I did not like this sermon. I know you realize that not all of your sermons will be well-received by everyone (and nor should they) but this one is indicative of a trend I find irritating. My irritation stems from these main points (and I’ll elaborate on each one for anyone that cares to read that much):
I. Your sermons have been shifting left of center since a little before the Seeing Gray series.
II. Man-made Global Warming is a hoax with political ties and thus an inappropriate topic with which to give religious credence.
III. You convey these somewhat left-leaning issues in ways that you’ve criticized other churches for using and in a manner I believe you would never use were the issue a conservative one.
The Seeing Gray series bothered me….a lot. I posted a fair amount on this blog at its onset and my irritation culminated with the last sermon in the series. I wrote my response 3 times and forced myself to delete each one as there was no way to put a “kind” face on it. In retrospect, I don’t know if such self-censorship was wise because this leftward trend of yours is rather persistent.
Whether you’re a Democrat or Republican doesn’t really matter to me and shouldn’t matter to anyone else. What does matter is that you realize whatever biases you have and that they do manifest themselves whenever you speak on political and controversial issues. Every time that happens, you slightly shift this church towards one political side. At the end of the day, we’re left with a church that favors one side of the political spectrum and I don’t think that’s right (in both senses of the word.)
A perfect example is man-made Global Warming. This issue is tied to the Democrat party in all sorts of ways. Al Gore, Hollywood and liberal academia are its main figureheads (which should all be red-flags but that’s another discussion). Its main objective is increased government control be it control over the car/oil/power industries or control over the individual through limiting energy consumption and taxes. Any relation to the concepts of being a good steward and moderation are so scarce that they can hardly be considered part of the issue. Nevermind that the whole thing is a hoax anyway.
Scientology has some decent goals: “a civilization without insanity, without criminals and without war, where the able can prosper and honest beings can have rights, and where man is free to rise to greater heights.”
When you start to take a deeper look at it though, you realize how absurd it all is. I can’t imagine Adam ever lending his name and gifted abilities to preaching on the merits of Scientology. Still, when I hear him preaching that our motivation for living moderately is to err on blindly accepting Global Warming I half expect to be told to reduce my engrams so my body thetan core has a better chance at reaching the planet Xenu.
To err on extremes is such a weak argument anyway. Why not build a massive missile defense shield against the threat of a large meteor impact or worldwide Avian Flu vaccines? At least with those we actually have hard evidence instead of a movement based on shame, guilt and fear.
This leads to the way in which these issues are being presented and I’ll use abortion as a comparison. If I was going to discuss abortion with a friend struggling with the issue and the only one of Adam’s sermons I’d seen was his last one, I would assume this would be an acceptable tactic:
-guilt my friend with words like “careless” and “wasteful”
-shame my friend with words like “pillaged” and “wounded” and all manner of negative statistics
-scare my friend by telling stories of women whose lives were ruined and only present information from one side
Do you think this would be the right way to approach the issue with my friend? I can draw direct parallels with each of these tactics to Adam’s sermon. The quoted words were the ones he used. The 10 warmest years stat is under debate and appears to be an error on NASA’s part…..4 of the hottest years occurred in the 1930’s. Also, 2007 was the coldest year this century and the economic toll and loss of life was much higher as a result. All that was presented was one side of the issue and I don’t believe Adam would preach this way if the issue were a conservative one. Matter of fact, Adam has largely criticized such counter-productive tactics.
I’ve been coming to this church for over 7 years, volunteering every week with SGP for 5 of those years and a member for 4. I’m hooked and Adam is truly a blessed and gifted pastor but (as I’m sure he would admit) not infallible. I think I’ve laid out my reasons for disagreeing with him in a respectful way. I thought this last sermon was wrong on a few levels and I thought Seeing Gray was largely a mistake. Whatever position someone inevitably takes, it will be viewed as extreme to someone else.
Seeing Gray is no more wrong or right than the colors Black and White,
and every bit as extreme as the positions in between.
Fabulous post. I personally have had to come to grips with the differences that Adam and I have within the political spectrum. While my preference would be that we avoid discussion of all things political within the safety of our church, I also understand just how difficult that can be at times.
I actually made the choice to avoid this past weekend’s services because of the sermon subject, although my wife attended because of a youth activity commitment (which brought me up to speed on what I had missed). That’s not a decision I make lightly—-I credit Adam Hamilton above all other worldly influences with bringing me to Christ. I love the man with all my heart and have immeasurable respect for his ability to inspire the unchurched and nominally religious. As a firmly-planted COR member, I have no plans to look elsewhere. However, moving forward, my hope is that sermons like this one remain few and far between. If Adam continues to have a strong desire to repaint the line between faith and politics, perhaps he will remember that there are multiple sides to every issue.
I have to also agree with Michael’s post above. Many of the issues he has, my wife and I had with the Seeing Gray series. For whatever reason we saw a change in tone in Adam’s sermons, beginning with the Gray series. Admittedly we were not long time members of COR, so could only base our impression on short term attendance at the church. However, when the sermon got to the poor little girl in India sleeping on the street, I believe a disclaimer should have been made that the film clip was actually taken from a G-8 summit You Tube posting (or at least that’s where we found it) and that the clip appeared to be staged for the benefit of the G-8 protesters; I mean, how frequently do you see little homeless girls sleeping on the streets of India in pressed dresses?
At any rate, we have discontinued our attendance at COR based on what we felt was becoming an overt liberal (and not too subtle) approach. I periodically lurk on this blog to see what is transpiring, but felt I had to post this note.
Have to agree with all of the above. My husband and I have been members at COR and tithers for several years…not sure if we should give anymore money to this agenda though. It’s becoming harder each week to know if we are supporting the right (or left) thing. If we have to leave, I will so sad…but it is becoming really intolerable and I personally can not attend a church that I can not support financially. I just don’t think that is right.
I’m curious – anyone out there who saw the sermon who felt differently than this? Hard for me to see how any of you could disagree with the opening point of the sermon – the theological framework for environmental concern. The world belongs to God. We should take care of it. We should not be wasteful. How we steward our resources, both individually and as a planet, matters to God. Those seem self-evident. Even the National Association of Evangelicals is saying similar things today. Likewise a host of both Republicans and Democrats, including Newt Gingrich, are agreeing that we need to set aside partisan politics and become concerned about these issues. This is not a Republican or Democratic issue. I would also say that this sermon could have been preached by Rick Warren, Bill Hybels and a host of other leading evangelicals in the United States who are saying the same things. I love you whether you agree with me on this, and I welcome your criticism, but I stand by the sermon and I do believe this is a theological and spiritual issue that is rooted and grounded in the scriptures and in God’s claim on our planet and our lives and that this is one dimension of living as followers of Jesus Christ.
First let me get my credentials out there. I have voted Republican in every election since I was of age, I am from Texas and one of the 30 percent that still like George Bush, I even still think that the Iraq Invasion was a good idea. Also I attended the most conservative seminary in Methodism and I am unapologetically an evangelical. Ok credentials finished.
Having said that, I’m baffled by the opposition to the sermon on Environmental concerns. I cannot understand how Christians of any stripe would object to a deep concern for God’s creation. I realize that certain policies and approaches will be debated from the left right perspective, but Adam’s sermon did nothing like this. He proposed that we live humble lives, not over-consuming, rejecting the materialistic mentality that has either put our planet in peril, or if you don’t believe that, imperils our own souls. Dominion and care of the earth are Biblical mandates from the very earliest words of scripture.
As for Abortion, I too an one of those that find very few areas where I believe it could be acceptable, and I have trouble even with those areas that I might think maybe it could be. Having said that – those of us who are staunchly pro-life must realize that millions of people dying in abortion clinics is only trumped in tragedy by the tens of millions dying world wide because of a lack of food, basic health care, and access to clean water. I just wish we could come to be consistently pro-life, or more importantly that we could consistently embrace ALL of the gospel as our light, guide, and blueprint of our lives.
Pastor, I think the disagreement (for me) begins and ends with the theory of man-made global warming. I’m all for maintaining a clean environment and conserving resources legitimately (within the confines of a free market), but there is a tremendous amount of evidence that is contrary to pop culture’s man-made warming hysteria. I realize—-with much frustration—-that there are some on the Right who have given in to the political pressure (Gingrich, McCain, Bush). But the environmentalist movement has always resided on the Left, where it can find willing allies who share a common hatred of capitalism (among other things).
All that being said, I love this church and everything that it has done to positively change me and my family. It occurs to me that I probably don’t have a single family member with whom I agree on all issues. Why would I expect my Pastor to be any different?
Hard for me to see how any of you could disagree with Scientology’s goals? Are we all against human rights because we’re not Scientologists? I guess we’re all racists too because we’re not members of the NAACP? Please, let’s not play that game.
There’s a lot to like about Mormonism, Islam and Buddhism too…good family structure, good prayer life, avoidance of sin but much of it gets tainted the deeper you look. I would venture to guess that 100% of the congregation agrees with the “theological framework for environmental concern” and that “the world belongs to God. We should take care of it. We should not be wasteful.” I find it curious that you could read my post and the others that followed it and come to the conclusion that we were against those things?
What I am against and what I believe taints your message and the environmental movement is (like FamilyMan said) man-made Global Warming. I’m also against tactics that guilt, shame or scare people into believing something. Tell me what emotions you sought to elicit with these phrases: “We have pillaged the earth”, “We have wounded the planet”, “We have treated this handiwork of God carelessly”, “We take the earth for granted, … it’s really an interesting play-thing for our personal enjoyment and nothing more.” Now I ask you, would you ever even think of using such phrases were you to speak at a women’s group on abortion? Would you say, “We have pillaged and wounded our bodies”, “We have treated God’s gift of childbirth carelessly”, “We take this gift for granted and view our bodies as an interesting play-thing and nothing more.”
I know you wouldn’t guilt or shame someone like this because I’ve read your chapter on abortion and have heard your sermons on it. Now abortion is a more personal issue and maybe the comparison breaks down a bit there but the tactic is hardly one I see you encouraging. I’m curious as to why you found it appropriate here? Furthermore, regarding your Seeing Gray approach to controversial issues, I don’t know how you can stand by such a one-sided sermon favoring Global Warming. Every statistic, every picture, every simplified scientific explanation gave credence to Global Warming. This is Seeing Gray?
You’re right though, Environmental concern isn’t a political issue and neither are abortion, prayer in school, evolution, gun ownership, or healthcare……in a perfect world. As you know, we don’t live in a perfect world and in this world, Democrats have laid claim to the Environmental movement. It isn’t wrong or right, it’s just fact and it would be naïve to believe otherwise.
Well said Michael. I’m sorry I didn’t say more in my previous post. I’m just so frustrated with being treated like a child when I disagree with Adam. Pastor, I know you don’t do this intentionally, but you might would do better not to read so much into our posts that isn’t there. I too believe in taking care of the earth, but not for man-made global warming. I don’t like giving out incandescent light bulbs in church (which I use but hate because they are dim and I can’t see as well with them) and I sure hope our tithe didn’t pay for them. I don’t like the indication that pampers are less wasteful than cloth diapers. If you were a baby you might feel differently about this issue, THEY KEEP YOU DRIER and diaper rash is less likely. This is silly stuff but you get my point I hope. And, if I want to keep a light on when I’m not around, it might be for a reason that doesn’t include wastefulness. Like, Thomas Kinkade (such a gifted artist and painter of light) who shared that he was inspired by a house in his neighborhood, that he used to walk by at night, he saw the lights on in the house and was drawn to that light. To him it symbolized peace and warmth. Come on, please, who are you, or anyone Pastor, to spy out my liberty in this area? NOW I feel like I have to fight against the toxic message you delivered that wants to take away that joy I have and replace it with guilt that I’m some how wasting energy if I leave a light on when I’m not in the room. UGH! Please I’m choking on this milk. We still love you too but we can not grow on this stuff…. more meat please.
OK I’ll bite. First of all, I am pro-life and yes I would say to women concerning abortion, “we have pillaged and wounded our bodies, we have treated God’s gift of childbirth carelessly,” and “we take this gift for granted.” I would also say “abortion is a permanent solution to a temporary problem,” “we have the rest of our lives to catch up financially if we have the baby and to look back on the decision we made.” I would even say “I feel it would haunt me if I had an abortion” but I have a hard time saying that around my sister because I don’t know if she’s had one and what I say might cause it to haunt her or might cause her to feel she can’t be around me lest I ever find out…so one reason I watch what I say about abortion among fellow women is you never know who’s had one and they can’t undo it and it may be haunting them. So I try to keep it to, “I am pro-life and as much as I think about it I just feel that way but I am very sorry it gets linked with other political issues I don’t support and so I don’t vote the issue because I don’t think God would punish a nation just on that one basis when there is so much evil going on that is just as evil in the name of other things.”
I am as sorry as I can be that some issues have gotten associated with one party or the other and therefore (I think) push people to associate that position with everything else that party supports. I wish there would be pro-life politicians who support more of the things I support and fewer of the things I don’t support, like pollution.
I am very sorry that the pro-life issue has gotten so linked with one party. If there were a politician who leaned a little left of center and were pro-life I would vote for him or her in a heartbeat.
In a similar fashion, I regret tremendously that the environmental issue has gotten linked with the left. I wish that would change and I think it is changing. I think some people reject the whole issue precisely because it is associated in people’s minds with government nannying and the left. I hope that is changing. One way it needs to change is that money stands to be made by new technologies being invented and built. There would be a lot of money in that. This needs to happen anyway because there’s not enough oil to last forever anyway.
I used to be one of those people who did not like to be nannied and nagged and it was kind of worse when I worked in academia. At that time I was surrounded by your worst nightmare nannying-type people and I was young. I would sometimes say things to egg on the worst of the nannying types but that was a long time ago and these issues weren’t quite so pressing.
I used to be a bit opposed to the nannying because of the type of people who nannied, but once I got away from that environment (no pun intended) and the studying I did was on my own, I ran across a book that changed my mind on the subject. It came out of a justice issue. The book said that if people in the more wealthy nations would just cut down a little, it would save ranchers in South America from cutting down the rain forest to make more rangeland.
This made me see it as a justice issue and not being nannied and told what to do by some smug type and it was more like the change in my feelings was my own decision. The book didn’t say everyone in the wealthy countries had to stop enjoying X, Y, and Z, it just pointed out that if everyone cut down a little, it would have these far-reaching benefits.
And that’s how I see environmentalism. Everyone can’t do all of the things but if a large number of people took little steps as they progressed in life and got more able, it would add up. I am very sorry that the issue has gotten the taint of nannying and this needs to change. Again, I myself used to resist certain things because of the annoying nanny types until I thought for myself and it was my own decision. I think it always has to be a person’s own decision but I hope the rhetoric changes so people aren’t reacting to perceived nannying and they view environmentalism as moving toward something positive with benefits. I really think that needs to happen.
I view it as a justice issue for our children and grandchildren.
Down around the Texas border a few years ago there was a rash of babies without brains. I think it is called anencephaly. A lot of people thought this was due to the factories that moved to Mexico right around the border where they had no government rules on pollution. I respectfully submit that those fetuses killed by pollution are just as dead as fetuses killed by abortion and that both are wrong. One was more of a collective evil and one was more of an individual evil but I see much of this as a justice issue. Why should babies born in poor countries not have enough food because….oops I’m nannying. Let me go back to, I see it as a justice issue for people not just a “let’s worship the earth” issue.
I was brought up in a strict sect that taught Social Darwinism as coming straight from the Bible and I didn’t go to church for 20 years. So young people can get turned off of church if too much social darwinism and certain similar ideologies are taught same as people can get turned off of church because of the smug nanny culture. I think today’s young people are changing back to how I was…likely to turn off of church if they hear social darwinism equated with Christianity.
Maybe whether the young people will get turned off shouldn’t matter…I came back but when I did, I searched what church didn’t preach social darwinism because I will never beleve social darwinism equals Christianity. OOOPS I am nannying probably. EEEK it’s so hard not to veer into nannying with this topic.
I do think some people take it too far and they turn people off. What needs to happen is people feel like they are moving toward something positive. I think that will start happening soon….I pray that it does!
Adam, I am puzzled about the negative remarks regarding your sermon about taking care of our environment. This is not about politics, just common sense. My parents taught me me to treat the earth with respect from the time I was old enough to be taught not to litter. Thank you Adam for speaking about a subject that is dear to my heart. As usual, Bob and I left the service uplifted and ready to face another week.
I don’t see alot wrong with the sermon though I agree with the comments on Global Warming. We could have gone deeper on the facts with that subject. Some European countrys have banned Gores’ ‘documentary’ being shown in schools unless preempted by a disclaimer citing dozens of falsehoods. But I think Adam eluded to being unsure about the Global Warming issue and added that any effort to take care of the enviroment would be beneficial.
What I might see in Adams’ sermons is not so much a leaning to the left, but a focus on world and human concerns with some scripture injected instead of Gods’ concerns with some human effects, if that makes sense. For instance we won’t produce deep Christians recycling or buying a hybird car. But me becoming deeply committed is not Adams’ job and I like his variety of subjects for the most part. If Adams’ statements on Global Warming were clearly negative I’m sure he would receive distraught mail as well.
Anytime we get away from the Gospel and the deeper studies of God controversies may be more prevalent. Personally I like studying apologetics, church history, such as creeds and fathers of the faith, lives of Puritains, and doctrines and covenents. Preparing such subjects could be very time-consuming and in a church this size I can understand if time is scarce. Teachings of any sort will drive someone away, and trying to be non-offensive might offend everyone. Maybe the issue is who not to drive away, and the remainder would dictate what kind of congregation we will be. I have faith in Adams’ theology and I will ride this train until things become humanistic therapy. I’m sorry to hear that people are leaving due to sermons. Why did you join?
Adam, I thing blogs are such a great way to keep your finger on the congregations’ pulse, especially with a church this size. I just wish more would participate so there would a wider range of views and reactions.
First let me say that I have never emailed a pastor! Also let me say that although I disagree with you sometimes, I wouldn’t trade you for anything and I am blessed to listen to you each week.
I agreed with much of your sermon. We must be stewards of God’s creation. We all can do our part to use less and conserve our natural resources. Unfortunately, this argument has spun out of control and is totally one-sided. People who don’t believe that global warming is man-made and can be fixed by government action are called ‘deniers’, as if it is appropriate to make an analogy to Holocaust deniers. To be clear, I believe the Earth is getting warmer over the last century. It has been warmer than this in the past and it has been cooler. In fact, the Earth hasn’t warmed since 1998, as evidenced in this link.
My issue is the statement that you made saying that GW is man made, caused by CO2, and is agreed upon by most of the scientific community. This is the same information fed to us by the mainstream media and is now being taught to my kids at school! Now I go to church on Sunday and hear the same story. Based on the research I have read, it is more likely that solar activity (yes, the sun!) is making the Earth .7 degrees C warmer over the last 100 years and CO2 concentrations FOLLOW increases in temperature. The media silences dissent on the issue and the natural result will be massive new government regulation, taxes, and stifling of our economy. Like the ethanol debacle, this will hurt the environment more than it helps, and (I think) more importantly as a Christian, these policies will make life more difficult for the poor.
Thank you for your sermon. I am a registered Republican and do not understand why one would not want to address the climate change issue just because some consider it ‘man made’ or not. I believe that everything that we can do to make the world a better place, not to mention a healthier place, is a topic worth discussing. Regardless as to whether the climate change issue is man made or not, additional issues including our continued overdependence on scarce fossil fuels should be enough for even the most conservative person to consider thinking about this issue. A big reason that I am a continued member at COR is that you tackle tough issues, some may seem a bit more ‘liberal’ and other times ‘conservative’. Regardless, you give us different perspectives to consider, provide your own opinion, and then leave it up to us to ponder. I really appreciate this approach.
Keep up the good work!
Thanks for your inspiring Earth Day sermon! If we, as informed inhabitants, do not tend and care for our Earth – who will? In your sermon, you challenged us to become better stewards in our home, church and community. If we take to heart these challenges and make an earnest effort to practice the 3 R’s (reducing, reusing and recycling) our environment will become a better place for us and our children and grandchildren to live. If for no other reason, we ‘owe’ our children and grandchildren this legacy.
Just sticking to the actual sermon here, which I just watched and noted carefully…
A couple of points:
#1 – He did not mention Al Gore
#2 – He did not endorse the “left” or the “right”. Understanding this sermon as an endorsement of the left, to me, is serious eisigesis.
#3 – He did not say to “blindly” follow anything. If there is one thing about COR that I have always appreciated, and hope to emulate someday soon, it is that you are discouraged from checking your brain at the door. I fail to see how taking personal steps to reduce consumption, recycle, etc, is “blindly” following anything destructive.
I tried very hard and yet failed to see anything majorly wrong with this message.
After all, he’s a pastor not a scientist. Not even the scientists can agree on this stuff. I encourage anyone to try and speak for 30+ minutes and deliver a perfect message with no errors, loaded assumptions, or other flubs. Good luck!
If you are a Christian, you are neither “left” nor “right”. You belong to an alternative kingdom that values truth regardless of the source. If you are looking for Christianity that sees the Gospel as an endorsement of your political views, you can surely find it, but may very well miss what Jesus endorsed.
Seriously, folks—–nobody’s for polluting and wasting resources! Go back and read the arguments against man-made global-warming.
I also don’t think being a Christian excludes you from having left or right political leanings any more than it keeps you from being left- or right-handed.
Interesting arguments all! As a relatively new member of COR (I joined last summer), I receive each sermon with the understanding that “we are a congregation of thinking people” (as I believe Pastor Adam puts it to all joining members). No one is expected to accept anything that is said blindly. I would not label myself as either a liberal or conservative, but my political views do lean somewhat to the right of center. Each sermon, as I understand it, is presented to provoke each of us to reach within and explore how we feel about the subject.
Personally I have greatly enjoyed this sermon series and this sermon in particular. This is not because I agree with every point that was made, but because it urged me to take a look at how I feel about it. Is global warming man-made or part of a political party’s agenda? I don’t know. Is it real? The science seems to point to yes, although I am admittedly relying on that data as I don’t have any data of my own on the subject. Do we have some kind of impact on the earth? How could we not?! Have we been charged with the great responsibility of being good stewards of God’s gift to us as humankind? No question. Who knows what will be said about our environmental efforts 20, 50 or 100 years from now? Take for example the compact flourescent light bulbs that we received after the sermon this week. What would the environmental impact be if we switched exclusively to their use? I’m not a scientist, but these things do contain mercury, and the liklihood that they would all be disposed of properly is not high. Again, allow me to stress that I don’t know the answer to any of these questions. None of us do. There simply has not been enough data gathered or time elapsed for us to know.
So, What do we do? Throw up our hands and blame Pastor Adam for ‘foisting’ ‘liberal’ views on us. That certainly would not be helpful to the world or to anyone in it. Get educated. Do your research. Reduce your impact on the environment… Not because it might lessen the impact of global warming or because Pastor Adam says to or even because Al Gore makes movies about it. Do it because it is the correct thing to do. Do it because we are charged with stewardship of this earth. Do it because if you don’t and you are wrong there will, by the time we know it for sure, be no return.
Maybe your efforts are something as small as reducing the number of plastic bags or other unnecessary wasteful consuption. I doubt anyone could disagree with the benefits of that. I personally work in an office that becomes less and less reliant on paper every day (among many other environmental initiatives). I am astounded at the reduction in the amount of paper we purchase and the volume of trash we produce (the small amount of paper that we do dispose of is recycled).
I’m not trying to convince anyone that I’m right or Pastor Adam is right, but it’s undeniable that something must be done, not to save our earth, but to make it a better place to live.
Finally, ask your kids. I can tell you for a fact that they understand the importance conservation. They will be the ones who pay for our mistakes after all. I think you’d be surprised at how strongly most of them feel about that.
This is a cool website – I think it’s neat to see people chatting about Pastor Adam’s sermons and about events taking place at COR!
I thought I’d throw my two cents into this subject…
I was kind of surprised after I heard this entire sermon. I knew from the previews and with Earth Day coming up, the sermon was going to have an “envrionmental” feel, but I was surprised to see how much it focused on global warming. I for one am skeptical about man-made global warming. It could be true, but I also am wary of man’s actual impact compared to the immense size of the Earth.
For the first time in any sermon I have heard from COR, I really felt like there was a bias! Pastor Adam normally goes out of his way to be impartial and to “see gray” on a subject. I have a lot of respect for that and can definitely see how Jesus combined both the “religious right” and “religious left” into his ministry. I think Pastor Adam truly is as moderate as they come overall, but definitely leans left when it comes to the subject of global warming – that’s fine, but I was just surprised by how definite he was on what is a truly debatable topic!
I did not like how statistic after statistic was rattled off to try to show how greedy and wasteful we are. I believe that the truly better argument for conserving resources is that it’s simply the right thing to do, both economically and environmentally.
I think this sermon would’ve been more universally approved had it not of focused on global warming, but on the importance of practicing moderation in life. The sermon series is about simple truths in life… talking about how we need to practice moderation (at our job, with our hobbies, with our busy schedules etc.) seems like a much more valuable life lesson than discussing what we can to save the planet from warming more than 1 degree per decade!
I hope that this summer, COR does a sermon series on lessons from a specific set of stories in the Bible (like they did last summer with the kings of the old testament). I love discussing politics and simple truths in life, but I think they should be balanced with sermons that teach us more about the Bible! That book has so much history and tradition in it, I need all the lessons I can get!
Still, keep up the good work Pastor Adam… your sermon has made people think – I believe that’s what you are trying to do!! I am truly blessed to be able to attend such a wonderfully run church!
I think most people desire to feel relevant, do some good in the world, and to believe in something bigger than them. A potential danger in the global warming movement is that it can satisfy the aforementioned needs, but become a substitute for a person’s religion or faith. In other words, a person worships and spends more free time concerned about the creation rather than learning about the Creator.
I’d prefer a COR member prioritize and make a concentrated effort to pray, study the Bible, worship and grow in his/her relationship with the Lord, tutor an inner city child, take an elderly person to the grocery store, have a genuine and respectful conversation with a homeless person more than recycle, use cloth grocery sacks, buy a hybrid, use a cork screw light bulb, and on and on and on…
I can hear your response through my computer. People can do all of those things. Unfortunately, when saving the planet becomes an obsession and substitute for your religion, it may leave little time, commitment, priority, and need for pursuing your faith. Further, when this message comes from Pastor Hamilton and the pulpit, it may encourage some COR members to be satisfied in doing the “green things” first or in place of devoting precious free time to praying, Bible study, fellowship with other Christians, worship, serving others and growing in the faith.
In addition, I’m not a big fan of increased government control, admin., and taxation. The global warming movement or hoax has the potential to increase all three.
As an aside, thanks to Pastor Hamilton for starting this blog and participating in it. I appreciate his willingness to listen to respectful feedback and to address current issues in the context of what the Bible teaches. I worked for a large KC company in which the CEO did not welcome honest feedback from the employees, management or the Board. In 10 years, the company was run into the ground and sold. The emperor had no clue that he was missing important pieces of clothing. Our family is grateful that Adam teaches the scripture in a way that is appealing and thought provoking with stories and examples that are poignant, occasionally humorous and always illuminating.
COR may want to invite a critical and respectful blogger to serve on the Advisory Board. I hear that before Ewing Kauffman funded an important project, he required the strongest advocate and fiercest critic to debate the issues in his office. I think that openness to constructive feedback is the mark of a healthy and thriving organization.
Wow! Where do I begin? One blogger is convinced we are a leftist plot of some kind. I wonder if that person has noticed the advertisements recently where Nancy Pelosi and Newt Gingrich say they don’t agree on much but they do agree that climate change needs to be addressed? Has Newt become a leftist? How about the 140 employers in the Kansas City area that have signed the Chamber of Commerce Climate Protection Partnership? Some of the largest employers in the area are on that list, which you can see for yourself on the Chamber website. How about the 20 local cities and counties that have signed a similar agreement? All leftists? How about Chicago and New York being two of the greenest cities in the country? Why would all of these companies and organizations be committed to this? Because they believe climate change is real and they believe we might be able to stop it or at least minimize the impacts.
Whether you believe in climate change or not, the suggested activities save you money. Is that a leftist plot too?
As for Messenger who thinks we should be doing other things for the church because we desire to feel relevant, what an arrogant statement. It reminds me of the Pharisees. I believe she or he would find that most of us already are, in addition to spending time trying to clean up God’s earth.
As for Adam’s sermon, I think he did an excellent job of avoiding what I thought would be controversial statements. Maybe any statement can be controversial for some people.
Keep up the good work Adam.
Its fine to agree or disagree about somethings but perspective is needed. It is not about if anyone one of US “liked” the sermon. We must discuss whether GOD liked it. Was there anything unbiblical? Did it glorify and honor Him? Was the Gospel proclaimed to where someone could hear it, and through the grace of become become saved? These are things we should think about when we hear any sermon.
I have to say, Wesleyite made, probably, the best point of all – and I might even add that I would think it important for a sermon to be inspired by the Holy Spirit. God knows what is in each and every heart of those sitting in the pews and in our Pastor’s heart. When the Word is preached, it is to those that do not know Him, it is to those that are struggling with whether they can trust Him enough so they can make that commitment, and to those who want, desperately, to know Him better and want to know how to do that. When we love God, all the “works” fall into place because we want to please Him (just like anyone we love)…and often, we show that through our actions. But, the actions are irrelevant if we don’t know Him.
I also heard several, different, underlying, concerns. Perhaps, the mention of “global warming” triggered feelings and thoughts that could be continued to be expressed on another blog, such as, “Do we believe we are noticing a change in Pastor Adams’ sermons, writings, feelings, etc.” or “Does anyone believe the church seems to be leaning more to the left than it did 5 years ago?” Perhaps those subjects are at some of the heart (in addition to the points already made about the “facts” concerning “global warming” brought forth by Pastor Adam as being accepted mostly by “leftists”)of the bloggers’ cooncerns. Maybe the subject of environmental concerns wasn’t really what was bothering the bloggers as much as what Michael had been experiencing over the past few months and some as long as the past 5 years. Perhaps it is because of these concerns that some of the folks seemed more sensitive to the issues discussed.
So, if Pastor Adam were to utilize (and maybe he already does?)the “criteria” set forth by “Wesleyite”, for future sermons, hopefully he would become more aware of what would distract from the focus of what he believed God wanted us to hear. I am all for making the Bible relevant to my life today, but I don’t necessarily grow closer to Him through some of the sermons…and find much of the same topics in many of the sermons being shared by “self help guru’s”. There should be a difference between what the average person says about overcoming a problem or challenge we face and what a Pastor says, or rather, what a Pastor allows the Holy Spirit to say through him.
I’ve reread what I have written, but am unsure whether I succeeded in expressing my thoughts clearly enough. I know Pastor Adam loves the Lord. Only Pastor Adam knows what motivates him or inspires him to write a sermon. As a congregation, I think everyone has the responsibility to pray for him that God guide him in that delivery, topic, etc…
Adam has always talked from a viewpoint that being a Methodist does not mean checking your brain at the door.
It disturbed me that he attempted to use stats to claim everyone believes in Global Warming.
Well guess I no longer fit the COR mold.
Just reviewed the November 1976 National Geographic that outlines the case for Global Cooling.Only recently has the media abandoned the “global cooling ” scare.
The 1990’s being the hottest record on record –oops forget the hundreds of Soviet Union’s Artic Stations that did not report in the second set of data or no stats are used from the Southern Hemisphere ( which is getting cooler ).
Adam used his Alaska trip to show the receding Glacier — A recent study ( American Meteorological Society ) shows global warming is causing some glaciers to grow -warmer winters and cooler summers –bringing increased precipitation causing some glaciers to grow in size.
My point being I expect to be guided and inspired to follow God’s direction for Man -being a good steward of the earth and all creatures in it ( including man ).
I felt an agenda was being pushed — and one I’m not in agreement with.Should this cause me to leave COR — Maybe
We need to get our perspective back –There are more pressing problems in the world- hunger,poverty,and disease.We can help more people at a lower cost which a higher chance of success versus pursuing drastic climate policies at a cost of trillions of dollars.
Being a Good Steward of the Earth — God’s Agenda for man
Pushing -Global Warming Myths — Man’s politacally driven agenda.
I respect Adam’s personal viewpoints that go beyond Biblical teachings — just don’t expect them driven from the pulpit — love he is willing to see the world as not black and white- example Seeing Gray Book etc .
Do not shy from difficult subjects ( not in his nature ) but ask that he realize he pushes a personal bias that is not in the middle for all — and does not help in the path for leading us to becme more deeply committed Christians — COR numbers seem to show record numbers of new members — the rate of those dropping off (increasing ? )
This is my first time of posting a comment on this blog, or any blog. It is just my reflections after reading many of the comments on the blog for the last couple of months.
It’s not really a response to any specific posting, or any particular point of view, although I guess it is mostly concerning blog postings about sermons, as opposed to blog postings about other topics or conversations. Anyway, it is just my reflections, and I hope it will be useful in some way.
Sermons are not, in general, just statements of positions that we, the congregation, are to react to, in the way we might react to someone’s comments in a conversation or a debate or discussion, as in ‘you make your point, then I will react to that point and agree or disagree with your point’.
Sermons are (intended to be) messages that cause us to reflect on, and respond to, what we hear God speaking to us. The pastor tries to listen to the Holy Spirit (God working in and through us) to discern what the Holy Spirit (God) would want His people to hear, reflect on, and then possibly act on. Which could be in terms of doing something different in the way we live our lives or even possibly some specific action, whether it be reading the Bible more, or bringing our kids to Sunday School, or participating in some activity at church, or being kind to a neighbor, or reaching out to a not-so-near neighbor in another part of the city or the world to help them in some way.
So when we listen to a sermon, it is not just about us reacting to what we hear – as in, I agree with that point, I disagree with another point, I am upset over another point, etc.
We should also reflect on why we are reacting. What is this speaking to in me that I should react this way? Why do I disagree with X? Why am I upset about Y? Why do I find one thing encouraging but another thing upsetting? What is it in me that gives rise to this reaction? What am I attached to? What aspect of my normal, worldly self is this message speaking to? Am I more attached to my thoughts and reactions or some aspect of my normal (worldly) self than I am open to the message that God may be trying to speak to me? What is God trying to say to me through this?
Just as in reading Scripture, I’m not reading Scripture in order to evaluate Scripture, but to let it speak to me, to try to hear what God is trying to say to me through the Scripture, and this might lead to a change in my thoughts or my actions.
Similarly with a sermon. This is why we traditionally say that the pastor is ‘preaching the Word’, that is, the Word of God. The pastor is intending and trying to speak a Word that he or she discerns God speaking to him or her, and to the congregation. Of course, no human pastor can perfectly do this, but this is the intent. So, sometimes a sermon speaks to me in a way that I don’t agree with. Is this an issue of the sermon or me? The first question is, what is God trying to say to me through the sermon, which of course can and will be different for each different person, but that is still the question.
Just my reflections on the whole blog process. I think a blog is for the purpose of expressing our point of view, agreeing or disagreeing with someone else’s point of view, perhaps just to explain our thoughts, or to persuade someone else to agree with our point of view. Of course, God can speak to us through any event, conversation or happening in our lives, and we are to be open to that as Christians, but that is not the usual rationale or intent of a blog. But it is the rationale and intent of every sermon.
Going back to the point I made in my original post. Rev. hamilton seemed to have missed a big opportunity in his sermon. He could have used the pollution etc.. of the earth that mankind has done to show how man takes what God does and does not do His will as an example of our sinful nature. This would have provided a nice segway for Rev.Hamilton to pronounce the Gospel. Did he though? I didn’t hear any of that. Why doesn’t he let those who hear him know that we all are sinful and need to repent and put our faith and trust in Jesus as lord and savior. He did ask people to pray for forgiveness about the creation steweardship issue, but not about the issue that each person faces and that is our position before God as sinners. John Wesley I’m sure got topical at times, but his main goal was the soul’s of people and their need for salvation. The problem with sometimes that churches have is they assume people in the doors who become members actually are Christians. Churches need to not only do “evanglism” to non-christians, but they need to “Re-vangelize” to those who have been in churches for years. BTW I am copywriting re-vangelize…
“One can ask what might it take to have an agriculture that does not degrade the soils, a fishery that does not deplete the ocean, a forestry that keeps watersheds and ecosystems intact, population policies that respect human sexuality and personalyity while holding numbers down and energy policies that do not set off fierce little wars. These are the key questions worth our lifetimes and more.”
Gary Snyder (Pulitzer Prize in poetry, 1975
The politically charged/pseudo-religious posts in this blog defy the Biblical teachings to love one another and to steward the Earth we live in, on, under and over.
My, My, My… Don’t we take oursleves seriously? Leaving the church, refusing to tithe, pointing and accusations. Adam always brings points forward that I hadn’t thought about and leaves me to make up my own mind as I take his words of encouragement and faith out into the workweek and try to do God’s will. Left, right, man-made…. Is this anything new? The unholey, actions man has brought agains his brothers, PLEASE! In “MY Fathers World” he faught in WWII to give me a better place to live and assure me freedom of speech and religion, left, right, even abortion if my God allows. You can’t win the abortion debate … It’s as personal as the millions of us who live on this earth. Keep you opionion to yourself. I beleive as a human we are bound by GOD to leave things at least as we found them if we’re lazy and better than we found them IF we care. And last but not least not take ourself so seriously that we can stand firm on anything but Gods’ word.
The problem is that not everything is a mater of “seeing grey”. In fact God is very much black and white about certain things. take murder for example, he is against it. Take stealing, he is against it. Take lying, same there. There are things we don’t get the option of “deciding” on. Scripture gives us specific rules, and on issues without specifics it gives us principles to go by and those are set as well and we can’t abandon the principles scripture gives us in regards to dealing with other issues.
Not to argue with you Wesleyite, not at all. BUT, should we then go back to the old testement? Become something other than Methodist? Quite frankly I lean toward the Jewish way of life. They all have their points.
I believe anyone, anywhere that worships in faith even if it’s not mine is striving for the same thing we all are reaching out for, to walk the path toward the light of God as we know him. I for one am more than willing to bow my head with the next believer in respect of his beliefs.
If someone worships anything other than the triune God of the Bible: God the Father, God the Son (Jesus Christ) and God the Holy Spirit, then no matter how sincere they worship in vain and in fact are guilty of idolatry. Whats weird is that modern Christians and even pastors shy away from this so as not to offend people. Which is worse, someone being offended by pointing out to them they worship a false God, or them going to hell? There are certain things we don’t get options on. Such as, who God is, how to follow that God, what salvation is etc.. Something we do get choice on, say the style of music at church, or what we would like to wear to church etc… Those are vastly different however and to group them in the same “oh lets everyboyd be convinced in their own mind” is dangerous when someone thinks it fits for everything.
I don’t know Wesleyite? Does God judge us on the basis of what we know? or what we do with what we know? I’m all for doctrine, that is not worshiping a false God, but if a person doesn’t know who God is, I think the scriptures are clear that he is judged based on what he does with what he DOES know. Doesn’t Romans say “apart from the law there is no sin”. I don’t know, maybe I’m all washed up here, but that’s just how I understand it.
“You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart. I will be found by you,” declares the LORD.”
-Jeremiah 29:13-14
“The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.”
Romans 1:18-20
Those who honestly seek God will find Him. Those who seek a God, but only a God that suits them will find that too. One is Truth, the other is false. This is basic stuff, however a lot of UM pastors and pastors in other denominations have abandoned solid theology for man-centered teachings.
W, I think we’re talking about two different things here. What do you think the Holy Spirit means by ’seek’ in Jeremiah? In the NT, the Holy Spirit through Paul says “no man seeks God”. Again, I don’t think it’s about theology, what can be known about God is vast and good, but it’s more about the heart than the head. Just my thoughts.
39 Comment(s)
Michael Hagerman | Apr 23, 2008 | Reply
Pastor Adam,
I did not like this sermon. I know you realize that not all of your sermons will be well-received by everyone (and nor should they) but this one is indicative of a trend I find irritating. My irritation stems from these main points (and I’ll elaborate on each one for anyone that cares to read that much):
I. Your sermons have been shifting left of center since a little before the Seeing Gray series.
II. Man-made Global Warming is a hoax with political ties and thus an inappropriate topic with which to give religious credence.
III. You convey these somewhat left-leaning issues in ways that you’ve criticized other churches for using and in a manner I believe you would never use were the issue a conservative one.
The Seeing Gray series bothered me….a lot. I posted a fair amount on this blog at its onset and my irritation culminated with the last sermon in the series. I wrote my response 3 times and forced myself to delete each one as there was no way to put a “kind” face on it. In retrospect, I don’t know if such self-censorship was wise because this leftward trend of yours is rather persistent.
Whether you’re a Democrat or Republican doesn’t really matter to me and shouldn’t matter to anyone else. What does matter is that you realize whatever biases you have and that they do manifest themselves whenever you speak on political and controversial issues. Every time that happens, you slightly shift this church towards one political side. At the end of the day, we’re left with a church that favors one side of the political spectrum and I don’t think that’s right (in both senses of the word.)
A perfect example is man-made Global Warming. This issue is tied to the Democrat party in all sorts of ways. Al Gore, Hollywood and liberal academia are its main figureheads (which should all be red-flags but that’s another discussion). Its main objective is increased government control be it control over the car/oil/power industries or control over the individual through limiting energy consumption and taxes. Any relation to the concepts of being a good steward and moderation are so scarce that they can hardly be considered part of the issue. Nevermind that the whole thing is a hoax anyway.
Scientology has some decent goals: “a civilization without insanity, without criminals and without war, where the able can prosper and honest beings can have rights, and where man is free to rise to greater heights.”
When you start to take a deeper look at it though, you realize how absurd it all is. I can’t imagine Adam ever lending his name and gifted abilities to preaching on the merits of Scientology. Still, when I hear him preaching that our motivation for living moderately is to err on blindly accepting Global Warming I half expect to be told to reduce my engrams so my body thetan core has a better chance at reaching the planet Xenu.
To err on extremes is such a weak argument anyway. Why not build a massive missile defense shield against the threat of a large meteor impact or worldwide Avian Flu vaccines? At least with those we actually have hard evidence instead of a movement based on shame, guilt and fear.
This leads to the way in which these issues are being presented and I’ll use abortion as a comparison. If I was going to discuss abortion with a friend struggling with the issue and the only one of Adam’s sermons I’d seen was his last one, I would assume this would be an acceptable tactic:
-guilt my friend with words like “careless” and “wasteful”
-shame my friend with words like “pillaged” and “wounded” and all manner of negative statistics
-scare my friend by telling stories of women whose lives were ruined and only present information from one side
Do you think this would be the right way to approach the issue with my friend? I can draw direct parallels with each of these tactics to Adam’s sermon. The quoted words were the ones he used. The 10 warmest years stat is under debate and appears to be an error on NASA’s part…..4 of the hottest years occurred in the 1930’s. Also, 2007 was the coldest year this century and the economic toll and loss of life was much higher as a result. All that was presented was one side of the issue and I don’t believe Adam would preach this way if the issue were a conservative one. Matter of fact, Adam has largely criticized such counter-productive tactics.
I’ve been coming to this church for over 7 years, volunteering every week with SGP for 5 of those years and a member for 4. I’m hooked and Adam is truly a blessed and gifted pastor but (as I’m sure he would admit) not infallible. I think I’ve laid out my reasons for disagreeing with him in a respectful way. I thought this last sermon was wrong on a few levels and I thought Seeing Gray was largely a mistake. Whatever position someone inevitably takes, it will be viewed as extreme to someone else.
Seeing Gray is no more wrong or right than the colors Black and White,
and every bit as extreme as the positions in between.
-Michael
FamilyMan | Apr 23, 2008 | Reply
Michael,
Fabulous post. I personally have had to come to grips with the differences that Adam and I have within the political spectrum. While my preference would be that we avoid discussion of all things political within the safety of our church, I also understand just how difficult that can be at times.
I actually made the choice to avoid this past weekend’s services because of the sermon subject, although my wife attended because of a youth activity commitment (which brought me up to speed on what I had missed). That’s not a decision I make lightly—-I credit Adam Hamilton above all other worldly influences with bringing me to Christ. I love the man with all my heart and have immeasurable respect for his ability to inspire the unchurched and nominally religious. As a firmly-planted COR member, I have no plans to look elsewhere. However, moving forward, my hope is that sermons like this one remain few and far between. If Adam continues to have a strong desire to repaint the line between faith and politics, perhaps he will remember that there are multiple sides to every issue.
Gray.
lonestar | Apr 23, 2008 | Reply
I have to also agree with Michael’s post above. Many of the issues he has, my wife and I had with the Seeing Gray series. For whatever reason we saw a change in tone in Adam’s sermons, beginning with the Gray series. Admittedly we were not long time members of COR, so could only base our impression on short term attendance at the church. However, when the sermon got to the poor little girl in India sleeping on the street, I believe a disclaimer should have been made that the film clip was actually taken from a G-8 summit You Tube posting (or at least that’s where we found it) and that the clip appeared to be staged for the benefit of the G-8 protesters; I mean, how frequently do you see little homeless girls sleeping on the streets of India in pressed dresses?
At any rate, we have discontinued our attendance at COR based on what we felt was becoming an overt liberal (and not too subtle) approach. I periodically lurk on this blog to see what is transpiring, but felt I had to post this note.
Northstar | Apr 24, 2008 | Reply
Have to agree with all of the above. My husband and I have been members at COR and tithers for several years…not sure if we should give anymore money to this agenda though. It’s becoming harder each week to know if we are supporting the right (or left) thing. If we have to leave, I will so sad…but it is becoming really intolerable and I personally can not attend a church that I can not support financially. I just don’t think that is right.
Adam | Apr 24, 2008 | Reply
I’m curious – anyone out there who saw the sermon who felt differently than this? Hard for me to see how any of you could disagree with the opening point of the sermon – the theological framework for environmental concern. The world belongs to God. We should take care of it. We should not be wasteful. How we steward our resources, both individually and as a planet, matters to God. Those seem self-evident. Even the National Association of Evangelicals is saying similar things today. Likewise a host of both Republicans and Democrats, including Newt Gingrich, are agreeing that we need to set aside partisan politics and become concerned about these issues. This is not a Republican or Democratic issue. I would also say that this sermon could have been preached by Rick Warren, Bill Hybels and a host of other leading evangelicals in the United States who are saying the same things. I love you whether you agree with me on this, and I welcome your criticism, but I stand by the sermon and I do believe this is a theological and spiritual issue that is rooted and grounded in the scriptures and in God’s claim on our planet and our lives and that this is one dimension of living as followers of Jesus Christ.
chuckrussell | Apr 24, 2008 | Reply
Hey Folks,
First let me get my credentials out there. I have voted Republican in every election since I was of age, I am from Texas and one of the 30 percent that still like George Bush, I even still think that the Iraq Invasion was a good idea. Also I attended the most conservative seminary in Methodism and I am unapologetically an evangelical. Ok credentials finished.
Having said that, I’m baffled by the opposition to the sermon on Environmental concerns. I cannot understand how Christians of any stripe would object to a deep concern for God’s creation. I realize that certain policies and approaches will be debated from the left right perspective, but Adam’s sermon did nothing like this. He proposed that we live humble lives, not over-consuming, rejecting the materialistic mentality that has either put our planet in peril, or if you don’t believe that, imperils our own souls. Dominion and care of the earth are Biblical mandates from the very earliest words of scripture.
As for Abortion, I too an one of those that find very few areas where I believe it could be acceptable, and I have trouble even with those areas that I might think maybe it could be. Having said that – those of us who are staunchly pro-life must realize that millions of people dying in abortion clinics is only trumped in tragedy by the tens of millions dying world wide because of a lack of food, basic health care, and access to clean water. I just wish we could come to be consistently pro-life, or more importantly that we could consistently embrace ALL of the gospel as our light, guide, and blueprint of our lives.
FamilyMan | Apr 24, 2008 | Reply
Pastor, I think the disagreement (for me) begins and ends with the theory of man-made global warming. I’m all for maintaining a clean environment and conserving resources legitimately (within the confines of a free market), but there is a tremendous amount of evidence that is contrary to pop culture’s man-made warming hysteria. I realize—-with much frustration—-that there are some on the Right who have given in to the political pressure (Gingrich, McCain, Bush). But the environmentalist movement has always resided on the Left, where it can find willing allies who share a common hatred of capitalism (among other things).
All that being said, I love this church and everything that it has done to positively change me and my family. It occurs to me that I probably don’t have a single family member with whom I agree on all issues. Why would I expect my Pastor to be any different?
Northstar | Apr 24, 2008 | Reply
Ok Pastor, you can stand by your sermon. What I’ve noticed is that you ALWAYS
Northstar | Apr 24, 2008 | Reply
do that.
Michael Hagerman | Apr 24, 2008 | Reply
Hard for me to see how any of you could disagree with Scientology’s goals? Are we all against human rights because we’re not Scientologists? I guess we’re all racists too because we’re not members of the NAACP? Please, let’s not play that game.
There’s a lot to like about Mormonism, Islam and Buddhism too…good family structure, good prayer life, avoidance of sin but much of it gets tainted the deeper you look. I would venture to guess that 100% of the congregation agrees with the “theological framework for environmental concern” and that “the world belongs to God. We should take care of it. We should not be wasteful.” I find it curious that you could read my post and the others that followed it and come to the conclusion that we were against those things?
What I am against and what I believe taints your message and the environmental movement is (like FamilyMan said) man-made Global Warming. I’m also against tactics that guilt, shame or scare people into believing something. Tell me what emotions you sought to elicit with these phrases: “We have pillaged the earth”, “We have wounded the planet”, “We have treated this handiwork of God carelessly”, “We take the earth for granted, … it’s really an interesting play-thing for our personal enjoyment and nothing more.” Now I ask you, would you ever even think of using such phrases were you to speak at a women’s group on abortion? Would you say, “We have pillaged and wounded our bodies”, “We have treated God’s gift of childbirth carelessly”, “We take this gift for granted and view our bodies as an interesting play-thing and nothing more.”
I know you wouldn’t guilt or shame someone like this because I’ve read your chapter on abortion and have heard your sermons on it. Now abortion is a more personal issue and maybe the comparison breaks down a bit there but the tactic is hardly one I see you encouraging. I’m curious as to why you found it appropriate here? Furthermore, regarding your Seeing Gray approach to controversial issues, I don’t know how you can stand by such a one-sided sermon favoring Global Warming. Every statistic, every picture, every simplified scientific explanation gave credence to Global Warming. This is Seeing Gray?
You’re right though, Environmental concern isn’t a political issue and neither are abortion, prayer in school, evolution, gun ownership, or healthcare……in a perfect world. As you know, we don’t live in a perfect world and in this world, Democrats have laid claim to the Environmental movement. It isn’t wrong or right, it’s just fact and it would be naïve to believe otherwise.
Northstar | Apr 24, 2008 | Reply
Well said Michael. I’m sorry I didn’t say more in my previous post. I’m just so frustrated with being treated like a child when I disagree with Adam. Pastor, I know you don’t do this intentionally, but you might would do better not to read so much into our posts that isn’t there. I too believe in taking care of the earth, but not for man-made global warming. I don’t like giving out incandescent light bulbs in church (which I use but hate because they are dim and I can’t see as well with them) and I sure hope our tithe didn’t pay for them. I don’t like the indication that pampers are less wasteful than cloth diapers. If you were a baby you might feel differently about this issue, THEY KEEP YOU DRIER and diaper rash is less likely. This is silly stuff but you get my point I hope. And, if I want to keep a light on when I’m not around, it might be for a reason that doesn’t include wastefulness. Like, Thomas Kinkade (such a gifted artist and painter of light) who shared that he was inspired by a house in his neighborhood, that he used to walk by at night, he saw the lights on in the house and was drawn to that light. To him it symbolized peace and warmth. Come on, please, who are you, or anyone Pastor, to spy out my liberty in this area? NOW I feel like I have to fight against the toxic message you delivered that wants to take away that joy I have and replace it with guilt that I’m some how wasting energy if I leave a light on when I’m not in the room. UGH! Please I’m choking on this milk. We still love you too but we can not grow on this stuff…. more meat please.
Canopus | Apr 24, 2008 | Reply
OK I’ll bite. First of all, I am pro-life and yes I would say to women concerning abortion, “we have pillaged and wounded our bodies, we have treated God’s gift of childbirth carelessly,” and “we take this gift for granted.” I would also say “abortion is a permanent solution to a temporary problem,” “we have the rest of our lives to catch up financially if we have the baby and to look back on the decision we made.” I would even say “I feel it would haunt me if I had an abortion” but I have a hard time saying that around my sister because I don’t know if she’s had one and what I say might cause it to haunt her or might cause her to feel she can’t be around me lest I ever find out…so one reason I watch what I say about abortion among fellow women is you never know who’s had one and they can’t undo it and it may be haunting them. So I try to keep it to, “I am pro-life and as much as I think about it I just feel that way but I am very sorry it gets linked with other political issues I don’t support and so I don’t vote the issue because I don’t think God would punish a nation just on that one basis when there is so much evil going on that is just as evil in the name of other things.”
I am as sorry as I can be that some issues have gotten associated with one party or the other and therefore (I think) push people to associate that position with everything else that party supports. I wish there would be pro-life politicians who support more of the things I support and fewer of the things I don’t support, like pollution.
I am very sorry that the pro-life issue has gotten so linked with one party. If there were a politician who leaned a little left of center and were pro-life I would vote for him or her in a heartbeat.
In a similar fashion, I regret tremendously that the environmental issue has gotten linked with the left. I wish that would change and I think it is changing. I think some people reject the whole issue precisely because it is associated in people’s minds with government nannying and the left. I hope that is changing. One way it needs to change is that money stands to be made by new technologies being invented and built. There would be a lot of money in that. This needs to happen anyway because there’s not enough oil to last forever anyway.
I used to be one of those people who did not like to be nannied and nagged and it was kind of worse when I worked in academia. At that time I was surrounded by your worst nightmare nannying-type people and I was young. I would sometimes say things to egg on the worst of the nannying types but that was a long time ago and these issues weren’t quite so pressing.
I used to be a bit opposed to the nannying because of the type of people who nannied, but once I got away from that environment (no pun intended) and the studying I did was on my own, I ran across a book that changed my mind on the subject. It came out of a justice issue. The book said that if people in the more wealthy nations would just cut down a little, it would save ranchers in South America from cutting down the rain forest to make more rangeland.
This made me see it as a justice issue and not being nannied and told what to do by some smug type and it was more like the change in my feelings was my own decision. The book didn’t say everyone in the wealthy countries had to stop enjoying X, Y, and Z, it just pointed out that if everyone cut down a little, it would have these far-reaching benefits.
And that’s how I see environmentalism. Everyone can’t do all of the things but if a large number of people took little steps as they progressed in life and got more able, it would add up. I am very sorry that the issue has gotten the taint of nannying and this needs to change. Again, I myself used to resist certain things because of the annoying nanny types until I thought for myself and it was my own decision. I think it always has to be a person’s own decision but I hope the rhetoric changes so people aren’t reacting to perceived nannying and they view environmentalism as moving toward something positive with benefits. I really think that needs to happen.
I view it as a justice issue for our children and grandchildren.
Down around the Texas border a few years ago there was a rash of babies without brains. I think it is called anencephaly. A lot of people thought this was due to the factories that moved to Mexico right around the border where they had no government rules on pollution. I respectfully submit that those fetuses killed by pollution are just as dead as fetuses killed by abortion and that both are wrong. One was more of a collective evil and one was more of an individual evil but I see much of this as a justice issue. Why should babies born in poor countries not have enough food because….oops I’m nannying. Let me go back to, I see it as a justice issue for people not just a “let’s worship the earth” issue.
I was brought up in a strict sect that taught Social Darwinism as coming straight from the Bible and I didn’t go to church for 20 years. So young people can get turned off of church if too much social darwinism and certain similar ideologies are taught same as people can get turned off of church because of the smug nanny culture. I think today’s young people are changing back to how I was…likely to turn off of church if they hear social darwinism equated with Christianity.
Maybe whether the young people will get turned off shouldn’t matter…I came back but when I did, I searched what church didn’t preach social darwinism because I will never beleve social darwinism equals Christianity. OOOPS I am nannying probably. EEEK it’s so hard not to veer into nannying with this topic.
I do think some people take it too far and they turn people off. What needs to happen is people feel like they are moving toward something positive. I think that will start happening soon….I pray that it does!
bregan | Apr 24, 2008 | Reply
Adam, I am puzzled about the negative remarks regarding your sermon about taking care of our environment. This is not about politics, just common sense. My parents taught me me to treat the earth with respect from the time I was old enough to be taught not to litter. Thank you Adam for speaking about a subject that is dear to my heart. As usual, Bob and I left the service uplifted and ready to face another week.
Peace
Brenda
cokey | Apr 24, 2008 | Reply
I don’t see alot wrong with the sermon though I agree with the comments on Global Warming. We could have gone deeper on the facts with that subject. Some European countrys have banned Gores’ ‘documentary’ being shown in schools unless preempted by a disclaimer citing dozens of falsehoods. But I think Adam eluded to being unsure about the Global Warming issue and added that any effort to take care of the enviroment would be beneficial.
What I might see in Adams’ sermons is not so much a leaning to the left, but a focus on world and human concerns with some scripture injected instead of Gods’ concerns with some human effects, if that makes sense. For instance we won’t produce deep Christians recycling or buying a hybird car. But me becoming deeply committed is not Adams’ job and I like his variety of subjects for the most part. If Adams’ statements on Global Warming were clearly negative I’m sure he would receive distraught mail as well.
Anytime we get away from the Gospel and the deeper studies of God controversies may be more prevalent. Personally I like studying apologetics, church history, such as creeds and fathers of the faith, lives of Puritains, and doctrines and covenents. Preparing such subjects could be very time-consuming and in a church this size I can understand if time is scarce. Teachings of any sort will drive someone away, and trying to be non-offensive might offend everyone. Maybe the issue is who not to drive away, and the remainder would dictate what kind of congregation we will be. I have faith in Adams’ theology and I will ride this train until things become humanistic therapy. I’m sorry to hear that people are leaving due to sermons. Why did you join?
Adam, I thing blogs are such a great way to keep your finger on the congregations’ pulse, especially with a church this size. I just wish more would participate so there would a wider range of views and reactions.
Bryan | Apr 24, 2008 | Reply
Pastor Adam:
First let me say that I have never emailed a pastor! Also let me say that although I disagree with you sometimes, I wouldn’t trade you for anything and I am blessed to listen to you each week.
I agreed with much of your sermon. We must be stewards of God’s creation. We all can do our part to use less and conserve our natural resources. Unfortunately, this argument has spun out of control and is totally one-sided. People who don’t believe that global warming is man-made and can be fixed by government action are called ‘deniers’, as if it is appropriate to make an analogy to Holocaust deniers. To be clear, I believe the Earth is getting warmer over the last century. It has been warmer than this in the past and it has been cooler. In fact, the Earth hasn’t warmed since 1998, as evidenced in this link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=216v5AoQcFQ
My issue is the statement that you made saying that GW is man made, caused by CO2, and is agreed upon by most of the scientific community. This is the same information fed to us by the mainstream media and is now being taught to my kids at school! Now I go to church on Sunday and hear the same story. Based on the research I have read, it is more likely that solar activity (yes, the sun!) is making the Earth .7 degrees C warmer over the last 100 years and CO2 concentrations FOLLOW increases in temperature. The media silences dissent on the issue and the natural result will be massive new government regulation, taxes, and stifling of our economy. Like the ethanol debacle, this will hurt the environment more than it helps, and (I think) more importantly as a Christian, these policies will make life more difficult for the poor.
Thanks for listening.
Alysia | Apr 24, 2008 | Reply
Pastor Adam,
Thank you for your sermon. I am a registered Republican and do not understand why one would not want to address the climate change issue just because some consider it ‘man made’ or not. I believe that everything that we can do to make the world a better place, not to mention a healthier place, is a topic worth discussing. Regardless as to whether the climate change issue is man made or not, additional issues including our continued overdependence on scarce fossil fuels should be enough for even the most conservative person to consider thinking about this issue. A big reason that I am a continued member at COR is that you tackle tough issues, some may seem a bit more ‘liberal’ and other times ‘conservative’. Regardless, you give us different perspectives to consider, provide your own opinion, and then leave it up to us to ponder. I really appreciate this approach.
Keep up the good work!
tr | Apr 24, 2008 | Reply
Pastor Hamilton,
Thank You for the informative message…and for challenging us to look at how we live our lives.
I am always blessed by your sermons. Thank You.
ron royer | Apr 25, 2008 | Reply
Pastor Adam:
Thanks for your inspiring Earth Day sermon! If we, as informed inhabitants, do not tend and care for our Earth – who will? In your sermon, you challenged us to become better stewards in our home, church and community. If we take to heart these challenges and make an earnest effort to practice the 3 R’s (reducing, reusing and recycling) our environment will become a better place for us and our children and grandchildren to live. If for no other reason, we ‘owe’ our children and grandchildren this legacy.
Ron
jnoble5826 | Apr 25, 2008 | Reply
Just sticking to the actual sermon here, which I just watched and noted carefully…
A couple of points:
#1 – He did not mention Al Gore
#2 – He did not endorse the “left” or the “right”. Understanding this sermon as an endorsement of the left, to me, is serious eisigesis.
#3 – He did not say to “blindly” follow anything. If there is one thing about COR that I have always appreciated, and hope to emulate someday soon, it is that you are discouraged from checking your brain at the door. I fail to see how taking personal steps to reduce consumption, recycle, etc, is “blindly” following anything destructive.
I tried very hard and yet failed to see anything majorly wrong with this message.
After all, he’s a pastor not a scientist. Not even the scientists can agree on this stuff. I encourage anyone to try and speak for 30+ minutes and deliver a perfect message with no errors, loaded assumptions, or other flubs. Good luck!
If you are a Christian, you are neither “left” nor “right”. You belong to an alternative kingdom that values truth regardless of the source. If you are looking for Christianity that sees the Gospel as an endorsement of your political views, you can surely find it, but may very well miss what Jesus endorsed.
FamilyMan | Apr 25, 2008 | Reply
Seriously, folks—–nobody’s for polluting and wasting resources! Go back and read the arguments against man-made global-warming.
I also don’t think being a Christian excludes you from having left or right political leanings any more than it keeps you from being left- or right-handed.
dan_williams | Apr 25, 2008 | Reply
Interesting arguments all! As a relatively new member of COR (I joined last summer), I receive each sermon with the understanding that “we are a congregation of thinking people” (as I believe Pastor Adam puts it to all joining members). No one is expected to accept anything that is said blindly. I would not label myself as either a liberal or conservative, but my political views do lean somewhat to the right of center. Each sermon, as I understand it, is presented to provoke each of us to reach within and explore how we feel about the subject.
Personally I have greatly enjoyed this sermon series and this sermon in particular. This is not because I agree with every point that was made, but because it urged me to take a look at how I feel about it. Is global warming man-made or part of a political party’s agenda? I don’t know. Is it real? The science seems to point to yes, although I am admittedly relying on that data as I don’t have any data of my own on the subject. Do we have some kind of impact on the earth? How could we not?! Have we been charged with the great responsibility of being good stewards of God’s gift to us as humankind? No question. Who knows what will be said about our environmental efforts 20, 50 or 100 years from now? Take for example the compact flourescent light bulbs that we received after the sermon this week. What would the environmental impact be if we switched exclusively to their use? I’m not a scientist, but these things do contain mercury, and the liklihood that they would all be disposed of properly is not high. Again, allow me to stress that I don’t know the answer to any of these questions. None of us do. There simply has not been enough data gathered or time elapsed for us to know.
So, What do we do? Throw up our hands and blame Pastor Adam for ‘foisting’ ‘liberal’ views on us. That certainly would not be helpful to the world or to anyone in it. Get educated. Do your research. Reduce your impact on the environment… Not because it might lessen the impact of global warming or because Pastor Adam says to or even because Al Gore makes movies about it. Do it because it is the correct thing to do. Do it because we are charged with stewardship of this earth. Do it because if you don’t and you are wrong there will, by the time we know it for sure, be no return.
Maybe your efforts are something as small as reducing the number of plastic bags or other unnecessary wasteful consuption. I doubt anyone could disagree with the benefits of that. I personally work in an office that becomes less and less reliant on paper every day (among many other environmental initiatives). I am astounded at the reduction in the amount of paper we purchase and the volume of trash we produce (the small amount of paper that we do dispose of is recycled).
I’m not trying to convince anyone that I’m right or Pastor Adam is right, but it’s undeniable that something must be done, not to save our earth, but to make it a better place to live.
Finally, ask your kids. I can tell you for a fact that they understand the importance conservation. They will be the ones who pay for our mistakes after all. I think you’d be surprised at how strongly most of them feel about that.
jjbjhawk | Apr 26, 2008 | Reply
This is a cool website – I think it’s neat to see people chatting about Pastor Adam’s sermons and about events taking place at COR!
I thought I’d throw my two cents into this subject…
I was kind of surprised after I heard this entire sermon. I knew from the previews and with Earth Day coming up, the sermon was going to have an “envrionmental” feel, but I was surprised to see how much it focused on global warming. I for one am skeptical about man-made global warming. It could be true, but I also am wary of man’s actual impact compared to the immense size of the Earth.
For the first time in any sermon I have heard from COR, I really felt like there was a bias! Pastor Adam normally goes out of his way to be impartial and to “see gray” on a subject. I have a lot of respect for that and can definitely see how Jesus combined both the “religious right” and “religious left” into his ministry. I think Pastor Adam truly is as moderate as they come overall, but definitely leans left when it comes to the subject of global warming – that’s fine, but I was just surprised by how definite he was on what is a truly debatable topic!
I did not like how statistic after statistic was rattled off to try to show how greedy and wasteful we are. I believe that the truly better argument for conserving resources is that it’s simply the right thing to do, both economically and environmentally.
I think this sermon would’ve been more universally approved had it not of focused on global warming, but on the importance of practicing moderation in life. The sermon series is about simple truths in life… talking about how we need to practice moderation (at our job, with our hobbies, with our busy schedules etc.) seems like a much more valuable life lesson than discussing what we can to save the planet from warming more than 1 degree per decade!
I hope that this summer, COR does a sermon series on lessons from a specific set of stories in the Bible (like they did last summer with the kings of the old testament). I love discussing politics and simple truths in life, but I think they should be balanced with sermons that teach us more about the Bible! That book has so much history and tradition in it, I need all the lessons I can get!
Still, keep up the good work Pastor Adam… your sermon has made people think – I believe that’s what you are trying to do!! I am truly blessed to be able to attend such a wonderfully run church!
Messenger | Apr 26, 2008 | Reply
I think most people desire to feel relevant, do some good in the world, and to believe in something bigger than them. A potential danger in the global warming movement is that it can satisfy the aforementioned needs, but become a substitute for a person’s religion or faith. In other words, a person worships and spends more free time concerned about the creation rather than learning about the Creator.
I’d prefer a COR member prioritize and make a concentrated effort to pray, study the Bible, worship and grow in his/her relationship with the Lord, tutor an inner city child, take an elderly person to the grocery store, have a genuine and respectful conversation with a homeless person more than recycle, use cloth grocery sacks, buy a hybrid, use a cork screw light bulb, and on and on and on…
I can hear your response through my computer. People can do all of those things. Unfortunately, when saving the planet becomes an obsession and substitute for your religion, it may leave little time, commitment, priority, and need for pursuing your faith. Further, when this message comes from Pastor Hamilton and the pulpit, it may encourage some COR members to be satisfied in doing the “green things” first or in place of devoting precious free time to praying, Bible study, fellowship with other Christians, worship, serving others and growing in the faith.
In addition, I’m not a big fan of increased government control, admin., and taxation. The global warming movement or hoax has the potential to increase all three.
As an aside, thanks to Pastor Hamilton for starting this blog and participating in it. I appreciate his willingness to listen to respectful feedback and to address current issues in the context of what the Bible teaches. I worked for a large KC company in which the CEO did not welcome honest feedback from the employees, management or the Board. In 10 years, the company was run into the ground and sold. The emperor had no clue that he was missing important pieces of clothing. Our family is grateful that Adam teaches the scripture in a way that is appealing and thought provoking with stories and examples that are poignant, occasionally humorous and always illuminating.
COR may want to invite a critical and respectful blogger to serve on the Advisory Board. I hear that before Ewing Kauffman funded an important project, he required the strongest advocate and fiercest critic to debate the issues in his office. I think that openness to constructive feedback is the mark of a healthy and thriving organization.
David | Apr 27, 2008 | Reply
Wow! Where do I begin? One blogger is convinced we are a leftist plot of some kind. I wonder if that person has noticed the advertisements recently where Nancy Pelosi and Newt Gingrich say they don’t agree on much but they do agree that climate change needs to be addressed? Has Newt become a leftist? How about the 140 employers in the Kansas City area that have signed the Chamber of Commerce Climate Protection Partnership? Some of the largest employers in the area are on that list, which you can see for yourself on the Chamber website. How about the 20 local cities and counties that have signed a similar agreement? All leftists? How about Chicago and New York being two of the greenest cities in the country? Why would all of these companies and organizations be committed to this? Because they believe climate change is real and they believe we might be able to stop it or at least minimize the impacts.
Whether you believe in climate change or not, the suggested activities save you money. Is that a leftist plot too?
As for Messenger who thinks we should be doing other things for the church because we desire to feel relevant, what an arrogant statement. It reminds me of the Pharisees. I believe she or he would find that most of us already are, in addition to spending time trying to clean up God’s earth.
As for Adam’s sermon, I think he did an excellent job of avoiding what I thought would be controversial statements. Maybe any statement can be controversial for some people.
Keep up the good work Adam.
Northstar | Apr 28, 2008 | Reply
Personally, I feel Messenger made a valid point. And that point was certainly NOT arrogant.
Wesleyite | May 1, 2008 | Reply
Its fine to agree or disagree about somethings but perspective is needed. It is not about if anyone one of US “liked” the sermon. We must discuss whether GOD liked it. Was there anything unbiblical? Did it glorify and honor Him? Was the Gospel proclaimed to where someone could hear it, and through the grace of become become saved? These are things we should think about when we hear any sermon.
Sandy | May 2, 2008 | Reply
I have to say, Wesleyite made, probably, the best point of all – and I might even add that I would think it important for a sermon to be inspired by the Holy Spirit. God knows what is in each and every heart of those sitting in the pews and in our Pastor’s heart. When the Word is preached, it is to those that do not know Him, it is to those that are struggling with whether they can trust Him enough so they can make that commitment, and to those who want, desperately, to know Him better and want to know how to do that. When we love God, all the “works” fall into place because we want to please Him (just like anyone we love)…and often, we show that through our actions. But, the actions are irrelevant if we don’t know Him.
I also heard several, different, underlying, concerns. Perhaps, the mention of “global warming” triggered feelings and thoughts that could be continued to be expressed on another blog, such as, “Do we believe we are noticing a change in Pastor Adams’ sermons, writings, feelings, etc.” or “Does anyone believe the church seems to be leaning more to the left than it did 5 years ago?” Perhaps those subjects are at some of the heart (in addition to the points already made about the “facts” concerning “global warming” brought forth by Pastor Adam as being accepted mostly by “leftists”)of the bloggers’ cooncerns. Maybe the subject of environmental concerns wasn’t really what was bothering the bloggers as much as what Michael had been experiencing over the past few months and some as long as the past 5 years. Perhaps it is because of these concerns that some of the folks seemed more sensitive to the issues discussed.
So, if Pastor Adam were to utilize (and maybe he already does?)the “criteria” set forth by “Wesleyite”, for future sermons, hopefully he would become more aware of what would distract from the focus of what he believed God wanted us to hear. I am all for making the Bible relevant to my life today, but I don’t necessarily grow closer to Him through some of the sermons…and find much of the same topics in many of the sermons being shared by “self help guru’s”. There should be a difference between what the average person says about overcoming a problem or challenge we face and what a Pastor says, or rather, what a Pastor allows the Holy Spirit to say through him.
I’ve reread what I have written, but am unsure whether I succeeded in expressing my thoughts clearly enough. I know Pastor Adam loves the Lord. Only Pastor Adam knows what motivates him or inspires him to write a sermon. As a congregation, I think everyone has the responsibility to pray for him that God guide him in that delivery, topic, etc…
bakbike | May 3, 2008 | Reply
Adam has always talked from a viewpoint that being a Methodist does not mean checking your brain at the door.
It disturbed me that he attempted to use stats to claim everyone believes in Global Warming.
Well guess I no longer fit the COR mold.
Just reviewed the November 1976 National Geographic that outlines the case for Global Cooling.Only recently has the media abandoned the “global cooling ” scare.
The 1990’s being the hottest record on record –oops forget the hundreds of Soviet Union’s Artic Stations that did not report in the second set of data or no stats are used from the Southern Hemisphere ( which is getting cooler ).
Adam used his Alaska trip to show the receding Glacier — A recent study ( American Meteorological Society ) shows global warming is causing some glaciers to grow -warmer winters and cooler summers –bringing increased precipitation causing some glaciers to grow in size.
My point being I expect to be guided and inspired to follow God’s direction for Man -being a good steward of the earth and all creatures in it ( including man ).
I felt an agenda was being pushed — and one I’m not in agreement with.Should this cause me to leave COR — Maybe
We need to get our perspective back –There are more pressing problems in the world- hunger,poverty,and disease.We can help more people at a lower cost which a higher chance of success versus pursuing drastic climate policies at a cost of trillions of dollars.
Being a Good Steward of the Earth — God’s Agenda for man
Pushing -Global Warming Myths — Man’s politacally driven agenda.
I respect Adam’s personal viewpoints that go beyond Biblical teachings — just don’t expect them driven from the pulpit — love he is willing to see the world as not black and white- example Seeing Gray Book etc .
Do not shy from difficult subjects ( not in his nature ) but ask that he realize he pushes a personal bias that is not in the middle for all — and does not help in the path for leading us to becme more deeply committed Christians — COR numbers seem to show record numbers of new members — the rate of those dropping off (increasing ? )
dougcurts | May 3, 2008 | Reply
This is my first time of posting a comment on this blog, or any blog. It is just my reflections after reading many of the comments on the blog for the last couple of months.
It’s not really a response to any specific posting, or any particular point of view, although I guess it is mostly concerning blog postings about sermons, as opposed to blog postings about other topics or conversations. Anyway, it is just my reflections, and I hope it will be useful in some way.
Sermons are not, in general, just statements of positions that we, the congregation, are to react to, in the way we might react to someone’s comments in a conversation or a debate or discussion, as in ‘you make your point, then I will react to that point and agree or disagree with your point’.
Sermons are (intended to be) messages that cause us to reflect on, and respond to, what we hear God speaking to us. The pastor tries to listen to the Holy Spirit (God working in and through us) to discern what the Holy Spirit (God) would want His people to hear, reflect on, and then possibly act on. Which could be in terms of doing something different in the way we live our lives or even possibly some specific action, whether it be reading the Bible more, or bringing our kids to Sunday School, or participating in some activity at church, or being kind to a neighbor, or reaching out to a not-so-near neighbor in another part of the city or the world to help them in some way.
So when we listen to a sermon, it is not just about us reacting to what we hear – as in, I agree with that point, I disagree with another point, I am upset over another point, etc.
We should also reflect on why we are reacting. What is this speaking to in me that I should react this way? Why do I disagree with X? Why am I upset about Y? Why do I find one thing encouraging but another thing upsetting? What is it in me that gives rise to this reaction? What am I attached to? What aspect of my normal, worldly self is this message speaking to? Am I more attached to my thoughts and reactions or some aspect of my normal (worldly) self than I am open to the message that God may be trying to speak to me? What is God trying to say to me through this?
Just as in reading Scripture, I’m not reading Scripture in order to evaluate Scripture, but to let it speak to me, to try to hear what God is trying to say to me through the Scripture, and this might lead to a change in my thoughts or my actions.
Similarly with a sermon. This is why we traditionally say that the pastor is ‘preaching the Word’, that is, the Word of God. The pastor is intending and trying to speak a Word that he or she discerns God speaking to him or her, and to the congregation. Of course, no human pastor can perfectly do this, but this is the intent. So, sometimes a sermon speaks to me in a way that I don’t agree with. Is this an issue of the sermon or me? The first question is, what is God trying to say to me through the sermon, which of course can and will be different for each different person, but that is still the question.
Just my reflections on the whole blog process. I think a blog is for the purpose of expressing our point of view, agreeing or disagreeing with someone else’s point of view, perhaps just to explain our thoughts, or to persuade someone else to agree with our point of view. Of course, God can speak to us through any event, conversation or happening in our lives, and we are to be open to that as Christians, but that is not the usual rationale or intent of a blog. But it is the rationale and intent of every sermon.
Wesleyite | May 3, 2008 | Reply
Going back to the point I made in my original post. Rev. hamilton seemed to have missed a big opportunity in his sermon. He could have used the pollution etc.. of the earth that mankind has done to show how man takes what God does and does not do His will as an example of our sinful nature. This would have provided a nice segway for Rev.Hamilton to pronounce the Gospel. Did he though? I didn’t hear any of that. Why doesn’t he let those who hear him know that we all are sinful and need to repent and put our faith and trust in Jesus as lord and savior. He did ask people to pray for forgiveness about the creation steweardship issue, but not about the issue that each person faces and that is our position before God as sinners. John Wesley I’m sure got topical at times, but his main goal was the soul’s of people and their need for salvation. The problem with sometimes that churches have is they assume people in the doors who become members actually are Christians. Churches need to not only do “evanglism” to non-christians, but they need to “Re-vangelize” to those who have been in churches for years. BTW I am copywriting re-vangelize…
codeemax | May 4, 2008 | Reply
“One can ask what might it take to have an agriculture that does not degrade the soils, a fishery that does not deplete the ocean, a forestry that keeps watersheds and ecosystems intact, population policies that respect human sexuality and personalyity while holding numbers down and energy policies that do not set off fierce little wars. These are the key questions worth our lifetimes and more.”
Gary Snyder (Pulitzer Prize in poetry, 1975
The politically charged/pseudo-religious posts in this blog defy the Biblical teachings to love one another and to steward the Earth we live in, on, under and over.
HC Palmer
JaneB | May 4, 2008 | Reply
My, My, My… Don’t we take oursleves seriously? Leaving the church, refusing to tithe, pointing and accusations. Adam always brings points forward that I hadn’t thought about and leaves me to make up my own mind as I take his words of encouragement and faith out into the workweek and try to do God’s will. Left, right, man-made…. Is this anything new? The unholey, actions man has brought agains his brothers, PLEASE! In “MY Fathers World” he faught in WWII to give me a better place to live and assure me freedom of speech and religion, left, right, even abortion if my God allows. You can’t win the abortion debate … It’s as personal as the millions of us who live on this earth. Keep you opionion to yourself. I beleive as a human we are bound by GOD to leave things at least as we found them if we’re lazy and better than we found them IF we care. And last but not least not take ourself so seriously that we can stand firm on anything but Gods’ word.
Wesleyite | May 5, 2008 | Reply
The problem is that not everything is a mater of “seeing grey”. In fact God is very much black and white about certain things. take murder for example, he is against it. Take stealing, he is against it. Take lying, same there. There are things we don’t get the option of “deciding” on. Scripture gives us specific rules, and on issues without specifics it gives us principles to go by and those are set as well and we can’t abandon the principles scripture gives us in regards to dealing with other issues.
JaneB | May 5, 2008 | Reply
Not to argue with you Wesleyite, not at all. BUT, should we then go back to the old testement? Become something other than Methodist? Quite frankly I lean toward the Jewish way of life. They all have their points.
I believe anyone, anywhere that worships in faith even if it’s not mine is striving for the same thing we all are reaching out for, to walk the path toward the light of God as we know him. I for one am more than willing to bow my head with the next believer in respect of his beliefs.
Wesleyite | May 5, 2008 | Reply
If someone worships anything other than the triune God of the Bible: God the Father, God the Son (Jesus Christ) and God the Holy Spirit, then no matter how sincere they worship in vain and in fact are guilty of idolatry. Whats weird is that modern Christians and even pastors shy away from this so as not to offend people. Which is worse, someone being offended by pointing out to them they worship a false God, or them going to hell? There are certain things we don’t get options on. Such as, who God is, how to follow that God, what salvation is etc.. Something we do get choice on, say the style of music at church, or what we would like to wear to church etc… Those are vastly different however and to group them in the same “oh lets everyboyd be convinced in their own mind” is dangerous when someone thinks it fits for everything.
Northstar | May 6, 2008 | Reply
I don’t know Wesleyite? Does God judge us on the basis of what we know? or what we do with what we know? I’m all for doctrine, that is not worshiping a false God, but if a person doesn’t know who God is, I think the scriptures are clear that he is judged based on what he does with what he DOES know. Doesn’t Romans say “apart from the law there is no sin”. I don’t know, maybe I’m all washed up here, but that’s just how I understand it.
Wesleyite | May 6, 2008 | Reply
“You will seek me and find me when you seek me with all your heart. I will be found by you,” declares the LORD.”
-Jeremiah 29:13-14
“The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.”
Romans 1:18-20
Those who honestly seek God will find Him. Those who seek a God, but only a God that suits them will find that too. One is Truth, the other is false. This is basic stuff, however a lot of UM pastors and pastors in other denominations have abandoned solid theology for man-centered teachings.
Northstar | May 6, 2008 | Reply
W, I think we’re talking about two different things here. What do you think the Holy Spirit means by ’seek’ in Jeremiah? In the NT, the Holy Spirit through Paul says “no man seeks God”. Again, I don’t think it’s about theology, what can be known about God is vast and good, but it’s more about the heart than the head. Just my thoughts.
Northstar | May 6, 2008 | Reply
What I’m trying to say is that I think a man can know God in his heart before he knows him in his head. But only God is the judge of the heart.