Saturday
Apr172004
Do preachers over-explain?
Saturday, April 17, 2004 at 8:53AM
From Ginkworld:
As Calvin Miller writes of the preaching of Jesus, "His sermon on the Mount is his only entire sermon mentioned and can be preached in 18 minutes. In an economy of 2,320 words, Jesus spends 348 on such images as wolves, sheep, light, rock, sand, and storms." Not once, I might add, does he conjugate a Greek verb or mention "soteriology". Brine and York, noting the Shakespeare/King James connection, point out that the frontispiece of the original edition states, "Appointed to be read in churches." Not explained, not exegeted, not outlined or underlined, but read. Itís almost as if they believed the words contain the Word, and would do their work on their own. So try something radical: read the Bible. No, you wonít understand it all and youíll want to look some stuff up later, but not until you see what happens. The first time I read Hamletís famous "To be or not to be" soliloquy, I had no idea what a fardle was, but by the time I reached the end, I was a different person.
Reader Comments (25)
The New Testament account of the "Sermon on the Mount" is hardly a verbatim transcript of Jesus' complete sermon. Not to diminish its authority or inerrancy, just to say that it can be naive to draw conclusions on it's composition when it's obvious that both Matthew and Luke have both redacted it in their own way for their own purposes. But having said this, I'm all for Pastors reading the Bible publicly and following what Paul commanded Timothy to do in the assembly of Christians (1 Tim. 4:14), something that there seems less and less of these days. I've been attending various churches in the GTA and not once has anyone read an entire chapter of God's word.
I understand the complexities re: the Sermon on the Mount. Even if it's not verbatim, it seems to be pretty indicative of Jesus' preaching. Unless his style varied quite a bit from what's recorded, I think the quote's point is a fair one. The reading of Scripture is pretty uncommon in churches today. I was convicted about this recently as I heard a CD on expository reading of the Bible. I know we (at Richview) don't do it enough.
There's two points being made here... 1. Us preachers can make mountains out of molehills (yes, it's true at times). 2. Writer uses the sermon on the mount to make the point that Jesus said all he needed to say, in 18 minutes. However, just because that's all we have recorded, it doesn't mean that's all that Jesus said that day. Jesus hardly ever sat down to teach crowds for 18 minutes, it was usually whole mornings/afternoons/days! So, although the writer makes a good & accurate point (pastors over do it), he's probably using the wrong text to make his point (Jesus & sermon on the mount). To over do it (I'm a pastor) in making my point... At Pentecost Peter preached a sermon that lead to 3000 plus people being saved. You could preach it faster than the sermon on the mount. However, tucked away at the end of the passage it says, "with these and many other words..." However, what the writer says about Shakespeare - good stuff. I think we're all a bit like this in trying to make our points...
Hey Dave, if your visiting churches, come check out Harvest Bible Chapel in Oakville. Just launched last Sunday. Real big on the Word and reading it and applying what it says to our lives and being relevant. Check it out on the web at www.harvestoakville.ca Hope you don't mind the plug Darryl.
George: that was a shameless plug! Ed: I think his reference to the Sermon Mount isn't about brevity. It's to back up what he said in the article: "I sometimes fear that Iím so busy deciding what Iíll do to the text that I never ask what the text wants to do to me." He's saying we go too far sometimes in explaining the text rather than listening and applying. For a church, that doesn't do that, check out George's church. ;)
Hey George thanks for the invite...I'll plan to check it out. I'm kind of in between churches right now. I have been going mainly to Mt. Pleasant Road Baptist but may want to change. It's a long story.
I can see your point, Darryl, and that of David Miller. I also agree to a point. There does seem to be a tendency towards too much explaining The Word and not enough simple reading of The Word. However, I seem to recall several instances where even the disciples approached Jesus and asked Him to explain what He meant. There is definitely room for both, especially since many still rely on the old King James Version, and who speaks like that anymore?
I knowest not.
You wouldn't want me in your congregation. I'd sit politely staring over your head as you preached, but I wouldn't be listening,it would only look that way. I find scripture reaches me. Even if I try to tune out, it gets through. Small study groups sink in if they are participatory.Books can get my attention. So a Catholic mass with all it's scripture feeds this protestant more than any homily or sermon. I'm ashamed to admit this, but out of the thousands of sermons I've heard, I only remember two. Still friends?:^)
Bene if your sentiments are genuine there is something fundamentally wrong. Historically those in the church who have been "scripture purists" making an existential disconnect between scripture and means of grace that mediate scripture have constructed a false and unbiblical disjunction. The present reign of Christ and the sovereign reign of the Spirit through church history have granted colourful spiritual gifts for her edification. To dash expository preaching against the rocks is to quench the very fountainhead Himself.
I really appreciate Bene's honesty. I think there are many who feel exactly the same way, but aren't as forthright about how they feel. They only think what Bene has said. I suppose we could blame them, but it could be that our models of preaching are wrong, or we're just not doing a good job.
Great discussion. I appreciate your posts very much Dave - you're very articulate. It's very interesting analyzing the different mediums that make different types of people tick. I love the sermon part of the service, as a matter of fact to my shame, I'd prefer to show up when the sermon starts and leave immediately after it's over. My wife really goes for the small group, relationship type of learning atmosphere. However, one thing that I have noticed is that if you've got a true Spirit gifted preacher everyone seems to relate and be impacted. My guess would be that Bene hasn't been exposed to many of the true prophets of today.
I am honestly trying to empathize with what this kind of honesty may represent. I see myself as an evangelical so even when preaching is dull with less cut and thrust than perhaps should be there my heart finds cause to feed upon God's truth. I believe a boring sermon is a sin, but so is a predisposition to tune out biblical preaching notwithstanding its human imperfections. If my assumption that Bene sits under biblical preaching is wrong then my sentiments are probably misguided. I have heard "spring board" preachers who read scripture and then jump into a pool of their own opinion that actually undermines the Bible, and that is one thing - reprehensible. But biblical preaching that is homiletically inadequate is another. Personally I've shared some angst over the last couple of years because of a mishandling of the word of God by Pastors, much less insensitive models of preaching, and I have been sorely tempted to censure them too, but I realize that my response to God's word preached is as much a reflection on myself as it is on that poor preacher.
Take heart, all you preachers of the Word: God says "So shall My word be that goes forth out of My mouth; it shall not return to Me void - without producing any effect, useless - but it shall accomplish that which I please and purpose, and it shall prosper in the thing for which I sent it." Isaiah 55:11 (Amplified) It is a fact that we humans do not usually remember a lot of what we are TOLD (preaching), but we remember more of what we read and study, - hence the instruction to "study to show yourself approved." Like Bene, I can count on the fingers of one hand with some left over the number of sermons I can remember. It takes an exceptional preacher with an equally exceptional message to cause most of us to really remember a sermon. Some Truths, however, like delectable morsels, remain forever entrenched in our hearts and minds because of the preaching of God's Word.
I agree there are those gifted with preaching but far, far fewer than schools churn out. If 1/100th of grads had that gift I'd be shocked. If I was not in the western world and could read, I'd be lucky to have a bible, let alone a church or a preacher.If I was imprisoned for my faith, all I'd have is the word hidden in my heart and the comfort of the Holy Spirit. The fact I'm surrounded by churches and preachers doesn't make me any richer. I'm one of the lost causes Dave, you wouldn't want me in your church either. I wouldn't pat you on the back and tell you how terrific your sermon was, (or tell you how bad I thought it was either).:^) I'd be watching your life and see if you showed the fruits of the Spirit. I'd look for the love of God. I'd be there to pray with you if you were crushed, and would be happy to showing up Monday and clean the church. I tend to think what we are speaks so loud the world can't hear what we are saying sometimes. Blog on!
Great discussion, makes me want to extend the invitation all over again for you all to come visit us at Harvest Bible Cahpel Oakville. Great preaching. Just launched Easter Sunday. This Sunday will be week 2 of an 8 week series of Surrendering to God. I'm confident you will remember the sermons. Sorry Darryl, couldn't resist, another shameless plug.
LoL George: That's real nice of you, guess we'll have to settle with collecting at this post for this chat. Getting Darryl's readers to Oakville Canada? would be quite expensive for a church service. Let's see, how many countries, time zones and airlines????:^)
George: I'm going to have to add you to my comment spam list pretty soon! ;) Okay, last free plug. I'll send you my advertising price list next time!
Isa. 55:11 yields great confidence. I also appreciate the emphasis on fruit of the Spirit as the platform for Spirit-lead preaching. I think it was Francis Assi who said something like 'Preach the word in and out of season, and if necessary use words.' I'm thinking of a clarifying remark that may be appropriate: Unless I'm mistaken I sense a false working assumption is in the offing, namely, if one did not recall a given sermon then such a sermon was ineffective. No doubt certain homiletical mnemonics may be creatively applied, but sermonic recall is no more a test for the power and impact of God's word than remembering what I ate last Thursday for lunch is necessary for me to derive nourishment from it. Just as I represent, in part, the sum total of the numerous meals I've eaten over the long haul, so the spiritual formation of church parishioners is, in part, the result of a steady diet of God's word preached over time.
Dave: No,the assumption may be made, but not by me. By nature some of us aren't passive learners is all. As a broadcaster, I think I grasp the power of the word. So on one level I can identify as the speaker/writer, but I also identify as the one who receives the words. To poorly use your nourishment analogy, I don't find forced feeding as beneficial as feeding myself. Blog on!
Fair enough Bene. The more proactive learning style you come by is certainly a valuable asset especially in a laissez faire culture like ours. Also I can understand your distinction between active and passive learning in terms of doing vs. listening. I've been exposed to a variety of preachers in the last six months and if I ever encounter forcible feeding I think I too will recoil. I imagine that you certainly experience the humility of receptivity to God's word regardless of the means of impartation. Lately my sermon tasting has been a double quest: To actively learn of God by bowing both at the cognitive level and the level of the heart. Blessings.
Dave: I'm genuinely sorry you and others felt you to take so much time defending preaching. I need to learn to keep my mouth shut here sometimes. Darryl understood what I said and I should have just left. Making disciples and feeding sheep has to be unbelievably frustrating and difficult. I could not do your job. You spend thousands for an education and have to sparkle with the sermons week after week. I wasn't trying to be critical or anti-biblical, I suspect you get way too much thrown at you and your paycheck depends on pleasing. Blog on!
No problem Bene. I'm no preacher so there's no personal rep to defend here, but I do believe that preaching is a biblically indispensable means of church grace in our world today. I probably differ with you on this and so it's true my reaction to your comments is defensive. As you say blog on.
"but I do believe that preaching is a biblically indispensable means of church grace in our world today" Dave: I was wondering if you believe "preaching" can take on different forms? When is preaching no longer preaching? How much flexibility is there?
Here are some thoughts: I realize that in our day, for many, preaching has been treated as an outmoded means of communication for various reasons. I beg to differ. I believe that preaching is a God anointed heralding of the word of God with a view to calling the human conscience to a verdict for the purpose of conformance to Christ. So as I see it, it morphs into something else when it veers away from its rightful authority, the text of scripture and it's rightful theme Jesus Christ. When the centrality of expository preaching and doctrinal teaching is replaced with motivational pep talks, hobby horse riding (or ranting), psychological self-help and/or entertainment, psycho-therapy etc. etc. preaching is no longer preaching. However, off the top of my head I think preaching can take on various forms relative to 1) the nature of spiritual gifting, 2) homiletics and 3) target audience. 1) Preaching can take on a variety of forms inasmuch as those who preach have God-given unique mixes of spiritual gifts, gift baskets if you will. So the speaking gifts of the Spirit alone, like exhortation, teaching, evangelizing and prophesying, can be blended in various measures of strength and also they can functionally overlap in their distribution to various individuals. Plus, add to a speaking gift or a combo of speaking gifts another service gift like say mercy or faith or leadership and itís obvious that the possible combos are innumerable. 2) Preaching can take on various forms inasmuch as the artistic ingredient of crafting the style of a sermon will differ from preacher to preacher. There is no standardized personal style of preaching. In the creative craft of sermon-making I always expect diversity. The preacher I heard this morning used an inductive approach (not deductive), quotes (but no anecdotes) a single object lesson (no multi-media), a central point (no three points with alliteration) and so on. 3) Preaching can take on various forms inasmuch as astute preachers pay sensitivity to the demographics of their audience. For instance, age, educational background and language can shape the form of the presentation of Godís word. Interpreting the target audience is almost as important as interpreting the Godís word.