Unapologetic Church Advertising...

[Crash Davis]

As far as who receives the judgment, there is only one way, and that is through Jesus Christ. I accept that by faith, through grace, both of which were given to me by God's Holy Spirit. There is absolutely no other way.

What century is this?

[zombie-a-go-go]

What century is this?

21st?

What do I win?

[traderumor]

What century is this?

That's what's so cool about Biblical truth. It stands the test of time, despite the changes from century to century. You really want to see things get rolling, I'll revive my argument that this culture is just as barbaric as the barbarians, but have simply found more sophisticated ways to be barbaric. That usually really gets me classified as a neanderthal.

[westofyou]

21st?

What do I win?

A dog-eared copy of Joseph Campbell's "Myths to Live By"

[traderumor]

A dog-eared copy of Joseph Campbell's "Myths to Live By"

I am very proud of you for staying out of this discussion for so long. I've normally gotten a few barbs from you about my worldview by now.

[westofyou]

I am very proud of you for staying out of this discussion for so long. I've normally gotten a few barbs from you about my worldview by now.

I'm getting prepared for my in-law visit next week.

[registerthis]

Bored bored bored bored bored bored. Bored by template sermons. Bored by the droning on of someone standing at the pulpit who is preaching instead of teaching. Bored by the expectation that this part follows this part and that part will precede the next expected action.

Bored to tears. Boring to no end. B O R I N G.

Well, exactly.

There seems to be a group of people--I don't know if TR includes himself in this or not--that thinks that people will just naturally want to attend church because of their inherent desire to be a Christian. Or that if they require a good preacher to inspire them they are somehow not "true Christians." Or lack a true belief in God. Or what have you.

I have--as have you--sat through far too many church services that have little to no relevance to myself or anyone I know. There is no energy or life. There's nothing to inspire you to want to learn more. There's nothing practical or applicable to your life. And there are people who believe that it SHOULD be this way. it's how my grandmother was raised.

But I don't subscribe to that for a moment. I quit attending my parent's church when I found myself dragging myself there every Sunday morning and zoning out through the service. There was simply no point to it. It wasn't until I found a non-traditional church that catered to people in my situation that I started to attend church on a regular basis again. The doctrine they teach is exactly the same as in my parents much more conservative church--but the way they do it is significantly different. We have a rock band rather than a capella singing. Our pastor wears khakis and a polo shirt rather than a three piece suit. The teachings are relevant to your everyday life, rather than fire-and-brimstone sermons on a weekly basis.

In other words, it's much more inspiring. Contrary to what TR may write, the messenger IS important. Jesus taught in parables so that the people could understand him and relate to him. Paul frequently brought others with him on his journeys (such as Timothy) who were better public speakers than he was. Because they understood that the way the message is delivered is important.

Some churches may stubbornly refuse to adapt to this, which is their choice. But if they feel that is the correct way to go, I would like to show them a dwindling church in Southwest Missouri that speaks far better than I could of the perils of following this path.

[traderumor]

I'm getting prepared for my in-law visit next week.

Oh boy, I feel your pain from the opposite perspective. My mother-in-law, who claims to be a Christian but hasn't been to church in a few years, was telling another relative who has just started reading the Bible that she was proud of him because many Christians don't read the Bible like they should. Or go to church, apparently But, I kept my mouth shut.

Good luck with that visit.

[GAC]

Definately a difference in ministry philosophy there, Tom. What is your scriptural support for such a method, or do you see that as a necessity when it comes to evangelism?

How about the apostle Paul?

"For although I am free from all people, I have made myself a slave to all, in order to win more people. To the Jews I became like a Jew, to win Jews; to those under the law, like one under the law--though I myself am not under the law--to win those under the law. To those who are outside the law, like one outside the law--not being outside God's law, but under the law of Christ--to win those outside the law. To the weak I became weak, in order to win the weak. I have become all things to all people, so that I may by all means save some. Now I do all this because of the gospel, that I may become a partner in its benefits."

1st Corinthians 9:19-23

Ashland Theological Seminary. Good school Tom. My pastore graduated from there many years ago.

Good luck, and my the Lord be with you.

Greg (GAC)

[registerthis]

How about the apostle Paul?Ashland Theological Seminary. Good school Tom. My pastore graduated from there many years ago.

Good luck, and my the Lord be with you.

Greg (GAC)

Good Lord GAC.

I think we're in agreement on this thread.

[traderumor]

Well, exactly.

There seems to be a group of people--I don't know if TR includes himself in this or not--that thinks that people will just naturally want to attend church because of their inherent desire to be a Christian. Or that if they require a good preacher to inspire them they are somehow not "true Christians." Or lack a true belief in God. Or what have you.

I have--as have you--sat through far too many church services that have little to no relevance to myself or anyone I know. There is no energy or life. There's nothing to inspire you to want to learn more. There's nothing practical or applicable to your life. And there are people who believe that it SHOULD be this way. it's how my grandmother was raised.

But I don't subscribe to that for a moment. I quit attending my parent's church when I found myself dragging myself there every Sunday morning and zoning out through the service. There was simply no point to it. It wasn't until I found a non-traditional church that catered to people in my situation that I started to attend church on a regular basis again. The doctrine they teach is exactly the same as in my parents much more conservative church--but the way they do it is significantly different. We have a rock band rather than a capella singing. Our pastor wears khakis and a polo shirt rather than a three piece suit. The teachings are relevant to your everyday life, rather than fire-and-brimstone sermons on a weekly basis.

In other words, it's much more inspiring. Contrary to what TR may write, the messenger IS important. Jesus taught in parables so that the people could understand him and relate to him. Paul frequently brought others with him on his journeys (such as Timothy) who were better public speakers than he was. Because they understood that the way the message is delivered is important.

Some churches may stubbornly refuse to adapt to this, which is their choice. But if they feel that is the correct way to go, I would like to show them a dwindling church in Southwest Missouri that speaks far better than I could of the perils of following this path.

There are good and bad ways to conform to the culture. What the preacher wears in the pulpit is just something folks should care less about in their preacher. Sadly, your opinion is prevalent, and that makes it hard to find a church that is not focusing on the lesser things while the greater things are neglected. I challenge you to listen to the discussion that I provided a link to on an earlier page and I think you'll understand a little better my perspective. I have been bored in church myself, some of it was because the person couldn't speak, some of it was because I was daydreaming, etc. and so forth. I have also been greatly inspired by folks who were not good speakers. The church I go to now has an excellent preacher, but why I consider him to be that has little to do with what he does, but with the content of his preaching. Perish the thought.

[registerthis]

The church I go to now has an excellent preacher, but why I consider him to be that has little to do with what he does, but with the content of his preaching. Perish the thought.

I've never said that content can't be inspiring. And if you go back and read my post, nowhere did I say that the pastor at our church was a good speaker. I only said that the nature of the service was quite different--which is why I mentioned the dress code.

I don't see why my PoV being prevalent is a sad thing--it's a GOOD thing. Not only is it Biblical, which would pass your litmus test, it is Biblical while serving to attract more to the Church, which I think you would ALSO be in favor of.

I will also say that a good speaker with good content trumps a bad speaker with good content every single day of the week.

[Johnny Footstool]

Semantics? You say the gospel is reduced down to saving oneself? No, we are at opposite ends of the spectrum, my friend.

Here's a simple question: what drives a person to seek salvation?

[WVRed]

Y'know, I'm a preacher's kid. And I don't, at all, feel that the majority of folks walk away disillusioned when they walk away.

I think they walk away because they're bored to tears. Not bored by God or His message. Bored by messengers who fail to understand that they must, before all other things, connect with their audience to facilitate the learning process in order to further inspire the listener's connection to God.

Bored bored bored bored bored bored. Bored by template sermons. Bored by the droning on of someone standing at the pulpit who is preaching instead of teaching. Bored by the expectation that this part follows this part and that part will precede the next expected action.

Bored to tears. Boring to no end. B O R I N G.

I do agree with this. It is a matter of keeping peoples attention, and if a pastor fails to accomplish that, then odds are he will have very little success winning souls to Christ if he cannot communicate with them.

However, I also agree with traderumor, while the content of the preaching is important, the doctrine that is taught is what matters most.

Jonathan Edwards "read" one of the greatest sermons of all time in "Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God.". If you study Jonathan Edwards, you will find that people were wailing in the pews as he read his sermon, just as one would read a book.

It doesnt bother me in the least if a preacher runs through a ring of fire to make an illustration, just as long as he is doing it from the Word of God.

[GAC]

You want my honest opinion as to why the church is "failing" today. Personally, I hate that word because the Gospel is not failing. Yes, many churches are, and do you know why IMO?....

Compromise, pure and simple. I have no problem with the different approaches being utilized to bring people to Christ. There is nothing wrong with being inventive as long as the message itself remains intact and not water-downed. Christ, nor the apostles, never watered down nor soft-tossed anything. They pulled no punches, and weren't afraid of the consequences. Examine their lives and the trials, persecution, and matyrdom they suffered for preaching the truth.

Alot of ministries in today's "established" churches, in order to get the numbers in those pews - because it's all about numbers anymore - are telling the people what they want to hear, not what they need to hear in order to get them in the doors. They are therefore unprepared because they are given a false/wrong impression of what a disciple is.

The gospel message should never be compromised in order to meet society's changing/evolving standards.

This may not go down as a very popular statement on here (but I don't really care)... but if those who don't have the ears to hear, and accept the message intact as it is, and just as Jesus preached it, then they should be allowed to walk away. Again, they abandoned Jesus in masses over the message preached, and Jesus didn't go running after them, getting down on his hands and knees, and begging them to come back and he'll try to work out some sort of acceptable compromise.

Examine the scriptures my friends - with Jesus, it was take it or leave it. Pure and simple. it was Jesus who said "Do not give what is holy to the dogs; nor cast your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces." (Matthew 7:6)

Translation? Jesus didn't waste his time with those who willfully and beligerantly rejected the truth. He didn't waste his time trying to reach compromise with them. He let them walk away. He was saddened over it; but he offered no compromise.

Take a good hard look at Jesus' minstry in the beginning. He had HUGE masses following him wherever he went. They were intrigued, which is basic human nature. They loved to be witnesses of the miracles, the healing of the sick, raising the dead, providing for their material needs, etc. It brought the masses out in throngs. But when Jesus started preaching/teaching spritual truths which many label "hard sayings", which revolve around the willingness to sacrificing all (money, family ties, even your very life) in order to be his disciple, then the crowds started to thin.

Look at Jesus' message in Luke 14:25-33....

Large crowds were traveling with Jesus, and turning to them he said: "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters—yes, even his own life—he cannot be my disciple. And anyone who does not carry his cross and follow me cannot be my disciple.

Now look at the lesson he conveys in the following verses in the same passage (28-33) concerning salvation..

"Suppose one of you wants to build a tower. Will he not first sit down and estimate the cost to see if he has enough money to complete it? For if he lays the foundation and is not able to finish it, everyone who sees it will ridicule him, saying, 'This fellow began to build and was not able to finish.'

"Or suppose a king is about to go to war against another king. Will he not first sit down and consider whether he is able with ten thousand men to oppose the one coming against him with twenty thousand? If he is not able, he will send a delegation while the other is still a long way off and will ask for terms of peace. In the same way, any of you who does not give up everything he has cannot be my disciple.

Nobody then liked that message.... and it's still the same today. So we alter it, and adapt it, to become more palatable/acceptable to today's current generation.

And I blame many within the church themselves (especially pastors). We have come to equate success to numbers/church membership (a piece of paper). Get them pews filled - that's a sure sign you're being successful. That is until real life sets in, and the message many are being taught doesn't pan out - especially when the going gets rough, or they hit life's "bump in the roads". They were taught it wasn't suppose to be like this. Because they are not rooted, they get discouraged, drift and fall away...."sigh, the gospel doesn't work."

The Parable Of The Soils, as taught by Jesus in Luke 8: 4-15, tells us alot about differnet ways inwhich the message is received and the differing affects it has on the human heart. Those same conditions exist today...

"While a large crowd was gathering and people were coming to Jesus from town after town, he told this parable: "A farmer went out to sow his seed. As he was scattering the seed, some fell along the path; it was trampled on, and the birds of the air ate it up. Some fell on rock, and when it came up, the plants withered because they had no moisture. Other seed fell among thorns, which grew up with it and choked the plants. Still other seed fell on good soil. It came up and yielded a crop, a hundred times more than was sown.

"When he said this, he called out, "He who has ears to hear, let him hear."

His disciples asked him what this parable meant. He said, "The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of God has been given to you, but to others I speak in parables, so that,
'though seeing, they may not see;
though hearing, they may not understand.'

"This is the meaning of the parable: The seed is the word of God. Those along the path are the ones who hear, and then the devil comes and takes away the word from their hearts, so that they may not believe and be saved. Those on the rock are the ones who receive the word with joy when they hear it, but they have no root. They believe for a while, but in the time of testing they fall away. The seed that fell among thorns stands for those who hear, but as they go on their way they are choked by life's worries, riches and pleasures, and they do not mature. But the seed on good soil stands for those with a noble and good heart, who hear the word, retain it, and by persevering produce a crop."

Examine the situation between Jesus and the Rich Young Ruler in Mark 10:17-29. This young man walked away sad because he refused to make that sacrifice.

Compare his situation with those of the 12 apostles, and then of Paul and the early church. They realized the cost, weighed it all, and made that sacrifice/commitment.

Repentance, faith, sacrifice, commitment - those are concepts lost in alot of today's churches because it's not what some want to hear. So it is omitted.