Category Archives: relevance

Posted on

How Do You Know What A Preaching Portion Means?

by

Adding a Meaning Element from Speech Act Theory

Yesterday I had the privilege of joining Dr. Mark Meyer, Hebrew specialist at LBC|Capital, at their D.C. location (Greenbelt, MD) for a workshop, Unpacking Sacred Scripture. We worked together in Psalms 1 and 2, the introduction to the Psalter, to show the combined exegetical and homiletical process. Our goal was to help close the gap between finding meaning and application.

One of my responsibilities was to introduce the participants to a new kind of meaning summary. You can see that in this slide:

Consider this kind of meaning to be your goal as you begin sermon or lesson preparation this week.

I call our target meaning, illocutionary intent-infused meaning (II-M). I’ll spare you the boring details and only say that this fancy language originates from Speech Act Theory and their concept of illocution. Illocution describes what a person is doing by what they are saying.

My favorite illustration of the illocutionary element of communication is my wife, Michele, saying, “Ran, the dog needs to go out.” If I respond with, “That’s nice, Dear,” and go back to my very important job of writing a blog post, then I missed what she meant. In saying, “The dog needs to go out,” she’s really asking me to take the dog out. That’s what she was doing in what she was saying.

As you can see from the slide, II-M is the combination of biblical content and biblical intent. The intent part is critical because this contains the seeds of valid application derived from the meaning of the text.

So, before Sunday, see if you can detect your pericope’s intent. Answer this question from your text:

What does God intend for this Scripture to do to the listener?

If you can add intention to your meaning summaries, you will always keep primary application tied directly to meaning. And, I am suggesting that we really do not know what a Scripture means until we have identified how God intends for it to function for the church.

So, as you begin to identify the meaning of your upcoming Text, complete the meaning summary by adding: “____________ with the intent of_________”

May our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) as we communicate both content and intent.

Randal

Posted on

We Practice Theological Interpretation When We Preach (whether we know it or not)

by

For the past several years, because of my preaching and teaching duties, I have been enamored with theological interpretation (TI). My recent Ph.D. studies at LBC|Capital created even more time to investigate this as part of my dissertation.

Is it important? Yes, it is.

Because while TI might be more than showing how Scripture functions for the church, it can’t be less than that according to all my research to date. This means that TI forms a foundation for any attempts to apply Scripture.

So, if you asked me, “What kind of book on TI should I read first?” I would answer:

Scripture As Real Presence: Sacramental Exegesis in the Early Church by Hans Boersma.

The reason is because pre-modern interpreters–and Boersma–understand Christ to be the key to interpreting Scripture for the church.

If you’re interested in preaching or teaching from the Old Testament, you should note Boersma’s argument:

“that the church fathers were deeply invested in reading the Old Testament Scriptures as a sacrament, whose historical basis or surface level participates in the mystery of the New Testament reality of the Christ event.” (p. xiii)

Some of the primary material is tough to read through, but the book is so helpful for those of us who feed flocks on Sunday from the Old Testament. And, if you’ve studied preaching with me then you will appreciate another look at a hermeneutic that arrives at application “by moving from the Old Testament, via Christ, to the situation of today” (p. xiv).

Well, anyway. When you read, Scripture As Real Presence, you will encounter hermeneutical/homiletical concepts such as:

“sacramental hermeneutic” (pp. 12-13)

“christological/ecclesial allegorizing” (p. 91) [which is important because most of our exposure to the allegorical method is from a “what’s wrong with it” perspective.

“‘christo-ecclesiological’ form of exegesis (p. 148)

“the doctrine of totus Christus–the ‘whole Christ'” (p. 152)

All these concepts will help you think about the relationship between meaning and application, something that you and I engage in every week.

May our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) as you communicate the results of theological interpretation.

Randal

Posted on

How What Evangelicals Currently Believe Affects Our Preaching

by

The current State of Theology helps us know the doctrines in danger.

In preparing for some new disciple-making initiatives in the coming year, a colleague of mine at church and I have been collecting some data on what Evangelicals believe. In the process of skimming some of the findings, I realized how important this data can be for our preaching.

[For years, I have watched the survey results reveal a slow, but steady movement away from orthodox beliefs. This has caused me to see at least part of my preaching ministry as an attempt to keep my listeners from losing important aspects of the Christian faith.]

If you’re interested, I suggest you look at what Ligonier and Lifeway present about the State of Theology (thestateoftheology.com).

What you will find is that Evangelicals are moving away from traditional beliefs about Christology, including things as foundational as whether or not Jesus was created by God.

When I presented some the findings to our Wednesday night crowd, two folks quickly replied: “Well, I wonder how the survey defined ‘Evangelical’?” That’s a very common Fundamentalist reaction. My reply was that it doesn’t matter. Even if the word wasn’t defined as tightly as some of us might want, the stats still show that some of our parishioners might be experiencing a similar shift.

If you’ve used such info before, then you know that the survey answers help us know what doctrines we need to highlight in our preaching. For instance, in one recent survey I saw, three of the five questions/answers involved the Person and work of Christ.

May our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) as we accurately preach Christ as God portrays Him in His Word.

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

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

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

Learning to Extend Your Exegesis by Asking “Why?”

by

One Key To Explanatory Exegesis

I am calling one key element of deep exegesis, explanatory exegesis. I welcome other possible ways to identify it because I’m still not sure “explanatory exegesis” is the most accurate.

Here’s what I am talking about. This past Sunday I had the privilege of preaching Paul’s extraordinary prayer in Ephesians 3:14-21. The request for spiritual strength for his readers culminates in v. 19 with the ability,

“…to know the love of Christ that surpasses knowledge.”

Standard exegetical practices will certainly uncover the paradox of knowing such a thing that can’t be fully known.

Explanatory exegesis goes a step further than lexical meanings and grammatical/syntactical relationships between the key terms in the clause. It explains why knowing the love of Christ is so important.

Why is that “why?” so important? Because God knows that knowing the unknowable love of Christ is the most important thing for His child to know.

But why?

Because God is the most important Being in the universe. Infinitely more valuable to the human psyche than social validation is being validated by God. Knowing Christ loves us is a most stabilizing reality.

Okay. That was my attempt to answer the question. The point is that it needs to be asked and answered in order for the prayer to have its intended impact. Paul assumes that his readers will recognize the importance of knowing Christ’s love and, therefore, gladly receive spiritual strength from the Lord.

I have found this kind of explanatory exegesis to be most fruitful in showing the relevance of Scripture.

If you haven’t done so yet, identify any place in your preaching/teaching portion for Sunday where the “Why?” question needs to be asked and answered. And as a result of your explanatory exegesis, may the Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21).

Randal

Posted on

Don’t Forget To Explain Why

by

“Why?” is often the missing piece in our preaching.

If you’re preaching or teaching context is like mine, then most of your listeners are familiar with Christian or biblical language.

Early last week I heard an excellent preacher tell his listeners that reading their Bible this year would help them be more Christlikeness. I couldn’t agree more, especially since the preacher was careful to emphasize not only reading but appropriating Scripture or applying their lives to the Bible.

As I listened I asked whether the listeners knew why becoming more Christlike was a good thing for them. Congregants who know their Bibles well probably would readily admit that they want to be more Christlike, but would they, or my own parishioners, know why it’s good.

That brief sermon segment I heard on the radio helped me understand my need to explain the “why” of the doctrines I preach and teach.

Give it a try: Becoming more Christlike is an excellent goal for every Christian because __________________.

You could start with something like: “….because it is good for God’s reputation in the church and in the world.”

You could also explain that, “…because it is good for us. Period.”

You could also state that, “…because it is good for our witness in the world.”

I came away thinking that even if my listeners know the concept of being Christlike, they may not be able to articulate why it’s a good goal for them. If listened to my own sermons I might find that, too often, I leave this critical piece of the theological puzzle out.

As you craft your sermon/lesson this week, look for doctrine that your congregants know, but may not know the “why” attached to it. And may our Lord continue to receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) as a result of your efforts.

Randal

Posted on

What I Learned About Preaching from the Beatles

by

Through the years I have always been intrigued by critiques and analyses of musical performers. Recently I enjoyed a documentary on the Beatles and once again came away with insights for preaching.

One interviewer/reviewer said of the Beatles:

“They were fresh and they were honest.”

Just those two things, but extremely important for explaining part of why this new singing group took the world by storm.

It got me thinking whether these two elements of being fresh and honest are important for preaching God’s Word in church on Sunday.

First, why is being fresh and honest important for preachers? Our listeners resonate with a sense of freshness that they hear in our preaching. This kind of freshness means that you and God are together in the study before the sermon. Freshness means God’s Spirit is teaching you in the study and in your sermons and lessons you are relaying what He is teaching you. It is very current, very fresh material.

Then there is honesty. This gives our listeners the assurance that you are being real in your own faith-journey. Your preaching and teaching is genuine, not contrived. Our listeners find it easier to listen to us because they feel we’re real, not fake.

Second, how do preachers accomplish being fresh and honest? This kind of freshness sounds different, but not in the sense of always coming up with things they’ve never heard before. It might be the way your use words and phrases. It may be your particular style, but it is unmistakably you.

And being honest? It includes an honesty about your own wrestling with the text. It includes honestly preaching the text no matter how it might sound to the listeners. It also includes the sense that you believe what you’re saying and that it’s a matter of life and death.

Anyway, I hope this creates some thinking on effectively communicating God’s Word. You probably have things come to mind immediately that could add to either being fresh or honest or both.

May any sense of Spirit-created freshness and honesty result in our Lord receiving glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21),

Randal