Wow look I'm sorry

[Luther073082]

Ok while I'm still not sure exactly what I did wrong, all I know is that I offended a lot of people with my poll as there was talks of warning me for being uncooperative or banning me from here.

Obviously I touched on some nerve or something and I'm sorry for whatever offended or hurt you because I certainly didn't mean to hurt or offend anyone.

So without getting my head ripped off could someone please calmly explain to me what nerve I touched and why it made so many people angry with me.

[Melethiel]

Some people are just overly touchy. :hug:
I think your thread was just posted at the wrong time, because we're still in the wake of an anti-Martin Luther thread which ticked a lot of people off.

I don't think you did anything wrong, and the thread would have made for some interesting discussion, so I'm also curious to see what the reasoning was for everyone jumping all over you.

[RayJGentry]

I just finished reading through the thread too. Again. I think you were fine. It was simply a question of, "if we sainted people, would we saint martin luther or not." You simply gave a brief (as would be expected in the poll option) example of some of his foibles. The way I see it, you didn't put something clearly enough for some people then ended up on the defensive. I know how that goes. Don't worry about it. You're doing fine. Your contributions and questions that I've seen have been nothing but genuine and honest. Thanks for contributing and don't worry about anything. Give it a day and it'll all blow over.

[porterross]

I guess I missed it. :scratch: I voted for you and Keri, though! ;)

[C.F.W. Walther]

No problem here. You just voiced an opinion that touched some nerves.

Keep up you search and quest for knowledge. Being controversial is not a way to start a dialogue.

[Luther073082]

No problem here. You just voiced an opinion that touched some nerves.

Keep up you search and quest for knowledge. Being controversial is not a way to start a dialogue.

But what nerve did I touch? I didn't even think I was being controversial. . . I mean someone asked if Luther was a prophet and everyone was cool with that. But we determined that he didn't fit under the NT definition. And I agreed.

But I suggested well would he qualify as a saint. And a person said something to the effect of that would be an interesting discussion.

I guess I missed it. :scratch: I voted for you and Keri, though! ;)

Its called "should we call Martin Luther a saint" And thanks for voting!

[LilLamb219]

Part of what Mel said about we just got through an Anti-Luther thread is something I think is still in the backs of some of our minds and so we become protective of our forum. Bad timing on your part, not that you knew any different at the time! ;)

[porterross]

But what nerve did I touch? I didn't even think I was being controversial. . . I mean someone asked if Luther was a prophet and everyone was cool with that. But we determined that he didn't fit under the NT definition. And I agreed.

But I suggested well would he qualify as a saint. And a person said something to the effect of that would be an interesting discussion.

Its called "should we call Martin Luther a saint" And thanks for voting!


:eek: :swoon: Just kidding. :D

It's partly the environment here right now and partly your choice of words and manner of communicating your meaning. It may not be coming across as you are intending. That is the challenge of the written word versus face-to-face interaction.

What was (is) your major in college? Have you done much explanatory writing or studied much literature?

[Luther073082]

My degree is in Finance.

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

My degree is in Finance.
Haha, so not much expository writing, eh? I'd say I feel for you, but I don't- I'm politics and history with some creative writing courses under my belt. Best of luck, though. :wave:

[Luther073082]

I can usually communicate fairly well. . . but I just don't get it.

The whole thing was suppose to be a joke and from the moment I posted it on, everyone was basically telling me I was a jerk. And yeah I might have gotten aggressive at a few points because I was trying to explain that I was trying to have a lite hearted fellowship discussion with other Lutherans and I wasn't actually trying to be a jerk about anything.

I just feel like I got punched in the stomach, I'm just so surprised that my poll for fun made everyone think I was a jerk.

[Melethiel]

I know how you feel...don't let it get to you.
I think apologies are due all around - you were by far quite cool, given the circumstances.

[porterross]

Maybe we're just old and cranky? ^_^

There are some subjects off limits to referencing in jest in some circles. I bet you'll consider your audience a bit more from now on, huh. ;)

[Luther073082]

Maybe we're just old and cranky? ^_^

There are some subjects off limits to referencing in jest in some circles. I bet you'll consider your audience a bit more from now on, huh. ;)

"If you can not laugh in heaven I do not want to be there" --Martin Luther

"If Lutherans can't laugh, I don't want to be one of them" -Luther073082 (That he just made up)

[filosofer]

I can usually communicate fairly well. . . but I just don't get it.

The whole thing was suppose to be a joke and from the moment I posted it on, everyone was basically telling me I was a jerk. And yeah I might have gotten aggressive at a few points because I was trying to explain that I was trying to have a lite hearted fellowship discussion with other Lutherans and I wasn't actually trying to be a jerk about anything.

I just feel like I got punched in the stomach, I'm just so surprised that my poll for fun made everyone think I was a jerk.

If we were passing out medals for putting feet in mouth and trying to speak/write or stepping into the wrong situation or not being aware of the situation, I would probably be the first in line. I have about 4 decades head start on you. :) ^_^

Many years ago, soon after I was ordained, we had a member who was killed in an accident at work, slipped off a railroad car - on New Year' Eve. I served a dual parish at the time, and was just going into worship at the other church when I got the call. The elders from the other church said to finish the service, because they had the investigation at the scene, the body had to be moved - it would be 1-2 hours before I could see the family anyway.

So as soon as church is finished, I drive to the house in the other town. I'm comforting this widow of 2 hours, her daughters and SsIL and about 40 others gathered in the house. So I read Psalm 121 (very comforting Psalm - normally). Verse 3 reads: "He will not let your foot slip..." As soon as I finished the Psalm, the widow reaches over and says, "Pastor, you know he did slip." You could hear a pin drop!! :prayer:

After crawling out from the cracks in the floor, I said yes, that was true, but he didn't slip away from God's ultimate protection. In God's use of our mistakes, within six months the two SsIL took adult instruction (and their wives came with them, even though they were members already) and became active members of the congregation.

So, it is good of you to apologize. In real life, the consequences can be even more gut-wrenching. Just remember, everyone here has been through a similar experience. If they haven't, they are either too young or they're lying ... or both. :P



In Christ's love,
filo

[Luther073082]

Thanks Filo, what would be more helpful would be if I could understand my error though and what set so many people off? I mean I still don't know what to apoligize for but I felt the need to apologize for something. I'd really like to know what it is.

[DaRev]

Thanks Filo, what would be more helpful would be if I could understand my error though and what set so many people off? I mean I still don't know what to apoligize for but I felt the need to apologize for something. I'd really like to know what it is.

It was your inaccurate portrayal of Luther "hating Jews" (something that Lutherans have had to defend for decades) and your unwillingness to listen to those who were trying to correct you.

[Luther073082]

It was your inaccurate portrayal of Luther "hating Jews" (something that Lutherans have had to defend for decades) and your unwillingness to listen to those who were trying to correct you.

But if he did not hate Jews then please explain his anti-semetic statements. Especially from his last publication. "On the Jews and their Lies" because I guess because I'm just a lay reader but the whole document to me read's like the president of Iran's favorite work.

BTW the Jews didn't kill Christ, neither did the Romans. I did, I killed Christ.

[DaRev]

As has been said to you NUMEROUS times already, Luther didn't hate the Jewish people, he hated the Judaics, those who promoted the Jewish religion. Big difference.

[porterross]

:doh:

[Luther073082]

As has been said to you NUMEROUS times already, Luther didn't hate the Jewish people, he hated the Judaics, those who promoted the Jewish religion. Big difference.

But he doesn't call them Judaics he called them Jews.

He advocates in his final work, murdering them, burning their synagoges, confiscating of property, and given no legal protections.

I mean I'm struggling to understand here. I've got a copy of "On the Jews and their lies" sitting in front of me and he never once mentions the Judaics, he mentions the Jews.

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

But if he did not hate Jews then please explain his anti-semetic statements. Especially from his last publication. "On the Jews and their Lies" because I guess because I'm just a lay reader but the whole document to me read's like the president of Iran's favorite work.

BTW the Jews didn't kill Christ, neither did the Romans. I did, I killed Christ.
I've already explained this to you.

The concept of 'race' would not have occured to Luther. Race and ethnicity are nineteenth century cultural constructs growing out of Darwinism and its bastard twin children, eugenics and scientific racism.

Did Luther hate practitioners of the Jewish religion later in his life? Yeah, I think so, and I've explained why- his depressing and dissapointment and personal frustraition with what he perceived as his own failure to reform the church and convert the Jews of Europe.

But is it anti-Semitism? No. The idea of a 'Semite' is, again, a racial construct. Nor was it ingrained in Luther- again, as I've said, Luther was personal friends with several local rabbis well into his public career.

On the Jews and Their Lies is itself a pack of lies and unworthy of any Christian, of course. But anti-Semitism is a completely anachronistic label for a fifteenth century individual, especially for a man like Luther-- because at the other end of the spectrum is that other Luther-written document, That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew. I suggest you look it up.

[Luther073082]

I've already explained this to you.

The concept of 'race' would not have occured to Luther. Race and ethnicity are nineteenth century cultural constructs growing out of Darwinism and its bastard twin children, eugenics and scientific racism.

Did Luther hate practitioners of the Jewish religion later in his life? Yeah, I think so, and I've explained why- his depressing and dissapointment and personal frustraition with what he perceived as his own failure to reform the church and convert the Jews of Europe.

But is it anti-Semitism? No. The idea of a 'Semite' is, again, a racial construct. Nor was it ingrained in Luther- again, as I've said, Luther was personal friends with several local rabbis well into his public career.

On the Jews and Their Lies is itself a pack of lies and unworthy of any Christian, of course. But anti-Semitism is a completely anachronistic label for a fifteenth century individual, especially for a man like Luther-- because at the other end of the spectrum is that other Luther-written document, That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew. I suggest you look it up.

To me a Jew is a person who practices Judaism. Jewish is not a race, so I never said anti-semite. You can go through the entire thread again and you will never see me say "anti-semite" or refer to the Jews as a race. In fact several times I also said that I do not view Jews as a race but rather as people who practice Judaism.

If you belive he hated people who practiced Judaism, who I call "Jews" then we are in complete agreement.

Jewish is not a race in my opinion.

[LilLamb219]

To me a Jew is a person who practices Judaism. Jewish is not a race, so I never said anti-semite. You can go through the entire thread again and you will never see me say "anti-semite" or refer to the Jews as a race. In fact several times I also said that I do not view Jews as a race but rather as people who practice Judaism.

If you belive he hated people who practiced Judaism, who I call "Jews" then we are in complete agreement.

Jewish is not a race in my opinion.

Do you ever consider that your opinion could just very well be wrong?

[filosofer]

But if he did not hate Jews then please explain his anti-semetic statements. Especially from his last publication. "On the Jews and their Lies" because I guess because I'm just a lay reader but the whole document to me read's like the president of Iran's favorite work.

BTW the Jews didn't kill Christ, neither did the Romans. I did, I killed Christ.

To me a Jew is a person who practices Judaism. Jewish is not a race, so I never said anti-semite. You can go through the entire thread again and you will never see me say "anti-semite" or refer to the Jews as a race. In fact several times I also said that I do not view Jews as a race but rather as people who practice Judaism.

If you belive he hated people who practiced Judaism, who I call "Jews" then we are in complete agreement.

Jewish is not a race in my opinion.


In mathematics, that would be QED, quod erat demonstrandum ("that which was to be demonstrated")

--------

Or have I misunderstood?


In Christ's love,
filo

[Luther073082]

Do you ever consider that your opinion could just very well be wrong?

No more then any other person does. . .

Being Jewish is not a race

Being Jewish is not a race because Jews do not share one common ancestry or biological distinction. People of many different races have become Jewish people over the years.

Being Jewish is not a nationality

Being Jewish is not a nationality because Jews have been dispersed throughout the world for almost two thousand years. People of many different nationalities are Jewish.

http://judaism.about.com/od/abcsofjudaism/a/beingjewish.htm

What is interesting though if I may be so bold is it was you who accused me of failing to read your posts to the fullest, but yet it was you who ultimatly failed to read the two or three times I said that I do not consider Jewish or Jew to be a race but rather a person who practices Judaism.

I've never been able to just look at someone and automatically deterimine they where a Jew unless they where dressed or groomed in a manner which clearly reflects their religious traditions.

I however can notice a Hispanic, an African decendent, an Arab, an Asian and a Caucasion. No matter what they are wearing unless their skin is completly covered.

[Luther073082]

In mathematics, that would be QED, quod erat demonstrandum ("that which was to be demonstrated")

--------

Or have I misunderstood?


In Christ's love,
filo


Only partially, I regret my unfortunute choice of words however I don't belive I used those words in the previous thread.

So I apologize you are correct that I used them in this thread.

However even so

someone who hates and would persecute Jews

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:anti-semite&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title

Also note it says race or religion. Religion is the big thing.

[RayJGentry]

The big argument came around because Luther"assorted numbers" used the word "Jew" differently than others understand the usage. Here's the thing: the OP explained how he was using it. Rather than just accept the difference of usage and work from there, everyone just used it as a confrontation point. I don't think it should have been a big deal. I remember the post where he explained how he was using the word...besides that, he used the word the same way Luther did (according to other people's posts, nonetheless) so it should have been an issue.

Oh well, I honestly think this entire issue stems from the Members of TCL and their worry that they're going to lose control of the forum to the liberal and non-christian. It's become very tense around here and people have needed to walk on egg shells on more than one occasion...more often than when people were more secure in the control over the forum. I think that's evident in all of the "i can't believe the ELCA gets to use Lutheran in their name" comments I've been reading. It's freakin' annoying. Even if the ELCA isn't an "orthodox lutheran church" according to conservative standards, we're included in this forum. Either kick us out and make us go somewhere else, start a thread to actually talk about things (cause even if we don't follow every confession, we're more lutheran than we are anything else), or stop with the subversive comments.

Sorry for the rant, I know that I'm not the most active in the forum lately and it's off topic, but just reading things lately has made me feel the same way Luther073082 feels right now.

[Luther073082]

So anyone here willing to admit that I was in fact telling the truth about Luther as I saw it. (hatred of Jews who are those who practiced Judaism)

And that I wasn't in fact the big jerk you all thought I was?

Anyone?

[RayJGentry]

I see where you're coming from and I'm honestly really more in agreement with you than those who were ragging on you tons. So yeah, sorry man.

[porterross]

So anyone here willing to admit that I was in fact telling the truth about Luther as I saw it. (hatred of Jews who are those who practiced Judaism)

And that I wasn't in fact the big jerk you all thought I was?

Anyone?
Don't be so worried about too many people here think. Trust me, it's really of little consequence in the grand scheme of things.

Eat the fish and spit out the bones. :)

[Luther073082]

Don't be so worried about too many people here think. Trust me, it's really of little consequence in the grand scheme of things.

Eat the fish and spit out the bones. :)

Yeah thats my downfall, I'm especially concerned about what other Christians think.

If I do not have them to fall back on in matters of faith who do I have? Certainly not my family.

Half of them think I'm a certifiable lunatic for my faith.

The other half think I'm a heretic distorting the minds of children with ideas like grace alone, faith alone, scripture alone.

[porterross]

Yeah thats my downfall, I'm especially concerned about what other Christians think.

If I do not have them to fall back on in matters of faith who do I have? Certainly not my family.

Half of them think I'm a certifiable lunatic for my faith.

The other half think I'm a heretic distorting the minds of children with ideas like grace alone, faith alone, scripture alone.

Don't be so sure that all whom you encounter online care as much about you, though, is my point. The knowledge you might find here or be led to further study from a few very wise folks here can be of great service to you, but as far as letting the opinions and harsh words of others hurt you, it's best to not let yourself get too wrapped in all that.

It's a slippery slope and you're far too young to not be out fellowshipping and/or exchanging theology with folks your own age with whom you can develop deeper relationships. ;)

Do young people not, like, just hang out anymore? :D

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Do young people not, like, just hang out anymore? :D

'Other people' are so... passe...

Haha, I'm kidding. Another I wouldn't characterize myself as a people person or an extrovert, I do manage to nurture a few very deep friendships.

[Luther073082]

Don't be so sure that all whom you encounter online care as much about you, though, is my point. The knowledge you might find here or be led to further study from a few very wise folks here can be of great service to you, but as far as letting the opinions and harsh words of others hurt you, it's best to not let yourself get too wrapped in all that.

It's a slippery slope and you're far too young to not be out fellowshipping and/or exchanging theology with folks your own age with whom you can develop deeper relationships. ;)

Do young people not, like, just hang out anymore? :D

I hang out on Friday night with people for ballroom dancing. There are some fairly young people there, most are Christians but I really don't think they are in the mood to exchange theology, the ladies want to dance and its my job to make sure they all dance.

And when you go to a church where there are 3 people in their 20's, me and two others and the two others are married to eachother then its difficult to find someone to relate to.

I really just want to find a job and move to California to be with my girlfriend.

But no I'm really just hurt by the fact that I was just trying to have a bit of fun in a thread and suddenly I had to go through 8 pages of people basically telling me I'm lying about Luther and (whom I do admire btw) and besmerching his name when I was actually telling the truth about him.

Miscommunication I know but I said two or three times that I don't consider Jewish to be a race and it was ignored. I don't know I feel a very bad vibe in this section as though people are almost angry and out looking for someone to fight with or something to fight about. And I just hope that isn't actually true and its just a bad first impression.

I love the fact that I'm a Lutheran, I like talking with other Lutherans, thats mostly who I used to talk to in college. Almost all my friends where Lutheran, my dance partner was Lutheran. Some where LCMS some where ELCA, we got along though. We attended services together even. I love my church, yeah sure there is a great divide in which there are very few 20 somethings but a lot of other age groups, but honestly its a friendly and loving second family. I can not thank them or God enough for what they did for me while my mom was in the hospital hanging by a thread from eternal hellfire.

I don't know maybe I just expected to much in thinking that the fellowship I've had before would be something similar to what I find here. My expectations where too high.

[Melethiel]

Do young people not, like, just hang out anymore?
Not during the summer...nobody's around anyway. Plus, I'm not the most social person.

[filosofer]

So anyone here willing to admit that I was in fact telling the truth about Luther as I saw it. (hatred of Jews who are those who practiced Judaism)

And that I wasn't in fact the big jerk you all thought I was?

Anyone?

First, Luther's statements regarding the Jews (or many other topics, for that matter) do not reflect the Lutheran doctrine. We do not follow Luther, but rather the doctrinal stance of the Christian Church as reflected in the Confessions.

Second, Luther was sometimes more honest about where he was at than most contemporary Christians. Does that mean we have to accept/defend what he wrote on this topic? No. But reading Luther in context, even his most adamant detractors will admit that Luther repeatedly employed the language of violence against most, if not all, of his enemies.

Third, why does not anyone also quote from Luther's 1523 essay That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew? Luther condemned the inhuman treatment of the Jews and urged Christians to treat them kindly. Luther's fervent desire was that Jews would hear the Gospel proclaimed clearly and be moved to convert to Christianity. Thus he argued:

If I had been a Jew and had seen such dolts and blockheads govern and teach the Christian faith, I would sooner have become a hog than a Christian. They have dealt with the Jews as if they were dogs rather than human beings; they have done little else than deride them and seize their property. When they baptize them they show them nothing of Christian doctrine or life, but only subject them to popishness and monkery...If the apostles, who also were Jews, had dealt with us Gentiles as we Gentiles deal with the Jews, there would never have been a Christian among the Gentiles ... When we are inclined to boast of our position [as Christians] we should remember that we are but Gentiles, while the Jews are of the lineage of Christ. We are aliens and in-laws; they are blood relatives, cousins, and brothers of our Lord. Therefore, if one is to boast of flesh and blood the Jews are actually nearer to Christ than we are...If we really want to help them, we must be guided in our dealings with them not by papal law but by the law of Christian love. We must receive them cordially, and permit them to trade and work with us, that they may have occasion and opportunity to associate with us, hear our Christian teaching, and witness our Christian life. If some of them should prove stiff-necked, what of it? After all, we ourselves are not all good Christians either.

Martin Luther, "That Jesus Christ was Born a Jew," Trans. Walter I. Brandt, in Luther's Works (Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1962), pp. 200-201, 229.


Fourth, in 1983, The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod denounced Luther's "hostile attitude" toward the Jews. (11 years before the ELCA formally did)

Finally, let's hope most of our writings don 't become public, so that we can become the brunt of anyone and everyone who claims to know about us than we do. And sit in judgment of us. I'm glad that God is my judge.

In Christ's love,
filo

[Luther073082]

First, Luther's statements regarding the Jews (or many other topics, for that matter) do not reflect the Lutheran doctrine. We do not follow Luther, but rather the doctrinal stance of the Christian Church as reflected in the Confessions.

Second, Luther was sometimes more honest about where he was at than most contemporary Christians. Does that mean we have to accept/defend what he wrote on this topic? No. But reading Luther in context, even his most adamant detractors will admit that Luther repeatedly employed the language of violence against most, if not all, of his enemies.

Third, why does not anyone also quote from Luther's 1523 essay That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew? Luther condemned the inhuman treatment of the Jews and urged Christians to treat them kindly. Luther's fervent desire was that Jews would hear the Gospel proclaimed clearly and be moved to convert to Christianity. Thus he argued:


Fourth, in 1983, The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod denounced Luther's "hostile attitude" toward the Jews. (11 years before the ELCA formally did)

Finally, let's hope most of our writings don 't become public, so that we can become the brunt of anyone and everyone who claims to know about us than we do. And sit in judgment of us. I'm glad that God is my judge.

In Christ's love,
filo



I'm a Lutheran I know this. I know no Lutheran church supports or teaches the anti-jewish statments of Luther. The ELCA basically wrote that as soon as it was born and got things going as it was born a lot later then the LCMS but lets not worry about church history. Thats meaningless at this point.

I'm really hurt here, I was told I was a liar by people who didn't even know what I was talking about and didn't take the time to care. I named myself after Luther, I'm no expert but I'm trying to learn more about him, I really wanted to see if other people thought we should call him Saint Martin Luther because of everything he did. Luther is my favorite movie, call me crazy but I even got a Martin Luther bobblehead doll. And everyone is talking to me like I'm speaking untrue ills about Luther? I love Luther, him and Napolean are my favorite people from history. Luther hated Jews, Napolean had a thing for starting wars. (Napolean is much worse then Luther btw). I'm not going to deny those things or treat them like they never happened. And I really think the only thing that would prevent us from calling him Saint Martin Luther is our own fear of becomming Catholics, the laity's lack of knowledge about our church history, and the fact that Luther hated Jews. (Practicers of Judaism)

[PreachersWife2004]

It's great to be considered a heretic!! :D:wave:

[GratiaCorpusChristi]

Fourth, in 1983, The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod denounced Luther's "hostile attitude" toward the Jews. (11 years before the ELCA formally did)

Funny how that's openly admitted by the Synod and yet any criticism of Luther is taken as blasphemy...

[Luther073082]

It's great to be considered a heretic!! :D:wave:

Sunday school teaching heretic . . . My catholic grandmother had kittens when my church selected me.

Funny how that's openly admitted by the Synod and yet any criticism of Luther is taken as blasphemy...

Can we not start please? I'm trying to reconcile with some people who hurt me not start something else and this is bait.

[PreachersWife2004]

Funny how that's openly admitted by the Synod and yet any criticism of Luther is taken as blasphemy...

By whom?

I wouldn't call it blasphemy, but I might call it irresponsible depending on the situation.

[Edial]

Ok while I'm still not sure exactly what I did wrong, all I know is that I offended a lot of people with my poll as there was talks of warning me for being uncooperative or banning me from here.

Obviously I touched on some nerve or something and I'm sorry for whatever offended or hurt you because I certainly didn't mean to hurt or offend anyone.

So without getting my head ripped off could someone please calmly explain to me what nerve I touched and why it made so many people angry with me.
Here is the problem.

You said that you wanted to have some fun.

OK. Here are your poll options to the question whether Martin Luther should be considered a Saint.

1. Yes, his contributions to the faith are irreplacable.

2. No, he hated the Jews and had other flaws that prevent him from sainthood.

3. No, but for other reasons then hating Jews.

"Hatred of Jews" is mentioned in 2 out of the 3 choices.
In the eyes of many here, this topic is not "having fun" as you claim.

It is a serious matter that took centuries of debate.

Since we now might all agree that "hating the Jews" discussion is not a "jet's have a fun thread", let's look at the topic of "hating the Jews".

You refused to accept the suggestion that being Jewish is not necessarily a religion, but a nationality.

I presented to you millions of atheistic Jews in Soviet Union (I was born and raised there till 15) that are called a Jew as their legal identity, next to Russians, Ukranians, Armenians, Uzbeks.

Soviet Union was an atheist state.

Also, I teach Bible to a number of Russian immigrants, some of whome were atheist Jews.
I do this for years.

These Jews "look" Jewish (a politically incorrect statement) and they were openly saying that they were atheists.
In the atheistic Soviet Union they were considered to be Jewish.
Atheist ... Jews.
Eastern Jews have real genetic distinctions that are clear to anyone that notices.

What you read on Internet are often the writings that are influenced by the Judaic Jews that promote the myth that being Jewish is necessarily being Judaic.

A falsehood.

Jesus Christ, our Lord was a Jew, yet he called the certain Judaic Pharisaeic teachers the children of the devil.

And this must not be ignored, however politically incorrect it might sound.

After that, many church fathers presented distinct dislike towards the Judaic Pharisees and their synagogues.

There was a REASON for it.

I know for a fact some Judaics in Israel that slander that minute 2% of Christians to such an absurd degree that it is ridiculous.

I know the head Priest of the Armenian Quarters in Jerisalem. I spend time with him. I know him for years.

When he walks the streets of Jerusalem in his cassok and black robe, some Pharisaeic Judaics spit on him.
(Of course, this is done when the tourists are not watching).

Not all Jews are the enemies of the Cross.
Not all the Judaics are the enemies of the Cross.
Yet there are children of the devil (John 8:44)

Thanks,
Ed

[Luther073082]

I know they arn't enemies of the cross or Christ Edial. And I completly reject that the Jews are a nationality even now. Israel is just a state with a majority Jewish population. Thats like saying that Christians are a nationality because they where all from Europe in the middle ages.

Secondly they are not a race because unless they dress or make themselves up (with beards and the like) in their traditional religious garb and dress I have never seen someone I can just point to and say "thats a jew" However if your black I can tell, if you are hispanic I can tell, if you are arab I can tell, if you are asian, I can tell if you are white I can tell. Never been able to pick out a Jew, if they are a race then tell me what color they are?

Atheistic Jews do not exist any more then Atheistic Christians. There may be atheists who practice Jewish holidays out of traditions but there are plenty of atheists who practice Christian holidays as well. Atheists are atheists no matter what holidays they observe.

And I also add that neither side is sinless in any kind of Jewish/Christian relational issues. Nor have they ever been sinless in the whole history.

But Luther did hate those people who practiced Judaism (Jews) at the end of his life and that is an undeniable fact. He may have had some reasons too but I'm not going to use those to excuse him. He has no excuse.

The reason I mentioned it is because thats the worst thing someone can say about Luther these days is that he hated Jews. And considering he lived 500 years ago when everyone else hated Jews, I think thats pretty good.

BUT and this is the big thing, his contributions to the faith are irreplaceable and he has gone down in history in a very good light because of his contributions to the faith. Without him we would still be buying indulgences from the Pope and following his false doctrines.

[DaRev]

Secondly they are not a race because unless they dress or make themselves up (with beards and the like) in their traditional religious garb and dress I have never seen someone I can just point to and say "thats a jew" However if your black I can tell, if you are hispanic I can tell, if you are arab I can tell, if you are asian, I can tell if you are white I can tell. Never been able to pick out a Jew, if they are a race then tell me what color they are?

Atheistic Jews do not exist any more then Atheistic Christians.

:doh: "Race" and "color" are two different things.

You are trying to convince us that your opinion is widely accepted as fact, when it is not. You personally don't consider Jews a seperate "people". That is your own personal opinion, but it doesn't jive with fact. Therein lies the problem.

The reality is that Jews are indeed a seperate "people". They also consider themselves as such. This is an accepted norm.

[KEPLER]

"Jewish" is an ethnic identifier.

Definition of "ethnic":
The classification of a population that shares common characteristics, such as religion, traditions, culture, language, and tribal or national origin.

Yes, Luther#####, it is entirely possible to be a Jewish atheist.

My father-in-law was born and raised Jewish. When he was a teenager, his family stopped going to Temple. He was still Jewish. He married a Methodist woman; he was still Jewish. At 71, he professed his faith in Christ and was baptized. He was now a Christian; he was still Jewish.

[Luther073082]

If thats true then am I ethnically catholic?

or

Would I be ethnically agnostic?

Because my parent's where both agnostics but one grandmother was catholic, one was lutheran, and two where agnostic. Or ethnically American?

I think you'll find that I tend to challenge accepted facts based off of "What does not belong"

I don't consider Buddism a religion. . . Why? Because if you look at the beliefs and practices of Buddism its a way of living and it is not mutually exclusive to any other religion. The teachings of Budda to my knowledge do not teach anything about God. You can be a Buddist Christian.

But on the other had I do give that Jewish is considered an ethnicity by a lot of people. . . but not me. And I really wasn't aware people viewed them like that.

[DaRev]

But on the other had I do give that Jewish is considered an ethnicity by a lot of people. . . but not me. And I really wasn't aware people viewed them like that.

Just because you believe something doesn't make it true. Jewish is an ethnicity, whether you believe it to be or not. Judaism is the religion. Two different things.

From Merriam-Webster:


Main Entry: Jew
Pronunciation: 'jü
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French ju, jeu, from Latin Judaeus, from Greek Ioudaios, from Hebrew YehudhI, from YehudhAh Judah, Jewish kingdom
1 a : a member of the tribe of Judah b: Israelite
2 : a member of a nation existing in Palestine from the sixth century B.C. to the first century A.D.
3 : a person belonging to a continuation through descent or conversion of the ancient Jewish people
4 : one whose religion is Judaism


You'll notice that three of the four definitions above of "Jew" say nothing at all about religion. They speak of their ethnicity. One can certainly be Jewish and not practice Judaism. There are Jewish atheists, Jewish Christians, and believe it or not, Jewish Muslims.

And I honestly don't know of anyone (besides yourself) that considers the term "Jew" as strictly religious. It's common knowledge that Jews are ethnic.

[Melethiel]

Secondly they are not a race because unless they dress or make themselves up (with beards and the like) in their traditional religious garb and dress I have never seen someone I can just point to and say "thats a jew"
I can. There are some very distinctive features. The confusion arises because some people who claim Jewish ancestry have bloodlines so diluted that they're more European, but I have some friends who are ethnically Jewish and it's quite obvious.

[Edial]

I can. There are some very distinctive features. The confusion arises because some people who claim Jewish ancestry have bloodlines so diluted that they're more European, but I have some friends who are ethnically Jewish and it's quite obvious.
Of course.

[Luther073082]

Again I have never seen one and I have never been able to identify one as such.

Besides if we follow the definition of ethnic which has been given on here I'm in about 8 different ethnic groups right now. . .

[Melethiel]

Again I have never seen one and I have never been able to identify one as such.
Then that's your problem. It doesn't negate the fact that Jews are a distinct group under the broad "Semitic" category.

[DaRev]

Again I have never seen one and I have never been able to identify one as such.

That doesn't mean that they aren't ethnic.

Besides if we follow the definition of ethnic which has been given on here I'm in about 8 different ethnic groups right now. . .

What would they be?

[Luther073082]

That doesn't mean that they aren't ethnic.



What would they be?

German -- Common national origin
American -- common national origin
Catholic --Religious tradition of most of my family
Lutheran --Religious tradition of others in my family
English -- I speak it (Language)
Polish -- Though I am not polish I celibrate their traditions due to where I live. Dyngus day!!!
White -- Common Characteristics
Christian -- Religious and traditions (I was an atheist Christian at on point!)
British -- One anscestor lived in Britian. . . (National Origin)

I'm sure I could name more. Maybe Ballroom Dancer cause we have our own traditions. . . te he te he I'm ethnically ballroom dancer.

The definition does not specify how many of the classifications I need to be an ethnicity. Therefore in the interests of being a pain in the kiester I have decided that I only need one. Therefore I am very mutli ethnic. . . as is everyone. . . ever

Actually I could probably share Jewish ethnicity too because I have practicipated in the common tradition of circumsision. (sp?)

^_^ ^_^ ^_^

I'm just playing Rev though, but you see what I mean that the definition is bad because its so open to interpretation?

[Melethiel]

No, no, no. Ethnicity refers to genetic bloodline only. So, you would be ethnically German. I am ethnically Ukrainian.

The confusion with the word "Jew" is that it can refer to an ethnicity OR a follower of Judaism.

[Luther073082]

No, no, no. Ethnicity refers to genetic bloodline only. So, you would be ethnically German. I am ethnically Ukrainian.

The confusion with the word "Jew" is that it can refer to an ethnicity OR a follower of Judaism.

Or I could be ethnically everything. I know a lot of German last names in my family but given that I only know up to my grandparent's last name. Odds are good I'm ethnically everything.

But my point was that this definition says

The classification of a population that shares common characteristics, such as religion, traditions, culture, language, and tribal or national origin.

[Edial]

Does Keri know about this?

I REALLY would have wanted to see her opinion on this posted here.

Thanks,
Ed

[DaRev]

German -- Common national origin
American -- common national origin

The only "ethnic" Americans would probably by native Americans, or Americam Indians.

Catholic --Religious tradition of most of my family
Not an ethnicity
Lutheran --Religious tradition of others in my family
Not an ethnicity
English -- I speak it (Language)
You're not ethnicly English simply because you speak the language
Polish -- Though I am not polish I celibrate their traditions due to where I live. Dyngus day!!!
You're not ethnicly Polish simply by abserving a holiday
White -- Common Characteristics
Ethnicly Caucasian
Christian -- Religious and traditions (I was an atheist Christian at on point!)
Christian is not an ethnicity. And the term "athiest Christian" is a contradiction of terms
British -- One anscestor lived in Britian. . . (National Origin)
Partial ethnicity

I'm sure I could name more. Maybe Ballroom Dancer cause we have our own traditions. . . te he te he I'm ethnically ballroom dancer.
:doh:

The definition does not specify how many of the classifications I need to be an ethnicity. Therefore in the interests of being a pain in the kiester I have decided that I only need one. Therefore I am very mutli ethnic. . . as is everyone. . . ever

Actually I could probably share Jewish ethnicity too because I have practicipated in the common tradition of circumsision. (sp?)

^_^ ^_^ ^_^

I'm just playing Rev though, but you see what I mean that the definition is bad because its so open to interpretation?

The definition of "ethnic" is learned in grammar school. I would suggest you go back to...

...ah, skip it.

[KEPLER]

German -- Common national origin
American -- common national origin
Catholic --Religious tradition of most of my family
Lutheran --Religious tradition of others in my family
English -- I speak it (Language)
Polish -- Though I am not polish I celibrate their traditions due to where I live. Dyngus day!!!
White -- Common Characteristics
Christian -- Religious and traditions (I was an atheist Christian at on point!)
British -- One anscestor lived in Britian. . . (National Origin)

I'm sure I could name more. Maybe Ballroom Dancer cause we have our own traditions. . . te he te he I'm ethnically ballroom dancer.

The definition does not specify how many of the classifications I need to be an ethnicity. Therefore in the interests of being a pain in the kiester I have decided that I only need one. Therefore I am very mutli ethnic. . . as is everyone. . . ever

Actually I could probably share Jewish ethnicity too because I have practicipated in the common tradition of circumsision. (sp?)

^_^ ^_^ ^_^

I'm just playing Rev though, but you see what I mean that the definition is bad because its so open to interpretation?
Actually, a sociologist would categorize you (albeit not quite politically correct) as a WASP - white anglo-saxon protestant.

[Luther073082]

Thats weird because my Dad was Catholic before he went agnostic. My mom pretty much grew up agnostic. I chose protestant mainly because I made the determination that Jesus saying "Peter is the rock on which I will found my church" does not equal all powerful pope.

I know what ethnicity is suppose to be, but I still don't see it in jews. Sorry can't figure out how Robin Williams looks any different from the rest of us "WASPs"

[Melethiel]

Read my sentence from a few posts back:
The confusion arises because some people who claim Jewish ancestry have bloodlines so diluted as to be more European.

[Luther073082]

Read my sentence from a few posts back:
The confusion arises because some people who claim Jewish ancestry have bloodlines so diluted as to be more European.

But as was pointed out before that no one regarded them as an ethnicity until after Darwin. . . And they where less "watered down" then . . .

And still even so, I don't see how Robin Williams looks any different from the rest of us. . . Any other famous people with Jewish ethnicity?

[filosofer]

Jack Benny, Marx Brothers,...

[DaRev]

Their ethnicity has to do with their ancestry and their bloodlines, not their physical appearence. We've tried repeatedly to explain that to you, but you apparently have no interest in learning the truth.

[DaRev]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGI9KP3Ki6g

[DaRev]

But as was pointed out before that no one regarded them as an ethnicity until after Darwin. . . And they where less "watered down" then . . .

Ever read the Old Testament?

[QuiltAngel]

I suggest you go to this site, scroll down on the right side to the link about Luther and Jews. There are many papers to read and one is in regards to the pamphlet that has been mentioned.

http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/

There is lots of reading there.

Now, as far as the poll. My personal opinion would have been if the options would have been a simple "yes" or "no", things would have been much calmer. You could have stated your views in your answer to the poll.

Here's the thing, there are many of us here who have had many discussions over the years regarding Luther and his views of the Jews. These discussions are usually along the lines of how can you be Lutheran because of what he wrote on the Jews. These discussions also misrepresent what Luther said. The discussions come across as what we say is wrong because of what Luther said about the Jews. They come across as arrogant to us. Kind of a big put down if you will.

The poll came along right after a dabate on CF regarding Luther. Many of us grow weary of the same old discussion over and over. Then to have someone come on with a Lutheran icon and make a statement along the same lines was just too much at this time.

One also needs to remember that things like humor and sarcasm do not come through the written word. Since know of us know you, we don't know how you mean somethingw without something being written that leads us that way.

As far as ethnicity, it has been explained to you over and over how this is meant. You feel that it not the case, yet you are in the minority there. It is going to be hard to change many many years of something being defined one way. For many many years, Jewish has been understood to be a race or ethinicity. I am not sure how one person is going to change that.

[Luther073082]

Well I've been here for a few days now and the impression I've gotten thus far is there is not a such thing as a sense of humor on this board. There are three types of posts.

1. Argument
2. Intense theological analysis
3. Ripping on the ELCA.

Check if and see if 90% the posts on here arn't one of those three.

[LilLamb219]

I think your posting fits in there quite well ;)

Oh, look, I DO have a sense of humor! ^_^

[DaSeminarian]

Well I've been here for a few days now and the impression I've gotten thus far is there is not a such thing as a sense of humor on this board. There are three types of posts.

1. Argument
2. Intense theological analysis
3. Ripping on the ELCA.

Check if and see if 90% the posts on here arn't one of those three.


Well you do have to have a thick skin to be here if you are ELCA. :) (Maybe 15-20 layers) It also depends on the nature of the thread.

Most threads here are looking for an aspect of the three that you mention, but if you go to the Adiaphora Alehouse you will find a more tongue in cheek flow to many of the posts.

[Edial]

Well I've been here for a few days now and the impression I've gotten thus far is there is not a such thing as a sense of humor on this board. There are three types of posts.

1. Argument
2. Intense theological analysis
3. Ripping on the ELCA.

Check if and see if 90% the posts on here arn't one of those three.
I'm an ELCA member. And I think you are bluffing.

You know exactly what we are talking about.

Does Keri agree with you?

I would love to see her opinion on this.

Thanks,
Ed

[KEPLER]

Well I've been here for a few days now and the impression I've gotten thus far is there is not a such thing as a sense of humor on this board. There are three types of posts.

1. Argument
2. Intense theological analysis
3. Ripping on the ELCA.

Check if and see if 90% the posts on here arn't one of those three.
This is not even nearly a complete list!

We also argue about beer (lager or ale?), jell-o (always green or liturgically determined?), and those all-encompassing food stuffs cooked in your biggest piece of Corning-Ware™ (hot-dish or casserole?)

What do you know, newbie?

[/sarcasm]

[Luther073082]

I'm an ELCA member. And I think you are bluffing.

You know exactly what we are talking about.

Does Keri agree with you?

I would love to see her opinion on this.

Thanks,
Ed

Keri, is not a Lutheran and I've strongly recommended for multiple reasons, not to mention people calling her a heretic for not being Lutheran that she not come here.

We havn't decided if we are going to go to her denomination or an ELCA church if we get married. A lot will depend on the individual churchs. I was talking about switching to the LCMS for a little while there but my experiences in here have turned me against that.

[Luther073082]

Well you do have to have a thick skin to be here if you are ELCA. :) (Maybe 15-20 layers) It also depends on the nature of the thread.

Most threads here are looking for an aspect of the three that you mention, but if you go to the Adiaphora Alehouse you will find a more tongue in cheek flow to many of the posts.

I usually am pretty thick skinned but at one point you just wonder what the point is.

[Edial]

Keri, is not a Lutheran and I've strongly recommended for multiple reasons, not to mention people calling her a heretic for not being Lutheran that she not come here.

We havn't decided if we are going to go to her denomination or an ELCA church if we get married. A lot will depend on the individual churchs. I was talking about switching to the LCMS for a little while there but my experiences in here have turned me against that.
Oh no.
I'm just curious to see what she thinks about this Jewish ethnicity and religion discussion that we are having.

Somehow I suspect that she might tell you after reading these posts: "Honey, maybe these guys do have a point".

And, I wish you both well on your wedding. :)

:)
Ed

[Luther073082]

Oh no.
I'm just curious to see what she thinks about this Jewish ethnicity and religion discussion that we are having.

Somehow I suspect that she might tell you after reading these posts: "Honey, maybe these guys do have a point".

And, I wish you both well on your wedding. :)
:)
Ed

Perhaps she would, I don't know, personally I don't decide what I belive based off of her. So really it doesn't matter. ;)

And we're not engaged, we are just looking at it as we belive this relationship is heading towards marriage.

For me I always view the relationship as "intent" on marriage and the engagement is the promise. Right now we are just in the intent stage. Way too early to be engaged for us and we also live 3000 miles away.

Although seeming how my parents where engaged 3 days after they met and married a week later (and still together after 27 years) we' are moving at a snails pace. :D

[Edial]

Perhaps she would, I don't know, personally I don't decide what I belive based off of her. So really it doesn't matter. ;)

And we're not engaged, we are just looking at it as we belive this relationship is heading towards marriage.

For me I always view the relationship as "intent" on marriage and the engagement is the promise. Right now we are just in the intent stage. Way too early to be engaged for us and we also live 3000 miles away.

Although seeming how my parents where engaged 3 days after they met and married a week later (and still together after 27 years) we' are moving at a snails pace. :D
My sister and her husband married in 2 months and are together for 29 years. :)

But 3000 miles away ... that is far.