Enthusiasm Breeds Even More Enthusiasm. "I Dreamed a Dream."

WELS has a cheerleader,
someone eager to grease the guillotine.

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Gather the Kindling - WD40 the Guillotine. The WEL...":

Classic. It's not enough that the Intrepid Lutherans, those who have not been excommunicated for being faithful to Christ's chief doctrine of one Justification solely By Faith Alone, still consider the antiChristian COP to be Confessional and Conservative. Now the COP demands that none of them support or condone the one they've labeled a heretic.

But the tigers come at night
With their voices soft as thunder
As they tear your hope apart
As they turn your dream to shame.

You would think they would be more concerned about the (W)ELS Pastor who recently confessed to his congregation that he had a dream where he was told that Christ is not going to come soon and because of that he is convinced his church should bring people to church in any way possible.

His previous training from MLS and a (W)ELS emergent church growth effort gave him the training and determination to jetison the Liturgy, Law and Gospel readings, children attending the service and a renewed appreciation for pietistic growth groups.

Judgement has come upon the (W)ELS and the apostate leaders will require, make that demand, that the laity gorge themselves upon the carrion of the New Age Emergent carrion. 

"Let's throw a big, opaque blanket
over this nastiness. Erase Loehe and Stephan.
Who put that mask on Walther?"

The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod - Synod Board endorses plans to strengthen CUS schools

The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod - Synod Board endorses plans to strengthen CUS schools:

Synod Board endorses plans to strengthen CUS schools

By Joe Isenhower Jr.

ORLANDO, Fla. -- At its Nov. 15-16 meeting here, the LCMS Board of Directors heard and endorsed plans for strengthening in a number of ways the 10 LCMS colleges and universities that make up the Concordia University System (CUS).

CUS Interim President Rev. Dr. Alan Borcherding presented to the Board a plan for CUS reorganization that he called "CUS 2.0." -- a plan that would enhance the responsibilities of the CUS board and involve CUS presidents. He said that both those groups are developing the plan, based on needs they recognize.

Borcherding said that the schools' presidents are excited about CUS 2.0 because "they want a more structured way to operate common activities, to learn and plan for the future and to strengthen all [10] institutions." And "they want coordination with the CUS board to work together on important activities."

"Why should you care about CUS 2.0?" he asked the Board. "Well, I think this is an approach to strengthening the institutions. It will strengthen our board's work and I think it will provide more opportunities when an institution gets in trouble. Because if the presidents are working together as a group, I think they will be much more inclined to see how a problem might be solved.  The presidents are very eager to continue on this."

Board of Directors members voiced support for the plan, including Synod President Rev. Dr. Matthew C. Harrison, who said it is "addressing the right questions." Harrison also complimented Borcherding for initially proposing the plan.

The Board also decided to join with the CUS board in proposing overtures for this year's LCMS convention for changes to Synod Bylaws that would address the need for members of the CUS board and those schools' boards of regents to be qualified in areas such as theology, education, finance, real estate and other specialties.

Also addressed in LCMS Bylaw proposals is removing a number of details about faculty employment that background information for the overtures describes as a "parallel layer of regulation that serves no useful purpose." The background material also states that certain other Bylaw stipulations concerning policies about "the relationship of faculty members to the Synod [are] appropriate to remain in the [Bylaws]."

The overtures will be submitted to the Office of the President to be included in the Convention Workbook with other overtures for consideration by floor committees that will draft resolutions for the July 20-25 Synod convention in St. Louis.

"Jointly submitting these overtures to the Workbook is a powerful statement of the importance of these matters for the welfare of the Synod and its institutions of higher education," the boards' resolution notes.

'A very unique time'

"We're in a very unique time, as we get our thoughts together after the November election," Harrison said as he began his report during the Board meeting.

He said that "on the one hand, we have positives. In this sense, we have a more diverse country ... that re-elects a black president. I think this shows that racism is less a factor in our country. ... Those are certainly positives.

"On the downside," Harrison said, "the real challenge is the fact that you have connected with that election a president and an administration that has policies ... so inimical to ... fundamental convictions of natural law regarding sexuality.

"And also, policy decisions that are really going to be making it more and more difficult for us as Christians and occupiers of Christian institutions to be major players at the table in a range of services."

"I have no illusions about us being able to fundamentally affect culture in America," Harrison continued. "So I think our mode will simply be an aggressive defense -- as aggressive as we can mount with our current limitations and challenges. But the good thing is that we do have a lot of friends in these issues."

Harrison reminded Board members of demographic data presented during their meeting in August that shows the LCMS is not planting churches in most of the nation's 100 fastest-growing counties.

He spoke of dramatic drops in the number of young people in the Synod since 1980 -- as well as in child baptisms.

"We continue to confirm half or less of the [children] we baptize," he noted.

And, on a more positive note, he shared results of a pan-denominational poll in which Synod youth were at or near the top percentages with responses about the frequency of talking about their faith and their decisions to continue involvement in their home congregations.

Harrison asked Board member Rev. Dr. Victor Belton to share his impressions of the International Conference on Confessional Leadership, Oct. 31-Nov. 2 in Peachtree City, Ga., which gathered confessional Lutheran leaders representing 22 million members.  The event was sponsored by the Synod and funded by Thrivent Financial for Lutherans.

'On the world stage'

Belton responded that it "was an unparalleled meeting of the heads of Lutheran churches throughout the world -- unparalleled in the history of Lutheranism. It squarely places us as the prime player on the world stage for the advancement of confessional Lutheranism on the planet."

Harrison added that several "key ... ecumenical partners" also attended the conference, and that "it was good for the International Lutheran Council partners [there] to look beyond themselves."  He pointed out that a number of deaconesses participated in the conference.

"It was a really a great event," Harrison said.

Also reporting to the Board were:

• Wyoming District President Rev. Richard Boche, on the work of the Resolution 8-07 Task Force that is studying that resolution adopted by the 2010 Synod convention and will make recommendations in a number of areas the resolution addresses. They include general principles of viability for an LCMS district, the purpose and function of a district and how to improve the districts' efficiency and coordination with others.
The resolution also called for "an implementation plan for any recommended changes that will address [the districts'] staff ... and financial operations."
The task force has so far held two meetings.
"At present, nothing has been decided; we're still gathering information," Boche said before Board members took time to fill out a survey for the task force.
• The Rev. Randall L. Golter, who was installed Oct. 25 as the first executive director of the LCMS Office of International Mission.
"This is a privilege for a big sinner like me," Golter told the Board. "We as the LCMS have the privilege and opportunity to get on the wagon to be Christ's Church as a prophetic voice worldwide." He said, "we also need to communicate the story of Christ's mission to the church."
• Barbara Below, an assistant to Harrison, who provided an update about the 2013 Synod convention.
She said that work is progressing in forming floor committees and that so far, some 150 overtures for convention action had been proposed.

Other resolutions adopted at the November Board meeting resolve to:

• receive the unqualified audit of the national Synod for fiscal year 2011-12.
• create a legal entity -- Concordia International South Africa -- to "better support and facilitate the work of [LCMS] mission workers" in Africa, according to the resolution.
• increase KFUO Radio's capital budget request (from $371,610 to $669,977) to cover costs associated with that LCMS ministry's office and studio relocation from the campus of Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, to the LCMS International Center. That increase will be offset by a corresponding reduction in this year's operating budget.

Joint BOD/COP session

The Board of Directors was one of several groups to hold meetings before the 2012 Lutheran Church Extension Fund Fall Leadership Conference here Nov. 16-18.

As is the custom for their November meetings in recent years, the Board and the LCMS Council of Presidents (COP) met for a joint session -- this time on Nov. 15. COP Chairman Rev. Dr. Larry Stoterau and Board Chairman Rev. Dr. Robert Kuhn co-chaired that session.

On its agenda were presentations by Borcherding; Mark Hofman, executive director of Mission Advancement for the Synod; Chief Administrative Officer Ron Schultz; and Sherri Strand, general [legal] counsel for the Synod, who spoke during an executive session.  Wrapping up the two groups' time together was a question-and-answer period.

Borcherding reviewed the CUS board's proposed bylaw recommendations on governance that he later presented to the Board of Directors, gave an update on CUS enrollment and finances, and offered a five-year outlook for the CUS schools.

Hofman described Mission Advancement's operations and provided a status report on those operations.

Schultz spoke about Board of Directors policies -- many of which deal with agencies of the Synod, including districts. He pointed out that each district president has received a copy of those policies.

Posted Dec. 19, 2012

'via Blog this'

---

From Someone:

Harrison got the CUS to assume their own debt rather than have the synod HQ pay $2 million. The decision was made in Nov at that Orlando meeting at the Gaylord resort, but didn't get out until the Dec issue of the LCMS Reporter came out in mid-December. Sometime in that period you'll recall that hits on the LCMS seminary fraud page went astronomical with hits. So I'd imagine there are plenty of people who think that the mole caused all these reforms, and cost the CUS $2 million, and cost the seminaries a lot of embarrassment.

---

Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel has left a new comment on your post "The Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod - Synod Board...":

Ichabod -

I'm perplexed! Why would the LCMS president be so concerned? Here, is a portion of what was reported and what he said:

>>>>>> ....... Harrison reminded Board members of demographic data presented during their meeting in August that shows the LCMS is not planting churches in most of the nation's 100 fastest-growing counties.

He spoke of dramatic drops in the number of young people in the Synod since 1980 -- as well as in child baptisms.

"We continue to confirm half or less of the [children] we baptize," he noted....... <<<<<<<

No need to worry. Perhaps, chief "universal objective justification" apologist, Dr. David Scaer, should come to the encouraging rescue and should remind President Harrison of the Missouri Synod's battle hymn:

"Our UOJ, Our Help in Ages Past"..............

Extra Nos: Will the real oddball please stand up?

Extra Nos: Will the real oddball please stand up?:


Will the real oddball please stand up?



I, along with Dr. Jackson, the Ichabod, have been called an oddball by a Lutheran Internet blogger. The actual quote by Martin Yee can be found here, at Beggars All Reformation run by a good Internet acquaintance, James Swan.

No one calls you an oddball unless the person is opposed to what you stand for - and since I am known as an anti-UOJ, I can only assume that the gentleman who called me by that label must be pro-UOJ. I am not deluded in thinking I am well liked by people, I am not. Now,  I have been to his blog and I could not detect if he has his own articulation of UOJ since most of his posts are bits and pieces of items normally from various authors, i.e., theologians or scholars, and since he recommended to James Swan to read Marquart on UOJ, I can safely assume Yee accepts the authority of the UOJ masters.

So let me consider some of the creative ways UOJers are using Scripture to promote the idea that all have already been justified, declared righteous and hence, forgiven automatically at the Cross.

The first attempt was in Romans 4:25. In this post I have outline why their favorite verse does not teach their theory but rather that if an individual swallows such interpretation, he/she must swallow other inconsistencies against Scripture. Indeed, this is where the Synodic Lutherans of USA are quite peculiar to the rest of the Lutheran world. In fact, they are peculiar also to the rest of the Protestant world.  Only the subscribers to UOJ take Romans 4:25 to mean that by that verse the whole world even those yet to be born are already justified.

The second one is Colossians 2:14 found in this blog post by a member of Steadfast Lutherans [sic] (so they call themselves) found here.  Let me repeat what was said and let me put my emphasis on a bad interpretation of Col 2:14

This is to say, there would be nothing real for faith to receive and cling to. When we talk about the objective nature of justification, the terms used relate to Christ’s work as it satisfies the legal requirements of the Law with the whole of mankind in view. That is, the record of debt against the world, with all its legal demands, has been blotted out (Col 2:14), the sins of the world absolved, and this pardon is now freely offered to all in the Word and Sacraments. Some will receive through God given faith this gift to their joy, while others will sadly continue to reject this gift to their own damnation (Mark 16:16)

I have reacted to this interpretation and you will find my counter discussion of this found in my posts, here and here. I have continued to reflect on this passage over the past months and in this occasion I shall add more argument why Col 2:14 is being misused in that quote.

According to Pierce, by virtue of Col 2:14, all legal demands against the world are gone; the Law has no more teeth to bite anyone. Something fishy is going on in here because the word “world” is being used without qualification.  Is this true, that the world has already been absolved of the Law’s demands? If so, why do we baptize anyone? Scripture says that sin is transgression against the Law. If the Law has no more claims on anyone, even perhaps a Christian, why do we confess our sins and why do we have the promise that if we confess them God, cleanses and forgives (1 John 1:9)?

If we read the whole context of Col 2:14, i.e, verses 8-14 inclusive we see that St. Paul was referring to the Christian, it is only to the Christian where the demands of the Law have been thwarted because as v.12 says he/she has been baptized, meaning the sinner has been incorporated into Christ by that Means of Grace. St. Paul was addressing the Christian living in Colossia. The thwarting of the Law’s demands happens only to the believer and not to the whole world without qualification.

This is sometimes where I find how UOJers are like Calvinists in the reverse order. When the Bible uses pronouns, like “us”, we” and they are a referent to the Christian, the UOJer interprets it to mean the whole human race. On the other hand when the pronouns “us”, “we” as a generic referent to the human race, the Calvinists confine it to believers.   It is only through the JBFA Lutheran that I find there is consistency and respect for the language of Scripture.

Scripture interprets Scripture, in fact according to St. Paul which I have stated in the said posts, it is the Christian who is not under the Law, because he is now under grace -  Romans 6:14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace.

Who is now under grace? It is the believer, the sinner who trusts in Christ. It is the one united with Christ who is freed from the claims of the Law because he/she has died with Christ in baptism. The Law has no more claim on dead people yet only those in whom the Means of Grace have been applied are the ones declared dead by St. Paul in Romans 6.

So here once again, we see a peculiar way of taking Scripture found in Col 2:14.

Please do not get me started on Ephesians 2:15.  Luckily no one has yet attempted to say the same thing in the Ephesian passages.

So I say, who is the real oddball here? The UOJ Lutheran or the JBFA Lutheran?


'via Blog this'

---

Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel has left a new comment on your post "Extra Nos: Will the real oddball please stand up?":

Dr. Cruz -

In one comment posting, you rip the "universal objective justification" security blanket, to shreds! You aptly expose the untoward foolish and false hermeneutics of those who oppose Scripture's and Luther's "justification by faith alone:"

I quote you:

>>>>>>> ...... If we read the whole context of Col 2:14, i.e, verses 8-14 inclusive we see that St. Paul was referring to the Christian, it is only to the Christian where the demands of the Law have been thwarted because as v.12 says he/she has been baptized, meaning the sinner has been incorporated into Christ by that Means of Grace. St. Paul was addressing the Christian living in Colossia. The thwarting of the Law’s demands happens only to the believer and not to the whole world without qualification....... <<<<<<<<

I agree. You are not the "oddball." But, those who stubbornly continue in their anti-Scriptural teaching of "universal objective justification (UOJ); they are the bizarre ones! May the good Lord have mercy on them and may His Holy Spirit convict them of their sin. May they confess their sin of molesting Scripture and forsake their error!

Nathan M. Bickel

www.thechristianmessage.org
www.moralmatters.org

"Next you will criticize my reptilian hands, Pastor Bickel."

---

Daryl Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Extra Nos: Will the real oddball please stand up?":

Dr. Cruz reiterates what Paul writes in vs. 4 and 8 (NIV):

(4) I tell you this so that no one may deceive you by fine-sounding arguments.

(8)See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.

An Act of God? - One WELS Pastor Asked. Wis. Residents Mourn Loss of Historic Dunn County Church to Fire

Wis. Residents Mourn Loss of Historic Dunn County Church to Fire:

'via Blog this'

---

bruce-church (https://bruce-church.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "An Act of God? - One WELS Pastor Asked. Wis. Resid...":

St. John's (WELS), rural Colfax, WI:

http://goo.gl/maps/PVshF

http://goo.gl/maps/bY7Yz

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=508073719236985

Gather the Kindling - WD40 the Guillotine. The WELS COP Will Examine the Intrepid Lutheran Pastors on UOJ

From the WELS DP:
Another item involved the Intrepid Lutheran website.  There is a concern that those who still wholeheartedly support this group by being “signers” are also supporting a pastor who has been removed from the ministerium of the WELS for doctrinal reasons, because he has been given a forum on their website.  

The consensus was that each district president should approach pastors in their district who are listed as “signers” on the website and determine whether or not they are in support of the false doctrine that the suspended pastor espouses.     

Paul McCain loves UOJ as much as Jon-Boy Buchholz.
Missouri and WELS share the same media hero - Mark and Avoid Jeske.

***

GJ - The WELS COP took years to address Mark and Avoid Jeske's problems. Buchholz went from Nay! to Yay for Mark! in a matter of weeks, speaking in favor of their New Age theologian from the floor of the convention. I burst into tears...of laughter.

The question is - will pastors confess justification by faith or COP a plea to UOJ to stay safe?

This new Inquisition is a great idea, because justification by faith and world absolution are completely opposed to one another.

The question is - do these pastors agree with the Scriptures, the Book of Concord, and Luther?

---

Dimestore Liam has left a new comment on your post "Mequon Connection in Jeske Exit":

Wow, I know a lot of those guys... I had no Idea the WELS had gotten so much crazier since my exit in 1992! Mark Jeske played in a "Christian Rock" band with a guy I knew, I met him at the '85 Youth Rally; Tom Jeske was my tutor at MLS that Fall... R.e. Mequon '78, Mark Porinsky was my Pastor from 1979-1985; Kenneth Jahnke was the emissary who had to explain why I was kicked out of St. Mark's, Flat Rock MI & then why Pastor Gore & I were 86d from the WELS a couple of years later, poor guy... 

As for Mark Freier, I got in a shoving match with him in the chapel at HVLHS in 1987 because he was mis-quoting scripture in his sermon and I stood up and called him a liar, hahaha... He jumped down from the pulpit and took a swing at me. That wasn't the last time I had a run-in with him, either. That guy is a complete lunatic! Oh yeah, I also just finished reading Mark Braun's "A Tale Of Two Synods" immediately before getting online this morning, which is how I ended up on this website again... 

Ask Mark Freier about WELS helping to start CrossRoads Community Church,
which is now Evangelical Covenant.

The Evangelical Covenant Church is a rapidly growing multiethnic denomination in the United States and Canada with ministries on five continents of the world. Founded in 1885 by Swedish immigrants, the ECC values the Bible as the word of God, the gift of God’s grace and ever-deepening spiritual life that comes through a faith with Jesus Christ, the importance of extending God’s love and compassion to a hurting world, and the strength that comes from unity within diversity.

The Evangelical Covenant Church is:

• Evangelical, but not exclusive
• Biblical, but not doctrinaire
• Traditional, but not rigid
• Congregational, but not independent

GJ - The Michigan District of WELS should try honesty and just join the ECC. So should WELS.

---

bruce-church (https://bruce-church.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "Gather the Kindling - WD40 the Guillotine. The WEL...":

Hey, that sounds like the WELS--coming down from preaching from the pulpit and throwing a punch :)

Meanwhile, here's a dictionary to help interpret the last comment:

---------
86 (term):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/86_(term)

..."86","86'd", "86ed", or eighty-sixed when used as a verb in American English, is a slang term for refusing service or getting rid of something.

-----------

Mark Braun: Effective Church Shrinkage Principles:

http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2011/05/mark-braun-wels-wlc-soil-testing-to.html

------------

HVLHS (WELS area Lutheran HS): Huron Valley Lutheran High School, Westland, Michigan:
http://www.hvlhs.org/local-congregations.htm 

------------ 

McCain's Excuse for Plagiarizing Papal Materials and Passing Them Off as His Own

bruce-church (https://bruce-church.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "A Mere Mention? - Or a Pattern of Constant Promoti...":

McCain's rationale for sharing [GJ - plagiarizing] all the Catholic and Eastern Orthodox material is the Vincentian Canon, but it's a tautology (see link below). McCain says that he's supposedly copying Luther, the Christian East and High Anglicanism in using the Vincentian canon. McCain also seems to be copying John Henry Newman, to which McCain refers, in that he wants to "return the" Lutheran "Church to many Catholic beliefs and forms of worship traditional in the medieval times."

-------------

Like Walther, Pope Otten is against suing Christians,
unless he is suing Christians.
Otten's foundation has net assets of $400,000.
Missouri should sue him - they made him independent.

McCain writes: There is, then, such a thing as rightful Lutheran appeal to the Vincentian Canon, the determination of orthodoxy in virtue of what has been taught everywhere, always, and by everybody—quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est. This un-Roman Catholic way of doing theology (check out John Henry Newman’s Development of Doctrine!) might not in fact be the sole preserve of the Christian East and High Anglicanism:

http://cyberbrethren.com/2010/09/25/why-did-martin-luther-c-f-w-walther-and-most-every-other-orthodox-lutheran-theologian-believe-the-blessed-virgin-mary-remained-always-a-virgin/

-------------

One prominent Orthodox theologian from the 20th century (indeed, some say the greatest Orthodox theologian of the last century) who thinks the Vincentian Canon is not up to the task:

http://acroamaticus.blogspot.com/2011/03/vincentian-canon.html

Strictly speaking, the Vincentian Canon is something of a tautology. The word omnes (all) is to be understood as referring to those that are orthodox. In that case the criterion loses its significance.

--------

John Henry Newman
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Henry_Newman

This influential grouping of Anglicans wished to return the Church of England to many Catholic beliefs and forms of worship traditional in the medieval times to restore ritual expression. 

***

GJ - The origin of LCMS papalism can be found in the professors of both seminaries. 

When denominations get old, they lose their faculties.

David Scaer is one of the papalists at Ft. Wayne. McCain brags about working under him when he stayed in school for post-graduate MDiv work. (Who does that?) Scaer is one of the top theologians in Indiana.

The Roman Catholic Church has done a masterful job of propagandizing the Protestants, making them believe that Holy Mother Church cannot be a mere regional sect (as each SynCon part is) but a world-wide cult. It must be very old (not just a century or two old) and have thousands of enormous theological books backing its claims, as Rome does.

The SynCons wrote their little square books for one generation and stopped. Now they write essays, copy and paste blogs,  and look for ways to flee the shrinking reservation.

Lutherandom today has no argument against the Fuller Seminary dolts or the Roman Catholic seducers, because their overpaid and underworked leaders have abandoned the efficacy of the Word in the Means of Grace. 

Without Isaiah 55, without Luther, without the Instruments of God's grace, nominal Lutherans can only repeat what other sects and cults have claimed.

"My friend Herman Otten will sell you
The Facts about Luther 
and Valleskey's Church Growth textbook.
Mwa-ha-ha."

The First Sunday after Epiphany, 2013. Be Not Conformed

http://www.normaboecklerart.com

The First Sunday after the Epiphany, 2013

Pastor Gregory L. Jackson

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/bethany-lutheran-worship

Bethany Lutheran Worship, 8 AM Phoenix Time

The Hymn # 277     I heard the voice            4:57

The Confession of Sins
The Absolution
The Introit p. 16
The Gloria Patri
The Kyrie p. 17
The Gloria in Excelsis
The Salutation and Collect p. 19
The Epistle and Gradual             Romans 12:1-5
The Gospel           Luke 2:41-52          
Glory be to Thee, O Lord!
Praise be to Thee, O Christ!
The Nicene Creed p. 22
The Sermon Hymn # 396   Oh For a Faith   4:18

Be Not Conformed

The Hymn #130   O Jesus King of Glory   4:49

The Preface p. 24
The Sanctus p. 26
The Lord's Prayer p. 27
The Words of Institution
The Agnus Dei p. 28
The Nunc Dimittis p. 29
The Benediction p. 31
The Hymn #267   If God Had Not                      4:61

KJV Romans 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. 2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God. 3 For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith. 4 For as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office: 5 So we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another.

KJV Luke 2:41 Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the passover. 42 And when he was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast. 43 And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it. 44 But they, supposing him to have been in the company, went a day's journey; and they sought him among their kinsfolk and acquaintance. 45 And when they found him not, they turned back again to Jerusalem, seeking him. 46 And it came to pass, that after three days they found him in the temple, sitting in the midst of the doctors, both hearing them, and asking them questions. 47 And all that heard him were astonished at his understanding and answers. 48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with us? behold, thy father and I have sought thee sorrowing. 49 And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist ye not that I must be about my Father's business? 50 And they understood not the saying which he spake unto them. 51 And he went down with them, and came to Nazareth, and was subject unto them: but his mother kept all these sayings in her heart. 52 And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man.

http://www.normaboecklerart.com

First Sunday After Epiphany

Lord God, heavenly Father, who in mercy hast established the Christian home among us: We beseech Thee so to rule and direct our hearts, that we may be good examples to children and servants, and not offend them by word or deed, but faithfully teach them to love Thy Church and hear Thy blessed word. Give them Thy Spirit and grace, that this seed may bring forth good fruit, so that our homelife may conduce to Thy glory, honor and praise, to our own improvement and welfare, and give offense to no one; through the same, Thy beloved Son, Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with Thee and the Holy Ghost, one true God, world without end. Amen.

Be Not Conformed

KJV Romans 12:1 I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.

When Epiphany itself was over, I read Luther’s sermon (in parts) and found so many paragraphs that were perfect for today. Likewise, the sermon for this Sunday, on the epistle, fits today’s world just as well as it did the late Medieval era.

Luther explained this as two kinds of holiness – the kind loved by unbelievers and the kind loved by God. There is a great fondness for the sanctity of the world today. It is a secular holiness and also an outward holiness in the church.

The secular holiness is based upon the thousand commandments of the Left. That concerns supposed global warming, which is a fraud; being a vegetarian but wearing leather; loving every religion except Christianity, etc. The more someone obeys these commandments, the more that person is honored, respected, and quoted.

Likewise, there is the outward show of holiness in the visible church. The Church of Rome has always had the corner on this market. Holy communion – the Mass – is a great show, truly entertaining. This sanctity is based on works, very showy, empty, and hypocritical. Everything except faith is important. Apart from faith, the display is everything.

God despises all this because the Gospel is given for us to believe, not as something to display apart from faith.

Christians wonder why faith in Christ is met with so much opposition and ridicule, especially from those who profess allegiance to the Savior. That is the sacrifice, also called the cross. The faithful must be willing to give up honor, friendship, even property in bearing the cross.

Our Old Adam says, “This should not be. The apostates are rolling in luxury.” Thus the subtle temptation begins. It may not affect someone at first, but later it does. Those who give in to these thoughts become part of that large group despising anyone who suffers anything disagreeable because of faith. They are the best Stormtroopers to go over and say to a friend with the same concerns, “Don’t be a martyr. This is not important.” One LCMS professor said, “Pick the fights you can win.” I would not like to follow him into battle. He sounded like the last generation of Muslim Janissaries who became so used to their luxuries that they entered battle looking for the best escape route out. And they ran. They ran so far away.

2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.

This spiritual wisdom is completely at odds with current wisdom, as it was 500 years ago.

The wisdom of today is, “Be conformed and you will do very well indeed. And everyone will love you. Those who don’t – ignore them.”

Finding this out is like passing through a wall of fire and stones and mud, only to emerge on the other side and say, “That was worth it.”

I can truthfully say that for a decade I thought it had been useless to point out the fallacies of universal absolution (UOJ) or justification without faith. It was like singing a solo in a very small coat closet. Faithful laity got me going on the project and many things were done to expose the issues, but progress was zero as people simply batted it debate away. Some understood and made real contributions, only to be verbally beaten into conformity again.

In many places it meant giving up a congregation, friends, and respect. That wears on people, to be despised, laughed at, and ridiculed.

But there is no question today that justification by faith is being confessed again, little by little. It was before, but often people kept under the radar, as they say. Now more has happened, thanks to God’s efficacious Word, and many are enjoying the benefits.

The renewal of your mind

God gives us faith through the Gospel, so it is a gift of the Holy Spirit, but He has also given us minds so we grow in our understanding.

The old leaven is conformity, so that must be purged by the Gospel. There are hundreds of false conceptions based upon conformity with the world. Renewing the mind means seeing the Word of God as our gracious Heavenly Father giving us the truth and ejecting those false concepts, then adapting those concepts in all our thinking, no matter what another person says.

Conformity means believing those things, more or less, but always trimming and compromising so no one is offended or reacts against one particular article of faith.

I recall a layman becoming angry and saying, “You don’t believe in the immortality of the soul, do you?” He was a prospect, supposedly. That was said with great force and aimed at making me back down.

As I mentioned too often – two Roman Catholic theologians said, “You believe in the actual resurrection of Christ? What about the Virgin Birth?” Then “There is no use talking to you.” Both are still active leaders in the Church of Rome, American edition.

I have to shorten this today, but there it is – either the wisdom of the world or the wisdom of God. One brings temporary earthly riches. The other brings temporary earthly discomfort and the cross. But conformity brings eternal destruction while the wisdom of God leads to forgiveness, joy, and eternal life.

http://www.normaboecklerart.com

Do the Intrepids Recognize the Chief Article of the Christian Faith?Where Were the Intrepids When Jon-Boy Was Removing Pastor Rydecki?

One of these dogs is guilty.

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "WELS Divided over NNIV. Martin Luther (sic) Colleg...":

Douglas Lindee states in the post, "...is to invite a rift with nearly all other confessional Lutherans in America."

And in his comments, "the issue isn't at all a minor one. It is a matter of fundamental Christian doctrine."

What is it with these so-called Intrepid Lutherans where they refer to the Lutheran Synods as Confessional after they recently excommunicated faithful Pastor Paul Rydecki (himself a founder of the Intrepid Lutherans) for teaching and defending one Justification solely by the gracious gift of Faith in Christ alone?!!

Then he has the gall to refer to the NNIV's perversion of Scripture as a matter of fundamental Christian doctrine. Where's the Intrepid (Douglas Lindee, Father Spencer etc) disgust and public action against the excommunication of a faithful pastor for teaching and defending the CHIEF AND CENTRAL ARTICLE OF CHRISTIAN FAITH?

It's all such a joke. 

***

GJ - I understand Buchholz is on thin ice, now that he has emulated Pope John the Malefactor in the Little Sect on the Prairie.

The laity have to step up because the clergy are spineless. 

"If only I had some power." 

Mark Schroeder does - and he has been silent for years. Plush salary and benefits - no leadership.

WELS Divided over NNIV. Martin Luther (sic) College and Mequon Against Mark "The Helpless" Schroeder

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 9, 2013

LCMS Commission on Theology and Church Relations (CTCR) recommends against NIV 2011

More Sharing ServicesShare|Share on facebookShare on myspaceShare on googleShare on twitter

In December of 2011, a similar headline appeared on Intrepid Lutherans: ELS doctrine committee recommends against NIV 2011. In that post, we reported that the Doctrine Committee of the Evangelical Lutheran Synod (ELS), “based on preliminary study of the NIV 2011” upon which they found “significant changes to the text of the NIV (1984)... diminish[ing] the accuracy of the NIV,” proceeded to publicly “recommend against the use of the NIV (2011).”

In August of 2012 – coincidentally, shortly following the last of the WELS 2012 District Conventions – the Commission on Theology and Church Relations (CTCR) of the Lutheran Church - Missouri Synod (LCMS) issued a similar, though more lengthy, statement expressing their opinion on the strength of the NIV 2011 as a suitable translation for use in the congregation, specifically with reference to its rendering of the Biblical texts in gender inclusive language. The statement was issued at the request of LCMS Synod President Rev. Matt Harrison. The name of this document is CTCR Staff Opinion on Inclusive Language in the New International Version (2011). They conclude on page four:

...[W]e find the NIV's Committee on Bible Translation [CBT] decision to substitute plural nouns and pronouns for masculine singular nouns and pronouns to be a serious theological weakness and a misguided attempt to make the truth of God's Word more easily understood. The use of inclusive language in NIV 2011 creates thepotential for minimizing the particularity of biblical revelation and, more seriously, at times undermines the saving revelation of Christ as the promised Savior of humankind. Pastors and congregations of the LCMS should be aware of this serious weakness. In our judgment this makes it inappropriate for NIV 2011 to be used as a lectionary Bible or as a Bible to be generally recommended to the laity of our church. This is not a judgment on the entirety of NIV 2011 as a translation – a task that would require a much more extensive study of NIV 2011 – but an opinion as to a specific editorial decision which has serious theological implications.

(NOTE: in all quotes from this Statement, emphasis is mine)

Leading up to this conclusion, the August 2012 CTCR Statement makes plain that the issue of Gender Neutrality is not one that hasn't already been thoroughly investigated by the LCMS. Unlike WELS, they are not just beginning to discuss it as a Synod, but took the issue of gender neutral Bible translation seriously when it first emerged in the 1990's. Responding to gender neutral editorializing of the Bible, such as that taken up by the translators of the New Revised Standard Version, the CTCR examined the issue closely and at length, issuing in 1998 a document entitled, Biblical Revelation and Inclusive Language (BRIL). The August 2012 CTCR Statement on the issue of inclusive language in the NIV 2011 quotes at length from this 1998 document. It states that, while BRIL “recognizes that 'language evolves' and so takes no position with regard to the propriety of inclusive language in everyday life,”

[t]he concern that led to [BRIL] had to do with the removal of gender specific language from translations of the Holy Scriptures... and the substitution of gender inclusive language that is not present in the original languages and texts of Scripture. In this regard [BRIL] takes a clear position grounded in the understanding of revelation itself that is held by us as Lutheran Christians:

This raises a different set of difficulties, for the Scriptures are not merely the rendering of a culturally based understanding of God. They are to be regarded as revelation whose author is finally God himself. Moreover, not only the concepts of Scripture but the very words of Scripture have been given to the biblical authors to write (1 Cor. 2:9-13; 2 Tim. 3:16; 2 Pet. 1:19-21; Jer. 30:2). While the church will certainly wish to accommodate modern sensibilities and translate anew where the language of the Scriptures allows, the church is not free to alter the language of revelation.

Quoting from BRIL, the August 2012 Statement of the CTCR goes on to say,

It is in the Word made flesh (John 1:14) that God has fulfilled “his purpose for humankind's eternal destiny.” This purpose, in one particular Person born of Mary at a particular time and place, is revealed in the particularity of Holy Scripture and most specifically “in the written testimony of the evangelical and apostolic writings of the New Testament.” The specificity and particularity of the Word made flesh and the sacred Scriptures compel the church to “resist demands to change the words of Scripture or to replace them with words derived from common human experience, cultural predilections, or the ideas of philosophers and lawgivers.”

Biblical Revelation and Inclusive Language considers two aspects of the debate about masculine language in the Scriptures: the language that is used to refer to God and the language that is used to refer to humanity (both Christians and humanity in general). With regard to biblical language about God, the CTCR concludes: “If one wishes to translate accurately the words of the Scriptures, the language of both the Old Testament and the New Testament is clear enough concerning the terminology about God. God and his Spirit are consistently referred to in masculine terminology.” With regard to language about people, BRIL asserts that whenever the Scriptures speak about people, the texts should be translated in a way that is consistent with “the language which the biblical authors in fact use.”

While merely interpreting concepts and rendering them “with words derived from common human experience, cultural predilections, or the ideas of philosophers and lawgivers” (the way that NIV 2011 does), instead of translating the actual words and grammar “which the biblical authors in fact use,” doesn't adversely affect the meaning of a translation in every case, the August 2012 CTCR Statement stresses that this ideology of translation itself violates our understanding of Biblical revelation in principle, and that this is sufficient grounds for rejecting it, and thus also the NIV 2011. Nevertheless, this brief statement goes on to give two “very significant” examples where the meaning of Scripture is, in fact, adversely affected by the gender inclusive principles espoused by the translators of the NIV 2011. Rather than reproduce the entire Statement here, I leave it to the reader to download and digest its contents. Again, those documents are as follows:

CTCR Staff Opinion on Inclusive Language in the New International Version (2011)
Biblical Revelation and Inclusive Language (BRIL)

It should not escape the readers notice that, based on the CTCR's appeal to the Lutheran understanding of the very nature of Biblical revelation, for WELS to continue embracing the NIV 2011 as a viable translation that is not only suitable but recommended for use in our pulpits and in the homes of our laymen for private study, and which will serve as the Standard translation in all WELS publications – from devotions to hymnals, catechisms and commentaries, and even theological works published by Northwestern Publishing House (NPH) – is to invite a rift with nearly all other confessional Lutherans in America over the nature of Biblical revelation itself, including the doctrines of inspiration, inerrancy and perspicuity.