Blind Guides Discuss Justification Without Faith - Their Hobbyhorse at LutherQuest (sic)

Kurtzahn had major problems with pancakes on Shrove Tuesday, but no problem with Chinatown adultery/incest.


Click here for the thread. You have to look around for an older thread.
The usual blind guides, clowns, and illiterati get a chance to post brief thoughts without being responsible. One pastoral friend called LQ (sic) "a skunk patch." LI wondered if insanity or ignorance had the upper hand on the discussion board.

Timothy Blank opened up the discussion, and Joe Krohn weighed in to make a point.

LQ (sic) is a UOJ union shop. I think most of the contributors have macros, so they can post the same thing repeatedly. Below is an example of a shallow WELS response. Kurtzahn was WELS, CLC, and WELS again. David Menton said he would not remain in the same room with Kurtzahn, as a measure of his disgust with the man.

Kurtzahn:

I suppose by commenting on this my picture will be on Ichabod again...

Jackson basically holds to the old Ohio Synod position on justification. Lenski is his idol. That should tell you everything.

BTW, Jackson didn't really make an issue of justification while he was in the CLC.

***

GJ - Kurtzahn managed to be wrong in three out of three statements. He added another error later on a different topic, the CLC and self-love, making him four for four.

"Jackson basically holds to the old Ohio Synod position on justification."

I agree with St. Paul, Luther, and the Book of Concord about justification by faith. I also agree with Robert Preus' last book, Justification and Rome, which I quoted in Thy Strong Word and emphasized in Luther versus the UOJ Pietists: Justification by Faith.

I am not sure what he means by "the old Ohio Synod position on justification." That is a good example of making an unwarranted claim, with no evidence on either side. But that would require some intellectual effort and study.

"Lenski is his idol. That should tell you everything."
I have not provided any evidence for that claim - just the opposite. I fault Lenski for his monkeying around with the text, following that charlatan Tischendorf and the apostates Wescott and Hort.

I have pointed out more than once that Lenski tried hard to moderate toward the UOJ position. If Kurtzahn actually cracked open his Lenski, he would find passages that would titillate and excite him. In fact, Lenski could be used by the ruffians on LQ (sic) to make their case, if they ignore some of his basic conclusions.

But that is my problem. I read Lenski steadily and know his work fairly well. They do not, because in sneering about Lenski they excuse themselves for never studying the text. No one else has carefully examined and explained the entire text of the New Testament. Those who look down on Lenski only prove what fools they are. Timothy Blank is definitely one of those.

The theologians I admire the most are Luther, Melanchthon, Chemnitz, and Chytraeus. "Idol" is not a term I would use for any writer or leader.

BTW, Jackson didn't really make an issue of justification while he was in the CLC.

I was discussing the justification issue with various people when I was in the corrupt, immoral, legalistic CLC (sic). The topic had been raised in St. Louis, and people from various parts of Lutherdom communicated with me. Kurtzahn was too busy being a lapdog and weathervane to notice.

Kurtzahn error #4 - bonus. He denied there was any teaching of self-love in the CLC (sic). The conflict began with an article in a WELS periodical, arguing that "Love your neighbor as yourself" is a commandment to love ourselves. The Shrinker faction of the sect emulates WELS errors as much as possible, so they were promoting self-love. The convention discussed it. Old Paul Nolting got up and beat the drums for self-love, offering himself as an example.

The UOJ Problem
The Enthusiasts may buzz all day long, but they cannot change some simple facts:

1. UOJ cannot be found in the Scriptures.
   
2. Their position is identical to ELCA's and close to Universalism. The difference with the Universalists is that they are more honest.
   
3. The Book of Concord teaches justification by faith, not UOJ. The same is true of Luther, Chemnitz, Melanchthon, Chytraeus, Gerhard, Calov, and Preus in his last book.
   
4. Gausewitz, the favorite WELS catechism, had no UOJ in it. Kuske with UOJ replace Gausewitz. With that came Church Growth.
   
5. The LCMS still sells a KJV catechism with no mention or teaching of UOJ.
   
6. Few laity agree with UOJ because they know the Word of God and have not suffered from the brain-washing of the Lutheran seminaries.