to attack justification by faith, and to ignore the Means of Grace."
Timothy Blank (Timothyblank)
Intermediate Member
Username: Timothyblank
Post Number: 418
Registered: 11-2004
Posted on Monday, April 04, 2011 - 2:56 am: Edit Post Delete Post Print Post
quote:
"I understand these two passages to be a repudiation of UOJ and an apology for all the harm done in the name of that fad." - Gregory Jackson
I just started reading Gregory Jackson's book, Luther versus the UOJ Pietists: Justification by Faith in which he quotes Justification and Rome by Robert Preus. He says the same on his website - the quote from Dr. Preus' book is on the website as well.
I think G.J. is quite confused, to say the least. G.J. says, "Preus clearly repudiated UOJ late in life."
I'm wondering if there are any reactions out there?
Timothy
***
GJ - This is quite funny, because the LutherQueasies could not address the question, which was really an accusation, in two months.
Instead, like frightened gorillas pounding their chests, they ranted about everything wrong with me and Bethany Lutheran Church.
One LCMS pastor pointed out to them that all their criticisms of Bethany could be applied to their own synod practice.
Of course, Rolf (son of Robert) weighed in with an angry denial, but no facts. All I have is:
1. Robert Preus' initial essay, lovingly produced by Jack Casione (ex-LCMS), answering me by avoiding the question. That was 100% UOJ, dated from the 1980s, when Concordia Seminary, Ft. Wayne, offered a DMin in Church Growth.
2. Robert Preus final book, Justification and Rome.
Those are documents, not anecdotes. They cannot be altered to suit the mood of the moment.
I have published four graphics quoting Robert Preus where he pointedly rejected any justification apart from faith. These great MDiv scholars (Blank, Webber, Kurtzahn, Cascione, Rolf Preus) should offer a direct answer instead of more bile.
I believe the graphics have made them hyper-ventilate. I also created an Abraham Calov graphic, because Robert Preus quoted Calov with approval. Calov is good for fixing a late date (post Book of Concord) on justification by faith, where UOJ is excluded with the most precise terms possible. I cannot be sure if Calov was answering something specific, but his words do not allow for God "justifying everyone before birth" (R. Preus.1 quoting Eduard Preuss) and similar nonsense.
Quenstedt was another Robert Preus favorite. I remember him mentioning that as a possible name for one of his many sons. I will try to get that graphic done soon.
---
| Michael Bryant (Mike) Senior Member Username: Mike Post Number: 2380 Registered: 1-2005 |
"I think this discussion is coming to a close as we are close to simply repeating ourselves." [Art Bolstad, LCMS Missionary] Except you have yet to actually say anything of substance. Rather, you have "examined" and no one has given you the ammunition you were hoping for in order to use against your brother, but instead the contrast between them and Dr. Jackson is ever more clear. For this, we can all be grateful. The wayword (sic) and poor practices among us are not the schismatic practice some wanted initially to say they were equal to. |
***
GJ - You have it right, Brer Mike.
UOJ opposes the Gospel and substitutes Halle Pietism for Biblical doctrine. You OJers hate Luther's Gospel and cannot defend your own. The gulf is great indeed.
