What is good, biblical preaching?
(This is taken from Chapter 13 in The Perfect Pastor?)
Jake and Ben came running from around the back of the house when their Dad pulled up. The sky was barely lit with a blue-gray fluorescence and the evening was warm and muggy. They were so excited to see Dan that they ignored the mud on their almost naked bodies and nearly succeeded in tackling him to the pavement. “Woe! Boys! What have we here?” Dan cried out. It was too late, but thankfully Dan was not in his dress attire.
“Daddy’s home! Daddy’s home Mommy! Mooommyyy! Daddy – is – home!” Ben shouted toward the kitchen window.
“We missed you, Daddy!” Jake said wrapped around Dan’s right leg.
“I missed ya’ll too. What are you boys up to?”
“Playing in the pond,” Ben said proudly.
“Pond? What pond?” Dan asked with a little trepidation. The boys then grabbed dad’s fingers on both hands and led him down the driveway, turning right around the back of the house into the yard. Sure enough there was a pond of sorts: an approximately four-foot round pool of settled water in a depression toward the back fence. It used to be the dog’s hole, what he dug to rest in during hot days. The water was obviously not shut off all the way.
Just as they brought him to show off their new pond, Mona popped out the back door with Hannah. Ben was telling their dad they could put fish in it. Jake wanted it bigger. “Hi Honey! I see you found our pool?” she half grinned.
“Oh, yeah. Thought you turned the water off?”
“Thought so too, but water keeps filling it up,” she apologized.
A pastor’s life isn’t altogether different than everyone else. In the home or other environments, the pastor is usually like every other person. In the excitement, Dan left his car door open. As he was toying around with the automatic controls for the sprinkler system, talking with Mona and making baby noises for his little girl, Ben, ever the precocious child jumped into the driver’s seat, mud and all.
Normally Dan was pretty handy around the house, but he could not determine the cause of the leak. Darkness was blanketing the evening, so he put off the project for another time. When he went back to retrieve his briefcase and laptop he discovered Ben in the car. “Look at me, Daddy! I’m big like you! I can drive,” as he pulled the stiff steering wheel from side to side.
Mona was afraid Dan might explode, so she rushed to pull the unlicensed driver out of the car. Instead, Jake proudly yelled at his brother, “Ooooo, you’re in truh-uh-ble!”
“Jake,” Dad commanded, “You go inside and get ready for a bath. Now!”
Mona had Hannah in her left arm and Ben’s left arm in her right hand.
“I’ll handle this,” Dan said. He took both of Ben’s arms in his hands, squatted down, and looked at him square in the eyes. Ben kept looking away. “Ben, look right at me.”
With his muddy head down and big eyes up the little nymph sheepishly asked, “Are you preaching me now?”
Dan laughed. “No, Son. What I’m going to do is not preach at you.”
He grabbed his middle child and embraced him. Dan’s right cheek rested upon the child’s wet and dirty hair. Ben smelled like mud, sweat, and dog. Dan loved the boy anyway. He scooped him up and carried him into the house while giving Ben a firm, but gentle talk about what he had done wrong. As a consequence, Ben was going to help his father clean the inside of the car the next day. After rinsing him off in the master bathroom’s shower he plopped him into the bubble bath with Jake. The two enjoyed a lengthy stay under the bubbles.
“Preach at me? Where did he get that from?” he asked Mona as he cleared out his briefcase and put away the laptop.
“Probably from Jake. Jake often pretends to be you. Ben and the stuffed animals are the church. You know Ben – he can’t sit still very long. So Jake will yell at him and tell him to behave, that he needs to preach at him.”
Dan exploded in a howl and belly laugh. It was a good and productive time away at school, Dan shared with his wife, but it was better being home.
Dan helped Mona put the boys down and then rocked his little princess to sleep as he and Mona talked about the things he learned. Mona didn’t have much to share since she had already apprised him of the daily events. Dan then raided the refrigerator for leftover meatloaf – he loves meatloaf sandwiches with plenty of ketchup.
After breakfast, early Saturday morning Dan and the boys went out to the yard in their bathing suits. Working out regularly gave Dan a fairly good physique, but he was still hesitant to be seen by unappreciative members who would take offense at his supposed nudity. That was why the threesome tackled the exterior of the car first, to get it over with quickly. By the end of the wash, all of them were drenched in a cocktail of dirty, soapy, and hose water. Just as Dan was about to retrieve one of the few dry towels Bernie and his sister pulled unexpectedly into the Lee’s driveway.
Too late - all Dan could do was hang the moderately sized, old towel around his neck. “Boys, run inside now and get some snacks. I’ll get you when I am ready.”
As they ran off, Ben stopped, turned and asked, “Daddy? They going to preach at you?”
“Benny, go see Mom!”
Irma got out first. She glared at Dan’s water plastered black hair on his head and chest. After a struggle, Bernie was able to extract himself from his sister’s brand new Lexus.
“You’re indecent, Mr. Lee!” were the first words Bernie blurted.
“Mr. Dumpleton. Ms. Dumpleton. What’s the occasion of this visit?” Dan said as he rested against the trunk of his car. “Need a car wash? The boys and I can offer you a great deal,” he said with a smirk spread across his face.
“Don’t get funny with me, young man!” Bernie scolded.
Dan was finished being mister nice guy. “Mr. Dumpleton, your abrasive and arrogant manner will not be tolerated. I’ll not have you treat me with contempt!”
“Mr. Lee – where have you been this past week?” Irma interrogated.
“You should have known. Your brother, the elders, and deacons and anyone who read the announcements knew I was off to seminary to take an advanced preaching class.”
“Ellie May died Monday, Mr. Lee.” Bernie chopped through his thin lips. Irma began to sniffle.
“I’m sorry to hear that. I didn’t know. Why wasn’t I called?”
”You should have known. You should have been here for her. You knew she was
dying, but you selfishly took off on some pleasure trip. I’ll have your job for this! This is the last straw.”
Dan bent over and picked up the nozzle of the hose. “Bernie, you are rude and abusive. This conversation is over. Leave now!” he said as he pointed the hose in their direction.
The two Dumpletons turned and shuffled back toward the car doors. Irma, the first to find the driver’s seat, kept yelling at her brother to hurry up. Even before Bernie slammed the navy blue door Irma was squealing out the driveway and down the narrow street like some hot teenager.
Are they mental? Lord, what is their problem?
Mona was a stealth figure behind the front screen door. She observed everything and for the first time witnessed how abusive the Dumpletons were toward her husband. She began to cry. Sympathetic Hannah began to cry too.
Dan turned toward his girls. He could not see them very well, but could hear their sobs. “Darn! They were just upset I wasn’t wearing a tie!” he announced.
“Dan! Stop that.” Mona said. She opened the black metal screen door. Hannah tried to toddle out onto the cement landing.
“Courage and levity, my Dear!” Dan said as if unfazed by the incident. In fact, he was amazed at his self-control and lack of anger. Thank you Lord for the fruit of your Spirit! The issue no doubt would rear its beastly head soon enough. Dan decided to spend his Saturday with his family and allow the crisis to develop without his involvement.
The next morning before Sunday School, he learned that Ellie Mae’s family held the funeral the previous Wednesday. They did not see any reason to contact Dan since her son decided to have the funeral and burial service in the family’s old hometown where most of Ellie Mae’s old friends and family were.
So what in the world were the Dumpletons so tweaked about?
Preaching about preaching?
During the Sunday morning announcements Dan told the congregation of his plan to preach on the subject of preaching, as per the seminary requirements. He finished the chapter of the book he had been preaching through and promised to pick it up again at a later date; Lord willing, of course.
The same grumpies and judges were in their reserved seats waiting for Dan to impress them. It didn’t matter now. He had his fellow classmates and a professional communicator’s words of encouragement ringing in his ears.
For the first time Dan recognized that while a majority of the members who had been at Grace before Dan arrived were negative toward his preaching, he would occasionally receive expressions of appreciation from a small number of the long-term members; including two of the nominated men for office of elder. One also was a deacon who was very encouraging and often told Dan he was growing quite a bit because of the messages. Music to a pastor’s ears!
Then there were the few who would always say, “Nice message Pastor,” as they shook his hand on the way out the front door. Frankly Dan hated that, for it was meaningless and trivial. He could understand they were trying to be nice, but they were not really being kind. It’s just something people get into the habit of saying; kind of like the rhetorical greeting “How are you?” So Dan began to respond to such comments by saying, “Thank you for your feedback. What did you get out of the message today?” It put most of them on the spot not knowing how to answer him. It was not what he wanted to do. He wanted to challenge people to think – think about the message, think about the possibility the message could be relevant to their lives, think about what they were really doing. The platitudes quickly ceased and instead the parishioners would say something like, “Good to see you today, Pastor,” or “Isn’t the weather lovely?”
None of the elders ever commended Dan for his preaching and Dan did not expect any change even after taking the classes. As for preaching issues, Bernie had significantly backed off since the original confrontation. He no longer shuffled to the entrance of the church after the service to say things like, “Unacceptable!” or “That was a miserable message!” or “You’re not cutting it!” All the verbal lashing was seemingly done, but not the negative body language. It was so distracting Dan quit looking in Bernie’s direction when he preached. The pastor friend in Montana would have the guts to stop the message and verbally chastise Bernie for his belligerence. Dan was not as bold.
There were times when one elder or another would let the pastor know that they did not like the way he would move out from behind the massive oak pulpit, or end his sentences with a preposition, or read while looking down at the Bible, or look at his sermon notes. They all wanted Dan to memorize his sermons, yet at the same time they criticized him for being too conversational with the audience.
They also wanted Dan to speak with better articulation and eloquence. He was told he was dumbing down the messages because he no longer used those grand theological terms or five-syllable words. He argued that profound truth can be articulated simply. Jesus did that, and that was what he was trying to do. They would have been happy with a lecture from a brilliant seminary professor. In fact, that is what Bernie had told him one time – he wanted a brilliant preacher to attract the college professors and white-collar professionals. Such an expectation never came up in the candidating process.
Bernie and a couple of the elders believed that criticism and nagging was the most effective method for provoking the pastor to improve. But criticism and nagging and other negativities are never as effective as nurturing, teaching, encouraging, or rewarding. It’s as Don MacNair said,
Criticism can also inhibit preaching. If a pastor feels threatened by possible criticism from a segment of his congregation, his ministry of the Word will be hampered, and the presence and power of the living Lord will in that measure be restricted (Donald MacNair, 1999, p. 99).
At one elders’ meeting Dan asked, “Just what is it you are looking for? You still haven’t defined what a good sermon or good preaching is. If you can’t do that then just give me names of men or samples of their sermons so I can get a sense of what you think are good.” However, no one offered a definition and only Bernie could remind Pastor Dan that the church’s previous pastor was the best preacher ever.
Okay, so Dan rummaged through the old boxes of recorded cassettes and found several messages by Bernie’s idol. He listened to about a dozen of them. While the content was good and the sermons were biblical, the rather expressionless delivery put Dan to sleep. The man wasn’t even eloquent, though he had a rich vocabulary. His style was somewhat reminiscent of the sermons Dan had read by certain preachers of the English Victorian era. It was very high brow with thick theology that spoke about a subject, never to the people. They did not resonate with Dan.
Dan was very uncomfortable about evaluating the pastor’s sermons, though. Just because the man’s style did not resonate with him did not mean that he was necessarily a bad preacher; or even a great one as Bernie claimed. As Dan was known to do, he gathered all of his books on preaching and systematically put together his findings into a written report. He had been keeping a running file of notes, clipping, articles and excerpts from books so the process would not take too long. The two main questions he wanted to answer were: What does God say about preaching? and How does God qualify good preaching? Now, providentially, these were questions he had to answer for his class assignment.
It was much easier preaching at the previous church. The only challenges he had were from two men and a family. The two men had strong but opposing perspectives about preaching, and Dan didn’t fit either view. It was humorous because the one claimed Dan’s preaching was too applicatory or moralistic while the other man said Dan did not stress application or holy living enough. The family was a different case. Dan noticed anytime he would say something that apparently offended the father the man would bow his head and look into his lap. As if on cue, his wife and children did the same. When it was apparently safe for them to listen again the father would look up as would his family. It was distracting, but humorous; almost like marionettes with a puppeteer controlling them. Dan was too cowardly to ask husband and father why they did that.
The father never criticized the pastor, but did tell Dan that his children were not permitted to ask the pastor any questions because it was the father’s responsibility to teach his children. He did not want the pastor to usurp his role as a father. The pastor was also not permitted to directly counsel or teach the children anything. Dan would respect that, even if he strongly disagreed. But then he began to be confronted by the oldest son who believed he had the freedom and duty to correct or rebuke Dan for making comments in sermons the young teen believed were wrong. Pastor Dan put a stop to that.
So many opinions about preaching
Preaching is a funny thing. Like most issues, everyone has an opinion about it. During his previous seminary training, the three professors who taught homiletics agreed on what preaching was: the official and authoritative message from King Jesus proclaimed through his official herald. However, the three of them could not agree on the method for preaching. The first instructor insisted that you never preach topically but always from the theme derived from a segment of a book, which could be a paragraph or a whole chapter in the Bible. The ideas from the passage would be arranged so as to present three main points. Every point was presented in the declarative, just like his lectures. A poem or quote or portion of a hymn could dress the sermon up. No application was to be given since that is the prerogative of the Holy Spirit. The other professor did not have such a restrictive view, while the third teacher was heavy on application.
Even the pastors and professors to whom he sent his sermons for evaluation responded with conflicting reports. While one message was rich and well presented according to one man, it sounded too condescending according to another. One message did not flow, but to a different pastor across the country, the same message was too logical and didactic. A good message according to yet another fellow preacher was labeled as adequate by a professor who said, “Yeah, you aren’t a good or great preacher, but neither am I.”
What Dan also noticed, besides the disfavor his preaching had in the eyes of most of the long time members, was how much the new members had profited from and enjoyed the messages. Most said that Dan’s preaching is what drew them to stay at the church. Nevertheless, no matter how often the new people would commend or encourage Dan, he would fight the sting of the vocal critics. “Trying to please people will get you nowhere!” his dear wife would often remind him. He just had to face the fact that no matter what he did, some people had their own special preferences for preaching just like Dan, and Dan would never fulfill those preferences. He would not, and did not even want to preach like any of the previous pastors. If he did he would be a phony, and then the rest of the people would not like that style either. He was learning the hard way that the pastor’s duty is to please God not people. Relying upon God’s Spirit, faithful to God’s Word, and with much work to develop effective communication skills the messages should be good. In the meantime Dan realized that the issue of his supposedly bad preaching was an obstacle to developing a good relationship with the elders – he would never be acceptable to them at Grace Church. But the advanced training at this seminary was changing his perspective on the issue.
One of the things Dan had been doing was to keep a running list from the many different preaching resources of the conflicting views pastors, professors, authors, elders, and church members claimed to be good or great preaching (see Appendix I). The list could have gone on for many pages, but it was clear that preaching, like many other things, is a conflicted issue. Reviewing the list one evening in his office Dan played the role of a church member, “Pastor Dan, if you circled all the answers I like then I will consider you to be a good preacher worth listening to. If you circled most of the answers I like then I will listen to you, but will expect you to change to what I want. If you circled half or less of the right answers I won’t listen to you, at least not often. Of course, if that’s the case I have only three options: do everything I can for you to get you to preach the right way, or do what I can to see that you leave my church, or I will leave and go where there is a good preacher!”
“Well dear man,” Dan talked back to himself, “Those don’t have to be the only three options you know. You could pray for me, encourage me, endure with me as I endure with you, and you could learn to be a better listener.” Oh yeah, Dan, that would go over like a lead balloon, he thought. I need to say it anyway!
A lesson on preaching
An even larger group had come to the breakfast training session at Mo’s. The little air conditioner didn’t pack much of a punch in her café. Not many ordered coffee, but plenty of water and iced juice kept coming to the table. Dan was now teaching on the subject of preaching. The best way to learn is to teach. It was time to apply the fruit of his labors and schooling. When Mo came over to check on her “good customers” Dan turned to her and asked, “Mo, does your priest give a sermon at your worship?”
“You mean a homily?” she asked in her brogue.
“Yes, a homily.”
“Oh sure, every Sunday.”
“How long is the message?”
“The Father takes ten or fifteen minutes, God bless him.”
“Is that a good or a bad thing?”
“I’m supposin’ it’s a good thing, but he could do without it altogether.”
Everyone laughed.
“Why say anythin’ at all when you don’t have anythin’ to say?”
The crowd roared.
“Good point. Don’t you get anything out of the homily?”
“Oh sure, sure I do. I get a good nap!”
Now the group was hysterical.
“Well Mo, don’t you think it is possible you could get something out of his messages if you listened?”
“Deary, after fifteen years of hearin’ the same man drone on and on about the same stuff, there’s not much to hear.”
“Oh, that’s too bad,” Dan said trying to sympathize with her.
“No, lad, it’s not. A good shnooze is good for your heart, you know?”
“What keeps you at the church then?” Dan inquired.
“Now that’s a funny question. You don’t think we go to hear the man speak, do you? No, sonny. We go for Mass, for worship. And for a good fill of tea and sweets afterward. Most of us have friends there too.”
“Wow! If I was like that we would probably not have a church. Or at least I would no longer be there.”
“Who said you aren’t like that?” cried out Brad.
Everyone chuckled.
“Sorry! Didn’t mean it,” Brad apologized quickly. A few people threw their napkins at him.
“So the preaching isn’t the main thing for you? Does it affect the way you or others think about your priest?”
“Oh hel…heck no! We all love the father for his kindness and the wonderful things he does. Just like everyone loves you, Father Dan.”
The crowd around the table chorused a resounding, “Ahhhhh.”
Dan blushed. I wish that were true. As Mo scooted off to another table the pastor turned to his class and asked, “What styles of preaching can we find in Western churches these days?” Dan read off a list of the various styles he had been told constituted good or great preaching, “practical, ethereal, highly doctrinal or causally soft in teaching, light and upbeat or heavy and morbid, pietistic, moralistic, expositional, exhortational, strongly evangelistic, eloquent with perfected speech, vulgar, passionate or unemotional… You see, the list can be rather endless when you think about it.”
“I learned this in seminary recently,” he said as he wrote on the right side of the board under the heading of Types of Sermons:
· Book study
· Expository sermon
· Informational – usually thematic or theological and doctrinal
· Instructional
· Occasional sermon – such as in a crisis situation
· Topical – theme-based sermon or series
“Preaching the Word of God can come through any one of these types of sermons.”
From his research, Dan organized a handout he gave out at this Saturday class and intended to later present to the elders. He also put together some bulletin inserts to supplement his short series on what the Bible says about preachers and preaching. “Turn with me to Acts 20. While you are doing that, here’s a question: ‘What constitutes good preaching?’”
There was a lull as people wrestled their minds for an answer. “Good preaching is what speaks to me,” offered Melissa.
“What speaks to you, Melissa?”
“Good preaching,” she bounced back, somewhat embarrassed. “I don’t really know.”
“But you think you know it when you hear it?”
“Right!”
“Good preaching teaches me something,” joined Brad.
“It talks to my head and heart,” declared Harold.
“You mean it teaches you and is directed at your will?” asked Dan.
“Exactly.”
The group volleyed the questions and answers around for another ten minutes or so. Some people took the opportunity to visit the restrooms, or refill their drinks, or order more food.
Harold volunteered to read Acts 20:17-27. When he finished, Dan asked, “What are some things this text tells us about Paul and his ministry of the Word of God?”
“He didn’t keep anything from them,” Phil, one of the elder candidates said.
“Paul taught them, and gave them what was helpful to them,” Neil, another candidate volunteered.
Dan was writing these things on the whiteboard.
“He called for repentance and faith!” Brad noted.
Melissa spoke out, “Paul says that his life and ministry testifies to the Gospel of Christ.”
“Anything else,” the pastor asked.
“He preached the kingdom of God,” Harold contributed.
“And he taught the whole counsel of God,” spoke Dan’s favorite deacon.
“Wonderful responses. Now, let’s go back and use these points to inform us as to what good preaching is. First, Paul did not hold back any truth from his hearers. This is Biblical doctrine applied to life. Second, Paul taught them and gave them what was helpful. Good preaching is proclaiming from God’s Word anything that would be instructive and helpful in Christ. A parallel verse would be Second Timothy three, verse seventeen.”
“The third thing about good preaching, and we assume it is good because God spoke it through his messenger Paul, is that it calls for people to repent and believe in Christ. Melissa, you made a good point, that his life was consistent with the message. This is certainly very important, isn’t it? The fourth thing is good preaching involves preaching the kingdom of God and also preaching the whole counsel of God, which is the message of Christ from the Old and New Testaments.”
“Explain what you just said about ‘the message of Christ’?” Brad asked.
“Our sermons must be centered upon and flow from the person and work of Jesus Christ. Good preaching is not centered upon us as people and what we do but upon Christ as the God-Man and what he did and does for us. To summarize Greidanus from his Modern Preacher and the Ancient Text good preaching is biblical when it imparts a Bible-shaped word in a Bible-like way. The Bible must govern the content of the sermon and the function of the sermon must come out of the very Scripture itself. Being Bible-centered means being Christ-centered since the central theme and message of Scripture is Jesus Christ. Let me read too what D. A. Carson also said on page thirty-four in The Cross and Christian Ministry,
But rhetoric brings with it many dangers. Those who pursue eloquence and high-sounding insight with precious little content are often doing little more than preening their own feathers. Such oratory made Paul nervous. It affords far too many temptations to pride to be safe for anyone interested in preaching the Gospel of the crucified Messiah.
“Carson later says about First Corinthians on page one hundred-thirteen,
In light of 1:18-2:5, this is the power of the gospel, the power to forgive, to transform, to call men and women out of darkness and into the kingdom of God’s dear Son. Mere talk will not change people; the gospel will. So Paul is going to ask for their credentials: What people have your eloquence genuinely transformed by bringing them into a personal knowledge of the crucified Messiah? He is going to expose them for the empty, religious windbags that they are.
“But what if you have all that in your sermons and people don’t think it is good preaching?” asked Michael.
“Okay, excellent question. What of that?”
Harold was quick to offer an answer, “Doesn’t the Bible say something about itching ears?”
“Right on the money, Harold. Turn to Second Timothy, four and verse one, and read to verse four.”
Melissa said, “I’ve got it:
I charge you therefore before God and the Lord Jesus Christ, who will judge the living and the dead at His appearing and His kingdom: Preach the word! Be ready in season and out of season. Convince, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.
She read from her New King James Reformation Study Bible.
“Remember what I said about this word ‘preach’ and that it is an official proclamation from a king’s herald. In the context of telling Timothy to preach with that kind of authority, Paul also warns that there will be those who will reject good preaching and instead will want what?”
Harold answered again, “Not good teaching, but anything that will suit their own desires.”
“Yeah, but Paul was a good preacher. Who would have rejected him?” the deacon asked.
“Yes, he was a great preacher. Nevertheless, there were many times he was considered to be a poor speaker or not-so-good preacher. Take these verses home with you and look them up,” Dan ordered as he copied some of his notes to the whiteboard:
1 Cor. 2:1, 4; 1 Cor. 1:17; 2 Cor. 10:10 and 11:6.
Most of the class was astounded to hear that Paul was rejected and not considered a good preacher. Dan got a certain satisfaction in that fact, but he had to remind himself that he would never be a Paul.
“Hey, what if a preacher has all these qualities in his sermons but comes across really, really bad. Is that still good preaching?” Sam wondered.
“I’ve heard from many different homiletics professors and pastors that it is a sin to give good content but fail to communicate. One man said it’s a sin to bore people because one could conceivably bore them right into hell. Now, I wouldn’t agree with that, but it is sad when there is little to no passion when it comes to preaching or even teaching God’s Word.” Dan told them about the quote from the famous preacher Charles Spurgeon who said, “I believe that many ‘deep’ preachers are simply so because they are like dry wells with nothing whatever in them, except decaying leaves, a few stones, and perhaps a dead cat or two.” (Larry J. Michael, 2003, p. 26). Spurgeon also said that dull preachers “…make good martyrs. They are so dry they burn well.” (Larry J. Michael, 2003, p.142).
“At the same time, some of the old Puritan preachers read their sermons, Dan taught. “Jonathan Edwards’s most famous sermon, Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, was apparently read with little emotion or expression. Some say he did that for fear of manipulating people through expressive communication. Others say that was his rather stoic personality. But there are at least two things to consider: his sermon was written and presented with great force of argument. The other thing was the role of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit can use any message from the Word to speak to hearts. Listen to what Allen Dillmore says about Edwards on page 421 of his biography about the preacher-evangelist George Whitefield,
One who knew him, being asked whether Mr. Edwards was an eloquent preacher replied: ‘If you men, by eloquence, what is usually intended by it in our cities, he made no pretensions to it. He had no studied varieties of the voice and made no strong emphasis. He scarcely gestured or even moved; and he made no attempt by the elegance of his style, or the beauty of his pictures, to gratify the taste, and fascinate the imagination. But if you mean by eloquence the power of presenting an important truth before an audience with overwhelming weight of argument, and with such intenseness of feeling that the whole soul of the speaker is thrown into every part of the conception and delivery, so that the solemn attention of the whole audience is riveted from the beginning to the close, and impressions are left that cannot be effaced, Mr. Edwards was the most eloquent man I ever heard speak.
“I hate to say this but some pastors just can’t preach their way out of a wet paper bag,” complained Harold. Laughter erupted at the table. There was a bit of truth in that statement.
“Look, it’s a tough issue to sort through. We live in the age of communication, and as pastors, we have to compete,” Dan said marking quotation marks with his fingers in the air, “with specialists. There are so many TV anchormen or women, actors, radio hosts, and talk show hosts who just have a natural talent for communicating while others are expertly trained. People come to church expecting their servant-preacher to be of the same caliber. Then you have the big church personalities who by virtue of their God-given natural endowments go on TV, radio or streaming video and attract huge crowds. Some are great communicators who are faithful to God’s Word and others are dynamite speakers who handle God’s Word terribly. People are often attracted to the presentation more than the content.”
Marcus spoke up, “It’s always been that way. I’ve been reading about the time in which Peter, John, James, and Paul lived. Eloquence and rhetoric was a popular and very important part of society then. But look at what Paul said in First Corinthians two starting with verse one,” he urged while turning to the reference in his New King James chain reference Bible,
And I, brethren, when I came to you, did not come with excellence of speech or of wisdom declaring to you the testimony of God. For I determined not to know anything among you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified. I was with you in weakness, in fear, and in much trembling. And my speech and my preaching were not with persuasive words of human wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and power, that your faith should not be in the wisdom of men but in the power of God.” He paused a minute and then added, “Paul did not preach by human standards or methods, because he wanted full credit to go to the powerful work of God’s Spirit!”
Marcus was right. D. A. Carson points this out in The Cross and Christian Ministry, “Fascinated by the rhetoric of learned scholars of their day, the Corinthians were sometimes more impressed by form and show than by content and truth. They loved ‘words of human wisdom’ – literally, ‘wisdom of word,’ the wit and eloquence that neatly packaged more than one school of thought in first-century Greece.” (D. A. Carson, 1993, p. 13).
“Thanks Marcus!” Dan said very appreciatively. “Having said that, it is not an excuse for those who are called to serve in preaching to be lazy or boring or poor communicators.” The table was interrupted when the attendants started clearing away the dishes. Mo’s grandson refilled glasses, cups, and mugs.
“You know what else?” Marcus interjected.
“What’s that?” Dan asked.
“According to the book of Acts the disciples were considered unlearned, unsophisticated, earthy and raw, and yet based upon the results of their Spirit-filled preaching they were great preachers. The Jewish government was so upset by their success that they told them to shut up! Now that is great preaching.” he said slapping his large, fleshy hand on his Bible.
“Well, I still don’t know how we can determine good preaching. It all sounds too relative,” complained Blake.
“To be good is to have superior quality or excellence. We’ve already seen that there is some standard for evaluating good content. The question comes down to what constitutes a good presentation. In a sense, that is relative. Years ago a liberal Lutheran set about to study what constituted a good or good sermon according to listeners. He wanted to quantify objectively. Hans van der Geest was his name.”
“Sounds Dutch. Hey, you’re Dutch aren’t you Harold?” Brad asked his elderly friend across the table.
“I’m German. And don’t you forget it!” he shot back waving his fork at the young teaser.
“Anyway, Hans said that good or great sermons had all three of the following elements,” Pastor said while writing again on the whiteboard. “The first is Geborgenheit, not easily translated into English, has to do with the sermon’s appeal to the emotions. Like was it gripping or moving, did it give a sense of trust or assurance? Did people respond with a greater trust or peace? Does it touch the love relationship with God? The second thing was whether or not a sermon has befreiung.”
“Bee frying?” joke Brad.
“Behave kid!” snapped a smiling Harold.
“This second dimension has to do with a sense of liberation and freedom. Or does the message touch my life or awaken wonder or offer hope by underscoring the victory of God’s kingdom in my life today? Did the preacher preach in a surprising way?”
Dan took a few gulps of orange juice. Seeing no questions or comments he continued, “The third dimension is what he called erkennen.”
“Air cannon?” Brad joked again.
“Go home kid!” Harold scolded.
“Did the sermon teach and did the listener learn? Did it address faith, knowledge, and growing in truth? What do I think now that is different that before the message? What do I know now that I may not have known before?”
“So, mind, will and emotions?” Sherry asked for approval.
“Kind of like that. The point of his work was that after evaluating dozens of sermons by different pastors and many responses from various audiences these were the three things that were consistently found in sermons that people said were good or great.” Dan concluded.
“What is a great preacher, then?” asked Marcus.
“The word great means remarkable, markedly superior. One pastor friend said that he believed great preaching was a message from God’s Word that was consistent with the purpose God had for that portion of the Word and presented by a special unction of the Holy Spirit. A great preacher is someone who preaches consistently good sermons over a long period of time,” Dan provided.
The group was getting a little restless having sat in the somewhat uncomfortable red vinyl, padded chairs for nearly two hours, and the pastor was aware of it, so he decided to bring the meeting to a close.
“I’ve got three more things to say and then we’ll be dismissed. First, the New Testament does not say that the purpose of preaching is to preach well! Many students, preachers or church members have this as the aim. However, we need to recognize that what this does is to confuse the means with the ends. Preaching is not the end; it is one of the main means for a God-transformed life. Make sure you get my handout on how to grow through the preaching of God’s Word (see Appendix J). The thing we all should ask, especially the pastor who preaches is not ‘Has he or have I preached well?’ but ‘Has he or have I served God in Christ and have I served the people by being faithful to the meaning and in the delivery of God’s Word?”
“Second, God makes it clear that we are not to compare preachers with other preachers. It’s wrong and sinful. Just look at Acts eighteen, verse twenty-four and compare that with the context of First Corinthians one, starting with verse twelve. Another place to study is Second Corinthians ten, twelve where Paul said we do not compare ourselves with others. It is a study worth digging into. Pastors are wrong to compare and God’s people are wrong to do it too. Finally, my last point is a preface to this handout (see Appendix K). It’s about how to listen to the preached Word. Are you aware that the emphasis in Scripture is far more heavily placed upon the hearer of the Word of God than upon the preacher’s method of preaching the Word of God? In fact, you will be pressed to find God coming down hard on the prophets, apostles, teachers, pastors for how they preached. God is concerned with what they preached – were they faithful to God’s Word? The Bible makes it very clear that the burden of responsibility is more upon the listener of the Word of God than upon the one proclaiming it!”
This statement somewhat stunned more than a few of the students. “You’ll be seeing this again one Sunday, along with a couple other handouts or inserts,” he warned.
“I have one more thing to say as I give you one last handout,” Dan called out.
“That’s four things in closing then, Pastor,” Brad yelled over the commotion.
“Yep, you’re right. And I can see you know how to count?” Dan ribbed back. “If you want a good preacher with good or great sermons then you need to pray with me that I would be a good preacher with good or great sermons. Dr. Eby in his book has some suggestions for how God’s people can pray for that, and I’ve added a few additional things to pray for,” he admonished as he passed around another sheet (see Appendix L). “Not only should you pray for me as your servant-preacher, but there are things you can do to encourage me or any other pastor for that matter. Take this lesson home and review it well,” Dan said giving out the notes from Dr. Williams.
As people were filing out of the café, Marcus pulled Dan aside and asked, “What if God answers our prayers and your preaching becomes powerful…”
“Only by his grace and Spirit,” Dan interjected.
“…uh huh. Will it change people who don’t like your preaching?”
“If it’s from God, his Word is always effective.”
“But what if some still don’t like it. Will they change?” he asked having overheard Bernie complaining about Dan’s sermons.
“Sure. They’ll either be convicted or convinced.”
“What kind of consequence will there be if they become convicted, but still don’t like your messages?”
“What do you think?”