Posted on 08/15/2010 2:28:32 PM PDT by SmithL
Again: Why aren’t scriptures enough? Why do you need a Confession?
Where does it come from in your church?
Scripture is enough, the Confessions are drawn from them. Originally, they were used against charges from Catholics, who coincidentally don’t believe in Scriptural authority. Nowadays, they are helpful for those looking for a church home. They tell what Lutherans believe and profess. Other churches do this as well. Catholics tell what their church believes, but I’m not sure if they tell the origin of those beliefs. Lutherans welcome the comparison and even provide the references for the ‘Bereans’ out there. As the Holy Spirit guides people into all truth perhaps they will visit a Lutheran congregation and worship with us.
It came as a response to Catholic attempts at re-establishing Rome's hegemony over the Reformation churches. It is done. There is current human authority in matters of church practice, not doctrine.
I meant, that you and I don't speak the same language. Some other Protestants have a different view on silence in Scripture and adiaphora. I can't help that. Some differ in worship practices.
Names please?
There is current human authority in matters of church practice, not doctrine.
Who determines what is the difference between practice and doctrine - for example whether women can be clergy. Is that practice or doctrine?
Why isn't just giving them a Bible enough?
Scripture is enough, the Confessions are drawn from them.
Drawn? Why not just have a list of scriptures without the other words? Do you really need to tell them what you "draw" from the scriptures?
Could they read the same scriptures and come up with a doctrine quite different from your Confession?
Right! There is no difference between a murderer and a liar or a person having impure thoughts, etc. A newborn baby is born into sin. Sin condemns us to death. The Good News is Jesus on the cross paid our sin debt.
AHA! This is the “faith alone” concept. I mean no disrespect, but it just doesn’t work for me.
But, thanks for the concise explanation.
Yeah. With “Totally Depraved” babies in the womb thrown in for good measure.
For whom?
I believe women clergy exclusion is church practice, but I could be wrong. There are preachers on this thread.
When you are using the Word of God as a reference, it would seem proper to give the credit and the glory to Him.
Could they read the same scriptures and come up with a doctrine quite different from your Confession?
Of course, as the Catholics have done for almost 500 years. Except that they don't draw doctrine exclusively from God's Word, and they have a magisterium. Many others do as well, I refer you to an earlier post on this subject.
Why isn't just giving them a Bible enough?
We do give out Bibles, and participate in the distribution with others like the Gideons of millions more, because of the power of the written Word. As you have noted 'others' have a different take on what the Bible says. That is their issue, not mine. I'm only concerned with them coming to faith in the finished work of my Lord and Savior Jesus. That message resides within the pages of Scripture, accessible to all through the work of the Holy Spirit.
The 'church' saves no one. It is made up of all believers in Christ and Jesus hold the membership rolls in the Book of life. Despite this, salvation comes from grace through faith and that is God's work, not man's.
Those who responded - those who decided and wrote your confession.
I believe women clergy exclusion is church practice
How about gay clergy?
As a "reference"? Why do you need any thing else? Isn't it your view that Scripture has authority all on its own? Does your doctrine, written by men, that references Scripture have more authority? What's it's purpose?
As a former lutheran, you know how to google. Try Lutheran confessions.
How about gay clergy?
I assume you're asking about males. If they aren't practicing homosexuality and remain chaste, what is the problem? That said I don't know of any. But as with hetero clergy, unchastity will get you run.
Yes, as a reference, most Catholics I've met aren't this dense. However, if you are sincerely perplexed, I am not too surprised since doctrinal origin hasn't always been a Catholic strong point.
Does your doctrine, written by men, that references Scripture have more authority? What's it's purpose?
The authority for the doctrine comes from Scripture, otherwise it is invalid. Again, I believe the Catholic intention here are to be purposely obtuse to lend more credibility to their practice of making up doctrine of whole cloth, without Scriptural justification, hence the need for 'sacred traditions'. Can't find it in the Bible, make it up and create a sacred tradition to uphold it.
And round and round you go.
No, it's not obtuse at all: it is making the same point. Scripture has no "authority" for doctrine on its own - if it did there would be no need for doctrine referencing scripture, no need for doctrine at all.
Doctrine is made by men based on these men's interpretation of scripture, which they reference. Same scripture, same reference, different doctrine.
Here is the ELCA's Statement on Sexuality.
Same Lutheran foundation, same confessions and Book of Concord, same Scriptures. Very different doctrine.
The only difference that makes a difference in doctrine and practice is in who has authority to say so.
The same is true in your church. This is my same and only point.
You may go round and round in your position again now.
Only to a Catholic does basing doctrine on Scripture make no sense. I think we're done.
It should be clear that my point is doctrine all depends on who is doing the “basing”.
If that’s not clear by now, well… I think we’re done too.
thanks for your discussion.
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.