Accretions

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Whatever meaning it conveys, that meaning must be explained with words, so we’re back to God’s Word except there is no ceremony involved but there is a blessing attached to the intake of it.
God's word is what authorizes -- or shall we say that it 'directs' or' commands?' -- the administration of the sacraments, sure.
 

prism

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 26, 2022
Messages
711
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
God's word is what authorizes -- or shall we say that it 'directs' or' commands?' -- the administration of the sacraments, sure.
You had said, "It is a ceremony/act/observance that uses physical elements in order to convey a spiritual meaning,..."
Where does that 'spiritual meaning' come from except God's Word?
Do Sacraments have a meaning apart from God's Word?
Why do different Church bodies have differing views of a Sacrament?
If it is such an important means of grace, why isn't scripture clear on the matter?
If scripture is clear, why the different views?

Me smells an accretion. (not a Cretian lol)
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
You had said, "It is a ceremony/act/observance that uses physical elements in order to convey a spiritual meaning,..."
Where does that 'spiritual meaning' come from except God's Word?
Do Sacraments have a meaning apart from God's Word?
Why do different Church bodies have differing views of a Sacrament?
If it is such an important means of grace, why isn't scripture clear on the matter?
If scripture is clear, why the different views?

Me smells an accretion. (not a Cretian lol)

The Bible is an accretion.


.
 

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
You had said, "It is a ceremony/act/observance that uses physical elements in order to convey a spiritual meaning,..."
Where does that 'spiritual meaning' come from except God's Word?

There are all sorts of spiritual truths and realities. In the case of a sacrament, the ceremony imparts forgiveness and grace (which are spiritual values often referred to in Scripture) in addition to all that the person being baptized vows as a part of the ceremony.

Do Sacraments have a meaning apart from God's Word?
No. (unless I am misunderstanding what you have in mind by that question)

Why do different Church bodies have differing views of a Sacrament?
There isn't as much disagreement as that question makes it sound. The differences--mainly Catholic vs Protestant, not a whole bunch of different denominations going their own ways--exist because the churches have slightly different interpretations of the definition, basically concerning how many sacraments there are.

Iff it is such an important means of grace, why isn't scripture clear on the matter?
Actually, it is about as clear as Scripture ever is. Consider how little we here agree on other things spoken of in Scripture like justification, the Elect, the end of the age, Faith vs Works, church leaders, etc. etc.

By comparison, the directives given by Christ concerning these sacraments/ordinances, and the benefits we receive through the reception of them, seem to be rather uncomplicated.
 
Last edited:

prism

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 26, 2022
Messages
711
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
There isn't as much disagreement as that question makes it sound. The differences--mainly Catholic vs Protestant, not a whole bunch of different denominations going their own ways--exist because the churches have slightly different interpretations of the definition, basically concerning how many sacraments there are.
I’ve seen a small Lutheran Church break up and dissolve over the question of “When does the real presence of Christ‘s Body occur during the Sacrament?”…when it’s in the mouth of the recepient or during the Words of Institution? You make it sound quite clean and simple but it is not.
 

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I’ve seen a small Lutheran Church break up and dissolve over the question of “When does the real presence of Christ‘s Body occur during the Sacrament?”…when it’s in the mouth of the recepient or during the Words of Institution? You make it sound quite clean and simple but it is not.
If we're being forthright about the matter, we'll have to admit that the isolated dust-up you refer to as having happened in one "small Lutheran" congregation is not indicative of any wider dispute.

All the other examples of doctrinal disagreements that I referred to in my previous post are, however, famous areas of dispute which anyone who's informed about the doings of the various denominations in the USA would recognize instantly. AND, they've all been the subject of heated debate here on Christianity Haven, too.
 

prism

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 26, 2022
Messages
711
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
If we're being forthright about the matter, we'll have to admit that the isolated dust-up you refer to as having happened in one "small Lutheran" congregation is not indicative of any wider dispute.

All the other examples of doctrinal disagreements that I referred to in my previous post are, however, famous areas of dispute which anyone who's informed about the doings of the various denominations in the USA would recognize instantly. AND, they've all been the subject of heated debate here on Christianity Haven, too.
Thank you for your condescending opinion.
 
Last edited:

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Thank you for your condescending opinion.
It wasn't condescending, my friend. Consider the two points in my post that you highlighted.

First, I pointed out that your reservation concerned only a single--and "small"--Lutheran congregation. That dispute (and I'll take your word for it being as you reported) only involved a handful of Christians. And that was your own example.

I didn't embellish it in any way. You testified to the fact that it was a lone dispute that occurred in a single, and small, Lutheran congregation. So that was not at all like the raging doctrinal disputes that I mentioned which never have ended and which also really divided one denomination from another.

Second, you highlighted my point that the really important doctrinal disputes are famous. They're well-known to anyone who is interested in church history and theology. That wasn't saying that you are excluded from that group!

It was simply a note to the effect that we should be able to agree that those particular arguments have been really significant in church history...as contrasted with the isolated argument in one small congregation that hardly anyone knows anything about.
 
Last edited:

prism

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 26, 2022
Messages
711
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
The Bible is an accretion.
Define 'accretion'.
I would say it is closer to something added to God's Word, not God's Word itself.
Some Jewish people might argue the New Testament is an accretion though.
 

Messy

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 18, 2023
Messages
1,553
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
But you did say, "The Church settled the issue" (39), that to me is appealing to 'Scripture plus'. Even the Church Fathers had disagreements among themselves concerning infant baptism. It wasn't til about the 3rd century that the practice became widespread.

No my point is in v.37. How would we know if an infant 'believes with all their heart'? (That was the condition Philip placed on the Ethiopian.)
Why would they not believe with all their heart? For such is the Kingdom. John the Baptist jumped up in the whomb when Jesus came. I think they have to be older than 3 to understand with their mind about sin. Why? When my son was 3, the 5 y o son said he had to get saved now or else he'd go to hell. He had listened a bit too much to his dad's preachings, but those were for adults. I said: There there. He goes to heaven. He doesn't understand it yet and that's no problem. Kid had no idea what sin was or why Jesus had to die for his sins. He invited Jesus in his heart with 5 I think. They were all 4 or 5 and if it had been up to me they'd have been baptized then too, cause the evangelicals make it 2 happenings, but in Acts they immediately got baptized when they got saved, but churches and pastors said nope, so 2 are still not even baptized with 13 and 14. To me it makes no sense. And communion was always okay, even at a few months old, cause the Israelites all took the Pascha, but that was in our church. They always got communion. We went to my mom's church. They were saved already. Nope. Too young. No communion for you. Pffffffff
It's all so arbitrary. Why is communion okay and baptism not? Does a 3 month old understand that it represents Jesus' blood?
 
Last edited:

prism

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 26, 2022
Messages
711
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Why would they not believe with all their heart? For such is the Kingdom. John the Baptist jumped up in the whomb when Jesus came. I think they have to be older than 3 to understand with their mind about sin. Why? When my son was 3, the 5 y o son said he had to get saved now or else he'd go to hell. He had listened a bit too much to his dad's preachings, but those were for adults. I said: There there. He goes to heaven. He doesn't understand it yet and that's no problem. Kid had no idea what sin was or why Jesus had to die for his sins. He invited Jesus in his heart with 5 I think. They were all 4 or 5 and if it had been up to me they'd have been baptized then too, cause the evangelicals make it 2 happenings, but in Acts they immediately got baptized when they got saved, but churches and pastors said nope, so 2 are still not even baptized with 13 and 14. To me it makes no sense. And communion was always okay, even at a few months old, cause the Israelites all took the Pascha, but that was in our church. They always got communion. We went to my mom's church. They were saved already. Nope. Too young. No communion for you. Pffffffff
It's all so arbitrary. Why is communion okay and baptism not? Does a 3 month old understand that it represents Jesus' blood?
I was in a Scandinavian ELS Church where they didn’t baptize infants because they believed they hadn’t sinned yet. Was that their accretion?

John the baptist was filled with the spirit here…

When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.
— Luke 1:41

He was chosen a prophet before hand and leaped before being baptized. You might have a case to say he was quickened at the presence of Jesus.
 

Messy

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 18, 2023
Messages
1,553
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I was in a Scandinavian ELS Church where they didn’t baptize infants because they believed they hadn’t sinned yet. Was that their accretion?

John the baptist was filled with the spirit here…

When Elizabeth heard Mary’s greeting, the baby leaped in her womb; and Elizabeth was filled with the Holy Spirit.
— Luke 1:41

He was chosen a prophet before hand and leaped before being baptized. You might have a case to say he was quickened at the presence of Jesus.
Yes I think so. They are not able to sin, so why should they get baptized and have their sins washed away? I get the other reasoning too.
 

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
I was in a Scandinavian ELS Church where they didn’t baptize infants because they believed they hadn’t sinned yet. Was that their accretion?
The "problem" here is that it is always possible to find some abnormality somewhere among the hundreds of thousands of Christian congregations that exist.

If we say that a certain denomination believes in X, there probably is some oddity, some small exception somewhere (such as the one you mentioned, the ELS [Evangelical Lutheran Synod]).

That church claims only 11 congregations in the whole country, all of them located in the vicinity of Mankato, Minnesota, each of which is allowed to decide its own doctrinal position.

So, does that tell us anything meaningful about the nature of Lutheranism, arguably the largest Protestant denomination in the world? Well, no.

And the same can probably be done with all of the other Christian denominations--if we look hard enough. But IT DOESN'T PROVE ANYTHING about what it is that the different denominations believe, or what has always been the stance of any particular denomination or Christianity itself, etc.
 
Last edited:

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Yes I think so. They are not able to sin, so why should they get baptized and have their sins washed away? I get the other reasoning too.
According to the Bible, all men are born in sin, and all of us need the Savior.

If each person born throughout history was completely on his own, to live sinlessly or not, there would not have been any need for the Son of God to become man, suffer, and die on a cross in order to reconcile humankind to God.

The Almighty could just as well have accepted those people who, presumably, had kept the Law perfectly, and rejected those who did not.
 
Last edited:

Messy

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 18, 2023
Messages
1,553
Gender
Female
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
According to the Bible, all men are born in sin, and all of us need the Savior.

If each person born throughout history was completely on his own, to live sinlessly or not, there would not have been any need for the Son of God to become man, suffer, and die on a cross in order to reconcile humankind to God.

The Almighty could just as well have accepted those people who, presumably, had kept the Law perfectly, and rejected those who did not.
Yes they are not sinless and need Jesus' offer, but they aren't capable of really sinning. He can't say to them: I was thirsty and you didn't give Me a drink. A baby can't even hold a bottle.
 

Josiah

simul justus et peccator
Valued Contributor
Joined
Jun 12, 2015
Messages
13,927
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Lutheran
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Yes they are not sinless and need Jesus' offer, but they aren't capable of really sinning.


@Messy So, which is it? They are sinful or they are not?

Let's see what Scripture says...


What is the Law?


The Law is the will of God - flowing from His absolute perfection and justice. It is, in essence, that we be as He is - not in terms of essence but character.


Psalm 51:5 "I was sinful at birth"

Genesis 8:21, "Every inclination of man's heart is evil from childhood."

Romans 5:12, "Sin entered the world through one man's sin, and death through sin, and therefore death came to all men for all have sinned."

First John 3:4, "Sin is lawlessness"

Romans 3:12, "There is no one who does good, not even one."

Mark 10:18, "There is none who is good but God exclusively."

First John 1:10, "If we claim we have no sin, we make God a liar and His word is not in us."

There are at least 613 laws specifically written just in the Old Testament. We think often of the Ten Commandments but actually there are many, many more just in the OT - and still more in the NT. The Law is not "thou shalt try" or "Be better than the idiot bozo next door." It's be equal to God in morality, love and holiness. There's NOTHING in Scripture that says, "If you didn't mean to sin, ergo you didn't." There's NOTHING in Scripture about "If you don't feel remorse for your sin ERGO you never sinned." There's NOTHING in Scripture that says, "But those under the age of X cannot sin cuz they are equal to God" or "But those under the age of X aren't accountable for their sins."



What does the Law mandate?


Essentially, that our character be identical to His.


Matthew 5:48, "You must be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect."

1 Peter 1:16, "You must be holy even as God in heaven is holy."

John 15:12, "Love all people just as I (Jesus) first loved you."

Ephesians 4:32, "forgiving one another, just as God in Christ first forgave you."

First John 2:6, "Whoever claims to live in him must live as Jesus did."

Philippians 2:5, "You must have the same attitude that Christ did."



What is "Sin"?


"Sin" literally means "to miss the mark."

We are sinful if we aren't what the Law mandates; we aren't Matthew 5:48, 1 Peter 1:16, John 15:12, Ephesians 4:32, 1 John 2:6, Philippians 2:5, etc.

We are sinful if we "fall short" of what the Law states.

In ancient Greece, if an archer missed the target, the therefore "sinned" because he missed the mark, missed the target. The Bible says "ALL fall short." IF you have absolutely, perfectly, divinely, 24/7 "hit" all the targets above, then you are obedient and free of sin. Otherwise...... Well, the Bible would be correct and not lying when it says that "NO ONE is righteous, no, not even one." "For ALL fall short." "NO ONE is good." "If you claim to have no sin (you hit the mark), then you lie and call God a liar."

Sin = "Falling short" "Missing the mark"

Romans 3:23 "For all have sinned, missing the mark."

There is no verse that states, "For all over the age of Who-Knows are sinful." Or "until one reaches the age of Who-Knows, they are sinful but all consequences of this are waved."



What is the consequence of sin?


Romans 6:23 "For the result of sin is death."

Romans 5:12, "Sin entered the world through one man's sin, and death through sin, and therefore death came to all men for all have sinned."

Isaiah 59:2 "Your sin has made separation between you and God."

Galatians 6:7-8 "Whatever a person sows, such will he reap"

Galatians 5:19-21 "Those who do such things will not gain the kingdom of God"

Obviously, non-homo sapiens die too but the Bible states that for humans anyway, this is a direct result of SIN. So, if a person dies obviously they had sin. Since people can die even before they are born, well.....



What are the two types of sin?


Original Sin


Psalm 51:5 "I was sinful at birth"

Genesis 8:21, "Every inclination of man's heart is evil from childhood."

Romans 5:12 "Sin entered the world through one man and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people for have sin."

Ephesians 4:22, "Put off the old man which corrupts."

Ephesians 2:3, "We all were by our very nature objects of God's wrath."

Ephesians 2:1 "You were dead in your sins."

Romans 8:7 "The sinful mind is hostile to God, it does not submit to God Law because it cannot do so."

"Original sin" is a spiritual disease. It is universal. Let's say I have the disease of a cold. And thus, I likely (at least at times) have symptoms of that - coughing, sneezing, runny nose, sore throat. Now, does the coughing result in me having a cold? No, it's the cold that (may) result in the cough. "Original sin" (usually spoken of in Scripture by the singular "sin") is the disease, the spiritual defeat that humanity got at the Fall. If I shoot my neighbor, the "problem" is not limited to the microsecond when I pulled the trigger.... there is a HISTORY here, chain of things, that goes all the way back to my heart, my nature and how it sought to hurt and hate. "Original sin" is that heart problem, that spiritual disease. But the disease not only can lead to symptoms (read the next section) but it also results in our spiritual DEATH and being hostile to God and our inability to believe in God.


Actualized Sin


Matthew 7:17 "A bad tree bears bad fruit" (note, it's not the other way around.... something BAD exists, and ERGO bad fruit exists)

Galatians 5:19 "The acts of our SINFUL NATURE are......" (Ditto)

Matthew 15:19 "Out of the sinful heart come ....."


"Actual Sin" is the symptoms of the disease. If I have that cold, I may well have symptoms of it. The symptoms may vary... they may be severe or slight.... I may be able to control some and perhaps not others.... I may have times when there are no symptoms at all... but I still have the disease, the sickness. The "evil inclination of the heart" (as Scripture puts it) - the disease ("Original Sin") may lead me to shoot my neighbor (the actualized sin) - the symptom.

By the presence and power of the Holy Spirit, Christians have a rich advantage in controlling the symptoms, but Paul insists that the "old Adam" still exists in us.




- Josiah




.
 
Last edited:

Albion

Well-known member
Valued Contributor
Joined
Sep 1, 2017
Messages
7,760
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Anglican
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
Yes they are not sinless and need Jesus' offer, but they aren't capable of really sinning.
"really sinning?" We know what you mean. It's called "actual sin," but sin is defined as any falling short of God's standard, which is why it's safe to say that everyone is a sinner in need of God's mercy.

The Bible also testifies that there is another category of sin besides "actual sin." We are part of a fallen race, the descendants of Adam and Eve who lost their standing with God by committing the original sin. And so we believe, with the Bible, that we start life as a sinner, that all who come into this world are born in that condition, outcasts from God's righteousness.

Thankfully, God is not only just but loving, and that's why he came as Christ to take our sins upon himself. That is the #1 feature of Christianity and makes it different from all the other religions of the world.
 
Last edited:

prism

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 26, 2022
Messages
711
Gender
Male
Religious Affiliation
Christian
Political Affiliation
Conservative
Marital Status
Married
Acceptance of the Trinity & Nicene Creed
Yes
So, does that tell us anything meaningful about the nature of Lutheranism, arguably the largest Protestant denomination in the world? Well, no.

And the same can probably be done with all of the other Christian denominations--if we look hard enough. But IT DOESN'T PROVE ANYTHING about what it is that the different denominations believe, or what has always been the stance of any particular denomination or Christianity itself, etc.
It does confirm that the sin nature remains as well as…

For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known.
— 1 Corinthians 13:12
 
Top Bottom