Someone Asked about Rolf Preus' Ululation on UOJ. The Truth Comes Out. Kokomo Justification Exposed

 Confessional Lutheran Fellowship on Facebook - A Closed Group,But Open to ELCA and UOJ Apostates.

 More details about Kokomo UOJ are here.

Rolf's citation of "It is finished" is an old LCMS bromide to claim God pronounced the absolution of the world the moment Jesus died, but that is not what the verse says. Besides that, Rolf also uses "Raised for our justification!" - from the Halle-centric Easter absolution, based on the erroneous Pietistic understanding of 1 Timothy 3:16. Those two errors cannot be reconciled with each other, let alone with the Scriptures and Confessions.

The next part is accurate about the Word as a Means of Grace - God brings us salvation - but does Rolf mean it? He ululates between Objective Justification and Justification by Faith, but always comes to rest on OJ.

For example, he sounds Lutheran for several sentences and then retreats into OJ again - here - We were saved when Jesus died for us. That is pure Edward Preuss, as quoted favorably by his father in the attempt to crush and displace Walter Maier II.

That suggests to me that the middle part was another shell game, a swindle, a con, starting with OJ, switching to the Means of Grace, and ending with his true love - Enthusiasm.

Rolf Preus The so called Kokomo statements were compiled by deniers of objective justification to discredit the pure teaching. They snookered their pastor into acquiescing to statements written by a WELS theologian but taken out of context. It is dishonest to set forth the Kokomo statements a representative of anyone's teaching of objective justification.

3

Manage

Like

 · Reply · 4w

Jim Schulz Rolf Preus It is willful ignorance to say that no one is expressing Objective Justification in Kokomo ways.

This little paragraph by Rolf, from the same FB page, is another deception. I traveled to Kokomo and met with the two families WELS kicked out for rejecting the four Kokomo Statements. WELS and UOJ sects engage in willful deception about this.

Pastor Papenfuss (WELS) began teaching his Kokomo congregation that the entire world was declared forgiven. Two families were shocked by this, and Papenfuss gave them JP Meyer's Ministers of Christ (WELS, still in print). They copied the first three statements from the book and added a fourth one from an earlier debate. These men asked them, "Is this what WELS believes?" Papenfuss said "Yes" but added that he never heard of UOJ until he began studies at Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary in Mequon.

That means Papenfuss had a Lutheran education and confirmation, probably with the Gausewitz (non-UOJ) Catechism, attended four years of Northwestern College (RIP) which was for future WELS pastors only. And yet never heard of UOJ.

Rolf - They snookered their pastor into acquiescing to statements written by a WELS theologian but taken out of context. It is dishonest to set forth the Kokomo statements a representative of anyone's teaching of objective justification.

Rolf - please stop lying. The two families took their case to WELS and WELS, headed by Armin Panning (chairing the Committee to Extend the Left Foot of Fellowship) agreed with the excommunication. The Four Statements were in the letter, saying (Thy Strong Word) that they were being removed for not accepting those four statements. Sig Becker supported that as well.

WELS re-published Ministers of Christ with the same offensive statements in the "new" version, edited by Armin Panning, president of Mequon and New Testament professor. Since Panning agreed with extending the Left Foot of Fellowship, was he also snookered? Poor Rolf - one should not put whoppers into print where they can be subjected to the truth.

In conclusion, without quoting everything Rolf has written, I can only conclude that he enjoys wearing fleece when confronted by someone who understands Justification by Faith. But he cannot resist letting the slavering lupine jaws and sharp claws emerge from his ovine camouflage. 

Court denies appeal in corruption case | NWADG

 The Paris family's Ecclesia College was going to expand, they claimed, so they needed more money than any other entity to do that. And what did they do with it? They bought 50 acres on top of the 200 they already owned. Meanwhile, the campus continued its Third World ambience from lack of improvements.

Court denies appeal in corruption case | NWADG:



"FAYETTEVILLE — A federal appeals court has refused to hear an appeal of an order to dismiss filed by defendants in the corruption case involving former state Sen. Jon Woods.

Woods, Oren Paris III, and Randell G. Shelton sought to have charges against them dismissed because FBI special agent Robert Cessario had a hard drive of a laptop computer used in the investigation erased after being ordered to turn it over for inspection in a evidence-related dispute.

U.S. District Judge Timothy Brooks’ refused to dismiss the charges and the appeal to the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals followed.

A three-judge panel today denied the appeal in a two-sentence ruling."

Rusty Cranford is involved in this scandal too.

'via Blog this'

Answer the Fallacies of Forgiveness and Election without Faith. From the Artesian Well Called The Lutheran Library Publishing Ministry

After finishing Loy yesterday, I decided to take another look at the 3-books-in-one published by Schodde as The Error of Missouri. The middle one Intuitu Fidei was translated by Lenski. The following quote is from part one.

Alec

---

Dr. Jacob Andreae is, besides Chemnitz, one of the main authors of the Formula of Concord. He was far more active than even Chemnitz himself in bringing matters so far that the Formula was produced. In the year 1574 he published a disputation on predestination in which thesis 10 reads as follows: “Predestination and election by grace is the eternal decree of God, declaring that He will save those persons who are penitent and believe in Christ, the Savior and only Redeemer of the world.” Thesis 172: “It is God’s immutable will that all should believe in the Gospel, and that those who believe shall be saved,” Mark 16. Th. 173: “As it is likewise His immutable will, that those who do not believe shall be damned.” Th. 174: “Nor does the universality of the promises of the Gospel contradict the particularity of election” (i. e. by the fact, that election is restricted to a few, or that only a few are chosen). Thesis 175: “For God has not promised salvation to all promiscuously, but only to those who believe.” Thesis 176: “Hence the particular election is included in the universal promise.”

Moreover in this disputation of 1574 Andreae opposes an unconditional election in the following words: “Whoever seeks predestination in an absolute decree of God, because God’s foreknowledge is absolutely certain, leads men to think that such a decree necessarily brings about the salvation of certain persons who under no circumstances can be condemned, while it likewise effects the damnation of others so that they cannot be saved. The result of this is that believers, becoming perplexed when considering this divine foreknowledge, cannot be cheered by consolation; men of Epicurean mind, however, thereby open for themselves and others the door for transgression; because the hidden will of God has decided everything, all our efforts avail nothing. . . . The reason why all are not saved is this, that they spurn the divine grace, which God offers to all in Christ. 

The fact, that this grace cannot be accepted by our own reason or strength, does not overthrow our proposition. All indeed are to hear, and by hearing are to come to faith. Whoever despises preaching, must accuse himself, and not a hidden decree of God, just as his conscience accuses only himself. The doctrine of an absolute decree also renders the work of the Word and the Sacrament useless. Reprobation by an absolute will, without the foresight of unbelief, is blasphemous. Whoever hears the Word, which he indeed cannot believe by his own powers, to him the Holy Spirit is promised, and He works that all who hear may also believe. This coming to hear preaching, this willing and hearing, God demands as a piece of outward obedience, a leading, as it were by the hand, unto Christ, although in itself it does not effect conversion. But this man can do, hear the Word which is the organ of the Spirit, or stop his ears; but man has not the least measure of power for assent, as Erasmus claimed, assent is altogether the work of the Holy Spirit.”

Well, well, Andreae, what are you teaching here? Are you, the actual author of the Formula of Concord still really in such lamentable ignorance regarding the very first letter of the pure doctrine of predestination, which consists of the very opposite of what you teach in these propositions? Don't you know that predestination and the universal gracious will of God are two entirely different "sides" of God's will, which neither reason nor the light of grace is able to harmonize with each other? Let me tell you, my dear Andreae, you should have remained at home with your wisdom, which betrays a "rationalizing tendency"; you had better remain silent as long as you have no clearer light on the a b c of the pure doctrine of predestination. See, "it is impossible for us to mediate between, or to harmonize with our reason, these two scriptural doctrines concerning particular election and concerning universal grace. Not even the light of grace is able to remove this discord, we must wait for the light of glory" ("L. u. W.", 1880, 308). How then could you write such nonsense as this: "The universality of the promises does not contradict the particularity of election; for God has not promised salvation to all promiscuously, but only to those who believe; hence the particular election is included in the universal promise." Why, the thing is just the reverse! Election is "an altogether different thing" from this universal promise. And therefore the particularity of election contradicts the universality of the promise, and we cannot solve the contradiction, and you dare not, as you venture to do. harmonize the two by referring to passages like these: "He that believeth shall be saved," or: "Without faith it is impossible to please God." I am very much afraid, my dear Andreae, that you agree with the later dogmaticians who make "election depend on faith", although I know, of course, that you are the chief author of the Formula of Concord and that you ought to know how it is to be understood. Certainly we respect your Lutheranism otherwise: but when you include the particularity of election in the universal promise ("He that believeth shall be saved"), understanding the former by the latter, when thus you attempt "to explain somewhat and make plausible to our reason'" (!!) "this wonderful mystery of election" by mixing in foreseen faith, then, we are sorry to say, you too have "forsaken the Scriptures and the Symbol" and gone off on the wrong track of Pelagianism. Still one thing serves to excuse you somewhat: your co-workers on the Formula, as the extracts from Selnecker and Chytraeus show, were likewise not quite straight on this subject, and, to put it as mildly as possible, badly misunderstood their dear Formula of Concord in this a b c point of the pure doctrine of election! _Sapienti sat_. [Note from the I. F. proper. – Translator.] 

Two Terms To Understand - Justification and Forensic

 CFW and his brother kidnapped their niece and nephew from their father's parsonage. The Saxon migration was proud of the minors who came along with them on their merry adventure. CFW let his future mother-in-law go to jail while he escaped to America with the rest of the criminals. Pastor Martin Stephan took his main mistress - there were others - on the same ship he sailed.

CFW Walther and his brother grew up in the parsonage of a rationalist. They were also trained in rationalism when they were obtaining their credentials to be pastors. The men who examined them were rationalists because the state church was controlled by rationalists. Anyone else was considered a Pietist.

Needless to say, since Walther chose to associate with Pietistic circles, he must have been quite clever to give the accepted answers when examined for graduation and ordination.

Clearly, the entire Walther circle was trained in rationalism and drawn closer in cell group Pietism, led by two different abusive mentors. The first one died, so they gravitated to Pastor Martin Stephan, Bohemian Pietist pastor called to the Dresden congregation of Bohemian Pietists.

Pastor Martin Stephan was known early for promoting the Scriptures and the Book of Concord, but he also became known for corruption, spending a lot of late night hours with young women, and violating the state rules that allowed him to be called without a degree and serve cell groups as long as they practiced at their church property. He was often caught conducting his cell group work at other locations.

Calvinism is the primary source of rationalism in the state churches of Europe, and Lutheran Pietism served as a blend of Lutheran and Calvinistic doctrine.

Therefore, Walther's dogma is all the more suspect if we look at its origins and his unfettered devotion to a criminal that he helped to become a bishop-for-life. Rather than start with Walther and his infallible life, why not consider two important terms - justification and forensic.

Justification
The word Justification is used only in connection with a declaration, so its use as an addition to the Atonement is entirely suspect.

Robert Preus correctly declared that the Atonement is not Justification. That is because:

1. Objective Justification
2. The Justification of the World, and
3. General Justification

are expressions that "God's pronounced the entire world forgiven and saved."

Forensic
However, Melanchthon was the pioneer in expressing forgiveness as Forensic Justification. As many realize, forensic is a term commonly used today in crime - forensic expert, etc. Melanchthon's use of the term means that when the Gospel treasure is conveyed by the Word to someone, creating faith by the work of the Holy Spirit, that individual is declared forgiven by God.

Note how clever the false teachers are, using Calvinistic concepts (Enthusiasm) to improve upon the teaching of the Bible and Book of Concord by merging the Atonement and Forensic Justification.

I have read quite a few WELS treatments of their favorite dogma, their only dogma. They kidnap the term forensic to say that God held a trial and declared the whole world forgiven. As a veternal reader of Roman Catholic Enthusiasm, I have been struck by the parallel between papal inventions (the scapular) and UOJ - the "startling decree." Yes, we are startled and alarmed that so much foolishness is attributed to God, Who will judge those false teachers.

 Read this out loud to a Christian believer.
What?????

The Atonement/Justification Merger
When the UOJ Stormtroopers are done with their deceit, the individual is no longer declared forgiven (justified) through faith in Christ (forensic, as in a judicial proceeding). Instead, the entire world is declared by God to be forgiven and saved - apart from faith, without hearing the Word of the Gospel, without the Spirit at work in the Means of Grace.

Enthusiasm is defined in the Book of Concord as the foundation for all false doctrine, including the pagan religions of the world and the pope's creative and imaginative inventions. Let us move on to the second part, largely ignored, of OJ/SJ - Subjective Justification.

Subjective Justification
This term  was used by the Calvinist Woods to explain how one is forgiven-forgiven, because the entire world has already been forgiven. This is really a snipe hunt, because hardly anyone deals with the nonsense of Subjective Justification. Even though Lutherans supposedly are devoted to Subjective Justification, 99% of their effluence is devoted to Objective Justification.

The Lutheran Enthusiasts define their Subjective Justification as accepting or agreeing with the absolution of the world (OJ). So every single individual is born forgiven but not really forgiven until he accepts or decides that he is already forgiven. Asking someone to elaborate on such a contradiction is cruel and unusual punishment. That is why virtually all of mainline, liberal or apostate theology is Objective Justification. To talk about faith - these wise men say - is to deny God's grace. They are very skilled, like cows playing the harp.

This confession of false doctrine is in Valleskey's Church Growth textbook, which Herman Otten adores. Webber cannot find a connection between UOJ and Church Growth. But, he cannot find Luther's Galatians Lectures either.

UOJ
The excessive term Universal Objective Justification is an example of mission creep. If the entire world has already been forgiven and saved, why add Universal to Objective? WELS likes to be different, so they use UOJ while their partners in doctrinal crime commonly use OJ. The exception is John Sparky Brenner, who writes Justification of the World, more words to say the same thing - God has declared the entire world forgiven and saved. General Justification is the old German term, which does not mean the Atonement, but "every and every one" is forgiven and saved.

"Ach, vas dat dein Fuss, Liebchen, er Charlotte?"
Barth/Kirchbaum taught UOJ and passed on their cathedral of false doctrine to the grandees of Fuller Seminary.