 |
| Those labels are so familiar. Knapp, at Halle, never denied OJ. An ELS pastor was peeved that I did not give proper credit to the Calvinist translator who used these terms. But aha, the lectures themselves speak glowingly of Universal Justification. Why am I the only one who reads old books? I own it. |
GJ - I am addressing the baloney copied below because it is too thick and putrid to interrupt with the Chief Article. I will just put in some markers so readers can find what I am addressing.
😀"Denial of objective justification" - The Chief Article is not the OJ of Pietism and Calvinism but Justification by Faith, from Genesis 15:6 through the Bible.
😆 Refusal to use Biblical terms is seen as a license to engage in dishonest doctrinal history, which strangely avoids the Reformation. How did so many men go to college and seminary without reading the basics of the Bible? The Scriptures judge all books, so chanting from the dogmatic, self-serving Synodical Conference tomes is far from convincing. In fact, it reveals the insecurity of their baseless convictions. Samuel Huber, their saint, was a Calvinist. All their dogmatic points come from Pietism, from Halle. They refuse to touch Genesis 15:6, Abraham in the New Testament, Romans 3 - 5. The real founder of Missouri was a syphilitic hound-dog who shared his disease with his wife, children (via his dying wife), and young women of the Stephanite migration. The LCMS theologian, CFW Walther B.A., was his pimp and then his kidnapper and robber. Thus the morals and ethics of OJ.
😎 I am not going to address the superficial skip through the Bible golden book provided by the OJ salesman. I have already addressed those points and published extensive Scriptural study of the main passages. It will be in print fairly soon.
Citing Luther is hilarious beyond belief, and I have dealt with many bow-legged, slack-jawed, sissified OJ salesmen. Thus my cool sunglasses look. I may even buy a pair.
The source cited is the Smalcald Articles, written by Luther, anticipating a conference with the papists, and included in the Book of Concord.
 |
| Luther, Melanchthon, and Chemnitz agree that the Chief Article is Justification by Faith. Did Luther flip in the Smalcald Articles and no one noticed? |
THE SECOND PART
Treats of the Articles which Refer to the Office and Work of Jesus Christ, or Our Redemption.
Part II, Article I: The first and chief article.
GJ - What is the first and chief article?
The quotations are all about the Atonement, but the rationalistic Pietists merge the Atonement and Justification, making a mess out of both. Why? They are loyal to their criminal founders, Stephan and Walther, and have never grown beyond the meager Biblical knowledge and dishonest behavior of those saints.
They must preserve their dogma and myths, so they cannot even see when their arguments defeat their OJ.
I have already addressed the Preusian follies many times. Rolfie One-Note wants everyone to read his North Dakota lectures, where he failed to even mention his father's last book, Justification and Rome, which he edited with his OJ brother, Dan.
Steve Schmidt (Sschmidt)
Advanced Member
Username: Sschmidt
To address your questions specifically:
😆Denial of objective justification has its roots in the Iowa and Ohio Synods, which also opposed Missouri in the Predestinarian controversy. While not as deficient in confessional Lutheranism as the Pennsylvania based General Synod (they did oppose the Four Points), these synods were error ridden in the doctrines of justification and predestination. The theological legacy of both synods descended to the ALC and then the ELCA. The ELCA has never presented an official teaching on objective justification. Deniers of objective justification usually have roots in one of the predecessor denominations of the ELCA (ALC, LCA).
Characteristic of these predecessor bodies was a belief in election "in view of faith," which started with Aegidius Hunnius and passed through Gerhardt into scholastic Lutheran orthodoxy. Election in view of faith was a speculation developed to combat Calvinistic double predestination, but it is not biblical. Those who mock objective justification because Luther never used the term seemingly have no problem with the idea of election in view of faith, which Luther also never expressed (see Bondage of the Will). Significantly, Arminian Protestants, who influenced the General, Ohio, and Iowa Synods, all interpret election in view of faith.
Time and basic reading comprehension of the Formula of Concord on Election has proven Missouri correct. Walther went back to Lucas Osiander, translator of the Formula of Concord into Latin, for support, which is essentially FC SD XI point by point.
The caricature of objective justification is that Christ died for all, which universally justifies all, and so our job is to choose, in the vein of Protestant decision theology, to believe it. A legacy of sloppy theology from the WELS and the Kokomo Theses actually have lent a certain plausibility to this caricature. It is, in the end, a false caricature.
Also at issue is where the term came from. The Age of Orthodoxy was a scholastic period that endlessly analyzed and subdivided doctrine for polemical reasons. Objective justification was a term used, at times correctly and incorrectly, from the time of Osiander to the present. Its use testifies that Lutherans were aware that justification is both a Second and Third Article doctrine. The Bible emphatically teaches that the Lamb of God takes away the sin of the world. Being found without sin is justification. It also teaches that our sin places us under God's wrath and judgment. But I thought my sins were nailed to the cross (Colossians 2:14, Hebrews 10)? That they indeed were. The New Testament is full of verses about the atonement. Deniers of objective justification don't know what the atonement means (Hello, Gustaf Aulén!). The atonement means your sins are forgiven.
"He was raised for our justification." What does this mean? Luther tells us what it means. He preached two or three recorded sermons on this topic. It means Christ has died to take away our sins once and for all. It means God raises Christ so that he lives victorious over sin. To be victorious over sin and death is to be justified. Now, is Christ alone justified? By no means. By dying, our sins, not his, were forgiven. By rising, that is conquering death, hell, and sin, we have conquered death, hell, and sin.
18 Consequently, just as one trespass resulted in condemnation for all people, so also one righteous act resulted in justification and life for all people. (Rom 5:18)
8 But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
9 Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! 10 For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life! 11 Not only is this so, but we also boast in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation. (Rom 5:8-11)
Here Paul teaches that while still sinners, we all were reconciled by the death of his Son and justified by his blood (Second Article). This is objectively true. It happened 2000 years ago. What does it mean that now justified, forgiven and reconciled, we shall be saved by his life? It means that the Holy Spirit grants us the gift of faith in Christ to apprehend this treasure (Third Article). Subjective justification comes through faith.
Therefore, since we have been justified through faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2 through whom we have gained access by faith into this grace in which we now stand. (Rom 5:1-2a)
😎
Luther laid out this "order of salvation" in the Smalcald Articles, on The Chief Article [justification]:
1] That Jesus Christ, our God and Lord, died for our sins, and was raised again for our justification, Rom. 4:25.
2] And He alone is the Lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the world, John 1:29; and God has laid upon Him the iniquities of us all, Is. 53:6.
3] Likewise: All have sinned and are justified without merit [freely, and without their own works or merits] by His grace, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, in His blood, Rom. 3:23f
4] Now, since it is necessary to believe this, and it cannot be otherwise acquired or apprehended by any work, law, or merit, it is clear and certain that this faith alone justifies us as St. Paul says, Rom. 3:28: For we conclude that a man is justified by faith, without the deeds of the Law. Likewise 3:26: That He might be just, and the Justifier of him which believeth in Christ.
Therefore, since the Bible and Confessions speak of justification as being the office of Christ ("raised for our justification," that is, to stand triumphant over all sin), "by grace" (the mercy of God), "for all" (all have sinned and are justified), "through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" (Atonement), "in His blood" (the Crucifixion), and also that "since it is necessary to believe this," that is to say, it is through faith alone that we acquire this justification individually (to be "in Christ"), we freely use the terms "objective" and "subjective" justification to fully describe the entire plan of salvation that is the chief article of the church.
Luther:
"But when I come to understand the fact that all the works God does in Christ are done for me, nay, they are bestowed upon and given to me, the effect of his resurrection being that I also will arise and live with him; that will cause me to rejoice."
"But since Christ died for our sins and was raised for our justification, we cannot see it nor feel it, neither can we comprehend it with our reason. Therefore we must disregard our feeling and accept only the Word, write it into our heart and cling to it, even though it seems as if my sins were not taken from me, and even though I still feel them within me. Our feelings must not be considered, but we must constantly insist that death, sin and hell have been conquered, although I feel that I am still under the power of death, sin and hell. For although we feel that sin is still in us, it is only permitted that our faith may be developed and strengthened, that in spite of all our feelings we accept the Word, and that we unite our hearts and consciences more and more to Christ."
