Although fundamentalists love sermons on sin of the outrageous and titillating variety, they very often lack any openly practicing sinners in their midst. This results in the odd circumstance of pastors preaching entire sermons on a topics that ostensibly apply to nobody who is listening; it’s like  a sort of  National Geographic tour of the wastelands of iniquity so curious Christians can be suitably shocked.
Perhaps you too have enjoyed the pleasure of sitting in a youth group consisting of three pastor’s kids, one youth pastor’s son, and one child of a visiting missionary.  Not at all deterred by the apparent squeaky cleanness of  his audience, the speaker will still treat those present to a forty-five minute tirade in which the speaker insinuated that most of those present were probably 1) practitioners of witchcraft 2)drug addicts or 3)passing notes during the sermon instead of paying attention.
Yet somehow in the throes of condemning those not present, the real sin in the camp goes unnoticed. Given the average audience in a fundy church it would seem that sermons on gays, Â ganja, and gambling would give place to more relevant sermons on things like gossip, gluttony, or greed. But it’s just so much easier to convince those who are already converted.
image found at sacredsandwich.com
Preaching instead of teaching to God’s elect is a trademark of fundies. I don’t know how many times I’ve heard salvation messages when everyone in attendance professed Christ and acknowledged their conversion. I think deep down fundies (particularly IFB’s), want to make sure their brand of easy-believism is actually working. The other side of this is that most fundy preachers actually don’t know what the Bible says so they stick with salvation messages for decades hoping none of the flock catches on that they can’t edify or teach the flock. It’s one thing to stand up there week after week and castigate people’ and their sins but quite different to lovingly and compassionately teach people about the Christ of the Bible.
I always loved youth camp because it was there that I learned what music I was missing out on.
It is just much easier to get an “amen, preach it brother” if you stay away from the sins of the congregation.. You have to go after those distant sinners and leave those close at hand alone–after all the next-pew-neighbor sinners are the ones who pay the preacher’s salary.
Thus you have evangelist led services preaching to the converted in their own churches, where the evangelist has to qualify the appeal by saying, “I’m not trying to talk you out of your salvation. I’m not trying to make you doubt your salvation. etc.”
They either know that they are doing that, or don’t have any other playbook available, and are clueless to the state of the people sitting right in front of them.
They should be hard-hitting on the sin that actually exists in such a group, but instead give a “sinners-angry-god” appeal that would be more fitting out on the street.
Just shows how relevant preaching really isn’t in this day. So many ignored while you preach to the choir in the youth group.
How many times have I heard in the fundy bunker, “Well he’s a good teacher but he’s not a preacher.” or the other side of the coin…”He”s a great preacher but he is not much of a teacher.”
Given the choice keep the teacher and throw the other bum out.
Fundies act as if there is some dichotomy between the gift of preaching/teaching. At least that is the way they see it in the King Jimmy version they so venerate.
The gift of preaching and teaching is one gift not two, and it is a gift… not an office. It is the ability to proclaim and explain the whole Gospel of God… not just the [so-called] preacher’s presuppositions regarding sin and his ideas on sinless perfection. (oh the fundies claim they don’t believe in sinless perfection but then they go on to set up their camp rules as if it is possible to obtain spiritual nirvana and sinless perfection by keeping the rules and appearing to be perfect. Don’t worry… when you seem to be getting off track the “preacher” will “preach” a hell-hot sermon on it and get you back on the straight and narrow.)
When the “Preacher” needs to really get the congregation’s attention he’ll trot in some fire-n-brimstone spewing Evangelist to re-light the fire under the sheeple and for the next month you will hear, ” That was some good preachin!” “YEAH, BUDDY MY TOES ARE STILL SORE!” “Yep, that’s just the kind of preachin’ we need more of, I really felt the spirit move.” (What spirit is still to be determined but some spirit moved and the people were helped… that’s all that matters.)
wow, I seem to have went all Billy Sunday ranting and raving here… sorry, certain issues regarding the IFB cult still turn my crank and off I go.
I think the uncomfortable truth about why preachers don’t address the “sin in their own camp” is that the fundy preacher operates as an axis. If he stops preaching about “those people” in the wastelands of sin, he swings around into “you people” mode, leaving himself out in both instances as the conduit of the Word. The result is that when the preacher does go into “you people” mode, the congregation spends the next month mad that he’s acted so much above them and he spends the next month preaching about Moses and grumblers. I’ve seen that happen a lot.
That’s very insightful, JP.
The one thing I would add is that in “you people” mode, real problems aren’t usually addressed either. It’s usually sermons on bitterness, not submitting to authority (your example of Moses and the grumblers is spot on) and ‘standards.’
I’ve heard a lot of preaching on sin in fundamentalism. I’ve not heard too much that really reached the root of the problems there.
Jordan, it may be simpler than that. If he starts pointing out their real sins, they will probably start pointing out his.
@Bassenco
Oh no that’s not allowed… that would be “coming against gawd’s annointed!”
Strictly forbidden in the Fundy Circular camps and you know it. 😉
…At least not until he does something really embarrassing at which point he will either be quietly moved to another location (for sins such as molestation, adultry, or embezlement) or will become personna non grata in the fundy world all together ( for liberal teachings against the KJB, not fully embracing the pre-trib/pre-rapture view of eschatology or even minimally embracing Calvanism.)
@Don
That’s right! We’ve got to make the punishment fit the crime, amen?
@ Don
You hit on something that’s been bothering me for a long time which is the whole idea of the evangelist. To me it seems like Ephesians 4 teaches that evangelists are part of local churches working (with a separate gift) along with pastors/teachers in ministering (Ephesian 4:12). How did we end up where evangelists are in itinerant ministry going from church to church preaching the same messages each week? I remember hearing one famous fundy evangelist back in the late 80’s. Just a couple of years ago I heard him again preach the exact same message, with the same movements, inflections, etc. Something just didn’t seem right about that.
Spot on.
I had mentioned to someone in church that if the pastor preaches the whole counsel of God, sooner or later he is going to be preaching as a hypocrite.
When I first read the title of the post, I thought something else apparently. Relating to the topic idea, I instantly thought of how fundies make it a point to preach to, and say I, evangelize, to other Christians. Such as, say an outreach event. Some teens I know brought some of their other Christian friends to those events, and there, they were “evangelized”, as if those of other Christian denominations weren’t saved. It even spread to main sermons and the like. With blatant sayings how other Christian denoms weren’t real and true. Now that was “preaching to the Converted”. Definitely a Stuff Fundies Like.
@Don. In reference to the third paragraph, when people go on for a month later saying “that’s great preachin'” etc. I’ve had that once. After a sermon one Sunday morning, I almost went insane on how terrible the sermon was. Not long after that afternoon, I happened to see various people raving about how “great” the “preachin'” was that morning on Facebook. I almost went mad!
@stan — quite agreed, sir. Modern-day evangelists are almost entirely derived from 19th Revivalism — all the way down to emotional appeals, altar calls, and week-long crusades (Thank You, Charles Finney).
A biblical evangelist is probably more akin to modern missionaries. They establish and edify churches is new locations. This understanding is borne out in early post-apostolic writings.
I have not problem with itinerant, fifth-wheel-toting preachers as long as they truly preach the Word of God (preferably expository with a minimum of emotional pulpit-pounding) — but they aren’t Eph 4 evangelists.
@Nathan I think you were looking for this post: http://www.stufffundieslike.com/2009/08/witnessing-to-presbyterians/
🙂
@mfdc5 Preaching the whole counsel of God is the way it ought to be done but not from a holier-than-thou attitude, ie. Not, “You sinners….” but, “we sinners.” (That avoids the hypocracy, if done in the right attitude towards God and the riches of His mercy.)
Everyone of us are sinners by our very core nature, and even though saved by God’s unimaginable grace… we are still sinners, and we sin every day. That is the truly amazing thing about Grace, we do not deserve any grace and yet God in his will and purpose has extended unfathomable grace to us.
@Josh Amen…. We’ll circle the wagons if the authorities get involved because we know if a “worldly” institution like the police and political types are questioning the man of gawd then it is most surly persecution and tribulation against gawds anointed for “his stand ah-gin’ sin and how hard he’s been preachin’ hard here lately. Ya know, the devil don’t like that and he’s just tryin’ to devour our man-o-gawd. Dontcha know…”
…At least until he is proven guilty then we’ll throw him under the bus. Or if he starts preachin’ against the pet sin of the biggest tither’s in the church, then we’ll throw him under the bus. Of course we will defend him publically to the rest of the world knowing we have to show the world we are pure as the driven snow… but we will eat our own given the least provocation.
@Stan That has been an issue that has bothered me for a long time now as well. Lord Acton in his famous quote against the issue of Papal Infallibility said: “…Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority: still more when you superadd the tendency or certainty of corruption by full authority. There is no worse heresy than the fact that the office sanctifies the holder of it.â€
I have a problem with the whole “Office” take on the gifts that the Spirit gives which are supposed to (like you said according to Ephesians 4:12,) “…equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ,” What we have in the modern church template are “Professional” saints that are in a class above the “common” saints and are getting paid to hold the office of “Professional” halo’d saints.
Sorry everyone… for rambling so today.
Greed is a good one, a really good one.
I’m curious as to your opinions on “Prosperity Gospel.”
Preaching to the choir: teach/preach on Wednesday nights about how to study the Bible…….
My mom is a Fundy Lutheran. She and dad tried a different Lutheran church last week and said they didn’t like the preaching because the “Law and Gospel” weren’t presented. It’s like they haven’t heard the same message in the pews for 50 years – gotta have that Law. Ironically, the Law preachin’ was what drove me out of Lutheran Fundyism.
We gotta have an “evangelist” post on SFL (if there’s not one already)!
I don’t think this post is exclusive to Fundies. I’m pretty sure that you can apply it to any denomination, and a good percentage of churches in general.
@ Morgan
Preaching the Law for conversion or for the saints to live by, isn’t found in the early NT church (Acts – Revelation), especially when dealing with the Gentiles. Paul didn’t whip out his version of the Pentateuch and go through a list of do’s and dont’s to get peopled saved or for the newly converted as a guide for their lives. Look at all of the stuff that went on in Corinth. He never once ran back to the OT law to instruct the Corinthians church. Paul talked of his (and everyone else’s) inability to keep the law (Romans & Galatians). The law is reviewed in the NT in terms of fulfillment of prophecy to the Jews (Hebrews, James, & Peter). The new Lawgiver is Jesus Christ and his commands are binding for every believer. Now that I’ve opened up the “antinomian” can of worms, let’s just go fishing!
@Brandon here it is:
http://www.stufffundieslike.com/2009/09/evangelists/
Neil Diamond probably said it best:
Brother Love’s show
It’s kind of outside the scope of what I talk about here, but suffice it to say I agree with Bro. Piper’s assessment: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PTc_FoELt8s
Tom Vasel wrote, “I don’t think this post is exclusive to Fundies. I’m pretty sure that you can apply it to any denomination, and a good percentage of churches in general.”
This may be true, but it seems especially ironic for IFB churches because we claim to follow the Bible more closely than anyone else. We chide others for having itching ears without realizing that our own may be itching too when all we want to hear are scorching sermons on the evils of Harry Potter but none on the evils of back-biting and harboring hatred toward others.
“Fundies act as if there is some dichotomy between the gift of preaching/teaching.”
Thats because “teaching” is properly done by laypeople, women, and sissies, whereas puhREECHin is the style of elocution that identifies the speaker as a Managawd. Properly done, it is supposed to be loud, “dynamic” (whatever that means), and characterized by lots of well practiced emotion, and should include at least two anecdotes about a wayward “young person” usually named Johnny.
@Rob. Ah yes! My all-time favorite! Thank you for reminding me of that one! I needed a good laugh again. 🙂
Pastor’s Wife:
“We chide others for having itching ears without realizing that our own may be itching too when all we want to hear are scorching sermons on the evils of Harry Potter but none on the evils of back-biting and harboring hatred toward others.”
One of the defining characteristics of fundyism is that the list of sins is determined by the “Man o’ Gawd.” As long as you are doing what the MOG says to do and not doing what he says not to do, then you are a spiritual Christian. And the MOG will never challenge his people to do (or not do) anything outside that list. I know hundreds of people who, even when they hear a good sermon or read their Bible or a good book, pass what they hear or read through the grid of their MOG and totally miss what the Scripture really says.
@Richard Sullivan
“Look at all of the stuff that went on in Corinth. He never once ran back to the OT law to instruct the Corinthians church.”
I don’t get it. Paul “runs back” to the OT at the 18th verse of the first chapter to instruct the church. Maybe we’re using “law” in two different ways. The law was not just the Ten Commandments, but rather the salvation history of God in the Pentateuch. Take the way Paul talks about the law involving the release of the Jews from slavery, or the covenant with Abraham, but most certainly the Acts 15 council regarding blood, to name a few. But even if we were talking the Ten Commandments, Romans is the perfect example of Paul using the law upon believers.
My next point is more general on the original post: in 1 Cor 5, Paul has no intentions to ramble on about the sins of others when he has sins within the congregation to deal with. The preacher he says is to “judge the church”. This is a godly exercise if done along with the Gospel to comfort these trouble consciences. Christ came to save sinners. And you know what? You’re one of them and I am to. God be praised!
@Morgan
Law and gospel are very important. We need to be slammed down with the law and picked up with the gospel.
I think your parents are right.
Whats the gospel without the law? The law shows us how great the gospel is. We cant keep the law. The gospel is given to us. It puts it all on the Lord.
If thats a fundy Lutheran, then call me one too.
We NEED the law to appreciate why we needed forgiveness.
@ Don
Preaching the whole counsel of God is the way it ought to be done but not from a holier-than-thou attitude, ie. Not, “You sinners….†but, “we sinners.†(That avoids the hypocracy, if done in the right attitude towards God and the riches of His mercy.)
Everyone of us are sinners by our very core nature, and even though saved by God’s unimaginable grace… we are still sinners, and we sin every day. That is the truly amazing thing about Grace, we do not deserve any grace and yet God in his will and purpose has extended unfathomable grace to us.
Well said
@ Josh
“But even if we were talking the Ten Commandments, Romans is the perfect example of Paul using the law upon believers.”
So as a Christian, you’re now able to keep the Law? The Law isn’t just the 10 Commandments. The Law is everything: ceremonial, civil, and moral. If you are trying to keep the Law, that means all: the tithing requirements, dietary, etc. That’s what James 2:10 is talking about – “the whole law”.
“I don’t get it. Paul “runs back†to the OT at the 18th verse of the first chapter to instruct the church.”
You must be referring to verse 19 which is a quote from Isaiah 29:14 not verse 18 (preaching of the cross). What has this verse got to do with living to the law? It’s simply referring to the high-mindedness of the Greeks who craved knowledge (I Cor. 1:22). Also, since you brought it up, Paul preached what? The “preaching of the cross”. Not a list of that “thou shalt and thou shalt not’s” for the NT believer.
With regards to Romans, particularly chapters 4-7, the Law is spoken of very prominently but not as a rule of life for the Christian. Paul never once said obey this part (10 Commandments) but ignore the dietary stuff, tithing, etc. He shows how he desired to obey and keep the law but couldn’t. Very instructive. As a lost man, we can’t keep the OT Law so what makes you think as a Christian we are to live by the OT Law? It shouldn’t and most obviously can’t be done.
This is why Galatians was written. Peter got wrapped up in the OT ways again and behaved legalistic. Paul rebuked him and Peter admitted he was in the wrong. Galatians should be read and re-read for anyone struggling with legalism and the OT Law.
As far as giving the OT Law for evangelism, the Gospel which is mentioned numerous times, is not the OT Law but the literal Good News of Jesus Christ.
If you feel that the OT Law is necessary to evangelize, then that’s your choice in your approach to witnessing to others. But as far as the OT Law (all of it, not just cherry-picking what’s “applicable” for the Christian), we’ll have to disagree on that one. I have no intention as a believer in Jesus Christ to submit to the OT Law when it wasn’t designed for that purpose. I’ll most gladly submit to the New Law (NT) and the New Law Giver, Jesus Christ. Any believer fulfills the Law when they love one another.
@ Richard Sullivan: wouldn’t love just be the root of the matter. If you love God and other believers, you won’t do those things forbidden and do the things commanded in the moral law? If you were to preach the law would’nt the application be to check your love for God and believers? Concerning the law for evangelism didn’t Paul say the purpose of the law was to give knowledge of sin(Romans) and that it was the schoolmaster to bring belivers to Christ? Paul preached that Christ died for our sins(I Cor 15) . You have to define sin don’t you? Isn’t sin transgression of the law? again it might be that love is the root of the whole matter( Love God with the whole heart and love neighbor as yourself)
@ Phil
How can you divide the Law into only obeying the “moral” law without considering the “civil and ceremonial parts.” The OT Law cannot be “cherry-picked” through. You must obey it in its entirety (which no man can do). Many people (myself included) on this site have slammed fundies for being legalistic and picking verses out of its intended meaning and then preaching on them. You would be guilty of that as well when slice and dice the OT Law into what’s relevant for the Christian but what part isn’t. Be truthful here. Go through the Pentateuch, and honestly divide each of the commands into what part it is: moral, ceremonial, or civil. Historically, the Reformers tried to do this (and still try) but the early church and the OT Jews didn’t because it was an “all or nothing” situation. The point I’m making is that the OT Law (especially the Pentateuch) was never made to be “sorted” through in that manner.
Yes, the OT was written for our learning and was our schoolmaster but we are under no legal requirement to obey it as a rule of life as a Christian. As far as evangelism, site one instance in the early church where preaching on the fulfillment of legal requirements of the OT Law were used to witness. There aren’t any. There are plenty of uses for the OT Law used to cite fulfillment of prophecy. Look how Paul and the Apostles witnessed. They preached the cross and Christ. Every aspect of the OT Law was fulfilled in Christ. Period.
“You have to define sin don’t you? Isn’t sin transgression of the law?” Which law? The Law of the OT or NT Law? Hebrews 8:8-13, 10:16. A few quotes from the OT about the OT Law? No, the Jews knew the OT Law. It’s a direct fulfillment of Christ as the new Law Giver. It amazes me how people see Jesus as Lord and Savior but not as the giver of NT Law. Look at Christ’s commands. Are these just suggestions? No. They are to be obeyed just as the OT once was before the cross. Of course, as Christians we sin when we cannot obey Christ’s commands just as in the OT when people failed to obey the Law. Look at the OT through NT eyes instead of looking at the NT through OT eyes.
This site has been some good fun in the past few months but in all sincerity I left fundamentalism because of all the unscriptural practices that I heard and that I even at one point condoned. I feel there are still people on here that are still in bondage without even realizing it because they are still following the teachings of men and their denominations over the Scriptures. John 6:28-29
@ Richard Sulivan : Hi Richard. I know its been a couple of weeks, but I’m still mulling over what you said I relized you were here so I’d thoght I’d ask questions
Ok sin is transgression of the law which law – can you answer what yopu think it is ?
Your point about the law and not being able to sort it. Were you saying the whole thing is totaly irrelavent or just not an outward rule of life?
If its irrelevant does it mean that Christians do not use it at all ?
What is your view of Paul sighting The commandment to Honor both father and mother for long life(the first commandment with promise if the law is not binding) ?
Are the only NT laws Love God with whole heart and love neibor as self? or are there more
Do yo see The OT law as a schoolmaster for the time it was around till Christ came ?
Can you explain your application of John 6:28-29
@ Phil:
“Ok sin is transgression of the law which law – can you answer what yopu think it is ?
Your point about the law and not being able to sort it. Were you saying the whole thing is totaly irrelavent or just not an outward rule of life?”
Sin is transgression of the law – Christ’s law. Christ’s commands are my rule of life as a Christian. When I break them, I sin. Christ preached with authority (Matthew 28:18) and not as the scribes (Matthew7:29). As far the OT Law, it must be obeyed in its entirety not just the 10 Commandments. You must observe everything. James 2:10 is referring to that. You just can’t “cherry-pick” through it. Question. Were you able to divide all the OT Law into moral, civil, and ceremonial? You can’t. That’s the point. All or nothing. And no one has been ever able to keep the OT Law except Christ.
“If its irrelevant does it mean that Christians do not use it at all ?”
As I said before, look at the OT through NT eyes. Look for Christ in it. If your just reading it (OT) for reading’s sake without looking for Christ, pretty dry to say the least. Christ is in there. I read from the OT everyday but not a rule for my life. If you believe that then you would have to stone adulterers, kill witches, kill homosexuals, etc. That’s also in the OT Law. If you are led to believe to keep the Law (OT), then you must keep all of it including what I just wrote and more.
“What is your view of Paul sighting The commandment to Honor both father and mother for long life(the first commandment with promise if the law is not binding) ?”
I obey it because it was given as part of Christ’s Law (Christ is the author and finisher of our faith, is He not?). Also a lot of quoting done in scripture is done to highlight a point and not necessarily to be obeyed – such the disobedience of the Israelites (Acts 7). If everything quoted from the OT were to be obeyed in its entirety, that would lead to other problems for the NT believer. Again, the context of quoting the OT in the NT, is to see the fulfillment of the OT Law through Christ.
“Are the only NT laws Love God with whole heart and love neibor as self? or are there more”
That is the total summation that Christ expects from a believer. If you have that love, you would be fulfilling all of Christ’s commands. However, we don’t. If we did, we would obey His commands (NT) and not sin but that is not possible. That should be our rule of life and not trying to keep a bunch of OT laws that weren’t even written for a Christian but for a nation. They were national laws to set apart Israel from the rest.
“Do yo see The OT law as a schoolmaster for the time it was around till Christ came ?”
Christ has come and gone over 2,00o years ago. It was the schoolmaster up until he gave Himself for the elect. The non-believers aren’t under the OT law but are under God’s wrath. Satisfaction was made with the perfect sacrifice – Jesus Christ. Why do you think Christ said, “It is finished” (John 19:30)? What happened to the temple (Matthew 27:51)? It was ripped apart ending the sacrifices and all the OT Laws.
“Can you explain your application of John 6:28-29”
I put that in there because as I have already stated on this site many people have railed on fundies for doing things far from being anything scriptural. But reading some of the posts by some on here, write about their denominations (Anglican, Catholic, SBC, etc.) The problem that keeps coming up is they left one problem for another. I pastored 2 churches, have been involved in missions and church planting, and other ministries. I see people putting more faith in their church (a building, denomination, fellowship, etc.) than in Christ. They are stuck on man-made traditions rather than scripture. It’s simple – believe in the One whom God has sent and obey His teachings. Period. Anything else is an addition to it and is another Gospel (Galatians 1).