Rev. David R. Boisclair (Drboisclair) Intermediate Member Username: Drboisclair Post Number: 336 Registered: 1-2002 |
The reason that ELDoNA takes a careful line with Walther and The Brief Statement is because they are made up of and have fellowship with congregations that used to be part of the LCMS. They put the complete "onus of error" on Franz Pieper, erstwhile chief theologian of the LCMS. In dealing with what they would do or not do with The Brief Statement they declare in Thesis 7: "While we may have had a 'received body of doctrine' beyond Scripture and the Confessions in a previous body of affiliation, the lack of ownership of the documents setting forth the same--and, thus, our inability to modify such non-binding documents where they have misspoken--prevents us from adopting the same as our own in such a way as to make them settlers of disputes. That is, the only way to adopt a non-binding document over which we do not have ownership (and, thus, cannot alter) is to adopt it as unalterable and binding ..." Even the Missouri Synod, which might be considered to "own" The Brief Statement, would never alter it. ELDoNA here is declaring its independence as a new denomination that can start afresh with writing and publishing their own doctrinal statements as they just have; however, they run the risk of not being a haven for confessional congregations and pastors, who want to maintain adherence to The Brief Statement. The Gregory Jackson connection comes in with their observation in their prefatory material: "While in practice we have often witnessed a minimizing of the Means of Grace in bodies that hold to this teaching, that is certainly not the intent of those who first promoted it, since such reception is done by means of faith that is created in the one receiving by the Holy Ghost’s use of the Gospel." Gregory Jackson accuses those who hold to the biblical teaching of Objective Justification of Enthusiasm in that he alleges that they in speaking of a justification of any kind irrespective of faith deny the scriptural doctrine of the Means of Grace. This, of course, is a "straw man" fallacy because in addition to confessing the biblical doctrine of Objective Justification we also confess the biblical doctrines of Subjective Justification through faith wrought by God through his Means of Grace. Jackson is also keen on using other logical fallacies such as "poisoning the well" and "post hoc propter hoc." | ||
     Rick Strickert (Carlvehse) Senior Member Username: Carlvehse Post Number: 4227 Registered: 10-2003 |
Can it be just last year that "Rev. Paul Rydecki Receives Sabre of Boldness 2012" from the Gottesdeinst editors?!? | ||
| George Mueller (Mueller) Senior Member Username: Mueller Post Number: 1050 Registered: 11-2012 |
They should ask Rydecki to return it. | ||
| Joe Krohn (Jekster) Member Username: Jekster Post Number: 180 Registered: 4-2011 |
All men are saved unless they are in rejection of this salvation. I like this analogy alot (I would change 'acceptance' to 'receipt' so as not to sound like the Reformed): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Wils on "United States v. Wilson, 32 U.S. 150 (1833), was a trial in the United States in which the defendant, George Wilson, was convicted of robbing the US Mail in Pennsylvania. Due to his friends' influence, Wilson was pardoned by Andrew Jackson. Wilson, however, refused the pardon. The Supreme Court was thus asked to rule on the case. The decision was that if the prisoner does not accept the pardon, it is not in effect: "A pardon is a deed, to the validity of which delivery is essential, and delivery is not complete without acceptance. It may then be rejected by the person to whom it is tendered; and if it is rejected, we have discovered no power in this court to force it upon him." Therefore, Wilson was not released from prison early.[1]" | ||
| Rev. David R. Boisclair (Drboisclair) Intermediate Member Username: Drboisclair Post Number: 341 Registered: 1-2002 |
Great analogy, Joe! Luther would be proud. |
