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?

Randal

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.

Randal

Three Judges for American Idol, plus Jelly Roll

Almost every year I learn something about effective preaching from judges’ comments on American Idol.

I know; you’re shocked by that. I get it.

But for years I’ve paid close attention to their feedback to these young singing artists. This year is no different. I’m writing this as Michele and I get ready to watch the current episode (they’re down to the top six and I’m rooting for country singer, John Roberts).

A few weeks ago, here’s what legend, Lionel Ritchie, said to my favorite:

“You were so comfortable that it made it believable for us.”

Preaching works like that too. To the degree that you and I are comfortable as a result of trusting the Lord while preaching, there is a level of believability that helps our congregants respond to God.

And then, that same evening, guest mentor and legend, James Taylor, said to the young lady singing the song, Take a Little Piece of My Heart,

“Read the lyrics out loud without the music to get into the story.”

Another gem for preachers. She was singing but she wasn’t believable. She needed to “get into the story.” Again, we help our listeners when we are able to relate well to God’s Word. They sense it and it helps them in some way to believe it too.

By the way, I never remember a year on American Idol where so much attention was given to Christian music. One whole evening was devoted to songs of faith. And Jelly Roll is a guest musician showing up each night and demonstrating incredible heart for these performers.

Thanks for reading a lighter-than-usual post!

May our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) as we continue to strive for excellence in the delivery of God’s Word each Sunday.

Randal

P.S. Vote for John Roberts!

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:

1. 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.”
2. 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.]
3. 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.”
4. 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.”
5. 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:

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!

Randal

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.

Randal