Wednesday, November 16, 2011

WELS Love Shack - Director of Communications Hochmuth Arrested on Child Porn Charges

Joel Hochmuth
http://www.fox6now.com/news/witi-20111116-hochmuth-child-porn,0,188658.story

http://www.jsonline.com/news/waukesha/man-arrested-suspected-of-distributing-child-porn-l433cdj-134008158.html

On TV - http://www.wisn.com/r/29790392/detail.html
Update - Images of Young Boys Found at WELS Office Computer


Second Update - What Is Child Pornography?


Third Update - Synod President Claimed Uncertainty


Confession on Tuesday, Fired on Friday


Survivors Network (SNAP) Issued Statement to WELS


Terms of Bond


Warning to WELS


Failure To Supervise, Failure To Report


Episcopalian Parallel to Hochmuth Case






WAUKESHA, Wis. -- A Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod employee was arrested Tuesday on child pornography charges, according to Waukesha police.

Investigators said the FBI Cyber Crimes Task Force provided them with evidence that child pornography was distributed from a home in the 1900 block of Hunter Court. Police searched the home and arrested Joel Hochmuth after they found numerous images of child pornography, according to a police report. Hochmuth, 52, is the director of communications for the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod. He was in the Waukesha County Jail Tuesday night and was expected in court on Wednesday.

12 News spoke with the group's president, Mark Schroeder, by phone. He said he is hopeful the allegations prove to be a false alarm or a mistake. He said Hochmuth's job does not involve direct contact with children.

The WELS are the third largest Lutheran church body in America with 390,000 members. The national headquarters are in Milwaukee.

Read more: http://www.wisn.com/news/29790392/detail.html#ixzz1dvtvW1i5

---


Joel  Hochmuth

Joel Hochmuth

Director of Communications at Wisconsin Ev. Lutheran Synod
Greater Milwaukee Area 
Religious Institutions
Current
  • Director of Communications at Wisconsin Ev. Lutheran Synod
Past
Education
  • San Francisco State University
  • California State University-Sacramento



http://www.wels.net/streams/podcasts/series/witness-this


http://www.uwec.edu/wels/bios/hochmuth.html

Joel Hochmuth


Joel Hochmuth
Joel Hochmuth currently serves as WELS director of communications, a position he has held since 2007. As director of communications, he oversees and coordinates all communication coming from synod administration, both to internal and external WELS audiences. Before coming to Milwaukee, Hochmuth was a professor of journalism and communication at Kennesaw State University in Georgia. The bulk of his professional career was spent at CNN in Atlanta where he worked from 1987 to 2002. There he had numerous positions including correspondent, writer and copy editor. Hochmuth was raised in California, the son of WELS Pastor Robert Hochmuth. He earned a B.A. in communication studies from California State University, Sacramento and an M.A. in radio and television from San Francisco State University. He has been married to his wife Heidi for 15 years. They have a son, Adam, 13, and attend Trinity Ev. Lutheran Church in Waukesha, WI.


---

Convention wrap-up

---

Michele Bachman story - waffling on the Antichrist

---

Video of Hochmuth and Schroeder.

---

Hochmuth is Facebook friends with Aaron Frey, another recent WELS embarrassment. Frey is trying to start some business - PearlVault - ""PearlVault is creating a permanent, digital margin in which to write your lifetime of Bible notes." How far can he go?

---


WELS HIRES COMMUNICATION DIRECTOR

In an effort to fully coordinate communications and provide messages effectively and efficiently to various constituents, WELS has hired Joel Hochmuth to be its full-time director of  communications.

In this position, Hochmuth will be responsible for strategic planning, communication coordination, WELS publications, marketing efforts, and public relations for WELS.

“We have the rock-solid truth, but keeping it to ourselves doesn’t do anybody any good . . .,” says Hochmuth. “Our ultimate mission is to communicate the gospel.”

A member at Beautiful Savior, Marietta, Ga., Hochmuth worked for 15 years at Cable News Network (CNN) in Atlanta, Ga., where he produced hundreds of network-quality, long-form video reports and series. He also taught communication courses at Kennesaw State University, Kennesaw, Ga.

---

From SpenerQuest:


This from WISN Channel 12 in Milwaukee:

"12 News spoke with the group's president, Mark Schroeder, by phone. He said he is hopeful the allegations prove to be a false alarm or a mistake. He said Hochmuth's job does not involve direct contact with children."

Call me daft, but how is having child porn on your PC a 'false alarm'? "A mistake"? ('oops, I meant for those photos to be loaded on my iPad'). How about a sin - and a heinous one at that?

And another comment:

Indeed, President Schroeder's statement is quite disengenuous. Even a "We take these allegations seriously and will deal with them accordingly" is better than a "Hopefully, this is all a mistake," which gives a public impression that they do not take the allegations seriously and even that they are circling the wagons to defend Hochmuth. And I agree- I have no idea what he means by "false alarm"!  Who cares whether "Hochmuth's job does not involve direct contact with children." A statement that Hochmuth is no longer an employee of the WELS should have been issued immediately.

How denominational entities can stumble so badly, especially on that level, is baffling. Perhaps, in this case, it's because their communications director is in jail?!

Wrong Way Driver: Family of Interstate crash victim speaks out - WITI.
WELS Universalism

Wrong Way Driver: Family of Interstate crash victim speaks out - WITI:

AC V has left a new comment on your post "Slow Day":

Here's one. Luther Prep School student corrects mother with UOJ.

From the WELS "Together":

On Nov. 5, Fox 6 News out of Milwaukee interviewed the family of a man killed in a wrong-way crash on the Interstate. He was the father of two students at Luther Preparatory School, Watertown, Wis. The family’s interview had a clear message of forgiveness:

http://www.fox6now.com/news/witi-20111105-wrong-way-crash-victim,0,1643196.story

 

'via Blog this'

Jack Cashill's column: "Joe Paterno and Bishop Finn".
The WELS/ELS Penn State Problem

Jack Cashill's column: "Joe Paterno and Bishop Finn":

'via Blog this'

Slow Day

Only 1,800 page-reads today.
But 4,000 page-reads tomorrow, I promise.

---

rlschultz has left a new comment on your post "Slow Day":

With my tongue firmly planted in cheek, I say, you must be making up that number of only 1800 page reads. Everyone know that no one reads Ichabod.

***

GJ - That is why I link Feedjit. People can see Mankato, New Ulm, Milwaukee, Appleton, and St. Louis light up all the time.

When Heaven Freezes Over: German Village Rebuilds Its Snow Church 100 Years Later - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News - International

Photo Gallery: German Village Plans Snow Church
Photos



When Heaven Freezes Over: German Village Rebuilds Its Snow Church 100 Years Later - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News - International:

bruce-church (https://bruce-church.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "AC V Suggests - Read the Tom Hardt Footnotes":

This could be a WELS church--ice cold walls to go with ice cold fellowship:

When Heaven Freezes Over
German Village Rebuilds Its Snow Church 100 Years Later
http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/0,1518,797988,00.html

GJ - many are cold, but few are frozen.

'via Blog this'

Evangelicals, Catholics out of Illinois foster care - chicagotribune.com



Evangelicals, Catholics out of Illinois foster care - chicagotribune.com:

GJ - Missouri Synod caves in - no surprise. What does Pope Paul the Unlearned say?

Lutheran Child and Family Services, affiliated with the conservative Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, amended its policy to comply with the state. On Monday, the last of five Catholic Charities agencies across the state agreed to transfer cases to other agencies. The Evangelical agency also agreed to transfer cases to Youth Service Bureau of Illinois Valley and Children's Home & Aid Society of Illinois.

'via Blog this'

An Idea for The Love Shack and PU Towers

No one can match WELS steweardship.


An idea from SpenerQuest:


I would beg to differ on their point that [WELS] CMO is flat. Adjusted for inflation, CMO peaked in 2008. It peaked in 2008 because congregational offerings peaked in 2008 (inflation adjusted). CMO is mainly a function of the number of members and how much they give. According to my calculations, CMO will continue to go down in the inflation-adjusted sense for the next few decades.

Just a month ago, I learned that 2009 represented the peak year of earnings for Baby Boomers. Statistically, they will never earn more (inflation adjusted), because of aging and retirement. Although the WELS has been shrinking since 1990, giving continued to rise until 2008. This article explains why giving continued to increase for nearly two more decades.

Because of these demographic changes, the best thing the WELS could do would be to sell property to pay down their debt, which threatens to grow in the per-capita sense. Buying a new, cheap admin building to replace their old, relatively valuable one is a very good idea.

An even better solution would be to sell both buildings and turn the basement of the new chapel at MLC into offices. There is more than enough room down there.

***

GJ - But where do they move when MLC is turned into a retirement village or a prison?

---


The same principle could be applied to the LCMS. The St. Louis seminary was rumored to be worth $500 million (granted the economy may have reduced this now), the purple palace is well located for a commercial building, again should be worth a pretty penny. Sell them, use some to build/buy property in Wentzville (on I-70 30 minutes from Lambert airport) where land is much cheaper. 


Move the seminary to Concordia TX, where they have more land than they know what to do with; or Seward, NE in both cases to move away from the Synod HQ. That should leave enough to pay off the synod debt, at which point, it should be made illegal to go into debt more.


***


GJ - I wonder why Pewaukee Universalist Towers was not purchased on a contingency. That would have ended the sale when The Love Shack sale went bust.


Instead, WELS seems to be on the hook for $3 million for a real estate office building.  Was that an ominous sign? The firm did not want its own office building. 


Real estate continues to decline in Milwaukee, something the real estate firm probably knew would happen. Mortgage foreclosures. Lay-offs. Unemployment. Obama. Leftist politics. 


Various people have the same insights. Various denominations have plenty of land, and they own land in very choice locations, like Mequon. The officials would have to swallow their pride and pick low-cost land, away from their swank homes bought with tax-free housing allowance money.


A successful retailer has made a few billion dollars by following the same plan - low overhead, cheap land, no-frills headquarters. WELS and Missouri, though, are non-prophet operations.

AC V Suggests - Read the Tom Hardt Footnotes

WELS scholarship is so awesome. Exceptions to this claim are:
LCMS German catechism,
LCMS KJV catechism (still in print)
Gausewitz WELS catechism.


AC V has left a new comment on your post "Mystery Solved: The Secret Behind Robert Preus' Ju...":

Don't forget to read the footnotes in Hardt's essay, especially footnote #75 where he references R. Söderlund in his article “Läran om den universella rättfärdiggörelsen i teologihistorisk belysning” (“The doctrine of universal justification in the light of the history of theology”) in Svensk Teologisk Kvartalstidskrift, 1979, pp. 114-129.

In his article Söderlund criticizes S. Becker's theology of "Universal Justification":

Absolution and the means of grace are downgraded to means of communication and deprived of their efficacy. Sig Becker. op. cit., p. 55, interprets John 20:23: “they are remitted unto them” as a reference to what has already happened at Calvary, p. 56: “The meaning is this: ‘They have been forgiven completely in the past, and they still are forgiven now. This means that when we preach the message of the Gospel, we do not effect the remission of sins through our sermon.’” (tr. from Swedish). 3) Universal justification is said to be the contents of the sermon to be delivered to the heathen without any previous reference to the Law. This striking similarity to Huber’s pastoral advice to the Wittenberg theologians, quoted above in our article, is found in Becker, op. cit., p. 56 f. (tr. from Swedish): “In America it is very common that Reformed missionaries tell a man whom they try to gain: ‘Are you saved?’ … It is, however, not likely that a Lutheran missionary would ask: ‘Are you saved?’, as the experience of conversion is not so important from his theological point of view. As he believes in universal redemption and in universal justification it is more likely that he changes the order of the words and says: ‘You are saved,’ ‘Your sins are forgiven unto you.’ He can say so to everyone, as he knows that it is true about everyone.” Through the centuries Huber’s missionary sermon: “Habetis gratiam Dei” resounds in the 20th century. Undoubtedly Söderlund’s fears concerning the theology introduced through Becker into Sweden seem reasonably justified.

Perhaps a side-by-side "You are saved" quote by Becker next to the discredited Huber "You have salvation" quote would be appropriate.

One cannot toss double-justification schemes back into
the Book of Concord era, 1580.
Double-justification language was expressed by Knapp/Woods in 1831,
endorsed by CFW Walther later.


***

GJ - I would love to have a Huber graphic. There must be one out there.

Timid Tim Glende Quits Again - Cannot Face Opposition to His False Doctrine

Valleskey agrees with Huber and Knapp, two heretics.
UOJ antinomianism feeds crimes against children (Werner)
and Church Growth (Radloff and Valleskey).




Real Ichabod said...

We're calling it quits with the conversation between quiet WELSian and LPC. LPC had another remark he wanted to post, but it was so absurd we deleted it. Remember the reason for Real Ichabod. We're here on the web to show the errors of Dr. Gregory L. Jackson, and that he's not the confessional Lutheran hero some misguided souls seem to think.

***

GJ - I am just a blogger who signs his name to his work, Tim.

I will be glad to post Dr. Lito Cruz' post when he sends it to me.

Rutschow is the manly man who backs up
Mark and Avoid Jeske, the head of Church and Change,
so Mark is Tim Glende's real boss.
The supernatural glow is Enthusiasm.


Lots of rotten apples came from the 1970 tree.
Not one of them is a Church Growther - just ask them.
Oh no. Neither is Valleskey or Radloff.

Tuesday, November 15, 2011

Mystery Solved:
The Secret Behind Robert Preus' Justification and Rome




Robert Preus earned two doctorates in theology
and the respect of all Protestants for his scholarship.
When I bought Robert Preus' Justification and Rome, I read it carefully. I was interested in what he said about Rome, which was not going to be a surprise. And I also wanted to know how he expressed himself on justification.

I knew what he wrote and taught before. His little essay, which Jack Cascione lovlingly reproduced, quoted his distant relative Eduard Preuss offering the fabulous opinion that we are justified before we are born.

I also knew that UOJ was untouchable by LCMS standards because it was embedded in the 1932 Brief Confession, doubly blessed.
  • First of all, that particular statement was the swan song of Franz Pieper.
  • Secondly, the Olde Synodical Conference fixated on that particular confession as the infallible truth of all time, far above the Book of Concord (in practice).

    Big shock. Robert Preus quoted various sources against UOJ and definitely confirmed his opposition to that strange heresy. My intuition was that his sources were arguing against someone or something. Later, when someone showed me the double-justification from the English version of Georg Christian Knapp (Halle University, mother ship of Pietism), I was still stumped. The Preus citations were pre-Knapp, pre-Pietism.




    Just recently, another researcher--name withheld--fell upon the Hardt essay involving Samuel Huber and Polycarp Leyser. That explained the Preus citations. The post-Concord theologians were arguing against Huber's weird justification - the absolution of the whole world. As Dr. Lito Cruz has pointed out in his cogent posts and comments, the merging of the Atonement and justification is a hallmark of Calvinism. Huber came over from Calvinism. Spener got his cell groups from Calvinism.

    The Walther mythology deceives people into thinking he delivered American Lutherans from Pietism. CFW Walther was a Pietist who swore allegiance to the Pietist Stephan, a cell group fanatic. Cell groups continued in the foundering Missouri Synod, because all the pastors were Pietists. They did come to struggle against the unionism of America. So did the General Council, another Pietistic group. The Wisconsin Synod was Pietistic and moved away from it (with mixed success) - thanks to Hoenecke and Bading.

    Therefore, enjoy the graphics gathered below and see how they are reactions against the false doctrine of Samuel Huber. If you agree with Huber's version of justification, you are roundly condemned by Leyser (Chemnitz' biographer and also an editor of the Book of Concord) and other great theologians.


  • Preus repudiated UOJ in this statement and cited
    Calov in support.

    This statement is answering the claim that
    everyone in the world is absolved of sin (OJ).


    I heard Preus lecture about how much he
    loved Quenstedt.

    J. S. Bach, who was orthodox, owned the famous
    Calov Biblical commentaries.

    Gerhard co-authored a famous book with Chemnitz.
    No Lutheran before Huber taught universal absolution.
    Huber was kicked off the faculty for teaching what the
    Olde Synodical Conference leaders love the most.

    Quenstedt was a precise writer.

    Some of these theologians have been cited as supporting UOJ,
    just as Tim Glende claimed I did.
    UOJ fanatics are not very bright.



    Thrivent offers 100,000 reasons to fill red kettles on Dec. 2 - Thrivent Financial for Lutherans

    Thrivent offers 100,000 reasons to fill red kettles on Dec. 2 - Thrivent Financial for Lutherans:

    GJ - And 100,000 reasons not to waste money on Thrivent.

    'via Blog this'


    Proud of WELS support of the Salvation Army.

    Real Estate Weekly for Wednesday, August 10, 2011 - BizTimes.
    "It's a Steal" - Depending on Who Is Doing the Stealing

    Real Estate Weekly for Wednesday, August 10, 2011 - BizTimes:


    Bielinski Homes sells its HQ office building

    The Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod recently purchased the 32,000-square-foot office building at N16 W23377 Stone Ridge Dr. in Pewaukee, from Bielinski Homes for $2.85 million.
    The sale price is significantly lower than the assessed value for the property of $4.2 million, according to Waukesha County records.
    A representatives for the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod could not be reached for comment.
    Bielinski plans to move its headquarters another location in Pewaukee, said Paul Bielinski, chief operating officer of Bielinski Homes.
    "(The new location) will give us a better street presence," he said. "We found a new location that better suits our needs today."
    RFP Commercial brokers Bob Flood and Scott Revolinski represented Bielinski Homes in brokering the transaction.
    Bielinski Homes is the only tenant in the building and currently occupies about half of the building, said Jenna Johnson, marketing coordinator for RFP Commercial.
    Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod’s offices are currently located at 2929 N. Mayfair Road, Wauwatosa.
    Bielinski Homes and other home builders have been adversely affected by the downturn in the housing market. Last year housing starts were down 71.3 percent from the market’s peak in 2004.


    'via Blog this'

    Intrepid Lutherans: On "Emasculated Bibles" and being "Objective"

    Doug Lindee



    Intrepid Lutherans: On "Emasculated Bibles" and being "Objective":


    On "Emasculated Bibles" and being "Objective"



    I spent an evening last week in the company of around fifty WELS laymen and clergy. They had asked me speak to them about the issue of Bible translations, in preparation for the decisions our Synod will be faced with in the very short period of time between now and the 2012 District Conventions. I think I used about two hours of time – I lost track. I first gave a “presentation” – “a little talk”, as I put it to them, rather than a formal lecture or power point entertainment session. I think that lasted around fifty minutes or so, in which I talked a little about the history of Christian education, from Abraham to the Reformation, and the fact that all education over the expanse of time the Church has existed – both the Old Testament Church and the New Testament Church – grew from God’s command to read that which was written. That is, our forebears didn’t create for themselves dumbed-down childrens’ Bibles to read. They didn’t produce translations rendered in an artificially reduced grammar and vocabulary for the sake of wider distribution and profit (in the name of “readability,” of course). Instead, they read the Scriptures as they were written, and in the case of the Greek Septuagint, the Latin Vulgate, Luther’s German Bible, and Tyndale’s English Bible, they read in their own language translations which were honest academic attempts to reproduce in those languages, not just the meaning of the original text, but a grammatical structure and vocabulary that was as nearly parallel to that of the source texts that the target language could accommodate – a parallel grammar and vocabulary in the target language that also carried the meaning of the source. But the Bible, in the source languages, has a lot of complex grammar, and very precise vocabulary! If, as a result, the Bible was hard to read and understand, what was the solution for the Hebrews? The early Christians who read Paul’s letters directly in Greek? The Latin Church? And the Reformers? The solution was not to dumb-down and emasculate the Bible. The solution was to redouble their commitment to educating Christians. All Christian education emanated from this need: to read and understand God’s Word.

    Emasculated Bibles
    From there, I talked a little about the terms Dynamic Equivalence and Formal Equivalence, which readers of Intrepid Lutherans should be familiar with – we wrote a little about these terms in our post The NIV 2011 and the Importance of Translation Ideology, and they come up frequently in discussion concerning the evaluation of modern Bible translations. After that, I spoke a bit about the difference between Complementarianism and Egalitarianism, the militant feminist influence which faces us in Egalitarian teaching, the postmodern devices of language employed by feminism to “cleanse” the English language of masculine forms (read about this, and the recent challenges WELS has faced from Egalitarians, in our recent post on Postmodernism and pop-culture), and the clear connection between emasculation of the Bible in the NIV 2011 and the objectives of Egalitarianism and militant feminism, including confused teaching regarding the roles of men and women, especially in Acts 1 and 1 Cor 14 (for more on this, see NIV 2011: A brotherly debate). I concluded “my little talk” with a dramatic reading of a conversation which covers many of these issues.

    Being the first time through these presentation materials in front of a group, it went a little rough. Add to this the fact that I was actively redacting and adding material on the fly, to adjust for my audience. But it went well-enough that nearly an equal amount of time was spent in Q&A following, discussing the material in my presentation, and other various issues related to the decisions we will be facing, the time for which is swiftly bearing down on our Synod. This presentation, and the conversation with followed, was good timing for these men; and the materials I left them with, Rev. Brian Keller's (WELS) excellent essay, Evaluating Bible Translations: Alle Schrift von Gott eingegeben, and Rev. Robert Koester's (WELS) important open letter Thoughts on Gender-Neutral Language in the NIV 2011, will go a long way toward informing their thinking. The fact is, there are many deep issues for the laity to investigate and consider. It would be a pity if they were presented with substantive information to consider only a couple months before District Conventions.

    Being “Objective” in matters of consequence
    But did I provide them an “objective” presentation? The answer is emphatically, “No, I did not.” I was nice, of course, and non-polemical – I even told a joke or two. I simply provided a positive case for my position. So the next question to ask is “Did my audience know that I was biased, and that my presentation was ‘non-objective’ from a political standpoint?” The answer is emphatically, “Yes, they did.” How do I know? Because I told them so. Here are my words from introductory remarks I prepared and delivered:

    How do you do, gentlemen? My name is Doug Lindee. I’ve been invited here tonight to talk a little bit about Bible Translations. None of you really has any good reason to know who I am, so you may be wondering, “Why was this guy asked to speak here, on this topic?” I am not a pastor. I am a layman. I have no education that would be officially recognized by Synod as qualification for Ministry of any sort among us, nor am I, having no Call from a Congregation, a “Minister of the Word” in any sense. I am a simple layman, and any “ministry” I engage in occurs within the context of Vocation, not in any “special” capacity within the Church. But I have a College Education. Thirteen years of full time, classroom education, 10.5 years straight, including Summers (except two), plus 2.5 years straight beginning about five years later. In this time, I studied Mathematics, Physics, Economics, Computer Science, Education and Philosophy, and Business and Organizational Leadership. In other words, I know how to learn, and using the tools of learning which I obtained through years and years of practice, I have independently pursued study in matters of the greatest consequence: those of my own faith and confession. It was this study which brought me, along with my wife who studied with me, through the Scriptures, to the conclusions of the Lutheran Confession, and which propels us into further study and advocacy of Scripture’s teachings. As a result, I have gained somewhat of a reputation (a good reputation according to some, a not-so-good reputation according to others) for taking and defending positions – more recently, positions related to the ideology of Bible Translation. So, when it was mentioned to an acquaintance of mine that someone was looking, and found it difficult to find, a person who could speak on the issue of translations which is currently facing our Synod, and inquired whether he knew of someone who might be able to discuss this issue with laity, when my name was mentioned as a knowledgeable layman, this person was aware of who I was and what I have written on the subject. Apparently, that was qualification enough to appear here before you tonight...

    Finally, I need to be honest with you and say, I am not objective regarding the issues I will be discussing. I have already drawn conclusions that I am convinced are correct and worth defending. That isn’t to say my mind can’t be changed, but anyone who attempts to do so will have their work cut out for them, as I have been considering and researching these issues for over fifteen years, and my position didn’t just develop overnight. This is important for you to know. For this reason, I am going to stay as far away as I can from characterizing the perspectives of those holding a position opposite to mine. Why? Simply because I know that I will not be able to do so to their satisfaction – I am biased after all. And this should really be the approach taken by anyone discussing these issues who is known to have taken a position regarding them. How disingenuous it would be for me, or for anyone, to claim objectivity in this matter when it is known that I have taken a firm position. You would have every reason to be suspicious of me! I mentioned that I have 13 years of college experience – and this is an absolute fact that I have learned at the feet of countless college professors during that time. The absolute best professors were those with a definite position, who advocated that position in their lectures. I may have disagreed with them from start to finish, but their impassioned defense provided me the opportunity to develop a more refined rebuttal of my own, and more firmly establish my own position. At other times, though I may at first have disagreed with them, I found their impassioned defense to be more valid than my own position, prompting me to change my mind. Yeah, that happens too, and there is nothing wrong with it.

    On the other hand, the absolute worst professors were those who were “objective.” The only way to be truly objective in matters of consequence, without violating your own conscience, is if you actually don’t care. The worst professors were the “objective” professors. Why? Because they actually didn’t care about what they were talking about. In matters of consequence, this was most frustrating, because we had no idea whether we were receiving key information which would determine the issue, or if such information was being deliberately omitted to keep us students from developing a definite position of our own. But the real tricky professors were the ones who “pretended” to be objective. You see, one rule you can always count on is that college professors know far more than what they actually say in lecture. They choose to share certain information, and choose to withhold certain other information, time being the primary criterion, of course, but also usually according to an unspoken agenda. No, they are not actually objective, but when they nevertheless pass themselves off as objective, they are disingenuous. Sometimes, they are under genuine political pressure to publicly lend support to certain viewpoints which are at odds with their own convictions. Other times, perhaps they are required to "objectively" present issues on which they hold definite bias. The result in any case is that they do so in a way which minimizes damage to what they are convinced is true. The kids who pay attention usually have such professors figured out by the end of their Sophomore year, if not before. In either case, such professors, once they are figured out, are not considered reliable.

    Anyway, my purpose here isn’t necessarily to change your mind or establish your position, nor is it to “demonize” those holding an opposing position, but is simply to give you information which supports my own position – a position held by quite a number among both laity and clergy in our Synod – knowing that you will be exposed to opposing information. And that’s as it should be. You need to hear information from opposing positions, from those who actually hold those positions, in order to draw your own conclusions. What is my position? I am convinced that adopting the NIV 2011, as our English Language standard of the Holy Scriptures, would be a major mistake; and further, that any alternative ought to favor a Formal Equivalence approach to the translation of the source texts into English.

    The laity of our Synod will be presented information regarding Bible Translations. The men of the TEC have been tasked with doing this. They are all known to hold definite positions. This fact, along with their rather staunch defense of NIV 2011 at the 2011 WELS Synod Convention, raised the question of their “objectivity” in this task from the floor of the Convention: “Haven’t they already ‘tipped their hand’?” is the question I recall. This question resonates with me, along with many laymen and clergy I speak to or hear from. These men are certainly capable of providing a defense of their own position, which is support for the NIV 2011, and in all fairness I think they ought to continue doing so. But who will speak from an opposing perspective? We at Intrepid Lutherans don’t know. While we assume that they must exist, we know of no man from either the Seminary or MLC who is opposed to the NIV 2011. If such men exist, as we assume, then “they ain’t talkin’”. On the other hand, there are many very knowledgeable parish pastors who are busy talking and writing in defense of something other than the NIV 2011 – but to my knowledge they are not being selected to the invitation-only Symposium in January, from which will proceed positions/materials used to present these issues next Spring. Which raises a second issue regarding the presentation of these issues to the laity: “How much time will the laity have to consider these substantive issues, prior to the time they cast their votes at the District Conventions?” A couple of group meetings a few months before District Convention is insufficient.

    Henry VIII burned Tyndale at the stake for his translation.
    Tyndale prayed, "Open the King of England's eyes."
    King James published a revision of the Tyndale translation,
    essentially the Luther Bible in English.



    For my part, I am convinced that, given the time, regular folks can digest these difficult issues, come to sound conclusions, and act accordingly. I am also convinced that, in the absence of other voices, I am willing, and find it necessary, to speak and write about them as my conscience dictates.


    'via Blog this'

    Brett Meyer on Universal Objective Justification



    Those who teach, promote and defend UOJ like to say that there is only assurance of forgiveness through Objective Justification. Objective Justification is their new gospel which declares the whole unbelieving world forgiven of all sin, justified and righteous by God's divine verdict when Christ paid for the world's sin. UOJ teaches that this declaration is the only thing that can create faith and that the promise of forgiveness of sins through faith in Christ cannot create faith because faith must have the certainty of sins already forgiven, justification already declared and righteousness already bestowed for it to cling to. The resulting teaching is that Objective Justification must be true for anyone to be assured that they are forgiven and have true peace. Therefore UOJ teaches that without UOJ there is no Gospel.

    But are they teaching a doctrine of peace? Certainly not, and not only because the Scriptures and Confessions reject Objective Justification as a new and false gospel. But look at the doctrine of UOJ in more detail and you'll see the contradictions and fear it creates when it abandons Christ, Scripture and God's Gospel of the promise of forgiveness of sins through faith alone, and that faith in Christ's atonement alone.



    UOJ distributes Christ's body and blood to the whole unbelieving world for the forgiveness of sins. In Holy Communion the Lutheran Church confesses that anyone who receives Christ's body and blood without faith is condemned. Where is the peace then for the whole unbelieving world to whom the UOJists distribute His body and blood to?



    UOJ teaches that Christ died and paid for all sins except for the sin of unbelief. UOJ teaches that unbelief is the unforgivable sin. In fact it's that teaching that they lean on to prove they are not Universalists. They confess not everyone will be saved even though everyone has been declared forgiven of all sin, guiltless, righteous and children of God. But because some don't believe the wonderful news that God sees them as He sees Christ, they won't be saved. Yet, who was conceived with faith? Every human being ever conceived was born in unbelief - they didn't believe in Christ. You didn't believe in Christ when you were born. Everyone is guilty of the sin of unbelief. So if Christ didn't die and pay for that sin then everyone is going to Hell. No one is saved, not Adam, Moses, Abraham or you. Where's the peace in that? But since Christ died and paid for all sins, He paid for the sin of unbelief too (Romans 11:23). Therefore UOJists are in fact Universalists because the one sin it hinges upon was paid for by Christ and by their teaching was also forgiven by Him before they believed and even if they never believe.

    UOJ teaches that the whole unbelieving world has been declared by God to be forgiven of all sin, justified and righteous by Christ's atonement. Yet, they aren't saved unless they believe it's true. So being declared sinless, guiltless, justified and righteous - just as Christ is, because it is His righteousness they have been given, doesn't save them. Worse yet UOJ teaches that God's wrath over sin still resides on them even though they've been given Christ's righteousness. What peace is there in that? What peace does a believer have, if having accepted the teaching that they were forgiven and righteous before they believed, God's wrath still abides on them for the sin they commit in their sinful flesh.



    UOJ teaches that faith doesn't do anything but receives the benefit of what was already declared to be true before they believed. So where is the peace for the believer if they are truly the same as before they believed - when God's wrath still rested on them while they had Christ's righteousness.

    Faith in the false gospel of UOJ doesn't rest on Christ and Him crucified for all sins and particularly your sins. UOJ's faith rests on the fact that you were declared forgiven, justified and righteous before faith in Christ. UOJ even teaches that a person is not to look at their faith for the assurance of forgiveness. Read the holy grail of (W)ELS UOJ teaching, Siebert W. Becker's essay on Justification for the most blasphemous statements about faith to come from sources other than the Antichrist.

    Here's a quote from that essay, "But universal and objective justification is one doctrine whose place in the victorious Christian life is clear. Wherever men teach that faith comes first as a condition that must be fulfilled or a work that must be done or even as a fact that must be recognized before forgiven is bestowed or becomes real, men will be trained to look into their own hearts for assurance rather than to the words and promises of God. If my sins are forgiven only if I first have faith then I have no solid foundation on which to rest my hope for eternal life. I must then know that I have faith before I can know that my sins are forgiven.

    But there are times when a Christian does not know that he has faith. And many people who think they have faith do not have it, and many that think they are not believers are believing children of God. In regard to our own faith we may be in error or filled with doubt. But there is nothing uncertain in the truth that is proclaimed in the Gospel. Your sin is taken away, wiped out, forgiven, cancelled, swallowed up in the empty grave in Joseph’s garden. To that we must cling. To that we can cling. On that we can build a solid hope that will not make us ashamed.



    In times of temptation when I am no longer aware of my faith, when my heart tells me that I am an unbeliever, I have no place to turn for assurance if faith must come before forgiveness. But if forgiveness comes first, if it is always there, if it is true whether I believe it or not, I do not need to know whether I have faith or not before I can cling to God’s promise. I know that my sins are forgiven whether I feel forgiven or unforgiven. I know that my iniquity is pardoned whether I believe it or not. And when I know that, then I know also that I am a believer. John teaches us that when he writes, “Brethren, if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart and knows all things.” Take away objective and universal justification and you have gone a long way toward cutting the heart out of the Gospel message." Page 13 http://www.wlsessays.net/files/BeckerJustification.PDF

    (W)ELS' own Our Great Heritage confirms the same teaching that Becker declares above. Where is the peace when God gives you what Christ has and yet you are not saved. Where is the peace when you taught not to look at your faith for assurance that you, one - believe that Christ Jesus died and paid for your sins, and two - that believing you are forgiven, justified and saved. (W)ELS contends against Christ in this regard when He declares in 2 Cor. 13:5, "Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?" True UOJists are reprobates, warring against Christ, against the Father and against the Holy Spirit and teaching others to do the same.

    In Christ, Brett Meyer


    ---

    LutherRocks has left a new comment on your post "Brett Meyer on Universal Objective Justification":

    It is the father of all lies that propagates ambiguity...notice how that serpent misdirects attention from Christ as our stand-in to a 'universal absolution'. It is classic smoke and mirrors...and the sheeple follow....

    ***

    GJ - I figure only a small percentage of all Synodical Conference members know what UOJ is teaching.

    I saw a billboard that had a baby on it. The message said, "A baby is forever." I said to my wife, "Look a pro-life message." I was driving.  She said, "Read the whole billboard the next time we go by."

    The next time I had a chance to glance at more of the billboard. I could see that the baby was a negative message. "You are stuck with this baby forever." They wanted to provide abortions, but they were not going to put that on a billboard in plain words.

    So I think many laity hear UOJ language, as pastors have done, and think, "Oh, Christ died for the world's sin. That is OJ. We are justified by faith = SJ." In fact, I thought that OJ was simply a recent synonym for the Atonement. Laity got me started and kept me going about the real meaning of Universal Objective Justification.

    James Heiser was at Ft. Wayne during the Robert Preus years. He first reacted with shock about "denying OJ." When he read my quotations about the real meaning of UOJ, in Thy Strong Word (supported by laity), he saw the light. Paul McCain, a graduate of the same school, about the same time, never got beyond Robert Preus.1, so he is still stuck on UOJ.

    WELS ministers are the least enlightened, because they are trained against the Book of Concord and in favor of synodical idols. All the Shrinkers are paraded through the synodical schools as heroes of the unfaith, so the students realize they must follow the Fourfold Path:
    1. UOJ,
    2. Church Growth,
    3. Infallible synod,
    4. Death to Ichabod.


    But that is fine with me. There is no better way to drive readers to this blog than to ban it.

    "Don't waste your time reading Ichabod." The dean and the president are telling us not to read Ichabod. What was in it today? They are really steamed.

    ---

    LutherRocks has left a new comment on your post "Brett Meyer on Universal Objective Justification":

    Well if our excommunication as well as others doesn't show people the awful truth about this doctrine, then nothing will.

    ***

    GJ - Start with California, who only questioned trends. She was excommunicated. The two Kokomo families correctly questioned J. P. Meyer's UOJ and decision theology. They were excommunicated. Rick Techlin correctly identified Tim Glende's plagiarism, as the circuit pastor did. Rick was excommunicated (more or less) and the circuit pastor was replaced with a finger puppet.

    I know a number of pastors hated out of WELS. One was a circuit pastor who dared to challenge WELS about Church Shrinkage.

    This appeared in a discussion about Penn State, which parallels WELS and Missouri:

    C.S. Lewis said it best in "The Abolition of Man": "In a sort of ghastly simplicity we remove the organ and demand the function. We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honor and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful."


    Don't vote for girly-men and expect doctrinal leaders.

     ---

    LutherRocks has left a new comment on your post "Brett Meyer on Universal Objective Justification":

    Keep voting for girly men and you'll get girly language in the Bible and girly worship...