Wednesday, January 7, 2015

Classic Ichabod - Jay Webber's Colleague, Roger Kovaciny, Puts Down His Grog to Deliver Another Famous Kovo Diatribe

Tuesday, October 12, 2010


Jay Webber's Colleague Roger Kovaciny Reminds Everyone How They All Worked For Floyd Luther Stolzenburg's Masonic CG Church




Roger Kovaciny (ex-WELS, ex-ELS) preached and taught at Stolzenburg's Masonic Church in Columbus, to raise money for Thoughts of Faith: John Shep (now ELCA) and Jay Webber (UOJ Stormtropper, ELS).


Prof. Roger Kovaciny has left a new comment on your post "Jay Webber, John Shep, DP Seifert, VP Kuske, Kovac...":

So many of your allegations are either outdated or incorrect that the only thing on your blog that I'll bother correcting is that you are an "independent" pastor. You're only "independent" in the sense that four congregations and four synods were glad to see the back of you don't want anything to do with Greg Jackson, ever again. Most of them allowed you to resign because it would have been so much trouble to force you to leave, and nobody thinks you're worth the trouble of blogging about. Virtually everybody would be happy if you'd just go away forever and if they would never see or hear from you again. I hope you don't think I bother reading your blog--somebody just told me I should check this particular article out. If anyone wants to know about your specific allegations, they know how to e-mail me. I'll let you know how many hundred queries I get.


The LCMS DP forced Stolzenburg to resign from his parish (Salem, Black Jack, Mo) - for cause. WELS knew he was ideal to promote the Church Growth Movement and set up an agency with Roger Zehms (also out of a parish and a marriage) for that very purpose.


Jay Webber had the Ukraine Seminary down so low that he was encouraged to leave. Enrollment went up afterwards. Now that's Church Growth. Shep, Webber, Kovaciny and ELS worked together to give Stolzenburg credibility as a "conservative" Lutheran pastor.
Isaiah 5:23 Who justify the wicked for a bribe, And take away justice from the righteous man!


UOJ is the false doctrine behind Church Growth and mainline apostasy. So Intrepids (sic) You Owe Jaya big thank-you for celebrating Reformation Month with a lengthy, smug, bilious attack on justification by faith.

---

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Jay Webber's Colleague Roger Kovaciny Reminds Ever...":

I'm curious to know if other people notice the thin, nearly translucent, skin of the UOJists and the Holy Mother Synod worshipers? It was a hallmark of these people on Bailing Water, Luther Quest[self sic], here on Ichabod and now again on Intrepid blog, to almost faint if one of their own clergy or theologians were shown to violate Christian doctrine using Scripture and the Confessions. Even if they were questioned on their confessionalism they would bristle. What has happened to these people that they do not seem to have a backbone to hear, discuss or in any way tolerate a person's opinion that does not 'glow' about the Synod or it's theologians. Pastor Rydecki has made it a talking point of concern "The risk of legitimizing the vitriol" Vitriol means, something highly caustic or severe in effect, as criticism. And what's the problem?... Some people and certainly myself have Scriptural and Confessional proof that (W)ELSians are teaching false doctrine. What is wrong with responding harshly to false doctrine and unrepentant false teachers? We get the same vitriol when the Synod worshipers respond in defense of these people and their doctrines. I don't see anyone on the Confessional side crying about this. Just strikes me as interesting and I chalk it up to their perversion of the central doctrine of Justification by faith alone but I'm curious if other people see it and may attribute it to something else.

By the way, the Intrepids and others have identified what they wish to call sloppy writing, sloppy theology, and overall less than ideal confession of doctrine but have any of these people identified as being sloppy ever corrected their sloppiness? Did Buchholz, Becker, Zarling, Webber, Rydecki, Preus, Seiltz, Humann, Rodmyre, Ski, Glende, etc. etc. etc.? None of them have retracted the "sloppy" theology. My point is that it's not sloppy theology. It's precise, exacting and purposeful, they intended to say exactly what was written and confessed. There's nothing sloppy about it. It wouldn't be so consistent if it was and they'd correct it if it was sloppy and inaccurate. Something to think about.

***

GJ - Jay Webber and Roger Kovaciny were engaged in propping up the Reformed doctrine of Church Growth 15-20 years ago.

I find the self-righteousness of the Neo-Pietists shameful.

The Tepid Lutherans have found the real enemy - not The SORE, not Church and Change - but those who teach justification by faith.

The Conference of Pussycats does not need to shut down the Tepids. The Tepids have already become Rottweilers for Church and Change. I could have tolerated their meandering, poor argumentation except they have chosen to guard Holy Mother Synod instead of the Word of God and the Confessions.

"My apologies. It's hard for me to keep my cool when the central doctrine of Scripture is being attacked. (Luther also had the same problem.) But that's no excuse. I'll be more respectful in the future.

Mr. Adam Peeler" (On the IL websty)

We know from Adam Peeler that they are not Bereans, but they are not Luthers either. Martin Luther taught justification by faith, not UOJ.

Their citation of Syn Conference writing is an excellent smoke screen, so that no one ventures too close to the Word.

The WELS Essay File is the Talmud of the Upper Midwest. Bow down.

Posted by Gregory Jackson at 4:27 PM   

Labels: 

Brett Meyer

4 years ago
 
Reading through the context of this quote on Page 4 of the letter it looks as though Weenaas was charging Preus with removing the Means of Grace from justification of the sinner and thus faith from justification - both of which Preus and the UOJists are guilty of. My reason for believing this is the phrase, "...who with his real contents brings..." Real contents are the Word and Baptism, the Means of Grace. I like the next paragraph which states, <i>"We have however already seen in the foregoing how unfounded the charge is that we disengage justification from faith and Christ since we base it precisely on Christ, his death and resurrection for our justification as fact which is to be proclaimed, <b>make it possible both that faith can be conceived through the blessed message and that faith can grasp and appropriate it</b> to oneself to his comfort, all of which is an impossibility according to the professor's assertion. <b>Because what does not exist as a fact cannot justifiably be proclaimed or believed as such.</b> So it is therefore apparent that it is actually Professor Weenaas who subverts the basis of justification, Christ, by his doctrine, and faith as the means by which it is reckoned and in this way destroys justification itself."</i> The bold section is typical UOJ denegration of the Holy Spirit's faith. It is as much to say, "faith can't possibly cling to a promise of something that isn't already a reality - it goes against all reason" This is also taught by the current false teachers who schlep UOJ to the sleeping laity. Having read this letter I find myself enthralled with the confessionalism of Weenaas and appalled at the apostacy of Preus! Additional information on Professor August Weenaas. http://www.friendsofthecemetery.org/history/alley_articles/Weenaas_August.shtml http://books.google.com/books?id=yI0cAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA847&dq=weenaas&lr=&ei=G_SaS-nHI4TmlASljrTOCQ&cd=11#v=onepage&q=weenaas&f=false
Show less

LPC

4 years ago
 
B.M. Here is the quote from Herman Preus who quotes Weenaas. Weenaas appears to have charged H Preaus of viewing faith as <b>"not a personal act of God, who with his real contents brings an actual, new personal relationship."</b> So according to this quote Weenaas charged Preus of misunderstanding the nature of saving faith. LPC

Brett Meyer

4 years ago
 
LPC, I agree with you. I'm not sure what you mean by, "...as a creation of God from nothing." Can you provide a quote? Yes, H.A. Preus was horrible in his apostacy and fortunately for us he was as unashamed as Siegbert W. Becker and very clear and plain in his promotion of UOJ. Today's persistent UOJ defenders are wiley and deceptive. Case in point, the (W)ELS This We Believe declares the whole world righteous in Christ before and without faith. The Universalists ignore this glaring false doctrine. It's time the laity engage this false central doctrine head on.

LPC

4 years ago
 
B.M. Additionally, the late Preus here muddied the waters and seems to me engaged in propaganda by misrepresenting Weenaas view of faith. From the article, Weenaas viewed justifying faith as a creation of God from nothing. This is Bibilical for in 2 Cor 5:17. Faith in Scripture is never trivial, but in UOJ it is, there is nothing to it. LPC

LPC

4 years ago
 
Brett, I re-read, and Prof. Weenaas saw the heart of this a hundred years ago and his points were just as valid and even penetrating as it is today. LPC

Brett Meyer

4 years ago
 
Cont... But now how does the professor prove again this doctrine of his of faith as such a condition? As far as I can see from his confusing reasoning, with the following two reasons: a) that "God's regenerating act in Baptism and the sustenance of the Lord's Supper and the act of incorporating into Christ are only present where there is faith" and b) that a person is justified by faith alone. Now concerning the first of these reasons, it does not hold water. The professor's comparison does not apply. Because the acts of God mentioned in Baptism and the Lord's Supper which the professor calls "re-generation" and "renewal" in another place, cannot be separated from faith, because they indicate the saving effects of Baptism and the Lord's Supper which cannot occur except in connection with faith. But God's act of forgiving sin, which is the same thing as God proclaiming and promising a sinner's forgiveness, is different from the effects of this act and can occur without this occurring, therefore also without faith being there. The effect of God's sin-forgiving act, which consists in this, that the sinner has the forgiveness of sins and justification as his personal possession and his heart's treasure, cannot be where there is no faith. On the other hand, Baptism and the Lord's Supper are "for the remission of sins," and God gives the forgiveness of sins through these Sacraments as well as through the Gospel and absolution even if the unbeliever despises the grace and thereby brings judgment upon himself. But when the professor says: "No absolution of God is given through the Means of Grace except through faith," then, all things considered, he also denies the divine power of the Sacraments and in a Calvinistic manner makes them empty symbols without content. Page 11 http://www.christforus.org/Papers/Content/HermanAmbergPreusonJustificationofWorld.htm Brett Meyer - There are so many more UOJ quotations from 1874 that are in harmony with all current confessions labeled "sloppy" by the UOJ apologists. Highly recommend studying this letter in light of Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions. Prof. Weenaas is faithful to Christ. Pres. H.A. Preus wars against Christ and His Church in his confession and teaching. This is still true today in those who teach, promote and defend Universal Objective Justification.
Show less

Brett Meyer

4 years ago
 
Cont... But now how does the professor prove again this doctrine of his of faith as such a condition? As far as I can see from his confusing reasoning, with the following two reasons: a) that "God's regenerating act in Baptism and the sustenance of the Lord's Supper and the act of incorporating into Christ are only present where there is faith" and b) that a person is justified by faith alone. Now concerning the first of these reasons, it does not hold water. The professor's comparison does not apply. Because the acts of God mentioned in Baptism and the Lord's Supper which the professor calls "re-generation" and "renewal" in another place, cannot be separated from faith, because they indicate the saving effects of Baptism and the Lord's Supper which cannot occur except in connection with faith. But God's act of forgiving sin, which is the same thing as God proclaiming and promising a sinner's forgiveness, is different from the effects of this act and can occur without this occurring, therefore also without faith being there. The effect of God's sin-forgiving act, which consists in this, that the sinner has the forgiveness of sins and justification as his personal possession and his heart's treasure, cannot be where there is no faith. On the other hand, Baptism and the Lord's Supper are "for the remission of sins," and God gives the forgiveness of sins through these Sacraments as well as through the Gospel and absolution even if the unbeliever despises the grace and thereby brings judgment upon himself. But when the professor says: "No absolution of God is given through the Means of Grace except through faith," then, all things considered, he also denies the divine power of the Sacraments and in a Calvinistic manner makes them empty symbols without content. Page 11 http://www.christforus.org/Papers/Content/HermanAmbergPreusonJustificationofWorld.htm Brett Meyer - There are so many more UOJ quotations from 1874 that are in harmony with all current confessions labeled "sloppy" by the UOJ apologists. Highly recommend studying this letter in light of Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions. Prof. Weenaas is faithful to Christ. Pres. H.A. Preus wars against Christ and His Church in his confession and teaching. This is still true today in those who teach, promote and defend Universal Objective Justification.
Show less

Brett Meyer

4 years ago
 
To further my contention that the (W)ELS central doctrine of UOJ is not a fruit of sloppy theological language but a calculated and precise doctrine detailing a false man made gospel I quote from Herman A. Preus. President H. A. Preus had his response published in the February 13, 1874 issue of the Evangelisk Luthersk Kirketidende. While Professor Weenaas considers “rational orthodoxy” and spiritual “exclusivism” the “heart and soul” of Wisconsinism ...When he now goes on to enumerate and to treat these things as only "offsprings" of those, then we can conclude already by what right the professor attributes to us these new signs of our synod's "Wisconsinism." As the first of these off-springs the professor counts “the justification of the world” or as it is more often called, objective, universal justification. By this we understand that by raising Christ from the dead God declares him righteous and at the same time acknowledges and declares all people, the whole world, whose Representative and Substitute Jesus Christ was in his resurrection and victory as well as in his suffering and tribulation ("He was delivered for our offenses and raised for our justification"), as free from guilt and punishment, and righteous in Christ Jesus. Page 2 <b>But it could not possibly be the will of God </b>that anyone should believe it and comfort himself with it, if it had not taken place, if the world was not freed from condemnation through the death and resurrection of Christ and acquitted of its sin and guilt and declared righteous. Page 4 Thus 2) <b>the Gospel no longer becomes the Good News which bestows the forgiveness of sins and justification and thereby works faith</b> which appropriates this gift to itself, but it becomes a new law which demands faith from man for complete satisfaction. <b>And 3) faith becomes not the poor sinner's hand which merely grasps and makes one's own what is already prepared and at hand, namely God's love, conferring of grace, forgiveness of sins and justification, but it becomes a fulfilling of the new law, a work of man or a new quality in him who has such a power and merit</b> in himself that it finishes the work of redemption begun by Christ and works a change in God's heart so that now he lets his wrath cease, becomes reconciled with the believer, loves, confers grace and justifies him. Page 7 cont...
Show less

Brett Meyer

4 years ago
 
Thanks for commenting on this Scott. I think you're right and the statements from the Preus clan in defense of Herman A. Preus and his blasphemous UOJ confession toward faithful Prof. Weenaas is additional proof of your contention. http://www.christforus.org/Papers/Content/HermanAmbergPreusonJustificationofWorld.htm This is another regurgitation of UOJ speak that is similar to the Buchholz 2005 Convention essay and that of Siegbert W. Becker. More proof that what is being identified as sloppy theological language is actually precise, consistent and exacting confession of Universalism. The fact that someone denies that they teach Universalism means nothing when the words they strung together into sentences, paragraphs and essays form a confession which declare and teach it.

LutherRocks

4 years ago
 
If a former proponent of deformed rock and roll church can turn from error, they too can correct their errors. It's called manning up. Its been a struggle for me since the day my pastor told me that he felt our band was affecting the growth of our church. And the struggle is probably just beginning since I am still a member of WELS and the outlook for confessional change is dim. But with God all things are possible. Kudos to all of you who hang out around these parts and remain true to God's word and are willing to publicly proclaim it. JK

LPC

4 years ago
 
Joe, I plugged you bro. LPC

Brett Meyer

4 years ago
 
Cont... Note here UOJists - God is not reconciled before faith,<i><b> "37] Neither is love present before reconciliation has been made by faith.</b> For without Christ the Law [God's Law or the First Commandment] is not performed, according to [Eph. 2:18; 3:12 ] Rom. 5:2: By Christ we have access to God. And this faith grows gradually and throughout the entire life, struggles with sin [is tested by various temptations] in order to overcome sin and death."</i> Without obtaining Christ through faith, graciously worked by the Holy Ghost through the Means of Grace, there is no reconciliation to God. Unbelievers remain under His wrath and condemnation unless God calls them to contrition and faith. The BOC, "71]<i><b> but we maintain this, that properly and truly, by faith itself, we are for Christ's sake accounted righteous, or are acceptable to God.</b></i> And because "to be justified" means that out of unjust men just men are made, or born again, it means also that they are pronounced or accounted just." http://www.bookofconcord.org/defense_4_justification.php Luther confesses, "29. You cannot extricate yourself from unbelief, nor can the Law do it for you. All your works in intended fulfillment of the Law must remain works of the Law and <i><b>powerless to justify in the sight of God, who regards as just only believing children</b></i>." http://www.trinitylutheranms.org/MartinLuther/MLSermons/Galatians4_1_7.html Again, UOJ does not stand but is evicerated by God's Word, the completely faithful Lutheran Confessions and Martin Luther. Wither and die UOJ! How's that for virtriol Pastor Rydecki. Note that I condemn the doctrine only. It is God who condemns false teachers. I would that false teachers would, by the grace of God, read, mark, learn and inwardly digest God's pure Word, turn in contrition to God and receive forgiveness through faith alone in Christ. And as a fruit of the Holy Spirit's faith, correct the horrid error that they have been teaching men, women and children. Amen.
Show less

Brett Meyer

4 years ago
 
I wanted to post a response to Joe Krohn. I am truly thankful to God the Father, Son and Holy Ghost that He has led you to a faithful and confessional foundation built on the Word. It is this foundation which you earnestly promote and defend. Take heart in the Lord, He provides everything we need, when we need it. If God be for you, who can be against you?! Your discussion with Pastor Webber will be helped by the BOC section on Repentance in the Defense of the Augsburg Confession. Here is but a small section which condemns Pastor Webber's Universalist UOJ confession that, "just as <b>the gospel itself also proclaims forgiveness to all men in the whole world</b> and exempts no one from this universal context." October 10, 2010 7:59 PM And here, "But the statement itself was a statement about Christ's <b>removal</b> and carrying off <b>of the sins of the whole world</b>, and not only the sins of those disciples." Book of Concord, The Defense of the Augsburg Confession, Repentance: 35] We therefore add as the second part of repentance, Of Faith in Christ, that in these terrors the Gospel concerning Christ ought to be set forth to consciences, in which Gospel the remission of sins is freely promised concerning Christ. Therefore, they ought to believe that for Christ's sake 36] sins are freely remitted to them. This faith cheers, sustains, and quickens the contrite, according to Rom. 5:1: Being justified by faith, we have peace with God. This faith obtains the remission of sins. This faith justifies before God, as the same passage testifies: Being justified by faith. This faith shows the distinction between the contrition of Judas and Peter, of Saul and of David. The contrition of Judas or Saul is of no avail, for the reason that to this there is not added this faith, which apprehends the remission of sins, bestowed as a gift for Christ's sake. Accordingly, the contrition of David or Peter avails, because to it there is added faith, which apprehends the remission of sins granted for Christ's sake. <b>37] Neither is love present before reconciliation has been made by faith.</b> For without Christ the Law [God's Law or the First Commandment] is not performed, according to [Eph. 2:18; 3:12 ] Rom. 5:2: <b>By Christ we have access to God.</b> And this faith grows gradually and throughout the entire life, struggles with sin [is tested by various temptations] in order to overcome sin and death. 38] But love follows faith, as we have said above. And thus filial fear can be clearly defined as such anxiety as has been connected with faith, i.e., where faith consoles and sustains the anxious heart. It is servile fear when faith does not sustain the anxious heart [fear without faith, where there is nothing but wrath and doubt]. http://www.bookofconcord.org/defense_10_repentance.php Cont...
Show less

Scott E. Jungen

4 years ago
 
Brett, I too have noticed the thin skin on some WELS folk. I believe it is something that Pastor Jackson mentioned awhile back. It's the lack of critical thinking skills taught in WELS schools. I noticed that back in my DMLC days. I once stood on a desk to make a point in class. Many of my classmates just sat there. They had no concept of anything other than sitting with pencils and notebooks at the ready. I wanted to discuss and probe, they wanted to have their heads filled with information for the test. I'm sure it was the same at Northwestern, and I KNOW it's the same at WLS. Gee, no wonder I didn't always get along so well at DMLC! I believe it's also what I call WELS inter-breeding. My dad was a pastor, and he taught X, how could dad be wrong? Uncle Bob helped write "This We Believe", so of course the whole world, sinners and all, have been redeemed. My brother is a DP, so he's got to be doctinally correct. Scott E. Jungen
Show less

Brett Meyer

4 years ago
 
I'm curious to know if other people notice the thin, nearly translucent, skin of the UOJists and the Holy Mother Synod worshipers? It was a hallmark of these people on Bailing Water, Luther Quest[self sic], here on Ichabod and now again on Intrepid blog, to almost faint if one of their own clergy or theologians were shown to violate Christian doctrine using Scripture and the Confessions. Even if they were questioned on their confessionalism they would bristle. What has happened to these people that they do not seem to have a backbone to hear, discuss or in any way tolerate a person's opinion that does not 'glow' about the Synod or it's theologians. Pastor Rydecki has made it a talking point of concern "The risk of legitimizing the vitriol" Vitriol means, <i>something highly caustic or severe in effect, as criticism.</i> And what's the problem?... Some people and certainly myself have Scriptural and Confessional proof that (W)ELSians are teaching false doctrine. What is wrong with responding harshly to false doctrine and unrepentant false teachers? We get the same vitriol when the Synod worshipers respond in defense of these people and their doctrines. I don't see anyone on the Confessional side crying about this. Just strikes me as interesting and I chalk it up to their perversion of the central doctrine of Justification by faith alone but I'm curious if other people see it and may attribute it to something else. By the way, the Intrepids and others have identified what they wish to call sloppy writing, sloppy theology, and overall less than ideal confession of doctrine but have any of these people identified as being sloppy ever corrected their sloppiness? Did Buchholz, Becker, Zarling, Webber, Rydecki, Preus, Seiltz, Humann, Rodmyre, Ski, Glende, etc. etc. etc.? None of them have retracted the "sloppy" theology. My point is that it's not sloppy theology. It's precise, exacting and purposeful, they intended to say exactly what was written and confessed. There's nothing sloppy about it. It wouldn't be so consistent if it was and they'd correct it if it was sloppy and inaccurate. Something to think about.
Show less

LutherRocks

4 years ago
 
Since you're talking about Pastor Webber, I have posted my answer to a question he asked me on Intrepid Lutherans here: http://lutherrocks7.blogspot.com/ I am back to blogging, but I doubt I will be posting as much as I used to. It would be great to get a plug by posting this. JK

Brett Meyer

4 years ago
 
Pastor Jay Webber is commenting in defense of UOJ on the Intrepid blog. LPC and I have discussed UOJ with (W)ELS Pastor Webber on Extra Nos blog before. Here's a gem that Pastor Webber teaches and is at the core of the UOJ doctrine (a new man made gospel of righteousness declared by God to the unbelieving world without faith and without the Means of Grace): Pastor Jay Webber (W)ELS, "In Christ, <b>as God looks at the world through Christ, all are under divine mercy and are forgiven,</b> and are therefore invited to believe and be saved. But outside of Christ, <b>as God looks at the world apart from Christ, all are under divine wrath and judgment, and are condemned.</b> <i>The same people - namely all people - are under consideration in each case</i>." I called Pastor Webber on the UOJ teaching that unbelievers are under divine mercy and forgiven and believers are under God's condemnation and he stated, <i><b>"Of course the Bible does not say exactly this in so many words.</b></i> But the basic point is reflected here: "For 

Brett Meyer

4 years ago
 
Pastor Jay Webber is commenting in defense of UOJ on the Intrepid blog. LPC and I have discussed UOJ with (W)ELS Pastor Webber on Extra Nos blog before. Here's a gem that Pastor Webber teaches and is at the core of the UOJ doctrine (a new man made gospel of righteousness declared by God to the unbelieving world without faith and without the Means of Grace): Pastor Jay Webber (W)ELS, "In Christ, <b>as God looks at the world through Christ, all are under divine mercy and are forgiven,</b> and are therefore invited to believe and be saved. But outside of Christ, <b>as God looks at the world apart from Christ, all are under divine wrath and judgment, and are condemned.</b> <i>The same people - namely all people - are under consideration in each case</i>." I called Pastor Webber on the UOJ teaching that unbelievers are under divine mercy and forgiven and believers are under God's condemnation and he stated, <i><b>"Of course the Bible does not say exactly this in so many words.</b>

Brett Meyer

4 years ago
 
Pastor Jay Webber is commenting in defense of UOJ on the Intrepid blog. LPC and I have discussed UOJ with (W)ELS Pastor Webber on Extra Nos blog before. Here's a gem that Pastor Webber teaches and is at the core of the UOJ doctrine (a new man made gospel of righteousness declared by God to the unbelieving world without faith and without the Means of Grace): Pastor Jay Webber (W)ELS, "In Christ, <b>as God looks at the world through Christ, all are under divine mercy and are forgiven,</b> and are therefore invited to believe and be saved. But outside of Christ, <b>as God looks at the world apart from Christ, all are under divine wrath and judgment, and are condemned.</b> <i>The same people - namely all people - are under consideration in each case</i>." I called Pastor Webber on the UOJ teaching that unbelievers are under divine mercy and forgiven and believers are under God's condemnation and he stated, <i><b>"Of course the Bible does not say exactly this in so many words.</b></i> But the basic point is reflected here: "For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all" (Romans 11:32)." http://extranos.blogspot.com/2010/03/grinding-my-ax.html Sloppy theological language? Poor theological training? NO, it is precise and consistent from one modern Lutheran [sic] theologian to the next. It is the basis for the false doctrine of UOJ.

Posted by Ichabod the Glory Has Departed at 5:51 AM
Labels: , , , ,