Justification by Faith - Some Doctrinal Summaries

A. Biblical doctrine does not belong to a person or a synod. Nothing is decided by vote, except which political party has won for the moment.
B. The Book of Concord is a carefully worked out, unified, confession of faith - presenting the Christian Faith as believed, taught, and confessed.
C. The Book of Concord does not include every word spoken or written by Luther, but selections that convey the Biblical truths being discussed.
D. The Book of Concord commends the study of Luther's Galatians Commentary for those who want to pursue even more detail about justification by faith.
E. The use of "who takes away the sin of the world" for UOJ is thoroughly repudiated in the Galatians Commentary.
F. It is widely known but seldom admitted that justification in the Bible and in Luther has only one meaning - justification by faith.
G. Justification without faith - UOJ - is the bedrock dogma of Modernism, the mainline denominations. Participation by WELS-LCMS in ELCA means they are all happy together with their common unconfession of unfaith.
H. Richard Jungkuntz easily went from WELS UOJ Pietism into LCMS liberalism and pre-ELCA radicalism - as a UOJ Enthusiast and promoter of homosexual ordination.
I. WELS-LCMS-ELS Church Growth is based upon UOJ. The biggest loudmouths in favor of Church Growth are also UOJ buzzers.

Summary Statements about UOJ and Its Sordid History

1. "It is easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled." - Mark Twain
2. Universal Objective Justification was never taught by a respectable Lutheran, during the Reformation or after.
3. Samuel Huber, a "former" Calvinist, tried to impose his teaching of  righteousness without faith, but Leyser - an editor of the Book of Concord - and Hunnius utterly refuted him. Huber was deposed as a Lutheran teacher for advocating what dominates the SynCons today - and the "Steadfast" website.
4. Influenced by Calvinism and Unionism - Pietism at Halle University became the modern incubator of UOJ.
5. The single greatest source of UOJ was Pietism, through Halle University, which sent over so many leaders of American Lutheranism.
6. TLH hymn-writer Rambach (#298) advocated righteousness without faith. His interpretation of 1 Timothy 3:16 is used deliberately by UOJ to teach the Easter absolution of the world. He was a Halle Pietist.
7. Georg Christian Knapp's lectures were published in German and English, before Stephan landed his sex cult in New Orleans and Walther helped make him bishop-for-life. Knapp taught at Halle University, and Bishop Martin Stephan studied at Halle.
8. Knapp's lectures, still in print today, were influential in Europe and even more so in America, where all the mainline schools used his lectures in English.
9. The English translation made Leonard Woods, a Calvinist, famous. Woods coined - or at least franchised - the double-justification formula used so lovingly today.  Woods graduated from Andover Seminary and served as president of Bowdoin College.
10. Walther learned his UOJ from Martin Stephan, an event that "saved his life." Walther never departed from the Easter absolution of the entire world - without faith - of Halle and Stephan.
11. Stephan never graduated from a university and was not qualified to be a pastor.
12. Walther's training consisted of a rationalistic bachelor's degree and subordinating himself to two different abusive Pietistic sect leaders - Kuehn first, who died, and then Stephan.
13. Walther, his brother, Fuerbringer, the lawyers, and the leading clergy were all aware of Stephan's rampant adultery and unethical behavior. Would any of you Walther worshipers today be allowed to walk alone in the woods at 2 AM with a young woman? Would you take a mission call to another country, leave your dying wife and children, and take your mistresses along?
14. Walther and his snuck-in parrot, Pieper, gradually imposed UOJ on the LCMS. The Brief Statement of 1932 marked the beginning of the end. That opened the door to Unionism, the Biblical doubters, Pentecostalism, Church Growth, and Paul McCain. 
15. The Synodical Conference has been and continues to be double-focused. Many believe and teach Luther's justification by faith, without persecution. At the same time, certain assassins wig-out against the Biblical doctrine and make sure the person is ousted.
16. The LCMS still markets a justification by faith Small Catechism, the KJV catechism Over 2 million sold!
17. WELS used the Gausewitz (as others did) which also taught justification by faith. The cult replaced it with an "expanded and improved" one and then with the Kuske UOJ version. Papenfuss (best name in WELS) knew nothing about UOJ until he attended Mequon. That says a lot, don't it?
18. Robert Preus changed his position on UOJ, moving decidedly against it. Earlier he used quotations on both sides of the issue. His last book clearly repudiated UOJ. His sons remain clueless.

Logical Question on "Steadfast" - Where Luther's Gospel Is Rarely Heard

But Frosty Bivens says UOJ is the Chief Article.
The Book of Concord must be wrong.

1. 

   Stephen Kramer
   February 21st, 2014 at 02:27 | #1

   Reply | Quote

   Sven,

   I’ve been following this discussion with interest, but I’m not sure of something. You are quite offended that someone says you are teaching justification without faith. But I thought that was the whole point of Universal Objective Justification–that it is a universal gift of God and pronouncement of forgiveness on everyone. As Prof. Bivens (WELS) says in his essay: “If justification is universal, it must also be objective; sinners have been forgiven whether they believe it or not.” (www.wlsessays.net/files/BivensMessage.rtf‎)
   
   Whether they believe it or not. That means… even if they don’t believe it, right? Even if they don’t have faith?
   
   
   I don’t see how what you are saying you don’t say is compatible with what Prof. Bivens does say. I’m actually WELS and I know you’re not, but I don’t think that your confession here would be acceptable in the WELS. As Prof. Bivens writes: “justification is universal; sinners have been forgiven whether they believe it or not.”
   
   
   What am I missing? Also, I think you may have been too harsh on Mr. Meyers. Taking his words and actions in the kindest possible way, if he comes from a WELS background he may be expecting that your confession of the doctrine is compatible with the WELS confession of the doctrine (that justification is universal and sinners are forgiven even if they don’t believe it), since the doctrines share the same name and WELS/ELS and LCMS folks all seem to be in agreement on it in this discussion.
   
   
   I stand ready to be corrected if I’ve missed something! I was surprised by the harshness of your words, but it is quite possible that I am missing something and it’s all reasonable.

***