Scott Barger

Seriously

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Tue, 04 Oct 2011 00:13:00 +0000

This summer I had an epiphany.

Seriously.

I realized why people like to be legalistic. What I mean by the term "legalistic" is they like to live by convictions that they really think other people should live out. When I was younger I attended a small Christian school that was pretty legalistic. They lived out convictions about the kind of music you should listen to, the kinds of movies you should see, the kind of clothes you should wear, the kind of bible you should read.

I can remember feeling like these convictions were intended to make me feel like I was less than them. I mean, at the very least I felt like I was less than them. I can remember kind of grousing at them in my mind, "Do you think you're better than me?"

Here's the zinger.

They actually did feel like they were better than me, that's why they did it.

Seriously.

How did I come to this realization? Because I to live out convictions that I think other people should live out and one of the payoffs of this attitude is that it makes me feel like I am better than other people.

Seriously.

I compost and recycle. Why? Because I think it is the right thing to do. I think Christians ought to do these things. When I do them and I look around at other Christians who do NOT do these things, I feel like I am a bit better than they are.

I reclaim rainwater and use it to grow organic vegetables. Why? Because I think I ought to. Why else? Because I end up feeling like I am better than you.

There are all kinds of convictions that I live out that end up making me feel like I am a better sort of person than those who don't. Here's a short list:

- I am politically informed.
- I read the Bible.
- I am a libertarian.
- I live in a small house.
- I have a bitchin' mustache.
- I listen to music you've never heard of.

You get the idea.

Here's another zinger...I see other Christians doing the same thing, I think. Here is a list of convictions I see my fellow Christians living out in such a way that I think they end up feeling like they are actually better people than those who don't:

- They talk about how hot their spouse is (or how great the sex is)
- They don't use birth control.
- They home-school.
- They use cloth diapers.
- They don't use credit cards.
- They talk about how awesome their churches are.

I really think I am right about this one. Come to think of it, the fact that I am saying it out loud makes me feel like I am, you know, actually better than you.

Assurance, Insurance, and the Bottom Line

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 15:54:00 +0000

(Note: I am posting from the road. Sketches may be added later.)

This past week I shared a sermon from Hebrews 3:7-19. The central truth of this passage is that obstinate rebellion results in judgment, even for people of promise. I think Hebrews brings an increasingly severe (and scary) series of warnings to the church. The warning seem to be making the case that there is a line of apostasy, and if you cross that line there is NO coming back.

Of course this immediately raise the questions of eternal security, losing one's salvation, perseverance of the saints, once saved - always saved...how ever you want to describe it. I read these passages and am forced to ask the question, "Can a Christian lose the promise of life eternal?"

Hebrews seems to answer that question affirmatively.

Now I realize that my fellow Calvinists will have a handful of theological constructs they use to explain away this interpretation of the warning passages in Hebrews. I do not have the time energy or desire to discuss these constructs other than to ask, "If there is no danger, then why is there a warning?"

The concept I would like to engage now is how quickly biblical exhortations to Christian faith (and conversely warnings against apostasy) end up as discussions about so called eternal security.

Is it possible that we have reduced the entirety of the Good News to a list of theological propositions or moral decisions that we have to accept in order to avoid damnation? Is the only value of following Jesus escaping hell? Is there nothing else of value?

Or, to turn the issue on its head, if there was no such promise of eternal life or threat of eternal damnation, would we still follow?

The Right Reverend Wright is Right

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Wed, 29 Jun 2011 13:35:00 +0000

(Note: Posting from the road. I might add sketches later)

I watched the following video through a friends FaceBook link yesterday:

http://vimeo.com/24472481

Anyone who knows me knows that I have, um, let's call it an "affinity" for N.T. Wright. Ever since I rad Surprised by Hope a couple years ago (a book, by the way, that absolutely changed my life) I have been reading through Wright's stuff as fast as I can. He is an accomplished Bible scholar and prolific writer, so there is a lot of stuff to read, but it is always good and always challenging.

So when I saw a link to the video above, naturally I had to watch. It's called "Messianic Lunacy," a title which is dripping with the kind of stinging but true style of critique that Wright employs so often and so well.

The premise of the video is a question, " What makes N.T. Wright Angry?"

As I watched the video, I found myself, as usual, agreeing with what he was saying. Maybe I am an unthinking fan boy, but this Brit makes sense.

It is frustrating to encounter Christians who view the world so myopically and yet feel so strongly that they know just what is wrong and just how to fix it.

Watch it and become more awesome than you are right now.

"No-ing" versus "Knowing"

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Fri, 24 Jun 2011 22:14:00 +0000

(Note: Posting from the road. Sketches may be added later.)

I had an interesting conversation today. One that related to my studies Hebrews. More or less we talked about doubting. The question we talked around was, "How much can you doubt and still believe?"

This is a good question, I think. One that more and more Christians seem to be asking. Some Christian leaders would have us believe that doubting is symptomatic of a lack of faith. They would tell us that to waiver in belief means that you don't believe, that you have no faith.

I am not sure I agree.

As I read the Bible, it seems that God has a lot of graciousness for doubters. People who waiver, stumbled in their certainty. People who wonder why God does what he does, or when he will do what he has said he will do. Or whether he is even there at all.

On the other hand, he doesn't seem to tolerate obstinate rebellion. Could it be that "believing" isn't an absence of doubt as much as it is the presence of obedience?

Over the last few weeks I have had several opportunities to answer a version of the following question, "What should I do when I find it hard to believe in God?"

My response?

Live like you believe it is true.

I mean, what else can you do? You can't make yourself believe what you don't believe, right? You can't just decide to have no doubt, can you? I sure can't. So when I experience doubts in my own life, and see others around me doubting, I find comfort in God's apparent patience with those who have a hard time believing, and motivation from his apparent frustration with those who stumble into rebellion.

I live like it is true...even though sometimes I wonder whether or not it is.

Seeing Myself in The Desert of Sin

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Wed, 22 Jun 2011 17:50:00 +0000

I have been preaching my way through Hebrews at my church. You can check out some sermons here: http://sermon.net/newhorizon

This coming Sunday I will be teaching from Hebrews 3:7-19. It is an iteresting passage. Structurally it challenging because it essentially is using a story from Israel's past (Exodus 17:1-7 and Numbers 20:1-13) as it is understood theologically from the perspective of the Psalmist in Psalm 95.

So I have been reading through sections of the Exodus story, reacquainting myself with the rocky relationship between God and his people in these early years. As I have been doing this I have realized a pretty challenging fact.

The people in the desert remind me of me.

I tend to revert to a complaining sort of fatalism at the first glimpse of significant obstacles in my path. I find myself questioning the path that God has called me to walk, not because the path is hard - I expected as much - but because the path seems to be fatal. There are times when I think I might be in mortal danger (figuratively speaking of course...well mostly). I find myself thinking, "Wouldn't it have been better to not have started the journey than to come this far only to fail?"

As I read the story of God's people and their exodus out of Egypt towards the promised land, as I see how similar their attitude is to mine, I am suddenly a bit fearful.

Because that attitude angers God.

"The Terrible Twos" (Jude 5-7)

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 19:22:00 +0000

Yesterday my friend and teacher Herb Bateman preached, I had the day off.

It was great.

It has been a long time since I sat and listened to a sermon. The content was good, the presentation engaging, and the experience of learning was a real treat.

But, wow, Jude? What a trip. When was the last time you heard a sermon out of Jude? Such an overlooked but powerful little letter.

Herb focused on verses 5-7 and summed up the idea this way: Divine repercussions exist for those who persist in telling God, "No!"

He called it the "Sermon in a Sentence." I like that, I might steal it. After all, he probably stole it from someone else.

He explored some "angel rebellion" stories from 1 Enoch, which bothered some people, I guess, but absolutely fascinated me. The bottom line, it doesn't matter who you are, a follower of God, an celestial being, a pagan...if you rebel against God's norms there WILL be repercussions.

Ouch.

It got even better during sermon discussion (a weekly tradition at my church) where he shared that he believed Jude was written to Jewish believers who were at risk of being deceived by rebellious political dissenters who were stirring up people en route the soon-to-erupt Jewish rebellion of the late 60s - early 70s C.E.

As I thought about it, I slowly began to realize that if Herb is right, then the implications for modern day believers become even more challenging. As Jewish rebels were gathering strength, they would have done so (at least in part) by appealing to the nationalistic sentiment of their countrymen. A sentiment that almost entirely ignored the claim that Jesus was the real messiah, and his kingdom is not of this earth. In other words, throwing off the oppressive rule of a gentile empire (Rome) was not the concern of a follower of Jesus, the Christ.

This sounds like a teaching against rebellion of all sorts, not the least of which is rebelling violently against oppressive governments.

Yay Gandhi!

But that might be beside the point.

Undeniable is the strength of Jude's warning: persist in rebellion and there WILL be repercussions.

Good stuff, Dr. Bateman, good stuff.

This Instead of That

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Mon, 20 Jun 2011 19:12:00 +0000

I have only ever been a casual blogger. This is probably because I like to think of myself as a writer but I really am not. I can write, but it does not come easy. On top of that, the writing I do is usually not that good and the things I write not really that valuable.

But people ask me to. I actually have people ask me to blog more. I usually respond by saying, "Have you actually read my blog? It isn't that good."

But they persist.

So I have decided to focus my blogging activity on my job, which is teaching the Bible. If you want personal stuff, talk to me in person. I will try to keep the rants to a minimum, and focus on writing my way through what I am preaching and teaching at my church.

Thanks for reading.

How has your perspective of atheists (and atheism) changed since you've been a part of the Christian and an Atheist podcast?

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Fri, 31 Dec 2010 16:25:00 +0000

Among other things, I have learned that there are beleivers, fundamentalists, amicable free thinkers, and zealous evangelists on both sides of the atheism/theism debate. I have also learned that many Christians do a poor job of listening and responding to the questions of our critics. We tend to talk AT and ABOUT atheists a lot, instead of talking with them.

Ask me anything

I Am Well Liked

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 03:52:00 +0000

Things said to me today:

"Wow, you're a pastor, no wonder your head is all muddled up. Good day to you and shame on you for preaching such screwed up ideals, most likely indoctrinating your children too, (which is child abuse) and robbing them of reason. You make me sick honestly."

and...

"Seminary! What a waste of a life! poor, poor choice. Brainwashed, that's what I call it."

and...

"I see you are a pastor and I see that you went to seminary. Therefore my reason tells me you bring your kids to church and this is disgusting. Congrats on filling their heads with utter nonsense. Way to be a great parent."

and...

"I really have to go now, but you are delusional and leading other lemmings to the slaughter. You personify the "ignorance is bliss" phrase, and that is not to be commended. Hopefully, 20 years from now, when you are rational and an atheist, you'll remember this little spat, and how an asshole told you exactly the problems with your "harmless" faith. Adios."

I love my job. :-/

What is your one favorite song of all time?

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Thu, 28 Oct 2010 17:33:00 +0000

This is a tough one. I am not sure how to measure "favorite" but I think if you were to tally up the number of listens throughout my life the clear winner would be "Tommy the Cat" by Primus.

Ask me anything

Name It

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Sat, 10 Jul 2010 15:50:00 +0000

Me: Hey kids, we should name our van!
Kids: (silence)
Me: What do you think we should name it?
Kids: (silence)
Me: How 'bout "Ol' Ironsides"?
Kid #1: How about "The Family Bus"?
Kid #2: How about "Road-Killer"?

Awe. Some.

I am Smallish

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Wed, 07 Jul 2010 14:18:00 +0000

About once every two or three months I experience what I could probably describe as a "little mid life crisis." Usually these aren't of the buy-a-sports-car-and-hairpiece variety, but more of the I-should-do-more-sit-ups variety. Invariably these little crises have to do with reconciling what I am with what I thought I would be by now.

Not everyone can be an astronaut when they grow up.

But it's not like I wanted to be an astronaut when I grew up. I was never really sure what I wanted to be when I grew up. When people asked, I would usually respond, "An artist. I want to be an artist." But I never really had any clear idea how an artist made a living. All I knew was that artists made art. I liked to make art, therefore I wanted to be an artist.

This was not the most satisfactory response for those adults in my life with a greater appreciation of the necessity of gainful employment. But I didn't care. Not really. I just had this kind of impressionistic idea in mind of what working for a living would look like when I got older.

In fact, it wasn't until about the ripe old age of 27 that I finally had a clear idea of what I wanted to be when I grew up.

I wanted to be a pastor.

No. A preacher.

I wanted to talk to people about the Bible and help them understand what it said. I wanted to help them live out the teachings in the Bible, and embrace its outlandish claims about life, death, and the nature of reality. I was excited.

Until I became a pastor.

That's when I became familiar with the very real and inescapable rule of self worth that is almost universally embraced by every single person who has gone into the pastorate in North America over the last 100 years.

Size matters.

Not just a little, but a lot. A whole lot. SIze really, really matters. A lot.

Really.

We gauge the worth of our pastors by their effectiveness, and we measure their effectiveness by how many bodies fill our building. The bigger the church, the more significant the pastor. The smaller the church, well...you can see where this is going.

As expected, this almost universally accepted standard of pastoral significance works in the favor of large church pastors and not so much in favor of the rest of us.

If you are endowed with a big church, you are significant. If you are not, you are not.

So, to make peace with the feeling of insignificance that creeps in when I encounter my more significant co-labororers, I tell myself a version of the same condolement that less-than-well-endowed men have ben telling themselves for years.

"Size doesn't matter."

Or, "This is a good size."

And this is where the little crises creep in. As much as I tell myself that size doesn't matter, or that what I have is a good size, I secretly suspect that I am mistaken. I mean, it certainly does seem like big church pastors are more signifiant than small church pastors.

On top of this, I always expected that my good size would be slightly larger than the good size I have now. I thought that by now, I would be slightly more significant than what I am.

But that's OK, the first will be last, the last will be first. The least will be the greatest. Smaller is better.

Size doesn't matter.

But it sure feels like it does.

What was your favorite book as a child?

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Thu, 24 Jun 2010 19:54:00 +0000

"Where the Wild Things Are" by Maurice Sendak.

Ask me anything

Incarnational Text

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Tue, 23 Mar 2010 17:51:00 +0000

The following is a response I wrote to an acquaintance over at achristianandanatheist.com

I was responding specifically to the idea that interpreting the Bible is a "simple" matter that involves "just reading" the text and doing what it says. We were in the middle of a discussion of the New Testament's treatment of women. This is what I wrote:

[This conversation] reveals a more important issue that I think is cause for concern, namely, the attitude that interpreting scripture is a "self-evident" process which is a matter of "just reading scripture."

I certainly do not mean to put words in your mouth, but I have picked up on this perspective in several of your posts before. This is why I asked you to clarify your "only one interpretation" comment earlier. The idea that interpreting scripture is "simple" or a matter of "just reading" the text strikes me as arrogant, ignorant or both. It is my opinion that interpreting the Bible is NOT simple, and it is certainly a bit more involved than "just reading" the text.

Your post proves my point to an extent. The fact that you appeal to Greek translation (ie should the diakonos "διάκονος" be translated "servant" or transliterated "deacon"?) shows that even these fairly straightforward passages include some interpretational issues that must be dealt with, and could quite possibly lead different readers to different conclusions. Not to mention that the translators' treatment of diakonos also involves theological/cultural/historical issues regarding weather the term is being used to describe the function of the person or the office of the person.

Let me take it a step further in hopes to demonstrate that the process of interpretation is a complicated and multifaceted one that is as likely to produce a multiplicity of interpretations as it is consensus of opinion.

One of the passages that is a big part of our discussion is in 1 Timothy chapter 2. Here is what verses 11 & 12 say:
"A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent."

Straightforward? Maybe, but I don't think so. First of all, what makes a "man"? When does a boy become a man? Or does this passage prohibit all women in the church from teaching all males regardless of their age? What is "teaching"? Does Paul mean biblical instruction, theological instruction, moral instruction, practical instruction or all instruction? Is he thinking of an official "teaching" function of the church (Sunday schools and bible studies) or any and all instances where a man might learn something from a woman (a female missionary shares a testimony)? None of these questions are answered directly by the text, so we 21st century believers are forced to interpret the text the best way we know how, which of course, causes many churches to come to different answers to the question "what does this mean?"

The issue becomes even more cumbersome when we read Paul's reasoning for why women are prohibited from teaching. Verses 13 & 14 show that Paul's prohibition is based on a twofold reason: 1) Created order; 2) Eve was the one who was deceived. So what does this mean? Women are more gullible? Enough confusion so far? Well, if not, keep reading. Paul goes on to say that women will be "saved" through "child bearing." What is the simple, straightforward interpretation of that?

All of this and I still have mentioned that part of the interpretational process where we ask the question, "Is this explicit instruction universally binding or is it a specific instruction to a specific person regarding a specific issue that may reveal a more universal principle?" For example, earlier in the chapter, Paul tells Timothy that he wants women "to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes, but with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God. " Is Paul's explicit command that women not wear jewelry or braid their hair a universally binding command? Or was that part of the instruction situational and only the more general principle of "adorn yourself with good deeds, not good clothes" meant to be universally binding?

The more I study this collection of ancient texts, the more I try to learn their wisdom and change in light of their instruction, the more I realize that there is a LOT of ambiguity in the "Good Book". God inspired this thing we call the Bible, but he did so in a very incarnational way. And in doing so, He revealed that He is apparently quite alright with wrapping the "Emmanuel" of the inspired text in the swaddling clothes of human culture, imagination, and experience.

The result is both joyful and messy.

Break Taken

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Sun, 31 Jan 2010 21:13:00 +0000

I had the privilege to attend an awesome church today...mine. The best part was, I didn't preach there this morning. I usually preach, but today I did not. Instead we had some shaggy headed hippie preach about openness and hiddenness out of 1 John 1.

The message of the text was presented with clarity and conviction.

I walked away thinking that our salvation is the result of open confession and "light-walking"

Neither of which happened when I first answered an alter call and asked Jesus into my heart.

It was a good break, thanks Dan!

Sex on the Brain

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 18:35:00 +0000

With February right around the corner I find myself once again preparing for a series of sermons on human sexuality.

This is not as much fun as you might think.

I mean sex is fun, but the annual process of preparing a series of sermons on the topic is a bit of work.

First you have the obvious challenges with content. What do you talk about? How do you say what you say? What does the Bible really say about this stuff? Where's the line that delineates between fearless teaching and offensive blather? I mean, I want people to learn something, to somehow develop a healthier view of sexuality without being so embarrassed by hearing the word "clitoris" that they don't learn anything.

That being said, I have no intention of teaching through the Song of Solomon, because, quite frankly people, that book is full blown Ancient Near Eastern Erotica.

My Office > Your Office

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 18:47:00 +0000

Things that are in my office:

1) Green Lava Lamp
2) Coffee
3) A picture of "Elvis"
4) A bunch of books
5) A mixer board
6) 2 large format printers
7) A couple diplomas
8) The fellers from Darkroom practicing for their up and coming CD release show.

Not a bad place to study the Bible.

Careful what you ask for

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Thu, 07 Jan 2010 21:10:00 +0000

I had this great idea for the Sunday morning message this past week.

Motivated in part by the fact that I was sick and unable to do a lot of talking and also in part to my conviction that good preaching is a product of community, I decided to have an open discussion during the normal preaching time.

Instead of talking "at" I was actually talking "with" my church family. The subject: "Why preach?" which quickly developed in to "What to preach?"

I asked them to tell me what they thought we should spend time discussing in the year 2010.

Here are some of their responses:

- Heaven/hell
- Homosexuality
- The Trinity
- The Nature of God
- Reconciling the God of the OT with the God of the NT
- Church History, specifically Patrology
- Baptism
- What should Christian politics look like?
- Forgiveness and restoration
- Justice
- Intertestamental history
- Christian pacifism

Oh, and the above were in addition to the topics we had already slated for the year which include money, sex, peace, and the resurrection.

Someone has some work to do.

Things Christians in America Worship

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 19:29:00 +0000

1) The Bible
2) Big Churches
3) Marriage
4) Wealth
5) So-called "Conservative" Politics
6) Bumper Sticker Theology
7) Pastors of Big Churches
8) Sermons
9) Heterosexuality
10) Comfort

Coming to Grips with...

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 15:08:00 +0000

One of my favorite books is "Death by Suburb" by Dave L. Goetz. It is really a fantastic read. I put it right up there with "Surprised by Hope" by N.T. Wright and "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" by Douglas Adams.

One of the concepts Goetz discusses in DBS is the tendency for 21st century North American suburbanites to define themselves by what they do. In part of that discussion he references middle aged pastors of small churches who finally realize that they will never be the pastor of a big church. When that reality settles in, says Goetz, it can make for a dark couple of years.

I can completely identify with this phenomenon. Though I am a bit younger than middle aged (unless I die at 72, in which case I am right smack dab in the middle of middle aged), I still feel the cold fingers of reality slowly clawing at my soul. I will likely never be the pastor of a big church.

I will not be the next Bill Hybels. I will not be the next Rob Bell, Erwin McManus, or Francis Chan. Odds are I will labor away my days in relative obscurity having never been "the man" at "the church."

Coming to grips with your own mediocrity can be cathartic at times, but mostly it's just annoying.

Before you cast stones at me for my steeple envy, and at this point I will remind you of what both Jesus and Demetri Martin have to say about throwing stones, please hear me out.

You must understand that for a small church pastor there is no promotion possible within the organization. Unless you hire someone to be your superior and then replace them a few years down the road, you have already ascended to the pinnacle of your employment hierarchy. You are already the man...lucky you.

This means that the only way to effectively get a promotion is by publishing a book or growing a very large church. This is reality. This means that if I want to ever make more money, I must grow a bigger church. If I want to preach for more people, I must grow a bigger church. This makes it easy for the have-nots to covet what the haves have, doesn't it? You betcha.

Even though I am starting to realize I will never "make it" or "get there" I still desperately want to...I absolutely covet the big church (at least sometimes).

Now here's the rub...

My church needs more people if we are going to make it as an organization. If we are ever going to fix what is broken, do what needs to be done, we are going to need to have more people. Our leaders have decided that we must aggressively try to get more people. We have to.

This puts me in an interesting position. My church really HAS to get more people in the door...and my dark side really WANTS to.

Ministry Journal

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Mon, 03 Aug 2009 05:00:00 +0000

The following is a weekly "ministry journal" of the last three months...enjoy.

Week 1: We need more money.
Week 2: We need more money.
Week 3: We need more money.
Week 4: We need more people.
Week 5: We need more people with more money.
Week 6: Came to the slow and burning realization that there are too many churches in town.
Week 7: We need more money.
Week 8: We have plenty of money! Yay God!
Week 9: Oops, accounting error, we need more money than we thought we did.
Week 10: I was attacked by hundreds of fleas which have taken up residence in one of the "buildings" on our "campus"
Week 11: We need more money, or else.
Week 12: Got a dose of penicillin to help me cope with the slow and burning realization that this is small church ministry in North America.

Cheers.

Darkroom Announcement

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 15:14:00 +0000

This post is a slight departure from the high-quality and intellectually stimulating swill my readers are used to reading. The guys from Darkroom have officially announced that they are about to start recording their second full length album. You see the official announcement here: http://www.da.rkroom.com

These gents are friends of mine, you should visit their site and buy lots of swag from their store.

The video on the front page is well-done IMHO, the sound is an instrumental intro to a song I've heard them play live on several occasions. I am not sure which song it is. I think it's maybe off of "Jets that Fly." Anyway, the video was shot and cut by friend and talented local barkeep Andy Clark.

Check it out.

Preach that Sermon, Preacher Man!

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Wed, 20 May 2009 20:01:00 +0000

My fellow preachers, calling our sermons "talks" doesn't make them something other than sermons. Everyone in the room knows you are preaching to them. The term "talk" may be disingenuous unless you are actually inviting the people to talk back. Otherwise, you are simply talking "at" a room full of people, and who wants to be "talked at"?

A Broke Bloke

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Fri, 01 May 2009 14:57:00 +0000

Anyone who knows me knows that I tend to chirp about being broke. No joke. It's not that I don't make any money, I do. It's that it seems as though I never make enough. Apparently, according to some perceptive government bureaucrat, my wife and I are what they call "working poor," in other words we live paycheck to paycheck.

Now, I don't want to come off as a total complainer, so let me say there are some advantages to living paycheck to paycheck. For example, the stock market collapse of last year barely affected me, that's an advantage, right?

There are some not-so-good things, like we can't afford to buy a house, but even that negative consequence has some advantages. For example, If my roof leaks, I don't have to worry about fixing it. Or if my water heater, furnace, etc. break down, it's not my problem. It's the landlord's problem. That's peace of mind, right there.

Also there is an upside to the pseudo "poverty mindset" that settles in after living paycheck to paycheck for a few years. You kinda get used to it. I was broke yesterday, I am broke today, I'll probably be broke tomorrow. It can be stressful, that's for sure, but I don't think it's any more stressful than what some people are worrying about these days. You know, imploding mutual funds, collapsing house values, and a President who seems to be pretty convinced that everyone should pay more taxes.

Everyone but me, that is.

Make that Money

noreply@blogger.com (Scott Barger) — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 22:25:00 +0000

When I was in seminary I had a this idea that I would work hard to learn about the Bible, improve my skills as a preacher, develop important leadership skills and then find a church where I could work hard to grow that church into something special.

Then I started full time vocational ministry. More specifically I became the pastor of a small church. Within the first couple of years I realized that my job wasn't so much growing a church as it was maintaining an organization. I was in the ministry maintenance field.

I feel like most of my time is spent figuring out ways to maintain the organization where I work and most Sundays are simply dog and pony shows where I shake my money-maker and hope we make enough scratch to pay our bills that week.

Good morning, God bless, make that money, see you next week.