I. A theology of felt needs rejects the Article of Original Sin.
II. A theology of felt needs rejects Divine monergism.
III. A theology of felt needs seeks God elsewhere than in the Crucified One.
IV. Therefore, a theology of felt needs seeks God elsewhere than in Word and Sacrament.
V. A theology of felt needs calls Truth Lie and Lie Truth by denying Sola Scripturas:
a. A theology of felt needs rejects the notion of objective Truth;
b. A theology of felt needs makes Truth subject to the person.
VI. Therefore, a theology of felt needs denies the marks of the pure Church of God on Earth (AC VII):
a. A theology of felt needs denies that the Word is purely preached only where the Lord's Supper is rightly administered;
b. A theology of felt needs denies that the Lord's Supper is rightly administered only where the Word is purely preached.
VII. A theology of felt needs rejects the Incarnational Nature of Christ's Church:
a. A theology of felt needs sees the Church as organization;
b. A theology of felt needs rejects the Unum Sancta, a living thing.
VIII. A theology of felt needs is centripetal to Word and Sacrament.
IX. A theology of felt needs rejects the Crucified One's Cross.
X. A theology of felt needs rejects preaching the Law.
XI. Therefore, a theology of felt needs cannot bring sinners to Christ, the Crucified One:
a. A theology of felt needs cannot preach redemption;
b. A theology of felt needs cannot preach reconciliation
c. A theology of felt needs cannot preach the Article of Justification;
d. Therefore, a theology of felt needs confirms hardened Pharisees or despairing cynics.
XII. A theology of felt needs also rejects the usum tertias (third use of the law):
a. A theology of felt needs cannot correct erring persons;
b. A theology of felt need cannot correct erring communions.
XIII. A theology of felt needs cannot comfort trouble souls:
a. A theology of felt needs turns man inwards;
b. A theology of felt needs rejects turning outward into the Crucified One.
XIV. A theology of felt needs manifests chiliasm. (Millenialism)
XV. A theology of felt needs manifests Nestorian christology (Christ is God in name only); therefore:
a. A theology of felt needs manifests a Nestorian ecclessiology;
b. A theology of felt needs manifests a Nestorian sacramentology.
XVI. "Evangelical style" contradicts "Lutheran substance"- a scriptural falsehood and ontological fallacy:
a. A theology of felt needs contradicts Lutheran piety;
b. True Lutheran worship obtains from biblical and confessional principles;
c. Reformed evangelical worship obtains from the enthusiasm and fanaticism of men's corrupt hearts;
d. Lutheran worship looks outward to the Crucified One; Reformed/evangelical worship is curvatus a se (curved into onesself)-- pagan self-worship.
XVII. A theology of felt needs rejects the Person, Nature and Work of Christ Jesus, the Crucified One.
XVIII. A theology of felt needs is a construct of Maslovian transpersonal psychology, New Age psychobabble.
XIX. A theology of felt needs establishes a personal hermenuetical principle of Biblical interpretation.
XX. A theology of felt needs teaches man as merely sick rather than a condemned criminal, coram Dei (according to the judgement of God):
a. A theology of felt needs establishes theraputic regimens;
b. A theology of felt needs establishes pastors as therapists;
c. A theology of felt needs results in theosophical speculation.
XXI. A theology of felt needs cannot distinguish common graces from special graces in His Church.
XXII. As before, a theology of felt needs establishes the Church as an organization:
a. Business school programmatics supplant Word and Sacrament in a theology of felt needs;
b. A theology of felt needs converts pastor from shepherd and steward into administrator.
XXIII. A theology of felt needs manifests unionsim.
XXIV. A theology of felt needs establishes man as God.
XXV. A theology of felt needs is a theology of inclusion:
a. A theology of felt needs embraces "open communion";
b. A theology of felt needs supplants openness and tolerance for acceptance, accommodation and affirmation;
c. A theology of felt needs cannot comprehend the term "catholic".
XXVI. A theology of felt needs accepts man as righteous according to his works; that is, a theology of felt needs rejects the sola fide (from V).
XXVII. Therefore, a theology of felt needs is a Theology of Glory:
a. A theology of felt needs is heresy;
b. Heterodox communions practice according to principles of felt needs theology;
c. A communion may not be called orthodox, confessional or Lutheran when applying principles of felt needs theology.
XXVIII. Pastors and theologians embracing a theology of felt needs are hermenuetical and epistematical liberals. These must be summarily deposed.
XXIX. A theology of felt needs ultimately leads to apostasy.
XXX. A theology of felt needs necessarily rejects Christ's Real Presence both to His Church and in His Supper.
XXXI. A theologian of felt needs cannot be a Theologian of the Cross.
XXXII. A theology of felt needs exposes a sacramentarian.
XXXIII. A theology of felt needs supplants scriptural marks of the Church for human visions, goals and outcomes.
XXXIV. A theology of felt needs seeks fulfillment in direct social and political action.
XXXV. A theology of felt needs seeks relevance in this world; a Theology of the Cross seeks relevance by embracing that which is foolish and irrelevant - the Cross.
XXXVI. Worship based on a theology of felt needs is both narcissistic and nihilist.
XXXVII. Worship based in a theology of felt needs is enslaved to base culture; orthodox and confession worship is transcendent -- that is, countercultural and transcultural.
XXXVIII. Worship based in a theology of felt needs conforms to the prevailing culture's norms and precepts:
a. A theology of felt needs minimizes its breadth of influence;
b. A theology of felt needs follows the least common denominator;
c. A theology of felt needs subordinates the church beneath culture.
XXXIX. Worship based in a theology of felt needs exposes a liberal ecclessiology.
XL. The Lutheran church subsists in the dialectal tension of paradox; relieving that paradox results in either Calvinism (double predestination) or Arminianism (man cooperates in his salvation by his free will):
a. Arminianism devolves into Socanism in the limit;
b. A theology of felt needs is extreme Arminianism;
c. A Lutheran Church becomes minimally heterodox if not apostate when practicing a theology of felt needs.
XLI. A theology of felt needs reflects a sectarian spirit.
XLII. A theology of felt needs establish men, groups and movements as normative rather than Scripture doctrine.
XLIII. An ecclessiology based in a theology of felt needs repudiates Christ Jesus' Great Commission.
XLIV. A theology of felt needs violates good order in the Church:
a. Small groups form conflicting polities;
b. Small groups often form micro churches;
c. Small groups often form elitist circles based on common interest, economic and social status; such groups may establish church policy outside of congregational purview;
d. Small groups are the breeding ground of heresy.
XLV. A theology of felt needs violates confessional unity within the congregation and Synod.
XLVI. No practice based in a theology of felt needs can be adopted, modified, rehabilitated or sanctified for use in the Lutheran Church:
a. Such practice is rooted in un-Scriptural Zwinglian ecclessiology (the church is a physical, politicial entity);
b. Reformed/evangelical ecclessiology is antithetical to Scriptural Lutheran principles.
XLVII. A theology of felt needs only affects the emotions thereby effecting only shallow, temporary change in man; a Theology of the Cross annihilates man to crush his will -- a theology of felt needs cannot affect the will of man.
XLVIII. In a theology of felt needs, man ascends to God; whereas in a Theology of the Cross God condescends to man:
a. A theology of felt needs seeks that which it can neither go nor seek;
b. A Theology of the Cross finds that which was blind, bumbling and lost.
XLIX. A theology of felt needs makes every man Pope and antichrist.
L. A theology of felt needs manifests postmodern fascism.
LI. A theology of felt needs is counter-reformational.
LII. A theology of felt needs deals with man's symptoms not his root disease: sin and rebellion.
a. Man's felt needs are asymptomatic of his root problem;
b. A theology of felt needs gives blinded man a cane not sight.
LIII. A theology of felt needs breeds mysticism.
LIV. A theology of felt needs is pietistic in that it emphasizes holiness and activity as evidence of the church.
LV. A theology of felt needs is grounded in a deistic world view.
LVI. A theology of felt needs destroys the external supports of the Church.
LVII. A theology of felt needs confuses the visible and invisible Church even whether the visible Church exists.
LVIII. A theology of felt needs hinders the Spirit's work by permitting His activity to be understood psychologically, sociologically or philosophically (from XLVII).
LIX. A theology of felt needs profanes the holy and sanctifies the profane.
LX. A theology of felt needs is heretical if only because it tolerates heresy (from XII).
LXI. A theology of felt needs breeds tyranny by investing congregational authority in within a leadership clique.
LXII. A theology of felt needs confuses the Office of the Holy Ministry with "leadership".
LXIII. A theology of felt needs is a gutter form of post-modern "process" theology.
LXIV. In a theology of felt needs, pastors degenerate into mere enablers.
LXV. A theology of felt needs is universalism (from XL).
LXVI. A theology of felt needs embraces a "realized" eschatology.
LXVII. A theology of felt needs subverts the doctrine of faith.
LXVIII. A theology of felt needs confuses the Priesthood of All Believers with the Office of Holy Ministry.
LXIX. A theology of felt needs rejects the orthodox Creeds as relevant to contemporary man.
LXX. A theology of felt needs rejects the confessional principle:
a. A theology of felt needs rejects quia subscription;
b. A theology of felt needs confuses the doctrine of inspiration of Scripture;
c. A theology of felt needs rejects confessional exegesis.
LXXI. A theology of felt needs enslaves the Church under human law rather than subsisting in the Gospel.
LXXII. Therefore, a theology of felt needs destroys the Article on Election by confusing the elect with the non-elect.
LXXIII. A theology of felt needs is narcissistic expressivism.
LXXIV. A theology of felt needs allows Recognized Service Organizations (RSO) to trample the Lord's Vineyard.
LXXV. A theology of felt needs allows another voice in the Church other than the Good Shepherd's Voice.
LXXVI. A theology of felt needs cannot comprehend the doctrine of the call to teach in the Church.
LXXVII. A theology of felt needs is cultic.
LXXVIII. A theology of felt needs allows the Church to be looted by hirelings with no call to office much less even to speak.
LXXIX. In a theology of felt needs, the "homogeneous unit principle" embraces determinism.
LXXX. In a theology of felt needs, "church growth" eyes are blind, because they can only see man coram humano. (according to human judgment)
LXXXI. A theology of felt needs seeks to manipulate God to achieve predictable empirical results thereby ignoring God's Sovereign Will and Purposes (from XXIV).
LXXXII. Therefore, a theology of felt needs violates the First Commandment.
LXXXIII. A theology of felt needs is a reductionist fallacy, because it assumes empirical metrics quantify the Church's vitality.
LXXXIV. In a theology of felt needs, "contemporary worship" is a complex-compound oxymoron.
LXXXV. In a theology of felt needs, "contemporary worship" isn't, because it's the same old Adam struggling to express himself.
LXXXVI. A theology of felt needs cannot give all Glory to God alone.
LXXXVII. Therefore, a theology of felt needs robs God of His Glory thereby deifying man (see XXIV).
LXXXVIII. A theology of felt needs is a "zero sum" paradigm.
LXXXIX. As man prefers darkness rather than light, a theology of felt needs advances in secret conclaves by political chicanery.
XC. The presence of a theology of felt needs identifies a Church that has lost faith in the Gospel.
XCI. A theology of felt needs breeds either a nihilist cynicism or narcissistic solipsism (reality is one's experience only) thereby quenching the Spirit.
XCII. In a theology of felt needs, evangelism is merely "sheep stealing".
XCIII. A theology of felt needs presumes knowledge known only to God alone (see LXXXIII and LXXII).
XCIV. A theology of felt needs exhibits cognitive dissonance, because it separates worship from professed Word and doctrine.
XCV. Therefore, a theology of felt needs must be condemned and execrated as an abomination from Hell.