 |
| Let No False Doctrine Me Beguile |
FRIDAY, AUGUST 1, 2014
A Travesty Interrupted
We'll get back to our "Travesty" series in just a bit. First, though, we need to deal with a deliciously WELSian comment we just received. Here it is (with my comments interspersed) in honorary Lillo-pink:
This thread is a perfect example of why no one takes any of you seriously.
No one takes any of who seriously? (Or is it any of whom?) Confessional Lutherans? You don't take Confessional Lutherans seriously? Maybe that's because you don't take the Confessions seriously.
None of you have even bothered to contact any of the leaders or discuss the matter with anyone at all who knows more about the conference or the presenter.
Yes! Only the second sentence and we've already gotten the patented WELS "Matthew 18 Maneuver". Just a few problems:
You all just sit on computers and blog about what you assume to be true, and you have an inflated view of the importance of that process.
You shouldn't sit on your computer. Very easy to break it that way. I'm simply blogging about what the conference website says (and doesn't say). An inflated view of the importance of what process? Blogging? Well, when you're not allowed to voice disagreement through official means, you have to use whatever's left.
This blog has quickly become a tabloid, not the valuable forum for discussion that it could have been.
Now I'm just confused. You just said that blogging isn't important. Now you say that this blog could have been valuable. Which is it? Is a blog only important and valuable as long as it doesn't actually criticize the WELS?
This thread is a perfect example of why no one takes any of you seriously.
No one takes any of who seriously? (Or is it any of whom?) Confessional Lutherans? You don't take Confessional Lutherans seriously? Maybe that's because you don't take the Confessions seriously.
None of you have even bothered to contact any of the leaders or discuss the matter with anyone at all who knows more about the conference or the presenter.
Yes! Only the second sentence and we've already gotten the patented WELS "Matthew 18 Maneuver". Just a few problems:
- Matthew 18 is about private sin, not public sin. In the case of public sin (and this conference is very public) a public rebuke is not only allowed, but required.
- The conference website doesn't tell us who the "leaders" are. There are contacts for registration, marketing, and (of course) sponsors, but no mention of who's on the organizing committee.
- You didn't contact me personally to discuss the matter with me. You just went right ahead and posted a public criticism of me. Hypocrisy--look it up.
You all just sit on computers and blog about what you assume to be true, and you have an inflated view of the importance of that process.
You shouldn't sit on your computer. Very easy to break it that way. I'm simply blogging about what the conference website says (and doesn't say). An inflated view of the importance of what process? Blogging? Well, when you're not allowed to voice disagreement through official means, you have to use whatever's left.
This blog has quickly become a tabloid, not the valuable forum for discussion that it could have been.
Now I'm just confused. You just said that blogging isn't important. Now you say that this blog could have been valuable. Which is it? Is a blog only important and valuable as long as it doesn't actually criticize the WELS?
 |
| Wauwatosa started this creative and ever-changing theology fad in WELS, but all they do is copy false teachers from the past and marvel at their creativity and flexibility. |
