To Sermon, Or Not To Sermon

How NOT to give a Sermon

This is Bob's Sermon Outline. 

Is studying acting acceptable for Christians?

Will animals, like wolves and lions, remain carnivores?

Does Ezekiel 13 warn against false prophets?

Should you be baptized for the dead?

What are Bible marginal references?

Should you follow people like Edgar Cayce?

How do you calculate a tithe?

What is second tithe?

What is third tithe?

What is the ‘tithe of the tithe’?

When do you start a third tithe year?

Did Adam first marry Lilith?

What are the fasts of Zechariah 8:19?

How is God jealous in Exodus 20:5?

Can women hold outside jobs?

What is kosher?

Would Jesus vote?

Should Christians vote?

Dr. Thiel goes through scriptures, facts, COG documents, and historical information to provide answers.

Let's edit this just a tad. 

Is studying acting acceptable for Christians?

Will animals, like wolves and lions, remain carnivores?

Does Ezekiel 13 warn against false prophets?

Should you be baptized for the dead?

What are Bible marginal references?

Should you follow people like Edgar Cayce?

How do you calculate a tithe?

What is second tithe?

What is third tithe?

What is the ‘tithe of the tithe’?

When do you start a third tithe year?

Did Adam first marry Lilith?

What are the fasts of Zechariah 8:19?

How is God jealous in Exodus 20:5?

Can women hold outside jobs?

What is kosher?

Would Jesus vote?

Should Christians vote?

Dr. Thiel goes through scriptures, facts, COG documents, and historical information to provide answers.

There.

Now we have a sermon topic which will be entitled "Is Studying acting acceptable for Christians".  This will thus be the topic of the Sermon. The Sermon length should conclude in 20 minutes. However, being a COG, where long sermons are the norm, let's be generous and, because of the obvious novice level of the speaker, let's expand it to 30 minutes. But before we do this, let's think this over just a bit.

1. HOW MANY MEMBERS ARE ACTIVELY CONSIDERING GOING TO COLLEGE TO STUDY ACTING? 

2. HOW MANY MEMBERS AFTER CONSIDERING GOING TO COLLEGE TO STUDY ACTING CAN ACTUALLY AFFORD TO GO TO COLLEGE TO STUDY ACTING? 

3. IS THE SERMON TOPIC ABOUT STUDYING ACTING SOMETHING THAT WILL BENEFIT THE CONGREGATION AS A WHOLE, OR IS THIS BETTER HANDLED AS A PERSONAL COUNSEL? 

4. DOES ANYBODY IN YOUR CONGREGATION HAVE ANY CONCERN ABOUT THIS TOPIC? 

5. WHY? 

6. AGAIN, WHY? 

7. WHO IN AFRICA OR IN THE GENERAL MEMBERSHIP HAS THE TIME TO DO SO? 

8. AGAIN, PLEASE, FOR THE REASON OF LOGIC - WHY?!

If there is a logical need for this message as a whole to benefit the whole church body (which there is not), let us proceed then with structuring the message properly. For the sake of humoring the topic, let's just go with this. 

We will now need to outline this 30 minute sermon using the following format: 

1. Introduction (used to engage the audience. Use some humor and pose an interesting question for engagement). 

This should be 4-5 minutes or less. Here's some ideas:

"Many of you this morning have probably risen from bed this morning with quite the urge to go to Hollywood." Wait, no, I don't really think this will work, as the answer to this is none. Sorry about that. Let's switch gears.

"Have you ever wanted to be someone famous? Like Sylvester Stalone, or (insert actor here, here...) Have you ever seriously considered going to school to study acting?" It's a start, but it's a non-starter honestly because this is an un-relatable subject to the majority of the audience. It is better handled with personal counsel one on one, not as a full sermon subject. How did we even get on this subject in the first place? Oh yeah, we had to cancel out all the other subjects and just go with the first one to try to make a cohesive sermon! That's right! And we ended up with a sermon topic on studying acting which 95% of the audience simply does not care about!!!!!!. Right. 

But since we know none of this will matter, let's continue to the second point. 

2. Discuss what acting is. (This should be 5 minutes or less. Be to the point, on target, and be referenced.)

This should be easy. It need not be a long-winded, pointless diatribe about the history of acting, or the pagan origins of acting, or bouncing around to everything about acting that is unchristian or evil. Succinct, simple, and short. And most of all, REFERENCED. 

3. Scripture reading. (Use scripture(s) (no more than 2 or 3 at most) to support your position. This should again, take about 3 to 5 minutes.) 

Find a scripture to support your position on why STUDYING acting is wrong. Not ACTUALLY acting, but STUDYING acting. If you were to give a sermon on ACTING, that would be a whole different message. This one is about STUDYING acting, and why STUDYING acting is wrong. Once you find your scripture on why STUDYING acting is wrong...

***Crickets****

***more crickets****

then we can go to the next point. 

4. Expound on Scripture, explain the position (Why not study acting), overcome any possible objections, prove your point. (3 to 5 minutes.)

This may prove to be difficult, based on the success of point 3. 

Pretending that point 4 was successful, let's move on to point 5. 

5. Re-Engage the audience, tie-back to the introduction, prove the point. (3 to 5 minutes)

6. Conclude the Message. (3 to 5 minutes.) 

Let's pretend that the message outline is completed properly. Now let's give it a chance to actually be a Sermon. 

In the message: 

Use a little humor if needed. 

Use vocal inflection. Don't be monotone. 

Be natural. Avoid stiff and awkward gestures. 

Don't sniff. 

Make sure the scriptures back up the message. 

Avoid crooked bookcases. They are distracting. 

Avoid ragged curtains. They are distracting. 

Relate to the audience. Use real-world examples. 

Be fluid. Don't jump all over the place. The Sermon should flow, not jump waves like a new surfer. 

Stay ON TOPIC. 

Make the message memorable. 

This is a completely free public service lesson. 

There's no charge. 

There's no follow-back. 

There! 

Now that wasn't so hard! Or, was it?

submitted by SHT

Personal Infallibility, the plague of COG leaders and members

This is from a blog posting by James McGrath which precisely sums up how certain Church of God leaders act, and many members, for that matter. Most have no real theological education, have never examined other points of view on theology, exegesis, hermeneutics, or even read anything other than something Herbert Armstrong wrote or said. That in its self adds another dimension to how COG leaders and members think.  If Herbert said it, explained it and said it was true, therefore I believe it is true. End of subject.

McGrath writes:

You can see from what it says the contemporary issue that sparked the statement. But it has a much broader application, which is what made it seem particularly memeworthy. It certainly seems true to my own experience. Even while claiming “it isn’t me, it’s God,” I did precisely what Lars Cade says in practice, although it is only with hindsight and after significant introspection and self-examination that I recognize these things.

Is this your experience of what is at work in fundamentalism – that the reason for being concerned to defend the authority of the Bible is ultimately to defend the rightness of one’s own views and those of one’s community? To be sure, the claim is always that it is one’s own beliefs that are being conformed to the Bible rather than vice versa. But that only works because, despite all the praise heaped on the Bible and its importance, the average conservative Christian does not know the Bible well enough to appreciate its diversity, reads it in a translation that hides discrepancies and differences from them, and knows only (or at least knows best) those parts that can be interpreted as supporting their stance.

“The Bible is True. I believe the Bible. Therefore, everything I believe is true.” Does that sum this viewpoint up well?

Bob Thiel Answers The Question: Did Edgar Cayce Marry Lilith Before He Dropped His Tithe Off At The Kosher Voting Place Next To The Acting Studio?

It is another fun-filled weekend in Arroyo Grande, home of the improperly named "continuing church of god" and its Chief Overseer and Grand Bawana, Bob Thiel.  He just released his latest information-overload video sermon for this most sacred of Sabbath days.  Does he honestly think any of his African followers care one bit about the majority of these topics?  Instead of sticking to a single point and preaching a well-researched sermon of 20 minutes, he has to spend over an hour and twenty minutes discussing the following topics:

Is studying acting acceptable for Christians?

Will animals, like wolves and lions, remain carnivores?

Does Ezekiel 13 warn against false prophets?

Should you be baptized for the dead?

What are Bible marginal references?

Should you follow people like Edgar Cayce?

How do you calculate a tithe?

What is second tithe?

What is third tithe?

What is the ‘tithe of the tithe’?

When do you start a third tithe year?

Did Adam first marry Lilith?

What are the fasts of Zechariah 8:19?

How is God jealous in Exodus 20:5?

Can women hold outside jobs?

What is kosher?

Would Jesus vote?

Should Christians vote?

Dr. Thiel goes through scriptures, facts, COG documents, and historical information to provide answers.

It's Not a Question of Love...It is a Question of Common Sense and Wisdom

Vaccine controversies are public debates around the medical, ethical and legal issues related to vaccines. These controversies have occurred since almost 80 years before the terms vaccine and vaccination were introduced.

Here in the Pacific North West, both in Vancouver and now in Portland,  a Measles outbreak has occurred of late. There have been 50 confirmed cases and more suspected. The PNW is also a center for anti-vax parents who, for many reasons, refuse to vaccinate their children against the common or now mostly not common at all childhood diseases. 

2019 Portland, Oregon

(Personal note: In spite of WCG sentiments on immunizations, I personally took responsibility for the immunizations of my two children in the 1970's and had them vaccinated according to schedule.  When members asked for the exemption forms I always asked them if this was their own conscious decision or were they feeling they had to not vaccinate due to church "teachings"?  Some asked if I "minded" if they went ahead with getting their children immunized and always told them that was their decision and had nothing to do with me (or the church in reality). On the entire topic of doctors and medicine, I always encouraged, in some cases begged, members to get to their doctor and hospital if need be. I'd anoint them there and later and especially quickly if it involved their children. My lifelong "ministerial" view was that while an adult can make any faith filled  medical decision they wish FOR THEMSELVES, they should not make those kinds of decisions or exhibit their own faith FOR THEIR CHILDREN.  I only mention this so those who would like to criticize me for my past coming this conclusion NOW will understand it has ALWAYS been my conclusion and I lived it with my own family and congregations from the start. As is the custom of some, their projections of their own experiences on to myself would be mistaken)

Because of this rare but aggressive outbreak of Measles here in the PNW the controversy about not only parents withholding vaccinations because of religious beliefs but also for the belief, real or imagined of the dangers of doing so has erupted afresh. 

On top of that there is a new phenomenon now of children old enough to think it through up through teens  getting vaccinated on their own without parental permission or even knowledge of doing so. The availability of information both pro and con is much more available to children and teens now through their own devices than anything we, as children, ever had access to. Some adults  whose parents, when  young who also withheld vaccinations, are also leaving the guilt,  lack of information or choice their parents enforced on them and getting themselves vaccinated as advised.

Parents and adults can live their adult faith for themselves however that expresses itself.

Whether it be immunizations or medical care, no parent has the right to inflict their faith, as if it were also a child's faith, in such matters. With proper medical and doctor advice and counsel, this should not be the problem some few parents, both in a religious context and the ever present conspiratorial context make it out to be. 

If a parent has the faith, for the child,  to not protect their child with vaccinations, perhaps they could have the faith to protect them with them?

After all, how many times has one said "And bless and cleanse this food to the nourishment of our bodies"

Proverbs 17:22
If a merry heart makes GOOD like a MEDICINE, perhaps the Bible at least admitted to the benefit of MEDICINE long before WCG came along
Just sayin'

https://www.mommyish.com/teenager-gets-self-vaccinated-babysitting-money-anti-vax-parents/

Save

When I was a teenager, I spent all my babysitting money on vintage clothes, Manic Panic, and clove cigarettes. I thought I was so cool, but I was nowhere near as cool as the Ontario teen who took her health into her own hands and went and got herself vaccinated against the wishes of her anti-vaxxer parents.

Her mother, of course, was furious, and turned to Reddit’s /r/legaladvice forum to ask whom she was allowed to sue about this. She wrote:

None of my children are vaccinated. Totally by accident I came to find out that my oldest daughter has been fully vaccinated (Tetanus, diphtheria, pertussis, polio, measles, mumps, rubella, hep a and b, menengitis a and b and hpv) without mine or my husband’s knowledge or consent. In Ontario we have socialized medicine and publicly funded vaccines. She admitted she went to clinics run for school aged children run by our local health public health unit to get her shots and also got a few at a local walk in clinic that are not yet publicly funded paid for with her babysitting money. When I called public health and the clinic to complain they both said that because she is age 16 they cannot release any information to me – and I’m her mother! My husband and are livid that she was vaccinated without our consent. What kind of action can we take against public health and the clinic for vaccinating a child without parental consent? Do we have a case for a lawsuit?

Reddit, of course, enjoyed a delightful summer shower in anti-vaxxer tears over this post, because the poster’s teenage daughter is smart and awesome and deserves a high-five for taking her health into her own hands. Also Ontario deserves a high-five for its socialized medicine and publicly funded vaccines that allowed this 16-year-old to get up-to-date on all her vaccinations.

High-fives for everyone!