Pastor Rolf David Preus (Rolf) Senior Member Username: Rolf Post Number: 10215 Registered: 5-2001 |
I am not convinced that Becker taught a different doctrine than Walther, Marquart, Robert Preus, the CTCR and Buchholz. The LCMS and the WELS teach the same [gangrenous] dogma. Hale does a fine job of showing where ELDoNA, Jackson, and others [like my Dad in Justification and Rome] err. Pastor Rolf David Preus | ||
     David Jay Webber (Djw) Advanced Member Username: Djw Post Number: 989 Registered: 12-2004 |
Rolf, don't you have to admit that Becker, and especially Meyer, did not always express themselves well with respect to certain important aspects of this doctrine? My endorsing of Buchholz's essay includes my endorsing of his criticisms of the poorly-chosen and misleading expressions that were sometimes used by WELS writers in earlier decades. | ||
| Pastor Rolf David Preus (Rolf) Senior Member Username: Rolf Post Number: 10216 Registered: 5-2001 |
They did not always express themselves well. You're right. Meyer's words in his 2 Corinthians commentary were poorly chosen. Becker has been criticized for what he wrote when he tried to put the best construction on the Kokomo theses. Maybe he shouldn't have tried, but as I read what Becker wrote, I don't find him teaching anything wrong. He did point out where the Kokomo statements were off. Pastor Rolf David Preus | ||
| Steve Schmidt (Sschmidt) Intermediate Member Username: Sschmidt Post Number: 489 Registered: 3-2017 |
http://www.angelfire.com/ny4/djw/JustificationObje ctiveSubjectiveMarquart.pdf Reviewing the bibliography takes one to this 1872 Synodical Conference essay on Justification by Walther, in my estimation the best thing he ever wrote. Hopefully, CPH's Walther's Works series will include a volume entitled "Justification," with this piece, which answers every question about Lutheranism anyone might ever have. |
