I would have to peacefully and friendly disagree with you AMM:
and with equal peace, I'll respond to your points
1) The view of Original Sin is more similar to the Roman one (plus Total Depravity):
Sin, Original
(inherited; hereditary; principal; capital; Adam's sin; nature-sin; person-sin). 1. In its ordinary meaning this term does not refer to the origin of sin but to the guilt of Adam's sin imputed to his offspring (hereditary guilt,
Ro 5:12–19;
Eph 2:3;
cf. FC SD I 9) and the corruption of man's nature that occurred when sin entered and which inheres in the human will and inclinations.
Cf. Gn 5:3;
6:5;
8:21;
Jb 15:14;
Ps 51:5;
Jn 3:6;
Ro 14:23. Original sin is not an activity but a quality, a state, an inherent condition. It exists, though there be no conscious, voluntary act of internal or external powers, of mind or body. It is “the chief sin, a root and fountainhead of all actual sins” (
FC SD I 5).
Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod - Christian Cyclopedia
The citation given to "FC SD I 9" (Formula of Concord, Solid Declaration, Article I, Paragraph 9) doesn't exactly say everything that's in the explanation, though. Rather, just says that because of Adam's sin, we are guilty of sin ourselves. (In the sense that: Adam sinned, therefore subjecting us to death and the consequences of sin. Which is the reason that we sin now. NOT that I'm guilty of Adam's sin of eating the fruit, which is the Roman view, albeit a simplified version.) And again, Patr. Jeremias II agreed to this. I unfortunately don't have the text of either the Lutheran writing or the Patriarch's response on hand right now.
2) The view of Eucharist might be similar but I believe Luther and Lutherans do not believe of it as a sacrifice
"Closely connected with the pernicious doctrine of transubstantiation are the papistic errors of the "sacrifice of the Mass," by which "Christ's body "is continually offered up in an unbloody manner for the sins of the living and the dead." (Christian Dogmatics, 511)
Lutherans would accept the concept of the Eucharist as a sacrifice in some contexts, depending on what exactly is meant by that.
And the Catholic understanding of Eucharist as sacrifice is not the same as the Orthodox teaching.
3) Holding "Christus Victor" and "Theosis" does not mean they cannot relate to "Penal Substitution", I believe a Reformed Christian said Christus Victor does not make sense without Penal Substitution
To be fair, Reformed Christians are not Lutherans and don't determine Lutheran theology. I wasn't saying that Lutheran soteriology is the same as Orthodox soteriology - they're not. Just that there's more similarities than some people (including some Lutherans) would see.
4) Lutheran might not believe in your typical "where is that in the Bible?" Sola Scriptura but it is still anti-historical to see Scripture as the authority when it was the Church who set the authority to have the canon.
I don't know that it's fair to see it as wholly anti-historical when there are many Church Father quotes lending support to the idea of sola scriptura. (That's not to say Sola Scriptura is true, just that it isn't always as clear cut which was the historical position.) One Lutheran pastor would always say "Scripture teaches us the necessity of tradition, and tradition teaches us the necessity of Scripture".
It's a both-and, not an either-or. As my priest (I think...) explained it to me, the Church is the ultimate authority, and her highest authority is the Scriptures. They're the pinnacle and capstone of the mountain of Tradition - but there is only one "mountain", not two (Scripture
and tradition/magisterium), as Rome teaches
Can you tell me how it has been influenced by Evangelical Culture? I have been thinking that since Orthodoxy has a lot of converts from an Evangelical background then there could be some influence there.
I've just seen some things and heard some priests that sound more like evangelicals. Sermons that feel like a cheap "God loves you so just be happy and invite him in to your heart and be saved" altar-call type thing. Books that just feel like decision theology and false mysticism (when we have such a rich tradition of true mystical theology!). A conflation of the Republican party/Conservative politics and Christianity. Priests that don't wear clerical clothing outside of the services and take off the collar (if they're wearing a clerical shirt) immediately after the service because of the same reasons that evangelicals don't use them to begin with.
