Category Archives: argument

Posted on

Learning About How Meaning Is Made For Biblical Preaching

by

Discover how meaning is made before asking what the meaning is.

Last week I had the privilege of teaching the Ph.D. course BIB909, Old Testament Hermeneutics and Theology, for LBC|Capital Seminary & Graduate School. One of the concepts we discussed during residency days in Greenbelt, MD was how meaning is made in a pericope.

It is not a familiar topic, especially when worded that way. It comes from the world of literary studies.

In my own practice I always discover how meaning is made in my selected preaching portion before attempting to discover what the meaning is. This allows me to allow the biblical author to show me what he means to say.

In many cases this means beginning with the passage’s structure. In a narrative, for instance, trace the storyline of the text (setting, rising action, climax, and conclusion). This is how theology is communicated. This is how meaning is made. This shows the interrelationship between the many ideas in a narrative. This helps you know what idea is prominent and which are subordinate.

In other cases, such as didactic texts, you are tracing the flow of thought or argument of a paragraph. This provides the logical relationship between sentences and paragraphs. This is how theology is communicated. This is how meaning is made. Again, this shows the interrelationship between the many ideas in the argument. This helps you know what idea is prominent and which are subordinate.

In both case above, you will have to investigate further. You will have to ask how various elements in your preaching portion mean something to your readers. Here’s an example from Matthew 10:1-15, my text for this coming Sunday, Lord willing.

In a text like this, Jesus’s instructions to the Twelve somehow instruct us in how to make disciples.

That’s it.

You’ll have to decide how much of the details transfer to our day, but as far as how meaning is made, you’ve got it. There’s authority, specific instructions on what to do, including how to handle rejection and what that means for those who do that.

It’s your turn. If you’re preaching Sunday and if you didn’t do this already, take a moment and analyze how meaning is made in your preaching portion. And may our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus through your Spirit-guided efforts! (Ephesians 3:21)

Randal

Posted on

Does Your Exegetical Method Help You Do These Two Things?

by

Make Sure Your Exegesis Allows You To Do Two Things

As I was preparing to preach this past Sunday, I reminded myself again that my job was fairly straightforward. Not necessarily easy, but uncomplicated. If I remember correctly, I even mentioned these two things to our faith-family at the start of the message.

Two things seemed most important if the sermon was going to be a vital part of the worship service. If I could accomplish those two things, then I would have been faithful to my calling as a soul-watcher.

[I realize there’s much more to preaching than these two things, but not less!]

First, it is important for our exegetical method to trace the flow of thought or argument of a preaching portion, regardless of genre (type of literature). Since God decided to write down His revelation to us, He determined to convey theology through literary structure. Tamper with the structure and we may run the risk of tampering with the theology. That’s how His communication works. So, you might consider analyzing the flow of thought or logical structure of a text to be exegesis’s first task. It is always the first thing I do every Monday morning.

Some of my students will recall this being the “A” in ABIT.

Second, it is important for our exegetical method to discover the worship response God is aiming at in His Word. Tracing the flow of thought will reveal how the ideas fit together to form meaning. You and I will have to infer, however, how God intends that meaning to move His listeners to some worship response. You might be more familiar with thinking about the application and that’s fine. I prefer to think of how God intends for the Believer to respond to His revelation as an act of worship. Our exegetical method should allow us to arrive in the pulpit each Sunday ready to announce what God intends for His Word to do to the church.

Again, students may remember this as the “I” in ABIT.

Is this really that important? Sermons on Luke 15 that primarily call all prodigals to come home have missed the flow of thought arising out of vv. 1-2. Missing the argument automatically skews the intention. Tracing the argument leads to a sermon that primarily calls all Pharisee-like listeners to come home.

May our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) as you use your exegetical method each weekend.

Randal

Posted on

Exposition that Doesn’t Follow the Structure of Scripture, but for Good Reason

by

Let’s Not Make Communicating God’s Word
Any Harder by our Sermon Structure.

This past Saturday I had the privilege of co-leading a four-hour workshop on the campus of Lancaster Bible College | Capital Seminary & Graduate School, Unpacking Sacred Scripture. Our task was to help unpack Psalm 1 and 2, the formal introduction to the Psalter.

I suggested we follow the structure of Psalm 1 and 2. The flow of thought is easy to follow. Here’s what I mean in Psalm 1:

1:1-3 describe the blessed person.

1:4-5 describe the wicked person.

1:6 explains why this is reality.

This past Sunday I had the privilege of preaching Psalm 86. I chose not to follow the structure of the Psalm. Psalm 86 is filled with at least 15 requests to God, with virtually each request followed by reasons why we pray like that.

For instance, 86:1a is “Incline your ear…and answer me…” and 86:1b explains, “for I am poor and needy.”

This same flow of thought continues throughout much of the Psalm.

So, as I often do, I decided to make the first major movement of the sermon devoted to the requests. The second movement dealt with all the reasons why, such as 86:1b above.

In this way, I kept the communication from bouncing back and forth between request and reason. I could spend several minutes of the message focused on the requests and their contribution to theology and the faith-journey. Then, in the second major point, I grouped the reasons why together.

My goal in straying from the structure was to make communication lines a little clearer. It is risky. I made a judgment call that breaking the structure didn’t break the theology of the passage. I preserved the theology by making sure we all knew that the Psalm presented requests with their reasons (keeping the structure intact in our minds).

Before Sunday see if there may be a need to group similar ideas together in a point, even if the text scatters them throughout the preaching portion.

May our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) as we work hard at clear communication.

Randal

Posted on

Learning to Think (and Preach?) Like Edwards: What I’m Learning From Reading Jonathan Edwards’s Early Sermons

by

Edwards displayed comprehensive knowledge of Scripture and reasoning abilities.

A couple of weeks ago I posted the observation that Jonathan Edwards’s preaching did not spend much time on word studies. Instead, he used numerous Scripture to buttress his explanations of his selected text. Then, he bombarded his main concepts with powerful, but simplistic reasoning.

Let me show you a quick example from, what is so far, my favorite sermon of Edwards, Christian Safety, on Proverbs 29:25 “But whoso putteth his trust in the Lord shall be safe.”

God’s message is clear: “All those that thus trust in God are safe.” Edwards attacks the reality this way: “We shall show, first, what they are safe from; second, how they are safe.” (p. 456)

That outline is typical of Edwards. (An aside: if you’ve heard or read many of Tim Keller’s sermons, you might recognize some similarities in their approach.)

The first point contains four things: temporal evils, death, the devil, and hell. Edwards uses no proof-texts for these paragraphs. The first in the list, temporal evils, presents the toughest challenge for me. As I’ve mentioned before, what I love about this sermon is the way Edwards explains safety in a world of dangers: “worldly afflictions do often happen to them, but the evil of them don’t befall them. They may be exposed to difficulties, losses, and troubles, but he is not properly in danger of them.” (p. 456) I found this so helpful.

The second point contains three cross-references: 1 Peter 3:13; Isaiah 11:6-9; Mark 16:18. [Dispensationalists with a capital “D” will cringe reading Edwards’s statement: “That prophecy in Is. 11:6-9 is fulfilled upon all true Christians…”

Edwards’s third major point is, “Now follow the reasons of the doctrine.” (p. 459) This section is also loaded with proof-texts about how God protects us and Christ overcomes our enemies.

Anyway, every time I read Edwards’s sermons, he teaches me how to think better. I need that in order to keep functioning well as a pastor/theologian.

May our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus as we work hard by His Spirit to preach and teach His Word (Ephesians 3:21).

Randal

Posted on

More Than Word Studies: What I’m Learning from Reading Jonathan Edwards’s Early Sermons

by

Comprehensive Meaning Means More Than Word Studies.

It’s been a long time since I have mentioned the fact that Jonathan Edwards did not do a lot of word studies. This caught my eye again in his sermon, Christian Safety. The sermon covers Proverbs 29:25, “But whoso putteth his trust in the Lord shall be safe” (using the old language).

First, you might appreciate reading what I consider to be my favorite quote so far from Edwards. It pertains to how God keeps His children safe in a badly broken world where so many bad things happen. In footnote 1 on page 453 (Kimnach’s volume 10 of The Works of Jonathan Edwards) is:

“Though they ben’t safe from those things that are in themselves evil, yet they are safe from the evil of those things.”

It’s the best explanation I’ve ever read or heard. I hope you like it and can use it.

Second, when Edwards defines “trust,” he moves way beyond a word-study approach. He asks the simple question, “What is trust in God?” (p. 454). He answers the question first, by what it is not and then what it is. I probably would have only hit the second part.

But Edwards talks about trust “not barely” desiring or hoping that God would deliver and bless us. It’s like saying, “Well, I hope so.” That’s not biblical trust.

Then, he moves to present seven characteristics of true trust. The one that surprised me was #5: “A love to God: there is no such thing as trusting in God, as long as we are enemies to him and hate him” (p. 455).

Very little of this involves word studies; most of it requires intense thinking about the nature of saving faith–what it isn’t and what it is. All this results in a comprehensive understanding of a crucial Christian concept.

May our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) as we try to present comprehensive understanding the mirrors much of Edwards’s genius.

Randal

Posted on

Think Twice Before Purchasing Someone Else’s Sermon Outlines

by

It is very appealing to hear that purchasing someone else’s sermon outlines can save tons of time, but…

I love Logos as a tool and believe in using lots of tools. 99.9% of the time, I draw the line by refusing to use someone else’s sermon outline for my own preaching.

So, when I saw this ad by Logos, I thought I should send a caution. The product is:

Sermon Outlines For Busy Pastors (11 Volumes).

It is advertised this way:

“Today, pastors are busier than ever, with more time spent in ministry activities and less time spent in sermon preparation. Sermon Outlines for Busy Pastors: Sermons for All Occasions gives the busy pastor a head start on sermon preparation.

Pastors can save hundreds of hours a year, with the base research and layout for a year’s worth of sermons already in place.”

I have no doubt that this is true, but I believe it will cost most preachers way more than the cost of the product itself in terms of their preaching quality. I am not primarily thinking of plagiarism.

The reason is because of how important it is for preachers to identify their own style of outlining that works for them.

Whether preachers formally announces the main points or not, outlining shows how the preacher understands the logic of a text. That logic is critical for helping the sermon hold together for the listener.

Years ago, research showed that one common complaint from our listeners is that our sermons contain too many ideas. More than one thing contributes to this, but one important thing is whether or not we have presented a unifying logic. Outlines present that.

And one critical part of sermon preparation is identifying your own sense of the text’s interior logic.

Study other preacher’s outline if you can and you will see various ways in which outlines are done. But work hard at your own outline so that it works for you and your listeners. Let them see how the major thought blocks of your preaching portion hold together and our God will receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21).

Randal

P.S. My outline from yesterday’s sermon on Matthew 7:15-20 was:

  1. “Beware of false prophets…” (v. 15a)
  2. Here’s what to look for” (vv. 15b-18, 20)
  3. The implied warning to all of us (v. 19)

It worked for us. I felt I owned the logic of it. It made sense to me as a pathway to the theological interpretation of this part of the Sermon on the Mount.

Posted on

How Outlining A Sermon Helps Me, Not Just My Listeners

by

How does outlining help you? And your listeners?

Through the years I have tried many different outline methods.

The method I taught in my early years of teaching preaching was that each major point should be worded as an application. It had some merit since it forced preachers to see listener response in each major point and not just at a segment at the end of the sermon. It helped listeners to respond each step of the way.

Then, I spent several years preaching without any outline. Instead of announcing major points, I simply used logical transitions to move from one segment to the next.

For the past several years my outlining follows the method of Timothy Keller, former pastor at Redeemer NYC. You may not know this but Keller’s method of outlining follows the method of another famous preacher named, Jonathan Edwards. I found that out after listening to hundreds of Keller’s sermons and, later, reading Edwards’ sermons.

My best attempt to explain the method is to say that the outline reflects an attempt to show the logical divisions of a particular idea.

Which brings me to my point in this post.

Now I teach and practice a form of outlining that stems from tracing the argument of a passage. My students know this as the “A” in ABIT.

The outline emerges from the practice of dividing a preaching portion into thought blocks, summarizing each block in a sentence, and identifying the logical transition that exists from block to block.

In this way the practice of tracing the argument contributes to the formation of a preaching outline. And for me, this exercise begins on Monday morning. While I might not create the final wording of the outline until later in the week after my exegesis is complete, I understand how the meaning is made in the pericope.

You probably do something like this to create your outline.

Our outlines may help our listeners keep the sermon from fragmenting into too many ideas. The major points all fit together.

The outline helps me make sure I understand how the author is communicating theology. It is a teaching tool for me. If I can outline it right, I am more confident I can communicate the theology clearly.

And, as always, the goal in such clarity is that our Lord would receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21),

Randal

Posted on

Continuing to Dig Deeper with our Exegesis: More Examples from Preaching Matthew

by

Attempting to Add Additional Depth to our Exegetical Practices for Sermon Development

I am hoping that providing these examples of asking and answering questions as part of exegesis will help you dig deeper as you prepare to preach and teach the Scriptures.

I encountered another example as a result of preparing to preach today from Matthew 3:1-12, the John the Baptist narrative.

One of the key exegetical/theological aspects of the preaching portion is in v. 2, John’s sermon:

“Repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”

If you’ve preached or taught this before then you’ve defined “repent” and also announced the logical connection created by the connector, “for.” It is because the kingdom of heaven has come near that everyone is called to repentance. You have also defined the kingdom of heaven.

Now, I have been promoting the need to dig a bit deeper by asking and answering additional “why” questions. The analysis above, while important, is not sufficient. In this case I want to ask,

“Why does the arrival of the kingdom of heaven warrant repentance?”

Could you answer that question? Do you see why that question is important for the sermon/lesson? Imagine critical sermon minutes devoted to things like an explanation of the kind of King Jesus is or the kind of kingdom He is creating or the kind of citizen that can occupy this kingdom.

An attempt at an answer is something like: “Only repentance from sin, a true turn from sin and turning to God, creates the kind of citizen that can inhabit the kind of Kingdom God is creating for His new world.”

I am hoping you can see how God can receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) with that kind of exegetical and theological depth.

Randal

Posted on

Adding Theological Depth to Preaching by Answering the “Why” Question: Another Example

by

Explore another level of exegesis with me.

This is the third post aimed at helping us think about adding theological depth to our preaching. The reason why it is important is because most of our exegetical methods do not include this aspect of sermon development.

At this stage of my thinking I am still considering answering the “Why?” question part of theological exegesis (TE). But I usually think of TE as exegeting a text in its broader immediate and canonical context so it functions for the church, part of theological interpretation (TI).

I am toying with terms like, Implicational Exegesis (IE), or Philosophical Exegesis (PE). I’ll take any suggestions.

Another example of this level of exegesis is in Matthew 1:23 “…they shall call his name Immanuel’ (which means, God with us).”

Since Matthew already does the heavy lifting in the word study aspect of exegesis, it’s up to us to ask why the arrival of “God with us” is significant.

Well, I can tell you that the answer to that question is not easy to find in major commentaries. It will take much theological thinking, thus justifying the label of theological exegesis. We’re asking the question, “Where in the Bible do we learn the significance of having
God with us?” and “When we locate such doctrine, what do we learn about what His presence means for His people?”

If we don’t reach that exegetical depth in our sermon, it will be impossible for listeners to connect emotionally with this stated fact. [I am using “connect emotionally” to convey the times when our parishioners feel praise welling up in them because of the reality.]

So, whatever we end up calling it, I find this to be an important, time consuming element of our exegetical practice.

And may our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) as a result of our efforts to dig a bit deeper into His glorious revelation.

Randal

Posted on

Thinking of Application in Terms of Intentionality

by

The Text Signals It’s Intention By It’s Shape

Even if you were not familiar with the three tools shown above, you could probably figure out what they were intended to do. Just look at their shape. Also, think about what would happen if you tried to make their functionality interchangeable. Imagine using the saw in the middle for a hammer!

Biblical texts–our preaching portions–signal their intention by their shape. Theology is conveyed through literary structure, things like grammar and syntax, and the type of literature. That’s why I live and die by this method:

After I pray Aquinas’s famous prayer, “Grant to me keenness of mind…”, my first study minutes are devoted to tracing the argument of the passage.

Pauline epistles convey their theology through logical argumentation. Old and New Testament narratives communicate through their storyline. Old Testament poetry preaches through parallelism.

That’s all simplistic, I know, but true enough to make the point.

Our search for applications begins with a search for intentionality. Here’s the key question:

What does God intend to do to His readers in this preaching portion?

Answer that and you’ve got the foundation for any form of application from that pericope.

In order to answer that question, you have to know what to look for. The epistles or other didactic genres (types of literature) are easiest, I think. Follow the imperatives and the logical flow. Doctrinal sections intend for readers to affirm them as real, real enough to elicit praise and corresponding lifestyle.

Narratives are the worst. We can talk about that next time, Lord willing.

For now, as you head into another work week, be thinking in your first hours of study what God intends to do to His readers, your congregants so He receives glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21).

Randal