 |
| My great-uncle Fritz is amused by people promising grace without the Means of Grace, justification without faith. |
http://steadfastlutherans.org/?p=35105
A Statement on Justification from the ACLC
February 14th, 2014
Categories:Pastor David Jay Webber
Rules for comments on this site:
Engage the contents and substance of the post. Rabbit trails and side issues do not help the discussion of the topics. Our authors work hard to write these articles and it is a disservice to them to distract from the topic at hand. If you have a topic you think is important to have an article or discussion on, we invite you to submit a request through the "Ask a Pastor" link or submit a guest article.
Provide a valid email address. If you’re unwilling to do this, we are unwilling to let you comment.
Provide at least your first name. Please try to come up with a unique name; if you have a common name add something to it so you aren't confused with another user. We have several "john"'s already for example. If you have a good reason to use a fake name, please do so but realize that the administrators of the site expect a valid email address and also reserve the right to ask you for your name privately at any time.
If you post as more than one person from the same IP address, we’ll block that address.
Do not engage in ad hominem arguments. We will delete such comments, and will not be obligated to respond to any complaints (public or private ones) about deleting your comments.
Interaction between people leaving comments ought to reflect Christian virtue, interaction that is gracious and respectful, not judging motives. If error is to be rebuked, evidence of the error ought to be provided.
We reserve the right to identify and deal with trollish behavior as we see fit and without apology. This may include warnings (public or private ones) or banning.
Engage the contents and substance of the post. Rabbit trails and side issues do not help the discussion of the topics. Our authors work hard to write these articles and it is a disservice to them to distract from the topic at hand. If you have a topic you think is important to have an article or discussion on, we invite you to submit a request through the "Ask a Pastor" link or submit a guest article.Provide a valid email address. If you’re unwilling to do this, we are unwilling to let you comment.
Provide at least your first name. Please try to come up with a unique name; if you have a common name add something to it so you aren't confused with another user. We have several "john"'s already for example. If you have a good reason to use a fake name, please do so but realize that the administrators of the site expect a valid email address and also reserve the right to ask you for your name privately at any time.
If you post as more than one person from the same IP address, we’ll block that address.
Do not engage in ad hominem arguments. We will delete such comments, and will not be obligated to respond to any complaints (public or private ones) about deleting your comments.
Interaction between people leaving comments ought to reflect Christian virtue, interaction that is gracious and respectful, not judging motives. If error is to be rebuked, evidence of the error ought to be provided.
We reserve the right to identify and deal with trollish behavior as we see fit and without apology. This may include warnings (public or private ones) or banning.
Pastor Webber, thanks for your response. If I understand you correctly, the different phrases change the timing of justification, and would you agree that either “because of Jesus” or “in Jesus” does not change thedeclaration itself, that Jesus and all people are declared righteous?
At a very basic level, without objective justification there is no absolution. It cannot be offered to everyone if it is not objectively true.
Just looking at the basic definitions of Justification & Sanctification,their differences between the two, it seems pretty simple & basic to me. I’ve read many of these papers, for both sides. I see alot of names I do not know, but Scripture in It’s context, as we are taught to take it & use it, appears to be very lacking. Can either side, only allowed to use Scripture first, & only Luther, second, lay out the issues?
To state what should be obvious: “justification by faith alone” also does not mean justification without faith.
526. There are three persons and one God, who has given himself to us wholly and perfectly, with all that he is, and all that he possesses. The Father gives himself to us, with heaven and earth, together with every other creature, in order that they may serve us, and contribute to our necessities. But through the fall of Adam, this gift is obscured and rendered unavailable. For this reason, the Son afterwards gave himself also to us, he bestowed upon us all his works, his sufferings, his wisdom and righteousness, and reconciled us with the Father, by which we, living and restored again, might know and possess the Father also with his gifts.
527. But because this grace would be accessible to no one, if it remained confined so profoundly, and could not come to us, the Holy Ghost therefore descends to us and bestows himself wholly and entirely; he teaches us to know this beneficence of Christ which has been manifested to us; he helps us to receive and preserve it, to use and impart it effectually, to increase and extend it: internally, by faith and other spiritual gifts, but externally through the gospel, through baptism, and the Sacrament of the Altar, by which he comes to us, as through three media or means, and exercises the sufferings of Christ in us, and employs it for the promotion of salvation.
“God doesn’t first justify all people, and then impute the righteousness of Christ to those who believe.”
“And may God judge between us and those who condemn our Christian (sic) confession.”
This “debate” reminds me of a church I visited while traveling a couple of years ago. The retired snow-bird meddling pastor was teaching a bible class, claiming the Bible is full of “if and then” statements. He claimed the 3rd article of the creed was actually only about redemption. He essentially argued eldona’s justification, faith in faith.