It was slightly unsettling how many of their suggestions hit home for me. And yet, there is a lot of good advice here as well.
Three things that really stood out to me:
Stop preaching for your seminary professors.* Turn around, and let the gallery shape and influence you, but preach for your particular congregation.
You are not in an audition, so quit seeking immediate praise for the job you’ve done. Start feeding the sheep.
Content cannot trump communication… and if you’re passionless, you are changing the content, because you’re saying, “Its not important to me.”
Watch the whole thing:
*Side note: At first I disagreed with Tullian’s remark, because I think it is so important to preach with your profs and the “cloud of witnesses” in mind when preparing and delivering the Word of the Lord. But then his remarks from his editor clarified what he meant, and I really appreciate the illustration.
SC got a lot of great one liners in, including a terrific set up for his last line. Though the entire show is on the chin, it was also a profound demonstration that something ≠ nothing. Further, the way Krauss was willing to speak in hushed/awed tones of “what we now know from quantum mechanics,” it is easy to see everyone worships something (and has presuppositions to boot).
The nuns taught us there were two ways through life—the way of nature and the way of grace. You have to choose which one you’ll follow… Grace doesn’t try to please itself. Accepts being slighted, forgotten, disliked. Accepts insults and injuries… Nature only wants to please itself. Get others to please it too. Likes to lord it over them. To have its own way. It finds reasons to be unhappy when all the world is shining around it. And love is smiling through all things… They taught us that no one who loves the way of grace ever comes to a bad end.
I don’t agree with everything from the Milton Friedman-U of C school of thought. In fact, there are parts even in this brief segment that I have strong reservations about.
But is anyone strong enough to disagree with his opening assertion?
There is a fundamental economic law – which has never been contradicted to the best of my knowledge – and that is that if you pay more for something, there will tend to be more of that something available. If the amount you are willing to pay for anything goes up, somehow or other, somebody will supply more of that thing.
We have made immoral behavior far more profitable. We have, in the course of the changes in our society, been establishing greater and greater incentives on people to behave in ways that most of us regard as immoral.
If this is correct, how may this insight be applied to current moral challenges?