Ichabod, The Glory Has Departed: Facebook Debate Separates Sound Doctrine from the Deceptions of UOJ, Revealing the Gospel versus Halle Rationalism

Thursday, May 22, 2014

Facebook Debate Separates Sound Doctrine from the Deceptions of UOJ,
Revealing the Gospel versus Halle Rationalism

Todd Wilken shared a link.

"All theology is pastoral theology. We must not forget this. Doctrine has no place being discussed among ivory tower theologians if it cannot be preached all the way from the pulpit to the deathbed." -Anthony Voltattorni

The Necessity of Preaching Objective Justification

alienrighteousness.org

13Like · · Share

Glenn Niemann, Charles P. Schaum, Gaven Mize and 61 others like this.
Jim Schulz The doctrine on which the church stands or falls is not Objective Justification. It is Objective AND Subjective Justification, or in other words, justification by faith alone.

14 hours ago · Like · 2
Gregory J Schultz No, the doctrine on which the Church stands or falls is *justification.* The symbols use neither those words (OJ or SJ) nor the definition of those words.

14 hours ago · Like · 6
Paul Rydecki "Through the resurrection of Christ God declared that He has accepted Christ’s work of redeeming the sinful world. Therefore, Christ’s resurrection is God’s declaration of the justification of the entire world of sinners." The conclusion is not supported by the premise. God's acceptance of the work of Christ does not equal or result in the justification of all sinners, nor does Rom. 4:25 say or teach this, as Rom. 4:24 makes abundantly clear, "...It shall be imputed to us who believe in Him who raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead,"

13 hours ago · Unlike · 4
Gregory L. Jackson The Halle Pietists agree with the blog and Wilken.

13 hours ago · Like
Jim Pierce An excellent quotation from our Confession in the article: "The human race is truly redeemed and reconciled with God through Christ, who has merited with His innocent obedience, suffering, and death, both the righteousness that avails before God and eternal life” (FC SD XI: 15)."

Indeed, it certainly follows from that "...if we do not have Objective Justification right, then all other matters in the life of the church falls apart." IOW, if Christ has not "truly redeemed and reconciled" the human race with God, then there is nothing to receive by faith. "[T]hen all other matters in the life of the church falls apart."

12 hours ago · Edited · Like · 1
Paul Rydecki Jim, Jesus promises, "Whoever believes in the Son has everlasting life" (Jn. 3:36). Are you saying that the Son is not a trustworthy object of faith?

12 hours ago · Like
Jim Schulz My point is: there are not two doctrines of justification, i.e. 1) Objective Justification and 2) Subjective Justification. But there is only one doctrine of justification which must include the three solas: grace, faith, and Scripture. The Roman Catholic Church teaches a doctrine of justification, but it includes good works combined with faith. Evangelicalism teaches a doctrine of justification, but it excludes Word and Sacrament as the exclusive means by which God delivers his grace through faith. Therefore the doctrine on which the church stands or falls is justification, which is by grace through faith worked through Word and Sacrament. It's a package deal.

12 hours ago · Like
Andy Jurgen Kaut You'll note the author did not pit objective vs. Subjective, but rather the objective nature of justification vs. Silence. Let's thank god there are pastors that take their duties seriously...

12 hours ago · Like
Jim Pierce Pr. Paul Rydecki, I am not and I don't know how you could draw such an inference from my statement.

Pr. Jim Schulz, I don't know why your point would be "there are not two doctrines of justification" because by now you should know that the LC-MS, which teaches Objective Justification, doesn't confess the red herring you, and the detractors of OJ, constantly raise up. Furthermore, the article cited above doesn't teach "two doctrines of justification." It baffles me how one who claims to confess OJ, along with his synod, has such a problem with the teaching.

12 hours ago · Like
Daniel Baker “God does not wait for men to reconcile Him with themselves by means of any efforts of their own. He is already reconciled."

The first sentence is true. It does not, however, prove the second. To the contrary, the Confessions tell us that the "the unbelieving and unconverted...person is not reconciled to God” (FC:SD:IV:8). Indeed, as our Lord Himself tells us, the wrath of God abides on these individuals (Saint John 3:36).

The problem with UOJ fanatics is that they fuss about Sacred Scripture's emphasis on faith as if faith is man's work. Faith is not a work of man, but rather a work of God. It's okay to say it's necessary for justification because it's a component required and provided by God.

"The fullness of the Gospel itself is made contingent upon the reception of it, and so it is no Gospel at all,"

I guess someone forgot to give our Lord and His Holy Apostles the memo.

"He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God."

"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned."

"Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost."

11 hours ago · Edited · Like · 2
Christian Schulz There's no such thing as "objective justification" or "subjective justification" -- subject justification, according to UOJ, meaning that believing in "objective justification" you are then justified subjectivelyand personally. There's only justification by faith in Christ. Simple as that.

11 hours ago · Edited · Like · 2
Nicholas Kandoll Romans 5:18 ESV

Therefore, as one trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men.

10 hours ago · Like
Daniel Baker "It is considered and understood to be the same thing when Paul says (a) we are “justified by faith” (Romans 3:28) or (b) “faith is counted as righteousness” (Romans 4:5) and when he says (c) “by the one man’s obedience the many will be made righteous” (Romans 5:19) or (d) “so one act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all men” (Romans 5:18). Faith justifies not because it is such a good work or because it is so beautiful a virtue. It justifies because it lays hold of and accepts Christ’s merit in the promise of the Holy Gospel. For this merit must be applied and become ours through faith, if we are to be justified by it. Therefore, the righteousness that is credited to faith or to the believer out of pure grace is Christ’s obedience, suffering, and resurrection, since He has made satisfaction for us to the Law and paid for ‹expiated› our sins" (FC:SD:III:9-14).

10 hours ago · Like · 1
Christian Schulz As if Scripture weren't clear enough, I appeal to Gerhard:http://www.intrepidlutherans.com/.../johann-gerhard-on...

Intrepid Lutherans: Johann Gerhard on Romans 5:18
www.intrepidlutherans.com

Thank you, Rev. Rydecki, for translating these. I hope you have more in the hopp... See More

10 hours ago · Like · 1
Christian Schulz Ignore me (well, not entirely). Listen to the Confessions as posted by Daniel. When you have to manipulate what the Confessions clearly confess, then you might not be a Lutheran or even Christian.

10 hours ago · Edited · Like
Christian Schulz I honestly just love how clear the Confessions put it. We can shove the Brief Statement down our throats but the Confessions/Scripture will reign. You'll only get UOJ if you don't independently consult Scripture.

10 hours ago · Like
Jonathan Mayer Denying UOJ simply because Scripture and the Confessions don't use "objective" and "subjective" in their discussion of justification is about as valid as saying that homosexuality is okay because Jesus didn't verbally condemn it. UOJ is taught in Scripture and in the Confessions. It's an exegetical error to apply one definition of justification to every instance of the word, regardless of context, in order to avoid straining human logic.

8 hours ago · Like · 3
Daniel Baker I'd like to know in what universe Scripture and the Confessions' clear testimony that all sinners are not righteous in God's sight but rather abide under His wrath and condemnation until they are declared righteous through God-given faith alone is a lie from the "pit of hell." If anything is from the pit of hell, it's such asinine rhetoric.

8 hours ago · Like · 1
Paul Rydecki So now it's a "lie from the pit of hell" to teach that "all are sinners and are justified solely by faith in Christ"? That's what I teach. That's what Luther taught. That's what the Scriptures teach. Sinners are either justified by works, or by faith in Christ. Only those two possibilities. And the works route isn't valid for sinners anyway. Justified by faith alone in Christ alone. Apparently the new doctrine of demons.

8 hours ago · Like · 1
Jim Schulz Erich, beautiful indeed when your g-grandfather said: "What is the Gospel? We quickly answer: It is the good news of salvation, the glad tidings of the gracious remission of sin through faith, which is in Christ Jesus."

8 hours ago · Like
Jonathan Mayer Pr. Rydecki, it isn't the "by faith in Christ" statement that is from the pit of hell. It's the heresy you serve on the side. Namely, that "if you don't have faith, you aren't justified."

8 hours ago · Like
Paul Rydecki This is getting bizarre. What do you think "justified by faith in Christ" means, if you're actually justified *not by faith in Christ*? Either faith is the instrument of justification, or it isn't. You can't have it both ways. If you want to say all people are justified (whether they believe in Christ or not), then please stop saying that justification is by faith. You're just confusing people.

8 hours ago · Like · 2
Dagan Siepert So...We are justified by faith alone in Christ but it is a lie from the pit of hell to say 'if you don't have faith, you aren't justified'? That rhetoric makes absolutely no sense.

8 hours ago · Like · 3
***

GJ - People complain that debating on Facebook is a waste of time. Nevertheless, this particular debate clearly showed the difference between the Gospel and that philosophy taught by the syphilitic founder of the LCMS (Stephan) and his enforcer (Walther).