Preaching from the gospels
Since the Gospels are a unique genre (see Gospel [Genre]) of biblical literature, preaching from the Gospels presents a distinct set of challenges. On the one hand, the Gospel genre is a form of preaching, and therefore contemporary preaching from the Gospels conforms well with the nature of this genre. On the other hand, in the Gospels contemporary preachers are faced with the complexities of various homiletical horizons (e.g., that of Jesus and of the Gospel writers), four different Gospels (see Canon) about the same historical Jesus, and numerous human characters who threaten to upstage Jesus in the sermon. The challenge is to preach sermons that do justice to the complexities of the Gospels while they speak relevantly to the church here and now.
2. Various Homiletical Horizons
1. The Gospels As Preaching
The Gospels communicate “the good news” (to euangelion) about “Jesus Christ, the Son of God” (Mk 1:1; see Gospel [Good News]). As good news addressed to the church, the written Gospels themselves are a form of preaching (kerygma). Moreover, the Gospels are rooted in the preaching of Jesus and the apostles: “Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God*, and saying, ‘The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe the gospel’ ” (Mk 1:14–15 RSV; cf. Mt 10:7; 28:18–20). Since the Gospels are formed out of early Christian preaching and are themselves a form of preaching, contemporary preaching from the Gospels is not contrary to their nature but is a natural extension of the Gospel genre. This affinity of the Gospels and preaching facilitates contemporary preaching of Gospel passages, for the message and its objective are given in the Gospel itself. Other characteristics of the Gospels, however, complicate their preaching today and require careful reflection.
2. Various Homiletical Horizons
In preaching from the Gospels one of the first issues confronting preachers is which homiletical horizon is the proper level for interpretation and preaching. Redaction criticism (see Redaction Criticism) distinguishes various life settings in the Gospels. For preaching purposes, two life settings other than the contemporary horizon are important: (1) the life setting of the historical Jesus (see Historical Jesus) as he preached to the disciples*, the Jewish leaders and the crowds (Sitz im Leben Jesu) and (2) the life setting of the Gospel writers as they used the oral and written traditions about Jesus to write the Gospels for their churches (Sitz im Leben des Verfassers).
2.1. The Horizon of Jesus. Many preachers almost automatically opt for the horizon of the historical Jesus, preaching sermons on Jesus calling his disciples, Jesus healing* the sick, Jesus challenging the Pharisees*, etc., and applying the message from that original horizon to the church today. The question may be raised, however, if this approach does full justice to the written text. To be sure, this method uses the written text, but only as a transparent window-pane through which to view the historical Jesus and his words and actions. The Gospels, however, as a comparison of the four will show, are not transparent windowpanes but distinctly colored presentations of the historical Jesus. To look right through the written text to Jesus’ historical horizon is to miss the kerygmatic point made by the Gospel writer in a later horizon. This method fails to do full justice to the inspired Gospels.
2.2. The Horizon of the Evangelist. Other preachers seek to preach the Gospels from the homiletical horizon of the Gospel writers. They try to detect the message Matthew proclaimed to the Jewish Christian church or the message Luke formulated for the church of Theophilus, and then transfer that message to the church today. For support, this approach can appeal to the fact that the church received as God’s inspired Word the written Gospels and not our reconstructions of the historical Jesus. As well, it can appeal to Jesus’ promise to his disciples, “When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth” (Jn 16:13 RSV). Only after Jesus’ resurrection* and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit (see Holy Spirit) did the apostles* begin to understand what had taken place in Jesus (see Lk 24:25–27; Jn 14:25–26; 16:12–15). By itself, however, this method of focussing on the horizon of the Gospel writer also fails to do full justice to the Gospels as we have them. For it tends to slight the historical referents in the Gospels; it tends to overlook the very reason for which the Gospels were written, namely to convey the meaning of the life, death and resurrection of the historical Jesus.
2.3. Working with Both Horizons. A more thorough approach than either of the above seeks to work with both ancient horizons. This procedure naturally gives rise to the question, Which horizon has priority, that of the historical Jesus or that of the Gospel writer? Although the horizon of Jesus is chronologically prior, one learns about the historical Jesus only through the later Gospel writer. Hence one’s interpretation needs to begin with the horizon of the Gospel writer.
By studying the composition of a Gospel in its own historical context and by comparing it with the other three Gospels, one becomes aware of the differences among the Gospels: They offer not four identical photographs of Jesus but four unique portraits. These distinct views of what Jesus did and taught are not, as is often supposed, a liability for contemporary preaching but an advantage. They are a liability only when one allows a naturalistic or immanentistic historical-critical method to use the variations in the Gospels to undermine their fundamental historicity (see Greidanus, 24–47, 268–77). But for contemporary preachers who assume the Gospels’ basic historicity (see Gospels [Historical Reliability]), these distinct views of the Gospel writers are an advantage. For the portrait each Gospel writer paints of Jesus reveals the homiletical use to which he put the received traditions (see Tradition Criticism). Each unique slant may reveal the relevant point for a particular early Christian church. That homiletical point, it should be emphasized, is made by proclaiming “all that Jesus began to do and to teach” (Acts 1:1). In spite of the variations, therefore, the horizon of the Gospel writer in the early church is firmly linked to that of the historical Jesus.
This connection between the two ancient horizons enables contemporary preachers to use the Gospels for exploring the horizon of the historical Jesus. They can probe for the point Jesus made as he taught his disciples or the crowds (see People, Crowd) with sayings, parables* or miracles (see Miracles and Miracle Stories). Next they can investigate how Matthew, Mark, Luke or John, in a later setting, used that original message or event to bring the same or a revised message for a different time and place. And finally they can reflect on the significance of this point for the church today.
In the sermon itself one need not necessarily begin with the horizon of the Gospel writer but can frequently start with the point made by Jesus in his historical horizon, next show how the Gospel writer applies this to the church in his day, and finally show the implications of this point for the church today.
For example, if one preaches on the conclusion of Matthew’s Gospel (28:16–20), one can begin at the level of Jesus commissioning his eleven disciples, “to make disciples of all nations” and promising them for this awesome task his abiding presence. Next one can show how Matthew in his later horizon introduces this mandate with a reference to “the mountain” (v. 16; see Mountain and Wilderness), thus reminding his Jewish readers once again that Jesus is indeed the new Moses,* the new mediator between God and his people, the Law* giver of the new covenant (cf. Ex 19:20; Mt 5:1; 17:1). Matthew further notes that the disciples “worshiped him” (v. 17) as Jews would worship* only God. This sets the stage for Jesus’ astounding statement “All authority* in heaven and on earth has been given to me” (v. 18). The King of kings himself commands not only the original disciples but through them the early Christian church to go and “make disciples of all nations” (v. 19). Along with this mandate the early church receives also the empowering promise “I am with you always, to the close of the age” (v. 20). Matthew makes this promise (which forms an “inclusion” with the Immanuel of 1:23) the grand finale of his Gospel. Once the message has been understood in both of these horizons, its implications for the church today will be evident: The Lord of the church commands and empowers also his church today to make disciples of all nations (see Gentiles) because he is Lord of all.
3. The Homiletical Significance of Four Gospels
The validity of this double-horizon approach is borne out by the fact that the Bible contains four different Gospels about the historical Jesus. This biblical given can be made homiletically fruitful by discovering the specific objective or goal of each Gospel writer and by comparing their parallel passages.
3.1. The Objective of Each Gospel. Luke and John explicitly state their homiletical objectives. Luke writes Theophilus, “It seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may know the truth concerning the things of which you have been informed” (Lk 1:3–4 RSV). Even more precisely, John writes his audience that “Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name” (Jn 20:30–31 RSV). Although Matthew and Mark do not mention their objectives explicitly, redaction criticism, or more precisely, composition criticism can help bring them to light. One of Matthew’s objectives, clearly, is to persuade his audience that Jesus of Nazareth was indeed the promised Messiah (see Christ), the long-awaited King of Israel*. One of Mark’s objectives, by contrast, is to demonstrate to his audience that Jesus Christ had freely chosen the road of suffering and that his followers should be prepared to do the same (cf. Mk 8:31–38). These homiletical objectives—“that you may know the truth,” “that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ,” etc.—are beacons lighting the way to understanding the specifics of each Gospel.
3.2. Comparing Parallel Passages. The specifics of each Gospel can be discerned even more exactly when, because of double or triple traditions, one has opportunity to compare parallel Gospel passages (see Synoptic Problem). Most biblical scholars hold that Mark was the first Gospel and that Matthew and Luke used Mark (or his source Urmark) and other sources in writing their Gospels. Consequently, any variations from a Markan passage might indicate the specific interests of Matthew or Luke. Although this procedure frequently works, there are too many variables to accept it as foolproof. Since preachers are primarily interested in discerning the specific emphases in each Gospel and each passage (rather than who changed what), the most dependable method for them is carefully to compare the parallel Gospel passages in the light of the different objectives of each writer (see Fee, 39–40, 103–116). Such a comparison will reveal the kind of material each Gospel writer selected for transmission and how they rearranged and/or modified it. This information, in turn, will lead to understanding the homiletical interests and purposes of each writer and provide insight into the point of the preaching text (Greidanus, 271–73).
For example, if one preaches on Luke 18:15–17, the story of people bringing their children (see Child, Children) to Jesus, a comparison with Mark (10:13–16) and Matthew (19:13–15) will enable one to discern Luke’s homiletical interests. First, in contrast to Mark and Matthew, Luke precedes this story with the parable* of the pharisee and the tax collector (see Taxes). Thus Luke sets this story about children in the context of proper humility: “he who humbles himself will be exalted.” Second, in contrast to Mark and Matthew, Luke changes the Greek word for children in verse 15 to a word denoting infants or babies. Thus Luke sharpens Jesus’ point for his particular audience: “Whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child [the way a helpless baby receives its nourishment] shall not enter it” (v. 17 RSV). A sermon on Luke 18:15–17, therefore, would seek to emphasize our utter inability to contribute anything toward receiving the kingdom of God and encourage us to place our full trust in our heavenly Father who provides this wonderful gift for his children free of charge.
4. Christocentric Messages
All four Gospel writers intend to preach Jesus Christ. For example, in his second volume Luke writes, “In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach, until the day when he was taken up” (Acts 1:1–2 RSV). The new literary criticism (or narrative criticism; see Literary Criticism) confirms that Jesus is central in the Gospels: he is described as “the central figure,” “the subject around which every narrative turns” (Achtemeier, 53), “the major character,” “the protagonist,” “the supreme exponent of God’s evaluative point of view” (Kingsbury 1988, 10–13, 36). In sermons that would be true to the Gospels, this centrality of Jesus may not be subverted.
4.1. The Peril of Anthropocentrism. Unfortunately, in contemporary “biographic” and “character preaching,” Jesus is frequently upstaged by the other characters in the Gospels: Mary or Peter or Thomas receive center stage. Often this switch is made for the sake of relevance: the characters are sketched as warning examples whose attitudes and actions the hearers ought to avoid, or as good examples the hearers ought to emulate. In spite of good intentions, however, this kind of example or moralistic preaching cannot be recommended, for it turns the christocentric Gospel message into an anthropocentric sermon and in the process loses the real relevance of the Gospel. One important question preachers need to ask is, Was this the intention of the Gospel writer? Did he intend to portray these characters as moral examples for the early Christians?
4.2. The Role of Gospel Characters. One must grant, of course, that these human characters play their parts in the Gospels and may not simply be ignored in preaching. The question is, If they may not upstage Jesus, what is the place of Mary, Peter or Thomas in the sermon? Genuine biblical preaching, it seems fair to suggest, should seek to give the same place and function to these persons in the sermon as they have in the Gospels. In other words, preachers need to ask how the Gospel writer has used these characters in presenting his Gospel.
Narrative criticism has shown that some characters function simply as catalysts for other characters to exhibit their traits or to move along the action in a scene. Other characters, however, function as foils to contrast and highlight certain traits of Israel or of the disciples. For example, Matthew contrasts the magi’s faith in Jesus and later that of the Roman centurion with Israel’s unbelief (Mt 2:1–12; 8:5–13), and he contrasts the faith of the leper and that of the father of an epileptic with the disciples’ “little faith” (Mt 8:2, 26; 17:14–21; see Kingsbury 1988, 25–27). When we realize that Matthew’s Jewish audience would tend to recognize itself in Israel and more particularly in the disciples, his polemical as well as his homiletical point comes into view.
4.3. The Story of Jesus the Christ. Further, it is clear that the characters in the Gospels function not independently but as parts of an overall plot. This fact would also argue against the practice of isolating characters for the sake of presenting them as moral examples for the congregation. For the narrative structure entails that these characters ought to be understood and preached in the context of the whole story. That whole story, of course, is the story about Jesus Christ. Thus every character in the Gospels stands in relation to Jesus, and every Gospel sermon, also when dealing with these characters, can be genuinely christocentric.
Contemporary preachers need only follow the lead of the Gospel writer. For example, when Matthew (11:2–6) uses John the Baptist’s* doubt to emphasize that the very miracles that made John doubt are proof that Jesus is the promised Messiah, contemporary preachers can follow suit. When Luke (19:1–10) uses the wealthy, chief tax collector Zacchaeus to proclaim that Jesus is able to save even rich sinners (see Rich and Poor; Sinner), contemporary preachers can make the same use of Zacchaeus. By thus following the lead of the Gospel writers, contemporary preachers can pay appropriate attention to the various human characters while retaining center stage for Jesus and his teachings.
4.4. Christocentric Preaching and Theocentric Preaching. The Gospels themselves, of course, are not independent stories either but now form an integral part of the Bible and its all-encompassing story. This unity of the Gospels and the Bible elucidates how christocentric preaching is related to theocentric preaching. The one story the Bible relates is the history of God’s kingdom (see Kingdom of God) which began with God’s good creation (Gen 1), continued its up-and-down course despite the fall into sin (Gen 3:15), and will come to completion with the new creation (Rev 21–22). The Gospels proclaim that the coming of Jesus is God’s mightiest act in this history of God’s coming kingdom. The Word that was with God in the beginning “became flesh and dwelt among us,” proclaims John (1:1, 14). In the coming of Jesus, God’s promised King has come, preaches Matthew, for Jesus is the Messiah, the great Son of David (see Son of David), “God with us” (1:1–23). Consequently, christocentric preaching is theocentric preaching.
Jesus himself preached “the gospel of the kingdom” (Mt 4:23), defeated Satan, the pretender to the throne, and established a major beachhead for God’s kingdom on earth (Mt 12:28). Jesus in turn commanded his disciples and church to spread the gospel of the kingdom and “make disciples of all nations” (Mt 10:7; 28:19). The Gospel writers responded to this mandate by writing their Gospels, thus spreading into the world the good news of the kingdom of God that has come in Jesus Christ. By preaching these Gospels today, contemporary preachers can transmit the same good news of Jesus Christ and his kingdom. With the Gospels they can challenge their hearers with the broad vision of the kingdom of God that has come on earth and is still coming.
5. Preparing Gospel Sermons
The Gospels, it was observed above, are formed out of early Christian preaching and are themselves a form of preaching. By their very nature, therefore, the Gospels are well suited to be sources for contemporary preaching.
5.1. Selecting Preaching Texts. In order to conform to the Gospels as preaching, contemporary preachers should select as preaching texts not isolated fragments of the Gospels but complete literary units. Form criticism (see Form Criticism) has shown that the basic preaching units underlying the written Gospels are the pericopes—roughly corresponding to paragraphs in our English Bibles. These pericopes will frequently make excellent preaching texts. “When the pericopes of the Gospels are taken as texts for preaching, one is in close touch with their original intent and purpose” (Smith, 20). Naturally, these literary units, whatever their size, must now be interpreted in the light of the whole written Gospel and ultimately in the light of the whole Bible.
Sometimes, for the sake of congregational retention, one may wish to select as preaching text a very brief text, perhaps the heart of a pericope. At other times, especially with scenic narrative, it may be advisable to select several consecutive pericopes. Whether short or long, preaching texts must be literary units. Frequently, rhetorical criticism (see Rhetorical Criticism) can help discover ideal preaching texts in the Gospels by identifying rhetorical structures such as repetition, inclusion and chiasm which mark the limits of literary units.
Since these pericopes now proclaim their message in the context of a particular written Gospel, it is not advisable to create one’s own preaching text by combining verses from different Gospels. Such a hybrid preaching text mixes decidedly different literary and historical contexts and makes it extremely difficult if not impossible to do justice to the intention of each Gospel writer.
The Gospels lend themselves well to series of sermons on consecutive pericopes. Scenic narratives in particular, as well as composite discourses (e.g., Matt 5–7, 10, 13, 18, 24–25), are excellent sources for consecutive treatment. By preaching a series of sermons on similar Gospel pericopes, preachers can take advantage of the similarity by sketching the background material only once and concentrating in subsequent sermons on reinforcing and expanding the main point. For the sake of retaining interest, however, a series should seldom extend beyond five or six sermons on the same material or topic.
5.2. Stating the Theme and Objective. Once the preaching text has been tentatively selected, one should formulate its theme and objective. The theme is the main thought of the text: a brief assertion (subject and predicate) of what the text is saying. The objective or goal is what the Gospel writer is trying to accomplish with this theme. The sermon theme functions as a magnet for attracting and selecting only appropriate ideas for the sermon. The objective functions as a compass for setting the direction and focus of the sermon for the desired congregational response. Although the textual theme needs to be reviewed in the context of the whole Gospel and the Bible before it can be used to construct the sermon, as a rule Gospel themes can serve directly as sermon themes.
5.3. Choosing the Sermonic Form. The preacher also needs to choose an appropriate form for the sermon. The form of a Gospel sermon can be either narrative or didactic (teaching), or a combination of these forms. Ideally, the form of a specific sermon should do justice to the form of the preaching text and its objective. In general a narrative text from the Gospels would be best served by a narrative sermon form (see Narrative Exegesis), while a didactic text from the sayings would be best served by a logical, didactic form.
In addition to choosing the appropriate sermon form, preachers need to decide whether to develop this form deductively or inductively. Deductive development states the theme at the beginning and leads (deduces) from this theme the particular points. Inductive development, by contrast, begins with the particulars and leads them (induces) into the theme. Deductive development is effective in a didactic sermon, for it enables one to state the theme at the beginning of the sermon and to explain, expand and reinforce it throughout the sermon. Inductive development, by contrast, is especially effective in a narrative sermon, for it creates suspense regarding the outcome of the sermon and may stimulate greater congregational involvement in discovering the point of the narrative.
Various combinations of deductive and inductive development are possible, such as inductive-deductive (also known as the “plain style sermon”) and deductive-inductive (see Greidanus, 141–56). Preachers should choose a sermon form which, on the one hand, shows respect for the preaching-text and, on the other hand, pays attention to congregational interest and involvement. In addition preachers need to be aware of their own strengths since different forms require different skills.
6. The Relevance for Today
Without relevance there is no sermon, for a sermon is God’s relevant word for his church today. This definition of a sermon makes relevance a crucial issue for preaching. How does one preach relevant sermons from the Gospels?
6.1. Discovering the Original Relevance. The first requirement for relevant preaching of the Gospels is the recognition that they were extremely relevant in their own historical horizons. The Gospels were God’s astonishing, comforting, imploring good news to various early Christian churches. This original relevance implies that the Gospels need not be made relevant, least of all by questionable methods such as moralizing or spiritualizing. Instead of trying to make the Gospels relevant for today, preachers need only discover that past relevance and seek to transfer it from the early church to the church today.
To discover that past relevance, contemporary preachers should ask, What was the Gospel writer’s objective with this passage? What response did he seek from his hearers with this particular message? Was he aiming at the response of faith? or repentance? or trust? or obedience? or thanksgiving? The particular response sought reveals the specific relevance of this message for an early Christian church. The remaining problem for contemporary preachers is how to transfer this past relevance from the early church to the church today.
6.2. Transferring the Original Relevance to Today. For transferring relevant preaching from the past to the present one needs to appreciate the continuity that obtains in the one kingdom-history. Although this kingdom history forges forward, resulting in discontinuities between different historical horizons, these discontinuities occur within the one kingdom history which is characterized by the overarching continuities of the constancy of God (Yahweh), his covenant faithfulness to his people, as well as the similarity of his people throughout the ages. These overarching continuities enable one to observe analogies between the early Christian church and the church today and between the situation they faced and the situation we face today. As a result, preachers can draw parallels between the early church and its historical circumstances and the contemporary church and its circumstances. These parallels form a bridge across the historical-cultural gap—a bridge for transferring God’s relevant message from the horizon of the early Christian church to the church today.
By making use of these analogies to extend the Gospel message from the past to the present, preachers will be under less pressure to make the text relevant by questionable means. Given the obvious analogies between the church then and the church today, there is no reason to seek relevance in spiritualizing the original Gospel message or in presenting certain Gospel characters as moral examples for today’s congregations (see further Greidanus, 175–81).
When the relevance of a passage for one’s congregation has been clearly discerned, the preacher is ready to start writing the sermon with that relevance in mind. This procedure ensures that relevance will not be confined to an application at the end of a lengthy exposition, but that it will permeate the sermon from its introduction to its conclusion.
Bibliography. P. J. Achtemeier, Mark (2d ed.; Philadelphia: Fortress, 1986); F. B. Craddock, The Gospels (Nashville: Abingdon, 1981); G. D. Fee, New Testament Exegesis: A Handbook for Students and Pastors (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1983); S. Greidanus, The Modern Preacher and the Ancient Text: Interpreting and Preaching Biblical Literature (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988); W. E. Hull, “Preaching on the Synoptic Gospels,” in Biblical Preaching: An Expositor’s Treasury, ed. J. W. Cox (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1983) 169–194; L. E. Keck, The Bible in the Pulpit: The Renewal of Biblical Preaching (Nashville: Abingdon, 1978); J. D. Kingsbury, “The Gospel in Four Editions,” Int 33 (1979) 363–375; idem, Matthew as Story (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1988); W. L. Liefeld, New Testament Exposition: From Text to Sermon (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1984); T. G. Long, Preaching and the Literary Forms of the Bible (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1989); I. H. Marshall, ed., New Testament Interpretation: Essays on Principles and Methods (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977); G. R. Osborne, “Preaching the Gospels: Methodology and Contextualization,” JETS 27 (1984) 27–42; D. Rhoads, “Narrative Criticism and the Gospel of Mark,” JAAR 50 (1982) 411–434; D. M. Smith, Interpreting the Gospels for Preaching (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979).
Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, Second Edition
For month of April 2024
Ongoing Free item strategy:
Try these Logos Bible Software Discount codes Furnished by Rick Livermore Webmaster220 San Juan Capistrano California – Publisher InformationThis blog post was furnished by Webmaster220 Bible Study Blog other blogs by the same person: |
Posts
.jpg?x-oss-process=image/auto-orient,1/quality,q_70/resize,m_mfit,w_350,h_350/format,webp)
No comments:
Post a Comment