Is simple better?

[Michael68]

I believe its more PC to use the phrase “picking fruit from a tree one did not plant”

Hahaha

 

[LutheranScholar]

See, that word “tradition” keeps coming up. WHOSE tradition do you speak of? That’s the key question and that’s how you will interpret the Bible. THAT will be your authority. I don’t see any way around it, again, unless your name is Charles Taze Russell.

I guess I could go on a long dissertation about the Early Church and some of the teachings of the Early Church fathers that have been retained in Confessional Lutheranism, but I just got home from visiting my grandfather’s brother, my great- uncle and I’m tired. Suffice it to say that we try to maintain the traditions of the early Church that have been preserved in the Book of Concord, acting in conjunction with Scripture.

 

[LutheranScholar]

Yes, I can certainly understand an affinity for Tradition. Tradition!~ You actually make an argument for Catholics as why Sola Scriptura does not work. Alone with a Bible alone you might be like the poor Ethiopian.

Acts 8/NIV online

30Then Philip ran up to the chariot and heard the man reading Isaiah the prophet. “Do you understand what you are reading?” Philip asked.
31“How can I,” he said, “unless someone explains it to me?” So he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.
32*This is the passage of Scripture the eunuch was reading:

“He was led like a sheep to the slaughter,
****and as a lamb before its shearer is silent,
***so he did not open his mouth.
33
In his humiliation he was deprived of justice.
****Who can speak of his descendants?
For his life was taken from the earth.”
34The eunuch asked Philip, “Tell me, please, who is the prophet talking about, himself or someone else?” 35Then Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus.

This begs the ? as to who has the authority to interpret scriptures. The Lutheran Church does not claim that authority does it? To be an infallible interpreter of Scripture. Just like the Catholic Church there have been issues in interpreting in the LCMS.

I think of the Seminex walkout, the Benke dispute and others all over interpreting scripture and how to do it, or how to interpret scriptures that lead to syncretism or unionism such as 911.**

I don’t even see such words as syncretism and unionism in the Bible. But that’s another story.

Mary

you speak of the perennial tensions between the conservatives and the moderates in the Lutheran Church- Missouri Synod. The traditionals tended to win those arguments, while the moderates tended to leave and form more liberal bodies. Scripture interprets Scripture and there are several dissertations from our Biblical scholars who put a lot ( a lot) of footnotes in the Lutheran Study Bible explaining context and relating them to Lutheran teachings). Syncretism has no place in any Christian Church. If I were to join a Lutheran Church, I want it to be traditional and adhere closely to its doctrine. I would want the same thing from a Presbyterian or Anglican body, were I to join either of those. I can see how two churches who agree on vital points of doctrine can get together for pulpit and altar fellowship, but they had better be pretty close.

 

[MaryT777]

I guess I could go on a long dissertation about the Early Church and some of the teachings of the Early Church fathers that have been retained in Confessional Lutheranism, but I just got home from visiting my grandfather’s brother, my great- uncle and I’m tired. Suffice it to say that we try to maintain the traditions of the early Church that have been preserved in the Book of Concord, acting in conjunction with Scripture.

Hope you enjoyed your visit. The issue is if you try to maintain traditions of the early Church you still have to “shuffle through” all the early Church writings to decide which you will embrace. That means someone is an “authority” in the sense of it was decided SOMEHOW which to choose for the Concord book.

There really is no way around the fact then that Scripture alone did not take top precedent, but man interpreted scripture in some manner.

Mary.

 

[Lenten_ashes]

you speak of the perennial tensions between the conservatives and the moderates in the Lutheran Church- Missouri Synod. The traditionals tended to win those arguments, while the moderates tended to leave and form more liberal bodies. Scripture interprets Scripture and there are several dissertations from our Biblical scholars who put a lot ( a lot) of footnotes in the Lutheran Study Bible explaining context and relating them to Lutheran teachings). Syncretism has no place in any Christian Church. If I were to join a Lutheran Church, I want it to be traditional and adhere closely to its doctrine. I would want the same thing from a Presbyterian or Anglican body, were I to join either of those. I can see how two churches who agree on vital points of doctrine can get together for pulpit and altar fellowship, but they had better be pretty close.

I would only agree with your statement of scripture interpreting scripture if the bible came in textbook form. Even footnotes gets you no where because there are so many different versions and i can play my scholar beats up your scholar, etc, etc. So we just basically go around in circles all day.

And in regards to Lutheran doctrine, are any versions of the bible acceptable there?

And lastly, I I know protestants are outnumbered here and I appreciate you taking the time to answer all these posts from all of us.

 

[LutheranScholar]

Hope you enjoyed your visit. The issue is if you try to maintain traditions of the early Church you still have to “shuffle through” all the early Church writings to decide which you will embrace. That means someone is an “authority” in the sense of it was decided SOMEHOW which to choose for the Concord book.

There really is no way around the fact then that Scripture alone did not take top precedent, but **man interpreted scripture in some manner.
**
Mary.

I cheerfully concede this point, about people interpreting Scripture. It was a good visit, thank you. I just wish somebody would use a tape recorder for all of his stories. I talk about a great- grandfather( in effect, my great- uncle’s Dad), my great- great grandparents ( his grandparents) and it puts time in a little bit more of a perspective, you know? Things Souls who are remembered as little more than names were once living, breathing human souls with their own struggles and triumphs and that’s a good thing to be reminded of every now and again.

 

[LutheranScholar]

I would only agree with your statement of scripture interpreting scripture if the bible came in textbook form. Even footnotes gets you no where because there are so many different versions and i can play my scholar beats up your scholar, etc, etc. So we just basically go around in circles all day.

And in regards to Lutheran doctrine, are any versions of the bible acceptable there?

And lastly, I I know protestants are outnumbered here and I appreciate you taking the time to answer all these posts from all of us.

We normally use the English Standard Version, but I suppose any Bible translation is a good one. I personally try to avoid Paraphrases, though. When people try to paraphrase the Bible, you can get some pretty ridiculous versions. It’s always a pleasure! I appreciate the insights I get from good Catholic posters on various viewpoints and I do try to explain the Lutheran viewpoint as well as I can.

 

[Wannano]

So, from the Bible (not looking for answers - just making a point),

Is Jesus really present in the bread and wine or is this symbolic?

Should infants be baptized?

Is sprinkling ok for baptism or is it immersion only?

Do works have any role in salvation?

Will Christ reign for a literal 1,000 years?

Will only 144,000 be in heaven?

Will Christ rapture his church prior to the Tribulation?

Is the Church visible or is it an invisible body?

Can a person reject Gods grace?

Is a person’s eternal state predestined from birth?

I could go on and on and on. FROM THE BIBLE, put 100 christians in a room and how much agreement would there be? BUT, from how you answer those questions I would pretty much be able to tell what “tradition” you belong to.

In post 108 you said we should ALL be ashamed of ourselves. Why don’t you want to be included?

 

[Wannano]

We already are one faith in Jesus Christ. The issue is when everyone wants everyone else to convert to their tradition or denomination.

You have hit the nail squarely on the head!

 

[Wannano]

I don’t recall seeing that in the Catechism though it could be somewhere between the lines.

Anyway, it can be both literal and spiritual. We had a saint that moved a mountain.

My original whole point in this discussion sure got side railed fast. Oh well, thanks for your charitable reply at least.

I wouldn’t mind having more info on the saint who moved a mountain.

 

[MaryT777]

I cheerfully concede this point, about people interpreting Scripture. It was a good visit, thank you. I just wish somebody would use a tape recorder for all of his stories. I talk about a great- grandfather( in effect, my great- uncle’s Dad), my great- great grandparents ( his grandparents) and it puts time in a little bit more of a perspective, you know?** Things Souls who are remembered as little more than names were once living, breathing human souls with their own struggles and triumphs and that’s a good thing to be reminded of every now and again**.

Yes, I like how you stated the above that I bolded. My mother often says they wish they would have recorded some of the stories my grandparents told. You seem to have a high affinity for family and that is always nice to see.

God Bless,

Mary.

 

[Reuben_J]

My original whole point in this discussion sure got side railed fast. Oh well, thanks for your charitable reply at least.

I wouldn’t mind having more info on the saint who moved a mountain.

St Gregory Thaumaturgus, 3rd century saint.

I came across this saint randomly many years back while discussing about faith that moved mountain.

St Simon the Tanner, 10th century saint of the Coptic Orthodox tradition.

 

[ajcstr]

I guess I could go on a long dissertation about the Early Church and some of the teachings of the Early Church fathers that have been retained in Confessional Lutheranism, but I just got home from visiting my grandfather’s brother, my great- uncle and I’m tired. Suffice it to say that we try to maintain the traditions of the early Church that have been preserved in the Book of Concord, acting in conjunction with Scripture.

Well, maybe an abridged version would be interesting

 

[ajcstr]

It was a work impossible for the rich man to do at that point. Again, if the faith is there, so will the love be and when the faith is strong enough, people will leave their lives behind to follow Jesus. The Apostles are cases in point. Peter wanted to know in so many words " what was in it for them," because they did leave everything behind. Did Jesus rebuke Peter for his lack of faith ( again)? No, he answered the man’s question. Faith leads to love which leads to work. *Of course *works are going to follow faith. How can they not? Luther wasn’t condemning good works at all and as a matter of faith, he says that they are natural products of faith, " fruits of the spirit," if you will bookofconcord.org/defense_19_goodworks.php . Sure, the rich man would have been doing a mighty work if he had it in him to do what Jesus suggested so he could be perfect. He couldn’t, he didn’t and Jesus went on to speak of how difficult it would be for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God, but by the power of the Holy Spirit and the grace of God, it could be done. The rich man just missed out, that was all… as would have almost any other rich person used to creature comforts and having others " do" for them. It wound up being a promise on those who maintained their faith.

Well this leads into a justification discussion nicely.

My take would square with James, the rich man is given an opportunity to demonstrate his faith through his works, but he declined to do so thus rejecting the grace (maybe more precicely not cooperating with the grace). So the faith this man had was a dead faith.

Now, just to cut to the chase, I believe our only disagreements would be:

1. I would view justification as a process not a one time event (hence the justification/sanctification issue).
2. My understanding is that Luther would say that there is no cooperation with grace, you would either accept or reject the grace and the good works merely flow from the grace but would have no role in justification.

 

[LutheranScholar]

Well this leads into a justification discussion nicely.

My take would square with James, the rich man is given an opportunity to demonstrate his faith through his works, but he declined to do so thus rejecting the grace (maybe more precicely not cooperating with the grace). So the faith this man had was a dead faith.

Now, just to cut to the chase, I believe our only disagreements would be:

1. I would view justification as a process not a one time event (hence the justification/sanctification issue).
2. My understanding is that Luther would say that there is no cooperation with grace, you would either **accept or reject **the grace and the good works merely flow from the grace but would have no role in justification.

Here’s something from the Smalcald Articles about Justification and Good Works:

*Part III, Article XIII. How One is Justified before God, and of Good Works.

1] What I have hitherto and constantly taught concerning this I know not how to change in the least, namely, that by faith, as St. Peter says, we acquire a new and clean heart, and God will and does account us entirely righteous and holy for the sake of Christ, our Mediator. And although sin in the flesh has not yet been altogether removed or become dead, yet He will not punish or remember it.

2] And such faith, renewal, and forgiveness of sins is followed by good works. And what there is still sinful or imperfect also in them shall not be accounted as sin or defect, even [and that, too] for Christ’s sake; but the entire man, both as to his person and his works, is to be called and to be righteous and holy from pure grace and mercy, shed upon us [unfolded] and spread over us in Christ. 3] Therefore we cannot boast of many merits and works, if they are viewed apart from grace and mercy, but as it is written, 1 Cor. 1:31: He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord, namely, that he has a gracious God. For thus all is well. 4] We say, besides, that if good works do not follow, faith is false and not true. *

Here’s something from the LCMS Cyclopedia about sanctification:
*
Sanctification.
In a wide sense, sanctification includes all effects of God’s Word in man (cf., e.g., Acts 26:18; Eph 5:26; 2 Th 2:13; Heb 10:14; 1 Ptr 1:2). See also Conversion, III; Good Works.

In a narrow sense, sanctification is the spiritual growth (1 Co 3:9; 9:24; Eph 4:15; Ph 3:12) that follows justification (Mt 7:16–18; Jn 3:6; Eph 2:10). By God’s grace (Gl 5:22–23; Ph 2:13) a Christian cooperates in this work (2 Co 6:1; 7:1; Ph 2:12; 1 Ti 4:14; FC SD II 65–66); through the Holy Spirit’s work faith is increased daily, love strengthened, and the image of God renewed (cf., e.g., Jn 14:26; 16:13–14; Ro 6:15–23; 8:15–16, 26; 14:17; 15:13; 1 Co 12:7–11; Gl 5:16–18; 2 Ptr 3:18). A believer’s good works are not perfect; but sins of weakness are forgiven (Jn 15:3). Sanctification differs in the same Christian at different times (Ro 7:14–19; Gl 2:11; 5:17; 1 Jn 1:8).

God works sanctification only through the means of grace.*

The most comforting part of the doctrine of sanctification is that which speaks of the completion of sanctification in heaven (Ps 17:15; I Co 13:12; 15:20–57; Rv 7:9–17; 21:4–7). RLS*

I bolded that statement about either accepting or rejecting grace because in a Confessional view, even that implies a cooperation with God that we simply don’t have on our own. I don’t have enough bytes to copy/ paste, so I’ll just provide the link:
bookofconcord.org/sd-freewill.php.

 

[ajcstr]

I bolded that statement about either accepting or rejecting grace because in a Confessional view, even that implies a cooperation with God that we simply don’t have on our own.

.

And wouldn’t you say this is the crux of the issue. We would agree that “Its all about the grace”. If you take justification/salvation together we would probably not disagree in principal. I am not familiar with the various Lutheran groups, but wasn’t there a joint declaration on Justification between Catholics and Lutherans?

Our differences, well they have been debated by much greater minds than mine (I won’t speak for you) so I would not expect to make any headway there.

 

[LutheranScholar]

Don’t get me wrong… Justification did happen in a moment of time… nearly 2,000 years ago, when Jesus died and rose again from the dead. We apply that universal justification to ourselves individually when we partake of the Word and Sacraments ( at least, that happens to be my opinion. I might be wrong, but in the period of time I’ve been a practicing and believing Lutheran, I haven’t seen anything to contradict this). Here’s a link that might be able to explain some things a little bit better: issuesetcarchive.org/articles/bissar17.htm

I’m not that good with words ( although I use them enough), so sometimes I need other things to help clarify my thoughts, the work of other people who know more than I do and can explain things better than I can.

 

[MaryT777]

And wouldn’t you say this is the crux of the issue. We would agree that “Its all about the grace”. If you take justification/salvation together we would probably not disagree in principal. I am not familiar with the various Lutheran groups, but wasn’t there a joint declaration on Justification between Catholics and Lutherans?

Our differences, well they have been debated by much greater minds than mine (I won’t speak for you) so I would not expect to make any headway there.

There was a Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification signed between the Catholic Church and the LWF Lutheran World Federation which would include ELCA Lutherans.

The Confessional Lutherans such as LCMS and WELS did not sign this agreement and are not part of the LWF. A statement was even said by the President of the LCMS at the time that it was a “giant step back for Lutheranism” and a compromise of doctrine by the ELCA.

There was a response back from the Catholic Church recognizing the two “Signatures” were different as the Vatican has a signature that can bind doctrine for all Catholics and the Lutherans do not.

Thus sometimes there is confusion regarding this doctrine. One Lutheran from one synod can sign a document that is not recognized by a Lutheran President of another synod.

Mary.

 

[LutheranScholar]

There was a Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification signed between the Catholic Church and the LWF Lutheran World Federation which would include ELCA Lutherans.

The Confessional Lutherans such as LCMS and WELS did not sign this agreement and are not part of the LWF. A statement was even said by the President of the LCMS at the time that it was a “giant step back for Lutheranism” and a compromise of doctrine by the ELCA.

There was a response back from the Catholic Church recognizing the two “Signatures” were different as the Vatican has a signature that can bind doctrine for all Catholics and the Lutherans do not.

Thus sometimes there is confusion regarding this doctrine. One Lutheran from one synod can sign a document that is not recognized by a Lutheran President of another synod.

Mary.

The above stated is quite true. I do, however, offer this little snippet on how the International Lutheran Council and the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity have been working together…

*Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity (PCPCU) and the International Lutheran Council (ILC) to Hold Informal International Dialogue
Posted on November 19, 2013 by Al Collver
Prof. Dr. Werner Klan, Rev. Dr. Robert Bugbee, Bishop Hans-Jörg Voigt, Cardinal Kurt Koch, Rev. Dr. Albert B. Collver, Monsignore Dr. Matthias Türk
Prof. Dr. Werner Klan, Rev. Dr. Robert Bugbee, Bishop Hans-Jörg Voigt, Cardinal Kurt Koch, Rev. Dr. Albert B. Collver, Monsignore Dr. Matthias Türk

VATICAN CITY – The Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity (PCPCU) and the International Lutheran Council (ILC), an organization for the purpose of encouraging, strengthening, and promoting confessional Lutheran theology, met to discuss the possibility of extending local and regional informal discussions into an
informal ecumenical dialogue process on the international level. The meeting between the PCPCU and the ILC primarily occurred after several informal discussions between some ILC members and Roman Catholic organizations resulted in positive outcomes, especially those held between the Lutheran Theological Seminary Oberursel of the Independent Evangelical Lutheran Church (SELK) and the Johann-Adam-Möhler Institute for Ecumenism in Paderborn, Germany. Other informal discussions that contributed to the meeting between the PCPCU and the ILC included those held between The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod and the Archdiocese of Saint Louis and the United States Catholic Conference of Bishops, and those between Lutheran Church–Canada (LCC) and representatives of the Canadian Council of Catholic Bishops.

Cardinal Kurt Koch, President of the Dicastery, and Monsignore Dr. Matthias Türk represented the PCPCU. Bishop Hans-Jörg Voigt, Chairman, Rev. Dr. Albert B. Collver, Executive Secretary, Rev. Dr. Robert Bugbee, Vice-chairman, and Prof. Dr. Werner Klän, Lutheran Theological Seminary Oberursel, represented the ILC.

The discussion had three primary points: A Presentation of the International Lutheran Council (ILC) including its history and priorities, Ecumenical Relations between ILC members and the Roman Catholic Church, and Future Ecumenical Goals.

After a productive discussion, it was proposed that the local and regional informal discussions may be extended to an informal international dialogue process between the ILC and the Roman Catholic Church. These international series of consultations would be delegated to the ILC executive committee and to the Johann-Adam-Möhler Institute for Ecumenism. The goals of these discussions would be to define more unity between the churches represented by the ILC and the Roman Catholic Church and to offer a deeper understanding of the work already accomplished by the Lutheran – Roman Catholic dialogue on the international and regional level.

Cardinal Koch and Bishop Voigt expressed gratitude for the meeting and looked forward to a deepening of relationships between member churches of the ILC and the Roman Catholic Church.

The ILC and the Johann-Adam-Möhler Institute for Ecumenism after an organizational meeting, propose to hold two meetings a year for the next three years with the results of these discussions to be presented to the PCPCU.

———————

About the International Lutheran Council
The ILC is a worldwide association of established confessional Lutheran church bodies, consisting of 34 member churches, which proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ on the basis of an unconditional commitment to the Holy Scriptures as the inspired and infallible Word of God and to the Lutheran Confessions contained in the Book of Concord as the true and faithful exposition of the Word of God. (www.ilc-online.org)

About the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity
The Pontifical Council is entrusted with the promotion of Christian Unity. It carries out this task in liaison with the various departments of the Roman Curia and through ecumenical relationships and theological dialogues with the other Christian Churches and ecclesial Communities on the world wide level. (www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/)*

 

[MichaelP3]

And another thing that really pisses me off. Christianity is under attack, big time, and we are here squabbling with each other about justification, sanctification, and every other thing you can think of when we should be uniting to save our faith. We should all be ashamed of ourselves.

Can’t disagree! Maybe not in such terms, but I have implied this before. Do you have an idea how to do this?