14 April 2008

1/3 of 1%

Here is a St. Louis Reporter's words about David Strand's words on the petition:

"He pointed out that the 7,000 signatures make up one-third of 1 percent of the church body." Are you feeling the love yet? GRR!

Which is, being interpreted, I suppose: Hey, 7000, you guys are small beans and don't count.

What God has to say about 7,000 can be read in 1 Kings 19:18.

Hmm. What does this mean?

You can read the whole story here:

click here


Stoleman said...

Pastor Weedon,

Thanks for the link to the article.

I believe Mr. Strand seems not to think about the importance of numbers.

"Strand...pointed out that the 7,000 signatures make up one-third of 1 percent of the church body."

This may be true, but remember what happened with the following figures....

+ 1 person on Cross 2000 Years ago
+ 1 person nailing 95 Thesis to a door
+ 1 show of Issue's airing in any form or fashion that leads and convinces 1 person to confess "Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior" and be baptized in the name of the "Father, Son and Holy Ghost"

Priceless in the Eyes of God, but evidently not the eyes of man!!!

Darian L. Hybl

P.S. "I will not bow to Baal or kiss him" Great OT Quote!!!

Stoleman said...

What would Ablaze be if '1/3 of 1%' didn't matter?

Just another thought???

Darian L. Hybl

Jeremy Loesch said...

I suppose if Mr. Strand is seeking to be accurate, his figure of 1/3 of 1% is incorrect. I would guess that of the people who signed the petition (me being in the high 400s), at least 200 are non-Lutheran, some even non-Christian. So let's at least be accurate. Rev. Weedon, I am not feeling the love. Jeremy

Steve Newell said...

Mr. Strand is doing a good job from avoiding the questions and concerns of those of us who are upset about the entire way the BCS handled the Issues, Etc. mess.

I guess if I'm not important to Mr. Strand, neither is my donations either. I'm sure that there are very good ministries who view me as important.

It appears that we have reduced the gospel to a cost/benefit analysis.

Jim Roemke said...

This is the kind of mindset that can say, without batting an eye, that we in the LCMS are the most united now that we have ever been. It is easy to be united if you only count those who agree with you and marginalize and trivialize those who dissent in any way. I wonder what Mr. Strand would have said about the measely 3000 the Holy Spirit brought to faith at Pentecost? That wouldn't have even warranted notice by our synod I suppose.

Absolutely disgusting!

Frank said...

From the Ablaze! website:Why count? Why report?

Counting has always been important in the Bible as one of the indications of how things are and what needs to be done. A fine example is the parable of the Lost Sheep in Luke 15:4-7. When the shepherd gets to 99, and he knows that there should be a hundred sheep, he leaves the 99 to seek and find the one lost sheep. Without counting, human beings often do not have a clear picture of the real state of affairs.

So... counting must be very, very important to use this particular verse.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Strand's comments are very telling about the Synod's views of us common folk in the pew...

GIven the direction that Synod has taken in the last 6 - 10 years, it is no surprise really.

The other tellign comment was the very last line in the article

In the vacated time slot, the church has launched a new program called "The Afternoon Show," with topics Strand said should have a broader appeal.

A broader appeal... mmmm isn't that just LCMS Code speak for "Seeker Sensitive"?

Matt B.

I Have Issues, Etc said...

Don't forget...he fails to mention that 7000 is about 3.5 times the number he said even listened to the program.

Matt B, on 'broader appeal," YES

Rev. Eric J Brown said...

But 7000 is what percent of people who show up to Church on Sunday? Probably closer to 1%. Woo-hoo!

Rev. James Leistico said...

demonstrating absurdity by being absurd:
7000 signatures do not count, so neither does a circuit or two of congregations (which in most cases would be less than 1/3 of 1%). (Though GK thinks a circuit's a circuit, no matter how small, and it needs to be counted at Synod conventions.)

Likewise, how small a percentage do all those pastors passing resolutions in all those circuits and districts represent?

How much does the CID Board of Directors count for?

and Matt B., you've got it all wrong. When Strand says, "broader appeal," he is answering in the affirmative Pastor Weedon's question on this blog: "No Room for the Men?"
Of course, if he really wanted to appeal to women, he should find a different term. No lady that I know finds the term "broad" appealing.

Anonymous said...

The article said:
"'Issues' was the largest and most obvious cut at our disposal."

Does anyone know what other cuts have been made?

Anonymous said...

Sure are grateful to pastors among the vigilant yesterday.
Means a lot, even to those of us who couldn't be there.
Susan in Tupelo

Allen said...

Mr. Strand has betrayed himself with the comment about the Afternoon Show and its appeal.

It really isn't about finances, but rather broader appeal. Logical inconsistencies tend to point out untruths and dodging the questions.

Orianna Laun said...

Thanks for the I Kings reference. It's easy to become discouraged when one feels like a lone voice.

If 1/3 of 1% didn't count, why did they have to recount Florida with their dangling chads? I'm sure that was not much more than 1/3 of 1%, was it? Why do they talk about disenfranchised voters? Why say anybody's vote matters? It seems to me that 7000 is enough to be listened to.

kjslutherisch said...

Here are some numbers Strand conveniently didn't mention: the pastors of the roughly 578 congregations in 4 districts who have officially petitioned to get Issues reinstated (South WI: 212 parishes; South Dakota: 114 parishes; Southern IL: 97 parishes; Central IL 155 parishes). Basically, the shepherds of approximately 265,000 souls disagree with Strand (South WI: 125,000; SD: 30,000; SI:40,000; Central IL: 70,000).

Anonymous said...

The only percentage that matters down at the corner of Kirkwood and Babylon is 52%.

hausnfef said...

I don't think Mr. Strand is ever going to come out and tell the real reason why he canned Issues, Etc. because I think the real reason is that he and his counterparts don't agree with the Lutheranism or Christianity Pastor Wilken and Jeff taught and professed.

They are afraid to tell the real reason because they either know they are wrong or they think they are right, but have doubts. Perhaps they really do believe what they say and do is right, but they know that a lot more than 7000 Missouri Synodans would disagree with them and side with the confessions Pastor Wilken and Jeff ascribe to. Whichever is the case, I think they are much to be pitied.

Kelly Klages said...

This latest development has already inspired another "Draw Boldly." The stupid things are practically drawing themselves these days.

Cheryl said...

I'm beginning to think this was all by design with the intent of driving the confessionals out of synod. From the behavior and comments of our leaders, it doesn't appear that they really want or care about us at all and would be happy to see us gone. In fact, doesn't one of the documents posted at Save the LCMS say as much?

Anonymous said...

The reason for Jeff and Todd's firing is political. Someone pressured BCS to do it. The reason BCS and therefore the Synod is stonewalling is political.

Look for KFUO to be sold within the next year. And expect the Kieshnick Kommandos to get a big pat on the back for selling our heritage for a bowl of cold stew.

"How great a forest is set ablaze by such a small fire! And the tongue is a fire, a world of unrighteousness. The tongue is set among our members, staining the whole body, setting on fire the entire course of life, and set on fire by hell." James 3:5b-6 ESV

Anonymous said...

When I worked for KFUO back in the late 70's, we regarded each letter we received from a listener as being the equivalent of 200 people having the same view, but who didn't write in.

Extrapolating that view with regard to the 7,000 plus signatures on the Issues, Etc. petition, that would be the equivalent of 1,400,000 people.

Ah, but I guess that doesn't matter if you're purpose-driven to blend in with the rest of generic Christianity.

Emily said...

I was waiting for someone to say this about the number of signatures! I mean, 7000 is nothing compared to one successful mega-church. I just don't understand the blatant assumptions that Strand is making.

1. 7000 upset people are insignificant compared to the number of people who haven't (yet) signed the online petition. However, how does the scale of this protest compare to any other previous controversy?

2. "The Afternoon Show" has a "broader appeal"---to whom? How do the numbers of listeners, esp. downloaded episodes, compare to the number of people listening to Issues, Etc.?

3. "'Issues' was the largest and most obvious cut" to whom? To a relatively large number of outraged supporters, cutting this program was the most inexplicable cut one might make.

All of these unfounded assumptions are continuing to weaken Strand's position from a critical thinking standpoint.

Stoleman said...

Pastor Weedon,

From all the discussion and debate, the one point that has not been clearly made or debated is the distinction of the positions of the affected individuals of "Issues, etc.". Specifically, there was a "CALL" issued from the synod for both positions. This makes it not just a 'business' decision, but more importantly the 'will' or "CALL of the CHURCH" to 'hire' and to 'remove these peole from office'!! I do not believe anything these men have done requires this 'level' of decision. For the President of our synod to 'side step' this point and issue is a tragedy and definitely should be a "CALL" of the members of the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod to "CALL" for the resignation of ALL involved for the gross sin of both omission and commission.

May God have mercy on all of us!!!

Darian L. Hybl

Anonymous said...

I can't imagine a publicly held corporation being so dismissive of shareholders. This isn't Pepsico were talking about here either!