 |
| Woods' - a Calvinist - added this translation note to his English translation of the published Knapp lectures. Woods was a major figure in American Calvinism and this book was used throughout America. Knapp was considered one of the last Pietists at Halle University, which became entirely rationalist, the home of Biblical "scholars" who mocked the Scriptures - like the faculties of LCMS, WELS, ELS, and ELCA today. I own an early copy of the English version, which circulated before Walther and his syphilitic bishop landed in America. |
 |
| The Objective Justification salesmen seem unaware of this passage and its basis for Justification by Faith throughout the New Testament. |
 |
Jojakim Dettmann (Random_layman) Senior Member Username: Random_layman Post Number: 3907 Registered: 5-2006 |
The Ichabod site is probably not a source you want to be using on LQ much, even if it is right which it is sometimes. A mistake Rev. Jackson makes is that he does not understand the German idealist roots of the Objective-Subjective distinction. Instead he thinks objective justification came from Pietism or an earlier figure named Huber. Also, he thinks that rejecting Objective Justification and affirming a simpler "Justification by Faith" concept he is adhering to the true biblical view. Actually, his position is just reflective of a different epistemology. It doesn't make him any more biblical. Because he doesn't realize the crypto-secularist orgins of his disagreements, he (& many if not all of his opponents) are doomed to talking past each other, trying to solve the question with theology, when really it is an underlying difference in their secular philosophies. |
Answers Below
Dettmann - "The Ichabod site is probably not a source you want to be using on LQ much, even if it is right which it is sometimes."
GJ - LutherQueasies get hysterical when someone refutes their nonsense with the Scriptures, the Book of Concord, Luther, Chemnitz, Melanchthon, and Hunnius.
Dettmann - "A mistake Rev. Jackson makes is that he does not understand the German idealist roots of the Objective-Subjective distinction. Instead he thinks objective justification came from Pietism or an earlier figure named Huber. Also, he thinks that rejecting Objective Justification and affirming a simpler "Justification by Faith" concept he is adhering to the true biblical view."
GJ - I have shown the source of OJ/SJ and cited it. Dettman has refuted nothing and somehow does a long-distance brain scan to explain what I think. Knapp was one source, and the translation led to the Waltherians adopting the OJ/SJ labels, because Walther liked that distinction. Huber has been explained and researched on this blog and his works eviscerated by Hunnius, translated by Rydecki. The plain words of the Sacred Scriptures are far more persuasive than the quasi-psycho-socio-neo-crypto-babbling of LutherQueasies.
Dettmann - "Actually, his position is just reflective of a different epistemology. It doesn't make him any more biblical."
GJ - Dettmann starts in darkness and ends in confusion.
Doomedman - "Because he doesn't realize the crypto-secularist orgins (sic) of his disagreements, he (& many if not all of his opponents) are doomed to talking past each other, trying to solve the question with theology, when really it is an underlying difference in their secular philosophies."
GJ - The fear in this doomed man is palpable, but where is his post from yesterday?
 |
| The print copy of The Path To Understanding Justification is found here. |
 |
| No faith, no forgiveness, no Holy Spirit. |
 |
| OJ won in the LCMS, WELS, ELS, CLC (sic), and ELCA. |
