Panoply of False Doctrine in the Wisconsin Sect

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "UOJ Gems - Stoeckhardt":

Additional quotes, only a few of the thousands, confirming UOJ as the foundation of all (W)ELS theology.

"Any and every denial of the blessed truth of objective, universal justification is a denial of the Gospel itself. Any impairment of it is an impairment of the Gospel."
The Ministry of the Keys with Special Emphasis on the Power of the Christian to Forgive and Retain Sins
by Wilbert R. Gawrisch
http://www.wlsessays.net/files/GawrischKeys.pdf

"Long ago God already forgave every man his sin, believer and unbeliever alike. Nothing more remains to be done by the sinner himself before the anger of God is appeased. Therefore, a Christian can go to any manon earth and say to him, “Your sins are forgiven.”
The Absolution in the Theology and Practice of the Reformation
By: Edwin Lehmann
http://www.wlsessays.net/files/LehmannReformation.pdf

"The forgiveness of sins is not a potential fact that becomes a reality only when it is proclaimed in the Gospel and accepted by faith. This ought to be crystal clear to all members of a church in which the doctrine of universal, objective justification has been so definitely and emphatically proclaimed as in the Wisconsin Synod."

"And faith, too, is a necessary part of the process, yet, again, it is not necessary to bring forgiveness into being. We need clearly to remember that the word of forgiveness both brings faith into existence and is accepted by faith. As an objective truth to be proclaimed to all men, saints and sinners, believers and unbelievers, forgiveness does not depend on faith. In our teaching we must guard against leaving the impression that forgiveness becomes a reality only for the believer."

"When we ask the penitent sinner whether he believes in Christ, we ought not to ask this as a condition that must be fulfilled before his sin can be forgiven but as a reminder that it is only by believing the message that the blessings offered there become his own. And if he does not believe it before the absolution is spoken, we hope and pray that he will believe it after the forgiveness is announced."
The Doctrine of Confession and Absolution
From the Papers of Siegbert W. Becker
http://www.wlsessays.net/files/BeckerConfession.PDF

"And God saw all his Son had done, and behold it was very good, and there was justice, and there was mercy—the Lord’s way. I forgive you, one and all, for my Son’s sake, God declares; believe it to your salvation, he invites. This is the gospel for the ages."
The Fragile Nature of the Public Ministry [Arizona-California District Convention, Mesa, Arizona, June 20-22, 1994]
by Nathan R. Pope
http://www.wlsessays.net/files/PopeMinistry.pdf

---

Appendix One: False Claims In Favor of UOJ

Halle University - Professor Knapp

From Knapp’s Lectures on Christian Theology, translated by Leonard Woods, Jr., New York, 1833. The LCMS was organized in 1847, the Stephan ships landing in 1839.

§ 113. UNIVERSALITY OF JUSTIFICATION. 817

It is universal as the atonement itself; vid. § 111, II. If the atonement extends to the whole human race, justification must also be universal; i. e. all must be able to obtain the actual forgiveness of their sins and blessedness, on account of the atonement of Christ. But in order to obviate mistakes, some points may require explanation. Justification, then, is universal,

(1) In respect to the persons to be pardoned.

All men, according to the Bible, may partake of this benefit. It was designed for all; vid. especially Rom. 3: 23. 5: 15 (§ 111),

318 ART. X. § 113. UNIVERSALITY OP JUSTIFICATION

in opposition to Jewish exclusiveness. It is bestowed however conditionally ; certain conditions are prescribed which are indispensable. Those who do not comply with these conditions, are excluded from the enjoyment of the benefit. Justification and forgiveness are not, therefore, universal in effect (actu); and this solely through the fault of men.*

Another conclusion from the universality of justification is, that every one may be sure of his forgiveness. This certainty, however, must not be founded upon inward feelings, which are frequently deceptive ; but upon an actual compliance with the conditions on which God will forgive sins. If any one finds in himself the signs of true faith, of sincere love to God and Christ, of a renewed heart, and of a virtuous Christian disposition, he is justified. Rom. 8: 16, " The holy, Christian temper wrought in us by God, gives us the clearest and surest proof, that we are the children of God." 1 John 3: 7. 2 Pet. 1: 9, 10. This certainty is in the highest degree necessary to our tranquility and happiness. 1 Tim. 1: 16. ICor. 6: 11. 1 John 5: 18—20.

(2) In respect to sins and the punishment of sin.

(a) As to sins; the position that all sins, without exception, are forgiven for Christ's sake, is proved partly from the power and efficacy of the atonement of Christ, which is extended to all sins (vid. § 111, and the texts there cited) ; and partly from the texts which promise forgiveness of all sins, even the greatest and blackest, to those who comply with the prescribed conditions of pardon. Ezek. 18: 21, 22. Ps. 103: 3. 1 Cor. 6: 11. Ephes. 2: 5. 1 Tim. I: 15. The sin against the Holy Ghost cannot be regarded as an exception ; vid. § 84.

(6) As to the punishment of sin ; the answer to the question whether the pardoned are exempt from all the punishments of sin, whether therefore justification is plena et perfecta, may be learned from § 111, II. The natural and physical evils which result from past sins, indeed, remain ; but they are mitigated and rendered more tolerable, and are divested of the terror of punishment….

* [Translator - This is very conveniently expressed by the terms objective and subjective justification. Objective justification is the act of God, by which he proffers pardon to all through Christ; subjective, is the act of man, by which he accepts the pardon freely offered in the Gospel. The former is universal, the latter not.]

End of Knapp quotation

Jackson –  This may be the first instance where the Atonement and justification were confused and intermingled. New terms often introduce concepts alien to the Word, such as creating a separate Holy Spirit baptism distinct from water baptism, elevating one while demeaning the other. Knapp’s book remains in print today, so the translator’s introduction of two justifications is significant for understanding the origin of this error. This particular selection, like so many discussions of two justifications, is lacking any emphasis upon the efficacy of the Word in the Means of Grace. To discuss forgiveness without the efficacy of the Word is a grave error that cannot be fixed with the elegant use of Latin terminology.

Eduard Preuss, Missouri Pastor Who Became Roman Catholic

"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."

1. R. Eduard 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.

Jackson – Luther and the Concordists always kept the Gospel message in harmony with the Scriptures, emphasizing both the universal Atonement of Christ and the necessity of faith in receiving God’s declaration of forgiveness. Preuss has been quoted many times to support the forgiveness of the world, without the Word, which is the fundamental error of the Brief Statement, 1932.

Cherney, WELS

“Not guilty—period. God’s court doesn’t work that way either. God, our judge, has pronounced his verdict over us: Not guilty—period. We’ve been declared innocent of the crime of sin, free from the penalty of eternal death, all because Jesus took our place under God’s justice and paid every penalty we ever owed. And to demonstrate his verdict just as dramatically and convincingly as possible, God raised Jesus from the dead. “He was raised to life for our justification,” (Romans 4:25). That means Jesus rose to prove we are justified. Acquitted. Not guilty.”

            Pastor Ken Cherney (WELS), “The Surprising Verdict,” Northwestern Lutheran, August, 1998.

Jackson – Exegesis this poor should get someone removed from the ministry, but that is not true when UOJ is being defended. This claim is exactly the same as Universalism – everyone in the entire world is forgiven. Romans 4 teaches faith and Abraham as the father of faith. This article teaches forgiveness without faith.

Sig Becker, WELS

"The two terms are relatively modern. They are not used in the Lutheran Confessions. They are also not really synonymous. '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."

Siegbert Becker, "Objective Justification," Chicago Pastoral Conference, WELS, Elgin, Illinois, November 9, 1982, unpaginated.

Jackson – The terms are definitely modern, the first instance in English is dated in the 1830s (Woods translation of Knapp), where objective was contrasted with subjective justification. Universal seems to be even more recent, used in the last few decades and added to objective.

Hoenecke Citing Burk

And Ph. D. Burk (Rechtfertigung und Versicherung, p. 41) rightly said:

‘The difference between general justification and the more common usage of the term justification can be expressed as follows. The latter takes place precisely upon the appropriation of the former.’ (Cited in Hoenecke)

"For God has already forgiven you your sins 1800 years ago when He in Christ absolved all men by raising Him after He first had gone into bitter death for them. Only one thing remains on your part so that you also possess the gift. This one thing is—faith. And this brings me to the second part of today's Easter message, in which I now would show you that every man who wants to be saved must accept by faith the general absolution, pronounced 1800 years ago, as an absolution spoken individually to him."

C. F. W. Walther, The Word of His Grace, Sermon Selections, "Christ's Resurrection—The World's Absolution" Lake Mills: Graphic Publishing Company, 1978, p. 233. Mark 16:1-8.

F. Pieper

"Now, then, if the Father raised Christ from the dead, He, by this glorious resurrection act, declared that the sins of the whole world are fully expiated, or atoned for, and that all mankind is now regarded as righteous before His divine tribunal. This gracious reconciliation and justification is clearly taught in Romans 4:25: 'Who was delivered for our offenses and was raised again for our justification.' The term dikai,wsij (dikaiosis) here means the act of divine justification executed through God's act of raising Christ from the dead, and it is for this reason called the objective justification of all mankind. This truth Dr. Walther stressed anew in America. He taught that the resurrection of Christ from the dead is the actual absolution pronounced upon all sinners. (Evangelienpostille, p. 160ff.)…Calov, following Gerhard, rightly points out the relation of Christ's resurrection to our justification as follows: 'Christ's resurrection took place as an actual absolution from sin (respectu actualis a peccato absolutionis). As God punished our sins in Christ, upon whom He laid them and to whom He imputed them, as our Bondsman, so He also, by the very act of raising Him from the dead, absolved Him from our sins imputed to Him, and so He absolved also us in Him.'" [Bibl. Illust., ad Rom. 4:25]

Francis Pieper, Christian Dogmatics, 3 vols., St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1951, II, p. 321. Romans 4:25.

"Scripture teaches the objective reconciliation. Nineteen hundred years ago Christ effected the reconciliation of all men with God. God does not wait for men to reconcile Him with themselves by means of any efforts of their own. He is already reconciled. The reconciliation is an accomplished fact, just like the creation of the world. Romans 5:10: 'We were reconciled to God by the death of His Son.' When Christ died, God became reconciled. As Christ's death lies in the past, so also our reconciliation is an accomplished fact. 2 Corinthians 5:19: 'God was in Christ, reconciling' (namely, when Christ lived and died on earth) 'the world unto Himself.' The katalla,ssein (katallassein) of Romans 5:10 and 2 Corinthians 5:19 does not refer—let this fact be noted—to any change that occurs in men, but describes an occurrence in the heart of God. It was God who laid His anger by on account of the ransom brought by Christ. It was God who at that time already had in His heart forgiven the sins of the whole world, for the statement: 'God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself' means—and that is not our, but the Apostle's own interpretation—that God did 'not impute their trespasses unto them.' And 'not imputing trespasses' is, according to Scripture (Romans 4:6-8), synonymous with 'forgiving sins,' 'justifying' the sinner. "The resurrection of Christ is, as Holy Writ teaches, the actual absolution of the whole world of sinners. Romans 4:25: 'Who was raised again for our justification.' At that time we were objectively declared free from sin."

Francis Pieper, Christian Dogmatics, 3 vols., St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1951, II, p. p 348. Romans 5:10; 2 Corinthians 5:19.

Stoeckhardt

"This doctrine of general justification is the guarantee and warranty that the central article of justification by faith is being kept pure. Whoever holds firmly that God was reconciled to the world in Christ, and that to sinners in general their sin was forgiven, to him the justification which comes from faith remains a pure act of the grace of God. Whoever denies general justification is justly under suspicion that he is mixing his own work and merit into the grace of God.”

George Stoeckhardt, Concordia Theological Quarterly, April, 1978, p. 138. Cited by Pastor Vernon Harley "Synergism—Its Logical Association with General Justification," 511 Tilden, Fairmont, Minnesota 56031, August, 1984, p. 1.

Engelder, 1933

"The chief purpose, however, is to keep this article (general justification) before the people for its own sake. It cannot be presented and studied too often. Its vital relation to the subjective, personal justification by faith, cannot be stressed too strongly. It forms the basis of the justification by faith and keeps this article free from the leaven of Pelagianism. Unless the sinner knows that his justification is already an accomplished fact in the forum of God, he will imagine that it is his faith, his good conduct, which moves God to forgive him his sins. And unless he knows that God had him personally in mind in issuing the general pardon on Easter morning, he will have no assurance of his justification."

Theodore Engelder, Concordia Theological Monthly, July/August/September, 1933. Reissued by the seminary print-shop, Ft. Wayne, 1981. Cited by Pastor Vernon Harley, "Synergism—Its Logical Association with General Justification," 511 Tilden, Fairmont, Minnesota 56031, August, 1984, p. 1f.

"The entire Pauline doctrine of justification stands and falls with the special article of general justification. This establishes it beyond peradventure that justification is entirely independent of the conduct of man. And only in this way the individual can have the assurance of his justification. For it is the incontrovertible conclusion: Since God has already justified all men in Christ and forgiven them their sins, I, too, have a gracious God in Christ and forgiveness of all my sins."

Quoted with approval by Theodore Engelder, from George Stoeckhardt, Commentary on Romans, p. 264. Cited by Pastor Vernon Harley, "Synergism—Its Logical Association with General Justification," 511 Tilden, Fairmont, Minnesota 56031, August, 1984, p. 2.

Theodore Mueller, 1982

"The resurrection is God's public absolution of the entire world: 'Your sins are forgiven, all sins of all human beings; and there is no exception.' This is the meaning of the technical term 'objective justification.' The objective justification is central to the doctrine of salvation and derives logically from the facts that God's reconciliation, forgiveness, and declaration of 'not guilty' in no wise depend on the attitude or behaviour of human beings. If objective justification is denied, then it must follow that those who are declared righteous in some way have contributed to God's change of heart; justification is then no longer solely the result of God's grace."

Theodore Mueller, Concordia Theological Quarterly, January, 1982, p. 29. Cited by Pastor Vernon Harley, "Synergism—Its Logical Association with General Justification," 511 Tilden, Fairmont, Minnesota 56031, August, 1984, p. 3.

Theodore Brohm, 19^th Century

"The fact of the redemption and reconciliation of the entire human race through Christ, and with it the forgiveness of all sins for all men on God's part—which, indeed, is precisely what the Gospel proclaims, presents and gives—can by no means become a lie through the unbelief of men...even when the unbelievers don't receive it, but reject it for themselves and for this reason—indeed, for this reason alone—are lost."

Walther's colleague, Theodore Brohm, 1808-1881. 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. 16.

Norwegian Synod, 19^th Century

"The teaching of the Wisconsin Synod [of the old Norwegian Synod] is this, that in and with the universal reconciliation, which has occurred in Christ for the whole world—even Judas; the whole world—even Judas—has been justified and has received the forgiveness of sin. Therefore, according to Luther's clear words ("for where there is forgiveness of sins, there is also life and salvation"), the whole world (i.e. every person who is a part of the world—even Judas) has become a child of God and an heir of heaven."

Gottfried Fritschel, "Zur Lehre von der Rechtfertigung," Theologische Monatshefte, volume 4, 1871, (1-24), p. 7. 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. 2.

Missouri Synod Brief Statement, 1932

“Scripture teaches that God has already declared the whole world to be righteous in Christ, Romans 5:19; 2 Corinthians 5:18-21; Romans 4:25; that therefore not for the sake of their good works, but without the works of the Law, by grace, for Christ’s sake, he justifies, that is, accounts as righteous, all those who believe in Christ, that is, believe, accept, and rely on, the fact that for Christ’s sake their sins are forgiven.”

            Brief Statement of the Doctrinal Position of the Missouri Synod, 1932, “Of Justification.”

J. P. Meyer, 1963

“About 300 years earlier Johann Gerhard expressed the same truth in these words: ‘By raising Christ from the dead God absolved Him from our sins, which had been imputed to Him, and accordingly He absolved us also in Him.’ Gerhard was professor of theology in Jena. He did not write a Brief Statement, but he did write a book on Lutheran dogmatics consisting of 20 volumes. He died in 1637.”

            J. P. Meyer, “The Holy Spirit Creator,” The Northwestern Lutheran, September 24, 1950, p. 310.

Jackson – When this was published, people did not have access to Gerhard in English. This statement is a serious distortion of Gerhard, who agreed with the Concordists and published with Chemnitz.

First Kokomo Statement

I. "Objectively speaking, without any reference to an individual sinner's attitude toward Christ's sacrifice, purely on the basis of God's verdict, every sinner, whether he knows about it or not, whether he believes it or not, has received the status of a saint. What will be his reaction when he is informed about this turn of events? Will he accept, or will he decline?"

J. P. Meyer, Ministers of Christ, A Commentary on the Second Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 1963, p. 103f. 2 Corinthians 5:18-21.

 Jackson – This is utter rubbish. In the New Testament, only believers are forgiven and given the status of saints.

Second Kokomo Statement

II. "Before Christ's intervention took place God regarded him as a guilt-laden, condemned culprit. After Christ's intervention and through Christ's intervention He regards him as a guilt-free saint."

J. P. Meyer, Ministers of Christ, A Commentary on the Second Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 1963, p. 107. 2 Corinthians 5:18-21.

Jackson – This is Enthusiasm, because the distribution through the Holy Spirit in the Means of Grace is omitted. Teaching this laid the groundwork for Fuller Enthusiasm and worse.

Third Kokomo Statement

III. "This applies to the whole world, to every individual sinner, whether he was living in the days of Christ, or had died centuries before His coming, or had not yet been born, perhaps has not been born to this day. It applies to the world as such, regardless of whether a particular sinner ever comes to faith or not."

J. P. Meyer, Ministers of Christ, A Commentary on the Second Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 1963, p. 109. 2 Corinthians 5:18-21.

Jackson – Meyer ignored Abraham, the father of faith, who believed “and it was reckoned as righteousness.”

Decision Theology

"Objectively speaking, without any reference to an individual sinner's attitude toward Christ's sacrifice, purely on the basis of God's verdict, every sinner, whether he knows about it or not, whether he believes it or not, has received the status of a saint. What will be his reaction when he is informed about this turn of events? Will he accept, or will he decline?"

J. P. Meyer, Ministers of Christ, A Commentary on the Second Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, Milwaukee: Northwestern Publishing House, 1963, p. 103f. 2 Corinthians 5:18-21.                                                     

Jackson – The fatal attraction of WELS to various liberal Baptists is explained by this endorsement of Decision Theology.

WELS Conference of Presidents, 1954

“The Judge in heaven examines this evidence. He declares His verdict. It is one of acquittal. Man’s debt of sin is no longer charged against him. Sinful man is free!”

            WELS Conference of Presidents, “Every Sinner Declared Righteous,” 1954 tract.

Jackson – This is another example of the Atonement confused with justification by faith, showing what happens when the Means of Grace are ignored and the efficacious Word is not trusted.

Excommunicated For Denying Kokomo UOJ Statements, 1979

“Faith Lutheran Church

3215 West Judson Road

Kokomo, Indiana 46901

August 30, 1979

Mr. and Mrs. David Hartman

R. R. #1, Box 90

Kokomo, Indiana 46901

Dear Mr. and Mrs. Hartman,

In response to your letter of August 18, 1979, it is our understanding that your ‘no’ vote on June 20^th against supporting the biblical doctrine of the WELS was based at least in part, on your failure to accept the following statement – included in your letter – all of which are in agreement with the teachings of the WELS, namely that:

1. ‘Objectively speaking, without any reference to an individual sinners’ [sic] attitude toward Christs’ [sic] sacrafice [sic], purely on the basis of God’s verdict, every sinner, whether he knows it or not, whether he believes it or not, has received the status of a saint.’
2. ‘After Christs’ [sic] intervention and through Christs’ [sic] intervention, God regards all sinners as guilt-free saints.’
3. ‘When God reconciled the world to Himself through Christ, He individually pronounced forgiveness to each individual sinner whether that sinner ever comes to faith or not.’
4. ‘At the time of the resurrection of Christ God looked down in hell and declared Judas, the people destroyed in the flood, and all the ungodly, innocent, not guilty, and forgiven of all sin and gave unto them the status of saints.’

I trust this is the information you desire.

Jackson – WELS describes the Kokomo Statements as a caricature of justification written by the families involved. The first three were taken from J. P. Meyer’s Ministers of Christ. The fourth was from an earlier debate in Lutheranism. They did write them down, because their pastor was teaching that “caricature of justification.” Therefore, they were kicked out by WELS for disagreeing with these statements and blamed by WELS for writing down what WELS still teaches.

LCMS Theses on UOJ, 1983

"Thus objective justification or reconciliation is the forgiveness of sins both as it has been acquired for the entire human race by Christ's work of obedience in its stead and declared by His resurrection, and as it is seriously and efficaciously offered to all in the means of grace."

Commission on Theology and Church Relations "Theses on Justification" St. Louis: May, 1983, II. #5.

Jackson – Why did only a few LCMS pastors object to this nincompoopery? Like Kokomo, this is another step beyond the initial error of UOJ because it explicitly claims that forgiveness is acquired and declared for the human race – but on what grounds? A large number of people enjoy the Means of Grace, but not everyone does. This sentence is Universalism hidden under the guise of the Means of Grace.

"Subjective justification or reconciliation is this same forgiveness as it is received, appropriated by, and applied to the individual sinner through God-given faith alone (sola fide)."

Commission on Theology and Church Relations "Theses on Justification" St. Louis: May, 1983, II. #6.

Jackson – This is a second forgiveness, since the first forgiveness is universal, according to #5.

Jackson - The CTCR devoted section III to “The Nature of Justification (What Happens When the Sinner is Justified).” Theses 7 and 8 both speak of justification without mentioning faith. This error is compounded by another grand statement:

“It is contrary to Scripture and the pure Gospel to teach: That, although Christ by His work has earned forgiveness for all, there are still certain conditions which God demands of people before He will pronounce them righteous.”

Commission on Theology and Church Relations "Theses on Justification" St. Louis: May, 1983, III. #8.

Confessional statements should be precise and clear, but this formula introduces the Monster of Uncertainty. Is faith now a demand? What an odd term for faith. Or do they mean something else? Any Lutheran graduate of Theology 101 knows that the efficacious Gospel produces faith, that faith receives the Gospel promise of forgiveness.

Section III announces that forgiveness has been earned for all, that all sins are forgiven. This is followed by Section IV, “Man’s Need for Justification,” a Law section. Why would this noteworthy commission declare the Gospel first and then the Law? The method is common to Moravian Pietism and denounced by Luther. However, since justification itself has been confused already, the meaning of the Law section is especially troubling. Section IV by itself is adequately written. The runt of the litter seems pretty healthy when the rest are still-born.

Section V, “The Basis of Justification,” is another misbegotten effort. One can hardly imagine that Lutheran theologians with access to the Book of Concord, Luther, and Chemnitz, could write so poorly about justification. Once again, “It is contrary to Scripture and the pure Gospel…” Why is that peculiar formulation used? Is the pure Gospel something other than what God reveals to us in the Scripture? I suspect that the men involved followed Karl Barth’s distinction between the Scriptures and the Word.

The lupine teeth and claws come out from under the fleece in Section VI. “The Universal and Finished Results of Christ’s Work of Obedience.” Note well:

1. “Christ is the Savior of all. This means that the whole world of sinners has been redeemed, forgiven, and reconciled to God in Him.”

Commission on Theology and Church Relations "Theses on Justification" St. Louis: May, 1983, VI. #19.

Jackson – This is Universalism.

2. “God, by raising His Son from the dead, has justified Him, declared Him to be the Righteous One, and in Him (i.e., for the sake of His finished work of obedience and satisfaction) has declared (as proclaimed in the Gospel), or reckoned, the whole world to be righteous.”

Commission on Theology and Church Relations "Theses on Justification" St. Louis: May, 1983, VI. #22.

Jackson – This is perverted Universalism, because the language of justification by faith (reckoned or counted righteous) is employed to make justification by faith meaningless.

3. “God has acquired the forgiveness of sins for all people by declaring that the world for Christ’s sake has been forgiven. The acquiring of forgiveness is the pronouncement of forgiveness.”

Commission on Theology and Church Relations "Theses on Justification" St. Louis: May, 1983, VI. #23.

After establishing a vague Universalism, the CTCR devotes the next section to “Justification by Faith,” although the main heading is “The Appropriation of Christ’s Righteousness.” The rest of the document does not merit additional comment, because the entire structure is wrong from the beginning, even if isolated statements are correct by themselves. The “Theses on Justification” are a leaning tower of logs, like the one that collapsed at Texas A and M University, built badly on a soft foundation. One statement alone condemns the entire work, which contains many other errors, confusions, and fraudulent statements:

“It is contrary to Scripture and the pure Gospel to teach:…That it is not Biblical to speak of ‘objective justification.’

Commission on Theology and Church Relations "Theses on Justification" St. Louis: May, 1983, VI. #23.

Jackson – This is pure popery, denouncing anyone who adheres to the Book of Concord and Luther as being “contrary to Scripture and the pure Gospel.”

UOJ Gems - Stoeckhardt

From the Wendland essay:

Wendland:
It will be argued, perhaps, that neither Luther nor our early Lutheran confessions make this distinction between “objective” and “subjective” justification. It is true that they do not make use of this specific terminology, just as little as they use the term “verbal inspiration.” But to deny that both Luther and our Confessions present justification from the standpoint outlined above would certainly take a great deal of misinterpretation. Luther surely stresses justification by faith. So do our Confessions. But faith is never presented as something necessary to complete a justification which God has only made possible. 

Stoeckhardt writes:

Never in this sense do we hear it presented: I believe; I am conscious of the fact that I believe on my Savior. Therefore I am justified in the sight of God. A believing Christian does not make the pulse of his faith-life the criterion of his state of grace… The believer rather makes this conclusion: O, how godless I still am. Out of my heart godless thoughts continue to arise. There is no doubt but that I am a poor, unworthy sinner. My sin is ever before me. But now God’s Word tells me, that God has already declared godless Sinners righteous. Thus I belong without any doubt whatsoever in the number of those whom God justifies (St. Römerbrief, p. 185).

***

GJ - The paragraph on Luther reveals the zombie-like attitude of Syn Conference leaders. After conceding--as he must--that Luther and the Confessions not have this OJ/SJ distinction, Wendland argues that denying OJ/SJ requires "a great deal of misinterpretation."

The first step is to set aside Luther and the Confessions. At least Wendland concedes the facts in this matter. Recent authors (like Blank) find OJ under every rock in the Book of Concord. All their precious OJ passages are about the Atonement.

But Wendland is more dangerous in asserting a blatant falsehood and using that falsehood to claim a furtive, stealthy OJ in Luther and the Confessions.

Here is the Wendland argument - verbal inspiration is not found in Luther and the Confessions either. Verbal inspiration was not being debated in Luther and the Confessions, yet the concept is taught with great clarity. The term verbal inspiration is not found because it is a modern term, but the doctrine is there - even the Latin words for inerrant and infallible (Luther's words, in the Book of Concord).

A note on terminology - When apostates began attacking verbal inspiration with tricky little subversive arguments, the faithful began saying plenary inspiration. Likewise, since infallible was under attack--"infallible in doctrine, but not in history or geography"--inerrant was used. Thus older works could be lacking in the latest terms but still teach the same doctrine as before.

Although Wendland destroys his own argument, he makes it anyway. On Wendland's authority we are supposed to assume that double-justification is the basis for Luther and the Confessions. He contradicts himself.

"Luther surely stresses justification by faith. So do our Confessions."

What follows is incomprehensible.

"But faith is never presented as something necessary to complete a justification which God has only made possible."

Like all UOJ Enthusiasts, Wendland is keen to make the case for universal absolution without faith. Once the reader understands the agenda, it is easy to see how every bit of nonsense is applied to confuse and bewilder the victim.

Who better to Stoeckhardt to turn confusion into doctrinal surrender?

Stoeckhardt: "Never in this sense do we hear it presented: I believe; I am conscious of the fact that I believe on my Savior. Therefore I am justified in the sight of God. A believing Christian does not make the pulse of his faith-life the criterion of his state of grace…"

I am not sure what the pulse of faith-life is, but this bizarre claim is guaranteed to make faith in the Gospel seem to be an illusion. Another characteristic of all the UOJ writers is to attack faith.

In contrast, Luther clearly teaches at all times, in harmony with the Scriptures, believers are forgiven. The foundational sin, in the words of Jesus Himself, is "they do not believe on Me." (John 16)

More Stoeckhardt - and they let him teach?

The believer rather makes this conclusion: O, how godless I still am. Out of my heart godless thoughts continue to arise. There is no doubt but that I am a poor, unworthy sinner. My sin is ever before me. But now God’s Word tells me, that God has already declared godless Sinners righteous. Thus I belong without any doubt whatsoever in the number of those whom God justifies (St. Römerbrief, p. 185).

Exactly how can the believer be called "godless"? They are still sinners because they are human. Stoeckhardt comforts sinners by telling them they were already forgiven, without faith, so now they know they are forgiven.

Stoeckhardt followed Walther, literally and figuratively. Behind this confusion is the theme of Walther's Easter absolution sermon:
1. God has already forgiven the sins of the entire world.
2. Now you must believe that this is true.

One must trust in an anti-Scriptural, anti-Confessional absurdity (universal absolution, without faith, without the Word, grace without the Means of Grace) to be forgiven, because the first absolution does not work unless one makes a decision to accept the unacceptable. They call this decision "subjective justification."

This is a counterfeit argument. As one Lutheran student said, the UOJ essays are comical if one has just spent a day reading the Book of Concord.

---

"For neither you nor I could ever know anything of Christ, or believe on Him, and obtain Him for our Lord, unless it were offered to us and granted to our hearts by the Holy Ghost through the preaching of the Gospel. The work is done and accomplished; for Christ has acquired and gained the treasure for us by His suffering, death, resurrection, etc. But if the work remained concealed so that no one knew of it, then it would be in vain and lost. That this treasure, therefore, might not lie buried, but be appropriated and enjoyed, God has caused the Word to go forth and be proclaimed, in which He gives the Holy Ghost to bring this treasure home and appropriate it to us. Therefore sanctifying is nothing else than bringing us to Christ to receive this good, to which could not attain ourselves."
The Large Catechism, The Creed, Article III, #38, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 689. Tappert, p. 415.

J-501
"But outside of this Christian Church, where the Gospel is not, there is no forgiveness, as also there can be no holiness [sanctification]. Therefore all who seek and wish to merit holiness [sanctification], not through the Gospel and forgiveness of sin, but by their works, have expelled and severed themselves [from this Church]."
The Large Catechism, The Creed, Article III, #56, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 693. Tappert, p. 418.

"The danger is that by use of the term 'subjective justification' we may lose the objective divine act of God by which He declares the individual sinner righteous ex pistews pistin in the instant faith (embracing Christ) is wrought in him, leaving only the one divine declaration regarding the whole world of sinners, calling this an actus simplex, the only forensic act of God, and expanding this to mean that God declared every sinner free from guilt when Christ was raised from the dead, so many millions even before they were born, irrespective of faith, apart from and without faith." This surely wipes out 'justification by faith alone.' Only his faith is reckoned to him for righteousness."
R. C. H. Lenski, Interpretation of Romans, Augsburg Publishing House: Minneapolis, 1963, p. 85. Romans 1:17.

“But this must be noted: Christ died 1900 years ago, on a certain day, at a certain hour in time. But this counts for all time: for the entire future time, for all the prior time. For by Christ’s death ‘all died,’ Adam and all his descendants. The effect covered all. It is literally true: ‘the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.’ His death availed for Adam. All in the Old Testament who believed were saved by that death just as all are in the New Testament who believe.”
R. C. H. Lenski, Interpretation of Second Corinthians, Columbus: Wartburg Press, 1957, p. 1033. 2 Corinthians 5:15.

I believe that Jesus Christ, true God, begotten of the Father from eternity, and also true man, born of the Virgin Mary, is my Lord, who has redeemed me, a lost and condemned creature, purchased and won [delivered] me from all sins, from death, and from the power of the devil, not with gold or silver, but with His holy, precious blood and with His innocent suffering and death, in order that I may be [wholly] His own, and live under Him in His kingdom, and serve Him in everlasting righteousness, innocence, and blessedness, even as He is risen from the dead, lives and reigns to all eternity. This is most certainly true.”
Martin Luther, The Small Catechism, Explanation of the Second Article of the Creed, II. 4. Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis; Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 545.

"This faith, encouraging and consoling in these fears, receives remission of sins, justifies and quickens. For this consolation is a new and spiritual life [a new birth and a new life]. These things are plain and clear, and can be understood by the pious, and have testimonies of the Church [as is to be seen in the conversion of Paul and Augustine]. The adversaries nowhere can say how the Holy Ghost is given. They imagine that the Sacraments confer the Holy Ghost ex opere operato, without a good emotion in the recipient, as though, indeed, the gift of the Holy Ghost were an idle matter."
Article IV., Justification, Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 139. Tappert, p. 115.

"Now, that faith signifies, not only a knowledge of the history, but such faith as assents to the promise, Paul plainly testifies when says, Romans 4:16: 'Therefore it is of faith, to the end the promise might be sure.' For he judges that the promise cannot be received unless by faith. Wherefore he puts them together as things that belong to one another, and connects promise and faith."
Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Article IV, Justification, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 135. Tappert, p. 114. Romans 4:16.

"But as the Confutation condemns us for having assigned these two parts to repentance, we must show that [not we, but] Scripture expresses these as the chief parts in repentance and conversion. For Christ says, Matthew 11:28: Come unto Me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Here there are two members. The labor and the burden signify the contrition, anxiety, and terrors of sin and of death. To come to Christ is to believe that sins are remitted for Christ's sake; when we believe, our hearts are quickened by the Holy Ghost through the Word of Christ. Here, therefore, there are these two chief parts, contrition and faith."
Apology of the Augsburg Confession, Article XII (V), #44, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 263. Tappert, p. 187. Matthew 11:28.

"How is a person justified before God? This occurs solely by faith in the Son of God, Jesus Christ; that is, freely, not because of any works or merits of one's own but only because of the one Mediator, Jesus Christ, who became the sacrificial victim and propitiation on our behalf. By this sacrifice, man obtained forgiveness of sins and became righteous; that is, God-pleasing and acceptable. His righteousness was imputed to man for Christ's sake, and man becomes an heir of eternal life when he believes with certainty that God gives him these blessings for the sake of His Son."
David Chytraeus, A Summary of the Christian Faith (1568), trans., Richard Dinda, Decatur: Repristination Press, 1994. p. 105.

"Christian righteousness is the forgiveness of sin, the imputation of the righteousness of Christ and acceptance to eternal life. It is free, not the result of any virtues or works but is given solely because of Christ, the Mediator, and apprehended by faith alone."
David Chytraeus, A Summary of the Christian Faith (1568), trans., Richard Dinda, Decatur: Repristination Press, 1994. p. 106.

"Scripture therefore uses these words, 'We are justified by faith,' to teach both: 1) What the reason (or merit) for justification is, or what the blessings of Christ are; to wit, that through and for the sake of Christ alone we are granted forgiveness of sins, righteousness and eternal life; and 2. How
these should be applied or transferred to us; namely, by embracing the promise and relying on Christ by faith alone."
David Chytraeus, A Summary of the Christian Faith (1568), trans., Richard Dinda, Decatur: Repristination Press, 1994. p. 107.

"It must be admitted that when our Lutheran Confessions speak of justification they speak almost exclusively of that facet of justification we usually call 'subjective' justification, which has also been called 'special' or 'personal' justification. But the Confessions also show us that the basis for this justification is the justification that precedes faith."
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. 13.

"The chief differences between the contestants [Norwegians and Augustana] seems to have been in the essence rather than in the effect of Absolution. Both agreed that the Gospel offered the forgiveness of sins, but the one side held that it was given only to those who in faith received it, while the other side said that it was given also to unbelievers, though they did not accept it. Both agreed that unbelievers received no benefit from such an absolution."
J. Magnus Rohne, Norwegian Lutheranism up to 1872, New York, Macmillan, p. 231. 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. 20. [This is important for understanding the early Robert Preus, who supported UOJ.]

"Against both these parties the pure teachers of the Augsburg Confession have taught and contended that by the fall of our first parents man was so corrupted that in divine things pertaining to our conversion and the salvation of our souls he is by nature blind, that, when the Word of God is preached, he neither does nor can understand it, but regards it as foolishness; also, that he does not of himself draw nigh to God, but is and remains an enemy of God, until he is converted, becomes a believer [is endowed with faith], is regenerated and renewed, by the power of the Holy Ghost through the Word when preached and heard, out of pure grace, without any cooperation of his own."
Formula of Concord, Thorough Declaration, II. 5. Free Will, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 881.

"The second argument is that 'God desires all men to be saved' (1 Timothy 2:4), and He gave His Son for us men and created man for eternal life. Likewise: All things exist for man, and he himself exists for God that he may enjoy Him, etc. These points and others like them can be refuted as easily as the first one. For these verses must always be understood as pertaining to the elect only, as the apostle says in 2 Timothy 2:10 'everything for the sake of the elect.' For in an absolute sense Christ did not die for all, because He says: 'This is My blood which is poured out for you' and 'for many'--He does not say: for all--'for the forgiveness of sins.' (Mark 14:24; Matthew 26:28)
Martin Luther, Luther's Works, 25 p. 375. 2 Timothy 2:10; 1 Timothy 2:4; Mark 14:24; Matthew 26:28

"In like manner Moses must precede and teach people to feel their sins in order that grace may be sweet and welcome to them. Therefore all is in vain, however friendly and lovely Christ may be pictured, if man is not first humbled by a knowledge of himself and he possesses no longing for Christ, as Mary's Song says, 'The hungry he hath filled with good things; and the rich he hath sent empty away,' Luke 1:53."
Martin Luther, Sermons of Martin Luther, ed., John Nicholas Lenker, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983, II, p. 149. Matthew 15:21-28; Luke 1:53.

"The apostle says 'our,' 'our sins;' not his own sin, not the sins of unbelievers. Purification is not for, and cannot profit, him who does not believe. Nor did Christ effect the cleansing by our free-will, our reason or power, our works, our contrition or repentance, these all being worthless in the sight of God; he effects it by himself. And how? By taking our sins upon himself on the holy cross, as Isaiah 53:6 tells us."
Martin Luther, Sermons of Martin Luther, ed., John Nicholas Lenker, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983, VI, p. 180. Hebrews 1:1-12; Hebrews 1:3;

"Christ is speaking here not of the word of the law, but of the Gospel, which is a discourse about Christ, who died for our sins, etc. For God did not wish to impart Christ to the world in any other way; he had to embody him in the Word and thus distributed him, and present him to everybody; otherwise Christ would have existed for himself alone and remained unknown to us; he would have
thus died for himself. But since the Word places before us Christ, it thus places us before Him who has triumphed over death, sin, and Satan. Therefore, he who grasps and retains Christ, has thus also eternal deliverance from death. Consequently it is a Word of life, and it is true, that whoever keeps the Word shall never see death."
Martin Luther, Sermons of Martin Luther, 8 vols., ed., John Nicholas Lenker, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983, II, p. 177. John 8:46-59.

"To this incline your ears, and be persuaded that God speaks through men and forgives you your sins; this, of course, requires faith."
Martin Luther, Sermons of Martin Luther, 8 vols., ed. John Nicholas Lenker, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983, II, p. 200.


"If I do not believe it, I will not receive its benefits; but that neither renders it false nor proves that anything is lacking in Christ."
Martin Luther, Sermons of Martin Luther, 8 vols., ed., John Nicholas Lenker, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1983, II, p. 258. Easter, Third Sermon. Mark 16:1-8.

Ernie Wendland WELS UOJ Essay - 1951 - Complete

Kuske Catechism and UOJ

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Does Anyone Wonder Why WELS Pastors Are So Mixed U...":

Lito, very good to hear from you my friend!

The (W)ELS also pulled a very sinister move back in 1982 when they had David Kuske revise Luther's Catechism and added the false gospel of UOJ. I'll post the quote here and note that because the Bible verses he quotes do not support UOJ he paraphrased. The brackets () are in his original statement.

Page 210, section 252 On What Basis Did God Declare Guilty Sinners To Be Righteous?

Kuske posts: Romans 3:23-26 (So that God could be a good judge and still declare sinners righteous, he had Christ pay the debt which sinners owed for all their sins.)

Heads should fly over this blatant manipulation of Luther's Catechism in order to promote and defend the central doctrine of the Emergent New Age Church Growth religion.

I'm willing to provide whatever UOJ documentation anyone needs to educate themselves, address the doctrine of UOJ with others or call the Synod and church officials, clergy and laity to task over their promotion of this false gospel.

Christ's abundant blessings to you and yours LPC!

In Christ,
Brett

***

GJ - One person theorized that the Kuske blue catechism created a pan-WELS UOJ unity. Before that, UOJ was not such a plague. Perhaps that spread it down to the teens. Certainly the heresy was well entrenched before that.

When someone asked me which catechism I liked, I said, "Luther's."

"No, I mean which edition of the catechism do you like?"

I said, "Luther's alone. The textbooks turn into Talmuds, and they often teach against the catechism."

Even seminarians cheat — a term paper ghostwriter speaks « Churchmouse Campanologist

Say it ain't so, Joe. Say it ain't so. Plagiarizing a Hybels email doesn't count, does it?


Even seminarians cheat — a term paper ghostwriter speaks « Churchmouse Campanologist

Mid-Week Advent Service

By Norma Boeckler


Advent, December 15, 2010

Pastor Gregory L. Jackson

http://www.ustream.tv/channel/bethany-lutheran-worship

Mid-Week Advent, Thursday, 7 PM Central

The Hymn #81 Gerhardt Thy Manger Is 3.60
The Order of Vespers p. 41
The Psalmody Psalm 100 p. 144
The First Lection
The Second Lection
The Sermon Hymn #90 Gerhardt Come Your Hearts 3.83

Sanctification Follows Justification

The Prayers and Lord’s Prayer p. 44
The Collect for Peace p. 45
The Benediction p. 45
The Hymn # 93 O Lord We Welcome 3.40

KJV 2 Thessalonians 2:13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: 14 Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. 15 Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle. 16 Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace, 17 Comfort your hearts, and stablish you in every good word and work.

KJV Luke 1:1 Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us, 2 Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word; 3 It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus, 4 That thou mightest know the certainty of those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.

Sanctification

The whole clause expresses one thought: “God chose you from the beginning unto salvation in connection with sanctification of spirit and faith in truth.” There is no other choice or election save this one for salvation in connection with sanctification and faith. Some think only of final salvation (heaven), i.e., of the “glory” mentioned in v. 14; but sanctification and faith point to “salvation” both here and hereafter.
Lenski, R. C. H.: The Interpretation of St. Paul's Epistles to the Colossians, to the Thessalonians, to Timothy, to Titus and to Philemon. Columbus, O. : Lutheran Book Concern, 1937, S. 439.

Today I would like to emphasize the ongoing work of the Gospel Word in our lives, which is often called sanctification.

When people understand the Holy Spirit’s work in creating faith and justifying us, the continuous work of sanctification is also clear.

Sanctification is a long, Latin word for “making holy.” We do not make ourselves holy. The Gospel Word does that.

Lutherans often emphasize and talk about justification, even when they are abusing the term and twisting its meaning.

This is really simple and plain, easy to understand. The Gospel Promises create faith in our hearts and sustain that faith. Faith receives God’s declaration of forgiveness. That begins with conversion when we are first unbelievers, whether as babies or later in life. Receiving forgiveness in faith means trusting in God’s work in Christ on the cross. Both the creation of faith and the declaration of forgiveness are God’s work (monergism).

Obviously, many have rebelled against this simple message, building all manner of hedges, traps, sinkholes, and barriers. In a few words, they add works to faith.

This forgiveness is a continuous action for believers, but that is not all that happens. The Gospel Word is like good yeast, which continues to permeate our lives, slowly having more effect

Justification is God’s action through the Word, and sanctification is also His action through the Word.

Forgiveness is just the beginnings of God’s blessings through the Word. The New Testament uses the term “saints” for believers, which literally means “the holy.” Believers are holy because God has made them holy.

No one is a saint without faith. Giving someone the status of a saint, without faith, is absolute absurdity, but that is the official opinion of the Wisconsin Sect and the ELS. To make matters worse, they like to say that everyone in Hell is a saint. That only makes sense if one subscribes to their notion of grace without the Means of Grace, forgiveness without faith, without the Word of the Gospel.

Universalism pops up in many ways today because it is a symptom of rationalism, subjecting the Word of God to human reason, that is, subordinating God’s Word to man’s opinions.

Modern Roman Catholics have a version of this, which is called The Anonymous Christian. That little deviation is enormously popular among the moderns and is widely repeated by liberal Protestants. It came from the Jesuit Karl Rahner, who said that when missionaries come to pagan lands, they find people who are loving, kind, and generous. They have the attributes of Christians without knowing who Christ is. Hence they are anonymous Christians. Taken a little farther, it makes someone ask, “Why are we going there? We only bring our own sins there.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_Christian

The statement quoted in Wikipedia is almost identical to a passage in C. S. Lewis.

Ultimately, faith is the stumbling block, because faith means complete, child-like trust in God’s Word.

Our Old Adam rebels against faith. For instance, any time we object to bearing the cross, the pain and complaining mean that we do not trust it is for our own good.

Whenever we doubt the goodness of God and His gracious will for us, our faith is being submerged by the Old Adam, which will never go away while we are alive.

That is why it is comical when people pretend to be holy through their works when this inherent selfishness remains in us and must be fought against with the weapon of the Word.

The Holy Spirit in the Law slays our self-righteousness and convicts us of not believing on Jesus Christ.

Lenski likes “believing on” and I think I know why. The term is a bit foreign for me, but I think he takes it to mean “total trust in.”

WELS church lady mentioned “hating on” someone, and we know what that means. Everyone piles on and there is nothing but malice and revenge. That goes with shunning. Sometimes the hate is most eloquently expressed in silence and making someone invisible.

“Loving on” is a Southern expression I hear in Arkansas. One woman said, “I was just loving on my little niece…” I knew exactly what she meant. When we are with a small child who is a relative (like a grandchild, niece, or nephew) we give total love to that child and show it in many ways, with words and hugs and kisses.

So I would translate the famous passage in John 16 this way:
KJV John 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. 8 And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: 9 Of sin, because they believe not on me; 10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;

Jackson Living Bible – The Holy Spirit will convict the world of sin, because they do not trust completely in Me for their salvation.

KJV Romans 8:30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. [GJ – This utterly destroys UOJ in one verse.]

Luther often exchanged justification and sanctification when he wrote, because the two go together. Justification brings sanctification, and sanctification presumes justification by faith.

Following justification is the life of the believer – sanctification. Whatever we do in faith glories God who created this faith through the Gospel. Works of faith follow salvation. The fuel for these works is the Gospel Word. Its effect moves us to be generous, patient, kindly, willing to speak about our faith.

If those attributes are lacking, we should look at whether we trust completely in Christ for our salvation.

Does Anyone Wonder Why WELS Pastors Are So Mixed Up About Right and Wrong?

GJ Note - The Wendland essay is 100% UOJ. But this selection may confuse readers because it begins with  brilliant refutation of UOJ by the Ohio Synod. I have marked the refutation of UOJ in blue. Wendland's support of UOJ follows.

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Introduction to WELS DP Beckman's Guilt-Free Saint...":

(W)ELSian Ernst Henry Wendland quotes an appropriate warning, by the Ohio Synod's Kirchenzeitung in its May issue of 1905, to everyone who teaches and defends the false gospel of Universal Objective Justification in his essay, Review of Common Confession Article VI-Justification given to the Biennial WELS Convention at DMLC, New ULM, MN in 1951.

(1) Reconciliation and personal justification are thrown together (by Missouri), so that nothing is left of an individual justification by faith. According to Missouri’s new teaching the whole world is justified, in fact, already when Christ completed his work of redemption. A different justification, which takes place when man comes to faith is not present according to this teaching. Thus the central teaching of Scripture and of the Lutheran church is destroyed. (2) According to this new doctrine of justification is already completed without faith, before faith ever enters into the picture. Faith limps behind. Man should only believe in a justification already completed a long time ago. Thus Missouri destroys the Bible teaching of a justification by faith. (3) It is no longer true according to this new doctrine that God first justifies in the moment that a sinner comes to faith. No longer - faith, then justification; rather centuries ago a justification of the whole world - now believe this! We shudder at this sin against everything sacred! God preserve these blinded creatures, who prate so about the clarity of Scripture, and condemn vigourously everything that doesn’t suit their fancy. Now through their own blindness they have fallen so deeply into the night of error! God have mercy upon the poor people who are no longer hearing the central teaching of Scripture, but rather a miserable fallacy, a poor figment of man’s own invention (Lehre u. Wehre, Vol. 51, p. 385 ff.) Page 3

E.H. Wendland goes on to clarify the heart of UOJ and dismisses Missouri's Brief Statement as too ambiguous in regards to declaring the whole unbelieving world forgiven, justified and righteous by God's divine verdict.

"Now we come finally to the Common Confession, where this doctrinal divergence has been supposedly resolved. As we approach it we naturally ask, “Will it contain an unequivocal statement on objective justification? Will it rule out the thought that faith is first necessary before any justification of God’s part is possible?”

We read: “By His redemptive work Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world; hence, forgiveness of sin has been secured and provided for all men. (This is often spoken of as objective justification.)”

We readily agree that this first sentence is a statement which sets forth the Scriptural truth of universal redemption. We cannot say that there is anything unscriptural about it, as far as it goes. But we certainly cannot agree with the following parenthetical statement, that this sentence adequately and unequivocally covers objective justification. As a matter of fact, we cannot find the essential characteristic of objective justification mentioned at all, the fact that God “has already declared the whole world to be righteous in Christ” (cf. Brief Statement). “Secured and provided” do not convey the thought of an outright grant, declaring man as acquitted before the bar of God’s justice. Perhaps they can be interpreted in that light by members of the Missouri Synod. But they can just as well be interpreted by the American Lutheran Church to uphold their old position, that although God has secured and provided forgiveness of sin by the redemptive work of Christ, He does not actually justify or declare the sinner to be righteous until the first spark of faith is kindled in his heart. The ambiguity of the Common Confession’s definition of objective justification is so evident that we cannot see how it can be accepted as a final settlement of the old controversy."

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

Note the new URLs for essays. The old links will not work.

***

GJ - I will publish the whole essay here soon. Read and weep, WELS/ELS members. Your pastors are trained in utter rubbish.

Missouri still tries to amalgamate UOJ with justification by faith. Its more recent justification theses were confused and contradictory but definitely anti-justification-by-faith.

Mr. Squirrel Fooled Me Again

Many bird-watchers bribe squirrels with corn.
Squirrels find a way into the birdseed, treating their bribes as a side dish.

I was congratulating myself yesterday for feeding small birds with an inexpensive feeder - no perch. The seed supply was getting lower, and I saw no opportunity for any creature except a small bird to feed there.

This morning Mr. Squirrel disabused me of that fantasy. He stood on his hind legs and reached into the small aperture where the seed came out. He scooped the seed directly into his mouth.

He was so intent that he did not see me for a long time. Suddenly he jumped up onto the top of the feeder and looked at me, his tail twitching. Seeing no signs of a threat, he went back to his SRO (standing room only) feeding routine.

In the backyard, another squirrel was feeding from the corn feeder.

As piggish as the squirrels might seem, they do not haunt the feeders. I put an upturned bucket near the lower bedroom window and filled the section with seed, finishing the mixed seed bag. Another squirrel worked over that pile this morning, but he left and cardinals began enjoying the rest. They were also at the main sunflower feeder.

Reward - as I came back from the kitchen with a fresh cup of coffee for Mrs. Ichabod, a blue jay appeared at the inexpensive bird squirrel feeder. I thought they moved South for the winter, but they have moved in for the food.

Blue jays are so good at burying acorns that they are given credit for maintaining oak forests. If I were managing things, I would have given that chore exclusively to the squirrels, just to keep them busy doing something useful. Every role in Creation seems to have multiple redundancies built into the picture.

We have plenty of oak trees in this area, so squirrels and blue jays are happy and well fed.

I decided to buy a huge bird house, 25 feet tall, upright, and have it dug into the ornery soil of the ravine. The word for shovel in Bella Vista is pickax. I ordered one with multiple holes and plenty of food mounted on its outside. The estimate was several thousand dollars, not including labor. Then I thought, "Wait, I already have a dead tree standing up in the ravine. It has holes in it and doubtless many insect larvae stuck in the bark."

Just kidding. Why buy a bird-house like that when God has already planned for them, far better than I could?

Blue jays nested outside our bedroom window in 2010, raising their brood.
LI wondered about a baby bird waving its wings and thinking, "What are these? Maybe I can fly?"
Do evolutionists ever consider the software involved in baby bird flight? 

---

bored has left a new comment on your post "Mr. Squirrel Fooled Me Again":

When I saw this picture I immediately thought of the WELS churches who survive on grants.

"PLEASE GIVE US MORE MONEY!!! WE NEED A ROLL-DOWN PROJECTOR SCREEN! AND NEW AMPS FOR OUR BAND!"

But that disrespects the Blue jays.

***

GJ - Blue jay nestlings grow up and fly away on their own, but you are certainly right about the image.

Introduction to WELS Pastor Beckman's Guilt-Free Saints in Hell Essay, 1983

Brett Meyer and others--you know who you are--have encouraged me to publish the UOJ essays, lest these treasures of heresy be lost to history. They represent a smug, anti-Christian, anti-Confessional attitude that explains much of what is happening right now.

Here is an interesting contrast. Most WELS/ELS/CLC laity do not know about these essays. If a layman has read any of them, that person is an exception. I have been linking them for some time, mostly because of Brett's comments. Something told me I should publish them for more exposure. The laity are responding in shock.

In contrast, most of the seminary graduates have read these essays. In WELS, the essay file is their BoC - Butchering of Concord, a new set of confessions supplanting the Lutheran Symbols.* The best and brightest heretics get their offscourings added to the WELS BoC. New Ager Jeske is one such honoree. So is the bored-again Atheist Curtis Peterson (formerly LCMS CG pastor, formerly WELS CG pastor, formerly married).

Anyone who gets acquainted with these essays will see how the same quotations are recycled with the care and devotion of aging hippies reusing their trash piles.

The ELS is expected to follow suit by parroting these essays, and they do.

UOJ advocates reveal their vile nature by claiming to teach justification by faith, but their real joy in life is undermining justification by faith and the Means of Grace. Read the absurdities below.

WELS used DP Beckman to excuse the joint leadership conference at Snowbird - ELCA/WELS/LCMS. The explanation du jour was, "If we don't spend the money, someone else will get it." Another excuse was, "They force us to spend the money that way." And finally, without cracking a smile, they said, "You know, they do not have to give it to Lutherans. They can give the insurance money to anyone they please." And they do. Habitat for Humanity and The Salvation Army are recent Thrivent grant recipients. So are the worst pastors in WELS.

WELS Pastor Beckman, Guilt-Free Saints in Hell, Pages 1-4.

---

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Just A Vacation Book - Or Two":

Joe Krohn touches on a critical and important point of discussion. UOJ teaches that the whole unbelieving world has been declared righteous and justified. ALL sins that Christ paid for have been forgiven every man, woman and child.

Why then does anyone go to Hell? UOJ teaches that the unforgivable sin is Unbelief. That is the sin that God didn't forgive. Unbelief is the sin that Christ didn't pay for, that His righteousness didn't cover.

Then the question must be asked, "Who was born into this world without being guilty of unbelief?"
Romans 11:32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.


Everyone was born with the sin of unbelief. Then we ask, "Where is it written that the sin of unbelief isn't forgiven?"

Romans 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again.

The essence and foundation of UOJ is Universalism. It doesn't matter that someone teaching UOJ denies it, it teaches that the whole world is forgiven, Justified, declared righteous and saved eternally "because that's what Christ came to do". The whole doctrine falls apart when Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions are faithfully applied.

WELS Pastor Beckman on Guilt-Free Saints in Hell, 1983, Pages 1-4.

WELS Pastor Beckman, Guilt-Free Saints in Hell, Pages 5-7.

WELS Pastor Beckman on Guilt-Free Saints in Hell, 1983, Pages 5-7.

WELS Pastor Beckman, Guilt-Free Saints in Hell

WELS Pastor Beckman on Guilt-Free Saints in Hell, 1983, Pages 8-11.

Just A Vacation Book - Or Two

Justification By Faith cover by Norma Boeckler

Vacation
For two weeks around Christmas I will have no classes to teach and only a little bit of homework to grade. My first priority is to get the Justification book ready to send around to seminaries. Secondly, I want to do any revisions necessary for the English--only version of Thy Strong Word, which is on Lulu.com now.

I would like to upload a lot of material to the new Martin Chemnitz Press website. My old domain is gone (gljackson.com) so I am running a new website with the same folks who do TurboTax - Intuit.

The Intrepids (sic) demonstrated the inherent weakness of a church history argument with their merger chart. That convinced me to start Justification with the Biblical passages.

However, I will have a section on key theologians. My Notre Dame program concentrated on modern theology, which is usually skipped over--except for the glories of Fuller Seminary--in the Syn Conference seminaries. That may be one of many reasons why MDiv graduates are lacking in doctrinal discernment.

Key players are:

1. Spener and the Pietists, their homage to Calvin.
   
2. Halle University - Knapp and Tholuck. Hoenecke graduated from Halle, mentored by Tholuck.
   
3. Schleiermacher (Halle again) - the pivotal theologian for the modernists. Schleiermacher was very important for that adulterous Commie gas-bag Karl Barth, and Barth is the theologian of Fuller Seminary.
   
4. Walther and his Easter absolution theory.
   
5. Robert Preus, OJ and his repudiation of OJ.
   
6. ELCA's Gospel reductionism, or, how the stuffy old Pietism of yesteryear becomes the far out activism of today.
   

I have noticed challenges to UOJ coming from all over, and the Syn Conference is reacting with alarm and trepidation.

Additional improvements to the book will include more research from two authors. The advantage of Lulu is that I can develop a new edition and upload it. Every single book is available for free as a PDF download. The books can be distributed as PDFs to anyone, without asking permission, without any charges or licensing fees or litigation.

---

Justification by Faith Is Necessary To Combat WELS/ELS/LCMS Enthusiasm

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Evangelism Program for the Very Wealthy with No Do...":

David J. Beckman provides an explanation of the official and central doctrine of the (W)ELS, "The position that all men’s sins have been forgiven, even the sins of those in hell, has always been held to by orthodox Lutheran theologians."

The following quotes are from an essay delivered at the District Pastor-Teacher Conference of the South Atlantic District, January 27, 1983, Universal and Objective Justification with Special Emphasis on a Recent Controversy.

"Pastor Kobleske of the agenda committee suggested to me that special emphasis be given to the status of those in hell in regard to justification, since that was a major issue in the Kokomo controversy. Because so many other things must be established to adequately discuss the status of those in hell, that issue itself has become a subpoint in this paper. Against the background of’ this recent controversy we take up the topic Universal And Objective Justification." Page 1

"The confusion appears to have arisen particularly over the use of the phrase “status of a saint.” “Status of a saint” is employed by Meyer in his comments on II Corinthians 5:18-21. He uses the phrase to explain all that was involved in God reconciling the world to himself, not charging men with their sins, but imputing to them the righteousness of Christ, who became sin for us. The word “status” is particularly important because it reflects Meyer’s attempt at getting behind the original meaning of the Greek word for reconcile, katalla&ssw, which has to do with change. It’s not a change in man, but it’s a change in God’s attitude toward man; a change in man’s standing with God because of what Christ did. The recipients of this change in status are indeed the entire world.

The Bible therefore does teach that all the sins of all mankind are completely forgiven. That means also the sins of Judas, the sins of the people destroyed in the flood, the sins of all the ungodly, and the sins of all people who will from now to the end of time die apart from Christ and end up in hell. All people have a changed status. But that is not to say that all people are saints.

Cont...

And that is where the problem lies. When we hear the phrase “status of a saint” we dwell more on the world “saint” than on the word “status,” because of how we have heard “saint” used. “Saint” is always used in Scripture to describe the child of God. So without a thorough study of Meyer, it’s easy to jump to the false conclusion that Meyer says all are saints; that all people are going to heaven; that WELS has endorsed universalism. But that’s certainly not what Meyer or the WELS teaches, as we will hear in our subsequent paper on subjective justification. To say that all are justified and all are forgiven is not the same as saying all are going to heaven.

The position that all men’s sins have been forgiven, even the sins of those in hell, has always been held to by orthodox Lutheran theologians. Koehler writes, “There is not a soul in all the world which God has not already absolved from all sin. This is called objective or universal justification.”22 Schaller says, "Salvation is just as perfect and complete for those who are finally lost. This is the only reason, but a sufficient one, why he that believeth not is damned. Unbelief is the rejection of life and salvation achieved and personally intended for every unbeliever." 23 Orthodox Lutherans therefore, on the basis of the scriptural doctrine of universal and objective justification, teach, believe and confess that all people who have lived, are living or will ever live on earth have been declared righteous by God and have thus been forgiven of all their sins." Page 8/9

"The same precious truth is most important in the care and instruction of our little ones. What does frightened little Suzy need to hear when she comes to you and says, “Teacher, my Baptist friend told me I’m going to burn in hell if I don’t hurry up and ask Jesus into my heart”? What a time to apply the objective reality of Jesus’ love for Suzy! What a time to apply Christ’s universal salvation to this trembling little lamb!" Page 9
http://www.wlsessays.net/files/BeckmanUniversal.PDF
---

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Evangelism Program for the Very Wealthy with No Do...":

Here are a few quotes from one of the (W)ELS' most highly and favorably quoted UOJ theologians, Siegbert W. Becker. I was recently told by a (W)ELS pastor, "I did have Sig Becker for a professor, for a number of classes, and I can say, and will say from the roof-tops if called upon to do so, that this man is so far away from UOJ that he's not even in the same universe. OK, I know, I know, he defended Kokomo, but I happen to know that that was a case of synod blood being thicker than confessional water, so to speak. Of course, that doesn't make it right, but that's the fact, Jack - as the kids say these days... So, I may be dumb, but I'm not totally stupid. So, I think - in my own humble opinion - that if I say some guy is not an UOJ fanatic, I just might know what heck I'm talking about."

The following quotes are taken from Becker's essay entitled, "Objective Justification".

In the light of the previous discussion we may now briefly evaluate the so-called “Four Kokomo Statements.” The statements read:
1) Objectively speaking, without any reference to an individual sinner’s attitude toward Christ’s sacrifice, purely on the basis of God’s verdict, every sinner, whether he knows it or not, whether he believes it or not, has received the status of a saint.
2) After Christ’s intervention and through Christ’s intervention, God regards all sinners as guiltfree saints.
3) When God reconciled the world to himself through Christ, he individually pronounced forgiveness to each individual sinner whether that sinner ever comes to faith or not.
4) At the time of the resurrection of Christ God looked down in hell and declared Judas, the people destroyed in the flood, and all the ungodly, innocent, not guilty, and forgiven of all sin and gave unto them the status of saints.

"The first three statements are taken verbatim from WELS sources. It should be said that they are found in contexts that throw considerable light on what the writers intended to convey by the words used. The last statement is quoted from a term paper from Concordia Seminary in Fort Wayne.

Every one of the statements can be understood correctly, even though one must swallow a little hard to accede to the fourth. However, because the statements were used to discredit the truth of universal justification and to cause other laymen to doubt this teaching it is especially necessary to point out that the statements do not contain false doctrine."

"One really becomes a guilt-free saint only through faith, if we limit ourselves to the biblical usage of the word. However, since our holiness, as Augustine says, consists in sin’s remission rather than in life’s perfection, we could say that when God forgave the sins of the whole world he regarded all sinners as guilt-free, but if they are guilt-free we might also say that they are considered sinless in the sight of God. But a sinless person is a holy person, a saint."
Page 13/14
http://www.wlsessays.net/files/BeckerJustification.PDF

See Ichabod's posting of Becker's two essays - click here.

---

LutherRocks has left a new comment on your post "Just A Vacation Book - Or Two":

"To say that all are justified and all are forgiven is not the same as saying all are going to heaven."

This begs the question then...what is justifying faith? This is just one baby step away from universalism.

"Unbelief is the rejection of life and salvation achieved and personally intended for every unbeliever."

And I thought unbelief was the rejection of Christ and the forgiveness of sins that comes through faith....alone....

Evangelism Program for the Very Wealthy with No Doctrinal Discernment

What Sasse Says: A Confession Is Nothing, Unless It Is Confessed

What Sasse Says: A Confession Is Nothing, Unless It Is Confessed

A Confession Is Nothing, Unless It Is Confessed

… In every church there can be and exists error, and even heretical opinions may occur. Every church is confronted with the problem how to deal in an evangelical way with such errors. What matters is, whether or not a church is prepared to maintain its doctrinal standard, whether it regards its confession as a real confession, and not only as a statute valid before men. I can assert a confession only if I believe it. …Training future pastors belongs to the highest ecclesiastical functions. The confessional obligation of the faculty of St. Louis is obviously different from that of Upsala where the chair of church history was occupied by a Methodist, to take only this example. Here lies for me the root of all differences between Missouri and the LWF churches. For you a confession is nothing, unless it is confessed…


Hermann Sasse, in a letter to Dr John W. Behnken, President of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, March 1, 1958.

HT Rev. Matthew Harrison
http://mercyjourney.blogspot.com/2010/12/sasse-to-behnken-for-you-confession-is.html

The Birds Flock to St. Timothy of Fox Valley

Push Back Means Blow Back, Too

I Photoshopped Ski and Glende's favorite DP, after I did the same for an ELCA bishop.
The ELCA bishop's office got their version from Faith in Moline, purely by mistake. They were not amused.


rlschultz has left a new comment on your post "Controlling the Masses with Biblical Deception":

The result of WELS push-back has been some blow-back. Many in the WELS will not play this game of follow the leader. They have figured out that talking to the leaders first about public sin, i.e. false doctrine, is an exercise in futility.

They will either remain silent, grumble amongst themselves, or seek another outlet, like Ichabod. The lack of accountability and the implied infallibility of WELS leadership drives many in the WELS bonkers. I have witnessed much better ethics in the secular workplace. At my employer, we have access to a third party whistle blower for extreme cases of ethical violations. We can remain anonymous to all parties involved, without rear of retribution. Ichabod is our third whistle blower. When we go public here at Ichabod, we can say - "come and go after us now, for we now have a multitude of witnesses".

***

GJ - Notice that Glende continues to blog "anonymously" while using the 8 and 18 bait and switch.

---

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Push Back Means Blow Back, Too":

They want to close the schools to get rid of our doctrine

Justification, the central article of Christ's doctrine, the one doctrine which confessed correctly makes a person a Christian and condemns a person if confessed incorrectly, has been perverted within all Lutheran synods as their official teaching promotes Universal Objective Justification. The doctrine is already gone. The majority of the few left, who do reject UOJ and confess Justification by Faith Alone as Scripture clearly teaches and the Book of Concord correctly explain and confirm, are too timid to openly defend Christ's doctrine and stand firmly and publicly for the Truth of God's Word.

The New Age Emergent apostates don't need to close the schools to get rid of unwanted doctrine. They need to close the schools to funnel the available money to further their aims at boiling the frog and ushering in the New Age of Ecumenical cooperation under the Antichrist. The laity are financing this right now at the expense of their spiritual wellfare and that of their children.

---
bruce-church (http://bruce-church.myopenid.com/) has left a new comment on your post "Push Back Means Blow Back, Too":

Ichabod is the Crime Stoppers of the WELS. By the way, other organizations have an independent judiciary, ombudsman, comptrollers, inspector generals, the RCC Office of the Inquisition, etc., who are are supposed act somewhat independently, i.e., serving the interests of the cause or justice rather than serving the interests of the hierarchy. The WELS has, outside its hierarchy, only the 8 & 18 switch and Ichabod:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ombudsman

http://www.csiworld.org/

***

GJ - Who disciplines the Doctrinal Pussycat in WELS? The Circuit Pussycats do - and the DPs appoint them. I have seen several cases where the CP is on the staff of the DP's congregation. What are the chances that any CP is going to do anything about the DP?

John Seifert was a CP when he urged me to press charges against DP Robert Mueller. He thought it was worthwhile, as long as someone else did it. However, he made sure Mueller and Kuske knew he was on their side. But Seifert stepped onto the throne when Mueller decided to leave the office and country for a year.

The political are rewarded for being political.

---

WELS church lady has left a new comment on your post "Push Back Means Blow Back, Too":

Let me tell you something! Do NOT listen to Glende or ANY of the Church And Change leadership. These guys worship mammon and not the Risen Savior who lived a perfect life. There is NO salvation outside of Jesus Christ. The devil and the grand architect cannot save you from your sins. Mark Jeske is just another TV preacher. Her is not, IS NOT our spokesman for Confessional Lutheranism. Jeske's buddy Bruce Eberle is a right-wing money producer for his Washington guru friends. They want to close the schools to get rid of our doctrine. There is no money??? Hey, these cats are gazillionaires! They got more money than you can shake a stick at. The interreligious people want to get rid of closed communion. Remember, Jeske mocked  closed communion in the Concordia Mequon speech. Long story short, these guys are dangerous. I am leaving out a WHOLE lot. It will have to be continued. You have to pray for those people.

In Christ,
from WELS church lady

***

GJ - The DPs and SP Schroeder look past the sins of Jeske and see instead the glorious moneybags of the Daddy Warbucks.

Kelmed from Pastor Tim Glende's Anonymous Blog

The Groeschel plagiarizer even kelmed the name of my blog.

We haven't commented on this blog for some time because Greg Jackson continues to spew the same old slander on "Ichabod, the Glory Has Departed." If you dig deep enough through the garbage, you can find a gem of truth every now and then. For example, this "independent Lutheran pastor," who really is not a pastor at all because he has no call, reveals what he really thinks of himself by posting this picture of St. Gregory of Arkansas.

***

GJ - This is too comical for words. No wonder an attorney in his congregation had to write an enormous letter detailing all the wrongs done by Glende as an inept, bullying and plagiarizing false teacher.

This is the beginning of the letter about Glende's "stewardship of the mysteries of God." He has not been found faithful.

Mrs. Ichabod was on the phone with a friend when I went out to feed the birds with Sassy, the three-legged wonder dog. I heard her say, "St. Francis is feeding the birds." I came back in and created a Photoshop, which amused people with a sense of humor.

The attorney's letter about Glende had no effect. WELS is adept at one thing - letting things get worse and worse. Apparently SP Schroeder's secretive emails assure people he is working on it - the 30 year plan.

Meanwhile, Church and Change continues to run the synod. Fox Valley may be the sewer of WELS, but the sewer is the font of every blessing. Church and Change founder Steve Witte (Gordon Conwell drive-by D.Min.) is now the president of the portable Asian seminary while Changer John Lawrenz advises him.

PS - Good news, Tim. You now have about 2,000 page reads today, about 100 times your normal rate. I know you love Twitter, so I tweeted the page, too.

This reads like your swan song, Tim. Most pastors cannot follow someone who was there forever (Ron Ash) and is still hanging around.

Controlling the Masses with Biblical Deception

"I brought up the public proclamation of false doctrine,
and they opened another can of 8th Commandment on me.
And Matthew 18."

As all the readers know, WELS has no trouble with criminal defamation. The synod leaders and pastors practice it all the time. They do not even answer when addressed privately and personally. They are immune from the Eighth Commandment and do not need to respond to Matthew 18, because they are WELS.

The corporate world calls this push-back. If someone thinks a mistake has been made, the response is to find out what is wrong with the whistle-blower. A clever switch is made. "Yes, of course you are right about this concern, but you have gone about it the wrong way." Someone who persists will discover going about it the wrong way is a felony while the mistake was a misdemeanor - if that. Fortunately there are procedures in the secular world that limit the harm done, unlike church organizations.

For instance, push-back with plagiarism can mean, "How do you know?" and "Do you have proof?" and "Do you have copies of the proof with you?" Push-back can also involve, "She is close to graduation," and "She has connections with the staff."

If pursued in a court case, where a student sues for his diploma, in spite of his blatant plagiarism, the issue of intent is raised. There is no way to prove the individual intended to plagiarize (so they claim). I had one of those rare cases, someone who just did not know, due to lazy public school teachers. I worked with her for five weeks, and she was able to pass a writing course and learn how to avoid plagiarism.

Cheating is so prevalent that every assignment submitted (both schools) must be run through a nifty plagiarism checker. A 20% score is the max, but only if it includes properly cited sources. I have seen 83% scores, meaning the student actually added a few words to what was copied verbatim. Wikipedia is a favorite source. Sometimes the Wiki codes (citation needed) are left in the copied material.

Since deliberate plagiarists are liars and cheats, they rail against anyone who catches them in the act. One woman said angrily, "I changed a few words." Another one said, "I did not know it was wrong. I changed the order of the quotations." So I said, "Then you knew it was wrong, because you were trying to hide the evidence." One man came up with 12 very intellectual points on one slide, 12 parallel points on the next slide. Surprise, they were right off the Net. They do not just fuss and fume - they make up stories too. (Imagine that, WELS victims!) My favorite invented story was having the class watch a pro basketball game from the Net - for four hours. Two witnesses shot that one to pieces, because normal organizational structure allows for the facts being heard.

That does not happen in a crooked, corrupt, false-teaching synod.

The plagiarists in WELS are rewarded with multiple calls and serve as featured speakers at synodical events.

I have seen the latest examples of WELS push-back. One blogger lost all his sources. Another one confessed that he did not go to the false teacher first, although many people had already done that, without any result. End of blog number two. The Intrepids were warned, "You have questioned the clear teaching of the synod."

Ski does his own push-back. He called up one layman and pressured him for daring to disagree with his copied Groeschel false doctrine. WELS Pastor Tim Glende published a number of anonymous blogs, but he stopped when identified. "A watched man watches himself."

Anyone who knows the Book of Concord realizes that WELS/LCMS/ELS leaders are lying when they cry "Eighth Commandment!" about rebuking false doctrine. According to their own Confessions (Book of Concord, Large Catechism, The Ten Commandments), the Eighth Commandment does not apply to public false doctrine. Their accusation of "Slander!" is yet another lie, showing they are servants of their Father Below - or so inept that they should leave the ministry.

When they say, "You should have gone to him privately first," the synod leaders are switching between private sin and public false teaching. Matthew 18 would apply when someone sees the pastor shop-lifting (or appearing to do so) and asks him about it privately, rather than going public.

Notice how adroitly the synod leaders pile error upon error. First they cry "Slander and Eighth Commandment!" when someone objects to a pastor proclaiming false doctrine from the public. Next they use Matthew 18 to confuse the members, as if it is a terrible sin to confront error in any way.

But here is the ultimate, the master-stroke in their demonic doctrine. These same synod leaders slander people (behind their backs, of course) to anyone who will listen. In the hardness of their hearts, they get even - not only with the original dissenter, but anyone in his family and any friend as well. They have no problem with breaking up a marriage, ruining family relationships, destroying friendships.

These synodical felonies are not limited to WELS or the Little Sect or the Missouri Sect. ELCA and earlier bodies practiced them with a little more smoothness.

If an ELCA congregation wants to leave the Lavender Mafia, the ELCA bishop insists on coming to the church and preaching the sermon for that Sunday. The Iowa bishop preaches on the love chapter, I Corinthians 13. That conjures up images that may lose the argument, but it lays a foundation for saying to anyone, "You are not being loving. A loving person would allow for various opinions. A loving person would not condemn an alternate lifestyle. A loving person would not push people away."

Love can be used to condemn a lot of people, but love is not a fruit that grows on the tree of apostasy.

One person said I should stop "bashing WELS" for Advent. All I do is teach doctrine and that includes rebuking false doctrine. I know a lot of very nice people in Lutherdom, not just in WELS or the ELS. They are aghast that the synods are so poorly led by such weak, vacillating, uncertain men. As a result, they suffer from the results of pastors teaching against the Word of God.

---

Daniel Baker has left a new comment on your post "Controlling the Masses with Biblical Deception":

To be fair, the push back isn't what stopped me from blogging. Ultimately, after realizing that there is false doctrine much closer to home than Appleton that needs dealing with, I'm focusing my efforts on my local congregation for the time being.

Having said that, I'm contemplating listening to all of Ski's sermons for the past 3 months (and perhaps beyond) to determine a pattern, but I just haven't been able to subject myself to that kind of torture yet. Perhaps after the semester is over I'll have a chance to get on that.


***


GJ - A few WELS laymen have shown what can be accomplished by publishing a factual article about doctrinal error, plagiarism, and Whoopee Worship. Do not write a letter - publish a letter.

Bernie Madoff Is Contrite