Taking every thought captive

Can [preaching] really be simply a passing phenomenon destined to become outdated as we enter a more technologically oriented age of electronic communication media?
(Graeme Goldsworthy, Preaching the Whole Bible as Christian Scripture, p.29)

The Reformation and Evangelical Awakening may have been highlights in recent church history for preaching, but the fathers and apostles practised it, as did the OT prophets. The Bible and church history show it to be more than a passing phase.

Is it outdated? The message is obviously not because the Gospel is timeless. When held against electronic communication media the vast difference in method is apparent. But we must beware of this comparison because we are comparing chalk with cheese.

Electronic media are not communication oriented, at least not in the same way as other media. Neil Postman’s insightful analysis (which is shared by others) has shown us how they do not tend towards information but rather entertainment. Preaching is not entertainment (at least not if engaged in as God intended), and thus does not work in such media, unless great care is taken to ensure that the message is not overwhelmed or lost within the media itself.

Electronic communication media cannot, therefore, be used to outdate preaching. What is clear is that electronic communication media and preaching are out of step with each other, and not only in terms of technique, but ultimately in terms of content, which looks like the main thrust of Goldsworthy’s chapter (which I’ve only just started). This out of stepness is a necessary consequence of being in the world, but not of it.

In my youth it was common for the Christian’s walk to be preached on. Modern translations have generally eliminated to word “walk” from the many NT occurrences. Given that we still talk about walking as in being in or out of step, or walking the walk, I’ve often thought it a pity that translations could not trust readers of Scripture to understand the user of the term. Is it not a richer expression than “live”?

It gives a clearer picture of life as a journey. And it also, to my mind, gives a clearer picture of the pace at which life is to be lived. Although the NT does talk of running a race, its overwhelming picture is of walking. Walking is not a fast activity, nor a frenetic one. Yet so much of daily life travels at the speed of light. Nor am I convinced that running the race implies speed, but rather endurance. So the biblical pace of life would most definitely appear to be what this world calls “life in the slow lane”.

The idea of being out of step with the world’s thinking indicates that life is no solitary existence. Life’s walk involves companionship: the journey is undertaken in company. Being out of step with the world’s thinking will inevitably lead to a parting of company with the world. But Christian believers walk in company–with one another in the Church. But beyond the human companionship of a journey travelled in company with like-minded people, is the divine companionship of God, and in particular his Holy Spirit. So the NIV captures the flavour of this in Galatians 5:25 by “keep in step with the Spirit”.

Though no doubt many sentimental sermons have been preached on Enoch, surely his walk with God makes this divine company on the journey so abundantly clear and immensely comforting. Even at the physical level, Genesis 2 must teach us that human beings walk in company–it was not good for the man to be alone.

Graeme Goldsworthy is undoubtedly right in pointing out the out of stepness of the Christian with the secular thinking when he says, “Christianity presents a unique picture that is so out of step with the secular way of thinking that it has to be constantly argued and defended even within the pages of Scripture.” (Preaching the Whole Bible as Christian Scripture, p.17) But the flip side is the instepness of the Christian with the Spirit. The out of stepness inevitably leads to conflict in the arena of ideas. Thus Paul exhorts Timothy to “wage the good warfare” (1Tim 1:18) and he instructs the Corinthian Christians to engage in spiritual warfare that will destroy arguments and contrary opinions (2Co 10:4,5).

Given the nature of the struggle which faces all Christians of keeping in step with the Spirit while living in a world which is out of step with God it is so helpful that Scripture gives us arguments and defences within its pages. And those concepts are earthed in the lives of men of God like Abraham and Paul who struggled to march of the rhythms of heaven’s drum, rather than that of this age.

Goldsworthy continues, “There is only one way the nations will find God, and that is through the salvation of Israel, which is set to be a light to the nations.” (p.18) This is precisely where Paul is coming from in 1Tim 1:!6. He himself is an example in the hands of Christ of God’s mercy in dealing with sinners. His out of stepness was no mere eccentricity, but the think that drew attention to him that God’s message of salvation may be delivered.

Goldsworthy’s warning against religious syncretism (p.17) is timely and crucial for true Christian witness. Heterodoxy enables people to walk in step with the secular thinking. Orthodoxy puts us out of step, and noticeably so. It will prompt questions in the minds of unbelievers that permit us to give the reason for the hope that is in us (1Pet 3:15). It is part of God’s Gospel strategy. We dare not deviate if we are to wage the good warfare. So let us be out of step with secular thinking.

Mark Dever comments on the decline in hymns about the grave and the afterlife in current hymn books:

Our reluctance to sing about the grave in church on Sunday only reveals how much our hopes have been entrusted to this life–and we do not wish to conceive of them being lost. Our treasures have been put too much in this world.
Completely Unavoidable Optimism, Together for the Gospel blog, 22 Feb 2007

I’ve previously pondered the decline in singing about death. This is certainly another important factor in the decline. It’s a very long time since I heard the hymn

This world is not my home
I’m just a’passing through
My treasures are laid up
Somewhere beyond the blue

It may not be the best example of Christian hymnody, but it’s certainly not as popular today as it was in my youth. Perhaps the reason lies not so much in changes in musical taste but in changes of hope.

Albert Mohler has a useful and interesting blog on Ten Great Christian Biographies. Looks like I need to get a few more books! Also looking forward to the promise of further lists.

Commenting on the inherent entertainment bias of television in Amusing Ourselves to Death, Neil Postman asserts

The problem is not that television presents us with entertaining subject matter but that all subject matter is presented as entertaining, which is another issue altogether. (p. 87)

He supports his assertion by examining the ABC program broadcast on 20 November 1983 following the controversial movie The Day After. It was billed as a serious discussion of the possibility of a nuclear holocaust, but Postman explains that it was merely entertainment dressed up as serious discussion. He concludes,

At the end, one could only applaud those performances, which is what a good television program always aims to achieve; that is to say, applause, not reflection. (p.91)

Living lives immersed in the modern television culture we cannot escape the effects of this pervasive entertainment bias. If we expect the same of a Christian worship service, God help us. And God help the pastor who seeks to conduct it in television style.

Tellingly, Postman later gives two examples of Roman Catholic priests who have sought to connect with their audiences, for so it seemed to Postman they were, rather than congregations. Greg Sakowicz summed up his approach by saying, “You don’t have to be boring in order to be holy.” (p. 93). Pointedly, Postman concluded of John J O’Connor that he “apparently believes you don’t have to be holy at all.” (p. 93)

Protestant pastors are not immune from the urge to compete with the televisual. But, given the nature of the beast, there is grave danger, for the pastor preaches not for applause but for application. Christian worship is far from a performance, and reflection is an important component in it.

And yet, the medium can be used sensitively if used carefully, as Postman himself mentions, though such programmes will make “bad television”. It strikes me that the difference is illustrated by comparing something like the BBC programme Songs of Praise on British television, and a webcast of a full traditional church service where the predominant shot is of the pulpit, with perhaps shots of the choir when they sing introits and anthems. Watching at least one such webcast each week (as well as attending my local church, I hasten to add) I have noticed how as a family we feel very much part of the congregation as we sing, recite the creed and participate in the responsive reading. However, on the rare occasions I watch Songs of Praise it always seems more entertainment as various people are interviewed, and we are subjected to gratuitous scenery or roving shots of the congregation during the singing of hymns, and have the inevitable performance of celebrity solo/group songs, many completely sub-Christian in content. Very entertaining, but hardly praise or worship.

Heartened as I am by the realisation that the technology may be used in a beneficial way, there is also a very real danger that we may attempt to make our worship services too much like television, making enjoyment the principal goal and measure of success. Perhaps many services have already become enjoyable entertainment–happy hours, rather than holy ones.

Postman concludes his chapter with a series of short descriptions illustrating of the impact of Show Business on the wider culture. He concludes,

What all of this means is that our culture has moved toward a new way of conducting its business, especially its important business. (pp. 97-98)

His insights and conclusions are surely applicable to the Church of the Living God. May we be vigilant as we conduct our important business with a holy God, that it may not be Show Business. May we not be concerned with showmanship but stewardship, “the stewardship from God that is by faith” (1Tim 1:4).

Wesley’s concern was

‘Tis all my business here below
To cry: ‘Behold the Lamb!”

That is a long way from Show Business. It is most certainly a challenge to conduct The King’s Business in the Age of Show Business.

In Amusing Ourselves to Death, Neil Postman writes,

Think of Richard Nixon or Jimmy Carter or Billy Graham, or even Albert Einstein, and what will come to your mind is an image, a picture of a face, most likely a face on a television screen (in Einstein’s case, a photograph of a face). Of words, almost nothing will come to mind. This is the difference between thinking in a word-centered culture and thinking in an image-centered culture.
Ch 4. The Typographic Mind, p 61

Postman is right, and twenty years on it is increasingly more so.

It occurred to me that Jesus Christ could be added to the list. For most people he is now a Hollywood figure along with Moses/Charlton Heston. Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ has done nothing to change that perception, for, as I understand it, Christ’s teaching played little or no part in the movie, which was largely image-centred, and graphically so.

Worshippers of the living God are forbidden to make images for worship. This is the second Word of God, for what are commonly known as the Ten Commandments are in fact the Ten Words in Hebrew. Our modern experience as outlined by the Apostle Paul shows the problem with image-centred culture. God’s command took Israel out of a worship structure which was image-centred. Nor was Egypt alone in having a well-developed image-centred worship culture, Canaan, too, had such a culture. Ancient pagan worship in general had a great element of spectacle as images were carried and mythological events reenacted in elaborate ritual drama. Such image-centred worship was specifically forbidden by God, and we would be wise if we still adhered to the prohibition.

Word-centred worship will make demands on our lifestyle, ethics and morality. Worship where the central focus is on the Word of God will have a content that may be articulated, and that must be applied to the whole of life.

If our worship becomes image-centred then it will tend toward experience. Content will become unimportant and application non-existent. Postman et al. may have uncovered this aspect of culture, but I suspect God knew the human tendency, since he had created men and women and knew how they ticked.

We deviate from word-centred worship at our peril. Image-centred worship tends to exclude the engagement of the mind as the spiritual/emotional experience becomes dominant. Word-centred worship, on the other hand, engages mind and spirit. Paul’s advice on speaking in tongue, perhaps, has some relevance here. He wished to pray with both spirit and mind (1 Cor 14:15). Word-centred worship does not exclude emotional experience, but subjects emotion to the mind, and God’s objective teaching about how worship ought to be conducted.

Postman’s observations have much wider ramifications than he could ever have imagined.

Joshua Sowin has interviewed Steve McCoy (Reformissionary blog) on reading over at Fire & Knowledge. I always enjoy finding out how and what others are reading. Steve’s a man after my own heart — never read a single book at time if seven will do. It’s so good to hear someone else say they don’t always read books all the way through either. I used to feel that was such a failure, but now I know better. Good to have confirmation from another brother.

This interview is one of a series, and I’m looking forward to reading the other interviews in the series, The Reading Interviews. As I was preparing this entry I noticed that Justin Taylor has some helpful advice on selecting books in his interview. “If people want advice on reading, one thing I’d mention is to find certain authors you trust and read as much of them as you can.” I’ve found that a particularly helpful thing over a good number of years, which is probably why my recent trip to the bookshop cost me well over £100 as I bought all of Ralph Davis’s commentaries since I enjoyed The Word Became Fresh so much (and they were discounted). I’ll let Justin tell you his list of must read authors. He also has a wonderful quote from John Owen on the differences between Christian and non-Christian knowledge in general. Very insightful.

Three influences have come together in my thinking at the moment, so let me confess them at the start:

1. A recent preaching workshop at our church where David Jackman (on video, I hasten to add, lest you receive the wrong impression) was talking about identifying each Gospel’s theme(s) (see Meeting Jesus in the Gospels, from Proclamation Trust)
2. Reading Dale Ralph Davis The Word Became Fresh (see my review for further details and links to other reviews)
3. Current studies in Numbers conducted by David Gooding

In each case, much was made of outlines of passages and books, not as ends in themselves, but as tools in understanding the themes and messages of the books. A little reflection on this led me to the conclusion that there are two types of such outlines.

The first is simply a table of contents that may be grouped into sections, but often these sections bear no real relation to the themes of the book. They can be superficial groups that may derive simply from chronology, geography or literary features of the text. This kind of outline is easy to construct, but is not without value. It tends to be the type given in most commentaries under the heading “Outline”. It is the first kind of outline to construct when one is trying to get a handle on a book. It helps to provide basic orientation of the content, but usually no more.

But the second kind of outline is the more valuable. It cannot be done without the former, or certainly not easily. If identifies sections thematically. It requires a lot of thought about how each passage is related to others in the book, particularly adjacent ones, but sometimes more distant ones. It comes from querying the text (a la Piper), or catechising the text, as many oder preachers called it. It is not a microscopic study, but a macroscopic one (a la Davis). It aims to get to the real reasons for the selection and arrangement of the book.

From this thoughtful, and often length process, we begin to identify larger sections, or movements as David Gooding calls them. It is this thoughtful outline that is really beneficial, more so than the superficial outline that can be produced by arranging the table of contents. It should never be imposed on the text, but arise from it, reflectively and meditatively.

In my experience, my reactions to the two types are, “Oh, that’s interesting” (superficial/table of contents), but “Wow! I never saw that before” (thoughtful). There is an instinctive recognition of the value of the thoughtful outline that brings the book alive, and will prove invaluable in getting to grips with the message in detail, and helping me retain it.

The maximum value of such an outline can only be received when it is accompanied by careful study of the book in question. It must be tested against the text, and sometimes it may need modification. It is an invaluable aid in the study of a Bible book, whether for preaching, teaching a Sunday School class, or for in depth personal Bible study.