Many arguments are unedifying. They remind me of toy balloons filled with hot air and let loose.
- They make some rude noises,
- Fly around unpredictably, and
- Quickly run out of energy.
One clue is the leading argument, a series of personal attacks followed by an equally weak series of straw man logical fallacies. The straw man fallacy flops by claiming, "You are saying..." and filling in the blank with nonsense. In contrast, a good argument offers a fair summary, often with quotations, and then uses evidence to refute the opponents' position.
Has anyone seen an article or book promoting Objective Justification which lays out the arguments for Justification by Faith as expressed in the Scriptures and Lutheran Reformation? No, they communicate the attitude that there is only one position, which was always there. As WELS claims, the NIV finally has the wording Paul would have used if he were a better writer - as in "all are justified." Paul was OJ - who knew?
Ignoring Academic Truths
The genius of current argumentation is ignoring academic truths and rushing ahead with their substitution for those truths, an effort to establish their opinions as the new canon, undeniable eternal truths.
I was thinking last night about academic truths ignored in various discussions. By academic, I mean a body of evidence that can be easily uncovered if there is a desire to do so, often by research or writing by well known leaders of the past.
Biblical Inerrancy
This was the universal belief of various Christian confessions, opposed only by small sects such as the Socianians and early Unitarians. This changed very slowly from the influence of Halle University Pietists who ushered in an era of rationalism at their school. British rationalists also contributed to this change, hailed by the modern New Testament scholars. Their heroes came mostly from rationalistic Halle.
The change in America began with attacks on the traditional New Testament text. The three frauds - Tischendorf, Westcott, and Hort - invented their own style of text, hailed as scientific. The vast majority of Christian leaders and scholars advocate this "scientific" text and refuse to use or name anything (KJV family) using the traditional text. If the actual text of the Old and New Testaments are voted upon by post-moderns, why take its meaning seriously. The same blunt instruments have been applied to the canon, the number of books in the Bible, with similar results.
Creation
When we read the history of science, the current authors fail to explain - their heroes and heroines believed God created the universe. That position is not allowed in any science curriculum or science department today.
But that is also true at Concordia, St. Louis, where Creation is watered down and those who object are labeled slanderers. The confessional chameleon, Matt Harris, responded, "I believe, help Thou my unbelief."
Justification by Faith
Apart from the sterile, mummified domains of Midwestern Lutheran sects, everyone else has known and taught that Justification by Faith was the foundation of the Lutheran Reformation. Zwingli's and Calvin's alleged improvements only show that they hitched a ride and tried to feign allegiance because the work and sacrifices had been made.
But lo, the heirs of the syphilitic bishop, Martin Stephan, continue to leverage their Easter absolution of the world against the Bible, Reformation, and Book of Concord. They only magnify their errors by picking one moment after another for their Objective Justification. When asked to prove their thesis, they run like cowards and cry like Brownies whose cookies were stolen.
Not everyone gets to know world famous Yale church historians like Roland Bainton and Jaroslav Pelikan, but the unenlightened could take a peek at the books and articles they published.
Remember that David Scaer sneered at Walter Maier and his family, though the patriarch earned a PhD in Semitics (Old Testament languages) and established a world-famous radio ministry. He did not fail his PhD thesis and come home to a G.E.D. (good enough degree) from Concordia, St. Louis. Perhaps one should pay some attention to the scholar-broadcaster instead of rehearsing grudges like Waldo Werning in his last book. They are hilariously similar in tone and doctrinal confusion, Scaer's and Werning's.
Avoid Sectarian Thinking
True scholars avoid sectarian thinking, but the rebels get punished - even in science.
The problem with religious sects is that the opinions of one become the canonized truths of the entire group, an effect enhanced by the outrage of relatives and descendants.
A scholar is not someone with a PhD. That is an American obsession. The word "scholar" comes from the Greek word for leisure, because their scholars did not have degrees but original thoughts and creations.
The clergy, from MDivs on down to DMins from Fuller, are the least likely to be scholars. The interested laity are the most likely to study the Word of God, the Book of Concord, and faithful books, without being tied down to the political opinions of the seminary faculty.
The Lutheran clergy are have already taken their denominations down the road to Perdition. There is no essential difference between the OJ of ELCA and the OJ of WELS-ELS-LCMS-OLCC-CLC (sic). Their Church Growth was learned at the same schools, like Fuller,Trinity Divinity, and Willow Creek. Take the photo quiz below and ask, "Which synod is superior to the other?"
 |
| Future ELCA pastor Anders Nelson danced at the Luther Seminary chapel, the hoots and applause of his friends in the recording. |
 |
| WELS Keynote speaker at the Leadership Conference not only had a cross-dressing congregational picnic, but they still post all the photos. |
 |
| Mueller's former congregation should stir memories of SP Schroeder sending out a letter with Joel Hochmuth about ELCA's recognition of gay ordination and marriage. |
