Choice of Denomination

[st. Worm]

quote:

"BTW Martin Luther; a Christian?! This the man who urged the slaughter of peasants and the telling of "strong lies" and rejected the book written by Our Lord's own brother. Gimme a break."

Very strange that you would consider the leader of the Reformation an unbeliever. Are you saying if he were not such a sinner (which he readily acknowledged) that he would be a "true" Christian like you? Are you one of those angels dancing on the head of a pin? Christ came to save sinners and not the righteous dear soul. I have no problem being confronted with Luther's imperfections and errors. Certainly there are factors that led to his questioning at one point in his life of James as inspired but you do not bother to elaborate on that.

You also need to learn more about history and church history in particular before you make your accusations and judgments against those living in a different time and place.

You seem to have little in common with Christians in your view of the Trinity but much in common with Mohammed.

[st. Worm]

quote:

"My whole point is that neither of these men believed in justification by faith alone. I never said that their understandings were identical, but they both believed in Sacramental salvation, regardless of how they tried to twist scripture to make it fit. They were both disciples of Augustine, and both have a "gospel" based on works rather than faith alone, regardless of the fact that that they make that claim."

That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever read in my life. Is your idea of faith walking down the aisle after a Billy Graham crusade and signing a piece of paper? How funny!

Lutherans clearly teach and believe justification by faith and faith alone but also view the sacraments as true means of grace for receiving and strengthening that gift of faith.

[MrSealedEternal]

quote:

"My whole point is that neither of these men believed in justification by faith alone. I never said that their understandings were identical, but they both believed in Sacramental salvation, regardless of how they tried to twist scripture to make it fit. They were both disciples of Augustine, and both have a "gospel" based on works rather than faith alone, regardless of the fact that that they make that claim."

That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever read in my life. Is your idea of faith walking down the aisle after a Billy Graham crusade and signing a piece of paper? How funny!

Have I ever said that was my idea of faith? You're being a little presumptuous aren't you?

Lutherans clearly teach and believe justification by faith and faith alone but also view the sacraments as true means of grace for receiving and strengthening that gift of faith.

Just because you call your religious works by a different name, doesn't mean your not trying to work out your own salvation.

Grace means unmerited favor. In other words, you can't do anything to deserve it. If you are doing something to try to earn it, then you are denying the grace.

Galatians 5:4 You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

Faith means to trust fully in Him and not yourself. If you try to work out your own salvation, then you really don't have faith that He has already worked it out for you.

Roman 4:5- 6 , "But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessings upon the man to whom God reckons righteousness apart from works:"

Mr SE

[st. Worm]

What in any of my replies or the Lutheran confessions would cause you to believe we believe in works based salvation? Baptism can hardly be called a work of anyone other than the Holy Spirit and neither can Holy Communion since Christ has already done the work there even as we receive the benefit. Faith which enables belief is a gift and received by the Holy though the means of grace, word and sacrament. You are trying to play the straw man game.

[st. Worm]

MR/MRS,

Since we talking about salvation by works, I would submit that your view of salvation is more clearly one of good works. Your good work is belief itself. Grace is not a reward for belief as you apparently believe.

[other one]

quote:

"It is not Christ that they have rejected but the self richeous members of denominations that consider themselves correct at everyone elses expense."

When you find that perfect church without sinners that you are seeking please do not enter its door because you will certainly corrupt it.

Seriously that view you are espousing is the all time cop out. Wah! I cannot have my way and do as i please so I will leave the church. How sad.

Actually the last three sunday school classes I was asked not to talk because of asking questions and one of those I was asked not to come back....... Just for questions..... I am sure you'd feel quite at home at either of those places...... You'd feel right at home at the chruch of christ I grew up in.............. right on brother.......

[MrSealedEternal]

What in any of my replies or the Lutheran confessions would cause you to believe we believe in works based salvation? Baptism can hardly be called a work of anyone other than the Holy Spirit and neither can Holy Communion since Christ has already done the work there even as we receive the benefit. Faith which enables belief is a gift and received by the Holy though the means of grace, word and sacrament. You are trying to play the straw man game.

I'm not trying to play any game. A work is a work no matter what name you give it. Inventing an unbiblical word such as "sacrament" doesn't change what it is.

Baptism with the Holy Spirit is performed by God when you trust in Him. Water baptism is a work that follows, and is a wonderful thing to do, but has nothing to do with your salvation. Scripture is clear that you are saved when you trust in Christ, and water baptism always comes later.

Ephesians 1:13 "In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation -- having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise,"

Act 10:43,44,47 "Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins." While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message. "Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?"

They were saved while Peter was still giving them the message of truth, the gospel of their salvation, and they hadn't even thought about going to the water yet. They then performed the ceremony of water baptism, which is scriptural after you are saved.

It is the Holy Spirit that washes and regenerates, not water.

Titus 3:5-7 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.

You'll notice that the regeneration of the Holy Spirit is doing the washing, not the other way around. He baptizes you with His Spirit first, and then you are free to perform the good work of water baptism. If you reverse the order, you reject Christ, and try to save yourself by works.

Mr SE

[Waimahia]

You seem to have little in common with Christians in your view of the Trinity but much in common with Mohammed.

No, St Worm,

My view of the so-called trinity has commonality with Paul, Peter, James and John. I refer anyone to check those epistles which have formulaic greetings. These clearly show that they did not accept that the Holy Spirit was part of the Godhead they worshipped. I have never heard a trinitarian explain away this fact.

I also invite anyone to study the history of how the trinity doctrine came to be accepted by the Catholic Church (suggest 11th Edition of Britannica as a good starting point). Just get familiar with the history of the trinity doctrine and ask, "Is this of God's revelation?"

Waimahia

[st. Worm]

It is terribly sad that you would deny your children the saving grace of baptism. As Peter says the promise is for you and your children. Calling sacraments an unbiblical word is like calling the Trinity an unbiblical word. Its also seems highly unlikely that the households mentioned in the NT where all were baptized were households that included no children or infants.

Your belief about baptism as a work of obedience following a profession of faith is in reality the good work that you attempt to apply to me. There is nothing in the NT that rejects baptism for infants. Infants can have faith as evidenced by the unborn infant that Elizabeth was carrying.

Be baptized and wash away your sins.

I would suggest Luther's SC with explanations if you wish to truly learn about baptism from a Lutheran perspective instead of parrotting that it is a good work as you have been misled to believe.

[st. Worm]

quote:

"Actually the last three sunday school classes I was asked not to talk because of asking questions and one of those I was asked not to come back....... Just for questions..... I am sure you'd feel quite at home at either of those places...... You'd feel right at home at the chruch of christ I grew up in.............. right on brother......."

Is it my fault you have such poor discernment when selecting a church?