Power Point

Obviously, and I am sure we are both glad about that.

Since there was not slander, there's nothing to ignore. However, your creative editing of my post certainly left out the point of the post which was the role of dependence on things other than the Scripture and the Holy Spirit in preaching.

I said I was being sarcastic, and I took the time to make a point from Scripture. You did not interact with that.

First, people understand just fine without powerpoint when we take the time to explain it. We have more than 1900 years of church history to prove it.

Secondly, that wasn't the point anyway. I would like you to seriously interact with the point that was made, namely the role of things other than the word in the preaching of the word.

BTW, by accusing me of slander when it was non-existent, you have made a personal attack. Please do not do that.

 

PowerPoint is a great asset. It is a scientific fact (see http://lowery.tamu.edu/Teaming/Morgan1/sld023.htm for proof) that we remember about 5% of what we hear in a lecture (or sermon), 10% of what we read, 20% of what we receive in an audio-visual format, and 30% of what we see by demonstration. I will take 20 or 30% anytime over 5%.

I have preached both with and without it. It takes me no longer to prepare my messages- I have a man who takes care of setting up the PP's for me- and I have seen the benefit of PP in the congregation's increased retention of the content of the messages.

Try it sometime- preach without PP and on Tuesday call a few of your folks and ask them if the remember what you preached on last Sunday. Then try it with PP and the difference may astound you.

I think it is foolish NOT to take advantage of any way we can to get our message across- after all, isn't it the most important message in the world??

 

The way that we preach probably has more effect than we know. Many pastors preach a series of points. People don't remember that. If we preach one point, they will remember that. It takes more work, but ultimately works better.

I too have preached both with and without it. I see no real difference in it. I see the difference in retention is connected to the way that I preach.

My concern is the idea that we can "really drive a point home with just the right visual." I think that is too cavalier, at least as it was presented, about the work of the Spirit. It communicates that if we pull the right triggers people will respond. It's a very subtle (or not so subtle) form of Finneyism.

One of Paul's point in 1 Cor 1-2, and 2 Cor 1-4 was that he had all manner of communicative techniques available to him, but he refused to use them so that the power could be seen to be of the Spirit and not human wisdom. How does that apply to powerpoint? Honestly ... Don't just give the right answer.

How does this reconcile with Paul's point in 1 Cor 1-2 and 2 Cor 1-4? He did not seem to share your view on this. He said there were things that we should not use to communicate the message.

 

Using a power-point presentation to help or accent a sermon would depend on the presenter. I do not think that it would take away from prayer, in fact, in some cases power-point may be an answer to prayer. I have seen several types of presentations ranging from minimal and simple to very elaborate. I usually enjoyed them and they do help with note taking. Fortunately we are not bound by the opinion of some depressed poster on an Internet forum.

I am so glad that God can speak directly to the individual and direct them according to His blessing. I pray that God blesses the many power-point presentations made every week to spread the Gospel and I pray for the blessing of the Word that is given without aid of power-point. Neither is more right that the other when delivered in God's will.

Remember, not all preach alike, not all sound alike and not all are conditioned alike but we who are brothers because of our faith that Jesus Christ is our Lord and Saviour have one message that is alike.

 

Who's depressed?

What does this mean? Does God speak directly to us and direct us to use powerpoint?

Can you, or anyone here, interact with the Scriptures on this topic?

 

Larry, you and I are pretty similar in our convictions, but I find it hard to say that the Bible condemns PP. 1 Cor 2:1-4 could describe preaching that uses or does not use PP.

PP is a tool and nothing else. Some use it well, others don't. We shouldn't fall into the trap of thinking it's Satanic, nor should we think we're inferior by not using it. Bulletin outlines, notesheets, handouts, PP, illustration books....every age will have fads. Preaching the Word plainly, consecutively, exegetically, and Christologically never fails. NEVER.

 

I often preach narrative sermons rather than "points". Honestly, I don't know how Powerpoint would be used at all when I preach using this method. So, in a sense, I see your point.

OTOH, equating Powerpoint with "human wisdom" and condemning it is a mis-application. Surely, in your seminary classes, your professors used printed notes, chalk boards, handouts, marker boards, overheads, and all manner of teaching aids. That is what Powerpoint is, as I understand it. It is a teaching aid like those, only a little more high-tech. While I realize that the profs were not preaching, per se, in a seminary class, surely they would consider what they were doing to be guided by the Holy Spirit, not human wisdom.

 

Powerpoint and video reference systems are a great tool when used properly.

It only adds about ten minutes to more normal prep when I'm teaching. Otherwise I hand off my major points (and significant takeaways/application) to our media guy who puts it into our presenter program. (Which is just a cut and paste from my Word document.)

I usually present inductively (suits my personal style) which means powerpoint definitely aids.

 

Then you and I agree yet again. I don't condemn it either. As I said earlier, we use it everyweek for singing and I use it occasionally for preaching.

Exactly. The issue there and in 2 Cor 1-4 is about the use of means that rely on things on than the gospel of Christ simply preached. The statement was made earlier that the right visual treatment can really drive home a point. My response was to question the reliance on things other than the Word and the Spirit to "really drive home a point."

 

I didn't do that, though.

The point is the reliance on the Word and the Spirit.

BTW, I think the same thing about illustrations in preaching. When someone tells a tear-jerking story, I have to question their reliance on the Scripture. Is Scripture not enough without my adding an emotional story?

It applies to all kinds of things.

I use powerpoint and will continue to. I am pointing to a bigger issue: What is our belief in the sufficiency and power of the Word?

 

I would agree that if you feel you must use PowerPoint every sermon, you are overly dependent on it.

I would also agree that some sermon styles/subjects/approaches lend themselves much better than others.

 

Of course people have misused illustrations for manipulative purposes and, no doubt, some have gotten so fancy with Powerpoint that it becomes a distraction rather than an aid. But that does not rule out the use of either alltogether. I know you know that because you are using Powerpoint and you probably use illustrations in your sermons. That is why I object to your use of I Cor. Does I Cor forbid the use of all human methods in communication and say that all of them show a lack of trust in the Word and the Spirit? If so, then YOU must stop using Powerpoint and illustrations. The fact that you use them shows that they must have some benefit, at least in your thinking.

 

I agree. My preaching is very linear. They usually go...
I.
A.
1.
2.
3.
B.
1.
2.
3.

Or some variation. I also pass our fill-in-the-blank handouts that follow the outline.

This kind of preaching goes well with powerpoint. But, it works fine without it!

 

I have to confess- YES, I rely upon PP...


but NOT to the exclusion of the Holy Spirit.

A lot of it has to do with my audience. I preach primarily to the deaf, although the congregation is usually about 50-50 hearing and deaf. Deaf people are visual and tactile learners, thus my presentations MUST be made visually.

PP is a great help in that I can put Bible verses up and point to specific words and explain their meaning within the context. It also is a time-saver because I use from 20-30 (occasionally more) reference verses per sermon, and I have a personal conviction that folks should have time to see what the Word says for themselves instead of just listening to the preacher quote them (or as happens in many cases: MIS-quote or de-contextualize them).

So, it may not be everyone's 'cuppa joe' but it is a blessing to many.

 

Depends on what you mean by "human." Carnal and fleshly? Yes. Dependent on something other than the power of the word? Yes. That's Paul's point isn't it:

Don't you think that 1 Cor 1-2 and 2 Cor 1-4 proscribe some boundaries around proper communication of the gospel? That's really the issue, to me.

It seems to me that there is a far too uncritical acceptance of certain methodologies that may reveal a lack of dependence on the Word. I think some people really think, "If I don't get the powerpoint just right, someone might go to hell." Or "If I don't show a clip from some movie, someone might to hell."

And no one would ever say that, but I think actions reveal a lot.

 

Man I wish I could twist Scripture to get to accomodate my preferences...

so does adding a bracket really mean that you can do that?

 

You use Powerpoint, yourself, but you are concerned about others and how they use it. I Cor is a warning to them and indicates that they may not be in the power of the Spirit, but you have it all in balance. You use Powerpoint AND you are controlled by the Spirit. That is what it sounds like you are saying. It sounds arrogant.

 

I am also concerned about how I use it. I am thinking about it this week because I have an idea but I am not sure I should actually do it. So this is far from a settled matter in my mind and it is far from merely academic. I have a day and a half to figure out this particular idea.

Then you should read closer and with a bit more charity perhaps. I have said nothing about having it all in balance. I have said nothing that remotely sounds like I am controlled by the Spirit and others are not. I have said nothing that is arrogant.

Perhaps we should explore the negativity towards someone who is suggesting we should interact with Scripture when deciding on our philosophy of preaching. Is that really so out of bounds? Why should we not?

Does Scripture give us any input on acceptable means of communication of the gospel? If so, what does it say?

 

What does this mean? Is this directed at me? Where did I twist Scripture or add a bracket? I think all I have done is suggest that 1 Cor 1-2 and 2 Cor 1-4 proscribe some boundaries around the means of communication.

So far you haven't actually interacted with Scripture, have you? Did I miss it somewhere? Does Scripture give us any input on how we communicate? If so, what?

You don't know that you're not twisting Scripture to accommodate your preferences until you interact with it. Why not do that? Let's have a serious discussion about this instead of these personal attacks against someone who suggests that perhaps we should think about the issue from Scripture.

 

Thanks for your reply. I do not think you are arrogant. Sometimes things sound different on this board than they were intended. Your initial comment about Powerpoint and your relating it to I Cor made it sound like a blanket condemnation, yet, obviously you are using the product. Perhaps you could share some of your thinking on the balance here.

As to the question above, preachers and prophets in the scriptures make liberal use of visual aids in their preaching. Jeremiah did it. Jesus did it. Proverbs makes liberal use of natural phenomena to illustrate truth. Paul uses many visual and conceptual metaphors in his writings--builders, athletes, etc. I, frankly, am not sure what he is condemning in I Cor. Given the liberal use of teaching aids elsewhere in scripture, I am quite hesitant to condemn such based on I Cor unless I know specifically what is being condemned. Can the use of such visual aides become entertainment rather than teacing? Yes. In our preaching, we have to ask ourselves if we are seeking to help others understand the scriptures through humble means or if we are seeking to entertain and glorify ourselves. I don't think there is any rule or set of rules that can determine this, I think it is a matter of the heart for the individual who is preaching.