ICHABOD, THE GLORY HAS DEPARTED - explores the Age of Apostasy, predicted in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, to attack Objective Faithless Justification, Church Growth Clowns, and their ringmasters. The antidote is trusting the efficacious Word in the Means of Grace. John 16:8. Isaiah 55:8ff. Romans 10. Most readers are WELS, LCMS, ELS, or ELCA. This blog also covers the Roman Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodoxy, and the National Council of Churches.
Zoom link -> https://us06web.zoom.us/j/85187471604?pwd=ciuMQhDJEfpE0wgXeKLYsTgDJ8lvbi.1
YouTube link will be here, after conversion -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pl5NYptONwA
I mentioned having more Biblical doctrine lessons. One person said, "Why not a seminary?" I thought about and said, "We have to save Zoom webinars, so that has to work."
Nothing was easier than a conversion to YouTube, so here I am with the first session. I am going to have an outline each time, posted in advance. I will limit my talk to 30 minutes, and we can have discussions after.
We have not fixed dates and times yet, but that will develop. Ichabod will be the primary post, which will be copied on Reformation Seminary, making the lectures orderly rather than lost in all the other posts.
Foundational Concept of the Bible -
The Efficacy of the Word - The Holy Spirit at Work in the Word and Sacraments
1. Dogmatics books tend to multiply themselves and promote battles.
2. Genesis 1 and John 1 are examples of efficacy, John explaining Genesis.
3. A. Hoenecke - The Word never without the Spirit, the Spirit never without the Word - that is sound doctrine. His Dogmatics were much more like the German Reformation.
4. The Reformation does not include Zwingli-Calvin, the changes in England, or anywhere else. The Reformation itself was established by Luther, Melanchthon, and Chemnitz.
a. Luther was the foundation, the result of many years of monastic work and teachers.
b. Melanchthon served as his opposite in temperament, the same in Biblical doctrine.
c. Martin Chemnitz studied under both and solidified their work through the Book of Concord, Examination of the Council of Trent, etc.
Efficacy
Effectual, powerful: energes
1 Corinthians 16:9 (KJV) For a great door and effectual is opened unto me, and many adversaries.
Philemon 1:6 (KJV) That the communication of thy faith may become effectual by the acknowledging of every good thing which is in you in Christ Jesus.
Hebrews 4:12 (KJV) For the word of God quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart.
Operations, working: energema
1 Corinthians 12:6 (KJV) And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.
To show forth, work: energew
Matthew 14:2 (KJV) And said unto his servants, This is John the Baptist; he is risen from the dead; and therefore mighty works do show forth themselves in him.
Mark 6:14 (KJV) And king Herod heard ; (for his name was spread abroad:) and he said, That John the Baptist was risen from the dead, and therefore mighty works do show forth themselves in him.
Romans 7:5 (KJV) For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death.
1 Corinthians 12:6 (KJV) And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.
1 Corinthians 12:11 (KJV) But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.
2 Corinthians 1:6 (KJV) And whether we be afflicted, for your consolation and salvation, which is effectual in the enduring of the same sufferings which we also suffer: or whether we be comforted, for your consolation and salvation.
2 Corinthians 4:12 (KJV) So then death worketh in us, but life in you.
Galatians 2:8 (KJV) (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)
Galatians 3:5 (KJV) He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
Galatians 5:6 (KJV) For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.
Ephesians 1:11 (KJV) In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:
Ephesians 1:20 (KJV) Which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set at his own right hand in the heavenly ,
Ephesians 2:2 (KJV) Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh
in the children of disobedience:
Ephesians 3:20‑21 (KJV) Now unto him that is able to do exceeding abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that worketh in us, {21} Unto him glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end. Amen.
 |
| Could they improve by teaching the Gospel instead of this drivel? |
The list of departing LCMS colleges is growing:
The biggest - or foulest charade - has been the supposed distance between the Walther synods (LCMS-WELS-ELS-CLC) and the ELCA. Thrivent unifies the worst of them all.
Abortion is an attack on the weakest of the weak, the poorest of the poor - the unborn. There is no excuse for this among Christian churches. Thrivent is just as much for this genocide as ELCA.
How can God bless church bodies that work together against the unborn? Our indifference to this horrible crime is the ultimate display of apostasy - falling away from the Scriptures and God's Creation by the Word.
The synodical managers (they are not leaders) think that money makes the world go around. They dedicate their lives, their fortunes, their sacred honor to -- wait, that is a contradiction. They dedicate their lives to their comforts, their luxuries, and their positions of honor. They want no interference with that singular goal. That is why they lick the boots of Thrivent, pleading that the financial demands are not too burdensome.
+++
Long ago, I noted from a Kurt Marquart article that the synods were being handed a huge sum of money from AAL (one of the two insurance companies merging). We lived downhill from Martin Luther College, WELS, so I looked for the materials on this AAL Church Membership Initiative.
"To the reader: This binder contains a summary of activities and findings of the Church Membership Initiative funded by AAL. A meeting in February, 1993 at Orlando involving congregational participants and church executives was phase three. This summary focuses on the findings of phases one and two. As is the nature of such studies, emphasis is on research and statistical analysis. Such studies do provide helpful indicators. Such an approach, however, cannot directly reflect spiritual reality, which must remain with the judgment of those dispensing the means of grace. Phase four--utilization of information coming out of the first three phases--is open ended for whatever church body [ELCA, WELS, LCMS] will determine such use to be."
Rev. Wayne Borgwardt, WELS, Church Membership Initiative, Narrative Summary of Findings, 1993, Aid Association for Lutherans, 4321 N Ballard Road, Appleton, WI, 54919-0001, June 30, 1993. Five copies at Martin Luther College (WELS). BV 4523 .C48 1993 c.5
"In 1970 there were 500,000 more baptized members of Lutheran congregations than was the case in 1990. The Church Membership Initiative project was undertaken to understand and address this decline... [GJ - This is still the saddest or funniest example of Thrivent helping out and making everything worse.]Contact:
Church Membership Initiative, Narrative Summary of Findings, 1993, Aid Association for Lutherans, 4321 N Ballard Road, Appleton, WI, 54919-0001, June 30, 1993.
+++
There is a direct connection between AAL and LB erasing "Lutheran" during their merger, so they could say Thrivent! and forget about the past. The Big Five have revealed their incompetence to be Christian organizations who have no compassion for the unborn, no ability to proclaim the Means of Grace, only results from their Father Below.
 |
| KJV Isaiah 40 - "11 He shall feed his flock like a shepherd: he shall gather the lambs with his arm, and carry them in his bosom, and shall gently lead those that are with young." |
Epistle Sermon for Palm Sunday ->Complete Epistle Sermon Here
12. They are startled by this expression also: “Christ thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” Now, at first sight these words do not seem to refer solely to Christ, since even the devil and his own, who continually aspire to equality with God, do not think their action robbery in spite of the testimony of their conscience to the contrary. But with Paul the little word “think,” or “regard,” possesses a powerful significance, having the force of “perfect assurance.” Similarly he says (Romans 3:28), “We reckon therefore that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law”; and (1 Corinthians 7:40), “I think [deem] that I also have the spirit of God.” But the wicked cannot boast it no robbery when they dare take upon themselves the form of God; for they know, they are satisfied in themselves, that they are not God. Christ, however, did not, nor could he, think himself not equal to God; in other words, he was confident of his equality with God, and knew he had not stolen the honor.
Paul’s words are chosen, not as an apology for Christ, but as a severe rebuke for those who arrogate to themselves the form of God against the protest of conscience that it is not their own but stolen. The apostle would show how infinitely Christ differs from them, and that the divine form they would take by theft is Christ’s by right.
13. Paul does not use this expression, however, when he refers to Christ’s assumption of the servant form which is his, not by nature, but by assumption. The words produce the impression that Christ took by force something not his own. Paul should be expected to say: “He held it not robbery to assume the form of a servant.” Why should he rather have chosen that form of expression in the first instance, since Christ did not assume the divine form, but possessed it as his very own — yes, laid it aside and assumed a form foreign to his nature? The substance of the matter is that he who becomes a servant does not and cannot assume anything, but only gives, giving even himself. Hence there is no warrant here to speak of robbery or of a disposition to look upon the matter in this light.
On the other hand, assumption of the divine form necessarily involves taking, and altogether precludes giving. Hence there is warrant to speak of robbery in this connection, and of men who so view it. But this charge cannot be brought against Christ. He does not render himself guilty of robbery, nor does he so view his relation, as all others must do. Divinity is his by right, and so is its appropriate form a birthright.
14. Thus, it seems to me, this text very clearly teaches that to have divine form is simply to assume in regard to others, in word and deed, the bearing of God and Lord; and that Christ meets this test in the miraculous signs and life-giving words, as the Gospels contend. He does not rank with the saints who lack the divine essence; he has, in addition to divine form, the divine essence and nature. On the other hand, the servant, or servile, form implies acting toward others, in word and deed, like a servant. Thus Christ did when he served the disciples and gave himself for us. But he served not as the saints, who are servants by nature. Service was, with him, something assumed for our benefit and as an example for us to follow, teaching us to act in like manner toward others, to disrobe ourselves of the appearance of divinity as he did, as we shall see.
15. Unquestionably, then, Paul proclaims Christ true God.
 |
| Michael Cooper-White, ELCA Autobiography |
He is currently the interim president of Brite Divinity School, Disciples of Christ, one of the most radical (fastest shrinking) denominations in America. Previously he was president of Gettysburg Seminary, now merged with the Philadelphia Seminary to form United Lutheran Seminary, ELCA.
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/84012706346?pwd=JaQBsS7XzL7aLvwaD3znbGcCFeQuc6.1
 |
| Designed by Norma A. Boeckler |
Epistle Sermon for Palm Sunday ->Complete Epistle Sermon Here
Paul’s words are chosen, not as an apology for Christ, but as a severe rebuke for those who arrogate to themselves the form of God against the protest of conscience that it is not their own but stolen. The apostle would show how infinitely Christ differs from them, and that the divine form they would take by theft is Christ’s by right.
13. Paul does not use this expression, however, when he refers to Christ’s assumption of the servant form which is his, not by nature, but by assumption. The words produce the impression that Christ took by force something not his own. Paul should be expected to say: “He held it not robbery to assume the form of a servant.” Why should he rather have chosen that form of expression in the first instance, since Christ did not assume the divine form, but possessed it as his very own — yes, laid it aside and assumed a form foreign to his nature? The substance of the matter is that he who becomes a servant does not and cannot assume anything, but only gives, giving even himself. Hence there is no warrant here to speak of robbery or of a disposition to look upon the matter in this light.
On the other hand, assumption of the divine form necessarily involves taking, and altogether precludes giving. Hence there is warrant to speak of robbery in this connection, and of men who so view it. But this charge cannot be brought against Christ. He does not render himself guilty of robbery, nor does he so view his relation, as all others must do. Divinity is his by right, and so is its appropriate form a birthright.
14. Thus, it seems to me, this text very clearly teaches that to have divine form is simply to assume in regard to others, in word and deed, the bearing of God and Lord; and that Christ meets this test in the miraculous signs and life-giving words, as the Gospels contend. He does not rank with the saints who lack the divine essence; he has, in addition to divine form, the divine essence and nature. On the other hand, the servant, or servile, form implies acting toward others, in word and deed, like a servant. Thus Christ did when he served the disciples and gave himself for us. But he served not as the saints, who are servants by nature. Service was, with him, something assumed for our benefit and as an example for us to follow, teaching us to act in like manner toward others, to disrobe ourselves of the appearance of divinity as he did, as we shall see.
15. Unquestionably, then, Paul proclaims Christ true God. Had he been mere man, what would have been the occasion for saying that he became like a man and was found in the fashion of other men? and that he assumed the form of a servant though he was in form divine? Where would be the sense in my saying to you, “You are like a man, are made in the fashion of a man, and take upon yourself the form of a servant”? You would think I was mocking you, and might appropriately reply: “I am glad you regard me as a man; I was wondering if I were an ox or a wolf. Are you mad or foolish?” Would not that be the natural rejoinder to such a foolish statement? Now, Paul not being foolish, nor being guilty of foolish speech, there truly must have been something exalted and divine about Christ. For when the apostle declares that he was made like unto other men, though the fact of his being human is undisputed, he simply means that the man Christ was God, and could, even in his humanity, have borne himself as divine. But this is precisely what he did not do; he refrained: he disrobed himself of his divinity and bore himself as a mere man like others.
 |
| Greger's short essays and videos are fun to watch and read. There are many of both on each topic, just fill in the blank. He likes to joke where he can fit in some medical humor. |
I got absorbed in the free essays of Dr. Michael Greger today, so I am going to do more on Reformation Seminary tomorrow.
I was picking up my eye drops and talked to my favorite pharm tech, who was at this Walmart from the beginning, as I was. She was curious about my groceries, so I said, "Blueberries, apples, chick peas..." She said, "Chick peas! What can you do with them!?" She was quite animated. I said, "I enjoy them daily because they are anti-cancer and satisfying." I told her my weight loss and she was stunned, asking for the name of the nutritionists.
Today I was looking at the value of sweet cherries, thanks to Dr. Greger and I looked up chick peas (Garbanzo, aka Cicero Beans). Anti-inflammatory is the word -
https://nutritionfacts.org/video/anti-inflammatory-life-is-a-bowl-of-cherries/
I am not against meat, but I find the thought of eating chicken revolting. I know too much about the industry and see too many trucks filled with crates of half-dead chickens. No wonder our town's nickname is Chickendale, home of Tyson.
As I wrote before, I studied the nutrition. I saw that fast food and highly processed food were robbing me blind financially and wrecking my blood panel results. I really enjoy the food too, just as Charlie Sue does.
My vegetable consultant has pointed out many good ideas about food. He moved me into spices, so I replaced the ancient and unused relics with cumin, turmeric (wild ginger, anti-oxidant), allspice, mustard powder, and ground flax seed.
The beginning of this change was eating walnuts every day, sternly advised by another member. Cholesterol went down to perfect, A1C went up to diabetic, because I put the walnuts on Schwan's Vanilla Ice Cream, a dessert to die for.
I have repudiated eggs and butter by leaving them in the fridge for the last three months, both because of their value in adding fat.
I am no expert on nutrition, but I have followed two doctors who are. That shook me on how important this list is - and I follow it.
 |
| Tune: "Old Hundredth" |
 |
| If the great and wise among the Big Five - ELCA-LCMS-WELS-ELS-CLC (sic) would read, mark, learn and inwardly digest this, they would end their siege against the Chief Article, Justification by Faith. |
America thinks history concerns what happened a few years ago. Let me fill you in on The Social Gospel Movement, which owns the better part of all denominations. I was looking for a dissertation topic when a kindly librarian at Wittenberg College gave me someone to study and a box full of books on the topic of the Social Gospel Movement.
A few men gathered to form the Brotherhood of the Kingdom. At that time, Kingdom was a special word for them, not unlike Growth! is for today's Church Shrinkage Movement. Walter Rauschenbusch was one of the Brotherhood leaders. He was one of the liberal Baptists, very popular among the liberal Protestants. His famous Yale lecture on "The Social Gospel" was a reworking of the Gospel itself - many parallels with the obnoxious Church Growth Movement. The articles of Christianity are simply there to be used for the benefit of the Movement.
The Social Gospel Movement was far to the Left from the beginning. Using the Biblical terms, it was dedicated to changing the meaning of all of them. They wanted the federal government to pass more regulations and the churches to support everything, actually to be lobbyists for all those causes.
President Franklin Roosevelt was very busy in controlling everything and passing would-be-good federal regulations that suffocate us to this day, because they never stop smothering and devouring.
If you run across a Lutheran praising Rauschenbusch, you have identified another Social Gospeler. Their agenda is Socialism or worse, their doctrine is modern Unitarianism at its "best." I have been invited to Unitarian-Universalist congregations to teach twice - not that I would go. They now have a very long radical activist creed that must be obeyed to join. I said, "Thank you, but we have nothing in common."
Readers should be concerned that their Church Growth icons are also radical leftists. The modern Social Gospelers want the Growthers to be lax in doctrine and ruthless in carrying out a caring program of improvement - more like Jane Fonda, a lot less like Luther. The Social Gospelers want everyone to feel guilty about everything, but that is not enough. The complete agenda must be fulfilled so they can add more items.
Do you really think the LCMS and WELS have pushed back the Social Gospel and worse to come? If they have any connection with the Federal Student Loan business, they are sworn to accept and support homosexuals, lesbians, and combinations thereof. How are they different from ELCA?
As I have said before, one WELS pastor almost cried when he heard that our District Pope was on an ELCA board for sending things overseas. I have to prove to another, chapter and verse, how WELS was giving money ($5,000) to the United Nations!
When I could search synodical gift funds through an Internet program (no longer allowed for free), I could see how ice cream money was given to LCMS and WELS and shuffled around so that outsiders did not know where it finally arrived. While they were kicking out a pastor for teaching Justification by Faith, they were also praising and protecting a man who gave them tons of money. They were furious that I had part of the truth printed in Christian News. The whole truth was even worse.
The peewee synods (ELS and CLC) like to posture as so far beyond the LCMS and WELS, but they are also proponents of nest-feathering and shock at how bad the other synods are. Former members have a lot they can tell, and current members keep their silence.
Epistle Sermon for Palm Sunday ->Complete Epistle Sermon Here
9. From these explanations Paul’s meaning must have become clear. His thought is: Christ was in the form of God; that is, both the essence and the bearing of Deity were his. He did not assume the divine form as he did that of a servant. He was, I repeat it; he was in the form of God. The little word “was” expresses that divinity was his both in essence and form. The meaning is: Many assume and display an appearance of divinity, but are not themselves actually divine; the devil, for instance, and Anti-christ and Adam’s children. This is sacrilege — the assumption of divinity by an act of robbery. See Romans 2:22. Though the offender does not look upon such conduct as robbery, it is none the less robbing divine honor, and is so regarded by God and angels and saints, and even by his own conscience.
But Christ, who had not come by divinity through arrogating it to himself, but was divine by nature according to his very essence, did not deem his divinity a thing he had grasped; nor could he, knowing divinity to be his very birthright, and holding it as his own natural possession from eternity.
10. So Paul’s words commend Christ’s essential divinity and his love toward us, and at the same time correct all who falsely assume a divine form. Such are we all so long as we are the devil’s members. The thought is: The devil’s members all would be God, would rob the divinity they do not possess; and they must admit their action to be robbery, for conscience testifies, indeed must testify, that they are not God. Though they may despise the testimony of conscience and fail to heed it, yet the testimony stands, steadfastly maintaining the act as not right — as a malicious robbery.
But the one man, Christ, who did not assume the divine form but was in it by right and had a claim upon it from eternity; who did not and could not hold it robbery to be equal with God; this man humbled himself, taking upon him the form of a servant — not his rightful form — that he by the power of his winning example, might induce them to assume the bearing of servants who possessed the form and character of servants, but who, refusing to own them, appropriated the appearance of divinity upon which they had no claim, since the essence of divinity was forever beyond them.
11. That some fail to understand readily this great text, is due to the fact that they do not accept Paul’s words as spoken, but substitute their own ideas of what he should have said, namely: Christ was born true God and did not rob divinity, etc. The expression “who, existing in the form of God” sounds, in the Greek and Latin, almost as if Christ had merely borne himself as God, unless particular regard be given to the words “existing in,” which Paul contrasts with the phrase “took upon him.” Christ took upon himself the form of a servant, it is true, but in that form was no real servant. Just so, while dispensing with a divine appearance, behind the appearance chosen was God. And we likewise take upon ourselves the divine form, but in the form we are not divine; and we spurn the form of servants, though that is what we are irrespective of appearance. Christ disrobes himself of the divine form wherein he existed, to assume that of a servant, which did not express his essential character; but we lay aside the servant form of our real being and take upon ourselves, or arrogate to ourselves, the form of God to which we are not fitted by what we are in reality.
12. They are startled by this expression also: “Christ thought it not robbery to be equal with God.” Now, at first sight these words do not seem to refer solely to Christ, since even the devil and his own, who continually aspire to equality with God, do not think their action robbery in spite of the testimony of their conscience to the contrary. But with Paul the little word “think,” or “regard,” possesses a powerful significance, having the force of “perfect assurance.” Similarly he says (Romans 3:28), “We reckon therefore that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law”; and (1 Corinthians 7:40), “I think [deem] that I also have the spirit of God.” But the wicked cannot boast it no robbery when they dare take upon themselves the form of God; for they know, they are satisfied in themselves, that they are not God. Christ, however, did not, nor could he, think himself not equal to God; in other words, he was confident of his equality with God, and knew he had not stolen the honor.
