Life in Quarantine: One man's reflections

[D. Engebretson]

Don't ever diss the power of The Word of God, Charles, simply because it's not entertaining or sophisticated enough for you.

For the word of God to be powerful, it needs to be heard. Proclaiming the greatest sermon to an empty church will not have any affect. It can't be planted and take root in people's lives if no people hear it.

Given the context of this exchange it would be assumed that the word of God is reaching people through the medium of the internet, just as it might through the radio, TV, etc. People are obviously hearing the word.  They are responding, in part, through notes of gratitude. The idea of preaching so that no one hears it seems, well, odd.  Can't imagine why anyone would do that.

[Dan Fienen]

Don't ever diss the power of The Word of God, Charles, simply because it's not entertaining or sophisticated enough for you.

For the word of God to be powerful, it needs to be heard. Proclaiming the greatest sermon to an empty church will not have any affect. It can't be planted and take root in people's lives if no people hear it.

Do you even understand what you are responding to? Nobody is suggesting that a sermon preached to an empty church that nobody but the preacher hears or sees is effective. How about a sermon preached to a church that is empty but for a camera that records that sermon or live streams it so that people who cannot be there to listen to the sermon live and in person? Is that efficacious? Even if they don't have the kind of production values that they might be able to pull off at the National Cathedral or a mega church?

[Brian Stoffregen]

Don't ever diss the power of The Word of God, Charles, simply because it's not entertaining or sophisticated enough for you.

For the word of God to be powerful, it needs to be heard. Proclaiming the greatest sermon to an empty church will not have any affect. It can't be planted and take root in people's lives if no people hear it.

Brian,

I've commented on your stream of consciousness posts. But wow, this one doesn't even manifest cognizance.

So thankful that you weren't my seminary professor when I wrote a paper on hearing the Word of God. There's much we can do to help people hear the message we are proclaiming. 60% of what is heard in a two-way conversation is from non-verbal cues. I suggest that this says a lot about how we deliver a sermon; and the how is just as important as the what. If we say all the right words - properly proclaim the Word - but it's not heard or is misheard; we have not adequately preached the Gospel.

[Brian Stoffregen]

Don't ever diss the power of The Word of God, Charles, simply because it's not entertaining or sophisticated enough for you.

For the word of God to be powerful, it needs to be heard. Proclaiming the greatest sermon to an empty church will not have any affect. It can't be planted and take root in people's lives if no people hear it.

Do you even understand what you are responding to? Nobody is suggesting that a sermon preached to an empty church that nobody but the preacher hears or sees is effective. How about a sermon preached to a church that is empty but for a camera that records that sermon or live streams it so that people who cannot be there to listen to the sermon live and in person? Is that efficacious? Even if they don't have the kind of production values that they might be able to pull off at the National Cathedral or a mega church?

I'm suggesting, no, I'm stating, because I've done it; should people tune in and see a poor production or a sermon that's hard to hear, they go to something else. (We've done that with a lot of movies, watch 5-10 minutes and if it hasn't caught our interest by then, we're off hunting for another movie.) Leaving a service/sermon before it's over is much easier when viewing from the privacy of one's home.


Yes, I believe I know what I'm responding to. I'm speaking from my own experiences of watching (and then not watching) services on the internet.

[RandyBosch]

Take a breath, Pastor Fienen.  It ain’t worth all this mewling. Good grief!

Mewling (especially of a baby): Cry feebly or querulously; whimper.

[Donald_Kirchner]

Don't ever diss the power of The Word of God, Charles, simply because it's not entertaining or sophisticated enough for you.

For the word of God to be powerful, it needs to be heard. Proclaiming the greatest sermon to an empty church will not have any affect. It can't be planted and take root in people's lives if no people hear it.

Brian,

I've commented on your stream of consciousness posts. But wow, this one doesn't even manifest cognizance.

So thankful that you weren't my seminary professor when I wrote a paper on hearing the Word of God. There's much we can do to help people hear the message we are proclaiming. 60% of what is heard in a two-way conversation is from non-verbal cues. I suggest that this says a lot about how we deliver a sermon; and the how is just as important as the what. If we say all the right words - properly proclaim the Word - but it's not heard or is misheard; we have not adequately preached the Gospel.

So, is that it? You had a seminary professor teach you stream of consciousness thinking, to respond with a totally irrelevant and nonsensical observation just because it comes to mind?

[RandyBosch]

Chapter 9 - The Haircut 

Nicely written!  Thanks for sharing!

[John_Hannah]

Great write up, Charles. I got my clippers from the online military exchange. I haven't had the courage to try them. Your account stirs me to action.   

Alleluia! Christ is risen!  JOHN

[Dave Benke]

Chapter 9 - The Haircut 

Nicely written!  Thanks for sharing!

Absolutely - that was great!

Dave Benke

[mariemeyer]

Because our pastor is not live streaming Bill and I live streamed the service at Pacific Palisades Lutheran.   The preacher was Bill's 92 year old brother, the Rev. Richard Z Meyer, St. Louis class of 1952.  His sermon was on Jesus the Good Shepherd and how the 23rd Psalm speaks to us today.

Due to the distance between Bethel CT and Pacific Palisades CA we have not heard Dick preach for many years.  This morning my reflections turned to the last time I heard Bill's dad preach shortly before his death at 89.  Today, as Bill and I worshiped from the dining room table I glanced at the picture of Bill's 21 year old mother on her wedding day. She was a role model for me as a daughter of our heavenly father, a wife, a mother and a disciple of Christ.

Marie Meyer 

[Dave Benke]

Because our pastor is not live streaming Bill and I live streamed the service at Pacific Palisades Lutheran.   The preacher was Bill's 92 year old brother, the Rev. Richard Z Meyer, St. Louis class of 1952.  His sermon was on Jesus the Good Shepherd and how the 23rd Psalm speaks to us today.

Due to the distance between Bethel CT and Pacific Palisades CA we have not heard Dick preach for many years.  This morning my reflections turned to the last time I heard Bill's dad preach shortly before his death at 89.  Today, as Bill and I worshiped from the dining room table I glanced at the picture of Bill's 21 year old mother on her wedding day. She was a role model for me as a daughter of our heavenly father, a wife, a mother and a disciple of Christ.

Marie Meyer

Great reminiscences, Marie!  Wow - I met Dick several times, a vibrant pastor just like his brother Bill.  I have trouble understanding the big age difference, though, since Bill is still in his mid-60s, and you're what, 54?

Dave Benke

[Brian Stoffregen]

Don't ever diss the power of The Word of God, Charles, simply because it's not entertaining or sophisticated enough for you.

For the word of God to be powerful, it needs to be heard. Proclaiming the greatest sermon to an empty church will not have any affect. It can't be planted and take root in people's lives if no people hear it.

Brian,

I've commented on your stream of consciousness posts. But wow, this one doesn't even manifest cognizance.

So thankful that you weren't my seminary professor when I wrote a paper on hearing the Word of God. There's much we can do to help people hear the message we are proclaiming. 60% of what is heard in a two-way conversation is from non-verbal cues. I suggest that this says a lot about how we deliver a sermon; and the how is just as important as the what. If we say all the right words - properly proclaim the Word - but it's not heard or is misheard; we have not adequately preached the Gospel.

So, is that it? You had a seminary professor teach you stream of consciousness thinking, to respond with a totally irrelevant and nonsensical observation just because it comes to mind?

So if 1/2 or 3/4 of the viewers turn off the streaming service before it's over; that's "totally irrelevant and nonsensical"? What number of folks leaving a service in the middle become relevant?

[Donald_Kirchner]

Now you’re simply being intellectually dishonest, Brian. You moved from an empty church, no one hearing, to some not hearing.

And the point remains. If some are not going to listen to the Word of God because they’re not sufficiently entertained or the tech is not top notch, there’s something deeper, more troubling going on. IOW, if it’s like you flicking through movies that you find entertaining...  😳

[Brian Stoffregen]

Now you’re simply being intellectually dishonest, Brian. You moved from an empty church, no one hearing, to some not hearing.

And the point remains. If some are not going to listen to the Word of God because they’re not sufficiently entertained or the tech is not top notch, there’s something deeper, more troubling going on. IOW, if it’s like you flicking through movies that you find entertaining...  😳

The original topic was about the quality of the production. I suggested that if the quality is so bad that no one is listening to the live streaming, it's like preaching to an empty church. The Word lands in no soil. I further suggested that if the production quality (not the sermon quality) is bad, folks may stop listening - again, when there's no soil, the word can't be planted and take root. I see nothing dishonest about this. The topic is the quality of the production. The better the quality the more likely people are to tune in and keep listening.


You don't think people, even back in my parent's generation, flipped through TV channels to find a more entertaining worship service? Billy Graham drew thousands to his crusades and TV shows. Other evangelists were not so entertaining. I would watch Oral Roberts because of the quality of the programming. (I didn't care much about the message back then.) They put on a good music show.

[James J Eivan]

Now you’re simply being intellectually dishonest, Brian. You moved from an empty church, no one hearing, to some not hearing.

And the point remains. If some are not going to listen to the Word of God because they’re not sufficiently entertained or the tech is not top notch, there’s something deeper, more troubling going on. IOW, if it’s like you flicking through movies that you find entertaining...  😳

The original topic was about the quality of the production. I suggested that if the quality is so bad that no one is listening to the live streaming, it's like preaching to an empty church. The Word lands in no soil. I further suggested that if the production quality (not the sermon quality) is bad, folks may stop listening - again, when there's no soil, the word can't be planted and take root. I see nothing dishonest about this. The topic is the quality of the production. The better the quality the more likely people are to tune in and keep listening.

Sorry Rev Stoffregen ... quality was NOT the original issue ... as is clearly stated below the medium IS the issue that originated this discussion. Quality and medium are NOT synonyms.

But if the medium does not work, the message is weakened or lost completely.

But then moving the goal posts is your speciality. ☹️