Problems with the Missouri Synod Lutheran Chrurch.

[zone]

This is the purpose of this thread...

[h=2]Problems with the Missouri Synod Lutheran Church.[/h]

right.

you've decided you're qualified to know what those problems might be, Redster.

but this is proof you're not:

....

Paul had received by revelation a measure of grace according to God's purpose that he was to administer, dispense, oversee and manage in terms of its affairs, its doctrine and the building up of believers as a habitation of God through the Spirit.

This was to be done by faith and all under the stewardship of this grace that was given.

This was never offered to Israel nor was it a part of the commonwealth of Israel.

It was solely offered to the church as part of the manifold grace and wisdom of God according to God's purpose to reveal the mystery of Christ and the church.

It excluded Israel as a people and nation.....BradC

...

'member, the issue of baptism came up, and you can't deal with it from Scripture...cuz you have another gospel going on. fundamentally wrong on every level, dear.

can't seem to convince ya to reconsider....

so what have we to do with one another?

back on ignore for awhile Redster.

 

[Digital_Angel_316]

Are we to understand that these verses of scripture point to baptismal regeneration or are you just trying to avoid the inevitable? Is this your way of hiding from us what you believe in your heart or perhaps from the church you serve God in? If you really believe in baptismal regeneration just say so. Why should you be ashamed if that is what you truly believe and adhere to in your faith? Is there excommunicating issues involved? Anyone can quote verses of scripture, but God has given teachers and preachers to the church, who labor in the word and doctrine who are enabled to bring us into the unity of the faith through the Spirit. Baptismal regeneration is false doctrine that Lutherans adhere to and you may not want to be associated with it, but if you do adhere to it, then that is a serious issue of our faith that needs to be addressed. Salvation or regeneration by association or proxy is not what the cross of Christ has provided to man. Water baptism by sprinkling or immersion provides nothing in terms of grace that bring salvation to any sinner, conceived and born in sin.

Here is a reminder just in case some have gotten off course with their faith.

Rom 10:9-17

In the above passage there is no mention of water baptism as a prerequisite for salvation or regeneration and God made that point on the cross with the thief who asked for mercy and with the publican in (Luke 18:13,14). Water baptism is not even an after thought of confirmation that is given to relegate as something that 'seals the deal' or makes salvation or regeneration a sure thing.

SO THEN ...
Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God ...

Perhaps, to be a little fundy, we should review (one verse theologies versus exegesis and) the concept of 'baptism' from it's original Greek -- Immersion.

The issue for now, is not one of sprinkling or dunking in the physical sense, tho they be good metaphor. In fact, the Greek for baptism is somewhat best related to a metaphor, so often posted here I will leave it to the interested student to look into it.

The concept is IMMERSION in a new way of life ... Dead to the old man - buried with him in Immersion, washed from the old way of life, and rising up again into a new life in which we become engrossed *(see end note)

this all gets back to the concept, if not doctrine of separation, for how can we be 'immersed' if we are diluted, deluded and polluted by the world. The same concept applies to the parable of the sower and the seeds. A little gets snatched up right away, maybe evaporates in the sense of water. When shallow (as in ground or heart or in a shallow religion) or shallow water, a thing tries to take hold but cannot. When diluted as in waters - or better yet, meal mixed with leaven, or contended for as in weeds or associations (versus separation) there may be growth again for a time, but then a corruption or choking out of the intended growth.

End Note -

Synonyms for engrossed --- adj preoccupied; attentive to

absorbed, captivated, consumed, engaged, enthralled, submerged, bugged, busy, fascinated, gone,
gripped, hooked, immersed, intrigued, lost, monopolized, occupied, riveted, all wound up, assiduous,
caught up, caught up in, deep, diligent, fiend for, head over heels, heavily into, hung up, industrious,
intent, into, rapt, really into, sedulous, taken up with, tied up, turned on, up to here in, wrapped up

Antonyms for engrossed

existing, idle, inactive, bored, disenthralled, disinterested, ignoring, inattentive, oblivious, uncaring,
uninterested, unoccupied, Roget's 21st Century Thesaurus, Third Edition Copyright © 2013 by the Philip Lief Group.

 

[notuptome]

Good stuff. was just thinkin' ...

What is "Immediate Justification"

What is "Easy Believism"?

Why do some preach that they are 'saved sinners' but cannot be born again, lest they could not [implicitly] continue in their cult of sin and extortion and idolatry?
View attachment 62044

Wow what a collection of terminological inexactitudes.
Easy believism so it is. Even a child can believe but the intellectually astute struggle. Poor enter before the rich.
Immediate justification. There is no other kind when God makes the atonement. Quickened. Dead in sin now alive in Christ.
Sinners are the only kind that get born again. Self righteous see no need. After the new birth sinners receive the righteousness of Christ but still carry the burden of the old body of flesh. When they are glorified they will be like Christ and the sinful body of flesh will be regenerated to be like Christ's body.

Blessed are the poor in spirit. Mat 5:3

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[BradC]

Zone, the Lutherans believe in baptismal regeneration and you must follow their doctrine. Here is a testimony of a former Lutheran, Mr.Peterson, who states the reason why he left the Lutheran church.

"Some sincere and well-meaning friends cannot understand why I left the Lutheran church. They honestly feel that I should have remained in the church and worked there. I want to assure all my Lutheran friends that my love for them has not changed, but rather grown because of the separation. My reason for leaving the church was that the constitutions of all Lutheran congregations require one to believe in Baptismal Regeneration. They regard it as a basic doctrine, so no one can be a consistent Lutheran and not believe in Baptismal Regeneration. If you know in your heart that you do not believe so, then to be true to the constitution and your own heart, you should at once do as God tells you. All Lutheran congregations are basically built on Baptismal Regeneration. It is the central pillar of the church. Therein you are solemnly declared, by the laying of the hands, to be born again; therein is heaven's door opened to you; therein you are grafted into the body of Christ; therein your sins are forgiven; therein you receive Life Eternal. This is what you are taught to believe. Naturally if you do not believe it you should repudiate such teaching by leaving the organization that stands for it.

After long and careful study I came to the conclusion that there was no saving power in baptism. You will, therefore, understand that I would have had to play the part of a hypocrite had I remained in the church. I would have had to confess with my mouth what I did not believe in my heart. There was no choice. No matter how hard the separation, or how great the cost, it had to be done. I wish to assure the Lutheran people that my separation from them is only technical. At heart I love them more than ever. The cost of the separation, which meant the loss of all things, should prove my love. God's Word convinced me beyond a shadow of a doubt that Baptismal Regeneration was not a Bible teaching, but an idol. Thus there was no course open to me but to deal with it as an idol.

Dare any man say that these men did not love their people when they broke down their idols? Can any man say that they did not perform a much needed labor at a great personal sacrifice? There is no other way open to those who would follow God's command. Beyond dispute then, it is the duty of men in responsible positions, not to fraternize with people's idols, but to break them down and throw them away. Many honest people in the days of Gideon were not even aware that they were serving idols, but when they saw Gideon break them down they woke up and left the idols. What suffering it must have caused Moses to order his own people slain because they served idols. "Put ye every man his sword upon his thigh . . . and slay every man his brother and every man his companion, and every man his neighbor . . . and there fell of the people that day about three thousand men."

No man can accuse these men of not loving their people. True it was not this wishy-washy thing we call love now-a-days, the principle characteristic of which is to compromise with evil in order to keep peace. True love involves stern sacrifice and not sickly compromise. True love means great suffering: "Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends." Any man who is called upon to break down idols will soon find that he must lay down his life for his fellow-men. Yes, ere he realizes it, he will find himself wading waist deep in blood and tears of human misery. He will discover as never before that lie is fighting principalities and powers in heavenly places. This drew both blood and tears from Jesus. Will it draw less from us?"

[This book, Baptismal Regeneration, provides a solid refutation of the false doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration. The book is copyrighted; however, it is out of print and the copyright is over 50 years old. "Some say, why stir up trouble about a question of such minor importance as Baptismal Regeneration. Is a so-called door to heaven a small issue? Spurgeon says, 'For of all lies which have dragged millions down to hell, I look upon this (Baptismal Regeneration) as being the most atrocious.' ..What must I do to be saved?... the answer shall be Not Through a Legalistic System of Water and Works, but through a genuine new birth, wrought in the sinner's heart by the Holy Spirit through the Word of God. V.L Petersen, 1947]

Here's the link: False Teaching - Baptismal Regeneration Chapter 4-False Teaching - Pagan Babylon and Not the Bible Is the True Source of Baptismal Regeneration

Some have chewed on false doctrine because of a wrong premise for so long that it becomes part of the bacteria of their teeth and they will never be able to spit it out and get rid of it. It has also become absorbed into their cells all the way through to their skin and they wear it every place they go and when things get hot they start to sweat and what's in their skin is released as smelly toxins and they lose their sweet savour of Christ. Organically, when you have been on a steady diet of the wrong food it has a way of revealing itself in more ways than one, especially long term.

 

[Digital_Angel_316]

Wow what a collection of terminological inexactitudes.
Easy believism so it is. Even a child can believe but the intellectually astute struggle. Poor enter before the rich.
Immediate justification. There is no other kind when God makes the atonement. Quickened. Dead in sin now alive in Christ.
Sinners are the only kind that get born again. Self righteous see no need. After the new birth sinners receive the righteousness of Christ but still carry the burden of the old body of flesh. When they are glorified they will be like Christ and the sinful body of flesh will be regenerated to be like Christ's body.

Blessed are the poor in spirit. Mat 5:3

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Sorry Roger for throwing around terms, there are so many. A web search on "Easy Believism" reveals - About 49,700 results (0.28 seconds). After you have a chance to review we can discuss it more in depth.

Name-it, Claim-it religions, apart from a basis in doctrinal beliefs which yield an understanding and lifestyle change. Magic salvation, a moment or event, a physical act with a claim - just no good Roger. Belief in WHAT one might ask? ... Surely a child can believe. I have seen a number of pastors come to the podium after Sunday school declaring an entire class of 8 year olds has been 'saved'. Eight year olds can believe -- the Easter bunny, Santa, the tooth fairy, some fake preachers idea of religion, a cool cell phone app or a new video game ... ya just gotta believe ...

Immediate Justification (About 13,800,000 results (0.21 seconds)) as corrupted, continues along with the theme of name-it, claim-it. The concept as described in the referenced post as making a claim, calling ones self a 'saved sinner', that is - one who thinks they are saved because they joined the cult, and now in joining are free to sin (saved [to be] sinners), to make the religion an Idol, and to use Calvinism, Freemasonry, sometimes the Lesser Keys and such other forms of manipulation, deception and extortion as scripture warns us of.

I apollo gize for what might be unfamiliar terms and concepts to you. Perhaps after you have a chance to review the koinage (sic) and concepts we could discuss this more fully. Perhaps another thread would be good so as not to hijack this one. I merely brought up these concepts and kept it short intentionally in response to those who implicitly or otherwise are claiming it in their assertions here.

In His Service,

Digital_Angel_316

 

[Stephen63]

right.

you've decided you're qualified to know what those problems might be, Redster.

but this is proof you're not:

....

Paul had received by revelation a measure of grace according to God's purpose that he was to administer, dispense, oversee and manage in terms of its affairs, its doctrine and the building up of believers as a habitation of God through the Spirit.

This was to be done by faith and all under the stewardship of this grace that was given.

This was never offered to Israel nor was it a part of the commonwealth of Israel.

It was solely offered to the church as part of the manifold grace and wisdom of God according to God's purpose to reveal the mystery of Christ and the church.

It excluded Israel as a people and nation.....BradC

...

'member, the issue of baptism came up, and you can't deal with it from Scripture...cuz you have another gospel going on. fundamentally wrong on every level, dear.

can't seem to convince ya to reconsider....

so what have we to do with one another?

back on ignore for awhile Redster.

OH NOOOOOO!! WHAT A TERRIBLE MISTAKE! WE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN YOU'RE THE ONLY ONE RIGHT ON HERE!!! OH MANNN! OUR BAD!!
By the way, how long until you call me Red33 too? Do you have Red33-titus?

 

[notuptome]

Sorry Roger for throwing around terms, there are so many. A web search on "Easy Believism" reveals - About 49,700 results (0.28 seconds). After you have a chance to review we can discuss it more in depth.

Name-it, Claim-it religions, apart from a basis in doctrinal beliefs which yield an understanding and lifestyle change. Magic salvation, a moment or event, a physical act with a claim - just no good Roger. Belief in WHAT one might ask? ... Surely a child can believe. I have seen a number of pastors come to the podium after Sunday school declaring an entire class of 8 year olds has been 'saved'. Eight year olds can believe -- the Easter bunny, Santa, the tooth fairy, some fake preachers idea of religion, a cool cell phone app or a new video game ... ya just gotta believe ...

Immediate Justification (About 13,800,000 results (0.21 seconds)) as corrupted, continues along with the theme of name-it, claim-it. The concept as described in the referenced post as making a claim, calling ones self a 'saved sinner', that is - one who thinks they are saved because they joined the cult, and now in joining are free to sin (saved [to be] sinners), to make the religion an Idol, and to use Calvinism, Freemasonry, sometimes the Lesser Keys and such other forms of manipulation, deception and extortion as scripture warns us of.

I apollo gize for what might be unfamiliar terms and concepts to you. Perhaps after you have a chance to review the koinage (sic) and concepts we could discuss this more fully. Perhaps another thread would be good so as not to hijack this one. I merely brought up these concepts and kept it short intentionally in response to those who implicitly or otherwise are claiming it in their assertions here.

In His Service,

Digital_Angel_316

Whatever. We should focus on Christ and less on the other religions. We bog down on everything except how great our God Who alone can save remains. Love the Lord thy God with all thy strength. He alone is worthy.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[zone]

OH NOOOOOO!! WHAT A TERRIBLE MISTAKE! WE SHOULD HAVE KNOWN YOU'RE THE ONLY ONE RIGHT ON HERE!!! OH MANNN! OUR BAD!!
By the way, how long until you call me Red33 too? Do you have Red33-titus?

why would i call you Red33?
you're not him...BradC is.

really stephen, are you 9?

 

[Stephen63]

why would i call you Red33?
you're not him...BradC is.

really stephen, are you 9?

Just a couple of months ago you were calling someone else that. You must be paranoid, or sumthin'

 

[zone]

Just a couple of months ago you were calling someone else that. You must be paranoid, or sumthin'

right. i did think (wrongly) that Roger was Red...the doctrine matched so closely.
i did apologize.

then lo and behold, Red (BradC) showed up.

not paranoid dear. amused (especially at the moment).
like....you're a PASTOR stephen - ya know try to pull it together, man.
Gee.....arg.

 

[Digital_Angel_316]

Whatever. We should focus on Christ and less on the other religions. We bog down on everything except how great our God Who alone can save remains. Love the Lord thy God with all thy strength. He alone is worthy.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[BradC]

I think that Zone behaves and says some of the things that she does because she does not want others to know what she really believes in certain areas of doctrine. When she is put in a corner she comes back with some outrageous replies, some having nothing to do with the topic at hand. This issue with the Lutherans doctrine of baptismal regeneration is a sacred cow which seems to be off limits.

 

[BradC]

I know that you think I am this Red33, but I am not. Please settle that with yourself and please refer to me as BradC, that would be appreciated.

 

[zone]

I know that you think I am this Red33, but I am not. Please settle that with yourself and please refer to me as BradC, that would be appreciated.

uh-oh...careful.
drop it Red - unless you want your internet stuff known.
lying is a sin.
back on ignore.

 

[zone]

I think that Zone behaves and says some of the things that she does because she does not want others to know what she really believes in certain areas of doctrine. When she is put in a corner she comes back with some outrageous replies, some having nothing to do with the topic at hand. This issue with the Lutherans doctrine of baptismal regeneration is a sacred cow which seems to be off limits.

its not off limits...read the LCMS material, as you have been - then do what you want with it.

RED33.

dont deny being Red again...i will post what i have, if you keep lying about that.

 

[BradC]

uh-oh...careful.
drop it Red - unless you want your internet stuff known.
lying is a sin.
back on ignore.

Presumption is a great transgression, have you also forgotten that? No one seems to have any privacy on the web these days, so what is stopping you from posting this 'internet stuff'? Never stopped you before. You don't need my permission if you are convinced I am this Red33. Make it known and do what you do best. If it involves sin you have Numbers 23:19 to back you up which would always trump 1Pt 4:8, RIGHT? Do you have the spiritual testosterone to do such a thing, then have at it and then you can see what God does.

 

[Digital_Angel_316]

I think that Zone behaves and says some of the things that she does because she does not want others to know what she really believes in certain areas of doctrine. When she is put in a corner she comes back with some outrageous replies, some having nothing to do with the topic at hand. This issue with the Lutherans doctrine of baptismal regeneration is a sacred cow which seems to be off limits.

Such is the nature of any organization of man. I think it good to stick with the scripture. The discussion of Baptismal Regeneration in Organized Religions is fairly convoluted and not easy for any member of an organized religion to pin down, since it is not easy for the organization to pin it down. A good summary of the concept of Baptismal Regeneration is again provided by wikipedia for students with an interest - Baptismal regeneration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The Roman Catholic, Orthodox and Anglican Churches (especially its High-Church and Anglo-Catholic parties) as well as Lutherans support this doctrine, but article 251 of Luther's Small Catechism and other Lutheran teachings recognize this is not absolutely necessary, one can be saved without Baptism and a Baptized Christian can lose salvation if he later falls from faith. (This from the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS)) from citation above.

Scripture study makes the concept a bit clearer and it is good that Zone cites the scripture more than the catechism. A walk through of the various explanations of the organized religions supporting Baptismal Regeneration might be worth someone's time. For some it might explain the concept better to see it summarized in catechismal form and compared to the scriptures, for others it may just lead to more confusion. If the thread is here to do that, carry on. For me, the scripture suffices.

Without careful and thorough study and with snippets from catechismal teachings, one could easily get lost in, confused by, or use for a false teaching, the concept of Baptismal Regeneration as salvific. It leads many religions into the name-it, claim-it fallacy. On a similar note, Charles Finney is sometimes cited for creating a similar concept of name-it, claim-it movement, again which needs to be more carefully and thoroughly examined and again which opens a door to manipulation and corruption.


C. H. Spurgeon on Baptismal Regeneration: Baptismal Regeneration

(not that I go by Spurgeon either, but again, for some it may help in this one instance of doctrinal review)

 

[nathan3]

Why are we looking for problems with other Christians sowing discord with eachother... We can ask our self ,what is the problem with ones self.

 

[BradC]

Such is the nature of any organization of man. I think it good to stick with the scripture. The discussion of Baptismal Regeneration in Organized Religions is fairly convoluted and not easy for any member of an organized religion to pin down, since it is not easy for the organization to pin it down. A good summary of the concept of Baptismal Regeneration is again provided by wikipedia for students with an interest - Baptismal regeneration - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The Roman Catholic, Orthodox and Anglican Churches (especially its High-Church and Anglo-Catholic parties) as well as Lutherans support this doctrine, but article 251 of Luther's Small Catechism and other Lutheran teachings recognize this is not absolutely necessary, one can be saved without Baptism and a Baptized Christian can lose salvation if he later falls from faith. (This from the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod (WELS)) from citation above.

Scripture study makes the concept a bit clearer and it is good that Zone cites the scripture more than the catechism. A walk through of the various explanations of the organized religions supporting Baptismal Regeneration might be worth someone's time. For some it might explain the concept better to see it summarized in catechismal form and compared to the scriptures, for others it may just lead to more confusion. If the thread is here to do that, carry on. For me, the scripture suffices.

Without careful and thorough study and with snippets from catechismal teachings, one could easily get lost in, confused by, or use for a false teaching, the concept of Baptismal Regeneration as salvific. It leads many religions into the name-it, claim-it fallacy. On a similar note, Charles Finney is sometimes cited for creating a similar concept of name-it, claim-it movement, again which needs to be more carefully and thoroughly examined and again which opens a door to manipulation and corruption.


C. H. Spurgeon on Baptismal Regeneration: Baptismal Regeneration

(not that I go by Spurgeon either, but again, for some it may help in this one instance of doctrinal review)

You need to post this article by Charles Spurgeon and let the winds of conviction blow as they may. If you choose not to, I will, because it is needed and extremely relevant to the faith of believers as part of the doctrine of Christ and the church. Another thing, if I may, this water baptism by immersion that we have as NT believers was never given to Israel or its commonwealth because this baptism involves resurrection, out with the old and in with the new, a putting off of the old man and a putting on with the one new man, and that baptism is for the church who are in Christ through the new birth.

 

[BradC]

Why are we looking for problems with other Christians sowing discord with eachother... We can ask our self ,what is the problem with ones self.

Is it important that we as believers have the right doctrine as part of our faith? How are we to have the mind of Christ in the details of life if we have the wrong understanding of the doctrine of Christ and the church? Coming to the knowledge of the truth is not discord but to have others sow false doctrine (or leaven) that results in division could lead to discord. We want unity through the Spirit of truth and through the cross. Without unity we can not be like minded in the faith or walk together agreed.