| I study Robert Preus' book Justification and Rome |
because his family clearly does not.
Lito Cruz, on Facebook:
I just saw the post on Ichabod about Andy One Note's [Andrew Preus'] explanation of OJ/SJ.
I remember when we were in discussion with the theologian from ELS, that it was the same teaching, we have to believe in OJ - i.e that we are already forgiven, to really be forgiven, for if not, we are not forgiven at all.
This is like Word of Faith, believe you are healed and so you are already, believe you are not and so you are not. Ergo, whatever you believe is what you are. The parameter of truth is *whatever* you believe and not the truth in the object of your belief. Notice too that in that Andy One Note defense that the object of faith is not Christ but the declaration you are already forgiven, saved - subtle universalism says Google Latin.
Yes, that is a good explanation, so OJ is not the Atonement, but some declaration not found in the Bible, Luther, the Book of Concord, or any bumper stickers. SJ is not faith but believing in this unrecorded universal declaration of absolution and salvation.
The Universal Objective Justification Stormtroopers should remember - and perhaps they do - that Preus distinguished their precious Objective Justification from the Atonement in his short essay.
Robert Preus, 1987:
| Bishop Martin Stephan, STD, taught this to Walther,|
and Walther insisted on it throughout his career as pope.
This peculiar dogma comes from Halle University, not the Bible
or Luther or the Book of Concord.
| An illiterate, verbose false teacher, a Fuller alumnus,|
can become president of the Sausage Factory.