Lily

🧵 The reason for this is not only that it defends the soundness of doctrine, but also the Catholic Church would abuse the notion of a divine mystery to inject heretical doctrine. Such as indulgences granting release for souls in purgatory.

🧵 The issue you are running into here, is in Lutheranism sola scriptura is used to dismiss heretical traditions. This occurs as well with Sacrimental Union (the Lords Supper) as well as the Trinity. Lutherans reject attempts to decipher divine mysteries without support from scripture.

🧵Excellent question! This is what I would call a Lutheran divine mystery. “the fact that nothing has been [divinely] commanded or enjoined upon us concerning the dead. Therefore all this may be safely omitted, even if it were no error and idolatry.”(Source: bookofconcord.org/smalcald-art... )

The coffee hour vibe is sharing the love of Christ and being neighborly.

Omg at the point where they have a pastor say the Martin Niemöller confession “first they came for” (which was after the war,) in 1934 during a sermon with the Gestapo present?

One of the craziest things about the Bonhoeffer movie is the timeline is completely discontinuous. In 1934 supposedly he played a recording of a rendition of Swing Low Sweet Chariot by Paul Robeson which was published in 1949? The eastern front (in 34???) is mentioned in the same segment.

It’s not democrats fault — but also, they ran on the premise of preventing democratic backsliding, even though they lost the national election; elected dems still have an ethical obligation to deliver on their promises made to the electorate.

“All but none of the above”

“I am very dissatisfied with the services I do not partake in.”

What does this mean? Throwing minorities under the bus? Why vote Democrat at all? I will boycott all elections if Dems follow that route.

The unicode encoding is completely different on the characters, lol.

Was the page fully loaded when the first command was run?

I agree with this — though, I think because of barriers to undocumented immigrants receiving the legal minimum wage standards; there is an economic trade off to some extent.

I tend to think of slavery as an example where racism was used to justify an economic system first and foremost, whereas anti-Latino racism in America tends to not serve a direct economic benefit itself, but serves as a distraction.

Do you have thoughts on materialist interpretations focused on redirection by the majority of anger at material circumstances vs direct material exploitation as prominent causes?

What is even the current composition of the opposition to Assad? Is it mostly Turkish backed rebels at this point, and if so — will they eventually turn towards the Kurds?

😭😂 Don’t fall for the bots!!

Here’s an interesting proposition:
Yes we accept faith alone as justification for why we believe in divinely inspired truth.
Yet; if you believe in empirical perception alone — how do you know perception = reality without faith? Empiricists also rely on faith to justify their beliefs as true.

The Ten Commandments The First Commandment. Thou shalt have no other gods before Me. 1 That is: Thou shalt have [and worship] Me alone as thy God. What is the force of this, and how is it to be understood? What does it me...

🪡Citations: bookofconcord.org/large-catech... - book of concord
www.projectwittenberg.org/pub/resource... - 95 theses

🪡 I would like to conclude by wrapping the two segments of my thread together: Luthers opposition in the 95 theses to indulgences is related to a wider opposition to theft, and he had perceived indulgences as violating the 7th commandment in addition to the many other issues with indulgences.

🪡 He goes as far as to say - what is far worse than lowly thieves is the arch thieves, whom had kept company with lords and princes and plundered the wealth of cities under the protection of and coordinated by the papacy.

🪡Luther places great emphasis in general within this section, exclaiming the importance of fair market activity. Going as far as to call those [workmen, mechanics, and day-laborers] who cheat in the market buy over charging "far worse than sneak-thieves."

🪡In the section of the Large Catechism "Thou shalt not steal." Luther goes as far to say of God: "Him who takes care of the poor sorrowful hearts, and will not allow them to go unavenged" in regards to the overcharging of the poor, when we ought to "give [to] for nothing".

🪡The preference of helping the poor over the papacy is a consistent theme not just because of the great wealth, and unnecessary nature of indulgences practiced by the papacy - but because Luther doctrinally places great emphasis on charity and sees the exploitation of the poor as a form of theft.

🪡The other time this is mentioned in the 95 theses is regarding the pope - "Why does not the pope, whose wealth is to-day greater than the riches of the richest, build just this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of poor believers?" (86th thesis)

🪡There are two other times this issue is mentioned in the 95 theses; one other time where he exclaims the primacy of helping the poor over buying indulgences: "Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better work than buying pardons" (43rd thesis)

🧵The relationship between Lutheranism and economic justice needs more focus: "Christians are to be taught that he who sees a man in need, and passes him by, and gives [his money] for pardons, purchases not the indulgences of the pope, but the indignation of God" (45th - 95 Theses)

#Lutheran #ELCA

Actually people do argue for separation between men and women by using biological essentialism. The author of the article ignores how these arguments are identical to the ones used by transphobic people.

I agree 100% — but there is an interesting conversation on where secular ethics begins and ends. The state ought to be ethical, but how do you justify the legitimacy of any ethical system without metaphysical grounding? What is the rationale for knowing the common good purely rooted in materialism

“believing in gods because they believe if they do not the hell awaits them.” This presupposes though, that God exists. Why would you believe in God because you’re afraid of something that necessities God exists? Belief in God always must precede belief in hell.