This article critiques confessionalism and methodological biases affecting the reformed tradition, highlighting the relevance of Luther's theology.
This article stems from teological concerns regarding the tendency of the Reformed tradition to reduce Martin Luther's intellectual contributions to mere historical symbols rather than as a living source of theology. This study critiques strict confessionalism, systematic preferences, and methodological biases that obscure Luther's teological values, and advocates for the restoration of appreciation for the relevance of his thought. Using a literature study approach, this article compares Luther's works with classical Reformed theology, particularly in methodology, soteriology (the distinction between Law and Gospel), sacramentology, and the theology of the cross. The finding reveal that neglecting Luther's contributions has caused the church to lose essential epistemological and spiritual dimensions. Luther offers a theology that is paradoxical, existential, and prophetic – qualities that are urgently needed in the contemporary world.Abstrak. Artikel ini lahir dari kegelisahan teologis terhadap kecenderungan tradisi Reformed yang mereduksi kontribusi pemikiran Martin Luther menjadi sekadar simbol historis, bukan sebagai sumber teologi yang hidup. Kajian ini mengkritisi konfesionalisme ketat, preferensi sistematis, dan bias metodologis yang mengaburkan nilai-nilai teologis Luther, serta mendorong pemulihan apresiasi terhadap relevansi pemikirannya. Dengan pendekatan studi pustaka, artikel ini membandingkan karya-karya Luther serta teologi Reformed klasik, khususnya dalam metodologi, soteriologi (distingsi Hukum dan Injil), sakramentologi, serta theologia crucis. Hasil kajian menunjukkan bahwa pengabaian terhadap kontribusi pemikiran Luther menyebabkan gereja kehilangan dimensi epistemologis dan spiritual yang esensial. Luther menawarkan teologi yang paradoksal, eksistensial, dan profetik – yang sejatinya sangat dibutuhkan dalam konteks dunia kontemporer.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mozes Lawalata (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: