Preaching sappy feel good Biblically watered down sermons isn’t an example of bravery, innovation, leadership or "out of the box thinking"!
Instead, it’s sad, pathetic, cowardly Judas-like behavior.
Judas betrayed Jesus for 30 pieces of silver. Sell Out Pastors betray Jesus for the fame and adulation that comes with attracting large crowds of people.
2 Timothy 4:1 I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom: 2 preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching. 3 For the time is coming when people will not endure sound teaching, but having itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions, 4 and will turn away from listening to the truth and wander off into myths.
Every time someone posts a punchy, succinct thought like this, it makes my own bloated blog posts seem all the more unnecessarily long. So STOP IT!
-Z
www.pastorzach.com
Posted by: Rev. Z. Bartels | April 17, 2009 at 04:12 PM
Twitter helps you think succinctly.
Posted by: Chris Rosebrough | April 17, 2009 at 05:30 PM
"...the fame and adulation that comes with attracting large crowds of people."
Wow, Chris. Jesus was considered a bit of a "maverick" in His day. He had tax-collectors and prostitutes as confidantes and friends. He didn't treat women like animals. He attracted large crowds during His ministry on earth. 5000 people came to hear him once and were so attracted they tried to follow Him the next day.
So does Jesus fall under your blanket condemnation or is He exempt from your obvious bitterness over what your poor eyes can only see as a "numbers" game??
I see large crowds at church as lost souls hungry for meaning and significance. I pray for them to find salvation through faith in Jesus.
It would be nice if you took your eyes off the numbers and started seeing people.
It would be nice if you help build these pastors up not tear them down because they don't adhere to "your way or the highway" method of preaching.
Let's say I walked into your church and sat through the service and found it lacking (let's just say in my eyes, it was lacking). Ok, fair enough. But would I sit down and spend my days slamming your pastor or belittling him because I personally found him "old-fashioned" or "out of touch"? Would I write the things you have dared to write about some of these men of God? God forbid. I feel sorry for you. You must be eaten up inside by bitterness.
I weep for your judgmental heart.
Posted by: catransplant48 | April 17, 2009 at 08:28 PM
Cat,
Did Jesus ever preach anything other than the Word?
That's the point. Not the numbers.
Posted by: GZ | April 17, 2009 at 08:54 PM
Cat,
What color is the sky on your planet?
Posted by: Chris Rosebrough | April 17, 2009 at 09:44 PM
Wow, Chris, Clever you. Pat yourself on the back. My points still stand:
I see large crowds at church as lost souls hungry for meaning and significance. I pray for them to find salvation through faith in Jesus.
It would be nice if you took your eyes off the numbers and started seeing people.
It would be nice if you help build these pastors up not tear them down because they don't adhere to "your way or the highway" method of preaching.
Posted by: catransplant48 | April 17, 2009 at 11:09 PM
Cat,
They won't find salvation or faith apart from the Word.
It would be nice if you took your eyes off the numbers and focus on the Word.
"Preach the word" is not Chris' way--it's God's way.
These are not accusations against you. These are answers to drive home the point. Has the point been driven home?
Posted by: GZ | April 17, 2009 at 11:33 PM
GZ,
"They won't find salvation or faith apart from the Word."
...of course that's a given.
I'm not a preacher/pastor. I'm saying as Christians we need to be aware of the lost and be ready to minister to those around us in our churches, instead of wasting time hurling venom at the ones whom God has entrusted to preach the Good News.
Preaching the Good News to people who have never heard it before in simple ways or in ways that grab their attention reaches many, many souls for Christ. That's my point.
Who cares if the numbers in your congregation are 5000 or 50? Chris implies that if a pastor attracts large crowds he must be ego-driven. I love how Chris can see into the heart and souul of every pastor and discern their motivation. I wish I had enough of an ego to make that claim, but I don't. I'll leave that judgment up to God.
Posted by: catransplant48 | April 18, 2009 at 12:08 AM
catransplant:
"5000 people came to hear him once and were so attracted they tried to follow Him the next day."
No! No! NO! Read the text! They followed Him the next day because they ate their FILL of FREE FOOD!! Where am I getting this from? Jesus Himself said so!! It wasn't because He was attractive (in any sense), it wasn't because they enjoyed His understandable teachings, it wasn't even because they witnessed a miracle. It was because they wanted more food. And when Jesus preached the gospel to them not only did they leave but many of His disciples did too!!
Why are you denying and altering the clear words of scripture?
-Ray
Posted by: Ray | April 18, 2009 at 12:16 AM
I can't believe what I see on this site sometimes.
Of course Jesus was attractive to them....because of what they had seen and heard!!! How can you trivialize the fact that people recognized something so special about "this man" that they would leave their villages and homes for days just to follow Him and listen to what He said; that they would want to touch even the hem of His garment to be healed??
Are you seriously implying that all those people wanted was a free meal? That's actually an insult to Christ, to be honest. The crowd He had fed TRIED to follow Him but He actually had to send them away. Yet even after He crossed the lake to Genessart the crowds there recognized Him and wanted to be near Him.
Of course He was attractive - because of His his compassion for people and His provision and because of the truth that many recognized even though they didn't fully understand it. And soon afterwards by the Sea of Galillee great multitudes came to Him for healing. Do you think seeing His miracles and listening to Him speak attracted people or repelled them? And even after all that he fed 4000 men, women and children.
Ray, YOU read the text. It's all there. Jesus attracted GREAT MULTITUDES of people to Him. This was part of the reason He soon after became a "problem" to the local government officials.
Posted by: catransplant48 | April 18, 2009 at 03:04 AM
Cat,
You are OFF TOPIC. I fear for you.
Is your heart hardened? Having eyes do you not see, and having ears do you not hear?
Jesus NEVER compromised the message IN ORDER to draw a crowd. Jesus NEVER sold-out. In fact, his insistence on speaking the truth in all of its painful thorniness cost him almost ALL of his followers.
Where was "the crowd" on the day Jesus was crucified? Were that at the foot of cross demanding that Jesus be taken down from the cross because of the gross miscarriage of justice that was playing out, or was the crowd DEMANDING that Jesus be crucified and Barabbas released to them?
Posted by: Chris Rosebrough | April 18, 2009 at 08:52 AM
There you go again Chris, trying to get people to conform to the law.
How come when Andy Stanley talks about getting people to live out the scripture you claim he is trying to get people to conform to the law.
Is 2 Timothy 4:1 the only verse of scripture that it's ok to try to get people to live out??? How did you come to that conclusion?
Posted by: Paul | April 18, 2009 at 09:16 AM
Paul,
1) I've never once reviewed an Andy Stanely sermon.
However, when I do a sermon review, one of the things I look for is whether or not the pastor is preaching ONLY the law and/or sanctification APART from the gospel. You need to go back and listen closer.
2) 2 Timothy 4:1 lays out the duties of a Pastor. Pastors don't get to 'make up' their own job descriptions or pick and choose the duties that like and feel most comfortable with. If a man does not want to fulfill the duties of the Pastoral office then he should step down.
3) two purposes of the law are to A) to show us our sin B) show us what a good work is. In the case of 2 Tim 4 it first shows us what good works are required of Pastors. In the case of Pastors who are not being faithful to the duties of their office this verse exposes and shows their sin. Therefore, it is incumbent upon those pastors to repent of their sin and entrust themselves to the mercy of Christ to forgive them for the wickedness they engaged in by NOT preaching God's Word but instead watering it down in order to draw a crowd. The good news is that Christ died for even a sin as wicked as that and will forgive.
Posted by: Chris Rosebrough | April 18, 2009 at 09:57 AM
cat writes:
That would apply to Jesus' criticism of the Pharisees. You just need to accept the fact that Scripture is objective and that pastors' behavior can, should, and must be objectively contrasted with it.
Posted by: Tim the Cyanide-Gargling Faith Gladiator | April 18, 2009 at 10:05 AM
catransplant:
"Are you seriously implying that all those people wanted was a free meal? That's actually an insult to Christ, to be honest."
John 6:26:
"Jesus answered them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, you are seeking me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate your fill of the loaves."
What is Jesus saying here?
-Ray
Posted by: Ray | April 18, 2009 at 10:57 AM
How many threads are we going to view and see the old argument of Jesus drawing huge crowds but then ignore everything our Lord said about those crowds and how those crowds left Him because they didn't like what He had to say and how those same crowds eventually called for His crucifixion?
At this point, it is willful refusal to acknowledge the very words of our Lord. It is refusal to accept the whole counsel of the Word of God.
Am I to understand that the Bible is lying when it states the crowds left when Jesus spoke hard things, that Jesus is lying when He says "they're here for free food", and that the people really weren't yelling, "Crucifiy Him!"?
If we can't trust the Bible, who or what can we trust?
Posted by: Brian of the Hill People | April 18, 2009 at 11:40 AM
Chris I was replying to Ray's comment. He went off topic and I responded. No need to blow a gasket.
Posted by: catransplant48 | April 18, 2009 at 12:27 PM
Cat,
With all due respect you need to stay on topic and stop avoiding the clear passages of scripture that people are quoting.
Whenever your position is show to clearly contradict the scriptures you just change the subject. That behavior needs to stop.
Posted by: Chris Rosebrough | April 18, 2009 at 12:49 PM
Chris, my response was to your comments on the Catalyst site that started with the Andy Stanley article.
You were talking about the comment of being "educated beyond our obedience" and were making a very strange case against the idea of Pastors preaching for people to be obedience to the Word of God.
The thing that struck me as somewhat hypocritical is that you use verses of scripture to do that.
You seem to be saying that it is futile for Pastors to try to get their congregation to obey verses of scripture about sex, or family, or money, or anything that you would deem as trying to draw a crowd. However, you have no problem calling pastors to obedience to 1 Timothy 4 (which I am in favor of by the way).
Posted by: Paul | April 18, 2009 at 01:23 PM
Ray and Brian you point to one particular part of scripture, a specific case and want to say it applies to everything. There are also many other places where Jesus praised people who understood His message and stayed because of the hope it gave them.
Examples: The Samaritan women at the well. The blind man outside Jericho, Zacchaeus, the Canaanite woman, the woman in the house of Simon the Pharisee and there are many others.
These are just a few examples. If you two would stop trying to proof text, you would get a better understanding of the big picture.
And Chris, your interpretation of what is:
"Preaching sappy feel good Biblically watered down sermons isn’t an example of bravery, innovation, leadership or "out of the box thinking"!"
is generally way off the mark. You have a very narrow, biased view of what you feel is appropriate worship. Most of it is based on personal preferences and NOT on biblical principals.
Does Christ need to be the center of worship? Yup. Does the law and gospel need to be preached every week? yup. But even when you hear law and gospel you complain that it's not enough or too much law, or too much gospel.
I would say that you have fallen to 2 Tim 4. But the ears that you scratch are the ears of the people who can't wait to see who you are going to talk bad about next, or who your next target will be so that they can go sharpen their pitchforks and light their torches.
This site has gone from sad and depressing to disgusting and destructive. There is no reason for me to come back here. Some day I hope you will realize the error of your ways, but I doubt it.
Posted by: Akira Kurosawa | April 18, 2009 at 02:15 PM
Paul,
Thanks for the clarification.
Let me clarify my position.
All of us are already educated beyond our obedience BECAUSE none of us is even close to being perfectly obedient. Each of us sins daily and sins much.
The point of Christianity is faith and trust in Christ and good works are the fruit of true Christian faith.
Those good works are cultivated are produced in a Christian's life through the Word NOT apart from the word. Christian do not read God's Word merely to get information or to find out the things that we need to do in order to be obedient (as if the Bible is merely some type of owners manual for life).
In a VERY real sense God's word is the 'food' of faith.
Matt 4:4 But Jesus answered, “It is written, “‘Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.’”
John 17:17 17 Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth.
As Christians we don't need LESS Bible study we more. We should never limit our study of God's word by saying that we don't need more of it but instead need to learn to obey what we've already learned. Instead, we need to daily feed on God's Word. Just like we daily feed our bodies. Man does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.
Posted by: Chris Rosebrough | April 18, 2009 at 02:24 PM
Akira writes:
You have a very narrow, biased view of Chris's view.
No, there are lots of reasons. :)
Posted by: Tim the Cyanide-Gargling Faith Gladiator | April 18, 2009 at 02:28 PM
Akira,
You are speaking from ignorance.
I am not arguing for personal preference. Pastor's who put together sappy feel good topical sermons that have a couple of sprinkled in Bible verses ripped from context to support their Pop-psychology Felt-Needs based sermons are NOT Preaching God's Word. This is an objective fact.
I review these sermons on daily basis on my radio program. I suggest that you listen to a few thousand of them (like I have) before you make such claims again.
Posted by: Chris Rosebrough | April 18, 2009 at 02:29 PM
Chris:
"In a VERY real sense God's word is the 'food' of faith."
Jesus said that his "food" was to DO THE WILL OF HIS FATHER. You know the will by his word, but it is in obedience that you are fed.
Jesus also seemed to speak pretty clearly that its he who hears his word and puts them into practice that will be blessed.
Posted by: Paul | April 18, 2009 at 02:59 PM
Paul,
What does doing the will of the Father mean?
John 6:38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will but the will of him who sent me. 39 And this is the will of him who sent me, that I should lose nothing of all that he has given me, but raise it up on the last day. 40 For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who looks on the Son and BELIEVES IN HIM should have eternal life, and I will raise him up on the last day.”
John 6:28 Then they said to him, “What must we do, to be doing the works of God?” 29 Jesus answered them, “This is the work of God, that you BELIEVE in him whom he has sent.”
Paul, how are you doing regarding the obedience thing. The standard when it comes to obedience is perfection (Matt 5:48). How are you faring?
Men have languished for life times in Monasteries trying to achieve the obedience demanded by God's law. Even Monks were educated far beyond their obedience.
Are you writing these comments from a cell in a monastery? If not then I don't think you're truly serious about this obedience thing. You're just playing at it.
Posted by: Chris Rosebrough | April 18, 2009 at 03:16 PM
Paul,
Of course those who obey the will of the Father will be blessed. And the point of Christianity is that Christ imputes His perfect obedience to us who believe in Him. We are blessed on account of Christ. Get it? See, if you want to talk about Christians' own obedience (rather than the obedience of Christ), you are also stuck with Christians' own disobedience. You can't have one without the other. And it seems pretty clear that those who disobey will be damned.
Posted by: Tim the Cyanide-Gargling Faith Gladiator | April 18, 2009 at 04:29 PM
Akira:
The fact that Jesus spoke well of the faith of a few individuals by no means numerically disintegrates the overwhelming numbers of those who Jesus called faithless. Catransplant was making a case for large numbers of crowds becoming believers when scripture states otherwise (until Pentecost). You step in with sleight-of-hand argument that Jesus praised a few individuals for their faith. This might work with seeker-sensitive or purpose-driven types who do not actually study the Bible but not me.
See, the problem is, your wanting to quote scriptures on individuals like the centurion or whomever else Jesus remarked upon for having strong faith but we were discussing the crowds. Ray and I use scripture referring to the crowds, the context subject being debated. You're out in left field.
Furthermore, futility upon futility, you make an argument that we are only quoting select scriptures. Fair enough. Tell me, does scripture contradict scripture? If so, how do you decide which portion of scripture is accurate.
If you wish to refute our position that the crowds following Jesus were not in fact throngs of believers, please refer to scripture that indicates the crowd and what was said of the crowd. Until then, you're bringing irrelevent data to the debate at hand.
BTW, after seeing you post your obviously derisive opinion of Chris' board here for the umpteenth time, why do keep coming back and subjecting yourself to our awful stance on scriptural authority and truth? Surely there are places where the Word of God carries less real weight and whoever has the best opinion wins, right?
Posted by: Brian of the Hill People | April 18, 2009 at 09:49 PM
With all due respect, Chris, YOU are the moderator of this blog. Ray's comment belonged elsewhere, as did my response. But since it was here I responded to it directly.
Posted by: catransplant48 | April 19, 2009 at 12:58 AM
Chris, you are demonstrating a very narrow understanding of Scripture.
Jesus planted seeds of faith in many hearts during His ministry on earth but if you are familiar with the horrific process of crucifixion and the indiscriminent cruelty of the Roman-based government that ruled at that time, maybe you could understand why those who were following him fled and were nowhere to be found. I'll be big enough to admit that I probably would have stayed away, too.
Weak? Yes. These people showed a very basic, human fear for their life. Even Peter denied His Lord when pressed and suspected to be Christ's friend. Was that included in Scripture randomly? No. It was to illustrate how human we all are. Even most of Jesus' closest friends were not at the foot of the cross.
Yes, many professed faith in Him after His death and ressurection...after He appeared to many people in Jerusalem and the surrounding countryside and they knew they had witnessed a true miracle. But to imply that because there weren't throngs of people present at His crucifixion means one can automatically assume they didn't believe really misses the mark.
Posted by: catransplant48 | April 19, 2009 at 01:16 AM
I think my last comment should have been addressed to Brian not Chris.
Posted by: catransplant48 | April 19, 2009 at 01:17 AM
Catransplant:
*sigh*
The problem, again, is I quote scripture supporting my claim. You do not quote scritpure or you quote it out of context and are rebuffed for it.
Now, I'm not one that needs everything copy/pasted directly from scripture. If you say "God shut Noah in the ark," I'm not going to argue that this isn't exactly word for word what the Bible says because I know what you are referring to and that getting picky at the exact words only matters when it is those words that will settle the truth of scripture between two or more competing/debating views.
Your story must simply keep evolving for you to even have any response.
What do I mean by that? The subject was about crowds of believers (which the Bible never states Christ had, just crowds) and once you realized there was no scripture that identified the crowds as believers yet we had scripture that indicates they were not believers, you had further develop your claim.
So now, instead of being wrong, you must make the unbiblically verified assumption that Jesus' crowds of believers were just scared and hiding even though scripture only mentions the disciples hiding and/or denying Christ. You have now concocted a logical, but unproven, story that you hope will somehow refute people quoting scripture itself. No amount of your good intentions or logical reasoning is ever superior to what scripture actually states.
You claim my view of scripture is narrow merely because I believe we operate within the confines of it and cannot add stories we like that aren't supported by the scripture. We may atudy many things for many reasons, church history, etc. But nothing supercedes scripture in my narrow view and if I bring scripture to bear, you must either show how I am misusing it or refute it from the entire scriptural context of scripture interpreting scripture.
You completely make-up stories, have no scriptural support, and expect that to trump actual scripture. Your view of scripture is so loose and porous, it can just be anything we want it to be.
Jesus a wild maverick? Sure! Just because the Bible never indicates anything at all rebellious in Christ (but rather, obedient unto death) doesn't mean we can't call Him one cuz it's so kewl in our day and age.
You know what, Cat? Seriously, are you aware how you try to change the subject when it isn't going your way? Do you notice how you try to refute scripture with your own logic?
You either need to demonstrate how I (or anyone else you differ with) are misapplying/misusing/misquoting scripture through other scripture, a dictionary that defines terms, historically-held interpretation, etc, or if you can't do that, then you may as well publically declare that your opinion of how things should be (or should have beeen or should become) is superior to what God claims in His Word.
I never claimed believers weren't weak, so that little bit about how people could have failed and denied Christ, I know all about that. I'm a terrible, obnoxious, rebellious, wicked, willful, arrogant, presumptuous, perverted, foolish, lazy, unwise, sinful dog. I fail Christ daily. Hourly. Minute... -ly?
Part of your problem is also that you think that we think of ourselves as super christians or something. But none of us considers ourselves to have attained. We repent daily and turn humbly to Christ. Our dependence and hope upon Him, is in fact so great, this accounts for the jealousy we have for His Word that I think you and others take that as arrogance, patting ourselves on our little bible-thumping backs.
Posted by: Brian of the Hill People | April 19, 2009 at 01:15 PM
Thank you Chris for you wonderful website. I have been to so many churches where I have been told to pursue a holy life, but I always feel that they don't accept me for who I am. I'm grateful that you point out as a christian God accepts me on account of my faith, and that I don't need to learn to be holy as a christian.
Posted by: Irrelevancy | April 19, 2009 at 09:54 PM
sorry, in case you didn't pick it up, that last post was a bit of sarcasm. I think you're doing some good thinking here, but being a new visitor to the site, I do get the impression that anything that vaguely calls people to obedience to Christ is frowned upon
Posted by: Irrelevancy | April 20, 2009 at 06:37 AM
Irrelevancy,
I am all for the obedience that comes from faith. Legalistic, law-based, gospel-less obedience. Saves and sanctifies no one.
Col. 2:20 If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations— 21 “Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” 22 (referring to things that all perish as they are used)—according to human precepts and teachings? 23 These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.
Read Romans and Galatians.
Rom. 3:31 Do we then overthrow the law by this faith? By no means! On the contrary, we uphold the law.
Posted by: Chris Rosebrough | April 20, 2009 at 07:40 AM
Chris,
Are you saying that we should not even try to be obedient to God and his word? It seems that Paul had something to say in Romans 6.
If that is true, then why can't people just disregard the only verse of scripture that you seem to think we should strive to obey.... Preach the Word?
Posted by: Paul | April 21, 2009 at 03:01 PM