 |
| This is bizarre, sick, and Biblically ignorant. |
Steve Schmidt (Sschmidt)
Advanced Member
Username: Sschmidt
Post Number: 909
Registered: 3-2017
Posted on Saturday, February 01, 2020 - 12:51 pm:
Edit Post Delete Post Print Post
Ichabod has posted a “line by line refutation” of SP Harrison’s January article, “Paid in Full,” a fine presentation of Objective Justification. As usual, it’s not much of a refutation. Here’s a brief blow-by-blow response to the response.
1. Ichabod doesn’t like Romans 4:25. It needs to be cited with all of Romans 4. And possibly 5. Ichabod seems to be blissfully unaware that Luther cheerfully cites Rom. 4:25 in isolation under “The Chief Article” in the Smalcald Articles.
2. Ichabod doesn’t like 2 Cor. 5:19. Apparently Ichabod is unaware that Chemnitz states that “reconcile” here means the same as “justify.”
3. “God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself...”. “In Christ” does not here mean “believers” or else the meaning is Calvinist, or a limited atonement. “God was in Christ” means Christ’s divinity, that God acts through Christ to justify all. There is no “cosmic child abuse” here...God suffers, and God dies to take away the sins of the world.
4. Ichabod makes much of a supposed ambiguity in the moment of justification won. Apparently Ichabod has not read Gerhard on this topic in “Justification through faith.”
5. Ichabod protests the analogy of justification as a treasure received through faith. Words fail me. Luther states this same idea over and over. Christ’s redemption once for all is a fact whether you believe it or not. Rejecting Christ is rejecting his benefits.
6. I could go back and quote Luther, Chemnitz, Melanchthon, Mörlin, Flacius, et al. from this blog on justification over the past year, but really, what’s the point in the face of such obstinacy?
     Steven W Bohler (Sbohler) Senior Member Username: Sbohler Post Number: 1451 Registered: 9-2001 |
I would not worry too much about Rev. Jackson and his congregation of one. |
 |
| Lonely and bitter are the OJ Stormtroopers. |
LQ - Ichabod has posted a “line by line refutation” of SP Harrison’s January article, “Paid in Full,” a fine presentation of Objective Justification. As usual, it’s not much of a refutation. Here’s a brief blow-by-blow response to the response.
No citation is given for my post about Harrison's OJ- Parsing the Drivel - nor is one given for Harrison's PAID IN FULL.
Note the membership collapse with Harrison going full Calvinist.
1. Ichabod doesn’t like Romans 4:25. It needs to be cited with all of Romans 4. And possibly 5. Ichabod seems to be blissfully unaware that Luther cheerfully cites Rom. 4:25 in isolation under “The Chief Article” in the Smalcald Articles.
GJ - "Doesn't like" betrays a flaccid argumentation style. Instead of stating what I wrote, he tries in vain to make people see foul words conveyed by his foul spirit.
I have refuted the misuse of the Smalcald Articles. In short, the section is on the Chief Article, Justification by Faith, which the Queasies hate. So we have to assume Luther used Romans 4:25 to express the Pietistic Calvinism of Halle, Walther's syphilitic bishop, and Walther himself.
2. Ichabod doesn’t like 2 Cor. 5:19. Apparently Ichabod is unaware that Chemnitz states that “reconcile” here means the same as “justify.”
GJ - Vague references do not elevate a sagging argument against the Chief Article. There is always a Scaeresque air of superiority in OJ arguments, as if only their intellectual elites comprehend this mystery - revealed only to the abusive bishop, the pimp-kidnapper, and their disciples.
3. “God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself...”. “In Christ” does not here mean “believers” or else the meaning is Calvinist, or a limited atonement. “God was in Christ” means Christ’s divinity, that God acts through Christ to justify all. There is no “cosmic child abuse” here...God suffers, and God dies to take away the sins of the world.
GJ - "In Christ" always means believers in the New Testament, just as "saints" are always believers. See the graphic for another pratfall by the Lutherqueasies.
5. Ichabod protests the analogy of justification as a treasure received through faith. Words fail me. Luther states this same idea over and over. Christ’s redemption once for all is a fact whether you believe it or not. Rejecting Christ is rejecting his benefits.
GJ - Words never fail LQs - but sound doctrine remains a mystery to those who cling to the relics of the 19th century.
6. I could go back and quote Luther, Chemnitz, Melanchthon, Mörlin, Flacius, et al. from this blog on justification over the past year, but really, what’s the point in the face of such obstinacy?
GJ - The point is - you continue to amuse those who know the difference between OJ and Justification by Faith.
---
Steven W Bowler (Sbowler)
Senior Member
Username: Sbowler
I would not worry too much about Rev. Jackson and his congregation of one.
GJ - The LutherQueasies bristle that they cannot reach more people. Members travel to us from various states, and we visit them. The OJ Sects - ELCA, LCMS, WELS, ELS, CLC (sic) - are imploding because they do not teach the Gospel, forgiveness, or anything else that is Scriptural.
 |
| L. Fuerbringer read Luther all the time - see his two books on the history of the LCMS. |
