Kent Brandenburg reports from the Evangelical Theological Society

I thought Ken’s attention to how Bauder and Company presented themselves was very interesting when compared to Al Mohler. This summer I toured Southern Seminary and Mohler’s offices in particular. His office literally takes up the entire second floor of the main seminary building. In many ways it reminded me of the culture I was exposed to at BJU. Very clean, proper, and tasteful. The staff was well-dressed, well-groomed, and very modest. I was impressed to say the least. In Mohler’s office hung a large portrait of Spurgeon (or was it Jeff Straub; they look similar). One of Mohler’s rubrics is that he detests prolonged adolescence.

I don’t have time to read anything with that poor grammar and style.

If you want me to read your post, you’ll have to step it up first…

[Paul J. Scharf] I don’t have time to read anything with that poor grammar and style.

If you want me to read your post, you’ll have to step it up first…

Duh pour gramma and steel I can teak butt mor suptance den watt dey weer. Does we reely care if dey werr genes or sutes?

“I could see how that Presbyterianism could make a bit of a run with some who are looking for some doctrinal and practical stability.”

Perhaps Brandenburg is a bit out of practice at giving compliments?

[Steve Davis]

[Paul J. Scharf] I don’t have time to read anything with that poor grammar and style.

If you want me to read your post, you’ll have to step it up first…

Duh pour gramma and steel I can teak butt mor suptance den watt dey weer. Does we reely care if dey werr genes or sutes?

I think it’s more style than true grammar issues. And I don’t know where a spelling jibe like that would come from—other than the occassional typo his spelling is fine, but cheap shots are easy when you know a guy won’t respond directly here.

Style-wise, Kent may be an acquired taste, but I find his contra-fundy/evangelical thinking to be always provacative and sometimes even helpful. Although I haven’t read the article in question yet.

[DavidO]

[Steve Davis]

[Paul J. Scharf] I don’t have time to read anything with that poor grammar and style.

If you want me to read your post, you’ll have to step it up first…

Duh pour gramma and steel I can teak butt mor suptance den watt dey weer. Does we reely care if dey werr genes or sutes?

I think it’s more style than true grammar issues. And I don’t know where a spelling jibe like that would come from—other than the occassional typo his spelling is fine, but cheap shots are easy when you know a guy won’t respond directly here.

Style-wise, Kent may be an acquired taste, but I find his contra-fundy/evangelical thinking to be always provacative and sometimes even helpful. Although I haven’t read the article in question yet.

I read the blog. It was reporter style and I didn’t notice what Paul did. My point was really that there was too much on dress and other superficial comments - these guys dress this way, others guys another way. That would’ve been okay if he had given something of substance (which I think he will eventually). I wasn’t able to attend ETS and am interested in some of the issues discussed. I do find Kent provocative at times and even helpful. I will be interested to read his observations once he gets into something serious. So if Kent reads this I’d like him to know I didn’t intend a cheap shot. Not that I’ve never done that.

Steve

Not that what I wear in public is any of Kent’s business … but I just wish he would at least get his facts straight about what he thinks he saw.

For the record, I wore a pressed dressed shirt and creased dress slacks … no tie however or coat so I guess this constitutes “very casual.” I am not in the habit of wearing a suit … oh why am I trying to justify what I wear to Kent!

“Casual” is a golf shirt and khakis.

“Very casual” is shorts and a t-shirt.

I wore “afternoon dress” for the BJ insiders! :D

Keep up the good work Kent! With reporting like this, I can’t wait for the next installment!

Move over Clark Kent! This is a job for Superman!

I don’t believe that Kent is a registered user of Sharper Iron, is he?, so I guess technically he’s not “our” reporter. And, I’m also guessing that while writing his report he wasn’t thinking that Sharper Iron readers would “care” about the clothing of the presenters. I welcome one of our moderators to correct me if I’m wrong, but I think he was reporting for the purposes of his own blog and audience and Sharper Iron simply linked to it without officially commissioning him to report on the ETS event for us.

I appreciate being able to read Kent’s report even if it is not in a style I prefer and even if he mentions things that might not be important to me. And, I appreciate the corrections or different perspectives offered by those who also are in attendance. It’s good to have more than one “take” on an event such as this.

[DavidO] I think it’s more style than true grammar issues. And I don’t know where a spelling jibe like that would come from—other than the occassional typo his spelling is fine, but cheap shots are easy when you know a guy won’t respond directly here.

Style-wise, Kent may be an acquired taste, but I find his contra-fundy/evangelical thinking to be always provacative and sometimes even helpful. Although I haven’t read the article in question yet.

Having at least some experience teaching the Bible to all grades from first through senior in college, I understand the profound nature of the problems that students in our Christian school system have when asked to produce the written word. It is probably no worse than the problem in society at large, but it is certainly no better. I would suggest that for people who claim to draw their hope from the Word, this is matter of shame.

As one who does editing for a living, I can say without hesitation that Kent’s writing is so poor that, if handed to me in a professional capacity, I would simply hand it back. It is not worthy of consideration for publishing on any level. I understand that the Internet evens all of that out, for whatever it is worth. But that does not make it right. If he is trying to persuade us of a particular viewpoint, he has thus failed out of the gate. To the extent that anyone reading this tripe uses it to paint the type of fundamentalism I and many others aspire to, it ought to make us weep.

[Jeff Straub] Not that what I wear in public is any of Kent’s business … but I just wish he would at least get his facts straight about what he thinks he saw.

He saw your http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppelg%C3%A4nger] Doppelgänger (And that’s a very scary thought … another guy that looks like Jeff Straub!)

Who said

To the extent that anyone reading this tripe uses it to paint the type of fundamentalism I and many others aspire to, it ought to make us weep.

Kent does not claim to be a fundamentalist

[Paul J. Scharf] As one who does editing for a living, I can say without hesitation that Kent’s writing is so poor that, if handed to me in a professional capacity, I would simply hand it back. It is not worthy of consideration for publishing on any level. I understand that the Internet evens all of that out, for whatever it is worth. But that does not make it right. If he is trying to persuade us of a particular viewpoint, he has thus failed out of the gate. To the extent that anyone reading this tripe uses it to paint the type of fundamentalism I and many others aspire to, it ought to make us weep.

Paul, at first I though you were kidding. Kent is simply writing in his blog, and it reads like a journal. In the comments, he affirms what you say to some degree. He’s not trying to make it to your level of standard. He’s just sharing his thoughts. He’s just a farm kid like you!

http://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com/2011/11/my-field-trip-to-evangelica…

[Jeff Straub] Not that what I wear in public is any of Kent’s business …

Doesn’t what we wear in public concern everyone who sees us?

[Kevin Subra]

[Paul J. Scharf] As one who does editing for a living, I can say without hesitation that Kent’s writing is so poor that, if handed to me in a professional capacity, I would simply hand it back. It is not worthy of consideration for publishing on any level. I understand that the Internet evens all of that out, for whatever it is worth. But that does not make it right. If he is trying to persuade us of a particular viewpoint, he has thus failed out of the gate. To the extent that anyone reading this tripe uses it to paint the type of fundamentalism I and many others aspire to, it ought to make us weep.

Paul, at first I though you were kidding. Kent is simply writing in his blog, and it reads like a journal. In the comments, he affirms what you say to some degree. He’s not trying to make it to your level of standard. He’s just sharing his thoughts. He’s just a farm kid like you!

Kevin, I think you are kidding! I guess that is why I don’t read or write blogs, per se.

I see that Kent caught a typo of mine!!! If I were not already embarrassed to be wearing a suede sport coat and blue jeans, I would just go home and listen to Al Mohler CDs! :) 8-) :8)