Friday, August 24, 2012

UOJers deny they are Huberites at Steadfast Waltherians

I read with amusement the discussion happening at this plog post here.
[Update: Forget it, they closed down the comments, the moderator spat the dummy. I suppose they were forced to bite the dust.]
You might recall that the moderator of Steadfast Waltherians has got me banned from commenting in that website.

So I read that these UOJers are claiming they are different from Huber because they have this so called dual distinction of Universal Justification and Subjective Justification. Huber according to one Rev. Martin Diers said did not have that distinction.

The first point is - show us from Scripture where this Universal Justification being taught,  respecting the meaning of the term Justification as understood from Scripture and by the BoC signers. Justification, please recall means - to be declared righteous. This is tantamount to being declared forgiven.

Please note that the Atonement is not the same as Justification. I have written about this countless times in this blog. Atonement is not the same as Justification unless you are a UOJer and by default you want it to be.

Accordingly then if I may surmise in the comments, UOJers are not Huberites because Huber only had one scheme but they have two.

I think Huber was being more consistent with his assumption of having a Universal Justification rather than the Waltherians. Indeed, if Huber was right that there is a Universal Justification, then of course by necessity of reason and common sense logic - Subjective Justification is superfluous.

Please note, that in here right in this blog we have on record comments from UOJ pastors claiming that that for the UOJ the object of faith is NOT the ATONEMENT. The object of faith is that declaration that has happened 2000 years ago for you (so they tell me) before you were born at either (depending on who you speak to ) at Jesus' death at the Cross or at His resurrection from the tomb.

28 comments:

Brett Meyer said...

Thanks for this post Lito. To clarify a bit more... in the doctrine of UOJ the object of faith is not Christ and Him crusified for your sins. The object of UOJ's faith, and consequently the only thing that can create faith, is the declaration that your sins have already been forgiven by God the Father, you've already been declared righteous and guilt free - you just have to believe it to be saved eternally.

What the true UOJists on Steadfast couldn't answer is what sin do people go to Hell for? The sin which, per UOJ doctrine, wasn't forgiven when Christ paid for all sins and therefore which Christ didn't pay.

Here they are at a complete loss because to claim it is the sin of Unbelief is destroyed by Romans 13:5. To claim any other sin is to teach that Christ didn't die for all sins. To claim that there isn't a sin that Christ didn't pay for and therefore didn't forgive at the atonement is to label themselves Universalists because everyone then is eternally saved regardless of their lack of faith in Christ.

At some point the only answer UOJists have is to slit the throats of those who question their man made chief and central doctrine.

Brett Meyer said...

Correction:

Romans 11:23, “And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.”

LPC said...

Brett,

Looks like they closed comments.

One further observation is that the claim the difference between them and Huber is that this justification is not distributed without the mean of grace.

Have a think about this a few minutes. The universal justification says you are already justified long ago, then the means of grace (which they misunderstand) then just delivers what already has happened in the past. So you have been called righteous in the past then the means of grace comes, and you get called righteous again? Huh?

LPC

LutherRocks said...

You do agree that the Atonement is universal, no?

Brett Meyer said...

Joe, yes Christ lived a perfect life as God/Man and died for the sins of the whole world.

Joe, can you answer the question I posted on Steadfast before they Kilcreased the comments?

Which sin did Christ not die for and, by the doctrine of UOJ, did God not forgive at the atonement - the sin committed by people who have been declared forgiven of all sin and righteous in Christ but are currently suffering in Hell for eternity.

Please provide your Scriptural proof text.

Joe Krohn said...

I do not think you understand the objective side of justification by your line of questioning; especially since you say: "Joe, yes Christ lived a perfect life as God/Man and died for the sins of the whole world.", and then turn around and ask 'which sin did Christ not die for?'

So I ask you again...is the Atonement universal or not? Does the Atonement aquit all men of their sins?

Brett Meyer said...

The Atonement is Christ's satisfactory payment for the entire worlds sins. The iniquity of us all was laid on Him and he paid for them all.

The Atonement: Christ's payment for the worlds sins, does not forgive all men their sins because unbelievers are not in Christ by the Holy Spirit's faith worked through the Means of Grace: Word and Baptism. The unbelieving world is dead in their sins. Your teaching of the unbelievers being forgiven by God the Father is not Scriptural and neither is it Christian.

Were God to graciously call the unbelievers to Godly repentance and faith in Christ then they would die to sin, no longer be under the Law, would be born again to Life under God's grace, Christ would be in them and they would receive His righteousness, the forgiveness of all of their sins and eternal life. But most do not have faith in Christ and so remain in their sins and under the wrath and condemnation of God because of their sins.

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.

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.

Would you please answer my question. Per your religion the whole unbelieving world was acquitted of their sins, declared justified and righteous by God - what sin did those in Hell commit which Christ didn't die for and therfore they weren't forgiven of which sent them to Hell for eternity?

Joe Krohn said...

Brett…Please see my comments in parentheses…

The Atonement is Christ's satisfactory payment for the entire worlds sins. The iniquity of us all was laid on Him and he paid for them all. (Would you agree that mankind owed a debt that Christ paid and now that debt is forgiven-objectively?)

The Atonement: Christ's payment for the worlds sins, does not forgive all men their sins because unbelievers are not in Christ by the Holy Spirit's faith worked through the Means of Grace: Word and Baptism. (I agree…by the unbeliever’s rejection, he does not possess the gift of forgiveness…however, nonetheless forgiveness is still in Christ-objectively for all men) The unbelieving world is dead in their sins. (Untrue…this is a blanket statement…not all in the world are unbelievers.) Your teaching of the unbelievers being forgiven by God the Father is not Scriptural and neither is it Christian. (They are objectively in Christ…that is the Atonement…you said: “The iniquity of us all was laid on Him and he paid for them all.”

Were God to graciously call the unbelievers to Godly repentance and faith in Christ then they would die to sin, no longer be under the Law, would be born again to Life under God's grace, Christ would be in them and they would receive His righteousness, the forgiveness of all of their sins and eternal life. But most do not have faith in Christ and so remain in their sins and under the wrath and condemnation of God because of their sins. (This is a grave error. These statements infer that there must be some fault in God since He does not call all men to eternal life when He does. He wants all to be saved. Matt. 23:27)

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.

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.

Would you please answer my question. Per your religion the whole unbelieving world was acquitted of their sins, declared justified and righteous by God - what sin did those in Hell commit which Christ didn't die for and therfore they weren't forgiven of which sent them to Hell for eternity? (He died for all and paid for all their sins leaving forgiveness for all. Those who are in Hell chose to be there and denied Christ and His Spirit…there is no unforgivable sin…Matt. 23:37)

Joe Krohn said...

My bad...I meant to attribute Matt. 23:37 both times...it was a typo...

LPC said...

Joe,

Since you say that people are in hell because they chose to be there and since death for sins is according to your previous comment forgiven objectively then by your theology, people in hell are there because Jesus did not die for their choice of going to hell.

Is there still something you want to discuss?


LPC

Brett Meyer said...

To further Lito's point Joe - would you then say every child born to parents who practiced Wicca and have died unbelievers by the age of 4 years old is in heaven since they clearly had no opportunity or intellectual capability to choose to reject Christ and opt for eternity in Hell?

You say that unbelievers are objectively in Christ - where in Scripture is this taught?

Galatians 5:2-4, "Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace."

Those under the Law - unbelievers - are outside of Christ and Christ is not in them and neither have they been declared forgiven and righteous in Christ.

Joe, you finish by stating, "there is no unforgiveable sin". So, according to UOJ, since Christ died and paid for all sin and forgave the whole world their sins then every sin - even the sin of rejecting Christ (if they live long enough to do so) has been forgiven and therefore the whole world is saved eternally - Joe, you're one french fry away from a Universal Salvation Happy Meal.

Joe Krohn said...

Christ came to save the world and not condemn it.

If I were a thirsty man and found a well, the well would not be real unless I drank from it.

There is no comfort in your gospel, fellas.

LPC said...

Joe,

I do not know what your metaphor is all about. At least this is what I know, the well is real whether you drink from it or not. Your action does not make something real or false.

Lastly, what you have is a gospel of false comfort, would you prefer that? Your formulation of the Gospel denies the faith created by the HS through the MoG.

In fact in your formulation, the MoG does not mediated such that the person comes to faith and thereby get justified at the point of faith. Your MoG declares already a reality that happened to them be they believe it or not.

Your position is inconsistent with your own doctrine of universal absolution/justification. Huber was a better theologian than you folks, for he rightly deduced that if universal absolution is true all the rest are superfluous, which is quasi-universalistic.

LPC

Brett Meyer said...

Yes, there is no comfort in Scriptures central and chief doctrine of Justification by Faith Alone for those who do not have the faith of the Holy Ghost. And neither is there comfort in any other doctrine.

Joe states, "If I were a thirsty man and found a well, the well would not be real unless I drank from it."


This is pure rationalism. It goes hand in hand with UOJ's "it must mean...", "God could only then...", "God did this so he must do that..."

These are all man made rational directives which deny the divine inspiration of the Scriptures and attempt to interpret God's Word the way man wants.

Joe your manhandling of God's Word is in opposition to 2 Peter 1:20, "Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation."

Joe Krohn said...

The metaphor describes your theological positions.

There is forgiveness for all men's sins in Christ whether someone drinks in the water of life or not.

This is objective justification. It does not mean one is saved regardless since we know a man can deny it.

Brett Meyer said...

Joe, according to your beliefs, who is in control of a man having faith in Christ or not having faith in Christ?

God or man?

Joe Krohn said...

Brett, according to the book of Job, God makes it quite clear who is control of all things.

God does not drag a man kicking and screaming to faith and salvation.

God has provided salvation for all. He is the one responsible for man's salvation. Man can reject God's gift of salvation. This is orthodox Lutheran theology. Why some are saved and not all is not for us to question or know. This is the mystery of Election.

Now I have a question for you.

Who is in control of man not having faith?

Brett Meyer said...

You realize you didn't answer my question and then posed the second part of my question back to me?

Interesting that your religion teaches that God dragged the entire world to the forgiveness of sins and being righteous but doesn't drag the entire world to faith and salvation. Which is the reason for my initial question. If God is solely responsible for calling men to faith as Scripture teaches then why does He, in your religion, not drag them to salvation too - unless you believe that man is responsible for believing. Is this true? do you believe that man is responsible for coming to faith in Christ and therefore if he doesn't he is solely responsible?

You blamed me above when I said that all men were not declared forgiven by God through the Atonement (Me: But most do not have faith in Christ and so remain in their sins and under the wrath and condemnation of God because of their sins. You:(This is a grave error. These statements infer that there must be some fault in God since He does not call all men to eternal life when He does. He wants all to be saved. Matt. 23:27) By the same consistent teaching you also infer that there is some fault in God since He does not save all men he has forgiven and declared righteous in His Son.

You may feel you answered the question because you equate faith solely with salvation - and that's probably what happened. But you don't equate faith with the forgiveness of sins, righteousness too. My post on Ichabod quoting the Lutheran Confessions The Righteousness of Faith - shows that being declared forgiven of all sins and righteous by God is salvation - all three are applied solely to those with faith in Christ.
http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2012/08/uoj-contradicts-formula-of-concord-case.html

To answer my question and subsequently yours - Man is solely responsible for rejecting the Gospel promises that are only through faith in Christ.

Joe Krohn said...

You realize you didn't answer my question and then posed the second part of my question back to me? (JK-Yep, and I answered your question...just not the way you wanted.)

Interesting that your religion teaches that God dragged the entire world to the forgiveness of sins and being righteous but doesn't drag the entire world to faith and salvation. (JK-You are twisting what I say and your strawmen are twisting in the wind...God dragged Christ into the place of the entire world etc...objectively for all men.) Which is the reason for my initial question. If God is solely responsible for calling men to faith as Scripture teaches then why does He, in your religion, not drag them to salvation too - unless you believe that man is responsible for believing. Is this true? do you believe that man is responsible for coming to faith in Christ and therefore if he doesn't he is solely responsible? (JK-You are grasping at straws and setting up the venerable scarecrow...I addressed my confession concerning this in my previous post regarding Election...you would do well to reread this in the BoC under the Formula re: Election)

You blamed me above when I said that all men were not declared forgiven by God through the Atonement (Me: But most do not have faith in Christ and so remain in their sins and under the wrath and condemnation of God because of their sins. You:(This is a grave error. These statements infer that there must be some fault in God since He does not call all men to eternal life when He does. He wants all to be saved. Matt. 23:37) By the same consistent teaching you also infer that there is some fault in God since He does not save all men he has forgiven and declared righteous in His Son. (JK-No...I never said what you are saying...you are putting words in my mouth...now you are lying.)

You may feel you answered the question because you equate faith solely with salvation - and that's probably what happened. (JK-You might just be getting it.)But you don't equate faith with the forgiveness of sins, righteousness too. (JK-No, because sins have been dealt with objectively. Faith does not make this gift real but receives it.) My post on Ichabod quoting the Lutheran Confessions The Righteousness of Faith - shows that being declared forgiven of all sins and righteous by God is salvation - all three are applied solely to those with faith in Christ.
http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2012/08/uoj-contradicts-formula-of-concord-case.html (JK-This proves nothing...since I agree and so do all orthodox Lutherans.)

To answer my question and subsequently yours - Man is solely responsible for rejecting the Gospel promises that are only through faith in Christ. (JK-There is hope for you...and I mean that sincerely...)

Joe Krohn said...

Brett, here is the quote in context regarding election where you misrepresented me.

"Were God to graciously call the unbelievers to Godly repentance and faith in Christ then they would die to sin, no longer be under the Law, would be born again to Life under God's grace, Christ would be in them and they would receive His righteousness, the forgiveness of all of their sins and eternal life. But most do not have faith in Christ and so remain in their sins and under the wrath and condemnation of God because of their sins. (This is a grave error. These statements infer that there must be some fault in God since He does not call all men to eternal life when He does. He wants all to be saved. Matt. 23:37)"

LPC said...

Joe,

The metaphor describes your theological positions.

Well your metaphor is wrong and way off the mark.

There is forgiveness for all men's sins in Christ whether someone drinks in the water of life or not.

This is objective justification. It does not mean one is saved regardless since we know a man can deny it.


This is where sophistic speech happens on your part.

When you say There is forgiveness of all men's sins in Christ you are just like other UOJers who can easily drop the "in Christ" phrase and declare as you did "This is objective justification".

Tell me if you dare to answer, that known atheist there on the street, can you tell me if that atheist has already been declared righteous in Christ by God?

If you answer, no, then answer, what is this objective justification you are talking about, can you give a Scripture?

If you answer, yes. Then please admit also that atheist based on your doctrine is in Christ while he is still in unbelief.

We have gone this rounds many times with you and your comments are boring me to death, you carry no new argument into the discussion.

I will let you do your monologue since I do not find your comments something that I can take seriously.

LPC

Brett Meyer said...

I don't see how I misrepresented you. You certainly didn't show where you felt I did.

I recommend a thorough study of faithful Concordist Aegidius Hunnius - Theses Opposed To Huberiansism which was translated by Pastor Rydecki from Latin into English (available on Amazon for $10 U.S.) It is an outstanding Confessional treatment of UOJ and certainly addresses your version of the doctrine. Hunnius condemned UOJ as unChristian as we have done here.

We have no animosity toward you Joe. We do though have it toward the false gospel of UOJ and we'll continue to battle it with Scripture and the Confessions until the Lord ends this world or our lives here on the earth.

When you can't find Scripture passages that clearly state your teaching then you must abandon it in favor of what the Word clearly states. You continue to subject Scripture to your rational thought by saying, "God must have", "God couldn't only", "It must mean". That will have to stop if you are to honor the supremacy of God's Word, it's perspicuity and supreme efficaciousness.

Joe Krohn said...

Brett...you clipped the unscriptural part of your quote to put my response in a different light...making me look unscriptural. You do this all the time...take stuff out of context.

Lito, you said: "Tell me if you dare to answer, that known atheist there on the street, can you tell me if that atheist has already been declared righteous in Christ by God? (JK-Yes, but only in the sense that he has been aquitted of his guilt in the reconciliation of the world...(2 Cor. 5) it does not apply to him personally since he is rejection of it.)...

...If you answer, yes. Then please admit also that atheist based on your doctrine is in Christ while he is still in unbelief." (JK-I will not admit this untruth. He is not in Christ...but his reconciliation is still in Christ.)

Brett Meyer said...

Joe, your religion has been addressed by Concordist Hunnius:

Thesis Concerning the Huberian Universal Justification of Believers and Unbelievers

Huber professes such a justification, for the sake of which Christ has properly, actually and practically conferred redemption on the entire human race in such a way that sins have been equally remitted to all men, including the Turks, and that all men (including unbelievers) have received remission of sins, and that the whole human race has, in actual fact, been received into the grace and bosom of God.

Thesis 2
Hence he says that all those to whom the Gospel is proclaimed are to be called "elect, justified by God, sanctified, redeemed," and some of these are said to be "believing and converted."

Thesis 3
This universal justification of the entire human race he considers (even without respect of faith in Christ) to be fully completed, sins having been remitted on account of the satisfaction made by the Son of God and swallowed up in His own blood and wounds. These things he says concerning his justification.

Thesis 4
He was pleased to correct this foul and disgusting error in the first legal proceeding before the commissaries. But what he was at that time thought to have vomited out, he swallowed up again in his later writings, which his own reply to the Heidelberg Articles as well as a rsponse to the censure of the Tubingen theologians shows in the page markings in the upper margin.

Thesis 5
This notwithstanding, we most willingly grant that there is a righteousness that avails before God for the entire human race, a righteousness that has been gained and acquired through Christ, so that if the whole world were to believe in Christ, then the whole world would be justified. With respect to this, Paul writes in Romans 5 that "through one man's justification, the gift has spread toward all men for justification of life." Nevertheless, no one is justified nor does anyone obtain remission of sins from this acquired universal righteousness without the imputation of this acquired righteousness of Christ. But the imputation of righteousness does not take place except through faith.

Thesis 6
Hence Paul, when he expressly discusses justification in Romans 3 and 4, does not know of a justification apart from faith, and expecially as Galatians 2 plainly says, "Man is not justified except by faith in Jesus Christ."

Thesis 7
Outside of faith in Christ and without it, man remains in condemnation, according to John 3, "Whoever does not believe has been judged already." And again, "Whoever does not believe in the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God remains upon him." And Mark 16, "Whoever does not believe will be condemned." If such a one has already been judged, if the wrath of God remains upon him, if he will be condemned, then in what beautiful way has he been justified? In what splendid manner have his sins been remitted unto him? Indeed, where sins have truly been remitted, there all wrath and condemnation are gone (Rom. 8). "Blessed are they whose sins have been remitted" (Psalm 32). Now then, are all men blessed? Even unbelievers? Turks? Reprobate Jews?

Thesis 8
Therefore, it is certain that no one receives remission of sins for the sake of Christ except the one who believes in Him (Acts 10). Nor is anyone justified from his sins except the one who believes in Christ (Acts 13).


http://www.amazon.com/Theses-Opposed-Huberianism-Lutheran-Justification/dp/1475186541/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1346376602&sr=8-1&keywords=hunnius

Joe Krohn said...

Brett...

N/A = Not Applicable. The Hunnius deal addresses heresy...

As an orthodox Lutheran, one must be able to discern the objective from the subjective regarding justification. You either can't or refuse to do so. Your theology says you are forgiven if you only have faith (there is no comfort here Mr. Mustard Seed) without providing the objective reality in which faith resides...namely the forgiveness of sins for all men won by Christ in His atonement.

Brett Meyer said...

Hunnius continues to address your religion Joe:

Thesis 9
But let Huber explain to us the mystery of this universal justification of his, and let him set forth in detail when these unbelievers, who have never believed and are not going to believe in the Son of God, ever received the remission of sins and were justified before God?

Thesis 10
Now, was it perhaps from eternity in that (as he imagines) universal election? In that case, they are said to be born into this world justified, that is, with a universal justification having taken place before they came into existence105 • Thus they must be proclaimed to be born sons, not of wrath, but of grace, for whom original sin does not matter at all before God, since it was already forgiven from all eternity, even without faith.

Thesis 11
How then will Christ's statement in John 3 stand? "Truly, truly I tell you, unless someone is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of heaven; what is born of flesh is flesh ."

Thesis 12
If, however, he responds that, in the person of our first parents, sins were forgiven to their entire posterity when the absolution from sins was announced to them by the pronouncement of the promise about the seed of the woman, not even then will Huber's doctrine be able to stand.

Thesis 13
For since those first-formed human beings106 were not justified nor did they obtain forgiveness of sins without faith in the promised seed, why would we affirm something different about their posterity, that sins have surely been remitted to them and that the righteousness of Christ has been conferred on them, whether they should believe in their times or not believe?

Thesis 14
For thus in this grace, in this justification their posterity are born, if they immediately received, in their first parents, the forgiveness of sins before they ever came into existence107 • Nevertheless, since from Adam and Eve, not God's grace, not remission of sins, not justification, but sin and, on account of sin, wrath and indignation, death and condemnation have spread to all men (Rom. 5), therefore, neither can this explanation stand.

Thesis 15
If, however, Huber should affirm that all men were justified and obtained remission of sins by force of the merits of Christ (even without faith) at the time when Christ, on the cross, made satisfaction for the sins of the whole world, then would not even Caiaphas and the rest of the most sworn enemies of the Lord Jesus have been justified from sins and freed from the wrath of God even while His suffering was taking place?-although the indignation of God never arose so horribly against them as it did in that flagrant crime whereby they were unafraid to crucify the Lord of glory.

Cont...

Brett Meyer said...

Cont...

Thesis 16
But let Huber also cut this knot: do the unbelieving Jews, Turks, etc., after they were thus justified at one time without faith, still retain this justification, or do they perhaps lose it again?

Thesis 17
If they retain it, will they then be saved with all Christians and the faithful? If, however, they lose it, then let Huber answer, how and through what do they lose it? This justification could not be erased108 for them through unbelief, because they are supposed to be justified without any regard to faith (which is also what makes them unbelievers).

Thesis 18
Again, since at one time the Gentiles, and today the Turks and reprobate Jews were never not unbelievers, certainly if that general justification109 is said to be erased for them through unbelief, then it must have always been erased for them, because they have al ways been unbelievers. And consequently, they were never justified, not even with a universal justification, if indeed this cannot coexist with unbelief, but is erased through the same. If his Huberian justification cannot splendidly coexistl10 with unbelief in its very beginning, then neither can it coexist with it going forward.

Thesis 19
In addition, if we were all justified at the same time with a general justification and restored to the bosom of divine grace with sins having been forgiven solely by the merit of Christ without faith, then does not the justification by faith so accurately passed on by St. Paul lie in ruins, since it is clearly not a necessity for us?

Thesis 20
Huber will never be able to explain his way out of this nonsense of insoluble contradictions and most prodigious absurdities. Therefore let him enjoy his justification, and let him bless his elect and sanctified people with it-Turks, Jews, and all unbelievers. We, in the meantime, shall restrict justification to believers only, as prescribed by all prophetic and apolstolic Scriptures.

LPC said...

Joe,

You said Lito, you said: "Tell me if you dare to answer, that known atheist there on the street, can you tell me if that atheist has already been declared righteous in Christ by God? (JK-Yes, but only in the sense that he has been aquitted of his guilt in the reconciliation of the world...(2 Cor. 5) it does not apply to him personally since he is rejection of it.)...

...If you answer, yes. Then please admit also that atheist based on your doctrine is in Christ while he is still in unbelief." (JK-I will not admit this untruth. He is not in Christ...but his reconciliation is still in Christ.)




You already in saying the above admitted your equivocation and your sophistry.

The BoC speaks a lot about the false teaching attached to sophistry.

There is no more need to go further in this endless going around in circles here. You drop in here make comments but you just spread around your sophistry and absurdity of speech, so no offense, you have equivocated already so what more discussion is lacking here, nothing.

You can call yourself an "orthodox Lutheran" but please, please do not make yourself a laughing stock.
The label does not mean much - the orthodox Lutherans were against Huber but you are not for you espouse Huberian myth just as your labelling yourself "orthodox Lutheran" is a myth.

You can believe about it yourself, the same way the self righteous believes he is a good person but you are no orthodox Lutheran.

Orthodox Lutherans do not commit the fallacy of category mistake - but you and your fellow UOJers do.

LPC

LPC