A Simple Comparison Shows the Three Blind Mice Want You To Be Blind Too

I will drop some supplemental graphics below, but I first want to show how simple it is to compare the truth in the Book of Concord to the rubbish promoted by Matt the Fatt, Mirthless Mark, and Pope John the Malefactor.

The first quotation is the classic definition of the Chief Article of Christianity, articulated by Luther, Melanchthon, and Chemnitz - who was the senior editor of the Formula of Concord. Compare and contrast this with WELS' Zarling and Bivens.

Zarling and Bivens (both WELS) claim in writing that their precious Objective Justification is the Chief Article and that all the praise aimed at Justification by Faith is really about Justification without Faith - OJ.

Phil Hale, the cub editor of Christian News, has solemnly declared that "Justification by Faith is just a phrase." Of course, this phrase hardly ever appears in Christian News, but it does occur frequently in Romans and Galatians, which explain the Chief Article so well.

Calvin

The second quotation may seem odd to most Lutherans - and it is - but I placed it there to show its affinity to the Edward Preuss statement below - ecstatically copied into an Objective Justification essay by Robert Preus. According to Calvin, babies of the "elect" are born forgiven. Just to be clear - because Calvin rejected the Spirit always at work in the Word - he made baptism an ordinance, a law, not God's work but man's witness to his faith. 

Edward Preuss

Justification of the Sinner is a booklet-length essay by Edward Preuss, who taught at Concordia Seminary in St. Louis. Walther blessed the booklet, even though Preuss left Lutheranism for the Church of Rome and spent the rest of his life promoting Catholicism.

"Yea, in Christ we were justified before we were even born" sounds like Preuss was too close to the incense when writing his booklet, which also has this gem.

"So, then, we are reconciled; however, not only we, but also Hindus, and Hottentots and Kafirs, yes, the world. 'Reconciled,' says our translation; the Greek original says: 'placed in the right relation to God'. Because before the Fall we, together with the whole creation, were in the right relation to God, therefore Scripture teaches that Christ, through His death, restored all things to the former right relation to God." 

F. R. Edward Preuss, 1834-1904, Die Rechtfertigung der Suender vor Gott. Cited in Rick Nicholas Curia, The Significant History of the Doctrine of Objective or Universal Justification, Alpine, California: California Pastoral Conference, WELS. January 24-25, 1983. p. 24. (Rick Curia put together the worst of the worst OJ material. Curiously, his last name is used for the governing body of the Antichrist.)

The Great Walther

If the quotations are read together - a short homework assignment, to be sure - then Calvin, Preus, and Walther are opposed to the Chief Article of Christianity and anxious to replace it with their own dogma. The Book of Concord statement is not an opinion of the Lutherans at that time, but a concise definition that fits all the previous, faithful leaders of Christianity.

To be Biblical, the blind lead the blind - and ignore the clear teaching of Romans and Galatians in order to build and improve upon the Chief Article with... Walther's Universal Absolution, followed by making a decision for Universal Forgiveness. 

The Great Walther belongs with the Great Edward Preuss and the Great Calvin for messing up the Gospel and replacing it with their own fantasies. The post above shows that the Missouri Synod did not start out teaching Objective Justification but clearly taught Justification by Faith until the Brief Statement of 1932 departed from the Chief Article to promote Walther's error.

The Great Valleskey is next to the Great Walther in my Justification folder. Feel free to save and share my graphics. 

Who teaches Decision Theology? Answer - The Great Walther.

Diamond Mark Zarling, WELS, Has the Corona Virus

Zarling and Frosty Bivens teach that Objective Justification is the Chief Article of Christianity. 

I think Zarling was on the choir tour too, which they didn’t cancel... so all those students and congregations were exposed

Zarling is Brown County’s first case.... (New Ulm).

---

February 27 – March 8, 2020

College Choir Spring Tour

The MLC College Choir looks forward to sharing God’s Word in song in the Southeast as part of this year’s spring tour. Concerts are planned for the states of Tennessee, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina and Florida. Please plan to attend a concert near you, or follow the choir on Facebook with videos from the concerts and stories from the students.

DMLC transformed their college name, 25 years ago, and they transformed the school from a teacher's college into the WELS College of Ministry. Top that, ELCA!

Job Opening - President, Martin Luther College (nee Dr. Martin Luther College)

 Mark Zarling

Zarling is leaving a sinking ship early, like the Concordia's captain.

Help Wanted Ad - WELS Convention

"Active pastor, male teacher, or male staff minister for the position of president of Martin Luther College. No doctoral degree required. This is to fill a vacancy in the president’s office created by President Mark Zarling’s announced desire to retire on June 30, 2020."

Polish the diamond of Objective Justification in retirement, Mark.
That was a great paper - Bivens plagiarized it. 

 Stand in Awe of Justification, The Diamond Among the Jewels of Divine Revelation - M. Zarling

"The article of justification is the master and prince, the lord, the ruler, and the judge over all kinds of doctrines; it preserves and governs all church doctrine and raises up our conscience before God. Without this article the world is utter death and darkness... The doctrine of justification must, as I frequently urge, be diligently learned; for in it all the other articles of our faith are comprehended. And when that is safe, the others are safe too."
(E. M. Plass, ed, What Luther Says: An Anthology, 3 volumes. (St. Louis: CPH, 1959), 2:703-704.)

"The Chief Article"
( P. Melanchthon, "Apology of the Augsburg Confession," Article IV (II): "Of Justification," Concordia Triglotta. (St. Louis: CPH, 1921), p. 121.)

GJ - From the Chief Article to its repudiation, without blushing.

Zarling: "Universal justification" is a term denoting the doctrine that God has forgiven the sins of all men. Strictly speaking, the term "objective justification" expresses the thought that the sins of a man are forgiven by God whether he believes it or not. Objective justification is not necessarily universal, but if justification is universal it must of necessity be objective."
(Becker, S.W. "Objective Justification," an essay delivered to the Chicago Pastoral Conference, No. 9, 1982, page 1.)

 Bivens

The Primary Doctrine in Its Primary Setting: Objective Justification and Lutheran Worship

Frosty Bivens, 1996

“The article of justification is the master and prince, the lord, the ruler, and the judge over all kinds of doctrines; it preserves and governs all church doctrine and raises up our consciences before God. Without this article the world is utter darkness and death.”
(Martin Luther, What Luther Says, Vol. 2. p 703.)
Bivens - "Luther’s appraisal of the doctrine of justification is also ours. We hold it to be the primary doctrine of Scripture, that is, the central and most important teaching revealed by God for us sinners."

GJ - Does he agree with the Chief Article? Like Zarling, he repudiates it.

Bivens - "As revealed in the Bible, this declaration of God is made totally by grace and on account of Jesus Christ and his substitutionary life and death on behalf of mankind. To phrase it somewhat differently, God has justified acquitted or declared righteous the whole world of sinners. He has forgiven them." 

***

 Andrea's catechism is the original Gausewitz.

 Gausewitz was used throughout the Synodical Conference, so guys - quit lying to everyone about OJ always being taught.

GJ 

Bivens just happened to start his dishonest essay in the same deceitful way Mark Zarling began his. 

WELS originally taught Justification by Faith and used the King James Version. They ash-canned the JBFA Gausewitz and replaced it with Kuske's OJ catechism. Before that, WELS eviscerated the KJV in preparation for destroying the sect with OJ and Church Growth.

Jay Webber's Online Seminary Deceives People about Justification by Faith

 

WELS genius level pontificators Zarling and Bivens did this with Justification. They used the language about Justification by Faith (the Bible, Luther, etc) and applied it to Objective Justification - Calvin, Huber, Halle University, Knapp, Stephan, Walther, Barth.)

Knowing that Jack Kilcrease was educated ELCA and teaches Roman Catholics, serving on the ILT online faculty, I am not shocked that Webber hardened and calcified his Pietistic OJ at the school.

Too bad that Webber inflicted his ignorance and errors on the audience of Emmaus, with Buchholz grinning like a hog in the wallow. But it is even worse to have ILT use the face of Luther to deface Christian doctrine.

SP Schroeder - Why Is WELS Supporting a 50 Year Lady Porn Addict Promoting Luther Days with a High School Girl? No Wonder Joel Hochmuth Got Off Lightly

Facebook Cover Photo
You can hear Professor Daniel Deutschlander in person at 
Luther Days on September 17th.

WELS.net linked Luther Days, which has its own website. There is no non-profit status, or even an LLC, in spite of the claims made.

Luther Days also has a Facebook page with a video.

The website has most of the information.

The contact page says -

Natalie Pratt posted this as her photo on Facebook,
but has removed it.

Contact Info
If you have questions about the event or would like to get involved, we would love to speak with you.

Event Coordinator
Natalie Pratt: info@lutherdays.org - 50 years old - clearly a porn and get rich quick addict.

Marketing Manager
Karalena Pittenger: marketing@lutherdays.org, related to ELS Pastor Tony Pittenger. High school student.

Social Media
www.facebook.com/lutherdays
www.twitter.com/lutherdays

Email
info@lutherdays.org

---

Webber can add this phony conference
to his sketchy credentials.
With luck, it will be mentioned in ILT News.

Note that the website, planned by Natalie Pratt, links the Luther Days Twitter account. This was not dug up by nefarious means, but displayed as part of the promotion on the website.

Luther Days' Twitter Account Reflects the Degenerate Morals And Attitudes of WELS/ELS

I asked an ELS/WELS computer expert (not related to me) to list some of the worst and strangest accounts followed. He provided me with lists and comments.

Six Lutheran accounts, such as WELS Seth Bode's, have "liked" Luther Days.

Luther Days is following 2,590 accounts.

The first one is no longer Pastor Ski, but he is still listed.

LUTHER DAYS FOLLOWS THESE PORN ACCOUNTS

1. A female named Daniel has "Disney scenes for adults," with cartoon illustrations.
2. Cewgre has x-rated comments and photos.
3. Poopstachio. Analysis needed? Lots of obscene remarks. 
4. Some lady looks well known to the vice squad - Click for billions. Get rich schemes.
5. Many accounts are all about dealing with porn addiction.
6. One is for booking tours for open-minded couples. An article inside advocates spouse-swapping to improve one's marriage.
7. More of the same could be listed.

Here is a lady following Luther Days - https://twitter.com/marianneterre18 - "View my sexy videos at..." (one night friend dating)

Some Surprises

• Lots of Twitter accounts followed are ELCA, LCMS, WELS, ELS, and other mainline denominations.
• Many more are individual pastors of various denominations.
• Charities and entities within ELCA, LCMS, WELS, ELS and mainline denominations are included.D
• David Bendix - He is the WELS pastor arrested for soliciting a prostitute, in New Ulm.
• Church and Changers - Ski, Bill Limmer; Jim Aderman (follows).
• Church Growth/Emergent Church - Batterson.
• Liberals like DP Dave Benke. ELCA Trinity Lutheran Seminary. Pillar Seminary?
• Thrivent Builds.
• Higher Things George Borghardt.

Additional Comments from the Field

Isn't it odd that a "WELS/ELS" event follows a bunch of ELCA Twitter feeds given the official position towards the ELCA? An event headed and organized by two women, following a plethora of ELCA pastorettes. 

Yep, you read that right, women pastors' accounts are some of the favorites of Luther Days. Are they trying to send a message to the WELS? Add in Willow Creek, BOTH Osteens, some questionable "buy likes/follows/etc" accounts, and porn feeds and you have Luther Days' Twitter account. I wonder which TWIT is running it...

A cursory Google search of Natalie Pratt's name reveals plenty about her failed "events" business, and looking up the "Marketing Manager" reveals it is a high school student. Curiously, Shoreland Lutheran High School doesn't list the event on their calendar - but does list a Widows Mite Rummage Sale. An oversight? Perhaps, but given Ms. Pratt's numerous 
failed ventures, I'd wager good money that she hasn't confirmed or paid fees yet. Or maybe the Somers, WI police caught wind of it, and said no - since Shoreland doesn't even have enough parking for its own graduation services.

Luther Days is listed on the WELS events page, while the "other" event this summer - Return to Wittenberg, a confessional Lutheran conference aimed at millennials intending to teach them about the Confessions and encourage them in their faith has apparently been blacklisted. I guess the powers that be at the new WELS HQ are fine with a couple of women with questionable business practices and ties trying to get into the Guinness Book of World Records; but a group of WELS pastors and laymen trying to further theological and doctrinal education of young people? Well, we obviously can't have that listed on our events page!

A free event of this scale (or $5 at the door), yet Luther Days somehow has been promising the "presenters" that their travel expenses would be covered. It must have some good sponsors - there are a lot of logos listed - but if I were a sponsor, I'd want my sponsor level listed 
somewhere... Except, given that there are a plethora of porn Twitter feeds followed and following Luther Days, I think I'd rather not be associated at all since it is apparent that, at best, the people responsible for organizing this event are incompetent, unreliable, and totally irresponsible (all it takes is a few clicks to get rid of those porn feeds - yet they still haven't done it).

https://wels.net/event/luther-days-festival/

Luther Days shared Martin Luther College's video.

May 4 at 8:06am · 

Learn more about Martin Luther College and hear President Mark Zarling speak at Luther Days at Shoreland Lutheran High School on Sep 17th.
Other MLC professors that will be speaking include: 
Professor of German James Danell
Professor of Hebrew Thomas Nass
Vice-President for Mission Advancement Michael Otterstatter
Professor of Theology and Social Studies David Sellnow

Luther Days Festival - a Distinctly Lutheran event for all ages!

Speakers Include: Mr. James Aderman, Rev Michael Berg, Mr. Mark Bergemann, Rev Luke Boehringer, Rev Daniel Bondow, Rev John Braun, Dr John Brug, Mrs. Laura Bublitz, Dr Rebekah Carey, Rev Aaron Christie, Prof James Danell, Prof Mark DeGarmeaux, Mrs Rebecca DeGarmeaux, Rev Daniel Deutschlander, Mrs. Sallie Draper, Rev Nathan Ericson, Mrs Karen Fischer, Rev Robert Fleischmann, Rev Don Frelitz, Rev Joel Gaertner, Ms Rachel Greiner, Rev Brock Groth, Rev Nick Haasch, Rev Mike Hartman, Rev Robert Hein, Ms Angela Hohenstein, Rev Kevin Hudley, Mr Rick Kneser, Rev Dan Koelpin, Rev Rik Krahn, Mrs Melissa Kreuser, Rev Daniel Kroll, Mr Brian Arthur Lampe, Mrs Marinda Ledermann, Mrs Linda Liesener, Dr Gary Locklair, Prof Thomas Nass, Mr Carl Nolte, Rev Michael Otterstatter, Rev Adam Pilarski, Rev Tony Pittenger, Mrs Melissa Pittenger, Dr Joel Pless, Rev Paul Prange, Mrs Sarah Reik, Mrs Amanda Rose, Ms Pat Schlosser, Mrs Naomi Schmidt, Rev John Schuetze, Rev Michael Schultz, Rev Roger Schultz, Rev Curt Seefeldt, Rev Nathan Seiltz, Rev David Sellnow, Mr Martin Spriggs, Rev Richard Starr, Rev Paul Stratman, Mr Jeremy Thiesfeldt, Rev Benjamin Tomczak, Mrs Bethany Warnke, Rev David Jay Webber, Rev Paul Webber, Rev Kenneth Wenzel, Mr Patrick Winkler, P.E., Rev Brad Wordell, Rev Mark Zarling, & Rev. Paul Ziemer.

Lena Pittenger, a high school student,
is working with Natalie Pratt.
Is anyone watching the store in the ELS or WELS?

ELS Pastor Tony Pittenger is listed as a speaker.

Events in the Past - Apparently Managed by Natalie Pratt

Making Healthy Connections

Healthy Living Events - Rated F

Mark Zarling Mentions the Diamond Often - But Offers Cheap Cubic Zirconia Instead

Stand in Awe of Justification
The Diamond Among the Jewels of Divine Revelation
M. Zarling, 1983

So he begins with a metaphor - justification is the diamond.

But how is this justification defined? After copying the typical descriptions of justification by faith, borrowed from Luther and quoted in the Book of Concord (which he seems not to own), he switches to justification without faith - Universal Objective Justification - cubic zirconia.

Zarling's doctrinal confusion is evidenced by his mauling of the metaphor, in an essay which reads like a prep school assignment sent back for immediate revision. The Jay Webber debacle is enshrined in the essay file too, along with an atheist's support of Church Growth, so the standards are not high.

Let's look at some of his diamond passages, rendered in WELSian blue - a painful, but necessary exercise.

Let us polish the jewel of justification. We need always to stand in awe of this diamond among all of God's revelation. (p. 1) GJ - The Gospel is not polished or protected. All this language reeks of Decision Theology making the Word of God appealing, attractive, and relevant.

However, we need always to be on guard against falsely promoting two types of justification. There is only one divine diamond. Trying to separate the diamond will only shatter it. (p. 1) GJ - He knows as little about diamonds as he does about Lutheran doctrine, and even so contradicts his own claim, making justification forgiveness without faith, as emphasized below in red.

Only Dr. S. Becker carefully delineates between objective and universal justification. 

"Universal justification" is a term denoting the doctrine that God has forgiven the sins of all men. Strictly speaking, the term "objective justification" expresses the thought that the sins of a man are forgiven by God whether he believes it or not. Objective justification is not necessarily universal, but if justification is universal it must of necessity be objective. (Becker, Objective Justification, Chicago, 1982) GJ - Who made Sig Becker the Great Prophet who explains the Bible and the Book of Concord?

Perhaps such a distinction is helpful if it assists us in understanding the glorious Gospel: In Jesus, God has declared the entire world righteous and forgiven, regardless of whether or not the world believes it. Such is the jewel described by objective, universal, or general justification. (p. 2)

So it is with justification. Do not try to cut the diamond in two. To do so will only result in falsehood. The truth would be shattered. Objective justification apart from subjective justification leads to universalism. A subjective approach to justification apart from an objective basis would lead to synergism. We quote from President Mischke's newsletter of June, 1982.  GJ - These are vapid claims without any support, with confirmation from Pope Mischke, which settles it! Note that the Webber essay has already achieved the isolation of Objective Justification which other apostates (Schleiermacher of Halle, Barth/Kirschbaum of the cozy cabin, ELCA's ILT have promoted.

A word of caution may, however, be in place. It may be well to remind ourselves not to divide "objective" and "subjective" justification as if they were two totally different things which can be treated in isolation from one another. They are rather the two sides of the same coin, and there can be no "saints" or salvation without faith. To teach otherwise would indeed be universalism. (p. 2)

Theological terms can be helpful in describing the various facets of the diamond of all doctrines— justification. Yet terminology might cause confusion or result in controversy. Rather than debate the terms, we need to grasp the Scriptural truth. Dr. Becker gets to the heart of justification quickly. 

"The crux of the controversy can be summed up in a very simple way: 'Has God forgiven the sins of all men?'" To answer that question accurately, we need to ponder what Scripture reveals about God. (p. 2) GJ - The answer is no!, but the essay continues.

The diamond of justification is a revelation of God's eternal plan of salvation. (p. 2)

However, we need always to be on guard against falsely promoting two types of justification. There is only one divine diamond. Trying to separate the diamond will only shatter it. (p. 2) GJ - Zarling made his precious OJ central, not that his SJ means anything to Christians.

Despite the shining glory of this diamond of justification, men continually becloud its brilliance. The problems at Kokomo, at Ft. Wayne, and elsewhere, are but the perennial problems of man's reason conflicting with God's wisdom. (p. 7) GJ - This fuddled freshman has no grasp on the Biblical doctrine of the Word, which stands above all human efforts as a weapon of attack and defense. The Word alone attacks false doctrine. The Word alone defends sound doctrine.

We cannot begin to rationalize this diamond of justification. As mentioned earlier, if we stress objective justification and ignore the warnings of God's Law concerning unbelief, we result in universalism. (p. 8) GJ - Universal absolution and salvation is Universalism, but the Universalists are honest about it, but WELS shimmies and quivers and denies and re-asserts. "What are you hiding in your nasty little pocketses?" as Gollum asked Bilbo. (Tolkien, The Hobbit)

Satan will continually try to corrupt this diamond of justification. Errors creep in among seemingly orthodox statements. Let us always be vigilant to protect this jewel. We dare not separate it into two distinctive doctrines. There is but one diamond. (p. 9) GJ - He should have warned Gausewitz, whose catechism never mentioned UOJ, or Missouri's old Catechism, 1905, which defined justification as justification by faith. Once again - WELS postures as the group protecting God's Word when the Scriptures convict the sect of false doctrine.

It is true, even if I doubt it, even if I don't believe it. This is the priceless treasure of the diamond of justification. On my deathbed I need not fear, nor worry, nor doubt. God has declared the world righteous in Christ. I am part of the world. Therefore; I know I am declared righteous. Our preaching, our teaching, our life, all must stand on this jewel of justification. There is no question about it. (p. 11) GJ - This syllogism of sillyness would make Dr. Cruz' head spin.

***

GJ - The two graphics above answer the abominations in the Zarling essay, and yet Zarling is president of a college preparing young men and women for church vocations, preaching and teaching. No wonder the so-called Evangelism Day at Martin Luther College is an orgy of Jeske's Church and Changers invading New Ulm with their tricks, gimmicks, and Dreck.

No wonder Martin Luther College is the gay capital of Lutheran colleges in America.

Who Are the Authorities? - The References Give Away the Agenda. Like Jay Webber Recently, Zarling Argued One Side - Against Luther and the Book of Concord. A Sign-Off Tonight for the Icha-peekers

The President of Martin Luther College published this UOJ nonsense:

"Faith does nothing more than receive the forgiveness which is offered in the Gospel. It is not a condition we fulfill nor is it a cause of forgiveness. We are already forgiven. God's message of justification in Christ is there whether we believe it or not. Faith then receives the blessings." And, "Faith that accepts the good news of universal justification is the work of God the Holy Ghost." Page 7

“The glorious Gospel: In Jesus, God has declared the entire world righteous and forgiven, irregardless of whether or not the world believes it. Such is the jewel described by objective, universal, or general justification.” Page 2

Quoting Stoeckhardt, “If God has already in Christ justified all men and forgiven their sins, then I also in Christ have a gracious God and the forgiveness of all my sins.” Page 5

“Irregardless of man's faith, God declares the world just.”
Page 6

“Our salvation is an accomplished fact. It is done. It is finished. The resurrection is the proof that God has declared the sinners justified!” Page 6

“Faith does nothing more than receive the forgiveness which is offered in the Gospel. It is not a condition we fulfill nor is it a cause of forgiveness. We are already forgiven.” Page 7

“Simply present Law and Gospel. Warn sinners that unbelief damns, and rejection of Christ will bring eternal torment. Then comfort them with the glorious objective reality that all sins are already forgiven in Christ.” Page 7

http://www.wlsessays.net/files/ZarlingJustification.pdf

I previously identified, more than once, the dishonest opening of Mark Zarling's horrible essay, Stand in Awe of Justification - which began calling justification the Chief Article of the Christian Faith and perversely defined justification as justification without faith.

Oh - that justification?

Zarling's References 

Ardnt, D. "The Doctrine of Justification and the Controversy Over the Views of Dr. W. Maier in the Missouri Synod." Redwood Falls Conference paper, delivered Nov. 17, 1981.

Arndt, Wm. "The Doctrine of Justification," Essay IX in volume 2 of The Abiding Word. St. Louis: CPH, 1947.

Becker, S.W. "Objective Justification." Essay delivered at the Chicago Pastoral Conference, November 9, 1982. Becker, S.W. "The Gospel." Essay XIV in volume 2 of The Abiding Word. St. Louis: CPH, 1947.

Brinsmead, R.D. "Lutherans in Crisis over Justification by Faith." Verdict, vol. 2, no. 6, November, 1979.

Burgdorf, T. "The Basis of Justification: The Work of Christ and the Grace of God." Essay number 3 at the Second Lutheran Free Conference, printed in His Pardoning Grace. Milwaukee: NPH, 1966.

Concordia Triglotta. St. Louis: CPH, 1921.

Curia, R.N. "The Significant History of the Doctrine of Objective or Universal Justification Among the Churches of the Former Evangelical Lutheran Synodical Conference of North America." Paper delivered at the California Pastoral Conference, January 24-25, 1983.

Hummel, H.D. "Justification in the Old Testament." Concordia Journal, vol. 9. no. 1, January, 1983.

Kuske, D. "Making Use of Lutheran Heritage: 'Objective Justification' in our Mission Outreach Based on an Exegesis of II Corinthians 5:18-19." Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly, vol. 77, no. 1, January, 1980.

Lawrenz C.J. "On Justification, Osiander's Doctrine of the Indwelling Christ." No Other Gospel. Milwaukee: NPH, 1980.

Meyer, J.P. Ministers of Christ. Milwaukee: NPH, 1963.

Moellering, H.A. "How to Preach Objective Justification—A Lesson from C.F.W. Walther." Concordia Journal, vol. 9, no. 1, January, 1983.

Otten, H. "The Meaning of Justification." Essay two of the Second Lutheran Free Conference, printed in His Pardoning Grace. Milwaukee: NPH, 1966.

Pieper, F. Christian Dogmatics. St Louis: CPH, 1951. vol. 2.

Plass, E.M. compiler. What Luther Says. An Anthology in 3 volumes. St Louis: CPH, 1959.

Preus, R.D. "Perennial Problems in the Doctrine of Justification." Concordia Theological Quarterly, vol. 45, no. 3, July, 1981.

Reim, N. "The Appropriation of Justification: Justifying Faith." Essay five at the Second Lutheran Free Conference, printed in His Pardoning Grace. Milwaukee: NPH, 1966.

Sanday W. and Headlam, A.C. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1971 reprint. [Favorite liberal, HCM commentary set. But where is Lenski?]

Scaer D.P. "The Two Sides of Justification." Christianity Today. June 26, 1981.

Schaller, J. Biblical Christology. Milwaukee: NPH, 1981.

Schaller, J. "Redemption and Universal Justification According to II Corinthians 5:8-21." Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly, vol. 72, no. 4, October, 1975.

Scheutze, A.W. "The Presupposition of Justification: The Sin of Man and the Holiness of God." Essay one at the Second Lutheran Free Conference, printed in His Pardoning Grace. Milwaukee: NPH, 1966. Seminary Dogmatics Notes, cf. the Seminary mimeo company.

Steele, D.N. and Thomas, C.C. The Five Points of Calvinism: Defined, Defended, Documented. Philadelphia: Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing Company, 1963.

Stoeckhardt, G. Epistle to the Romans. translator E.W. Koehlinger. Ft. Wayne: Concordia Theological Seminary Press.

Stoeckhardt. G. "General Justification." Concordia Theological Quarterly, vol. 46, no. 2-3, April and July, 1982.

Surburg, R.F. "Justification as a Doctrine of the Old Testament: A Comparative Study in Confessional and Biblical Theology." Concordia Theological Quarterly, vol. 46, no. 2-3, April and July, 1982.

Teigen, R.N. "The Proclamation of Justification: The Gospel Message of Forgiveness." Essay four at the Second Lutheran Free Conference, printed in His Pardoning Grace, Milwaukee: NPH, 1966.

Walther, C.F.W. The Proper Distinction Between Law and Gospel. translator, W.H.T. Dau. St. Louis: CPH, 1928. Warth, M.C. "Justification Through Faith in Article Four of the Apology." Concordia Theological Quarterly, vol. 46, no. 2-3, April and July, 1982.

***

GJ - Serious lapses can be spotted at once. Zarling's list is larded with recent UOJ authors. Where are:

• Lenski, 
• Luther, and 
• Gausewitz?

Luther's sermons are extremely important and easily obtained in many forms and editions. Since Luther placed the sermon as the most important effort in church life, ignoring them is a major - and in fact - a dishonest omission.

Zarling ignored the Book of Concord and merely copied some quotations this way -

"32 This presentation was simplified greatly by Torald N. Teigen, in his essay, "the Proclamation of Justification: The Gospel Message of Forgiveness," printed in His Pardoning Grace, (Milwaukee: NPH, 1966), pp. 62-88. We follow his outline."

Zarling asserted that his cursory copying of quotations proved that the Lutheran Confessions are  in agreement "with our position."

This brief presentation of confessional quotations should be sufficient to assure us that our position is indeed synonymous with the Symbols of our church. Justification is the diamond among the jewels of God's revelation. It is the heart of the Gospel message. For our own eternal comfort, let us always treasure its priceless worth. p. 10, Zarling essay!

Let us everyone try to keep from laughing out loud when someone claims a "quia subscription to the Confessions" is the WELS position. Zarling makes it sound like the Book of Concord has a quia subscription to the UOJ of WELS.

Zarling's rhapsody is a clear case of begging the question, a type of circular reasoning. He simply assumes his initial point is true and piles on all the statements agreeing with it. But this is a logical fallacy because he does not entertain or even acknowledge that another position, even another definition of justification, is relevant.

In short, he correctly states that justification is the Chief Article of the Christian Religion, etc etc. His source is What Luther Says, which sounds like going deep sea fishing with a Ronco Pocket Fisherman. This betrays the modern WELS loathing of the Book of Concord. Why actually study The Righteousness of Faith, Article III in the Formula of Concord -  or engage the Apology's brilliant, clear discussion of justification by faith?

The Formula of Concord cites Melanchthon and Luther
in the article, The Righteousness of Faith.
These are authorities for sincere Lutherans,
far above the recent synodical squat-heads.

Instead, Zarling defines justification by opposing Luther, Melanchthon, and the Book of Concord. This sleight of hand, almost magical, is academic dishonesty and doctrinal bankruptcy. Instead of declaring a difference between the Book of Concord and the WELS dogma, he defines the original statement as really meaning the WELS dogma and runs away with his begging the question. Everyone must conclude from Zarling's manipulation that the Chief Article is indeed Objective/Subjective Justification, which are flotsam and jetsam from Halle Pietism and a Calvinist translator.

Zarling and Bivens remind me of the young woman who sang the praises of Margaret Sanger in her presentation in college. I asked about Sanger's speech to the Ku Klux Klan. Did she know about that?

The woman said, "Oh, I ran into that stuff about the KKK, but ignored it because it clashed with my theme."

Bivens Plagiarizes Zarling, 13 Years Later, Same Quotation and Citation.But Both Are Lying About the Chief Article, the Master and Prince.

Stand in Awe of Justification

The Diamond Among the Jewels of Divine Revelation

M. Zarling

[Presented to The Minnesota District Pastoral Conference April 12-13, 1983 at Martin Luther Ev. Lutheran Church St. Louis, MO]

The doctrine of justification is the shining jewel of our faith. Indeed, this teaching of Scripture is the heart and core of Christianity. Luther, as is well known, called justification the articulus stantis et cadentis ecclesiae. Dr. Luther goes on in admiring this jewel by saying:

The article of justification is the master and prince, the lord, the ruler, and the judge over all kinds of doctrines; it preserves and governs all church doctrine and raises up our conscience before God. Without this article the world is utter death and darkness... The doctrine of justification must, as I frequently urge, be diligently learned; for in it all the other articles of our faith are comprehended. And when that is safe, the others are safe too.1 (E. M. Plass, ed, What Luther Says: An Anthology, 3 volumes. (St. Louis: CPH, 1959), 2:703-704.)

The Confessions of our Church echo this regard for the centrality of justification. Each of the symbols of Reformation vintage view justification as "the chief topic of Christian doctrine"2 or words to that effect. Therefore, since we view this doctrine as the central teaching of our church, by which the church stands or falls, it is not without some trepidation that this paper is presented. I certainly must confess, "Who is sufficient for these things?"

Last year, when first approached to take this assignment, I was under the impression that this paper would be a response to the now famous "Kokomo case." (My only criterion for selection was that I happened to vicar in the same conference back in '78-'79, when the situation first developed. Now I know that vicaring for George Boldt is an honor, but I wonder if I should thank him for being assigned a paper purely by association?!) In the intervening year, the Kokomo case has been dealt with by the proper committees of our church. Yet to read the "august" pages of the Christian News one would imagine that the controversy rages on. Such is not the case. I am convinced that our gracious Lord has united the brethren in our Church in a Scriptural understanding of justification. There is no controversy or conflict within the WELS. However, since our position has been raped and plundered by those who put words into our mouths, this paper might prove a beneficial review.

One final word of apology before we start in. The subject matter assigned was "objective - subjective justification." I found the assigned topic rather extensive. Where does one begin? In the course of preparing this essay, brethren asked me to review the Kokomo situation. Others wanted me to cover the Maier case at Ft. Wayne. Others asked for an exegetical presentation of pertinent passages. At the risk of trying to cover everything, yet doing nothing thoroughly, I will attempt to oblige all. I hope to present a brief review of Scripture teaching on justification and also analyze the current difficulties men are having with this central doctrine of the Bible. Let us polish the jewel of justification. We need always to stand in awe of this diamond among all of God's revelation.

I. Listen to Men Describe its Various Facets

Lutherans view justification as the key to understanding God's plan of salvation. To paraphrase a popular ad, we could shout "When you've said justification, you've said it all." The term is a catch-all phrase by which we feel confident that orthodox teaching is preserved. But is it? What have we said? What do we mean? Sometimes the pastor in the pulpit uses a handy theological trade word that only confuses the parishioner in the pew. We need to examine how men try to describe the various facets of this brilliant jewel.

Three phrases are usually applied to the teaching that God has forgiven the sins of all men: "Objective justification", "general justification", or "universal justification." Most of the time these terms are interchangeable. Stoeckhardt3 seems to prefer "general justification," while Pieper4 talks of "objective reconciliation." Only Dr. S. Becker carefully delineates between objective and universal justification. And Now We Hear the Echo from Bivens, 13 Years Later The Primary Doctrine in Its Primary Setting: Objective Justification and Lutheran Worship [Prepared for the WELS National Conference on Worship, Music and the Arts Carthage College, Kenosha, Wisconsin, July, 1996. “The article of justification is the master and prince, the lord, the ruler, and the judge over all kinds of doctrines; it preserves and governs all church doctrine and raises up our consciences before God. Without this article the world is utter darkness and death.” (What Luther Says, Vol. 2. p 703.) Luther’s appraisal of the doctrine of justification is also ours. We hold it to be the primary doctrine of Scripture, that is, the central and most important teaching revealed by God for us sinners.2  The truth of justification, above all others, distinguishes Christianity from all other religions. If this teaching were obscured or lost, attempts to show significant differences between the Christian religion and others would ultimately prove to be futile. Also, as revealed and emphasized in the Bible, all other doctrines either prepare for or flow from this chief article of faith. Without this truth, all others would mean little. This doctrine is the source or basis of the benefits and blessings which mankind receives from God.  What precisely is this “master and prince, lord, ruler and judge” over other doctrines? Justification is a declaratory act of God, in which he pronounces sinners righteous. As revealed in the Bible, this declaration of God is made totally by grace and on account of Jesus Christ and his substitutionary life and death on behalf of mankind. To phrase it somewhat differently, God has justified acquitted or declared righteous the whole world of sinners. He has forgiven them. They have been reconciled to God; their status in his eyes has been changed from that of sinner to forgiven sinner for the sake of Jesus Christ.  But Luther, The Apology of the Augsburg Confession (Melanchthon), and the Formula of Concord Say *** GJ -  Some are going to say, "Bivens did not plagiarize. He used different wording. It is not the same verbatim - what Zarling wrote and what Bivens wrote. You have violated the Eighth Commandment and Matthew 18 and Volume 17 of the Unwritten Laws of the WELS Sect." Plagiarists typically follow their source and change a few words here and there. That way the match is not exact, but that is also what gives them away. As several have done or even said in my classes, "Change a few words, and it is not plagiarism." Note - the Zarling was meticulous in the scholarly citation and Bivens more brief. But it was the same source, same page, same quote. And Bivens also immediately defined the Chief Article as universal absolution, just as Zarling did. Like Zarling, anyone who teaches other than justification without faith is a destroyer of Christianity, plus all the other denunciations called down by Luther. Brilliant - except for one thing - Zarling and Bivens are the object of Luther's wrath. The Chief Article is not the Halle Dogma loved by Rambach, Stephan, and Webber, but justification by faith - as stated twice in the Book of Concord, and constantly taught in those confessions. Let us dare not chuckle that these two intellectual giants of WELS failed to consult the Book of Concord. Would they discuss Vatican decrees from My Golden Book on the Church of Rome? I think so. But - since I own a faded and well used copy of What Luther Says, 3 vols., I looked up their joint quotation. Look at what I found. The LCMS publication does not mention justification by faith for pages, but constantly lists this or that Luther quotation as Objective Justification - Oh! Oh! Oh!  - or Subjective Justification.That is a cute way to adjudicate the issue before it is presented. Teachers - in contrast to synodical puppets like Zarling and Bivens - present the Scriptures and Confessions without making the recent Pietists the ultimate authority on God's Word and the Confessions. Zarling and Bivens are like Marxists who treat every issue as the battle of the proletariat against the oppression of the capitalists, whether Goldilocks or Luther or Shakespeare. OJists only find OJ and their SJ is not even justification by faith, but faith in their absurd dogma of universal absolution and salvation without faith. As readers know, I copied this from Dr. Robert Preus, Justification and Rome. James 3 My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation. Zarling and Bivens are conscientious, careful, and deliberate liars. Which is worse - they know the truth and deny it? Or- they are so poorly trained themselves that they have no idea what is taught in the Scriptures, Luther, and the Book of Concord? WELS is betting the farm on this absurdity. If JP Meyer is wrong, then so is CFW Walther and his syphilitic bishop!