"Excellence in Preaching" by Simon Vibert (published by InterVarsity Press, 2011)
This book by Simon Vibert is a book about twelve "famous" preachers.
As part of our work as pastors we attend a monthly meeting of pastors from our denomination in what is called a "circuit." Also, we have two larger gatherings a year which are called regional and general pastor's conferences which consist of 100-200 fellow clergy. Over the years I have always felt that every one of these meetings should include some kind of focus or topic on preaching. Even though the work of pastoral ministry involves many different areas of work, we find ourselves preaching at least once a week and often more than that. To me, pastors need help with preaching. I know I do.
That is also the thrust of Vibert's book. He sets out to examine these twelve famous preachers after he acknowledges that Jesus is the primary "preacher." I enjoyed this book and found it very helpful, even though I had not heard of most of these preachers. I found it interesting that Vibert noted that some preachers are completed "manuscript free" while others write out and preach their sermons "word for word." He found that both styles, though completely different from each other, can be viable and helpful.
Another piece of information that he shared was that many of these preachers often preach 45 minute sermons and some preach sixty minute sermons. I wonder what our congregations would feel about that.
Many of the preachers highlighted in this book are part of very large churches but I still felt that the information that he shared applies to preachers serving churches of all sizes.
I highly recommend this book and recommend that preachers continue to read, mark, learn, and inwardly digest all they can to stay relevant and helpful in their preaching.
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Friday, January 27, 2012
Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close
From the ads on TV you might think that this movie is about 9/1/1. I think it's more of a movie about a child finding himself and finding his father and mother. Oskar Schell (Thomas Horn) "loses" his father in the Twin Tower tragedy and is devastated as he listens to his father's voice on the answering machine on what Oskar calls the "most horrible day."
When he eventually looks through his father's stuff he finds a mysterious key and sets out to find the lock that this key opens. In doing this he encounters all sorts of individuals and they minister to this reluctant boy and he "records" their visits on his psyche and on a camera inherited from his father. As his search continues he enlists the help of an aged boarder who lives with his grandmother (Zoe Caldwell). Max von Sydow plays this mute character who ends up having a key link with Oskar's father (Tom Hanks). This character helps Oskar deal with some of his fears--especially his fears of public transportation and enclosed places...obvious reactions to the 9/1/1/ tragedy.
Oskar is also very angry with his mother (Sandra Bullock) who desperately tries to allow her son to grieve and search and question. As Oskar tries to connect with his father he ends up connecting with her.
What Oskar eventually "finds" with the key is not what you expect. The movie is straightforward and sober and reflective with just enough humor to make you smile from time to time. The movie draws you in and you just can't stop watching. If and when it is shown on TV I suspect that commercial and station breaks will ruin the rhythm.
At the end of the movie everyone in the theater just sat there for a while. You couldn't really stay but you just weren't ready to leave. Oskar and the rest of the survivors would be OK and you will be OK too. However, you will be changed forever! That's what such tragedies do.
When he eventually looks through his father's stuff he finds a mysterious key and sets out to find the lock that this key opens. In doing this he encounters all sorts of individuals and they minister to this reluctant boy and he "records" their visits on his psyche and on a camera inherited from his father. As his search continues he enlists the help of an aged boarder who lives with his grandmother (Zoe Caldwell). Max von Sydow plays this mute character who ends up having a key link with Oskar's father (Tom Hanks). This character helps Oskar deal with some of his fears--especially his fears of public transportation and enclosed places...obvious reactions to the 9/1/1/ tragedy.
Oskar is also very angry with his mother (Sandra Bullock) who desperately tries to allow her son to grieve and search and question. As Oskar tries to connect with his father he ends up connecting with her.
What Oskar eventually "finds" with the key is not what you expect. The movie is straightforward and sober and reflective with just enough humor to make you smile from time to time. The movie draws you in and you just can't stop watching. If and when it is shown on TV I suspect that commercial and station breaks will ruin the rhythm.
At the end of the movie everyone in the theater just sat there for a while. You couldn't really stay but you just weren't ready to leave. Oskar and the rest of the survivors would be OK and you will be OK too. However, you will be changed forever! That's what such tragedies do.
The Book of God
This is a brief book review of "The Book of God" by Walter Wangerin Jr. The book itself says that it is "The Bible as a Novel." I started reading this in October and finished it today (January 27). It proved to be very satisfying and, like the Bible, approached the different narratives in many different ways. Usually it was written as a straight forward account but sometimes it included first person readings or songs or character reflections. Notable unique approaches included the Song of Solomon, the temptation of Christ, and Simon Peter's struggles with his tongue.
The Bible is presented in chronological order beginning with Abraham with the Creation accounts and poetic psalms being presented as "flashbacks" or in similar reflections. Wangerin is not preachy but the law and the Gospel constantly emerge as the narrative unfolds. It would be a wonderful tool to get the reluctant Bible reader to understand the scope of the Scriptures.
I confess that I wish that he went beyond day of Pentecost but he only spends a few paragraphs on the work of the Early Church. Perhaps he meant to write a second volume based on Acts-Revelation. Or perhaps the 850 pages that he did write would make including the "rest of the story" a bit too ponderous.
Used copies of the book might be available at Goodwill or the Salvation Army. That's where I got my copy. No matter how much you pay for it, I think you will be very satisfied when you take the time to read it. The pages of the Bible literally come alive!
The Bible is presented in chronological order beginning with Abraham with the Creation accounts and poetic psalms being presented as "flashbacks" or in similar reflections. Wangerin is not preachy but the law and the Gospel constantly emerge as the narrative unfolds. It would be a wonderful tool to get the reluctant Bible reader to understand the scope of the Scriptures.
I confess that I wish that he went beyond day of Pentecost but he only spends a few paragraphs on the work of the Early Church. Perhaps he meant to write a second volume based on Acts-Revelation. Or perhaps the 850 pages that he did write would make including the "rest of the story" a bit too ponderous.
Used copies of the book might be available at Goodwill or the Salvation Army. That's where I got my copy. No matter how much you pay for it, I think you will be very satisfied when you take the time to read it. The pages of the Bible literally come alive!
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Book - 11/22/63
I have a separate book review blog but I have decided to combine this with my movie blog.
The book 11/22/63 is by Stephen King. I confess that I have never before read a Stephen King book and have never seen a complete Stephen King movie. This title and the dust jacket, however, intrigued me greatly and I had to read this book since I have always been interested in the Kennedy assassination and various conspiracy theories and resolutions of these theories.
Stephen King writes horror books and the dust cover suggests that the book if "terrifying." I would have to disagree. It is an interesting and good book but far from terrifying It has the hero Jake Epping following the lead of his friend, Al, in entering and trying to alter the past through a portal which has him emerge in 1958. Al wants to prevent the Kennedy assassination by killing Lee Harvey Oswald. That premise is interesting, to say the least, but the only struggle I had with Jake (who disguises himself as George Amberson) is really capable of killing anyone.
He falls in love with a teacher named Sadie and again and again he finds that the past is "obdurate" and resistant to change. All sorts of things get in his way time and again until he finds himself rushing on November 22, 1963, to prevent this terrible day in history.
The book is very good and may very well be adapted to a movie or TV movie, though there are so many sub-plots that it would be impossible to really bring the entire book to the screen. My son says that a book always has an "unlimited budget" when it comes to our imagination. How true this is. I found myself quickly turning the pages when "we" finally after 700 pages get to the key date.
I like the book but don't always appreciate the street language that invades the pages. King manages to make us sympathize just a bit with Oswald and paints an incredible picture of what life was really like in the late 1950's. Just reading about restaurants, movies, music, and dances fills one with nostalgia. I remember this stuff!
Hey...if you want to read an 850 page book, read it. I don't think you'll be disappointed...especially if you like Kennedy assasination reading.
The book 11/22/63 is by Stephen King. I confess that I have never before read a Stephen King book and have never seen a complete Stephen King movie. This title and the dust jacket, however, intrigued me greatly and I had to read this book since I have always been interested in the Kennedy assassination and various conspiracy theories and resolutions of these theories.
Stephen King writes horror books and the dust cover suggests that the book if "terrifying." I would have to disagree. It is an interesting and good book but far from terrifying It has the hero Jake Epping following the lead of his friend, Al, in entering and trying to alter the past through a portal which has him emerge in 1958. Al wants to prevent the Kennedy assassination by killing Lee Harvey Oswald. That premise is interesting, to say the least, but the only struggle I had with Jake (who disguises himself as George Amberson) is really capable of killing anyone.
He falls in love with a teacher named Sadie and again and again he finds that the past is "obdurate" and resistant to change. All sorts of things get in his way time and again until he finds himself rushing on November 22, 1963, to prevent this terrible day in history.
The book is very good and may very well be adapted to a movie or TV movie, though there are so many sub-plots that it would be impossible to really bring the entire book to the screen. My son says that a book always has an "unlimited budget" when it comes to our imagination. How true this is. I found myself quickly turning the pages when "we" finally after 700 pages get to the key date.
I like the book but don't always appreciate the street language that invades the pages. King manages to make us sympathize just a bit with Oswald and paints an incredible picture of what life was really like in the late 1950's. Just reading about restaurants, movies, music, and dances fills one with nostalgia. I remember this stuff!
Hey...if you want to read an 850 page book, read it. I don't think you'll be disappointed...especially if you like Kennedy assasination reading.
Thursday, December 29, 2011
Best of 2011
Since I mentioned in my recent review the idea of "Best of 2011" I thought that I would suggest a list of what I thought were the best and worst movies we saw in 2011. Both lists are fairly short. I'm sure there are many more that could be on this list...but I can only share about the ones that we saw.
Here's a list of the best in my order (best first):
J Edgar
We Bought a Zoo
The Help
The King's Speech
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
Courageous
Dolphin Tale
X-Men 4
And the worst that we saw in my order (worst first)
Puss in Boots
Cars 2
Here's a list of the best in my order (best first):
J Edgar
We Bought a Zoo
The Help
The King's Speech
Rise of the Planet of the Apes
Courageous
Dolphin Tale
X-Men 4
And the worst that we saw in my order (worst first)
Puss in Boots
Cars 2
The Muppets (2011)
Everything is "retro" nowadays...even the Muppets. Not much has been seen of them for a dozen years so this is definitely a "reboot." We actually own a couple of the videos, including our favorite, Muppets in Space.
This new movie was a welcome movie and funny at times and always "watchable." The premise within a premise is that Kermit and the new Muppet (Walter) with Walter's "brother" Gary (Jason Segel) and his girl friend Mary (Amy Adams) must raise $10 million dollars to save the Muppets theater/museum and prevent Tex Richman (Chris Cooper) from demolishing the theater to dig for oil. I like subtle humor in movies like this and that was the reason I hated the Puss in Boots movie because one had to dig pretty deep to find any humor there. In the Muppets there is underlying humor such as Gary and Walter's unique relationship and the fact that Gary is such a dolt with Mary. Even the "evil" people in this movie (even the Moopets) are funny and redeemable. The movie doesn't take itself very seriously and offers some innovative and silly updates on what the Muppets have been doing the last dozen years. Even the theater trailers six months ago poked fun at the premise of this movie.
Of course, the theater is saved and the Muppets will thrive and even Gary and Mary will become an item. But it doesn't really matter. It's just a nice "escape" movie.
I fear, however, that the movie didn't do as well as expected and I'm sorry that it took a month for me to write the movie blog. When I saw the announcement of the release date for the video in a few months I thought I better quickly offer my thoughts.
Hey...see it at the theater...or, if you have to, wait for the video. Either way, I don't think you will be disappointed and Disney should make some money on this one. I wasn't disappointed.
The Muppets is a 2011 American musical comedy film, the first Muppets theatrical release in 12 years,[6] as well as the first Disney-produced Muppets film since 1996's Muppet Treasure Island. In the film, Walter (performed by Peter Linz), the world's biggest Muppet fan, and his brother Gary (Jason Segel) and Gary's girlfriend Mary (Amy Adams) must raise $10 million to save the Muppet Theater from Tex Richman (Chris Cooper), a businessman who plans to demolish the Muppet Theater to drill for oil. The film is directed by James Bobin, written by Segel and Nicholas Stoller, produced by Martin Baker, David Furnish, Segel, David Hoberman, Todd Lieberman, and John Scotti, and features Bret McKenzie as the music supervisor.
This new movie was a welcome movie and funny at times and always "watchable." The premise within a premise is that Kermit and the new Muppet (Walter) with Walter's "brother" Gary (Jason Segel) and his girl friend Mary (Amy Adams) must raise $10 million dollars to save the Muppets theater/museum and prevent Tex Richman (Chris Cooper) from demolishing the theater to dig for oil. I like subtle humor in movies like this and that was the reason I hated the Puss in Boots movie because one had to dig pretty deep to find any humor there. In the Muppets there is underlying humor such as Gary and Walter's unique relationship and the fact that Gary is such a dolt with Mary. Even the "evil" people in this movie (even the Moopets) are funny and redeemable. The movie doesn't take itself very seriously and offers some innovative and silly updates on what the Muppets have been doing the last dozen years. Even the theater trailers six months ago poked fun at the premise of this movie.
Of course, the theater is saved and the Muppets will thrive and even Gary and Mary will become an item. But it doesn't really matter. It's just a nice "escape" movie.
I fear, however, that the movie didn't do as well as expected and I'm sorry that it took a month for me to write the movie blog. When I saw the announcement of the release date for the video in a few months I thought I better quickly offer my thoughts.
Hey...see it at the theater...or, if you have to, wait for the video. Either way, I don't think you will be disappointed and Disney should make some money on this one. I wasn't disappointed.
The Muppets is a 2011 American musical comedy film, the first Muppets theatrical release in 12 years,[6] as well as the first Disney-produced Muppets film since 1996's Muppet Treasure Island. In the film, Walter (performed by Peter Linz), the world's biggest Muppet fan, and his brother Gary (Jason Segel) and Gary's girlfriend Mary (Amy Adams) must raise $10 million to save the Muppet Theater from Tex Richman (Chris Cooper), a businessman who plans to demolish the Muppet Theater to drill for oil. The film is directed by James Bobin, written by Segel and Nicholas Stoller, produced by Martin Baker, David Furnish, Segel, David Hoberman, Todd Lieberman, and John Scotti, and features Bret McKenzie as the music supervisor.
We Bought a Zoo
I probably tend to be more positive about movies than some reviewers are. After all, two of the movies I liked in 2011 were on the "Ten Worst Movies" list on Yahoo. earlier this week. BUT..."We Bought a Zoo" is one of the best movies we've seen in a long time. (Now I sound like former Vicar Brad..."It was the best...")
I'm not sure what I was expecting from this movie. I thought it would be funny. It was not particularly funny but it was sweet and positive. I thought that there would be cheap slapstick humor such as was in "Zookeeper" (on Yahoo's worst movie list in 2011) but there was no such thing. Oh, there was the escape of the dangerous bear but the subsequent encounter and recapture was pretty well done.
OK. OK. Get to the movie. The premise of the movie, based on a true story and what I would call a dramody (comedy/drama), is that widower Benjamin Mee (Matt Damon) needs to start over after his wife's recent death and his son's expulsion from school and so buys a dilapidated zoo and its animals and staff and takes on the challenge of reopening it for the public. Benjamin struggles with his relationship with his 14 year old son, Dylan (Colin Ford), and Dylan's seemingly dark attitude about life as expressed in his art work. His daughter, 7 year old Rosie, is happy with the zoo and the animals and sometimes is like the "Mommy" to her grieving father who wants to get away from the sad reminders in the city of his deceased wife. He spends all he has to prepare the zoo and finds himself near bankruptcy but then is blessed with a surprise nest egg that his wife has hidden away to help him. His brother, Duncan, (Thomas Haden Church) tries to dissuade Benjamin from using the rest of his money to throw at a dream. Benjamin's innovations with the zoo are apparently in real life, a new wave of zoo engineering, but the movie doesn't focus on that.
Some might suggest that the movie and how it unfolds is predictable but there are some deep emotions in the movie. The depiction of Rosie (Maggie Elizabeth Jones) is wonderful. Her smile lights up the screen and lights up their lives. Benjamin is torn in his love for his son. They are alike and that's the problem. Benjamin loves him and loves and misses his wife dearly. The movie gives us time to appreciate his mood and moodiness and his joy and sadness about his lost love. Though Kelly Foster (played by Scarlett Johannson) is his new love life, their guarded relationship is handled tastefully and carefully. Benjamin challenges his son to consider "20 seconds of insane courage" in telling his new girl friend what he thinks of her. Later Benjamin explains to his children that this was how he met their mother, Katherine (played by Stephanie Szostak)
It's difficult to explain why this movie was special. You have to see it to understand. If you get past the premise and the zoo and even the animals and some of the regular characters, you quickly see that this is not a movie about zoos. It is a movie about love for spouse, children, parents, co-workers, and love for life and work. It is on my top ten list of best movies on 2011.
I'm not sure what I was expecting from this movie. I thought it would be funny. It was not particularly funny but it was sweet and positive. I thought that there would be cheap slapstick humor such as was in "Zookeeper" (on Yahoo's worst movie list in 2011) but there was no such thing. Oh, there was the escape of the dangerous bear but the subsequent encounter and recapture was pretty well done.
OK. OK. Get to the movie. The premise of the movie, based on a true story and what I would call a dramody (comedy/drama), is that widower Benjamin Mee (Matt Damon) needs to start over after his wife's recent death and his son's expulsion from school and so buys a dilapidated zoo and its animals and staff and takes on the challenge of reopening it for the public. Benjamin struggles with his relationship with his 14 year old son, Dylan (Colin Ford), and Dylan's seemingly dark attitude about life as expressed in his art work. His daughter, 7 year old Rosie, is happy with the zoo and the animals and sometimes is like the "Mommy" to her grieving father who wants to get away from the sad reminders in the city of his deceased wife. He spends all he has to prepare the zoo and finds himself near bankruptcy but then is blessed with a surprise nest egg that his wife has hidden away to help him. His brother, Duncan, (Thomas Haden Church) tries to dissuade Benjamin from using the rest of his money to throw at a dream. Benjamin's innovations with the zoo are apparently in real life, a new wave of zoo engineering, but the movie doesn't focus on that.
Some might suggest that the movie and how it unfolds is predictable but there are some deep emotions in the movie. The depiction of Rosie (Maggie Elizabeth Jones) is wonderful. Her smile lights up the screen and lights up their lives. Benjamin is torn in his love for his son. They are alike and that's the problem. Benjamin loves him and loves and misses his wife dearly. The movie gives us time to appreciate his mood and moodiness and his joy and sadness about his lost love. Though Kelly Foster (played by Scarlett Johannson) is his new love life, their guarded relationship is handled tastefully and carefully. Benjamin challenges his son to consider "20 seconds of insane courage" in telling his new girl friend what he thinks of her. Later Benjamin explains to his children that this was how he met their mother, Katherine (played by Stephanie Szostak)
It's difficult to explain why this movie was special. You have to see it to understand. If you get past the premise and the zoo and even the animals and some of the regular characters, you quickly see that this is not a movie about zoos. It is a movie about love for spouse, children, parents, co-workers, and love for life and work. It is on my top ten list of best movies on 2011.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)