I don’t think you’ll need to listen to very much here to get the idea.
If you went to a public recreation area with your family and someone stood above you, reading from the Bible, would you like it?
Do you think this is good stewardship of God’s Word…or poor stewardship of God’s Word?
I got this off of youtube and the title and subtitles are all original to the video (I did not add anything).
Filed under: Open-air preaching |
The Old Adam Lives! 
Steve –
I respect your opinion, but respectfully disagree with it.
Actually, he was not preaching.
He was simply reading the Bible. He was reading the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew (chapters 5,6 and 7).
It’s quite hard for me to imagine that just hearing the words of Christ (from the reading of the Bible) would make Christians ‘unhappy’.
JOV said it best..” If this was someone singing, or playing the guitar, it would be ok, but anytime anyone speaks the Word of God, they are hated.”
Imagine John the Baptist telling God that he can’t go and preach in public because someone’s heart might become more hardened because some people just don’t want to hear it…despite John’s calling by God to do so.
And that’s exactly what this is…a calling by God to go into all the world and ‘preach’ the Gospel to every creature. (Mark 16:15)
There is no disclaimer added to the commission like:
Unless they don’t want to hear it; or don’t preach the Gospel out in the open and in public; or only preach to people one on one; etc.
There will always be people offended by the hearing of the Gospel…but you know what? Now they have no excuse if they were to leave after hearing the Gospel and died on their way home.
God gave them yet another opportunity!
Sorry Steve…I think you are totally wrong here.
Wayne,
I respect your opinion. But I whole heartedlty disagree.
Reading the Bible, preaching, to captive people in a public place, who have gone to that place to enjoy themselves and have some recreation, is, in my opinion, counterproductive and poor stewardship of God’s Word.
I am a believer in Jesus Christ and He is everything in my life, and this totally turns me off.
I believe it gives Christianity and Christians a bad name and hardens people to the gospel.
There is a proper time and place to read the Bible.
If someone were to follow you around everywhere and read the Bible to you when you did not want it read to you…would you like it?
No. I wouldn’t like it.
The message of the Gospel has its own offense… we don’t need to try to make it more offensive by being weird. Jesus preached to crowds that followed him… who wanted to hear.
If that guy had mingled kindly and respectfully with the crowd and met individuals on their level of need, interest and understanding, he might have had a meaningful conversation with someone. As it is, he probably did more harm than good.
The Word is powerful and like a sword… but we should wield it skillfully.
Patrick,
My thoughts, exactly.
I am unclear as to the motivation one would have to take it upon himself to do as this person is doing. It perhaps would be more productive to approach individuals to see who may be prepared to listen. Otherwise it appears it is more “Hey! Look at me!”
Also the sermon on the Mount is pure, unvarnished and viscious law. It definately needs explanation on how we cannot do it. The Gospel needs proclaiming for those who realize they are hopeless.
David,
I think the motivation may be a good one (although I have never met a pure motive yet).
But the enthusiasm is not well channeled.
The Sermon on the Mount is about a strong of message of law as one could ever hear.
But, even if he were to read a good balance of law and gospel and follow up the reading with an explanation, I wouldn’t be to pleased to have it forced upon me at a venue designated for public recreation.
I’m sure the gentlman didn’t mean it to be, but I see it as a selfish endeavor.
Thanks for your comments, St. David!
– Steve
Steve –
How should we apply Mark 16:15 today and where should we go to preach the word so that no one will be offended?
This is a good example of Christians becoming their own enemy. Sorry not holding back anything on this one.
Ultimately things like this drive people further away from the Gospel and Jesus Christ and further entrenched as to why their opinions need to be 180 degrees separate from Christians beliefs. I can see it in my own family. The more entrenched a pure Christian belief is the more other family members become in their ideologies because truth is not being presented with the love of Christ. Evbentually any presentation of the the bible becomes completely counterproductive
The message needs to salted with Love AND truth. Truth without love is not truth and love without truth is not love.
Jon
Jon,
I think you are right. Christians can be their own worst enemy and people can become hardened to the gospel.
I have seen it, and been guilty of it myself with my own family.
Thanks, Jon.
– Steve
Wayne,
We certainly ought go into all the world and preach the gospel. We are in complete agreement there.
We just differ on how that is best accomplished.
I could stand on a busy street corner in Manhattan and wear a sandwich board that says, “Repent…believe in Jesus or risk going to Hell!”
There is truth in that statement. It is Biblical. Hundreds of thousands might see it everyday. But is that the best use of God’s Word towards winning souls for Jesus?
I think not. I would become a characture and God’s Word would fall on deaf ears.
Invite people to church, to bible studies. Find out where they are hurting. Tell them how you hurt in the same ways…then speak of Jesus and the cross and the new life that He gives.
I think that is a far greater use of the Word of God.
Thanks, Wayne.
– Steve
I wonder how the great preachers of old would respond to your comment Steve?
Wesley, Knox, Whitefield, Sunday, Torrey…or older; Elijah, Ezra, Jonah…..and hundreds of unknown names over the last two thousand years….all open air preachers.
Spurgeon: “What the world would have been if there had not been preaching outside of walls, and beneath a more glorious roof than these rafters of fir, I am sure I cannot guess. It was a brave day for England when Whitefield began field-preaching. When Wesley stood and preached a sermon on his father’s grave, at Epworth, because the parish priest would not allow him admission within the (so-called) sacred edifice, Mr. Wesley writes: “I am well assured that I did far more good to my Lincolnshire parishioners by preaching three days on my father’s tomb than I did by preaching three years in his pulpit.”
Spurgeon continues: “No sort of defense is needed for preaching out-of-doors; but it would need very potent arguments to prove that a man had done his duty who has never preached beyond the walls of his meetinghouse. A defense is required rather for services within buildings than for worship outside of them. Apologies are certainly wanted for architects who pile up brick and stone into the skies when there is so much need for preaching rooms among poor sinners down below. Defense is greatly needed for forests of stone pillars, which prevent the preacher from being seen and his voice from being heard; for high-pitched Gothic roofs in which all sound is lost, and men are killed by being compelled to shout till they burst their blood-vessels; and also for the willful creation of echoes by exposing hard, sound-refracting surfaces to satisfy the demands of art, to the total overlooking of the comfort of both audience and speaker.”
Thanks Steve
One thing Christians love to talk about is “the narrow door” and how they have entered it but so few others have. Scripture tells us that many that have said “Lord, Lord” will not see heaven. Jesus attracted sinners to him but repelled the religious, keepers of biblical truth, pharisees. Long story as to why I dislike the word truth here :-). Its like Christians have wormwood speaking in their ear only you know the real truth… somehow in finding truth we also find religious pride… maybe even a pride in our humility if that makes sense to anyone but me … :-).
Thanks be to God to what he did through his son Jesus Christ because I can’t do it on my own.
In Waynedawg’s defense those are some pretty good names of effective preachers… but in Steves defense there is a difference between preaching to people and preaching at people. Paul tended to change his style for his audience type but many people do not posses Pauls skills.
Waynedawg, I think you are failing to take “culture” into account. The historical figures you mentioned preached to receptive audiences… receptive if not to the message, at least to the venue.
This isn’t a debate about whether or not to preach the Gospel, but rather what is the most effective way to do it in THIS culture. Using your logic, it would be a good thing for me to buy a HUGE BOOM BOX and BLAST the reading of scripture out of my window into the neighborhood… irrespective of whether people are wanting to hear it, trying to sleep or enjoying their quiet privacy.
It was apparent on that video that the audience wasn’t listening, didn’t appreciate the intrusion, and felt totally disrespected by this man who was imposing himself upon their other plans. They weren’t as offended by the message as they were by the man.
If he had made a simple announcement to the crowd that day… “if any of you would like to hear some “good news”, please come over here to a private place and I will share it”… that at least would have been kind and respectful.
If the fruit of the Spirit doesn’t season the message, it won’t taste good to anyone.
“To the weak I became weak, to win the weak. I have become all things to all men so that by all possible means I might save some.”
1 Cor 9:22
The culture certainly has changed since the early part of our country’s history.
I believe there was a time when every single college, university, and hospital were founded by and run by Christian denominations.
You can scarely bring up a serious conversation about Jesus Christ (nowadays) in a classroom of “higher learning” without being laughed out of the room.
If you sprayed a firehose into a crowd, I’m sure that some would get some water in their mouths.
I just think that offering the thirsty a cool drink on an individual basis is the much more effective method.
Patrick said, “Waynedawg, I think you are failing to take “culture” into account. The historical figures you mentioned preached to receptive audiences… receptive if not to the message, at least to the venue.”
I’m not totally sure I know what you mean by venue…
The preachers of old I mentioned all have some testimonies of being ridiculed, mocked and told to shup up when they open air preached.
The preaching of the Word has always been hated….
Steven was stoned for it.
Paul was stoned and more for preaching it. 2 Cor 11:23-26 has a pretty extensive list of what Paul had to endure for preaching the Gospel.
Don’t get me wrong here guy’s, I love personal evangelism. Had great conversations with 6 different folks over the last couple weeks.
But I also believe that if God has called folks to go out and open air preach…then let us not hinder the work of God among us.
I’m with Wayne……..how many people in our culture will wish someone used a bull horn on their corner when they are spending eternity in hell.
It has been my experience that too many “christians” are keeping the Gospel to themselves. I don’t remember the percentage…….but it was high…..of how many christians have not shared Christ….not once.
On the other hand….it would not be appropriate to “bull-horn” a family picnic………some discernment or common sense would certainly be in order.
Waynedawg,
I think it is wonderful that you are able to share the gospel with people, one on one.
People will do what they will do, but I honestly believe that open air preaching or Bible reading will do much more to harden people to the gospel than it ever does to lead people to Christ.
But, it makes people feel like they are doing something productive and laudable by engaging in this activity.
I think if they could understand the damage they do, they might think twice.
As I have said before. I don’t appreciate it. When I go to the beach to relax, I don’t want to hear someone preaching or reading the Bible.
A non-believer’s view of Christianity (that they are just a bunch of wierdos) will be become hardened even further. Then when someone can get to them one on one, they might be sufficiently hardened where that gospel Word might not be able to break through.
I think we ought be smart about this and try to do ‘no harm’.
It’s been mentioned over and over that this type preaching will do more to harden people than it does to lead them to Christ.
I think what is being missed is an understanding of the depravity of man. That mankind indeed is an enemy of God and loves sin (Job 15:16, Rom 3:10, 5:10, Col 1:21, etc). Instead of our fear being ‘we’ll turn them off!!’ we need to grasp the reality of John 3:36 and understand God’s wrath presently abides on them. I don’t know Mr Miano’s motives (although many here have taken liberty to assume they’re selfish). We must remember that the Gospel is powerful (Rom 1:16) and Paul was thankful the gospel was preached even though those preaching it didn’t have pure motives (Phili 1). I’m amazed at the culture comments, especially since the ‘culture’ loved Jesus preaching so much they tried to throw him off a cliff, and on another occasion stone him. I recall Paul being stoned as well, and we all know what happened to Stephen. Remember the ‘culture’ in the times of the early Church thought they were nutjobs too (Gamaliel likens Christians to other cultists in Acts 5:34-40 and Paul is accused of being ‘mad’ in Acts 26:24 by a dignitary!). Please don’t buy into the culture myth, the Bible shows time and again that mankind has the same disease today that it had 2000 yrs ago, as well as the same cure.
To sum up: 1)Mankind hates God and is His enemy (they can’t be ‘more hardened’). 2)Gospel is powerful and doesn’t rely on our delivery to accomplish God’s divine purposes. 3)Mr Miano will give an account to God personally for his motives whether selfish or selfless where his works will burn or stand the test of fire (ICor 3), so let’s rejoice in the preaching of the law/gospel.
Ike,
If people will go to hell because someone didn’t preach to them (open-air), then how could we justify not using a bullhorn to read the Bible or preach at a family’s picnic?
Steve,
God’s will…will be done with you and me or w/o either one of us. It’s a wonderful privilege to be a part of His will. I’m torn between what you are saying and what Wayne is saying. So I guess I’m saying that there is a time and a place to witness to people……with common sense. As far as the “bullhorn”……..God will bring all His sheep home….the problem isn’t the bullhorn….the problem is that a very high percent of professing christians have not shared Christ with anyone. We are called to either go out into all the world or support those who do and that doesn’t mean we who work in the secular world…..do nothing.
Waynedawg,
A good venue is a proper time, place and occasion to do something.
I can conceive of a good place for sharing the gospel in an open air setting where people may be open, free and willing to hear a message even if they disagree with it. They might even heckle and persecute the speaker for the message… but the issue won’t be the venue.
A good venue might be in a busy place where people are coming and going … like a street corner. A place where people are free to stand and listen or continue on their way.
To impose the message at a time and place where people are intentionally trying to enjoy something else but are all of a sudden captive to an unwelcome message is simply insensitive and arrogant. The hearer may conclude that if Jesus makes you that rude and insensitive, I don’t ever want to hear His message.
1 Peter 3:15-16
Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.
“asks”… “gentleness and respect”… “good behavior”
“A good venue might be in a busy place where people are coming and going … like a street corner. A place where people are free to stand and listen or continue on their way. ”
I think here we can agree……..
Where I stood Saturday and read was in the middle of the town sqaure where people were free to come and go or stay if they wanted to.
I would never use a bullhorn to street preach. The man in the video did not use one either.
I would like to try some ‘Stop Light’ street preaching though!
check this out –
http://www.evtales.com/index.php/2009/05/21/stop-light-preaching-yes-you-can.html
Waynedawg,
Thanks for sharing the link. I don’t particularly like that approach nor do I think it’s very effective but at least the people could keep walking. While I don’t especially like it, I’d defend your right to do it that way… particularly if you believe that is what you’re called to do. God Bless.
I think one very effective venue for presenting the Gospel is what Steve is doing with this blog… it’s far reaching, it’s interesting, it’s culturally appropriate and Steve is respectful of opposing ideas.
Repent and believe the Gospel… for what it’s worth, I preached a short sermon on that statement sometime ago…http://www.livingfaithcapecoral.com/Sermons/RepentBelieveGospel.mp3
Thanks Patrick – I’ll download it and check it out!
Not too crazy about the stop light preaching, either.
Not to crazy about gimmicky preaching techniques.
I am a fan speaking to a broken heart, a hurting person, and telling them about Christ Jesus.
“I am a fan speaking to a broken heart, a hurting person, and telling them about Christ Jesus.”
What if their not hurting? What if they have the world, love their lust and spend each day living with full life like it’s their last day?
How do you reach that person?
Sorry for butting in, but here are some thoughts…
1. We are called to tell as best we can, when we can… the Spirit does the reaching
2. People who don’t know it are still hurting… they have a God shaped vacuum in their heart that only God can fill.
3. The self-sufficient are the most difficult to “tell” and the most reluctant to hear
4. A proper use of law and gospel can transform the hardest heart
5. The law shows a self sufficient person that he is not
6. The law troubles and drives him toward the remedy
7. The Gospel is the only remedy
Patrick – No fears….I know how to reach that person too.
I agree with all your points except the second part of #2. To be honest, I really dislike that phrase.
Check out this post about ‘God shaped vacuums’ or ‘God shaped holes’
http://skateparkchronicles.blogspot.com/2008/07/scraping-at-scabs.html
Given that understanding of the God shaped vacuum/hole… I don’t like it either. I think of it as a fatal hole/vacuum… not a mere asset deficiency on the balance sheet.
Patrick,
I’m looking forward to hearing your sermon. Thanks for the link.
Wayne,
Everyone has areas in their life where they are being had. Everyone has their times of pain. Everyone. And good Law/Gospel preaching will expose and condemn the sinner and raise him again (Lord willing).
Ike,
I guess you are right…we all have gifts and we should all use them for the purposes of our Lord.
Even though we are all derelict in our duty, the Lord somehow gets His work accomplished.
This is where getting to know someone a bit can really be valuable as we speak of Christ.
for some reason the approach jesus took seems more organic.
The most successful gospel-oriented ministries have found that the main causes of people not wanting to go to Church is the legallistic pharasaism that absolutely, without a doubt, exists in the Church. People are basically turned off by the right wing, turn off the gospel, and turn on moralism, legallistic thinking in the CHurch.
Christ changes top-down, inside-out and not bottom-up, outside-in — mans methods. Moralism is a by-product of the Gospel and the Gospel is not a by -product for legalists/moralists to use to accomplish thier purposes.
Long story in those comments and not enough time…. :-).
Wayne,
I read that article on the link you provided from skatepark chronicles.
I don’t think he quite understands the theology of the cross (Lutheranism).
We don’t promise anyone that Jesus will make them happy and fix all their problems…in this life.
We hold an end times view of problems being fixed.
Sure, there are lots of ways that our lives change because of Christ Jesus, but our problems persist because we are sinners in a fallen world. (Patrick’s sermon – link provided a few comments back spoke very well ti that fact).
But into the lostness and the sadness of life (everyone will be there sooner or later) we speak of the hope of Christ and speak of that cross and what it means for the world and for each one of us individually.
That’s the gospel (the good news) and it changes hearts, by God’s grace, when and where it wills.
FYI… their are plenty of theology of the cross people that are not Lutheran too!
It seems to be making a comeback in many circles… Presbyterian, Reformed, etc. Lets hope it does.
Patrick,
Thanks for the kind words about the blog. The folks that stop by here are a really good respectful bunch (although we have all had our moments) and so my hat is off to all of you.
Sometimes we have to agree to disagree, but it is good that we at least hear the other persons point of view and understand where they are coming from.
We are all works in progress and…who knows how we might change. Hopefully for the better, by His grace.
Your sermon (link a few comments back) was REALLY WONDERFUL!
[audio src="http://www.livingfaithcapecoral.com/Sermons/RepentBelieveGospel.mp3" /]
I loved the picture of God as the Dad who lifts the son to make a basket!
Thanks for sharing that one with us. I’d like to give it a post of it’s own (the next posting).
http://centralityofthegospel.wordpress.com/
Jon,
Sorry about that, my friend. You are right. The theology of the cross is not just the domain of the Lutherans ( although I think Luther’s understanding of it cannot be outdone by anyone 😀 )
It really does need to make a comeback..except for one thing. It never was really popular to begin with.
Human beings tend not to gravitate to the harsh realities of life, and the part of the Christian faith that says we must die, that we will die. It’s sounds like such a downer to people.
I hate to say this, but I think that the theologies of glory will always be far and away more popular.
“But into the lostness and the sadness of life (everyone will be there sooner or later) we speak of the hope of Christ and speak of that cross and what it means for the world and for each one of us individually.
That’s the gospel (the good news) and it changes hearts, by God’s grace, when and where it wills.”
AMEN…During loss and sadness and seasons of joy…we need to hear this Good News…not the endless listing of “do’s and don’ts” Yes there are many shoulda, coulda, wouldas for us in life….Victory rarely follows our listing of failures…
John 16:33 (New Living Translation)
I have told you all this so that you may have peace in me. Here on earth you will have many trials and sorrows. But take heart, because I have overcome the world.”
Boy I came into this one too late. Sorry, Steve, but I have no problem whatsoever with what Tony is doing in this video. If the woman who was heckling him was offended, that is sad. However, if the Spirit was able to plant a seed in her, (or anyone else who was listening,) than it was all worth it. No matter who, where or how you preach the gospel, (if it is the true gospel of repentance and faith,) someone is going to be offended. If i hadn’t of been offended by the fact that I am a dirty rotten sinner, I would never have been saved in the first place.
I noticed someone had commented that Paul often changed his preaching style depending on who was listening. I would add to that the fact that in just about every city Paul visited, they were so offended by his message that they rioted, had his arrested and even plotted to kill him. Perhaps Paul is not the best example to rail against this video.
Jesus said:
Blessed are those who are persecuted ‘because of righteousness’
and
Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you ‘because of me’.
Jesus said because of “righteousness” and because of “me”.
It is alarming to me that some Christians wear as a badge of honor their “being persecuted” for the sake of being disrespectful.
I wonder if those who have argued for proclaiming the message without regard to the means would appreciate someone doing what this man did at their son or daughters graduation commencement ceremony or wedding or at a loved ones funeral without regard to it’s appropriateness.
Timm,
In my last comments you know that I feel there are better ways to share the gospel.
I really would not like someone presenting the gospel to me at a time or place that I felt inappropriate.
There are limits. For example, if you had to get up and go to work and someone was preaching the true gospel outside your window all night.
Was it the true gospel? Yes, it was. Was it good stewardship of that gospel Word? No, it wasn’t.
Believe it or not, people’s hearts can be hardened to the gospel message.
Insensitive, arrogant, selfish, unthinking Christians, are often counter-productive with respect to their witnessing. I know, I have been guilty of this very same thing in the past.
I appreciate your thoughts, Timm.
– Steve
This comment is from Greg (my computer is acting up a bit and I’m not sure why the comment didn’t come up on it’s own…but I want to make sure it gets up…if it is duplicated, then excuse me)
Greg says:
It’s been mentioned over and over that this type preaching will do more to harden people than it does to lead them to Christ.
I think what is being missed is an understanding of the depravity of man. That mankind indeed is an enemy of God and loves sin (Job 15:16, Rom 3:10, 5:10, Col 1:21, etc). Instead of our fear being ‘we’ll turn them off!!’ we need to grasp the reality of John 3:36 and understand God’s wrath presently abides on them. I don’t know Mr Miano’s motives (although many here have taken liberty to assume they’re selfish). We must remember that the Gospel is powerful (Rom 1:16) and Paul was thankful the gospel was preached even though those preaching it didn’t have pure motives (Phili 1). I’m amazed at the culture comments, especially since the ‘culture’ loved Jesus preaching so much they tried to throw him off a cliff, and on another occasion stone him. I recall Paul being stoned as well, and we all know what happened to Stephen. Remember the ‘culture’ in the times of the early Church thought they were nutjobs too (Gamaliel likens Christians to other cultists in Acts 5:34-40 and Paul is
accused of being ‘mad’ in Acts 26:24 by a dignitary!). Please don’t buy into the culture myth, the Bible shows time and again that mankind has the same disease today that it had 2000 yrs ago, as well as the same cure.
To sum up: 1)Mankind hates God and is His enemy (they can’t be ‘more hardened’). 2)Gospel is powerful and doesn’t rely on our delivery to accomplish God’s divine purposes. 3)Mr Miano will give an account to God personally for his motives whether selfish or selfless where his works will burn or stand the test of fire (ICor 3), so let’s rejoice in the preaching of the law/gospel.
Steve,
I think some have missed the point of your post. The issue isn’t whether or not humankind is depraved and in need of the message of Christ. The issue isn’t whether or not the Word is powerful and effective. The issue isn’t whether or not we should take the message of God’s Word to the world. The answer to all those questions is a resounding YES.
Your question was “would you like it?” and “is this the BEST stewardship of the message?”
If Jesus demonstrated anything to us, it was a radical identification with “culture”… He came to us as one of us. He identified with us in every way but was without sin. He met us where we are and with compassion.
Missionaries who go into a new culture, make it a point to learn the culture first so as to not create walls that are unnecessary. Once they understand the culture, they contextualize the message so that it can be heard.
Those who have argued for proclamation without regard to culture have ignored other truths clearly expressed in scripture. “gentleness and respect” “truth in love” “For God so LOVED the world” etc.
While I would defend the video man’s civil & first amendment rights to do what he did, I could not defend it as being the most effective way to do it. The offensive and judgmental labeling done by the editor of the video, and that the reader was insensitive to the crowd that was trying to enjoy something “else” that day is pretty clear. He didn’t meet the crowd at their level of interest and need but rather imposed himself in a way that Jesus did not do.
No confusion on the point of the post. Just two very differing opinions on mans dilemma. One says mankind is in a burning building that will collapse at any time, kick the door down if necessary to save the occupants. The other says it’s a very slow burning fire and we need to convince the occupants using our God given abilities to coax them out in a non-offensive way, but if they’re not receptive don’t come on too strong or they’ll for sure stay inside.
As I see it, one has a focus on man in the coversion process, the other rests in God’s sovereignty.
As I see it, one has a focus on the whole counsel of God in the application of the Word, the other rests on an simplistic tactic. In either case, mans dilemma is the same and God is sovereign.
Finesse is often faster than force in a rescue.
Patrick,
Nice job, sir.
You have clearly laid out all the aspects of this question and I believe answered each one in a way that is consistent with Christian love and the Christian ethic (do no harm).
Thanks, Patrick.
– Steve
We (Lutherans) believe in the sovereignty of God, also.
That’s why we baptise babies so the Holy Spirit can go to work on them and in them right from the start.
Then we teach them the great things that God has done for them in that baptism, as they grow in their faith and listen to the Word.
It keeps us grounded in His Word and His Sacraments, and helps to keep us away from gimmicky preaching or witnessing techniques.