Posted on 05/21/2011 4:46:26 AM PDT by marbren
So my analysis is off, because you haven't finished your fiction. Of course you side will be right.
What are the usual church boiler plate constitutional reasons for a removal of a Pastor. I believe Belteshazzar posted them earlier in the thread.
Who cares at this point, since this an exercise in unreality, just make them up, anyone buying the story won't care because it will be marketed to those who share the same bias.
Remember this is my story and it is fiction.
It certainly is.
There is also a component of sheeple and elderly, like my Dad
Fiction or not, nice observance of the 4th Commandment. Hopefully your father has departed this realm before you publish. I'm sure he would be proud of what his son thinks of him.
GiovannaNicoletta.
I suppose one could say, since you wrote nothing of your own in this post, that you left no fingerprints on what you posted. On the other hand, due to the fact that you posted it without comment, one is left to draw one’s own conclusions about your reasons, which I will not presume to divine. But the very fact that you excerpted what you did excerpt and post from what are already self-evidently (c’mon, the site is nobeliefs.com!!!!!!!) agenda-driven excerpts does not engender in me any confidence in your scholarship or ethics.
As to the treatise, “On the Jews and their lies,” both its writing and publication were unfortunate, but sadly typical of late medieval Europe. Jews were entirely expelled from England in 1290, from France in 1394, and from Spain in 1492 with the support of the Inquisition. The various and many disparate German states began to do similarly in the 16th century. It is a sad chapter in the history of Europe from which no one emerges without some degree of guilt. You, of course, know all this, do you not?
Several things should be said about both what Luther wrote in the treatise and about Lutherans in general. First, Luther did not advocate their death. He expressly wrote: “We dare not avenge ourselves.” (Luther’s Works, vol. 47, p. 268) Second, he concluded the treatise by saying, “My Christ, our dear Lord, convert them mercifully and preserve us steadfastly and immovably in the knowledge of Him, which is eternal life. Amen.” (LW 47, p. 306) Beyond pointing out those two facts, I will not defend any of Luther’s advice to the governing authorities. Third, the very fact that he said, “dear princes and lords, those of you who have Jews under your rule - if my counsel does not please you, find better advise ...” tells you something about the Lutheran doctrine of the Two Kingdoms. The church has no power of the sword. That belongs to the state. To their great credit the Lutheran princes either did not follow Luther’s advice in this or, if they took any of it, it was very little. But their decision to decline Luther’s advice did not in the end stop the growth of anti-semitism in the German states. And it certainly did nothing to reverse what had already happened in England, France, and Spain, nor would it do anything to alter the anti-semitism which was widespread in the various Slavic states farther east. As I said, this is a sad chapter in Europe’s history. No one comes out looking very good.
Lastly, official Lutheran doctrine is to be found in the Book of Concord, which in our day all pastors of the Lutheran groups in America subscribe to unconditionally ... except those of the ELCA. In it there is no endorsement of the kind of thinking behind Luther’s wrong-headed advice regarding the Jews whatsoever. One could even go so far as to say there is not even a hint of it whatsoever. It was repudiated. And it remains so to this day. Those few Lutheran-in-name-only officials of the era of the Third Reich were just that, Lutherans in name only. Naziism by its very nature is anti-Christian, even pagan. The same could be said for any of the so-called Roman Catholics in that era, they were Catholics in name only. I can be very critical of Roman Catholicism, as you and others know, but I readily state that it does not endorse persecution of the Jews, nor to my knowledge does any other reputable variant of Christendom. Thus even the attempt to brand Hitler as a Catholic is ludicrous. Whether he was Catholic at some time earlier in his life he is immaterial. As an adult he was apostate, pagan, and utterly anti-Christian.
The Lutheran bottom line is that Martin Luther too falls under the authority of the Holy Scriptures, which alone interpret themselves and determine true heavenly doctrine from false. Martin Luther was no pope, nor was he ever accepted or endorsed as such. His advice in this case was sadly and inexplicably wrong and shameful. It was rejected. That is the fuller story, brief though it is here given, that your mere quotation of the worst of the excerpts did not bother to touch on.
This will definitely be a main point in my story. Rules today, in our American culture, are not followed and made up as we go. The US constitution trashing is a prime example of this for all of us.
Fiction or not, nice observance of the 4th Commandment. Hopefully your father has departed this realm before you publish. I'm sure he would be proud of what his son thinks of him.
My Dad has a lot to do with my approval needs story. I was disappointed and hurt that he was deceived by the pharisee conspiracy and propaganda. He is one of those who idolize the church. His dementia had not yet manifested itself at the time. By God's grace He did abstain for voting at the congregational meetings. My Mom was really shaken, my Sister and I are on the same page as to what happened. Time has healed the rift my Mom has gotten over her denial of his condition. We all love him for who he is and he is blessed to have 24 hour care at home. I do see some faith growth in my Dad now so I have no fear of his destiny. God's grace can cover it.
This will also be a big part of my fictional story. The LCMS does not follow its rules. P#4 knows the Book of Concord very well. A debate between P#4 and DP will show the lack of Book of Concord understanding of DP.
You have stated the 'LCMS didn't follow its own rules' and here you imply the same. In the real world, how do you back up your assertion? I'm not interested in your fictional world since that is 'based on your experience', and therefore is not your experience. You have made a judgement about an organization to which you purport membership, but have provided no proof of this deviation from its (LCMS) rules. No names are required, but what rule of the organization has been violated and under what circumstances?
That part of the story comes later. I will back it up with facts. My Local church history, I think, is very important to the context of where we are today. I believe I am beginning to understand the dirty Lutheran pride. There are two components one has a lot to do with my ethnic group EG#1. I asked P#4 yesterday if we are an isolated dysfunctional church. P#4 has been around the country with the LCMS. He says the Pride is a systemic issue with the LCMS. Our church is just more overt in the manifestation of the dirty kind of pride. BTW is there a good kind of pride? Isn't humility and being poor in spirit the first step in the walk of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ?
Matthew 5:1-3 (New International Version) 1 Now when Jesus saw the crowds, he went up on a mountainside and sat down. His disciples came to him, 2 and he began to teach them. The Beatitudes He said: 3 “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
So Belteshazzar, Reading your post says Martin Luther was antisemitic because everyone else was at the time. The thesis of my OP may be correct because virtually everyone in Europe at the time believed in replacement theology.
Yes, you may be right. On the other hand you may be of the opinion you are because so many others in our day, especially in America, have fallen under the thrall of dispensational delusions. The dispensational virus seems to be most at home in the American body politic.
Remember, you too are a child of your time no more far or clear sighted than those of other eras. God alone knows the times for what they are, the future for what it will be, and the past for what it actually was. Many forget this, even Christians. Pride stalks us all.
“Do not be wise in your own eyes; fear the LORD and depart from evil.” (Proverbs 3:7)
“Now to the King eternal, immortal, invisible, to God who alone is wise, be honor and glory forever and ever. Amen.” (1 Timothy 1:17)
BTW is there a good kind of pride?
Of course there is, pride in a job well done, pride in a child achievements, pride in honorable service. And as I've told you before pride in a wonderful tool that allows you more easily to do God's work. Libs sound like this? Some have given in to their re-definition of the english language. Pride doesn't neccessarily bring haughtiness. The vets I honor today are proud of their service as am I and righteously so. Yet some still exhibit the negative side of pride on this thread, not in the Lutheran doctrine but in their own ability in their own eyes to fault sinful men for misapplication of solid doctrine based on God's Word without proof.
When you say dispensational delusions I assume you include replacement theology.
Would you agree that the only allies Israel has today are the Christians that agree with my thesis that Israel and the church have different roles in God's plan? I think antisemitism is getting worse than it ever has been. Do you not see the whole world including the USA turning against Israel?
xone makes some interesting points:
Of course there is, pride in a job well done, pride in a child achievements, pride in honorable service. And as I've told you before pride in a wonderful tool that allows you more easily to do God's work. Libs sound like this? Some have given in to their re-definition of the english language. Pride doesn't neccessarily bring haughtiness. The vets I honor today are proud of their service as am I and righteously so. Yet some still exhibit the negative side of pride on this thread, not in the Lutheran doctrine but in their own ability in their own eyes to fault sinful men for misapplication of solid doctrine based on God's Word without proof.
Can we ever take the glory for ourselves?
marbren wrote:
“When you say dispensational delusions I assume you include replacement theology.”
Then you assume wrongly. I reject dispensationalism in all its forms. It is wholly unscriptural. As for “replacement theology,” it is a term whose very foundation and framing I reject.
marbren also wrote:
“Would you agree that the only allies Israel has today are the Christians that agree with my thesis that Israel and the church have different roles in God’s plan?”
No. I don’t agree with your thesis, and I consider myself an ally of Israel. I have been so for my whole life. Nothing will change that. And I know many, many others who think similarly.
marbren also wrote:
“I think antisemitism is getting worse than it ever has been. Do you not see the whole world including the USA turning against Israel?”
I don’t think antisemitism is getting worse than it has ever been. It has been awfully bad at particular times, as a truly careful examination of history will reveal to anyone who will take the effort to look. And it has never been right. As for these days, there is little doubt that the rise in fervor of the radical wing of Islam is helping push more people into a frame of mind that can be manipulated into antisemitism.
Unfortunately, we live in an age of history when, as has happened several times before, islamic ideology, which is a very unhealthy mix of religion and government, is particularly aggressive. What makes them seem more powerful than they are is the very pervasiveness of western media through which they have learned how to manipulate us, exploiting our fears and weakness as well as our general inclination to avoid unnecessary conflict. The media, together with the political left, has also managed to encourage western self-loathing, which the muslims are all too willing to assist them with. Islam are not allies against western civilization, but they share it as an enemy, and thus could be termed co-belligerents.
Just as a point of trivia, my first year Hebrew teacher was a reserve tank commander in the IDF. She is only one of the many Jews I have known in my life, and in some cases, still know. Most are/were simply acquaintances, but a few I count friends, as with all people I have known in my life. I am not unfamiliar with the realities of Israel either past or present.
Hal Lindsey and Whisenut predicted that Christ was coming back by 1988 based on their faulty views of the need for Israel to be reestablished.
Tim LaHaye wrote that the generation which saw WW1 would see the second coming. He has also moved to the unbiblical idea that the generation that was around in 1948 or 1967 will see the return.
Camping’s errors were not based on replacement theology. He’s just a Kook. Christians, Jewish and gentile, are the chosen people through faith.
Lindsey’s pro-Israel view led to his error (Late Great).
Give God the glory for every good thing that comes of our lives.
By my perception of the matter, a Christian should become uncomfortable with compliments and quick to give God the glory and leery of other Christians who still want credit.
In Revelation 21 we see the New Jerusalem in the new heaven and earth with twelve pearl gates each named for a tribe of Israel and twelve foundation layers of gemstones each named for an Apostle. But their names are not mentioned.
The Song of Moses (Deut 32) is mentioned in Revelation 15, but Moses himself is not mentioned. Neither is Enoch, Noah, Abraham, David, Solomon, Elijah, Mary (though some would argue that she is mentioned in chapter 12 by metaphor) and so on. Neither Peter nor Paul are mentioned by name. John is mentioned only as the one receiving the revelation.
Pride is an abomination to God:
The meek will he guide in judgment: and the meek will he teach his way. - Psalms 25:9
Blessed [are] the meek: for they shall inherit the earth. - Matt 5:5
But [let it be] the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, [even the ornament] of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price. - I Peter 3:4
If I were you, I'd be saying "Thank God for the LCMS Lutheran doctrine."
To God be the glory, not man, never man.
Yes, they do believe that the Gospels and the Book of Hebrews, etc. are just for the Jews. Only some of the Pauline Epistles do they acknowledge.
"have arrived"? Why do I hear the theme song of the Jeffersons here?
That old time revival ya say?
Do you ever say anything worth listening to???
For example
The NT was written in Greek, ok -- not all, but let's take your argument for the sake of argument. Remember also that the words of Jesus were mostly Aramaic or Hebrew or maybe even GReek -- we've already shown that in SEmitic languages like Aramaic/hebrew there is no differntiating term between a blood brother and a cousin, let's examine the GReek ouch outos estin o tekton o uios Marias adelphos de Iakobou Iose kai Iouda kai Simonos
If the term is that the adelphoi have the same mother then it would be ho adelphos But that is not used. Without the article adelphos is non-specific and non-exclusive and can mean kinsmen, relatives
Furthermore, I give you two examples of why He didn't have blood brothers of the same mother
He also had brothers, half brothers.
perhaps brothers from his father's earlier wife maybe, or more plausibly cousins.
Have you been to the Middle-East lately? A guy will call his cousin his brother. This is true of this clan society just as it was in the time of Christ.
More importantly, you have no proof that they were the children of Mary -- if they were, then why did Jesus tell John to take care of His mother? that's a classic affront if he had any brothers through Mary
you have no proof for your statement, there is nothing in the Bible that holds to your statement
Yet, let's look at scripture, in Luke 1:27 we read 27To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph == ok, so Mary's married to Joseph, yet in 1:34 we read How shall this be, seeing I know not a man?
Huh? She's already espoused to Joseph, why should she be surprised that the angel says You will conceive and give birth to a son?
Note -- you "will" -- if she expected to have normal marital intercourse, she'd say "ok, I'm a virgin now, so I WILL have sex, conceive and give birth, big deal", yet she is surprised and asks "how? I'm a virgin" -- this does not make sense unless she was not going to have sex at all.
Like pointing out the errors in your belief that Jesus IS the Father and the Holy SPirit IS the Father
Like pointing out the errors in your belief that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are just MODES of God, so since God is a spirit, this belief then denies the Incarnation and the Crucifixion
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.