Tuesday, October 09, 2012

Steadfast Huberites and their upside down Justification

This post is dedicated in honor of those Lutheran ministers who are today suffering for opposing the Huberian false doctrine of Universal Objective Justification.

Many visitors of this blog are now sick of me posting against the Huberism of UOJers but I speak for one reason – UOJ is not Biblical and it is an improper way of speaking about the central doctrine of the Christian Church. The BoC speaks a lot about speaking. In the BoC one will encounter the phrase “properly speaking” many times. As for me, I speak against UOJ because it is an old heresy from Samuel Huber. It is a false way of speaking about what God does and has done in relation to how a sinner is made right with God. I got no other agenda and I hold no animus to those I disagree with. 

A few months ago, the Steadfast Waltherians ran a post by Jim Pierce on their Doctrine of Justification. I say “their doctrine” because I do not believe it is the Biblical doctrine of justification that they hold. The article in question is found here.

I won’t go into the fine details but the reader should notice therein how Biblical concepts have been taken in isolation taking their cues from a denominational work called the LCMS Christian Cyclopaedia.  I liken this behavior to the Jehovah’s Witnesses expositing Biblical teachings using their New World Translation Bible.

I will cut to the chase and go down to the bottom summary of the post, where we read:

In wrapping up my answer, we can talk about the entire human race, or the world, being justified—just as the Scriptures do (Ro 4:25)—as the action God took in response to Jesus’ resurrection from the dead where the Law is concerned, as the following explains. The Law condemns the whole world (saint and sinner alike) and, because of Christ and what He did, the Law now has no hold on the whole world, since God receives the sacrifice of His Son which atones for each and every sin and thereby the requirements of the Law are fully satisfied by Christ. When we talk about the sins of the world being absolved, or forgiven, we are talking about a reality that holds for the world in Christ. That reality is excellent news for everyone, since it means we are not justified by our own works of the Law, but by God’s grace alone, through faith alone in Christ Jesus. Indeed, Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us and received by faith alone; thereby we are justified by what we Lutherans like to describe as the “alien righteousness of Christ” which is outside us, or not our own.

I got so many things to say but I will home in on the statements I have highlighted above. These statements are contrary to the Holy Scripture.

Firstly when Mr. Pierce said, “the Law now has no hold on the whole world”, what are we to make of this antinomian thesis? It is a perversion of the Law and bulldozers no less than two Biblical texts that come to mind…

a.)   Romans 6:14 says 14 For sin shall not have dominion over you: for ye are not under the law, but under grace. Who are those not under the Law? It is not the whole world. The “you” in the verse does not refer to generic human beings; rather it refers to “you, the (Roman) Christians who believe in Christ”. They are the ones who are not under the Law since they have become believers in Christ so they are now under God’s grace.
b.)    The other passage is Romans 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.
What the post suggests is that since Jesus Christ died for the whole world, that means the world is no longer under the Law and thus not under condemnation. This is not true, why would God send people to perdition? This idea runs contrary to 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.

Let me resurrect A. Hunnius against Pierce …
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? (Muslims?), Reprobate Jews?

So now we come to the second part, Pierce continued saying… Indeed, Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us and received by faith alone.

Note now the intent of this statement, this implies the imputation of Christ’s righteousness has already happened to all and this is now a matter of believing to receive. Note further that another concept tied up to justification is the imputation of the righteousness of Christ.
Pierce and Co are indeed putting confusion to where there should be none, for what is the point of receiving already what has already been imparted – righteousness of Christ? To Pierce and his cohorts, this precedes faith and when believed nothing fresh happens to you, you are simply believing what has always been there, no new creation is being created.  This is a perversion of the Scriptural teaching on imputation of righteousness i.e. Justification. For in toto, these people believe that the imputation of Christ’s righteousness or Justification, happened already first apart from faith when Christ died and was raised.

Let us see what the Scripture says here, recall Romans 4
: 21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform. 22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness. 23 Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him; 24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; 25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification
 Thinking and Bible literate Christians will not deny that the imputation of righteousness on Abraham happened not before he believed but at the point of his believing. In fact even old orthodox Lutherans would oppose Pierce’s understanding. An example of this is Quenstedt (credits:Ichabod)

Let me again resurrect A. Hunnius against these Waltherian-Huberites for indeed these UOJ defenders believe in a Justification that already occurred apart from faith and before faith came to be… What does Hunnius say regarding this matter?

 Thesis 5
...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 especially as Galatians 2 plainly says, "Man is not justified except by faith in Jesus Christ."

Incidentally since UOJers love Romans 4:25 as their champion verse proving a justification that occurred to all mankind, we can now quote Hunnius who says that Romans 4 included, knows of no justification that has occurred before people were born or before they believe. By this quote we can once again dismiss that UOJ is a Huberite revivalism since for them Romans 4 knows of a justification apart from faith.



Joe Krohn said...

I don't think Jim Pierce is going to answer...so don't hold your breath there, buddy.

I posed a question on LQ earlier today. While I am waiting for a response...let me ask it here:

Who do the sins of the world belong to?

Gregory L. Jackson said...

I enjoyed seeing my graphic, Dr. Cruz. Did you know there is a tool for getting rid of formatting from the copy and paste? In the compose mode it it is T with the red x. I use that a lot now. At other times I copy and paste into WordPad, then copy and paste that into the blog. WordPad does not recognize html and drops it.

LPC said...

Dr. Greg,

Thanks for the tip, that will certainly help in my copying and pasting from the web next time.


LPC said...


I never for a moment expected Pierce to answer but I am concerned for people like you who took on his argument and returned to what you have vomited.

To answer your question, I quote to you
2 Corinthians 5:21
For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

Did you get that Joe, the statement does not stop at the semi-colon. It goes on.

The Gospel is the Word of promise that Jesus took away our sins but if we do not believe in the work and merits of Christ we remain in our sins.

Whereas our sins have been imputed to him, his righteousness needs to be imputed to us. Justification subsumes forgiveness of sins but it also means the righteousness of Christ must be imputed to us too. These two events are not simultaneous which you UOJers like Pierce teach.


Now I shall prove that you are a Huberite.

In the previous post I said this:

ME: "Joe it is different because Brett and I do not believe in the starting point that there is justification that has happened FOR all men without faith or without regard to faith. That is difference. The difference is that we do not posit or assert a universal justification."

You: You are speaking against Romans 4:25.

Therefore you know in Romans 4 of a justification that does not involve faith.

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

Did you read that Joe, Romans 4 as per Hunnius, does not know of a righteousness apart from faith, this includes Romans 4:25 since it is part of Romans 4 thus, apparently like Huber you do know.

Conclusion: You are a Huberite by that assertion you just made above.

Joe Krohn said...

C'mon, Lito. To call me a Huberite is to call me a Universalist...really?

Look again at what you wrote:

"The Gospel is the Word of promise that Jesus took away our sins but if we do not believe in the work and merits of Christ we remain in our sins.(JK-Now who is speaking gobbily gook? Is this not what OJ teaches????)

Whereas our sins have been imputed to him, his righteousness needs to be imputed to us.(JK-I agree!!! If the sins have been taken away as you have established; even imputed to Christ as you say, it is an objective acquittal of those sins...couldn't you say this according to your words? This is the declaration of objective righteousness towards the human race; the redemption and reconciliation...you just admitted it by the imputation of sins to Christ regardless of faith.) Justification subsumes forgiveness of sins but it also means the righteousness of Christ must be imputed to us too."(JK-This is what comes through FAITH!!!)

LPC said...


You said This is the declaration of objective righteousness towards the human race; the redemption and reconciliation...you just admitted it by the imputation of sins to Christ regardless of faith.

No I have not admitted nor conceded to you on this.

The imputation of our sins to Christ is not the same as the imputation of his righteousness to me nor to the world.

This is where you are tangled up. Did you look at
a.) The blog post link? I have written about this many moons ago.
b.) Did you look at the Quenstedt graphics provided by Ichabod, where Quenstedt.speaks about the two imputations are not the same thing?

IMHO I believe you are misunderstanding Jesus' words specifically this is the reason why he could say John 8:24
I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins

Like Huber you believe in a justification without regard to faith and you get this idea from Romans 4:25, a mishandling of the text. You quoted this verse to me in fact in the last blog post.

Yet Hunnius says in Thesis 6, that Romans 3 and 4, know of no justification . Hunnius' teaching contradicts you and the rest of your mates, Pierce and Kilcrease.


Joe Krohn said...

No, Lito. I am beginning to see the semantics in this. You say the sins of the world are imputed to Christ and yet the sinner in unbelief dies in his sins. And yet you accuse 'UOJers' of claiming a God forgives and then un-forgives. Please explain this.

LPC said...


Because you claim that there is a justification that has already occurred without faith. You said it is Romans 4:25. Justification mean forgiveness of sins and the imputation of righteousness of Christ. And then you require faith to be truly forgiven and if the person does not believe the first absolution or the first justification then the person goes to hell.

Your problems all along in this is that you posit a justification which occurred without faith.

I for one deny that there was a justification that occurred prior to faith. There was atonement but atonement is not the same as justification. You heard that before from us, what is hard to understand. Which point is it that you do not get?

Read my post...

Can I give you a friendly advice, why don't you read, reflect and think about it first then go use your keyboard. You seem like a cowboy, you shoot with your keyboard and ask questions later.

Why do you keep interacting with us, when in fact we have gone around this block ad infinitum, are you thick or something? (Sorry I can not help but use that word, I got no other way to describe your behaviour).

Why? Do you also want to believe in only one justification through faith like we do?


Joe Krohn said...

You need to read Dr. Kilcrease again and let it sink in. You are not realizing that the Confessions do not address the Election controversies in American Lutheranism. Do you not think that the devil continues to invent new ways to attack the church? You are helping the devil by your inflexibility. Now who is being the thick one who is inflexible?

LPC said...


Inflexibility? SO called flexibility is the elastic method of Romanists that is why they are able to invent new doctrines. See the pattern you are in?

You are reading the wrong guy. I do not even think you are reading your Bible.

Joe, forget Lutheran 101, do Logic 101 first you have no clue when I bring up the fallacy of Kilcrease.

In this discussion I have shown you that the Jesus you have is not the Jesus of the Bible, are you not bothered with that? You rail against faith when in fact Jesus spoke so much about it , he authors it and perfects it.

I think you just want to hear yourself speak, you do not bother reading the comments to you, I know it hurts your senses, the truth is like that, so like the sun, your eyes are not able to stare at it.

Truth is good for you Joe, it will set you free.

What I am inflexible, so you want me to be flexible so I can give room to false doctrine like you have? You want me to give place to the devil, you want me to be flexible with false doctrine??? So you want me to compromise? That is funny.

Pardon me while ROFMFALOLing.

Hahahahaha, you are funny Joe, you are very funny. I am teary eyed of laughter as I type this. No kidding and no offense meant but your comment is packed with hilarity.


Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel said...


As I sit here and read you and Krohn go at it, I am pleased that you can find some amusement in the exchange.

For me, however, I see Mr. Krohn struggling to maintain a belief which must bring to him some solace as he seems to be one who desires to be on the majority side.

I will admit that we "justification by faith alone" crowd are in the minority; but, that reality has no bearing on Scriptural reality. As you say, Scripture does not know of a justification without faith. Somehow Krohn and his UOJ cronies think they have found their needle in the haystack and they are more than happy to bray like jackasses.

Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel


LPC said...

Pr. Nathan,

Well, there is a lot of comfort in numbers, this is of course a very worldly wisdom.

Jesus in the minority is enough for me. The numbers do not mean that God is with the many. Not necessarily.

It is the truth that counts. As St. Paul said, we can only stand with the truth.


Pastor emeritus Nathan Bickel said...


I agree -

As you say:

"It is the truth that counts. As St. Paul said, we can only stand with the truth." [Your spot on assessment]

Joe Krohn said...

To continue to falsely present the doctrine of Justification; even set up caricatures; straw men and then knock them down while continuing in your self inflicted ignorance is about as amusing as watching grown men soil themselves in public.

LPC said...


That is what your UOJ mentors like you to believe and what you want to believe.

There is no caricature. You believe that Romans 4:25 teaches that human beings have been justified at the resurrection of Jesus from the dead, a finished event and without reference to faith.

In that respect you share Huber's misunderstanding.

I presented to you Hunnius' Thesis 6. He says St. Paul knows of no justification with out faith in Romans 4.

This is high school algebra. The property of a set is also the property of its subset.

Hunnius says Romans 4 knows no justification with out faith. v. 25 is part of Romans 4, therefore, Roman 4:25 does not teach justification without faith.

What is the caricature or straw man there? You were pressed for Scripture evidence for your UOJ and you cited Romans 4:25. I did not bring that up. Just look at the above comments here.