Red flags for detecting deceptions in subtle sermons

A "refrigerator magnet sermon" is a sermon that is quite "attractive" but contains little meaningful content. Such sermons can be preached in any church. A euphemism for a "refrigerator magnet sermon" is ARMS (Attractive Refrigerator Magnet Sermons).

When someone asks you what you thought of the church or sermon, you can say:

Your church has real open ARMS.

I felt welcomed with open ARMS

That preaching was an great example of open ARMS.

Note: A "refrigerator magnet sermon" not of the polarity of the congregation is "repulsive" unlike actual magnets where opposite poles attract.

More: Attractive refrigerator magnet sermons

Colossians 2:4 And this I say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words. [kjv]

τουτο λεγω ινα μηδεις υμας παραλογιζηται εν πιθανολογια [gnt]

The Latin word "decipio" ≈ "catch, ensnare" from the Latin word "de" ≈ "of, from" and the Latin word "capio" ≈ "capture" and is the source of the English word "capture". The "enticing words" is interesting in the Latin.

The Latin word "subtilitate" ≈ "subtle".
The Latin word "sermonum" ≈ "sermons" and has to do with words being spoken and is the source of the English word "sermon".

Using the Greek and Latin: See that no one uses false reasoning on you in subtle sermons. Does your pastor preach "subtle sermons"?

Might there be a reason why you seldom hear this chapter being preached?

More: Colossians 2:1-23 Philosophy and false reasoning through subtle sermons

Aristotle wrote a book called On Sophistic Refutations in which he detailed the "false reasoning" used by Sophists (from the Greek word for "wisdom") who would use invalid logic to convince others of ideas to make money for themselves. In English, "sophistic" logic or "false reasoning" is "sophistry".
One of the many types of invalid logic detailed by Aristotle was "eristic" reasoning. Paul uses that word often but it is often translated, without the "bad logic" connection, as "strife"

More: Eristic reasoning creates strife and contention

More: Aristotle

The ancient Greek word "παραλογίζομαι" ≈ "reason falsely" is used often by Aristotle in his work On sophistic refutations. Paul uses this word in Colossians - a book that uses many Aristotelian words. Apparently "false reasoning" in "teaching" was a problem at the church at Colossae.

Colossians 2:4 And this I say, lest any man should beguile you with enticing words. [kjv]

τουτο λεγω ινα μηδεις υμας παραλογιζηται εν πιθανολογια [gnt]

The Latin for "enticing words" is "subtle sermons".

One meaning: Beware lest anyone use false reasoning on you with subtle sermons.

More: Colossians 2:1-23 Philosophy and false reasoning through subtle sermons

More: Aristotle

Here is a start at some red flags in sermons that require further investigation. There is a saying, "where there is smoke there is fire". There is not always a fire, but when smoke is observed, better check if there is a fire. Some sermons will be blowing smoke. Better check those out.

Why is a theologian quoted? Why not use a verse from the Bible that expresses the same view?
Why is a modern definition provided for a word in a Bible verse? The definition needed is the one when the original word was used, not the definition that probably has changed over time.
A skipped verse is a red flag. Check the skipped verses. Better yet, at least check the verses before and after the verse used. This is called checking the context of the verse.
A selection of verses throughout the Bible is a red flag for cherry-picking. That is, selecting verses out of context to weave the desired view that may not be in line with the Bible.
Some pastors will tell a quick joke or make some humorous comment so that the audience laughs. This allows the pastor to move on without covering part of the verse that may not be in line with the pastor's political or social views.

Ration of verse and Bible time to total time. Some pastors may not even cover a single verse in a sermon. [story]
Using mind control ideas from psychology to create dots to be connected by the congregation. This provides plausible deniability when that direction is brought up.
When presented with something that was not true, a pastor may say "I just wanted to keep it simple" when it is clear the pastor had little idea what he was talking about.
Idle words
God is not mocked
Avoiding eye contact
Avoiding interaction with congregation after the service

... more to be added ...

Strawman fallacy
Selective evidence fallacy
Converse fallacy

Some, however, have bought into the following argument.

The Bible is a logical system, not a reality system (as Jesus says).
The church has established traditions such as the Friday crucifixion.
The church has made essentially man-made political decisions, for better or worse, as to which books should be in the canon.
Once these decisions are made, faithful are recruited to take oaths and to defend those decisions at all costs.
Any attack on the church tradition is an attack on the Bible and an attack on Jesus.
Thus, various groups spend a lot of time and effort, and sometimes various types of warfare, with human causalities. to crusade for those traditions.
As such, these are diversions from the true intent of Christ.

The basic approach to this type of warfare is the following.

Twist the English, Latin and Greek to fit what is desired.
Cherry-pick verses, usually out of context, to support that view.
Ignore any verses or context that does not fit the conclusion that is desired.
Present selective evidence to support the view that one has already decided is true, even if the conclusion does not really matter.

More: Selective evidence fallacy: Cherry picking

By contrast, a constraint-based model approach finds reasonable constraints, using the original language, logical reasoning, etc., in an attempt to reduce the solution set to reasonable possibilities. That is, it is one way to find an "inference to the best explanation". This more general idea is sometimes called "abductive reasoning".

More: Constraint logic: unification and resolution

More: Abducted by abductive reasoning

Some assumptions, many of which do not fit reality, can be used. Here are some.

Jesus spoke Aramaic but knew a few Greek words. Thus, the Greek is a translation and does not reflect the Aramaic used by Jesus. Note that Greek had been spoken in Judea for some 350 years, as it was throughout the Middle East.
The Greek used was Koine Greek, so any meaning can be changed as desired and attributed to Koine Greek. Koine and Classical or Attic Greek are essentially the same language. One is more formal and one is less formal. The same is true of every language. Each can understand the other.
The idiom excuse, sometimes called the idiot excuse, can be used whenever what one desires does not fit the original language - in this case Greek with an Aramaic influence. This is much like Egyptian influencing the Coptic language (and vice versa).

Some assumptions, many of which do not fit reality, can be used. Here are some.

Take what Luke reported from people's memories some twenty years later, or what Peter remembered and told Mark, to take precedence over what Matthew wrote down from what Jesus said. Matthew appears not to have actually understood what Jesus meant. Matthew just wrote down what he heard Jesus say. When Jesus used play on words, Matthew did his best to write down the Greek that best fit that play on words.

Advice: You should use the best tool for the job.
Saying: If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. (attributed to various sources)

If all you know is a spreadsheet, every problem is solved with a spreadsheet.

[databases]

The hammer and nail idea can be applied to Biblical analysis and meaning.

If all you know is the KJV (King James Version) of the Bible (in modern English), then every Biblical problem gets solved with the KJV (in modern English).

If all you know is the Latinized Greek of the Bible (as some pastors claim to know), then every Biblical problem gets solved with the Latinized Greek of the Bible.
If all you know is opinion (hand-waving) truth, not logical truth nor reality truth, then every Biblical problem gets solved with opinion (hand-waving) truth.
If what you know best is the Hebrew Old Testament, then every New Testament problem gets solved with the Hebrew Old Testament.

Monte-Python Hearing Aid sketch: Eyewitness testimony (with John Cleese): Blind man says he saw it with his ear.

Some young people say: I said ... in a text message.

Can one "read" by "listening" (e.g., audio book)?
Can a blind person "read" (e.g., by Braille)?

There are many Greek words for "seeing".

The ancient Greek word "βλέπω" ≈ "see, observe" (a pre-Greek word). That is "seeing" or "observing" but not (yet) "knowing" or "understanding".

[theory]

... more to be added ...

More: He that hath ears

... more to be added ...