Just a note to readers of this blog — I didn’t make up this headline: “Preaching through Bible has risks, pastors say”
I know. You don’t know whether to laugh or cry. Reading the article won’t help, either. Seems we now need panel discussions among pastors to figure out what to preach and how to preach it. I’ll say it again: the most compelling point of evidence in my mind that biblical Christianity is the truth is the Church. It should have imploded a long time ago but hasn’t. God must be behind it.
Here are some choice pull quotes from my reading of this piece. My responses (at MSH) will once again remind all of you why I couldn’t be a pastor in today’s church.
“Many pastors believe tackling Scripture verse by verse from the pulpit is the only acceptable approach,” said moderator Ed Stetzer, general editor of The Gospel Project. “But that view may be different from the pews,” the four panelists agreed. [MSH: So what. Where did the idea that the people determine what’s preached come from?]
Continuity is broken if people don’t attend every service — and “I can guarantee you during football season you’re going to have people who are there every third Sunday,” said Chip Henderson, pastor at Pinelake Church in Jackson, Miss.” [MSH: Ditto on the so what? If football’s more important than learning Scripture, let them stay away. They need to hear they are accountable to God for such choices, not that the faithful people need to adjust to their misguided priorities.]
“A lengthy series of sermons can leave newcomers “feeling like they’re catching the movie in the middle,” said H.B. Charles Jr., pastor of Shiloh Metropolitan Baptist Church in Jacksonville, Fla. [MSH: Excuse me, pastor, but have you not heard of recording your sermons? MP3s? What a lame objection this is. Again, zero accountability. Might I suggest that we challenge people’s hypocrisy when they claim to believe Scripture is inspired but can’t be bothered to show up somewhere to hear it explained for thirty minutes.]
“Most important,” Stetzer said, “a demand for expository preaching may discourage pastors in developing countries who lack the academic training to analyze every verse.” [MSH: Also lame. Their people would likely not demand this sort of preaching, and expository preaching need not be verse-by-verse anyway. The issue is giving them a sermon that derives from the text in demonstrable ways instead of spinning yarns and telling jokes with Bible phrases sprinkled in between. Preaching the text is about explaining what the text means and refusing to dilute it, dodge it, or filter it through a creed or foreign context. Give people the text and don’t make the fact that it was divided into verses sometime in the Middle Ages an excuse for not doing so.]
“Still, the pastors acknowledged the verse-by-verse approach isn’t commanded in Scripture and probably wasn’t practiced by the early church.” [MSH: True – but so what? Teach the text without using this false criterion as an objection to doing so. It’s not rocket science.]
“Pastors today can’t assume people understand Christian theology,” Charles said. “The heart of it is you need to explain things. People need to become familiar with the content of the Bible.”[MSH: And so the best way to do that is to be careful not to preach too much of the text? Hello?]
I’ll stop there for my own sanctification. You can read the rest. This is the sort of quandary that develops when we care too much about our audience being entertained or (perhaps more apropos) when we are afraid to challenge people with content. Thinking people know when they aren’t being asked to think. There are more of them in churches than many pastors suppose. It’s not the job of the pastor to keep people in spiritual diapers so they’ll keep coming back. Many really do want to learn something. The choice isn’t between offering them pablum from the pulpit or graduate level content. Just teach the text and tell them the goal is to learn one new thing each week and live out the truth in one way every week that takes them out of their comfort zone or builds spiritual discipline. That’s 52 new things / acts of obedience / good habits in a year. In a few years, you’ll have discipled people from the pulpit and will have more mature believers under your care than the year before. Catering to those disinterested in growing will stunt the growth of the ones who come for the right reasons. If there are so many of the unwilling in churches that pastors would lost their jobs over this, maybe it’s time for more tent-making ministry instead of a salaried class of pastors. But I doubt things are that far gone. At least at this point.
What you are saying makes perfect sense to me a “baby christian”
Good – we like to make sense. What are you guys doing the 4th?
God bless you Dr. Heiser. Just know you’re prayed for as family, and my respected teacher.
Thanks – I do appreciate it. I’m not kidding when I say it matters that people learn something from what I do. It’s why I’m here.
Looking forward to the reality series where you take over a pulpit/church for a month and see what ensues.
THAT was hilarious!
A few thoughts come to mind. When I was teaching weekly to a youth group, several students (especially those who had grown up in and were still attending other churches) stated they loved coming because they were challenged and excited to learn something new (taking the text contextually) and growing. They stated they hated missing a service because they would MISS something. And when some kids would miss a few weeks, and then have question about something when they missed, I’d simply say, “Well, we covered that a few weeks ago, when you missed.” And move on. We honor the people who are there on time, not the people who aren’t or are running late.
You snooze, you loose. If there isn’t value in attending church (and being there on time), then why attend?
My second thought is this: our (fairly large) church has a teaching team which rotates speakers every week, instead of just the senior pastor speaking each week. On that team is a pastor with a Ph.D. in Quantum Physics. Early in his teaching career, when he taught from Paul (for example), he really stretched a lot of people, often leaving many in the dust of confusion, while a second group of people were left profoundly moved as some mystery about God was revealed by this gifted thinker. (Over time, he has been coached into becoming more relatable).
The first group would come back the next week to hear an easier-to-understand take on the sermon series from the senior pastor or some other member of the team they related to better.
Some of the challenges offered by harder teaching can be discussed in the small groups, where the curriculum coincides with the sermon series. Small groups can help people who missed a few weeks catch up, as well. But if you miss small group, you miss out on the deeper lesson.
My thought is the teaching team approach has value, but for reasons I don’t always understand.
For instance, some time ago, I was speaking with a newer unsaved attendee who expressed such excitement about not knowing who was going to speak, and appreciating the different takes each presenter had on the topic. He appreciated the deeper teachings although he didn’t understand them. He liked the mystery of knowing he would someday understand some of this, but that after all God is incomprehensible. But he found of value the more home-spun teaching as well. His experience with the teaching team was far different than mine (and a few months later, he became saved and later became a small group leader). His wide-eyed approach to the messages moved me.
It’s useful to remember if we become bored with God, we’ve probably made an idol of something.
Anyway, it’s a moving target.
Everything in a church service should convey Christian theology and should be explained. Songs should convey theology. The theology behind offering or worship or prayer or communion or teaching from the Bible should be explained, each and every time.
Those of us who have attended church all of our lives sometimes get into the little routines and rituals, and so explaining everything each and every time is useful to both the nonbelieving visitor and us old-hats.
Well said — and if a church is committed to challenging people with content, it CAN be done. It may not be perfect — things may need adjustment, and you can always do X never again — but it’s about the commitment and direction.
I loved the first paragraph. It’s been a long time since I heard or saw something like that.
Yes it Can, and it is !–I love this type of talk that Doug and you just shared. I also love the multi teacher way, but want to report about another addition to that I have seen in one of the particular churches I went to, where also they had meetings that whoever was led ,would get up to the pulpit and share. But here is the even more exciting thing I want to share here. Growing up in the Lutheran church I went out and explored many other churches and groups, and could write a book about the kind of things Doug shared. But I have come back to the Lutheran church and here is what I have to say: There are 4 Lutheran Churches in my town and believe me ,they are hearing about Michael S Heiser and The Divine Council (and a whole lot of other things related to it all) I mean , I went right to the pillars of the churches, first in a small home group, that one of the main elders holds, and then at the other Lutheran church in town, the main men’s meeting on Tuesday morning that the pastor attends) At that one, we were already getting into deeper stuff with scholar Amy -Jill Levine, and it was prime ground to bring up Mikes work. But the Lutheran churches are awesome for this !–They Already are Theologically minded, and even though they might be pretty Pastor -centric, the fact that they do services the same way they have for hundreds of years, weeds out the catering to every pop-idea of how to relate to people. But here is another thing that really makes the Lutheran Church a great place to bring in deeper Theology like Mike offers. One of them I am talking about IS ALSO A SCHOOL– K thru 12,—–So, just to let you know, the Lutheran churches in my town ,are hearing ALL about Michael S Heiser and purer Theology !! I am hoping to use your writings for our groups in fall. I have been discussing recently with one of the main Theologians in the one church, who recently went to the Northwest Lutherans conference in Portland ,and he is of the type who is governed Theologically about things ,I mean in the way we need here. Praise the Living God ! , who is able to get those moving targets Doug mentioned.
Make it a free-for-all (and get ready for push-back).
Hi Mike,
What do you believe is the ultimate goal of learning scripture?
To know as much about God and what he’s been up to as possible, so that we can appreciate our own creation, and that he loved us enough to stay committed to his plan to have a human family despite ourselves. In other words, to know God and respond with believing gratitude — that is, to give God what he wants (believing gratitude) so he can give us what he wants us to choose — everlasting life with him.
Particular Christians, don’t you think they already possess that without knowing scripture inside-out?
That, Dr. Mike, was stated beautifully.
Thanks; cumulative experience I guess.
I listened through your discussion with Ronn Johnson and he asks “how” exactly do you bring up these issues you talk about. So I guess my question is, even IF they don’t learn about a divine council, have they really lost out on the end goal? Do they not possess a faithful life with gratitude toward their curator?
Sure; there’s more than one motivation for gratitude.
Fair enough.
BTW, have you ever written on your motivation? Meaning, the Divine Council is not just academic for you, correct? Is there something deeper in it for you in how you engage in your Christianity and your love for Christ?
I don’t think so. I really don’t dichotomize the two, though I know they are different (i.e., I don’t make any effort in that regard).
Well said Dr. Heiser. For years my family has stopped attending church because the music focuses loudly on entertaing the audience and the sermons are simplistic, self-help sessions. After attending, I have no sense that God was there. On the other hand, when I hear you teach, the word comes alive and it seems as if I am actually getting to know God–as if He’s actually there! I thank God that He wants us to know Him and that He has made this possible. You are a faithful and wise manager feeding many of His servants.
As long as someone benefits, I’m happy to do it. Thanks.
Honestly I’d probably be doing it even if no one liked it. 🙂
There is more important reason to be well grounded in Scripture. The great deception is coming. I have wondered many times how it would be possible to deceive “Christians”.
We are admonished to grow in knowledge 2Pe 3:18
There is already so much confusion out there, people believe in fables not in the only reality that counts.
I am thankful that knowledge is available, thankful that God uses people like yourself to help people who truly want to know and be challenged.
The more we know about Him the more Awesome He becomes in our eyes.
Right now the door is open – it is our chance to learn and really get to know Him.
It is so sad that today’s churches make their congregations popular social clubs with diluted offerings. I am afraid that one day they will find themselves “left behind” in the darkness, outside the door and they will be bewildered.
Please keep doing what you’re doing. It is a blessing to many.
Thank you and may God be with you and your work
Janina
It appears to me pastors are more interested with keeping donor$ around rather than believers.
Many are, but it’s sort of Catch-22 for those who sincerely want their people to grow. Pastors seem to fear that people will not tolerate content, so to give it to them = people will go elsewhere. I really believe people want to be challenged more than they are and the majority will tolerate content. But pastors feel the pain of risk here (faith?) – which is why I think a tent-making model (see Aaron’s comment) is the way to go in today’s spiritual climate. A tent-making pastor + *seriously* engaged lay people (for admin, counseling, youth, music, etc.) could function and give sound content. They wouldn’t need a large group to sustain the effort. The committed could make it work. Naive? It’s worked before with pretty good results.
It is sad that the church has come to this. I have always been someone serious about content and it seems that is not something welcome in churches anymore. I have tried to serve in a church but the pastors either seem intimidated by how much I know oelr struggle with where to put me so I don’t change the status quo.It always amazes me because I am only there to be faithful and use the gifts God has given me. Its sad because people seem to be helped by content driven teaching but the leadership seems to want to avoid it like the plague.
That should have read or not oelr.
I realized I should have probably put biblical content driven teaching instead of just content driven teaching.
been there; fortunately in a better place now, but been there.
As you know I’m building on the tent maker idea right now with an up and coming company that I’m working on.
When it’s established I’m planning on bringing you out.
I have great support in this so it’s going to be very exciting!
Thanks again Dr Heiser, always brilliant material!
Thanks; it would be exciting to meet you and others interested in all this. Paul was really wise doing things as a tent-maker. That’s what I’d do, too.
Thank you for writing this. I have long struggle how to phrase one of the reasons I had change churches, even at the expense of family harmony.
I am sure I didn’t uproot my family in anything at all resembling the right way of doing it. But I was given a piece of meat to chew on at a chance visit to what became our new church, and suddenly the malnourishment of 15 years of skim milk was too much to continue enduring.
That’ll do it.
First off I would say that we do not preach the text. We preach the Gospel. The text you teach. Paul was both a preacher and a teacher. They are not the same thing and each has a grace and a purpose that varys from the other.
Secondly an over reliance on a technique or tactic doesn’t give much room for God to move. The church is often bound in an unBiblical paradigm, a peddling, as in corruption, of the word, that resists Ephesians 4:11 and has overemphasised the role of the pastor/teacher. The Spirit of God moves through apostles, prophets and evangelists in ways that are different from pastors. The church is less then what it should be without the other gifts sowing their grace into the hearts of the people of God. Prophetic sermons do not occur in a controlled environment that allows only a verse by verse exposition of the text. On the day of Pentecost Peter did not have a prepared sermon.
God feeds His people best when we allow these to occur according to the Spirit of God’s lead. Of course one must have leadership who are led by the Spirit of God in order for this to occur properly and for that to happen you all need to jack your prayer lifes up and above the 12 minutes one study says is the pastoral average.
You are not going to see the growth that lasts, and bears the fruit I would hope you desire, if your prayer life is a lukewarm has been of a concept no matter how pure your motives are.
Growth without content isn’t real growth. I’m not talking about prepared sermons. I’m talking about content (and Peter’s sermon at Pentecost was pregnant with biblical-theological content).
This is why I still miss the old Memra.
Thanks for the guilt. 🙂