Pastor Wolfmueller - so right about "doing the leg work" yourself versus depending on AI. Not from a Christian family, although I went to Baptist church with an elderly neighbor. In college, I met Roman Catholics and Pentecostals. I literally read the Bible numerous times in college, looking for answers to these different denominational issues. So in looking for an answer to tongues, I got the entire Bible! That's a win vs just being given the answer.
Pastors Wolfmueller and Packer, I need wisdom on how to use Romans 14 in my daily life around other people. Is it actually just referring to people who are in places of power or wisdom or reputation? How do I know if someone is telling me that I'm being a stumbling block only to cause me to do what he wants under duress? At what point am I answering a fool according to his folly? What kinds of freedom do I have in Christ to do adiaphora?
I am one of the people in the fb group who was "put off" by the book saying "God wanted Jesus to have brothers and sisters, that's why I'm here." It didn't sit right with me, and I'm now questioning everything 😂 I think my knee-jerk reaction comes from the fact that we (Lutherans anyway) don't normally put ourselves as "equals" with Jesus. To me, this wording does that - not wrongly, I now see - but to think of ourselves that highly seems so arrogant! Of course, this is putting the focus on us and our standing instead of God's love that really is that big and all-encompassing! And side-note: all generic Christian groups on fb are full of Mormons that argue and take offense when someone points out they aren't Christian. 😅
LLM training on the Lutheran confessions would be great. look up training and RAG and Langchains for this. Some of the issue is prompting, not knowing how to properly prompt an LLM will give very bland answers/prose/universals
I am new to Lutheranism, I think you guys said we don't celebrate the trinity yet in the Lutheran prayer companion (originally written by Martin Luther and others, Concordia Press) it refers to "The feast of the Holy Trinity" and the first through 26th Sunday after Trinity, I have been wondering about this can you explain? AT 9:50 minutes.
If you are referring to the conversation around 9-10 minutes, they are referring to their experiences when they were in the American evangelical traditions ("non-denominational", church of Christ, etc.). In those traditions, they found that the Trinity was rarely discussed/celebrated. But we definitely teach about and celebrate the Trinity in confessional Lutheranism (in other words, those who still teach and confess that the collection of works called "the Lutheran Confessions/the Book of Concord", which includes the catechism among other things, is a true understanding of Scripture, and therefore what we believe).
@@TheodenEdnewDoesDnD I think it is currently called the first etc Sunday after Pentecost, and used to be called the first etc Sunday after Trinity, this is what I am trying to understand. Thank you for responding, peace of Christ.
@@erinm8772(at the 9:50 mark) I think it is currently called the first etc Sunday after Pentecost, and used to be called the first etc Sunday after Trinity, this is what I am trying to understand. Thank you for responding, peace of Christ.
So I know some people don't think my question on Mary not remaining a virgin, isn't important because our salvation doesn't rely on it but it is important because it has to do with inerrancy of the Bible. Matthew 1:25 is a narrative and was written AFTER Jesus was resurrected so it makes no sense to think that was for then...or was the plan but didn't happen afterwards. It is a history of what DID happen. It is the same as the historical creation narrative in Genesis where it says God created everything in 6 days. This is important because it also relates to understanding the bread and wine as being Christ's true body and blood. We either believe in the plain reading or we don't. So maybe my real question is, do Lutherans truly believe in the plain reading of Scripture?
I'm Lutheran and don't believe Mary remained a virgin her whole life but also don't read every word in the Bible as literal otherwise you get the flat earth types
Speaking of being children of God and Jesus' brothers and sisters why do some Lutherans (including Luther) think Mary remained a virgin her whole life. We Lutherans are big on plain language and the plain language in the Bible is that Jesus had brothers and sisters. Also, the Bible says Joseph took Mary home with him but did not consummate the marriage until after Jesus was born which implies they did after. I know Catholics believe Mary was always a virgin but when Lutherans say this it makes me think they are saying it is sinful to have sex in marriage... and that they think Mary never sinned which I know is what Catholics believe and I think is wrong. Can you explain this? It is so confusing to me!
If I may, I can try to help with some of it: 1. You're right that the "plain language" says that Jesus had brothers and sisters. However, these Lutherans (myself included) would argue that such language is used to signify close familial relations. This is similar to the word "brethren" in English, which literally refers to one's brother but can also be used to signify a closer relation. We do see this sometimes in Greek, like in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) when Lot is called Abraham's "brother" (the same Greek word), even though Lot is actually his nephew. Similarly, we see two of our Lord's "brothers" in scripture--James and Joseph--are really his cousins. This is implied by the listing of women at the crucifixion and resurrection. In John 19:25, there are two Mary's listed--the mother of our Lord and her sister, the wife of Clopas. In Matthew 27:56 and Mark 15:40, there are references to a Mary who is "the mother of James and Joseph/Joses." This is very unlikely to be Mary--since she would likely be called "his mother," like she is everywhere else, and she is listed second to Mary Magdalene, which would be odd. Thus, it is more likely Clopas' Mary, which would make James and Joseph the cousins of Jesus, but they are called "brothers" because of their close blood relation. 2. For the "until" reference, the word doesn't mean that they necessarily consummated the marriage afterward. The same word is used in Matthew 28:20: "Behold I am with you always UNTIL the end of the age." (Note: this is the same gospel as the "until" reference) Obviously our Lord will be present with us after the end of the age, but He's simply saying that He will still be present beforehand. We would argue that "until" is used in this passage in the same sense. 3. To my knowledge, no Lutheran would say that this means sex is sinful. It is a holy part of marriage involved in the one-flesh union. However, we see from 1 Cor. 7:36-38 that there is a place for a betrothed pair to simply never engage in the sexual union. This is what we would say happened with Mary and Joseph. In addition, none of us (to my knowledge) think Mary was sinless, simply that she had no more children. 4. Interesting to note, the Lutherans who believed in it included Luther himself as well as many of his early successors like Chemnitz and even some of the Americans, including Pieper and Walther, though the latter's view may have changed over time.
@@williamkillinger8618 Thank you for this detailed answer but I have heard much of this but it seems it isn't a plain reading if it takes this much explaining. It is like those who try to say the wine was really just grape juice argument some Christians make....it just isn't plan reading. I do appreciate your answer but Mary having other children just seems the clearest reading to me.
@@srice6231I think the most important thing thing is that, as Lutherans, we have liberty to say that since Scripture doesn’t explicitly answer this question, we can leave it as a matter of pious opinion rather than dogmatizing it, as the Catholics do
@@williamkillinger8618 Thank you for that great answer! You are very cool sir! have you ever seen Wonka? It's a really good movie I've heard! Ive only seen some of it with a great man! He made really cool typology for it and you should give me some typology for it if you can, I have a good feeling that you would be good at that for some reason... God's blessings brother!
John 1:9 The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. 11 He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. 12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
Maybe the text would be more clear of it said you were adopted to be God’s children rather than made to be God’s children. I bet many less people would have had LDS red flags go up. LDS doctrine is so insidious, I’m glad the readers have their antenna up.
Mormons use, sort of, “perpendicular” words. The use words like “trinity” but they don’t mean the same thing. We say “One God, three persons”, they say “three gods, one purpose”. They muddle the language, use similar expressions, add Freemasonry (I was a Mason for many years - Mormonism is Masonry + religious themes), and make some sort of strange sci-fi religion out of it. *edit* I said “perpendicular” - I don’t think that’s right. “Parallel”might be better but the beliefs don’t really match or even come close to the same thing. I don’t know. But they use our words and mean totally different things.
The mormon cartoon you are referencing was/is not made nor put out by them. It was created by a group back in the 80's who also did one on the jw's. I do not recall the name of the group that produced them, but the videos I did watch by them were quite accurate. The videos should be watched by Christians so as to get a better understanding of these two cults and how they manipulate the word every chance they get to fit their worldly "christian" agenda. They are both very charming but quite disturbing cults.
Maybe have an LDS theologian on here. Not a good thing to think you know another religion without actually talking with their theologians and reading their texts. Yes, LDS believe the Bible. Jesus' mother only provided a mortal body. She was not godlike herself. She had other children as the Bible says. Being a mother presumes a denigrating status. A bit gnostic. Mortal woman giving birth is somehow gross and beneath God of the universe? So, you need to concoct a Caesarian virgin birth story and then perpetual virgin otherwise she is not worthy? So, females giving birth is so gross that Jesus would never ever be associated with it. Let's invent Mary was sinlessly conceived and birthed so she is unspotted or unsoiled by original sin. Right.... LDS say a mortal woman becoming a natural mother IS SACRED. Nothing ugly, dirty, or sinful in all that. And so if Mary had other children by conceiving after Jesus that negates her purity card? Huh? LDS give Mary her due: the honor and respect as a mortal woman chosen to birth mortal Christ whom she knew was not really hers so God blessed her with other children. Logical. Merciful. Loving. Rational.
It sort of seems like ai is a Tower of Babel. Create an “all knowledge, one knowledge” thing for the purpose of getting “up” to a “god knowledge”. What possible could go wrong? 🫣
Pastor Wolfmueller - so right about "doing the leg work" yourself versus depending on AI. Not from a Christian family, although I went to Baptist church with an elderly neighbor. In college, I met Roman Catholics and Pentecostals. I literally read the Bible numerous times in college, looking for answers to these different denominational issues. So in looking for an answer to tongues, I got the entire Bible! That's a win vs just being given the answer.
Pastors Wolfmueller and Packer, I need wisdom on how to use Romans 14 in my daily life around other people. Is it actually just referring to people who are in places of power or wisdom or reputation? How do I know if someone is telling me that I'm being a stumbling block only to cause me to do what he wants under duress? At what point am I answering a fool according to his folly? What kinds of freedom do I have in Christ to do adiaphora?
I am one of the people in the fb group who was "put off" by the book saying "God wanted Jesus to have brothers and sisters, that's why I'm here." It didn't sit right with me, and I'm now questioning everything 😂
I think my knee-jerk reaction comes from the fact that we (Lutherans anyway) don't normally put ourselves as "equals" with Jesus. To me, this wording does that - not wrongly, I now see - but to think of ourselves that highly seems so arrogant! Of course, this is putting the focus on us and our standing instead of God's love that really is that big and all-encompassing!
And side-note: all generic Christian groups on fb are full of Mormons that argue and take offense when someone points out they aren't Christian. 😅
LLM training on the Lutheran confessions would be great. look up training and RAG and Langchains for this. Some of the issue is prompting, not knowing how to properly prompt an LLM will give very bland answers/prose/universals
I am new to Lutheranism, I think you guys said we don't celebrate the trinity yet in the Lutheran prayer companion (originally written by Martin Luther and others, Concordia Press) it refers to "The feast of the Holy Trinity" and the first through 26th Sunday after Trinity, I have been wondering about this can you explain? AT 9:50 minutes.
I think there must have been a miscommunication, because you are right. We absolutely do celebrate it.
If you are referring to the conversation around 9-10 minutes, they are referring to their experiences when they were in the American evangelical traditions ("non-denominational", church of Christ, etc.). In those traditions, they found that the Trinity was rarely discussed/celebrated.
But we definitely teach about and celebrate the Trinity in confessional Lutheranism (in other words, those who still teach and confess that the collection of works called "the Lutheran Confessions/the Book of Concord", which includes the catechism among other things, is a true understanding of Scripture, and therefore what we believe).
@@TheodenEdnewDoesDnD I think it is currently called the first etc Sunday after Pentecost, and used to be called the first etc Sunday after Trinity, this is what I am trying to understand. Thank you for responding, peace of Christ.
@@erinm8772(at the 9:50 mark) I think it is currently called the first etc Sunday after Pentecost, and used to be called the first etc Sunday after Trinity, this is what I am trying to understand. Thank you for responding, peace of Christ.
Hey Bryan, I have a question: Do Lutherans believe in God's divine order like christ over man and man over women and women over children
So I know some people don't think my question on Mary not remaining a virgin, isn't important because our salvation doesn't rely on it but it is important because it has to do with inerrancy of the Bible. Matthew 1:25 is a narrative and was written AFTER Jesus was resurrected so it makes no sense to think that was for then...or was the plan but didn't happen afterwards. It is a history of what DID happen. It is the same as the historical creation narrative in Genesis where it says God created everything in 6 days. This is important because it also relates to understanding the bread and wine as being Christ's true body and blood. We either believe in the plain reading or we don't. So maybe my real question is, do Lutherans truly believe in the plain reading of Scripture?
I'm Lutheran and don't believe Mary remained a virgin her whole life but also don't read every word in the Bible as literal otherwise you get the flat earth types
Speaking of being children of God and Jesus' brothers and sisters why do some Lutherans (including Luther) think Mary remained a virgin her whole life. We Lutherans are big on plain language and the plain language in the Bible is that Jesus had brothers and sisters. Also, the Bible says Joseph took Mary home with him but did not consummate the marriage until after Jesus was born which implies they did after. I know Catholics believe Mary was always a virgin but when Lutherans say this it makes me think they are saying it is sinful to have sex in marriage... and that they think Mary never sinned which I know is what Catholics believe and I think is wrong. Can you explain this? It is so confusing to me!
If I may, I can try to help with some of it:
1. You're right that the "plain language" says that Jesus had brothers and sisters. However, these Lutherans (myself included) would argue that such language is used to signify close familial relations. This is similar to the word "brethren" in English, which literally refers to one's brother but can also be used to signify a closer relation. We do see this sometimes in Greek, like in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament) when Lot is called Abraham's "brother" (the same Greek word), even though Lot is actually his nephew. Similarly, we see two of our Lord's "brothers" in scripture--James and Joseph--are really his cousins. This is implied by the listing of women at the crucifixion and resurrection. In John 19:25, there are two Mary's listed--the mother of our Lord and her sister, the wife of Clopas. In Matthew 27:56 and Mark 15:40, there are references to a Mary who is "the mother of James and Joseph/Joses." This is very unlikely to be Mary--since she would likely be called "his mother," like she is everywhere else, and she is listed second to Mary Magdalene, which would be odd. Thus, it is more likely Clopas' Mary, which would make James and Joseph the cousins of Jesus, but they are called "brothers" because of their close blood relation.
2. For the "until" reference, the word doesn't mean that they necessarily consummated the marriage afterward. The same word is used in Matthew 28:20: "Behold I am with you always UNTIL the end of the age." (Note: this is the same gospel as the "until" reference) Obviously our Lord will be present with us after the end of the age, but He's simply saying that He will still be present beforehand. We would argue that "until" is used in this passage in the same sense.
3. To my knowledge, no Lutheran would say that this means sex is sinful. It is a holy part of marriage involved in the one-flesh union. However, we see from 1 Cor. 7:36-38 that there is a place for a betrothed pair to simply never engage in the sexual union. This is what we would say happened with Mary and Joseph. In addition, none of us (to my knowledge) think Mary was sinless, simply that she had no more children.
4. Interesting to note, the Lutherans who believed in it included Luther himself as well as many of his early successors like Chemnitz and even some of the Americans, including Pieper and Walther, though the latter's view may have changed over time.
@@williamkillinger8618 Thank you for this detailed answer but I have heard much of this but it seems it isn't a plain reading if it takes this much explaining. It is like those who try to say the wine was really just grape juice argument some Christians make....it just isn't plan reading. I do appreciate your answer but Mary having other children just seems the clearest reading to me.
@@srice6231I think the most important thing thing is that, as Lutherans, we have liberty to say that since Scripture doesn’t explicitly answer this question, we can leave it as a matter of pious opinion rather than dogmatizing it, as the Catholics do
@@williamkillinger8618 Well said
@@williamkillinger8618 Thank you for that great answer! You are very cool sir! have you ever seen Wonka? It's a really good movie I've heard! Ive only seen some of it with a great man! He made really cool typology for it and you should give me some typology for it if you can, I have a good feeling that you would be good at that for some reason... God's blessings brother!
John 1:9 The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. 11 He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. 12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.
Maybe the text would be more clear of it said you were adopted to be God’s children rather than made to be God’s children. I bet many less people would have had LDS red flags go up. LDS doctrine is so insidious, I’m glad the readers have their antenna up.
Mormons use, sort of, “perpendicular” words. The use words like “trinity” but they don’t mean the same thing. We say “One God, three persons”, they say “three gods, one purpose”. They muddle the language, use similar expressions, add Freemasonry (I was a Mason for many years - Mormonism is Masonry + religious themes), and make some sort of strange sci-fi religion out of it.
*edit* I said “perpendicular” - I don’t think that’s right. “Parallel”might be better but the beliefs don’t really match or even come close to the same thing. I don’t know. But they use our words and mean totally different things.
The mormon cartoon you are referencing was/is not made nor put out by them.
It was created by a group back in the 80's who also did one on the jw's. I do not recall the name of the group that produced them, but the videos I did watch by them were quite accurate. The videos should be watched by Christians so as to get a better understanding of these two cults and how they manipulate the word every chance they get to fit their worldly "christian" agenda. They are both very charming but quite disturbing cults.
No LDS cult. Cult would be Martin Luther's heresy.
Maybe have an LDS theologian on here. Not a good thing to think you know another religion without actually talking with their theologians and reading their texts. Yes, LDS believe the Bible. Jesus' mother only provided a mortal body. She was not godlike herself. She had other children as the Bible says. Being a mother presumes a denigrating status. A bit gnostic. Mortal woman giving birth is somehow gross and beneath God of the universe? So, you need to concoct a Caesarian virgin birth story and then perpetual virgin otherwise she is not worthy? So, females giving birth is so gross that Jesus would never ever be associated with it. Let's invent Mary was sinlessly conceived and birthed so she is unspotted or unsoiled by original sin. Right.... LDS say a mortal woman becoming a natural mother IS SACRED. Nothing ugly, dirty, or sinful in all that. And so if Mary had other children by conceiving after Jesus that negates her purity card? Huh? LDS give Mary her due: the honor and respect as a mortal woman chosen to birth mortal Christ whom she knew was not really hers so God blessed her with other children. Logical. Merciful. Loving. Rational.
In short: AI is like the news broadcast; don't expect full knowledge on subject bo only watching CNN and/or FOX, both are heavily redacted.
It sort of seems like ai is a Tower of Babel. Create an “all knowledge, one knowledge” thing for the purpose of getting “up” to a “god knowledge”. What possible could go wrong? 🫣