Tim, you'll be happy to know I DID preach the gospel in that sermon, as I do in EVERY Sermon. I've been doing this for 25 years, and I no longer need to write "gospel" in my outline as a prompt.
You'll also be happy to know that I would have gladly received admonishment from this older man.
Unfortunately, he didn't do that. He went behind my back and tried to have me fired, and then launched a smear campaign.
You'll also be happy to know that we tried very hard to establish a good rapport with this older woman. Sadly, instead of being a Titus 2 older lady to my wife, she played Herod's wife and demanded my head on a platter.
This older, "well-respected" couple, as you keep framing them, did not even have the common decency to resign in a respectful manner. They quit immediately, and left the church in the lurch that Sunday, scrambling to cover their various duties (youth, audio/video, finances). Another Deacon had to read his resignation letter in his absence. I'm also not the first pastor to leave (or be fired), due, in part, to them.
As far as hit pieces go, yours gets an F. You've really got to disguise your intentions better. You need to make us feel that you're NOT writing a thinly veiled smear. Your animosity and bias were simply too obvious.
It's hilarious to me that you appointed yourself as the arbiter of my case. You've never met me, and doubtlessly never been to this church or town. You also clearly don't know the first thing about preaching or ministry. Yet, you posture yourself as some kind of expert on these matters. It's laughable that you pretend to reconstruct and "assess' my sermon based on a short-hand outline. Both your ignorance, and your arrogance are astounding. Rest assured, nobody is buying it. Least of all, me.
In the interests of fairness, let's assume you preached the Gospel, even though it's nowhere in your outline. It sure doesn't look like you've developed that in your notes, but we'll assume you did.
Still, what I'm seeing in the outline is a textbook example of what NOT to do in a sermon. Like I said, that would get you an F in seminary. Most likely, they would have told you to re-write it. And the student assistant probably would have given you pointers on what they expect. (After all, theology departments are not like engineering departments: they really aren't trying to flunk people.)
You're not exegeting; you're eisegeting. That's not good form. The Master's Seminary--John MacArthur's outfit--would not have accepted this. SBTS would not have accepted it. SEBTS would not have accepted it. Gordon Conwell would not have accepted it. Westminster would not have accepted it. All of those are very conservative, accredited Calvinistic institutions. What you did is exactly what they tell you--almost from day one--NOT to do.
As for me being the arbiter, please. I'm a little fish in a big pond, but I'm an old geezer--pushing 58--who's been around the block.
Forget what I'm saying; I'd challenge you to run your sermon notes past any homiletics, OT, NT, or theology professor at any reputable conservative seminary: TMU, Gordon Conwell, Westminster, SBTS, SEBTS, TEDS. If you do, please let me know what feedback you get.
There's an old saying: "Good judgement comes from bad experience, which comes from bad judgement." I've got enough gray hair to say I've done some of the latter in my life. As a former boss of mine said, "If you ain't screwin' up, you ain't doin' nothin'!"
But the issue is what are you learning?
I've seen your sermon outline, and by any objective standard, you rolled a gutterball. I can honestly say that, if I had preached a sermon like that in any of my church staff experiences, I would have either been fired or--if I were a guest preacher--would have never been asked back again. And those were all conservative churches.
At my current church--also very conservative--I would also get taken to the woodshed for a sermon like this. In fact, the other pastors would not have let me make it to the pulpit, as they would have reviewed the outline and told me to sit.
But if you wish to insist that you were in the right, hey...you do you.
Like I said, all differences aside, I empathize with your current sitrep, as I have been there. I highly recommend the bivo route.
Tim, let me save you some time here. I read the first two paragraphs of your response, and that's all. I'm not going to read the rest of your consdescending drivel. It's obvious that you think very highly of seminary...and of yourself. I could not care less about your ignorant opinion of my sermon outline, nor whether the academic eggheads would approve of my preaching. Have a good day.
Tim, you'll be happy to know I DID preach the gospel in that sermon, as I do in EVERY Sermon. I've been doing this for 25 years, and I no longer need to write "gospel" in my outline as a prompt.
You'll also be happy to know that I would have gladly received admonishment from this older man.
Unfortunately, he didn't do that. He went behind my back and tried to have me fired, and then launched a smear campaign.
You'll also be happy to know that we tried very hard to establish a good rapport with this older woman. Sadly, instead of being a Titus 2 older lady to my wife, she played Herod's wife and demanded my head on a platter.
This older, "well-respected" couple, as you keep framing them, did not even have the common decency to resign in a respectful manner. They quit immediately, and left the church in the lurch that Sunday, scrambling to cover their various duties (youth, audio/video, finances). Another Deacon had to read his resignation letter in his absence. I'm also not the first pastor to leave (or be fired), due, in part, to them.
As far as hit pieces go, yours gets an F. You've really got to disguise your intentions better. You need to make us feel that you're NOT writing a thinly veiled smear. Your animosity and bias were simply too obvious.
It's hilarious to me that you appointed yourself as the arbiter of my case. You've never met me, and doubtlessly never been to this church or town. You also clearly don't know the first thing about preaching or ministry. Yet, you posture yourself as some kind of expert on these matters. It's laughable that you pretend to reconstruct and "assess' my sermon based on a short-hand outline. Both your ignorance, and your arrogance are astounding. Rest assured, nobody is buying it. Least of all, me.
In the interests of fairness, let's assume you preached the Gospel, even though it's nowhere in your outline. It sure doesn't look like you've developed that in your notes, but we'll assume you did.
Still, what I'm seeing in the outline is a textbook example of what NOT to do in a sermon. Like I said, that would get you an F in seminary. Most likely, they would have told you to re-write it. And the student assistant probably would have given you pointers on what they expect. (After all, theology departments are not like engineering departments: they really aren't trying to flunk people.)
You're not exegeting; you're eisegeting. That's not good form. The Master's Seminary--John MacArthur's outfit--would not have accepted this. SBTS would not have accepted it. SEBTS would not have accepted it. Gordon Conwell would not have accepted it. Westminster would not have accepted it. All of those are very conservative, accredited Calvinistic institutions. What you did is exactly what they tell you--almost from day one--NOT to do.
As for me being the arbiter, please. I'm a little fish in a big pond, but I'm an old geezer--pushing 58--who's been around the block.
Forget what I'm saying; I'd challenge you to run your sermon notes past any homiletics, OT, NT, or theology professor at any reputable conservative seminary: TMU, Gordon Conwell, Westminster, SBTS, SEBTS, TEDS. If you do, please let me know what feedback you get.
There's an old saying: "Good judgement comes from bad experience, which comes from bad judgement." I've got enough gray hair to say I've done some of the latter in my life. As a former boss of mine said, "If you ain't screwin' up, you ain't doin' nothin'!"
But the issue is what are you learning?
I've seen your sermon outline, and by any objective standard, you rolled a gutterball. I can honestly say that, if I had preached a sermon like that in any of my church staff experiences, I would have either been fired or--if I were a guest preacher--would have never been asked back again. And those were all conservative churches.
At my current church--also very conservative--I would also get taken to the woodshed for a sermon like this. In fact, the other pastors would not have let me make it to the pulpit, as they would have reviewed the outline and told me to sit.
But if you wish to insist that you were in the right, hey...you do you.
Like I said, all differences aside, I empathize with your current sitrep, as I have been there. I highly recommend the bivo route.
Tim, let me save you some time here. I read the first two paragraphs of your response, and that's all. I'm not going to read the rest of your consdescending drivel. It's obvious that you think very highly of seminary...and of yourself. I could not care less about your ignorant opinion of my sermon outline, nor whether the academic eggheads would approve of my preaching. Have a good day.
I gave you my $0.02. That you even bothered to consider what I had to say was a start. You're free to take it or leave it.
All the best.