Fundament 20: Scripture 2; “outside the faith”, ultimate warning; “be silent… let them go”

[2024-12-12: updated Luther quote to direct links]

      This continues from Part 19 (Table of Contents in Part 1), a translation of Franz Pieper's essay on the foundation of the Christian faith ("Das Fundament des christlichen Glaubens"). —  This installment gets quite serious for our modern world – a world that discards God's Word, the Bible, as just an ancient relic.  I have a sticky note on my computer monitor that records the Bible verse Amos 8:11-12 –

“Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land, not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord: … they shall run to and fro to seek the word of the Lord, and shall not find it.”

This blog post also runs concurrent with my series "Walther & Scripture" Part 2, which pointed out Walther's strongest possible warning against deniers of the full divinity of  Scripture. Dr. Robert Preus, in an essay for the anthology Walther, the American Luther, wrote (p. 153, my emphasis):

“Walther is very prone to point out that a loss of the Scripture principle and the evangelical doctrine go hand in hand, for both oppose the unbridled reason of man, whatever form it takes.”

Preus is not overstating Walther, and he appears to be "prone" to join Walther in this serious warning. Preus also stated on p. 150 that “Pieper, the dogmatician,… so far as I can discern, never deviates on any significant issue from the theology and dogmatics of his mentor.”

Now we are prepared for Walther's successor, Franz Pieper, to issue the very same warning.  At the risk of overstating the case, even an opponent of Old Missouri, Prof. (emeritus) Patrick R. Keifert of Luther Seminary, is reported to have said (p. 76 n59) that he "regarded the theology of Walther and Pieper as essentially the same and he could not identify significant differences." So this warning against the denial of the divinity of Holy Scripture issues equally from both Pieper and Walther:

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

Text preparation and translation by BackToLuther using DeepL, Google Translate, Microsoft Translate, Yandex Translate. All bold text is Pieper's emphasis. All highlighting, red text, and most text in square brackets [ ] is mine.

Das Fundament des christlichen Glaubens.

The Foundation of the Christian Faith.

[by President Franz Pieper, Concordia Seminary; continued from Part 19 - page 284]

First of all through their declaration that they have written the same thing that they taught orally. The apostle John teaches this fact in these words: “That which we have seen and heard declare we unto you,…  and these things (ταῦτα) write we unto you, that your joy may be full.” (1 John 1:3-4) Paul points to the same fact when he exhorts the churches to make no distinction between his oral and written words: “Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions [or teachings] which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle!” (2 Thess. 2:15)  Secondly, the apostles themselves describe their written word as the only certain foundation of the Christian faith. Just as the Romanists tried to bring their anti-scriptural teachings onto the market by invoking an orally transmitted word of the apostle up to this day, there were already people in the apostolic church who referred not only to their “spirit” for their unapostolic teachings, but also to alleged words and writings of the apostles. In order to resist this abuse of the apostolic authority and the associated falsification of the foundation of the Christian faith, Paul admonishes Christians not to be shaken or frightened “by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us”, (2 Thess. 2:2) and refers to his letters signed by his own hand: “The salutation of Paul with mine own hand, which is the [page 285] token in every epistle: so I write.” (2 Thess. 3:17; also 1 Cor.16:21; Col. 4:18)  Christ and his Apostles so powerfully teach the inspired Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as the infallible, steadfast foundation of the Christian faith. Those who, like modern theologians, deny the inspiration and thus the infallible divine authority of Scripture, deprive the Christian Church of the foundation of its faith. The objection that Scripture is to be called the foundation of faith only in general, not in all its words, contradicts the testimony of Christ. His testimony that Scripture cannot be broken refers precisely to a single word, namely to the fact that Ps. 82:6 uses the word אֱלֹהִ֣ים, [ĕlōhîm], θεοί [theós]. The whole argument of the Saviour is based on this according to the context. (John 10:34-36)     

"committed to the Holy Scriptures"
sola scriptura
Ultimate "biblicist"

Like Christ and his Apostles, Luther is also committed to the Holy Scriptures. He teaches very decisively and consistently that only the Christian faith is based on the Word of the Scriptures. He says: 117) “Faith teaches and holds the truth, for it clings to the Scriptures; it does not lie and deceive” Luther therefore describes the righteous teachers of the Church as “catechumens and pupils of the prophets”, “in that we repeat and preach what we have heard and learned from the prophets and apostles”. 118) Of course, he does not understand by “repeat” that one should not use “more or other words than those contained in Scripture”, for “this cannot be adhered to”, but that the Christian teacher “shall not teach except the Scripture in divine things”. 119) 

According to Luther, the right nature of a Christian teacher includes the ability to let go of all thoughts that came to him without Scripture. 120) [see also here] He calls the theologians who have departed from Scripture “monsters” (portenta) of theologians like Thomas [Acquinas], [Duns] Scotus and others. 121) Therefore, Luther cuts through the tablecloth between himself and all the theologians who destroy the foundation of the Christian faith by challenging the infallible divine authority of Scripture. 

-------------- 

117) St. L. XI, 162. [§ 22; Am. Ed. ?; Lenker 10/1, p. 182, §22]

118) St. L. III,1890. [§ 10; Am. Ed. 15, p. 276]

119) St. L. XVI, 2211 f. [Am. Ed. 41, p. 81-83]

120) St. L. XX,792. Erl. 30, 46. [Am. Ed. 37, p. 28-29, 45]

121) Opp. exeg. Lat. Erl. IV, 328; St. L. I, 1289-1290 § 235 f. [Am. Ed. 3, p. 306]

He [Luther] remarks on 1 Peter 3:15:

“If the people will not believe [the Scripture], you shall keep silent; for you are not guilty of forcing them to consider the Scripture to be God's Book or Word; it is enough that you give your reason for it. As if they did so and said, ‘You preach not to hold doctrines of men, but St. Peter and Paul, even Christ Himself, are men’; if you [page 286] hear such people who are so blinded and hardened that they deny that this is the Word of God, what Christ and the Apostles have spoken and written, or doubt it: so be silent, speak not a word to them and let them go; speak only so: I will give you reason enough from the Scriptures; if you will believe it, well; if not, so go on always.” (St. L. IX,1238. [not in old series Am. Ed., but see 30, p. 107])

This raises the question of whether it is still possible for someone to still stand in the Christian faith while denying the divine authority of Holy Scripture. We must say: Certainly not if this denial is given its practical consequence. [emphases mine] Those who do not believe Christ and his Apostles when they testify of the Scriptures: “The Scriptures cannot be broken” [John 10:35] and: “All scripture is given by inspiration of God” [2 Tim. 3:16], he will consequently not believe Christ and the Apostles in what they teach about the forgiveness of sins for the sake of the Blood of Christ. This subheading includes Luther's word: 123) “The Holy Spirit does not let Himself be divided or cut up so that he should let one point be taught and believed as trustworthy and another as false.” Luther adds of course: “Except in the case where there are weak believers who are willing to let themselves be instructed and are not stubbornly opposing his truth.”  

-------------- 

123) St. L. XX, 1781. [§ 50; Am. Ed. 38, p. 308] [2024-12-12: updated to direct links]

We dare not deny the possibility that such “weak believers” also include learned theologians. A number of years ago a German theologian [Delitzsch? Who was it that wrote to Pieper?], who under the general pressure of modern “science” had abandoned the inerrancy of Scripture, wrote to us that we should believe him that he nevertheless wanted to die solely on the blood of Christ. We believed him in love. We recently received a letter of similar content from a younger theologian. [What younger theologian?] 

But all those who can be counted in the category of the “weak” described by Luther have every reason to consider how they contradict Christ and his Apostles, and what dreadful soul danger they are in. The happy inconsistency they have can turn any moment into a perishable consequence. Vestigia terrent! [The footsteps terrify!] If we look around at the present time, we see that the theologians who deny the inspiration of Scripture as a rule also reject the satisfactio Christi vicaria. God save us all from self-deception!     

= = = = = = = = = = concluded in Part 21 = = = = = = = = = =

      I have spent a large amount of time researching and preparing for this blog post – I could have included much more material in support of the Old Missouri, and against today's LCMS.  This blog summarizes why I cannot return to the LCMS in which its teachers will not suffer gladly being called "biblicists" or "fundamentalists". (Just ask their teachers!)  But Walther did. Now I have to question the faith of almost all their teachers who will not defend the full divinity of Holy Scripture.

Further information is available in the "Read more »" section below (on Pelikan, Appold).

Thomas Jefferson, Jaroslav Pelikan
Both Unitarians?

      As I read above Luther's quote “The Holy Spirit does not let Himself be divided or cut up”, I had to think of President Thomas Jefferson's personal Bible in which it is reported that he cut out various passages which he believed did not belong there. He was essentially a Unitarian, outside the Christian faith in this regard.  But along with this sad situation is the case of Prof. Dr. Jaroslav Pelikan, the well-known general editor of the American Edition of Luther's Works, who joined with a Unitarian theologian in the re-publishing of Jefferson's Bible. ... Hmmm, was Pelikan even a Unitarian at heart, as he left the Lutheran faith, … despite reports to the contrary?  We will leave off as to whether Dr. Pelikan was a "weak believer" or was like the above German theologians who wrote to Pieper that they still relied solely on the blood of Christ for their salvation.  Imagine that – German theologians writing to the Missourian Franz Pieper, as if they wanted his blessing!

      Also, as I read above how the deniers of Scripture's divinity “contradict Christ and his Apostles” and are in “dreadful soul danger”, I thought of how almost all Lutheran theologians of today have abandoned “verbal inspiration”.  An example is Prof. Dr. Kenneth G. Appold, a member of the ELCA who is promoted by LCMS theologians and leaders.  He was invited to contribute to the Pieper Lectures, volume 9 (2004/2005) and to Robert Kolb's 2008 book Lutheran Ecclesiastical Culture, 1550-1675. In the essay for Kolb's book, Appold stated the following (p. 105, emphasis mine): 

Scripture, understood as the inspired Word of God, stood in the center of early-modern Lutheran theology, as it had for the reformers. The notion of “verbal inspiration,” about which much has been written subsequently, tends to be both misunderstood and overemphasized. Not terribly controversial in its day, it occupied at most a subsidiary position in early Lutheran systems of thought.

When one contrasts Appold's judgment with that of C.F.W. Walther, one may wonder that not only Appold but also the LCMS theologians who promote him are in "dreadful soul danger" because they themselves question whether "all Scripture" (2 Tim. 3:16) is actually God's Word.  How is it that they are qualified to teach future pastors for the Office of the Ministry? — In the next Part 21…