Tag Archives: rhetorical analysis

Posted on

Building Your Sermon (part 3): What I’m Learning From Reading Jonathan Edwards’s Early Sermons

by

My mentor, Haddon Robinson, used to say there were three things you could do to an idea: you could explain it, prove it, or apply it.

[Look at the manuscript you’re creating for your next preaching/teaching assignment and locate these segments.]

That rhetorical strategy has been around for a while. Jonathan Edwards didn’t invent it, but used it in his day (early 18th century). His words were explication, confirmation, and now application.

Now, I know you’re familiar with application, but Edwards might help you; it has helped me and continues to do so. Here’s how.

First, before Sunday, check to see if your Scripture is either doctrinal or practical.

If it’s doctrinal, plan on showing the effects that believing this doctrine has on the Christian life (thinking and acting). It’s tempting to only explain or prove a doctrine, but Edwards moved from those two to application. “Since I believe in God’s sovereignty as expressed in this Scripture, it affects me by…”

Last evening while teaching through An Orthodox Catechism Q&A on the providence of God, I asked the folks what our day would be like if we began with affirmation about this wonderful ability of our God to uphold every facet of our lives.

If your Scripture is practical, does it provide reproof, or consolation, or exhortation? Edwards was a master at providing motives either from “Profit” or “Danger” that would “excite the affections”  He was meticulous in providing the “Meanes to direct the actions” (p. 31 in Kimnach).

I quickly realized that I do not spend near enough time providing motives to move the affections. I am too quick to direct the actions from the text without explaining and proving why such application is the right thing to do. That was new to me: combining all three in the application of the sermon.

May our Lord help you build your sermon/lesson so He continues to receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21).

Randal

Posted on

How To Structure Your Sermon (part 2): What I’m Learning From the Early Sermons of Jonathan Edwards

by

These posts are designed to give us a look at how Jonathan Edwards crafted his sermons. You can compare this to the way you do it.

Last week I began with Edwards first major sermon section, explication. This week we move to his second section, confirmation. Edwards confirmed the truths he explicated by:

positive proofs from Scripture or reason and also by providing solutions to some major doubts and questions that arise from the text. (cf. Kimnach, p. 30 for more details, including the weird spelling below).

Edwards divides his time between what he called “notionall”, “doctrinall” and “practicall” truths. His powerful logic works thr0ughout the sermon to convince his listeners that what God says is true. And since his third major sermon section is application, you can see that the “practicall” truths he presents already bleeds into the application section.

Edwards is relentless in his attack of the mind of his listeners to grasp the meaning, proof, and implications of Scripture. He literally argues with his audience and their thought-patterns along the way in his second major section of the sermon.

So, before Sunday, see if you have some places in your message where you can confirm the faith and challenge to the doubts and questions of your listeners. See if you are taking them on a logical journey that is impossible to deny (provided they start with your presuppositions about Scripture, God, and the plight of sinful man, of course).

My mentor, Haddon Robinson, used to say that there were only three things you could do with an idea: explain, prove, or apply. These three certainly piggyback onto Edwards distinct Puritan sermon form of explication, confirmation, application.

May our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21) due to the way you structure your sermons.

Randal

Posted on

How You Structure Your Sermon: What I’m Learning From Reading Jonathan Edwards’s Early Sermons

by

I didn’t know Cox’s book existed, but virtually everyone has heard about sermons crafted with three points and a poem. It’s almost always said in jest (and that’s no slam on Cox).

One of the things I’m learning from reading Jonathan Edwards’s early sermons is what Kimnach refers to as “the seventeenth-century Puritan sermon” (p. 27). Edwards loosely followed a three-point structure of explication, confirmation, and application, borrowed from a seventeenth-century author, Wilkins (Ecclesiaastes, Or, A Discourse Concerning the Gift of Preaching as it falls under the Rules of Art (London, 1646)).

Kimnach provides a detailed look at each of the three and I will summarize the first one, explication, in this post (p. 29). He writes,

“Explication is either of the text…or of the doctrines deduced from it.”

If you decided to develop your sermon from the text, then that would include three things:

First, an “Unfolding [of the] difficulties” of that text. This involved unraveling the difficulties of a phrase, the circumstances surrounding that text (to whom it was written), and the Analogy of Faith (other similar Scriptures).

Second, “Distinguishing ambiguous…words [and/or] phrases.”

Third, “dividing of the Text, which must not be…Needlesse [sic.] [or] Obscure.”

If you decided to develop your sermon from the doctrines within your text, then you would:

One, Clearing their inference (meaning, I think, that you make a clear connection between your text and the doctrine you are expounding).

Two, “Showing the latitude of every…Truth [or] Duty…According to their severall [sic.]…Branches [or] Degrees.”

Let me quickly say two things that might help our own sermon development.

First, Edwards (through Wilkens) did not divide the Text needlessly. That means he only showed divisions that were important for establishing meaning and application. Before Sunday, check how you’ve divided the text and eliminate any unnecessary divisions (those that do not highlight critical flow of thought/argument).

Second, from the second, Two, above, Edwards has made me realize I need to spend more time meditating on the range that a particular doctrine has in life, both truth and duty. Before Sunday, see if you have explored the far-reaching effects of your doctrine.

And may God be glorified in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21).

Randal

P.S. Next time, Lord willing, we’ll explore the confirmation and, then, application sections.

Posted on

Using Analogies To Add Clarity: What I’m Learning from Reading Jonathan Edwards’ Early Sermons

by

One of Jonathan Edwards’ favorite rhetorical reasoning tools is an analogy. Here’s an example from his sermon, Christian Happiness. Edwards is arguing that a godly person does not need to be afraid of any troubles on earth.

First, “what need a man be afraid of storms and tempests without, that has so good a shelter?” (Kimnach, p. 301) Edwards is referring to a Christian having God and Christ watching over him.

Then, “And is there any man here present that would be at all afraid of the pain of the prick of a pin for a minute, if he knew that after it he should enjoy a life of–suppose–seventy years of the greatest prosperity imaginable, without the least molestation?” (pp. 301-302). Edwards is referring to suffering a little during one’s earthly life versus enjoying eternity pain-free.

Those are two quick examples of how Edwards gains clarity and adds strength to his arguments. And he does this a lot.

Me, not so much. But I’m learning.

I’m learning that analogies are a great way to explain and argue for the truth of Scripture. Analogies like the second one above force the listener to say:

“No person in their right mind would ever allow their fear of a little needle stick to keep them from getting a vaccine that would save their life.” (That was my quick attempt to create a variation of Edwards’ analogy)

And that’s what we want to happen in our listener’s minds. We want the force of our argument to force our congregants to agree with God’s Word.

Finally, I was thinking that Edwards’ analogies are functioning like a kind of illustration. Usually, illustrations in sermons can take a while. What I like about Edwards’ version is they don’t take up lots of message minutes, but they are effective.

Anyway, before Sunday see if your Scripture and sermon can use the help of an analogy to add clarity and strength to your argument so God receives glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21).

Randal

P.S. Merry Christmas!

Posted on

Taking Time To Reason: What I’m Learning From Reading Jonathan Edwards’ Earliest Sermons

by

Have you ever tracked how you use your sermon minutes? This series of posts presents some of my findings of how Jonathan Edwards used his. For instance, in his sermon, The Value Of Salvation, Edwards spends 15 and a half pages explaining why the soul is more valuable than the whole world.

His text was Matthew 16:26 “For what is a man profited, if he gain the whole world, and lose his own soul, or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?”

After placing this verse in the previous context, Edwards begins to explain the Doctrine:

The salvation of the soul is of vastly more worth and value than the whole world.

I think you can see how Edwards moved from Scripture to doctrine.

To develop this doctrine Edwards begins to reason with his listeners. He goes to great lengths to explain why the doctrine he has presented is true, why the soul is worth more than anything else. He stated:

I. Because all world good things shall have an end.

II. The whole world shall have an end with respect to every particular person at death. I found this point to be very similar to the first one, but from a slightly different angle. You can see that from the next sentence, “When a man dies, the world has an end with respect to him: all worldly pleasure, profits and honors, with him are come to an end.” (p. 313)

III. Worldly good things are very uncertain, and oftentimes come to an end before death.

How does Edwards reason this way? At times he uses Scripture, such as in the first point where he cites from 2 Peter 3:10, Matthew 24:35, and Rev. 20:11 which speak of the earth coming to an end.

That sets off a series of questions: “…and then where will be all the fine cities of the world, with which the earth prides herself? Where will be….What then will become of….Where will be the…?” By the end of the section all his listeners with ears to hear say, “God is right. Nothing is more important than the salvation of my soul.”

Next time we’ll see that Edwards doesn’t only reason from direct Scripture.

Before the first Sunday of Advent, see if there are any places in the development of your sermon that could use some additional reasoning. And may our Lord receive glory in the church and in Christ Jesus because of your Spirit-driven efforts (Ephesians 3:21).

Randal

Posted on

Exegetically Lite, Theologically Heavy: What I’m Learning From Reading Jonathan Edwards’s Sermons

by

I’m learning from Jonathan Edwards’s sermons that I should be able to display the coaster above all over my church or home study. I saw another t-shirt sign, however, that reflects most preaching practice: “Will exegete for food.”

I said in a previous post that most of us think more about exegesis than we do theology. It shows in our sermons. A typical sermon in my theological camp is often exegetically heavy and theologically light. This usually involves in-depth word studies and grammatical insights, plus some cross-referencing for added support.

 

Edwards’s sermons appear to be exegetically lite and theologically heavy (I might argue that the same goes for Timothy Keller’s sermons too). That doesn’t mean there is no exegesis. It means that the sermon is constructed with minimal exegesis and maximum theological insights.

And I’m not really sure if “theological” is the right word for what I’m seeing. Maybe better to describe Edwards’s sermons as theological-philosophical.

So, in his sermon, Christian Happiness, Isaiah 3:10 is the foundational text: “Say unto the righteous, it shall be well with him: for they shall eat the fruit of their doings.”

Edwards’s opening sentence displays his theological/philosophical method:

“Reasonable beings, while they act as such, naturally choose those things which they are convinced are best for them…” (p. 296, The Works of Jonathan Edwards, Vol. 10).

Edwards is quick to point out that God deals with us as reasonable beings. And we are persuaded by this desire for our own good.

Before Edwards gets to any of what I would call pure exegesis of Isaiah 3:10, he highlights how God’s motivation is designed to work. Isaiah doesn’t tell us how, but Edwards goes on to tell us how. That’s one of thousands of examples of Edwards’s exegetically lite and theologically heavy preaching.

Before Sunday, see if there are places in your preaching portion that could benefit from this type of analysis for God’s glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21).

Randal

Posted on

Avoiding “Ping Pong” Preaching

by

Not that long ago I finally finished reading Bartow’s, God’s Human Speech. I say, “finally,” because for years I’ve read authors who quoted Bartow. In the book he says,

“there is no need for what has been called ‘ping pong’ speech, exposition followed by application: ‘This is what the text meant then, here is what the text means now.’ Whatever the exegetical method behind the sermon, in it, with texts of Scripture, God speaks to us in the present….It may deal with the past. it may look to the future. But its stance from beginning to end is in the here and now.” (p. 131)

There is no need for ping pong preaching because of the nature of Scripture. In Scripture God is addressing us. But expositors, in an effort to be biblical, often spend precious sermon seconds in background material and historical exegesis. As I’ve written before, preachers are often more historian than theologian (real bloggers would now write, “tweet that”).

Remember, our task isn’t to talk to our listeners about the Bible, but instead, we talk to them about them from the Bible. God is addressing us every Sunday.

To avoid bouncing back and forth and giving your congregants chronological whiplash, try the following:

  • begin the sermon with a clear, concise statement about how we will worship in response to this revelation (somewhere in the introduction, say, “This morning we worship by…”)
  • think in terms of “you” and “us” and “we” instead of “the Corinthians…”
  • translate as much exegesis as possible into theology that functions for and addresses the church (as opposed to historical, exegetical fragments about the text)
  • repeat and restate the intended worship response at strategic moments/minutes in the sermon (as opposed to only thinking about a big idea that summarizes the content)
  • rhetorically speaking, speak in such a way that your listeners never forget that God is addressing us.

Before Sunday, especially this coming Easter Sunday 2017, write your sermon manuscript–yes, you should write it out and leave it in your study (another topic for another time!)–with as little ping pong approach as possible.

Preach well so God receives glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21).

Randal

Posted on

Three Takeaways from Cox’s, Rewiring Your Preaching

by

rewireyourbrain

I recently finished reading, Richard H. Cox’s book, Rewiring Your Preaching: How the Brain Processes Sermons (IVP). Here are three takeaways from the book that may help you as you prepare sermons this week:

One. Repeating key theological and practical concepts is helpful in making disciples. On page 35 Cox writes,

“Specific brain changes result from repetitive learning….The brain responds to repetition.”

That helped me because I often shy away from any kind of repetition. I tell myself repeatedly, “They already heard this before” or “They already know this.” I didn’t realize how valuable repetition is for transformation into Christlikeness.

Two. Anyone who addresses the congregants, such as pastors or song leaders, needs to help them take their attention off the temporal and place its squarely on the eternal. Cox states that parishioners…

“must make the neural switch from daily problem solving to thinking about eternal matters if they are to hear and listen” (page 46).
Our listeners don’t make that switch automatically when they enter the church service. I need to do a better job helping them make that switch with cues such as: “We’ve all arrived having spent an entire work week in the daily grind. It’s time to spend some minutes together thinking about God and the world He is creating for us.”
Three. Our sermons must contain critical matters in God’s Word and help our parishioners realize those words are critical. On page 73 Cox writes,
“The sermon must contain things that we must hear. It must also convince us that we need to hear those things.”

Of course, it takes some effort to convince some of our listeners that the Word of God is a “must hear” kind of communication. Actually, that is God’s job of creating ears that can hear. Our job is to make sure our sermon contains His Word, not our opinions. Our own faith and intensity can help our listeners realize how desperately we need to hear from God.

Before Sunday, keep these three things in mind so God receives glory in the church and in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 3:21).

Randal

Posted on

What Do You Do to the Bible To Create A Sermon? (part 2)

by

047-SurgeryOpt1KAS

In this series I’m exploring what I consider to be the most neglected part of my own teaching of Homiletics, how sermons are created. In order to create sermons, we all perform a variety of operations on the Bible (unless, of course, you simply read the Text and pronounce the benediction!). I expect that even radically different kinds of sermons on the same Text use similar rhetorical devises.

Part 1 listed explanation as the bread and butter or meat and potatoes of expository preaching. I want to spend a moment talking about preaching on purpose, announcing to our congregants the shape worship takes as we respond to God’s revelation in our preaching portion.

UP-Purpose-DefinedW

Sermonic purpose is similar to application, maybe the second step of application (the first step being to urge Believers to believe the Gospel or, what I call, faith-first application; you can see this explained in earlier posts). Preaching on purpose means letting everyone know how your preaching portion generally functions for the Church. As a result of hearing God’s Word, those with ears to hear will think, feel, and act in ways determined by the preaching portion.

Lately, immediately after the corporate reading of God’s Word, I’ll begin my sermon by saying something like, “This is God’s Word. The shape of our worship this morning will be putting into practice Jesus’ instructions concerning handling our own sins and also the sins of others (from Luke 17:1-6).” At that moment, everyone in the house hears how this preaching portion functions in life. Throughout the sermon and, certainly near the end, I’ll restate this purpose. Other rhetorical devices such as illustration and explanation contribute to preaching on purpose. It’s difficult to overestimate its importance for soul-watchers.

Before Sunday see how God displays His intention (what your preaching portion is intended to do to the church) and clearly write out the broad shape worship will take.

Preach well for the sake of His reputation in the Church and in the world.

Randal