tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post7224721242717035722..comments2023-11-05T02:55:10.230-06:00Comments on Gottesdienst Online: In the Roll of the Book It Is Written of HimPr. H. R.http://www.blogger.com/profile/16756503062523543708noreply@blogger.comBlogger56125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-50905862848016247942013-12-11T07:10:26.818-06:002013-12-11T07:10:26.818-06:00"That which belongs to created human life per..."That which belongs to created human life per se is not part of His humiliation, but is the goodness of Man in the Image of God."<br /><br />Here is my question - were Adam and Eve created as children or adults? If they were created as adults did not grow in stature, did they then miss out in the goodness of Man in the Image of God?<br /><br />This is actually (if I can be over simplistic) a difference that I noticed between East and West. The East tends to have a, I'll call it 'romantic' as ironic as that is, notion of continual and perpetual growth - the idea of moving ever more and more closer to God. It's an idea that I will admit is appealing (romantic was not meant to be derogatory there). More common in the West (and I actually think slightly more Scriptural) is the idea of completion, perfection. <br /><br />This is part of the way I may a distinction between incarnutus and homo factus. It's no demeaning thing to be incarnate - Image of God and all that after all. However, to take upon the burdens of growth - shin splints and cracking voices aren't quite what I'd call glorious or go. Christ could have incarnated as a fully grown adult - but he comes to experience all the impacts of life after the fall, including helplessness. The very Word by which all things were made must sit in His own mess and wait on His mother to change Him... that is humiliation.<br /><br />(Now, if I wanted to pull in Baseball and Sabermetrics, I would note that generally the peak of athletic performance comes at 27, so physically Jesus would have also experienced decline, the slowing of metabolism, the body falling apart more quickly than it rebuilds... another part of humiliation - but this comes up simply because I've been reading a stat nerd book this week)<br /><br />Take care, have good services today, and I will go and prep for mine as well!<br />Rev. Eric J Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17747919365522145094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-73349025155407966612013-12-10T20:17:06.144-06:002013-12-10T20:17:06.144-06:00I agree with most of what you say here, Brother Er...I agree with most of what you say here, Brother Eric, and I love same passages, too. Even so, come quickly, Lord Jesus!<br /><br />I disagree with you, however, on your assessment of our Lord's growing in stature. That which belongs to created human life per se is not part of His humiliation, but is the goodness of Man in the Image of God. In this respect, the greater Mystery is not so much the simul iustus et peccator, but the union of the two natures in the one Person of the Christ.<br /><br />In any case, I appreciate your comments. Thank you for responding. And a blessed Advent Tide to you and yours.Rev. Rick Stuckwischhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10664716292792101540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-65029792873899117782013-12-10T20:07:11.462-06:002013-12-10T20:07:11.462-06:00It is the simul. It is saint and sinner. It is w...It is the simul. It is saint and sinner. It is why as we die we can sing, "And take they our life, goods, fame, child, and wife..."<br /><br />The passage I like for all this is 1 John 3:1-3. Then it will be great - we will be as He is. Or Paul - Now, dimly, as though a mirror, then face to face.<br /><br />The problem is never the New, though. The problem is always the old.<br /><br />+ + + + + <br /><br />Oh, as for the growing in stature -- that's part of the stages of humiliation. It is not something in Christ Himself that He would need to grow, but for our sake He emptied Himself, made Himself nothing. He grew as we had been created to grow. Fulfilling all righteousness. Rev. Eric J Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17747919365522145094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-39746360080811047192013-12-10T07:17:06.528-06:002013-12-10T07:17:06.528-06:00Although I've regretfully not yet been able to...Although I've regretfully not yet been able to respond to others, I'll respond quickly to this, Brother Eric, with thanks for your comments and input.<br /><br />What you've written here sounds "meet and right" to me, but I'm not sure it answers or addresses the questions I've been pondering in this regard. Well, sometimes, I suppose that's how it is: The answers we get are not those we went looking for!<br /><br />I agree that our Lord took up the old man for our redemption. He was born under the Law, to redeem those who were under the Law. He had no sin of His own, but He made Himself to be sin, in order that we might become the righteousness of God in Him. And certainly, in the Resurrection, we shall no longer need the Law in the way that we always need it here.<br /><br />However, even in the Resurrection, you here write of the Law, which all of us will know perfectly. I think, in that, you are touching upon the point that I have in mind; or, at least, another aspect of it. No more sin, no more fall, nor even the possibility of falling anymore, but the good and acceptable Will of God, His divine and holy Will, remains eternally.<br /><br />In the meantime, it is already ours in Christ, and it is already perfected in Him for us; while, at the same time, we remain sons and daughters of Adam, children of dust and of death, because we are sinful and unclean. I haven't heard anyone suggest that, as sinners, we don't need the Law now; nor have I ever questioned that need, which is patently obvious in myself.<br /><br />But as I think about what it means to be "in Christ," and as I then think of the Life that He has lived for us, by grace, it is not true that He "needed" the Law for the sake of curbing His flesh or crushing any sin of His own. It is true that He voluntarily submitted to the Law, in order to fulfill it for us. Is this not what we do, in order to love and serve our neighbor and glorify God?<br /><br />Our Lord actually commands us to do as He has done for us, to love and serve each other, as He has loved and served us. We are to be like Him, even now, as we look forward with longing expectation to the Resurrection and the revealing of the sons of God. We are to follow the example that He has left for us. In this way, the Apology indicates, the Kingdom of God is already being manifest on earth, though in weakness under the Cross.<br /><br />The command and the example of our Lord do accuse and condemn us, because, in our sinful flesh, we are always falling short of His glory and His righteousness. But that is not all we are, nor is that all there is to it. For it is no longer we who live, but Christ who lives in us. And Christ, even now, in us, has the ear of a disciple: He listens and learns the Word of God, and He speaks and confesses and lives a godly life according to it.<br /><br />Our Lord was taught the Law in His life as true Man, by His earthly parents, by His pastors and teachers. "He grew in wisdom and stature, in favor with God and man." Not because He was sinful, or lacking in away way, but in order to become "our childhood's pattern," as the hymn puts it; in order to be and to live as "true Man," in the way that God intended Man to be and to live in the beginning: As one who listens to, and live by, every Word that proceeds from the mouth of God. He has done it, that we might live in Him, the Word-made-Flesh. And, I would here suggest, that, living in Him by grace through faith in the Gospel, we do also hear and heed His Word concerning "faith toward Him and fervent love toward one another."Rev. Rick Stuckwischhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10664716292792101540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-54291471363253357152013-12-10T06:08:16.090-06:002013-12-10T06:08:16.090-06:00I will put up my thoughts here for you.
He was in...I will put up my thoughts here for you.<br /><br />He was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary, and was made man.<br /><br />The distinction that I had been taught at the Sem, that I think is useful, is this. Christ, in and of Himself, has no sin. (I trust that isn't a scandalous position). Rather - He who knew no sin became sin for us -- that is, Homo Factus Est. That He was not just incarnate, bearing flesh because it would be fun, but that He became Man, born under the Law. It is language of the humiliation of our Lord - that the Word who gave the Law would need to learn it. It is the old language of the active and passive obedience of Christ.<br /><br />So, when you are looking at the Incarnation, you are seeing the Great New Man take up the old... so that we who are in the Old may put on the New, both now while we are both sinner and saint, but especially then when Christ alone is our head and all sin and old is forgotten, for the former things have passed away. <br /><br />This is what Jeremiah would have us look forward towards: " For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts. And I will be their God, and they shall be my people. And no longer shall each one teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the Lord,’ for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest, declares the Lord. For I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.”<br /><br />In the resurrection, we will not need the teaching of the Law, we will not need to ponder or be instructed in morality... not because morality ceases or the Law is bad - but because we will know it... we will be following Christ our Head completely, and as He will not fall like Adam we will never fall again. In the resurrection, we will have total and complete active and passive obedience, because when we see Him, we will be like He is.<br /><br /> Rev. Eric J Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17747919365522145094noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-49805788950913600312013-12-08T17:12:35.675-06:002013-12-08T17:12:35.675-06:00I apologize that I have not returned to the discus...I apologize that I have not returned to the discussion or responded to the various comments since this past Wednesday. I appreciate the input and conversation, and I haven't forgotten you all, but have been engaged in other duties and responsibilities. As the Lord so enables, I will reply as best I can in due season. A blessed Advent Tide to one and all.Rev. Rick Stuckwischhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10664716292792101540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-90956842410341672002013-12-08T14:52:09.511-06:002013-12-08T14:52:09.511-06:00Another example of a Forde-ite misrepresenting and...Another example of a Forde-ite misrepresenting and falsifying Lutheran history, not to mention Biblical doctrine.<br /><br />This book totally refutes any claim that Luther did not know and advocate a third use of the law:<br /><br />http://www.cph.org/p-19257-friends-of-the-law-luthers-use-of-the-law-for-the-christian-life.aspx<br /><br /><br />Steve, if you would stop posting nonsense like this and spend more time actually informing yourself of the facts, you'd do yourself a huge favor.Rev. Paul T. McCainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04846468267196335350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-13717460431321270662013-12-07T19:14:05.383-06:002013-12-07T19:14:05.383-06:00I think this is a perspective (by Dr. Steven Pauls...I think this is a perspective (by Dr. Steven Paulson) with a few ideas that maybe either side has not given a lot of thought to:<br /><br />http://wordandworld.luthersem.edu/content/pdfs/21-3_The_Law/21-3_Paulson.pdf<br /><br />Thanks.Steve Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13251554325064300307noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-48857366415252698252013-12-06T08:45:34.685-06:002013-12-06T08:45:34.685-06:00Steve, I'll continue to preach in such a manne...Steve, I'll continue to preach in such a manner that is faithful to the command, example and promise of preaching that is replete throughout Holy Scripture, that is clearly articulated and confessed in the Book of Concord and that is modelled by all faithful orthodox Lutheran preachers both past and present.<br /><br />We'll leave the denial of a proper place for Christian parenesis, a denial of Scripture on these points and a denial of our Lutheran Confessions to those who think they know better than these sources, Gerhard Forde and his disciples included, of course.Rev. Paul T. McCainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04846468267196335350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-20388365788359688102013-12-05T19:14:51.552-06:002013-12-05T19:14:51.552-06:00Christian freedom is not what led to the problems ...Christian freedom is not what led to the problems in the ELCA, Rev. McCain.<br /><br />They have thrown God's Word overboard for more generous words.<br /><br />We take God's law seriously. So seriously that we know that we are not up top the task of making use of it (the law). But it exposes us…and drives us to Christ.<br /><br />"Christ is the end of the law…"<br /><br />But, go ahead, try and preach this 3rd use at people. You'll either make them proud…or lead them to despair.Steve Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13251554325064300307noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-11978409683733299222013-12-05T18:39:29.249-06:002013-12-05T18:39:29.249-06:00Forde's drumbeat for "freedom from the La...Forde's drumbeat for "freedom from the Law" and his denial of the third use of the Law played directly into the rhetoric and beliefs used to prop up the ELCA's rejection of the notion that any sin can, or does, separate us from God, etc. etc.<br /><br />His rejection of the third use along with the anti-third use crowd that came into the ELCA from Seminex planted the seeds that bore their poisonous fruit in recent years.<br /><br />That's what I'm referring to.Rev. Paul T. McCainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04846468267196335350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-46030736192741836042013-12-05T16:20:57.092-06:002013-12-05T16:20:57.092-06:00I'd have to disagree with Brother Paul. Forde&...I'd have to disagree with Brother Paul. Forde's teaching did not lead to liberalism in the ELCA. Forde was rather conservative. However, he was conservative similar to how Immanuel Kant was, by today's standards, conservative. And therein lies his problem.<br /><br />In fact, if you look closely at Forde's teachings, there are remarkable similarities with his view of the Law and Kant's philosophical views of it. One sees this especially in Forde's discussion of sexuality, where it almost appears that Forde has Kant's Lectures on Ethics and Philosophy of Law open in front of him as he writes.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-45942336248763815102013-12-05T15:43:46.851-06:002013-12-05T15:43:46.851-06:00I wonder if the idea of the Decalogue remaining wi...I wonder if the idea of the Decalogue remaining with us even in the coming life has to do with the Decalogue reflecting the good nature of God - which, of course, endures forever.<br /><br />The thought has grown ever stronger with me in recent years, although I am sure that some would brand this a highly unLutheran commingling of law and Gospel, that the Ten Commandments in their actual content actually express the Gospel, only in the imperative form. <br />The First Commandment, obviously, points to God as the only Saviour, and prohibits us from trying to be our own. Now, that is Gospel.<br />The Second Commandment is a call to call upon the name of the Lord and thus be saved.<br />The Third Commandment is a call to receive His salvation, as it is given to us in Christian Gospel and Sacrament worship.<br />The Fourth Commandment points out that the God of our salvation, Father of Christ, after whom all fatherhood is named, whose kingship is our salvation, is the final and ultimate Authority - and as His throne stands forever, so does our salvation.<br />The Fifth Commandment points out that He who died for us is the God of life. <br />The Sixth Commandment points to His steadfast and sacrificial love for His Church, expressed in that He binds to us by His promise in a covenant that is sacred, as marriage is sacred (I still do not quite get that "testament rather than covenant" thing - which may very well be something ethnic on my part) rather than by our fleeting feelings, as in a passing fling .<br />The Seventh Commandment points to God as all Giver of all things good, and Provider of all that we (really) need.<br />The Eighth Commandment points to God as the God of truth. We can trust His promises. And Christ our heavenly High Priest speaks well of us and puts the best construction on everything that has anything to do with us by pointing out to the heavenly Father that our sin is dealt with and done away with by what He Himself has done for us.<br />And the Ninth and the Tenth Commandment point to the complete purity and perfection that is in God, and thus also in the righteousness given to us in Christ - and the perfect peace (shalom) that is His heavenly Kingdom.<br /><br />Again, just some thoughts.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11921246275185939140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-76980673854900505112013-12-05T15:35:44.005-06:002013-12-05T15:35:44.005-06:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11921246275185939140noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-74807177138405799072013-12-05T15:08:58.603-06:002013-12-05T15:08:58.603-06:00Dear Rev. Sawyer: I consider Luther’s discovery of...Dear Rev. Sawyer: I consider Luther’s discovery of the meaning of the Gospel one of the greatest miracles wrought by God – comparable to the conversion of Saul. But I am sure that there were things from his life before the “Tower Experience” that stuck to him throughout his life. In our time, we have seen the collapse of the Soviet and Nazi regimes. Both had some adherents who genuinely believed in their ideology without any thought of gain for themselves. When these regimes disappeared, not all of these people were able to abandon their old ideology completely; in fact, some were not able to do so at all. I am sure that something like that happened to Luther, because before he ever heard of the Gospel, he had a lifetime devotion to the Law, and specifically to the Decalogue. The church of his time encouraged this, because it was easier to retain power with fear rather than with freedom. I have not read the work you refer to so whatever I write about it is based on the brief excerpt you offered. <br />Is the Decalogue “written in the hearts and minds of all”? In all likelihood Luther did not include non-believers in the “all”. But where does this come from? From Jeremiah 31? The word used there is “Torah”, which includes the Decalogue, but is not limited to it.<br />I really don’t know what Luther means in writing that the “Decalogue will remain with us even in the coming life.” I do know that when our Lord was asked which was the greatest commandment, He responded with two, neither one of which is in the Decalogue. <br />Peace and Joy!<br />George A. Marquart<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-36565885957651633452013-12-05T15:07:47.495-06:002013-12-05T15:07:47.495-06:00Jais Tinglund:
I do not make the rules for this bl...Jais Tinglund:<br />I do not make the rules for this blog, but I suspect that on this Lutheran blog you may quote anyone who does not explicitly forbid the drinking of beer.<br />George A. Marquart<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-26413014017230602462013-12-05T14:35:32.006-06:002013-12-05T14:35:32.006-06:00We've all seen how well that Forde inspired &q...We've all seen how well that Forde inspired "freedom" has worked itself out in the ELCA.Rev. Paul T. McCainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04846468267196335350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-88815535354646263492013-12-05T13:53:21.444-06:002013-12-05T13:53:21.444-06:00You guys' "3rd use" stuff and your b...You guys' "3rd use" stuff and your biblicism keeps you chained to that peg. You might have a longer chain than others…(some semblance of freedom)…but you are still burdened.<br /><br />Try freedom some day. It's great! There's no going back once you have tasted it.Steve Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13251554325064300307noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-21466109852813732192013-12-05T13:50:59.778-06:002013-12-05T13:50:59.778-06:00I LOVE Forde.
He realized that it is ALL …or noth...I LOVE Forde.<br /><br />He realized that it is ALL …or nothing.<br /><br />Something that other Lutherans would do well to learn.Steve Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13251554325064300307noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-31643927231685263192013-12-05T12:56:36.306-06:002013-12-05T12:56:36.306-06:00It is also instructive, it seems to me, that Luthe...It is also instructive, it seems to me, that Luther can view the Decalogue as both “law” and not “law.” He says that here it accuses (on account of sin), but in the coming life, it will not, since we will have no sin. <br /><br />“The Decalogue, however, is greater [than circumcision] because it is written in the hearts and minds of all and will remain with us even in the coming life. Yet not so circumcision, as baptism also will not remain, but only the Decalogue is eternal – as such, that is, *not as law* - because in the coming life things will be like what the Decalogue has been demanding here. Finally, the Decalogue is also nobler for that reason that it brought Christ from heaven. For if there had not been the Decalogue that accused and condemned us, for what, I ask, would Christ have descended?” Luther, Solus Decalogus Est Aeternus, Thirty-Fourth Argument<br />Rev. Rick Sawyerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09041697125084579483noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-6088033126658755832013-12-05T12:17:08.670-06:002013-12-05T12:17:08.670-06:00Forde...enough said.Forde...enough said.Rev. Paul T. McCainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04846468267196335350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-75029267125609580902013-12-05T10:35:29.749-06:002013-12-05T10:35:29.749-06:00What we have here is Law/Gospel reductionism, pure...What we have here is Law/Gospel reductionism, pure and simple.<br /><br />Whereas Paul, Augustine, Luther, Melanchthon, Chemnitz, Gerhard, et al. recognized that the Bible itself speaks of the Law in different ways (say, negatively when Paul juxtaposes it against the Gospel, or positively in other passages of Scripture), the Erlangenists, neo-Lutherans, Fordeans, et al. reject this because it doesn't fit into their closed theological "system" (a system which, by the way, German theological faculties borrowed from the sciences in the 18th and 19th centuries). <br /><br />Law/Gospel for this crowd is a theological strainer of sorts, and those portions of the Bible (even if pertaining to the Law) that don't come through it are rejected. The Law can't be positive, because it is negative. <br /><br />Missouri is on the heels of another theological crisis: Seminex redux. Time to do some work, folks.<br /><br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-71144181982590723202013-12-05T09:43:21.347-06:002013-12-05T09:43:21.347-06:00Steve,
I think it would be superfluous if "3...Steve,<br /><br />I think it would be superfluous if "3rd use" referred to the content of the Law (wouldn't distinguishing between 1 and 2 be superfluous too, then?). But that's not what we mean (see above).<br /><br />Can it be abused for legalism? Yes. But that is abuse and must be rejected.<br /><br />The Law of God is not a fox; it is not evil or bad. It is good and holy (as I'm sure you would readily acknowledge, obviously). Moreover, (to engage your metaphor) the law would only be "let back into the henhouse" if it were given some role in our justification. The third use as taught in the Formula specifically denies this in the strongest possible terms.<br /><br />I hope that helps some. Be careful of Forde. He has a lot of great stuff, but he also denies the vicarious atonement of Christ, which is a most grievous sin.Rev. Joshua Hayeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05265502288700164812noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-92032593612907193172013-12-05T09:05:09.430-06:002013-12-05T09:05:09.430-06:00I think this sermon (by my pastor) nails it:
http...I think this sermon (by my pastor) nails it:<br /><br />http://theoldadam.com/2013/12/03/the-freedom-of-the-christian/Steve Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13251554325064300307noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4778905687600416321.post-244539384102917052013-12-05T09:03:04.407-06:002013-12-05T09:03:04.407-06:00My own pastor, Mark Anderson, who is an ardent For...My own pastor, Mark Anderson, who is an ardent Fordeian.<br /><br />Also, of course, Dr. Luther himself in his Heidelberg Disputation.Steve Martinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13251554325064300307noreply@blogger.com