Value of Polemics

Jack Preus, Former LCMS President
The unionists and apostates cannot tolerate polemics, which raise the issues they want to avoid.

The word polemic comes from the Greek word for war. Robert and Jack Preus wrote polemics about the state of the Synodical Conference. Their work forced Lutherans to face some of the issues of the day. Special congregational meetings filled with people who wanted to hear about the issues. The Missouri Synod improved and revived from facing and studying the doctrinal issues.

The General Synod in the 19th century went through a similar battle. The liberals (then as now) hated Lutheran doctrine. The tipping point was reached when a new, unionistic synod was formed within the General Synod. The General Council erupted from the General Synod, roughly a 50-50 split. By 1917 the General Council had won over the liberals and they united again as the United Lutheran Church in America. Big mistake. The apostates quickly took over again.

The apostates are not tolerant. They are not loving. They are not forgiving. Read their favorite authors, the ones they quote so often and so lovingly. That is where their treasure is. They work tirelessly to drive away all opposition. For example, WELS drove three good pastors in Toledo out of the ministry. All three dared to oppose some doctrinal aspect of the Church Growth Movement, which is now Becoming Missional among the Leonard Sweet-hearts.

***

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Value of Polemics":

"Three good pastors"? I suppose one of them was you?

GJ - No, but thank you for making my point.

***

"Therefore, do not speak to me of love or friendship when anything is to be detracted from the Word or the faith; for we are told that not love but the Word brings eternal life, God's grace, and all heavenly treasures."
What Luther Says, An Anthology, 3 vols., ed., Ewald Plass, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959, III, p. 1411. Ephesians 6:10-17.

"Therefore nothing but a satanic, seductive, and sinister strategy is involved when we are called upon to yield a bit and to connive at an error for the sake of unity. In this way the devil is trying cunningly to lead us away from the Word. For if we adopt this course and get together in this matter, he has already gained ground; and if we were to yield him a fingerbreadth, he would soon have an ell."
What Luther Says, An Anthology, 3 vols., ed., Ewald Plass, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959, III, p. 1411f. Ephesians 6:10-17.

"However, if anything is undertaken against the Word, faith, and the honor of God, we are in no wise to preserve silence, are to bear it far less patiently. Then we should offer stubborn resistance."
What Luther Says, An Anthology, 3 vols., ed., Ewald Plass, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959, III, p. 1308. Sermon, 1523.

Polemics Are the Best Tool. Lutherans Gone Mild

ELCA beckons and Thrivent pays the tolls on the way.

I have seen the reaction many times. If someone clearly defines a topic and also shows why the opposite is not true, manufactured storms of protest arise. The accusations are mostly personal attacks, but the real issue is - No polemics are allowed.

Another version of the rule might be - No Confessions allowed, There is not much difference between polemics and the Confessions of the Lutheran Church (or any good confession of faith). The Book of Concord defines sound doctrine and also repudiates false doctrine.

America was not afraid of polemics in the early days. The Founders had to motivate people to fight for their freedom rather than remain colonies of the British Empire. Ben Franklin had a great joke played on them once when he published a letter in England saying Britain should pay taxes to Germany since England was originally a German colony with a Germanic language. On a feature show a British gentleman became angrier and angrier reading this out loud - until the end, when the satire said - "After all, these are the same arguments used for America paying taxes to Britain." He burst into laughter and Franklin smiled.

Blogmasters have to deal with the way things are. Lutherans have gone mild, In the good old days, the Methodists were the mild ones. They were moderately conservative on all topics, but irenic, always anxious to keep everyone happy. Lutherans are the irenic Methodists now. Nothing will keep someone from a plush position faster than having a position on anything.

This attitude makes everything sublime for the false teachers. Simply raising an issue is an attack on Holy Mother Synod. It is considered "bad form," in the language of the New England prep school. The coven of false teachers quickly lands on this Neanderthal and silences him, especially when the point is on target.

Lutherans should welcome banishment by the Synodical Con-Men. The more people jump from the hot air balloon, the faster it will rise into the stratosphere of New Age Paganism. The fact is, the midly conservative Lutherans - who will not fight for justification by faith - are keeping the balloon on course toward merger with ELCA. Mild Lutherans are ballast, just ballast.

Bad form, Luther.
Synodicals will celebrate the Reformation while rejecting
your Biblical doctrine.

Understanding the Art of Polemics

Thomas Cole, Subsiding of the Genesis Flood

Lutherans surprise me with their lack of understanding about polemics.

The term comes from the Greek word for war. Luther was a polemical writer, the best in Christendom. Few realize it because they do not read Luther. They are ashamed of the word and can barely allow the word Lutheran to mar the titles of their odious works (Christian Worship) and the signs of their lukewarm congregations.

Apologetics are different. That term is used for explaining and defending the faith. Now we are considered so dumb that the Apology of the Augsburg Confession is often called the Defense of the Augsburg Confession. When our high school English class heard about John Cardinal Newman's Apologia Pro Vita Sua, we knew what it meant - not an apology but a defense of his life. That was when all college bound seniors took two years of Latin.

This is a polemical blog. Those who want a Holy Mother Synod blog can find plenty of examples, where various people tiptoe around the issues and ban anyone raising a genuine doctrinal problem.

Facebook has a hilarious example, where Jack Kilcrease, an adjunct at a convent school, an ELCA and Jesuit graduate, lectures Lutherans on Lutheran doctrine. The title is Confessional Lutheran Fellowship.

Polemical writing is an art. Ignorant sarcasm, previously showcased on the Appleton blog (RIP) was a prime example of missing the mark.

A polemical book, essay, or post will identify what is wrong with the opposing opinion and describe the correct position.

Galatians is an excellent example of polemical writing. Adding works was an error in justification. Paul, inspired by the Holy Spirit, argued for justification by faith alone. Luther wrote an extensive commentary on Galatians, a polemical commentary commended by the Book of Concord.

Therefore, a polemical post will show that UOJ is wrong, that justification by faith is correct because it is Scriptural. Errors have a history, and so does sound doctrine. Both sides can be studied as an exercise in scholarship. The documents are available. I have copied or linked plenty of them. Various Lutherans have shared their own research, which may seem to be mine. It is really a group project.

Many think that calling me a bad person is a sound argument, because they have never progressed beyond the Holy Mother Synod mode of thinking. The wise ones join Rome, where they have this concept down perfectly. One infallible pope is far better than many infallible little popes.

Detail, St. John in the Wilderness, by Thomas Cole

The Museum
My wife and I have always enjoyed art museums. Our favorite place was the Art Institute of Chicago, with its vast collection. We have stopped at museums whenever we could. One was dedicated to Norman Rockwell.

Now we are volunteers at a billion dollar art museum, so we attend lectures and films. The Thomas Cole exhibit is visiting the museum at the moment. I have been posting his landscapes copied from the Net. Seeing them lit in a majestic, quiet room patrolled by anxious guards is another experience altogether.

I have lost count of the times I have seen the Cole paintings. We also attended several lectures on him and his group of painters - the Upper Hudson River School. The museum shows us what is already there in art. The various professors and guides point out what we need to know about each painting and style, what we need to look at to appreciate it more. Books and the Net supplement what we receive at the museum.

The Course of Empire, one of five paintings by Thomas Cole.
This one is Consummation of Empire.
People consider the series symbolic of all empires, including the American empire.

Personal Agreement Is Not the Issue
I find it odd when people write to me and stress whether some agree with me or not.

The issue is whether they agree with the Scriptures or not, the Book of Concord or not. Ultimately, as Chemnitz stressed, the creeds and books have to be set aside in favor of the Word alone, because that is the font and source of all spiritual wisdom. Only one book is written by the Holy Spirit.

When I get people upset by telling them the truth and giving the evidence, they have to think about the doctrinal issues. A convenient escape for many is to say I belonged to as many synods as Al Barry or Robert Preus did. Polemical writing is entertaining and clarifying. One ELCA pastor cannot resist reading this blog, but he seems to hate everything he reads. He sends me nasty emails telling me I am nasty.

But  I am a museum curator, rotating my exhibits, explaining what they mean. Some are entire books - Luther's Sermons, the Book of Concord. Some are works of art featuring great quotations and the Scriptures. An important part of education is combining the picture with the thought.

I am happy if people visit and increase their interest so much that they devour Luther's Sermons, study the various catechisms (with eyes opened). They should become students of the Word on their own - as everyone must be.

The curator asked me about the Thomas Cole exhibit. I said, "That is an experience. I have never seen anything like that before." His sagging face transformed into an ethereal look of peace, as if to say, "That is what this entire complex is designed to do." He cannot wait to set up the next one.

---

Rev. Dr. Jackson -

Regarding your excellent article posting of:

Understanding the Art of Polemics

http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2012/08/understanding-art-of-polemics.html

Thank you for this wonderful explanatory posting. Perhaps, now, some who are fearful of Ichabod and even more fearful of their synodical bureaucratic [hierarchical] taskmasters, will, at least feel free to post some comment feedback, even if they do so, anonymously. 

I can't imagine how some of these active parish pastors and members must feel, belonging to a Lutheran synod where they have so many levels of "supervisory" "leadership" hoops with which they must jump, crawl and / or straddle. I suppose the only thread holding some of them to their perspective mother synod, is, the fear of being stereotyped, shunned and / or the threat of somehow losing (their perspective) full church retirement pension and benefits. Would that some of these parish pastors and their perspective congregations consider going independent, to the end that they be free of negative synodical restraints and their corresponding torturous ecclesiastical bondage shackles.

Furthermore, I think an appropriate question to ask, is:  “Could our congregation survive without any circuit, district and / or, synodical influence and / or interference?” If that question is “No,” – then that would be a clear indication to remove one’s church from a bureaucratic system that need not be. There is no sense in being part of a self-serving system which sucks the Scriptural life-blood out of a church fellowship.

Find the blogger.

But, be that as it may; Rev. Jackson - upon reading your remarks about polemics, and those who (in cavilier fashion) capriciously speak ill of you; I could not help but think of Christ's words to the (envious) religious hypocrites of His time who would work themselves up in a frenzy every time He spoke and connected to the crowds:

Luke 6:26 - "Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you! for so did their fathers to the false prophets." [KJV]

Presently, I am reminded of a recent conversation I had with a member of my local WELS congregation. He expressed his displeasure of Ichabod; its author, and my Ichabod comments. But, he stopped short of attempting to contend with the Ichabod website's Christian Confessional Lutheran content. It was clear to me that he doesn't understand and appreciate the Lutheran tradition of polemics; and of the Ichabod web author's personalized style of writing and online web use of corresponding pics.

As much as I respect this Christian Brother, I find that his type thinking is systemic of many Lutheran church members glued to a certain unmovable and fixed mindset. Don't ever object to mother synod; keep those synodical boot clicking heels in top condition. And most of all, visit your local chiropractor so that you are always limber (enough) to bow to the latest Lutheran synodical bureaucratic innovation whim.

Pastoral care is rigorously applied in Fox Valley, WELS.

Finally, I believe that given our present decadent culture, it behooves every Christian church member, including Lutheran church members, to evaluate their present church membership. Is that membership worth your continued love and discipleship to the Lord Jesus? Is that membership such, that it erodes your faithful commitment to Christ; faith in His Word; and personal faith?  Is that membership coming between you and your faith and devotion to God's Word? Is that church membership worth your priceless soul as it leads you away from the truths of the divine revelation because it divides your attention from knowing, believing and doing God's will?

Nathan M. Bickel - pastor emeritus

http://www.thechristianmessage.org/

http://moralmatters.org/

LutherQueasy's Lead Ankle-Biter Obsesses about His Ichabod Coverage

Pope Paul the Unlearned has started his own thread about Ichabod on LutherQueasy. He has three posts on that topic alone in one day. He must have been weaned too early, because nothing shows obsession more clearly than reading this blog simply to find more more posts to blog about.

Someone said, "Fame is a shuttlecock kept aloft by opposition," so I appreciate all the extra web attention.

How many Lutheran blogs have various would-be authors dedicated to this holy task?

I did reproduce an error in earlier posts. I gave McCain credit for three years as a nominal parish pastor while he worked with Herman Otten to get Al Barry elected Synod President. McCain's bio shows only two years in that position, carefully avoiding congregational work ever since.

A little bit of research shows almost the same wording used by Paul Without a Call, no matter who is the object of his wisdom. Someone who spent two extra years in seminary without earning a degree is rather special.

Some of you are thinking, "Oh, you mean his time-out and defenestration on the ALPB Online discussion forum?" Oh no, here is an example from a Roman Catholic, who ran into McCain's macro-wit. I do not mean giant wit, but saying the same thing every time, no matter what the topic is, regardless of the facts.

You can find McCain quoted here - Lutheran pastor (sic) and slander expert:

I have already made several replies to White's efforts. Rev. McCain wrote, for example, the following on a Lutheran blog, c. 22 March 2007:

Warning!

Dave Armstrong is one of those sad persons who apparently spend (sic) nearly every waking moment on their (sic) Internet site. He is a Roman Catholic apologist who culls (sic) through the Internet looking for any chance he can to pounce on people who dare breathe a word of protest against what "Holy Mother" Rome has to say on anything. As is the case with most apologists like him, he tends to get his facts pretty screwed up.

If you engage him, it is akin to sticking your hand on flypaper, he and his groupies like to swarm.

He is the Roman version of a guy like James White, who has a similar style.

Dave Armstrong is not interested in "helpful discussion" but only attacking non-Romanists. I informed him that he is unwelcome to post on any of my blog sites. He only wants a platform to spread his false teachings. [he is welcome on my blog, any time]

Just a word of caution.

His foil here is a Roman Catholic layman named Armstrong who self-published a book titled, "The One Minute Apologist."

The Catholic blogger replied:

Nice try, but, um, no cigar. It is published by Sophia Institute Press, a very reputable and well known Catholic publishing house that specializes in classics (and I received an advance of $3000: that would be quite a feat indeed for a self-published book. Who would write the check, I wonder?). One would think that a "reviewer" could get his basic facts about the book reviewed straight, but no such luck.

 This is in line with his [McCain's] stated antipathy to apologetics:

Perhaps we would do well to distinguish between apologetics and polemics. Lutherans have done polemics since the "we condemn" of the Lutheran Confessions. Apologetics? Not so much.

When I read Dave Armstrong's blog, or James White's blog, I frankly find myself getting bored, in a hurry. Both men are self-proclaimed and self-annointed [sic] "apologists" and yet they seem to spend a lot of their time attacking other apologists and arguing with how other apologists argue, and then debating who said what, about what, when, and where, etc. It is really finally absurd.

I think Lutherans much prefer simply to proclaim, and confess, and teach and let the truth speak for itself.

That is not to say that we do not do polemics. This is a perfectly fine and even necessary thing to do, but apologetics? Well, like I said, not so much.

It seems that Rev. McCain's impulse to finally mention me on his blog has something to do with a marked dislike of my person. On the same discussion thread (the next day) he "proclaimed":

By the way, this particular post and thread has set Dave "I'm a Roman Catholic apologist" Armstrong off on what can only be described as a temper tantrum becoming a three year old. It is however a very good illustration with the problem of most of this on-line "apologetics" work going on. Dave tried to bait me into an argument, one of his favorite tactics, and then failing to do that he didn't take kindly to some observations I made about his blog site and his apologetics methodologies and then the mud really started to fly.

Armstrong is a convert from what he calls "Evangelicalism" though admitted to be a member of an ELCA congregatio[n] at some point or another. Now, as is so often the case, he must breathlessly, with near desperation, "defend" Romanism against any perceived slight. The funny thing is that he can't see that the very things he finds as faults with others and how they express themselves, are all precisely the same way he conducts his "apologetics ministry" only at about a multiplying factor of ten.

It finally gives me a good case of the giggles.

***

GJ - Many more examples can be found elsewhere.

Some People Need To Understand Polemics

I began Ichabod as a polemical blog, for perhaps 20 people. I did not think most people had a capacity to understand or appreciate polemics, but I was wrong. The normal views for a day are about 2,000, but many times they are 5,000, even 6,000.

Polemical blogs are the equivalent of the pamphlet wars of the past. Polemic is a word based on the Greek word for war. When people engage in polemics, the positions are drawn out rather than hidden.

Many FB writers like to call me names, but they do not wish to debate ideas. They seem distressed when their own public words from FB are copied into this blog. How delicious it must be to say anything on a private FaceBook page, all  the fun gone when it appears - with names and links - on a blog.

If an error is made on a post, I can fix it. That has happened before. A few posts have been erased because they were not really doctrinal and the individual requested the favor. One person wanted $35 for her post, so I erased that one.

Opinions are not facts, but I believe there is more pain from the facts than from any of my opinions. Sometimes the information is from background sources - and comes in from all directions and sources.

Church of the Thrivent Hos

Matt Harrison, Mark Schroeder, and Pope John the Malefactor agree -
"Stop writing about the LCMS, WELS, and ELS!"

Some are terribly offended that I write polemics about Lutherdom's prospective demise.

Luther was a polemical writer. So were Augustine and Paul. Have you read Galatians lately? Paul said the Circumcision Party should castrate themselves if they were so interested in cutting.

I see people wigging out about the WELS Documented Blog and the WELS Discussions Facebook page.

They do not like even a hint of conversation about the issues. Of course, they are the synod minders - or really synod worshipers - whose duty it is to protect Holy Mother WELS.

They Started the Polemics!

Listen up, innocents. The polemics began decades ago, with attacks against -

• Lutheran doctrine, worship, creeds, and hymns - they are keeping us from growing!
• The name Lutheran - keeping us from growing.
• The name church - keeping us from reaching out to the stoners, hedonists, and souses.
• The King James Version of the Bible - no good. We need one denying the Sacraments.
• Traditional Lutherans - mocked, insulted, thrown under the bus.
• Church discipline, which would have eliminated the drunks, adulterers, file swappers, and the murderers if it had been practiced.
• Justification by faith. The Synodical Con-Men specialize in this.
• The efficacy of the Word. The seminarians are so brain-washed by the Valleskey-Werning robots that they cannot even discuss this foundational Biblical concept.

God's creations are increasingly beautiful when magnified.
Man's inventions do not look so good close up.

History

Ever since the Walther-Pieper crowd created their new Booklet of Concord, the Brief Statement of 1932, the Synodical Conference has been in self-destruct mode.

That means 85 years of decline from the BS of 1932 to the 500th Anniversary of the Lutheran Reformation, plenty of time to divide and conquer.

The Walther Mob created the template for the Jeske Mob to take over decades later - same tactics, same insecurities, same power plays. They all claim intellectual superiority. Jeske, like Walther, markets himself as an expert on everything while copying the New Age aphorisms of Joel Osteen and Oprah.

These false teachers have been on the warpath since ordination. They have teamed up and worked across synodical lines. Their common school is a seminary - Fuller Seminary in Pasadena. Their common authority figure is their Father Below, the ultimate Changer.

Classmates from Mequon are velcroed together,
especially when they share the same false doctrine.
Behold - the polemicists, the Church and Changers.

UOJ Stormtroopers Expose Themselves More Than Prince Harry in Vegas

The UOJ Stormtroopers are determined to expose themselves. But lo, we have our cameras out and will share their pudenda (objects of shame) via the Net.

Harrison, Schroeder, and Pope John the Malefactor will call them into their palatial offices and dress the Enthusiasts down (or up) for displaying their nuda doctrina.

They used to say, "In wine, truth," but more accurately, "In anger, truth."




Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel has left a new comment on your post "UOJ Advocates Are Raging on Steadfast Lutherans":

Ichabod -

I happened to run across this Steadfast blog posting you are referencing. No sooner than I had made 2 innocent comments, I was bushwhacked with the accusation that I've committed slander! What gives! Where is their universalist tolerance? I thought their site was a forum of comment opinions! I am befuddled!

Nathan M. Bickel

www.thechristianmessage.org

www.moralmatters.org


---
Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel has left a new comment on your post "UOJ Stormtroopers Expose Themselves More Than Prin...":

Ichabod -

Please allow me (for context sake) to submit my original comment:

August 23rd, 2012 at 11:12 # 42 Reply

Daniel -

You have expressed yourself well, throughout this posted thread. I don’t believe that you have any problem understanding the doctrine of justification; but, the problem [challenge] with some who would attempt to contend with you, is that they apparently cannot break away from some of their universalist thinking, – making more of the Atonement than what Scripture says.

Generally speaking, I believe that one of the reasons for their Atonement = Justification [deficit] thinking, is that there is no room in their limited thinking for what it actually means to be “reprobate.” They conveniently ignore God’s gift of free moral agency and also ignore (in the process) Dr. Luther’s Bondage of the Will, thesis. Hence, Scriptures such as Galatians 5:19-21 and 1 Corinthians 6:10 are avoided by them. They really can’t deal with them because these Scriptures don’t fit into their Universalist inside the box mentality. [They can’t think outside the box; they can’t conceive of Scripture paradox]

Consequently, in their feverish zeal that all should be saved, they scuttle the reality of man’s free will to reject the Gospel and its all encompassing Atonement work of Christ. They just can’t leave “well enough alone” and emphasize the Holy Spirit’s work of initiating personal faith and His completion of faith in the believer. Their misunderstanding over emphasis of the Atonement makes them (in some respects) proponents of a type of decision theology. Although they would not agree with a Billy Graham perversion; they promulgate (by their understanding and teaching) a decision theology based upon an individual’s free will acceptance of their understanding of universal justification. ["Do you believe that Christ's sacrifice gives you peace with God; - then, say: 'yes; I accept that!’ Good! Once you do that - then you are saved! Now, come to the Lutheran altar and receive Communion!'"]

Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel

http://www.thechristianmessage.org/
http://moralmatters.org/

1. 

   Nathan M. BickelAugust 23rd, 2012 at 11:35 | #44

   Reply | Quote

   @Rev. Paul T. McCain #43

   Rev. McCain -

   I’m am thrilled that I have (apparently) made your day! Any time that I can bring joy to a Universalist, stuck in the mud of misunderstanding, I am therefore grateful.
2. 

   Pr. Martin Diers
   August 23rd, 2012 at 11:49 | #45

   Reply | Quote

   @Nathan M. Bickel #41

   Pr. Em. Bickel, this is pure slander.

   Please show me where anyone who confesses Objective Justification denies the existence of the reprobate, denies the ability of man to resist the Holy Spirit and the means of grace, or in any way limits or denies the Holy Spirit’s exclusive work in initiating, effecting, and preserving saving faith in the believer?

   Your accusations are shameful.

   You accuse us of having a: “feverish zeal that all should be saved”. I am not sure what you mean by this. By “should be saved” do you mean to imply that we confess that all will be saved? If so, this is pure slander.

   However, I suspect, rather, that this is what you mean (Correct me if I am wrong.): We have a feverish zeal that, since Christ has indeedatoned for all sins of all men, and that therefore, they should indeedbe saved! Why? Because God Himself wills it, and God Himself atoned for their sins!

   What part of that have I gotten wrong?

   They should be saved. However, they are not all saved, because they resist the Holy Spirit. They do not believe God. They are not justified by faith.
3. 

   Pr. Martin Diers
   August 23rd, 2012 at 11:59 | #46

   Reply | Quote

   @Nathan M. Bickel #42

   Pr. Em. Bickel,

   I have had a great deal of difficulty getting to the bottom of what the Jacksonites are teaching regarding the Atonement. I don’t understand what they are trying to say. Every attempt I have made in the past has gotten nowhere. It has devolved into a bunch of name calling.

   Therefore, please, if you would, let me pose a question to you. It is not a trick question. I am trying to, yet again, understand what you are teaching.

   First a statement:

   The “Three forms of unity” Calvinists believe that the atonement of Christ was sufficient to atone for the sins of the whole world, but the atonement itself was limited to those who would actually believe and be saved.

   Now my question:

   How is your view of the Atonement different from the Calvinist position I have outlined above? Where are they in error, and how do you differentiate yourselves from them on this doctrine?

   Please try to instruct me on your position. You may reply separately to my previous post. I want to get at your own understanding of these doctrines.
4. 

   Nathan M. Bickel
   August 23rd, 2012 at 12:04 | #47

   Reply | Quote

   Pastor Martin Diers -

   My goodness – the manner, in which you would accuse me of slander, makes me believe that I designated you for perdition! Calm down. Cool down and chill-out!

   I’m sorry, [for you] that you have apparently “extended the argument.” If you look closely at my comment, I said: “Generally speaking…..” Can I not speak of a collective mentality – from my opinion thoughts? It seems to me that you are needlessly taking offense, to now accuse me of slander. Cannot you appreciate a forum with back and forth contrasting comments and expressed thoughts? Perhaps, you should read a piece about “polemics,” which may help you to calm yourself down:

   “Understanding the Art of Polemics:”

   http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/search?q=polemics

   Please extend your Universalist type of forgiveness to me for the aforementioned title and link. It is my way of helping to evidence some of my comment train of thought.

   Pastor emeritus Nathan M. Bickel

   http://www.thechristianmessage.org
   http://www.moralmatters.org
5. 
   

   Pr. Martin Diers
   August 23rd, 2012 at 12:24 | #48

   Reply | Quote

   @Nathan M. Bickel #47

   You will note that I challenged your use of “Generally speaking” asking for even a single example of your “Generally”. If you cannot do even that, then your “Generally” allegations are just as surely slander as had your pointed the finger at an individual.

   Now, if you can demonstrate to me that your “general” accusations are not slander, I will happily withdraw my accusation of slander.

   Do not hide behind a scholastic definition of polemic. You have made specific allegations regarding those who teach Objective Justification. I have, in the spirit of your polemic, challenged you to defend them.

   Now please do so.
   
   

Nathan M. Bickel

August 23rd, 2012 at 12:38 | #49

Reply | Quote

Pastor Martin Diers -

I’m sorry, that you apparently have taken offense to my forum comments. I cannot help that. However, having stated that, I don’t countenance (what I regard to be) shoot from the hip [emotional] charges. If forum participants have thin skins then forums such as “How to garden” would be more fitting for them.

---

LPC has left a new comment on your post "UOJ Stormtroopers Expose Themselves More Than Prin...":

Pr. Nathan,

I love the comment on gardening. They should raise onions since just a inkling of speech doubting their position makes them cry foul.

It is not the JBFA people who throw names at the first encounter, if you observe, it is the UOJ people who cry wolf when they see a mouse.

LPC

When Calvinists Were Still Crypto

Crypto-Calvinists, Then and Now

Read the chapter for free here.

Before Luther's death, most of the doctrinal battles were against the Medieval errors of Roman Catholicism. After his death in 1546, the errors of John Calvin began to undermine Lutheran doctrine. Calvin's errors, in this controversy, concerned the two natures of Christ as well as the Lord's Supper. What someone believes about Christ will inevitably be reflected in what he believes about Holy Communion. Calvin could not believe that the resurrected Christ could pass through solid walls (John 20:19).



J-737

“They [the Lutherans] object that Christ went forth from the closed sepulcher [Matthew 28:6] and went to His disciples through closed doors [John 20:19]. This gives no more support to their error. For just as the water, like a solid pavement, provided Christ with a path as He walked upon the lake [Matthew 14:25], so it is no wonder if the hardness of the stone yielded at His approach. Yet it is more probable that the stone was removed at His command, and immediately after He passed through, returned to its place. And to enter through closed doors means not just penetrating through solid matter but opening an entrance for Himself by divine power, so that He suddenly stood among His disciples clearly, in a wonderful way, although the doors were locked.”

John Calvin, ed. John T. McNeill, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2 vols., Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960, II, p. 1400. Book IV, XVII, #29.



Similarly, Calvin could not accept the Real Presence of Christ with the elements of the Lord's Supper.[25] In addition, he separated the work of the Holy Spirit from the Word, so the Sacraments of Holy Communion and Baptism were symbolic and not effective in Calvin's thought. Once again, Melanchthon's unionism, timidity, and lack of honesty played a tragic part in launching the evil Crypto-Calvinist party. His desire for union with Calvin's Geneva and with Rome caused Melanchthon to change his views and try to strike a compromising position somewhere between the truth, Rome, and Geneva.

As early as 1535, Melanchthon harbored anti-Lutheran views, but hid them from Luther. By 1540 Melanchthon had changed the Augsburg Confession to conform with Calvin's views! Many people are still astonished today that Luther's co-worker could alter a confession of the Lutheran Church on his own. That is why Lutheran denominations adhere to the "Unaltered Augsburg Confession" or UAC, as found on church cornerstones. Melanchthon urged his followers to dissimulate, to cleverly deceive, rather than reveal their positions to the pure Lutherans. Modern Crypto-Calvinists, in the Church Growth Movement, also refuse to state their doctrinal beliefs.



J-738

"To all practical purposes the University of Wittenberg was already Calvinized. Calvinistic books appeared and were popular. Even the work of a Jesuit against the book of Jacob Andreae on the Majesty of the Person of Christ was published at Wittenberg. The same was done with a treatise of Beza, although, in order to deceive the public, the title-page gave Geneva as the place of publication. Hans Lufft, the Wittenberg printer, later declared that during this time he did not know how to dispose of the books of Luther which he still had in stock, but that, if he had printed twenty or thirty times as many Calvinistic books, he would have sold all of them very rapidly."

F. Bente, Concordia Triglotta, Historical Introductions to the Symbolical Books of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 189.





Joachim Westphal was the one of the first to warn Lutherans of the influence of Calvinism. John Calvin caused confusion by his early agreement with the Lutheran position. Melanchthon secretly converted to Calvin’s position on the Lord’s Supper. Westphal's polemics brought out Calvin's polemics, which clarified the differences between the two confessions. During this period of time, a group of Philipp Melanchthon's followers in Wittenberg conspired to surrender Luther's Reformation to the Calvinists. They convinced the Elector August that they were faithful Lutherans. These secret Calvinists (Crypto-Calvinists) also encouraged the Elector to drive out the genuine Lutherans, accusing the faithful men of being heretics! Luther predicted this would happen.

The Crypto-Calvinists gathered Melanchthon’s writings into a Corpus Philippicum with the approval of Melanchthon. The group of writings included Melanchthon's false doctrine and excluded Luther's writings. Those who did not subscribe to the document were deposed and driven out of their church positions. Early success made the Crypto-Calvinists bolder. They surrounded Elector August and convinced him to persecute sincere Lutherans as zealots and trouble-makers. Calvinist books were promoted to such a degree in Wittenberg that Luther's books remained unsold. The theologians craftily published a book, Exegesis Perspicua, which advocated union with the Calvinists, surrendering all doctrinal points to Calvin. Their triumph opened the eyes of the naive Elector, but one more stroke destroyed them in their cleverness.




The Crypto-Calvinists Self-Destruct



After Luther's death in 1546, Melanchthon's followers, with his help, conspired to replace Luther's doctrine with Calvin's at Wittenberg, Leipzig, and across Germany. Their stealth book, Exegesis Perspicua, revealed their dishonesty and allegiance to Calvin. Elector August, a faithful Lutheran who had been deceived by the Crypto-Calvinists, was angered and humiliated. The Crypto-Calvinists added to their fame as liars in 1574, when a Calvinist devotional book was delivered to the wrong person.



J-739

"By mistake the letter was delivered to the wife of the court-preacher Lysthenius....After opening the letter and finding it to be written in Latin, she gave it to her husband, who, in turn, delivered it to the Elector. In it Peucer requested Schuetze dexterously to slip into the hands of Anna, the wife of the Elector, a Calvinistic prayer-book which he had sent with the letter. Peucer added: 'If first we have Mother Anna on our side, there will be no difficulty in winning His Lordship [her husband] too.' Additional implicating material was discovered when Augustus now confiscated the correspondence of Peucer, Schuetze, Stoessel, and Cracow. The letters found revealed the consummate perfidy, dishonesty, cunning, and treachery of the men who had been the trusted advisers of the Elector, who had enjoyed his implicit confidence, and who by their falsehoods had caused him to persecuted hundreds of innocent and faithful Lutheran ministers. The fact was clearly established that these Philippists had been systematically plotting to Calvinize Saxony. The very arguments with which Luther's doctrine of the Lord's Supper and the Person of Christ might best be refuted were enumerated in these letters. However, when asked by the Elector whether they were Calvinists, these self-convicted deceivers are said to have answered that 'they would not see the face of God in eternity if in any point they were addicted to the doctrines of the Sacramentarians or deviated in the least from Dr. Luther's teaching.' (Walther, 56.)"

F. Bente, Concordia Triglotta, Historical Introductions to the Symbolical Books of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 190



The sly letter enclosed with the book from Melanchthon's son-in-law, suggested that Elector August be converted through his wife Anna. August ordered an investigation, which revealed even more intrigue. The Crypto-Calvinists were thrown into prison. August took on a leadership role in restoring genuine Lutheran doctrine. Martin Chemnitz, Jacob Andreae, and Nicholas Selnecker were made trusted advisors to August.[26]

As horrible as the Crypto-Calvinist reign appeared at the time, their excesses and sudden collapse provided a God-given way to unite Lutherans in a common confession. At the Colloquy of Worms in 1557, the Lutherans were divided, thanks to Melanchthon, and the Romanists refused to negotiate with them. Many unity efforts failed, until Jacob Andreae published his Six Christian Sermons in 1573. Andreae's sermons, the collapse of the Crypto-Calvinists, and Martin Chemnitz' leadership all combined to generate movement toward the Formula of Concord.



J-740

"What really gave Andreae a break and promoted his unity endeavors was the exposure of the Crypto-Calvinists in Wittenberg in 1574. Thus all three groups of true Lutherans were for the first time in many years to sit down at the table and devote their efforts to their internal problems. Just about this time Andreae providentially published his Six Christian Sermons. At this point and on these sermons Chemnitz was willing to talk."

J. A. O. Preus, The Second Martin, The Life and Theology of Martin Chemnitz, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1994, p. 183.









J-741

"The Exegesis perspicua [1573] marked the end of the hidden and underhanded efforts of those within Saxony who had espoused Calvinism. Everything was out in the open. These men repudiated the sacramental union, the oral eating of the body of Christ, and the eating of the body by the wicked. They held that Christ's body is enclosed in heaven and Christ is present in the Supper only in His power. There is no union of the body of Christ with the bread. The ubiquity doctrine of Brenz is repudiated as Eutychianism, and ancient heresy that asserted that after the union of the divine and human natures in Christ only one nature remained. Believers who participated in the Supper, the Wittenbergers asserted, become members of Christ who is present and efficacious through the symbols of bread and wine. They lavished praise on the Reformed and urged immediate union with them in opposition to the papacy."

J. A. O. Preus, The Second Martin, The Life and Theology of Martin Chemnitz, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1994, p. 175f.



The Formula of Concord required the cooperation of Andreae, Chemnitz, Selnecker, David Chytraeus, Musculus, and Cornerus.[27] Most people could not abide Andreae, because of his tactless, overbearing, and self-willed nature, but he was crucial in getting the work started and completed. Chemnitz was the dominant theologian, but the others all contributed significant insights to the Formula, which was signed in 1577. The Book of Concord, which includes the Ecumenical Creeds, the Augsburg Confession, the Apology to the Augsburg Confession, the Smalcald Articles, the Small Catechism, the Large Catechism, and the Formula of Concord, was completed in 1580.



J-742

"Such was the manner in which the Elector allowed himself to be duped by the Philippists who surrounded him, —men who gradually developed the art of dissimulation to premeditated deceit, falsehood, and perjury. Even the Reformed theologian Simon Stenius, a student at Wittenberg during the Crypto-Calvinistic period, charges the Wittenbergers with dishonesty and systematic dissimulation."

F. Bente, Concordia Triglotta, Historical Introductions to the Symbolical Books of the Evangelical Lutheran Church, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 188.


Crypto-Calvinism Now



J-743

"In other words, Zwingli and his numerous adherents declare that the means God has ordained are unnecessary and hinder true piety."

Francis Pieper, Christian Dogmatics, 3 vols., trans., Walter W. F. Albrecht, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1953, III, p. 104.





J-744

"Calvinism rejects the means of grace as unnecessary; it holds that the Holy Spirit requires no escort or vehicle by which to enter human hearts."

John T. Mueller, "Grace, Means of," Lutheran Cyclopedia, Erwin L. Lueker, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1975, p. 344.



J-745

"The Christian doctrine of the means of grace is abolished by all 'enthusiasts,' all who assume a revealing and effective operation of the Holy Spirit without and alongside the divinely ordained means of grace."

Francis Pieper, Christian Dogmatics, 3 vols., trans., Walter W. F. Albrecht, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1953, III, p. 127.



J-746

"Our opponents hold that saving faith must be founded on Christ Himself, not on the means of grace. This reasoning, common to the Reformed, the 'enthusiasts' of all shades, and modern 'experience' theologians, assumes that faith can and should be based on Christ to the exclusion of the means of grace."

Francis Pieper, Christian Dogmatics, 3 vols., trans., Walter W. F. Albrecht, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1953, III, p. 152.



J-747

"The specific Reformed cultus, due to the Reformed denial of the efficacy and objective nature of the Means of Grace, represents a quest after the grace of God revolving around human agency and subjective experience. The Lutheran cultus places the grace of God nigh unto the sinner in the Means of Grace."

Th. Engelder, W. Arndt, Th. Graebner, F. E. Mayer, Popular Symbolics, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1934, p. 21.



J-748

"The Reformed are simply deluding themselves in claiming Scripture support for their teaching regarding the means of grace. Their teaching is not derived from the Bible."

Francis Pieper, Christian Dogmatics, 3 vols., trans., Walter W. F. Albrecht, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1953, III, p. 150.





J-749

"The doctrine of salvation through the Means of Grace is distinctive of Lutheranism. The Catholic churches have no use for means of grace, for a Gospel and for Sacraments which offer salvation as a free gift. And the Reformed churches, while they hold, in general, that salvation is by grace, repudiate the Gospel and the Sacraments as the means of grace. It is clear that matters of fundamental importance are involved. The chief article of the Christian religion, justification by faith, stands and falls with the article of the Means of Grace. Justification by faith means absolutely nothing without the Means of Grace, whereby the righteousness gained by Christ is bestowed and faith, which appropriates the gift, is created."

The. Engelder, W. Arndt, Th. Graebner, F. E. Mayer, Popular Symbolics, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1934, p. 4f.



J-750

"This downplaying of the importance of the means of grace on the part of many in the Church Growth Movement would seem to stem from several factors."[28]

David J. Valleskey, "The Church Growth Movement: An Evaluation," Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly, Spring, 1991 88, p. 105. Holidaysburg, 10-15-90.[29] [emphasis added]



J-751

"Observe, then, the depreciative, contemptuous, and scorning ring in the words of the Reformed when they speak of the sacred Means of Grace, the Word and the Sacraments, and the grand majestic ring in the words of the Lord and the apostles when they speak of these matters...The true reason for the Reformed view is this: They do not know how a person is to come into possession of the divine grace, the forgiveness of sin, righteousness in the sight of God, and eternal salvation. Spurning the way which God has appointed, they are pointing another way, in accordance with new devices which they have invented."

C. F. W. Walther, The Proper Distinction Between Law and Gospel, trans., W. H. T. Dau, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1928, p. 152f.

UOJ Enthusiasts Malign Faith: One Error Leads to Many Others

THE TRUE RULE OF CHRISTIANITY
Contrary to these vain trifles and doting dreams, we teach faith, and give a true rule of Christian divinity in this sort: first, that a man must be taught by the law to know himself, that so he may learn to say with the prophet “All have sinned and have come short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23); also “There is none righteous, no not one; (Romans 3:10-11); also, “Against Thee only have I sinned” (Psalm 51:4)...

Here now the sinner beginneth to sigh, and saith in this wise: who then can give succour? For he being thus terrified by the law, utterly despaireth of his own strength: he looketh about and sigheth for the help of another, of a Mediator and Saviour. Here then cometh in good time the healthful Word of
the Gospel, and saith, “Son, thy sins are forgiven thee” (St. Matt. 9:2). Believe in Jesus Christ, crucified for they sins. If thou feel thy sins, and the burden thereof, look not upon them in thyself, but remember that they are translated and laid upon Christ (Isa. 53:5). This is the beginning of health and salvation.

By this means we are delivered from sin, justified and made inheritors of everlasting life, not for our own works and deserts, but for our faith, whereby we lay hold upon Christ.

Martin Luther, Kregel, Galatians 2:15-16, p. 69f.

***

GJ - Luther warned everyone against the dreams of the philosophers, the invented distinctions of His Holiness, the Antichrist.

But the ignorant, foolish, and deluded UOJ Enthusiasts run to their  OJ and their SJ, much like the papal condign and congruous merit labels, and pet them over and over. OJ and SJ are their toy poodles, so adorable and harmless. Anyone against OJ poodle and SJ poodle is a an obvious poodle-hater and must be consigned to the lowest depths of Hell with all those guilt-free saints.

From their double-justification labels (from Halle University Pietism and a Calvinist translator) they leap into nasty personal attacks. Heaven forbid they would crack a Book of Concord, a Luther commentary, or Luther's English Bible (the KJV).

Medium Rare pointed out, months ago, that the primary error of UOJ was their blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. John 16:8ff shows how true this is. Christ Jesus defined sin as the Holy Spirit convicting the world that they do not utterly trust in Him.

Sin is not denying OJ! Every time I see that claim, delivered with great indignation, I laugh.

The most obvious sin of UOJ, besides blasphemy, is turning something good - faith - into something dark and terrible. At the end of their diatribes they have a toss-away line, "you gotta believe this UOJ," but that is nothing more than an additional perversion.

Later I will spend more time on faith itself, but I want to point out what one observer said. "They separate all those things that belong together - the Gospel, the Means of Grace, election, the Holy Spirit, faith. They are all connected."

That is a philosophical mindset, one that eventually killed off orthodoxy and paved the way for Pietism. The fading orthodoxy of Europe turned each Latin label into a new skirmish, so studying for the ministry was a tedious lesson in philosophical polemics.

The Pietists drew large crowds simply by opening the Bible and working through the actual content of the Bible. The Word of God is efficacious. When given a choice between Pietism, philosophical polemics and its cousin, rationalism, many chose Pietism.

WELS Discussion Participants Run Back into the Great Cloacha

Someone asked about one of my graphics and posted it on the WELS Discussions Facebook page.

That quickly degenerated into a contest - how many personal attacks could they make against me and avoid the original question: what was the graphic about?

When one member asked about getting back to the question, a WELS lady snarled that he was my lapdod. I only have one lapdog, named Sassy.

After many false accusations aimed at me, I responded with a remark or two. A WELS minder deleted my comment.

Joe Jewell Gregory L. Jackson that was bashing. Deleted.

These graduates of the WELS education system do not realize that Luther engaged in polemics throughout his publishing history. His best works are polemical.

Satire graphics have been used from the earliest days. They portrayed Luther as a seven-headed monster. The Lutherans pictured the pope as the Antichrist. I do not know if the artwork of the Reformation was up to the standards of a Kaplan University graduate.

I like the word amateur - I work on graphics because I love (amateur) expressing satire with photos. They are obviously effective, because they make humorless false teachers go bonkers.

The WELSians respond that polemics are not fair and Photoshops are pure evil, so they unload another series of personal attacks (which are logical fallacies).

"Bashing" is the typical liberal, unionistic way of avoiding the facts. Someone who prefers marriage to sodomy is "gay-bashing." Individuals who loathe entertainment cloaked as worship are "Christian bashing."

Kudu Don Patterson hates this graphic
and denies being a Church and Changer.
He went to their last open conference - I did not.
Which one of us is a Changer?

This graphic make the WELS Discussion group go wild.