Stage 2 – Passage Study

Preaching and Biblical Theology – Side 1

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Biblical Theology is a very fruitful field for preachers.  Not every fruit is worth eating, of course, but there is real benefit to studying works in this field.  To give a basic definition for the sake of this post: Biblical theology is the fruit of studying the Bible in such a way as to recognize the individuality of each biblical author, the progress of revelation over time and the unity of the canon resulting from the inspired nature of Scripture. My question today is simple, does our preaching honor these three aspects of biblical theology, or do we neglect one “side of the triangle?”  Today we’ll consider the first “side of the triangle,” with the others to follow:

Individuality of each biblical author – The writings of John have a distinctive style, vocabulary and content when compared to the writings of Luke, or Paul, etc.  How do we neglect this reality in our preaching?  We do so by blending everything into the same, flat message.  We do so by excessive cross-referencing to other authors without good reason.  A high view of the Scriptures can easily lead to neglect of the individual styles and content of the human authors.  Obviously we would affirm that John does not contradict Matthew, or Moses, for that matter.  However, we may let our listeners down when we give the impression that the human author’s individuality does not shine through in their writings.  In fact, we may be undermining the high view of Scriptures we affirm if we give the impression they were mere conduits for the dictation of God – a flawed understanding of inspiration!

Guidelines? Wherever possible, recognize and value the individuality of the human author when preaching a passage.  Generally seek to demonstrate the flow of thought within the book, rather than demonstrating the theology of the passage through cross-referencing all over the canon.  Perhaps consider how to preach the content of this passage using the vocabulary and style of this author (eg. I preached the resurrection passage in Luke in deliberately Lukan terms, rather than slipping into Johannine vocabulary or Pauline, 1Cor.15, argumentation.)

These are not hard and fast rules, just suggestions to help if this “side of the triangle” is being neglected in your preaching.  Other suggestions?  (The other two sides are coming, so please don’t get overly concerned that I haven’t emphasized the unity of the canon yet!)

Are There Really Only Three Passages?

/ Peter Mead / 9 Comments

I recently heard a friend make an excellent point.  Apparently there are only three passages in the Bible.  How do we know this?  Well, there seem to be only three sermon outlines, so obviously there are only three texts.  The sermon outlines are as follows:

1. Jesus died for your sins, repent and believe, when you die you’ll go to heaven

2. Read the Bible more, pray more, evangelise more

3. Have more faith, be more obedient.

That’s pretty convincing (if you base your research on the majority of sermons preached).  But perhaps the research is flawed?  Perhaps there are more than three texts in the Bible?  Perhaps these three outlines don’t really reflect the beautiful variety and complexity of the Bible?

Of course, there are probably a couple of handfuls of major themes that trace their way through the Bible.  However, what an amazing selection of texts.  Which one are you preaching tomorrow?  Does it have a more specific outline and main thought than these three listed above?  Let’s make sure it shows.

What If You’re Not Ready?

/ Peter Mead / 4 Comments

It is so important to understand the text before you preach it!  I don’t mean just knowing what the big words mean.  I don’t mean just having a collection of exegetical insights to share.  I don’t mean even having a sermon vaguely based on certain parts of the text.  I mean really understanding what the text is saying – understanding it’s unity, it’s message, it’s point, it’s purpose, it’s role in the broader flow of thought in the book.  What if you’re not ready though?

Suggestion with several caveats to follow: If you’re not ready, don’t preach it.  Instead preach an old message again that you are confident is biblically sound.

Just think what an example that might be for the congregation!  “We were scheduled to be in Epistle XYZ 4:15-22, but I’ve been studying it over several weeks and still am not there yet – some passages take real work to really grasp!  So I’ll keep on studying, but for today, let’s look again at . . . ”

Caveats a coming!

1. Chances are, they won’t remember a message you re-preach.  But it would be honest to tell them it’s worth a second look at this old message rather than trying to “slip it through.”

2. Recognize that as a Bible student we never fully plumb the depths of any passage and as a preacher we shouldn’t really present all the plumbs either!  It takes wisdom to know the difference between “I’ll never fully plumb this passage” and “I haven’t grasped the fundamental unity and flow of thought in this passage.

3. It is in no way a good example if you simply started too late.

4. Whether you are a paid pastor preaching weekly, or an unpaid preacher preaching periodically, there is an element of commitment involved.  It will undermine your credibility if you follow the above suggestion more than very rarely!  (In fact, if you are only doing one section in a series from the same book, you can’t simply make the subsequent weeks shift by missing your section.  Get help earlier in the process and make sure you grasp the passage before you preach it, for surely you must preach it!)

5. It is probably better to take this post as a strong prod to really be prepared, rather than actually trying what I suggest!  (I’d be interested to hear if anyone has ever publically announced their need for more time to study a certain passage!)

Five Looks and Two Options

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

This post is building on the previous two.  Yesterday I shared “Five Looks” approach to Bible study to illustrate a discussion on Monday’s post.  The issue raised on Monday was do we preach the main thought of a text, or a biblical theology prompted by the main thought of a text?  The question really focuses in on step 4 of the “five looks” – Look Forward.  How does looking beyond our focus text help us in the process of interpretation?

Some would say that we must read all of Scripture through the lens of later revelation, and that consequently all preaching must progress the story to its full conclusion.  I beg to differ, while asking for careful hearing so that I am not just dismissed as being somehow outside the pale of someone’s definition of orthodoxy!

It is important to consider a text in its biblical context.  This includes what comes later, as well as what came before.  However, we should not explain a text in light of later revelation such that the text itself, as inspired originally, is left stripped of its value.  The human author did not know the later revelation, so why must we require later information in order to interpret the text as it stands?  The progress of revelation matters greatly, but we need not immediately read a passage through a later lens.  We look at a passage in its context of the progress of revelation, but then progress the story beyond that if necessary and helpful.  We do not need to meld the latter with the former into one “super-interpretation” (although I would call such a process actually a diminished interpretation).  Rather we should do one, then the other, recognizing that the order matters.

Study, understand and preach a passage in its context (recognizing where it fits in the progress of revelation).  If necessary, develop the greater story to its culmination.  If you like, using the “five looks” approach presented above: step 4 carefully understood is important in our Bible study, but in preaching we should preach the fruit of steps 1-3, plus 5, adding in 4 if necessary and helpful.

Look Look Look Look Look

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Perhaps you have come across the “Five Looks” approach to Bible study?  It is a clear and helpful approach credited to Andrew Reid of Ridley College, Melbourne.  Here is a brief synopsis:

1. Look Up – We need to receive the Bible as the word of God.  This implies a commitment to prayer and faith.

2. Look Down – We must recognize the Bible as the work of human authors.  This implies careful consideration of the deliberate communication as designed by the human writer. So, exegesis is about considering and understanding the text itself, while also adding in two more looks…

3. Look Back – We need to see a text in its biblical context by looking back to what has gone before, and:

4. Look Forward – We need to see a text in its biblical context by looking forward to what comes after the text.

5. Look Here – Finally it is important to apply the text today and consider it’s application in today’s world.

This is a helpful approach.  Tomorrow I will add a post commenting on this approach to Bible study in light of my post from yesterday.  Feel free to comment in the meantime.

The Mastery Challenge – Rationale pt 2

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Here are the last three points of rationale for my list.  This follows on from the last two days of posts.

5. The brick wall approach urges book by book study – By definition it helps avoid the “mastery of preferred proof texts approach,” or the “selected doctrines based on preferred theology approach,” or other less than ideal approaches.  To be a real Bible man or woman, I’m convinced we need to really know the books of the Bible (i.e. verses in context!)

6. The brick wall approach taps into personal motivation – What do you want to study next?  Romans?  Revelation?  Psalms?  Esther?  Nahum?  This approach says go for it!  When the heart is in the task, the study is a delight.  When discipline alone is boss, then the tanks feel permanently empty.

7. The brick wall approach recognizes that study is never exhaustive – So you’ve done a few weeks in John, and for now you feel that is enough.  You’ve come to a point of closure, thanked the Lord, finished well and moved on to another book that is attracting you.  Does that mean you are done with John?  Of course not.  In a few months or years you’ll come back, motivated again, and you’ll go deeper and further.  By then you’ll be building on top of other bricks that have been laid in the mean time.  Perhaps a study of Psalms will bring John’s use of Davidic Psalms out in a fresh way, for instance.

This approach encourages success by generating achievable goals, by tapping into personal motivation, and by progressively building throughout life in a way that never suggests completion, but recognizes progress continually.

I could add more rationale, but I’ll leave it at that for now.  I’m not saying this is the only way, or even the best way, but I’ve yet to find an approach to Bible mastery that has tempted me to change my approach (or to change what I suggest when asked for my suggestions!)

The Mastery Challenge – Rationale pt 1

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday I shared my foundation and brick wall approach.  This post won’t make sense without reading that one first.  Here are seven of the underlying thoughts that make me think this approach is a healthy one:

1. Motivation is Key – This approach is designed primarily to facilitate the motivation of the individual.  Too often Bible study is shot through with guilt associations and the need for motivation is overlooked.  That we should be motivated to study God’s Word does not mean that we always are motivated!

2. Success breeds motivation – Too often people begin a study program and then fail to complete it.  This leaves a lingering guilt.  Think of how many times people start reading through the Bible in January, but give up in February or March (Leviticus or Numbers tend to wipe them out).  This model that I am suggesting has success built in.  Every time a Bible book is selected and studied for a couple or a few weeks, there is a point of closure, a point of successful completion of a task that can be celebrated before the Lord (giving thanks to Him).  I would even suggest a deliberate act to celebrate.  Perhaps enjoy a favorite bar of chocolate, or listen to a certain praise song . . . anything, but do something to mark the completion of a season of study (all while giving thanks to the Lord for the privilege and His help).

3. Demotivation by integrating the two halves kills study – People typically try to read through and study at the same time.  The problem is that it is hard to retain anything and keep up the required reading pace.  So people get bogged down in the Pentateuch, while their motivation is really to study a New Testament book (but that seems so far away!)  Much better to give yourself permission to just keep moving in the read through, and study what you want to study.

4. The foundation covers the need to study the whole counsel – Instead of feeling compelled to study Leviticus as you read through it, this approach accepts that often you will read through it quickly, but when the motivation is there to study it, you will have opportunity to really get stuck into it.  By constantly cycling through the whole canon, you are getting the bigger picture of God’s revelation, which in turn provides continual context for the book studies you pursue concurrently.

Tomorrow I’ll share the other three points of rationale that make sense of the brick wall (book by book) approach.

The Mastery Challenge – Suggestion

/ Peter Mead / 4 Comments

Back on April 7th I wrote about the need for us all to prioritize mastering, and being mastered by, the Bible.  Winston commented and asked for my suggestions on this.  I’ll share my thinking briefly here.  I’d encourage you to read the earlier post again to refresh your memory and stir the motivation – it is here.

My approach is to split personal Bible study into two halves.  These two halves are best explained as a foundation and brick wall approach:

Half 1 = Foundation – The foundation is to be reading through the whole Bible.  My strong encouragement is to keep reading through the whole Bible, at a fairly persistent pace.  Allow the big story to wash through you.  Don’t get caught up in details, or in trying to remember every interesting fact you find.  Don’t try to pronounce every long name.  Just keep moving.  Like pouring water through a sieve, the goal is not to retain, but to be cleaned and to get a big picture awareness of the Bible God has given to us.

Half 2 = Brick Wall – With the other half of the time available I suggest getting your teeth into study.  By default I would suggest a book-by-book approach.  God didn’t give us a topical index, or a collection of proof texts; He gave us a collection of books.  So pick a Bible book and study it.  Use whatever skill and resources you have.  Begin with inductive study of the book, constantly moving between analysis of the details and synthesis of the whole.  If you have original language skill, use it.  If you have quality commentaries, eventually consult them.  Make it your goal to master and be mastered by the book you are studying.  After a few weeks of this you will find that your motivation for that book wanes and you feel like you are coming to finish point in your study.  I like to be able to explain my way through a book, section by section, without looking at the text.  Perhaps you would choose another way to define the finish line.  Then move to another book you want to study.  Periodically you can do a topical study, or a character study, or a theological study, or whatever, but default back to book by book.

Tomorrow I will share my underlying thinking that helps to make sense of this approach.

Short Cuts to Nowhere Good – Two

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday I pointed out that prayer is by no means a short cut when it comes to preparing to preach.  It is critical, but it should not be viewed as a short cut.  Today I’d like to share another unhelpful short-cut.

2. Passage Details. It is always tempting to bounce off a detail in the passage and preach a message that may be biblical, but is not the message of this passage.  For instance, you might see a theological term that is rich in meaning and you can easily put together a series of thoughts on that aspect of theology.  Or perhaps you spot a name of a character that you’d like to speak about.  Or maybe there is some other detail in the text that is familiar and lends itself to a message that just falls together easily.  Wait.  This may be a short-cut, but it is not a good path to take.  Instead be sure to study all the details in the passage so that you can wrestle with what this passage is actually saying, not just what words it includes.  Using details in the text, but failing to actually preach the text is what I might call pseudo-expository preaching.  It sounds biblical, it looks expository, but it has a weakened authority since the message of the text is not the message of the sermon.  It takes longer to study a passage through in detail, but it is so worth the effort!

Short Cuts to Nowhere Good

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

There are a couple of short-cuts taken by many preachers that need to be highlighted for the sake of Biblical Preaching.  Please be sure to read the explanation as well as the heading (it’s amazing how people miss the point of what’s written sometimes!)

1. Prayer. Prayer is not a short-cut.  It is a necessity.  It is critical.  However, it is not a short-cut.  In fact, praying in preparation will probably make the preparation take longer, but it is worth the longer journey.  Many preachers think that all they need to do is pray and then preach their impressions.  This is neither pleasing to the Lord nor helpful for the listeners.  Why do some preachers think God is so pleased when they essentially dismiss the Bible by skirting around the study process in preparation?  I suspect that if we pray “Lord, please show me what I should say from this text!” that His answer would include “I want you to say what the text says.” God takes His Word very seriously, so should we, and prayer is not short-cut around the blessing of spending significant time and effort wrestling with the true and exact meaning of the passage.

Tomorrow I will add another short-cut that is not worth taking if we are to be Biblical Preachers!