And now for the "why don't"s...

[DojoGrant]

Originally posted by tulpje:
We don't worship Mary.... you are full of it. but anyway. like we said earlier. Luther is a man. we can do away with what Luther says. If it is not the teaching s of the Bible out it goes.... thanks for proving our point

I want to talk about what it said in the article I cut and pasted.

Thank you for that brutal attack. You have not only demonstrated immaturity, but that I am absolutely correct.

Furthermore, please quote me where I said you worship Mary. Catholics don't worship Mary, and neither should you.

Oh, and I see that you can dismiss what Luther wrote. So I guess we better though out the Augsburg Confession, since this stuff is in there. Or...do you mean, you can throw out stuff from Luther that you don't agree with? How selective of you. I mean, you have no problem with Luther calling the Pope the anti-Christ (because you like that idea), but when he says that Mary is the Mother of God, that the Hail Mary should be in your prayer life, and that Mary was born without original sin and that this is wonderful...you can throw it out, because you don't "like" the idea. Talk about appealing to emotion.

Thanks for reassuring me.

[ March 10, 2002, 01:04 AM: Message edited by: DojoGrant ]

 

[DojoGrant]

Originally posted by tulpje:
I have never met anyone so hard headed in all my life... it's not just in revelation. it's in 4 or 5 places in scripture all pointing to rome and the papacy. sad but true. just look at the statue bleading tears. not a miracle?

I'm not the hard-headed one. You are the one who claims to follow the Lutheran Confessions closer than all other Lutherans (read your other posts) but will through out the parts on Mary because you don't like them.

Second, if it was to be so clear, and those following the anti-Christ wouldn't be able to discern they were wrong, why didn't the Bible just use the word "pope" and say he'd reside in "Rome?" It doesn't say those things; you add them in there.

Thirdly, what defines a miracle? What is the criteria? You are obviously in knowledge of what is a miracle from God and what isn't, so I'd like to know.

 

[DojoGrant]

Originally posted by tulpje:
we can do away with what Luther says. If it is not the teaching s of the Bible out it goes.... thanks for proving our point

I want to talk about what it said in the article I cut and pasted.

A few more things. Nice point, but when will you follow through with it? Sure, Lutherans have successfully supressed Luther's beliefs about Mary, but the confessions have not been altered. These confessions, which the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod says "all should conform to" states that Mary was always a virgin, was indeed Holy (without sin), and should be called the Mother of God. We should venerate her, and pray through her (not to her).

All of this is STILL in the creed. So, what you are doing is single-handedly rejecting something that has not been taken out by the Church. Your throwing away what you don't PERSONALLY believe in. Is that how your belief opperates? If so, why did you bother converting to WELS? ELCA is much more liberal on these issues.

Also, this has everything to do with the article. You are claiming the pope is the antiChrist because of all the false doctrines he "introduces," and yet Luther called his followers to hold on to nearly 90% of Marianology. Would this not mean that Luther himself has been corrupted by the anti-Christ (the papacy), and thus make the Lutheran denomination just as bad? If you say no, I'm eager to hear how you'll dismiss it off.

 

[DojoGrant]

Originally posted by tulpje:
Point #2 The points the author makes regarding the passages on the antichrist are absolutely compelling. Especially the one out of revelation. I was astounded!

Try reading "Hail, Holy Queen" and "The Lamb's Supper" by Scott Hahn. You will be "astounded" at how "compelling" Revelation can be in regards to Mary as the Queen of Heaven and the constant references to the Mass in Revelation.

Of course, you are free to denounce that stuff right here and now (without bothering to read the books, of course), but if you say that Hahn is just reading WAY too much into Revelation, you discredit your theory that the Pope is the anti-Christ, which you get by READING IN to what Revelation says.

 

[Deacon's Son]

Hi all,

Ok. I've donned my bullet-proof vest so maybe I'll be alright to duck in and ask a question or two. It's gettin' down right scary (and dangerous) on this thread!

I do have a few honest questions for you, Tulpje. In one of your posts, you quoted a document which said the following: "If anything, the Roman Catholic Church has changed for the worse...now it also has added the immaculate conception and assumption of Mary...the possibility of salvation for the heathen..."

Firstly, dealing with the doctrines of the Immaculate Conception and the Assumptions of Mary. Now, I won't delve into whether or not these teachings are to be found (implied or explicitly) in Scripture for we both know that we'll disagree on that. I would like to know, however, whether or not you (or anyone else) thinks that these two doctrines are only as old as their papal proclamations (1854 and 1950, respectively).

FYI, short definitions of the teachings follow: The doctrine of the Immaculate Conception states that Mary, being set aside from her conception to be the vessel of Christ, was born without the taint of original sin and remained sinless throughout her life. The doctrine of the Assumption teaches that when Mary's life came to an end (whether or not she suffered death is not clearly defined), she was assumed bodily into heaven.

Of course, the reason that the Catholic Church holds on to these teachings is that they are held to be of Apostolic origin. One interesting point in favor of the Assumption doctrine is the fact that, throughout history and to this present day, NNE has EVER claimed to possess the relics (bones) of the Virgin Mary.

Secondly, about "the salvation of the heathen." I'd be curious to know whether or not you think that someone who is born, lives and dies without ever having the chance to hear the Gospel is hell-bound. Short and simple questions requiring a short and simple answer.

God Bless.

IOA,
Deacon's Son

 

[tulpje]

To my knowlege, we don't believe in these things. They are not contained in scripture. Christ was the only one on earth born holy and who led a holy life. You know i didn't even know that you believe that she accended into heaven like Jesus. That is just rediculous. We believe that Mary was the mother of God and had a very signifigant role. We do not believe that she was a god. We don't believe that she was sinless. She was human like you and me. Show me where it says that. Gabriel said to her, "You are the chosen one" he didn't say because you are without sin. We are all born into sin. She was a human.

I believe that a person is without excuse. but we here are not talking about that. We are talking about justification not through Christ alone. The Catholic church is saying Christ is not the only way to heaven that you can get there through Allah or other means.

 

[DojoGrant]

Originally posted by tulpje:
To my knowlege, we don't believe in these things. They are not contained in scripture. Christ was the only one on earth born holy and who led a holy life. You know i didn't even know that you believe that she accended into heaven like Jesus. That is just rediculous. We believe that Mary was the mother of God and had a very signifigant role. We do not believe that she was a god. We don't believe that she was sinless. She was human like you and me. Show me where it says that. Gabriel said to her, "You are the chosen one" he didn't say because you are without sin. We are all born into sin. She was a human.

I believe that a person is without excuse. but we here are not talking about that. We are talking about justification not through Christ alone. The Catholic church is saying Christ is not the only way to heaven that you can get there through Allah or other means.

I say again...it's in the Lutheran Confessions. If you don't believe it, it's because the Lutheran Church has simply NOT TAUGHT this, despite the fact that it is fully contained in what you are aupposed to believe as Lutheran. Say what you want, but simply not knowing much about it is much different than fully denying it (what you are doing); you're going against the Confessions.

And it is in Scripture. "Full of grace."

As for the Ascension...was not Elijah taken up into Heaven on a chariot? Realize that Mary did not ASCEND into Heaven as you chose to word it. This is false and NOT what Catholics teach. She was ASSUMED, body and soul, into Heaven. This means she was "carried" into Heaven, where as Jesus simply rose to Heaven on His own. Big difference.

No one said "Mary is a god." Again, you put words in my mouth. Why do you keep doing that?

You believe that "Mary is the mother of God?" Then you're ahead of most of your protestant brethren. Congratulations.

If you don't believe she was sinless, then you go against the roots of what Luther taught. Go ahead; ignore my quotes, but you have no excuse. Please note that in a letter that was attached to the 95 Theses, something you would never refute (do you even know what that was about?), Luther referred to blaspheming about the Virgin Mary as a sin that we should repent of. You've done just that, except you feel no remorse for it. How Lutheran are you, really, now that you know these things?

Luther said she was the highest woman in all Christianity, just under Christ Himself. No where in Scripture does she say she was an ordinary "human like you and me."

No, the Catholic Church does not say these things. You pretend they do so that you can get upset at us. Jesus is the way, the truth, and the light. No one comes to the Father except through me.

Oh, but Lutherans believe that an infant who dies before it can be baptized can still be in Heaven. This means that there are exceptions to the general rule. A baby who was not born again, by the mercy of God, can still be in Heaven. Or do you renounce this as well?

So if a Baby without the chance to believe can be in Heaven, a devout and spiritual Muslim, who never truly heard the Gospel, might receive the mercy of God as well. Might, not WILL. It's in God's hands, not our judgemental hearts.

 

[DojoGrant]

Originally posted by Deacon's Son:
Ok. I've donned my bullet-proof vest so maybe I'll be alright to duck in and ask a question or two. It's gettin' down right scary (and dangerous) on this thread!

Hey Brad,

I've put my gun away. It's safe to come out now.

I have simply found it amazing at how devoted to Mary Luther was at all points in his life and how Lutheranism has simply stopped teaching these things because of the Catholicity of it all. I spent many hours last night combing the depths of the LCMS website last night, and my thoughts were totally reconfirmed.

Lutherans avoid Mary like the plague. It's better to just not talk about her. I know this from growing up, where the only time Mary was mentioned is in the hymn, "This Child of Mine," or some other Christmas program. Just as in the creeds, "Born of the Virgin Mary" is something taken for granted by the congregation, just as, "We believe in one Holy, Christian church," has taken out the word "Catholic" and no one really cares.

Anyway, regarding the website...there are FEW instances where Mary is talked of, and people ask serious questions about here (in the Q&A section), and the questions are seriously dodged. When asked what the Church's position on Mary and the saints, the church ONLY says that it does not condone praying to saints for help. It's like they totally looked over Mary. Why? Because the confessions support the beliefs in perpetual virginity, immaculate conception, veneration, and more, and to renounce those things on the website would be going against the Confession, and thus destroying the Church from within.

So, instead, they just keep quiet about it and hope no one notices (how it has worked!). Luther's beliefs on Mary are well suppressed, but it is amazing and beautiful to see how much Marianology he intended to retain in the new church.

Unfortunately, because it is not taught, it is not practiced. And the lack of practice and lead to condemnation of the very beliefs that the Church was founded with.

I just can't help but find it humerous how Tupje is condemning something that is called for in her church doctrine. In fact, since the LCMS secretly supports this, it should make having to remain Lutheran for the next several years much better.

 

[tulpje]

Arguing with you is pointless. I have no idea what you are talking about. We have told you time and time again that Luther is not the POPE. just because the POPE puts himself above the word of God and doesn't mean that we put Luther above the word of God. Everything that Luther said was not the inerrant, inspired, infallable truth. there is only one place to find that, the Holy Scriptures. Of course we believe that Mary was the Mother of God. We believe what it says in the three ecumenical creeds. If it doesn't say it there, or in the scriptures ... then we don't believe it.

APOSTLES' CREED
I believe in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord,
who was conceived by the Holy Spirit,
born of the virgin Mary,

NICENE CREED
For us and for our salvation, he came down from heaven,
was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the virgin Mary,
and became fully human.

THE ATHANASIAN CREED
He is God, eternally begotten from the nature of the Father, and he is man, born in time from the nature of his mother, fully God, fully man, with rational soul and human flesh,

The Anthanasian Creed actually makes a very good point. He gets his humanity from his mother.(Pssssssst... the Lutherans didn't write that. The Catholics did. If you believed all of this stuff before, how come it's not in the creeds?)

 

[tulpje]

"I just can't help but find it humerous how Tupje is condemning something that is called for in her church doctrine. In fact, since the LCMS secretly supports this, it should make having to remain Lutheran for the next several years much better."

Just for clearification here... I don't care what theLCMS is doing. The LCMS and the WELS do not share doctrine! I don't belong to the LCMS. I belong to the very strict, very confessional, extremely conservative, very orthodox WELS. I do not agree with the things that are happening in the LCMS. That is why I decided to join the WELS and not the LCMS. Neither do the WELS! That is why we broke fellowship with them in the sixties!

[ March 10, 2002, 10:58 AM: Message edited by: tulpje ]

 

[DojoGrant]

Originally posted by tulpje:
"I just can't help but find it humerous how Tupje is condemning something that is called for in her church doctrine. In fact, since the LCMS secretly supports this, it should make having to remain Lutheran for the next several years much better."

Just for clearification here... I don't care what theLCMS is doing. The LCMS and the WELS do not share doctrine! I don't belong to the LCMS. I belong to the very strict, very confessional, extremely conservative, very orthodox WELS. I do not agree with the things that are happening in the LCMS. That is why I decided to join the WELS and not the LCMS. Neither do the WELS! That is why we broke fellowship with them in the sixties!

You hold the same Confessions, do you not? The Augsburg Confessions, Smalcald Articles, and the apologies to those? Then the stuff I've been preaching is in there. You said you are more strictly aligned with the confessions than LCMS, and yet you just rejected something from it. You can't have it both ways. Either you are in total agreement with it, or you are not. If you're not, then don't say you are.

I'll be back tonight with WELS stuff, since that's what you want to here.

 

[DojoGrant]

And just curious...since Luther "isn't the pope," and you rely on no human authority, who makes the decisions for your church? Who decided to break away in the sixties? Who has the power to make such bold decisions?

 

[tulpje]

I am not going to argue with you. I have not read the confessions. I do not know what is in there exactly. If what you are saying is true, then we indeed threw out these errors. No we do not have the same doctrine as the LCMS. Three very big noticable differences would be:
1)woman's sufferage. In our church woman have no authority over men
2)The Office of Holy Ministry
3)Fellowship
4)Boy Scouts
5)Closed communion(not strictly held to)
There are many many issues that divide us. If you just look at the whold Dave Benke issue that is easy to see. We would never attend a service like that. It goes beyond unionism to syncretism. Jesus Christ was prayed to as if he were the same and equal to allah! That is a tragic shame! Unfortunately, the LCMS is heading down the same road as the ELCA. Does that mean that we ahere to the confessions more? No! That means that we abide by the word of God. I am not going to argue with you all day. You are obviously are a lost and condemned person.

 

[tulpje]

By the way, there was a Cathic Biship there as well. Oprah's "Prayer for America" at Yankee Stadium. It's a lie to tell people that Jesus Christ is the same god as Allah!

[ March 10, 2002, 12:30 PM: Message edited by: tulpje ]

 

[tulpje]

http://www.wels.net/sab/frm-qa.html
Q:Roman Catholics teach that Mary was free of sin from the time of her conception in order to bear the all-pure Son of God. Catholics refer to this dogma as the Immaculate Conception. Eastern Orthodox who do not understand original sin as the Western Church does teach that Mary was cleansed of sin at the Annunciation when she freely and willingly accepted God's offer to be the mother of Jesus. She was addressed by the angel "Hail Mary, full of grace..." She rejoiced in "God her Savior." The point of both teachings is that Mary was sinless when she bore the Son of God, thus becoming the Mother of God, the Theotokos (God-bearer). What is Lutheran teaching on the state of grace that Mary was in as carried the Son of God in her womb, thus giving Him human flesh? What about after His birth?

A:We believe that Mary was a sinner from the moment of her conception just as every other human being who is conceived by the union of sinful parents (John 3:6, Psalm 51:5). Jesus was preserved from original sin because he was conceived by the power of the Holy Spirit (Luke 1:35, Matthew 1:20-21). The fact that Mary calls God her Savior (Luke 1:46-47) is an indication that she recognized her need for a Savior from her sins. Nothing in Scripture gives any indication that Mary was without sin in her conception, birth or life. The greeting of Gabriel ("Hail Mary, full of grace," as Catholic sources often translate) does not mean that she was sinless, but that God was showing her tremendous grace and favor in choosing her to be the mother of the Savior.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[tulpje]

http://www.wels.net/sab/frm-qa.html
Qoes the Lutheran church teach that Mary ascended (in bodily form) into heaven? Do the Lutherans teach like the Catholics saying she was crowned Queen of Heaven and Earth?

A:Lutherans do not teach the bodily assumption of Mary nor do we teach that she was crowned queen of heaven and earth. Neither of those teachings has any basis in the Bible.

 

[tulpje]

Originally posted by DojoGrant:
Ah, guess what. I have some great quotes from Luther for you...AND THEY ARE POST REFORMATION:

ON PERPETUAL VIRGINITY

"Christ . . . was the only Son of Mary, and the Virgin Mary bore no children besides Him . . . "brothers" really means "cousins" here, for Holy Writ and the Jews always call cousins brothers." (Sermons on John, chapters 1-4, 1537-39).

"He, Christ, our Savior, was the real and natural fruit of Mary's virginal womb . . . This was without the cooperation of a man, and she remained a virgin after that. " (Ibid.)

"God says . . . : "Mary's Son is My only Son." Thus Mary is the Mother of God." (Ibid.)

"God did not derive his divinity from Mary; but it does not follow that it is therefore wrong to say that God was born of Mary, that God is Mary's Son, and that Mary is God's mother . . . She is the true mother of God and bearer of God . . . Mary suckled God, rocked God to sleep, prepared broth and soup for God, etc. For God and man are one person, one Christ, one Son, one Jesus, not two Christs . . . just as your son is not two sons . . . even though he has two natures, body and soul, the body from you, the soul from God alone." (On the Councils and the Church, 1539).

ON IMMACULATE CONCEPTION

" It is a sweet and pious belief that the infusion of Mary's soul was effected without original sin; so that in the very infusion of her soul she was also purified from original sin and adorned with God's gifts, receiving a pure soul infused by God; thus from the first moment she began to live she was free from all sin" (Sermon: "On the Day of the Conception of the Mother of God," 1527).

"She is full of grace, proclaimed to be entirely without sin- something exceedingly great. For God's grace fills her with everything good and makes her devoid of all evil." (Personal {"Little"} Prayer Book, 1522).

ON VENERATION OF MARY

"The veneration of Mary is inscribed in the very depths of the human heart." (Sermon, September 1, 1522).

"[She is the] highest woman and the noblest gem in Christianity after Christ . . . She is nobility, wisdom, and holiness personified. We can never honor her enough. Still honor and praise must be given to her in such a way as to injure neither Christ nor the Scriptures." (Sermon, Christmas, 1531).

Feel free to use this one against me...I already feel it coming, but no Catholic does what Luther warns of...it is merely anti-Catholics claiming they do so...Catholics, in fact, do merely what Luther ascribes above.

"No woman is like you. You are more than Eve or Sarah, blessed above all nobility, wisdom, and sanctity." (Sermon, Feast of the Visitation, 1537).

What's this? Notions of Eve and Sarah? Shoulda listened to Carson...

"One should honor Mary as she herself wished and as she expressed it in the Magnificat. She praised God for his deeds. How then can we praise her? The true honor of Mary is the honor of God, the praise of God's grace . . . Mary is nothing for the sake of herself, but for the sake of Christ . . . Mary does not wish that we come to her, but through her to God." (Explanation of the Magnificat, 1521).

Hello...looks like praying to Christ through Mary is okay with Luther.

MARY AS OUR SPIRITUAL MOTHER

"It is the consolation and the superabundant goodness of God, that man is able to exult in such a treasure. Mary is his true Mother, Christ is his brother, God is his father." (Sermon, Christmas, 1522)

"Mary is the Mother of Jesus and the Mother of all of us even though it was Christ alone who reposed on her knees . . . If he is ours, we ought to be in his situation; there where he is, we ought also to be and all that he has ought to be ours, and his mother is also our mother." (Sermon, Christmas, 1529).

LUTHER APPROVES OF HAIL MARY

" Whoever possesses a good (firm) faith, says the Hail Mary without danger! Whoever is weak in faith can utter no Hail Mary without danger to his salvation." (Sermon, March 11, 1523).

" Our prayer should include the Mother of God . . . What the Hail Mary says is that all glory should be given to God, using these words: "Hail Mary, full of grace. The Lord is with thee; blessed art thou among women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus Christ. Amen!" You see that these words are not concerned with prayer but purely with giving praise and honor . . . We can use the Hail Mary as a meditation in which we recite what grace God has given her. Second, we should add a wish that everyone may know and respect her . . . He who has no faith is advised to refrain from saying the Hail Mary." (Personal Prayer Book, 1522).

Wow...is Luther still a Catholic? Will you curse the Hail Mary now?

So...let's see what you have to say now. Either you are misguided in your Lutheran views...the modern Lutheran Church has strayed from what Luther taught (which you claim it has not), or Luther has fallen for one of those lies of the anti-Christ, and is encouraging you to follow with him!

Where did you get this information? I was just realizing that all the years on here were while he was still a monk in the Catholic Church. Not one of these comes from the confessions.

 

[trying2understand]

Originally posted by tulpje:

Where did you get this information? I was just realizing that all the years on here were while he was still a monk in the Catholic Church. Not one of these comes from the confessions.

Luther was excommunicated 01/03/1521

 

[DojoGrant]

Originally posted by trying2understand:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by tulpje:

Where did you get this information? I was just realizing that all the years on here were while he was still a monk in the Catholic Church. Not one of these comes from the confessions.

Luther was excommunicated 01/03/1521</font>

Why did you bother posting this? It just proves my point more efficiently. Look at the dates on all of these quotes - they are POST 1521! That means he said these things when he was fully NOT CATHOLIC. This is POST REFORMATION.

And if you'd bother to read, most of these are sermons. I never said they were in the Lutheran Confessions. An early post had quotes from the Lutheran Confessions. However, unless Luther was a fool (and you obviously don't think he was), he would not have been preaching things against his own Confessions. And he didn't, because these beliefs are contained in the Confessions.

And no, the Confessions are unaltered for the WELS Church, so the WELS have simply chosen to ignore them.

 

[DojoGrant]

Originally posted by tulpje:
Where did you get this information? I was just realizing that all the years on here were while he was still a monk in the Catholic Church. Not one of these comes from the confessions.

I pulled it from his sermons, which can be found all over the net if you search.

Okay...and below this post, you say he was excommunicated in 1521, and all of my quotes were from post 1521. So, how could he have been a monk if he was excommunicated? Luther rejected monastic vows in the Confessions, so he wouldn't have still been one! This is just an outright lie on your part.