Category Archives: preaching

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

Our Listeners Really Haven’t Changed

by

You can decide whether this quote is encouraging or discouraging; same with the following post.

Back in March I introduced you to the multi-volume set, Theoretical-Practical Theology, by Petrus Van Mastricht. The title is a strong hint as to why I believe the set holds tremendous promise for preaching.

Van “Mastricht argued that the TPT was to be used in the preparation of preaching” (p. xxxix). That’s what makes this volume a special part of my reading this year.

Preachers and homileticians will also be interested in an early chapter, The Best Method of Preaching. Now, remember that the following quote was written in 1682. Tell me whether this sounds familiar…

“I did not produce those disputations in haughtiness, for I cheerfully and frankly confess that they do not possess anything from their learning and erudition that could comment them to anyone–especially not in this most self-indulgent age…” (emphasis added, Preface, p. 3).

Imagine that: Mastricht described his day as a “most self-indulgent age.”

When I read something like that it gives me courage. At times I find myself thinking that all of our technological advances make it more difficult to minister in this day. Mastricht’s description fits our day. Back then people respected ministers more than they do today, but the age of self-indulgence marches on.

One of our responsibilities as preachers and teachers of God’s Word is to continue to call Christ-followers toward self-denial. That sounds like something Jesus taught, more precisely as a prerequisite for following Him.

I asked earlier whether this post would be encouraging or discouraging. Either way it hits you, it potentially keeps us focused on our task. And as we work at this each weekend our Lord receives glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21),

Randal

Posted on

Theological Depth By Implication

by

Theological Depth Is Often Found Through Implication.

I have the privilege recently to be preaching through the early chapters of the Gospel of Matthew. In verses 13-16, Jesus teaches His listeners that they are salt and light.

Explicitly this teaches us about ourselves and how Christ has transformed us into new creations with new spiritual properties.

Implicitly this teaches us about our world.

One sermon segment then can focus attention on what our being salt and light implies concerning the condition of the world in which we live. The logic goes like this:

if we function as salt and light in the world this must imply something about what the world is made of.

The world must need salt and the world must need light. The world needs salt because the world’s substance is subject to decay, let’s say. The world needs light because it is in darkness (I found that one easier).

My point is that as you prepare for this coming Sunday, you can add some theological depth to your sermon by observing implications. God may be stating some things explicitly and you are able to draw conclusions even though God didn’t state that conclusion explicitly.

As is always the case when providing extra-textual data, the way to remain theologically sound is to be sure your implications can be substantiated in the broader context of Scripture. The case above, the implication might not be in Matthew 5:13-16, but it could be in other places in Matthew or in other places in the Canon of Scripture. This gives implication the same authority as the information in our preaching portions.

As you study this week look for strong implication and may our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21).

Randal

Posted on

An Example of the Second Reason We Might Put our Listeners to Sleep (the Beatitudes)

by

We Could Be Losing our Listeners with our Well-crafted (yawn) Outlines.

A couple of weeks ago I suggest that we contribute to that glazed look (the Steve Carrel pic) by (1) allowing gaps in the emotional connection between our sermon data and our listener’s response and (2) allowing gaps in the logical connection between our sermon data–even main points–and our listener’s response.

In both cases I am talking about responses in terms of worship responses: what God intends for Scripture to do to the Christian.

An example of the second phenomenon is a sermon on the Beatitudes in Matthew 5.

There are nine “Blessed are’s…” in the section (vv. 1-12). I chose to spend two sermons on all nine (I covered the first three and then the final six).

This type of list can easily cause slumber in the seats because of how easy it is to allow gaps in the logical connection between the individual Beatitude and a worship response.

That means we have to work hard at each Beatitude, each main point if you will, to keep the worship response intact.

I did not do a very good job at this because I chose to cover the final six together: how the blessed ones are described.

Then, it was time to play catch up and connect the dots between Beatitude and God’s intention for announcing such blessings: Kingdom-Made Christians…

  • believe the blessing
  • stabilize their hope in this upside down world
  • assess the degree that they mirror these characteristics

I hope you can see that too many minutes between those bullet points and each Beatitude can create the yawns or blank stares.

May our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) as work hard to keep strong emotional and logical connections with our listeners who have ears to hear.

Randal

Posted on

Revisiting that First Reason We Might Lose our Listeners

by

He couldn’t take any more of my fascinating biblical history lesson! Go figure.

In the previous post I talked about how the loss of emotional and logical connections can contribute to listener fallout. This weekend I want to elaborate on the first one.

My main preaching mentor, the late Haddon Robinson, taught us a major difference between preaching and lecturing. My own students each year are reminded of the difference between two stances: historical lecturer vs. theological preacher.

Haddon’s words were: the lecturer talks to people about the Bible, while the preacher talks to people about people from the Bible.

It is difficult to find balance, but ideally we want the sermon to sound like we’re talking to our listeners about them throughout the message. In the sermon, the Lord is addressing them and expecting them to respond to His Word.

That means that even those minutes devoted to explaining historical background, for instance, must quickly be reeled back into the preacher’s stance. The historical data, or exegetical data for that matter serves the purpose of theology–Scripture functioning for the Church.

Too many minutes of the lecturer’s stance–talking to them about the Bible–creates a lull in our emotional connection with our listeners.

If you had the courage to listen to a recent sermon, listen to which stance you’re in most of the time. You might find that you’re conditioned to be a lecturer. And you might try to reframe your delivery so that you talk to your listeners about them from the Bible. It will be more difficult for them to fall asleep on you if you’re talking to them about them and, as always, our Lord will receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21).

Randal

Posted on

Two Reasons We Might Lose Our Listeners

by

At times, we might contribute to this classic parishioner, blank stare.

One advantage of experiencing a couple of surgeries to extract a 6mm kidney stone from my right kidney was the opportunity to listen to a couple of sermons.

Preachers can relate to this. I was sincerely wanting to worship, not critique the sermon. But while I was worshiping, the homiletician in me thought, “Try to figure out the cause of the blank stare syndrome.”

I came up with two things over the past few weeks. They may help you as you prepare to preach.

First, I help create the blank stare when there is a lull in the emotional connection. There are sermon minutes filled with minutia that do not engage the listener. The data is not connected to any worship response. Many listeners who take God’s Word seriously will endure these minutes until the impact returns. But it’s painful for them and I don’t wan to cause this.

Second, I also help create the blank stare when there is a break in the logical flow of the subject matter. Too many minutes elapse as too many details are disconnected to the main worship response. And this can all happen within a well-crafted outline. Listeners easily lose their place in a sermon. Sometimes we lead them down this path of inactive learning by not connecting the individual concepts to their worship.

The two reasons I’ve listed cover the emotional and logical components of listening. Both are equally important for communication.

When you’re on vacation this summer and you’re a worshiper, play the reason-for-the-blank-stare game. God knows why you’re doing it. You want to be a better preacher. See if you experience what I did and for similar reasons.

And He will receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) because of His gift and your extra effort to improve.

Randal

Posted on

Preaching With A Kidney Stone

by

Preaching While Dealing With A Kidney Stone! Yikes!

First, I have been out of commission for a couple of weeks due to fighting a kidney stone. To make a long story short, the first surgery was unsuccessful and the second surgery is scheduled for tomorrow.

The first surgery left me with a temporary stent in my right kidney. That stent prevented me from having another painful attack, but left me with nasty UTI-like symptoms. My main concern, apart from the occasional pain and discomfort, was whether or not I could preach yesterday without feeling like I had to go to the bathroom. And, trust me, with a stent in the ole saying, “When you gotta go, you gotta go,” is reality.

All that to say, this was one of those rare times in my 30 plus years of preaching that I had to preach not knowing whether I was up to the task physically.

If you’ve experienced something similar, then you know what that meant: I had to trust God more than normal.

I don’t like admitting that, but it’s true. I would rather write that I always trust God to the same degree for every sermon. But there is something about suffering for a couple of weeks that elevates the need for God’s help.

[I am keeping the past two weeks in perspective because I have parishioners who have been battling far greater suffering for much longer.]

Yesterday was a good reminder that God is merciful and I need His mercy, sometimes to a greater degree. The great thing about preaching is that it is God’s work. We do have a part to play in it, but I know He knows how much we need Him, especially when we’re struggling.

God was very gracious to me yesterday. I was able to preach a full-length message without having to run to the bathroom mid-sentence.

I hope you never have to preach with a kidney stone, but if you do our Lord will receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) as you entrust the sermon to His care.

Randal

Posted on

What Kind Of Meaning Do You Preach?

by

The statement means much more than is being said!
Introducing Illocutionary Intent-Informed Meaning (II-M) and Why it Matters

This past Monday I was privileged to present some of my more important Ph.D. dissertation findings to the Alcuin Society of Lancaster Bible College | Capital Seminary & Graduate School. Many thanks to faculty and guests who were extremely gracious.

Here are a few things that are pertinent to preachers:

  1. Learn to think about application early in the sermon development process. The old school approach was to wait on application because if entertained too early, the process had the potential to skew exegesis.
  2. In order to think about application earlier, the search for application must be a part of the search for exegetical/theological meaning.
  3. In order for that to happen your exegetical method must include the search for what I call, Illocutionary Intent. This involves looking for clues as to what the biblical author wants to do to the readers.

If you like, try to create a meaning summary, II-M, for Luke 15. In other words, your one-sentence meaning summary must include an element of what the author intends to do to the reader. Or, to put it another way, make sure your meaning summary includes the intended application or response of the church to Luke 15.

Try it and see how you do.

Also, if, like me, you’re already looking at a Text for this coming Sunday, see if you can detect the illocutionary intent of the author. This will give you a sneak peak at your primary sermon application and worship response of your congregants.

And may our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21),

Randal

P.S. I trust you enjoyed a wonderful Easter celebration!

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