Monday, September 24, 2007

Monday Thoughts: What Makes for Good Preaching?

Steve deNeff gave a great sermon again yesterday. The text was David and Goliath. Here are a few of the more striking thoughts I took from the sermon:
  • We all tend to identify with David, but most of us operate with an orientation to Goliath's standard of strength.

  • We often think we are David fighting in the kingdom of Saul when we fight like Goliath in the kingdom of David.

  • Goliath was not fighting David. He was fighting God.

  • Saul wanted David to fight with Goliath's type armor. David fought with God's type of armor.

  • What's in your armory? What are your rules of engagement?
Now here is the meta-question I want to ask. Did deNeff get this wisdom from the biblical text or did the Holy Spirit bring it to him as a wise person as he read the biblical text?

I think it is clearly the latter. No doubt thousands of sermons have been preached on this text and hundreds of them have been sound. Yet I wonder how many of them drew out what deNeff brought this morning.

The Bible is a divinely appointed meeting place for us to hear God speaking. It is a sacrament of revelation. But it takes more than the words and stories of the Bible alone for the word of God to be preached and heard in Scripture.

1. It takes the Holy Spirit.
We used to call this God's anointing. The inspiration of the text will not reach the congregation unless the preacher and/or audience also receives inspiration from the Spirit. The Spirit can anoint anyone, and the Spirit can anoint the ears of anyone to hear a word from the most foolish of speakers.

However, I would argue that most of the time the Holy Spirit works closely with the natural gifts and wisdom of the human speaker. The Holy Spirit can speak through a donkey, yes, but usually He speaks through people like Paul who could speak even before they believed.

2. It takes wisdom on the part of the preacher.
God has simply blessed deNeff with great wisdom above so many of his contemporaries. Every Sunday morning God sanctifies those gifts and brings forth a word from the LORD. Certainly "out of the mouths of infants God perfects truth," but most of the time preachers are born rather than made (so also Augustine).

Most pastors will never be great preachers. They can improve to be sure. They can deliver God's word to be sure. But God has simply blessed some individuals with more wisdom than others. Without wisdom in the preacher, the Bible usually does not become Scripture in the mouth of the speaker.

If the preacher does not have wisdom by God's gracious gift, then the preacher must seek it out from others. God did not give us Scripture as an end in itself but as a sacrament in which we might hear God's voice through the Holy Spirit and His anointing of those to whom He has granted the gift of wisdom.

But the words of the Bible alone ensure that God's word is heard no more than if you were simply to read the words and sit down. Often doing so would not be too shabby in itself! But wisdom is a crucial thing--seek wisdom.

11 comments:

Jeffrey Crawford said...

My only disagreement with this post is that I would argue that rather than Steve's preaching coming the wisdom of the Holy Spirit - which it no doubt is! - that it is a combo - a synergistic effect, to cop a phrase, of insight by the Holy Spirit speaking from the text and to the heart of an obedient servant! We are really, really missing him down here!

Anonymous said...

I just try not to be jealous of-or insecure about- those who have seemingly recieved the gift in larger amounts than I have, whether in preaching, music or whatever.

Angie Van De Merwe said...

Preaching is but one aspect of wisdom's discourse. While the local preacher is concerned with issues about his local congregation; theologians are concerned about the task of theology in defending the Church, while politicians are concerned over issues that play to their advantage in the area of local, national and international endeavors...

Barth understood that systematizing theology as a formal task was not his "call", because he felt that it was his encounter with experience that gave him wisdom to understand and theologize.

While Barth understood his limitations within historical time, the Iranian president who was just addressing the U.N. about nuclear arms is pertinent to the political concerned. Although he expressed an openness to America in balancing "power", he also has his own nation's interest at heart. He said that he was aghast over America's concern for our military over nuclear interests in Iran. He suggested that the American military would surely be able to stand up to such minimal resources....

The issue for the U.S., as it always is, is not just its interests, but can America "trust" others whose values of "law" are not as ours? We do have international law, but how are decisions resolved when there are various interests that are represented...How is the U.N. to maintain a neutral ground (as justice is NOT supposed to be partial), when there is a diversity in the balance of power AND interests? These are the compelling questions to be discussed for a "globalization" of every aspect of our lives. Should we have "sold our souls" for cheaper goods, at the expense of those who make them and the jobs of those at home? And with jobs leaving America, and scientific advancements making jobs more specialized, while our country's educational system is in decline...how are we to help without undermining the freedoms that allow "free choice", "free market", etc.? What was the motivating factor in having cheaper products? Consumerism? We have a lot of "work" to do and that is not pragmatic, but theoretical thinking, so that our nation's freedoms will not be lost...

Keith Drury said...

Superb reflection on yesterday's sermon Ken. DeNeff's preaching is a great example of the limitations of the Bible-head Mafia's approach to the Bible which locks up all meaning of Scripture in its original meaning. DeNeff's sermon yesterday showed that a story from the history of Israel can be used to convict people several thousand years later in a way quite unrelated to the way the original readers would have read the text. "A preacher with great exegesis and bad theology is more dangerous than a preacher with bad exegesis and good theology." Of course, we want both.

Scott D. Hendricks said...

"seek wisdom" - hmmm . . . what have you been reading lately? *wink, wink*

Ken Schenck said...

I had Proverbs 4:7 in mind, so I'm okay. (I know you were thinking Sirach, no doubt plotting to get me in trouble :-)

Judy H. said...

Ok, this is the first time I've ever responded to one of these things. I write this with trembling fingers... But I want to say "Thanks"! Ken, thanks for reminding me of the hope that we have been given. Not only do we have God's written Word, but we have the confidence of wisdom from above. Thanks to Steve for seeking and finding. It encourages me to do more of the same! Thanks, Ken!!

David Drury said...

As to Dad's comment I see what he's saying... but of course usually there is "average theology coupled with average exegesis."

I wonder what the "run of the mill" preachers should do. Is the kind of preaching Pastor Steve is capable of a brass ring that they will have trouble reaching, and thus they should walk the more stable and sure ground of exegesis?

Of course, how stable is that ground either?

-DD

Ken Schenck said...

Judy, welcome to the company of blog initiates :-)

David, one question I ponder is exactly what good exegesis leaves us with. I'm reading through Grant Osborne's Hermeneutical Spiral in conjunction with a class I'm teaching right now. It's the mother of all evangelical inductive Bible study books (Bauer-Traina, we're still waiting for that revision!). He makes it sound like you just do the massive exegesis and, ding, you have your sermon outline.

But with this story of David and Goliath, what do we have after our thorough exegesis? That YHWH is more powerful than the gods of the other nations? That Israel should have trusted in Him. That GOD does not need bronze armor to win? That Israel are the good guys and the Philistines are the bad guys? That God set David aside as a young man with a destiny? These are the sorts of things I come up with exegetically.

How do these connect to me? I'm not David. How do I know that God wants me to fight like David? There are no Philistines alive today and no one worships their gods any more. Are there any equivalents today? How would I determine what they are? What am I to take from the bronze armor, if anything?

These are questions that the biblical text does not answer because they are my questions, questions from the standpoint of 2000 years later. The Spirit and wisdom are required now in this territory the Bible doesn't cover for us.

And it is here that God has given Steve a brass ring. Many of his points were almost "allegorical" readings of the story--this is like that. The bronze armor is like the weapons of the world and such.

I think that's a gift that some people have and others need to borrow from those who have!

My thoughts...

Ken Schenck said...

Sorry--3000 years later. I'm stuck in the New Testament!

Brian B said...

Ken...pertinent insights, especially for a guy who preaches almost every week to collegians as I do, and from the very stage that Steve speaks from in the morning (humbling in and of itself)...Your words on the Spirit's connection with the speaker and the text beg the question for me, "How much does the Holy Spirit influence the medium and play into the message?" Whether one defines medium as simply the speaker delivering or the actual means in which s/he delivers, I am curious as to how much the Spirit plays a part in the effectiveness of the message. I am reminded of Edward's "Sinner's in the Hands of an Angry God" message and how it was entirely read (if my church history memory serves me correctly). Arguably, one of the most famous sermons in church history, I can only picture blank faces staring at me reading verbatim my sermon this Sunday night to my 747 listeners. Now, I know the Spirit would be working and using the text to work in the hearts of the listeners, but how much of the medium could be influenced by the Spirit to drive the message home? Or, how much of the message will be received by the listeners with the help of the Holy Spirit, despite the medium?