Posted on 08/22/2005 6:26:33 PM PDT by sionnsar
As this piece points out, the churches where you are least likely to hear Scripture read during services are often those where the authority and teaching of Scripture are most emphasized, particularly evangelical churches. Strange, but true. And the writer’s experience is that even Anglican evangelical churches often read Scripture in their worship less.
My personal experience as one with a evangelical/fundamentalist background? My current REC church is the first of my church homes where Scripture is regularly read during services outside the context of the sermon.
I think this is one way is which evangelical-style worship impoverishes itself. As I’ve experienced first hand, there is a power to formally reading the raw word of God in worship. I'd much rather sit and listen to the reading of Scripture than sing one more “praise and worship” song. And Scripture reading is a prominent feature of Jewish and Christian worship through the centuries. Why cut oneself off from that?
Yes, I greatly value the role of Lector, of reading the Scripture lessons aloud during services.
My reading duties begin this Sunday.
Pat was speaking as an American, and assuming our "sword."
As political debate, I really don't have any problems with what he said.
"Both the traditional and modernized Lutheran worship service is little more than a direct lift of the Roman Missal with the Protestant offending portions emphasizing the Eucharistic sacrifice and ministerial priesthood excised.
We even have the same order of readings and chants to be said throughout the year."
Of course. The Lutheran church retained as much of Catholic worship as consistent with its core doctrines. Just because the Catholic church got some things wrong doesn't mean they get all things wrong :)
I agree about Robertson, but he and Falwell are not part of The Blasphemy Network, I don't think.
All I know is that the Catholic Mass has the Liturgy of the Word every day and bible verses are read and the priest discusses the passages and their meaning to the parisioners.
You know, I'm really not sure what your game is, but it's a game. Too bad you aren't funny.
You are not a cowboy. You are not an Arminian.
You don't even make a heck of a lot of sense.
Carry on with your nonsense if you must. I have no power to do anything about it.
But leave me out of it.
Do give my regards to "Helen."
yes I would....that would obligate my caring what youve discussed
I havent reached that point
seems you all share the sams pic for each derision though
sams = same
The problem with Robertson and Falwell is that they are in the media's gunsights. The devil knows that a good way to discredit christianity is to discredit Christians. So, when you see high profile Christians embarrssing themselves or saying stupid stuff, I think we need to realize that the Devil himself is working overtime to destroy their ministries and their witness.
As long as there are Christians, there will be high profile Christians and as long as there are High profile Christians there will be Satan at the ready to assist them in making fools of us all.
If I were the media's go to man for statements on Christianity, I doubt very seriously that I would do as well as either Robertson or Falwell. I'm sure I would have done more than my fair share to embarass the whole of Christianity by some stupid innane remarks that the devil and the media would be more than happy to run with.
Frankly what Robertson said yesterday was ok by me. It was his later apology that was embarrasing. He had nothing to apologize for. The fact is that if Chavez thinks the US is out to assasinate him, then heck, why not assasinate him? Maybe then the next tin-pot dictator will think twice about making negative statements about America.
Why do you guys think that Ghadaffi all of a sudden became our ally in the war on Terror? Because he was terrified.
I agree pro610. If this were Osama bin Laden, then no one would have raised an eyebrow.
This is the socialist MSM protecting one of their own down in Venezuela....as they did with Ba'athist (national socialist) Saddam, btw. I don't know why Christians cannot see that.
There's a critical difference between Bin Laden and Chavez: Bin Laden attacked us.
There is only the extent of the attack.
Are you aware of the evidence linking Chavez to the drug trade in America....he is simply today's version of Manuel Noriega. He is using petro-dollars to destabilize an entire region, supporting both the drug cartel and the marxist rebel movement in neighboring countries.
Therefore, I have no problem -- as a political statement by an American with the right of free speech -- saying that Chavez could be a just target.
At the same time, I could pray for his salvation. I don't consider those contradictory statements. One is political and one is religious.
I don,t disagree with you but in the eyes of God evil is evil.
I agree.
I'm not offended, as a Christian or an American.
If fascists heard that their days were numbered, maybe there would be less fascists in the world.
I trust Hillary Clinton more than I trust WorldNetDaily.
A fact is a fact no matter the source.
The difficulty is in determining fact from assumption from opinion.
Therefore, Hillary Clinton speaking factually or WND speaking factually should cause all to register the facts spoken despite the source.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.