New to Lutheranism. But Pre-trib.

wordsoflife said:

And to answer your question: Yes, you can be Lutheran and believe in the pre-tribulation rapture. Although, this will neither be the Lutheran belief or the correct belief based on scripture.

Click to expand...

More like, you can call yourself a Lutheran.

Aibrean said:

More like, you can call yourself a Lutheran.

Click to expand...

I would consider a persons eschatology a secondary issue and would have no problem fellowshipping with someone who holds to the pre-tribulation belief as a Lutheran. As long as they believe in the second coming and the weightier matters like justification by grace through faith.

It's more of not picking and choosing which part of scripture you want to believe as truth. It's all or nothing, and frankly, pre-trib isn't scriptural.

Goodness, you don't even need to be Lutheran to believe in the second coming and justification by grace through faith (all non-Catholics/Orthodox do...and even some of them do too).

I agree we must not reject a brother in Christ over less vital doctrines, as Romans 14 teaches with regard to weaker brethren. Our Lord gave Holy Communion to the disciples even when they barely understood anything about the Gospel. He does not cast out the clueless Christian, so neither should the Church.

It's true that in theory all LCMS and WELS churches affirm the whole BoC, but in practice there are always, or almost always, a few exceptions taken.

GOODNESS, I'm not saying they aren't a Christian. They just can't be Lutheran.

It is my experience that in practice eschatology is rarely discussed in Lutheran parishes (unfortunately). The resources are there for a member to be informed of the official stance of the church but more than a few pious folk opt to wander down to Lifeway or some other purveyor of Evangelicalism and read what is on the shelf, which is usually speculative millenialism in the tradition of Darby and Scofield.

I have read in full the continuing doctrinal statements of WELS and LCMS on this subject and both are insightful. It's a pity such quality teaching does not make it to the pews much.

Aibrean said:

GOODNESS, I'm not saying they aren't a Christian. They just can't be Lutheran.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry I have to disagree with you on this. I think someone who is pre-trib could attend my church and this would be just fine.

wordsoflife said:

I'm sorry I have to disagree with you on this. I think someone who is pre-trib could attend my church and this would be just fine.

Click to expand...

Absolutely they can attend. But when one becomes a member they confess that they agree with what the Scriptures teach. Since the Scriptures do not teach pre-trib, one cannot agree with Scripture and also be pre-trib.

I believed in Pre-trib before I ever studied it myself. Our churches always preached it, and I accepted it because they would use specific bible verses to back it up, and it was convincing. This is how my trip to Lutheranism started actually.

So Christ through his grace brought me back. However as mentioned in another thread, I didn't just want to accept old teachings, I wanted to study hard myself, and still I had made the choice, "I'm gonig baptist." But it started slightly with the rapture as I was reading... it just didn't fit, and that led me to look deeply into other things like what things Assemblies of God believed and other things Baptists believed and such... which led me to go further into the study of each denomination... finally arriving at the Lutheran Church LCMS.

So... though I haven't been confirmed and am not Lutheran quite just yet, I agree.

Back to the original question:
the easiest way to see what affirmations would be required of you is to ask the pastor for a copy of the membership vows. You may find adequate wiggle room in them as they stand.

shanethetheologian said:

The resources are there for a member to be informed of the official stance of the church but more than a few pious folk opt to wander down to Lifeway or some other purveyor of Evangelicalism and read what is on the shelf, which is usually speculative millenialism in the tradition of Darby and Scofield.

Click to expand...

Emphasis mine...

I remember well when I was first introduced to millennialism in college. It was in a non-denom youth group, where a lot of us had study Bibles... but the only study Bibles out there at the time that had extensive notes (as opposed to just textual notes) were ones like the Scofield reference Bible. So those were the ones we bought, because we wanted commentary with our Bibles. I am SO grateful that I bought the Thompson Chain Reference Bible instead. It didn't have the commentary, but it really got me to understand how Scripture isn't just one verse here and there, but really connected in an over-arching narrative.

Anyway, my point is that in the 70s and 80s, when we didn't have the explosion of special-interest Study Bibles that we currently have, the most commonly found (and bought) were Scofield and the like. So their millennialism spread widely. Now, especially with Left Behind, it's become rather ingrained in the "collective unconsciousness" of American culture. Most non-Christians I've talked to assume that all Christians believe in the rapture and tribulation. (the "in case of rapture this car will be unmanned" bumper stickers don't help, either...)

Eschatology, while interesting, is not a huge emphasis in most amillennial-teaching churches (for lack of a more descriptive term). Yeah, we may hear a bit about it in November at the end of the church year, and our Pastor's done an adult ed class maybe twice in the past ten years on the subject (mostly as a response to a surge in interest in the culture). But it's really not a huge theological discussion in Lutheran circles. We know we don't have to work to avoid, or warn people about, being "left behind". So it's not a big deal in our theology, except as a reminder that Christ will return in glory.

The other unscriptural aspects of Milleniumism are: (summerized from a series of lectures presented at a Pastors' Institute at Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary in 1974 by the professor Dr. Gawrisch)

[1] Historically been held as wrong

• Augsburg Confession alludes to the origin of this error
• Luther held the position that Milleniumism is a hersey (sermon preached in 1539)
• Calvin wrote that the doctrine of the millenarians is a "fiction too puerile to require or deserve refutation"

[2] Millennialism has long and hoary of failed history

• The Jews of the OT and NT were looking for "earthly kingdom rule"
• Carlstadt, Zwingli, and tha Anabaptists of the Reformation are the fathers of the what is known as Chiliasm
• The Scofield reference Bible is based on refderences from the doctrines taught by John Darby (of the Plymouth Brethern) and Charles Scofield (an American lawyer).
  • James Gray (president of the Moody Bible Institute) published Scofield Reference Bible

[3] Millanialism therefore is unscriptural in that:

• looks for a physical restoration of Isreal and conversion of the Jews
• incorrectly makes the rapture into a seperate event
• the return of Christ ... claiming a multiple return
• the resurection .... claiming a multiple occurance
• Hell ... an aberration range from outright denial to universalism
• Heaven ...the doctrine of heaven is correlative of the doctrine of hell.
  • those who err in the one err on the other

Another way to look at this is that Millennialism is the practice of predicting the end of the world. It can be calculated in this manner: