# Der Lutheraner_St. Louis Missouri_1851 04 01_S124
# AI translation — CHI Digital Archive (demonstration)

124

...ilies of the earth." (1 Mos. 12, 16. 18) And how do the prophets speak later, who had, as it were, that first promise of the Messiah in Paradise and the promise made to Abraham as the text of their sermons? They cry as with One voice: "O LORD, are not thine eyes upon the truth?" (Jer. 5, 3.) — And where should we begin, where end, if we wished to cite even only the plainest passages of the New Testament, in which salvation is ascribed to faith alone and eternal damnation to unbelief without recall? The following passages may suffice: "He that believeth on the Son, says the LORD himself, hath everlasting life; and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." (John 3, 36.) "He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." (John 3, 18.) "But to him, St. Paul adds, that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness." (Rom. 4, 5.) Without faith it is impossible to please God." (Heb. 11, 6.) And so it reads throughout, from the first book of the Old to the last of the New Testament. We cannot open the Bible without meeting a passage where salvation is ascribed not to works, but to faith alone.

But even apart from the fact that Holy Scripture teaches this everywhere else, it needs only a somewhat closer consideration of that saying of Peter itself, and the mists in which the enemies of the faith have wrapped it by their false interpretation vanish of themselves, and we find that the words, far from contradicting the doctrine of the alone saving power of faith, rather mightily confirm it, and that therefore the mixers of religions, who wish to defend themselves with it, as a recent writer says, "seize the sword by the blade."

Consider first, the Apostle says: "In every nation," — he does not say then: in every religion, "he that feareth God and worketh righteousness is accepted with him." If a simple Christian only holds this before the enemies of the faith, their supposed weapon is thereby already wrested from their hands and turned against themselves.

Consider also further, the Apostle says: "He that feareth God." What kind of God is it, then, that an Apostle of Jesus Christ means when he speaks of God? Did the Apostles and Prophets believe in several gods? God forbid! They write: "Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God." (2 John 9.) "Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father" (1 John 2, 23.) "Is there a God beside me? yea, there is no Rock; I know not any." (John 44, 9.) And of the heathen they write: They have "no hope, and are without God in the world." (Ephes. 2, 12,) Yes, in another place they testify: "What say I then? that the idol is any thing? or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is any thing? But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God". (1 Cor. 10, 19. 20.) From this we see, if one were to understand Peter as the enemies of the faith interpret his words, he would, according to the Apostles' own teaching, have meant to say as much as: "In every religion, he that feareth something which he calls God, even if it were the Devil himself, is accepted with God." But who will dare to impute so mad and blasphemous a doctrine to a holy Apostle? — No, when an Apostle, when Peter speaks of God, he speaks of no other than the one true God, in whom he believed and whom he preached: of the God of the Bible; of the Jehovah who revealed himself to the patriarchs and prophets; of the Triune, Father, Son and Holy Ghost; of the God who in Christ became man.

Consider further, the Apostle says: "He that feareth (this) God." What, then, according to the apostolic doctrine, does it mean: to fear God? According to the doctrine of the holy Apostles, those alone fear God who have awakened out of their natural carnal security, who acknowledge themselves sinners, who recognize that with their sins they have deserved God's wrath and eternal disfavor, who give God alone all the honor and desire nothing but his grace. For thus it is said among other things: "Who shall not fear thee, O Lord, and glorify thy name? for thou only art holy." (Rev. 15, 4.). And in this connection and meaning the holy prophets already speak of the fear of God: "But there is forgiveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared." (Ps. 130, 4.)

Consider finally, the Apostle says: "He that feareth God and worketh righteousness." What do the Apostles understand by this, when they speak of doing right? Thus writes our Peter: Add to your faith virtue." (2 Peter 1, 5.) and further St. Paul: "For whatsoever is not of faith is sin"! (Rom. 14, 23.) Unto the unbelieving is nothing pure, but even their mind and conscience is defiled." (Tit. 1, 15.). The holy Apostles have followed in this doctrine, as in all others, their LORD and Master, who says: "As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. I am the vine, ye are the branches. He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing." (John 15, 4. 5) Where is it found, then, in the words of the Apostle, what the enemies of the faith and Indifferentists wish to prove from it? It stands nowhere less than precisely in these words; it stands nowhere, except in the heads and writings of these gentlemen, and because it seems so right to them, they carry it into the apostolic saying and then read their own imports out of it again.

But, some may perhaps say, does it not remain strange, after all, that the Apostle expresses himself just so, as we read? What, then, is the meaning of it, really? What does the Apostle really wish to say by it? — Of this, God willing, in the next number.

(Conclusion follows.)

(Communicated.)

Freie Blätter.
An Organ for Religious Enlightenment.

Under this title there appears at present in St. Louis a paper, edited and published by Mr. Franz Schmidt, which preaches the coarsest atheistic rationalism. To refute it we hold to be superfluous, since it has long since been overcome with all the weapons of science. Already years ago it was said in Germany that rationalism was like a thoroughly beaten dead dog, and as one is ashamed to go on cudgeling a stinking carcass, so the learned also were ashamed to go on combating the blasphemous nonsense of rationalism. 

Mr. Schmidt is an atheist or denier of God, at least he tries to deaden his conscience and to eradicate from it the eternal truth that there is a God. He himself confesses: "that the barriers between world and God, between natural and supernatural being are nothing but vain imaginations, inventions and errors." As said, it [illegible] superfluous to refute this denier of God; every one who is not yet wholly brutalized, but still possesses something of that which distinguishes man from the beasts, namely reason and conscience, can with slight trouble refute him.

The Freie Blätter belong, then, indisputably to the so-called progress. What the exalted goal of this progress is, the Socialists and Communists have stated most plainly, namely: abolition of all government and [illegible] marriage, annihilation of Christianity and of all religion, slaughter of all the rich, erection of foundling-houses, a general gluttony, drunkenness and whoring; in a wo[illegible] complete brutalization of mankind is their goal.

To live, to die, like the beast,
That is their theory.

The means which for the bringing about of a[illegible] general and complete brutalization of man[illegible]

*) We cannot refrain from remarking here [illegible] that not only the local "Anzeiger des Westens," from [illegible] nothing better was to be expected, but even the English-German newspaper of Dr. Gempp b[illegible] who in his youth is said to have had a Christian education [illegible], has recommended the "Blätter" named above, in which [illegible] almighty God in heaven is denied. Dr. Gempp has thereby himself broken the staff over his [illegible] which is to make the Germans known to the Americans, to inspire the latter with respect for the former, and to bring both stocks nearer to one another. [illegible] paper will serve for nothing but to open the eyes of the American [illegible] to what pool of atheism, [illegible] of godlessness, many of the Germans immigrated here [illegible] have sunk. Instead of respect Dr. Gempp will [illegible] to the religious or even only moral American — F[illegible] the deepest contempt upon the German name h[illegible] The Redact[illegible]