 |
| Joshua Scheer |
Joshua Scheer got bent out of shape over my claim that "Steadfast" helped cover up the crimes of Darwin Schauer. Here is a list of some Darwin Schauer posts. I did not erase my posts, many of which were copied from "Steadfast Lutherans," not to mention others from LutherQuest (sic).
I was told that Matt Harrison ordered "Steadfast" to erase the thread on Schauer - and the thread was erased. Steadfast?
I blame the enablers far more than the criminals themselves. The LCMS put Schauer in a position to offend again, just as Joel Hochmuth's clever lawyer did for the WELS PR director. Forcing the erasing of the thread protects the synod and Schauer, not the victims of Schauer. But money talks.
Official LCMS policy is to shred all evidence of sex crimes, if a pastor took notes while interviewing someone.
I told Scheer he was just a cog in the wheel. Now he can be a hero to the UOJ Hive. The drones have no argument, no scholarship, and no integrity. That is evident in Snidely S. Snidely, aka Jim Pierce, who by God's grace (he says) turned from Pentecostalism to Atheism.
That is just one indication of how mixed up UOJ can be. Faith justifies, so a Pentecostal believer is justified by faith, forgiven his sins, even if he cares too much for CoWo and stage bands. An atheist is not forgiven.
As for frothing at the mouth whenever justification by faith is mentioned...I will let God sort that out.
UOJ has not been good for the Synodical Conference, from the migration of the Stephanite sex cult to the founding of Seminex by UOJ advocates like Richard Jungkuntz.
- February 20th, 2014 at 12:51 | #22Bryan Lidtke :
It seems as if you bring him up to completely discredit Mr. Meyer’s argument just because he agrees with Jackson. It sure seems like guilt by association, to me at least.That would be reading a motive into what I have written, but I can see how my words could be taken that way. So let me offer a quick explanation and I will leave it here. The reason to bring up Jackson is to warn others reading this thread where Mr. Meyers is getting this teaching and the similarities in the type of attacks he uses against the clear Scriptural teaching of Christ’s vicarious satisfaction made for the sins of all humanity. So, no. I do not intend to argue a “guilt by association” and have in fact given quite a few theological explanations as to where Mr. Meyer is in error. The purpose of mentioning Greg Jackson is to give the source of Mr. Meyer’s errors much like we point out if someone is teaching an error of John Calvin. To be clear, just because Meyer is a follower of Jackson’s doesn’t mean what he is saying here is false. No, what Meyer is saying here is false because it undermines the clear teachings of our Scriptures and the Confessions concerning the chief article, Justification.Hope that helps. - [GJ - Yes, this explains how Pierce continues to put down Brett Meyer, a serious student of the Word with his ignorant, snide, remarks - typical of all UOJ Enthusiasts. Pierce has no argument from the Scriptures, Luther, or the Book of Concord, so he must "warn" others not to read both sides on Ichabod. Who is afraid to quote the other side? Answer - Steadfast Pietists, LutherQueasies, Pope Paul McCain the Plagiarist, etc. etc. They do not trust the Word but fill the world with their inane ravings. We should trust them instead of the plain meaning of the Scriptures.]
- February 20th, 2014 at 13:56 | #23@Thomas #17
So we bring him up because he is by default wrong? That’s the impression I get from reading your comment, Thomas. I don’t have a problem with you taking offense from his comments, but he hasn’t been on *this* blog. Why bring him up? Defend your doctrine with a Scriptural argument instead of guilt by association. - February 20th, 2014 at 14:00 | #24@Jim Pierce #22
Thanks for the explanation! It makes sense to bring him up in your context, but I think Thomas’ comment above shows how it is made into guilt by association many times. It still confuses me as to why he must always be brought up into every single conversation as a way to discredit an argument, but that’s not your fault. - February 20th, 2014 at 14:53 | #25Joe Krohn :@Brett Meyer #18
Pr. Rydecki has ignored this request for months…maybe you can take a stab at it, Brett.
According to Is. 53: 6&11
“All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.”
And: “…by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.”
There is a correlation here of bearing all the sin or sins of men resulting in a justification (an objective one) of those whose sins He bore.No, I disagree. There is no resulting justification because Christ paid for the sins of the whole world. The reason is clearly taught in Scripture and confirmed in the Lutheran Confessions by declaring Christ is only apprehended as Mediator between God and man, and Propitiation for man’s sins, through the gracious, Holy Spirit created, faith in Christ alone.The false gospel of UOJ teaches that Christ actively mediated God’s wrath over the unbelieivng world’s sins before and without faith. That Christ stands as the unbelievers propitiation so that God the Father declares the unbelieving world righteous in Christ (while the unbelieving world is NOT in Christ) and therefore forgiven all sin (Justified) and saved.You contradict the Christian Book of Concord which clearly teaches:
80] AAC That We Obtain The Remission of Sins By Faith
Alone In Christ, “The wrath of God cannot be appeased if we set against it our own works, because Christ has been set forth as a Propitiator, so that, for His sake, the Father may become reconciled to us. But Christ is not apprehended as a Mediator except by faith. Therefore, by faith alone we obtain remission of sins when we comfort our hearts with confidence in the mercy promised for Christ’s sake.”
http://www.bookofconcord.org/defense_4_justification.phpNote this clear testimony of the Lutheran Church states God’s wrath cannot be appeased except by faith in Christ. Clearly within the timeframe that UOJ states God’s wrath was removed by the atonement of Christ regardless of the Holy Spirit working through the Means of Grace to work faith in Christ alone. No UOJ Subjective Justification mumbo jumbo, hocus pocus here.Yes, the doctrine of UOJ attempts to use Romans 5:18 , “Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life” as proof text for Objective Justification’s claim that the whole unbelieving world has been declared righteous by God’s omnipotent and divine verdict at the atonement of Christ. This is where OJ is rightly charged with Universalism because ‘justification of life’ is eternal life – eternal salvation. Not only does this passage not teach the false gospel of UOJ but it’s clearly taken out of context when the chapter begins with, “Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ: By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.which clearly declares individuals only being in God’s grace through faith. UOJ would have the world believe that God has declared the unbelieving world righteous and justified while not even being in His grace.Joe Krohn :@Brett Meyer #18
The bigger issue is a man un-justifying himself through un-faith since the gift of justification has come over all men.So Hell is full of justified and righteous unbelievers?
