You're preaching an entire sermon that's someone else's
A larger section of a sermon is from someone else
You're quoting a section from a book word for word
but again, the difference between verbal communication and written communication lead to different needs. In books, academic papers, and journalistic publications, authors can do extensive citation without distracting readers by footnoting / end noting. The reader doesn't have to hear "I got this statistic from blah blah blah academic journal, which cited a study in 2016 called ________." They can just read the stat with a little footnote number next to it and check the source on a completely different page at the end of the book if desired without the citation interrupting the flow of the prose. The same is not possible in verbal preaching, and as noted by Bart Barber, President of the SBC, over-citation in verbal preaching can be distracting for hearers." - Josh Howerton
The fact that Josh scoured the Internet to find guys who agree that stealing and lying are not a big deal does not change the fact that it is a big deal. He is also continuing to pretend we are talking about something we are not. I am not suggesting that every single thought we should give credit for. I agree that would muddy down the preaching. I am just saying if you are stating a thought as if it is your own when you know full well it is not, you are in fact a lair. I am not saying this academically, but rather from a Christian perspective. I am glad to see there are some standards Howerton has but the compelling factor for him seems to be the length of the theft and not the theft in general. Quoting an entire book? Bad to not give credit but taking a singular independent thought that is not yours and acting like it is? No problem! By the way if it is not that big a deal, why not just use your own thought? Surely you can be creative when designing the sermon to have your own thoughts. Realize that in his sermon prep, Howerton is actually writing down the catch phrases of other people and choosing to not give them credit for it. That is theft, period full stop. Bart Barber's opinion about how we should not care as preachers about lying and stealing is also irrelevant. Again, how hard would it have been for Howerton to just say, Andy Stanley once said?
"But pastors are supposed to be getting their own word from God for their church!" They are! That happens THROUGH the research process, not apart from it. Just like in commentaries, books, lectures, and articles, sometimes I'll hear something in a sermon and think, "Yeah, that's a word for our church right now," think the Spirit wants me to deliver it, and I'll use an illustration, phrase, or way of explaining a passage. That's a "word in season" that happened through research, not individual inspiration. I'm not gonna go here, but if you REALLY want to get salty, know who didn't always cite sources? Bible writers. Gospel writers and other epistles borrow liberally from the Old Testament, sometimes citing, but often just saying without citation because in preaching what really matters is that people are helped with the truth." - Josh Howerton
Nice try. This is a perfect example. Would Josh Howerton quote a commentary and not give credit for which one he used? I hope not. No one is suggesting that research is not important but give credit when you choose to use someone else's material! Perhaps the worst offense in this entire defense of lying and stealing is to smear the New Testament writers in this manner. The reality is that Josh Howerton has NO IDEA what or how these men taught or preached. Maybe Howerton does not know because he is a hireling but the books of the New Testament were actually written down by scribes. Who knows how they shortened the words to make the book flow better. That said, I seriously doubt that the Apostle Paul would quote something from the Old Testament as if he himself wrote it. I seriously doubt that Peter would quote the prophets of old but present it as an original thought. The smear is ludicrous on its face but when you are as compromised as Josh Howerton is, why not slander the writers of the gospel to support the fact that you are a lair a thief and a cheat.
If you have stuck with this for this long, kudos to you dear reader. Josh Howerton is clearly an NAR fool, doing the bidding of his political dominionist masters. He has no clue about scriptures and apparently only uses the bible to prop up his unbiblical positions. Besides quoting heretics and not giving them credit for it, he actually thinks it is a good look to defend such indefensible activities. I have preached before. It is not very difficult to give proper credit, where credit is due. Mark and avoid Josh Howerton and this episode proves how ironically funny God is because I never thought I would be defending Mark Driscoll and Andy Stanley's right to have their own heretical thoughts be given proper credit.
