I read parts of that book when my son was on leave and you’re right, it’s a great book! Indeed, very illuminating.

Other great books that comment about this period are Jonathan Kirsch’s “God Against the Gods,” Karen Armstrong’s “The History of God,” and “The Battle For God,” The most influential non-christian books, for me, were Elaine Pagels’ “The Gnostic Gospels” and “The Origin of Satan,” and Ludwig Feuerbach’s “The Essence of Christianity” which is found online at http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/feuerbach/index.htm
Wonderful, heady stuff.

The bloggers here would probably love a most excellent overview of metaphysics found in Iris Murdoch’s “Metaphysics as a Guide to Morals” which is a brilliant treatise on philosophers’ ideas, some church “fathers” included. My post which focuses on the very human origins of christianity is bolstered by all these books which outline the personal, political, and philosophical infighting taking place during the early centuries leading up to and following Jesus’ death.

There are two general types of sermons: topical and expository. You’ll find topical preaching emphasized in most seeker-oriented (growth-driven) churches. Typically, the pastor comes up with a series of messages he wants to preach, he applies catchy titles, his staff institutes a visually-stimulating marketing campaign, and then he sets out to find particular passages which suit the premise(s) he wants to communicate. They believe this methodology is most relevant to the culture and most likely to draw people in. But in my opinion, it’s a backward approach … it reveals the preacher’s will, but not necessarily the mind of God. It may draw people in because it’s catchy, but it attracts people for all the wrong reasons. What you win them with, you win them to. In order to keep these types of “seekers” happy, you have to keep feeding them entertainment-oriented services … like a drug, it has to be bigger, better, funnier, edgier. When you let them down, they move to the church down the street! This is the sad state of bubble gum Christianity today.

Don’t get me wrong … topical preaching can be done with integrity, but more often than not it’s manipulated to further the goals and purposes of the pastor or church leadership.

In churches where preaching and teaching is emphasized over and above church growth and cultural relevance, you’re more likely to find expository preaching. In expository preaching, the text is the central issue, not the pastor’s opinion. The main point(s) of the text create the main point(s) of the sermon. An expositor will usually start at verse 1:1 of a particular book and preach it all the way through using a “one concept at a time” approach (anywhere from one verse per Sunday to one chapter per Sunday, depending upon the natural breaks in the text). Since the NT writings were often written as letters – meant to be read from beginning to end – this is the most natural way to preach. It also allows the preacher to build one sermon upon another, always staying within the historical, cultural, and literary context. This is the preferred style of the church I shepherd. It may not be glitzy, but it’s the real deal … and it’s what people really need if they desire to be transformed. As many of you here at de-con have seen, the bubble gum version of Christianity doesn’t change people … it just feeds their consumer-oriented lifestyles without any significant change in heart or behavior. Again, sad.

BTW, I could double the size of my church next year if I decided to compromise my integrity and follow the lead of most mega-churches. But what good would that do?

And, yes, expository preaching requires a great deal of scholarly research. I spend on average 25-30 hours per week preparing my sermons. That includes doing my own translation from the original language, various word and grammatical studies, exegetical diagramming, historical and cultural background research, reading commentaries, several rough drafts, and a finished manuscript. It’s painstaking work, but the journey is amazing … I wouldn’t have it any other way. Sorry for going so long!

I have heard sermons more like you mentioned Lorena, that are skillfully constructed to make a particular point, and I actually agree that those are more interesting and enjoyable.

They were not favored by my pastors, however. They would often decry those kinds of sermons because they were taking the bible “out of context.” They preferred to read in context, rather than sculpt a true oratory to make a point.

I think you are right. Many preachers, particularly Pentecostals, just “Let the Spirit Lead.” But as I said on my response to him, I assumed that he was a “scholarly” type.

My mistake–wrong assumption. I guess in my book, those preachers who “follow the lead of the Spirit” are really bad. I could never stand those sermons, because I need the structure that a well-prepared message has.

The mistake comes from the fact that I could never listen to a disorganized sermon for very long. I just stood and walked away–or fidgeted the whole time.

It is possible, and quite common, for Bible teachers and pastors to not follow your procedure at all. I have been to many churches that just grab a chunk of scripture, say a chapter or two, and slog on through it while giving a running commentary with no apparant theme other than what is found in that passage. I have been to pj11′s website, and from what I saw, I do believe he conducts his services this way.