Condemned already: not just Calvinist

[Jesus is YHWH]

Read the book of Romans.

any particular chapter/verse lol ?

 

[RickReads]

any particular chapter/verse lol ?

I put up a good portion of Romans 8 in a post since some folks around here have trouble distinguishing between water and spirit. It ties into the Nicodemus discussion.

However, I think that the Gestapo deleted some of my posts so I'm going to go play
somewhere else. I`m not sure when or if I`ll be back. I've gotten well enough now that I can do things besides laying in bed looking at a computer screen anyways.

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

I put up a good portion of Romans 8 in a post since some folks around here have trouble distinguishing between water and spirit. It ties into the Nicodemus discussion.

However, I think that the Gestapo deleted some of my posts so I'm going to go play
somewhere else. I`m not sure when or if I`ll be back. I've gotten well enough now that I can do things besides laying in bed looking at a computer screen anyways.

Oh yes Romans 8 is in my top 5 chapters in all of Scripture.

 

[TedT]

There is no mention of a pre-earth existence of any human being.

Sure there is...quite a few. They just get explained away by orthodox eisegesis.

For instance:
Jeremiah 1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly, I knew thee.
If the Scripture said, I knew thee when you were a little child, we would say that Jeremiah existed at that time. If it said, I knew thee when you were in the womb, we would interpret it as saying that Jeremiah existed at that time. Why then, when the time moves back before the womb, does "I know thee" mean something else such as: “I knew about thee"? In the natural use of the word “knew", it is impossible to know someone before they exist, no matter how much you know about them.

We must be careful to not mix up knowing and knowing about as they are two different things. For example, Christians know Jesus, demons know about Jesus. This difference is also brought out in Matthew 25:12 where Jesus said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not... to the five foolish virgins. He obviously knew all about them, He just did not know them. Mighty big difference! Well this also means that there is a mighty big difference between GOD knowing Jeremiah and GOD knowing about Jeremiah.

Since I believe that GOD knows about this difference then when GOD says to me that HE knew Jeremiah before his conception, I believe that GOD is sort of telling me that Jeremiah existed before his conception.If GOD was not bearing witness to Jeremiah's pre-conception existence in this verse, would you please tell me what HE was revealing? Was it HIS omniscience, that is, was HE telling Jeremiah that HE knew all about him before HE made him in the womb, that is, before he was created?

But Jeremiah needed no revelation of GOD's omniscience. Jeremiah was a priest. He was trained in the Scriptures and the Jews knew about GOD's omniscience long before his time. Well, anything but his pre-conception existence eh!!!

Let me ask you this. In your opinion, just what would GOD have to say to Jeremiah to reveal that he existed before he was made in the womb?

 

[TedT]

To quote Scriptures to give evidence of a pre-conception existence is to twist the Scriptures out of their normal context and make them say something different to what was intended by the author.

To quote Scriptures to give evidence of a pre-conception existence is to reinterpret the Scriptures out of their normal context and make them say something different to what was intended by the previous interpreters.

Every verse I use is completely true to the meaning of the words within the verse...they are just not true to the orthodox interpretation of the words which interpretations are indeed sometimes abject failure in face of what was actually written:
Ps 9:17 The wicked do turn back / return to Sheol, All nations forgetting God. Going to Sheol is the result of a judgment. The implication is clear. The wicked are punished by being sent to Sheol instead of heaven. The word is translated as return 391 times by the biased KJV, just not here in this verse.

TURN BACK; Strong’s H7725 shûb
A primitive root; to turn back
to return, turn back
• to turn back
• to return, come or go back
• to return unto, go back, come back

English Standard Version
The wicked shall RETURN to Sheol, all the nations that forget God.

Berean Study Bible
The wicked will RETURN to Sheol—all the nations who forget God.

New American Standard Bible
The wicked will RETURN to Sheol, Even all the nations who forget God.

IF the wicked RETURN to Sheol, logic and ordinary use of language indicates that they were there before but left. We have humans coming from Sheol and then returning back to there.

But when you look this verse up in your favourite KJV bible it says the wicked turn into not return to which is basically the opposite of to return which is written, implying that they are now going forward into a new place.

 

[ViaCrucis]

My comments ( )

1There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews:

2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.

3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?

( You claim it might be silly to believe that Jesus referred to "water breaking" but yet this is exactly how Nicodemus understood Jesus and Jesus didn't correct him)

5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

( Here Jesus said there are two births one is water and the other is spirit.)

6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

( Here Jesus interprets verse 5 for us. He said there is a flesh birth and a spirit birth. Note: no combo water-spirit birth is indicated, He said what is born of the spirit is spirit just as He tells us what is born of the flesh is flesh which is the water birth of verse 5. Verses 5 and 6 are joined together and the Bible rarely becomes any plainer than it is right here.)

7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.

8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

( A water baptism is seen. It's not the unseen action of the Spirit.)

What does it mean to be born of water? | GotQuestions.org

Alright, my turn.

Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. This man came to Jesus by night and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God, for no one can do these signs that you do unless God is with him.” Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.”

Can we pause for a moment to think about Jesus' response to Nicodemus' statement. It's almost like Jesus just doesn't acknowledge what Nicodemus said, and changes the topic immediately. Or perhaps Jesus chooses to acknowledge Nicodemus by now becoming the teacher Nicodemus has confessed Him to be.

Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?”

Nicodemus' question posed to Jesus after hearing that to see God's kingdom one has to be born again isn't entirely unreasonable; but it's a little strange. Do we really think Nicodemus was convinced in his mind that this is what Jesus--who Nicodemus just got done calling a great rabbi--that Jesus was suggesting something as absurd as this? I'm not going to accuse Nicodemus of being disingenuous, though that he only comes to Jesus under cover of night certainly gives the impression of a man who is afraid to be seen with this controversial rabbi from Nazareth. We can't read Nicodemus' mind obviously, but I do find Nicodemus' response interesting--especially if we let ourselves assume Nicodemus isn't a complete nincompoop.

Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

On the contrary to your position, I maintain that Jesus merely repeats His earlier statement "you must be born again" with more clarity. After all, Jesus doesn't say "unless one is born of water and is born of the Spirit", but merely speaks of a being born "of water and the Spirit". "Water and the Spirit" are grammatically connected to this "born". These are not two separate births, this is what the singular new birth is concerned with: water and the Spirit. How is a person born again? Of water and the Spirit.

That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

Connecting the mention of water with flesh here is not invited anywhere in the text. This is Jesus trying to move Nicodemus into a deeper conversation.

Nicodemus said to him, “How can these things be?” Jesus answered him, “Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you do not understand these things?

See, here Jesus tells Nicodemus, "Hey, you're an educated rabbi, how is it that you don't understand what I'm saying?"

That's because Jesus knew that Nicodemus shouldn't have known that this language of newness, of being born with a new identity was something already present in the Jewish religious life. Water had always played an integral role in Jewish history and religion, from the crossing of the red sea, to the rock from which water sprang from, to ritual washings and oblations commanded of them. Consider also stories, such as when Naaman dipped himself seven times in the Jordan to be cleaned of leprosy. At no point, of course, was water ever seen as some kind of magic; but God regularly used the ordinary means of His creation to accomplish His power and work. Through water God rescued Israel from Egypt, through water God cleansed and healed His people, through water the impure was purified to enter God's presence, through water Gentiles were born again as Jews when they converted to Judaism.

Nicodemus knew all of this. Which is why Jesus continues,

Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know, and bear witness to what we have seen, but you do not receive our testimony. If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you heavenly things?

Jesus had not yet even truly begun to get into the meatier things, He is still talking about stuff Nicodemus should already be aware of--that God has always brought renewal to the world through ordinary mundane things. At this juncture Jesus will go on to to those deeper things, such as "For God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son"; but up to this point His talk of being born again is merely entry-level stuff. It's Baptism, so when Jesus after His resurrection commands that His Church make disciples and baptize, well, His followers understood what this baptism thing was about. Which is why they say what they said about it, such as there is forgiveness of sins (Acts of the Apostles 2:38), and that it is death, burial, and resurrection with Jesus (Romans 6:3-4 and Colossians 2:12), even being clothed with Jesus Himself (Galatians 3:27); and Peter will go on to very explicitly say that this baptism "now saves you, not as a washing of dirt from the body but the pledge of a new conscience before God through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 3:21).

Baptism isn't theater we put on for God's sake. Baptism is God's work and power invading this world, invading our lives. If baptism were a human work we do for God, it is rather worthless--just another filthy rag. But if Baptism isn't something we do, but it's what God does--then it is no longer our filthy rags, but rather the clean white robes of Jesus Christ, and we actually "put on Christ" as Paul says, clearly, explicitly, in Galatians 3:27.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

8 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

2 For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.

3 For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh:

4 That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

5 For they that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.

6 For to be carnally minded is death; but to be spiritually minded is life and peace.

7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.

8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

9 But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.

11 But if the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

12 Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.

13 For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.

14 For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.

15 For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.

16 The Spirit itself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God:

I love this chapter.

In this chapter the Apostle has expertly brought contrast to what he had been saying previously, in Romans 7--the condemnation of the Law and the death which comes from it is washed away in the Gospel. And the life of the Spirit we have received is our hope that in spite of the present struggles and sufferings--and indeed all the sufferings and labors of all creation--there is the true and confident hope that what God has done in and for Christ He will do not only for us, but for the whole of creation. Which is why he twice specifically brings up the future hope of the resurrection of the body, for example right there in Romans 8:11 which you have quoted.

Is there something specific in these verses from Romans 8 you'd like to discuss in depth?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[RickReads]

Alright, my turn.

Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. This man came to Jesus by night and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God, for no one can do these signs that you do unless God is with him.” Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.”

Can we pause for a moment to think about Jesus' response to Nicodemus' statement. It's almost like Jesus just doesn't acknowledge what Nicodemus said, and changes the topic immediately. Or perhaps Jesus chooses to acknowledge Nicodemus by now becoming the teacher Nicodemus has confessed Him to be.

Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?”

Nicodemus' question posed to Jesus after hearing that to see God's kingdom one has to be born again isn't entirely unreasonable; but it's a little strange. Do we really think Nicodemus was convinced in his mind that this is what Jesus--who Nicodemus just got done calling a great rabbi--that Jesus was suggesting something as absurd as this? I'm not going to accuse Nicodemus of being disingenuous, though that he only comes to Jesus under cover of night certainly gives the impression of a man who is afraid to be seen with this controversial rabbi from Nazareth. We can't read Nicodemus' mind obviously, but I do find Nicodemus' response interesting--especially if we let ourselves assume Nicodemus isn't a complete nincompoop.

Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

On the contrary to your position, I maintain that Jesus merely repeats His earlier statement "you must be born again" with more clarity. After all, Jesus doesn't say "unless one is born of water and is born of the Spirit", but merely speaks of a being born "of water and the Spirit". "Water and the Spirit" are grammatically connected to this "born". These are not two separate births, this is what the singular new birth is concerned with: water and the Spirit. How is a person born again? Of water and the Spirit.

That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

Connecting the mention of water with flesh here is not invited anywhere in the text. This is Jesus trying to move Nicodemus into a deeper conversation.

Nicodemus said to him, “How can these things be?” Jesus answered him, “Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you do not understand these things?

See, here Jesus tells Nicodemus, "Hey, you're an educated rabbi, how is it that you don't understand what I'm saying?"

That's because Jesus knew that Nicodemus shouldn't have known that this language of newness, of being born with a new identity was something already present in the Jewish religious life. Water had always played an integral role in Jewish history and religion, from the crossing of the red sea, to the rock from which water sprang from, to ritual washings and oblations commanded of them. Consider also stories, such as when Naaman dipped himself seven times in the Jordan to be cleaned of leprosy. At no point, of course, was water ever seen as some kind of magic; but God regularly used the ordinary means of His creation to accomplish His power and work. Through water God rescued Israel from Egypt, through water God cleansed and healed His people, through water the impure was purified to enter God's presence, through water Gentiles were born again as Jews when they converted to Judaism.

Nicodemus knew all of this. Which is why Jesus continues,

Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know, and bear witness to what we have seen, but you do not receive our testimony. If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you heavenly things?

Jesus had not yet even truly begun to get into the meatier things, He is still talking about stuff Nicodemus should already be aware of--that God has always brought renewal to the world through ordinary mundane things. At this juncture Jesus will go on to to those deeper things, such as "For God so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son"; but up to this point His talk of being born again is merely entry-level stuff. It's Baptism, so when Jesus after His resurrection commands that His Church make disciples and baptize, well, His followers understood what this baptism thing was about. Which is why they say what they said about it, such as there is forgiveness of sins (Acts of the Apostles 2:38), and that it is death, burial, and resurrection with Jesus (Romans 6:3-4 and Colossians 2:12), even being clothed with Jesus Himself (Galatians 3:27); and Peter will go on to very explicitly say that this baptism "now saves you, not as a washing of dirt from the body but the pledge of a new conscience before God through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 3:21).

Baptism isn't theater we put on for God's sake. Baptism is God's work and power invading this world, invading our lives. If baptism were a human work we do for God, it is rather worthless--just another filthy rag. But if Baptism isn't something we do, but it's what God does--then it is no longer our filthy rags, but rather the clean white robes of Jesus Christ, and we actually "put on Christ" as Paul says, clearly, explicitly, in Galatians 3:27.

-CryptoLutheran

I`m not going to invest the time it would take to sort this mess out. You are making water baptism a component of salvation and that does not work.It is simply a means by which some dominations try to establish authority over their congregations.As I said previously you are combining verses about the Holy Spirit with verses about water.

If you were right about the water then control of salvation is taken from Jesus and given to men.
That is contrary to salvation by grace when we believe we have to help Jesus save us or that we are able to compel God to save us. Sorry but that is error.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Sure there is...quite a few. They just get explained away by orthodox eisegesis.

For instance:
Jeremiah 1:5 Before I formed thee in the belly, I knew thee.
If the Scripture said, I knew thee when you were a little child, we would say that Jeremiah existed at that time. If it said, I knew thee when you were in the womb, we would interpret it as saying that Jeremiah existed at that time. Why then, when the time moves back before the womb, does "I know thee" mean something else such as: “I knew about thee"? In the natural use of the word “knew", it is impossible to know someone before they exist, no matter how much you know about them.

We must be careful to not mix up knowing and knowing about as they are two different things. For example, Christians know Jesus, demons know about Jesus. This difference is also brought out in Matthew 25:12 where Jesus said, Verily I say unto you, I know you not... to the five foolish virgins. He obviously knew all about them, He just did not know them. Mighty big difference! Well this also means that there is a mighty big difference between GOD knowing Jeremiah and GOD knowing about Jeremiah.

Since I believe that GOD knows about this difference then when GOD says to me that HE knew Jeremiah before his conception, I believe that GOD is sort of telling me that Jeremiah existed before his conception.If GOD was not bearing witness to Jeremiah's pre-conception existence in this verse, would you please tell me what HE was revealing? Was it HIS omniscience, that is, was HE telling Jeremiah that HE knew all about him before HE made him in the womb, that is, before he was created?

But Jeremiah needed no revelation of GOD's omniscience. Jeremiah was a priest. He was trained in the Scriptures and the Jews knew about GOD's omniscience long before his time. Well, anything but his pre-conception existence eh!!!

Let me ask you this. In your opinion, just what would GOD have to say to Jeremiah to reveal that he existed before he was made in the womb?

The Scripture does not say that Jeremiah actually existed before he was made in the womb. That is adding to what the Scripture actually says. It says that God knew Jeremiah before he was formed in the womb. It speaks more of the omniscience of God. God knows the beginning from the end. He knew all about the universe and our world long before He laid the foundations of it. God knew who was going to be saved or lost before the foundation of the world, long before Adam and Eve were created. Therefore God's knowledge of a person's future existence doesn't mean that the person pre-existed.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I`m not going to invest the time it would take to sort this mess out. You are making water baptism a component of salvation and that does not work.

Except Scripture says it does. And Christians have literally always believed this.

It is simply a means by which some dominations try to establish authority over their congregations.

That's a hefty charge that probably deserves to be backed up.

As I said previously you are combining verses about the Holy Spirit with verses about water.

Why should I believe that when "baptism" is mentioned that it means anything else other than baptism? When the biblical authors want to use baptism in a more metaphorical sense, they go out of their way to say it. Like when John the Baptist says that the One who comes after him will baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire. This "baptize with the Holy Spirit" is clearly not regular baptism, but is something different.

Now if we want to know what the Bible means by "baptism with the Holy Spirit", I'd argue that we should look to see what the Bible actually says about it.

The phrase "water baptism" isn't biblical, and it's also redundant. When ancient people saw this word they knew it inferred water. If I said, "I'm going to take a bath" we'd all know what I meant, I don't have to say, "I'm going to take a water bath". Because if I wanted to speak of some other kind of bath, I would say something like "I'm going to take a mud bath" or "I'm going to go bathe in good fortune".

I would argue that, without additional context or information to the contrary, there is no reason to think that "baptism", when spoken plainly, means anything other than baptism.

If you were right about the water then control of salvation is taken from Jesus and given to men.

You have it backward, actually. When we take away God's means of grace we deny God's power and we introduce our own works and means. Things like the altar call or the sinner's prayer.

That is contrary to salvation by grace when we believe we have to help Jesus save us or that we are able to compel God to save us. Sorry but that is error.

Let's ignore for a moment the absurdity of claiming that Lutherans, of all people, don't believe in salvation by grace alone (that's kind of our entire brand).

I asked you earlier this question: How is a person saved? You simply told me to read Romans. But I still don't know what you believe about this subject.

Would you care to know what I believe, as a Lutheran?

"For neither you nor I could ever know anything of Christ, or believe on Him, and obtain Him for our Lord, unless it were offered to us and granted to our hearts by the Holy Ghost through the preaching of the Gospel. The work is done and accomplished; for Christ has acquired and gained the treasure for us by His suffering, death, resurrection, etc. But if the work remained concealed so that no one knew of it, then it would be in vain and lost. That this treasure, therefore, might not lie buried, but be appropriated and enjoyed, God has caused the Word to go forth and be proclaimed, in which He gives the Holy Ghost to bring this treasure home and appropriate it to us." - Luther's Large Catechism, Part II, Article III.

"Also they teach that men cannot be justified before God by their own strength, merits, or works, but are freely justified for Christ's sake, through faith, when they believe that they are received into favor, and that their sins are forgiven for Christ's sake, who, by His death, has made satisfaction for our sins. This faith God imputes for righteousness in His sight. Rom. 3 and 4." - The Augsburg Confession, Article IV

And, pretty much, the sum total of everything in the Lutheran Confessions is repeated, continual, solid confession that salvation is from God alone, by His power alone, by Christ's life, death, and resurrection alone, grace alone, through faith alone.

I could not be saved unless God gave me faith, for this faith is not of myself, it is the gift of God (Ephesians 2:8); I contribute nothing--no works, no efforts, nothing, for Ephesians 2:9 is clear, it is not on human efforts, so that none may boast. This means even faith is from God.

How then, can a person have faith? The Apostle is to our rescue in answering this question, for he explains in Romans 10:17 that faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ. So how does one receive faith? From the word, the Gospel. For this reason the Apostle has just finished saying that all who call on the name of the Lord shall be saved and never put to shame, but, he asks, how can they call on Him whom they have not heard, and how can anyone hear unless someone is sent to preach?

This is why, by the way, the Apostle said in the first chapter of Romans, "For I am not ashamed of the Gospel, for it is the power of God to save all who believe, the Jew first and also the Greek."

The Gospel is the power of God to save.

It's that Gospel that gives us faith, God works and creates faith--and He does that through Means. He does that through His word--so when the Gospel is preached, it--for it is a doubled edged sword that knows the secret thoughts and intentions of the heart (Hebrews 4:12)--the power of God breaks through and gives hears to hear and eyes to see, it gives faith to believe.

So, we can say, with confidence, that wherever the word is, God is alive, active, and working.

So what does Paul say in Ephesians 5:26, that Christ cleansed and sanctified His Church by the washing of what with the what?

If Baptism were just water, then this whole conversation would be over. Water is just water, and it can't do anything. But, but if it is water to which the word is connected and comprehended; if it is water that the Holy Spirit Himself is active and at work in and through (and if the word is there, then of course the Spirit is there). Then Baptism is not some work of man to get wet; but the work and power of God to bring about the very work and promises which He Himself has made.

What kind of promises? Like this: "For all of you who were baptized into Christ have put on Christ". Water can't do that, but the word can, the Holy Spirit can--and He does that through and with the water.

Which is why Lutherans believe the following:

"For to be baptized in the name of God is to be baptized not by men, but by God Himself. Therefore, although it is performed by human hands, it is nevertheless truly God’s own work. From this fact every one may himself readily infer that it is a far higher work than any work performed by a man or a saint. For what work greater than the work of God can we do?

But here the devil is busy to delude us with false appearances, and lead us away from the work of God to our own works. For there is a much more splendid appearance when a Carthusian does many great and difficult works; and we all think much more of that which we do and merit ourselves. But the Scriptures teach thus: Even though we collect in one mass the works of all the monks, however splendidly they may shine, they would not be as noble and good as if God should pick up a straw. Why? Because the person is nobler and better. Here, then, we must not estimate the person according to the works, but the works according to the person, from whom they must derive their nobility. But insane reason will not regard this, and because Baptism does not shine like the works which we do, it is to be esteemed as nothing.

From this now learn a proper understanding of the subject, and how to answer the question what Baptism is, namely thus, that it is not mere ordinary water, but water comprehended in God’s Word and command, and sanctified thereby, so that it is nothing else than a divine water; not that the water in itself is nobler than other water, but that God’s Word and command are added.

Therefore it is pure wickedness and blasphemy of the devil that now our new spirits, to mock at Baptism, omit from it God’s Word and institution, and look upon it in no other way than as water which is taken from the well, and then blather and say: How is a handful of water to help the soul? Aye, my friend, who does not know that water is water if tearing things asunder is what we are after? But how dare you thus interfere with God’s order, and tear away the most precious treasure with which God has connected and enclosed it, and which He will not have separated? For the kernel in the water is God’s Word or command and the name of God, which is a treasure greater and nobler than heaven and earth.

Comprehend the difference, then, that Baptism is quite another thing than all other water; not on account of the natural quality but because something more noble is here added; for God Himself stakes His honor, His power and might on it. Therefore it is not only natural water, but a divine, heavenly, holy, and blessed water, and in whatever other terms we can praise it,-all on account of the Word, which is a heavenly, holy Word, that no one can sufficiently extol, for it has, and is able to do, all that God is and can do [since it has all the virtue and power of God comprised in it]. Hence also it derives its essence as a Sacrament, as St. Augustine also taught: Accedat verbum ad elementum et fit sacramentum. That is, when the Word is joined to the element or natural substance, it becomes a Sacrament, that is, a holy and divine matter and sign." The Large Catechism, Part IV

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

To quote Scriptures to give evidence of a pre-conception existence is to reinterpret the Scriptures out of their normal context and make them say something different to what was intended by the previous interpreters.

Every verse I use is completely true to the meaning of the words within the verse...they are just not true to the orthodox interpretation of the words which interpretations are indeed sometimes abject failure in face of what was actually written:
Ps 9:17 The wicked do turn back / return to Sheol, All nations forgetting God. Going to Sheol is the result of a judgment. The implication is clear. The wicked are punished by being sent to Sheol instead of heaven. The word is translated as return 391 times by the biased KJV, just not here in this verse.

TURN BACK; Strong’s H7725 shûb
A primitive root; to turn back
to return, turn back
• to turn back
• to return, come or go back
• to return unto, go back, come back

English Standard Version
The wicked shall RETURN to Sheol, all the nations that forget God.

Berean Study Bible
The wicked will RETURN to Sheol—all the nations who forget God.

New American Standard Bible
The wicked will RETURN to Sheol, Even all the nations who forget God.

IF the wicked RETURN to Sheol, logic and ordinary use of language indicates that they were there before but left. We have humans coming from Sheol and then returning back to there.

But when you look this verse up in your favourite KJV bible it says the wicked turn into not return to which is basically the opposite of to return which is written, implying that they are now going forward into a new place.

The actual Hebrew word used in Psalm 9:17 is translated as "turned" (יָשׁ֣וּבוּ),not "returned" (שׁ֚וּבָה). As you can see the first Hebrew character (reading from right to left as the language is read) for "turned" is different to the first Hebrew character for "returned" (as seen in Hosea 14:1 where it says "Return to the Lord") If the psalmist meant that the wicked would return to Sheol from where they originally came, he would have used the Hebrew word for "returned", which he doesn't.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Except Scripture says it does. And Christians have literally always believed this.



That's a hefty charge that probably deserves to be backed up.



Why should I believe that when "baptism" is mentioned that it means anything else other than baptism? When the biblical authors want to use baptism in a more metaphorical sense, they go out of their way to say it. Like when John the Baptist says that the One who comes after him will baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire. This "baptize with the Holy Spirit" is clearly not regular baptism, but is something different.

Now if we want to know what the Bible means by "baptism with the Holy Spirit", I'd argue that we should look to see what the Bible actually says about it.

The phrase "water baptism" isn't biblical, and it's also redundant. When ancient people saw this word they knew it inferred water. If I said, "I'm going to take a bath" we'd all know what I meant, I don't have to say, "I'm going to take a water bath". Because if I wanted to speak of some other kind of bath, I would say something like "I'm going to take a mud bath" or "I'm going to go bathe in good fortune".

I would argue that, without additional context or information to the contrary, there is no reason to think that "baptism", when spoken plainly, means anything other than baptism.



You have it backward, actually. When we take away God's means of grace we deny God's power and we introduce our own works and means. Things like the altar call or the sinner's prayer.



Let's ignore for a moment the absurdity of claiming that Lutherans, of all people, don't believe in salvation by grace alone (that's kind of our entire brand).

I asked you earlier this question: How is a person saved? You simply told me to read Romans. But I still don't know what you believe about this subject.

Would you care to know what I believe, as a Lutheran?

"For neither you nor I could ever know anything of Christ, or believe on Him, and obtain Him for our Lord, unless it were offered to us and granted to our hearts by the Holy Ghost through the preaching of the Gospel. The work is done and accomplished; for Christ has acquired and gained the treasure for us by His suffering, death, resurrection, etc. But if the work remained concealed so that no one knew of it, then it would be in vain and lost. That this treasure, therefore, might not lie buried, but be appropriated and enjoyed, God has caused the Word to go forth and be proclaimed, in which He gives the Holy Ghost to bring this treasure home and appropriate it to us." - Luther's Large Catechism, Part II, Article III.

"Also they teach that men cannot be justified before God by their own strength, merits, or works, but are freely justified for Christ's sake, through faith, when they believe that they are received into favor, and that their sins are forgiven for Christ's sake, who, by His death, has made satisfaction for our sins. This faith God imputes for righteousness in His sight. Rom. 3 and 4." - The Augsburg Confession, Article IV

And, pretty much, the sum total of everything in the Lutheran Confessions is repeated, continual, solid confession that salvation is from God alone, by His power alone, by Christ's life, death, and resurrection alone, grace alone, through faith alone.

I could not be saved unless God gave me faith, for this faith is not of myself, it is the gift of God (Ephesians 2:8); I contribute nothing--no works, no efforts, nothing, for Ephesians 2:9 is clear, it is not on human efforts, so that none may boast. This means even faith is from God.

How then, can a person have faith? The Apostle is to our rescue in answering this question, for he explains in Romans 10:17 that faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ. So how does one receive faith? From the word, the Gospel. For this reason the Apostle has just finished saying that all who call on the name of the Lord shall be saved and never put to shame, but, he asks, how can they call on Him whom they have not heard, and how can anyone hear unless someone is sent to preach?

This is why, by the way, the Apostle said in the first chapter of Romans, "For I am not ashamed of the Gospel, for it is the power of God to save all who believe, the Jew first and also the Greek."

The Gospel is the power of God to save.

It's that Gospel that gives us faith, God works and creates faith--and He does that through Means. He does that through His word--so when the Gospel is preached, it--for it is a doubled edged sword that knows the secret thoughts and intentions of the heart (Hebrews 4:12)--the power of God breaks through and gives hears to hear and eyes to see, it gives faith to believe.

So, we can say, with confidence, that wherever the word is, God is alive, active, and working.

So what does Paul say in Ephesians 5:26, that Christ cleansed and sanctified His Church by the washing of what with the what?

If Baptism were just water, then this whole conversation would be over. Water is just water, and it can't do anything. But, but if it is water to which the word is connected and comprehended; if it is water that the Holy Spirit Himself is active and at work in and through (and if the word is there, then of course the Spirit is there). Then Baptism is not some work of man to get wet; but the work and power of God to bring about the very work and promises which He Himself has made.

What kind of promises? Like this: "For all of you who were baptized into Christ have put on Christ". Water can't do that, but the word can, the Holy Spirit can--and He does that through and with the water.

Which is why Lutherans believe the following:

"For to be baptized in the name of God is to be baptized not by men, but by God Himself. Therefore, although it is performed by human hands, it is nevertheless truly God’s own work. From this fact every one may himself readily infer that it is a far higher work than any work performed by a man or a saint. For what work greater than the work of God can we do?

But here the devil is busy to delude us with false appearances, and lead us away from the work of God to our own works. For there is a much more splendid appearance when a Carthusian does many great and difficult works; and we all think much more of that which we do and merit ourselves. But the Scriptures teach thus: Even though we collect in one mass the works of all the monks, however splendidly they may shine, they would not be as noble and good as if God should pick up a straw. Why? Because the person is nobler and better. Here, then, we must not estimate the person according to the works, but the works according to the person, from whom they must derive their nobility. But insane reason will not regard this, and because Baptism does not shine like the works which we do, it is to be esteemed as nothing.

From this now learn a proper understanding of the subject, and how to answer the question what Baptism is, namely thus, that it is not mere ordinary water, but water comprehended in God’s Word and command, and sanctified thereby, so that it is nothing else than a divine water; not that the water in itself is nobler than other water, but that God’s Word and command are added.

Therefore it is pure wickedness and blasphemy of the devil that now our new spirits, to mock at Baptism, omit from it God’s Word and institution, and look upon it in no other way than as water which is taken from the well, and then blather and say: How is a handful of water to help the soul? Aye, my friend, who does not know that water is water if tearing things asunder is what we are after? But how dare you thus interfere with God’s order, and tear away the most precious treasure with which God has connected and enclosed it, and which He will not have separated? For the kernel in the water is God’s Word or command and the name of God, which is a treasure greater and nobler than heaven and earth.

Comprehend the difference, then, that Baptism is quite another thing than all other water; not on account of the natural quality but because something more noble is here added; for God Himself stakes His honor, His power and might on it. Therefore it is not only natural water, but a divine, heavenly, holy, and blessed water, and in whatever other terms we can praise it,-all on account of the Word, which is a heavenly, holy Word, that no one can sufficiently extol, for it has, and is able to do, all that God is and can do [since it has all the virtue and power of God comprised in it]. Hence also it derives its essence as a Sacrament, as St. Augustine also taught: Accedat verbum ad elementum et fit sacramentum. That is, when the Word is joined to the element or natural substance, it becomes a Sacrament, that is, a holy and divine matter and sign." The Large Catechism, Part IV

-CryptoLutheran

It goes along with the verse: "With the heart believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

This is why a personal commitment to Christ followed by baptism is the essential pathway to salvation. When a person receives Christ in his heart, he receives the assurance of salvation based on the promise "Those who have received Christ have the right to call themselves the children of God". But salvation is completed when the person rises from the dead to meet the Lord on the last day. Therefore, just saying the "sinner's prayer" of commitment to Christ is not enough if there are not follow up actions to show the fruit of repentance, such as public confession of faith in Christ and a walk in the Spirit, forsaking the works of the flesh.

Therefore, I believe that water baptism is the Scriptural way of making the public confession of faith in Christ. It goes along with the Scripture that says that if a person is not ashamed of Christ before the world, Christ will acknowledge him at the Judgment. Therefore, in the body of Christ, water baptism is the universal and accepted act of public confession of faith and commitment to Christ.

 

[ViaCrucis]

It goes along with the verse: "With the heart believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

This is why a personal commitment to Christ followed by baptism is the essential pathway to salvation. When a person receives Christ in his heart, he receives the assurance of salvation based on the promise "Those who have received Christ have the right to call themselves the children of God". But salvation is completed when the person rises from the dead to meet the Lord on the last day. Therefore, just saying the "sinner's prayer" of commitment to Christ is not enough if there are not follow up actions to show the fruit of repentance, such as public confession of faith in Christ and a walk in the Spirit, forsaking the works of the flesh.

Therefore, I believe that water baptism is the Scriptural way of making the public confession of faith in Christ. It goes along with the Scripture that says that if a person is not ashamed of Christ before the world, Christ will acknowledge him at the Judgment. Therefore, in the body of Christ, water baptism is the universal and accepted act of public confession of faith and commitment to Christ.

One of the things that tends to make the Lutheran tradition distinct within Protestantism is that we don't view conversion as a momentary thing. Conversion is a process, we are being converted, just as we are being saved. It's present tense. We also say the same thing about justification. It's not that we merely were justified, we are justified--present tense. God justifies us, present tense.

When we assemble together around Word and Sacrament, the chief purpose isn't us doing something for God. We go to receive Word and Sacrament, these gifts of God--where God is active in accomplishing His work. Justifying us, sanctifying us, saving us, giving and working faith in us.

It's all God.

Which is why we understand that whether a person is baptized as an infant, or baptized as an old man after having already believed for many years--it all remains the same work of God.

Take myself for example, I wasn't baptized until I was 17. Though I've always believed in Jesus, there was never a time in my life when I didn't believe. So when was I born again? Well, when God gave me faith. Which is why we say "Word and Sacrament" not "Word or Sacrament" or "Sacrament only".

Word and Sacrament--because these aren't two things, they're one thing. So whether you were baptized at a few days old, or baptized on your deathbed, it's still baptism. Whether you came to faith young or late, it's still faith. It's all God's work. God working through His means of Word and Sacrament to accomplish what He wants in us; namely to save us.

My assurance doesn't come from any thing I've said, thought, felt, or done. My only assurance comes from the Gospel itself--because I understand now that what God says in the Gospel is a promise. And God doesn't go back on His promises. The Prophet wrote almost three thousand years ago, "so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it." (Isaiah 55:11).

I'm not saved or justified because I accepted Jesus, or made a commitment to Jesus. I'm saved and justified because God, in Jesus, made His commitment to me--a worthless and wretched sinner. That's the peace that surpasses all understanding. God chose me, God claimed me, God did everything.

I'm merely the naked, starving beggar with nothing whatsoever to give. My hands are empty and soaked with sin and blood. Christ, the Good Samaritan, saw me naked and beaten on the road, and picked me up, took me to the inn, and paid for everything.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[RickReads]

Except Scripture says it does. And Christians have literally always believed this.



That's a hefty charge that probably deserves to be backed up.



Why should I believe that when "baptism" is mentioned that it means anything else other than baptism? When the biblical authors want to use baptism in a more metaphorical sense, they go out of their way to say it. Like when John the Baptist says that the One who comes after him will baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire. This "baptize with the Holy Spirit" is clearly not regular baptism, but is something different.

Now if we want to know what the Bible means by "baptism with the Holy Spirit", I'd argue that we should look to see what the Bible actually says about it.

The phrase "water baptism" isn't biblical, and it's also redundant. When ancient people saw this word they knew it inferred water. If I said, "I'm going to take a bath" we'd all know what I meant, I don't have to say, "I'm going to take a water bath". Because if I wanted to speak of some other kind of bath, I would say something like "I'm going to take a mud bath" or "I'm going to go bathe in good fortune".

I would argue that, without additional context or information to the contrary, there is no reason to think that "baptism", when spoken plainly, means anything other than baptism.



You have it backward, actually. When we take away God's means of grace we deny God's power and we introduce our own works and means. Things like the altar call or the sinner's prayer.



Let's ignore for a moment the absurdity of claiming that Lutherans, of all people, don't believe in salvation by grace alone (that's kind of our entire brand).

I asked you earlier this question: How is a person saved? You simply told me to read Romans. But I still don't know what you believe about this subject.

Would you care to know what I believe, as a Lutheran?

"For neither you nor I could ever know anything of Christ, or believe on Him, and obtain Him for our Lord, unless it were offered to us and granted to our hearts by the Holy Ghost through the preaching of the Gospel. The work is done and accomplished; for Christ has acquired and gained the treasure for us by His suffering, death, resurrection, etc. But if the work remained concealed so that no one knew of it, then it would be in vain and lost. That this treasure, therefore, might not lie buried, but be appropriated and enjoyed, God has caused the Word to go forth and be proclaimed, in which He gives the Holy Ghost to bring this treasure home and appropriate it to us." - Luther's Large Catechism, Part II, Article III.

"Also they teach that men cannot be justified before God by their own strength, merits, or works, but are freely justified for Christ's sake, through faith, when they believe that they are received into favor, and that their sins are forgiven for Christ's sake, who, by His death, has made satisfaction for our sins. This faith God imputes for righteousness in His sight. Rom. 3 and 4." - The Augsburg Confession, Article IV

And, pretty much, the sum total of everything in the Lutheran Confessions is repeated, continual, solid confession that salvation is from God alone, by His power alone, by Christ's life, death, and resurrection alone, grace alone, through faith alone.

I could not be saved unless God gave me faith, for this faith is not of myself, it is the gift of God (Ephesians 2:8); I contribute nothing--no works, no efforts, nothing, for Ephesians 2:9 is clear, it is not on human efforts, so that none may boast. This means even faith is from God.

How then, can a person have faith? The Apostle is to our rescue in answering this question, for he explains in Romans 10:17 that faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ. So how does one receive faith? From the word, the Gospel. For this reason the Apostle has just finished saying that all who call on the name of the Lord shall be saved and never put to shame, but, he asks, how can they call on Him whom they have not heard, and how can anyone hear unless someone is sent to preach?

This is why, by the way, the Apostle said in the first chapter of Romans, "For I am not ashamed of the Gospel, for it is the power of God to save all who believe, the Jew first and also the Greek."

The Gospel is the power of God to save.

It's that Gospel that gives us faith, God works and creates faith--and He does that through Means. He does that through His word--so when the Gospel is preached, it--for it is a doubled edged sword that knows the secret thoughts and intentions of the heart (Hebrews 4:12)--the power of God breaks through and gives hears to hear and eyes to see, it gives faith to believe.

So, we can say, with confidence, that wherever the word is, God is alive, active, and working.

So what does Paul say in Ephesians 5:26, that Christ cleansed and sanctified His Church by the washing of what with the what?

If Baptism were just water, then this whole conversation would be over. Water is just water, and it can't do anything. But, but if it is water to which the word is connected and comprehended; if it is water that the Holy Spirit Himself is active and at work in and through (and if the word is there, then of course the Spirit is there). Then Baptism is not some work of man to get wet; but the work and power of God to bring about the very work and promises which He Himself has made.

What kind of promises? Like this: "For all of you who were baptized into Christ have put on Christ". Water can't do that, but the word can, the Holy Spirit can--and He does that through and with the water.

Which is why Lutherans believe the following:

"For to be baptized in the name of God is to be baptized not by men, but by God Himself. Therefore, although it is performed by human hands, it is nevertheless truly God’s own work. From this fact every one may himself readily infer that it is a far higher work than any work performed by a man or a saint. For what work greater than the work of God can we do?

But here the devil is busy to delude us with false appearances, and lead us away from the work of God to our own works. For there is a much more splendid appearance when a Carthusian does many great and difficult works; and we all think much more of that which we do and merit ourselves. But the Scriptures teach thus: Even though we collect in one mass the works of all the monks, however splendidly they may shine, they would not be as noble and good as if God should pick up a straw. Why? Because the person is nobler and better. Here, then, we must not estimate the person according to the works, but the works according to the person, from whom they must derive their nobility. But insane reason will not regard this, and because Baptism does not shine like the works which we do, it is to be esteemed as nothing.

From this now learn a proper understanding of the subject, and how to answer the question what Baptism is, namely thus, that it is not mere ordinary water, but water comprehended in God’s Word and command, and sanctified thereby, so that it is nothing else than a divine water; not that the water in itself is nobler than other water, but that God’s Word and command are added.

Therefore it is pure wickedness and blasphemy of the devil that now our new spirits, to mock at Baptism, omit from it God’s Word and institution, and look upon it in no other way than as water which is taken from the well, and then blather and say: How is a handful of water to help the soul? Aye, my friend, who does not know that water is water if tearing things asunder is what we are after? But how dare you thus interfere with God’s order, and tear away the most precious treasure with which God has connected and enclosed it, and which He will not have separated? For the kernel in the water is God’s Word or command and the name of God, which is a treasure greater and nobler than heaven and earth.

Comprehend the difference, then, that Baptism is quite another thing than all other water; not on account of the natural quality but because something more noble is here added; for God Himself stakes His honor, His power and might on it. Therefore it is not only natural water, but a divine, heavenly, holy, and blessed water, and in whatever other terms we can praise it,-all on account of the Word, which is a heavenly, holy Word, that no one can sufficiently extol, for it has, and is able to do, all that God is and can do [since it has all the virtue and power of God comprised in it]. Hence also it derives its essence as a Sacrament, as St. Augustine also taught: Accedat verbum ad elementum et fit sacramentum. That is, when the Word is joined to the element or natural substance, it becomes a Sacrament, that is, a holy and divine matter and sign." The Large Catechism, Part IV

-CryptoLutheran

I'm glad I didn't try to discuss the Eucharist with you.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I'm glad I didn't try to discuss the Eucharist with you.

I'm not adverse to it. And if you think I'm an idolator, well I've certainly been called worse. I once got called an agent of Satan because I didn't believe that Harold Camping's prediction of the rapture was correct. And I've been called a devil worshiper on more than one occasion, I don't recall why, but there were numerous occasions and for different reasons. I'm pretty used to all of that, I've been hearing it for the last twentyish years.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[RickReads]

I'm not adverse to it. And if you think I'm an idolator, well I've certainly been called worse. I once got called an agent of Satan because I didn't believe that Harold Camping's prediction of the rapture was correct. And I've been called a devil worshiper on more than one occasion, I don't recall why, but there were numerous occasions and for different reasons. I'm pretty used to all of that, I've been hearing it for the last twentyish years.

-CryptoLutheran

I believe the only negative thing I said about you is that you behaved piously when you attacked me over my sense of humor and I apologized for confronting you about it in the forum.

I`ve even been telling a few site members that I`m leaving for a while and it's in large part due to this incident with you last night.

 

[ViaCrucis]

I believe the only negative thing I said about you is that you behaved piously when you attacked me over my sense of humor and I apologized for confronting you about it in the forum.

I wasn't attacking your character. I simply mentioned in passing that if someone calls me an idolator for what I believe about the Lord's Supper then, so be it. When you said you were glad you didn't talk about the Eucharist with me, I simply thought of what the absolute worst outcome of that could be. I was being sincere, it's okay if you were to think I'm an idolator. I wouldn't be angry, or upset, or really even offended. That's really all I was saying here.

I`ve even been telling a few site members that I`m leaving for a while and it's in large part due to this incident with you last night.

I apologize if I have been such a negative impact. I truly do not want that. Don't let me be the reason you step away, I have no desire to see you leave.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[RickReads]

I wasn't attacking your character. I simply mentioned in passing that if someone calls me an idolator for what I believe about the Lord's Supper then, so be it. When you said you were glad you didn't talk about the Eucharist with me, I simply thought of what the absolute worst outcome of that could be. I was being sincere, it's okay if you were to think I'm an idolator. I wouldn't be angry, or upset, or really even offended. That's really all I was saying here.


-CryptoLutheran

It was another of my jokes that you really didn't get. I never talk about the Eucharist because it's not a hill I want to fight and die on.

Until recently I`ve been dealing with some unpleasant chronic pain. I`m doing better and my pain level has gone down but I can't seem to stop making jokes a lot of the time. I got one foot on the other side and it's become hard to take life all that seriously when it comes to certain things.

Until a few weeks ago I couldn't concentrate on anything and now that my mind is clear again my thoughts kind of race a bit and I get a little goofy because I feel like having some fun.

 

[ViaCrucis]

It was another of my jokes that you really didn't get. I never talk about the Eucharist because it's not a hill I want to fight and die on.

Until recently I`ve been dealing with some unpleasant chronic pain. I`m doing better and my pain level has gone down but I can't seem to stop making jokes a lot of the time. I got one foot on the other side and it's become hard to take life all that seriously when it comes to certain things.

Until a few weeks ago I couldn't concentrate on anything and now that my mind is clear again my thoughts kind of race a bit and I get a little goofy because I feel like having some fun.

I'm sorry to hear about the chronic pain. It can also be difficult for humor to be communicated clearly on a discussion thread. And I know that when I get into "serious discussion mode" I can get tunnel vision and perhaps take things more seriously than they were intended. So for that I apologize.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[RickReads]

I'm sorry to hear about the chronic pain. It can also be difficult for humor to be communicated clearly on a discussion thread. And I know that when I get into "serious discussion mode" I can get tunnel vision and perhaps take things more seriously than they were intended. So for that I apologize.

-CryptoLutheran

I have the same problem and It's time to let this all go. I just found it hard to take criticism for things I said in harmless jest.