Showing posts with label Phil Hale. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Phil Hale. Show all posts

Sunday, December 1, 2024

Five Years Ago, Cub Editor Hale Went Ballistic against Justification by Faith

 

Sunday, December 1, 2019

Luther and the Book of Concord - Are "Satanic" -
According to Ft. Wayne Graduate Phil Hale

There is nothing like Christian News for trashing Luther and the Book of Concord.




Hale's Rash, Raging, Reckless Thoughts on Defending OJ!

"It is satanic that people like Gregory Jackson and Paul Rydecki have used misleading and complicating rational arguments, incorrect biblical interpretation, and misleading historical evidence to make this such a difficult issue to grasp today. They attack and obscure Scripture, rather than clarify it, though. (This is why they hate and refuse to deal directly with 2 Cor. 5:19, since it is so clear and helpful on this issue.) In the same way, the 1979 Kokomo theses were uncarefully drawn up to make light of and mock objective justification, not to defend it or help bring about a right understanding." p. 6, 11-04-2019 CN.

The hip accusation in the OJ hive is to say, "You are not a Christian. Your faith is in faith, not in Christ. You are a Faithian, not a Christian!" (Add red face and spittle flying, of course.) Luther called himself a faith-alonian, in Latin, which is too tough for Ft. Whiners to translate.
 For trashing Dr. Walter A. Maier II and taking away his Romans course - because he taught Justification by Faith - Concordia Ft. Wayne should be knocked down, dismantled, and the soil sown with salt - as a memorial to their Calvinism, Rationalism, and Pietism.

Tuesday, October 10, 2023

A Layman's Response to Phil Hale's Review - The Path to Understanding Justification

 

Phil Hale's idols are Calvin and the Pietist theologian at Halle University - Knapp. Has Hale stormed the same way about Fuller Seminary? I missed that post, perhaps because he banished me from the free list. Here is the Hale Storm.


Pastor Greg,


The Calvinist News editor wrote an angry speech, proof read by the Ft. Wayne miscreants denouncing Justification By Faith. What else is new...right?

He denounced you in his diatribe, but NOT ONCE, did he mention Martin Luther's many writings and quotes on faith alone (JBF). Many scripture passages were also overlooked. 

I suppose it's all your fault your waking up Lutheranism up as it slowly circles the drain.

Good job!


In Christ,

I knew Robert Preus and attended some of his classes. I still have his Justification and Rome. I  used to have essays before that book where he was slowly moving toward Justification by Faith.

The Olde Synodical Conference still bows to the Justification Without Faith of their syphilitic founder - Bishop Martin Stephan, Halle alumnus - and bows to CFW Walther, who ignored his bishop's pursuit of young women and the obvious source of their STD.


 

Saturday, July 29, 2023

The Solution Is Clear for Everyone - Start with the Divine Nature of the Scriptures

  


Worse Than Silence about the Efficacy of the Word - Repudiated Through Rationalism and Marketing

A number of our members have said, "I never heard of the efficacy of the Word until I read about it from your blog."

I can understand that, because I went to the library of Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, and found almost nothing among all the "Biblical scholars." Kittel's famous volumes - on all the terms in the New Testament - were very thin on the entire word group. 

The Greek word for energy is actually "energy,"  ἐνέργεια, but the genius scholars of today even have trouble with "virgin" παρθένος in Matthew and Luke. Nobody saw the Parthenon, even in photos? (The temple honors the virgin goddess Athena, but who needs Greek when we have Tik-tok and video games? Parthenos in Greek is virgin.)

Efficacy is one of those perfect words, conveying the Holy Spirit at work in the Word and never apart from the Word.   

The entire Bible teaches that this Book alone is the established revelation of God, written by men through the power (energy) of the Holy Spirit. 

If this power, clarity, and harmony is set aside, the Bible is little more than a quaint book of wisdom, a cultural icon.

That has set "Biblical scholars" free to explore their creativity, since nothing is real except their latest suffocatingly dull publication. Yale Divinity School's own Professor of Weirdness must have 100 publications in its CV.

The Evil Four Plus One 

Scorn the Bible

The National Council of Churches' RSV, NRSV, ESV, repudiates the Bible - not to mention

The NIV!

"That they were from many denominations—including Anglican, Assemblies of God, Baptist, Brethren, Christian Reformed, Church of Christ, Evangelical Free, Lutheran, Mennonite, Methodist, Nazarene, Presbyterian, Wesleyan and other churches—helped to safeguard the translation from sectarian bias." 1984 Preface, no really, Lutherans - no bias!

Plus One is the Beck-Otten Bible, sold dishonestly in every issue of the Christian News. The Beck-Otten has all the flaws and lies of the Evil Four.


Nota Bene - The Christian New$ - known for promoting Objective Faithle$$ Ju$tification - has canceled my free copies of the overpriced CN  issues online. Sob! I was just telling a member about the "husband of one wife" featured in the tabloid, a pastor on his third wife. But that is the criterion in New Haven (not to be confused with Yale University's campus). Anyone who graduated from a Missouri seminary is righteous for life.


How do people read this gibberish without laughing out loud? This was published in LutherQuest. One reader asked, "Have they found Luther yet. They are on a quest, after all."

 Calvin? Knapp? Hale? That is how they pick editors in New Haven, stuck on Calvinism and Objective Faithless Justification.

Let the Walther inbreds crow about their infallible, inerrant Bibles, arguing only about which bad Bible they love the most. Each one of the Evil Four Plus One drops verses, words, even the resurrection of Jesus Christ in Mark 16. The ending may be separated, or dropped in a footnote, or vanished - the message is the same: "We do not believe in the Empty Grave. Seminex has won. ELCA - give us a smooch of victory."


Thursday, June 2, 2022

Get Your Apostate News! Beck Bible Proof of the Great Swindle

 The Beck Bible, sold by Christian News, is brought to you by Westcott and Hort, who conspired to replace the Majority Text with one of their own. CPH supported the Voelz Gospel of Mark monstrosity without a peep from Phil Hale. CPH supports Codex Vaticanus? 
 Alec Satin, the Lutheran Librarian, has published a free online copy The King James Version, inspired by the German and Greek student below. The book is intended to serve as a textbook on the topic of the New Testament text and the value of the King James Version and Majority Text.
Christina Jackson was an honors student in German and studied Greek at Augustana College.


I looked up the ending of Mark's Gospel to review the wording of Mark 16:9-20, the Resurrection of Christ removed by Count Tischendorf, Westcott-Hort, and all the liberal apostates. The source for this removal? - Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus. Sinaiticus was "discovered" by Tischendorf, though it had no previous history there. Vaticanus was promoted by Tischendorf, though it had no certain dates. The two bound volumes had no descendants, but we are expected to agree they are the "oldest and best" when they disagree with each other.

I was going to go through the Beck Bible, Otten's money machine, and look for the classic missing verses removed by the demonic labors of Tischendorf, Westcott, and Hort. But lo, I did not need my reference books. The famous omissions, like Acts 8:37, are clearly noted in the footnotes with the excuse that the "oldest and best" sources omitted them.

The omissions deal with the divinity of Christ and faith in Him - just a co-inky-dink.

Heretics erase rather than add, because it is almost impossible to match the original style with new words. Besides, what the heretics hated most of all was - and is - the divinity of Christ and faith in Him.

The Majority Text is almost 100% in agreement, five thousand examples. Like all written works, there are examples of sleepiness, sloppiness, and our inherent ability to replace the right word with a wrong word. Long ago, Christina was riding with relatives who were arguing whether they were 19 or 90 kilometers away from home. Just like the English version, the words are difficult to get across while yelling.

With thousands of examples, it is easy to determine what the original says. Westcott and Hort were anti-Christian looney-tunes, so they spent 10 years secretly promoting their Greek New Testament, which even omits the Son of God from Mark 1:1. The KJV Revision dopes did not go with that, but they offered their slavish devotion to the rest of the errors introduced by the pair.

The KJV Revision of 1881 was so bad that the men in charge could not figure a way to fix it.

I ordered piles of books about this era and text criticism of the New Testament. Here is the laugh - after all is said, the current Nestle-Aland Greek New Testament is the Westcott-Hort GNT, only 150 years later. 

Kurt Aland liked to say that his version was the Standard Text of the GNT. In fact, it is a snip, clip, and glue job from here, there, everywhere, a slight revision of the secretive and blasphemous Westcott-Hort. I have and use

  1. the Majority (Stephanus) Greek New Testament, 
  2. the Nestle-Aland, and 
  3. the Westcott-Hort. 

So Otten liked to portray himself as a persecuted conservative, trying to revive the liberal LCMS. But he was always selling and promoting the Beck Bible, which was no better than the RSV from the National Council of (Marxist) Churches.

Pastor Phil Hale - lacking academic credentials - is promoting and selling Beck Bibles. Look at the footnotes! - all the verses removed by the genius of Westcott-Hort and other apostates. 

Otten liked to "sell to both sides of the issue" - his words. That is why he supported the Medieval Roman Catholicism of one group, the Southern Babtists, and anyone who graduated from a Missouri Seminary. The Kokomo Statements filled many issues of Christian News, without enlightening anyone.

Outraged blog reader: "But didn't Otten condemn the Church Growth Movement via Marquart's essay? and your Liberalism: Its Cause and Cure?" Yes, and he sold Valleskey's odious Fuller-saturated We Believe, Therefore We Speak.

Valleskey is a typical book-burner. He denies going to Fuller Seminary, but also admits going there. He cannot abide anyone teaching Lutheran, Biblical doctrine, but there are few of those left in WELS. He and his buddies have won, and they have ruined what was left of a hard-drinking, womanizing, cross-dressing sect. 

 The publishing tradition continues with Phil Hale - loving every confession of faith except Luther's.

Wednesday, April 7, 2021

They Fell Off a Truck - No, Really - Cascione Books by the Case.
Calvinist News Special


The cub editor of Calvinist News has a rabid aversion to Luther's doctrine and exegesis, preferring the dreams and illusions of Pietists, Enthusiasts, and Calvinists (in declining order).


Hale cannot deal with Justification by Faith ("just a phrase"), Holy Communion ("idolatry"), or Greek exegesis of Romans ("the wrong path!") to show what Paul, Luther, and Maier taught.

A competent editor would feature my books (sent to him at no cost) and refute them as dangerous to Church Growth, Calvinism, and pastoral pension funds. Hale follows the self-destructive editorial policies of Herman Otten, who promoted Objective Justification, the vilification of Dr. Walter A. Maier (PhD, Harvard), Church Growth books, and a lying, hate-filled, anti-Luther book written by a priest.

Sons of Satan, count them - three!
Champions of apostasy!



Wednesday, February 17, 2021

Cub Editor of Calvinist News on What He Does Not Know about Communion

 Christian News continues to be a mixture of Calvinism (right) and rationalistic Pietism (Profesor Knapp, Halle University)




If people want to use distance Holy Communion and pastors want to provide it, why does Hale get his Geneva gown in a knot about it?

Hale also says that Justification by Faith is "just a phrase." True it is a phrase used many times in the New Testament and expressed from Genesis 15:6 on - in the Old Testament. But all his blabbering in the language of Halle University and Calvin's Geneva is nothing more than the feeble protests of a bishop wannabee.

He should read this book, published by Christian News:

Maier earned a PhD in Semitics and invented radio evangelism. Did he imagine that his talks about the inerrant Word of God were ineffective over the airwaves? Poor Hale knows nothing about the efficacy of the Word and the Means of Grace, phrases seldom found in Calvinism and Pietism.


I am guessing that the vast majority of Lutheran congregations have not provided for broadcasting their worship services, with or without Holy Communion. Did their synods and pastors do them a favor, caught flat-footed in the Covid shutdowns? Many chose not to have services at all, after all these months.

Hale's argument is as retrograde as it could be, suggesting that anything other than the Word within the nave is forbidden! No Hammond organ. No microphones. No screens (a idea, actually). 

Would Hale rage against those pastors who hold no services? That would step on too many tender Ft. Wayne toes. 

Wednesday, February 3, 2021

The Calvinist News - aka Christian News - Uses "Efficacy" Seven Times in This Issue!



Cub editor Phil Hale, of the Calvinist News, gets a free control-f test every issue, to see if he can distance himself from the Ladies Home Companion content of the previous ones. 

Here are the latest results for the February 3 issue:
  • Control - f - Jackson = No examples, even though I send him free copies of books to review. Luther's Galatians? Phil? Phil? Anyone? Anyone? Walther, the American Calvin? You remember him from the Fort's idolatry class, don't you?
  • Control - f - Justification by Faith  = No examples, even though it is the Chief Article of the Christian Faith. But, of course, it is just a phrase to young Phil.
  • Control - f - Means of Grace = No examples
  • Control - f - efficacy = Seven (7) examples! But efficacy was only involved with the potency of the Covid vaccine.
"Just a phrase," Phil says, "just a phrase."
As the mayor said in The Music Man, "Watch your phraseology, young man!"




Thursday, November 26, 2020

Phil Hale Reviewed by Dr. Eric Rachut

Rachut Review is linked here on Amazon



Customer Review

Reviewed in the United States on November 25, 2020
My first reaction, upon hearing of Objective Justification (or Universal Objective Justification, UOJ) was that it was unscriptural; a Lutheran pastor and true believer in it, however, advised me to read this book. Sadly, I had neglected that admonition - the duty of every scholar is to read both sides.

The great majority of Lutherans, including, I am confident, those in the church bodies which espouse UOJ - these being members of the old Synodical Conference and its derivatives (Missouri Synod, Wisconsin Synod, etc) - would draw a blank if asked their opinion on this. Two graduates of the Missouri Synod seminary in Fort Wayne, Indiana, have told me that students there are informed that UOJ is simply the Atonement and not to make anything of it. (As this book points out, UOJ, if taken seriously, is indeed far more than the Atonement). I also have the suspicion that the Missouri Synod, at least, understands that a frank airing of the topic might result in a walk-out of significant numbers of their faithful.

A short synopsis: after Luther's death in 1546, several contentious questions faced Lutheran theologians. These were ironed out in a collection of writings termed the Book of Concord (1580); both the simplest topics and the most complex were addressed, the former in Luther's catechisms and in the key definition of Lutheranism, the Augsburg Confession. However, in 1592 a Swiss German, Samuel Huber, was appointed to the faculty of the University of Wittenberg, the center of academic Lutheranism at the time; he was originally Calvinist, but had rebelled against the Reformed doctrine of double predestination (some persons are predestined by God to be damned, some to be saved) - or against Calvin's Limited Atonement, as this books states, or both. His rebellion led him to become Lutheran, but still with a rationalistic mindset; he went beyond the Scriptural doctrine that Christ's Crucifixion and Resurrection paid the penalty of man's sin (the Atonement) and made the unscriptural claim that God the Father now rules all men, everywhere, innocent of ever having been guilty of sin in the first place (UOJ). Men are then saved if they as individuals have faith (subjective justification - what we non-UOJ'ers simply term Justification). This new doctrine led to Huber's expulsion from the faculty (1594) and then his banishment (1595). Aegidus Hunnius, acknowledged by all as an orthodox Lutheran father, wrote against Huber's ideas (Theses Against Huberianism - in print, although not listed in the book now reviewed). That should have been the end of it, but Huber's way of thinking rumbled along in Saxony, particularly among pietists (those more interested in holy living than doctrine) and re-emerged in the mid-1800's in the writings of CFW Walther, a man revered as the founder of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, and later in the four-volume Christian Dogmatics, by Franz Pieper of the same body. Lutheran theologians in predecessor bodies of today's Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) - at a time when that strand of American Lutheranism really was orthodox - vigorously contested Huberianism. But this rather odd item of theology has persisted as fundamental in the Missouri and Wisconsin synods and their smaller offshoots. It crops up periodically in other faiths - but only periodically.

I would urge readers interested in the topic to investigate BOTH sides - this book, touted as the best pro-UOJ, and, for the opposition, the Youtube expositions from the little church body, ELDoNA (either a short four part series by Rev Joshua Sullivan in "Ask the Pastor" or the nine-part in-depth presentation from several ELDoNA pastors), and the online and print writings of Rev Gregory L Jackson (PhD, Notre Dame). Hunnius's Theses Against Huberianism are available from Amazon - see if this short orthodox tome does not attack the UOJ this modern book promotes. In regard to Aspects of Forgiveness, it should be pointed out: the subtitle (The Basis for Justification and its Modern Denial) is incorrect - the opponents deny not justification, but Universal Objective Justification; persons in both camps are addressing the issue with the best intentions - not "hand[ling] the Word of God deceitfully" (the statement of an endorsing clergyman on the back cover) and UOJ's opponents are not "satanic, " "foolish," or "irrational," terms this book uses. At the risk of committing the fallacy of poisoning the well myself, let me say that this rather repetitious work repeatedly uses Non Sequiturs, False Analogies, False Dichotomies and arguments ad hominem. UOJ is read into biblical and confessional writings where no disinterested reader could see it. The multitude of bible references which do not dovetail with UOT are ignored; the five or six which could be of use - especially if you do not know the original Greek - are emphasized. (This is the first time I have seen, in a scholarly work, the recommendation [p 8] to disregard the context of a bible verse - Romans 4:25 - possibly because the preceding verse states that Rom 4:25 pertains to the justification of believers and not universally. Read the whole passage, Rom 4: 16-25). The writer acknowledges that UOJ is not a topic in the Book of Concord, but believes that this is either because 1) it was so basic that everyone just knew it (Luther's Small Catechism is in the Book of Concord and deals with just those basics - no UOJ) or 2). the confessional writings DID deal with it, but you have to be able to read the subtleties here and there. Overall the methodology here is similar to the way Earl Warren, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in the Eisenhower era, decided cases: he made up his mind according to Masonic principles beforehand and then sent out his law clerics in search of precedent.

So read both sides and make up your own mind. This is within the grasp of the laity - if you can tolerate "tangled mess[es]" (phrase in the book). Be aware the author is no doubt correct in his claim (p 44) that "those who are unscriptural on justification have lost any right to bear the name 'Lutheran'." However, this description may actually best fit the by my estimate 5% of Lutherans in the world who are UOJ'ers.



Wednesday, November 18, 2020

Cub Editor Phil Hale Loves His Garbled Words So Much,
He Uses Them as Filler in Calvinist News

Hale's reliance on Calvin and Halle Pietism is honored in this Photofunia.
"A dolt is just a dolt, a slogan just a slogan.
The fundamentalist things apply, as time goes by."


CN editor Phil Hale - From His Bizarre, Self-Published Aspects of Forgiveness, which means he is self-publishing his self-publishing.

It is true that we are justified (individually) by faith, but this slogan is just that—a slogan, and not a full representation of the teaching of forgiveness in God’s Word. In fact, this minimalistic stereotype leaves out the most important factor of justification: Christ and His work. However, for the modern deniers of objective justification—who claim that there is no aspect of, or basis for, justification before faith—this is said to be the only proper way to speak of justification: There is no ‘‘faithless, universal justification,’’ because there can only be ‘‘one justification taught in Scripture—that of ‘justification by grace through faith’.’’1 It is a historically Lutheran way of speaking, though it has become an identifying phrase for Protestants in general. The issue is not the words themselves, but what they are used to say and avoid saying. 

Stay tuned for Walther, The American Calvin: A Synod Built on Felonies.


‘‘In normal Biblical and ecclesiastical usage the terms ‘justify’ and ‘justification’ refer to the (‘subjective’) justification of the individual sinner through faith.’’2 However, Satan does not rest, and false doctrine is not stagnant. We must be careful using 400-yearold phrases without fully understanding what they were used to express and reject. We cannot rule out the possibility of a new error that hides behind traditional Lutheran slogans

While the modern denial of objective justification says that objective justification is a new teaching, the reverse is actually true: the term is new, to be sure, but Christians are free to use any words to express the truth of God. There is no legalistic, ceremonial rule forbidding new terms or expanded meanings. The issue is whether the teaching, not the language, conforms to Scripture. It is the denial of objective justification that is new, though due to historical circumstances, it was not a teaching at the forefront until recently. 

The concept expressed by objective justification is assumed and implicit in the understanding of pre-modern Lutherans because Scripture teaches an objective aspect to justification. It is the denial of the universal application and extent of Christ’s redemptive work that is actually new.3

1 Vernon H. Harley, ‘‘Synergism—Its Logical Association with General or Universal Justification,’’ 1984. 

2 CTCR, ‘‘Theses on Justification.’’ 

3 Even classical Calvinists hold to an objective reconciliation, according to 2 Cor. 5:19, but only for the elect. 


Hale's pacifier - OJ/SJ - comes from the Calvinist translation of Halle Professor G. C. Knapp's Christian Theology. The pacifier is old and slimy, obviously decaying, but so comforting to Enthusiasts who venerate Walther and Calvin.


Friday, September 4, 2020

A Calvinist with Objective Justification Will Be a Calvinist with Holy Communion



The cub editor of Christian News was given a poor education in Christian doctrine, and now he shows as little aptitude for the Faith as he does for editing -


"Regarding the “online administration” of the Lord’s Supper, Communion is communal – it has to do with people gathering together to receive the undivided Christ’s body and blood. A surprising number of Lutheran pastors and churches, though, are trying to redefine the Supper, against Christ’s will stated in Scripture. While Communion is a comfort, it is not a necessity. There is much false emotionalism in Lutheran circles over receiving Communion."

"Our Lord is not panicked or upset by what is going on, even if most of the world is."
 end of quotes, emphasis added

I have to start with this quote from another blog dealing with the topic - "...note Robert Kolb’s charge on the CPH website that we have neglected to seriously study Walther since the middle of the 20th century up to the present." That is the Kolb who put together the Book of Concord with the ELCA gay activist Wengert.



I am glad Hale and the LCMS guys want to prove my thesis that Walther was the American Calvin - and certainly not the American Luther.

Enthusiasts divorce the Spirit from the Word, so one version is Pentecostalism, where the Spirit is always telling people what to do in their dreams and adding new books to the canon. One book would be First Kenneth - the Spirit told Kenneth to become a missionary in Nigeria, where a large sum of cash awaited him. His cell group agreed, so it had to be true. And he left.

Calvin was another type of Enthusiast. He taught with great consistency that divine worship, the sermon, communion, and baptism were only valid if the Spirit chose to be present. Lacking any concept of the efficacy of the Word (see Fuller and the Lutheran seminaries), Calvin had to fill in with human reason.

Hale's Objective Justification is very much like Calvinism, but his blabber on the blog reminds me of WELS and Pentecostals jabbering about everything except what the Scriptures teach. I can find no claims made by Hale that are supported by the Word of God. 

I am not overly emotional about Holy Communion, but I left the Disciples of Christ (home of the Church Growth Movement, loved by WELS-ELCA-LCMS-ELS-CLC sic). I was struck by the importance of the Eucharist at Salem Lutheran Church - quite a contrast with passing little crackers and grape juice across the pews at First Christian. Immersion really mattered at FC. Every since I became a Lutheran, the Sacraments have been important as the visible Word of God.

Hale is quite the angry young cleric, with sparks flying here and there, rage flowing when his ridiculous OJ is questioned. Perhaps he simmers over the smells and bells antics of David Scaer at Ft. Wayne. But they are buddies in trashing the Chief Article.


Tuesday, March 10, 2020

A Reader Answers the Hysterical Essay of Phil Hale-Storm Hale,
Ft. Wayne Graduate, LCMS Pastor. His Essay Is Conveniently Posted Below.

Lutheran laity understand the Book of Concord, but the treasures of the Gospel are taken away with force by the Concordia, Ft. Wayne professors, especially David Scaer.
I put the entire essay on this blog, and added comments. Someone posted objections to Hale, below in blue. His essay is at the bottom, in green.

From a reader:
"I have never read such an excellent article for the study of incoherent writing, logical fallacies, contradictions and arbitrary statements.

However, his basic premise contradicts the Formula of Concord, which clearly states:

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. 

11] This faith is a gift of God, by which we truly learn to know Christ, our Redeemer, in the Word of the Gospel, and trust in Him, that for the sake of His obedience alone we have the forgiveness of sins by grace, are regarded as godly and righteous by God the father, and are eternally saved. 

12] Therefore it is considered and understood to be the same thing when Paul says that we are justified by faith, Rom. 3:28, or that faith is counted to us for righteousness, Rom. 4:5, and when he says that we are made righteous by the obedience of One, Rom. 5:19, or that by the righteousness of One justification of faith came to all men, Rom. 5:18. 

13] For faith justifies, not for this cause and reason that it is so good a work and so fair a virtue, but because it lays hold of and accepts the merit of Christ in the promise of the holy Gospel; for this must be applied and appropriated to us by faith, if we are to be justified thereby. 

14] Therefore the righteousness which is imputed to faith or to the believer out of pure grace is the obedience, suffering, and resurrection of Christ, since He has made satisfaction for us to the Law, and paid for [expiated] our sins. 

15] For since Christ is not man alone, but God and man in one undivided person, He was as little subject to the Law, because He is the Lord of the Law, as He had to suffer and die as far as His person is concerned. For this reason, then, His obedience, not only in suffering and dying, but also in this, that He in our stead was voluntarily made under the Law, and fulfilled it by this obedience, is imputed to us for righteousness, so that, on account of this complete obedience, which He rendered His heavenly Father for us, by doing and suffering, in living and dying, God forgives our sins, regards us as godly and righteous, and eternally saves us. 

16] This righteousness is offered us by the Holy Ghost through the Gospel and in the Sacraments, and is applied, appropriated, and received through faith, whence believers have reconciliation with God, forgiveness of sins, the grace of God, sonship, and heirship of eternal life.

17] Accordingly, the word justify here means to declare righteous and free from sins, and to absolve one from eternal punishment for the sake of Christ's righteousness, which is imputed by God to faith, Phil. 3:9. For this use and understanding of this word is common in the Holy Scriptures of the Old and the New Testament. Prov. 17:15: He that justifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the just, even they both are abomination to the Lord. Is. 5:23: Woe unto them which justify the wicked for reward, and take away the righteousness of the righteous from him! Rom. 8:33: Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth, that is, absolves from sins and acquits."

***

 Hale's original essay is posted below.



"FAITH WITHOUT CHRIST?


Objective justification is often misportrayed, because what it actually describes has always been assumed by genuine Lutherans. It is the denial of any objective aspect, basis, or foundation to justification that is new, and therefore requires a pointed and emphatic response. It is often assumed that those who hold to this objective aspect of justification require it to be mentioned or made explicit, which is not the case. It is simply the new error that must be rejected. This frustrates those who, in denying it, cannot hold two parallel biblical truths together without pitting them against each other.
Gregory Jackson, the most visible and energetic denier of any objective aspect of justification in Lutheran circles today, recently said “Faith? Faith? Where Is Justification by Faith on Their [the LCMS] Wiki Page?,” on a blog post entitled “Gentlemen — I Refer You to Your Own Document — The Augsburg Confession.” So “faith,” is the magic word, and the phrase “justification by faith” becomes all-important—indeed, everything, to the deniers. But to the upholders of the Lutheran teaching of justification—who confess that righteousness is solely from Christ, not our faith or personal decision—there must be a doctrine and meaning behind these words. Three words, no matter how historical, enshrined, or well-regarded do not make a full-bodied doctrine, especially the central doctrine of the Scriptures.
Jackson takes issue with this statement describing the Missouri synod: “The synod rejects any attempt to attribute salvation to anything other than Christ’s death and resurrection.” This highlights Jackson’s error most visibly. Faith is not the ultimate cause of salvation, or a factor in bringing about righteousness, but rather faith simply receives what Christ won and gives in the Word. Another way to put it is: Can one have “saving faith” without Christ’s death and resurrection? No.
The context of the Wikipedia page, from which Jackson took the phrase, is: “It [the LCMS] teaches that Jesus is the focus of the entire Bible and that faith in him alone is the way to eternal salvation. The synod rejects any attempt to attribute salvation to anything other than Christ’s death and resurrection.” So while Jackson can only read the emphasis on Christ’s death and resurrection as against faith, faith is correctly upheld as the only way to salvation in Christ. Faith alone is not against Christ, His saving works, or the forgiveness of the world in Him.
In fact, Scripture directly says that faith without Christ’s resurrection does nothing: “And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is in vain. We are even found to be misrepresenting God, because we testified about God that he raised Christ, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. For if the dead are not raised, not even Christ has been raised. And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. If in Christ we have hope in this life only, we are of all people most to be pitied” (1 Cor. 15:14-19).
Christ’s death, by itself, is not our righteousness, according to Scripture. If Christ was still dead, faith in His death would do nothing, according to God’s Word. His death was the payment Christ made while bearing the sins of the world. But payment is not forgiveness or acceptance of the payment. The resurrection of Christ was not an add-on or unnecessary bonus. Easter proclaims that we are free of our sins, for Christ rose for us—not just for Himself. It was the Father’s action, by the Spirit, to raise our Lord, on our behalf. We—all humanity—are forgiven in Christ. His resurrection signals the Father’s acceptance and mankind’s vindication from the guilt of all sin—from God’s side of things. Faith, in the believer, is not the entire picture of justification. Even “justification by faith” does not even mention our Lord at all! Forgiveness is complete and actually available in Christ, though no one is in Christ without faith. The world is reconciled and justified in Christ. This is why anyone can be forgiven, even an unbeliever, so they may trust the Gospel and be justified personally in time by faith.
So for the deniers of anything beyond or before faith, like Jackson, the righteousness objectively present and given in the Gospel — whether someone believes it or not—can only sound like a denial of faith. Faith for them has replaced Christ. Since faith is everything for them, nothing is allowed before it. But this is not the scriptural teaching of faith—mankind was absolved in Christ, marking the divine verdict, before we were born! Why? Because of Christ, “who was delivered up for our trespasses and raised for our justification” (Rom. 4:25). Does our faith depend on how well we believe and turn the Father toward us in faith?
No, “All this is from God, who through Christ reconciled us to himself and gave us the ministry of reconciliation; that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting to us the message of reconciliation” (2 Cor. 5:18-19). The fact that the Father is already presently reconciled does not mean faith or the preaching of the Gospel is unnecessary. In fact, there could be no faith in a gracious God unless He were already reconciled and not wrathful. We objectively believe in something—that God is truly forgiving toward sinners before anything happens in us. Without this true fact that forgiveness is not incomplete, the Gospel is more law, mere directions about how to go about getting an unfinished righteousness—and faith becomes its completing work.
Christ did not need vindication for His righteousness—that is not why the Son of God became man. Our Lord took on flesh and blood for us—for you and your sin—for the sin of all sinners, every single one. And salvation is not only partially accomplished—forgiveness is for all, even though no one partakes of this righteousness apart from faith, which incorporates in Christ. Faith does not make forgiveness real or the Father appeased—it depends only on Christ. Righteousness, the verdict of justification, exists before faith. Our faith does not create or finish salvation—that would make Christ Himself insignificant. Christian trust is not faith in our faith, as something we do for God—a sort of propitiatory sacrifice. We proclaim Christ crucified, who is not dead and lifeless because of our sins, but alive, risen from the dead for us. So rejoice, there is righteousness for you. It depends only on Christ, who is not dead. Your participation in the Gospel does not make it true, or else you would have a flimsy belief. No, Christ is the content of your faith, and in Him forgiveness is for all mankind. This is what gives the Gospel power—not faith. After all, which comes first: personal faith or the Word which applies Christ’s righteousness? (Rom. 10:14-17)
So is our faith greater than Christ? Must we pick between the two? Is faith unnecessary, because Christ died and rose? No, not at all. No one is saved apart from faith, but faith is not the causesource, or objective foundation of our righteous verdict—that is the error of general Protestantism today: faith (in the believer) is considered more significant than the God who died for our sins and rose for our justification. So the sinner’s response is greater than Christ’s substitution in place of all sinners.
So emphasizing the objective aspect of justification is not a denial of faith alone, but simply says that faith (what happens in the believer) is not the sum total content of Christianity. We do not make Christ rise and the Father reconciled to us in, or because of, our act of believing. There is something objective we believe in, before faith: the Son of God, who has been vindicated in our stead.
To pit faith and Christ against each other, is to lose everything. Scripture upholds both aspects of the Gospel, as do our confessions. The tie between faith and Christ’s universal justification is what we actually believe and receive in the Gospel. The Father is not an angry, un-appeased god until we offer Him the work of our faith—that is what the denial of objective justification must lead to. How could one ever believe in such a god? No, the father is reconciled—it already happened—by Christ. Forgiveness is complete and for all the world in Christ already. But we are conceived unreconciled sinners, so we must be presented with the forgiveness of God in Christ. Only when the righteous God offers us His righteousness, which is for all in Christ, can we believe in Him, in any biblical sense. Otherwise faith must become a cursed work of the law—something that replaces the Savior and causes God to turn from His wrath against our sin. If faith changes the Father, the believer becomes his own savior, in place of Jesus. Salvation, then, would be entirely subjective and personal.
No one is saved apart from faith. Amen. No one is saved apart from Christ’s works, which were received by the Father for us. Amen. No one is saved apart from faith in the resurrected Lord, in whom there is forgiveness for all. There is no contradiction. Amen. —ed.
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” (SD 3:4).
his merits have been presented as those which make satisfaction for others, which are bestowed by divine imputation on others, in order that through these, just as by their own merits, they may be accounted righteous. As when any friend pays a debt for a friend, the debtor is freed by the merit of another, as though it were by his own. Thus the merits of Christ are bestowed upon us, in order that, when we believe in Him, we may be accounted righteous by our confidence in Christ’s merits as though we had merits of our own. And from both, namely, from the promise and the bestowing of merits, confidence in mercy arises. Such confidence in the divine promise, and likewise in the merits of Christ, ought to be brought forward when we pray. For we ought to be truly confident, both that for Christ’s sake we are heard, and that by His merits we have a reconciled Father” (AP 20:19-20)."