Intrepid Lutherans - Comments
Joe,
Many consider John 3:16 to be the heart of the Gospel. John 3:16 says "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." That sounds remarkably similar to the verse I used in the post, from Acts 16:31. I will say it again, "Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved." The words in quotations are part of God's Word, the Means of Grace. The Holy Spirit works through the Means of Grace to give and strengthen faith. It often amazes me to see so many people, many of them theologians, who work so hard to trivialize a gift of the Holy Spirit. If you are a believer that needs assurance of your forgiveness, use the Means of Grace. If you are not a believer, the Holy Spirit still works through the Means of Grace to give faith and forgiveness. This is what is taught in the Gausewitz edition of Luther's Small Catechism, and the Lutheran Confessions, both reflecting the truths of Scripture. It is actually quite easy and simple to articulate.
Vernon
Many consider John 3:16 to be the heart of the Gospel. John 3:16 says "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." That sounds remarkably similar to the verse I used in the post, from Acts 16:31. I will say it again, "Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved." The words in quotations are part of God's Word, the Means of Grace. The Holy Spirit works through the Means of Grace to give and strengthen faith. It often amazes me to see so many people, many of them theologians, who work so hard to trivialize a gift of the Holy Spirit. If you are a believer that needs assurance of your forgiveness, use the Means of Grace. If you are not a believer, the Holy Spirit still works through the Means of Grace to give faith and forgiveness. This is what is taught in the Gausewitz edition of Luther's Small Catechism, and the Lutheran Confessions, both reflecting the truths of Scripture. It is actually quite easy and simple to articulate.
Vernon
Vernon...nothing confesses objective justification better than Christ's fervent prayer at the cross...Father forgive them...do you reject this? -Joe
I, for one, fail to see that Christ was teaching the doctrine of Universal Justification in this statement, at all. The so-called doctrine of "Universal Justification" is nowhere stated in the Scriptures. Nowhere. In no section in the entirety of the Bible, where the Holy Spirit, through the pen of the inspired writers, has directly taught the Doctrine of Justification, is so-called "Universal Justification" even in view. In no context in which Justification is actually taught, is "Universal Justification" the message. The only direct teaching of the Bible concerning Justification is Justification by Faith Alone. "Universal Justification" is a pure invention.
It is impossible to allow Christ's words, here, to stand on their own and speak for themselves while at the same time understanding them as the teaching of "Universal Justification." They simply don't teach this doctrine. In order to interpret these words as a teaching of "Universal Justification," one must first insist that this so-called doctrine, which is nowhere stated in the Scriptures, is actually the central teaching of the Scriptures, and then use this teaching as a filter by which all Scripture is interpreted.
I'd be happy to accept "Universal Justification" as a Biblical doctrine, even as the central teaching of the Scriptures, if the Holy Spirit had thought it was important enough to actually include this doctrine in the direct teaching of Holy Writ. But it simply is not there. Anywhere. Again, the so-called doctrine of "Universal Justification" is neither mentioned, nor simply stated, nor articulated at length, nor developed and explained -- in short, it is not taught anywhere in the Scriptures. Therefore, I will not allow my conscience to be bound by it.
It is impossible to allow Christ's words, here, to stand on their own and speak for themselves while at the same time understanding them as the teaching of "Universal Justification." They simply don't teach this doctrine. In order to interpret these words as a teaching of "Universal Justification," one must first insist that this so-called doctrine, which is nowhere stated in the Scriptures, is actually the central teaching of the Scriptures, and then use this teaching as a filter by which all Scripture is interpreted.
I'd be happy to accept "Universal Justification" as a Biblical doctrine, even as the central teaching of the Scriptures, if the Holy Spirit had thought it was important enough to actually include this doctrine in the direct teaching of Holy Writ. But it simply is not there. Anywhere. Again, the so-called doctrine of "Universal Justification" is neither mentioned, nor simply stated, nor articulated at length, nor developed and explained -- in short, it is not taught anywhere in the Scriptures. Therefore, I will not allow my conscience to be bound by it.
***
GJ - UOJ is a dogma looking for a text, not unlike the Roman Catholic Church, where peculiar doctrines are matched with Biblical verses that do not address the question at all. For example, "hay and stubble" that will be burned by fire is not addressing Purgatory but doctrinal content itself.
1 Corinthians 3:10 According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.
11 For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.
14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward.
15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.
This passage perfectly describes the poor work done by the Missouri clergy who followed Stephan, obeyed Stephan, and covered up adultery for Stephan. They taught the rationalistic Pietism of Halle, which Stephan learned while studying there. Their faction made a point of dominating the Missouri Synod and its partners with the entire universe absolved on Easter - abusing 1 Timothy 3:16.
Abandoning faith and the Means of Grace, Missouri and WELS and the Little Sect inserted this Halle cancer into everything, which made Pentecostalism, Church Growth, and work with ELCA so easy to promote.
Joe has everyone forgiven - without faith - at the cross. Then why was everyone forgiven again at the empty tomb? That is the problem with invented dogma. Roman Catholic dogma about Mary is quite appealing, until matched with appropriate Biblical verses. Rome has Mary never committing an actual sin, serving as Co-Redemptrix, but no Scripture hints at either one. Likewise they are left with a problem. Was Mary assumed into heaven after she died or without dying? That is not yet settled doctrine, as Buchholz would say, like world absolution on Good Friday or Easter Sunday. I await another Emmaus essay - with unfeigned anticipation.
Joe forgot to mention that his beloved UOJ, which he was challenging at the moment - at Holy Word, Austin - could not even be addressed by future DP Don Patterson. That is what UOJ does to the doctrine-damaged.
 |
| Quenstedt answered all objections to justification by faith - and look who quoted and cited him - Robert Preus. |
 |
| Just to prove me right, Jay Webber cited Rambach the Pietist in favor of his UOJ, countering Martin Chemnitz the senior editor of the Book of Concord. This should not be a struggle, to choose Chemnitz over Rambach. But now Webber cites the unknown Quistorp, another Pietist. |
