RichinJesus.com

Over the years, I have dealt with people who have reacted to my teaching and preaching in ways I found dissappointing. I felt they weren't listening, were apathetic, or perhaps were ignoring what I was saying.

I used to complain that it seemed like people listened to my preaching through a filter. I did my best to make my messages simple and concise, and yet it seemed like most people took what I said and just filtered it out.

I wanted to somehow take those filters out of people's ears.

Over the years, I made excuses, ignored the problem, dismissed people as being hard-hearted, and never came to a satisfactory understanding of what was really going on.

This all came to a head one Sunday morning when I called four young people into my office to talk to them before they were baptized. These were youngsters who had been coming to our church for quite some time. They were respectful and generally "good" kids. They professed a salvation experience several months before, but since I had broken my foot and was on crutches, several months had passed before I was able to baptize them.

This meeting was supposed to be a formality. I was supposed to ask them if they had been saved and understood baptism. They were supposed to just give a pat answer so we could go ahead with the baptism.

When I got to the part about baptism and asked them if they understood the nature of baptism, they began to explain to me in detail how the baptismal waters washed away sin.

I don't teach that. Their Sunday School teacher doesn't teach that. In spite of the discipleship course they had completed, not only were they giving me an answer that was totally wrong, but they thought it was the answer I was looking for.

I was floored. This experience rocked my world.

I couldn't find a way to explain this using any of the standard excuses. They just didn't fit. These kids weren't hard hearted. They weren't dumb. They weren't apathetic. They weren't even poor listeners. On the contrary.

I put everything I could on hold over the next few weeks. I had to figure something out.

I did a lot of introspective soul-searching, thinking, and research. And I started to find some surprising answers. Answers not only to the problem at hand, but also answers that helped me with some other seemingly unrelated things.

I came to realize the simple reality that a lot of the people I thought were rejecting my preaching weren't even understanding my preaching.

My never ending attempts at making things more simple were, in fact, doing exactly the opposite and making things even harder for them to understand.

Thankfully, I found a major key to getting through that filter I imagined. While it is as old as Adam's family, it is largely forgotten and misunderstood by today's academics, teachers, and preachers for reasons I plan to discuss in later posts.

More next week, but for now, I will leave you with one of the sites that helped enlighten me as to what was going on.

Back then, the site was called, www.chronologicalbiblestorying.com. Now it has been updated. Unfortunately, perhaps due to copyright concerns, it seems to be missing the pdf orality test, the part that helped me the most. You can find the updated site at www.oralitystrategies.org.

—Luke

This is the second article in this series. You can find the first one here.

I once had a student in an afternoon class who went to school all morning, went home, probably ate a quick lunch and then was off to my class.

The unfortunate thing is that he couldn't sit still. That is hard for a six year old boy who hasn't played all day.

I soon found out though, that his inability to sit didn't affect his ability to learn. On the contrary, he couldn't learn if I made him sit still. He was too distracted thinking about trying to sit still!

And so he would stand. He would dance. He would twirl. He would fiddle with his pencil. He would do anything but sit. For the sake of the other (also very active) students, I tried to get him to at least dance in one place and not go all over the room.

And he learned. He was very smart and had a natural gift for learning English, and so he excelled. The other students also did well, but when I asked a question, he would stop moving around (or not) and spit out the answer before anyone else. And the answer was right.

Nevermind that to all outward appearances he wasn't paying a bit of attention.

He learned the material and much more importantly, he wasn't learning to hate learning.

I just hope someone doesn't ruin it for him.

—Luke

We are seeing a grave "illness" (i.e. sin) affecting churches In America and many parts of the world.

I once thought it mostly affected the conservative churches like those I am a part of, but I have come to realize it isn't unique to any one denomination or church. It is widespread and pervasive

I'm calling it the "My church is about me" syndrome.

If I weren't looking for a cute name, I would probably just call it something boring like "selfishness" or "pride."

From hyper conservative churches to old denominational churches to new seeker friendly churches, to uniquely independently independent unafiliated non-denominational churches, most seem to be suffering from the same disease.

While the underlying disease may be the same across the churchscape, it is confusing because it manifests itself in different ways in different congregations.

In some churches, this syndrome is manifested through the "all truth, all the time, always right, never wrong" attitude. Nevermind that such churches almost always regularly preach things as basic doctrines that are clearly and demonstrably unscriptural or at the very least on very shaky ground.

They often revel in hard preaching they say is designed to reach the lost. Visitors say it is designed to confirm what the choir already believes. They have been afflicted with "My church is about me" syndrome.

At the other extreme, there are the "all love, all the time, always loving, never critical" churches. Nevermind that they may be nearly doctrine-free and don't share common views of the scriptures or much of anything else among the congregation except that they gather at the same location on Sundays.

They say their church is about worshipping God, but what really comes through is that their church is about how they feel. They have been afflicted with "My church is about me" syndrome.

Some churches are known for their elaborate worship services complete with upbeat music, drama team, advanced artistry, sound, and camera work. They say it is to aid in worshipping God.

Nevermind that God can be worshipped more adequately in a lonely forest or park for millions less. They may have caught the "My church is about me" syndrome.

Congregants stay only a few years at a church before moving on to another church in the community. They shop for a new church like they were shopping for new shoes. They may have caught the "My church is about me" syndrome.

Pastors may stay only a few years in a church or alternatively build their ministry around their own unique personhood. They may have caught the "My church is about me" syndrome.

Churches count their success by their growth, not their true vitality or their reproduction. They may have caught the "My church is about me" syndrome.

How do you relate to your church?

—Luke

I have a lot to say about Bible storytelling. I also have a lot to learn. I expect that after I learn some more, I will have more to say and also find I have even more to learn which will lead to having more to say and then...

Well, you get the idea. You can expect to hear a lot more about this topic as time goes on.

Three methods of preaching

When I was in bible college, I recall being taught three different ways to preach. If there were others, I probably slept through them after working until the wee hours of the morning at my great job as a closer at Burger King.

First, there was the topical method. With this one, you just pick a topic, any topic, pulling passages from all over the Bible. It is highly popular and also easily abused.

Second, there is the textual method which bases itself in a Bible passage and then seeks support from other verses to back up the theme of that passage. A lot of people consider this expository preaching, but my teacher preferred to separate them.

Third, there is the expository method which chooses a passage and does not stray from that passage seeking to pull out whatever truths are in that particular passage.

I have discovered, however, there is yet another very important method that is distinct from those just discussed.

Narrative preaching

Storytelling or narrative preaching finds a Bible story and bases the message in that story. In some cases, it may pick up a storyline through numerous Bible passages.

Some of you are already up in arms and looking for the comment section to tell me that storytelling isn't preaching. Before you leave a comment, take a look at Stephen's sermon in Acts 7.

I don't just mean that illustrations or Bible stories are incorporated into one of the before mentioned styles, but that the message itself is based upon a Bible story. A lot of preachers are storytellers, but don't use this method. It might help, but you don't have to be an animated storyteller to use this method.

When I talk about narrative preaching here, I am talking about the basis and organization of the message more than the style of delivery.

Benefits

There are a number of benefits to narrative preaching both for the preacher and the listeners. For reasons I plan to discuss in a future post, for church members and visitors who are not avid readers, it may be the only method they really thrive on. In preaching to children, I would suggest that narrative preaching is without equal.

The neurons can't find each other

Unfortunately, it represents an enormous mind shift for most North American preachers. It is almost the antithesis of what we were taught about preaching and the methods we tend to employ in our personal Bible study. For many of us, learning to preach narrative messages is almost like learning to preach all over again. Perhaps worse.

In over my head

Several years ago, I jumped in with both feet and started preaching most of my messages in this style. At the same time, I (temporarily) stopped using notes. I am not suggesting the "cold turkey" method for most preachers. I think a softer transition is more appropriate for most, but that is what I did. I still don't feel really comfortable with it, and realize that I have a lot to learn and a long way to go.

When I started to read the Bible in my personal study concentrating on following the stories, it was like reading it for the first time. I saw things in a totally different light. I think it is fair to say that I started to see certain things more as they were intended rather than as I had perceived them.

Coming up

In this article, I have told you how excited I am about storytelling. In my next post on this subject next Thursday, I want to back up and tell you the story of the things that led me to start using this method of preaching.

In later posts, I want to open up the topic of storytelling and its importance in communicating doctrine to children as well as Bible study methods, teaching methods and some other branches of this topic.

The study of storytelling is closely related to the study of literacy. Together, they have far reaching implications for preachers, teachers, students, missionaries, social workers, families, music, and many other areas you probably never realized.

—Luke

This is the first article in this series. You can find the second one here.

I just wanted to take a moment to point some of you in the direction of a 50 year study on rural patterns in America and their impact on rural churches. I know this isn't of great interest to a lot of you, but I am excited about it.

You don't have to keep reading if you don't want to.

OK, still here? This study is centered on Missouri and is applicable to much of the American Midwest. It is unique because it deals with an entire state and compiles 50 years of data.

It opened my eyes to a lot of things I saw and yet really didn't understand as a child growing up in the rural Indiana.

If you are interested in moving to the country, working in a rural church, doing business in rural areas, or otherwise interested in rural history and trends, you will want to at least scan through this report.

Back to our regularly scheduled programming on Thursday.

—Luke

Joel Salatin backs up and dumps the wagon load in favor of freedom, family, local economies, healthy food, and sustainable farming. I have no idea what his views are of God and the Bible, but about all I could say after listening to his talk was "Wow!" and "Amen!"

—Luke

In case you missed it, there is a story out today about some Chinese and Turkish explorers who believe they may have found Noah's ark 4,000 meters up a mountain in Turkey. They were reported as being 99.9% sure.

They reason it was a wooden structure that could not have been built as a building by an early civilization since it carbon dated to 4,800 years ago and was above 4,000 meters and no established human civilization has ever been found above 3,500 meters in that area and from that time period.

Of course no 4,800 year old boats have ever been found above 3,500 meters either.

Not

I am going to go way, way out on a limb and predict that this is assuredly NOT Noah's ark.

The Bible

First of all, let's talk about the Bible story of the flood. Assuming you accept the story as literal and factual, as I do, you probably subscribe to one of three schools of thought.

1. The flood was global and catastrophic.
2. The flood was global, but non-catastrophic.
3. The flood waters were worldwide from Noah's perspective, local from our perspective, but global in their impact on humanity.

Pretty much everyone would agree that while Noah may have been very intelligent and very old, he almost assuredly didn't have access to Roman or even Egyptian era technology and lived in a time when there was likely no commercial shipping.

Also, the boat he built was vey big. So big in fact, that no modern designer has been able to make a wooden boat even close to those dimensions.

That leaves us without any explanation for how Noah could have designed and built a boat with no engineering or boat building experience, no advanced tools, and no opportunity for failure. It isn't looking good for Noah and the future of humanity.

You might argue that God would have guided him every step of the way. I would agree that is what it would have taken to build a hollow hulled boat and even then, it may have needed some steel reinformcement or some sort of wondrous wood strengthening compound. My problem with this view is that it assumes far, far more than is suggested either in the Bible text or by history and archaeology.

A realistic boat

Since I have started doing hand tool woodworking, I have developed the idea that the ark was likely based on a design along the lines of a floating dock or barge-like structure. Perhaps it was several distinct structures linked together in some way and that is what was meant by the rooms that were to be made.

First of all, the Bible text says it was pitched within and without. Why would a hollow structure need to have been pitched on the inside? To preserve it for future explorers? A floating barge made up of split beams laid side by side and layered many layers deep could have been pitched throughout so the logs wouldn't get waterlogged and to help hold them together. On top of this structure, a storied house could have been built to hold everyone.

A craft of this kind could have been built with simple hammers, knives, axes, and wedges. Logs could have been felled along one of the rivers or its tributataries, split, dried and pitched with tar either before or after arrival at their destination, rolled down into the water or floated with the rising spring waters and floated downsteam to the dockyard.

When the logs arrived, they could have been maneuvered into place relatively easily with just a few men if the logs were split into beams, and lashed or interlocked to the other logs.

This type of construction would very possibly have been familiar to Noah and allows for the ark to have actually been built on the water and therefore be float tested before the big flood. Also, it would allow for significant flexibility of the base in the flood waves without leaking or breaking apart, and could have been built by a relatively small labor force over a period of dozens of years.

It might even be conceivable that such a structure could have been build just with Noah and his family over a period of a hundred years or so. If so, this solves another problem. Some have suggested that Noah was likely a king-type figure and had great wealth and the ability to conscript large labor forces. It seems that such assumptions would be necessary for the building of a hollow hulled boat. On the other hand, it seems that if so many people were involved in building the ark that at least some of them would have gotten on the ark if only to have pleased Noah. If Noah and his family were the lone ark architects, it makes more sense that they were the only ones to get on. Also it solves the related problem of how a people could be so bad with such a good king.

If my theory of a bargebased ark is correct, given its immense bulk, we might actually have a slim chance of finding parts of the base of the ark, particularly if it were made from some rot resistant wood, which I think likely. Cypress is probably the most commonly suggested wood species. I suppose it is as good a candidate as any since we really have no idea what gopher wood was.

Finding Noah's ark

What we should be looking for is more along the lines of something that was once huge stacks of large timbers rather than a large hollow hull. Depending on your view of the Genesis geneaologies and how much telescoping of the generations you are willing to allow for, it should be roughly 4,300 to 50,000 years old.

Of course, we would then have to redraw all of the ark pictures in every Bible story book ever written.

—Luke