Power Point

That’s a hard one, Swaimj, to boil down simply because I have not entirely worked through it. Here are some thoughts (perhaps sort of random and rambling) and I welcome interaction. I present them as statements that may sound dogmatic, but please read that as my effort to be simple and direct, not dogmatic on all these things.

1. Simplicity should be the rule. When the backgrounds, effects, etc. are noticeable, it is probably distracting not helpful. For singing, we use white text on a black background, and we try to get as many words as possible on the page so that the flow of thought is connected. We usually use a 36-40 point font. We haven’t used picture backgrounds primarily because I am not sure that we need them to help us worship God who is spirit. (Secondly because I have better things to do than try to find backgrounds every week.) When we make text appear (such as for preaching, we just make it appear. We don’t fly it in from the right or checkerboard it or some such so as not to make the technology the issue. Furthermore, I think it is cheesy and unprofessional.)

2. We don’t need video clips from movies to help make Jesus attractive. The avenue of conversion is the Word of God, not a short clip from a movie. I maintain that if there is not enough power in the preached word to save, then adding something like this won’t help it. The word does use visual illustrations, and I have no problem with that (until it becomes the issue ... I could say more but I will save it). But I think it is a far cry from Jesus talking about a fig tree, or Ezekiel laying on his side to showing clips from Hollywood movies.


(Disclaimer: My tension that I mentioned earlier is that I am coming to the end of a series on 1 Peter and tomorrow is 5:8-9 about Satan as a lion who want to devour. I would like to open with a Discovery channel type clip of a lion stalking and ripping apart her prey to give a picture of what Satan wants to do. My qualms are 1) about the children or adults who might be bothered by the gruesomeness of it (I have mentioned many times that I can’t stand to watch those types of shows and my wife thinks it is funny that I don’t), and 2) I want to focus on what God said, not what I might be able to come up with through google. For generations, the words were sufficient … are they not now?)

3. Preaching and teaching should not depend on props. The use of illustrations is not the problem. Depending on them is.

4. Putting verses on the screen tends to create a culture of dependence where people aren’t using their Bibles. I want people to bring their Bibles, use them, learn to find their way around in them as fast as I can, underline, highlight, make notes in the margin, etc. By weekly putting verses on the screen, I am not creating that kind of culture. You can’t underline something on the powerpoint. Seeing on the powerpoint won’t create an image in your mind of where it is on the page. I occasionally put an isolated verse up, but very very rarely (maybe once in the last year). Someone said (I don’t remember who, and I don’t mean to attack in anyway) that they put lots of verses on the screen because they use so many. I think that goes to philosophy of preaching. I don’t use a lot of verses because I think we preach the text as God gave it primarily. I will occasionally reach to a support verse. But when God wrote the Bible, it was self-contained units that were sufficient to communicate the point. I think that should inform the way we preach it.

5. Most people, IMO, put way too much on PP. If you are going to use it, use one screen, with two, three, or four key words. I think preaching should be the communication of one key point, not the accumulation of many points. Part of the problem mentioned earlier with people not remembering what is preached is that pastors aren’t clear about what they are preaching. If we work harder on our content and communication, we will not need the props as much.

I have more thoughts, but I will stop there. Again, I present these cautiously because there are some I am not sure about. I am fairly sure about some (like #4 … If you put a lot of verses on the screen, STOP), and not so sure about others.

I have a great concern that our entire ministry be based on a biblical view of the sufficiency of Scripture. Technology might hamper that.

 

I agree with much of what you said above. We do most of that except for the #4 part. I have never used a film clip to prove a point- at least not yet.

It does not necessarily follow that just because one uses PP during his messages that indicates a denial of the sufficiency of Scripture. I personally think that it enhances it.

I think it comes down to your "style" versus my "style" and the type of audience that you are trying to reach.

 

OK, most know I tend to push the envelope sometimes...but I agree with PL in this way:

Some ministers will do this: "Man, I've seen this great film clip, illustration, etc...how can I "work this into" my sermon?

Wrong approach. The Word should be central. If a related film, PPT show, etc., hits a "bullseye," fine. But if you are seeking to build your sermon around the illustration/film clip/whatever, then you have things out of proportion.

Wow. I sound pretty traditional, eh?

But seriously, the word of God should be central, not ancillary.

 

I agree. But I think there are some implications that we need to think critically through ... and apparently, I am alone in that, judging from the responses.

In what way does the use of PP enhance the sufficiency of Scripture?

 

Does it go farther than this? Does the use of technology, illustrations, props, etc. run the risk of saying "This" (whatever "this" is) can make the point better than the words of Scripture make the point?

For instance, a movie clip (which seems pretty popular) ... Does showing a movie clip say, "[Insert Hollywood writer/actor/director] makes this point better than Peter/Paul/John/Jesus made it"?

Are we not in danger of saying (at least tacitly) that the Scripture makes more sense and is more relevant, and therefore has a better chance to change people's lives because we can find just the right story to go with it?

Again, there are a lot of implications here that need some critical thought.

 

Here, we must be careful.

Jesus used contemporary (in His day) examples. Jeremiah and Isaiah used object lessons.

God created people with many different styles of learning. I have no problem using different approaches to presenting the truth. There are visual learners, experiential learners, etc.

As long as the truth of Scripture is central, and as long as the illustration points toward Scripture and the Word takes center stage, I have no problems with illustrating truth with different media. And as I said...I think God showed us (particularly with Isaiah & Jeremiah) that He uses very concrete, visual ways to illustrate His truth to people that need to hear it.

But...when we step into the realm of the "gimmicky," for its own sake, or our first thought is to use this cool video, drama, etc. (instead of the Scriptural truth underlying it), then we've put the cart before the horse.

 

I agree.

But are these of the same type that are being used today? What are the similarities and what are the differences?

 

In my case it does because I can literally walk up to the screen which is 8' at the top and point out words and emphasize those words as well as explain them. Like I said earlier, a lot of it has to do with my particular ministry. It works for our church.

 

I think simplicity IS a guiding principle in worship. However, I do not see it as the single rule that determines everything. For instance, in our singing for worship, we do not practice maximum simplicity. If we did, we would have no organ, piano, or any other musical instrument. Musical instruments are not essential for worship. The only essential is that people lift their voices in praise to God. However, when God's people have musical gifts, they can use them to God's glory and to minister to the body. This additional dimension of music is not required, but it is a gift that can enhance worship.

I think of PP in the same vein. It is not required. It may even become a distraction. And when people begin to say "you have to have PP, or you cannot minister to the modern mind" I think this is misguided. I think it does reflect a mindset that does not believe that scripture is sufficient. It is taking something that is not essential and elevating it to an improper importance. If I feel I can communicate more clearly by using an audio visual aide, I believe I have the freedom to do so. I would be cautious that people understand that, while the aid may be an aid to understanding, it is not essential to understanding or to worship. In this way, the church remains indigenous, so that a given body is free to use the gifts God has given to it, without a restriction of simplicity gone too far, and without the pressure of having to keep up with some other church that God may have chosen to give more gifts than he has given mine.

 

Could you not do this by pointing people to the actual text of Scripture in the Bible in front of them? That way they could underline, highlight, make a note in the margin, etc. And they could see it in context rather than as an isolated verse. It would help them next time they read that passage as well, and you aren't there to point it out.

This is one of my biggest concerns with PP (no offense to you). We aren't intentionally getting people in their Bibles, and in many cases we are removing the need for it. People say, "Why should I carry a Bible? It's going to be on the screen."

 

I think that is probably a better way to do it, particularly in an age of literacy. As I said a few pages ago, you can't underline anything on a screen.

 

I take no offense. I have the very same concern.

Unfortunately, prior to my ministry here, the congregation was not encouraged to carry their own Bibles. We do provide them and even tell them to take the "pew Bible" as their own if they wish. I am also dealing with a group whose mother tongue is not English- it is American Sign Language (ASL). The only American Sign Language "Bible" available (that I know of) is on DVD. As I said earlier, my "dependency" upon PP is out of due consideration to the needs and educational levels of the congregation more than to any "entertainment value".

(BTW, I do my very best to present every support verse in context rather than using isolated verses. I am in agreement with the saying, "A text without a context is a pretext.")

To look at it in another way- I preach in ASL, which can be a very dramatic language. It is very easy to dramatize the Bible instead of preach it with ASL. I have to be careful to maintain a balance.

I appreciate your concerns and share many of the same, I guess the difference is that I am sure that my Lord and Master would be pleased with my motivations for using PP and my applications thereof.

 

I use PP every week... and I seem to be violating one of the cardinal rules some have mentioned. I have become aware that while 95% of the members and regulars bring their Bible, I often see guests, visitors, and members without them for one reason or another. I have begun including the pericope I am praching from in my presentation along with many of the support passages I am reading from.

That said, I am using a similar format every week using TW CEN no smaller than 40 so that every one can read from the screen. I know and agree that no PPt presentation can do what God's Word can do which is why I have every one reading it whether they have their Bibles with them or not.

No one is going to leave a worship gathering without having read from God's Word.

Aside from that, I occasionally use a video or other media tool, but I do not make a habit of that as the folks may begin to look forward to the next "cool" thing rather than a rich message (at least I pray it is...)

 

If the powerpoint is the message and messenger then the preacher is not needed.

When I teach I use powerpoint slides almost exclusively because it has the main points and pictures of what I am talking about. It helps to give more content and less need for an explanation of what something looks like.

When I preach I seldom do. When I preach I see an urgency for a right resaltionship with God and people. I want people focused on what I am saying not the illustrations on the slide. When I deliver a sermon I am focused on what God wants not what a picture of something looks like. The majority of failures in life stem from our relationship with God and our relationships with people. I have not been able to figure out how to deliver the kind of message as Jesus did using powerpoint slides. For example I pastored a church where some of the farmers employed some Christians who worked for them and worked on Sunday at the same time the farmers were in church. I am not sure how a powerpoint slide would convey what Jesus would have said to that kind of service.

 

I have a love-hate relationship with PowerPoint. I can't teach without it, but I can't preach with it.

If I'm teaching a class, it's an indespensible tool. It's also great if you're lazy like me because you only have to do the work one time.

But I've tried preaching with it a couple of times and it's distracting, both to me and to the congregation.

It's also a little like an old eight track tape. You get into a groove and then you have to stop and change slides. Tends to make preaching very mechanical.

I don't like it for practical reasons but that's just a personal thing. Before I bought one, I'd try to borrow one to see if I liked it.

 

Couldn't agree more. Like I said, I find that it's distracting, both to me and to the congregation.

 

I just post the scripture passages I am referring to.
this keeps things simple for a guy like me.

most often my daughter runs the slides for me.
most of the time i get the passages in order, but if i digress from my outline too far she lets me know later

and i keep the backgrounds dark with a light font.
good contrast is the key.

my projector is on a stand and the laptop is right there under it. of course our churcdh is small so my 4:3 4' by 3' screen is plenty big enough. rule of thumb for me is the letters on screen is 3 or 4 inches high at least. anything smaller is a waste.

the projection system i use cost me 750 dollars and is on the lower end. the systems can run well over 10,000.