Problems with the Missouri Synod Lutheran Chrurch.
- Thread starter RedTent
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Re: Problems with the Missouri Synod Lutheran Church.
A mighty fortress is our God, a bulwark never failing;
Our helper He, amid the flood of mortal ills prevailing:
For still our ancient foe doth seek to work us woe;
His craft and power are great, and, armed with cruel hate,
On earth is not his equal.
Did we in our own strength confide, our striving would be losing;
Were not the right Man on our side, the Man of God’s own choosing:
Dost ask who that may be? Christ Jesus, it is He;
Lord Sabaoth, His Name, from age to age the same,
And He must win the battle.
And though this world, with devils filled, should threaten to undo us,
We will not fear, for God hath willed His truth to triumph through us:
The Prince of Darkness grim, we tremble not for him;
His rage we can endure, for lo, his doom is sure,
One little word shall fell him.
That word above all earthly powers, no thanks to them, abideth;
The Spirit and the gifts are ours through Him Who with us sideth:
Let goods and kindred go, this mortal life also;
The body they may kill: God’s truth abideth still,
His kingdom is forever.
Words & Music: Mar*tin Lut*her, 1529
A mighty fortress is our God, a bulwark never failing;
Our helper He, amid the flood of mortal ills prevailing:
For still our ancient foe doth seek to work us woe;
His craft and power are great, and, armed with cruel hate,
On earth is not his equal.
Did we in our own strength confide, our striving would be losing;
Were not the right Man on our side, the Man of God’s own choosing:
Dost ask who that may be? Christ Jesus, it is He;
Lord Sabaoth, His Name, from age to age the same,
And He must win the battle.
And though this world, with devils filled, should threaten to undo us,
We will not fear, for God hath willed His truth to triumph through us:
The Prince of Darkness grim, we tremble not for him;
His rage we can endure, for lo, his doom is sure,
One little word shall fell him.
That word above all earthly powers, no thanks to them, abideth;
The Spirit and the gifts are ours through Him Who with us sideth:
Let goods and kindred go, this mortal life also;
The body they may kill: God’s truth abideth still,
His kingdom is forever.
Words & Music: Mar*tin Lut*her, 1529
Re: Problems with the Missouri Synod Lutheran Church.
Ai, i will now leave people to GOD, once or twice something if there is no direction, i wipe the dust off my shoes.
and if Martin Luther indeed was a man following biblical principles, then i suppose through the ages, What He stood for was purvetted.
I apologize for any ungodly comments, and behavior to yall and to GOD.
Good day.!!.
Ai, i will now leave people to GOD, once or twice something if there is no direction, i wipe the dust off my shoes.
and if Martin Luther indeed was a man following biblical principles, then i suppose through the ages, What He stood for was purvetted.
I apologize for any ungodly comments, and behavior to yall and to GOD.
Good day.!!.
Re: Problems with the Missouri Synod Lutheran Church.
Yet again we are not to put any one as our focus, but those who have been mighty of faith are witnesses and a testimony of which we learn from not create a denomination out of..
We have not seen through out the ages those who call themselves "Pauls disciples", He strictly rebuked that from the church of Corinthians. "Some say am of paul, others says am of Apollo"... Soo? Know Christ and the Power of HIS resurrection!!..
ai.. anyways
Yet again we are not to put any one as our focus, but those who have been mighty of faith are witnesses and a testimony of which we learn from not create a denomination out of..
We have not seen through out the ages those who call themselves "Pauls disciples", He strictly rebuked that from the church of Corinthians. "Some say am of paul, others says am of Apollo"... Soo? Know Christ and the Power of HIS resurrection!!..
ai.. anyways
Re: Problems with the Missouri Synod Lutheran Church.
please remind me when i said something like that?
Somehow looking up the roots of those who do not believe in the gift of prophecies, i could say and this is just a thought that they probably encountered a false prophet and thought that ALL could be false prophets. But i guess you think evidence? Well the Lord said, Seek And ye shall find, i pray in JESUS name that you find out out and believe.!!. There is nothing that moves a heart like a Holy Ghost visitation.
but dear...you have uttered First Person Verbatim prophecies "I The Lord say".
so, i have a problem with that. are some to be of my_adonai_?
- God speaks through him.
so, i have a problem with that. are some to be of my_adonai_?
- God speaks through him.
Somehow looking up the roots of those who do not believe in the gift of prophecies, i could say and this is just a thought that they probably encountered a false prophet and thought that ALL could be false prophets. But i guess you think evidence? Well the Lord said, Seek And ye shall find, i pray in JESUS name that you find out out and believe.!!. There is nothing that moves a heart like a Holy Ghost visitation.
The "God is dead" movement originated with Nietzsche's Also sprach Zarathustra. Perhaps people are confused by the term "pseudo-Luther-Biblical style"?
-> http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/1998/pg1998.txt
"When Zarathustra was alone, however, he said to his heart: "Could it be possible! This old saint in the forest hath not yet heard of it, that GOD IS DEAD!""
Oh my!
I'm not engaged in Luther- or Lutheran-bashing on this thread.
I have other work--tonight I'm posting the first of my "Understand Your Local Jew" essays.
In the meantime... -> Wotan sing-off - 11 basses and baritones sing Wotan's Abschied - YouTube
by the term "pseudo-Luther-Biblical style"?-> http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/1998/pg1998.txt
"When Zarathustra was alone, however, he said to his heart: "Could it be possible! This old saint in the forest hath not yet heard of it, that GOD IS DEAD!""
Oh my!
I'm not engaged in Luther- or Lutheran-bashing on this thread.
In the meantime... -> Wotan sing-off - 11 basses and baritones sing Wotan's Abschied - YouTube
It is inconceivable to the Narcissist that any fault could be attributed to them. In order to transfer the responsibility for outrageous and damaging acts, they will indulge in the practice of Projection. Projection is a term meant to describe the transference of culpability from the guilty to the innocent. Anyone who has ever had to live with a Narcissist will recognize this tactic instantly. However, if a person hasn’t been a victim of Projection, they may never fully understand the anguish it causes. Projection invariably occurs whenever a crisis point is reached. Since it is impossible for the Narcissist to admit thoughtlessness or error, it must have been someone else who was at fault.
Who has the "posse" in this thread?
Who has the "posse" in this thread?
B
Zone, in your doctrine do you believe that water baptism is needed and necessary for salvation to take place in the life of one who has believed upon Christ? Would salvation be incomplete in one's life if one did not receive water baptism after they believed? Is believing in the finished work of Christ enough to be justified before the Father and have all sins remitted or is water baptism also needed?
The Book of Concord - The Confessions of the Lutheran Church - Holy Baptism
quote '24] Therefore state it most simply thus, that the power, work, profit, fruit, and end of Baptism is this, namely, to save. For no one is baptized in order that he may become a prince, but, as the words declare, that he be saved. 25] But to be saved, we know, is nothing else than to be delivered from sin, death, and the devil, and to enter into the kingdom of Christ, and to live with Him forever.26] Here you see again how highly and precious we should esteem Baptism, because in it we obtain such an unspeakable treasure, which also indicates sufficiently that it cannot be ordinary mere water. For mere water could not do such a thing, but the Word does it, and (as said above) the fact that the name of God is comprehended therein. 27] But where the name of God is, there must be also life and salvation, that it may indeed be called a divine, blessed, fruitful, and gracious water; for by the Word such power is imparted to Baptism that it is a laver of regeneration, as St. Paul also calls it, Titus 3:5.
28] But as our would-be wise, new spirits assert that faith alone saves, and that works and external things avail nothing, we answer: It is true, indeed, that nothing in us is of any avail but faith, as we shall hear still further. 29]But these blind guides are unwilling to see this, namely, that faith must have something which it believes, that is, of which it takes hold, and upon which it stands and rests. Thus faith clings to the water, and believes that it is Baptism, in which there is pure salvation and life; not through the water (as we have sufficiently stated), but through the fact that it is embodied in the Word and institution of God, and the name of God inheres in it. Now, if I believe this, what else is it than believing in God as in Him who has given and planted His Word into this ordinance, and proposes to us this external thing wherein we may apprehend such a treasure?
The Book of Concord - The Confessions of the Lutheran Church - Holy Baptism
quote '24] Therefore state it most simply thus, that the power, work, profit, fruit, and end of Baptism is this, namely, to save. For no one is baptized in order that he may become a prince, but, as the words declare, that he be saved. 25] But to be saved, we know, is nothing else than to be delivered from sin, death, and the devil, and to enter into the kingdom of Christ, and to live with Him forever.26] Here you see again how highly and precious we should esteem Baptism, because in it we obtain such an unspeakable treasure, which also indicates sufficiently that it cannot be ordinary mere water. For mere water could not do such a thing, but the Word does it, and (as said above) the fact that the name of God is comprehended therein. 27] But where the name of God is, there must be also life and salvation, that it may indeed be called a divine, blessed, fruitful, and gracious water; for by the Word such power is imparted to Baptism that it is a laver of regeneration, as St. Paul also calls it, Titus 3:5.
28] But as our would-be wise, new spirits assert that faith alone saves, and that works and external things avail nothing, we answer: It is true, indeed, that nothing in us is of any avail but faith, as we shall hear still further. 29]But these blind guides are unwilling to see this, namely, that faith must have something which it believes, that is, of which it takes hold, and upon which it stands and rests. Thus faith clings to the water, and believes that it is Baptism, in which there is pure salvation and life; not through the water (as we have sufficiently stated), but through the fact that it is embodied in the Word and institution of God, and the name of God inheres in it. Now, if I believe this, what else is it than believing in God as in Him who has given and planted His Word into this ordinance, and proposes to us this external thing wherein we may apprehend such a treasure?
they won't be LCMS because they are excommunicated.
....
Hanson Defeated, Eaton Elected ELCA’s First Female Presiding Bishop
Thursday, August 15, 2013, 9:00 AM
Mathew Block | @captainthin
Elizabeth-Eaton
Presiding Bishop Mark Hanson of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) was defeated yesterday in his bid for re-election. In his place, the ELCA has elected its first female presiding bishop: Bishop Elizabeth Eaton of the Northeastern Ohio Synod.
The election went to a fifth ballot, the ELCA notes, where Bishop Eaton received 600 votes to Bishop Hanson’s 287. Sarah Pulliam Bailey notes at Religion News Service that the election of Bishop Eaton was something of an upset: “The election was a surprise to many,” she writes, “as Hanson was expected to win an unprecedented third term after 12 years in office.” Before becoming Bishop of the Northeastern Ohio Synod, Rev. Eaton served as the pastor of Ohio congregations. She is married to Rev. Conrad Selnick, an Episcopal priest.
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette suggests both Bishop Eaton and Bishop Hanson are considered “centrists” in the ELCA. It noted that while Bishop Eaton “supported the decision to allow local options on partnered gay clergy,” she further expressed the opinion that “being an inclusive church meant respecting those who had a different understanding of Scripture and doctrine.” “These people also have voice in this church,” she said. “We need to make room for those who do not agree with us, but agree with our claim upon the cross.”
Hanson Defeated, Eaton Elected ELCA’s First Female Presiding Bishop
....
Hanson Defeated, Eaton Elected ELCA’s First Female Presiding Bishop
Thursday, August 15, 2013, 9:00 AM
Mathew Block | @captainthin
Elizabeth-Eaton
Presiding Bishop Mark Hanson of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) was defeated yesterday in his bid for re-election. In his place, the ELCA has elected its first female presiding bishop: Bishop Elizabeth Eaton of the Northeastern Ohio Synod.
The election went to a fifth ballot, the ELCA notes, where Bishop Eaton received 600 votes to Bishop Hanson’s 287. Sarah Pulliam Bailey notes at Religion News Service that the election of Bishop Eaton was something of an upset: “The election was a surprise to many,” she writes, “as Hanson was expected to win an unprecedented third term after 12 years in office.” Before becoming Bishop of the Northeastern Ohio Synod, Rev. Eaton served as the pastor of Ohio congregations. She is married to Rev. Conrad Selnick, an Episcopal priest.
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette suggests both Bishop Eaton and Bishop Hanson are considered “centrists” in the ELCA. It noted that while Bishop Eaton “supported the decision to allow local options on partnered gay clergy,” she further expressed the opinion that “being an inclusive church meant respecting those who had a different understanding of Scripture and doctrine.” “These people also have voice in this church,” she said. “We need to make room for those who do not agree with us, but agree with our claim upon the cross.”
Hanson Defeated, Eaton Elected ELCA’s First Female Presiding Bishop
they won't be LCMS because they are excommunicated.
....
Hanson Defeated, Eaton Elected ELCA’s First Female Presiding Bishop
Thursday, August 15, 2013, 9:00 AM
Mathew Block | @captainthin
Elizabeth-Eaton
Presiding Bishop Mark Hanson of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) was defeated yesterday in his bid for re-election. In his place, the ELCA has elected its first female presiding bishop: Bishop Elizabeth Eaton of the Northeastern Ohio Synod.
The election went to a fifth ballot, the ELCA notes, where Bishop Eaton received 600 votes to Bishop Hanson’s 287. Sarah Pulliam Bailey notes at Religion News Service that the election of Bishop Eaton was something of an upset: “The election was a surprise to many,” she writes, “as Hanson was expected to win an unprecedented third term after 12 years in office.” Before becoming Bishop of the Northeastern Ohio Synod, Rev. Eaton served as the pastor of Ohio congregations. She is married to Rev. Conrad Selnick, an Episcopal priest.
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette suggests both Bishop Eaton and Bishop Hanson are considered “centrists” in the ELCA. It noted that while Bishop Eaton “supported the decision to allow local options on partnered gay clergy,” she further expressed the opinion that “being an inclusive church meant respecting those who had a different understanding of Scripture and doctrine.” “These people also have voice in this church,” she said. “We need to make room for those who do not agree with us, but agree with our claim upon the cross.”
Hanson Defeated, Eaton Elected ELCA’s First Female Presiding Bishop
....
Hanson Defeated, Eaton Elected ELCA’s First Female Presiding Bishop
Thursday, August 15, 2013, 9:00 AM
Mathew Block | @captainthin
Elizabeth-Eaton
Presiding Bishop Mark Hanson of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) was defeated yesterday in his bid for re-election. In his place, the ELCA has elected its first female presiding bishop: Bishop Elizabeth Eaton of the Northeastern Ohio Synod.
The election went to a fifth ballot, the ELCA notes, where Bishop Eaton received 600 votes to Bishop Hanson’s 287. Sarah Pulliam Bailey notes at Religion News Service that the election of Bishop Eaton was something of an upset: “The election was a surprise to many,” she writes, “as Hanson was expected to win an unprecedented third term after 12 years in office.” Before becoming Bishop of the Northeastern Ohio Synod, Rev. Eaton served as the pastor of Ohio congregations. She is married to Rev. Conrad Selnick, an Episcopal priest.
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette suggests both Bishop Eaton and Bishop Hanson are considered “centrists” in the ELCA. It noted that while Bishop Eaton “supported the decision to allow local options on partnered gay clergy,” she further expressed the opinion that “being an inclusive church meant respecting those who had a different understanding of Scripture and doctrine.” “These people also have voice in this church,” she said. “We need to make room for those who do not agree with us, but agree with our claim upon the cross.”
Hanson Defeated, Eaton Elected ELCA’s First Female Presiding Bishop
they won't be LCMS because they are excommunicated.
....
Hanson Defeated, Eaton Elected ELCA’s First Female Presiding Bishop
Thursday, August 15, 2013, 9:00 AM
Mathew Block | @captainthin
Elizabeth-Eaton
Presiding Bishop Mark Hanson of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) was defeated yesterday in his bid for re-election. In his place, the ELCA has elected its first female presiding bishop: Bishop Elizabeth Eaton of the Northeastern Ohio Synod.
The election went to a fifth ballot, the ELCA notes, where Bishop Eaton received 600 votes to Bishop Hanson’s 287. Sarah Pulliam Bailey notes at Religion News Service that the election of Bishop Eaton was something of an upset: “The election was a surprise to many,” she writes, “as Hanson was expected to win an unprecedented third term after 12 years in office.” Before becoming Bishop of the Northeastern Ohio Synod, Rev. Eaton served as the pastor of Ohio congregations. She is married to Rev. Conrad Selnick, an Episcopal priest.
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette suggests both Bishop Eaton and Bishop Hanson are considered “centrists” in the ELCA. It noted that while Bishop Eaton “supported the decision to allow local options on partnered gay clergy,” she further expressed the opinion that “being an inclusive church meant respecting those who had a different understanding of Scripture and doctrine.” “These people also have voice in this church,” she said. “We need to make room for those who do not agree with us, but agree with our claim upon the cross.”
Hanson Defeated, Eaton Elected ELCA’s First Female Presiding Bishop
....
Hanson Defeated, Eaton Elected ELCA’s First Female Presiding Bishop
Thursday, August 15, 2013, 9:00 AM
Mathew Block | @captainthin
Elizabeth-Eaton
Presiding Bishop Mark Hanson of the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) was defeated yesterday in his bid for re-election. In his place, the ELCA has elected its first female presiding bishop: Bishop Elizabeth Eaton of the Northeastern Ohio Synod.
The election went to a fifth ballot, the ELCA notes, where Bishop Eaton received 600 votes to Bishop Hanson’s 287. Sarah Pulliam Bailey notes at Religion News Service that the election of Bishop Eaton was something of an upset: “The election was a surprise to many,” she writes, “as Hanson was expected to win an unprecedented third term after 12 years in office.” Before becoming Bishop of the Northeastern Ohio Synod, Rev. Eaton served as the pastor of Ohio congregations. She is married to Rev. Conrad Selnick, an Episcopal priest.
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette suggests both Bishop Eaton and Bishop Hanson are considered “centrists” in the ELCA. It noted that while Bishop Eaton “supported the decision to allow local options on partnered gay clergy,” she further expressed the opinion that “being an inclusive church meant respecting those who had a different understanding of Scripture and doctrine.” “These people also have voice in this church,” she said. “We need to make room for those who do not agree with us, but agree with our claim upon the cross.”
Hanson Defeated, Eaton Elected ELCA’s First Female Presiding Bishop
so RedTent:
of course the sign says - all are welcome. it means - all who are unrepentant are welcome because we have a "different understanding".
and that terrible awful LCMS insists on preaching the LAW as well as the Gospel and we feel convicted by the LAW.
being an inclusive church for them (and apparently you and some others) means including and giving a voice to those who have a "different understanding of Scripture and doctrine"
that different understanding - that "inclusiveness means", among many other things....partnered gay clergy.
nothing there about repentance...and the forgiveness of those sins....no, unrepentant homosexual clergy.
is your understanding of 'Scripture and doctrine' different too?
if so, please don't pretend you respect and defend God's Law so much.
apparently you don't know what it says. check your phylactery again.
Last edited:
Although my vision is not perfect, I am still able to read quotes in posts. The first renowned person to make the declaration, "God is dead," to the best of my knowledge is Friedrich Nietzsche, a philsopher. He was not pronouncing a belief as though it were factual, it was more a statement on the human condition. See a quick "google" below from the Wikipedia.
God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. Yet his shadow still looms. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?
—Nietzsche, The Gay Science, Section 125, tr. Walter Kaufmann
The next mention of "God is dead" by anyone renown is the theologian, William Hamilton, in the 1960's. He was a confused indiviudal who could not possibly have known the repucussions of making such a declaration, which was followed by a string of death threats and a general plummeting of anything resembling spiritual authority in assemblies who worship the Living God, Who, is no here near ailing, let alone dead. Soon all will see His vitality.
God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. Yet his shadow still looms. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?
—Nietzsche, The Gay Science, Section 125, tr. Walter Kaufmann
The next mention of "God is dead" by anyone renown is the theologian, William Hamilton, in the 1960's. He was a confused indiviudal who could not possibly have known the repucussions of making such a declaration, which was followed by a string of death threats and a general plummeting of anything resembling spiritual authority in assemblies who worship the Living God, Who, is no here near ailing, let alone dead. Soon all will see His vitality.
lol Red. theres absolutely no way i'm going to untangle your hyper-dispenationalism in this thread.
can't really help ya.
but the Holy Spirit might.
check your doctrine here - see if He lets you know it's wrong:
".....This was recently done again in the July/August 1999 issue of Uplook magazine (published by the Plymouth Brethren). In this their Dispensationalism Issues issue, they presented an excellent overview of dispensationalism. As a matter of fact, we would agree with the majority of what was written. But then, one writer had to add this statement:
“One final word. Like all good things, the study of dispensations can be abused. There are some Christians who carry dispensationalism to such an extreme that they accept only Paul’s Prison Epistles as applicable for the church today. As a result, they do not accept baptism or the Lord’s Supper, since these are not found in the Prison Epistles. They also teach that Peter’s gospel message was not the same as Paul’s….These people are sometimes called ultra-dispensationalists or Bullingerites (after a teacher named E. W. Bullinger). Their extreme view of dispensationalism should be rejected.” 2"
...
"Regarding the “ordinances” of the church, there is no place in Scripture where water baptism and the Lord’s supper are linked. The Lord’s Supper is a memorial that we are instructed in I Corinthians 11 to keep “until He come.” However, we do feel that water baptism is a Jewish ordinance and is something that was phased out during the transition period. It is also rarely pointed out that we are not unique in understanding that water baptism is not for today. Other groups throughout church history, such as the Quakers, have also come to this same conclusion."
Are We Hyper-Dispensationalists?
by David M. Havard
https://www.bereanbiblesociety.org/are-we-hyper-dispensationalists/
They also teach that Peter’s gospel message was not the same as Paul’s < oops. false gospel. but ya need TWO of everything when you wrong divide the word of truth.
can't really help ya.
but the Holy Spirit might.
check your doctrine here - see if He lets you know it's wrong:
".....This was recently done again in the July/August 1999 issue of Uplook magazine (published by the Plymouth Brethren). In this their Dispensationalism Issues issue, they presented an excellent overview of dispensationalism. As a matter of fact, we would agree with the majority of what was written. But then, one writer had to add this statement:
“One final word. Like all good things, the study of dispensations can be abused. There are some Christians who carry dispensationalism to such an extreme that they accept only Paul’s Prison Epistles as applicable for the church today. As a result, they do not accept baptism or the Lord’s Supper, since these are not found in the Prison Epistles. They also teach that Peter’s gospel message was not the same as Paul’s….These people are sometimes called ultra-dispensationalists or Bullingerites (after a teacher named E. W. Bullinger). Their extreme view of dispensationalism should be rejected.” 2"
...
"Regarding the “ordinances” of the church, there is no place in Scripture where water baptism and the Lord’s supper are linked. The Lord’s Supper is a memorial that we are instructed in I Corinthians 11 to keep “until He come.” However, we do feel that water baptism is a Jewish ordinance and is something that was phased out during the transition period. It is also rarely pointed out that we are not unique in understanding that water baptism is not for today. Other groups throughout church history, such as the Quakers, have also come to this same conclusion."
Are We Hyper-Dispensationalists?
by David M. Havard
https://www.bereanbiblesociety.org/are-we-hyper-dispensationalists/
They also teach that Peter’s gospel message was not the same as Paul’s < oops. false gospel. but ya need TWO of everything when you wrong divide the word of truth.
B
I specifically asked you about water baptism and you did not reply, you were none responsive perhaps for a personal reason. I also quoted from 'The Book of Concord'. If there have been changes concerning water baptism and also infant baptism in relationship to salvation, what are those changes and do you adhere to them? What this has to do with your problem concerning dispensational truth should have no bearing upon this issue of water baptism. Perhaps you don't want us to know what your doctrine is on this issue, if that is true, it is not like you.
B
The finished work is a complete work and everyone who believes in Christ and him crucified is justified by faith. The outward act of water baptism can not be added to complete salvation for any individual and if Lutherans believe such a thing then they are in error and it would be equivalent to the Jews adding circumcision for the same reason. Water baptism takes place after on has believed upon the name of the lord and is baptized in that name.
B
Zone, I have no idea what you are talking about in response to water baptism and salvation. You seem to be out in left field somewhere or you don't want to talk about it. Where is your friend 'unclefester' and 'praus' and 'psychomom' and 'Elin' and all the others? If they really knew what you believed as a Lutheran about water baptism would that be embarrassing for you? I was doing some reading and thought I would ask.
hi Red. sorry.
i didn't drop everything to respond to your [fake] question. been busy.
(eventually we'll return to your hyper-dispensationalism, though...it's important).
Lutherans take the Lord's words exactly as they are given. We simply believe what it says.
and yes, we baptize infants, because we believe that children are born into believing families; raised in a believing congregation; and are part of the New Covenant family.
(you will never agree, because you don't believe this command was for your Mystery Gentile Church Gap thing):
Acts 2:38
Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
now, i challenge anyone to read that passage and cause it to say something other than exactly what it says - pentecostals and those who say the One Baptism is The Baptism of The Holy Ghost please don't reply - unless you can explain why One Baptism actually means TWO (or three).
also:
Romans 6:3
3Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? 4Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.
once again - one baptism - or two?
as for you Red, if you are true to your dispensationalism, you really don't believe in any baptism....because that was a jewish LAW ordinance according to your CHURCH AGE GAP theology. but you probably baptize people (just in case, as a public testimony to THE CHURCH MEMBERS...right?)
simply go and find ALL references to people and baptism; in scripture and in history....then do what you want with it.
Lutherans do NOT (in practice, not in my church) say that if a person dies without baptism they are damned to hell.
they DO SAY - "why the delay? did you not believe the Gospel?"
why the despising of baptism?
why taking it lightly, when it CLEARLY SAYS
Acts 2
38Peter answered them, “Every one of you must repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus the Messiaha for the forgiveness of your sins. Then you will receive the Holy Spirit as a gift. 39 For this promise belongs to you and your children, as well as to all those who are distant, whom the Lord our God may call to himself.”
read that one again.
so that's it - take it or leave it.
okay?
i didn't drop everything to respond to your [fake] question. been busy.
(eventually we'll return to your hyper-dispensationalism, though...it's important).
Lutherans take the Lord's words exactly as they are given. We simply believe what it says.
and yes, we baptize infants, because we believe that children are born into believing families; raised in a believing congregation; and are part of the New Covenant family.
(you will never agree, because you don't believe this command was for your Mystery Gentile Church Gap thing):
Acts 2:38
Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
now, i challenge anyone to read that passage and cause it to say something other than exactly what it says - pentecostals and those who say the One Baptism is The Baptism of The Holy Ghost please don't reply - unless you can explain why One Baptism actually means TWO (or three).
also:
Romans 6:3
3Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? 4Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.
once again - one baptism - or two?
as for you Red, if you are true to your dispensationalism, you really don't believe in any baptism....because that was a jewish LAW ordinance according to your CHURCH AGE GAP theology. but you probably baptize people (just in case, as a public testimony to THE CHURCH MEMBERS...right?)
simply go and find ALL references to people and baptism; in scripture and in history....then do what you want with it.
Lutherans do NOT (in practice, not in my church) say that if a person dies without baptism they are damned to hell.
they DO SAY - "why the delay? did you not believe the Gospel?"
why the despising of baptism?
why taking it lightly, when it CLEARLY SAYS
Acts 2
38Peter answered them, “Every one of you must repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus the Messiaha for the forgiveness of your sins. Then you will receive the Holy Spirit as a gift. 39 For this promise belongs to you and your children, as well as to all those who are distant, whom the Lord our God may call to himself.”
read that one again.
so that's it - take it or leave it.
okay?