Wednesday, August 04, 2010

What Theologians can learn from Mathematicians


Theologians of the systematic kind (you know who) love to do deductions. The problem is that in their business of deduction, they have hidden axioms which may not be axioms at all.

Mathematicians on the other hand are not legally allowed to make deductions if the step does not conform to a deduction rule or is not supported by an axiom. So what are axioms? They are propositions that are self evidently true. For example in human logic, P v ~P (P or Not P) is an axiom (now to mess up your mind a bit, there is one logic system where this is not an axiom, think about the implication of that for a moment). This is evidently true, right? It is obvious a thing cannot be white and not white at the same time, etc.

Good Systematic Theologians stay with their axioms and proper exegesis. The axioms in systematic theology are gathered or sourced from Scripture. This is why I find it astounding when a systematic theologian does not do exegesis first, but rather wants me to go by rapid conceptualizations and make deductions from there. Statements in Scripture are axioms because God defines them to be God's Word and God's Word is true.

From what I have seen good Lutheran theologians stick close to their axioms(Scripture), and those who don't, ergo, are bad. For example, the BoC refuses to conclude there is double predestination though it affirms that God predestines believers. Logically the BoC may be thought of as strange in this regard. However, the BoC refuses to go the deductive route of asserting double predestination because the word "predestine" is only found in reference to believers and never in connection with un-believers. Hence, they are staying close to the statements of Scripture, their axioms. It just sound and responsible scholarship to be that way.






50 comments:

Gregory L. Jackson said...

You have identified the basic LCMS/WELS method. The assumptions are in place. They only need to refer to their own experts from the recent past and cite some Scripture passages. Thus, they declare God has already declared the world forgiven of its sins, which was absolved when Christ rose from the dead (Rom 4:25; Walther, Brief Confession). Anyone who questions that is attacking Walther, the Syn Conference, and the Apostle Paul at the same time. Thrice woe.

Brett Meyer said...

Hence, they are staying close to the statements of Scripture, their axioms. It just sound and responsible scholarship to be that way.

Seems to me that the Concordists were only intent, by the grace of God, on explaining Scripture, God's Word, in the Confessions and therefore remained faithful to the clear statements of Scripture.

Current theologians having shaken off the shackles of the Confessions, so restrictive, and are intent on proving thier own man made doctrines, pleasing their fellow men and wallowing in the glory of their own reason. The Bible speaks of these times.

David Cochrane said...

St Lito,

Amen!

pax domini. †

Gregory L. Jackson said...

Brett is correct. I want to add that Chemnitz, my homie, wanted to show everyone how the Lutheran Confessions are consistent with the Fathers of the Church. Lutheran exegesis agrees with the sound exegesis and confessions of the past.

The Midwestern Lutherans simply circle around the same talking points.

LPC said...

To go beyond Scripture is not wise.

Who was it who said that? Oh I think his name was Luther.

Ah yeah, I was told Luther did not get it right in some places but Walther never got anything wrong.

LPC

Matthew Delves said...

Lito, it has been far too long since we caught up. Do you have an email address? Mine hasn't changed so if you still have that, send one my way. The only ones I have for you are old monash addresses.

God bless,
Matt Delves.

Dr. Jack Kilcrease said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
LutherRocks said...

Dang...I'll never get those minutes back from reading that blog post, Jack. You would do well to proof read before you post. Jibberish is hard enough without having to decipher it with words missing or misspelled.

Less is more. Thank God Jesus didn't carry on like you 'scholarly' guys. Christianity would have gotten lost with the rest of the philosophical muck of the day.

Man's reason is flawed period. Faith - a gift from God (in case you forgot) - cannot have a relationship with man's frail reasoning. I believe the Bible speaks in more than one place about the use of many words and leaning on your own understanding.

Joe

Dr. Jack Kilcrease said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
David Cochrane said...

Dang it! Well I was hoping St LPC was backing away from this so called logic of: Christ living a perfect life and dying on the cross for entire mankind but only rising for a few who would believe.

How does a pastor absolve sin with that view? "I forgive you all your sins if you believe enough!"

LPC said...

Jack,

You have many self appointments. You appoint yourself as UOJ fides difensor now you appoint yourself as the proper interpreter of Luther and we poor lots the nitwits.

Seriously Jack your arrogance makes me believe you are a legend in your own mind.

There are many reliable Lutheran scholars I would go to, but no offence, you would not be one of them. Just being frank.

LPC

LPC said...

David,

Do your LC-MS minister, before announcing forgiveness say "Upon this your confession" or words to that effect? I just want to ask this first so that I can help answer your question. If he does not do this, can you share the ritual procedure that he follows?

Here, in Australia, our pastors say ...."as a servant of the Word, I forgive you all the sins of you who repent and believe".

BTW, first you say Amen to this post now you imply I am teaching this....
dying on the cross for entire mankind but only rising for a few who would believe

You misrepresent me in saying that.

Another, when you say imply I teach "I forgive you all your sins if you believe enough. Where did I make such an assertion?


Jesus' resurrection is part of the atonement. Atonement is for all sinners.

However I do say that Jesus' Atonement does not mean that by virtue of it, all are automatically forgiven be they believe it or not.

Again, just tell me where in the Bible does it say that all are forgiven already because Jesus died on the Cross? Also can you show me where did Jesus forgive anyone who did not have faith in him? I will be ready to concede and eat my words. But unless it can be shown to me, you would do well to not be emotional on this issue.

Lastly, I can prove to you from the BoC as it quotes Luther that Luther did not believe in UOJ. As pointer for you, study on how Luther viewed the wrath of God as he ia quoted by the BoC.

David, the ultimate goodnews is Universalism. Be forewarned of that.

LPC

LPC said...

Joe,

You can observe that the more Jack promotes reason, the more you can appreciate I hope how UOJ is rationalistic in its conclusions.

Take a look at what Luther said in one place. He said if Jesus told him through the Word to eat crap/dung, he would do it because he trust Jssus' Words to be salutory for his good.

Now just try and see where Luther does with reason.

UOJers laud reason yet each time they turn they produce new logical fallacies.

I am a mathematical logician myself, I prove things by reason all the time. Yet I know the limitation of my craft though I find it enjoyable. That in the end, may my faith be in the power of God (his word) rather than in the reason of men.

LPC

LPC

LPC said...

Dear Matt,

I will email you through your blog. I lost your email too.

LPC

LPC said...

Matt,

Could not comment on your blog. Comment back here but this time with your blogpost account.

Do you still have my mobile cell phone number, the one that ends 300583?

LPC

Brett Meyer said...

Faithful posts and confession LPC. Christ continue to be with you and yours.

Brett Meyer said...

Jack, you're just trolling for people to read your blog. You copied and pasted your comment above on the previous thread, "Needing philanthropic help".

Dr. Jack Kilcrease said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gregory L. Jackson said...

I prefer the sacrament of deletion, which you perform often, Jack.

LPC said...

Jack,

As I said to Stephen, reason has its place. However its place is not the first.

In our debate with you on UOJ, you go to reason first rather than Scripture, that is the problem.

At least if you are going to do that, admit you have no Scripture to back up your UOJ but you have reason to back it up. Then people here can decide for themselves if they should go it your way.

You did not come with Scripture but with reason so making it explicit that you are using reason to promote or support UOJ would have been more honest.

LPC

Dr. Jack Kilcrease said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
LPC said...

Jack,

You used Scripture which was not relevant to your point. That is why I still consider you to have lacking Scripture support.

You cannot willy nilly quote Scripture for the sake of it. It must be exegetically relevant. The Scriptures you presented did not carry your point.

In fact we had a discussion on the OT in which you wanted to prove that there were people forgiven without faith. You used Leviticus. I asked you about this and you could not. If you want ... I state to you LC-MS 1932 Brief Statement Article 17, the first part which is UOJ. Here it is Scripture teaches that God has already declared the whole world to be righteous in Christ, Rom. 5:19; 2 Cor. 5:18-21; Rom. 4:25;

Those passages have been rebutted by the Maier paper as an example of how they are spurious text usage. Now a.) do you subscribe to this statement as I highlighted (I think you do based on your answer to my Atheist) b.) if so now do your OT.

Let's see.

LPC

LPC said...

BTW you said Every time I did, you ignored me or dismissed my argument without actually giving any reasons for it

Really Jack did I not show how fallacious your arguments were? So there were reasons for dismissal, so who is not being honest and misrepresenting who?

LPC

LutherRocks said...

Sacrament of deletion...that was funny.

Brett Meyer said...

ROTFL, Jack did it again, he deleted his comments on this thread and on the other where he was also trolling for blog readers.

Unfortunate and sad.

Gregory L. Jackson said...

Joe - Jack is a daily communicant in that regard. I am glad you got a laugh from it.

David Cochrane said...

St Lito,

Sorry for the emotion. I was rather disappointed. I thought perhaps you were returning to your previous blog posting style. Before you got captivated by GLJ's teaching you had very interesting blog posts. Even after you started examining his teaching they were rather interesting. Now it appears that no matter the subject we all end up riding his hobby horse.

I would be able to provide a miriad of scripture for you showing all are justified in Jesus. However, you would not see it. I have that frustration with my Calvinists as well. The submit everything to reason as well.

I see GLJ doing exactly what your recent post decries. It is a sadness you are not seeing it.

You remain in my prayers Bro Lito.

pax domini. †

Gregory L. Jackson said...

Lighten up, David. The laity normally see through UOJ first. I am not sure how you got justification by faith so twisted up.

LutherRocks said...

David - All are ATONED for in Jesus.

Quote your best Bible verse saying all are justified and I will show you how it isn't.

Peace,
Joe

LPC said...

David,

We refugees from Evangelicalism are the most susceptible people to be sucked in looking at the Gospel from the UOJ perspective because we have been burnt out by the Law and lack of certainty. However, Luther would call us falling on the other side of the horse if we swing to the edge where UOJ is.

At first, I too thought that UOJ was just another idea about the atonement until I investigated further, that indeed UOJ is declaring all already justified because of the atonement. Just think if all sins are already forgiven without reference to faith, then what is the point of the Sacraments, Preaching and confession and absolution?

Calvinism and UOJers have one thing in common, they equate atonement with justification. For Calvinist, since the see the two as equal and seeing justification is not universal, conclude that atonement is not universal too. For UOJers, seeing that atonement is universal decalres justification must be universal too. The two are operating in the same paradigm.

Rather Lutheran JBFA says atonement is indeed for all people but justification is not. Hence, we do not become Limited Atonement people neither are we Universalists either.

UOJers think the cure for Limited Atonement is UOJ, this is falling on the other side of the horse.

I asked one of our old Lutherans in the church of several generations, if he has ever heard that at the Cross God forgave all people's sins. He denied he has ever heard such a thing, he added it sounds like error. He further said to me that if a man has no repentance and faith in Christ, the person is not absolved.

You see Pr. Greg is correct in general about this. The laity do not buy into UOJ as a rule.My experiment anecdotally testifies to this.

You would be repeating the same error you found yourself in Evangelicalism if you do not study this for yourself with the Scripture on your left and the BoC on your right hand. You will be letting man rule over your faith.

I hammer on UOJ here because some pastors in my synod eat all the dish that comes out from LC-MS. Most of them come from seminary where they also become sausages, not being given the tools to think for themselves.

I appreciate your prayers and thank you, I will do the same for you too.

LPC

LPC said...

Kilcrease,

You have the habit of running away when called to task.

What duh? You erased all your comments. Whats up with that? Do you think your fans will appreciate this?

What would McCain say? He is banking on you to uphold his beliefs. Don't let him down. I am sure you think we are poor misguided numb skulls, The look from your photo says so.

LPC

Brett Meyer said...

An interesting note on UOJ. As much as UOJ toutes itself as the perfect assurance of forgiveness, at the same time it destroys what it means to be justified.

In UOJ God declares the entire unbelieving world as justified in Christ. Some do this overtly through declaration and some covertly by saying God forgave the unbelieving world of their sins when Christ triumphed at the cross - or when he arose (another inconsistency which should be examined).

So what does it mean then to be justified in Christ? UOJists contend that it's comfort and assurance of sins already forgiven. But before faith UOJ says it's yours but you don't benefit if you don't believe - you don't benefit from God declaring you forgiven and just if you don't believe it. So then after you "so called believe it" then it's yours and you can rejoice - but where's the assurance? UOJ says don't look at your faith (your belief) in Christ but just look that God already declared you forgiven and justified before you ever believed. But it's not mine unless I believe but I'm not to look at my belief. And where's my assurance since I didn't benefit from God declaring me forgiven and justified before faith then how can I benefit from God declaring me forgiven and justified after so called faith.

There is no comfort from being declared justified in the blood of Christ, by God the Father, in the doctrine of UOJ.

The point is that being declared justified by God the Father is the gift. It is the forgiveness of sins, the adoption of sons, life and salvation through Christ. Scripture declares this and the Confessions confirm.

It is UOJ which destroys Christ Word.

Romans 5:9 declares this when Christ declares that Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. But in UOJ being justified by His blood is not enough to be saved from God's wrath. Christ establishes in this verse that those justified are saved in accordance with Justification by Faith alone.

Romans 5:1 Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

May the Holy Ghost, by the grace and mercy of God, lead you into all Truth, His Word is Truth.

In Christ,
Brett Meyer

David Cochrane said...

St Lito,

I have been studying it for myself. Even though I have not been responding very often I have been reading all the discussion and going to the links provided. I still do not see it. It appears to be limiting part of Christ's work unlike the Calvinists who limit Christ's entire work.

As far as JBFA I believe I got that quite well. Justified by faith apart from works of the law. Therfore if one rejects it in unblief he or she does not receive the gift of eternal life. Rather the receive what is due to all of us sinners eternal damnation and death.

Once again I hope you can leave this idea in search of a controversy and return to your former interesting posts. This has been done to death IMHO.

pax domini. †

LPC said...

Dear David,

My last question for you and I will stop questioning your conviction.

Do you agree with the LC-MS 1932 Brief Statement #17.. Scripture teaches that God has already declared the whole world to be righteous in Christ, Rom. 5:19; 2 Cor. 5:18-21; Rom. 4:25;

I do not agree with this, but do you? Then I will leave you with your conviction.

LPC

David Cochrane said...

St Lito,

Yes that is my understanding of what scripture teaches.

pax domini. †

Brett Meyer said...

LC-MS 1932 Brief Statement #17.. Scripture teaches that God has already declared the whole world to be righteous in Christ,

Luke 5:32 I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

UOJ is Antinomian because when the whole unbelieving world is declared righteous in Christ there is no more Law to call them to repentance and belief in Christ.

Additional proof - 1 Timothy 1:9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers,

Surprise, the prayers of unbelievers are heard and answered by God - James 5:16 Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.

Further proof - 1 Peter 3:12 For the eyes of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears are open unto their prayers: but the face of the Lord is against them that do evil.

Now if the whole unbelieving world (dead in sins, alive to sin, servants of Satan and rotting in the stench of decay) is declared righteous by God who also declares Christ righteous it perverts Christ's righteousness as it becomes no better than rotting in sin and death.

David Cochrane said...

Brett,

Those verses to which you refer are true as well. And no it does not pervert the righteousness of Christ nor make it rotting flesh. These are the very same verses my Calvinists use against universal atonement. Such a pity to use firm promises in scripture to fight against other firm promises in scripture.

pax domini. †

Brett Meyer said...

David, of what righteousness do you speak when those that are accounted righteous in the blood of Christ, are dead in sins, alive to sin and not born again?

The Confessions even speak against such doctrines that promote the whole unbelieving world to be righteous in Christ when they declare, "48] The adversaries feign that faith is only a knowledge of the history, and therefore teach that it can coexist with mortal sin. Hence they say nothing concerning faith, by which Paul so frequently says that men are justified, because those who are accounted righteous before God do not live in mortal sin."
http://www.bookofconcord.org/defense_4_justification.php

Those accounted righteous before God do not live in mortal sin.

According to the Lutheran Confessions UOJ is rejected.

LPC said...

David,

Why I reject Statement 17.

1. The statement is senseless and misleading.

The whole world is NOT in Christ for if the whole world is ALREADY in Christ, there is no point to the MEANS OF GRACE. The MEANS of GRACE are there so that the wicked can be incorporated and united in Christ.

2. 2 Cor 5:17 and John 3:16 are against this. BoC is also against this. I have the references if you are interested.

3. Everyone born to this world is under the wrath of God because of their sin, yes even that new born baby is under God's wrath. That is why we baptize children so that that the child may be included in Christ. There is no point to baptism if he is already forgiven automatically by Jesus Atonement. Acts 2:38.

4. Those verses used to support Statement 17 were verses taken out of context. Walther Maier's exegesis of these verses have not been rebutted. I am still awaiting a concerted paper that challenges Maier (an LC-MS scholar himself) on this. No one has yet dared.

God's peace as well,

LPC

Steven Goodrich said...

The statement is senseless and misleading.

The whole world is NOT in Christ for if the whole world is ALREADY in Christ, there is no point to the MEANS OF GRACE. The MEANS of GRACE are there so that the wicked can be incorporated and united in Christ.


According to that logic, it would make no sense for the Scripture to say that Christ is the Savior of all of men (1 Tim 4:10) since not all believe.

Even Maier concedes that the Confessions teach that Christ death affected a placation of God's wrath towards humanity:

It may be noted here that the Lutheran Confessions do speak of Christ’s sacrifice as propitiating God’s wrath and of reconciling the Father to sinful humanity. See, e.g., Article III of the Augsburg Confession and Article XXIV, paragraph 19 of the Apology. In using this terminology they communicate basic Biblical truth, indeed, but express themselves in a manner other than do the Scriptures.

He then makes an appeal to authority to say that the Confessions mean something else.

This can be found be found in his paper linked here: http://www.wlsessays.net/files/MaierJustification.pdf note xlvii

Why don't you quote the entire statement Lito? This is the entire statement.

Holy Scripture sums up all its teachings regarding the love of God to the world of sinners, regarding the salvation wrought by Christ, and regarding faith in Christ as the only way to obtain salvation, in the article of justification. Scripture teaches that God has already declared the whole world to be righteous in Christ, Rom. 5:19; 2 Cor. 5:18-21; Rom. 4:25; that therefore not for the sake of their good works, but without the works of the Law, by grace, for Christ's sake, He justifies, that is, accounts as righteous, all those who believe, accept, and rely on, the fact that for Christ's sake their sins are forgiven.

The whole point that is being made is that justification is not our work but The Triune God's work from procurement to application.

I have no problem stating that without faith (ie knowledge, assent , and confidence that the finished work of Christ is for me) I will burn in hell forever.

So what do I do when I doubt if I have justifiting faith, I don't say, "Oh well, it's okay cause 'in Christ, God declared the world forgiven'." I return to God's Word and the Sacraments because they are the Spirit's means of creating faith (i.e. confidence).

Steven Goodrich said...

UOJ is Antinomian because when the whole unbelieving world is declared righteous in Christ there is no more Law to call them to repentance and belief in Christ.

Again by this logic, saying Christ is the Savior of all men (1 Tim 4:11) would also be Antinomian.

The wrath of God remains on those who do not believe because they are outside of Christ.

Again read the Bondage of the Will. Luther explains the difference between the Preached God and Not Preached God

Steven Goodrich said...

I asked one of our old Lutherans in the church of several generations, if he has ever heard that at the Cross God forgave all people's sins. He denied he has ever heard such a thing, he added it sounds like error. He further said to me that if a man has no repentance and faith in Christ, the person is not absolved

Do you think Pieper or Walther would disagree that without repentance and faith the person is not absolved.

I know Lutheran laity that think that the Predestination as taught in the BOC is errant teaching as well.

I notice that again you only presented a part of the statement. Show him the whole sentence and see what he says.

Also ask him if agrees with this statement:

The Law, which made all sinners, seemed to have done injury, but when the Lord Jesus Christ came, He forgave to all sin which no one could avoid, and, by the shedding of His own blood,
blotted out the handwriting which was against us.


BTW have you read Marquart's paper on this?

LPC said...

Steven,

You said Why don't you quote the entire statement Lito? This is the entire statement
The reason is because if the part I quoted were eliminated, the entire statement would have been correct. It is similar to asserting A therefore B. Now beacuse it is there, the whole statement has a contradiction, A the premise contradicts Scripture and A could be believed by people which they do already. Besides it is not a proper way of saying things. The WHOLE world has unbelievers in it, so the statement says that the these are already justified. This is nonsense. One may say, but the "therefore" elaborates on this, but if it does not mean what it wants it to mean, then my point is again valid, it is a senseless statement. It is sophistic. BTW, my synod has no such official statement though I am sure, due to some here adoring Walther would be crypto-UOJers.

You said According to that logic, it would make no sense for the Scripture to say that Christ is the Savior of all of men (1 Tim 4:10) since not all believe.
Have you heard of straw man arguments? You and Kilcrease seem to fall into this often. Whose logic are we talking about? Not my logic but yours. You make deductions for me, and make conclusions for me and then you demolish out the conclusion yourself. That is straw man. Have you ever read me making such arguments? These are not my arguments but yours.

Goodness, I do not make such logic because the over all teaching of Scripture says that God has set forth Jesus as the Saviour of the World. Do you mean if no one believes, that also means God has not done this setting forth of Jesus to be the Saviour of the World? That is another nonsense in logic on your part. You guys love A or NOT A and love doing reduction ad absurdum but you misapply it. Because your fallacy is false dichotomy. Jesus is still the Saviour of the World if no one ever believed it! There are tribal people who have not heard of Jesus yet, does that mean that God has not set forth Jesus to be Saviour towards these people?

The Scripture and the BoC echoes that the work of Jesus is a gift and an offer. UOJers believe God has no more wrath for the World because of Jesus' Atonement. UOJers do not take the nature of the Atonement as Covering. They think that God has already declared the WHOLE (wide) WORLD righteous already in Christ, but not all are in Christ so how can God declare the WHOLE WIDE WORLD ALREADY righteous in Christ? This is nonsense. UOJers imply that all are now under grace, even the atheist.

UOJers think there is no more war between God and Man. They mistake the cease fire as a pact of peace. So N. Korea and S. Korea by virtue that they do not exchange fire must be no longer at war. Nonsense. The two countries had a cease fire, that does not mean they are no longer at war. So is with God. God is witholding his wrath because of Jesus death for he could kill all of us at a whim. So I offer to the reader here 2 Peter 3 But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
8 But, beloved, do not forget this one thing, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some count slackness, but is longsuffering toward us,[b] not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance


I address the independent reader of these comments: To those who reject the offer, they blaspheme God and are confirmed in their condemnation by rejection of the Means of Grace. To those who believe, Romans 5:1 applies to them and are saved through the same Means of Grace.

You said I have no problem stating that without faith (ie knowledge, assent , and confidence that the finished work of Christ is for me) I will burn in hell forever
I know you do not have a problem, of course you don't because you have no problem being inconsistent and sophistic.

LPC

LPC said...

Steven,

Do you think Pieper or Walther would disagree that without repentance and faith the person is not absolved.

Don't be silly. They are not here to be interviewed. When people have been inconsistent they can go either way. The proper recourse is to tell where he went wrong and were he was right. Scripture teaches pick the good and throw the bad.

You said Again by this logic, saying Christ is the Savior of all men (1 Tim 4:11) would also be Antinomian.

See my comment on straw man arguments, that is your logic which you try to impose on me Romans 6:1.

I read me criticize antinomianism which results from even from Christian universalism so why would I conclude that even remotely Scripture teaches antinomianiss? So your suggestion does not even scratch my argument.

You said BTW have you read Marquart's paper on this?

If you are referring to the article referring to the Kokomo incident, yes I have, and one of the very first I read about UOJ controversy.

LPC

Steven Goodrich said...

Well I'm done. God's peace.

Brett Meyer said...

Through the grace, mercy and power of the Holy Spirit, children of God who are heirs to eternal life through faith alone stood boldly with lions and allowed themselves to be cut in two than to stop contending for and enduring in the one true Christian faith and doctrine. It is the Holy Spirit in us through faith that causes us to remain in the good fight until the Day is at hand.

Hebrews 11

And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets:

33 Who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions.

34 Quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies of the aliens.

35 Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection:

36 And others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment:

37 They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented;

38 (Of whom the world was not worthy:) they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth.

39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:

40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.

Brett Meyer said...

According to that logic, it would make no sense for the Scripture to say that Christ is the Savior of all of men (1 Tim 4:10) since not all believe.

All thorough UOJ discussions will lead to these Universalist statements. To claim that 1 Tim 4:10 declares all men to be saved by Christ is in perfect harmony with UOJ. UOJ shows itself as false by doing so and then when faced with this statement, the pure result of the doctrine, the UOJ proponents will then backtrack and say, "well, all men are saved, just not Heaven saved." (WELS CDS teacher)

Steven shows that UOJ is Universalism and by not following through with it, it also becomes a false twisted doctrine of Scriptural contradictions and absurdities.

Important to note that true Scriptural doctrine is foolishness to those who reject Christ's doctrine as taught in Scripture and defended in the Lutheran Confessions. No one understands or accepts it but by the Holy Spirit. Thus the true Justification by Faith alone doctrine will never be understood or accepted except the Holy Spirit lead that person into the truth and understanding. No other way. That's why an attack on UOJ should contain God's Law which convicts a person of sin by holding to and teaching false doctrine. It is this Law which the Holy Spirit uses to expose and condemn the false doctrine, working contrition, and the true Gospel message to work faith. Thus UOJists will naturally become angry because they do not have the comfort of the Holy Spirit grounded in the pure Word.

Matt Delves said...

Hey Lito,
I've updated my google account so you should be able to get an email address from that.

God bless,
Matt.

Steven Goodrich said...

I just want to point that I am not angry. I am just taking a break from this debate for now to focus on other things, and I feel that I really have nothing new to offer at this time.

LPC said...

Steven,

No worries.

LPC