical Introduction. In Drawn into Controversie: Reformed Theological Diversity and Debates within Seventeenth-Century British Puritanism. Edited by Michael A. G. Haykin and Mark Jones. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. [Google Scholar]
- Muller, Richard A. 2011b. Reception and Response: Referencing and Understanding Calvin in Post-Reformation Calvinism. In Calvin and His Influence, 1509–2009. Edited by Irena Backus and Philip Benedict. New York: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Muller, Richard A. 2012. Was Calvin a Calvinist? In Calvin and the Reformed Tradition: On the Work of Christ and the Order of Salvation. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic. [Google Scholar]
- Naselli, Andrew David, and Mark A. Snoeberger, eds. 2015. Perspectives on the Extent of the Atonement: 3 Views. Nashville: B&H Academic. [Google Scholar]
- Ngien, Dennis. 2018. Luther’s Theology of the Cross: Christ in Luther’s Sermons on John. Eugene: Cascade. [Google Scholar]
- Nicole, Roger. 1967. The Case for Definite Atonement. Bulletin for the Evangelical Theological Society 10: 199–207. [Google Scholar]
- Nüssel, Frederike. 2000. Allein aus Glauben: Zur Entwicklung der Rechtfertigungslehre in der konkordistischen und frühen nachkonkordistischen Theologie. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. [Google Scholar]
- Nüssel, Frederike. 2002. “Ich lebe, doch nun nicht ich, sondern Christus lebt in mir” (Gal 2,20a): Dogmatische Überlegungen zur Rede vom “Sein in Christus”. Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 99: 480–502. [Google Scholar]
- Oberman, Heiko A. 1957. Forerunners of the Reformation. Grand Rapids: Revell. [Google Scholar]
- Pauck, Wilhelm, ed. 1961. Luther: Lectures on Romans. Philadelphia: Westminster. [Google Scholar]
- Pedersen, Else Marie Wiberg. 2019. Introduction. In The Alternative Luther: Lutheran Theology from the Subaltern. New York: Lexington. [Google Scholar]
- Peters, Ted. 1972. The Atonement in Anselm and Luther, Second Thoughts about Gustaf Aulen’s Christus Victor. Lutheran Quarterly 24: 301–14. [Google Scholar]
- Peterson, Cheryl M. 2015. Healing as an Image for the Atonement: A Lutheran Consideration. In Justification in a Post-Christian Society. Edited by Carl-Henric Grenholm and Göran Gunner. Cambridge: James Clarke. [Google Scholar]
- Pieper, Francis. 1957. Christian Dogmatics. St. Louis: Concordia, 4 vols. [Google Scholar]
- Plass, Ewald M., ed. 1959. What Luther Says: An Anthology. St. Louis: Concordia. [Google Scholar]
- Ponter, David. 2008a. Martin Luther (1483–1546) on the Death of Christ: Unlimited Redemption, Sin-Bearing and Expiation. Available online: http://calvinandcalvinism.com/?p=193 (accessed on 15 June 2023).
- Ponter, David. 2008b. The Paradoxical Luther on 1 Tim 2:4–6. Available online: https://calvinandcalvinism.wordpress.com/2008/01/21/the-paradoxical-martin-luther-on-1-tim-24-6/ (accessed on 9 August 2023).
- Ponter, David. 2014. The Colloquy of Thorn (1645) and the Death of Christ. Available online: http://calvinandcalvinism.com/?p=14572 (accessed on 12 August 2023).
- Preus, Robert D. 1958. The Doctrine of Election as Taught by the Seventeenth Century Lutheran Dogmaticians. Quartalschrift 55: 229–61. [Google Scholar]
- Preus, Andrew J. 2018. The Theology of the Cross and the Lutheran Confessions. Concordia Theological Quarterly 82: 83–104. [Google Scholar]
- Rainbow, Jonathan. 1990. The Will of God and the Cross: An Historical and Theological Study of John Calvin’s Doctrine of Limited Redemption. Princeton Theological Monograph Series; San Jose: Pickwick. [Google Scholar]
- Remy, Gérard. 2018. La substitution pénale: De Luther à Bossuet. Recherches de science religieuse 106: 573–89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rolf, Sibylle. 2010. Luther’s Understanding of Imputatio in the Context of His Doctrine of Justification and Its Consequences for the Preaching of the Gospel. International Journal of Systematic Theology 12: 435–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rolf, Sibylle. 2017. Martin Luther’s View of Atonement and Reconciliation. In The Oxford Encyclopedia of Martin Luther. Edited by Derek R. Nelson and Paul R. Hinlicky. Oxford: Oxford University Press, vol. 1. [Google Scholar]
- Rosenthal, Shane. 2002. Early and Late Luther: A Calvinist Perspective on Luther’s Evolution. Logia: A Journal of Lutheran Theology 11: 37–43. [Google Scholar]
- Rouwendal, Pieter L. 2008. Calvin’s Forgotten Classical Position on the Extent of the Atonement: About Sufficiency, Efficiency, and Anachronism. Westminster Theological Journal 70: 317–35. [Google Scholar]
- Scaer, David P. 1967. The Nature and Extent of the Atonement in Lutheran Theology. Bulletin for the Evangelical Theological Society 10: 179–87. [Google Scholar]
- Scaer, David P. 1979. The Doctrine of Election: A Lutheran Note. An Excerpt from Perspectives on Evangelical Theology; Grand Rapids: Baker. Available online: https://www.issuesetcarchive.org/issues_site/resource/archives/scaer2.htm (accessed on 14 June 2023).
- Schaeffer, Harry. 1920. The Doctrine of Atonement in the Writings of Luther and Calvin. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. [Google Scholar]
- Schaff, Philip. 1993. The Creeds of Christendom, 6th ed. 3 vols. Grand Rapids: Baker. [Google Scholar]
- Schmelder, William J. 1975. The Predestination Controversy: Review and Reflection. Concordia Journal 1: 21–33. [Google Scholar]
- Selderhuis, Herman J. 2017. Luther and Calvin. In Martin Luther: A Christian between Reforms and Modernity. Edited by Alberto Melloni. Berlin: De Gruyter. [Google Scholar]
- Siggins, Ian D. K. 1970. Martin Luther’s Doctrine of Christ. New Haven: Yale University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Smith, Morton H. 1997. The Case for Full Subscription. In The Practice of Subscription. Edited by David W. Hall. Oak Ridge: Covenant Foundation. [Google Scholar]
- Söderlund, Rune. 1983. Ex Praevisa Fide: Zum Verständnis der PräDestinationslehre in der lutherischen Orthodoxie. AGTL 3. Hannover: Lutherisches Verlagshaus. [Google Scholar]
- Spitz, Lewis W. 1950. Luther’s Concept of the Atonement Before 1517. Concordia Theological Monthly 21: 165–80. [Google Scholar]
- Steinmetz, David C. 1986. Luther and the Hidden God. In Luther in Context. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. [Google Scholar]
- Stellhorn, F. W. 1894. The Thirteen Theses on Election Adopted by the Missouri Synod in 1881; Columbus: Lutheran Book Concern. Available online: http://cyclopedia.lcms.org/display.asp?t1=t&word=THIRTEENTHESES (accessed on 14 June 2023).
- Stewart, Kenneth J. 2011. Ten Myths about Calvinism: Recovering the Breadth of the Reformed Tradition. Downers Grove: IVP Academic. [Google Scholar]
- Strehle, Stephen. 1980. The Extent of the Atonement within the Theological Systems of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries. Ph.D. dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, Dallas, TX, USA. [Google Scholar]
- Sweeney, Douglas A. 2014. Was Luther a Calvinist? The Gospel Coalition. July 15. Available online: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/was-luther-a-calvinist (accessed on 15 June 2023).
- Terry, Justyn Charles. 2013. The Forgiveness of Sins and the Work of Christ: A Case for Substitutionary Atonement. Anglican Theological Review 95: 9–24. [Google Scholar]
- Thianto, Yudha. 2022. An Explorer’s Guide to John Calvin. Downers Grove: IVP Academic. [Google Scholar]
- Thomas, G. Michael. 1997. The Extent of the Atonement: A Dilemma for Reformed Theology from Calvin to the Consensus. Carlisle: Paternoster. [Google Scholar]
- Tomczak, Benjamin J. 2014. The Monstrous Uncertainty. Available online: https://www.academia.edu/9030487/The_Monstrous_Uncertainty (accessed on 9 August 2023).
- Torso, Perry. 2018. Trusting the Word and Nothing Else at All: Luther’s Design for Evangelical Preaching. Eugene: Wipf & Stock. [Google Scholar]
- Trelstad, Marit. 2006. The Way of Salvation in Luther’s Theology: A Feminist Evaluation. Dialog: A Journal of Theology 45: 236–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Van Biema, David. 2009. The New Calvinism. Time. March 12. Available online: https://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1884779_1884782_1884760,00.html (accessed on 27 November 2023).
- Vind, Anna. 2019. Latomus and Luther. The Debate: Is Every Good Deed a Sin? Ref500 Academic Series 26; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht. [Google Scholar]
- Watson, Philip S., ed. 1953. Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians Based on Lectures Delivered by Martin Luther. Westwood: Revell. [Google Scholar]
- Wengert, Timothy J. 2006. The Formula of Concord and the Comfort of Election. Lutheran Quarterly 20: 44–62. [Google Scholar]
- White, Graham. 1994. Luther as Nominalist: A Study of the Logical Methods Used in Martin Luther’s Disputations in the Light of Their Medieval Background. Schriften der Luther-Agricola-Gesellschaft 30. Helsinki: Luther-Agricola Society. [Google Scholar]
- Youngs, Samuel J. 2020. “Therapeutic” Atonement? A Psychological Paradigm of the Cross in Dialogue with Martin Luther. Anglican Theological Review 102: 393–415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Hartog, P.A. A Legacy Lost to the Reformed Imagination: Luther and Confessional Lutheranism on the Extent of the Atonement. Religions 2024, 15, 228. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15020228
Hartog PA. A Legacy Lost to the Reformed Imagination: Luther and Confessional Lutheranism on the Extent of the Atonement. Religions. 2024; 15(2):228. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15020228
Chicago/Turabian StyleHartog, Paul Anthony. 2024. "A Legacy Lost to the Reformed Imagination: Luther and Confessional Lutheranism on the Extent of the Atonement" Religions 15, no. 2: 228. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15020228
APA StyleHartog, P. A. (2024). A Legacy Lost to the Reformed Imagination: Luther and Confessional Lutheranism on the Extent of the Atonement. Religions, 15(2), 228. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel15020228