Arguing from Authority is also called the Appeal to Authority - ad verecundiam. This logical fallacy depends on premises that can be examined for their truthfulness.
The insecure pastors use this argument because they cannot discuss doctrine with the laity. The more insecure they are, the more they bully. For example, Concordia Seminary Ft. Wayne is the remedial seminary for Missouri, designed for those with inadequate language training. An education there could be just as good as St. Louis, but there is always an inferiority complex at work among the graduates.
So it should be no surprise that two of the most obnoxious UOJ advocates--Jay Webber and Paul McCain--both graduated from Ft. Wayne and never advanced beyond their dogmatics notes.
The Wisconsin Sect and the Little Sect on the Prairie both emphasize the superiority of their plan, but both have mediocre faculties who teach synod-worship and Fuller principles. Dark Helmet, the infamous pope of the ELS, got himself a job on the seminary faculty without graduating from college. That made him an expert on UOJ, too.
Students vary in their abilities, no matter where they go to school. Many stop learning anything more once they graduate. The authority is not the school, the synod, or the synodical leaders. The only authority is the Word of God. The best commentary on the Word is the Book of Concord, but that does not excuse anyone from skipping their study of the Scriptures to quote this passage or that from the Book of Concord.
Greek and Hebrew are especially useful in studying the Word, but the insecure graduates act as if God revealed his Word only to those who took Greek 101 and Hebrews 10 - and got a C in both.
Wikipedia has a good summary of the Appeal to Authority:
X holds that A is true
X is a legitimate expert on the subject.
The consensus of experts agrees with X.
Therefore, there's a presumption that A is true.
Additional presuppositions are that X is an infallible expert from their infallible Holy Mother Synod. The Holy Spirit would never allow their synod to be wrong about anything (a Roman Catholic argument).
If various synodical leaders have endorsed UOJ, then it must be correct. Please do not go into historical background, such as Samuel Huber's repudiation by the Concordists. Huber's position is just too close to the Olde Synodical Conference.
Do not bring up Georg Christian Knapp, whose double-justification scheme at Halle predated the blessed landing of Bishop Martin Stephan, STD, in New Orleans.
Never mention that Missouri and WELS have taught justification by faith in their published materials, even in their catechisms. WELS got rid of Gausewitz entirely and flushed him down the memory hole. No one would know from the Grace (WELS) Milwaukee website that Gausewitz was the pastor there at once time, that he was the head of the entire Synodical Conference. Therefore, Gausewitz is no longer quotable, no longer an authority.
Concordia Publishing House still sells a KJV Small Catechism that fails to mention UOJ in any form. Although the Walther-Pieper faction gradually made UOJ canonical, vast numbers of LCMS pastors know it is hogwash.
When the Argument from Authority fails the nasty and deceitful purveyors of UOJ, they always have the Guilt by Association fallacy to use. The air is blue with Guilt by Association from the UOJ hive. The drones insult those who ask questions by accusing them of being told what to think.
One layman said to me, "No wonder people post on Steadfast and other blogs with fake names. They do not want the vicious attacks launched by the clergy."
 |
| Everyone is born forgiven, especially billionaire adulterers with a guilty conscience. Bethany Lutheran College can erect a few buildings to replace those feelings with a sense of pride. The ELS also sells mission opportunities so the chosen few can have European vacations. |
---
Brett Meyer has left a new comment on your post "The Logical Fallacy of Arguing from Authority":
Bishop Martin Stephan, STD ROFL!!
