ever heard of anything like this?

Well, maybe I'm wrong, I seem to be wrong about everything here lately.

When I went to Grace Community, John McArthers church, he never used theatrics and I enjoyed it very much. I think what I liked about his preaching is that I always came away with more knowledge than I went in with.

I've gone to three churches in my life... First Assembly of God of Bell Gardens, Grace Community and Lancaster Baptist Church. The Baptist church was the most entertaining.

So what's your phylosophy Dr. Bob and P.T.W? What is better to the two of you? I only have a limited experience...3 churches in 40 years.

 

How does one define "pulpiteering"?

Exposition is a human method of preaching. It does not circumvent visual aids that help the hearer identify with the spoken word or understand it more clearly. Jesus Himself is the classic example of one who employed visual images. Bottom line: people grasp 75% more of what they hear and see than what they hear alone. That in itself should settle the question of whether visual aids are appropriate.

BTW, I am an expositional-application oriented preacher, so this is not about the legitimacy of expository preaching. But we must not forget even expository preaching is a style created by humans.

 

If using a graphical illustration or some other sort of illustration is tempered and used sparingly and in it's appropriate place and measure then why not. Remember that crazy Jeremiah and all the things he did instead of using careful exposition. He walked around practically naked for a while and then made bread from the most vile of substances. These were God commanded actions.

Illustrations should be used sparingly and in their proper place.

 

Nice example, M. Wickens!

Personally, I think the style should be appropriate to the congregation. I have a hard time thinking of a lot of conservative, white-collar folk responding well to the type of preaching which is popular among the hand-clapping and shouting crowd. On the other hand, a bit of something unusual once in awhile could really wake them up!

It's very easy to get used to what you are used to! It's very easy to think that is the 'right way' or the 'only way.' The fact is, God created an amazing diversity among us human-folk, and not everyone responds to the intellectual approach.

When I was teaching, I realized there are two basic ways of learning: those who can grasp the theory first and then figure out how to apply it (the intellectual approach), and those who need a lot of examples before the theory ever even makes sense (the hands-on approach). Preach and Dr. Bob and some others seem to prefer the more intellectual approach. Actually, so do I. There is a temptation there, though, not to touch earth often enough -- not to get involved with practical day-to-day applications.

But many others really do have brains that require the hands-on approach. These folks are in danger of the approach that depends on the personal charisma of the person teaching or preaching, however. They can get caught up in the current and swept along without realizing what is going on. But they sure know the day-to-day stuff!

We need each other. It's best not to condemn different styles. If preaching is anything like teaching, then different congregations have different group personalities (difference is, we changed every year and preachers are stuck with their groups for longer!). And you quickly learn to adapt your style to the personality or character of the group you have at the time. Even as a public speaker I know to do that. You sort of 'feel out' your audience in the first couple of minutes and adapt a bit from there.

And it probably does us all good to hear different styles at different times. The one example I can think of in my own experience was a rather striking one. I am not much for the severe liturgical style of the high Episcopalians and such. Yet, when Barry and I were in Santa Barbara a year or so ago, we had the privilege of attending church with Isa Baxter, Sidlow Baxter's widow, who is a good friend of ours. She is a feisty little Scottish lady even in her mid-nineties! Lovely person!

But the church she attends is very liturgical. A lot of older people there. One aging gentleman got up to pray and I considered getting a mint out of my purse to suck on so I wouldn't fall asleep. Was I in for a surprise. Yes, the gentleman prayed slowly, but I have never in my life been so heart-involved in a prayer in church. This gentleman knew the Lord and that was a prayer not only for us to join in with our hearts, but a prayer from a man to his Best Friend. After this long, the impact of that is still with me, liturgy or not.

Occasional changes can sometimes be just what we need to get us out of our own personal ruts. And perhaps its a wise pastor who recognizes that..

 

Jonathan Edwards preached a sermon called "Sinners in the hands of an angry God". He was sick. He read the sermon. He was monotone. People were clinging to pews in fear of God. Through his preaching (and others like him), the Great Awakening happened (historical fact whether Edwards is someone you like or not).

The power is in preaching. The foolishness of the cross is the point, not the foolishness of the preacher.

 

I agree with PTW.

Laurenda,if you attended John Mac's church you would probably know his beliefs on this issue...he has a book called *Ashamed of the Gospel* and it speaks about some of the foolishness done in churches in the name of Christ and like PTW has stated,the power is in the Word of God and the cross...not in persuasiveness of speech or attention getters. The focus should be on God,not man.

We are members of a church very similar to John MacArthur's and I would never see that kind of stunt stuff from the pulpit...it just wouldn't happen. Our pastor is very good friends with John Mac and they are in close contact. Our pastor/teacher is sold out to the Word of God and that is the emphasis in everything we do.

 

Let's look at a few things in the Bible which were not just straight monotone preaching:

Moses drawing a line in the sand, literally, and commanding folks to go one way or the other.

Moses slamming the tablets down in disgust, or falling on his face in front of the people. We won't discuss the drama of the plagues or the sea parting...

David dancing before the Lord.

David, having psalms of imprecation sung.

And, oh dear, multitudes of animals slaughtered right there in the Temple all those many years! What drama! What a mess!

Jeremiah's been mentioned...

Jesus got a little wildly dramatic with that whip in the Temple courts...

He took time out to feed people, too.

But, of course, all that is over now. Now we are just supposed to speak conservatively and without any controversial inflections or demonstrations in front of properly dressed, sitting-up-straight, utterly serious Christians.

I guess human nature really HAS changed!

...not...

 

Helen, I do not preach monotone. My point was that the power was in the preaching, not the flare.

Btw, all those examples have nothing to do with church worship.

The prophets (like Jeremiah) were not pastor/teachers. That gift is something the Lord gave to the church.

 

OH BROTHER!!!! What is so wrong with using object lessons to get a point accross! If it will save someone from going to hell or keep someone from making major mistakes with their lives, so be it. I will bet you that the congregation will never forget that message. I wonder if you all chew your pastor up as much as you do others? All I have to say is that I'm glad I'm in a church that is alive. I don't think I would like to be in some of your dead churches. You all argue to much, over really foolish things. Your too perfect for me.

[ April 02, 2003, 10:43 PM: Message edited by: journeyheaven ]

 

No, Preach. The power is NOT in the preaching, but in the Word of God -- however it is gotten across.

 

I'm sorry you feel that way,I think you have missed the point...our church is very alive and the people here live very godly,they know the word of God and live it out. They are alive in Christ.

I also wanted to clarify...monotone is not what anyone is saying is the right way to preach(that is sooo not the point),the point was simply made that Jonathan Edwards preached and it was the Word,his preaching, that moved people to fear the Lord...not his presentation.

 

Probably a good illustration. I heard of a preacher that preached on drugs, alcohol, todays schools, killings, and he brought in a casket(I believe it had his son in it, not sure). The point was, get your family in order or your son, daughter, wife, husband, etc. may be the ones in the casket.

Some people go by a program in church while others are lead by the Holy Spirit.

 

Well, I do disagree. Consider Paul's words:

1 Cor. 1:17-18, 21
17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to PREACH the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect.
18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved IT IS THE POWER OF GOD.
21 For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, IT PLEASED GOD THROUGH THE FOOLISHNESS OF THE MESSAGE PREACHED TO SAVE THOSE WHO BELIEVE.

In another place (Rom. 1:16), the gospel is said to be the power of God unto salvation. So, when the connection is made, it is the preached gospel that God has chosen to save people.

Also consider the following:
Romans 10:17
17 So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word (rhema - an utterance, something spoken) of God.

So, it is in the preaching Helen.

People might remember theatrical experiences, but it is the word of God that saves (initially and ultimately).

(This was added for clarification of my point which had nothing to do with Calvinism).

 

Doesn't work too well with the deaf, Dr. Bob. They need object lessons.

So do a lot of folks.

God gives them to me all the time -- a weed so big its roots are entangled with the plant I want to stay and thrive, pruning roses to encourage new growth, a tiny bit of yeast making the whole loaf rise, my absolute joy when a child is spiritually renewed or matured. I read about these things in the Bible, but they REALLY come alive when I see them or examples of them in my daily life.

get that sin confessed and out early; don't let it grow

discipline feels harsh at first, but yields better character

a little yeast...

there is joy in heaven...

God shows us everyday what He is talking about. He carved it in history.

There is no reason in the world we cannot share that with one another when appropriate. From the pulpit or anywhere else. Granted the knife bit may have been a little much, but it sure made an impact on those watching, and they won't forget.

How much of the standard sermon is, by contrast, forgotten as soon as the people leave church?

 

Sadly, this happens alot. Both parties are guilty. The congregation for depending on the preacher to "move them" and the preacher for being lazy and not preaching the word. Granted, just because a sermon is forgotten doesn't necessarily make it the fault of either party. Too often it is though.

 

I have warned you privately and publically to cease with the above reference to calvinism. It is unnecessary and it is a jab at me as moderator of this forum. Stop it Now.
Murph

 

Murph, I said it because I referenced Jonathan Edwards. He is a well known calvinist. I do not agree with alot of his positions (eschatology, baby sprinklin, etc). I do however agree with his soteriology.

Some people might have made the connection to calvinism even though it wasn't my point.

It had nothing to do with you Murph. You aren't the only one reading these posts.

 

I have read the posts on this thread and my opinion still stands. I think this demonstration was very inappropriate based on many factors.

A knife in church???

My pastor holds his congregation's attention without such antics. He preaches the Word!
He uses illustrations! He may use visual aids, but I hope and pray he never uses something like this.

I guarantee our church isn't dead! The Holy Spirt is there leading every service.

 

Molly, I attended the church with my husband for a couple of years, I've never read any of his books. I was impressed with John MacArthur the man. He's the most mild mannered and competant teaching preacher I've ever had the priviledge of hearing.

I'm not disagreeing with your right to your opinion, I just don't think it's an accurate assessment of facts... to say that when a preacher uses visuals they are detracting attention from God? onto themselves?! Rediculous.

When someone says something is, and I have experience that says that it isn't...I can't very well agree with what I have found to be false. But what do I know...I can only attest to the truth of my own experience...which pattently contradicts you're opinion based on what? A book? What other pastors have instilled in you as being true?

All I can say...is your entitled to your opinion...but I hope that you are open to the possibility that your opinion may not be absolutely correct in every situation. I think perhaps you are thinking of charismatic faith healers such as Benny Hinn? This is not what I was speaking of at all. I'm speaking of reading from the Bible and using illustrations to make it more understandable...to help it sink below the top layer of consciousness. The best teachers do this.

God uses who he will...all the multifaceted attributes of personality and opportunity. Salvation and spiritual growth is the result. If people are being saved and grow spiritually in a church where the Pastor is fully commited to being used by God...then how can you still find fault in his methods?

[ April 02, 2003, 06:45 PM: Message edited by: Wisdom Seeker ]