Stop Applying the Text
Friday, November 11, 2011 at 5:00AM Radical words from two authors - and I think they're on to something.
Darrell Johnson writes:
I want now to do what I can to lift a horrible burden off of preachers. It is the burden of "applying the text" to the everyday life of the listeners. Yes, we can, and we should, try to help people understand the text's radical implications. But applying the text is not the preacher's responsibility. (The Glory of Preaching: Participating in God's Transformation of the World
)
Johnson does a great job of explaining the difference between implications (which are good) and applications (which aren't as good). His whole chapter is worth reading if you are provoked by an earlier post I did called Forget Remembering: Aiming for More in Preaching.
One more author, and one more quote:
I've spent years trying to convince pastors and preachers that the application part of the sermon is the boring part, the part that doesn't really do us much good … The way to make a real change in people's lives is not by telling them how to change their lives, but by telling them about Christ and how he has changed everything -- including their lives, their identities, and their future…
My contention is that the kind of sermon that gives us real help living the Christian life is not about us but about Christ. It does not tell us what to do, but what Christ does. (Good News for Anxious Christians: 10 Practical Things You Don't Have to Do
)
Provocative and helpful. What do you think?
Reader Comments (9)
Why not both the exaltation of Christ and clear application in every sermon? Why does it have to be one or the other? It is a false assumption to say so.
The prophets and preachers of the Bible were specific: put away your idols (literally), stop being immoral, why aren't you tithing, you failed to take sabbath rest, stop getting drunk at communion, make sure you give attention to publicly reading Scripture, pray all kinds of prayers...and we should be that specific too.
Lift high the name of Christ and make sure your hearers know that this is about conversion and the ongoing work of transformation by the power of the Holy Spirit in their lives. And be prophetic and give them some idea how that should look on Monday morning.
Todd:
I think the authors are writing against two things:
1. Sermons that are more law than gospel
2. Application that is too specific on particular actions rather than a whole-person response to the gospel
I do like the term implication. The model in the epistles is a good one: here is the gospel, and here is what it means in your life. Obviously, the gospel needs to be applied and worked out as we hear it.
I was just teaching on this last week, moving from application to implication. The former suggests that new understanding or correction can just be added onto our lives, while the latter requires that the new transform every aspect of our lives.
OKAY...are we merely trying to use a new word or is there really a difference? I would hate to think that we are merely trying to fill blog space with a discussion that has us arrive at the same place we started.
My question then...whether you use the word "application" (not sexy enough anymore) or "implication" (I'll admit, more sexy), are we talking about getting specific with people regarding how they live out the Text of God's Word?
Jamie: Exactly.
Todd: Johnson argues that this isn't just about a new term. "I do not think I am playing a semantic game here. I think we are talking about two very different understandings of how God works to transform us."
That being said, I think I know you well enough to guess that you and I are on the same page here. From what I know of you, we share the same model of preaching, and it's not the one that Johnson is writing about.
Glad I'm not crazy (and coincidentally, I'm working on an outline for a book on this very subject).
Aaron:
You may very well be crazy, but if you are, at least you're not crazy alone!
So maybe I should read the book and not just the quotes from it on your blog! Ha!
Darryl, that has to be one of the best things I've read about homiletics in quite some time. We can hardly fail if we simply preach the cross of Christ and how it has changed absolutely everything. The cross preaches itself when we speak of it in spirit and in truth only because the Spirit of God bears witness to our spirits. The rest is just blah, blah, blah filler, trying to get people to listen.