This is Mark Paustian, currently teaching up at MLC. I applied to join the Church & Change forum merely because I learned that some materials I had put out many years ago, a long list of sermons series I had preached as an outreach exploratory missionary, were posted somewhere on the website.
(That's a whole 'nother story; in my freedom, I've changed my views on sermon series and am no longer completely comfortable being seen as an advocate of that homiletical method. I digress.)
Anyway, I confess to being one who has watched "Church & Change" with a little skepticism and concern. There's no need to react to that statement, since I'll admit it's largely based on perception. In fact, I teach communications at MLC (also Hebrew) and I both know the destructive power of
perception and am an energetic proponent of ethical dialogue. So, I say from the heart, more power to you!
My whole point is that, from what I've learned so far about Leonard Sweet, the people involved in "church and change" may be shooting themselves in the foot, unnecessarily polarizing the people of the WELS. That would sadden me. I can only think there are many, many people who are like me, hoping to hear good things come out of "church and change" to dispel our skepticism, chiefly by providing new models of energetic Lutheranism that manage to penetrate this pathetically lost culture. I was in church planting and home mission work for over 12 years, and I do understand the pain and passion
that clearly makes the people in "church and change," and all of you, tick.
I fear Leonard Sweet will become the issue. To put it crassly, he's a PR nightmare:-)
[GJ - And not a doctrinal nightmare? How Church and Changish to say that.]
He threatens to be the thing people will point to as telling evidence of what "church and change" is all about, how well rooted and grounded this rising organization is in appropriate theological exploration and expression, even how Lutheran you really want to be. And I'm afraid people will falsely read the minds and hearts of the organizers, as if they only turn to a man of Sweet's theology after concluding the answers they need most are not contained in their own,as if mining the depths of God's heart in his Word has plainly not worked.so we turn with eager ears to a brilliant unregenerate mind. I'm not saying that's a fair assessment. I'm positive it's NOT a fair assessment. And I'm not saying Sweet's talk won't be fascinating, or even helpful to gospel ministry in some way the speaker himself doesn't have the heart to intend. (At the same time, if you've ever been broken, truly broken, the only indispensable word was absolution.and to listen too long to a speaker who doesn't know of such things finally does little but break your heart. I know how pious and simplistic that sounds.) Anyway, what I am saying is that Sweet will polarize, damage the credibility of your movement and create needless controversy. I have a hard time believing this speaker is worth it, from what little I know about him. I could be wrong. Someone in our camp is obviously impressed with him for reasons I'm just not privy to. That's an honest confession of ignorance, not a thinly veiled jab.
So much of your dialogue in this chat room heartens me and causes me to reconsider my poorly substantiated concerns about "church and change." In the deepest place, we are the same in Christ, and we all want essentially the same thing for our dear, dear WELS, though our visions may differ greatly. Having Sweet as a keynote speaker (please tell me I'm wrong about that) tugs hard in the opposite direction. (By the way, I was captivated and edified by a speech by Edward Veiths, author of "Loving God With All Your Mind" at a WELS college symposium not too long ago. He's not WELS, but he is a brilliant, regenerate, theologically conservative, Christ-centered thinker who has much to say about communicating Christ even in a secular postmodern academic setting. I'd endorse him for a setting like the one we have in mind in a heartbeat. I'm not framing this in terms of fellowship.)
Now, what if we were looking for a keynote speaker and asked, "Who in our midst do we think has the very strongest grasp of the intended meaning of God's own Word to the WELS by virtue of their scholarship in the original languages of Scripture?" What if we said, "Isn't that who we want to set the tone for our event.someone who can speak to us from the very heart and mind of God!?" And what if we let come to mind the names of, for example, my colleagues at MLC, scholars like Joel Frederick (Greek) and Tom Nass (Hebrew).now that would be change.
Sorry this was so long. If it turns out I've only managed to offend, this will be the last you'll ever hear from me, I promise.
Mark Paustian
---
For what it's worth,
Vicar John Stelljes [Pilgrimage to Exponential and Brother Stetzer]
The theme of this year's Church and Change conference is "Changeless Gospel, Changing World". It's being held Wed - Fri, Nov. 9 - 11 in Madison, WI. Sixteen workshops will offer insights on WELS innovative ministries that are proclaiming the changeless Gospel in a changing world...from Professor Mark Paustian's narrative witnessing to Pastor Jeff Gunn's very blessed mission start to Campus Pastor Tom Trapp's interview with atheists and agnostics and much, much more! Dr. Leonard Sweet, an outstanding presenter, will speak on our changing culture. This will give us information which will help us design Gospel ministries to reach our changing world. Phil Boileau is composing an original theme song for the conference. In addition, we plan to have a room full of vendors and sources of materials we hope you will find useful in your ministry. On top of that, we plan to have two evenings of Christian entertainment by WELS artists, including comedy. There will be a lot of Christian music throughout. Here is the next workshop and presenter:
God's goal for me is maturity - "attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ" (Ephesians 4:13) presented by Pastor Randy Hunter. The gospel builds maturity; love demonstrates maturity. Jesus gave us a new commandment: love one another. Love demonstrates discipleship and maturity. But what happens when people of the Christian community don't even know each other much less those outside the church? Loving one another, demonstrating maturity, gets harder. This workshop will lead participants to better understand maturity, identify obstacles to Jesus' new command, determine causes of the obstacles in your church and your life, and search for solutions.
---
Prepared to Answer:
Telling the Greatest Story Ever Told
by Mark A. Paustian
Are you afraid to be asked about your Christian beliefs because you don't feel prepared? This set consists of Prepared to Answer (221 pages, 12N2021) and More Prepared to Answer (254 pages, 12N2022). These two books provide a helpful model for sharing the Christian faith by supplying Scripture-based responses to common objections to Christianity. Author Mark Paustian provides a unique approach to answer the questions people have. Since every situation suggests a story, he uses divinely inspired narratives (well-loved gospel stories) to "plant a seed." The power in the words and deeds of Christ show us the evil in ourselves, smash our complacency, and reveal our desperate need for his grace.
Some topics in these books include abortion, why bad things happen, Jesus as myth, feminism, and religion as viewed by science. You can order these books separately or as a set. For specific information about each book, see the product descriptions for the individual titles. Paper cover.
Some topics in these books include abortion, why bad things happen, Jesus as myth, feminism, and religion as viewed by science. You can order these books separately or as a set. For specific information about each book, see the product descriptions for the individual titles. Paper cover.
---
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "New NPH Stuff from Church and Changer Mark Paustia...":
I would assume that you have never heard Mark Paustian speak in person, or bothered to read either of the "Prepared to Answer" books. If you had, you would know far better than your accusations reveal.
Mark Paustian is not challenging the efficacy of the Word. He is not suggesting that the Word and Sacraments are not the means of grace. He is suggesting that different people need a different approach ("different strokes for different folks", I believe the phrase goes).
Paustian's comments concerning Sweet are right on the money.
***
GJ - I have to assume the words reprinted above were not read with discernment or comprehension. There is a cute little dance, both for and against Church and Change, coming from someone who spoke at their conference - a sure sign of approval.
His "right on the money" comments include:
And I'm not saying Sweet's talk won't be fascinating, or even helpful to gospel ministry in some way the speaker himself doesn't have the heart to intend.
How exactly would Sweet the Space Cadet, the New Ager, the Methodist Leftist fascinate and help any Lutheran?
GA works - say one thing and then the opposite. Let the audience pick a version to believe.
Dom Perignon has done the same thing with Church and Change. He has some issues with it, but he gave a Bible study of sorts there, and he attended the 2007 conference. When VP Patterson drops his plans to go hunting and flies up to Milwaukee for a Church and Change conference, his heart is with the Chicaneries.
Another factoid - Paustian started the church near Love's Park that made it pack up and move (or plan to). They out Church Growthed Larry Olson's CG congregation.
---
raklatt has left a new comment on your post "New NPH Stuff from Church and Changer Mark Paustia...":
I have read Paustian’s "Prepared to Answer" and found he asks many more questions than he answers. The style of his book is like the style of his post, as though he is afraid to stir the pot as well as Luther did against Zwingli and Muenzer.
***
GJ - KJV James 5:12 But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation.
The strange thing is - WELS pastors think their anonymous snarkiness is convincing, when it is just the opposite.
---
Someone very experienced in party politics and WELS politics made this comment:
For a professor teaching classes in "communications", Mark Paustian's convoluted litany re: Leonard Sweet and Church and Change, appears to be cognizant dissonance. But there's a name for it in political jargon. It's called "plausible deniability" for when the roof begins to cave in from dissent after the fact.
***
GJ - Veterans call it GA training.
---
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "New NPH Stuff from Church and Changer Mark Paustia...":
Notice how Prof Paustian is still so tactful with the CG crowd, careful not impugn their motives. However, when it comes to the anti-CG crowd, then he's free to impugn and malign. If he's not full-blown CG, that shows which way he leans.
Paustian also uses the Clinton defense when it comes to Rockford--denying the charges, nitpicking at the factual basis of the case, and impugning the integrity of the witnesses, saying he sinned and is in need of God's mercy. For instance, he says that the mileage between the churches is wrong. That old post he refers to can be found on Ichabod by searching on Mark Paustian. Related posts can be found searching on Larry Olson or "Larry Olsen's old church". A Google Maps search reveals that the distance between Loves Park and New Life is 5.7 miles, whereas the old post says it is 5 miles. That's pretty close, so half the case is holding up to scrutiny quite well.
The distance between New Life and the Belvidere church is 8.8 miles, not the 5 miles as stated in the old post. Whoever wrote that in to Dr. Jackson probably meant the west edge of Belvidere is 5 miles from New Life. What Paustian is not telling the reader is that the WELS church is on the extreme south side of Belvidere, and that involves stop-and-go city traffic for Belvidere residents, whereas getting to New Life involves mostly highway driving on Hwy 20. So the difference between driving to the Belvidere church and driving to New Life is only a matter of a few minutes for many Belvidere residents! That's not enough to discourage anyone from Belvidere with an itch for the CG style, or for a larger church, from attending New Life.
Since everything around Belvidere is mostly corn and soy fields, and most farms are corporate-owned so large farm families are increasingly rare, so the Belvidere church can only draw people from Belvidere itself. It must have EVERY WELS member in Belvidere join it just to stay afloat. Thus, to introduce this easy alternative church option for WELS members in Belvidere jeopardizes the Belvidere church, as well as being detrimental to the Loves Park WELS church. As proof, look at Hope's church sign on their web page. It reminds one of a tombstone!:
http://www.hopebelvidere.org./index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=16&Itemid=19
One would think that if there were a territorial conflict with one WELS church, much less two, that would be enough to locate to the south of Rockford where the new church was envisioned to go in the first place! However, if the CG crowd envisioned creating a WELS fast-growing mega-church, like they envisioned but failed to create in Columbus, Ohio, then New Life would be located exactly where it is today, overlapping the areas staked out previously by other WELS churches.
Then Prof Paulstian stakes his case on his reputation and the motives in his heart. However, only God can see into his heart, but we can only look at the deeds and recorded statements. Here is the evidence we can see:
1) He tries to distance himself from the CG crowd, but the fact is the church he left behind in Rockford is decidedly CG, and probably was when he was there. Just look at their websty.
2) No one can find an impolite word written by Paustian about the CG crowd, but only incrimination toward the anti-CG crowd.
3) He admits that he set up New Life in conjunction with the pastor at the too nearby Loves Park church, judiciously not giving his name! Why's that? I'm sure that at the time that pastor was none other than Rev. Larry Olson, who received a D.Min at Fuller Seminary, and is a big WELS CG guru.
4) Then Rev Larry Olson received a call to be the Waldo Werning Professor of Church Growth at Martin Luther College. Sometime later Rev. Paustian followed him to MLC and received a professorship in communications, which class is probably geared toward giving the students the tools they need to run CG-style churches.
5) Etc. (search Ichabod for more).
---
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "New NPH Stuff from Church and Changer Mark Paustia...":
The real reason Paustian wants to make clear that this was the last time he'd read this blog is not for the sake of Ichabod readers, but because in the CG circles he wants to hang around with, or rub elbows with, reading Christian News and the Ichablog is a BIG taboo--even to respond to critics. Paustian wrote:
"Was I clear enough that I resolve never to access this blog again?"
***
GJ - He solicited Facebook connections, so I friended him. Mark sent a couple of dancing-around semi-hostile emails, and UNFRIENDED me a few minutes later.
19 comments:
Sounds like Mark is sucking up to the movers and shakers of the the C&C stealth evangelist movement, not exactly a fine "Here I Stand" moment.
That's a disappointment! This is what our school has come to? No wonder they turn out so many goofballs up there in New Ulm.
Thank you Mark Paustian, you have helped me to understand why so many MLC students and graduates suffer from immaturity and inadequate personality development.
The power in the words and deeds of Christ show us the evil in ourselves, smash our complacency, and reveal our desperate need for his grace.>>>
Too often that does NOT hold true for the WELS clergy.
I would assume that you have never heard Mark Paustian speak in person, or bothered to read either of the "Prepared to Answer" books. If you had, you would know far better than your accusations reveal.
Mark Paustian is not challenging the efficacy of the Word. He is not suggesting that the Word and Sacraments are not the means of grace. He is suggesting that different people need a different approach ("different strokes for different folks", I believe the phrase goes).
Paustian's comments concerning Sweet are right on the money.
I have read Paustian’s "Prepared to Answer" and found he asks many more questions than he answers. The style of his book is like the style of his post, as though he is afraid to stir the pot as well as Luther did against Zwingli and Muenzer.
My response is directed to Mark Paustian.
Please, if you are reading this, "Prepared to Answer" was composed by you! Your work is 100 times more coservative and confessional then those apostates at the Church and Change. I would propose that you take a higher stand. For instance, do you want to share the gospel? Then sit down with your brothers at the C&C and speak the law and gospel to them. Those guys, Hunter, Gunn, Jeske, and the rest have fallen so hard down the slippery-slope. They are trying to take WELS with them. Their teachings go against the things that you are trying to inform about. One example would be feminism. Hunter's congregation has a female staff minister assisting with the Means Of Grace. Come on Paustian, you might as well be throwing all your books(and wisdom) out the window. WELS practices the doctrine of close communion, could you explain that to Pastor Jeske? Look, I could say much....much.... more. But everybody knows the story with these folks. And so do you.(from Willow Creek to everything else outside the frame-work of fellowship)
Last, but not least, stand tall. WELS needs leaders not sell-outs. Go to the Church and Change and minister the truth to them. They, and all of us sinners, need spiritual guidance from Orthodox Lutheran teachings. Notice the word "Lutheran," because some have trouble keeping that term. It may offend somebody! When the word "Lutheran" finaly disappears, our confessions will cease to be aknowledged by our leaders.
May God bless you Mark Paustian! Are you prepared to answer?
In Christ,
from WELS church lady
Mark is "Prepared to Answer" but he's waiting for a cue for which way the wind is blowing.
WOW! You all realize these posts are from FOUR YEARS AGO, right??? Sweet was at the C&C conference in '04, if I'm not mistaken... and he was ineed interetsting! Why on earth would you dig this up now? Slow news day, "doctor"?
Icky does not have an original thought left in his brain.
This is Mark Paustian. You've succeeded in embarrassing me. Allow just a few words of explanation on this, my first and last post.
Here's the history: I accepted an invitation to speak at a conference based on some acquaintance with the man who invited me. "Church and Change" wasn't in the email I received. The writer probably assumed I knew what group he was associated with. I did not. I was only vaguely aware that there was controversy surrounding Church and Change. (This is all very old news by the way.) When I learned what some of the issues were, I entered a discussion group for a short time and tried to dissuade members from bringing in Leonard Sweet as a guest speaker. I wrote in ignorance in many ways and would have handled things differently, especially had I known my late night comments would come back to me years later. I was aiming for tact, for not impugning the motives or faith of my brothers and sisters. I wrote as I did in the interest of being heard by people I did and still do count as my family of faith.
I didn't get my way on that issue, as Sweet was not uninvited. I withdrew from the discussion group. (From the way that discussion went, I think the leaders would have been surprised to learn I had been trying to "suck up" to them:) But, no, I did not withdraw my participation in the conference as that, too, would have been done on hearsay.
I had long conversations with respected colleagues at my college about whether I should still lead a break-out group at the conference. Martin Luther College is a wonderful and important place, and I didn't want to hurt her reputation. However, we were and are still in fellowship with all the people in question. (I trust my synod officials to handle things in a brotherly and orderly way; I have no knowledge of reasons to end fellowship with the people involved. For reasons that will follow, I simply don't believe the assertions in this blog.)
Well, the consensus was that our college should use opportunities afforded us to influence that group rather than the alternative. My part was humble, but your readers would have been very pleased by the opening sermon preached to that group by a seminary professor.
My opinion, in keeping with my conscience, is that there are ways a guest speaker from outside our fellowship can be introduced and handled that would not be confusing in terms of fellowship. Just as there are ways it could be handled that would be very confusing and harmful. The issue is not black-and-white for me. I went to the conference to see for myself rather than listen to gossip and rumor. Sweet was thought-provoking in a number of ways, but not my choice for a conference speaker. I realize my association with him through the conference has, apparently, resulted in confusion for some, which I regret. I left the conference early and did not hear some troubling things that were said in the closing session, but I have it on good authority that the speaker was confronted in the proper way and responded in a way the completely satisfied his confronter. What I didn't care for at the conference was limited to issues of style - at worst I thought of one writer's comments about "the wine of Lutheran theology served in a Styrofoam cup." At best, I saw a zeal for the knowledge of Christ that can only be a work of the Holy Spirit, the latter outweighing the former. I personally heard nothing even remotely approaching heresy.
That ended my involvement with Church and Change, but not prayers that my WELS brothers and sisters are blessed in their desire to worship the Savior in spirit and in truth and to reach out to the lost with all their worth. (continued in the next post)
I appreciate the comments on this blog addressed directly to me and challenging me to be bold and so on. I take those words to heart. I would also appreciate if further correspondence would come to be directly. (I'm on Facebook, for example.) I won't be accessing this blog even to read how these statements are going to be dissected. From the nature of other comments, such as that my somewhat ill-conceived post to a discussion group years ago furnishes the reason that MLC graduates are (however the comment went)...this doesn't seem to me to be a very fruitful dialogue.
My challenge to your readers, in Christian love, would simply be that they should practice some discernment on this blog. Here's why...
The article relating to my exploratory mission is filled with factual errors, easily demonstrated, on everything from the distance between churches, to how the church began (as an effort initiated and led by the Pastor and congregation in Loves Park we were supposedly trying to kill off), its style of worship, the way it grew (over 200 adult confirmations), how we went about decisions about property, the way we dealt in love and respect with our sister congregations with whom we cooperated in many programs and efforts (who received transferred members from us as well as vice versa)...and in virtually every assertion. That we brought a new model of worship and church planting, and this in the interest of building a mega-church and shutting down the churches nearby, well, it's laughable to anyone who knows me. Better, it is really quite sad. I pray the harm was minimal, as God's mercy is great.
That article is pure slander and lie. Even taking it in the most generous way, that the writer didn't know about the errors, it still sort of takes your breath away that he didn't even bother to find out. Such things did not seem to matter either to many who have read the piece, swallowed it whole and reacted. I cannot allow myself to be drawn in to such an environment. This, and all of you, will be a matter of prayer.
It's a serious thing for one's words or actions to confuse naive believers in any way. I remain open to criticism of my speaking and writing. No one can find more against me than I find against myself, and I rest in the cross of Jesus, the source of this gentle, non-defensive response. I do believe and stake my soul on the doctrine of objective justification - if that has anything to do with why I now find myself a target, I can only glory in it.
All may feel free to contact me directly. Was I clear enough that I resolve never to access this blog again?
Sincerely,
Mark Paustian
LOL, you got called on your C&C sympathies. The false humility part is real smooth, too. Meow.
-refugee from Lutheran Church Growth
Anon @ 1:35
I seriously question your reading comprehension skills if that's all you got from Paustian's comments. Your remark was stupid and uncalled for.
Raise your hand if you know the man.
Anyone? Anyone?
Mark Paustian has been my professor, my advisor, my confessor and my friend.
While four years ago this article would have been a grand critique, now it seems odd.
Worse yet, do none of you understand the written word? Written, words are nearly devoid of context. To judge the man's humility as "false" is so far out of bounds it is silly.
I HATE the 8th commandment card but that, right there, is taking someone's words and actions in the worst possible way. I'm not sure how else to define Anon@1:35's stupid stupid comment.
The man has nothing false about his humility. If you knew him, you wouldn't say that. Perhaps you should put a slightly better than worst construction on his words.
Or email him, or facebook, as he made himself available.
And again, if you know me you know there is no church and change/8th commandment nazi bone in my body. But, assume whatever you want.
Notice how Prof Paustian is still so tactful with the CG crowd, careful not impugn their motives. However, when it comes to the anti-CG crowd, then he's free to impugn and malign. If he's not full-blown CG, that shows which way he leans.
Paustian also uses the Clinton defense when it comes to Rockford--denying the charges, nitpicking at the factual basis of the case, and impugning the integrity of the witnesses, saying he sinned and is in need of God's mercy. For instance, he says that the mileage between the churches is wrong. That old post he refers to can be found on Ichabod by searching on Mark Paustian. Related posts can be found searching on Larry Olson or "Larry Olsen's old church". A Google Maps search reveals that the distance between Loves Park and New Life is 5.7 miles, whereas the old post says it is 5 miles. That's pretty close, so half the case is holding up to scrutiny quite well.
The distance between New Life and the Belvidere church is 8.8 miles, not the 5 miles as stated in the old post. Whoever wrote that in to Dr. Jackson probably meant the west edge of Belvidere is 5 miles from New Life. What Paustian is not telling the reader is that the WELS church is on the extreme south side of Belvidere, and that involves stop-and-go city traffic for Belvidere residents, whereas getting to New Life involves mostly highway driving on Hwy 20. So the difference between driving to the Belvidere church and driving to New Life is only a matter of a few minutes for many Belvidere residents! That's not enough to discourage anyone from Belvidere with an itch for the CG style, or for a larger church, from attending New Life.
Since everything around Belvidere is mostly corn and soy fields, and most farms are corporate-owned so large farm families are increasingly rare, so the Belvidere church can only draw people from Belvidere itself. It must have EVERY WELS member in Belvidere join it just to stay afloat. Thus, to introduce this easy alternative church option for WELS members in Belvidere jeopardizes the Belvidere church, as well as being detrimental to the Loves Park WELS church. As proof, look at Hope's church sign on their web page. It reminds one of a tombstone!:
http://www.hopebelvidere.org./index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=16&Itemid=19
One would think that if there were a territorial conflict with one WELS church, much less two, that would be enough to locate to the south of Rockford where the new church was envisioned to go in the first place! However, if the CG crowd envisioned creating a WELS fast-growing mega-church, like they envisioned but failed to create in Columbus, Ohio, then New Life would be located exactly where it is today, overlapping the areas staked out previously by other WELS churches.
Then Prof Paulstian stakes his case on his reputation and the motives in his heart. However, only God can see into his heart, but we can only look at the deeds and recorded statements. Here is the evidence we can see:
1) He tries to distance himself from the CG crowd, but the fact is the church he left behind in Rockford is decidedly CG, and probably was when he was there. Just look at their websty.
2) No one can find an impolite word written by Paustian about the CG crowd, but only incrimination toward the anti-CG crowd.
3) He admits that he set up New Life in conjunction with the pastor at the too nearby Loves Park church, judiciously not giving his name! Why's that? I'm sure that at the time that pastor was none other than Rev. Larry Olson, who received a D.Min at Fuller Seminary, and is a big WELS CG guru.
4) Then Rev Larry Olson received a call to be the Waldo Werning Professor of Church Growth at Martin Luther College. Sometime later Rev. Paustian followed him to MLC and received a professorship in communications, which class is probably geared toward giving the students the tools they need to run CG-style churches.
5) Etc. (search Ichabod for more).
As a WELS pastor, I have heard Professor Paustian speak and present papers and answer questions on a couple of occasions. I have heard him preach several times. I have read his books.
Believe me, I absolutely detest Church and Change and what they have done to my synod. But Mark Paustian is of a completely "different spirit" than the Church and Change scoundrels. He is a solidly Lutheran and Confessional pastor.
I'm ashamed that what should be a proper stand against false teachers in our synod has turned into a witch hunt that's dragging even good solid pastors through the mud.
The real reason Paustian wants to make clear that this was the last time he'd read this blog is not for the sake of Ichabod readers, but because in the CG circles he wants to hang around with, or rub elbows with, reading Christian News and the Ichablog is a BIG taboo--even to respond to critics. Paustian wrote:
"Was I clear enough that I resolve never to access this blog again?"
For what it's worth, I'd like to just add my two cents and add that Professor Paustian is, quite simply, the most humble man that I've ever met (that’s no exaggeration), and a solid theologian who holds Scriptural truth above everything else. He has been the most influential teacher I've had here, and counseled me through some very difficult times, all by pointing me straight to Christ crucified and the promises found in His Word. The Lord has truly blessed our college of ministry with Professor Paustian's ministry on campus.
As for the Church Growth discussion, I'd be lying to you if I claimed to know much about these topics. However, when it comes down to it, all I've ever gotten from Professor Paustian is God's Word, pure and simple, and I can't say that he has departed down any erroneous road. You guys can put him down if you want, but at the very least I'll add my testimony to his excellent character. We're blessed to have him here, I'm only one of hundreds - nay, thousands - of students who have passed through our doors that would say that, and nothing you say will ever really change that.
But what do I know? I’m only a senior pastor-track guy, and hardly wise by your standards.
But maybe that’s all I need to appreciate God’s wonderful gift to our church.
So to those of you who have already thrown aside this man without meeting him, I’d ask you not to let your opinion be colored by a mere blog. If you ever had a chance to actually sit down with this man and have a talk, you’d wonder why you ever felt the way you did.
Soli Deo Gloria,
--Nate Walther
Post a Comment