Why would I want a band to play the music of James Swearingen? He wrote a few marginally worthwhile pieces, I suppose . . . but there are better pieces within the repertory of similar difficulty level.
Why would I want to listen to the fluff of Joel Osteen and his ilk when more Bible-based, more solid teaching is available from more credible sources? Sure, Osteen may make you feel good if you’re not really paying deep attention, but when a message is built on sand, it eventually collapses.
Why would I want to use the “Bible study methods” of Rick Warren? A few of his published dozen methods have some merit, to be sure, but not all.¹ There are better methodologies available that take advantage of authentic scholarship and pay more attention to context.
Why would I want to use the KJV? Could someone find God through it? Sure, but it’s often harder to figure things out, not to mention the obsolete or mistaken translations that appear more frequently than in most other reputable bibles; plus, the KJV makes the historical realities seem a lot more distant than they need to seem.
When better material exists, why not use it?
I’m currently using resource material by Luke Timothy Johnson, and I’m finding a lot of merit in it.
B. Casey, 10/2 and 10/11/15
¹Note: I suppose I could have asked the question about the Gospel Advocate or Beth Moore or others. I know even less about their material, but I’m convinced there is better material than theirs, too.