Rolf Preus:
You are not at liberty to change the meaning of terms to suit yourself. The correct understanding of objective justification is what we all have been saying.
***
GJ - I love reading the encyclicals from the Pontifical Institute (aka LaughQuest).
General Justification, Objective Justification, Subjective Justification, and Universal Objective Justification are all non-Biblical terms - invented long after the Book of Concord and foreign to Lutheran Orthodoxy.
In fact, the first bloop of UOJ--from Samuel Huber--was repudiated by Polykarp Leyser, an editor of the Book of Concord and the biographer of Martin Chemnitz.
The next citation I have, using the term General Justification is from the Pietist Burk. Hoenecke, who graduated from Halle University (under Tholuck) quoted Burk in his Dogmatik.
After that, I have a quotation from the Calvinist translation of George Christian Knapp, the Halle University Pietist, famous as the last of the old Pietists. That quotation uses the double justification so dear to Synodical Conference hearts.
The UOJ Stormtroopers contradict themselves so often that I have not figured out their definition or their dogma.
Was everyone absolved the moment Christ died or the moment He rose from the dead? Something so important should be noted somewhere in the Bible.
Is everyone in the world forgiven before birth, as several authors claim? For all time?
Are Hitler, Stalin, and the Sodomites all guilt-free saints?
 |
| Does LaughQuest agree with Leyser or label him a false teacher? |
