tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post1482682588135379037..comments2024-03-22T16:09:48.895-04:00Comments on Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: Continuing Lutheran Justification ControversyJames Swanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-48365208147460813362013-02-22T08:41:13.079-05:002013-02-22T08:41:13.079-05:00More helpful stuff:
http://justandsinner.blogspot...More helpful stuff:<br /><br />http://justandsinner.blogspot.com/2013/02/atonement-theories-and-objective.htmlNathanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18235437889789484774noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-12584754618004505842013-01-30T01:30:03.006-05:002013-01-30T01:30:03.006-05:00Looks like this controversy is unlikely to be reso...Looks like this controversy is unlikely to be resolved anytime soon as both sides are digging in with their respective positions.Martin Yeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10161902509192193592noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-29304396282072555262013-01-29T15:09:23.692-05:002013-01-29T15:09:23.692-05:00James,
Perhaps of help: http://jackkilcrease.blo...James, <br /><br />Perhaps of help: http://jackkilcrease.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-rydecki-situation.html<br /><br />+Nathan Nathan Rinnehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13994922104672096902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-73204640834218833842013-01-28T16:51:19.465-05:002013-01-28T16:51:19.465-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15056210915546208869noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-84089042353282763212013-01-27T23:58:32.910-05:002013-01-27T23:58:32.910-05:00Andrew,
Thanks for the input. Learn something ne...Andrew, <br /><br />Thanks for the input. Learn something new today.<br /><br />Regards,<br />MartinMartin Yeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10161902509192193592noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-84505645812462956952013-01-27T22:55:20.328-05:002013-01-27T22:55:20.328-05:00Martin, I have indeed read Romans. 4:25 "Who ...Martin, I have indeed read Romans. 4:25 "Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification."<br /><br />But consider the context, sir. The entirety of Romans 4 is an argument for justification by faith apart from works. <br />Verse 24 and 25 together say "But for us also, to whom it (righteousness)shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification."<br /><br />The "us" and the "our" are the same justified group. Is that justified group the entirety of humanity? When we simply move on to the next verse, Romans 5:1, we see that it is not. <br />5:1 "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ"<br /><br />So verse 24 says that righteousness is imputed to those who believe on Jesus (the imputation of righteousness being justification). Verse 25 says that he was raised "for our justification" and the first verse of chapter 5 simply re-enforces the definition of the the group about whom Paul is speaking. Those believing are the justified ones. <br />We are declared righteous by faith. Justification before faith? That is nonsense. That is not biblical, brother. <br /><br />Andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15056210915546208869noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-74984110874193977852013-01-27T22:26:13.659-05:002013-01-27T22:26:13.659-05:00Dear Andrew,
Sorry, but the Bible does talk this ...Dear Andrew,<br /><br />Sorry, but the Bible does talk this way. See Romans 4:25. So you are saying the Bible talk nonsense?<br /><br />Regards,<br />MartinMartin Yeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10161902509192193592noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-31789308670562943022013-01-27T21:51:22.955-05:002013-01-27T21:51:22.955-05:00I agree with Reverend Rydecki. Since justification...I agree with Reverend Rydecki. Since justification is a legal declaration of the sinner's being righteous before God. It only serves to confuse to say "you are forgiven and justified already; but you wont be justified really until you believe". The bible doesn't talk that way. It's nonsense. Andrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15056210915546208869noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-85817803541955216942013-01-27T09:34:30.140-05:002013-01-27T09:34:30.140-05:00Hi James,
You may like to check out this article ...Hi James,<br /><br />You may like to check out this article by Tom Hardt at<br />http://hans.blc.edu/~eteigen/Theology_&_Church_History_files/Justification%20and%20Easter.pdf<br /><br />Objective/Subjective justification is not unique to Lutherans, even a Baptist hold this view, see<br />http://lutheranpastor.wordpress.com/2008/09/26/objective-subjective-justification/<br /><br />Below is the link to the Missouri Synod's CTCR Statement on it<br />http://www.google.com.sg/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=44&cad=rja&ved=0CEYQFjADOCg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ltsg.edu%2FPrograms%2FLutherStudies%2Ffiles%2FLutherJustGlobal-edtd&ei=fjUFUb_4Jcb5rAe1yYHwBg&usg=AFQjCNGiNwyeW1zq79-YvuSULAuPpgrtMw&sig2=fC61D89Ee_XY2JZnQApfPg<br /><br />Siegbert of WELS paper on justification can be downloaded here<br />http://www.google.com.sg/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=10&cad=rja&ved=0CH0QFjAJ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wlsessays.net%2Ffiles%2FBeckerJustification.rtf&ei=hjoFUbO_Ms_PrQf8_IGgCA&usg=AFQjCNGw_HruG9kORn98Fh4oQd0Nyl7ZDA&sig2=Ia2SORjwsDe8DwUpEqRIOA&bvm=bv.41524429,d.bmk<br /><br />Regards,<br />MartinMartin Yeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10161902509192193592noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-68625863083647064762013-01-27T09:17:15.804-05:002013-01-27T09:17:15.804-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.yeebetsyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01676413217551574998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-34013849131926471662013-01-27T09:08:07.444-05:002013-01-27T09:08:07.444-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.yeebetsyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01676413217551574998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-62931227385275661182013-01-27T07:48:45.861-05:002013-01-27T07:48:45.861-05:00Martin,
Thanks for the comments. As I read briefl...Martin,<br /><br />Thanks for the comments. As I read briefly through Rev. Rydecki's view, it sounds a lot like Luther's view to me (and still does).<br /><br />Have any of the "majority view" Lutherans produced any studies on Luther's view?<br /><br />Curious.James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-56141644677169507532013-01-27T04:46:39.206-05:002013-01-27T04:46:39.206-05:00Hi James,
The Missuori Synod and the WELS' vi...Hi James,<br /><br />The Missuori Synod and the WELS' view is the majority view which almost all Lutherans subscribe to, Rev Rydecki's view is only subscribed to by a small minority. Actually both sides believe in justification by faith alone. Good works does not count for justification before God. Nobody said that faith is not necessary for justification. Just that the majority view is that justification has an objective/subjective side to it like two sides of the same coin. Scripture teaches that Christ died and rose for our justification. That is the objective side, when in faith we appropriate that justification that is the subjective side. Another thing we need to know is when Luther talks about justification and sanctification, he does not always use them in the same way all the time. It depends on the context he is using it. Sometimes he use in in a broad sense, sometimes a narrow sense. Rev Rydecki is probably talking about justification in a narrow sense.<br /><br />The above is based on my limited understanding and I may be wrong.<br /><br />Regards,<br />Martin Yee Martin Yeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10161902509192193592noreply@blogger.com