The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod, or LCMS, is a confessional Lutheran American denomination. This video discusses what they believe - their theology.
I grew up in a LCMS Church and school. Took for granted the excellent education and Church life we experienced. I appreciate it more than ever, now that I'm old.
@@arunanarina1316 We are free to use any Holy Bible translation that we want to use. I use the New International Version (NIV). However, the main translation that is used in orders of worship is the New English Version (NEV). I just wanted to answer.
I appreciate your videos and how detail-oriented you are. You are very good at using the same language as used in the church and do not have an obvious bias towards or against any denomination. You clearly convey what each church teaches. Thank you
@@patriot345 More or less, yes. We believe the best way, and the way that seems most consistent with Christian and churchly order, is that the father is the head of the household, who teaches the faith to the family, provides for the family, etc. The mother is the helpmate, who also leads the home, teaches the children, etc., though the father is still the head. In the church, only men can be pastors, though women can teach as long as the teaching is done under the authority of the pastor, and women should only teach other women and children. This keeps good order in the home and in the church and reflects God's order in creation. We don't believe men are "better" than women, such as the world might accuse us of, but we believe men have roles, women have roles, and those roles should not be forfeit if at all possible. If a women decides to work and have a career, that's fine, just so long as the children and the home aren't neglected, especially with regard to the faith. But in the church, women cannot be elders, pastors, or have any ecclesial authority over men.
Interesting to note, with regard to ecumenical relationships: In situations where an ACNA Church is sharing physical facilities with another Church, it is most likely to be an LCMS Church... I am a priest in ACNA, and our small congregation very happily shares facilities with a local LCMS congregation.😇
My aunt and uncle were members of a Norwegian Lutheran Congregation in Michigan c. 1940's, the NLC was one of the many groups that merged into the ELCA - but my aunt chose to go Missouri Synod and this little German-esque Church was a delight to attend on Christmas and Easter (I was Roman at the time) - I tend to gravitate towards this synod and if no RC church is around, I'll go LCMS in a heartbeat
Yeah as a LCMS member, I would probably prefer to go to a Roman Catholic church versus some other Protestant one. To be frank, the Romans are significantly closer to my own beliefs than many of the people who we are subgrouped into within studies and such. I have never gone to one(I am only 16) and frankly I don't know of any nearby.
My grandpa was baptized at a norwegian church, but confirmed at the 1st Lutheran in Fargo. ELCA of his time (1920-1993) was a whole different animal. Being almost fully norwegian, I left my lefse making church for LCMS. It sure is different. But at least I don't have a non binary, genetically female, pastor anymore. My old church is covered in rainbows. Even the altar and the cross.
Your videos are a phenomenal resource and a gift to RUclips. The quality of your material is probably the best on the discussion of differing Christian Denominations and Confessions. Well done!
I grew up Non-Denominational and have been looking into other denominations because NDs seem to loose the reverence of God and I love that the Lutheran Motto is Grace Alone Faith Alone Scripture Alone
The dirty little secret of ND churches is that they are non-denominational in name in only. Churches that call themselves non-denominational virtually all fall into one of three categories: Baptist in all but name, Charismatic/Pentecostal in all but name, or some combination thereof. Look up where your ND pastor went to seminary and where your ND church gets its teaching materials. There you will find that it is part of a denomination regardless of its claims to the contrary.
I attended my first lcms service this past Sunday. I do like their emphasis on the bible. Everyone was welcoming and the pastor was open to answer any questions I had about doctrine. Maybe I'll convert one day I don't know. I do want to go back though.
Don't convert, you are already there. The fact that you didn't like emphasis on the bible could be saying what you believe, doesn' match up with the bible. Or said directly, "Don't let the bible get in the way of what you believe."
We’d love to have you in the LCMS! I suggest starting with confirmation/adult inquiry classes (the name changes depending on where you go). The pastor will go through the doctrine of the church, and at the end of it you have the opportunity for membership
As someone who appreciates the rich history and uniqueness of all these denominations, your presentation is excellent. You don’t appear to have any agenda…you just present the information as is and they are very informative and educational. Thank you and keep up the good work 🙏🏾
Very interesting and detailed analysis. I was brought up Lutheran (LCA and then ELCA) and loved the worship style and the people but not so much the seemingly less-than-biblically-focused, evolving "liberal" doctrine of the denomination. Ultimately I became Catholic, thanks be to God. The LCMS seems to have maintained much (at least) of traditional, doctrinally principled Lutheranism.
I'm a lifelong Catholic, and there are troubling trends in our church. The LCMS is somewhat attractive, if only they didn't over-interpret 1 Timothy 2:5 so radically.
@@shellieperreault6262 The meaning is clear if you read more than just the isolated quote. It's an admonishment to unity because we have one intercessor, so "let's be one". Instead, it's taken as a strict ban against requests for prayers.
I am a member, and profoundly thankful for being a member of this branch of the body of Christ. My concern is twofold, the youth and evangelical outreach. We have solid Biblical teachings, Sacraments and tradition. I pray we seek to reach out and also grow pastors and leaders from within our churches and communities. Having pastors travel across country to start a work that has been around for many years is problematic in my view. The early church had home grown leaders. I pray we use all the wisdom of God. We don't have enough Pastors that's why home grown is so appealing. ❤❤
You forgot something. The LCMS does teach the scripture in James 2:17 that "Faith without works is dead". This simply means that we show and share our faith with others by helping them and also, making sure they are cared for if help is needed by them. If there are no works being shown, then faith is meaningless and dead when there are no works at all. It is THE Christian duty to care for those who are poor, especially those who are poor in spirit. Just a heads up.
The LCMS is the closest thing in America to the Book of Concord doctrinally. But it is not close in regard to practice. There are some congregations which strive to draw near to evangelical catholic practice, but many more that do not. The LCMS allows fairly broad latitude in local practices. On paper, the unity is in doctrine, but the mechanisms to enforce doctrinal unity is fairly feeble. Nothing tangible is ever done to enforce unity of practice, but it's supposed to happen by pastoral and congregational vows. There are no ecclesiastical courts to deal with erring clergy or parishes. Once in a while, an erring clergyman will face discipline. The bureaucratic structure has little teeth to enforce anything. Congregationalism is where the political rubber meets the road.
@Ready To Harvest, I'm just making sure I understand exactly what you are saying... Are you saying that the LCMS is self governing to where anyone can start an LCMS church? Self governing like the Independent Baptists and the non-denominational churches?
Local Churches are self-governing in the sense that they can choose their own ministers, handle their own business. Run congregationally, so they own their own property. And they can leave the LCMS if they want. Starting a new LCMS church is another deal, under normal circumstances, you would need to do so under the authority of another LCMS church and following LCMS guidelines sddlcms.org/media/files/Service%20Areas/LCMS%20Church%20Planting%20Manual.pdf However, a person could just go start a church and once it was going, move to join the LCMS. But this isn't just a show process. There are real requirements that would need to be met. So in all, congregational government, internally self-governing. No bishops that tell a congregation what to do. But not completely autonomous, and churches can get kicked out if they stray from the rules.
In addition to what Joshua said, someone could theoretically start an independent Lutheran congregation, and if for whatever reason that congregation wanted to be in fellowship with the LCMS but not actually part of it, they could petition the LCMS to establish altar and pulpit fellowship with them. The requirments for them to enter into fellowship with the LCMS might be less complicated than actually joining the LCMS, but at a minimum they would have to confess the same doctrine and have a pastor that has been educated in a way deemed acceptable to the LCMS. However, to my knowledge this hasn't actually happened. There are other Lutheran denominations that are in fellowship with the LCMS, but to my knowledge there are no independent single congregations in fellowship with the LCMS other than overseas mission congregations started by the LCMS itself.
Not quite. LCMS church structure is really a mixture of congregational polity and episcopal polity. The churches are organized into 35 districts and each district is overseen by a district president, which is analogous to the role of bishop. The entire synod is overseen by the synod president, akin to the role of archbishop. The 35 district presidents + the synod president form the Council of Presidents (COP), one of whose duties is to place graduates from the two LCMS seminaries as pastors in congregations that have requested one. Also, when a person becomes a pastor, the Ordination Rite is usually led by the District President or his delegate. However, each congregation is self-governed and resolutions made by district presidents or the Synod president are advisory not binding if it's not according to scripture or if it's inexpedient for the individual congregation. But even in the process of a congregation "choosing its own pastor", the district president and his delegate is very much involved - the church doesn't just call up an available pastor and ask them to lead their church and it's a done deal. You can read the full process here: mo(dot)lcms(dot)org/call-process, but in short, the congregation notifies the district president of their vacancy, the president schedules a meeting with congregational leaders to outline the process, congregational leaders meet with delegate to work through form and pastoral rankings, the president's President reviews the list of nominees and possibly adding suggested names based on the congregation's needs, Call Committee presents its top two or three candidates to the Voter’s Assembly, and the assembly votes. I think a better term for this structure is limited episcopal polity. The structure and hierarchy of episcopal polity is present, but the authority bishops have over the churches they oversee is minimal (at least when compared to other churches with full episcopal polity like RCC, Orthodox, Anglican, or even some European Lutheran churches with which LCMS is in communion).
I amTesfaw Mekete from Ethiopia. I want to attend class of pastoral ministry in the midst of diverse challenges on online. How can I join it? Thank you for your kind response. I am from evangelical church of myc.
Former LCMS here now a VERY happy Roman Catholic! Absolutely NOT! The LCMS is a train wreck. Just look back on the years 1969-1981. And if they're not careful, they're about to repeat it again. This is a church to avoid.
Yet ironically, would not welcome German Lutherans (nor any others for that matter) and are not part of the global Lutheran community, publicly shames its pastors who (gasp) pray with others and remains disconnected from the entirety of the broader Christian community, not just other Lutherans. The LCMS spends much of its energy and official positions being critical of the overwhelming majority of Lutherans, and distain the worlds Lutherans have grown closer to other liturgical churches, including most Lutherans agreements with the Catholic Church and full communion with Episcopalians.
This is why I was catechised and baptized a Confessional Lutheran. Had to drive an hour and a half to be baptized. So much division occurred after Luther and after Lutherans arrived in the USA. It forced me to read the works of Luther to find out what he truly taught. Oddly enough, he lead me straight to Rome.
Proud to be LCMS because of its resistance to change with the times. From beliefs to worship style, I appreciate that it rejects worldly ways. Maybe that contributes to the decrease in members, but I think Lutherans would rather go out of fashion than cheapen itself and succumb to the world.
I grew up Missouri Synod and did NOT think of us as Evangelical … that conjured up images of adult baptism, less pretty church buildings and guitars and drums as part of the service, lol.
He alludes heavily that he is an Independent Baptist in several videos, I believe he said he is an Associate Professor at an Independent Baptist College as well.
@@illinoisbayis this the gospel according to Frank Zimmerman or is it written in some part in the bible, I'm trying to find the church that has been around since the death of Christ, can you tell me where are the apostle buried at or which church has there remains? Where is the oldest Church and is it Lutheran, Baptist, Catholic, Jehovah witness, Mormon or other.
When Luther said "the apocrypha is useful to read -- although not to the same level as Scripture" he meant that it is useful to read *in church* , in other words, in the Church's lectionary.
True Lutheran Theology is believing that the Bible IS God's Word. Not "contains" God's Word, which leads to people and church bodies choosing what they like and ignoring what they don't like. Something ELCA blatantly does.
Come now you know what he is talking about. The ELCA is filled with pastors who talk about how Jesus was just a man or that Jesus never rose from the dead or are straight up unitarians. Search the sparkle creed or go to an ELCA church in a large city. Don't be coy the ELCA is Lutheran in name only.
I was raised LCMS and met Jesus on his terms of surrender at the cross. In 1973 at the age of 18. I went to Concordia Lutheran College in Austin Texas. To study to be a Lutheran minister. But SEMINEX discouraged me and I left the LCMS in 1975 for Charismatic Churches I am of the persuasion that the only Means of Grace that God will honor is
Sounds like you already had pentecostal tendencies in you even at Concordia. Yeah, the whole seminex thing was a mess, but it needed to happen because the LCMS was drifting in a horrible direction, at least at the St. Louis seminary (Ft. Wayne, at the time, was still confessional and faithful to the Scripture and still are to this day). Just reading what you wrote, "met Jesus on his terms of surrender at the cross..." this is not a Scriptural statement. Jesus surrendered His life for us at the cross! THAT'S the Gospel! In Charismatic churches, you rarely get the gospel; you get a whole lot of law, but so little gospel. It's why I left that world. Everything was about me and what I have to do to be totally committed, and all it did was bring fear and despair and uncertainty.
First, LCMS is confessional. That means it is original Christianity. Pre-Roman Catholic, pre-Schism, meat and potatoes only. No fluff, Scripture only. That means if the Bible says it then that is what it is. No saint worship, no American politics, no politics.
LCMS members do not consider absolution a sacrament. There must be material elements to be a sacrament, and it must be instituted by Christ and for the forgiveness of sins. It is an office or rite and not a sacrament and I know of no congregation that does private confession. We have public confession and forgiveness during the church service.
One thing you will learn about the LCMS the longer you are in it is that it is a very Your Mileage May Vary denomination. There are entire districts where adherence to the Confessions is not strictly enforced despite the LCMS striving to be a confessional denomination. Private confession and absolution is absolutely a historic Lutheran practice. It's in the Catechism. Regarding whether or not it is a sacrament, the Augsburg Confession explicitly states that Lutherans are not to split hairs over how many sacraments there are, so long as we understand the nature and purpose of each. Martin Luther viewed confession/absolution as an extension of baptism and thus did not number it as a third sacrament, but he wasn't dogmatic about whether there are two or three sacraments. After all, there is no Biblical list of "sacraments" in the Bible. There are plenty of LCMS churches that do private confession/absolution. There are also some that would provide it if you asked, but don't really advertize it. Really, all LCMS churches should at least present it as an option. Luther himself almost made it almost a requirment to receive communion.
Chris, if you read the new Small Catechism from CPH, it doesn't say two sacraments anymore. By citing one sentence in the entire Book of Concord, they claim there is now at least 3 sacraments. They actually say we shouldn't say firmly how many sacraments there are. Mark my word, someday they will say, like the Roman Catholics, that ordination is a sacrament. Me personally, I say there are 2 sacraments. Because the best Small Catechism that came out of CPH, the blue 1943 edition, says 2. So does it's predecessor the 1912 Small Catechism.
I think it is unfortunate that Churches must take such literal stances on things like Creation. It is not important in regards to salvation and other interpretations of the beginning of Genesis that still affirms inerrancy still exists, but are excluded. This is what creates a negative situation for me who is tired of the liberal theological churches that reject the Bible's teachings and commands on important moral questions, yet also reject the literalism of many conservative churches. I consider myself to be a conservative, but I am more inline with people like Dr. Michael S. Heiser when I try to interpret and understand the Old Testament.
This has been what has held me off from the LCMS for a while. In most respects, it is a very good church body. But the always-read-literally mindset just doesn't make sense to me. Yes, I believe everything in the Bible is true, but you're essentially dumbing the biblical writers down by reading it all literally. The Bible is possibly the most verbally-rich and deep collection of books in the world. There's metaphors, symbolism, allegories, parables... Entire books are split into acts in a grander play, each section helping to tell the story of the others. Science, in my eyes, helps to further prove God's existence. Yet when churches like the LCMS go against basic facts clearly identified by scientific means, it just makes the whole denomination harder to believe.
As a LCMS member, I would say the reason we take things so literally is because if you say one part of the Bible is at fault, then the whole book is as well. Just take a look at the ELCA if you want a reason on why we haven’t left that baseline
the main reason I believe in a literal stance on interpreting Genesis is that Jesus beveled and taught it as real. I accept Jesus as God, and God is Good, all knowing, and all powerful. If Jesus is good and all knowing, why would he then teach things he knows to be fiction? why would he lie? (Jesus believed that Abraham and Mosses were real people, that Sodom and Gomorrah were real places, and that Adam was a real person.) If Jesus is God, and Jesus for some reason did lie, then ether God is not good (as he is spreading deceptive information that is wrong) or God is not all knowing (he simply only knew what was taught to him). If Jesus is not good, then all of mankind is doomed to the mercy of a passive and/or evil god and should have no hope in anything he tells us. If Jesus is not all knowing, then we should have no confidence in his teaching to reflect reality and should not follow him. But since Jesus is good and is all knowing, we should have confidence in what He teaches (and believes) to be true.
The LCMS believes that books of the Bible should be interpreted as literally as they were clearly intended to be interpreted. Genesis is clearly intended to be a historical document. You can choose to believe it or not but the author(s) clearly intended for it to be taken and believed literally. You can be saved without belieiving in literal six day creation, but it sets up a slippery slope whereby then you are open to not believing in a literal Adam and Eve, sin literally entering the world through sin, a literal flood, a literal Tower of Babel, a literal story of Moses and the Israelites, and before you know it you could find yourself doubting if the life of Jesus, his crucifixion and resurrection, was literal. Where the LCMS differs from Fundamentalists in in interpreting Revelation. Unlike Genesis, Revelation was very clearly intended as a symbolic book. We believe the author (traditionally John the Evangelist) literally had the visions, but that the visions were not literal in what they portrayed.
@@RepublicofE God bless, friend. Under whose final authority in the LCMS hierarchy do you reach that conclusion? Who has the authority to say that one book must be read strictly historically and another book must be read strictly symbolically? God has invited us to explore and understand much of His creation to us. We call this science. God Himself has given us the evidence that certain literalist views (like YoungEarthCreationism) is objectively wrong. We as Christians ought not throw out science or the Bible, but instead understand how the two work in tandem, without compromising the authority of Scripture. As a side-note, I'd just like to explicitly affirm that I believe many of the examples you gave are indeed true. A literal Adam and Eve, a literal flood, a literal crucifixion and resurrection, etc. I simply pray for the Christians who approach the Bible too narrowly and end up contradicting evidence found in God's creation.
Actually the age of the universe is only a few days ahead of the age of Man. Genesis says that God made the light and he made one for Dan one for night. It also talks about the stars. This could all be explained if you think of this world as God's simulation. In other words, God has a giant computer, so to speak, that he runs a program on that is our world. If you notice, we are like in a giant fishbowl, and we are not allowed to go too far beyond it's physical boundaries, But yet, there are entities that have special nature that can appear and disappear, such as angels, demons, and heavenly personalities. There has been examples in scripture of people being brought back from death to be animated and be alive again. An example of that would be Lazarus in the New Testament, but there are others. There's all kinds of miracles that are recorded as well. These could easily be explained with God's control over the program. In other words he owns the cheat sheet. I have to compare it to a gigantic computer electronic game. So if one views it that way, all the archaeological history has been placed there already when God wrote the program. I know this sounds far-fetched, but as we get further and further into the digital age, one can actually grasp the digital world, which is artificial, but it seems real. Whatever the case, we will eventually know the full truth, but for now we must use faith in God, in Jesus, as long as we point ourselves that way and follow his commands and believe in him, we shall be saved. He'll explain it all later.
I do love your informative videos, mr Ready To Harvest! This one, however can be somewhat debated. You say "The LC-MS is the largest Lutheran denomination in the US that enforces adherence to its confessions, what is called confessional Lutheran." I would not say the LC-MS is confessional, because they do NOT enforce their doctrinal position. For example, about Scripture, they state as you say that the Bible is The Word of God, Inspired, Inerrant and Infallible. This is a very good statement, but they do not enforce it anymore. They accept historical critical method. Brief Statement (1932) is a good confession, but after the the death of their chief theologian Francis Pieper (1931) they slowly fell down into pluralism. There are not few conservative theologians who fight the deviations, but there is almost no doctrinal discipline. (Prof. Matthew Becker, who was ousted in 2015, is an very rare exception.) At LC-MS conventions they vote on doctrinal matters, voting for different conflicting doctrinal positions, which they allow, both before and after. One side wins, but is not enforced. There is a group which wants to restore confessionalism, The AECELC (Association of Confessing Evangelical Lutheran Congregations), which was founded in 2010. They point to areas where Biblical doctrine and practice are not upheld: Pure Doctrine - Holy Communion - Divine Service and Liturgical Offices - Unionism & Syncretism - Service of Women in the Church - Office of the Holy Ministry - Unbiblical Removal of Pastors from their Calls -The Church’s Mission and Her Evangelistic Task - Ecclesiastical Supervision. The AECELC has 31 member congregations (after eleven years) out of approx. 6 000 churches in the LC-MS. The LC-MS is not confessional. An appropriate word would be "CONSERVATIVE".
Eh, we don't "accept" historical critical method. We accept the fact that it exists and is taught (either intentionally or unintentionally) in the LCMS, but we do not accept it as a proper method of interpretation. As a pastor in the LCMS, I can tell you that most pastors reject it outright and work VERY hard to avoid it. Sadly, HC is EVERYWHERE and our members are exposed to it on an almost daily basis. This makes it hard.
@@evangelicalcatholics The sentence is maybe ambiguous, who are "they" in "They accept historical critical method"? It was not my intention to state that the pastors generally accept it - I'm happy to hear that most pastors reject it - but that HC is accepted within the LC-MS. Pastors in the LC-MS may be confessional, but the synod itself is not.
@@konkordiekyrkan The LCMS does not officially accept, teach, or otherwise promote HC. Our official documents, condemn the method and pastors are taught, from day one, that higher criticism is an offense to the Scripture. I went through 4 years of seminary and 4 years of undergrad at a Concordia. Higher Criticism is not accepted. There is not an official statement promoting, accepting, or otherwise giving a thumbs up to HC in the LCMS. ELCA? Sure, that denomination is all about higher criticism. But the LCMS is not. Again, this is not to say that there aren't a handful of people/pastor in the synod who, intentionally or unintentionally, employ it. After all, humans are, by nature, higher critics of God's Word. Perhaps you could provide an example of where you think we, the LCMS accept HC. Perhaps a writing or a quote or something. I'd like to see it.
@@evangelicalcatholics That's not my point. I don't deny there are many good official documents in the LC-MS, but you don't enforce them. A confessional church body does not tolerate false doctrine. Surely the LC-MS is not like the ELCA, which is liberal. The LC-MS is not liberal but is conservative.
@@evangelicalcatholics The LC-MS is unionistic which is in opposition to be confessional.. During Francis Pieper the LC-MS was confessional. He wrote "Thirdly, unscriptural unionism is present when a denomination acknowledges the confessional writings of the orthodox (that is, Lutheran) church in its constitution but tolerates false teachers undisciplined in its midst." (Theses on Unionism, By Dr. Franz Pieper. [An essay delivered at the 1924 convention of the Washington-Oregon District] L. L. White, Translator, January 1980)
I was actually raised in the LCMS. It's strange hearing someone sum it up. Looking back now, I don't regret leaving the church. I'm happier now than I was ever in the church. I'm not saying I was abused or anything. I just disagreed with Christianity and left it. I haven't regretted it since.
Aw yes, the threat of being tortured for all eternity if I don't bow before a tyrant god who claims to love me. I'm quite aware of that theology, my friend. All I can say is this: Should you be worried about Ragnarok? When the Norse gods slaughter one another and the world is destroyed? Shouldn't you be that strong warrior that helps fight in the final days? Your answer would be no. You find it silly because they aren't the 'true' gods of this world. I can't fear something that I don't believe in. If the only reason to be Christian is to 'avoid' a terrible fate, then I'm not quite sure how that is any different from angering any other 'true' god in the world. No matter how much 'love' language is used to cover up this ugly little truth. Also, please don't make a 'witty' remark that is a true battle between evil and good. Seriously, I have a basic grasp of theology, and religion in general, to reject or accept it. @@Stigma-ba115
That "theology"...? I know the implication is that you're educated enough to be confident to not be Christian, and I won't dispute that, your choice is yours. Seems weird to say "that theology" as if you're particularly knowledgeable when no Theology of any sort was mentioned beyond the obvious implication of hell. Also, as someone who is previously Christian, commenting on a Christian video, about a Christian denomination, I don't know why you're surprised that you'd get this comment, but I certainly think a nuclear comment like this is not only unwarranted, but it's unnecessary. Chill out. @@davidbrevik2537
Not requiring the clergy to believe the theology is absurd. If you don't believe in the resurrection, you aren't really a Christian. And you're pushing it if you reject virgin birth or bodily assumption of Christ. I have a hard time believing this stuff is controversial...
This Denomination has its roots in the German Lutheran Church. German people have a tendency to be ridged and stubborn. Truth can be hitting them in the face but it’s not accepted. Catholic Germans tend to be much the same. Traditionalists! Not my favorite type of person I enjoy being around.
I'm half German ancestry, born in the US. I've traveled to many countries on four of the seven continents. Encountering Germans abroad (specifically their millennial men) has always been a frustrating & unpleasant experience. German millennial men are by far the most rude, arrogant, & utterly undignified people I have ever known.
@@Paladin1776a so you mean like one church would teach non 6 day creation or what? If you mean that the LCMS churches do not actively preach on everything we believe explicitly I can agree with that
@@jewey1894 What I mean is that the Lutheran Faith has been codified in the Book of Concord. The LCMS on paper adheres to those beliefs. In practice it is a very different story. The LCMS states that they believe in Closed Communion (which is clearly taught in Scripture, 1 Cor 10, 1 Cor 11), but in practice, most churches practice Open Communion. In terms of Scripture, on paper they say that the Bible (Holy Scripture) is the sole source and norm for Christian Faith and Practice, but in practice, they call what God clearly says, Adiaphora, and don't practice it. Some examples; fellowship with other Church bodies they are in para-church ministry with, the role of women in the church, etc. All these things damage the proclamation of the Gospel, which is why the LCMS is a mess and shrinking. I hope this helps...
@@Paladin1776a Then yes I agree with you on several points. The LCMS is most certainly in a bad place right now, but I would say that most churches still adhere to the stated teachings. Where we fall short is teaching those things explicitly to our congregations, but I think as the culture continues to change, the LCMS will join with WELS and become more hardline
Ah Lutherans... As a Westminster guy, so much of their theology agrees with mine and I love the way they express much of their theology. But then they try to contrast their theology with mine and pull out the worst strawman version of our position they could find. I'd hope as a confessional church, they'd understand the importance of defining our position based on our confessions, but alas, no.
I am an LCMS Lutheran. Creating a straw man of another’s confession of faith would indeed be sin, and if so we would need to ask forgiveness. But how are we doing that?
Reformed have this weird habit of accusing everyone of misrepresenting them, even other reformed Christians. If you listen to a debate between any group of Christians that doesn't include a reformed person, the words "straw man" and "misrepresent" are rare. If you put a Calvinist in the mix, it becomes a focus of the debate. I'm starting to think y'all just don't actually know what you believe, despite Westminster and Dort.
@@dugood70 Lol at that, as if anyone actually argues against our confessions instead of arguing against doctrines we reject. Every anti-calvinist wants to argue against equal ultimacy, a denial of free will, or whatever pops into their head when they read the two word phrases making up TULIP, rather than double predestination, our affirmation of free will and Dort. Every Lutheran wants to argue against Zwingli and not Calvin, or fight for real presence and sacramental union while being ignorant of our affirmation of those things. The worst is the "Christians" using atheist arguments like the problem of evil as if they are immune to the same argument. And everyone wants to gang up on the Calvinist instead of defending their own position and actually presenting a biblical alternative. It's as if they know that if they actually spelled out their own system, it would either be obvious rank heresy or have all the same issues they accuse Calvinism of. The way I see it, if you think we don't understand our own beliefs while half quoting our confessions or straight up making things up, I'm going to start to wonder if you actually love Jesus. Jesus said if we love him, obey his commandments. His commandments include not bearing false witness and supporting accusations with the testimony of two or three witnesses. And yet 90% of the accusations are the same tired slander that has been refuted over and over again. All that said, if you have an argument that refuted _what we confess,_ I'm all ears.
As an Anglican, I’ve found that everybody tends to do that to everybody. Lutherans and the Reformed though almost have more trouble talking because they assume they assume they use words the same way and then spend 20 minutes arguing only to realize they actually agree but just use the same words differently.
I'm rather disposed to Lutheran theology as it teaches the Bible's teachings. Many bad mouth the Lutheran Church because Luther wasn't as good as they judge. Luther was a fallible human and not the Lord. Not everything they teach is perfect, surprise! Humans cannot be nor teach perfection.
Before you make the jump, take a good hard look at what happened to the LCMS in the years 1969-1981. It was a nightmare. I know, I lived through it. I left the LCMS in 1981 never to return and I won't and they'll being skiing in Hell before I ever step into another LCMS church. Both sides fought like hell for what they thought was their "heavenly cause." The strife, thuggery, division and general ill will was too much to take.
@@frankconnors9497 I liked the fact that the LCMS stood up against the liberalizers, but I've also said I didn't believe everything they teach and I believed them to be just as fallible as any human can be. I was part of a church where a bunch of people wanted to require belief in a young Earth creationist view to be a member. They really caused a lot of grief with their insistence that you cannot believe in an old Earth and the Bible at the same time. Luckily the pastor was wise enough to put a stop to them by making up a list of over 50 members who were old Earth creationists and he told the yec people that these people would have to be booted out. He told the yec's they must be excommunicated first otherwise they couldn't be told to leave according to church by-laws. It made what they were doing sink in, at least to most, but not all by no means. The pastor just said it is not an essential doctrine, but if some were not happy they were welcome to leave. He pointed out that no one was causing strife about it except themselves and he'd prefer they left if it bothered them so much they were willing to cause strife over it. There are plenty of churches for them to go to. Whereas old Earth creationists didn't have many churches that would accept them. I've seen the same situation over eschatology. Rapture, no Rapture until the 2nd Coming, dispensationalism versus the standard interpretation for over a thousand years. As long as there are people there will be strife although there needn't be as long essentials are upheld and nonessentials are recognized for what they are. Picking a wise pastor and elder, deacons whatever your church has is very important and why Paul gives a list of character traits for church leaders. No rich people running a church with their checkbook is another priority.
Be aware that there was virulent anti-Lutheran teaching at Roman Catholic churches after Vatican 2. They felt it important to make sure they weren't seen as giving in to Luther's criticisms. I'm almost 60 and I heard that Luther was responsible for the holocaust. This was in the Midwest with a large LCMS presence. They didn't want us to get any fancy ideas about heading up the street! Haha. There's political reasons behind some of the criticisms. Besides, I worship Christ, not a long deceased mortal man. He was brilliant but flawed as are we all.
@@MountainFisher First, the conflict between liberals and moderates had been locking horns on doctrinal issues since WWII. The question was not doctrinal difference it was behavior of both sides toward the other. BUT...J.A.O. Preus was the LCMS President and as the leader HAD THE RESPONSIBILITY to lead his flock through the trouble. Instead of taking the high road of "come let us reason together," he along with his allies chose thuggery and may way or the highway. If you view the You Tube Video on Seminex, Preus's Grandson admits Preus admitting to an aunt and uncle that, "I've destroyed the Synod." Well...he didn't destroy the Synod but the LCMS lost about 10% of it's membership and to this day, never recovered. I took no sides but left the LCMS on the following point, "YOU CAN'T FIGHT LIKE HELL FOR WHAT YOU BELIEVE TO BE YOUR HEAVENLY CAUSE." Sorry, I have my faults and foibles but I'm not going to be associated with people who act (then) like barbarous heathens.
@@nckoes Once again, history is not completely definitive on some points but rather presents precursor events and behaviors that manifest themselves in the future. In "The Destruction Of The European Jews" by Raul Hilberg, Luther is referenced 32 times in the context of his anti-semitism. It is an irrefutable fact that Martin Luther was a rabid anti-semite. Was he responsible for the holocaust? That might be a heavy lift but one thing that cannot be refuted is contributing to the evil philosophical basis that would occur a little over 400 years later. Vatican II recognized salvation in the Protestant Churches but maintains that Protestants are "separated bretheren" and the RCC is not going to change on that point. I would be most interested in specific "virulent anti-Lutheran teachings by the RCC after Vatican II. Now the Council of Trent was quite specific in it's condemnation of Luther, Melanchton, Zwingly and the rest of the Reformation's usual suspects.
Mathew 18 uses children to illustrate what faith looks like, but then refers to the believer as like a child that believes, leading to Jesus warning those who would direct them away from faith. It is a great stretch of the text to say that this scripture is about babies coming to faith. It is disheartening to see how churches twist scripture to validate mans Old teachings from hundreds of years ago. Many people place old commentaries along side scripture as if they are one and the same.
*John the Baptist had and professed faith from his Mother’s womb.* _And of the Holy Spirit he shall be filled even from the womb of his mother. ...And it happened that as she [Elizabeth] heard the greeting of Mary, σκιρτάω [leap (for joy), skip, bound] the baby in the womb of her,_ Luke 1:15, , 41 *A psalmist had faith from birth.* _For You are my hope, O Lord GOD;_ _You are my trust from my youth._ *_Upon You נִסְמַ֬כְתִּי [I have leaned myself] from my birth;_* _You are He who took me out of my mother’s womb._ Psalm 71:5-6 *David had faith from birth.* _[You made me trust] מַ֝בְטִיחִ֗י while on the breasts of my mother._ _I have been dependent on you since birth;_ _from the time I came out of my mother’s womb you have been my God._ Psalm 22:9 *Timothy had faith in the Gospel from infancy.* _From βρέφους [ an unborn or a newborn child; infant, babe, child in arms] you have known the holy message._ 2 Timothy 3:15 *David and Jesus do not find it incredible that nursing infants can praise God in faith.* _And Jesus said to them, “Yes. Have you never read,‘ Out of the mouth of νηπίων [babies] and θηλαζόντων [nursing infants] You have perfected praise’?”_ Matthew 21:16
Jesus, in that passage, explicitly states that children can believe when He says, "Whoever receives one such *child* in my name receives me, but whoever causes one of these *little ones* who *believe in me* to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea." The parallel passage in luke even calls the children brought to Jesus "infants," making the possibility of faith in infants quite certain.
@@Mygoalwogel thank you. i'm exploring the lutheran church (leaning toward lcms) and that had me concerned. i still have trouble with amillennialism but as long as i'm allowed to disagree on that i'm going to continue forward.
@@2singHispraise My pleasure! Disagreements about amillennialism won't get you into trouble as long as your pastor knows his office. It's not mentioned in the Catechism, so it's not essential for lay people.
@@Mygoalwogel 'his office'? idk that term. thnx for answering. i think i'm ready for church instruction for the faith but i don't think i can read the book of concord and the small and large catechisms. that's a lot of heavy reading. will i have to do that?
I get a kick out of "God created the world in six natural days." If you read the story, there weren't days yet at first! I don't doubt that God created the universe, but we have to recognize mythical language as used by our ancient predecessors.
The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (LCMS) completely accepts and teaches the doctrine of the Athanasian Creed (an ecumenical creed created by catholic theologians) and the statements describing what the catholic faith is within this creed. Part of this creed is a statement saying you must hold the catholic faith. Athanasian Creed: Whoever desires to be saved must, above all, hold the catholic faith. Whoever does not keep it whole and undefiled will without doubt perish eternally. And the catholic faith is this, that we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity, neither confusing the persons nor dividing the substance. For the Father is one person, the Son is another, and the Holy Spirit is another. But the Godhead of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is one: the glory equal, the majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit: the Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, the Holy Spirit uncreated; the Father infinite, the Son infinite, the Holy Spirit infinite; the Father eternal, the Son eternal, the Holy Spirit eternal. And yet there are not three Eternals, but one Eternal, just as there are not three Uncreated or three Infinites, but one Uncreated and one Infinite. In the same way, the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, the Holy Spirit almighty; and yet there are not three Almighties, but one Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God; and yet there are not three Gods, but one God. So the Father is Lord, the Son is Lord, the Holy Spirit is Lord; and yet there are not three Lords, but one Lord. Just as we are compelled by the Christian truth to acknowledge each distinct person as God and Lord, so also are we prohibited by the catholic religion to say that there are three Gods or Lords. The Father is not made nor created nor begotten by anyone. The Son is neither made nor created, but begotten of the Father alone. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son, neither made nor created nor begotten, but proceeding. Thus, there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits. And in this Trinity none is before or after another; none is greater or less than another; but the whole three persons are coeternal with each other and coequal, so that in all things, as has been stated above, the Trinity in Unity and Unity in Trinity is to be worshiped. Therefore, whoever desires to be saved must think thus about the Trinity. But it is also necessary for everlasting salvation that one faithfully believe the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, it is the right faith that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is at the same time both God and man. He is God, begotten from the substance of the Father before all ages; and He is man, born from the substance of His mother in this age: perfect God and perfect man, composed of a rational soul and human flesh; equal to the Father with respect to His divinity, less than the Father with respect to His humanity. Although He is God and man, He is not two, but one Christ: one, however, not by the conversion of the divinity into flesh, but by the assumption of the humanity into God; one altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by unity of person. For as the rational soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is one Christ, who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead, ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father, God Almighty, from whence He will come to judge the living and the dead. At His coming all people will rise again with their bodies and give an account concerning their own deeds. And those who have done good will enter into eternal life, and those who have done evil into eternal fire. This is the catholic faith; whoever does not believe it faithfully and firmly cannot be saved.
@@frankconnors9497 While the English text of the Athanasian Creed authorized by the bishops of the Anglican Church in North America in the 2019 Book of Common Prayer does in fact capitalize the ‘C’ in the adjective ‘Catholic’ in the Athanasian Creed (though not in the Nicene-its translation follows the original Greek, not the Latin), the original Latin text of the Athanasian Creed is believed to have been produced in the 5th century AD, yet there was no distinction between uppercase and lowercase (majuscule and minuscule) letters at the time it was written as minuscule letters were not invented until the 9th century AD, and rules for their mixing manuscripts did not begin to emerge until the 13th century or so. Even so, in English usage, determination of where and when to capitalize has varied across time, e.g., there was a trend in the 17th and 18th centuries to capitalize all English adjectives and nouns deemed important, as was done in the text of the 1662 Book of Common Prayer in the text of the Nicene Creed with ‘Catholick Church’, as is still somewhat the case in German (though German proper adjectives, at least in the early 20th century, were not capitalized when they appear in prose bodies). In Latin texts, even where proper nouns are now capitalized (as would not have originally been the case (no pun intended)), proper adjectives are still frequently not capitalized, as is the case for the word ‘catholicam’ in both my copy of The Roman Missal (1962) and Concordia Triglotta (1921; the Lutheran Book of Concord in German, Latin, and English). Interestingly, in the 1921 Concordia Triglotta, in the English translations of the Nicene Creed and Athanasian Creed, ‘Catholic’ is indeed capitalized, whereas later Lutheran printings opted for lowercase ‘c’.
1. What was the disagreement? It could have been a serious issue of theological truth and not just disagreeing with the pastor. Can you please explain? 2 needs a little more clarification... ie. Supporting infanticide(abortion) is worthy of excommunication. Therefore a person supporting someone who would allow for it (and knowing it) is no longer in good standing with not just the Church, but with Christ Himself as all life from the beginning until its end is sacred. I feel like #2 wasn't as simple as "you don't like Trump." But I'd like to hear what it was about! 🙂
BS meter went off. You intentionally left out details on both of them 🤣 For all we know, they disagreed with the pastor on gay marriage and didn't support Donald Trump speaking at March for Life. And then they left on their own
@@BoxOfOranges84 My BS meter twitched as well. This person seems ignorant of the fact that while an LCMS pastor can withhold communion from someone, they don't have the power to unilaterally disfellowship someone from the congregation altogether. Typically disgruntled members leaving the LCMS goes like this: Layman: Wants to believe and confess something that is contrary to Scripture and the Lutheran confessions that either the secular world on one hand (e.g. gay marriage is good) or the evangelical sphere on the other (e.g. open communion) say is good. Pastor: That's not in keeping with the Bible. Layman: But I thought Jesus taught love. Pastor: Yes, he did. Now let me explain to you how our teaching on this issue actually supports and doesn't diminish the love of Christ. Layman: No, you've already shown me that you're unloving by not immediately agreeing with me. I'm leaving now (proceeds to go and tell everyone they can that the LCMS is a fundie cult that won't tolerate you asking questions about their doctrines).
The Misery Synod isn’t just a nickname, the LCMS are outliers to what 95% of the world’s Lutherans practice. Too bad it focuses so much of its energy obsessed with being critical and judgmental on all other Christian groups (including most Lutherans. It doesn’t engage with other liturgical churches nor part of the global Lutheran church. . The fact it literally does not allow its pastors to pray with others, refuses most Lutherans (or other Christians) from taking communion, should tell people all they need to know about how inward and isolated it has become and why it isn’t in mainstream of Lutheran beliefs, despite shared core beliefs in the Trinity, Creeds (though LCMS changed words heard in Catholic and other Lutheran churches due to its oddity of avoiding the word catholic).
What do you mean by the global Lutheran church? There are three large international Lutheran fellowship organizations, and the LCMS belongs to one of them, the International Lutheran Council. Also, what do you mean by the LCMS doesn't allow its pastors to pray with others? The LCMS doesn't allow its pastors to participate in their capacity as clergy in joint services with non-Lutheran clergy, including ecumenical prayer services. They absolutely allow their pastors to pray with non-Lutheran Christians at the private level. It's the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod that tells its members not to pray with non-Lutherans, although even they allow for broad exceptions. Practicing closed communion isn't just an LCMS thing. The Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox do as well. So do most Baptist churches and a good chunk of Reformed churches.
@@RepublicofE LCMS very publicly made its own pastors “apologize” for (gasp) participating in community prayer services after 9/11, and again after the tragic school children shooting in CT (How or why this is so sinful even dumbfounded many LCMS members). LCMS doesn’t belong to global or local ecumenical organizations. It issued statements and news releases because Lutherans worldwide and Catholics came to agreement in the late 90s on many topics of shared faith, and LCMS was beside itself when the Pope and Lutheran bishops came together to celebrate the 500th anniversary of the Reformation together in Sweden (something most U.S. Lutherans rejoiced about). The Lutheran World Federation represents 90%+ of Lutherans on earth, LCMS is not affiliated as it disagrees with most Lutherans around the world (as well as most in US too).. There are small, orgs which LCMS belongs with other Lutherans outside US. 90%+ of Lutherans in the world, and most US Lutherans, are not welcomed in LCMS churches and certainly not communion. That is very much a LCMS thing, not a practice of other denominations. There are not US catholic dioceses which tell 90%+ of Catholics they are “not worthy” of communion in their churches. Overall, the denomination does much to distance itself from others while most other faith groups look for common ground and shared understanding, even when they disagree.
For someone who I don't think is LCMS, the guy in the video has a better understanding of it than some in the LCMS.
I met someone in a LCMS church who said they were a "Calvinist Lutherin" and I just didn't know what to say to that.
I grew up in a LCMS Church and school. Took for granted the excellent education and Church life we experienced.
I appreciate it more than ever, now that I'm old.
Me too!
Hi Buddy 🙋🏻♂️
Indonesian🇮🇩 here, i just wanna ask you what version of the Bible does LCMS Church use ?
@@arunanarina1316ESV
Please, if you’re able to see this comment, would you explain how it was a excellent? I’m considering LCMS!
@@arunanarina1316 We are free to use any Holy Bible translation that we want to use. I use the New International Version (NIV). However, the main translation that is used in orders of worship is the New English Version (NEV). I just wanted to answer.
My wife and I are blessed to have found a home at a LCMS congregation; we are very happy there. We have FINALLY found our permanent church home!
I appreciate your videos and how detail-oriented you are. You are very good at using the same language as used in the church and do not have an obvious bias towards or against any denomination. You clearly convey what each church teaches.
Thank you
Thanks Nick!
THANK YOU for providing a clear and objective missive on the LCMS. I am a nearly life-long member and am myself a pastor in the LCMS.
Does the lcms believe in Christian patriarchy
@@patriot345 More or less, yes. We believe the best way, and the way that seems most consistent with Christian and churchly order, is that the father is the head of the household, who teaches the faith to the family, provides for the family, etc. The mother is the helpmate, who also leads the home, teaches the children, etc., though the father is still the head. In the church, only men can be pastors, though women can teach as long as the teaching is done under the authority of the pastor, and women should only teach other women and children. This keeps good order in the home and in the church and reflects God's order in creation. We don't believe men are "better" than women, such as the world might accuse us of, but we believe men have roles, women have roles, and those roles should not be forfeit if at all possible.
If a women decides to work and have a career, that's fine, just so long as the children and the home aren't neglected, especially with regard to the faith. But in the church, women cannot be elders, pastors, or have any ecclesial authority over men.
Interesting to note, with regard to ecumenical relationships: In situations where an ACNA Church is sharing physical facilities with another Church, it is most likely to be an LCMS Church... I am a priest in ACNA, and our small congregation very happily shares facilities with a local LCMS congregation.😇
I love the wonderful classical church hymns in my LCMS church. Our old Hymns are beautiful. :-)
My aunt and uncle were members of a Norwegian Lutheran Congregation in Michigan c. 1940's, the NLC was one of the many groups that merged into the ELCA - but my aunt chose to go Missouri Synod and this little German-esque Church was a delight to attend on Christmas and Easter (I was Roman at the time) - I tend to gravitate towards this synod and if no RC church is around, I'll go LCMS in a heartbeat
Yeah as a LCMS member, I would probably prefer to go to a Roman Catholic church versus some other Protestant one.
To be frank, the Romans are significantly closer to my own beliefs than many of the people who we are subgrouped into within studies and such.
I have never gone to one(I am only 16) and frankly I don't know of any nearby.
My grandpa was baptized at a norwegian church, but confirmed at the 1st Lutheran in Fargo. ELCA of his time (1920-1993) was a whole different animal. Being almost fully norwegian, I left my lefse making church for LCMS. It sure is different. But at least I don't have a non binary, genetically female, pastor anymore. My old church is covered in rainbows. Even the altar and the cross.
Oh, Lord have mercy! So glad you left…the church of rainbow confusion is deceiving so many. We must pray for them @@SolSkinn
This is exactly the content what I've been looking for thank you for making these videos!!!
Excellent
Your videos are a phenomenal resource and a gift to RUclips. The quality of your material is probably the best on the discussion of differing Christian Denominations and Confessions. Well done!
I grew up Non-Denominational and have been looking into other denominations because NDs seem to loose the reverence of God and I love that the Lutheran Motto is Grace Alone
Faith Alone
Scripture Alone
Evangelical Presbyterian might be a good fit too. I’m an ND, but served at an epc church and found it a great experience.
The dirty little secret of ND churches is that they are non-denominational in name in only.
Churches that call themselves non-denominational virtually all fall into one of three categories: Baptist in all but name, Charismatic/Pentecostal in all but name, or some combination thereof.
Look up where your ND pastor went to seminary and where your ND church gets its teaching materials. There you will find that it is part of a denomination regardless of its claims to the contrary.
I don’t think they are Calvinist though.
@@RepublicofE I came here to say this.
@@RepublicofE This is generally true.
You said all that without one goof-up! Excellent!
I attended my first lcms service this past Sunday. I do like their emphasis on the bible. Everyone was welcoming and the pastor was open to answer any questions I had about doctrine. Maybe I'll convert one day I don't know. I do want to go back though.
Don't convert, you are already there. The fact that you didn't like emphasis on the bible could be saying what you believe, doesn' match up with the bible. Or said directly, "Don't let the bible get in the way of what you believe."
We’d love to have you in the LCMS! I suggest starting with confirmation/adult inquiry classes (the name changes depending on where you go). The pastor will go through the doctrine of the church, and at the end of it you have the opportunity for membership
@@jakobi4971 My reply for facetious. Sorry that didn't come across. I re-read and it seemed plain to me. Blessings.
As someone who appreciates the rich history and uniqueness of all these denominations, your presentation is excellent. You don’t appear to have any agenda…you just present the information as is and they are very informative and educational. Thank you and keep up the good work 🙏🏾
Hi 👋 thank you very much for this episode,, it very helpful and very informative an enjoyable.
This is why I'm a Confessional Lutheran.
Very interesting and detailed analysis. I was brought up Lutheran (LCA and then ELCA) and loved the worship style and the people but not so much the seemingly less-than-biblically-focused, evolving "liberal" doctrine of the denomination. Ultimately I became Catholic, thanks be to God. The LCMS seems to have maintained much (at least) of traditional, doctrinally principled Lutheranism.
I'm a lifelong Catholic, and there are troubling trends in our church. The LCMS is somewhat attractive, if only they didn't over-interpret 1 Timothy 2:5 so radically.
@@Krakondack Explain?
@@shellieperreault6262 The meaning is clear if you read more than just the isolated quote. It's an admonishment to unity because we have one intercessor, so "let's be one". Instead, it's taken as a strict ban against requests for prayers.
@@Krakondack How does the LCMS use this to stop people from praying for each other?
@@shellieperreault6262 Those aren't the words I used. I think you're baiting me, anyway, and know perfectl well what I mean.
Any chance that you can do a program comparing Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (LCMS) and Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS)?
I am a member, and profoundly thankful for being a member of this branch of the body of Christ. My concern is twofold, the youth and evangelical outreach. We have solid Biblical teachings, Sacraments and tradition. I pray we seek to reach out and also grow pastors and leaders from within our churches and communities. Having pastors travel across country to start a work that has been around for many years is problematic in my view. The early church had home grown leaders. I pray we use all the wisdom of God. We don't have enough Pastors that's why home grown is so appealing. ❤❤
@ready to harvest do they believe in Complementarianism
Why does the ELCA have time stamps but this video does not?
I started adding them recently, and have not taken the time to go back and do it on my older videos.
There is an LCMS office "Minister of Religion Commissioned" who are called church workers. Deaconesses are in that classification, but others as well.
You forgot something. The LCMS does teach the scripture in James 2:17 that "Faith without works is dead". This simply means that we show and share our faith with others by helping them and also, making sure they are cared for if help is needed by them. If there are no works being shown, then faith is meaningless and dead when there are no works at all. It is THE Christian duty to care for those who are poor, especially those who are poor in spirit. Just a heads up.
The LCMS is the closest thing in America to the Book of Concord doctrinally. But it is not close in regard to practice. There are some congregations which strive to draw near to evangelical catholic practice, but many more that do not. The LCMS allows fairly broad latitude in local practices. On paper, the unity is in doctrine, but the mechanisms to enforce doctrinal unity is fairly feeble. Nothing tangible is ever done to enforce unity of practice, but it's supposed to happen by pastoral and congregational vows. There are no ecclesiastical courts to deal with erring clergy or parishes. Once in a while, an erring clergyman will face discipline. The bureaucratic structure has little teeth to enforce anything. Congregationalism is where the political rubber meets the road.
Could u do a video over venture church network?
I really enjoy your content but I loath youtube. Do you post on any other platforms like bitchute?
You're joking right?
@@jacobh2147 nope
@@silashollis6630 damn may God help you in that case
@@jacobh2147 relax. You tube is out dated and on its way out just like the typewriter. I dont think God is too concerned
@@silashollis6630 meh i guess so but bitchute really?
@Ready To Harvest, I'm just making sure I understand exactly what you are saying... Are you saying that the LCMS is self governing to where anyone can start an LCMS church? Self governing like the Independent Baptists and the non-denominational churches?
Local Churches are self-governing in the sense that they can choose their own ministers, handle their own business. Run congregationally, so they own their own property. And they can leave the LCMS if they want.
Starting a new LCMS church is another deal, under normal circumstances, you would need to do so under the authority of another LCMS church and following LCMS guidelines sddlcms.org/media/files/Service%20Areas/LCMS%20Church%20Planting%20Manual.pdf
However, a person could just go start a church and once it was going, move to join the LCMS. But this isn't just a show process. There are real requirements that would need to be met.
So in all, congregational government, internally self-governing. No bishops that tell a congregation what to do. But not completely autonomous, and churches can get kicked out if they stray from the rules.
In addition to what Joshua said, someone could theoretically start an independent Lutheran congregation, and if for whatever reason that congregation wanted to be in fellowship with the LCMS but not actually part of it, they could petition the LCMS to establish altar and pulpit fellowship with them.
The requirments for them to enter into fellowship with the LCMS might be less complicated than actually joining the LCMS, but at a minimum they would have to confess the same doctrine and have a pastor that has been educated in a way deemed acceptable to the LCMS.
However, to my knowledge this hasn't actually happened. There are other Lutheran denominations that are in fellowship with the LCMS, but to my knowledge there are no independent single congregations in fellowship with the LCMS other than overseas mission congregations started by the LCMS itself.
Not quite. LCMS church structure is really a mixture of congregational polity and episcopal polity.
The churches are organized into 35 districts and each district is overseen by a district president, which is analogous to the role of bishop. The entire synod is overseen by the synod president, akin to the role of archbishop. The 35 district presidents + the synod president form the Council of Presidents (COP), one of whose duties is to place graduates from the two LCMS seminaries as pastors in congregations that have requested one. Also, when a person becomes a pastor, the Ordination Rite is usually led by the District President or his delegate.
However, each congregation is self-governed and resolutions made by district presidents or the Synod president are advisory not binding if it's not according to scripture or if it's inexpedient for the individual congregation.
But even in the process of a congregation "choosing its own pastor", the district president and his delegate is very much involved - the church doesn't just call up an available pastor and ask them to lead their church and it's a done deal. You can read the full process here: mo(dot)lcms(dot)org/call-process, but in short, the congregation notifies the district president of their vacancy, the president schedules a meeting with congregational leaders to outline the process, congregational leaders meet with delegate to work through form and pastoral rankings, the president's President reviews the list of nominees and possibly adding suggested names based on the congregation's needs, Call Committee presents its top two or three candidates to the Voter’s Assembly, and the assembly votes.
I think a better term for this structure is limited episcopal polity. The structure and hierarchy of episcopal polity is present, but the authority bishops have over the churches they oversee is minimal (at least when compared to other churches with full episcopal polity like RCC, Orthodox, Anglican, or even some European Lutheran churches with which LCMS is in communion).
I amTesfaw Mekete from Ethiopia.
I want to attend class of pastoral ministry in the midst of diverse challenges on online. How can I join it?
Thank you for your kind response.
I am from evangelical church of myc.
Can u receive communion if you are divorced and remarried
Yes.
can you compare the LCMS to Roman Catholic
@@LindseyMysse
How?
Former LCMS here now a VERY happy Roman Catholic! Absolutely NOT! The LCMS is a train wreck. Just look back on the years 1969-1981. And if they're not careful, they're about to repeat it again. This is a church to avoid.
@@LindseyMysse wow someone has an axe to grind
LCMS was started by German Lutheran immigrants to the Midwest US.
That's right! The story is told in this video: ruclips.net/video/rJuQBtgUeMk/видео.html
@@LindseyMysse
How?
Yet ironically, would not welcome German Lutherans (nor any others for that matter) and are not part of the global Lutheran community, publicly shames its pastors who (gasp) pray with others and remains disconnected from the entirety of the broader Christian community, not just other Lutherans. The LCMS spends much of its energy and official positions being critical of the overwhelming majority of Lutherans, and distain the worlds Lutherans have grown closer to other liturgical churches, including most Lutherans agreements with the Catholic Church and full communion with Episcopalians.
This is why I was catechised and baptized a Confessional Lutheran. Had to drive an hour and a half to be baptized. So much division occurred after Luther and after Lutherans arrived in the USA. It forced me to read the works of Luther to find out what he truly taught. Oddly enough, he lead me straight to Rome.
Proud to be LCMS because of its resistance to change with the times. From beliefs to worship style, I appreciate that it rejects worldly ways. Maybe that contributes to the decrease in members, but I think Lutherans would rather go out of fashion than cheapen itself and succumb to the world.
I grew up Missouri Synod and did NOT think of us as Evangelical … that conjured up images of adult baptism, less pretty church buildings and guitars and drums as part of the service, lol.
So I think we all want to know, what denomination are you?
I agree
Think he’s IFB.
He alludes heavily that he is an Independent Baptist in several videos, I believe he said he is an Associate Professor at an Independent Baptist College as well.
WELS vs lcms vs lcmc vs elca
Papists vs sedevacantists vs Palamites vs Coptics vs Church of the East
When did the Lutheran church start?
I would date it to 1529, see en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestation_at_Speyer
Gen. 3:15. Always.
@@illinoisbay so why the name Lutheran Church as it has always or is it Lutheran because of Martin Luther around the year 1500?
Where there are sinners hearing the Law and Gospel and faith is created , that is the Lutheran church.
@@illinoisbayis this the gospel according to Frank Zimmerman or is it written in some part in the bible, I'm trying to find the church that has been around since the death of Christ, can you tell me where are the apostle buried at or which church has there remains? Where is the oldest Church and is it Lutheran, Baptist, Catholic, Jehovah witness, Mormon or other.
One of the last Bible based church
When Luther said "the apocrypha is useful to read -- although not to the same level as Scripture" he meant that it is useful to read *in church* , in other words, in the Church's lectionary.
The LCMS does have an excommunication policy to remove unrepentant sinners. No mention of that?
The ELCA doesn't require ministers to adhere to Lutheran theology? You obviously never went through the candidacy process in the ELCA...
True Lutheran Theology is believing that the Bible IS God's Word. Not "contains" God's Word, which leads to people and church bodies choosing what they like and ignoring what they don't like. Something ELCA blatantly does.
Come now you know what he is talking about. The ELCA is filled with pastors who talk about how Jesus was just a man or that Jesus never rose from the dead or are straight up unitarians. Search the sparkle creed or go to an ELCA church in a large city. Don't be coy the ELCA is Lutheran in name only.
Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
- John 3:5
I was raised LCMS and met Jesus on his terms of surrender at the cross. In 1973 at the age of 18. I went to Concordia Lutheran College in Austin Texas. To study to be a Lutheran minister. But SEMINEX discouraged me and I left the LCMS in 1975 for Charismatic Churches
I am of the persuasion that the only Means of Grace that God will honor is
FAITH in the finished work of the cross.
@@davidboehmer4359 - and faith is what the means of grace create, strengthen and keep us in. Faith in the finished work of Christ upon the cross.
Sounds like you already had pentecostal tendencies in you even at Concordia. Yeah, the whole seminex thing was a mess, but it needed to happen because the LCMS was drifting in a horrible direction, at least at the St. Louis seminary (Ft. Wayne, at the time, was still confessional and faithful to the Scripture and still are to this day). Just reading what you wrote, "met Jesus on his terms of surrender at the cross..." this is not a Scriptural statement. Jesus surrendered His life for us at the cross! THAT'S the Gospel! In Charismatic churches, you rarely get the gospel; you get a whole lot of law, but so little gospel. It's why I left that world. Everything was about me and what I have to do to be totally committed, and all it did was bring fear and despair and uncertainty.
I like you lived that nightmare of 1969-1981. You made a good call leaving the LCMS.
@@freethinker9071 Good handle name. As a free thinker you certainly won't let the bible get in the way of what you believe. Carry on....
First, LCMS is confessional. That means it is original Christianity. Pre-Roman Catholic, pre-Schism, meat and potatoes only. No fluff, Scripture only.
That means if the Bible says it then that is what it is. No saint worship, no American politics, no politics.
I dont understand how they believe in real presence yet deny the transubtation.
It's similar to the Orthodox. They believe in a real presence but as transubstantiation.
It's the mystery. We don't believe that it changes elements in a way we can understand.
LCMS members do not consider absolution a sacrament. There must be material elements to be a sacrament, and it must be instituted by Christ and for the forgiveness of sins. It is an office or rite and not a sacrament and I know of no congregation that does private confession. We have public confession and forgiveness during the church service.
One thing you will learn about the LCMS the longer you are in it is that it is a very Your Mileage May Vary denomination. There are entire districts where adherence to the Confessions is not strictly enforced despite the LCMS striving to be a confessional denomination.
Private confession and absolution is absolutely a historic Lutheran practice. It's in the Catechism. Regarding whether or not it is a sacrament, the Augsburg Confession explicitly states that Lutherans are not to split hairs over how many sacraments there are, so long as we understand the nature and purpose of each. Martin Luther viewed confession/absolution as an extension of baptism and thus did not number it as a third sacrament, but he wasn't dogmatic about whether there are two or three sacraments. After all, there is no Biblical list of "sacraments" in the Bible.
There are plenty of LCMS churches that do private confession/absolution. There are also some that would provide it if you asked, but don't really advertize it. Really, all LCMS churches should at least present it as an option. Luther himself almost made it almost a requirment to receive communion.
Chris, if you read the new Small Catechism from CPH, it doesn't say two sacraments anymore. By citing one sentence in the entire Book of Concord, they claim there is now at least 3 sacraments. They actually say we shouldn't say firmly how many sacraments there are. Mark my word, someday they will say, like the Roman Catholics, that ordination is a sacrament.
Me personally, I say there are 2 sacraments. Because the best Small Catechism that came out of CPH, the blue 1943 edition, says 2. So does it's predecessor the 1912 Small Catechism.
I was thinking of visiting a local Lutheran church before watching this. Not going to now. Thankyou
Good call!
Please try a ELCA Lutheran Church. Nothing like the LCMS sect.
I think it is unfortunate that Churches must take such literal stances on things like Creation.
It is not important in regards to salvation and other interpretations of the beginning of Genesis that still affirms inerrancy still exists, but are excluded.
This is what creates a negative situation for me who is tired of the liberal theological churches that reject the Bible's teachings and commands on important moral questions, yet also reject the literalism of many conservative churches.
I consider myself to be a conservative, but I am more inline with people like Dr. Michael S. Heiser when I try to interpret and understand the Old Testament.
This has been what has held me off from the LCMS for a while. In most respects, it is a very good church body. But the always-read-literally mindset just doesn't make sense to me. Yes, I believe everything in the Bible is true, but you're essentially dumbing the biblical writers down by reading it all literally. The Bible is possibly the most verbally-rich and deep collection of books in the world. There's metaphors, symbolism, allegories, parables... Entire books are split into acts in a grander play, each section helping to tell the story of the others.
Science, in my eyes, helps to further prove God's existence. Yet when churches like the LCMS go against basic facts clearly identified by scientific means, it just makes the whole denomination harder to believe.
As a LCMS member, I would say the reason we take things so literally is because if you say one part of the Bible is at fault, then the whole book is as well. Just take a look at the ELCA if you want a reason on why we haven’t left that baseline
the main reason I believe in a literal stance on interpreting Genesis is that Jesus beveled and taught it as real. I accept Jesus as God, and God is Good, all knowing, and all powerful. If Jesus is good and all knowing, why would he then teach things he knows to be fiction? why would he lie? (Jesus believed that Abraham and Mosses were real people, that Sodom and Gomorrah were real places, and that Adam was a real person.) If Jesus is God, and Jesus for some reason did lie, then ether God is not good (as he is spreading deceptive information that is wrong) or God is not all knowing (he simply only knew what was taught to him). If Jesus is not good, then all of mankind is doomed to the mercy of a passive and/or evil god and should have no hope in anything he tells us. If Jesus is not all knowing, then we should have no confidence in his teaching to reflect reality and should not follow him. But since Jesus is good and is all knowing, we should have confidence in what He teaches (and believes) to be true.
The LCMS believes that books of the Bible should be interpreted as literally as they were clearly intended to be interpreted.
Genesis is clearly intended to be a historical document. You can choose to believe it or not but the author(s) clearly intended for it to be taken and believed literally.
You can be saved without belieiving in literal six day creation, but it sets up a slippery slope whereby then you are open to not believing in a literal Adam and Eve, sin literally entering the world through sin, a literal flood, a literal Tower of Babel, a literal story of Moses and the Israelites, and before you know it you could find yourself doubting if the life of Jesus, his crucifixion and resurrection, was literal.
Where the LCMS differs from Fundamentalists in in interpreting Revelation. Unlike Genesis, Revelation was very clearly intended as a symbolic book. We believe the author (traditionally John the Evangelist) literally had the visions, but that the visions were not literal in what they portrayed.
@@RepublicofE God bless, friend. Under whose final authority in the LCMS hierarchy do you reach that conclusion? Who has the authority to say that one book must be read strictly historically and another book must be read strictly symbolically?
God has invited us to explore and understand much of His creation to us. We call this science. God Himself has given us the evidence that certain literalist views (like YoungEarthCreationism) is objectively wrong. We as Christians ought not throw out science or the Bible, but instead understand how the two work in tandem, without compromising the authority of Scripture.
As a side-note, I'd just like to explicitly affirm that I believe many of the examples you gave are indeed true. A literal Adam and Eve, a literal flood, a literal crucifixion and resurrection, etc. I simply pray for the Christians who approach the Bible too narrowly and end up contradicting evidence found in God's creation.
The age of the universe is of the number within the stars of heaven and the age of the earth to that of the sands in the sea
Actually the age of the universe is only a few days ahead of the age of Man. Genesis says that God made the light and he made one for Dan one for night. It also talks about the stars. This could all be explained if you think of this world as God's simulation. In other words, God has a giant computer, so to speak, that he runs a program on that is our world. If you notice, we are like in a giant fishbowl, and we are not allowed to go too far beyond it's physical boundaries, But yet, there are entities that have special nature that can appear and disappear, such as angels, demons, and heavenly personalities. There has been examples in scripture of people being brought back from death to be animated and be alive again. An example of that would be Lazarus in the New Testament, but there are others. There's all kinds of miracles that are recorded as well. These could easily be explained with God's control over the program. In other words he owns the cheat sheet. I have to compare it to a gigantic computer electronic game. So if one views it that way, all the archaeological history has been placed there already when God wrote the program. I know this sounds far-fetched, but as we get further and further into the digital age, one can actually grasp the digital world, which is artificial, but it seems real. Whatever the case, we will eventually know the full truth, but for now we must use faith in God, in Jesus, as long as we point ourselves that way and follow his commands and believe in him, we shall be saved. He'll explain it all later.
I do love your informative videos, mr Ready To Harvest! This one, however can be somewhat debated. You say "The LC-MS is the largest Lutheran denomination in the US that enforces adherence to its confessions, what is called confessional Lutheran." I would not say the LC-MS is confessional, because they do NOT enforce their doctrinal position. For example, about Scripture, they state as you say that the Bible is The Word of God, Inspired, Inerrant and Infallible. This is a very good statement, but they do not enforce it anymore. They accept historical critical method. Brief Statement (1932) is a good confession, but after the the death of their chief theologian Francis Pieper (1931) they slowly fell down into pluralism. There are not few conservative theologians who fight the deviations, but there is almost no doctrinal discipline. (Prof. Matthew Becker, who was ousted in 2015, is an very rare exception.) At LC-MS conventions they vote on doctrinal matters, voting for different conflicting doctrinal positions, which they allow, both before and after. One side wins, but is not enforced.
There is a group which wants to restore confessionalism, The AECELC (Association of Confessing Evangelical Lutheran Congregations), which was founded in 2010. They point to areas where Biblical doctrine and practice are not upheld: Pure Doctrine - Holy Communion - Divine Service and Liturgical Offices - Unionism & Syncretism - Service of Women in the Church - Office of the Holy Ministry - Unbiblical Removal of Pastors from their Calls -The Church’s Mission and Her Evangelistic Task - Ecclesiastical Supervision.
The AECELC has 31 member congregations (after eleven years) out of approx. 6 000 churches in the LC-MS.
The LC-MS is not confessional. An appropriate word would be "CONSERVATIVE".
Eh, we don't "accept" historical critical method. We accept the fact that it exists and is taught (either intentionally or unintentionally) in the LCMS, but we do not accept it as a proper method of interpretation. As a pastor in the LCMS, I can tell you that most pastors reject it outright and work VERY hard to avoid it. Sadly, HC is EVERYWHERE and our members are exposed to it on an almost daily basis. This makes it hard.
@@evangelicalcatholics The sentence is maybe ambiguous, who are "they" in "They accept historical critical method"? It was not my intention to state that the pastors generally accept it - I'm happy to hear that most pastors reject it - but that HC is accepted within the LC-MS. Pastors in the LC-MS may be confessional, but the synod itself is not.
@@konkordiekyrkan The LCMS does not officially accept, teach, or otherwise promote HC. Our official documents, condemn the method and pastors are taught, from day one, that higher criticism is an offense to the Scripture. I went through 4 years of seminary and 4 years of undergrad at a Concordia. Higher Criticism is not accepted. There is not an official statement promoting, accepting, or otherwise giving a thumbs up to HC in the LCMS. ELCA? Sure, that denomination is all about higher criticism. But the LCMS is not. Again, this is not to say that there aren't a handful of people/pastor in the synod who, intentionally or unintentionally, employ it. After all, humans are, by nature, higher critics of God's Word.
Perhaps you could provide an example of where you think we, the LCMS accept HC. Perhaps a writing or a quote or something. I'd like to see it.
@@evangelicalcatholics That's not my point. I don't deny there are many good official documents in the LC-MS, but you don't enforce them. A confessional church body does not tolerate false doctrine. Surely the LC-MS is not like the ELCA, which is liberal. The LC-MS is not liberal but is conservative.
@@evangelicalcatholics The LC-MS is unionistic which is in opposition to be confessional.. During Francis Pieper the LC-MS was confessional. He wrote "Thirdly, unscriptural unionism is present when a denomination acknowledges the confessional writings of the orthodox (that is, Lutheran) church in its constitution but tolerates false teachers undisciplined in its midst." (Theses on Unionism, By Dr. Franz Pieper. [An essay delivered at the 1924 convention of the Washington-Oregon District] L. L. White, Translator, January 1980)
I was actually raised in the LCMS. It's strange hearing someone sum it up. Looking back now, I don't regret leaving the church. I'm happier now than I was ever in the church. I'm not saying I was abused or anything. I just disagreed with Christianity and left it. I haven't regretted it since.
You may on the day of judgment. Please return home.
Aw yes, the threat of being tortured for all eternity if I don't bow before a tyrant god who claims to love me. I'm quite aware of that theology, my friend. All I can say is this: Should you be worried about Ragnarok? When the Norse gods slaughter one another and the world is destroyed? Shouldn't you be that strong warrior that helps fight in the final days? Your answer would be no. You find it silly because they aren't the 'true' gods of this world. I can't fear something that I don't believe in. If the only reason to be Christian is to 'avoid' a terrible fate, then I'm not quite sure how that is any different from angering any other 'true' god in the world. No matter how much 'love' language is used to cover up this ugly little truth. Also, please don't make a 'witty' remark that is a true battle between evil and good. Seriously, I have a basic grasp of theology, and religion in general, to reject or accept it. @@Stigma-ba115
That "theology"...? I know the implication is that you're educated enough to be confident to not be Christian, and I won't dispute that, your choice is yours.
Seems weird to say "that theology" as if you're particularly knowledgeable when no Theology of any sort was mentioned beyond the obvious implication of hell. Also, as someone who is previously Christian, commenting on a Christian video, about a Christian denomination, I don't know why you're surprised that you'd get this comment, but I certainly think a nuclear comment like this is not only unwarranted, but it's unnecessary. Chill out.
@@davidbrevik2537
Lutheran in Asia is low in number. I hope that Lutheran [LCMS] send its missionary to Asia.
Not requiring the clergy to believe the theology is absurd.
If you don't believe in the resurrection, you aren't really a Christian.
And you're pushing it if you reject virgin birth or bodily assumption of Christ.
I have a hard time believing this stuff is controversial...
Where did it say this stuff? I cant find it in the video.
This Denomination has its roots in the German Lutheran Church. German people have a tendency to be ridged and stubborn. Truth can be hitting them in the face but it’s not accepted. Catholic Germans tend to be much the same. Traditionalists! Not my favorite type of person I enjoy being around.
I'm half German ancestry, born in the US. I've traveled to many countries on four of the seven continents. Encountering Germans abroad (specifically their millennial men) has always been a frustrating & unpleasant experience. German millennial men are by far the most rude, arrogant, & utterly undignified people I have ever known.
The LCMS does NOT enforce adherence to the Lutheran Confessions. It only does so on paper NOT in practice.
How do you say that?
@@jewey1894 Easy, over 50 years in the LCMS and a few years at an LCMS Seminary... so, direct personal experience...
@@Paladin1776a so you mean like one church would teach non 6 day creation or what? If you mean that the LCMS churches do not actively preach on everything we believe explicitly I can agree with that
@@jewey1894 What I mean is that the Lutheran Faith has been codified in the Book of Concord. The LCMS on paper adheres to those beliefs. In practice it is a very different story. The LCMS states that they believe in Closed Communion (which is clearly taught in Scripture, 1 Cor 10, 1 Cor 11), but in practice, most churches practice Open Communion. In terms of Scripture, on paper they say that the Bible (Holy Scripture) is the sole source and norm for Christian Faith and Practice, but in practice, they call what God clearly says, Adiaphora, and don't practice it. Some examples; fellowship with other Church bodies they are in para-church ministry with, the role of women in the church, etc. All these things damage the proclamation of the Gospel, which is why the LCMS is a mess and shrinking. I hope this helps...
@@Paladin1776a Then yes I agree with you on several points. The LCMS is most certainly in a bad place right now, but I would say that most churches still adhere to the stated teachings. Where we fall short is teaching those things explicitly to our congregations, but I think as the culture continues to change, the LCMS will join with WELS and become more hardline
This unfortunately is not the church of the first century. Not the one Jesus built.
Which is?
And you make this claim why?
Please LCMS Lutherans please be more Conservative!
Ah Lutherans... As a Westminster guy, so much of their theology agrees with mine and I love the way they express much of their theology. But then they try to contrast their theology with mine and pull out the worst strawman version of our position they could find. I'd hope as a confessional church, they'd understand the importance of defining our position based on our confessions, but alas, no.
Westminster?
I am an LCMS Lutheran. Creating a straw man of another’s confession of faith would indeed be sin, and if so we would need to ask forgiveness. But how are we doing that?
Reformed have this weird habit of accusing everyone of misrepresenting them, even other reformed Christians. If you listen to a debate between any group of Christians that doesn't include a reformed person, the words "straw man" and "misrepresent" are rare. If you put a Calvinist in the mix, it becomes a focus of the debate. I'm starting to think y'all just don't actually know what you believe, despite Westminster and Dort.
@@dugood70 Lol at that, as if anyone actually argues against our confessions instead of arguing against doctrines we reject. Every anti-calvinist wants to argue against equal ultimacy, a denial of free will, or whatever pops into their head when they read the two word phrases making up TULIP, rather than double predestination, our affirmation of free will and Dort. Every Lutheran wants to argue against Zwingli and not Calvin, or fight for real presence and sacramental union while being ignorant of our affirmation of those things. The worst is the "Christians" using atheist arguments like the problem of evil as if they are immune to the same argument.
And everyone wants to gang up on the Calvinist instead of defending their own position and actually presenting a biblical alternative. It's as if they know that if they actually spelled out their own system, it would either be obvious rank heresy or have all the same issues they accuse Calvinism of.
The way I see it, if you think we don't understand our own beliefs while half quoting our confessions or straight up making things up, I'm going to start to wonder if you actually love Jesus. Jesus said if we love him, obey his commandments. His commandments include not bearing false witness and supporting accusations with the testimony of two or three witnesses. And yet 90% of the accusations are the same tired slander that has been refuted over and over again.
All that said, if you have an argument that refuted _what we confess,_ I'm all ears.
As an Anglican, I’ve found that everybody tends to do that to everybody. Lutherans and the Reformed though almost have more trouble talking because they assume they assume they use words the same way and then spend 20 minutes arguing only to realize they actually agree but just use the same words differently.
I'm rather disposed to Lutheran theology as it teaches the Bible's teachings. Many bad mouth the Lutheran Church because Luther wasn't as good as they judge. Luther was a fallible human and not the Lord. Not everything they teach is perfect, surprise! Humans cannot be nor teach perfection.
Before you make the jump, take a good hard look at what happened to the LCMS in the years 1969-1981. It was a nightmare. I know, I lived through it. I left the LCMS in 1981 never to return and I won't and they'll being skiing in Hell before I ever step into another LCMS church. Both sides fought like hell for what they thought was their "heavenly cause." The strife, thuggery, division and general ill will was too much to take.
@@frankconnors9497 I liked the fact that the LCMS stood up against the liberalizers, but I've also said I didn't believe everything they teach and I believed them to be just as fallible as any human can be.
I was part of a church where a bunch of people wanted to require belief in a young Earth creationist view to be a member. They really caused a lot of grief with their insistence that you cannot believe in an old Earth and the Bible at the same time.
Luckily the pastor was wise enough to put a stop to them by making up a list of over 50 members who were old Earth creationists and he told the yec people that these people would have to be booted out. He told the yec's they must be excommunicated first otherwise they couldn't be told to leave according to church by-laws. It made what they were doing sink in, at least to most, but not all by no means.
The pastor just said it is not an essential doctrine, but if some were not happy they were welcome to leave. He pointed out that no one was causing strife about it except themselves and he'd prefer they left if it bothered them so much they were willing to cause strife over it. There are plenty of churches for them to go to. Whereas old Earth creationists didn't have many churches that would accept them.
I've seen the same situation over eschatology. Rapture, no Rapture until the 2nd Coming, dispensationalism versus the standard interpretation for over a thousand years. As long as there are people there will be strife although there needn't be as long essentials are upheld and nonessentials are recognized for what they are. Picking a wise pastor and elder, deacons whatever your church has is very important and why Paul gives a list of character traits for church leaders. No rich people running a church with their checkbook is another priority.
Be aware that there was virulent anti-Lutheran teaching at Roman Catholic churches after Vatican 2. They felt it important to make sure they weren't seen as giving in to Luther's criticisms. I'm almost 60 and I heard that Luther was responsible for the holocaust.
This was in the Midwest with a large LCMS presence. They didn't want us to get any fancy ideas about heading up the street! Haha.
There's political reasons behind some of the criticisms. Besides, I worship Christ, not a long deceased mortal man. He was brilliant but flawed as are we all.
@@MountainFisher First, the conflict between liberals and moderates had been locking horns on doctrinal issues since WWII. The question was not doctrinal difference it was behavior of both sides toward the other. BUT...J.A.O. Preus was the LCMS President and as the leader HAD THE RESPONSIBILITY to lead his flock through the trouble. Instead of taking the high road of "come let us reason together," he along with his allies chose thuggery and may way or the highway. If you view the You Tube Video on Seminex, Preus's Grandson admits Preus admitting to an aunt and uncle that, "I've destroyed the Synod." Well...he didn't destroy the Synod but the LCMS lost about 10% of it's membership and to this day, never recovered. I took no sides but left the LCMS on the following point, "YOU CAN'T FIGHT LIKE HELL FOR WHAT YOU BELIEVE TO BE YOUR HEAVENLY CAUSE." Sorry, I have my faults and foibles but I'm not going to be associated with people who act (then) like barbarous heathens.
@@nckoes Once again, history is not completely definitive on some points but rather presents precursor events and behaviors that manifest themselves in the future. In "The Destruction Of The European Jews" by Raul Hilberg, Luther is referenced 32 times in the context of his anti-semitism. It is an irrefutable fact that Martin Luther was a rabid anti-semite. Was he responsible for the holocaust? That might be a heavy lift but one thing that cannot be refuted is contributing to the evil philosophical basis that would occur a little over 400 years later. Vatican II recognized salvation in the Protestant Churches but maintains that Protestants are "separated bretheren" and the RCC is not going to change on that point. I would be most interested in specific "virulent anti-Lutheran teachings by the RCC after Vatican II. Now the Council of Trent was quite specific in it's condemnation of Luther, Melanchton, Zwingly and the rest of the Reformation's usual suspects.
Mathew 18 uses children to illustrate what faith looks like, but then refers to the believer as like a child that believes, leading to Jesus warning those who would direct them away from faith. It is a great stretch of the text to say that this scripture is about babies coming to faith. It is disheartening to see how churches twist scripture to validate mans Old teachings from hundreds of years ago. Many people place old commentaries along side scripture as if they are one and the same.
*John the Baptist had and professed faith from his Mother’s womb.*
_And of the Holy Spirit he shall be filled even from the womb of his mother. ...And it happened that as she [Elizabeth] heard the greeting of Mary, σκιρτάω [leap (for joy), skip, bound] the baby in the womb of her,_ Luke 1:15, , 41
*A psalmist had faith from birth.*
_For You are my hope, O Lord GOD;_
_You are my trust from my youth._
*_Upon You נִסְמַ֬כְתִּי [I have leaned myself] from my birth;_*
_You are He who took me out of my mother’s womb._ Psalm 71:5-6
*David had faith from birth.*
_[You made me trust] מַ֝בְטִיחִ֗י while on the breasts of my mother._
_I have been dependent on you since birth;_
_from the time I came out of my mother’s womb you have been my God._ Psalm 22:9
*Timothy had faith in the Gospel from infancy.*
_From βρέφους [ an unborn or a newborn child; infant, babe, child in arms] you have known the holy message._ 2 Timothy 3:15
*David and Jesus do not find it incredible that nursing infants can praise God in faith.*
_And Jesus said to them, “Yes. Have you never read,‘ Out of the mouth of νηπίων [babies] and θηλαζόντων [nursing infants] You have perfected praise’?”_ Matthew 21:16
Jesus, in that passage, explicitly states that children can believe when He says, "Whoever receives one such *child* in my name receives me, but whoever causes one of these *little ones* who *believe in me* to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea." The parallel passage in luke even calls the children brought to Jesus "infants," making the possibility of faith in infants quite certain.
@@Mygoalwogel thank you. i'm exploring the lutheran church (leaning toward lcms) and that had me concerned. i still have trouble with amillennialism but as long as i'm allowed to disagree on that i'm going to continue forward.
@@2singHispraise My pleasure! Disagreements about amillennialism won't get you into trouble as long as your pastor knows his office. It's not mentioned in the Catechism, so it's not essential for lay people.
@@Mygoalwogel 'his office'? idk that term. thnx for answering. i think i'm ready for church instruction for the faith but i don't think i can read the book of concord and the small and large catechisms. that's a lot of heavy reading. will i have to do that?
I get a kick out of "God created the world in six natural days." If you read the story, there weren't days yet at first! I don't doubt that God created the universe, but we have to recognize mythical language as used by our ancient predecessors.
How else would God have done it?
I read that those churches come back to Catholic, orthodox-and oriental churches too many sects around and Jesus says One Church.
If Catholics and Orthodox didn’t change things... yeah.
The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (LCMS) completely accepts and teaches the doctrine of the Athanasian Creed (an ecumenical creed created by catholic theologians) and the statements describing what the catholic faith is within this creed. Part of this creed is a statement saying you must hold the catholic faith.
Athanasian Creed:
Whoever desires to be saved must, above all, hold the catholic faith. Whoever does not keep it whole and undefiled will without doubt perish eternally.
And the catholic faith is this, that we worship one God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity, neither confusing the persons nor dividing the substance. For the Father is one person, the Son is another, and the Holy Spirit is another. But the Godhead of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit is one: the glory equal, the majesty coeternal. Such as the Father is, such is the Son, and such is the Holy Spirit: the Father uncreated, the Son uncreated, the Holy Spirit uncreated; the Father infinite, the Son infinite, the Holy Spirit infinite; the Father eternal, the Son eternal, the Holy Spirit eternal. And yet there are not three Eternals, but one Eternal, just as there are not three Uncreated or three Infinites, but one Uncreated and one Infinite. In the same way, the Father is almighty, the Son almighty, the Holy Spirit almighty; and yet there are not three Almighties, but one Almighty. So the Father is God, the Son is God, the Holy Spirit is God; and yet there are not three Gods, but one God. So the Father is Lord, the Son is Lord, the Holy Spirit is Lord; and yet there are not three Lords, but one Lord. Just as we are compelled by the Christian truth to acknowledge each distinct person as God and Lord, so also are we prohibited by the catholic religion to say that there are three Gods or Lords.
The Father is not made nor created nor begotten by anyone. The Son is neither made nor created, but begotten of the Father alone. The Holy Spirit is of the Father and of the Son, neither made nor created nor begotten, but proceeding. Thus, there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons; one Holy Spirit, not three Holy Spirits. And in this Trinity none is before or after another; none is greater or less than another; but the whole three persons are coeternal with each other and coequal, so that in all things, as has been stated above, the Trinity in Unity and Unity in Trinity is to be worshiped. Therefore, whoever desires to be saved must think thus about the Trinity.
But it is also necessary for everlasting salvation that one faithfully believe the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, it is the right faith that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is at the same time both God and man. He is God, begotten from the substance of the Father before all ages; and He is man, born from the substance of His mother in this age: perfect God and perfect man, composed of a rational soul and human flesh; equal to the Father with respect to His divinity, less than the Father with respect to His humanity. Although He is God and man, He is not two, but one Christ: one, however, not by the conversion of the divinity into flesh, but by the assumption of the humanity into God; one altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by unity of person. For as the rational soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is one Christ, who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead, ascended into heaven, and is seated at the right hand of the Father, God Almighty, from whence He will come to judge the living and the dead. At His coming all people will rise again with their bodies and give an account concerning their own deeds. And those who have done good will enter into eternal life, and those who have done evil into eternal fire.
This is the catholic faith; whoever does not believe it faithfully and firmly cannot be saved.
@@bobyeager157 Not catholic...but Catholic! The original text (pre-dating October 31, 1517) uses the proper noun.
@@frankconnors9497 While the English text of the Athanasian Creed authorized by the bishops of the Anglican Church in North America in the 2019 Book of Common Prayer does in fact capitalize the ‘C’ in the adjective ‘Catholic’ in the Athanasian Creed (though not in the Nicene-its translation follows the original Greek, not the Latin), the original Latin text of the Athanasian Creed is believed to have been produced in the 5th century AD, yet there was no distinction between uppercase and lowercase (majuscule and minuscule) letters at the time it was written as minuscule letters were not invented until the 9th century AD, and rules for their mixing manuscripts did not begin to emerge until the 13th century or so. Even so, in English usage, determination of where and when to capitalize has varied across time, e.g., there was a trend in the 17th and 18th centuries to capitalize all English adjectives and nouns deemed important, as was done in the text of the 1662 Book of Common Prayer in the text of the Nicene Creed with ‘Catholick Church’, as is still somewhat the case in German (though German proper adjectives, at least in the early 20th century, were not capitalized when they appear in prose bodies). In Latin texts, even where proper nouns are now capitalized (as would not have originally been the case (no pun intended)), proper adjectives are still frequently not capitalized, as is the case for the word ‘catholicam’ in both my copy of The Roman Missal (1962) and Concordia Triglotta (1921; the Lutheran Book of Concord in German, Latin, and English). Interestingly, in the 1921 Concordia Triglotta, in the English translations of the Nicene Creed and Athanasian Creed, ‘Catholic’ is indeed capitalized, whereas later Lutheran printings opted for lowercase ‘c’.
The Lutheran Church is the Catholic Church purified by the Gospel.
I’ve been a member of two LCMS churches that have excommunicated members for:
1-Disagreeing with the pastor
2-Not supporting Donald Trump
1. What was the disagreement? It could have been a serious issue of theological truth and not just disagreeing with the pastor. Can you please explain?
2 needs a little more clarification... ie. Supporting infanticide(abortion) is worthy of excommunication. Therefore a person supporting someone who would allow for it (and knowing it) is no longer in good standing with not just the Church, but with Christ Himself as all life from the beginning until its end is sacred. I feel like #2 wasn't as simple as "you don't like Trump." But I'd like to hear what it was about! 🙂
BS meter went off. You intentionally left out details on both of them 🤣
For all we know, they disagreed with the pastor on gay marriage and didn't support Donald Trump speaking at March for Life. And then they left on their own
@@BoxOfOranges84 My BS meter twitched as well. This person seems ignorant of the fact that while an LCMS pastor can withhold communion from someone, they don't have the power to unilaterally disfellowship someone from the congregation altogether.
Typically disgruntled members leaving the LCMS goes like this:
Layman: Wants to believe and confess something that is contrary to Scripture and the Lutheran confessions that either the secular world on one hand (e.g. gay marriage is good) or the evangelical sphere on the other (e.g. open communion) say is good.
Pastor: That's not in keeping with the Bible.
Layman: But I thought Jesus taught love.
Pastor: Yes, he did. Now let me explain to you how our teaching on this issue actually supports and doesn't diminish the love of Christ.
Layman: No, you've already shown me that you're unloving by not immediately agreeing with me. I'm leaving now (proceeds to go and tell everyone they can that the LCMS is a fundie cult that won't tolerate you asking questions about their doctrines).
The Misery Synod isn’t just a nickname, the LCMS are outliers to what 95% of the world’s Lutherans practice. Too bad it focuses so much of its energy obsessed with being critical and judgmental on all other Christian groups (including most Lutherans. It doesn’t engage with other liturgical churches nor part of the global Lutheran church. . The fact it literally does not allow its pastors to pray with others, refuses most Lutherans (or other Christians) from taking communion, should tell people all they need to know about how inward and isolated it has become and why it isn’t in mainstream of Lutheran beliefs, despite shared core beliefs in the Trinity, Creeds (though LCMS changed words heard in Catholic and other Lutheran churches due to its oddity of avoiding the word catholic).
What do you mean by the global Lutheran church? There are three large international Lutheran fellowship organizations, and the LCMS belongs to one of them, the International Lutheran Council.
Also, what do you mean by the LCMS doesn't allow its pastors to pray with others? The LCMS doesn't allow its pastors to participate in their capacity as clergy in joint services with non-Lutheran clergy, including ecumenical prayer services. They absolutely allow their pastors to pray with non-Lutheran Christians at the private level. It's the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod that tells its members not to pray with non-Lutherans, although even they allow for broad exceptions.
Practicing closed communion isn't just an LCMS thing. The Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox do as well. So do most Baptist churches and a good chunk of Reformed churches.
@@RepublicofE LCMS very publicly made its own pastors “apologize” for (gasp) participating in community prayer services after 9/11, and again after the tragic school children shooting in CT (How or why this is so sinful even dumbfounded many LCMS members). LCMS doesn’t belong to global or local ecumenical organizations. It issued statements and news releases because Lutherans worldwide and Catholics came to agreement in the late 90s on many topics of shared faith, and LCMS was beside itself when the Pope and Lutheran bishops came together to celebrate the 500th anniversary of the Reformation together in Sweden (something most U.S. Lutherans rejoiced about). The Lutheran World Federation represents 90%+ of Lutherans on earth, LCMS is not affiliated as it disagrees with most Lutherans around the world (as well as most in US too).. There are small, orgs which LCMS belongs with other Lutherans outside US. 90%+ of Lutherans in the world, and most US Lutherans, are not welcomed in LCMS churches and certainly not communion. That is very much a LCMS thing, not a practice of other denominations. There are not US catholic dioceses which tell 90%+ of Catholics they are “not worthy” of communion in their churches. Overall, the denomination does much to distance itself from others while most other faith groups look for common ground and shared understanding, even when they disagree.
@@mic1240 The Bible says to mark and avoid false teachers.
Lutherans Please side with the Republican party in politics ✝️🇺🇸
Contemporary worship is just plain.wrong
Gay
You should come out on Twitter, not RUclips.
@@zarnoffa twitter is to straight edge