I don't want to further burden you, which is why I asked for you to point me to something already available online so that you wouldn't have to "repeat yourself" just for me. I was trained in UOJ at CTSFW and have been taught that, as long as one avoids such nonsense as "the damned in hell are saints," UOJ gives comfort in providing an "objective" focus for one's faith in Christ on the "finished work" of our redemption, rather than to focus "subjectively" upon our own personal faith in Christ. --Warren
Dear Dr. Jackson: Here is how I have understood UOJ: Eph. 2:8 says "For by grace are ye saved, through faith..." and therefore the grace of God (UOJ) precedes the gift of faith which receives Subjective Justification, "grace" referring to UOJ rather than to the gift of saving faith through the Means of Grace. I have understood a parallel between the Justification controversy and the Election controversy, in that Election is determined by grace and not "in view of faith," and Justification is also because of grace, with faith being the gift of God which receives justification, and not a good work meriting justification. --Warren
I can understand the point that OJ can be used to minimize the necessity for
saving faith, but is there a danger that faith can become a "good work" if OJ is
denied, by stressing something "in the believer" rather than divine monergism?
Does OJ take on the appearance of the Reformed "Preservation of the Saints" and
"one saved, always saved" as the basis for the believer's assurance of salvation
by stressing something "outside of the believer"?
For that matter, what is the PRACTICAL difference between OJ and speaking of Christ having "atoned for the sins of the world" or "reconciled the world to God"?
Thank you for your understanding of these matters! --Warren
For that matter, what is the PRACTICAL difference between OJ and speaking of Christ having "atoned for the sins of the world" or "reconciled the world to God"?
Thank you for your understanding of these matters! --Warren
***
GJ - I have been repeating material from Luther, Chemnitz, and the Book of Concord for some time, so I am happy to have basic questions raised.
Intellectually-lazy MDivs like Rolf Preus, Jack Cascione, Jay Webber, and Jon Buchholz have perpetuated the notion that there is a nice, tame, Lutheran version of UOJ - far better than J. P. Meyer and the Kokomo Statements. But all versions are the same, no matter what name they claim - General, Objective, Universal, or Universal Objective.
The foundational error of UOJ is confusing the atonement with justification by faith, so the advocates find all kinds of ways to cloak their error.
They pounce on atonement passages, whether in the Bible or Luther or the Confessions and declare, "Aha - we have proven UOJ from the fact that the sins of the entire world are forgiven."
The atonement and justification are distinct and different. Merging their meaning explains why the UOJ Enthusiasts say such things as "the sins of Sodom were forgiven" and "I was saved 2000 years ago." Both statements are pathetic testimony to the poor state of Lutheran education.
The universal scope of the atonement is not disputed, because Christ indeed paid for the sins of the world. He redeemed the world, and that is the Gospel message, the reconciliation.
Justification by faith is quite simple. The atonement is the Gospel, so the Holy Spirit distributes this treasure through the Word and Sacraments. Those who receive this treasure in faith are declared forgiven of their sins and saved. Apart from faith, there is no forgiveness.
The atonement is universal, but justification is individual. The truth of the atonement does not depend on a single person believing it to be true, as Luther often said. However, no one in the Bible or the Confessions is forgiven apart from faith in this atonement.
The UOJ Stormtroopers are lying when they attack justification by faith, because orthodox Lutherans do not teach faith in their own faith, or faith as a virtue, but faith in the atoning death of Christ.
But what does UOJ claim?
Their shriveled little fake Gospel teaches faith in the dogma of universal absolution, a cancer so dangerous that it has killed most of Lutheran doctrine today.
False Doctrine Is a Devouring Cancer
I am a cancer survivor. Fortunately (tragically for UOJ), it was a basal cell carcinoma growing on my forehead. I was shocked to read a diagnosis of my condition in my insurance textbook. I hoped it would go away on its own. (First stage - denial!) No one knew it because it was so inconsequential looking. I told Mrs. I. and showed her the proof. I could press the area with tissue and get a tiny show of blood, just a little pink, any day and any time. There are three treatments - surgery, chemo, and radiation. A snip at the doctor's showed I was right, and a specialist cut it out. Mrs. I almost fainted when reading the report. The little BCC was already showing signs of ambition, digging in, and taking over.
UOJ Is Wrong Because
This universal absolution of Hottentots, polytheists, atheists, and cannibals is wrong. UOJ contradicts the Bible and Confessions by:
- Separating the Holy Spirit from the Word, mocking the Spirit.
- Denigrating the efficacy of the Word, hence the Consecration of the elements by the Word.
- Denying the true Gospel and substituting a system of man-made law.
- Obscuring and rejecting the Means of Grace.
- Teaching decision theology - you must make a decision for UOJ.
- Paving the way for Church Growth, Pentecostalism, Romanism, and many other symptoms of not trusting the Word.
Robert Preus clearly repudiated UOJ, after clearly advocating it. Both of his positions can be proven, but the UOJ minions have decided to go silent on his final work, Justification and Rome, where their Helen of Troy is tossed under the bus in no uncertain terms.
---
Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "UOJ Questions Answered: Enthusiasm Breeds Enthusia...":
UOJists teach that faith doesn't do anything but receive what was already divinely declared to be true before they believed. They find comfort in this confession because they believe faith is a work of man and therefore because it is only a withered and outstretched beggars hand they avoid synergism - their faith, their work, contributing to their forgiveness and salvation. By this UOJ confession on faith they expose themselves as non-Christians because they've rejected the Holy Spirit's faith which is not from man but solely from God, graciously worked through the Means of Grace, Word and Sacrament. By the Holy Spirit's faith a man dies to sin, is born again in Christ, no longer under the Law but under Grace, receives the adoption of Sons, is forgiven, saved eternally and all this is instantaneous. UOJists recoil at the changes that faith in Christ bring about divinely and graciously because they already declared those who continue in their rejection of Christ, who are under the Law and dead in sins, to be under God's grace, mercy and forgiveness and not under God's wrath and condemnation as Scripture clearly teaches and the faithful Lutheran Confessions confirm.
UOJists have 0, none, zilch, nada, nothing within their new false gospel that is true and defensible by Scripture. They have separated themselves from Christ, forgiveness and salvation. By God's grace and mercy individuals within the Lutheran Synods hold to or will hold to the one true Gospel and faith in Christ.
---
AC V has left a new comment on your post "UOJ Questions Answered: Enthusiasm Breeds Enthusia...":
Brett, to wit:
"For, as Dr. Luther writes in the Preface to St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans: Thus faith is a divine work in us, that changes us and regenerates us of God, and puts to death the old Adam, makes us entirely different men in heart, spirit, mind, and all powers, and brings with it [confers] the Holy Ghost. Oh, it is a living, busy, active, powerful thing that we have in faith, so that it is impossible for it not to do good without ceasing."
- Formula of Concord Solid Declaration, IV:10, Good Works.
