How Do You Define "Watered Down" Preaching?

[Rick Schworer]

I agree it should be the focus, but how do you know which books of the Bible were inspired? Roman Catholicism has 73 books; Protestantism has 66 books; Greek and Russian Orthodox Churches have 79 books; Eastern, Ethiopian and Syriac Orthodox Churches have 81 books. Where did God speak which books were in the Bible you read?

I am not trying to be argumentative, just merely trying to solidify your position a little.

A friend of mine answered this in another forum and did an excellent job, here it is....



Luke 24:44 And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the LAW of Moses, and in the PROPHETS, and in the PSALMS, concerning me.

In this verse, Jesus Christ Himself, reveals the three divisions of the Old Testament. They are the Law (also called the Pentateuch), the Prophets (including the historical books), and the Psalms (also called the writings). They are alternately known in the Jewish Masoretic Old Testament as the Torah, the Nevi'im, and the Kethuvim.

Every book in the Masoretic OT, and the KJV OT, fits into one of those three divisions.

http://www.jewfaq.org/torah.htm

TORAH (The Law):

· Berei****h (In the beginning...) (Genesis)
· Shemoth (The names...) (Exodus)
· Vayiqra (And He called...) (Leviticus)
· Bamidbar (In the wilderness...) (Numbers)
· Devarim (The words...) (Deuteronomy)

NEVI'IM (The Prophets):

· Yehoshua (Joshua)
· Shoftim (Judges)
· Shmuel (I & II Samuel)
· Melakhim (I & II Kings)
· Yeshayah (Isaiah)
· Yirmyah (Jeremiah)
· Yechezqel (Ezekiel)
· The Twelve (treated as one book)
· Hoshea (Hosea)
· Yoel (Joel)
· Amos
· Ovadyah (Obadiah)
· Yonah (Jonah)
· Mikhah (Micah)
· Nachum
· Chavaqquq (Habbakkuk)
· Tzefanyah (Zephaniah)
· Chaggai
· Zekharyah (Zechariah)
· Malakhi

KETHUVIM (The Psalms or Writings):

· Tehillim (Psalms)
· Mishlei (Proverbs)
· Iyov (Job)
· Shir Ha-Shirim (Song of Songs)
· Ruth
· Eikhah (Lamentations)
· Qoheleth (the author's name) (Ecclesiastes)
· Esther
· Daniel
· Ezra & Nechemyah (Nehemiah) (treated as one book)
· Divrei Ha-Yamim (The words of the days) (I & II Chronicles)

There are a few books missing from this list - the APOCRYPHA. The apocryphal books were not considered to be part of Jewish scripture, nor are they part of the KJV OT. They were not considered OT scripture according to Jesus Christ Himself, when He gave the standard divisions in Luke 24:44. In order to accept the apocrypha, one must disagree with the traditional Jewish Old Testament, the King James Bible, and Jesus Christ.

[Athanasius]

That's just funny, I don't care who you are...

I think my biggest concern with these opinions about watered down preaching and web sites that don't allow the truth to be heard goes something like this:

If a follower of Christ embraces the very thing (sin) that our Savior died on the cross for, then the body of Christ, the church, should act to help that person understand the consequences of sin. Can't quote you exact scripture and this is a generalization for the sake of brevity. Please have a look at 1 Corinthians for the biblical basis (and let me know if you think I have missed something!

I believe you're thinking of 1 Corinthians 5, you might also have Matthew 18 in mind. I believe the church should actually go further than you suggest. If the person understands the consequences of the sin and continues in it, they should be removed from the body.

It follows that those who are outside the body of Christ, who have not accepted Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior and who have not agreed to the implications said acceptance has on our behavior, are NOT to be judged. They should instead be loved by Christians as oustiders.

You got it!

Practicly speaking, I think we must learn to understand that when we stand in judgement of people who have not accepted our way of life, we push them in the opposite direction...away from the Lord. Reach out to them with Christ's love. Bring them into the church. Then lovingly help them overcome the sin that has controlled their lives and limited their potential.

If more churches got this right, so many more people would be saved. I'm just sayin'...

"Love thy neighbour as thyself"--one of the hardest commandments ever uttered.

I need to check this site more often, I get distracted and it's hard to keep up!

It's okay, I completely forgot about this thread.

The Council of Trent (1545-1564) was Rome's answer to the Reformation. In it they listed all the protestant doctrines, and declared those that believe in them to be "anathema" - which means damned. That's the church's official stand still today.

As far as what Protestants believe, well, I'm not interested really.

The RCC is very norrow minded and bigoted on who gets into heaven and who doesn't. I believe there are plenty of Catholics going to Heaven, just like there are many Protestants and Baptists going as well. Church membership is not a pre-requisite to salvation, it is by faith only.

Well then I have something of an interesting experience. If that's still the church's "official stand," I haven't experienced it in practice (outside of my lovely grandmother). I certainly haven't experienced it in my reading of Catholic theologians, especially those who converted from Protestantism to Catholicism (i.e. Peter Kreeft). As for what Protestants believe, I think it should be something that interests you. Catholics condemn Protestants on the one hand, and Protestants condemn Catholics on the other. Of course, not all Catholics and not all Protestants do this, but it's been my experience that this is largely the case.

The Council of Trent declares that if you're not a Catholic you're going to Hell.

My grandmother declared that a few times, quite seriously. I'm probably going to be accused of playing games... I think that Catholics who believe this, simply because I'm Protestant, are missing the point. So I'm probably guilty of appealing to a very specialized segment of Catholicism--those who aren't missing the point.

The focus of the Catholic organization, not necessarily the common everyday Catholic, has certainly not been on Jesus. It has been on obtaining power by any means possible. As far as the Catholic cheerleaders you've been reading, of course they're going to try to paint a pretty picture.

Try reading some works by the following authors:

Edmund Paris
Avro Manhattan
Charles Chiniquy
Ralph Woodrow
Alexander Hyslop
Ex-Jesuit Alberto Rivera's tesimony (Jack Chick Publications)
John Foxe

I'll add them to my list, and will probably get around to reading a few of them. However... I'd have difficulty starting "objectively". Knowing their position beforehand, I'm going to go into the work believing they've missed the point.

Sure, Protestants have killed their thousands, and Catholics their ten thousands. More like millions.

And Calvin said, "it was all ordained" Hopefully you aren't Calvinist....

I think the Catholic Church's bloody hands are extremely divissive, and wrong. Pointing it out is doing a service to mankind.

That's fine. As long as they preach Jesus, I'll work with them.

[Firefighter]

A friend of mine answered this in another forum and did an excellent job, here it is....

But aren't you adding to the list by adding "including historical books" and "also called the writings" and hence adding to what scripture says??? There is nothing prophetic about 1 & 2 Kings or the other writings for that matter... Nor are there any Psalms in Malachi. Not to mention the fact that there is absolutely no mention of the NT canon.

[Rick Schworer]

And Calvin said, "it was all ordained" Hopefully you aren't Calvinist....

I'm a Baptist, my forefathers were getting killed by the Catholics and the Protestants. However, there are so many types of Baptists out there, so to be more specific I'm a Bible believing Independent Baptist.

That's fine. As long as they preach Jesus, I'll work with them.

But there are many false Christs(Matt. 24:24), and we're commanded not to fellowship with those that abide not in the doctine of Christ(II John). I'll work with anyone, to a certain degree, that teaches the true Christ. Nazarenes, Charasmatics, and many Protestants teach a Jesus Christ of the Bible. That He is the Son of God, God manifested in the flesh, and that whosover believeth upon Him shall be saved. I don't agree on many of the particulars, and so I wouldn't be a member of their churches, but from what I understand of them their organizations still preach the correct Gospel.

However, JWs teach that He's a created god, or that He's Michael the Archangel; Mormons teach that He had to develop to become God. Would you work with them? They preach Jesus. Do you draw a line anywhere, or do you accept any organization that names the name of Christ to be good?


Matt. 24:24, "For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect."

II John 1:9-11, "Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. "10": If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: "11": For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds."

[Bandit]

This seemed like a common issue people seem to have with mega churches, but I am having trouble understanding what people mean when they say the preaching in Mega Churches (or any church) is "watered down".

As before, in the interest of full disclosure, I have to say I am a member of a very large church so I do have a bias(www.northpoint.org). Andy Stanley is my pastor.

My observation of the preaching has been that it is very thorough and biblically based. Andy and the rest of his pastoral team dig into the Greek and the Hebrew to aid in explanation of principles in scripture. they provides extensive information on the commonly understand cultural context in both the New and Old Testament teachings. I am having a hard time understanding what is watered down about that.

Any thoughts?

Hello Sea Pony,

This is a tough topic. I would agree with the sentiment that every large church has made certain compromises in order to become what they are. Or at least what they have become is directly related to the compromises they have made. And since every teacher justifies what he teaches, it should come as no surprise that the “watered-down” teachers do the same. This does not mean that all mega-churches are bad, but it does mean that you will need to be discerning concerning what is taught, for they will teach a mixed-bag of stuff. And it does not mean that one can’t find the real Jesus at such churches, for many do, but what also happens is that because of the watered down teaching, many others deceive themselves and will be found to have come up short at the final judgement.

In my opinion, the most common compromise is the “watering-down” of what it means to be "saved." This leads to teachings which reduce salvation to a one-time “profession” of faith, or to the act of baptism, or to any other human action that can be viewed as completed in the past. This then feeds into the false doctrine of once saved always saved, in which a person is told that once they “got it” they “can’t loose it.” That is probably the single most common sign that one is in a “watered-down” church. Another people-pleaser is the pre-trib rapture teaching.

If your church teaches any of these: salvation by mere momentary profession of faith, once saved always saved, or pre-trib rapture, then you are in a watered-down church. And I am not saying you should leave, but be aware that you are being taught a mixed bag of truth and lies, but the more of these your church teaches, the more careful you need to be. It doesn’t mean that the teachers are insincere, just that they themselves have been deceived on a number of important biblical issues. (But then, that is normally a requirement to ascend to a position of leadership in most churches. One must agree with the political powers that be if one wants to be a political player - that is a part of the road of compromise.)

[Gilligan]

My definition is preaching that is not close.

[gringo300]

Watered down preaching, in my opinion, includes stating that salvation involves the ADDITION of something GOOD (which in and of itself is true), but failing to state that salvation also involves the SUBTRACTION of something BAD.

[kay-gee]

To me watered down preahing is a gospel that does not contain the water...Acts 2:38.

all the best...

[Flashlight]

Well I am a preacher...

1. We are commanded in scripture (1 Corinthians 5) to NOT judge sinners.

2. The Bible says that it is the GOODNESS of God that leads a man unto repentance.

3. I have never understood the logic behind trying to win unbelievers with threats of hell. Why would someone who doesn't believe in God believe in hell???

4. There is nothing wrong with calling sin sin and warning of the terrible consequences of sin, but if that is your punchline, you might wanna rethink your approach.



Running and ducking now...

I agree with you for some people it wouldn't win them. In my case as I was being called, the messages of hell I heard before I knelt to Christ, rushed to my memory and heart. God used the earlier messages from friends & family to give me answers to my hunger for him.

I believe All scripture should be spoken in the love of Christ. Good news is only good news if a person knows the bad news first, right?

[Buzzword]

My experiences with what I consider watered-down preaching include the following:

1. Focusing more on capitalistic values than Christian values
-the church my brother's family attends actually has a standardized format they follow during every congregational prayer, which includes praying for checks in the mail, bonuses, raises, promotions, finding cash on the street, etc.

2. Omitting/avoiding any talk of suffering, struggling with sin, or the need for Christ's presence in your life
-the service my highschool choir sang in at the Crystal Cathedral was full of bullet-dodging regarding these areas.

3. Focusing on a political agenda rather than the Gospel or the Christ-life
-too many pastors are apparently aspiring politicians, having long ago decided that "tree hugging hippies" or "fascist oppressors" represented more of a threat to following Christ than man's own fallen nature.


What I do NOT consider watered-down preaching:
Avoiding political sermons
-my own pastor has done a wonderful job of addressing the needs of mature and baby Christians alike, WITHOUT causing division in the family of God by bringing politics into it. He has demonstrated a great understanding of the divisiveness of political discussion, and takes great pains to keep the focus on drawing closer to God and to each other as fellow Christians, rather than on who's out to get whom on any given day.