Happy New Year!

I know I am a little early, but I wanted to finally get to post. I had to reinstall Windows XP after a virus/malware caused mayhem. After a couple weeks of scanning, scrubbing and reinstalling, I am finally back up.

I hope you enjoy the coming New Year in your own way, but remember to thank God for keeping you this past year, and to place everything on Him for this next. He has promised to provide, and He will. Remember this especially when times are tough, when it is hardest. Wait for the Lord to do His work. (Psalm 27:13-14, Lam 3:23-26. Isaiah 8:17) And pray that we all stay virus and malware free!

I'm back!

I know my posts have been few and far between, but I am back now. I took a Masters level course, and it consumed my free time and some not so free time. The class is over and I plan on trying to toss little things up here much more frequently now.

Since the election is over and our President-Elect is Barack Obama, we must all pray he has wisdom and God's guidance. I don't agree with his policies to date, and I personally think he might do more harm then good. But he will be President, and thus the leader, of the USA, and I should pray that he does well. This is a civic duty as a citizen to wish the President and Congress to do well, but it also is my Christian duty. He has made it there because God granted it so. I make it a point to not argue with the Almighty. (Though I do fall into sin regularly, as all do. It still isn't wise to argue with God.) So, no matter what side you are on, pray that God guides Mr. Obama with wisdom. It is the right thing to do.

To the Polls!

For those who might read this prior to the polls closing, remember to vote. It is your duty, privilege and vocation as a United States citizen.

For Christians, there should be a litmus test that some seem to ignore. They choose who sounds the best, who promises the most tax cuts / social programs, or who looks the best in pictures and movies. In the end, though, a Christian should vote according to conscience based on Scripture. For example, a Christian should not vote for a "pro-choice"/abortionist because of the Fifth Commandment. (There should be no lee-way here.) If there are extensive social programs, they should ring warning bells because they might ignore 2 Thess 3:10b "...we gave you this rule: "If a man will not work, he shall not eat."" In the end, a gov't official who properly understands their roles in relation to Christ via proper understanding of Law and Gospel will (hopefully) translate to fulfilling their earthly roles with honor and distinction.

Unfortunately, the options we have to choose from might be unfavorable on any side. At that point, all we can do is consider to run ourselves for gov't positions. Crazy? Who else will stand up? The politician? Something to consider as we have plenty of opportunities to serve in the USA. Selecting an office to run for might be crazy, but at the same time we can't blame anyone but ourselves for the politicians and fools that we do elect. Just something to mull on as the mother-of-all-election-seasons wind down. Anyone up for Election 2012?!

Heterodoxy in the Synod

Heterodoxy is an important issue for any Christian. But most don’t know why, or what it means other than a general “feel.”. First, what is heterodoxy? The LC-MS has heterodoxy defined in the “Christian Cyclopedia” as “Teachings or beliefs differing from a position held to be orthodox.” (For clarity, orthodox is defined on the same site as “orthodox implies conformity to a certain standard.”) Heterodoxy is also defined publicly as “the state of being at variance with established doctrines or beliefs” (thefreedictionary.com). Both of these are in agreement- it is a variation from the established norm. While this is usually not a major issue in most areas of our lives, it is of utmost importance in a church body. Failure to ensure consistent doctrine and belief is the start of error and schism. This is seen in a document on Lutheran Understanding of Church Fellowship. Heterodoxy is a serious affair. So how does this apply to the LC-MS?

For the sake of brevity, I will be short and require you to do a little more reading than normal. However this is good because you yourself must be discerning between falsehood and nuance and the Truth. This means comparing ANY teaching and ANY doctrine against Scripture and Confessions. I am also not going to cover areas I have already posted on, such as the issues within the Synod. The one that promptly pops into my mind that is the most related of previous posts is the inclusion of non-Scriptural “worship elements.” It isn’t wise and goes against teaching only Scripture and the Confessions. And this practice is allowed and encouraged within the LC-MS. This is one item of heterodoxy.

Another item is closed communion. This is proper practice and supports the spiritual health of the congregation as well as her visitors. Those without faith or a proper understanding will drink to their detriment. (1 Cor. 11: 29-30) There isn’t an overt “open communion” policy. But when was the last time you visited an LC-MS church and went to the communion rail without being questioned? Also beware questions of dubious worth that allow the individual to say “yes” without an examination, especially by the pastor. For an excellent post on wiggle words and how this is done “under the table” within the LC-MS, see Father Hollywood’s post on “Word games and communion statements.” Some LC-MS churches with a focus on “contemporary worship” won’t even bother to ask. (Try visiting a couple…see here) This is heterodox error number two, and puts souls in jeopardy.

Syncretism and Unionism have popped in and out of the LC-MS view recently, most notably with the Benke affair right after Sept. 11, 2001. Since then, the LC-MS has issued several resolutions (2004 Res. 3-06A and 2001 Res. 3-07A), and the defense of which hinges on the “civic-ness” of the event. I am all for engaging other denominations and religions, if only as an avenue to teach. That stops when the avenue becomes a “level field” where everything is equal and prayers offered. It does not have to reach the level of a “Lutheran Service” (i.e. page 15 in the red hymnal), but the level of service for any of the presiding erring denominations or pagans. We wouldn’t consider a prayer to a “goddess of a hill” a worship service, but to a pagan, that might constitute a worship service entirely. We would do better to avoid such things to present a clear message. The worming around with the words does not lend clarity. Given Benke was not disciplined (that I know of) and the unfortunate presiding Vice President, Rev. Wallace Schultz, was fired after providing an honest evaluation (after being asked to do so), the LC-MS’s dedication to providing a clear message of Christ Crucified is lacking. This is a troubling case of bowing to pressure to “not offend,” and losing the Truth in the process.

I have provided three clear cases here, evidence from the LC-MS and others, and several anecdotal ones in previous posts. I believe you can see a trend here, even within the past decade towards “not offending” others with the Gospel (by watering down the Gospel and preventing the “meat”), moving towards demographics and market studies (and ignoring the effect and the third person in the Trinity, the Holy Spirit), and pillaging those things which are beneficial (congregational solidarity, unity, and seeking to remove aspects that don’t agree with them- see recent appointments to offices, Issues Etc affair).

I am also not the only one posting on LC-MS heterodoxy. “John the Steadfast” has posted on heterodoxy as well related to a youth gathering in Texas. This is a very serious affair, one the LC-MS is either blind to, or willingly ignoring. Both are bad, but the latter more so.

I have proven that claims that the LC-MS is not heterodox are unoriginal and misinformed. See for yourself! Synod has set herself up as the arbiter of her own rulings. When was the last time a District used Scripture instead of a By-Law to instruct her members? Why does Ablaze use Baptist terminology, invent new words, and seek to be all inclusive while providing a confusing witness to the world? Read Scripture, and the Confessions. And do it again. I firmly believe that you will discover that the LC-MS is a paper-disciple. Looks great on paper, and has all of the i’s and t’s dealt with. But the paper stays in the drawer and practice is something else. And that is the true sign of a heterodox church.

Posting

If you wish to post comments, I encourage you to do so. However, if you are going to discuss any given thing, don't just say it is true. Back it up with quotes, links, and verses. Those who don't will be challenged. I don't think anyone has time to be wasted trying to prove everyone's opinion for them. I will end with this quote, which I find more than covers quite a few situations like these.

"Sine factus persone istra cum opinione solo tu es."
In English: "Without facts, you are just another person with an opinion."

LC-MS Warning!

Take heed, brothers and sisters in Christ. It appears foul play is at work in the LC-MS. I don't want to steal any thunder from an excellent post, so here is the link to the article on Extreme Theology: Changing the LCMSChanging the LCMS. I strongly recommend this to anyone in the LC-MS.

Public Confessions

I am not seeking a “perfect church.” It does not exist this side of heaven, and to seek a perfect church in this world is utter foolishness. What I seek is a church that seeks God. Sadly, that is a rarity anymore in the LC-MS. To paraphrase a saying I have heard, ‘you worship as you believe’. This is why I was led to question some of the actions of the LC-MS.

One of the questionable actions is the LC-MS affiliation with the AALC, which has an official “closed communion” policy like the LC-MS, but is known for its open communion practice. LC-MS as a Church Body has allowed itself to be yoked with another body that does not hold in practice to closed communion. This weakens the Synod’s official stance on Communion and its “conservative” status. The Synod’s public, outward acts are its public confession. This is how anyone is known. LC-MS is also known by who they associate with, which makes the poor doctrine of some daughter churches, members and affiliations detriments to the confession of Scripture. This is spoken of in the Formula of Concord, Section X (about adopting adiaphora and its dangers) and in a “Brief Statement of the Doctrinal Position of the Missouri Synod” (adopted 1932), Section 28 and 29. I quote 29 as it is directly applicable to the question of public confession.

29. The orthodox character of a church is established not by its mere name nor by its outward acceptance of, and subscription to, an orthodox creed, but by the doctrine which is actually taught in its pulpits, in its theological seminaries, and in its publications. On the other hand, a church does not forfeit its orthodox character through the casual intrusion of errors, provided these are combated and eventually removed by means of doctrinal discipline, Acts 20:30; 1 Tim. 1:3.

Poorly chosen affiliations and a lack of Christian Church Discipline against church growth movement/contemporary services have all eroded the position of the LC-MS as a church body. I am quite concerned that these all affect and decrease the use of Scriptures in the church, provide confusion and a lack of consistency, and will ultimately drive the faithful to other denominations or away altogether. I know of several LC-MS congregations and members who have left (including going to non-Lutheran denominations). I also have a deep concern for my children, who would figure out the divisions and wonder why they exist in the Synod. They will have poor understanding while young and in the early stages of doctrinal understanding, but that will provide an inlet for Satan to sow doubt and unbelief. Since I must give an account, I could not remain silent on these issues (nor should any Christian in the Synod). I am seeking God and His Truth, not a perfect church or happy Synod. Because of the issues, I sought a way to have an orthodox doctrine, confessional church in our area. But anyone who reads this blog knows how that turned out.

An Explanation

Someone had suggested I explain a little more why I left the LC-MS, and I am finally getting around to writing a little. This will most likely take more than one post, as the issues are complicated, long, and carry a lot of weight. I hope to list this out clearly and concisely. I will include the correspondence quotes unchanged, including typos.

One of the most glaring reasons I grew very concerned on the focus of the Synod is the following quote from correspondence with the South East District (SED). The context is a discussion on desiring a confessional, orthodox mission congregation in our area (rapidly growing) and the one LC-MS church that is here is not confessional and introduces it's own variations of services (against Formula of Concord Section X, more on this later).

"In addition, we do not plant churches so that a small group can be more orthodox than other LCMS churches in the area. Our new congregations are Great Commission efforts. We plant to reach the lost for Jesus. This is our primary purpose by direction of our District convention and BOD. We do that in the context of solid Lutheran doctrine. "

Pay close attention to the focus on "Great Commission efforts" and "plant to reach the lost." While those are true, every church has those same goals. The phrases brought to my mind the Baptist revival movement and works, not Grace for the sinful. The approach seems focused on the "lost" and not on preserving the "found." I have no problem about solid Lutheran Doctrine (the whole point of desiring a confessional mission), but to exclude orthodoxy as a future option is quite limiting. It tells me that the "orthodox" or "confessional" is not wanted to form churches- they only want those with Ablaze (another poor adaptation of American Protestant revivalism) leanings. I found it also telling that he doesn't suggest this is due to Scripture (although the Great Commission does make a link), but explicitly though direction of the District and the BOD.

Another, later email contained this:

"Together, we look at a lot of factors - demographics, the need for a Lutheran presence, local support (e.g. parenting congregation), available resources ($, leadership, etc.). The primary focus of our congregations is on mission to the lost. "

I don't know of a church who's mission is not in search of the lost (in addition to the studying and learning of the Word). However, I also don't find a mention of demographics, need for a presence, or available resources in any of the missionary work within the New Testament. Christ sent disciples out without money, Paul went wherever he was asked or the Spirit lead him, and the list goes on. Not once do they study for demographics. I sincerely doubt there was a statistician or accountant on Pentecost holding back the disciples from preaching in the Synagogue because the majority there were not followers of Christ. The Spirit goes where it will, and, in my mind, limiting that to what we ourselves can do betrays a lack of trust in God. The explanation for the First Commandment is "We should fear, love and trust in God above all things." This includes pocketbooks, demographics, etc. Focusing on the "need for a Lutheran presence" while "seeking the lost" is like asking a family who needs food if they prefer stuffed turkey or hamburgers, then leaving when not satisfied with the answer! The "lost" need the Word! The believers need it too! Who are we to deny them this? Because there aren't many "Lutherans" around? This is what makes this ridiculous. So what if there aren't many "Lutherans" around? The Word is to be preached to all people (Great Commission). If Lutheran Doctrine is the Word, then what is the issue?

This was one of the highly troubling aspects of my discussion with SED. They talk about the "Great Commission", but then say that the demographics need to support it. Why not trust God and try? It is a hard concept; truthfully a nearly impossible one. But the Church lives on the Word of God and the faith God imparts. She must trust that God will lead in all cases (and all true Christian denominations). If God wills it, will man prevail? I think not.

I will continue with more of my reasonings later as this is longer than I expected, and my short time to write is coming to an end. God's blessings.

Proper Discernment

While I was contemplating leaving the LC-MS, I was told I shouldn't judge other's intentions. I agree with that statement. But all too often admonitions not to judge the heart are shortened to include admonitions to not judge at all. We are supposed to, and encouraged to, judge actions. You know who someone is by what they do, since we cannot see the heart. Actions by LC-MS hierarchy have not been wise, and their actions to not match their words. For this alone they should repent and turn back to using Scripture alone.

Decisions on missions and church starts should be done by need for the Gospel, not on budget. I don't suggest anyone ignore the reality of the pocketbook, but I don't believe that is the sole basis of stewardship. Stewardship means trusting God's promises to provide for our needs. Just because the pocketbook is narrow doesn't mean you stop preaching the Word where it is needed. Faith requires you to lean on God through plentiful and through scarce. This is the tack I am taking- I am trusting God to provide for our mission, regardless of the wisdom or sense of man or demographics.

Moving On...

I have moved on from the LC-MS. I don't think anyone would argue that the public LC-MS doctrine has not been diluted, Synod-wide practices unified, or even that the Synod has presented a good face recently. I hope that the Synod returns to its roots and confesses the confessional doctrine it has officially on paper without embarrassment. Given the refusal by the Synod to tend to the needs of the flock in denying a confessional church and for varying from Scripture and the Book of Concord, the choice was made for me. This is a difficult path that I have been walking for the past 4 or 5 months, and I have finally made the decision to leave.

If you are curious, the group we are affiliating our congregation, Agnus Dei, with is the United Lutheran Mission Association (ULMA). They seem to be the most confessional group out there and are headed by a church in Decatur, Ill. They willingly provided (after prayerful consideration of course) a missionary-at-large for our pastor and we had our first service today with him presiding. Our congregation is focused on proper worship of God and hopes to be a beacon to the area of confessional, proper Christian doctrine. We especially want to help those in the LC-MS who want to focus on God, not numbers or bureaucracy, return to the historical position of the Christian Church since the beginning. Sola Dei Gloria (to God be the Glory)!

Truely Sweet?

Buried in the March issue of the LC-MS Reporter is the following two paragraphs:

An Aug. 18-20 theological convocation on Congregation — Synod — Church is set for the Marriott St. Louis — Airport, where some 250 Synod leaders — including representatives from each district — will take an in-depth look at the 22 theological principles.

Sponsored by the COP and the CTCR, the convocation will feature a presentation on the theological principles by the presidents of the Synod's two seminaries. Also on the schedule as a presenter is Dr. Leonard Sweet, a theologian, author, and church futurist who was voted "one of the 50 most influential Christian leaders in America" for 2006 and 2007.

This sounds all well and good. However, a quick check on Dr. Leonard Sweet can lead you to the following site. The site has exceptionally un-christian, heretical statements that liken faith and Christianity as one path to a type of enlightenment, unionism, and the list goes on. This man will be talking to the LC-MS?! What has the LC-MS done?! This is to provide clarity?! No clarity can be had outside the Word. I am incensed that this is even possible. Even the Pope doesn't consider Christianity a path in the same line as Hindus, Muslims, or any other theology or cult!

This should be an outrage, but since this is a buried comment, I sincerely doubt anyone even knows who this joker is. Be wary, Brothers...

The "Issue" with Synod

For anyone who has somehow missed the latest unchristian approach by Synod, the conservative, and quite popular, radio show "Issues, Etc." was unceremoniously canceled the Tuesday before Easter. The two pastors in charge were fired, and one of their wives is gravely ill. I won't attempt to redo the work of many fine bloggers. See all of Pastor Esget's blogs, Whey Lay's comment, the well reasoned comments on CyberStones, and the insight at Kyrie Eleison. This whole issue stinks. There is no other way to put it. While we are supposed to put the best face forward, let us not do it to cover actions that are in opposition to the right thing to do, the proper thing, the Christian thing. Firing Pastors without cause, without proper discussion, and with only consideration for programming and budget is WRONG. There is no sugar coating possible.

At the very least, Strand should be fired for ineptitude (not having recent numbers for all listeners, firing without consultation of the board, etc) as he would in the commercial world. Others involved should be fired, and very serious questions asked about the theological considerations for stewardship. Wasting money is very bad for stewardship. However, the church is supposed to rely on God for its sustenance. If a program is doctrinally sound, what good money reason is there for canceling it? I ask the question in light of the $5 million for Ablaze, but not $650k for Issues, Etc. Why is the LC-MS spending money on a program that is questionable with dubious theological underpinnings and canceling conservative, orthodox programs?

I have been told by the South East District that they won't allow any new "more orthodox" churches than the closest congregation. They revised this to "confessional" from orthodox, but the point was clear to me. Ol' Mo is in serious trouble.

New Words

I know it has been a while, but here goes another post. In some reading lately, I came across an Ablaze document titled "Covenant Churches." I figured this would be interesting to peruse. I found a new word in there that is troubling. It is "incarnational." No, not "incarnate" as in "incarnate God." Here is a quick quote:

The cross of Christ heralds the incarnational, expansionary
movement of the reign and rule of Jesus Christ in the hearts
and lives of people also today.

The usage of "incarnational" becomes problematic when you consider other english words with the "-al" ending. Those words usually mean "act of" or "being" such as confessional (act of being in confession), functional (having function) , and internal (being inside). What does "being incarnate" mean? Let me pull another variation of incarnate used.

This “Gospel imperative” spoken to the disciples as the
representative leaders of the church summarized the
will of God that the reign and rule of Jesus Christ in the
hearts and lives of people on earth (the kingdom of God)
be incarnated, expanded, and lived out in communities of
the faith, confession, and mission.

Catch the use? Since incarnate means "embodied in flesh" and "personified," and include that with the Christian verbiage about Christ as the Incarnate God, you are opening up a place of confusion. Are we "little incarnate christs"? Or are they trying to mean "living in the way of Christ"? I think the intention is probably the latter, but the lack of clarity leaves this too dangerously close to the edge. Creating new words in english is a dangerous proposition, as it is in any language.

I won't even start on the legalistic tone of the document. There are Baptist/Pentecostal type calls for service and the insinuation of a requirement to do something. This is not going to help churches expand the ministry. What helps is the Word of God spoken clearly and taught properly. Anything else is a weakened place to start missions from.

Proper Teaching

We have been reading the Catechism at night to my children. My eldest at least recognizes the Ten Commandments in order and can recite most of the Apostle's Creed. This has shown me the necessity of proper teaching of our children. It isn't the Pastor's responsibility. It isn't something that will just pop into their head. Parents must teach it consistently. This is a failing point of many Christians, not limited to just LC-MS, Roman Catholics or some "other denomination." If you aren't teaching your children, the best you can hope for is a mediocre appreciation and very little to fall back on in times of temptation and testing. For anyone who ends up reading this (if there is anyone at all), please teach your children the basics of Christian faith. It is imperative that they understand and learn these things early. It is the basis that allows a deeper understanding of what the Bible is really about.

Happy New Year

It is 2008 and I just read an essay called "Strangers in our father's house" by Dr. Laurence White. It goes over the history of the LC-MS and contains quotes by Walther and Pieper (among others) that promote and require that the Synod must reject false doctrine, poor teaching in all places if the Synod is to remain strong. Alas, looking around at the LC-MS, orthodoxy is a minority and error is allowed to "preserve the peace." I hear from a lot of orthodox, good Christian people that they are working to "change from the inside." After getting some more in depth understanding of where the Southeast district, and thus a portion of the Synod, sits, I think my response will be "So when was the last time you/your church rebuked error in the Synod?" True Christians cannot tolerate theological error any more than mathematicians can tolerate lax arithmetic and symbology. A church body should seek to remove error whenever it is found, even if it is within itself. Perfect churches don't exist, but pursuit of a true understanding of God's Word does. This should be the aim of the Synod and every sanctuary within it. This doesn't seem to be the case, but I will expound more on that at a later date, when more information is available.

May God bless your New Year.

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas to everyone. Verses taken from biblegateway.com, Isaiah 9:1-7 (KJV):

1Nevertheless the dimness shall not be such as was in her vexation, when at the first he lightly afflicted the land of Zebulun and the land of Naphtali, and afterward did more grievously afflict her by the way of the sea, beyond Jordan, in Galilee of the nations.

2The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light: they that dwell in the land of the shadow of death, upon them hath the light shined.

3Thou hast multiplied the nation, and not increased the joy: they joy before thee according to the joy in harvest, and as men rejoice when they divide the spoil.

4For thou hast broken the yoke of his burden, and the staff of his shoulder, the rod of his oppressor, as in the day of Midian.

5For every battle of the warrior is with confused noise, and garments rolled in blood; but this shall be with burning and fuel of fire.

6For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

7Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.

Troubling...

I know is has been a while since I blogged, but time has slipped away lately. I do want to post something that was troubling from Sunday, 8 days ago. My family was all ill with a very bad cold (we are still on the tail end after 2 weeks), so I decided to go to the local LC-MS Church. The service was uneventful, and the sermon less Scripture and more pep talk. The part that was most disturbing came at the end. In the narthex, in full view of the main door was a listing of the Ten Commandments. They were, however, the reformed version (4 God centered and 6 worldly, with the change from "Thou shalt not murder." to "Thou shalt not kill."- a big difference). I brought up that this was not in keeping with Lutheran Confessions (what all LC-MS churches are supposed to follow), I got a weak, noncomittal reply from the senior paster. The response was, paraphrasing, that a member had given it "in love" and, well, they just didn't have the "guts" to let this member know that it wasn't right! He willingly and knowingly let incorrect teaching exist because he, as he claimed, didn't "have the guts"! This is appalling. This is also why I drive an hour one way every Sunday- to ensure my family are properly taught good Doctrine.

I am troubled that Pastors are allowed this lee-way and who allow poor doctrine to invade the church. I think this is a fundamental problem within the LC-MS church- a lack of discipline within the church. No amount of "Ablaze" or Church Growth Movement will stem the flow of dissatisfied church goers who simply wanted the Word or are enticed by shiny "worship" baubles pandered by other, larger churches. If the LC-MS doesn't enforce some discipline among the Pastoral office, she is in for a rough future.

Good Article on Gov't and Authority

This was a pertinent article by Pastor Stiegemeyer on the authority of a government. Enjoy Pastor Stiegemeyer's article- it is a very good one.

The rancor in American politics is frighteningly high. We also just had an election day last Tuesday and the Presidential debate has been going on for about a couple weeks shy of eternity (alright, closer to a year and a half..). It is understandable that some of us has our government on our mind. We also read of politicians saying strange things, like this one from Cuba's Vice President "a president's legitimacy stems not only from his election by voters ... he must also be legitimate in the exercise of power." This is in opposition to the authority given by God to serve and protect the people. Legitimacy comes from God alone.

However, our first allegiance is to God. In a world of political correctness, a man can be seriously incriminated for simply implying some sort of discrimination. In Finland, a Lutheran Pastor has been brought under charges for sex discrimination for not conducting a service with Communion with a female pastor. He is following God's design and is in trouble. I stand behind his decision because he did what God directed, not what man, or in this case a woman, wanted. If you don't think it won't happen here in the US, just wait a couple more years. I wouldn't be surprised.

Soft versus Hard

I work in the Aerospace and Defense business, and there are two types of "kills" in a military mission. There is the "Hard Kill" where something explodes, disintegrates, or otherwise dies in a fairly certain fashion. A "Soft Kill" is a result that renders the target unable to fight, but not necessarily dead. This "soft kill" is hard to figure out if it has worked in most cases, leaving the slight doubt that the target might still be able to shoot. It occurred to me that this is analogous to how people in general view sin. They haven't done the "hard sins" of praying to budda, allah, or some other deity. They haven't stolen from a bank, shot anyone, committed adultery, or used God's name in vain. Often, however, the "soft" sins are committed with abandon. They deny God's deity through evolution and trust in their 401k and job security. They steal what is other's due by skipping payment here or there. They support murder through abortion and murder in their hearts by wishing evil on another. They lust after pictures of women/men as long as they "look but don't touch." They hit their hand with a hammer and the next words are "G-- D--- IT!" These "soft kills" are just as deadly, even if they seem less dangerous. Just a different way of terming it, but the end is the same. Thank God for the sacrifice of Christ!

Victor's Parade

Pastor's sermon today spurred an interesting thought in my mind. The background are verses discussing Christ's return to heaven at Ascension. One of the verses Pastor used was from Psalm 24:7 "Lift up your heads, O you gates; be lifted up, you ancient doors, that the King of glory may come in." There is a "challenge and response" methodology in Psalm 24. One demanding the doors be opened, and the challenge being "Who is it?" The response between the two is a victor's style request of a king returning from battle victorious. It reminded me of the parades Rome would put on when a general returned from a successful campaign. The general would parade through Rome's streets, trailing behind him the spoils of war. Usually captives, treasure, and exotic beasts would be behind him, showing a sample of the spoils for the emperor. It occurred to me that Christ, upon returning to Heaven's Gate, was doing the same thing. He was returning as the victor. He paraded through the gate to show the victory and the spoils. The spoils were Himself as the resurrected Christ- the first resurrection of any man.

I found it to be interesting the duality carried even to Heaven with the Ascension, as it has to if Christ is truly raised man and God in one. I guess I shouldn't be too surprised, but one is always learning and finding new things in the Word.

Thorns of the Soul

Drudge Report carried a link to a Times article on Mother Teresa, or rather her "Crisis of faith," as exposed in her letters and confidential writings to Priests and confidants. First, she wanted those writings destroyed, but she was overruled by the Vatican and her request ignored by the recipients. Her main concern was the focus on herself and not Christ, and I think this is an important point they overlooked. But, given that these writings exist, the article is interesting and actually fairly decent. Obviously you miss the context of the writings, but it is clear from some of it that she couldn't "feel" God's presence in her life and was "tortured" by that. Some of the text of "conversations" with Jesus sounds a bit like Satan to me. They include an emphasis on works and doing something for God, which is what leads me to that conclusion. They also have a "passive aggressive" tone that I don't find Christ using anywhere in the Bible.

The article is also startling in how it shows the danger of emphasis on works. I don't think she ever felt like she did enough. I also noticed that all of the people who conversed with her never mentioned (at least in the article) the promises of God. To be sure, that was probably assumed. However, don't we all need to hear that from time to time?

It is a good read and I recommend it simply for the perspective it places. The article does have a section near the end that includes the assertion that faith isn't a feeling. I am sure this is news to Charismatics and contemporary worship devotees.

I just wish the people who she confided in would have gone a little farther and mentioned the promises of God, and if they did that it had been included in the article. I think that portion of the Gospel would have been the salve to her soul, as well as anyone else traveling in "the shadow of the valley of death..."

Sin Rights

If you read through the Old Testament, you will come across the phrase "..did what was right in their own eyes..." a significant number of times, relating to Israelites and their disobeying of God's Word. Sometimes it reads almost like a broken record where the punishment and the straying are only verses apart. This same phrase comes to mind when I see fellow Christians wallowing into areas they don't belong with reckless abandon. A case in point is the ELCA looking to "accept" homosexuals, even to the point of ordination! For those who wonder what the fuss is about, see this excellent post from Cyberstones titled The Power of Naming an Enemy. Rebellion against God is the essence of sin. Homosexuality rebels against the order God has made, the nature of the blessings of marriage, and the marring of those two aspects in the imagery of Christ and his bride, the Church. We want to "not offend" and let people do what they think is right. But a Christian must call a sin a sin, lest he grow blind to it.

The devil always says "Did God really say....?" because that is one of the most effective weasels he has. God has said "Thou shalt not commit adultery." We twist that around to any number of meanings. Our flesh cries out "I have a right!" God, if He so cared to, could respond (rightly) "To do what?!" We wouldn't have a great answer to the Creator of all things. Our flesh just wants the right to sin. The warfare we face to beat back this devilish impulse is intense and we will fall a multitude of times. Only God fighting for us keeps us from falling forever. Thank God He has the right to choose to fight on our behalf!

Soldiers and Heaven

The Life of the World (a publication of the LC-MS Seminary in Fort Wayne, IN) had the theme of chaplains for its current issue. An article titled "What does this mean?" discussed Luther's arguments that a soldier is not in peril of eternal damnation due to his vocation as a soldier. And I agree with this article. However, I cannot seem to rectify myself to full satisfaction the difference between soldiering in ancient times and the American methodology. Previous generations were conscripted (drafted in modern parlance) to fight when there was an enemy. The only other source of soldiers were mercenaries who fought for money. The modern American soldier is a "volunteer", which means they sign up for service without being directly "asked" to do so. While this is a proper vocation as it is an arm of the government emplaced by God, does the vocation take on a slightly less proper hue when the soldier is a volunteer versus a draftee? I don't think it would, but I can't seem to reason out the solution. Thoughts on the subject are welcomed.

Plug

This is a quick plug for my Pastor's blog. You can find it here and I will be adding it, when time permits, to my sidebar. Enjoy!

As an aside, I think time will be more permissive for posting soon as I am changing jobs which will reduce the commute (at least 30 minutes one way!). But, I have a paper to write, so until Aug. 1, I will still be spotty. Then I will pick up with some stuff on Ablaze.

Still Here

My apologies for not posting lately, but life has been fairly busy. I have spent a large amount of time between family, house repairs, changing jobs (official in two weeks) and an assortment of other duties. I hope to post more in the near future once the new job starts. Until next time, God's blessings.

Persecution of the Church

I wanted to bring some examples of persecution of the Faith through direct and indirect means. I am not sure how much you see, but these came across my screen in the past day or so. The Devil is alive and well, and assaulting the Church anywhere he can.

Read about the Taliban giving Christians until this Thursday to convert to islam or face bombings. Obviously the Christians are concerned, but apparently not the government officials. Hopyfully they stand firm in their faith, even to martyrdom. I am sure many churches in the US would also provide sanctuary for those leaving town/country. I wonder if there is anything we can do through our missionary channels.

Hong Kong is pondering giving the Bible an "indecent" rating. I guess it has too much sex and violence for the Chinese to distribute directly. This is probably a means to censor and track those who buy it. I doubt that people are genuinly offended by the sex and violence, but the parts about "Thou shalt..." and their sinful flesh.

One last one, and this one is self-inflicted. Can you imagine your pastor dressing up as a... clown?! Niether can I, but I came across this and I couldn't believe it. This is self-inflicted by inciting derision of the church through crappy theatrics. The pastor has this to say in response. He ends by saying "So, those of you pursuing us, God bless you! See you in heaven! Lord, thank you for being the judge for us, so we don't have to judge others." He has no idea what he is doing. This is a prime example of being so doctrinally lax, your faith falls out. The phrase "Doing what was right in their own eyes" comes to mind. I pity the congregation and their pastor. If their souls aren't in danger now, they most certainly will be in the near future.

Pray for all believers. We are in a war to end all wars in the spiritual sense. Gird yourself with prayer and faith for the battle is long, but the war won.

Rebirth!

This has been my first opportunity to post, but my son was Baptised last Sunday. A new Christian and a new man (in baby form of course). Childbirth is an amazing thing. Rebirth into Christ even more so. Praise God!

Sadness...

This is the first opportunity that I have had on writing since my last post. This weekend has been a roller-coaster. My son was born Friday morning after a relatively uneventful labor which changed dramatically with a footling breech birth that had to be delivered via c-section after the water broke. I was just recovering from the birth when the news reached me yesterday about the shooting at my alma mater, Virginia Tech. Anytime news like this reaches me, it just generates such sadness and a loss to even understand. This is even more so when it is somewhere I know, and really do love to be at. Man is sinful, and that is why these things happen. Americans aren't good, no one is. That is why Christ had to save us. Pray for those who lost loved ones and those who have been wounded. God bless those affected, and those on campuses around the country and the globe.

Repetition

This blog will be short because my third child, a son, was born on Friday morning and I have been fairly busy with other important matters. I had to put this out because it puts in clear focus the reason for those "repetitive, boring services" that are the same week after week. You learn them! Doubt it? I don't. Last night, while dressing my two kids for bed, my daughter started saying a phrase that I couldn't help but wonder at. She was saying "very God of very God..." over and over. She was reciting part of the Creed without studying it! I explained where it came from and the next couple lines before she lost interest, but she knows part of the Creed. She is 3!

The service is the basics of the Word, and the Readings and the Sermon should include the meat. But the point of the repetition is to teach the service, the psalms, and the important aspects without the need for fancy classes. It is placed in the rote memory. It is just there. If you toss that out for ever changing services, there is no continuity. You deprive yourself and your kids from the consistency and the rote memory of the Church. It isn't a catch all for preventing apostasy, but it is a great spot to start. If you don't have a doctrine, how do you know if you have left it?

Bumper Stickers

You can learn a lot from bumper stickers. I saw one today that, I believe, is used by pro-abortion supporters. The sticker said "Keep your theology off my biology." Catchy, huh? There were also several budda references and Eastern mysticism stickers. My thought was "without "theology" (ie God), you wouldn't have a biology." People think they can force God out just by saying "I don't believe in you," as if God is an "imaginary friend" that you can wish away. It is sad, but it is a fact of the fallen human nature. Sometimes what people stick on their bumpers (or email signature or whatever) gives you better clues as to who that person is than actually meeting them. I try to avoid stickers myself- I don't want to peel them off later on when they are faded. Plus, if I put a Christian sticker on, then violate a law (regardless of intending to or not), I might cause someone to fall. So my car is boring.

So, what's on your bumper?

Steeped in the Secular

Many of us view our Church as a sanctuary from the trials of life. And it is, for the most part. However, how many of you look closely at how the Church body has slowly absorbed the world? Suffrage for almost everyone in the church is a new, "American" thing. Suffrage for women is controversial because, given the nature of the Church, some of the votes might involve matters of theology. Since the wife is to be submissive to the husband in Churchly things (Eph 5:22-33), this poses a theological dilemma. If you thought this was easily corrected, try to change it. The reaction would be more strenuous than if you asked to change the Creed! (Sad state of affairs)

There are other encroachments that depend on the Church body. Some liberal churches want "current music" (another way of saying they want to be entertained). Some Churches still have the American Flag flanking the altar. (It belongs elsewhere.) The avenues are many, varied, and muddy the line between Church and the world. So please be careful, and teach people the meaning of the Churchly things. Hopefully then you can remove the secular without resorting to a divisive conflict.

Sex still sells...

If it didn't, the proliferation of escapades wouldn't be in the news and on the commercials every moment. One particular headline caught my eye today. The headline was "Sexually Suggestive Sermons From Michigan Pastor Leave Some Hot and Bothered." The part that piqued my interest was the story was on a Lutheran Pastor. Thinking it was a crazy ELCA thing, I clicked on the link. Nope- it is a LC-MS Pastor! I had to investigate further. The hubub is about the sermon topics the pastor has chosen.

The pastor has a whole series of sex-related topics for Lent. While there is something to be said for educating the congregation on proper sexuality, I don't think it has to do with Lent. This is a time to recall the direct path to the Cross and our sins, not on "Puresex." (BTW if you want to see the intro movie that has caused the commotion (it is not explicit for those who are wondering), click here.) The sermon topics should, at the most, be studies in Scripture. I have some familiarity with the Pastor, and he tends to the liberal side and most likely views the entire service as something secondary and adjustable.

To his credit, their "About Epic" part of the webpage (Epic is the name of the church) is pretty much on the theological mark. My concern is where they say "Through music, video, performing arts, and the spoken word – our desire is to create an engaging community where you can discover both who God is and how you can connect your story to the epic story of Jesus. We’ve made every effort to eliminate all of the nonessentials that take away from God. No getting dressed up because God cares about our hearts, not our appearance. No long boring sermons filled with terminology you don’t understand, just messages that relate to real issues in your life!" What have they thrown out? Apprently the historical Liturgy has taken a blow. They claim to include the "spoken word," but I would hazard a guess that "the spoken word" might be open to (significant) interpretation.

Now I have nothing wrong with exploring the use of more "modern" technology in the Church. It just shouldn't be done in the Service! The Liturgy IS the WORD, and to that end is not a "nonessential." Even if this Pastor is 110% always on Scriptural cue and Doctrinally sound, churches that suffer the loss of their Doctrine in the Service usually fall away/fail within a generation or so. I hope this isn't the case, but history is a harsh teacher. Proper Theology is not a cure for improper practice. See Luther in the Small Catechism on Prayer for an example. The true comfort of the Service is not in fun songs, but the sureness of the Forgiveness, the WORD, and the Sacraments. Anything different (song, epics, and/or charisma) only dilute and dispel the good things God gives.

Compromising Duty

I am in the South-East District of the LC-MS, which includes the Carolinas, Virginia, and Maryland (I don't think it has much if Georgia, if any). I can count the number of confessional churches on one hand, and I dare say it might be as, or more so, liberal as California and Massachusetts. Being in the Bible Belt and Baptist country, there is a lot of influence on the SE District from those aspects. This is a challenging District, if only for those reasons.

Given the fairly universal influence, I am not terribly surprised that some of the Pastors let things bend one way or another in a limited (or sometimes extreme) fashion to accommodate the expectations of the congregation. However, I would expect a higher level of attention to detail at district meetings. I have it on good authority that a majority of the Pastors balk at a full service with communion for the meeting. They wanted a shortened version without a lot of the parts of the service that set the stage for communion. I do not know their reasoning, but a failure to practice the full service (and the Word that the service uses) indicates a greater reluctance to the more important things. I am not surprised at this, but it is disheartening. If the shepherds of the flock act like "hired hands," what does that say for the hope and direction of the flock? I dare say it will scatter (John 10:11-13).

This is also one of the objections I have to "incorporating" and entailing business-like terminology. It robs the church of the history and Biblical references that Shepherd and Servant give. I think being a Pastor is less of a career choice and more of a commitment to something above and beyond yourself. I know I am counter to the "second" and "third" career Pastor terminology (which I have used myself). However, I think leaving the vestiges of the business and worldly terminology has its own benefits which outweigh growth charts, market studies, and other man-made junk.

The Kantorei

I was privileged to go to the Kantorei service on Dec. 31 and my family was able to host two fine Seminarians that night. For those who are interested, Pastor Stiegemeyer posted their schedule here. They are quite good and worth a decent trip to hear. For those who are unable to hear them in person, I know they have CDs that are accessible via the CTS bookstore website.

The Seminarians we hosted were about my age. One was a 4-year student who should receive his first call this spring and has a family similar to my own. The other was a first year student and isn't married yet (he is engaged though). Both were conservatives, and it was interesting talking about how they got to be a conservative and theology in general. It was a late night, but worth the time. I certainly hope I can keep in contact with these new friends as they enter the official position of Pastor. If you get the chance to host a Kantorei or Seminarian, don't only ask them about the new Lutheran Service Book (LSB), but ask who they are. I found the whole discussion to be enjoyable and will do it again if the opportunity presents itself.

As a side note, I have started looking at the Ablaze propaganda to attempt to figure out where the root issue starts. So far my impression is there is something wrong, I just can't stick my finger on it. I have found things that display a stunning lack of forethought, but I will save those for an Ablaze only post. I want this post to simply point out the Kantorei's ability and the men that make it up. Conservatism isn't for old guys anymore.

Merry Christmas

I wanted to wish everyone out there that comes across this small blog a Merry Christmas. I hope you remember the real reason for this season isn't the Macy Parade or Santa Claus or football. The real reason comes in a few months in Easter. This is merely the warm up for the "advent" of the ultimate gift- salvation. Something to think about if your church isn't astute enough to remind you already.

Reason for the Season...and the Universe

Welcome to the Advent season. This is a two parter.

The first part plays off the common saying this time of year- "Jesus is the reason for the season." While this is entirely true, it does gloss over the reason Christ had to come in the first place- our sin. Trite and catchy sayings cannot catch the essence of our faith. I would argue these sayings only hurt Christianity in that it provides a shallow message to the world, one often sullied by inappropriate actions. (How many cars with a Christian symbol have you seen drive dangerously and/or illegally?) If it takes God the entire Bible, why should we think we can narrow it down further? It might be a bit gloomy to consider that this season is simply for the tree that we nailed Christ to with our sin, but what greater joy than one that compares our hope with the price paid? A sober celebration is important this time of year. So please, dispense with the endless, pointless mirth. Look at yourself in relation to your sins. Then look to the cross- and thank God for His mercy!

The second part is an article on whether to calculate a universal constant based on the premise that if it was wrong, humans couldn't exist. (Click here for the article) Normally this is a counter-intuitive, even blasphemous, idea in science. The most interesting thing is that the calculation based on humans is almost exact, while the best of quantum physics is off by 120 orders of magnitude! (that is like the bank estimating you have a penny in your account when you actually have 10 billion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion dollars- i.e. a lot) This almost screams "Design by God!" The chances of an evolutionary universe is pretty remote then. The argument could be made that it is simply by chance- we couldn't exist otherwise to calculate a different value. I would counter by pointing out that there are now only two options- a very very narrow random chance or a God. Given that the chance is narrowed significantly more when you factor in evolution and all of the other variables, you end up with two choices- God or a chance universe so remote that physics currently estimates that constant better!

I know this is probably over most of your heads, but I put it out there for you to consider. Without knowledge, we can only sit on the sidelines and not provide an answer for our faith.

Some Links to Share

I hope everyone enjoyed Thanksgiving. It is getting to be that hectic time in the year, but I wanted to put some links on here that I found interesting. I won't provide much commentary, only some lines to give you an insight into my thoughts.

The first grouping appeared within a week or so, but I found them interesting because of what the two implied.


Human Genome is more different than previously thought

Neanderthal matches 99.5% of the human genome

These two don't mean much apart. I don't believe in evolution, and the human genome being more different than we thought really doesn't impact our daily lives. However, the new human genome research shows we can be as much as 12% different from other humans. Compare this with the Neanderthal being "99.5% human" and you could have a case for removing the "Neanderthal" classification. Maybe Geico is right- they never disappeared and live among us even now! All joking aside, the other aspect of the Neanderthal is that they "disappeared" around 30,000 years ago. The thought in my mind was a simple theory- Neanderthals are really humans, only with different physical characteristics, and the reason they "died out suddenly" was a small thing called the Flood. There isn't any evidence to back the theory up, and I don't really expect there to be. But until you look at those articles in that manner, you won't think of these connections. It is possible to see where science might be missing the forest for the bark imprints.

Aetheist Scientist vs Christian Scientist (a man, not the religion)

A good read and fairly interesting. The aetheist ends up slightly affirming that a god is a possibility, but one he doesn't think is valid. I think Christians should spend a little time thinking about these aspects, and science in general, and being aware. Science is an area I think Christians in general do not do well in. Theology is by far more important, but I find the world around us also provides a brilliant tapestry of God's handiwork and adds to our faith. It's one thing to know there are sparrows or lillies; it is different to look at the complexity and beauty of the design. God really does know what He is doing on a whole different level than us. Thank God!

Rocky the "Christian Warrior"?

I never thought about this and I am not a fan of the Rocky movies. However, there is a quote that I think is a good summary of lives as Christians. Stallone said "I feel the same way about Christianity and about what the church is: The church is the gym of the soul." Profound isn't it?

Hubris

It has been blogged and articled to death, but the fall of Ted Haggard should be seen as a warning to us all. He believed that he didn't need to hear of his sins often, and he probably thought he didn't sin all that much. It is a common lie we tell ourselves, especially those of us in regular contact with Baptists (of all flavors) in the "Bible Belt." Many people consider Lutherans to just be depressing, wallowing in our sins. But what better way for a dose of reality than to know that we can't do what we naturally want to do? If you read the necessary sacrifices in the Old Testament, the temple had to have been awash with blood. The ground was most likely reddish with the tint. We rationalize that our sins are "minor" or light. Christ paid the ultimate price for each of them. This is why Christians are to remember their sins, then praise God that He has provided the perfect sacrifice for them. If we aren't reminded of them often, we forget too quickly and merrily fall off that tall cliff. We are most definitely sheep; in need of remembrance and grace.

Busy Busy Busy

I have been rather busy the past few weekends and I am still playing some catch up. I am thinking of things to write on, but I need to do a little research on it first. I wish all of you God's blessings.

Something to think about. Scholars have said in recent years that the sea the Israelites crossed when they left Egypt for the Exodous was miswritten as the "Red Sea" when it was the "Reed Sea" (think a swamp). However, Isaiah 51:10 says:

"Was it not you who dried up the sea,
the waters of the great deep,
who made a road in the depths of the sea
so that the redeemed might cross over?"

I thought it was interesting since it mentions "the deep." The "Reed Sea" isn't much deeper than about 2 meters (around 10 feet). I don't know if that qualifies as "great deep" in Hebrew. I don't know any Hebrew, but I think it would be interesting to compare some of these phrases with the actual word for the sea they crossed. I suspect it wasn't shallow like a "reed sea." Anyone out there with training in Hebrew willing to look this up?

Can I get a testimony?

These are words found more often in Baptist churches and rarely in Lutheran. However, this past weekend I visited my mom and my family went to her church, which is a WELS congregation. They are starting up some "new" thing where someone gets up at the end of the service and mentions how God has worked in their life. They didn't call it a "testimony" I don't think, but that is precisely what it is. On the surface, it might sound good. Some good, relevant comments from parishioners might be useful in providing reassurance to other communicants, right?

The part where this goes all wrong is, at the end, it becomes something that focuses on what we did for God... sacrificed a car, a house, a marriage, billions of dollars, etc. (and, oh yea, God made it work out ok) But the focus is still on self! What has God done for me? The fact I exist and am at church should say it all. Remember the parable of the rich man and the beggar? When the rich man asks for Moses to send the beggar to his brothers, the reply states (paraphrased) "If they don't believe the prophets, they won't believe someone who rises from the dead!" Why do we need "current" examples? Why won't the Bible fit this role? The reason, I think, goes to the fact that the Bible is, at this point, objective to us. We don't know anyone in there (other than Christ), we don't live in the area, and for the most part it exists outside of ourselves. However when your example is someone you know, it is easier to rationalize and justify, and even puff yourself up. These become pharasaical "sharing." This is a dangerous introduction. It would be far better to include an additional reading from the Bible, perhaps of one of its many examples, than it would be to have these subjective talks.

Has anyone else seen this? This was a first with a Lutheran church of any type. Thoughts are welcomed as I am still a bit puzzled and definitely concerned.

Correction and Clarification

An anonymous commenter for the last post pointed out some issues with my post on the passing of Prof. Marquart, and I wanted to address them here because of their importance. I must ask for your forgiveness for these Omissions.

First the reader took me to task on the phrase "Jesus Christ was the Word incarnate- LAW and GOSPEL. There is no dividing the two- they are one and the same." He referenced two latin phrases: "opus alienum" and "opus proprium." Unfortunately, I am a lay person and have no experience with Latin. I did some checking and as best as I can get this to make sense is, respectively: "someone else's deeds" and "a deed I have done." His comment was "Is the law opus alienum, or opus proprium?"

This is where I omitted the important clarification, although I did allude to the calrification. Because of this omission, it changes everything, and I was in error due to it. I am going to go about it the long way so it is very clear where the error was.

There are two important doctrines of salvation (capitalized for clarity)- LAW and GOSPEL. These aspects are quite different and are separate. The LAW shows us our sins, and proclaims to us our inability to do anything to warrant any blessings of God. The LAW, while it is good, will damn us to hell. The GOSPEL is the wonderful news that God has given us mercy through the sacrifice of Christ. Christ takes our place and has fulfilled the LAW, allowing us to live eternally with God. This is where the latin comes in- "opus proprium" applies in the LAW (works you do mean zilch for salvation) and "opus alienum" applies to the GOSPEL (works of Christ provides for our salvation). In failing to be precise and clear (what I even suggested in the post), I am in grave error and must beg your forgiveness.

The intent was to point out that Christ is the Word made Flesh. He embodies both LAW and GOSPEL- they are combined in Him. He was under the LAW and fulfilled it, becoming our salvation. Since both LAW and GOSPEL complement one another perfectly, they are the two halves of our salvation. The LAW drives us to seek God, and the GOSPEL provides the mercy of God. I was looking at the LAW and GOSPEL as the two parts that make us Christian and provide the whole package for our salvation. As C.F.W. Walther says in Thesis I of God's No and God's Yes, the Proper Distinction Between Law and Gospel "Both are equally necessary. Without the Law the Gospel is not understood; without the Gospel the Law benefits us nothing." The intent was to suggest a better phrase is "Word of God" since the secular/baptist translation often just means the GOSPEL and not the LAW (which is at odds with the Bible and Lutheran teachings). This was the intent, but the post fell far short.

The poster also took issue with my peeve of doing something "in someone's honor." The genesis of this peeve is the ubiquitous listings, at least in the southern US, of "driving (or another activity) in the memory/honor of ." This is blantantly wrong on so many levels- namely you do not drive in memory of someone, but to get to work, school, or another location. It only belittles their memory, even if they were pious. Let me get to what the poster wrote:

"You also have this problem, namely, the Lutheran Confessions in fact teach us to honor the saints, and imitate them. Before you are so quick to judge those who would honor this great servant of God, perhaps you might want to consider whether you yourself in fact have a full and complete grasp of the teachings of the Book of Concord. You might start with CA XXI and Ap XXI. Prof. Marquart was a very humble man, and did nothing for his own honor. But it is not right for you to teach such un-Lutheran ideas in a post about him."

First off, I did not intend to in any way relate this to Prof. Marquart. He has the respect of everyone I know who knew him, and my own, even though I did not know him or take classes under him. I know him simply by reputation, which was spotless. I was simply reflecting on a single passage in an article about his passing. I am sorry this was understood in such a way, but it was not my intent, nor did I say it directly or otherwise.

Secondly, a humble man will not, by definition, wish you do anything in their name or to honor them. That is the definition of humility! I take issue with the poster on this point due to the obvious contradiction. I sincerely doubt Prof. Marquart would want anyone to do anything but believe in God wholeheartedly. Even Luther cringed at the thought of the Lutheran denomination being named after him. I hope the poster can and does provide clarification on this point.

Thirdly, on the articles that the poster references, they mention two articles from the Augsburg Confession and the Apology to the Augsburg Confession that deal with the Invocation of the Saints. These were written in response to the Roman Catholic teaching of praying to the saints (Mary, the Apostles, and others). In Article XXI of the Apology of the Augsburg Confession, the article seems to relate to saints as the Roman Catholic church understood them, not as the Lutheran doctrine of simultaneously sinner and saint. That difference not-with-standing, there is a clear prescription for honoring the saints.

The Apology says there are three ways we should honor the saints (sentences 4-7) in Article XXI. The first honor is to thank God for their examples of mercy, because God wishes to save people, and He has given the Church gifts (teachers are called out specifically). Second honor is the strengthening of our faith in that God has forgiven them of their sins and will forgive ours also. The third honor is to imitate their faith, and then their other virtues in our vocations. As I read and understand that, you honor the saints by 1) praising God for their example, 2) using that example as reassurance we also have salvation from God and 3) use our faith to be an example to others. Since faith is ultimately God's work, ultimately this boils down to: we are praising God for his examples and asking that we would in turn be those examples to others. The focus is on God alone.

While the original intent of the author of the article might have been to suggest we honor Prof. Marquart's memory by being faithful, I would argue that a line was crossed when the following was written "honor the blessed memory and legacy of Kurt Marquart is...redoubling our efforts and even more energetically advancing the cause of authentic, genuine, confessing Lutheranism..." Why do we confess our faith and keep it genuine? Is it because of Kurt Marquart? Or that which God has done, and does, for us? This point isn't as clear as it should have been, making the rememberance seem more than it should be- turning Prof. Marquart's example into a rallying cry.

I hope the anonymous poster will review this post and provide corrections and/or some form of acceptance that this is proper doctrine. I am a layman, and I am human. I will get some things really wrong, and other things slightly so. I can only correct error when it happens and I am made aware of it, and ask for forgiveness. I hope those who read this blog will provide me with the necessary correction when necessary.

It is my desire to use this blog to defend the faith, and in times of correction, grow in it. I only hope that this provides some benefit to those who read it as well.

Ft. Wayne Professor Passes...

It is unfortunate that I must include the news that Professor Marquart at the Fort Wayne Seminary has passed away. I won't include the details, but you can find them here.

I do want to briefly touch on a quote from the link because it shows something that is troubling- the loss of the distinction of Law and Gospel. First, the quote:

The greatest way we can, and will, honor the blessed memory and legacy of Kurt Marquart is by holding fast to the confession and tradition that he passed on to us and redoubling our efforts and even more energetically advancing the cause of authentic, genuine, confessing Lutheranism -- the cause of the pure and unadulterated Gospel of Jesus Christ.

What stands out in that sentence? It is certainly well meaning, but something else is there, or rather not there. I don't want to pick it to death, but the phrase "...cause of the pure and unadulterated Gospel of Jesus Christ." is missing the LAW! Jesus Christ was the Word incarnate- LAW and GOSPEL. There is no dividing the two- they are one and the same. It shoud read "... cause of the pure and unadulterated Word of God." (The Word is Christ.) This isn't just a technicality. By removing the Law from the Gospel, you have removed the very essence and power it entails. This is the secular/Baptist type saying, which has unfortunately also entered the lexicon of the Lutheran church. Gaurd your mouths and fingers (in the case of blogging) lest someone misunderstand the unadulterated Word. We should seek clarity, simplicity, and accuracy in all things lest our answers be unclear.

I also want to point out as more of a peeve that if Marquart was a confessional Lutheran (by all accounts he is - yes IS; he is just in a much better place), he by no means would relish anything done in his honor. That is another American/Baptist-ism and we would do well to avoid it. Want to do something in memory of someone? Go to Communion!

Rest in Peace, Brother Marquart.

Discipline

My son is getting to the age where he can associate results from actions. So this means discipline starts. My daughter is also trying her bounds to see what her parents will do and allow. So we are a household full of learning moments. Sometimes this is the part that parents really hate- your kid(s) do something against the rules or something you have said to do and they are being coy about it or are just pushing a little and something inside you says "eh, it wasn't that bad..." If you are a parent, you rember the rules and the punishment and you carry it out. Anything else is a disservice to both you and the kids.

It occured to me a couple nights ago that some people associate punishment with pain. Others associate it with teaching violence. Some punish little, if at all. Others punish excessively. Both believe that doing so is the right thing. But none of these thoughts are true.

Punishment and discipline, when done in the proper context, will, of necessity, inflict some amount of discomfort and pain. The point is to knock off a burr, smooth a rough spot, purge the dross from the child. You do it to render the person better in the end. Parents forget that Satan has already started on their children before they (or you) were born. They look innocent, but their heart is dark and their ways are corrupt. Until Baptism in Christ, they have no redeeming qualities when it comes to eternity, or life here on earth. They want to do whatever suits them. So we start with a rough, corroded heart and we must polish, pound, and even burn off those behaviors they will try in order to teach them to be a benefit to society and how to be a Christian. This is our Christian and parental duty. God does the same things in our lives- He presents us with opportunities to learn, be disciplined, and grow in faith. Children is simply God's way of showing us what He does.

I don't want to read too much into the role of parenting and what example it shows- mainly because there is such a plethora of failed families out there that the meaning would be lost on many people. Those who it wouldn't be lost on probably already understand this. I could be wrong. Suffice to say, anyone who loves their kids will discipine them. Anyone who doesn't only hates them. I have great pity for the kids of those who are too caught up in themselves to care about their children.

Good stuff

Get Religion has some good items. The one I will reference is by Mollie entitled "God of Nice Things" about a Time Article on the "Just Believe and all will be well." I think the last quote sums it up nicely. If I copy it here, I won't spoil the ending I don't think.

“Who would want to get in on something where you’re miserable, poor, broke and ugly and you just have to muddle through until you get to heaven?” asks Joyce Meyer, a popular television preacher and author often lumped in the Prosperity Lite camp. “I believe God wants to give us nice things.”

Let's see... I want something in this life that corrodes, can be lost or stolen, and that will only distract me from God OR I can have Heaven, which won't pass away. There is a tough one! I feel it's only right to end this with "May God have mercy on their souls..."

A new link

I wanted to point out that I have added a link to "Get Religion", specifically with Mollie Ziegler. She is an excellent writer and a good Lutheran. I know because she goes to my church. I recommend her blogging, and her other articles she writes. Her name will change soon (getting married) so I will update that once I know what it is! ;-)

What you see is what you get!

My coauthor and myself have submitted our paper's first draft. I have a lull and can put down something that has been banging around my mind for a couple days.

The thought relates directly to the "Christianity Lite" and the recent abduction and release of the Fox News people in Gaza. First, "Christianity Lite", also known as the "worship celebration," the "don't-bother-me-with-words-just-good-vibes" or, my phrase, "marshmellow services." What do you really get here? A sense of community? A discount at a spa? Maybe the church you go to isn't that far, it just has a contemporary service, maybe some more "upbeat" music. Yea, the music is low on substance, but it has more pep that some of the older hymns. Maybe the only thing that bugs you is how things seem a little off, but you can't put your finger on it. I know the last part- I have lived that one myself. Something is off, and you can't figure it out. It most likely is NOT the theology- or at least not directly. Surprised? You should be. The theology in these churches is, more or less, on. They read and try to adhere to the Bible. But what is the theology? Where is the error?

Think on it while I go to the next aspect- kidnappings in Gaza, and the Middle East as a whole. The Fox News people were held for about 2 weeks in an unusual abduction. They were released alive, in keeping with previous kidnappings. But something HAS changed in that warfront. The journalist from the Christian Science Monitor, these newspeople, and the latest from al-quiada all have something in common. Conversion. If you don't convert, well thats too bad for you. Never mind the conversion happens at the end of a gun (or willingly for that matter, as long as it happens). As long as you aren't currently attached to the wrong end of a weapon or its projectile, a conversion seems to be a "willing" conversion in islam.

Back to Fox News- both of their correspondents claimed to have "converted", but pulled a "fake out." (term from the 80's related to lying for those less than 18) They said they didn't mean it. Granted, I have never had a muslim put a gun to my temple and start reading the koran. I have not had the pleasure of sitting in their version of the "Hanoi Hilton." I pray everyone who reads this does not also experience this. Hoewver, given all that humans can do and say, the words of Christ come to mind "For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake and the gospel’s will save it." (Mark 8:35 NKJV) There is a lot of pressure to follow the easy path in prisons such as these. This is why the Christian is to trust God always. "Convert" to save your life? You might well loose that which you should mind above this life. Your life here is temporal. This is exile. Why do we grasp it so? (good Christian answer: old adam and sin!)

How does this relate to the question above? America has had a wonderful state of prosperity and peace. Our homeland has not been invaded by a foreign army since the War of 1812. (Mexican minor incursions not withstanding- I am talking about actual invasions. Civil War doesn't count- that was us on us.) Our religious freedom is unprecedented. This sort of conversion is not something we are used to. What does "kumbaya" give you to fall back on during such conversions? Where does the "happy clappy" fall into the Lord's Prayer? How much do you really keep to use in time of stress and trouble? This is the error- they have theology, but it is liquid, weak, and not providing the strength for battle! Read that again- the theology is "correct", but weak. "How can God's Word be weak?" I hear some screaming. God's Word is never weak- only faith of individual people. The "lite churches" revel in spiritual immaturity. They only want milk, suckling long past their time. Doubt this happens?

12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food. 13 For everyone who partakes only of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe. 14 But solid food belongs to those who are of full age, that is, those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil. (Hebrews 5:12-14)

Those "lite churches" do not provide the sustenience to "fight the good fight" or run the race. They provide sweet milk, but watered down. Think of it as spiritual formula- kinda like the real stuff, just no where near as good. I know this sounds harsh, but in the end, you will have to stand and defend your faith. It might be at the end of a kid with a gun anywhere, a muslim with a sword (gun, etc), or the guy who says "it's all the same isn't it?" No! Again- NO! It is not the same! Fight the fight- defend your faith! Eat the meat of the Word, do not dwell in the nursery! The milk can leave you guessing. It is the meat that sustains, leaves no doubts. Do you want to doubt when the time comes to know?

Maybe I shouldn't watch action movies prior to posting. ;-) On the other hand, the movie I watched has a chilling image of the current situation. I watched "Chronicles of Riddick." It was an action flick, but the arch enemy either converted you or killed you. It sounds a lot like some words from the koran. The interesting thing is they destroy a muslim planet. Some irony, huh?

Tagged....

Whey Lay tagged me, and I hadn't forgotten. Let's see... I will go grab the list from his site and answer the Tag.

1. One Book that changed your life: I think the unspoken one on Whey Lay's site, but the one I will list here is the Bible. Without it I know I would have no hope, and probably wouldn't be anywhere near where I am today. The second best book I guess would be Luther on Vocation. Excellent book. The rest that I have read for fun don't compare to the value of the Bible or Luther on Vocation.

2. One book you've read more than once: I don't think I could list these. I was quite a bookworm until college, when time became a scarce commodity. I once took 14 books home from a library in High school and had them read in a week! I think it was something like 3000 pages of text total. I can't say I remember everything, but it was fun! ;-) Anyway, I think I have read half of my library at least twice. And that isn't a small collection- we have about 6 bookcases in our house, and need to buy another one. So in the interest of keeping this short- Genesis.

3. One book you'd want on a desert island: Besides an NKJV Bible, a book on a million ways to prepare seafood and coconuts. (I don't need a book on boats. ;-))

4. One book that made you laugh: Hmm... I think the last one I read was More Riddles by Bennett Cerf. This is one of the old "Beginner Books" series with a "Cat in a Hat" logo with a copyright of 1961. I was reading it for my daughter, but there are some nice silly riddles in there. Sometimes the best humor is the simplest.

5. One book that made you cry: The only book I could have cried on was Executive Orders by Tom Clancy. No- it wasn't the story line or the death of a character. Just at 1200 pages, it took me almost 2 years to finish! I wanted to cry- mainly out of frustration in the long delay from start to finish.

6. One book that you wish had been written: Heh... Why Relative Morality Causes Your Brain to Melt. Or something along those lines...you get the drift. Reminds me of the egg-frying, brain-on-drugs ads of the 90s.

7. One book that you wish had never been written: Anything by Karl Marx or any other socialist. Their arrogance and insistence on a godless culture is appalling. So many have died and been misled by their ideology. It is quite sad.

8. One book you're currently reading: Unfortunately, not really anything for pleasure. I am reading a book, but the title is upstairs. I will amend this list with the actual title. It is an entrepreneurial book that I am reading out of interest in the topic. I hope to pick up something from #9 shortly though.

9. One book you've been meaning to read: Anything by C.S. Lewis- I have been meaning to pick up some of his stuff, but haven't got the time- yet!

10. Now tag someone else. Hmm... who can I tag? I don't know- this will take some looking. I might have to answer this one later on.

Well, 9 out of 10 isn't bad I think. I hope this means my blog won't be hit by any nasty bad luck, viruses, horrible dislocations of bits or any other normal internet curse. ;-) (Sorry Whey Lay, I had to toss that in there. ;-)) All in good fun. Now you all know I read too much, but now I do too much. If I ever retire, I don't think I will ever notice. (Current trends means that retirement age will be about 152 years old by the time I can retire...)

Self-Deception

I have been trying to write about this off and on, except I kept forgetting the point just when I sat down to write it! I am going to keep it short, but I think you will get the idea.

To a Christian, it is easy to see that sinful man wants so badly to run his own salvation. It is a little harder to see, but still evident, that man also blames his actions for his failures. What a contradiction! You want to be saved by the same things you first blame when something goes wrong! "What did I do to get cancer?" "Why did I get into the car wreck? I must have done something wrong." "Katrina hit New Orleans because of ." God does allow for punishment in this life for things we do. However, isn't it also the defninition of insanity to also rely on e gloomy and deprethose very same works to save you? Thank God for His Mercy!

I think this probably isn't anything too deep to think about for the Confessional Lutheran. However, it bears repeating because it is so basic and easy to fall into the traps and lies we tell ourselves. It is a practice in self-deception that we can save ourselves, that we really "aren't that bad," or that we are ok anyway. If you don't come out of the service sobered (not drunk with your sinful self), then you either didn't hear the proper preaching of the Word, weren't paying attention, or any number of detrimental aspects. You should be sober and realize that you can't do it yourself, everything you have done is "vanity" (as in Ecclesiastes, written by Solomon), and your only hope is in Christ. To expect to either be happy and joyful, or on the flip side gloomy and depressed, is to expect vanity in place of real worth. It is something to think about and be wary of. Our works mean nothing in the grand scheme of things. Only the work of God (whether through us or not) is what matters. True self-deception is using the boards of the bottom of the boat to bail it out. It just doesn't work.

Exciting News

This post isn't a rant, but a blog of Thanksgiving- my wife has just found out that we are expecting our third child! Praise Him from whom all blessings flow! The tenative due date is April 26. I will periodically give updates as things progress.

Two posts in a day...

This is a record for me. I wanted to post this separately because it is so much more different than the other post. I just wanted to throw this out there.

Anyone who knows me, also knows that I hold modern science just above pond scum in its ability to reason. Evolution, global warming, and other concepts are, in a phrase, a pipe dream. (Ok- the why: pipe dream refers to the hallucinations of someone in an opium den- not only is it considered unreliable, but those "dreams" are also usually scary/horrifying and entirely fictional.) My thought relates to those who try to tie the Bible in with modern science and the creation story. They try to include evolution and say "Well God must have meant many years and used evolutoin to make the creatures of the earth." While that might SEEM reasonable at first blush, it violates the most basic principles of the Bible. First, that God doesn't lie. Second, if the Garden was perfect, why would animals need to die and mutate to be perfect? This adds contradictions and removes "original sin." (doubly bad) Third- if you are that unsure on the Word of God, why do you try and marry it with bad science? Evolution is so pitiful, I was able to destroy it twice in my biology class in 10th grade. If a 10th grader can see through it, it has some pretty big holes. Marrying that junk to the Holy Writ should be incomprehensible to anyone who cares about the Word of God.

Alright, I will end the rant. Just keep in mind that modern science still requires a team of people to do simple heart surgery due to the complexity. We still don't understand basic physics, and biology just now figured out that genes can work for multiple functions. This is not possible by chance- only by God. The more I see and understand, the more in awe I am of His power.

Teaching the Why

No, I didn't mean "The Who." How many times have you heard people say "I don't know why I do this this way..?" There is a mayor of a small town (I am not sure where the internet article is that I read this) that has stopped mowing his lawn. His reasoning "Why do we do it?" This led to a deeper thought that this touches on while I was doing my own mowing today.

The answer for mowing your lawn goes back to the late 1800's and early 1900's. It was quite fashionable to have a lawn of tall grasses. That is until they discovered that the insects (i.e. mosquitos, gnats, etc) and pests (cockroaches, rats, mice) that carry disease all love tall grasses. It didn't take long to connect that with plagues and the spread of disease, and those lawns weren't so fashionable if you ended up with a contagious disease (even the flu was deadly then). So the push mower was born, and the rest was history. Now why is this on a Lutheran blog site? Well, since people no longer know WHY you mow your lawn, they think it's purely ornamental. So you either get 1) no lawn mowing or 2) inane and anal mowing restrictions (such as your lawn must not exceed 2.1756380 inches in height.. (ok so thats a little extreme in measurement, but you get the idea). Alright, here is the tie in.

How many times have you heard "We don't need such an old tradition/method/etc for..." and you can fill in the blank with whatever is the topic du jour: abortion, gay marraige, contemporary worship, Lord's Supper, etc. They aren't taught the "why," and so are left to make it up. This is evident in everyday life when anyone teaches another person any task, method, or morality. They remember to teach the mechanations, the rules, and the expected outcomes. But hardly do they teach the "why." "Why don't you play with guns?" You/others get shot and die. "Why don't you drive drunk?" You and/or other people will get badly hurt and/or die. "Why don't we marry gays?" (Do I really need to spell this one out?) "Why do I have to...?" Every parent and Pastor has to keep this in mind when they teach their children/flock. First you explain the rules, and then the why. (I try and do this with my children regarding ledges and other dangerous/important details.) God has done this throughout the Bible, and provided not only the why, but the who, what, when, where, and how. If only human teachers were so effective.

Next time you hear someone asking "why" (or one of the many variations that mean the same thing), provide the "why." "Why don't we sing newer more upbeat songs?" Because they aren't founded on the Word, they are not beneficial to the congregation, and "A Mighty Fortress is Our God" will continue to be sung to the end of time- this pop-rock song won't make it till next week! Provide a why, and the questions usually end. Provide the why, and cause the doubt to wither instead of the faith.

A little sparse...

I apologize for the sparse posts, but I have been very busy lately, only to be compounded by a paper I am co-authoring with another engineer. So what little time I have is now less/non-existant. I will get back as soon as the time presents itself.

I did want to post a little thought provocation before I get too busy. In the USA, there is an "expectation", usually referred to as a "right," of privacy. My question is this- is it truely a right? Before you start to wonder how this applies to a Christian blog, think of it this way. Is our "desire" for privacy simply the fear of the publicly unknown things in our lives becoming well known? If there is nothing to hide, why hide? I think this goes back to the fallen man placing clothes on in the Garden of Eden. It isn't because it's needed, it's only because man wants to feel "protected and secure" from the sins he knows are there. (Knowing isn't necessarily a conscious knowing.) Anyway, I put this out to make you think, and possibly post your thoughts. This will be most "offensive" to Americans simply because it is such a part of the culture.

As a sidenote- privacy isn't explicitly stated in the Constitution. The only reason it exists is due to a Supreme Court ruling... interesting, huh?