Steps, Formulas, and Alliteration

OK, time for a rant. How many of you have sat through a seminar, sermon or message where the speaker presents "5 Easy Steps to ..." or "8 Things You Must Do to ...?" Probably all of you reading this, right? In a seminar situation you expect that kind of teaching. People go to a seminar or class because they are wanting to know the steps necessary to fix whatever "..." is in their life. Occassionally, depending on how it's presented, it's OK to have that kind of sermon from the pulpit on Sunday mornings. Usually these kinds of sermons have single-verse references drawn from all over the Bible to back up whatever claim the pastor is making. And generally, these step-type sermons never cover a large block of Scripture at a given time, and never are taught from an expository perspective.

It's my opinion, however, that pastors preaching this format week-after-week, no matter how strong a preacher they may be, are selling out their congregations, and they need to quit. Why do I feel so strongly about this? For the sheer irony of it, let me give you my 5 reasons why.

Reason #1:
While occassionally--let me stress occassionally--it's OK to get a 10-step message, because of the proof-text nature, the diatribes usually dictate that there's little, if any, true Scriptural basis for the steps. The reality is the Hebrew and Greek languages the Bible was written in are contextual languages that relay a concept via the entire story the passages are describing. You can't get the true meaning of what the writer was saying by pulling bits and pieces out of their original context. So to back up a point by pulling a Scripture out of context to "proove" the point in the message means the point wasn't proven by Scripture. It just means the speaker is stretching it.

Reason #2
Because of the story-driven nature of most societies (the US and Canada are certainly story-driven cultures-just look at the popularity of "reality tv"), to preach a 10-point message means the speaker is robbing his or her audience of the depth they could gain by digging through a biblical story and then exposing the background of why things happened the way they did. It's through this deeper understanding that story-driven cultures can make life-changing applications that last.

Reason #3
Step-type messages are like a recipe to make the "perfect Christian." When a church member has sat through weeks of step-type messages to apply to their lives, they reach a limit to what they can change. Statistically it takes at least 6 weeks of steady repitition of a practice to implement and change a life style or habit. If week after week the church members are given a new list of steps they need to accomplish, exactly how are they to implement all the life-changing steps and make them be permanent? The reality is that surface-level, proof-texted, step-driven messages only give us more hurdles to overcome, more legalistic ways of living in order to be the "perfect Christian."

Reason #4
Step-type messages are, in my opinion, the lazy pastor's work-around to actually digging into the Word and digging out the guts to give to his or her congregation. That's right, lazy. Any person can develop a list of life-changing steps and then, using a good concordance, find Scriptures to back up those points. But it takes sacrifice to dig into a given text, sort through the hidden intricacies of the text, and the mold it into a message that will capture the heart of God's people. Also, statistically its been proven that expository preaching (where the pastor walks the congregation through a block of Scripture and gives the deaper meaning behind each verse as they walk through it together) is far more effective a method at being life-changing than any other form of preaching. Therefore, why would a pastor do the step-thing on a weekly basis if he or she really wants the lives of his congregants to actually change?

Reason #5
While recovering from addiction might be a 12-step program, making it daily through life isn't. And while headline articles on the cover of a magazine bost "Five Fantastic Ways to Spruce Up [you name it yourself here]" and might sell magazines, they do a poor job of selling people on the fact that God's Word is transformational. The spiritual depth of step-type messages often leave the church members feeling more like they can't be a Christian because they can't keep all the steps. Step-type message can lead to legalism if that's all a new Christian hears. So why even go there?

Bottom line, Christianity simply can't be broken down into a continuous stream of steps. Pastors have got to unfold the mysteries of the Scripture for their churches. Unfortunately, that chore is seldom accomplished the steps, formulas, and alliteration.

The Smoking Gun is Stretching It!

Those of us in blog-land have our share of blogs that we like to read because they have content that tickles our interest. One of the blogs I read on a semi-regular basis is "The Smoking Gun." I don't read it because of the sometimes macabre content they expose, but because they often expose they hypocrisy in the Entertainment and Political world by hunting down illegal occurrences and details most entertainment and political moguls would just assume the public didn't know. I was especially please when they exposed James Frey, the author who created a fictitious, horrific memoir and then somehow fooled Oprah into making it her Book Club selection. Check out their detailed expose by clicking here. Loved the fact that Oprah was duped and, after standing up for him and his book, had to dedicate an entire show to calling Frey and Random House (the publisher) on the carpet and also apologize to the public for her mistake. You go girl!

At any rate, because of the Smoking Gun's reputation of exposing the not-to-be-public details to the world, they're always on the hunt for good dirt. But, regarding a recent story on an e-mail searching for stories to cover for ABC's Extreme Makeover: Home Edition, I really think they're stretching what's really going on in an effort to under gird their status as being the independent hard-nosed sleuths. In their "expose," they show an e-mail from an ABC executive to ABC affiliates seeking help searching out stories to cover on the show. The Smoking Gun, however, berates the show's creators because the e-mail actually names situations or ailments faced by family whom they would like to build a home for. Check out the story by clicking here.

Is it really all that bad for the Extreme Makeover: Home Edition's creators to circulate an e-mail seeking these situations to build a show around? Admittedly, I'm not a big fan of the show. OK, philosophically I have a bit of a problem with the show's premise that, despite all the good they are doing for these unfortunate families, ABC's making humongous bucks on building these outrageously huge and tweaked out homes for them. The charity thing aside (which for me is the only redeeming factor of the show), builders, suppliers, product suppliers and more are lining up to donate their goods and services just for the sake of being able to say they are an organization who is a part of the Extreme Makeover: Home Edition team. It's just a huge money-making animal based on charity work. Something about that just smacks me wrong.

But the reality is, if the producers are going to have a successful show, and if the public has accepted its premise as good--despite my personal reservations--then they have the right to seek out unique situations to build their shows around without being berated. It might sound cynical, or even bizarre, but they have to spread the wealth where covering stories of tragedy and loss are concerned. Extreme Makeover can't build houses just for cancer victims, or just for those who lost their house in a tornado, or any one group. They have to try to seek out new stories concepts to show they are "spreading the wealth," so to speak. This is just an axiom of publishing and media. If they series is to stay fresh, the American public will want to see new angles the show will cover in its charity work. That being the case, Extreme Makeover has every right to seek out new situations of pain and loss, and networking is the best way to seek out those stories.

That being the case, the Smoking Gun should just drop it and let it go.

I'm the Green Lantern

Just took this funny little online personality test that compares who I am to what superhero I would be. I think I like the results:


Your results:
You are Green Lantern

Green Lantern 80% Superman 55% Hulk 45% Robin 42% Supergirl 40% The Flash 40% Wonder Woman 35% Iron Man 30% Batman 25% Catwoman 25% Spider-Man 15%

Hot-headed. You have strong will power and a good imagination.

Click here to take the Superhero Personality Quiz

Bart Ehrman - Sad Comment On Too Much Head-smarts

For those of you faithful who have all but given up on my postings, I thank you for your patience in my absence from blogging. So it's been a month almost since my last blog entry. I apologize for my lack of diligence. Sometimes, even the little things in life back up so much that they become overwhelming roadblocks. I will comment no more on this other than to say, thank for your patience.

I was reading today on the Washingtonpost.com. For those of you hardline conservatives out there, please don't crucify me just because I read the 'post on a regular basis. Yes, it can have some extreme biases toward the liberal end of things. But I am a firm believer that to have a balanced mind about things, one must actually read both ends of the arguments and then make an intelligent decision on one's own. But I digress. The point is, while reading the 'post I came across this article about Bart Erhman's book, Misquoting Jesus, now number 16 on the New York Times Bestsellers list. Here's a link to the article:

• The Book of Bart

For those of you who don't know who Dr. Bart Erhman is, Bart is a biblical scholar who, while researching the Bible for three decades actually became an agnostic. My take is that his findings led him to the conclusion that, since everything didn't match up perfectly according to his analytical, education mind, then the Bible must only be legend. As such why give it much precedent? Why not just believe whatever you want to believe?

The sad part is, all too often the scholars try to boil everything down to black and white issues. In reading the article I became aware that this highly educated man missed the whole point in the Gospels. While some people might say the purpose of the Gospels is to tell the stories of Jesus (and I don't disagree with that), for me the bigger point of the Gospels is to spark a hunger for the mysteries of God. The Gospels exist for the purpose of driving us to want a faith relationship with this man who changed the world, this Jesus. A faith relationship necessitates that we don't have all the answers. Otherwise, why would we need faith?

For me in reading this story about Dr. Bart Erhman I realized that while knowledge is a critical component of understanding God, where our faith is concerned, if we rely on the head knowledge to get us through then we are a lost cause in the beginning. I feel pity for Dr. Erhman. He has the ability to pick the details of the Bible apart. No doubt he will cast enough doubt on the Bible to cause some who might become believers to turn elsewhere for their answers. However, I can't help but feel that Dr. Erhman is where he is right now spiritually because he relied more on his own strength and wisdom than resting in his faith in the direction, wisdom, and supremacy of God. Maybe he never had it to start off with. I pray he does some day.