 |
| UOJ Enthusiasts devour this swill, from a Missouri professor who joined the Church of Rome after seeing a brilliant sunset - a sign from God to join the Pope! |
     Christian Schulz (Schulzcj) New member Username: Schulzcj Post Number: 13 Registered: 10-2012 |
I don't know if it's been brought up in this long discussion because I haven't followed it all the way through, but as far as "dealing with Scripture," what do you have to say about this paper? [GJ - Vernon Harley's paper] https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0U0GKIkUYsKNnlWe GFxTlhPMG8/edit?usp=sharing | ||
| Joe Krohn (Jekster) Intermediate Member Username: Jekster Post Number: 210 Registered: 4-2011 |
Harley denies the doctrine of objective justification just as ELDoNA does. Rydecki makes the same error as Harley by translating the two 'many' in Romans 5:19 as describing two different groups. All are called and few are the chosen, so why would you translate one of the 'many' to be just believers? The Bible never talks about believers as the many, but only few. To say that the two 'many' refers to two different groups, you would have to then change the meaning of Isaiah 53:11. I asked on Rydecki's Intrepid blog on more than one occasion to deal with Isaiah 53 in regard to his position and it never was. | ||
| Franz Linden (Franz_mann) Senior Member Username: Franz_mann Post Number: 1813 Registered: 12-2004 |
I read through the first several pages and found that there are many leaps in his explanations of the texts. For example, in discussing the Romans passage, he makes a big deal out of the context of a verse helping us to understand its meaning, but then leaps away from the immediate context of the verse to the context of the entire book. The extended context helps us in flow of thought, but it doesn't help us understand the precise meaning of a specific verse. It is a horrible way to do theology. A person could prove anything his sinful heart can imagine by Harley's method of hermeneutics. The whole paper is semi-Calvinism. Sorry, Mr. Schulz. Franz | ||
| Rev. David R. Boisclair (Drboisclair) Intermediate Member Username: Drboisclair Post Number: 436 Registered: 1-2002 |
Those of us, who are old duffers remember the controversy about the possibility of Dr. WAM, Jr. being elected SP in 1981. The rank and file synod wanted him to succeed J.A.O. Preus, but President Preus raised the legitimate concern of WAM's doctrine of Justification in his class on Romans. So, Vern Harley said that instead of the problem being WAM it is Objective Justification. His article in Christian News was "Problems with Objective Justification." R.C.H. Lenski is one that doesn't believe in the doctrine of Objective Justification either. This generation carries on with Jackson, Rydecki, and ELDoNA. | ||
| James Warble (Warble) Member Username: Warble Post Number: 158 Registered: 1-2013 |
Looking at the link above, and reading the 4 questions posed to the couples in Kokomo, Indiana, is this a proper way to speak? Do we speak of sainthood apart from faith? God forgives and declares the whole world whose sins Christ bore righteous at his resurrection. Yes. But is this the same as receiving the status of saints? I don't think so. I think a saint is one who is a member of the holy Christian Church, as we confess in the Creed. A saint is one who in faith receives God's declaration and so receives his status as saint. There is a distinction between righteous and holy, isn't there? | ||
| David Bickel (Drb) Advanced Member Username: Drb Post Number: 512 Registered: 11-2009 |
Luther's advice on election (Luther: Letters of Spiritual Counsel, Martin Luther, ed. & trans. Theodore G. Tappert, Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 2006): "… the highest of all God's commands is this, that we hold out before our eyes the image of his dear Son, our Lord Jesus Christ. Every day he should be our excellent mirror wherein we behold how much God loves us… In this way, I say, and in no other, does one learn how to deal properly with the question of predestination. It will be manifest that you believe in Christ. If you believe, then you are called. And if you are called, then you are most certainly predestined." (p. 116) "Do you believe what you hear in the preaching of the Word and do you accept it as the truth? … To have faith in him is to accept these things as true without any doubting. God has revealed himself to you. If you believe this, then you are to be numbered among his elect. Hold to this firmly in with assurance, and if you accept the God who is revealed, the hidden God will be given to you at the same time… If we cling to him, he will hold us fast, and he will tear us away from sin and death and will not let us fall." (pp. 133-134) "We should think of [Jesus Christ] daily and follow him. In him we shall find our election to be sure and pleasant, for without Christ everything is peril, death, and the devil, while in Christ is pure peace and joy. Nothing but anxiety can be gained from forever tormenting oneself with the question of election. Therefore, avoid and flee from such thoughts, as from the temptation of the serpent in paradise, and direct your attention to Christ." (pp. 137-138) Theology of the Cross: http://DawningRealm.com | ||
| Rev. David R. Boisclair (Drboisclair) Intermediate Member Username: Drboisclair Post Number: 437 Registered: 1-2002 |
I completely concur with James Warble about the Kokomo Theses. Jon Buchholz of WELS also finds fault with them, and he is from WELS! His essay is here. The provocative idea is that Judas in hell has the status of saint as do all those who are in hell. It comes from John P. Meyer's (WELS) 2 Corinthians commentary Ministers of Christ. Jon Buchholz a scholar DP in WELS writes in his paper (p. 40): Each of these statements is so poorly crafted that it cannot be accepted, regardless of authorship. Dr. Siegbert Becker, in an essay to Chicago area pastors, rightly lamented the poor choice of words, but he upheld the statements on principle. I would like him to have said, “Throw them out and start over!” The Kokomo Statements should be roundly rejected by the WELS as an incongruous mishmash. The rejection of these statements, as they are written, is not a repudiation of universal objective justification, which these statements pretend to defend. |
***
GJ - SpenerQuest posted the argument that everyone destroyed in Sodom has been given the status of a saint. That came from one of their regular ravers.
Typically, they flit from one person to another, their blessings resting on those who agree with their false doctrine, their curses falling on those (already forgiven!) who agree with Luther, Paul, and the Holy Spirit.
Three of the four Kokomo Theses come from J. P. Meyer's Ministers of Christ, recently reprinted by WELS with all the offensive passages left untouched - A. Panning (aka Panzer) - editor. The fourth one comes from a controversy between the Augustana Synod (justification by faith) and some Norwegians (UOJ).
SpenerQuesters do not know what they are talking about. When are they going to apologize for linking Paul McCain's Roman Catholic posts that were plagiarized from The Catholic Encyclopedia? He is the knave who extracts apologies from everyone spineless enough to kneel before him, but he never addresses his cowardly dishonesty.
PS - I met Vernon Harley and used his excellent essays in preparation for Thy Strong Word. I also quoted his translation of the early, German LCMS catechism that made no mention of UOJ - circa 1905.
Missouri never charged Harley with false doctrine. The conflict with WAM.2 was manufactured by LCMS President Jack Preus to make his brother Robert the president of the seminary. Apparently WAM.2 had the seminary presidency in the bag until he was publicly assaulted and humiliated by Jack.
The Robert Preus family cannot admit to the sandbagging job, not will they face the fact that Robert repudiated UOJ in Justification and Rome. Their dealing with his last book reminds me of Pentecostals dancing in the Spirit.
