Do Lutherans still believe that the Pope is the AntiChrist?

[SPALATIN]

The problem I have with the JD DJ is that it was only the more liberal Lutheran synods who agreed to this.

The more conservative synods LCMS, ELS and WELS were not part of the ILC that signed the document.

 

[ukok]

;LCMS brief doctrinal statement
43. As to the Antichrist we teach that the prophecies of the Holy Scriptures concerning the Antichrist, 2 Thess. 2:3-12; 1 John 2:18, have been fulfilled in the Pope of Rome and his dominion. All the features of the Antichrist as drawn in these prophecies, including the most abominable and horrible ones, for example, that the Antichrist "as God sitteth in the temple of God," 2 Thess. 2:4; that he anathematizes the very heart of the Gospel of Christ, that is, the doctrine of the forgiveness of sins by grace alone, for Christ's sake alone, through faith alone, without any merit or worthiness in man (Rom. 3:20-28; Gal. 2:16); that he recognizes only those as members of the Christian Church who bow to his authority; and that, like a deluge, he had inundated the whole Church with his antichristian doctrines till God revealed him through the Reformation -- these very features are the outstanding characteristics of the Papacy. (Cf. Smalcald Articles, Triglot, p. 515, Paragraphs 39-41; p. 401, Paragraph 45; M. pp. 336, 258.) Hence we subscribe to the statement of our Confessions that the Pope is "the very Antichrist." (Smalcald Articles, Triglot, p. 475, Paragraph 10; M., p. 308.)

This post is very informative, i had no idea that this was the Lutheran belief..i had actually begun to feel that we had more in common than we had to distance us from one another, but if the Pope is considered antichristian, then i suppose that Catholic's who follow the teaching's of the Catholic Church are subsequently considered non christian also? ah, that's ok, i still love you

 

[KagomeShuko]

May I ask how you know the people at the MS church are unfriendly? Did you take the time to get to know them? Maybe they just take some getting used to and don't give their friendship so easily. Please don't judge them if you didn't get to know them.

It's just one church and I know them. When I was in fifth grade, I went there for VBS. They welcomed me, but I was still not a "part" of their church, and they didn't like that, so I was only involved with small parts even though we could've done things evenly.

I went there to help with their VBS one summer, too. I was there at least the week before their VBS started and I was ready to help with whatever they needed. No, I wasn't looking to be a teacher or anything, just to run around and help them get stuff ready. I thought they'd appreciate help, but all they did was tell me to be there for the Arts and Crafts during VBS and then they'd only let me sit there rather than helping the kids make anything.

When I had went, too, there was a girl about my age or a bit younger and when somebody asked us (my mom, sister, and I) if we were from the ELCA church, the only response was "oh" and they didn't speak to us - only the one mom I knew from going to school with her son.

It's just the people there - the church is also in the "uppity" part of town. It's not everybody, but generally most of them there. Even the pastor who was there was reluctant in deciding just to let us help with VBS. Yes, they consulted the pastor on us just helping.

So, I know that the people there are quite unfriendly. Like I said, though, the other MS church nearby is extremely friendly and we had a great time together.

Stein Auf!
Bridget

 

[KagomeShuko]

This post is very informative, i had no idea that this was the Lutheran belief..i had actually begun to feel that we had more in common than we had to distance us from one another, but if the Pope is considered antichristian, then i suppose that Catholic's who follow the teaching's of the Catholic Church are subsequently considered non christian also? ah, that's ok, i still love you

I had no idea about that either. One reason my church doesn't like any of the SDA theology is their "proof" that the Pope is the AntiChrist and we laughed at that.

Stein Auf!
Bridget

 

[BrightCandle]

KagaomeShuko:

The "proof" that the SDA Church uses to prove that the Papacy and the Popes that have been the "heads" of the Papacy are the Antichrist, is largely based on the Biblical and historical evidence that was has been in existence for centuries. Here is a brief list of those who believed that the Papacy is the Antichrist: Wycliffe, Tyndale, Luther, Calvin, Cranmer, John Knox, Bunyan, the translators of the King James Bible and the men who published the Westminster and Baptist confessions of Faith. Cotton Mather and Roger Williams of the Colonial American Era, and the list goes on. This wasn't a "laughing" matter to them. Their conclusions were for the most part, were forged out of the fires of persecution that they themselves experienced by the Antichrist power of the Papacy.

Brooks

 

[ukok]

KagaomeShuko:

The "proof" that the SDA Church uses to prove that the Papacy and the Popes that have been the "heads" of the Papacy are the Antichrist, is largely based on the Biblical and historical evidence that was has been in existence for centuries. Here is a brief list of those who believed that the Papacy is the Antichrist: Wycliffe, Tyndale, Luther, Calvin, Cranmer, John Knox, Bunyan, the translators of the King James Bible and the men who published the Westminster and Baptist confessions of Faith. Cotton Mather and Roger Williams of the Colonial American Era, and the list goes on. This wasn't a "laughing" matter to them. Their conclusions were for the most part, were forged out of the fires of persecution that they themselves experienced by the Antichrist power of the Papacy.

Brooks

i am unwilling to debate this post here, but i and my fellow Catholic Brother's and Sister's would be glad to tackle what i consider to be the innacuracies of this post, if you were to bring this to OBOB in question format

I understand that you might not want to hear the flip side, but the offer is there if you want to take me up on it.

 

[KagomeShuko]

KagaomeShuko:

The "proof" that the SDA Church uses to prove that the Papacy and the Popes that have been the "heads" of the Papacy are the Antichrist, is largely based on the Biblical and historical evidence that was has been in existence for centuries. Here is a brief list of those who believed that the Papacy is the Antichrist: Wycliffe, Tyndale, Luther, Calvin, Cranmer, John Knox, Bunyan, the translators of the King James Bible and the men who published the Westminster and Baptist confessions of Faith. Cotton Mather and Roger Williams of the Colonial American Era, and the list goes on. This wasn't a "laughing" matter to them. Their conclusions were for the most part, were forged out of the fires of persecution that they themselves experienced by the Antichrist power of the Papacy.

Brooks

Um, I already know the history and stuff about how they got that. I did an SDA study - and even went to an SDA church for awhile. Otherwise, how would I know about thier theology?

Stein Auf!
Bridget

 

[BrightCandle]

Dear UKOK:

I would love to take you up on the offer. It would be great if we could just look at the historical and Biblical evidence and let it speak for itself, and not have the censorship that is so often done under the guise of "preserving the unity" of the CF forum.

Brooks

 

[BrightCandle]

KagomeShuko:

If you know SDA theology so well, then how could you "laugh" at the SDA reasons for identifying the Antichrist when they are largely the same reasons that Luther based his conclusions on? And sense you are Lutheran, you would be then laughing at yourself!

Brooks

 

[Bradford]

Please free to use this thread- in THIS forum to debate this. As long as the debate remains respectful, it is allowed in the forum!

 

[BrightCandle]

Thanks, Bradford, for your permission. One question: Are you the Moderator of this thread? And can you stop it from being locked?

Brooks

 

[Carrye]

1) Non-Lutherans are reminded, that while their input is welcome and they are permitted to debate, they are not to denigrate, or be dis-respectful towards Lutheran doctrine. The guiding principle is this- "Don’t make a mess in another’s home"

 

[Bradford]

1) Non-Lutherans are reminded, that while their input is welcome and they are permitted to debate, they are not to denigrate, or be dis-respectful towards Lutheran doctrine. The guiding principle is this- "Don’t make a mess in another’s home"

That's the rules here... I don't enforce them, I just wrote them...

 

[KagomeShuko]

KagomeShuko:

If you know SDA theology so well, then how could you "laugh" at the SDA reasons for identifying the Antichrist when they are largely the same reasons that Luther based his conclusions on? And sense you are Lutheran, you would be then laughing at yourself!

Brooks

I've not read anywhere in Lutheran doctrine that you are required to believe that. I know Martin Luther wrote lots of things like that, but at times he could even sound like Adolf Hitler with the Ariyan race thing . . .and we certainly don't enforce that! Luther is a good source for some things, but he'd be terribly unhappy with the Lutheran church of today.

SDA theology has nothing to do directly with Lutheran theology.

Stein Auf!
Bridget

 

[BrightCandle]

KagomeShuko:

I don't think that you understood the point that I was trying to get across, namely, that if you were laughing at the reasons that SDAs give for the Pope being the Antichrist, that those reasons are very similar to what the founder of the Lutheran church, Martin Luther, used to justify his biblical and historical reasons for identifying the Papacy and the Pope as its head as the Antichrist. I'm assuming that the Lutheran church believes, in this day and age, what its founder believed regarding the Pope being the Antichrist. The fact is, that almost all of the Reformers of the 16th century came to believe that the Papacy was the Antichrist, which became very clear to them when they suffered its wrath for proclaiming that the Good News that the "just shall live by faith".

You are right in that SDA theology has nothing to do directly with Lutheran theology, but SDA theology has built upon Luther's views, and the other Reformers, when it comes to identifying the Antichrist. So if you "laugh" at the SDA position, then you would be laughing at the founder of your own church, Martin Luther. That was my point.

Brooks

 

[filosofer]

We need to be clear when addressing this issue: our doctrine is not established by everything that Martin Luther wrote. Rather, what has been accepted as the foundation of the faith. In fact, Luther only wrote three (or four depending on how documents are viewed) of the Confessional documents (Small Catechism, Large Catechism, Smalcald Articles/Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope) and is quoting in two more. Thus just because Luther wrote something on the Pope or the Jews or any other topic does not make it doctrine.

First consider the writing known as the Apology (Defense) of the Augsburg Confession. When the Augsburg Confession (written formally by Melancthon) was presented before the Emperor in June 1530, the confessers wanted to clearly show that what they taught was consistent with what the Christian Church had taught since the time of the Apostles. They saw that the Roman Church had deviated from that. And so 28 articles of faith were presented. The Roman Catholics wrote a Confutation (rebuttal), but refused to give a copy of it to the confessors. Nevertheless the confessors had taken notes, and then composed the Apology and presented it in 1531. The key issue was the central issue of faith - justification by grace through faith. in fact, Article IV takes up 65+ pages in the Tappert edition. For Luther and all the Reformers, the centrality of Christ and justification by grace through faith guided the discussion and led them to write what they did about the Roman Church at that time.

The key articles in this discussion are:
Article VII Concerning the Church
Article VIII What is the Church?
Article XV Concerning Church Regulations/Rites

Article VII and VIII of the Apology

9] And this article has been presented for a necessary reason. The article of the Church Catholic or Universal, which is gathered together from every nation under the sun, is very comforting and highly necessary. We see the infinite dangers which threaten the destruction of the Church. In the Church itself, infinite is the multitude of the wicked who oppress it [despise, bitterly hate, and most violently persecute the Word, as, e.g., the Turks, Mohammedans, other tyrants, heretics, etc. For this reason the true teaching and the Church are often so utterly suppressed and disappear, as if there were no Church, which has happened under the papacy; it often seems that the Church has completely perished]. Therefore, in order that we may not despair, but may know that the Church will nevertheless remain [until the end of the world], likewise that we may know that, however great the multitude of the wicked is, yet the Church [which is Christ’s bride] exists, and that Christ affords those gifts which He has promised to the Church, to forgive sins, to hear prayer, to give the Holy Ghost, this article in the Creed presents us these consolations. 10] And it says Church Catholic, in order that we may not understand the Church to be an outward government of certain nations [that the Church is like any other external polity, bound to this or that land, kingdom, or nation, as the Pope of Rome will say], but rather men scattered throughout the whole world [here and there in the world, from the rising to the setting of the sun], who agree concerning the Gospel, and have the same Christ, the same Holy Ghost, and the same Sacraments, whether they have the same 11] or different human traditions.

In the Article XV (and VII), the issue of the Antichrist arises. Note the specific statements given in this regard -- the concern is always with those who teach that something must be added to Christ’s redemptive work.

The Defense of the Augsburg Confession
Article XV (VIII): Of Human Traditions in the Church

18] And what need is there of words on a subject so manifest? If the adversaries defend these human services as meriting justification, grace, and the remission of sins, they simply establish the kingdom of Antichrist. For the kingdom of Antichrist is a new service of God, devised by human authority rejecting Christ, just as the kingdom of Mahomet has services and works through which it wishes to be justified before God; nor does it hold that men are gratuitously justified before God by faith, for Christ’s sake. Thus the Papacy also will be a part of the kingdom of Antichrist if it thus defends human services as justifying. For the honor is taken away from Christ when they teach that we are not justified gratuitously by faith, for Christ’s sake, but by such services; especially when they teach that such services are not only useful for justification, but are also necessary, as they hold above in Art. VII, where they condemn us for saying that unto true unity of the Church it is not necessary that rites instituted by men should everywhere be alike.

The following is the key passage that Luther wrote regarding the Papacy

Smalcald Articles
Article IV: Of the Papacy.

10] This teaching shows forcefully that the Pope is the very Antichrist, who has exalted himself above, and opposed himself against Christ because he will not permit Christians to be saved without his power, which, nevertheless, is nothing, and is neither ordained nor commanded by God. 11] This is, properly speaking to exalt himself above all that is called God as Paul says, 2 Thess. 2, 4. Even the Turks or the Tartars, great enemies of Christians as they are, do not do this, but they allow whoever wishes to believe in Christ, and take bodily tribute and obedience from Christians.

12] The Pope, however, prohibits this faith, saying that to be saved a person must obey him. This we are unwilling to do, even though on this account we must die in God s name. 13] This all proceeds from the fact that the Pope has wished to be called the supreme head of the Christian Church by divine right. Accordingly he had to make himself equal and superior to Christ, and had to cause himself to be proclaimed the head and then the lord of the Church, and finally of the whole world, and simply God on earth, until he has dared to issue commands even to the angels in heaven. 14] And when we distinguish the Pope’s teaching from, or measure and hold it against, Holy Scripture, it is found [it appears plainly] that the Pope’s teaching, where it is best, has been taken from the imperial and heathen law and treats of political matters and decisions or rights, as the Decretals show; furthermore, it teaches of ceremonies concerning churches, garments, food, persons and [similar] puerile, theatrical and comical things without measure, but in all these things nothing at all of Christ, faith, and the commandments of God. Lastly, it is nothing else than the devil himself, because above and against God he urges [and disseminates] his [papal] falsehoods concerning masses, purgatory, the monastic life, one’s own works and [fictitious] divine worship (for this is the very Papacy [upon each of which the Papacy is altogether founded and is standing]), and condemns, murders and tortures all Christians who do not exalt and honor these abominations [of the Pope] above all things. Therefore, just as little as we can worship the devil himself as Lord and God, we can endure his apostle, the Pope, or Antichrist, in his rule as head or lord. For to lie and to kill, and to destroy body and soul eternally, that is wherein his papal government really consists, as I have very clearly shown in many books.

And there is a reference to this topic in the Formula of Concord.

Given these statements, we recognize that there are two ways to view the Confessions as doctrinal documents (statements of faith):

1. The word ‘quia’ is simply Latin for ‘because’. A quia subscription to the Lutheran Confessions indicates that one holds to their teaching because it is in full agreement with Holy Scripture. (LCMS, WELS, ELS, etc.)

2. This is in contrast to a ‘quatenus subscription’, ‘quatenus’ being Latin for ‘insofar as’--that is, “I hold to the Lutheran Confessions ‘insofar as they agree with Scripture.” To say that one subscribes ‘quatenus’ is to say that one does not really subscribe at all, but rather allows one to pick and choose which doctrines to accept as correct statements of doctrine. (ELCA)

 

[Carrye]

Who inserted all of the [ ] comments in the above documents?

 

[filosofer]

Who inserted all of the [ ] comments in the above documents?

Those are part of the translation process - to offer alternative renderings of the specific phrase.

 

[Carrye]

Those are part of the translation process - to offer alternative renderings of the specific phrase.

I was asking because it seems like a lot of negative opinion.

 

[BrightCandle]

filosofer:

Thanks for posting the quotes from Melancthon. It seemed to me that the document was pretty clear as to what the writer's position was, namely, the Papacy being the Antichrist. Which was in agreement with what the majority of the other Reformers of the Reformation of the 16th century beleived.

One follow up question: Why is it that I don't hear the Lutherans sharing this belief much anymore?

Brooks