Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
The wording might make some difference, but Faith in Christ IS the main point of the Gospel. No two ways about that. So, while the Gospel is somewhat more complicated than that, this is the starting point, which is why I don't completely fault the style we're discussing.
How is sharing Christ at a funeral, a "sales pitch"?I'm a big fan of preaching the Gospel as well. I'm just not too keen on sales pitches.
"Get people to have emotional experiences"?That assumes that the Gospel can be reduced to "religious conversion" in a pietist sense. The Tent-Meeting preachers get people to have emotional experiences and agree to religious ideologies, but there's a serious lack of spiritual maturity in that mindset.
That's true, but couldn't even usually mature preaching ending with the same sort of invitation every week cause some errors to crop up, whether or not it's well-intentioned? An example might be people asking to get "re-baptized," perhaps. As you said, I don't completely fault them either (it was in such a context where the Lord came to me), but might this approach be a little misguided?
Is that a bad thing?That's true, but couldn't even usually mature preaching ending with the same sort of invitation every week cause some errors to crop up, whether or not it's well-intentioned? An example might be people asking to get "re-baptized,"perhaps.
Sounds like a good policy to me.As you said, I don't completely fault them either (it was in such a context where the Lord came to me), but might this approach be a little misguided?
Well, you say it so eloquently,I guess I'm just reluctant to get on board with all those who make fun of the tent preacher and altar calls, etc. If we take the worst examples possible, it would be possible to make anything done in the course of Christian life look phony or bad. Pastors are only out for money; Baptism just gets you wet; Catholic priests are all pedophiles; Baptists are all yokels who say JAY-zuz; and so on.
In this case, I know that some preachers (on the sawdust trail in particular, but that's not typical of what we're speaking of) are Elmer Gantrys. However, others are evangelists who have done such good work and brought so many to Christ that they put to shame the prissy theologians in the pulpits of a lot of other churches.
Thanks again for checking me there... as soon as I hit "submit" I wondered if I had just said that the potential for abuse takes away the rightful use, and it seems that I had!I guess I'm just reluctant to get on board with all those who make fun of the tent preacher and altar calls, etc. If we take the worst examples possible, it would be possible to make anything done in the course of Christian life look phony or bad. Pastors are only out for money; Baptism just gets you wet; Catholic priests are all pedophiles; Baptists are all yokels who say JAY-zuz; and so on.
Amen.More to the point, there is a right way and a wrong way to do all of this. First, it's unfair to say that such preaching appeals only to the emotions. Some does but I have heard many other such sermons that were not at all that way. Second, a proper altar call following preaching to a general audience should include personal counseling. It is a mistake to have the profession of faith and a hearty sendoff...and nothing else. Yet that is the stereotype. There should be counseling that includes getting that person more aware of what is involved and also connects him with a local congregation.
And that's my great stumbling block when I try to explain why I like liturgical worship the best... as much as I may prattle on about having the Bible proclaimed and saturating the words of the service, or loyalty to the early Church, or the nebulously-defined reverence, I always find myself coming back to "I feel," and I start to doubt whether I'm really just gratifying my own ego by trying to argue for my emotionally-favored worship expression. I believe it is more authentic and so forth, but I wonder how much that really matters. Maybe I'm just too childish to accept a different perspective than my own.BTW, it is also quite true that the churches at the opposite end of the spectrum are subject to the same criticisms. I know a number of Catholics, Orthodox, and Episcopalians who tell me, starry-eyed, how the twinkling lights, the incense, the beautiful cathedral, etc. "just made me feel the presence of God." If that isn't reliance upon one's emotions, nothing is. It just doesn't involve a sermon!
And that's my great stumbling block when I try to explain why I like liturgical worship the best... as much as I may prattle on about having the Bible proclaimed and saturating the words of the service, or loyalty to the early Church, or the nebulously-defined reverence, I always find myself coming back to "I feel," and I start to doubt whether I'm really just gratifying my own ego by trying to argue for my emotionally-favored worship expression. I believe it is more authentic and so forth, but I wonder how much that really matters. Maybe I'm just too childish to accept a different perspective than my own.
And the order of the Orthodox church goes like????
Just curious.
And that's my great stumbling block when I try to explain why I like liturgical worship the best... as much as I may prattle on about having the Bible proclaimed and saturating the words of the service, .
yeah everyone has a different way of loving God with all their heart .
But where is the community in that idea, though? The Church is a body; a bride, even. How best ought the Church corporately express to her head and groom the worship he deserves, in your opinion?
And that's my great stumbling block when I try to explain why I like liturgical worship the best... as much as I may prattle on about having the Bible proclaimed and saturating the words of the service, or loyalty to the early Church, or the nebulously-defined reverence, I always find myself coming back to "I feel," and I start to doubt whether I'm really just gratifying my own ego by trying to argue for my emotionally-favored worship expression. I believe it is more authentic and so forth, but I wonder how much that really matters.
that's where love and the heart of the father comes in . but many elder and prodigal sons duking it out as if there is no father .
And that's my great stumbling block when I try to explain why I like liturgical worship the best... as much as I may prattle on about having the Bible proclaimed and saturating the words of the service, or loyalty to the early Church, or the nebulously-defined reverence, I always find myself coming back to "I feel," and I start to doubt whether I'm really just gratifying my own ego by trying to argue for my emotionally-favored worship expression. I believe it is more authentic and so forth, but I wonder how much that really matters. Maybe I'm just too childish to accept a different perspective than my own.
For me, one thing I've done is evaluate how focused on Christ I actually am over the course of the service. In evangelical services, I'm distracted by the chaotic lighting and the trendy wardrobe the band--"worship team"--is wearing and all of the anarchy that takes place around me. Seriously, at any given moment I felt like there could be a half dozen separate things happening in all directions.
Contrast that with the liturgical services where my focus remains on Christ, the gospel actually is proclaimed and God really is being worshiped.
That's me though.
What do you think?That is, it doesn't matter, because the Father is pleased with whatever a group brings (no sarcasm, just me making sure I understand you right)? Surely there are limitations, though, aren't there?
Do you make allowances for different cultures?But where is the community in that idea, though? The Church is a body; a bride, even. How best ought the Church corporately express to her head and groom the worship he deserves, in your opinion?
Do you make allowances for different cultures?
Or do you believe that we must all show honor to God
in the same way?
Which would be what?Different cultures will most certainly express things differently, but again, they are worshipping the same God who requires the same thing of his children, so one might expect at least some continuity between them, right? In substance if not in structure?
Which would be what?
What is it that our one God desires of us?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?