Author Topic: Lutheran Forum  (Read 4206 times)

mariemeyer

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 4287
    • View Profile
Re: Lutheran Forum
« Reply #15 on: October 30, 2020, 04:46:33 PM »
Honestly, when I saw the full slate of WHITE MALE RACIST! articles, and especially the note from the editor that we 👏 must 👏 spend 👏 more 👏 time 👏 on 👏 this 👏 burning 👏 issue (if they don't come through the spaces are the ubiquitous hand clap emojis), I let out a whimper of despair.

The entire theological game of trying to push off a warmed over Liberation Theology which was always Marxism in Christian drag is tiring.  To try and jump from a Pauline "In Christ" to "Christ is found wherever you find oppressed bodies" to "if you were truly Christian you must support BLM, you only earn justification through being an ally of the oppressed" is reading the gospel upside down and backwards.  Which is no gospel at all.  It strips out the transcendent.  It removes the teaching the the real offense of sin is against God.  And it sets up unending wars over who is in persona Christi (the intersectional pokemon points pyramid).

What I appreciated Lutheran Forum for was that it managed to be theologically intelligent while avoiding both the traps of "we are so smart, see our Latin phrases, 3000 obscure footnotes, and topics that only 5 people care about" and "everybody who is important is talking about this intellectual in-group signal".   It looks like Lutheran Forum is saying "that ditch looks nice" and turning the wheel hard port.   

But other than that, great issue!

Pastor Brown, are we talking about the same issue of Lutheran Forum?   Please clarify where you read anything in the latest Lutheran Forum that was "warmed over Liberation Theology which was always Marxism in Christian drag."

Please explain the sentence, "It (the alleged striping out of the transcendent) removes the teaching the the real offense of sin is against God. And it sets up unending wars over who is in persona Christi (the intersectional pokeman points pyramid)."

How do you define St. Paul's understanding of what it  means to be "In Christ?"  I do not understand where and by whom the
"unending wars over who is in persona Christ" is being fought.

Marie Meyer
 


James J Eivan

  • Guest
Re: Lutheran Forum
« Reply #16 on: October 30, 2020, 05:02:49 PM »
Marie, you'd perhaps be surprised to learn that a majority of posters here are not subscribers to LF/FL; many of them weren't readers long before "they burned their bridges."
For others the bridge was burned long before joining this humble forum ... it should come as no surprise that we are a theologically diverse group with deeply held beliefs. For most, Christian stewardship discourages the support of fundamentally diverging ideologies.Perhaps the facts Rev Johnson’s presented above prompted the suggestion that forum participants be LF/FL subscribers.🤫There is no evidence that Rev Johnson or anyone @ ALPB has endorsed this thoughts.
Frankly, this possibility has been discussed for some time. Why should people who don't support the mission of the ALPB, both theologically and financially, have any expectation at all to be able to torpedo discussions here? There's enough diversity of every kind within the subscription group to make for robust disagreement and discussion. <emphasis added> So there's your evidence.
Respectfully Rev Johnson had you used the term ‘participate’ in place of ‘torpedo’ there would have been no indication of preferential treatment of one position over another ... the use of ‘torpedo’, at least in the minds of some, seems to imply that only those not subscribers to FL/LF are capable of torpedoing forum discussions. 

Hopefully we non subscribers are not deplorables, but by stating that restricting forum participation to subscribers only would eliminate torpedoing of discussions, it is indeed implied that non subscribers are deplorables.

Having said this, I welcome specific critique of my posts in the event they convey thoughts and messages that I do not intend to convey.  Thank you!
« Last Edit: October 30, 2020, 05:09:24 PM by James »

peter_speckhard

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 16828
    • View Profile
Re: Lutheran Forum
« Reply #17 on: October 30, 2020, 05:16:35 PM »
Marie, you'd perhaps be surprised to learn that a majority of posters here are not subscribers to LF/FL; many of them weren't readers long before "they burned their bridges."
For others the bridge was burned long before joining this humble forum ... it should come as no surprise that we are a theologically diverse group with deeply held beliefs. For most, Christian stewardship discourages the support of fundamentally diverging ideologies.Perhaps the facts Rev Johnson’s presented above prompted the suggestion that forum participants be LF/FL subscribers.🤫There is no evidence that Rev Johnson or anyone @ ALPB has endorsed this thoughts.
Frankly, this possibility has been discussed for some time. Why should people who don't support the mission of the ALPB, both theologically and financially, have any expectation at all to be able to torpedo discussions here? There's enough diversity of every kind within the subscription group to make for robust disagreement and discussion. <emphasis added> So there's your evidence.
Respectfully Rev Johnson had you used the term ‘participate’ in place of ‘torpedo’ there would have been no indication of preferential treatment of one position over another ... the use of ‘torpedo’, at least in the minds of some, seems to imply that only those not subscribers to FL/LF are capable of torpedoing forum discussions. 

Hopefully we non subscribers are not deplorables, but by stating that restricting forum participation to subscribers only would eliminate torpedoing of discussions, it is indeed implied that non subscribers are deplorables.

Having said this, I welcome specific critique of my posts in the event they convey thoughts and messages that I do not intend to convey.  Thank you!
James, if you weren’t so in tune to being insulted you wouldn’t find insults everywhere. This illustrates my point about you latching on to some aside or perceived slight and making the discussion about that.

Charles Austin

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12943
    • View Profile
    • Charles is Coloring
Re: Lutheran Forum
« Reply #18 on: October 30, 2020, 05:48:23 PM »
Richard writes:
Marie, you'd perhaps be surprised to learn that a majority of posters here are not subscribers to LF/FL; many of them weren't readers long before "they burned their bridges."
I comment:
So in terms of their real relationship with the ALPB, all their huffing and puffing was simply a show. Most of them had no relationship with ALPB other than free-loading in this modest forum.
Retired ELCA pastor. Iowa born. Now in Minnesota. Twice-vaccinated.

peter_speckhard

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 16828
    • View Profile
Re: Lutheran Forum
« Reply #19 on: October 30, 2020, 05:54:23 PM »
Richard writes:
Marie, you'd perhaps be surprised to learn that a majority of posters here are not subscribers to LF/FL; many of them weren't readers long before "they burned their bridges."
I comment:
So in terms of their real relationship with the ALPB, all their huffing and puffing was simply a show. Most of them had no relationship with ALPB other than free-loading in this modest forum.
That depends on whether "relationship" means more than sending money or subscribing. Plenty of people who perhaps didn't subscribe but who read article, purchased books or devotionals, and even wrote articles for ALPB publications were so turned off by that article that it has indeed burned whatever bridge was there or was potentially there.

James J Eivan

  • Guest
Re: Lutheran Forum
« Reply #20 on: October 30, 2020, 05:58:19 PM »
Marie, you'd perhaps be surprised to learn that a majority of posters here are not subscribers to LF/FL; many of them weren't readers long before "they burned their bridges."
For others the bridge was burned long before joining this humble forum ... it should come as no surprise that we are a theologically diverse group with deeply held beliefs. For most, Christian stewardship discourages the support of fundamentally diverging ideologies.Perhaps the facts Rev Johnson’s presented above prompted the suggestion that forum participants be LF/FL subscribers.🤫There is no evidence that Rev Johnson or anyone @ ALPB has endorsed this thoughts.
Frankly, this possibility has been discussed for some time. Why should people who don't support the mission of the ALPB, both theologically and financially, have any expectation at all to be able to torpedo discussions here? There's enough diversity of every kind within the subscription group to make for robust disagreement and discussion. <emphasis added> So there's your evidence.
Respectfully Rev Johnson had you used the term ‘participate’ in place of ‘torpedo’ there would have been no indication of preferential treatment of one position over another ... the use of ‘torpedo’, at least in the minds of some, seems to imply that only those not subscribers to FL/LF are capable of torpedoing forum discussions. 

Hopefully we non subscribers are not deplorables, but by stating that restricting forum participation to subscribers only would eliminate torpedoing of discussions, it is indeed implied that non subscribers are deplorables.

Having said this, I welcome specific critique of my posts in the event they convey thoughts and messages that I do not intend to convey.  Thank you!
James, if you weren’t so in tune to being insulted you wouldn’t find insults everywhere. This illustrates my point about you latching on to some aside or perceived slight and making the discussion about that.
Respectfully Rev Speckhard...I was taught that words mean things ... and choice of words is of importance as well. Understanding not only what is said .. but why it is said is important to understanding.

As a lowly pew sitter, I often feel somewhat vocabulary challenged .. sparing with forum members with far more education than I. Through the wonders of electronics, these $10 vocabulary words used by participants are far more understandable than if I had to rely on a legacy dictionary.

By the way ... how is referring to forum members by another forum member as ‘free loaders’ here really constructive and edifying forum dialogue.

Weedon

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 11372
    • View Profile
    • My Blog
Re: Lutheran Forum
« Reply #21 on: October 30, 2020, 06:00:43 PM »
I subscribed to LF in the past and to Forum Letter. No more.
William Weedon, Assistant Pastor
St. Paul Lutheran Church, Hamel IL
Catechist on LPR Podcast: The Word of the Lord Endures Forever
A Daily, Verse-by-Verse Bible Study with the Church, Past and Present
www.thewordendures.org

+Verbum Domini Manet in Aeternum

Steven W Bohler

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 3635
    • View Profile
Re: Lutheran Forum
« Reply #22 on: October 30, 2020, 08:28:42 PM »
Marie, you'd perhaps be surprised to learn that a majority of posters here are not subscribers to LF/FL; many of them weren't readers long before "they burned their bridges."
For others the bridge was burned long before joining this humble forum ... it should come as no surprise that we are a theologically diverse group with deeply held beliefs.

For most, Christian stewardship discourages the support of fundamentally diverging ideologies.

Perhaps Rev Johnson’s statement above prompted the suggestion that forum participants be LF/FL subscribers.🤫

I subscribed to LF/FL for a number of years. I even gave a friend of mine a gift subscription. I found the articles thoughtful, well written, and engaging. I loved the articles in FL and looked forward to it each month.I was very pleased when Piotr Malsyz, a man I greatly respect, became associate editor.

I did not agree with everything written, but I never expected to. But I enjoyed what I read immensely.

Then came the article on mobbing. It was bad enough that they published it in print; worse yet they published it online. People who never heard of LF or the ALPB were discussing the allegations. An article listing the allegations was written in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Finally, the article falsely accused a participant on this Forum of being "the Main Nag." I will grant that this last accusation was withdrawn and an apology was given, but the accusation should never have been made in public without verification in the first place. LF/FL never published any evidence for any of the allegations. It was, in my mind, a terrible breach of the 8th commandment.

All we got for our concerns was "trust us. This is real."

In response, I chose not to renew my subscription.Until these allegation are either substantiated or retracted, I will not subscribe. Like Will, I believed that LF/FL had burned this bridge. The editors, and the ALPB Board, made a decision and they stuck to it. In consequence, I made a choice and will stick to mine as well.

Was there actually a withdrawal of, and apology for, the accusation made against gan ainm?

I just received from gan ainm informing me that the false accusation was NOT retracted nor was any apology -- public or private -- ever made.

Charles Austin

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12943
    • View Profile
    • Charles is Coloring
Re: Lutheran Forum
« Reply #23 on: October 30, 2020, 08:32:48 PM »
Well, Pastor Bohler, if your friend is so honked off at ALPB that he or she will never again take part In this modest forum, we will just have to accept his or her absence.
Retired ELCA pastor. Iowa born. Now in Minnesota. Twice-vaccinated.

jebutler

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1613
    • View Profile
Re: Lutheran Forum
« Reply #24 on: October 30, 2020, 09:13:32 PM »
Marie, you'd perhaps be surprised to learn that a majority of posters here are not subscribers to LF/FL; many of them weren't readers long before "they burned their bridges."
For others the bridge was burned long before joining this humble forum ... it should come as no surprise that we are a theologically diverse group with deeply held beliefs.

For most, Christian stewardship discourages the support of fundamentally diverging ideologies.

Perhaps Rev Johnson’s statement above prompted the suggestion that forum participants be LF/FL subscribers.🤫

I subscribed to LF/FL for a number of years. I even gave a friend of mine a gift subscription. I found the articles thoughtful, well written, and engaging. I loved the articles in FL and looked forward to it each month.I was very pleased when Piotr Malsyz, a man I greatly respect, became associate editor.

I did not agree with everything written, but I never expected to. But I enjoyed what I read immensely.

Then came the article on mobbing. It was bad enough that they published it in print; worse yet they published it online. People who never heard of LF or the ALPB were discussing the allegations. An article listing the allegations was written in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. Finally, the article falsely accused a participant on this Forum of being "the Main Nag." I will grant that this last accusation was withdrawn and an apology was given, but the accusation should never have been made in public without verification in the first place. LF/FL never published any evidence for any of the allegations. It was, in my mind, a terrible breach of the 8th commandment.

All we got for our concerns was "trust us. This is real."

In response, I chose not to renew my subscription.Until these allegation are either substantiated or retracted, I will not subscribe. Like Will, I believed that LF/FL had burned this bridge. The editors, and the ALPB Board, made a decision and they stuck to it. In consequence, I made a choice and will stick to mine as well.

Was there actually a withdrawal of, and apology for, the accusation made against gan ainm?

I just received from gan ainm informing me that the false accusation was NOT retracted nor was any apology -- public or private -- ever made.

I stand corrected. I thought it had been corrected. Or was it that the line was stealth edited in the online edition?
These are things that we can discuss among learned and reasonable people, or even among ourselves. (Luther, SA III, paraphrased).

Steven W Bohler

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 3635
    • View Profile
Re: Lutheran Forum
« Reply #25 on: October 30, 2020, 09:17:00 PM »
Well, Pastor Bohler, if your friend is so honked off at ALPB that he or she will never again take part In this modest forum, we will just have to accept his or her absence.

Rev. Austin, you are a real piece of work. 

Jeremy_Loesch

  • ALPB Forum Member
  • **
  • Posts: 87
    • View Profile
Re: Lutheran Forum
« Reply #26 on: October 30, 2020, 10:15:07 PM »
I get one present from my parents every two years...a su scription to LF/FL. They don't need to get me any gift, but this makes them content. I rarely read LF. I just don't find it that interesting.  I look at the table of contents to see if I recognize any names. If I do, then I scan the article. I do look forward to FL, because that is more interesting. (I recognize that this may say something about my attention span.) But I look forward to reading what Richard and Peter write.

FL is good.
LF has not much to offer.

The mobbing issue was tremendously disappointing. I know ganga ainm personally and the lack of journalistic integrity was, even for something like LF, was rotten.

Jeremy

Charles Austin

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12943
    • View Profile
    • Charles is Coloring
Re: Lutheran Forum
« Reply #27 on: October 30, 2020, 10:45:12 PM »
Maybe another example of the problems with anonymity. Some here know who the anonymous ones really are. Others don’t, so we have to guess or suspect. In many situations, that destroys the possibility of fair and honest conversation.
Retired ELCA pastor. Iowa born. Now in Minnesota. Twice-vaccinated.

Julio

  • ALPB Forum Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 285
  • Still awaiting the Certified Election Results!
    • View Profile
Re: Lutheran Forum
« Reply #28 on: October 30, 2020, 11:39:14 PM »
Maybe another example of the problems with anonymity. Some here know who the anonymous ones really are. Others don’t, so we have to guess or suspect. In many situations, that destroys the possibility of fair and honest conversation.
Many have no idea who many of the “non anonymous” forum members are and still participate in fair and honest conversations ... at times fair and honest conversations are derailed by “non anonymous” forum members.

Making a mountain out of a molehill ... there is a thread for this foolishness here.

Dan Fienen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12134
    • View Profile
Re: Lutheran Forum
« Reply #29 on: October 30, 2020, 11:43:47 PM »
Whether you, I, or anyone else knows the name that applies to gan aimn in other contexts should not matter when considering accusations that are leveled without any real evidence that the person so identified has committed certain offenses. Unsubstantiated accusations should not be made merely on suspicion.


This is a discussion forum for discussing especially Lutheran theology and whatever else of the passing scene catches participants' fancy. This is not a venue for adjudicating claims against people for offensive behavior committed outside the forum. In those venues establishing the "real" identities of people is crucial. But not here. I do find it helpful for people here to maintain stable online identities so that their various posts can be connected with each other. That can help provide context to help understand this particular post. Also knowing their profession and church body can be helpful, especially if their claim some authority for what they post. But again this is just discussion.


Pr. Daniel Fienen
LCMS