Read the ELCA Articles that Caused a Huge Uproar

1/30/2013

Bible-believing Lutherans were upset a few years ago when they learned of numerous heretical and unorthodox articles from the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. They were posted on the ELCA's official website under a section meant to explain the ELCA's beliefs and teachings, called “Dig Deeper.” The ELCA leadership took a great deal of well deserved heat for what the articles said and even though they never repudiated the articles or the teaching, with no apology, they removed them from elca.org.

Now with the help of a website which archives old web pages you can view the articles as they looked in 2009.

Propagating the idea of Universalism (that all people go to heaven) is the ELCA article titled “Salvation” - See here.

The ELCA questions the “Virgin Birth” in this informational page – See here.

The ELCA's “The Bible” page (see here) has a section in which they say “Because Biblical writers, editors and compilers were limited by their times and world views, even as we are, the Bible contains material wedded to those times and places. It also means that writers sometimes provide differing and even contradictory views of God’s word, ways and will.”

The page also tells a few of the forms of study (biblical criticism) which the ELCA uses when studying Scripture. The article describes Redaction Criticism in this way, “understanding how writers creatively shaped material they inherit and how, perhaps, they brought nuances from their own context and culture.”

Here is a better description from a Christian apologetics website -

“Redaction Criticism of the Bible is the theory that different copyists and commentators of the early biblical writings embellished and altered the biblical texts throughout early Jewish and Christian history to make them appear more miraculous, inspirational, and legitimate. An example of redaction theory would be the claim that Old Testament prophecies were modified by redactors after the fact to make them appear as miraculous prophecies. Redaction criticism reduces the quality of the biblical record, casts strong doubt on its inspiration, and implies that the Bible is not trustworthy as a historical document." (read here)

The ELCA's “The Resurrection” page promotes universalism and doubt about Christ's physical resurrection. See here.

Gnesio, an online magazine of Lutheran theology, addresses the ELCA's “The Resurrection” page saying:

“The resurrection for the ELCA does not necessarily have to be a historic event, but something of faith. From their website: 'All of this has led some scholars to write that the risen Jesus (and apparitions of the risen Jesus) is a supernatural reality which does not belong to this world and cannot be the object of historic investigation. Rather, Jesus’ resurrection is an object of faith.

Accordingly, ELCA members believe that what history does is to demonstrate the disciples’ faith in the resurrection. Their witness and testimony to Jesus’ post-death appearances make it abundantly clear that the resurrection was a primary object of the apostolic proclamation from Christianity’s very beginning.'

This view then means that it is not important whether Jesus is still dead in a tomb or not, just that you believe that He rose." (see here)

The ELCA's page on “Satan” tells us that believing or not believing in Satan is a-okay. See here.

The ELCA took down these teaching webpages, but Exposing the ELCA has extensive evidence which shows that the ELCA leadership continues to believe, teach and allow these same heretical beliefs.

3 Comments

Chuck Braun

1/30/2013 07:14:37 am

When I read these the first time, it shook my faith more in a minute than two ex-Lutheran secular humanist deists and an outed atheist ex-wife could do in 45 years. Thank you, Dan, for exposing these false teachings, but let the reader of weak faith beware. By God's grace, my wife and I have left the ELCA for the LCMS. The depression caused by the ordeal still remains, but now I look forward to Sunday mornings instead of dreading them...

Janet Muldoon

1/31/2013 01:46:56 am

Jesus said this "Don't misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose" Jesus is the fullfillment of the Old Testament. Again, why discredit what He clearly says in how many translations of the New Testament?

Didaskalos link

2/1/2013 11:09:08 am

ELCA leaders and parishioners who reject foundational tenets of the Christian faith ought rightfully to be alarmed by the Apostle Paul's question, "Test yourselves to see if you are in the faith. Examine yourselves. Or do you yourselves not recognize that Jesus Christ is in you?--unless you fail the test."

To cite but one example, Albert Mohler writes in "Must We Believe in the Virgin Birth?":

". . . Must one believe in the Virgin Birth to be a Christian? This is not a hard question to answer. It is conceivable that someone might come to Christ and trust Christ as Savior without yet learning that the Bible teaches that Jesus was born of a virgin. A new believer is not yet aware of the full structure of Christian truth. The real question is this: Can a Christian, once aware of the Bible’s teaching, reject the Virgin Birth? The answer must be no. . . .

"Even if the Virgin Birth was taught by only one biblical passage, that would be sufficient to obligate all Christians to the belief. We have no right to weigh the relative truthfulness of biblical teachings by their repetition in Scripture. We cannot claim to believe that the Bible is the Word of God and then turn around and cast suspicion on its teaching.

"Millard Erickson states this well: 'If we do not hold to the virgin birth despite the fact that the Bible asserts it, then we have compromised the authority of the Bible and there is in principle no reason why we should hold to its other teachings. Thus, rejecting the virgin birth has implications reaching far beyond the doctrine itself.' ” . . .

"Carl F. H. Henry, the dean of evangelical theologians, argued that the Virgin Birth is the 'essential, historical indication of the Incarnation, bearing not only an analogy to the divine and human natures of the Incarnate, but also bringing out the nature, purpose, and bearing of this work of God to salvation.' " . . .

". . . Those who deny the Virgin Birth affirm other doctrines only by force of whim, for they have already surrendered the authority of Scripture. They have undermined Christ’s nature and nullified the incarnation.

"This much we know: All those who find salvation will be saved by the atoning work of Jesus the Christ — the virgin-born Savior. Anything less than this is just not Christianity, whatever it may call itself. A true Christian will not deny the Virgin Birth." [end of article excerpt]

As ELCA pastors and church members who are truly in the faith become aware of the vast preponderance of evidence of the ELCA's heresy, they're obligated by God to sever themselves from a church whose leaders "shut the door to the kingdom of heaven in people's faces."

"How can righteousness be a partner with wickedness? How can light live with darkness? . . . Therefore, 'Get away from them and separate yourselves from them,' declares the Lord."

"Anyone who wanders away from this teaching has no relationship with God. But anyone who remains in the teaching of Christ has a relationship with both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to your meeting and does not teach the truth about Christ, don’t invite that person into your home or give any kind of encouragement. Anyone who encourages such people becomes a partner in their evil work."

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.

Read the ELCA Articles that Caused a Huge Uproar

Leave a Reply.

Dan Skogen

Categories

Archives

Home

Share

Exposed Blog

HELP

Contact