Luther Said Much the Same Thing - False Doctrine Is Far More Evil Than Carnal Sin

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Can Any Pope Be a Believing Christian? - No: Impos...":

If the clergy in the Lutheran synods do not take a public stand against UOJ as their call into the Public Office of the Ministry requires, then they’re no better than Joel Hochmuth in the ongoing spiritual abuse of the laity they are responsible for. DP Pastor Jon Buchholz did everyone a favor by clearly showing that UOJ is incompatible and contrary to Christ’s central and chief doctrine of one Justification solely By Faith alone in Christ. He publicly anathematized Christ’s doctrine of Justification by labeling faithful Pastor Paul Rydecki as a heretic for rejecting the false gospel of UOJ.

A comparison of the tolerance for UOJ in the Lutheran synods with the recent, putrid Joel Hochmuth case (at the time he was the (W)ELS Director of Communications) is supremely accurate. Hochmuth was convicted as a computer pedophile who sat at synod headquarters watching children being violently abused and raped by homosexual men. The Lutheran synods are full of silent clergy who watch as their Synod and clergy abuse men, women and children in their churches – by teaching and allowing to be taught the faith destroying false gospel of UOJ which separates the confessor from Christ and eternal salvation. How many souls are gnashing their teeth in eternal torment because they embraced (W)ELS UOJ at the expense of the Holy Spirit’s faith in Christ alone? Many in the Lutheran synods sit by and either condone UOJ or reject it - but still silently watch as men and women in their fellowship use it to privately and publicly manipulate the laity, with the effect of tearing them away from Christ, the forgiveness of sins, the comfort and peace of the Holy Spirit and eternal life.

Right now is the time to stand up and be publicly counted as a faithful Christian, by the grace and mercy of God, who is willing to carry the cross of Christ, teach and defend pure doctrine and right practice as Scripture clearly teaches and the Christian Book of Concord faithfully explains. Test the Spirits and identify the posturing clergy, hold them accountable for what they teach, confess and condone. Study the doctrine of UOJ as the synods teach the various versions of it and compare it, not to some professors class notes, but to Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions. Now is not the time for equivocation and ambiguity in doctrinal matters and neither is it the time to entertain those who have become masters of both.

---

Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel has left a new comment on your post "Luther Said Much the Same Thing - False Doctrine I...":

Ichabod -

In your Luther pic, a nun asks:

"How can a man from 500 years ago speak so clearly to me today?"

If one but believes the Scripture and the Romans 12 gifts; it is not difficult to understand that some of Luther's gifts were prophecy and exhortation.

Consequently, if modern day Lutherans actually believed in these gifts to the church, they would happily accept Luther's preached word about "justification by faith alone." Instead they go astray and worship their false god of universal objective justification.

Sadly, Lutheran church big wheels lead the people astray. They no longer believe that Luther could be one of those of whom Scripture speaks:

"Consider your leaders; those who spoke to you the Word of God; consider the outcome of their life; and imitate their faith." [Hebrews - RSV - as I recall it]

Can Any Pope Be a Believing Christian? - No: Impossible

Ichabod, ” Buchholz was UOJ all the way, so I am not going to credit him with any scruples or doctrinal knowledge. He is simply one more example of someone eager to posture for a time, and even more eager to switch sides when convenient.”

Posturing in the Lutheran Synods, some do it with the intent to mislead, others out of respect for their egos and still others out of pure ignorance and apathy. Pastor Spencer published a post yesterday stating that the Roman Catholic office of Pope will contain The Antichrist Scripture speaks of in the last days. The body of the article was accurate as it briefly detailed the reasons the Lutheran Confessions make the same determination regarding the Pope. The problem that I had with it was in the last paragraph where Pastor Spencer writes contrary to the evidence he just presented and which Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions confirm. He equivocates and states that not every Pope is an antichrist and that they may even be Christian believers who will be saved eternally. Scripture teaches that a Christian is someone who has been received into God’s grace as His own dear child and saved eternally. I posted a comment disagreeing with his false statement and initially it was graciously allowed to be posted. That changed this morning when my statement was kilcreased. I post it here so that people may see the horrendous problem with Pastor Spencer’s false teaching.

Pastor Spencer states, "This does not mean that any particular individual Pope is the Antichrist, or even an antichrist in the wider sense of the term, or that these men cannot also be Christian believers and thus saved and in heaven with God for eternity."

I believe that this statement requires more explanation. As it stands it is nonsensical. The very position which the Popes take as the "Vicar of Christ" requires full agreement with the Council of Trent as they continually reconfirm it's teachings. The Council of Trent anathematizes Justification by Faith Alone and by that rejects Christ and the chief and central article of Christ's doctrine. The Council of Trent also places the standing Pope as the mediator between God and man which clearly subverts and perverts Christ and His position as sole Mediator. What this means is that every Pope who is faithful to the Catholic Church's official teachings is an antichrist just as those outside of the Catholic Church who replace Christ's doctrine of one Justification solely by Faith in Christ Alone are also antichrists. Any confession which changes the singular doctrine of Christ removes Christ from it and He is not a part of it. Therefore anyone who perverts the central article of Justification is not a Christian and therefore is not saved. This is most certainly true for antichrists. The only way for someone in an unChristian church body (a church body who's official teaching perverts the central article of one Justification solely by Faith in Christ Alone, given by God's grace alone through the Means of Grace alone) to be a Christian is for them to be hypocrites within their denomination. For instance the only way a member of the Catholic Church could be a Christian and saved eternally would be that he is a hypocrite and truly believes contrary to the official teaching of the Catholic Church and trust in Christ alone, forsaking his own false works righteousness, for the forgiveness of sins and salvation. Same goes for members of all other denominations where the official teaching perverts Christ's doctrine of Justification - they must be hypocrites within their denomination.

Martin Luther in his “The Private Mass and the Consecration of Priests,” states, “For we must believe and be sure of this, that baptism does not belong to us but to Christ, that the gospel does not belong to us but to Christ, that the office of preaching does not belong to us but to Christ, that the sacrament (of the Lord’s Supper) does not belong to us but to Christ, that the keys, or forgiveness and retention of sins, do not belong to us but to Christ. In summary, the offices and sacraments do not belong to us but to Christ, for he has ordained all this and left it behind as a legacy in the church to be exercised and used to the end of the world; and he does not lie or deceive us. Therefore, we cannot make anything else out of it but must act according to his command and hold to it. However, if we alter it or improve on it, then it is invalid and Christ is no longer present, nor is his ordinance.”

Thanks for allowing me to comment. Brett Meyer

http://www.intrepidlutherans.com/2012/10/the-roman-papacy-is-antichrist-spoken.html

Pastor Spencer’s false statement highlights a heinous problem caused by the toleration of the false gospel of Universal Objective Justification (aka: General Justification, Objective Justification, Universal Justification). UOJ teaches that the entire world was imputed Christ’s righteousness for the forgiveness of their sins regardless of the Holy Spirit graciously working Godly contrition and Faith in Christ alone through the Means of Grace. In fact UOJ teaches Christ’s righteousness must have been imputed to the whole world before and without faith otherwise faith would have nothing to cling to. First, this highlights that the false gospel of UOJ replaces Christ as the object of the Holy Spirit’s faith with the Forgiveness of Sins being the object of faith. Certainly this is an Antichristian gospel. Secondly it means that even The Antichrist and all of the minor antichrists have been imputed Christ’s righteousness and by that received the “non-imputation” (forgiveness) of sins. UOJ makes the Antichrist a child of God having been declared by God to have been given the inheritance of Christ. Therefore it is a fruit of UOJ to say that antichrist’s can be believing children of God and saved eternally – regardless of their doctrinal position which is contrary to Christ if they believe they have been declared forgiven by God they are saved eternally since their sins have already been forgiven.

Posturing. It is transparent when faithful Christians subject what is being taught to Scripture and the Christian Book of Concord. No wonder few take an public stand against the Antichrists in the Lutheran Synods who are actively anathematizing Christ’s Church while the laity suffer under clergy induced sleep. The glory of the (W)ELS.

***

GJ - I do not look at the Intrepid blog anymore, unless forced to do so. I am disappointed but not surprised by their weak response, during this Reformation month, to the suspension of Pastor Paul Rydecki for teaching justification by faith.

Anyone who becomes pope has already pledged himself to the infallibility of the office. In fact, ever since Pope Pius IX made papal infallibility a teaching of Rome, the dogma has been extended to more occasions and clergy as the world marched toward the End Times.

Now - any bishop, cardinal or priest who teaches in harmony with the pope is infallible. Therefore, the clergy are godlike when they agree with a man elected by a group of like-minded men. That is the spirit of the Antichrist, to set himself in the temple (St. Peter's) as a god. Spencer should be reading 2 Thessalonians and some Vatican publications, plus my Catholic, Lutheran, Protestant, where more documents are listed.

Secondly, every pope teaches justification by works, the opposite of the Gospel - just as UOJ is the opposite of the Gospel. That alone makes him an Antichrist and not a believer.

So any given pope may not be THE Antichrist, but his office is chief and greatest office of all Antichrists. So Benedict may be regarded by all Protestants as only the Antichrist-Elect.

All false teachers, who set themselves up in the same way--like Jon Buchholz--are little Antichrists. They share in the terrible, divisive, soul-murdering work of their Father Below. They may lack in the global reach and political power of the big guy in Rome, but they are no less complicit in his work.

---

LPC has left a new comment on your post "Can Any Pope Be a Believing Christian? - No: Impos...":

As it stands it is nonsensical.

Amen.

Rev. Spencer's statement is really political because theologically it has no substance.

LPC

***

GJ - Let's not be too hard on Holy Father Antichrist - that is the message I get. People are offended that the papacy is the Antichrist, because Aunt Charlotte is a Roman Catholic. So is Uncle Fritz. Are you saying my aunt and uncle, who still give me presents, belong to the Church of the Antichrist?

Where else can one find such beautiful rituals and solemn ceremonies, ancient customs and treasured dogmas - all designed to replace the Gospel with the Law, Christ with Mary, and Satan with God?

Real Women Speak Out: How Student Loans Have Affected Me | Fox Business. When Will Lutherans Deal with Their Punitive Seminary Loan Situations?

Real Women Speak Out: How Student Loans Have Affected Me | Fox Business:

You can’t help but notice the dire chatter surrounding student loans these days.

In fact, student loans are one of the hottest topics here at LearnVest, whether in LV Discussions, your comments or stories we write. Some are calling it the newest lending crisis, equal in scope to the subprime mortgages that torpedoed the economy in 2008.

No wonder–a record one in five households now holds student debt. Increasingly, this debt burden is altering lives, and not in the way students imagined when they first took out the loans. Enrollment in graduate programs has dropped, as students face mounting undergraduate loans. 44% of graduates are delaying buying a home, and 23% will delay having children because of their debt burden.

Defaults on student loans are at a record 13.4%, and there’s no clean slate in sight–student loans are rarely dischargeable in bankruptcy.

One NYU professor has even said that student loans are immoral.

This is a topic you’re passionate about. According to a nationwide survey conducted by LearnVest and Chase Blueprint, more than half of you have student loan debt, and you owe an average of $41,000. A quarter of you have more than five loans outstanding, and more than a third of you don’t think your student loans were worth it.

We wanted to show the faces behind these statistics, so we reached out to five LearnVest readers to share their own stories of naiveté, guilt and–in some cases–acceptance and triumph.

Do you recognize your own story in theirs?

Rebecca Harris, law student

Debt: $160,498

I came out of undergrad with almost $40,000 in student loans, and decided to go straight into law school. I wasn’t worried about taking on more debt because law schools all but guarantee that their graduates get jobs. The reality is that those numbers were inflated and manipulated. Students from my school who graduated two years ago are just now starting to get real jobs or picking up temporary work.

I’ve been adding to my loans for three years, and I now have an outstanding balance of $160,498 in federal loans (find out why federal loans are better than private), and I haven’t been able to pay down any while in school. My school requires 25 hours per week in legal clinics in addition to classes, reading and work, so there is little to no time for an extra job.

I feel extremely stressed out and overwhelmed. Recently I’ve been wondering if this is the right career for me after all, after getting a taste through clinic work. I want to find something that doesn’t make me stressed and anxious, and is more fulfilling. I’ve been researching other options, like working in HR or taking a management job that doesn’t require a law degree but would still make use of it.

Tiffany, public sector professional

Debt: $97,000

Even with a half-tuition scholarship, help from my parents and graduating early, I graduated from Boston University with $70,000 in student loan debt, then embarked on a career in the public sector in New York, starting at $30,000.

About two years ago, my boyfriend asked what the pay-off date for my loans was, and I had no idea. I read all the fine print and repayment terms and found I would be paying for nearly 30 years at the rate I was going! It felt like getting hit over the head with a ton of bricks.

I have since calculated my monthly payments so I will be paid off no later than December 2020. I allocate more to the higher-interest loans and take advantage of incentives such as lower interest if you enroll in auto-payment. I have a credit card that sends my cash-back bonuses straight to my private student loans.

“Even paying $100 a month while in school would have saved me $1,200 in accrued interest.”

I am grateful that the loans allowed me to go to the school of my choice. I just wish I understood capitalized interest and the terms of repayment better. I would have made an effort to pay at least something on my loans while in school. Even $100 a month, which would have been feasible with my college job, would have saved me $1,200 in accrued interest.

Now I’m back in school for my master’s in public administration and I’m looking at another $60,000 in debt, but this time with more knowledge. I chose a program that allowed me to continue working full-time and have paid off over $15,000 of my debt while in school. At work, I have been promoted, now earning between $50,000 and $60,000, and will graduate with my master’s in a much better position, both professionally and financially, than if I had attended a full-time program.

Diane Bitler, receptionist

Debt: $80,000

When I took out my student loans, I was young and did not have any clue about money, like the difference between lenders and good versus bad APR. My parents were new to the process as well and had no qualms about taking loans out. I wish my counselors guided me more, but instead I was encouraged to apply to any bank for loans.

I majored in Political Science at SUNY Albany. I chose my major at 17, and by the time I realized it didn’t appeal to me, I was a junior and it was too late to switch majors. Still, I figured I would graduate and find a job in six months (the time before receiving the loan bill). In reality, I graduated, and could only find part-time or extremely low paying jobs, none of which were enough to support myself and pay student loans.

For a long time I felt like a failure because I had no means of paying these loans. I tried the late payment rehabilitation program, but was two payments away when my work hours were cut and I could no longer afford it. My lenders continue to raise my interest and tack on late fees, which now accounts for the majority of my debt. Because my mom co-signed my loans, she’s been getting collection calls and harassment letters about garnishing her wages. Her credit is ruined along with mine.

“I’ve ruined my mom’s credit as well as mine.”

I went to a free financial counseling center in NYC, which helped me figure out how much I owe and to whom, but I am still at a loss as how to deal with these lenders. I’m trying to find a way to consolidate all my loans into just one bill.

I finally left Manhattan and moved to Virginia to find work. Now I earn $10 an hour, roughly $21,000 a year. I feel trapped. I could pay these off if I became a millionaire. Otherwise, I will be paying them until I die. I just wish I could file bankruptcy and start fresh.

I don’t understand how this could be done to the future of America.

Lily Engle, sales professional

Debt: $0

When I graduated in May 2009, I had a solid amount of student loan debt. While I know that $15,000 definitely isn’t that high, it was still a considerable sum to wrap my head around, and it lit a fire under my butt to find a job.

I work in sales, which isn’t my dream job (I had been hoping to find something in development or fundraising for a non-profit), but it has proven to be extremely rewarding and pays twice as much. So my happiness at work is one positive that came out of my student loans.

If I didn’t have these loans, I may have been more frivolous with my spending after college and would not have been able to create an emergency “savings cushion” like I have now. My loans helped me learn to budget and think about money differently. When paying down my debt, I always paid far more than the monthly minimum. As a trade-off, I chose to live somewhere where my rent was lower than the max I could afford. I also planned my budgets and spending around my salary, not my bonuses.

“My loans have helped me learn to budget and think about money differently.”

When I received my end-of-year bonus in March 2012, I used the entire thing to pay off the remaining $8,000. Because I didn’t incorporate my expected bonus into my budget, it wasn’t painful to say goodbye to it. I saved big on interest–I would have ended up paying an additional $800 or so over the life of the loan had I just kept on paying as usual, which would have taken me until 2015.

(Find out why she saved by paying earlier.)

Because of my loans, I can really appreciate the value of my education. Compromising on my education to avoid borrowing may have left me jobless post-graduation and given me no choice but to remain financially dependent upon my family. And being sure to pay my loans each month has given me good credit and solid financial footing as I prepare to take on additional financial responsibilities like homeownership or a family (eventually!).

Virginia Bosch, actor

Debt: $110,000

I was recently asked to fill out a survey from my private university, including the question: “If you could do it all over again, would you choose this school?” I answered, “Yes for the experience, but not for the money.”

I’ve wanted to be an actress since I was a little girl, but I also wanted to go to a school that let me explore other options and grow personally, so I chose to get a BA in the arts instead of going to a conservatory program. My university had the best theater program in the country … and was also named the most expensive college in the state. Originally we had more aid from the school and my parents were planning on paying more upfront. But since the market crashed when I was in college, our situation changed and the amount of aid the school gave me drastically dropped by the time I graduated (this was all told to my parents, not me).  So my parents took out more loans. I graduated in 2009 with $12,000 in federal and private student loans in my name, and over $100,000 in my parents’ names.

My goal is still to be an actress, but I’ve built up a swarm of freelance flexible jobs. I tried a steady administration job, but was miserable. So now I am currently an actor/babysitter/teaching artist/administrative temp/superstar errand-runner. (Find out more ways to make income on the side.) My income ranges between $1,000 to $2,600 a month. I’m back on track to paying my loans, and starting to formulate a financial plan.

When I graduated, the words “consolidation” and “interest rate” were foreign to me, despite the fact that I had borrowed so much money. When applying to college, I would have loved someone to sit me down and explain the ins and outs of loans. $50,000 in debt is very impractical as an actress. At my current rate, I will be able to pay off my portion of loans within the next five years, but I plan on taking on as much of the $100,000 in loans in my parents’ names as possible, even though they say they are willing to pay for my education.

Originally, my loans only produced guilt that I chose an expensive education, guilt that my parents were helping me, and primarily, guilt that I was pursuing my passion when I had this debt. I have been making peace with this, especially since guilt doesn’t pay the loans. And I’m so grateful for my parents’ support.

If You’re in Student Loan Debt or Considering Taking It on:

One good rule of thumb is to never take out more student loans than your anticipated first year’s salary. But we bet, now that you’ve read other women’s stories, you have more questions of your own about how to handle student loans responsibly.

We answer them all in LearnVest’s Knowledge Center. First, understand how student loans work with our complete guide. If you need loans, use our easy checklist to figure out how, and what type, to take out in the first place.

If you’re paying off student loans, use our checklist on how to pay them off, which runs through all the strategies and resources available to you to get a handle on your payments. If you’re struggling, read about your options here.

Want More?

By the Numbers: The Student Loan Crisis

Take Control of Your Money With Our Free Bootcamp

8 Things to Know Before Applying for Financial Aid

Read more: http://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-finance/2012/10/29/real-women-speak-out-how-student-loans-have-affected-me/#ixzz2B4GtTJcq

'via Blog this'

Denominations Are Dead: Evangelicals Agree That the System Cannot Be Fixed. Holy Mother Church Has Self-Destructed

Yesterday I was talking to someone with similar connections to mainline denominations, including my hometown. We had a name in common. I said, "He is the reason I became a Lutheran." The minister speaking had a chance at that man's library, when he retired. He could take any book he wanted. "The trouble was," he said, "all the books were as shallow as he was. But he was known for being a good speaker."

We outlined some individual skirmishes. The Disciples of Christ, who are big in a swath from Illinois to Texas, would not ordain homosexuals. So they partnered with the United Church of Christ, who ordained homosexuals far earlier than anyone else. Any Disciple candidate who wanted to out himself could get ordained in the UCC and serve in the Disciples, because ordination was mutually accepted, based on their agreement.

And the Disciples refused to entertain even a watered-down inerrancy statement ("an option") because "it was credal. We have no creeds but the bobble." Para-church groups formed to battle this and they finally said, "Why are we bothering?" They dissolved their group within the Disciples and loosely affiliated after that time, leaving the Disciples as a group.

That will obviously be the trend from now on. Before the 2009 ELCA meeting I kept holding up the Episcopal Church as an example where serving bishops were taking their dioceses out of the The Episcopalian Church (TEC) as a whole. I never expected ELCA bishops to do the same, and not one serving bishop ever tried. But the retired ELCA bishops did join the movement out of ELCA after 2009 (ordination of homosexuals approved). At last count, six retired ELCA bishops were organizing NALC, a group parallel to the older LCMC.

The local ELCA church lost 2/3rds of its Sunday attendance after 2009. An LCMC congregation formed from the exiles.

ELCA began shrinking by 20%. Naturally, the ELCA bishop Mark Hanson and TEC's bishop Katie Schori, went to work to ensure their dominance and control - at any cost.

My friends in blogging and writing - ChurchMouse, California, and Rogue Lutheran - have all dealt with this phenomenon - Diaprax. Every issue becomes a process, a way of resolving it so the leaders get their way.

The denominations do not fear political action - they welcome it. The ambush is already prepared for each and every attempt. "Sure let's have a meeting where this is discussed." They identify the dissenters and pick them off, one by one. Some are frightened away. Others are bribed - I have names. The persistent are targeted in various ways.

The persistent are going to be a minority. I noticed from a profile (Keirsey - free test) that Idealists are a minority. An Idealist is going to address issues according to principle rather than by what's-good-for-me. The persistent buckle and surrender - or they are driven away and shunned.

Look at the dullards and belly-servers who are SynCon DPs and SPs. And their history! No matter what the name of the man, the last 50 years have shown their eagerness to work with ELCA (or predecessors) for money and the warm glow of approval from apostates.

They are the apostasy enablers.

No one is more dangerous than the pastor or synodocat who pretends to oppose error and flips when it matters most.

Jon Buchholz is a good example of someone who agreed to sign the secret petition about Mark Jeske. He was known for being a DP "concerned" about the situation, stymied like poor helpless Mark Schroeder because the Gang of Four protected Jeske.

The only resolution at the convention, once the process took over, was one in favor of Jeske. And who spoke in support of that groveling, sycophantic motion? Jon Buchholz, California-Arizona DP, WELS, the Jedi Knight of Orthodoxy (in his mind).

As Henry  of Navarre once said, "The kingdom of France is worth a Mass" when he was forced to abandon his Protestant faith.

Buchholz was UOJ all the way, so I am not going to credit him with any scruples or doctrinal knowledge. He is simply one more example of someone eager to posture for a time, and even more eager to switch sides when convenient.

SP Schroeder and DP Buchholz are now adoring members of JELS:

JELS - the Jeske Emergent Legalistic Sect. 

Any questions? You are fired.