What is it about non-denominations that Lutherans warn against?

[DaRev]

What does this say to you? Mark 9

Whoever Is Not Against Us Is for Us

38 “Teacher,” said John, “we saw someone driving out demons in your name and we told him to stop, because he was not one of us.”
39 “Do not stop him,” Jesus said. “For no one who does a miracle in my name can in the next moment say anything bad about me, 40 for whoever is not against us is for us. 41 Truly I tell you, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to the Messiah will certainly not lose their reward.

I dislike the partison bickering I see so often in Christianity, and yes, I am an ELCA'er.

If I may...

Actually, the verses you quoted support PW's point perfectly.

Those who teach that baptism is symbolic are apart from Christ who teaches it is a means of grace. Those who teach that communion is symbolic are apart from Christ who says that the bread and wine are His body and blood. Those who teach that there are multiple paths to God are apart from Christ who says "no one comes to the Father except through Me."

"Whoever is not against us is for us." Those who teach against the word of Christ are certainly not for Him. Thus the reason that the Scriptures tell us to stay away from false teachers. Those who are not for Him are against Him, and thus against His people who hold to His teachings.

 

[ricker]

If I may...

Actually, the verses you quoted support PW's point perfectly.

Those who teach that baptism is symbolic are apart from Christ who teaches it is a means of grace. Those who teach that communion is symbolic are apart from Christ who says that the bread and wine are His body and blood. Those who teach that there are multiple paths to God are apart from Christ who says "no one comes to the Father except through Me."

"Whoever is not against us is for us." Those who teach against the word of Christ are certainly not for Him. Thus the reason that the Scriptures tell us to stay away from false teachers. Those who are not for Him are against Him, and thus against His people who hold to His teachings.

No offence but you have it backwards. Those Jesus was talking about certainly were not theologically perfect. They weren't following Jesus in the manner the Disciples were, and yet Jesus said because they were using His name they were for Him, and would not lose their reward. Maybe someone could be a true follower of Jesus and not be one of you? Please read the passage again.

 

[Aibrean]

Hmm...schooling a pastor. This should be interesting.

*sits patiently to watch*

 

[PreachersWife2004]

No offence but you have it backwards. Those Jesus was talking about certainly were not theologically perfect. They weren't following Jesus in the manner the Disciples were, and yet Jesus said because they were using His name they were for Him, and would not lose their reward. Maybe someone could be a true follower of Jesus and not be one of you? Please read the passage again.

Jesus knew their hearts, too.

We don't have that luxury.

Church A says that you don't have to be baptized to be saved. Church B says that you do have to be baptized to be saved.

Which is it? How do you determine which church is right? They can't both be right. There is no "maybe" in the bible as I said before.

Holding people to the right teachings doesn't make us mean, or close-minded. We're told to use the bible to teach, correct and rebuke. What you want is a free-for-all where people can believe what they want and still have eternal life and everyone gets together and sings Kumbyah. If God really worked that way, I doubt he would've told us that that the way to heaven is narrow but the path to destruction is wide.

 

[truefiction1]

"Whoever is not against us is for us." Those who teach against the word of Christ are certainly not for Him. Thus the reason that the Scriptures tell us to stay away from false teachers. Those who are not for Him are against Him, and thus against His people who hold to His teachings.

If I may...

Dear Reverend, our Lord will forgive you for your blasphemy against Christ, committed by you through your unintentional misrepresentations of His teachings due to ignorance of what is really taught in the Bible concerning faith and salvation. But please, for your own sake, be careful not to fringe upon blasphemy against the Holy Spirit by refusing to acknowledge or by disregarding the good works done in Jesus' name by the inspiration and power of the Spirit. For such was the sin of the scribes and Pharisees, who worshiped not the Father, Whom they did not really know or understand, but rather their own religious beliefs. Such sin is the worst possible according to the Word, is it not?

Please forgive me, I don't mean to offend, but only to reveal Truth as a warning. God forgives.

Glory be to Jesus Christ! Glory forever! Amen!

And may His mercy be upon us all.

 

[wordsoflife]

We liked that there was a call to come forward at the end of the service

This is one thing I don't like about many Churches. I see people go forward every Sunday but never really learn the scriptures and have a saving faith.

 

[alexnbethmom]

No offence but you have it backwards. Those Jesus was talking about certainly were not theologically perfect. They weren't following Jesus in the manner the Disciples were, and yet Jesus said because they were using His name they were for Him, and would not lose their reward. Maybe someone could be a true follower of Jesus and not be one of you? Please read the passage again.

If I may...

Dear Reverend, our Lord will forgive you for your blasphemy against Christ, committed by you through your unintentional misrepresentations of His teachings due to ignorance of what is really taught in the Bible concerning faith and salvation. But please, for your own sake, be careful not to fringe upon blasphemy against the Holy Spirit by refusing to acknowledge or by disregarding the good works done in Jesus' name by the inspiration and power of the Spirit. For such was the sin of the scribes and Pharisees, who worshiped not the Father, Whom they did not really know or understand, but rather their own religious beliefs. Such sin is the worst possible according to the Word, is it not?

Please forgive me, I don't mean to offend, but only to reveal Truth as a warning. God forgives.

Glory be to Jesus Christ! Glory forever! Amen!

And may His mercy be upon us all.

and to think i get a front row seat to this....

 

[Moses Medina]

I'll be over here... totally minding my own business.

 

[DaRev]

No offence but you have it backwards. Those Jesus was talking about certainly were not theologically perfect. They weren't following Jesus in the manner the Disciples were, and yet Jesus said because they were using His name they were for Him, and would not lose their reward. Maybe someone could be a true follower of Jesus and not be one of you? Please read the passage again.

I've read them numerous times. Even preached on them before. I'm not the one who has it backwards. It's a situation where if A=B and B=C then A=C. If whoever is not against Him is for Him, then whoever is not for Him is against Him. How do we know who is for or against? We use the Scriptures as our guide. Jesus plainly taught a number of things. Those who teach or act contrary to them are certainly not for Him. It's really quite simple.

Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, even Muslims use the name of Jesus in different ways or for different things. But they certainly aren't for Him. Anyone who says they are is wrong.

If I may...

Dear Reverend, our Lord will forgive you for your blasphemy against Christ, committed by you through your unintentional misrepresentations of His teachings due to ignorance of what is really taught in the Bible concerning faith and salvation.

Exactly where am I ignorant "of what is really taught in the Bible concerning faith and salvation"? I'd be interested to hear that.

But please, for your own sake, be careful not to fringe upon blasphemy against the Holy Spirit by refusing to acknowledge or by disregarding the good works done in Jesus' name by the inspiration and power of the Spirit. For such was the sin of the scribes and Pharisees, who worshiped not the Father, Whom they did not really know or understand, but rather their own religious beliefs. Such sin is the worst possible according to the Word, is it not?

Where have I made any such statements? I'm not denying the work of the Spirit in anyone. But those who actively promote teachings and actions that are contrary to the clear teachings of our Lord in His word are certainly not working by the Spirit. The Scriptures say much about false teachers and false prophets. Those who are truly being led by the Spirit cannot teach or act against the Lord. In Mark 9:39 Jesus says "No one who does a mighty work in my name will be able soon afterward to speak evil of me." Those who are truly acting by way of the Spirit cannot speak or act or teach against our Lord.

 

[PreachersWife2004]

If I may...

Dear Reverend, our Lord will forgive you for your blasphemy against Christ, committed by you through your unintentional misrepresentations of His teachings due to ignorance of what is really taught in the Bible concerning faith and salvation. But please, for your own sake, be careful not to fringe upon blasphemy against the Holy Spirit by refusing to acknowledge or by disregarding the good works done in Jesus' name by the inspiration and power of the Spirit. For such was the sin of the scribes and Pharisees, who worshiped not the Father, Whom they did not really know or understand, but rather their own religious beliefs. Such sin is the worst possible according to the Word, is it not?

Please forgive me, I don't mean to offend, but only to reveal Truth as a warning. God forgives.

Glory be to Jesus Christ! Glory forever! Amen!

And may His mercy be upon us all.

I'd say you need to look up the word blasphemy.

And remember, you are a guest in this forum.

 

[ricker]

I've read them numerous times. Even preached on them before. I'm not the one who has it backwards. It's a situation where if A=B and B=C then A=C. If whoever is not against Him is for Him, then whoever is not for Him is against Him. How do we know who is for or against? We use the Scriptures as our guide. Jesus plainly taught a number of things. Those who teach or act contrary to them are certainly not for Him. It's really quite simple.

I see you are trying to confuse the issue by algebraic comparisons."Whoever is not against Him, is for Him" has a completely different meaning than "Whoever is not for Him, is agianst Him". Don't us Lutherans try to take the Bible for exactly what is says?

Jesus did not in this case say "whoever is not for Him is against Him". Please don't take a lovely passage advocating tolerance for other Christians not in our group, and try to somehow countervail the meaning.

 

[ricker]

Hmm...schooling a pastor. This should be interesting.

*sits patiently to watch*

I believe in a priesthood of believers. (With due esteem to the clergy, of course.)

 

[Aibrean]

I believe in a priesthood of believers. (With due esteem to the clergy, of course.)

I believe not everyone has the authority to preach. Why else would there be a need for a calling?

 

[ricker]

I believe not everyone has the authority to preach. Why else would there be a need for a calling?

Or administer the Sacraments. This is a friendly discussion forum, however, not a message from the pulpit. BTW, are not all Christians part of the Great Commission sent to preach the Gospel?

I take the opinions of a pastor seriously. However, my ordained Lutheran pastor's message this last Sunday was on the passage I quoted, and he has quite a different understanding of it than the honorable Da Rev has.

 

[truefiction1]

All good points being made, and I give due consideration to all of them. But, out of my own honest curiosity, I'd like to set forth a hypothetical scenerio in order to get a consensus, from Lutheran's and those standing outside the Luthuran tradition, on what the proper attitude would be toward the scenario if it were experienced in reality. Here is my scenerio:

In a small Roman Catholic parish in a remote village in say, Ohio, an icon of the virgin Mary, which is frequently venerated and prayed before by the laity and the parish priest, who is commonly called "father", begins, with no logical explanation, to form tiny droplets of an oily substance and to emit a powerful fragrance that is more pleasant even than the aroma of the greatest smelling flowers on earth. Soon, the mysterious oil forming on the surface of the icon is being inexplicably produced so abundantly that it begins to flow off of the icon and onto the surface of the table upon which is sits, eventually running over the edge of the table, down the table legs, and onto the floor. The members of the congregtation immediately rejoice in this event and begin to fervently bless and give thanks to the Virgin Mary and to God for giving them a miracle. The oil is collected into small vessels and is used to annoint the faithful. Also, the Catholics take the oil with them and annoint those who are sick, some with terminal/incurrable diseases, and these prayers are answered by a full recovery which the medical professionals are at a loss to explain.

This phenomena is soon reported to the local bishop, who reports it to the Vatican, from which an official investigation into the occurrance is launched. The conclusion of the investigation, with the approval of the Pope, is that the icon of the virgin Mary is indeed miraculous, and that Christ's mother has truly visited His people.

That is the scenario. What do you say about it?

 

[PreachersWife2004]

I see you are trying to confuse the issue by algebraic comparisons."Whoever is not against Him, is for Him" has a completely different meaning than "Whoever is not for Him, is agianst Him". Don't us Lutherans try to take the Bible for exactly what is says?

Jesus did not in this case say "whoever is not for Him is against Him". Please don't take a lovely passage advocating tolerance for other Christians not in our group, and try to somehow countervail the meaning.

If you are not FOR something, what exactly are you then?

Don't try to take scripture and water it down so that it makes the point you want it to make.

 

[DaRev]

I see you are trying to confuse the issue by algebraic comparisons."Whoever is not against Him, is for Him" has a completely different meaning than "Whoever is not for Him, is agianst Him". Don't us Lutherans try to take the Bible for exactly what is says?

Well, we in the LCMS take the Bible for what it says. The ELCA, on the other hand, does not as evidenced by their teaching and practice.

Jesus did not in this case say "whoever is not for Him is against Him". Please don't take a lovely passage advocating tolerance for other Christians not in our group, and try to somehow countervail the meaning.

Tell me where in that passage is Jesus excusing false doctrine? Where is He advocating tolerance of error? This is the heart of the matter in discussion here. I'm not the one countervailing the meaning. The truth is intolerant of error. Those who teach and act contradictory to our Lord's teaching certainly are not for Him. It's not all that difficult to understand.

 

[DaRev]

All good points being made, and I give due consideration to all of them. But, out of my own honest curiosity, I'd like to set forth a hypothetical scenerio in order to get a consensus, from Lutheran's and those standing outside the Luthuran tradition, on what the proper attitude would be toward the scenario if it were experienced in reality. Here is my scenerio:

In a small Roman Catholic parish in a remote village in say, Ohio, an icon of the virgin Mary, which is frequently venerated and prayed before by the laity and the parish priest, who is commonly called "father", begins, with no logical explanation, to form tiny droplets of an oily substance and to emit a powerful fragrance that is more pleasant even than the aroma of the greatest smelling flowers on earth. Soon, the mysterious oil forming on the surface of the icon is being inexplicably produced so abundantly that it begins to flow off of the icon and onto the surface of the table upon which is sits, eventually running over the edge of the table, down the table legs, and onto the floor. The members of the congregtation immediately rejoice in this event and begin to fervently bless and give thanks to the Virgin Mary and to God for giving them a miracle. The oil is collected into small vessels and is used to annoint the faithful. Also, the Catholics take the oil with them and annoint those who are sick, some with terminal/incurrable diseases, and these prayers are answered by a full recovery which the medical professionals are at a loss to explain.

This phenomena is soon reported to the local bishop, who reports it to the Vatican, from which an official investigation into the occurrance is launched. The conclusion of the investigation, with the approval of the Pope, is that the icon of the virgin Mary is indeed miraculous, and that Christ's mother has truly visited His people.

That is the scenario. What do you say about it?

The only thing we can say for certain is that if there were miraculous healings, they were done by the will of God alone, not by the Virgin Mary nor by any oily type substance emanating from a statue.

 

[filosofer]

Jesus did not in this case say "whoever is not for Him is against Him". Please don't take a lovely passage advocating tolerance for other Christians not in our group, and try to somehow countervail the meaning.

Are you sure about that?

[Jesus said:] “He who is not with Me is against Me;” (Luke 11:23)

And he also said this:

[Jesus said:] “For he who is not against us is for us.” (Mark 9:40)

So, Jesus covers it both ways.

 

[ricker]

Are you sure about that?

[Jesus said:] “He who is not with Me is against Me;” (Luke 11:23)

And he also said this:

[Jesus said:] “For he who is not against us is for us.” (Mark 9:40)

So, Jesus covers it both ways.

Did you not notice I said "in this case"? I am not debating a grand overview of all Scripture here, just what Mark 9 plainly says.