Happy Birthday, Brett Meyer!

 

Long ago I fashioned the graphic above because Brett Meyer, our congregational president, was challenging the dark forces of Universal Faithless Justification. That dogma, nurtured at Halle University - a combination of Pietism and Rationalism - has unified WELS, ELCA, ELS, LCMS, CLC (sic), and other fragments of Lutherdom. 

Today is Brett's birthday. God's blessings on him and his family.

Our Congregation's Attorney - Glen Kotten - Found a Post from 2011 That He Appreciated

 Hi Pastor Jackson, I stumbled across this letter from Brett Meyer on your blog, very quality writing and it expresses my sentiment with the Lutheran sects. In Christ, Glen 

From 2011

http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2011/03/letter-to-uoj-fanatics-in-wels-missouri.html

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Letter to the UOJ Fanatics in WELS, Missouri, the ...":

WELS, ELS and LCMS Pastor Mark Jeske from the Time of Grace money sponge speaks for the (W)ELS, carrying the UOJ banner high with:

On the other hand, Schuller does have an important message for all public proclaimers of God’s Word. If we are not careful, our law-messages can be presented so forcefully that they stick in hearers’ minds more than our gospel-messages. We don’t want Christians’ dominant phrase of self-description to be “I am a poor, miserable sinner.” The truth is that forgiveness trumps sin, resurrection trumps death, hope trumps fear, and Christ rules. If you believe the Christian gospel, you automatically become an optimist. We can indeed do all things through him who gives us strength.
http://www.timeofgraceblog.org/2010/11/01/crystal-debt/

Jeske is following his Satanic Mentor Leonard Sweet in elevating man and perverting Christianity.

---

Dear UOJ Fanatics,

Many of you complain loudly--behind closed doors and in secret emails--about the disgusting, embarrassing, and anti-Christian antics of your group. I just want to mention that you are just as much at fault as they are, for supporting false doctrine that naturally leads to what they are doing:

1. Hiding the name Lutheran.
   
2. Hiding the sacraments.
   
3. Removing the liturgy and Creeds.
   
4. Plagiarizing Groeschel's sermons.
   
5. Imitating the worst of the Emergent Church fads.
   
6. Adulterating the Word to attract more people.
   
7. Offering bad music as a replacement for sacred music.
   
8. Yardwork clothes worn on the stage, which was once the chancel.
   
9. Giving treats, sodas, and coffee to consume during the service.
   
10. Mocking worship by dancing in front of the altar in a preaching gown.
    
11. Baiting the hook, offering soccer and head-banger music if youth will pretend to engage in Bible study of some type, always imported from false teachers.
    
12. Working with ELCA on religious projects.
    
13. Raising money from different sects that apparently do not agree on doctrine, although they do agree on false doctrine.
    
14. Funding the Salvation Army! (for the babies)
    
15. Women's ordination and crypto-women's ordination...women usurping authority, teaching men, and leading worship.
    

You think they are the bad guys, but they are only carrying out the implications of Universal Objective Justification, which is your only doctrine and their foundational belief.

You are conservative Pietists, you complainers, while they are the liberal Pietists.

This is why. most of you in the fragments and diaspora of the Synodical Conference bow to the strange opinion of Halle professor Georg Christian Knapp. Pietism borrowed this concept from Calvinism, and Knapp wrote it into his lectures. Woods translated the golden sentences which are the core of your doctrine and practice, and that book is still in print.

I will reprint it from the copy I own. This book was already in circulation in English and German before C. F. W. Walther landed in New Orleans. And it is still in print today. UOJ is the doctrine of ELCA and the Universalists.

This is very conveniently expressed by the terms objective and subjective justification. Objective justification is the act of God, by which he proffers pardon to all through Christ; subjective, is the act of man, by which he accepts the pardon freely offered in the Gospel. The former is universal, the latter not.

Double-justification (UOJ) merges the Atonement with justification by faith, yielding a sterile mulish doctrine for mules to follow. And you do follow it. You talk fellowship, but you ignore it. You talk closed communion and wink at open communion. You condemn ELCA's gaity, but you tolerate your own college (in WELS) promoting a plagiarized gay video. You are so superior to ELCA but you work with them on religious projects and teach the same sterile mulish doctrine.

Mulish is too polite for your pursuit of forgiveness without faith. But let's go over what you love so dearly:

1. UOJ omits the Means of Grace completely.
2. UOJ denies original sin, with the bizarre claim that babies are born already justified, without Holy Baptism, already forgiven, without the Word.
   
3. UOJ separates the Holy Spirit from the Word, making all of you adherents Enthusiasts, false teachers condemned by the Book of Concord you ignore so famously.
   
4. UOJ confuses Atonement and justification by faith, pronouncing it a sin to distinguish between the two.
   
5. UOJ lies about its origins, because it cannot be found before Pietism, whether in Luther, the Book of Concord, or the post-Concordists. The honest scholars admit that, but you do not.
   
6. UOJ denigrates faith and often describes the order of salvation in terms of decision theology.
   
7. UOJ is so derogatory toward faith that its most consistent followers, like Schleiermacher, simply drop faith and teach Universalism.
   
8. UOJ uses the terms "all are saved" in many different documents, so the Universalism is already there, though hidden behind the fig-leaf of you gotta believe it.
   
9. UOJ is Antinomian, teaching that the Law no longer exists, but you adherents are especially legalistic, making up more rules than the famous rabbis of old - not that the rules ever apply to you.
   

I know from many communications that your groups are not united in this ridiculous doctrine, perhaps because it was not made "official" until fairly recently - the Brief Statement of 1932 and the Kuske Catechism. Missouri and WELS both taught justification by faith, even though Walther and Pieper were all mixed up about it. The ELS may have been true to its Norwegian Pietism and stayed where they started, in Enthusiasm. Your laity see through in the insane contradictions of UOJ, but you clergy do not. You chatter on about it, superficially repeating the talking points drilled into you. You really need to have synod-wide studies of the Book of Concord, setting aside the Roman Catholic doctrine of Holy Mother Church. Your sect is not infallible. Your leaders are not infallible. It's time:

1. To tremble at the Word of God, instead of the footsteps of the DP.
   
2. To make Luther the most copied preacher in Lutherdom - instead of Groeschel.
   
3. To apologize to the laity for misleading them, exploiting them, and abusing them.
   
4. To rebuke, convert, or excommunicate the false teachers.
   

The Post Referenced Directly Below - Posted for Your Convenience Here

From: Brett Meyer <pygmypoacher@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 6:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Intrepid Lutherans] New comment on Christian Charity and Provisions for Amiable Separ....
To: Intrepid Lutherans <intrepidlutherans@gmail.com>

Thank you for your response and explanation Mr. Lindee.  It is difficult to be objective about the situation when you don't know what I wrote.  In fact it was simply the Scriptural extrapolation of what Daniel Baker stated in the second most recent post - to the effect that Universal Justification is a heresy.  Does IL disagree that teaching a heretical gospel removes the individual from Christ, the forgiveness of sins and salvation?  General Justification does exactly that as DP Buchholz clearly showed - those who teach Justification solely By Faith Alone are heretics and anathema in the (W)ELS.  Am I really breaking new ground by stating that as a fact?

Five years ago I began discussing the doctrine of Justification with Lutheran laity and clergy online and in my personal life and the most common thread of thought was that the differences between JBFA and UOJ were insignificant, despite my contention to the contrary.  A few weeks ago my contention was proven correct in a most vile and violent way in an open and public attack on Christ and His Church from within the (W)ELS.  Since the doctrine of General Justification has no Scriptural or Confessional support can it not be said that those who truly believe and confess it, to the point of excommunicating those who reject it, are not of Christ and therefore are not forgiven of their sin or eternally saved?  Is the preaching of God's Law restricted to the clergy as in the RCC or was it given to the priesthood of all believers?

You state, "I'm not convinced that any of these men, having an honest disagreement with you over the central message of Scripture, are offended to the point of literally hating you for any of these reasons."

Since we're talking about complete disagreement concerning the central doctrine of Scripture: Justification I disagree with your statement and refer to John 7:7, "The world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil."  Your statement implies that someone can teach a false gospel and not be affected to the point of hating by teaching contrary to the Triune God.  I am directly stating that I am correct in my confession of the doctrine of Justification and in the identification of those teachings that depart from it.  I have defended it from Scripture and the Confessions and have shown where the contrary teachings have contradicted both. 

I must disagree with your contention that I've condemned specific individuals to Hell.  That accusation is unfounded.  My public and private statements have always tied a specific confession to its Scriptural conclusion and not an individual as though I've decreed who is damned and who is saved.  There is a significant portion of the Lutheran Synod's slide into apostasy which is averse to absolutes.  I can no longer count the number of Lutheran's who disagree that those individuals in the Catholic church who truly confess and believe exactly what the RCC officially teaches stand condemned and under the wrath of God.  This is the same knee-jerk reaction that spawns the claim that I am condemning individuals to Hell.  You should ask them to prove it by providing my quotes. That being said,  I certainly hope that you are not saying that we cannot condemn confessions of belief that oppose the central doctrine of Scripture.

You state, "To be engaged in honestly, both parties need to display a willingness to be corrected."  I don't think I've ever engaged in a doctrinal discussion where the opposing view was not allowed to establish their contentions.  But if a Christian is defending verbatim quotations of Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions how could there be a show of correctability?  In a discussion of subjective opinions, then yes, I agree completely.  But in regard to Scripture and the Confessions I disagree.  It is also typical of those who are teaching from authority that is not of Scripture to cry foul and claim their opponent is not willing to be corrected.  Was this same tactic not used against Pastor Rydecki?  You simply need to read the Bailing Water, LutherQuest and Extra Nos discussions concerning UOJ to see that I have been uterly patient and consistent in my defense of Scriptural and Confessional Justification while suffering the ad hominem and personal attacks so prevalent with UOJists.

I do appreciate the time you gave me in writing such a thorough response I find most of it to be driven by the opinions of third parities of which you received only their side of the story.  And considering the fact that most if not all of them have a long history of teaching and defending the false gospel of Universal Justification is it any wonder that they would "hate" me for publicly opposing their central doctrine?  Pr. Rydecki was just excommunicated by those men and women.  There are only a handful of men in the world (LITERALLY) who are publicly opposing the faith destroying false gospel of UOJ and IL chooses to reprimand me for being contentious to the point of people hating me.  Can there be enough opposition to that doctrine when your own IL founder has been excommunicated for opposing it?  And again, I have consistently condemned the doctrine and not the individuals. 

The problem Pastor Spencer has with me has been clearly taken to the point of utter childishness.  To remove one of my comments for the sole reason it was written by me, without regard to its veracity and faithfulness to Scripture is a practice that should be relegated to school yards and not theological blogs.  I'm offended that you recommend I apologize to Rev. Spencer when you don't even know what I'm being asked to apologize for.   That he would justify his deletions of my comments with the reason that I've offended him without explaining to the rest of the IL management what that justification entails is absurd.   I publicly contended against his public promotion of UOJ on the IL blog by posting a public statement against such promotion on Ichabod.  He complained to Pastor Jackson to which I replied and we exchanged two brief emails.  Neither of which contained any false accusations or false teachings and to which I cannot apologize.  (attached email files). 

You state, "Second, referring to those with whom you find yourself in disagreement as hell-bound reprobates, proclaiming them to be under Satan's dominion, declaring them the Gospel's enemy, or condemning them to an eternity of suffering in the torments of hell, simply will not be tolerated by us -- we can't tolerate such comments from anyone. And frankly, I'd suggest that you cease commenting on the internet like this in general."  I find this statement to completely disregard the specific doctrine at issue (Justification) which if one confesses faithfully to Scripture he is a Christian, receives the adoption of Sons, forgiven of all sin and saved eternally and which if one confesses contrary to Scripture he is not a Christian and remains under God's wrath and condemnation.  You may wish to boil the issue down to "those with whom you find yourself in disagreement" but it is wholly unfair, a false statement and slanderous.

In Christ,

Brett Meyer

***

GJ - I recall, since I got emails from Brett and Steve Spencer, that the issue was this - Brett saying UOJ was a minor or superficial matter was worse than Hochmuth's crime against children.

Spencer was extremely upset about that, even though that is precisely Luther's point about sins against the First Table. As Luther wrote, carnal sins harm the sinner (Hochmuth) but false doctrine murders souls. 

To cap the discussion, Spencer solemnly declared--about UOJ versus justification by faith--"a pox on both your houses."

In Shakespeare, a pox is syphilis. Spencer's prayer means - I hope you get syphilis. That may be Shakespearean, even Waltherian (given the STD of Bishop Stephan). 

I was extremely disappointed about this attitude of the Circuit Pastor and titular head of the Intrepid Lutherans. Indifference about the Chief Article of the Christian Faith makes me wonder, "Why be a pastor? To defend Holy Mother WELS? To get a classmate into the synod presidency?"

---

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Brett Meyer to the Intrepid Lutherans":

My exact statement to Pastor Spencer was, "If you won’t take a public stand against UOJ in the (W)ELS as your call requires of you then you’re no better than Hochmuth in the ongoing spiritual abuse of the laity you are responsible for."

The comparison is between WELS Communication's director Hochmuth sitting in Synod Headquarters watching young boys being homosexually raped and molested (specific charges by the United States FBI) and Lutheran clergy who have taken an oath before God to purely teach and defend Scripture and in accordance with the faithful Christian Book of Concord but instead sit silently by and refuse to publicly condemn the false gospel of Universal Objective Justification (UOJ) as their call requires. UOJ being a new and different gospel and way to righteousness before God which when truly confessed separates men, women and children from Christ, the forgiveness of sins and eternal salvation - Galatians 1. Those who knowingly sit by and watch silently as the sheep are slaughtered are called hirelings in the Bible. That was true in the Apostle John's day as it is in ours - John 10:12-13.

As to Doug Lindee's contention, "Doctrinal discussion/debate between parties with opposing views amounts to mutual admonition and correction. To be engaged in honestly, both parties need to display a willingness to be corrected,..." - I quote Martin Luther:

"Therefore, do not speak to me of love or friendship when anything is to be detracted from the Word or the faith; for we are told that not love but the Word brings eternal life, God's grace, and all heavenly treasures." 19 " In matters concerning faith we must be invincible, unbending, and very stubborn; indeed, if possible, harder than adamant. But in matters concerning love we should be softer and more pliant than any reed and leaf and should gladly accommodate ourselves to everything." 20 "Doctrine is our only light. It alone enlightens and directs us and shows us the way to heaven. If it is shaken in one quarter (in una parte), it will necessarily be shaken in its entirety (in totum). Where that happens, love cannot help us at all." 21 " But this tender mercy is to be exercised only toward Christians and among Christians, for toward those who reject and persecute the Gospel we must act differently; here I am not permitted to let my love be merciful so as to tolerate and endure false doctrine. When faith and doctrine are concerned and endangered, neither love nor patience are in order. Then it is my duty to contend in earnest and not to yield a hairbreadth." What Luther Says, II, 637f.

"However, if anything is undertaken against the Word, faith, and the honor of God, we are in no wise to preserve silence, are to bear it far less patiently. Then we should offer stubborn resistance."
What Luther Says, An Anthology, 3 vols., ed., Ewald Plass, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959, III, p. 1308. Sermon, 1523.

Someone Refused a Free Copy of The Faith of Jesus Offered, To Read on a Long Trip. I Thought of Brett Meyer and This Luther Quotation

Brett Meyer's First Report on the Emmaus Conference.

I attended the second half of Pastor Jay Webber’s presentation of his essay promoting the false gospel of Universal Objective Justification.  Having previously contended against the doctrine of UOJ with many who were in attendance I want to provide my critique of Pastor Webber’s essay.  The challenging aspect is deciding where to start with an essay which promotes and defends a doctrine which completely contradicts Scripture and teaches contrary to the Lutheran Confessions.  There is not one aspect of the doctrine of Objective Justification which doesn’t war against Christ’s Word and the faithful Christian Confessions.

I will begin by addressing Pastor Webber’s false claim that God looks at the whole world, both believers and unbelievers as being in Christ and being outside of Christ.  The first time I heard him confess this was in a discussion of UOJ on Dr. Lito Cruz’s Extra Nos blog back in 2010 where he stated, "In Christ, as God looks at the world through Christ, all are under divine mercy and are forgiven, and are therefore invited to believe and be saved. But outside of Christ, as God looks at the world apart from Christ, all are under divine wrath and judgment, and are condemned. The same people - namely all people - are under consideration in each case." 6:40am http://extranos.blogspot.com/2010/03/grinding-my-ax.html

Pastor Webber promotes the same false teaching in this 2015 essay here, “The judgment of God that is proclaimed in the law, is a reflection and outgrowth of what God sees when he looks at the world apart from Christ, and sees the world as it is in and unto itself. Outside of Christ, God sees a world that is defined by fallen humanity's innate wickedness and hostility toward him, and a world that deserves to be, and is, under his wrath. In contrast, the forgiveness and acceptance of God that is proclaimed in the gospel, is a reflection and outgrowth of what God sees when he looks at the world through the "lens" of Christ, and sees the world as it is in Christ, under the covering of Christ's righteousness. In and through Christ, God sees a world that is defined by his Son's sinlessness, and a world where there is no accusing law, but only the peace and harmony with God that has been established by the obedience of Jesus. Do not try too hard to understand this. The twofold mystery of what God sees and says for condemnation apart from Christ, and what God sees and says for justification in Christ, cannot be understood beyond what Scripture specifically reveals.”

Page 8/9

When challenged on this false teaching in the 2010 discussion he responded, “Of course the Bible does not say exactly this in so many words. But the basic point is reflected here: "For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all" (Romans 11:32).”  

This is classic UOJ deception and fraudulent twisting of Scripture which was used by WELS DP Jon Buchholz in his 2005 Conference paper when he wrote the following blasphemous self-convicting contradictions in promotion of UOJ: 

Buchholz, "God has forgiven the whole world. God has forgiven everyone his sins." This statement is absolutely true! This is the heart of the gospel, and it must be preached and taught as the foundation of our faith. But here’s where the caveat comes in: In Scripture, the word "forgive" is used almost exclusively in a personal, not a universal sense. The Bible doesn’t make the statement, "God has forgiven the world."

Buchholz, "God has forgiven all sins, but the unbeliever rejects God’s forgiveness." Again, this statement is true—and Luther employed similar terminology to press the point of Christ’s completed work of salvation.16 But we must also recognize that Scripture doesn’t speak this way."

Buchholz, "God has declared the entire world righteous." This statement is true, as we understand it to mean that God has rendered a verdict of "not-guilty" toward the entire world. It is also true—and must be taught—that the righteousness of Christ now stands in place of the world’s sin; this is the whole point of what Jesus did for us at Calvary. However, once again we’re wresting a term out of its usual context. In Scripture the term "righteous" usually refers to believers. "

http://www.wlsessays.net/node/390

The truth is that since believers are in Christ by faith, they have put on Christ and are adopted as sons of God the Father.  It is absurd to contend that God looks at his adopted children in any sense as being outside of Christ and therefore under His wrath and condemnation. 

John 5:24, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.”

Romans 8:33, “Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth.”  

Romans 8:34, “Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us”

2 Cor. 5:17, “Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.” 

Galatians 3:27, “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.”

And since unbelievers are children of Satan and clearly outside of Christ it is equally absurd to contend that God looks at them in any sense as being in Christ,

Romans 8:9, “But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.” 

John 3:36, “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.”  Note that God’s wrath abideth – continues on all those who do not have faith in Christ alone.

John 3:18, “He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.” 

Condemnation and Reconciliation are two exclusive things.  God, who is the same yesterday, today and forever cannot be simultaneously reconciled to the unbelieving world while they remain under his condemnation.  False teaching UOJists claim this is a mystery of God.  It is quite clearly a contradiction created by the false gospel of Universal Objective Justification.  Scripture teaches that being In Christ only occurs through the Means of Grace creating faith in Christ alone. 

Acts 3:16, “And his name through faith in his name hath made this man strong, whom ye see and know: yea, the faith which is by him hath given him this perfect soundness in the presence of you all.”

Pastor Webber’s contention in this regard is the prerequisite required in his false doctrine for teaching that God has declared the unbelieving world to be righteous and forgiven all sin all while being under God’s wrath and condemnation over their sin.

I’ll continue this review.  In the meantime compare Pastor Webber’s defense of the false gospel of UOJ to Scripture when he writes, “And St. Paul reminds us that "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith" (Romans 3:23-25, ESV).

Page 9

KJV Romans 3:25, “Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;”

Two completely different meanings – the KJV which is harmonious with Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions proclaiming Christ is a propitiation through faith in Christ (note not faith in a prior declaration of justification and righteousness while an unbeliever).  The Book of Concord, Apology to the Augsburg Confession: "80] ...Thus, therefore, we prove the minor proposition. The wrath of God cannot be appeased if we set against it our own works, because Christ has been set forth as a Propitiator, so that for His sake, the Father may become reconciled to us. But Christ is not apprehended as a Mediator except by faith. Therefore, by faith alone we obtain remission of sins, when we comfort our hearts with confidence in the mercy promised for 81] Christ's sake."

http://www.bookofconcord.org/defense_4_justification.php

I would like to provide additional responses but the false teachings are numerous and will take a few reviews to address.

In Christ,

Brett Meyer

***

GJ - This double-talk style, used by Webber and Buchholz, where they make claims they announce are unbiblical, can also be found in the aged godfather of Church Growth in WELS, Paul Kelm.

Anyone with reading ability will stop and wonder how anyone can be so deceitful, but the WELS pastors are trained to accept such nonsense and second it.

Not that long ago Sig Becker had to lend his weight in defending the Kokomo Statements, which are now taught with a vengeance - but without open conflict.

There is one thing to do - make a decision for UOJ.

Will you spend a few minutes with JP and make a decision for UOJ?
Not for Christ, but for UOJ.
This is the proper language, since Walther also used it.

Happy 25th Anniversary - Brett and Amy Meyer

Twenty-five years and forty-five years.
Snoqualmie Falls, Washington.

Brett Meyer - On Polluted WELS

Polluted WELS Blog

 Anonymous said...

I was listening to Pastor Frey's sermon. Around 33:30 he stated "You can walk up to anyone and say "your sins are forgiven."
Isn't this a diminishing of the Law? So long as a person remains outside of Christ he remains under God's Wrath and is doomed to hell.
Another way to put it is why would a person think they need to believe in Jesus their savior unless they first realize they need saving? This can only be brought about by an application of the Law. To ignore that step seems dangerous and foolish.
He states " You can say your sins are forgiven and that's a fact."
Would it not be better and more Scripturally accurate to say "Your sins have been paid for"?
Just wondering
-Jon

July 23, 2014 at 2:06 PM

 Anonymous said...

Mr. Amendall,

You said this: [i]"WELS is confused on their definition of the Office of the Ministry."[/i]

What do you mean by that exactly?

- Mr. Abbott

July 23, 2014 at 2:12 PM

 Gregory Jackson said...

Anonymous - it worked great for Ski, for the various felons, including DP Ed Werner, who went to state prison, as did Vicar Scott Zerbe. It is the perfect message for the Me Generation. Do what you want. WELS's Meditations, March-May 2014, for Monday, 17 March 2014. The howler is in the second column reads: "No matter what you did yesterday -- or failed to do -- and no matter what you will do tomorrow, God has forgiven you."

July 23, 2014 at 2:32 PM

 

I have heard stories - good ones.

 Brett Meyer said...

I was once told that Synod officials hated me for my approach to the defense of Christ’s Chief Article – one Justification solely by the gracious gift of faith in Christ alone. It is my experience that what they hate is the doctrine itself as I’ve been called an Antichrist, heretic and even a disciple of Pastor Gregory Jackson by the clergy and laity of the WELS, ELS and LCMS for using Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions to teach, promote and defend Christ’s doctrine of Justification while exposing the false gospel of Objective Justification. The discussions available on the internet are many. But most recently there was a revealing discussion of UOJ on this blog which exposes what the WELS teaches and rejects concerning the doctrine of Justification – Objective Justification is completely contrary to Scripture.
http://pollutedwels.blogspot.com/2014/07/so-what-now.html

"However, if anything is undertaken against the Word, faith, and the honor of God, we are in no wise to preserve silence, are to bear it far less patiently. Then we should offer stubborn resistance."
What Luther Says, An Anthology, 3 vols., ed., Ewald Plass, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959, III, p. 1308. Sermon, 1523.
Martin Luther to George Major:

"Therefore, do not speak to me of love or friendship when anything is to be detracted from the Word or the faith; for we are told that not love but the Word brings eternal life, God's grace, and all heavenly treasures." 19 " In matters concerning faith we must be invincible, unbending, and very stubborn; indeed, if possible, harder than adamant. But in matters concerning love we should be softer and more pliant than any reed and leaf and should gladly accommodate ourselves to everything." 20 "Doctrine is our only light. It alone enlightens and directs us and shows us the way to heaven. If it is shaken in one quarter (in una parte), it will necessarily be shaken in its entirety (in totum). Where that happens, love cannot help us at all." 21 " But this tender mercy is to be exercised only toward Christians and among Christians, for toward those who reject and persecute the Gospel we must act differently; here I am not permitted to let my love be merciful so as to tolerate and endure false doctrine. When faith and doctrine are concerned and endangered, neither love nor patience are in order. Then it is my duty to contend in earnest and not to yield a hairbreadth." What Luther Says, II, 637f.

Cont...

July 23, 2014 at 2:47 PM

 Brett Meyer said...

Cont...


"It is by your silence and cloaking that you cast suspicion upon yourself. If you believe as you declare in my presence, then speak so also to the church, in public lectures, in sermons, and in private conversations, and strengthen your brethren, and lead the erring back to the right path, and contradict the contumacious spirits; otherwise your confession is sham pure and simple, and worth nothing. Whoever really regards his doctrine, faith, and confession as true, right, and certain cannot remain in the same stall with such as teach, or adhere to, false doctrine; nor can he keep on giving friendly words to Satan and his minions. A teacher who remains silent when errors are taught, and nevertheless pretends to be a true teacher, is worse than an open fanatic and by his hypocrisy does greater damage than a heretic. Nor can he be trusted. He is a wolf and a fox, a hireling and a servant of his belly, and ready to despise and to sacrifice doctrine, Word, faith, Sacrament, churches, and schools. He is either a secret bedfellow of the enemies or a skeptic and a weathervane, waiting to see whether Christ or the devil will prove victorious; or he has no convictions of his own whatever, and is not worthy to be called a pupil, let alone a teacher; nor does he want to offend anybody, or say a word in favor of Christ, or hurt the devil and the world."
Martin Luther, quoted in Bente's Historical Introduction, Concordia Triglotta, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1921, p. 94.

"Therefore nothing but a satanic, seductive, and sinister strategy is involved when we are called upon to yield a bit and to connive at an error for the sake of unity. In this way the devil is trying cunningly to lead us away from the Word. For if we adopt this course and get together in this matter, he has already gained ground; and if we were to yield him a fingerbreadth, he would soon have an ell."
What Luther Says, An Anthology, 3 vols., ed., Ewald Plass, St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1959, III, p. 1411f. Ephesians 6:10-17.

July 23, 2014 at 2:48 PM

 Ben Wink said...

Isn't this all a symptom of a larger problem that comes with Church Growth attitudes? When you reduce the work of the church to a numbers game, you want to increase those member numbers, correct?

What is the easiest way to do that? By having a watered down message that appeals to everyone, regardless of Scripture truths and accurate doctrine. If this means telling everyone that Jesus loves them and that everyone is absolutely amazing in the eyes of God the Father, then so be it. You achieved your results and more people have shown up because of the weak tea version of Christianity you just served.

All I ever hear, consistantly pounded over and over again is "God's love" and "the Gospel message". Yet where is the Law? Is not the Law equally important? What meaning does the Gospel have, when you minimize the Law or eliminate it altogether? You then just want to get rear ends in your pews or your theater seating or whatever.

It is getting to the point that the supposed crackpots with the placards that say "Repent for the End is NEAR!" signs are actually getting more closer to the point of Scripture than certain sermons by trained pastors I've been privy to have cross my ears.

The Bible is quite clear in having both Law and Gospel be equally important. Without the Gospel, you end up in desperation and the cul-de-sac of works righteousness. Without the Law, you end up with a lovey dovey message that sounds great here on earth, but won't sound so great for an eternity.

But as people don't by nature like to hear that they are sinners and that's a negative and won't help our numbers, so intead we will lead with the Gospel instead and mention the Law in passing, if at all. And I don't think that I'm exaggerating this phenomenon. Look at some of the websites for these churches and just see the gooey messages of love oozing everywhere. This smarmy nonsense isn't true love.

True love means telling someone that they are a sinner, that God hates sin, and that they are condemned to an eternal hell.

True love then tells someone that God sent His Son to be the atoning sacrifice for those that believe in Christ as their Savior, through the gift of faith from the Holy Spirit.

Maybe when churches focus on the totality of the Word and present and teach the entire Scripture, not just the parts that get pews filled, then some balance will come. But I'm not holding my breath.

Brett Meyer Shoots Down Anonymous UOJ Fallacies

Polluted WELS Blog Comments:

 Anonymous said...

No, Mr. Meyer. You do not understand. 'Many' in scripture consistently refers to 'the many that are called'. When believers are spoken of, they are the few; the chosen.

Mr. Meyer, you are guilty of emasculating the atonement when you say Christ paid for something and then refuse the idea that His payment accomplished the cancelling of a debt. Yes, there is one justification as you say; the pardon declared for all men: IT IS FINISHED!!! which is apprehended by faith or lost by unbelief.

July 13, 2014 at 6:43 PM

 Brett Meyer said...

Anonymous,
Your statements are faithful to the doctrine of Objective Justification.

They are not founded in Scripture or the Lutheran Confessions.

You state, "You do not understand. 'Many' in scripture consistently refers to 'the many that are called'. When believers are spoken of, they are the few; the chosen."

Actually I do understand. Your confession of Objective Justification - the new gospel of the ELS, WELS, ELCA and LCMS - teaches that the whole world has been forgiven all sin, the whole world's debt canceled by Christ's atonement, the whole world declared justified and righteous. Therefore you teach that the whole world has been called by stretching the meaning of the word 'many' to match the meaning of the word 'all'. Except you fail to quote Romans which teaches that those God has called He has saved eternally (glorified).
Romans 8:30, "Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified.

Again, you clearly demonstrate why the doctrine of Objective Justification has been charged with teaching Universalism. The only way it doesn't is for the Lutheran Synods to separate salvation from the forgiveness of sins - and they have done so in the doctrine of UOJ. A wicked, convoluted and contradictory mess Objective Justification creates.

Anonymous states, "Mr. Meyer, you are guilty of emasculating the atonement when you say Christ paid for something and then refuse the idea that His payment accomplished the cancelling of a debt."

I refuse the idea...Yes, I do. Because it is only an idea and not the teaching of Scripture. Other WELS pastors have charged me with refusing to 'take the leap' much like your charge that I refuse the 'idea'. The Scripture and Confessional statements I've provided in this short discussion reject the idea and condemn the leap.

Anonymous states, "Yes, there is one justification as you say; the pardon declared for all men: IT IS FINISHED!!! which is apprehended by faith or lost by unbelief."

Lost by unbelief...? And since the unbelieving world has remained in unbelief from conception - at what glorious time were they ever declared pardoned?

Objective Justification is a false rationalistic gospel, contradictory to Scripture and the Christian Book of Concord. The Lutheran Synods are using it to lead men, women and children away from sole trust in Christ.

In Christ,
Brett Meyer

There is not one tenet of Objective Justification that does not contradict Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions.

July 13, 2014 at 10:42 PM

Notice how precisely Quenstedt disposes
the Huber UOJ argument of righteousness without faith.
Pietism took over the false Huber position,
and WELS/LCMS/ELS/ELCA reflect that together.
Walther's dream of unity has been accomplished!
Praise the Lord and pass the popcorn - it's time for church.

 Brett Meyer said...

Anonymous the Christian Book of Concord clearly states that only on account of the gracious gift of faith in Christ alone are men accounted righteous or acceptable to God - not on account of Christ's atonement alone while the unbelieving world continues in unbelief as the false gospel of Objective Justification contends.

Also, 71] "but we maintain this, that properly and truly, by faith itself, we are for Christ's sake accounted righteous, or are acceptable to God. And because "to be justified" means that out of unjust men just men are made, or born again, it means also that they are pronounced or accounted just. For Scripture speaks in both ways. [The term "to be justified" is used in two ways: to denote, being converted or regenerated; again, being accounted righteous. Accordingly we wish first to show this, that faith alone makes of an unjust, a just man, i.e., receives remission of sins".
http://www.bookofconcord.org/defense_4_justification.php

In Christ,
Brett Meyer

July 14, 2014 at 7:03 AM

 Brett Meyer said...

Also, from the Christian Book of Concord:

9] Concerning the righteousness of faith before God we believe, teach, and confess unanimously, in accordance with the comprehensive summary of our faith and confession presented above, that poor sinful man is justified before God, that is, absolved and declared free and exempt from all his sins, and from the sentence of well-deserved condemnation, and adopted into sonship and heirship of eternal life, without any merit or worth of our own, also without any preceding, present, or any subsequent works, out of pure grace, because of the sole merit, complete obedience, bitter suffering, death, and resurrection of our Lord Christ alone, whose obedience is reckoned to us for righteousness. 10] These treasures are offered us by the Holy Ghost in the promise of the holy Gospel; and faith alone is the only means by which we lay hold upon, accept, and apply, and appropriate them to ourselves.
http://www.bookofconcord.org/sd-righteousness.php

Calov was always cited as teaching UOJ,
but the opposite is true.
I found this in Robert Preus' essay
and also in Justification and Rome.

Anonymous Attacks the Gospel on the Polluted WELS Blog - Brett Meyer Answers

Comments on Polluted WELS Blog:

 Brett Meyer said...

Anonymous at 4:45PM – in Isaiah 53:11 Christ uses the word ‘many’ and not ‘all’. It’s a clear distinction. ReferenceIsaiah 53:6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. Christ here uses the word ‘all’ in reference to the whole world. He doesn’t use the word ‘many’ as he does in verse 11. The doctrine of Objective Justification repeatedly changes the meaning of Christ’s Words.

Regardless of what you may feel my confession of the atonement does to the Gospel the Scripture verses I’ve used to defend my position are clear and do not allow for justification without faith, the payment of debt without faith, the grace of God without faith or redemption and reconciliation without faith in Christ alone.

You support the doctrine of Objective Justification by teaching the whole unbelieving world has been redeemed by Christ’s atonement. Yet there is no Scriptural proof that God ever declares this.
The Christian Book of Concord also rejects the redemption and reconciliation of unbelievers by faithfully confirming redemption and reconciliation are solely by the gracious gift of faith in Christ alone:
BOC: ”there must be faith in Christ by which we are reconciled to God and first obtain the remission of sin.”
BOC: ”58] … because for Christ’s sake we have a sure and firm reconciliation, if you believe, even though sin inhere in your flesh.”
BOC: ”61]… because by faith alone we receive remission of sins and reconciliation”
http://bookofconcord.org/defense_5_love.php

4] In opposition to both these parties it has been unanimously taught by the other teachers of the Augsburg Confession that Christ is our righteousness not according to His divine nature alone, nor according to His human nature alone, but according to both natures; for He has redeemed, justified, and saved us from our sins as God and man, through His complete obedience; that therefore the righteousness of faith is the forgiveness of sins, reconciliation with God, and our adoption as God’s children only on account of the obedience of Christ, which through faith alone, out of pure grace, is imputed for righteousness to all true believers, and on account of it they are absolved from all their unrighteousness.
http://bookofconcord.org/sd-righteousness.php

“142] But righteousness is faith in the heart. Moreover, sins are redeemed by repentance, i.e., the obligation or guilt is removed, because God forgives those who repent, as it is written in Ezek. 18:21-22. Nor are we to infer from this that He forgives on account of works that follow, on account of alms; but on account of his promise He forgives those who apprehend His promise. Neither do any apprehend His promise, except those who truly believe, and by faith overcome sin and death.” 
http://bookofconcord.org/defense_5_love.php

You also take Romans 5 verse out of context when you teach that the whole unbelieving world has been reconciled to God without faith in Christ. You left out the preceding verse nine which is integral to the statement made in verse ten and shows that those reconciled in verse 10 are justified and saved in verse 9 – verse 10 confirms those justified and reconciled in these verses are also saved eternally – “much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.”
Romans 5:9-10
9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.

UOJ teaches Universalism by its perversion of these verses to teach universal redemption and reconciliation with God for all unbelievers.

In Christ,
Brett Meyer

July 11, 2014 at 7:03 PM

 Gregory Jackson said...

I didn't know this blog was about me. I thought the topic was "Polluted WELS."

July 11, 2014 at 8:07 PM

 

 Brett Meyer said...

Anonymous at 5:17pm,

My comment on this thread July 9th, 2014 6:50am
The one thing a few of us contend is that the WELS holds to a false gospel as taught in their doctrine of Universal Objective Justification. No better time than the present to discuss and establish whether or not that doctrine is in harmony with Scripture and the Lutheran Confessions.

Not only is it a supreme endeavor to confess, discuss and defend the chief article of Justification whenever possible, but it also serves to clarify your options when considering 'So what now?'

If WELS is wrong about their doctrine of UOJ, and I contend that it is, then the LCMS and ELS are also wrong and the majority of churches in their fellowship which adhere to it would be out of consideration for 'So what now?'. Individual confessional churches who teach Christ's chief article faithfully and who are affiliated with those synods would be a consideration as well as independent confessional churches and ELDONA.

We couldn't be more on topic. I am waiting for the thread to open which addresses the called workers of the WELS, ELS, LCMS and ELCA duping the laity into financing Thrivent which is distancing itself from any Lutheran identity at light-speed while using their shared financial resources to support murder by abortion. But that is in-fact another topic.

Brett Meyer

July 12, 2014 at 5:13 AM

 Anonymous said...

Mr. Meyer, you do not understand the sound pattern of words. If the many does not mean all, then Christ does not bear the sins of all. If He does not bear all the the sins of men and pay the debt price for all of them, the atonement becomes limited. You seem to okay with this arrangement.

July 12, 2014 at 5:15 PM

 Brett Meyer said...

Anonymous,
It's the doctrine of Objective Justification which abuses the pattern of sound Words.

It is only in the doctrine of UOJ where 'many' means all when it was Christ Himself who dictated the word in the verse to be many.

The imperative to remain faithful to the pattern of sound words is why I posted the quotes from the Christian Book of Concord.

He forgives those who apprehend His promise. Neither do any apprehend His promise, except those who truly believe, and by faith overcome sin and death.”
http://bookofconcord.org/defense_5_love.php

This statement alone rejects the entire false gospel of Objective Justification - and yet I posted three such quotes and there are many, many more.

”there must be faith in Christ by which we are reconciled to God and first obtain the remission of sin.”
”58] … because for Christ’s sake we have a sure and firm reconciliation, if you believe, even though sin inhere in your flesh.”
http://bookofconcord.org/defense_5_love.php

Anonymous states, "If He does not bear all the the sins of men and pay the debt price for all of them, the atonement becomes limited. You seem to okay with this arrangement."

Isaiah 53:6 clearly states that the sins of all men were laid upon Christ. Again, nowhere does the Bible teach that the debt of the unbelieving world was removed by Christ at the atonement. The atonement paid for all sins - no limitation. The doctrine of Objective Justification perverts Christ's Word to equate the atonement with justification. UOJ sees that Christ died for the whole world thus it falsely teaches the whole world must be justified. As already proven by Scripture Justification is by the gracious gift of faith in Christ alone. Therefore the Atonement (Christ's completed payment for the world's sins) isn't the same as Justification (an individual receiving Christ' righteousness through faith and being forgiven thereby). Calvinism makes the same error as UOJ in equating the atonement with Justification. The doctrine of Calvinism sees that only a few are saved (justified) and therefore limits the atonement (Christ's payment of sins) to a few. Both doctrines are false but UOJ goes one step further and separates Christ's justification, the forgiveness of sins, from eternal salvation. A good reason why UOJists should stop mocking Calvinists.

So again, I have retained the pattern of sound words and Many means some - not all. And all means everyone. The BOC confirms this as well. There is one justification which is solely by the gracious gift of faith in Christ alone.

In Christ,
Brett Meyer

July 12, 2014 at 6:31 PM

The personal attacks via email from this UOJ fanatic
set a new record in skunkery,
which proves he has nothing else lfet in his arsenic arsenal.