LP Cruz wrote a post below, which never saw the light of day on the Intrepid Lutherans.
Cruz exemplifies critical thinking and intellectual honesty.
Here are some basic guidelines for critical thinking and intellectual honesty in theology:
- The opposite view needs to be identified and described accurately. For instance, if Rydecki wants to promote his vision for UOJ, he needs to state what he arguing against. Instead, he writes about "extreme anti-UOJ statements" and offers his version, to make the other side look ridiculous.
- The evidence has to be presented honestly. If a quotation is borrowed from a source, that source needs to be named. Cloning footnotes or citations is fine, as long as the practice is acknowledged. Otherwise, the author appears to be doing research instead of copying and pasting from a single source.
- Seminary professors and essayists are not in the same league as the great theologians of the Lutheran Church. Repeating seminary dog notes and conference talking points will never advance an argument. The ruled norm is the Book of Concord. Additional theologians worth studying in depth are: Luther, Melanchthon, Chemnitz, and Gerhard. In America we have a few more than Walther - Jacobs, Schmauk, and Krauth. Neglecting the best theologians for the political in-crowd is not productive or edifying. A good rule for theologians cited is - the deader, the better.
- Lutherans should be arguing for doctrinal clarity than an imaginary middle ground. There is no middle ground with false doctrine. All union efforts end in the worst doctrine prevailing. An honest division is better than a dishonest, manufactured unity (to reflect a point by Reu).
