Ichabod, The Glory Has Departed: 2010-11-07

Monday, November 15, 2010

DP Buchholz UOJ Essay, Pages 21-24

Some Readers Appreciate an Open Forum

rlschultz has left a new comment on your post "How To Talk Lutheran":

Pastor Jackson,
Without being the least bit patronizing, I will say this. We have never met each other in person. Yet, you have responded to every e-mail which I have sent you, often in a very timely manner. You have posted every comment that I have made on Ichabod, often in the main body of the post. Certainly, I am not the only one that you have treated this well. My point is that many who would have a similar background to yours are far too standoffish and aloof. The DP's have a fraction of this under their belt and witness the manner in which they treat laity who are concerned. They say "write a letter", but never show enough common courtesy to respond. It must be that some of us old timers had decent parents who taught us some manners.

***

GJ -

I find it easy to allow perspective. I only know my little corner of the world, so people are welcome to report their experiences. Several have shown that Church and Changers have manipulated congregations into wasting huge amounts of money on masonry evangelism (a dubious goal) and even more money by paying Changers to raise money for ruinous charges - even a commission on the offerings.

I take pride in posting as many hostile comments as possible. Most blogs will not do that. In fact, they will erase comments that do not fit their fetishes - or if their feathers are ruffled. I only erase a comment when bad judgment has led me to allowing an insulting comment come through (unless the person is insulting me).

I noticed a precipitous drop in anti-Ichabod insults once I started OpenID and identified the Appleton circuit as the source - not to mention Garland, Texas.

The UOJ team at the Intrepids blog could post all they want here, but they do not. Readers should ponder that. They could share in the 1600+ page reads a day, and present as freely as they wished. I would even feature their comments. But they remain mute and ask me not to copy their ruminations.

How To Talk Lutheran

Untrue to Chemnitz means untrue to Lutheran doctrine.

I have been warned:

Not to be on the Intrepids site early, because it made them nervous.

Not to quote them on Ichabod because people might confuse my blog with theirs? Why? Because they both start with the letter "i"?

Not to be mean to them, because they are doing a wonderful job with UOJ.

WELS Pastor Tim Glende is impressed with his own education, so much that no one is allowed to disagree with him.

No one on the Intrepids' blog has said "Boo!" about Glende's Ministry of Groeschel plagiarism. They even backed down from naming his Appleton neighbor for plagiarizing Chuck Swindoll (swindle all). But since the WELS pastors are all intoxicated by their own education, let me point out a few things.

Theologian, Not Just an MDiv
I also went to a Lutheran college, one of the best in America, still thriving. The State of Illinois paid most of my tuition because of my score on the college entrance exam. I also went to seminary, and finished a four year program in record time by taking a double-course load. I finished seminary with Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and German.

Yale University accepted me for an STM degree in Biblical studies, where I studied the Old Testament in Hebrew and the New Testament in Greek. I went to church with world-famous Lutheran scholars. Yale looked down on them because they were too conservative.

Notre Dame gave me a full tuition scholarship and a fellowship for their PhD program in theology. My professors were world famous in their fields, from various confessions (Lutheran, Mennonite, Roman Catholic). My dissertation concerned a Lutheran seminary professor, so I spent years writing about Lutheran history in America, defending the dissertation in front of a Mennonite, a Roman Catholic historian, a priest/theologian who specialized in Mary, etc. Martin Marty thought the disseration was good enough to be published, and it was.

I also took courses at Concordia Seminary, Ft. Wayne, plus a semester at The Sausage Factory, Mequon. I have written for 30 different periodicals, including FICKLE (nee The Northwestern Lutheran) and I have edited articles for some national theological journals. I lost count on the articles I have published, perhaps 400.

Northwestern Publishing House published my Liberalism: Its Cause and Cure, and still sells my Catholic, Lutheran, Protestant. I have written a few more books besides.

I teach religion at two universities, where I receive very high ratings from my students and supervisors. Teaching adults from all walks of life has given me a chance to get better at explaining difficult concepts.

Apparently this matters to the Lutheran audience, since my blog receives about 500,000 page reads per year at the current rate.

I have had unique opportunities in higher education, almost impossible to reproduce today. Someone can define Lutheran theology and discuss it as an academic field, but for me it is life and death, the truth that I believe because the infallible Word teaches it.

How To Talk Lutheran
Lutheran Confessional theology is Biblical theology, but since everyone wants to claim "Biblical," I have to write - How To Talk Lutheran. Every statement is clearly taught in the Scriptures and also in the Book of Concord.

The Scriptures are clearly taught (perspicuity) so anyone can learn the basics of Christian doctrine, without knowing the Biblical languages or attending seminary. Let's face it, men - seminaries teach the synod more than they teach theology.
Any layman or laywoman can ask questions and raise issues about Biblical doctrine. In fact, they are expected to discern doctrine and be Bereans in comparing the Word to what is being taught.
Ministers, officials, and theologians cannot usurp the majesty of the Word and the Confessions by claiming authority by virtue of their office.
All Biblical teaching must begin with the efficacy of the Word alone. Efficacy has not been taught or has been weakly taught in the Synodical Conference. Efficacy alone has been taught against by virtue of many Pietistic attitudes and claims.
God only works through the Word, so His Holy Spirit is always united in His Word and Sacraments. Therefore, it is impossible that any divine activity could take place apart from His Word.
Faith is good, because faith is trust in God's Word, God's mercy and loving-kindness. When people attack faith and ascribe divine benefits to non-faith, in the absence of the Word, they are Enthusiasts, not Lutheran.
God creates faith through the preaching and teaching of the Gospel Word. He sustains faith and builds faith through the Word and Sacraments.
Sins are forgiven because of God's grace, not because of man's virtue, and God's grace comes to us only through the Instruments of Grace, or the Means of Grace, the Word and Sacraments. Apart from the Means of Grace there can be no forgiveness.
Therefore, every flavor of Universal Objective Justification is deadly wrong, because UOJ teaches grace without the Means of Grace, without the Word, its promoters lording it over the laity because people cannot follow their convoluted thinking.

Luther Rocks and the Intrepids' Role--or--"Rome Again"

LutherRocks has left a new comment on your post "Intrepid Lutherans - An Uncertain Trumpet Sound - ...":

"You can only understand Justification if you are a theologian"

This has crossed my mind more than a few times. Never-mind the scriptures, we have theologians to tell us what it says. Huh? Sounds a bit like the Rome Luther fought against.

That goes right along with 'If I want your opinion, I'll give it to you.'

I Visited with the Families in Kokomo, Indiana,
About the WELS Kicking Them Out

Rydecki wrote on the Intrepid Lutheran blog:

"Note: I can’t provide here a complete history of what happened in Kokomo, IN, in 1979. There are several articles out there describing what happened, and I’ve only skimmed a few of them. I’m not even sure that KM was fully briefed on the situation. It seems that a group of members at that WELS congregation found themselves in disagreement with the way the WELS had been teaching Objective Justification, and so wrote up some extreme statements to characterize this doctrine, not because they believed the statements, but in order to point out how ridiculous they perceived the WELS teaching to be."

Unlike Rydecki, I traveled to Kokomo and visited with the families involved. How strange that Rydecki would post more erroneous material after admitting how little he knew about it.

Two families were kicked out of WELS, not a group. The two families were shocked by Pastor Papenfuss teaching the tenets of UOJ. He admitted to them (in the kitchen where we were standing) that he had never heard of it until he went to seminary in Mequon.

The two men wrote up four statements based on what Papenfuss was teaching. Three of them were almost verbatim from Mequon Professor J. P. Meyers, Ministers of Christ. The fourth one they discovered from some research on the topic. They wrote these down and said to Papenfuss, "Is this what you are teaching?"

Papenfuss said it was.

Because these two families rejected what Papenfuss admitted to teaching, WELS kicked them out for false doctrine, stating that fact in a letter sent to both families. They gave me a copy of each letter, and I copied it in Thy Strong Word, with this background information.

The letter included the four statements. The elders of the congregation gave as their reason the two families' rejection of the Kokomo Statements.

The families appealed, and Panning was on the appeals board. The synodical appeal agreed with the expulsion of the two families for rejecting the Kokomo Statements.

So let us finally dispose of the falsehoods promoted once again by Rydecki:

The first three statements were not made up by the two families but published by WELS, by a seminary professor of WELS, and taught by WELS at its seminary.
The fourth statement was supported by Papenfuss and the appeals committee. It came from an earlier controversy over the same topic - UOJ.
The four statements are not extreme UOJ but ordinary, synod-supported UOJ.
The four statements are not a caricature of justification, unless one concedes that WELS has indeed published and taught a caricature for many decades (while lying about it).
WELS has told quite a few lies to turn two families into evil, dishonest trouble-makers when they were doing what they should have done in discerning doctrine. That the clergy continue to slander them--whether they were right or wrong--is an indictment of the synod.

The Intrepids are falling back on the Sloppy Language argument to justify forgiveness without faith, an argument Jay Webber has been shopping around for a long time, with the recent help of DP Buchholz. Since they cannot get their facts right, should anyone trust them with doctrinal matters?

I think not.

Intrepids Confuse the Kokomo Justification Issue

Creating more Stormtroopers

http://www.intrepidlutherans.com/2010/11/justification-marquart-section-4-just.html

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2010

Justification - Marquart, Section 4 - Just say "no" to Kokomo

Share|

Section 4 of Marquart’s essay is a direct response to some points made in a letter by “Mr. Darby.” In this section, KM defends several of Mr. Darby’s statements and expresses his agreement with Mr. Darby’s complaints. We begin with his first and perhaps biggest complaint: the Kokomo statements.

4. Defensible Theses of Mr. Larry Darby: 1. That the “Kokomo” notions about Judas and other inmates of hell being declared “innocent” and granted “the status of saints,” are an absurd and reprehensible travesty of Lutheran doctrine.

Note: I can’t provide here a complete history of what happened in Kokomo, IN, in 1979. There are several articles out there describing what happened, and I’ve only skimmed a few of them. I’m not even sure that KM was fully briefed on the situation. It seems that a group of members at that WELS congregation found themselves in disagreement with the way the WELS had been teaching Objective Justification, and so wrote up some extreme statements to characterize this doctrine, not because they believed the statements, but in order to point out how ridiculous they perceived the WELS teaching to be.

In other words, their assertion was: (1) these four statements accurately represent the doctrine of Objective Justification, (2) these four statements are obviously unscriptural, therefore (3) we reject the doctrine of Objective Justification.

As Marquart will point out, they ended up creating a straw man – a false characterization of the correct teaching of Objective Justification, even though – and this is important – even though some of their statements did indeed reflect the incorrect presentation of the doctrine by some WELS teachers in the past.

Here are the statements drafted by the Kokomo members:

1. Objectively speaking, without any reference to an individual sinner’s attitude toward Christ’s sacrifice, purely on the basis of God’s verdict, every sinner, whether he knows it or not, whether he believes it or not, has received the status of a saint. 2. After Christ’s intervention and through Christ’s intervention, God regards all sinners as guilt-free saints. 3. When God reconciled the world to Himself through Christ, He individually pronounced forgiveness on each individual sinner whether that sinner ever comes to faith or not. 4. At the time of the resurrection of Christ, God looked down in hell and declared Judas, the people destroyed in the flood, and all the ungodly, innocent, not guilty, and forgiven of all sin and gave unto them the status of saints.

Here’s Marquart’s evaluation of them:

It is mind-boggling that any Lutheran could ever have written such stuff, and Mr. Darby is completely right to denounce it as the mischievous nonsense which it is. Thesis 3 is perhaps the least offensive, although in its context it is thoroughly misleading. Thesis 1 confuses “objective” and “subjective” justification by saying of the former what may only be said of the latter, namely that sinners have “received” forgiveness. Objective justification means that forgiveness has been obtained for and is being offered to all in the Gospel—not that anybody has “received” it. The receiving can happen only through faith, sola fide. [emphasis added] Thesis 2, that after Christ’s sacrifice “God regards all sinners as guilt-free saints” is simply false, St. Jn. 3:36; 1 Jn. 5:12. And Thesis 4 about hell’s human denizens being pronounced innocent, given “the status of saints,” etc. is fantasy. An unbiblical logic has driven biblical language senseless: what can it possibly mean to have (or, worse, receive!) “the status of saints” in hell? The grace and forgiveness which Christ obtained for all, had been offered to the dead during their life-time, in the means of grace (St. Lk. 16:29; Heb. 9:27), but are in no way given to the godless in hell, where there is no Gospel, hence no forgiveness (Large Catechism, Creed, 56). The trouble with these repulsive “Kokomo” statements is that they ignore the pivotal significance of the means of grace and thereby abandon the proper distinction of Law and Gospel. [emphasis added]

Apparently, the members who drafted the Kokomo Statements wrote letters to the entire synod complaining about the WELS doctrine (which they had formed into a caricature). This eventually resulted in some WELS theologians having to react to the Statements. Among them was Dr. Siegbert Becker, respected professor at Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary. In his essay, he expressed his dislike for the terminology of the Statements, but felt constrained to defend them in principle as statements that could indeed be understood correctly. It is my understanding (and I could be wrong!) that the Kokomo members were eventually given the ultimatum of accepting their own Statements as the true biblical doctrine, or be excommunicated. If someone can confirm or correct that, let him do so.

I disagree with some of Dr. Becker’s exegetical conclusions in his essay, and I also disagree with his defense of the Kokomo Statements, half-hearted though it may have been. In my opinion, he made a grave mistake, one that has given a degree of credence to the Kokomo description of Justification over the last 30 years, and has only served to further confuse the issue and disseminate the caricature.

From what Marquart says below, it seems that he initially wrote some things in defense of Dr. Becker’s defense of the Kokomo Statements. Looking back, he regrets doing that:

In light of Mr. Darby’s citation of the late Dr. Siegbert Becker in support of the “Kokomo” theses (HD, p. 240), I now regret my editorial note (A Lively Legacy, p. 78) which attempted to shield Becker against criticism by Hardt on justification. However technically defensible my cavils may have been, the larger truth signaled by the “Kokomo” affair is that Hardt was right and I was wrong.

This is what Rev. Jon Buchholz had to say about the Kokomo Statements and Becker’s reaction in his essay presented to the WELS synod convention in 2005:

Each of these statements is so poorly crafted that it cannot be accepted—regardless of authorship. Dr. Siegbert Becker, in an essay to Chicago area pastors, rightly lamented the poor choice of words, but he upheld the statements on principle. I would like him to have said, “Throw them out and start over!” The Kokomo Statements should be roundly rejected by the WELS as an incongruous ecclesiological mishmash.

There’s no reason in the world to defend the Kokomo Statements, and every reason in the world to reject them and go back to a confessional Lutheran presentation of Justification:

“The Law of God condemns all mankind as unrighteous, for all have sinned. But God has provided another way for men to be judged by Him – not on the basis of our works, but on the basis of the works of Another Man. God, in his grace, has provided payment for the sins of all in the death of His Son, Jesus Christ, and has permitted the righteousness of Christ to stand in the place of the world’s unrighteousness, so that all may believe in Christ and be saved. In the Gospel, He holds out the promise of the free forgiveness of sins to all for the sake of Christ. To the poor sinners who believe God’s promise, the righteousness of Christ is imputed, and by faith alone in Christ, the unrighteous are counted as righteous before God – justified, forgiven, adopted, regenerated and saved.”

OK, the above is wordy and probably not concise enough for a formal doctrinal statement. It’s inferior to the wording we already have in the Confessions. But I’ll take it any day over the “repulsive Kokomo statements,” or any other statements that reflect the Kokomo caricature.

Some claim that the caricature IS the historical, prevalent teaching of Justification in the WELS. To the extent that such may be the case, my hope is that, as we move forward, we can return to the sound form of teaching found in our Lutheran Confessions, from which I fear we have strayed – in articulation at least, if not in actual belief. If, as Marquart states above, all that is meant by Objective Justification is that “forgiveness has been obtained for and is being offered to all in the Gospel — not that anybody has ‘received’ it,” then we should be careful to talk about it that way, without all the overstatements that often accompany it.

Intrepid Lutherans - An Uncertain Trumpet Sound - Instead of Sound Doctrine

Quote Gerhard - unknown to most people, with books unavailable to most pastors. Cite the source?

bored has left a new comment on your post "Gerhard and Calov in the Book of Concord? - Rydeck...":

I sent Pastor Rydecki a note in response to his comment in which he footnote-stole Gerhard and Calov. (New Ichaslang entry? "did he just rydecki some quotes from Preuss?") I asked him for something from the Book of Concord that supports universal absolution/forgiveness without faith. I look forward to seeing what he offers.

The rest of that comment, though, is a very interesting. It sort of sums up my experience with many other WELS pastors. (not, by any stretch, all)--WELS argumentation in a nutshell. (I'm not writing this comment to defend myself, but to continue to help expose how UOJ storm troopers argue)

First, he begs the question: "... toward men who have proven themselves to be fine theologians" Marquart hasn't 'proven' himself to be anything except a teacher false Justification(s).

Then he guilt-trips and puts words into my mouth: "Have a care how you speak of these men. They have never been categorized as heretics." I never said anyone was a heretic, spin-meister.

Then a little smattering of diaprax: " If you don't like Pieper and Walther's use of the word (which I don't really either)..." Read between the lines. Rydecki: I'm like you: I don't like Pieper and Walther either. We agree. We're buds. But you have to consider... (Then he asks you to accept the same thing he just said he doesn't like.) Which leads to logical fallacy #2: Appeal to authority: "...there are still Gerhard and Calov to address." If Calov and Gerhard said it must be true. Gosh.

Then, the coup de grace: You can only understand Justification if you are a theologian. Pr Rydecki wrote: "All that said, there is also a difference between those who have proven themselves as solid Christians and theologians, and those who have barely dabbled in theology." His thinly veiled insult is really directed at all laymen. It is right for laymen to give respect to their pastors but not at the expense of our own discernment. Need I mention that Rydecki's attitude is pretty common in the WELS?

Finally, the punch line: " All that said, there is also a difference between those who have proven themselves as solid Christians and theologians, and those who have barely dabbled in theology. Those who are infatuated with sectarian teachers already show themselves to be theologically bankrupt." (laughtrack) If you wait for it, WELS pastors, in the act of stomping on a discerning layman will usually offer a humorous sum-up. Here Rydecki is criticizing anyone who reads Ichabod, and accusing Dr. Jackson of false doctrine.

It's funny because Rydecki is the one defending sectarian doctrines. Rydecki is joining many others in a path that diverges from the BoC.

It's funnier yet because he runs to the LCMS for the ultimate defense of UOJ, though it's a WELS-only blog. He's not defending UOJ with WEL theologians. I wonder if that's who he's referring to as 'dabblers'. He calls the anti-UOJ people theologically bankrupt, but yet spends his time dancing around the arguments made by those who challenge UOJ, never proving them to be false.

Sunday, November 14, 2010

Common Sense for a Senseless World: Don't Ask, Don't Tell

Gerhard and Calov in the Book of Concord? - Rydecki Dishonesty - Typical for UOJ

Rydecki claimed:

"By raising Christ from the dead God absolved him for our sins which had been imputed to him, and consequently he also absolved us in him. In the resurrection of Christ we are absolved from our sins, so that they are not able to condemn us any more before God." (Excitando Christum a mortuis absolvit eum Deus a peccatis nostris ipsi imputatis, ac proinde etiam nos in ipso absolvit. - In Christi resurrectione a peccatis nostris sumus absoluti, ut non amplius coram Dei iudicio nos condemnare possint.) – Johann Gerhard

"Christ's resurrection took place as an actual absolution from sin (respectu actualis a peccato absolutionis). As God punished our sins in Christ, upon whom He laid them and to whom He imputed them, as our Bondsman, so He also, by the very act of raising Him from the dead, absolved Him from our sins imputed to Him, and so He absolved also us in Him." – Abraham Calov

***

GJ - Which quotation is in the Book of Concord?

Answer - Neither one.

What is the source of the quotations?

Answer - Rydecki. He did not give a citation for either one. That would never be allowed in an accredited school. Scholars need the source, even if the source is wrong. Otherwise, people will just invent or twist their quotations.

Did Robert Preus, an expert in Post-BOC Orthodoxy refute these claims?

Answer - Yes. He did - in his book Justification and Rome.

What did those authors say?

Answer -

From Catholic, Lutheran, Protestant (second edition), p. 108:

However, Preus clarified the true meaning of justification in his final book, Justification and Rome, p. 72, which was published posthumously. Preus wrote this definitive comment:

"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."

Preus immediately followed the statement above with a quotation from Quenstedt, one of his favorite orthodox Lutheran authors:

It is not just the same thing to say, “Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us” and to say “Christ is our righteousness.” For the imputation did not take place when Christ became our righteousness. The righteousness of Christ is the effect of His office. The imputation is the application of the effect of His office. The one, however, does not do away with the other. Christ is our righteousness effectively when He justifies us. His righteousness is ours objectively because our faith rests in Him. His righteousness is ours formally in that His righteousness is imputed to us.

Preus also quoted Abraham Calov with approval:

"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."

What does the Book of Concord say?

Answer -

"For neither you nor I could ever know anything of Christ, or believe on Him, and obtain Him for our Lord, unless it were offered to us and granted to our hearts by the Holy Ghost through the preaching of the Gospel. The work is done and accomplished; for Christ has acquired and gained the treasure for us by His suffering, death, resurrection, etc. But if the work remained concealed so that no one knew of it, then it would be in vain and lost. That this treasure, therefore, might not lie buried, but be appropriated and enjoyed, God has caused the Word to go forth and be proclaimed, in which He gives the Holy Ghost to bring this treasure home and appropriate it to us. Therefore sanctifying is nothing else than bringing us to Christ to receive this good, to which could not attain ourselves."

The Large Catechism, The Creed, Article III, #38, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 689. Tappert, p. 415.

"But outside of this Christian Church, where the Gospel is not, there is no forgiveness, as also there can be no holiness [sanctification]. Therefore all who seek and wish to merit holiness [sanctification], not through the Gospel and forgiveness of sin, but by their works, have expelled and severed themselves [from this Church]."

The Large Catechism, The Creed, Article III, #56, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 693. Tappert, p. 418.

***

GJ -

Note the hand-me-down quotations noted: JP Meyer, Becker then Webber then Rydecki. Rydecki hasn't studied this doctrine at all.

By raising Christ from the dead God absolved him for our sins which had been imputed to him, and consequently he also absolved us in him. In the resurrection of Christ we are absolved from our sins, so that they are not able to condemn us any more before God. (Excitando Christum a mortuis absolvit eum Deus a peccatis nostris ipsi imputatis, ac proinde etiam nos in ipso absolvit. - In Christi resurrectione a peccatis nostris sumus absoluti, ut non amplius coram Dei iudicio nos condemnare possint.) – Johann Gerhard (quoted in John P. Meyer, “Objective Justification,” in Our Great Heritage [Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 1991], Vol. 3, p. 42)

By raising [Christ] from the dead, [God] absolved him from our sins which had been imputed to him, and therefore he also absolved us in him that Christ’s resurrection might thus be the cause and the proof and the completion of our justification. – Johann Gerhard (Annotationes in Epist. ad Rom. [Jena, 1666], p. 156; quoted in Siegbert W. Becker, “Universal Justification,” in Our Great Heritage, p. 56)

Christ’s resurrection took place as an actual absolution from sin (respectu actualis a peccato absolutionis). As God punished our sins in Christ, upon whom He laid them and to whom He imputed them, as our Bondsman, so He also, by the very act of raising Him from the dead, absolved Him from our sins imputed to Him, and so He absolved also us in Him. – Abraham Calov (Bibl. Illust., ad Rom. 4:25; quoted in Francis Pieper, Christian Dogmatics, Vol. III [Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1951], p. 321).

http://www.angelfire.com/ny4/djw/lutherantheology.justificationquotes.html

***

GJ - This is called academic dishonesty, or footnote stealing. The quotation implies the author looked up this material when he did not. Rydecki is quoting Webber, who is quoting JP Meyer and Becker, OJ Stormtroopers, who are quoting from what source? The trail goes cold, Gibbs.

UOJ is a self-perpetuating racket.

WELS Church and Change - Swallowing the Holy Ghost, Feathers and All

WELS is about two months away from selling glory cloths over the Internet.

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Star of Bethlehem Lutheran Church
To: church_and_change@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Sun, November 14, 2010 5:57:59 PM
Subject: Re: [church_and_change] Men's Ministry

All,

It sounds like some toes have been stepped on. We just started a men's Bible study that is meeting twice a month. It's going well. We have fellowship (think food), Bible study, we pray for each other and then call it a night. I know that the Spirit works through that. It's not flashy, but the men who attend are encouraged and want to keep doing it.

The idea of having a larger WELS Men's ministry arm isn't wrong, but it's difficult to organize. After being here in Winston eight years, I'm thrilled to have a Bible study. I'm plowing through Philippians under the theme of competition. I think men can relate to the thrill of victory better than just "joy". My mother-in-law puts the word "joy" all over her house - I don't mind that, but that's not something guys normally do - I know stereo type. There is a book - Why men hate going to church that talked about the differences between guys and gals (there are some). I watched the video - you would have to pay me to hug another man.

As for pointing out an ELCA ministry, yeah it may be benign as a concept, but just the fact that it has ELCA attached to it makes most WELS pastor's scream and run the other way. I'm saddened that I have more in common with many of my Baptist neighbors than I do with the ELCA churches. I know you can't throw all ELCA folks under the bus - I'm sure there are some Christians in ELCA.

The other thing is kind of little, maybe it's semantic. WELS Lutherans - at least me - get nervous when we hear - being obedient to the Spirit, being led by the Spirit. Brian said, "Goodness is one of the virtues imparted to us by the Holy Spirit. We could only function well as Christian if we are obedient to the Holy Spirit. We can become the good trees that produce good fruits as the Holy Spirit moves us." Ok - I think I get what you're saying, but it's rapidly approaching seeking God where he may not be found. I am not aware of the Holy Spirit's promptings. I know that he lives in me. I know that the good things I do come from him, but I don't feel his presence. I don't want to feel his presence. Why is it that the sanctification train needs to be hijacked by feelings? I know what Jesus did; out of thanks I want to let me light shine before men so that they might see my good deeds and praise him. I pray to God the Holy Spirit to help me and... he does. God's already prepared good things for me to do! It's like when my dad bought me a present for my mom on mother's day - all I had to do was wrap it and put my name on it. The fruit tree effortlessly produces fruit. The saints on the last day in Matt 25:37 are unaware of their good works.

May the Spirit fill your life even if you can't feel it ;)

--

Pastor Fred Guldberg

Star of Bethlehem Lutheran Church

1355 Jonestown Rd

Winston Salem, NC 27103

336-705-1523

On 11/14/2010 3:10 PM, brianandtracey tds.net wrote:

Hello List serves members,

As one of the Church and Change Board of Directors, I wanted to clarify that our new list serve member Dave is not of the ELCA. He and his family have been long time members of the WELS. God introduced us through Pastor Jeske. The Holy Spirit has personally inspired Dave to make an attempt at men’s ministry. His “One year to live” efforts have been ignored at almost every turn. Kindness in the WELS at is best? I think we can do better.

I have the same personal struggles when it comes to the topic of member ministry CEO ministries. A few years ago a WELS Pastor asked me “who gave you permission to start CEO Ministries?” I took a few moments to think about my answer and remembered reading this from the book titled “His Word, our delight” and answered, Simply the Mean’s (sic) of Grace. The Passion of Christ earned it. His resurrection sealed it. The Gospel message guarantees it! He walked away speechless. [GJ - Appalled by the ignorance, arrogance, or the spelling?]

Our member ministries our by-products from God’s Word and messages we hear from the pulpit. They are cultivated fruits of faithfulness produced by the Holy Spirit. Let’s look at few of them;

(GOODNESS)

According to Jesus, only one possess this virtue, and that is God as he counsel the rich young ruler. How does goodness differ from kindness? The word is synonymous to suitable or worthy. The term is also used for the servant who invested well his resources.

He is called good and faithful servant. It also indicates that something is functioning well. If we said that this watch is no good anymore, it won't keep track of the right time any longer. Jesus said that a good tree produces goof fruit, that is the tree functions properly.

Something is good when it works. Even if the methods are alien to traditional ministry efforts, Jesus constantly produced parables that didn’t match up to traditional teachings and He never failed. His teachings made a lasting and profound lasting impression.

Goodness is one of the virtues imparted to us by the Holy Spirit. We could only function well as Christian if we are obedient to the Holy Spirit. We can become the good trees that produce good fruits as the Holy Spirit moves us.

(GENTLENESS)
Gentleness is synonymous to meekness. Jesus claimed meekness for himself and significantly coupled it with being “lowly in heart.” His meekness is worthy of our imitation. Meekness of a Christian is displayed by accepting God’s dealings with us as good without any resistance. This is a display of lowliness before God and humility before men.

If our efforts of goodness are met with coldness, go unappreciated, are mis-understood, are repaid with cruelty, or arrogance, I pray to God that He help keep me company, and encourage me by helping me remember Jesus fruits of love were met with the same attitude. He went through more than I can ever imagine. He was captured, questioned, tried, convicted, beaten, bruised, nailed to the cross, and suffered death.

Praise God for Jesus resurrection!

Member ministries should beyond the shadow of doubt partner with our WELS Pastor’s (sic) and congregations. I constantly hear even today, “I don’t where CEO ministries is going to fit, or if it will at our church.” All my life of 42 years I’ve heard go out and preach to all nations, sang hymns like “Stand up for Jesus,” and “Here am I send me.” Now that God has dusted me off, cleaned me up through sanctification, my efforts have been met with scowl faces, and pastoral resistance for past seven years.

Praise God for showering me with the same underserved Grace He expects me to use by remaining faithfully patient.

Christ’s Love, our calling?

Isn’t everyone called?

God Bless

Brian Arthur Lampe

CEO-ministries.org

On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 7:38 PM, Carl Graf wrote:

Greetings all,

I have been a WELS Lutheran through my entire half century of life. I have two uncles who were WELS ministers, a cousin-in-law who is a WLES minister and two cousins who teach Christian day school. My father served on the WELS Synod Finance committee for almost 25 years. I myself was a signature away from attending seminary myself, when my youngest son was born with Down Syndrome and the Lord told me that he had other plans for my discipleship and put me on a new path.

I'm relatively new to this group. If I may humbly comment on a word that was recently used. That word is "WELS-ify". Hearing that word and further discussions regarding being "too close to ELCA" and others who don't share our fellowship, made me feel a little unsettled, almost embarrassed, knowing that there very likely are members of the ELCA silently listening to our discussions just as I was until now.

While it is very important to be true to what the Word teaches, I also believe that we must ask God to help us guard against an arrogance which pushes others away, rather than living a Christlike life where others are drawn to us and want to have what we have. People who call themselves WELS lutherans are not the only people that will go to heaven, Heaven will be filled with Baptist, Catholics, Methodists, and others who have in their hearts accepted Jesus as their savior. In fact considering WELS short existence on this little planet, we will very likely be a very small minority once we get there. I always try to remind others in my own church when the discussion sways to talking about those "other" churches, that Jesus wasn't a WELS luthern, neither was Abraham, Noah, Moses... etc...

If Jesus were alive today he wouldn't be only in a listserve with WELS lutherans, but groups for pedophiles, homosexuals, and other groups whom appear to us as resisting God's love more than others.

Finally, I want to humbly remind us all that when we push others way, we judge them, and God was pretty clear about who is qualified to do the judging. With that said, I agree that there are probably individuals who are members of the ELCA in this group and I would invite them to share their thoughts, so we can find our similarities and grow towards the Truth from that point.

Think about it. A member of an ELCA church in this listserve. If that isn't a God given opportunity to share His Truth, then I don't know what is. :)

Thank you for the opportunity to share my thoughts.

Carl

On 11/12/2010 10:56 AM, Matthew Krenke wrote:

Thanks Chris, I too agree with everything you wrote.
My concern is that if this is being used to advertise or promote a gathering within our fellowship (and I know some of the history was explained in earlier postings), a person could easily do what I did, Google "Lutheran Men in Mission," and go striaght (sic) to an ELCA site. There are plenty of people not of our fellowship on this list serve, and I don't take it lightly when we are tied too closely to ELCA, unless they one day get their house in order. Even if it weren't tied to ELCA, I would much have preferred seeing a vignette of someone who explained how he was taken back to the Word of God, and encouraged to examine his relationship with the Lord, and lifted up by the message of forgiveness in Christ. This may very well be what happens at this event.. then say that. Then we're giving testimony to our value of and trust in God's word.
Please forgive me if my original posting seemed to harsh,no offense was intended.
- Matt

To: church_and_change@yahoogroups.com
From: marksalzwedel@yahoo.com
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 08:15:38 -0800
Subject: Re: [church_and_change] Men's Ministry

>we can certainly do better by adding the word of God and how it strengthens faith.

I think this is the crux of the issue - do we view sanctification as our work, with God's Word "added" in as an ingredient - or is it solely the work of God's Word? The problem with most of these Evangelical-style programs is not that they explicitly espouse false doctrines (those are easy to fix and "WELS-ify"), but that they are founded on assumptions that undermine the efficacy of Scripture/Means of Grace.

That said, I sometimes come down on either side of these kinds of debates, and I haven't had time to investigate the particulars of what is being discussed here - just making a general observation.

- Mark

From: Christopher Hoppe
To: church_and_change@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, November 12, 2010 9:58:00 AM
Subject: RE: [church_and_change] Men's Ministry

I agree with everything Matt said, but I also think we need to be careful we don't become too critical of other ministries, so as not to extinguish the fire that the Holy Spirit has started in the hearts of others. We know the ELCA has gotten too social at times and have put activity above the word and I don't agree with that either. Keep it Christ centered and let the word ignite your faith!

The video is usually a way to get people in the door, a teaser per se. It would certainly be better that they say that it's God's Word that is the source of all our strength, we as pastors know that, and I hope and pray that it's there! Getting together with like minded men is certainly something that can bolster faith as we share experiences in life and how we can tackle real life issues with God's help and the help of fellow brothers in the faith. A support system is not necessarily bad - as God encourages us to carry each other's burdens and build each other up.

There are many men out there who are not living their faith, but are running away from it. How can we get to men where they are? How can we reach out to them to help them speak their faith and live in the calling they have received? It it's through a venue like this -- then praise God from whom all blessings flow! Let's not get too critical or jump to conclusions.

And if it's a WELS member getting it going - we should take their words and actions in the kindest possible way and trust that they are Christ centered. I am encouraged as a pastor to teach my people to go out with their faith and share it, but I put a yoke around their necks and tell them what they can and cannot do, and sometimes we end up choking out the faith the Holy Spirit has put there. Let's encourage.... let's dig into the word... and let's pray that God would open doors for us to reach out with the love of Christ! The video was just a template and idea for us to put into action in our midst, we can certainly do better by adding the word of God and how it strengthens faith.

Chris Hoppe

--- On Fri, 11/12/10, Matthew Krenke wrote:

From: Matthew Krenke
Subject: RE: [church_and_change] Men's Ministry
To: church_and_change@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, November 12, 2010, 9:34 AM

I watched the video. I learned that real men wear pink. I learned that if you go to this "One Year to Live" program you might be moved to take part in some social gospel enterprise (that's what the ministries mentioned sounded like). I heard lots of talk about how they grew in their faith. I don't quite know how this video was to give me proof of this internal, spiritual growth, but what I did see had no mention of sin and grace, of which increasing your understanding is the only way to grow in faith. I heard an appeal to financially support a ministry I don't feel I could. I understand the intent, that as Christian men we need our brothers to rely on, and I commend its intent. I recommend getting into the Word and being strengthened, in the Bible studies and activities that are probably already going on in your own congregation. What do we do with this great wonderful truth? We share it. We don't need to huddle together with like-minded brothers to do that.

Pastor Matt Krenke - Zion Lutheran , Valentine, Nebraska

http://www.youtube.com/user/LutheranMenInMission#p/a/u/1/JCJzH5RbvJU

--

Pastor Fred Guldberg

Star of Bethlehem Lutheran Church

1355 Jonestown Rd

Winston Salem, NC 27103

336-705-1523

Philippians 3:18-19

Philippians 3:18 (For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: 19 Whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things.)

KJV Romans 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. 18 For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

The Twenty-Third Sunday after Trinity

The Risen Christ, by Norma Boeckler

The Twenty-Third Sunday after Trinity

Pastor Gregory L. Jackson

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/bethany-lutheran-worship

Bethany Lutheran Church, 10 AM Central Time

The Hymn # 29 Praise to the Lord 3:1
The Confession of Sins
The Absolution
The Introit p. 16
The Gloria Patri
The Kyrie p. 17
The Gloria in Excelsis
The Salutation and Collect p. 19
The Epistle and Gradual
The Gospel
Glory be to Thee, O Lord!
Praise be to Thee, O Christ!
The Nicene Creed p. 22
The Sermon Hymn #246 Holy, Holy, Holy 3:35

Citizenship in Heaven

The Communion Hymn #316 O Living Bread 3:45
The Preface p. 24
The Sanctus p. 26
The Lord's Prayer p. 27
The Words of Institution
The Agnus Dei p. 28
The Nunc Dimittis p. 29
The Benediction p. 31
The Hymn # 309 O Jesus Blessed Lord 3:70

KJV Philippians 3:17 Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample. 18 (For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: 19 Whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things.) 20 For our conversation is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: 21 Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.
KJV Matthew 22:15 Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his talk. 16 And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, Master, we know that thou art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man: for thou regardest not the person of men. 17 Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not? 18 But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites? 19 Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny. 20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription? 21 They say unto him, Caesar's. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's. 22 When they had heard these words, they marvelled, and left him, and went their way.

Twenty-Third Sunday After Trinity
Lord God, heavenly Father: we thank Thee that Thou hast hitherto granted us peace and graciously spared us from war and foreign dominion: We pray Thee, graciously let us continue to live in Thy fear according to Thy will, giving no cause for wars or other punishment; govern and direct our magistrates, that they may not hinder the obedience due to Thee, but maintain righteousness, that we may enjoy happiness and blessing under their government, through our Lord Jesus Christ, who liveth and reigneth with Thee and the Holy Ghost, one true God, world without end. Amen.

Citizenship in Heaven – Not in the Chow Line

This passage is one of the clearest Law and Gospel passages.

The first part condemns the wrong path in life and describes the results.

I have no doubts that the people described in the first part are within the visible church, or once were and fell away. Many times that is not an obvious change, but one which takes place over many years and decades.

Many heard the Gospel and joined with great joy, but following Mark 4 (Matthew 13) they had the implanted faith snatched away from them or became consumed by the cares of the world.

The same reaction can be seen today, taking place over a period of time. What might have been indicated at first is now blossoming in its glory. As I once observed in gardening, “Is that a weed?” became rank growth when left alone.

Philippians 3:17 Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample.

This urging by Paul does not mean that he alone is the example, but that sincere believers should imitate one another. In that way we serve to admonish each other before someone wanders off in the wrong direction.

“Mark” means to examine closely, so we get “remarkable” from that verb.

KJV Romans 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.

These passages have been changed in intent, to protect the false teachers. Now the organizations use Mennonite shunning to silence and ostracize anyone who dares to mention that false doctrine is being taught.

KJV Philippians 3:18 (For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ:

The verb “walk” is used to include a whole range of behavior. If there is a gulf between behavior and supposed belief, then that person ought to re-examine what is believed. As Luther said, more than once, our outward behavior says a lot about our repentance or lack of repentance.

I told one young husband, “When you hang out with potheads after work, you are telling your wife that they are more important than she is. And you expect her to welcome you when you finally come home, smelling like marijuana?” I added that they were sure losers, and they felt better if he added to their numbers.

That is one of the dynamics about error, whether it means engaging in obvious carnal behavior or falling for false doctrine. Error loves company and hates correction of any kind.

Paul in his travels had a lot of experience in seeing people fall away and become trapped in their own carnal nature. Then, as now, the world culture encouraged the worst.

KJV Philippians 3:19 Whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things.)

This four-fold description shows how all-inclusive this behavior is.
1. It can only end in destruction. For example, one Assemblies of God TV show featured “ministers” carrying on off-stage just before getting on camera and weeping about how they loved Jesus.
2. Literally “God belly”,
3. “glory in shame”. The expressions in the text show how emphatic Paul is. Making the belly God includes all the aspects of our carnal nature, from greed to lust to gluttony. False teachers love to glory in how they are getting away with it. I know of several cases where they published or announced their gloating. One religion lecturer used to denounce all the articles of faith and say, “There God did not strike me down.” Those religion teachers are greatly valued in academic life because they reinforce the atheistic nature of our culture.
4. who mind earthly things. They obsess about their rewards on earth and forget about the Kingdom of God. Step by step they become atheists. One pastor promoted Church Growth and found himself promoted as a “conservative Lutheran.” Then he was finally caught in adultery and kicked out. Now he is an atheist. Who is that? I am thinking of three different men, and I knew all three. And there is a fourth…the list goes on.

The Ten Commandments are natural law – God commands what is good for us. If we defy those commandments, about pure doctrine and behavior, we will pay a price. My radio announcer friend said he used to work out in the hot sun in construction, drinking chocolate milk and eating doughnuts. He said he gave it up when he got dizzy and could not work.

These matters are too obvious. Anyone embarking on false doctrine will find himself damaged and blinded by the misuse of the Word. Likewise, engaging in sinful behavior will lead more obviously to destruction. That is why false doctrine is more dangerous, because the effects are less obvious and often take a long time to show up. I have pointed out how the notable TV frauds of today once looked and sounded normal, somewhat conservative. Now they act and look demonic.

20 For our conversation [citizenship] is in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ: 21 Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.

I do not know where “conversation” came from – in King James English. The word Paul used means “citizenship.” Believers are spiritual citizens of the Kingdom of God, whether they belong to one country or another.

Luther took the long view. If we trust in pure doctrine, we will have the cross as our companion, a short period of turmoil in which everything is challenged – one way or another. We will have a short period of affliction, eternal peace with Christ the life hereafter.

If we trust in the ways of man, if our bellies come first, we will have great peace and rewards in this life. Apostates are adored and rewarded in dozens of ways. Almost every academic teacher of religion is an atheist, and many of them started out to be ministers. The ministers loved by politicians are the bad ones. So earthly peace and rewards are great but short-lived. “Their end is destruction” means eternal suffering.

in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ

At some time in the future, Christ will return and claim everything promised. The vast majority will say, “It really was true.” The minority will rejoice and say, “We believed it. We knew it.”

21 Who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, according to the working whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself.

Final judgment will mean an end to history, and a complete resurrection of all who have died.

KJV John 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Just as the Gospel Word calls us to faith and declares us forgiven, so will the Word of Christ call us from the grave and glorify our bodies, making them like His. Those who died unbelieving will have the opposite fate.

God’s promises are always kept, unlike man’s. His promise of grace is accompanied by the Instruments of His grace, the Word and Sacraments. Justification is always His declaration – it belongs to the work of His Word.

Behold a Host Arrayed in White

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tu4GePxRs8&feature=related

"Behold a Host, Arrayed in White"
by Hans A. Brorson, 1694-1764

1. Behold a host, arrayed in white,
Like thousand snow-clad mountains bright,
With palms they stand. Who is this band
Before the throne of light?
Lo, these are they of glorious fame
Who from the great affliction came
And in the flood of Jesus' blood
Are cleansed from guilt and blame.
Now gathered in the holy place,
Their voices they in worship raise,
Their anthems swell where God doth dwell,
Mid angels' songs of praise.

2. Despised and scorned, they sojourned here;
But now, how glorious they must appear!
Those martyrs stand a priestly band,
God's throne forever near.
So oft, in troubled days gone by,
In anguish they would weep and sigh,
At home above the God of Love
For aye their tears shall dry.
They now enjoy their Sabbath rest,
The paschal banquet of the blest;
The Lamb, their Lord, at festal board
Himself is Host and Guest.

3. Then hail, ye mighty legions, yea,
All hail! Now safe and blest for aye,
And praise the Lord, who with His Word
Sustained you on the way.
Ye did the joys of earth disdain,
Ye toiled and sowed in tears and pain.
Farewell, now bring your sheaves and sing
Salvation's glad refrain.
Swing high your palms, lift up your song,
Yea, make it myriad voices strong,
Eternally shall praise to Thee,
God, and the Lamb belong.

Hymn #656
The Lutheran Hymnal
Text: Revelation 7:13-17
Author: Hans Adolf Brorson, c. 1760
Translated by: composite
Titled: "Den store hvide Flok vi se"
Norwegian folk-tune, c. 1600
Tune: "Great White Host"
Arranged by: Edvard H. Grieg, 1907, ad.

Religion briefing - JSOnline

Religion briefing - JSOnline

Faith community figures discuss books

Two well-known figures in Milwaukee's faith community will discuss their latest books in separate events over the next week.

Theologian and Marquette University associate professor Father Bryan Massingale will talk about "Racial Justice and the Catholic Church" from 8:30 a.m. to noon Nov. 20 as part of a Black Catholic History Month program at All Saints Catholic Church, 4051 N. 25th St. Pre-registration is required at (414) 444-5610.

Christian television host and New Age Pastor Mark Jeske will talk about "Time of Grace," a compilation of Bible studies for busy people, at 9 a.m. Nov. 21 at his church, St. Mark and Avoid Lutheran, 2215 N. Palmer St.

Saturday, November 13, 2010

LPC from Extra Nos - Asking Intrepid Questions

Calvin and Zwingli were also Enthusiasts, bogged down by rationalism.

LPC has left a new comment on your post "Book of Concord Study":

What I wrote to Rev. Rydecki just recently...
----
Pr. Paul,

Can we be confident that you are the official and proper expositor of UOJ/OJ?

If so, why do you think you have the proper handle on this?

Would Becker, Beckman, Walther, Pieper agree with you?

I am not trying to be disrespectful, I am just questioning you on this because these posts remind me a lot of things when I was in Calvinism.

When I was in Calvinism, there was a question of who was the "real Calvinist". So much so there was a joke asking for the "real Calvinist" to stand up.

Also this reminds me of damage control in Calvinism. Some tried to do a sales job on the bluntness for example of Limited Atonement and Sovereignty of God. They wanted to retain the label and redefine what it means so that the rugged edges are smoothened.

Also in history, Calvin tried to be the via-media between Zwingli and Luther on the Supper. Did he succeed? Nope, he failed.

I think you are trying to be the via-media also, but my best wishes for your efforts. Lessons from history has not been encouraging on via-media folk.

Lastly on the concept of Jesus winning justification for all sinner. Jesus did win the victory for all sinners by his death and resurrection. Atonement has gifts and benefits attached to that wonderful sacrifice. That is a fact.

However, your insisting to call this "objective justification" (if I am correct) IMHO is at best misguided if not problematic. Why? Because justification in the Bible is always connected with faith. This labeling allows one to stretch like a rubber band the semantic meaning of justification which the Scripture does not allow for. Let me illustrate. If one calls the fact that Jesus won justification for all as objective justification, one can easily also make the slide to saying that everyone has been forgiven automatically by what Jesus has won. This is exactly what has been happening. Why? Because the word objective and justification has that usual meaning and you are redefining its usual meaning and putting the label in the wrong spot.

WELS TWB IV 1, 1. We believe that God has justified all sinners, that is, he has declared them righteous for the sake of Christ. This is the central message of Scripture upon which the very existence of the church depends. It is a message relevant to people of all times and places, of all races and social levels, for "the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men" (Romans 5:18). All need forgiveness of sins before God, and Scripture proclaims that all have been justified, for "the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men" (Romans 5:18).

Do you believe this is an accurate reflection of what the Bible teaches?

My answer: NO, what is yours?

LS-MS Brief Statement...17 Scripture teaches that God has already declared the whole world to be righteous in Christ, Rom. 5:19; 2 Cor. 5:18-21; Rom. 4:25; that therefore not for the sake of their good works,

Do you believe this is an accurate reflection of what the Bible teaches?

My answer: NO, what is yours?

Mt 5:37

LPC