Posts Tagged ‘Steven D. Mathewson’

How to Preach Narratives With Variety, Part 2 (Six Inductive Sermons)

Posted: May 10, 2011 in Preaching Narratives
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
2

Previously in Part 1, we discussed preaching narratives with variety by using the three deductive sermons with either the demand, declaration, or question proposition. In this post, we will consider six inductive narrative styles and the also the inductive/deductive narrative style to add variety to your narrative preaching.

First, the two categories of inductive preaching will be briefly discussed.

The first inductive sermon form is similar to life-situation preaching and contemporary problem-biblical solution preaching. It starts with life’s problem and moves toward the biblical solution. Ralph and Gregg Lewis advocate and define inductive preaching. “Induction begins with the particulars of life experience and points toward principles, concepts, conclusions. The inductive course can grow out of the hearer’s needs rather than the uncertainty of the preacher.”[1] Chapell issues a warning concerning this kind of inductive preaching.

“Because the inductive process emphasizes matters not directly off the pages of Scripture, it raises suspicions . . . it is weak on exposition of the Bible. The sermon revolves around the life situation, and whatever is said about the Scriptures is often incidental to the message rather than its central core.”[2] Chapell’s concern is well founded. The two examples of this kind of inductive sermons in Lewis’s book,

Inductive Preaching, are over ninety percent anecdotes, facts, and examples from history. This kind of inductive sermon is not included with the others types of narrative sermons in this post.

The second kind of inductive sermon also starts with a problem and is called The Biblical problem/Biblical solution Narrative sermon. This is the inductive narrative sermon advocated in this post. The problem is presented in the narrative text and the solution is also found in the Biblical story. This kind of inductive preaching reflects the problem/solution characteristic of biblical narratives. David Duel advocates this approach, “If the preacher’s goal is to be expositional, what is more expositional than preaching the text in its story-line form.”[3]

Inductive sermons can be preached with two emphases: Direct and Indirect Application. There is a debate whether narrative sermons should be preached inductively and open endedly as narratives are written in Scripture and let the audience make its own application or if the narrative must always be directly applied.  Richard A. Jensen supports the position that narrative sermons need not always be directly applied based on the parabolic preaching of Jesus, “The story is the preaching itself. That is my translation into the art of homiletics of Bornkamm’s dictum regarding the parables of Jesus: ‘the parables are the preaching itself.’ I am convinced that preaching can be ‘parabolic’ in just that sense. Preaching in story form can be revelatory in and through the medium of the story. It need not point somewhere else.”[4] It is true that some of the parables Jesus preached were self explanatory as the parable of the lost sheep, coin, and son in Luke 15. Jesus told this story with no direct application to his pharisaic audience because the application was so apparent. They were the self-righteous elder brother. The three story sermons that Jensen provides as examples in his book are inductive sermons that find the problem in the life situation and the solution is the Bible. They are weak in the Bible content. It is possible for this indirect application method to be used occasionally when a Bible narrative is preached as in first person sermons. But most of time narrative sermons will be directly applied by the preacher to varying degrees as the preaching occasion demands.

Six Inductive Narrative Sermons

1. The Biblical problem/Biblical solution narrative sermon. This kind of sermon simply follows the crises/resolution pattern of a biblical narrative. Steven D. Mathewson provides an example of this kind of direct application sermon. This is the first of three options in his homiletic guidelines.

“Option One: Develop theological points that are developed from the ‘crisis’ and ‘resolution’ elements of the plot . . . . A sermon on Exodus 5:1-6:13 can relate the crisis in chapter 5 and the resolution in 6:1-13. Moses’ plea to Pharaoh for the release of God’s people resulted in harsher work conditions. The raw materials were reduced while the production quota was increased. The Israelites then turned on Moses, and Moses turned on God. The story is resolved by God’s promise in 6:1-13.”[5] The preacher’s first point could actually state the problem and the resolution in the second point.

2. The Narrative/Applications narrative sermon.  Mathewson describes this sermon in his second option for preaching narrative passages. “Option Two: Retell the story in a series of ‘moves’ that lead to the big idea. This tactic is more subtle. Its effectiveness depends on an expositor’s storytelling skill. Instead of proceeding from ‘point one’ to ‘point two,’ the sermon unfolds in a series of what Buttrick call ‘moves.’ In a sermon on a narrative passage the various ‘moves’ will consist of scenes in the story, as well as an eventual discussion of the narrative’s central idea.”[6] First, the preacher tells the narrative scene by scene following the crisis/solution pattern of the narrative.

Once the story is told, then the preacher presents the applications at the end. This differentiates the Narrative/Applications sermon from the Biblical problem/Biblical solution sermon where the applications are spread throughout the sermon. Swindoll’s article, The Shadow of the Giant, on David and Goliath takes this approach. After telling the old, old story in the modern garb of contemporary language, he draws “two timeless truths” at the end of the story. The two applications are: “Prevailing over giants isn’t accomplished by using their technique” and “Conquering giants isn’t accomplished without great skill and discipline.”[7]

3. The Hidden Outline narrative sermon. This narrative sermon also plots the story line of crisis/resolution making applications through out the sermon but the outline is not emphasized as in the Biblical problem/Biblical solution sermon. The outline like a skeleton is present but not observable. James Rose preaches a narrative sermon entitled, The Big Valley and conceals his outline from the audience and thus, does not distract from the story of David and Goliath in 1st Samuel 17. His first point is mentioned in the flow of the story sermon but not identified as point one. “Giants are overwhelming to those who look at life from that level.” That point is developed with sub-points, again not stressed, and applications. The second point is even more camouflaged. “Those of us who see life from God’s level, like David, are ignited into action by the giants that block the path of God.”[8] The second point is developed with unrecognizable sub-points and applications.

While it is true that Jesus preached some parables with no applications, at other times, he did make applications or one application at the end. When Jesus told the parable of the rich fool, he made one application in His conclusion in Lk.12:21, “So is he that lay up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God.” With the next two narrative sermons only one application will be made at the end of the sermon. This will vary the approach from the Narrative/Applications sermon which has multiple applications presented at the end of the story.

4. The Pure narrative. The Pure Narrative is defined and advocated by John C. Holbert. “A pure narrative sermon is just that: a narrative. In other words, a pure narrative sermon is a story — no more and no less. The story may be embellished in its detail and dressed up in its execution, but it is still only a story. Pure simply means that the story is in no sense explained to the hearer, or commented on, outside the bounds of the narrative. In such a sermon, no introduction or conclusion outside of the story is used. The story’s introduction is the sermon’s introductions; the story’s conclusion is the sermon’s conclusion.”[9] Once in a while for variety sake, an open-ended, i.e. a sermon with no explanation, can be preached. The argument against the pure narrative sermon is that the listeners will not make the correct application. Holbert justifies the open-ended sermon. “Finally, open-endedness in preaching provides openings for the unique work of the Holy Spirit.”[10] Holbert, in his book, Preaching Old Testament, provides an example of the pure narrative sermon entitled, The Best Laugh of All, with helpful comments interspersed through out the sermon. My modified version advocated in this post would have one application at the end. The one application is the big idea or the proposition. So the proposition would be stated with applications made in several different areas of life.

5. The Frame narrative. The Frame Narrative is much like the Pure Narrative with an introduction and a conclusion. The usual materials for an introduction can be used and in the conclusion, the preacher “focuses the narrative for the congregation.”[11] Holbert also provides an example of a frame narrative entitled The Moabite Widow with a running commentary to explain how to preach frame narratives. Like the Pure Narrative there is one application at the end.

6. The First-Person narrative. The First-Person narrative is in a category all by itself.  In contrast to third-person sermons, where the preacher tells the narrative as an observer from without the story, first-person sermons tell the story in character from within the narrative. The book of Nehemiah is a narrative book told in first-person by the cup bearer. Haddon Robinson defends the first-person sermon. “One reason that expository sermons sometimes seem as out-of-date as running boards on automobiles is that they never change form. Preachers assume that sermons take only one shape and that no matter what genre the biblical writers use, the preacher must refashion it as a sermon.”[12] The first-person sermon is an opportunity for the preacher to throw away the homiletical cookie cutter.

There are two excellent examples of dramatic monologue in Robinson’s Biblical Sermons. One first-person sermon is by George Kenworthy entitled, For “Wait” Watchers Only from Luke 1:5-25. The other first-person sermon is by Donald Sunukjian on the book of Esther. The story of God’s providence in the life of Esther and other Jews in Persia is told in first-person monologue from the vantage point of Harbona, the private secretary to King Xerxes. Another example of a first-person sermon is preached by Paul Borden in expositapes (tape number 2290). Paul Borden tells Paul’s autobiography in 2nd Cor. 11.

One Inductive/Deductive Narrative Sermon

Steven Mathewson offers the inductive/deductive sermon as a third kind of narrative sermon in his homiletic guidelines. He describes it as “Option Three: Retell the story in a series of ‘moves’ that lead to the big idea and then return to the story to explore the big idea at length. This represents a combination of the previous two approaches. It is semi-inductive because the big idea emerges in the middle of the sermon. So, while the first half proceeds inductively to the big idea, the second half proceeds deductively and develops the idea.”[13]

James Rose in his sermon The Big Valley uses the inductive/deductive method. His first major point presents the problem.

“I. Giants threaten those of us who look at life from the ground level (1 Sam. 17:1-25).” After moving inductively from this point, the big idea is stated in his second point which is deductively developed.

“II. Giants ignite those of us who look at life from a ‘God-level’ perspective (1 Sam.17:26-58).”[14]

We have discussed and illustrated ten narrative sermons with variety: Three deductive narratives (Demand, Declarative, and Question proposition), six inductive narratives ( The Biblical problem/Biblical solution, Narrative/Applications, Hidden Outline, Pure Narrative, Frame Narrative, and First-Person Narrative), and one inductive/deductive narrative sermon.

Not only is variety the spice of life but of preaching. These ten different styles can rob our sermons of predictability and make coming to church a new adventure for our listeners.

[1]Lewis, Ralph L. and Gregg Lewis. Inductive Preaching: Helping People Listen. (Westchester: Crossway Books, 1983), 32.

[2]Chapell, Bryon. Using Illustrations to Preach with Power. (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992), 26,27, 30.

[3]David C. Duel, “Expository Preaching From Old Testament Narrative.” In Rediscovering Expository Preaching, ed. John MacArthur, 275. Dallas: Word, 1992.

[4]Jensen, Richard A. Telling the Story: Variety and Imagination in Preaching. (Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1980), 134.

[5]Mathewson, Steven D. “Guidelines for Understanding and Proclaiming Old Testament Narratives,” Bibliotheca Sacra 154, no.616 (October-December 1997) : 410-35.

[6]Ibid., 427, 428.

[7]Swindoll, Charles R. Killing Giants, Pulling Thorns. (Portland: Multnomah Press, 1978), 14.

[8]Robinson, Haddon W. Biblical Sermons. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1989), 54, 57.

[9]Holbert, John C. Preaching Old Testament: Proclamation and Narrative in the Hebrew Bible. (Nashville: Abingdon, 1991), 42,43.

[10]Ibid.,

[11]Ibid., 43.

[12] Robinson, Biblical Sermons, 143.

[13]Mathewson, Guidelines for Understanding and Proclaiming Old Testament Narratives, 429.

[14]Robinson, Biblical Sermons, 62.

Book Review of He is Not Silent by R. Albert Mohler, Jr. The Preface

Posted: May 15, 2010 in Book Reviews
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
0

I agree with Tim Challies’ book review that this is a book that both preachers and those who listen to preachers should read and benefit from. Stephen Olford used to take one Sunday evening a year at his church and teach his people what all was involved in preparing one expository sermon. Mohler’s book can also provide this insight for church members so they can better appreciate the work of their pastor.

Mohler is trying to centralize decentralized preaching in our post-modern, authority rejecting, deconstructing, right brain, image oriented culture.

After recognizing a renaissance of expository preaching in some places, biblical preaching has been eclipse in many more. In his preface, Mohler, lays out in his opinion, what are the factors for the weakening of expository preaching in the 21st century.

First, contemporary preaching suffers from a loss of confidence in the power of the word.

Second, contemporary preaching suffers from an infatuation with technology.

I agree “that the visual quickly overcomes the verbal.” Can technology and movie clips be abused? Certainly! Does this mean we preachers should never use technology such as powerpointsermons.com or even occasionally movie clips from wingclips.com? I don’t think so. If movie clips, etc. serve as sermon illustration and whether it is spoken or digitized matters not. The problem is the abuse of this technology as in the abuse of story illustrations that produces sky scraper sermons where story is built upon story which is built upon story, which is built upon story.

Third, contemporary preaching suffers from embarrassment before the biblical text.

This is evidenced when politically correct preachers ignore confrontational passages. All Scripture should be preached (2 Timothy 3:16) if our confidence is secure in the authoritative Word of God.

Fourth, contemporary preaching suffers from an emptying of biblical content.

When a passage is not ignored and preached, the context of the passage is ignored and the content of the text is not properly interpreted before applied. This practice leads to what Haddon Robinson called the “Heresy of Misapplication.” One reason for this factor that weakens expository preaching is the exacting work of interpreting a passage in the contexts of the entire Scripture (canonical context), the genre, the biblical theology of the book, and the immediate context of the pericope. Then there is the spade work of finding the one eternal truth of the passage and how that one truth is developed in the text.

Fifth, contemporary preaching from a focus on felt needs.

As a result of this factor that weakens expository preaching “the sacred desk has become an advice center, and the pew has become the therapist’s couch. Psychological and practical concerns have displaced theological exegesis.”

Sixth, contemporary preaching suffers from an absence of gospel.

Mohler opens this section saying, “The preaching of the apostles always presented the kerygma—the heart of the gospel. The clear presentation of the gospel must be a part of the sermon, no matter the text.” I disagree. First, we are not apostles in the first century when the canon of Scripture was incomplete. Next, earlier Mohler contended that when preaching a passage we must not empty it of its content. Every passage, however, is not about the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ.

Here is Steven Mathewson’s response to this debate. “I’ve wrestled with this issue quite a bit recently as I’ve worked through Preaching Christ from the Old Testament by Sidney Greidanus. In his book Greidanus compares the Christological approach of Martin Luther with the theocentric approach of John Calvin. While the view of Greidanus falls somewhere between the two, my view is closer to Calvin’s. Based on Calvin’s understanding of the Triune God, his God-centered sermons were implicitly Christ-centered. But because of (1) his insistence on unfolding the mind of the author in a passage of Scripture and (2) his focus on the sovereignty and glory of God as his interpretive center, Calvin did not see the need to make every Old Testament sermon explicitly Christ-centered. He preached what was in the passage. Even Bryan Chapell, a preaching professor from the Reformed tradition, says, ‘A sermon remains expository and Christ-centered not because it leapfrogs to Golgotha, but because it locates the intent of the passage within the scope of God’s redemptive work’ (Christ-Centered Preaching, 296). In fact, Chapell suggests that sometimes a Christ-centered sermon may not even mention Jesus. The issue is, does a sermon demonstrate the relationship of the passage preached to the overall war between the seed of the woman and Satan” (Steven D. Mathewson. The Art of Preaching Old Testament Narrative, Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002, 175).

I would agree with Mathewson, Calvin, and Chapell. Preach the one eternal truth of the passage or what we call the authorial intent. Yes include the gospel especially when the unsaved are in your service. The pastor is to equip the saints with the whole counsel of God’s Word which covers all the doctrines of systematic theology.

In my next post I wll interact with chapter one “Preaching As Worship: The Heart of Christian Worship.”

Why the Popularity and Diffculity of Narrative Preaching? The Homiletic Paradigm Shift: Part 1

Posted: November 26, 2009 in Preaching Narratives
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
0

When Haddon Robinson was president of Denver Seminary, he interviewed Paul Borden, professor of Homiletics at Denver Seminary and asked, “Why do you think many preachers find narrative passages and preaching difficult?” Borden’s response was, “From my own personal experience, I was never trained in narrative preaching. Having four years of Bible College and four years of seminary, I recognized when I came out of school, I did not know how to deal with narrative passages. I also had very few models since most of the men I looked up to didn’t teach me how to do it and didn’t do it well, I had no one to follow” (Paul Borden, Preaching from Biblical Narratives, Expositapes (Denver: Denver Seminary, n.d.), Set III, #1).

Since this interview there has been a renewed emphasis on narrative preaching. There are seminary courses on narrative preaching, significant books published, and journal articles, both academic and popular, written on narrative preaching. This resurgence, however, has not completely resolved the problem according to Steven D. Mathewson. He gives 4 reasons pastors still struggle preaching Old Testament stories:

1. We view stories as fluff.

2. We mimimize the role of Old Testament stories in the canon.

3. We get intimidated by the language and literature of the Old Testament.

4. We get enslaved to a particular style of exposition (Steven D. Mathewson. The Art of Preaching Old Testament Narrative. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2002, 23-25). Mathewson elaborates on each of these points.

Still, there has been a paradigm shift from a didactic to a narrative form of preaching and from a deductive to an inductive form of preaching?

Osborne pinpointed the new trend: “The tendency in current homiletic theory is to reject the propositional form of preaching espoused in this section in behalf of ‘story preaching,’ an ‘event’ approach that narrates a plot or tells a story rather than presents in didactic fashion a series of theological assertions” (Grant R. Osborne, The Hermeneutical Spiral, Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity, 1991, 361). The purpose of this series of posts is not to replace propositional preaching, but only to add Biblical narrative preaching to the preacher’s repertoire.

Here are some reasons for the homiletic paradigm shift.

The First Reason for the Homiletical Shift       

One reason for the paradigm shift is the new emphasis on the form of the sermon reflecting the form of the genre. Jensen explains: “Why should we de-story these stories in our sermons and simply pass on the point of the story to our listeners? Why should we rip the content out of the form as our normal homiletical process? If the story (or whatever literary form the text may take) is of no matter why didn’t the biblical writer first tell us the point in the first place? Why didn’t the author of Genesis 2-3 just tell us what sin is? Why did he tell us a story? And if that biblical author carefully constructed a ‘sin story’ why do we always feel compelled to improve on the story by preaching on the point” (Richard A. Jensen, Telling the Story: Variety and Imagination in Preaching . Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1980), 128)?

The Second Reason for the Homiletical Shift

Not only do narrative sermons reflect the narrative genre, but narrative sermons have the potential to hold the interest of the hearer better than didactic sermons. The literary devise of plot or story line with its crisis, suspense, and resolution to the crisis, which is common to narratives, if reflected in the sermon, will hold the listener’s attention. Craddock argues for the interest holding ability of the narrative sermon. “Some forms make no demands of the listeners. The old pattern of stating the sermon in digest at the outset, developing the sermon, and then summarizing in conclusion is such a form. In contrast, the pattern, ‘Not this, nor this, nor this, but this’ expects the hearers to remain thoughtfully engaged to the end” (Fred B. Craddock, Preaching, Nashville: Abingdon, 1985, 174).

The Third Reason for the Homiletic Shift

The narrative form of preaching is less Greco-Roman in style, and the didactic and deductive form is more Greco-Roman; this is another reason for the renewed interest in narrative exposition. At the turn of the second century, Greco-Roman rhetoric began and continued to influence sermon preparation until the last thirty years. For example, in Acts 2, Peter’s sermon is inductive. The theme is not announced until the end: “God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ” (Acts 2:36).

Peter’s audience was antagonistic and had he opened his sermon deductively with the theme at the beginning, the Jews, who crucified Christ just one month earlier, perhaps would have stoned Peter, when he proclaimed that they had put to death the Messiah. “Why should the multitude of forms and moods within biblical literature and the multitude of needs in the congregation be brought together on one unvarying mold, and that copied from Greek rhetoricians of centuries ago? Craddock explains: An unnecessary monotony results, but more profoundly, there is an inner conflict between the content of the sermon and its form. The minister is seriously affected by the conflict. The content calls for singing but the form is quite prosaic; the message has wings but the structure is quite pedestrian” (Fred B. Craddock, As One Without Authority, Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1979, 143-44).

The Fourth Reason for the Homiletical Shift

The revival of narrative preaching at the end of the twentieth century and at the beginning of the twenty-first century is also due in part to people’s love for stories. “One of the most universal human impulses can be summed up in a familiar four-word plea: Tell me a story. How many of you have finished reading a story to your child and he/she almost immediately says, “Daddy, read it again!” The Bible constantly satisfies that demand. Narrative is the dominant form of the Bible. Despite the multiplicity of literary genres found in the Bible, it is above all a book of stories” (Leland Ryken, Words of Delight: A Literary Introduction to the Bible, Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1987, 35).

R. C. Sproul said in an interview with Michael Duduit, “I’m big on preaching from narratives because people will listen ten times as hard to a story as they will to an abstract lesson” (Michael Duduit, “Theology and Preaching in the 90s: An Interview with R. C. Sproul,” Preaching 9, March-April, 1994: 23).

When 30 to 40 percent of the Old Testament are stories, how can be say we preach the whole counsel of God’s Word and neglect the most prominent genre in Scripture?