Table Talk: Beth Moore Part 2

November 6th, 2012 Post by

Last week I began a two part article on Beth Moore bible studies. There were a lot of comments, some helpful and others counterproductive. However, I would like to conclude this article and give some constructive ways in which we the faithful can overcome this current invasion of the evangelical horde.

The first issue addressed against Beth Moore was her doctrine of free will. Like most evangelicals, Moore begins the theological task with the false assertion that man has free will to choose Jesus over and against the devil. This false confession leads to many other statements that contradict Sacred Scripture.  Another issue with evangelical theology is it’s symbolical interpretation of the Sacraments.

In her bible study, Moore asserts her interpretation of the Last Supper saying, “Capture this meal with your imagination. I think we’ve inaccurately pictured the last meal as moments spent over the bread and the wine. Christ and His disciples observed the entire Passover meal together. Then He instituted the new covenant, represented by the bread and the wine” (Jesus the One and Only pg 200). Moore interprets the Last Supper, specifically the bread and the wine, as mere symbols of the new covenant. They are not the true Body and Blood of our Lord, Jesus Christ, but rather they represent the new covenant that Jesus will institute in His death and resurrection.  In the remainder of her bible study, Moore does not connect the cross to the Lord’s Supper, at least not asserting the Lord’s Supper as the means by which the sinner receives the benefits of the cross.

Is this issue worth the denial of any help from Beth Moore. Is this misinterpretation of the Lord’s Supper cause for alarm or distress? Yes, of course it is. In his treatise,That These Words of Christ, “This Is My Body,” ETC., Still Stand Firm Against The Fanatics,Luther says, “It is precisely the same devil who now assails us through the fanatics by blaspheming the holy and venerable sacrament of our Lord Jesus Christ, out of which they would like to make mere bread and wine as a symbol or memorial sign of Christians, in whatever way their dream or fancy dictates. They will not grant that the Lord’s body and blood are present, even though the plain, clear words stand right there: “Eat, this is my body.” Yet those words still stand firm.” Dr. Martin Luther, of blessed and holy memory, asserts that these Words of Christ stand against the heretical confessions of the fanatics. The Words of Christ still condemn those who would make the bread and the wine mere representatives of the covenant.

Beth Moore does not listen to the clear words of Christ Jesus when she interprets His last will and testament. She confuses the reader by allowing her own emotional exegesis to control the meaning of Christ’s Words, rather than listening to her savior. As the Formula of Concord so clearly confessed, “now there is no more faithful and more reliable interpreter of the words of Jesus Christ than the Lord Christ Himself. He understands his own words and his heart and intention best. Given his wisdom and intelligence, he best understands how they are to be explained. Here, in the institution of his last will and testament and this enduring covenant and agreement, he did not use flowery language but rather the most appropriate, simple, unambiguous, and plain words. He also did so in all articles of faith and in every institution of the signs of his covenant and grace, or sacraments, such as circumcision, the various sacrifices in the Old Testament, and Holy Baptism (Formula of Concord Solid Declaration VII.50-51).

The Church receives the Words of Christ and therefore confesses the Bodily presence of His Body and Blood in the Bread and the Wine in the Lord’s Supper. The Words of Christ determine the sacrament, not the opinions of fallen man. Moore’s poison rushes quickly to the heart of the believer who reads this imaginary theology.

What then should we do about these Beth Moore bible studies going on in our Lutheran Churches today? Should we rush in, wield the sword of the Spirit, and excommunicate all who cherish this beloved sister in the faith. Shall we, as Christ, chase out the money changers of false doctrine? Well, we could if we were Christ, but we are not. We are sinners who receive the benefits of forgiveness, life, and salvation solely out of the depths of Christ’s gut wrenching compassion. Let us repent of these self-righteous notions. We are no better and we have been corrected of some false doctrine at some point in our Baptismal life. On the other hand, we are called to be faithful and steadfast in the one, true faith. Let us remember the words of St. Paul to St. Timothy, “preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching. For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths. As for you, always be sober-minded, endure suffering, do the work of an evangelist, fulfill your ministry (2 Timothy 4:2-5).

We are called to be faithful, but in a peaceful manner. We are called to teach patiently.  Like a parent teaching a child to ride a bike, so the Pastor must be patient and suffer in leading the flock back to the truth. No parent screams at their beloved child who falls down and scraps their knee, but instead rushes to them and cares for them. So the Pastor must not punish, but should with great haste tenderly care for the souls of the sheep entrusted to him.  He must not be angered, nor grow tired of preaching the same message over and over again. All we can do is preach, teach, and above all else pray that God will rid the Church of all false doctrine and Charlatan evangelists.

I recommend that the Church oppose Beth Moore and any evangelical materials. She must remain pure and not lust after the false promises of main stream protestantism. Let’s be Lutheran shall we. We aren’t children of the Pope, nor are we brothers of Geneva. We are descendants of the bold confessors of old like Luther, Chemnitz, Flacius, Walther, Sasse, and Preus. We know this, but many people in congregations today do not know this; therefore, we must be loving and excruciatingly patient in teaching the truth and removing false doctrine.

If the Church desires to have a separate women’s bible study, I recommend that the Pastor lead the study. He is called to teach as per AC XIV. If he is unavailable because of time constraints, then there are good materials from Concordia Publishing House. Especially if you are trying to replace Beth Moore, the series, “A New Song,” is very helpful.  The ideal is that the Church doesn’t have any of these Small Groups, but that all would be taught together by the Pastor.

Let us pray that God would defend us against any aggressors that would wreak havoc on the Bride of Christ by bringing false teaching into her bedchamber.  Pray therefore that God keep you steadfast in the faith unto life everlasting, Amen.


Categories: Steadfast Luther Tags:




Rules for comments on this site:


Engage the contents and substance of the post. Rabbit trails and side issues do not help the discussion of the topics.  Our authors work hard to write these articles and it is a disservice to them to distract from the topic at hand.  If you have a topic you think is important to have an article or discussion on, we invite you to submit a request through the "Ask a Pastor" link or submit a guest article.


Provide a valid email address. If you’re unwilling to do this, we are unwilling to let you comment.


Provide at least your first name. Please try to come up with a unique name; if you have a common name add something to it so you aren't confused with another user. We have several "john"'s already for example.  If you have a good reason to use a fake name, please do so but realize that the administrators of the site expect a valid email address and also reserve the right to ask you for your name privately at any time.


If you post as more than one person from the same IP address, we’ll block that address.


Do not engage in ad hominem arguments. We will delete such comments, and will not be obligated to respond to any complaints (public or private ones) about deleting your comments.


Interaction between people leaving comments ought to reflect Christian virtue, interaction that is gracious and respectful, not judging motives.  If error is to be rebuked, evidence of the error ought to be provided.


We reserve the right to identify and deal with trollish behavior as we see fit and without apology.  This may include warnings (public or private ones) or banning.

  1. Mrs. Hume
    November 8th, 2012 at 09:19 | #1

    sue wilson :
    Pr Rossow.

    You misunderstand. I never implied that the chains came from Christ. YOU are the one, and your colleagues, who add the heavy chains to the freedom of the true gospel. I never implied that Jesus’ teaching added “chains.”
    Good Bye.

    Could you give us an example of these heavy chains? That way we can better understand your point.

  2. Ellie Corrow
    November 8th, 2012 at 11:18 | #2

    In the original post, Pastor Hull points out Moore’s debilitating view of the Sacrament of the Altar. It was suggested in the comments that this is just one issue, which is secondary to the gospel, and I’ve heard this comment from others who have tried to “Lutheranize” Evangelical materials. I would suggest that a failure to understand the sacraments correctly is not to misteach on one issue, but is to ultimately misconstrue the Gospel and Christ. When the sacraments are not present, one is forced to look to other places for certainty of one’s salvation, which leads to exhausting, and ultimately fruitless, self-examination, or a tendency to glory in one’s supposed “good works.” One leaves us much like Narcissus, staring at ourselves, imagining we see the Savior, the other leaves us cuddled up to our filthy rags, and the assumption that God is somehow impressed with us. To reject the sacraments is not merely to reject to small pieces of doctrine, it is to reject who we are before God, and to reject how it is that Christ comes to us, for us, and our salvation. The repeated rejection of the sacraments is why the DNA in these studies will always be mutated, leaving despondent or Pharisaical Christians in their wake.

  3. Lumpenkönig
    November 8th, 2012 at 11:21 | #3

    Can someone please find the quote from Beth Moore that stated she was born and raised an LCMS Lutheran, but she left the LCMS to join the Southern Baptists because she thought the LCMS was “too legalistic.”

    Thank you.

  4. Ellie Corrow
    November 8th, 2012 at 11:29 | #4

    @Lumpenkönig #3
    I don’t think that’s Beth Moore. At least I’m unaware of it. Could you be thinking of Joyce Meyer?

  5. November 8th, 2012 at 12:46 | #5

    @John Rixe #48
    John, by creating a doctrinal hierarchy (thus what some call reductionism) you make such demands. The doctrine we have is a body of doctrine. To lessen the emphasis on one part demeans the rest and places them out of balance with one another.

    I guess I am thinking of how you have often tried to boil down discussions to such reduced things (the most important stuff according to you). I have often heard this (not from you I don’t think) summed up in the phrase “We all love Jesus”. There is no great virtue to living off of milk and never progressing to meat – the Corinthians were chastised by Paul for such ways. Christians grow into maturity as God teaches them through His Word. The fact of the matter is this – to confess that a representative understanding of our Lord’s body and blood is a minor issue is to be alright with Jesus (and the Spirit who inspired the Words to be written down) being called a liar (at worst) or at least horribly confusing in how He spoke. That is no minor thing at all – but cuts into the gospel like the worst of poisonous false teaching. That is why false teachers WILL receive condemnation for their evil works of leading the sheep astray. Taking on the role of teacher of the Scriptures (whether rightly by a divine call or by usurping a vocation not given to you or your gender) is a serious thing, one which requires great fear of God – for you are instructing souls either towards Jesus or away.

  6. Mrs. Hume
    November 8th, 2012 at 13:11 | #6

    @Pastor Joshua Scheer #5

    for you are instructing souls either towards Jesus or away.

    What? no fence? you must be a baptist! :D

    Okay, I am starting to think Sue doesn’t want to answer my questions. Was it something I said?

  7. Carl H
    November 8th, 2012 at 13:40 | #7

    @Ellie Corrow #2
    Ellie, your characterization of non-Lutheran Christians is rather different from how I think of my non-Lutheran Christian friends. Among at least some people who do not share a Lutheran understanding of the sacraments, the Word speaks clearly about the way of salvation by grace alone through faith alone. It seems to me that, indeed, many Christians have embraced the plain meaning of John 3:16 and Ephesians 2:8-9.

  8. Mrs. Hume
    November 8th, 2012 at 13:56 | #8

    @Carl H #7

    Okay, but what about Christian fellowship? as in communion? and the prayers? and teaching in the Christian community? All of those things are for our benefit. Why should we just reduce what we are willing to benefit from?

  9. Ellie Corrow
    November 8th, 2012 at 14:41 | #9

    @Carl H #7
    I’m unsure how you feel I characterized non-Lutheran Christians, as I was simply trying to underscore the importance of the broader nature of our sacramental theology. We cannot put the sacraments in a box and pretend our view of them does not affect other areas of doctrine. The simple fact is that if you cannot have a concrete means of grace you lose assurance, and must find it inside yourself, which is why Evangelicalism is so full of mysticism and enthusiasm.

  10. Kathy L. M.
    November 8th, 2012 at 14:53 | #10

    For those following this conversation…I just spent over an hour talking to two homeschool moms who believe that God does speak to Beth Moore and to them, and I just need to be “in tuned” to hearing Him. Is this Beth Moore, pop-psychology, bad theology? How can one refute this using the Scriptures?

  11. John Rixe
    November 8th, 2012 at 15:08 | #11

    @Pastor Joshua Scheer #5

    Fair enough but please don’t imply I run around demanding anyone listen to me.  

    – John, MN Nice

Comment pages
1 2 24335
If you have problems commenting on this site, or need to change a comment after it has been posted on the site, please contact us. For help with getting your comment formatted, click here.
Subscribe to comments feed  ..  Subscribe to comments feed for this post
Anonymous comments are welcome on this board, but we do require a valid email address so the admins can verify who you are. Please try to come up with a unique name; if you have a common name add something to it so you aren't confused with another user. We have several "john"'s already for example. Email addresses are kept private on this site, and only available to the site admins. Comments posted without a valid email address may not be published. Want an icon to identify your comment? See this page to see how.
*

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.