What's the Difference?

[BelindaP]

Thank you, Filo for taking the time to clearly show how those two denominational beliefs are different.

Yes. Thank you. This is the sort of discussion I've been craving for a very long time.

 

[Studeclunker]

I've already said that I am open to correction on this. So, show me where what I said I believe is in conflict with the Confessions.

I am not a cradle Lutheran and am not tied strictly to denominational identity. I go with what is scripturally correct. So, if you show me scripturally where I am wrong, then I am willing to listen. If you beat me over the head and accuse me of unionism or heresy or whatever, it ain't gonna fly. Even Luther himself would say stick to the scriptures. Zeph hasn't shown me the courtesy to do so. Instead, he's insulted and baited me for weeks now.

Belinda, I haven't accused you of Unionism, I haven't actually accused you of anything that I can recall. I said, rather I wouldn't like to do so. Nor do I want to beat you over the head. All that would do is give you a headache. My sole and only point is that Calvinsim is not compatible with the Lutheran beliefs. Yes, of course they're close. However, when you very carefully examine Calvin's teachings, you will find they don't agree with your Lutheran ones.
One reason people are getting so hot under the collar about all of this is because all of the denominations are under attack to compromise themselves. It's a defensive mechanism in difficult times like this. We, the Lutherans, aren't the only ones facing these Baalams in our midst. There are traitors to all the Christian denominations showing the evil one's servants just how to disolve all the barriers and protections. We have wolves in the sheepfold and I fear the President of the LCMS is one of them.

but I degress...

If you would like to debate Calvinist vs Lutheran doctrines, that's fine with me. However, I would give you two caveats to work by:
First, we must stick to one doctrine at a time.
Second, expect strong reactions.

Sometimes we learn and grow a bit more when we get a bit singed. Believe it or not it teaches us a valuable tool: appologetics. Sometimes it also teaches us manners (are you listening Zec?). Often it also thickens our skins and allows us to objectively analyze what someone has said and respond more... helpfully. Not that I'm yet an expert at that (LOL)! There isn't anything wrong with looking at these Calviniste Noels and working their strengths into your Lutheran walk. Just keep in mind that you are not a Calvinist. You are a Lutheran and must keep to our teachings and confessions. Teachings and Confessions that Calvin refused to follow... exactly.

Here's another way of looking at it, look at what happened to the ELCA. I don't mean this in a derogatory way at all. Nonetheless, they can't even be in the same forum with us. This is because the ELCA has fallen so far from the core Lutheran beliefs that, in my opinion, they have ceased to BE Lutheran. Sometimes, I wonder if they're even Christian anymore. They have compromised so far that one even wonders if they can say what, if anything, they firmly, officially, believe. Yes, yes, I know there are congregations that still practice and believe the core Lutheran beliefs. Still, their organization as a whole has fallen very far from the parent tree.

So, when many people hear someone say they're a (how did you put it? Oh, yes,) Christmas Calvinist, they start ringing alarm bells.

Nevertheless and however, I believe the subject of this thread wasn't Christmas Calvinism but the difference between the LCMS and WELS. May I respecfully suggest to all parties concerned that we return to that subject? If we keep going in the current direction, the Mods are going to have to get involved.

 

[BelindaP]

Studeclunker, I know you haven't accused me of being a unionist. I was just pointing out that such accusations don't work on a person like me (or very many other people for that matter). You are right that the original topic was the difference between the synods. It was Zeph who brought up the Christmas calvinism thing as a way to further harass me.

Even so, all things work to the good of those who love the Lord. My question concerning LCMS/WELS differences has been answered, and I am in a very nice discussion on the differences between Calvinism and Lutheranism. I don't see it as so much a debate as an educational opportunity for me. Being a convert, I wasn't teethed on the BoC, so I don't know a whole lot more about Lutheranism than what I was taught in the Catechism.

So, I do hope the mods will let us continue this discussion. I don't see any blood on the walls, and we are all WELS/LCMS Lutherans here. It's the only good discussion I've had in TCL, and I'd like it to continue.

 

[Studeclunker]

Thank you, Filo for taking the time to clearly show how those two denominational beliefs are different.

DITTO! Another really excellent post, Filo. One that we can study and really get a lot out of. Thanks again.

See, Belinda? You really are a Lutheran after all.

 

[BelindaP]

DITTO! Another really excellent post, Filo. One that we can study and really get a lot out of. Thanks again.

See, Belinda? You really are a Lutheran after all.

That's good to know. Can somebody please let Zeph in on the secret?

I am very happy to be having this discussion.

 

[DaRev]

I just received the Eucharist like I normally do. The pastor came around with one element while the 3 or 4 other distributors helped out. I didn't have a problem with it, I think I like Philo's explanation. But I would walk out of a church that was in anyway blaspheming the Sacrament, and I'm not a very quiet person.

Having a woman involved in the administration of the Sacrament (distributing) blasphemes the Sacrament.

Those God has chosen, He draws to himself irresistibly. People can fight it and some do for a really long time, but He will have whom He will have. (This might be where I differ a bit from orthodox Lutheranism.)
One can't just walk away from God. I suppose it is possible to completely renounce God, but one doesn't casually lose salvation.

This is where your argument departs from Lutheran doctrine. The Confessions and Scriptures do support the fact that one can resist the Holy Spirit and in effect lose their salvation. I believe Filo has shown the passages.

Revrand, if you re-read the last line of what you quoted from me, you will see that I never accused you of any doctrinal or theological folderol in the least. The solution that I can no longer wait for is for Pastors like yourself to rise up and shake the leadership into doing something about the eroding standards coming out of, and encouraged by, St. Louis.

As to the actions of the Redding Congregation, and many others in California, Michigan and other states, the Synod IS responsible to dicipline the Pastors and congregations when they err like this. The Synod is not only not doing so, they are encouraging this activity, and this disturbs ME very greatly. It injures my conscience so much that to even attend at the Redding church is out of the question. So much so, that I can no longer continue in your Synod. This is because I will NOT quit going to Church. The only possible alternative is to switch Synods as there is no other LCMS Church in possible commuting distance. Not to my liking, not really my choice either.

By the by, according to the latest statistics, LCMS is shrinking not growing. So, I'm not the only one who feels this way, I'm sure.

I think you'll see that all church bodies are shrinking, including the WELS.

My main problem with the LCMS is, as you said, they don't seem to want to instill discipline on erring congregations. You need to remember that the LCMS has a congregational polity, thus what you see in these congregations must be supported by the laity. In some cases (not all, sadly) it's not the pastors who are purposely deviating from the norm, but the congregations themselves. This is where the synod needs to step in and re-set the standard. Sadly, they have fallen short.

For me, there is simply no where else to go.

 

[Studeclunker]

Studeclunker, I know you haven't accused me of being a unionist. I was just pointing out that such accusations don't work on a person like me (or very many other people for that matter). You are right that the original topic was the difference between the synods. It was Zeph who brought up the Christmas calvinism thing as a way to further harass me.

Even so, all things work to the good of those who love the Lord. My question concerning LCMS/WELS differences has been answered, and I am in a very nice discussion on the differences between Calvinism and Lutheranism. I don't see it as so much a debate as an educational opportunity for me. Being a convert, I wasn't teethed on the BoC, so I don't know a whole lot more about Lutheranism than what I was taught in the Catechism.

So, I do hope the mods will let us continue this discussion. I don't see any blood on the walls, and we are all WELS/LCMS Lutherans here. It's the only good discussion I've had in TCL, and I'd like it to continue.

Blood on the walls... LOL, I love it! Well, if there wasn't just a little blood on the walls, it probably wouldn't be the Lutheran Forum (LOL)! Don't feel bad about not,' teething on the BoC.' very few Lutherans were either. In fact, a great many don't even know what the Book of Concord is! The Pastor of the local LCMS congregation thought it rather odd that my friend Paula and I were studying it. Paula is an ex-Pentecostal and wanted to know what it was that made a Lutheran what they are.

Yes, Filo can be excellent. The Revrand too.

 

[QuiltAngel]

Belinda,
Might I make a few suggestions to help you in your study? These are things that have helped me understand the Lutheran teachings much better. I was not raised Lutheran, was raised in a church that ascribed to Calvin and his theology. I became Lutheran at 18 in an LCA (one which became ELCA) and LCMS 4 - 5 years later. My learning about Lutheran theology to become a Lutheran was pretty sketchy. I am constantly learning.

If you have the opportunity to take an adult catechism class where the Small Catechism is used, take advantage of it. It is good for all of us to review that.

Read the Small Catechism with Explanations. If you don't have a copy, you can find it online here: An Explanation of Luther's Small Catechism

Get and read the Book of Concord, the Reader's Edition that CPH publishes is a good one. I struggle to read it myself so I need to take my own advice. While you wait to get one, you can get it here: Welcome to the Book of Concord

A good book to read is "Why I Am A Lutheran" by Daniel Preuss cph.org: Why I Am a Lutheran by Preus, Daniel

Another good read is "Spirituality of the Cross" by Gene Edward Vieth cph.org: The Spirituality of the Cross by Veith Jr., Gene Edward

Then there is also "The Proper Distinction of Law and Gospel" by C.F.W. Walther

Filo's reply was excellent and gives you a few things to look up and study on this subject.

 

[Zecryphon]

I think I'll do everyone a favor and just leave TCL too. You win Belinda. I left CC to come here and post solely here. And you follow me here. Everyone in the know knows I'm really close to Perma-Ban status, so before that happens I'll check out GT where people can handle my posting style. See ya all in a couple of months or not.

 

[BelindaP]

Oh, for pity's sake, Zeph. It's not about winning or losing. I'm not trying to drive you away. We should be able to occupy the same place, both of us being Christian brethren. I will leave before I drive you off.
When you told me I wasn't Lutheran, it challenged me. So, I've been studying the BoC to better understand the faith. It would only be natural for me to come here to learn a bit more. I am not stalking you--really. Let us share a holy kiss and make up. What do you say?

 

[Zecryphon]

Oh, for pity's sake, Zeph. It's not about winning or losing. I'm not trying to drive you away. We should be able to occupy the same place, both of us being Christian brethren. I will leave before I drive you off.

When you told me I wasn't Lutheran, it challenged me. So, I've been studying the BoC to better understand the faith. It would only be natural for me to come here to learn a bit more. I am not stalking you--really. Let us share a holy kiss and make up. What do you say?

<staff edit>


I can not co-exist in the same forum as you do. That was proven numerous times in CC. We just don't get along and we never will. Since you have people here believing you are a Lutheran now and since you say you are eager to learn all you can about Lutheranism, you need to stay here more than I do. I can hold my own in GT, they can handle my posting style and don't report me for every little thing I say that they don't like. So I will leave TCL, my home forum for a while and let you learn about Lutheranism in peace.

Kiss and make up? I don't kiss other women as I'm a married man. There are people on CF that I just do not like and I am honest enough to come right out and tell them that I don't like them. To pretend to like them in order to "get along", to me is living a lie, and I just don't like you Belinda. I will leave this forum for the time being with this parting gift to you Belinda. It is from the WELS website and explains the differences between Calvinists and Lutherans on the points of the TULIP acronym. You say you don't believe in Limited Atonement, fine. But it does seem you believe in Irresistible Grace. Lutherans do not.

http://www.wels.net/cgi-bin/site.pl?1518&cuTopic_topicID=10&cuItem_itemID=15094

 

[BelindaP]

I am so sorry about misspelling your name. I didn't realize I was turning it around like that. I have been reading it as Zephycron all this time.

And, no. I am not going to run you out of this forum. It means more to you than it does to me. It isn't fair for me to show up and make you leave. We don't have to like one another, but if you can't even stand to fellowship with me, so be it. I'll go back to my other haunts and leave you alone.

So long, folks. It's been nice chatting with you. I'll spend some time looking over the resources and links you shared.

 

[Tangible]

Oh ... Kay ...

Funny, I don't remember filling out an Orthodox Lutheran Doctrine Questionnaire when I joined TLC.

After a lifetime of taking infused grace for granted, I'm honestly still trying to come to grips with means of grace and extra nos, though I want to believe it. Does that somehow make me less than Lutheran?

 

[LilLamb219]

Let's get back on topic if we can and leave personal issues by the wayside

 

[BelindaP]

And what of those who aren't capable of repentance? Are they not saved? And what does Paul mean when he says that God chose us before the beginning of the world?

 

[Tangible]

Maybe we need to agree on a definition of 'repentance'.

 

[DaRev]

And what of those who aren't capable of repentance? Are they not saved? And what does Paul mean when he says that God chose us before the beginning of the world?

None of us are capable of repentance apart from the grace of God. As I said, it is a work of the Holy Spirit within us.

 

[DaRev]

Maybe we need to agree on a definition of 'repentance'.

When I teach confirmation regarding Confession and Absolution, I define "repentance" in both broad and narrow terms. In broad terms it refers to both the feeling of guilt and remorse we have once confronted with the Law and the desire to change our behavior to conform with God's will. (This is of course worked in us by the Holy Spirit.) In the narrow sense it is that desire, moved in us by the Holy Spirit, to change our behavior. In many places inb Scripture it is used to mean "to change one's mind". There are passages in Scripture that say God 'repented'. Certainly God has no sin to be guilty about. But God has 'changed His mind' on occasion. In the narrow meaning we break down the feeling of guilt and remorse as "contrition" and the desire to change our behavior, "to change our minds" as "repentance". Even a small child has feelings of guilt and remorse when they do something wrong. This is repentance worked in them by the Holy Spirit.

 

[Tangible]

Thanks, DaRev. This is the understanding of repentance that I have come to embrace since becoming Lutheran. Thank God.

At times I still struggle with trying to shed the pietistic notion of repentance as something we do with our will, out of our own strength, with lip service to 'help' from the Holy Spirit. When I lived in that nightmare I would sometimes wonder if I was really saved, since I tried and tried to 'repent' from my sins and was hardly ever successful.

 

[BelindaP]

The kind of repentance I was rejecting was what the guy was trying to force on me, histrionic, crying sort of repentance. He basically said that if you didn't want to tear your eyes out, you weren't repenting. While we all have had moments like that in our walk with Christ, that isn't my experience of repenting every single time. Sometimes it is simply a change of mind. Sometimes there is a bit of guilt, other times a lot of guilt.

But, to expand on the salvation without repentance thing. Yes, young children do have remorse for things they've done wrong. In fact, they are often better at it than we are. But, your six month old baby isn't capable of repentance. They don't even understand that they've done something wrong when they whack you across the nose with their rattle. Were that child to die after doing so, wouldn't they be saved if baptized and in a state of faith? That's my sole objection to the idea that we must repent before being saved. And, it's why I think we are saved when God gives us faith. Faith in a working mind will induce repentance. But, in a grossly immature mind (as in a six-month old or a profoundly retarded individual), repentance isn't possible.