Twitter-TF Tenney at Jentezn Franklin's 2morrow!

[Jeffrey]

I have my own qualms about the homiletic demise of our age. It's an art more than anything else. Creativity wins out. Speakers look for the next biggest thing. The coolest story. The neatest twist of biblical words to make a point, even at the cost of distorting the original intent of the bible's authors. The Bible is now a crayon book, open for the coloring and even re-imaging of those we call preachers.

Yes, that's a broad generalization. So, obviously, no that doesn't include EVERYONE. It's a rant Sorry.

Preaching is about edifying the body. Proclaiming grace. Re-telling the Story.

We need more preaching that sounds like teaching, IMO, and less preaching that sounds like a contest of oratory.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Interesting that he says that practice is generally acceptable... Just sayin

I definitely disagree with him. And it's not the only thing I disagree with about his post. I should qualifying, borrowing a thought is not what I disagree with, but the practice of re-preaching other's sermons identically, and making other's believe it's their own is troubling. That goes for more than preaching... pretty much everything in life.

[Jack Shephard]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

No. Apparently JF dissed OP's in a sermon. This guy ranted about it, using it as an opportunity to talk about how wrong it is that he rips off UPC preacher's sermons, and then turns around and bashes them as well.

The guy alleging is not a preacher (I don't think), nor is the person who was "robbed."

http://ryanaustindean.wordpress.com/...little-secret/

I have read this before. Jentezen was not raised oneness he was raised Holiness. This thought about the women in skirts and make-up and such is similar to how I feel. I read what they quoted him a s saying and there was nothing offensive, IMO.

[MissBrattified]

Aw. I got a little lost reading Ryan & Shari Dean's romance story (from his perspective). Sweet Coolness.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by JTULLOCK

Here is the rub. You think that using someones sermon is plagiarism. I find it virtually impossible to use someones sermon word for word...this is not going to happen often or at all, IMO. Acutal plagiarism is an issue with something that is published. Video and audio messages is not covered by this unless it is ones opinion to include it. I will say this that if a preacher constantly uses someone elses sermons all the time then that is weird.

Question....do you think that it is wrong to use bible things like word a flame publications as your notes when preaching or teaching? Isn't that what they are there for? I don't think one can actually plagiarise in the pulpit unless they are using something that is actually published like a book and trying to pass it as their own.

If I preached...

Mt 28:19 GO

- Cool story from the NY Times about the beginning of Western Civ. Ties together the cry to "GO"

- The etymology of "Go" in Mt 28:19 and in Gen 12, God's words to Abram

- The purpose of a Commission, Defining a Commission

- Tying together of biblical characters that were called to "GO"

- Acts 1-2, the marching orders of the church

- Altar appeal, using specific story from Readers Digest

(not included here are many sub-points, specific quotable sayings, etc)

Now... if you preached that outline as your own, exactly as it is here, is that plagiarism? What about if you printed it and sold it?

Word of Flame usually produces doctrine, and ideas that are commonly held and known. But, if you are going to read the tract word-for-word, it's certainly the right thing to let people know you are using "word of flame." This is ethics, bro.

If I preached the above sermon, and you got inspired and wanted to share the subject of "GO" with your fellowship, and did so in your own way, or did so in the above way and cited bro so-and-so somewhere in it, then there are certainly no problems.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by JTULLOCK

I have read this before. Jentezen was not raised oneness he was raised Holiness. This thought about the women in skirts and make-up and such is similar to how I feel. I read what they quoted him a s saying and there was nothing offensive, IMO.

I didn't think it was offensive either. Please, let's not drag out another tangent.

[Jeffrey]

Some other voices on this matter:

Preaching and Plagiarism
PreachingToday.com is currently running "Stolen Goods: Tempted to Plagiarize", an article by Thomas G. Long about the necessity of citation and the damage of deceit in preaching. If you're a member of Preaching Today, you can read it at any time by clicking on the link. Brian Larson (chief editor) and I will be discussing the article and its implications in the next episode of PT Talk (to be posted very soon). In the meantime, here are a few juicy quotes from Long's work:

The ethics surrounding pulpit plagiarism, then, are not simple, but a good bit of clarity is achieved, I think, when we keep two factors in focus. The first is truthfulness. "Plagiarism," writes Richard A. Posner in The Little Book of Plagiarism, "is a species of intellectual fraud." Posner goes on to name the two key ingredients of fraud in every act of plagiarism: one, somebody copies something and then claims ("whether explicitly or implicitly, and whether deliberately or carelessly") that these words are his or her original composition; and two, this deception causes the readers (or hearers) of these words to act differently than they would if they possessed the truth...

Giving credit to others is not merely a matter of keeping our ethical noses clean; it is also a part of bearing witness to the gospel...

Only preachers who deliver their own sermons stand with one foot in the life of the people and one foot in the biblical text. No Internet preacher stands in this same place. No borrowed sermon, however fine, can answer the question that cries out from every congregation, "Is there a word today, a word for us, from the Lord?" This is not the same as saying that sermons must be fully original. All preachers borrow from others, and should. There is a difference between being a debtor and being a thief. All preachers stand on the shoulders of biblical scholars, theologians, and faithful witnesses from across the generations. We do not owe our congregations an original essay; we owe them a fresh act of interpretation.

http://blog.preachingtoday.com/2008/...lagiarism.html

[Jack Shephard]

Originally Posted by Jeffrey

..

I have answered this MANY TIMES. I don't think it necessary to do so. Good enough answer???? Probably not.

[Jeffrey]

A more middle-of-the-road and balanced opinion by Ed Stetzer: http://www.edstetzer.com/2008/05/pre...d-sermo-1.html

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by JTULLOCK

I have answered this MANY FLIPPING TIMES. I don't think it necessary to do so. Good enough answer???? Probably not.

Can you flesh out why it's not important?

Can you think with me, and maybe posit some ideas about why it would be important?