Elca

[SPALATIN]

From now on I will no longer consider the E?CA Lutheran. Especially in light of the compromise that the church has made and will make in light of the BoC. They are discussing in a thread on their forum the subject of Confession-olatry. They feel that we put on par scripture with the confessions.

I think they feel that we treat our confessions the same way that Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox treat Tradition.

I feel they don't take them seriously enough. They constantly are ready to unsin sin in their desire to have unity for the sake of unity. They are truly a heterodox synod and no longer worthy of using the name Lutheran in anything that they do. Since this is on my forum I expect it not to be deleted.

I make only one apology to two persons whom I consider to be an exception to this and that is Danhead and MusicforHymn.

Just to set this straight The Word of God is the norma normans and the Book of Concord is the Normans normatta. It is an exposition of the Christian faith only. If one studies the Book of Concord they will realize that it is totally scriptural in content and context. I make no apologies for what I believe, but I apologetically defend my faith to my death.

[Melethiel]

E?CA? Have you been reading Bunnie Diehl's blog? ;)

[SPALATIN]

E?CA? Have you been reading Bunnie Diehl's blog? ;)

Never heard of her. I am taking a clue from LQ who refers to one of their own synods as the LC?S. Only those who subscribe aquia to the confessions should be allowed to call themselves Lutheran.

[Protoevangel]

From now on I will no longer consider the E?CA Lutheran. Especially in light of the compromise that the church has made and will make in light of the BoC. They are discussing in a thread on their forum the subject of Confession-olatry. They feel that we put on par scripture with the confessions.

I think they feel that we treat our confessions the same way that Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox treat Tradition.

I feel they don't take them seriously enough. They constantly are ready to unsin sin in their desire to have unity for the sake of unity. They are truly a heterodox synod and no longer worthy of using the name Lutheran in anything that they do. Since this is on my forum I expect it not to be deleted.

I make only one apology to two persons whom I consider to be an exception to this and that is Danhead and MusicforHymn.

Just to set this straight The Word of God is the norma normans and the Book of Concord is the Normans normatta. It is an exposition of the Christian faith only. If one studies the Book of Concord they will realize that it is totally scriptural in content and context. I make no apologies for what I believe, but I apologetically defend my faith to my death.
No apology necessary Scott. I do not necessarily disagree with you. The ELCA as a whole has strayed from Lutheranism and from Scripture.

The attack over there is out of line and clearly a straw man. They are building a case that no one represents, and parading around, showing off how they can tear down that false argument.

[LilLamb219]

If one studies the Book of Concord they will realize that it is totally scriptural in content and context.

I agree with that! The BOC is a true exposition of what the Bible says. Read the Bible then read the Book of Concord and see that the latter is in full agreement with the first. How could that be idolatry? It's like having Cliffnotes ;)

[Tetzel]

I disagree. The ELCA is Lutheran because the fundamental doctrines which it upholds are Lutheran. The ELCA subscribes to the Augsburg confession. As a convert to the LCMS, the instruction course was not greatly different from the teachings of the ELCA except on the issues of Historical Criticism, women in clergy, and a generally more strict approach to current affairs. On the matters of how salvation happens, what the sacrament of the altar is, what baptism is, and other things like single predestination the ELCA is in agreement with other branches of Lutheranism. In fact, when I borrow books from my pastor often they are written by theologians of the ELCA, similarly when my mother was serving as the head of Christian Education in an ELCA church she often ordered publications from Concordia because she felt that they better illustrated the teachings that her church but did not contradict the ELCA's teachings.

[Jim47]

Not that it matters, but I agree with Scott. I know a Menonite lady, although her church is not Menonite as we know it, she is more Lutheran than most of what I have seen from the ELCA members here. I certainly don't hold hard feelings of any of them, I am saddened over their basically wanting to re-write the Bible to feel their current life needs.


God warned us about changing His Word, but they choose to go around it by all kinds of different roads.

I have always admired Dan for his un-wavering stand for the truth according TO God's Word. I hope some day that they will see their errors.

[lakesidelady]

The Word of God is the norma normans and the Book of Concord is the Normans normatta.

Scott, what do these words mean?

I've heard this about the ELCA before. How do they differ from LCMS? I'd like to know how to answer people who say that there is no basic difference between the two.

Thanks!

[Music4Hym777]

The Word of God is the norma normans and the Book of Concord is the Normans normatta.

Scott, what do these words mean?

I've heard this about the ELCA before. How do they differ from LCMS? I'd like to know how to answer people who say that there is no basic difference between the two.

Thanks!

Yes, there are major differences, the ELCA has strayed away from "real" Lutheranism for the most part (there a few exceptions of churches). I know this because I may say I am ELCA because thats what it says on the church sign, but I am VERY LCMS in view, I have been too both churches and it is only because my fiance is planning on going to seminary to be an ELCA pastor that I am staying ELCA, otherwise, I would be at an LCMS church.

Major differences are

1. Women as pastors (ELCA says yes, LCMS says no)
2. Open Communion (ELCA says yes, LCMS says no)
3. Womens right to choose (ELCA says yes, LCMS says no)
4. Confession and absolution are seen alot more in the LCMS then the ELCA
5. Confirmation, the ELCA has become really relaxed and really hardly uses the Small Catechism. Where as the LCMS holds really hard too it.
6. The ELCA fellowships with other denominations, where as the LCMS sticks to being in altar communion with only CERTAIN Lutheran synods (if any).

I am sure their are more, but I cant think of them off of the top of my head.


No apology necessary Scott. I do not necessarily disagree with you. The ELCA as a whole has strayed from Lutheranism and from Scripture.

The attack over there is out of line and clearly a straw man. They are building a case that no one represents, and parading around, showing off how they can tear down that false argument.

I agree completely with you Dan, there is no need for Scott to apologize for his beliefs (as long as they stay in here ;) ). I agree with most of them, as well.

[Tetzel]

Major differences are

1. Women as pastors (ELCA says yes, LCMS says no)
2. Open Communion (ELCA says yes, LCMS says no)
3. Womens right to choose (ELCA says yes, LCMS says no)
4. Confession and absolution are seen alot more in the LCMS then the ELCA
5. Confirmation, the ELCA has become really relaxed and really hardly uses the Small Catechism. Where as the LCMS holds really hard too it.
6. The ELCA fellowships with other denominations, where as the LCMS sticks to being in altar communion with only CERTAIN Lutheran synods (if any).


I still think these are really more issues of discipline, practice and of synod history than they are issues of theology. If you want me to believe that the ELCA is not Lutheran, then I need to see fundamental differences of doctrine. For example points #6 and #2 are probably results of the fact that the LCMS was once filled with Saxon immigrants who were upset at the Prussian government's creation of the German "Evangelische Kirche" that compelled Lutherans and Calvinists to be in fellowship. With such a background, it is easy to see why the LCMS tends to shun interaction with other denominations.

The ELCA on the other hand is the result of many years of consolidating small Lutheran groups that usually had a different history. Germans of the 1700's or later Germans not particularly bothered by the Evangelische compulsion, Swedish, Norwegian, Finnish, Danish, Slovak and Latvian Lutherans had all formed their own micro-synods. During the 20th Century as these groups assimilated more to America and learned English, it was realized that they no longer had linguistic reasons to stay apart. To the ELCA joining together has been the trend for a long time and they feel comfortable with it.

If the ELCA was talking about making a decision for Christ or re-instituting the Roman church's sacrament of Pennance, I'd see that as a repudiation of the Evangelical Lutheran Faith. But when you look at so many of the essential questions when it comes to classification of a denomination such as: What baptism is, what the sacrament of the altar is, how man is justified, how one should confess sins, what the ultimate authority for the Church is, what the role of tradition in the Church is, what the ability of man to merit salvation is, what is the Church, etc. a clear answer comes out: The ELCA is not Baptist, not Calvinist, not Eastern-Orthodox, not Roman-Catholic, not Methodist, not Unitarian but Lutheran. Are they properly remembering all of the teachings of our Evangelical Lutheran Faith? Probably not, but then again one could argue that the LCMS or WELS doesn't either. So while we may not like what the ELCA does, we should bear in mind that it would be much more accurate to describe it as Lutheran-lite than non-Lutheran.

[night2day]

I disagree. The ELCA is Lutheran because the fundamental doctrines which it upholds are Lutheran. The ELCA subscribes to the Augsburg confession...

Are you fully certain? When those who orginally presented the Augsburg Confession to Emporer Charles the V of Germany and his brother Ferdinand, King of Austria, they were ordered to join with the others in the full Catholic Mass the next day...or else. The German princes, however, stood up to them and refused. George, Margrave of Brandenburg spoke for the others by stating:

"Before I let anyone take from me the Word of God and ask me to deny my God, I will kneel and let them strike off the head."

And yet today, what does E?CA do with the fundamental doctrines you state it claimes it upholds from the Sciptures? It states at the offical website itself there are some things that may by read and applied within a culteral context only...as if what was written within the Scriptures couldn't have possibly have happened as it said. *(edited) Miracles must be able to be explained away. For others, there must be the freedom to believe otherwise regarding the Scriptures.



And lets not forget, E?CA is also in full fellowship with at least the Episcipalian and the United Church of Christ, if not more. Brushing aside some of the more morally issues regrading pastoral leadership, there's something much more basic the UCC voted on recently that was expected to lose at a recent convention:

Whether or not Jesus was God.

That's fairly basic Christian doctrine. And the the Augsburg Confessions underlie this. If you doubt...go recheck Article 3 regarding the Chief Articles of Faith.

If E?CA was Lutheran, then why is there denominational fellowship with two denominations that disregard some of the very basic teachings of Christianity such as the above? Why be within an fellowship which allows for an "open tent" of diverse and conconflicting teachings that only lead to confusion when the Scriptures warn us to stay away from false doctrine and remain with the true?



What Benke and his cohorts did in order to wordplay the BoC to their "Universalism" that regardless whether or not they have Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior by grace, through faith they will be saved was inexcusabled. If they want to practice false all-are-one from any religion practices and the like in which all religions and any gods or goddesses are welcome...at least they should be honest and not masqurade pastors of Jesus Christ who're called to administer the sacraments as Christ commanded and preach the pure and unadulterated Law and Gospel.

I'm not that far off from labeling my own Synod as the ?CMS either if they continue to keep going the way they are either come to the on it.

I'm very glad I kept my BoC from my ole college days when Ann Arbor was still a small collage.

[SPALATIN]

I disagree. The ELCA is Lutheran because the fundamental doctrines which it upholds are Lutheran. The ELCA subscribes to the Augsburg confession. As a convert to the LCMS, the instruction course was not greatly different from the teachings of the ELCA except on the issues of Historical Criticism, women in clergy, and a generally more strict approach to current affairs. On the matters of how salvation happens, what the sacrament of the altar is, what baptism is, and other things like single predestination the ELCA is in agreement with other branches of Lutheranism. In fact, when I borrow books from my pastor often they are written by theologians of the ELCA, similarly when my mother was serving as the head of Christian Education in an ELCA church she often ordered publications from Concordia because she felt that they better illustrated the teachings that her church but did not contradict the ELCA's teachings.

It may say it holds to the Augsburg confession, but does it really? How about the rest of the Book of Concord? These issues you speak of are intrinically important if you read scripture apart from the Historical-Critical interpretation. Their compromise to the Episcopalians in the CCM was a betrayal to the Augsburg Confession, the Apology, the Smalcald Articles, The Formula of Concord and the Epitome. The E?CA betrayed Lutheranism for unity and thereby gave up their right to be called Lutheran.

The Problem is that you have a rogue leadership in the ELCA that wants to do it's own will apart from the will of the congregations. They act only in their own self-interests. The people in Word Alone state this fact consistently.

[Melethiel]

The Problem is that you have a rogue leadership in the ELCA that wants to do it's own will apart from the will of the congregations. They act only in their own self-interests. The people in Word Alone state this fact consistently.

I agree completely. I have a question though, aren't Kieschnick (sp?) and DayStar doing a similar thing in the LCMS?

[SPALATIN]

I agree completely. I have a question though, aren't Kieschnick (sp?) and DayStar doing a similar thing in the LCMS?

I won't disagree that there are problems in the LCMS with the current Synod President. I certainly didn't like it that Daystar and JesusFirst were campaigning for him last year. And his desire to put the CCM(Committee on Constitutional Matters) as a higher authority than the Synod Board has caused much consternation among the clergy and "confessionals" there, but I think he has less authority than we often give him credit for.

If he goes overboard too much he runs the risk of being voted out after 3 years. Whereas the Bishop of the E?CA I believe has a reign for as long as he wants it. If someone from the E?CA wants to correct me on this I won't get in their way.

[Jim47]

I still think these are really more issues of discipline, practice and of synod history than they are issues of theology. If you want me to believe that the ELCA is not Lutheran, then I need to see fundamental differences of doctrine.


Please believe me, I am not looking to insult nor debate, but have you not heard that many ELCA churches deny the Bible as being God's Word, they deny the ten commandments and say homo-sexual practices are O/k and I won't even bother with the other issues.

How can you consider them Lutheran.

Music. I am very happy to hear that you adhere to the LCMS beliefs. I wished you could convince your betrothed to join LCMS. At any rate, I wish you all God's Blessings in your marriage.

[night2day]

---I have a question though, aren't Kieschnick (sp?) and DayStar doing a similar thing in the LCMS?

Yes and no. Yes, the Synod preesident as well as Jesus First, Daystar, and any anti-Biblical outifit are doing the same. Recall, however, LCMS has offically not changed it's core teachings. So, no, even though these groups are working hard for that to happen officially and foundationally, the LCMS doctrinally has not changed.

While there are also entire congergations which have drifted away from the teachings and practices of the LCMS while fully retaining the name on the...which to only to be more "loving" and "accepting"...or is it more "loved and "acccepted" by a society which changes on a whim?

Still, half of the congergations in the LCMS aren't even kept up to date of what's even going on within their own synod...by their Pastors. Certain districts within the LCMS tend to be much more liberal. While others...are much more Biblically-bound. The more Biblically-bound ones are usually also the ones that are more updated by their pastors what is transpiring in the Synod.

Is it any wonder then that there are a number of LCMS members confused as to what the church really does teach unless they are sat down and taught from the pure unadultered Scriptures? And the Holy Spirit draws them to realize what they need to listen to instead of them hearing to only what they want to hear?

[IowaLutheran]

If he goes overboard too much he runs the risk of being voted out after 3 years. Whereas the Bishop of the E?CA I believe has a reign for as long as he wants it. If someone from the E?CA wants to correct me on this I won't get in their way.

He has a six year term.

http://www.elca.org/bishop/office.html

[Zoomer]

ELCA will no longer be Lutheran in a few years. It's sad, that there are Lutherans who do not even know what that means.

[Tetzel]

Please believe me, I am not looking to insult nor debate, but have you not heard that many ELCA churches deny the Bible as being God's Word, they deny the ten commandments and say homo-sexual practices are O/k and I won't even bother with the other issues.


I don't make it a practice to believe rumors without evidence.

Extraordinary claims like yours require a lot of proof. Also, just because there might be a person here or there that says something does not make it official doctrine. A few weeks ago we had a guest-pastor at my LCMS church who said the earth is 6000 years old, but if one consults the LCMS webpage it says that there is no scripture that says the earth is not older. Does that mean that those who dislike the LCMS would be justified in claiming that the LCMS promotes fundamentalism because this one man said something that would be in agreement with many fundamentalists?

[SPALATIN]

I don't make it a practice to believe rumors without evidence.

Extraordinary claims like yours require a lot of proof. Also, just because there might be a person here or there that says something does not make it official doctrine. A few weeks ago we had a guest-pastor at my LCMS church who said the earth is 6000 years old, but if one consults the LCMS webpage it says that there is no scripture that says the earth is not older. Does that mean that those who dislike the LCMS would be justified in claiming that the LCMS promotes fundamentalism because this one man said something that would be in agreement with many fundamentalists?

The ELCA holds to the Historical Critical method of understanding scripture. Which means that the Bible in part was written only to that culture at that time and does not hold relevance to today. This is how they are justifiying women being Pastors and the upcoming vote on Sexuality. I don't know that it is at the congregational level completely, but I do know that the Synod will say as much on their web-page.

[Protoevangel]

Please believe me, I am not looking to insult nor debate, but have you not heard that many ELCA churches deny the Bible as being God's Word, they deny the ten commandments and say homo-sexual practices are O/k and I won't even bother with the other issues.
I don't make it a practice to believe rumors without evidence.

Extraordinary claims like yours require a lot of proof. Also, just because there might be a person here or there that says something does not make it official doctrine. A few weeks ago we had a guest-pastor at my LCMS church who said the earth is 6000 years old, but if one consults the LCMS webpage it says that there is no scripture that says the earth is not older. Does that mean that those who dislike the LCMS would be justified in claiming that the LCMS promotes fundamentalism because this one man said something that would be in agreement with many fundamentalists?
Hi Tetzel,

Actually, Jim hit the nail on the head. The evidence is all around, if you care to see it. From the statements on the ELCA Website, to the Seminary Textbooks, to the ELCA magazine, The historic Lutheran and even core Christian doctrine are being dissected and brought into question while ancient and modern heresies are being embraced.


edit: deleted repeated word

.

[C.F.W. Walther]

Hi Tetzel,

The Lutheran, historic Lutheran and even core Christian doctrine are being dissected and brought into question while ancient and modern heresies are being embraced.

.

.


AAAAA----MENNNN:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

[Jim47]

I don't make it a practice to believe rumors without evidence.

Extraordinary claims like yours require a lot of proof. Also, just because there might be a person here or there that says something does not make it official doctrine. A few weeks ago we had a guest-pastor at my LCMS church who said the earth is 6000 years old, but if one consults the LCMS webpage it says that there is no scripture that says the earth is not older. Does that mean that those who dislike the LCMS would be justified in claiming that the LCMS promotes fundamentalism because this one man said something that would be in agreement with many fundamentalists?

I'm not sure I entirely understand your statement. I was speaking about ELCA churchs, not LCMS.

Why would say I am guilty of spreading rumors? This is common knowledge. My own kin belong to one such church and the pastor had publicaly stated that he didn't believe the Bible was God's Word nor did he believe in God's creation.

Isn't it about time we quit candy coating sin and utter disbelief?

As I said before in other posts, I don't hate these people, I pray for them that they will see their errors and repent.


my past statement>
I am not looking to insult nor debate, but have you not heard that many ELCA churches deny the Bible as being God's Word, they deny the ten commandments and say homo-sexual practices are O/k and I won't even bother with the other issues.

[SPALATIN]

I'm not sure I entirely understand your statement. I was speaking about ELCA churchs, not LCMS.

Why would say I am guilty of spreading rumors? This is common knowledge. My own kin belong to one such church and the pastor had publicaly stated that he didn't believe the Bible was God's Word nor did he believe in God's creation.

Isn't it about time we quit candy coating sin and utter disbelief?

As I said before in other posts, I don't hate these people, I pray for them that they will see their errors and repent.

Jim,

I don't think that Tetzel misunderstood you but was using an LCMS example of what he thinks you did with your comments on the ELCA.

But I agree with you about the Candy coating of sin. And we do need to pray for our E?CA brothers and sisters in Christ.

[Music4Hym777]

I'm not sure I entirely understand your statement. I was speaking about ELCA churchs, not LCMS.

Why would say I am guilty of spreading rumors? This is common knowledge. My own kin belong to one such church and the pastor had publicaly stated that he didn't believe the Bible was God's Word nor did he believe in God's creation.

Isn't it about time we quit candy coating sin and utter disbelief?

As I said before in other posts, I don't hate these people, I pray for them that they will see their errors and repent.

I will agree that there are very liberal ELCA churches that will tell you that and say those things. I once stepped foot into an ELCA church where the sermon was on how there is no such thing as God's will. But you also remember that there are other ELCA churches (the majority) that speak actual truth. They dont coat it, they speak law and gospel. I one time did an experiment, I went to an 8:00 (traditional) LC-MS church and then to a 10:30 (traditional) ELCA service, they were the EXACT same, same liturgy and all, I thought it was rather interesting.

I am not one to play sides on the different synods and you all know that.

I agree that the ELCA needs praying for. Some of the churches are going way to far off the deep end. The ones that need the most prayers are those that are RIC (Reconciling in Christ), they are the ones that are on the front lines of the LGBTQ movement.

On the flipside though I have seen some rather radical LC-MS churches, they are LCMS but I know that there is controversy about them being registered LCMS parishes. They seem to be on the front lines of over seas missions. I hadn't even thought that a Lutheran church would do that. It is not something that I am familiar with in the Lutheran church. Now I am very use to it in churches like the Missionary Church Alliance (where the entire mission of the church is to grow people up and send them over seas). Does anyone have anymore information on these LCMS churches?

Monica

[SPALATIN]

From now on I will no longer consider the E?CA Lutheran. Especially in light of the compromise that the church has made and will make in light of the BoC. They are discussing in a thread on their forum the subject of Confession-olatry. They feel that we put on par scripture with the confessions.

I think they feel that we treat our confessions the same way that Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox treat Tradition.

I feel they don't take them seriously enough. They constantly are ready to unsin sin in their desire to have unity for the sake of unity. They are truly a heterodox synod and no longer worthy of using the name Lutheran in anything that they do. Since this is on my forum I expect it not to be deleted.

I make only one apology to two persons whom I consider to be an exception to this and that is Danhead and MusicforHymn.

Just to set this straight The Word of God is the norma normans and the Book of Concord is the Normans normatta. It is an exposition of the Christian faith only. If one studies the Book of Concord they will realize that it is totally scriptural in content and context. I make no apologies for what I believe, but I apologetically defend my faith to my death.

In a conversation with filosofer in the main forum he made the case for not labeling the ELCA the E?CA. I therefore will not use the label as I suggested I would in the title. I have even changed the title of the thread though it won't show up in the page of threads that way. I do not hold those of you in an ELCA congregation in any contempt, but I do hold the leadership of your synod to be responsible for the poor witness I believe they are giving by their constant compromises over the past 17 years.

Scott

[Jim47]

In a conversation with filosofer in the main forum he made the case for not labeling the ELCA the E?CA. I therefore will not use the label as I suggested I would in the title. I have even changed the title of the thread though it won't show up in the page of threads that way. I do not hold those of you in an ELCA congregation in any contempt, but I do hold the leadership of your synod to be responsible for the poor witness I believe they are giving by their constant compromises over the past 17 years.

Scott

Scott

This is very admirable for you to do that, however, everyone of them has a Bible and knows how to read. They have chosen to follow their leaders rather than seek the truth as God's Word tells us.

My Pastor has told us many times that if He should ever start preaching anything but the whole truthes of the Bible that it was our duties first to discuss it with him, and if it could not be resolved, that we should look elsewhere for a church that did preach all of God's Word and adhere to it.

There are very few that have admited that their church is wrong, only Dan and Monica that I know of. Dan is I believe looking for another church, and Monica says her own church does teach close to the LCMS beliefs.

Where are the rest?

Didn't God warn us not to follow crowds that do wrong?

[Melethiel]

I admit that the ELCA as a whole is wrong, and my personal beliefs are closer to that of the LCMS. However, I have yet to hear any unsound teaching at my church. (Though the person picking the hymns could use some help. ;) )

[RedneckAnglican]

I do not hold those of you in an ELCA congregation in any contempt, but I do hold the leadership of your synod to be responsible for the poor witness I believe they are giving by their constant compromises over the past 17 years.

Scott

me, too...some of us are working to change that...

[ctobola]

...
The evidence is all around, if you care to see it. From the statements on the ELCA Website, to the Seminary Textbooks....
...



Dan,

Just an informational comment about the textbook issue....

I'm not sure if you're referring to an "urban myth" that's floating around about a textbook supposedly used at ELCA seminaries called Christian Dogmatics; regardless, here are a couple points to consider:

1. Every professor chooses his/her own textbooks and they change frequently -- there are no "official" textbooks that professors are required to use.

2. Textbooks are almost never totally used. For example, when I taught a class a couple years ago, my announcement to the class the first day when something like this. "Please open the XYZ textbook to chapter 6. Using a pencil, please clearly note that the information in this chapter is completely inconsistent with current standards. If you use this information in your papers or on the test, you will lose points." (I chose that particular textbook become some of the other sections were well written and note available in other places.)

3. To assume that "one of their textbooks says this, so this is what they believe" is a significant error, particularly in graduate education.
In primary and seconday school people are taught what to think -- "In 1492, Columbus discovered North America." In undergraduate and graduate education (and a typical seminary degree is a graduate degree), they teach students how to think -- "What arguments and historic evidence might be used to demonstrate Columbus' motivation for sailing to North America?"

4. Professors frequently assign readings that cover different perspectives -- sometimes even radically different -- on a particular topic. Understanding the various positions, even ones that could be considered wrong or outdated, is part of learning "how to think."
Once again an example from my own experience... Several years ago, I taught a graduate class and we used three different textbooks, each presenting completely different (and contrary) view on a particular topic. (I've been in classes where up to eight textbooks were used.) There was a view in one of the textbooks that I think is right, but it was important to understand all of the views to understand how/why one of the views was superior.

Anyway, I just wanted to clarify why "they use THAT textbook" is a meaningless and unfair statement that seems to keep floating around.

Thanks for listening!

In Christ, -Cloy

[night2day]

I will agree that there are very liberal ELCA churches that will tell you that and say those things. I once stepped foot into an ELCA church where the sermon was on how there is no such thing as God's will. But you also remember that there are other ELCA churches (the majority) that speak actual truth. They dont coat it, they speak law and gospel. I one time did an experiment, I went to an 8:00 (traditional) LC-MS church and then to a 10:30 (traditional) ELCA service, they were the EXACT same, same liturgy and all, I thought it was rather interesting.

It can't be said the same of all churches within either Synod. One only needs to look at what each publically and officially teaches and who they fellowship with. Not even are the various church districts the same within the differing parts of the country. For example, many of the northeast coast districts of the LCMS are rather liberal while many of the midwestern districts are not.

To do a thorough experiment, you would probabaly have to attend quite a few LCMS and ELCA churches. Some would be as expected. Some may be the oppisite as one may expect.

A friend of ours from one of the churches where my father had been a minister had visited us and relayed what she saw when she was at the church in Kirkwood, where Kieshnick, the synodical president, is pastor. Can anyone say "megachurch"? The way she described almost everything was not designed for a worship sevice...but for a show and entertainment.

But then, this is one who feels remaining within sound Biblical doctrine isn't important...it's missions. However, how will one properly be able to able to spread the Law and Gospel if they don't know what sound Biblical doctrine is?

I am not one to play sides on the different synods and you all know that.

I personally tend to be much more critical about my own. :)

I agree that the ELCA needs praying for. Some of the churches are going way to far off the deep end. The ones that need the most prayers are those that are RIC (Reconciling in Christ), they are the ones that are on the front lines of the LGBTQ movement.

ELCA first allowed women ministers...then homosexuals into ministery. Whether active or not , what ELCA offically did was first state God's word can be changed. And then they opened themselves up to pulpit and alter fellowship with two other denominations who have fully accepted homosexual practices as acceptable.

Then state someone's perception of themselves should be fully accepted. People dealing with temptation of any type, including homosexuality, does not make them guilty of that sin. They're only guilty of that sin if they fall into that sin. However, like all sin there is forgiveness offered. But that by no means excuses encourging or accepting that sin.

My brother knows a campus pastor. During an event for college-age LCMS Lutherans there was a RIC table there filled with leaflets seeking for youth to join in. I have to wonder just how that table got there. As I recall there were other speakers there from other denominations. I can perhaps understand one or two depending on the subject. Such as when one of the speakers was Joni Erikson Tada regarding issues of the sanctity of life (even though there is "Lutherans for Life" and mayhaps Gene Gartan could have been called.) But more than a handful...and I have to ask how can it be termed as a Lutheran event?

On the flipside though I have seen some rather radical LC-MS churches, they are LCMS but I know that there is controversy about them being registered LCMS parishes. They seem to be on the front lines of over seas missions...Does anyone have anymore information on these LCMS churches?

I haven't heard of those...at least in the sense of over-seas missions. What I have heard more of were mission churches. LCMS-speak of stating "church growth" as well as focusing on "megachurches".

But again...sound doctrine and the Great Commision were meant to go hand in hand as Christ Commanded. Not "mission first, be concerned with Biblical doctrine later".

Updated: Almost forgot to add, I read recently these "mission churches" the center of the LCMS speaks of is referring to churches building sister churches and those churches build more churches. They're not referring to the more known form in which a new congergation would form from another congergation in which the previous became too large and simply prayed anc called on a pastor and became a mission congergation.

From what I read it appeared more on center in on more missions....build more churches. But don't look into more into what these churches are teaching. Quanity over quality.

[SPALATIN]

I want to state again that I in no way have anything against those that belong to an ELCA congregation. My beef is with the Synod Leadership and especially Bishop Hansen. If I lead anyone to believe that I was against anyone particular layperson I apologize for misleading you. That was not my intent.

[Music4Hym777]

I want to state again that I in no way have anything against those that belong to an ELCA congregation. My beef is with the Synod Leadership and especially Bishop Hansen. If I lead anyone to believe that I was against anyone particular layperson I apologize for misleading you. That was not my intent.

I'll admit that alot of the national leadership needs to be replaced and some stuff go on at that level, but I know that some of the regional synod bishops are awesome. Ours (Grand Canyon Synod) is excellent! He gave probably one of the best sermons I have ever heard, full of law and gospel. The only other two sermons that stick out more in my mind are theo one of "There is no such thing as God's Will" and "If Mary were my Daughter" (I really wish I had a tape of the "If Mary was my Daughter" sermon. It was a really good advent one, putting the birth of Jesus in modern times. The pastor basically made us to believe that his 13 year old daughter had gotten pregnant by the power of the holy spirit through one of his great stories (he uses stories alot, some from personal experience, from books, from the Bible), it was a really powerful sermon to think, what would it be like for Mary's family?)

Both synods have issues that they need to deal with, and yes my church is very LCMSish, you would think that you were in an LCMS service until it came time for communion (open) they even have private confession available after each service.

[ctobola]

Music,

Could you provide sources for numbers 3 through 5? These are certainly contrary to my experiences/understandings, but if you have statistics I'd certainly be willing to hear about them.

Thanks!

In Christ, -Cloy



...snip...
Major differences are

1. Women as pastors (ELCA says yes, LCMS says no)
2. Open Communion (ELCA says yes, LCMS says no)
3. Womens right to choose (ELCA says yes, LCMS says no)
4. Confession and absolution are seen alot more in the LCMS then the ELCA
5. Confirmation, the ELCA has become really relaxed and really hardly uses the Small Catechism. Where as the LCMS holds really hard too it.
...snip...

[Protoevangel]

Music,

Could you provide sources for numbers 3 through 5? These are certainly contrary to my experiences/understandings, but if you have statistics I'd certainly be willing to hear about them.

Thanks!

In Christ, -Cloy

As far as #3 goes, the ELCA approving of the murder of innocent children (as long as they aren't born yet):
The ELCA has a number of "exceptions", allowing for this murder. The LCMS, to the best of my knowledge, does not. Also, the ELCA insurance plan coveres elective baby-murder for pastors and professional church workers.

A prety good Analysis of the ELCA Social Statement on Abortion (http://www.lutheransforlife.org/PDF%20Files/Analysis%20of%20the%20ELCA%20position%20on%20abortion.pdf) can be found at Lutherans for Life. It is in PDF format (You will need Adobe Acrobat Reader or similar software to read it).

Or if you click here (http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:cEwowU3g4A8J:www.lutheransforlife.org/PDF%2520Files/Analysis%2520of%2520the%2520ELCA%2520position%2520on%2520abortion.pdf+elective+abortion+elca&hl=en&client=firefox-a), I have linked from Google, converting the PDF to HTML so your browser can view it. (this may or may not work)

[filosofer]

As far as #3 goes, the ELCA approving of the murder of innocent children (as long as they aren't born yet):
The ELCA has a number of "exceptions", allowing for this murder. The LCMS, to the best of my knowledge, does not. Also, the ELCA insurance plan coveres elective baby-murder for pastors and professional church workers.

A prety good Analysis of the ELCA Social Statement on Abortion (http://www.lutheransforlife.org/PDF%20Files/Analysis%20of%20the%20ELCA%20position%20on%20abortion.pdf) can be found at Lutherans for Life. It is in PDF format (You will need Adobe Acrobat Reader or similar software to read it).

Or if you click here (http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:cEwowU3g4A8J:www.lutheransforlife.org/PDF%2520Files/Analysis%2520of%2520the%2520ELCA%2520position%2520on%2520abortion.pdf+elective+abortion+elca&hl=en&client=firefox-a), I have linked from Google, converting the PDF to HTML so your browser can view it. (this may or may not work)




The LCMS says that in extremely rare situations (and they indeed are rare), when the life of the mother is threatened, there may be a decision made that is characterized as the "lesser of two evils".

[Tetzel]

As far as #3 goes, the ELCA approving of the murder of innocent children (as long as they aren't born yet):
The ELCA has a number of "exceptions", allowing for this murder. The LCMS, to the best of my knowledge, does not.



"A. The LCMS believes that abortion is contrary to God's Word and "is not a moral option except, except as a tragically unavoidable byproduct of medical procedures necessary to prevent the death of another human being, viz., the mother" (1979 Res. 3-02A). Official synodical resolutions and other materials on this topic are available from the Synod's Commission on Theology and Church Relations (CTCR) (http://www.lcms.org/pages/default.asp?NavID=79)."
http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2120

[night2day]

"A. The LCMS believes that abortion is contrary to God's Word and "is not a moral option except, except as a tragically unavoidable byproduct of medical procedures necessary to prevent the death of another human being, viz., the mother" (1979 Res. 3-02A). Official synodical resolutions and other materials on this topic are available from the Synod's Commission on Theology and Church Relations (CTCR) (http://www.lcms.org/pages/default.asp?NavID=79)."
http://www.lcms.org/pages/internal.asp?NavID=2120

Quite easy to understand really. The basis is from the commandment "Thou shall not murder" which applies to the sacredness God has placed on human life, from conception until natural death....regardless whatever condition he or she may hold. This addresses anything from abortion to euthenasia, and all other assortment of issues.

Society has gotten into the habit of placing judgments on whether a person should live or die based on their "quality of life". God calls us to do much better than that. The late synodical president Dr. A.L. Barry wrote one of the aforementioned materials -- a document on The President's Commission on the Sanctity of Life (http://homepage.mac.com/gurban/commentary/that_they_may_have_life.html) while in office. It explains the LCMS stance rather well.

"(Life) has measureless value, because every individual, at every state of development and every state of consciousness, is known and loved by God. This is the source of human dignity and the basis for human equality. It must therefore be asserted without exception or qualification: no one is worthless who God has created and for whom Christ died."

-- Quote cited given within the 60th Synodical Regular Convention

[SPALATIN]

Quite easy to understand really. The basis is from the commandment "Thou shall not murder" which applies to the sacredness God has placed on human life, from conception until natural death....regardless whatever condition he or she may hold. This addresses anything from abortion to euthenasia, and all other assortment of issues.

Society has gotten into the habit of placing judgments on whether a person should live or die based on their "quality of life". God calls us to do much better than that. The late synodical president Dr. A.L. Barry wrote one of the aforementioned materials -- a document on The President's Commission on the Sanctity of Life (http://homepage.mac.com/gurban/commentary/that_they_may_have_life.html) while in office. It explains the LCMS stance rather well.

"(Life) has measureless value, because every individual, at every state of development and every state of consciousness, is known and loved by God. This is the source of human dignity and the basis for human equality. It must therefore be asserted without exception or qualification: no one is worthless who God has created and for whom Christ died."

-- Quote cited given within the 60th Synodical Regular Convention


Let's just hope that Kieschnick &Co don't undo all of that.

[night2day]

Let's just hope that Kieschnick &Co don't undo all of that.

Here, here.

[C.F.W. Walther]

Amen Scott:amen:








:confused:

[ILoveYeshua]

practicing homosexuals shouldn't be priests. that much should be just..... obvious.