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 - Mike Bennett

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 68
121
Your Turn / Re: On My Mother's Side - Theology?
« on: September 07, 2010, 04:36:42 PM »
Found a version I like better.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRVfr7tP_x4&feature=related

Nobody here wants to address whether this faithfully presents the two natures?

Maybe it's so simple that nobody wants to embarrass me by responding?

Mike Bennett

I, like you, know enough to know that the song is theologically problematic.  And enough to know that I am not the one to start explaining why.  I'd get myself into trouble very quickly with the professional theologians who post here.

I am confident, though, that the lack of responses to your thread is not due to the simplicity of the issues involved.  It's much more likely that the opposite is true.

From the Athanasian Creed:

But it is necessary for eternal salvation that one also faithfully believe the incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore it is the true faith that we believe and confess that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is at once God and a human being. He is God, begotten from the substance of the Father before all ages, and a human being, born from the substance of his mother in this age. He is perfect God and a perfect human being, composed of a rational soul and human flesh. He is equal to the Father with respect to his divinity, less than the Father with respect to his humanity.

Although he is God and a human being, nevertheless he is not two but one Christ. However, he is one not by the changing of the divinity in the flesh but by the taking up of the humanity in God. Indeed, he is one not by a confusion of substance but by a unity of person. For, as the rational soul and the flesh are one human being, so God and the human being are one Christ.

He suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose from the dead, ascended into the heavens, is seated at the right hand of the Father, from where he will come to judge the living and the dead. At his coming all human beings will rise with their bodies and will give an account of their own deeds. Those who have done good things will enter into eternal life, and those who have done evil things into eternal fire.


Kolb, R., Wengert, T. J., & Arand, C. P. (2000). The Book of Concord : The confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church (24–25). Minneapolis: Fortress Press.

I guess I'm thinking that a Person was crucified and rose again, and that that Person had two natures, not to be either confused or separated, and that the part of the song that deals with crucifixion and resurrection gets derailed because of that. 

I didn't have it sharply focused until I was provoked to look up the Athanasian Creed.

Mike Bennett

122
Your Turn / Re: On My Mother's Side - Theology?
« on: September 07, 2010, 03:38:06 PM »
Found a version I like better.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRVfr7tP_x4&feature=related

Nobody here wants to address whether this faithfully presents the two natures?

Maybe it's so simple that nobody wants to embarrass me by responding?

Mike Bennett

123
Your Turn / On My Mother's Side - Theology?
« on: September 07, 2010, 01:49:38 PM »
A friend of mine from high school posted a link to this catchy song on his facebook page:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N5ddoyfn6g4

Being a country music lover I like the sound. 

And the theology was pretty good up to a point, I thought, until the answers to the question:  "What's your plan?" So what do you all think of the theology of the answers to that question, from a two natures theological point of view?  I'm thinking it misses the mark regarding exactly Who died on the cross? and Who rose on the third day?  (Jesus of Nazareth, or God the Son, or both?)  But maybe I'm wrong, or maybe those answers are too big for processing by my human brain.

(I also have a little quibble with the "on my Father's side" answer to the question "Where're you from?"  but it's a relatively minor quibble).

Thanks in advance for your thoughts, and for a rancor-free topic.

Mike Bennett

124
Your Turn / Re: Mosque at Ground Zero?
« on: August 31, 2010, 05:54:24 PM »
From Rodney Stark's book God's Battalions:  In any event, mass murders of Christian monks and pilgrims were common.  An unsystematic list based only on Moshe Gil's immense History of Palestine, 634-1099 includes the following events:
* Early in the eigth century, seventy Christian pilgrims from Asia Minor were executed by the governor of Caesura, except for seven who converted to Islam.
* Shortly thereafter sixty pilgrims, also from Asia Minor were crucified in Jerusalem.
*  Late in the eighth century, Muslims attacked the monastery of Saint Theodosius near Bethlehem, slaughtered the monks, and destroyed two nearby churches.
*In 796 Muslims burned to death twenty monks from the Monastery of Mar Saba.
* In 809 there were multiple attacks on many churches, convents, and monasteries in and around Jerusalem, involving mass rapes and murders.
* These attacks were renewed in 813
* In 923, on Palm Sunday, a new wave of atrocities broke out, churches were destroyed, and many died.
These events challenge the claims about Muslim religious tolerance.  (84-85)

As would an equally long list of witch burnings, pogroms, heretic burnings, forced conversions, and bombings done in the name of Christianity.  The two challenges are equally illegitimate, though each challenge is a salutary reminder that we are capable of mis-using our faith in hideous ways to justify our sinful actions.

Mike Bennett

125
Your Turn / Re: Galatians 3:23--29 and the Emergent Lutheran Synods
« on: August 30, 2010, 12:01:03 PM »
The questions don't apply. For Lutherans, the issues related to the Law centered on the proper uses of the Law. Theologically, the Law needs to condemn sinners, but only as a precursor to the Gospel which removes the condemnation through Christ by killing the sin, forgiving the sin, giving new life. Civilly, Christians need to live under the Law for the sake of good order in society. The Law curbs evil behaviors and promotes good behaviors.

Thus, I believe that we judge commands as to how well they help bring order to society and/or how well they expose our sins and our sinful nature.

It is a misuse of the Law to think that obedience makes us more moral or righteous or saintly people before God.


1. Another example of how denial of the Third Use leads to trouble.  With no Third Use, evidently, your view is that the questions being asked are useless.

2. Nobody here has suggested that obedience does any of the things you've listed as misuse of the Law.  Obedience to the One Who is the source of everything I have, including my very survival from now until lunch time, requires no ulterior motives.

But we've been over this ground countless times.

Mike Bennett

126
Your Turn / War of One Man Against Every Man
« on: August 30, 2010, 11:13:08 AM »
A teaser from a thought-provoking article:

"The author and commenters bristled at my critique. I bristled right back. The argument escalated. At one point, I said to myself, “All right, you want to play hardball, we’ll play hardball” — and I would have cut loose and said exactly what I wanted to say, except that at that moment my hands were shaking too violently for me to type accurately. I looked at my trembling fingers for a moment. Then I closed that browser tab and spent a few minutes removing all Anglican-related blogs from my bookmarks and my RSS reader. I stopped reading those blogs and have never looked at them again to this day. I don't think I’ve ever made a better decision."

The full article can be read at:

http://www.bigquestionsonline.com/columns/alan-jacobs/the-online-state-of-nature

Anybody here who hasn't experienced what Prof. Jacobs writes about?
Anybody here who hasn't experienced it right here at ALPB Forum Online?
Could this be a place where mercy and charity grow?
(By the way, I think this forum is far, far from the worst, which is why it's one of the few I still visit and even occasionally post to).

Mike Bennett


127
Your Turn / Re: Compensation for Assisting Ministers
« on: August 28, 2010, 08:32:40 PM »
An issue that I have run into is the question of compensation for assisting ministers.

One congregation made a distinction between members and non-members. The non-member pianist was paid. When members played, they were not paid. (At least that's became the policy when I wasn't being paid for playing the piano during the non-member's absence to have a baby.)

If a member is compensated for playing the organ or piano, why shouldn't Sunday school teachers or altar guild members be compensated for their time and talents? Where should one draw the line about which volunteers receive a salary and which do not?

The first congregation I served had a policy that, except for the pastors, no employees could be members of the congregation. So the secretary, choir director, organists, groundskeeper, janitor, were all non-members.

On one hand, I see the benefit in such a policy, especially when an employee has to be let go because of poor performance or financial reasons.

On the other hand, I've also experienced the benefit of a secretary who was an active member and her "work" as secretary was seen more as part of her ministry to and for the congregation. It was more than just a "job". (I've experienced non-member secretaries who see it as nothing more than a "job" -- and whose commitment is more to her own congregation than to ours.)

Other thoughts.

While our congregation doesn't forbid hiring a member, we did adopt a  policy a few years ago that no member/employee is eligible to be elected to the congregation council or to serve as a committee chair.

Mike Bennett

128
Your Turn / Re: ELCA Fiscal Crisis continues into 2010
« on: July 06, 2010, 05:48:06 PM »

I use my real name, which means something since I am the only person in America named George Erdner. If I had the same name as 992 other people, then using my real name is nothing really to brag about, is it?
  

I don't get it.  A simple web search turns up more than one person in America named George Erdner. 

Mike Bennett

129
If you want to see an example of Evangelicals at their worst on the 4th of July, just take a look at the pictures from this link: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/07/04/1544056/mike-huckabee-preaches-at-first.html

Former Arkansas governor, Mike Huckabee, preaches at First Baptist of Charlotte, NC.  If you scroll through the photos, you'll notice the larger-than-life American flag covers the wall behind the choir and completely covers the stained glass window of Jesus. (I wonder if they see the irony in that?). Note also the military people they brought in to do the pledge of allegiance and the balloons and confetti that were released on the congregation. Amazing.  I've never seen such a confusion of the Kingdom of Christ and the Kingdom of Caesar.  It isn't that what they are doing is wrong or evil, but I cannot for the life of me understand why this has any place in CHRISTIAN worship. Can anyone explain.

Boris

"This Land Is Your Land" in a Christian worship service?   :o

What a perfect example of "I don't have anything against it, but not here!"

Mike Bennett

130
Your Turn / Re: Illegal Immigration and Immigration Reform
« on: July 02, 2010, 05:15:04 PM »
The issue under this discussion is why do immigrants (legal and otherwise) matter. It's not just about children. It's also about teenagers and adults -- and even oldsters who may have been living in America as good citizens, but illegally, for decades.

That's an oxymoron if I ever saw one. No one who is not a citizen at all can possibly be a "good" citizen.

One definition of "citizen" is "an inhabitant of a particular town or city." One can live in an American city, obey the laws, pay taxes, do community service, without being an American citizen.

Let me help you with the words, Brian:  "'Good citizens' was a bad choice of words.  I should have said something like 'good neighbors and productive members of their community'."   The words won't stick in your throat.  I promise.  ::)

Mike Bennett

131
Your Turn / Re: Illegal Immigration and Immigration Reform
« on: July 02, 2010, 05:03:42 PM »

So who sees this humble correspondent, Pastor Stoffregen, Pastor McCain, Mr. Erdner and almost everyone else here side by side on the demonstration line for immigration reform and walking the halls of Congress advocating health care for the children of undocumented aliens?


I don't see one good reason why not, but somehow I'm thinking it won't happen.

Mike Bennett


And a flurry of axe-grinding postings from the usual gang of axe-grinders has vindicated my dubiousness.  :(

Mike Bennett

132
Your Turn / Re: Illegal Immigration and Immigration Reform
« on: July 02, 2010, 04:59:41 PM »
So save your cynical accusations, snide remarks, and axe-grinding for some topic that doesn't involve life and death for the most helpless among us.

Mike Bennett

How are the Mexican drug-smuggling cartels "the most helpless among us"?


Obviously nobody here has a corner on use of RED HERRINGS, do they?  I support arresting, trying, and punishing drug smugglers. 

Mike Bennett

Do you support arresting them when they are attempting to cross the border, or do you support waiting until after they've delivered their drugs and the drugs are sold and the drug smugglers are drinking cervezas at the cantina?


I support arresting a drug smuggler on the first occasion that (s)he's caught smuggling drugs.  Of course smuggling drugs across the border would be a fine occasion for arrest.

Mike Bennett

133
Your Turn / Re: Illegal Immigration and Immigration Reform
« on: July 02, 2010, 04:49:59 PM »
I'll gladly join you on that line, Charles, if you join me on the picket line protesting Roe v. Wade and the murder of unborn children. Deal?

1. I'm not Charles, but I'd have no problem with that deal.

2. I do find it rather hard on the strangers that support for their survival is a bargaining chip in an argument about abortion.  (I also find it rather hard on the unborn that their survival is a bargaining chip in an argument about immigration).  Does anybody else have a problem with either or both of these endangered groups being pawns in somebody else's deal-making process?

Mike Bennett

134
Your Turn / Re: Illegal Immigration and Immigration Reform
« on: July 02, 2010, 04:40:22 PM »

So who sees this humble correspondent, Pastor Stoffregen, Pastor McCain, Mr. Erdner and almost everyone else here side by side on the demonstration line for immigration reform and walking the halls of Congress advocating health care for the children of undocumented aliens?


I don't see one good reason why not, but somehow I'm thinking it won't happen.

Mike Bennett

135
Your Turn / Re: Illegal Immigration and Immigration Reform
« on: July 02, 2010, 04:37:07 PM »
For George, Paul, Charles, Brian, and anybody else who wants to make treatment of the stranger a matter of "liberal vs comservative," "traditionalist vs revisionist," or somehow drag your favorite peeve or grievance against the "other side" into a conversation regarding treatment of the stranger:

This traditionalist/conservative Lutheran finds Scripture (both OT and NT) consistent and unequivocal regarding treatment of the stranger, the poor, and the helpless.  He also finds the Lutheran Confessions to be consistent and unequivocal in that regard.  And he's content to be instructed by Scripture in every other matter of faith and conduct.

So save your cynical accusations, snide remarks, and axe-grinding for some topic that doesn't involve life and death for the most helpless among us.

Are you then arguing that we should let the desperately poor enter our country to work so that they can provide for their families? That we should do everything possible to keep those entering illegally from dying, e.g., walking across the Arizona desert, swimming in the irrigation canals (which provide almost no way out)?

Is the Pope Catholic?


Has the fence and increase in personnel slowed illegal crossings?


The fence reminds me of a photograph in Life's Picture History of World War II, a book I used to look at by the hour as a child.  The photograph was of some hapless European nation's attempt to slow down invading German tanks.  The photograph showed a narrow road blocked for as far as the eye could see by trees that had been felled across the road by the defenders.  Parallelling the road was a column of German tanks racing along next to the road, probably 20 feet from the felled trees.

I think the wall has forced folks to cross the border somplace that doesn't have a wall.  That's all.

Mike Bennett

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 68