Glenda's anonymous comment on his anonymous blog:
There's no difference. The issue is this: do words have uniform grammatical meaning or are do they function differently in different contexts? In other words, Jackson's whole thing is that for him the word "justification" must always mean the same thing in every context. It means "to communicate forgiveness and to save." So, when people say "we believe in universal justification"- Jackson goes "aha! you believe in universal salvation." They respond and say "no, you've got us wrong. The word "justification" means in one context the act of forgiving by God (objective justification). And in another context it means the reception and communication of forgiveness through faith (subjective justification)." Jackson responds "no, the word means the same thing in every context. I don't care if you define it differently in the different contexts. I don't care if the people who came up with this distinction were using the word differently in different contexts. I say it means the same thing in every context and that meaning is the communication of forgiveness and salvation. So, whether you want to be or not, you're a universalist. And that's why you believe in the Church-growth movement! Ha, I'm smarter than you!" Then the people who follow him think "wow, how brilliant, he figure (sic) out what was wrong with all the synods. It's UOJ. He's got a Ph.D from Notre Dame. He must be smart. If I agree with him, I can be smart too!" And so his cult persists!
***
GJ - Glenda is the victim of a poor educational system, designed to give passing grades to mediocre students. One of the WELS teachers wrote to me about how she had to give good grades to the children of WELS officials, no matter how poorly they performed. The teachers tell the children that their education is vastly superior to anything in Missouri.
Glenda's excommunicated member has recorded in minute detail the bullying of the pastor. No one dare question him. He has 8 years of
I have simply said that if Glenda's members should be in awe of his MDiv from an unaccredited seminary, he should take off his shoes when addressing a genuine PhD, who also earned a degree at Yale, where his Uncle John Brug merely studied.
There is no difference, Glenda claims, but he had to post again about no difference. That sounds like an argument to me. That is the classic tactic of the false teacher, to claim that his opinion is no different from the traditional view, while insisting on his view alone. He also lied when he claimed he was not plagiarizing Groeschel. Glenda has trouble with the facts, let alone the truth.
Another tactic of the false teacher is to say, "This is your opinion." Glenda does not want to cite Luther, because he knows so little doctrine that he eagerly copies a clownish Mefodist. Now he must grapple with the Intrepids, who have come to similar conclusions on their own, in spite of having the same education as Glenda.
I have often quoted this from a great Lutheran theologian, Henry E. Jacobs - that many times the layman has a better grasp of the Word of God than the pastor. The layman studies the Word without the filter of Uncle Fritz' essay lovingly placed in the Holy of Holies (WELS Essay Files), kept there even if Fritz is now an atheist.
When the battle is joined, many pastors throw off their ennui and study the Word in a fresh light. The issue is not "how much education and where" but applying ourselves to the Word and the Confessions.
I will take Luther, Chemnitz, and Melanchthon as greater authorities and better exegetes than Uncle Fritz. No wonder the Syn Conference sects pretend to have a quia subscription to the Book of Concord while plagiarizing Groeschel, Driscoll, and Stanley Junior. Uncle Fritz was an Enthusiast, so they see everything through the filter of Enthusiasm.
Glenda should admit on his blog that Floyd Luther Stolzenburg led St. Paul, German Village (non-WELS at the time) into Church Growth, that Floyd had no business being a lay leader, let alone a pseuo-pastor and "evangelism consultant." Poor Tim was raised in a congregation and synod where right is wrong, and wrong is right.
