I enjoy politics without the spin. This election has increased my strong dislike for what I call savy manipilation. One can say what they want in a round about way in order to say they said what they wanted to say without really saying it (hope thats not to confusing). In politics they speak this political language. Being a pastor myself, and one who cares deeply about preaching, I wonder sometimes if instead of speaking in political language preachers speak spiritual language, another way of taking on this art of savy manipulation. Saying what one wants in such a round about way, as to not provoke, without really just saying it.

as for this discussion, i think it is important to remember that the Holy Spirit does use gimmicky stuff, and uber-programmed stuff, and cheesy ’study tools,’ yeah, He frequently uses the dull tools in the shed of man and man’s creation to triumph gloriously… just look at the biblical patriarchs or even john chandler… that being said i think it is worth saying that if the question is how do we express teaching and compassion and relevance and God to anyone, especially to the current driving edge of post-post-whatever culture; the the answer is real disciplship.

In the same way that the church ought not foist it’s responsibilities and privlidges on the state by investing and relying solely or too largely on legislated or legislatible sins, but be the wonderfully inticing beacon of a family of acceptance, worship, truth, hope, and human wholeness through community… any individual ought not foist responsibilities and privilidges onto a paid minister, a program, a study tool, or a teaching method; but ought to actively seek to find and to be a personal spritual mentor. You and me, starting with one. This is the true power of the familiness and bodiness of the church, where the best worship lays, and how the most compassion and love and teaching will ever happen, ever. Especially now when personal meta-naratives and non-written examples are snowballing in effectiveness; and when that which is gimmicky, pretentious, cold, commercial, and packaged as jeff defined it leaves so many with a bad taste in their mouth.

I used to try and want to cut out all the bad stuff in my spiritual life, piece by piece. Until i realized that there is little but futility and then guilt and myopia in that. I need reminders everyday to obey the things i know and be who I am, namely seek to be and make better disciples and to live freely in that…

It seems to me that disciplship was for jesus and is now the thing that ought to have our focus… i need a paul like timothy had, and a timothy like paul had… and y’all can be my collective barney…

living up to may name
D.t.r.

Gary, I could not agree with you more. Very well put.

Gary, very well put. Your ideas are similiar to where my thoughts were going–thank you for saying it in such a way I couldn’t.

Nash, unfortunately I’ve never met you, but I think I see where you’re coming from, or smell what you’re stepping in. You are absolutely right. It’s very easy for programs to exist merely for the sake of having a program. I’ve seen churches that sell the package rather than the product. It’s all about having a gimmick that will get people in the doors…How can we make church like Sportscenter so we can have families drag their dad/husband in through the doors…(I’ve seen it done).

Church programs are not inherently evil. The problem arises when we lose focus of what the program is all about. I think that the creative ways of packaging truth become mere gimmicks when we start to forget that we’re dealing with real people on an intimate, spiritual level. Do we do things so people will call us clever or cute, or because we are honestly and deeply concerned about their lives. I believe that part of the reason Jesus’ ministry was so effective was that he saw people “harrassed and helpless” and had compassion on them. His parables weren’t just neat little sayings but were meant to connect with people on a profoundly deep level.

It should be remembered that anything we do that loses it’s meaning becomes a mere gimmick. Whether it’s our programs, our teachings, singing songs, taking communion, cooking dinner, or washing a car.

First off guys, thank you for the patience to dialouge this with me, as it were. My apologies for sounding so “hijacking” here–I did not realize how intense the comment came across until I reread it a few hours later (my humble apologies again).

Of your four points (John), I do feel that my quote in Point 1 was taken a bit out of context..it really needs to be paired with the next sentence. But on the comment about Jesus conveying the truth through human vehicles, I think God incarnate as a human and the programs and books created *by* humans are both very different things. Some of these things can be truly God-inspired, and they are extremely effective when they are. However, I believe most humans forget about divine intervention, true discipleship, and leading from the Holy Spirit when they are trying to think of ways to help “unpack the sugar.”

Your other three comments raise good questions that I would love to talk with you more about over lunch.

Primarily, the reason I posted what I did is because I feel that such programs, teaching times, and study aides really do leave very little room for the Holy Spirit to work. It’s a control issue it seems to me, and we want to control it. I’ll avoid further ranting and we can discuss this later, as well.

Dean, I agreed that I swinged the pendulum too far in my last post–and there is a middle ground. Some call it pendulum swinging–some call it the “3 steps forward, two steps backward” analogy. Like our conversation at the wedding, the current post-post modernism movement would not be what it is if it hadn’t been for the extreme post-modern movement swinging the pendulum way the other way. We would never have moved past modernism if it wasn’t for that push.

Well, like Dave said on here once, my horse is now dead and it’s been kicked a few times.