What the LLC's own meetings show
No doctrine was ever identified, and the teaching the removed congregations were said to hold is one their own statements expressly deny.
Verbatim from transcripts of the LLC's meetings with Wolf Lake (7 December 2019 and 13 May 2022) and Menahga (26 March 2021), made by hand from the recordings, and from one sermon after the removal. Ellipses mark omitted text.
“On some of those, I personally do not I do not understand what is the difference? … My answer was, I am confused. I do not know where all of the questions are coming from?”
“We live daily in the forgiveness of sins. It must be so, because we all carry Original Sin. … We need to be able to live everyday and every moment in forgiveness.”
“Sometimes, we have been asked this question, what must the Wolf Lake congregation repent of? And my answer has been nothing.”
“There have been those times when representatives from Wolf Lake have spoken in a way that I could not agree with. I don't have a specific example today.”
“The issues aren't the issue, if you know what I mean. There's something else that is fueling it.”
“We want to know what the difference is. What are the differences? … I don't know where these issues are now to be honest.”
“Continual forgiveness does not mean that I feel like I can sin and be free. That I only have to have my sins forgiven once. No. The fruit of faith guides us and we want to hear that word preached.”
“oftentimes, we couldn't put a finger on what was different. … Maybe it wasn't a point of doctrine that we could understand or put a finger on. But it was a different spirit.”
The straw man
After the July 2022 removal, LLC pulpits described the doctrine of those removed as “once forgiven, always forgiven.” Set beside it: what Wolf Lake and Minneapolis actually said when they used the term.
“Once a believer, always a believer. Once forgiven, always forgiven. So on. That kind of strange teaching that is so foreign, so contrary to the scriptures”
“these words of continual forgiveness were brought to our attention … so quickly converted to that false understanding, that false understanding that is so common in other Christian faiths of this world. that once forgiven, always forgiven”
“I believe that we are continually forgiven. If I would die right now, I do not need to have heard just immediately before I died that my sins are forgiven. … Continual forgiveness does not mean that I feel like I can sin and be free. That I only have to have my sins forgiven once. No. The fruit of faith guides us and we want to hear that word preached.”
“Continual forgiveness: This is the same as owning the righteousness of faith or living in grace. We sin daily and momentarily in word, thought and deed. … We live in continual forgiveness at every moment. This does not mean, once a believer, always a believer. It does not mean that the hearing of the gospel one time in life is sufficient. It does not mean that we never need to use confession.”
Next: In their own words, LLC leaders on continual forgiveness before and after the removals.
The LLC’s own leaders, in their own words
The LLC’s board chairman and one of its board members said the substance of “continual forgiveness” themselves; what they objected to was the term.
Minneapolis and Wolf Lake were faulted over “continual forgiveness.” This section sets what they meant by it beside what the LLC’s board chairman and one of its board members said, in their own words, before and after. Each quotation is marked: most are from machine transcripts of the posted recordings (press play to hear the quoted moment); those from the May 2021 continent-wide meeting are from a participant’s typed transcript, because the recording is not held. Where a speaker agrees with the substance, and where he criticizes the term or the people who used it, is noted beside each group.
What the term meant to those who used it
“We believe that continual forgiveness and grace are the same thing, not different from one another, as some suggest. A child of God can believe that their sins are forgiven at every moment, not only after asking for a blessing.”
Jim Frantti, LLC board chairman
2018 and January 2019: he questions the term and the reading he feared it carried, while describing “living under grace” in the same breath.
“Maybe it means what I think of as living under grace. I don't know if that's what is meant by it or not. But I just want to share my understanding that a child of God … under the protection of God's grace. And God's grace is this way towards us, that if we fall into sin, He does not reject us. We don't lose faith every time we fell into sin.”
“But sometimes it has felt to me that this term, continual forgiveness, means that our sins of the past and present and future are all forgiven, and therefore I don't even need to hear the gospel. … The term continual forgiveness almost implies to me like there's no such thing as unforgiven sin. … So that's why that term feels odd to me. Like I said, I'm not saying this to judge anybody who has used this term because I don't know what they mean by it.”
“I have been taught that the gospel is not a reassurance that my sins have been forgiven ahead of time, but it is indeed the cleansing of the conscience from sin.”
December 2019 and May 2021: he sets the phrase aside and states the substance himself, in nearly the words Wolf Lake used.
“this phrase of continual forgiveness has come up now and then. It seems to be a burr in some saddles or something, and maybe it would be good if we could just not think about that phrase. But, you know, I think we believe, I think we all believe, this is at least how I would view it, that we live continually under the protection of God's grace.”
“I would like to especially comment on how God's children live under the ‘continual protection of God's grace’. … So, if we did not have the ‘continual protection of God's grace,’ we would have no hope, because we carry sin corruption always. … When we fall into committed sin, whether by thought, word or deed, God does not cast us off. We do not lose faith every time we fall into sin. … But it does not mean that we do not put away sin.”
Keith Waaraniemi, LLC board member and Minneapolis minister
Before May 2021, on the substance: in his own preaching and at the Menahga meeting he says what the term was used to mean.
“We live in God's grace every day and every moment. We're partakers of the redemption of the Lord Jesus Christ and His resurrection victory. We're believers. We believe upon Him. And when we believe upon Him, we are heaven acceptable.”
“And when we preach the gospel, we preach that you can believe all sins forgiven. … So with this question, my concern has been as if we get so deeply into this doctrinal question, we lose sight of the simplicity of the everyday endeavor of faith that yes, we can believe all of our sins forgiven, everything of grace, but caring for the conscience is very important.”
Before May 2021, on the people who used it: his criticism is of an emphasis, of John Lehtola’s preaching, and of the Wolf Lake confession, not of a stated doctrine.
“And so, the stuff that is continuously quoted, I have to believe that that's where John's concerns lie. It feels to me like John is battling law-mindedness, and emphasizes grace, which is very important to emphasize …”
“I feel like there's an emphasis on love and grace to the point that the righteousness of life is not spoken of or very rarely spoken of.”
“I felt that personally, I'd just say in a general sense, that there are errors in the letter … there are many things … that are correct in there and accurate, but there are also things that are inaccurate and perhaps not even doctrinally correct.”
May 2021: in one speech he states the substance and then warns against stressing it.
“We live in the Forgiveness of sins every moment. We are carried by the grace of God. Our sins are cleansed in the blood of Christ. We are heaven-acceptable, not because of our own purity or keeping up-to-date so to speak In confession. We don't lose faith when we fall into sin. But in these discussions, I have also been concerned when we are emphasizing one side of the way. Do we lose sight of the other side? Is there a danger in these discussions of losing the fear of God and the fear of doing sin? … If we begin to say or to over-emphasize the fact. If I fall into sin, I am still heaven-acceptable. … Yes, we live in grace. We live in the forgiveness of sins every moment. But we need this precious gift of confession.”
“Luther has written of the antinomians. … “They think: one should not frighten or trouble the people, but rather always preach comfortingly about grace and forgiveness of sins in Christ.” Then I would also note that also we hear much about Christ and grace. I feel that they are emphasized in such a way that endeavor or the caring for the life of faith and the conscience are minimized.”
“And I feel the avoidance of speaking about the work of the Holy Spirit in some over whom we're concerned. Luther spoke or wrote about the antinomians of his time. … They think one should not frighten or trouble the people, but always preach comfortingly about grace and forgiveness of sins in Christ”
After the July 2022 removal: in his sermons the substance stays, and the error is described as “once you believe, you are always acceptable,” a teaching no one is named as holding.
“And by God's grace are we here waiting, believing, trusting, endeavoring, erring on this side and that side, falling into sin. And only by God's grace, the food that is in the Father's house can we be heaven acceptable.”
“first and foremost, we're saved by faith, by grace, and that not of ourselves. It's not in the perfection of the endeavor or even in the perfection of … or in attempting to perfect the care of the conscience, caring for matters. There are many dangers on both sides. On the one hand, if we begin to look at it this way, as some heresies have developed and departed from God's kingdom, where once you believe, you are always acceptable, always have an acceptable relationship and there's not need to care for your life of faith.”
Others in the same years
“The term continual forgiveness, I understand theologically what that means and I believe that. That is what we believe. But how it plays out in our everyday lives is exactly as Luther says. We can confess our sins one to another.”
“And I've been thinking this term of continual forgiveness, how when brothers explain their thoughts on it and how they believe. I can't find fault in those words and I don't want to, but yet I'm troubled by that term.”
“the concerns that have arisen about continual forgiveness, those of us that have been concerned about that, we're not concerned about what Juhani Uljas wrote on page 79 of his treasure hidden. … But I agree fully, and I don't think anyone disagrees with what our brother Juhani has brought out there”
On the record we have found, neither Jim Frantti nor Keith Waaraniemi contradicted the substance of “continual forgiveness” as Wolf Lake defined it. Both said, in their own words, that a believer lives in grace and in the forgiveness of sins every moment and does not lose faith with each fall, and both added, as Wolf Lake did, that sin is still to be put away. What they objected to was the term, an emphasis they heard in some preaching, and a reading of it (“forgiven ahead of time,” “always acceptable”) that no Minneapolis or Wolf Lake statement in the record teaches. The tension is not in the doctrine. It is that the same substance was a charge when Minneapolis and Wolf Lake said it, and a confession of faith when LLC leaders said it. Mr. Waaraniemi called the Skoog–Raisanen confession inaccurate “and perhaps not even doctrinally correct” without naming the error; seventeen months later he said what its section on continual forgiveness says. The reader can compare the quotations above.
Next: Withholding forgiveness, the 2011 error, the 2021 rule and the 2026 meeting.
Withholding forgiveness
On the LLC side, withholding forgiveness went from a possibility defended in 2011 to a rule stated in 2021 and applied in 2026.
The removed congregations were charged over “continual forgiveness.” Through the same years ran the opposite question: may forgiveness be withheld from someone who asks for it? The SRK had named withholding forgiveness as an error of the 1970s. On the LLC side it was first defended as a possibility, then stated as a rule, and in 2026 applied. The quotations in this section are from machine transcripts of the posted recordings; press play to hear each one at the quoted moment.
The error the SRK named, 2011
“In addition to these phenomena, the following began to appear: the diminishment of the conscience of the individual, injurious speech, and withholding forgiveness. … We regret the errors in doctrine and the abuses that occurred.”
The question, 2011 to 2018
“This discussion about forgiveness and withholding forgiveness, my first recollection of it was in 2011 at the meeting of the Minnesota boards, or Midwestern boards and speakers at the Rockford Church … But then the question was specifically asked, well, could there ever be a time, not now referring to the 70s and 80s, but could there ever be a time when the gospel could not be preached? And Brothers gave scriptural examples of such times.”
“If we go to the forgiveness issue that came up in 2011, as Keith mentioned, we gave, I think, scriptural examples, the two that always come to my mind, well, three would be Esau, Samuel, and, of course, the church law.”
“Additionally, comments and scriptural examples were made about cases where believers have not been able to preach forgiveness to one such as Saul. … When asked to answer this question, brothers serving LLC have expressed that we always preach the gospel to the penitent. … Yet, is it scriptural to say that never could a situation arise when the gospel cannot be preached to one asking for it?”
“it began with this question, would there ever be a situation in which God's children cannot preach the gospel? … how can we say never? How can we say to God, you can never close the mouth of your children? He has done it. … these situations are clearly the exception. Maybe they don't happen in some of our lifetimes. Does that mean we can say never?”
The rule, 2021
“there are situations where as believers, we can't preach the gospel to somebody who asks. But I think that some of the confusion results from the fact that some equate the word ask with repent. They're not the same thing. … we don't have to see into somebody's hearts if their words already reveal, for example, that they aren't penitent, as was the case, for example, with Saul.”
“there was one that was traveling in the heresy … he wanted to preach the gospel one to another, that we can just preach the gospel to each other. The Spirit didn't answer. It wasn't in, we weren't able to preach the gospel. … What's in question is whether or not we believe the same, that there is times when God has through the power of the Holy Spirit, even withheld forgiveness.”
The rule applied: the Southwest Area Board meeting, 14 March 2026
Phil Siljander, chairman of the Coastal California congregation, joined the meeting online and was questioned for about two hours on whether he still believed. Through the morning, at least ten of the board members and ministers present closed their remarks by asking for the forgiveness of their own sins and doubts. Near the end Phil was asked directly whether he wanted to believe.
“I will say, like I said at the beginning, my faith hasn't changed. My strength comes through the gospel, and I do want to hear that gospel if I can believe. I promise to believe.”
“this discussion has gone similarly that the gospel is preached when one asks … as long as Phil, you do not feel that you are in unbelief from what you've said. You don't believe. You've said your faith has not changed. Then you ask to hear the gospel, but … the humility that's required is to repent from unbelief itself. … If you don't feel that you're in that state, then we can't. There's nothing that we can do to help you at this point. Only God himself can help you. … it's a simple thing to ask for the gospel, but it's not so simple a thing to ask for the sin of unbelief to be forgiven, to accept that sort of humility.”
The gospel was not preached to him. The speaker closed by asking for it himself: “I need that gospel again for myself” [02:03:33].
“He was invited to attend our last Southwest Area Board meeting, and he did attend remotely. And his testimony was not that of a believer. … I guess I could offer him the same thing that I did his dad … to let you know, Briar, that you are not a believer, that if you want to repent from unbelief, the opportunity is there to believe even that sin forgiven, that sin of unbelief.”
Forgiven, then reopened: Phoenix, 8 January 2022
In October 2021 Brett Rintamaki, a Phoenix speaker, asked forgiveness from the pulpit, and the congregation preached it to him. The matter did not end there; in January a motion was made at a congregation meeting to remove him from speaking.
“my heart was rejoiced a lot when Brett had the strength to care for these matters from the pulpit the next day. And we had a board meeting shortly thereafterwards, and the topic came up again that there were some congregation members who wondered if Brett should still be serving even after matters had been taken care of. … I was very, very concerned about why some congregation members could not just let the fruits of repentance and these matters be buried in the sea of grace and we could carry on.”
What the LLC side says
“And we are not to evaluate someone's penitence or someone's heart. But if we go to those lengths to say there could not ever be a time, I don't think that that matches up with scripture. But I want to emphasize that there's no one that I have talked to, nor have I witnessed it in our country, our continent, that there's been a desire to withhold forgiveness.”
“And yet, somehow, how out of that, you know, comes this understanding that we're teaching the withholding of forgiveness. That's not anywhere near the truth.”
“What I meant by that is I'm not going to say that every situation was wrong. I can't, I'm not God, I can't say that. But I emphasize that grave errors were made in that regard and God help us.”
The LLC side says the gospel is always preached to the penitent and that no one's heart is to be judged. Its working rule, as stated at Menahga in 2021, is that a person's own words can show that they are not penitent, and that to ask is not to repent. In March 2026 a man who asked for the gospel and promised to believe was told that he must first repent of the unbelief the meeting had found in him, and the gospel was not preached to him. In 2011 the SRK listed withholding forgiveness among the errors of the 1970s and said it regretted them. Whether the 2026 meeting repeated that error, the reader can judge from the recordings above.
Back to the start: Continual forgiveness, what was charged and what was actually said.