 |
| VP James Huebner is a Fuller alumnus, like the rest of the WELS leaders. |
This Universalism won in the
latest version of the NIV, where in Romans 3, not only have all sinned, but all – yes all – have been justified, though the second all is not in any text. That no longer matters when the clergy know
little Latin and less Greek.
New NIV
Romans 3:22b There is no difference between Jew and Gentile, 23 for all have
sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 and all [GJ – not in any Greek text] are justified freely by his grace
through the redemption that came by Christ Jesus.
Young Calvinist, Old Unitarian
Sages of the past have said, “Young
Calvinist, Old Unitarian.” Those regions dominated by Calvinists – like New
England – show that effect, and the congregations shrink accordingly. The
effect of rationalistic and contradictory Calvinism on people is to gradually
reduce their trust in the Scripture and rely instead on Dame Reason. If we
allow our human reason and fickle emotions to judge the Bible from the beginning,
that lady’s work will not finish until nothing divine is left.
Universalism Is No Better
Calvinism is a type of
closeted Universalism, so no one should wonder that Objective Justification is
so similar. The Calvinist will consider the vast majority of people condemned
to hellfire from eternity as a poor reflection on God’s grace, asking instead
why not declare everyone forgiven and saved, familiar words to DP Jon Buchholz.
Under such conditions, conclusions will be:
1.
Everyone is saved – basic Universalism.
2.
Everyone is saved and only needs to agree with
that statement.
Those are hollow statements,
derived from contradictory assumptions and clearly opposed to the Gospel, God’s
grace, and the Word of the Holy Spirit.
In Romans 10, Paul shows that
we are forgiven through faith in the Gospel. All who call upon the Name of the
Lord will be forgiven and saved. They only come to faith from hearing the
preached Word – reflecting on Isaiah 53, the Old Testament Gospel. Therefore,
we must proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Forgiveness and salvation come
from the broadcast of God’s Word, not from philosophical speculation.
From Orthodoxy’s Prolixity to Barthian Bombast
Lutheran Orthodoxy and Calvinist Attacks
Chemnitz compared the
Calvinists and Zwinglians to renters in his brilliant conclusion to the Apology
of the Book of Concord. The Swiss interlopers are like the renters who tell the
owner of the properties that they would behave if only landlords did what they
were told by those living in their homes and apartements. The Reformation began
with Luther, Melanchthon, and many brilliant and faithful men drawn to
Wittenberg. As stated before, Zwingli and Calvin pretended to agree with Luther
until they had another way of viewing the Scriptures, the very source of false
doctrine, separating the Spirit from the Word. They were no different from the
Pope declaring revelations from the throne of his heart or Mormons writing and
revising books from convenient revelations shared only with them.
Chemnitz studied under Luther
and Melanchthon, feeling the force and anger of the Swiss separatists and their
influence upon the Reformation. The forces against Rome were thus divided by
not continuing a faithful witness to the Word. Chemnitz continued the style of
Luther and Melanchthon, drawing out the lessons of the Word through careful
teaching from the appropriate texts. After Gerhard, who worked with Chemnitz on
the Harmonies, Lutheran Orthodoxy became far more philosophical and opaque in
answering the philosophical objections of the Swiss.
Concentrating on the Third String
Certain Lutheran groups would
have people sigh like rock fans when they hear the term Lutheran Orthodoxy, but
that is misleading. One should picture enormous Calvinist tomes answered by
equally large Lutheran volumes, each one engaged in the Latin terms for their
philosophical structures built to replace the size and splendor of Medieval
cathedrals.
Luther did not write a
systematic theology, but later writers did, and the field of Christian theology
became dry, sterile, and aching for replacement. Unfortunately, Pietism was the
ecumenical answer and confessing the truth from the Scriptures was sidelined.
Walther and Pieper found it
practical to teach from J. W. Baier and Pietism, rather than from Luther, Melanchthon,
and Chemnitz.[1]
By concentrating on the late, third string orthodox, the leaders were able to
construct a rationalistic structure clogged with Latin terms. There is even a
book published to help people with all of Pieper’s Latin terms. A key to the Scriptures
would be more useful, especially since Walther and Pieper taught against the
Bible, against Luther and the Book of Concord, against the Reformation.
American Protestants of the 19th
century were influenced by rationalism, Pietism, and Lutheran or Calvinist
orthodoxy. Some went through times when they sought to recover their founders’
wisdom and fidelity. Although Walther’s sect was considered or at least
fashioned a repristinating movement, it was really a smorgasbord without the
Swedes. They were brought over by a bishop, Stephan, and taken over by a pope,
Walther. All the Stephanite leaders were cell group Pietists, though Walther
pretended otherwise and everyone has officially forgotten the facts.
A lot of great work was done
in publishing but the Halle Pietism of Objective Justification took over, pushed
forward by Walther and his carefully selected successor, Pieper. No one should
wonder that the Missouri Synod has two multi-volume editions of a dogmatics
textbook – Pieper and Harrison. Both contradict the style and content of the Reformation,
which brings us to the era of Barth-Kirschbaum.
Karl Barth and Charlotte Kirschbaum – Infidelity Personified
Once upon a time I met a
graduate student at Yale. His wife worked at the Yale Medical School Library,
where I labored in xeroxing rather than pediatrics or neurosurgery. He went on
to write Karl Barth and Radical Politics,
to head the Barth Center at Princeton. Barth was called the “red pastor of Safenwill”
and his group of pastors the red circuit. His initial Romans commentary made
him famous, and he was elevated or ejected into academic life, where he was
over his head. His beautiful young assistant, Charlotte Kirschbaum, helped him
with his research and everything else. Frank Fiorenza, former president of the
Barth Society, said the Barthians concluded that she did the small print work
in the dogmatics while he constructed the outlines. He took the glory for her
labor, but he dedicated his first volume to Charlotte, lived with her in a
cottage each summer, writing together, and moved her into his home with his
wife Nelly and their children.[2]
Simply put, that enormous set
of books is an intellectual structure to enhance and promote the Marxist
politics of Karl Barth and his mistress, Charlotte Kirschbaum. Barth did more
than cheat in his marriage and ordination vows. He also plagiarized the work of
his lovely assistant, who worked for nothing, only pennies for expenses. When
people gave him material for his colossal set of dogmatics, he included their
work verbatim, without attribution.
A few conservative Protestants
saw his clever claptrap for what it was, a mask over apostasy, where he
presented an idea and undermined traditional Christian teaching. Like all
Calvinists, he loathed Lutheran doctrine and made that plain in comments like
this, “He was a good Lutheran, too good a Lutheran.” He finally dedicated his
last volume, which was not finished, to Nelly, after Charlotte became sick and
died. The Dogmatics ended with
Charlotte’s life, but the damage has continued.
Barth has fooled the conservative
Evangelicals to such an extent that one Hillsdale College professor tore my
head off when I suggested Barth was an apostate and a fraud.
Just as Scheiermacher was the
first liberal theologian, a product and a professor at Halle University, so
Barth was the most ecumenical apostate of the 20th century and
beyond. Two influential professors at Fuller Seminary studied under Barth and
brought back his rationalistic view of the Bible – it contains God’s Word but
is not God’s Word. One WELS pastor earned a DMin at Fuller Seminary and wrote
to me in a note, “You are right. Barth is the official theologian of Fuller.”
The famous Battle for the Bible narrative, about
Biblical inerrancy being excommunicated from Fuller, is based upon Barth’s
influence on the seminary’s leadership. Harold Lindsell wrote about the agony
caused in a school founded to teach inerrancy and turned another direction by Barth
alumni, one the founder’s son. Is there a better Absalom than Daniel Fuller?
2
Samuel 18:33 O my son Absalom, my son, my son Absalom! would God I had died for
thee, O Absalom, my son, my son!
Fuller expanded greatly after
abandoning inerrancy, sending out a brochure which is comical in its angry
confession of principles –
"Were
we to distinguish our position from that of some of our brothers and sisters
who perceive their view of Scripture as more orthodox than ours, several points
could be made: 1) we would stress the need to be aware of the historical and
literary process by which God brought the Word to us... 4) we would urge that
the emphasis be placed where the Bible itself places it—on its message of
salvation and its instruction for living, not on its details of geography or
science, though we acknowledge the wonderful reliability of the Bible as a
historical source book; 5) we would strive to develop our doctrine of Scripture
by hearing all that the Bible says, rather than by imposing on the Bible a
philosophical judgment of our own as to how God ought to have inspired the
Word." David Allan Hubbard,
"What We Believe and Teach," Pasadena, California: Fuller Theological
Seminary, 800-235-2222 Pasadena, CA, 91182. [emphasis added]
Fuller Seminary went after the
leaders of all denominations in world missions, then did the same with Church
Growth. They did not exclude Roman Catholic leaders. No one missed the message
that study at Fuller was the best way to leverage one’s career, especially when
the executives suggested it, funded it, and rewarded it with promotions. All
Protestant denominations are burdened with Fuller Seminary alumni, many with
drive-by DMins, all anxiously and energetically destroying their denominations
in the name of growth. These know-it-all bumpkins wreck worship, evangelism,
and Scripture while sowing hatred and various levels of infidelity. All this
can be laid at the feet of Barth and Kirschbaum, their knowing enablers, and
those too timid to object.
Creative Dogmatics tune in tomorrow
[1]
Baier was born a century after the Book of Concord (1580) was published. That
is like teaching the U. S. Constitution from the Chicago Tribune of 1920, using German philosophical terms.
[2]
Marcus Barth spoke to Waterloo Lutheran Seminary, a small group gathered in a
lecture room. Otto Heick gasped, “He is the picture of his father.” The Barth
children were constantly embarrassed by his father’s living arrangements,
hinted at in the Fortress Press biography of Karl Barth.
