| Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A |
| Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A Q&A |
President Bush used the phrase "Well done, my good and faithful servant." Is this a phrase out of the Bible, and if so, what is it referring to and where is it found? Also, do you know if Christians typically vote republican or democratic? (I feel very strongly about the moral conservative issues such as pro-life, which is why I support President Bush, and I believe that is definitely God's position on that issue,) but I wonder if there are any issues that a persons faith in Christ would lead them to vote democratic vs. republican?
The quotation, "Well done, good and faithful servant," is from the Parable of the Talents, Matthew 25:14-30.
Christians do not always vote for one party or the other. They often vote for individual candidates, regardless of party. Analysts have said that in the 2000 presidential election Christians and other religious people tended to vote for George W. Bush. Analysts have also said that abortion and other moral issues entered into the decision to vote for now President Bush.
Other moral issues that might influence Christians to vote for a certain party or candidate rather then for the opponent could be legalized gambling, the legalization of same sex "marriage," euthanasia and assisted suicide, or certain church-state questions.
Party platforms, legislative actions, and executive performance help Christians and other people decide which party or candidate they will vote for.
Moral issues dare not be the only determining factor in choosing one party or candidate over another. It is possible for one candidate to be stronger on moral issues than another, but lack competence. It is possible for a candidate to be wrong on a particular issue and yet have a sounder philosophy of what government should concern itself with.
Christians, like other citizens, are sometimes required to choose the lesser of two evils. Sometimes, they may even decide to stay away from the polls and simply pray for the government and the nation.
Do historians know where the city of Nineveh was located?
The ruins of Nineveh are located on the Tigris River opposite the modern city of Mosul, Iraq. Mosul is about 220 miles northwest of Baghdad. The site is split by the river Khoser which enters the Tigris from the northern mountains. The outline of the city walls can still be traced. The circumference is about 8 miles. The larger mound is about 100 acres and 90 ft. high. The mound was excavated between 1820 and 1932. The second mound, named by the Arabs after Jonah (Tell Nebi Yunus) is half the size of its sister. Because this mound is occupied today, it has not been seriously excavated.
The location of the site was in doubt until the 1800's. An Englishman, C.J. Rich was the first to survey and excavate. Nineveh's more famous archaeologist was another Englishman, A. H. Layard who discovered Sennacherib's palace of some 70 rooms. Asshurbanipal's palace with its massive cuneiform library was discovered later by local archaeologist, H. Rassam. This library confirmed beyond a doubt that the site in question was Nineveh. Later archaeologists included E.A.W. Budge, L.W. King, R.C. Thompson.
I would say we can be quite sure that the ruins of ancient Nineveh have been found and identified correctly.
Is or has America every truly been a "Christian" nation. I know a lot of people claim it was, but if you look at the founding fathers, some were far from Christian in belief, but did believe in a supreme being. How would one discuss this topic without offending someone else.
In order to answer this question we have to agree on what the expression "Christian nation" means. If "Christian nation" means that America is a country which enjoys the freedom to practice religion without interference from the government or from private groups, then we would have to say the term applies. To say that America is a "Christian" nation would suggest that here Christianity can be practiced and here there are Christians.
Unfortunately, many, especially many among the evangelicals, have a different idea of what it means to be a "Christian" nation. These individuals suggest that America was founded specifically to be a refuge for Christians and that this country was established with clearly Christian principles in mind. This would not be accurate.
As you have indicated the founding fathers of the United States displayed a wide variety of religious beliefs. Some were deists, others expressed little personal faith in God, while a few were more concerned about their relationship with God. Those who have studied religion in America suggest that prior to the "Great Awakening" of the 19th century, Americans were only 15%, or less, practicing Christians.
In discussing this topic with others, you will find it to be a very emotional issue. Therefore it is a good idea to ask the person what he/she understands by the term "Christian" America. Then help them to see that America was founded to safeguard the religious freedoms of all beliefs and not just specifically Christians. We want to be careful not to judge the level of religious conviction found in others when we have no evidence one way or the other. Yet at the same time we cannot ignore the words of so many of the founding fathers who expressed little confidence in God.
We might like to embrace the idea of America having been founded on Christian principles. A close examination of the beginnings, however, will help one to understand that such an idea is little more than wishful thinking.
In spite of the misconception held by many, we can be thankful that our Lord does continue to give us the opportunity to practice our faith without interference. We rejoice that we have the privilege to proclaim Christ to our countrymen who now more than ever need to hear that they too have a Savior from sin.
Back in World War II there was a Lutheran theologian named Dietrich Bonhoeffer. He was martyred for his beliefs as well as his resistance to Nazism. Can you tell me more about him? Was he WELS?
Dietrich Bonhoeffer (1906-1945) was a Lutheran pastor and theologian in Germany before and during the Second World War. After Hitler came to power in 1933, Bonhoeffer became a leader in the so-called "Bekennende Kirche" or "Bekenntniskirche," the "Confessing Church," which resisted the "Deutsche Christen" movement of the Nazi regime. The "Deutsche Christen" effort attempted to make Christianity merely a cultural element of National Socialism. In opposition the "Confessing Church" group issued the famous Barmen Declaration in 1934.
Following a two-year pastorate in London, Bonhoeffer returned to Germany in 1935 to establish a secret seminary for the "Confessing Church" at Finkenwalde in Pommerania. During this period he wrote two books which would be published after his death, The Cost of Discipleship and Life Together.
When the Nazis closed the seminary, Bonhoeffer began to work with a resistance group that collaborated in an attempted overthrow of the Nazi government. An aborted assassination plot against Hitler resulted in Bonhoeffer's imprisonment. During the last two years of his life he became something of a mystic, writing Letters and Papers from Prison. He was hanged by the Nazis on April 9, 1945, just as the Allies were approaching the Flossenberg concentration camp.
Bonhoeffer's The Cost of Discipleship emphasized a concept known as "costly grace." He proposed that there should be more to a Christian's life than conversion to the faith, that there should continue to be growth in grace as exemplified by "meaningful discipleship." This book influenced American Christianity in the postwar years.
Bonhoeffer's Letters and Papers from Prison speak about a "religionless Christianity." He makes a distinction between "religion" and faith as found in the Bible. He was upset that the German state churches had given in to Hitler. Likewise he disagreed with "religion" being separated from the rest of a person's life.
Dietrich Bonhoeffer was not a member of the WELS. He was a member of the state church which even in pre-World War II Germany was ecumenically minded.
Sinfulness leads to wars. What are your thoughts on when there is a war, how does God play into the outcome of that war? Does God choose sides? Whatever the outcome of war, it must be the will of God. (e.g. Both the North and the South believed God was on their side. Was it God's will that the South lost?)
Consider these words of Paul to the men of Athens, "From one man [God] made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth, and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live" (Acts 17:26). Notice how intimately involved the will of God always is in the rise and fall of nations and the individuals who live in those nations. It is often through wars that God has determined those "places" and "times" he sets for peoples and nations. For another example, consider how God showed Daniel (chapter 2), through Nebuchadnezzar's dream, what would be the rise and fall of earthly kingdoms according to God's plan and purpose. Sometimes God uses a war to punish one sinful nation by the tool of another sinful nation (see Habakkuk 1:1-11). Therefore, even where God permits the sin of mankind to lead to the bloodshed and cruelty of warfare, there God still accomplishes his will.
However, even though God permits a war and uses it to accomplish his will in this world, that does not excuse the sin that may have been present in the motives and purpose of those involved in a war. Just because one nation won a particular war, that certainly does not mean that their cause was just or that God was on their side. Through all the complicated intrigues and conflicts of human history, God in his amazing wisdom accomplishes his will through it all. "Our God is in heaven; he does whatever pleases him" (Psalm 115:3).
In saying this, we are in no way implying that a Christian cannot be involved in a war. Where a Christian is convinced from Scripture that the cause of his government is just (for example: defending his own nation or another against attack), the Christian is performing a service to God and his neighbor as he serves in defense of his country or the country of another. At such times, as an arm of the state, he may in good conscience wield the "sword" which God has entrusted to the state for just such defense of the welfare of others.
Is it sinful to watch daytime TV talk shows and soap operas? A Lutheran Pastor years ago told me it is, based on the fact that if you watch them, you condone all the sin and smut that is on these programs.
Permit me to begin my answer with a few questions. Is there something in those programs that builds you up in your faith, strengthens you for Christian living, or cheers you in your cross bearing, or simply affords you wholesome recreation? If not, and if they are sinful and smutty, why watch them? Can you exercise some discrimination in choosing what to watch and not to watch? "Condoning" means to accept or excuse or tolerate what is wrong. In the case of TV it involves adding to their viewer ratings. I suggest that you, as a person with Christian convictions who knows the difference between what is wholesome and what is not, find other daytime entertainment.
What is theonomy and does the WELS support it?
The word theonomy derives from two Greek words meaning "law of God." It is an alternative and shorter name for American Reconstructionism. It believes that American law should reflect biblical teachings. Its practical understanding of that belief includes supporting the death penalty for abortionists, homosexuals, and "incorrigible sons." Its ideal government could be termed a "theocracy," the rule of God.
It is supported by some conservative Christians of the Reformed persuasion. It is a political movement, led by people who believe in a coming thousand year reign of Christ on earth (the millennium)
To the best of my knowledge the WELS has not expressed itself officially with regard to this movement. It is clear, however, that WELS could not support a political movement, or Reformed theology, or millennialism.
Are there prophets who exist today?
The Bible tells us that God has revealed everything we need to know for our salvation in Jesus Christ (Hebrews 1:1), and that we need no further revelations of God's plan or his will for us, such as those alleged revelations followed by the Mormons and other cults. There can be no more apostles because they had to be eyewitnesses to Jesus' ministry. We have all the guidance we need for our salvation and our Christian living in God's Word. The means of grace (the Word and sacraments) are the only way the Holy Spirit strengthens our faith.
The Bible does not say that God never can reveal a message to someone today through an angel or some other means in order to deal with a personal crisis that the person faces, but it does not lead us to expect or claim such revelations. In cases in which someone claims to have received such a revelation, one would want to talk to the person involved to see what sort of messages they think they have received and whether they agree with the Word or are being used as a substitute for the Word. We must stress the sufficiency of the Word as we have it in the Bible as a guide to making the decisions we need to make in our lives.
When we look at the teachings of people who claim to be prophets today, we find no case in which their teachings agree with the Bible, so it is clear we are not to accept these "prophets." We can not say with certainty that God will never send another direct message to anyone, but we have no such promise in Scripture. All the biblical statements about prophets in the last days are warnings against false prophets who will appear in the end times.
In the wide sense of the word everyone who speaks for God is a prophet. In that sense every faithful preacher of the Word is a prophet.
What is meant by "moralizing"?
Moralizing is any attempt to teach people to be good and do good without the motivation of the gospel. Only the gospel can change the heart and move people to do those things which are God pleasing (Romans 1:16-17, 2 Corinthians 5:14-15, Romans 14:23b).
What is the WELS position on pastors serving as enlisted military officers in the Armed Services -- their duties to be full time chaplains, especially in combat areas? Were there any WELS/Missouri Synod pastors serving in the combat areas during World War II, the Korean War and the Vietnam War?
From the time of World War I to the present, the WELS has supported and supplied civilian chaplains to serve men and women of our fellowship. In the sense of serving in war zones, the fullest involvement of our chaplains was in Viet Nam.
We do not participate in the military chaplaincy for a these reasons:
1) We do not believe that ministers of the gospel should be called, commissioned, or supervised by any government agency, including the military. Military chaplains are commissioned officers, subject to military discipline, and under the command of officers who may or may not understand or care about their religious scruples.
2) US military chaplains are expected to conduct services for people of all faiths, which could involve a chaplain in compromising his biblical principles.
It should be noted that if our synod did participate in the US government's chaplaincy program there would be no guarantee that any chaplain of our synod would be in a given war zone, since assignments are based proportionately to the size of the church body. Where our civilian chaplains are not able to reach men and women in the armed forces, foreign missionaries of our synod serve these personnel whenever possible.
SEARCH our Q&A archives using the subject you have in question as your keyword. Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod ©
2929 N Mayfair Road
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53222
www.wels.net content is copyrighted unless otherwise stated.
Request written permission to copy.
Bravo! Bravo!