Search This Blog

Thursday, March 23, 2017

Fall of Daniel Preus – layman judges blindness; Part 2b

      This concludes from Part 2a, how a review of old posts sparked a living history from 50 years ago.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
      The testimony of Dr. Siegbert Becker 50 years ago dramatically exposes today's LC-MS.

Rev. Daniel Preus
- sees no false doctrine
- on "Holiday"
Vice-President Rev. Dr. Daniel Preus
In 1999 Rev. Preus authored a good essay on the fall of the LC-MS in its past – "LC-MS Holiday from History".  But I can no longer read this essay because the author V.P. Daniel Preus is now part of the "Holiday" that he wrote about!  Becker's 50-year old essay (see Part 2a) dramatically tells the story of today's Pastor Daniel Preus, who was formerly a defender of truth.  Here is a copy of the latest communication between Preus and layman Harold Dagenhart of Taylorville, N.C. as reported in the January 16, 2017 Christian News – both a copy of the newspaper clipping and extracted text (text file here):





Let me highlight Mr. Dagenhart's wonderful layman's judgment:
"When he [Daniel Preus] asks me to identify the false doctrine, he is admitting that he sees none. His response is clear, he sees no false doctrine in the Kloha paper."
Not only is layman Dagenhart seeing clearly in regards to V.P. Rev. Daniel Preus, he is by implication correctly judging Prof. Kloha's teaching on the effect of variant readings as false doctrine.  Mr. Dagenhart is just like the layman "von Klencke" who cried out against theologian Albrecht Ritschl († 1889). Could Mr. Harold Dagenhart of Taylorsville, N.C. be one of those "lay circles" that Franz Pieper speaks about, those who will keep the Church alive during struggles with devastating false doctrine – just like Dr. Siegbert Becker had to deal with 50+ years ago?
==>> To Mr. Harold Dagenhart
As you read the great testimony of Dr. Siegbert Becker above, know this.  You are standing on the Rock, that is the Word of Christ, just like Dr. Siegbert Becker did when he so masterfully exposed the LC-MS for what it was... and is now.  You are exercising your God-given duty.  As Walther says: "The Sheep Judge Their Shepherds".
Robert Preus:
"Walther and the Scriptures"
      What irony! ... that at the upcoming 2017 Emmaus Conference, who should represent C.F.W. Walther and his theology?...  Rev. Dr. Daniel Preus.  It was his own father, Dr. Robert Preus, who so wonderfully praised "Walther and the Scriptures" – Walther's teaching on the Inspiration, Infallibility, and Inerrancy of Holy Scripture in the pages of Concordia Theological Monthly, November 1961 (text here).  I have found fault with Robert Preus's weaknesses in other teachings, but not with this essay.  On page 685, R. Preus references that same 1886 Lehre und Wehre Foreword of Walther quoted in the last blog post about the weeping lady:
"In his Foreword to Lehre und Wehre of January 1886 he takes note [pp. 1-2] of a statement of Professors Volck and Muehlau of Dorpat denying the inerrancy of the Bible. Had this statement been made in the 17th century a storm of protest would have arisen. But Walther observes in 19th-century Germany not one word of protest from any theological faculty."
... "not one word of protest from any theological faculty"!  ... the same as today with Prof. Jeffrey Kloha in America's "Dorpat" -- St. Louis Concordia Seminary.  Robert Preus chose well his sources to reveal the true Walther.  — On the same page 685, Preus says
"What, then, does Walther mean by the inerrancy of Scripture? He means what the church has always meant, that all the declarative statements of Scripture are true, that they correspond to fact..."
Here Robert Preus is not just reporting what Walther taught, he joins with the church of all times in teaching the very same thing.
      I recall some Valparaiso University students who were friends of my older brother when they visited our family during a school vacation time.  They sounded quite strange – like they didn't believe the Bible.  Thank God!... my brother hung onto and believed the Bible even unto death. — The weeping students that Prof. Becker reported above sound like me 40+ years ago!
     And I thank God for the testimony of Dr. Siegbert Becker for it lives on today!... even if the LC-MS (and CHI) continue on Daniel Preus's "Holiday from History".

2 comments:

  1. Mr. Dagenhart to Prof. Kloha: "When he [Daniel Preus] asks me to identify the false doctrine, he is admitting that he sees none. His response is clear, he sees no false doctrine in the Kloha paper."

    This is a false inference. In his January 9, 2017, email, Rev. Preus did not admit or imply he saw no false doctrine in Kloha's original paper. He only asked Mr. Dagenhart to provide what he identified as false teachings, along with documentation, in order that he [Preus] could respond to what Mr. Dagenhart said was Prof. Kloha's reply to Mr. Dagenhart's email (which was not supplied).

    Furthermore, as a member of the LCMS, Rev. Preus is constrained by Bylaws 1.8, 1.10, and 2.14 in commenting openly with others (especially those not "within the fellowship of peers") about any heterodoxy in statements made by other synodical members in a paper that some have claimed was not a public document.

    If Mr. Dagenhart had provided the statements and references requested, then Rev. Preus presumably could have responded to Mr. Dagenhart's objections about those statements.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your comment would have some validity if this matter and the publications surrounding it were obscure. But they are not. Over the past weeks, months, indeed, years, there have been numerous writings, publications, debates, forum discussions, etc. This matter is not hidden. It is plain as day.

      My first reaction was indeed the same as yours – it would have been nice if Mr. Dagenhart had given a specific quote from Prof. Kloha and then brought the charge of false doctrine. But then I realized this matter is just like 50 years ago when Dr. Siegbert Becker pointed out to Concordia Seminary President A. O. Fuerbringer that

      “...only those who are deliberately and culpably blind cannot fail to see it.”

      Becker’s series is filled with the gory details of how today’s LC-MS is behaving. – So then it became clear to me as I read Dagenhart’s correspondence again that rather than being incomplete, it is a master stroke. Indeed it was C.F.W. Walther himself who said in 1874 of the stubborn Iowa Synod:

      “It appears impossible to convince the Iowans even with the most compelling evidences from God’s Word.”

      Walther depended solely on God’s Word for his defense. And when the opponents would not listen, he broke it off.

      And so all I have to say to today’s LC-MS is this: “The scripture cannot be broken” - John 10:35. It wasn’t just Pieper, Engelder, and P.E. Kretzmann who used this Bible verse – it was C.F.W. Walther who used it before them.

      What is more important? To hold to LC-MS Bylaws or to defend the truth of Holy Scripture? – I will not publish another critical response to the dear Mr. Harold Dagenhart on this post.

      Delete

Comments only accepted when directly related to the post.