Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - RDPreus

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 79
1
Your Turn / Re: Vaccine Discussin
« on: April 09, 2021, 01:33:39 PM »
If I've already had the virus do I need to be vaccinated against it?  I've heard from several sources that if you've already had it and get vaccinated the side effects can be quite serious.
Consult with your doctor in this situation. He may need to consult experts in order to give you sound advice.

Thanks, Dan.  That's good advice.

2
Your Turn / Re: Vaccine Discussin
« on: April 09, 2021, 01:32:08 PM »
I'm pretty sure I've had it.  Doesn't that make me immune? 

3
Your Turn / Re: Vaccine Discussin
« on: April 09, 2021, 12:49:03 PM »
If I've already had the virus do I need to be vaccinated against it?  I've heard from several sources that if you've already had it and get vaccinated the side effects can be quite serious.

4
Your Turn / Re: Pesach 2021
« on: March 28, 2021, 12:20:14 AM »
Pastor Preus:
Jesus Christ ~is~ the Passover. 
Me:
For us, maybe, “a” Passover. My Jewish friends have “The” Passover. And we have that one too, unless we deny our roots in that event.

St. Paul writes, "For indeed Christ, our Passover, was sacrificed for us" (1 Corinthians 5:7b)  Christ has always been the Passover.  To reject Christ is to reject the Passover.  Your Jewish friends have something that they may call the Passover, but it is not the Passover.  Christ is.  That's what Paul says.

5
Your Turn / Re: Pesach 2021
« on: March 27, 2021, 06:18:07 PM »
I like that kind of history, Pastor Weedon, but for me the Passover stands on its own. I can theologically choose not to break the connection with the Passover lamb and the Lord, but I also choose not to stress it in ways that have it overwhelm the Passover itself.

Jesus Christ ~is~ the Passover.  1 Corinthians 5:7

6
Your Turn / Re: God's regard
« on: March 25, 2021, 07:41:38 PM »
Luther's commentary on the Magnificat is wonderful reading.  One thing I love about Lent is that we sing the Magnificat every week at the midweek Lenten services.  Mary is truly an icon of the Church in faith and humble obedience.

7
Another paragraph from Schroeder's article.


If we have everything else in the Christian heritage, all the other articles of faith, but do not have this, we have nothing. At least, we have nothing specifically Christian to stand on. The opposite is also true. So long as we still have this one gratis gift, we may let everything else go— “life, goods, fame, child, and wife”—and we have not lost out on anything. In practice Luther applied this line from “A Mighty Fortress” to theology itself. If a supposed article of faith has nothing to do with this one article, it will become a competitor with the solus Christus. Whatever we let go without letting go of this one gracious gift is no real loss; we are still fully and truly Christian, and we dare let no one convince us we are not. If someone tries to do so, he is criticizing not us but our Lord Jesus Christ—the consequences of which, for the critic, are disastrous.


Are abortions and same-sex marriages part of what "we may let … go"? Going further, if they have nothing to do with the one article, are they in competition with solus Christus?


Discussions about the morality of abortions or same-sex marriages are good to have. To connect a position to Christianity ends up destroying the Christian faith.

Does not the Christian religion stand opposed to abortion and same sex "marriage"?  How does saying so destroy the Christian faith?  How does it militate against justification through faith alone?

8
As I recall, there was a Senator Simon from Illinois some years ago who belonged to the LCMS and took a public position in favor of legal abortion.  I believe he was the brother of a prominent minister in the LCMS.  At the time, the LCMS had not spoken as clearly against abortion as she has in recent years. 

9
I can't access the NY Times article, but I searched the internet for things about Ron Johnson and it seems the left can't stand him for the usual reasons the left can't stand conservatives.

10
I am amazed at how many Roman Catholic politicians there are that reject basic teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.  Biden used to show at least a little bit of respect for the consciences of fellow Catholics and others who did not want their tax dollars to fund abortion.  Now he is fully in support of the left wing agenda on abortion.  Well, that's the price you pay to get the Democratic Party to nominate you for president.  I wonder what Biden's pastor thinks about this.

11
Your Turn / Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
« on: March 18, 2021, 04:56:53 PM »
What benefits does Baptism give?
It works forgiveness of sins, rescues from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare.
Which are these words and promises of God?
Christ our Lord says in the last chapter of Mark: “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” (Mark 16:16)

I think I'll go with the Catechism over textual critics who reject the testimony of the vast majority of Greek manuscripts.


Then you also have to deal with the following verses: 17 "These signs will be associated with those who believe: they will throw out demons in my name. They will speak in new languages. 18 They will pick up snakes with their hands. If they drink anything poisonous, it will not hurt them. They will place their hands on the sick, and they will get well.”


Those "vast number of Greek manuscripts" that include the longer ending come from the 5th-15th centuries. The two oldest Greek manuscripts (4th century) do not include it. They are not in an Old Latin manuscript (4th-5th century) nor in a Syriac manuscript (4th-7th century). Even older authors: Clement of Alexandria (215) and Origen (254) show no knowledge of the longer ending. Eusebius (339) and Jerome (420) attest that the ending was absent from almost all Greek copies of Mark that they knew.


A number of copies from the 10th-15th centuries mark the longer ending with asterisks or obeli, which was the conventional way of indicating a spurious addition to a document.


Both the external evidence (oldest manuscripts) and internal evidence (at least nine words that occur no where else in Mark,) and the awkward transition from v. 8 to v. 9, favor vv. 9-20 as later additions.


However, questions remain: Did the evangelist intend to end the gospel at v. 8? Was there another sheet of manuscript that was lost?


I think that the ending at v. 8 fits well the themes of Mark's gospel.


While 16:16 may be a favorite verse, other verses are not so favorable. Similarly, even though the Gospel of Thomas is not canonical, there are verses that are likely to go back to Jesus - and many that do not.

Irenaeus quotes from Mark 16:19 in Against Heresies.  That's in the 2nd century.  In P 45, just a few pages of Mark's Gospel survive.  What do we have of Mark's Gospel in P 45 (about 225 A.D.) corresponds closest to Codex Washingtonianus in the 4th or 5th century which contained the long ending of Mark.  It is reasonable to assume that P 45 did as well.

12
Your Turn / Re: Easter and the End of Mark's Gospel
« on: March 18, 2021, 01:46:22 PM »
What benefits does Baptism give?
It works forgiveness of sins, rescues from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare.
Which are these words and promises of God?
Christ our Lord says in the last chapter of Mark: “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” (Mark 16:16)

I think I'll go with the Catechism over textual critics who reject the testimony of the vast majority of Greek manuscripts.

13
Your Turn / Re: Coronavirus news
« on: March 15, 2021, 01:22:15 PM »
I don't encourage or discourage vaccinations.  It's a personal decision based on many factors.  I think I already had Covid.  I've never been tested, so I don't know for sure, but I think I had it and I assume I won't get it again.  Should I get a vaccine?  I don't know.  I do know that it's my decision to make, not the government's.  I think this is where we find a divide in America.  How much power does/should the government have over our lives?  What's ironic is that we conservatives are the liberals on this question while liberals are not so liberal.  Personal freedom entails the right to choose whether or not to submit to a medical procedure.  On vaccines, I am pro-choice.   

14
Your Turn / Re: When “homosexuals” entered the Bible.
« on: March 13, 2021, 03:27:33 PM »
About forty years ago, LCUSA published a report that delineated differences between the LCA/ALC on the one hand and the LCMS on the other.  One of the differences was that the LCA/ALC viewed doctrinal inflexibility as a sin for which we should repent while Missouri disagreed.  That difference persists to this day as the conversation on this thread illustrates.  Can we be certain that our doctrine is true?  Or is this carnal pride?  Speaking as a conservative, I concede that there are among us conservatives bullheaded and arrogant people for whom doctrinal correctness is a weapon to be used against others.  On the other hand, among liberals there are those just as bullheaded and arrogant.  Strong doctrinal conviction is not arrogance.  While the faithful are always plagued by doubts, doubt is not faith.  It's no virtue.  Doctrinal certitude is no vice.

15
Your Turn / Re: When “homosexuals” entered the Bible.
« on: March 12, 2021, 07:56:17 PM »
The Bible clearly defines marriage as the lifelong union of one man and one woman.  If we read Genesis 1 & 2 as an historical account of the first man and the first women and we take to heart what the Lord Jesus says in Matthew 19 it is quite clear.  Jesus refers to what God has joined together in Matthew 19:6.  Marriage is God joining a man and a woman together.  With respect to same sex "marriage" we cannot say that God has joined them together.  Regardless of what the civil authorities say, same sex "marriage" is not marriage and no Christian should say that it is.


No where does Genesis 1 & 2 limit God to joining the man to one woman. The ancient Jews, for whom this was sacred scriptures, never interpreted it that way. Men were being joined to many women as wives, slaves, and concubines. Their children were often blessed by God.

Jesus is the one who interprets Genesis 1 & 2 to refer to God joining one man to one woman.  What Jesus says settles it.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 79