John Benton's article, 'Blockbuster Audio', in the March issue, contained much excellent advice on making good sermons. What he did not explain, however, is how we get from biblical preaching and teaching to delivering sermons.
In answer to his ten-point guide, can I suggest the following ten points?
1. The sermon can hardly claim Scriptural support - the word is not even mentioned in the Bible.
2. The extensive use of the sermon arose under the influence of Greek rhetoric. Tertullian, Cyprian and Augustine were among many of the church's fathers who had been professional rhetoricians before becoming Christians.
3. New Testament preaching is heralding the gospel to the lost. The examples in Acts are in response to specific evangelistic opportunities. 'In the New Testament, preaching has nothing to do with the delivering of sermons to the converted, which is what it usually means today, but always concerns the proclamation of the 'good tidings of God' to the non-Christian world. As such, it is to be distinguished from teaching.' ('Preach', Theological Word Book of the Bible, Editor: Alan Richardson). Once this basic fact is recognised, the aura surrounding 'pulpit preaching' disappears and the subject can be tackled from a biblical perspective.
4. The gift of teaching is extremely important and much needed today. Elders in the church must be 'able to teach' (1 Timothy 2.2) but nowhere are they told how they are to do this. The New Testament stresses the paramount importance of truth, but leaves the elders and church free to adopt those teaching methods appropriate for the local situation.
5. Though there is no example in the New Testament of teaching by monologue in the gathered church, this is one option and has some obvious advantages - the teaching of Jesus by discourse sets a clear precedent for this. But most of the teaching of Jesus, however, was dialogical, initiated by, or in response to, questions. Paul seems to have followed this approach at Troas. The word describing his ministry there is dialegomai (Acts 20.7,9) and is translated in Acts 19.9 (NIV) as 'had discussion'. It was dialogue, not monologue. The encouragement to Christians to teach one another (Romans 15.14, Colossians 3.16) and the emphasis on participation in church gatherings (1 Corinthians 14.26, Ephesians 5.18-19, Hebrews 10.24-25) confirms that much of the edification in the early church was achieved through sharing together.
In practice today this could mean, for example, teaching through the use of groups or through the inductive study of God's word. Where discourse is used, it could allow for questions or incorporate into it testimony or story relative to the subject.
6. We may wonder why the New Testament does not give a clear blueprint for teaching in the church. The simple reason is that the Bible is our final authority! This means, by its very nature, it must be relevant to the church in every culture and until the end of the age. Finality and flexibility belong inevitably together. One recent writer grappling with post-modernism says: 'The problem is simply what while the classic expository model may have suited the book-driven, linear mindset of the modern West, it is hard to see how it will suit the screen-driven, multimedia mentality of post-modern culture.' If we are going to engage relevantly with men and women today, we will have to give far more thought to the means we use in proclaiming the unchanging gospel and teaching the whole will of God.
7. God's truth is so vital to the wellbeing of his people that we cannot go on restricting ourselves to an approach that is serving many people so poorly. Here is a suggestion: instead of constantly examining the role of the preacher and teacher, let us approach the whole subject of God's word in the church from the perspective of the 'ordinary' Christian. Let us think in terms of learning, living and experiencing God's truth and then seek the best ways of achieving these ends. I would suggest that one of the reasons for the whole new emphasis on counselling is because, in many of our churches, God's truth is not being worked through into Christian experience and practice.
8. Reassessing how we learn together in the church cannot, of course, be considered in isolation. It will inevitably drive us to look at why the church gathers, the size of the gathering and the meeting place. Above all, it will force us to take seriously the uniquely new covenant metaphors for the church, namely, temple and body. John's use of 1 Thess. 5.14 in his article is addressed not to teachers, but to all the brothers.
9. The sermon in contemporary evangelicalism is virtually sacrosanct. But if it is true that the massive edifice of 'pulpit preaching' has been built on the flimsiest of foundations, then we must reject our claim that God's word is our final authority in all matters of belief and practice. We must also question whether it is only Roman Catholicism that is committed to the authority of tradition. To maintain the status quo requires just as much biblical justification as does change.
10. If New Testament preaching is to be defined primarily by its content - the good news, and the nature of the hearer - the unbeliever, then for all our emphasis on the subject we are probably doing very little of it! And that is a sobering thought on which to conclude.
For those who want to examine this important subject further, I have found the following publications stimulating:
Grove Pastoral Series No. 68, Preaching as Dialogue, Jeremy Thomson;
Picking up the Pieces, David Hilborn, Hodder & Stoughton, p.149-169;
To Preach Or Not To Preach, David Norrington, Paternoster Press;
Is the Sermon Concept Biblical?, Searching Together, Spring/Summer '86 - still available from Mr G. Wood, 19 North Road, Ripon, N. Yorks. HG4 1JP.
Richard Chester