Lessons on God from Biblical Genre: History

February 24, 2011February 18, 2011 / Peter Mead / 6 Comments

Yesterday we pondered what the epistolary genre might teach us about God, and the implications for our preaching. Continuing with some springboarding off D A Carson’s recent Laing Lecture at LST, let’s think about biblical history.

Carson suggested the following: God discloses himself not only in words, but also in space-time history. We have access to that through witnesses, the standard mode of communicating historical veracity. Thus there is so much emphasis placed on the importance of witnesses.

In fact, Christianity is unique among religions in that if we were to take Jesus out of history, there would be no Christianity (not true of other religions). If Jesus didn’t actually rise from the dead, then witnesses are liars and we are still in our sins, our faith is futile. For the Christian, one of the tests of our faith is the truthfulness of the faith’s object. So no matter how strong and precious your faith may be, if that faith is not in something that is true, then you have nothing.

Biblically, a personal and precious faith without truth does not make a person spiritual, it makes them a joke. So Biblical faith is not the same as the contemporary view – that it is either a synonym for religion, or a personal subjective religious choice. This final definition makes it a faux pas to introduce the truth question (since we are talking about something both personal and subjective). But the truth question is absolutely paramount. While there are many elements of Christianity where we are to take God at His word, there are also critical elements, foundations, that require a test in history – notably the resurrection of Christ.

Implications for our preaching? I would suggest:

1. We must overtly overcome the “Bible story as fairy tale” perception. It is not enough to assume people understand the historicity of the biblical record, we need to be overt on this matter.

2. We should seek to overcome the notion that the Bible is a religious book, but good history books are published by other printing presses. The Bible is not only history, but it is phenomenally trustworthy historical source material.

3. We must train believers to know that their faith is resting on reality and fact, rather than the “leap in the dark” nonsense coming from both critics and ill-advised testimonies of people feeling public-presentation fright.

4. We should recognize how unaware Christians tend to be in respect to the differences between biblical Christianity and other religions. This leaves people very vulnerable when other religions are so proactively on the march.

Lessons on God from Biblical Genre: Epistle

February 23, 2011February 18, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

In the past two days I have shared D A Carson’s five points on the diversity of biblical genre. Now to some specific genre and what their design might suggest about God.

Carson suggested the following: There are lessons to be learned about God from the occasional nature of the epistles. Paul never gave his summary of doctrine. He is always found to be, in some way, responding to a felt need of some kind.

Carson suggested that differences in Paul’s letters reflect differences in occasion, rather than maturation of Paul. (His support for this suggestion is the timing of the letters. Paul had about 16 years post-conversion before he wrote any of the epistles, then in the latter part of his “career” he wrote his letters. We would expect significant maturation if he began as a naïve new believer, but he didn’t.)

So God address particular churches with particular needs, carefully applying the message of the gospel to each. He gave the example of Paul’s different approaches to circumcision in respect to Timothy in Acts 16 and Titus in Galatians 2. The difference here was a different occasion/circumstance. In one the exclusive sufficiency of Jesus was at stake. In the other it was about avoiding an unnecessary obstacle to ministry. Occasionality is important and it is in the multiplicity of books that we find the full picture.

Implications for our preaching? I would suggest four for now:

1. We should seek to preach specific gospel presentation to specific audiences, rather than generic gospel presentations to undefined audiences.

2. We should seek to help listeners grasp the occasional/situational context for an epistolary passage, rather than treating the epistle as some other form of writing (the systematic treatise comes to mind).

3. Since there is no “gospel in a vacuum” presentations in the New Testament, we should try to avoid this all too common phenomena in our preaching. Be sure to concretely apply the gospel to the lives of those listening.

4. We should be very careful to preach a single passage with the full force of its own message, but always being sensitive to the fuller picture of the teaching of the other epistles and books.

Lessons on God from Biblical Genre – Carson … part 2

February 22, 2011February 18, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

So yesterday we considered how the diversity of genres precludes the notion of containing God in a neat systematic definition. We also considered the variety of modes of inspiration. D A Carson offered three other lessons from the diversity of genre in Scripture:

3. The Biblical treatment of interaction between God and human beings are preserved not only in affirmations and commands and propositions, but in stunning depictions.

How true and how easy it is for preachers to take the stunning depictions and turn them into something less stunning. Now a well-crafted propositional statement should capture the essence of a passage, but the goal is not word-craft, rather it is life transformation in response to the Word of God. When that Word offers stunning depiction via narrative, or poetry, or prophetic oracle, or whatever, then our task is to re-present that!

4. The diversity of materials placed along an historical axis, generate some of the most important trajectories of the Bible. Carson gave the example of Melchizedek, and how the progress of revelation through the three key passages makes such a powerful statement about the purposes of God.

As preachers we need to help people see the beauty of Scripture, and the unity coming from the Author who inspired the whole.

5. Sometimes there are interesting lessons to be learned from the diversity within the literary genres. Carson spoke of the diversity within wisdom literature, or in the gospels. Actually, he highlighted that there is one Gospel and it isn’t a book. Just as you cannot say to a newsreader, “announce the news, and if necessary use words,” he pointed out the nonsense of the quote attributed to St Francis of Assisi along similar lines. The gospel has to be proclaimed, by definition it is news.

Let’s be encouraged that our ministry of proclaiming and announcing the message of the Bible is a vital and necessary ministry!

So that is five thoughts in respect to the diversity of genre in the Bible. Tomorrow I will start to look at the specific lessons from specific genre, along with comment in respect to the preaching task.

Lessons on God from Biblical Genres – Carson

February 21, 2011February 18, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

I recently attended a lecture by D A Carson on the biblical genres and what they teach us about God. I’d like to share some of his points and reflect on them a bit in terms of the preacher’s task.

Carson began by asking why didn’t God give us a systematic theology? Or why didn’t God give us a holy book like the Qu’ran? I’m tempted to pause there and ask whether our preaching reflects the diverse nature of Scripture, or whether we tend to preach systematic theology or uniform religious instruction . . . but I won’t.

The first part of the lecture considered what the diversity of genres tell us about God, then the second part looked at some specific examples from specific genres. So, five things the diversity of genres tell us about God.

1. Although many true things can be said about God, he cannot be domesticated, boxed and neatly defined. He spoke of how the formalized categories of systematic theology always get stretched by narratives, giving examples in reference to sovereignty, aseity, impassibility.

Seems to me there is always a danger of superimposing supposedly orthodox theology on the Bible. Sometimes the Bible does not quite seem to fit with a system forged in fires not fuelled by inspired revelation alone. Nevertheless, let us certainly heed the warning, as preachers, to not think clear explanation and structure can somehow exhaustively present God.

2. The diversity of literary genres attest different modes of inspiration. Unlike the Qu’ran or book of Mormon, Scripture is God-breathed in different ways.

What does this mean for our preaching? I suppose we shouldn’t flatten inspiration into some kind of dictation concept, or other restricted view. From my perspective I feel there should be wonder at the diversity of inspiration modes God used, and therefore response at what a great revealer God we have (i.e. He wasn’t restricted to getting people into a trance and then giving magic messages).

Tomorrow I will continue this list of five lessons from the diversity of genre in the Bible.

Surprising Identification

February 18, 2011February 6, 2011 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

When we read “narrative” – that is, story – we naturally find ourselves identifying with some characters, and perhaps distancing ourselves from others. We do the same thing when we watch films or TV shows too. There’s nothing wrong with that, whether it is a fictional story (like a film), or an inspired account of something that actually happened (like a biblical narrative).

As a preacher, part of your task is to tap into this natural response to narrative. You do this by telling the story well enough that people start to identify. You do this by overtly helping people to identify. But sometimes the natural point of identification is not the way to go (or maybe it is the way to go, with a twist somewhere along the line for greater affective impact!) Take, for example, the passion narratives. Who might you, or your listeners, naturally identify with? Caiaphas, Peter, Pilate, Judas?

Here’s an interesting quote from a certain German monk, a Dr Martin Luther:

“It is a Christian art when a person can regard the Lord Jesus as one whose business is to deal with our sins. . . . Although Christians will identify themselves with Judas, Caiaphas, and Pilate; sinful, condemned actors in the Gospel story – there is another who took the sins of humanity on himself when they were hung around his neck. . . . And today, Easter Sunday, when we see him, they are gone; there is only righteusness and life, the Risen Christ who comes to share his gifts.” (Sermons, 125.)

The amazing thing about the easter story, the heart of our proclamation, is that while we naturally identify with so many of the characters involved, we are invited to identify with the One at the centre of it all. It isn’t natural that we identify with the sinless Jesus, but it is the heart of the gospel to do so!

Compare and Contrast

February 17, 2011February 6, 2011 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

I’ve had to do one or two exams over the years. Exams tend to imprint certain phrases in your subconscious – “You may begin,” or “stop writing, please.” And then there are the questions. Perhaps it was just a fad in the mid-nineties, but I seemed to always read “compare and contrast…” somewhere on the exam paper. Well, it’s back! Compare and contrast … Leviticus and Hebrews!

Offerings and sacrifices, altars and sanctuaries, priests and high priests. They have so much in common. But they were written at different times, and something so significant had occurred in the interim. So as we see what God expected of the Israelites in the wilderness, we can also rejoice in what we see of Christ in Hebrews. A better priestly order, a better covenant, a better sacrifice in a better sanctuary!

For many people Leviticus is not a highlight in the Bible (although the more you get into it the more fascinating and helpful it is). But Hebrews…what can I say? Perhaps it is no coincidence that Hebrews and highlight begin with the same letter! Ok, actually that is a complete coincidence. But if you engage your imagination as you read Leviticus and imagine living in those times, then compare and contrast with the joy, confidence, hope and privilege of living the life Hebrews offers. Compare and contrast…and enjoy!

As a preacher, part of your privilege is to engage not only your imagination, but also everybody else’s. Engage their imaginations and help them to see the wonder of all that we have in Christ. I can almost guarantee that there are some in your church for whom the Bible feels flat. Not only emotionally as they respond (or don’t) to it, but from cover to cover, they are unmoved by the massive move that happened when Christ came. As a preacher you may be preaching a single passage, but help people to compare and contrast so they know what a wonderful blessing this new covenant is!

Preaching in Light of the Big Question

February 16, 2011February 6, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

The big question throughout Scripture is consistently the same. Will people trust God or not? Will they have faith in Him or not? Will we?

We are living under the same banner, the same fluttering question mark. Will we trust God? As preachers we need to help people see the simplicity of life (i.e. this is really the issue in every situation), while addressing the complexity of life (i.e. it never feels that simple!)

Hebrews 11, for an obvious example, presents example after example of people of faith who lived in the present in light of eternity. They were willing to choose discomfort now, because of what was to come. This is always a great indicator of faith in God. They trusted God. But this is an obvious preaching passage. What about something more obscure?

Leviticus 17 makes an enigmatic reference to the people making sacrifices outside the camp to goat demons or goat idols. Some obviously were choosing to be unfaithful to God for some reason or other. This incident is similar to the golden calf incident back in Exodus. God had delivered them, was among them, yet they rebelled and didn’t trust Him. Ok, what else?

Actually if we take any incident in Scripture, any narrative, we will find people either trusting or not trusting God.

We face the same options today, although in different forms. Will we be unfaithful to a God who has given us so much and dwells among us? Will we commit spiritual adultery by giving our worship to another? Or will we be men and women of faith, trusting in God even when it means choosing discomfort in the present circumstances? Let’s be preachers that encourage others to allow God’s Word to inspire them as we read all sorts of biblical texts, obscure or otherwise – and let’s try to live out a good answer to the big question hanging over us today.

Preach With The Right Goal

February 15, 2011February 6, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

I’d like to think this was obvious that it wouldn’t need to be stated. I suspect I’d be wrong. The goal of Bible reading, and indeed, the goal of sermon listening, isn’t to gather information. That’s not a bad side-effect or by-product, but it’s not the real goal.

The goal of spending time in God’s Word is not to fill the brain with facts so that you can impress at the next Christmas Bible trivia quiz. It’s not to gather information so that you can feel good about your knowledge relative to others. Now this is not to say that our brains don’t matter. They do, very much. But our goal in Bible reading, and our goal in preaching the Bible, is not primarily intellectual, but spiritual.

The goal of spending time in God’s Word is to know, relate to and respond to God Himself. We worship God, not the Bible. Yet we can know God and respond to God as we spend time in what He’s given of Himself to us in the Word, the Bible.

Make this clear in your preaching. Even if you know this, I guess some of your listeners will still be in the “I need to know more, educate me” school of spirituality. As preachers we must first live, and then also preach, the central vital absolute importance of Christianity as relationship.

Some of your listeners don’t grasp this. In fact, they may be getting very overwhelmed and discouraged because they struggle to retain information. Help them know that the real goal is to know and respond to God. The goal of preaching is not primarily informational, educational, or even transformational, it is relational. Spiritual. The goal is God, not just a better them.

The War of the Words

February 11, 2011February 6, 2011 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Ever since the beginning, everything seems to be about words in conflict. After all, God’s creation was all good, until a little conversation in chapter 3. What was the core of that conversation? “Did God really say?” The serpent questioned God’s words, and questioned whether or not those words could be trusted. He offered an alternative, “you won’t die” as opposed to “don’t eat or you will die.” Tragically, they went for it.

So, history is all about Adam’s “dead” offspring. Oh, and about a God who captures the hearts of this spiritually dead humanity by offering his words again, “believe in me and you will have life!”

Sometimes we crave direct and exciting intervention from God, if only we could see His angels all the time, or miracles immediately after every prayer. But the vast majority of the time, even in Bible times, God is more indirect. He gives His word and He asks us to trust Him.

In the book of Genesis, once the war of the words becomes clear, the foundation is laid. Then the story shifts to focus on one man, Abram, and God’s plan. God’s word to Abram at the start of Genesis 12 really sets the direction for the rest of the Bible. We get to watch Abram growing in his trust in God’s word. Just like us, he didn’t get it all at once. Just like Abram, we need to listen carefully to what God says and trust Him.

The Bible goes on like this for three-quarters of a million words. Our lives go on like this for even more words. As preachers we stand and preach in this war of words, and the words we preach matter.

The war of the words still rages, let’s make sure we’re listening when we open God’s word. Let’s be sure we’re preaching our hearts out whenever we get the chance. Because for the rest of the day, the rest of the week, there will be plenty of alternative words trying to capture all of our hearts!

Superficial Preaching Isn’t Christlike

February 10, 2011February 6, 2011 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

When Jesus finished preaching the sermon on the mount, the crowds were astonished at his teaching! I’m sure one of the reasons for that was because when Jesus taught, he didn’t stay on the surface. He spoke in simple ways, but spoke such profound truths. His teaching went beyond behaviour to motives, past the outward to the inward issues of the heart. If we imagine being there, we can see why they were amazed!

After that sermon the reader moves into two chapters of Jesus’ miracles. The crowds were amazed again, and I suspect that part of that related to how Jesus wasn’t superficial with people – it’s not his style, is it? We see his heart in his actions as well as his preaching.

So what about when we preach? Are we superficial? Do we fail to probe the depths of the experience of contemporary experience of the pain of life? Superficial allows more time for heady exegetical demonstrations. Superficial allows more time for obscure learned illustrations. Superficial allows me to avoid the discomfort of being real with the listeners.

But superficial preaching, just like superficial living, simply isn’t Christlike.