Originally posted by qtiger
I don't find it unreasonable that a Reform church would change over the course of say... 485 years, I just find it a little bit hilarious that a church would be named after a religious scholar and philospher with whom their fundamental precepts are in disagreement.
I was just thinking about that myself, i dont think that Lutheranism is necessarily "we believe everything luther said" as much as "what luther was hinting of was really profound, but lets take that one step further"
the idea of AELC is that while what luther said at the time was terribly profound, it was profound for the time, and that in order to respect what Luther was getting at we must continually evolve the church and its beliefs to reflect the times...even if that means changing basic tennants and teachings to create growth and freshness
i cant think of any examples of what im trying to say, but its right on the tip of my tongue, and i think it occurs fairly frequently.