Luther, Lord's Prayer, and OJ

Little Rockers listen to new hit parody -
"Perish is the word I use to describe..."

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "First Known Statement of Two Justifications - From...":

Dr. Jackson,

I agree with you on UOJ. I was wondering if you could briefly comment on Luther's explanation of the 5th Petition in the Large Catechism, which might be used as a defense for UOJ.

***

GJ - Here is the statement in question:

88] Therefore there is here again great need to call upon God and to pray: Dear Father, forgive us our trespasses. Not as though He did not forgive sin without and even before our prayer (for He has given us the Gospel, in which is pure forgiveness before we prayed or ever thought about it). But this is to the intent that we may recognize and accept such forgiveness. 89] For since the flesh in which we daily live is of such a nature that it neither trusts nor believes God, and is ever active in evil lusts and devices, so that we sin daily in word and deed, by commission and omission, by which the conscience is thrown into unrest, so that it is afraid of the wrath and displeasure of God, and thus loses the comfort and confidence derived from the Gospel; therefore it is ceaselessly necessary that we run hither and obtain consolation to comfort the conscience again.

This is a beautiful statement about the Atonement, which is pure forgiveness. One example from the New Testament is Paul's discussion on Reconciliation, a synonym for the Atonement.

KJV 2 Corinthians 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. 18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; 19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation. 20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.

Another is the three-fold example of Christ's sacrificial death:

KJV Romans 5:6 For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.

KJV Romans 5:8 But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

KJV Romans 5:10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

These examples show that the Atonement is the Gospel, an objective fact which does not depend upon man's faith or virtue. Luther often wrote things like this, which I am paraphrasing - "Christ died for the sins of the world" - that is a meaningless statement unless you say "He died for me." Here the explanatory phrase is ignored by the Stormtroopers: "(for He has given us the Gospel, in which is pure forgiveness before we prayed or ever thought about it)."

The preaching of this Gospel produces faith, the Holy Spirit working effectively through the Word. The best comparison is the Atonement being the great treasure (a term used more than once in the Book of Concord). The treasure lies in one pile until it is distributed by the Holy Spirit in the Word and Sacraments.

So the Atonement is already true, without us and apart from us. But the declaration of our forgiveness is separate from the Atonement. Justification in the Bible always means justification by faith. The UOJ Stormtroopers confuse "if" and "when." They erect their Straw Man fallacy and say, "You are not forgiven because of your faith!" Faith means trust in the Gospel Promises, so we are forgiven when we believe in the forgiveness proclaimed in the cross of Christ. The Word of God daily proclaims this to us. The Gospel of John was written to produce faith, so faith must be good in the eyes of God. John 3:16 commends faith and John 3:36 condemns unbelief. " He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him."

Either we believe or we do not believe. There is no middle ground.

The tragedy of our time comes from Lutherans who have separated grace from the Means of Grace. Not trusting in the effectiveness of the Word, they turn to secular methods and become hardened unbelievers who will do or say anything to maintain their chintzy little kingdoms.

I know intelligent Lutherans who embrace UOJ and supposedly reject the Church Growth Movement. UOJ is the foundation of CGM, as Valleskey revealed in his odious book and the fake Ichabods disclosed on their defeated blog.

I highly recommend reading Luther's Commentary on Galatians in its entirety. I read it aloud to Mrs. Ichabod. The commentary was Bunyan's favorite, apart from the Bible. Luther said he would keep two of his books - Galatians and his Small Catechism. It is so strange that seminary professors suggest drivel like Your Church Can Grow instead of Luther.

Perish Services Perishing

Their pop hit needed just a little tweaking.

Perish is the word I use to describe
All the feeling that I have hiding here for you inside. (Yech, yech)
You don't know how many times I've wished that I could scold you,
You don't know how many times I've wished that I had sold you,
You don't know how many times I've wished that I could have
Rolled you into something who could
Perish yourself as much as you perished me.


Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "WELS Convention Thread for Thursday":

I think even bigger news than the budget is the resolution that Schottey brought up. Perish Services has been totally decimated. Rather than a Board with an Administrator and a Chairman and decision making power, with many sub-boards and sub-administrators, Perish Services now consists of only 3 sub-administrators who report to the Conference of Presidents and are called by the COP.

President Schroeder slapped them down for trying to go around his authority and destroyed them and their support of the CG movement. Now there's not much left of Perish Services, and what is left can't do a thing without the COP knowing about it.

This is great news.

First Known Statement of Two Justifications - From Halle University Pietist

Look at who donated the Knapp book scanned by Google.

George Christian Knapp (1753-1825) was a Pietist but very rationalistic. He taught two justifications, objective and subjective, in his Lectures on Theology, published in German in 1789. The Lectures were translated into English in 1831 by Leonard Wood, who was very influential at the time, published and used in many editions in America. The Lectures were still being used at Andover at the end of the 19th century, mirroring the enormous span of years Knapp spent teaching.

Knapp taught Objective and Subjective Justification, in form familiar to Missouri, WELS, and the Little Sect on the Prairie:

Here are some statements from the English edition, 8th, 1859, p. 397ff:

The Scripture doctrine of pardon or justification through Christ, as an universal and unmerited favour of God.

1. The Universality of this Benefit

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

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

(GJ note - This is the same formula, in the translator's note, taught by J. P. Meyer, Ministers of Christ, late professor at Mequon, originator of the first three Kokomo Statements. This formula morphs easily into Babtist decision theology, hiring Ed Stetzer, and learning from Andy Stanley. I understand the "dog notes" at Mequon are from Meyer himself.)

The Register, quoted below:

"Dr. Knapp, late Professor at the University of Halle, was born at Glancha,in Halle, on the 17th of September, 1753, and received his early education in the Royal Paedagogium, one of the institutions of the pious Francke. At the age of 17, he entered the university at Halle, and attended the lectures of Semler, Noesselt and Gruner, with more than common success. The Bible was his great object of study, while the Latin and Greek classics still received a degree of attention which enabled him ever afterwards to adorn, enrich and illustrate from classical literature whatever he said or wrote in the department of Theological science. In 1774 he completed his course of study, and in 1775, after a short absence, he began to lecture, at Halle, with much success upon Cicero, the New Testament, and the more difficult portions of the Old Testament. He was appointed Prof. Extraordinary in 1777, and Prof. Ordinary in 1782. He then lectured in Exegesis, Church History, and in Jewish and Christian Antiquities.

On the death of Freylinghausen (1785), he and Niemeyer were appointed Directors of Francke's Institutes; and continued jointly to superintend these establishments for more than 40 years. In the division of duties, the Bible and Missionary establishment fell to Dr. Knapp, which brought him into near connection with the Moravians. The lectures, of which this volume forms a part, he commenced during the summer of the same year."

WELS Convention Thread for Thursday

Michael Schottey has left a new comment on your post "Walther, Valleskey, Brenner, and Propositional The...":

The WELS passed a four part resolution this morning

1) Acceptance of "Option C"--cuts will be made in administration, travel and in para-ministries that can be easily replaced at a later time.

2) Encouragement of synodical entities to use the WELS VEBA Holiday refund by remitting it back to synod in the newly established ministry support fund

3) Mandate to the Synodical Council that if, in the second year of the biennium, cuts need to be made, Salary Furloughs are utilized first rather than cuts.

4) We as a synod place emphasis and understand that it is God who blesses us and thank him for these gifts.

---

From WELS:

Delegates have adopted a resolution of the Finance and Budget Floor Committee for the 2009-11 biennium, which provides enough funding for Ministerial Education to retain WELS' present three-tier, four-school system as contained in the Synodical Council's proposed budget Option A.

The resolution also keeps funding for the Boards for Home and World Missions at the same level as the proposed budget Option B so that no further missionary cuts are needed.

Instead, the budgets of Communications, Financial Services, Technology, the Congregational Resource Team within Parish Services, Mission Counselors, and corporate travel expenses will be cut by a total of $1 million.

Look for more details to follow.

---

An observer wrote:

"An interesting conclusion might be drawn from the vote (paper ballots) on the first budget resolution that kept Missions and Education at the higher levels and moved the cuts elsewhere. The vote was, as I recall, 261 to 65, give or take a few, the ayes being 80%. That seems to say those favoring the schools were 80%, while those against them were 20%, of those present. That might be an indication of the ratio against the C&C gang. Maybe that is not a sound conclusion, but I thought the ratio looked good."

---

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "WELS Convention Thread for Thursday":

Why couldn't the SC come up with this as well? They could not come up with something like this "Option C"?

261 to 65? Convincing vote.


***

GJ - I think SP Schroeder showed wisdom in allowing the convention to decide on options rather than forcing one solution through. Inventing a crisis and forcing the purchase of a failed Roman Catholic school led WELS into Prairie due Chien, which is now a prison, and losing a prep in New Ulm, where WELS members are especially dense. The density of WELS members in that area moved them to spend oodles on their own Area Lutheran High School, removing a large number of potential students from Prairie.

Someone wrote earlier about $22 million in debt. Institutions and individuals always have debt. The report showed the debt being reducing by about 1/3 while the economy was in meltdown. That is impressive.

Schroeder has led the synod well, with The Love Shack throwing in more obstacles than one finds in The Pilgrim's Progress. Now it is up to members and pastors to consistently follow through, first by studying the Confessions, second by applying them in all situations.

Walther, Valleskey, Brenner, and Propositional Theology

Growth in WELS

Pastor Wehrwein reprinted an essay by Egbert Schaller about the basic weaknesses of the Missouri Synod.

Schaller made some excellent points about Walther not being a Biblical theologian. Walther stated propositions and followed them up with "proof" from various citations, often just a list of Biblical passages. Walther and Pieper's dogmatics classes were often "repeat after me" exercises, too, something Mequon reproduced with predictable results. The ELS lets seminarians think a little bit, but smacks around those who express their confessional conclusions. Pope John the Malefactor keeps the Left Foot of Fellowship ready - his knee-jerk reaction to dissent from his infallible doctrine.

Most of the errors weighing down Lutherans today are from propositions offered up and given no Biblical support. The propositions are endlessly repeated and people soon learn not to question the theses. Therefore, Biblical passages opposed to the falsehood or not supporting the error are attached to citations, like lint to Velcro. Just try to pull them apart.

When did God "declare the entire world forgiven of its sin"? Walther declared it in his Easter absolution sermon, and the Brief Statement entered the notion into canonical law.

Valleskey promoted Fuller doctrine the same way - with propositions in his odious WLQ essay. Those who even questioned him were pushed out of the WELS ministry. Brenner was already at Mequon when the seminary published the essay as Gospel truth. When I spoke to Brenner about the seminary's published errors, since they endorsed Church Growth with the publication, he had two answers for me:

1. The editor Gawrisch was sick, so that was why nothing was done. I asked if the whole faculty was also sick, since they did nothing.
   
2. "Write a letter."
   

So when Brenner began chanting the slogans of Kokomo Justification, I knew Enthusiasm would not depart from Mt. Zion in the near future. Forgot the politics of how the faculty and board have been stacked with members of the Patterson-Jeske-Parlow network. There are no doctrinal standards to evict professors like Al Sorum until the Book of Concord is studied, known, and discussed.

I think there is a good start already. Politics will not win the day. The Word of God will accomplish His purpose.

Confidential to all those who kept silent and let me answer Valleskey by myself - Has WELS grown larger and stronger since 1991?

Spoiling the Egyptians

More on Universal Objective Justification

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Objective Justification Question":

Pastor Jackson,

Are you saying, in reference to the interchangeability of the the word Atonement and Justified etc., which has caused confusion, that you had never heard pastors, professors, theologians actually say "the whole world is forgiven of all their sins, even those who don't believe are foprgiven," like was said at the WELS convention on Tuesday by the seminary professor, prior to 1991 when writing your book Liberalism?

[GJ - I went to summer school at The Surrendered Fort in the late 1980s and decided to join WELS after the LCMS convention in Indianapolis. I never heard the two justification scheme in theological studies or in reading Luther. When I first read Pieper at that time, I thought he was using objective justification as a synonym for the Atonement. Since then I have talked to or written to a number of laity and pastors who thought the same thing. In fact, Bishop Jim Heiser thought that way too, and he publishes all the post-Luther books at Repristination Press. Chapter Five of Thy Strong Word opened a lot of eyes and also made some people very angry with me.

After Kokomo, WELS and Missouri avoided the subject.]

I admit that I had first heard the phrase specifically in about 1992 or 93. Before that I can't say I ever heard anything other than, "Christ died for the sins of the whole world."

I would think it odd that a pastor would not have run into that speak earlier and thus using the term Objective Justification should have already been known to not mean the same as Atonement.

[GJ - The ALC/LCA side of the Lutheran Church did not use the term Objective Justification. But their Gospel reductionism offered the same message - everyone is forgiven. Lenski, who is read on both sides of the Lutheran divide, never accepted OJ for good reason - it is absent in the Scriptures. My favorite theologians of General Council never delved into the Walther/Pieper scheme.

The Synodical Conference was unduly influenced by the propositional thinking of Walther and Pieper, but the LCMS did not regurgitate double-justification from the beginning, as people would like to promote. The 1905 LCMS catechism never mentioned the scenario.]

I need to clarify this in my mind. I do not intend to sound antagonistic.

[GJ - The antagonistic ones sound very different from you - believe me.]

Thank you.