LCMS vs PCA vs ACNA (What's the Difference?)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 лис 2020
- The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod (LCMS), Presbyterian Church in America (PCA) and Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) have ares where they are similar, and areas where they disagree. We're going to take a look at those to see how these three confessional church bodies differ.
As far as confessionalism goes, this video is essentially answering "What is the difference betweeen Lutherans, Presbyterians, and Anglicans?"
Very interesting. I started as a Presbyterian, moved to the LCMS for school for my children, as the government schools were collapsing and worshiped with the Anglican's when I was in the Middle East. I was welcomed and felt at home in all three. To God be the Glory
As an LCMS Lutheran, I have been watching some of your videos recently, and I have to say that I really appreciate just how much effort you put into accurately representing Lutheranism. Most of my Christian friends are various other forms of Protestant, and I'm constantly explaining things when they either don't know anything about us or simply confuse us with Roman Catholics.
I love the LCMS church!
As a catholic, how on Earth can someone mistake a lutheran for a catholic? 😳
@@dariocarcano1379 plenty of ways. Where Protestants might wear a plain cross, many Lutherans (myself included) are more likely to wear a crucifix; that throws people off sometimes. While we might disagree about the "how," we both believe that Christ is literally, physically present in the Eucharist, that it's not merely symbolic or "spiritual presence." Our view of baptism is closer to yours, we retain private confession (although we don't mandate it, our liturgy already includes corporate confession and absolution). Our liturgy is going to be more familiar to Roman Catholics than to say, a Baptist or a non-demoninational Christian. Things like that. Plus, some Lutherans consider themselves as being closer to Catholicism than to Protestantism.
It doesn't really bother me. Heck, sometimes it's even funny.
@@dariocarcano1379 You must not know a lot about the Lutheran church (LCMS). Lutheran liturgical service and key parts of doctrine aligns closer to Catholic's more than it does to most other protestant denominations.
66
As a new Christian trying to figure out denominations. These videos have been a blessing. Thank you Lord Jesus for showing me this. and thank you Harvest channel!
I humbly point out that you need to ask yourself, which organisation teaches Christ's infallible truth in every age? You see, Christ promised that every generation would have the same access to his infallible doctrinal truth which the first believers had. Clearly "Bible as Final Authority" does not provide this, because there are not different versions of doctrinal truth. It is an historical reality that Christ established HIS church, and promised it would teach HIS truth, in HIS name, in EVERY GENERATION until the end. In your search for truth you will obviously long for something other than the doctrinal confusion and continual division that is offered by Protestant denominations with their practice of Bible as Final Authority. You would need to move past that and askyourself, which organisation can claim to possess ALL 4 Marks of being ONE in doctrine, HOLY in it's serious adherents, CATHOLIC spread across the world, APOSTOLIC in both succession and in origin of doctrine. I recommend you refer to the "Catholic Answers" website. Protestants who emerse themselves in the tuth of history, cease to be Protestant. There is an army of Protestant converts in every age, not least in our own time. Peace be with your spirit, my friend.
@dougy6237 when Catholics stop worshipping false Idols return thou shall not make for yourself a graven image back into the catholic 10 commandments and Put Jesus before Mary then I will consider joining.
I go to an old small town PCA church. We also believing in the baptism of babies, but that it does not save that child from their sins (as stated in the video). In our church, that person being baptized takes vows on what they believe (ex. “Do you believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ?” but they are more technical than that). When babies are baptized, the parents and the church take vows to raise the child according to the will of the Lord.
that was not stated in the video
I’m a new Christian in the process of figuring out which denomination to be a part of, and your videos are incredibly helpful! Thank you so much for the work that you do. You are a blessing! ❤
Thank you, Emily!
The doors are always open over here in the ACNA 😉
@@C.S.Sperry Thanks! 😊
This video is very helpful! Thank you! I'm prayerful considering attending either an ACNA or a LCMS church. I came to faith in the Baptist/Non-Denominational side of the church, but I have come to value and believe in liturgical and sacramental traditions. I have never been to this kind of church, so I'm a little shy, but I hope to learn more and put down roots. Thanks again for the work that went into this comparison video! ^.^
You would be most welcomed at my ACNA church. We have lots of Baptist and Non denominational converts like us. I especially like that there isn't a bitterness against our old denominations just clear teaching on the the parts that were in Biblical error.
I took am considering LCMS. I've found Bryan Wolfmueller's channel so helpful in explaining Lutheran beliefs, liturgy, etc.
Man, I couldn't imagine the amount of research going into this video. Thanks so much for all that work and effort!
I am a PCA pastor and enjoy your content. The Lord be with you.
I moved, and there was no PCA church (my preference) in my area, there is however the Canadian version of LCMS. I never would have gone to a Lutheran church if I didn't come across this, thank you.
This is terrific. There is the official 2019 BCP which is now received by the ACNA.
Thanks for these amazing, well made videos. God bless your work man.
Thanks for the videos, especially this one!
Having been a part of two of the three groups mentioned I concur his information is spot on and this is a great channel to share with friends who have questions about certain denominations. If there were an LCMS congregation in my area I think that's where I would be now.
Very helpful video. I'm sharing on social media!
Thanks so much Jeremy, I appreciate it!
Thanks for these videos, I thought I was already a subscriber, will be now!
I love your videos! Thank you for always being so clear and informative. You have answered so many of my questions without me having to ask.
Thanks Jonathan!
How is it that such a thoroughly researched, impartial, and educational channel has so few subscribers and views? I appreciate your effort and love having the privilege of learning about all of these various denominations and their various doctrines; thank you! I hope your channel blows up.
QUESTION: Where do you typically go to research this info? Also, do you know of any other YT channels, books, or other resources that compile similar information on the various denominations and their doctrines?
Thanks for your kind comments. The research I do would only be possible in the digital age. First I look to the denomination's own resources... e.g. bylaws, constitution, statement of faith, catechism, book of discipline. I am looking for certain answers that some denominations don't address, so I will do targeted google searches on those keywords on Denominational websites. I may buy ebooks the denomination has put out on doctrine if resources are rare. I will refer to blogs or church websites of credentialed ministers. I will watch videos made by pastors or listen to podcasts. I try and dig up Denominational magazines or publishing houses' materials. For old denominations there may be scanned public domain books. I also will use the internet archive to dig into old versions of Denominational websites.
Every video I make I have to try new methods... but I am not content with "I don't know" as an answer to the important questions.
The end result is often information that can't be easily found anywhere else in an organized way. So I hope this channel will be helpful to people looking into denominations long into the future.
There are some websites that cover denominations, but they are mostly shallow and don't reference sources. I am working on my own (readytoharvest.com) but it is a work in progress. It is based on the same info from this channel.
There are good youtube resources on the denomination level, for example on Lutheran there is "Ask the Pastor" or on Presbyterians there is Matthew Everhard, and a basically unlimited source of Catholic material.
However, I am not aware of any channels like mine that try to cover everything. In fact, my search for this kind of research and failure to find it led me to make my own videos.
@Johnny Rep That’s me but I didn’t know what to call myself!😂😂
@Johnny Rep I am a PCA member but have spent a lot of time with the Baptist, Methodist, Nondenominational fellowship type churches, but I keep finding that the Westminster confession of faith suits my understanding of the Bible. I have found amazing Christians in all denominations though.
@@ReadyToHarvest I'm not even Christian or American, but I found your channel pretty amusing. I never thought there are many denominations of the religion.
ACNA is so interesting.
I think an interesting comparison would be one between the NALC, ECO, and the ACNA, all denominations which split from mainline denominations in the early 2010's.
*fascinating.* so much history.
As a PCA member I'd say all those denominations are based.
The sheer size of the LCMS compared to the PCA is astonishing
That's because the LCMS is the original US lutheran denomination. The PCA are just presbyterians who left the PCUSA due to homosexuality, abortion, and female pastors.
Incredible overview, I've been struggling and torn between Lutheranism and Anglicanism, this has been so helpful to discern the differences...yet I'm still so unsure, I hope you'll continue to provide more Anglican and Lutheran content (and perhaps on the universal level beyond America to have an insightful overview of how these churches are received globally and also perhaps how their worship/teaching/culture differs). Thank you so much!
that was really useful, thanks so much and God bless you
Would love a video on the North American Baptists or the NAB for short.
You should do one for ACNA, Anglican Personal Ordinariates, and Church of England
Well researched brother. Just out of interest what denomination are you part of? If any?
Cool graphics!
LCMS here. It's interesting because casual observers might conclude that there are very little differences illustrated. But for those who have studied these things in depth, there is a vast gulf separating Calvin and Luther's theology. Even when you drill down further within each of these denominations there are enormous practical differences with doctrine and practice. The LCMS is very different on paper than in practice. Luther wouldn't even recognize many LCMS congregations. Why? Lex orandi lex credendi... Thanks for the video. 👍
The PCA does not affirm a one-time salvation experience. Decision theology falls in the domain of Methodist and Baptist denominations, not those that are Reformed.
Small critique, the comparison between “real” presence in the Lords supper vs “Spiritual” presence is not very accurate. All of these traditions would affirm a real presence, we just disagree on the mode in which Christ is present
Would you now include the Global Methodist Church within this group?
Might want to research that 1/5 for LCMS again. It’s more like 3/5 or 4/5, depending on how irresistible grace and perseverance are understood. Unconditional election is definitely the LCMS view.
Thanks for your input. It's hard to nail this one down exactly because there are varying views within the LCMS. Though there are those in the LCMS who hold to Unconditional Election, I don't believe that we can say that the LCMS as a whole accepts it in the same meaning that Reformed folks do. For example, the LCMS website positively quotes Dr. Thomas Manteufel in saying: "the Bible does not teach, as do the Calvinists, that some are predestined for damnation." www.lcms.org/about/beliefs/faqs/denominations
@@ReadyToHarvest
For Lutherans, the Elect are elected to belief, in contradiction to their default hell-bound condition of disbelief.
The non-Elect are hell-bound by default, according to their default condition of disbelief. God doesn’t contradict it.
So, LCMS Lutherans are on the Unconditional Election side because the topic for them has to do with the Elect, not the devil and his angels or others.
@@zarnoffa understood. This is why Lutherans don't hold to the Calvinist doctrine of unconditional election. Lutheran unconditional election is different. So in a comparison like this where we compare Lutherans to Calvinists it is right to say they deny that point of calvinism. They may have a doctrine with the same name, but it is a different doctrine. I am not making a judgment on which is correct, simply that there is a distinction.
@@ReadyToHarvest
Ok thanks. btw, in your latest video, I think you mean “limited atonement” in the graphic around 4:40, unless I have it backward. I think your videos are excellent and accurate and a really good resource. Thanks.
@@zarnoffa Ha. Nice catch. Mistype. Too bad UA-cam doesn't let us correct videos!
Hi! Great video 🙂 Love that topics (differences between denominations) - especially because as a German student of theology so I can learn more about that huge number of denominations in the US.
But is the LCMS really bigger than the ELCA? I thought the ELCA had around 1,3 Million people more than the LCMS?
(Sorry for my bad english - still learning 🙂)
The ELCA is indeed much larger than the LCMS. I think the video said the LCMS was the largest theologically conservative Lutheran denomination in the USA.
Nothing wrong with your English (but I'd say "so I can learn").
@@doubledee9675 Oh thank you - that was something where I used a construction I was used to from the German language 😅🙈 So thank you for telling me that!
@@flo.meidinger Not a problem - and your English is vastly better than my German.
@@doubledee9675 Yeah - German is really hard to learn. Or at least people often sah that… 🙈😅
Update: the PCA has voted to leave the NAE. None of these 3 Churches are members, although I do think the PCA allows for local congregations to join or partner with the NAE, even if the PCA as a whole doesn't.
The ACNA has dioceses or whatever that are called the Reformed Episcopal Church. They are not as "high church" and their services and practices are a bit different than the rest of the ACNA.
There really should be a third categorization of Protestantism in America. People often only label the Seven Sisters as Mainline, but I really don’t see any of these three as truly “Evangelical” … they’re just conservative, and those are not synonymous.
What is the difference between something being a sacrament and it being an ordinance?
No difference - certain denominations call them ordinances and others call them sacraments.
In my experience, the ELCA would claim to be a confessional body. The PECUSA is a confessional church, but they are very low-key regarding the 39 articles
Some ELCA churches, yes, but the denomination as a whole? Not a chance.
PCA believes in real presence at communion.. just because it's a spiritual presence does not make it any less of a real presence. The difference isn't real vs spiritual presence, the difference is corporal vs spiritual (corporal meaning physical/bodily). And the ACNA adheres to the 39 articles which clearly state Christ's presence in communion is not corporal.. so ACNA and PCA are officially on the same page.
Corporeal vs Pnuematic, this is a goof point of clarification.
Clicked this video because my wife grew up LCMS and I grew up PCA lol
Can someone tell me what a "one-time salvation experience" means?
Once saved, always saved. AKA False doctrine.
Have you ever thought about posting your content on alternative platforms such as Bitchute? Many like me want to support your channel but not youtube.
Silas, I have used Bitchute for other projects of mine in the past, but I have not done so for this channel. I may do so though. It would not be all that difficult to reupload over there. Thanks for asking.
@@ReadyToHarvest that would be greatly appreciated. This is really good content that you are producing.
My LCMS church has Elders.
I know this is an old comment, but elders in the LCMS are not ordained like Pastors are. The elders in the other denominations are using a different idea when they mean elder. For the LCMS, Elders are men from the congregation who are called to help support the pastoral office.
I'm curious where you got the information that the LCMS approves of administering baptism by sprinkling. Lutherans in general baptise only by pouring and immersion, but not sprinkling. I'm not LCMS, but the LCMS hymnal (the Lutheran Service Book) specifies in the rubrics: "The pastor pours water three times on the head...". I've never seen nor heard of a Lutheran baptism that wasn't administered by either pouring or immersion. I imagine the only time sprinkling would be acceptable is in an emergency situation.
That's interesting. I hadn't heard that before. I was curious if the Book of Concord had more information, but I didn't find anything concrete about mode of baptism like I would in the Westminster Confession. I did notice that Luther in his Large Catechism Part 4 makes two passing references to sprinkling.
45 For that is the reason why these two things are done in Baptism, namely, that the body, which can apprehend nothing but the water, *is sprinkled,* and, in addition, the word is spoken for the soul to apprehend.
78 But we need not again be *sprinkled* with water; for though we were put under the water a hundred times, it would nevertheless be only one Baptism, although the operation and signification continue and remain.
The mode of baptism is clearly not the focus of either passage. Similarly, 36 seems to indicate pouring, but again in a passing reference:
36 For by suffering the water to be *poured* upon you, you have not yet received Baptism in such a manner that it benefits you anything; but it becomes beneficial to you if you have yourself baptized with the thought that this is according to God’s command and ordinance, and besides in God’s name, in order that you may receive in the water the promised salvation. Now, this the fist cannot do, nor the body; but the heart must believe it.
I didn't find anything else related to mode via the search function at bookofconcord.org so I find it a bit surprising that sprinkling would be forbidden given at least the passing references and as an outsider.
Is there a better source for these sorts of practices if I wanted to find out more?
@@oracleoftroy
I'm not sure I would go as far as to say administering baptism by aspersion is "forbidden", as much as it's simply not generally done. In fact, they would still be valid baptisms (if administered with water the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in the context of a trinitarian Christian congregation). But whether it's a valid mode or whether it's an acceptable mode aren't really the same issue. It can still be valid even if it's done in a way that isn't generally acceptable.
Acceptable modes of baptism are most directly addressed in official liturgical resources of Lutheran churches, such as liturgical books and manuals or commentaries on the liturgy. The Book of Concord doesn't address the mode of baptism because Lutherans didn't disagree with the Roman Catholics on how it should be administered: by pouring or immersion.
Baptism by sprinkling is an innovation inconsistent with the recieved traditions of the church. I'm not sure when it became a thing, but it doesn't appear to have been a concern among the Lutheran reformers so it likely wasn't put forward as a valid practice yet. It seems to be a reformed innovation. The earliest source we have concerning the modes or baptism is the Didache with origins in the first century. Didache, Ch 7: "But if you have not living water, baptize into other water; and if you can not in cold, in warm. But if you have not either, pour out water thrice upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit." This has remained the norm since apostolic times.
In Luther's large catechism section on baptism, there are at least as many references to pouring (including a "handful of water" 4.16) than to sprinkling. The two instances where sprinkling are mentioned, especially 4.78, seem to be an allusion to Christ's blood which makes us clean. Here he's talking about repentance and forgiveness, and that through the blood of Christ our hearts are sprinkled clean and we have access to God the Father. Hebrews 9 and 10 seem to be primarily what is being referenced, and not specifically a mode of baptism.
"Since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water." Hebrews 10.21-22
The Book of Concord does address the Lutheran stance on the liturgy: that we generally retain the rites and ceremonies we inherited for celebrating the sacraments. Concerning the Mass, the liturgy of Holy Communion, the Augsburg Confession states: "Nearly all the usual ceremonies are also preserved" (art. 24). The same general principle is how Lutherans approach baptism: nearly all the usual ceremonies are also preserved, except those that contradict scripture. The usual baptismal ceremony we inherited was by pouring (and immersion), so Lutherans continued with the historic practice rather than embrace unnecessary innovation.
I don't have any specific LCMS resources I can direct you to, but here's commentary on baptism from the Manual on the Liturgy for the Lutheran Book of Worship (Augsburg, 1979):
"Two forms are suggested: pouring and immersion. Mere sprinkling--not to mention touching the candidate's head with a damp finger--is undesirable and should be avoided. The amount of water used does not of course affect the validity of the sacrament, but an ample quantity of water should he used to show symbolically the washing of baptism. Baptism by pouring has been the usual practice of western Christians for many centuries."
I've never seen nor heard anything from any LCMS source that would make me think that this doesn't also explain their position or the position of confessional Lutherans as a whole. I know there's a similar manual published by Concordia Publishing that likely says roughly the same thing. Perhaps that would best source specifically for an LCMS position, though the rubrics in the liturgy itself make their position clear.
The bottom line is that Lutherans just don't generally baptize by sprinkling. I was flabbergasted when I heard the assertion made on this (and another) video about Lutherans. It's just simply not true, with the possibility of a few random exceptions outside the overwhelming norm of the entire tradition. The only possible exception I can think of is a baptism administered in an emergency situation, but that would be the exception to the norm and not indicative of what actually is the normal practice. If you go look at the baptismal compilation video on this channel you'll see that every Lutheran baptism was administered by pouring, as has every Lutheran baptism of any synod I've ever witnessed (with the exception of some immersion baptisms). In some ways it is a small, nitpicky thing, but the assertion this video makes on baptism modes is simply and plainly wrong and I wanted to make sure the record was corrected. The information on this channel is very accurate in general, with one blatant exception being this assertion about Lutherans and baptism.
@@lukemwills I was being sloppy in my post when I said "forbidden" and merely had in mind the mode of baptism as practiced within the LCMS, and not regarding what would be acceptable for one converting to LCMS, so thanks for bringing more precise about the language. Your description of an acceptable baptism aligns with what I understand the Lutheran position to be and matches the practice in the PCA as I see it.
I guess now that I watched one video on this channel, youtube started recommending other videos. He has one specifically on the LCMS in which he cites from their FAQ.
One question asked is: "QUESTION: The LCMS uses the “sprinkle” method of baptism, if you will. The people of the Bible, including Jesus, were baptized using the immersion method. Why doesn't our church follow the way Jesus was baptized by John?"
The answer never challenges the assumption that the LCMS "sprinkles" people in baptism, but instead answers purely from the angle that the text of the Bible doesn't support that baptism is only by immersion. And when I search for "sprinkle", I see articles that reference the same verses Presbyterians would cite to make the case for sprinkling being a Biblical mode of baptism.
The concluding paragraph seems relevant, and was the closest thing I have seen to an official LCMS position on sprinkling:
"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."
This seems quite affirming of sprinkling without the aversion you express in your op.
The more I look into it, the more I wonder if the 'emergency situation only' aversion to sprinkling as described in your op is unique to your tradition, or at least not as universal as your op indicates. Everything I've been able to find from Lutheran sources seems to list it as a valid mode without any clarification a preference for the other modes when administrating in the Lutheran church. But given that the LSB explicitly instructs pastors to pour the water three times (as you pointed out), I wouldn't be surprised if LCMS almost exclusively uses pouring.
_"Baptism by sprinkling is an innovation inconsistent with the received traditions of the church. I'm not sure when it became a thing, but it doesn't appear to have been a concern among the Lutheran reformers so it likely wasn't put forward as a valid practice yet."_
Well, given that Luther explicitly referenced the practice as I quoted from his large catechism, it was known to him and he didn't seem to think he need to dissuade people from practicing it, but seems affirming of the practice (if I may read into his passing references). My tentative theory based on what I've seen is that aversion to sprinkling is the later tradition given that the only explicitly negative citation I've seen is your 1979 source.
Anyway, fascinating discussion. Thanks for your research and contributions, I learned a lot!
I have heard a Lutheran say that God doesn’t micromanage the exact way things are done in worship, including baptism. It’s not the water itself that saves, but the promise of God, along with faith in Christ, with water, symbolizing the washing away of sins, done in the name of the Trinity. If so, the manner in which it is done is left to Christian freedom, or adiaphora.
I was baptized in the Lutheran church in Germany (EKD) and they only baptized with sprinkling.
Wow. As a lifelong catholic new to ACNA i understood next to none of these words😂 ohhhh lawd.
I humbly point out that you need to ask yourself, which organisation teaches Christ's infallible truth in every age? You see, Christ promised that every generation would have the same access to his infallible doctrinal truth which the first believers had. Clearly "Bible as Final Authority" does not provide this, because there are not different versions of doctrinal truth. It is an historical reality that Christ established HIS church, and promised it would teach HIS truth, in HIS name, in EVERY GENERATION until the end. In your search for truth you will obviously long for something other than the doctrinal confusion and continual division that is offered by Protestant denominations with their practice of Bible as Final Authority. You would need to move past that and askyourself, which organisation can claim to possess ALL 4 Marks of being ONE in doctrine, HOLY in it's serious adherents, CATHOLIC spread across the world, APOSTOLIC in both succession and in origin of doctrine. I recommend you refer to the "Catholic Answers" website. Protestants who emerse themselves in the tuth of history, cease to be Protestant. There is an army of Protestant converts in every age, not least in our own time. Peace be with your spirit, my friend.
LCMS Lutherans pour in Baptism, at least this is my experience.
These three denominations are the last bastion of hope for the Biblically faithful Protestant traditions.
So, what's your denomination? Or do you have one even?
Just as an FYI, the LCMS does not ordain Deacons. Deacon is a lay position and not every church has them. The only ordained office is Pastor.
Why do you say that the ACNA is the largest confessional church within the Episcopal denomination, when in your video on the ACNA you mention it has 127,624 members in 972 congregations... and ECUSA has 1,698,972 members in the US alone? What am I missing?
The episcopal church isn't confessional. They don't hold to them anymore. They're not real churches. They're false gospels. The ACNA is the largest that actually holds to the 39 articles and book of common prayer.
What is the deal with ACNA refusing to call the Bible 'inerrant' yet still use it as the ultimate standard for Truth? Do they just not like the word inerrant for some reason and prefer to use another word that means the same thing or do they actually allow for opinions that the Bible nay have errors? Could someone from the ACNA help me understand this? I hear it all the time about them, but I don't understand the reasoning for the position.
This is an odd comparison ACNA has 126,700 or so members but TEC it’s parent has 1.8 million. Episcopal-Anglican spin offs from the Church of England total 18 different denominations in the US. It’s a mess. BCP 1928, 1979, 2010, 2018, etc. lots of variations on a similar theme.
Shouldn't there be an explanation of what a 'confessional church' is? That was a confusing beginning to the video with zero attempt to explain how these can be both the largest and second largest. A connection to another video or explanation in the description would help. I went to wikipedia but you can't expect that everyone in your audience is on board with what these distinctions between protestant churches mean. As a Catholic I find it confusing that there are churches that aren't confessional I thought that was why all the denominations exist, because they don't believe the same thing as those they broke from.
Thank you. I'm aLCMS Lutheran and agree with the facts you stated. Peace
its called Deuterocanon not apocrypha
The ACNA actually uses both. They're the most open to the deuterocanonical books being scripture.
I am glad to say he lost me. But I am careful what I listen to and if he is correct or if any is curved. But good info
4:52 it's not entirely accurate to say that the LCMS holds to total depravity. The way that TD is often taught is that through the lapse into sin, man is corrupted down to his very nature. Lutherans would affirm that the nature ascribed to human beings at creation has not been corrupted, but that the human person bears a corrupted condition.
I'm not sure I see the difference. Or are you saying there are people out there that teach that the fall retroactively corrupted human nature at creation?
Must be a slow week!
PCA also know as the church f Jango Fett.
What?
Confessional is a misleading term. I accept and study my confessions but don’t weaponise them
I hate to tell you, but the ELCA is confessional as well, as an ordained pastor confessional subscription was part of my ordination rite. The majority of ELCA pastors abide by the confessions as they also were ordained under confessional subscription. You may want to dig a little deeper into your research instead of just throwing out the extreme one offs that I have seen on this channel. Just my two cents. Peace.
The definition of confessional is not simply that a denomination has confessions. ELCA does not enforce adherence to confessions so it is not confessional.
@@ReadyToHarvest I beg to differ. I really think it is funny that enforcing adherence to the confessions includes positions that are not in the confessions but are part of Lutheran Orthodoxy. I think yhou need to rework your understanding of confessional adherance.
@@DavidCotePhotography As an ELCA Lutheran lay person, I've got to say that Joshua is closer to the truth. We do not enforce adherence to our confessional documents.
@@mj6493 In a sense you are right, there is no tribunal set up to ensure confessional subscription. But it is part of the rite of ordination, and if your pastor is not adhering to the confessions, that is something that needs to be addressed by the congregation to the pastor. But to say that the ELCA does not have confessional subscription is not correct, but it is correct that there are no enforcement mechanisms in place, which as a Lutheran pastor is very frustrating. I take my confessional subscription very seriously. Unfortunately, others do not. Your mileage may vary.
@@DavidCotePhotography Thank you, Pastor, for taking your subscription to the confessions seriously. Those of us in the pews appreciate it.
Why to go Luther. You left em with a mess!!!!
Which Denomination Would I Favor?
Absolution? = If I Feel Like It, Sometimes I can be regretful of things. I know what it's like to keep hatred & regret bottled up inside, So I might want to open up. You want to know what it's like, Dear Reader? Well, by keeping all those secrets your whole life... makes you feel insane & completely bitter towards others! So = Anglican.
The Remaining 4 Ordinances? Only Matrimony Should Be Absolutely Required of the 4! Otherwise, I don't feel like my marriage to the Woman I would love is legitimate! So = Anglican.
Baptismal Method? I Prefer Sprinkling, Tho Pouring & Immersion Should Never Be Used on Infants! So = Lutheran &/or Presbyterian.
Baptismal Seriousness? Just Symbolic! = Presbyterian.
Confirmation? = Should be Optional, Personally No = Presbyterian.
Holy Presence in Communion? Since It's All Symbolic, It's Just Spiritual Presence! Since Nobody Dresses Up as the Savior, During a Sermon! So = Presbyterian.
Belief in the Apocrypha? If it's not canon, then I would only read it during free time. However, it may not be important anyway. So Why Bother? So = All 3 Seem Fine, But Presbyterian Mostly Wins Out Here.
Inerrant Bible Belief? I Personally Don't Believe the Bible is 100% Accurate, Especially on Everything! In Fact, I Hardly would find anything true in it. It was written by Men of Ancient Times, who were completely biased &/or ignorant of the world at large! But If I had to choose which of the 3 are correct, it would be the 1 closest to my personal agendas. So = Anglican... for at least they admit, they can be Wrong! Which makes them more open to Bible Debates!! I guess that's why they have the Apocrypha! So why do the Lutherans have it, if they believe ALL the Lutheran Bibles are Unquestionable?!
Literal 6 Day Creation? No, I might believe it took 6 days to create just a Planet... But an Entire Universe?! Forget About It!... So when it comes down to the Mythos, The Lutherans Must Be The Most Wrong!!! Especially since they have the most Apocrypha in their bibles, Out of the 3 Denominations Here!!! & Didn't They Say Their Bibles Were 100% Unquestionable?! So I'm seeing them more as a Stupid, Egotistical Cult! So = Anglican &/or Presbyterian!
One Time Salvation Experience? If anyone should receive Salvation, it should be at their final hour of life. Where they can be judge accordingly! So no, I don't believe a 1 time good point should stick from Age 22... if you got a bad point at Age 67. So = Lutheran &/or Anglican.
TO BE CONTINUED IN PART 2!!
Part 1 Score Only: Lutheran = 3, Presbyterian = 6, Anglican = 6.
Have you already decided ?
to anyone outside organized religion, who cares?... the differences between the Abrahamic religions are irrelevant.. kudos to you for being objective and factual... but to a layman and an atheist the differences only go to prove that 1 Corinthians 14:33 KJV is a blatant lie and NOT god's word.... may you all find comfort in your understanding of the sky fairy.... stay safe.
Tawhid and Trinity are mutually exclusive, so a swing and a miss right out the gate. You know you dont get any prizes for being correct, right? On your view, we are all going to have the same ultimate fate. So just relax and act like you believe what you say you do.