Gary, your articulation of the intricacies of the convoluted and contradictory doctrine of UOJ is remarkable. By your doctrinal confession of Justification and admission that you have never heard of the term UOJer (ist) you have provided an excellent example of the nearly complete replacement of JBFA with UOJ in the Lutheran Synods - and the laity, yourself included, are none the wiser.
Your "Sinners chose to send themselves to Hell" is a classic UOJ idiom highly used by Joe Krohn. This idiom though is false. Individuals who reject Christ, reject the Triune God and reject Justification solely by faith in Christ alone are not making a decision for Hell. They in their original sin and rejecting the Holy Spirit are doing the only thing natural man can. It is solely by the grace of God that the Holy Spirit works Godly contrition over sin and trust in the promises of Christ alone in those God has called to faith.
You state, "The sinner's debt has been paid (record expunged)."
This is more UOJ dogma that is false as we have provided sufficient quotes from the Christian Book of Concord to show. Christ indeed paid for the whole worlds sins, the iniquity of us all was laid upon Him and He suffered the punishment for those sins to God the Fathers satisfaction. This is the atonement. It is man's rationalism that equates that atonement with 'debt removed', 'debt expunged', 'a million dollars deposited in our account'. Scripture clearly doesn't teach that. What Scripture does declare consistently is found in John 8:24, "I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins." Notice that in contrast to UOJ teaching that God has expunged the unbelieving world's debt but ardent unbelievers choose to go to Hell instead of receiving the benefit of the million dollar debt removal - they in Scriptures reality die in their sins, die in debt, die in their crimson rags - never having been given Christ's righteous robe that washes them clean as snow as the false gospel of UOJ teaches.
Yes, your doctrinal confession makes you a UOJer but there is more that makes you ignore the clear Confession of the BOC and Scripture, the examples provided in this brief discussion by individuals that have suffered and witnessed particular events that show that your assumptions are incorrect - and yet you continue to hold to your assumptions as though these men had never responded.
UOJ, by its tenets, declares anathema upon the Scriptural doctrine of Justification solely by faith in Christ alone. Scripture declares anathema upon any perversion of the Gospel of Christ revealed in Scripture. Scripture also declares anathema upon any who would add to or subtract from the revealed Word of God. So, clearly no, this eternal war between these two contrary doctrines is not merely a matter of confusing terms and talking past one another. Pastor Rydecki's violent excommunication is sufficient to prove that assertion to be completely wrong.
 |
| How can this be used to promote UOJ? Ask the UOJ Enthusiasts. |
Gary,
I too thought and felt like you at one time, that the issue of objective justification was nothing more than a dispute in terminology. But, as I listened and read and observed, I became convinced otherwise by the nagging feeling that long standing basic teachings were being changed or ignored. The three solas is a good example. Grace, Faith and Scripture, all are present and important in this basic teaching of Scripture. Minimizing one is taking away the full truth of Scripture. And that's what I witness many of the most vocal and ardent promoters of objective justification do. They minimize faith. And in the extreme cases, they even declare outright war on faith. But this isn't the language of the Bible. There is no minimization of faith in the Bible.
In my work, the manufacturing operation is driven to produce. Production is the life blood of manufacturing. But a wise leader always makes sure that he never emphasizes production output at the expense of safety or quality. The best manufacturing leaders always say, "We must produce, but we must produce safely and with the highest quality". The wise leaders understand that without safety and quality, production output becomes meaningless. The balance is essential. I see many objective justification advocates focussing solely on grace, at the expense and neglect and even outright rejection of faith and Scripture, with faith being declared as a human work rather than a gift of God by the means of grace, and Scripture being replaced by man-made opinions and teachings. I encourage you to listen to the words. Is there a balance in the three solas, a basic teaching of Scripture, or is one being advanced and promoted over the others?
The basic simple teachings found in and coming from the Lutheran Confessions, such as the Apostles Creed and the three solas, were there for a purpose, to confess the truths of Scripture. Test what you see and hear against these simple basic teachings. Confusing terminology should be a warning sign that efforts are being made to convolute the truth. This is true in all aspects of life, not just theology. So-called experts who are enveloped in their own brilliance will seek to impress and confuse those who are beneath their level of intellect, with big words and contradictory logic. But the best teachers, the faithful teachers are those who profess truth in the simplest of terms.
Finally, I would point out that those who are the most ardent advocates of objective justification don't see this issue as just an issue of terminology.
Vernon
I too thought and felt like you at one time, that the issue of objective justification was nothing more than a dispute in terminology. But, as I listened and read and observed, I became convinced otherwise by the nagging feeling that long standing basic teachings were being changed or ignored. The three solas is a good example. Grace, Faith and Scripture, all are present and important in this basic teaching of Scripture. Minimizing one is taking away the full truth of Scripture. And that's what I witness many of the most vocal and ardent promoters of objective justification do. They minimize faith. And in the extreme cases, they even declare outright war on faith. But this isn't the language of the Bible. There is no minimization of faith in the Bible.
In my work, the manufacturing operation is driven to produce. Production is the life blood of manufacturing. But a wise leader always makes sure that he never emphasizes production output at the expense of safety or quality. The best manufacturing leaders always say, "We must produce, but we must produce safely and with the highest quality". The wise leaders understand that without safety and quality, production output becomes meaningless. The balance is essential. I see many objective justification advocates focussing solely on grace, at the expense and neglect and even outright rejection of faith and Scripture, with faith being declared as a human work rather than a gift of God by the means of grace, and Scripture being replaced by man-made opinions and teachings. I encourage you to listen to the words. Is there a balance in the three solas, a basic teaching of Scripture, or is one being advanced and promoted over the others?
The basic simple teachings found in and coming from the Lutheran Confessions, such as the Apostles Creed and the three solas, were there for a purpose, to confess the truths of Scripture. Test what you see and hear against these simple basic teachings. Confusing terminology should be a warning sign that efforts are being made to convolute the truth. This is true in all aspects of life, not just theology. So-called experts who are enveloped in their own brilliance will seek to impress and confuse those who are beneath their level of intellect, with big words and contradictory logic. But the best teachers, the faithful teachers are those who profess truth in the simplest of terms.
Finally, I would point out that those who are the most ardent advocates of objective justification don't see this issue as just an issue of terminology.
Vernon
 |
| This is clear enough for a Mequon graduate to comprehend, but too deep and complicated for LQ denizens. |
