What We Believe

The differing enumerations of the Ten Commandments among various religious traditions is not generally regarded as a doctrinal matter dividing the churches. The Oxford Companion to the Bible (Oxford, 1993) is correct when it states: “The contents of the Ten Commandments are ... the same for all of the religious communities, despite the differences in their enumeration.”

The Lutheran Cyclopedia notes in its article on the “Decalogue” that the Bible neither numbers the commandments nor determines their respective position, and for this reason divergent enumeration has occurred.

The Jews make Exodus 20:2 the 1st Commandment, Exodus 20:3-6 the 2nd, and Exodus 20:17 the 10th.

The Eastern Orthodox and the Reformed churches make Exodus 20:2-3 the 1st, Exodus 20:4-6 the 2nd, and Exodus 20:17 the 10th.

The Lutheran and Roman Catholic churches regard Exodus 20:4 as a part of (or commentary on) the 1st Commandment (Exodus 20:3). They then draw the 2nd from Exodus 20:7, the 3rd from Exodus 20:8-11, and make Exodus 17a the 9th and Exodus 17b the 10th.

The Jews divide the Ten Commandments into two groups of five each.

Lutheran and Roman Catholics assign three commandments to the first table and seven to the second.

Eastern Orthodox and Reformed churches assign four to the first table and six to the second.

Both the Old and New Testaments are the Word of God (Heb. 1:1), authored by the one and same Holy Spirit. No one can discard either one without incurring the wrath of God.

Essentially the two are the same in that they both contain the same moral law and the same Gospel message that sinners are saved alone by grace in His Son, the Messiah, who was to come.

The Gospel of Christ is the central message of the entire Bible, essential for our salvation. Jesus affirmed that He is the Christ of the Old Testament (Luke 24:25-27).

Above all, we need the Old Testament to see Jesus in it and to know what He fulfilled for us.

We also need the Old Testament, because, being God-breathed, it is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness (2 Tim. 3:16). It can be used for edifying and encouraging one another.

Without the Old Testament we would not understand much of the New Testament, especially why God sent Jesus. History, examples of those who had faith and of those who rejected God's promises, wisdom for life, etc. would be missing.

We need the Old Testament! And that’s what the ancient Christian Church said when they established the list of authentic books of God's Word, the Bible. The Bible is to be used as a whole for our justification and sanctification.

It has generally been taught in our church that unless there is a compelling reason, on the basis of the biblical texts themselves, to understand the six days of the Genesis accounts as anything other than normal 24-hour days, we are to believe that God created the world in six 24-hour days (see Luther’s Small Catechism with Explanation, Question 97 [Concordia Publishing House, 1986, p. 106]).

The New Testament does not provide us with specific information regarding the age of the disciples of Jesus, or of Timothy and Titus. We therefore can only conjecture.

Commentators sometimes point out, for example, that since the fishing business involved the kind of hard labor only younger men were able to endure, Peter and Andrew, James and John, were probably younger men in their 20s and 30s.

Commentators (Fee, Kelly, e.g.) believe that the reference to Timothy's youth in 1 Tim. 4:12 could mean that he was a man in his low to mid 30s.

And, of course, we must remember — as scholars also observe — that life expectancy was much lower in the ancient world than it is today. This fact makes it all the more likely that the disciples, probably for the most part, were younger men.

Again, this is only guess work, so that we must be highly tentative regarding any conclusions that are drawn in this regard.

In Jewish tradition the age 30 was regarded as the time of maturity and the minimum age for public teaching. It is possible, although not certain, that Titus and Timothy would have fulfilled this requirement.

The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (Third Edition, 1998) in its article on Christmas details the history of the dating of Christmas. The article points out that the time of Christ’s birth was a matter of speculation and even dispute in the early centuries of the Christian church.

The celebration of Christ’s birth on a specific day did not become a general practice until the 4th century. The earliest mention of December 25 is in a calendar representing Roman practice of the year 336, the date probably chosen to oppose the pagan feast of the sun.

Other traditions of the dating were present, including the Eastern tradition of connecting Christ’s birth with Epiphany on January 6 (a practice still followed in the Eastern churches).

The Scriptures, of course, do not give us a precise date for Christ’s birth and therefore it must always remain a matter of conjecture. It is not a doctrinal matter.

First, it is important to recognize that belief in the Scriptures as God’s Word and the certain conviction that they do not lie to us come to an individual only when the Holy Spirit works in that person's heart as a result of faith in Jesus Christ created through the Gospel.

No amount of reasonable, historical arguments — however helpful they may be — will ultimately convince anyone of the truth of the scriptural writings.

Skeptics, whatever their intellectual or personal presuppositions may be, will never be convinced on the basis of reason. We need to remember that in Jesus’ time even the religious authorities, who always sought “signs” to prove everything, would not be convinced even “if someone should rise from the dead” (Luke 16:31).

This being said, anyone who has carefully looked at the history of the biblical canon will quickly discover that the biblical writings were not mere “recollections” that came into being decades after the events recorded in the sacred text.

Those who want to disparage the Bible have long used this argument, which is easily discounted even with casual familiarity with the way the biblical writers approached their task. Take for example, the first four verses of Luke’s Gospel. They reveal a careful and meticulous historian at work.

It will always be mystifying to Christians why the skeptics among us are far more ready to accept as historical other ancient documents, the texts of which date centuries — not mere years-from the date of their purported happening.

All this said, however, in the end the conviction that the Bible is God’s truthful Word is a faith — conviction arrived at apart from merely intellectual endeavor.

The New Testament is silent on this question. It does report that the disciples themselves baptized as representatives of Jesus (John 4:2).

Given the command and promise attached to this sacrament instituted by Jesus (Matt. 28:18-20; cf. Acts 2:38ff), and the fact that the disciples administered this sacrament to others, it seems reasonable to assume that they were baptized as a matter of course as followers of Jesus, commissioned also by Him to administer the means of grace to others that they may also become heirs of the Kingdom of Heaven.

In the entry under Chronology in the Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (Intervarsity, 1992), H.W. Hoehner offers a helpful summary of the chronology of Passion Week. He says:

“Traditionally, Jesus is thought to have died on the Friday of Passion Week.” On the basis of Matthew 12:40, he says, “some conclude Jesus could not have died on Friday; Jesus may have died on Wednesday or Thursday, thus allowing for three days and three nights.

“However, when one recognizes that the Jews reckoned a part of a day as a whole day, Jesus’ death on Friday does not present a real problem.

“Furthermore, the New Testament repeatedly refers to Jesus’ resurrection as having occurred on the third day (not the fourth day; e.g., Matt. 16:21; 17:23; Luke 9:22; 18:33; Acts 10:40; 1 Cor. 15:4).

“Moreover, the Gospels specifically mention the day before the Sabbath (Friday) as the day of his death (Matt. 27:62; Mark. 15:42; Luke 23:54; John 19:14, 31, 42). Therefore, both scripturally and traditionally, it seems best to accept Friday as the day of Jesus’ death.”

There are a number of “James” referred to in the New Testament, including one called “brother of the Lord.” He is listed first among the brothers of Jesus, presumably as the oldest of them (Matt. 13:55; Mark 6:3).

Most scholars think that he is the same person as the one simply referred to as James in the book of Acts (12:17; 15:13; 21:18; 1 Cor. 15:7) and in Galatians (2:9, 12). There has been some dispute regarding the relationship between Jesus and James, the natural interpretation being that James was the son of Mary and Joseph (thus a “half-brother” to Jesus).

In the history of the Christian church, some believing in the perpetual virginity of Mary developed the view that Jesus and James were foster brothers, while others conjectured that they were cousins.

LCMS theologians have found no difficulty with the view that Mary and Joseph themselves together had other children, including James.

The current system of dating by A.D. (anno domini means “in the year of the Lord”), based on the traditional year of the birth of Christ, was devised by a 6th century monk by the name of Dionysius Exiguus.

It is now commonly held, however, that the actual birth was several years earlier, between 7 and 4 B.C., since it has been established that Herod the Great died (Matt. 2:19) in 4 B.C.

Lutherans believe that the Bible teaches that a person is saved by God’s grace alone through faith in Jesus Christ alone.

The Bible tells us that such “faith comes by hearing” (Rom. 10:17). Jesus Himself commands Baptism and tells us that Baptism is water used together with the Word of God (Matt. 28:19-20).

Because of this, we believe that Baptism is one of the miraculous means of grace (another is God’s Word as it is written or spoken), through which God creates and/or strengthens the gift of faith in a person’s heart (see Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16; 1 Peter 3:21; Gal. 3:26-27; Rom. 6:1-4; Col. 2:11-12; 1 Cor. 12.13).

Terms the Bible uses to talk about the beginning of faith include “conversion” and “regeneration.” Although we do not claim to understand fully how this happens, we believe that when an infant is baptized God creates faith in the heart of that infant.

We believe this because the Bible says that infants can believe (Matt. 18:6) and that new birth (regeneration) happens in Baptism (John 3:5-7; Titus 3:5-6). The infant’s faith cannot yet, of course, be verbally expressed or articulated by the child, yet it is real and present all the same (see e.g., Acts 2:38-39; Luke 1:15; 2 Tim. 3:15).

The faith of the infant, like the faith of adults, also needs to be fed and nurtured by God’s Word (Matt. 28:18-20), or it will die.

Lutherans do not believe that only those baptized as infants receive faith. Faith can also be created in a person's heart by the power of the Holy Spirit working through God's (written or spoken) Word.

Baptism should then soon follow conversion (cf. Acts 8:26-40) for the purpose of confirming and strengthening faith in accordance with God's command and promise. Depending on the situation, therefore, Lutherans baptize people of all ages from infancy to adulthood.

The LCMS does not believe that Baptism is ABSOLUTELY necessary for salvation. All true believers in the Old Testament era were saved without baptism. Mark 16:16 implies that it is not the absence of Baptism that condemns a person but the absence of faith, and there are clearly other ways of coming to faith by the power of the Holy Spirit (reading or hearing the Word of God).

Still, Baptism dare not be despised or willfully neglected, since it is explicitly commanded by God and has His precious promises attached to it. It is not a mere “ritual” or “symbol,” but a powerful means of grace by which God grants faith and the forgiveness of sins.

Luther goes to the heart of the foundational theological questions at issue over against errant understandings of Baptism present among those involved in the Anabaptist movement of his time.

Perhaps we can make a couple of points that seem pertinent to the issue(s) you have raised.  First, as you have implied in your letter, it seems important to note that while Baptism is God's gracious means of conveying to human beings His saving grace revealed to us in Jesus Christ our Savior, it is not the only means.

On the basis of the Scriptures we teach that the spoken Word of the Gospel (Rom. 1:16-17; 10:17) and the Lord's Supper (Matt. 26; Mark 14; Luke 22; 1 Cor. 11) are also means of grace.

It is no less a miracle of God's grace at work that an adult should believe by hearing the words of the Gospel, than that an infant should receive through Baptism the Spirit who creates the very faith by which one receives incorporation into Christ (Rom. 6:4, “We were buried therefore with him by [Greek: the instrumental dia] baptism...”).

Adults who hear the spoken Word and believe eagerly seek to be baptized, not because it is a human rite symbolic of one's commitment or something to that effect, but because of what God promises in and through Baptism.

It must be remembered that the only theological distinction between the spoken Word of the Gospel and Baptism is that the sacrament includes a visible element; hence, our Lutheran fathers commonly spoke of Baptism as “visible Gospel.”

The Scriptures distinguish Baptism and the spoken Word — but do not separate them; they are both means of grace. As you also no doubt are fully aware, we teach that it is not the lack of Baptism that necessarily condemns, but it is the despising of this precious gift that endangers faith, for God Himself has instituted it and attached His promises to it.

The Scriptures teach, of course, that there is only one Baptism (Eph. 4:5). There is no indication that God has limited this blessed means of grace to individuals on the basis of age or levels of maturity.

Baptism is God’s act, a divine testimony to what “grace alone” really means, whereby He imparts the blessings of forgiveness, life, and salvation to individuals, children and adults alike.

And as our Lutheran fathers have always taught, Baptism confirms the grace of God upon adults who have already come to faith, and strengthens them in their faith, even as the Lord’s Supper does.

Lutherans believe that the Bible teaches that a person is saved by God's grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ. Baptism, we believe, is one of the miraculous means of grace (together with God's written and spoken Word) through which God creates the gift of faith in a person's heart.

Although we do not claim to understand how this happens or how it is possible, we believe (because of what the Bible says about Baptism) that when an infant is baptized God creates faith in the heart of that infant.

This faith cannot yet, of course, be expressed or articulated, yet it is real and present all the same (see, e.g., 1 Peter 3:21; Acts 2:38-39; Titus 3:5-6; Matt. 18:6; Luke 1:15; 2 Tim. 3:15; Gal. 3:26-27; Rom. 6:4; Col. 2:11-12; 1 Cor. 12:13).

Parents and sponsors of a baptized child bear the responsibility of teaching this child God's Word so that the child's faith may remain alive and grow (Matt. 28:18-20).

Confirmation is a time-honored church tradition (not required by God's Word, but we believe useful nonetheless) in which the child baptized as an infant is given the opportunity to confess for himself or herself the faith that he or she was unable to confess as an infant.

Faith is not “created” at confirmation, but it is rather confessed for all to hear so that the church can join and rejoice in this public confession, which has its roots in the faith which God Himself created in Baptism.

Infants are included in “all nations" who are to be baptized (Matt. 28:19). Certainly they were included in Peter's Pentecost exhortation in Acts 2:38, 39: “Repent and be baptized everyone one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. ... The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off — for all whom the Lord our God will call.”

Whole households, everyone in the family, were baptized in the beginning of New Testament times, which in all probability included infants (Acts 16:15 and 33). [The “household” formula used here by Luke has Old Testament precedent, with special reference also to small children, as for example in 1 Sam. 22:16, 19; see Joachim Jeremias, Infant Baptism in the First Four Centuries, 22-23.]

In Romans 6, the Holy Spirit tells us in the Word that in Baptism we have been united with Jesus' death and resurrection–regenerated, dying to sin and rising to new life. That happens to infants when baptized (Gal. 3:27).

“For as many of you who have been baptized have put on Christ.” Baptism through the Word creates the faith necessary to receive salvation for infants. Infants can have faith.

In Mark 10:14 Jesus said, “Let the little children come to Me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.”

The Greek word in this text is “paidia” which means babes in arms. Infants can belong to the kingdom of God.

“From the lips of children and infants, You have ordained praise ...” Psalm 8:2. “Yet You brought me out of the womb, You made me trust in You even at my mother's breast” Psalm 22:9.

From the beginning of New Testament Christianity at Pentecost to our time, unbroken and uninterrupted, the Church has baptized babies. Polycarp (69-155 AD), a disciple of the Apostle John, was baptized as an infant.

Justin Martyr (100-166 AD) of the next generation, about the year 150 AD, states in his Dialog with Trypho The Jew “that Baptism is the circumcision of the New Testament.”

Irenaeus (130-200 AD) writes in Against Heresies II 22:4 “that Jesus came to save all through means of Himself — all, I say, who through Him are born again to God – infants and children, boys and youth, and old men.”

Similar expressions are found in succeeding generations by Origen (185-254 AD) and Cyprian (215-258 AD), and at the Council of Carthage in 254 where the 66 bishops stated: “We ought not hinder any person from Baptism and the grace of God ... especially infants ... those newly born.”

Origen wrote in his Commentary on Romans 5:9: “For this also it was that the Church had from the Apostles a tradition to give baptism even to infants.” Origen also wrote in his Homily on Luke 14: “Infants are to be baptized for the remission of sins.”

Cyprian's reply to a bishop who wrote to him regarding the baptism of infants stated: “Should we wait until the 8th day as did the Jews in the circumcision? No, the child should be baptized as soon as it is born."

Augustine (354-430 AD) wrote in De Genesi Ad Literam, 10:39 declared, “The custom of our mother Church in baptizing infants must not be counted needless, nor believed to be other than a tradition of the Apostles.”

Augustine further states: “... the whole Church which hastens to baptize infants, because it unhesitatingly believes that otherwise they cannot possibly be vivified in Christ.”

In 517 AD, 10 rules of discipline were framed for the Church in Spain. The fifth rule states that “... in case infants were ill ... if they were offered, to baptize them, even though it were the day that they were born...such was to be done.” (The History of Baptism by Robert Robinson, London, Thomas Knott, 1790, p.269)

This pattern of baptizing infants remained in Christianity through the Dark and Middle Ages until modern times. In the 1,500 years from the time of Christ to the Protestant Reformation, the only notable church father who expressed opposition to infant Baptism was Tertullian (160-215 AD). Tertullian held that in the case of “little children,” baptism ought to be delayed until they “know how to ask for salvation” (“On Baptism,” ch. 18).

Then in the 1520s the Christian Church experienced opposition specifically to infant Baptism under the influence of Thomas Muenzer and other fanatics who opposed both civil and religious authority, original sin and human concupiscence.

Thomas' opposition was then embraced by a considerable number of Swiss, German and Dutch Anabaptists. This brought about strong warning and renunciation by the Roman Catholics, Lutherans and Reformed alike.

It was considered a shameless affront to what had been practiced in each generation since Christ's command in the Great Commission (Matt. 28:18-20) to baptize all nations irrespective of age.

Historical excerpts are from “Infant Baptism in Early Church History," by Dr. Dennis Kastens in Issues Etc. Journal, Spring 1997, Vol. 2, No. 3.

On the basis of the evidence provided in the New Testament, it is not possible to prove that the term “baptize” always refers to immersion, nor that the Baptisms mentioned were all done by immersion — implying (in the view of some) that only Baptisms done by immersion can be considered valid.

In fact, taken as a whole, the evidence suggests otherwise. In some cases the term "baptize" is synonymous with “wash” (Titus 3:5-6; see also Heb. 9:19; Eph. 5:26, Acts 22:16; and Mark 7:1-4 — a passage in which some earlier translators considered the term “baptize” to include the washing of “dining couches”), and it is highly likely that Baptisms were performed in the early church by methods other than immersion.

Three thousand were baptized on Pentecost in Jerusalem, where no river exists and no mention is made of other large quantities of water that would or may have been used.

In fact, the shortage of water supplies in general in many parts of the ancient world would have precluded Baptism by immersion.

As the Supplementary Volume of The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible correctly notes, “It is unlikely that in Jerusalem, Samaria, Damascus, Philippi, Corinth, Rome, or Asia Minor enough water was always available for a full bath” (87).

It should be noted that very early in Christian history methods other than immersion were used and allowed. The Didache requires the administrant of Baptism to “pour water three times on the head” (7:3). No mention is made of immersion.

Early Christian art depicts Baptisms of persons standing in shallow pools with water poured on the head (see David Scaer, Baptism, 96-101).

Lutherans have therefore held that the manner of Baptism (that is, immersion, pouring, sprinkling, etc.) does not determine whether a Baptism is valid, any more than the manner of distributing the Lord's Supper (common cup, individual glasses) affects the validity of this Sacrament. Only the Word of God and the “element” (water), according to divine institution, makes a Baptism valid.

The LCMS recognizes and accepts the validity of baptisms properly administered (i.e., using water in any quantity and/or mode, together with the Trinitarian invocation instituted by Christ, Matt. 28:19) in all Christian churches.

Assuming, therefore, that you have already received a proper Christian Baptism, there would be no need for you or your wife to be re-baptized, although completion of some form of instruction classes” or “membership classes” is normally required of non-Lutherans who wish to become communicant members of LCMS congregations.

Please discuss this with your pastor, who would be happy to discuss this issue with you and to answer any other questions you have about membership. There is no need to be shy — pastors encounter these kinds of questions all the time.

Lutherans baptize infants because of what the Bible teaches regarding:

1.) God's command to baptize (Matt. 28:18-20; Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38). There is not a single passage in Scripture which instructs us not to baptize for reasons of age, race, or gender.

On the contrary, the divine commands to baptize in Scripture are all universal in nature. On the basis of these commands, the Christian church has baptized infants from the earliest days of its history.

Since those baptized are also to be instructed in the Christian faith, (Matt. 28:20), the church baptizes infants only where there is the assurance that parents or spiritual guardians will nurture the faith of the one baptized through continued teaching of God's Word.

2.) Our need for Baptism (Psalm 51:5; John 3:5-7; Acts 2:38; Rom. 3:23; Rom. 6:3-4). According to the Bible, all people–including infants–are sinful and fall short of the glory of God (Rom. 3:23).

King David confesses, “I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me" (Ps. 51:5). Like adults, infants die–sure proof that they too are under the curse of sin and death.

According to the Bible, Baptism (somewhat like Old Testament circumcision, administered to 8-day-old-babies – see Col. 2:11-12) is God's gracious way of washing away our sins – even the sins of infants – without any help or cooperation on our part. It is a wonderful gift of a loving and gracious God.

3.) God's promises and power (Acts 2:38; Mark 16:16; Acts 22:16; 1 Peter 3:21; John 3:5-7; Titus 3:5-6; Gal. 3:26-27; Rom. 6:1-4; Col. 2;11-12; Eph. 5:25-26; 1 Cor. 12:13).

Those churches which deny Baptism to infants usually do so because they have a wrong understanding of Baptism. They see Baptism as something we do (e.g., a public profession of faith, etc.) rather than seeing it as something that God does for us and in us.

None of the passages listed above, nor any passage in Scripture, describes Baptism as “our work” or as “our public confession of faith.”

Instead, these passages describe Baptism as a gracious and powerful work of God through which He miraculously (though through very “ordinary” means) washes away our sins by applying to us the benefits of Christ's death and resurrection (Acts 2:38-39; Acts 22:16), gives us a new birth in which we “cooperate” just as little as we did in our first birth (John 3:5-7), clothes us in Christ's righteousness (Gal. 3:26-27), gives us the Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5-6), saves us (1 Peter 3:21), buries us and raises us up with Christ as new creatures (Rom. 6:4; Col. 2:11-12), makes us holy in God's sight (Eph. 5: 25-26) and incorporates us into the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:13).

All of this, according to the Bible, happens in Baptism, and all of it is God's doing, not ours. The promises and power of Baptism are extended to all in Scripture — including infants — and are available to all.

Parents and sponsors then have the privilege and responsibility of nurturing the baptized child in God's love and in His Word so that he or she may know and continue to enjoy the wonderful blessings of Baptism throughout his or her life.

 We live in a world permeated with sin. It's a sinful world. Because of that and since the devil is the prince of this world, as the Bible says, bad things happen to good people.

But consider this.  A lot more good has happened to people who love God in Jesus than bad. Read Psalm 90 and 91. And consider how God can turn the bad things into good for those who love God (Romans 8:28).

God does no evil. Yes, He can cause and allow bad things to come to us, but always for our good. Scripture also gives witness to God punishing the wicked (Proverbs) and punishing individuals and even whole nations for evil (Egyptians, Israel for their wickedness and idolatry, etc.).

But when it comes to sin, we Christians know that God has punished Jesus in our place for our sins, and that we are not punished. God disciplines those whom He loves. Read Hebrews 12.

We know God is Good and Gracious and Loving in giving us the Way, the Truth and the Life for our salvation, our Savior Jesus. We know that He works all things for our good. And that must be the purpose in your and your mother's case, although it may be a bitter pill to swallow.

We must always turn to God in His Word and prayer for answers, never away from Him. Sometimes the answers He has are not evident right now, but later. It may even be in heaven that we see and understand His purposes.

The question you have raised often arises in connection with the words spoken by Jesus in the context of the Lord's Prayer (Matt. 6:14), "If you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will forgive you; but if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses."

In view of Scripture's wider teaching concerning forgiveness, it seems proper to understand Jesus' point in Matt. 6:14 to be that the stubborn, persistent refusal to forgive others is evidence of a blinded and hardened heart which lacks a real understanding of and faith in God's forgiveness in Christ.

What Jesus is doing here, therefore, is issuing a strong warning to us to "search our hearts" to see if we really understand and accept the Gospel and its practical implications for our lives.

If we say, "I want God to forgive me, but I refuse to forgive those who sin against me," we really don't know what "forgiveness" and "faith in Jesus" are all about. We cannot expect God to "forgive" us if the attitude of our heart reveals that we have no real understanding of or faith in his undeserved grace in Christ Jesus.

Anyone who truly understands the true nature God's grace and forgiveness in Christ and puts his or her trust in that forgiveness will desire and seek to extend that forgiveness to others.

God's forgiveness is not a "reward" for our forgiving others, but once we receive it in true faith and gratitude it is impossible not to want to share it with others.

Repentance means first of all, to acknowledge our sins, to be truly sorry for them. This "godly sorrow" comes from the Holy Spirit convicting us with God's law.

But the Bible also uses the work of repentance in a broader sense to include faith in Jesus our Savior. This faith is produced by the Holy Spirit, who convinces us through the Gospel that our sins are forgiven for the sake of Jesus, who lived, died and rose again for us.

Put those two concepts together and you have repentance in its fullest sense. (Jesus told His disciples in Luke 24:47 that repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in His name to all nations.)

According to the Bible, those who are truly sorry for their sins and trust in Jesus as their Savior also want to turn away from their sins, intending with the help of the Holy Spirit not to keep on living a life of sin.

If we want to keep on sinning, we need to ask ourselves if we have really repented. However, we are weak human beings and although we do not want to commit the same sins again and again, we may sometimes fall into sin out of weakness.

Whenever we sin, we know (as John says) that "if we confess our sins, [God] is faithful and just and will forgive our sins" for the sake of Jesus our Savior (1 John 1:9).

If repentance becomes a "game" with God, if we don't really want or intend to stop committing a certain sin (say stealing), and if we go on stealing and living always in that sin of stealing, then we place ourselves in grave spiritual danger.

We need to ask that God the Holy Spirit give us the power to stop committing that sin and trust Him to help us fight against it.

Sad to say, the desire to sin may come back at times, for which we will have to repent again. That's not the same as living in sin. We all commit all kinds of sins daily, for which we have to daily repent. As long as we are sorry for our sins and believe that God forgives our sins for Christ's sake, we will be forgiven and have eternal life.

Worldly sorrow is the kind of sorrow Judas Iscariot had, which caused him to commit suicide. It was a self-centered remorse and despair that wrongly concluded that all was lost in this life, that there was no hope, that there was nothing God could do.

Second Corinthians 7:10 says that this kind of sorrow brings death. But godly sorrow is true sorrow over sin accompanied by trust in Jesus for forgiveness.

This is the kind of sorrow Peter had after he denied Jesus, and it is the sorrow King David had after he committed adultery and murder (Psalm 51). Godly sorrow leads to life and salvation because it includes faith in Jesus Christ.

Presumably you are referring to the warning of Jesus against the sin against the Holy Spirit in Matthew 12:31-37 (paralleled in Mark 3:28-30; Luke 12:12). This warning follows the Pharisees’ accusation that Jesus was in collusion with Satan upon hearing of Jesus’ healing of the dumb demoniac (Matt. 12:22-30; cf. parallels in Mark and Luke).

In all three Gospel accounts the term “blaspheme” is used to describe this sin against the Holy Spirit. It should be noted that Jesus does not say that the Pharisees had actually themselves committed this sin, but that they were in danger of doing so.

The sin against the Holy Spirit is the conscious, persistent, stubborn, unyielding refusal of someone who was at one time a believer to acknowledge his or her sin, be sorry for it, and desire God's forgiveness in Christ.

It is impossible, therefore, for a confessing Christian to fall into this state unknowingly or unwillingly, and any confessing Christian who is sincerely concerned about the possibility of having committed this "sin" clearly has not committed it, because one of the necessary signs of being in this state of non-repentance and unbelief is having no real concern or remorse about being in this condition.

In his book What's the Answer? (Concordia Publishing House, 1960), LCMS theologian Otto Sohn raises the question, "What stand does our church take regarding the heathen who have never had the opportunity to hear the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and what is the individual's responsibility toward these people?" His answer follows:

Christ, the Savior of the world, answered the first question in this way: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned" (Mark 16:16). The apostle Peter put it another way: "Neither is there salvation in any other; for there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved" (Acts 4:12). The same truth is expressed in John 3:16 and 18:36; Rom. 2:12; Eph. 2:11-13.

Though such people have not heard the Gospel, they are without excuse (Rom. 1:19-23 and 2:12). God has not left Himself without witness (Acts 14:17), but He has revealed His existence by the works of nature and wants men to seek Him, if "haply they might feel after Him and find Him" (Acts 17:27).

The Bible also reveals that people who knowingly and willfully reject the Gospel of Jesus will be more severely punished than those who never heard it (Luke 12:47, 48).

Because of the horrible doom awaiting all those who do not believe in Jesus, we should seek to reach as many as possible with our own fearless witness and ardently support the missionary endeavors of our church on behalf of those whom we cannot reach with our own voice.

Nor must we forget our responsibility toward fellow Christians who are on the verge of erring from the truth, whether by word or deed (Gal. 6:1; James 5:19, 20). And lest we should preach to others, but ourselves become castaways, we should be earnestly concerned about our own salvation (Matt. 26:41; 1 Cor. 10:12; Phil. 2:12).

In its report on The End Times: A Study of Eschatology and Millennialism, the Synod's Commission on Theology and Church Relations says regarding hell:

"In both "body and soul" unbelievers will suffer eternal separation and condemnation in hell (Matt. 18:8 and 25:46; Mark 9:43; John 3:36; 2 Thess. 1:9; Jude 13; Rev. 14:11).[40] Indescribable torment will be experienced consciously, the degree determined by the nature of the sins to be punished (Matt. 11:20-24 and 23:15; Luke 12:47-48)."

Regarding heaven and "degrees of glory" the Commission says: "Eternal life is pictured in the Scriptures as a state of never-ending "blessedness." This means, on the one hand, that Christians will live forever in perfect freedom from sin, death, and every evil (Is. 25:8; 49:10; 1 Cor. 15:26, 55-57; Rev. 2:7, 11, 20:14 and 21:4).

At the same time, they will experience the unending joy of being with God in the new heavens and new earth (e.g., Rev. 21-22; Ps. 16:11). Forever eliminated is the possibility of falling away from God. This blessedness will bring with it the joy of being in eternal communion with fellow believers, whom we have reason to believe we shall recognize (cf. Matt. 17:3).

And, there will be no limitations or degrees attached to the enjoyment of the happiness to be experienced, though there will be degrees of glory corresponding to differences of work and fidelity here on earth, producing praise to God but no envy (see 2 Cor. 9:6; Matt. 20:23)."

The answer to your question depends on what you mean by "the rapture." The English word "rapture" is derived from the Latin translation of the verb "caught up" in 1 Thess. 4:17 (rapiemur).

Lutherans certainly believe what Paul teaches in this passage, namely, that those who are still living on earth when Christ returns visibly on the last day "will be caught up" ("raptured") together with "the dead in Christ" to "meet the Lord in the air."

Some Christians teach, however, that the "rapture" will take place not on the last day but in connection with an "invisible" coming of Christ occurring before a seven-year period of "tribulation" on earth, allowing Christians to "escape" this tribulation and then later return to earth for a literal "1,000 year reign of Christ."

Lutherans do not believe that these teachings are based on a proper understanding of Scripture. Scripture teaches that all Christians will endure varying degrees of "tribulation" until the last day, that Christ will return only once (visibly) to "catch up" ("rapture") all believers, living and dead, into heaven, and that all believers will reign forever with him in heaven.

Lutherans understand the "1,000 years" of Rev. 20:11-15 to be a figurative reference to Christ's reign here and now in the hearts and lives of believers, which will culminate in our reigning with Christ forever in heaven following his return on the last day.

For more information, you may want to read the Synod's theological commission report titled The End Times: A Study of Eschatology and Millennialism.

There is no sin in heaven, because it is the place where the sinless God dwells.

Those who have been cleansed in the blood of the Lamb have been cleansed forever. There is no more death in heaven, the result of sin. We die once and then the judgment. Our death ends sin, the Scripture says.

Just as the good angels are fixed in their sinless state now, so also we shall be. We will serve God forever willingly, but it will be impossible for us to will to sin as did our first parents.

In heaven it will not be like in the beginning of our human history. Old things have passed away, the new has come (Rev. 21:4). There will be only life, eternal life, and where there is eternal life there is eternal sinlessness.

Rest your soul on that and praise God for His great goodness in giving us a sinless Savior.

 Lutherans believe that Scripture teaches that at the moment of death the souls of believers enter the joy of heaven (Luke 23:43; Acts 7:59; Rev. 14:13; Phil. 1:23-24), while the souls of unbelievers at death are consigned to "the prison" of everlasting judgment in hell (1 Peter 3:19-20; Acts 1:25).

The departed souls remain in heaven or hell until the Day of Judgment, when they shall be reunited with their own bodies (Matt. 10:28; John 5:28-29; John 11:24; Job 19:26).

Therefore, "The Last Judgment is the grand finale of this present world, in which the sentence pronounced in death over the individual will be publicly confirmed and extended to the body, which till then has returned to the dust, from whence it came. He who continues in the faith unto the end has nothing to fear for his soul after death or for his body and soul on the Day of Judgment (Rev. 2:10; 14:13)" (Edward Koehler, A Summary of Christian Doctrine, St. Louis: Concordia, 1939).

You may also want to read the following FAQ, "Asleep Until the End of the World."

What Scripture teaches concerning the death of the Christian is summarized as follows by Lutheran theologian Edward Koehler in his book, A Summary of Christian Doctrine:

In the moment of death the souls of the believers enter the joy of heaven. Jesus said to the malefactor: "Today shalt thou be with Me in paradise" (Luke 23:43). Stephen said in the hour of death: "Lord Jesus, receive my spirit" (Acts 7:59). Whoever dies in the Lord is blessed "from henceforth" (Rev. 14:13). Paul desires "to be with Christ," and adds that this is "far better" for him than to continue in the flesh (Phil. 1:23-24). For this reason we pray that finally, when our last hour has come, God would grant us a blessed end and graciously take us from this vale of tears to Himself in heaven.

On the day of the final judgment, the redeemed souls in heaven will be reunited with their own (now glorified) bodies and will begin to enjoy the bliss of heaven in both body and soul (John 5:28-29; Phil. 3:20-21; 1 Cor. 15).

The Lutheran church has always rejected as unscriptural the idea that the soul "sleeps" between death and Judgment Day in such a way that it is not conscious of heavenly bliss.

Lutherans believe that faith is created and strengthened not by looking inside of one's self (to one's own faith and/or doubts) but by looking outside of one's self (to God's Word and promises in Christ).

Therefore, assurance of salvation is to be sought by looking to God's Word and promises in Christ (which create and strengthen the faith through which one is saved), not by looking inward at the strength or weakness of one's own faith (which creates either pride and false assurance or doubt and lack of assurance).

Anxiety regarding doubts, strength of faith and certainty of salvation are signs of faith (however weak it may be), not signs of unbelief, since the unbeliever has no concern or anxiety about doubts, faith or salvation.

If you would like to study this issue further, I would recommend Martin Chemnitz's book on Justification, available from Concordia Publishing House (800-325-3040, stock no. 15-2186).

The statements of the Creed read as follows: "At whose coming all men will rise again with their bodies and will give an account of their own works. And they that have done good will go into life everlasting; and they that have done evil, into everlasting fire."

It is important to note that the Athanasian Creed does not here say that certain people will "enter eternal life" because they "have done good." It says that "those who have done good" (and only those who believe in Jesus alone for salvation are able to "do good" in God's sight) "will enter eternal life."

On Judgment Day, God will point to our good works not as the cause of our salvation but as the evidence of the faith through which we have been saved and which enabled us to do that which was well-pleasing in his sight.

There are numerous Bible passages that make the same point and use the same language (e.g., Matt. 25:31-46, Rom. 2:6-10, James 2:14-16).

The confession of these sentences in the Athanasian Creed in our churches is, in fact, a helpful reminder of the relation of faith and good works as taught in the Bible.

(In this connection you may wish to review the following comments on Rom. 2:6-10 in the NIV Concordia Self-Study Bible [published by the LCMS] which explains:

"Paul is not contradicting his continual emphasis in all his writings, including Romans, that a person is saved not by what he does, but by faith in what Christ does for him. Rather, he is discussing the principle of judgment according to deeds. Judgment will be rendered according to one's deeds in the sense that the good works of the believer give evidence that he has faith. Good works, which are seen, give evidence of faith, which is unseen."

Lutherans believe both are true and Scriptural: It is possible for a believer to fall from faith and lose salvation, and it is possible for a believer to have complete assurance of eternal salvation through faith in Jesus Christ.

If this seems paradoxical to human reason, then (Lutherans say) this is only because the teaching of Scripture itself on this issue (as on many other issues) appears paradoxical to human reason.

For Lutherans, this is essentially a matter of properly distinguishing between Law and Gospel: Warnings against falling from faith are the strongest form of God's Law, intended to warn against "carnal security" based on "good works" or against the attitude that "since I'm saved, I can do anything I want to do."

Assurances of God's constant and eternal love in Christ are the sweetest and purest form of Gospel, intended to comfort those who are plagued by their sins and by their failures to keep God's Law perfectly.

The key question you seem to be asking is this: Is what Paul says in Romans 3 (e.g., v. 28 "...we hold that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of law") "an attack on good works as being a means for salvation?"

As you no doubt are aware, the central and consistent teaching of Paul that we are justified by grace alone through faith alone on account of Christ is nowhere more beautifully summarized than in Eph. 2:8-9: "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God — not because of works ..."

By its very definition "grace" means that human works do not contribute in any way to a person's salvation or justification, as St. Paul says in Rom. 11:6, "But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works; otherwise grace would no longer be grace."

Or as the apostle had already said in 3:28, "...a man is justified by faith apart from [Greek: choris] works of law."

Paul said this, of course, in the context of Jewish opinions regarding what was required for salvation. By making circumcision a necessary requirement for one to be saved (See Acts 15:5ff.), the Jews had attacked the Gospel of God's grace at its very core (see Gal. 5:1-12!).

The faith of which Paul speaks, of course, is a living faith in Jesus Christ that produces, by God's Spirit, the good works that God wills be done in the Christian's life.

That is why, immediately after his beautiful summary of the Gospel in Eph. 2:8-9, he continues, "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them."

Of this living faith, Luther so eloquently said: "Oh faith is a living, busy, active, mighty thing, so that it is impossible for it not to be constantly doing what is good. Likewise, faith does not ask if good works are to be done, but before one can ask, faith has already done them and is constantly active" (Formula of Concord, SD, IV, 10-11).

This is precisely what the entire book of James is all about. Genuine faith is a faith that shows itself in good works.

Or as Luther again put it once, as an apple tree makes fruit and the fruit does not make an apple tree, so works do not make a Christian, but a Christian does good works.

The Lutheran Cyclopedia (Erwin L. Lueker, editor; Concordia Publishing House, 1975) contains the following helpful summary of the Lutheran understanding of what Scripture teaches regarding the freedom of the will:

The scriptural doctrine of the freedom of the human will is closely connected with the doctrine of original sin (see Sin, Original). The doctrine of the freedom of the human will after the fall of man must be studied from the viewpoint of original sin.

Scripture emphatically declares that man, also after the fall, continues to be a responsible moral agent, who in earthly matters, to some extent, may exercise freedom of will; but it asserts that "natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, ... neither can he know them" (1 Cor. 2:14); that man, by nature, is "dead in trespasses and sins" (Eph. 2:1); that "the carnal mind is enmity against God" (Rom. 8:7) and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost" (1 Cor. 12:3).

Accordingly, Scripture denies to man after the fall and before conversion freedom of will in spiritual matters, and Scripture asserts that conversion is accomplished entirely through the Holy Ghost by the Gospel. God "hath saved us ... not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace" (2 Tim. 1:9); "Turn Thou me, and I shall be turned" (Jer. 31:18).

Accordingly, Article 18 of the Augsburg Confession ("Freedom of the Will") states:

It is also taught among us that man possesses some measure of freedom of the will which enables him to live an outwardly honorable life and to make choices among the things that reason comprehends. But without the grace, help, and activity of the Holy Spirit man is not capable of making himself acceptable to God, of fearing God and believing in God with his whole heart, or of expelling inborn evil lusts from his heart.

This is accomplished by the Holy Spirit, who is given through the Word of God, for Paul says in 1 Cor. 2:14, "Natural man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God."

Additional Scripture passages which may be helpful as you study and discuss this issue are: John 1:12-13; 15:16-19; Rom. 10:14-17; Eph. 1:4; 2:1-9; Col. 3:12; 2 Thess. 2:13.

The question you are wrestling with is really the question, "Why are some saved and not others?"

Theologians throughout history have referred to this question as the "crux theologorum" ("the cross of the theologians") because of the difficulty (and from the Lutheran perspective, the impossibility) of giving an answer to this question which is satisfactory to our human reason.

Some answer this question by pointing to man's "free will" — only those are saved who "choose" to be saved. Lutherans reject this answer as unscriptural because according to the Bible even man's will is "dead" and powerless to "choose" God and his grace in Christ.

We are saved not because we "choose" to be saved but because the Holy Spirit works faith in our heart through the Gospel (even faith is a gift!).

Others answer this question by pointing to God's sovereign will: God himself predestines from eternity some to be saved and others to be damned. Lutherans reject this answer as unscriptural because, according to the Bible, God sincerely desires all to be saved and has predestined no one to damnation.

So how do Lutherans answer this question? The answer is that Lutherans do not try to answer it because (we believe) the Bible itself does not provide an answer to this question that is comprehensible to human reason.

Lutherans affirm, with Scripture, that whoever is saved is saved by God's grace alone, a grace so sure that it excludes all human "action" and "choice" but rather rests on the foundation of God's action in Christ and his "choice" (predestination) from before the beginning of time.

Lutherans also affirm, with Scripture, that those who are damned are damned not by God's "choice" but on account of their own human sin and rebellion and unbelief. From a human perspective, there is no "rational" or "logical" way to put these two truths together.

Lutherans believe and confess them not because they are "rational" and "logical," but because this is what we find taught in Scripture.

For a further discussion of this issue, you may want to read Of the Election of Grace in the Brief Statement of the LCMS, and/or Articles II and XI in the Formula of Concord (contained in the Book of Concord, the Lutheran Confessions).

You may criticize your Christian brother for failing to do good works insofar as God's Word criticizes him (faith without deeds is dead – James 2:14-26), but you must criticize yourself at the same time because no one is perfect, all have sinned. We need to be merciful and forgiving to one another. Also encourage one another to do good works (Heb. 10:24-25).

Consider this Word to be the answer to your next two questions: "For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do" (Eph. 2:10).

The answer to the second part of this question is no, we cannot feel assured that we have done or are doing enough good works, since we do not know how many God has set for us to do. We don't know what God's plans are.

If God has prepared in advance the works we are to do, He cannot be indifferent to any of our good works. Again, we need to encourage one another to do good works.

All our good works are tainted with sin. "All our righteous acts are like filthy rags," as Isaiah reminds us. Therefore, they cannot be counted for our salvation.

Only the perfect, all-sufficient righteousness Jesus accomplished for us with His perfect life will be enough for our salvation. This comes to us by grace, imputed to us through faith, faith being a gift of God (Eph. 2:8-9).

God recognizes the Christ-like good works of the unbeliever as good in the sense that they are done according to the divine Law written in their hearts (Rom. 2:15). However, since they come from a wicked heart that is dead in trespasses and sins (Eph. 2:1), and not from faith, they are sin (Rom. 14:23) and in the spiritual sense displease God (Ps. 53:1-3).

In the Kingdom of God's power, the civil righteousness — the good works of unbelievers — are good only outwardly. These are necessary for the welfare of human society, and God even rewards them with temporal blessings.

But these good works of the unbelievers get them nowhere with God in His Kingdom of grace. Even works of civil righteousness will ultimately receive the condemnation of Jesus and will not prevent eternal punishment (Matt. 25:41-46).

The Christian is not saved by KNOWING he has faith. By grace, God has given him faith in Jesus, and it is through that faith he is saved. For example, Abraham believed God (had faith, not just knew he had faith), and it was credited to him as righteousness (Rom. 4:3).

Yes, the Christian should bother whether he is doing Christ's good works, even though he is saved by faith alone. It is God's will and express command that a Christian should do good works, which the Holy Spirit works in him.

Christ's good works are indicators that a Christian has Christ's faith and not something else. Christ's good works will be the products of that faith, and those good works will be the public signs on which Christ will pronounce His public final judgment (Matthew 25).

Faith, big or small, strong or weak, as long as it trusts in Jesus' merits, will SAVE. Saving faith is not contingent upon the amount of works one does, but is a gift of the Holy Spirit through the Gospel.

Trust in Jesus above all for forgiveness and life eternal. Work while it is day before night comes when we cannot work, knowing God has given us a purpose and things to do for Him in this short life.

Scripture teaches us to repent of our sins — to be truly sorry for them and trust in Christ for forgiveness, every time we sin. At the same time, we sincerely and earnestly resolve, by the assistance of God the Holy Spirit, to henceforth amend our sinful lives.

We do not play around with this. But repenting thus does not mean we will never sin again. When we sin again, we go again in repentance and faith and resolve, and God forgives again.

As we trust in Jesus' merits, God forgives and saves us. In the end, it is unbelief — failure to trust in Jesus — that will condemn us to hell.

Being saved does not depend on how hard we try to amend our sinful life, but as Paul said to the jailer in Philippi when he asked what he should do to be saved: "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved — you and your household."

Then, being forgiven in Christ, we will be compelled by God's love to leave our sins and live as God wants us to live.

The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod believes and teaches that it is possible for a true believer to fall from faith, as Scripture itself soberly and repeatedly warns us (1 Cor. 10:12; 1 Peter 5:8; 2 Peter 3:17; Heb. 2:1-3, 3:12-19, 6:4-8, etc.).

Such warnings are intended for Christians who appear to be lacking a right understanding of the seriousness of their sin and of God's judgment against sin, and who, therefore, are in danger of developing a false and proud "security" based not on God's grace, but on their own works, self-righteousness, or freedom to "do as they please."

By the same token, the LCMS affirms and treasures all of the wonderful passages in Scripture in which God promises He will never forsake those who trust in Christ Jesus alone for salvation (John 10:27-29; Rom. 8; Heb. 13:5-6, etc.).

To those who are truly repentant and recognize their need for God's grace and forgiveness, such passages are powerful reminders of the true security that is ours through sincere and humble faith in Christ alone for our salvation.

A person may be restored to faith in the same way he or she came to faith in the first place — by repenting of his or her sin and unbelief and trusting completely in the life, death and resurrection of Christ alone for forgiveness and salvation.

Whenever a person does repent and believe, this always takes place by the grace of God alone and by the power of the Holy Spirit working through God's Word in a person's heart.

The LCMS believes that Scripture clearly teaches (in passages such as those mentioned in your question) a predestination to salvation by God's grace in Jesus Christ alone.

The LCMS does not believe that Scripture teaches a predestination to damnation; God desires all to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth (1 Tim. 2:3-4).

Like so many teachings of Scripture (e.g., the Trinity, eternity, the two natures of Christ, the love of a holy God for rebellious sinners), this teaching seems contradictory and is incomprehensible to human reason.

We believe it not because it "makes sense" to human reason, but because this is what we find taught in the pages of God's holy Word.

For a helpful summary of the LCMS position on predestination, see the section on Of the Election of Grace in the Synod's Brief Statement (adopted in 1932).

The common table prayer has long been in use, especially among Lutherans but also among Moravian Christians. One version is: “Come, Lord Jesus, be our Guest. Let these gifts to us be blest.” The second line of the prayer is sometimes expressed as “Let Thy gifts to us be blest” or “Let these Thy gifts to us be blest.” The English versions are loose translations from German versions that have similar variations.

The prayer has been attributed to several supposed authors, including Martin Luther and, more often, Nicolaus Ludwig Graf von Zinzendorf (1700–1760). A recent historical survey by James R. Eggert, however, shows that the earliest publication of the prayer was in a 1698 schoolbook by Johann Conrad Quensen. In his Schulbuch, the prayer reads: “Komm, Herr Jesu! sey unser Gast; und segne, was du bescheret hast” (literally: “Come, Lord Jesus! Be our Guest, and bless, what you have bestowed”). The prayer’s presence in a schoolbook for children is no doubt the reason for its wide distribution. Quensen may have composed the prayer based on a 1669 aria by Johann Rudolph Ahle. The words of the prayer — “Come, Lord Jesus, be our Guest” — may be intended to evoke the Emmaus story, when the two disciples asked Jesus to stay and eat with them, only to have Him break bread and open their eyes to recognize Him as their risen Lord (Luke 24:13–35). It is also possible that the prayer was to remind children of the wedding at Cana, where Jesus, the guest, provides the wine that all enjoy (John 2:1–11).

For more information, read “The Origin and Diffusion of the Common Table Prayer ‘Come, Lord Jesus’” by James R. Eggert (Lutheran Quarterly vol. 37 [2023]: 49–72).

Significantly, the Athanasian Creed, which summarizes the doctrine of the Trinity as confessed by the church through the ages, begins by stating: "And the catholic faith is this, that we worship one God in three persons and three persons in one God, neither confusing the persons nor dividing the substance."

It is clear from the Creed that to make statements such as "the Father is Jesus" or "the Holy Spirit is Jesus" is to confuse the persons of the Holy Trinity. At the same time, according to the Creed the three distinct persons of the Trinity are of one substance or essence.

When the Scriptures speak of the three persons of the Trinity as God (the Father is God; the Son is God; the Spirit is God) they mean that each of the persons, though distinct, are of one divine essence: they are God.

Specifically with respect to the Lord Jesus Christ, the Creed states of Him that He is God (and man): "God of the substance of the Father." This language is very carefully chosen here, so that — as the Creed states at the outset — neither the persons nor the substance are confused.

As I know you agree, the Holy Trinity in Whom we believe is a profound mystery that is beyond human comprehension. This implies a twofold caution.

On the one hand, we are bound only to what God has revealed about Himself in the Word, and thus we can say no more and no less than what the Scriptures teach.

And on the other hand, we are unable on the basis of human reason to explain everything we may wish to know about this mystery.

In answer to the question "To whom should we pray," Luther's Small Catechism with Explanation (Concordia Publishing House, 1986) clearly answers: "We should pray to the true God only, Father, Son and Holy Spirit."

According to Scripture and the historic teaching of the Lutheran Church, Christians may offer their prayers to any or all of the three persons of the Trinity, each of whom is "true God."

This is a clear and indisputable teaching of Scripture and of the Lutheran Church.

 In the LCMS, we have generally commended the question of gluten-free wafers to the realm of individual pastoral judgment.

In its 1983 report on Theology and Practice of the Lord's Supper, the Commission on Theology and Church Relations (CTCR) stated the following concerning the element of bread in the Sacrament: "Since the Scriptures are silent on the source of the bread, it may be baked from the flour of wheat, rye, barley, or other grains" (16; emphasis added).

Similarly, Dr. C.F.W. Walther, in his Pastoral Theology, wrote concerning the kind of grain from which the flour for the bread has been prepared: "It is an adiaphoron whether the bread be leavened, whether it be rye, wheat, barley, or oats bread, and whether it have this or that form, so long only as it is baked of grain flour and water."

Since rice is a grain, it would also seem consistent with this position that bread made from this grain would be permissible.

Nothing here would preclude someone bringing bread to the pastor that is gluten free. However, Lutheran practice would require that the pastor consecrate this bread together with the elements being used in the Communion service. You are encouraged to discuss this with your pastor.

The website celiac.com (under the question "Which Grains are safe, which are not?") notes that wheat, rye and barley must typically be avoided, but not necessarily oats, corn or rice. You should consult with your doctor as to whether oats, corn, or rice might be acceptable.

The LCMS believes Scripture teaches the Lord's Supper is a precious gift of God in which Christ gives us His true body and blood (in a miraculous way), together with the bread and wine, for the forgiveness of our sins and the strengthening of our faith.

Because the Bible teaches that this Sacrament may also be spiritually harmful if misused, and that participation in the Lord's Supper is an act of confession of faith, the LCMS ordinarily communes only those who have been instructed in the teachings of our church and who have confessed their faith in these teachings.

All three accounts of the institution of the Lord's Supper in the Gospels (Matt. 26:26-29; Mark 14:22-25; Luke 22:14-23) explicitly state that Jesus took BREAD, blessed it, broke it, and gave it to his disciples saying, "Take, eat; this [i.e., this BREAD, which I have just blessed and broken and am now giving to you] is my body."

Jesus uses similar language in referring to "the cup" (of wine) as "His blood." A plain and straightforward reading of these words leads to the conclusion that BOTH bread AND body, BOTH wine AND blood are present in the consecrated elements of the Lord's Supper.

Perhaps the most explicit expression of this truth, however, is found in 1 Cor. 10:16-17, where Paul writes:

"The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?  Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread."

Paul clearly says here that we all "partake" of "BREAD" when we receive the Lord's Supper—even as we also partake of and "participate in" the true body of Christ. And he says we all "partake" of the wine (the cup), even as we also partake of the true blood of Christ.

Similarly, in 1 Cor. 11:26, Paul says: "For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord's death until he comes."

Paul expressly states here that when we receive the Lord's Supper we are "eating bread" and "drinking the cup" (wine), but he goes on to say those who eat this bread and drink this cup are also partaking of the true body and blood of Christ.

So "real" is this participation in Christ's body and blood, in fact, that (according to Paul) those who partake of the bread and wine "in an unworthy manner" are actually guilty of "profaning the body and blood of the Lord" (1 Cor. 11:27).

(Partaking of the Lord's Supper "in a worthy manner," of course, is not something that we "do" or "accomplish" on the basis of our "personal holiness" or "good works." It means receiving God's free and gracious gifts of life and forgiveness offered in the Lord's Supper in true repentance produced by the work of the Spirit through God's Law and in true faith in Christ and His promises produced by God's Spirit through the Gospel).

Lutherans distinguish between two realms, or “kingdoms.” The right-hand realm, often referred to as the spiritual realm or heavenly kingdom, has primarily to do with the gospel, faith, and the ministry of the church, such as preaching and the sacraments. The left-hand realm, often identified as the civil sphere or earthly kingdom, has primarily to with earthly laws, rulers, government, economics, and the like. There are times when the two realms do overlap, such as in the case of abortion (a Scriptural matter legislated by the state) or religious freedom (a federal law with implications for the worship of the church).

While Christians live in both realms, they must not mistake them for one another or confuse them. We should not, for example, present our personal political opinions and views as if they were mandated by God in Scripture unless they clearly and expressly are, such as in the cases of marriage or abortion.

Lutheran pastors (or other church workers) may involve themselves in political affairs according to their role as citizens in the left-hand realm. They do so only according to their status in the kingdom of the left, not according to their office as ministers of Word and Sacrament, which concern matters of the right-hand kingdom. When they engage in matters that are strictly political, they do so as citizens of the left-hand kingdom on the basis of their own personal views and opinions, not on behalf of the Missouri Synod or the congregations they serve.

Concern over pastors inappropriately acting in the political sphere becomes a matter for ecclesiastical supervision, which is exercised confidentially and discretely according to the Synod’s constitution and bylaws.

The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod believes those Scripture passages which say women should not "teach" or "have authority" in the church (see, for example, 1 Cor. 11 and 14; 1 Tim. 2) mean that women ought not hold the authoritative teaching office in the church — that is, the office of pastor.

Women are allowed to hold other offices in the church, as long as these offices do not involve the one holding them in carrying out the distinctive functions of the pastoral office. In 1994, the Synod’s Commission on Theology and Church Relations prepared a report on The Service of Women in Congregational and Synodical Offices, which is helpful in this regard.

At its 2004 convention, the Synod adopted Resolution 3-08A affirming the conclusions of this report. Nearly half — more than 9,000 — of the Synod's professional, full-time church workers are women (serving in such offices as teacher, deaconess, director of Christian education, etc.).

For more information, read the Commission on Theology and Church Relations report Women in the Church: Scriptural Principles and Ecclesial Practice (1985) and The Creator’s  Tapestry  (2009).

Strictly speaking, the word “elder” in the Bible (Acts 14:23; 1 Tim. 5:17-19, Titus 1:5-9 and 1 Peter 5:1-4) refers to those who hold the pastoral office. What we commonly call “elders” in the LCMS are laypersons appointed to serve a congregation in various ways, in keeping with its constitution and bylaws.

Such “elders” hold an office that is humanly defined and is not the equal of biblical elders. As a humanly defined office, the term elder itself does not have a uniform meaning throughout The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod. Indeed, some congregations prefer the term “deacon” to refer to laymen with similar duties.

Elders (or deacons) typically support and assist the pastor in in his spiritual and administrative tasks toward the goal of nurturing and strengthening the spiritual life, mission, and ministry of the congregation.

The office of pastor is divinely instituted and indispensable for the Church, but an elder or deacon is a humanly instituted office. Where it exists, it seeks to provide help, support, and encouragement for pastors.

Elders may pray with and for the pastor, advise the pastor in certain decisions of pastoral care, help to evaluate and encourage his performance in his pastoral and administrative duties, assist him in visitations and in the distribution of the Lord’s Supper, and advocate for the pastor’s and his family’s material, emotional, and spiritual well-being.

In such ways elders may help a congregation and pastor to have a godly and healthy relationship.

Tithing (meaning giving 10 percent of one's income) is a term used in the Scriptures, especially throughout the Old Testament.

In most of those cases the "tithe" was a "legislated" matter to support the levitical priesthood and provide other benefits. Freewill offerings were made in addition to the tithe.

In the New Testament, tithing is not mentioned nearly as much, but such expressions as cheerful, firstfruit, and proportionate are used repeatedly. This leads us to conclude that while tithing may be a good spiritual discipline and a good starting point for a mature Christian, it may not be the best way to present biblical giving since it can easily become a legalistic requirement of the law rather than a cheerful offering motivated by the love of God shown toward us in Christ.

Therefore, in the second of the eight Biblical Stewardship Principles, we maintain that God's stewards are managers, not owners. This means God's stewards have been entrusted with life and life's resources and given the privilege of responsibly and joyfully managing them for Him.

Thus, as children of God through faith in Jesus Christ, and with the Holy Spirit's help, we will encourage cheerful, first-fruit, proportionate (including but not limited to tithing) living and giving in all areas of life by Christian stewards.

Another way of thinking about this issue is to remember that all things, including money, belong to God, and the real question is how much of what belongs to Him are we going to keep for ourselves and how much are we going to use to fulfill His purposes? King David said it very well in 1 Chron. 29:14: "But who am I, and who are my people, that we should be able to give as generously as this? Everything comes from you, and we have given you only what comes from your hand."

The word “advent" is from the Latin word for “coming,” and as such, describes the “coming” of our Lord Jesus Christ into the flesh.

Advent begins the church year because the church year begins where Jesus' earthly life began — in the Old Testament prophecies of his incarnation. After Advent comes Christmas, which is about his birth; then Epiphany, about his miracles and ministry; then Lent, about his Calvary-bound mission; then Easter, about his resurrection and the sending of the apostles; and then Ascension (40 days after Easter) and Pentecost, with the sending of the Holy Spirit.

The first half of the church year (approximately December through June) highlights the life of Christ. The second half (approximately June through November) highlights the teachings of Christ. The parables and miracles play a big part here. That's "the church year in a nutshell," and it should help reveal how Advent fits into "the big picture."

Advent specifically focuses on Christ's "coming," but Christ's coming manifests itself among us in three ways — past, present, and future.

The readings which highlight Christ's coming in the past focus on the Old Testament prophecies of his incarnation at Bethlehem. The readings, which highlight Christ's coming in the future, focus on his "second coming" on the Last Day at the end of time. And the readings that highlight Christ's coming in the present focus on his ministry among us through Word and Sacrament today.

The traditional use of Advent candles (sometimes held in a wreath) originated in eastern Germany even prior to the Reformation. As this tradition came down to us by the beginning of this century, it involved three purple candles and one pink candle.

The purple candles matched the purple paraments on the altar (purple for the royalty of the coming King). The pink candle was the third candle to be lit (not the fourth) on Gaudete Sunday, the Third Sunday of Advent. "Gaudete" means "Rejoice!" in Latin, which is taken from Phil. 4:4.

("Rejoice! ... the Lord is near"). Hence a "pink" candle was used to signify "rejoicing." Some also included a white "Christ candle" in the middle to be lit during the 12 days of Christmas (Dec. 25 to Jan. 5).

The concept of giving each candle a name, i.e., Prophecy, Bethlehem, Shepherd and Angel, etc., is a relatively novel phenomenon and probably originates with certain entrepreneurial publishers seeking to sell Advent candles and devotional booklets.

There are many beautiful customs and traditions surrounding Advent as well as a load of history concerning its development. These matters would be better found in books than here.

Here are a few:

• Lee A. Maxwell,  The Altar Guild Manual, Lutheran Service Book Edition (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 2008).
• Fred L. Precht,  Lutheran Worship: History and Practice (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1992).

Lutheran Worship: History and Practice, a commentary on Lutheran Worship, one of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod’s hymnals, says this about ashes on Ash Wednesday: "Other customs may be used, particularly the imposition of ashes on those who wish it. This ancient act is a gesture of repentance and a powerful reminder about the meaning of the day.

Ashes can symbolize dust-to-dustness and remind worshipers of the need for cleansing, scrubbing and purifying. If they are applied during an act of kneeling, the very posture of defeat and submission expresses humility before God."

The use of ashes on Ash Wednesday is a more recent custom among most LCMS congregations, although some have done it for decades. The ashes are usually derived from the burned palms from the previous Palm Sunday.

Experience will show, however, that in obtaining ashes this way, it doesn't take many ashes to "ash" a whole congregation. Like sin, they are very dirty and go a long way. One palm leaf will produce enough ashes for several years.

Usually the pastor takes the ashes on the end of his thumb and makes the sign of the cross on the forehead of each worshiper, saying these words: "Remember: you are dust, and to dust you shall return." This follows most effectively prior (or as part of) the Service Corporate Confession and Absolution on pages 290-291 of the Lutheran Service Book.

When it comes to figuring out the date for Easter, there is really no simpler way than just looking at the calendar for the upcoming year. But how do the calendar makers know when Easter will be? For instance, in 1999, it was April 4. In 2000, it was April 23. How exactly is the date for Easter determined?

The early church had the same problem, and the root of the problem is this: How exactly do you date the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus? We know that he was crucified on a Friday and rose again on a Sunday, but since Sundays do not always have the same date, another system of calculating a date had to be devised.

How They Used to Do It

By the middle of the second century, there were basically two ways Christians dated their celebrations of Easter. Some, the Quartodecimans (or “fourteenthers”), celebrated the death and resurrection of our Lord according to the “14th day of Nisan” — the day of the Jewish Passover (Lev. 23:5).

Since this date was not always on the same day of the week, the Quartodeciman celebration did not always fall on a Sunday. The rest of the church, however, celebrated the passion and resurrection of our Lord according to a different formula which always placed Easter on a Sunday.

Needless to say, there was no little controversy over this discrepancy, and it wasn't until the Ecumenical Council of Nicea in A.D. 325 that the churches of the world finally got together and agreed on this rule: Easter Day shall always fall on the Sunday after the first full moon that occurs on or after the spring equinox. That should have settled it, right?

Well, not exactly. You see, there was the little problem of determining when exactly the spring equinox would fall. Various astronomical and calendrical solutions have been used at different times down through the centuries, but even today there is still no unanimity among churches concerning the celebration of Easter.

Epiphany is from a Greek word meaning to "reveal" or "make manifest." The season of Epiphany is our time to focus on the revelation of "who" Jesus is: both true God and man.

On the Festival of Epiphany, Jan. 6, we hear the reading of the visit of the wise men (Matt. 2:1-12). In that event, these foreigners bowed down in acknowledgment that this infant was indeed the Christ, the Son of God.

The Sunday after Epiphany we hear the story of the Baptism of Jesus (Matt. 3:13-17). Here, God the Father confirms this man standing in the water is His beloved Son. The following Sunday we hear the story of the changing of water into wine at Cana (John 2:1-11). Through this event, Jesus revealed his glory and his disciples put their faith in him.

According to Jewish law, all males were circumcised on the eighth day — one week after their birth. We don't know the actual birth date of Jesus so we don't know the day of His circumcision either.

But since we have set aside a date for observing His birth, Dec. 25, we then set aside Jan. 1 (eight days later) as the date for the naming and circumcision of Jesus (Luke 2:21). The significance of this day is that our Savior began His long ministry of submitting Himself to the Law in our place.

Also, this was the first shedding of His blood, and points, in a small way, to the ultimate shedding of His blood on the cross.

From the perspective of The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, "giving something up for Lent" is entirely a matter of Christian freedom. It would be wrong, from our perspective, for the church to make some sort of "law" requiring its members to "give something up for Lent," since the Scriptures themselves do not require this.

If, on the other hand, a Christian wants to give something up for Lent as a way of remembering and personalizing the great sacrifice that Christ made on the cross for our sins, then that Christian is certainly free to do so — as long as he or she does not "judge" or "look down on" other Christians who do not choose to do this.

Early in the Church's history, the major events in Christ's life were observed with special observances, such as His birth, baptism, death, resurrection and ascension.

As these observances developed, a period of time was set aside prior to the major events of Jesus' birth and resurrection as a time of preparation.

During Lent, the Church's worship assumes a more penitential character. The color for the season is purple, a color often associated with penitence. The "Hymn of Praise" is omitted from the liturgy. The word "Alleluia" is usually omitted as well.

By not using the alleluia — a joyful expression meaning "Praise the Lord" — until Easter, the Lenten season is clearly set apart as a distinct time from the rest of the year.

Additionally, it forms a powerful contrast with the festive celebration of Jesus' resurrection when our alleluias ring loud and clear.

Finally, the penitential character of Lent is not its sole purpose. In the ancient Church, the weeks leading up to Easter were a time of intensive preparation of the candidates who were to be baptized at the Easter vigil on Holy Saturday.

This time in the Church's calendar was seen as an especially appropriate time for Baptism because of the relationship between Christ's death and resurrection and our own in Holy Baptism (see Rom. 6:1-11).

This focus would suggest that the season of Lent serves not only as a time to meditate on the suffering that Christ endured on our behalf but also as an opportunity to reflect upon our own Baptism and what it means to live as a child of God.

Properly speaking, only church workers and congregations are officially members of the LCMS. Church workers include both ordained ministers (such parish pastors, retired pastors, professors, or ordained clergy serving in other capacities) and commissioned ministers (such as teachers and directors of Christian education).

Both church workers and congregations are admitted into membership only after subscribing to the Synod’s constitution and bylaws, which require their affirmation of Scripture as God’s inspired Word and the Lutheran Confessions as true interpretations of Scripture. Individual Christians become members of a local congregation by virtue of their subscription to the congregation’s own constitution and bylaws, not the Missouri Synod’s.

Individual members of a Synod congregation do have certain rights and privileges under the Synod’s constitution and bylaws, including eligibility to serve on boards and commissions, to represent the congregation as district and Synod conventions, and to appeal their own excommunication.

Pastors of LCMS congregations typically conduct a series of instruction/membership classes on a regular basis for adults interested in joining the congregation or learning more about what The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod believes.

The length and nature of these classes vary from congregation to congregation, so those wishing to join an LCMS church are encouraged to speak with the pastor of the church. 

For those who come from a Lutheran (non-LCMS) background, these classes serve as a kind of "refresher" course in Lutheran doctrine and as a way of clarifying the differences between the LCMS and other Lutherans. For those coming from other denominations, these classes provide a thorough overview of the LCMS' central and foundational teachings and beliefs.

Joining a church says to the public you are a Christian and that you are a member of God's own people, who are called "a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation" (1 Peter 2:9).

It says you believe and act thus and thus as a witness to the Christian faith and as an example to others. It means you are doing what the very first Christians did in joining to devote themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the breaking of bread, and to prayer (Acts 2:42).

It means you will be able to receive the encouragement, strength, prayers, Baptism, the Lord's Supper and the application of God's Word from fellow Christians and a pastor, which you may not have the privilege of receiving as a non-member.

It will tell other Christians and the world you have considered it a serious matter to be able to join together with Christians to support the work of the church of calling a pastor, providing instruction in the Christian faith for the youth, adults, the older set, doing evangelism and mission work at home and abroad.

It would not only witness to other people who you are and what you are about, but it would show God what He wants of His groups of His chosen, His own people — that you are not just talking about and maybe doing half-heartedly but are involved whole-heartedly in doing what He expects.

Joining a congregation is a serious declaration you intend — with His help — to participate fully in doing the things of God. In most congregations, only members who have joined receive the Lord's Supper, have the privilege of voting, obtain recognition by the government for tax purposes, and have full use of the church and other amenities.

What would happen to God's church if everyone decided not to join with other Christians to BE His own people?

The 12 most common names for LCMS congregations are:

Trinity Lutheran Church — 522

Saint Paul Lutheran Church — 354

Saint John Lutheran Church — 352

Immanuel Lutheran Church — 302

Zion Lutheran Church — 295

Grace Lutheran Church — 217

Faith Lutheran Church — 211

Redeemer Lutheran Church — 143

Our Savior Lutheran Church — 143

Christ Lutheran Church — 132

Good Shepherd Lutheran Church — 125

Peace Lutheran Church — 114

View the most current data available for LCMS congregations reporting more than 3,000 baptized members, along with average worship attendance.

In terms of the official position of our two church bodies as reflected in formally adopted statements of belief and practice, the three main areas of difference between the LCMS and the ELCA are the following:

1. The doctrine and authority of Scripture. The LCMS believes that the Bible is without error in all that it says. The ELCA avoids making such statements, holding that Scripture is not necessarily always accurate on such matters as history and science.

Differences between the LCMS and the ELCA on the authority of Scripture also help to explain why the ELCA ordains women to the pastoral office, while the LCMS does not (based on 1 Cor. 14:33-36 and 1 Tim. 2:11-14).

Similarly, on the basis of what Scripture clearly teaches (Rom. 1:18-28; 1 Cor. 6:9), the LCMS position on homosexual behavior is unequivocal: homosexual behavior is contrary to God's will, while the ELCA has declared that it lacks a consensus regarding what Scripture teaches about homosexual activity.

Consequently, those who disagree with one another in the ELCA have been called to respect the ‘bound conscience’ of the others. The ELCA has also determined to allow the ordination of practicing homosexuals as long as they are in a life-long, committed relationship.

2. The commitment to Lutheran confessional writings. The ELCA, while affirming its commitment to the Gospel of Jesus Christ as witnessed to in the Lutheran Confessions, also tends to emphasize the historical character of these writings and to maintain the possibility of dissent to confessional positions that do not deal directly with the Gospel itself understood in a narrow sense.

All LCMS pastors are required to affirm that the Lutheran Confessions are a correct explanation of the teachings of Scripture.

3. The level of agreement necessary to join together in one church body. While the LCMS believes the Bible requires agreement in all that the Bible teaches, the ELCA holds that disagreement in some matters of doctrine, such as the mode of Christ's presence in Holy Communion, do not prohibit church fellowship.

During its 1998 convention, the LCMS adopted a resolution that provides a helpful summary of some of the key differences between our two church bodies, particularly as these differences have to do with ecumenical decision and relations. Here is that resolution:

To Express Deep Regret and Profound Disagreement with ELCA Actions
RESOLUTION 3-08A
Adopted in Convention by The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, July 1998

Preamble
In 1997 the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) adopted A Formula of Agreement which formally declared full communion with the Presbyterian Church (USA), the Reformed Church in America, and the United Church of Christ based on what is referred to as "a fundamental doctrinal consensus" (A Formula of Agreement, p. 19).

Although this document acknowledges that "it has not been possible to reconcile the [Lutheran and Reformed] Confessional formulations from the sixteenth century" concerning the presence of Christ in the Lord's Supper, it contends that "these enduring differences" can be regarded "as acceptable diversities" and should therefore not be regarded as "church-dividing, but are complementary" (p. 20). The Lutheran Confessions, however, reject the Reformed position on the presence of Christ in the Sacrament (FC Ep. VII, 21-42; FC SD VII, 111-28), and they clearly affirm what the Scriptures teach, namely: "We believe, teach, and confess that in the Holy Supper the body and blood of Christ are truly and essentially present and are truly distributed and received with the bread and wine. We believe, teach, and confess that the words of the testament of Christ are to be understood in no other way than in their literal sense, and not as though the bread symbolized the absent body and the wine the absent blood of Christ, but that because of the sacramental union they are truly the body and blood of Christ" (FC Ep VII, 6-7).

The ELCA in 1997 also formally accepted the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification. The purpose of this statement is "to show that on the basis of their dialogue the subscribing Lutheran churches and the Roman Catholic Church are now able to articulate a common understanding of our justification by God's grace through faith in Christ" (p. 2). While recognizing that this common understanding "does not cover all that either church teaches about justification," this statement declares that "the remaining differences in its explication are no longer the occasion for doctrinal condemnation" (p. 2). However, these "differences in ... explication" as articulated in this statement itself have to do with such critically important issues as the following:

• The centrality of the doctrine of justification in its relationship to all other teachings of Scripture (para. 18)
• The Roman Catholic view "that persons 'cooperate' in preparing for and accepting justification by consenting to God's justifying action" (para. 20)
• The relationship between the Lutheran understanding that "the sinner is granted righteousness before God in Christ through the declaration of forgiveness" and the Roman Catholic emphasis on "the renewal of the interior person through the reception of grace imparted as a gift to the believer" (para. 23-24)
• The precise role of faith in justification; i.e., the significance of the difference in the Lutheran understanding that "God justifies sinners in faith alone (sola fide)" and the Roman Catholic understanding which only "sees faith as fundamental in justification" (para. 26-27)
• The compatibility of the Lutheran understanding of "the Christian as a being 'at the same time righteous and sinner' " and the Roman Catholic view that the inclination toward sin in the justified Christian is not really "sin in the authentic sense" (para. 30). It is clear that Roman Catholics and Lutherans have not yet resolved substantive points of disagreement over the doctrine of justification.

Whereas, The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America's actions–i.e., the declaration of full communion with three Reformed church bodies while recognizing continuing disagreements between them regarding the understanding of the bodily presence of Christ in the Sacrament of the Altar; and also its adoption of the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification which claims a common understanding between Lutherans and Roman Catholics on the sinner's justification by God's grace through faith in Christ in spite of continuing lack of agreement between them on critically important aspects of the doctrine of justification–have significant implications for all Lutherans and other Christians in the United States and around the world; and

Whereas, The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod desires to remain faithful to its commitment to Holy Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions as stated in Article II of its Constitution, even while striving to resolve differences in doctrine with other church bodies; therefore be it

Resolved, That in faithfulness to God's Word and the Lutheran Confessions, and motivated by our love and concern for the people and pastors of the ELCA, we express our deep regret and profound disagreement with these actions taken by the ELCA; and be it further

Resolved, That we encourage all members of the LCMS to commit themselves to engage in theological discussions with the members of the ELCA; and be it further

Resolved, That the LCMS support its President as he continues to work together with the Presiding Bishop of the ELCA in arranging for discussions of these issues between representatives of our two church bodies; and be it further

Resolved, That these discussions address such theological issues as the doctrine of justification, the Lord's Supper, the nature of Lutheran identity, and the appropriate relationships with churches of other theological traditions in today's confusing and changing ecclesiastical landscape; and be it finally

Resolved, That the CTCR be asked to prepare an evaluation of the  ELCA/Reformed A Formula of Agreement and the Lutheran/Roman Catholic Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification for use in discussing these issues throughout the Synod.

From the LCMS perspective, the three main theological differences between the LCMS and the WELS are the following:

1. The biblical understanding of fellowship.

The WELS holds to what is called the "unit concept" of fellowship, which places virtually all joint expressions of the Christian faith on the same level.

In an official statement made in 1960 the WELS states, "Church fellowship should therefore be treated as a unit concept, covering every joint expression, manifestation, and demonstration of a common faith" (Doctrinal Statements of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod, 1970, pp. 51-52).

The LCMS, however, has historically not understood or practiced church fellowship in this way. Our Synod, for example, has made a distinction between altar and pulpit fellowship (for which full doctrinal agreement is required) and other manifestations of Christian fellowship, such as prayer fellowship (which do not necessarily require full doctrinal agreement).

Disagreements on this issue led the Wisconsin Synod to break fellowship with the LCMS in 1961.

2. The doctrine of the ministry.

With respect to the doctrine of the ministry, since the days of C.F.W. Walther our Synod has held that the office of the public ministry (the pastoral office) according to Scripture is the one divinely established office in the church, while the church possesses the freedom to create other offices, by human institution, from time to time to assist in the carrying out of the functions of the pastoral ministry.

The WELS' Theses on Church and Ministry, however, expressly deny that the pastoral ministry is specifically instituted by the Lord in contrast to other forms of public ministry (see Doctrinal Statements, pp. 9-11; cf. the Commission on Theology and Church Relations' 1981 report on The Ministry: Office, Procedures, and Nomenclature.

3. The role of women in the church.

While both the LCMS and the WELS strongly oppose the ordination of women to the pastoral office on Scriptural grounds, the LCMS has concluded that the Scriptures do not forbid woman suffrage in the church. The WELS opposes woman suffrage in the church as contrary to Scripture.

View a list of church bodies in fellowship with the LCMS.

Let me first note there is much that the Assemblies of God and our The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod (LCMS) have in common as Christian churches. Both have a high view of the Holy Scriptures as God's inspired Word, a belief in the doctrine of sin, and the doctrines of the Holy Trinity, the deity of Jesus Christ, and His saving work.

However, the principal differences between the churches have to do with such teachings as sanctification, Baptism, the Lord's Supper, the gifts of the Holy Spirit (Baptism of the Holy Spirit and tongues), and the end times.

It would be difficult adequately to discuss the differences that exist in these areas in brief. I would suggest you consider attending one of our adult information classes to learn what the Lutheran church believes on the basis of its understanding of the Scriptures.

Being familiar with the teachings of the Assemblies of God (and Pentecostalism), you would be in a good position to compare the teachings between our churches. You should not feel under any prior obligation to accept or commit yourself to what is being taught; the purpose of the class is to help you on the basis of the Bible to judge for yourself whether what the Lutheran Church teaches is grounded in all that it teaches.

I have found the Assemblies of God official website very helpful in summarizing their teaching, and, if you have not looked at this site, you also may find it helpful.

Finally, let me call your attention to two reports our Commission on Theology and Church Relations prepared in the 1970s: The Charismatic Movement and Lutheran Theology (1972) and  The Lutheran Church and the Charismatic Movement (1977).

Since Lutherans and Pentecostal churches have differing understandings of the Holy Spirit's work and gifts, you may find these reports useful. Read more information on the Lutheran view.

While unlike the LCMS, Baptist churches do not require subscription to a creedal statement or "body of doctrine" as such. However, one of the major doctrinal differences has to do with what the Bible teaches about Baptism and the Lord's Supper.

Lutherans regard Baptism and the Lord's Supper as divinely instituted sacraments. Our confessional writings describe them as the Gospel in "visible" form. They are, therefore, at the heart and center of the Lutheran faith.

Baptist churches do not regard Baptism as a means of grace through which the Holy Spirit works to create and strengthen faith. Therefore, they reject infant Baptism. They also place great emphasis on the mode of Baptism (immersion required).

Likewise, the Lord's Supper is generally regarded by Baptists as merely a commemorative meal, not a sacrament in which the body and blood of Christ is truly present in and with the bread and wine for the forgiveness of sins.

Baptist churches also typically stress the role of "free will" in conversion, and (accordingly) speak of faith in Christ as being attained through a person's "choice" or "decision."

Lutherans, on the other hand, believe that faith itself is a gift of God's grace and is brought about not by the "free will" of human beings but by the power of God's Spirit working through God's means of grace, the Word and Sacraments.

For more information, see FAQs on Salvation.

While there are a number of significant theological differences between the LCMS and the Episcopal Church (e.g., the issue of authority in the church, especially as it relates to the doctrine of Scripture as the inspired and inerrant Word of God; the nature of the sacraments as means of grace; the precise understanding of the doctrine of justification; the question of what it means to be a "confessional" church), perhaps the most obvious difference has to do with the Episcopalian view of apostolic succession (which pertains equally to more "conservative" offshoots from the Episcopal church).

This difference is summarized as follows in Lewis Spitz's booklet "Our Church and Others":

Episcopalians attach great important to the theory of the apostolic succession. They insist that the apostles ordained bishops, these in turn ordained their successors, and so down through the centuries, so that the present-day bishops are the successors of the apostles through an unbroken chain.

Scripture knows nothing of such a theory. Episcopalians hold that only bishops who have received their authority in this way can properly ordain ministers and that without such Episcopal ordination a minister cannot validly perform the sacraments.

For more information about denominational differences, you may read Churches in America by Thomas Manteufel, available from Concordia Publishing House (800-325-3040 or cph.org).

While we are not aware of any material that compares the teachings of the Evangelical Free Church of America (EFCA) and the LCMS, perhaps these few observations will be helpful.

Please note there is no formal statement of differences between the LCMS and the EFCA available, since we have had no formal contacts or discussions with the EFCA.

The Evangelical Free Church of America revised its 1950 Statement of Faith, adopting a new Statement of Faith in 2008. The new Statement and additional explanations and resources are available at https://go.efca.org/resources/document/efca-statement-faith.

Although statements of this kind are generally very brief and do not delineate precisely what is meant on topics that are traditionally disputed, it is possible to make some evaluative comments.

It is clear from the statement itself, first of all, that there would be a substantial amount of doctrinal agreement between our churches regarding core teachings, such as the doctrine of Holy Scripture, God, salvation, the church as the body of Christ, and the resurrection.

At the same time, however, those committed to Lutheran confessional doctrine would want to seriously question certain points in this statement.

Point 7 of the EFCA Statement of Faith says that Baptism and the Lord’s Supper “visibly and tangibly express the Gospel,” but they “are not the means of salvation.” Teaching notes for the new Statement comment that the EFCA prefers the term “ordinances” to the word “Sacraments.”

Those same notes also state that “salvation, viz. conversion/regeneration, is not attained through the actual participation of [the ordinances], contra the Roman Catholic Church and the Lutheran Church.”

The notes state that the EFCA position allows for both a memorial view of the Lord’s Supper, as well as a “spiritual presence” view, both views that deny the Real Presence of Christ in the Supper.

The Lutheran church teaches that Christ’s Body and Blood, according to His word and promise, are truly present in the Lord’s Supper (Matt. 26:26-28; 1 Cor. 10:16; 1 Cor. 11:27).

On the basis of scriptural teaching regarding these two Sacraments (not mere “ordinances”), Lutherans have held that they are “means of grace.” That is to say, they are divinely appointed vehicles through which the salvation procured by Christ is conveyed to people (Titus 3:5; Matt. 26:26-28) — just as the spoken Word of the Gospel is a divine means of conveying God’s grace and forgiveness to people (Rom. 1:16-17).

The EFCA, along with many evangelicals, seems to hold to a view of these Sacraments that we would find contrary to biblical teaching.

Point 9 of the EFCA Statement refers explicitly to their premillennial view of the end times.

The EFCA Statement’s teaching notes comment that they “embrace a premillennialism that consists of Dispensationalism, Progressive Dispensationalism and Historic Premillennialism, along with pre, mid, or post tribulation positions.” They believe any one of those positions may be embraced but that one “must not deny the other positions.”

This stands in strong contrast to the Augsburg Confession, which expressly rejects millennialist teaching (Article XVII). You might find the 1989 CTCR report on The End Times to be helpful on this topic, especially the chart at the end of the report.

Several times the teaching notes for the new EFCA Statement of Faith comment that a certain Evangelical Free doctrinal position is only one of several acceptable positions, or that a position may be acceptable but not exclusive. This stands in contrast to the Lutheran Confessions, which affirm certain doctrines and at times “reject and condemn” other positions as “incorrect and contrary to God’s Word.”

From a Lutheran perspective what may be regarded by some as non-essential or acceptable positions may in fact directly impinge on the biblical Gospel or biblical truth. For example, the denial of infant baptism in some circles is sometimes dismissed as a point on which differences must be permitted, when in fact in most cases fundamental understandings of the nature of sin, the means of grace, faith, etc. are at issue.

This is a difficult question to answer in the abstract, for a few reasons:

1. There are dozens of denominations of "Methodist" background and character which differ greatly from each other in theology and practice, from "holiness" churches to "Pentecostal" churches to "mainline" Methodist churches;

2. Even Methodist churches of the same denomination often differ to some degree in their theology and practice, since Methodist churches, as a rule, tend to be more concerned with "deeds" than "creeds."

Therefore, one might say the most fundamental difference between Lutheran and many Methodist churches is that the Lutheran church is a confessional church (i.e., it binds itself and its member congregations to a specific, formal confession of faith) while the Methodist church, in its varied forms, tends not be as concerned with formal "confessions" of faith to which its congregations must subscribe.

The primary differences between Lutheranism and "classical" Methodism rooted in the theology of John Wesley center in Wesley's doctrine of salvation.

Wesley taught, contrary to Lutheran theology, that 1) man is free not only to reject salvation but also to accept it (free salvation) by an act of human will; 2) all people who are obedient to the Gospel according to the measure of knowledge given them will be saved (universal salvation); 3) the Holy Spirit assures man of his salvation directly, through an inner "experience" (sure salvation); 4) Christians in this life are capable of Christian perfection and are commanded by God to pursue it (full salvation).

Wesley also held to a "symbolic" view of the sacraments in contrast to the Lutheran view of the sacraments as real and powerful means of grace.

For more information, you may wish to check the following sources:

Lutheran Cyclopedia, edited by Erwin Lueker, Concordia Publishing House (CPH), page 154, on "Methodist Churches"; American Churches: Beliefs and Practices, by F. E. Mayer, CPH, 1956; The Religious Bodies of America by F. E. Mayer, CPH, 1961.

The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, together with the vast majority of Christian denominations in the United States, does not regard the Mormon church as a Christian church. That is because the official writings of Mormonism deny fundamental teachings of orthodox Christianity.

For example, the Nicene Creed confesses the clear biblical truth that Jesus Christ, the second Person of the Trinity, is "of one substance with the Father." This central article of the Christian faith is expressly rejected by Mormon teaching — thus undermining the very heart of the scriptural Gospel itself.

In a chapter titled "Jesus Christ, the Son of God: Are Mormons Christian?" the president of Brigham Young University (Rex Lee, What Do Mormons Believe? [Salt Lake City: Deseret Book, 1992] summarizes Mormon teaching by stating that the three persons of the Trinity are "not ... one being" (21), but are "separate individuals."

In addition, the Father is regarded as having a body "of flesh and bone" (22). Such teaching is contrary to the Holy Scriptures, destructive to the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and indicative of the fact that Mormon teaching is not Christian.

For more information about beliefs of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints read this document prepared by the Commission on Theology and Church Relations.

While Lutheran theology strongly emphasizes the importance of good works and holy living as fruits of a true and living faith in Jesus Christ, Lutherans also believe that the Bible teaches that Christians will not be “entirely sanctified” and totally free of sin until they reach their home in heaven.

This is one significant difference between the Lutheran Church and those Nazarene churches that teach some form of “entire sanctification.” Although one may find some variation in the beliefs and teachings of Nazarene churches at the local level, other key differences between Lutherans and Nazarenes would typically include:

• Views regarding the nature of conversion
  Nazarenes: man contributes to his conversion by an act of “free will”;
  Lutherans: conversion is completely God's work by the power of the Spirit working through the Word
• The nature of the Sacraments
  Nazarenes: Sacraments are symbolic “reminders” of Christ's presence;
  Lutherans: Sacraments are actual “means of grace” through which God conveys His love and forgiveness,
• And issues relating to the proper distinction between the Law and the Gospel in Holy Scripture.

Perhaps the main difference between The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod and Pentecostal churches is that Pentecostal churches tend to emphasize the importance of personal and spiritual "experiences" (such as "Baptism in the Holy Spirit" and speaking in tongues), while the LCMS emphasizes the importance and centrality of the word and promises of God in Holy Scripture, which remain true and valid regardless of our personal "feelings" or "experiences."

To learn more about the LCMS view of Scripture and its most important teachings, see What Do Lutherans Believe and What About ... the LCMS?

As is the case with most mainline denominations today, there are specific issues such as the ordination of women, abortion, homosexuality, etc., that divide the distinct Presbyterian church bodies — for example, the Presbyterian Church in the USA (PCUSA) and the more conservative Presbyterian Church in America (PCA).

Such differences typically stem from more fundamental differences concerning the authority of Scripture itself. Having said this, the major theological differences between historic Lutheranism and Presbyterianism (and other churches of Calvinistic background and theological orientation) include the following:

1. The centrality of the Gospel. Presbyterian churches tend to emphasize the "glory" or "sovereignty" of God as the central teaching of Scripture, while Lutherans believe that the central teaching of Scripture — and the key to understanding and interpreting the Bible — is the Gospel: the Good News of Salvation for sinners by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.

2. The nature of Christ's atonement. Lutherans believe that when Jesus died on the cross He atoned for the sins of all people of all time — even those who have not or will not come to faith in Christ and will spend eternity in hell.

Some Presbyterian churches teach a "limited atonement" of Christ, i.e., that Christ's death on the cross atoned only for the sins of "the elect" — those who have been predestined from eternity to believe in Christ and will spend eternity with Him in heaven.

3. Predestination. Most Presbyterian churches teach a "double predestination," i.e., that some people are predestined by God from eternity to be saved and others are predestined by God from eternity to be damned.

Lutherans believe that while God, in his grace in Christ Jesus, has indeed chosen from eternity to save those who trust in Jesus Christ, He has not predestined anyone to damnation. Those who are saved are saved by grace alone; those who are damned are damned not by God's choice but because of their own sin and stubbornness. This is a mystery that is incomprehensible to human reason (as are all true Scriptural articles of faith).

4. The authority of Scripture. A fourth difference has to do with the proper use of reason and its relationship to the authority of Scripture.

Lutherans look to Scripture alone as the source of all Christian doctrine, and we hold to the teachings of Scripture even when they are incomprehensible to human reason.

Some Presbyterian churches tend to place human reason alongside Scripture as a source of doctrinal authority, and they seek to bring seemingly paradoxical Scriptural truths into harmony with human reason in ways that (in our view) undermine the truthfulness and authority of Scripture.

5. The Sacraments. Most Presbyterian churches (to a greater or lesser degree) view the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper merely as "signs" or "symbols" of God's grace.

Lutherans believe Baptism and the Lord's Supper (which is the true body and blood of Christ in, with, and under bread and wine) are actual means of God's grace through which the Holy Spirit works to convey and/or strengthen faith.

A more detailed discussion of the differences between Lutherans and Calvinist churches may be found in Churches in America by Thomas Manteufel, available from Concordia Publishing House in St. Louis (800-325-3040 or cph.org).

Just as there are many significant differences in theology and practice between Lutherans of varying denominations, the same is true when it comes to different churches within the Reformed tradition.

Differences exist among Reformed churches even regarding such fundamental issues as the authority of Scripture and the nature and centrality of the doctrine of justification.

Historically, however, most Reformed churches adhere to the five points of Calvinist theology commonly summarized by the acrostic "tulip" as these were set forth at the Synod of Dort (1618-19).

On page 41 in his book, Churches in America, Dr. Thomas Manteufel reviews these five points and explains how they compare and/or contrast with what Lutherans believe regarding these matters.

T (Total Depravity) The Calvinists rightly teach that all descendants of Adam are by nature totally corrupt in spiritual matters. People do not have freedom of the will to turn to God in faith or cooperate in their conversions (Eph. 2:1; John 3:5-6; Rom. 8:7).

U (Unconditional predestination) Scripture does teach that it is by grace that God has predestinated the elect to eternal salvation and given them justifying faith. It is not because of any condition fulfilled by them (2 Tim. 1:9; Eph. 1:4-6; Phil. 1:29). However, the Bible does not teach, as do the Calvinists, that some are predestined for damnation. God wants all to be saved (1 Tim 2:4).

L (Limited atonement) It is true that Christ died for the church and purchased it with His blood (Eph. 5:25; Acts 20:28). Furthermore, His atoning death does not mean that all people are saved (1 Cor. 1:18). However, Jesus died for all (2 Cor. 5:15).

I (Irresistible grace) We agree that God makes us alive by His mighty power, without our aid (Eph. 2:5; John 1:13). But Scripture warns we can resist God’s gracious call (Matt. 23:37; Acts 7:51; 2 Cor. 6:1). And some people do resist God’s grace, or all would be saved (1 Tim 2:4). Furthermore, God warns us not to resist His grace (2 Cor. 6:1; Heb. 4:7).

P (Perseverance in grace) We affirm with Scripture that those who are predestined to salvation cannot be lost but will continue by God’s power to a blessed end (Rom. 8:30; 1 Peter 1:5). Scripture does not teach, however, that those who come to faith cannot lose that faith (Heb. 6:4-6; 10:26-29; Ps. 51:11). God urges His people not to continue in sin but to live in repentance and faith (Rom. 6:1-4).

Churches in America by Dr. Thomas Manteufel; p. 41 (St. Louis: CPH, 1994).

For more information about the Reformed Church as well as other denominations in the United States, you may contact Concordia Publishing House in St. Louis at 800-325-3040 or cph.org and ask for Churches in America, by Thomas Manteufel, stock no. 22-2522.

At the risk of oversimplification, and keeping in mind that individual Lutheran (and Catholic) theologians would undoubtedly disagree about the success of recent Lutheran-Roman Catholic dialogues in lessening or even "resolving" historic doctrinal differences between these two churches, listed below are what the LCMS would regard as some of the major theological differences between the Lutheran Church and the Roman Catholic Church:

1. The authority of Scripture.

Lutherans believe Scripture alone has authority to determine doctrine; the Roman Catholic Church gives this authority also to the pope, the church, and certain traditions of the church.

2. The doctrine of justification.

Lutherans believe a person is saved by God's grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone. The Roman Catholic Church, while at times using similar language, still officially holds that faith, in order to save, must be accompanied by (or "infused with") some "work" or "love" active within a Christian.

3. The authority of the pope.

Unlike the Roman Catholic Church, Lutherans do not believe the office of the papacy as such has any divine authority or that Christians need to submit to the Pope's authority to be "true" members of the visible church.

4. Differences remain about both the number and the nature of the sacraments.

Roman Catholics speak of seven Sacraments while Lutherans tend to speak of only two (or three). More important than number is how the Sacraments are understood.

To take a single example, Lutherans believe that in the Sacrament of the Altar (Communion) Christ’s body and blood are truly present in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper, but they do not accept the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation, which teaches that the elements are permanently changed from the substances of bread and wine to the substances of body and blood.

Transubstantiation is rejected for several reasons: It is a philosophical explanation for a work of Christ’s almighty Word which we can only believe, not explain. In seeking to explain a mystery it changes the plain and simple meanings of God’s Word (Scripture refers to the elements as both bread and wine and body and blood, 1 Cor. 11:26-27).

Transubstantiation leads to the assertion that the body and blood of Christ remain present “even apart from the administration of the Supper” and so encourages veneration of the elements apart from their sacramental use and detracts from the use Christ commands: “Take eat … drink … for the forgiveness of your sins.” Lutheran rejection of transubstantiation should not in any way be taken to mean a denial that Christ’s very body and blood are truly present in the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper for the forgiveness of sins.

5. Differences remain about the role of Mary and the saints.

Unlike Catholics, Lutherans do not believe it is proper or scriptural to offer prayers to saints or to view Mary as in any sense a "mediator" between God and human beings.

While Lutherans believe any doctrinal error has the potential to distort or deny Scripture's teaching regarding salvation, we also believe that anyone (regardless of denominational affiliation) who truly believes in Jesus Christ as Savior will be saved.

Since apostolic times visible Christendom has been divided. Although there are historical, cultural, and sociological factors that have contributed to such division, departure from God's truth revealed to us in the Holy Scriptures must be regarded as the principal cause for such division.

The apostles themselves foresaw and had to deal with such division within early Christian communities (see, for example, Acts 20:25-31).

While the Scriptures are the inerrant source and norm of all doctrine and while God's Truth is one, sinful human beings can and do err. Hence, division occurs in visible Christendom.

The same can be said for modern denominationalism. While there are historical, cultural and sociological factors involved in the formation of denominations, disagreement regarding the understanding and application of biblical doctrine remains the fundamental reason for division between and among them.

We hold that there can be only one Truth, and that denominations exist because some Christians have departed from what is faithful to biblical doctrine.

In spite of the divided state of Christendom, we in The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod remain committed to the quest for external unity in the church based on agreement in doctrine. We believe that this is not an option, but is God's will.