ELCA, LCMS, and the Antichrist

Condescending LaughQuest Denizens Hep Out Joe Krohn

David Jay Webber (Djw) 
Perhaps something that has contributed toward Mr. Krohn's confusion on what the authentic Lutheran teaching is, is that he was accepted into membership in an LCMS church, even though the one and only reason for his having been disciplined in his former WELS church was his rejection of objective justification. On that point, the LCMS pastor and church should probably have told him that the LCMS and the WELS are in agreement regarding objective justification, so that a rejection or questioning of this doctrine is not in itself a valid reason either to depart from the WELS or to go to the LCMS. 


If his previous WELS pastor had perhaps not explained objective justification clearly, or if he had explained it in a misleading way, that pastor could have been encouraged to read WELS Pastor Jon Buchholz's essay on the topic, in which Buchholz points out and corrects certain weak and even erroneous forms of expression that have sometimes been used in WELS to explain this doctrine; and in which Buchholz also lays out the balanced and correct way to explain it. 

His crypto-Universalism is different from J. P. Meyer's?
How?

Mr. Krohn likewise should have been encouraged to read and study this essay himself. But on this particular issue, Mr. Krohn should have been guided back toward a reconciliation with his WELS pastor and church, and not to have been taken into LCMS membership, as if the LCMS does not also embrace and confess objective justification.


Jim Pierce (Jim_pierce)
For those who are interested, Mr. Krohn has his own blog Luther Rocks. If one were so inclined to do a search against Dr. Jackson Ichabod blog, you would find many a comment by Mr. Krohn aka "Luther Rocks" in support of Dr. Jackson and Jackson's views against OJ. 


If I am mistaken, then please correct me, Mr. Krohn. 


Btw, Mr. Krohn is somewhat of a hero in the Jackson sect, because he was "persecuted" for his faith and kicked out of his WELS congregation for teaching against OJ, according to the information at Dr. Jackson's blog. Please correct that if it is wrong, Mr. Krohn.


***


GJ - I recall Joe Krohn daring to ask about the WELS-LCMS fund-raising fee of $40,000. Never get between a Changer and his money.

---
Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Condescending LaughQuest Denizens Hep Out Joe Kroh...":

Pastor Webber is directing people to (W)ELS DP Buchholz' Universal Justification paper for clarity. He's got to be kidding. Note that it was Pastor Jon Buchholz' primary goal in writting the essay to move people to use terms that Scripture uses to describe and teach the doctrine of Justification. Here's the clarity and return to Scriptural verbage that Buchholz provided:

"God has forgiven the whole world. God has forgiven everyone his sins." This statement is absolutely true! This is the heart of the gospel, and it must be preached and taught as the foundation of our faith. But here’s where the caveat comes in: In Scripture, the word "forgive" is used almost exclusively in a personal, not a universal sense. The Bible doesn’t make the statement, "God has forgiven the world."

"God has forgiven all sins, but the unbeliever rejects God’s forgiveness." Again, this statement is true—and Luther employed similar terminology to press the point of Christ’s completed work of salvation.16 But we must also recognize that Scripture doesn’t speak this way."

"God has declared the entire world righteous." This statement is true, as we understand it to mean that God has rendered a verdict of "not-guilty" toward the entire world. It is also true—and must be taught—that the righteousness of Christ now stands in place of the world’s sin; this is the whole point of what Jesus did for us at Calvary. However, once again we’re wresting a term out of its usual context. In Scripture the term "righteous" usually refers to believers." [GJ - "Usually"?]

What a scam these guys are pulling over on the laity and weak willed clergy!

***

GJ - Buchholz portrayed his paper as a corrective, so they could slither away from the Kokomo Statements, which they lied about while supporting and enforcing them.

Buchholz considers himself an expert, but when I asked him about studying the issue, he said, "I haven't unpacked your book." I did not go to him about UOJ. He went to me. He had time to dig a giant pool, worthy of an emperor, but not time to study the Word. The requirement is "apt to teach," not "apt to swim."

Thy Strong Word has been available free on the Net for years, so he could have done that without unpacking his books.

Webber is another one who pursues the logical fallacy of Special Pleading. He endlessly repeats the same, lame arguments. He has no grasp of his errors because any interruption causes the recording to play over again.

The New NIV Contradicts Inerrancy with Its Mytho-Porno-Feminist Language

Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel has left a new comment on your post "WELS Translators Do Due Diligence":

My wife and I are presently members of a WELS congregation. We have been having a very tough time thinking how it would be conscionable for us to remain with WELS should WELS choose the gender neutral Bible (NIV11) for its official publications. The very reality that WELS is considering the NIV11 is distressing and also, revolting to us.

We believe the choice is both simple and clear. I continue reading literature from WELS and our local congregation that WELS is committed to sound doctrinal Christian belief and practice, based upon the inerrant Word of God. However, the very consideration of the gender neutral NIV11, renders that repeated resolve, inconsistent (incompatible).

Adopting a gender neutral Bible is tantamount to messing with God's Word. I prefer to liken it to "molestation" of God's written revelation. Adopting gender neutrality in Scripture, has the effect of humanly micro managing and tweaking Scripture to suit one's own (carnal political correctness, Bible study slothfulness, or, whatever) ends. There is no Scriptural or rational excuse to intentionally remove and / or alter / edit Scripture's patriarchal language. Doing so would be akin to literary revisionism, - as the altering of other literary works of antiquity, such as Homer's Iliad, Caesar's Gallic Wars, Josephus’ writings, etc. Even in the secular world, I’m convinced that many would consider this, type of "editing alteration," unconscionable and irresponsible.

Scripture, itself makes it clear that "every word of God is pure." Scripture, also states that "all Scripture is given by inspiration of God" [God-breathed - the very words] - [Proverbs 30:5-6 ; 2 Timothy 3:14-17]

If WELS leadership and congregational pastors would be (Biblically) wise, (and aware of the offense they are conveying), they would drop the NIV11 consideration from their mix of options. Presently, I'm reminded of the Scriptural reality: ".....Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you....." [2 Corinthians 6:14-18 - in context]

It speaks volumes that the large [Christian] Southern Baptist Conference gave thumbs down to the NIV11. Knowing that the Southern Baptists are committed to the doctrinal teaching of Biblical inerrancy as well as the continued (such) profession of WELS – we ask ourselves the rational question: “How can WELS persist in riding the fence, including a gender neutral translation in the mix of its consideration for a new translation change for synodical and congregational publications?”

Again, I believe, it all boils down to shifting the patriarchal language of Scripture [the manuscripts] and “adapting” the present culture’s ever changing language usage. It will be utterly gagging to my wife and me, (should WELS adopt the NIV11) to hear WELS synodical leadership and pastors profess the “inerrancy of Scripture” having [then] decided that the NIV11 was acceptable for synodical publications and congregational usage!

Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel
www.thechristianmessage.org

***

GJ - Somehow the "conservative" Lutherans have left all KJV alternatives off the table. We all know why WELS is going to <s>finesse</s> study the issue - they knew they would be clobbered at the district meetings.

Lutherans are free to choose between Romanism or Fullerism:
anything is better than Lutheran doctrine, the leaders say.

Fake-o-Blog Accuses Luther of Contradicting Himself

Nothing is more pathetic than Luther-haters quoting the Reformer to promote their false doctrine.

If Luther did teach UOJ, then the quotation from the same commentary--in the graphic--contradicts the fake's citation.

I figure Jim Pierce provided the quotation, because Tim Glende is too lazy to find something from Luther. Maybe Uncle John forwarded it to him.

I read every word of the Galatians commentary out loud to Mrs. Ichabod. We have read thousands of pages of Luther together. The Reformer did not contradict himself. He never departed from the efficacy of the Word in the Means of Grace.

The Luther-haters use the hunt and peck method. They look for what they want and bray about it, never thinking their claims only show how little they know.

Beware of Crypto-Calvinists Selling Calvinist Bibles to Lutherans

Paulus locutus est - causa finita est.

Paul McCain is selling his Calvinist Bible from a supposedly Lutheran publishing house, simultaneously warning everyone about crypto-Calvinism.

Driscoll, on the far left, is the potty-mouth pastor admired by Glende and Ski.
J. I. Packer is a famous Calvinist who edited McCain's favorite Bible, the ESV.

rlschultz has left a new comment on your post "Beware of Crypto-Calvinists Selling Calvinist Bibl...":

I once made a Crypto Calvinist bristle when I jokingly referred to him as one. The whole premise of Crypto Calvinism is deceit. They say that they are Lutheran, but are really in the Reformed camp.

***

GJ - The crypto-Calvinists are no longer crypto, as one NPH publication stated. To be precise, the main influence in the Synodical Conference (tm) is Arminian, Decision Theology.

Time To Study John Calvin

John Calvin was a prolific author.

J-721

"When intent upon establishing their peculiar tenets, Calvin and Zwingli likewise preferred rational argumentation to the plain proofs of Holy Writ. Their interpretation of the words of the Sacrament is but one glaring instance; but there are many more. The schools and the denominations which they founded became infected with this same disease of theology."

Martin S. Sommer, Concordia Pulpit for 1932, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1931, p. iii.

J-722

John Calvin, Commentaries, Amos 8:11-12: "...we are touched with some desire for strong doctrine, it evidently appears that there is some piety in us; we are not destitute of the Spirit of God, although destitute of the outward means."

            Benjamin Milner, Calvin's Doctrine of the Church, Heicko A.Oberman, Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1970, p. 109. CO, XLIII, 153.

J-723

“Wherefore, with regard to the increase and confirmation of faith, I would remind the reader (though I think I have already expressed it in unambiguous terms), that in assigning this office to the Sacraments, it is not as if I thought that there is a kind of secret efficacy perpetually inherent in them, by which they can of themselves promote or strengthen faith, but because our Lord has instituted them for the express purpose of helping to establish and increase our faith. The Sacraments duly perform their office only when accompanied by the Spirit, the internal Master, whose energy alone penetrates the heart, stirs up the affections, and procures access for the Sacraments into our souls. If He is wanting, the Sacraments can avail us no more than the sun shining on the eyeballs of the blind, or sounds uttered in the ears of the deaf. Wherefore, in distributing between the Spirit and the Sacraments, I ascribe the whole energy to Him, and leave only a ministry to them; this ministry, without the agency of the Spirit, is empty and frivolous, but when He acts within, and exerts His power, it is replete with energy. ...then, it follows, both that the Sacraments do not avail one iota without the energy of the Holy Spirit; and that yet in hearts previously taught by that preceptor, there is nothing to prevent the Sacraments from strengthening and increasing faith.”

            John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2 volumes, Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970, I, p. 497. Also cited in Benjamin Charles Milner, Jr., Calvin's Doctrine of the Church, Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1970, p. 119. Institutes. IV.xiv.9.

J-724

“We must not suppose that there is some latent virtue inherent in the Sacraments by which they, in themselves, confer the gifts of the Holy Spirit upon us, in the same way in which wine is drunk out of a cup, since the only office divinely assigned them is to attest and ratify the benevolence of the Lord towards us; and they avail no farther than accompanied by the Holy Spirit to open our minds and hearts, and make us capable of receiving this testimony, in which various distinguished graces are clearly manifested… They [the Sacraments] do not of themselves bestow any grace, but they announce and manifest it, and, like earnests and badges, give a ratification of the gifts which the divine liberality has bestowed upon us.”

John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2 volumes, Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970, I, p. 503. Institutes, IV, XIV, 17. 

J-725

“But assuming that the body and blood of Christ are attached to the bread and wine, then the one must necessarily be dissevered from the other. For the bread is given separately from the cup, so the body, united to the bread, must be separated from the blood, included in the cup.”

John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2 volumes, Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1970, I, p. 570. Institutes, IV, XVII, 18.

J-726

John Calvin, Institutes IV.xvii.19: "We must establish such a presence of Christ in the supper as may neither fasten Him to the element of bread, not enclose Him in bread, not circumscribe Him in any way (all of which clearly derogate from His heavenly glory)...."

Benjamin Charles Milner, Jr., Calvin's Doctrine of the Church, Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1970, p. 128.

J-727

John Calvin, True Method of Reforming the Church: "The offspring of believers are born holy, because their children, while yet in the womb, before they breathe the vital air, have been adopted into the covenant of eternal life."

Benjamin Charles Milner, Jr., Calvin's Doctrine of the Church, Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1970, p. 123. 

***

GJ - Two characteristics of John Calvin are most important. First of all, he separates the work of the Holy Spirit from the Word and Sacraments.


I. Enthusiasm
Calvin is an Enthusiast in divorcing the Spirit from the Word. Luther, Melanchthon, the Concordists, and the post-Concord Lutherans were clear, forceful, and consistent in following the Scriptures in this fine summary from Hoenecke - "The Spirit never without the Word. The Word never without the Spirit. That is sound doctrine."


UOJ has all babies born forgiven (Eduard Preuss and J. P. Meyer) while Calvin has the children of believers born holy. The difference is UOJ's crypto-Universalism, which makes it so easy to join Rome or ELCA or Craig Groeschel or anyone else.


Grace without the Means of Grace is characteristic of Calvin and UOJ, except Calvin is relatively consistent.


II. Reason above Scripture
Calvin placed human reason above Scripture, but Luther understood the Word of God as revelation that transcended and often opposed human reason. 


The problem of Calvin's magisterial use of reason is where to stop. If the Real Presence of Christ is a mystery that cannot be explained by human reason, then so are the Two Natures of Christ. If someone cannot calculate the waters being sufficient to cover the earth in the Genesis Flood, then it did not happen.


Lutherans treat the efficacy of the Word in the Means of Grace as central to the Gospel, foundational for everything claimed about the true Christian Church. 

Schleiermacher - Halle and UOJ

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Fail-o-Blog Should Call Himself the Real Calvin":

So (W)ELS' chief UOJ theologian Siegbert W. Becker was channeling Schleiermacher when he wrote their confession of the false gospel of Universal Justification.

Becker - "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."
http://www.wlsessays.net/files/BeckerJustification.PDF

Becker's essay is ground zero for this false teaching in the (W)ELS. It's required reading for anyone who cares to know what the (W)ELS teaching concerning this doctrine including his determination that the Kokomo statements contained no false doctrine.