Going back to Lutheran Church after very long “journey” which included E. Orthodoxy and Evangelicalism. I love the liturgy and the fact of hymns and minimal electronics and other distractions. Thanks be to God for the rich musical heritage of the Lutheran Church. Worship that has not turned into a rock band circus.
I have very recently rediscovered my faith. I was raised Methodist, walked away many years ago, but a gift of faith has been granted to me, and the Lutheran way resonates with my very core and my truest authentic self. I shall seek my local Lutheran congregation in the UK and ask to be received by them following appropriate preparation.
@m.v.5425 to point out anti-Biblical and anti-Christian behavior which has been consistently occurring, in order to warn someone who may be innocent/unaware of it, is not judgemental in a negative sense. It is precisely the judgement which God commands.
Excellent overview of the confessional Lutheran faith. One that I can forward to our adult kids and others to provide the detail on what we believe and how/why we differ from Catholicism and modern Protestantism.
The is no lutheran faith. Martin Luther said you are not allowed to call you self lutheran since it's not his belive. We are are only allowed to call us Christian. It's the very fist sentence of the catechesis.
Absolutely fantastic presentation! Anything that lessens, decreases, or detracts from Christ’s sacrifice on the cross is not Christian. Lutheran’s seem to have the best grasp that the Christian religion is based on Jesus Christ.
The praise and worship should be biblical and theological sound but that doesn't mean only 1500 organ music.. We have good teachings and I would hope we reach out more to others
I searched for a church that wasn't corrupted and found out about Lutheranism online, I feel so blessed to also find a Lutheran church near where I lived at the time!
15:30 I’m glad that he doesn’t seem particularly happy about Lutheranism not being one united church like Catholicism or Orthodoxy. I definitely do not want my church to pick and choose which parts of scripture should be adhered to, or to be swept along in the ever-changing cultural tides… I need something GROUNDED.
How "One church" is Catholicism, really, unless you say that Catholic-like sects like the one to which Mel Gibson belongs, aren't? The Pope might say that they are not, but we Lutherans don't necessarily agree with everything he says, do we?
Our good works, our deeds, are the response to God's Grace working in our life. Faith and works, actions, are the two sides of the same coin. The only reason we ever came to faith in Christ and repented of our sins working out our salvation is because God put that in us by His Spirit. No one comes to Christ that is not drawn to him by the Father. All that belongs to Christ are given to him by the Father therefore we are His inheritance and He is our inheritance. He took our sins so that we might obtain His righteousness. Our life is now hidden with Christ in God. We have died. None of it from our coming to faith to our obedience is of ourselves. It is all God's Grace working in us. Coming to this realization that it is not of ourselves and that it is all Christ working in us we can say with Paul, I am crucified with Christ and yet not I but Christ lives in me.
Was baptized by a church that taught the doctrine of the Trinity. Later joined Mormon church. Wanted out and withdrew membership when I realized what I had done. Should I be baptized by a pastor that teaches the Trinity doctrine? What a fool I was. Please help.
Sir, treating women like helpless, overgrown children does not help them have the fortitude to say “No” to a man asking for sex. Morals must also be taught to our daughters. Fatherless daughters are usually more promiscuous than girls raised by a mother and father. If a man forces a woman to have sex against her will, that’s rape and that’s criminal and immoral. Two adults consenting to sex outside of marriage? Both are guilty in God’s eyes.
Can you elaborate on how you think the Catholic Church has been ruined by hierarchy? I’m a lifelong Lutheran (non-practicing most of it) and I’m current feeling quite drawn to Catholicism however I’m very skeptical of it. God bless you and thank in advance for reading this
@@Trivico it’s too long for a response. But, it’s disgusting what the leaders have done, continue to do, and cover up. Makes me want to vomit. Stay away
30:06 🤔 if you think about it it's not a murderer's fault that he murders, it's the person who didn't give him the money or car or etcetera in a timely manner before he murdered them. It's who ever made the murderers life so hard that he felt the need to murder someone,🤔 right? 🤔 Abortion is the woman's fault. She who carries one out is a murderer. That being said she may have additional accomplices besides just the person performing the abortion.
No. Please don't lie. There is no true church. Eastern orthodoxy is not Christian and it is not orthodox. It is a cult. They worship idols and pray to dead people. How am I going to draw a picture of you and bow to it, and ask you to intercede for me. Grow up. Get real
Also NALC and LCMC. I’m sure the “sticking point” for those who say only WELS and LCMS are Biblical is the issue of women preaching and teaching in the church.
As a confirmed back in 1992 ELCA Lutheran I’ll give a thought: The church needs to start doing 1000x more use of technology and virtual services and such. The Nordic and German boomers where the church set up (upper Midwest, Midwest) are very old and there’s not many of my generation and less of the newer generations interested because we feel ignored by outdated teachings and how information is offered. Example: all of RUclips and maybe 3 services.. from 2018… just sayin’ 🤷♂️ I also feel that the boomer generation wasn’t nearly as educated and didn’t have the word comprehension as later generations. In middle age now, as a last born Gen-X I’m finding some (in my opinion) teachings are in direct opposition to what Jesus tells us in the Gospel and sometimes contradictory in the same few words. I’m sorry, but it is. I’m a university grad, I can understand the English language lol.. as well as people twisting words to make opposite meanings. Forgive me Lord and I ask any readers forgiveness if I caused anger. To many people get burned out as kids in church and don’t read the Bible fully.. the gospel at least.. with adult word/sentence understanding or word trickery being used. Hypothetical sentence: The dog walked by a tree on a sunny day. Nothing more to say and no misunderstanding right? When Jesus speaks clearly, don’t twist the meaning ok? I respect the education and experience of our Pastors, Bishops and all but, in 2024 now, most information is near instantly available to people as is the word comprehension and historical knowledge of an adult. Martin Luther being an EXTREME antisemite for instance 🤷♂️ my only belief without question is in our Savior, The Father and the Holy Spirit. I would like my church to not twist the gospel. Examples: The church says either or both for eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood.. THAT is a lie and wrong. Jesus doesn’t say that. “… eat of my flesh… ***AND*** drink of my blood” in every bible version old and new.. I was raised with the NIV bible.. our version.. NO OR.. JUST AND. That is a BIG problem right there. Pastors telling their flock the virgin birth of our lord probably wasn’t a virgin birth?!?…. Seems my Church is being corrupted by evil. The resurrection even.. the most important, most powerful message that at that moment, began Christianity by our Savior’s resurrection. Telling people that’s basically metaphorical then skip skip jump to twist into another quote of our Savior? THAT’s not proper! That’s.. I’m sorry.. that’s evil. No other way to say it. Forgive me Jesus for my judgement. ❤️
Luther's flaw was his severe hatred of the Jews. His book "The Jews and Their Lies" is a terrible book of hatred. Very few religious groups in Christianity actually teach LORDs true word and the teachings and the love of Yeshua. We hold to man made traditions and doctrine that is simply not in the word of God
The Talmud was verbally inspired by Satan. Luther hated the devil's religion and prayed for the conversion of the Jews who were taught to hate Christ. You have neither actually read his little book on their lies nor bothered to understand the context. And his name is Jesus, not Yeshua. You don't see anyone going around insisting on Iésous. What a pompous way to feign deeper acquaintance of Christ than those who taught you not to blaspheme.
I am disappointed by this outdated theology. I understand why thinking people are leaving the Lutheran Church. This kind of theology leads to divisiveness and we are given a ministry if reconciliation. Don Tastad
Luther wasn't in agreement with the position of the Formula of Concord on predestination. Although he held that Christ died for the sins of the whole world, he didn't hold that the Holy Spirit is efficacious in the Word to all who hear it. Luther held that the Scriptures teach double predestination, and that God wills to damn some from eternity. I agree with Luther. For instance Paul's analogy of the potter who makes vessels of honour and dishonour in Romans 9 wouldn't be apropos if Paul didn't hold that God predestines people to both heaven and hell. If Paul had been confessional Lutheran in theology he wouldn't have the potter making vessels of dishonour (e.g. chamber pots), but only vessels of honour (e.g. vases). With regards to the confessional Lutheran doctrine of the universal operation of the Holy Spirit in the means of grace (Word and sacraments), Luther rejected this in The Bondage of the Will. He distinguished between the outer drawing of the Gospel which goes out to everyone but which doesn't have the power to regenerate, and the inner drawing by the Holy Spirit through the Gospel which irresistibly regenerates those whom the Father wills. Luther wrote: Now take the saying of Christ in John 6 [:44]: "No one comes to me unless my Father draws him." What does this leave to free choice? For he says that everyone needs to hear and learn from the Father himself, and that all must be taught by God. He plainly teaches here, not only that the works and efforts of free choice are fruitless, but that even the message of the gospel itself (which is what this passage is about) is heard in vain unless the Father himself speaks, teaches, and draws inwardly…. But the ungodly does not come even when he hears the Word unless the Father draws and teaches him inwardly, which He does by pouring out the Spirit. There is then another "drawing" than the one that takes place outwardly; for then Christ is set forth by the light of the Spirit, so that a man rapt away to Christ with the sweetest rapture, and rather yields passively to God's speaking, teaching, and drawing than seeks and runs himself. (p.285,286, Vol. 33, Luther's Works) Confessional Lutherans don't accept this distinction between an inner and an outer drawing, and believe that the Holy Spirit is always efficacious in the Word towards everyone, and that the reason why people are damned is because they resist the Holy Spirit. Luther on the other hand rejected this and held that people are damned because God doesn't will to regenerate them through the Holy Spirit but rather to leave them in their sins so that they're damned. Luther addressed the seeming injustice of God in doing so by explaining that God's justice can't be comprehended in this life but will be understood in the next. Confessional Lutherans wrongly conclude from the fact that God through Christ desires to save everyone that it must follow that He hasn't predestined anyone to be damned. However this is a false deduction. The Scriptures teach both and it's wrong to pit one against the other and conclude that the Scriptures only teach single predestination. Simple logic also dictates that if people are saved only because God has elected to save them in eternity that the reason why people are damned is because God didn't elect or will to save them in eternity. It's not possible that predestination to heaven can exist on its own without it being accompanied by predestination to hell. Confessional Lutherans should have stayed with Luther's Scriptural doctrine of predestination instead of adopting Chemnitz's heretical doctrine. By the way, I'm not a Calvinist. I agree with the documents contained in the Book of Concord that were in existence during Luther's lifetime. It's only the Formula of Concord, which was produced after Luther's death, that I take issue with.
Also, in the analogy from 2 Timothy, I don't see anywhere it stating that the potter created the tools for noble/ignoble use. In fact, in the context it states that we should be sure that we live in order to be useful and of noble use to the master. not that he has predetermined whether we will or will not be of use to him. So it's actually kind of saying the opposite it seems.
@@dave1370 2 Timothy 2:19-20 ESV But God's firm foundation stands, bearing this seal: “The Lord knows those who are his,” and, “Let everyone who names the name of the Lord depart from iniquity.” [20] Now in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver but also of wood and clay, some for honorable use, some for dishonorable. I agree with Luther when he wrote in The Bondage of the Will that the above verses show that it is God who prepares the vessels for their intended use. See pages 204-205 Vol. 33, Luther's Works.
@@dave1370 McCain doesn't in any way disprove that Luther endorsed double predestination. Luther didn't deny that God has predestined some to be damned in his commentary on Genesis. In fact he affirmed it when he said he had written in The Bondage of the Will that everything is absolute and unavoidable.
@@dave1370 I previously wrote out what follows with the intention of using it sometime in the future but I might as well post it here now: According to confessional Lutherans God by His revealed will wills that everyone should be saved and that this isn't in conflict with His hidden will which elects to save only some people and not everyone. According to them although God doesn't elect to save everyone this isn't because He's unwilling to save them, but it involves a mystery which is impossible to understand. So according to this there's something which isn't an unwillingness to save everyone which accounts for why God doesn't elect to save everyone. However this doesn't make sense. There can't be any other reason why God doesn't do something other than He wills not to do it. He's all-powerful and has perfect freedom to do as He wills. If He doesn't elect to save everyone that's because He doesn't will to save everyone. There's nothing mysterious as to why He doesn't elect to save everyone. He simply doesn't elect to save everyone because He wills to save only those He chooses to save. So although in His revealed will in Christ He desires to save everyone, at the same time according to His hidden will, which determines what happens, He doesn't will to save everyone. So it follows that the Holy Spirit is only efficacious in the Word to those whom God has elected to save. The promise of salvation is made to everyone on condition that they believe in Christ as their Saviour but only the elect are enabled to have true saving faith in Christ. This is what Christ taught when he said in John 6:44 that no one could come to Him unless the Father drew them to Him. It follows therefore that the reason why people aren't saved is because the Father isn’t willing to draw them to Christ, which is indeed what Christ taught in John 6:64-65: [64] But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) [65] And he said, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father." (ESV) Christ obviously meant by this that the reason why some were unbelieving was because the Father hadn't draw them to Him and that therefore they hadn't been granted the ability to believe in Him. So the idea that people are unbelievers because they've resisted the Holy Spirit's attempt to convert them as taught in confessional Lutheranism isn't why people are unbelievers according to Christ. The reason Christ gives is that it's due to the Father who in their case hasn't willed to give them the Holy Spirit through the Word so that they can be converted. So the confessional Lutheran teaching of the universal operation of the Holy Spirit in the means of grace isn't true. That's a false conclusion reached by making the wrong assumption that the Father wills to draw everyone to Christ and grant everyone the ability to believe which simply isn't taught in Scripture. One can't legitimately conclude from Christ's desire to save everyone that therefore the Father attempts to convert everyone through the Word and that people are to blame if they don't believe. That's not actually what is being taught even though from some passages it appears that everyone has the ability to believe and that blame is being attached to them for their failure to do so. Blame is being attached to their unbelief but that's not because they have the ability to believe if they refrain from resisting. As Luther pointed out in The Bondage of the Will we don't have free will to decide whether to believe or not because the decision as to who become believers is down to God who has elected and predestined only certain people to become believers and be saved. The rest can't become believers and be saved, and are predestined to be damned, and Luther based this on John 6:44 and Romans 9 and other similar passages. In Romans 9 Paul refers to the complaint that some would make (in opposition to the teaching that God has decided to have mercy only on some people and not all and that some are hardened by God in their unbelief) that it is unfair that they should be held responsible for their unbelief when God has willed that they be unbelievers (i.e. You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” Romans 9:19 ESV). So that in itself disproves the confessional Lutheran teaching that God has mercy on everyone and wills to save everyone. If that was true it would be pointless for anyone to raise the objection that God's will can't be thwarted and that God is being unreasonable in blaming people for their unbelief. If people were unbelievers because they resisted the Holy Spirit and rejected God's mercy then there would be no basis for anyone to complain that God's will can't be resisted. It only makes sense to make this complaint if God is blaming people for their unbelief when at the same time He has willed that they remain unbelievers. Paul answers why it is legitimate for God to blame people for their unbelief when He has willed that they remain unbelievers by saying that God can do as He wishes because He's like a potter who makes both vases and chamber pots. In other words Paul is teaching that God decides the fate of individuals by assigning them to either heaven or hell. Romans 9 thoroughly disproves the confessional Lutheran teaching that God has mercy on everyone and hardens in unbelief those who have rejected His mercy and resisted the Holy Spirit. That isn't taught in Scripture and makes a nonsense of Romans 9. Paul doesn’t say that God has mercy on everyone, but that God has mercy only on some people (i.e [15] For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” ... [18] So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.). The Confessional Lutheran teaching that God has mercy on everyone and tries to convert everyone by the Holy Spirit through the Word and hardens only those who resist the Holy Spirit and reject His mercy is directly contradicted by Romans 9. Paul clearly teaches that God hardens in unbelief those whom He doesn’t have mercy upon. (When in Romans 11:32 Paul says “For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all.” Paul is only referring to the elect both Jew and Gentile not to everyone in general) So Scripture is on the side of those like myself who reject the teaching on predestination found in the Formula of Concord, and who believe that it doesn’t represent authentic Lutheran teaching as taught by Luther and the early Lutherans. This latter is corroborated by one of the authors of the Formula - David Chytraeus - who said to the theological faculty of the university of Wittenberg with reference to some of the things Luther had written in The Bondage of the Will the following: "These and many similar exceedingly terrible utterances, which at that time were taught in your school as divine revelations, are now nowhere retained except in the schools of the Calvinists. Philippus (Melanchthon) our common teacher, has gradually softened and removed them … and this already while Luther was living.” (quoted on page 23 in Walther and the Predestination Controversy: The Error of Modern Missouri) So from this one can see that the teaching on predestination in the Formula of Concord owes its origin not principally to Luther but rather to Melanchthon who rejected Luther’s exposition of absolute predestination in The Bondage of the Will. Luther’s explanation of predestination in The Bondage of the Will is simply what Scripture teaches on the subject so for Chytraeus to get upset about what Luther had written and call it terrible shows how lacking in understanding he was. This was also true of the principal author of the Formula Martin Chemnitz who also totally rejected that Scripture teaches double predestination. His explanation of various Scripture passages in the Formula concerning predestination I simply can’t accept. His interpretation of Romans 9 for instance is basically wrong. It doesn’t agree with what Paul was meaning. Chemnitz argued for instance from verse 22 that God wouldn’t need to be long suffering towards those who are heading for damnation if He’d actually predestined them to be damned. But to say this is to ignore what Paul had previously argued and to take verse 22 out of context. Also it doesn’t follow that God won’t need to show patience towards those who are destined to be damned if He has declined to have mercy upon them and has willed that they be damned in their sins. The reason why they’re damned isn’t simply because God has withheld the Holy Spirit from them but is also because they’re sinners who wish to continue sinning, so in that case God does need to be long suffering towards those who are predestined to be damned. I can only subscribe to the Formula of Concord in so far as its teaching agrees with Scripture which means I can’t give it my complete approval. Also it's clear to me that Luther and the early Lutherans wouldn't have subscribed to it with their signatures. The single predestination doctrine taught in the Formula represents a departure from the teaching of Scripture and authentic Lutheranism, and to my mind those who give it their approval aren’t really Lutherans. They should in reality be named after Martin Chemnitz not Martin Luther.
Going back to Lutheran Church after very long “journey” which included E. Orthodoxy and Evangelicalism. I love the liturgy and the fact of hymns and minimal electronics and other distractions. Thanks be to God for the rich musical heritage of the Lutheran Church. Worship that has not turned into a rock band circus.
Are you born again?
I feel blessed to have had parents who raised me in the Lutheran church
I've felt grateful countless times for the very same!❤
I have very recently rediscovered my faith. I was raised Methodist, walked away many years ago, but a gift of faith has been granted to me, and the Lutheran way resonates with my very core and my truest authentic self. I shall seek my local Lutheran congregation in the UK and ask to be received by them following appropriate preparation.
God Save The King
R u born again?
@@himynameisjohnwumsh7631Are you Lutheran?
@@gotenks38 I used to be. I was born again 6 years ago and no longer am Lutheran.
@himynameisjohnwumsh7631 Which belief structure do you currently practice?
I'm converting from Presbyterian to Lutheran ASAP
make sure it is a confessional Luthern Church. ELCA is no longer Christian
@@octaviosalcedo9239 yes absolutely....not even NALC or LCMC....make sure it's real Lutheran like LCMS or WELS or ELS or ELDONA or AALC
Well you all got perfect and judgmental real quick.
@@theodosios2615 judge not lest you be judged.
@m.v.5425 to point out anti-Biblical and anti-Christian behavior which has been consistently occurring, in order to warn someone who may be innocent/unaware of it, is not judgemental in a negative sense. It is precisely the judgement which God commands.
I am Old Lutheran . This will be interesting to watch .
I am a non-denominational Christian, and I am fairly certain I want to join a confessional lutheran church.
I was where you were. Becoming a confesional Lutheran has been a blessing for my family and I. May the Lord continue to guide you.
Excellent overview of the confessional Lutheran faith. One that I can forward to our adult kids and others to provide the detail on what we believe and how/why we differ from Catholicism and modern Protestantism.
The is no lutheran faith. Martin Luther said you are not allowed to call you self lutheran since it's not his belive. We are are only allowed to call us Christian.
It's the very fist sentence of the catechesis.
Nice presentation...they are bless to have you..your blessed or blessings come too you..
Vary concise, well-grounded presentation!
Wow, thank you for your explanation.
Is Lutheranism growing or shrinking?
Are there more Lutherans now than there were ten years ago?
thanks God for you time to put this on...
The WELS and the LCMS are the only two Lutheran Churches in the USA.
Absolutely fantastic presentation! Anything that lessens, decreases, or detracts from Christ’s sacrifice on the cross is not Christian. Lutheran’s seem to have the best grasp that the Christian religion is based on Jesus Christ.
The praise and worship should be biblical and theological sound but that doesn't mean only 1500 organ music.. We have good teachings and I would hope we reach out more to others
Thank you very much for sharing this informative vedio.
Very good content and presentation! The music however was very distracting.
So agree!! The music was annoying!!
Well done!
This is amazing
Fantastic
Wonderful
I asked, what if I agree with certain aspects of Non-Calvinist and Calvinist, and disagree with other aspects?
Answer: Become Lutheran:)
I searched for a church that wasn't corrupted and found out about Lutheranism online,
I feel so blessed to also find a Lutheran church near where I lived at the time!
@@AnnabelleJARankinr u born again?
@@himynameisjohnwumsh7631 That was why I sought a church that teaches sound doctrine!
@@AnnabelleJARankin is that a yes or no?
@@himynameisjohnwumsh7631 Is English not your first language ('that' is a relative pronoun...)? Why the interrogation? Please desist.
A chip off the old block!
15:30 I’m glad that he doesn’t seem particularly happy about Lutheranism not being one united church like Catholicism or Orthodoxy. I definitely do not want my church to pick and choose which parts of scripture should be adhered to, or to be swept along in the ever-changing cultural tides… I need something GROUNDED.
All churches pick and choose. They discard the old testament. Create their own traditions
How "One church" is Catholicism, really, unless you say that Catholic-like sects like the one to which Mel Gibson belongs, aren't? The Pope might say that they are not, but we Lutherans don't necessarily agree with everything he says, do we?
Lutheran '✝️..is The Best ! Formerly Catholic ! So ! Much ! Better !! 🥰🕊️
Our good works, our deeds, are the response to God's Grace working in our life. Faith and works, actions, are the two sides of the same coin. The only reason we ever came to faith in Christ and repented of our sins working out our salvation is because God put that in us by His Spirit. No one comes to Christ that is not drawn to him by the Father. All that belongs to Christ are given to him by the Father therefore we are His inheritance and He is our inheritance. He took our sins so that we might obtain His righteousness. Our life is now hidden with Christ in God. We have died. None of it from our coming to faith to our obedience is of ourselves. It is all God's Grace working in us. Coming to this realization that it is not of ourselves and that it is all Christ working in us we can say with Paul, I am crucified with Christ and yet not I but Christ lives in me.
Was baptized by a church that taught the doctrine of the Trinity.
Later joined Mormon church. Wanted out and withdrew membership when I realized what I had done. Should I be baptized by a pastor that teaches the Trinity doctrine? What a fool I was. Please help.
No need for a rebaptism if you were baptized in a church that believes in the Trinity. One baptism is sufficient.
@@pete3397 "One faith, one baptism..."
Hope you've found a good Lutheran church now, Dennis.
I like that the Pastor puts the blame on the MEN who impregnate the women as being the root cause of the abortion epidemic in this country.
Sir, treating women like helpless, overgrown children does not help them have the fortitude to say “No” to a man asking for sex. Morals must also be taught to our daughters. Fatherless daughters are usually more promiscuous than girls raised by a mother and father. If a man forces a woman to have sex against her will, that’s rape and that’s criminal and immoral. Two adults consenting to sex outside of marriage? Both are guilty in God’s eyes.
We switched from Catholic to Lutheran. The hierarchy has ruined the Catholic Church
Can you elaborate on how you think the Catholic Church has been ruined by hierarchy?
I’m a lifelong Lutheran (non-practicing most of it) and I’m current feeling quite drawn to Catholicism however I’m very skeptical of it.
God bless you and thank in advance for reading this
@@Trivico it’s too long for a response. But, it’s disgusting what the leaders have done, continue to do, and cover up. Makes me want to vomit. Stay away
@@rickdockery8390 Thank you, I will look into it.
sedevacantists are the real catholic church.
Can you answer a question for me please, do Lutherans believe in the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist? Thank you
30:06 🤔 if you think about it it's not a murderer's fault that he murders, it's the person who didn't give him the money or car or etcetera in a timely manner before he murdered them. It's who ever made the murderers life so hard that he felt the need to murder someone,🤔 right? 🤔
Abortion is the woman's fault. She who carries one out is a murderer. That being said she may have additional accomplices besides just the person performing the abortion.
Orthodoxy >>> Lutheranism. Orthodox is the true church.
No. Please don't lie. There is no true church. Eastern orthodoxy is not Christian and it is not orthodox. It is a cult. They worship idols and pray to dead people. How am I going to draw a picture of you and bow to it, and ask you to intercede for me. Grow up. Get real
Disclaimer, ELCA. Not Biblical Lutheranism like WELS or LCMS.
Hi, I'm the pastor being interviewed in the video. I'm not part of the ELCA. I'm a pastor in the Evangelical Lutheran Synod
Also NALC and LCMC. I’m sure the “sticking point” for those who say only WELS and LCMS are Biblical is the issue of women preaching and teaching in the church.
Luther had a lot of problems…see ewtn The Journey home.
Mostly with the heresies of the Roman Church and the corrupt papacy and local German criminal bishops he had to deal with.
He was human and flawed like all of us, but the point is he fought for a pure church that was faithful to the Bible. Lutherans do not worship Luther!
As a confirmed back in 1992 ELCA Lutheran I’ll give a thought: The church needs to start doing 1000x more use of technology and virtual services and such. The Nordic and German boomers where the church set up (upper Midwest, Midwest) are very old and there’s not many of my generation and less of the newer generations interested because we feel ignored by outdated teachings and how information is offered. Example: all of RUclips and maybe 3 services.. from 2018… just sayin’ 🤷♂️ I also feel that the boomer generation wasn’t nearly as educated and didn’t have the word comprehension as later generations. In middle age now, as a last born Gen-X I’m finding some (in my opinion) teachings are in direct opposition to what Jesus tells us in the Gospel and sometimes contradictory in the same few words. I’m sorry, but it is. I’m a university grad, I can understand the English language lol.. as well as people twisting words to make opposite meanings. Forgive me Lord and I ask any readers forgiveness if I caused anger. To many people get burned out as kids in church and don’t read the Bible fully.. the gospel at least.. with adult word/sentence understanding or word trickery being used. Hypothetical sentence: The dog walked by a tree on a sunny day. Nothing more to say and no misunderstanding right? When Jesus speaks clearly, don’t twist the meaning ok? I respect the education and experience of our Pastors, Bishops and all but, in 2024 now, most information is near instantly available to people as is the word comprehension and historical knowledge of an adult. Martin Luther being an EXTREME antisemite for instance 🤷♂️ my only belief without question is in our Savior, The Father and the Holy Spirit. I would like my church to not twist the gospel. Examples: The church says either or both for eating of his flesh and drinking of his blood.. THAT is a lie and wrong. Jesus doesn’t say that. “… eat of my flesh… ***AND*** drink of my blood” in every bible version old and new.. I was raised with the NIV bible.. our version.. NO OR.. JUST AND. That is a BIG problem right there. Pastors telling their flock the virgin birth of our lord probably wasn’t a virgin birth?!?…. Seems my Church is being corrupted by evil. The resurrection even.. the most important, most powerful message that at that moment, began Christianity by our Savior’s resurrection. Telling people that’s basically metaphorical then skip skip jump to twist into another quote of our Savior? THAT’s not proper! That’s.. I’m sorry.. that’s evil. No other way to say it. Forgive me Jesus for my judgement. ❤️
You need to watch Pastor Bryan Wolfmueller who was ELCA then Evangelical and finally LCMS.
@@BlaisesongsPastor Wolfmueller is quite awesome. Kind, gentle, firm, knowledgeable, and seemingly very devout.
Luther's flaw was his severe hatred of the Jews. His book "The Jews and Their Lies" is a terrible book of hatred. Very few religious groups in Christianity actually teach LORDs true word and the teachings and the love of Yeshua. We hold to man made traditions and doctrine that is simply not in the word of God
The Talmud was verbally inspired by Satan. Luther hated the devil's religion and prayed for the conversion of the Jews who were taught to hate Christ. You have neither actually read his little book on their lies nor bothered to understand the context. And his name is Jesus, not Yeshua. You don't see anyone going around insisting on Iésous. What a pompous way to feign deeper acquaintance of Christ than those who taught you not to blaspheme.
@@johnchristianpreusyou've made one of the most concise points on Luther which I've ever read. Absolutely perfectly stated.
I suggest that you do some independent research on this subject. You may be shocked and humbled over your ignorance on the subject.
I am disappointed by this outdated theology. I understand why thinking people are leaving the Lutheran Church. This kind of theology leads to divisiveness and we are given a ministry if reconciliation. Don Tastad
If you think the Bible is outdated please leave and choose your own religion. Accept the Bible or choose a different religion
Many are actually leaving Calvinism for the historic biblical truths of Lutheranism. I was one of them.
True Christians are unconcerned with a lack of 'trendy' behavior. We are far more concerned with serving God.
Scriptural theology is never 'outdated'. Read the Bible - not one dot or tittle will pass away from the law, according to Jesus!
Sad, trying to bolster a sinking ship.
??
Not at all a sinking ship! A great explanation about a truly faithful church.
@@AnnabelleJARankin you and I both know you are in denial
@@neilanadams5173 Of what??
Luther wasn't in agreement with the position of the Formula of Concord on predestination. Although he held that Christ died for the sins of the whole world, he didn't hold that the Holy Spirit is efficacious in the Word to all who hear it. Luther held that the Scriptures teach double predestination, and that God wills to damn some from eternity. I agree with Luther. For instance Paul's analogy of the potter who makes vessels of honour and dishonour in Romans 9 wouldn't be apropos if Paul didn't hold that God predestines people to both heaven and hell. If Paul had been confessional Lutheran in theology he wouldn't have the potter making vessels of dishonour (e.g. chamber pots), but only vessels of honour (e.g. vases).
With regards to the confessional Lutheran doctrine of the universal operation of the Holy Spirit in the means of grace (Word and sacraments), Luther rejected this in The Bondage of the Will. He distinguished between the outer drawing of the Gospel which goes out to everyone but which doesn't have the power to regenerate, and the inner drawing by the Holy Spirit through the Gospel which irresistibly regenerates those whom the Father wills. Luther wrote:
Now take the saying of Christ in John 6 [:44]: "No one comes to me unless my Father draws him." What does this leave to free choice? For he says that everyone needs to hear and learn from the Father himself, and that all must be taught by God. He plainly teaches here, not only that the works and efforts of free choice are fruitless, but that even the message of the gospel itself (which is what this passage is about) is heard in vain unless the Father himself speaks, teaches, and draws inwardly…. But the ungodly does not come even when he hears the Word unless the Father draws and teaches him inwardly, which He does by pouring out the Spirit. There is then another "drawing" than the one that takes place outwardly; for then Christ is set forth by the light of the Spirit, so that a man rapt away to Christ with the sweetest rapture, and rather yields passively to God's speaking, teaching, and drawing than seeks and runs himself. (p.285,286, Vol. 33, Luther's Works)
Confessional Lutherans don't accept this distinction between an inner and an outer drawing, and believe that the Holy Spirit is always efficacious in the Word towards everyone, and that the reason why people are damned is because they resist the Holy Spirit. Luther on the other hand rejected this and held that people are damned because God doesn't will to regenerate them through the Holy Spirit but rather to leave them in their sins so that they're damned. Luther addressed the seeming injustice of God in doing so by explaining that God's justice can't be comprehended in this life but will be understood in the next.
Confessional Lutherans wrongly conclude from the fact that God through Christ desires to save everyone that it must follow that He hasn't predestined anyone to be damned. However this is a false deduction. The Scriptures teach both and it's wrong to pit one against the other and conclude that the Scriptures only teach single predestination. Simple logic also dictates that if people are saved only because God has elected to save them in eternity that the reason why people are damned is because God didn't elect or will to save them in eternity. It's not possible that predestination to heaven can exist on its own without it being accompanied by predestination to hell. Confessional Lutherans should have stayed with Luther's Scriptural doctrine of predestination instead of adopting Chemnitz's heretical doctrine.
By the way, I'm not a Calvinist. I agree with the documents contained in the Book of Concord that were in existence during Luther's lifetime. It's only the Formula of Concord, which was produced after Luther's death, that I take issue with.
Read:
Paul McCain
"Refuting Calvinist Claims that Luther Taught Double Predestination"
Also, in the analogy from 2 Timothy, I don't see anywhere it stating that the potter created the tools for noble/ignoble use. In fact, in the context it states that we should be sure that we live in order to be useful and of noble use to the master. not that he has predetermined whether we will or will not be of use to him. So it's actually kind of saying the opposite it seems.
@@dave1370 2 Timothy 2:19-20 ESV
But God's firm foundation stands, bearing this seal: “The Lord knows those who are his,” and, “Let everyone who names the name of the Lord depart from iniquity.” [20] Now in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and silver but also of wood and clay, some for honorable use, some for dishonorable.
I agree with Luther when he wrote in The Bondage of the Will that the above verses show that it is God who prepares the vessels for their intended use. See pages 204-205 Vol. 33, Luther's Works.
@@dave1370 McCain doesn't in any way disprove that Luther endorsed double predestination. Luther didn't deny that God has predestined some to be damned in his commentary on Genesis. In fact he affirmed it when he said he had written in The Bondage of the Will that everything is absolute and unavoidable.
@@dave1370 I previously wrote out what follows with the intention of using it sometime in the future but I might as well post it here now:
According to confessional Lutherans God by His revealed will wills that everyone should be saved and that this isn't in conflict with His hidden will which elects to save only some people and not everyone. According to them although God doesn't elect to save everyone this isn't because He's unwilling to save them, but it involves a mystery which is impossible to understand.
So according to this there's something which isn't an unwillingness to save everyone which accounts for why God doesn't elect to save everyone. However this doesn't make sense. There can't be any other reason why God doesn't do something other than He wills not to do it. He's all-powerful and has perfect freedom to do as He wills. If He doesn't elect to save everyone that's because He doesn't will to save everyone. There's nothing mysterious as to why He doesn't elect to save everyone. He simply doesn't elect to save everyone because He wills to save only those He chooses to save. So although in His revealed will in Christ He desires to save everyone, at the same time according to His hidden will, which determines what happens, He doesn't will to save everyone.
So it follows that the Holy Spirit is only efficacious in the Word to those whom God has elected to save. The promise of salvation is made to everyone on condition that they believe in Christ as their Saviour but only the elect are enabled to have true saving faith in Christ. This is what Christ taught when he said in John 6:44 that no one could come to Him unless the Father drew them to Him. It follows therefore that the reason why people aren't saved is because the Father isn’t willing to draw them to Christ, which is indeed what Christ taught in John 6:64-65:
[64] But there are some of you who do not believe.” (For Jesus knew from the beginning who those were who did not believe, and who it was who would betray him.) [65] And he said, "This is why I told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by the Father." (ESV)
Christ obviously meant by this that the reason why some were unbelieving was because the Father hadn't draw them to Him and that therefore they hadn't been granted the ability to believe in Him. So the idea that people are unbelievers because they've resisted the Holy Spirit's attempt to convert them as taught in confessional Lutheranism isn't why people are unbelievers according to Christ. The reason Christ gives is that it's due to the Father who in their case hasn't willed to give them the Holy Spirit through the Word so that they can be converted. So the confessional Lutheran teaching of the universal operation of the Holy Spirit in the means of grace isn't true. That's a false conclusion reached by making the wrong assumption that the Father wills to draw everyone to Christ and grant everyone the ability to believe which simply isn't taught in Scripture. One can't legitimately conclude from Christ's desire to save everyone that therefore the Father attempts to convert everyone through the Word and that people are to blame if they don't believe. That's not actually what is being taught even though from some passages it appears that everyone has the ability to believe and that blame is being attached to them for their failure to do so. Blame is being attached to their unbelief but that's not because they have the ability to believe if they refrain from resisting. As Luther pointed out in The Bondage of the Will we don't have free will to decide whether to believe or not because the decision as to who become believers is down to God who has elected and predestined only certain people to become believers and be saved. The rest can't become believers and be saved, and are predestined to be damned, and Luther based this on John 6:44 and Romans 9 and other similar passages.
In Romans 9 Paul refers to the complaint that some would make (in opposition to the teaching that God has decided to have mercy only on some people and not all and that some are hardened by God in their unbelief) that it is unfair that they should be held responsible for their unbelief when God has willed that they be unbelievers (i.e. You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” Romans 9:19 ESV). So that in itself disproves the confessional Lutheran teaching that God has mercy on everyone and wills to save everyone. If that was true it would be pointless for anyone to raise the objection that God's will can't be thwarted and that God is being unreasonable in blaming people for their unbelief. If people were unbelievers because they resisted the Holy Spirit and rejected God's mercy then there would be no basis for anyone to complain that God's will can't be resisted. It only makes sense to make this complaint if God is blaming people for their unbelief when at the same time He has willed that they remain unbelievers. Paul answers why it is legitimate for God to blame people for their unbelief when He has willed that they remain unbelievers by saying that God can do as He wishes because He's like a potter who makes both vases and chamber pots. In other words Paul is teaching that God decides the fate of individuals by assigning them to either heaven or hell. Romans 9 thoroughly disproves the confessional Lutheran teaching that God has mercy on everyone and hardens in unbelief those who have rejected His mercy and resisted the Holy Spirit. That isn't taught in Scripture and makes a nonsense of Romans 9. Paul doesn’t say that God has mercy on everyone, but that God has mercy only on some people (i.e [15] For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” ... [18] So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills.). The Confessional Lutheran teaching that God has mercy on everyone and tries to convert everyone by the Holy Spirit through the Word and hardens only those who resist the Holy Spirit and reject His mercy is directly contradicted by Romans 9. Paul clearly teaches that God hardens in unbelief those whom He doesn’t have mercy upon. (When in Romans 11:32 Paul says “For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all.” Paul is only referring to the elect both Jew and Gentile not to everyone in general)
So Scripture is on the side of those like myself who reject the teaching on predestination found in the Formula of Concord, and who believe that it doesn’t represent authentic Lutheran teaching as taught by Luther and the early Lutherans. This latter is corroborated by one of the authors of the Formula - David Chytraeus - who said to the theological faculty of the university of Wittenberg with reference to some of the things Luther had written in The Bondage of the Will the following:
"These and many similar exceedingly terrible utterances, which at that time were taught in your school as divine revelations, are now nowhere retained except in the schools of the Calvinists. Philippus (Melanchthon) our common teacher, has gradually softened and removed them … and this already while Luther was living.” (quoted on page 23 in Walther and the Predestination Controversy: The Error of Modern Missouri)
So from this one can see that the teaching on predestination in the Formula of Concord owes its origin not principally to Luther but rather to Melanchthon who rejected Luther’s exposition of absolute predestination in The Bondage of the Will.
Luther’s explanation of predestination in The Bondage of the Will is simply what Scripture teaches on the subject so for Chytraeus to get upset about what Luther had written and call it terrible shows how lacking in understanding he was. This was also true of the principal author of the Formula Martin Chemnitz who also totally rejected that Scripture teaches double predestination. His explanation of various Scripture passages in the Formula concerning predestination I simply can’t accept. His interpretation of Romans 9 for instance is basically wrong. It doesn’t agree with what Paul was meaning. Chemnitz argued for instance from verse 22 that God wouldn’t need to be long suffering towards those who are heading for damnation if He’d actually predestined them to be damned. But to say this is to ignore what Paul had previously argued and to take verse 22 out of context. Also it doesn’t follow that God won’t need to show patience towards those who are destined to be damned if He has declined to have mercy upon them and has willed that they be damned in their sins. The reason why they’re damned isn’t simply because God has withheld the Holy Spirit from them but is also because they’re sinners who wish to continue sinning, so in that case God does need to be long suffering towards those who are predestined to be damned.
I can only subscribe to the Formula of Concord in so far as its teaching agrees with Scripture which means I can’t give it my complete approval. Also it's clear to me that Luther and the early Lutherans wouldn't have subscribed to it with their signatures. The single predestination doctrine taught in the Formula represents a departure from the teaching of Scripture and authentic Lutheranism, and to my mind those who give it their approval aren’t really Lutherans. They should in reality be named after Martin Chemnitz not Martin Luther.