The Lutheran view of creation, and the Lutheran view of Luther? 

I believe he might have condemned the genocide but wrote the Jews' businesses and homes should be forfeit. They should be forced into hard servitude and killed if needed.

On the jews and their lies by Martin Luther

It's a complete dismantling of Erasmus' position, shared by many then and since, that the will contributes or refrains from not-contributing to the monergistic work of God.

I checked it out from the library four of five times. I finally bought my own copy a few years ago, realizing that I'd never get tired of reading it.

Anyone who writes anything in addition to the word of God has said, the word of God is not sufficient, you need me to explain it to you. God did not explain it correctly, let me write a book or whatever to help you understand it. This is an abomination and is why the entire church is 100% apostate.

SF,....He did a terrible job of answering the question of creation. He is not a Christian, he is a Godless man of the Godless world and one who is 100% steeped in the Godless worlds 100% fake manmade religion of scientism, absolutely not the Bible Christianity. The Bible is clear that the earth God made is stationary and flat, I guess he forgot to mention the most important thing about creation. He of course did this because he like the entire apostate church is 100% on board with the God hating worlds 100% fake manmade graven image of their spinning ball (baal).

Give them the law and the gospel brother. Likely they need to be converted. I like Ray comfort methodology the way of the master. He goes through Four of the 10 Commandments and ask them if they’ve kept them. Law first then gospel.

Show them Christ, the lostness of humans outside of Christ, and the grace of the redemption Christ offers. And let the Holy Spirit do "His job". We cannot make people believe. Luther was a human being. His antisemitism (I assume that is what people refer to) was real, but Luther's faults don't make truths he taught untrue.

How do they realize that they are lost? Bad news first. Or the good news won’t make sense

I hear and see you J A. 😁. If it helps, I had to examine why it “pissed” me off 😁 Pastor Wolfmueller just helped us see that truth is still here. The truth will never be stopped. It can’t be stopped. I’ve realized I can’t force anyone to see truth. This sight is a gift given by God. This makes you and I very different. Different is very good. 😁. Grace and peace to you.😁

@J A I tired for a while. It is a lost cause. They follow what their itching ears want to hear. Speaking the Law and the Gospel is always useful . I have personally confronted pastors and bishops regarding the colossal liberal slide. That was more that 30 years ago. I was called a judger, a bigot, a person that cannot be helped. I mentioned I am not any of those things, but only one who is pointing to the Bible that has already pronounced judgement on such things as they were promoting. As Luther put it, I was stared at "like a cow that stares a freshly painted barn". There is a Confessional Lutheran Church in Sweden. Perhaps there is one in Finland you can trek to as time permits. God bless you friend.

@@IronPoorBlood I am not familiar with him. I am familiar with Christian Reconstructionism but have no agreement with its teachings or theology.

@@IronPoorBlood There seems to be a revival amongst the Reconstructionists/Theonomy groups, again. As for neothetic counseling, thankfully it is no longer recognized by most Reformed and Presbyterian pastors, but I can imagine it appeals to some theonomists. Doug Wilson and his group at Moscow, Idaho are quite popular to some Reformed Baptists and Presbyterians who are drawn towards it. The small denomination he founded is growing. His “Federal Vision” theology was judged either heretical or errant by several of the denoms in the North American Presby and Reformed Council, thankfully. In all, the Recon group is still fringe, I agree that we can appeal to unbelievers with reason, as reason and logic are God’s works.

@@IronPoorBlood I agree with your assessments and I appreciate your comments. There have been many people harmed by such movements. In these difficult times, such groups offer a refuge of sorts to those with concerns about the culture war. And their eschatology offers some sort of comfort to the flesh. It is unfortunate that they are labeled Reformed when they are in clear conflict with the other Reformed groups. My denomination (URCNA) regularly picks up the people damaged by their hyper-patriarchal teachings. 😢. Like you I am blessed by pastors like Rev Wolfmueller. Thankfully we’ve been blessed with many in my denomination, but who has such skills and talents needed to produce media as Rev W. does? He is a real treasure.

KS,...He has done a terrible job of answering this question of creation. He totally neglected to mention the most important thing that everything in Christianity hinges upon, the shape of the earth. Is the earth the God hating worlds 100% fake manmade spinning ball, or is it the Bibles stationary flat earth? Only one can be true and each one makes the other impossible and a false religion. It is a battle of two completely opposed religions and he totally failed to mention anything about it. This is an abomination.

Just for your consideration. Where in the Bible is a particular form or order of conducting worship services spelled out? Where does the Bible sanction only LSB music, liturgy, pastoral roles, or length of sermon. Is it biblical to limit a worship service to 60 minutes, 10 to 15 minutes reserved for preaching the Word ? Where in the Bible does Jesus tell us to spend 45 minutes singing, repeating over and over again one of the three Creed’s , the Lord’s Prayer, and all the many nuances required to rigidly maintain proper form ? So much effort has been put into monitoring the way worship services are conducted so as not to offend the LCMS standards. I am an LCMS member and I find myself longing for some more relaxed and spontaneous worship services. The way things have always been done, is not necessarily a just reason to take umbrage when the Pastor preaches for 30 minutes , or we skip the Nicene Creed. Or is it ? In one LCMS church a lady was angered that the Pastor had taken to walking out into the congregation as he preached his sermon. By coming down out of the pulpit, he was offensive? Does he not know proper form and where he is required to stand ? Horror. Things to ponder.

The Corinthian Church knew that 1 and 2 Corinthians (for example) were canonical as soon as the Holy Spirit and the human author wrote them. The same is true for all Churches that received Books and Epistles from Apostles. Other books not of the Holy Spirit and true human author were rejected by their intended audiences in the primitive Church. For example the Peshittas, which have no relationship to papism or even later councils, do not include the "gospel" of Thomas. St. Thomas and his immediate disciples did evangelize the Assyrian Church of the East, but he didn't author any "gospel" to them. The Tawahedo Canon, the Peshitta Canon, the Greco-Russian Canon, The Papal Canon, and the Protestant Canon all differ. They all share the Homologoumena books and all have discrepancies among Antilegomena books to this very day. So we can dismiss the exaggerated claim that some one council magically created one definitive canon one day. Homologoumena has always been accepted by Assyrian Church of the East, Miaphysites, Palamists, Protestants, and Papists from the time of the Apostles until today. Even the Popes don't fret that Byzantine Catholics chant the portions of their longer canon in their Holy Liturgy. Antilegomena books do not present a challenge to Anglican or Lutheran protestants because they don't contradict their doctrines anywhere.

Please check Pastor's explanations of the 1000 years. He does a good job with that is . Note that he already did a good job of calling Genesis a historical book to be taken literally as we do all the NT except the very last book. Revelations at it's begining is declare to be a vision not historical and so it is read with a different mine set. But keep listen to Pastor. Also check for other confessional Lutheran synods like the WELS.

@@jameswillison1527 thanks. I'm already swaying away from dispensational pre trib rapture theology and can understand that. Then what makes the creation account historical? Is there some sort of hermeneutic rule? Also if historical/literal, would that mean God literally walked in the garden looking for Adam? Do you think that would have been Jesus in a preincarnate human body? Just things I been thinking about.

Time may not have always been uniform, so what was created in days could now look like billions of years. Diamonds take millions of years to form naturally, but they can be manufactured in a lab today and the difference is energy/pressure. Revelations is a different genre than Genesis. They both reveal Christ, though.

The Lord GOD tellis us in the Bible that he chose holy men to write down HIS story that we might know HIM and what he wants for us in our lives. It is faith worked by the Holy Spirit that helps us believe al things. So Genesis is Gods words telling us how the world and all in it was formed. For all believers that makes it fact thus historical. And Revolution is a vision given to John of what will come. And in the vision what do the lamp stand, the seals, the horsemen, the 1000 years mean. These are mysteries that need thinking about. Confessional / conservative Lutherans Pastor's from both the LCMS and the WELS synod have written explainations . A warrenting, this is an area where many have tried to explain very mystical ways where as Confessional Lutherans will always go back to the rest of the Bible to determine what is being said in Revelation and tie this vision into what the LORD has already told us.

And yes the LORD GOD almighty walked with Adam and Eve. This was when they were still in HIS image (that they were still holy too). After they disobed and sinned , then GOD no long walked with them. Remember that we look to Jesus to wash away our sins and make us holy again so in heaven we will walk with GOD again. How blessed is that !!!!

Not his best video. I'd really recommend reading Luther's own Lectures on Genesis. 1. Luther admits that he learned in his own lifetime the proof that the moon gets its light from the sun. This contradicts "A lesser LIGHT to govern the night." 2. He explains that he accepts the proof. 3. He explains that he will continue to preach both on the literal meaning of Genesis, just as though he had never heard the proof. 4. And he explains he will continue to preach on the spiritual meaning of Genesis without regard to the literal meaning. 5. Because both have important and true theological points to teach. I wish modern Lutherans could think about the text this way. Most can't. You'll have heard that he rejected Copernicus. That's not quite right. He never heard Copernicus' name because nobody was willing to publish Copernicus until after Luther's death. He was reacting, essentially, to gossip and not to science when he insulted what he heard about it. One of Luther's own students, Osiander, was the first person in the world to publish Copernicus.

I remember he did a video on it but it was deleted. Probably ended up being too controversial for the channel

Luther made a literary hit piece on Judaism, calling it out for the paganism that it is. Those who practice the religion known as Judaism are as much enemies to the Gospel, and the Christian Church as Islam is. People conflate condemnation of a religion with the condemnation of a race.

Always check an online list for confession / conservative Lutheran synods. I very much enjoy the very good but simple way Pastor is able to explain issues.

In the early 17th century, a Lutheran astronomer, Johannes Kepler, described science as the vocation of those who are priests in the book of nature (which I suspect is what you are alluding to). It was Kepler who took Copernican heliocentrism and realized that modeling planetary motion with elliptical rather than circular planetary put the balance of evidence strongly in favor of heliocentrism over geocentrism. Three centuries later in the early 20th century, LCMS Lutheran theologians like Francis Pieper were still insisting that scripture demands that we believe geocentrism is true, essentially betting the truth of Christianity on that claim. Though sometime in the last century LCMS theologians came to accept that the earth orbits the sun, they haven’t shown any signs of budging from literalistic readings of Genesis (aside from those forced out of the synod in the 1970s, resulting in there being virtually no moderate voice in the LCMS and virtually no conservative voice in the ELCA, which formed in the aftermath). To my knowledge, both of the LCMS’s seminaries still use Francis Pieper’s dogmatics series to teach Lutheran theology, presumably glossing over the bits demanding adherence to geocentrism, and presumably paying close attention to the parts demanding adherence to 6 24 hour day young earth creationism. What’s sad is that Genesis is so much more illuminating when one reads it in its Ancient Near Eastern context and sees its creation-temple themes recurring throughout both the Old and New Testaments.

@@augustinian2018 Amen.

The first time 2 Peter 3:8 shows up in a Christian document outside the New Testament, it’s in a document called the Epistle of Barnabas written between 70 and 135 AD likely by a different Barnabas than Paul’s companion. That author believes it refers to the days of creation, which he believes to have been symbolic. (To my knowledge, this document is also the first place creation is discussed outside the New Testament in church history. The author takes each day of creation to represent a thousand years, making him a young earth creationist but not a literalist about the days of creation. That combination pops up from time to time throughout the early church. Young earthers tend to focus on that these folks were also young earthers, but overlook that their exegetical method would predispose them to hold something other than a young earth view were they writing today. (The church fathers noticed that Adam couldn’t have named all animal on the sixth day, and the the order of events in ch. 1 is slightly different from the order of events in ch. 2, and also that light is creating on the first day before the sun, moon, and stars, so as a result many came to the conclusion that God and the human author intended for us to interpret it after an allegorical or literary many-they believed that such was the literal intent of the authors.) That doesn’t really answer the question as to whether that was or was not the authors’ real intent (though I find their reasoning sound), but it does demonstrate that it’s not just what modern science claims that has led people across history to read the opening chapters of Genesis as less than strictly historical narratives. John Walton, an evangelical scholar at Wheaton College, has a pretty fascinating take that actually yields a more Christological reading than literalists without trying to-it just kind of emerges from the text when recurring symbols from the Ancient Near East like the seven days and the rest of a god are examined. His (and some others’) take is that the narrative is something like a corrective account to the ideas the ancient Hebrews would have had from their neighbors in the Ancient Near East and Egypt as to how (roughly) the world was ordered, couched in a cultural idiom that his audience would understand (e.g., if Genesis 1:1 began with theoretical astrophysics, the cultural idiom of material creation accounts in contemporary Western culture, the ancient Hebrews wouldn’t have known what to do with it).

Steven, what questions? I will try to assist. That is if you are not simply "trolling" to start an argument. Pax.

Hi. Tha apostles and disciples wrote the scriptures by inspiration of the holy spirit. Luther and others then interpreted from their writings. So they had direct revelation from God to inspire His word, whereas luther had the word already.

@@hagenjunger2914 How do you explain Thomas and others like him (Scripturally revealed divine inspiration) in juxtaposition to Luther in John 24-29 “…Blessed are those that have not seen and yet have believed.” Further, who is to say which if any of Luther’s writings were or were not divinely inspired.

@@IronPoorBlood How do you explain Thomas and others like him (Scripturally revealed divine inspiration) in juxtaposition to Luther in John 24-29 “…Blessed are those that have not seen and yet have believed.” Further, who is to say which if any of Luther’s writings were or were not divinely inspired.

Yes, absolutely

1. I know not "seems." His Catechism and Smallcald Articles are full of peace and beauty. So are his Genesis Lectures, and prefaces to the books of the Bible. Watch papalist Bishop Robert Barron's video on Luther. He says his theological exaggerations are due to "falling in love with God." Luther's polemical works are, of course, not peaceful. You have no basis for this claim. 2. Have you ever heard of the book of Joshua?

@@Mygoalwogel 1. I said much not all of his writing. 2. Why go so far back? Was God the one torturing and beheading anabaptists? It’s a simple question.

@@dylan3456 1. Can you name a work of Luther's that is both non-polemical and non-peaceful? 2. When Luther wrote, "God calls the sword his own ordinance" he's confessing with St. Paul the teaching of Romans 13: "Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is *no authority except from God,* and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will *incur judgment.* For rulers are not a *terror* to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no *fear* of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, *be afraid,* for he does not *bear the sword* in vain. For he is the servant of God, an *avenger* who carries out God's *wrath* on the wrongdoer.

Please check for other confessional Lutheran synods that might be in your area. a pod cast from ready to Harvest does a good job of explains confessional Lutheran from liberal Lutherans and list several smaller synods.

Mark: "It really doesn't affect anything." I am sorry Mark, but it really does. I could not say it any better than this this anti-Christian magazine, "Christianity has fought, still fights, and will fight science {I would say here "pseudo-science" rather than "science"} to the desperate end over evolution, because evolution destroys utterly and finally the very reason Jesus' earthly life was supposedly made necessary. {Exactly, Romans 5:12} Destroy Adam and Eve and the original sin, and in the rubble you will find the sorry remains of the son of god. If Jesus was not the redeemer who died for our sins, and this is what evolution means, then Christianity is nothing." [G. Richard Bozarth, "The Meaning of Evolution," American Atheist, Feb. 1978]

@@trinitylutheranchurch-lcms2691 I don't think you understand my comment. Of course it matters that God created the universe, everything in it and Adam and Eve in the order given in Genesis. I never mentioned evolution. Microevolution: the adaption to the environment so that existing characteristics become more or less common is clearly part of God's creation. The hypocrites who demand evidence for the existence of God have no evidence whatsoever for evolution as the start of a single species let alone the origin of life, zero. What doesn't matter is exactly how God created everything and how long He took to create it. What does matter is that God created everyone and everything. To use labels Young Earth vs Old Earth Creationism does not affect Salvation. Creationism vs anything else does. God bless you.

Mark Horton Could you please respond to this: "When Jesus spoke of Himself as being the bread, He was not teaching the fictitious transubstantiation of the Papal church. It is preposterous to hold that the Son of God turned a piece of bread into Himself. When Jesus said "this is my body" or "blood," He did not change the substance, but was explaining that He is the one "represented" by the passover bread and wine. Jesus did not say 'touto gignetai', this has become or is turned into, but 'touto esti', which can only mean this represents or stands for..."

@@doriesse824 The RCC seems to have borrowed from Greek philosophy in their doctrine that the essence of the bread and wine are changed to His body and blood while the bread and wine retain their appearance, color taste, texture etc. It is false. The Lutheran opinion which Luther was sure of enough to pound on the table shouting THIS IS MY BODY" sealing the definitive break between Lutherans and Reformed is clear. Both the bread and Jesus's body, both the wine and Jesus's blood have real presence. The expression used is "in with and under". Giving this doctrine a name, there is one, would be claiming to understand the mystery. God created the universe and everything in it. No human can come close to understanding. I don't understand quantum physics either.

But if you read the Hexaemerons of the early church fathers, most certainly help to Creation being literal history, and guys like Saint Basil adamantly told that the day in Genesis is still a 24-hour day. so, if it was good enough for them to read scripture in such a light, why would we differ (other than the obvious, which is that people cower into wanting to try to line up with the modern consensus of scientism which is based on erroneous presuppositions and axioms in the first place)?

@@dave1370 I am not afraid to say the Bible is a story of redemption. Period. It is not a science book nor a history of the world. We can interpret it as a 24 hour day, but why would God be under a time constraint? And why would things be created out of order? I believe things have been added and deleted from God's original inspiration. Chapter one of Genesis is not the Gospel. I don't fear science, nor do I fear to use the rational mind God gave me. We have the privilege of knowing more than the early church fathers. Chariots of fire would be far more clear to them, if they lived today.

just read the book

I read the book. Reminded me why Paul wrote Galatians, and why paganism like Judaism is condemned. The Law does not save.

"And there was EVENING and there was MORNING, the first day." The other verses read similarly. Unlike more metaphoric usages such as "Day of the Lord", the Genesis 1 account adds details that indicate that the days of Creation are literal days.

@@petestorz172 With sincere respect, there is a paradigm in hermeneutics that says words to the effect of, "let scripture be literally taken, unless the literal taking suggests figure". I don't mean rationalism whatsoever, (ie deciding what is literal or true by what seems reasonable) but there is certainly room for dialogue around this usage of evening and morning, particularly given that the sun is not even created until day four. Further, in Genesis 1:5 itself, Moses records the usage of the term "day" in two different ways. I am not implying or suggesting that the text is obscure or worse, inaccurate...only that the usage may be far more involved and nuanced in truth that the bare words themselves, to modern ears, seems. To One for whom a day is as a thousand years and vice versa, the words of Genesis are true, and possibly true in a way that indeed only now is being further proven by cosmological inquiry.

We are in Babylon and Jesus said good teachers would become like him not paid as a hireling- Jesus became homeless so no one could say he loved money not God- how many homeless preachers do you listen to who you know don't love money? Wolves care not for sheep so BEWARE AS JESUS SAID TRUST NO MAN!! READ MATTHEW AND REVELATION TO WAKE UP TO GODSTKINGDOM COMING TO EARTH SOON

@@IronPoorBlood : Bill, Mike is not asking a question but standing in his own self-righteousness is casting aspersions upon those whose theology he does not even casually understand. I have dealt with many like him. His own words give him away. Kyrie Eleison!

@@IronPoorBlood : I am not breaking the Eighth Commandment against you, I am simply reading your own words, "Do LUTHERAN HIRELINGS . . .?" It is you, dear sir, that is breaking the Commandment against all faithful and confessional Lutheran pastors. Sir, I seek your repentance. Kyrie Eleison!

GL,....Correct. The fact that the church does not understand what you have laid out here is a huge problem. Also, an even bigger problem with Luther, the guy in the video, and the entire church is, they will say, oh yes we believe in the Bibles creation account, but the truth is, they do not. The Bible is absolutely clear that the earth God made is stationary and flat. The belief in the 100% fake, manmade graven image of the spinning baal (ball) earth is an entirely different religion to the Bibles Christianity. No Christian believes in the spinning ball. If the earth were a spinning ball then it is impossible for anything in the Bible to be true. The Bible is either true and the earth is stationary and flat as the Bible clearly tells us it is, or the earth is a spinning ball flying through endless space and the Bible is nothing more than the fables of men. For anyone claiming to be a Christian, (Luther, every church pastor, the guy in this video, etc) to not make this 100% clear has exposed that they are not a Christian. They are all in reality 100% steeped in the Godless worlds fake manmade religion of scientism and are only pretending to be Christians.

The Bible does not only say that the Lord's Supper is done in remembrance: Matthew 26:28 Jesus calls it the blood of the covenant. Hebrews 9:20 The author quotes Moses saying the exact same words about real blood. There is no precedent here for saying "is" means "represents." 1 Corinthians 10:16 The bread and the cup are a koinonia (co-union/intimacy/participation/contribution/distribution) of the body and blood of Christ. 1 Cor 11:20 There is an objectively true Lord's Supper. Unreconciled schism within the congregation make it objectively not the Lord's Supper. 1 Cor 10:21-22 The Lord, whose name is Jealous, is jealous of his cup and his table. 1 Cor 11:23 The Lord specifically and personally revealed the Supper to Paul. 1 Cor 11:27 Misuse of the Lord's Supper is not just a bad reenactment. It makes you guilty of sin against the very body and blood of the Lord. 1 Cor 11:28-30 Mere reenactments do not require earnest soul searching on pain of punishment and death. Therefore true Christian faith in these words: "This is my body which is for you, … This is my blood of the new covenant," must take all into account. 1 Cor 5:11 We are not to eat even secular food with christians who do not accept correction. Guests, whose lives are unknown to the pastor, should be catechised first. "Revilers" (who insult our face value belief) are rightly excluded.

Jesus is the literal door for literal sheep. John 10:7.