My Homiletics Challenge

[AV1611VET]

Do you have examples of this?

Two words: Lester Roloff.

 

[AV1611VET]

Looks like its time to close the thread down AV.

Not hardly.

 

[bhsmte]

Two words: Lester Roloff.

What about the dude? Was he a politician?

 

[selfinflikted]

Goodbye.

Not quite.

I asked what the point of this thread is, and can't quite get an answer.

Someone other than AV wanna tell me what all these shens are about?

 

[Split Rock]

I'm not talking about teaching.

I'm talking about preaching.

While I agree that scientists should keep their hands out of the sermon; I'm one that won't hesitate to go to my pastor later and mention something he said that was scientifically incorrect, and he will thank me.

But your proposal goes way beyond that, doesn't it? A regular church attendant who corrects the pastor on a scientific point is hardly the same as a scientist assigned there to specifically do so.

 

[AV1611VET]

But your proposal goes way beyond that, doesn't it?

Actually it does.

A regular church attendant who corrects the pastor on a scientific point is hardly the same as a scientist assigned there to specifically do so.

Well ... the scientist would have to be a Scriptually-baptized member, of course.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Actually it does.

Well ... the scientist would have to be a Scriptually-baptized member, of course.

Would such a "Scripturally-baptized member" be willing to challenge the pastor if he made an error?

 

[AV1611VET]

Would such a "Scripturally-baptized member" be willing to challenge the pastor if he made an error?

Let's get him in the church first, shall we?

 

[bhsmte]

Let's get him in the church first, shall we?

What would the goal of the church be to bring in a guy like this?

Good to have a goal you know.

 

[AV1611VET]

What would the goal of the church be to bring in a guy like this?

Good to have a goal you know.

The goal is stipulated in the OP.

 

[bhsmte]

The goal is stipulated in the OP.

Ok, so back to the question you didn't answer.

How would the pastors respond to a "fact checker" in regards to their sermons?

 

[AV1611VET]

Ok, so back to the question you didn't answer.

How would the pastors respond to a "fact checker" in regards to their sermons?

Let's use my example from Post 27, shall we?

Pastor's sermon, submitted to scientist, contains the words:

Einstein wrote the book Origins, and in it he said...

Scientist to pastor:

You need to change "Einstein" to "Darwin."

Whereupon the pastor would change "Einstein" to "Darwin."

Let's not make this harder than it looks, eh?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Let's use my example from Post 27, shall we?

Pastor's sermon, submitted to scientist, contains the words:

Scientist to pastor:
Whereupon the pastor would change "Einstein" to "Darwin."

Let's not make this harder than it looks, eh?

Let's try this example:

Pastor's sermon, submitted to scientist, contains the words:
"Darwin was clearly a proto-Hitler and his "Preservation of Favored Races" was little more than a eugenics manual!"

Scientist to pastor:
"This is wrong on so many levels because... (insert 20 minute explanation here)"

Whereupon the Pastor changes nothing, as the scientist has just torpedoed the entire point of his sermon.

 

[bhsmte]

Let's use my example from Post 27, shall we?

Pastor's sermon, submitted to scientist, contains the words:

Scientist to pastor:
Whereupon the pastor would change "Einstein" to "Darwin."

Let's not make this harder than it looks, eh?

Sure why not, if a church wants to do something like that, no one is stopping them from doing so, as they can pretty much do what they like. Are you thinking about recommending this in your church AV?

With that said, I don't think pastors do much science in their sermons anyway. What would be much more interesting, is having a biblical historian or scholar on staff, to fact check the pastor, but that would not be pretty, unless they got someone who was not an independent thinker and just went along.

 

[JustMeSee]

In your opinion, should every church have an on-site scientist to verify the sermon first before it is preached, and to make corrections as necessary where applicable?

The minister should have received the applicable science education in his coursework requirements for the Th. M.

 

[AV1611VET]

Are you thinking about recommending this in your church AV?

No way, Jose.

Of the two: I'd rather he be scientifically wrong and theologically right; than scientifically right and theologically wrong.

I just made this thread for those who call Mr. Hovind, Mr. Ham, etc. "liars;" so I can QV them to this thread and tell them I gave them a chance to rectify that problem, but they weren't interested.

Even though this thread is a hypothetical, it was a real eye-opener to me.

I think scientific methodists need to see us wrong, when we venture on to their turf.

 

[AV1611VET]

The minister should have received the applicable science education in his coursework requirements for the Th. M.

Good point ... but if he doesn't keep up with science, science will soon leave him behind.

Scientists need to obsolete their stuff asap, so as to keep the public thinking they're actually doing something.

That's why I think we're seeing a rash of "scientific discoveries" all the time.

 

[bhsmte]

No way, Jose.

Of the two: I'd rather he be scientifically wrong and theologically right; than scientifically right and theologically wrong.

I just made this thread for those who call Mr. Hovind, Mr. Ham, etc. "liars;" so I can QV them to this thread and tell them I gave them a chance to rectify that problem, but they weren't interested.

Even though this thread is a hypothetical, it was a real eye-opener to me.

I think scientific methodists need to see us wrong, when we venture on to their turf.

Why would anyone want to change what is taught in the church? And on theology, church's have different beliefs and they claim the other church is wrong.

But, when someone claims to know science, like a Hovind and they are talking to the public, they expose themselves to scrutiny. If Hovind wants to say his lies in a church, he can preach what he likes.

 

[bhsmte]

No way, Jose.

Of the two: I'd rather he be scientifically wrong and theologically right; than scientifically right and theologically wrong.

I just made this thread for those who call Mr. Hovind, Mr. Ham, etc. "liars;" so I can QV them to this thread and tell them I gave them a chance to rectify that problem, but they weren't interested.

Even though this thread is a hypothetical, it was a real eye-opener to me.

I think scientific methodists need to see us wrong, when we venture on to their turf.

Whatever AV.

As I said, it would be a lot more interesting to have a biblical historian or scholar on staff to fact check the pastor. Much more work to be reviewed there.

 

[TLK Valentine]

No way, Jose.

Of the two: I'd rather he be scientifically wrong and theologically right; than scientifically right and theologically wrong.

I just made this thread for those who call Mr. Hovind, Mr. Ham, etc. "liars;" so I can QV them to this thread and tell them I gave them a chance to rectify that problem, but they weren't interested.

You just admitted you weren't, why should they care for truth when you don't?

Even though this thread is a hypothetical, it was a real eye-opener to me.

I think scientific methodists need to see us wrong, when we venture on to their turf.[/QUOTE]

Only when you are wrong, which you admit doesn't phase you.