sabbath keepers

[icedragon101]

Are there any Sevent-day Sabbath keepers her. seventh-day lutherns, sabbatarian lutherns.

[seajoy]

Our church has one saturday night worship service each week, on sunday we have two, but all three are the same.

[LilLamb219]

Seajoy, my church is the same...an evening service on Saturday and 2 Sunday services.

Lutherans believe that Jesus is our Sabbath rest, so we aren't legalistic about forcing a certain day for worship.

[DaRev]

Lutherans follow the Biblical, apostolic practice of worshipping on Sunday, the first day of the week, since that is the day of the Resurrection and Jesus is our Sabbath.

[Jim47]

I've never heard of Lutherans worshipping on Saturday unless it was a holiday? DaRev is right. Our Savior was raised on Sunday morning and we worship on Sunday to honor Him. We are no longer under a sabbath watch. Jesus set us free from the law.

[C.F.W. Walther]

hmmm...then maybe we should quit having lenten services on wednesday.......or any other day except Sunday?

[Jim47]

hmmm...then maybe we should quit having lenten services on wednesday.......or any other day except Sunday?


Very funny :P

[DaRev]

I've never heard of Lutherans worshipping on Saturday unless it was a holiday?

We unfortunately live in a world that doesn't view Sunday morning any differently than any other day of the week. There are some who, in order to provide for their families, have to work on Sunday mornings. I myself had for a time to while I was raising three kids by myself.

If we lived in a perfect world, it wouldn't be an issue. However, as we are very well aware, this is not a perfect world.

Starting with our Lenten services, we will be offering a mid-week Vespers service every Wednesday for those of our congregation who cannot attend Sunday mornings.

[icedragon101]

Seajoy, my church is the same...an evening service on Saturday and 2 Sunday services.

Lutherans believe that Jesus is our Sabbath rest, so we aren't legalistic about forcing a certain day for worship. are you legalistic about worshiping on sunday??? sure seem like it.

By the way I am just trying to get a count of other Sabbatarian groups. I'm not wanting to fight about the issue of the day.

[Jim47]

We unfortunately live in a world that doesn't view Sunday morning any differently than any other day of the week. There are some who, in order to provide for their families, have to work on Sunday mornings. I myself had for a time to while I was raising three kids by myself.

If we lived in a perfect world, it wouldn't be an issue. However, as we are very well aware, this is not a perfect world.

Starting with our Lenten services, we will be offering a mid-week Vespers service every Wednesday for those of our congregation who cannot attend Sunday mornings.



Ahh, in deed I forget about those who have to work on Sundays. I was in that position myself for a while, but I made some sacrifices so that I could once again worship on Sunday which is our only service unless Lenton or Advent season.

I thought we talking about people who wanted to worship on Saturday, at least that is what the OP suggested?

[DaRev]

are you legalistic about worshiping on sunday??? sure seem like it.

By the way I am just trying to get a count of other Sabbatarian groups. I'm not wanting to fight about the issue of the day.

Sounds to me like you're trying to pick a fight.

The point is that Christians worship on Sunday to celebrate the Resurrection of Christ. That is the day He rose, thus that is the day Christians worship. We follow the apostolic practice of gathering together on the first day of the week. Nothing legalistic about it. We do it because the Holy Spirit moves us to.

[LilLamb219]

are you legalistic about worshiping on sunday??? sure seem like it.

By the way I am just trying to get a count of other Sabbatarian groups. I'm not wanting to fight about the issue of the day.

You didn't read what I wrote? We are NOT legalistic about worshipping on Sunday. My church and seajoy's church have Saturday worship services.

Please read Da Rev's posting on why Sunday is the general day of worship.

And it does sound as if you're trying to pick a fight.

[DaSeminarian]

Lutherans follow the Biblical, apostolic practice of worshipping on Sunday, the first day of the week, since that is the day of the Resurrection and Jesus is our Sabbath.


The First Day or the 8th Day depending on which Gospel you go by is how the Church father's determined that Sunday was the day of Christian worship.

[filosofer]

The Sabbath was originally the day of God's rest/harmony with what he created.

Genesis 2:3 So God blessed the seventh day and made it holy, because on it God rested from all his work that he had done in creation.

The giving of the Law as the people departed from Egypt and slavery included that creation, pre-fall remembrance
Exodus 20:8-11 Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

But in Deuteronomy there was another aspect, the deliverance from bondage in Egypt as the basis for the Sabbath remembrance:

Deuteronomy 5:15 You shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the Lord your God brought you out from there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm. Therefore the Lord your God commanded you to keep the Sabbath day.

Jesus came to fulfill the entire Law (Matt. 5:17). He also said:

Matthew 11:28–29 Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.
Which he goes on to explain in greater detail in Matthew 12:1–14 (something greater than the Temple and the Law-keeping associated with it), after all Jesus is the Lord of the Sabbath (Matt. 12:8).

Paul writes about this issue:
Romans 14:5–6 One person esteems one day as better than another, while another esteems all days alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. The one who observes the day, observes it in honor of the Lord. The one who eats, eats in honor of the Lord, since he gives thanks to God, while the one who abstains, abstains in honor of the Lord and gives thanks to God.

Galatians 4:9–11 But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God, how can you turn back again to the weak and worthless elementary principles of the world, whose slaves you want to be once more? You observe days and months and seasons and years! I am afraid I may have labored over you in vain.

The writer to the Hebrews also stresses the future aspect of the rest, which comes from being in Christ now, and ultimately reaches its perfection in heaven: Hebrews 4:1-12. Note the focus on faith, and the basis for it is the Word. Based on this text, which is the better "rest": the partial, law-keeping of the Old Testament that can never give true rest ("otherwise, why was there "another day"?), or the fullness which is rest in Christ?

And finally Paul summarizes the entire issue, which is the key of DaRev's (Christ is the center) and LilLamb's (we have freedom)responses:

Colossians 2:16–17 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.
Or as Paul writes to the Galatians:
For freedom Christ has set us free; stand firm therefore, and do not submit again to a yoke of slavery.

The Lutheran view is: why go back to something which is only a shadow, when we have the fullness and the reality in Christ?


In Christ's love,
filo

[Studeclunker]

Therefore let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ.

Phillips paraphrase puts it even clearer:

In view of these tremendous facts, don't let anyone worry you by criticizing what you eat, or drink, or what holy days you ought to observe or bothering you over new moons or sabbaths. All these things have at most only a symbolical value; the solid fact is Christ.


There is to my knowledge no sabbatarian Lutheran sect. This subject has come up before with exhaustive arguments. You might, Dragon, want to do a search on this. We had a fellow come into this forum with the same question. By his arguments, he was either a Roman Catholic or a Seventh Day Adventist. Regardless, the practice of worshiping the Lord on Sunday predates the RC by several hundred years. The explanation has been muddied by time and poor records. The Lutheran church retained many rites and practices after breaking from the RC. This was because they pre-dated the Papal authority and the Roman Catholic church that was in place in the sixteenth century. Martin Luther was asked about this and responded with the oft quoted, "Don't let's throw the baby out with the bath water."

Yes, well, Filo, you beat me to it.:D ;) I'm just not fast enough with posting.:sigh:

[Edial]

Good post and conclusion, filo. :)

[Studeclunker]

I agree, excellent post, Filo!

[TheCosmicGospel]

We never find the Amazing Grace of the Lord by hanging on to the legalism of the Sabbath. They had a hard time giving up circumcision among converts. There was a clear ship that sailed there. Freedom (among other things) kept them from ever returning.

Cheers,
Cosmic

[icedragon101]

bump

[FaithfulRemnant]

Are you certain the saturday we have now is the sanctified sabbath and according to the same calendar used 2,000 years ago? Also what if a calendar starts at Monday and ends on Sunday? It's an area of unnecessary disputing.

[DaRev]

We know that Jesus rose on the first day of the week. Christian worship on the first day of the week is mentioned in Acts 20:7. Sunday, as the first day of the week, goes back to the earliest days of the Church.

[DaSeminarian]

We know that Jesus rose on the first day of the week. Christian worship on the first day of the week is mentioned in Acts 20:7. Sunday, as the first day of the week, goes back to the earliest days of the Church.


The argument can also be made regarding the 8th day. From the day that Jesus came to Jerusalem (Palm Sunday) Easter Sunday is the 8th day and is the beginning of our life in the Resurrected Lord Jesus Christ.

[DaRev]

The argument can also be made regarding the 8th day. From the day that Jesus came to Jerusalem (Palm Sunday) Easter Sunday is the 8th day and is the beginning of our life in the Resurrected Lord Jesus Christ.

The point that I am making is that Scripture specifically mentions the disciples gathering to worship and "break bread" on the first day of the week.

[Aibrean]

icedragon:

we also LOOOOVEEEEE pork!

[Orion567]

I observe Saturday as the Sabbath and Sunday as the The Lord's Day respectively because I use one day to rest from my labours. In all truth I work harder to get my kids ready for church than I do all week and could not consider Sunday a Sabbath due to the sweat and tears that goes into getting my kids ready for church. I do not observe it legalistic in nature, more out of convenience just one day I look at my labours and rest from it. Otherwise, the debate of this is more relative as each one of us in christian liberty is not bound by Law for any of our salvation, but by Grace alone. If I choose to observe saturday as Sabbath, I am not transgressing but choosing to put aside one day to rest and reflect on the labours the Lord has allowed me to rest from. Then on Sunday I worship the Lord my God in observance of what He has done for me in the work of Christ. Not debating the issue in any way, just putting in .0002 cents as I am able at this time of the morning. :)

[BigNorsk]

are you legalistic about worshiping on sunday??? sure seem like it.

By the way I am just trying to get a count of other Sabbatarian groups. I'm not wanting to fight about the issue of the day.

Absolutely not legalistic about it in any way shape or form. For a good explanation, I would refer you to Luther's Small Catechism with explanations. (http://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/LCMS/explanation.pdf) It would be the part on the third Commandment, Questions 35-40 starting on page 15.

Also the Large Catechisms (http://www.bookofconcord.org/largecatechism/3_tencommandments.html)explanation on the Third Commandment.

Some people misunderstand and think that Lutherans teach that we must worship on Sunday but that is not the case, we generally worship on Sunday to commemorate that Jesus rose from the dead on the first day but this is not a matter of law where we must worship that day.

If things were such that it was convenient for the church to meet and worship on Thursday, that would be fine. Sunday works for most places especially in the United States and Europe so Sunday it is. Some Congregations are large enough they are able to offer worship multiple times during the week.

Here are some points from the Catechisms.

82] This commandment, therefore, according to its gross sense, does not concern us Christians; for it is altogether an external matter, like other ordinances of the Old Testament, which were attached to particular customs, persons, times, and places, and now have been made free through Christ.

89] And, indeed we Christians ought always to keep such a holy day, and be occupied with nothing but holy things, i.e., daily be engaged upon God's Word, and carry it in our hearts and upon our lips. But (as has been said) since we do not at all times have leisure, we must devote several hours a week for the sake of the young, or at least a day for the sake of the entire multitude, to being concerned about this alone, and especially urge the Ten Commandments, the Creed, and the Lord's Prayer, and thus direct our whole life and being according to God's Word. 90] At whatever time, then, this is being observed and practiced, there a true holy day is being kept; otherwise it shall not be called a Christians' holy day. For, indeed, non-Christians can also cease from work and be idle, just as the entire swarm of our ecclesiastics, who stand daily in the churches, singing, and ringing bells but keeping no holy day holy, because they neither preach nor practice God's Word, but teach and live contrary to it.

37. Does God require the church to worship together on any specific days?
A. God requires Christians to worship together.
115 Acts2:42,46 They devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to the fellowship, to the
breaking of bread and to prayer.... Every day they continued to meet together in the temple
courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts.
116 Heb. 10:25 Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us
encourage one another-and all the more as you see the Day approaching.
B. He has not specified any particular day.
117 Rom. 14:5-6 One man considers one day more sacred than another; another man considers
every day alike. Each one should be fully convinced in his own mind. He
who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord.
118 Gal. 4:10-11 You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! I fear for
you, that some how I have wasted my efforts on you.
C. The church worships together especially on Sunday because Christ rose from
the dead on Sunday.
119 Luke 24:1-2 On the first day of the week, very early in the morning, the women took the spices
they had prepared and went to the tomb. They found the stone rolled away from the tomb.
120 Acts 20:7 On the first day of the week we came together to break bread. Paul spoke to the
people and, because he intended to leave the next day, kept on talking until midnight.

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

I have routinely, in the past, participated in Messianic Sabbath services on Friday at dusk (the family dusk service is far more important than the synagouge Torah reading on Saturday morning).

If anything else, participation in that ritual has strengthened my belief in the importance of Sunday morning worship in word and sacrament. On Friday at dusk the Jewish people remember the completion of the creation of the world (which happened at Friday at dusk) through the reading of the Genesis account and the eating of a ritual meal. And through that ritual, they participate in the act of creation. So too, we, celebrate the completely of the recreation event on Sunday morning, im remembrance of the resurrection, through the reading of the Gospel, the words of the institution, and the practice of the new covenant meal. And through worship in word and sacrament, we participate in Christ's death and resurrection and the new creation.

Of course there is Christian liberty, and many people would feel uncomfortable participating in a Jewish Sabbath dinner. But for me, personally, it has been very beneficial.

[Luther073082]

I've never heard of Lutherans worshipping on Saturday unless it was a holiday? DaRev is right. Our Savior was raised on Sunday morning and we worship on Sunday to honor Him. We are no longer under a sabbath watch. Jesus set us free from the law.



My uncle's LCMS church offers a Saturday evening service that they used to attend very often. I don't know if they still attend or if they still even have that service. But I do remember as a young atheist being dragged to services at his church when they where babysitting me.

Yes I was an atheist before I was old enough to take care of myself while my parents where away.

[DaSeminarian]

We unfortunately live in a world that doesn't view Sunday morning any differently than any other day of the week. There are some who, in order to provide for their families, have to work on Sunday mornings. I myself had for a time to while I was raising three kids by myself.

If we lived in a perfect world, it wouldn't be an issue. However, as we are very well aware, this is not a perfect world.

Starting with our Lenten services, we will be offering a mid-week Vespers service every Wednesday for those of our congregation who cannot attend Sunday mornings.


I hope you are back to working Sundays. Otherwise your congregation will be without a leader. ;)

[DaSeminarian]

The point that I am making is that Scripture specifically mentions the disciples gathering to worship and "break bread" on the first day of the week.

Scripture also (Luke) uses the 8th day as the beginning of the new life in Christ. Both are used and I did understand your point. I was just adding to it.

[DaRev]

I hope you are back to working Sundays. Otherwise your congregation will be without a leader. ;)

Well, yeah, if you call what I do "work". :P

Scripture also (Luke) uses the 8th day as the beginning of the new life in Christ. Both are used and I did understand your point. I was just adding to it.

:thumbsup:

[KimLCMS]

Well, yeah, if you call what I do "work". :P



:thumbsup:
We all know that you have a very demanding job. Thanks for doing what you do!

[PreachersWife2004]

Kim, I certainly wish more people had your attitude!

I am constantly surprised at the number of people who think my husband only works one day of the week. I wish that were the case.

As it stands, my husband works a double work-week - he usually clocks in at least 80 hours of work. (At least he claims to be working - he does have internet and he does like to play games! ;))

And then let's add in the hospital visits and the shut-in visits. And the adult bible classes and the confirmation classes...well, okay, just class this year but still.

Pastors DO have very demanding jobs. On top of that they must deal with living in glass houses and some even have to worry about whether their spouses are going to get in trouble for wearing a shirt that wasn't high enough up on the neck......... :eek: Oh, the things they put up with!!!

[DaRev]

(At least he claims to be working - he does have internet and he does like to play games! ;))

:eek: Didn't your hubby ever tell you not to give out all our secrets?? :doh:

^_^ :P :D

[PreachersWife2004]

If he did, it probably went in one ear and out the other, like a lot of things he says to me!! ;)^_^

[Luther073082]

Kim, I certainly wish more people had your attitude!

I am constantly surprised at the number of people who think my husband only works one day of the week. I wish that were the case.

As it stands, my husband works a double work-week - he usually clocks in at least 80 hours of work. (At least he claims to be working - he does have internet and he does like to play games! ;))

And then let's add in the hospital visits and the shut-in visits. And the adult bible classes and the confirmation classes...well, okay, just class this year but still.

Pastors DO have very demanding jobs. On top of that they must deal with living in glass houses and some even have to worry about whether their spouses are going to get in trouble for wearing a shirt that wasn't high enough up on the neck......... :eek: Oh, the things they put up with!!!

Actually I don't know why people still belive Pastor's only work on Sunday. I personally feel sorry for my pastor because we have a congregation of 1000 baptized members and 400 people attending every Sunday and growing and we just lost our intern pastor. The way he puts in as many hours as he does, doing the kind of job that he does and yet still always has a smile on his face is something I've always admired about him.

Although I wonder why your husband teaches confrimation. . . I'm one of 6 confrimation teachers at my church and none of them are paid staff. We're volunteers under the direction of the youth director. The adult bible studies are taught by my pastor, but they are at the same time as confrimation, which is unfortunte because I can't usually attend them because of it.

:eek: Didn't your hubby ever tell you not to give out all our secrets?? :doh:


I know you have to be doing some CF posting at your office in the church.

[DaRev]

Although I wonder why your husband teaches confrimation. . .

It's part of our job. This is one of the main differences between the LCMS and the ELCA. The Missouri Synod takes the Lord's Supper very seriously. It is the pastor's responsibility as the steward of the mysteries to admit or deny admittance to the Lord's Table. Confirmation instruction is the preparation for admission to the Sacrament, thus it is the pastor's duty and responsibility to instruct those who desire to be admitted. No one else in the church has that authority to admit or deny.

[Luther073082]

It's part of our job. This is one of the main differences between the LCMS and the ELCA. The Missouri Synod takes the Lord's Supper very seriously. It is the pastor's responsibility as the steward of the mysteries to admit or deny admittance to the Lord's Table. Confirmation instruction is the preparation for admission to the Sacrament, thus it is the pastor's duty and responsibility to instruct those who desire to be admitted. No one else in the church has that authority to admit or deny.

Our pastor interviews and tests each candidate for confrimation before they are confirmed. We teach them the material they need to know for this and then some. So in order to be confirmed it has to go through the pastor. Although you are right because you don't have to be confirmed to recieve the Eucharist in our church, you get first communion in 5th grade and in 6th grade start confrimation which ends as you are just entering high school

I think it would be more correct that we don't worry about who receives the sacrament in the ELCA. You still have to be ordained in order to speak the words of institution and administer the Eucharist. I don't think we hold to the idea of "horizontal" communion.

[LilLamb219]

Our pastor works a great deal as well. It was wonderful to be able to call our former vicar to the Associate's Pastor position to help alleviate some of that workload!

I'm glad women don't get to be pastors :) It's a rough job!

[DaRev]

Our pastor works a great deal as well. It was wonderful to be able to call our former vicar to the Associate's Pastor position to help alleviate some of that workload!

I'm glad women don't get to be pastors :) It's a rough job!

I had a classmate at sem who once said, "Anyone who WANTS this job needs to have their damn head examined!!!"

[porterross]

I'm less than crazy about the idea of our non-M.Div. pastor instructing my daughter's confirmation. How can someone who's not ordained or thoroughly instructed in Scripture, the Large Catechism and the Confessions instruct others about the Lutheran Church? :scratch:

[Luther073082]

I'm less than crazy about the idea of our non-M.Div. pastor instructing my daughter's confirmation. How can someone who's not ordained or thoroughly instructed in Scripture, the Large Catechism and the Confessions instruct others about the Lutheran Church? :scratch:

How can Abraham Lincoln become a lawyer?

Also our teaching in our church isn't very thorough I've found.

In the class I took for adults joining the church, I learned absolutly nothing. . . All I learned about Lutheranism came from college.

[PreachersWife2004]

Luther######, Seeing how many questions you pose here wrt Lutheran Doctrine, I wouldn't want you teaching my son confirmation. I realize that sounds pretty harsh, but in reality it's honest truth.

[Luther073082]

Luther######, Seeing how many questions you pose here wrt Lutheran Doctrine, I wouldn't want you teaching my son confirmation. I realize that sounds pretty harsh, but in reality it's honest truth.

Thats fine, I don't know the curriculum that you teach either. It doesn't bother me because my pastor, the rest of the staff at my church, and the laity has full confidence in my ability to teach the classes.

The curriculum our church teachs is very basic, I was worried about doing it because I had only been a Christian for like 3 or 4 years.

I don't know how knowledgeable the average laity is in your churchs but in my church it isn't much. In fact part of the reason I was selected was because of my knowledge on Lutheran history and doctrines.

But you have to remember that everything that I do know from that has been self taught. Everything I know from the bible has also been self taught or learned from a sermon.

Actually I was wondering, our church in the fire-side room has a collection of books containing all of Luther's writings on particular subjects, and I was reading some of them the other day but I was wondering where might be able to purchase a copy of the set myself.

Oh yeah and you can call me Kirk, this goes for everyone. Typing Luther##### has probably gotten annoying by now, so just use my first name.

[PreachersWife2004]

I don't know which is worse, typing Luther##### or seeing William Shatner in my head. I'm sure you've NEVER heard that one, right?

Our ministers attend school for a minimum of eight years. They are in regular college for four and attend seminary for four. They vicar their third summer of seminary.

Most WELS pastors also choose to continue their learning through courses that the seminary offers over the summer.

All in all, they are VERY learned in not only the scripture, but Lutheran doctrine as well.

I think you can purchase most of Luther's works through either Concordia Publishing or Northwestern Publishing House.

[Luther073082]

I don't know which is worse, typing Luther##### or seeing William Shatner in my head. I'm sure you've NEVER heard that one, right?

Just don't call me Captain, the funny thing is that in Star Trek, William Shatners Character's name was James T. Kirk which means Kirk was his last name, this is my first name. No actually Kirk means "Church" Its older name that was never very popular. By 1990 it didn't even make the top 1000 popular names. I have met 3 people in my lifetime with the same name.


Our ministers attend school for a minimum of eight years. They are in regular college for four and attend seminary for four. They vicar their third summer of seminary.

Most WELS pastors also choose to continue their learning through courses that the seminary offers over the summer.

All in all, they are VERY learned in not only the scripture, but Lutheran doctrine as well.

As do ours. . .

Not sure what your point is in this?


I think you can purchase most of Luther's works through either Concordia Publishing or Northwestern Publishing House.

K, although honestly I read one chapter of what Luther wrote and it already disagreed with what Rev told me in here earlier. Which is scary, I don't know if Luther reversed his opinion later or maybe I was misinterpeting someone but I re-read it a couple times.

Although this was an early work, and is not found in the book of concord.

[DaRev]

How can Abraham Lincoln become a lawyer?

But Lincoln didn't practice Law until he learned it. The LCMS DELTO program (which is now defunct) was putting untrained, uneducated (at least in theology) men into pastoral roles and responsibilities and the churches have been suffering from it.

[DaRev]

Thats fine, I don't know the curriculum that you teach either. It doesn't bother me because my pastor, the rest of the staff at my church, and the laity has full confidence in my ability to teach the classes.

The curriculum our church teachs is very basic, I was worried about doing it because I had only been a Christian for like 3 or 4 years.

I don't know how knowledgeable the average laity is in your churchs but in my church it isn't much. In fact part of the reason I was selected was because of my knowledge on Lutheran history and doctrines.

But you have to remember that everything that I do know from that has been self taught. Everything I know from the bible has also been self taught or learned from a sermon.

Actually I was wondering, our church in the fire-side room has a collection of books containing all of Luther's writings on particular subjects, and I was reading some of them the other day but I was wondering where might be able to purchase a copy of the set myself.

Oh yeah and you can call me Kirk, this goes for everyone. Typing Luther##### has probably gotten annoying by now, so just use my first name.

There is nothing more important than our eternity. Thus, there is nothing more important than learning all we can about God and His Church through which He gives us the gift of life and salvation. You will never see an intern teaching someone brain surgery, and an untrained layman should not be teaching the finer points of our faith.

[DaRev]

Just don't call me Captain, the funny thing is that in Star Trek, William Shatners Character's name was James T. Kirk which means Kirk was his last name, this is my first name. No actually Kirk means "Church" Its older name that was never very popular. By 1990 it didn't even make the top 1000 popular names. I have met 3 people in my lifetime with the same name.

So I guess calling you Cameron is out then, huh? ^_^

K, although honestly I read one chapter of what Luther wrote and it already disagreed with what Rev told me in here earlier. Which is scary, I don't know if Luther reversed his opinion later or maybe I was misinterpeting someone but I re-read it a couple times.

Although this was an early work, and is not found in the book of concord.

We don't base our teachings on Luther's works. We base them on Sola Scriptura. You have to remember that in his early years Luther was still very much influenced by Romansit teaching and practice. As he matured in the faith his writings became more reflective of this.

The entire set of "Luther's Works" are available through Concordia Publishing House (volumes 1-30) and Augsburg Fortress Publishing (volumes 31-54). The whole set can be had for about $1300.00

[porterross]

How can Abraham Lincoln become a lawyer?

Also our teaching in our church isn't very thorough I've found.

In the class I took for adults joining the church, I learned absolutly nothing. . . All I learned about Lutheranism came from college.

You mean, how DID Abraham Lincoln come to know as much about the law as he did? That's an odd analogy that cannot be applied given that he did study a wide variety of subjects, reading most everything he could get his hands on including law. He still had be examined to be admitted to the Bar, formal education or not.

As for your ELCA adult classes being useless, that is not exactly a shock to any of us here. It's exactly why we have a difficult time considering the whole of the ELCA to be truly Lutheran.

Catechesis should only take place under the guidance of clergy, by those properly and thoroughly instructed in the Lutheran Confessions. Thank God that a highly confessional LCMS pastor offered to oversee my daughter's progress here. I feel much better knowing she will be properly instructed and examined before Holy Week, when I would hope she can take part in communion. :pray:

[DaSeminarian]

How can Abraham Lincoln become a lawyer?

Also our teaching in our church isn't very thorough I've found.

In the class I took for adults joining the church, I learned absolutly nothing. . . All I learned about Lutheranism came from college.

Kirk,

How thorough can you possibly be? So far you have asked us more about the Lutheran church than most people. I do think you want to learn, but what you learn here is going to be minimal. If I may, I would like to suggest that you read some books before you even think about teaching a confirmation class.

I suggest that you read the Kolb/Wengert Book of Concord (Tappert edition or Concordia Triglotta are good as well). After reading these compare what they say to what your Synod teaches about scripture in general. See if you think that Luther and the Lutheran Church fathers who wrote a good amount of the work in the BOC, were of a Higher critical mind as is the majority of the theologians in your synod.

Read Luther's Large Catechism and see how the LC expands on the Small Catechism that you are supposed to teach in confirmation. Do yourself the favor of studying this stuff as thoroughly as possible and then let us know if you still think the teaching your church is giving their people is still sufficient.

[DaRev]

Thank God that a highly confessional LCMS pastor offered to oversee my daughter's progress here. I feel much better knowing she will be properly instructed and examined before Holy Week, when I would hope she can take part in communion. :pray:

Hmmm... I wonder who that could be... :scratch:


;)

[DaSeminarian]

Hmmm... I wonder who that could be... :scratch:


;)

Oh stop scratching your head in mock surprise. You know darned well who it is. :D

[porterross]

Hmmm... I wonder who that could be... :scratch:


;)


Some yankee preacher who stirred a whole slew of pots by doing his proper, liturgical, traditional thing in a quiet Texas town one Sunday in June.


But Lincoln didn't practice Law until he learned it. The LCMS DELTO program (which is now defunct) was putting untrained, uneducated (at least in theology) men into pastoral roles and responsibilities and the churches have been suffering from it.



That's a gross understatement to say the least. :(

[DaRev]

Some yankee preacher who stirred a whole slew of pots by doing his proper, liturgical, traditional thing in a quiet Texas town one Sunday in June.



Don't forget the one that was stirred by wearing this...

http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w254/jweatherell/mecollar.jpg

^_^

[Luther073082]

Kirk,

How thorough can you possibly be? So far you have asked us more about the Lutheran church than most people. I do think you want to learn, but what you learn here is going to be minimal. If I may, I would like to suggest that you read some books before you even think about teaching a confirmation class.

I suggest that you read the Kolb/Wengert Book of Concord (Tappert edition or Concordia Triglotta are good as well). After reading these compare what they say to what your Synod teaches about scripture in general. See if you think that Luther and the Lutheran Church fathers who wrote a good amount of the work in the BOC, were of a Higher critical mind as is the majority of the theologians in your synod.

Read Luther's Large Catechism and see how the LC expands on the Small Catechism that you are supposed to teach in confirmation. Do yourself the favor of studying this stuff as thoroughly as possible and then let us know if you still think the teaching your church is giving their people is still sufficient.

Actually I've asked more questions about LCMS & WELS Lutheranism.

And I've already taught 8th grade for a year, and every confrimation teacher, the youth director and the head pastor has witnessed my teaching and has never raised an issue with it and they have invited me to teach again this year.

I was asked to teach this class I did not request it.

Please don't question my qualifications to teach this class. This isn't a doctrine class so much as it is a basic bible class. We don't teach from the book of concord, the only literature we are going to teach from is Luther small cathecism (sp?) and the NLT bible. I find doctrines interesting however I don't view them as life and death, maybe you do. But if you do you might want to do a better job on some of your members, most LCMS members that I've met know less about your doctrine then I do.

I know more then you realize.

[PreachersWife2004]

You are still a new Christian, a babe suckling on milk. YOU still need to be taking classes.

I have been a Lutheran for 33 years. 33 years!! and I still would not be comfortable teaching a confirmation class, not only because I'm a female (DUH) but because I am not a trained minister and the studies I've done of Lutheran Doctrine have been through bible classes and self-study. That's not enough to be teaching the future of the church.

It's not a person thing against you or anything like that. But it is a fairly good indication as to why the ELCA is slowly circling the drain if they are letting laity teach confirmation classes.

[Luther073082]

You are still a new Christian, a babe suckling on milk. YOU still need to be taking classes.

I have been a Lutheran for 33 years. 33 years!! and I still would not be comfortable teaching a confirmation class, not only because I'm a female (DUH) but because I am not a trained minister and the studies I've done of Lutheran Doctrine have been through bible classes and self-study. That's not enough to be teaching the future of the church.

It's not a person thing against you or anything like that. But it is a fairly good indication as to why the ELCA is slowly circling the drain if they are letting laity teach confirmation classes.

Every national Lutheran church is circling the drain. . . fortunutly our parish isn't one of them as its about doubled in size in the last 10 years.

And really I don't view myself as a infant Christian. I don't claim to be an expert but for a class such as this you don't really need to be. I had no idea confessional churchs had so little trust in their laity. The idea that our pastor could teach a confrimation class is laughable, he simpily wouldn't have the time. Especially since confrimation is a 3 year program and we seperate students by grade.

And I thought females where allowed to teach children. Are 11 to 14 year olds not children?

Pastor's wife is going to teach 7th grade this year.

[DaRev]

Every national Lutheran church is circling the drain. . . fortunutly our parish isn't one of them as its about doubled in size in the last 10 years.

Parish size has nothing to do with it. Some of the most heterodox churches in the world are growing leaps and bounds.

And there's a difference between those who are fighting to put the plug back into the drain, and those who are fighting to pull it further out.

[porterross]

I don't mind teaching my daughter what she needs to know to fully grasp the Lord's Supper and what it means to be a confirmed Lutheran. However, Rev can confirm that I wouldn't pretend to be able to do it properly without the guidance of an ordained LCMS pastor and I was baptized in the LCMS when I was two. My daughter's catechesis is just too important to assume I'm getting it right.

[Luther073082]

Parish size has nothing to do with it. Some of the most heterodox churches in the world are growing leaps and bounds.

And you wonder why I worry about attachment to doctrines?

Personally I prefer to view Churchs at Christian or not Christian. (I a few fringe non-christian religions call their houses of worship churchs) I like to learn about doctrines and all but really, I applaud other Christian church's growing, not lament it.

And there's a difference between those who are fighting to put the plug back into the drain, and those who are fighting to pull it further out.

And what pray-tell pulls the drain further out? Whatever it is, its not a confessional/non-confessional issue because all three churchs are in a similar rate of decline.

[PreachersWife2004]

Well, I also know that the bible talks about the end times and how the world will continue to get worse.

Those churches that are growing by leaps and bounds may have a little of the gospel being preached, but more and more of them are all about what YOU can do for God, not the other way around. I can only hope and pray that the Holy Spirit guides the people in these misdirected churches to the right path.

With the ELCA, however, they go beyond destroying Luther's doctrines, they also destroy the scriptures. They have eroded the scriptures to the point where they really don't matter any more. ELCA is on the brink of a huge explosion (or maybe implosion). While WELS and LCMS and ELS may have budget woes, or a small decline in membership, we are not faced with outright mutiny the way ELCA is. And I daresay that if any of the synods above passed a memorial similar to that one passed by ELCA, you can bet your small catechism there'd be a mutiny, and it would be fast and furious.

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

And you wonder why I worry about attachment to doctrines?

I worry about when people care more about attracting people to their church instead of attraching them to the gospel.

[DaRev]

I worry about when people care more about attracting people to their church instead of attraching them to the gospel.

Here, here!! :clap: :amen:

[PreachersWife2004]

I worry about when people care more about attracting people to their church instead of attraching them to the gospel.

Where's my reps button?

Nail, meet head. Bonk.

[porterross]

I worry about when people care more about attracting people to their church instead of attraching them to the gospel.
I see you've decrypted the mega church mission statement.

[Luther073082]

Well, I also know that the bible talks about the end times and how the world will continue to get worse.

Those churches that are growing by leaps and bounds may have a little of the gospel being preached, but more and more of them are all about what YOU can do for God, not the other way around. I can only hope and pray that the Holy Spirit guides the people in these misdirected churches to the right path.

With the ELCA, however, they go beyond destroying Luther's doctrines, they also destroy the scriptures. They have eroded the scriptures to the point where they really don't matter any more. ELCA is on the brink of a huge explosion (or maybe implosion). While WELS and LCMS and ELS may have budget woes, or a small decline in membership, we are not faced with outright mutiny the way ELCA is. And I daresay that if any of the synods above passed a memorial similar to that one passed by ELCA, you can bet your small catechism there'd be a mutiny, and it would be fast and furious.

I agree the ELCA is on the verge of an outright Mutiny. I keep saying that the church is going to split eventually so lets just do it right now and get it over with.

The healthy midwestern synods will probably go more conservative, although I disagree, they will probably dump celibate homosexual clergy. Possibly also dump women in the clergy. . .

Its tough for me, I can't find a national Lutheran church body in which I agree totally with doctrinally.

[DaSeminarian]

I agree the ELCA is on the verge of an outright Mutiny. I keep saying that the church is going to split eventually so lets just do it right now and get it over with.

The healthy midwestern synods will probably go more conservative, although I disagree, they will probably dump celibate homosexual clergy. Possibly also dump women in the clergy. . .

Its tough for me, I can't find a national Lutheran church body in which I agree totally with doctrinally.

You are correct they will not "dump" these. Word Alone has already said that any of the congregations going to the Lutheran Church in Mission for CHrist (LCMC) that they will still ordain women to preach.

I hope for your sake that you decide whether or not the ELCA is worth staying and fighting. Many have been fighting before you and their fight has been futile so far.

Last month at the LCMS convention the ELCA secretary urged more talks between the synods. But that was before their convention. I truly hope that the LCMS sees this final red flag and withdraws from any further talks for a while.

Your synod in my opinion has demonstrated that they are heterodoxical and only trying to appease the politically correct in what they do.

I pray for you Kirk and that God will lead you in this. If he chooses to keep you where you are then that is his business, but I pray that he leads you out of the ELCA.

Scott

[Luther073082]

You are correct they will not "dump" these. Word Alone has already said that any of the congregations going to the Lutheran Church in Mission for CHrist (LCMC) that they will still ordain women to preach.

I hope for your sake that you decide whether or not the ELCA is worth staying and fighting. Many have been fighting before you and their fight has been futile so far.

Last month at the LCMS convention the ELCA secretary urged more talks between the synods. But that was before their convention. I truly hope that the LCMS sees this final red flag and withdraws from any further talks for a while.

Your synod in my opinion has demonstrated that they are heterodoxical and only trying to appease the politically correct in what they do.

I pray for you Kirk and that God will lead you in this. If he chooses to keep you where you are then that is his business, but I pray that he leads you out of the ELCA.

Scott

I feel the warning flags going up, the problem is that I don't know where to go. I'm not in total docrtinal agreement with the LCMS either and in order to commune they want total doctrinal agreement. And I'm not going to lie about it like a lot of LCMS members do. I have to find a church that represents what I belive in or at least allows some freedom of belief within it.

The one nice thing that sort of keeps me stuck a little bit is that the ELCA allows for a lot of freedom for each person to belive how they wish. The problem is this freedom has gone way too far to where everything has become permissable. On top of that I have no desire to leave my current parish. Although eventually I will have to move and if I change national affiliation, that is probably when I'm going to do it.

Actually I should add that it was strange that when I took an oath to teach confrimation my oath only asked me to uphold and teach the doctrine and teachings of Bethany Lutheran Church and never actually asked me to teach or uphold any ELCA doctrines. I remember thinking that was kind of strange, but I now I see why that is.

[DaSeminarian]

I feel the warning flags going up, the problem is that I don't know where to go. I'm not in total docrtinal agreement with the LCMS either and in order to commune they want total doctrinal agreement. And I'm not going to lie about it like a lot of LCMS members do. I have to find a church that represents what I belive in or at least allows some freedom of belief within it.

The one nice thing that sort of keeps me stuck a little bit is that the ELCA allows for a lot of freedom for each person to belive how they wish. The problem is this freedom has gone way too far to where everything has become permissable. On top of that I have no desire to leave my current parish. Although eventually I will have to move and if I change national affiliation, that is probably when I'm going to do it.

Actually I should add that it was strange that when I took an oath to teach confrimation my oath only asked me to uphold and teach the doctrine and teachings of Bethany Lutheran Church and never actually asked me to teach or uphold any ELCA doctrines. I remember thinking that was kind of strange, but I now I see why that is.
Try LCMC which I mentioned in my quotes. They are more conservative than ELCA, but they are still a little more liberal than LCMS.

[DaRev]

The one nice thing that sort of keeps me stuck a little bit is that the ELCA allows for a lot of freedom for each person to belive how they wish.

And this right here is the root of the problem. They allow people to "believe as they wish" instead of teaching people what God's will is as revealed in the Scriptures. It's not about us and what we "wish" to believe, it is about God and what He has told us about the faith.

[LilLamb219]

EXACTLY, Rev!!!! Before I started attending the LCMS church I'm at now, I was at a church that was ELCA and as Luther pointed out, they allow for people to believe as they want...instead of believing what God has given us to believe. Kind of like he has his truths and I have mine, but that doesn't work out very well since there is only one truth.

[Luther073082]

The problem is that I can read the bible for myself and I still disagree with LCMS doctrines based biblically. I personally think its ok to disagree on how you read something in the bible, but for the LCMS this is the scariest thing imaginable.

I also don't hold the high view of the church or clergy that only they can interprete scripture. If that where true we wouldn't have so many different clergy from so many different churchs saying that they are right but teach different doctrines (Also claim to hold completely to scripture.). Ultimatly I have to decide for myself who is right and so I can't trust anything but my own reading of the bible and by asking people questions.

EXACTLY, Rev!!!! Before I started attending the LCMS church I'm at now, I was at a church that was ELCA and as Luther pointed out, they allow for people to believe as they want...instead of believing what God has given us to believe. Kind of like he has his truths and I have mine, but that doesn't work out very well since there is only one truth.

Well they went too far to where there is no scriptural defense for some of what they do, but you've seen that I have different ways that I view scripture from the LCMS but you can't go through and say that they arn't scriptural because they are. They are just different conclusions being drawn from the same passage(s). I'm sorry that I can't trust that you are right on your conclusions simpily because you say that you are.

[DaRev]

The problem is that I can read the bible for myself and I still disagree with LCMS doctrines based biblically. I personally think its ok to disagree on how you read something in the bible, but for the LCMS this is the scariest thing imaginable.

I also don't hold the high view of the church or clergy that only they can interprete scripture. If that where true we wouldn't have so many different clergy from so many different churchs saying that they are right but teach different doctrines (Also claim to hold completely to scripture.). Ultimatly I have to decide for myself who is right and so I can't trust anything but my own reading of the bible and by asking people questions.

Well they went too far to where there is no scriptural defense for some of what they do, but you've seen that I have different ways that I view scripture from the LCMS but you can't go through and say that they arn't scriptural because they are. They are just different conclusions being drawn from the same passage(s). I'm sorry that I can't trust that you are right on your conclusions simpily because you say that you are.

There is only one way to interpret the Scriptures and that is from the Scriptures themselves. The passages in the Bible say what they say, not what people "want" them to say. If there are multiple conclusions being drawn from Biblical passages, only one can be correct. The rest are obviously wrong.

Either baptism saves or it doesn't. Either Christ's body and blood are in the Sacrament or they're not. You can't have it both ways. It isn't "what I want to believe it says" but rather what God intends for it to say.

The Roman Catholics interpret them based on tradition and the whim of the Pope.

The Reformed interpret them based upon human reason, which is by nature flawed.

The ELCA and several other liberal protestants interpret them based upon history and culture, which change over time. The word of God is changeless.

The Bible says what it says. I am of the firm opinion that the Confessional Lutheran Church is the closest to the Biblical truth that is possible on this earth. We don't add anything to the Scriptures like flawed human traditions, or flawed human reason, or ever changing culture and history. God's word is timeless and changeless. Unless one reads it that way, they will never have or know the pure truth of God's word and will for us, His children.

[DaSeminarian]

The problem is that I can read the bible for myself and I still disagree with LCMS doctrines based biblically. I personally think its ok to disagree on how you read something in the bible, but for the LCMS this is the scariest thing imaginable.


Which LCMS doctrines do you specifically disagree with. I may have missed the post where you mentioned the and don't want to go back over hundreds of posts to find them. So I ask that you please refresh my memory.


I also don't hold the high view of the church or clergy that only they can interprete scripture. If that where true we wouldn't have so many different clergy from so many different churchs saying that they are right but teach different doctrines (Also claim to hold completely to scripture.). Ultimatly I have to decide for myself who is right and so I can't trust anything but my own reading of the bible and by asking people questions.


I am neither high church nor low church. I like some things about both, but I am neutral when it comes to these practices because most of them are adiaphora.


Well they went too far to where there is no scriptural defense for some of what they do, but you've seen that I have different ways that I view scripture from the LCMS but you can't go through and say that they arn't scriptural because they are. They are just different conclusions being drawn from the same passage(s). I'm sorry that I can't trust that you are right on your conclusions simpily because you say that you are.

Again please give me the examples so I have something to refer to next time.


Scott

[Qoheleth]

There is only one way to interpret the Scriptures and that is from the Scriptures themselves. The passages in the Bible say what they say, not what people "want" them to say. If there are multiple conclusions being drawn from Biblical passages, only one can be correct. The rest are obviously wrong.


This is a powerful statement, DaRev. Yet taken at face value there appears to be issues...



In the 1st place... texts do not interpret texts. People interpret texts.

Second, who decides which Scripture explains which?

and

Who decides what constitutes one Scripture 'clear' and another 'obscure'?




The Roman Catholics interpret them based on tradition and the whim of the Pope.



I understand that this is statement concerning Sola Scriptura...I am wondering how this can be true as the Lutheran Confession sstate thus...


Although concerning the saints we concede that, just as, when alive, they pray for the Church universal in general, so in heaven they pray for the Church in general, albeit no testimony concerning the praying of the dead is extant in the Scriptures, except the dream taken from the Second Book of Maccabees, 15, 14. ( Ap. XXI.9 )

Granting that the blessed Mary prays for the Church
(Ap. XXI.27.)



It appears that the AP clearly states that there is no testimony from Scripture on this issue, but the language of the AP is direct and with force.

Two things quickly come to mind and they are, is Maccabees considered canonical Scripture, inspired on the same level as the rest of Scripture?

If not, is this not a tradition?



Q

[PreachersWife2004]

I know that the WELS doesn't consider Maccabees to be canonical.

[LilLamb219]

I hope you're just not back to try to stir up more trouble, Qoholeth?

[Luther073082]

Which LCMS doctrines do you specifically disagree with. I may have missed the post where you mentioned the and don't want to go back over hundreds of posts to find them. So I ask that you please refresh my memory.

Real presence of Christ so the bread and the wine is both bread and wine and also Christs body and blood
Role of women in the church
Justification by grace alone thorugh faith alone.
Sola Scriptora
"pre-destination" I do not know what to call it but the explaination how Grace is always provided and not "found" by human action but rather realized. Hell for all those who reject Christ
The sacraments (Holy Baptism and Holy Communion)

then of course the basic things that most protestants agree on such as the purpose of marriage, pastors allowed to marry, Holy trinity.

Sacraments only administered by those who are ordained and called (Although I belive in emergency situations both sacraments can be utilized by an individual beliver. Basically I'm more of the opinion that ordained and called ministers are called to oversee the sacraments in regular usage in order to preserve the integrety of the sacraments. I don't belive it is because an individual beliver can not do such a thing, but rather because ordained and called pastors understand the processes better)

I am neither high church nor low church. I like some things about both, but I am neutral when it comes to these practices because most of them are adiaphora.

I'm not talking about high church, low church. I'm talking about high clergy and low clergy.

High Clergy: I am the sole person in a church which can teach and enforce doctrines. My ordination gives me "special access" with God which allows for things such as binding and loosing that not every beliver has access to. Clergy alone are the only people qualified to completly understand scripture as scripture can not be understood in its entirey by the Laity.

Low Clergy: My job is to administer sacraments and over see the church and how it applies and teaches important doctrines. But I do not micromanage all teaching, I simpily oversee its correctness with church doctrine as individual belivers can understand scriptures and doctrines well enough to teach them to others. While I may be better trained and understanding of it, I am no better qualified to understand scripture then an individual beliver only more knowledgeable. My ordination and calling is to lead the church on a day to day basis but does not give me any more access or power with God which includes binding and loosing of sins. The reason that I am the primary and best person to go to for individual confession is because I am to lead all belivers spiritually and it is my oath and job to be understanding and forgiving, provide counciling and correction in accordace with the holy scriptures. However all belivers may forgive others in the name of the triune God.

Maybe I am wrong but the LCMS seems to take the high view of clergy rather then the low view of clergy.


Again please give me the examples so I have something to refer to next time.

The debate that a man who is attracted to men does not live in sin for his attractions but only sins when he allows himself to lust or engages in any homosexual activity. Being homosexual is not a crime, engaging in it or acting upon it is.

[Qoheleth]

I hope you're just not back to try to stir up more trouble, Qoholeth?


I'm asking legitimate questions. Please do not label me or presume my intentions.


Q

[Luther073082]

I hope you're just not back to try to stir up more trouble, Qoholeth?

I think he's more forcefully making the same point that I am.

There are a lot of people who are going to tell me that they belive in the whole truth of scripture, based solely on scripture. And as you claim there is only one truth. . .

So in the end at the very least most of those people are lying. So how do I know the truth and who I think is telling the truth or the closest thing to the truth???? I read it and I understand it myself, without a pastor telling me how to understand it or read it simpily because he said that he was correct.

[LilLamb219]

I'm asking legitimate questions. Please do not label me or presume my intentions.


Q

If you noticed, I asked a question as well.

[PreachersWife2004]

My husband says that when the texts are looked at in their old form, they area very easily understood. Sure, you gotta know Greek and Hebrew but that's seminary is for.

Scripture interprets scripture perfectly. People interpret scripture incorrectly. Happens all the time.

Exmaple:

Jesus says "Take and eat, this IS my body and blood, given and shed for you for the remission of your sins."

Scripture's interpretation: The body and blood of Christ are present in the bread and the wine.

Man's interpretation: Since I don't understand how that's possible, and I need a logical understanding, it MUST mean that the bread and wine are only symbolic or representative of Jesus' body and blood. He probably really said "this is a symbol of my body and blood..."

Man's interpretation: Since I don't understand how it's possible for something to be two things at once, the bread and wine MUST turn into the body and blood of Christ, so that the bread and wine are no longer present, just his body and blood. Therefore, only the priests can partake of communion, because Christ wouldn't give his body to just any old sinner.

[porterross]

I hope you're just not back to try to stir up more trouble, Qoholeth?

I'm asking legitimate questions. Please do not label me or presume my intentions.


Q


:sigh: Deja vu all over again.

[Luther073082]

My husband says that when the texts are looked at in their old form, they area very easily understood. Sure, you gotta know Greek and Hebrew but that's seminary is for.

Scripture interprets scripture perfectly. People interpret scripture incorrectly. Happens all the time.

Exmaple:

Jesus says "Take and eat, this IS my body and blood, given and shed for you for the remission of your sins."

Scripture's interpretation: The body and blood of Christ are present in the bread and the wine.

Man's interpretation: Since I don't understand how that's possible, and I need a logical understanding, it MUST mean that the bread and wine are only symbolic or representative of Jesus' body and blood. He probably really said "this is a symbol of my body and blood..."

Man's interpretation: Since I don't understand how it's possible for something to be two things at once, the bread and wine MUST turn into the body and blood of Christ, so that the bread and wine are no longer present, just his body and blood. Therefore, only the priests can partake of communion, because Christ wouldn't give his body to just any old sinner.

I agree with you that sometimes people form their own interpretations because they can't comprehend how God makes all things possible. And being able to read Hebrew and Greek helps understand things a little better. But lots of clergy from lots of different churchs can read Hebrew and Greek and they will claim that they are scipturally correct and letting scripture interprete scripture. However these poeple will teach different things and it is not possible for me to know who to trust.

I want to kind of throw this out there as a reason for our different prospectives.

You naturally trust Lutheran idealogies, teachings, and clergy because most of you GREW UP in a Lutheran church being taught the following things are true. Because of your upbringing, you naturally trust a your Lutheran Church of choice until they betray your trust. IE ELCA changed a lot of doctrines since its inceptions and does not nationally uphold the doctrines that many of its members (especially from ALC) grew up learning and feel their trust had been betrayed.

On the other hand I grew up in no church being taught nothing of God or the bible. In fact I was taught many things that are very counter to the bible. In order for me to convert I have not only rejected those things that I was taught growing up but also have entered a world where I don't a solid backing of experience and childhood of who to trust. So to me you keep saying "Everyone of our doctrine's is true and based completely on scritpure and we are the only ones that are correct." But in my mind I'm saying join the crowd of all the other denominations and churchs who are saying the same things.

[DaSeminarian]

This is a powerful statement, DaRev. Yet taken at face value there appears to be issues...



texts do not interpret texts. People interpret texts.




Q









Explain then what hermeneutics are as you understand them. And please make your intentions known,

[Qoheleth]

If you noticed, I asked a question as well.


Yes, and I did answer. I'm asking legitimate questions.


Q

[Luther073082]

Explain then what hermeneutics are as you understand them. And please make your intentions known,

It has nothing to do with hermeneutics.

His intentions are simpily that because there are so many others teaching many different doctrines and all claiming to hold to inerrant, infaliable, word of God based only on scripture then eventually I and everyone else has to come to their own conclusions about who is correct.

Rev nor can anyone else can not simpily expect someone to belive that he is right simpily because he, or other people, or even Martin Luther himself say he is right.

[PreachersWife2004]

Kirk, I have NEVER claimed that we are the only ones who are right. NO ONE here has claimed that. (You might be confusing us with Catholics!!)

I do believe our doctrines are the closest when it comes to being scripturally sound doctrines. Every doctrine we believe comes directly from scriptures. Other churches cannot claim this...they base some of their doctrines on tradition and not the scripture.

Other churches who are teaching a false doctrine cannot claim they are letting scripture interpret scripture. And it is quite easy to discern when this is happening. The ELCA's reasoning that homosexuality was a cultural sin back in the day but not now is a very good example of this. They claim that view is scripture, but have no passages or references to back it up, yet those of us who still believe that homosexuality was, is and always be a sin have the passages to back up our claim, and the passages aren't ambiguous about their meanings, either. The Baptists can also be guilt of this, when they say that you must accept Jesus into your heart. They claim it is biblical, yet where are the bible passages that say this? There are none. But the passages that point to Jesus choosing us are numerous.

I've been a Lutheran all my life, true, but that doesn't mean I just accepted Lutheran doctrine at face value. I trust my Lutheran doctrine because I have found them to be biblically sound after studying them, NOT because I was raised a Lutheran. If my synod starting toying with such things as the ELCA has, then I would be forced to [art ways with the WELS - and sure, it would be painful, but it would be necessary. And I would do it in a heartbeat if they started teaching false doctrine.

[Qoheleth]

Explain then what hermeneutics are as you understand them. And please make your intentions known


The methods and theories of interpreting religious texts. This is done by people not the texts themselves.

And from my experience, whether that person is Catholic, Anglican Lutheran, Orthodox or Baptist and all being fluent in Greek, Hebrew and other relevant languages as well as history and culture...all come up with different interpretations.

My intention is to engage current Lutherans here in discourse on an open thread. I want to know how you all understand these things as they appear in the Confessions and Scripture.


Q

[DaSeminarian]

The methods and theories of interpreting religious texts. This is done by people not the texts themselves.

And from my experience, whether that person is Catholic, Anglican Lutheran, Orthodox or Baptist and all being fluent in Greek, Hebrew and other relevant languages as well as history and culture...all come up with different interpretations.

My intention is to engage current Lutherans here in discourse on an open thread. I want to know how you all understand these things as they appear in the Confessions and Scripture.


Q


Let me understand this. You were Lutheran and left and you never understood what we understand?

[Qoheleth]

Let me understand this. You were Lutheran and left and you never understood what we understand?

I'm asking the current Lutherans in this forum, (there are new faces and all) what and how they understand these topics according to the Confessions and Scripture.


Q

[DaSeminarian]

I'm asking the current Lutherans in this forum, (there are new faces and all) what and how they understand these topics according to the Confessions and Scripture.


Q
I'll sit this one out then.

[Luther073082]

Kirk, I have NEVER claimed that we are the only ones who are right. NO ONE here has claimed that. (You might be confusing us with Catholics!!)

I'm not saying that you did say this. However my point is that I can not know who to trust if you belive that only clergy can properly understand or teach doctrines or scripture. (Maybe you just belive teach).


I do believe our doctrines are the closest when it comes to being scripturally sound doctrines. Every doctrine we believe comes directly from scriptures. Other churches cannot claim this...they base some of their doctrines on tradition and not the scripture.

Other churches who are teaching a false doctrine cannot claim they are letting scripture interpret scripture. And it is quite easy to discern when this is happening. The ELCA's reasoning that homosexuality was a cultural sin back in the day but not now is a very good example of this. They claim that view is scripture, but have no passages or references to back it up, yet those of us who still believe that homosexuality was, is and always be a sin have the passages to back up our claim, and the passages aren't ambiguous about their meanings, either.

I compeltly agree with you on this.


The Baptists can also be guilt of this, when they say that you must accept Jesus into your heart. They claim it is biblical, yet where are the bible passages that say this? There are none. But the passages that point to Jesus choosing us are numerous.

I've found there are passages for both, although I agree that if you take all of them into account I belive in the Lutheran doctrine that Christ chooses the world for us and we do not take hold of grace but it takes hold of us unless we explicity reject it.


I've been a Lutheran all my life, true, but that doesn't mean I just accepted Lutheran doctrine at face value. I trust my Lutheran doctrine because I have found them to be biblically sound after studying them, NOT because I was raised a Lutheran. If my synod starting toying with such things as the ELCA has, then I would be forced to [art ways with the WELS - and sure, it would be painful, but it would be necessary. And I would do it in a heartbeat if they started teaching false doctrine.

My point about betraying your trust. . .

My point was is that you made your decisions with a bias towards Lutheranism. You where taught Lutheranism from the very beginning of your life so asking you to reject their doctrine would require a little more then a simple 50/50 unbias decision. I'd say you have a 75% bias towards Lutheranism. You'll give them a lot of benefit of the doubt, but if it gets blatent your not going to stick with them.

However I was taught nothing of the sort, I was taught pre-marital sex was ok, that God's word is not found in a bible, that I should hate my enemies, the only thing wrong with taking the lord's name in vain was that it was inpolite, to love myself and my family before God, right and wrong are determined by society . . . etc etc.

I've rejected all those things, but my point is that it is unrealisitc for me to step up and accept all of LCMS or any other chruch's doctrine in its complete form. This is why I can not join the LCMS, because I reject small portions of their doctrine and the LCMS requires complete and utter ahearence to every bit of its doctrine or I should not join or commune.

And from my experience, whether that person is Catholic, Anglican Lutheran, Orthodox or Baptist and all being fluent in Greek, Hebrew and other relevant languages as well as history and culture...all come up with different interpretations.

Which is exactly why I can't join the LCMS, I look at the scriptures from the prospective of Kirk and what he has learned from life. Because I have not learned from the LCMS I can not view the scriptures as they do every single time.

Which is why I have to trust my own reading of the scriptures (for which I'm mercilessly ridiculed of forming my own God.) because I can no more establish that an LCMS pastor is telling me the truth then a baptist pastor is telling me the truth unless by my own judgement (hopefully guided by the Holy Spirit) I can come to the conclusion that one of them is correct.

[Qoheleth]

I'll sit this one out then.


Ahh, come on. Stay with it.


Q

[PreachersWife2004]

Kirk, maybe you should look into Association Free Lutherern Congregations. I don't know all that much about it, so I'm not much help, but here's some websites to look at:

http://www.aflc.org/
http://www.aflconline.org/youth/index.html

[Luther073082]

Kirk, maybe you should look into Association Free Lutherern Congregations. I don't know all that much about it, so I'm not much help, but here's some websites to look at:

http://www.aflc.org/
http://www.aflconline.org/youth/index.html

Actually they are more of a confederacy then the ELCA from what I can see. Not a denomination so much as an confederacy to help eachother out.

Biggest problem with looking at the smaller lutheran churchs though (aalc, lcmc, aflc etc) is that they arn't that easy to find. If I move to an area I have to find a church in that area because I can't just move to an area for a church. (Wish I could sometimes)

I have done some research on those churchs though.

But I think you see my point behind my biggest disagreement with the LCMS is no freedom of movement. Whereas the ELCA gives too much freedom of movement in beliefs, the LCMS gives too little. Which is the primary reason why I havn't bolted to the LCMS, because I'm not allowed to join because saying that I confess to their doctrines 100% would be a lie.

[DaRev]

Ahh, come on. Stay with it.


Q

I think you need to re-read the post you're quoting. You have an annoying habit of putting one persons name in another persons post.

[DaRev]

Originally Posted by DaSeminarian
Which LCMS doctrines do you specifically disagree with. I may have missed the post where you mentioned the and don't want to go back over hundreds of posts to find them. So I ask that you please refresh my memory.


Real presence of Christ so the bread and the wine is both bread and wine and also Christs body and blood
Role of women in the church
Justification by grace alone thorugh faith alone.
Sola Scriptora
"pre-destination" I do not know what to call it but the explaination how Grace is always provided and not "found" by human action but rather realized.
Hell for all those who reject Christ
The sacraments (Holy Baptism and Holy Communion)

then of course the basic things that most protestants agree on such as the purpose of marriage, pastors allowed to marry, Holy trinity.

Sacraments only administered by those who are ordained and called (Although I belive in emergency situations both sacraments can be utilized by an individual beliver. Basically I'm more of the opinion that ordained and called ministers are called to oversee the sacraments in regular usage in order to preserve the integrety of the sacraments. I don't belive it is because an individual beliver can not do such a thing, but rather because ordained and called pastors understand the processes better)

Hmmm... Scott asked what LCMS doctrines you disagree with and you list practically everything that the Evangelical Lutheran Church holds, teaches, and confesses?

Explain to us again why you think you are Lutheran? :scratch:

[Qoheleth]

I think you need to re-read the post you're quoting. You have an annoying habit of putting one persons name in another persons post.

Thanks for the heads-up


Q

[Luther073082]

Hmmm... Scott asked what LCMS doctrines you disagree with and you list practically everything that the Evangelical Lutheran Church holds, teaches, and confesses?

Explain to us again why you think you are Lutheran? :scratch:

whooopsie I misread that and thought he was asking for what I agreed with

I disagree mainly with closed communion and high view of clergy. Sorry for the mix up. . .

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

whooopsie I misread that and thought he was asking for what I agreed with

I disagree mainly with closed communion and high view of clergy. Sorry for the mix up. . .
What's wrong with a high view of clergy? They're the divinely ordained leaders of the people of God, for goodness sake.

[Luther073082]

What's wrong with a high view of clergy? They're the divinely ordained leaders of the people of God, for goodness sake.

High Clergy: I am the sole person in a church which can teach and enforce doctrines. My ordination gives me "special access" with God which allows for things such as binding and loosing that not every beliver has access to. Clergy alone are the only people qualified to completly understand scripture as scripture can not be understood in its entirey by the Laity.

Low Clergy: My job is to administer sacraments and over see the church and how it applies and teaches important doctrines. But I do not micromanage all teaching, I simpily oversee its correctness with church doctrine as individual belivers can understand scriptures and doctrines well enough to teach them to others. While I may be better trained and understanding of it, I am no better qualified to understand scripture then an individual beliver only more knowledgeable. My ordination and calling is to lead the church on a day to day basis but does not give me any more access or power with God which includes binding and loosing of sins. The reason that I am the primary and best person to go to for individual confession is because I am to lead all belivers spiritually and it is my oath and job to be understanding and forgiving, provide counciling and correction in accordace with the holy scriptures. However all belivers may forgive others in the name of the triune God.

Clergy should be respected as leaders. . . and questioned the same if need be. (Note if need be, not questioning to be questioning)

Clergy are called and ordained to be leaders and uphold the sacraments because that is what they have been trained to do. It it not because their ordination carries with it any special significance of being solely able to teach doctrine or scripture or being solely able to bind or loose.

They are better trained to do these things, but not so much so that they are the sole people in a congregation who can do so. The laity can both understand and teach without pastorial assistance both doctrines and scriptures in their true form. The pastor should like all things in the church keep some oversight of what is being taught, however he is not the person who is solely responsible for teaching.

A big part of this applies to how the congregation can rule itself. If congregation's council or elders are unable to understand doctrine's or scripture completely without pastorial assistance then it can not be entrusted to select or interview a pastor to lead its congregation. Nor can it be entrusted to make any other decisons for the congregation.

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Clergy should be respected as leaders. . . and questioned the same if need be. (Note if need be, not questioning to be questioning)

Clergy are called and ordained to be leaders and uphold the sacraments because that is what they have been trained to do. It it not because their ordination carries with it any special significance of being solely able to teach doctrine or scripture or being solely able to bind or loose.

They are better trained to do these things, but not so much so that they are the sole people in a congregation who can do so. The laity can both understand and teach without pastorial assistance both doctrines and scriptures in their true form. The pastor should like all things in the church keep some oversight of what is being taught, however he is not the person who is solely responsible for teaching.

A big part of this applies to how the congregation can rule itself. If congregation's council or elders are unable to understand doctrine's or scripture completely without pastorial assistance then it can not be entrusted to select or interview a pastor to lead its congregation. Nor can it be entrusted to make any other decisons for the congregation.
Well if you're going to change the scale of high and low, then I guess we're going to have a problem, aren't we?

Look, not even the Catholic Church holds to your definition of 'high clergy,' and their view of the clergy is really, really high. It becomes very hard to work with when your erect strawmen such as this.

[Luther073082]

Well if you're going to change the scale of high and low, then I guess we're going to have a problem, aren't we?

Look, not even the Catholic Church holds to your definition of 'high clergy,' and their view of the clergy is really, really high. It becomes very hard to work with when your erect strawmen such as this.

Given that the LCMS views pastors as the only people qualified to teach confrimation or able to bind and loose, it to me makes sense that their view of clergy tends to be more on the high end.

Am I mis-interpreting their views at all? Please correct me if I am.

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Given that the LCMS views pastors as the only people qualified to teach confrimation or able to bind and loose, it to me makes sense that their view of clergy tends to be more on the high end.

Am I mis-interpreting their views at all? Please correct me if I am.
Yes.

All members of the body of Christ are able to proclaim the forgiveness of sins. I am not sure about catechesis, however; I imagine it is simply that pastors have four years of seminary training, whereas the laity have, on average, zero.

[PreachersWife2004]

WELS believes the same thing, although we might have instances of staff ministers who teach confirmation. But they still have received the proper training. I still don't think a "new" Lutheran has any business teaching confirmation, though.

As for binding and loosing...I don't know what the LCMS believes. Our pastors proclaim the congregation forgiven during confession and absolution, but that doesn't mean that I can't forgive someone for sinning against me. I do NOT, however, have the power to forgive YOUR sins against others. I'm not sure why anyone would have a problem with this - I suppose if you really want to forgive everyone's sins in God's name, you should go school to be a pastor.

[DaSeminarian]

Given that the LCMS views pastors as the only people qualified to teach confrimation or able to bind and loose, it to me makes sense that their view of clergy tends to be more on the high end.

Am I mis-interpreting their views at all? Please correct me if I am.


This is not true either. When I was in confirmation I had lay people teaching us in our 1st year. The second and third years were taught by the pastors.

[DaRev]

All members of the body of Christ are able to proclaim the forgiveness of sins.


As for binding and loosing...I don't know what the LCMS believes. Our pastors proclaim the congregation forgiven during confession and absolution, but that doesn't mean that I can't forgive someone for sinning against me. I do NOT, however, have the power to forgive YOUR sins against others. I'm not sure why anyone would have a problem with this - I suppose if you really want to forgive everyone's sins in God's name, you should go school to be a pastor.

Here is the point. Anyone can proclaim the forgiveness of sins, but only those who are called and ordained to hold and carry out the functions of the Office of the Keys by the authority of Christ can absolve sins. The order of Confession and Absolution in the LCMS hymnals has both a general proclamation of forgiveness which can be used by laymen such as elders when a lay service is done, and the general absolution which is only done by an ordained pastor.

From LSB setting 1, 2, & 4 - "Almighty God in His mercy has given His Son to die for you and for His sake forgives you all your sins. As a called and ordained servant of Christ and by His authority, I forgive you all your sins in the name of the Father and of the Son + and of the Holy Spirit."

From LSB setting 3 & 5 - "Upon this your confession, I by virtue of my office as a called and ordained servant of Christ, announce the grace of God unto all of you. And in the stead and by the command of my Lord Jesus Christ and by His authority, I forgive you all your sins in the name of the Father and of the Son + and of the Holy Spirit"

[Qoheleth]

I know that the WELS doesn't consider Maccabees to be canonical


Almost missed this.

Well, since Maccabees is not Scripture (canonical), then this ( Ap. XXI.9 & Ap. XXI.27) would appear to be a tradition without clear foundation from Scripture and therefore it would seem (at least for this) Lutheranism can not claim Sola Scriptura?


Q

[PreachersWife2004]

I think our hymnal's wording is very similar. The big part that we've always emphasized is that it is in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, meaning that THAT is where the power comes from.

[Luther073082]

WELS believes the same thing, although we might have instances of staff ministers who teach confirmation. But they still have received the proper training. I still don't think a "new" Lutheran has any business teaching confirmation, though.

As for binding and loosing...I don't know what the LCMS believes. Our pastors proclaim the congregation forgiven during confession and absolution, but that doesn't mean that I can't forgive someone for sinning against me. I do NOT, however, have the power to forgive YOUR sins against others. I'm not sure why anyone would have a problem with this - I suppose if you really want to forgive everyone's sins in God's name, you should go school to be a pastor.

Jesus presented the power to proclaim forgiveness of poeple's sins against God to others. So in a way yes I can pronounce forgiveness of all sins through Christ.

And how many years does one have to be a Lutheran to no longer be a new Lutheran? Offically I've been a Lutheran for 3 years and I've been unoffically Lutheran for pretty much my entire time of being a Christian which is somewhere around 4 to 5 years. Perhaps 6 depending on how you define it.

Intially I was concerned that I was not well educated enough but was re-assured by the youth director that the class was very simple and he also added that I understood Lutheran traditions & doctrines better then most of the laity.

But you have to remember above all this is a very simple class that we are teaching here. A little too simple IMO but simple none the less.

Hey get this, my co-teacher for 6th grade this year (all classes are team taught) is a 19 year old college student. I'm a little uncomfortable with this because last year I was matched up with an experienced teacher in her 40's. This year I'm being matched up with not only someone inexperienced in teaching but is also significantly more youthful then myself.

However I've found that my fears last year in lack of knowledge where completely unfounded and so I have confidence that through God that my lack of confidence in my co-teacher will also prove to be unfounded.

[PreachersWife2004]

Almost missed this.

Well, since Maccabees is not Scripture (canonical), then this ( Ap. XXI.9 & Ap. XXI.27) would appear to be a tradition without clear foundation from Scripture and therefore it would seem (at least for this) Lutheranism can not claim Sola Scriptura?


Q

Ahh...and herein lies the motivation for Q's attention to this thread.

Yes, Lutherans can STILL claim Sola Scriptura.

[C.F.W. Walther]

"From these passages [Matt. 20:25-26; Matt. 23:8; and John 18:36] we learn that the church of Jesus Christ is not a kingdom of rulers and subjects but one large, holy brotherhood, in which no one may rule or exercise authority.. . . However the equality of believers is abrogated and the church is changed into a secular organization if a minister demands obedience not only to the word of Christ, his own Lord and Head and that of all Christians, but also to what his own insight and experience regards as good and suitable.

Church and Ministry (Kirche und Amt), Witnesses of the Evangelical Lutheran Church on the Question of Church and the Ministry, by C. F. W. Walther, trans. by J.T. Mueller, 1987, Concordia Publishing House, St. Louis, MO., p. 312

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Luther ######: Not that I'm questioning your education as a Lutheran (because believe me, I'm well aware of the ignorance of the common man), but have you thoroughly read through the Book of Concord?

[C.F.W. Walther]

"Accordingly we believe as an incontrovertible truth that the right to recognize, judge, or test doctrines is ours and not that of the councils, popes, fathers, and teachers. . . . but to us belongs the right to recognize, prove, and judge His [God's] Law and Word and to separate that from all other enactments.
. . . So you see how wonderfully human arrogance can counsel with its decrees in spiritual matters. Therefore, we must find another way for the unity of the Church, and that is none other than what Christ mentions: "They shall all be taught by God. Therefore everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me." (John 6:45). The inward Spirit alone causes us to dwell together in a house with one accord. He teaches us to believe the same thing, to judge the same thing, to confess the same thing, and to follow the same thing. Where He is lacking, unity cannot exist. Where there is any other kind of unity, it is only outward and whitewashed."

Church and Ministry, p. 335

[C.F.W. Walther]

"But ought not the ecclesiastical ministry have reverence and authority? By all means! However, not in such a way that they have rule in the church, either absolute or with some limitation, but that they have the ministry. Therefore they bring the doctrine, the voice and Word of God, then we render obedience, not to men but to God Himself. But when they lay something upon the conscience outside of, over and above, or contrary to the Word of God, then our Baptism reminds us of our obligation to render obedience to the divine Word; It reminds us also of our freedom from the commandments, doctrines, and traditions of men." (Examination of the Council of Trent, [Kramer translation, vol. II, 151-152; emphases Walther's])

Essays for the Church, Vol. II, p. 263.

[PreachersWife2004]

err...I don't think anyone's promoting some pastoral dictatorship here.

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

err...I don't think anyone's promoting some pastoral dictatorship here.
Ya, seriously. You'll have to go talk to the Presbyterians about that one.

[PreachersWife2004]

Ya, seriously. You'll have to go talk to the Presbyterians about that one.
Why did the movie Fargo just pop into my head?

[C.F.W. Walther]

Walther then, as the same as now, had stated that some have presumed that the learning and pious intentions make the clergy's leadership beyond that which the Word of God provides of itself."That this teaching does not set aside a genuine true obedience owed to pastors according to Heb. 13:17 (Obey your leaders, and submit to them; for they keep watch over your souls, as those who will give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with grief, for this would be unprofitable for you"

[PreachersWife2004]

Walther then, as the same as now, had stated that some have presumed that the learning and pious intentions make the clergy's leadership beyond that which the Word of God provides of itself."That this teaching does not set aside a genuine true obedience owed to pastors according to Heb. 13:17 (Obey your leaders, and submit to them; for they keep watch over your souls, as those who will give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with grief, for this would be unprofitable for you"

and I totally get that. But, let's not confuse people. Ministers are granted a higher authority, and people MUST respect that. Too many people could take what you're posting and say "well, my pastor can't tell me I can't do this or can't do that..."

I'm sure that's not your intention, but this is how the world is these days.

[porterross]

Why did the movie Fargo just pop into my head?


^_^ I actually own that movie! Must be the accents that drew me in. :P

[Luther073082]

Luther ######: Not that I'm questioning your education as a Lutheran (because believe me, I'm well aware of the ignorance of the common man), but have you thoroughly read through the Book of Concord?

We are not teaching from the entire book of concord but are teaching from Luther's Small Cathism (I can never spell that word) and the bible.

Some parts of the book of concord may be brought up as points of doctrine but not of major concern on the book itself.

I have read through at least once the following parts of the book of Concord.

The Augstburg Confession
Luther's Large Catheism
Luther's small Catheism

And I think a long time ago I read through the Tredisy (sp?) on the Power and Primacy of the Pope. If I havn't read it then I have at least scanned it.

So no I have not read the book in its entirety, but I have no desire to subscribe to the book in its entirety either. One of the other diagreements I have with the LCMS is that I do not view the office of the bishop of Rome, nor any other truely Christian office to be one of the anti-christ. Just a misguided leader with misguided followers.

I'd like to read the Apology of the Augustburg confession but when I went to do it, I realized it was so long that I would need to have a hard copy that I could read through in smaller doses, chapter by chapter rather then read through it all in one night. Reading too much on any topic at one time can turn it from interesting to boring very quickly.

and I totally get that. But, let's not confuse people. Ministers are granted a higher authority, and people MUST respect that. Too many people could take what you're posting and say "well, my pastor can't tell me I can't do this or can't do that..."

My pastor is my leader and so yes he can dicipline me within the church on how to behave. However his leadership position is granted by the laity of both the church local and the "church national" (Really the ELCA is starting to become a more of a highly organized confederacy then a national church body). We give him this position because we have recognized his training in such matters. However I tend to view him as better qualified to preside over the sacraments, teach, lead, & confess to. . . however not the only person capable. . . if that makes any sense.

I guess if I where to go a few weeks without an ordained pastor I would say no sacraments. But if where to go for an extremly long time without an ordained pastor on hand, I would say we would need to decide on the person best qualified among us to preside over the sacraments.

[C.F.W. Walther]

There is a thread that is running through this whole discussion and that is the role of the church as the part the pastor plays in it.

It is a marriage between the pastors role and the keys as it is given to the "church" and then passed through them to the minister. Walther made it this clear, "The most important freedom and the most important right of a congregation is its right to judge and evaluate their pastor's doctrine."

Essays for the Church, Vol. II, p. 38.

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

I highly, highly recommend you read it thought. If the only document you're read other than the catechisms and the Augsburg Confession is the Treatise, then you're getting a very skewed view. The Apologia, Smalcald Articles, and Formula of Concord contain excellent biblical interpretation. I hope you'll find them spiritually beneficial.

[C.F.W. Walther]

Since there isn't any interest in reading what the church fathers have to say I think I'll go watch American Chopper

[DaRev]

^_^ I actually own that movie! Must be the accents that drew me in. :P

Ya, for sure, you betchya!

[Luther073082]

I highly, highly recommend you read it thought. If the only document you're read other than the catechisms and the Augsburg Confession is the Treatise, then you're getting a very skewed view. The Apologia, Smalcald Articles, and Formula of Concord contain excellent biblical interpretation. I hope you'll find them spiritually beneficial.

Started reading the formula of concord and got through the preface and first two articles, when I went to the third it wouldn't load which I realized was Ok since I need to get to bed. I'll probably read some more of it tomorrow sometime.

From what I read I did not learn anything new that I had not already known however, I'll read the whole thing.

The apologia is too long for me to read off a computer screen so I'll either have to print it out or aquire a hard copy else where so I can take it in bits and pieces.

After I get done with the formula I'll take a looksee at the smalcald articles and their length.

So far honestly while some of them have given me prosepectives I havn't learned anything new from them doctrinally speaking.

[icedragon101]

if you are a seventh day sabbath keeper please vote and show your support for a sabbatarian icon

http://foru.ms/showthread.php?p=38252408#post38252408

[icedragon101]

please get back to the original Post topic.

[ByzantineDixie]

Since there isn't any interest in reading what the church fathers have to say I think I'll go watch American Chopper

Did I hear someone say "Church Fathers"...I'm game! From Saint John Chrysostom:

Whoever honors the priest will honor God, and he who has learned to despise the priest will gradually proceed, in time to insult God also....And when someone acts reverently toward a priest, he will be much more reverent toward God. And even if a priest is wicked, God, who is watching, will bestow a reward on you because you have shown reverence to him who is unworthy of honor in order to honor Him....

If you despise him, you are not despising him, but you are despising God who ordained him. And from whence does it appear that God ordained him? If you do not have this faith and reverence, your hope is rendered vain. For if God does not allow divine grace to work through an unworthy celebrant, you have neither the washing of baptism, nor do you participate in the sacraments, nor do you receive any blessings; and, therefore, you are not a Christian.

But if that's not what you had in mind...I am cool with American Chopper...although I think mama ought to put a little fire under the younger son's behind!!!

[DaSeminarian]

Did I hear someone say "Church Fathers"...I'm game! From Saint John Chrysostom:

Whoever honors the priest will honor God, and he