Category Archives: theological exegesis

Posted on

What An Odd Way to Preach the Gospel: Jesus’s Strongest Instruction, “Be perfect…”

by

Feeling the heavy weight of the command, “Be perfect…,” seems like anything but Good News!

If you have had or will have the privilege to preach through Matthew’s version of Jesus’s famous, Sermon on the Mount, brace yourself for having to explain His strongest instruction. It’s the last verse of chapter 5:

“You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect.”

Wow! No pressure there, right?!

Years ago I stumbled upon a commentary on Peter’s epistle–his name is Kelly, I think. I will never forget reading his take on New Testament commands. He referred to them as something like the Gospel in imperative form.

I am sure other authors have said similar things. And seemingly everybody quotes Augustine on similar matters. But this really has stuck with me through the years. And it is such a helpful preaching angle for our congregants.

I am enjoying reading Martyn Lloyd-Jones’s two volumes on the Sermon of the Mount. His understanding of this was also helpful. He calls Jesus’s command in Matthew 5:48 the best compliment Jesus could give His followers.

Isn’t that a great way to put it?

Can you see the Gospel in such a command?

So, when preaching any command, I am always thinking about how the command portrays some aspect of the nature of our salvation or transformation-in-Christ. And in the case of being perfect?

Along with telling our listeners how impossible it is–and depending on our theology, there is a sense that it is impossible on earth–tell them the great news that Jesus came to create followers who can obey His strongest instruction. If you can strike that wonderful balance or paradox, you will do justice both to our sinful selves and Christ’s marvelous power to save.

And you might notice that this prevents our parishioners from leaving church as good moralists, trying harder in their own efforts to be perfect Christians.

And while you explain how that is possible, our Lord will receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21).

Randal

P.S. Do you have your preaching portion for Sunday? Does that preaching portion contain any imperatives? Can you see the Gospel in that imperative form?

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

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

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

Adding Theological Depth To Your Preaching: Asking The “Why” Question Continued

by

Learn to get below the surface of theological concepts like “sin.”

A couple of weeks ago I posted on how answering the “why” question can add theological depth to our preaching.

First, when I advocate adding theological depth, I am not talking about the common notion that “deep” preaching is difficult to understand. I am talking about fleshing out the implications of key doctrines in a preaching portion. One way to do that is to look for unanswered “why” questions.

For instance, this coming Sunday, Lord willing I will be preaching Matthew 1:18-25. Verse 21 reads,

“She will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins.”

One question and answer that adds theological depth to preaching this section is,

“Why is being saved from our sins so important?”

The text does not tell us. We add theological depth by answering that question for our listeners.

Probably our theologically astute listeners will respond with something like: “Having Jesus save us from our sins is important because we are under the condemnation of God.”

Very true, of course.

But what about the sanctifying effect of being saved from our sins? Most of our listeners will not think about the devastating effects of sin in our daily lives.

Consider this standard definition of sin:

any lack of conformity to the character of God, whether by act, disposition, or state (a definition that I still remember from my first year of ministry training back in 1980!).

Notice what is missing in this definition. It’s not that it’s not accurate; it’s just not accurate enough. What’s missing is the soul-destroying, joy-destroying effect of sin. And so in a sermon we could say something like:

“Having Jesus save us from our sins is important because not only are we under the condemnation of God, we are also slaves to soul-destroying, joy-destroying sins.”

My point is that many preaching portions demand us to answer this kind of “why” question. And when we do, our Lord will 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

Me and God in the Study (part 2)

by

If you’re hungry, go to moonpie.com!

This morning I had the privilege of reading 1 Thessalonians 5:14 with our faith-family. It is an excellent test case to continue our discussion in the previous post about how much original material we put into our sermons.

The reason is because it is a short verse that needs a heavy dose of explaining:

“And we urge you, brothers, admonish the idle, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with them all.”

This means that much of the sermon contains the most precise, effective definitions we can get our hands on from Greek lexicons. Nothing original there.

So, what exactly do I bring to the equation with a text like this?

  1. I selected the text because of our current mini-series on our faith-family’s core values.
  2. That means I bring congregational purpose to this sermon, a purpose that, I hope, matches God’s purpose for this verse.
  3. Part of my job is to convince our listeners that this is critical (“…we urge you…”) and that they all have this responsibility (“…brothers…”), not just the leadership. These are implications of the explanations of meaning. Definitions alone won’t go there, but we need to.
  4. Then, I needed to help everyone see how important it is for us to care for each other like this. God decided to give us these four instructions at the end of the little letter. They must help a faith-family flourish spiritually. I helped them see the importance of these instructions by asking them what a local church would look like that didn’t treat each other like this.
  5. I wanted to make sure everyone realized that there are times when they might find themselves in one of the categories and in need of someone else’s assistance. Otherwise, we need to be ready to add real ministry to our small talk because it’s possible that whoever we’re fellowshipping with is in one of the categories and needs the appropriate response.
  6. Finally, I wanted to connect v. 14 with the the early part of the letter where the gospel and its transforming power is mentioned. This helps us see that God’s salvation in Christ creates the desire and capacity for us to respond well to each other. That way applying these instructions is a matter of genuine faith-at-work in a faith-family.

There may have been more, but this is a good amount of material that is more or less my doings. Before this coming Sunday, consider what kinds of things you contribute to your sermon and may our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) through your efforts.

Randal

Posted on

For 30+ Years I’ve Been Telling Preaching Students…

by

I remember thinking: “Everybody I’m reading quotes from C. S. Lewis and Jonathan Edwards!” What’s up with that?!?!

God has been gracious to me again this past year and given me yet another opportunity to teach preaching to students pursuing their Master’s degree as part of their training. Once again this year I said something like:

“Read and think hard to become a pastor-theologian for your faith-family.”

Each year part of my privilege involves listening to my new friends preach sermons as their final project/assignment for the semester in Advanced Homiletics. Each year I think to myself something like:

“Keep encouraging them to read and think hard to become a pastor-theologian for their faith-families.”

The sermons often contain the results of good exegesis, but many are a bit on the lighter side when it comes to theological thinking. I hear solid definition of key terms–word studies; I hear less solid thinking with respect to the why’s and how’s of our relationship to these well-defined concepts.

So, if you were interested in continuing to grow as a theologian, one easy and effective way to proceed is to consider reading Crossway’s series of leading theologians on the Christian Life. I am just completing Lewis on the Christian Life and it has been one of my top five reads in my lifetime. Really. Though not a theologian, Lewis’s thinking is unparalleled (which is not the same as saying he was a good exegete). Joe Rigney’s book, however, is excellent. And the other books I’ve read in the series are also extremely good.

It seems like modern pastor-theologians that are worth studying always quote the likes of Lewis and also Jonathan Edwards. I encourage you to join that club so our Lord continues to receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21),

Randal

P.S. Rigney’s analysis of Lewis’s thoughts on the corruption of human love and how temptation works on men and women is an example of how such thinking adds theological depth to sermons.