Lutherans subscribe to the Book of Concord, not to FIC, LW, or LS.
87] In the Epistle to the Romans, Paul discusses this topic especially, and declares that, when we believe that God, for Christ's sake, is reconciled to us, we are justified freely by faith.
Book of Concord, Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Justification.
The reconciliation expressed in Corinthians is the Atonement, not to be confused with justification. Melanchthon is clear, and Robert Preus explains:
"But the imputation of Christ's righteousness to the sinner takes place when the Holy Spirit brings him to faith through Baptism and the Word of the Gospel. Our sins were imputed to Christ at His suffering and death, imputed objectively after He, by His active and passive obedience, fulfilled and procured all righteousness for us. But the imputation of His righteousness to us takes place when we are brought to faith." [procured in italics in text]
Robert D. Preus, Justification and Rome, St. Louis: Concordia Academic Press 1997, p. 72.
Abraham Calov: "Although Christ has acquired for us the remission of sins, justification, and sonship, God just the same does not justify us prior to our faith. Nor do we become God's children in Christ in such a way that justification in the mind of God takes place before we believe." [Apodixis Articulorum Fide, Lueneburg, 1684]
Robert D. Preus, Justification and Rome, St. Louis: Concordia Academic Press 1997, p. 131n.
---
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Reconciliation Explained by Luther's Co-Worker Mel...":
This is one problem I have with Jacko: He claims to know more about Robert Preus than Preus' own family by insisting that he does not teach Universal Objective Justification. Instead it is claimed that he rejected UOJ, when his family denies that. Surely his family knows more about this great saint than does Jacko.
***
GJ - What Rolf claims is hearsay. What we have for certain is the book, even after unclean hands have touched it in editing the work. I base my claim upon the printed word rather than Rolf's testimony, which has been on both sides of the justification issue.
As James Heiser pointed out, Robert's sons are not known for their theological acumen.
7 comments:
FIC, LW, or LS are the tools of politicians, not for those seeking the Word of God.
The heavily maligned Lutheran Confessions - http://www.bookofconcord.org/defense_4_justification.php
""80] ...Thus, therefore, we prove the minor proposition. The wrath of God cannot be appeased if we set against it our own works, because Christ has been set forth as a Propitiator, so that for His sake, the Father may become reconciled to us. But Christ is not apprehended as a Mediator except by faith. Therefore, by faith alone we obtain remission of sins, when we comfort our hearts with confidence in the mercy promised for 81] Christ's sake."
WELS -
WELS AZ/CA District President Pastor Jon Buchholz, "Just to illustrate how easy it is to slip, I’ll point out that you also are guilty of imprecise writing. I have read some of the blogs you’ve posted on Ichabod. You have not only denied UOJ (about which we can certainly discuss terminology), but you have carelessly maligned universal reconciliation (which Dr. Jackson certainly does not deny). (Your posting of October 4 says: "The wrath of God cannot be appeased if we set against it our own works, because Christ has been set forth as a Propitiator.....But Christ is not apprehended as a Mediator except by faith." So the
Confessions see that until Christ is apprehended as a Mediator the world is not reconciled to God but under God's wrath.) 2 Corinthians 5:18-19 teaches both universal reconciliation and personal reconciliation. Lenski and
Jackson both are very clear on this point. Lenski uses the term “universal reconciliation,” although he does not like the term “universal justification.” Your blog posting contradicts Scripture, Lenski and Jackson (Scripture being the most important). I suggest that you rewrite that posting. (I note that you also say the same thing below, presumably quoting your blog posting or vice versa.)
Melanchthon sold out to the Calvinists when he abridged the Confessions.
See my notations...
"But the imputation of Christ's righteousness to the sinner takes place when the Holy Spirit brings him to faith through Baptism and the Word of the Gospel.(JK - this is SJ) Our sins were imputed to Christ at His suffering and death, imputed objectively (JK - OOPS - there's that word again!!!) after He, by His active and passive obedience, fulfilled and procured all righteousness for us. (JK - and here you have once again UOJ) But the imputation of His righteousness to us takes place when we are brought to faith."(JK - SJ) [procured in italics in text]
Robert D. Preus, Justification and Rome, St. Louis: Concordia Academic Press 1997, p. 72."
"Abraham Calov: "Although Christ has acquired for us the remission of sins, justification, and sonship,(JK - UOJ) God just the same does not justify us prior to our faith.(JK - UOJ) Nor do we become God's children in Christ in such a way that justification in the mind of God takes place before we believe."(JK - UOJ) [Apodixis Articulorum Fide, Lueneburg, 1684]
Robert D. Preus, Justification and Rome, St. Louis: Concordia Academic Press 1997, p. 131n."
And this is for Brett:
"Therefore, by faith alone we obtain remission of sins,(JK - Brett, this is Subjective Justification) when we comfort our hearts with confidence in the mercy promised for 81] Christ's sake."(JK - Our faith rests on that promise which is for all men - universal.)
Ah Joe Krohn, we meet again!
I would hope that more Confessional Lutherans had your tenacity.
My copy of Justification and Rome is not with me at the moment so I'll use your quotes and highlight my comments.
"But the imputation of Christ's righteousness to the sinner takes place when the Holy Spirit brings him to faith through Baptism and the Word of the Gospel.(JK - this is SJ) Our sins were imputed to Christ at His suffering and death, imputed objectively (JK - OOPS - there's that word again!!!)(the word itself is not bad - it's what UOJ says with it that's false) after He, by His active and passive obedience, fulfilled and procured all righteousness for us. (JK - and here you have once again UOJ)(No Joe, this is the Atonement that God laid on Christ the sins of the whole world and Christ paid for them. There is no distribution of that righteousness here and neither is there a declaration that the unbelieving world is forgiven or righteous outside of faith in Christ. But the imputation of His righteousness to us takes place when we are brought to faith."(JK - SJ)(this rejects UOJ since UOJ says God imputed Christ's righteousness to the world before faith so that faith has something to cling to. UOJ has God declaring the whole world righteous before faith. This statement rejects your false doctrine.) [procured in italics in text]
Robert D. Preus, Justification and Rome, St. Louis: Concordia Academic Press 1997, p. 72."
"Abraham Calov: "Although Christ has acquired for us the remission of sins, justification, and sonship,(JK - UOJ)(No, again, not UOJ this is the Atonement. No distribution of the remission of sins, declaration of Justification or declaration that the unbelieving world are now the children of God as UOJ claims) God just the same does not justify us prior to our faith.(JK - UOJ)(It is laughable that you call this UOJ. Opposing UOJ Calov states, God does not justify us prior to faith. You're getting your own false doctrine mixed up) Nor do we become God's children in Christ in such a way that justification in the mind of God takes place before we believe."(JK - UOJ)(Joe, in what world does "Nor" proceed a positive statement? It means Neither (negative). Calov confirms that God does not consider the whole world justified before faith. To claim that this promotes UOJ is truly unbelievable) [Apodixis Articulorum Fide, Lueneburg, 1684]
Robert D. Preus, Justification and Rome, St. Louis: Concordia Academic Press 1997, p. 131n."
Yes Joe the promise found in the true Gospel is for all men. But Joe, only those who believe in the Gospel promise are accounted by God to be forgiven of all sin, righteous and justified.
Brett, the problem is you are using too narrow of a definition of the words you select.
This is one problem I have with Jacko: He claims to know more about Robert Preus than Preus' own family by insisting that he does not teach Universal Objective Justification. Instead it is claimed that he rejected UOJ, when his family denies that. Surely his family knows more about this great saint than does Jacko.
Like heretic?
I thought the UOJists were confining themselves to confessing God says two different things when He uses the word Justified. Now that UOJ has been shown to be false you want to declare that there's a general sense of righteous and a personal sense? That there's a general sense of reconciled and a personal sense?
Your quote, "God just the same does not justify us prior to our faith.(JK - UOJ)"
Joe, lead me through your thought process which gave you the conviction that this quote is pro UOJ.
Are you now saying that Robert Preus is equally adept at using the general sense of the word 'justify' in order to say something that at face value the statement doesn't say?
Joe, where in the English language are you finding the narrow and wide definition of these words??
That's the beauty and God given blessing of the Greek language. For every variation in the meaning of a word it's a different word. Where do you UOJists find these new (pure) definitions of these Greek words - that even the Greeks didn't know about?
Post a Comment