 |
||
 |
|
|
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
||
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
A Serious Problem St. Peter's Leaders St. Peter's is a member congregation of the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod located in the United States of America, in Brooklyn, New York. As such, we Sponsor Boy Scout Troop 251, which meets weekly in our parish hall, with many scouts hailing from St. Peter's Begin each day at St. Peter's Lutheran School by pledging allegiance to the flag of the United States of America Encourage our members to participate in civil government by serving on juries, testifying in court, etc. Sing "God Bless America" with others at a variety of sporting and social events in the great metropolis of New York City Is participation by Lutheran Christians in such activities right or wrong? We believe it is right and the overwhelming majority of Lutheran Christians would agree with us. However, incredible as it may seem, there are a few folks, including influential clergymen in our denomination, among them some who have attacked our Pastor for his participation at Yankee Stadium, who would in point of fact OPPOSE these activities on doctrinal grounds. That, to us, is a SERIOUS PROBLEM. There are in fact several Lutheran denominations, the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod and the Evangelical Lutheran Synod, that have official positions that directly oppose the Boy Scouts on doctrinal grounds and consider many other activities, such as oaths in court or the pledge of allegiance, to be suspicious at best and basically to be avoided. These two denominations are linked together in a "big brother, little brother" arrangement. The Wisconsin Synod Website, www.WELS.net, contains a section called Questions. If you use the search mode and punch in Boy Scouts, or Oaths, you will find out these things from the WELS/ELS point of view: For a Lutheran to participate in the Boy Scouts is wrong and sinful because scouting has religious elements that imply a scout can do his duty to God no matter what religion he belongs to. The motto "In God We Trust" is not endorsed by the WELS/ELS The claim "One Nation Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag is not endorsed by the WELS/ELS. Lutherans are told they can only take oaths in court if they are to the Triune God. Why in the world would Lutheran Christians hesitate to endorse "In God We Trust?" When did we join the ACLU? Some of those who have filed complaints against Pastor Benke have articulated their opposition to the Boy Scouts, or to the capitalization of the "G" in God in the pledge of allegiance or on the dollar bill. Now come on! These are concepts that come from the Wisconsin and Evangelical Synods, not the Missouri Synod. When something is fabricated into a sin when it is not a sin, the human conscience suffers. God's people are being falsely accused of sin. THAT IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM. Beneath it all what suffers? Is it just a matter of words? No. These concepts separate people from opportunities to participate productively in society. Christians are actually kept from rejoicing in and tackling their responsibilities according to the First Article of the Apostles Creed. It is GOD'S world – "The earth is the Lord's," says the Bible. Isn't our participation in the world as citizens something that is good? Doesn't it help to build character? We think the WELS/ELS folks are putting the cart before the horse. Nobody gets to heaven on the basis of good works - we are saved by grace alone - that is Lutheran. But it is also Lutheran to be a good citizen and to demonstrate the kind of character and civil righteousness that God actually rewards with temporal blessings. How could anyone say it is wrong to understand the joys and responsibilities of participating in God's World? But what seems so important to us is that the WELS/ELS positions keep Christians from bringing the message of salvation to people in any and every circumstance, the Second Article of the Apostles Creed. What suffers? Evangelism. Outreach. The mission of God to reach the world with love through Christ. The controversy persists and grows. What next? No Scout Troop 251 at St. Peter's? Here is a quote directly from the Boy Scout Handbook: "... no boy can grow into the best kind of citizenship without recognizing his obligation to God." (Page 215 – Handbook) This is a God-pleasing intention for a Christian boy. Scouting should NOT be taken away from our boys in Brooklyn. THIS IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM. What next? We can't sing "God Bless America" at Shea Stadium because the person in the next seat might be Muslim, Jewish or Roman Catholic? We should prohibit our kids from pledging allegiance to the flag BECAUSE of the phrase "one nation under God?" Expressions of belief in God out in public should not be discouraged or forbidden BUT ENCOURAGED. THIS IS A SERIOUS PROBLEM. These strange ideas, these doctrinal errors, are being imported into the Missouri Synod. It seems to us like an attempt at what they call in the corporate world a hostile takeover. Our examination of websites and internet conversations uncovers way too many LCMS members falling prey to these errors, and acting like a "fifth column" within our denomination to spread their erroneous bad doctrine. That is a SERIOUS PROBLEM. There are solutions. Perhaps the folks within the Missouri Synod who hold these beliefs should join one of the other groups. Perhaps everyone would be happier if we went our separate ways. But that can't be the first solution. The first and best solution is to find ways to encourage everyone including the WELS and ELS to follow a better path in doctrine. There are helpful articles on our website on related topics already. Please read That We May Be One; "A Prayer at Yankee Stadium" Response to Request for Clarity; It Breaks Our Hearts; A Response to David L. Adams; The Christian in a Culture of Religious Pluralism; all of these archived articles assist in what we have learned as a more Lutheran approach to the Christian interaction in the world through the application of the "Two Kingdoms" as well as solid Biblical bases for action and witness for Christ. Additionally, Pastor Don Matzat has contributed to this specific dialog and discussion. His new article is called "How Many Gods (or gods) Are There?" It will help everyone who reads it to understand that when Christians do not understand the doctrine of God and misplace the first two articles of the Apostles Creed, what suffers is the Gospel of Jesus Christ! There IS a better path. It's the path of Bible truth. + + + + + How Many Gods (or gods) Are There? One of the questions that has come to the surface in the Benke matter is whether or not Christians and Muslims believe in the same God. This is a very timely subject since we have been engaged with Muslims in Iraq and Afghanistan. Muslims terrorized us in the name of Jihad and have referred to us as being "the great Satan." If you do a search of the Internet, you will discover that there are conflicting opinions among Christians on this subject. Obviously, prejudice does abound. Some say that Allah, the God of Islam, is simply the Arabic word for God and the God of the Muslims is the same God worshiped by the Christians (1). Others say that Allah is a false god created by Mohammed (2). Some on the theological fringe suggest Allah is a demon (3). The Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church speaks to the subject and declares, "The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind's judge on the last day." I do not believe that our Synod has ever officially spoken to this specific issue so perhaps everyone is entitled to his or her opinion. I do think we need to speak to the issue primarily in the interest of evangelism. There is one clear confessional quotation from the Large Catechism that says "All who are outside the Christian church, whether heathen, Turks, Jews, or false Christians and hypocrites, even though they believe in and worship only the one, true God, nevertheless do not know what his attitude is toward them." (4) In his massive works, Martin Luther says a great deal about this subject, but it is interesting to note that what he says about the Turks creating a god out of their imagination, he also says about the Jews, papists, monks and even the Anabaptists. What we apply to the Turks or Muslims from the writings of Luther we would be forced to apply to the Romanists or papists as well. (There are numerous references in Luther's Works where "Turks and papists" are linked together.) In one place Luther teaches that whoever distorts the doctrine of justification is ignorant of God and is an idolater and it makes no difference whether the person is a Jew, Turk or Anabaptist. (5) Because papists, Turks, Jews and Anabaptists have distorted the truth of God does this mean they no longer believe in the one God? This is the sixty-four dollar question. Does abuse confirm or deny the substance? I understand the reality of false gods or other gods when it comes to an idol or graven image. One can behold the idol or image, point to it and say, "There is a false god!" This is obvious since making graven images or worshiping actual idols is the primary prohibition of the First Commandment. I do not understand the concept of a false god or "other gods" within a theistic (6) context. To claim that non-Christians who believe in one invisible God, the creator of the universe to whom they are responsible, believe in a false god or an "other" god raises the question: how many Gods or gods are there? This creates the impression that there are a multitude of Gods. There is the Christian God who is identified as the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. There's the God of the Jews – the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. There is the God of the Muslims who goes by the name of Allah. There is the Hindu God, a single deity who chose to divide himself into three parts, identified as Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva. But this is not the end of the list. There is also the God of Greek philosophy identified as the unmoved Mover by Aristotle or the Demiurgos by Plato. Are these true or false gods? The Boy Scouts make it mandatory to believe in a God, any definition of God, in order to be a Scout. Is this the true God or false gods? The Masonic Order defines God as the "Great Architect of the Universe." Is this the true creator God or a false creator god? And of course, we also have our national God to whom we sing "God Bless America" and declare that we are one nation under this God by whatever name He is known. Is this a true God or false god? Considering that our founding fathers were by and large members of the Masonic Order, perhaps our national God is actually a demon of Free Masonry. (Let's burn our "In God We Trust" currency! On second thought, send it to me.) In line with this way of thinking, would it be proper to declare that the God of Eastern Orthodoxy is not the same god as the God confessed by the Western Church? After all, Orthodoxy does have a different definition of the procession of the Third Person of the Trinity. Because they distort the definition of the Triune God, are they worshiping the same God or a different god? There are some prominent Lutherans who have left the fold and joined Eastern Orthodoxy. Some of our theologians are very favorably disposed toward Eastern Orthodoxy. Maybe we should declare: "The Eastern Orthodox Church worships a false god!!" Sometimes I wonder about the God who goes by the name of Jehovah. Since the word "Jehovah" is actually a mistaken translation, is Jehovah a different god from the actual Old Testament God who is identified as Yahweh? Some Christians suggest that using the name "Jehovah" is blasphemy since there is no "j" sound in Hebrew and the word "hova" allegedly means "perverse." (7) Perhaps the word "Jehovah," which came into prominence in about 1530, is actually the name of a "demon god." When we sing "Guide Me O Thou Great Jehovah" to whom are we praying? When we pray to Jehovah does Yahweh listen? You see, when we speak about "other gods" or false gods based upon erroneous definitions within the context of theism we create much confusion and leave the impression that there are many gods. Creating such an impression is itself contrary to the First Commandment. We should have no other gods besides God. Isaiah writes in chapter 43 verse 10: "'You are my witnesses,' declares the LORD, 'and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me.'" There is only one God! Any Sunday School child would readily confess that truth. The one God has graciously implanted into the hearts of all men, based upon creation and the human conscience, the knowledge of Himself so they are without excuse. Yet this knowledge is placed within the human heart that is perverted by sin. As a result, man takes that knowledge of God and creates actual idols or, arising out of the idolatry of the heart, produces distorted definitions of the will and nature of God. When we speak of the God of the Jews, or the Muslims, or the Hindus are we speaking about other gods or false gods or are we speaking about erroneous and distorted definitions of God? The question we must ask is whether or not these distorted definitions and understandings obliterate and obscure the knowledge of the one God? This question does have a history within Lutheran theology and it would be wise for us to research it. Many are speaking to this issue without having done a great deal of homework. My primary concern in this matter has to do with evangelism. Believing in God is a prerequisite for hearing the Gospel that God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son, Jesus Christ. Only those who believe in God, who has inscribed His Law into the hearts of all men, will be conscious of sin. They are the candidates for the Gospel. Without the consciousness of sin, we might as well be preaching the Gospel to oxen or mules. As a result of the gracious Gift of His Son Jesus, God has revealed Himself to us as the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. While Jews, Turks and the heathen acknowledge the one God; they do not know what His gracious will is toward them. They remain under the wrath of God (as our Lutheran Confessions state). To them we speak the Good News of God's grace and mercy in Christ Jesus. At this very base level of pre-evangelism to make a distinction between people based on whether or not they acknowledge the Trinity is ludicrous. Since it is necessary to believe in God before hearing the Gospel, what are we going to do - teach the Trinity before preaching the Gospel? This is putting the cart before the horse or the Second Article before the First Article. It is a confusion of Law and Gospel. Are we saying that the only people who should hear the Gospel are Christians who already acknowledge the Trinity? So much for any evangelism efforts! The only distinction we should make between people at the level of pre-evangelism or prolegomena is whether they are theists or atheists. If people claim to believe in God to whom they are responsible, we have candidates for the Gospel. Even the Apostle Paul within the polytheistic context of Athens chose to proclaim their "unknown God" as the only Creator of the heavens and the earth. Pastor Donald G. Matzat
+ + + + + As a result of the two previous articles I posted, much discussion has taken place in Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod chat rooms. This is good. This is an issue that must be discussed at great length because there is a great deal at stake. This is a rather lengthy study that I have been working on for the past 7 or 8 months. It is my hope that you will read it – all of it, but I doubt whether many will. Perhaps this study will engender some serious discussion among those who are truly interested in pursuing this subject and not merely responding with senseless banter. Due to the systematic nature of theology, all positions taken have far reaching implications. Martin Luther writes: "In philosophy a tiny error in the beginning is very great at the end. Thus in theology a tiny error overthrows the whole teaching."(1) It is irresponsible to assume a doctrinal position without considering and dealing with the implications of the position. 1. Myriads of people claim to believe in God but do not acknowledge the Triune God. Do they believe in false gods? 2. We have a "national belief in God" as manifested in the motto "in God we trust," in the Pledge of Allegiance "one nation under God," and in the oath of office, "so help me God." Since the Triune God is not confessed, is our "national belief in God" the belief in a false god and is acknowledging our national motto; pledging allegiance to our flag; and taking an oath in a court of law contrary to the First Commandment? 3. The Boy Scouts of America believe that character cannot be developed in a young man without a belief in God and thereby do not accept atheists into their program. Since Boy Scouts pledge to do their duty to God and since the Triune God is not confessed, is this a false god and is participation in the Boy Scouts a violation of the First Commandment? The Missouri Synod has never identified the "national belief in God" as belief in a false god. The Missouri Synod has never said that being a Boy Scout violates the First Commandment. It is just the opposite. Many Missouri Synod Lutheran congregations sponsor Boy Scout troops. A. The First Commandment: 1. In his extensive explanation of the First Commandment in the Large Catechism, Dr. Martin Luther never mentions the Triune God. The name of Jesus Christ is also absent from the discussion. Luther writes that the Ten Commandments are not distinctly Christian but are inscribed in the hearts of all men. He makes no distinction between those who define God as Triune and those who do not. The revelation of the Trinity is distinctly Christian and is not inscribed in the hearts of all men? 2. Luther interprets the meaning of the First Commandment by teaching the distinction between trusting in God and trusting in idols and graven images (crass idolatry). The Commandment also speaks to the various idols of the heart such as mammon, wisdom, and knowledge. Some years ago in confirmation class I asked the children to page through magazines and newspapers and cut out pictures of "other gods." They got the idea and came back with pictures of new cars, money, clothing, rock stars, baseball players, etc. The First Commandment applies to Muslims and Jews in the same manner as it applies to Christians. 3. For Luther and for Lutherans this commandment applies to all people who acknowledge the existence of God, the creator of heaven and earth, and have a First Article, general, and legal knowledge of God. Lutheran theologians clearly distinguish between the "left-handed" general and legal knowledge of the true God and the Law written in the hearts of men, which is applicable to all people, from the "right-handed" revealed knowledge of God and His grace and mercy in Christ Jesus. This is a proper distinction between Law and Gospel. 4. The Confessions state that the Ten Commandments are inscribed on the hearts of all men and that Turks, Jews, heathen and false Christians all believe in and worship only the one true God. In his Large Catechism, Luther writes: (underlining is mine) These articles of the Creed, therefore, divide and distinguish us Christians from all other people on earth. All who are outside the Christian church, whether heathen, Turks, Jews, or false Christians and hypocrites, even though they believe in and worship only the one, true God, nevertheless do not know what his attitude is toward them. They cannot be confident of his love and blessing. Therefore they remain in eternal wrath and damnation, for they do not have the Lord Christ, and, besides, they are not illuminated and blessed by the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Now you see that the Creed is a very different teaching from the Ten Commandments. The latter teach us what we ought to do; the Creed tells us what God does for us and gives to us. The Ten Commandments, moreover, are inscribed in the hearts of all men.(2) 5. A question has been raised about the absence in the original German and Latin text of the definite article before "one true God" in the above quotation. I am aware that the Triglotta does not include it. In fact, about 6 months ago I contacted Pastor Bob Smith from the Wittenberg Project at CTS and asked about the discrepancy. He said he would get back to me but never did. The absence of the definite article makes absolutely no difference in the meaning of the paragraph. Luther says that this "one God" has an attitude of love and blessing toward heathen, Turks, Jews and hypocrites. They cannot be confident of the love and blessing of this "one God" toward them because they do not have the Lord Christ nor has the Holy Spirit enlightened them. Therefore, they remain under the wrath and damnation of this "one God." Within the context of the paragraph, which "one God" would Luther be referring to whose love and blessings are found in the Lord Christ through the illumination of the Holy Spirit? This "one God" has to be "the one true God" for what other so-called god is there who fits that description?
6. Luther's interpretation of the First Commandment is consistent with his general non-confessional teaching on this subject. In his commentary on John, he says that Christians, Turks and "the pope and his church" have agreement on the First Article. Neither the Turk nor the pope and his church accept Christ. Of the others, however, who do receive the testimony of Christ, John says that they "set their seal to this, that God is true" (John 3:33). When the Lord made His entry into Jerusalem, the vast majority, for instance, the Pharisees and others, did not receive His testimony. But of the small number he says that "they set their seal to this." Some do hear and receive it; they accept the message which is incomprehensible otherwise, which indeed transcends reason. They honor God and say "that God is true." We are all agreed on the First Article of the Christian Creed, which deals with creation. But in the Second Article, which deals exclusively with Jesus Christ and His redemption, we come to the parting of the ways.(3) 7. False gods do not exist. There are no other divine entities apart from the true God, the Creator of the heavens and the earth. Isaiah writes: "You are my witnesses," declares the LORD, "and my servant whom I have chosen, so that you may know and believe me and understand that I am he. Before me no god was formed, nor will there be one after me." (43:10) 8. While false gods do not exist, man, perverting the knowledge of the true God, creates so-called false gods out of the imaginations of his own heart or turns the knowledge of the true God into an idol (crass idolatry) made with human hands. It is to this that the First Commandment speaks. Daniel rebuked the Babylonian King Balshazzar (5:23) for breaking the First Commandment: Instead, you have set yourself up against the Lord of heaven. You had the goblets from his temple brought to you, and you and your nobles, your wives and your concubines drank wine from them. You praised the gods of silver and gold, of bronze, iron, wood and stone, which cannot see or hear or understand. But you did not honor the God who holds in his hand your life and all your ways. 9. There are literally millions upon millions of people in our world who believe there is one true God who created the heavens and the earth, but they are not Christians. The First Commandment applies to them as it did to Balshazzar. Our Confessions teach that even the heathen believe in and worship only that one true God. Francis Pieper writes, "Statesmen, also among the heathen, have raised the question whether it is advisable to grant the right of citizenship to avowed atheists."(4) 10. You do not have to be a Christian to confess the meaning of the First Article of the Creed that "God has made me and all creatures." Those who make that confession are our mission field. How inane it would be for us to say to them, "You have a false god!" and still hope to share with them the Second Article Good News of God's grace in Christ Jesus. 11. In the annotated Small Catechism, there is a note by Koehler under the question "When do people have other gods?" Under point B., Koehler says they have other gods "when they believe in a god who is not the Triune God." I have taught confirmation instruction for over 30 years. I have never questioned that statement. In reviewing the note in the light of the Word of God, the Lutheran Confessions and the writing of Luther and orthodox Lutheran theologians, I believe the note needs to be scrutinized and questioned for the following reasons: a. The statement is consistent with the error of the Wisconsin Synod who on the basis of that stated position reject the Boy Scouts and do not endorse the statement from the pledge of allegiance "one nation under God." This would be an accurate and consistent application of Koehler's note, an application that the Missouri Synod has not and does not make. b. If Koehler is referring to Jews, Turks, heathen and false Christians the statement is clearly contrary to the Lutheran Confessions. c. Why is Koehler choosing to go beyond what Luther stated in his lengthy explanation of the First Commandment? If the Ten Commandments are inscribed in the hearts of all men, as Luther says, and the Triune nature of God is not inscribed in the hearts of all men, why would Koehler make an application that is contrary to our Confessional application? Koehler's notes are not a part of our Lutheran Confessions and they are only valid is so far as they agree with Scripture and the Confessions. d. If Koehler is not referring to graven images and idols, who are these other gods? There is only one God who has revealed himself in Christ Jesus as the Triune God. B. Perverting the Knowledge of God: 1. To teach that there is no knowledge of the one and only true God apart from God's Triune self-revelation in Christ Jesus is the rejection of natural theology. According to the Apostle Paul, man, possessing the natural knowledge of God, breaks the First Commandment by turning the invisible God into idols made by human hands. He writes in Romans 1:20-23: For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles. 2. Regarding these important verses of Scripture, Dr. Martin Luther teaches in his commentary on Romans: That to all people, and especially to idolaters, clear knowledge of God was available, as he says here, so that they are without excuse and it can be proved that they had known the invisible things of God, His divinity, likewise His eternal being and power, becomes apparent from the following: All those who set up idols and worship them and call them "gods," or even "God," believing that God is immortal, that is, eternal, powerful, and able to render help, clearly indicate that they have a knowledge of divinity in their hearts. For with what reason could they call an image or any other created thing God, or how could they believe that it resembled Him if they did not know at all what God is and what pertains to Him?(6) 3. In his lectures on Genesis, Luther teaches that the true knowledge of God has been implanted in the human heart: Because of a natural instinct the heathen also have this understanding; they know that there is a supreme deity, that he must be worshiped, called upon, and praised, and that one should take refuge with him in all dangers. Paul says that they have a natural knowledge of God (Rom. 1:21). For God has implanted this knowledge in the hearts of all human beings. They call God a helper, kind, and forgiving, even though afterwards they are in error as to who that God is and how He wants to be worshiped.(7) 4. Concerning the scope of natural theology, Dr. Robert Preus writes in The Theology of Post-Reformation Lutheranism: What is the scope of natural theology after the Fall? What does it include? The answer to this question is very explicit in Lutheran theology. Although natural theology is sufficient to render all men without excuse for their unbelief, it is not sufficient to lead anyone to salvation. The extent of this theology may be summed up in five points. a) Natural theology is able to discuss God, His nature and attributes. It knows, nothing, however, of the three persons of the Deity, of God's evangelical will and works of grace. b) Natural theology knows the law of God, as heathen philosophers and religion abundantly demonstrate. c) It knows that sin is the transgression of the Law. d) It is aware of the guilt incurred by sin, for the conscience testifies to this. e) Natural theology knows of the immortality of the soul and of life after death.(8) 5. Without the knowledge of the Word of God, especially the knowledge of Christ Jesus, the natural knowledge of the true God is readily perverted. In his 1535 commentary on Galatians, Martin Luther comments on chapter 4 verse 10: Paul indicates this when he says: "When you did not know God, that is, when you did not know what the will of God is, you were in bondage to beings that by nature are no gods; that is, you were in bondage to the dreams and imaginations of your own hearts, by which you made up the idea that God is to be worshiped with this or that ritual." From the acceptance of this major premise, "There is a God," there came all the idolatry of men, which would have been unknown in the world without the knowledge of the Deity. But because men had this natural knowledge about God, they conceived vain and wicked thoughts about God apart from and contrary to the Word; they embraced these as the very truth, and on the basis of these they imagined God otherwise than He is by nature. Thus a monk imagines a God who forgives sins and grants grace and eternal life because of the observance of his rule. That God does not exist anywhere. Therefore the monk neither serves nor worships the true God; he serves and worships one who by nature is no god, namely, a figment and idol of his own heart, his own false and empty notion about God, which he supposes to be the surest truth. But even reason itself is obliged to admit that a human opinion is not God. Therefore whoever wants to worship God or serve Him without the Word is serving, not the true God but, as Paul says, "one who by nature is no god."(9) 6. Lutheran theology clearly distinguishes the natural knowledge of God, which is knowledge of the true God, from the perversions of the heart that distort that knowledge of God. In this entire discussion, this is the key issue. If we fail to make this distinction, we will end up quoting Luther against Luther. 7. Read carefully the following from Luther's commentary on Romans 1:20ff. Note the distinction in the scholastic syllogism between the "major premise" and the "minor premise." The "minor premise" that man perverts the knowledge of God does not negate the "major premise." Everyone wanted to see the divinity in the one who appealed to him, and so they changed the truth of God into a lie. Thus they knew that the nature of divinity, or of God, is that He is powerful, invisible, just, immortal, and good. They knew the invisible things of God, His eternal power and divinity. This major premise of the "practical syllogism," āthis theological "insight of the conscience," is in all men and cannot be obscured. But in the minor premise they erred when they said and claimed: "Now, this one," that is, Jupiter or any other who is like this image, "is of this type, etc." This is where the error began and produced idolatry, for everyone wanted to subsume according to his own interests. If they had stayed with this feeling and had said: "Look, we know this: Whoever this God, or this Divinity, may be whose nature is to be immortal and powerful and able to hear those who call upon Him, let us worship and adore Him, let us not call Him Jupiter and say that He is like this or that image, but let us simply worship Him, no matter who He is (for He must have being)," then without a doubt they would have been saved, even though they had not recognized Him as the Creator of heaven and earth or taken note of any other specific work of His hands. You see, this is the meaning of the words "The things that are known of God are manifest in them." But where and how? Answer: The invisible things of God are clearly seen in the things that have been made. One can see how one man helps another, one animal another, yes, how one thing helps and assists another, according as it has superior power and ability. At all times the higher and the more privileged one helps or suppresses the lower and less privileged one. Therefore, there must be that in the universe which is above all and helps all. People measure God by the blessings they receive. This is also the reason why people in ancient times made gods of those who showed them benevolence. In this way they wanted to thank them, as Pliny says.(10) 8. Apply this distinction to Roman Catholicism. Here is what Luther says about the "god" of the papists: Let us first consider the papists and the religious. These are laboring under the delusion that God is a being who is moved and satisfied by good works. That explains their many vocations, sects, and modes of life, in all of which they presume to serve and please God. Now tell me, what are these people worshiping as God if there is no God whose mind and will conforms to theirs? Is it not true that they are honoring their own delusion and their own fancy as God? For in truth there is no God who is of one mind with them. Therefore they go awry with their illusion. They miss the true God, and nothing remains but their own false notion. That is their god. To him they assign the name and honor of God.(11) 9. Apply this distinction to those who reject the doctrine of justification. Here is what Luther says: Whoever falls from the doctrine of justification is ignorant of God and is an idolater. Therefore it is all the same whether he then returns to the Law or to the worship of idols; it is all the same whether he is called a monk or a Turk or a Jew or an Anabaptist. For once this doctrine is undermined, nothing more remains but sheer error, hypocrisy, wickedness, and idolatry, regardless of how great the sanctity that appears on the outside.(12) 10. It is possible to suppress and deny the natural knowledge of God. Pieper identifies suppression of the knowledge of God as being the cause of atheism.(13) According to Robert Preus, Melanchton believed there were only "theoretical atheists" because everyone has the innate knowledge of God.(14) The existence of atheists actually proves the existence of God for how can anyone deny that which does not exist? 11. Luther speaks about the papists suppressing of the natural knowledge of God by promoting the traditions of Monasticism. He writes: Moses and his Commandments are better and older than the custom of wearing a friar's cowl. But in spite of this, monasticism was drubbed and drummed into the people; and they insisted on calling a monastic order holy. This, however, did not reflect a knowledge of God; it was blindness. Still they claimed: "Oh, this is the right way to live!" But listen, dear monk, who prescribed your deeds? What devil commanded them? The monks will answer: "They are inspired by our piety." Moses and our reason are better informed. They demand that one must not steal, also that one must obey parents and government. They are teachers instructing us in matters serving the interests of our temporal life. And if Moses' Commandments are as nothing in comparison with the knowledge of God from the Gospel, what must be said then about the value of the fabricated works of human righteousness? And in the face of this the papists still dare to prefer human traditions to the Law of Moses. They are foolish and ludicrous enough to rank cowls, tonsures, and ropes above filial obedience. This is as blind as you can get! But that is the way man fares when his reason digresses from the Law and the Gospel. To summarize, we have been so abominably corrupted by sin that we not only know nothing about our first and natural knowledge of God any longer, but we have also defected from the righteousness of the Law and fallen into lies. With our own fabricated works we presumed to reconcile God.(15) 12. Because the Jew, the Turk, the Papist, the Monk and the Anabaptist distort the knowledge of the one true God does not mean they have false gods. They have a false and distorted understanding of the one true God or they have suppressed the knowledge of the true God. The "major premise" - the knowledge of the one true God, is neither obscured nor obliterated by the "minor premise' – the distortion of the knowledge of the one true God. 13. Those who do not believe in the Lord Christ and reject the Gospel do not see the true nature of God but they only behold Him as an angry judge. They only see "the back" of God, or what Luther would speak of as the "alien side of God," or the "hidden God." But this is "the alien side" of the one and only true God. In the next quotation from Luther's commentary on the Catholic Epistles, Luther is essentially saying the very same thing he said in the Large Catechism confessional quote, "All who are outside the Christian church, whether heathen, Turks, Jews, or false Christians and hypocrites, even though they believe in and worship only the one, true God, nevertheless do not know what his attitude is toward them. They cannot be confident of his love and blessing. Therefore they remain in eternal wrath and damnation." Here Luther writes: But the fact that you, like the Turks, the Jews, and the devil, believe that God created all things—this is not the knowledge of God. Nor is this knowledge your belief that Christ was born from a virgin, suffered, died, and rose again. No, you have the true knowledge of God when you believe and know that God and Christ are your God and your Christ. This the devil and the false Christians cannot believe. Thus this knowledge is nothing else than the true Christian faith; for when you know God and Christ in this way, you will rely on Him with all your heart and trust in Him in good fortune and misfortune, in life and death. Evil consciences cannot have such trust, for they know no more about God than that He is a God of St. Peter and all the saints in heaven. But they do not know Him as their God; they regard Him as a jailer and an angry judge. To have God is to have all grace, all mercy, and everything one can call good. To have Christ is to have the Savior and Mediator who brought us to the point that God belongs to us, and who acquired for us all mercy from Him. You must weave this together in such a way that Christ becomes yours and you become His. Then you have a true knowledge. An unmarried woman can say, of course: "This is a man." But she cannot say that he is her man. Thus we can all say, of course, that this is a god; but we cannot all say that He is our God. For we cannot all trust in Him and take comfort in Him. To this knowledge also belongs what Scripture calls the facies et vultus Domini, that is, the countenance of the Lord about which the prophets have much to say. He who does not behold the face of God does not know Him but sees only His back, that is, an angry and cruel God.(16) 14. Muslims, Hindus, and Jews have perverted the knowledge of God with erroneous definitions and descriptions and as a result remain under His wrath and condemnation. Does such a god defined and described in the Koran exist? No, he exists only in the imagination of Muslims? Does such a god defined as Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva exist? No, he exists only in the imagination of the Hindus. Does such a god who has not manifested himself in Christ Jesus exist? No, such a god exists only in the mind of the Jews. 15. Behind these perversion of the heart, the knowledge of the one God remains. The devil himself believes in the true God. The natural inclination toward error and evil does not obliterate the knowledge of the true God. Without such knowledge of the true God there would be no possibility of distortion. Luther's statement from jurisprudence, which he applied to infant baptism, to the law, and to the office of the ministry, is also applicable here. "Abuse does not change the nature of a substance, indeed it proves the substance. There can be no abuse unless the substance exists."(17) 16. This issue became a point of contention in later Lutheran theology. The orthodox Lutheran theologian Abraham Calov stood in opposition to the teaching of the leader of the "gnesio-Lutherans," Matthias Flacius. Dr. Robert Preus explains the issue: Flacius admitted that the Second Table of the Law was written in man's hearts but denied that this was true of the First Table. This position was tantamount to denying that natural theology was true theology…Against Flacius position, Calov says that the "natural inclination toward error should not be placed in opposition to the natural knowledge of God, which we acknowledge is associated with imperfections and great corruption after the Fall. Such things are not in real opposition. For the apostle Paul teaches that the knowledge of God can coexist with the vanity of judgment and knowledge; and that in one and the same heart, in as much as it recognizes God but does not know Him."(18) 17. Muslims, Jews, and the heathen believe that there is one true invisible God, the creator of heaven and earth, to whom they are responsible but they have distorted that knowledge. They live under the wrath and judgment of God because they do not have the Lord Christ. The Apostle Paul said to the Athenians, "The God whom you call the unknown God, (a truly distorted definition) I am going to tell you about." So we say to Muslims, "The God whom you call Allah (which is Arabic for Elohim), we are going to tell you about." Or to the Jews, "The God who has revealed Himself in the Law, we are going to tell you about." 18. Some of our pastors, theologians and professors have stated that Jews, Muslims, and the heathen believe in and worship false gods or other gods. What do they mean by that? Are they saying that false gods or others gods actually exist beside and alongside the one and only true God? To say that would be contrary to the First Commandment. There are no other gods who exist alongside the true God. They must be saying that these so-called gods are "gods on paper." In other words, they are faulty descriptions and definitions. But the question is: they are faulty descriptions and definitions of what? They are faulty descriptions and definitions of the one and only true God! So the major premise (Jews, Muslims and heathen believe in and worship only the one true God) is proven by the minor premise (Jews, Muslims and heathen distort the knowledge of the one true God). The quotation in the Large Catechism stating clearly that Jews, Turks, and heathen worship only the one true God is consistent with the clear teaching of Martin Luther and the orthodox theologians of the Lutheran Confessions. C. The Jews and the Witness of the Apostles: 1. Believing in the Triune nature of the one true God is the result of believing the Gospel. The two are intimately connected. It is contrary to Scripture to teach that those who do not believe the Gospel do not believe in the true God of the First Article. If that was true, how would you preach the Law and to whom would you preach the Gospel? 2. Throughout the Book of Acts, the Apostles never contended that the Jews believed in a false god. If that were the case, we must conclude that every time the Apostle Paul entered the synagogues of the Jews and shared in the service he was allowing the false god of the Jews to be brought before the face of the true God revealed in Christ. He was participating in the idolatry of the Jews and giving the impression that there was no difference between the false god of the Jews and the God who revealed himself in Christ Jesus. 3. Paul spoke of the Jews as being "zealous for God" but not according to knowledge (Romans 10:2). The Ethiopian was traveling to Jerusalem to worship the true God (Acts 8:27). The gentile centurion Cornelius and his family were described as being "devout and God-fearing" (Acts 10:2). Paul addressed the people in the synagogue in Pisidian Antioch as "Men of Israel and you Gentiles who worship God" (Acts 13:16). Lydia was a worshipper of God whose heart was opened to the message of Paul (Acts 13:14). Titus Justus of Corinth was a "worshiper of God" (Acts 18:7). God-fearing Jews today remain zealous for God, yet without knowledge. 4. To suggest that Jews believe in a false god is clearly contrary to Scripture. D. False gods and the Gospel: 1. It is not possible to proclaim the Gospel to those who do not believe in the one true God. Could Jesus Christ be proclaimed as the Son of an idol? When the Apostle Paul had contact with those who worshiped idols, it was necessary for him to first proclaim the true God before he was able to preach the Gospel. 2. In Acts 14:15-17, the pagans at Lystra identified Paul and Barnabas with Hermes and Zeus. The Apostle did not preach the Gospel to them but attempted to persuade them to put away their worthless things and embrace the true God. The Apostle Paul said: We are bringing you good news, telling you to turn from these worthless things to the living God who made heaven and earth and the sea and everything in them. In the past, he let all nations go their own way. Yet, he has not left himself without testimony. He has shown kindness by giving you rain from heaven and crops in their seasons. He provides you with plenty of food and fills your hearts with joy. 3. To the Athenians who worshiped idols, the Apostle proclaimed the unknown god as the true God who was not an idol. He said in Acts 17:24-31: The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples build by hands. And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else. From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live. God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us. 'For in him we live, and move and have our being.' As some of your own poets have said, 'We are his offspring.' Therefore, since we are God's offspring. We should not think that the Divine being is like silver, or gold or stone – an image made by man's design and skill. In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead. 4. In both of these cases, the Apostle Paul used apologetic argumentation from the "book of nature" and the teachings of philosophers to convince those who worshiped idols to turn to the true God. The Apostle not only believed that his hearers were able to acknowledge the true God before believing in Jesus Christ but it was necessary for them to do so. Only those who acknowledged the true God and forsook their idols were candidates for the Gospel. 5. Dr. Robert Preus, who regarded Abraham Calov's explanation of natural theology to be an example of orthodox Lutheran theology, comments on the methodology of the Apostle Paul according to Calov. "The fact of a Creator God to whom we are responsible seems to Calov to be the point of contact Paul used in preaching the Gospel to unbelievers."(19) 6. To teach that those who do not acknowledge the Triune God believe in false gods creates a major dilemma. It produces a classic "Catch 22." Since belief in the true God is a pre-requisite for hearing the Gospel, the Church would be required to first teach the Doctrine of the Trinity to Jews, Muslims and Hindus before sharing the Gospel. But how could they believe in the Triune God if they have not heard the Gospel of Jesus Christ? In other words, since the knowledge of the true God is necessary for one to become a Christian, and since only Christians have the knowledge of the true God, no one can become a Christian! Martin Luther was certainly right when he said, "Thus in theology a tiny error overthrows the whole teaching." 7. The Triune nature of God is not a part of the Law but is a result of believing the Gospel. Placing the Second Article before the First Article is a clear confusion of Law and Gospel. F. Demons? 1. In 1 Corinthians 10:20-21, the Apostle states that food sacrificed to idols is being sacrificed to demons. There is no doubt that within Roman paganism there were occult practices as is evidenced by Simon the sorcerer in Acts 8; the fortune-telling woman of Acts 16; and the burning of the "sorcery books" at Ephesus in Acts 19. Any occult power attributed to a pagan idol was the power of the demonic. 2. There is no evidence in the Book of Acts that on their missionary journeys the Apostles defined "false gods and even idols" as being demons. In Acts 14 the Apostles did not define the false gods of the men of Lystra as being demons but the result of ignorance and foolishness. In Acts 17 the Apostle Paul presented the "unknown god," who happened to have his own altar, as being the true God. Perhaps we should speak of this "unknown god" within the Greek pantheon as being an "unknown demon?" Concerning the Jews, even though Israel rejected their Messiah, the Apostle Paul still affirms that the Jews "are zealous for God," not for a demon. 3. The Lutheran Confessions are not silent on this issue. If "heathen, Turks, and Jews" worshiped demons, why would Luther in the Large Catechism say that "heathen, Turks, and Jews" believed in and worshiped only the one true God? 4. There is a great deal of far-fetched biblical hermeneutics concerning the realm of the demonic. Some Christians teach the reality of generational demons passed on from the parents to the children based on Exodus 20:5-6. Many acknowledge "territorial demons" ruling cities and countries based on Daniel 10:11-20. These demons must be bound and cast out before evangelism can take place. It would be foolish for us to associate ourselves with strange doctrines. 5. If Jews, Muslims, and Hindus believe in and worship demons, what missiological pattern would we follow in doing evangelism? Do we first cast out the demons so they become atheists, teach the Doctrine of the Trinity, proclaim the Law, and finally preach the Gospel? 6. If the God worshiped by Jews, Muslims and Hindus is a demon, would we suggest that the "unmoved mover" of Aristotle and the Demiurgos of Plato were merely demons of Greek philosophy? Perhaps we should suggest that the "god" of the Boy Scouts is really a demon of American Indian spirituality? Since are founding fathers were of the Masonic Order, perhaps the god acknowledged in our pledge, "one nation under God," is really a demon of Masonry? When we sing "God Bless America" are we asking a demon to bless our nation? How do we make the distinction between the First Article acknowledgment of God and the worship of demons? 7. Believing in a Creator God to whom one is responsible is productive of civil righteousness. Our Confessions teach that God both commands civil righteousness and rewards civil righteousness with temporal blessings.(20) The Boy Scouts, for example, state that. "... no boy can grow into the best kind of citizenship without recognizing his obligation to God."(21) The desire of this organization to produce civil righteousness in young men is pleasing to God. Such civil righteousness rewarded by God is also evident among Jews, Muslims and Hindus who live responsibly in the fear of God. To suggest that their God is a demon is to divide Satan's kingdom against itself. Why would Satan want to produce civil righteousness? 8. This is not to say that demons do not associate themselves with false religious expressions nor is it to say that the knowledge of the true God is often perverted due to the sinful nature. Witchcraft is a work of the sinful flesh and in any religion where the occult is introduced the possibility of demonic activity is very real. Within some sects of Roman Catholicism such as Santeria, where occultism is syncretized with Catholic superstition, those claiming to call upon the true God may in fact be contacting demons. Many of the perversions of Roman Catholicism, especially the development of Marian theology, are in my opinion by and large demonic. I believe that the so-called manifestations of the "blessed Virgin" are demonic in nature. Luther spoke often of the teaching of celibacy to be a "doctrine of demons." Would we on that basis conclude that the God acknowledged by Rome is a demon? 9. To suggest that the God acknowledged by the Muslims, Jews, Hindus and heathen is a demon is merely human opinion. It is contrary to Scripture and harmful to the salvation of men to teach human opinion as if it is Divine truth.(22) Conclusion: We read the following in the Formula of Concord: Dr. Luther very diligently urged this distinction in nearly all his writings and showed in detail that there is a vast difference between the knowledge of God which comes from the Gospel and that which is taught by and learned from the law, since from the natural law even the heathen had to some extent a knowledge of God, although they neither understood nor honored him rightly (āRom. 1:21).(23) Let's take the abstract and move it into the practical and concrete. If you were a missionary to a heathen people, where would you begin? According to Scripture and the Confessions, the heathen have, to some extent, a knowledge of God (the one and only true God). Would you say to these heathen people, "You do not understand nor honor God properly. Because you do not believe in the Triune God you have a false god?" Wouldn't that be downright stupid? Wouldn't you instead, with the Apostle Paul, build on that knowledge of God they already possess and find every opportunity to present the Lord Jesus to them? Wouldn't wisdom dictate that the same approach should be taken in seeking to evangelize Jews, Muslims and the heathen? Do our seminaries offer any courses on evangelism and apologetics? Why are we choosing to close the door on any evangelism to the heathen, Turks, and Jews by rejecting the clear statement from our Lutheran Confessions and publicly declaring that these people worship false gods and demons or even Satan? In so doing, we have eliminated any evangelism approach. This is sad! Why are we doing this? What do we gain? Do we somehow think that by doing this we are pleasing God who would have all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth? Pastor Donald G. Matzat
|
|
|
Home | Who We Are | Calendar | Our School | Prayer for America | Directions | Contact Us | Links |
|