Please read if you plan on posting here...

[LilLamb219]

I just thought it was time for a reminder about our Forum Specific Guidelines:

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=6904145

We've had quite a lot of activity lately and I'm not sure all our new friends coming to our forum are aware of the guidelines. So, please take a look at the link above if you plan on posting so you don't get walloped :D:P;).

[DominusIesus]

May be I should introduce myself. :)

I am a confessional Anglican which means I affirm the (39) Articles of Religion and the doctrine of the Book of Common Prayer. The Articles were based upon the Augsburg Confession and I would have no issue with subscribing to that, nor indeed the Book of Concord. I agree with the Apostles' Creed, Nicene Creed and Athanasian Creed. I also hold to the five solas.

I agree with Lutherans on many of things and all I am interested in is having some friendly discussions concerning biblical theology.

[DaRev]

May be I should introduce myself. :)

I am a confessional Anglican which means I affirm the (39) Articles of Religion and the doctrine of the Book of Common Prayer. The Articles were based upon the Augsburg Confession and I would have no issue with subscribing to that, nor indeed the Book of Concord. I agree with the Apostles' Creed, Nicene Creed and Athanasian Creed. I also hold to the five solas.

I agree with Lutherans on many of things and all I am interested in is having some friendly discussions concerning biblical theology.

Just don't come in here and tell us that the Book of Concord is old and outdated and that we should rely on some "commentary" for our theology. The BoC is our Confession of faith. Some folks here will likely bite your head off if you speak evil against our Confession. :)

[Edial]

May be I should introduce myself. :)

I am a confessional Anglican which means I affirm the (39) Articles of Religion and the doctrine of the Book of Common Prayer. The Articles were based upon the Augsburg Confession and I would have no issue with subscribing to that, nor indeed the Book of Concord. I agree with the Apostles' Creed, Nicene Creed and Athanasian Creed. I also hold to the five solas.

I agree with Lutherans on many of things and all I am interested in is having some friendly discussions concerning biblical theology.
Welcome to TCL. :)

Ed

[Tofferer]

May be I should introduce myself. :)

I am a confessional Anglican which means I affirm the (39) Articles of Religion and the doctrine of the Book of Common Prayer. The Articles were based upon the Augsburg Confession and I would have no issue with subscribing to that, nor indeed the Book of Concord. I agree with the Apostles' Creed, Nicene Creed and Athanasian Creed. I also hold to the five solas.

I agree with Lutherans on many of things and all I am interested in is having some friendly discussions concerning biblical theology.


Welcome. Friendly dialogue and debate is always welcome. Even a little good natured teasing now and then. However, I agree with DaRev with regards to the BoC (I keep a copy on my book shelf, betwen the BoM and Koran). I do not mean any disrespect, however, I feel that the BoC is completely sufficient for explaining our Christian faith. I would argue that there are two books that every Christian family should have. Number one is the bible (I don't care too much about what version). Number two is the BoC. I find that the Reader's Edition is a very well put together version and that it is quite understandable for the casual reader, yet is still thorough enough for any decent theologian.

Notwithstanding, I hope you have fun here and you learn a little too.

[Radiata]

Two things. I will be hated and ridiculed for this, but I think that people need to be more tolerant of other denominations coming in here. Whenever I see someone speak in the slightest manor of "I'm right, you're wrong" then everyone gets in an uproar and starts yelling at the guy. Just let the guy talk, debate with them, have fun, and don't put the entire discussion on hold to flame the person for trying to prove his point.

Secondly, I think that the bible is outdated on a very select few things. The only thing I can think of is:
Genesis 9:7
As for you, be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it."

Due to overpopulation and a failing economy, it is currently not in the best interest to have many kids. (One of the reasons I never plan on getting married.... among others) If you do, there are many times too much financial strain to be able to live comfortably while at the same time being able to give freely to God and to devote what you own to His purpose.


Before I make too much of a fool of myself, I'll stop talking now.

[DaRev]

with regards to the BoC (I keep a copy on my book shelf, betwen the BoM and Koran).

How dare you desecrate the Lutheran Confessions by sandwiching it between two false documents? :eek:

;)

I think that the bible is outdated on a very select few things.

Your errant view of Scripture will be corrected once you get into seminary. You need to learn hermeneutics.

[LutheranMafia]

Secondly, I think that the bible is outdated on a very select few things. The only thing I can think of is:
Genesis 9:7
As for you, be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it."

Due to overpopulation and a failing economy, it is currently not in the best interest to have many kids. (One of the reasons I never plan on getting married.... among others) If you do, there are many times too much financial strain to be able to live comfortably while at the same time being able to give freely to God and to devote what you own to His purpose.
Even if the population bomb was not a thing of the past, most especially in North America and Europe, this refers to a principle of life, not socio-economic advice. Life is expansive, death is contractive.

It can be viewed at many levels, both symbolically and literally. We can easily have much more than the 2 or 3 children required for a zero birth rate, if we wish. That means that if a catastrophe strikes humanity can still survive, even if only a small group remains. Symbolically that is a promise of our eventual triumph, no matter how bad the odds. It is part of the Bible's promises to us, expressed in many ways, that we will eventually win and good will triumph over evil.

[Edial]

...

Secondly, I think that the bible is outdated on a very select few things. The only thing I can think of is:
Genesis 9:7
As for you, be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it."

Due to overpopulation and a failing economy, it is currently not in the best interest to have many kids. (One of the reasons I never plan on getting married.... among others) If you do, there are many times too much financial strain to be able to live comfortably while at the same time being able to give freely to God and to devote what you own to His purpose.


Before I make too much of a fool of myself, I'll stop talking now.
:D:D:).
Don't forget to invite me for your wedding once you lose your rationality for some gal who'll make Genesis 9:7 very much of a current event.

But if you insist to rebel against Gen.9:7 you could always protest by calling your firstborn Zigmund ... or Mr. Ziggy for short.

Ed

[seajoy]

Two things. I will be hated and ridiculed for this, but I think that people need to be more tolerant of other denominations coming in here. Whenever I see someone speak in the slightest manor of "I'm right, you're wrong" then everyone gets in an uproar and starts yelling at the guy. Just let the guy talk, debate with them, have fun, and don't put the entire discussion on hold to flame the person for trying to prove his point.

Hated and ridiculed? I highly doubt that.

There is enough tolerance in this country, that no one stands for anything anymore.

And it's not "I'm right, you're wrong", it's "the bible is right". We won't tolerate heresy from anybody. We care too much about them for that.

When someone tries to prove a point with intellect and flaming us, it will bite them in the rear.

Think about how Luther handled heresy. He would about go nuts in TCL at times. :)

[DaRev]

Think about how Luther handled heresy. He would about go nuts in TCL at times. :)

Luther would have probably been banned long ago. :P ^_^

[Edial]

Luther would have probably been banned long ago. :P ^_^
I'm sure he would have avoided swear words.

[Radiata]

I'm sure he would have avoided swear words.
Oh, I'm not so sure of that.^_^

[PreachersWife2004]

Secondly, I think that the bible is outdated on a very select few things. The only thing I can think of is:
Genesis 9:7
As for you, be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it."

I'm pretty certain this only applies to pastors and their wives... :P:D

[Korah]

I just thought it was time for a reminder about our Forum Specific Guidelines:

http://christianforums.com/showthread.php?t=6904145

We've had quite a lot of activity lately and I'm not sure all our new friends coming to our forum are aware of the guidelines. So, please take a look at the link above if you plan on posting so you don't get walloped :D:P;).
When I got baptized as an adult in 1969 in the Roman Catholic Church, there was no mention of the Athanasian Creed. When I switched to Episcopalian in 1992, I got a pass on the Athanasian Creed, even though they theoretically still believe it. And they let me into ELCA in 2004 without rejecting me because I won't recite the Athanasian Creed. In the bigger picture the Athanasian Creed is strictly a Western innovation that is not at all recognized in the East, whether Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox (Miaphysite), or Church of the East (Nestorian). And in the West where it originated, the Roman Catholic originators do not teach it any more.
I say the denomination-specific guidelines make us anti-Orthodox, anti-Catholic, and slant us to LCMS and against ELCA. Nobody to speak of posts in the ELCA sub-forum--do you really mean to expel us ELCA from the main Lutheran forum?
Korah

[Tofferer]

I don't see an issue with the forum specific guidelines. Of course, I am also not ELCA, so I don't feel like I am being expelled (I can assure you that I would be unwelcomed pretty quickly in the ELCA sub forum). I personally believe that the Book of Concord is in total agreement with scripture. To me, the guidelines are simply a safeguard against potential problems. I don't see a problem with not wanting problems.

[Tofferer]

:o How dare you desecrate the Lutheran Confessions by sandwiching it between two false documents? :eek:

;)


Sorry Rev.

I meant Book of Common Prayer when I said BoC. I am really Sorry about that. I don't think I was entirely awake when I wrote that. I also keep those three books on a top shelf that I can not easily reach (right next to a copy of the DaVince Code), if only because I doubt I will ever read them again.


:doh:

[LilLamb219]

When I got baptized as an adult in 1969 in the Roman Catholic Church, there was no mention of the Athanasian Creed. When I switched to Episcopalian in 1992, I got a pass on the Athanasian Creed, even though they theoretically still believe it. And they let me into ELCA in 2004 without rejecting me because I won't recite the Athanasian Creed. In the bigger picture the Athanasian Creed is strictly a Western innovation that is not at all recognized in the East, whether Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox (Miaphysite), or Church of the East (Nestorian). And in the West where it originated, the Roman Catholic originators do not teach it any more.
I say the denomination-specific guidelines make us anti-Orthodox, anti-Catholic, and slant us to LCMS and against ELCA. Nobody to speak of posts in the ELCA sub-forum--do you really mean to expel us ELCA from the main Lutheran forum?
Korah

ELCA members helped to create our guidelines.

[filosofer]

The following is from the ELCA web site:
=================================


ELCA Confession of Faith
What we believe in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America

This church confesses the Triune God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

This church confesses Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior and the Gospel as the power of God for the salvation of all who believe

Jesus Christ is the Word of God incarnate, through whom everything was made and through whose life, death, and resurrection God fashions a new creation.

The proclamation of God's message to us as both Law and Gospel is the Word of God, revealing judgment and mercy through word and deed, beginning with the Word in creation, continuing in the history of Israel, and centering in all its fullness in the person and work of Jesus Christ.

The canonical Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are the written Word of God. Inspired by God's Spirit speaking through their authors, they record and announce God's revelation centering in Jesus Christ. Through them God's Spirit speaks to us to create and sustain Christian faith and fellowship for service in the world.

This church accepts the canonical Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as the inspired Word of God and the authoritative source and norm of its proclamation, faith, and life.

This church accepts the Apostles', Nicene, and Athanasian Creeds as true declarations of the faith of this church.

This church accepts the Unaltered Augsburg Confession as a true witness to the Gospel, acknowledging as one with it In faith and doctrine all churches that likewise accept the teachings of the Unaltered Augsburg Confession.

This church accepts the other confessional writings in the Book of Concord, namely, the Apology of the Augsburg Confession, the Smalcald Articles and the Treatise, the Small Catechism, the Large Catechism, and the Formula of Concord, as further valid interpretations of the faith of the Church.

This church confesses the Gospel, recorded in the Holy Scriptures and confessed in the ecumenical creeds and Lutheran confessional writings, as the power of God to create and sustain the Church for God's mission in the world.

The Confession of Faith is published in the Constitution of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America.

ELCA Confession of Faith (http://www.elca.org/What-We-Believe/Statements-of-Belief/ELCA-Confession-of-Faith.aspx)

[Flipper]

Secondly, I think that the bible is outdated on a very select few things. The only thing I can think of is:
Genesis 9:7
As for you, be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it."

Due to overpopulation and a failing economy, it is currently not in the best interest to have many kids. (One of the reasons I never plan on getting married.... among others) If you do, there are many times too much financial strain to be able to live comfortably while at the same time being able to give freely to God and to devote what you own to His purpose.


Before I make too much of a fool of myself, I'll stop talking now.


Don't think that getting married means you will automatically have kids. DH and I are among many examples that God can have a huge sense of humor where that's concerned.

[Korah]

The following is from the ELCA web site:
=================================

This church accepts the Apostles', Nicene, and Athanasian Creeds as true declarations of the faith of this church.

ELCA Confession of Faith (http://www.elca.org/What-We-Believe/Statements-of-Belief/ELCA-Confession-of-Faith.aspx)


Thank you.
Fortunately (for me, anyway) I have never heard the Athanasian Creed recited during my four years in ELCA.
I guess if I get any more liberal, I'll have to go back to being Roman Catholic.
Korah

[Korah]

ELCA members helped to create our guidelines.
My Post #21 was moderated, delaying it almost a day. Apparently even though many here
question my Lutheranism, the moderator perceived my sense of humor and irony in "asking"
whether I was so liberal I would have to convert (again, like I did at age 27) to Roman Catholicism.
In a similar light-hearted vein, where do those of you who object to my beliefs think I belong? Should my objection to the Athanasian Creed force me out of ELCA, and if so, to where? I have particular objections to Eastern Orthodoxy, but that would still leave several Eastern bodies, such as Miaphysitism and Nestorianism. How about Western Orthodoxy, though I'm not sure what that is and know it is minuscule? Old Catholicism--probably has the Athanasian Creed? Maybe I should go back where I started, Methodist? I know they never had the Athanasian Creed, maybe that's the source of my distaste for it? In spite of all my searching and at least triple conversions, I'm really incapable of changing my beliefs from where I started?
Edited to add: I've surveyed "What we believe" in Wesley's Parish,and find no mention
there of creeds at all. I do know that my service book about 1960 contained the Nicene
Creed, but I would like to see that in the statement of faith. But the Augsburg Confession
seems to contain nothing about any of the classical creeds, either. Nor does it go out of
its way to dispute Roman Catholicism about RC's settled doctrine of Purgatory, whereas the
Methodist Articles of Religion does. I still say I fit best in ELCA, it allows me to be Catholic to the
degree I am and does not force me to consent to dubious dogma like Papal Infallibility, the
Immaculate Conception, and the Assumption of Mary (though I admit there's good evidence
for it). What I think about the Athanasian Creed should not affect where I fit in the
bigger issues of Christian belief. I don't know of any body except Anglicanism that lists
the Athanasian Creed in its most basic articles of religion--the Augsburg Confession
does not, the Methodist articles do not, Roman Catholicism does not, and of course no
Eastern body does. (And the Anglican 39 Articles list as canonical books that even RC
rejects.)
Korah

[Till]

Due to overpopulation and a failing economy, it is currently not in the best interest to have many kids. (One of the reasons I never plan on getting married.... among others) If you do, there are many times too much financial strain to be able to live comfortably while at the same time being able to give freely to God and to devote what you own to His purpose.



Sorry Radiata but what a sadening statement are you making here. You live in one of the richest countries of the world and state that having children is too expensive and you could not live comfortably anymore!? How sad! Devoting money to raising children IS devoting money to God's purposes!!! What could be more godly than to sacrifice yourself to some extent to raise children and to raise them as Christians.

[LilLamb219]

Thank you.
Fortunately (for me, anyway) I have never heard the Athanasian Creed recited during my four years in ELCA.
I guess if I get any more liberal, I'll have to go back to being Roman Catholic.
Korah

Because it's the longest of the creeds...and super long at that, many churches opt to not recite it at all. My LCMS church recites it once a year on Trinity Sunday I believe.

[LilLamb219]

Sorry Radiata but what a sadening statement are you making here. You live in one of the richest countries of the world and state that having children is too expensive and you could not live comfortably anymore!? How sad! Devoting money to raising children IS devoting money to God's purposes!!! What could be more godly than to sacrifice yourself to some extent to raise children and to raise them as Christians.

These are some wonderful points! :thumbsup:

[DaRev]

My Post #21 was moderated, delaying it almost a day. Apparently even though many here
question my Lutheranism, the moderator perceived my sense of humor and irony in "asking"
whether I was so liberal I would have to convert (again, like I did at age 27) to Roman Catholicism.
In a similar light-hearted vein, where do those of you who object to my beliefs think I belong? Should my objection to the Athanasian Creed force me out of ELCA, and if so, to where? I have particular objections to Eastern Orthodoxy, but that would still leave several Eastern bodies, such as Miaphysitism and Nestorianism. How about Western Orthodoxy, though I'm not sure what that is and know it is minuscule? Old Catholicism--probably has the Athanasian Creed? Maybe I should go back where I started, Methodist? I know they never had the Athanasian Creed, maybe that's the source of my distaste for it? In spite of all my searching and at least triple conversions, I'm really incapable of changing my beliefs from where I started?
Edited to add: I've surveyed "What we believe" in Wesley's Parish,and find no mention
there of creeds at all. I do know that my service book about 1960 contained the Nicene
Creed, but I would like to see that in the statement of faith. But the Augsburg Confession
seems to contain nothing about any of the classical creeds, either. Nor does it go out of
its way to dispute Roman Catholicism about RC's settled doctrine of Purgatory, whereas the
Methodist Articles of Religion does. I still say I fit best in ELCA, it allows me to be Catholic to the
degree I am and does not force me to consent to dubious dogma like Papal Infallibility, the
Immaculate Conception, and the Assumption of Mary (though I admit there's good evidence
for it). What I think about the Athanasian Creed should not affect where I fit in the
bigger issues of Christian belief. I don't know of any body except Anglicanism that lists
the Athanasian Creed in its most basic articles of religion--the Augsburg Confession
does not, the Methodist articles do not, Roman Catholicism does not, and of course no
Eastern body does. (And the Anglican 39 Articles list as canonical books that even RC
rejects.)
Korah

The Lutheran Confessions are more than just the Augsburg Confession. The Confessions of the Lutheran Church are contained in the Book of Concord of 1580, which most certainly includes the Athanasian Creed, along with the Nicene and Apostle's Creeds, the Augsburg Confession and it's Apology, the Smalcald Articles, the Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope, the Large and Small Catechsims of Dr. Martin Luther, and the Formula of Concord. Confessional Lutherans fully subscribe to these Confessions as thoroughly Biblical and true expositions of Biblical doctrines.

Since the ELCA does not fully subscribe to the Confessions, perhaps that is where you belong. They're not sure what they believe in, either.

[seajoy]

Sorry Radiata but what a sadening statement are you making here. You live in one of the richest countries of the world and state that having children is too expensive and you could not live comfortably anymore!? How sad! Devoting money to raising children IS devoting money to God's purposes!!! What could be more godly than to sacrifice yourself to some extent to raise children and to raise them as Christians.
This is a great post.

[LutheranChick]

This is a great post.
I second that!

[Korah]

Since the ELCA does not fully subscribe to the Confessions, perhaps that is where you belong. They're not sure what they believe in, either.
Yes, that's probably why they let me in. If LCMS were the only choice to
be Christian, I would not have been able to be baptized in 1960 when I
took LCMS inquiry class, and I would still be unbaptized. (I got baptized
in 1969 as Roman Catholic, easier to swallow than LCMS.)
The scoop now is that the ELCA will probably split in the 2009 General
Convention. The problem for me is that one will probably be too liberal
(Gay Agenda), and the other too conservative (Athanasian Creed or if
not that then Sola Scriptura). I'm praying that it not split, or if it does
to split three ways so there's one for me in the middle.
Korah

[DaRev]

Yes, that's probably why they let me in. If LCMS were the only choice to
be Christian, I would not have been able to be baptized in 1960 when I
took LCMS inquiry class, and I would still be unbaptized. (I got baptized
in 1969 as Roman Catholic, easier to swallow than LCMS.)
The scoop now is that the ELCA will probably split in the 2009 General
Convention. The problem for me is that one will probably be too liberal
(Gay Agenda), and the other too conservative (Athanasian Creed or if
not that then Sola Scriptura). I'm praying that it not split, or if it does
to split three ways so there's one for me in the middle.
Korah

What exactly is your beef with the Athanasian Creed?

[RadMan]

My Post #21 was moderated, delaying it almost a day. Apparently even though many here
question my Lutheranism, the moderator perceived my sense of humor and irony in "asking"
whether I was so liberal I would have to convert (again, like I did at age 27) to Roman Catholicism.
In a similar light-hearted vein, where do those of you who object to my beliefs think I belong? Should my objection to the Athanasian Creed force me out of ELCA, and if so, to where? I have particular objections to Eastern Orthodoxy, but that would still leave several Eastern bodies, such as Miaphysitism and Nestorianism. How about Western Orthodoxy, though I'm not sure what that is and know it is minuscule? Old Catholicism--probably has the Athanasian Creed? Maybe I should go back where I started, Methodist? I know they never had the Athanasian Creed, maybe that's the source of my distaste for it? In spite of all my searching and at least triple conversions, I'm really incapable of changing my beliefs from where I started?
Edited to add: I've surveyed "What we believe" in Wesley's Parish,and find no mention
there of creeds at all. I do know that my service book about 1960 contained the Nicene
Creed, but I would like to see that in the statement of faith. But the Augsburg Confession
seems to contain nothing about any of the classical creeds, either. Nor does it go out of
its way to dispute Roman Catholicism about RC's settled doctrine of Purgatory, whereas the
Methodist Articles of Religion does. I still say I fit best in ELCA, it allows me to be Catholic to the
degree I am and does not force me to consent to dubious dogma like Papal Infallibility, the
Immaculate Conception, and the Assumption of Mary (though I admit there's good evidence
for it). What I think about the Athanasian Creed should not affect where I fit in the
bigger issues of Christian belief. I don't know of any body except Anglicanism that lists
the Athanasian Creed in its most basic articles of religion--the Augsburg Confession
does not, the Methodist articles do not, Roman Catholicism does not, and of course no
Eastern body does. (And the Anglican 39 Articles list as canonical books that even RC
rejects.)
KorahWe can't make up you mind for you. Still don't know what you object to in the Athanasian Creed.

[PreachersWife2004]

Korah, mods are not actively moderating posts like that. I noticed that as well. It's a bug that happens, and random posts are pulled into the moderating queue. It had nothing to do with the content of the post, just so you are aware.

[Korah]

What exactly is your beef with the Athanasian Creed?
Have you read it? I mean, really read it with an open mind?
I mean, the basics of it might be true, but to an unprejudiced mind
it's just gibberish out of Through the Looking Glass.
But what's impossible for me to accept is the anathemas. I can't even
find the Athanasian Creed in my 1958 Service Book and Hymnal of the Lutheran
Church in America (I picked up when my ELCA parish was discarding it in 2005).
In the current Episcopal Book of Common Prayer of 1979, it starts,
Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic
Faith
and concludes,
This is the Catholic Faith, which except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved.
I guess nobody but LCMS faithful are saved, the rest of us fry eternally in Hell.
Or maybe you guys fry too, because you changed your Nicene Creed to say,
"Christian" where it's supposed to say "Catholic".
Korah

[Edial]

Korah, mods are not actively moderating posts like that. I noticed that as well. It's a bug that happens, and random posts are pulled into the moderating queue. It had nothing to do with the content of the post, just so you are aware.
I also noticed it and was wondering who was moderating it, since I was not. :)

Thanks for that PreachersWife.

Ed

[RadMan]

Edited: Sorry--quoted wrong person

[filosofer]

The term "catholic" has no reference to Roman Catholic Church. Rather it has been historically (from the first century) to refer to those who hold to the Christian faith. It means "universal", i.e. everything who confesses the faith of Jesus Christ and him crucified (and everything that such faith entails).

Having studied the creeds in sufficient detail at Seminary and in the past 20+ years I am very familiar with it; my regret is that we only use it once a year - I preached on it this year. There is much history behind the statements and the reasons for articulating the faith that way. BTW, anathemas are part and parcel of confessing the faith. Any time we make a positive confession of the faith, a corresponding negative statement condemns false teaching. Check out the Augsburg Confession as well as the Formula of Concord.

[Edial]

Edited: Sorry--quoted wrong person
.

[LilLamb219]

Have you read it? I mean, really read it with an open mind?
I mean, the basics of it might be true, but to an unprejudiced mind
it's just gibberish out of Through the Looking Glass.


Everything in the creed is completely biblical.

[RadMan]

.Flaglady is an interesting person but where she gets her ideas about flags is.................:doh:

[Edial]

Flaglady is an interesting person but where she gets her ideas about flags is.................:doh:
Ha! I do not have any idea. :D

She was my mod trainer after I came back to modding.
D'Ann was my trainer prior to my 7-7-07 modding days.

I think Flaglady stepped down from that position or something to that effect.

Historically I remember the firsts in any of the Christian ministries I am in and I appreciate them. I somehow keep that mental list.

Thanks, :)
Ed

[DaRev]

Have you read it? I mean, really read it with an open mind?
I mean, the basics of it might be true, but to an unprejudiced mind
it's just gibberish out of Through the Looking Glass.
But what's impossible for me to accept is the anathemas. I can't even
find the Athanasian Creed in my 1958 Service Book and Hymnal of the Lutheran
Church in America (I picked up when my ELCA parish was discarding it in 2005).
In the current Episcopal Book of Common Prayer of 1979, it starts,
Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the Catholic
Faith
and concludes,
This is the Catholic Faith, which except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved.
I guess nobody but LCMS faithful are saved, the rest of us fry eternally in Hell.
Or maybe you guys fry too, because you changed your Nicene Creed to say,
"Christian" where it's supposed to say "Catholic".
Korah

Of course I have read it and studied it. (Required at seminary.) And I stand behind every word it says. It is one of the most precise statements regarding the Christian faith in existence. This is why it is considered one of the Confessions of the Lutheran Church.

When one is accepted into communicant membership in the Lutheran Church, they make a vow to accept and uphold the Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, which includes the Athanasian Creed.

The words "catholic" and "Christian" are synonymous in terms of defining the faith. If you have an issue with the Athanasian Creed, you must then have an issue with the Christian faith.

I strongly suggest you enter into a good Confessional Lutheran catechism class to learn the truth of such things.

[seajoy]

Where is that popcorn-eating dude? :) I could use it right now. :cool:

[LutheranMafia]

Where is that popcorn-eating dude? :) I could use it right now. :cool:You mean this one?
http://www.hemmy.net/images/animals/hamsterpopcorn.jpg



Or this one?
http://members.arstechnica.com/x/freeman/homer-eating-popcorn-small-c7873.jpg

[PreachersWife2004]

The g--k word you are referencing is a slang for people of the asian variety, probably specifically Japanese.

Let me also remind you that you are in the Lutheran forum and you will treat everyone here with respect.

Perhaps tomorrow when I'm not dead tired and waiting for a caffeine rush to wear off, I will post the biblical references for the Athanasian creed.

In the meantime, Korah, you are more than welcome to give evidence as to why you believe it is not biblical. So far I have seen nothing in the way of proof from your POV, just sidewinding insults thrown around to those who have disagreed with you.

[QuiltAngel]

Hmm, I remember citing the Athanasian Creed in my LCA Days. Unfortunately, am not putting my hands on the hymnal I have from those days. Hopefully I will be able to find it this weekend and get back to you.

[Korah]

Hmm, I remember citing the Athanasian Creed in my LCA Days. Unfortunately, am not putting my hands on the hymnal I have from those days. Hopefully I will be able to find it this weekend and get back to you.
I'm sure you did recite the Athanasian Creed in old LCA days. I suspect your priest read from some special ordinal or lectionary of readings that he used for Trinity Sunday or such. I also suspect that the Athanasian Creed was not printed in some or all LCA books because of high-level decisions that compromised by not printing it, but still allowing it to be recited where tradition or the pastor's preference dictated.
I really think that Greek philosophy,mysticism, and pious exuberance entered into the formulation of the Athanasian Creed more than careful Bible study. I don't necessarily oppose Greek philosophy, mysticism, and pious exuberance. (In fact I was in the Charismatic Renewal in the Roman Catholic Church from 1977 to 1992.) It's not my purpose in this thread to demolish the beliefs of others, just to offer my defense for being a Lutheran albeit merely ELCA.
Regarding the "Catholic" vis-a-vis "Christian" equivalence, here again I don't wish to attack the understandings others take here where they are wholesome. Allow me to state what I would consider unwholesome. I hold that it reduces one's beliefs to mere sectarianism if one holds to removing "Catholic" as a means of denying that there are saved people among RC, EO, Anglican, and various other apostolic churches, and if one inserts "Christian" in its place as a means of saying "only those of us who recite the Nicene Creed/Apostles Creed with the word 'Christian' are in the church and saved."
That said, the sectarianism I question would not necessarily be limited to LCMS and WELS, as far as I know (and I don't know what WELS's word use is), but would pertain to ELCA or at least some or all of its forebears, because in that 1958 red Service Book the word "Christian" appears in both the main creeds. However, both contain a footnote that the word "Catholic" is the word in the original texts.
Korah

[Till]

I'm sure you did recite the Athanasian Creed in old LCA days. I suspect your priest read from some special ordinal or lectionary of readings that he used for Trinity Sunday or such. I also suspect that the Athanasian Creed was not printed in some or all LCA books because of high-level decisions that compromised by not printing it, but still allowing it to be recited where tradition or the pastor's preference dictated.
I really think that Greek philosophy,mysticism, and pious exuberance entered into the formulation of the Athanasian Creed more than careful Bible study. I don't necessarily oppose Greek philosophy, mysticism, and pious exuberance. (In fact I was in the Charismatic Renewal in the Roman Catholic Church from 1977 to 1992.) It's not my purpose in this thread to demolish the beliefs of others, just to offer my defense for being a Lutheran albeit merely ELCA.
Regarding the "Catholic" vis-a-vis "Christian" equivalence, here again I don't wish to attack the understandings others take here where they are wholesome. Allow me to state what I would consider unwholesome. I hold that it reduces one's beliefs to mere sectarianism if one holds to removing "Catholic" as a means of denying that there are saved people among RC, EO, Anglican, and various other apostolic churches, and if one inserts "Christian" in its place as a means of saying "only those of us who recite the Nicene Creed/Apostles Creed with the word 'Christian' are in the church and saved."
That said, the sectarianism I question would not necessarily be limited to LCMS and WELS, as far as I know (and I don't know what WELS's word use is), but would pertain to ELCA or at least some or all of its forebears, because in that 1958 red Service Book the word "Christian" appears in both the main creeds. However, both contain a footnote that the word "Catholic" is the word in the original texts.
Korah

Korah,

I grew up in the Evangical Church of Germany, the very church of the Lutheran Reformation. And there I learnt the Apostolic Creed with the wording "The Holy, Christian Church". I do not know when the wording was changed to Christian rather than Catholic but I know that noone took this to have the meaning you think it has. In fact we were taught that Christian means just that: Christian, not limited to a specific denomination.

The Catholics on the other hand - the region I grew up in is predominantly Catholic - took their wording of the Creed to refer to their denomination! Many of them were convinced that Protestants are not Christians.


Regarding the Athanasian Creed: Can you please outline in detail why you think "that Greek philosophy,mysticism, and pious exuberance entered into the formulation of the Athanasian Creed more than careful Bible study."

Many thanks,
Till

[DaRev]

I'm sure you did recite the Athanasian Creed in old LCA days. I suspect your priest read from some special ordinal or lectionary of readings that he used for Trinity Sunday or such. I also suspect that the Athanasian Creed was not printed in some or all LCA books because of high-level decisions that compromised by not printing it, but still allowing it to be recited where tradition or the pastor's preference dictated.
I really think that Greek philosophy,mysticism, and pious exuberance entered into the formulation of the Athanasian Creed more than careful Bible study. I don't necessarily oppose Greek philosophy, mysticism, and pious exuberance. (In fact I was in the Charismatic Renewal in the Roman Catholic Church from 1977 to 1992.) It's not my purpose in this thread to demolish the beliefs of others, just to offer my defense for being a Lutheran albeit merely ELCA.
Regarding the "Catholic" vis-a-vis "Christian" equivalence, here again I don't wish to attack the understandings others take here where they are wholesome. Allow me to state what I would consider unwholesome. I hold that it reduces one's beliefs to mere sectarianism if one holds to removing "Catholic" as a means of denying that there are saved people among RC, EO, Anglican, and various other apostolic churches, and if one inserts "Christian" in its place as a means of saying "only those of us who recite the Nicene Creed/Apostles Creed with the word 'Christian' are in the church and saved."
That said, the sectarianism I question would not necessarily be limited to LCMS and WELS, as far as I know (and I don't know what WELS's word use is), but would pertain to ELCA or at least some or all of its forebears, because in that 1958 red Service Book the word "Christian" appears in both the main creeds. However, both contain a footnote that the word "Catholic" is the word in the original texts.
Korah

This is complete nonsense. I hope you can provide some credible references to back up these claims of yours.

[Korah]

This is complete nonsense. I hope you can provide some credible references to back up these claims of yours.
No can do, Rev,
As in"If I try someone will report me, and like the other post you probably saw that has still not been allowed to remain posted, any new such post may disappear as quickly as the other one, plus I may get banned from TCL or even CF2, if the Lutheran anti-ELCA have enough pull here."
I didn't want to upset anyone, just defend my right to post in this sub-forum. Hey, don't blame me, blame RevCowboy, he's the one who told me to post in TCL, and to boot not to bother posting in the ELCA area, as there is so little going on there.
Korah

[Korah]

Korah,

I grew up in the Evangical Church of Germany, the very church of the Lutheran Reformation. And there I learnt the Apostolic Creed with the wording "The Holy, Christian Church". I do not know when the wording was changed to Christian rather than Catholic but I know that noone took this to have the meaning you think it has. In fact we were taught that Christian means just that: Christian, not limited to a specific denomination.

The Catholics on the other hand - the region I grew up in is predominantly Catholic - took their wording of the Creed to refer to their denomination! Many of them were convinced that Protestants are not Christians.


Regarding the Athanasian Creed: Can you please outline in detail why you think "that Greek philosophy,mysticism, and pious exuberance entered into the formulation of the Athanasian Creed more than careful Bible study."

Many thanks,
Till
See my Post #49 (if it's still there by the time you read this, if you ever get to read this at all).
RC are no longer allowed to believe that only Roman Catholics get to Heaven. Fr. Feeney was ex-communicated in the 1940's for teaching so. and Vatican II committed RC to be more liberal than they had been. The WELS and LCMS believers, in contrast, have gone in the anti-ecumenical direction.
Korah

[QuiltAngel]

There are a couple things I am hearing you say and that is 1) that you don't like the word catholic in the creed and 2) that because the LCMS and WELS teach that their is only one way to heaven and that is through Jesus blood, that you consider us to be anti-ecumenical? Or are you saying we are anti-ecumenical because we do not have altar and pulpit fellowship with other churches? What you write above, it seems to the the first.

[DaRev]

See my Post #49 (if it's still there by the time you read this, if you ever get to read this at all).
RC are no longer allowed to believe that only Roman Catholics get to Heaven. Fr. Feeney was ex-communicated in the 1940's for teaching so. and Vatican II committed RC to be more liberal than they had been.

Perhaps you need to get your facts straight. The fact is that the RCC still uphold the Unum Sanctum of 1302 which states that unless one believes and accepts that the Roman Pontiff is the supreme head of Christendom, he is anathema. This was upheld by both John-Paul II and Benedict XVI.

The WELS and LCMS believers, in contrast, have gone in the anti-ecumenical direction.
Korah

If your definition of "anti-ecumenical" is that we do not embrace false teachings, then we will proudly wear that moniker. Why would we want to preach the Gospel in its purity and then at the same time embrace and accept teachings that contradict the clear word of God?

[Till]

See my Post #49 (if it's still there by the time you read this, if you ever get to read this at all).
RC are no longer allowed to believe that only Roman Catholics get to Heaven. Fr. Feeney was ex-communicated in the 1940's for teaching so. and Vatican II committed RC to be more liberal than they had been. The WELS and LCMS believers, in contrast, have gone in the anti-ecumenical direction.
Korah

Well, the ones in the village I grew up in maybe hadn't heard that they were no longer allowed to belive that only Catholics are Christians.

Anyway you are mixing two things:

- Openness towards other churches and embracing ecumenical ideas and practices.
- Believing that only belivers of one's own traditions are Christian.

I do not know anyone here in person but from what I have read on this forum noone here, whether ELCA, LCMS or WELS believes the second.


Why don't you start posting what you consider WRONG in the Athanasian Creed and start a reasonable discussion? And what is this story about your posts disappearing? One of the admins wrote you that it is a problem with the software. They are not editing your posts.

[Korah]

There are a couple things I am hearing you say and that is 1) that you don't like the word catholic in the creed and 2) that because the LCMS and WELS teach that their is only one way to heaven and that is through Jesus blood, that you consider us to be anti-ecumenical? Or are you saying we are anti-ecumenical because we do not have altar and pulpit fellowship with other churches? What you write above, it seems to the the first.
There seems to be some mutual misunderstanding here.
1) Far from disliking the word "catholic" in the Creed, I insist upon it. Not that I would prevent you from saying "Christian" at the respective parts of the Apostles Creed and the Nicene Creed, but that I would say "Catholic" at that point, regardless of whether everyone else was saying "Christian". It's just historically that, as the footnotes to the 1958 LCA Service Book admit (pg. 4, 5).
2) Believe whatever you like about Jesus's Blood, what I regard as sectarian or cultic is if anyone thinks that by (LCMS and WELS?) saying the Athanasian Creed when hardly anyone else still does makes you the only Christians, or if anyone thinks when they say "Christian" in the other two creeds they (LCMS and WELS?) are the only Christians as against the superstitious RC and EO and damnably liberal Protestant bodies who say "Catholic". And yes, I would tend to think that anyone (if there is anyone) so sectarian is "anti-ecumenical"!
Altar and pulpit fellowship is one thing, and regarding everyone else not in such fellowship as not Christians is quite another. After my Episcopal denomination went apostate in 2003, I considered for awhile joining the ultra-conservative Reformed Episcopal Church, a group so small they have only 20,000 members and without inter-communion with anyone else. But I would continue to have regarded most RC, EO, and Protestants as fellow Christians. I wound up not joining it because they are so Calvinistic, and I joined ELCA instead.
Korah

[QuiltAngel]

What I was trying to say about Jesus' blood is that we are saved by his death on the cross.

I still don't get why you have a problem with the Athanasian Creed.

No one here has ever said that people in other church bodies are not saved. We don't say that they are not Christian. We don't agree with some of the doctrines in other churches, therefore, we choose not to be in fellowship with them. That is not saying they are not Christian.

[WildStrawberry]

Where is that popcorn-eating dude? :) I could use it right now. :cool:


http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c370/Kaemea/smilies/munch.gif

[Korah]

Perhaps you need to get your facts straight. The fact is that the RCC still uphold the Unum Sanctum of 1302 which states that unless one believes and accepts that the Roman Pontiff is the supreme head of Christendom, he is anathema. This was upheld by both John-Paul II and Benedict XVI.
If your definition of "anti-ecumenical" is that we do not embrace false teachings, then we will proudly wear that moniker. Why would we want to preach the Gospel in its purity and then at the same time embrace and accept teachings that contradict the clear word of God?
Golly, Rev, I don't embrace any false teachings, so that makes me "anti-ecumenical", I guess? Makes us brothers then, right? Come to think of it, no one at all embraces false teachings, because if they thought them false, they wouldn't believe them? Guess that makes us all brothers? Oops, brothers and sisters then? Or should I just say we're all siblings?
Yes, you're right about Unam Sanctum, but that was just Boniface VIII getting carried away with St. Thomas Aquinas's new-fangled theology of the just-prior generation. Ever since then the popes have tried to fit in with that, but to dodge it for all practical purposes. Some RC claim US was an infallible pronouncement, some don't, but all agree that there is salvation outside the visible boundaries of the institutional Roman Catholic Church. Where Protestants get steamed is not where the papal pronouncements and theological speculations and catechisms stretch to include Protestants, but where RC teachings extend yet further to doubt that our Merciful God really sends all non-Christians to eternal torture in Hell. All kinds of Protestants (except some sects like JWs that most Protestants don't regard as Christians) decry such liberalism in RC teachings. Such liberalism is why I chose RC to get baptized in in 1969.
Agreed, Pope Benedict XVI is paraded as a great theologian, but he badly bungled his terminology and reignited the whole controversy. He means well, but feels himself constrained not to admit Unam Sanctum was flat wrong, even though he knows so and tries to explain it away without renouncing it.
Korah

[Melethiel]

There seems to be some mutual misunderstanding here.
1) Far from disliking the word "catholic" in the Creed, I insist upon it. Not that I would prevent you from saying "Christian" at the respective parts of the Apostles Creed and the Nicene Creed, but that I would say "Catholic" at that point, regardless of whether everyone else was saying "Christian". It's just historically that, as the footnotes to the 1958 LCA Service Book admit (pg. 4, 5).
2) Believe whatever you like about Jesus's Blood, what I regard as sectarian or cultic is if anyone thinks that by (LCMS and WELS?) saying the Athanasian Creed when hardly anyone else still does makes you the only Christians, or if anyone thinks when they say "Christian" in the other two creeds they (LCMS and WELS?) are the only Christians as against the superstitious RC and EO and damnably liberal Protestant bodies who say "Catholic". And yes, I would tend to think that anyone (if there is anyone) so sectarian is "anti-ecumenical"!
Altar and pulpit fellowship is one thing, and regarding everyone else not in such fellowship as not Christians is quite another. After my Episcopal denomination went apostate in 2003, I considered for awile joining the ultra-conservative Reformed Episcopal Church, a group so small they have only 20,000 members and without inter-communion with anyone else. But I would continue to have regarded most RC, EO, and Protestants as fellow Christians. I wound up not joining it because they are so Calvinistic, and I joined ELCA instead.
Korah
*really really confused*

I think you're the ONLY one here who assumes that using the word "Christian" or the Athanasian Creed is saying that LCMS are the only Christians. NO Lutheran I know of would say such a thing.

[Korah]

What I was trying to say about Jesus' blood is that we are saved by his death on the cross.
I still don't get why you have a problem with the Athanasian Creed.
No one here has ever said that people in other church bodies are not saved. We don't say that they are not Christian. We don't agree with some of the doctrines in other churches, therefore, we choose not to be in fellowship with them. That is not saying they are not Christian.
Bravo! I have no problem with you.
I just have a problem with the Athanasian Creed. I guess if you've said it all your life, there's not an evident problem.
Korah

[Korah]

*really really confused*
I think you're the ONLY one here who assumes that using the word "Christian" or the Athanasian Creed is saying that LCMS are the only Christians. NO Lutheran I know of would say such a thing.
I'm glad to hear that.
Korah

[DaRev]

*really really confused*

I think you're the ONLY one here who assumes that using the word "Christian" or the Athanasian Creed is saying that LCMS are the only Christians. NO Lutheran I know of would say such a thing.

He was told what the word "catholic" means. He apparently missed that post.

[Korah]

Well, the ones in the village I grew up in maybe hadn't heard that they were no longer allowed to belive that only Catholics are Christians.
Anyway you are mixing two things:
First- Openness towards other churches and embracing ecumenical ideas and practices.
Second- Believing that only believers of one's own traditions are Christian.
I do not know anyone here in person but from what I have read on this forum noone here, whether ELCA, LCMS or WELS believes the second.
Why don't you start posting what you consider WRONG in the Athanasian Creed and start a reasonable discussion? And what is this story about your posts disappearing? One of the admins wrote you that it is a problem with the software. They are not editing your posts.
Once again, I'm over-joyed to see so many of you asserting the bolded above, and no one at all saying the contrary. Maybe such fanaticism died out with the disastrous religious wars of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
Believe what you want about the Athanasian Creed. Even my liberal Episcopal priest I turned away from in joining ELCA said he loved it as the highest expression ever of the theology of the Trinity. As I said earlier, I only get upset with the opening and closing anathemas and requirements to believe the body of the text absolutely. I think the opening and closing are not part of the original text, or am I wrong about that? It would seem that someone would have written the body of it, then someone or some council would come along (perhaps centuries later) and bracket the text with the statements that this is indeed the true faith and consequently must be believed. Even though thirty generations of Christians had already died without knowing of it, presumably going to Hell as quickly as all the pagans.
About the disappearing post. Yes, if the mod told us that some posts are randomly selected for review, I would tend to believe him. I know when I pressed "Submit" for that post a notice flashed on the screen something about it being subject to moderation. The next day I got a private message that my post had been reported and supervisors were studying it. Today I got word that it has indeed been rejected and deleted. All for fine and good reasons, I don't object. It was a very short and flippant post. I now know that CF2 requires better manners than is the norm over on Theology Web, where I have almost 2,000 posts in three years with only three points being charged against me for infractions.
Korah

[WildStrawberry]

<snip>I really think that Greek philosophy,mysticism, and pious exuberance entered into the formulation of the Athanasian Creed more than careful Bible study. I don't necessarily oppose Greek philosophy, mysticism, and pious exuberance. (In fact I was in the Charismatic Renewal in the Roman Catholic Church from 1977 to 1992.) It's not my purpose in this thread to demolish the beliefs of others, just to offer my defense for being a Lutheran albeit merely ELCA.

<snip>That said, the sectarianism I question would not necessarily be limited to LCMS and WELS, as far as I know (and I don't know what WELS's word use is), but would pertain to ELCA or at least some or all of its forebears, because in that 1958 red Service Book the word "Christian" appears in both the main creeds. However, both contain a footnote that the word "Catholic" is the word in the original texts.
Korah

1st. This is from the new LCMS Lutheran Service Book (LSB) regarding the Athanasian Creed. It is printed BEFORE the creed...

"Early in the fourth century, a north African pastor named Arius began teaching that Jesus was not truly God. The Church responded decisively in AD 325 with a statement of faith (The Nicene Creed), which confessed that Jesus is, in fact, true God. Toward the end of the fifth century, another creed was written that delved further in to the mystery of the Trinity. Though attributed to Athanasius, a fourth-century opponent of Arius, this anonymouns creed cleary came at a later stage in the debate.

The Athansasian Creed declares that its teaching concerning the Holy Trinity and our Lord's incarnation are "the catholic faith." In other words, this is what the true Church of all times and all places has confessed. More than fifteen centuries later, the Church continues to confess this truth, confident that the triune God, Father Son and Holy Spirit, has given Himself for our salvation."

The LSB has "Whoever desires to be saved must, above all, hold the catholic faith... And the catholic faith is this...This is the catholic faith..." in the creed

The LSB has "Christian: the ancient text reads "catholic," meaning the whole Church as it confesses the wholeness of Christian Doctrine." (pg 175 Lutheran Service Book ISBN 0-7586-12176 used for this example)

2nd, The Lutheran Hymnal (the hymnal that I grew up with and also my Mother and Father grew up with) Has, Whosoever will be saved, before all things, it is necessary that he hold the catholic [ie, universal, Christian] faith...And the catholic faith is this, ...This is the catholic faith..." (page 53, The Lutheran Hymnal)

This hymnal does not have the explanation for the Nicene and Apostles' Creed. However, I remember being taught from early childhood on, that catholic = Christian.

Lutheran Worship (the blue hymnal that was created jointly, iirc, by the LCMS and ELCA) has "Whoever will be saved shall, above all else, hold the catholic faith...And the catholic faith is this...This is the catholic faith..." (pgs 134-135 Lutheran Worship ISBN 0-570-03983-5 {hardcover} 0-570-02-4221-5 {softcover})

This hymnal DOES have the explanations "the acnient text: the holy catholic Church" after the Apostles' Creed and "the ancient text: one holy catholic and apostolic Church" after the Nicene Creed. (pgs 166-167 IBID used for this example.)

Kae

[QuiltAngel]

So it is using the word christian instead of catholic that you dislike? Well, our hymnal has the word catholic in the Athanasian Creed as does the one previously. Unfortunately, I don't have a copy of the one before that around here right now to look that one up.

Also, for the record, I have not been Lutheran all my life, so when you used the word "you" in your reply to me, are you meaning me, or are you meaning you all? I don't remember every saying the Athanasian Creed in the denomination I was brought up in.

[QuiltAngel]

A few of us posting at one time there.

Now I get it, it is the first and the last verses of the creed you object too? Do I have that right?

Kae has already posted a little history of the creed so I won't repeat it here.

[DaRev]

I truly do not understand how anyone can reject the explanation of the Holy Trinity and the redemptive work of Jesus Christ that is the Athanasian Creed. The Christian faith is the only true faith. Those who deny or reject the Christian faith are not saved. And the word "catholic" means "universal Christian."

The Athanasian Creed begins and ends by saying that if one does not believe or rejects the universal Christian faith, they are not saved. This is the basic teaching of Scripture. I simply do not see any problem with it. It is one of the Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church.

[Korah]

So it is using the word christian instead of catholic that you dislike? Well, our hymnal has the word catholic in the Athanasian Creed as does the one previously. Unfortunately, I don't have a copy of the one before that around here right now to look that one up.

Also, for the record, I have not been Lutheran all my life, so when you used the word "you" in your reply to me, are you meaning me, or are you meaning you all? I don't remember every saying the Athanasian Creed in the denomination I was brought up in.
Hello, Jane,
Yes, I suppose for someone with a poetic soul or possessing a meticulousness to dot every "i" and cross every "t", the AC would have an appeal even for the adult convert.
Allow me to be cynical enough to suspect that Lutheran ecclesiastics have for generations or centuries been tied up in knots over whether "Catholic" or "Christian" should be the word in the two main creeds, but have been willing to pass over the Athanasian Creed as if by leaving the word "Catholic" in it they're relegating the "credit" for it to the Roman Catholics, thus subtly divorcing themselves from responsibility for it. Why didn't they substitute in "Christian" for all the three creeds? I say it's because the Athanasian Creed was becoming an embarassment to Lutherans. Even granted that Lutheran theologians might well have believed it to be the ultimate statement on the Trinity, they realized that they were becoming more and more isolated in holding to it.
Let me say they may have been thinking, "keep the word 'Catholic' in the Athanasian to keep us linked to RC, but change the word to 'Christian' in the others to affirm our closer linkage to our fellow Protestants." Or does someone know why so many Lutherans have held to this inconsistency?
Korah

[QuiltAngel]

We can use the word catholic in the other two. Here is what it says at the end of both creeds in the LSB:

Christian: the ancient text reads "catholic," meaning the whole Church as it confesses the wholeness of Christian doctrine.

I had learned that it is appropriate to use the word "catholic" in the creeds.

[WildStrawberry]

Now I remember my 3rd point...

catholic (with a wee c) means universal...Christian.

Catholic (with a large C) means The Roman Catholic Church...a Denomination of the Christian Faith.

Saying "Christian" instead of "catholic" in the Creeds does not mean "Everyone except for Roman Catholics." It includes them as well.

Kae

[LilLamb219]

Yep, what they've all been saying...catholic does NOT mean Roman Catholic. Please, listen to these wise folks :) I went to an ELCA church prior to the LCMS church I attend now and they say "catholic" instead of Christian in the apostles creed. It has nothing to do with Roman Catholicism at all.

[BigNorsk]

Hello, Jane,
Yes, I suppose for someone with a poetic soul or possessing a meticulousness to dot every "i" and cross every "t", the AC would have an appeal even for the adult convert.
Allow me to be cynical enough to suspect that Lutheran ecclesiastics have for generations or centuries been tied up in knots over whether "Catholic" or "Christian" should be the word in the two main creeds, but have been willing to pass over the Athanasian Creed as if by leaving the word "Catholic" in it they're relegating the "credit" for it to the Roman Catholics, thus subtly divorcing themselves from responsibility for it. Why didn't they substitute in "Christian" for all the three creeds? I say it's because the Athanasian Creed was becoming an embarassment to Lutherans. Even granted that Lutheran theologians might well have believed it to be the ultimate statement on the Trinity, they realized that they were becoming more and more isolated in holding to it.
Let me say they may have been thinking, "keep the word 'Catholic' in the Athanasian to keep us linked to RC, but change the word to 'Christian' in the others to affirm our closer linkage to our fellow Protestants." Or does someone know why so many Lutherans have held to this inconsistency?
Korah

Well, you have a real good theory going. Only problem is, in the German, the use of Christian in the Apostles and Nicene Creed I'm pretty certain preceeded Luther. I have to think a bit, but I think I can even find a reference to that fact somewhere here if I remember where.

I'm kind of assuming the same thing wasn't true for the Athanasian, but that I'm not sure about.

I had questions about the wording myself awhile back and was kind of surprised to find the Christian preceeded Luther, but that does explain why there wasn't a big complaint about him mentioned by the contemporary Catholics on that at least.

Marv

[Edial]

Because it's the longest of the creeds...and super long at that, many churches opt to not recite it at all. My LCMS church recites it once a year on Trinity Sunday I believe.
My ELCA congregation also recites it once a year.

Pastor makes certain to tell people to remain seated during it's recital, since some people cannot stand that long.

Thanks, :)
Ed

[BigNorsk]

Kolb's translation of the Book of Concord has footnotes concerning this:

Apostle's: 12. catholica: this word, lacking in many texts of the Old Roman Creed, is translated "Christian" in both the German (already before the Reformation) and the traditional English version.

Nicene: 30. The German and traditional English translation use the word "Christian".

Athanasian: 42. German: "true Christian faith"

So the use of Christian appears to just be the result of the importance of the Germans in Lutheranism.

Marv

[Edial]

No can do, Rev,
As in"If I try someone will report me, and like the other post you probably saw that has still not been allowed to remain posted, any new such post may disappear as quickly as the other one, plus I may get banned from TCL or even CF2, if the Lutheran anti-ELCA have enough pull here."
I didn't want to upset anyone, just defend my right to post in this sub-forum. Hey, don't blame me, blame RevCowboy, he's the one who told me to post in TCL, and to boot not to bother posting in the ELCA area, as there is so little going on there.
Korah
One post has been removed due to CF rules violations.

The other one that was mistakenly "moderated" due to CF software bugs was not removed.

Thanks,
Ed

[Edial]

I just re-read the Atnanasian Creed.

http://www.ccel.org/creeds/athanasian.creed.html

Hey, reciting it just once a year I need a refresher. :)

Since the word catholic was already defined, the only objection that I see was made is that in the first and the last verses it states that one cannot be saved unless one believes what the creed says.

It sounds scary, since there are about 40 verses in this creed to believe!

Do I need to believe all this in order to be saved?
I thought I only need to believe in Jesus who died for me on the cross!!

But who is that Jesus?

Many Lutherans say - but everybody knows that.

Not everybody. :)

When I originally put my faith in Christ, I could not believe (in my heart) that Jesus is God. How could a man be God?
I wasn't arrogant about my disbelief, I just could not believe.
I did not tell anyone about this then, since I knew they all said Jesus is God and I did not want to admit that I have my doubts.

Obviously, I believed later on.

And Athanasian Creed presents that if I believe in just a man who died on the cross, this is not enough. I cannot be saved.
And Christ confirmed this in the Bible ...

JN 8:24 I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be,you will indeed die in your sins."

And if Christ claims to be the great I AM, then the belief in the Trinity and incarnation and resurrection is a must.

If I believe that Christ was just a man - how a man's blood be sufficient to pay for a sin of the world?

If I believe that Christ and Father are not one - how would I know the Father if not for Christ?

If I believe that there is no Trinity - how would I be able to know that Holy Spirit who lives in me is God?

If I believe that Word did not become flesh - who was it there 2000 years ago?

If Christ did not rise from the dead - why should I?

Athanasian Creed defines our proper understanding of who Christ is.
It puts into words that what the hearts of true believers believe, yet cannot define.

When I first read Athanasian Creed I was a bit apprehensive, since I did not know what to expect after rhe opening statement that one cannot be saved if one does not believe that whole long text.
And once I read it I was amazed that I believed everything in it. :doh:

But what if one was never taught all that and just sincerely believed in Christ?
God would never leave one just "hanging". :)
He did not leave me hanging. :)
One who'll wind up in the burning lake would have a clear opportunity to reject who Christ is. Spiritual matter. Information would be given. How? I do not know.

People who go to hell reject Christ to his face.
There is no middle ground.

JN 3:36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him."

Church history is amazing.

It defined what Christ meant by saying ...

JN 8:24 I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be,you will indeed die in your sins."

Thanks, :)
Ed

[PreachersWife2004]

Korah, let me clarify. The system has been pulling random posts and marking them moderated and left in a moderating queue. We do not actually review these posts...we actually don't have time to do that - we have to rely on people reporting posts that are violations. It is a bug in the system that posts are being moderated at all like this and we tend to "un-moderate" them as soon as we see them.

And I'd also like to assure you that the WELS does not, nor has she ever believed, that only WELS members are going to heaven.

If you are really interested in reading more about the WELS, I suggest you check out the Q&A section at www.wels.net.

[Korah]

Kolb's translation of the Book of Concord has footnotes concerning this:

Apostle's: 12. catholica: this word, lacking in many texts of the Old Roman Creed, is translated "Christian" in both the German (already before the Reformation) and the traditional English version.

Nicene: 30. The German and traditional English translation use the word "Christian".

Athanasian: 42. German: "true Christian faith"

So the use of Christian appears to just be the result of the importance of the Germans in Lutheranism.

Marv
I was checking everywhere and getting confused (I'm just a baby Lutheran, just since 2004--after my abortive 1960 LCMS inquiry class I thought Lutheran was the last thing I could imagine becoming), I now look more carefully at the above quote and see that (as I've found) the Athanasian Creed always uses the English word "catholic", even LCMS. It's only in German that "Katolisch" is apparently used instead of "christliche".
I did find on the net that the intellectual battle for the Athanasian Creed was pretty much lost in the 19th Century, and its use nose-dived in the 20th Century. Roman Catholic use fell to zero after Vatican II. The Church of England, a state church, is still officially committed to 19 uses by its 1662 Book of Common Prayer. But the Episcopal Church relegated it to a mere historical document in its 1979 book, and its predecessor 1928 Book of Common Prayer did not print it at all.
But all of that said and what's been discussed to this point, I don't mind anyone saying "Christian" in the Apostles Creed and the Nicene Creed as long as it's not a claim that only gniesiolutherans are saved. I don't mind anyone saying the Athanasian Creed (even using the word "Christian" like the German version), as long as you're not meaning (in spite of what you're saying) that only people (Lutherans and the very few English who still attend church) who say it go to Heaven.
Korah

[LilLamb219]

Well, since we aren't saying that only a certain denomination is the only one going to heaven, looks like you don't really have a problem with it :)

[QuiltAngel]

as long as you're not meaning (in spite of what you're saying) that only people (Lutherans and the very few English who still attend church) who say it go to Heaven.
Korah

Apparently you don't believe us. That being said, I think this conversation is no longer useful to any of us.

[WildStrawberry]

But all of that said and what's been discussed to this point, I don't mind anyone saying "Christian" in the Apostles Creed and the Nicene Creed as long as it's not a claim that only gniesiolutherans are saved. I don't mind anyone saying the Athanasian Creed (even using the word "Christian" like the German version), as long as you're not meaning (in spite of what you're saying) that only people (Lutherans and the very few English who still attend church) who say it go to Heaven.
Korah

Now see, I find this part to be very rude and condescending. We have made VERY clear that NONE of us believes that "Christian = ONLY LUTHERANS OF OUR PARTICULAR FLAVOR will go to heaven". None of us has been taught that and none of us teach or believe that. I think that you're confusing us with the 1611 Baptists who believe that anyone who doesn't read ONLY the 1611 KJV is going to go to hell because the Holy Spirit can't...you know...come to them from anything else.


Perhaps your "abortive 1960 LCMS attempt" was with a "Pastor" who should never have been teaching let alone preaching. Just because you had a bad experience with the LCMS 40someodd years ago doesn't mean that all LCMS people are like that. I find that your constant "oooh the LCMS = horrid bad people who teach heresy because of my one experience and not because I've actually done ANY study of just what they believe" to be rude and condesending and uncalled for. You'll just set people's hackles up and there will be no actual exchanging of ideas or friendly debate.

Kae

[RadMan]

Simply put. If you don't agree with your denoms teaching then just leave. We can't tailor each religion to our own whims. If we do then we just start another denom and add to the already vast number of around 3000. Nobody will ever find the exact religion that defines every little nuance of what they supposedly believe.

...........we see through a glass darkly........

[Korah]

Simply put. If you don't agree with your denoms teaching then just leave. We can't tailor each religion to our own whims. If we do then we just start another denom and add to the already vast number of around 3000. Nobody will ever find the exact religion that defines every little nuance of what they supposedly believe.

...........we see through a glass darkly........
Help! RevCowboy, gallop in to my rescue!
The natives are restless, they're picking on me!
I'll bet you thought you could get their arrows flying at me, instead of you!
No ELCA welcome here!
That's all for now. I've got a defense I'll present after I get back home from barbershop chorus rehearsal, if RevCowboy hasn't shown up.
Korah

[seajoy]

Help! RevCowboy, gallop in to my rescue!
The natives are restless, they're picking on me!
I'll bet you thought you could get their arrows flying at me, instead of you!
No ELCA welcome here!
That's all for now. I've got a defense I'll present after I get back home from barbershop chorus rehearsal, if RevCowboy hasn't shown up.
Korah
You are way more snotty than RevCowboy ever could be. Why include him with your problems on here? He's rather nice, like Ed. :)

[Edial]

He's rather nice, like Ed. :)
And on that note, coming from an ELCA sheep who is welcome here, it certainly looks like this thread ran it's course.

Thanks, :)
Ed

[Edial]

Closing this thread - seems like it ran it's course.

Anyone wants to reopen it, please PM me.

Thanks,
Edial