Narrow-Minded Lutheran Questions Dave Ramsey Seminar for LCMS

I'm sorry, but does a "confessional" Lutheran Synod have any business seeking financial advice from Evangelical Protestant Dave Ramsey?   Yes, we should certainly be responsible stewards of the financial gifts God has given us.  But is legalism going to be promoted?  For example, are those attending going to be told that God will financially punish them for not "tithing" (their strict 10%)?  

The fact that the Indiana District is going to reimburse the sem students for this is disturbing to me, especially since the Indiana District is one of the more "conservative" districts of the LCMS.  Perhaps I am making too much out of this, but coming from a Methobapticostal background, I can accurately guess what this will be about.  Yeah, the guy has good advice, but in a Left Kingdom sense.  I hope he does not mix the Right Kingdom in with his advice.  

Perhaps CTSFW shouldn't rob its students with ridiculous tuition to support "The Club"; and perhaps the LCMS should provide more than one-percent of its budget to assist sem students and their families.  Then Dave Ramsey wouldn't be necessary.

***

GJ - Don't be so narrow-minded! The non-Lutherans have all the answers. Check out the experts loved by Missouri, WELS, the Little Sect on the Prairie, and the CLC (sic):

1. Roman Catholic Bishop Weakland and his merry band of priestly Sodomites. WLC.
2. Another bishop marching in religious procession and speaking at the Little Schoolhouse on the Prairie, Bethany.
3. Leonard Sweet, space age Methodist at Concordia St. Louis.
4. C. Peter Wagner training the troops for WELS. Pentecostal Babtist.
5. Moo weaning Lutherans off the English Luther Bible.
6. Hybels teaching the lot of them that a God without wrath sent Christ without a cross to a world without sin.
7. Methodist Groeschel writing sermons for Glende, Ski, and many more.
8. Valleskey dumpster diving at Fuller, calling it Spoiling the Egyptians.

Important Post To Read and Remember about Christian Doctrine

Read this. Memorize it. Repeat it over again before succumbing to Lutheran papalism.

I am going to quote from an email from a Lutheran layman:  

Thanks again, as I will would like to use you as a theological screen so I interpret scripture correctly as I am not knowledgeable in Hebrew and Greek. 
 

I am happy to discuss Christian doctrine with people all the time, especially since so much effort has been made to silence me. As one ex-pastor chuckled the other day, "They thought they were done with you."

People need to get something down firmly in their minds. The truth of God's Word is revealed only through the Spirit, not through advanced degrees. Biblical languages are useful to know, but not knowing them is not a barrier to spiritual knowledge.

Luther said in the sermon for this week (Lenker set) - "The more educated, the more perverted." That came from a man who was pleased to mention his doctorate in Biblical studies (from a Catholic university, no less). An advanced education can be a great asset in serving and protecting the institution, which responds in kind by protecting its protectors from any challenges. Therefore, these factors do not necessarily lead to a superior knowledge of the Word:

1. A seminary degree.
2. Ordination.
3. A synodical position.
4. Training in Hebrew and Greek.
5. Advanced degrees.

First, someone must live in the Word. That includes, as an absolute necessity, engaging in doctrinal debates with people. Many clergy are useless because they spend far too much time in busy-work, goofing around, or synodical politics. Because they do not visit their own members or potential members, they have little grasp of the spiritual battles of others.

Many clergy have given up the battle themselves, so they move gradually from indolence to inertness to atheism.  Those who claim Biblical languages often do not use them much at all. WELS is always bragging about Hebrew and Greek, but that does not keep them from plagiarizing in English and defending the practice. Ask Deputy Doug Englebrecht, keeper of the flame.

It is easier to brag about Hebrew and Greek in front of people who have not studied either. In front of former classmates, the boast might evoke raucous laughter.

Secondly, the Word is clear and plain for everyone to grasp, regardless of station or education. If someone thinks the Word belongs to him, to interpret as he sees fit, then he will be blind to the truths of the Scriptures, no matter what he claims for himself. Faith in God is faith in His Word. That faith makes us bold to state those insights that come from God alone. They are hidden from man, especially the wise and powerful, but revealed to those considered foolish and weak.

Simply stating the truth will make the blind shriek the equivalent of - "You dare to arouse the wrath of the Great and Terrible Oz!?" The wrath is not faked, because the truth stirs up their Father Below, who answers through his servants. They will get even. They will never finish getting even.They will take out their wrath on everyone in the victim's families. They justify their rage by adding slander to their other crimes. In fact, they oppose justification by faith while specializing in self-justification.

This is all people need to be experts in discerning the spiritual truths of the Bible:

• The King James Bible.
• The Book of Concord.
• Lenker's Sermons of Luther.
• Lenski.

Roman Catholic Doctrines Embraced by Lutherans

Some claim to be placed in their positions by the Holy Spirit. That may be true - to serve as a bad example for all.

Please watch out for these Roman Catholic doctrines in your favorite Lutheran sect. These novel ideas are not Biblical.

1. Holy Mother Church is indefectible. That means the visible church cannot make a mistake. The same advocates will say the Word is unclear, ineffective, incomplete, and in need of clarification by Holy Mother Church. 
2. Papal infallibility. The genius of this doctrine is its application to all clergy in agreement with the pope. They derive their infallibility only through their agreement with him, but this is generally abstracted to "The Church" or "Synod." Doctrinal flat-liners will ask, "What does Synod say?"
3. Gray areas of Scripture. That is best expressed by stretching out gray as "g---r---a---y." Wince a little for effect, as if deep in thought. Rome switched to this as soon as they got clobbered in Biblical debates during the Reformation. Lutheran papalists seized on this as a great tactic, so they established their Boards of Doctrine, staffed with useful idiots. Each board is a bunch of bananas - green, yellow, and just plain rotten.
4. Enthusiasm - the Holy Spirit is at work everywhere except in the Word, where God is never at work. The higher the position, the more Spirit-soaked the individual is, the less likely anyone will challenge him...or her. Every entity within the organization is also anointed and incapable of error (#1). If there are any questions, see #2, because of #3.
5. Canon law. Nothing has been more effective for Rome than canon law, so Lutherans have their own. Anything can be done or undone through canon law. The worst false doctrine or the most egregious crimes can be ignored and forgotten if someone did not follow canon law in dealing with the situation. If they happen to do everything right, they are identified and excommunicated  for questioning #1- #4.
6. Indulgences, Purgatory, faith plus works. No one is ever forgiven - not completely. However, the richer someone is, the more likely he is to buy absolution with monetary gifts. For millions, all is forgiven.

These doctrines are in harmony with each other, providing a divine tranquility and stability.

---

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Roman Catholic Doctrines Embraced by Lutherans":

3. Laity will continue to be directed to the clergy and Synod for the 'correct' interpretation of Scripture. This has been happening for a long time with the (W)ELS teaching there are principles taught in Scripture and there are application's of principles. Only the clergy can determine when an application is Scriptural or not. The (W)ELS NNIV Hoodwink is a great example of this. The defensive statement, "Do you know Greek?" is another.

A more specific example is the following quote from District President Buchholz:

"Second, to the specific issue of women in the church, remember that there are principles and there are applications of principles. The principles are always inviolate. Some applications of principles are always inviolate. Other applications of principles may vary depending upon a whole passel of factors, including but not limited to: strength or weakness of faith; cultural sensitivities; customs of the people, and church etc. (An example might be the way Luther dealt with the radicals at Wittenberg who wanted to take the Reformation too quickly. He backed off and moved slowly, allowing the word to do its work in people’s hearts before he instituted things like Communion in both kinds—certainly a biblical practice.)

In asserting that Pastor Schewe was wrong to allow women to read sections of Scripture antiphonally, you want to be careful that you don’t turn the application of a principle into the principle itself. The principle that women are not to teach or have authority over a man is inviolate. Some applications of that principle, e.g., women pastors, women teaching men in Bible study, etc., are inviolate. However there is quite a stretch between women teaching (i.e., expounding, explaining, clarifying and elucidating Scripture) and reading Scripture antiphonally and collectively without giving instruction. (This doesn’t mean that Scripture itself is not instructive; that power to instruct inheres in the word. And, as you well know, the power and efficacy of the word to instruct is not made more or less effective whether it’s read by a woman or a man.)

Another question that may well be raised is whether a practice is wrong (i.e. inherently sinful) or merely ill-advised under the circumstances. Since in this case in point you’re dealing with an application—not the principle itself—there are a number of criteria that are to be evaluated to ascertain the benefit or detriment of an application. Does it pander to or foster a particular false belief? Is it an accommodation to worldly practice and mindset? Is it edifying? And so forth . ."

---

Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "Roman Catholic Doctrines Embraced by Lutherans":

Norcal763, maybe these quotes from DP Buchholz will help clarify his confession.

"God has forgiven the whole world. God has forgiven everyone his sins." This statement is absolutely true! This is the heart of the gospel, and it must be preached and taught as the foundation of our faith. But here’s where the caveat comes in: In Scripture, the word "forgive" is used almost exclusively in a personal, not a universal sense. The Bible doesn’t make the statement, "God has forgiven the world."

"God has forgiven all sins, but the unbeliever rejects God’s forgiveness." Again, this statement is true—and Luther employed similar terminology to press the point of Christ’s completed work of salvation.16 But we must also recognize that Scripture doesn’t speak this way."

"God has declared the entire world righteous." This statement is true, as we understand it to mean that God has rendered a verdict of "not-guilty" toward the entire world. It is also true—and must be taught—that the righteousness of Christ now stands in place of the world’s sin; this is the whole point of what Jesus did for us at Calvary. However, once again we’re wresting a term out of its usual context. In Scripture the term "righteous" usually refers to believers. "