Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Donald_Kirchner

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 840
1
Your Turn / Re: I Need Some Catechism Help
« on: Yesterday at 05:28:54 PM »
“I give up, except…”

Peter (Essential Austinian vibe) Garrison

Except for the straw man finale. 😆

2
Your Turn / Re: New CPH Large Catechism
« on: Yesterday at 05:03:37 PM »
You are confusing apples with oranges.  Your analogy doesn't apply.  A hymn in a hymnal is not an essay written to teach us about the Large Catechism.  They fall into different categories. 


Though I would argue that we should get rid of all hymns in the hymnal written by Unitarians and Modernists.

 ;D  Stop digging, Rolf!

3
Your Turn / Re: New CPH Large Catechism
« on: Yesterday at 04:39:46 PM »
In regard to the hymn of Wesley that you quoted, it is beautiful and doctrinally sound.  I don't know why it has not been included in any LCMS hymnal. 

Perhaps the decisionmaker used the same [il]logic that you do with Paulson? I'e.:

I am not arguing against what Wesley wrote in that hymn. (Because of other theological error,) I am arguing against including that hymn by Wesley, regardless of its merits.


4
Your Turn / Re: New CPH Large Catechism
« on: Yesterday at 03:30:11 PM »

I think we should let the readers judge Mr. Turnipseed's reasoning for themselves.

He highlights where the CPH LC essay says, "Some Christians sense themselves as the gender or sex opposite to their physical sex. Other Christians are sexually attracted to individuals of the same sex."

Mr. Turnipseed's twitter-take on his highlighted excerpt? "Here we have the New Catechism affirming a reality behind transgenderism, saying that it is in fact real and as described by those pushing it. This is a complete denial of God’s creation, but that shouldn’t be surprising..."

People can decide for themselves how much stock to put into Mr. Turnipseed's analysis.

Well, it appears that by that statement Mr. Turnipseed denies or at least ignores original sin, its effect on God's "very good" creation, and the corrupted image of God in which we all are born.

5
Your Turn / Re: New CPH Large Catechism
« on: Yesterday at 02:15:08 PM »
I have concerns about who was chosen to contribute to this book.  Stephen Paulson is one of the contributors to this book.  Here is what he writes about the vicarious satisfaction...

There's our prime example of irrelevance and the argumentum ad hominem for the day.

On another board, someone wrote:

"The Lutheran Service Book includes hymns by Wesley. Even though the ones selected are not doctrinally suspect many of his unselected hymns are as heterodox as they come. The LSB even includes "God of Grace and God of Glory" (850) written by the notorious heretic Fosdick who denied several key doctrines (e.g., virgin birth, second coming, substitutionary atonement, inerrancy of the Bible, etc.) and used the "code words" of the 1920s to signal progressive theology and teach it (even in this hymn I would argue). Should we call back the LSB for review because some of the writers of hymns taught things in OTHER places that are at variance with our doctrine even those included are perfectly consistent with our views? ...

The standard book by Elert ("The Structure of Lutheranism") is published by CPH but Elert also taught some ideas that run contrary to LCMS doctrine such as a denial of the Third Use of the Law, claiming it was a Melanchthonian 'interpolation.'"

On that same board, another wrote: "We also would add that Isaac Watts was likely an Arian and Unitarian, although his language on the point was quite vague. Without Watts, we would not have "Joy to the World," "Our God our Help in Ages Past" or "When I Survey the Wond'rous Cross"

Others have stated that Sasse held some views that do not align with LCMS doctrine.

In my classes at SemStL, we used texts by Forde (Theology is for Proclamation, one of my all-time favorites), Elert, and even Avery Dulles. So what?

But this irrelevant argument is nothing new. Heck, when I was at Sem, I recall Daniel Preus expressing to me a questioning of Robert Kolb's theology! Well, after all, he hung out with German church historian and theologian Irene Dingel! He even brought her to SemStL where she gave a theological presentation to us!

6
Your Turn / Re: New CPH Large Catechism
« on: Yesterday at 02:05:35 PM »
2 objections stand out:
1. Non LCMS theologians who contributed essays to the project. There seems to be some offense that a CPH project would allow ELCA authors to participate. 
2. Women were allowed to contribute essays to this project. There is a firm stance that women cannot teach men concerning doctrine and that LCMS should not allow it.
Indeed, the chief criticisms of the essays in the book seem to be grounded more in the identity of the authors than in the content of their contributions. Likewise, the initial defenses of the book seem to be grounded more in the identity (or alleged anonymity) of the critics than in the content of their criticisms. In other words, both sides seem to be committing the genetic fallacy instead of engaging in a reasonable discussion of ideas by assessing each other's claims on their merits.

I think there's a natural progression from (a) the statements are exceptional to (b) who's writing these things?

Might I be so bold as to suggest (and to do so as a reminder to myself as well, because I know I’ve transgressed in this as well) that in a forum of self-professed brethren in Christ, the default should be to assume that the other is telling the truth about themselves until proven otherwise, rather than assuming falsehood or obfuscation until proven otherwise?

You might, Chris,  since you are new to this forum.  A few years back many, many posters used pseudonyms. Some sued multiple pseudonyms and spent most of their time playing gotcha. Those of us who witnessed that are cautious still.

Chris' statement is absolutely correct.

Speak for yourself. I witnessed that and do not see the bogeymen that you do.

7
Your Turn / Re: New CPH Large Catechism
« on: Yesterday at 11:51:39 AM »
I'm not questioning whether there is a brouhaha. I'm questioning whether Turnipseed is a real person and whether there's any evidence for that.

Chris Schlep, stated on this board that he is a real person and that he knows him personally. He asked Dave Benke to apologize for saying the name "Ryan Turpinseed" was made up.

So I assume he's real.

Oh, there's a blog by some guy named Matthew Cochrane where you can read a bunch of the complaints.

Who is Chris Schlep, other than someone who recently started posting here?

He's an LCMS Commissioned Worker. You can look him up on the LCMS locator.

Some think there's a bogeyman around every corner. Note the recent narrow definition of mobbing, stating that it's usually covert.

8
Your Turn / Re: I Need Some Catechism Help
« on: Yesterday at 10:26:13 AM »
Charles,

Glad you got your 4 am (3 am your time) secular politics rant out of the way. I'm sure you were thinking of the 2nd Table, so there's the relevance to the thread, giving us Catechism help.  ::)

Can you give it a rest now?

9
Your Turn / Re: New CPH Large Catechism
« on: Yesterday at 10:21:59 AM »
I'm not on Twitter, and don't plan to be.  We use CPH and Sola almost exclusively, and I'm not familiar with this "new" LC.  Looking at the website doesn't yield any better results - the only one that seemed close to being the one in question has the Late Rev. Paul McCain attached to it.  Can someone post a link to the actual book please?

It's been put on "pause" or "pulled" (depending how you look at it), so you can't see it.

I bought mine on Monday, otherwise I wouldn't be able to find it.

That is correct. I checked again this morning as well as yesterday. Someone's protecting us from this blasphemous book.   ::)

10
Your Turn / Re: New CPH Large Catechism
« on: Yesterday at 10:00:36 AM »
...people I asked said some there are openly calling for the resignation of Pless, who served as general editor, and treating it a major, seminex-style, line in the sand moment for the future of the synod.

Good grief!   ::) ::)

11
Your Turn / Re: I Need Some Catechism Help
« on: January 25, 2023, 01:34:57 PM »
IMHO, if the concerns over the new LC with essays were legitimate instead of putting the worst possible construction on the motives of the authors based on the capitalization of one word in a footnote, then I could understand Pres. Harrison halting distribution.  But in light of the lack of evidence of the current complaints I think Pres. Harrison should have "taken them into consideration" while allowing the sale of this excellent resource that has gone through doctrinal review by several trusted sources.

As for allowing Paulson to write one of the essays, even though I have huge concerns with some of Paulson's theology this does not mean that he does not have good things to teach us on certain subjects.  For example, Herman Sasse is a theological hero in the LCMS even though Sasse himself had some very questionable theological views (especially on Creation and the historicity of Genesis chaps. 1-11).  As long as Paulson's contribution was itself theologically sound I see no reason to not include it in this new edition of the LC.

Thank you, Tom! You articulate my view as well, much better than I could have done. In my opinion, it seems to be, at best, an over-reaction to complaints by an "ecclesiastical vigilante" who is now comparing this kerfuffle to the Walkout and Seminex, concluding:

"I hope we do not become yet one more casualty to liberal theology, critical theory (biblical and social), and a passive acceptance of the world’s confession.  We emerged from the Seminex years battered and smaller, but united.  Maybe we will have to go through another such crucible."

https://www.gottesdienst.org/gottesblog/2023/1/24/why-this-stuff-matters

I do agree with Larry Beane on this: "And in the final analysis, each pastor is called to do the final review - doctrinally and otherwise - regarding what materials he will use in the parish." This includes our being able to read the publication and come to our own conclusions about it.


12
Your Turn / Re: I Need Some Catechism Help
« on: January 25, 2023, 10:55:49 AM »
Rev. Kirchner and Rev. Butler,

Rev. Hannah asked a question.  I gave a possible answer.  What you do with that possible answer is up to you.

And, in trying to apply your possible answer, I then asked a question. Care to answer?

No.

I didn't think so.

13
Your Turn / Re: I Need Some Catechism Help
« on: January 25, 2023, 10:22:25 AM »
There is also the claim that just because there is an essay by certain authors (e.g. Steve Paulson) then that must mean the editors agree with everything Paulson has ever written instead of letting the essay stand on it.

As a friend observed in hearing some diiscussion:

"Obviously there's not unanimity on Paulson's contribution but that's normal given his position on women's ordination and third use of the Law. Having said that he didn't address any of that in his work on the project. Some say he should not have been allowed to participate even if what he wrote in this case was right."

I wonder if the naysayers felt the same way about Nestingen's wonderful contributions to the Church?

14
Your Turn / Re: I Need Some Catechism Help
« on: January 25, 2023, 10:14:22 AM »
Rev. Kirchner and Rev. Butler,

Rev. Hannah asked a question.  I gave a possible answer.  What you do with that possible answer is up to you.

And, in trying to apply your possible answer, I then asked a question. Care to answer?

15
Your Turn / Re: I Need Some Catechism Help
« on: January 25, 2023, 09:35:23 AM »
I wonder what the Gottesdienst element wants in return for their efforts.

Peace, JOHN

Perhaps faithfulness to the Christian faith and the Lutheran Confessions (as they claim they are seeking)?

Sounds good. So, how is a publication  that is "...one of the greatest resources for Christian faith and living ever produced by The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod.... If we had but this volume alone, in addition to our precious inerrant Scriptures and the Book of Concord, we’d have reason to fall on our faces before God and sing a grateful Te Deum" opposed to that?

I don't know. I tried again this morning to purchase "one of the greatest resources for Christian faith and living ever produced by The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod." I cannot.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 840