They do obsess they actually call the opposite style of “their” preaching bad preaching, they call churches that decide not to preach the word biblically unfaithful. So either you didn’t read the post or you are blowing smoke either way, they are so obsessed with the sermon that many held a SERMON CONFERENCE. If that ain’t obsession I don’t know what is. You get men (please note that only men can do this) from all over the United States to talk about the importance of preaching. Are you seriously saying that isn’t an obsession when 2 of my last 20 posts have something to do with not preaching?

2. http://reformationtheology.com/

3. http://www.newreformationministries.org/

4. http://pastorsteveweaver.wordpress.com/2008/05/10/expository-preaching-conference-with-steve-lawson-and-john-macarthur/

5. http://www.shepherdsfellowship.org/pulpit/Tags.aspx?ID=22

6. http://fide-o.blogspot.com/2008/05/importance-of-preaching.html

7. http://biblicalpreaching.net/

Would you like for me to continue?

If I give you the sites that talk about preaching and the sermon being central to the church meeting will you go there and tell them how wrong they are?

“I am actually obsessed with ecclesiology, which is why the subtitle of this blog is “promoting New Covenant Ethics and Ecclesiology”. ”

My response:

I know you are, which is what I highlighted…

Lionel said:

“So I talk about ethics and ecclesiology. This will often times discuss sermons, buildings, leadership (this is where you should say I have the obsession),”

My response:

You can have an obsession on leadership, as well as sermons…

Lionel said:

“So again my obsession is with ecclesiology and ethics from a New Covenant and Organic pespective.”

My response:

I know that it is; but your obsession is also with the “sermon” which is what this particular blog is about, right? As a matter of fact, you’ve done several blogs on the “sermon” topic, to where you felt you had to put up a blog, making mockery of the “sermon” centered practices.

Lionel said:

” Many sites specialize or focus on one aspect.”

My response:

I realize this, and?

Lionel said:

“Some poltics, others what they label false teachers, some on great sermons preached, others with puritan thought, some focus on their seminary perspective, others on Christian books, some on Christian music, some on church planting, some on pastoral care, others on end times, some on greek text or even hebrew text, some on marriage, others on equality amongst the sexes, some on missions and others on homeschooling.”

My response:

And what’s your point?

Lionel said:

“Why you choose to come here and tell me what I shouldn’t focus on is beyond me.”

My response:

I’m not telling you what you ought not focus on, per se, but rather addressing a blog/topic of yours, with my own opinions; just like everyone else was doing…

I am actually obsessed with ecclesiology, which is why the subtitle of this blog is “promoting New Covenant Ethics and Ecclesiology”. So I talk about ethics and ecclesiology. This will often times discuss sermons, buildings, leadership (this is where you should say I have the obsession), church history, the current state of the church, New Covenant Theology flowing out of Christian ethics and a few others to name the least.

So again my obsession is with ecclesiology and ethics from a New Covenant and Organic pespective. Many sites specialize or focus on one aspect. Some poltics, others what they label false teachers, some on great sermons preached, others with puritan thought, some focus on their seminary perspective, others on Christian books, some on Christian music, some on church planting, some on pastoral care, others on end times, some on greek text or even hebrew text, some on marriage, others on equality amongst the sexes, some on missions and others on homeschooling.

Why you choose to come here and tell me what I shouldn’t focus on is beyond me.

I once told a member of the NOI that Farrakhan had an obsession with women’s bosoms (I’m being discretionary here), because every once in a while, in a blue moon, he would always make references to black women’s bosoms-in his analogies of what ills the black community, whether it be from exploitation from racial outsiders, or his own personal anguish (yeah he took it there, but I won’t).

Well, the NOI cat really didn’t appreciate that, and his only defense was-Farrakhan doesn’t always express such symbolism in his lectures; and that I can only point to just a few instances.

I’m like okay…