QnA: Why was Jesus Baptized? How did Jesus become sin? Did God love before creation?
Vložit
- čas přidán 20. 02. 2024
- Pastors Bryan Wolfmueller and Andrew Packer answer your theological and Biblical questions. In this episode we take up questions about:
* Why was Jesus Baptized?
* How did Jesus become sin?
* Did God love before creation?
Submit your questions here: www.wolfmueller.co/contact.
Article: Did Jesus become and Adulterer? wolfmueller.co/did-martin-lut...
Also, don’t forget to sign up for the free weekly email, Wednesday What-Not, www.wolfmueller.co/wednesday
Pastor Wolfmueller serves St Paul and Jesus Deaf Lutheran Churches in Austin, TX.
Pastor Packer serves Good Shepherd Lutheran Church in Collinsville, IL.
Upcoming events: www.wolfmueller.co/events
GLORY!!!I'm favoured, $255k every 3weeks! I can now afford anything and also support God's work and the church.
congratulations!!
I will love to be your friend dear as well. as sharing some ideas which you're benefiting.
As a beginner, it's essential for you to have a mentor to keep you accountable. I'm guided by a widely known crypto professional.
The professional is Ms Angelia Cole Carr
~I'm surprised that this same name is being mentioned here, I stumbled upon one of his clients testimonies on CNBC news last week.
my advice to everyone is this saving is great but investment is the key to be successful imagine investing $15,000 and received $301,500
Regarding minute 17:45 in the video, I agree that Jesus' baptism was His "ordination" into the office of Christ, but I think he was already Christ from His birth. As it is written in Luke 2:11, "For there is born to you this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord."
And notice how during the entire conversation, we've not once stopped talking about Jesus. I heard Pastor Bryan say that Lutheranism is 💯% Christocentric. Amen.
It's amazing to me, that a doctrine that gives me such great comfort (Satisfaction Theory - that the Christ took on all my sin by imputation, satisfying the Father's wrath (justice applied through punishment) - is the same doctrine that the Eastern Orthodox find so repugnant. But Satisfaction Theory is plainly taught in the New Testament. God wrote it. Take it up with Him.
This was beautiful. I've been a Christian for 33 years. Ive never heard this teaching. Floored
“Jesus sanctified Baptism by being Himself baptized. If the Son of God was baptized, what godly man is he that despises Baptism? But He was baptized not that He might receive remission of sins, for He was sinless; but being sinless, He was baptized, that He might give to them that are baptized a divine and excellent grace. For since the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also Himself likewise partook of the same [Hebrews 2:14], that having been made partakers of His presence in the flesh we might be made partakers also of His Divine grace: thus Jesus was baptized, that thereby we again by our participation might receive both salvation and honour.”
St. Cyril of Jerusalem
Catechetical Lecture 3
Your question at the 18 minute mark Pastor Wolf Miller, is spot on. I have never heard it preached that way that Jesus became the Christ at the point of coming out of the water of baptism but that needs to be preached. It is hardly preached that Jesus takes on the sins of the world or begins to take on the sins of the world in the baptism. That is something that is really needed.
As to Pastor Packers point aboutChrist being used as Jesus last name, he could not be more right. I often wonder in prayers why we say your son Jesus Christ, as opposed to your son, Jesus. Or say something like Jesus, the Christ, the son of the living God.
I'd never heard that teaching, either. It was hiding in plain sight!
Thank you for answering my question. This was perfectly clarifying. I will share with the elders.
And with thy spirit. I never knew that was the meaning behind that response. Thank you Pastor Wolfmueller.
Hey! There’s the icon painting I made on stone on Pr Packer’s shelf 😊
I have never heard that about Jesus' baptism.
Agreed on Jesus' baptism, it is his ordination. I think you explain this well, Brian, as you usually do. Let us make this the main point instead of saying things the Scriptures do not say.
''Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness'' (Matthew 3:15). Everything is scriptural.
Amen. Thank you pastors.
Thank you for your ministry!
John, who was in the priesthood line, was also presenting the perfect sacrificial lamb before the people for the sacrifice
Lev 16 scapegoat also relates to this and more fully answers the question on sins being laid on him right?
Re: the last question, John 17:24 (and all of John 13-17 leading up to that, really).
A thought: Maybe addresses THE question of questions from the very get gooooo - “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth...” Deep breath and work with me here…Why? Seriously, WHY? Do not pass go. Do not collect $200. Answer THAT question first and then proceed to the second which really confounds the senses considering the absolute majesty and pure awesomeness of The Creation itself, “Let Us make man in Our image.” Huh? What? WHAAAAT???? Why oh why DO THAT?!!! Really. Hop forward in Genesis a bit and notice the mess THAT caused. “And the rest as they say is history.” Holy cow! We know God doesn’t make mistakes so why, why, WHY make man??? Maybe, just mayyyyyybe, more imputation! That Trinitarian love for One Another (your John 17 reference is spot on, my opinion), imputed to us that we might share in THAT perfect love??? Talk about a mind bender! Again, just throwing it out there as a…maaaaaybe.
PS John 17…Jesus praying for us…US!!!…today(!!!)…in the garden…all the way back then. Talk about a Whoa Moment! Mind blown! God be praised!
Nice! You beat me to this answer. It’s a good one!
I strongly suspect it was my comment online somewhere that Jesus took on our sins in His baptism that sparked this question. I had heard it preached this way before. It does dovetail nicely with the beginning of His ministry and office.
I was baptized as a baby into the Church of Ireland.
Q: a question, in light of Hebrews 4 has the third commandment any relevance to how we should live as Christians beyond putting our faith in what Jesus has already done?
(p.s. really looking forward to Pastor Wolfmueller's visit to Denmark)
I have a question about Christ's atonement and the judgment of God. I've been noticing in the Scriptures that there seems to be a distinction of two ways that a person can be condemned: One is to be under slavery to the perfect requirements of the Law, which must condemn us (Rom 2-5), the other is to be faithless to God after being transferred from slavery under the Law to slavery to Christ (1 Cor 10, Heb 3, Rom 6, or Christ's parables of the talents/minas or the wedding garment). 1 Cor 10 notes the foreshadowing distinction of Israel being saved from slavery to Egypt but still being condemned for rebellious behavior in the wilderness.
Do we understand Christ's sacrifice to pay for both, or just the first kind? That is, does Christ's death and resurrection transfer us out of slavery from under the Law while also removing the threat of condemnation for faithlessness in our present wilderness?
Well, Prince Charles of Wales became King Charles III when Queen Elizabeth II died. Coronation came later. David didn't become King until Saul died, and he refused to hurry that along.
I have a question about the meaning of the alpha and omega. My church has these symbols in the glass window designs behind the alter and every Sunday I look at them and wish I understood more about their meaning. Thank you for clarifying.
The alpha is the first letter of the greek aplabet and the omaga is the last. So jesus is saying that he was there in the Beginning of time and will be there in the end of time as well.
Note that both the Father and Jesus state that they are Alpha and Omega, the First and the Last. This is part of how we can be sure of the Trinity.
"I heard a rumor..."
I think we really need to start reevaluating, reframing, or casting off that language of "sanctifying all waters", however Luther wrote or intended it. I think it has bred error in preaching and doctrine, prompting people to draw a straight line from John's baptism of Jesus to the Christian Sacrament of Holy Baptism. ("Jesus left some of Himself in the water", "Jesus was baptized so we too are baptized", etc). I'm afraid that the clearer and more correct view expressed earlier in the video became a bit muddled up in that stuff a little.
The entry of Jesus into His public ministry is the way to go with this one. Consider not only the Isaiah passages but Lev 8, the consecration of the Levitical priests and what was necessary for the Israelites and their own communion with Yahweh. Jesus afterward immediately undertakes an exodus in a wilderness akin to the people of Israel in their own wandering, facing temptation, etc. The idea that "Jesus is Israel reduced to One" is strong here: Jesus is undertaking the life of Israel ("my firstborn son", as described to Pharaoh, or in Hosea), and doing it right. Israel lived rightly, and perhaps by extension humanity lived rightly.
In this sense we could say that Jesus is uptaking into Himself a framework of righteousness that will envelop everything and everyone, and in His office of Messiah (but moreover the Suffering Servant, but moreover the Son of God, but moreover God Himself in the flesh) righteousness is fulfilled and this is the righteousness that is ultimately imputed to us... but I think the business of Jesus cleansing water or taking on sin directly here, or somehow directly instituting Holy Baptism here is sadly a red herring, not supported by the text or really by inference or the interpretation of other Scriptural passages. And I think we should be really careful about it, because otherwise we seem to start saying some questionable things about Christ's work and what He says to the Baptizer about it. (I think it's similar to how we can look at John 6 and recognize that it's not the institution of the Lord's Supper... but it's awfully interesting in retrospect that Jesus says/does things that way, almost as if He knew He would be birthing/anointing Christians with water and the Spirit in the coming age)
Anyway, I think the best we can do (even in our LSB rite of Holy Baptism) is to indicate that it was not required of Christ (nor does He require it of us) to be washed in the clean Levitical washbasin for His holy anointing with water and the Spirit, but the muddy crummy Jordan (see Naaman) or anything by the side of the road (eunuch) or tap water from your home or hospital or elder care facility will do nicely in order to receive new birth and the forgiveness of sins in Christ. Beyond that I think we should look with an exegete's careful eye at what the text says and doesn't say. Thanks, sirs! Great discussions as always.
''Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness'' (Matthew 3:15). Everything is scriptural and we agree on this with Rome and Constantinople. Do not invent new ideas.
John 3:5 (ESV)
5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
Matthew 28:19 (ESV)
19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Mark 16:16 (ESV)
16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.
@@user-nj1rc9hk4h?
Another element to Christ's baptism:
He is the first fruit of the new creation. Look at the Syriac version of Genesis and you'll something very, very interesting. The Spirit of God in the Syriac is "brooding over the waters."
Meaning, he was like a mother bird awaiting the hatching of the new life within the egg. At Christ's baptism you see the Spirit hovering like a dove over Christ.
There is the connection.
Christ was baptized not for any need of his own but was baptizing humanity. He was creating a new humanity through his own body (The Church). The total fulfillment of this was his death and then resurrection. So, now, when a believer is baptized, we (the Church) are receiving the benefits of Christ's baptism and united with him in space-time. We are plunged down into his death and raised to newness of life as a part of the new creation which will ultimately fulfilled at our own resurrection from the dead.
Consider the following Scriptural Evidence for Biblical Absolution:
- Samuel WITHHELD absolution from stubborn and impenitent Saul:
When Saul said:
Now therefore, I pray thee, PARDON MY SIN, and
turn again with me, that I may worship the LORD
Samuel replied:
I will not return with thee: for thou hast rejected
the word of the LORD, and the LORD HATH
REJECTED THEE from being king over Israel.
(1 Samuel 15:23-26)
- When David in true Contrition confessed his sin, Nathan pronounced absolution:
And David said unto Nathan,
I have sinned against the LORD.
And Nathan said unto David,
The LORD also HATH PUT AWAY THY SIN;
thou shalt not die
(2 Samuell 12:13)
- And When the Lord absolved the paralysed man he said:
Jesus seeing their faith said unto the sick
of the palsy; Son, be of good cheer;
THY SINS BE FORGIVEN THEE.
(Matthew 9:2)
Notice that Jesus alone, as true God and true man could and did forgive in the absolute sense. And indeed he has such power (Matthew 9:6)
But when Jesus absolved the paralysed man NOTICE that he used a similar form of words to that of Nathan. And make no mistake, Jesus and Nathan WERE pronouncing ABSOLUTION.
So why don't many of our pastors follow the ACTUAL EXAMPLES that Scripture lays down given that:
"ALL SCRIPTURE is ...profitable for DOCTRINE"
(2 Timothy 3:16) ?
(And Later, when we review the synoptic accounts of Matthew 9:2 and Luke 5:20 we shall see something truly remarkable emerge that is consistent with what Jesus teaches us about absolution in John 20:23.)
So let's first consider the foundation upon which Absolution is Founded upon.
Divine Scripture teaches the Doctrine of Objective Justification, in many passages. For example:
Zephaniah 3:15
Psalm 85:2, 3
Isaiah 12:1
Hosea 14:4
Ezekiel 16:63
2 Corinthians 5:19
Let's consider now the words of the Psalmist:
Thou hast forgiven the iniquity of thy people, thou hast covered all their sin. Selah.
THOU HAST TAKEN AWAY ALL THY WRATH THOU HAST TURNED THYSELF FROM THE FIERCENESS OF THINE ANGER.
(Psalm 85:2, 3)
God forgives the iniquity of His people and He covers all their sins.. But upon what basis ?
We read in Isaiah 12:2
The LORD ... IS BECOME my SALVATION
and again
THOU HAST TAKEN AWAY ALL THY WRATH
THOU HAST TURNED THYSELF FROM THE
FIERCENESS OF THINE ANGER.
God, in the person of the Son , turned away the wrath of God on Calvary. This is the PROPITIATORY DEATH OF Christ
(Romans 3:25) and this PROPITIATION is the basis upon which God forgives the sins also of all Christians (1 John 2:2).
Thus we preach:
God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
(2 Corinthians 5:19)
Now consider David, who we saw before was absolved by Nathan when he forgave the sins of David. For what does David himself say about the true nature of THIS forgiveness, pronounced by Nathan in his absolution?
I SAID,
'I WILL confess my transgressions
unto the LORD';
and THOU FORGAVEST the INIQUITY
of MY SIN. Selah.
(Psalm 32:5)
Psalm 32 concerns the same incident and the same sin that was absolved by Nathan.
But look at the inner nature of the forgiveness pronounced here by Nathan
David states: "I SAID I WILL confess"
We learn from Inspired Scripture in Psalm 32, that ... Even BEFORE David uttered his confession of sin in the presence of Nathan, even from the very moment that he PURPOSED in his heart before the Lord TO CONFESS his sins, that the Lord had already FORGIVEN him.
The reason for this is that both Contrition and Faith are gifts worked by the Lord through Law and Gospel. (Isaiah 66:2; Psalm 34:18; Psalm 51:17; Matthew 5:3, 4; Ephesians 2:8, 9)
In other words, true Repentance consists in Contrition and Saving Faith Worked in the heart by God. And David saw that even as the fruit of God's working led him to CONFESS, he was already in that instant forgiven BEFORE the Absolution was pronounced.
I SAID,
'I WILL confess my transgressions
unto the LORD';
and THOU FORGAVEST the INIQUITY
of MY SIN. Selah.
(Psalm 32:5)
Nathan simply pronounced the Absolution that God had already given David through faith.
"The Lord HATH PUT AWAY THY SIN"
(2 Samuel 12:13)
And this is consistent with the Greek verb tenses used in John 20:23 and Luke 5:20
But first of all some rules of Greek grammar:
Decker writes:
"The aspect of the PERFECT [Tense] is STATIVE: It describes a state / condition rather than an action"
"The Perfect Tense form is almost always significant when it is used. ...Writers may use the Perfect to highlight particular points and sometimes the Perfect is used to highlight THE MAIN POINT of a PARTICULAR Pericope on a narrative"
(Decker, R., 2014, Reading Koine Greek, Baker Books, USA, pp. 329, 330)
Wallace writes:
"The Perfect Tense is THE MOST IMPORTANT, exegetically of all Greek tenses"
"The force of the Perfect tense is simply that it describes an event that, COMPLETED IN THE PAST ...has results existing in the present time. "
"The present tense is used for not indicating past action as such but the present 'state of affairs', RESULTING FROM THE PAST ACTION"
Wallace also notes that Perfect tense has two emphases of PRESENT STATE based on past action and also COMPLETED ACTION of a past action... Usually we should translate with present tense but not always.
Wallace, D., 1996, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, Zondervan, USA, pp. 573, 574, 577)
Mounce states:
"The Greek Perfect ... Is often used to express great theological truths. The Greek Perfect describes an action that was brought to completion and whose effects are felt in the present. Because it describes a completed action, that ACTION will have OCCURRED IN THE PAST"
Mounce also points out that we must translate according to context as either a Perfect with PAST emphasis or a Perfect with PRESENT emphasis.
(Mounce, W., 2019, Basics of Biblical Greek, Zondervan, USA, pp. 276, 277)
Why is this important?
Because in John 20:23
Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted
unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain,
they are retained.
We have the Greek Perfect tense controlling the narrative. God has already forgiven the contrite sinner , BEFORE the Absolution is pronounced!
ἀφέωνται = " their sins have been / and are forgiven".
(ἀφέωνται - is a Perfect Passive Indicative verb)
ἀφῆτε = "you should all remit"
(ἀφῆτε - is an Aorist, Active, Subjunctive verb). And it should be noted that:
Subjunctive mood Verbs have the element of what is potential not definite, and also an aspect of future tense.
Wallace writes:
"The Indicative is primarily used for ACTUALITY, while the Oblique moods
[eg Subjunctive] usually remain in the realm of potentiality."
Wallace, D., 1996, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, Zondervan, USA, pp. 462, 463)
John 20:23
Whose soever sins ye SHOULD remit, they
HAVE BEEN / ARE remitted
unto them; and whose soever sins ye SHOULD
retain, they HAVE BEEN / ARE retained.
Has the SENSE that God has already forgiven the sins of the contrite and that we pronounce absolution that corresponds to that.
And "THE SENSE" (Nehemiah 8:8) is the all important thing when handling the Exposition of Scripture. We must read Distinctly AND give the Sense (Nehemiah 8:8)
Ergo
Thy sins be forgiven
Not
I forgive your sins
(Which is contrary to any use throughout ALL Scripture and contrary also to the Grammar. )
Moreover ... Matthew 5:2 and Luke 5:20 record synoptic accounts and are both true. But Luke uses the Perfect Tense in agreement with John 20:23
Man, thy sins are forgiven thee.
(Luke 5:20)
Literally
Man, thy sins HAVE BEEN/ ARE Forgiven thee.
The foundation of absolution is both
Objective Justification and Justifying Faith which is wrought by the Gospel in the hearts of the Contrite.
Absolution merely confirms the Forgiveness already imparted by God as we read:
THOU HAST FORGIVEN
the iniquity of thy people,
THOU hast covered
ALL THEIR SIN
(Psalm 85:2)
And again
If we confess our sins,
HE is faithful and just TO FORGIVE US
our sins, and TO CLEANSE us from all
unrighteousness.
(1 John 1:9)
It is God who forgives our sins before any absolution is pronounced.
So the sense in which "we remit" sins is the sense which Scripture itself employs , comparing Scripture with Scripture we see that we simply declare with Nathan
"The LORD HATH PUT AWAY THY SIN"
(2 Samuel 12:13)
In Psalm 2:7
"I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee."
It is incorrect to teach that it refers to the eternal begetting of Christ. Luther, evidently, also was wrong in this point.
We know this because we have tge clear Apostolic statement:
"God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath RAISED up JESUS AGAIN;
AS it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee."
(Acts 13:33)
So we know that this refers to Jesus being "BEGOTTEN from among the dead" in his RESURRECTION.
"And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and
THE FIRST BEGOTTEN OF THE DEAD, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood"
(Revelation 1:5)
'Promo sm'
I believe only Jesus can forgive sins. Why do Lutherans say In the stead and by the command of my Lord? Jesus Christ I forgive you all your sins in the name of the Father and of the + Son and of the Holy Spirit.
Because it is Jesus' words that the pastor is speaking. It is the Word of Jesus that forgives sins. The pastor is speaking that word of forgiveness to the congregation.
Jesus said to them again, “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I am sending you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you withhold forgiveness from any, it is withheld.” (John 20:21-22)
I agree the wording is rather poor, it doesn't sit well with Scripture.
NEVERTHELESS,
Absolution is Biblical doctrine and is present in The Old and the New Testament.
For example when David confessed his guilt Nathan immediately declared Absolution.
And Nathan said unto David,
The LORD also HATH
PUT AWAY THY SIN ;
thou shalt not die.
(2 Samuel 12:13)
Absolution is nothing more than declaring the forgiveness of our sins in the basis of Christ having turned away God's fierce anger
(Psalm 85:3; 2 Corinthians 5:15)
Notice that:
Nathan does not say
"I forgive your sins"
But rather,
"The Lord has put away thy sin."
This is Scriptural.
Nathan remitted David's sin. But Nathan himself was not the one who forgave but rather The Lord. And David declared the Lord's absolution.
Christian pastors and laypeople "forgive" in the sense that Christ has first forgiven onmthe Basis of the cross . And we simply declare God's forgiveness to those who repent.
Whose soever sins ye remit, they have been remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they have been retained.
(John 20:23)
Here the subjunctive mood is used in conjunction with the perfect tense.
The perfect tense shows that the standing of the sinner is a settled state before God. And we simply declare that forgiveness or lack of forgiveness.
The aorist tense / subjunctive mood verb is used for our pronunciation of the Absolution..but the actual forgiveness stands before God on the basis of Christ's sacrifice and upon genuine contrition for sin.
So in absolution we simply declare or withhold the declaration of that forgiveness , very much like Nathan did and like Saul did before him.
David's sins were remitted by Nathan when he repented.
(2 Samuel 12:13)
Saul's sins were retained by Samuel when Saul offered the sorrow of the world and refused to truly repent.
(1 Samuel 15:26)
So, to come full circle, I agree the expression "I forgive your sins" is unfortunate and troublesome to my mind also.
Much better to pronounce, with Nathan, "The Lord has forgiven your sins"
Notice also the aorist / subjunctive verb ἀφῆτε is plural and second person. It implies the subject
"YOU ALL"
And the perfect tense verb
ἀφέωνται (HAVE BEEN) is a state verb which describes a CURRENT STATE based on a PAST ACT
"HAVE BEEN FORGIVEN"
"Whosoever sins YOU ALL" forgive HAVE BEEN forgiven them"
The question arises:
Jesus is explaining to them that they are remitting sins by pronouncing the forgiveness that The Lord already declares consistent with Scripture..
So are they forgiving sins or is Christ forgiving sins, and they are merely declaring what God has done?
The answer is that they are declaring the forgiveness of the Lord. AND ONLY IN THAT SENSE ARE THEY "FORGIVING" SINS .
(The subject "You" [forgive] does not even appear explicitly but is implied in the verb. Because "you" are declaring the absolution but "you" are not the one forgiving but rather declaring the forgiveness already established by God in the basis of clear Bible doctrine regarding repentance and faith)
Thus I would conclude that the language of absolution was never intended to be "I forgive sins" but rather "you are forgiving or retaining sins when you declare the forgiveness or unforgiveness already declared by the Lord"
Surely this is the correct exposition and the intended sense of John 20:23.
Jesus says he is sending the apostles like the Father sent him. By your logic, Jesus should not say "I" either. He should always say, "The Father forgives you." That is not what he does.
The language of you is plural because he is talking to all the disciples in that room, not to diminish the personal nature of the act. Only if he addressed one disciple alone would he have used the singular.
Finally, and most importantly, you are wrong that the perfect tense here refers to an objective state of forgiveness granted to all because of Jesus' death.
Of course, all forgiveness finds its source in Jesus atoning sacrifice. But what is spoken of here is the delivery of the fruits of that sacrifice.
The aorist subjunctive point to the fact that the absolution is delivered once, and the perfect tense reminds us of the continuing benefit, namely that the sin is forgiven in heaven forever.
Otherwise there is no point to what he said. He connect the act of the apostles pronouncing absolution and the state of the forgiveness too closely. He is not simply saying, tell people what has occurred. He is telling them to forgive sins in his name and stead.
Since God ordains people to do this work, they can rightfully use "I." We of course add in the name and stead of Jesus to make clear our understanding of the "I."
@@mathete9968
@mathete9968 Look at the full section of confession and absolution in the liturgy. Especially when the form used for confession ends "Lord have mercy on me, a sinner," The pastor says, "The Lord has had mercy" then reminds every one of Christ's atoning sacrifice.
Then he does not say simply "I forgive you your sins " he says
" As an ordained servant of the Lord by the command and authority of Christ, I forgive you all your sins".
The pastor is not giving absolution by his own authority but by Christ's.
God also commanded us, through Paul, to confess to and forgive each other.
In that vein I saw a streamed service where the pastor confessed to and was absolved by the congregation before hearing their confession
I can't remember who the pastor was, I follow 5 Lutheran congregations that post services.
"Batpism"? (cover screen)
"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.
For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which
IS CHRIST THE LORD."
(Luke 2:10, 11)
John the Baptist was full of the Holy Spirit FROM his mother's womb (Luke 1:15)
But Jesus was CONCEIVED through the power of Holy Spirit (Luke 1:35)
And Jesus most certainly was filled with the Holy Spirit from conception.
But Jesus did not become "Christ" at Baptism. Just as we do not prove the virgin birth by the etymology of the Hebrew word "Almah" (Isaiah 7:14) but rather by a clear statement of the Scripture (Luke 1:34, 35), so likewise the meaning of Christ.
The clear statement of the angel , using the present tense verb ἐστιν makes it clear that Jesus was Christ already at his birth.
Yes, the Holy Spirit descended upon him when he sanctified the waters for all baptisms as he was baptized for us. And he was inaugurated into his office as Prophet, Priest and King. But he was already Christ at his coming into the world.
Don't worry it's not a fossil he doesn't believe in evolution. It's only an idol..