112 thoughts on “Preachers Who Wish They Were Comedians”

        1. (Judges 3:17) “And he brought the present unto Eglon king of Moab: and Eglon was a very fat man.”

        2. A statement of fact from the Bible that someone was fat somehow gives permission to make fun of people who are? The social and cultural ineptitude it takes to make that leap blows my mind.

        3. it depends on how fat the preacher is. if he’s fat, he can make fun of other fat people. i, for example, can make fun of fat people (even though i just had half my torso surgically removed) because i’m fat. i cannot, however, make fun of anybody else (except fundies).

        4. @Scorpio I believe it’s your turn to tag? @Reader Mo I think it’s safe to keep the jokes. Surgeons removing massive amounts of flesh/tissue is hardly a reason to not keep the humor coming!

  1. I think Fozzie Bear is better than this guy.

    Tony Hutson is another one that probably wishes he had gone into stand up comedy.

      1. There’s no incentive you can give me to listen to the fundamentalist BS. More than half the audio/video clips posted I can’t make it through, or have mentally wandered from less than halfway through. Having witnessed your own “exposition” done poorly time after time, I feel I’m not missing much skipping on your recommendation, and doubting your laudatory praise.

        1. Yet you still feel obligated and qualified to judge and crticize

          Maybe you don’t like fundies because they do it better and you are just jealous

        2. Really John, really? We’re sooooo jealous of fundies, doesn’t it just ooze through our posts??

          Come on now. Anything but that.

  2. That was horrible! What a way to turn off your audience before you even get into the substance of the sermon (if there was any).

    1. Most fundamentalists are preaching to the choir anyway, so, I suppose it doesn’t matter.

  3. If you go to the web site and listen to the whole sermon, he is very expository once he gets into the message.

    The “fat” comments weren’t until 2/3rds the way in.

    80% of professing Christians likely have no idea this story is even in the Bible, much less hear a textual sermon on it.

    1. John, don’t take this personally but you’ve been taking all the fun out of SFL for me lately. Lighten up, dude! LOL

      1. Establishing data points with @scorpio and calling out all the classless comments he makes has been amusing, but if there were a way to hide or block him ala facebook, I’d push that button.

      2. sorry -I love most all the stuff here, but sometimes it turns to slander and unChristian remarks in the talkbacks that deserve and answer

        I will try to dial it back where I can of good conscience

        1. John, I think people would have less trouble with you if you didn’t categorize both ‘any reasonable and well-grounded criticism’ and ‘statement of fact’, as ‘slander’.

        2. I believe this is the first actual apology we’ve gotten without an explanation how it makes him more mature than everyone else, or apologizing if you were offended. Much appreciated, and respected. And that’s not sarcastic.

    2. John, unfortunately I was not able to listen to the clip so I have to be careful about commenting on this.
      As I read the comments from people who did listen to this, it seems as if some are offended and others are saying “no big deal”.
      It reminds of the old fundy-jedi mind trick story of a little poop (or poison) in the brownies. My point being that even if one person is offended by something a preacher says that could be one person too many. In this case, how would the pastor know that there wasn’t someone in his audience that was overweight that was close to accepting Jesus, or the person was saved but was having doubts. For that person to hear a “joke” about someone being overweight could cause that person to be offended and not get saved or make that person really doubt their salvation even more.
      Of course to the fundie, that person is just bitter or not right with God.

    3. John,

      Alright, I took one for the team and listened to the whole sermon. 95% of what I heard I wouldn’t classify as cognitive thought preaching. Just catch phrases, (that he probably hopes will be written in the flyleafs of the Bibles of those who are listening), poor attempts at humor, (I’ve yet to crack a smile), judgmental ism (be it the fat jokes, gay bashing, KJV-onlyism, or his political party leanings), gun rights (“if guns had been invented, Ehud would have carried a Glock.”) , man centered “just try harder” “pull yourself up by the bootstraps” heretical theology, and more of the typical fundy rants. What I just listened to is not expository preaching. He had a theme he wanted to talk about, found a text that fit his theme, and started firing phrases and bits of scripture that seem to fit his message.

      Just to make myself clear. I am not offended by the fat jokes. They were not funny and I think they were in poor taste, but I’m not offended. I take more offense that you would defend this preacher and style of preaching as expository. It is precisely this type of preaching that drove me away from men who spoke with an agenda to men whose passion is for Christ and His Word. Unfortunately, I heard neither in this message.

      1. I call them “sermons in sound bytes,” which simply means either the speaker or the audience don’t have the attention span to deal with a well crafted sermon with an actual thesis and proof of that thesis. My guess is that it isn’t the audience. 😈

  4. Click on the Preacher’s name in the original post by Darrell and it takes you to the site

    The whole sermon is listed in big letters, entitled “Stick With It”

    1. Look at this little nugget on their About Us/Statement of Faith page:

      “The Scriptures shall be interpreted according to their normal grammatical-historical meaning, and all issues of interpretation and meaning shall be determined by the pastor.” 😯

      Yup. The pastor has a hot-line to God himself to properly interpret the meaning of scripture. No need to think for yourself folks, the pastor has ALL the answers.

      1. Isn’t that every Pastor/Elders job?

        It didnt say God gave the Pastor “special revelation” just that he was the overseer of this flock and that interpretaion was not left up to majority vote.

        1. What if the pastor’s interpretation is wrong?
          But according to that statement he never is.

        2. I believe you should be arguing for it being the body of Christ’s job to unitedly work through the Scriptures where some (presumably leaning towards Pastor’s) would be more familiar w/ systematic theology of some sort, and greek. Others will be more familiar w/ literature & history, all will bring their own personal experiences.

        3. interpretaion was not left up to majority vote

          Interpretation is not the job of the pastor/shepherd either. There is only one interpretation of scripture. There may be many applications but only one interpretation.

          That is one of the problems of Americanized churchianity today. There is a “shepherd” guiding his flock on every corner according to his own interpretation of scripture. They can’t go too far afield and have to parrot the denominational dogmas (so they are accepted as a mainstream congregation within the Independent Fundamental group of Independent Fundamentals,) but concerning the local standards that are elevated to essential doctrine they are given wide latitude. (the standing to piss preacher in AZ is an exception to this rule, as being one that had struck out on his own; blazing his own trail across the rabid fundy wilderness… but I digress.)

          That is why there are so many splintered congregations and “Church” splits today. Here in the rusted buckle of the Bible belt especially! It is a cult of personality that is a cancer in the body of Christ.

          In the IFB especially with the emphasis on “full-time” Christian service you end up with a surplus of guys who get it in their mind that they have been called to preach. And the only accepted way to preach is to have a congregation of sheeple. So a Group or a person has their “interpretation” of Scripture and they disagree with the pastor on the “interpretation of the sixth bowl judgment and how it relates to current world events. There is a split brewing, and next thing you know there ia new “ministry” in town. Of course these new “pastor/shepherds” who have called themselves to the ministry claim they need no training other than that SOTL correspondence course (or something equally as worthless). And they are off to build their little fiefdom in hopes of an empire someday.(a la: Elmer Gantry) So what we have is a homegrown surplus of home missions that fail to launch. There is no reason for so many bunkers and sub-bunkers to litter the landscape. The world looks on and laughs at the debacle of American Christianity.

          There’s Christian unity and brotherhood for you in America today, all neatly tucked behind the blast doors of their bunkers hunkering there against the influence of the worldly culture and the pandemic of sin in that culture. Safely seperated unto their god and unable to influence the culture around them because they have isloated themselves from the society they live in and are no longer relevant to the culture at large.

          But the M-O-g is the sole interpreter of the word of gid. “So sayeth the Shepherd!”
          “So sayeth the Flock!

  5. Seriously? Honestly not funny, and not even in a “obesity is a serious health problem and you shouldn’t make fun of it” way. Not funny in a “gosh, that’s just not funny” way. Not funny in a “I wasn’t even tempted to crack a grin even once” sort of way.

    And the southern accent is grating. But hey, at least this is the first SFL clip I made it all the way through on…

    1. The crowd seemed to love it.
      Only the thin skinned and biased whose funny bone only works on their enemies wouldn’t.

      How discrimatory to bring up the accent.

      1. Wait a minute here…
        You bringing up the accent is judgemental? I think only the thin skinned and biasedx whose funny bones only work on their enemies would have a problem with it.

      2. Or maybe they’re just laughing because that’s what they’re supposed to do. Maybe they’re just trained well.

      3. >>How discrimatory to bring up the accent.>>

        You know what? I don’t usually bite. But I’ll bite. Discriminatory? (When in doubt about spelling, Google is your friend.) No, I stated an opinion. Those who know me know I am opinionated. But that is not discriminatory. Discriminatory would be if I thought, “Oh boy, a Southern accent. Bet he’s stupid.” Categorizing someone by a trait is discrimination. Noting that I can’t stand to listen to him is not by itself discriminatory.

        For the record, his accent could be southern, northern, midwestern, Russian, or Cambridge and I’d still hold him with the same minuscule regard I currently do.

  6. Reminds me of Greg Locke.

    The WORST IFB humour I have ever heard was from either Sam Gipp, or Kent Hovind. The latter I quite enjoyed listening to, the former was an excercise in patience, since he never uses scripture in his sermons, except for 30 seconds at the start.

    Both of them would say “ahem” or cough after making a joke, which was really awkward. Like listening to a real life Neil Hamburger “America’s Funny Man”


    Be warned – very dark/bad humour. Intentionally bad.

    1. Thing is, his “jokes” aren’t too far off baptist jokes. Add a “because she dresses like a whore and deserved it” and the first “joke” would fit right in many IFB services.

  7. THAT was “preaching”…most of what passes for preaching is nothing more than a “sancfified” rant or attempts at comedy in the name of Jesus. πŸ™

    1. Right on…We need more exposition of scripture and not theatrics.

      The power of God is in the gospel, not in gimmicks.

  8. “man-uh”

    He can’t say a word without adding “uh”

    His cadence gets old really fast.

    1. I was thinking the same thing. It’s a pretty common cadence, though. Do they formally teach this in fundy seminaries? Bible 103 – Principles of Pro-nun-see-ay-shhh-unnNN-UH

      1. We’ve had this discussion before on here I think. The hypnotizing cadence of IFB preachers is something I think Darrell wanted someone to do a study on.

    2. Yeah, is this a way to sort of hypnotize the audience? It’s a very rhythmic pattern of speech, and I have to wonder if it doesn’t lull the audience into something akin to a trance. Is there a psychologist who reads this site who can clue us in?

    3. I used-ah to-ah use-ah fundamentalist-ah baptist-ah pureachers-ah as an example of good final consonant diction. I now prefer a little more nuanced sound.

  9. I’m in the 40% of Christians who’ve heard this text preached on many, many, many times.

    1. One of the things I love about stufffundieslike is that whenever some extremely obscure corner of scripture is mentioned, and someone says, “I’ve never heard a sermon preached on that,” someone else is sure to say, “Well, I have.”

      “I’ve never heard anyone preach on the instructions for using human excrement to bake a cake.”
      “I have. Brother Naftali went on about that for four hours one Sunday.”

      “I’m puzzled by the use of a red thread in sacrificing cattle.”
      “Ho! Chaplain Simon at Biblebanger U. did a 36-part sermon series on this.”

      1. LOL! Admittedly, when you’ve been in church all your life, attending Sunday school, Sunday morning, Sunday night, Wednesday night, Monday night Bible studies, Bible camp, Vacation Bible School, perhaps even Christian school with Bible class every day and chapel at least twice a week, then off to Bible college with chapel four times a week, you hear a LOT of Bible preaching (and a lot of not-so-Bible preaching!)

      2. One of my absolute faves ever, and I don’t think it’s been SFL’d, was a sermon a couple years ago the Mullinex was in full dispensationalist mode on a Rejoice broadcast, and spent more than half his sermon discussing the rarity of an unblemished red heifer, how “they” estimate one comes along every 2,000 years, how “they” are scouring the world for a newborn unblemished red heifer that would be able to be sacrificed in a rebuilt Temple in Jerusalem, etc. Was a classic example filled with all kinds of references to undocumented “they”s, misinterpreted OT typology, basic biology misunderstanding, storytelling, and would make another great example of searching for obscurities to extrapolate great fundy truths.

        1. According to one preacher they have the ashes of the last red heifer, and a herd of them ready as soon as the Dome of the Rock, um, disappears.

        2. Id love to know who fundamentalist preachers think the “they” are. I don’t know of any group of jewish believers who are looking to restore animal sacrifice, let alone obsessed with a red heifer. Also skipped in the idiotic lectures on the subject why the Evangelisys/authors of the Gospels somehow totally forgot to mention anything about the centrality of a Red Heifer to the Nativity story. And author of Hebrews totallly slipped his/her mind too.

  10. John reminds me of Brian on Family Guy. In the latest episode, Brian becomes a Republican after reading a book by Rush Limbaugh. The other characters figure out that he just likes being contrary, and having something to fight against.

    TA DA! Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you John! πŸ™„

    1. Ah, being judged by FAMILY GUY –THATis your standard of humore? A show that specializes in making fun of handicapped people, fat people, and blasphemes Jesus at every turn?

      This says sooooooo much about you and your mentality.
      Judge a hrist exalting preacher and use as THAT as your standard.

      1. John, how would know that Family Guys makes fun of handicapped people, and fat people and blasphemes unless….you watch it yourself!?!?!

        You forgot that they also make fun of pedophiles, gays, presidents, blacks, latinos, jocks, abortion, vasectomies, liposuction, rich people, Star Wars, etc. etc. etc.

        IMHO – Family Guy is best show on television

        1. “He that justifieth the wicked, and he that condemneth the just, even they both are abomination to the LORD.” Ò€”Proverb 17:15

        2. John – What I have told you about responding with scripture verses you deem appropriate? πŸ™‚

      2. John, I wish you could see the freedom that Christ offers. There is joy in having a relationship with him but unless you get your doctrine straight and get outta fundyland it will be very hard to experience it.

        If you would put Christ on the throne and put yourself on your knees in humble adoration of his majesty and grace…it would completely change your thinking and shake you to the core.

        I challenge you to throw man centered religion and non biblical rules out the door and seek out the gospel of Jesus. It will change your life in fantastic ways.

        God Bless.

        1. Mike W

          Appreciate your concern friend, but I have plenty freedom in Christ where I am.

          Beleiving the Bible and the fundamentals of the faith does not make one a “Fundy” charicature.

          Legalism is found in all stripes , not just the conservative. Ask any Nun and you will see.

      3. “This says sooooooo much about you and your mentality.”
        Wow. I said John reminded me of a character on a show, and now he knows me.
        Believe it or not, I’m actually finding more in common with that particular episode. When asked by Mr. Limbaugh if he had read any of his books Brian replied “NO, BUT I’VE READ THINGS PEOPLE HAVE WRITTEN ABOUT YOU AND I DON’T AGREE WITH THEM, I DON’T AGREE WITH THEM AT ALL!

        LMAO! Thanks John for NOT proving any points with your statement.

        “IMHO Γ’β‚¬β€œ Family Guy is best show on television” I like many shows, but Family Guy is freaking hilarious.

        I may be breaking fundy rules of personal separation, but I really don’t care about man-centered religion anymore.

        This is how I imagine fundy commenters on this site.. (Copy and paste friends)


        1. Case closed then

          Carnality is better than Christianity
          and “Family Guy” filth is superior to sermons

          got it.


        2. “Carnality is better than Christianity
          and Ò€œFamily GuyÒ€ filth is superior to sermons”
          I actually didn’t comment on the sermon… didn’t even listen to it. I got enough of that in 4 years at Fundy U.
          There’s the false dichotomy again. Either Carnality or Christianity. πŸ™„

          “Ò€¦and whereÒ€ℒd you get that picture of me? LOL”
          I appreciate that John does seem to have a sense of humor, I swear I’m not stalking you.

          I won’t continue responding because pointless disagreements on an website don’t do much to advance the Kingdom of God. Still, this is pretty darn entertaining.. almost as funny as Family Guy. πŸ˜†

  11. The post is about the humor, or lack thereof, of the preacher, not about the sermon. If John wants, I can get several friends to listen to it and deconstruct it, which probably won’t be very pretty. What would you like John?

    1. You’re both welcome to join @Scorpio and I documenting all the time John takes sarcasm, or mockery as literal with “data points”. I’m pretty convinced he still hasn’t caught on to it though. Its quite amusing.

        1. Maybe showing my age, but I have never been a fan of TNG. Only TOS will do for me. 😎

        2. I am with you on that.

          Watched and VHS’d the first season of TNG and then pronplty abandoned it.

          Tuned in very , very few times afterward, and usually regretted it.

  12. I didn’t think it was very funny. I chuckled at the accent, but I wouldn’t listen to the sermon based on 1) re-hashed Fundy truths (guilt , guilt, and in case you mention grace, we’ll place conditions on that grace that will mean you’re still guilty ’till you do x) and 2) that accent REALLY grates on me. It’s sort of an aggressive “you get on board with me now” kind of preaching style that (I can’t remember who said it, but he/she was right) is hypnotic. Plus: I doubt any exegesis is going on. Most of these sermons are a copy/paste of what the preacher thinks you should be doing and proof texts to support it (notwithstanding intent of the writer and immediate context). Using the same preaching style I can convince you Jesus was a megalomaniacal homosexual hippie that also happened to be suicidal. And I wouldn’t prove more than the fact that I can irresponsibly use the single best gift God has given the world in order to damn my listeners to a godless life of following my precepts. Nothing changes, just the names and the precepts. How pagan we all are (were?) … 😳

    1. Actually, knowing a bunch of neo-pagans, ‘blindly following a charismatic leader’ really isn’t a specifically a pagan trait (remembering trying to organise historical reconstructionist events involving multiple groups including norse pagan neo-Vikings and medievalist Wiccans, a bit of ‘blindly following what they were told to do without arguing’ would have been quite useful).

      1. Maybe that last line should have been set apart from the rest. I meant it as sarcasm. I was using their language: “pagan” = anything I want it to mean. I wasn’t specifically saying that “irresponsibly [using] the single best gift God has given the world in order to damn my listeners to a godless life of following my precepts” was historically pagan. I was borrowing their use of the word “pagan” as denoting anything negative and that should be avoided.

  13. I certainly am the last person who would ever really want to defend a fundamentalist, but I think everyone needs to lay off of Bro. John, for no other reason than the comments between the posters on here and Bro. John have gotten childish and a little out of hand.

    One thing I like about this site is that it is made up of educated people who are all “re-habbing” out of the staunch, legalistic fundamentalist mindset. The vast majority of us have grown up in environments where any type of respectful question, discussion or opinion was frowned upon. We were all taught to follow blindly and be loud about it — and that we had the right to be as obnoxious as possible because we were right and that’s all that mattered.

    I definitely think that fat jokes have no place behind the “sacred desk,” but this particular snippet of the sermon that was posted here “is what it is.” Do you think it’s funny, or not funny? Obviously, Bro. John thought it was funny and there were people in his congregation who thought it was funny. I’m sure that those in the congregation are familiar with his preaching style and “sense of humor” and like it, so that’s why they stay there. I’m sure anyone who didn’t like John’s preaching style and sense of humor would have left.

    I’m rambling here, but the main focus of my post is that there is no need to resort to name calling or immature, personal attacks. In reading the posts, I don’t see where there is any need for it. I really think that cutting comments and personal attacks against other posters cheapen this site.

    Let’s not get “all fundamentlist” over this. This isn’t over until the fat lady sings.

    P.S. I think saying “Bro. John” is funny for some reason. That’s why I used that term.

Comments are closed.