HOW TO WRITE A SERMON - THE CLERGY'S SCAM

How is a sermoan prepared?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1. Choose the Preaching Portion.
2. Read and Study Entire Context of Preaching Portion.
3. Read Repeatedly Through Preaching Portion – Perhaps as Many as a Dozen Times.
4. Outline the Passage.
5. Check Key Words and Phrases in the Original Language.
6. Discover the Theme of the Passage.
7. Consult Commentaries and the Writings of Others.
8. Discover an Angle for the Sermon.
9. Formulate a Proposition.
10. Write the Sermon Outline.
11. Write the Sermon Draft.
12. Choose a Title.
13. Revise, Tighten, and Reword Where Necessary.
14. Get the Final, Printed Copy to the Church Secretary for Distribution to Absentees, Deaf Ministry, Shut-ins, etc.
15. Preach Message. Distribute Tapes and Printed Copies.
16. Repeat This Process, at Least in Part, for the Evening Service. Start Over Again on Monday.

Adapted from http://preacherstudy.com/time3.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Exactly like a teacher does in every classroom worldwide:
- reflecting on subject matter
- consulting reference material
- consulting curriculum / institution guidelines
- considering age and ability of students
- preparing material
- delivering material
- getting feedback from students via assessments / tests
- evaluating effectiveness of material and delivery for each student
- remediating if necessary
- repeat for every class

Absolutely no different at all and exactly the same process - only a teacher does far more. No clergy sets an assessment or test. No clergy does sermoans every day of the working week.

No sermoan is is complicated. No sermoan is geared above a person of average intelligence. No sermoan goes into great detail. No sermoan is a literary masterpiece. They are also simple monologues geared to Stage 3 or lower in Fowler's Stages of Faith and using language and vocabulary of an average 10 year old.

I offered to write a full year's sermoans for one famous Aussie clergyman and do it in one day - for the cost of his yearly salary. I even told him how it could be done.

You pick out special days and look at bible verses that related to them - Mother's Day, Father's Day, Australia Day, etc. You do a month each on Easter and Christmas. With those five items mentioned you already have 11 different week's material - almost a quarter of the year. You only use the most popular bible verses found at http://www.topverses.com/ and fill in the rest of the year using those bible verses. You consult sermon outlines to pinch material from such as that from http://sermonoutlines.org/
 
You make three simple points for each sermoan such as the areas of:
1. Meaning
2. Application
3. Evaulation

Dead easy and simple to do. It is a simple creative writing exercise. I can do a year's sermoans in 24 hours and my offer is still open to any clergy who want to test me. My fee is the clergy's complete yearly salary (including love gifts, fees for speaking engagements as a visiting minister and at seminars and retreats, sale of dvds & books, perks, etc.)
Paying clergy a salary for a 20 plus hour writing of a sermoan is a scam that requires exposing.

For a related article see http://www.stufffundieslike.com/2011/11/how-to-write-a-sermon/ I quote from that link: "No good sermon should ever take more than 20 or 30 minutes to write. If you’re spending more time than that, you’re doing it wrong and should probably just use the sermon that you heard a guy preach at that conference that one time."

Fundamentalism - A C Grayling

From A C Grayling " Ideas That Matter". My comments in *[ ... ]



Someone who believes in the literal truth of a religious holy text is a fundamentalist of the religion in question.  By extension, people with very strong religious commitments which they believe to be close to the founding intentions of their religion are also described as fundamentalists even if they allow some interpretation of their scriptures. *[ It is thus utterly impossible for me to be a fundamentalist as I hold no commitment to a literal interpretation of any religious text nor any strong religious commitment to the founding intentions of any religion .] ... Fundamentalism's manifestations have taken sometimes horrifying forms ... In every case fundamentalists ... are opposed to democracy, liberal pluralism, free speech, and equal rights for women.  They reject the discoveries of modern science in the fields of physics and biology, and assert the literal and unrevisable truth of their ancient holy writings. *[An example is creationsim / Intelligent Design.] All the major fundamentalisms are determined to take control of the states in which they exist, and to impose their view of things on them. *[This should be a worry to every citizen.] ... what kind of ethics would be imposed by, say, a fundamentalist Christian government in the United States, if such came to pass. *[ I shudder to think! For a start, homosexuals would be persecuted, art banned, science destroyed, history rewritten and Islam banned.  The bible would be the standard for all law including stoning rebellious sons, no work on the Sabbath and rigid blasphemy laws. ] ... a religious morality imposed by enthusiasts would controvert almost every tenet of liberal views about tolerance, openess, personal autonomy, and choice, and would impose instead a harsh and limiting authority on behaviour and opinion, and doubtless even on dress and entertainment. *[In other words, a return to the Dark Age.]

PROOF OF SANTA'S EXISTENCE

From Rachel Held Evans "Evolving in Monkeytown" (Zondervan: 2010) pp. 32-33

Skeptic:

How do you know that Santa is real? Have you ever seen him?

Me:

No, I haven't. But Santa leaves enough evidence of his existence to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. Every year I find presents from him under the tree and little crumbs all over the kitchen table where I left his plate of cookies. I might not see Santa himself, but these things point to him, as bending trees point to the existence of wind.

Skeptic:

How come there's a different Santa in every department store?

Me:

Those are Santa's helpers, who, with his permission, disguise themselves as Mr. Claus in order to more efficiently compile a list of what the children across the world want for Christmas.

Skeptic:

Everyone knows that reindeer can't fly. How does Santa get around?

Me:

Yes, it is true that most reindeer cannot fly. However, reindeer empowered by the Holy Spirit can do anything God tells them to do, and those are the kind of reindeer Santa owns. For a prototype, read the story of Balaam's donkey in the book of Numbers.

Skeptic:

How can one person make it to every rooftop in the world in just one night?

Me:

Who says Santa is a person? Although Saint Nick is not mentioned by name, the Bible clearly points to the existence of supernatural angelic beings whose primary directive is to protect, inform, and bless humans. If Santa is an angel on a mission from God to reward the good children of the world, he's likely to boast supernatural strength and speed.

Skeptic:

What about those kids who say they saw their parents sneaking presents under the tree on Christmas Eve?

Me:

Unfortunately, these kids may be telling the truth.  You see, the scope of Santa's power in our lives is ultimately dependent upon our willingness to accept it. Parents who choose not to believe in Santa forfeit the blessing of his visits forever, and so they must rely on their own methods for supplying kids with presents at Christmas.

Skeptic:

Why do bad kids still get presents?

Me: Why, grace, of course.

Why people are leaving church

Why does no church ask why you have left church? Christians seem to make up their own reasons why people leave church but never ask the people who have left what the real reasons are. It's as if Christians intentionally do not want to know because they may have to change.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Although many Australians identify themselves as religious, the majority consider religion the least important aspect of their lives when compared with family, partners, work and career, leisure time and politics. This is reflected in Australia's church attendance rates, which are among the lowest in the world and in continuing decline."

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreligion_in_Australia

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Our survey found that about a quarter of people leaving the Church expressed a change in beliefs or simply lost interest in religion. Of that group of people, 62% stated that they had stopped believing in organized religion altogether."

from http://www.churchleaders.com/outreach-missions/outreach-missions-articles/138855-coming-home-why-people-leave-the-church-and-how-to-bring-them-back.html~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

No one knows the reason for the overall attendance drop, but three possible explanations are:

Worshipers attend less frequently. ...

Aging constituencies. Mainline churches have a disproportionate number of mem­bers age 65 and older. ....

The other side of this dilemma is the failure of churches to reach younger persons. .....

Lack of interest in religion. Adding to the challenge of reaching younger people is the fact that the age group in which self-identified adherents of "no religion" are found most is 25-34. Additional indicators of decreasing interest in church life are found in the General Social Survey 2008: fewer people report going to church "several times a year" and more people report going "once a year." Fewer report going "less than once a year" while many more report going "never." In fact, the attendance category that has grown the most since 1990 is "never."

from http://www.christiancentury.org/article/2010-09/no-shows

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

.. In the past when life had fewer distractions people measured Church attendance on a weekly basis, but today regular Churchgoing is often measured as those that go at least once a month. ... through the negative experience of Church, nearly all of these de-churched people are closed to invites to Church. ... So far nothing the Church leaders have done seems to have brought about any change in the decline that started in the 50's. ... The decline for attendance forecasts a 55% fall from the 1980 level by 2020. ... even amongst the membership the Church in general struggles to attract people to services. The rate of decline in buildings is significantly less than that for membership, suggesting that congregations are on average getting much smaller with many more nearing the point when they will cease to be financially viable. ... the Church in the UK is one that fails to attract four people groups:
1.Christians
2.men
3.young people
4.the poor ....

from from http://www.whychurch.org.uk/trends.php

Critique of Richard Rohr and his "cosmic Christ"

A critique of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LYQQO5uFtA  - Fr. Richard Rohr - Cosmic Christ.

Richard Rohr reinvents of the historical Jesus of Nazareth as the mythical Christ of faith and calls him the "cosmic Christ". It is merely Marcus Borg's post-Easter Jesus. http://www.aportraitofjesus.org/compare.shtml

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Pre-Easter Jesus  / Post-Easter Jesus

4 B.C.E. to 30 C.E. / 30 C.E. to present
Corporeal, human being of flesh and blood / Spiritual non-material reality
Finite and mortal  / Infinite, eternal
Human / Divine
A Jewish peasant / King of Kings and Lord of Lords
Figure of the past / Figure of the present
Jesus of Nazareth / Jesus Christ
Monotheistic Jew / Becomes the second person of the trinity, "God with a human face"
Galilean Jew of the first century / "The Face of God" (metaphor based on 2 Cor. 4:6 Beholding the glory of God in the face of Christ)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It is mythical and not historical. It is based in mysticism (4:45 ff) and not rationality. He confuses Jesus with God. There is no "cosmic Christ"in reality. A Christ is one anointed BY God and therefore can never be God Himself and certainly a messiah / christ is never infinite.

One does not require Jesus for the concepts that he is talking about. Substitute his "cosmic Christ" with Thor, Woden, Zeus or any other god or being and it works just as well.

Rohr borrows much from other Christian mystics like Pierre Teilhard de Chardin (19:20 ff) and primarily from "The Phenomenon of Man". See http://www.teilharddechardin.org/ I don't find Rohr saying anything new or startling that differs from such past Christian mystics. His "dualistic mind" (22:28) and thinking "both / and" about Jesus and the mythical Christ of faith confuses the two completely different entities and is both irrational and illogical. Rohr wants you to believe the two are exactly the same but they are vastly different as Marcus Borg explains. His "contemplative mind (23:30) merges everything as one and leaves no room for discernment of very important differences. God gave you a mind to use and that means using discernment, logic and reason.