Category Archives: relevance

Posted on

Two Implications of “God’s Excellencies”: What I’m Learning From Reading Jonathan Edwards’s Earliest Sermons

by

“For who in haven can be compared unto the Lord…” (Psalm 89:6)

One of the benefits of reading Jonathan Edwards’s early sermons is the opportunity to learn from his way of thinking.

Here are two quotes from his sermon, God’s Excellencies, based on Psalm 89:6. Notice that these are two implications of God’s perfection.

“[God] has made all things that are excellent, and therefore must have given them their excellency, and so must have all that excellency in himself, or else could not have given it. He must have all the glories, perfections, and beauties of the whole creation in himself in an infinite degree, for they all proceed from him, as beams do from the sun…” (p. 420, Kimnach).

Think of everything we admire in this created world and then think about our God who created them! It’s impossible not to praise Him.

Then, something that’s not so much fun to think about, but critical for walking with God:

“If he be such an excellent being, how dreadful is sin against [him]. There are very few that conceived what a dreadful thing it is to sin against the infinitely excellent, great, and glorious Jehovah. The aggravations of sin are really infinite, infinite in greatness and almost infinite in number, for it is committed against an infinitely great and powerful God…” (p. 426)

Think of all our temptations and spiritual struggles and tell me if this kind of thinking doesn’t keep us tethered to faithfulness!

So, it never fails: whenever I read Edwards I am caught up into his most excellent mind. And what’s refreshing to me is that all that brilliance is organically connected to soul-watching, a most practical theology indeed.

May Edwards spur you on to preach and teach well this week so God receives glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21).

Randal

Posted on

Could You Still Preach Your Sermon If…?

by

Would it matter to your sermon if no one was listening?

One of my mentors, the late, Dr. Haddon Robinson, taught me about the difference between preaching and lecturing. He put it this way:

“We don’t talk to our listeners about the Bible; we talk to them about them from the Bible.”

My wife, Michele, recently had an opportunity to listen to another preacher from a local church. I don’t blame her. To quote my mentor again, she’s heard enough poor sermons in her lifetime–bless her heart–it’s no wonder she’s still a Christian. [I’ve preached over 2,000 sermons and she’s heard most of them!]

So, I asked her the question that ranks second in my order of importance:

“Was the preacher talking to you about the Bible or talking to you about you from the Bible?”

Without hesitation she replied: “The first one.”

The first scenario, the lecturer’s stance, does not require listeners. Take a look at last week’s sermon or what you have developed so far this week and ask yourself whether or not the way it sounds requires listeners.

Michele followed that up with this insight:

“But if you believe your assignment is to teach the people [insert a book of the Bible or theological concept], then it makes sense to preach like that.”

But if our responsibility is to watch over souls (Hebrews 13:17), then we approach the sermon differently. We talk to them about them from the Bible because we are shepherding them in the moment, urging them to worship our Lord during the teaching.

As you continue to prepare for this weekend’s assignment, as yourself whether you are taking the lecturer’s stance or the preacher’s.

While I am convinced our Lord can receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) either way, I am also convinced you and I are being more responsible soul-watchers to the degree that we continue to talk to them about them from the Bible.

Randal

P.S. By the way, in case you’re interested, the first question of importance is, “Did the preacher preach with accuracy, faithfully saying what God is saying?”

Posted on

Practical Theology Indeed! What I’m Learning from Jonathan Edwards’s Earliest Sermons

by

“…we are not made for an earthly happiness” (J. Edwards)
Photo by bruce mars on Unsplash

I am reading Jonathan Edwards’s earliest sermons so I can hear someone else preach to me. He is also the consummate pastor-theologian so he’s a great role model for me in that area. He has the God-given ability to analyze Scripture to death while still remaining intensely practical for his 18th century New England congregants.

There. That should be enough rationale for why I choose to read Edwards.

The quote underneath the picture is from Edwards’s sermon, Nakedness of Job. His application falls under the heading, Improvement. I. Use of Infor….Second.

“Hence we learn that we are not made for an earthly happiness. God certainly never made man for that sort of happiness which he cannot hold; he was never made for that happiness which, almost as soon as enjoyed, flies from us and leaves us disappointed.”

And I would add, “…or grieving.”

Think about your preaching and teaching and look at how often such insight comes into play. Think about all the times when we are urging our listeners to love God supremely on the one hand, or warning them about certain temptations on the other hand. In either case the reminder that God did not make us for earthly happiness alone, apart from being happy in Him, can be extremely helpful.

As we move through Scripture, we and our listeners need constant reminders that the things that make us happy on earth are not ultimate things. Exceptions might be serving and worshiping God including all kinds of disciple-making.

This is great incentive for me not to hold too tightly to the things that bring me great joy on earth.

As you share this kind of practical theology with your listeners, may God receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21),

Randal

Posted on

Preaching Reality: What I’m Learning from Reading Jonathan Edwards’s Earliest Sermons

by

Read to Sharpen Your Theological Thinking
and Add Depth to Your Preaching

Every so often these blog posts dip back into the early preaching of Jonathan Edwards. My purpose for reading Edwards is twofold:

(1) Rarely do I get to have someone preach to me and I benefit from hearing God’s Word from the outside.

(2) Rarely am I disappointed by the depth of Edwards’s theological thinking that always lands at detailed application.

Today’s insights come from Edwards’s sermon, The Nakedness of God, from Job 1:21.

In the introduction to the sermon, Kimnach writes,

“…an even more urgent matter for him here and in later sermons is the…issue of human reality….the problem for men is not one of coming to terms with truth, but rather with reality” (p. 400).

In the sermon Edwards states,

“All the world knows the truth of this doctrine perfectly well [that when a person dies they lose all earthly treasures], but though they know, yet it don’t seem at all real to them; for certainly, if it seemed a real thing to them that, in a little time, they must certainly have no more to do with the world, they would act wholly otherwise than they do [emphasis added]” (p. 406).

The difference is subtle–the difference between talking truth and talking reality. But I find that it is a helpful distinction. My experience is that listeners have to think differently about accepting truth versus accepting reality.

Tomorrow as you begin praying and prepping for preaching, remember Edwards’s observation: your listeners probably believe the doctrine is true. Challenge them with respect to whether they think God’s Word is real. And, of course, we work hard all week with God’s help to develop a sermon that urges them to act as if they believe God’s Word to be real.

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

Posted on

Has the pandemic created any new preaching series?

by

Don’t we wish!
Photo by Immo Wegmann on Unsplash

This morning was my second in a relatively short, but still-being-planned, preaching series that is the result of crazy times. My wife, Michele, created this title slide for the series:

Last Sunday the pollutant was unpredictability and we anchored ourselves in the sovereignty and providence of God. So many of our plans last year were disrupted by the virus but not His.

This morning we adjusted our focus away from physical health, the talk of virtually every day’s news, and onto our relationship with God who, according to Psalm 73 is the “strength of our heart” which may indeed fail, virus or no virus.

Never in my lifetime have I seen the quality of the air we breathe so poor. While I’m tired of remembering to take a mask everywhere I go and putting one on, the mask reminds me that there are toxins in the air attacking my faith. So, before resuming our Psalms series, I thought it best to address the church with such things.

How about you? I was wondering if you have already preached or plan to preach some kind of series based upon the unique context in which we’re walking with God.

May our Lord continue to give you wisdom to navigate more-difficult-than-normal times so He receives glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21),

Randal

P.S. I’d love to hear from some of you, but know your lives are extra busy too!

Posted on

How Much of Your Sermon Is Original?

by

I believe that but also know of other preachers who have preached this text better!

In the middle of the week I began thinking about how much of my sermon-in-the-making is the result of my own thinking. I know about the debate surrounding whether or not anyone can ever have a truly original idea. And I’m not talking about plagiarizing either.

I guess I’m asking you to think about what parts of your sermon development and delivery are your work.

Let’s begin with some thoughts about using someone else’s material:

On one side of the spectrum, think about those times when you rely on an English dictionary, thesaurus, or original language lexicons and theological dictionaries. Now go all the way to the other side of the line and think about borrowing someone else’s sermon title and structure.

In the middle I put quotes or paraphrases from our favorite authors, like Jonathan Edwards, Augustine, or William Goldman (author and screenplay writer of The Princess Bride).

So, what do I bring to the equation? Every week by the grace of God I…

  • trace the argument of my preaching portion and discover how meaning is made before I know what that meaning is.
  • determine how this text intends to elicit worship (I complete the sentence: “We worship the Lord this morning by…”).
  • know enough about my congregants to know this text is relevant.
  • create a structure that leads to the theological meaning of the text.
  • talk to my listeners about their Christian experience from the text while I write out my sermon manuscript.
  • make critical word-choices that affect how the sermon sounds (an ora-script within the manuscript).
  • smile at them to let them know I love them.
  • show them how the Christ-event makes this text come true for those who believe.

What did I miss?

May our Sunday “originals” continue to give God glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21),

Randal

Posted on

Sovereignty And Election Are Extremely Relevant: My Only Post On Preaching Through Romans 1-11

by

I never thought I would write that the sovereignty of God and His election described in Romans 9-11 are easy to apply to the church! But they are. And I’m getting ahead of myself.

First, when I began preaching through Romans 1-11 a year ago Easter, I determined not to write posts from that series. The reason was simple: I do not consider preaching epistles like Romans to be difficult.

[I realize some of my friends and colleagues just ran to get their EpiPens!]

What I mean is that, although there are difficult theological concepts to explain, the structure and applicability of most epistles most of the time are not too difficult. In the case of Romans 9-11 one of my favorite commentators, Douglas Moo puts it this way:

“…while certain points remain hard to understand, Paul is claiming to be transmitting truth to which his readers are to respond” (p. 740).

Here’s how to locate the intended response for Romans 9-11 and all the heavy discussion of unconditional election:

First, when you begin working through chapter 9 you will need to point congregants forward to 11:17-22. This is Paul’s first indication of how the section functions for the church. There you find instruction for us not to be arrogant toward unbelieving Jews (v. 18), to stand fast through faith (v. 20), not become proud (v. 20), and to live as God-fearers (v. 20). The reason: “for if God did not spare the natural branches, neither will he spare you” (v. 21) and the warning in v. 22, “Otherwise you too will be cut off.”

It is easy to get lost in election in chapter 9 and forget what the section is intended to do to the faith-family.

Two other connections can and should be made. First, the entire section ends with a marvelous doxology in 11:33-36. Everything ends with praise to God. Second, the more practical section that begins in 12:1 stems from all the mercies of God highlighted in 9-11 (“…by the mercies of God”). Unconditional election magnifies the mercy of God which provides motivation for all the instruction in chapters 12-16.

I hope you have had or will have an opportunity to preach through Romans with your faith-family and God will receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21).

Randal

Posted on

Aim The Sermon At Alteration, Not Information

by

I am enjoying Carrell’s, Preaching That Matters, partly because of all the research she’s done that defines the preaching practices of so many. I didn’t enjoy learning about this:

“…remember that the vast majority of sermons (more than 95 percent) do not invite listeners to change.” (p. 66)

If pastors aren’t inviting their listeners to change, what are they doing? Carrell puts it like this:

“Preacher’s General Purpose: Let me tell you about something.

Listeners’ General Response: I agree with what you said.” (p. 66)

Let’s give ourselves the benefit of the doubt and say we’re telling our listeners about the Bible. And let’s give our listeners the benefit of the doubt and say they often agree with what we’re telling them about the Bible. I agree with Carrell that that’s not enough for what needs to happen on a Sunday morning.

So Carrell talks about not only identifying the subject of your sermon (which you know should come from your preaching portion), but also identifying the response to your sermon. In previous posts I’ve talked about how the intention for the sermon (what the sermon is intending to do to the listener) comes directly from the intention of the preaching portion (what the Scripture is intending to do to the listener).

I am often in the habit of wording it like this: After the public reading of Scripture, I’ll say, “This is God’s Word. We worship this morning by ___________.” I fill in the blank with whatever our Text is intending to do to the listeners. Right from the outset everyone in the house of the Lord knows how the Lord intends to change us.

That means every Sunday, like every New Year, should be an opportunity to make a fresh start.

Before Sunday, along with identifying the subject of your sermon, also identify the worship response so God receives glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21).

Randal

Posted on

From Inferences to Exhortations (part 2): What I’m Learning From Reading Jonathan Edwards’ Early Sermons

by

This week we’re still preaching to the choir, but this time to a different kind of choir member: the godly. Near the end of “Christian Happiness” Jonathan Edwards’ moves from five inferences to two exhortations. The first exhortation was aimed at the ungodly. The second one is aimed at the godly.

You may recall that the sermon is based on Isaiah 3:10. It reads:

“Say unto the righteous, it shall be well with him: for they shall eat the fruit of their doings.”

Last week I listed the following five inferences listed under the heading, “USE” (my explanations in brackets). I refer to these inferences as pre-application. Read them in light of the verse above:

Inf. I. Then we may infer that the godly man need not be afraid of any temporal afflictions whatsoever [since it shall be well with him].

Inf. II. Hence we may see the excellent and desirable nature of true godliness [because it provides such happiness].

Inf. III. We may hence learn that to walk according [to] the rules of religion and godliness is the greatest wisdom [because it leads to the most happiness].

Inf. IV. Hence learn the greatest goodness of God in joining so great happiness to our duty [it certainly is good of God to create such a system where even duty is delight!].

Inf. V. We hence learn [what] we are to do for a remedy when we are under affliction: even embrace religion and godliness.

Then Edwards moves immediately from inferences to exhortations. Note the shift from “we” to “you.” Exhortation #1 was “To the ungodly: to forsake his wickedness and to walk in the ways of religion….You have now heard of the happiness of the religious man…as you never yet experienced; you never yet….You…you have….You now…you are invited to such a happiness….Be persuaded, then, to taste and see how good it is” (p. 305). Pretty direct.

He’s just as direct in Exh. II. “Is to the godly to go on and persevere and make progress in the ways of religion and godliness. Go on….let nothing….You…you…you….Do not be discouraged by any evils….Go on, therefore…”

Before Sunday, these are the two broad categories of people we will be addressing. Check to see that your application stems directly from your text. Decide how direct you will be to your listeners. Certainly, you will want to speak to the professing Christians about how their faith in Christ drives their Text-driven transformation. And, as always, do it all so God receives glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21).

Happy Thanksgiving!

Randal

 

Posted on

What I Learned From Listening To Nine Sermons In One Day!

by

I recently returned from teaching a fine class of Doctor of Ministry students (Preaching the Literary Forms of the Bible track) at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary. It’s always enjoyable and a privilege each May to join my good friend, Dr. Jeffrey Arthurs, for these days.

However, one of our responsibilities is listening to their sermons. My mentor, Dr. Haddon Robinson, once said that he had listened to so many bad sermons over the years, it’s a wonder he was still a Christian. He was half-joking. Thankfully, these students preached well.

But here’s what I observed from listening to nine of ten sermons in one day (All the sermons were dealing with preaching a narrative text.):

We have a tendency to spend too much time retelling the history of the text and not enough time telling the theology of the text.

If I remember correctly, I wrote that comment on virtually every sermon evaluation form.

It seems that instinctively (or due to training/modeling) we believe our task as preachers is to rehearse past redemptive history. Preachers keep their listeners in the past, learning about what happened in the Story.

WE’RE THEOLOGIANS, NOT HISTORIANS

I encouraged the class to think of themselves as theologians, not historians. That means, of course, that we’re able to write the sermon from the perspective of conveying theology, not history. That means we know how each part of the Story is functioning for the Church. That means we know how each part of the Story addresses our human condition as churchgoers. That means we are always talking to us about us from God’s Word. It’s never about God’s Word.

Next time you preach try to monitor yourself in the moment–are you sounding like a history lecture or a theologian/pastor?

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

Randal