Sermons sound like a great idea, but what are people getting from them?
When it comes to sermons, people (especially preachers) tend to apply alot of “God-language” to them. But, in reality, all of the language about the centrality of Scripture or the work of the Holy Spirit through both preparation and delivery are not specific to sermons or lectures. The same is true of other types of speaking/teaching.
But, there is one thing that surveys and tests have consistently shown: people learn and understand less from lecture (sermon) than from other forms of teaching.
For example, Scot McKnight at “Jesus Creed” published excerpts from one such report in his post “Professors: What about lectures?” Here is the final paragraph (but make sure you read all of the excerpts):
When Mazur speaks to audiences on pedagogy, he asks his listeners to think about something they are really good at—perhaps some skill they are proud of, especially one that advanced their career. “Now, think of how you became good at it,” he says next. Audience members, supplied with wireless clickers, can choose from several alternatives: trial and error, apprenticeship, lectures, family and friends, practicing. Data from thousands of subjects make “two things stand out,” Mazur says. “The first is that there is a huge spike at practicing—around 60 percent of the people select ‘practicing.’” The other thing is that for many audiences, which often number in the hundreds, “there is absolutely zero percent for lectures. Nobody cites lectures.”
If our goal is to help people follow Jesus as his disciples, that means helping them do the things that Jesus commanded… not just know what he commanded, but do what he commanded. (Matthew 28:19-20)
If this research is true and if people rarely learn to do through lecture, why do we continue to put so much focus on lecture in the church (the sermon)? (By the way, before you answer, “Because Scripture says, ‘Preach the word…’,” make sure to look into what the authors of Scripture meant by the term “preach.”)
Why can’t we work together for the gospel?
This morning, Dave Black posted a new essay called “Can We Please Do Church Planting Cooperatively?”
The post is about working together with “nationals” – i.e., working with people who already live in a certain area. For example, he and his wife work with Ethiopians in Ethiopia. I know… it sounds obvious, right?
But, this is not always the case.
At one point, he quotes from his new book Will You Join the Cause of Global Missions?:
Unfortunately [I continue], many U.S. mission teams fail to coordinate their efforts with the churches of host locations. Recently a student of mine mentioned that his local church was going to plant a new church in China. I asked him, “Have you ever considered simply going to China and asking the existing churches how you can come alongside them and help?” Failing to understand and connect with God’s already-at-work global purpose is one of the greatest mistakes we can make as churches. More and more local churches in America are forging effective partnerships with local churches in foreign nations, asking how they can best serve the needs in those countries. When done well, everybody benefits through this kind of beautiful partnership, and Christ is honored as His people submit to one another in love.
I wonder if one of the biggest reasons that we don’t work with others on “global missions” is because we don’t work with others on “local missions.” The church has become so sectarian that we tend to isolate ourselves, even (and especially) when it comes to gospel work.
Celebrity Christians and how they influence us
Jamal at “illuminate” has written a very good post called “Cliques, Celebrity Leaders, and The Disease of Hierarchy.”
In his post, Jamal warns against “following” certain people because of their celebrity status, even Christian celebrity status. These people could be popular church leaders, authors, conference speakers, or even bloggers.
He offers three warnings at the end of his post:
1. Beware of ‘selective associating’ and ‘selective name dropping’
2. Beware of giving false honor and respect to those on the leadership ‘stage’
3. Beware of comparing yourself to others, & stop comparing your brothers and sisters in Christ to one another
I want to continue Jamal’s discussion by adding one more “warning” to his list: 4. Beware of “following” people that you do not actually know.
What am I talking about? For 99.9% of us, we do not actually know the big name authors, church leaders, conference speakers, or bloggers. We know what they’ve written or what they’ve said, but we do not know them. We do not know how they actually live; we only know what they SAY about what they live.
By the way, I’m not saying that these people DON’T live in a way that honors God. I’m simply saying that we do not KNOW how they live.
Also, for those who find themselves in the Christian spotlight, I offer this additional warning: 5) Beware of presenting yourself as an example to people with whom you do not actually share your life.
God has placed people in our lives already who can offer good, real, living examples of what it means to follow Jesus Christ. These are the people who should influence us the most as we follow Jesus Christ ourselves.
We are intricately connected with all members of Christ’s body
Bobby at “Deconstructing Neverland” wrote a wonderful post about our community and fellowship in Christ. The post is called “Quarantine and Community.”
According to his post, Bobby’s family has been going through a time of “quarantine” because of sickness running through the family. This time of isolation helped him think about community in Christ.
At one point, Bobby writes this:
The Body of Christ is not confined to the membership roles of those who gather at a particular location. Even if that is how a person thinks of it, it is not true. We are all inter-connected with one another and we all receive life and instruction from the same source, the Head. My eyes have been opened to the beauty of being a member of the Body of Christ. Even as someone who has abandoned traditional church services and doesn’t have his name on any membership roles, I am still intricately connected with, necessary to and dependent upon the other members of Christ body. As long as I remain attached to Christ the Head I also remain attached to all those who are attached to Him as well. Even if I’m not attached to a pew every Sunday. The fullness of Christ lives in each one of us and in Him we all live and move and have our being…together. We can be separated by wide areas of geography and still be one and share the same life while two others can sit side by side but feel miles apart inside. It all depends on the level at which we abide in Him.
This touches on many of the issues that I’ve been thinking about and writing about lately. Let me make it more specific: Bobby is not officially a member of any “traditional church service,” but – through Christ – he is a member together with those who are part of traditional church services.
I agree that we are intricately connected with everyone who is in Christ, even those that we will never meet. However, like a chain link fence, we are more closely and obviously dependent upon those that are closest to us – those who we interact with as we live our lives together.
If we refuse fellowship with someone who is in Christ and who is also in our lives, then we are refusing to be a channel for Christ and refusing to heed a channel that Christ can use. We are, in effect, hindering the maturity of Christ’s body.
So, how can we practically foster and demonstrate these intricate connections that we have with one another through Christ, even when we are NOT connected to one another through official church membership?
Is the church for misfits?
Dan at “Cerulean Sanctum” has written another excellent post called “Misfits of the Church.” (If you remember, a few weeks ago I linked to another great post in my post “People want real examples of organic church life.”)
In this latest post, Dan asks about “misfits” in the church – as you can tell from the title of his post. Who are the “misfits”? Well, according to Dan, these are people who just don’t “fit” into the current programs or organizations of the church.
He describes some of these misfits:
The one who creates beautiful art but who is told she can’t display it in the church building.
The one who hears from God but who is told such words are not appreciated.
The one who can see the roadblocks preventing growth and ways around them but who is despised because he is not ordained.
The one from the “rough background” who is forever limited by those who cannot put aside what he once was and did.
The one who failed once and will never be given a second chance.
The one who doesn’t agree with every denominational position and so will never be considered for leadership.
The one who warns people, who prefer the status quo, of the dangers ahead.
The one with great vision who is surrounded by those with little or none.
The one with many flaws but who loves people abundantly and unconditionally, just like Jesus did.
The one who is always serving, though not with the imprimatur of those in charge, and who makes them look bad for doing so.
As Dan says in his post, people who fall into the categories above – and many other categories – often “leave the church” because they do not fit in.
Dan ends his post with the following statements and questions:
I keep encountering more longtime Christians who are giving up. They’re not abandoning Jesus; they simply don’t know how to fit within the typical church. And it’s not for trying. I know these people have tried. But they’re weary of always receiving the left hand of fellowship, and they despair of ever contributing their God-given gifts because The Church™ does not want those gifts or it places ridiculous qualifications on their use that have no basis in Scripture and every basis in human selfishness and pride.
We talk, talk, talk, and talk about community in the Church, but what kind of community do we really have when someone is told to stop being the person God Himself is making him?
The Kingdom of God is filled with misfits, so how come our churches aren’t?
I want to echo something that Dan said above: the kingdom of God is filled with misfits. In fact, in a way, we are ALL misfits. Unfortunately, many church organizations have been designed for only a certain kind of misfits. Other misfits are too misfitted to join in.
Like Dan said, there’s a huge problem with that.
Can you think of ways that churches can open themselves up to other kinds of misfits?
You can and must become a leader in church unity… but it may come at a cost
Last week, Ed Stetzer published an interview with Jason Dukes, the author of a new book called Beyond My Church: Thinking and Living So That the World Might Know. (See his post “Beyond My church: A Book Interview with Jason C. Dukes.”)
I like the idea of the book – encouraging followers of Jesus Christ to look beyond the fences created by their “local church” in order to interact with the church of God that is all around them.
In the second question/answer of the interview, Ed and Jason touch on a topic that (I believe) is one of the main hindrances to actualized (real, relational) unity among the body of Christ:
Is this a book that only pastors and paid church leaders can appreciate, or can every follower of Jesus begin to think and live beyond their church, and if so, how?
It is absolutely a book for every follower of Jesus. Two reasons why. First, unfortunately, many pastors live either under the pressure to “grow their church,” which is an extremely anti-biblical thought, or they live stifled by their own insecurities, which creates a sense of competition and distrust between local leaders. Often times, our distinctive understandings of secondary theological ideals hinder pastors’ connection, as well. Thus, it is imperative that every follower of Jesus lead out in cultivating for unity around mission among followers of Jesus in a city, therefore encouraging their pastors to emphasize and prioritize for it.
This can be done in the very ways that they cultivate for “beyond me” living in their families, among their neighbors, in the marketplace, among leaders in the city where they live, and even in the ways that they think of the church in the city. There is actually one chapter per each of those topics in the book, offering suggestions for how “beyond MY church” thinking and living can be cultivated. We need a vision for “on earth as it is in heaven” in the communities where we live, not a vision for succeeding as individual local churches. And followers of Jesus who make up those local church families can be key catalysts in enabling and allowing their leaders to feel secure to think and live “beyond MY church.”
Yes, I agree completely that “it is imperative that every follower of Jesus lead out in cultivating for unity around mission among followers of Jesus in a city.”
However, we must admit that most modern church organization are leader-centric (pastor-centric), even if they do not want to be. So, the influence and desires of the leader(s) carries much weight among the believers who see themselves as part of that “local church.”
What would happen if these followers of Jesus Christ “led out in cultivating unity around mission among followers of Jesus in a city”? Well, they may start giving to needs other than their local church budget. They may start meeting and/or serving with others at times when their local church meets. They may start hanging out with and fellowshiping with people who disagree with their local church statement of faith or covenant.
What is “the pastor” going to say about that?
While I know there are exception, I’ve seen many, many examples of church leaders who are cheerleaders for unity among the body of Christ, as long as it doesn’t affect their own “local church.”
We do not HAVE community because we do not think we NEED community?
Arthur at “The Voice of One Crying Out in Suburbia” has written an excellent post about community called “Compulsory Community.”
The point of Arthur’s post seems to be that we do not live in community with one another because we do not think we need community with one another, that is, we do not think we actually need one another.
He begins by talking about the church in areas of the world where believers are truly persecuted because of their faith in Jesus Christ. The brothers and sisters depend on one another for their livelihood as well as for their lives.
But, we don’t face that same situation in the west. So, we do not rely on one another, and we do not think we need one another. Because of that, we readily separate from one another based on our preferences. He suggests that persecution is in the future for the church in America (and the West), and that we will then learn the necessity of community.
Arthur concludes with this:
We are not really in community with one another when our “community” is based on a voluntary association that caters to our preferences that we call “church”. I am quite certain that the culture my children will find themselves in will be very different than what I know and have experienced. The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that the future of the church, the actual church and not organized religion, in America is going to be far more difficult but far healthier in the years to come. The “visible church” in the West is way overdue for a winnowing and that day is coming soon. When it does, it will be the community of Christ that will be revealed amidst the persecution and an unmistakable witness will finally be visible. God grant us the strength to face those days without the crutch and hiding place of organized, culturally acceptable religion and instead finds us relying solely on Christ and the community He has created.
Do you think that we need community with one another? If so, is there a way that we can understand that necessity in our current situation or will we only understand it when we are persecuted?
Asking questions about sermons and preaching
My friend Eric at “A Pilgrim’s Progress” has been making some good statements and asking some good questions about sermons and preaching in the modern sense of the terms.
He started last week with his post “Ironically, Pulpit Preaching Violates Sola Scriptura,” and he continued last weekend with his post “A Better Alternative to Pulpit Preaching.”
In the first post, he makes his point clearly and early that monologue sermons/teaching are not found in Scripture:
Most pastors, preaching from a pulpit, will look to scripture to at least inform their sermons. They do this because they believe that the bible is our primary source of authority. It is how God has revealed himself to us. My guess is that almost all pastors would say they hold to the doctrine of sola scriptura.
The irony is all this should be obvious. If we scour the pages of the New Testament, we cannot find even one example of anyone preaching to the church. No one gives a monologue-style speech to a silent audience. It simply does not occur. It is foreign to the life of the church we see in scripture.
In the second post, he lists six principles that he finds in the New Testament: 1) Multiple participation, 2) Order, 3) Group comprehension, 4) Group discussion, 5) Role, and 6) Group edification.
This is the alternative to pulpit preaching that Eric finds in Scripture:
All six of the above principles apply well to teaching as the church comes together. Multiple people teach in orderly fashion. Teaching should always involve group discussion to bring about group comprehension. Roles are followed as this occurs. The end purpose and desire is body growth in Jesus Christ.
When we apply these principles, we are following God’s model for teaching as the church comes together. Not surprisingly, this is the most effective way to bring about Christian maturity and body unity.
Not surprisingly, I’ve found these and similar principles, examples, and even commands in Scripture. Also, while sermon preaching is usually wrapped in language related to the importance of Scripture, mutual teaching, encouragement, and discussion are just as likely to be scriptural in their content.
Now, even though I believe this, I do not think that it would be beneficial for all churches to suddenly change the format of their teaching from a sermon monologue to a group discussion. But, I do think it would be beneficial to start moving in that direction.
Don’t start a movement; start caring for those around you sacrificially.
The title of this post comes from another post by Dave Black. Yes, after not linking to his site for some time, I’m now linking to him twice in only a matter of days.
This time, he’s talking about “archy” and specifically “Christian archy” – both his book by that title and submission to God’s reign.
This is what he says (on Monday, February 6, 2012 at 7:57 a.m.):
Any Christian movement or ideology that takes the place of the cross has absolutely no biblical or theological foundation for its existence.
This is one reason I am reticent to identify myself with the “homeschool” movement or the “agrarian” movement or the “church growth” movement or other similar movements. Dietrich Bonhoeffer stated a beautiful spiritual truth when he wrote, “The person who loves their dream of community will destroy community, but the person who loves those around them will create community.” Many modern evangelical “causes” or “movements” are, frankly, in love with their causes and movements. We are tempted to enshrine our programs in golden calves and “Christian” bureaucracies. Indeed, once you start a 501(c)3 you feel obligated to do all you can to perpetuate your organization. You fight for the limited resources that are out there while forgetting that God is bigger than our petty organizations. Bonhoeffer was right. When we love our “dream” or “vision” more than the reality, we end up destroying both.
I want to make a modest suggestion: Our goal should not be to establish our majestic mega-church models but to embrace a “movement-less” kingdom that grows by simply caring for those around us sacrificially.
Yep. That’s it. When we submit to God as our one and only king, he leads us to follow his son, Jesus Christ. And, what did Jesus say about his own life on earth: “I did not come to be served, but to serve.”
That’s our calling as well: serve!
I’m not interested in any kind of movement, other than the way God moves in my life and in the lives of the people around me to serve and care for others.
But, I’ve found that’s the most difficult movement to take part in… I keep getting in the way.
And the pride of life…
I haven’t linked to Dave Black’s blog lately. So, this gem is highly overdue.
In the post, he’s talking about learning Greek… because, well, you know, he’s a Greek professor. So, he wants his students to learn to read Greek, right. Well, yes. But, it seems like that’s not his goal.
For example, he writes (on Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 5:40 p.m.):
That pride Jesus warned us about, the leaven of the Pharisees, is so infectious today that I would sooner teach students who are obedient than those who leave seminary with heads filled with useless knowledge. If a knowledge of Greek does not lead to greater obedience, if it is not marked by a passionate love for the lost, if it is not born of a commitment to the Great Commission, then it is the same old pride that does little more than flaunt our own superiority by making others feel just how “ignorant” they are.
I think Dave’s encouragement and warning can be applied to any type of knowledge – especially theological knowledge. Are you an expert in systematic theology? What about historical research? New Testament or Old Testament studies?
Without a heart submitted to God and a life lived in a way that demonstrates love for God and love for others… what good is it?