I do that too!

Hmm... My comment to you was in reply to what seemed (to me) like a very condescending rebuke to Michael ("You realize you just compared God to man, right?"). My point was simply that Michael's comparison was a valid one, as Jesus did the same thing, repeatedly. I wasn't arguing about the nature of love, although I would tend to agree that wholesale slaughter probably doesn't fit in with even the toughest of tough love. I appreciate your attempt to educate me on the continuity of the Bible, but again, it does come across a little on the condescending side. I'm more amused than offended, but maybe that's me being condescending!

As for contradictions, there are plenty throughout the Bible. It doesn't make it any less "true", and it doesn't make God inconsistent. It is a true reflection of how different people in different times have tried to reconcile what is happening/ has happened to them with their relationship with God. Or maybe it's a true reflection of how different people have interpreted their relationship with God in light of their present experiences and past history. Revision and exposition have happened all along.

Anyway, I'm with you on finding fault with the prosperity gospel, though maybe not for exactly the same reasons.

Yeah, I'm glad that in the tradition I'm in now, "long" is a 20 minute sermon instead of 15 min. But oh have I had to wait through some lengthy sermons in my life! Part of it I guess is cultural, and there are different expectations everywhere you go, but part of it is also respect. The respect should not be a one-way street from the congregation to the preacher; it should be reciprocated, and a speaker that doesn't respect his or her audience by preparing adequately to make the desired points within a reasonable time frame is not respecting the audience. Then again, I think in some traditions, preachers feel like the more they go on, the more "money's worth" the congregation is getting.

Your monkey story, by the way, is hilarious, but I couldn't possibly get offended by it, as that could have come straight from the mouths of at least half my family.

haha

and shake your head conspicuously in disgust!

Evening services can be an awkward way to start somewhere--they tend to be more informal and more intimate, as you said. It's easier to start off at the main Sunday service. But good for you for trying.

This is awful, I know, but sometimes it feels so good to be indignant at the wrongness of what's being preached that I'd rather stay for the fun of it, and spend my time coming up with all the reasons it's wrong. It's almost like a brain-training game. I think I must naturally be a little contrary. :( But you know, there are so many things I don't know what I think about, that when I hear something and can say, "That's wrong, and here's why", it feels good. It also feels good to hear something and know the rightness of it--the brain game then is to start connecting it and applying it.

But back to the wrong stuff--how wrong does it have to be to walk out? There have been a few times I can remember when walking out probably would have been appropriate. One I can recall was several years ago in a charismatic service during which the speaker implied that anyone who had cancer either didn't have enough faith or had some unrepented sin in their life. That, to me, is cruel. Guess what? Not only do you have cancer, but it's your fault! Another big misstep for me is for the preacher or pastor to blatantly back a particular political candidate from the pulpit as "God's choice". I may not walk out, but I certainly won't be going back. Oh and then there was the time the pastor told us at the beginning of the sermon to "take off our thinking hats and put on our faith hats". I wish I had walked out...with my thinking hat firmly in place.

I feel like this is a weird part of American Christian culture, something I once heard referred to as our "civic religion"--a strange mix of patriotism and religion, "God and country", as if the two belong in the same category. It kinda bothers me to see the American flag in churches, and the intentionally patriotic services can feel a little too much like triumphalism.

Jesus compared God to man didn't he? And made a similar point to Michael's. What father among you, if his son asked for a fish, would give him a scorpion instead?

God may not be subject to the morals of today's society (whatever that means), but I think we do expect God to be subject to God's own goodness.

I don't know. I prefer it to the mentality that the only important part is the sermon, which I know from growing up with family members who were preachers/pastors is often the case, at least in the more charismatic traditions. It's like the worship music at the beginning is just a warm up for the main event.

While I wouldn't go so far as to say that church is pointless without communion, I do appreciate the liturgical tradition I'm in now in which the Eucharist is the culmination of the service. I feel a bit cheated if it isn't there.

Thanks, Michael. I think that's a great point--Jesus does seem to go out of his way to draw the contrast between earthly kingdoms and the kingdom of heaven/God. Eye for an eye v. turn the other cheek. Lose your life to find it. Etc.

As to bad neighborhoods in heaven--it's a funny idea and I kinda like trying to imagine what that would look like, but I tend to think of the kindom of heaven less as a place and more of a system or "reign".