tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post5605585220762087438..comments2024-02-27T00:11:57.219+11:00Comments on Extra Nos: Why we need Dr. IchabodLPChttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11352627830833515548noreply@blogger.comBlogger52125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-91299973473565892792010-12-16T22:47:20.628+11:002010-12-16T22:47:20.628+11:00PAS,
I stand corrected. You did quote the BoC to ...PAS,<br /><br />I stand corrected. You did quote the BoC to me. The reason why I missed your point is because you managed to flood me with comments.Nevertheless I should have read all of them and so I am corrected. My apologies. However, when I re-read them, I fail to find the relevance of some of the discussions. In fact I have tried to move you forward to concrete realities, like my question if I was in the true church or not. Did you ever answer them inspite of my welcoming your frank assessment? No, no un-categorical statements forthcoming from you. So where do we go if we are going to be thin skin at every turn? Nowhere.<br /><br /><br />A few points before we agree to disagree. I am quite insulted at your calling Jackson as my hero. I have no heroes. Heroes are for those who are childish and have no energy to think for themselves. I am in my mid 50s and I have seen quite a lot of goings on in Christianity. I do not wish to be disillusioned by holy men, and certainly Walther nor Pieper won't be in my list though the may have said good things at some issues, I still wont quote them.<br /><br />You said <i>Your closed mindedness has caused you to lie, to deny what is before your eyes in black and white.</i><br /><br />Where exactly have I lied? If it was failing to credit you for some BoC quotes, I stand corrected.<br /><br />But if I misrepresented you in any other way, I do not think so, for I quoted to you back to you, your own words. For example you said this <i>You actually ignored what I said and changed it to something that I DID NOT SAY. I did not say that a believer is UNDER God’s wrath. I said that God’s wrath is still EXPERIENCED by the saints. I said that both the Scriptures and the Confessions say this. I can quote a number of places in the Confessions that very plainly say this and I started looking them up to quote for you. But since you have completely ignored my other quotes from the Confessions and gave absolutely no reply to them, what is the point?</i><br /><br />One reason it will be hard to converse with you is because you do not spot equivocation when you meet it. You said that you did not say the believer is under God's wrath and that you said instead that the saints still experience God's wrath! So there is a difference between being under God's wrath and experiencing God's wrath? What is the difference?<br /><br />If a saint is EXPERIENCING God's wrath is he not UNDER God's wrath? For if he is NOT UNDER God's wrath, why, pray tell me, please, does he STILL EXPERIENCES God's wrath (emphasis mine)?<br /><br />To the contrary, I jab at both meanings of the two. I deny that the saint still experiences God's wrath (even in the technical sense) neither is he under God's wrath. Rather what he experiences is discipline not anger. Incidentally I would like to see Scripture that says the saint experiences God's wrath.<br /><br />You exhibit the same attitude of UOJers who have come to exchange with me and in that when I ask for Scriptural evidences, they cry foul and consign my soul to the same fate as that of Jacksons, to the damned.<br /><br />I am still at a loss as to how I treated you badly. Am I mistreating you when I ask for some Scriptural support for your assertions when it comes to our differences?<br /><br />Your thesis is that the doctrine of the church is where the Lutheran bodies went wrong and not at UOJ. For me it is UOJ that is the culprit and that the Lutheran bodies then need Reformation as before. If you posit the fact that JBFA is not truly taught and that faith is lampooned, for it is faith that makes one in the true Church then there is more sense and clarification on your doctrine of the Church <br /><br />LPCLPChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11352627830833515548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-19646250550925134872010-12-16T17:21:59.033+11:002010-12-16T17:21:59.033+11:00LPC,
Perhaps someday it will be possible for you ...LPC,<br /><br />Perhaps someday it will be possible for you and me to have a real conversation. However, currently your heart is so hard towards me with the prejudice that you have toward me, that you cannot even see the direct quotes from the BOC. You are so convinced in your heart and mind that I have nothing to offer on this subject, that you prejudge my statements without even attempting to hear what I say. Your mind is so closed to me that even regarding the quote that includes the page number from the Tappert Edition of the BOC, you deny that even this quote was made by me.<br /><br />Dr. Jackson does the same thing to people. Unless a person comes to him as the supreme authority who cannot err, unless he is acknowledged as the professor given by God to men for their correct teaching in all things, he will not hear what the person says.<br /><br />Your closed mindedness has caused you to lie, to deny what is before your eyes in black and white.<br /><br />I point you to this in the hope that perhaps you may someday actually learn to hear what someone actually says, rather than ignoring it on account of prejudice. Even if the other person is wrong in his conclusions, it remains a lie to say that what he said was not said.<br /><br />Dr. Jackson is entirely unable to hear when he is in violation of the Eighth Commandment. Perhaps this is not so for you. Just because you or your hero believes that someone else is wrong does not grant license to giving false witness. Jackson gives false witness galore. If anyone calls him on it, he slanders/libels the person and multiplies his false witness a hundred fold. He even takes other people’s copyrighted pictures, changes them without telling anyone, and falsely presents them as representative of the person or group. The fact that the others may be liars and thieves does not make that OK. But he defends his sins and multiplies them rather than turning from them and receiving forgiveness.<br /><br />For your sake I pray that your heart is not as hard as his. I pray that you have not made such an idol of him that you cannot see where imitating him in this is sinful and damning. You are imitating him in this, and not just with your mistreatment of me.<br /><br />If you wish to have any further conversation with me, you will need to contact me directly. I will not respond further on your blog.Not Alone +++ PAShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07176295519558694481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-85759966255922805992010-12-16T15:57:47.413+11:002010-12-16T15:57:47.413+11:00PAS,
Quote the BoC to me? Where are the articles ...PAS,<br /><br />Quote the BoC to me? Where are the articles and paragraphs? Rather I quote back to you that though the BoC does not use the terms visible and invisible - by the way you also used this term (read again your comments to me) which you want to deny me, which is not in the BOC yet In AP Articles VII and VIII 12, it is implied. You do special pleading here which is rather unfair.<br /><br />So I do not know now the gist of your arguments.<br /><br />You also have ignored my clarification as to how to I know if I am in the "true church" (your term) as whether or not I am in it or not. I invited you to tell me if I am or if I am not and I welcome any assessments that you may have.<br /><br /><br />Finally you said <i> I said that God’s wrath is still EXPERIENCED by the saints.</i><br /><br />NO the saints do not experience God's wrath. I deny and challenge what you said. I pose to you that it is not an accurate teaching of Scripture. The believing sinner is under God's grace nor does the believing sinner experiences God's wrath. <br /><br /><br />God's discipline is not the same as God's wrath! God disciplines his children in fact he is not like we parents who discipline our children out of anger. God's wrath is anger, and yet he has no anger to the believing sinner who trust in Jesus despite his sins. Discipline and wrath are not the same.<br /><br />LPCLPChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11352627830833515548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-84081312361364077662010-12-15T17:45:02.999+11:002010-12-15T17:45:02.999+11:00LPC,
I’ve had to set this aside for a time, and t...LPC,<br /><br />I’ve had to set this aside for a time, and this will be my last response.<br /><br />You say:<br /><br />“I confess, I am not happy as to the way you use the word "Church" in your discussion. You need to define this and define it such a way that it clarifies mistaken notion about it which is what your main thesis is about.”<br /><br />I gave a full and direct quote from Luther’s Large Catechism and another from the Augsburg Confession regarding the definition of the Church. The rest of my comments are in accord with both of these. No where do the Lutheran Confessions speak contrarily to these. In fact, the invisible church concept is not mentioned in the Book of Concord.<br /><br />Your arguments are actually akin to those of Francis Pieper. Interestingly, he mocks those who speak of both “a visible and invisible side” to the Church, saying that they are both modern and confuse the marks of the Church. Even more interestingly, he does not give any quotations from the Lutheran Confessions. His quotes from the Scriptures he entirely misuses, actually changing the meaning of what they say.<br /><br /><br />You also say:<br />+++<br />Second, you said this, In particular, he seems to ignore the fact that both the Scriptures and the Confessions speak of God’s wrath still being experienced by the saints. In other words, he seems to forget the reality of the juxtaposition of simul iustus et peccator.<br /><br />I pose to you that you are the one mistaking the notion of what simul iustus et peccator means.<br /><br />I deny that a believer is both under God's wrath and under God's blessing.<br />+++<br /><br />You actually ignored what I said and changed it to something that I DID NOT SAY. I did not say that a believer is UNDER God’s wrath. I said that God’s wrath is still EXPERIENCED by the saints. I said that both the Scriptures and the Confessions say this. I can quote a number of places in the Confessions that very plainly say this and I started looking them up to quote for you. But since you have completely ignored my other quotes from the Confessions and gave absolutely no reply to them, what is the point?<br /><br />You are right to say that when you deliberately ignore what I say that we cannot go forward. When you change my words to fit your desire to attack something other than what I say, we also cannot go forward. So I’ll just back away and leave you alone.Not Alone +++ PAShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07176295519558694481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-66284342640208099822010-12-13T14:37:55.772+11:002010-12-13T14:37:55.772+11:00Levi,
Thanks for the input.
It is a sad show that...Levi,<br /><br />Thanks for the input.<br />It is a sad show that those who prejudge Pr. Greg have never thoroughly examined the aspects of his ministry specially on the sermon side of things.<br /><br />LPCLPChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11352627830833515548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-48941629094113129242010-12-13T12:19:30.797+11:002010-12-13T12:19:30.797+11:00I thought I might add that I find Pastor Jackson&#...I thought I might add that I find Pastor Jackson's sermon today for the Third Sunday in Advent to be very pastoral. There was both law and gospel. I was reminded of my sin and still could take comfort in the gospel promises. The many quotes that show up on the blog related to the sermon are not actually said during the video. But, I find them to be useful and edifying too.Levi Powershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00210781118539325163noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-58602095544517141172010-12-12T19:31:30.364+11:002010-12-12T19:31:30.364+11:00PAS,
You said In Christ, who has taken all sin in...PAS,<br /><br />You said <i>In Christ, who has taken all sin into Himself to such an extent that He Himself who knew no sin was made to be sin, I do not impute to your sin to you. In Christ I declare you all to be free from sin and entirely righteous to come into My holiness, in which no sin can come.</i><br /><br />These are your paraphrases of which I wonder where you get the Scripture from. No disrespect, these are your words and not an evidence from Scripture. So paraphrases etc and other rendition are not relevant. Give me exegesis from Scripture. Like I said, also, God declares anyone in Christ to be righteous, this does not apply to the whole world because the whole world in toto does not believe in Christ. John 3:16.<br /><br />Additionally some fallacies in the last comment you made... here it goes - your self contradiction is evident here<br /><br />a.) <i>The false church is easily identified as antichrist in accord with its false doctrine and practice, and the saints are admonished to mark and avoid and even to flee it</i><br /><br />The you say<br />b.)<i>The true pretenders, however, we cannot perceive.</i><br /><br />We cannot move forward because you allow yourself to contradict ... yourself.<br /><br />So you are not making sense here.<br /><br />More now to the point... are you in this True Church? Is your congregation in this True Church/ Is Jackson not in this True Church? Am I not in this True Church?<br /><br />Lest you think I am thin skinned, I am not. I have been called a heretic by lots of RCs and Lutherans, you won't be the first one to call me that so, I can stand name calling, believe me and I take no offense.<br /><br />LPCLPChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11352627830833515548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-61419512638027864102010-12-12T09:12:15.451+11:002010-12-12T09:12:15.451+11:00PAS,
I am flooded by your comments. The best way ...PAS,<br /><br />I am flooded by your comments. The best way to proceed is let us take assertions and then match or prove the assertions compatible with Scripture.<br /><br />So let us take it one bite at a time.<br /><br />I confess, I am not happy as to the way you use the word "Church" in your discussion. You need to define this and define it such a way that it clarifies mistaken notion about it which is what your main thesis is about.<br /><br />Second, you said this <i>In particular, he seems to ignore the fact that both the Scriptures and the Confessions speak of God’s wrath still being experienced by the saints. In other words, he seems to forget the reality of the juxtaposition of simul iustus et peccator.</i><br /><br />I pose to you that you are the one mistaking the notion of what simul iustus et peccator means.<br /><br />I deny that a believer is both under God's wrath and under God's blessing.<br /><br />Romans 6. The believer by being simultaneous saint and sinner, nevertheless is not under God's wrath because he is under God's grace, under Christ.<br /><br />To admit as you do that the believer is both under God's wrath and favor is to admit absurdity.<br /><br />All of us are sinners but there are two kinds - the sinner who does not trust Christ for his sins, and the sinner who DOES trust Christ for his sins. Everyone is either one of these.<br /><br />I think right there we have something to clarify. Perhaps we should deal with this first before we even go to the notion of what Church is.<br /><br />Sorry, I am not implying you purposely lied, when I was checking no equivocation. Equivocation is using the same term in two contrary senses. A person may be unaware to be in error like before St Paul was converted, but he was not a malefactor. So I am not accusing you of anything. Far from that. <br /><br />I see you as also challenging me and I see you as an honest and sincere person wanting an exchange.<br /><br />LPCLPChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11352627830833515548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-2111383659597221082010-12-12T03:28:58.547+11:002010-12-12T03:28:58.547+11:00Regarding the visible and invisible Church confusi...Regarding the visible and invisible Church confusion, while I appreciate the worthy attempts that Augustine and Luther and others have made, they actually state the matter backwards. It is not the true Church that is invisible, but the pretend Church that we cannot perceive.<br /><br />The false church is easily identified as antichrist in accord with its false doctrine and practice, and the saints are admonished to mark and avoid and even to flee it. The True Church likewise is very visible, marked by God with His pure administration of the Gospel and the Sacraments. No where do the Scriptures ever speak otherwise. The Scriptures only speak of instances where the Church was forced to go underground, so that men like Elijah imagined themselves to be entirely alone.<br /><br />The true pretenders, however, we cannot perceive. They are hidden from our sight as they gather with the true Visible Church on earth. They confess alongside the true saints word for word the True faith. They partake of the Sacraments alongside the true saints, acknowledging the efficacious nature of what God has ordained. From all that we can observe, they are true saints. Often, as the Lord Jesus declares, even they are unable to tell that they are not true believers. The Lord Jesus says that at the Last Day even they will be surprised to learn that they were really workers of iniquity. So it is the perfect hypocrite church that is invisible to everyone except to the Lord.<br /><br />But the true Church is very visible. It is easy for the world to persecute. They stand apart, marked by God with easily distinguishable signs, signs that are entirely opposite of anything that human reason will imagine or acknowledge, except through divine intervention by the Holy Spirit.Not Alone +++ PAShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07176295519558694481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-13345376146096063642010-12-12T03:25:49.020+11:002010-12-12T03:25:49.020+11:00God says to all the world:
In Christ, who has tak...God says to all the world:<br /><br />In Christ, who has taken all sin into Himself to such an extent that He Himself who knew no sin was made to be sin, I do not impute to your sin to you. In Christ I declare you all to be free from sin and entirely righteous to come into My holiness, in which no sin can come. I have provided for you the means by which I place this declaration upon you and receive you as My sons to live everlastingly in this declaration of My Righteousness. Come and receive the New Life that is yours in Christ Jesus, My Son. Come! Nothing is required of you. In Christ I have redeemed you all and have reconciled you all to Myself once again. Come and receive that which I have declared in Christ to be yours! Come and receive the absolution that I have declared to be yours! Trust Me! Believe Me. It IS yours!<br /><br />However, if you blaspheme My Holy Spirit and refuse His testimony so that you die apart from the Life that I have given you in the giving of My only-begotten Son for the purpose of saving the world and restoring faith to the world, clinging instead to the way of death that you have inherited from Adam, stubbornly holding to the rotting and stinking works and life that you produce for yourselves, you will indeed receive the final judgment that you yourselves have chosen and pronounced upon yourselves. If you die rejecting My gracious declaration in Christ, you shall surely receive the judgment that you have chosen in place of the Judgment that I have spoken through My Son! Therefore, come and hear it forevermore: In Christ Jesus I declare you to be righteous and holy, even as I am.Not Alone +++ PAShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07176295519558694481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-25599813442267235332010-12-12T03:22:51.088+11:002010-12-12T03:22:51.088+11:00Dear LPC,
Before moving forward, I need to speak ...Dear LPC,<br /><br />Before moving forward, I need to speak to your statement where you say:<br /><br />“However, I want to be sure you are not equivocating.”<br /><br />I checked two dictionaries multiple times to be sure that I was hearing you rightly. I had to check to be sure that you were actually saying that you suspect that I am presenting conniving lies. That was a bit hard to swallow.<br /><br />I had to remember that the Scriptures consign all men to being liars. I had to remember that the very nature of theological debate is one of challenging one another to consider carefully whether or not lies are being told in the form of mistakes.<br /><br />I also remembered that the very concept of UOJ is one that has been used wrongly and even deceptively. You are certainly right in saying that UOJ is not a new concept and that opposition to UOJ is not new. However, both are much older than you are acknowledging.<br /><br />Having heard your accusation against me, I want to thank you for your challenge. You are wrong in your suspicion, but you nevertheless have pressed me to dig even more deeply into the words of Scripture, which is always a good thing.<br /><br />I read more closely Maier’s Summary. I find that he makes both good points and bad assumptions, or omissions. One of the things that I noticed is that while he quotes the Scriptures and the Confessions, he does not truly listen to what he quotes. In particular, he seems to ignore the fact that both the Scriptures and the Confessions speak of God’s wrath still being experienced by the saints. In other words, he seems to forget the reality of the juxtaposition of simul iustus et peccator.<br /><br />Another of the flaws in the reasoning of those who misuse and misapply UOJ from both sides of the argument is the failure to understand and acknowledge the fact that God speaks from eternity. This has led to misunderstanding in other articles of doctrine as well, e.g. predestination and the begottenness of the Son.<br /><br />God speaks from eternity to His time-bound and time oriented creatures. There is only one man who is able to understand from the perspective of eternity, that is the man Christ Jesus. All the rest of us must hear God speak through His Son, in time. Thus, as soon as we apply our own time oriented reasoning, we distort the declarations of God. This is why, as Maier points out, that people are inclined to invent a double justification and presume a separation between what is called Objective and Subjective. They fail to see that the two are one declaration proclaimed from eternity, from what we perceive as being before time began, but in reality includes all time. For God declares Himself to be. He is and He was and He ever shall be. He does not change. His declarations are from everlasting to everlasting.<br /><br />And what does He say?Not Alone +++ PAShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07176295519558694481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-26209327937593391892010-12-07T12:32:23.184+11:002010-12-07T12:32:23.184+11:00PAS,
Thanks for these. Your position seems clear ...PAS,<br /><br />Thanks for these. Your position seems clear enough. However, I want to be sure you are not equivocating.<br /><br />Do you believe UOJ as taught by the quote I give you is Biblical? <br /><br />If the statement was "Scripture teaches that those who are in Christ are counted righteous", I would agree, but that is not what the LC-MS statement states.<br /><br />How can God has already declared the whole world righteous when in fact the whole world is not in Christ?!<br /><br />You said ...<i>Yet among the Lutherans it is commonly taught that one can confess and worship falsely and be saved.</i><br /><br />Yes because they believe in UOJ which is semi-universalism. If you are saved already before faith then faith did nothing to you.<br /><br />On the Church. <br /><br />Luther distinguished between the visible church and the invisible church and rightly I agree the True Church are only the people who truly believe in Christ - ie. JBFA.<br /><br />However, since we do not know for sure who truly believes, the task is to convert the visible to always be part of the invisible church.<br /><br />To your thesis, I would modify, rather if JBFA is truly taught rather than the false imagined myth of UOJ, then the goats either get converted to being sheep or they are kept in their state of being goats for the means of grace does this - it is saves those who repent and believe and damns those who reject what is being offered.<br /><br />UOJ is basically semi-universalism and this promotes the propagation of false believers. If we also teach then that only those who believe in Christ alone are saved, then it is the means also to purify the visible church.<br /><br />I guess my problem is that you do not see any distinction as a category of a visible church which Luther made.<br /><br />I agree though that the sharpening of faith should be emphasized. It is UOJ itself that denigrates faith and hence, how can the Church be purified if the very means to make her pure lampoons that means? For JBFA defines who is in and who is not in Christ!<br /><br />Correct me if I am wrong, my interpretation of your position is to extract out from the visible church - the invisible one.<br /><br /><br />LPCLPChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11352627830833515548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-32030562611415463762010-12-07T04:00:16.023+11:002010-12-07T04:00:16.023+11:00The confusion within the matter of UOJ is further ...The confusion within the matter of UOJ is further complicated by the idolatrous notion that “not judging the hearts of others” means that we can declare contrary to the clear teaching of the Scriptures that those who openly confess falsely cannot be judged as outside of God’s grace. For the Scriptures plainly say:<br /><br />That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. (Romans 10:9-10)<br /><br />Yet among the Lutherans it is commonly taught that one can confess and worship falsely and be saved.<br /><br />This is a false definition of Church. This is a false definition of the faith and of worship. This is idolatry, making a savior of one’s own faith, rather than of the Spirit of the Lord Jesus which leads us to confess Jesus is Lord from the righteousness of Jesus that the Holy Spirit imparts to us in our hearts through the faith that He generates within us.<br /><br />And this is why UOJ is taught. It is a facade or veneer that hides the false definitions of Church and faith and worship. If Lutherans still believed with Luther that the Church is on earth a little holy flock or community of pure saints under one head, Christ, called together by the Holy Spirit in one faith, mind, and understanding, if this were their definition of Church, then UOJ would not even be considered an issue. If Lutherans believed that the Church is defined as the place where false doctrine and those who confess it are condemned so that they may be turned to confess unto salvation by the pure administration of the Gospel and Sacraments, UOJ would not even be considered as it is currently taught and used. It is a smoke screen and a diversion from the false understanding of Church. It is an excuse used to avoid the truth that the Church is truly only a tiny little flock of true believers, a remnant torn by God from the broadly spread cloak of humanity.Not Alone +++ PAShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07176295519558694481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-1177623638146460892010-12-07T03:10:59.537+11:002010-12-07T03:10:59.537+11:00How can the right understanding of Justification b...How can the right understanding of Justification by Grace through Faith be embraced and taught if those who teach it are called schismatics, while those who teach contrarily are called Church? This is not what the Scriptures teach.<br /><br />UOJ is not the problem. UOJ is a symptom of the problem. The problem is that Lutherans continue to be unequally yoked and imagine that such a communion is the Church wherein Christ can be simultaneously embraced and denied. If Lutherans would turn from this false notion, UOJ would no longer be a problem.<br /><br />It is true that hypocrites will gather with true believers, pretending to believe when they really do not. But those hypocrites are NOT the Church. Moreover, the hypocrites mentioned in AC VIII are those who do not openly teach and practice contrary to the pure doctrine and practice of the true Church. The reason that they continue with the believers is that their mask of pretense covers what resides in their hearts. Otherwise they would be known as unbelievers and would be excommunicated. AC VIII is written for the sake of timid souls who would fear ineffectiveness of otherwise rightly administered means of grace by those who pretend so well that they cannot be distinguished from true believers. It most certainly does not include the goats as being part of the Church, only that some goats look like sheep so that we cannot distinguish them from the sheep.<br /><br />Those who encourage or tolerate remaining in church bodies that openly tolerate or even promote the mingling of false doctrine and practices do not understand what it means to be the Church and therefore are not of the Church. If they were of the Church, they would gather with the Church rather than with the known hypocrites, even it they could only find two or three true Christians to call Church, even as Jesus declares, and they would teach and urge all true Christians so to do.Not Alone +++ PAShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07176295519558694481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-67457478796988117602010-12-07T03:09:19.252+11:002010-12-07T03:09:19.252+11:00Your application of the maxim regarding the Church...Your application of the maxim regarding the Church standing and falling upon the article of Justification falls short as much as do the UOJ proponents. While it is true that the Church falls if the article of Justification is embraced wrongly, this article does not stand alone. The proper flow is quite wonderfully ordered in the Augsburg Confession. It begins with God, then Original Sin, then the Son of God, then Justification, then The Office of the Ministry/Church, and so on.<br /><br />The right understanding of Justification cannot be held apart from a right understanding of God, Sin, Son of God. Moreover, Justification cannot be taught rightly except through the pure administration of the Gospel and Sacraments within the pure ministry of the Church. The true faith by which men are saved and brought into the kingdom of God cannot stand with corruption of any of the articles of the faith.<br /><br />You say:<br /><br />“I think your thesis of a pure church rans counter against Jesus and Luther who believed that the church has both sheep and goat, both hypocrites and believers. What do you say to that?”<br /><br />This is a typical example of how Lutherans have redefined the Church. I quote Luther above as saying:<br /><br />“I believe that there is on earth a little holy flock or community of pure saints under one head, Christ. It is called together by the Holy Spirit in one faith, mind, and understanding.”<br /><br />AC VIII says:<br /><br />“Properly speaking, the church is the assembly of saints and true believers. However, since in this life many hypocrites and evil persons are mingled with believers, it is allowable to use the sacraments even when they are administered by evil men, according to the saying of Christ, “The scribes and Pharisees sit on Moses seat,” etc. (Matt. 23:2). Both the sacraments and the Word are effectual by reason of the institution and commandment of Christ even if they are administered by evil men.”<br /><br />Sadly, Lutherans have ignored the first statement and reduced this to the tolerance of evil men leading the Church. When someone dares to say that this is no longer the Church, for this is the very definition of schism that the Scriptures state and condemn and warn us to flee, that poor soul is labeled a schismatic! The Scriptures declare those who insist upon their own opinions in place of the ONE doctrine of the Church to be the schismatics. Morever the Scriptures command that such a person be counted as not a member of Christ’s Church after two warnings. (Titus 3:10) The Scriptures also decry churches that continue in communion with such as synagogues of Satan.<br /><br />Today’s so-called Lutherans denounce those who demand that only the Pure Church be called Church as schismatics. The Scriptures call such “Lutherans” the schismatics because they promote divisions in the Church.Not Alone +++ PAShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07176295519558694481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-41787868855382081972010-12-07T03:08:12.937+11:002010-12-07T03:08:12.937+11:00Regarding Luther and the Church, the following is ...Regarding Luther and the Church, the following is from his explanation of the third article of the Creed in his Large Catechism, pg. 417 of the Tappert edition:<br /><br />† † † <br /> Likewise the word communio, which is appended, should not be translated “communion” but “community.” It is nothing but a comment or interpretation by which someone wished to explain what the Christian church is. But some among us, who understand neither Latin nor German, have rendered this “communion of saints,” although no German would use or understand such an expression. To speak idiomatically, we ought to say “a community of saints,” that is, a community composed only of saints, or, still more clearly, “a holy community.” This I say in order that the expression may be understood; it has become so established in usage that it cannot well be uprooted, and it would be next to heresy to alter a word.<br /> This is the sum and substance of this phrase: I believe that there is on earth a little holy flock or community of pure saints under one head, Christ. It is called together by the Holy Spirit in one faith, mind, and understanding. It possesses a variety of gifts, yet is united in love without sect or schism. Of this community I also am a part and member, a participant and co-partner in all the blessings it possesses. I was brought to it by the Holy Spirit and incorporated into it through the fact that I have heard and still hear God’s Word, which is the first step in entering it. Before we had advanced this far, we were entirely of the devil, knowing nothing of God and of Christ. Until the last day the Holy Spirit remains with the holy community or Christian people. Through it he gathers us, using it to teach and preach the Word. By it he creates and increases sanctification, causing it daily to grow and become strong in the faith and in the fruits of the Spirit.<br /><br />† † †Not Alone +++ PAShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07176295519558694481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-20057949075938904432010-12-07T03:07:16.414+11:002010-12-07T03:07:16.414+11:00Dear LPC,
As I said earlier, I have been extremel...Dear LPC,<br /><br />As I said earlier, I have been extremely hesitant to write. These things are difficult to address with the restraints of this medium.<br /><br />Also, it is not my desire to speak against Dr. Jackson. However, things are being said that should be countered.<br /><br />I thank you for your kindly response and acceptance of my posting. I will attempt to address your challenges.<br /><br />You said: “I take it then that your thesis is that what is wrong in the Lutheran Church is that it does not have the right ecclessiology, and it is not the problem of UOJ.”<br /><br />Within Lutheranism and amongst the so-called Lutherans and so-called Lutheran churches, their use of the term UOJ, as they define it, is a serious problem. As an alumnus of this system, I was taught this false definition and misuse. However, it is not the cause of the demise as Dr. Jackson insists. It is a contributing factor. A person with the diarrhea of dysentery suffers dehydration and other factors until it is cured or death occurs, yet the cause of this illness is the infectious organism or inflammatory substance in the intestines. Treatment of the diarrhea may subdue the effects of the inflammatory agent, but as long as the agent remains, so does the disease. The diarrhea cannot be cured without addressing the cause.<br /><br />UOJ as it is taught amongst those in Lutheranism is a false definition and false application that flows from a false understanding of the Church and the minimizing of the total corruption of original sin. The problem amongst those who promote Universal Objective Justification as in the example that you quote from the LC-MS Brief Statement, “Scripture teaches that God has already declared the whole world to be righteous in Christ,” is that they ignore the IN CHRIST and apply it to the world apart from being in Christ IN HIS CHURCH. The reason for this is that they do not understand that to be in Christ is to be in His true Church. The reason that they do not understand this is because they have changed the definition of CHURCH to include the goats, that is, those who tolerate false doctrine and practice. This is something that Jesus and Luther most certainly never do.Not Alone +++ PAShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07176295519558694481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-66008475047851525982010-12-07T03:04:31.605+11:002010-12-07T03:04:31.605+11:00This comment has been removed by the author.Not Alone +++ PAShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07176295519558694481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-46901173376961783132010-12-07T03:03:46.063+11:002010-12-07T03:03:46.063+11:00This comment has been removed by the author.Not Alone +++ PAShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07176295519558694481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-74989859674659491042010-12-06T08:35:12.415+11:002010-12-06T08:35:12.415+11:00Dear PAS,
Thanks for commenting.
I take it then ...Dear PAS,<br /><br />Thanks for commenting.<br /><br />I take it then that your thesis is that what is wrong in the Lutheran Church is that it does not have the right ecclessiology, and it is not the problem of UOJ.<br /><br />UOJ is a just a 100+ old formulation famous in American Lutheranism. Over here, my synod which is the largest Lutheran synod in Aus, has no specific nor formal nor official formulation of UOJ. So it is not believed accross the board here, except with Lutheran pastors here who look up to the USA to define their Lutheranism.<br /><br />You said that the problem is the missapplication of UOJ. But that is where it fails. It is because UOJ is not formulated according to Scripture that the confusion is built in it. For example in LC-MS 1932 Brief Statement...<i>Scripture teaches that God has already declared the whole world to be righteous in Christ</i><br /><br />It is not the application that is wrong, it is the formulation because it is a myth contra the over all teaching of Scripture.<br /><br />Also, have you read Walther Maier II's paper on his counter exegesis of the major UOJ passages as taught by Francis Pieper? If not I suggest you do.<br /><br />Justification is where the Church stands or fall, if Justification is wrong, one's ecclessiology is wrong too. So Jackson comes way deeper than a problem in ecclessiology.<br /><br />Re:Jackson advicing someone to stay in the person's church body. It just shows that Jackson is not a schismatic.<br /><br />I think your thesis of a pure church rans counter against Jesus and Luther who believed that the church has both sheep and goat, both hypocrites and believers. What do you say to that?<br /><br /><br />Let me correct, anti-UOJ did not begin with Jackson as if he was the originator of this. Anti-UOJ has been arround during Walther's time and were opposed to Walther.<br /><br />LPCLPChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11352627830833515548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-72334368810590740952010-12-05T07:01:28.543+11:002010-12-05T07:01:28.543+11:00Yikes!
"The real problem is that passages li...Yikes!<br /><br />"The real problem is that passages like 2 Corinthians 5:19 ignore the means of the world’s reconciliation."<br /><br />This was supposed to read:<br /><br />"...in passages like 2 Cor. 5:19 they ignore ..."Not Alone +++ PAShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07176295519558694481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-89399027816738863132010-12-05T05:55:10.746+11:002010-12-05T05:55:10.746+11:00This open and obstinate denial of Jesus and His wo...This open and obstinate denial of Jesus and His words is the problem that becomes manifested in an application of UOJ in order to try to manufacture a means of comfort and salvation outside of the holy catholic Church. Since they do not believe that the Gospel is absolutely necessary, they create for themselves a way to apply the UOJ outside of Christ and apart from Christ in His body. They separate UOJ from Christ and the Gospel.<br /><br />The problem is not the teaching of Universal Objective Justification. The problem is that they separate it and try to apply it apart from its source.<br /><br />Justification IS Objective. It is not of us, or subjective. It is from an objective source, the pure Gospel.<br /><br />Justification IS Universal. It is for the Jew as well as the Greek, male and female, young and old. It extends throughout the entire cosmos, wherever people are gathered through Baptism into the body of Christ to receive from Him His life in His Holy Communion.<br /><br />The problem is that the Lutheran churches are not the Church. They separate Baptism from Communion and teach decision theology as the means for worthiness to receive the life of Christ that is in His blood. They teach that the Church is not pure and not one, but divided through the schism of unholy doctrines and practices that are counted as dangerous but not as separating from the Communion of salvation.<br /><br />The real problem is that what the Lutherans are calling UOJ is really USJ, Universal Subjective Justification. Aside from some of the trappings of the traditions of the Lutheran doctrine and practice, they are not Lutheran.<br /><br />The reason that Dr. Jackson cannot see this appears to be that he is too busy trying to show how much better he is than other so-called Lutherans. But he does not confess the holy catholic Church either. He recently convinced a very sincere and gentle man to ignore his conscience and the goading of the Holy Spirit and to remain in a church body that Dr. J himself condemns as not being the Church. This is not in any way pastoral. This is not faithful to the Word. If he truly believed that the Gospel were absolutely necessary, he would have commended that person for his willingness to follow Christ rather than to tell him that he has plenty of time to decide about his church body. Why then is Dr. J not in that church body? Why does he stand apart if it is not truly necessary? The reason is that he is not truly standing apart. His umbilical cord is still attached. He seems to enjoy the false sense of power that comes with attacking family dysfunction without actually letting it go. Surely such things need to be identified for the sake of those who would hear and respond in faith. But what is the point if all of the attacks are just noise and those who would respond in faith are discouraged from following their consciences? This is merely promoting the dysfunction.<br /><br />Lutherans today do not understand or believe Augustana VII, VIII, IX, XIII, and especially IV and V. This includes Dr. J.<br /><br />Dr. J has a brilliant mind and has a wealth of knowledge. It would be truly wonderful to see him use these to preach the pure Gospel rather than merely preaching about the pure Gospel. In this way he really is no different than those he attacks with such venom and vitriol. If he ever realizes this, his preaching will be powerful beyond description. The same is true for the other Lutherans.<br /><br />Preaching about the pure Gospel is not preaching the Gospel.Not Alone +++ PAShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07176295519558694481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-87553601097112256242010-12-05T05:53:22.138+11:002010-12-05T05:53:22.138+11:00Dear LPC,
I have been extremely hesitant to write...Dear LPC,<br /><br />I have been extremely hesitant to write.<br /><br />It is not my desire to speak against Dr. Jackson. However, I do not find him to be pastoral, not even in his sermons. He does not actually apply the Gospel to the hearers. He simply presents facts. In His Advent 1 sermon he never even preached the Gospel. Not once was the Gospel actually applied to anyone. No word of comfort is preached to anyone. If a word of comfort is derived from this sermon, the person does so by self-application, not because it has been administered to the hearer. You appear to be one who makes self-application from what is presented. But this does not make the sermon pastoral.<br /><br />However, my real reason for responding is the issue of the unobjective application of UOJ. When I first read Dr. Jackson’s statements and attacks regarding Universal Objective Justification a little over two years ago, I thought, “Ah ha! This puts the problem into proper perspective.”<br /><br />However, the more that I read, the more uneasy that I felt. It was like standing on the opposite side of a fence with a barking, growling, snarling dog on the other side, who wags his tail at the same time. The best approach is to keep one’s distance.<br /><br />It took some time for me to realize what made me feel uneasy. It was more than a difference in style. It was the false premise upon which the application was based. UOJ is not actually the problem. It rather is a symptom or manifestation of the problem.<br /><br />If the real problem were addressed, then UOJ would not be an issue. The real problem is that passages like 2 Corinthians 5:19 ignore the means of the world’s reconciliation. The “in Christ” is either ignored or redefined. The world has been reconciled to God IN CHRIST, in His body. In His body the sins of the world have been taken up and crucified and buried. In the body of Christ, the entire world has been declared to be righteous. However, the world has not been brought into the body of Christ in which this righteousness has been declared. This is what the Lord Jesus explains in John 3.<br /><br />The real problem in Lutheranism is not the doctrine of UOJ. The real problem is their false doctrine of the Church. The real problem is that in Lutheranism the holy catholic Church is neither taught nor believed nor embraced. Those in Lutheranism do not believe that the Church actually exists as either holy or catholic. They believe in a universal Church that is fragmented by partial holiness. They do not believe that the Church can be perfect. They do not believe that the means of grace are what produce that perfection and holiness. They imagine that an organization can be called church insofar as “enough of the Gospel” exists so as still to be able to save men.<br /><br />This means that they no longer believe that the Gospel is necessary. This means that they no longer believe that the Gospel is the “power of God into salvation to those believing” (Romans 1:16). St. Paul does not say that the Gospel is the power of God “unto salvation to all who believe”, but that the Gospel is the power of God “into salvation to those believing.” This is why the Lord Jesus says that no one can perceive the kingdom of God unless one be generated from above, and then further explains that unless one be generated out of water and spirit he is not able to enter into the kingdom of God.<br /><br />The real problem is that Lutherans are unable to perceive the kingdom of God. They imagine that one can enter into the kingdom of God through means other than the pure and holy body of Christ Jesus. They do not believe that the pure and holy body of Jesus exists on earth. They believe that people can deny Christ and His words In John 12:47-48 the Lord Jesus warns that He and His words cannot be rejected without standing in judgment. Yet Lutherans imagine that a church can exist in communion with the denial of the words of Jesus and still be called Church and that within such an unholy communion that people can still be saved by whatever they determine is “enough of the Gospel.”Not Alone +++ PAShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07176295519558694481noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-44493367085489322442010-12-04T16:08:20.895+11:002010-12-04T16:08:20.895+11:00Hi Brigitte,
Thanks for the comment and concern. ...Hi Brigitte,<br /><br />Thanks for the comment and concern. I appreciate your sincere concern for my soul. I hope you appreciate my concern also for yours too, as a fellow Christian. <br /><br />What you assert though is not enlightened by facts. For example you said <i>Nobody is saying that a person is in Christ without faith</i><br /><br />Oh yes they do. Even Stuart said this...<i>If the Word of God did not already objectively declare all men forgiven (based upon the atoning work of Christ), then no man could truly believe that his sins are forgiven.</i><br /><br />If Stuart's statements are true, then God has already declared all men forgiven already even before they believe. Now, if you study the saying of men adored by the Synod like Walther and Pieper, they said the same things. Shall I give you some quotes from UOJ Holy Men?<br /><br />I have crossed swords with UOJ pastors here in my blog as well as in their's and none of their attempts have convinced me. It was not because I am being thick, it is just because they show to me they are weak in exegesis, very abysmal in their scholarship and high schoolish when it comes to independent critical thinking. I expected a bit more from well seminary educated pastor-theologians.<br /><br /><br />You said <i>Jackson tells you what to put on your blog, in simple imperatives (a couple of posts down from this one.) </i><br /><br />Did I get the time to implement what Jackson suggested in my blog? I hardly done them, though they may be good suggestions, I have not gotten around to putting them. Please have a look again and see if I have the features Dr. Jackson suggested that I should make. I hope you do not think I am a mindless sheep following hypnotically a minister. I am too old for that.<br /><br /><i>You go to Spain, he ridicules the reigning monarch, etc.</i><br /><br />Brigitte, you live in Canada, a country under the Queen same as Aus, but if you keep on swallowing the stuff from the pastors you love in the internet, you will be like them, they got no sense of humor.<br /><br /><i>We are supposed to see how pastoral he is by reading his sermons rather than how he interacts with people. ! ? </i><br /><br />Have you listened to one or two? Here is one testimony of someone who listened...<br /><br />http://ichabodthegloryhasdeparted.blogspot.com/2010/12/roman-catholic-wrote-about-thanksgiving.html<br /><br />Try following the suggestion of my post, the blog is a polemic while the sermon is not. You get to understand the guy's polemic when you listen to his sermons.<br /><br />Note: I am not defending Jackson because he is perfectly capable of doing that for himself. Also I have been long in this business to know that I can not expect myself to agree with him in the future nor him with me. I cannot predict that. This is one reason why I do not have blog links and I do not expect my friends to link to my blog.<br /><br />One thing I appreciate with Jackson is that he is a pastor and not a politician, not like some pastors I know. Political pastors are dangerous because when the crunch happens, they will abandon you. Political pastors love your feelings, they do not want to offend you, they do not love you in the truth. In the end, they do you no service.<br /><br />What I am doing here is just lay down to you some facts.<br /><br /><i>You have been had</i><br /><br />But I am puzzled Brigitte, I am not getting something here, what have I been had of specifically? Can you be more definite?<br /><br /><br />LPCLPChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11352627830833515548noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15967712.post-90652586204772944292010-12-04T10:15:32.200+11:002010-12-04T10:15:32.200+11:00LP, you have painted yourself into such a corner. ...LP, you have painted yourself into such a corner. Just let it go. Come out. <br /><br />Nobody is saying that a person is in Christ without faith. Stuart has just given you a fresh, heartfelt response, like many of the rest of us have. <br /><br />It does no good to accuse everyone else of cowardice and laud yourself as bold and courageous; it does not make you right.<br /><br />Jackson tells you what to put on your blog, in simple imperatives (a couple of posts down from this one.) You go to Spain, he ridicules the reigning monarch, etc. We are supposed to see how pastoral he is by reading his sermons rather than how he interacts with people. ! ? <br /><br />You have been had, LP. Come out from this. Please. How many more well-meaning people are going to tell you the same thing?Brigittehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10259491144770243688noreply@blogger.com