Apology of the Augsburg Confession, IV
That We Obtain Remission of Sins by Faith Alone in Christ.
103] Here and there among the Fathers similar testimonies are extant. For Ambrose says in his letter to a certain Irenaeus: Moreover, the world was subject to Him by the Law for the reason that, according to the command of the Law, all are indicted, and yet, by the works of the Law, no one is justified, i.e., because, by the Law, sin is perceived, but guilt is not discharged. The Law, which made all sinners, seemed to have done injury, but when the Lord Jesus Christ came, He forgave to all sin which no one could avoid, and, by the shedding of His own blood, blotted out the handwriting which was against us. This is what he says in Rom. 5:20: "The Law entered that the offense might abound. But where sin abounded, grace did much more abound." Because after the whole world became subject, He took away the sin of the whole world, as he [John] testified, saying John 1:29: "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world." And on this account let no one boast of works, because no one is justified by his deeds. But he who is righteous has it given him because he was justified after the laver [of Baptism]. Faith, therefore, is that which frees through the blood of Christ, because he is blessed "whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered," Ps. 32:1,104] These are the words of Ambrose, which clearly favor our doctrine; he denies justification to works, and ascribes to faith that it sets us free 105] through the blood of Christ. Let all the Sententiarists, who are adorned with magnificent titles, be collected into one heap. For some are called angelic; others, subtile, and others irrefragable [that is, doctors who cannot err.] When all these have been read and reread, they will not be of as much aid for understanding Paul as is this one passage of Ambrose.
***
GJ - One of the fads of UOJ is the use of Ambrose to prove UOJ in the Book of Concord. I am always open to argumentation, and I enjoy seeing how one of the great theologians makes his points.
First of all, this document is literally the Defense of the Augsburg Confession. To clarify how important the 1530 confession was, the Formula of Concord authors confessed with Luther that they were "theologians of the Augsburg Confession."
Luther identified with Augsburg, and the Concordists did as well.
Melanchthon was an early member of the Reformation and a lucid defender of justification by faith. Please show me in the 1530 confession where he departed from that stance, the very stance where he was a pioneer on his own. I asked Robert Preus about that, and Preus agreed that was true.
Second - what is the title of this section in the Apology?
That We Obtain Remission of Sins by Faith Alone in Christ.
A good writer will set up his theme and follow that theme, especially where so much is at stake. Therefore, the point of this entire section is justification by faith alone. As my friends say, JBFA.
Third - Melanchthon was clearly in harmony with Luther's distinction (made in the Galatians commentary) that there are indeed two justifications:
- Justification by works.
- Justification by faith.
Is the issue in this paragraph justification without faith? No, because the Reformers never considered such a ridiculous notion. That came from Samuel Huber and other heretics. This is Melancthon, who gave up a fabulous estate (of books) to stay with the Reformation. Remaining a Catholic would have made him a hero and the owner of a priceless library.
The Romanists were (and still are) arguing for faith plus works in justification. That means, for those addled from study at Mequon, that we must have works added to be forgiven. Therefore, Melancthon used one of the great theologians of the papacy to eliminate works from the formula.
Nor did Melancthon stumble stupidly into the fantasy land of UOJ. Did he not teach the Means of Grace in the Augsburg Confession? Did he not teach the efficacy of the Word, Law and Gospel? The pea-brains of Mequon, Bethany, St. Louis, and Ft. Wayne cannot grasp the basics of Luther's doctrine, the truths of that tiny little booklet called the Augsburg Confession.
They remind me of the ideologues ranting about health insurance as a "Constitutional right" without knowing the lack of individual rights in the Constitution itself.
So how did Melanchthon lure people into thinking this paragraph is all about UOJ?
One must take into account the mule-headed ignorance of the UOJ crowd. They know everything. They do not need to study anything. Everyone needs to listen to them, because they never stop talking, censoring, accusing, weaving and dodging, hedging and trimming.
They love John 1:29 for UOJ, but the Fourth Gospel does not say that at all.
KJV John 1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.
Lenski:
The verb itself may mean either “to take up and bear” or “to take away,” “to remove.” For the latter compare John 11:48; 15:2; 17:15; 19:31 and 38, passages which show that this meaning is beyond doubt. If the meaning “to take up,” “to bear,” is preferred, the force of the present tense would be peculiar: the Lamb in the act of taking up. Something would have to be supplied, namely, the very thought brought out by the other meaning. For this Lamb will not again lay down its burden, will not carry its burden indefinitely, but will take it completely away. So we correct Luther’s version traegt and abide by our English versions, “taketh away.”
---
Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel has left a new comment on your post "Melanchthon Did NOT Use Ambrose To Teach UOJ. This...":
Ichabod -
Nice mini commentary! I think you make the point how corrupted teaching is fomented and promulgated by corrupted leadership.
One of the major reasons for this corruption is, from the wrong interpretation of the text. You illustrate this (by quoting Lenski) when it is shown how John 1:29 is [only] translated to mean, “takes away.”
"Takes away" as Lenski says, can also be, "taking up," "bearing." Thus it is very easy to understand why the Lutheran theological academia crowd of universal objective justification enthusiast zealots, become entangled with their false doctrine. They overlook one of the basic hermeneutical tools which non seminary students of the Scriptures, use effectively; that being, comparing Scripture to Scripture.
Allow me to do some comparing Scripture with the John 1:29 Scripture:
I'll add the corollary comparing Scripture of Isaiah 53:4 - "Surely He hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows....."
Also: 1 Peter 2:14 - "Who His own self bare our sins in His own body....."
The emphasis in John 1:29 is on "bore;" or, "bare." Not on erasing [taking away] as the myopic UOJ disciples would have their congregations mistakenly believe.
Finally, you say:
".....Oddly enough, the UOJ Enthusiasts resort to Decision Theology, as Walther did, when they say that to be forgiven, one must make a decision in favor of universal absolution."
Yes! That is spot on. I've stated this "decision" mentality in another way in another comment. But, you have zeroed in on that aspect of UOJ mesmerized fixation - and, it can be traced to C.F. Walther as you adeptly illustrate with his black and white pic; and quote.
One other thing: Thinking of what you stated about WELS Wayne Mueller misleading teens, by saying:
"Mission work is easy. Just walk up and say to people - Yours sins are already forgiven." I say to that - No wonder why Lutherans in general have for umpteen years been bereft of much mission success; because their approach is man orientated rather than Holy Spirit led. The corruption of preaching universal objective justification to the sinner is as about as successful as telling an ugly wart hog that she can transform himself into a respectable farm sow.
Nathan M. Bickel
www.thechristianmessage.org
www.moralmatters.org
---
Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel has left a new comment on your post "Melanchthon Did NOT Use Ambrose To Teach UOJ. This...":
Ichabod -
I just thought of something. I thought how the universal objective justification error is being continually reinforced in WELS [and other Lutheran church bodies]
Part of the liturgy song quite frequently, is:
"Lamb of God; You 'take away' the sin of the world........"
---
bruce-church (http://bruce-church.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "Melanchthon Did NOT Use Ambrose To Teach UOJ. This...":
UOJer's hit new low: The Gospel equals free beer:
http://steadfastlutherans.org/?p=22337
---
bruce-church (http://bruce-church.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "Melanchthon Did NOT Use Ambrose To Teach UOJ. This...":
UOJers play to antinomian instincts with Rev. Fisk's new book:
http://steadfastlutherans.org/?p=22372
Broken: 7 "Christian" Rules That Every Christian Ought to Break as Often as Possible
http://www.cph.org/p-19471-broken-7-christian-rules-that-every-christian-ought-to-break-as-often-as-possible.aspx?SearchTerm=broken
---
Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Melanchthon Did NOT Use Ambrose To Teach UOJ. This...":
Here's a recent comment from Joe Krohn - JBFA anathamatizer and UOJ advocate:
Joe Krohn said...
Christ came to save the world and not condemn it.
If I were a thirsty man and found a well, the well would not be real unless I drank from it.
There is no comfort in your gospel, fellas.
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 11:09:00 PM GMT+10:00
http://extranos.blogspot.com/2012/08/uojers-deny-they-are-huberites-at.html
The rationalism of UOJ in a teeny tiny nutshell.
---
LPC said...
Joe,
I do not know what your metaphor is all about. At least this is what I know, the well is real whether you drink from it or not. Your action does not make something real or false.
Lastly, what you have is a gospel of false comfort, would you prefer that? Your formulation of the Gospel denies the faith created by the HS through the MoG.
In fact in your formulation, the MoG does not mediated such that the person comes to faith and thereby get justified at the point of faith. Your MoG declares already a reality that happened to them be they believe it or not.
Your position is inconsistent with your own doctrine of universal absolution/justification. Huber was a better theologian than you folks, for he rightly deduced that if universal absolution is true all the rest are superfluous, which is quasi-universalistic.
LPC
Lenski, R. C. H.: The Interpretation of St. John's Gospel. Minneapolis, MN : Augsburg Publishing House, 1961, S. 127.
The verse does not mean "the Lamb of God who absolves all unbelievers, without faith and without the Word." As Lenski wrote, it means not only to bear and carry those sins, but to remove them in the atonement.
 |
| UOJ salesmen are always crafty. |
UOJ Storm-Puppets have a terrible hang-up with the atonement. They cannot distinguish between the atonement and justification by faith. Both become one and both become their Gospel. One must hear these addled leaders explain themselves to get the full impact of their error.
I have heard people like Wayne Mueller tell an audience of teens, "Mission work is easy. Just walk up and say to people - Yours sins are already forgiven." Luther said that people will respond to this like a cow staring at a newly painted fence.
I can tell the poor, suffering readers of Ichabod one truth - UOJ is the only dogma of WELS, Missouri, and the Little Sect on the Prairie. They cannot see anything else. Everything is explained and excused with UOJ. And UOJ is the source of their crimes, scandals, and abuse.
Likewise, they cannot find justification by faith in Romans 5, even though the theme is clearly -
KJV Romans 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ: 2 By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of
God.
I have mentioned many times that UOJists are allergic to faith, that this allergy leads to rash statements. This paragraph is their golden casket, but it contains JFBA, not UOJ. True to the theme announced in the heading, forgiveness comes through faith. They hold up this paragraph but warn against faith. Have they read this paragraph? I think not. The great Ambrose paragraph is another gem about justification by faith alone.
They are Biblical, these UOJ fanatics - The blind lead the blind and fall into a pit.
The message of the atonement is the Gospel, and the Gospel is received through faith.
Oddly enough, the UOJ Enthusiasts resort to Decision Theology, as Walther did, when they say that to be forgiven, one must make a decision in favor of universal absolution.
 |
---
Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel has left a new comment on your post "Melanchthon Did NOT Use Ambrose To Teach UOJ. This...":
Ichabod -
Nice mini commentary! I think you make the point how corrupted teaching is fomented and promulgated by corrupted leadership.
One of the major reasons for this corruption is, from the wrong interpretation of the text. You illustrate this (by quoting Lenski) when it is shown how John 1:29 is [only] translated to mean, “takes away.”
"Takes away" as Lenski says, can also be, "taking up," "bearing." Thus it is very easy to understand why the Lutheran theological academia crowd of universal objective justification enthusiast zealots, become entangled with their false doctrine. They overlook one of the basic hermeneutical tools which non seminary students of the Scriptures, use effectively; that being, comparing Scripture to Scripture.
Allow me to do some comparing Scripture with the John 1:29 Scripture:
I'll add the corollary comparing Scripture of Isaiah 53:4 - "Surely He hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows....."
Also: 1 Peter 2:14 - "Who His own self bare our sins in His own body....."
The emphasis in John 1:29 is on "bore;" or, "bare." Not on erasing [taking away] as the myopic UOJ disciples would have their congregations mistakenly believe.
Finally, you say:
".....Oddly enough, the UOJ Enthusiasts resort to Decision Theology, as Walther did, when they say that to be forgiven, one must make a decision in favor of universal absolution."
Yes! That is spot on. I've stated this "decision" mentality in another way in another comment. But, you have zeroed in on that aspect of UOJ mesmerized fixation - and, it can be traced to C.F. Walther as you adeptly illustrate with his black and white pic; and quote.
One other thing: Thinking of what you stated about WELS Wayne Mueller misleading teens, by saying:
"Mission work is easy. Just walk up and say to people - Yours sins are already forgiven." I say to that - No wonder why Lutherans in general have for umpteen years been bereft of much mission success; because their approach is man orientated rather than Holy Spirit led. The corruption of preaching universal objective justification to the sinner is as about as successful as telling an ugly wart hog that she can transform himself into a respectable farm sow.
Nathan M. Bickel
www.thechristianmessage.org
www.moralmatters.org
---
Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel has left a new comment on your post "Melanchthon Did NOT Use Ambrose To Teach UOJ. This...":
Ichabod -
I just thought of something. I thought how the universal objective justification error is being continually reinforced in WELS [and other Lutheran church bodies]
Part of the liturgy song quite frequently, is:
"Lamb of God; You 'take away' the sin of the world........"
---
bruce-church (http://bruce-church.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "Melanchthon Did NOT Use Ambrose To Teach UOJ. This...":
UOJer's hit new low: The Gospel equals free beer:
http://steadfastlutherans.org/?p=22337
---
bruce-church (http://bruce-church.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "Melanchthon Did NOT Use Ambrose To Teach UOJ. This...":
UOJers play to antinomian instincts with Rev. Fisk's new book:
http://steadfastlutherans.org/?p=22372
Broken: 7 "Christian" Rules That Every Christian Ought to Break as Often as Possible
http://www.cph.org/p-19471-broken-7-christian-rules-that-every-christian-ought-to-break-as-often-as-possible.aspx?SearchTerm=broken
---
Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Melanchthon Did NOT Use Ambrose To Teach UOJ. This...":
Here's a recent comment from Joe Krohn - JBFA anathamatizer and UOJ advocate:
Joe Krohn said...
Christ came to save the world and not condemn it.
If I were a thirsty man and found a well, the well would not be real unless I drank from it.
There is no comfort in your gospel, fellas.
Wednesday, August 29, 2012 11:09:00 PM GMT+10:00
http://extranos.blogspot.com/2012/08/uojers-deny-they-are-huberites-at.html
The rationalism of UOJ in a teeny tiny nutshell.
---
LPC said...
Joe,
I do not know what your metaphor is all about. At least this is what I know, the well is real whether you drink from it or not. Your action does not make something real or false.
Lastly, what you have is a gospel of false comfort, would you prefer that? Your formulation of the Gospel denies the faith created by the HS through the MoG.
In fact in your formulation, the MoG does not mediated such that the person comes to faith and thereby get justified at the point of faith. Your MoG declares already a reality that happened to them be they believe it or not.
Your position is inconsistent with your own doctrine of universal absolution/justification. Huber was a better theologian than you folks, for he rightly deduced that if universal absolution is true all the rest are superfluous, which is quasi-universalistic.
LPC
