Claims without Evidence - Objective Justification Refuted, Denied, Disproved

 Dr. Robert Preus hosted a DMin program in Church Growth at Ft. Wayne, and the faculty voted to support "Church Growth principles," according to Marquart. To support his promotion of Objective Justification (against WAM II), Preus went to Calvinist experts.

"At the time of the faculty’s conversations with Maier II, Robert Preus looked for support and found it among conservative friends in the Evangelical movement who admired him for his defense of biblical inspiration and inerrancy, including several faculty members of Westminster Seminary—Escondido, California, with its renowned Reformed scholar Michael Horton (b. 1964). Preus must have been aware, but chose to ignore that the Reformed see objective justification as a component of their doctrine of election, but it was hardly universal in scope as Lutherans have historically held it."  

Scaer, David P.. Surviving the Storms: Memoirs of David P. Scaer . Luther Academy. Kindle Edition.

 Dr. Walter A. Maier, PhD in Semitics at Harvard, stated the issue so well. The OJ Hive hates the Maier clan for undermining their little poison factory.

***
GJ

As one member of our little group observed,

- Is Objective Justification equal to the Atonement?  Why or why not?
- Is Subjective Justification the same thing as faith?  Why or why not?
- What is faith?
There is no Biblical proof presented.  Instead there is name calling (Fideists) and talk about Pietism.  I personally don't care that much about who is and who is not a Pietist.  What I do care about is what the Scriptures teach.  

One of the Yale doctoral students presented an excellent paper on evidence, which is part of our legal, academic, and theological arguments.

A claim must have evidence, which he called "a warrant for a conclusion."

We do not have to start at proving Biblical inerrancy, although the topic is worthwhile to study. Among Lutherans, certain verities are agreed upon - which are:

1. The Bible is inerrant and infallible, without contradiction in any area. 
2. The Bible judges all books and is not judged by any book.
3. All Christian doctrine must be derived from the Scriptures.

Those who make claims about doctrine have to test them to make sure they are backed by evidence. Few clergy do this, and the loudest are the most negligent.

For example, I was taken to task by one ELS pastor for misleading people about the Knapp graphic. I was quoting the Calvinist about OJ and SJ, not Knapp himself. I found the passage explosive for the claims of OJ, especially since those are favorite terms used to express the dogma. A Calvinist had no trouble explaining the theology of a Halle Pietist with those two terms. I looked up my copy of Knapp - I have actually possessed one for a long time. Knapp made his point in the text - the world is universally justified. Nothing was misleading, just uncomfortable for those who falsely equate the ELS with Lutheran doctrine, who think they own OJ and SJ, when the terms were pilfered from the Calvinists.

Scaer is one of the loudest promoters of OJ, so it is revealing that he admitted his OJ boss, Robert Preus, went to the Calvinists to prop up his OJ attack against Dr. Walter A. Maier II. Scaer admitted what many of us knew - it was a way to clear the path for the Righteous Brothers, Jack and Robert, to rule the LCMS. And it worked.

That line of attack is still working. Matt the Fatt Harrison is OJ!, and CPH is completely OJ!, given their dreadful dogmatics and their new SMALL CATECHISM promotion of OJ/SJ!.

 Explain these passages in clear, simple terms, without falling back on the ephemeral publications of man.

To this date, the claims about OJ/SJ being Biblical and Lutheran are lacking in Scriptural evidence. That is why I wrote The Path To Understanding Justification.

The only path is Scriptural, but the OJ Hive runs away from Scriptural exegesis like panicked children. 

They refused to exegete (declare the meaning of) the passages on the back cover, not to mention the entire section of Romans 3 - 5.

Repeating the errors of the beloved dead professors is not the same as providing evidence. 

Their weakness and fear are revealed by:

1. Attacking David Becker for reviewing the book in a mildly positive way. He revealed the 180 degree switch from JBFA in the Missouri Synod's own publications, proven by the book. Ow, that must hurt.
2. Calling me lots of names which have nothing to do with topic.
3. Continuing to avoid Genesis 15:6 and Romans 4 - 5:2.
4. Continuing to confuse the Atonement with Justification.

 Amazon link - The Path To Understanding Justification.