Recently in a class on Jeremiah, the group dove into chapters 30-32, the book of consolation, where Jeremiah gives great hope.  I asked the students to try some creative writing on the issue of hope.  One of the students, Kyle Beard, submitted this poem.   Of all the submissions, my judges ranked this one the best. 

I hope it gives  you hope.

HOPE

By Kyle Beard

One of my habits is to keep an eye on what is being published in the religious press.  One of the largest areas being taken up right now is the subject of God.  Consider these recent book titles:

The Prodigal God–Recovering the Heart of the Christian Faith

There is A God

Trusting in the Names of God

Great is the Lord–Theology for the Praise of God

God–Seen Through the Eyes of the Greatest Minds

Knowing God the Father

Images of God

The Shack

Approaching God–Accepting the Invitation to Stand in the Presence of God

How to Believe in God–Whether You Believe in Religion or Not

The Reason for God–Belief in an Age of Skepticism

That’s quite a list. 

Why all the books on God?   What do we make of what the publishers sense about contemporary culture?  I have three thoughts. You can add some more

1–Vacuum.   Many sense a blank when it comes to God.  They have not heard many sermons on God or studied about God in the Bible, so they have questions that they want answered.

2–Opposition.  Increasingly atheists have become more militant.  The anti-god propaganda raises questions and sends people on a search for a defense.

3–Misinformation.  Will Willimon tells of talking to a co-ed who did not believe in God.  He asked her to describe the God she did not believe in.   Then Willimon said, “I don’t believe in that God either.”   The world is filled with words about God, but not all of them describe the biblical Father.

My conclusion?   Take up some expository texts on our divine Father.  Schedule Sunday school classes on the topic of God.  Let’s fill the vacuum, take on the opposition and correct the misinformation.

Let me offer two thoughts on the use of the term “pulpit minister” and invite you to respond with your observations:

First, the Stone Campbell movement frequently pleaded with people to call Bible things by Bible names.  I believe that is good thinking.   Most could probably list several areas in which some have insisted on this feature.

Interestingly, there is Bible name for “pulpit minister.”  The Bible simply calls that person the “preacher.”   What made us drop an appropriate Biblical name for one that originated elsewhere?

Second, in the current debates about the nature of worship, it is often common to use “entertainment” as a trump card.   The reasoning is that if it is entertainment, then it could not possibly be worship.  

So it becomes even more interesting that we use the word “pulpit” which comes from the Latin word “pulpitum” which means “stage.”   So we replace Biblical “preachers” with “stage” ministers who speak in an “auditorium.” 

The word “auditorium” fits nicely with “stage ministers.”   “Auditorium” is a word which is usually used to describe a place where people gather to watch a show or the performers on the stage.  In fact, most auditoriums are places of entetainment.    Ironically we have used the word “auditorium”  replace the biblical word “assembly.”

I am not trying to quibble about words, but to raise the question of expectations.  Biblically the expectation of preachers is to share the Word of God with the assembled spiritual community.   That kind of language allows the preacher to stay focused and helps the community understand what God expects to happen.

My intent here is to build on the pieces below about inductive and expository preaching.  Inductive preaching engages the community in thinking about spiritual issues  Expository preaching basis the inductive work on the Bible itself.  Although this whole process can be made dry, the Bible has the potential of being quite interesting, challenging and probing. 

Perhaps we ought to return to the biblical language which keeps us focused on the Bible rather than on the pulpit minister, on God rather than the stage, on our relationship with the Father rather than rating worship like we might a new movie release. 

Harold, the preacher.

A good example of taking an expository approach to an extended biblical passage is Chris Altrock’s Rebuilding Relationships—A Sermon on the Mount Floor Plan (St. Louis: Chalice, 2008). Altrock’s thirteen chapters follow the themes and messages of Jesus’ three chapter Sermon on the Mount found in Matthew 5-7. Altrock’s approach is not to offer a commentary on the text, others do that. Nor does he cite the text and then go on to make his own points, many contemporary preachers do that. What he does is this: he stubbornly works his way through the entire sermon allowing the words of Jesus to raise the topic of his next chapter and insisting that the message of each chapter is dictated by Jesus’ own message.

Note these qualities of how Altrock unfolds the material in an expository way:

1—He argues that Jesus’ sermon centers on three relationships: with God, with possessions and with others. Showing that those three relationships arise out of Jesus’ sermon, rather than being imposed on the sermon, Altrock cleverly unfolds all three aspects of relationship building.

2—Altrock compares Jesus’ sermon to building a house. Altrock uses the vocation of Jesus’ early life as a carpenter as a way of communicating Jesus’ concern that we take greater care in how we “build” our relationships. He often compares the aspects of forming relationships to various kinds of construction. This extended metaphor allows Altrock to keep the material linked and provides ample helpful illustrative material. Thus Altrock works with three main issues: the material in Matthew 5-7, the three kinds of relationships, and the building metaphor. This triad serves him well allowing him to keep the presentation focused on the biblical material, but also unified and interesting.

3—Each chapter is abundantly illustrated. Each story reflects the topic or the message of the biblical passage. Some of the illustrations are used inductively. Altrock tells the story in such a way that before the story ends, the reader understands the point. Although he usually includes a brief deductive paragraph after each story, he proceeds to use many of his illustrations in an inductive manner.

Altrock enhances this approach by using many of the stories as envelopes or bookends. Early in the treatment of a section of the Sermon on the Mount, Altrock will introduce a story to make an inductive (or sometimes deductive) point. He then returns to the text to allow it to speak. The text points to another issue. Altrock will then return to the earlier story and tell another aspect of that illustration that links to the new point raised by the biblical passage. Inductive methods make the reader (or listener) think rather than being told what to think. Altrock is a master at this method.

4—As Altrock works his expository method on the Sermon on the Mount, he regularly recalls earlier key statements Jesus made or anticipates lines from later in the lesson. For example, in his opening chapter he cites the story of the wise and foolish builders from the end of Jesus’ lesson. Even at the conclusion of his book, Altrock is showing how the opening beatitudes play out in the rest of sermon.

There are many other fine features of Rebuilding Relationships, but certainly its expository approach is one of its most delightful qualities. Altrock helps us to see that we can allow the text to set the agenda and seek in the text the core message, and still be relevant and interesting in the process.

Harold Shank

 That comment gave me considerable pause.   The conversation moved on so I did not get to ask what he meant, but I suspect he was referring to sermons that are filled with exegetical details and word studies that have little relevance or interest for the average Christian.

Exegetical detail work and word studies are part of the foundational work for the sermon, but not part of the presentation.  If that is what my friend meant, then I agree.

However, good expository preaching pulls alongside a passage of Scripture, invites the listener into the core of what the biblical author meant, and allows God through his Word to communicate to the human heart.  Done well, expository preaching unlocks the power of God.   Executed with excellence, expository preaching can be as contemporary and relevant as any popular attempt to touch today’s Christian.

That kind of preaching challenges our thinking, alters our habits, refines our spirit and draws us closer to God.

Can we have too much of that kind of Bible?   No.  We need more of Scripture that touches us in that way.

Craddock, Fred B. As One Without Authority (Atlanta: Christian Board of Publication, 2001) 172 pages.

Craddock, Fred B. Overhearing the Gospel, Revised Edition (St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2002) 142 pages.

Lewis, Ralph L. and Gregg Lewis. Inductive Preaching: Helping People Listen (Wheaton: Crossway, 1983) 228 pages.

Lowry, Eugene. The Homiletical Plot: The Sermon As Narrative Art Form (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 2000) 138 pages.

Wilson, Paul Scott. The Four Pages of the Sermon: A Guide to Biblical Preaching (Nashville: Abingdon, 1999) 276 pages.

We invite you to join our conversation about inductive preaching. The conversation first started in a graduate preaching class on Genesis and Exodus at Oklahoma Christian University when the instructor, Dr. Harold Shank, required the students to do only inductive preaching in the sermons preached in class. Grant Sullivan, Associate minister at the North Heights Church of Christ in Bixby, Oklahoma, was part of that class. Listen to how things unfolded.
Harold Shank: Most of Genesis and Exodus is narrative. Yet it is a story told with a theological purpose. Seldom in these 90 chapters do we get a list of doctrines or conclusions about what to believe. For that reason, I asked the students in the class to do only inductive preaching.

Grant Sullivan: In this class I embarked on a difficult and yet exciting journey of learning. This journey has only begun, but I am beginning to see the fruit of my labor. This journey is to learn inductive preaching. Upon introduction to inductive preaching, brought to my attention by Dr. Harold Shank, I determined to read several books looking for a greater understanding of the inductive approach to preaching and teaching the word of God. Having read three books at the time of this writing certainly shows I am in no way an expert on the matter. However, this process is something that is certainly fresh on my mind.
Harold Shank: When I asked the students to do inductive preaching, I was not prepared for the response. They were resistant. But they were also confused. Despite the fact that the class was on Genesis and Exodus, we had to take a detour into the question of “what is inductive preaching?” I called my preaching expert friend, Dr. Chris Altrock, and he provided me with a list of the most helpful books on inductive preaching.

 
Grant Sullivan: All my life I have been surrounded by information and examples of deductive preaching, but had never knowingly encountered this other approach. At first the more I read the more confused I became. In fact several times along the way it crossed my mind that this journey might not be worth the effort. It seemed like I was learning a foreign language, and my deductive habits were not going to leave without a fight. Yet after making the initial effort I have found the rewards to outweigh all the difficulties of this process.
Harold Shank: In our class I called for students to do expository preaching that was inductive. Expository preaching means taking the biblical material paragraph by paragraph and allowing the themes, topics and points of the biblical material to direct the themes, topics and points of the sermon. I found that explaining inductive preaching to people who had only heard and practiced deductive preaching was more difficult.
Grant Sullivan: The first major obstacle, and one admittedly I am still trying to overcome, was finding a clear definition of “inductive preaching.” Some writers on the subject will refer to narrative style under the umbrella of inductive, while others suggest them to be similar but distinct styles. I would read page after page looking for a clear definition of terms only to be disappointed. Then through guidance from Dr. Shank I started realizing I was not dealing with an exact science. I now believe that “inductive preaching” cannot be placed inside a labeled box.
Here is my attempt to help the reader gain insight into the difference between inductive and deductive preaching. Imagine that it is Christmas morning and you are longing to open your gifts. The anticipation has been building inside of you for days now and you simply cannot wait any longer to find out what you are getting. Finally the moment comes and you begin ripping the wrapping paper off your present. You can hardly stand the excitement as you take the lid off the box and found within is the greatest gift you have ever received. Now imagine the same scenario, but this time your older brother who knows what you are getting spoils the surprise. There is something about the experience that has been taken away and can never be regained. You may still love the gift, but to a degree you have been cheated.

*How many times have you recorded a ball game not wanting to know the outcome, and someone walks by and tells you the final score?

How many times have you wanted to see a movie only to have a spoiler in your midst?

I use these examples to help define inductive and deductive preaching.

Harold Shank: It’s fascinating to me that Grant is now using an inductive method to help us understand inductive preaching. As he told his Christmas story, I could see the conclusion coming. He did not really have to even state it. I drew it myself. That’s the inductive method.
Grant Sullivan: Deductive preaching is that which begins with the conclusion and works backwards to provide the evidence for how this conclusion was reached. Therefore in deductive preaching the listener is told the ending at the beginning of the sermon, and the remainder of the sermon is spent providing the reasons why this is “correct”. The inductive approach put simply is the opposite of the deductive approach. Inductive preaching takes the listeners along the journey toward the conclusion. Inductive preaching begins with ambiguity and leads the listener toward the answer. As Eugene L. Lowry puts it in his book, The Homiletical Plot, we begin with an “itch” in search of the “scratch”.
Harold Shank: In Grant’s last entry, he becomes more deductive, telling us the conclusion and then supporting his point. There is nothing wrong with deductive reasoning. It has been used with profit for ages, but inductive preaching has advantages. But changing is hard.
Grant Sullivan: In this blog post I’ve tried to whet your appetite to consider inductive preaching. I would also challenge you to never be satisfied, but always look for ways to improve your delivery of the most important message ever told. Often people are not willing to change until they realize that there is a need for change. I have been guilty in the past of believing that if I preach the truth powerfully and with enthusiasm that people who refuse to listen are the ones at fault entirely. Although I would not dare remove all the responsibility from the listener I have come to believe that a good self assessment was needed in my preaching. I would like to share with you some things that I have noticed since beginning this series of personal assessment and growth.
Harold Shank: Most of us multi-task. We do more than one thing at a time. That becomes a problem on Sunday. If most of the audience is multi-tasking as I preach, I wonder how much of God’s word is actually getting through. Inductive preaching demands more attention from the listener. Instead of every conclusion being clearly stated and supported, the listener has to participate. That leads to a higher level of interest.
Grant Sullivan: This process has not been easy. Old habits are hard to break. So why did I go through with the process? It is partly because I am stubborn, but after trying the inductive approach I have a new and better reason to continue on this journey. The results are speaking for themselves.
I have noticed that people are not shifting in their seats and getting up to take restroom breaks nearly as often. I have had several people who have walked up discussing various parts of the sermon instead of the usual “great sermon” followed by “so what did you think of that ballgame yesterday?” This is just a few examples of the results I am noticing. The real excitement for me is when I realize how much I need to improve with my inductive delivery. It is my hope that as I improve the results will become even greater.
Harold Shank: Once a person becomes aware of these two ways of thinking/preaching, it is easy to become critical. But there is no right or wrong here. For me, it is more a means of making the preaching method fit the text. Genesis and Exodus force us to take the story and draw conclusions. Preaching from Genesis and Exodus might do the same.
Grant Sullivan: The latest problem I am having is what might be described as a “superiority complex”. I now have a hard time listening to others preaching deductively. You might say that I am overly critical. Much like a child with a new toy, I am enamored with something new, and imagine my criticalness of deductive preaching will fade with time. Admittedly there is a place for both inductive and deductive preaching. It might be that the inductive approach would even lose some of its freshness if there was a total abandonment of deductive preaching. For now I will simply say that the inductive approach is a breath of fresh air.

Harold Shank: We’ve simply shared a bit of our experience. Tell us yours. How can we sharpen our definitions? Join the discussion.

The words to this new hymn are below.  You can listen to it by going to “sermons” on this web site and clicking on “Heartbeat of God.”   Please ignore the fact that it says “preached by composer Kathy Thompson.”

The words and music to this hymn also appear on page 218 of my new book, Listening to His Heartbeat.”

“Heartbeat of God” by Dr. Kathy Thompson

1. LORD, LORD, compassionate, gracious God,
Slow to anger, abounding in love and faithfulness,
Maintaining love to thousands,
Forgiving wickedness, rebellion, and sin.
LORD, LORD, we hear your heartbeat of love.
2. LORD, LORD, The Prodigal Son confessed,
And was welcomed and pressed to his father’s loving breast.
Though weary and unworthy,
He heard that heartbeat of redemption and rest.
LORD, LORD, we hear your heartbeat of love.
3. LORD, LORD, we offer our thanks and praise,
For the breadth of your faithfulness blesses all our days.
We strive to walk in your ways,
But when we fall, we find the depth of your grace.
LORD, LORD, we hear your heartbeat of love.

Increasingly students of Scripture notice that few of us study the Bible while asking the question, “What does this passage say about God?”   Other issues tend to push aside the discovery about God.  Obstacles tend to get in the way.

*We read Genesis 1 asking questions about the creation, but often we don’t look for what it says about the creator.

*We read the Ten Commandments for moral direction, rather than seeking the moral director.

*We look at the Sermon on the Mount seeking the point, rather than seeking its preacher.

If we want to listen to God’s heartbeat, what better place to look than his book?  Can you think of a simplier tool than to read a verse and ask, “What does this passage say about God?” 

Perhaps instead of calling it Bible study, we can start describing the same process as “listening to God’s heartbeat.”

Once you hear it, it makes sense.  We lose our focus.  We get distracted.  We major on minors.  We need to get back on track.

But I have one additional problem.  I forget the line.  I forget that the main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing.  When I remember it, I know what to do.

So consider this “What’s the Point?” today’s reminder to remember that the main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing.