u/Alive-Jacket764

Do Lutherans in the LCMS have to dogmatically affirm inherited guilt? Like original sin is one thing, but what about inherited guilt?

Ok, so mods please feel free to delete this since you probably have to deal with stupid questions all the time. I’m still so confused on toll houses. I’m going to be honest if I have to weigh my good works against my sins and demons have to approve whether I’m clear to the next level. How does one get to heaven. Seems like we’re pretty much all damned and I’m not sure what the hope is. What am I missing? I don’t see how not to despair. Is God merciful to those who aren’t perfect or haven’t beaten all their sins before they die?

Before anybody says it’s theosis, I’m beating you to it. I’ve posted on here before since I’m a Lutheran. Look idk where I’m going tbh, I’m not looking for a marketing pitch on Orthodoxy. I really respect it. I’m interested in learning more on salvation. I know it’s not a legal thing for y’all. I don’t really disagree that it’s union and participation in Christ. I guess my question is do our good works earn or merit salvation or do they flow and help us participate and grow in our union with Christ? Like faith without works is dead and mere intellectual assent will not save. I also think works complete and also demonstrate faith. Yet, can one also renounce his unworthiness and merits and cling to the merits and mercy of Christ? Like faith produces works. They are inseparable , just don’t trust in your own righteousness but in God’s mercy and love?

Can one still be Lutheran but wholeheartedly believe in infant communion?

Does anyone know of a comprehensive review/rebuttal of this doctrine?

I’m starting to come around on the idea that Rome is fully heterodox and the Popes & Bishops of the medieval area are so off base that it stops being any bit of a true church and that classical Protestants particularly Lutheran and some Anglicans are the continuation of that church. For example, the Augsburg Confession famously states that the Church is where the Gospel is rightly taught and the sacraments are rightly administered. Rome blatantly rejected the Sacrament of the Eucharist by not giving full Eucharist in both kinds as commanded by Christ. They specifically rejected Christ’s own command of take eat and take drink all of you. They are the full blown schismatics. I get Luther’s frustration with the reformed on the Eucharist, but I disagree actually. I’d rather fellowship and try to get the reformed to come around than have the cup withheld by Rome. It’s actually terribly evil. Hus was 100% right on this matter.

So don’t shoot at me I am a Lutheran. We do have a mortal sin distinction that I believe is pretty solid. We would consider any sin that one refuses to repent of as grave and mortal. My reasoning would be it is ultimately prideful to refuse to confess or repent. Saving faith cannot coexist with such an attitude in our minds. Still, one who struggles and has contrition and confesses is forgiven. Now, we still believe some sins are worse than others, it’s just all sin is offensive to a perfectly holy God. My question is Orthodox pretty much the same as Roman Catholics with this distinction? I don’t know if any priests or bishops are on here lol. I’ve kinda come to the conclusion of I wasn’t Lutheran, Orthodox seems like the best place rather than Catholic. The Lutheran arguments against Catholicism are pretty strong, and the Orthodox arguments have also drained pretty much all appeal from Rome these days. I’d appreciate any help. God bless

The Lutheran Confessions often speak this way. For example, the Apology of the Augsburg Confession teaches that faith and the Holy Spirit are lost through deliberate persistence in sin and unbelief. However, the Confessions also recognize that believers are engaged in a lifelong struggle with sinful desires.
A confessional Lutheran pastor would usually ask questions such as:
Do you hate the sin, even if you keep falling into it?
Do you desire God’s forgiveness?
Are you troubled by your sin and want to resist it?
Or have you decided that repentance is unnecessary?
For someone with scrupulosity, this distinction is especially important. People who are worried that they have lost faith because they sinned are often demonstrating the opposite of a hardened, unrepentant attitude. Anxiety over sin, sorrow for sin, and a desire for God’s mercy are signs that the conscience is still responding to God’s Word.
In classic Lutheran teaching, faith does not coexist with impenitence, but it does coexist with weakness, temptation, and ongoing struggles against sin. The Christian life is not the absence of sin; it is a life of repentance and trust in Christ’s forgiveness.

Basically is it a sin every time you pass by a person walking down the street and not giving them a ride, food, or money? I’ve asked a question similar before. In no way is this meant to brag, but I do have a charity in my area I give to for this reason because I’ve been told and believe they do good work in this area. I know the safety concerns, it’s just freaking me out that I’ll be forfeiting salvation is I don’t offer rides. I did one time, and the situation didn’t work out well. I really wasn’t I position to help the person and ended just driving around and stopping at a dollar tree and gave the person some money. It just doesn’t feel like a safe way to be honest. I don’t want make excuses though

The story and history of Jan Hus is really inspiring but also just so dark. I’m not saying this to just rag on the Roman Catholics, but still it all seems so evil. Imagine being burned and declared a heretic with one of the main reasons you believe Jesus when He said eat & drink His Body and Blood meaning nobody should withhold both kinds in communion. Just appalling stuff.

Are we saved or justified before God by our works? Ephesians seems to say no, but James says it. All this has been bothering me because my works are certainly far from perfect. I don’t think I could stand before God being honest and say that any of my works aren’t stained with sin.