LCMS Convention Workbook St. Louis, Missouri — 2016, Page 337

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

LIFE TOGETHER
4-23

To Settle Prof. Jeffrey Kloha Controversy
Whereas, A controversy has arisen concerning Concordia
Seminary, St. Louis, Prof. Jeffrey Kloha and a paper which he presented in Oberursel, Germany, titled “Inspiration, Authority, and a
Plastic Text”; and
Whereas, The controversy has caused some to question openly
and vocally whether our Synod’s St. Louis seminary is once again
teaching false doctrine to the young men who are studying to be future
pastors within the LCMS; and
Whereas, The souls of men and women may well be led astray
and fall away from the one true and saving faith; and
Whereas, Prof. Kloha’s use of a nonbiblical term “plastic text”
suggests that a Christian layperson can never be certain that the Bible
they have in their home is the true and complete inspired Word of
God; and
Whereas, Prof. Kloha seems to indicate in his paper that the
Bible the lay members of our Synod have next to their nightstands
is filled with errors and mistakes, for in his paper Prof. Kloha states
that “Elizabeth probably sang the Magnificat, not Mary,” even though
Luke 1:46 states that it was Mary; and
Whereas, Prof. Kloha states in his paper: “Who then decides?
As always, the gathered, baptized, those who hear the voice of the
Shepherd and follow where He leads. From a human perspective, it
appears as if the church were the same as other voluntary social organizations; theologically we know that only those who have been called
by the Gospel, enlightened with His gifts, made holy and kept in the
one true faith are part of this social organization. The church decides,
but the church has been and continues to be led by the Spirit into all
truth as it hears ever again the Word.” Yet this position is the position that the Roman Church holds to and was condemned for in the
Lutheran Confessions. It is Scripture, not the church, which has the
final say (Sola Scriptura) (AC XXVIII; Tappert, p. 91); therefore be it
Resolved, That the 2016 LCMS convention set aside time for Prof.
Jeffrey Kloha to speak to the convention delegates about his view on
Holy Scripture; and be it further
Resolved, That Prof. Kloha answer in an honest and truthful manner the following questions:
1) Did he in fact write that Elizabeth, not Mary, spoke the Magnificat,
even though Luke 1:46 states clearly that it was Mary? Does he still hold
to the position he wrote in his paper?
2) Is the Bible which the lay members of the LCMS have in their homes
a reliable Bible, that as closely as possible represents the original autographs, and thus in truth the very Word of God?
3) Do the lay members have a reliable Bible whereby they can study
and understand, or are they in need of a clergy member to tell them
what to believe? In other words, do sheep have a reliable Bible whereby
they can judge whether the shepherd they have is telling them true or
false doctrine? The Preface to the Formula of Concord declares that the
Scriptures are the authority by which “all teachers and writings must be
judged.” A plastic Bible does not seem to support the theology of the
Book of Concord. If the Bible is “plastic: moldable, shapeable, changeable,” how can lay members be sure their Bible is true and trustworthy?
(At this point President Harrison shall read the Brief Statement to the
delegates.)
4) The LCMS at its 1959 convention reaffirmed that the “Brief Statement” was the official position of the LCMS. Do you agree that the
“Brief Statement” is a true and accurate understanding of the doctrines
it discusses, and is this also your position, so that the Brief Statement
position is your position?

and be it finally

337

Resolved, That after listening to Prof. Jeffrey Kloha answer the
above questions, the delegates of the 2016 LCMS convention shall
vote either to expel Prof. Kloha from membership in the LCMS or
to approve of Prof. Kloha and lay to rest this controversy and bring a
God-pleasing peace to the LCMS.
Salem
Taylorsville, NC
4-24

To Request Public Clarification of Kloha Paper
Whereas, The paper entitled “Text and Authority: Theological
and Hermeneutical Reflections on a Plastic Text” (which was presented by the Rev. Prof. Jeffrey Kloha in Oberusel, Germany) states:
I want to make clear from the beginning that the confession of the Scriptures as the infallible Word of God given by the Spirit through the prophets and apostles and the only source and norm of faith and life is not
in question; this is not what I am challenging in this essay. What I am
challenging is the manner in which we account for the inspiration and
authority of Scripture (“Text and Authority: Theological and Hermeneutical Reflections on a Plastic Text,” Kloha, p. 8).

and
Whereas, That which was just stated from the Rev. Prof. Kloha’s
paper has the ability to be read in such a way as to conclude that he
questions the inspiration and authority of Scripture; and
Whereas, The historical-critical method of dividing God’s Holy
Scripture is something to be very concerned about because it questions the inspiration and authority of God’s Holy Scripture and causes
serious doubt toward the doctrinal teachings contained within God’s
Holy Scripture (not meaning to imply that the Rev. Prof. Kloha actually holds to such a teaching, but that, in general, it’s a serious concern
of which to be circumspect); and
Whereas, If such a questioning of the inspiration and authority
of God’s Holy Scripture is held by the Rev. Prof. Jeffrey Kloha, then
it is not out of place to be concerned that he may have taught (and is
currently teaching) that very questioning of God’s Holy Scripture to
the seminary students of Concordia Seminary, St. Louis, MO; and
Whereas, The Rev. Prof. Kloha’s initial paper, entitled “Text and
Authority: Theological and Hermeneutical Reflections on a Plastic
Text,” has caused serious concern to the conscience of many because,
somehow, the entire paper was obtained and became a public document to be read by many (even if it was posted in copyright violation)
via the Internet (http://thebarebulb.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/textand-authority.pdf); and
Whereas, The Rev. Prof. Kloha, at a conference entitled “The
Day of Exegetical Reflection,” held at Concordia Seminary, St. Louis,
Missouri, on May 8, 2014, gave a presentation of what is supposed
to be the revised edition of his first paper which caused concern, a
presentation that was made available on the Internet (http://concordiatheology.org/2014/07/doer14/), yet in the presentation (because of
time constraints) he did not deliver all of the revised paper (for, at the
very beginning of that presentation, after being thankful for the meetings regarding the serious concerns of his first paper, the Rev. Prof.
Kloha, says, “The result has been, of course, a much longer paper. It’s
now about 36 pages. I won’t read you 36 pages, I promise.”); therefore, in watching the video presentation, one never knows exactly
how much of his first paper was revised, because a full presentation
did not take place; and
Whereas, The Rev. President Matthew Harrison eventually
released the following statement on August 15, 2014:
2016 Convention Workbook