Monday, February 25, 2013

UOJ - the source of antinomianism

UPDATED:
I have Evangelical friends in USA. I felt their shock when I told them I have become Lutheran.
What I know horrified them was the thought I have become antinomian. These friends of mine seeing Lutherans in their midst and how they behave, believe that Lutherans are antinomians.

To them, they are "anything goes" Christians. Well of course, anything will go. For if you have been taught that God has ALREADY forgiven you before you were born, before you even believe and before even the Sacraments got applied to you, why won't anything go? Why won't anything go if you are forgiven even before you could repent and even believe? What sin is there that would make you uneasy when that sin has already been forgiven even before you commit it? Nothing.

UOJ does not produce trust, or Biblical faith. Rather it produces assent similar to what the Devil has, an agreement. Notice how UOJers malign faith. Sometimes, I sense their real hatred for the concept.

Since UOJ does not produce faith and since it is to them believing already what is there, it does not bring a change in the one who has "faith". So by Biblical teaching, the faith they speak of does not justify and since there is no justification and there is no consequent sanctification. Hence antinomianism.

If there are American Lutherans who are bothered by the antinomianism in their camp, they should look at the tree,  and examine its fruit.

UPDATE:
Let me categorically say that lest you think antinomianism is my MAJOR objection to UOJ, then you are absolutely wrong about me. My MAJOR objection to UOJ is simple - it is CONTRARY to the Scripture and the Confessions. Antinomianism is just one of the fruits of a MAJOR error. For as can be expected false doctrine leads to false behavior.



16 comments:

Joe Krohn said...

Is this what you are getting at, Lito?

From Romans 1:

"...Jesus Christ our Lord, 5 through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations, 6 including you who are called to belong to Jesus Christ,..."

LPC said...

I am getting at 2 Cor 5:17

LPC.

Brett Meyer said...

You are correct Lito. While teaching a false object of the Holy Spirit's faith, replacing Christ with Justification already pronounced, they pervert the faith of Christ: Christ's righteousness, and turn it into a the withered hand of a beggar.

LPC said...

BM,

In UOJ there is no faith that converts the soul from being an unbeliever to a believer.

Their faith has no element of hope as defined by Heb 11:1. It is because they claim they are believing something already there which is not there in the first place. As we have amply discussed with them, the so called object of their faith is different as taught by Romans 3:21-25.

So their "faith" becomes a matter of assent, assent to the so called justification that has already happened in the past for them, so they say. St. James, says that such faith which is similar to a simple assent that God exists (note Justification for them already exists, finished) is similar to the unfaith of the devil.

So no change of heart really happens. No transfer from darkness to light.

Sad.


LPC

Gregory Jackson said...

The UOJ Enthusiasts quote Walther as if he were the last word in Lutheran doctrine, but they refuse to read, mark, and inwardly digest the writings of the Reformer himself. He would laugh Walther out of the room.

LPC said...

Yes Dr. Greg, What is this but similar to the RC of worshiping the saints. This is their idolatry.

LPC

Joe Krohn said...

I do not agree with your presentation of your perceived view of an objective justification, but be that as it may...

There is also the danger of going too far the other way, which I think you guys, especially Dr. Jackson are guilty of. Sometimes I think you take the obedience of faith to such an extreme that if one falters; and we all do; that one does not have the faith. This is at best legalistic where grace is ignored and obedience to the law is championed; or worse works righteousness!

How do you reconcile Romans 7:

"21 So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. 22 For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, 23 but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. 24 Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? 25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, I myself serve the law of God with my mind, but with my flesh I serve the law of sin."

I don't know, but I sin daily. How about you?

LPC said...

Sometimes I think you take the obedience of faith to such an extreme that if one falters; and we all do; that one does not have the faith.

It is you making that assumption or conclusion, not us because UOJ is allergic to faith.

Of course by Romans 7 a Christian is a sinner and saint. Of course I sin in word, thought and deed, not to admit that is contrary to 1 John 1:8.

However, UOJ mitigates against many Scriptures. An example is that UOJ will and does not promote the blessedness of being fearful of the Lord. The reason is because in UOJ all sins even before being committed have been forgiven. It immediately skips the payment of those sins and renders them already forgiven even before a person could repent or believe.

UOJ effectively does not promote the goodness of being fearful of God. In fact it works against it. In short IMHO UOJ produces an indifference to the possibility of grieving the HS.

I have observed UOJ pastors flaunt their liberty as an occasion to sin, even to the point of purposely offending others to parade their "liberty". For example a UOJ pastor said he purposely drinks wine in front of Evangelicals. Drinking wine is not a sin per se, I drink it in some occasions. But definitely purposely causing others to stumble - those who have weak consciences is - see Romans 14.

That to me is a bit arrogant.

LPC

Joe Krohn said...

"However, UOJ mitigates against many Scriptures. An example is that UOJ will and does not promote the blessedness of being fearful of the Lord. The reason is because in UOJ all sins even before being committed have been forgiven. It immediately skips the payment of those sins and renders them already forgiven even before a person could repent or believe.

UOJ effectively does not promote the goodness of being fearful of God. In fact it works against it. In short IMHO UOJ produces an indifference to the possibility of grieving the HS."

Lito, you have to understand that this is not a faithful rendering of justification from the objective sense. When you and your sect promote it this way, you are in just as much error as those who preach it that way. True faith creates remorse over sin and a willingness to change. OJ is there for the comfort of the one who is deeply disturbed by their sin; that their sins as well as all sin has forgiveness in Christ. It is irresponsible to teach OJ to an unrepentant believer.

LPC said...

Joe,

In this discussion let us assume we are talking about a UOJ believer.

It is irresponsible to teach OJ to an unrepentant believer.

But is it not the case that as per your UOJ, the unrepentant UOJ believer so called has been forgiven by God BEFORE he was born and before he could repent?

Do you not agree as per LC-MS 1932 Article 17... that 
Scripture 
teaches 
that 
God
 has
 already 
declared
 the 
whole
 world 
to
 be 
righteous 
in 
Christ.

Is it not the case that to be declared righteous is to be declared forgiven?


If so, the UOJ believer looks at his sin as already forgiven even before he commits it because he was forgiven even before he was born. Is that not the teaching of UOJ?

What we are talking about is the source of that antinomian attitude and I am saying, UOJ is a good source of that attitude.

If you want to deny that, then show why it is not or could not be a source of that antinomian attitude.

LPC

Joe Krohn said...

"But is it not the case that as per your UOJ, the unrepentant UOJ believer so called has been forgiven by God BEFORE he was born and before he could repent?"

No, Lito. He always has forgiveness objectively. If he is remorseful, he is forgiven. If not, he is in rejection of what he could have.

"Do you not agree as per LC-MS 1932 Article 17... that 
Scripture 
teaches 
that 
God
 has
 already 
declared
 the 
whole
 world 
to
 be 
righteous 
in 
Christ." No, I do agree. All men are righteous and by their 'free will' can reject this declaration.

"Is it not the case that to be declared righteous is to be declared forgiven?"

You do not understand 'pardon'. It is received in faith (by the HS) or denied by a man's 'free will'.

"If so, the UOJ believer looks at his sin as already forgiven even before he commits it because he was forgiven even before he was born. Is that not the teaching of UOJ?"

No. This is not truthful teaching of UOJ. It is antinomianism. I would have to ask if he is really a believer: i.e. values confession and absolution.

"What we are talking about is the source of that antinomian attitude and I am saying, UOJ is a good source of that attitude."

It is possible that a certain preaching and teaching of UOJ can go off the tracks...but then it would not be true UOJ preaching, but a preaching of universalism.

LPC said...

He always has forgiveness objectively. If he is remorseful, he is forgiven. If not, he is in rejection of what he could have.

The second part is not objective by the way you use that word. for to be objective means it is not subject to anything. So inconsistency there.

All men are righteous and by their 'free will' can reject this declaration.

Joe whatever happened to Psalm 116:11, Rom 3:23, 1 John 1:8.

If I can not make you see the inconsistency of claiming that all men are righteous(your statement), which the Scripture says is false, I have ran out of ways to convince you.

LPC

Joe Krohn said...

Your logic creates the inconsistency. I am surprised that by it you do not have a problem with the Holy Trinity.

The declaration of righteousness does not make them righteous. Faith does that, Lito. If a man stays in sin by his own volition, he is not free is he? That does not change the declaration.

LPC said...

My logic has no problem with the Trinity because it is Scriptural but perhaps why I have a problem with your inconsistecy is that it is inconsistent with Scripture.

What is disappointing with you is you do not back up your rationalistic assertions with Scripture. Notice how you answer this tread, you make all these pronouncements but we do not know at all if you have Scriptural basis for them.

All men are righteous and by their 'free will' can reject this declaration

Here is your inconsistency. I suggest maybe you meant to say "IN CHRIST". but that is wrong too because not ALL are in Christ.

So either way you go you wind up facing a wall.

LPC

Joe Krohn said...

I have used scripture many times in the past to no avail. You are too thick. What is the point? I thought I would reason with you, but you put words in my mouth instead and then disagree. I will cast pearls no more.

LPC said...

Joe,

I have used Scripture to you also before and yet again here I have used it. The word of the Lord is perfect, it converts the soul - Ps 19:7

Which attitude shown here really believes in the Means of Grace?

Casting pearls? The word of the Lord is like pearl but since you gave me none in this thread, you have not casted nor wasted yet anything of that on me.

I have shown how your inconsistent manner of speaking with regards to the subject and it has been me, I believe, who has been wasting Scripture on you since we know you have given me no Scripture at all.


LPC