 |
| His Biblical Christology is quite good. |
Reconciliation: This is the proper rendering of καταλλάσσων (2 Cor 5:18f; Ro 5:10f; Col 1:20), [GJ - reconciling] since the “change” is a change into another state of mind, the change from a God deeply offended by our sin to a God at peace with the world. The propitiatory work of Christ effects the permanent reconciliation of God. Announcing this fact, the gospel is the word of reconciliation. To preach this gospel is the ministry of reconciliation enjoined upon the church. The message proclaims “the peace of God which passeth all understanding” (Php 4:7; Ro 5:1), not the feeling of restful peace in the hearts of men, but the peace prevailing in the heart of God. If we find that the idea of reconciliation bears a close resemblance to those of propitiation and satisfaction, so that we slip from the one into the other almost without noticing it, we need not be disturbed; for we are not called upon to establish a regular logical sequence of these terms, but to accept each one at its full value without cavil.
….If, however, μὴ λογιζόμενος [GJ - not counting, not imputing] denotes an action which is not identical with reconciliation nor is presupposed by it, then Luther is correctly interpreting when he inserts an “and,” which Paul did not have. “AND did not impute their trespasses unto them.” (emphasis Schaller’s). … it is obvious that therewith not a presupposition but a consequence of reconciliation is to be expressed…Thus the giving or establishing of this Word (of reconciliation) is a consequence of the reconciliation and therefore at the same time includes the knowledge of the justification of the sinner, which indeed is involved in the reconciliation, but is not identical with it. –
John Schaller, Biblical Christology, Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 1981.
***
GJ - I found this on the Net somewhere and mccained it, so people would say, "Oh, look at all the research you do! Now it is crystal clear. Please may I be your Facebook friend?" I copied those comments from the precious few McCain and Kilcrease let through on their own blogs.
The Synodical Conference Enthusiasts love to glory in their past, as long as that past is selectively viewed through the filter of the Great Kidnapper, C.F. W. Walther.
This is one more example of an early SynCon writer not adopting the UOJ dogma. Gausewitz is another example, and he was president of the entire Synodical Conference, a measure of the esteem he enjoyed among all the participants.
This is the equivalent of the motion to adopt unanimously. If any person votes no on that motion, the question fails, because it is not unanimous. As far as I know, that is the only situation in Roberts Rules where one person can defeat an entire assembly.
The UOJ Hive would like people to imagine that all their SynCon writers taught world absolution, double-justification, and the Easter surprise - "Y'all forgiven, whether y'all believe or not, especially if not."
If only one esteemed writer can be found dissenting from the Walther party line, the opinion is no longer unanimous. Not only that, many pastors in the LCMS and WELS teach justification by faith instead of UOJ. The percentage is much higher in Missouri, because pastors are allowed to think in that group, although many do not avail themselves of the privilege. Even in WELS, where critical thinking is as rare as a July frost, about 20% of the pastors believe and teach justification by faith alone - not UOJ.
According to these Schaller quotations from WELS, District Pope Jon Buchholz would have marched uninvited to Wauwatosa with his hand-picked finger puppets (aka the district officers) and expelled Schaller from the seminary, condemning him as a false teacher.
 |
| A Luther statue on the campus does not mean Luther is taught there. The statues are more of a rabbit's foot, a lucky charm to be pulled out when handy. |
