Crystal Cathedral goes bankrupt

One of the first and most prominent megachurches, the Crystal Cathedral in Garden Grove, California, has gone bankrupt.  The 10,000 member congregation listed assets of $50 million and debts of $100 million.  The church was built by Robert Schuller, who preached a gospel of “positive thinking.”  He said that the Reformation was  mistaken in  its emphasis on sin, which gave people a negative self-image.  He wanted Christianity to be more positive, and he taught people that they could achieve their dreams and change their reality by having positive thoughts and faith in themselves.

Rev. Schuller retired from ministry a few years ago.  His daughter, Sheila Schuller Coleman, is currently the pastor of the church.

via Crystal Cathedral Ministries Seeks Bankruptcy, Blames Recession.

About Gene Veith

Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College, the Director of the Cranach Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary, a columnist for World Magazine and TableTalk, and the author of 18 books on different facets of Christianity & Culture.

  • Dennis Peskey

    I presume the headline references their finances; the Crystal Cathedral has been bankrupt in their theology since conception. I guess the ‘positive thinking’ didn’t apply to the checkbook.
    Peace,
    Dennis

  • Dennis Peskey

    I presume the headline references their finances; the Crystal Cathedral has been bankrupt in their theology since conception. I guess the ‘positive thinking’ didn’t apply to the checkbook.
    Peace,
    Dennis

  • Kirk

    “You know what Jesus always said: Don’t just roll over your credit card debt onto another credit card in order to finance your economically unsustainable garish monumental attention-seeking megachurch, there in Gomorrah.”

  • Kirk

    “You know what Jesus always said: Don’t just roll over your credit card debt onto another credit card in order to finance your economically unsustainable garish monumental attention-seeking megachurch, there in Gomorrah.”

  • Bryan Lindemood

    “The 10,000 member congregation listed assets of $50 million and debts of $100 million.”

    Just sounds like a larger version of many wanna-be-large congregation’s budgets right now. The times are tough I tell ya!

  • Bryan Lindemood

    “The 10,000 member congregation listed assets of $50 million and debts of $100 million.”

    Just sounds like a larger version of many wanna-be-large congregation’s budgets right now. The times are tough I tell ya!

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    It’s worth noting that this is a debt of about $10,000 per congregant. Given that average giving to a church is something like 2-3% of income, and church attendance is up and down, one wonders what induced the bankers (named in the article) to lend this much to them.

    Appropriately, it’s walking distance (OK, a long walk) from Disneyland.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    It’s worth noting that this is a debt of about $10,000 per congregant. Given that average giving to a church is something like 2-3% of income, and church attendance is up and down, one wonders what induced the bankers (named in the article) to lend this much to them.

    Appropriately, it’s walking distance (OK, a long walk) from Disneyland.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Aaand Dennis Peskey (@1) is first with the zing.

    “His daughter, Sheila Schuller Coleman, is currently the pastor of the church.” Well, maybe she’ll bring it back into orthodoxy.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Aaand Dennis Peskey (@1) is first with the zing.

    “His daughter, Sheila Schuller Coleman, is currently the pastor of the church.” Well, maybe she’ll bring it back into orthodoxy.

  • helen

    ‘PASTOR’ ‘SHE’ ‘ORTHODOXY’ same sentence?

  • helen

    ‘PASTOR’ ‘SHE’ ‘ORTHODOXY’ same sentence?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    (Helen, don’t make me use emoticons!)

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    (Helen, don’t make me use emoticons!)

  • Grace

    Kirk – 2

    “You know what Jesus always said: Don’t just roll over your credit card debt onto another credit card in order to finance your economically unsustainable garish monumental attention-seeking megachurch, there in Gomorrah.

    I don’t agree with the Crystal Cathedral, or what they teach/preach, however your little ditty about what Jesus might say? – making up a story like that is sad on your part.

    As far as “Gomorrah” is concerned, you might take a look at the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) – if you’re a Lutheran you don’t have far to….. well you get the idea.

    Sin is everywhere Kirk, most likely in your hometown, it doesn’t miss a city, town, country lane, or state.

  • Grace

    Kirk – 2

    “You know what Jesus always said: Don’t just roll over your credit card debt onto another credit card in order to finance your economically unsustainable garish monumental attention-seeking megachurch, there in Gomorrah.

    I don’t agree with the Crystal Cathedral, or what they teach/preach, however your little ditty about what Jesus might say? – making up a story like that is sad on your part.

    As far as “Gomorrah” is concerned, you might take a look at the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) – if you’re a Lutheran you don’t have far to….. well you get the idea.

    Sin is everywhere Kirk, most likely in your hometown, it doesn’t miss a city, town, country lane, or state.

  • fws

    Grace @ 8

    But of course your group at Calvary Chapel is above all that. Name one specific where you would identify them as having the same sorta trouble as the ELCA or chrystal cathedral. Just one.

    Grace you are so full of your own self you present yourself, thus far, as spiritually incapable of any serious , let alone specific self criticism or soul searching.

    Prove me wrong. I dare ya.

  • fws

    Grace @ 8

    But of course your group at Calvary Chapel is above all that. Name one specific where you would identify them as having the same sorta trouble as the ELCA or chrystal cathedral. Just one.

    Grace you are so full of your own self you present yourself, thus far, as spiritually incapable of any serious , let alone specific self criticism or soul searching.

    Prove me wrong. I dare ya.

  • Grace

    Calvary Chapel Churches don’t have homosexual pastors, nor do they allow women to pastor a church –

    Anyone, and that includes homosexuals are welcome to attend, and encouraged. However, they are not in any sort of leadership position.

    Calvary Chapel Churches are very prudent and careful when it comes to spending money, they always have been.

  • Grace

    Calvary Chapel Churches don’t have homosexual pastors, nor do they allow women to pastor a church –

    Anyone, and that includes homosexuals are welcome to attend, and encouraged. However, they are not in any sort of leadership position.

    Calvary Chapel Churches are very prudent and careful when it comes to spending money, they always have been.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Grace – most of the Lutheran visitors here are LCMS / LCC / WELS (Veith is LCMS, I believe).

    Calvary Chapels might be prudent with their money, but not with their theology, specifically, eschatology: Witness their dispensationalism, a theology which falls outside the bounds of orthodoxy, and which led to Smith’s “prophecy” of Christ’s return in 1981. However, it appeares that subsequent to that, Calvary Chapel did not excommunicate him. Do they not read what the Bible says about False prohpets?

    I say this only to show that imperfections is everywhere, and in everybody. You ought to acknowledge that.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Grace – most of the Lutheran visitors here are LCMS / LCC / WELS (Veith is LCMS, I believe).

    Calvary Chapels might be prudent with their money, but not with their theology, specifically, eschatology: Witness their dispensationalism, a theology which falls outside the bounds of orthodoxy, and which led to Smith’s “prophecy” of Christ’s return in 1981. However, it appeares that subsequent to that, Calvary Chapel did not excommunicate him. Do they not read what the Bible says about False prohpets?

    I say this only to show that imperfections is everywhere, and in everybody. You ought to acknowledge that.

  • Grace

    Louis,

    You can attack the doctrine of Dispensationalism all you want, obviously you and I are not going to change our minds.

    The so called prophecy of 1981 has been addressed in the past. I most certainly doesn’t hold a candle to the Jewish hatred Luther invoked with his little book, just to name one.

    By the way, no one calls Calvary church “Smitheran” -

  • Grace

    Louis,

    You can attack the doctrine of Dispensationalism all you want, obviously you and I are not going to change our minds.

    The so called prophecy of 1981 has been addressed in the past. I most certainly doesn’t hold a candle to the Jewish hatred Luther invoked with his little book, just to name one.

    By the way, no one calls Calvary church “Smitheran” -

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Grace, was he excommunicated?

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Grace, was he excommunicated?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Calvary Chapel churches all do this, and Calvary Chapel churches all don’t do that, … but they are not a denomination!

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Calvary Chapel churches all do this, and Calvary Chapel churches all don’t do that, … but they are not a denomination!

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    “The so called prophecy of 1981 has been addressed in the past.”

    That is super, super rich, comapred to how you went on and on and on about Luter’s sins, irrespective of how many times we told you that Lutheran churches have repented / apologised etc.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    “The so called prophecy of 1981 has been addressed in the past.”

    That is super, super rich, comapred to how you went on and on and on about Luter’s sins, irrespective of how many times we told you that Lutheran churches have repented / apologised etc.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    Um, dispensationalism may fall out of the bounds of Lutheranism, but dispensationalists affirm all of the solas. Let’s be very careful about defining our terms; saying one is “out of the bounds of orthodoxy” is saying something far more significant than “they do not affirm Lutheranism” or “they do not affirm Baptist distinctives.”

    Plus, I seem to remember any number of theologians predicting the end of the world–regrettably it’s not just one party that is guilty. A little bit of grace towards those with whom we do not agree would be in order here, no?

    That said, and back to the subject, it does seem to me that the Schuller “Gospel” is no Gospel at all, and that is only reinforced by the fact that this group is this far into debt. And, yes, to be gracious, if only all churches understood what the Scriptures say about debt–the borrower becomes slave to the lender. We ought to be very cautious about enslaving the Bride of Christ to moneylenders, no?

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    Um, dispensationalism may fall out of the bounds of Lutheranism, but dispensationalists affirm all of the solas. Let’s be very careful about defining our terms; saying one is “out of the bounds of orthodoxy” is saying something far more significant than “they do not affirm Lutheranism” or “they do not affirm Baptist distinctives.”

    Plus, I seem to remember any number of theologians predicting the end of the world–regrettably it’s not just one party that is guilty. A little bit of grace towards those with whom we do not agree would be in order here, no?

    That said, and back to the subject, it does seem to me that the Schuller “Gospel” is no Gospel at all, and that is only reinforced by the fact that this group is this far into debt. And, yes, to be gracious, if only all churches understood what the Scriptures say about debt–the borrower becomes slave to the lender. We ought to be very cautious about enslaving the Bride of Christ to moneylenders, no?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Grace, you told Louis (@12), “You can attack the doctrine of Dispensationalism all you want, obviously you and I are not going to change our minds.” Yes, that is your constant refrain whenever someone takes issue with something you believe. And yet you continue to comment here. Why? You don’t believe anyone will change their minds based on what you say. By your own argument, your own arguments here serve no purpose. Myself, I have had my mind changed by many arguments made on this blog. But they were reasonable arguments.

    “The so called prophecy of 1981 has been addressed in the past.” Said the woman who is incapable of letting go an issue even more in the past — several centuries more — that of Martin Luther. Oh, what’s that? She mentioned it in the next sentence? Oh, well, then …

    “I most certainly doesn’t hold a candle to the Jewish hatred Luther invoked with his little book, just to name one.” Grace, you’re a hypocrite. You won’t discuss the problems in the men who founded your own denomination, but you won’t shut up about the problems with Luther’s writings which no Lutherans here confess as their own beliefs.

    “No one calls Calvary church ‘Smitheran’.” A name is just a name. They call it “Calvary Chapel”. So what? Doesn’t make the theology any more Biblical, does it?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Grace, you told Louis (@12), “You can attack the doctrine of Dispensationalism all you want, obviously you and I are not going to change our minds.” Yes, that is your constant refrain whenever someone takes issue with something you believe. And yet you continue to comment here. Why? You don’t believe anyone will change their minds based on what you say. By your own argument, your own arguments here serve no purpose. Myself, I have had my mind changed by many arguments made on this blog. But they were reasonable arguments.

    “The so called prophecy of 1981 has been addressed in the past.” Said the woman who is incapable of letting go an issue even more in the past — several centuries more — that of Martin Luther. Oh, what’s that? She mentioned it in the next sentence? Oh, well, then …

    “I most certainly doesn’t hold a candle to the Jewish hatred Luther invoked with his little book, just to name one.” Grace, you’re a hypocrite. You won’t discuss the problems in the men who founded your own denomination, but you won’t shut up about the problems with Luther’s writings which no Lutherans here confess as their own beliefs.

    “No one calls Calvary church ‘Smitheran’.” A name is just a name. They call it “Calvary Chapel”. So what? Doesn’t make the theology any more Biblical, does it?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Bubba (@16) said, “Um, dispensationalism may fall out of the bounds of Lutheranism, but dispensationalists affirm all of the solas.” Okay … so … orthodoxy is defined merely as those who affirm “all the solas”? Is that what you’re saying? No, really, what’s your definition of orthodoxy? “Let’s be very careful about defining our terms,” indeed!

    If Lutherans believed something other than what they confessed was orthodox, they wouldn’t confess that thing anymore. That may offend some, but let’s not just go all relativist for the sake of not offending!

    “A little bit of grace towards those with whom we do not agree would be in order here, no?”

    Deuteronomy 18:

    You may say to yourselves, “How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD?” If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.

    A “little bit of grace” would be not stoning the false prophets. But let’s not make this a relativism matter, merely about “those with whom we do not agree”. This is about people telling lies. Lies in God’s name. To deceive people. This isn’t about us disagreeing with such false prophets. It’s about the facts — or, more directly, God — not agreeing with such deceivers.

    Anyone who continues to listen to a prophet with an obviously false prophecy (or two) under his belt is, simply, a fool.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Bubba (@16) said, “Um, dispensationalism may fall out of the bounds of Lutheranism, but dispensationalists affirm all of the solas.” Okay … so … orthodoxy is defined merely as those who affirm “all the solas”? Is that what you’re saying? No, really, what’s your definition of orthodoxy? “Let’s be very careful about defining our terms,” indeed!

    If Lutherans believed something other than what they confessed was orthodox, they wouldn’t confess that thing anymore. That may offend some, but let’s not just go all relativist for the sake of not offending!

    “A little bit of grace towards those with whom we do not agree would be in order here, no?”

    Deuteronomy 18:

    You may say to yourselves, “How can we know when a message has not been spoken by the LORD?” If what a prophet proclaims in the name of the LORD does not take place or come true, that is a message the LORD has not spoken. That prophet has spoken presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him.

    A “little bit of grace” would be not stoning the false prophets. But let’s not make this a relativism matter, merely about “those with whom we do not agree”. This is about people telling lies. Lies in God’s name. To deceive people. This isn’t about us disagreeing with such false prophets. It’s about the facts — or, more directly, God — not agreeing with such deceivers.

    Anyone who continues to listen to a prophet with an obviously false prophecy (or two) under his belt is, simply, a fool.

  • Grace

    ” Luter’s sins, irrespective of how many times we told you that Lutheran churches have repented / apologised etc.”

    Lutheran churches can’t repent for something Martin Luther did. Luther was adamant in his hatred. But then Luther also believed, that he could sin boldly, even a thousand times a day.

    No sin will separate us from the Lamb, even though we commit fornication and murder a thousand times a day.” – - Martin Luther – -
    Epistle of August 1, 1521 to Melanchthon
    (This translation is taken from the official Lutheran American Edition of his complete works, vol. 42, pp. 281-82:

    There you have it!

  • Grace

    ” Luter’s sins, irrespective of how many times we told you that Lutheran churches have repented / apologised etc.”

    Lutheran churches can’t repent for something Martin Luther did. Luther was adamant in his hatred. But then Luther also believed, that he could sin boldly, even a thousand times a day.

    No sin will separate us from the Lamb, even though we commit fornication and murder a thousand times a day.” – - Martin Luther – -
    Epistle of August 1, 1521 to Melanchthon
    (This translation is taken from the official Lutheran American Edition of his complete works, vol. 42, pp. 281-82:

    There you have it!

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Sorry, that should read (@18), “If Lutherans believed that what they confessed was heterodox, they wouldn’t confess that thing anymore.” And, conversely, if Lutherans believed something other than what they confessed was orthodox, they would add that other thing to their confession.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Sorry, that should read (@18), “If Lutherans believed that what they confessed was heterodox, they wouldn’t confess that thing anymore.” And, conversely, if Lutherans believed something other than what they confessed was orthodox, they would add that other thing to their confession.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Bike – dispensationalism is heretical, implicitly. It denies the efficacy of Christ’s death and resurrection, by implying the resumption of valid sacrifices at some point in the future. Furthermore, the New Testament teaches us that all believers, all of God’s people, are now one body. This is denied by the dispensationalists, who have created two classes of Believers.

    Dispensationalism is the invention of Darby, at Plymouth, in the 1830′s. Strange that such a “key doctrine” would have been hid from the Church for almost 2 millenia…..

    Dispensationalism is to Theology what US magazine is to journalism…

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Bike – dispensationalism is heretical, implicitly. It denies the efficacy of Christ’s death and resurrection, by implying the resumption of valid sacrifices at some point in the future. Furthermore, the New Testament teaches us that all believers, all of God’s people, are now one body. This is denied by the dispensationalists, who have created two classes of Believers.

    Dispensationalism is the invention of Darby, at Plymouth, in the 1830′s. Strange that such a “key doctrine” would have been hid from the Church for almost 2 millenia…..

    Dispensationalism is to Theology what US magazine is to journalism…

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    During the late 1970s and early 1980s, Chuck Smith wrote and published a prophetic timeline that declared:

    I believe that the generation of 1948 is the last generation. Since a generation of judgment is forty years and the Tribulation period lasts seven years, I believe the Lord could come back for His Church any time before the Tribulation starts, which would mean any time before 1981.

    In his 1978 book, Chuck reasoned that Haley’s Comet in 1986 would result in problems for those left behind:

    The Lord said that towards the end of the Tribulation period the sun would scorch men who dwell upon the face of the earth (Rev. 16). The year 1986 would fit just about right! We’re getting close to the Tribulation and the return of Christ in glory. All the pieces of the puzzle are coming together.

    There you have it, Grace! Your denomination was founded by a false prophet.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    During the late 1970s and early 1980s, Chuck Smith wrote and published a prophetic timeline that declared:

    I believe that the generation of 1948 is the last generation. Since a generation of judgment is forty years and the Tribulation period lasts seven years, I believe the Lord could come back for His Church any time before the Tribulation starts, which would mean any time before 1981.

    In his 1978 book, Chuck reasoned that Haley’s Comet in 1986 would result in problems for those left behind:

    The Lord said that towards the end of the Tribulation period the sun would scorch men who dwell upon the face of the earth (Rev. 16). The year 1986 would fit just about right! We’re getting close to the Tribulation and the return of Christ in glory. All the pieces of the puzzle are coming together.

    There you have it, Grace! Your denomination was founded by a false prophet.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Grace – was Smith excommunicated??

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Grace – was Smith excommunicated??

  • Grace

    For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Romans 3:23

    Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: Romans 5:12

    The above passages make clear that “all have sinned” that includes Mary.

    “It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary’s soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God’s gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin” – - Martin Luther
    (Sermon: “On the Day of the Conception of the Mother of God,” 1527).

    No one is free from sin, and that includes Mary, HOWEVER, Martin Luther believed she was sinless, “thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin” –

    The Bible says:
    46 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,

    47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.

    48 For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
    Luke 1

    You can see that Mary understood she needed a Savior, she was born into sin, just like everyone else, as the passages posted above from Romans states. Martin Luther must have skipped those passages.

  • Grace

    For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Romans 3:23

    Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: Romans 5:12

    The above passages make clear that “all have sinned” that includes Mary.

    “It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary’s soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God’s gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin” – - Martin Luther
    (Sermon: “On the Day of the Conception of the Mother of God,” 1527).

    No one is free from sin, and that includes Mary, HOWEVER, Martin Luther believed she was sinless, “thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin” –

    The Bible says:
    46 And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord,

    47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour.

    48 For he hath regarded the low estate of his handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me blessed.
    Luke 1

    You can see that Mary understood she needed a Savior, she was born into sin, just like everyone else, as the passages posted above from Romans states. Martin Luther must have skipped those passages.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    GRACE – WAS CHUCK SMITH EXCOMMUNICATED???

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    GRACE – WAS CHUCK SMITH EXCOMMUNICATED???

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Grace, it doesn’t matter what you say. You and I are not going to change our minds, and your church was founded by a false prophet.

    Also, I believe Louis has a question for you.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Grace, it doesn’t matter what you say. You and I are not going to change our minds, and your church was founded by a false prophet.

    Also, I believe Louis has a question for you.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    Um, Louis, sources, please. I’ve been a dispensationalist for two decades now, and have not seen this in mainstream dispensational thought. Nor does dispensationalism create two classes of believers.

    By the way, dispensational sources, not covenant theologians out on a witch hunt. Thank you.

    And if you want to talk about a doctrine being new….well, I guess they did that in Worms in 1521, and in Trent in 1564, didn’t they? Obviously you’re Catholic, and that pre-Vatican II, because the new doctrine is by definition false. Say hi to Mr. Tetzel for me, and hopefully you get a brick or two labeled at St. Peter’s for your generousity!

    Seriously, please, let’s show some grace here. Dispensationalism is not Lutheran, but is not unorthodox.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    Um, Louis, sources, please. I’ve been a dispensationalist for two decades now, and have not seen this in mainstream dispensational thought. Nor does dispensationalism create two classes of believers.

    By the way, dispensational sources, not covenant theologians out on a witch hunt. Thank you.

    And if you want to talk about a doctrine being new….well, I guess they did that in Worms in 1521, and in Trent in 1564, didn’t they? Obviously you’re Catholic, and that pre-Vatican II, because the new doctrine is by definition false. Say hi to Mr. Tetzel for me, and hopefully you get a brick or two labeled at St. Peter’s for your generousity!

    Seriously, please, let’s show some grace here. Dispensationalism is not Lutheran, but is not unorthodox.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    Louis; was Luther excommunicated for his writings against the Jews, and his apparents Mariolatry?

    Again, some grace here would be recommended. We can play “gotcha games” until the cows come home, and none of them will undo a word of Luther’s, or Smith’s, theology. At the blog of a PHC professor, I think we can at least try to adhere to some of the rules of informal logic, doncha think?

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    Louis; was Luther excommunicated for his writings against the Jews, and his apparents Mariolatry?

    Again, some grace here would be recommended. We can play “gotcha games” until the cows come home, and none of them will undo a word of Luther’s, or Smith’s, theology. At the blog of a PHC professor, I think we can at least try to adhere to some of the rules of informal logic, doncha think?

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Bike – I’m Lutheran (LCC). Try again.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Bike – I’m Lutheran (LCC). Try again.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Bike – I’d like to refer you to my original statement @ 11. Grace loves to point out perceived problems with everybody else, and claims to be a biblicist. I was merely pointing out a very obvious inconsitency, as Todd’s comments also highlight.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Bike – I’d like to refer you to my original statement @ 11. Grace loves to point out perceived problems with everybody else, and claims to be a biblicist. I was merely pointing out a very obvious inconsitency, as Todd’s comments also highlight.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Bike – Grace doesn’t follow links, but maybe you will: Here’s is one by Ken Gentry (now, he is a Preterist, and reformed, while I’m a amillenial Lutheran, but his Scriptural analysis of Dispensationalism in this article is quite clear):

    http://againstdispensationalism.blogspot.com/2010/04/tract-for-dispensationalists.html

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Bike – Grace doesn’t follow links, but maybe you will: Here’s is one by Ken Gentry (now, he is a Preterist, and reformed, while I’m a amillenial Lutheran, but his Scriptural analysis of Dispensationalism in this article is quite clear):

    http://againstdispensationalism.blogspot.com/2010/04/tract-for-dispensationalists.html

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Bubba (@27), you claimed, again, “Dispensationalism is not Lutheran, but is not unorthodox.” But what you didn’t do was define “orthodox”. By what rubric can you argue that dispensationalism is orthodox?

    Also, just thought I’d note that Martin Luther is dead. Not a whole lot we can do about him and his (incorrect) five-hundred-year-old personal opinions, except micturate on his grave. And I believe Grace has that covered.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Bubba (@27), you claimed, again, “Dispensationalism is not Lutheran, but is not unorthodox.” But what you didn’t do was define “orthodox”. By what rubric can you argue that dispensationalism is orthodox?

    Also, just thought I’d note that Martin Luther is dead. Not a whole lot we can do about him and his (incorrect) five-hundred-year-old personal opinions, except micturate on his grave. And I believe Grace has that covered.

  • Grace

    Martin Luther made a prophecy:

    “The world runs and hastens so diligently to its end that it often occurs to me forcibly that the last day will break before we can completely turn the Holy Scriptures into German. For it is certain from the Holy Scriptures that we have no more temporal things to expect. All is done and fulfilled.” Hugh Thomson Kerr, Jr. (ed.), A Compend of Luther’s Theology (Philadelphia, 1943), p. 245 (citing Luther’s Correspondence, Vol. II, No. 869, pp. 516 f.).

    Maybe some of you missed this?

  • Grace

    Martin Luther made a prophecy:

    “The world runs and hastens so diligently to its end that it often occurs to me forcibly that the last day will break before we can completely turn the Holy Scriptures into German. For it is certain from the Holy Scriptures that we have no more temporal things to expect. All is done and fulfilled.” Hugh Thomson Kerr, Jr. (ed.), A Compend of Luther’s Theology (Philadelphia, 1943), p. 245 (citing Luther’s Correspondence, Vol. II, No. 869, pp. 516 f.).

    Maybe some of you missed this?

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    And somewhere else it is noted (In Table Talk, somewhere), that he answered a fellow who asked him what would he do if he knew that the end of the World is Tomorrow? He answered – plant an apple tree. So context Grace.

    Meanwhile, maybe I should take a bet on how many avoidance tactics you can throw to my question: So far – 3 – Luther on Jews, Luther on Mary, Prophecy by Luther.

    Any takers at 100:1? :)

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    And somewhere else it is noted (In Table Talk, somewhere), that he answered a fellow who asked him what would he do if he knew that the end of the World is Tomorrow? He answered – plant an apple tree. So context Grace.

    Meanwhile, maybe I should take a bet on how many avoidance tactics you can throw to my question: So far – 3 – Luther on Jews, Luther on Mary, Prophecy by Luther.

    Any takers at 100:1? :)

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    Grace,
    Great. So Chuck Smith and Luther were both men with sins, glad you acknowledge that.
    Now, would you care to discuss what Lutherans actually believe, which has nothing to do with what Luther may have thought about the Virgin Mary, or when he thought the world would end. (By the way, Luther also continued to translate the scriptures, which is a good indication that he didn’t think his “forcible” intuition about the end of the world was correct. )
    Perhaps you would like to discuss the Biblical merits of your Chiliasm as taught to you by Chuck Smith? or perhaps the ability of infants to believe? or Justification by Faith alone? Baptism or the Lord’s Supper?

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    Grace,
    Great. So Chuck Smith and Luther were both men with sins, glad you acknowledge that.
    Now, would you care to discuss what Lutherans actually believe, which has nothing to do with what Luther may have thought about the Virgin Mary, or when he thought the world would end. (By the way, Luther also continued to translate the scriptures, which is a good indication that he didn’t think his “forcible” intuition about the end of the world was correct. )
    Perhaps you would like to discuss the Biblical merits of your Chiliasm as taught to you by Chuck Smith? or perhaps the ability of infants to believe? or Justification by Faith alone? Baptism or the Lord’s Supper?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Grace, it doesn’t matter what you say. You and I are not going to change our minds, and your church was founded by a false prophet.

    Also, I believe Louis has a question for you.

    Oh, and … um, what do you believe in that quote is a “prophecy”? I know you won’t actually answer me, so I’m just asking … Louis … instead?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Grace, it doesn’t matter what you say. You and I are not going to change our minds, and your church was founded by a false prophet.

    Also, I believe Louis has a question for you.

    Oh, and … um, what do you believe in that quote is a “prophecy”? I know you won’t actually answer me, so I’m just asking … Louis … instead?

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    See this is the result of Grace attacking Martin Luther after the teachings of Chuck Smith have been questioned. She affirms that Chuck Smith taught falsely. She could have tried to defend chuck smith, instead her reaction is martin Luther was a sinner too. Of Course, we Lutherans already knew that Martin Luther was a Sinner, and have already noted that we don’t believe everything Martin Luther ever said.
    By the way Bike, believing in the Semper Virgo, as detestable as I find it, is not the same as Maryolatry. Luther actually taught against Maryolotry, which is to teach that Mary ought to be worshiped and or prayed to. That he did not divest himself of the belief in the semper virgo is I suppose regrettable, but not unfathomable. It happens that when I talk to Mormon Converts, and even Baptist converts, many things they were taught as kids falsely still hang on, though they have come to believe in the central truths of the Christian faith as taught in Luther’s Small Catechism, which says very little about Mary, but that she was a virgin when she gave birth to Christ. Luther however did not think she therefore deserved our prayer. Perhaps praise in the sense that we praise people for doing all sorts of good, and Mary certainly does deserve praise for raising our savior which was not an easy task, mothering never is.

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    See this is the result of Grace attacking Martin Luther after the teachings of Chuck Smith have been questioned. She affirms that Chuck Smith taught falsely. She could have tried to defend chuck smith, instead her reaction is martin Luther was a sinner too. Of Course, we Lutherans already knew that Martin Luther was a Sinner, and have already noted that we don’t believe everything Martin Luther ever said.
    By the way Bike, believing in the Semper Virgo, as detestable as I find it, is not the same as Maryolatry. Luther actually taught against Maryolotry, which is to teach that Mary ought to be worshiped and or prayed to. That he did not divest himself of the belief in the semper virgo is I suppose regrettable, but not unfathomable. It happens that when I talk to Mormon Converts, and even Baptist converts, many things they were taught as kids falsely still hang on, though they have come to believe in the central truths of the Christian faith as taught in Luther’s Small Catechism, which says very little about Mary, but that she was a virgin when she gave birth to Christ. Luther however did not think she therefore deserved our prayer. Perhaps praise in the sense that we praise people for doing all sorts of good, and Mary certainly does deserve praise for raising our savior which was not an easy task, mothering never is.

  • Grace

    “Whoever possesses a good (firm) faith, says the Hail Mary without danger! Whoever is weak in faith can utter no Hail Mary without danger to his salvation.” Martin Luther (Sermon, March 11, 1523).

    “is weak in faith can utter no Hail Mary without danger to his salvation.” – danger of Salvation? – without Mary? – Jesus didn’t say, repent believe on me and my mother and thou shalt be saved –

    For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
    John 3:16

    But we believe that through the grace of the LORD Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. Acts1 5:11

    Mary’s name is never mentioned in the Scriptures as part of ones Salvation. Mary was blessed among women, there is no doubt about that. Many Protestant churches should put more emphasis on her. I believe it odd, that on Mother’s Day, Mary the mother of Jesus is rarely a topic.

    Martin Luther left the Roman church, however upon doing so, he took with him the idea that Mary was sinless, among many other beliefs of the Roman church.

  • Grace

    “Whoever possesses a good (firm) faith, says the Hail Mary without danger! Whoever is weak in faith can utter no Hail Mary without danger to his salvation.” Martin Luther (Sermon, March 11, 1523).

    “is weak in faith can utter no Hail Mary without danger to his salvation.” – danger of Salvation? – without Mary? – Jesus didn’t say, repent believe on me and my mother and thou shalt be saved –

    For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
    John 3:16

    But we believe that through the grace of the LORD Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. Acts1 5:11

    Mary’s name is never mentioned in the Scriptures as part of ones Salvation. Mary was blessed among women, there is no doubt about that. Many Protestant churches should put more emphasis on her. I believe it odd, that on Mother’s Day, Mary the mother of Jesus is rarely a topic.

    Martin Luther left the Roman church, however upon doing so, he took with him the idea that Mary was sinless, among many other beliefs of the Roman church.

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    Grace,
    once again you take out of context things that Luther has said. And in this point it seems you understand not what Luther is saying at all. But that comes as no surprise as you fail to understand what you contemporaries are saying.
    But applying the weaker brother passages to the dogma surrounding Mary as you are correcting the abuses of the Roman Catholic church and trying not to scandalize your congregation and people Carlstadt, seems to me to be a very wise choice to make.
    Of course I believe there are plenty of Catholics going to heaven despite their Hail Marys even today. I just don’t agree with that doctrine. I believe there are some from calvary chapel going to heaven despite the fact they don’t baptize their infants as God commands in Acts 2:38-39 also. I still think they should baptize infants.

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    Grace,
    once again you take out of context things that Luther has said. And in this point it seems you understand not what Luther is saying at all. But that comes as no surprise as you fail to understand what you contemporaries are saying.
    But applying the weaker brother passages to the dogma surrounding Mary as you are correcting the abuses of the Roman Catholic church and trying not to scandalize your congregation and people Carlstadt, seems to me to be a very wise choice to make.
    Of course I believe there are plenty of Catholics going to heaven despite their Hail Marys even today. I just don’t agree with that doctrine. I believe there are some from calvary chapel going to heaven despite the fact they don’t baptize their infants as God commands in Acts 2:38-39 also. I still think they should baptize infants.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Grace, in your tireless witch-hunt for quotes with which to defame Martin Luther, don’t you think it might be in your best interest to both read and comprehend what the quotes you unearth mean?

    Luther is saying that, for the weak Christian, saying the “Hail Mary” would be a stumbling block for him. So you appear to agree with him.

    Oh, also, it doesn’t matter what you say. You and I are not going to change our minds, and your church was founded by a false prophet.

    Also, I believe Louis has a question for you. Something about excommunication, I believe?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Grace, in your tireless witch-hunt for quotes with which to defame Martin Luther, don’t you think it might be in your best interest to both read and comprehend what the quotes you unearth mean?

    Luther is saying that, for the weak Christian, saying the “Hail Mary” would be a stumbling block for him. So you appear to agree with him.

    Oh, also, it doesn’t matter what you say. You and I are not going to change our minds, and your church was founded by a false prophet.

    Also, I believe Louis has a question for you. Something about excommunication, I believe?

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Grace:

    I have a question for you.

    The rest of you:

    Any takers at 568:1? ;)

    Todd: Not really.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Grace:

    I have a question for you.

    The rest of you:

    Any takers at 568:1? ;)

    Todd: Not really.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    Louis, if you truly hold to the idea that Dispensationalism is wrong because it’s the “new kid on the block”, then consistency demands you recant at Worms and Trent by your own logic. Got it? Luther’s was at that point the new theology.

    Or, to put things differently, since when does theology tested over 180 years qualify as “new and untested”? I would figure that after a few lifetimes, the novelty ought to wear off. (never mind hints of the same in the Scriptures–Darby and Scofield would vigorously debate how “new” their theology was with you if they were still on this earth)

    And again, let’s try a dispensationalist, not a preterist, if you want to make a point. The ugly reality is that, as many comments here have made very clear, too many are willing to misrepresent the theological views of their opponents. To prove points, you use PRIMARY sources.

    Finally, it’s entirely appropriate to define “orthodox” by the subset of things which impact salvation and the Word of God; if it were not so, our gracious host would not be employed by PHC. Let’s not mis-define “orthodox” as “not Lutheran,” because Lutherans of all people ought to be able to admit that people of other churches can get to Heaven.

    Again, if not, our host’s employment at PHC is utter blasphemy.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    Louis, if you truly hold to the idea that Dispensationalism is wrong because it’s the “new kid on the block”, then consistency demands you recant at Worms and Trent by your own logic. Got it? Luther’s was at that point the new theology.

    Or, to put things differently, since when does theology tested over 180 years qualify as “new and untested”? I would figure that after a few lifetimes, the novelty ought to wear off. (never mind hints of the same in the Scriptures–Darby and Scofield would vigorously debate how “new” their theology was with you if they were still on this earth)

    And again, let’s try a dispensationalist, not a preterist, if you want to make a point. The ugly reality is that, as many comments here have made very clear, too many are willing to misrepresent the theological views of their opponents. To prove points, you use PRIMARY sources.

    Finally, it’s entirely appropriate to define “orthodox” by the subset of things which impact salvation and the Word of God; if it were not so, our gracious host would not be employed by PHC. Let’s not mis-define “orthodox” as “not Lutheran,” because Lutherans of all people ought to be able to admit that people of other churches can get to Heaven.

    Again, if not, our host’s employment at PHC is utter blasphemy.

  • WebMonk

    Hey guys, guys. Do you want a repeat of whatever post it was that got 400+ comments and was apparently so vitriolic that Veith wrote a post about it.

    Sure, Grace is a hypocrite and a moron who lacks basic reading comprehension skills, Lutheranism was founded by a guy with bad doctrine, Smith was a false prophet, dispensationalism is outside the bounds of acceptable Christian belief, etc, etc, etc.

    Are all those things worth building up to the same sort of comment war and nastiness that just ended a week or so ago?

  • WebMonk

    Hey guys, guys. Do you want a repeat of whatever post it was that got 400+ comments and was apparently so vitriolic that Veith wrote a post about it.

    Sure, Grace is a hypocrite and a moron who lacks basic reading comprehension skills, Lutheranism was founded by a guy with bad doctrine, Smith was a false prophet, dispensationalism is outside the bounds of acceptable Christian belief, etc, etc, etc.

    Are all those things worth building up to the same sort of comment war and nastiness that just ended a week or so ago?

  • Grace

    42 Bike Bubba -

    Excellent points!

  • Grace

    42 Bike Bubba -

    Excellent points!

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Bike – read history. Luther wasn’t stating anything new – he was restating (highlighting) things that went back all the way to the church fathers. Take transubstantiation for instance. It only entered into the Church at the Fourth Lateran council in 1215. A mere 165 years later Wycliffe (for instance) publically opposed it etc etc. In essence, it was Rome who was steadily introducing new doctrine, thus Lutherans can say that Rome seperated from us, not we from Rome.

    Also Bike: I do not own any dispensationalist literature anymore. However, you are welcome to post some, so that I (we) can interact with it, or email me and we can take this discussion/debate/fight :) off Gene’s blog – the address you can use is thescylding at gmail etc.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Bike – read history. Luther wasn’t stating anything new – he was restating (highlighting) things that went back all the way to the church fathers. Take transubstantiation for instance. It only entered into the Church at the Fourth Lateran council in 1215. A mere 165 years later Wycliffe (for instance) publically opposed it etc etc. In essence, it was Rome who was steadily introducing new doctrine, thus Lutherans can say that Rome seperated from us, not we from Rome.

    Also Bike: I do not own any dispensationalist literature anymore. However, you are welcome to post some, so that I (we) can interact with it, or email me and we can take this discussion/debate/fight :) off Gene’s blog – the address you can use is thescylding at gmail etc.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Webmonk – she started it, she started it, I was merely….. :) :)

    Seriously though, if people keep on posting inflammatory nonsense, can you blame me if I react? The old Adam enjoys it so….

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Webmonk – she started it, she started it, I was merely….. :) :)

    Seriously though, if people keep on posting inflammatory nonsense, can you blame me if I react? The old Adam enjoys it so….

  • Grace

    Many of you people believe that Martin Luther, his beliefs, his Roman Catholic ideas have been hidden, that no one knows or understands his stance. WRONG! – we do. It’s time you understood this most important fact.

    It’s not hard to give you some ‘food for thought’ through a multitude of words Martin Luther wrote. You may not like the quotes, but they stand out like a sore thumb, when reading his works. This too, is not lost on Evangelical Believers – yes Born Again Believers, those people you like to attack and call “liver shivers” as children in a playground do when they become upset, throwing tantrums.

  • Grace

    Many of you people believe that Martin Luther, his beliefs, his Roman Catholic ideas have been hidden, that no one knows or understands his stance. WRONG! – we do. It’s time you understood this most important fact.

    It’s not hard to give you some ‘food for thought’ through a multitude of words Martin Luther wrote. You may not like the quotes, but they stand out like a sore thumb, when reading his works. This too, is not lost on Evangelical Believers – yes Born Again Believers, those people you like to attack and call “liver shivers” as children in a playground do when they become upset, throwing tantrums.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Make that 568+47 = 615:1

    Grace – liver shiver refers to the tendency of some (not all) evangelicals to ascribe their Salvation to mysterious feelings, or drives etc etc. It does NOT refer to what Jesus told Nicodemus, but to overt emotionalism a la Finney, the sawdust trail, and a host of other chenaningans which happened (especially in the Burnt Over District), and keeps on happening today. I don’t dispute the existence of revival, but the target here is the emotinalism inherent to Revivalism, for instance.

    Oh, yes, I think I had a question for you, I just have to remember what it is…

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Make that 568+47 = 615:1

    Grace – liver shiver refers to the tendency of some (not all) evangelicals to ascribe their Salvation to mysterious feelings, or drives etc etc. It does NOT refer to what Jesus told Nicodemus, but to overt emotionalism a la Finney, the sawdust trail, and a host of other chenaningans which happened (especially in the Burnt Over District), and keeps on happening today. I don’t dispute the existence of revival, but the target here is the emotinalism inherent to Revivalism, for instance.

    Oh, yes, I think I had a question for you, I just have to remember what it is…

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    Grace,
    Lutherans don’t think any of Luther’s writings are hidden. In fact Lutherans are quite upfront about publishing all his writings warts and all. We do not desire to put a Halo around Luther. We honor the man to be sure, but we don’t varnish him. Which is why most of the stuff you quote at us has been translated by Lutherans. And even now we endeavor to translate and publish more.

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    Grace,
    Lutherans don’t think any of Luther’s writings are hidden. In fact Lutherans are quite upfront about publishing all his writings warts and all. We do not desire to put a Halo around Luther. We honor the man to be sure, but we don’t varnish him. Which is why most of the stuff you quote at us has been translated by Lutherans. And even now we endeavor to translate and publish more.

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    Grace,
    Louis has a question for you.
    Webmonk, we endeavor to have a conversation that is all. So far it has been tame. Though I think I am going to go teach a Catechism class, and probably won’t contribute much more until Grace answers a question, maybe the one Louis asked, but really any question would be great.

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    Grace,
    Louis has a question for you.
    Webmonk, we endeavor to have a conversation that is all. So far it has been tame. Though I think I am going to go teach a Catechism class, and probably won’t contribute much more until Grace answers a question, maybe the one Louis asked, but really any question would be great.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Bror – apparently, Chapelites etc are wartless. Maybe they have a spell to say during full moon or something that can help us :) :)

    Grace: Oh, now I remember – the question was posed way back at #11.

    Any takers at 618:1?

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Bror – apparently, Chapelites etc are wartless. Maybe they have a spell to say during full moon or something that can help us :) :)

    Grace: Oh, now I remember – the question was posed way back at #11.

    Any takers at 618:1?

  • Grace

    “One should honor Mary as she herself wished and as she expressed it in the Magnificat. She praised God for his deeds. How then can we praise her? The true honor of Mary is the honor of God, the praise of God’s grace . . . Mary is nothing for the sake of herself, but for the sake of Christ . . . Mary does not wish that we come to her, but through her to God.” — Martin Luther (Explanation of the Magnificat, 1521).”

    “through her” (Mary) ? – - there is but one mediator and that is Christ Jesus, there is no other. Wherever did Martin Luther get the idea that anyone go through Mary to God? ANSWER: the Roman Catholic Church.

    For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
    1 Timothy 2:5

  • Grace

    “One should honor Mary as she herself wished and as she expressed it in the Magnificat. She praised God for his deeds. How then can we praise her? The true honor of Mary is the honor of God, the praise of God’s grace . . . Mary is nothing for the sake of herself, but for the sake of Christ . . . Mary does not wish that we come to her, but through her to God.” — Martin Luther (Explanation of the Magnificat, 1521).”

    “through her” (Mary) ? – - there is but one mediator and that is Christ Jesus, there is no other. Wherever did Martin Luther get the idea that anyone go through Mary to God? ANSWER: the Roman Catholic Church.

    For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
    1 Timothy 2:5

  • Dennis Peskey

    Whatever happened to the Crystal Cathedral? Oh ya, something about a Chapter 11 filing. Remember the Post!
    Peace (please)
    Dennis

  • Dennis Peskey

    Whatever happened to the Crystal Cathedral? Oh ya, something about a Chapter 11 filing. Remember the Post!
    Peace (please)
    Dennis

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Dennis – all threads have a tendency to meander. That’s three-quarters the fun of blogging.

    Grace – hmm – oh never mind, you’re ignoring me (and Todd and…) as usual. But if you have a chance – the question? Pretty please? With knobs on?

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Dennis – all threads have a tendency to meander. That’s three-quarters the fun of blogging.

    Grace – hmm – oh never mind, you’re ignoring me (and Todd and…) as usual. But if you have a chance – the question? Pretty please? With knobs on?

  • Grace

    “LIVER SHIVERS” ?

    I would imagine Paul had a real experience on the Damascus road – emotional, shocking, revelation – more than words, to define Saul/Paul’s body at the time, and then the blindness. The LORD certainly had his attention.

    3 And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven:

    4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?

    5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

    6 And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.

    7 And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.

    8 And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus.

    9 And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink.

    10 And there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord.
    Acts 9

    I believe there are times when the LORD gets our attention through means, which cause us to fall to our knees, trembling and asking his forgiveness, mercy and strength – and YES it’s an emotional time. The times one’s loved one is healed, a surgery is performed and the outcome could have only come from the LORD, we thank the LORD with grateful hearts, and tear stained cheeks, crying out to him with great emotion. Reading the Word of God, feeling great love and emotion for our Savior, grateful for our Salvation.

  • Grace

    “LIVER SHIVERS” ?

    I would imagine Paul had a real experience on the Damascus road – emotional, shocking, revelation – more than words, to define Saul/Paul’s body at the time, and then the blindness. The LORD certainly had his attention.

    3 And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven:

    4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?

    5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

    6 And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do.

    7 And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.

    8 And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus.

    9 And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink.

    10 And there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord.
    Acts 9

    I believe there are times when the LORD gets our attention through means, which cause us to fall to our knees, trembling and asking his forgiveness, mercy and strength – and YES it’s an emotional time. The times one’s loved one is healed, a surgery is performed and the outcome could have only come from the LORD, we thank the LORD with grateful hearts, and tear stained cheeks, crying out to him with great emotion. Reading the Word of God, feeling great love and emotion for our Savior, grateful for our Salvation.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Grace – there is a difference between emotions, and emotionalism. I think you can aprreciate that?

    And Grace – the question? Or are you to scared to answer? Is the answer to uncomfortable?

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Grace – there is a difference between emotions, and emotionalism. I think you can aprreciate that?

    And Grace – the question? Or are you to scared to answer? Is the answer to uncomfortable?

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    I meant “too uncomfortable”.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    I meant “too uncomfortable”.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Grace, I really wish I knew why you comment here. I really do.

    You don’t want to answer anyone’s questions. When people try to engage you, you brush them off by saying that no one is going to change anyone’s mind. You insist on making points that are irrelevant to even the meandering conversation (e.g. what Luther once said about something that no one is discussing). You frequently misunderstand the arguments others are making, or even the quotes you dig up to prove some point no one is disputing. You refuse to play by the same rules that you expect of others. And you refuse to not comment.

    Why should your behavior not be simply dismissed as purely trollish?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Grace, I really wish I knew why you comment here. I really do.

    You don’t want to answer anyone’s questions. When people try to engage you, you brush them off by saying that no one is going to change anyone’s mind. You insist on making points that are irrelevant to even the meandering conversation (e.g. what Luther once said about something that no one is discussing). You frequently misunderstand the arguments others are making, or even the quotes you dig up to prove some point no one is disputing. You refuse to play by the same rules that you expect of others. And you refuse to not comment.

    Why should your behavior not be simply dismissed as purely trollish?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Dennis (@53), the way to steer this conversation back to the topic you wish to discuss is to make a comment yourself about that thing you wish to discuss. Telling people to stick to the topic won’t work, as it gives us nothing to respond to, and such a comment will itself be off-topic.

    If there were more to say about the Crystal Cathedral, people would be talking about it.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Dennis (@53), the way to steer this conversation back to the topic you wish to discuss is to make a comment yourself about that thing you wish to discuss. Telling people to stick to the topic won’t work, as it gives us nothing to respond to, and such a comment will itself be off-topic.

    If there were more to say about the Crystal Cathedral, people would be talking about it.

  • Dennis Peskey

    Todd – A fair admonishment. Since I do not wish to join the “meandering” (Louis #54 – which, unabated will rival the Exodus in time and futility), I shall profer the following points.

    1. The Crystal Cathedral was never founded on christianity. By the intentional avoidance (if not outright antinomianism) of sin, the possibility of understanding the Gospel did not exist.

    2. Having listened to the elder Pr. Schuller, his “positivity gospel” was little more than the protestant work ethic – pull yourself up by your bootstaps.

    3. His final sermon – preached during Holy Week – focused on the Cross. In the introduction of this sermon, Pr. Schuller admitted he had never preached on the Cross before. Since he retired after this sermon, his record remains intact – he never did preach on the Cross.

    4. The CC Coup executed by his daughter to oust her brother signaled the final loosing of the straw house. While the younger Schuller did attempt a return to biblical teachings, his sister would have no part in this and lead the struggle against him.

  • Dennis Peskey

    Todd – A fair admonishment. Since I do not wish to join the “meandering” (Louis #54 – which, unabated will rival the Exodus in time and futility), I shall profer the following points.

    1. The Crystal Cathedral was never founded on christianity. By the intentional avoidance (if not outright antinomianism) of sin, the possibility of understanding the Gospel did not exist.

    2. Having listened to the elder Pr. Schuller, his “positivity gospel” was little more than the protestant work ethic – pull yourself up by your bootstaps.

    3. His final sermon – preached during Holy Week – focused on the Cross. In the introduction of this sermon, Pr. Schuller admitted he had never preached on the Cross before. Since he retired after this sermon, his record remains intact – he never did preach on the Cross.

    4. The CC Coup executed by his daughter to oust her brother signaled the final loosing of the straw house. While the younger Schuller did attempt a return to biblical teachings, his sister would have no part in this and lead the struggle against him.

  • Tom Hering

    Grace doesn’t exist. There’s an auto-comment program running on a computer somewhere. A program that is, of course – like all automatic message generators – incapable of real communication. It can only post the same stuff over and over again whenever triggered by certain discussions, i.e., those concerning anything Evangelical or non-denominational.

  • Tom Hering

    Grace doesn’t exist. There’s an auto-comment program running on a computer somewhere. A program that is, of course – like all automatic message generators – incapable of real communication. It can only post the same stuff over and over again whenever triggered by certain discussions, i.e., those concerning anything Evangelical or non-denominational.

  • Grace

    I post very little, if at all, to anyone who continues to make slurs against Believers identifying themselves as, “Born Again” slapping the word ‘moniker’ to it, OR using foul language. Add to that a list of other personal attacks, it’s unlikely I will answer or even read their comments.

    Debate is one thing, personal attacks are another.

  • Grace

    I post very little, if at all, to anyone who continues to make slurs against Believers identifying themselves as, “Born Again” slapping the word ‘moniker’ to it, OR using foul language. Add to that a list of other personal attacks, it’s unlikely I will answer or even read their comments.

    Debate is one thing, personal attacks are another.

  • trotk

    The train of thought on this thread is remarkable. Kirk mentioned Gomorrah, Grace got upset about that because the ELCA is also sinful, Frank challenged her with the fact that her denomination is sinful too, and she claimed it was perfect.
    And then people tried to point out that it wasn’t perfect.

    But she ignored that, and instead attacked Luther.

    GRACE, NO ONE IS SAYING LUTHER IS PERFECT. THE ORIGINAL POINT THAT YOU WERE CHALLENGED WITH IS THAT YOUR CHURCH MUST TOO HAVE FLAWS. JUST ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, AND THE DISCUSSION EVAPORATES.

    By the way, a “church” preaching a gospel of self-redemption is worse than a Gomorrah.

  • trotk

    The train of thought on this thread is remarkable. Kirk mentioned Gomorrah, Grace got upset about that because the ELCA is also sinful, Frank challenged her with the fact that her denomination is sinful too, and she claimed it was perfect.
    And then people tried to point out that it wasn’t perfect.

    But she ignored that, and instead attacked Luther.

    GRACE, NO ONE IS SAYING LUTHER IS PERFECT. THE ORIGINAL POINT THAT YOU WERE CHALLENGED WITH IS THAT YOUR CHURCH MUST TOO HAVE FLAWS. JUST ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, AND THE DISCUSSION EVAPORATES.

    By the way, a “church” preaching a gospel of self-redemption is worse than a Gomorrah.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Dennis (@60), it would only be fair for me to return the favor and reply to your points (along with noting that I appreciate your wry sense of humor).

    Do you have any references for your third point? I’d not heard this story before. I might be curious to read what he had to say about the Cross.

    Did you know the Crystal Cathedral was a member of the Reformed Church in America? And that the RCA maintains full communion with the Presbyterian Church (USA), the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and the United Church of Christ?

    Finally, and I am not making this up, here is The Crystal Cathedral Vision Statement:

    To be inspired and motivated through possibility thinking to grow in a loving relationship with Jesus Christ to be the persons God dreams, desires, and designed us to be.

    Also, apropos of nothing, I’m wondering if I could get everyone here to post a comment making reference to “the ‘Born Again’ moniker” used by some Evangelical denominations.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Dennis (@60), it would only be fair for me to return the favor and reply to your points (along with noting that I appreciate your wry sense of humor).

    Do you have any references for your third point? I’d not heard this story before. I might be curious to read what he had to say about the Cross.

    Did you know the Crystal Cathedral was a member of the Reformed Church in America? And that the RCA maintains full communion with the Presbyterian Church (USA), the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and the United Church of Christ?

    Finally, and I am not making this up, here is The Crystal Cathedral Vision Statement:

    To be inspired and motivated through possibility thinking to grow in a loving relationship with Jesus Christ to be the persons God dreams, desires, and designed us to be.

    Also, apropos of nothing, I’m wondering if I could get everyone here to post a comment making reference to “the ‘Born Again’ moniker” used by some Evangelical denominations.

  • Louis

    Grace, since you obviously do not follow arguments/discussions, believe your own interpretation of whoever says what, refuse to even consider the questions others ask, believe your own interpretation of scripture without bothering to understand what others are saying – I have quote for you:

    To deceive one self is the easies thing in the world, because what we wish, we readily believe – Demosthenes.

  • Louis

    Grace, since you obviously do not follow arguments/discussions, believe your own interpretation of whoever says what, refuse to even consider the questions others ask, believe your own interpretation of scripture without bothering to understand what others are saying – I have quote for you:

    To deceive one self is the easies thing in the world, because what we wish, we readily believe – Demosthenes.

  • trotk

    Louis, she won’t read it. Instead, she will quote something about Luther’s self-deception.

  • trotk

    Louis, she won’t read it. Instead, she will quote something about Luther’s self-deception.

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.blogspot.com/ John

    Seriously, and I thought Baptist blogs had messed up comment threads. Y’all are a bunch of born again monikers, that’s all I know.

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.blogspot.com/ John

    Seriously, and I thought Baptist blogs had messed up comment threads. Y’all are a bunch of born again monikers, that’s all I know.

  • Grace

    Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts. Proverbs 21:2

  • Grace

    Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts. Proverbs 21:2

  • trotk

    GRACE

    GRACE

    GRACE

    GRACE

    The train of thought on this thread is remarkable. Kirk mentioned Gomorrah, Grace got upset about that because the ELCA is also sinful, Frank challenged her with the fact that her denomination is sinful too, and she claimed it was perfect.
    And then people tried to point out that it wasn’t perfect.

    But she ignored that, and instead attacked Luther.

    GRACE, NO ONE IS SAYING LUTHER IS PERFECT. THE ORIGINAL POINT THAT YOU WERE CHALLENGED WITH IS THAT YOUR CHURCH MUST TOO HAVE FLAWS. JUST ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, AND THE DISCUSSION EVAPORATES.

    By the way, a “church” preaching a gospel of self-redemption is worse than a Gomorrah.

  • trotk

    GRACE

    GRACE

    GRACE

    GRACE

    The train of thought on this thread is remarkable. Kirk mentioned Gomorrah, Grace got upset about that because the ELCA is also sinful, Frank challenged her with the fact that her denomination is sinful too, and she claimed it was perfect.
    And then people tried to point out that it wasn’t perfect.

    But she ignored that, and instead attacked Luther.

    GRACE, NO ONE IS SAYING LUTHER IS PERFECT. THE ORIGINAL POINT THAT YOU WERE CHALLENGED WITH IS THAT YOUR CHURCH MUST TOO HAVE FLAWS. JUST ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, AND THE DISCUSSION EVAPORATES.

    By the way, a “church” preaching a gospel of self-redemption is worse than a Gomorrah.

  • trotk

    The train of thought on this thread is remarkable. Kirk mentioned Gomorrah, Grace got upset about that because the ELCA is also sinful, Frank challenged her with the fact that her denomination is sinful too, and she claimed it was perfect.
    And then people tried to point out that it wasn’t perfect.

    But she ignored that, and instead attacked Luther.

    GRACE, NO ONE IS SAYING LUTHER IS PERFECT. THE ORIGINAL POINT THAT YOU WERE CHALLENGED WITH IS THAT YOUR CHURCH MUST TOO HAVE FLAWS. JUST ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, AND THE DISCUSSION EVAPORATES.

    By the way, a “church” preaching a gospel of self-redemption is worse than a Gomorrah.

  • trotk

    The train of thought on this thread is remarkable. Kirk mentioned Gomorrah, Grace got upset about that because the ELCA is also sinful, Frank challenged her with the fact that her denomination is sinful too, and she claimed it was perfect.
    And then people tried to point out that it wasn’t perfect.

    But she ignored that, and instead attacked Luther.

    GRACE, NO ONE IS SAYING LUTHER IS PERFECT. THE ORIGINAL POINT THAT YOU WERE CHALLENGED WITH IS THAT YOUR CHURCH MUST TOO HAVE FLAWS. JUST ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, AND THE DISCUSSION EVAPORATES.

    By the way, a “church” preaching a gospel of self-redemption is worse than a Gomorrah.

  • Dennis Peskey

    Todd (64) I personally witnessed the broadcast of Rev. Schuller’s last sermon. Normally, I’d only watch about five minutes of the CC show – but he mentioned the sermon topic as the Cross. Had to watch the entire hour. It was the most painful sermon I ever witnessed. Schuller tried to preach, to explain, to comprehend – that Cross. But he was unable to grasp what God’s Son was doing on that cross. This is what happens when you spend your entire life in denial of sin – you will become ‘good’ in your own mind and convince yourself your God. That’s probably why God immediately threw Adam and Eve out of the garden (besides that other ‘tree’ which would have doomed all of us). I seem to recall Pastor Wilken of Issues.Etc doing a half-hour segment on this sermon. I’ll see if I can find the URL link to the show.
    Peace,
    Dennis

  • Dennis Peskey

    Todd (64) I personally witnessed the broadcast of Rev. Schuller’s last sermon. Normally, I’d only watch about five minutes of the CC show – but he mentioned the sermon topic as the Cross. Had to watch the entire hour. It was the most painful sermon I ever witnessed. Schuller tried to preach, to explain, to comprehend – that Cross. But he was unable to grasp what God’s Son was doing on that cross. This is what happens when you spend your entire life in denial of sin – you will become ‘good’ in your own mind and convince yourself your God. That’s probably why God immediately threw Adam and Eve out of the garden (besides that other ‘tree’ which would have doomed all of us). I seem to recall Pastor Wilken of Issues.Etc doing a half-hour segment on this sermon. I’ll see if I can find the URL link to the show.
    Peace,
    Dennis

  • collie

    Dennis, @71 about that “other tree” – wonder if you could expand on that a little. I’ve always wondered – if Adam and Eve had eaten from the Tree of Life first, in your opinion, what would have happened? would we have had heaven on earth from the beginning, without going through the whole “fallen earth” thing? Or was mankind doomed to challenge God, try to be like God, so the question is moot?

  • collie

    Dennis, @71 about that “other tree” – wonder if you could expand on that a little. I’ve always wondered – if Adam and Eve had eaten from the Tree of Life first, in your opinion, what would have happened? would we have had heaven on earth from the beginning, without going through the whole “fallen earth” thing? Or was mankind doomed to challenge God, try to be like God, so the question is moot?

  • Dennis Peskey

    Todd – found the Issues.Etc program. Was buried in the old KFUO archives. The URL is http://kfuo.org/Issues_ETC/ie_03_06_07.htm

    The title of the sermon is “Why the Cross is the Chosen Symbol in the World’s Largest Faith.” I feel this would be more accurate if the title began “Why IS the Cross …”. When you turn the Cross into just another symbol and deny its reality – Lord have mercy on your soul.
    Peace,
    Dennis

  • Dennis Peskey

    Todd – found the Issues.Etc program. Was buried in the old KFUO archives. The URL is http://kfuo.org/Issues_ETC/ie_03_06_07.htm

    The title of the sermon is “Why the Cross is the Chosen Symbol in the World’s Largest Faith.” I feel this would be more accurate if the title began “Why IS the Cross …”. When you turn the Cross into just another symbol and deny its reality – Lord have mercy on your soul.
    Peace,
    Dennis

  • Dennis Peskey

    Collie (72) If Satan had half a brain, he would have had Adam and Eve eat of the Tree of Life first, then the Tree of Knowledge. Had they eaten of the Tree of Life, then sinned, we would have no way out of our sins. There is a little know verse in Ecclesiastes 7:1 – it states the day of our death is better than the day of our birth. While death itself is a righteous curse pronounced on all creation with the advent of sin, it also is a blessing to those who die in Christ. We pass through the shadow of the valley of death, past the Cross and enter into eternal rest with our Lord. This is the way is was in Eden and will be again after the final judgment when we walk with God in our bodies and souls united with him.

    As to what could or would have happened if Adam and Eve ate of the Tree of Life first, this is not given us to know. I do know Adam and Eve already had heaven on earth at creation – they literally walked with God, talked with God, they could gaze upon His face without fear. We are permitted a brief foretaste of the feast in the Lord’s Supper when we partake of God and share His holiness. He is literally with us in the Divine Service. He is listening to you – and I pray you are listening to him. This is what Pr. Schuller was robbing his congregation of when he prattles on about himself and how we could make ourselves better. They have been bankrupt from the onset; let them not deceive anymore.
    Peace,
    Dennis

  • Dennis Peskey

    Collie (72) If Satan had half a brain, he would have had Adam and Eve eat of the Tree of Life first, then the Tree of Knowledge. Had they eaten of the Tree of Life, then sinned, we would have no way out of our sins. There is a little know verse in Ecclesiastes 7:1 – it states the day of our death is better than the day of our birth. While death itself is a righteous curse pronounced on all creation with the advent of sin, it also is a blessing to those who die in Christ. We pass through the shadow of the valley of death, past the Cross and enter into eternal rest with our Lord. This is the way is was in Eden and will be again after the final judgment when we walk with God in our bodies and souls united with him.

    As to what could or would have happened if Adam and Eve ate of the Tree of Life first, this is not given us to know. I do know Adam and Eve already had heaven on earth at creation – they literally walked with God, talked with God, they could gaze upon His face without fear. We are permitted a brief foretaste of the feast in the Lord’s Supper when we partake of God and share His holiness. He is literally with us in the Divine Service. He is listening to you – and I pray you are listening to him. This is what Pr. Schuller was robbing his congregation of when he prattles on about himself and how we could make ourselves better. They have been bankrupt from the onset; let them not deceive anymore.
    Peace,
    Dennis

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    I am trying to understand the significance of the bankruptcy in terms of the congregation. I am not that familiar with bankruptcy or with church bankruptcy. It seems like the congregation will just keep doing what it is doing, just like any business, and the court will decide how the creditors of the congregation will be treated. The thing is, this type of default seems like the church is cheating those who in good faith provided goods and services to the congregation and the church didn’t bother to be disciplined enough to make sure it would be able to pay for what it received.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    I am trying to understand the significance of the bankruptcy in terms of the congregation. I am not that familiar with bankruptcy or with church bankruptcy. It seems like the congregation will just keep doing what it is doing, just like any business, and the court will decide how the creditors of the congregation will be treated. The thing is, this type of default seems like the church is cheating those who in good faith provided goods and services to the congregation and the church didn’t bother to be disciplined enough to make sure it would be able to pay for what it received.

  • collie

    Thank you, Dennis. Thank you for reminding me that Adam and Even already had heaven on earth. Also, your explanation in the first paragraph reminds me of Satan’s double-mindedness in driving for Jesus’ death. He wanted to kill God, yet the end result was his own (Satan’s) condemnation. You are a pastor?

  • collie

    Thank you, Dennis. Thank you for reminding me that Adam and Even already had heaven on earth. Also, your explanation in the first paragraph reminds me of Satan’s double-mindedness in driving for Jesus’ death. He wanted to kill God, yet the end result was his own (Satan’s) condemnation. You are a pastor?

  • Louis

    sg – What I am wondering is what on earth does a congregation do to spend 100 million? I wouldn’t even know where to start, other than buildings etc – but that leaves another 50 million. What? Obviously their income was enough to be able to get those loans – but if you have that kind of income, why borrow the money?

  • Louis

    sg – What I am wondering is what on earth does a congregation do to spend 100 million? I wouldn’t even know where to start, other than buildings etc – but that leaves another 50 million. What? Obviously their income was enough to be able to get those loans – but if you have that kind of income, why borrow the money?

  • fws

    denis @ 74

    I always read the account in this way:

    the fruit of the tree of life is what adam and eve ate that kept them alive. and when the angels were put in place to prevent them from eating it any longer, that is when they started dying.

    what would be wrong with this understanding.? interesting stuff.

    I think of the Food of the Holy Supper as being our new Tree of Life from He who hung on a Tree.

  • fws

    denis @ 74

    I always read the account in this way:

    the fruit of the tree of life is what adam and eve ate that kept them alive. and when the angels were put in place to prevent them from eating it any longer, that is when they started dying.

    what would be wrong with this understanding.? interesting stuff.

    I think of the Food of the Holy Supper as being our new Tree of Life from He who hung on a Tree.

  • Grace

    The Crystal Cathedral has been a sad situation for years in Southern CA. I don’t know one solid Believer who attends that church. Most of us have visited to see what it is all about, look within the building, which is very unusual, but that’s it.

  • Grace

    The Crystal Cathedral has been a sad situation for years in Southern CA. I don’t know one solid Believer who attends that church. Most of us have visited to see what it is all about, look within the building, which is very unusual, but that’s it.

  • Grace

    70 trotk

    “The train of thought on this thread is remarkable. Kirk mentioned Gomorrah, Grace got upset about that because the ELCA is also sinful, Frank challenged her with the fact that her denomination is sinful too, and she claimed it was perfect.
    And then people tried to point out that it wasn’t perfect.”

    Who is Frank?

    Trotk, no one is upset, the comment Kirk made was incorrect, which needed to be corrected, as I did in my post #8.

    Homosexuality is a sinful practice, it isn’t something to take lightly, that is ONE of the reasons Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed.

    Trotk…. don’t play the game of “she claimed it was perfect” when in fact, that is untruthful – I didn’t say that. It might work in a jr. high, but this most certainly trumps school yard antics.

  • Grace

    70 trotk

    “The train of thought on this thread is remarkable. Kirk mentioned Gomorrah, Grace got upset about that because the ELCA is also sinful, Frank challenged her with the fact that her denomination is sinful too, and she claimed it was perfect.
    And then people tried to point out that it wasn’t perfect.”

    Who is Frank?

    Trotk, no one is upset, the comment Kirk made was incorrect, which needed to be corrected, as I did in my post #8.

    Homosexuality is a sinful practice, it isn’t something to take lightly, that is ONE of the reasons Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed.

    Trotk…. don’t play the game of “she claimed it was perfect” when in fact, that is untruthful – I didn’t say that. It might work in a jr. high, but this most certainly trumps school yard antics.

  • collie

    It’s been years since I peeked at the “Hour of Power”, but one impression of the senior Robert Schuller has stuck with me. It’s when he was describing his daughters’ tragic situation where she, I think had a leg amputated. Hope I have that right. The point he made though, was that he wasn’t going to let this tragedy get to him. He even confessed to how he had to escape to the men’s room to sob, but he fought it even then, repeating some kind of positive thinking phrase.

    The message I got was, wow, I’m not even supposed to grieve when I need to? This is really hard.

  • collie

    It’s been years since I peeked at the “Hour of Power”, but one impression of the senior Robert Schuller has stuck with me. It’s when he was describing his daughters’ tragic situation where she, I think had a leg amputated. Hope I have that right. The point he made though, was that he wasn’t going to let this tragedy get to him. He even confessed to how he had to escape to the men’s room to sob, but he fought it even then, repeating some kind of positive thinking phrase.

    The message I got was, wow, I’m not even supposed to grieve when I need to? This is really hard.

  • fws

    Collie @81

    Wow Collie, that is deep.

    I think that just goes to show us that people who are all about the Law, as Schuller certainly was are certainly also full of pain. “Giddy Happy” does not seem to be a label that fits well on Pharisees , self-flagelating monks, or the Reformed legalists.

    But let´t not forget that antinomianism is not an excape from the law either. By definition it is the intensifying of it. The word L.A.W. is erased there, but the Law never can be. It does us, we don´t do it. So the Gospel now becomes a new Law that is more terrible than Law because it becomes Law without Gospel.

    So penticostals like Grace suffer alot. We observe their judgementalism and smallness and it is so easy to get mad and respond as they try to get others to respond to them. It is important to see them as loved by Our Savior and wounded and hurting. Imagine being someone who feels they are modeling their behavior after their God´s behavior like Grace is doing. What would it be like to serve such a God. It is pain we all know. We have all been there. The Old Adam of all of us is STILL there with her. This is our point of solidarity with her and where we are called to bear each other´s burden. Sin.

    So what do we do? We correct their Law with the Gospel right? No. We leave them with their sch0olmaster for as long as they need it. This is what our Lord did with them: “Ok. I agree. Do that and you will live!” We just try to stay out of the Holy Spirit´s way and let the Law do them even as they try to do the Law.

    The problem with an antinomian like Grace is that she believes that the Law-turned-Gospel-arsenic will be like cancer medicine, extremely toxic, painful with lots of painful side effects. But if we trust the Pastor/Doctor and obediently take this poison, maybe we can make the cancer of sin go into remission if we take enough of it. Maybe it will kill the cancer of sin before it kills the patient.

    And with the medicine in this dosage, it is useless to us and others because we don´t have any energy left over to serve others. We are too busy trying to get better and cope with all those side effects. So we are stuck on Sacrifice with nothing left over to do Mercy.

    Jesus delivers the only dosage of that medicine the Law that is prescribed by God. That is only a dosage strong enough to really do what it is suppose to do: kill the patient.

    We need to let the Law do it´s work painful as it is to watch in that we can fully empathize when we see others suffering in that way.

  • fws

    Collie @81

    Wow Collie, that is deep.

    I think that just goes to show us that people who are all about the Law, as Schuller certainly was are certainly also full of pain. “Giddy Happy” does not seem to be a label that fits well on Pharisees , self-flagelating monks, or the Reformed legalists.

    But let´t not forget that antinomianism is not an excape from the law either. By definition it is the intensifying of it. The word L.A.W. is erased there, but the Law never can be. It does us, we don´t do it. So the Gospel now becomes a new Law that is more terrible than Law because it becomes Law without Gospel.

    So penticostals like Grace suffer alot. We observe their judgementalism and smallness and it is so easy to get mad and respond as they try to get others to respond to them. It is important to see them as loved by Our Savior and wounded and hurting. Imagine being someone who feels they are modeling their behavior after their God´s behavior like Grace is doing. What would it be like to serve such a God. It is pain we all know. We have all been there. The Old Adam of all of us is STILL there with her. This is our point of solidarity with her and where we are called to bear each other´s burden. Sin.

    So what do we do? We correct their Law with the Gospel right? No. We leave them with their sch0olmaster for as long as they need it. This is what our Lord did with them: “Ok. I agree. Do that and you will live!” We just try to stay out of the Holy Spirit´s way and let the Law do them even as they try to do the Law.

    The problem with an antinomian like Grace is that she believes that the Law-turned-Gospel-arsenic will be like cancer medicine, extremely toxic, painful with lots of painful side effects. But if we trust the Pastor/Doctor and obediently take this poison, maybe we can make the cancer of sin go into remission if we take enough of it. Maybe it will kill the cancer of sin before it kills the patient.

    And with the medicine in this dosage, it is useless to us and others because we don´t have any energy left over to serve others. We are too busy trying to get better and cope with all those side effects. So we are stuck on Sacrifice with nothing left over to do Mercy.

    Jesus delivers the only dosage of that medicine the Law that is prescribed by God. That is only a dosage strong enough to really do what it is suppose to do: kill the patient.

    We need to let the Law do it´s work painful as it is to watch in that we can fully empathize when we see others suffering in that way.

  • http://enterthevein.wordpress.com J. Dean

    Sounds like the Schullers weren’t “positive” enough about their church finances!

  • http://enterthevein.wordpress.com J. Dean

    Sounds like the Schullers weren’t “positive” enough about their church finances!

  • Louis

    Grace,

    Frank is fws’ first name.

  • Louis

    Grace,

    Frank is fws’ first name.

  • trotk

    Calvary Chapel Churches don’t have homosexual pastors, nor do they allow women to pastor a church –
    Grace, when challenged on whether your church had flaws, you said,
    “Anyone, and that includes homosexuals are welcome to attend, and encouraged. However, they are not in any sort of leadership position.

    Calvary Chapel Churches are very prudent and careful when it comes to spending money, they always have been.”

    If you told me that I was a sinner, and I respond to you by not answering your statement, and instead listed the ways that I was righteous, it would be in effect a claim to be perfect.

    It isn’t a school yard antics. It is actually reading the challenge and your response.

    Again, if you had acknowledged that Calvary Chapel was flawed, this whole conversation wouldn’t have occurred.

    Can you admit it? Are you capable of saying that your church is sinful as an institution (not just that sinful people go there)?

    I don’t think your pride will let you.

  • trotk

    Calvary Chapel Churches don’t have homosexual pastors, nor do they allow women to pastor a church –
    Grace, when challenged on whether your church had flaws, you said,
    “Anyone, and that includes homosexuals are welcome to attend, and encouraged. However, they are not in any sort of leadership position.

    Calvary Chapel Churches are very prudent and careful when it comes to spending money, they always have been.”

    If you told me that I was a sinner, and I respond to you by not answering your statement, and instead listed the ways that I was righteous, it would be in effect a claim to be perfect.

    It isn’t a school yard antics. It is actually reading the challenge and your response.

    Again, if you had acknowledged that Calvary Chapel was flawed, this whole conversation wouldn’t have occurred.

    Can you admit it? Are you capable of saying that your church is sinful as an institution (not just that sinful people go there)?

    I don’t think your pride will let you.

  • collie

    Hey fws@82, you’re the one with really deep thoughts! I always enjoy reading your posts, but I usually have to read them at least 2 or 3 times to get everything out of them because there is so much there. re: Grace – I agree with you. I confess I don’t like her very much right now, BUT I am striving to LOVE her as Jesus has commanded me. Dear Lord help me!

  • collie

    Hey fws@82, you’re the one with really deep thoughts! I always enjoy reading your posts, but I usually have to read them at least 2 or 3 times to get everything out of them because there is so much there. re: Grace – I agree with you. I confess I don’t like her very much right now, BUT I am striving to LOVE her as Jesus has commanded me. Dear Lord help me!

  • trotk

    Excuse me, things got out of order:

    Grace, when challenged on whether your church had flaws, you said,
    “Calvary Chapel Churches don’t have homosexual pastors, nor do they allow women to pastor a church –

    Anyone, and that includes homosexuals are welcome to attend, and encouraged. However, they are not in any sort of leadership position.

    Calvary Chapel Churches are very prudent and careful when it comes to spending money, they always have been.”

    If you told me that I was a sinner, and I respond to you by not answering your statement, and instead listed the ways that I was righteous, it would be in effect a claim to be perfect.

    It isn’t a school yard antics. It is actually reading the challenge and your response.

    Again, if you had acknowledged that Calvary Chapel was flawed, this whole conversation wouldn’t have occurred.

    Can you admit it? Are you capable of saying that your church is sinful as an institution (not just that sinful people go there)?

    I don’t think your pride will let you.

  • trotk

    Excuse me, things got out of order:

    Grace, when challenged on whether your church had flaws, you said,
    “Calvary Chapel Churches don’t have homosexual pastors, nor do they allow women to pastor a church –

    Anyone, and that includes homosexuals are welcome to attend, and encouraged. However, they are not in any sort of leadership position.

    Calvary Chapel Churches are very prudent and careful when it comes to spending money, they always have been.”

    If you told me that I was a sinner, and I respond to you by not answering your statement, and instead listed the ways that I was righteous, it would be in effect a claim to be perfect.

    It isn’t a school yard antics. It is actually reading the challenge and your response.

    Again, if you had acknowledged that Calvary Chapel was flawed, this whole conversation wouldn’t have occurred.

    Can you admit it? Are you capable of saying that your church is sinful as an institution (not just that sinful people go there)?

    I don’t think your pride will let you.

  • The Jones

    I’m so sad about this, I could cry. Okay. I didn’t cry. And now I’m over it.

  • The Jones

    I’m so sad about this, I could cry. Okay. I didn’t cry. And now I’m over it.

  • fws

    trotky @ 87

    “Can you admit it? Are you capable of saying that your church is sinful as an institution (not just that sinful people go there)?

    I don’t think your pride will let you.”

    No that´s not it Trotky. She really believes that her salvation depends upon it. There has to be a group of christians whose organization is not flawed that she can attach herself to, or everything she believes is a lie because then all that would be left is what? ….just blind faith…..

    We Lutherans can do the same thing with doctrinal purity or avoiding “willful sinning” to be certain we are not reprobate. So we don´t get off the hook either.

    Even the greatest gifts, such as pure doctrine, when they become an end unto themselves, can to the great harm of ourselves and others. We cry out “Lord have Mercy!”

  • fws

    trotky @ 87

    “Can you admit it? Are you capable of saying that your church is sinful as an institution (not just that sinful people go there)?

    I don’t think your pride will let you.”

    No that´s not it Trotky. She really believes that her salvation depends upon it. There has to be a group of christians whose organization is not flawed that she can attach herself to, or everything she believes is a lie because then all that would be left is what? ….just blind faith…..

    We Lutherans can do the same thing with doctrinal purity or avoiding “willful sinning” to be certain we are not reprobate. So we don´t get off the hook either.

    Even the greatest gifts, such as pure doctrine, when they become an end unto themselves, can to the great harm of ourselves and others. We cry out “Lord have Mercy!”

  • fws

    Even the greatest gifts, such as pure doctrine, when they become an end unto themselves, can to the great harm of ourselves and others. We cry out “Lord have Mercy!”

    How? Everything we do in church, including defending and teaching God´s Word and administering the Sacraments and celebrating the Holy Liturgy are earthly kingdom things.

    We confound law and gospel and make these into sacrifices and idolatry when we start to think that doing these things require faith. Then Lutheran and Christian = faith + something we can do.

    They require instead the discipline of mortification of the Old Adam. That is OUR part. It is about works and not faith in service to our neighbor´s deepest need: to hear Jesus and sit at his feet.

    In, with and under all that sin-ridden effort of believers is God´s part: Implanting the seed of faith in the goats and weeds and rocky soil of Old Adams in us believers and in our beloved pagan neighbors.

    Bread, Wine, Water, Palm-on-pate-absolution, sinful pastors leading a sinful priesthood of believers busy-at-rest in intercessory prayer. All visible, earthly kingdom things that will perish with Christ in , with and under them all.

    Salt and yeast cannot be seen. This is a mark of Heavenly Kingdom things.

  • fws

    Even the greatest gifts, such as pure doctrine, when they become an end unto themselves, can to the great harm of ourselves and others. We cry out “Lord have Mercy!”

    How? Everything we do in church, including defending and teaching God´s Word and administering the Sacraments and celebrating the Holy Liturgy are earthly kingdom things.

    We confound law and gospel and make these into sacrifices and idolatry when we start to think that doing these things require faith. Then Lutheran and Christian = faith + something we can do.

    They require instead the discipline of mortification of the Old Adam. That is OUR part. It is about works and not faith in service to our neighbor´s deepest need: to hear Jesus and sit at his feet.

    In, with and under all that sin-ridden effort of believers is God´s part: Implanting the seed of faith in the goats and weeds and rocky soil of Old Adams in us believers and in our beloved pagan neighbors.

    Bread, Wine, Water, Palm-on-pate-absolution, sinful pastors leading a sinful priesthood of believers busy-at-rest in intercessory prayer. All visible, earthly kingdom things that will perish with Christ in , with and under them all.

    Salt and yeast cannot be seen. This is a mark of Heavenly Kingdom things.

  • Dan Kempin

    Grace, @19, 24, 33, 38, and 52.

    You have thrown down some Luther quotes and, in all fairness, no one has responded to them. Let me do so briefly.

    First, to say that Luther wrote copiously is an understatement. To plunge into his published writings and come up with something that is in error or shocking is not particularly difficult, (especially since many of those instances have been earmarked for debates such as this.) It is important to clarify that “Lutherans” do not teach or believe that Luther was inspired or inerrant, nor do we feel bound to support (or defend, for that matter) everything he said.

    It is further the case that it took time for the full implications of his central insight (justification) to seep through to all of the implications. Thus in his earlier writings, Luther often speaks from his Roman Catholic background in ways that he later repudiates.

    You assert in post #24 that Luther believed in the sinless state of Mary based on the snippet of a quote, but the quote does not even finish the sentence. Does he go on to repudiate it in the very sermon you quote? I cannot say, since you did not cite the reference fully (perhaps becaue Dave Armstrong doesn’t cite it fully), I was not able to look it up easily myself. A book title or volume number would be helpful. Nevertheless, I am able to cite Luther more fully in response:

    “Therefore, when we preach faith, that we should worship nothing but God alone, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, as we say in the Creed: “I believe in God the Father almighty and in Jesus Christ,” then we are remaining in the temple at Jerusalem. Again, “This is my beloved Son; listen to him” [Matt. 17:5]. “You will find him in a manger” [cf. Luke 2:12]. He alone does it. But reason says the opposite: What, us? Are we to worship only Christ? Indeed, shouldn’t we also honor the holy mother of Christ? She is the woman who bruised the head of the serpent.2 Hear us, Mary, for try Son so honors thee that he can refuse thee nothing. Here Bernard went too far in his “Homilies on the Gospel ‘Missus est Angelus.’ ”3 God has commanded that we should honor the parents; therefore I will call upon Mary. She will intercede for me with the Son, and the Son with the Father, who will listen to the Son. So you have the picture of God as angry and Christ as judge; Mary shows to Christ her breast and Christ shows his wounds to the wrathful Father. That’s the kind of thing this comely bride, the wisdom of reason cooks up: Mary is the mother of Christ, surely Christ will listen to her; Christ is a stern judge, therefore I will call upon St. George and St. Christopher.
    No, we have been by God’s command baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit . . .
    Luther, M. (1999, c1959). Vol. 51: Luther’s works, vol. 51 : Sermons I (J. J. Pelikan, H. C. Oswald & H. T. Lehmann, Ed.). Luther’s Works (Vol. 51, Page 375). Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

    With regard to your assertion at #19, you are misunderstanding the context. Luther is here discussing the “greatness” of sin, if you will–there is no sin that is too great for forgiveness. This “committing murder a thousand times a day” does not refer to willful, repeated sin. I already discussed and clarified the Lutheran understanding of this with you based on Hebrews 10.

    The quote at #33 is unfair. Nothing stated there that is more or less than personal opinion.

    The quote at #38 was–forgive me–just sloppy. You misread it. He said that one with a weak faith could NOT call upon Mary without danger to their salvation.

    With regard to the quote at #52, I hesitate to respond. I don’t have time right now to look it up and see the full context, and I frankly don’t trust the way that Dave Armstrong quotes Luther. This I can say with confidence, though: I could assemble a formidable list of Luther quotes clarifying that salvation is in Christ alone and not through the medium of Mary. Such an exercise would make a post so long that it would make Fws truly envious. (That’s for you, buddy, just in case you read this!)

    I do want to thank you, though, for actually bringing Luther into the debate. I would encourage you to read some of his works as a whole. You might be pleasantly surprised.

  • Dan Kempin

    Grace, @19, 24, 33, 38, and 52.

    You have thrown down some Luther quotes and, in all fairness, no one has responded to them. Let me do so briefly.

    First, to say that Luther wrote copiously is an understatement. To plunge into his published writings and come up with something that is in error or shocking is not particularly difficult, (especially since many of those instances have been earmarked for debates such as this.) It is important to clarify that “Lutherans” do not teach or believe that Luther was inspired or inerrant, nor do we feel bound to support (or defend, for that matter) everything he said.

    It is further the case that it took time for the full implications of his central insight (justification) to seep through to all of the implications. Thus in his earlier writings, Luther often speaks from his Roman Catholic background in ways that he later repudiates.

    You assert in post #24 that Luther believed in the sinless state of Mary based on the snippet of a quote, but the quote does not even finish the sentence. Does he go on to repudiate it in the very sermon you quote? I cannot say, since you did not cite the reference fully (perhaps becaue Dave Armstrong doesn’t cite it fully), I was not able to look it up easily myself. A book title or volume number would be helpful. Nevertheless, I am able to cite Luther more fully in response:

    “Therefore, when we preach faith, that we should worship nothing but God alone, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, as we say in the Creed: “I believe in God the Father almighty and in Jesus Christ,” then we are remaining in the temple at Jerusalem. Again, “This is my beloved Son; listen to him” [Matt. 17:5]. “You will find him in a manger” [cf. Luke 2:12]. He alone does it. But reason says the opposite: What, us? Are we to worship only Christ? Indeed, shouldn’t we also honor the holy mother of Christ? She is the woman who bruised the head of the serpent.2 Hear us, Mary, for try Son so honors thee that he can refuse thee nothing. Here Bernard went too far in his “Homilies on the Gospel ‘Missus est Angelus.’ ”3 God has commanded that we should honor the parents; therefore I will call upon Mary. She will intercede for me with the Son, and the Son with the Father, who will listen to the Son. So you have the picture of God as angry and Christ as judge; Mary shows to Christ her breast and Christ shows his wounds to the wrathful Father. That’s the kind of thing this comely bride, the wisdom of reason cooks up: Mary is the mother of Christ, surely Christ will listen to her; Christ is a stern judge, therefore I will call upon St. George and St. Christopher.
    No, we have been by God’s command baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit . . .
    Luther, M. (1999, c1959). Vol. 51: Luther’s works, vol. 51 : Sermons I (J. J. Pelikan, H. C. Oswald & H. T. Lehmann, Ed.). Luther’s Works (Vol. 51, Page 375). Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

    With regard to your assertion at #19, you are misunderstanding the context. Luther is here discussing the “greatness” of sin, if you will–there is no sin that is too great for forgiveness. This “committing murder a thousand times a day” does not refer to willful, repeated sin. I already discussed and clarified the Lutheran understanding of this with you based on Hebrews 10.

    The quote at #33 is unfair. Nothing stated there that is more or less than personal opinion.

    The quote at #38 was–forgive me–just sloppy. You misread it. He said that one with a weak faith could NOT call upon Mary without danger to their salvation.

    With regard to the quote at #52, I hesitate to respond. I don’t have time right now to look it up and see the full context, and I frankly don’t trust the way that Dave Armstrong quotes Luther. This I can say with confidence, though: I could assemble a formidable list of Luther quotes clarifying that salvation is in Christ alone and not through the medium of Mary. Such an exercise would make a post so long that it would make Fws truly envious. (That’s for you, buddy, just in case you read this!)

    I do want to thank you, though, for actually bringing Luther into the debate. I would encourage you to read some of his works as a whole. You might be pleasantly surprised.

  • Dan Kempin

    “It is further the case that it took time for the full implications of his central insight (justification) to seep through to all of the implications. ”

    Got that from the department of redundancy department. That’s what you get when you proof after you post. :)

  • Dan Kempin

    “It is further the case that it took time for the full implications of his central insight (justification) to seep through to all of the implications. ”

    Got that from the department of redundancy department. That’s what you get when you proof after you post. :)

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    fws
    “We Lutherans can do the same thing with doctrinal purity or avoiding “willful sinning” to be certain we are not reprobate. So we don´t get off the hook either.”
    It’s funny. I’m all for doctrinal purity. I take Paul’s admonishments to Timothy and Titus seriously in that and spend quite a bit of time paying attention to my teaching. But when I read what you wrote above I think you hit the nail on the head. At times I run into ultra confessionals or what ever you want to call them, who are willing to break fellowship with another church over a disagreement concerning the semper virgo, (But the confessions talk about it!) and they seem to be in a constant state of hysteria. It seems to me a fear that if they do something wrong, or wink at their elders for putting the Christmas Tree up in Advent, rather than chew them out for such a break in church tradition that their own salvation is in jeopardy. It is a pietism of doctrinal purity that can quite easily breed a self-righteousness of its own. I can only say this because I have been there, and return like a dog to vomit quite often. There is a need to rebuke, etc. But charity is bred by an honest soul search.

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    fws
    “We Lutherans can do the same thing with doctrinal purity or avoiding “willful sinning” to be certain we are not reprobate. So we don´t get off the hook either.”
    It’s funny. I’m all for doctrinal purity. I take Paul’s admonishments to Timothy and Titus seriously in that and spend quite a bit of time paying attention to my teaching. But when I read what you wrote above I think you hit the nail on the head. At times I run into ultra confessionals or what ever you want to call them, who are willing to break fellowship with another church over a disagreement concerning the semper virgo, (But the confessions talk about it!) and they seem to be in a constant state of hysteria. It seems to me a fear that if they do something wrong, or wink at their elders for putting the Christmas Tree up in Advent, rather than chew them out for such a break in church tradition that their own salvation is in jeopardy. It is a pietism of doctrinal purity that can quite easily breed a self-righteousness of its own. I can only say this because I have been there, and return like a dog to vomit quite often. There is a need to rebuke, etc. But charity is bred by an honest soul search.

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    Dan,
    Please join the rest of us in our boycott. Grace is not being answered because she deserves no answers. She does not want them. nor does she want to have rational conversation. We are not responding to her. That is until she responds and answers a question, preferrably Louis’s. Well I don’t know who all has joined the boycott. But that is why I hadn’t responded to any of these quotes. on this thread, and or plan not to anymore. I trust other rational souls out there can see through her b.s. and so I don’t feel a need anymore to respond to her antics.

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    Dan,
    Please join the rest of us in our boycott. Grace is not being answered because she deserves no answers. She does not want them. nor does she want to have rational conversation. We are not responding to her. That is until she responds and answers a question, preferrably Louis’s. Well I don’t know who all has joined the boycott. But that is why I hadn’t responded to any of these quotes. on this thread, and or plan not to anymore. I trust other rational souls out there can see through her b.s. and so I don’t feel a need anymore to respond to her antics.

  • trotk

    frank

    As always, I appreciate your words. For some time now I have been meaning to tell you that I have seen and understood the grace of God more deeply because of your presentation of it in small statements on this blog over the last few years. For that I am grateful, because my struggle for the entirety of my Christian life has been accepting God’s grace.

  • trotk

    frank

    As always, I appreciate your words. For some time now I have been meaning to tell you that I have seen and understood the grace of God more deeply because of your presentation of it in small statements on this blog over the last few years. For that I am grateful, because my struggle for the entirety of my Christian life has been accepting God’s grace.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Bror – yes, that is the way to deal with “discussions” of such a nature – don’t feed them! I hope I can persevere, though.

  • http://theobservationtree.blogspot.com Louis

    Bror – yes, that is the way to deal with “discussions” of such a nature – don’t feed them! I hope I can persevere, though.

  • Dan Kempin

    How ironic to see lutherans boycotting grace. And it doesn’t seem to be anyone else, just grace alone. Ha!

  • Dan Kempin

    How ironic to see lutherans boycotting grace. And it doesn’t seem to be anyone else, just grace alone. Ha!

  • fws

    trotk @ 95

    Your comment means alot to me and is encouraging.

    I am increasingly seeing that Lutheran = Law and Gospel distinction.

    We read the confessions like a systematic catalog of theology. We need to stop that. It is intended to be, even in the catechisms, a hands on demonstration of how to distinguish law and gospel when teaching any christian article.

    And we need to stop thing of Law and Gospel as a doctrine . It is a blunt instrument with only a single purpose. It is to put everything visible , tangible, sense-ible that we can do or see or touch into the Earthly kingdom of true, god pleasing earthly righteousness. This is the kingdom of Missouri. the “show me!” state. Earthly righteousness MUST must have tangible useful , utilitarian proof, that requires NO faith if we are to know something to be truly God-pleasing on earth.

    This is the entire point and goal of Law Gospel distinction. Period.

    This includes the purest things you can think to see or do including administration of word and sacrament and evangelism. No it especially includes those things. These things, along with the proclamation of even law and gospel are earthly things that will perish with the earth. (FC art VI; large catechism 7th petition).

    This is so that in the Heavenly Kingdom faith remains alone.

    Christ alone.

    http://www.thirduse.com

  • fws

    trotk @ 95

    Your comment means alot to me and is encouraging.

    I am increasingly seeing that Lutheran = Law and Gospel distinction.

    We read the confessions like a systematic catalog of theology. We need to stop that. It is intended to be, even in the catechisms, a hands on demonstration of how to distinguish law and gospel when teaching any christian article.

    And we need to stop thing of Law and Gospel as a doctrine . It is a blunt instrument with only a single purpose. It is to put everything visible , tangible, sense-ible that we can do or see or touch into the Earthly kingdom of true, god pleasing earthly righteousness. This is the kingdom of Missouri. the “show me!” state. Earthly righteousness MUST must have tangible useful , utilitarian proof, that requires NO faith if we are to know something to be truly God-pleasing on earth.

    This is the entire point and goal of Law Gospel distinction. Period.

    This includes the purest things you can think to see or do including administration of word and sacrament and evangelism. No it especially includes those things. These things, along with the proclamation of even law and gospel are earthly things that will perish with the earth. (FC art VI; large catechism 7th petition).

    This is so that in the Heavenly Kingdom faith remains alone.

    Christ alone.

    http://www.thirduse.com

  • fws

    Dan @ 97

    Who is Grace?

  • fws

    Dan @ 97

    Who is Grace?

  • Tom Hering

    Boycott? I thought our response all along was “we don’t buy that.”

  • Tom Hering

    Boycott? I thought our response all along was “we don’t buy that.”

  • Dan Kempin

    Seriously, Grace, I’d be interested in your response @91. I haven’t been a participant in the discussion as a whole, but I can’t let these quotes from Luther go unanswered.

  • Dan Kempin

    Seriously, Grace, I’d be interested in your response @91. I haven’t been a participant in the discussion as a whole, but I can’t let these quotes from Luther go unanswered.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Dan said (@101), “I can’t let these quotes from Luther go unanswered.” Hopefully you won’t mind, though, if your own statements and questions go unanswered, as Grace has shown she lacks the compunction you feel. I can’t actually recommend you read the “Rich Man and Lazarus” thread (now at a pleasant 619 comments), but if you were to, you would see that Grace routinely throws out Luther quotes and then just as routinely ignores the replies to them, whether they be explanations, clarifications, or even saying, “Yup, Luther was wrong about that, we agree.”

    As for the boycott, it’s funny. I was going to email a bunch of you about that notion. Below is, more or less, the text of my unsent email:

    I’m sure you’ve all seen me getting dragged into absolutely ridiculous discussions with Grace of late. And, to varying degrees, I’ve seen you punch the tar baby a few times, as well.

    As for myself, I say “dragged” because I’m convinced it’s futile. I’ve seen how it’s played out, over and over. I’m pretty certain which “man” in me relishes the thought of yet another non-sequitur attack from Grace that needs demolishing, and it’s not the New one. And yet. And yet.

    What I’d like to ask all of you is if it’s really wise to reply to her arguments. I’m not asking if I have been wise in replying to her arguments. By and large, I haven’t. I’m just wondering if, in your opinion, the possibility exists for any wise reply to her comments.

    That is to say, is it unloving to conclude that the best thing to do is to ignore her comments? Because yes, while my main animus likely relishes pointless quarreling, there’s a part of me that thinks that simply ignoring false doctrine doesn’t really seem to be a good idea, in general. But even if it needs to be countered, it certainly doesn’t mean I’m the one who should be doing it.

    I don’t simply want to bash on Grace (though, sinful man that I am, I have succumbed to the temptation more than once). Maybe you think I’ve made more than an ass of myself, but you wouldn’t say so in a comment to the blog.

    Ha, well, now that I’m posting it on the blog, you have my permission to say I’ve been an ass, anyhow.

    But really, is there any value in engaging someone who doesn’t want to have a discussion, who raises questions without caring what the answers are, and won’t answer your questions, either? We wouldn’t engage her if Grace were trying to sell something with her comments (which would be move overt trollism), but we feel driven to reply when what she’s selling is the idea that Lutheranism is wrong. My question is: what’s driving us? Is it the New Man acting out of love? Or is it the Old Adam, hateful and proud?

    Anyhow, might as well have this conversation out in the open.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Dan said (@101), “I can’t let these quotes from Luther go unanswered.” Hopefully you won’t mind, though, if your own statements and questions go unanswered, as Grace has shown she lacks the compunction you feel. I can’t actually recommend you read the “Rich Man and Lazarus” thread (now at a pleasant 619 comments), but if you were to, you would see that Grace routinely throws out Luther quotes and then just as routinely ignores the replies to them, whether they be explanations, clarifications, or even saying, “Yup, Luther was wrong about that, we agree.”

    As for the boycott, it’s funny. I was going to email a bunch of you about that notion. Below is, more or less, the text of my unsent email:

    I’m sure you’ve all seen me getting dragged into absolutely ridiculous discussions with Grace of late. And, to varying degrees, I’ve seen you punch the tar baby a few times, as well.

    As for myself, I say “dragged” because I’m convinced it’s futile. I’ve seen how it’s played out, over and over. I’m pretty certain which “man” in me relishes the thought of yet another non-sequitur attack from Grace that needs demolishing, and it’s not the New one. And yet. And yet.

    What I’d like to ask all of you is if it’s really wise to reply to her arguments. I’m not asking if I have been wise in replying to her arguments. By and large, I haven’t. I’m just wondering if, in your opinion, the possibility exists for any wise reply to her comments.

    That is to say, is it unloving to conclude that the best thing to do is to ignore her comments? Because yes, while my main animus likely relishes pointless quarreling, there’s a part of me that thinks that simply ignoring false doctrine doesn’t really seem to be a good idea, in general. But even if it needs to be countered, it certainly doesn’t mean I’m the one who should be doing it.

    I don’t simply want to bash on Grace (though, sinful man that I am, I have succumbed to the temptation more than once). Maybe you think I’ve made more than an ass of myself, but you wouldn’t say so in a comment to the blog.

    Ha, well, now that I’m posting it on the blog, you have my permission to say I’ve been an ass, anyhow.

    But really, is there any value in engaging someone who doesn’t want to have a discussion, who raises questions without caring what the answers are, and won’t answer your questions, either? We wouldn’t engage her if Grace were trying to sell something with her comments (which would be move overt trollism), but we feel driven to reply when what she’s selling is the idea that Lutheranism is wrong. My question is: what’s driving us? Is it the New Man acting out of love? Or is it the Old Adam, hateful and proud?

    Anyhow, might as well have this conversation out in the open.

  • kerner

    Back on the infamous “Lazarus” post, which is still active and now up to 619 comments, Grace raised the criticism of Maryolotry among Lutherans.

    I responded by pointing out @613 and @615 what the Lutheran Confessions actually say about the invocation or worship of the saints, which I won’t re-type, but which take the position that while St. Mary may be an example of faith and humility, she should not be prayed to or invoked, and that there is only one mediator between God and men and that is Jesus Christ.

    See: Augsburg Confession XXI, 1-4 and Defense of the Augsburg Confession XXI (IX) 27-29.

    I asked Grace if she disagreed with any of it and she has not yet responded, but I left the comment last night, so maybe she hasn’t had time.

    Meanwhile, what we are now getting from Grace is the argument that Lutheranism is basicly Roman Catholicism-Lite. You hear it from other protestants all the time. What we call the “Lutheran conservative reformation” they call an unwillingness to let go of RC tradition.

    We know wat really happened. Some reformational sects, such as the Anabaptists and Enthusiasts, believed that the RC was so thoroughly corrupted that nothing less would do than to start over from scratch. Grace’s theology descends from these. Lutherans, on the other hand examined Church practices and tried to determine whether there were scriptiral bases for them. Th Lutheran reformers were unwilling to eliminate age old practices that originally had a foundation in Scripture, even if the then current practice had been tied to false doctrine.

    A really obvious example of this is Divine Service. Our worship is very similar to the Catholic Mass. Yet we do it because Divine Service is simply a series of Scripture passages (including some very important to Grace) strung together with one of the creeds that bring us to the foot of the cross very week. There is not really any reason to change our order of worship, other than that it appears, superficially, like the worship of RC’s. But the superficial issues are not a good enough reason to reject an otherwise scriptural practice that served the Church well for centuries.

    On the actual topic of this thread, the only personal experience I have is that my wife’s grandmother once saw Rev. Schuller plead for money to build the CC. Contributors were to receive a “crystal” in return for a donation. She, who was not wealthy, sent in the requisite contribution, and received back a small crystal shaped piece of plastic. She felt mislead and never sent Rev. Schuller money again. Which may explain how the CC got so far in the hole. The marketing budget kept going up, but they were running out of little old ladies to bilk.

  • kerner

    Back on the infamous “Lazarus” post, which is still active and now up to 619 comments, Grace raised the criticism of Maryolotry among Lutherans.

    I responded by pointing out @613 and @615 what the Lutheran Confessions actually say about the invocation or worship of the saints, which I won’t re-type, but which take the position that while St. Mary may be an example of faith and humility, she should not be prayed to or invoked, and that there is only one mediator between God and men and that is Jesus Christ.

    See: Augsburg Confession XXI, 1-4 and Defense of the Augsburg Confession XXI (IX) 27-29.

    I asked Grace if she disagreed with any of it and she has not yet responded, but I left the comment last night, so maybe she hasn’t had time.

    Meanwhile, what we are now getting from Grace is the argument that Lutheranism is basicly Roman Catholicism-Lite. You hear it from other protestants all the time. What we call the “Lutheran conservative reformation” they call an unwillingness to let go of RC tradition.

    We know wat really happened. Some reformational sects, such as the Anabaptists and Enthusiasts, believed that the RC was so thoroughly corrupted that nothing less would do than to start over from scratch. Grace’s theology descends from these. Lutherans, on the other hand examined Church practices and tried to determine whether there were scriptiral bases for them. Th Lutheran reformers were unwilling to eliminate age old practices that originally had a foundation in Scripture, even if the then current practice had been tied to false doctrine.

    A really obvious example of this is Divine Service. Our worship is very similar to the Catholic Mass. Yet we do it because Divine Service is simply a series of Scripture passages (including some very important to Grace) strung together with one of the creeds that bring us to the foot of the cross very week. There is not really any reason to change our order of worship, other than that it appears, superficially, like the worship of RC’s. But the superficial issues are not a good enough reason to reject an otherwise scriptural practice that served the Church well for centuries.

    On the actual topic of this thread, the only personal experience I have is that my wife’s grandmother once saw Rev. Schuller plead for money to build the CC. Contributors were to receive a “crystal” in return for a donation. She, who was not wealthy, sent in the requisite contribution, and received back a small crystal shaped piece of plastic. She felt mislead and never sent Rev. Schuller money again. Which may explain how the CC got so far in the hole. The marketing budget kept going up, but they were running out of little old ladies to bilk.

  • http://www.newreformationpress.com Patrick Kyle

    I worked at the CC for several years in the late 80′s and early 90′s.
    Interesting times…

    One of the things that I will talk about publicly is something that has stayed with me all these years. As a gift for their TV ‘partners’ one year, Dr. Schuller put together a little leather bound volume entitled something like ‘Positive Prayers for Power Filled Living.’

    One of the prayers in the book was titled ‘When the time ahead is short.’ The opening line was ‘Lord, I dishonor you when I remember my past failures….’ In other words don’t repent and ask for forgiveness when you are dying. (Yes I read the entire prayer many times, and no there was no repentance later in the prayer.)
    That and a couple other things told me all I needed to know about what was really going on.

  • http://www.newreformationpress.com Patrick Kyle

    I worked at the CC for several years in the late 80′s and early 90′s.
    Interesting times…

    One of the things that I will talk about publicly is something that has stayed with me all these years. As a gift for their TV ‘partners’ one year, Dr. Schuller put together a little leather bound volume entitled something like ‘Positive Prayers for Power Filled Living.’

    One of the prayers in the book was titled ‘When the time ahead is short.’ The opening line was ‘Lord, I dishonor you when I remember my past failures….’ In other words don’t repent and ask for forgiveness when you are dying. (Yes I read the entire prayer many times, and no there was no repentance later in the prayer.)
    That and a couple other things told me all I needed to know about what was really going on.

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.blogspot.com/ John

    fws, your comment at #82 was very interesting. I’d be interested in having some more serious conversations with you.

  • http://www.redeemedrambling.blogspot.com/ John

    fws, your comment at #82 was very interesting. I’d be interested in having some more serious conversations with you.

  • collie

    tODD@102, everything you mention has validity. It’s hard to know what to do, when someone upsets the balance of a blog community known for being “lively”. That’s one of the reasons I like Cranach. I don’t agree with everyone, but for the most part, conversations are usually respectful. When things get heated, what I’ve observed is that the parties just retreat.

    Grace does not do that. Giving her the benefit of the doubt, it’s probably because she does not see this type of debate as very “Christian”, so she wants to set us straight. In all honesty, my very personal opinion is that she likes everyone here, is fascinated by the level of education articulated by you guys, and I’ll even say – she likes playing in the dirt with Lutherans.

    Sorry it’s not much of a solution, it’s just my thoughts.

  • collie

    tODD@102, everything you mention has validity. It’s hard to know what to do, when someone upsets the balance of a blog community known for being “lively”. That’s one of the reasons I like Cranach. I don’t agree with everyone, but for the most part, conversations are usually respectful. When things get heated, what I’ve observed is that the parties just retreat.

    Grace does not do that. Giving her the benefit of the doubt, it’s probably because she does not see this type of debate as very “Christian”, so she wants to set us straight. In all honesty, my very personal opinion is that she likes everyone here, is fascinated by the level of education articulated by you guys, and I’ll even say – she likes playing in the dirt with Lutherans.

    Sorry it’s not much of a solution, it’s just my thoughts.

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    Dan, there is much more ironic about Grace’s name than the fact that Lutherans have taken to Boycotting her. Grace has been boycotting grace for quite sometime.
    tODD,
    It’s just moot. When Grace bothers to be civilized and engage us with questions rather than slinging accusations then it will be profitable to engage her. I don’t think we need feel compelled to answer the false allegations she throws at us. I always wonder about lurkers, who don’t comment but observe. But then if they are smart enough not to comment they are probably smart enough to see through Grace’s shallow attempts to , how does she say it?, challenge us?
    Perhaps we just let Louis ask one of his infamous questions at the beginning and ignore her until she answers that question.

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    Dan, there is much more ironic about Grace’s name than the fact that Lutherans have taken to Boycotting her. Grace has been boycotting grace for quite sometime.
    tODD,
    It’s just moot. When Grace bothers to be civilized and engage us with questions rather than slinging accusations then it will be profitable to engage her. I don’t think we need feel compelled to answer the false allegations she throws at us. I always wonder about lurkers, who don’t comment but observe. But then if they are smart enough not to comment they are probably smart enough to see through Grace’s shallow attempts to , how does she say it?, challenge us?
    Perhaps we just let Louis ask one of his infamous questions at the beginning and ignore her until she answers that question.

  • Grace

    91 Dan Kempin

    “It is further the case that it took time for the full implications of his central insight (justification) to seep through to all of the implications. Thus in his earlier writings, Luther often speaks from his Roman Catholic background in ways that he later repudiates.”

    WHERE? — in simple form?

    You assert in post #24 that Luther believed in the sinless state of Mary based on the snippet of a quote, but the quote does not even finish the sentence. Does he go on to repudiate it in the very sermon you quote? I cannot say, since you did not cite the reference fully (perhaps becaue Dave Armstrong doesn’t cite it fully), I was not able to look it up easily myself. A book title or volume number would be helpful. Nevertheless, I am able to cite Luther more fully in response:

    I gave the date of Luther’s sermon –

    Talk about sloppy – your fifth paragraph is a combination of whatever you’ve been able to throw in a religious malt and turn on the switch. You haven’t separated anything, … that is one of the poorest excuses for an excuse I’ve ever read.

    “With regard to your assertion at #19, you are misunderstanding the context. Luther is here discussing the “greatness” of sin, if you will–there is no sin that is too great for forgiveness. This “committing murder a thousand times a day” does not refer to willful, repeated sin. I already discussed and clarified the Lutheran understanding of this with you based on Hebrews 10.”

    Dan you can ASSERT whatever you like, Luther meant what he wrote, ….. that is probably one of the excuses he believed when he wrote the “Jews and their lies” – You clarified nothing, just an excuse. That’s the hole you people dig, making excuses, then believing whatever story you contrive will set everything right. WRONG!

    The quote at #33 is unfair. Nothing stated there that is more or less than personal opinion.

    This is poor nonsense on your part:

    “The world runs and hastens so diligently to its end that it often occurs
    to me forcibly that the last day will break before we can completely
    turn the Holy Scripture into German. For it is certain from the Holy
    Scriptures that we have no more temporal things to expect. All is done
    and fulfilled: the Roman Empire is at an end; the Turk has reached his
    highest point; the pomp of the papacy is falling away and the world is
    cracking on all sides almost as if it would break and fall apart
    entirely.” (37) Martin Luther


    Reformation Eschatology-Luther

    The quote at #38 was–forgive me–just sloppy. You misread it. He said that one with a weak faith could NOT call upon Mary without danger to their salvation.

    I didn’t misread anything Dan. You aren’t able to defend the words of Luther, he wrote, or preached them, no on can.

    Your problem Dan; you have taken a SWARM of brushes, however UN-successfully tried to whitewash the quotes. This is one of the reasons people stand in awe of such blatant attempts to discount Luther’s words.

    The Roman Church covered their tracks with ‘traditions’ their congregants had little access to the Bible, and in most cases were not allowed to study it. In the same way, Lutherans hide the very words of Luther!

  • Grace

    91 Dan Kempin

    “It is further the case that it took time for the full implications of his central insight (justification) to seep through to all of the implications. Thus in his earlier writings, Luther often speaks from his Roman Catholic background in ways that he later repudiates.”

    WHERE? — in simple form?

    You assert in post #24 that Luther believed in the sinless state of Mary based on the snippet of a quote, but the quote does not even finish the sentence. Does he go on to repudiate it in the very sermon you quote? I cannot say, since you did not cite the reference fully (perhaps becaue Dave Armstrong doesn’t cite it fully), I was not able to look it up easily myself. A book title or volume number would be helpful. Nevertheless, I am able to cite Luther more fully in response:

    I gave the date of Luther’s sermon –

    Talk about sloppy – your fifth paragraph is a combination of whatever you’ve been able to throw in a religious malt and turn on the switch. You haven’t separated anything, … that is one of the poorest excuses for an excuse I’ve ever read.

    “With regard to your assertion at #19, you are misunderstanding the context. Luther is here discussing the “greatness” of sin, if you will–there is no sin that is too great for forgiveness. This “committing murder a thousand times a day” does not refer to willful, repeated sin. I already discussed and clarified the Lutheran understanding of this with you based on Hebrews 10.”

    Dan you can ASSERT whatever you like, Luther meant what he wrote, ….. that is probably one of the excuses he believed when he wrote the “Jews and their lies” – You clarified nothing, just an excuse. That’s the hole you people dig, making excuses, then believing whatever story you contrive will set everything right. WRONG!

    The quote at #33 is unfair. Nothing stated there that is more or less than personal opinion.

    This is poor nonsense on your part:

    “The world runs and hastens so diligently to its end that it often occurs
    to me forcibly that the last day will break before we can completely
    turn the Holy Scripture into German. For it is certain from the Holy
    Scriptures that we have no more temporal things to expect. All is done
    and fulfilled: the Roman Empire is at an end; the Turk has reached his
    highest point; the pomp of the papacy is falling away and the world is
    cracking on all sides almost as if it would break and fall apart
    entirely.” (37) Martin Luther


    Reformation Eschatology-Luther

    The quote at #38 was–forgive me–just sloppy. You misread it. He said that one with a weak faith could NOT call upon Mary without danger to their salvation.

    I didn’t misread anything Dan. You aren’t able to defend the words of Luther, he wrote, or preached them, no on can.

    Your problem Dan; you have taken a SWARM of brushes, however UN-successfully tried to whitewash the quotes. This is one of the reasons people stand in awe of such blatant attempts to discount Luther’s words.

    The Roman Church covered their tracks with ‘traditions’ their congregants had little access to the Bible, and in most cases were not allowed to study it. In the same way, Lutherans hide the very words of Luther!

  • Grace

    Kerner – 103

    “Meanwhile, what we are now getting from Grace is the argument that Lutheranism is basicly Roman Catholicism-Lite. You hear it from other protestants all the time. What we call the “Lutheran conservative reformation” they call an unwillingness to let go of RC tradition.”

    In many ways Kerner that is true. The Roman Church was followed by a new wave of Rome, with a different name, leaving behind some of the ‘traditions’ and unsubstantiated beliefs – but in essence, mirrors the RCC with a slightly different stance.

    Protestants aren’t ignorant of ‘the new wave of Rome’ – that is one of the mistakes Lutherans make, as they try to understand what we have researched and studied regarding Martin Luther, and the Lutheran Church.

  • Grace

    Kerner – 103

    “Meanwhile, what we are now getting from Grace is the argument that Lutheranism is basicly Roman Catholicism-Lite. You hear it from other protestants all the time. What we call the “Lutheran conservative reformation” they call an unwillingness to let go of RC tradition.”

    In many ways Kerner that is true. The Roman Church was followed by a new wave of Rome, with a different name, leaving behind some of the ‘traditions’ and unsubstantiated beliefs – but in essence, mirrors the RCC with a slightly different stance.

    Protestants aren’t ignorant of ‘the new wave of Rome’ – that is one of the mistakes Lutherans make, as they try to understand what we have researched and studied regarding Martin Luther, and the Lutheran Church.

  • WebMonk

    Wow, here I thought I was just joking @43. That post was supposed to be hyperbole to make a point.

    Seriously people, stop feeding the troll. I suspect there are some mental issues at work.

  • WebMonk

    Wow, here I thought I was just joking @43. That post was supposed to be hyperbole to make a point.

    Seriously people, stop feeding the troll. I suspect there are some mental issues at work.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Okay, I will be a pain in the neck. I mean does it really matter what Luther said on xyz? Lutherans only claim the Book of Concord, right? So, if someone cites a sermon by Luther (or any other sermon writer) they just do it because in that particular instance they may agree. So, all the other stuff that Luther or anyone else said is irrelevant. I think tODD once agreed with something I said. If he brings up that instance, it certainly doesn’t imply he agrees with me on everything. Give Luther a break. He is a sinner like the rest. So what. He was right on the items that a group of folks included in the Book of Concord.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    Okay, I will be a pain in the neck. I mean does it really matter what Luther said on xyz? Lutherans only claim the Book of Concord, right? So, if someone cites a sermon by Luther (or any other sermon writer) they just do it because in that particular instance they may agree. So, all the other stuff that Luther or anyone else said is irrelevant. I think tODD once agreed with something I said. If he brings up that instance, it certainly doesn’t imply he agrees with me on everything. Give Luther a break. He is a sinner like the rest. So what. He was right on the items that a group of folks included in the Book of Concord.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Well, Dan, you can’t say you weren’t warned.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Well, Dan, you can’t say you weren’t warned.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    SG (@111), you’re not being a pain in the neck — at least, not to rest of us Lutherans who agree with what you say (and even the reasonable non-Lutherans), which I believe should be all of us.

    That said, the fact that you agreed with me once on this blog does, unfortunately, signify that you agree with everything I say. Anywhere. Forever. There’s no avoiding it. Sorry. ;)

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    SG (@111), you’re not being a pain in the neck — at least, not to rest of us Lutherans who agree with what you say (and even the reasonable non-Lutherans), which I believe should be all of us.

    That said, the fact that you agreed with me once on this blog does, unfortunately, signify that you agree with everything I say. Anywhere. Forever. There’s no avoiding it. Sorry. ;)

  • Tom Hering

    So, how’s the weather where you are? Bror? Todd? Louis? Webmonk? What did you all have for breakfast today?

  • Tom Hering

    So, how’s the weather where you are? Bror? Todd? Louis? Webmonk? What did you all have for breakfast today?

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    He, he, tODD. The funny thing is I agree with you on almost everything. Most of your comments are spot on.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    He, he, tODD. The funny thing is I agree with you on almost everything. Most of your comments are spot on.

  • trotk

    Grace, you are back!

    Is the Calvary Chapel perfect? I actually want to know, because you dodged the question at the beginning of this discussion and again at #80. You dodge, and dodge, and dodge.

    The biggest lingering questions are the first one (about the perfection of your church) and the second, more specific, version of it (the excommunication of Smith). We know the answer to Smith, but I want to know if you actually believe that Calvary Chapel is THE church, as Christ would have it, without flaw.

  • trotk

    Grace, you are back!

    Is the Calvary Chapel perfect? I actually want to know, because you dodged the question at the beginning of this discussion and again at #80. You dodge, and dodge, and dodge.

    The biggest lingering questions are the first one (about the perfection of your church) and the second, more specific, version of it (the excommunication of Smith). We know the answer to Smith, but I want to know if you actually believe that Calvary Chapel is THE church, as Christ would have it, without flaw.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Afternoon, Tom (@114). We’re continuing to enjoy our prolonged summer here in Portland, though it looks like the rainy season will begin in earnest, as usual, in the latter half of this month. (No, really, it doesn’t always rain in Portland; from July-October, there’s almost no rain at all, though we don’t like to tell people about this or else they’d move here.)

    For breakfast, I had a big bowl of Trollios. I bought a five-pound bag of the stuff at CostCo, but I think I’ve lost my use for it, so now I have to eat it myself, I guess. I have, like, four pounds left. It tastes bitter, and yet addictive. Who eats this crap?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Afternoon, Tom (@114). We’re continuing to enjoy our prolonged summer here in Portland, though it looks like the rainy season will begin in earnest, as usual, in the latter half of this month. (No, really, it doesn’t always rain in Portland; from July-October, there’s almost no rain at all, though we don’t like to tell people about this or else they’d move here.)

    For breakfast, I had a big bowl of Trollios. I bought a five-pound bag of the stuff at CostCo, but I think I’ve lost my use for it, so now I have to eat it myself, I guess. I have, like, four pounds left. It tastes bitter, and yet addictive. Who eats this crap?

  • Grace

    Trotk

    NO, Calvary Chapel Church is not perfect, I never said it was. That would be a foolish thing to state, and in your case, it is a foolish comment even to consider.

  • Grace

    Trotk

    NO, Calvary Chapel Church is not perfect, I never said it was. That would be a foolish thing to state, and in your case, it is a foolish comment even to consider.

  • mark†

    Bror Erickson@107 has, I think hit the nail on the head. Tom Baker says that theology is the art of making distinctions. Bror Erickson distinguishes questions from accusations. A reasonable inquirer asks questions. Someone who enjoys verbal combat and riling people up denies everything, admits nothings and makes accusations.

  • mark†

    Bror Erickson@107 has, I think hit the nail on the head. Tom Baker says that theology is the art of making distinctions. Bror Erickson distinguishes questions from accusations. A reasonable inquirer asks questions. Someone who enjoys verbal combat and riling people up denies everything, admits nothings and makes accusations.

  • Dan Kempin

    Grace,

    Ah. I see. That’s the kind of “argument” you want to have.

    Thanks, but no.

    (By the way, that “sloppy” fifth paragraph that I threw together was a direct quote from Luther that repudiates, with the specificity you demand, that God can be approached through Mary. It had a proper citation and everything. But if you’re not going to read the words, then there’s not much point. Keep up the kind of in-depth research on Luther you apparently found here:
    http://www.chnetwork.org/journals/mary/mary_5.htm
    And go get ‘em, tiger. Anyway, thanks for crediting me with the sloppy religious malt of Luther’s writing. Having actually read it, I am flattered.)

  • Dan Kempin

    Grace,

    Ah. I see. That’s the kind of “argument” you want to have.

    Thanks, but no.

    (By the way, that “sloppy” fifth paragraph that I threw together was a direct quote from Luther that repudiates, with the specificity you demand, that God can be approached through Mary. It had a proper citation and everything. But if you’re not going to read the words, then there’s not much point. Keep up the kind of in-depth research on Luther you apparently found here:
    http://www.chnetwork.org/journals/mary/mary_5.htm
    And go get ‘em, tiger. Anyway, thanks for crediting me with the sloppy religious malt of Luther’s writing. Having actually read it, I am flattered.)

  • Tom Hering

    Todd @ 117, Trollios? Yuck. I had a bowl of Luther’s Sin Flakes. (“They’re Gr-r-reat Sins!”) I felt bad about it, but it says right on the box you can be forgiven for eating them a thousand times a day.

  • Tom Hering

    Todd @ 117, Trollios? Yuck. I had a bowl of Luther’s Sin Flakes. (“They’re Gr-r-reat Sins!”) I felt bad about it, but it says right on the box you can be forgiven for eating them a thousand times a day.

  • trotk

    Grace, it wasn’t foolish. It was the only reasonable thing to conclude. Let me show you what frank said, and then how you responded:

    frank (fws) @ #9:

    “Name one specific where you would identify them as having the same sorta trouble as the ELCA or chrystal cathedral. Just one.”

    your response, @ #10:

    ” Calvary Chapel Churches don’t have homosexual pastors, nor do they allow women to pastor a church –

    Anyone, and that includes homosexuals are welcome to attend, and encouraged. However, they are not in any sort of leadership position.

    Calvary Chapel Churches are very prudent and careful when it comes to spending money, they always have been.”

    That is, the only reasonable conclusion one could come to is that you thought your church was flawless.

  • trotk

    Grace, it wasn’t foolish. It was the only reasonable thing to conclude. Let me show you what frank said, and then how you responded:

    frank (fws) @ #9:

    “Name one specific where you would identify them as having the same sorta trouble as the ELCA or chrystal cathedral. Just one.”

    your response, @ #10:

    ” Calvary Chapel Churches don’t have homosexual pastors, nor do they allow women to pastor a church –

    Anyone, and that includes homosexuals are welcome to attend, and encouraged. However, they are not in any sort of leadership position.

    Calvary Chapel Churches are very prudent and careful when it comes to spending money, they always have been.”

    That is, the only reasonable conclusion one could come to is that you thought your church was flawless.

  • Grace

    Trotk – 122

    Stating that Calvary doesn’t have homosexual pastors, or female pastors – OR that they spend funds prudently doesn’t equate to “flawless” -

  • Grace

    Trotk – 122

    Stating that Calvary doesn’t have homosexual pastors, or female pastors – OR that they spend funds prudently doesn’t equate to “flawless” -

  • Grace

    121 Tom Hering

    Todd @ 117, Trollios? Yuck. I had a bowl of Luther’s Sin Flakes. (“They’re Gr-r-reat Sins!”) I felt bad about it, but it says right on the box you can be forgiven for eating them a thousand times a day.

    This is but one example of how you are viewed by non Lutherans. Even sin is a joke when you deem it to be.

  • Grace

    121 Tom Hering

    Todd @ 117, Trollios? Yuck. I had a bowl of Luther’s Sin Flakes. (“They’re Gr-r-reat Sins!”) I felt bad about it, but it says right on the box you can be forgiven for eating them a thousand times a day.

    This is but one example of how you are viewed by non Lutherans. Even sin is a joke when you deem it to be.

  • trotk

    Grace @123 -

    I think it boils down to you thinking too rigidly and without broad vision:

    “same sorta trouble as…crystal cathedral” includes a host of things, such as doctrinal issues, issues of member behavior, an over-inflated sense of the worth of one’s own church (!), etc, etc.

    By responding to a challenge to point out a specific flaw in your own church with a statement of what you don’t do wrong, you act like a Pharisee. “Well, I am not like them. I manage money well, and don’t commit adultery, and don’t murder…”

    Grace, blessed are the POOR (literally beggars – ptochoi in Greek) IN SPIRIT, not those who claim to be okay. Acknowledging our desperate need for the grace of God is the only posture that is pleasing to Him (read Psalm 51:5, 7, and 17).

  • trotk

    Grace @123 -

    I think it boils down to you thinking too rigidly and without broad vision:

    “same sorta trouble as…crystal cathedral” includes a host of things, such as doctrinal issues, issues of member behavior, an over-inflated sense of the worth of one’s own church (!), etc, etc.

    By responding to a challenge to point out a specific flaw in your own church with a statement of what you don’t do wrong, you act like a Pharisee. “Well, I am not like them. I manage money well, and don’t commit adultery, and don’t murder…”

    Grace, blessed are the POOR (literally beggars – ptochoi in Greek) IN SPIRIT, not those who claim to be okay. Acknowledging our desperate need for the grace of God is the only posture that is pleasing to Him (read Psalm 51:5, 7, and 17).

  • trotk

    By the way, you still haven’t answered the challenge:

    “Name one specific where you would identify them as having the same sorta trouble as the ELCA or chrystal cathedral. Just one.”

    (Remember that same sorta trouble as the ELCA or crystal cathedral includes more than money and homosexuality. It also includes false doctrine, a lack of love, worshiping idols…)

  • trotk

    By the way, you still haven’t answered the challenge:

    “Name one specific where you would identify them as having the same sorta trouble as the ELCA or chrystal cathedral. Just one.”

    (Remember that same sorta trouble as the ELCA or crystal cathedral includes more than money and homosexuality. It also includes false doctrine, a lack of love, worshiping idols…)

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Tom (@121), Sin Flakes, eh? Is that the stuff that’s white like coriander seed, but tastes like honey? I saw it at the store, but I was all like, “What is it?” I think it’s highly processed, too. I read this one story about how, stored properly in a jar inside a box, it won’t spoil for years!

    No, seriously, Tom, sin-eating was largely discredited as a practice a century or more ago. Maybe you should help me try to finish off this giant bag of Trollios. I think I have more now than when I started. It’s almost as if the troll fodder keeps growing!

    TrotK (@126), what did you have for lunch?

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Tom (@121), Sin Flakes, eh? Is that the stuff that’s white like coriander seed, but tastes like honey? I saw it at the store, but I was all like, “What is it?” I think it’s highly processed, too. I read this one story about how, stored properly in a jar inside a box, it won’t spoil for years!

    No, seriously, Tom, sin-eating was largely discredited as a practice a century or more ago. Maybe you should help me try to finish off this giant bag of Trollios. I think I have more now than when I started. It’s almost as if the troll fodder keeps growing!

    TrotK (@126), what did you have for lunch?

  • BW

    Looks like the Power of Positive Thinking didn’t work for Robert Schuller. It must make him, and sadly, by association Christianity, look like even more of a joke to the unbelievers, even though the self help/positive thinking Gospel is contrary to Christ’s Gospel.

  • BW

    Looks like the Power of Positive Thinking didn’t work for Robert Schuller. It must make him, and sadly, by association Christianity, look like even more of a joke to the unbelievers, even though the self help/positive thinking Gospel is contrary to Christ’s Gospel.

  • trotk

    Leftover baked potato, green beans, and meatloaf. It was excellent. The meatloaf was 1/2 deer (personally killed and butchered, of course) and 1/2 pork, that I ground and my wife cooked beautifully.

    Plenty of food to sustain relatively decent work for the afternoon.

    I have been looking for a new breakfast. Trollios sound excellent, particularly in 5 pound bags.

  • trotk

    Leftover baked potato, green beans, and meatloaf. It was excellent. The meatloaf was 1/2 deer (personally killed and butchered, of course) and 1/2 pork, that I ground and my wife cooked beautifully.

    Plenty of food to sustain relatively decent work for the afternoon.

    I have been looking for a new breakfast. Trollios sound excellent, particularly in 5 pound bags.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    TrotK (@129), that sounds delicious. When I was a kid, meatloaf always seemed frightening. But yours sounds so tasty. Clearly, a dish I need to revisit.

    Any significance to your moniker? I have to admit, I always think of Trotsky when I read it. Probably not your intent.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    TrotK (@129), that sounds delicious. When I was a kid, meatloaf always seemed frightening. But yours sounds so tasty. Clearly, a dish I need to revisit.

    Any significance to your moniker? I have to admit, I always think of Trotsky when I read it. Probably not your intent.

  • trotk

    No, as I kid, I was in love with Tolkien’s books (not that I have lost that love). trotk was a codename that I used when playing games with friends that came from the first letters of The Return of the King. I keep it because it reminds me of a book I love and enjoyable afternoons with friends as a 12 and 13 year old kid.

  • trotk

    No, as I kid, I was in love with Tolkien’s books (not that I have lost that love). trotk was a codename that I used when playing games with friends that came from the first letters of The Return of the King. I keep it because it reminds me of a book I love and enjoyable afternoons with friends as a 12 and 13 year old kid.

  • fws

    todd @102

    ” My question is: what’s driving us? Is it the New Man acting out of love? Or is it the Old Adam, hateful and proud?”

    Article VI says that this is the wrong question. It is the question a roman scholastic or calvin would ask. Or a WELS Lutheran like me who is still looking at stuff through a pietistic/reformed matrix.

    Why is it the wrong question? Daily bread is daily bread. Love is love. Righteousness is righteousness even if someone does it who like the judge in Luke 18 has no faith in God or respect for his neighbor. A lawless judge.

    Think of the widow as conscience whose love has died. Old Adam. She wants justice. Maybe in this case it is an execution eye-for-eye for the death of love.

    So old adam serves old adam why? Because God makes that so.
    And this earthly kingdom stuff will all pass away.

    How much more will God use use you Todd and give you all good things as one of his elect, and aid you in serving a woman who is in obvious pain like Grace! This , in spite of your Old Adam and because God is so good. You only can know in faith that God is using your new man Todd. And you can practice discipline at the same time by killing your Old Adam daily in your baptism. You can keep busy trying your hardest to keep those 10 commandments and study what Dr Luther says about them in the Large Catechism. Not because you need to. Because Grace and I need that from you. And because you deserve that kindness of discipline for your own self. Life is less painful that way.

    Your goal as old adam or new man is identical: It is to show tangible over the top love to Grace. To suck up to her actually. The customer is always right. She is the customer and consumer of the righteousness of all of us here. How does one criticize a boss or police or judge or irs auditor or someone who has some power over us? That is how we are all supposed to criticize Grace when she needs that.

    Besides what we do here is all gonna be burned by fire at the end of the age. What will remain alone is Christ and faith in him. So that is what we want to bring , winsomely, to our dear blood-bought Grace.

    So will the Son of Man find faith in Todd when he returns? Answer: The Old Adam that was Todd will be dead. All that will be left is Todd in Christ. Translation: wrong question. It does not matter. Man is faithess but God is faithful and just. That alone is what will matter.

    Come Quickly Lord.

  • fws

    todd @102

    ” My question is: what’s driving us? Is it the New Man acting out of love? Or is it the Old Adam, hateful and proud?”

    Article VI says that this is the wrong question. It is the question a roman scholastic or calvin would ask. Or a WELS Lutheran like me who is still looking at stuff through a pietistic/reformed matrix.

    Why is it the wrong question? Daily bread is daily bread. Love is love. Righteousness is righteousness even if someone does it who like the judge in Luke 18 has no faith in God or respect for his neighbor. A lawless judge.

    Think of the widow as conscience whose love has died. Old Adam. She wants justice. Maybe in this case it is an execution eye-for-eye for the death of love.

    So old adam serves old adam why? Because God makes that so.
    And this earthly kingdom stuff will all pass away.

    How much more will God use use you Todd and give you all good things as one of his elect, and aid you in serving a woman who is in obvious pain like Grace! This , in spite of your Old Adam and because God is so good. You only can know in faith that God is using your new man Todd. And you can practice discipline at the same time by killing your Old Adam daily in your baptism. You can keep busy trying your hardest to keep those 10 commandments and study what Dr Luther says about them in the Large Catechism. Not because you need to. Because Grace and I need that from you. And because you deserve that kindness of discipline for your own self. Life is less painful that way.

    Your goal as old adam or new man is identical: It is to show tangible over the top love to Grace. To suck up to her actually. The customer is always right. She is the customer and consumer of the righteousness of all of us here. How does one criticize a boss or police or judge or irs auditor or someone who has some power over us? That is how we are all supposed to criticize Grace when she needs that.

    Besides what we do here is all gonna be burned by fire at the end of the age. What will remain alone is Christ and faith in him. So that is what we want to bring , winsomely, to our dear blood-bought Grace.

    So will the Son of Man find faith in Todd when he returns? Answer: The Old Adam that was Todd will be dead. All that will be left is Todd in Christ. Translation: wrong question. It does not matter. Man is faithess but God is faithful and just. That alone is what will matter.

    Come Quickly Lord.

  • fws

    Todd @ 102

    Remember that what we do here is earthly righteousness that will all perish.

    Our confessions direct us to Aristotles ethics to teach us how that earthly righteousness gets acquired:

    we act as though we are good and after a time that practice becomes second nature. Thus we become what we do by practice and more practice. This process looks identical for the Old Adam of pagan and christian alike.

    Get busy Todd. Your good works are necessary because your neighbor needs them for his and her happiness and pleasure.

    The fruit this effort produces from your vocations Todd , that makes the creaturely life of someone else happier, is alone what God considers true righteousness on earth.

  • fws

    Todd @ 102

    Remember that what we do here is earthly righteousness that will all perish.

    Our confessions direct us to Aristotles ethics to teach us how that earthly righteousness gets acquired:

    we act as though we are good and after a time that practice becomes second nature. Thus we become what we do by practice and more practice. This process looks identical for the Old Adam of pagan and christian alike.

    Get busy Todd. Your good works are necessary because your neighbor needs them for his and her happiness and pleasure.

    The fruit this effort produces from your vocations Todd , that makes the creaturely life of someone else happier, is alone what God considers true righteousness on earth.

  • fws

    John @ 105

    My Blog is http://www.thirduse.com or my email is fwsonnek@gmail.com

    I would be happy to correspond in private if you want to share some private matters, otherwise might I suggest an open dialog over at my blog so others could follow along and perhaps benefit from our give and take?

    You would be one of the only posters there… ha! and no I am not trying to get traffic there…. no. I am not. really. not.

    Like I said. Feel free to email me. sorry it took so long to get back to you here John

  • fws

    John @ 105

    My Blog is http://www.thirduse.com or my email is fwsonnek@gmail.com

    I would be happy to correspond in private if you want to share some private matters, otherwise might I suggest an open dialog over at my blog so others could follow along and perhaps benefit from our give and take?

    You would be one of the only posters there… ha! and no I am not trying to get traffic there…. no. I am not. really. not.

    Like I said. Feel free to email me. sorry it took so long to get back to you here John

  • trotk

    frank -

    I teach philosophy, and just finished my unit on Aristotelian Ethics, and was grateful for your statement on it a couple weeks ago, because I had never heard nor read the Lutheran perspective on his system.

  • trotk

    frank -

    I teach philosophy, and just finished my unit on Aristotelian Ethics, and was grateful for your statement on it a couple weeks ago, because I had never heard nor read the Lutheran perspective on his system.

  • fws

    Trotk @135

    Wow. Philosophy professor. And you never heard this about Lutherans? Why am I not surprised.

    And wow again. I am a Norwegian Lutheran farmboy from the dakotas degreed in accounting and now living in Brasil. I am no philosopher. I am grateful and more than flattered for the small help I could afford you here.

    More dialog with you could be immensely helpful to what I am trying to do on my blog whether you are a fellow Lutheran or not. Perhaps more if you are not a Lutheran even.

    I am the only Lutheran I have ever heard mention this as a fact. I believe that you will find the statement “Nothing can be added to the ethical system of Aristotle” under the article in the Apology on Free will .

    This has tremendous implications. Indeed it is precisely why both rome and the reformed say the Lutherans are not rigorously moral enough. We are moral. We just refuse to inject spirituality into morality. For Lutherans, Pagans and christians do evident morality by the same rules, in the same apparent manner , and motivated in the same way.

    http://www.borkofconcord.org. you can download a pdf there of the book of concord and search on “aristotle”.

    At the same time, Luther says that aristotle is a “whore” in the church. That is why we Lutherans embrace him warmly like ushers would embrace a loud drunk during a church service so we can usher him out of the church where he belongs.

    These two postures are extremely complimentary in nature.

    There was an excellent article by a Robert Frost who specializes in the writings of an english puritan but it dropped off the net. It was published in the Trinity Journal and was titleed “Aristotle´s Ethics, the real reason for Luther´s Reformation” It was brilliant. I would love to locate that text again.

    Runner up would be this link…

    http://www.tamuk.edu/mcpe/kirch.htm

    A document that shows Luther´s early break with scholasticism but by no means fully developed is…

    http://scholasticus.wordpress.com/2007/08/08/luthers-disputation-against-scholastic-theology/

    And finally a Roman Catholic view of “What Luther got wrong”. Aquinas is so very brilliant to them, that they can not imagine that Luther could have resisted him if Luther had only know of his writings. We can discuss what this author misses if you like.

    http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=3267

    Finally, if you are REALLY interested in all this, I can not praise enough the translation of John Chemnitz “Examin of the Council of Trent”.

    I read somewhere that two books were placed on the altar during the Council of Trent´s deliberations: The Bible and the Summa of Aquinas.

    Finally there is my own humble nascent blog:

    http://www.thirduse.com

  • fws

    Trotk @135

    Wow. Philosophy professor. And you never heard this about Lutherans? Why am I not surprised.

    And wow again. I am a Norwegian Lutheran farmboy from the dakotas degreed in accounting and now living in Brasil. I am no philosopher. I am grateful and more than flattered for the small help I could afford you here.

    More dialog with you could be immensely helpful to what I am trying to do on my blog whether you are a fellow Lutheran or not. Perhaps more if you are not a Lutheran even.

    I am the only Lutheran I have ever heard mention this as a fact. I believe that you will find the statement “Nothing can be added to the ethical system of Aristotle” under the article in the Apology on Free will .

    This has tremendous implications. Indeed it is precisely why both rome and the reformed say the Lutherans are not rigorously moral enough. We are moral. We just refuse to inject spirituality into morality. For Lutherans, Pagans and christians do evident morality by the same rules, in the same apparent manner , and motivated in the same way.

    http://www.borkofconcord.org. you can download a pdf there of the book of concord and search on “aristotle”.

    At the same time, Luther says that aristotle is a “whore” in the church. That is why we Lutherans embrace him warmly like ushers would embrace a loud drunk during a church service so we can usher him out of the church where he belongs.

    These two postures are extremely complimentary in nature.

    There was an excellent article by a Robert Frost who specializes in the writings of an english puritan but it dropped off the net. It was published in the Trinity Journal and was titleed “Aristotle´s Ethics, the real reason for Luther´s Reformation” It was brilliant. I would love to locate that text again.

    Runner up would be this link…

    http://www.tamuk.edu/mcpe/kirch.htm

    A document that shows Luther´s early break with scholasticism but by no means fully developed is…

    http://scholasticus.wordpress.com/2007/08/08/luthers-disputation-against-scholastic-theology/

    And finally a Roman Catholic view of “What Luther got wrong”. Aquinas is so very brilliant to them, that they can not imagine that Luther could have resisted him if Luther had only know of his writings. We can discuss what this author misses if you like.

    http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=3267

    Finally, if you are REALLY interested in all this, I can not praise enough the translation of John Chemnitz “Examin of the Council of Trent”.

    I read somewhere that two books were placed on the altar during the Council of Trent´s deliberations: The Bible and the Summa of Aquinas.

    Finally there is my own humble nascent blog:

    http://www.thirduse.com

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    Weather is warm, meaning the deer hunt will be an sob starting Saturday, looking forward to the climbs. Apple for breakfast with a helping of trollios.

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    Weather is warm, meaning the deer hunt will be an sob starting Saturday, looking forward to the climbs. Apple for breakfast with a helping of trollios.

  • collie

    Pastor Erickson, why don’t you come on over to Oakland County Michigan and take some of the excess deer population off our hands? All you have to do is sit in the house and before long, one, or likely 6 or 7 will come sauntering through the backyard of our quarter acre lot . Sure would appreciate it, I’m sick of them eating my garden and then leaving stuff behind in the yard for the dogs to find, if you know what I mean. I’ll even provide Trollios for you and your family.

  • collie

    Pastor Erickson, why don’t you come on over to Oakland County Michigan and take some of the excess deer population off our hands? All you have to do is sit in the house and before long, one, or likely 6 or 7 will come sauntering through the backyard of our quarter acre lot . Sure would appreciate it, I’m sick of them eating my garden and then leaving stuff behind in the yard for the dogs to find, if you know what I mean. I’ll even provide Trollios for you and your family.

  • trotk

    Bror, it will be about 32 degrees here (mountains of western NC) on Saturday, which is pretty close to perfect for me. But it is still bow season, which although I love, seriously limits the chance of success. I will enjoy the hike at least, and hopefully see something worth pursuing.

    I prefer peanut butter or cheese toast. The protein keeps me going for a long morning hunt.

  • trotk

    Bror, it will be about 32 degrees here (mountains of western NC) on Saturday, which is pretty close to perfect for me. But it is still bow season, which although I love, seriously limits the chance of success. I will enjoy the hike at least, and hopefully see something worth pursuing.

    I prefer peanut butter or cheese toast. The protein keeps me going for a long morning hunt.

  • Tom Hering

    Hey, I just heard that I turned sin into a joke, when I was actually making fun of someone’s twisted interpretation of a Luther quote about sin. Does anyone here know anything about this? And what’s for supper?

  • Tom Hering

    Hey, I just heard that I turned sin into a joke, when I was actually making fun of someone’s twisted interpretation of a Luther quote about sin. Does anyone here know anything about this? And what’s for supper?

  • collie

    Tom @139, I’m making fresh trollato sauce from the last of the trollatoes from the garden. Served over some penne or maybe rotini.

  • collie

    Tom @139, I’m making fresh trollato sauce from the last of the trollatoes from the garden. Served over some penne or maybe rotini.

  • BW

    Tom @139

    Trollios are what’s for dinner. We need to help tODD finish his unnecessarily large bag of them.

  • BW

    Tom @139

    Trollios are what’s for dinner. We need to help tODD finish his unnecessarily large bag of them.

  • Tom Hering

    Trollios, Trollatos – I’m tired of the same old, same old. Everything tastes so trollish. Maybe I’ll cook me up a Chuck roast, with a baked granny Smith apple for desert. Ya’ll come!

  • Tom Hering

    Trollios, Trollatos – I’m tired of the same old, same old. Everything tastes so trollish. Maybe I’ll cook me up a Chuck roast, with a baked granny Smith apple for desert. Ya’ll come!

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    Good luck trotk. Funny that it is cooler in N.C than it is here in Utah right now. But then we are supposed to have snow next week. That might make things a bit interesting.

  • http://www.utah-lutheran.blogspot.com Bror Erickson

    Good luck trotk. Funny that it is cooler in N.C than it is here in Utah right now. But then we are supposed to have snow next week. That might make things a bit interesting.

  • Grace

    Tom Hering – 142

    “Trollios, Trollatos – I’m tired of the same old, same old. Everything tastes so trollish. Maybe I’ll cook me up a Chuck roast, with a baked granny Smith apple for desert. Ya’ll come!’

    Sounds of – - – “The Jews and their lies” mixed as another version.

    This isn’t sarcasm as some of you often wail, it’s pure hatred.

  • Grace

    Tom Hering – 142

    “Trollios, Trollatos – I’m tired of the same old, same old. Everything tastes so trollish. Maybe I’ll cook me up a Chuck roast, with a baked granny Smith apple for desert. Ya’ll come!’

    Sounds of – - – “The Jews and their lies” mixed as another version.

    This isn’t sarcasm as some of you often wail, it’s pure hatred.

  • fws

    Todd

    Grace has complained that she has received too many responses and that we should be sensitive to the fact that she has other more important stuff to do.

    I would suggest that we try, sincerely and not sarcastically to please Grace. Only those Grace addresses with a question would respond with an answer.

    If she merely comments , then you are off the hook! Nothing is required of righteousness in response. One can optionally correct factual errors like quotes outta context. And what say we just leave her opinions to herself. A gift refuses remains with the giver,

    Grace ignores me, I suppose because I am a homosexual, so I am out of this and free to look for my own bag of Trolios here in Brasil. What is the group that licenses the Chuck Smith brand name down here so I can find a bag?

  • fws

    Todd

    Grace has complained that she has received too many responses and that we should be sensitive to the fact that she has other more important stuff to do.

    I would suggest that we try, sincerely and not sarcastically to please Grace. Only those Grace addresses with a question would respond with an answer.

    If she merely comments , then you are off the hook! Nothing is required of righteousness in response. One can optionally correct factual errors like quotes outta context. And what say we just leave her opinions to herself. A gift refuses remains with the giver,

    Grace ignores me, I suppose because I am a homosexual, so I am out of this and free to look for my own bag of Trolios here in Brasil. What is the group that licenses the Chuck Smith brand name down here so I can find a bag?

  • Tom Hering

    Ladies and gentlemen, I am capable of being hateful, but I’ve never been pure in anything.

  • Tom Hering

    Ladies and gentlemen, I am capable of being hateful, but I’ve never been pure in anything.

  • Tom Hering

    Frank, I think Trollios are called Chapelitos in South America. “Chapelitos, Chapelitos, oh they really are so neat-o, take a bite, they’ll prove they’re right, and that Luther was a freak-o!”

  • Tom Hering

    Frank, I think Trollios are called Chapelitos in South America. “Chapelitos, Chapelitos, oh they really are so neat-o, take a bite, they’ll prove they’re right, and that Luther was a freak-o!”

  • trotk

    Bror -

    I realize I gave a false impression of our weather right now in western North Carolina. It will be around freezing when I head out at 5:30am, but by noon, it will probably be around 65 or 70. It leads to one of those mornings where you want a real coat as you leave, but wish you had left it behind as you hike back.

    I am going to try positive thinking on this hunt. Perhaps it will work better for me than the Crystal Chapel. I am already seeing the deer I will get: 12 points, 180 pounds (big for NC), 30 yards away, head down as it looks for acorns. It snaps its head up as it hears my footsteps, freezes for a split second, and turns to run, just as my arrow hits the mark.

    Yep, I think I’ve got it already.

  • trotk

    Bror -

    I realize I gave a false impression of our weather right now in western North Carolina. It will be around freezing when I head out at 5:30am, but by noon, it will probably be around 65 or 70. It leads to one of those mornings where you want a real coat as you leave, but wish you had left it behind as you hike back.

    I am going to try positive thinking on this hunt. Perhaps it will work better for me than the Crystal Chapel. I am already seeing the deer I will get: 12 points, 180 pounds (big for NC), 30 yards away, head down as it looks for acorns. It snaps its head up as it hears my footsteps, freezes for a split second, and turns to run, just as my arrow hits the mark.

    Yep, I think I’ve got it already.

  • Tom Hering

    Note of interest: I found a list of Chuck Smith’s favorite books, and it includes Commentary on Galatians by Martin Luther. Yep, Martin Luther. (Google “Pastor Chuck Smith’s Favorites.”)

  • Tom Hering

    Note of interest: I found a list of Chuck Smith’s favorite books, and it includes Commentary on Galatians by Martin Luther. Yep, Martin Luther. (Google “Pastor Chuck Smith’s Favorites.”)

  • trotk

    It also included a work by Dietrich Bonhoeffer, but I don’t hold that against him.

  • trotk

    It also included a work by Dietrich Bonhoeffer, but I don’t hold that against him.

  • Grace

    trotk – 150

    “It also included a work by Dietrich Bonhoeffer, but I don’t hold that against him.”

    Spoken like a true……..

    “Dietrich Bonhoeffer: February 4, 1906 – April 9, 1945) was a German Lutheran pastor, theologian, and martyr. He was also a participant in the German Resistance movement against Nazism and a founding member of the Confessing Church. His involvement in plans by members of the Abwehr (the German Military Intelligence Office) to assassinate Adolf Hitler resulted in his arrest in April 1943 and his subsequent execution by hanging in April 1945, twenty-three days before the Nazis’ surrender. His view of Christianity’s role in the secular world has become very influential.”

  • Grace

    trotk – 150

    “It also included a work by Dietrich Bonhoeffer, but I don’t hold that against him.”

    Spoken like a true……..

    “Dietrich Bonhoeffer: February 4, 1906 – April 9, 1945) was a German Lutheran pastor, theologian, and martyr. He was also a participant in the German Resistance movement against Nazism and a founding member of the Confessing Church. His involvement in plans by members of the Abwehr (the German Military Intelligence Office) to assassinate Adolf Hitler resulted in his arrest in April 1943 and his subsequent execution by hanging in April 1945, twenty-three days before the Nazis’ surrender. His view of Christianity’s role in the secular world has become very influential.”

  • Dennis Peskey

    If I may be permitted to squeeze a response in edgewise, to Collie#76 – no, I’m just a layman who enjoys the Word of God. I did learn I live a few counties over from you in Clinton County (we’re about four degrees colder being inland.)

    For our culinary connoiseurs, we enjoyed our confessional study today (eighteen in attendance – Second Commandment, Large Catechism) which concludes with the requisite journey to the bar for my favorite – Wet Burrito and 8 ounces of Amber Bock. Truely a Lutheran delight.
    Peace,
    Dennis

  • Dennis Peskey

    If I may be permitted to squeeze a response in edgewise, to Collie#76 – no, I’m just a layman who enjoys the Word of God. I did learn I live a few counties over from you in Clinton County (we’re about four degrees colder being inland.)

    For our culinary connoiseurs, we enjoyed our confessional study today (eighteen in attendance – Second Commandment, Large Catechism) which concludes with the requisite journey to the bar for my favorite – Wet Burrito and 8 ounces of Amber Bock. Truely a Lutheran delight.
    Peace,
    Dennis

  • trotk

    Grace -

    Are you criticizing me for not holding it against Smith that he liked Dietrich Bonhoeffer?

    Or are you criticizing Bonhoeffer?

    If you have issues with Bonhoeffer, as seems evident by your response, do you hold that against Smith?

  • trotk

    Grace -

    Are you criticizing me for not holding it against Smith that he liked Dietrich Bonhoeffer?

    Or are you criticizing Bonhoeffer?

    If you have issues with Bonhoeffer, as seems evident by your response, do you hold that against Smith?

  • SAL

    Is this Calvary Chapel religion widespread?

    I don’t believe I’m familiar with them. Are there any distinctions of this religion or is it just a flavor of the Baptists?

  • SAL

    Is this Calvary Chapel religion widespread?

    I don’t believe I’m familiar with them. Are there any distinctions of this religion or is it just a flavor of the Baptists?

  • Grace

    trotk

    I admire Bonhoeffer, ….. he stood for what was right, which few Germans had the courage, or love for the Jewish people, to stand firm against the Nazi regime and Hitler.

    I have studied WW2 and Hitler. Not just as a hobby, but really studied. The German people for the most part were and still are anti-semitic. Those who immigrated to the U.S. still hold the same views they and their parents had pre-WW2.

    I have interviewed many Jewish people, those who were left from the camps, their parents slaughterd, or put in the gas chambers.

  • Grace

    trotk

    I admire Bonhoeffer, ….. he stood for what was right, which few Germans had the courage, or love for the Jewish people, to stand firm against the Nazi regime and Hitler.

    I have studied WW2 and Hitler. Not just as a hobby, but really studied. The German people for the most part were and still are anti-semitic. Those who immigrated to the U.S. still hold the same views they and their parents had pre-WW2.

    I have interviewed many Jewish people, those who were left from the camps, their parents slaughterd, or put in the gas chambers.

  • trotk

    Wow. Indictment of a whole country’s people?

    “The German people for the most part …still are anti-semitic.”

    I am glad you found that in your research. I, for one, went to school there for a year, and didn’t find that at all. I must have just missed it.

    Will you explain clearly what your reaction #151 meant?

    “Spoken like a true…” – Finish your statement, at least for the sake of clarity.

    Were you criticizing me, Smith, or Bonhoeffer?

  • trotk

    Wow. Indictment of a whole country’s people?

    “The German people for the most part …still are anti-semitic.”

    I am glad you found that in your research. I, for one, went to school there for a year, and didn’t find that at all. I must have just missed it.

    Will you explain clearly what your reaction #151 meant?

    “Spoken like a true…” – Finish your statement, at least for the sake of clarity.

    Were you criticizing me, Smith, or Bonhoeffer?

  • Grace

    Sal,

    There are over 1,000 Calavary Chapel Churches in the U.S. – and over 500 abroad. There are seminaries and Bible colleges in Europe and the U.S.

    They believe the Bible to be inerrant, inspired Word of God. They believe in the Trinity.

    This should be helpful, although I would not agree with everything.

    “Calvinism and Arminianism
    Calvary Chapel strives to “strik[e] a balance between extremes” when it comes to controversial theological issues such as Calvinism’s and Arminianism’s conflicting views on salvation.

    Calvary Chapels hold the following views on the five points of Calvinism:

    Calvary Chapel agrees with Calvinism’s view of all men as “sinners” but holds that – with God’s grace – salvation becomes possible.

    Calvinists believe that man’s election to salvation lies completely in the choice of God, while Arminians believe that man’s free will plays a role as well. Calvary Chapel has taken a middle ground approach by saying that “God clearly does choose, but man must also accept God’s invitation to salvation.”

    Calvary strongly sides with Arminianism, which contends that Jesus died “for the whole world”; this contrasts with the Calvinist view that Jesus’ death was intended and therefore efficient only for those who would believe. The Calvary Chapel view is that the “atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ was clearly sufficient to save the entire human race”.

    On dealing with man’s ability to resist God, Calvary sides with Arminianism and believes that “God’s grace can either be resisted or received by the exercise of human free will”. Calvinists believe in irresistible grace.

    Calvary Chapels believe in the perseverance of the saints (true believers) but express deep concern about sinful lifestyles and rebellious hearts among those who call themselves Christians.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvary_Chapel

  • Grace

    Sal,

    There are over 1,000 Calavary Chapel Churches in the U.S. – and over 500 abroad. There are seminaries and Bible colleges in Europe and the U.S.

    They believe the Bible to be inerrant, inspired Word of God. They believe in the Trinity.

    This should be helpful, although I would not agree with everything.

    “Calvinism and Arminianism
    Calvary Chapel strives to “strik[e] a balance between extremes” when it comes to controversial theological issues such as Calvinism’s and Arminianism’s conflicting views on salvation.

    Calvary Chapels hold the following views on the five points of Calvinism:

    Calvary Chapel agrees with Calvinism’s view of all men as “sinners” but holds that – with God’s grace – salvation becomes possible.

    Calvinists believe that man’s election to salvation lies completely in the choice of God, while Arminians believe that man’s free will plays a role as well. Calvary Chapel has taken a middle ground approach by saying that “God clearly does choose, but man must also accept God’s invitation to salvation.”

    Calvary strongly sides with Arminianism, which contends that Jesus died “for the whole world”; this contrasts with the Calvinist view that Jesus’ death was intended and therefore efficient only for those who would believe. The Calvary Chapel view is that the “atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ was clearly sufficient to save the entire human race”.

    On dealing with man’s ability to resist God, Calvary sides with Arminianism and believes that “God’s grace can either be resisted or received by the exercise of human free will”. Calvinists believe in irresistible grace.

    Calvary Chapels believe in the perseverance of the saints (true believers) but express deep concern about sinful lifestyles and rebellious hearts among those who call themselves Christians.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calvary_Chapel

  • Grace

    156 trotk – ENOUGH, you are looking for a fight and I won’t play!

    My experience, education and research trumps a year of college in Germany -

  • Grace

    156 trotk – ENOUGH, you are looking for a fight and I won’t play!

    My experience, education and research trumps a year of college in Germany -

  • trotk

    Then why did you respond?

    Again, whom were you criticizing? (I know that you have to read questions dozens of times before they sink in, but you always play.)

    And humbly, I submit that talking to actual Germans about their views is more enlightening that a book that describes them. The pompous nature of your last sentence knows no bounds. As if no one else has done research. As if your experience is king. Come on.

  • trotk

    Then why did you respond?

    Again, whom were you criticizing? (I know that you have to read questions dozens of times before they sink in, but you always play.)

    And humbly, I submit that talking to actual Germans about their views is more enlightening that a book that describes them. The pompous nature of your last sentence knows no bounds. As if no one else has done research. As if your experience is king. Come on.

  • trotk

    Grace @123 -

    I think it boils down to you thinking too rigidly and without broad vision:

    “same sorta trouble as…crystal cathedral” includes a host of things, such as doctrinal issues, issues of member behavior, an over-inflated sense of the worth of one’s own church (!), etc, etc.

    By responding to a challenge to point out a specific flaw in your own church with a statement of what you don’t do wrong, you act like a Pharisee. “Well, I am not like them. I manage money well, and don’t commit adultery, and don’t murder…”

    Grace, blessed are the POOR (literally beggars – ptochoi in Greek) IN SPIRIT, not those who claim to be okay. Acknowledging our desperate need for the grace of God is the only posture that is pleasing to Him (read Psalm 51:5, 7, and 17).

    And again,

    By the way, you still haven’t answered the challenge:

    “Name one specific where you would identify them as having the same sorta trouble as the ELCA or chrystal cathedral. Just one.”

    (Remember that same sorta trouble as the ELCA or crystal cathedral includes more than money and homosexuality. It also includes false doctrine, a lack of love, worshiping idols…)

  • trotk

    Grace @123 -

    I think it boils down to you thinking too rigidly and without broad vision:

    “same sorta trouble as…crystal cathedral” includes a host of things, such as doctrinal issues, issues of member behavior, an over-inflated sense of the worth of one’s own church (!), etc, etc.

    By responding to a challenge to point out a specific flaw in your own church with a statement of what you don’t do wrong, you act like a Pharisee. “Well, I am not like them. I manage money well, and don’t commit adultery, and don’t murder…”

    Grace, blessed are the POOR (literally beggars – ptochoi in Greek) IN SPIRIT, not those who claim to be okay. Acknowledging our desperate need for the grace of God is the only posture that is pleasing to Him (read Psalm 51:5, 7, and 17).

    And again,

    By the way, you still haven’t answered the challenge:

    “Name one specific where you would identify them as having the same sorta trouble as the ELCA or chrystal cathedral. Just one.”

    (Remember that same sorta trouble as the ELCA or crystal cathedral includes more than money and homosexuality. It also includes false doctrine, a lack of love, worshiping idols…)

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “What I am wondering is what on earth does a congregation do to spend 100 million? I wouldn’t even know where to start, other than buildings etc – but that leaves another 50 million. What? Obviously their income was enough to be able to get those loans – but if you have that kind of income, why borrow the money?”

    Louis, what amazes me is the way people (not just that congregation) waste money. So many times folks say if they had money, they would _______ , but this is an example that it just ain’t so. The building is cool, but it seems kind of wasteful too, especially since they didn’t actually have the money.

  • http://www.biblegateway.com/versions/Contemporary-English-Version-CEV-Bible/ sg

    “What I am wondering is what on earth does a congregation do to spend 100 million? I wouldn’t even know where to start, other than buildings etc – but that leaves another 50 million. What? Obviously their income was enough to be able to get those loans – but if you have that kind of income, why borrow the money?”

    Louis, what amazes me is the way people (not just that congregation) waste money. So many times folks say if they had money, they would _______ , but this is an example that it just ain’t so. The building is cool, but it seems kind of wasteful too, especially since they didn’t actually have the money.

  • kerner

    sg@162:

    They had the money for the building. They got it from poor widows like my wife’s grandma over 30 years ago. The pastors of some of those “God wants you to be prosperous” churches live pretty high off the hog. And the marketing/media production they do is extra expensive. But what they are selling isn’t real. Eventually, a media campaign like theirs runs out of suckers because people catch onto just how shallow the message is. When the contributions slow down to the point where they can’t meet expenses, they have they option to shut down, but they often become victims of their own propaganda. You know, if they just stay positive they’ll get their nimbers back up. But after a while of negative cash flow, they end up $50M in the hole.

  • kerner

    sg@162:

    They had the money for the building. They got it from poor widows like my wife’s grandma over 30 years ago. The pastors of some of those “God wants you to be prosperous” churches live pretty high off the hog. And the marketing/media production they do is extra expensive. But what they are selling isn’t real. Eventually, a media campaign like theirs runs out of suckers because people catch onto just how shallow the message is. When the contributions slow down to the point where they can’t meet expenses, they have they option to shut down, but they often become victims of their own propaganda. You know, if they just stay positive they’ll get their nimbers back up. But after a while of negative cash flow, they end up $50M in the hole.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X