Bailing Water: Confessional WELS churches' Web sites

Tuesday, December 4, 2007

Confessional WELS churches' Web sites

Anonymous said...: Could someone direct me to some confessional WELS churches' Web sites which have online sermons? I have several LCMS that I enjoy listening to (Petersen, Cwirla) and have been searching for some in Wisconsin. I know all say they are confessional, but ... nothing contemporary, please.

Thanks.

Rob

220 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 220 of 220

Anonymous said...: I guess it can be deduced that there aren't too many historically confessional churches within WELS ... at least that read or are willing to post on this blog. And there is dispute about what it means to be confessional.

So, what does a confessional, at least historically, church look like?

Rob; December 7, 2007 at 5:18 PM
Anonymous said...: "If I recall correctly, Elijah and John were addressing, for the most part, unbelievers or hardened sinners, not fellow believers."

Aren't we all hardened sinners? Or are some of us better than others because we recognize that when poeople ask for the Lord's Supper every service they are really just legalists?; December 7, 2007 at 5:21 PM
Anonymous said...: John,

Maybe it is time to start a new topic. Rob's question might be a good one: "So, what does a confessional, at least historically, church look like?"; December 7, 2007 at 5:25 PM
Anonymous said...: "Aren't we all hardened sinners?"

Are you seriously asking that question? If so, then we have much bigger things to talk about here than communion frequency.

Of course we aren't all hardened sinners. My old person is a hardened sinner, but that's not me anymore. The Holy Spirit has created a new person, one in the image of God.

Believers are not hardened sinners, that's why the example of Elijah to John doesn't fit here.; December 7, 2007 at 5:31 PM
Anonymous said...: Why has www not answered any of the questions asked by others? Could he or she please do that before we move on? There must be some good reason for the practices in many of our churches.; December 7, 2007 at 5:32 PM
Anonymous said...: Anon, whom I'll call "Michael" says I am arrogant because I label the WS doctrine and practice on the Supper ungodly and unLutheran. I show this in my posts. "Michael" simply makes the claim about me yet provides not one scintilla of evidence of said "attitude" as he judges not my words but my heart and claims I do what he does. Amazing. But that is the freedom of the blog, you can say whatever you want with no proof. You gotta love America.

What I find arrogant is "Michael's" invincibly arrogant claim that only WELS people will be saved.

RTMM; December 7, 2007 at 5:36 PM
Anonymous said...: "What I find arrogant is "Michael's" invincibly arrogant claim that only WELS people will be saved."

Huh? Did I miss something? What happened to providing quotes and proof, RTMM?; December 7, 2007 at 5:39 PM
Anonymous said...: "Believers are not hardened sinners, that's why the example of Elijah to John doesn't fit here."

The law preached by Elijah and John does not apply to me? Wow, now that's arrogance.

Carl M.; December 7, 2007 at 5:40 PM
Anonymous said...: "Huh? Did I miss something? What happened to providing quotes and proof, RTMM?"

(SNAP! Goes the trap)

Get it, see how easy it is to do that. But I guess those are the rules of this blog, you can say what you want without quotes.

RTMM; December 7, 2007 at 5:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Wow, Carl M., try reading in context. We were talking about the harshness of tone used here and the charges of being "ungodly". Those are the things that don't belong--not the preaching of the law in general.; December 7, 2007 at 5:42 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous at 5:42,

Better read the Formula of Concord, there is one law, and it always accuses. There is no "beleiver" law and "hardened unbeliever" law. That is Reformed teaching.

Carl M.; December 7, 2007 at 5:45 PM
Anonymous said...: Anonymous at 5:42,

Better read the Formula of Concord, there is one law, and it always accuses. There is no "beleiver" law and "hardened unbeliever" law. That is Reformed teaching.

Carl M.; December 7, 2007 at 5:45 PM
Anonymous said...: Sorry, hit the button twice, hit the button twice,

Carl M.
Carl M.; December 7, 2007 at 5:46 PM
Anonymous said...: Carl M.,

OK, go back and reread again. No one said anything about different kinds of law. We're talking about differences in the way that the law is applied.; December 7, 2007 at 5:48 PM
Anonymous said...: The law always accuses, there is no difference. Go back and read Formula VI.

Carl M.; December 7, 2007 at 5:49 PM
Anonymous said...: Ok, let's try it this way.

The WS practice of allowing voters to deny the sacrament to soul's desiring is ungodly and unLutheran :)

Better?

RTMM :); December 7, 2007 at 5:51 PM
Anonymous said...: "Of course we aren't all hardened sinners."

Maybe I don't understand what a hardened sinner is. How is a sinner different than a hardened sinner?; December 7, 2007 at 5:53 PM
Anonymous said...: I just looked in the bible and I couldn't find the phrase "hardened sinner."; December 7, 2007 at 6:00 PM
Anonymous said...: "For the old Adam, as an intractable, refractory ass, is still a part of them, which must be coerced to the obedience of Christ, not only by the teaching, admonition, force, and threatening of the Law, but also oftentimes by the club of punishments and troubles (FC TD VI 24)."

Anon, is your old Adam less an ass as the Formula says mine is?

Carl M.; December 7, 2007 at 6:01 PM
Anonymous said...: "Of course we aren't all hardened sinners."

Do you mean hardened unbeliever?; December 7, 2007 at 6:04 PM

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 220 of 220 Newer› Newest»