# Are FV any more dangerous than Lutherans?



## charliejunfan (Nov 21, 2008)

I was wondering where FV would stand on a list of systems of thought, for instance, is it better to be conservative Lutheran or FV? and so on


----------



## charliejunfan (Nov 21, 2008)

I know there are many variations, but I just want to see hypothetical opinions


----------



## Pilgrim (Nov 21, 2008)

You ask what amounts to two different questions. I can't recommend either choice although no doubt the Lord has his people among both camps. It could be said that the FV is more dangerous because they claim to the true representatives of the Reformed tradition.


----------



## TimV (Nov 21, 2008)

I also think the question interesting since Luther is in the target hairs of the FV. But please don't think this is a criticism, I think the larger question is worth discussing..


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Nov 21, 2008)

Pilgrim said:


> You ask what amounts to two different questions. I can't recommend either choice although no doubt the Lord has his people among both camps. It could be said that the FV is more dangerous because they claim to the true representatives of the Reformed tradition.





The Lutherans don't claim to be something they are not so there is no danger of blurring or co-opting important theological headers. I agree with Lane Keister who noted in an interview that he thinks there might be a bit less friction with the FV camp once they are not within the NAPARC congregations trying to re-define the Reformed faith. They need to stand apart and clearly state who they are - not Reformed on many key points.

I also think Lutheranism has had a few centuries to get its Systematics nailed down. The FV is a loose set of novel ideas that tries to cut and paste some Reformed dogmatics, re-cast a little here and there, and patchwork some ideas together. If they ever get around to systematizing their theology it will be easier to determine how dangerous they really are.


----------



## Scott1 (Nov 21, 2008)

As far as I know,
Lutherans hold a biblical Gospel
Federal Vision, at best, confuses the Gospel, at worst denies it

Nothing is more precious than the Gospel.


----------



## R. Scott Clark (Nov 22, 2008)

Scott1 said:


> As far as I know,
> Lutherans hold a biblical Gospel
> Federal Vision, at best, confuses the Gospel, at worst denies it
> 
> Nothing is more precious than the Gospel.



This is a very good point.

In the Book of Concord (including the Augsburg Confession Art 4) the Lutherans Churches confess the same gospel as we. How do I know? Because the Harmony of Reformed Confessions (1580) included the Augsburg Confession! Calvin signed the Augsburg. 

When it comes to the Reformation Solas we are one. 

That cannot be said of the FV. 

We have genuine disagreements with the confessional Lutherans on Christology, on reprobation, on resistibility of grace, on Christology, on worship, and on the Supper to name a few things. Nevertheless, we have a fundamental agreement as to what the gospel is.

The FV is a dangerous movement for the reasons specified but chief among them is that they either blur or outrightly deny the gospel. 

If you're not familiar with the literature on this question you can start here.


----------



## charliejunfan (Nov 22, 2008)

Thank you guys


----------

