How Important Is Docterine When Finding a Mate?

little_tigress said:

so the all church doctrines are ultimately based on Scripture?

Click to expand...

I'm sorry I have to do this

x 1 million

Yes of course where do you think doctrine was based??

Luther073082 said:

I'm sorry I have to do this

x 1 million

Yes of course where do you think doctrine was based??

Click to expand...

No kidding, if we were to create our own doctrines wouldn't we create something a little more convenient? Maybe have a bunch of virgins waiting for us in heaven or something?

Tradition and Revelation are just as common a source for Doctrine as scripture.

And is definitely true in your denominations (and mine).

JM

lostaquarium said:

No, I'm afraid, not at all :o I'm sorry.

It seems like you're describing a number of cliques, or clubs, or allegiances. Another allegiance might be "OK", but it's not our "custom" to talk to each other.

Click to expand...

Thats not true at all. Talking is not the same as having communion. Churchs talk to eachother all of the time. I talk to people outside of the Lutheran church all of the time.

But when it comes to communing we want only people who are of the same beliefs as us. Because communing with someone declares complete oneness with them in faith and doctrine.

I'm sorry. To me, what you describe seems like a very man-made tradition. Almost like a historical feud, that none of the present-day members have reason to be part of. In the Bible, everyone who is saved is in communion with each other. There were no sub-groups among true believers.

Click to expand...

Yes there is. The groups are divided by what doctrine they belive in. You should only commune with people who accept the same doctrines as you.

Thanks Melissa, you've done an excellent job of explaining it I was previously confused because people were using the phrase "being in communion" to mean "being in unity with" in a rather abstract way, and I didn't know what it actually meant for everyday lives. What you're saying is, it would be wrong to take communion in a church of a different denomination, because taking communion is an act of identifying yourself with that particular church. (Whereas I'd say the act of taking communion is one of remembrance in my own heart, which can be done together with believers of all different sorts... but that's me )

Click to expand...

Kind of, identifying yourself with the doctrines of that particular church. I take communion in my church, Melissa's church, and even a confessional Lutheran church. I'm not identifying myself as a member of those churchs, because I'm only a member of one church, but I am identifying my agreement with their doctrines.

I dunno... I kind of get what you're saying. But it seems to me like a lot of man-made distinctions and customs. Levels of closeness, for example.

Click to expand...

It sort of is levels of closeness or how you identify yourself.

If I identify myself as a Christian, I pray with other Christians, because we share that idenity. However when I identify myself as a Lutheran I identify myself only with Lutheran doctrine.

I guess, to condense what you say into a single sentence, would I be right in saying, "You'd only take communion with people who believe exactly the same things, even if they're not essential for salvation."?

Click to expand...

Its easier to base it on the identifyiable doctrines of the church rather then with individual people. I can't be held responsible if someone tries to crash our altar or if there is someone who is not of true faith but proclaims it.

Yep, according to Romans We're supposed to be able to figure it out by looking at nature. But most of us can't do that, so the Bible is a huge help

Click to expand...

What???

God created the church specifically for the teaching and understanding of scripture.

JonMiller said:

Tradition and Revelation are just as common a source for Doctrine as scripture.

Click to expand...

Yes and no... To a certain degree Holy Tradition came before the New Testament was committed to writing, but the scriptures back up tradition.

As for Revelation, we don't believe in any 'new' revelations. As the scriptures say, "As we have said before, so now I say again, if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be anathema."

Ok..question...when you find it wrong to commune outside of those that share your exact church teachigns/doctrines...is that a mandate found in Scripture as a requirement for partaking in the bread/wine? Or is it a church mandate? Cause I think I missed that verse in Scripture.

overit said:

Ok..question...when you find it wrong to commune outside of those that share your exact church teachigns/doctrines...is that a mandate found in Scripture as a requirement for partaking in the bread/wine? Or is it a church mandate? Cause I think I missed that verse in Scripture.

Click to expand...

"Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks [this] cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord's body." - 1 Cor 11:27-29

If someone isn't baptized into the Church, receiving confession, etc..., we don't commune them. Often our Priest won't allow even Orthodox Christians to partake of communion if they're in an unrepentant state...

Of course, most evangelical protestants don't believe in real presense in the eucharist anyway, so sharing communion with absolutely anyone isn't a big deal...

overit said:

Ok..question...when you find it wrong to commune outside of those that share your exact church teachigns/doctrines...is that a mandate found in Scripture as a requirement for partaking in the bread/wine? Or is it a church mandate? Cause I think I missed that verse in Scripture.

Click to expand...

I'm going to give you a document to read rather then to try and work through this one myself.

http://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/CTCR/admisup.pdf

I have to note that I havn't read it, but I think it would explain it better then I can.

So Tigress asking questions that are relevant is reason to treat her like she is stupid?

The doctrine is not based necessarily on scripture, but a man's interpretation thereof.... if it was only scripture, there would be no need for millions of different doctrines and man made rules.

Coach

I won't Luth-I want your response-based solely on Bible verse. I know it goes on and on pages and pages of interpretations/personal views-...trying to tie this in to verse in the actual Bible here. Unless you're saying there is pages and pages of explanation to the words "unworthy manner".

Not picking on you guys, Kirk and Melissa, but you bring up very interesting points which I'd love to address

Luther073082 said:

But when it comes to communing we want only people who are of the same beliefs as us. Because communing with someone declares complete oneness with them in faith and doctrine.
Yes there is. The groups are divided by what doctrine they belive in. You should only commune with people who accept the same doctrines as you.

Click to expand...

Like overit, I'd like it if you could give us a few verses to support this statement. For me, "unworthy manner" sounds like it's refering to non-believers who take communion. I'd agree with that - I wouldn't take communion with non-believers either. Is there any reason you think it refers to believers of a different denomination?

If I identify myself as a Christian, I pray with other Christians, because we share that idenity. However when I identify myself as a Lutheran I identify myself only with Lutheran doctrine.

Click to expand...

That's fine, if you're identifying in your own heart, for your own sake. But I think if you refuse to take communion with other believers, it might hurt them somewhat, and will end up doing more harm than good. Especially since it wasn't ordered by God.

What???
God created the church specifically for the teaching and understanding of scripture.

Click to expand...

Romans 1:18-20
18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

lostaquarium said:

Like overit, I'd like it if you could give us a few verses to support this statement. For me, "unworthy manner" sounds like it's refering to non-believers who take communion. I'd agree with that - I wouldn't take communion with non-believers either. Is there any reason you think it refers to believers of a different denomination?

Click to expand...

Read the document I pointed out.

That's fine, if you're identifying in your own heart, for your own sake. But I think if you refuse to take communion with other believers, it might hurt them somewhat, and will end up doing more harm than good. Especially since it wasn't ordered by God.

Click to expand...

If you read the scripture its far more harmful for them to receive communion in an unworthy manner then any emotional down they might get because I won't commune with them.

Should we refuse to state that homosexual acts are a sin just because it might hurt the feelings of some people who are gay? No of course not we speak the truth.

Therefore I will speak the truth about the real body and blood of Christ.

Lets change what we have in bold so you can understand it better.

Romans 1:18-20
18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

Paul is not saying that people can just get God.

He is saying God made 2 things apparent to every human.

1. Man's wickedness
2. God's power and divine nature

If people could just understand God without teaching, scripture or the church, there would be no need for any of them.

The last verse tells us why God made these things clear to them. So no person would have an excuse to not seek out God.

Are you really saying I worship God in an unworthy manner?

Luther073082 said:

Read the document I pointed out.

Click to expand...

I don't want to. Especially since you haven't. It's a long document.

lostaquarium said:

I don't want to. Especially since you haven't. It's a long document.

Click to expand...

I read about half of it since then. Going to read the rest later.

However I think the point is more or less about not if I've read it or not, but if I understand the basics of it.

And while I did learn a few things for the most part I already knew much of what was said.

Are you really saying I worship God in an unworthy manner?

Click to expand...

It depends on what type of worship you are talking about.

Do I belive that you take communion in an unworthy manner? Yes I do. Thats nothing personal against anyone or any church.

But the mere fact of the manner is, that if one accepts like the scripture says is true, that the body and blood of Christ is truely present in communion. Then by the verse in Corinthians those who do not discern (that is to recognize) that body and blood are therefore taking communion in an unworthy manner.

I don't take my faith as a reason to personally dislike or be against someone. I love my parents & brother a lot, but unless they change, they are all going to hell.

And let me tell you, thats a lot harder to say then it is to tell someone that they take communion in an unworthy/improper manner.

lostaquarium said:

Are you really saying I worship God in an unworthy manner?

Click to expand...

If Communion is a Sacrament, and you do not approach it as such, that would be "not discerning the body and blood of Christ." That may be different than "unworthy," which could also mean being in an unrepentant state of sin. Both and either are grounds for not receiving at a church that believes in Sacraments.

Llauralin said:

If Communion is a Sacrament, and you do not approach it as such, that would be "not discerning the body and blood of Christ." That may be different than "unworthy," which could also mean being in an unrepentant state of sin. Both and either are grounds for not receiving at a church that believes in Sacraments.

Click to expand...

I think the answer to that question is completly based on the answer to the question that sacramental churchs don't have any scriptural answer to.

That would be "Is communion served at a non-sacramental church still the true body and blood of Christ, or is it just bread without Christ's real presence?"

If the answer is that it is still the true body and blood of Christ, then the answer would be that you take it in an unworthy manner.

If the answer is no then the word improper would better describe.

1 Cor 11:29

For anyone who eats and drinks without recognizing the body of the Lord eats and drinks judgment on himself.

Click to expand...

I don't think the bible can be much clearer then this on the matter. Of course Evangelical Protestants will claim its all symbolic, just like baptism. Because to evangelicial protestants everything is symbolic, that is what seperates them from sacramental churchs who belive that both baptism and communion have real spriritual power and meaning. Not because we want it that way because God created it that way.

Luther073082 said:

I think the answer to that question is completly based on the answer to the question that sacramental churchs don't have any scriptural answer to.

That would be "Is communion served at a non-sacramental church still the true body and blood of Christ, or is it just bread without Christ's real presence?"

If the answer is that it is still the true body and blood of Christ, then the answer would be that you take it in an unworthy manner.

If the answer is no then the word improper would better describe.

...

Click to expand...

True.

Luther073082 said:

I'm sorry I have to do this

x 1 million

Yes of course where do you think doctrine was based??

Click to expand...

so then you're saying i was right in concluding that Scripture alone is enough to teach salvation and edify the believer's walk?

little_tigress said:

so then you're saying i was right in concluding that Scripture alone is enough to teach salvation and edify the believer's walk?

Click to expand...

Only when properly understood from its origional languages and its proper context. As well as taught within the proper context of other verses of scripture.

The problem is that an educated clergy is needed to teach these things because people arn't born understanding the proper context of things. No one speaks or reads biblical greek (Which is a much more ancient form of modern Greek) as their mother tongue. Only those who are raised as Jews are taught as children to read Hebrew.

Plus its important to understand the history of the church, especially the apostolic church from which we should model ourselves after as well as we can.

So once you can read greek and hebrew and understand everything in their proper context then scripture, are a complete expert on the 2000+ year history of the church, and you have years and years to properly study those scriptures in order to interprete scripture with scripture.

Then yes provided all of those things scripture might be enough. Although I'm not sure then, because God did hand the Jews scripture and they understood Hebrew and studyed it for years and they still didn't get it.

But since we are not really any of those things, the church and a well educated teachers are required.

To add in my personal story here. Before I went to college and received a proper education in Christian doctrine, I thought the bible was stupid and self contradictory. Thats because I had not yet been properly taught to read and understand the bible.

Jesus had to teach everyone what the OT ment and he was hanging around with people who studyed the OT for years and years and Hebrew was second nature to them. But they never really got it until Jesus came by to set the record straight. So I don't see where anyone can belive that just the bible is enough to understand faith. It sounds to me like a poor excuse to not learn and an even worse excuse not to teach their children about God and the bible.

I've seen children grow massivily in faith once they actually are taught how to understand the bible. Before that, its not much more then words to them because they don't understand it within its proper context. But before that, they where no where spritiually. Because mom and dad never took the time to teach them the difference between the OT and the NT, they just said. "Here is a bible."

You would be amazed what a difference it makes between a kid who doesn't know how to read the bible and one who does.