Know Your Theology and Preach Your Bible

Last week I wrote a post that spoke against theological agenda-driven preaching.  Yesterday’s post affirmed the value and relevance of theology.  Are these positions contradictory?  Not at all.  We are living in a generation where there is an increasing biblical and theological illiteracy.  So as preachers we have a responsibility to really know the important doctrines of the faith.  And as preachers we have the responsibility of preaching the Bible so that listeners will know where that doctrine comes from and how to get it.

Here’s a quote from Spurgeon’s Lectures to My Students that seems appropriate:

Be well instructed in theology, and do not regard the sneers of those who rail at it because they are ignorant of it.  Many preachers are not theologians, and hence the mistakes which they make.  It cannot do any hurt to the most lively evangelist to be also a sound theologian, and it may often be the means of saving him from gross blunders.  Nowadays, we hear men tear a single sentence of Scripture from its connection, and cry “Eureka! Eureka!” as if they had found a new truth; and yet they have not discovered a diamond, but a piece of broken glass. . . . Let us be thoroughly well acquainted with the great doctrines of the Word of God.

Know your theology, and preach the Bible well so that people can see not only what to believe, but how to derive that belief from the pages of Scripture.  There are two potential challenges in this.  One is ignorance of sound theology.  The other is adherence to a system of theology not firmly rooted in the Bible.  Let us preach to counter the increasing biblical and theological illiteracy, and let’s do it demonstrating healthy handling of the text!

Feeling Down in the Ministry

Non-preachers often don’t realize the roller-coaster of ministry.  Due to the exacting nature of ministry – giving out, being buffeted spiritually, etc. – we are all prone to repeated discouragement.  Today as you press on through another Sunday, take stock of the realities of ministry:

Discouragements are par for the course.  A preacher facing discouragement is normal.  One who claims to never get discouraged is a cause for concern.  Remember that if you’re feeling down today, or tomorrow, so are hundreds, maybe thousands of other preachers around the globe.  You are not alone.

God has gifted, prepared and used you.  Look back and spiritually reminisce over those times when God’s gifts have been clear.  Remember the blessing of training received, both formally and informally.  Thank God for the example of past mentors, prayer partners, etc.  Review your file of encouraging notes and emails.

Remember the standard.  It is tempting to try to, or to feel pressured to, live up to the standards of someone else.  Perhaps the previous pastor, or a famous preacher, or a personal ministry hero of yours.  God wants each of us to trust Him and give the best that we can.  Let others inspire, but not pressure.

Remember who to please.  It is not possible to keep everyone happy all the time.  You may preach sensitively and yet tread on toes nonetheless.  We are not called to a ministry of plate spinning where each plate is the emotional happiness of each person around us.  We are called to live a life of radical love for the Lord, where our desire is to please Him in what we do and why we do it.

What else would you add for the sake of fellow preachers who may be feeling discouraged today?

It Can’t All Be “We”

Cultures shift.  In the west we are living in an age when people no longer respect authority, including the authority of a preacher.  People may like the preacher, and listen to the preacher, but there is some resistance to the concept of a preacher speaking with authority.  Consequently, many preachers will try to use “we” throughout the sermon.  In effect, preaching as a fellow observer and recipient of the text.  This may be a good idea, but there are limits.

The notion of preaching without authority came to the fore in the 1970’s, with books like As One Without Authority by Fred Craddock.  This hugely influential book placed the “New Homiletic” into the consciousness of many.  Much of what Craddock wrote is well worth taking onboard, but there is an underlying issue we need to recognize.  The New Homiletic, even in its more conservative forms, is strongly influenced by the New Hermeneutic.  Here we find strong emphasis on a reader-response approach to the text, but the author seems to have been lost along the way.

If we hold to the importance of authorial intent in our hermeneutics, then a total “we” approach seems inappropriate.  As preachers, we study the text, hopefully with some degree of skill, in order to determine the author’s meaning.  Consequently, there should be a humble but authoritative explanation of the meaning of the text for the benefit of our listeners.  This “humble but authoritative explanation” may not require a “you” approach in contrast to “we,” but it does carry some authority.

Meaning is not determined by a primarily subjective response to the text in us all as readers.  In one sense there is a mutuality as we, God’s people, discover the meaning of the text.  However, that discovery must be the meaning of the text, not a meaning we discover subjectively in experiencing the text.

Nevertheless, in the applicational features of a sermon, and there should be many, perhaps “we” should be prevalent.  We all stand under the authority of the text.  We all should be responding to what we read.  Let the “we” feature in the shared need for the message of the text (introduce appropriate vulnerability and connection early).  Let the “we” feature carefully in application throughout the message.  However, let us be careful what we might imply with “we” in the explanation of the text. Let us strive to understand and communicate the meaning of the text as those with humble authority, but let us take our position amongst the ranks of God’s people responding to His Word.

Can You Support It?

One privilege of preaching is the privilege of study.  But not everything you discover in your private moments poring over the sacred text should be shared from the pulpit.  Some things may be an exegetical cul-de-sac that you pursued but led to an apparent dead end.  Other things may be genuine insights from the passage and its context, but are still better left unshared.  For instance, perhaps you discern an apparently symbolic or spiritualized understanding of some aspect of the preaching passage.  Should this be presented to a mixed congregation at various levels of biblical understanding?  Here are three questions to ponder before deciding to go ahead and share your insight:

Will your explanation be enough?  We all know the challenge of trying to explain intricate study, perhaps in the original language, to people seeing the text for almost the first time.  If our explanation appears inadequate, we run the risk of undermining our credibility or the logical cohesion of the message.

Do you feel the need to resort to cheap argumentation?  For instance, “If you were to read this book through once a week for 25 years, then you would begin to see that . . .”  This kind of throw-away remark in a sermon can cut deeply into the listeners.  Is the preacher unable to communicate the point now, so the listener is assured they would see it if they studied more?  (Incidentally, I was wondering whether the speaker who said this had read through the book in question 1300 times in the last quarter century!)

Will people copying your methodology get into trouble?  If the insight is somehow symbolic or spiritualized, do we want others copying the method?  Let’s say the insight is genuine.  What would happen if the listeners copy the method and start assigning non-obvious meanings to elements in their Bible readings?

There are times when an exegetical insight, even a genuine one, is better left in the study (or the classroom).  As preachers, we shoulder a significant responsibility for our listeners.  Let’s be sure to consider what is best for them, rather than what looks good for us.

Keep Drums Out of the Introduction

The first few minutes of a sermon are important. They provide the opportunity to get the attention of the listeners, surface a need for what is to follow and move them into the passage and message. During this relatively brief movement there is a temptation that we probably all face to one degree or another. There is the temptation to lay unnecessary foundational blocks (and thereby promote a personal theological agenda).

Recently I was not preaching and so had the opportunity to listen to a visiting speaker. I was not the only one to notice the significant theological agenda being pushed in the extended introduction. Our task as preacher is to bring the message of our preaching text, not to use the text to bang on our favorite doctrinal drum.

Next sermon, let’s be careful to evaluate the background we give. Do we give enough? Do we give too much? Is what we give relevant to the understanding and application of the passage? As I suggested yesterday, in one sermon we cannot achieve everything. Over time people should get the whole canon, but it’s not our task to achieve that in one message on one text. Perhaps you decide to preach the whole Bible’s message in one sermon – great, but be honest about that and don’t give the impression it all comes from one particular text.

Our responsibility is to faithfully preach the specific text before us. Give whatever background is necessary for the communication, explanation and application of that passage. But don’t abuse the introduction by banging your favorite theological drum.

The Easiest and Hardest Feedback

In order to improve as a preacher it is important to get feedback.  We need more than the handshake’s and comments after the service in order to grow.  Howard Hendricks has referred to this as the Glorification of the Worm ceremony!  So we need something more constructive.  Probably not after every sermon, but certainly periodically, and from a variety of sources.  Yet there is one source of feedback we can easily overlook.  A source of feedback who is always accessible, always capable and over whose schedule you have significant influence.

The person I am speaking of is yourself.  It would be a good discipline to either listen, or even better, to watch your sermon periodically.  Maybe once a month, or once a quarter.  It is surprising how much we can benefit from self-critique.  A few ideas:

Leave it a few days before reviewing the sermon.  Let the emotions drain away first.  Let the sermon go cold.  Then listen or watch.  You will be able to listen more as a listener this way.

Watching is worth it.  Even if it is a hassle to borrow a camera, set it up, arrange for someone to run it, etc.  It is worth it.  I am convinced that many preachers would improve noticeably if they’d just watch themselves once.  Distracting mannerisms, lack of energy, missing eye contact, etc.  When you watch, you’ll know.

Don’t assume you’ll hate it.   Most people hate hearing their own voice recorded.  Most expect a self-review to be a painful experience.  Sometimes it can be.  Often you’ll be pleasantly surprised.  You’ll pick up on some elements of content, flow or delivery that can be improved.  But you will also realize the sermon wasn’t as bad as it felt, that it had strengths.  You have strengths.  God was at work.  You may find the experience more encouraging than you expected!

A Great Opportunity To Be Missed?

The final moments of a sermon are highly strategic. The last opportunity to emphasize the main idea, drive home the application, stir motivation for response, etc. Then there is one other thing we may be inclined to include – an early advert for next Sunday’s continuation in the series, an early raising of need for what is to follow. I am not saying this should or should not be included, but I’d like to point out a couple of points to ponder before you choose to refer to series sermon today-plus-one:

Finish this sermon. Be sure to resolve the present sermon fully. Your mind may be wandering to the next in the series (or you may want to raise hope that next week will be better than this one), but be sure to preach a complete sermon now. This moment is primarily about today’s sermon, not next Sunday’s. (As you can tell from the site, I don’t recommend preaching through the text until time runs out and then picking up at the same point next time. Preach a complete unit of thought.)

Don’t undermine this sermon. It would be a waste of all that has gone before to end with something along the lines of, “. . . today was alright, but you don’t want to miss next week’s message! That one will really be something!”

Only dangle a carrot with care. Perhaps you are inspired by a well-written TV show that always leaves people at a cliffhanger and longing for next week’s episode. Remember that takes a high level of skill to pull off effectively. It is far easier to leave people disheartened and frustrated by doing this poorly. You may choose to leave some element of the sermon or text hanging in the air, but think it through carefully.

Let the title intrigue. Often all you need to stir interest in next week’s sermon is the title printed in the bulletin. The title is there to stir interest and to intrigue. I wrote a post on titles that may help – Titles: Tricky Little Things.

The end of this sermon may be an opportunity to motivate people to come for the next sermon. But think this through carefully, as it may just be a great way to undo the moment, dissipate focus and lose what you’ve been trying to achieve to this point. What do you think?

The Pre-Sermon Bible Study Journey

Bible study feels like a journey. Perhaps for others the terrain feels slightly different, but I can often discern three stages I go through in the process of studying a passage. I am not referring to exegetical method here, but rather to a sense of progress in my quest to understand the passage.

1. Apparent Clarity. Not in every text, but often the first reading seems relatively clear. Perhaps I recognize the characters, or note some rich preaching vocabulary or concepts. Whether or not I’m thinking about preaching it, the text seems initially clear. This stage does not last long. Once I start questioning the text, I soon move into the next stage:

2. Complexity and Lack of Clarity. As I seek to plumb the meaning of the passage, hunting for the author’s idea, it often becomes murky. There’s word study, lexical study, contextual analysis, wrestling with the flow of the text, alternating between synthesis and analysis, etc. At this point it is sometimes tempting to quit or go for a shortcut (like preaching multiple distinct ideas from the same text). If I prayerfully push on through, there is often the joy of arriving at the last stage:

3. Informed Clarity. This is where the relationship of the parts and the whole make sense. This is where the section is clear in its relationship to the flow of the book. This is a great place to get to in Bible study. This is the place I like to be before I think about preaching the text.

My fear for myself, and others seeking to be Biblical preachers, is that we will fail to preach out of a “stage 3” informed clarity. I see in myself the temptation to quit in stage two and preach some form of textual confusion (obviously we tend to paper over confusion to give apparent cohesion to the message). At times I hear messages where I wonder if the preacher even entered stage two at all. The presence of some “rich” preaching words seems to be enough to spark a whole message in some preachers! Let’s be sure to be diligent, to study and show ourselves approved, to push through to informed clarity for our own sakes, and for the sake of those who have to listen to our explanation of the text!

The Fine Art of Avoiding Over-Qualification

No biblical text says everything.  Each text says something.  So, we have a potential problem.  There is a constant temptation in preaching to over-qualify.  We are tempted to over-qualify the big idea so that it won’t be critiqued as biblically incomplete.  We are tempted to over-qualify the points of application so that we aren’t perceived to be imbalanced.  We are tempted to over-qualify the whole sermon so that we’re seen to be theologically well-rounded.

There is a place for qualifying.  Our big idea should not contradict the teaching of Scripture.  Our application should not be so imbalanced as to lead to harm or confusion.  Our whole sermon should be seen to fit fully in the category of “Biblical” preaching!

But, generally speaking, we are not required to preach the “whole counsel” from every text.  If we try to say everything, we run the risk of effectively saying nothing.  Let us prayerfully and carefully seek to let the force of the specific preaching text get through to our listeners.  Let us allow subsequent preaching to bring total balance.  Let’s not squeeze the sting out of each text and end up with a bland pulpit.

Wrestling with Flow

There are shortcuts in preaching.  Perhaps some are legitimate, although none spring to mind.  But there is one major shortcut that is very common, but that undermines the whole preaching event.  Failing to wrestle with flow.

It is easy to break a passage into its chunks and preach a sermon from each chunk.  Be sure to wrestle with how the text flows together.  If it is a true unit of thought, then there is unity, but it may take work to be able to understand and communicate it.  How do Proverbs 3:11-12 relate to 3:1-10?  How do the small parts of James 1:2-18 fit together?  Why does Luke 18:7-8 come attached to verses 1-6?  It’s easy to preach two or three sermons welded at the seams, but this is a shortcut that is not worth taking.  Be sure to wrestle with the text more and preach one message – of course it may have 2 parts, 3 movements, or whatever . . . but it needs to be one message.  

So, this week, as we prepare our sermons, let us put on our wrestling gear, enter the arena and give our all to pin down the flow!