Sunday, January 28, 2018

Luther's Epistle Sermon on the Race for the Prize. Septuagesima. 1 Corinthians 9:24ff


Luther's Sermon for Septuagesima, The Third Sunday before Lent


Text: 1 CORINTHIANS 9:24-27; 10:1-5. 24 “Know ye not that they that run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize? Even so run; that ye may attain. 25 And every man that striveth in the games exerciseth self-control in all things.

Now they do it to receive a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible. 26 I therefore so run, as not uncertainly; so fight I, as not beating the air: 27 but I buffet my body, and bring it into bondage: lest by any means, after that I have preached to others, I myself should be rejected. 1 For I would not, brethren, have you ignorant, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; 2 and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; 3 and did all eat the same spiritual food; 4 and did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of a spiritual rock that followed them: and the rock was Christ. 5 Howbeit with most of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness.

THE CHRISTIAN RACE FOR THE PRIZE.

1. This lesson is a part of the long four-chapter instruction Paul gives the Corinthians. Therein he teaches them how to deal with those weak in the faith, and warns rash, presumptuous Christians to take heed lest they fall, however they may stand at the present. He presents a forcible simile in the running of the race, or the strife for the prize. Many run without obtaining the object of their pursuit. But we should not vainly run. To faithfully follow Christ does not mean simply to run. That will not suffice. We must run to the purpose. To believe, to be running in Christ’s course, is not sufficient; we must lay hold on eternal life. Christ says ( Matthew 24:13), “But he that endureth to the end, the same shall he saved.” And Paul ( 1 Corinthians 10:12), “Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.”

2. Now, running is hindered in two ways; for one, by indolence. When faith is not strenuously exercised, when we are indolent in good works, our progress is hindered, so that the prize is not attained. But to such hindrance I do not think Paul here refers. He is not alluding to those who indolently run, but to them who run in vain because missing their object; individuals, for instance, who pursue their aim at full speed, but, deluded by a phantom, miss their aim and rush to ruin or run up against fearful obstacles. Hence Paul enjoins men to run successfully while in the race, that they may seize the prize and not lose it by default. In consequence the race is hindered when a false goal is set up or the true one removed. The apostle says ( Colossians 2:18), “Let no man rob you of your prize.” It is true, however, that an indolent, negligent life will eventually bring about loss of the prize. While men sleep, the enemy very soon sows tares among the wheat.

3. The goal is removed when the Word of God is falsified and creations of the human mind are preached under the name of God’s Word. And these things readily come about when we are not careful to keep the unity of the Spirit, when each follows his own ideas and yields to no other, because he prefers his own conceit.

Such must be the course of events where love is lacking. The strong and the learned desire to be looked upon as peculiarly commendable, while the weak in the faith are despised. Thus the devil has abundant opportunity to sow tares. Paul calls love the unity of the Spirit, and admonishes ( Ephesians 4:3) that we endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. In 2 Thessalonians 2:10 he proclaims the coming of Antichrist “because they received not the love of the truth”; that is, true love. “And every man that striveth in the games [that striveth for the mastery].”

4. Were he who competes in a race to attempt other things or to make a success of other matters at the same time, he would not gain much; rather he would soon be defeated, lose the race and everything. If he would truly strive, he must attend to no other thing. All else must be neglected and attention centered upon the contest alone. Even then the winner must have fortune’s favor; for they who neglect all to run do not all gain the prize.

Likewise in the Christian contest it is necessary, and in an even higher degree, to renounce everything and to devote oneself only to the contest.

He who would in addition seek his own glory and profit, who would find in the Word and Spirit of God occasion for his own praise and advantage after the manner of the dissenters and schismatics — what can such a one expect to win? He is wholly entangled in temporal glory and gain; bound hand and foot, a complete captive. The race he runs is the mere dream race of one lying upon his couch an indolent captive. “I therefore so run, as not uncertainly; so fight I, as not beating the air.”

5. Paul here points to himself as exemplar and hints at the cause of failure, viz., lapse from love and the use of the divine word in a wilful, ambitious and covetous spirit, whereas the faith which worketh by love is lacking.

Under such conditions, false and indolent Christians run indeed a merry race; yet God’s Word and ways in which they are so alert and speedy are merely a show, because they make them subserve their own interests and glory. They fail, however, to see that they race uncertainly and beat the air.

They never make a serious attempt, nor do they ever hit the mark. While it is theirs to mortify ambition, to restrain their self-will and to enlist in the service of their neighbors, they do none of these things. On the contrary, they even do many things to strengthen their ambition and self-will, and then they swear by a thousand oaths that they are seeking not their own honor but the honor of God, their neighbor’s welfare and not their own.

Peter says ( 2 Peter 1:9-10) this class are blind and cannot see afar and have forgotten they were purged from their old sins, because they fail to make their calling sure by good works. Therefore, it comes about that, as Paul says, they run uncertainly, beating the air. Their hearts are unstable and wavering before God, and they are changeable and fickle in all their ways, James 1:8. Since they are aimless and inconstant at heart, this will appear likewise as inconstancy in regard to works and doctrines. They undertake now this and now that; they cannot be quiet nor refrain from factional strife. Thus they miss their aim or else remove the goal, and cannot but deviate from the true and common path. “But I buffet [keep under] my body, and bring it into bondage [subjection].”

6. The apostle’s thought is the same as in his statement above, “Every man that striveth in the games exerciseth self-control in all things.” By “keeping under the body” Paul means, not only subduing the carnal lusts, but every temporal object as well, in so far as it appeals to bodily desire — love of honor, fame, wealth and the like. He who gives license to these things instead of subduing them will preach to his own condemnation, however correct his preaching be. Such do not permit the truth to be presented; this is true particularly of temporal honor. These words of the apostle, then, are a fine thrust at ambitious and self-centered preachers and Christians. Not only do they run in vain and fight to no purpose; they become actual castaways with only the semblance — the color — of Christianity.

EXAMPLES FROM SCRIPTURE.

“For I would not, brethren, have you ignorant, that our fathers were all under the cloud.”

7. Paul cites a terrible example from Scripture to prove that not all obtain the prize who run. There were about six hundred thousand of them, all of whom walked in the way of God and enjoyed his word and his confidence so completely as to be protected under the cloud and miraculously to pass through the sea; yet among the vast number who ran at that time only two, Joshua and Caleb, obtained the prize. They alone of all that multitude reached the promised land.

Later on in the chapter (verses 11-12) Paul explains this fact, saying: “Now these things happened unto them by way of example; and they were written for our admonition... wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.” The design of these dealings of God with Israel is to terrify the pride, false wisdom and self-will; to deter men from despising their fellows and from seeking to make the Word of God minister to their own honor or profit in preference to the honor and profit of others. The intent is to have each individual put himself on an equality with others, each to bear with his fellow, the weak enduring the strong, and so on, as enjoined in the four chapters.

8. How many great and noble men may have been among the six hundred thousand, men to whom we would have been unworthy to hand a cup of water! They included the twelve princes of the twelve tribes, one of whom, Nahshon, Matthew ( Matthew 1:4) numbers in the holy lineage of Christ. There were also the seventy elders who shared in the spirit of Moses, Eldad and Medad in particular ( Numbers 11:27), and all the other great men aside from the faction of Korah. All these, mark you, strove in the race. They did and suffered much. They witnessed many miracles of God. They aided in erecting a grand tabernacle and in instituting divine worship. They were full of good works. Yet they failed, and died in the wilderness. Who is so daring and haughty he will not be restrained and humbled by so remarkable an example of divine judgment?

Well may it be said, “Let him that... standeth take heed lest he fall.”

9. Well, the example of Israel is one readily understood. God grant we may heed it! Let us examine the apostle’s text yet further — his mention of baptism and spiritual food, using Christian terms and placing the fathers upon the same plane with us Christians, as if they also had had Baptism and the Holy Supper.

He would have us know, first, the oft-repeated fact that God from the beginning led, redeemed and saved his saints by two instrumentalities — by his own word and external signs. Adam was saved by the word of promise ( Genesis 3:15): The seed of the woman shall bruise the serpent’s head; that is, Christ shall come to conquer sin, death and Satan for us. To this promise God added the sign of sacrifice, sacrifice kindled with fire from heaven, as in Abel’s case ( Genesis 4:4), and in other cases mentioned in the Scriptures. The word of promise was Adam’s Gospel until the time of Noah and of Abraham. In this promise all the saints down to Abraham believed, and were redeemed; as we are redeemed by the word of the Gospel which we believe. The fire from heaven served them as a sign, as baptism does us, which is added to the word of God.

10. Such signs were repeated again and again at various times, the last sign being given by Christ in his own person — the Gospel with baptism, granted to all nations. For instance, God gave Noah the promise that he should survive the flood, and granted him a sign in the ship, or ark, he built. And by faith in the promise and sign Noah was justified and saved, with his family. Afterward God gave him another promise, and for a sign the rainbow. Again, he gave Abraham a promise, with the sign of circumcision. Circumcision was Abraham’s baptism, just as the ark and the flood were that of Noah. So also our baptism is to us circumcision, ark and flood, according to Peter’s explanation. 1 Peter 3:21. Everywhere we meet the Word and the Sign of God, in which we must believe in order to be saved through faith from sin and death.

11. Thus the children of Israel had God’s word that they should inherit the promised land. In addition to that word they were given many signs, in particular those Paul here names — the sea, the cloud, the bread from heaven, the water from the rock. These he calls their baptism; just as our baptism might be called our sea and cloud. Faith and the Spirit are the same everywhere, though the signs and the words vary. Signs and words indeed change from time to time, but faith in the one and same God continues. Through various signs and revelations, God at different times bestows the same faith and the same Spirit, effecting through these in all saints remission of sins, redemption from death, and salvation, whether they lived in the beginning or at the end of time, or while time progressed.

12. Such is Paul’s meaning when he says the fathers did eat the same meat, and drink the same drink as we. He, however, qualifies with the word “spiritual.” Externally and individually Israel had signs and revelations different from ours; but the Spirit and their faith in Christ was identical with our own. Spiritual eating and drinking is simply believing in God’s Word and sign. Christ says ( John 6:56), “He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth in me, and I in him.” And in the preceding verse, “My flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.” That is, He that believeth in me shall live. “For they drank of a spiritual rock that followed them.”

13. In other words, they believed in the same Christ in whom we believe, though he was yet to come in the flesh; and the sign of their faith was the material rock, from which they physically drank water, just as we in partaking of the material bread and wine at the altar spiritually eat and drink the true Christ. With the outward act of eating and drinking we exercise inward faith. Had the Israelites not possessed the word of God and faith as they drank from the rock, the act of drinking would not have benefited their souls. Neither would it profit us to receive bread and wine at the altar if we were without faith. Indeed, had not the Word of God come first, the rock would not have yielded water and command faith.

Likewise, if God’s Word did not accompany bread and wine, they would not be spiritual food nor exercise faith.

14. So it is ever the same spiritual meat and drink which God embodies in his word and sign, whatever its material and external form may be. Were he to command me to lift up a mere straw, immediately the straw would hold for me spiritual food and drink. Not because of any virtue in the straw, but because it is a revelation and sign of the divine truth and presence. Again, if God’s Word and his sign be lacking or unrecognized, the very presence of God himself has no effect. Christ says of himself ( John 6:63), “The flesh profiteth nothing.” He makes that statement because his hearers pay no heed to the words in which he speaks of his flesh, though it is these which make his body the true meat, according to his declaration (verse 58), “This is the bread which came down out of heaven.” Therefore we are not to regard unduly, as blind reason does, the works, signs and miracles of God; rather we are to recognize his message therein. This is the act of faith.

15. The apostle refers to a single type — the rock, saying: “They drank of a spiritual rock that followed them: and the rock was Christ.” By this statement he makes all the figures and signs granted to the people of Israel by the Word of God refer to Christ; for where the Word of God is, there Christ is. All the words and promises of God are concerning Christ. Christ himself refers the serpent of Moses to himself, giving it a typical significance, John 3:14. We may truly say the Israelites looked upon the same serpent we behold, for they saw the spiritual serpent that followed them, or Christ on the cross. Their beholding was believing in the Word of God, with the serpent for a sign; even as their spiritual drinking was believing in the Word of God with the rock for a sign. Without the Word of God, the serpent could have profited them nothing; nor could brazen serpents innumerable, had the Israelites gazed upon them forever. Likewise the rock would have profited them nothing without the word of God; they might have crushed to powder all the rocks of the world or drank from them to no purpose.

16. According to the general principle here laid down by Paul, by using the rock as illustration, we may say the Israelites partook of the same bread of heaven whereof we eat; and they ate of the spiritual bread of heaven which followed them — Christ. With them, eating was believing in the Word of God, while they had for their sign the bread from heaven whereof they physically partook. Had not this Word accompanied the bread, it would have been simply material food, incapable of profiting the soul or calling forth faith. Christ says ( John 6:32), “It was not Moses that gave you the bread out of heaven; but my Father giveth you the true bread out of heaven.” And ( John 6:58), “Not as the fathers ate [manna], and died.”

Even Moses says ( Deuteronomy 8:3), “And fed thee with manna... that he might make thee know that man doth not live by bread only, but by everything that proceedeth out of the mouth of Jehovah.”

In other words, “In the material manna you must not merely see the work — the act of satisfying the appetite — but much rather the word of promise bringing you the bread of heaven; for by that word you live forever if you have faith.”

17. We may say the same concerning the sea and the cloud. The children of Israel walked under the same cloud that shadows us; that means, they walked under the spiritual cloud that followed them — Christ. Otherwise expressed, walking under the cloud was simply believing in the word of God, the word they had in their hearts, which told them to follow the cloud. Without that word they would have been unable to believe or to follow; indeed, with the word lacking, the cloud would never have appeared. Therefore, the cloud was called the glory of the Lord whose appearance had been promised.

So we see how we must in all things have regard to the word of God. To it faith must attach itself. Without it, either there are no signs and works of God, or else, existing, and regarded with the physical eyes only, without reference to the Word, they cause one to open his mouth in wonderment for a while like everything else which is new, but they do not profit the soul nor do they appeal to faith.

18. Some take the words “which followed them” to mean that the spiritual rock accompanied the children of Israel, companioning with them — “comitante petra,” not “petra consequente,” Christ being spiritually present in the word and by faith. This view they endeavor to base upon the Greek text. I have rendered it: “the rock following.” The point is not worth contention. Let each understand it as he may. Both interpretations given are correct. I hold to what I have offered because all the circumstances of the incident, and earlier words of God, pointed to a future Christ, a Christ who should follow, in whom they should all believe. Thus Abraham saw behind him the ram in the thicket and took and sacrificed him; that is, he believed in the Christ who afterward should come and be sacrificed.

19. Again, some say the common noun in the clause “and the rock was Christ” means the material rock; and since Christ cannot be material rock they explain the inconsistency by saying the rock signifies Christ. They here make the word “was” equivalent to “signifies.” The same reasoning they apply to certain words of Christ; for instance, they say where Christ, referring to the Holy Supper ( Matthew 26:26), commands, “Take, eat; this is my body” — they say the meaning is, “This bread signifies, but is not truly, my body.” They would thereby deny that the bread is the body of Christ. In the same manner do they deal with the text ( John 15:1) “I am the true vine,” in making it “I am signified by the vine.” Beware of such reasoners. Their own malice has led them to such perverting of Scripture.

Paul here expressly distinguishes between material and spiritual rocks, saying: “They drank of a spiritual rock that followed them: and the rock was Christ.” He does not say the material rock was Christ, but the spiritual rock. The material rock was not spiritual, and did not follow or go with them.’ 20. The explanations and distortions of such false reasoners are not needed here. The words are true as they read; they are to be understood in substance and not figuratively. So in John 15:1, Christ’s reference is not to a material but a spiritual vine. How would this read, “I am signified by a spiritual vine”? Christ is speaking of that which exists, and must so be understood — “I am”; here is a true spiritual vine. Similar is John 6:55, “My flesh is meat indeed.” The thought is not, “My flesh signifies, or is signified by, true meat”; spiritual meat is spoken of and the meaning is, “My flesh is substantially a food; not for the stomach, physically, but for the soul, spiritually.” Neither must you permit the words “This is my body” to be perverted to mean that the body is but signified by the bread, as some pretend; you must accept the words precisely as they mean — “This bread is essentially, by a real presence, my body.” The forcing of Scripture to meet one’s own opinions cannot be tolerated. A clear text proving that the infinitive “to be” is equivalent to “signify” would be needed; and, even though this might be proven in a few instances, it would not suffice. It would still have to be indisputably shown true in the place in question. This can never be done. Now, the proposition being impossible, we must surrender to the Word of God and accept it as it stands.

21. Christ has been typified by various signs and objects in the Old Testament, and the rock is one of them. Note first, the material rock spoken of had place independently of man’s labor and far from man’s domain, in the wilderness, in desolate solitude. So Christ is a truly insignificant object in the world, disregarded, unnoticed; nor is he indebted to human labor.

22. Further, water flowing from the rock is contrary to nature; it is purely miraculous. The water typifies the quickening spirit of God, who proceeds from the condemned, crucified and dead Christ. Thus life is drawn from death, and this by the power of God. Christ’s death is our life, and if we would live we must die with him.

23. Moses strikes the rock at the command of God and points to it, thus prefiguring the ministerial office which by word of mouth strikes from the spiritual rock the Spirit. For God will give his Spirit to none without the instrumentality of the Word and the ministerial office instituted by him for this purpose, adding the command that nothing be preached but Christ.

Had not Moses obeyed the command of God to smite the rock with his rod, no water would ever have flowed therefrom. His rod represents rod of the mouth whereof Isaiah speaks ( Isaiah 11:4): “He shall smite the earth with the rod of his mouth; and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the wicked.” “A scepter of equity is the scepter of thy kingdom.” Psalm 45:6.

Saturday, January 27, 2018

New Testament Greek Will Start With the Introductory Right After Each MidWeek Service, Then Treat Romans 1-5 after Easter


Beginning Greek: A Functional Approach Steven W. Paine

ISBN-13: 9780195010138

ISBN-10: 0195010132

Paine is a long-standing favorite. People need this to know the basic endings and grammar. Copies cost from $22 up used.

Here Is the Plan
Starting with Ash Wednesday, I will complete the service and go into the Greek lesson based on the I AM sermons in the Gospel of John. They will also be the sermons.

Lent is the warm-up for Romans 1-5 and beyond. Easter week, we will have one hour sessions on Romans in Greek.

But take note - the class is mostly English and focused on learning what the English says, based on reading Greek. Several people joined the class for the exegesis.

We will emphasize reading Greek as opposed to grammar rules and vocabulary lists. The more you read, the better you will understand. Greek is very easy to learn.

The first lesson is being able to write out the Greek alphabet and recite it.



Gausewitz Original Catechisms
Kicking Him Under the Bus Was Part of the Plan To Have UOJ Apostasy and the Church Gropers Take Over

 I had a 1943 Catechism at one time - $10.


I am looking for the German Gausewitz Catechism and the original English one - not any of the improved versions.

Copies are probably around old church cupboards. In Canada I found German materials in the files of the new building. Congregations do not always clean up completely.

I think it would be useful to make them both available, at least as e-books.

Some Gausewitz history can be found here.

"Despite the heavy work load described previously, Gausewitz went to work and by 1917 the Catechism in both languages was available at the Northwestern Publishing House."

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

Notice how smoothly WELS improved and expanded Gausewitz,replaced with Kuske's UOJ Small Catechism for A Large Price, and kicked Gausewitz under the bus.

Give Sparky Brenner Credit - He Is the Perfect Spokesman
For WELS Mythology and UOJ.
However, He Is Mute about Hazing and Church Growth

 When two Mequon students went to Dean Brenner to express their opposition to the secretive hazing ritual at the seminary, Sparky defended GA/HB and said "The good outweighs the bad." The two students did not graduate from Mequon.


I am going to review Brenner's Jars of Clay fairly soon, but I found a couple of pages ideal for showing how the LCMS mythology slopped over into WELS. Brenner calls this a history of Mordor, aka Mequon aka Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary. But it is really a public relations booklet for insiders, a hagiography, often ignoring the basic details and skipping the real issues.



Do not ever look for a critical history of the Synodical Conference. Only the insiders care about their history. Only an outsider would dare to tell the sordid truths.


But here is the good part. I looked through the index of Sparky's book for Church Growth, which is not even mentioned. How can that be! Mordor is 100% Church Growth. What about hazing, GA or HB? No, even though WELS hazes students at the prep, college, and seminary level. I looked for UOJ - nope. I searched for OJ - nope.

Then I found in the Index - Justification, objective, p. 64. As Kenda would say, "Now. I. Am. Interested." Of course, there was no entry for the Chief Article of Christianity - Justification by Faith. In time, the facts and Biblical study will eliminate the Wisconsin sect - or merge them with the United Church of Christ.

 August Pieper, Concordia St. Louis graduate, 1879.

 J. P. Kohler graduated from Concordia, St. Louis 1880.
Kohler was the WELS seminary president first, disagreed with A. Pieper, and Pieper became president when Kohler was canned.

What is Sparky going to do with the topic of Justification? If he is faithful to the Scriptures, he will disappear faster than cases of beer at the dorm. Now that Gausewitz has been erased from synodical memory and Rydecki is anathematized, the Gospel can find no place to root on the flinty hearts of WELS.

Note the Twisted Use of Luther

August Pieper Reflections, 1922
"Make no mistake," Pieper insisted, "The secret of Walther's power lay in his clear, popular, joyful, and convincing presentation of objective justification. That was also Luther's power , Paul's power, and the power of the Gospel itself, the power of God which creates faith unto salvation." 


He goes on to explain -
In contrast to the justification scheme of later dogmaticians, Walther taught, not a justifying act of God in view of faith, but rather a faith in view of God's justification. God's act of justification [GJ - OJ] forgiveness of sin] precedes faith. It is not that the sinner must first believe [and only then that God forgives sin]. In this connection Walther repeatedly cited Luther's example of a royal castle that was actually bestowed on a beggar, whether he accepted it or not.

Jars of Clay, pp. 64-5



Classic Pietistic Blunder - Merging the Atonement and Justification

Walther was a wonder-boy, with all his energy and alpha-male leadership skills in bullying, threatening, and kidnapping. The Wunderkind confused the atoning death of Christ with God's declaration of forgiveness when someone believes. This is clearly stated in Romans 4, which the blind UOJists use as if it teaches their dogma.

May I mention that UOJ was decidedly advantageous in excusing the abuse of Martin Stephan, STD, and his loyal disciple until the disciple turned into Pope Walther?

Romans 4 KJV
13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.
14 For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect:
15 Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.
16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,
17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.
18 Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be.
19 And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sarah's womb:
20 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God;
21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.
22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.
23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;
24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.




PS - Brenner's book includes a savage, accurate portrait of the many failings of Walther as a seminary president and professor, as experienced by Pieper and Kohler. In short, Walther was poorly trained in Biblical languages and announced his doctrine rather than teaching from the Scriptures and leading people into the Scriptures. See the pages following the UOJ propaganda - Brenner p. 65ff.

Navigation for the LCMS Mythology Posts.
Getting Back to Luther Starts Here



The Foundational Myth - Stephan/Walther


The LCMS Civil War Myth - Jack and Robert Preus

 Red Bud, Illinois - Final pastorate and episcopacy of Martin Stephan

The Herman A. Preus Myth - His Temporary Removal and Martyrdom

 Herman A. Preus, UOJ martyr. OK, he got his church back.
His seminary is now a failing ELCA school.
The Preus clan ELCA college, Luther in Decorah - ditto.



The LCMS Contribution to WELS UOJ.



The Insanity of Universal Objective Justification




Luther Wrote - The Most Rational Are the Worst False Teachers




The Foundational Myth of LCMS/WELS - Bishop Stephan and Pope Walther

This is the Immaculate Conception of CFW Walther.
According to LutherQuest (sic) and Christian News,
Walther is the Master and Prince, the judge of all books,
all Christian doctrine. 

Stephan-Walther Myths

  1. Stephan took his group to America for religious freedom. False - he had too much freedom. He was under house arrest for multiple adulteries and misuse of funds. He was already being treated for syphilis and gave that to his wife and children.
  2. Stephan was a faithful Lutheran. False - he was more Confessional than most, but he was a Pietist and given a Pietist congregation of Bohemians. He came to believe he was the sole Means of Grace in Europe.
  3. Walther did not sign the document making Stephan his bishop-for-life. False - Walther did sign the document and served as Stephan's enforcer of discipline, but was mistrusted as a "fox."
  4. The big scandal was discovering Stephan committed adultery. Haha. False - Stephan left Europe with his only healthy child in the ship and his main mistress in the next cabin, but did not take his sick wife and children (syphilis). Stephan was constantly in the company of young women in the middle of the night and a trial revealed that he considered himself the master of their souls and bodies. The Walther circle even admitted that the adultery confession story was false, but it is told and re-told to this day.
  5. The brave Walther dealt with the bishop and gave him three choices about his adultery. False. Barrels of laughs - Walther organized the mob that came down from St. Louis and also worked secretly with his Perryville pals. No one has three choices with a rifle pointed at him. The mob took everything the bishop had, which was very handy for a bankrupt cult. They forced the bishop across the river. The syphilis outbreak among the young women was the motivation for the riot. Few know today how horrible a disgrace that was, dooming the women to a slow death. Yes, the bishop was a rotten rat, but the enablers were so much worse for donning their halos far too late. Synodical leadership has not changed one little bit.
  6. Walther was a Luther unawares. False, getting acid reflux - I guess that Emmaus topic got pulled for some reason. Walther earned a BA in a rationalistic system that hated Pietists. How did he get his call? He must have double-talked the examining board. His real religion was Pietism, although his father was a rationalist (think ELCA). Walther almost died of extreme Pietism, mortification of the flesh, and clung to Stephan's UOJ, which "saved his life." Where he had freedom, Walther was a Pietist, associated with Pietists, and obeyed a Pietist guru - Stephan. 


***

 The Walther shrine, recently refurbished, which is appropriate, since Missouri and ELCA agree about UOJ.


To understand American Lutheran doctrine, one must hack through the brambles of American Lutheran mythology. As I wrote before, many of the UOJ fanatics are burdened with maintaining the Herman A. Preus myth, complicated by the Preus Clan myth. A young Preus must admit to himself that his entire family has left an indelible bad impression on Biblical theology by falling for Halle Pietism at its worst.

At the same time, the Preus youngling has to explain how the most articulate of the Preus family, Robert, repudiated the eternal verities of Universal Absolution and Salvation Without Faith, commonly known as Objective Justification, Universal Justification, General Justification, and Justification of the World. One phrase they cannot utter is Justification by Faith, but Robert advocated the Chief Article and abandoned UOJ in Justification and Rome.

The greatest burden of all is the Bishop Martin Stephan and CFW Walther myth. The two belong together because wily CFW crafted the origins story and kept people from telling the truth. Now the facts are known but denied. Missourians sound like the Roman Catholics who claim, "The Church has always taught the Immaculate Conception of Mary." QED - you are a dolt, a devil, or an evildoer.

In short, Bishop Martin Stephan was a Pietist cult leader who preyed upon young women and ultimately gave them syphilis, a horrible disease that he inflicted on his wife and his children (except the oldest son). They died in misery, the children in institutions. The Walther circle was 100% Pietistic and followed Stephan with utmost obedience. They knew he was an adulterer before he took them all to America. Walther bided his time and organized the mob to depose and rob the bishop, apparently when the syphilis broke out among the girls and shamed a number of families.

Suddenly, Walther and selected thugs were outraged,steamed down to Perryville, and
  • threatened the bishop's life (a felony), 
  • stole all his gold (a felony), 
  • took away his property (a felony), 
  • grabbed his enormous library and personal belongings (a felony), and kidnapped him at gunpoint (a felony), 
  • forcing him to live in Illinois (definitely a felony).
 1 Timothy 3:16 does not teach that the world was absolved of all sin, justified without faith, when Jesus rose from the dead.

Walther took over as pope, in his usual crafty and circumspect way, and began teaching the Easter Absolution of the World, which he learned from Stephan, a man too lazy to earn his minimal clergy credentials by graduating from the university. He did attend Halle, where UOJ was dominant. 

Walther divided Lutherans with his zany emphasis on election without faith, which was another way to prop up his flimsy Justification without Faith. As far as I can see, there was a lot of lying about "in view of faith," a lot of smoke blown in people's faces. I still read mentions of a catechism no one seems to own anymore. But the aftermath, besides all the division Walther caused, is an increasingly absurd group of dogmatic claims about UOJ.

The DNA of UOJ is easy to trace. Its contagion was slow but gradually reached the Synodical Conference through Walther's domineering influence. Nor was UOJ something unique to the Perryville cult. Pietistic rationalism across Europe came to the same conclusions. The first part of UOJ (forgiving the entire world) soon became the only message of modern mainline theology, thanks to Schleiermacher (Halle trained, Halle professor) and others.

Walther made sure Franz Pieper followed him as seminary professor, so St. Louis produced a steady supply of UOJists, with intermarriage concentrating the autosomal recessive gene. By forcing the Wisconsin sect into supplying pastoral candidates, another UOJ cadre was achieved within WELS, which established its own seminary again - with UOJ teachers.

That does not mean UOJ was foreign to Protestantism. Former Calvinists find the language quite familiar. The Knapp theology textbook, where OJ/SJ was enshrined in the comments, was dominant in 19th century America, remaining in print today. Likewise, the best-selling Barth-Kirschbaum dogmatics profoundly affected the weak-kneed Evangelicalism of today, dropping the SJ for OJ all the way. UOJ never had much to do with faith because the dogma is 99.9% world forgiveness and world salvation.

Like the unScriptural claims about Mary in the Church of Rome, UOJ has a wealth of books - if wealth is the right term - supporting its dogma, plus many articles published by those insiders who are either trusted for their names or related to the readers by blood.

Walther did a superb job of crop-dusting all those who might interfere with his leadership. They were all false teachers. However, someone could leave Concordia, St. Louis for the Church of Rome, argue for papal dogma, and still be honored by all the UOJists - Edward Preuss. Notre Dame gave him their highest award for his promotion of Marian dogma, but the UOJists cite him and quote him like he is a warm, comforting blanket of grace.

 Grand theft marked the triumph of the Walther mob that kidnapped Bishop Stephan and left him to die in Illinois. Stephan's mistress came across and joined him. Stephan's wife and children died in Dresden.

Friday, January 26, 2018

This church has survived a fire that started back in 1962 - BBC News

 Built on solid rock, it will not be undermined by underground coal fires.

This church has survived a fire that started back in 1962 - BBC News:

"The town of Centralia has been left to die - but its last remaining church is thriving.

In Pennsylvania's coal-mining mountains, there's an empty grid where a town once lived.

Once, there were homes and gardens. Now there are weeds.

Before Centralia started burning from below, more than a thousand people lived here. At the last count, there were six.

The roads remain - on Google Maps, they have names like Railway Avenue and Apple Alley - but on the ground, they are ghost streets."



'via Blog this'

Another Layer of Family Mythology, Jack and Robert Preus - or -
Did They Teach This at Fort Wayne?
Yes!

 We ran into Jack Preus at the Chicago convention of the LCA, walking behind us on the street, at night. I thought it was Jack and called to him. He said, "Are you one of ours?"

Minnesota Governor Jake Preus begat Jack and Robert.
They are at their lake camp where the Preus clan still gathers. We knew Robert fairly well and liked him.

The governor is called Jake while his son was called Jack.

Previously I wrote about the mythology of Herman A. Preus, which is a burden for the ever-growing Preus clan. The younger generation seems even more frantic to impose UOJ on the faithful than were their fathers (the Klemet, Rolf, and Peter generation) and their grandfathers (Jack and Robert Preus)

After all the key, popular treatment of the LCMS-Seminex crisis is Preus of Missouri and the Great Lutheran Civil War. Jack and Robert are prominent in the book, along with a cast of characters: Herman Otten, Waldo Werning, and John Tietjen. I have owned several copies and read the book three times.

The Jack and Robert saga is hard to duplicate because there are no leaders anymore, only managers of public perception. Matt the Fatt and Paul the Plagiarist live in luxury. Look at the seminary cost issue seven years ago. No leadership - nothing done.

Jack and Robert Preus made their bones in winning control of the synod and Ft. Wayne.  Robert pursued Maier on the issue of Justification at Ft. Wayne, and Robert was laughably wrong. His little essay on UOJ is so bad that Frosty Bivens could have ghosted it. Every detail is nothing but dogmatic blabber with no Scriptural or Book of Concord support. Here are some brief details about the disastrous Robert Preus UOJ essay.

If you look at the problems with the Preus essay, you will also note the graphics based on Robert's last book - Justification and Rome. Rolf does not approve of my quotations from that book. Apparently, a published book remains the property of those who guard the mythology.

Herein lies the problem - the Preus clan has based their unity on the Preus mythology: generations defending UOJ against the noisome hordes of Justification by Faith adherents. But Robert jumped the fence and his sons Daniel and Rolf did not even notice, because they were the alleged editors (or censors?) of the book, which was published posthumously.

Did they rip out a heartfelt apology from their father? Given the overall content, that is a possibility.

However one frames the question, as the journalists say, the Lutherans who depend on mythology must face the dissonance. Ft. Wayne definitely cultivated a mythology built around Preus, Scaer, and Marquart. It is something non-Missourians notice about the LCMS and WELS too (if they are unlucky enough to meet up with the Wisconsin sect).

The issue is easily resolved if we follow what St. Paul said about being stewards of the mysteries of God. The only requirement is faithfulness of the steward, who has no ownership rights.

KJV 1 Corinthians
Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God.
Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful.
But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self.
For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord.
Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God.

A steward (house manager in Greek) takes care of matters for the owner, and the mysteries are those doctrines revealed by the Spirit through the Word. We cannot judge anything, not even our own success. We can only be faithful. Therefore, we can only defend and teach what the Scriptures reveal and attack whatever goes against the Word of God.

As previously shown in several hundred posts and a few books, there is no divine imperative to defend the family or synodical myths. To abandon the stewardship is nothing less than running away from the stewardship, often to gain rewards, honors, and promotions.

No one was ever born with a KJV in one hand and a Triglotta in the other. We have to learn and grow in our understanding of Biblical doctrine. If matters seem confused, we must go back to the Source, where the water is clear - the Scriptures alone.

As I wrote before, in that Preus UOJ essay which Jack Cascione and Paul the Plagiarist have waved in my face - allegorically speaking - Robert used UOJ dogma to beat WAM II down. The Preus brothers demoted WAM and a dark cloud hovered over him afterwards. Perhaps one day a Preus clan member will apologize to the synod and to WAM's family.

  



Herman A. Preus - How Difficult To Move Beyond the Family Mythology

 Herman A. Preus, UOJist
and Martyr to Unfaith


The Missourians were looked at as the leaders in the election controversy. When Preus and the other Norwegians supported the same position as Walther and Missouri, they were accused of loyalism to the Missouri Synod. The controversy became so fierce in the circles of the Norwegian Synod that on Good Friday, 1883, Herman and Christian were physically removed from their congregations. The Anti-Missourian Brotherhood, a group within the Norwegian Synod, had engineered their removal.[10] They were later received back to their parish after most of the people were convinced of the Preus' position on election.11 - Preus, Johan Carl Keyser Herman Amberg Preus: A family history (Privately printed and distributed by the Preus Family Book Club. 1966)


 Rolf Preus vacillates between UOJ and JBFA,
but he normally lands on UOJ.


Wiki quoting Rolf Preus quoting Herman A. Preus
Preus defended the doctrine of objective justification. In particular, he wrote:
"According to his new gospel the professor must preach that through his suffering and death Christ has only accomplished so much that God has now become willing to let his wrath cease and to be reconciled and to loose, confer grace, forgive, justify and open access to salvation, but that in actuality he can only do and does all this if man on his part fulfills the condition placed on him by God, namely that he is supposed to believe. And the thing which is thus supposed to be believed does not become this that God already has done this and is reconciled but that God will do it and will be reconciled when he sees the obedience and the good quality in man, that he believes." 5 - http://www.christforus.org/Papers/Content/HermanAmbergPreusonJustificationofWorld.htm

The section quoting Herman A. Preus shows how verbose and convoluted UOJ rationalism can be. Instead of simple Biblical truths, we find the complex syllogistic style of Aquinas and Aristotle. It is like going from Illinois to Milwaukee by taking a short-cut through Arizona. One does not need to bow to centuries of philosophy to teach the truth of the Gospel Word.

Walther's world was one of rationalism (his father and university teachers, not to mention those who ran the state church) and Pietism (his circle of friends, his first Pietist guru, their own cell group, and their final Pietist leader - Martin Stephan, pastor of a Pietist church and leader of cell groups.) Walther simply repeated the Easter absolution of the world according to the Pietists at Halle University, where his guru Stephan studied. 1 Timothy 3:16 does not teach the absolution of the world but the declaration that Christ in being risen from the dead was righteous, without sin.

KJV 1 Timothy 3:16
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: 
  1. God was manifest in the flesh, 
  2. justified in the Spirit, 
  3. seen of angels, 
  4. preached unto the Gentiles, 
  5. believed on in the world, 
  6. received up into glory.

The second statement is an emphasis upon the sinless, divine nature of Christ. Though He died as if a mortal sinner, He rose because of His sinless divine nature, declared by the Spirit.


The Justification of the World - without faith -  aka UOJ - is the sinking sand on which Pietism lived for a moment. Halle University became a rationalistic, anti-Christian center in only one generation. The Bible was attacked on every front by the Halle theologians, so Hoenecke's mentor Tholuck was considered the last of the good ones, and he proudly called himself a Universalist.

I prefer the simple, plain words of Jesus and Paul.



KJV John 16

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.
And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:
Of sin, because they believe not on me;
10 Of righteousness, because I go to my Father, and ye see me no more;
11 Of judgment, because the prince of this world is judged.
 As the UOJ Church Gropers say, "Nevermind."

The Spirit comes to us only through the Word, so the Holy Spirit convicts the world of unbelief, which is exactly the opposite of UOJ - telling unbelievers they are already forgiven.
How does the inspired Word teach the world of righteousness? Clearly this is the righteousness of faith, which is the theme of the Justification article in the Formula of Concord. 
Paul teaches the same in his brief but compelling section of Romans. Abraham was justified by faith, Genesis 15, but this lesson does not apply to him alone.
Grace and faith are not opposites, as the UOJ donkeys would have people believe, or do I mean disbelieve?

Romans 4:16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,


Romans 4
22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.
23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;
24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.

So the verbal tangles of Herman A. Preus and his disciples can be sliced into fragments by two passages from the New Testament. All the other proof-texts from the UOJists are from seeing and not seeing, hearing and not hearing, the price one pays for obstinate rejection of the Word.

 Is this not the summary of Romans 4?
Only a nitwit could claim that Romans 4 teaches UOJ?
Paul is not as dense as the Stormtroopers.