Every so often, folks from other camps especially the Reformed camp claim Lutherans are hardly in line with Luther theologically.
So let's put that to the test.
Confessional Lutheranism holds to Book of Concord as biblical rule of faith. That book contains three writings by Luther in full, three writings in full in Luther's lifetime that he agreed to and with, and a longer version of Formula of Concord that largely quote or paraphrase Luther (yes including his Bondage which was made binding on the Lutheran faith in it).
So explain again how we- confessional Lutherans- are out of step with Luther theologically again?
Here we stand.
9/15/16
"Free" Will???
The common error that those who believe in "free will" make is that
they look at passages with words like "choose" and "come" and
"whosoever", and then wrongly *assume* that that must mean that they
have the *ability* to choose. The Bible nowhere teaches this.
In fact, it teaches quite the opposite. Jesus says no one *can* (ability) come to Him unless the Father draws him. Jesus says none have life except those to whom the Son has revealed Himself. Romans 8:7-8 says that the sinful mind is hostile God, it does not submit to God's Law, nor can it do so. Those who are in the flesh *cannot* please God. Not to mention that the Bible describes the unregenerate as *dead* in sins and trespasses.
In fact, it teaches quite the opposite. Jesus says no one *can* (ability) come to Him unless the Father draws him. Jesus says none have life except those to whom the Son has revealed Himself. Romans 8:7-8 says that the sinful mind is hostile God, it does not submit to God's Law, nor can it do so. Those who are in the flesh *cannot* please God. Not to mention that the Bible describes the unregenerate as *dead* in sins and trespasses.
Notice, then, that these passages teach that mankind is *accountable* to choose, although they lack the moral ability to do so.
These folks counter by saying "Well then how can God say we are responsible then?"
Scripture declares we are nonetheless accountable. Jesus also commands us to be *perfect*, although none of us can do that. None of us have the ability. But we are still accountable to do so.
Please notice, then, that the only Perfection we will ever have is Christ Himself. And none of us desire Christ unless the Spirit convicts through the law and shows us Christ in the Gospel.
What many of these folks usually do is they say that God draws everyone, then leaves the rest up to man. This is another fundamental error because not only does the Bible nowhere teach this, but it also separates God's Spirit from His Word and His Sacraments. God is always pleased to *draw* people through His preached Word and His Sacraments administered. The Spirit willingly binds Himself to these.
These folks counter by saying "Well then how can God say we are responsible then?"
Scripture declares we are nonetheless accountable. Jesus also commands us to be *perfect*, although none of us can do that. None of us have the ability. But we are still accountable to do so.
Please notice, then, that the only Perfection we will ever have is Christ Himself. And none of us desire Christ unless the Spirit convicts through the law and shows us Christ in the Gospel.
What many of these folks usually do is they say that God draws everyone, then leaves the rest up to man. This is another fundamental error because not only does the Bible nowhere teach this, but it also separates God's Spirit from His Word and His Sacraments. God is always pleased to *draw* people through His preached Word and His Sacraments administered. The Spirit willingly binds Himself to these.
9/8/16
The Evangelical Lutheran Church is the True Church Because of the Gospel
Many religions compete for which is the true one. And many branches
of Christianity claim they are the truest to the Scriptures, or the true
church. However, unfortunately, many of these claim such merely for the
sake of "being right." They usually base it upon alleged "apostolic
succession," or "the successor of Peter," or "truest to the Scriptures."
However, even the last case of "truest to the Scriptures" begs the question of *how*. How should the Scriptures be interpreted?
However, even the last case of "truest to the Scriptures" begs the question of *how*. How should the Scriptures be interpreted?
The Evangelical Lutheran Church, or Evangelical Catholics, believes
that what constitutes the true visible Church on earth is the pure
preaching of the Gospel and the pure administration of the Sacraments
according to the Gospel. We believe that the Gospel is what constitutes
the proper interpretation of Scripture. Everything is about Jesus
Christ† and His work for us.
This is expressed in our Lutheran Confessions, which we believe to be faithful to the Good News of the Gospel. Apart from the Gospel, there is no church. This is why all false doctrine is dangerous. Anything that waters down the Good News of the Gospel inevitably points us toward our own efforts.
God must always come *down* to us. The Gospel is for us, for us poor, weary sinners.
It is all about the Gospel. Apart from this, there is no good news.
Christ is for us in Word and Sacrament!
This is expressed in our Lutheran Confessions, which we believe to be faithful to the Good News of the Gospel. Apart from the Gospel, there is no church. This is why all false doctrine is dangerous. Anything that waters down the Good News of the Gospel inevitably points us toward our own efforts.
God must always come *down* to us. The Gospel is for us, for us poor, weary sinners.
It is all about the Gospel. Apart from this, there is no good news.
Christ is for us in Word and Sacrament!
9/4/16
Forgiveness, Life, and Salvation
Rome says that the Eucharist forgives only venial sins, but not
mortal sins. This is absolutely impossible, for through the Eucharist we
are receiving Christ.
Rome says that Holy Baptism only forgives original, past, and present, but not future sins. But this is impossible. For through Holy Baptism, we are brought into union with Christ.
Rome says that Absolution is conditional and dependent upon works of contrition. But this is impossible, because no one's works are perfect, but are always tainted with sin. Further, it is impossible to even know all our sins, for our hearts are that deceitful, even after regeneration.
Rome says that Holy Baptism only forgives original, past, and present, but not future sins. But this is impossible. For through Holy Baptism, we are brought into union with Christ.
Rome says that Absolution is conditional and dependent upon works of contrition. But this is impossible, because no one's works are perfect, but are always tainted with sin. Further, it is impossible to even know all our sins, for our hearts are that deceitful, even after regeneration.
The bottom line is that, in Roman theology, Christ recedes into the
background and ultimately has to be viewed as a mere tack-on.
If we have been united with Christ in Holy Baptism, partake of His Flesh and Blood in the Holy Eucharist, and hear His gracious Words of forgiveness in Holy Absolution, it is impossible for sin to remain. Although it remains in our heart, we are shielded and clothed with Christ Our Righteousness.
All sins are forgiven.
And where there is forgiveness of sins, there is also life and salvation.
If we have been united with Christ in Holy Baptism, partake of His Flesh and Blood in the Holy Eucharist, and hear His gracious Words of forgiveness in Holy Absolution, it is impossible for sin to remain. Although it remains in our heart, we are shielded and clothed with Christ Our Righteousness.
All sins are forgiven.
And where there is forgiveness of sins, there is also life and salvation.
8/19/16
THE LUTHERAN EUCHARIST IS FOR THOSE WHO BELIEVE THE LUTHERAN EUCHARIST
Among Lutheran brethren, there are some who are concerned that the historic and confessional view of closed Communion ("Lutheran altars for Lutherans only") comes off as exclusivistic and unloving. Many of these well-meaning Lutheran brethren are concerned that, they believe, it is impossible to come to full agreement in doctrine this side of heaven--yet full agreement in doctrine is required for Altar fellowship in Lutheran churches.
For the sake of these brethren, I would like to take a different approach, which I think may be more helpful when it comes to the nature of the Sacrament of the Altar, and which perhaps, I hope, will help them, as well as others, understand why we believe that the Lutheran Altar is for Lutherans, and why we believe Lutherans should only partake with Lutherans.
THE VERY NATURE OF THE MOST BLESSED SACRAMENT IN LUTHERANISM
As Lutherans, we confess and believe a very unique view of the Supper, that only Lutheranism confesses. We confess that with the bread and wine, we receive the very Body and Blood of Christ, into our mouths and bodies, for the forgiveness of sins.
Do other traditions believe this?
*Our evangelical friends do not believe this. They believe the Supper is simply a remembrance and an action of meditation on Christ's death. They do not believe they receive the Body and Blood of Christ into their mouths. So, why would an evangelical want to come to a Lutheran Altar? And why would a Lutheran want to partake at an evangelical assembly?
*Our reformed friends do not believe this. They believe only those who have faith receive the sacrament, and only in a spiritual sense. Our concern as Lutherans is that this takes away objective assurance, and causes a person to go inward with reflection. Our further concern is that if the sacraments are only gracious for the elect, how do we know God is gracious toward *us*? Our concern is that this is damaging to the Gospel. The Gospel always includes "for *you*."
*Our Roman Catholic friends, although they confess the Real Presence, believe instead that it is a sacrifice that they are offering to God for both the sins of the living and the sins of the dead in purgatory. We Lutherans reject this as sacrilege. We reject purgatory. Why would any Lutheran want to participate in a Roman Catholic Eucharist?
*Our Eastern friends are similar, although their doctrine of purgatory is not as developed as Rome's. Many of them do not like the term "purgatory," but nonetheless they still believe the Eucharist is a sacrifice for the sins of the dead as well.
LUTHERANS TAKE CHRIST'S INSTITUTION VERY SERIOUSLY
We Lutherans take Christ's Words of Institution very seriously. No one has the right to take away the Cup of His Blood, as Rome used to do--and still does in some parishes. No one has the right to skip drinking the Blood.
Christ did not institute a Supper that is offered for sins of the dead; much less is there such a thing as purgatory.
Christ instituted the Sacrament of the Altar for comfort, for the forgiveness of sins.
For you.
Given the above, why would any Lutheran want to partake at any other Altar, given what we confess the Eucharist actually *is*?
And why would any non-Lutheran want to partake at a Lutheran Altar, since they do not believe what we believe about the Eucharist?
Considering the above, closed Communion makes perfect sense.
For the sake of these brethren, I would like to take a different approach, which I think may be more helpful when it comes to the nature of the Sacrament of the Altar, and which perhaps, I hope, will help them, as well as others, understand why we believe that the Lutheran Altar is for Lutherans, and why we believe Lutherans should only partake with Lutherans.
THE VERY NATURE OF THE MOST BLESSED SACRAMENT IN LUTHERANISM
As Lutherans, we confess and believe a very unique view of the Supper, that only Lutheranism confesses. We confess that with the bread and wine, we receive the very Body and Blood of Christ, into our mouths and bodies, for the forgiveness of sins.
Do other traditions believe this?
*Our evangelical friends do not believe this. They believe the Supper is simply a remembrance and an action of meditation on Christ's death. They do not believe they receive the Body and Blood of Christ into their mouths. So, why would an evangelical want to come to a Lutheran Altar? And why would a Lutheran want to partake at an evangelical assembly?
*Our reformed friends do not believe this. They believe only those who have faith receive the sacrament, and only in a spiritual sense. Our concern as Lutherans is that this takes away objective assurance, and causes a person to go inward with reflection. Our further concern is that if the sacraments are only gracious for the elect, how do we know God is gracious toward *us*? Our concern is that this is damaging to the Gospel. The Gospel always includes "for *you*."
*Our Roman Catholic friends, although they confess the Real Presence, believe instead that it is a sacrifice that they are offering to God for both the sins of the living and the sins of the dead in purgatory. We Lutherans reject this as sacrilege. We reject purgatory. Why would any Lutheran want to participate in a Roman Catholic Eucharist?
*Our Eastern friends are similar, although their doctrine of purgatory is not as developed as Rome's. Many of them do not like the term "purgatory," but nonetheless they still believe the Eucharist is a sacrifice for the sins of the dead as well.
LUTHERANS TAKE CHRIST'S INSTITUTION VERY SERIOUSLY
We Lutherans take Christ's Words of Institution very seriously. No one has the right to take away the Cup of His Blood, as Rome used to do--and still does in some parishes. No one has the right to skip drinking the Blood.
Christ did not institute a Supper that is offered for sins of the dead; much less is there such a thing as purgatory.
Christ instituted the Sacrament of the Altar for comfort, for the forgiveness of sins.
For you.
Given the above, why would any Lutheran want to partake at any other Altar, given what we confess the Eucharist actually *is*?
And why would any non-Lutheran want to partake at a Lutheran Altar, since they do not believe what we believe about the Eucharist?
Considering the above, closed Communion makes perfect sense.
8/9/16
Word, not just water, makes Baptism
We hold to it isn't the water by itself that makes baptism. It's the Word that makes baptism. The Word by which Christ washes through with water as outward means. It is by which the Holy Spirit calls us to faith that clings to Christ alone given unto us by outward and objective means. And out of the Father's grace, love and mercy, it is by which to draw us.
Being that the Word makes baptism, it means God can operate outside baptism to send forth His word to us, such as when it is preached.
So we deny one is lost for lack of chances to be baptized. Only unbelief condemns and cuts us off from Christ's Saving work.
It remains true though baptism is objective means we can point back to in regards to when God delivers His promises to us.
And not a one time in the water is baptism.
Our baptism covers our entire Christian life.
We were buried with Christ and in baptism and raised with Him to newness of life.
Daily we are to live out our baptism. Die to old Adam and alive with Christ.
And it is so by the Word and Sacrament giving, nourishing and strengthening our faith/assurance.
Our assurance is never inwards. It is outwards to the objective promises God give us in Word and Sacrament:
In Christ crucified, we are forgiven and our sins washed away.
Faith alone is the instrument in which we are justified. Object of that is Christ crucified for our sins. That is what faith alone receives. Word and Sacrament are means to deliver that to us and give us faith to receive what God gives us.
The Gospel of Christ crucified for our sins.
Here we stand.
Being that the Word makes baptism, it means God can operate outside baptism to send forth His word to us, such as when it is preached.
So we deny one is lost for lack of chances to be baptized. Only unbelief condemns and cuts us off from Christ's Saving work.
It remains true though baptism is objective means we can point back to in regards to when God delivers His promises to us.
And not a one time in the water is baptism.
Our baptism covers our entire Christian life.
We were buried with Christ and in baptism and raised with Him to newness of life.
Daily we are to live out our baptism. Die to old Adam and alive with Christ.
And it is so by the Word and Sacrament giving, nourishing and strengthening our faith/assurance.
Our assurance is never inwards. It is outwards to the objective promises God give us in Word and Sacrament:
In Christ crucified, we are forgiven and our sins washed away.
Faith alone is the instrument in which we are justified. Object of that is Christ crucified for our sins. That is what faith alone receives. Word and Sacrament are means to deliver that to us and give us faith to receive what God gives us.
The Gospel of Christ crucified for our sins.
Here we stand.
7/31/16
No We're Not
Lutheranism is Lutheranism. We do not borrow some from Calvinism and some from Arminianism and some from Rome. We are Evangelical Catholic. We are Lutheran.
It's way too common for Evangelicals who have some amount of learning experience in theology to try to jam Lutheranism into the debate between Calvin and Arminius. This simply does not work, and I will show you why. We ought to give these folks a pass on this, as it is not any sort of malicious attempt against Lutherans in any way. However, we do need to get the word out there about what we believe. Education is paramount in this endeavor. It must be shown, as we on this blog try to do to the best of our abilities, that we simply do not fit within either of these radical reformation traditions.
I was guilty of this too at one time. When I first started digging into theology, I jumped into Calvinism and Arminianism. I was simply being a good evangelical, and after all, evangelicals fall into one of these two categories; or a mixture of the two. Ultimately I cast my lot with Calvin and the Reformed tradition. I saw everything through the lens of the sovereignty of God, predestination, and covenant theology. I thought Lutherans were essentially Arminians, because Lutheranism rejected the P in the famous TULIP.
Then I came across some learned Lutherans online. I didn't listen to them much at first. I thought Lutheranism was a jumbled irrational mess. Little did I know, my world was about to be rocked.
So, why don't Lutherans fit with evangelicals? Simply put, it's the Sacraments. Whereas we can definitely have a scholarly conversation with Calvinists and Arminians regarding election, free will, and other things, we begin in a completely different place. For us, we start and end with Christ crucified for the forgiveness of all of our sins.
Why the Sacraments? Because in Lutheranism, you simply cannot divorce the Sacraments in any way whatsoever from salvation and justification. In Calvinist Covenant Theology, the Covenant of Grace has a substance and an administration. That is to say, there are two aspects to this covenant. One is external and one is internal. The external covenant is the administration of the covenant, where the Word is preached and the Sacraments administered. The internal is the substance, where the Holy Spirit gives that special inward call to the elect alone and no one else. This strips the Sacraments of objectivity. In Arminianism, everything hinges on the free will decision of the individual. Hence, modern American Evangelicalism, which is strongly Arminian and in many cases outright Pelagian, is big on getting people to make a decision for Jesus, ask Him into their hearts, or come forward for an altar call. All of these practices assume a choice is needed to enact salvation. This is the horrendous error of decisional regeneration or decision theology.
We don't fit. In Lutheranism, Christ is right there for us in our baptism. Saving us. We are baptized into the Triune God, objectively. It's not part of an external covenant. It's grace for you, and it saves.
We also need constant forgiveness. How do we know we are receiving constant forgiveness? Well, because some dude in a white dress who is called and ordained stands in the place of Christ (cf. John 20:23) and pronounces "I forgive you all of your sins in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Why do we believe this? Because Christ Himself ordained the Office of the Holy Ministry and gave the Keys to the Kingdom to the Church.
How do I receive forgiveness in other ways? Well, because some dude in a white dress consecrates ordinary bread and wine and Christ feeds us His true body and blood for the forgiveness of sins (cf. Matthew 26:26-28).
How do I know I am forgiven? Because I am baptized into the Name of God. He saved me right there; His Word working through ordinary water. Because I eat the body and blood of Jesus, in my mouth, orally. Now, for any of you Calvinists or Arminians who happen to stumble across this blog post, be honest with yourself. According to your theology, us Lutherans are idolatrous heretics. We know we are forgiven because we eat and drink Jesus in our mouths. Think about that. We know we are forgiven because the guy in the white dress acts on behalf of Christ and forgives us all of our sins. Think about that.
I close with an excellent quote from Gene Veith. He states:
"To understand Lutheranism, it is necessary to recognize that the Lutheran understanding of salvation by grace and justification by faith cannot be separated from the Lutheran teachings of baptismal regeneration and the real presence of Christ in the bread and wine of Holy Communion. These teachings are all intimately connected with each other in Lutheran theology and spirituality. If you play them off against each other, thinking you can have Lutheran soteriology without Lutheran sacramental theology, you might have Calvinists or Baptists or Calvinist Baptists or something else, but you cannot have Lutherans. Nor can you have Lutheran Calvinists or Calvinist Lutherans or Lutheran Baptists or Baptist Lutherans." Gospel Coalition Debate
Exactly. We do not fit.
And no we are not ______. Fill in the blank.
We are Lutheran. Here We Stand.
+Pax+
And no we are not ______. Fill in the blank.
We are Lutheran. Here We Stand.
+Pax+
7/26/16
Baptizing the Baby Polycarp
Since the Reformation, debates continue on when the earliest practice of infant baptism took place. Often cited as evidence are the words of Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna (who sat at the feet of the apostle John) right before he was martyred,
We read in Martyrdom of Polycarp:
Chapter 9. Polycarp refuses to revile Christ
Now, as Polycarp was entering into the stadium, there came to him a voice from heaven, saying, Be strong, and show yourself a man, O Polycarp! No one saw who it was that spoke to him; but those of our brethren who were present heard the voice. And as he was brought forward, the tumult became great when they heard that Polycarp was taken. And when he came near, the proconsul asked him whether he was Polycarp. On his confessing that he was, [the proconsul] sought to persuade him to deny [Christ], saying, Have respect to your old age, and other similar things, according to their custom, [such as], Swear by the fortune of Cæsar; repent, and say, Away with the Atheists. But Polycarp, gazing with a stern countenance on all the multitude of the wicked heathen then in the stadium, and waving his hand towards them, while with groans he looked up to heaven, said, Away with the Atheists. Then, the proconsul urging him, and saying, Swear, and I will set you at liberty, reproach Christ; Polycarp declared, Eighty and six years have I served Him, and He never did me any injury: how then can I blaspheme my King and my Saviour?
In his own words, Polycarp said he was a believer in Christ his entire life even from birth. Now how does that support the argument he was baptized as an infant?
Consider back then what baptism was seen as. It was regarded as means of grace by which God gives faith and rebirth.
For example, The Epistle of Barnabas stated:
Chapter 11. Baptism and the cross prefigured in the Old Testament
Let us further inquire whether the Lord took any care to foreshadow the water [of baptism] and the cross. Concerning the water, indeed, it is written, in reference to the Israelites, that they should not receive that baptism which leads to the remission of sins, but should procure another for themselves. The prophet therefore declares, Be astonished, O heaven, and let the earth tremble at this, because this people has committed two great evils: they have forsaken Me, a living fountain, and have hewn out for themselves broken cisterns. Is my holy hill Zion a desolate rock? For you shall be as the fledglings of a bird, which fly away when the nest is removed. Isaiah 16:1-2 And again says the prophet, I will go before you and make level the mountains, and will break the brazen gates, and bruise in pieces the iron bars; and I will give you the secret, hidden, invisible treasures, that they may know that I am the Lord God. Isaiah 45:2-3 And He shall dwell in a lofty cave of the strong rock. Furthermore, what says He in reference to the Son? His water is sure; you shall see the King in His glory, and your soul shall meditate on the fear of the Lord. Isaiah 33:16-18 And again He says in another prophet, The man who does these things shall be like a tree planted by the courses of waters, which shall yield its fruit in due season; and his leaf shall not fade, and all that he does shall prosper. Not so are the ungodly, not so, but even as chaff, which the wind sweeps away from the face of the earth. Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in judgment, nor sinners in the counsel of the just; for the Lord knows the way of the righteous, but the way of the ungodly shall perish. Mark how He has described at once both the water and the cross. For these words imply, Blessed are they who, placing their trust in the cross, have gone down into the water; for, says He, they shall receive their reward in due time: then He declares, I will recompense them. But now He says, Their leaves shall not fade. This means, that every word which proceeds out of your mouth in faith and love shall tend to bring conversion and hope to many. Again, another prophet says, And the land of Jacob shall be extolled above every land. Zephaniah 3:19 This means the vessel of His Spirit, which He shall glorify. Further, what says He? And there was a river flowing on the right, and from it arose beautiful trees; and whosoever shall eat of them shall live for ever. Ezekiel 47:12 This means, that we indeed descend into the water full of sins and defilement, but come up, bearing fruit in our heart, having the fear [of God] and trust in Jesus in our spirit. And whosoever shall eat of these shall live for ever, This means: Whosoever, He declares, shall hear you speaking, and believe, shall live for ever.
Another example would be The Epistle of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch (who also knew the apostles and was himself a martyr), to Polycarp:
Chapter 6. The duties of the Christian flock
Give heed to the bishop, that God also may give heed to you. My soul be for theirs that are submissive to the bishop, to the presbyters, and to the deacons, and may my portion be along with them in God! Labour together with one another; strive in company together; run together; suffer together; sleep together; and awake together, as the stewards, and associates, and servants of God. Please Him under whom you fight, and from whom you receive your wages. Let none of you be found a deserter. Let your baptism endure as your arms; your faith as your helmet; your love as your spear; your patience as a complete panoply. Let your works be the charge assigned to you, that you may receive a worthy recompense. Be long-suffering, therefore, with one another, in meekness, as God is towards you. May I have joy of you for ever!
Ignatius identified Polycarp's baptism as his faith and conversion and as something to be endured. Polycarp spoke of his faith as covering his whole lifetime.
That provides right there the strong key evidence for Polycarp being baptized as an infant unto faith and rebirth, for remission of sins.
Here we stand.
We read in Martyrdom of Polycarp:
Chapter 9. Polycarp refuses to revile Christ
Now, as Polycarp was entering into the stadium, there came to him a voice from heaven, saying, Be strong, and show yourself a man, O Polycarp! No one saw who it was that spoke to him; but those of our brethren who were present heard the voice. And as he was brought forward, the tumult became great when they heard that Polycarp was taken. And when he came near, the proconsul asked him whether he was Polycarp. On his confessing that he was, [the proconsul] sought to persuade him to deny [Christ], saying, Have respect to your old age, and other similar things, according to their custom, [such as], Swear by the fortune of Cæsar; repent, and say, Away with the Atheists. But Polycarp, gazing with a stern countenance on all the multitude of the wicked heathen then in the stadium, and waving his hand towards them, while with groans he looked up to heaven, said, Away with the Atheists. Then, the proconsul urging him, and saying, Swear, and I will set you at liberty, reproach Christ; Polycarp declared, Eighty and six years have I served Him, and He never did me any injury: how then can I blaspheme my King and my Saviour?
In his own words, Polycarp said he was a believer in Christ his entire life even from birth. Now how does that support the argument he was baptized as an infant?
Consider back then what baptism was seen as. It was regarded as means of grace by which God gives faith and rebirth.
For example, The Epistle of Barnabas stated:
Chapter 11. Baptism and the cross prefigured in the Old Testament
Let us further inquire whether the Lord took any care to foreshadow the water [of baptism] and the cross. Concerning the water, indeed, it is written, in reference to the Israelites, that they should not receive that baptism which leads to the remission of sins, but should procure another for themselves. The prophet therefore declares, Be astonished, O heaven, and let the earth tremble at this, because this people has committed two great evils: they have forsaken Me, a living fountain, and have hewn out for themselves broken cisterns. Is my holy hill Zion a desolate rock? For you shall be as the fledglings of a bird, which fly away when the nest is removed. Isaiah 16:1-2 And again says the prophet, I will go before you and make level the mountains, and will break the brazen gates, and bruise in pieces the iron bars; and I will give you the secret, hidden, invisible treasures, that they may know that I am the Lord God. Isaiah 45:2-3 And He shall dwell in a lofty cave of the strong rock. Furthermore, what says He in reference to the Son? His water is sure; you shall see the King in His glory, and your soul shall meditate on the fear of the Lord. Isaiah 33:16-18 And again He says in another prophet, The man who does these things shall be like a tree planted by the courses of waters, which shall yield its fruit in due season; and his leaf shall not fade, and all that he does shall prosper. Not so are the ungodly, not so, but even as chaff, which the wind sweeps away from the face of the earth. Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in judgment, nor sinners in the counsel of the just; for the Lord knows the way of the righteous, but the way of the ungodly shall perish. Mark how He has described at once both the water and the cross. For these words imply, Blessed are they who, placing their trust in the cross, have gone down into the water; for, says He, they shall receive their reward in due time: then He declares, I will recompense them. But now He says, Their leaves shall not fade. This means, that every word which proceeds out of your mouth in faith and love shall tend to bring conversion and hope to many. Again, another prophet says, And the land of Jacob shall be extolled above every land. Zephaniah 3:19 This means the vessel of His Spirit, which He shall glorify. Further, what says He? And there was a river flowing on the right, and from it arose beautiful trees; and whosoever shall eat of them shall live for ever. Ezekiel 47:12 This means, that we indeed descend into the water full of sins and defilement, but come up, bearing fruit in our heart, having the fear [of God] and trust in Jesus in our spirit. And whosoever shall eat of these shall live for ever, This means: Whosoever, He declares, shall hear you speaking, and believe, shall live for ever.
Another example would be The Epistle of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch (who also knew the apostles and was himself a martyr), to Polycarp:
Chapter 6. The duties of the Christian flock
Give heed to the bishop, that God also may give heed to you. My soul be for theirs that are submissive to the bishop, to the presbyters, and to the deacons, and may my portion be along with them in God! Labour together with one another; strive in company together; run together; suffer together; sleep together; and awake together, as the stewards, and associates, and servants of God. Please Him under whom you fight, and from whom you receive your wages. Let none of you be found a deserter. Let your baptism endure as your arms; your faith as your helmet; your love as your spear; your patience as a complete panoply. Let your works be the charge assigned to you, that you may receive a worthy recompense. Be long-suffering, therefore, with one another, in meekness, as God is towards you. May I have joy of you for ever!
Ignatius identified Polycarp's baptism as his faith and conversion and as something to be endured. Polycarp spoke of his faith as covering his whole lifetime.
That provides right there the strong key evidence for Polycarp being baptized as an infant unto faith and rebirth, for remission of sins.
Here we stand.
7/23/16
Start Wrong, End Wrong.
Theologically speaking, when a theology begins in a place it shouldn't, it ends up in a lot of trouble in the end.
Two great examples of this are the radical reformation theologies of Calvinism, taught in the Reformed Churches as well as Presbyterian and some Baptists; and Arminianism, taught by most Baptists, Wesleyans, and Charismatic churches.
A Synod was convened at Dort in 1618 in which the Remonstrants (Arminians) were challenging the traditional staunch predestinarian doctrines of the Reformed Church (Calvinists). The Remonstrants brought five objections to Reformed Theology, and the famous 5 points of Calvinism was the Reformed response.
Interestingly enough, the bickering that existed between these two schools of theological thought in the early 17th century is alive and well today. It is also quite common for proponents of these two systems to lump everything theological into one system or the other. Hence, any Christian church that believes in some sort of free will in the conversion of a sinner is "Arminian" and any church that believes that God elects people to salvation is "Calvinist."
The problem is that this caricature given by many evangelicals is just not true. No form of sacramental Christianity fits into either of these categories.
Ultimately, the problem with both Calvinism and Arminianism is that they begin their theology in the wrong spot. Arminianism starts with the free will of man. Some Arminians may object to this, but the objection is empty. This is precisely where Arminianism challenges Calvinism and thus begins its theology as an anti-Calvinism of sorts.
When you start with the free will of man, everything in the theological system ends up being read through that lens. Hence, you end up with logical deductions made into dogma. For instance, in many Baptist churches, there is a doctrine called the Age of Accountability. This is a direct result of elevating free will to a primary status. It is surmised that since an infant or young child is not capable of understanding the Gospel and thus unable to make a free will choice, they are then not held accountable by God until they are able to choose one way or the other. Of course, Scripture nowhere teaches this doctrine. It is an example of something completely foreign to Scripture being made a doctrine due to a starting place that is erroneous. Not to mention, many Arminian churches are Baptist, and one of the main arguments they make against infant baptism is that the infant is not able to choose to be baptized. Some Arminians have even proposed blasphemous absurdities like Open Theism, in which God doesn't know the future simply to keep our free will truly free.
Calvinism, on the other hand, has its own difficulties. Generally speaking, Calvinism starts their theology with the absolute sovereignty of God over all things. This idea manifests itself in different ways. One way is that Calvinists tend to get involved with abstract in-house debates about the logical ordering of God's decrees in eternity past. Scripture, however, really doesn't give enough information for one to hold to any of these logical orders. This is also something Luther would term a theology of glory. The Calvinist here is peering into the hidden God.
One outworking of this idea is that objectively speaking, the sacraments are stripped of their power. Ultimately, if a person is elect, the sacraments are effacious for them. But if they are not elect, the sacraments are useless. In this manner, the Spirit is divorced from the places He said He will be in grace. For this reason, Calvinists have to invent novel theories for retaining infant baptism. Calvinism and Infant Baptism Ultimately, infant baptism makes very little sense at all in a Calvinist Theology. It can't be to save them like Scripture says, because there is no correlation (or at the very least, it is unclear) between baptism and God's decree to elect specific individuals in eternity past.
Calvinism also relegates Christ's work to a status that must fit within God's logical order of decrees. Suffice it to say, Christ's work is always logically relegated to a position after God's decree of election. Hence, the Calvinist will argue that Christ only died for the elect and no one else. It is difficult for the Calvinist to say that "In Him we live and move and have our being" (Acts 17:28) or "For the love of Christ controls us, because we have concluded this: that one has died for all, therefore all have died" (2 Cor 5:14), because Christ is only for the elect in their scheme.
Two great examples of this are the radical reformation theologies of Calvinism, taught in the Reformed Churches as well as Presbyterian and some Baptists; and Arminianism, taught by most Baptists, Wesleyans, and Charismatic churches.
A Synod was convened at Dort in 1618 in which the Remonstrants (Arminians) were challenging the traditional staunch predestinarian doctrines of the Reformed Church (Calvinists). The Remonstrants brought five objections to Reformed Theology, and the famous 5 points of Calvinism was the Reformed response.
Interestingly enough, the bickering that existed between these two schools of theological thought in the early 17th century is alive and well today. It is also quite common for proponents of these two systems to lump everything theological into one system or the other. Hence, any Christian church that believes in some sort of free will in the conversion of a sinner is "Arminian" and any church that believes that God elects people to salvation is "Calvinist."
The problem is that this caricature given by many evangelicals is just not true. No form of sacramental Christianity fits into either of these categories.
Ultimately, the problem with both Calvinism and Arminianism is that they begin their theology in the wrong spot. Arminianism starts with the free will of man. Some Arminians may object to this, but the objection is empty. This is precisely where Arminianism challenges Calvinism and thus begins its theology as an anti-Calvinism of sorts.
When you start with the free will of man, everything in the theological system ends up being read through that lens. Hence, you end up with logical deductions made into dogma. For instance, in many Baptist churches, there is a doctrine called the Age of Accountability. This is a direct result of elevating free will to a primary status. It is surmised that since an infant or young child is not capable of understanding the Gospel and thus unable to make a free will choice, they are then not held accountable by God until they are able to choose one way or the other. Of course, Scripture nowhere teaches this doctrine. It is an example of something completely foreign to Scripture being made a doctrine due to a starting place that is erroneous. Not to mention, many Arminian churches are Baptist, and one of the main arguments they make against infant baptism is that the infant is not able to choose to be baptized. Some Arminians have even proposed blasphemous absurdities like Open Theism, in which God doesn't know the future simply to keep our free will truly free.
Calvinism, on the other hand, has its own difficulties. Generally speaking, Calvinism starts their theology with the absolute sovereignty of God over all things. This idea manifests itself in different ways. One way is that Calvinists tend to get involved with abstract in-house debates about the logical ordering of God's decrees in eternity past. Scripture, however, really doesn't give enough information for one to hold to any of these logical orders. This is also something Luther would term a theology of glory. The Calvinist here is peering into the hidden God.
One outworking of this idea is that objectively speaking, the sacraments are stripped of their power. Ultimately, if a person is elect, the sacraments are effacious for them. But if they are not elect, the sacraments are useless. In this manner, the Spirit is divorced from the places He said He will be in grace. For this reason, Calvinists have to invent novel theories for retaining infant baptism. Calvinism and Infant Baptism Ultimately, infant baptism makes very little sense at all in a Calvinist Theology. It can't be to save them like Scripture says, because there is no correlation (or at the very least, it is unclear) between baptism and God's decree to elect specific individuals in eternity past.
Calvinism also relegates Christ's work to a status that must fit within God's logical order of decrees. Suffice it to say, Christ's work is always logically relegated to a position after God's decree of election. Hence, the Calvinist will argue that Christ only died for the elect and no one else. It is difficult for the Calvinist to say that "In Him we live and move and have our being" (Acts 17:28) or "For the love of Christ controls us, because we have concluded this: that one has died for all, therefore all have died" (2 Cor 5:14), because Christ is only for the elect in their scheme.
Some of the higher Calvinists even take their doctrine of sovereignty to a level where they are fully comfortable saying that God is the author of sin. Perish the thought!
The bottom line is that if a theology begins in the wrong place and reads their starting point into everything else, they end up contradicting Scripture and deviating from classic Christian theology all over the place once the doctrines are fleshed out. Both combatants of the radical Reformation do this repeatedly. As I have argued elsewhere, the Reformed Churches are not a Reformation (Reformed is a Misnomer) but rather a completely new thing. Not to mention the Arminian Remonstrance, which is even further off the rails.
The proper starting place in Christian theology is not philosophical debates about the human will or the hidden God in eternity past. It is Christ, revealed to us, crucified and risen. Only in Lutheranism is this the case.
+Pax+
The proper starting place in Christian theology is not philosophical debates about the human will or the hidden God in eternity past. It is Christ, revealed to us, crucified and risen. Only in Lutheranism is this the case.
+Pax+
7/20/16
Kyrie, eleison
With so much going on in the world, including in the United States, with all the terroristic acts and all the suffering they produced, what is the proper Christian response?
To answer that question, we need to ponder different issues that are at hand here.
For starters, we got the hidden, inscrutable will of God. That is we can't read into God's mind why these things occur or what His purpose is in them. We do know from Scriptures that God does not cause or foreordain evil. We do know from Scriptures that God take what men meant for evil and use it for good, especially for the good of those who love Him, who have been accorded to His purpose, in Christ.
What we don't know, however, is what specific purpose these things occur. Nor are we allowed to decide on our own accord that God did it as judgment on specific individuals or groups of individuals regardless of what sins they may be participating in at the moment when their lives are taken away. That is because, regardless of what they did or didn't do, nothing insult the intent of God's creation (which is His image in humankind lost at the fall) more then murder. And more, it is not our place to peer into His hidden will which He forbids us to look into. When Christ was asked about various disasters and misfortunes that overtook and killed the lives of various individuals, His answer wasn't to say God was judging them. Instead of allowing them to satisfy their curiosity into what is inscrutable to them, He pointed to them to God's revealed will for them (and us): unless we repent, we also shall perish.
So when various preachers go on tv or radio and say people died in those instances of terrorist acts because of their own sins being judged by God, they are wrong, and seriously so. Whether of not sins were committed by the victims are immaterial to this. God didn't reveal why He allowed these events to take place so we must remain silence.
We do know that regardless, per God's revealed will shown in His word, He does not desire the death of the sinner. He wants all to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth. He does not want any to perish but all to come to repentance.
His love remains true for those who died in these horrific attacks regardless of what they were doing at the moment. He showed His love by sending His eternally begotten Son, Jesus Christ, to atone for their sins at the Cross. The fact many didn't avail themselves of what Christ did for them does not change the fact of God's love for them.
So what should our attitude be? First off, we need to always remember that God's love is for both victims and victimizers alike. Christ truly paid for the sins of both, no matter how heinous those sins are. When Scriptures say He is the Lamb that takes away the sin of the world, then that is most certainly true for even the worst of the worst of sinners. So we can pray for all involved that they would know God's love, revealed in God Incarnate crucified for them and offered up to them in Word and Sacrament.
Secondly, while Christ crucified is still the central message to all, that doesn't preclude us wishing and praying for governments to carry out justice. In fact, Romans 13 tells us God ordains governments for the very purpose of curbing and restraining evil. And we are indeed to pray for our leaders to do so in proper fashion. That is Lutheran doctrine of two kingdom in a nutshell.
Thirdly, we are to weep with those who weep, and mourn with those who mourn. And with the recent events, many are weeping and mourning the senseless deaths of their loved ones. If Christ as God in the flesh can weep for Lazarus before raising him from the dead or weep for the people of the city of Jerusalem, who rejected His message, we can also out of compassion that we are called to.
To answer that question, we need to ponder different issues that are at hand here.
For starters, we got the hidden, inscrutable will of God. That is we can't read into God's mind why these things occur or what His purpose is in them. We do know from Scriptures that God does not cause or foreordain evil. We do know from Scriptures that God take what men meant for evil and use it for good, especially for the good of those who love Him, who have been accorded to His purpose, in Christ.
What we don't know, however, is what specific purpose these things occur. Nor are we allowed to decide on our own accord that God did it as judgment on specific individuals or groups of individuals regardless of what sins they may be participating in at the moment when their lives are taken away. That is because, regardless of what they did or didn't do, nothing insult the intent of God's creation (which is His image in humankind lost at the fall) more then murder. And more, it is not our place to peer into His hidden will which He forbids us to look into. When Christ was asked about various disasters and misfortunes that overtook and killed the lives of various individuals, His answer wasn't to say God was judging them. Instead of allowing them to satisfy their curiosity into what is inscrutable to them, He pointed to them to God's revealed will for them (and us): unless we repent, we also shall perish.
So when various preachers go on tv or radio and say people died in those instances of terrorist acts because of their own sins being judged by God, they are wrong, and seriously so. Whether of not sins were committed by the victims are immaterial to this. God didn't reveal why He allowed these events to take place so we must remain silence.
We do know that regardless, per God's revealed will shown in His word, He does not desire the death of the sinner. He wants all to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth. He does not want any to perish but all to come to repentance.
His love remains true for those who died in these horrific attacks regardless of what they were doing at the moment. He showed His love by sending His eternally begotten Son, Jesus Christ, to atone for their sins at the Cross. The fact many didn't avail themselves of what Christ did for them does not change the fact of God's love for them.
So what should our attitude be? First off, we need to always remember that God's love is for both victims and victimizers alike. Christ truly paid for the sins of both, no matter how heinous those sins are. When Scriptures say He is the Lamb that takes away the sin of the world, then that is most certainly true for even the worst of the worst of sinners. So we can pray for all involved that they would know God's love, revealed in God Incarnate crucified for them and offered up to them in Word and Sacrament.
Secondly, while Christ crucified is still the central message to all, that doesn't preclude us wishing and praying for governments to carry out justice. In fact, Romans 13 tells us God ordains governments for the very purpose of curbing and restraining evil. And we are indeed to pray for our leaders to do so in proper fashion. That is Lutheran doctrine of two kingdom in a nutshell.
Thirdly, we are to weep with those who weep, and mourn with those who mourn. And with the recent events, many are weeping and mourning the senseless deaths of their loved ones. If Christ as God in the flesh can weep for Lazarus before raising him from the dead or weep for the people of the city of Jerusalem, who rejected His message, we can also out of compassion that we are called to.
Finally, we are to pray for God's mercy. That is what we do when we sing Kyrie, Eleison.
We sing that knowing how fully dependent we are on God's mercy for our salvation, for Christ's sake. But we sing that when we mourn at the evil things that take place in this world. We long for God's mercy to be shown others that change and comfort them as well.
So we sing and pray,
Kyrie, eleison
Christe, eleison
Kyrie, eleison
Lord, have mercy
Christ, have mercy
Lord, have mercy on us
Here we stand.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)