Conveying the “Life and Death” Importance of the Word of God Each Sunday
A few weeks ago, Michele and I watched the 30th Anniversary Reunion of the main producer and cast of the TV series sitcom, Everybody Loves Raymond.
If you’ve read my blog for a while you know I enjoy seeing parallels between communicating God’s Word in church on a Sunday and the way performers communicate through their craft. Here’s another example.
The producers of, Everybody Loves Raymond, explained why that series worked so well with that cast. Their answer was:
“[the cast was] fully committed to silly things as if it was life and death.”
The commitment of the cast of actors made the show enjoyable because it made it believable. All good actors do that to draw you into the reality they are creating.
How much more so should we be conveying our commitment to, not a silly thing, but the most important thing: God’s revelation in sacred Scripture!
Effective communicators convey that sense of “life and death” in their preaching of God’s Word. May our people this coming Sunday sense this so our Lord receives glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21).
Randal
P.S. Blessed New Year to you!
P.P.S. I may have mentioned many posts ago that one of the most common elements in my evaluation of young preachers is that I don’t get the sense from you that this Word from God is a matter of life and death.
What a joy to run into Adam Howell, the Daily Dose of Hebrew guy, at ETS!
I am currently on vacation this week following a wonderful first experience at the Evangelical Homiletics Society (more on that in another post).
Michele and I had the privilege to attend the annual ETS conference in Boston last week. On one of my breaks in between paper presentations, I ran into Adam Howell, the Daily Dose of Hebrew guy (kind of like the famous Capital One Bank Guy on TV). I thanked him for his work and told him I listen to him almost every morning.
If your Hebrew is a bit rusty or you simply want to keep your proficiency growing, nothing beats watching the Daily Dose of Hebrew. I get an email early each morning (there’s a Greek version too that’s excellent). The videos are about 3 minutes long. On your screen is a Hebrew Bible verse or part of a verse. Adam, who teaches at Boyce College, the undergraduate school at The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, KY, highlights the text as he reads the Hebrew and explains some of the grammatical issues.
From the time I learned about Daily Dose I have been making it a part of my morning routine. I can’t speak highly enough about what Adam does and how helpful the videos are.
One of the things I notice in young preachers with little or no Hebrew training: they mispronounce the Hebrew that they refer to in their sermon. While it’s not a sin punishable by death–hey, I mispronounce English words for goodness sakes!–it does eat at your credibility with some listeners. Plus, you owe it to your faith-family to be a good student of the word of God. If you’re going to dabble with the original languages, dabble with some measure of skill!
Daily Dose is the way to go!
May our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) as you expound the Word of God to your faith-family.
A few posts ago I mentioned returning to this subject of interpreting portions of Scripture so it could function for the church.
This past week I had the privilege of teaching a required Ph.D. course for Lancaster Bible College’s Biblical Studies program. The course is OT Hermeneutics and Theology and I spent some time talking about a method for interpretation.
One thing I noticed is that we are better at summarizing a passage than interpreting it. Even the big idea method I’ve taught for years in advanced homiletics classes is a matter of summarizing, not interpreting.
So, back to my example in Exodus 4:24-26
24 At a lodging place on the way the Lord met him and sought to put him to death. 25 Then Zipporah took a flint and cut off her son’s foreskin and touched Moses’ feet with it and said, “Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me!” 26 So he let him alone. It was then that she said, “A bridegroom of blood,” because of the circumcision.
Do you know what that pericope means? Do you know which meaning you’re after?
My method aims at meaning that combines exegetical content plus illocutionary intent. The last part is a fancy, speech act theory way of saying that meaning includes what God intends to do to the reader with that Scripture.
So, according to my working theory, we have not interpreted a text until we are able to state God’s intended effect on the reader. Are you able to do that for Exodus 4:24-26?
It might sound something like this:
The result of God attempting to kill Moses at the lodging place was that Zipporah circumcised their son, called Moses a bloody bridegroom, and God stopped the attack with the intention of urging the church to trust that, unlike Moses, their Redeemer kept the covenant for them and transforms them into covenant keepers.
It’s a mouthful, I know. However, the “with the intention of,” part is the critical part of interpretation.
More on that a little later.
May our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) as you faithfully interpret Scripture.
John and I took seven years to write this! Slow, I know!! (*smile*)
What was “forthcoming” for some time is now here!
While I was away on my annual motorcycle ride to old Quebec City with seven others, Michele sent me a picture of the two boxes Kregel sent me. When I got home I had the joy of opening the author copies of my new commentary on Genesis.
It took approximately seven years to complete this project. More than once I said to the Lord, “I love Genesis, but I am so done with it!” (I’m writing now so God was gracious in understanding what I meant.)
The Kerux Commentary series matches a biblical scholar (Dr. John Soden) with a preaching specialist (me). As you’ll see, John did the lion’s share of the work. He is an excellent exegete and adept at starting the move from exegetical ideas to theological ideas that get closer to serving the church.
Each pericope begins with one page that includes an exegetical idea, theological focus, preaching idea, and preaching pointers. Then the section proper begins with Literary Structure and Themes, technical Exposition that includes translation analysis and outline points, extensive Theological Focus, and Preaching and Teaching Strategies.
In the Preaching and Teaching Strategies is a section on Exegetical and Theological Synthesis, an attempt to tie together the exegesis and theology to form a solid foundation for preaching insights. The Preaching Idea is repeated and followed by Contemporary Connections: What does it mean? Is it true? and Now What? (you might remember these as Haddon Robinson’s three functional questions; he used to say you can only do three things to an idea: explain it, prove it, or apply it; this section of the commentary does all three to the degree the preaching portion calls for them).
Finally, I provide suggested preaching outline(s), Creativity in Presentation, and Discussion Questions for preachers and teachers to consider.
Anyway, there it is in a nutshell.
What a privilege for me to be invited to participate. I thank our Lord for insights and endurance to accomplish this in the middle of an extremely busy time in my life. May our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) whenever Genesis is preached/taught.
Good afternoon. Please check out the link below to see my opening my new book! Dr. John Soden and I worked off and on for seven years to complete this project. I’ll share more about it in another post.
Vanhoozer makes a very helpful statement: “…every church should, minimally, be forming readers to…”
I am writing from Elim Lodge in Lakehurst, Ontario, Canada. I won’t show you pictures because it’s located on a beautiful peninsula, surrounded by Pigeon Lake, and you’ll feel badly. The camp director and I studied together 40 years ago in NB, Canada and there are two other couples serving here that our dear friends of ours from our years serving in Canada. It’s been a great reunion.
But, that’s not important right now.
What is important is this statement by Vanhoozer. His Mere Christian Hermeneutics is one of my primary text this year for my Ph.D. course, OT Hermeneutics and Theology (Lancaster Bible College’s Ph.D. in Biblical Studies). In between speaking at the camp this week, I’m prepping for this course that opens August 25, 2025.
On page 102 Vanhoozer makes this statement:
“…whatever their particular denominational (or nondenominational) slant, every church should, minimally, be forming readers to read with a distinctly theological interest: to know and love God.”
It’s always helpful for me to hear this kind of condensing of ministry goals. It helps me keep things from getting too complicated.
In our ministry context, the “to know” God part comes fairly easily; historically, it’s expected in a Bible Church that we will learn biblical information about God.
It’s the “love God” part that is more difficult for us.
One way I attempt to form readers with such a theological interest to know and love God is to regularly ask myself and my hearers:
“Do we love God more as a result of learning this section of Scripture?”
That question may help you as you study for sermons and lessons.
May our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) as a result of our Spirit-driven efforts to create learners who love Him.
Your Preaching Reflects Your Understanding of Meaning
I am getting back into a more normal schedule after teaching two classes. The first was an eight week master’s level course at Lancaster Bible College, Hebrew Exegesis to Exposition. The second was a Doctor of Ministry cohort, From the Study to the Pulpit, at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary.
Here’s a look at the D.Min. group under the lights:
One of my goals was to help my new friends answer this basic question:
What does this pericope mean?
It sounds elementary, but proves quite challenging whether I’m posing the question to Masters, DMins, or PhD students.
If I asked you, “What does this Scripture mean?” how would you answer?
Exodus 4:24 At a lodging place on the way the Lord met him and sought to put him to death. 25 Then Zipporah took a flint and cut off her son’s foreskin and touched Moses’ feet with it and said, “Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me!” 26 So he let him alone. It was then that she said, “A bridegroom of blood,” because of the circumcision.
What I’ve discovered is that we are better at providing meaning in the form of summary or translation. We’re heavy on word studies and translating all the interesting concepts in this brief, bizarre OT narrative. We use the best tools we can to get to the bottom of their respective meanings.
If we are trained in some variation of identifying the big idea, we might present meaning as one cumbersome sentence that captures the interrelationship between the ideas of the narrative:
The results of the Lord meeting Moses and seeking to put him to death was that Zipporah circumcises their son, insults her husband, and the Lord let Moses alone.
Notice that this is not interpretation, but a summary of the narrative.
As I continue to teach the intersection of hermeneutics and homiletics, I keep urging my friends to consider what it means to interpret the meaning of a text.
More on that later.
For now, analyze your own method. Can you identify the meaning of the narrative? Does your meaning statement(s) include interpretation? If so, what is interpretation and what does that mean for your preaching/teaching?
Sometimes the size and kind of Scripture means only having time for “exegetical readings.”
This morning I had the privilege of preaching through Psalms 104. It’s 35 verses long which is a lot for me to cover in a 45-50 minute message.
Even more challenging are verses 1b-32 that list almost 30 references to God’s creative activity that made the world we experience.
You have a choice when it comes to preaching a Psalm like this, or any Scripture for that matter that contains lists. One option is to keep your normal method of diving into the details. Choosing door #1 will mean covering the Psalm in a mini-series. The two or three sermons will contain the same worship responses since they are coming from other places in the Psalm.
I chose door #2: performing an exegetical reading of the lengthy section.
That means I began reading at v. 1b and predetermined the places where I would add some exegetical insights. One example is the fact that Psalm 104 shows God creating the world in the same order in Genesis 1 (light is first, heaven is second, etc.). Psalm 104 is the poetic version of Genesis 1.
The goal of exegetical reading is partly to keep the pace up during this sermon segment. That many verses means not allowing myself to get bogged down in the details.
So, when v. Ib describes God’s clothing as “splendor and majesty” I just need them to know that He presents Himself as royalty, as King of the Universe. Or, at v. 7 where the poem says, “At your rebuke they fled [referring to the waters that covered the earth during the early creation narrative],” I want them to see this referring to when God spoke the dry land into existence (continents appear).
That’s the stuff of exegetical readings.
Most important, this exegetical reading has a place in expositional preaching. That’s because all that data about God creating and sustaining His world functions as the reason why we bless Him. Psalm 104 begins and ends with “Bless the Lord, O my soul…”
And all that talk about creation leads to the Psalmist’s prayer/wish in v. 35:
“Let sinners be consumed from the earth, and let the wicked be no more!”
After all that information in the exegetical reading part about God creating His world, we get to the concept of those who are destroying God’s good creation (cf. all the repetition, “God saw that it was good” in Genesis1). Any hope for the new creation, a new heaven and new earth, is linked to God one day answering the prayer/wish in v. 35.
When we say what the Psalmist says in that verse, we automatically must separate ourselves from the sinners and the wicked. Not because we don’t sin, but because our God in Christ and His Spirit forgives our sins on account of our faith in Him and has made us new creatures.
That’s just some of the expositional elements. The bulk of sermon minutes were devoted to the exegetical reading.
May our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) whenever you have opportunity to practice exegetical reading as a part of your expositional preaching and teaching.
I am offering a more light-hearted post this afternoon, the result of my first exploration into ChatGPT (I know, I’m late to the party!).
So yesterday, before completing my sermon review for this morning’s preaching on Psalm 95, I decided to see how AI would handle that Psalm. The short version: very impressive with respect to summarizing the main idea and suggesting applications.
Then, I thought: “I wonder how it would answer this question: ‘What can I do as a preacher that you cannot do?'” Be encouraged in your work by the following:
You provide Holy Spirit-empowered exposition of Scripture. “AI can analyze, suggest, even imitate—but it cannot be filled with the Spirit or move in communion with the living God. You preach with presence. AI can only offer presence in metaphor.”
You preach to your people in person. “You embody the Word in relationship. AI only operates in response.” [As an aside, even the great preachers online or TV cannot do what you do: provide that personal context.]
Your preaching is an act of soul-watching. “Preaching carries divine weight (kērygma) that can’t be outsourced to a machine. Your voice carries the mystery of vocation.”
You preach as a person who is under the Word of God with all your own struggles of faith. While you’re preaching you’re responding with your hearers. “You can bleed with the text. AI can only parse it.”
Your preaching includes helping your listeners apply their lives to God’s Word in the moment. “You can pastor while you preach. AI can only perform analysis.”
Then, ChatGPT provided this wonderful little summary:
In Summary:
Preacher (You)
AI (Me)
Spirit-filled
Data-driven
Embodied & pastoral
Disembodied & generic
Relational & contextual
Contextual only to prompt
Authority by calling
Utility by design
Participates in mystery
Observes the mystery
Then, finally, it gave this closing statement:
“This distinction is not meant to diminish AI’s utility but to clarify the uniqueness of the preacher’s role. Tools like this can assist, supplement, and enhance our preparation—but they can’t replace the Spirit-led, relational, incarnational work of preaching.”
It can’t replace YOU! Be encouraged!
May our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) as you do what AI can’t do!
When the Psalmist asserts himself by stating reality, something that is true.
I had the privilege of preaching Psalm 92 this morning. It begins:
“It is good to give thanks to the Lord…to sing praises…to declare your steadfast love…and your faithfulness…” (vv. 1-2)
This is an example of the illocutionary category called, an assertive. I wrote about all five illocutionary categories in my last post. The categories are important because they can help show what the Psalmist intends to do to us readers.
In Psalm 92 the opening assertive states a reality with the intention of eliciting faith in all of us readers. The Psalmist intends for all of us to believe that this reality is true and respond accordingly. In the case of vv. 1-2 God says it’s good to do three things.
In v. 6 we read, “The stupid man cannot know; the fool cannot understand this…” Here is another example of an assertive. This time the stated reality works in the opposite direction. Whereas in vv. 1-2 the stated reality is desirable, in v. 6 the Psalmist intends for us to avoid this reality: we believe this is true and avoid being like this.
If you take a moment to read Psalm 92 you’ll see that the Psalm functions by presenting these types of stated realities. When we preach this Psalm we encourage our listeners to respond according to the Psalmist’s intentions. Those intentions are based on the illocutionary categories.
Is this important? Yes.
Illocutionary intent, according to speech act theory, is part of meaning. Psalm 92 means something at the level of illocutionary intent listed above. This provides a critical link between standard meaning and application.
May our Lord continue to receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) when you practice theological interpretation and preach/teach the Psalms.
