In case you arrive here via a search engine I am referencing a post from yesterday.  In that post the idea was floated that our people might be more engaged by our sermons if we give them less information.

Let me throw out another idea….could we, by giving a great deal of information in a linear progression, actually be insulting our listeners?

I just finished a fascinating book, Everything Bad is Good For You.  The premise of this book is that popular culture is actually making people smarter because it more fully engages our mind.  (It does not make judgment of the morals of todays pop culture, just the mental processing of popular culture.)  The author speculates that there is a "sleeper curve" of increasing complexity in entertainment and that watching TV today requires more mental skills.


Check out this quote, "The Sopranos is several times more demanding of its audiences than Hill Street was, and Joe Millionaire has made comparable advances over Battle of the Network Stars.  The ultimate test of the Sleeper Curve theory: even the crap has improved."

Let’s face it, our people watch this stuff.  Where as 20 years ago a television show followed one story line…now it follows several and winds them together…sometimes referencing events from two or three seasons before.  Where as in the past story lines were resolved, today ambiguity rules.

What does this mean?

Because we still need clarity, perhaps the solution is making or listeners seem as if they are on a journey and exploring with us versus having our research presented to them from our lofty perch.  If not, we may be insulting their intelligence.  Also, perhaps rather than supplying people with applications we just supply them with questions.  Any thoughts?