tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27314824658444868392024-03-14T00:51:59.223-07:00We Believe, Teach, and ConfessAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13413229243640889757noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2731482465844486839.post-18134147593293237762013-08-01T10:15:00.000-07:002013-08-01T10:17:54.462-07:00So What is in a Confession of Faith?<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
So what is in a confession of faith? To
answer this question I will quote extensively from Charles
Porterfield Krauth's book “The Conservative Reformation and Its
Theology” (which by the way is a very long, and at times a very
difficult book to read, but I found it to be pleasant nonetheless).
Krauth writes:
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<b> Standing really upon the
everlasting foundation of this Rule of Faith, we stand of necessity
on the faith, of which it is the rule. It is not the truth as it
lies, silent and unread, in the Word, but the truth as it enters from
that Word into the human heart, with the applying presence of the
Holy Ghost, which makes men believers. Faith makes men Christians;
but Confession alone marks them as Christians. The Rule of Faith is
God's voice to us; faith is the hearing of that voice, and the
Confession, our reply of assent to it. By our faith, we are known to
the Lord as his; by our Confession, we are known to each other as His
children. Confession of faith, in some form, is imperative. To
confess Christ, is to confess what is our faith in him. As the Creed
is not, and cannot be the Rule of Faith, but is its confession
merely, so the Bible, because it is the Rule of Faith, is of
necessity not its Confession. The Bible can no more be any man's
Creed, than the stars can be any man's astronomy. The stars furnish
the rule of the astronomer's faith: the Principia of Newton may be
the Confession of his faith. If a man were examined as a candidate
for the chair of astronomy in a university, and were asked, “What
is your astronomical system?” and were to answer, “I accept the
teaching of the stars,” the reply would be, “You may think you
do—so does the man who is sure that the stars move round the world,
and that they are not orbs, but 'gimlet-holes to let the glory
through.' We wish to know what you hold the teachings of the stars to
be? Do you receive as in harmony with them, the results reached by
Copernicus, by Galileo, by Kepler, by Newton, La Place, and Herschel,
or do you think the world one great flat, and the sun and moon mere
pendants to it?” “Gentlemen,” replies the independent
investigator, “the theories of those astronomers are human
systems—man-made theories. I go out every night on the hills, and
look at the stars, as God made them, through a hole in my blanket,
with my own good eyes, not with a man-made telescope, or fettered by
a man-made theory; and I believe in the stars and in what they teach
me: but if I were to say, or write what they teach, that would be a
human creed—and I am opposed to all creeds.” “Very well,”
reply the examiners, “we wish you joy in the possession of a good
pair of eyes, and feel it unnecessary to go any further. If you are
unwilling to confess your faith, we will not tax your conscience with
the inconsistency of teaching that faith, nor tax our own with the
hazard of authorizing you to set forth in the name of the stars your
own ignorant assumptions about them.”</b></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<b> </b><br />
<b> What is more clear than that, as
the Rule of Faith is first, it must, by necessity of its being, when
rightly used, generate </b><b>a true faith? But the man who has true
faith desires to have it known, and is bound to confess his faith.
The Rule cannot really generate two conflicting beliefs; yet men who
alike profess to accept the Rule, do have conflicting beliefs; and
when beliefs conflict, if the one is formed by the Rule, the other
must be formed in the face of it. Fidelity to the Rule of Faith,
therefore, fidelity to the faith it teaches, demands that there shall
be a Confession of the faith. The firmest friend of the Word is the
firmest friend of the Creed. First, the Rule of Faith, next the Faith
of the Rule, and then the Confession of Faith.</b></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<b> </b><br />
<b> What shall be our Confession? Are
we originating a Church, and must we utter our testimony to a world,
in which our faith is a novelty? The reply is easy. As we are not the
first who have used, with honest hearts and fervent prayers, the
Rule, so are we not the first who have been guided by the Holy Ghost
in it to its faith. As men long ago reached its faith, so long ago
they confessed it. They confessed it from the beginning. The first
adult baptism was based upon a “human creed,” that is, upon a
confession of faith, which was the utterance of a belief which was
based upon a human interpretation of divine words. The faith has been
confessed from the beginning. It has been embodied in a creed, the
origin of whose present shape no man knows, which indeed cannot be
fixed; for it rose from the words of our Saviour's Baptismal
Commission, and was not manufactured, but grew. Of the Apostle's
Creed, as of Him to who its heart is given, it may be affirmed that
it was “begotten, not made.” The Confession has been renewed and
enlarged to meet new and widening error. The ripest, and purest, and
most widely used of the old Confessions have been adopted by our
Church as her own, not because they are old and widely received, but
because they are true. She has added her testimony as it was needed.
Here is the body of her Confession. Is her Confession ours? If it be,
we are of her in heart; if it be not, we are only of her name. IT IS
OURS—OURS IN OUR DEEPEST CONVICTION, REACHED THROUGH CONFLICTS
OUTWARD AND INWARD, REACHED UPON OUR KNEES, AND TRACED WITH OUR
TEARS—OURS IN OUR INMOST HEARTS. THEREFORE, WE CONSECRATE OURSELVES
TO LIVING, TEACHING, AND DEFENDING THE FAITH OF GOD'S WORD, WHICH IS
THE CONFESSED FAITH OF THE EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH. FIDELITY TO
THE WHOLE TRUTH OF GOD'S WORD REQUIRES THIS. We dare not be satisfied
simply with recognition as Christians over against the Jew, because
we confess that the Rule of Faith, of which the New Testament is a
part, has taught us faith in Jesus Christ: we dare not be satisfied
simply with recognition as holding the Catholic Faith as embodied in
the three General Creeds, over against heresies of various forms and
shades. Christian believers holding the faith Catholic we are—but
we are, besides, Protestant, rejecting the authority of the Papacy;
Evangelical, glorying in the grace of the Gospel; AND LUTHERAN,
HOLDING THE DOCTRINES OF THE CHURCH, of which the Reformation is the
child—</b><b>not only those in which all Christendom or a large
part of it coincides with her, but the most distinctive of here
distinctive doctrines, though in the maintenance of them she stood
alone. As the acceptance of the Word of God as a Rule of Faith
separates us from the Mohammedan, as the reception of the New
Testament sunders us from the Jew, as the hearty acquiescence in the
Apostles', Nicene, and Athanasian Creeds show us, in the face of all
errorists of the earlier ages, to be in the faith of the Church
Catholic, SO DOES OUR UNRESERVED ACCEPTANCE OF THE AUGSBURG
CONFESSION MARK US AS LUTHERANS; AND THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE APOLOGY,
THE CATECHISMS OF LUTHER, THE SCHMALCALD ARTICLES, AND THE FORMULA OF
CONCORD, CONTINUES THE WORK OF MARKING OUR SEPARATION FROM ALL
ERRORISTS OF EVERY SHADE WHOSE DOCTRINES ARE IN CONFLICT WITH THE
TRUE SENSE OF THE RULE OF FAITH—that Rule whose teachings are
rightly interpreted and faithfully embodied in the Confessions
afore-mentioned. Therefore, God helping us, we will teach the whole
faith of His word, which faith our Church sets forth, explains, and
defends in her Symbols. We do not interpret God's word, but
interpreting both independently, by laws of language, and finding
that they teach one and the same truth, we heartily acknowledge the
Confession as a true exhibition of the faith of the Rule—a true
witness to the one, pure, and unchanging faith of the Christian
Church, and freely make it our own Confession, as truly as if it had
been now first uttered by our lips, or had first gone forth from our
hands. </b><b>(p. </b><b>166-169)</b></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
So the question
becomes, “How seriously do we, members of the 'mighty'
Missouri-Synod uphold this exhortation 'to living, teaching, and
defending the faith of God's word, which is the confessed faith of
the Evangelical Lutheran Church?' Are we allowing our confession of
faith to collect dust? Do we, as the Missouri-Synod, do what Walther
suggests by providing “a good, inexpensive copy [of the Book of
Concord,] and pastors should see to it that every home has one,”
the Book of Concord being this most precious confession of faith. Or
are we allowing our Church to fall into apathy by hiding from our
laity the excellent gift we hold in our Confessions? Walther goes
onto say: “If a person isn't familiar with this book, he'll think,
'That old book is just for pastors. I don't have to preach. After
[working] all day, I can't sit down and study in the evening. If I
read my morning and evening devotions, that's enough.” No, that is
not enough! The Lord doesn't want us to remain children, who are
blown to and fro by every wind of doctrine; instead of that, He wants
us to grow in knowledge so that we can teach others.” It seems much
hasn't changed in our day from Walther's time. A lot of our body is
either subjected to forced ignorance about our Confession or are
willfully so. Whatever the case may be it would seem that Krauth and
Walther alike would be disappointed with the position our Synod is
in. We are not excising ourselves in the Confession that was so
diligently prepared and has been utilized and cherished for centuries
rather we are satisfied to do what the non-denominational churches
are doing. Like them our laity's theological insights are a mile long
and an inch deep. How many individuals in the LCMS, do you suppose,
even know what the Book of Concord is? How often are the Confessions,
those same Confessions that each and every Pastor must bow a knee to
before he is ordained and installed, invoked on a Sunday or in a
Bible study? I think the numbers would be embarrassingly low.
</div>
<div style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
Krauth's
exhortation to live in, teach, and defend our Confession of faith
faithfully and diligently is not a light suggestion. He recognizes
the grave danger that can befall a church body if she refuses to
remain steadfast in her confession of faith. We may still carry with
us the Rule of Faith, but without a fixed conception of what is
contained within its binding we would be better off without it. Do
we believe that our Confession was formulated in an easy,
lackadaisical way? By no means. The blood of faithful martyrs show
that clearly enough and yet now, in our twenty-first century American
mind, which is sedated with all the revelries of the world and false
doctrines from other Christian bodies decide it better to satisfy
ourselves with nothing more than the most minimal devotional
materials we can find. Devotional materials which bounce us from one
Bible verse to another, potentially conceptualizing them out of their
context, and so throwing us into the midst of the wolves. For
example, we'd rather tell our children, with the assistance of
non-contextual reading, that they are commanded by their boss, Jesus
Christ, to witness for him in the world (See previous post).
</div>
<div style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
I am aware that
there are pockets of confessional Lutherans out there “fight(ing)
the good fight of the faith” and “hold(ing) fast the confession
of [their] hope without wavering, for he who promised is faithful”
(1Tim 6:12; Heb 10:23). My thoughts, prayers, and most certainly
grinding teeth and raised blood pressure are with you. I'll leave you
with Krauth, who might as well have been giving this speech in
Braveheart:
</div>
<div style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<b> And shall we
despond, draw back, and give our names to the reproach of generations
to come, because the burden of the hour seems to us heavy? God, in
His mercy, forbid! If all others are ready to yield to despondency,
and abandon the struggle, we, children of the Reformation, dare not.
That struggle has taught two lessons, which must be secured at any
price. They are beyond all price. We dare not compute their cost.
They are the soul of our being, and the whole world is as dust in the
balance against them. No matter what is to be paid for them, we must
not hesitate to lay down their redemption price. The other grand
lesson is, that their price is never paid in vain. What we give can
never be lost, unless we give to little. If we give all, we shall
have all. All shall come back. Our purses shall be in the mouths of
our sacks. We shall have both the corn and the money. But if we are
niggard, we lose all—lose what we meant to buy, lose what have
given. If we maintain the pure Word inflexibly at every cost, over
against the arrogance of Rome and of the weak pretentiousness of
Rationalism, we shall conquer both through the Word; but to
compromise on a single point, is to lose all, and be lost. (p. 21)</b></div>
<div style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
</div>
<div style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
Lord's blessings.</div>
<div style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
In the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13413229243640889757noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2731482465844486839.post-62693848983668686422013-07-11T17:29:00.003-07:002013-07-11T17:30:45.324-07:00Be Told On the Mountain that Jesus Christ Was Crucified For Your Sins<style type="text/css">P { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }</style>
<br />
It is clear that there is an idea
floating around Christendom which attempts to suggest that every man
is a minister/missionary. Unless I am missing something it is also
clear that there is not a shred of biblical evidence to support such
an idea, in fact the Word speaks in quite the opposite direction
focusing on the fact that each person is called to a certain
vocation in this life (See table of duties in Luther's Small
Catechism). To be sure there are those who are called to the office
of preaching and teaching as well as mission work (Ephesians 4:11-14)
here in the United States and out in the other countries of the
world, but the notion that we should bind the consciences of the
laity with the false teaching that they are responsible for the
fulfilling of the “Great Commission” (another phantom that does
not show up in the scriptures) is damaging to both the office of the
holy ministry and to the peace of those who should be reminded of
Christ crucified for them each week by those who are actually called
to deliver them the Gospel. It is also very apparent that this idea
has found its way into the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod as can be
seen by the VBS theme for 2013; “Tell It on the Mountain Where
Jesus Christ is Lord.”
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Days 1-4 seem appropriate: Day 1 On
Mount Sinai: God is with His People; Day 2 On Mount Carmel: God Shows
He is the One True God; Day 3: On the Mount of Transfiguration: Jesus
Is God's Son; On Golgotha: Jesus Saves Us All. It is not until we
arrive at Day 5 that we see things start to crumble; On a Mountain:
Jesus Says, “Go to All!”. On the itinerary for Day 5 we have the
“Take-Home Point”: Jesus Christ is Lord, good start. Bible Memory
Verse next: Acts 1:8 Jesus says, “You will be my witnesses...to the
end of the earth” which if taken in the direction that the VBS
package suggests you take it makes the Scripture say something that
it is not intending to say. Bible Stories: Learn that Jesus tells us
to share His news of salvation with the world. Does he really?
Rotation 1:Application: Learn that Jesus wants us to witness to the
whole world through the power of the Holy Spirit. Does he really?
Rotation 2: Bible Challenge: Learn the Bible Memory Verse song and
how God uses Sinners like us to be His witnesses to Jesus, our Lord
and Savior. Again, does he really? Rotation 3: Crafts: This is where
the kids get to make Go & Tell Scratch Art. Then comes a break,
Snack time, but oh wait they are Spreadin' the Good News Snack. And
finally Games:Tell the World, Go and Tell, Climb A Mountain.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
As you can see after Day 4 on Golgotha,
where the focus of the entire VBS should be focused, we leave the
cross where our sins were put to death and then have the Law hurled
on us as we walk out the doors. “Yes kids, who have potentially
never heard the Gospel ever, here is a nice bit of Law for you to
chew and and assume this encapsulates the most important aspect of
Christianity.” What was that thing that C.F.W. Walther said: “You
are not rightly distinguishing Law and Gospel in the Word of God if
you first preach the Gospel and then the Law” (Law and Gospel,
Readers addition, p. 3). Does it sound as though the author is a bit
overreaching? I mean after all the kids are only 4-6 maybe 7 years
old. Is a bit of false doctrine really going to affect them that
badly? I mean are they really going to hear and comprehend God's Word
anyway? Can the Holy Spirit work through the proper teaching of God's
Word on someone so young? Aren't we just here to have a little fun?
False doctrine is false doctrine no matter what the age of the
individual is who is receiving it.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
That having been said it is probably
time to unveil the reason why I think this is false. Taking the Bible
Memory Verse alone will establish this. Acts 1:7-8: “He said to
them (the 11,) 'It is not for you to know times or seasons that the
Father has fixed by his own authority. But you will receive power
when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses
in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the
earth.” We can see right off the bat that Jesus is speaking
directly to the Apostles concerning the command he was giving them,
not the entirety of the Christian Church and especially not to those
who should be being catechized, namely the children. Christ says that
they will be His witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea, and Samaria. The VBS
book conveniently leaves this part out, maybe due to the fact that a
kid would say “Well we weren't witnesses in Jerusalem, Judea, and
Samaria so maybe Christ isn't telling us to do this,” and you can
just imagine what the response would be. Christ also adds that the
Apostles will be his witnesses to the ends of the earth. Does this
seem perplexing? Well it shouldn't because the Apostles are in fact
that witness because they recorded what they saw in the Holy
Scriptures, which is the Apostolic witness, of the things that Christ
did while he was on this earth and the implications of those actions
for the whole world. This establishes the fact that we are in fact
not Christ's witnesses. Let's forget about the fact that the authors
of the 2013 VBS packet fail to recognize the difference in terms
between those who witness and those who confess because even if they
had used the correct term, which is confess, they would have conveyed
the same false meaning on Day 5.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Who said that all of mankind was
supposed to run around spreading the Gospel? Are we all called to be
“witnesses” as Day 5 suggests? And if so how often have you
fulfilled this Law? If you haven't you are guilty of sin and should
repent. And let me say that even the most adamant of people who
suggest that we are all supposed to be spreading the Gospel are
probably not doing as good of job at it as they might think. I think
Paul gives us a nice picture of how the Gospel is spread. In Romans
chapter 10 verse 14 and following he writes, “How then will they
call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to
believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to
hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless
they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of
those who preach the good news!” It seems from this set of verses
Paul recognizes that preachers are called and sent, and I think,
actually no I know that the LCMS has some article in some book that
says that someone shouldn't preach without a divine call. Is this to
say that no one can talk about Christ unless they are called the
Office of the Holy Ministry? No, but it is saying that preaching the
Gospel and spreading the good news is not a command that applies to
all people, but is rather a gift to the Church that is received by
those who hear.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
In 1Corinthians chapter 3 verse 5 and
following Paul writes: “What then is Apollos? What is Paul?
Servants through whom you believed, as the Lord assigned to each. I
planted, Apollos watered, but God gave the growth. So neither he who
plants nor he who waters is anything, but only God who gives the
growth. He who plants and he who waters are one, and each will
receive his wages according to his labor. For we are God's fellow
workers. You are God's field, God's building.” “We” namely Paul
and Apollos and those who are called to the office of the ministry
are God's fellow workers in preaching the Gospel. And what are those
who receive this preaching? A field and a building. How does a field
grow? And how is a building built? Does the field grow itself by
dancing about tossing seeds everywhere? No, it is cultivated and
watered and grows by those means. Likewise does a building erect
because the stones hopped one on top of the other? No, it is built up
by the hands of the builder. Our church grows (or sometimes does not)
when the Word of God is preached and the sacraments are administered
by those who are called to do this work.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
The next question might be, “Well why
is it so bad to tell little children that they are supposed to be out
there telling people about Jesus?” If you have your VBS packet
handy turn to page 60 and follow along with the poem “The Great
Commission”: “Climb atop this mount with Me,” the risen Lord
did say.(He did?) “You shall be my witnesses, this fine and
glorious day. My Spirit will be with you as you step out in My name.
Tell the world I died and rose, for them I took the blame. Sin and
death are beaten, for I have set you free. Go and teach, and baptize,
for all have life through Me. Boys and girls, we have a job, <b>and
Jesus is our boss</b>; Let's show and tell His story, so none are
ever lost.” What was that other thing C.F.W. Walther said: “The
most common way people mingle Law and Gospel—and one that is also
the easiest to detect because it is so crude—is prevalent among
Papists, Socinians, and Rationalists. These people turn Christ into a
kind of new Moses or Lawgiver (or boss.) This transforms the Gospel
into a doctrine of meritorious works. Furthermore, some people—like
the Papists—condemn and anathematize those who teach that the
Gospel is the message of the free grace of God in Christ.”(Law and
Gospel, Readers addition, p. 2). What a perfect thing to send the
kids out with. “Jesus is the boss of you. Now I know your general
reaction to those who are the boss of you is to disrespect them, but
Jesus is the big boss so you better listen to him real good.” I
notice that Walther says this way of confusing Law and Gospel is “so
crude,” and the the “easiest to detect” and it absolutely is
because it takes the aspect of Christianity, which sets it apart from
all other religions, and has Christ walk hand-in-hand with religions
that demand works from people on their ascent to God. So my question
is, who doctrinally reviewed this? If this mingling of Law and Gospel
is so easy to detect and so crude, as the “stodgy” Walther
suggests, then why didn't a Pastor catch this, or some editor at CPH?
Perhaps it is due to the fact that some of us in the Missouri Synod
are in love with this “evangelical” stuff and we want to push it
on even the littlest among our ranks. I don't know and that was not
putting the best construct on the situation, but quite frankly I am
sick of seeing and hearing this kind of stuff. Let us not crush a
child's faith in the Lord Jesus Christ by burdening them with a Law
that is not founded on God's Word. And furthermore, if it is not too
much to ask of you CPH, please don't publish stuff like this which
forces Christ to take a back seat to our sinful flesh that is always
seeking the glory road of works.
</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Instead of this command to “Go tell
it on the mountain,” we should be teaching our children from the
mountaintop of parent-hood and the pulpit that Christ died for their
sins. We should be constantly pointing them to the crucifixion of
Christ instead of to the road of self-glorification through works of
the Law. But who's law is this exactly?</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
I'll end with a quote from the Solid
Declaration of the Formula of Concord article VI: “This doctrine of
the Law is needed by believers in order that they may not make up a
holiness and devotion of their own. Using God's Spirit as an excuse,
they must not set up a self chosen worship, without God's Word and
command. For it is written: “You shall not do according
to...whatever is right in [your] own eyes,” but “be careful to
obey all these words that I command you,” “you shall not add to
it or take from it.” (Deuteronomy 12:8, 28, 32). This notion of
every man a minister/missionary is in fact a made up “holiness and
devotion” because it suggests that this is the mightiest work that
can be done for God. Ironically God has never commanded it in this
way.</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
In the name of the Father ,and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13413229243640889757noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2731482465844486839.post-19277231998115001192013-06-26T11:48:00.002-07:002013-06-26T13:40:09.351-07:00Idle Chit-Chat<style type="text/css">P { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }</style>
<br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
“When I saw him, I fell at his feet
as though dead.” These are the Words of the apostle John as his
eyes beheld Jesus Christ during the revelatory vision he recorded. At
the presence of our Lord the apostle finds himself at Christ's feet
as though dead. In the Formula of Concord, article 8 of the epitome
the confessors write “Christ may give His true body and blood in
the Holy Supper, <b>as one who is present</b>—and it is very easy
for Him to do so. He does not do this according to the mode or
ability of the human nature, but according to the mode and ability of
God's right hand. Dr. Luther says this in accordance with our
Christian faith [as we teach it to] children: this presence <of
Christ in the Holy Supper> is not <physical or> earthly, nor
Capernaitic; <b>yet it is TRUE and SUBSTANTIAL</b>, as the words of
His testament read, “This is, is, is My body,” and so on” (R.E.
Of the Book of Concord p. 493). It seems that Confessional Lutherans
have believed and believe that Christ is present in the Divine
Service, not in some hyper spiritual sense as our modern
“evangelical” and charismatic friends would have us understand,
rather He is truly and substantially present with us (in one
undivided person both Divine and human natures,) not only in the
Sacrament of His body and blood, but also in the public reading of
the Word, Confession and Absolution, the proclamation of the Gospel
etc. Utilizing the Office of the Holy Ministry our Lord comes to meet
His people to serve them the means of grace which lead us to life. So
my question is, “Why are there so many in our congregations who
wish to fill what they might deem as down-time during the Divine
Service into moments for idle chit-chat?” Whether it's before the
Divine Service begins, or during the Distribution Hymn, or the
Offering, or worse yet the Sermon, should we not keep remain quite
and consider the falling down as though dead of the Apostle John?</div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
Luther describes three modes of Christ.
I will provide the latter two because they are significant in
understanding Christ's presence with us, though unseen:</div>
<div align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<i>Secondly, there is the
incomprehensible, spiritual manner of being present. According to
this, He neither occupies nor vacates space but penetrates all
creatures, wherever He pleases, just as, to offer a crude
illustration, my sight penetrates and is in air, light, or water and
does not occupy or vacate space; as a sound or tone penetrates and is
in air, water, board, or wall and also does not occupy or vacate
space; again, as light and heat penetrate and are in air, water,
glass, crystal, and the like, and also do not occupy space. Many
similar illustrations could be presented. This manner He used when He
left the closed sepulcher and when He came to His disciples through
closed doors, when He is present in the bread and wine in the Lord's
Supper and also, as people believe, when He was born of His mother.</i></div>
<div align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<i>Thirdly, there is the
divine, heavenly manner. Since He is one Person with God, all
creatures must, of course, be far more penetrable and present to Him
according to this manner of being present than according to the
second manner. For if, according to this second manner, He can be in
and with creatures in such a way that they do not feel, touch,
circumscribe, or comprehend Him, how much more marvelously will He be
in all creatures according to this sublime third manner of presence,
so that they do not circumscribe nor comprehend Him, but that he
rather has them present before Him, circumscribes and comprehends
them. For you must place this Being of Christ, who is one with God,
far, very far indeed, outside the creatures—as far as God is
outside them; again, as deeply into, and as near to, all creatures as
God is within them. </i><i><b>For He is inseparably on Person with
God. Where God is, He, too, must be, or our faith is false. </b></i>(What Luther Says, point 516 p. 178)</div>
<div align="JUSTIFY" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div align="LEFT" style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
The last sentence might be the most important concerning this
discussion. We believe that God is present everywhere and where the
divine nature of Christ is, there his human nature also resides, so
not to divide the person of Christ, but allow Him to remain the same
Christ that came into the flesh “born of woman, born under the Law”
(Gal. 4:4b) and was crucified for our sins on the tree of the cross.
Most especially is He present with us through the means of grace. The
preached Word and the visible sacraments of Holy Baptism and the
Sacrament of the Altar. During the Divine Service we experience the
presence of Christ in a way that we do not throughout the rest of our
week. This is a time set aside to be served by the triune God who has
his fullest revelation in the Person of Christ. So if the divinity of
Christ is present there too his humanity is present which means he is
no less substantially present as when the apostle John encounters Him
on the island of Patmos. Of course this is too much for our sinful
flesh to comprehend, but believe the Word of God which testifies to
Christ's presence even though he is unseen.
</div>
<div align="LEFT" style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div align="LEFT" style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
How many times have we all been caught despising the Word of God and
not paying due reverence to the Christ who comes to feed His flock?
This should not be. As a matter of confession we should remain in
silent reverence during the “down-time” of the Divine Service
revealing that we believe that Christ is truly and substantially
present with us and for us. If Jesus was standing right before your
very eyes I dare say that you might thrust yourself to the ground
just as John did. Brothers and sisters in the Lord, show fear and
reverence for the Christ who is present for you, to offer you
forgiveness, life and salvation. Believe that Christ is present where
he promises to be present, and if not for you do so for the love of
your neighbor who's Divine Service you may be interrupting when
you're chatting during the Distribution Hymn instead of singing
along.</div>
<div align="LEFT" style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div align="LEFT" style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
Lord's blessings to you as you hold your tongue, unless you are
addressing one another in “psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs” or
receiving into your mouths the very body and blood of your Lord for
forgiveness of sins, strengthening of faith, life and salvation</div>
<div align="LEFT" style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
<br /></div>
<div align="LEFT" style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">
In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
Amen.</div>
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13413229243640889757noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2731482465844486839.post-18667923201598820442013-05-29T06:55:00.000-07:002013-05-29T15:15:52.756-07:00The Blessing of Repetition in the Divine ServiceAmongst all the chaos in our world; the fast moving society, the ever-developing technology, the day-to-day fashion trends, the evolution of music (just to name a few) it brings great comfort to know that each Divine Service on Sunday mornings will begin with "In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit," invoking the name of the Triune God, (who we come to worship in Spirit and in truth) as well as calling to remembrance the sacrament of Holy Baptism where we were washed clean from our sin by the powerful working of our Lord. This is always followed by some variance of the confession of sins. Whether it be "I a poor miserable sinner plead guilty before God of all sins..." or "Most merciful God, we confess that we are by nature sinful and unclean..." we are reminded of our pathetic condition before a righteous God, but He doesn't leave us there. The proclamation of Christ crucified awakens the new man in order to hear the preached Word, both Law and Gospel, as well as receive the body and blood of our Lord in a worthy manner for the forgiveness of our sins. I give thanks for the structure of our liturgy which provides, with great clarity, the presence of Christ who comes among us to "liturgize" us with Word and Sacrament.<br />
<br />
I am afraid there are some among the fold who despise this repetition and seek a way to conform our Sunday morning routine in such a way that it reflects the chaotic culture that we are thrust into every day. Whatever the reason for this is, whether it be the desire to put an individual's talent on display, create a culturally satisfying environment, or attract a few younger people it seems that this wayward fold is missing a serious point in their endeavour. Like the Backstreet Boys or the earliest cell phones, an irreverent, "do whatever you want" Divine Service is going to eventually become dissatisfying to those who's satisfaction is trying to be fulfilled. This will result in yet another renovation and the point will continue to be missed; the happenings of the Church on Sunday morning, namely Word and Sacrament do not appeal to any culture and are a timeless culture in themselves. We can rejoice that the Aaronic benediction has been taking place in the Church for thousands of years, we can celebrate (along with the church catholic) the Word's of our Lord when he says, "This is my body; This is my blood," and we can happily confess, along with Simeon, "Lord now you let your servant go in peace, Your Word has been fulfilled," after receiving forgiveness of sins in the sacrament of the altar. This is only to name a few repetitive things we enjoy in the Divine Service. The "black sheep," if I can be so bold as to call them that, do not offer the same stable, timeless setting. Rather they are looking for new ways of doing things because by all appearances the old ways are not working. All of this is building up to the main focus of this post.<br />
<br />
For the sake of privacy I will not use this individuals name (although I do not think he would mind,) but I will use his age because it helps to highlight the blessings that the repetition in our Divine Service bring. To the best of my knowledge this little boy's age is 3-4. Each Sunday his mother brings him and his older sister to the Divine Service at Messiah Lutheran Church in Missoula, MT where (I am happy to say) the "mundane" repetition takes place very faithfully. Over the Easter season I was the crucifer so I would be seated in a little pew on the altar for the entire service. Throughout different parts of our liturgical rites I could hear a little voice (almost in unison with the Pastor I might add) mimicking some of the parts of service. My Pastor's custom is to elongate the "is" during the Word's of institution in order to drive home the point that we are receiving the very body and blood of our Lord. When my Pastor would arrive at "issssssssss my body" I could hear this other voice, when he would say "with angels and archangels" I could hear this other voice, when he would conclude the benediction "and give you peace" I could hear this other voice. Not to mention I could hear this other voice humming some of the collect tunes.<br />
<br />
To some this might be a frustration. Due to the sinful flesh they might be thinking "Can someone get this little kid out of hear, or tell him to stop mimicking the Pastor," but what a glorious and God pleasing thing it is when a child is delighted to receive and mimic the Pastor's words, especially when the parts he is mimicking are Holy Scripture. I dare say the same effect could not be attained in a Divine Service that is ever changing. Needless to say I had to abandon my reverence and look over to see who was speaking along with the Pastor and to my heart's delight it was this little boy. Usually I would be seated right behind him and notice him playing with little cars or eating fruit snacks, but it seems even in his distracted state (and mine as well) the Word of our Lord, which is infused into our repetitious liturgical life, is working all the same.<br />
<br />
So what is the next step for this little unnamed tike? I pray that he continues to be raised in the faith and the knowledge of the truth as well as the repetitive nature of the liturgy, BUT also that he is taught the importance and significance of the parts of service in our liturgy so that he can be protected against the tantalizing ideas that it is better to abandon such lifeless routines and become more "excited" about worship. This story is just one example of the blessing of repetition, but I'm sure there are many more. There may be some that revolve around those folks who are toward the end of their life and can be comforted by the recitation of Words memorized in our Divine Service. I can say that I have sung the Nunc Dimittis, Kyrie, Gloria Patri etc during frustration, temptation or strife and maybe some other people could say the same. Whatever the uses of the ordinaries/propers a person might have, the point is they can be recalled easily because they are done with such high frequency. And before those contemptuous, "super-pious" people shout "God wants us to be super sincere worshippers who are innovative in our love for him. We have to be diverse and super happy-clappy to show him how much we love him," consider what He did for you to show you his love. By being crucified on the tree of the cross God showed his love for you in Christ. This is not so glorious or flashy and yet Paul, in a repetitious manner says, "For I decided to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ and him crucified" (1Corinthians 2:2) Lord's blessings.<br />
<br />
In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.<br />
Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13413229243640889757noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2731482465844486839.post-47951402520195710212013-04-27T09:32:00.002-07:002013-04-27T11:58:46.023-07:00Johann Gerhard's Meditations on Divine Mercy.If you are looking for a good prayer book, which contains solid confessional prayers (meaning that they focus on the true source of justification, namely the crucifixion of our Lord) and point to the source of true hope and peace (namely the providential care of our Lord through Word and Sacrament,) then I recommend you purchase "Meditations on Divine Mercy," written by Johann Gerhard; translated by President Matthew C. Harrison. You can find it at CPH.org or Amazon.com; ISBN 0-7586-0387-8.<br />
<br />
I have not really been drawn to a prayer book until I began reading through Gerhard's prayers. It seemed that all the one's I had been reading were written by me. Gerhard does a great job bringing out the sinfulness of man, in light of the Scripture, and pointing to the source of forgiveness. He breaks the "7 rules that every Christian ought to break as often as possible" (another great book; Broken written by Rev. Jonathan Fisk, again CPH.org or Amazon.com) and points you to Word and Sacrament where our Lord is truly present to forgive the sins of his people.<br />
<br />
One prayer in particular that I have come to love is titled "Prayer For the Mortification of the Old Man":<br />
<br />
<b>O HOLY AND MOST MERCIFUL GOD, Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, I beg You in the Holy Spirit, for the sake of Your Son, to powerfully work in me and put to death the old man. I need this every day so I can be made strong in You according to the inner man. Sin dwells in my flesh (Romans 7:17). Give me the strength of the Spirit so I will not allow sin to rule me (Romans 6:12). You set my hidden sins in the light of Your countenance (Psalm 90:8). I ask You to bring them to light in my heart so I may recognize them, regret them, and humbly seek their forgiveness. </b><br />
<b> I am not yet completely free from the indwelling of sin. Please be gracious, I ask, and grant me freedom from the guilt and condemnation of sin. The law of sin in my members is warring against the law of my renewed mind (Romans 7:23). Give me the grace of Your Spirit so I may take captive the law of sin and not be captive to the old law of the flesh. The flesh lusts against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh (Galatians 5:17). Indeed, the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak (Matthew 26:41). Give my spirit, therefore, great power and strength so it may overcome the depraved lusts that battle in my flesh. Strengthen my inner man by Your Spirit (Ephesians 3:16) so lust cannot break the inner man's power. How incredibly difficult and hard it is to fight against one's self. When I fight the flesh, I am fighting myself. How difficult and arduous it is to remove an enemy from one's own home.</b><br />
<b> Unless You clothe me with heavenly strength in this war, I am afraid that I will certainly be defeated by the hidden plots of the enemy. Strike down, burn, cut, and kill the old man so I can flee from this flattering fraud and seduction. Grant that daily I die to myself so the lures of the flesh will not draw me away from the true life that is in Christ. Inflame the fire of the Spirit in my heart so I may offer to You as a sacrifice the beloved child of my soul, which are depraved lusts and my own will. Flesh and blood cannot receive the inheritance of the kingdom of God (1Corinthians 15:50). May they die in me so I will not be excluded from the kingdom of heaven. Those who live according to the flesh will die; those who by the Spirit kill the deeds of the flesh will live (Romans 8:13). Those who belong to Christ crucify the flesh with its desires (Galatians 5:24). Pierce and crucify my flesh, O Christ, You who were pierced and crucified on the altar of the cross for me. AMEN. </b><br />
<br />
This is a preview of the excellent quality of Gerhard's meditations on divine mercy. This prayer seems to reflect on Luther's explanation of the third petition of the Lord's Prayer. "Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven. <i>What does this mean?</i> Answer: The good and gracious will of God is done indeed without our prayer. But we pray in this petition that it may be done among us also. <i>How is this done?</i> Answer: <b>When God BREAKS and HINDERS every evil counsel and will that would not let us hallow the name of God nor let His kingdom come, such as the will of the devil, the world, AND OUR FLESH</b>."<br />
<br />
This is essentially Gerhard's request, that the evil intentions of his own flesh be mortified by our Lord through the death and resurrection of Christ, which also echoes Galatians 2:20 "I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me." It is a strange paradox that our Lord brings us to life through death. This ultimately happens through baptism where we die to sin and are connected to the death and burial of Christ, but even more to his resurrection to everlasting life (Romans 6:2-4). God bless in the merits of Christ crucified, for you.<br />
<br />
In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13413229243640889757noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2731482465844486839.post-43871261186213114962013-04-07T14:25:00.001-07:002013-04-07T14:25:21.140-07:00Fishing With Flashy Lures?During the last two days of my spring break I got to enjoy some fly fishing with my older brother. Every time I would cast my line up stream I was hoping to attract a fish with the nymph flies I had selected. I wanted to make sure I had the right flow, the right flies, and the right fish. You know, the fish that would be willing to be caught by my flashy trickery. While fishing I was reflecting on the passage where Christ approaches "Simon (who is called Peter) and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea, for they were fishermen. And he said to them, "Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men" (Matthew 4:18-19). The image of two disciples throwing a net into the sea in order to catch fish and likening that image with being fishers of men seems to take on a different idea if, say, the disciples were holding St. Croix fly rods in their hands.<br />
<br />
What I mean is this, fly rods and fly tackle are designed to attract fish so that they can be caught whereas a net being cast into the sea is designed, not to attract fish, but to forcibly snatch them up and pull them into the boat. You might even say that the fish are being caught totally against their will. Is it important to look into the imagery this closely? When contemplating the action of the will in our 21st century Christian world I think so. With so many denominations focusing on the correct action of our will in "accepting Jesus as our personal Lord and saviour" it is important to note this subtle yet profound image of how God calls people out of the darkness of sin.<br />
<br />
It does not seem coincidental that we have this particular scene recorded for us. In fact the disciples casting their net into the dark sea, forcibly bringing fish out of the water and placing them into the boat is a perfect image of how the Word of God calls people from the darkness of their sin and brings them to repentance and faith in Christ, placing them in the ark of the Church. This action of the preached Word does not involve our will in any way, rather we are passively receiving God's grace. And just like a fish desires to remain in the dark depths of the sea and not be put to death so our sinful flesh desires to stay in the dark depths of sin and wars against the idea of being crucified.<br />
<br />
When we consider the richness of this scene (the fact that Christ is paralleling God's work of saving people to the lowly image of fisherman tossing a net into the sea to catch unwilling fish) we can rightly ask the question "Does more need to be added to God's Word in order that the unwilling person be turned to repentance and faith? Should the net of God's Word and Sacraments be cast out to pull people from the darkness of their sin, or should we attempt to utilize flashy lures to catch fish? What are we suggesting when we attempt to make God's word more relevant to the age we live in? If we put bells and whistles on it will more people join the fold? Is our attempt to attach attractants to the Word and Sacraments a silent commentary on what we believe about the will?"<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2731482465844486839.post-18244027649167334492013-04-03T15:59:00.002-07:002013-04-03T15:59:42.380-07:00The Apostolic Witness & Confessing the FaithIn the up and coming Christian world there is a term that has taken hold, and a more important term that has fallen by the way side. It is often that we hear Christians say, "I'm going to witness for Christ today," or the question, "Have you witnessed to anyone?" In the meantime we have dropped out of our memory the better term, which is confess. To many people this distinction between witnessing and confessing is a mere splitting of hairs. It is to rigid to think that there is a problem with the use of 'witness' rather than 'confess.' The question has probably already arisen, "Why should I confess the faith rather than witness about it?" This question escaped me for a long time. I always thought that it was of no real consequence to "witness" to others. I did not consider the difference between witnessing and confessing as a noteworthy distinction. Being brought to the correct understanding of how these terms should be utilized I now have a deeper appreciation both for the power of the Word and my role as a Christian in the vocation that I have been called to. I believe we disrupt context and begin to lay out a false teaching when we insist on witnessing rather than confessing the faith, especially as it relates to the blessed doctrine of vocation that we in the Missouri-Synod are unique in possessing. To suggest that the term "witness" produces a false understanding of vocation (and ultimately the context of Scripture verses where "witness" is used) is a bold statement, but I'm convinced that it is true based on the results such so called "witnessing" has across the denominational board.<br />
<br />
You'll notice that the title of this post begins with "The Apostolic Witness." You might say to yourself, "Hasn't this guy just spent his opening paragraph suggesting that we should not use this term, but rather confess?" This is a good question, and you are right in asking it. It is better for US to confess the faith and allow the Apostles to remain in their rightful role of witnessing about all the aspects of the life of Christ our Lord. Klemet Preus asserts in his book "The Fire and the Staff:Lutheran Theology in Practice," that everywhere the term witness is used in the New Testament it refers to people who have actually seen an event take place. I trust that he has done a proper word search to verify that this is true, but even in our English use of the term "witness" it is defined as follows: "<span id="hotword"><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="cursor: default;">to</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="cursor: default;">see,</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="cursor: default;">hear,</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="cursor: default;">or</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="cursor: default;">know</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="cursor: default;">by</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="cursor: default;">personal</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="cursor: default;">presence</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="cursor: default;">and</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="cursor: default;">perception</span></span>," so it only makes sense that the Apostles would bear this special role or vocation as the witnesses to the life, death, and resurrection of our Lord, in turn excluding everyone else who has not witnessed these things, namely everyone but the Apostles. We can see in the book of Acts when the eleven Apostles must choose someone to replace Judas's office that that person has to be "one of the men who have accompanied us during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us--one of these men must become with us a <i>witness</i> to his resurrection" (Acts:1:21-22). The eleven produced two men who fulfilled this requirement and from the two Matthias was chosen. From this example we can see that certain individuals were chosen for this vocation.<br />
<br />
Preus discusses an important reason why we should confess the faith as oppose to witness about it. When you witness you might be tempted to say "'Let me tell you what Jesus has done for me.' No one really needs to know what you think when it comes to eternal life. And we certainly will never be saved by hearing what Jesus has done for you" (Preus, 389). The point is if you become a witness you might be concerned more about telling people how God is working in your life instead of confessing the universal faith that Christ died on the cross for the sins of the world. This is a good point to make, but I'm more concerned with how this false use of a term disrupts our sense of vocation.<br />
<br />
What is meant by vocation? The literal definition of the term is <span id="hotword"><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="cursor: default;">a</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="cursor: default;">particular</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="cursor: default;">occupation,</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="cursor: default;">business,</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword">or</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="cursor: default;">profession;</span> <span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="cursor: default;">calling. So a vocation could be anything from a witness, as the Apostles were, down to a father or mother, student, blue-collar worker, "black collar" worker (Pastor,) school teacher, husband or wife etc. The key term is called. These various positions are filled when God calls us to them which is a comforting and pleasant way to look at the various stations we hold in life. For one it gives us purpose, but also it does not leave us searching for ways to "do God's will." When we are faithful in our various callings we are being faithful to our Lord. In the Small Catechism of Dr. Luther he has a portion called [IX] Table of Duties. His introduction to this table of duties is as follows: "consisting of certain passages of Scriptures, selected for various estates and conditions of men, by which they may be admonished to do their respective duties" (Tappert, 354). "Various estates," "conditions of men," and "respective duties" can easily be rendered vocations. Luther notes importantly that the following admonitions are "certain passages of Scriptures," so our vocations are given by God and he gives us his Word in order that we carry them out according to His will. In the Large Catechism of Dr. Luther and the fourth commandment he discusses why and how children should honor their father and mother and "in the second place" he says, "notice what a great, good, and holy work is assigned to children. Alas, it is utterly despised and brushed aside, and no one recognizes it as God's command or as holy, divine word and precept. For if we had regarded it as such, it would have been apparent to all that they who lived according to these words must also be holy men. Then there would have been no need to institute monasticism or "spiritual estates" (Tappert, 380). </span></span><br />
<br />
<span id="hotword"><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="cursor: default;">As Luther shows we all have "great, good, and holy work(s)" assigned to us, but they are in the sphere of the vocations which we have been called to. Why is this important? For most Christians in our modern world "witnessing" is the main role of every Christian. With phrases like "every man a Minister" and "go out and witness" we have turned our faces away from the "great, good, and holy work(s)" only to suggest that somehow this zealous witnessing is something more elevated in the eyes of our Lord than the humble estates which he places us in. </span></span><span id="hotword"><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="cursor: default;"></span></span><span id="hotword"><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="cursor: default;">Oh how we have fallen into monasticism again by applying this word "witness" to all Christians instead of only those to which it was applied. In Luther's time individuals who entered into the monastic life were thought of as more holy and God pleasing because of this pursuit of God. How often do individuals think, "I'm a much better Christian than Joe because I "witnessed" to five people today and poor old Joe just went to his job, fulfilled his duties no doubt, but did not "witness" about Christ to anyone." </span></span><br />
<br />
<span id="hotword"><span id="hotword" name="hotword" style="cursor: default;">You might be wondering, "Well is this not just a different term with the same understanding as confessing the faith?" In shorthand the answer is no. If we are to confess, or </span></span><span class="short_text" id="result_box" lang="el"><span class="hps">ομολογ</span></span><span class="short_text" id="result_box" lang="el"><span class="hps"><span class="short_text" id="result_box" lang="el"><span class="hps">ε</span></span>ώ (homologeo,) than we are to say the same thing that the Scriptures say. By asserting that every Christian ought to witness as the Apostle's did, you are not saying the same thing as the Scriptures. For one you are giving an entirely new meaning to the word "witness," and for two you are placing the Law on the consciences of men where God has not placed it himself. Consider Luther's words about the book of Acts:</span></span> "Contrary to what has sometimes been the practice, this book should not
be read or regarded as though St. Luke had written about the personal
work or history of the apostles simply as an example of good works or a
good life...Rather it should be noted that by this book St. Luke teaches
the whole of Christendom, even to the end of the world, that the true
and chief article of Christian doctrine is this: We must all be
justified alone by faith in Jesus Christ, without any contribution from
the law or help from our works" (TLSB, 1828). It is almost as if Luther saw the day coming when people would read this
commission to the Apostles and then proclaim, "I must do just as the
Apostles have done, so I will witness to all the world!" You can see how
devastating it is to apply this little word "witness" to ourselves.
Luther sees that if we utilize the entirety of the book of Acts, and so
including this one passage, as a way to set up the Apostles as a guide
to right living we lose the true purpose of the book, which is the
proclamation of the forgiveness we have in Christ. What a difference. In
maintaining the context and so reserving this little word "witness" for
the Apostles we can either be burdened by the acronym WWAD (What Would
the Apostles Do) to a release from the Law and the acronym WDAP(What Did
the Apostles Preach) which is the complete forgiveness of sins in
Christ, without any merit or worthiness of our own, before or after our
conversion to faith. <br />
<br />
The clarification in context between the role of the Apostles and our own, as it concerns witnessing and confessing is important because without it consciences can be burdened by over-zealous spirits who wish to insert themselves into the role which is reserved for the Apostles. The distinction between the Apostles and ourselves lies in the notion that a witness refers to a person who has seen events first hand. The Apostles are this witness to the life of Jesus Christ, not you and I. We should reserve this term for the Apostles in order to separate their very important role in spreading the Gospel and not confuse their vocational task with our own. Let us consider the words of our Lord as he commissions the eleven:<br />
<br />
"But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my <i>witnesses </i>in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth."(Acts 1:8). <br />
<br />
This is a great and glorious comfort to us Christians today, and for all of those who would receive this witness from the Apostles. Christ has assigned a specific task to the eleven, as well as the newly appointed Matthias, and later Saul of Tarsus.<br />
<br />
Having the context in its proper place we can take further comfort in the fact that the spreading of the Gospel does not depend on us, but rather the Apostles. You might say, "How can the Apostles spread the Gospel, they are dead and gone," but I contest because contained within the New Testament Scriptures is the very substance that witnesses to the life, death, resurrection, and ascension of our Lord (among other important events). It is this Apostolic witness which is no doubt carried into the world by pastors, missionaries, and other Church workers, but the Apostles are still the ones testifying to the life of Christ. This brings power to the Word. Is the word efficacious in creating faith? Typically those who would advocate for witnessing do not place a whole lot of faith in the power of the Word. Is this a bold statement? Maybe, but I think not because after they are done witnessing they then leave it on the one witnessed to to make a decision as to whether or not they believe what was spoken. The power has thus been drained from the Word and it is merely a listing of facts which a person can either say yes or no to. In his letter to the Church of Rome, Paul seems to speak differently of the Word: "So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ" (Romans 10:17). Maintaining the distinction between the Apostolic witness and our confessing of that witness then trusts in the Word to do its job. To be sure this commission is in part fulfilled from the pulpit when the Lord's Word is read and preached. It is also fulfilled in the sending out of missionaries and other Church workers, but the growth of the people of God still does not depend on these individuals, but rather the power and substance of the Apostolic witness. The second point is something that our pride-filled flesh doesn't seem to swallow so easily. We want to proclaim, "Look at me, I am fulfilling the commission of Christ just as the Apostles did, this is the role for every Christian to partake in!" Sadly this brings a heavy burden upon the consciences of numerous Christians. In the false sense of piety and trust in our own good works we separate the role of the called Apostles, preachers, and teachers and those who are in reception of the gracious gifts of our Lord, namely the laity.<br />
<br />
So where does this leave us? If we should extinguish the use of the word witness and it's false emphasis on the idea that all Christians are called to verbal evangelism, does this mean that we should not confess the sacrifice of our Lord to others? In his first epistle the Apostle Peter says, "but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you" (1Peter 3:15). Paul speaks in a similar way in his epistle to the Colossians. He says, "Walk in wisdom toward outsiders, making best use of the time. Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person" (Col. 4:6). In each of these examples it is important to note that both Peter and Paul anticipate a question or an attack. The confession then is not an evangelistic tool in the way that Evangelical Christianity would force the word witness to be. Rather it is a response or defense which suggests that you, Christian, are being approached by someone else. In the tenth chapter of the Gospel of St. Matthew we see Christ addressing the twelve Apostles. He says, "Therefore all who <span class="short_text" id="result_box" lang="el"><span class="hps">ομολογήσει</span></span> (will confess) in me in the presence of men, <span class="short_text" id="result_box" lang="el"><span class="hps">ομολογήσω (I will confess) in him before my father" (Matthew 10:32). He also puts it negatively that all who deny Christ before men, he will also deny before his father. Taking Peter and Paul into consideration we can see that Christ is not commanding that all people go out and confess him, again, as an evangelistic method, rather this confession of Christ is presupposed by a question or an attack by another individual. And then the question becomes, how should we understand these words? Is Christ saying that our work of confessing causes a saving act? We are saved by grace through faith which is not from ourselves so I hardly think that is the case. </span></span>It is essential for a layperson to confess the faith when they are questioned or attacked, but this is not something that he possesses in himself to do, rather the new man, through the motivation of the Gospel, makes the confession of faith without a thought about it. For from the newly created faith pours forth all the fruits of faith, including the confession of the Apostolic witness.<br />
<br />
And this is not done by word only, but rather "Let your light so shine before others, so that they may see your good works give glorify to your Father who is in heaven" (Matthew 5:16). This also pours forth from faith, which again is a gift. We can see too that we are called to a certain vocation in this life, but we are all called to the newness of life in Christ as well, out of which is produced our confession when defending the Gospel of our Lord and walking in the ways of the Law. It is not a compulsion, obligation, or work but rather spontaneous and God given. Will we at times fail at these tasks? The Scripture testifies with a resounding yes! This is not the end though for Christ has given the witness to some, namely the Apostles, and he grants you to confess the one true faith as he nourishes you daily through his Word and Sacraments. Let us give thanks to God that our salvation does not depend on our own self measured piety, but rather on his son who WILL confess YOU before his father even as he causes you to confess him to men when those times come.<br />
<br />
In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy SpiritAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2731482465844486839.post-34112558367310120312013-03-22T19:43:00.000-07:002013-03-22T19:43:27.391-07:00The Bride of Christ Dressed in Culturally Relevant GarbThere is a dangerous tendency in our culture-serving 21st century American Christian world to abandon the sacramental way in which our Lord visits us each Sunday as we gather around His means of grace. This is in part due to sin which manifests itself in fear of a shrinking Church, but it also has to do with another aspect of the Old Adam in us which seeks to fight against the way of our Lord. In his constant need of the drug of self-justification, the Old Adam attempts to hop on the bandwagon of American Evangelicalism just as the wagon is about to plummet headlong into destruction. Not only is the Old Adam seeking to throw out from the bride of Christ her modesty which reflects her bridegroom, but he is also replacing her modesty with clothes fit for prostitutes. Let us rename the reasons in clearer terms. One, we fear the decline of our Church, and this is a first commandment problem. Two, we do not want to acknowledge that God desires to come to serve us with Word and Sacraments, thus not only showing us we are incapable of satisfying the law but also pointing to the redemptive act of Christ crucified for us. Our fear leads us to desperate solutions and our desire for self-justification leads us to hell. Can all of this be the effect of such abandonment from the proper form in which Christ comes to liturgize us with Word and Sacrament? Well if you find this hard to believe take a look at an "evangelical" Church's statement about worship:<br />
<br />
<i>Romans 12:1 says that our spiritual worship is "to present our bodies as living
sacrifices, holy and acceptable to God." So big picture, God wants us.
Not our songs, not our music, not our hands raised or clapping. He wants
our hearts. </i><b>To be sure this doesn't seem bad so far. </b><i>God is not interested in people who can merely perform
ritualistic ceremonies or utter heartless prayers and songs. He wants
the hearts of His people to love Him and give Him everything </i><b>(third use of the Law)</b><i>. As Jesus
says in Mark 7:6-7
when He is quoting Isaiah, "This people honours me with their lips but
their hearts are far from me; in vain do they worship me..." </i><b>(Scripture out of context). </b><i>So we,
above all, want to be a people who love God with our whole heart, soul,
and mind (Matthew 22:37), and because of that love, obey His commands (John 14:21). Then from that place we sing songs of praise, lift up holy hands, and celebrate the glory of King Jesus!<b>(More third use here).</b></i><br />
<br />
It took me all of two minutes to discover this nugget of dung, now you can imagine what other forms of self-justifying ideas concerning worship are out there. This Church says that their style of worship is "modern rock to folk or pop." And they desire to be "culturally relevant," and I wrote "culture-serving 21st century American Christian world" before I read this Church's stance on worship.<br />
<br />
Taking a quick look at the the context of Mark we will discover that Christ is addressing certain traditions of the Pharisees, none of which dealt with worship, but rather self-justifying acts, in this case "walking in accordance to the tradition of the elders," when it came to unwashed hands. Applying this verse to worship is a terrible perversion. It fails to recognize what was being addressed and also ignores the very fact that Jesus of Nazareth placed himself under the worship life of the Jews. He followed the laws according to the command of God and he never spoke out against the worship life of the Jews, but rather the superfluous doctrines and traditions.<br />
<br />
In this Church's understanding of worship they have in fact set up a tradition not found in the Scriptures, beginning with the notion that the people of God, the body of Christ, the bride of the holy bridegroom, ought to make herself culturally relevant. This notion is in no way found in God's Word. If in fact it were I dare say that John the Baptist would have been committing a grave sin, and the Jews would have done even worse by being faithful to God's Word and observing on the Sabbath as he had prescribed. Not only that but they have turned the Divine Service into a work of their own. They begin with the law, namely "giving God everything." This giving to God everything has now established the right relationship with the Lord. Forget about the sin that separates us from God and the justifying act that our Lord submitted himself to by being crucified for us, for YOU. Forget about God giving YOU EVERYTHING, no give God everything instead. Disregard the fact that he has brought you to faith through the power of his Word, you must first give yourself to Him. After being beaten with this portion of the Law you get exactly what you always wanted. No, not the Gospel of Christ, not the proclamation of free justification, NO. You have much more to do, <i>"So we,
above all, want to be a people who love God with our whole heart, soul,
and mind, and because of that love, obey His commands. Then from that place we sing songs of praise, lift up holy
hands, and celebrate the glory of King Jesus!" </i>After being beaten blue with the third use of the Law you either walk away in despair or become like the very people that our Lord rebukes in Mark 7. <br />
<br />
Take heart. Christ has overcome the world, he has put to death your Old Adam, he has taken the punishment that you rightly deserve for lacking fear, love, and trust in God above all things. He has bore your iniquities for fighting against the operations of our Lord in the search for self-justifying acts of worship. His very gruesome death, a death which places before you not an empty cross but one which his holy body inhabits because of your sin and FOR your sin. This is what Paul calls, "folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God" (1Corinthians 1:18).<br />
<br />
In speaking of the corrupt practices of his day Melanchthon writes: "Thus in our own time the wise men are reasoning: what is wrong with the idea that Christ is offered by many and by individuals? Or that we offer prayers for the living and the dead? Or that a part of the Sacrament is carried out? The prayers of the people are increased and the Sacrament given more honor" (Christian Freedom p. 178). These questions could just as easily be "What is wrong with the idea that we believe and practice like worship is our work to God? Or that we ignore that the main reason we are here is to receive God's service? Or that we play culturally satisfying music? The attendance in the congregation is up and God is being given more praise."<br />
<br />
Melanchthon continues: "But these lovely rationalizations and specious arguments lead people away from the Word of God. Indeed, games of this kind are forbidden by God. For with the same audacity they dream up their heretical errors--some, one kind, and others, other kinds. Indeed, despite their conscience struggling over the remission of sins and the will of God in times of great calamities, they become so accustomed to following these rationalizations and opinions that they lose the true consolations which have been given to us by God" (178). I would argue that "these lovely rationalizations" given to us by our liturgy-abandoning brothers are leading people away from the Word of God. And it seems that Melancthon is connecting worship with doctrine when he says that "with the same audacity they dream up their heretical errors." Doctrine and practice are intimately intertwined and so one cannot justify "culturally relevant practice" by the misuse of the Augsburg Confession Article XV, even if he is a Pastor. When we embrace practices littered with "evangelical" Christianity's false notions about worship we endanger the pure doctrine that we should rather be fighting for.<br />
<br />
Finally Melanchthon writes, "Men in civil life tell us that conflicts which are destructive for inexperienced people are often caused by very simple things. Discords hang on and increase by reason of zeal and hatreds of factions. Men do not disagree with moderation. Therefore, they say, why do you stir up such sad tragedies about things like milk, eggs, and the eating of meat? Why do you not put the public peace and tranquillity ahead of these minute things?" Today we might be asked "Why do you stir up such sad tragedies about things like praise bands, culturally relevant music etc.?" Melanchthon's answer to this, "The answer is true and SOLID. We are not contending about unimportant matters, but about many very important things, namely, the true knowledge and worship of God, which must be put ahead of our very life, all our physical comforts, governments, and the public concord, so that we do not look for opinions about God and His will outside of the Word which he has given us, as the Gentiles have done and all fanatic spirits" (178-79). Whether you agree with how I'm applying Melanchthon or not there is no denying that he valued correct worship so we should at least be discussing these "very important things" instead of hardening our hearts against the historic practice of the Church, the Lutheran Confessions, and above all the Holy Scriptures which proclaim a sacramental and God-serving Divine Service.<br />
<br />
"Faith is the divine service that receives the benefits offered by God.
The righteousness of the Law is the divine service that offers to God
our merits. God wants to be worshipped through faith so that we receive
from Him those things he promises and offers" ( Apology of the Augsburg Confession Article IV line 49).<br />
So let us not be blinded by the fact that "happy-clappy" styles of worship demand "the righteousness of the Law which is the divine service that offers to God our merits," and have our eyes opened to the grace, mercy, peace, forgiveness, and justification given through Jesus Christ and him crucified through "the divine service that receives the benefits offered by God," namely faith.<br />
<br />
"There is a common assumption today that the liturgy must reflect the language and the ethos of the current culture. If this is true, then liturgies will veer toward the pop culture in which we live. These culturally devised liturgies are at times exciting and entertaining, but are not transcultural. At most, they will give only immediate satisfaction. These liturgies then become just another expression of the culture's malaise, a feel-good, shallow, artificially uplifting sentimentality" (Heaven on Earth The Gifts of Christ in the Divine Service, Rev. Arthur A. Just Jr., p. 28-29) And let us extinguish our desire for a theology of glory, a theology that seeks God in ourselves, a theology that tells us to search for God outside of the cross. We cannot continue to concern ourselves with what our culture deems as relevant otherwise the LCMS will be the lamp placed under a table and not a lamp that shines in the darkness. Christ has shed his blood for us, for you, he has won the victory that we could never hope to win, he has attached this victory to you in the waters of Holy Baptism and he feeds you with his body and blood each weak. He will not allow the pure confession of faith to fail and even though we, yes you and I, fail to "fear, love and trust in God above all things," Christ continually had "fear, love and trust in God above all things," for you. And when your flesh fights against the Words and will of our Lord, Christ submitted himself perfectly. He has collected us as his body and will not let the gates of hell prevail against us. God bless.<br />
<br />
In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2731482465844486839.post-56789788023422991532011-11-30T21:56:00.000-08:002011-11-30T21:57:52.094-08:00In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Amen<title></title> <style type="text/css">
<!--
@page { margin: 0.79in }
P { margin-bottom: 0.08in }
-->
</style> <br />
<div style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"> Yes I am a member of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod and yes I make the sign of the cross. Does this seem odd to some of our Lutheran brothers and sisters? Should it? Do you, as a member of the LCMS view certain practices of orthodox Christianity as Roman Catholic and therefore suggest they should be avoided? We as Lutherans, all of Christendom for that matter, should not be afraid to embrace certain practices that are associated with Roman Catholicism. In fact I believe that the move in the opposite direction of certain, supposedly, Roman Catholic practices has actually produced negative results. So why make the sign of the Cross? Making the sign of the Cross is in fact adiaphora (neither commanded nor forbidden in the Bible so left to Christian freedom and choice) but we should not treat these practices, when understood correctly, as something to be avoided.</div><div style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"> In our hymnals, as we open the service with the invocation, we read in red letters that all can make the sign of the Cross in remembrance of their Baptism. What happened to baptized Christians at the font should not only be something that is desired but also one that is lived in and remembered. As Colossians 2:11-12 reveals to us, baptism is the fulfillment of circumcision, which to the Israelites was a covenant promise between God and the people of Israel. This covenant was made on God's part not of man's and the same is true in baptism. Man did not invent this institution but rather it was given to the Church by Christ. A profound reality exists in the waters of Baptism which should be remembered and celebrated and this “washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit” can be brought back into the mind of all those who have received this life giving flood by making the sign of the Cross.</div><div style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"> We need to realize as well that we are not only remembering what took place in our Baptism but by who it was taken place through. By making the sign of the cross we are confessing who we are gathering together to be fed spiritual food by. The Trinity is being confessed when we say “In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost” and they all certainly play unique roles in our coming to faith. God the Father has created us and by his gracious will and mercy uses the Church to proclaim the message of Christ where the Holy Spirit is present to bring us to faith. Jesus is the foundation of this proclamation and gives us this washing to renew us steadfast in the faith. The Apostle Peter confesses “baptism now saves you”, not just a past act that occurred in time, but an on going reception of salvation so it is only proper that we remember and confess it. </div><div style="line-height: 200%; margin-bottom: 0in;"> Again it is in our Christian freedom to make or not make the sign of the Cross but I say do or do not for the appropriate reasons. Don't do it if it is out of self centered Christian piety (in which case learn the theological reason behind it, which only enriches the experience) and don't avoid it because its Roman Catholic. Luther himself implores us to make the sign of the cross, not that Luther is the rule over Christ but it is testimony that this tradition exists outside of Rome. In the Small Catechism, evening and morning prayers, Luther writes<span style="color: black;"> "In the morning when you get up, make the sign of the holy cross and say:In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen."</span> </div><br />
In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. AmenAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2731482465844486839.post-18340097996165835332011-04-29T13:43:00.001-07:002011-04-29T13:43:44.614-07:00“Given and shed for you..”:The Sacrament of the Altar<div align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">“<i>Our Lord Jesus Christ, on the night when He was betrayed, took bread,</i></div><div align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i>and when He had given thanks, He broke it and gave it to the disciples</i></div><div align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i>and said:'Take, eat; this is my body, which is given for you. This do in</i></div><div align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i>remembrance of Me.' In the same way He also took the cup after supper,</i></div><div align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i>and when he had given thanks, He gave it to them, saying:'Drink of it, all </i> </div><div align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i>of you; this cup is the new testament in My blood, which is shed for you for</i></div><div align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i>the forgiveness of sins. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.'”</i></div><div align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">These words are recorded for us by the Apostle Paul in 1Corinthians 11:23-25, an institution made by Jesus Christ himself, for all of Christendom. They are of great comfort for us as Christians and the Lord's Supper is described as a means of grace or a sacrament. A sacrament is simply a sacred institution of God for the purpose of grace to those in reception of it. The names given to the Lord's Supper would be communion, Holy communion, the Eucharist, Sacrament of the Altar, etc. The big question surrounding the Sacrament is “Is Christ's body and blood truly present in the bread and wine or did he institute this for us for symbolic use only?” Most of the Christian world would say that this institution of Christ is merely a symbol, nothing more. They would say that we receive no benefit from the Lord's Supper other than partaking of the elements and in so doing we remember Christ. Some other explanations would be more simplified namely: “This is what Christians do.” And with little to no self investigation of Scripture and the beliefs of the Church throughout history the idea of Christ's body and blood being truly present in the Lord's Supper is thrown out the window. Seemingly our Lord and Savior would simply institute something of this magnitude on the night of His betrayal for no reason and when He says “given and shed for you for the forgiveness of sins” evidently he was just using word play of some sort.</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">Despite Christ's clear words, “this is my body, this is my blood”, most of the modern Christian world choose to accept the teachings of men on this issue of communion. Man in his blind reason cannot fathom why we would need to partake of the very body and blood of Christ. “Faith in Christ is sufficient enough!” they would proclaim in all their excellence, and I would agree but if you have faith in Christ than you should have faith in Christ's words and make your reason subservient to the Scriptures. The reason I partake in the Eucharist with the hope of being strengthened in faith through the Holy Spirit is directly correlated with faith in Christ and should not be separated by any means. If we apply the same logic of the deniers of the sacrament to the Scripture we can say the same thing. “Faith in Christ is sufficient enough! So why do I need the Scriptures? All I need is faith in Jesus!.” But you see that the Word is a means of grace just as the Sacrament is. The Word brings to us faith, forgiveness of sins, strengthening of faith, life, and salvation. For through the Word we hear of Christ and there the Holy Spirit is present to create faith in the heart's of men as it is written:</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"></div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">Romans 10:17</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ.</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">In the same way the Holy Spirit must be present in the Eucharist because not only was it established by Jesus, attached with it is God's Word. And if Christ tells us that forgiveness of sins comes through the Supper that he instituted then surely strength in faith, life, and salvation follow. If we step out of Christ's own word when instituting Holy Communion, which in itself is sufficient enough, we can see that the apostle Paul testifies to what Christ said, we see Christ confirming His words early on in the book of John, and there are Old Testament foreshadows of the Lord's Supper as well.</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"></div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">John 6:53-56</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For my flesh is real food an my blood is real drink. Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him.”</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">In these verses we hear Christ talk in bold terms and this is exampled in the reactions of the Jews and the very disciples of Christ who were present when he said this. Some people would refute that in this area Christ is speaking about the Lord's Supper but rather he is speaking about faith in Him in general because Christ was comparing himself in the beginning part of the chapter to the manna that came down from heaven to the Israelites. But it is an interesting note that not only the Jews became very disgruntled with Christ's word after Jesus says in verse 51 “This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world” but also his disciples did as well for we hear their response in verse 60:</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">On hearing it, many of his disciples said, “This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?”</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">The reason I want to point this out is that it seems whenever Christ's disciples misunderstand something that Christ says figuratively He addresses it with them instead of having them continue in their misunderstanding. We see this in Matthew when Jesus warns his disciples against the “yeast” of the Pharisees.</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">Matthew 16:5-12</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">When they went across the lake, the disciples forgot to take bread. “Be careful,” Jesus said to them. “Be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees and the Sadducees.” </div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">They discussed this among themselves and said, “It is because we didn't bring any bread.”</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">Aware of their discussion, Jesus asked, “You of little faith, why are you talking among yourselves about having no bread? Do you still not understand? Don't you remember the five loaves for the five thousand, and how many basketfuls you gathered? Or the seven loaves for the four thousand, and how many basketfuls you gathered? How is it you don't understand that I was not talking to you about bread? But be on your guard against the yeast of the Pharisees and the Sadducees.” Then they understood that he was not telling them to guard against the yeast used in bread, but against the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees. </div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-style: normal;">So we see that with a sharp rebuke Jesus gets His disciples thinking on the right track about the message he is trying to convey. Now there are other places where Jesus talks </span>in potentially confusing terms<span style="font-style: normal;"> of His body and does not explain. In the case of John chapter 2 when Jesus is speaking with the Jews about the temple. Christ says:</span></div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.”</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">We learn of course that Jesus is speaking of His very body not the actual Jewish temple and here he doesn't go into an explanation. But if we examine the attitudes of the people in each account we see that Jesus' disciples were acting in ignorance where as the Jews were speaking in arrogance and demanding that Jesus would give them a sign and for Christ to speak plainly to the Jews wouldn't have served his purpose because we know that Jesus was speaking to unbelievers in parables instead of literal terms so that they might ponder what Jesus was trying to say instead of hearing Him plainly and rebuking Him on the spot, as they do when Jesus is speaking of his body and blood in this account in John. We know that these Jews didn't have faith in Christ but the disciples did and we also know that Jesus tells his disciples that they will have the secrets of the Kingdom of God revealed to them. Furthermore we see some of Jesus' disciples leaving Him because of this issue and if he was speaking in figurative terms we would have to assume that Jesus wouldn't just let those who had faith in Him walk away because of the misunderstanding of words. </div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">Briefly, another account in John where Jesus goes to raise Lazarus from the dead we hear:</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">John 11:11-15</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">After he had said this, he went on to tell them, “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep; but I am going there to wake him up.” His disciples replied, “Lord if he sleeps, he will get better.” Jesus had been speaking of his death, but his disciples thought he meant natural sleep. So then he told them plainly, “Lazarus is dead, and for your sake I am glad I was not there, so that you may believe. But let us go to him.”</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">I moved away from the issue of the Lord's Supper but I think these serve as good examples for the point I'm trying to make. When Christ speaks of His body and blood in this account in John, I have no reason to believe He is speaking figuratively. Clearly he would have set His disciples on level ground so that they could understand that this hard teaching wasn't meant to be taken literally.</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">Now lets see what Paul has to say concerning this issue. I already wrote the words of Christ's institution of the Lord's Supper so what does Paul have to say after he records these words of Christ. We hear in 1Corinthians 11:27-29:</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">Therefore, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of the Lord. A man ought to examine himself before he eats of the bread and drinks of the cup. For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgement on himself.</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">Paul tells us that if we eat of the bread and drink of the cup unworthily we will be guilty of sinning against the body and blood of Christ! Now how can that be if the only thing contained in the supper is merely bread and wine. How can we sin against Christ's body and blood if they are not truly present. And how is that we drink in an unworthy manner? Paul talks about self examination which makes me believe that we should be repenting of sin and recognizing that we are sinful. He also says that if we do not discern the body of the Lord we eat and drink judgement on ourselves! So Christ wants us to be repentant and trust in his words “this is my body, this is my blood given and shed for you for the forgiveness of sins.” </div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">My question to those who would deny this blessed sacrament is, if God can create from nothing what we see today, if he can drown the sinful world in a flood and save Noah and his family in an ark, if he can keep Jonah in the belly of large fish for three days, if he can heal the sick and cast out demons, walk on water and be raised from the dead, then why on Earth could you not believe the words that He speaks during the Passover meal with his disciples? Nothing that I write can convince the unbelieving Christian of this merciful reality but I will say that I find pardon and peace in this sacrament. And its not because I trust in the ceremony or the bread and wine its because of Christ's own words “given and shed for you for the forgiveness of sins.” I don't share these things out of boastful pride but rather out of love. I would have all Christians experience this institution of our Lord. Christ has left this behind for us as a visible means of grace, along with the Scripture and Holy Baptism. The Triune God is present in these things to bring us to faith and keep us strengthened in that same faith. </div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"></div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">Again, like every other useful tradition or legitimate institution of God, the modern Christian world has abandon God's own word on this issue because of its perceived association, namely, the Church of Rome. Christians today want so badly to flee from anything that appears Roman Catholic that they manage to throw out things that aren't Roman Catholic but Scriptural. And a lot of these Churches like to quote ancient Church fathers such as Augustine, Ambrose, Irenaeus, Justin, and Polycarp as well as Martin Luther all the while ignoring the fact that these men believed in the very bodily presence of Christ in the Eucharist. For in Justin's own words:</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">“This we receive not as common bread and common drink. We receive them as Jesus Christ, our Savior, who through the Word of God became flesh. For the sake of our salvation he also had flesh and blood. So we believe that the food blessed by Him through the Word and prayer is the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ.”</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">I don't write this to suggest Justin Words are above Christ's or Paul's but to show that they are in agreement with them. So if the words of Christ, “this is my body, this is my blood”, are to be understood literally by the ancient Church all throughout her history then why would we stray from the agreement of the Church? Again I say it is to separate ourselves from the Roman Catholic Church and this is ignorance because Martin Luther himself recognized the false teachings of Rome even to the point of excommunication and the fear of death but held onto the sacraments because of Christ's Word.</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">How can bodily eating and drinking do such great things?:</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">“<i>It is not the eating and drinking, indeed, that does them, but the words, which are given here, “Given...and shed for you, for the forgiveness of sins.” These words are, beside the bodily eating and drinking, the chief thing in the Sacrament. The person who believes these words has what they say and express, namely, the forgiveness of sins.”</i></div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i> -Martin Luther</i></div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i> Small Catechism </i> </div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i> VI. The Sacrament of the Altar</i></div>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2731482465844486839.post-29792789007081735672011-04-23T23:39:00.001-07:002011-04-23T23:39:46.705-07:00Power of the Word:Defending the Liturgy<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">A verse in Romans comes to mind when I think of how a person comes to the knowledge of Christ.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Romans 10:17</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ.</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">All people are dead in their sins and transgressions and have no opportunity to be cleansed and brought to faith in Christ except through the Word. There is where the Holy Spirit is present to create the faith which clings to the cross and justifies us before God. I want to address the issue of pushing the liturgy out of the Church. The same liturgy that contains the very Words to bring the dead in sin to life in Christ. It seems that a figurative towel is being thrown in, concerning the liturgy, because of a decline in the Church. </div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">This begs the question, what is a better option? Seemingly for certain LCMS churches it is to do away with the organ, the hymns, the rites throughout the liturgy, and the reverence necessary to focus on Christ and Him crucified. We envision it being a problem that our service, in all its richness, doesn't appeal to the ever popular “secular Christianity” which demands a band on the stage in all THEIR glory. What can be more attractive to the flesh than focusing our attention off of the cross and onto the keyboard, guitar, drums, and vocalist who are supposedly leading worship when in actuality this “worship service” appears to be more of a concert than a place to confess our failings before the Lord. And through this confession the glory of the true passover Lamb is brought in its fullness. </div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Why do we want to replace the liturgy with a contemporary service? What are the reasons for this quick abandonment of something that has been in place for more than a thousand years? With reckless abandon we choose to “liven” up the service. And in my own mind I've discovered the answer to why we are choosing to throw the liturgy out. Sin. I'm not saying that contemporary churches are sinners. That isn't the issue here, what I am saying is the folks who propose heading in the direction of contemporary Christianity are afraid that if the LCMS doesn't change her ways than the attraction to such a traditional church would be slim to none by our upcoming youth. We've begun to notice that the youth are more interested in the secular world rather then the church and this, without surprise, forces us to make these drastic decisions. If a band brings kids in the church then lets do it! But there is a problem. We are bringing kids into the church by using something that wasn't designed for conversion or the creation of faith. And its obvious that a quick rebuttal is at hand, namely: “If we can get youth in the church with music then they will be exposed to God's Word.” But I say you're fishing without a hook. In the hopes for our youth to become and maintain their pilgrimage on Earth we turn to a desperate attempt to get them in the Church using something other then God's Word! If this is the direction we are headed, which I'm convinced it is, then we have a problem on our hands. There is nothing special about the liturgy, in the sense of excitement but there is something unique about it which is God's Word. From confession and absolution all the way to the end of the Service of the Sacrament God's word is infused everywhere! The last thing we hear in the service before the last hymn is the benediction that goes:</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The Lord bless you and keep you.</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The Lord make his face shine on you</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">and be gracious to you</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The Lord look upon you with favor and give you peace.</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">This benediction comes from Numbers 6:24-26</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">In the verses that come before and after this blessing God says to Moses:</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">“The Lord said to Moses, 'Tell Aaron and his sons, this is how you are to bless the Israelites. Say to them: </div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"></div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The Lord bless you and keep you; the Lord make his face shine upon you and be gracious to you; the Lord turn his face toward you and give you peace.</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">So they will put my name on the Israelites, and I will bless them.”</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">This blessing is thousands of years old and it is still used today in the LCMS. God says His name is being put on the Israelites and so they will be blessed and I believe the same can be said today. But would you find such richness when you ditch the liturgy? Certainly not, in fact the non denominational Churches don't even say the Lord's Prayer which strikes me because Christ said “when you pray, pray like this” and he gave us this prayer. In the two accounts where the Lord's Prayer was recorded, one in Matthew chapter 6 and the other in Luke chapter 11, Christ talks about forgiveness (Matthew account) and the receiving of the Holy Spirit (Luke account) so through this prayer we are receiving again the Holy Spirit and forgiveness from God. So why isn't it being prayed? </div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">As another example of the infusion of God's Word in the service, before the Gospel reading of the day is read the congregation rises and sings together:</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Alleluia. Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life. Alleluia, alleluia.</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">This comes from John 6:68 and the context is many of Christ's disciples deserted him and he says to the twelve:</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">“You do not want to leave too, do you?” Jesus asked the Twelve. Simon Peter answered him, “<b>Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.</b><span style="font-weight: normal;"> We believe and know that you are the Holy One of God.”</span></div><div align="left" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">Appropriately this is placed before the Gospel reading because here we are hearing what Christ has to teach to us and we know that he is the Holy One of God. These are just a few examples of how the liturgy is rich in God's Word. I want it to be clear that I am not speaking down on contemporary worship for no reason, as I believe others would speak down the liturgy because its “Catholic” or whatever other erroneous thought they can conjure about it. I've been in both places, contemporary and Lutheran alike that is so my opinions and thoughts aren't stemming from being raised in a traditional Lutheran Church. Nor was I lead to believe that the liturgy is rich and awesome but I realized it through experiencing it and being taught about it. </div><div align="left" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-weight: normal;">Further more the Lutheran understanding of worship is being dumbed down to a loud projection to a God that is evidently so far away. This is wrong! We believe, teach, and confess that where Christ is present he is there with both his divine and human nature. To divide the person of Christ is to make him something that he is not. When first studying the issue of the Person of Christ I thought it insignificant but by the end I truly appreciated this article of faith because it shapes the way we worship. If Christ is truly present with us in the service we are not going to be singing loud praises to him as if he is way up in the sky seated at God's right hand (he is seated there but its a position of power not a fixed box that he can't leave). Worship isn't about us doing things for God, it is about God coming to us with mercy and grace in hand to strengthen us. But the contemporary worship style forces our understanding to shift. It fools us into believing that the Service is our work for God, which in fact even in its name, Divine Service, we see that this isn't true. And then begins the trickle affect. If the Service is our work for God then so is everything else. Baptism is now our work of confessing publicly our decision for Christ, communion becomes our work of remembering Christ, sharing Christ is now our work instead of it being the work of the Spirit through us. And the preaching we receive is no longer an explanation of God's Word, which reveals his work of redemption through Christ but its about crushing the parishioners with the third use of the law. The third use of the law is as a guide. So while the Pastor should be preaching Christ and Him crucified he is spending more time telling his parishioners how they should live to be better Christians. I already do a good enough job beating myself up with the third use of the law so I don't need to hear it preached from the pulpit. I need grace, mercy, forgiveness, absolution, and Christ. I believe the style in which we worship ultimately dictates how we understand everything else. Don't believe me? You don't have to throw a stone very far to find a contemporary church preaching the “good Christian life” and creating the works righteousness mindset. The Roman Catholic church explicitly says we need good works to be saved, the evangelicals don't come right out and say it but its strongly suggested and this puts an overwhelming amount of weight on the congregation. Now of course there are exceptions to every rule and I'm not suggesting that where the liturgy is present problems don't exist, I'm just conveying what I've seen and the reasonable thought process of both sides. </span> </div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">I want to reiterate the point that I am not approaching this from ignorance. I have shared the experience of contemporary Christianity. I may offend some who read this but ultimately that is not my goal. My goal is to show that God's word and the glorification of the risen Christ is greatest through the liturgy. If we think about God's name being hallowed among us, which just means to be regarded as holy or sacred, then what better way can there be then to have the Word infused into every part of the service. And again I say if true conversion takes place where God's Word is being heard by the people then why should we remove something that is busting at the seams with God's Word. As I said before I believe the negativity against such a liturgical service is attributed to modern day Christianity's fear of appearing Roman Catholic. My thoughts on this is that the modern Christian world believes if they strip the Church of candles, hymnals, an organ, the liturgy, and the overall reverence that seems to them as being Roman Catholic and overload the Church with projection screens, lights, a band and whatever else the modern world can conjure up for the Church, then things will be better. If we can just be to the world a hip church that presents itself as laid back and cool, non judgemental and fun then we as Christians will be perceived better. I believe the desire to form the Church to fit the age that we're in is ultimately screaming disaster. We shouldn't be afraid to be traditional and “boring” to the world and if a Christian proposes that a traditional Church is boring then they are not looking at the liturgy, they are not paying attention to all aspects of God's Word that are right there in plain view. They are wanting something more, something that I don't believe God intends for us. They are searching for a way to make Church more fun and limiting the sufficiency of God's Word and Jesus Christ, this might be a drastic thing to say but I can think of no other explanation. We don't go to Church to be entertained, we are not there to hear the latest in rock n roll Christian music we are there to confess that we are sinners and in turn receive the absolution from God that we crave. Sure an upbeat song warms us for the time being but it ultimately holds no light to the forgiveness God gives to us through the death and resurrection of Christ. Jesus didn't come to this world in a flashy fun and hip way and I don't believe the the Church needs to present herself to the world in this way. But unfortunately this is what the world demands, they've had enough of that boring service that contains God's Word and gives Him the highest praise so we've said to the world “If these aspects of the service aren't bringing you in the doors then we will change for you to make you feel more comfortable and “free” as a Christian.” This is where I take my stand, I cannot believe that the liturgy is insignificant and should be replaced with a contemporary style of Christianity.</div><div align="left" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">This last paragraph is for the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod and her Pastors, district Presidents, and Matthew Harrison. We need to teach the liturgy! I'm sure that Pastors coming out of the Seminary know the liturgy well and it has to be their duty, if we are to show the richness of the liturgy, to teach it so the congregations will understand it. It comes as no surprise to me that people don't care for the liturgy when they are not understanding it. This was my problem with attending a Lutheran Church growing up. I had no idea what this repetitive script could possibly be doing for me so I ran away from it only to be brought back and taught the meaning of it all by my Pastor which opened my eyes to the strength of God's Word through the liturgy. How can we expect people to not ditch the liturgy if we aren't explaining why we should keep it? To all interested in learning about the liturgy I encourage you to ask a Lutheran Pastor instead of raising your nose at such a “Catholic” practice. This is exactly what I did and I'm sad to say I missed it in my life for eighteen years. </div>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2731482465844486839.post-68112878354332854842011-02-23T10:44:00.000-08:002011-02-23T10:44:24.297-08:00Baptism-How Can Water Do Such Great Things?<span style="font-size: small;">We hear at the end of Matthew's gospel, Christ say “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.” Matthew 28:18-20. Given that this is a prominent institution given by Christ, who is the source of life, it is probably a good idea to look into the gift of baptism and what its benefits are for a Christian.</span><br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">We should start by looking at the purpose of our baptism, because understanding the purpose is crucial to answering the other question pertaining baptism. We know from scripture that the state of mankind is sinful and this sin is expressed in two different ways, original sin and sins of omission(things we fail to do) and sins of commission(things we do that we aren't supposed to do). Original sin is our inherited infection, passed down from Adam. You may wonder how this is different from committing sin in our day to day lives. In Psalm 51:5 we hear David confessing his sin and in doing so says, “Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.”, this shows us that even in conception we are sinful. But how can that be? Surely a baby can't knowingly commit a sin right? That is where original sin is seen. If a baby can be sinful without knowingly committing the sin then there must be another explanation, which is inherited sin. Moses writes for us in Genesis 8: 21 “The Lord smelled the pleasing aroma and said in his heart: “Never again will I curse the ground because of man, even though every inclination of his heart is evil, even from his youth.” Here is another case where we see that man's evilness (which stems from sin) is present even in his youth. </span> </div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">So why is our baptism concerned with this sin? If we are looking at it from a modern understanding, our baptism would have nothing to do with our sin because it is merely a profession of our faith toward God in the presence of believers. This “pledge”, for modern Christians, is a fixed point in time that carries no significance throughout their life. But is this belief biblical or human construct? Do we find evidence anywhere that baptism is an act, which is fixed in time, and never thought about again? From looking at what the scripture has to say about it I would conclude this belief is of human origin, having no place in Scripture. Taking a verse out of the epistle to the Romans we see strong language from Paul, he says: </span> </div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Romans 6:1-4</span></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;"> “What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.”</span></div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">The picture that Paul paints here in Romans is very comforting for the Christian who has been baptized because he addresses the issue of sin and how its dealt with. We should focus on two important words/phrases that Paul uses in these verses to uplift baptism. He shows us a parallel between what happens in our baptism and the death and resurrection of Christ, which was vitally important for Christians. In the context of these verses Paul is addressing the issue of sin. We see that our death to sin was produced by the death and resurrection of Christ, which is brought to us by the Holy Spirit, in a new way which we hadn't received before, that being baptism. The two things that are important in this verse is the word “through” and the phrase “in order that”. The word “through” is telling us how we were buried, which was baptism, and the “in order that” is telling us what the purpose of that baptism is, which is “just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we to may live a new life.” So our baptism connects us, not symbolically but truly, to Christ's death and resurrection. </span> </div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Obviously this doesn't fit with our reason. “How can we be connected to Christ's death and resurrection that took place two thousand years ago?” Although our reason has been given to us by God we must let it be subservient to the Scripture in order to prevent human constructs.</span></div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Baptismal water regenerates the Christian from sin, putting to death his sinful nature and raising him to walk in the newness of life. Some might argue that “Faith in Christ alone is what saves, not baptism” and I would agree. Baptism and faith work together, because faith in Christ clings to the comforts and promises of baptism. There is no suggestion here nor biblical evidence that baptism alone saves a person, without faith in Christ. </span> </div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"></div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Galatians 3:26-27</span></div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;"> “You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.”</span></div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">In Paul's epistle to the church in Galatia we see faith and baptism working together to make us “sons of God.” First Paul tells us we were made 'sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus..' but a reality is revealed when Paul uses the word 'for' because this gives significance to our baptism and connects it with our son-ship in God through faith. This verse in Galatians is a comfort to Christians and should be embraced not rejected. You have 'clothed yourselves with Christ' who above all is perfect in every way and died for the sins of the world! We should not take away the comfort of this verse by suggesting that it is merely symbolic, rather we should live in this reality daily and comfort ourselves with this promise.</span></div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">In the verses following Romans 6:1-4 Paul says:</span></div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;"> “If we have been united with him like this in his death, we will certainly also be united with him in his resurrection. For we know that our old self was crucified with him so that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves to sin-because anyone who has died has been freed from sin.” </span> </div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">This is incredible comfort for the baptized Christian! We hear that through this baptism into Christ its as though we have already died to sin and it is no longer counted against us! This of course can take place with faith in Christ without baptism, but if there is another means of grace that exists, a visible assurance out there that God wants to bless us with, then I think its smart to make use of that gift. Furthermore Paul says that if we are united to Christ's death how much more will we be united to His resurrection and that in itself gives strong validity and reason for baptism.</span></div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Who then should be baptized? Everyone, as Christ gives the command to his disciples. All nations should be baptized! Again not for the purpose of proclaiming our faith publicly, although that can be a function, it is not the reason to be baptized. God doesn't need us to do anything for Him, He does it all for us. If being baptized is a work we do for God what would be the significance of that? The New Testament is no longer about law but grace and mercy. Law is certainly still applicable but God doesn't want us to do things for Him, that is law! He wants to do things to/for us, baptism included. </span> </div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Now when I say everyone, I mean everyone. Infants and the old alike are all in need of faith in Christ and baptism, which the Holy Spirit is present in to create faith in an infant and continues to strengthen faith. Currently the mainstream idea is that infant baptism is nothing more than a traditional practice made popular by Rome, or some other early Church, that people don't want to associate with so as a result they created their own tradition and human construct (not that the first was created by men or a human construct). Since the popular belief of today is Decision Theology (See To Choose or Not To Choose) then of course infants should not be baptized because they have not yet made “the decision to accept Christ as their personal Lord and Savior” (which is only done by faith, that is a Gift of God, produced by the Holy Spirit, through the Word) so how can they be baptized into something they don't understand? But Christ says 'make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit' and what is a disciple? It is a follower of some doctrine, in this case of Christ, so we see that the way the of discipleship is being baptized and following the teachings of Christ. </span> </div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Before I said that baptism and faith go together so the question rises “How can a baby have faith?” But I say, how can you have faith? Romans 5:6-8 says:</span></div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;"> “You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous man, though for a good man someone might possibly dare to die. But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.”</span></div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">Here we see that Christ died for us while we were still powerless! Other places in Scripture talk about being “dead in your transgressions”, so our faith is a result of God.</span></div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">And a baby can have faith, although its hard for “decionists” to imagine, in Luke 1:41-44 we hear:</span></div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;"> “When Elizabeth heard Mary's greeting, the baby leaped in her womb, and Elizabeth was fill with the Holy Spirit. In a loud voice she exclaimed: 'Blessed are you among women, and blessed is the child you will bear! But who am I so favored, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? As soon as the sound of your greeting reached my ears, the baby in my womb leaped for joy.'”</span></div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-size: small;">John the Baptist leapt for joy in Elizabeth's womb! This was a response in faith because he was in the presence of the unborn Christ! So John's faith existed there even in the womb. Psalm 22:9 says: </span>"Yet You brought me out of the womb, You made me trust in You even at my mother's breast" and Psalm 8:2 says: "From the lips of children and infants, You have ordained praise....". So anyone who says an infant can't receive faith is lacking the faith to trust those words of God. If he can create from nothing what we see today then he can create faith, in Christ, in an infant. Because we know from Romans 10:17 that God's word is the means by which faith is created, and this word is attached to the visible means of water where the Holy Spirit is present to create that faith in an infant and sustain them there. The child, when grown to understand these things, can and should look on his baptism knowing that he has been washed and renewed by the Spirit. </div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Furthermore we see two verses that raise a certain question the first one is Romans 2:29:</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">“A man is not a Jew if he is only one outwardly, nor is circumcision merely outward and physical. No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man's praise is not from men, but from God.”</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">This verse in Romans may seem confusing in a way, because the question is “How does the heart become circumcised by the Spirit?” Colossians 2:11 helps us to figure that out:</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">“In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.”</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Now why is this important? We know that in the Old Testament, Abraham was given the covenant of circumcision. Its purpose was to set the people of Israel apart from the world and was their seal as the people of God. Along with setting Israel apart it was a visible means which God used to create faith in the promise of the Christ. If this covenant wasn't kept then the breaker of the covenant was thrown out of Israel. We also know that Israelite infants were circumcised on the eighth day, now you have to ask yourselves. How would an eight day old infant know he was entering into a covenant with God? Shouldn't he be able to make that 'decision' for himself? The answer is no. God's blessing of sealing His people and creating faith in them in the Old Testament was circumcision and its greater reality is fulfilled in baptism as we see in Colossians. Is God's grace more abundant in the Old Testament that He would give this blessing to a baby of the Israelites and not bestow a seal on a New Testament Christian infant? Another point to note is the fact that baptism is an objective truth. Again the modern understanding of baptism is a fixed point in time where a person confesses their faith in front of believers, but the Scriptural position shows baptism as an action done by God which remains with us all our lives. It is something we can reflect on and say “Yes I have been baptized, although I don't remember the action I know that God's promises and His preserving presence is with me through this Sacrament.”</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">There is significance in baptism and it is for all to receive. It isn't up to sinful man to redefine the purpose of baptism and in effect hold it from infants, who are in need of it. There sin is as prevalent as ours so the question is, how do we deal with it? We can invent human constructs such as, the age of accountability, (a false idea that a person isn't accountable to God until they reach a certain age, an idea which only stems from our human reason of dealing with God's judgement as oppose to the Scripture) , but the fact is God gave us a way to deal with an infant's sin and you should not keep it from them for fear of following a man made tradition and as a result creating one for yourselves. </div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The question still remains “How Can Water Do Such Great Things?”:</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">“Certainly not just water, but the word of God in and with the water does these things, along with the faith which trusts this word of God in the water. For without God's word the water is plain water and no Baptism. But with the word of God it is a Baptism, that is, a life-giving water, rich in grace, and washing of the new birth in the Holy Spirit, as St. Paul says in Titus, chapter three:</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">“He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by His grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life. This is a trustworthy saying.”</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">-Martin Luther</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Small Catechism </div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The Sacrament of Holy Baptism.</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2731482465844486839.post-81854556920171212332011-02-09T10:03:00.000-08:002011-02-09T10:03:10.053-08:00Parts of Service: Invocation, Confession and AbsolutionEvery service I attend begins with the words that are recited in a Christian's baptism; In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, followed by an amen which is said by all. What an appropriate way to begin. There is beyond no shadow of a doubt who we're coming into the presence of in the service, the Triune God, to receive His gifts of Word and sacraments for the strengthening of our faith and the constant reminder of the forgiveness we have in Christ. First and foremost this is the purpose of coming together for Divine Service, that we may receive all the benefits from God in order that we might serve His will diligently and worship Him correctly and the secondary reason for attending the service is to give thanks to our God who constantly preserves us in the true Christian faith. For David writes in Psalm 51:14-15 “Save me from blood guilt, O God, the God who saves me, and my tongue will sing of your righteousness. O Lord, open my lips, and my mouth will declare your praise.” Through these verses we see that in order for David to sing praises and thanksgiving to the Lord, or rather about the Lord's work, he first needs to receive God's forgiveness from his blood guilt and more than that he needs God to open his lips in order for him to declare God's praise. <br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">So appropriately what follows the invocation is corporate confession which is recited by all. Here we confess:</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i>Pastor:If we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.</i></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i> </i><span style="font-style: normal;"><b>Congregation:But if we confess our sins, God, who is faithful and just, will forgive our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.</b></span></div><div style="font-style: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">These first two things that are recited are taken straight from 1John 1:8-9:</div><div style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">1John 1:5-10</div><div style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><span style="font-style: normal;"> This is the message we have heard from Him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all. If we claim to have fellowship with Him yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live by the truth. But if we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, his Son, purifies us from all sin.</span></div><div style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><b>If we claim to be without sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.</b> If we claim we have not sinned, we make him out to be a liar and his word</div><div style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">has no place in our lives.</div><div style="font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; margin-bottom: 0in;">We see the severity of sin and the repercussions we can face if the sin isn't dealt with. Christ dealt with our sin by His death and resurrection, but we also should confess not only in our day to day lives but also in the midst of God's presence in the service where he is present for the purpose of bringing us his Word , strengthening our faith, and forgiving those sins we confess.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">There is a moment of silence for the congregation to reflect on their sins of omission (things we fail to do) and sins of commission (things we do that we shouldn't) which then leads us to what is called corporate confession.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i>Pastor:Let us then confess our sins to God our Father.</i></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><b> Congregation:</b> <b>Most merciful God, we confess that we are by nature sinful and unclean. We have sinned </b></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><b> against You in thought, word, and deed, by what we have done and by what we have left undone. We have not loved You with our whole heart; we have not loved our neighbors as ourselves. We justly deserve Your present and eternal punishment. For the sake of Your Son, Jesus Christ, have mercy on us. Forgive, renew us, and lead us, so that we may delight in Your will and walk in Your ways to the glory of Your Holy name. Amen.</b></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">All the sins confessed here couldn't be closer to the truth. Confessing that we are sinful by nature and unclean is all over in the scripture.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Psalm 51:5</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">“Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.”</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Genesis 8:21</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">The Lord smelled the pleasing aroma and said in His heart: “Never again will I curse the ground because of man, even though every inclination of his heart is evil from childhood.”</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">We have certainly sinned against God in our thoughts, words, and deeds. And in all these ways which are said by the congregation. At the end you might be feeling that you haven't lived up to the expectations of God and are ashamed for the sins you've committed throughout the week, but the purpose of realizing our sin is to appreciate the grace we receive through the righteousness of the Lamb.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Romans 5:20-6:2</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">“The law was added so that the trespass might increase. But when sin increased, grace increased all the more, so that, just as sin reigned in death, so also grace might reign through righteousness to bring eternal life through Jesus Christ our lord. What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer?”</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">In order for realization of Christ as the one who takes away the sins of the world and the reconciliation that comes from Him, we hear the words of absolution. Those words are spoken after we are raked over the coals, because of our own sin, to comfort us and assure us, though we spent the week sinning and pulling away from God's will, He forgives us and wants us to know of our forgiveness in Christ. So we are absolved through the way of God's mercy. The words of absolution are spoken by the pastor, and not just for our benefit but also for his own forgiveness of the sins He has committed. The absolving words come from John 20:19-23 </div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">“On the evening of that first day of the week, when the disciples were together, with the doors locked for fear of the Jews, Jesus came and stood among them and said, 'Peace be with you!' After he said this, he showed them his hands and side. The disciples were overjoyed when they saw the Lord. Again Jesus said, 'Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, I am sending you.' And with that he breathed on them and said, 'Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.'”</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">In these verses there are two things we can focus on when dealing with absolution, which simply means forgiveness. The first is when Christ says “Peace be with you!” In the context of the verse he is saying this because of the disciples fear of the Jews but we see how through our fear of sin and damnation these words of Christ are a comfort because ultimately he is saying “Peace be with you, because you have confessed your sin and are forgiven.” So we no longer have to fear our sin, just as the apostles no longer had to fear the persecution of the Jews. Secondly is the authority Christ gives to the apostles which is, “If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.” This authority is exercised through the office of the ministry. Although the words are ultimately spoken to the the apostles, we see that this authority is carried out through the office of the ministry. This isn't to say that our sins can only be forgiven by the Pastor, who is in the stead of Christ, but to show the authority of the Church to call the unrepentant sinner to forgiveness, and so the Pastor speaks these words:</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i>Pastor: Almighty God in His mercy has</i></div><div align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i>given His Son to die for you and</i></div><div align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i>for His sake forgives you all your </i> </div><div align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i>sins. As a called and ordained </i> </div><div align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i>servant of Christ, and by His</i></div><div align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i>authority, I therefore forgive you</i></div><div align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i>all your sins in the name of the</i></div><div align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i>Father and of the Son and of </i> </div><div align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i>the Holy Spirit</i></div><div align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><i><b>Congregation: Amen</b></i></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2731482465844486839.post-83938246410269937372011-02-04T10:45:00.000-08:002011-02-04T10:45:30.136-08:00To Choose or Not To ChooseIs believing in God a choice? Do we make a decision for Him, and through that decision bring about God's grace through our work of deciding? Most Christians would say yes, although with out making faith a work, because obviously the Bible teaches that "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith-and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God- not by works, so that no one can boast." -Ephesians 2:8-9. So we must establish what classifies as a good work? Is it helping our neighbor, obeying our parents, or diligently serving God? These are examples that people can cling onto and say, "Look I'm a good person and so God will honor that fact because I do so many good works." These are in fact good works that please, but don't justify us before Him. So the question is: if in fact man can come to God on his own and make a decision to believe in him, and to use the modern phrase, "Make Jesus my personal Lord and Savior", does that classify as a work? Initially a person who holds to this construct would say "No its not a work, I decide to believe in Him and He bestows on me the benefits of that belief." Doesn't that language make it seem as though you have done something to bring about God's grace? I would have to conclude that that is the case.<br />
<br />
<br />
So what if I were to say that the Biblical position is that we are corrupted by sin to the point where we can't understand God, let alone believe in Him. To most Christians this would be heretical because "God doesn't force us to be Christians, He wants sincere love coming from His people and that can't take place if God forces us to believe." But doesn't Paul set a perfect example for us? A man who was against the Christian world and oversaw Christian's deaths and even approved of them. He persecuted the Church and was feared by Christians and yet he came to believe in the One True God(Father, Son, and Holy Ghost). So another question is raised. Didn't Paul have a choice? Christ was someone Paul was familiar with, its not as though he had never heard the name Jesus. So that option existed for Paul, yet he didn't make the choice, Christ had to intervene in order that Paul might stop his persecutions and become the man that God would have him be. He turned into the most influential writer of the New Testament. And people say he chose Christ after persecuting Him, I don't think so.<br />
<br />
<br />
1Corinthians 2:14 "The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned."<br />
<br />
<br />
This verse from Paul to the church in Corinth suggests that before we have the Spirit we are blind to the things that concern God. We can't accept them or do anything in our flesh to believe or worship correctly or pray correctly or do good works correctly or love correctly. So how then do we make a decision for God if before we have the Spirit we regard the things from Him as foolishness. This verse tells us that we need God's Spirit in order to believe in Him. Some might say that God prompts us in certain ways or gives us an initial push, but we must respond to it. So their theology starts to be chipped away, because before we made the choice to believe and bring about God's grace but now He prompts us first and then we believe. But is that correct? Does God first prompt us and then we respond by believing or is God's work more significant then that?<br />
<br />
<br />
Phillipians 2:13 “...for it is God who works in you to will and to act according to his good purpose.”<br />
<br />
<br />
From the epistle to the Philippians it would seem that God's work is the most significant thing in our coming to faith. Everything good that we produce in our life as a Christian is ultimately God's working not ours. That is why no man can boast. This is true even for our conversion. And what a comforting truth that is. I know that when I look to the cross for hope it is because God is enabling me to hope in it. If I kneel down to pray I thank God that my desire is to do so. And when I trust that Christ died for my sins I know it could have only happened in one fashion which is God bestowing that faith on me. I don't need to be concerned if my “decision” was good enough because God gave me the faith that allows me to cling to the promise of Christ. So what role do we play?<br />
<br />
<br />
Romans 3:9-12 "What shall we conclude then? Are we any better? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin. As it is written: 'There is no one righteous, not even one; there is no one who understands; no one who seeks God. All have turned away, they have together become worthless; there is no one who does good, not even one.'"<br />
<br />
<br />
Those verses from the Old Testament, which Paul is quoting, continue for a few more to explain man's condition in the flesh after the fall. Paul tells us that we are not any better and continues on to say that there is no one righteous, not even one! More then that there is no one who seeks God, who is the only one that can declare us righteous. The condition of man after the fall is nothing but sin and evil. <br />
<div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">So how then, in this condition, do we come to the knowledge of God. Does he just pick and choose at random who will be saved and who will not? That wouldn't fit with Scripture because in Ezekiel 33:11 God says "Say to them, 'As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Lord, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live..." So then how do people come to faith? </div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">Romans 10:17 “Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ.”</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0in;">God's means of bringing people to the knowledge of Him is his Word which the Holy Spirit works through to bring us to faith. If the Spirit is successful then we believe and the Christian fight begins, if we resist and harden our hearts then we are still spiritually dead. And some might say “That doesn't make sense. God wants us to choose Him.” But you must let your reason be subservient to the Scripture. Your reason might not let this fit together like a puzzle, but yet that is what the Scripture reveals. </div><br />
Understanding this point brings us to a conclusion. We shouldn't look to ourselves to determine the validity of faith, but rather be present where the Spirit is actively working to strengthen faith and keep us steadfast, walking in the righteousness of the Triune God who produces faith and preserves us in it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com1