Sept. Forum Letter Reports on LCMS

[Charles_Austin]

Steven, listen carefully. If "pure doctrine "is a gift, then it is a gift.
Therefore if someone says I don't have that pure doctrine, then I don't have the gift.
And they say they do.

[Dave Likeness]

"Pure Doctrine" resides in Holy Scripture.
The way to salvation is through faith in
Jesus Christ.  He died and rose again so
that all who believe in Him might have
the forgiveness of sins and the free gift
of eternal life in heaven.

This Gospel message is pure doctrine and
is the heart of Christianity.  This clear
message of salvation is proclaimed by many
denominations.  No denomination can
ever claim they are the only one with
pure doctrine.  The Holy Spirit works faith
in the heart of people who are saved.

[peter_speckhard]

Steven, listen carefully. If "pure doctrine "is a gift, then it is a gift.
Therefore if someone says I don't have that pure doctrine, then I don't have the gift.
And they say they do.

So what? Do you think everyone has pure doctrine?

[Harry Edmon]

I think this would be a good time to bring in Thesis XX from Walther's Law and Gospel (Reader's Edition, CPH 2010):

You are not rightly distinguishing Law and Gospel in the Word of God if a person's salvation is made to depend on his association with the visible orthodox Church and if you claim that salvation is denied to every person erring in any article of faith.

[peter_speckhard]

I think this would be a good time to bring in Thesis XX from Walther's Law and Gospel (Reader's Edition, CPH 2010):

You are not rightly distinguishing Law and Gospel in the Word of God if a person's salvation is made to depend on his association with the visible orthodox Church and if you claim that salvation is denied to every person erring in any article of faith.

I don't recall anyone doing either of those things, at least in this forum.

[Charles_Austin]

I wrote:
If "pure doctrine "is a gift, then it is a gift. Therefore if someone says I don't have that pure doctrine, then I don't have the gift. And they say they do.

Peter writes:
So what? Do you think everyone has pure doctrine?

I comment:
Do you think anyone has it, except you?

[peter_speckhard]

I wrote:
If "pure doctrine "is a gift, then it is a gift. Therefore if someone says I don't have that pure doctrine, then I don't have the gift. And they say they do.

Peter writes:
So what? Do you think everyone has pure doctrine?

I comment:
Do you think anyone has it, except you?

Well if you don't think everyone has it, how do you know who does and who doesn't? Or do you think mutually-exclusive doctrines can both be God's pure Word?

[George Erdner]

If there is no such thing as "pure doctrine", then no one has any reason to ever correct anyone else for errors. Ever.

[Charles_Austin]

I was asking you, Peter, and hoped the line of conversation would not get yanked around (as is the wont here) to "well, smartass, what about you!"?
The references to "purity of doctrine" seem to be an LCMS usage. And the cane-lashings laid upon the rest of us seem to be because we are alleged to have pooped on that pure doctrine. Hence my question.

P.S. to Mr. Erdner:
The "pure doctrine" matter is up for discussion. Errors in historical fact, grammar, usage of words, and - at times - spellings are not.

[peter_speckhard]

I was asking you, Peter, and hoped the line of conversation would not get yanked around (as is the wont here) to "well, smartass, what about you!"?
The references to "purity of doctrine" seem to be an LCMS usage. And the cane-lashings laid upon the rest of us seem to be because we are alleged to have pooped on that pure doctrine. Hence my question.

P.S. to Mr. Erdner:
The "pure doctrine" matter is up for discussion. Errors in historical fact, grammar, usage of words, and - at times - spellings are not.

Charles, look upstream. I asked you a question point blank and you didn't answer it, you responded with a question of you own. So it is more than a a little ironic that you accuse me of yanking the conversation around by answering your question with a question. My questions to you remain. Do you think everyone has pure doctrine? If not, do you think it is arrogant of you to think that? How do you know who has pure doctrine and who doesn't? Can mutually-exclusive doctrines both be God's pure Word?

For the record, I think lots of people have pure doctrine. I don't think the issue is an LCMS one, it is a Lutheran one generally, as in "God's Name is kept holy when the Word of God is taught in its truth and purity, and we, as children of God, lead holy lives according to it. Help us to do this, dear Father in heaven! But anyone who teaches or lives contrary to God's Word profanes the name of God among us. Protect us from this, heavenly Father!"

Those words presuppose that purity of doctrine is possible but that even "among us" it is possible for people to teach contrary to God's Word. In other words, the prayer is not about what pagans teach, it is about what professed Christians teach, and the possibility that such teaching will stray from the "truth and purity" for which we pray and which we receive, when and where we do, as a pure gift, not an achievement. So by saying some Christians have "impure doctrine" we aren't saying we know they aren't saved. 

[Harry Edmon]

I think this would be a good time to bring in Thesis XX from Walther's Law and Gospel (Reader's Edition, CPH 2010):

You are not rightly distinguishing Law and Gospel in the Word of God if a person's salvation is made to depend on his association with the visible orthodox Church and if you claim that salvation is denied to every person erring in any article of faith.

I don't recall anyone doing either of those things, at least in this forum.

I was not claiming any one had done them.  I just found Walther's thesis to be applicable to the discussion.

[Weedon]

Way to go, Pr. Speckhard, pulling us back into our common Catechism for thinking out this issue. And we note again the gift nature: it is something we ASK from our loving heavenly Father and something we beg Him to preserve among us, protecting us from falsifications of His Word.

[mariemeyer]

"Keep a close watch on yourself and on the teaching. Persist in this, for by so doing you will save both yourself and your hearers." 1 Timothy. 4:16   
Study note in Lutheran Study Bible (God alone saves, but the NT depicts human beings as instruments in his saving work.) 

" Watch your life and doctrine closely, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers." NIV

"Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continues in them:for in so doing thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee." KJ

"Yet she will be saved through childbirth – if they continue in faith and love and holiness with self-control." I Timothy 2:16
Study note in Lutheran Study Bible ( "Women are not saved by giving childbirth.")

I call attention to two passages in I Timothy that could be misinterpreted to say that either giving birth or teaching pure doctrine is salvific.  Both texts are not easy to interpret and are given to misinterpretation.  The question here is whether the text supports the final resolve in Resolution 3-10.  "That this convention give thanks to the Lord of the Church for preserving His pure and saving doctrine among us and pray for God given courage to resist the danger of shrinking back from the difficulty of the  Koinonia Project."

Can we of the LCMS honestly state "that our confession is pure, for it is founded in the source of all purity, the Sacred Scriptures?"   I submit that LCMS history reveals our confession of God's truth revealed in the Sacred Scripture has not always been pure.  What  LCMS pastor here can state that his understanding of the Scripture as taught in his sermons has always contained pure doctrine?  Have hearers come to know the pure saving Gospel in spite of less than pure doctrine in sermons and Bible Class?  Yes.  How many present LCMS professors are able to confess that their teaching of doctrine as stated in the Confessions is always been "pure?"  Does this mean that their students are not going out to teach and preach the pure saving Gospel?  No. 

The truth of Scripture is that God saves us even when our doctrine is not pure and our love not prefect. Why, because the righteousness of Christ covers that which remains imperfect and impure in us.

By the grace of God the LCMS has been blessed with men and women committed to faithfully study the Scriptures and the Confessions. By the grace of God the LCMS has been God's instrument in teaching of the pure saving Gospel.  A doctrinal truth of the Holy Scripture that we seem difficult to recognize is that we, individually and as a church body, remain broken, misshapen vessels through which God allows His saving Gospel to be taught for our salvation and for the salvation of others...even when our understanding of doctrine is less than pure and our love for God and our neighbor is less than perfect.   
     
We pray in the Lord's Prayer that God's Name be kept holy among us when He works in and through our teaching of the pure Gospel and by the lives we live as persons who He has recreated to love as God loves us.  We need to pray this petition daily knowing that we remain sinners who in this petition recognize how easily we are tempted by natural reason to in some way add to our distort pure saving Gospel.

Marie

[Brian Stoffregen]

I wrote:
If "pure doctrine "is a gift, then it is a gift. Therefore if someone says I don't have that pure doctrine, then I don't have the gift. And they say they do.

Peter writes:
So what? Do you think everyone has pure doctrine?

I comment:
Do you think anyone has it, except you?

Well if you don't think everyone has it, how do you know who does and who doesn't? Or do you think mutually-exclusive doctrines can both be God's pure Word?

Whatever anyone has is only partial. We can see only dimly. Jesus says that has not revealed everything to us, but the Holy Spirit will continue to reveal the truth as we are able to bear it. If anything, the pure doctrine says that we are not ever pure.

[Weedon]

Deaconess Meyer,

You ask:  Can we of the LCMS honestly state "that our confession is pure, for it is founded in the source of all purity, the Sacred Scriptures?" 

To that I'd say: We can and we ought. But I'd also hasten to add that I was speaking of our Symbols.