Improve Your Preaching

Dr. Steve Lawson – source: https://blog.tms.edu/20-tips-on-improving-your-preaching

How do I become a better preacher? There is more to it than eye contact, hand motions, and freedom from manuscript. There is more to it than staring at yourself in the mirror as you rehearse. The following are the twenty things I would tell the man who wants to improve his preaching:

1. Sit under great preaching

I firmly believe that preaching is more caught than taught. Over the years, I have learned so much about how to preach simply by sitting under great preaching. I often have young men ask me how to become a great preacher. I always encourage them with this: before even going to seminary, find someone who knows how to preach, and sit on the front row and glean as much as you can. You can’t just listen to him on a podcast or watch him on YouTube. You need to be in the building. You need to see it and feel it. Feel the pregnant pauses, the emotion of the congregation, the weight of the worship. We learn how to preach by sitting on the front row under powerful preaching.

2. Take Notes from Great Preaching

I used to listen to preaching on cassette tapes. I would hit the play button, listen to ten seconds, and then stop it. I would then write down everything the preacher just said. Then I would hit the play button for another ten seconds. Stop it. Then I would write that down. This would take hours. But through this tedious process, I began to grasp structure, transitional statements, subpoints, illustrations, applications, conclusions—all simply by transcribing great sermons. I saw what an introduction looked like on paper. I saw how carefully transitions are worded. I saw the precisely crafted draws and demands of application.

As soon as I heard great preaching, I knew what it was that I wanted to do. I just didn’t know how to do it. I needed for great preaching somehow to become practical. By taking notes, I learned what great preaching looked like on paper. I learned the movement, flow, and cadence of a sermon. I knew what great preaching looked and felt like before ever stepping foot in a preaching class, simply by taking notes.

3. Listen to Great Preaching

By this, I do mean just listening to preaching. When you listen to preaching over and over, it gets into your bones. Tune your ear to the sound of great preaching.

4. Read Great Preaching

There is much to be learned even from reading great preaching. Like taking notes, this is another way to see preaching. Read Spurgeon. Soak your mind in him. You can feel his passion. You can see the evangelistic pull and appeal of his words. You can almost hear the tone of his voice. Read Whitefield. Let him set you on fire as he did me.  

5. Learn from Many Great Preachers

My encouragement to you is not to listen to just one preacher. Do not become mesmerized with one personality. It will set a low ceiling over your preaching. You will settle into imbalances and imitation. Have multiple voices coming into your preaching. Everybody has weaknesses, blind spots. Surround yourself with a multitude of voices as you learn to find your own. They will complement and round off your edges.

6. Preach Yourself

You can’t learn to ride a bike in a classroom. You have to go outside and do it. The same is true of preaching. You have to go out and preach. Seek out preaching opportunities, even if it is just to a small group. Learn to preach by preaching.

7. Preach Often

Many men never surpass mediocrity in their preaching for the simple reason that they just don’t preach enough. George Whitefield said, “The more I preach, the better I preach.” Just as the more you play golf, the better you play golf; and the more you play piano, the better you play piano—it’s just a reality: the more you preach, the better you preach. That’s just the way it is. So preach often.

8. Preach in Different Settings

There is a certain predictability about preaching in a certain place. You need to continue to expand your horizons and enlarge your gift. Preach in as many different settings as you can, with different site-lines, podiums, faces, and responses—each one pulling something unique out of you. This doesn’t mean you have to go around the country to preach, just find different venues in your own city. Each one will draw something unique from you.

9. Preach Narrative

Our tendency as preachers is to tunnel deep into the epistles. And they are wonderful. But you must expand to other genres of Scripture. Learn to preach narratives. By preaching narratives, a didactive preacher becomes a dynamic preacher. There is a certain energy in a story—a passion that naturally flows from an inspired plot with rising action and conflict and character development. Learn to handle these portions of Scripture. Let them make you into a more dynamic preacher.  

10. Preach the Psalms

I did not fully develop as a preacher until I preached through the entirety of the psalter. That immersion into the songs of Israel ushered me into a different dimension of preaching. If you preach the psalms, they will change you. Your vocabulary will deepen. You will discover a new passion in your preaching. Metaphors and analogies will begin to pour forth from you. You will discover figures of speech in your arsenal. Your preaching will no longer have the tone of a correspondent, but a poet. You will gain a natural command of the language. You will preach to broken hearts—to people on the mountaintops and in the valleys of life. You will better understand emotions. But most of all, your preaching will be immensely God-centered.

11. Improve Your Vocabulary

Preaching is simply putting words into the air. If you have better words from which to draw, you will automatically have more going for you. In the first day of my doctoral program under Dr. Sproul, he made everyone in the class learn three hundred English vocabulary words. We were quizzed the next day. If you are a preacher, your life work is words. Read books to expand your vocabulary. Do whatever it takes to add more words to your arsenal—buy books, flashcards, and thesauruses. Use them. Never repeat yourself in preaching. Find the best word, the right word. Learn to opt for a carefully selected word over a story. If you are a preacher, words are your trade. Master them.  

12. Improve Your Grammar

When I graduated from seminary, my grammar was awful. English teachers in our church would pull me aside after sermons and correct my grammar. Initially, it bothered me. But I am so thankful those English teachers loved me enough to challenge my grammar. It opened doors. It cleared roadblocks. Those English teachers were God’s way of refining me to gain a hearing with people that I otherwise would not have. Yes, grammar really does matter. We have flies in the ointment when we have bad grammar. Tell your wife, I want you to correct me every time you hear me use incorrect grammar. Stop me. Have her make a list of grammatical mistakes in your preaching. There is no other way to extract bad grammar from you than for someone to love you enough to tell you. Thank her when she corrects you. It is God’s way of refining you.

13. Read Great Literature

If you are going to have a command of the sentence—its cadence, length, lead-in, phraseology, emphasis, word choice—there is no better method than to read great literature. I would urge you to do that. Spend time enjoying how masters of the English language communicate. It will begin to seep into you.

14. Learn to Write and Edit

To learn to preach, you must learn to write a sermon. And to write a sermon, you must learn to write. It may be nothing more than an article in the worship bulletin. Just write. It doesn’t matter who (or if anyone) is reading it. Learn to get your thoughts onto paper. Go through the excruciating practice of editing your own writing. Force yourself to dig into your own sentences, by doing this you will begin to learn to speak. Writing breeds accuracy, and accuracy is the heartbeat of expository preaching.

15. Invite Feedback when Preaching

Every preacher is subject to discouragement when our preaching is criticized by others. But find one or two people who love you and are committed to you, and ask them to give you honest feedback on your preaching. Ask them to show you your blind spots.  

16. Read Books on Preaching

Read Martin Lloyd-Jones’s book Preaching and Preachers. This book is a must read. Read MacArthur’s Preaching: How to Preach Biblically. Read J.W. Alexander’s Thoughts on Preaching. Read R.L. Dabney, Evangelical Eloquence. Read Between Two Worlds by John Stott. Read Spurgeon’s Lectures to my Students.

17. Read Biographies of Great Preachers

I am still trying to recover from reading the two-volume biography of George Whitefield by Arnold Dallimore. This is the only book I have ever read three times. It just makes me want to preach. You need to read books that make you want to preach. Read the autobiography of Charles Spurgeon. That book will do something to your soul. It makes me cry. It makes me want to get up early. It makes me want to study—to pray; to preach; to live a godly life. Read the biography of Martin Lloyd Jones by Iain Murray. This book will be a tipping point in your life. Read books that make you want to do something. Specifically, read books that make you want to preach.

18. Read Church History

Before seminary, I didn’t even know what church history was. I learned of the Reformation and the Great Awakening and the Modern Missions Movement and the Great Victorian Preachers, and these men became etched into me. There was a fellowship that I had with them. I was in their company. I was one of them. Church history taught me that conflict and controversy mark every movement forward. Studying church history forces you to grow up as a man. It matures you.

19. Read of the Martyrs

In one of his resolutions, Jonathan Edwards resolves to remember the martyrs. We must do the same. Read about Tyndale. Read about Cranmer. Read about these men and women being strapped to the stake.

In the front of my Bible, I carry a picture of John Rogers. He was burned at the stake in 1555. He was the first martyr burned by bloody Mary. His crime—helping finish Tyndale’s work of translating the Bible into the English language, repudiating the mass, and preaching the purity of grace. When you read church history, you begin to identify with the martyrs. I’ve never had a bad day, not compared to the martyrs. Any criticism I’ve ever had, any firing I’ve endured, any rejection I’ve suffered—is nothing. When you spend hours considering the lives of the martyrs, it has an effect on you when you step into the pulpit. It is hard to be a goofball in the pulpit when you’ve been drinking from this well.

20. Be More Zealous for God

Don’t let whatever stage of life you are in quench your fire. Let the words of Jesus sink in: “I have this against you, that you have left your first love. Therefore remember from where you have fallen, and repent and do the deeds you did at first” (Rev. 2:4–5). Remember when you were on fire for God. Remember when you were zealous and passionate. Remember when you were actively witnessing. When you used to cry. When you used to rejoice when you sang. And return to those days. Be more zealous for God. Ask God, by His Spirit, to ignite you—to set you on fire: “Were not our hearts burning within us while He was speaking to us on the road, while He was explaining the Scriptures to us?” (Luke 24:32, italics mine). Ask God to do that in your heart. That is a prayer God will answer.

A Rising Tide

If you were able to incorporate even some of these into your life, the tide would come in, and your preaching would be raised. If you could incorporate a good number of these into your life, your preaching would be lifted even higher. Be on fire for God. And if you are, no one will have to talk to you about gestures, eye contact, or techniques. In some ways, techniques are for men who don’t know how to preach. Get on fire for God, and you will find a way to get it across. I fell in love with my wife, and no one had to teach me about hand motions or eye contact when I told her I loved her. Fall in love with Christ, and you will learn to communicate.

Improving Your Sermon Delivery

Dr. Steve Lawson (original source: http://www.onepassionministries.org/blog/2020/2/26/improving-sermon-delivery )

Whenever the word is preached, the manner with which the sermon is delivered is always important. To be sure, the substance of what we have to say is the greatest priority. Truth is king, and it must reign supremely in our preaching. But how we deliver this truth is also important. Just as no one likes to eat cold scrambled eggs, neither does anyone like to be fed a steady diet of cold preaching. The manner in which the truth is served plays a large factor in how it is received.

That being said, I want to survey ten keys to improve the delivery of your preaching. Each of these should help you to reflect upon your preaching and to incorporate these into your delivery, as they are needed. 

Clarity and Passion

First, clarity. Clarity is never overrated. When you stand to preach, people should be able to easily understand what you are saying. They need to be able to follow you without laboring to grasp your point. You need to be a linear thinker, not a circular thinker. Structure, development of thought, and correct pronunciation of your words are all important parts of a lucid delivery.

Second, passion. When you are excited about something, it causes others to be enthusiastic about it. On the other hand, when you are bored with a matter, other people will tend to be bored. Passion is contagious. A fire in the pulpit will soon spread to the pew.

For your preaching, there needs to be a fire in your bones. There needs to be a holy enthusiasm for what you proclaim. There must be an excitement in your soul for what you say. Passion conveys to the listener the importance of what you are expositing.

Eye Contact and Tone

Third, eye contact. One of the greatest hindrances in sermon delivery is when the preacher is staring at his notes. If you are not looking up at the people to whom you are speaking, they will probably not listen to you. 

We call that kind of preacher a “bubble preacher,” because it is as if he is standing in a glass bubble, separate from the congregation. It is like he is in a remote sound booth, and the people are in another room. Without eye contact, this preacher is disconnected from the people to whom he is speaking.

Think about your own preaching. Eye contact is critically important to you being heard, because it helps you establish rapport with the people to whom you speak.

Fourth, tone. The warmth and volume with which you speak is critically important to the effectiveness of your sermons. Depending on the size of the room and the number of people you are addressing, it needs to be appropriate for the setting. 

There are many different settings in which we preach. There is Sunday morning in the worship center to the largest group. There is Sunday night to a smaller congregation. There is Wednesday night to a yet smaller group. There is Sunday School in a classroom. There is a men’s discipleship group in a more intimate setting. There is an elders’ or a deacons’ meeting in a boardroom setting.

Each of those venues influence the tone with which we speak. I have a louder, more demonstrative tone when I am speaking to 5,000 people at a national conference. I have a more pastoral tone when I am speaking to a smaller group of fifty people. A part of effective delivery is to be conscious of your setting and use the proper volume of your voice.

Volume and Gestures

Fifth, variance. You should learn to raise and lower the volume of your voice. You should not be blaring and loud for the entire forty-five minutes of the sermon. I will admit that I can be loud for too sustained of a period of time, but that is a personal weakness, not a strength. To use an airplane metaphor, you cannot step into the pulpit, soar immediately to 36,000 feet, stay at that altitude for almost an hour, and then abruptly end the message. That kind of prolonged intensity does not make for effective communication. 

For example, when I highlight my sermon notes with a yellow marker, if every word in my sermon notes is highlighted in yellow, nothing stands out. In like manner, if you are loud the entire sermon, nothing that you say stands out. You need to have peaks and valleys in your delivery, with an alternating loud and soft volume, as is appropriate.

In fact, some of the most impactful things you will say may be when you lower your voice. Varied volume is an important part of effective delivery. 

Sixth, gestures. You are speaking not only with your voice, but with your hands. How you use your hands in the pulpit to gesture is another critical factor in preaching.

You should not stand in the pulpit with your hands in your pocket for the entire sermon. You should not stand there with two hands tightly gripping the pulpit. There needs to be a natural freedom with the use of your hands as you preach.

At the same time, there should be a diversity with the kind of gestures that you use. You should not stand in the pulpit, and every gesture is a repetition of the same one. You should not repeat the “first down” gesture. Nor should every gesture be the triumphant “touchdown” gesture. You should use your hands in a variety of ways as you speak.

Natural Disposition and Vocabulary

Seventh, be natural. When you preach, you must be yourself. You should not be an imitation of another preacher, in which you try to mirror their delivery. It would be unnatural for you to preach like someone else. You should sound like the same person in the pulpit as when you step out of it.

You must be you. You are an original creation of God, that He has made uniquely. Use your own God-given temperament, personality, and vocabulary as you speak. 

Eighth, synonyms. You should learn to vary your vocabulary. Do not repeat yourself, using the same word over and over. There is a point of diminishing return when you use the same word again and again. After you have used a word four or five times, it begins to lose its effect. It could even lose its luster after two or three uses, especially if it is within the same sentence or the same paragraph.

I try to vary my word choice and use multiple synonyms. I also try to layer out my synonyms so that some words are accessible to teenagers and still others are for businessmen. All the while, though, I am communicating the same idea, but with different synonyms that connect with different people.

Vary Verbs and Maintain Energy

Ninth, verb moods.

Verbs are used with various moods. There is the indicative mood, which is a statement of fact. Most of the sermon will be given in the indicative mood. Then there is the interrogative mood, which is the sentence that ends with a question mark. It is where you are asking a question, which causes the listener to think and search for the answer.

Moreover, the imperative mood issues a command. It charges the listener to follow a particular course of action. In addition, there is the exclamatory mood, which is the sentence that ends with an exclamation point. It is intended to excite the hearts of those to whom you are speaking.

As I write my sermon manuscript, I am consciously aware of shifting the moods in my notes from the indicative, to the interrogative, to the imperative, to the exclamatory. Read your Bible and you will notice the same verb moods.

When I am in the pulpit, I may not be looking down at my notes, but I am still mindful to not be stuck in one mood with my verbs.

So many preachers stay in the rut of the indicative mood and never use the other moods of verbs. Their sermon sounds like this: statement of fact, statement of fact, statement of fact, statement of fact, statement of fact. This is why their preaching becomes very monotone and becomes little more than a data dump.

Tenth, energy. In the pulpit, there needs to be an energy level that comes through with your voice, eyes, gestures, and countenance. It conveys you are alive and awake, not tired or listless. When you are full of the Holy Spirit, there is a dynamic force in your preaching that will penetrate the soul of the listener.

Distinguished Delivery

For your part, make sure you have enough sleep the night before you preach. Make sure that you have had a proper breakfast. Make sure if you are a coffee drinker, that you have had enough caffeine. Whatever helps you to be energetic in the pulpit, you need to follow that path.

All this to say, your sermon delivery is very important to your message being heard and received. It is what distinguishes you from another preacher who teaches the same truth. The difference is not in the doctrine, but in the delivery. The substance of your sermon is important, but so also is the style with which it is delivered. Think about how you are coming across and how you can improve, for the glory of God alone.

On Alliteration

Personally, I am not a huge fan of alliteration. It is not something I attempt to do in my sermons. This is not to everyone’s taste, and I understand that. Some love alliteration; some feel they need it and others go further by saying that a lack of alliteration amounts to a lack of preparation on the preacher’s part. I don’t buy that. May I say, I find alliteration:

Forced

Frustrating

Feeble

Fatiguing

While I am all for anything that helps a congregation remember the main parts of a sermon, I am not convinced that alliteration is always a helpful and useful tool. I don’t believe a sermon without alliteration is a failure. My observation is that alliterated sermons often feel very forced, and, dare I say it, make me feel the preacher is trying to impress me by his rhetoric (the very opposite of the Apostle Paul’s motivation described in 1 Cor 2:1-5) rather than help me. In balance, sometimes alliteration can be useful, but I am yet to be persuaded that it is an essential component of preaching.

I believe that the following article “The Rules For Alliteration” by Tim Challies is a good resource for those who do use alliteration (original source – https://www.challies.com/articles/the-rules-for-alliteration/).

Tim Challies writes:

Strictly speaking, to alliterate is to provide a list of words that begin with the same letter or sound, as in “Peter Piper picked a peck of pickled peppers.” In a broader sense, to alliterate is to form an outline using similarly-sounding words or phrases. It is a device that, in theory, helps readers to follow along with a book or that helps listeners to follow along with a sermon.

So, for example, Steven Lawson’s little work on Jonathan Edwards has chapters titled “The Prerequisite of Faith,” “The Priority of God’s Glory,” “The Putting Away of Sin,” “The Precipice of Eternity,” and so on. Sometimes a whole sermon series will be alliterated, as in Colin Smith’s “Faith that Lasts” which was made up of three sermons titled “Firm Foundations,” “False Assumptions,” and “Full Assurance.” But we see it most commonly in individual sermons where, as often as not, it is used to form a three-point outline. Lawson once again provides an example with his sermon on Ephesians 1:21-26 which follows this outline: Paul’s Dedication, Paul’s Dilemma, and Paul’s Decision.

(Here, for your reading pleasure, is an alliterated defense of alliteration in preaching. Or you can read Jared Wilson’s alliterated “5 C’s of Preaching.”)

Over the years I’ve seen and heard some truly wonderful examples of alliteration. I’ve also seen and heard some truly awful ones. Most recently, a book I attempted to read had maddening alliteration for its chapter headings—the kind that stretched the meaning of words far beyond the breaking point, all for the sake of maintaining a common first letter. Based on that book and a handful of recent sermons, I thought I’d share some pointers for doing alliteration well (or, at least, not doing it poorly). And, as I do so, I admit that on various occasions I’ve doubtlessly violated each of these rules.

Rule #1: Know what it’s for. Alliteration is meant to add clarity to a sermon or book by providing a simple, memorable outline. It is not meant to show off the communicator’s expansive vocabulary or clever rhyming ability. It is, at best, a minor component of a sermon and one of the least important steps in preparation. This kind of outline is only helpful if it adds clarity; it can be harmful or wasteful if it reduces clarity. Unless each alliterated heading is clear enough that it could stand on its own even if it wasn’t alliterated with the others, it is likely to hinder communication more than help it.

Rule #2: Don’t despair. Don’t despair if you aren’t good at alliterating or even particularly good at creating an outline. There are some wonderful preachers who rarely create a highly-developed, three-point outline and some who rarely alliterate (John Piper comes to mind). Many of these are still clear, powerful preachers, even though they don’t follow what some may hold up as rules for sermon preparation. They have done lots of study, they have organized the sermon in their own minds, and they are more than able to make it all make sense to their listeners.

Rule #3: Don’t give it too much time. A great outline can be a great help to a listener. You’ve heard the rule of effective communication, I’m sure: Tell them what you’re going to say, say it, then tell them what you’ve said. An outline can help listeners understand where you are going, then remind them where you’ve been. However, the great power in preaching is not in the outline, but in the faithfulness to Scripture. Don’t put a ton of time into alliterating an outline if it is going to detract from the time you’d take to search the Scriptures and prepare to faithfully exposit them.

Rule #4: Don’t use a thesaurus. If you’ve prepared a three-point sermon with two words beginning with T, there can be a great desire to find a third T-word to complete the alliterated outline. But almost invariably, turning to a thesaurus will lead you to words that are too obscure to be helpful. In general, if you can’t come up with the word on your own, it’s not a word you ought to use to frame a whole section of a sermon. A thesaurus may occasionally remind you of a word you simply forgot, but more often it will lead you to words that are too uncommon to fit the purpose. It’s better to break the alliteration than to use a word no one has spoken in 400 years.

Rule #5: It’s better not to stretch. As in rule #4, a nearly-complete outline can drive you to a kind of desperation to get that final word or two in place. If that doesn’t drive you to use a thesaurus and dig up an obscure word, it may drive you to words you know, but that aren’t quite right. You may use a word that kind of means what you want it to mean, but you would never actually use if it didn’t begin with that particular letter or have that number of syllables. It is far better to be clear than cute. If the purpose of alliteration is to help with comprehension, you’ll be working against that goal by stretching words beyond their natural meaning or usage.

The big point is that alliteration is meant to serve a purpose, and the purpose is to add clarity to the mind of a reader or listener. But done poorly, it can actually detract from clarity and hinder the understanding of a reader or listener. So my counsel is to use alliteration only when it can serve that bigger purpose (which is to say, only when it obeys at least a few of those five rules).

Defining Preaching

Kevin DeYoung writes (source: https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevin-deyoung/what-is-preaching-and-who-does-it/):

One of the best books I read last year was Preaching in the New Testament (IVP, 2017) by Jonathan Griffiths. As part of D. A. Carson’s series New Studies in Biblical Theology, I expected the book to be exegetically rich and the cover to be slate gray. I was not disappointed on either account. Griffiths, a pastor in Ottawa, Canada, makes a compelling case that there is such a thing as preaching and that not every Christian is called to do it.

At the heart of Griffiths’s examination is this well-defended conclusion:

Preaching in the New Testament is a public declaration of God’s word by a commissioned agent that stands in a line of continuity with Old Testament prophetic ministry. (128-129)

Building on the work of Claire Smith, Griffiths argues that in the New Testament euangelizomaikatangello, and kerysso are semi-technical terms referring to the proclamation of the gospel. Griffiths charts all 54 uses of euangelizomai (“announce good news”), all 18 uses of katangello (“proclaim” or “announce”), and all 59 uses of kerysso (“make proclamation as a herald”). While the three terms are not employed in a uniform sense, they are “semi-technical” in that they normally refer to preaching by some recognized authority. Of the three verbs, kerysso is the most specialized term with the narrowest range of meaning. But even with the other terms, Griffiths notes, there are no examples in the New Testament where believers in general are commissioned or commanded to “preach” (36).

Preaching is a certain kind of speech carried out by certain kinds of people. Of course, there are other kinds of word ministries given to all believers (Eph. 6:13-17Col. 3:161 Thess. 1:81 Pet. 3:15) but preaching (especially the speech signified by kerysso) is a ministry set apart. Paul’s charge to Timothy (2 Tim. 4:1-2) indicates not only that preaching is a task for one with commissioned authority, but also that the preacher is a man of God (2 Tim. 3:17) like the prophets of old (61-66). Likewise, Romans 10 assumes that New Testament preaching stands in continuity with the Old Testament prophetic ministry of Isaiah. We also see that being commissioned (i.e., sent out) is an essential prerequisite for preaching ministry.

As Griffiths moves through 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians 2-61 Thessalonians 1-2, and Hebrews, he reinforces the main themes of the book: that New Testament preaching is powerful, that God speaks through gospel preaching, that God expects people to respond to preaching with faith and obedience, that preaching requires a commissioned speaker, that preaching stands in continuity with Old Testament prophetic ministry, and that preaching is, therefore, a unique word ministry.

Concluding Thoughts

So what does this mean for the church today? Griffiths offers several points of application, let me mention three of my own (which overlap with some of his).

1. Preaching is not what every Christian does. The work of heralding is related to other word ministries but is not identical with them. There are no instructions for non-leaders to preach or proclaim the gospel. Obviously, the Bible was written in Greek not in English. The apostles never used the word “preach,” but the words they did use under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit mean something distinct from bearing witness, one-to-one discipleship, or leading an inductive Bible study. There is such a thing as preaching, and not every Christian is called to do it.

2. The act of preaching is inherently authoritative. For some reason, I had not seen before how clear this is in Romans 10. Preachers preach the gospel. Yes, that’s clear. But what is also clear is that preachers don’t just decide themselves that they want to preach. They must be sent. Preaching implies a commissioned agent authorized to preach. Rightly understood, there is no preaching that does not come from an authority in the church and no preaching that does not carry with it God’s own authority. A corollary to this point, then, is that complementarians should not speak of “women preachers,” nor should we describe the word ministry of women as “preaching.” The use of such terminology is unwise and unbiblical.

3. Preaching is meant to lead to an encounter with God. The word of Christ preached is not only a word about Christ; it is a word from Christ (Rom. 10:17). Though coming from human lips, the preached word is nothing less than the divine word of God (1 Thess. 2:13). Think of the book of Hebrews, a word of exhortation (13:22) that most scholars now think is the earliest extant full-length Christian sermon. We see that preaching comes from a congregational leader (13:7-24). We see that preaching is an exposition of Scripture. And we see that in preaching we come face-to-face (or ear-to-ear, we might say) with the living God (3:7, 15; 4:7). God’s voice is heard in the Sunday sermon, which is why we are right to give preaching the central place in our worship services and why we should pray regularly for the powerful preaching of God’s Word.

If I could only have one verse…

Genesis 15:17 When the sun had gone down and it was dark, behold, a smoking fire pot and a flaming torch passed between these pieces. 18 On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram…

The following is a transcript from a teaching entitled “Narrative Preaching” by Dr. R.C. Sproul at the 2004 Ligonier Pastors’ Conference:

I’ve always said, if I was in jail, solitary confinement, and could only have one book, the book I would want would be the Bible. If I could have only one book of the Bible with me in prison, the book I would choose is Hebrews. People are usually surprised to hear me say that. They assume I am going to say ‘Romans,’ but I say ‘I already got that. I don’t need to have a copy of it.’ But there’s so much in Hebrews that develops both the Old and the New Testament and brings it together that that’s what I would like to have in my cell.

But if I could only have one verse, I would have the verse – the smoking torch and burning furnace moving through the pieces. Why? Because in this drama, the ultimate theophany of God as He manifests Himself is fire, the pillar of smoke, the burning bush, the consuming flame, this is God moving through the pieces… this is God entering into a covenant with His creature, and as the author of Hebrews said, ‘Because God could swear by nothing higher, He swore by Himself’ because graphically, dramatically, symbolically, what God is doing for Abraham when Abraham says ‘how can I know for sure You’re going to do it?’ God runs the gauntlet. God goes between these pieces and He’s saying to Abraham, ‘Abraham, if I ever break My word to you, may I be torn asunder, just as you have torn asunder the parts of these animals. May the immortal become mortal, the immutable have a mutation, may the eternal stop living! Abraham, I can’t swear on my mother’s grave, I can’t swear by the stars or the moons.. these are all part of the created order. The highest promise I can give to you is ‘I swear by Myself, by My own deity, by My very Being… that before I would lie to you, I would give up My own Divine essence.’

You wonder why I would have that (verse)… is that relevant today? Does that have 21st century application? It does to me. Because every time I worry and I am doubting and struggling because people break promises, I break promises, and I live in a world filled with covenant breakers… that I am brought back to the God who swore by Himself, who has never broken His word.

Should Women Preach in Our Churches?

Article by Kevin DeYoung (original source here – https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/kevin-deyoung/women-preach-churches/ )

This is not an article about the case for complementarianism instead of egalitarianism. That matters, of course, but this piece is for self-identified complementarians wondering if their theology can allow, or should allow, for women preaching.

Here is the question I want to address:

Is there biblical justification, given basic complementarian convictions, for the practice of women preaching sermons in a Sunday worship service?

Most people reading this blog understand the immediate relevancy of the question posed above. I’m not going to rehearse the cases where this question has been raised or sift through recent responses online. Instead, I’m going to interact with what I think is the best case, from a complementarian perspective, for allowing women to preach. First, I’ll explain the argument for women preaching as fairly as I can. Then I’ll make a case why the argument—no matter how plausible it may sound at first—fails to convince.

Hearing Her Voice

The best argument I’ve seen for women preaching is by the Australian minister and apologist John Dickson in his book Hearing Her Voice: A Biblical Invitation for Women to Preach (Zondervan, 2014). With affirming blurbs from J.I. Packer, Craig Blomberg, Graham Cole, and Chris Wright, one can see why this has been an influential book. Even if you aren’t familiar with the book, I’m quite certain it’s influenced people you do know. Besides the commendation from well-respected evangelical scholars, Dickson’s book is a model of clarity and accessibility. In just over 100 pages, Dickson makes a thoughtful, straightforward case—as one who admits “to being a broad complementarian” (88)—for the legitimacy of women preaching sermons in Sunday services.

Not surprisingly, Dickson focuses on 1 Timothy 2:12. While the application seems obvious to many of us—women aren’t permitted to teach or to exercise authority, so they shouldn’t preach sermons—Dickson argues that we’ve misunderstood what Paul meant by teaching. “Put simply,” Dickson writes, “there are numerous public-speaking ministries mentioned in the New Testament—teaching, exhorting, evangelising, prophesying, reading, and so on—and Paul restricts just one of them to qualified males: ‘teaching’” (11-12).

At the heart of Dickson’s argument is a simple syllogism, we can summarize like this:

  1. The only thing women can’t do in worship is teach.
  2. For Paul, teaching was a technical and narrowly conceived enterprise that is not the same as our modern sermon.
  3. Therefore, women can speak in almost every way in a church service, including preaching the sermon.

So, if preaching a sermon does not count as teaching, what did Paul mean by teaching? Dickson explains:

1 Timothy 2:12 does not refer to a general type of speaking based on Scripture. Rather, it refers to a specific activity found throughout the pages of the New Testament, namely preserving and laying down the tradition handed on by the apostles. This activity is different from the explanation and application of a Bible passage found in today’s typical expository sermon. (12)

Dickson builds the case for this preliminary conclusion in four parts.

Part One. There are several different kinds of speaking mentioned in the Bible: prophesying, evangelising, reading, exhorting, teaching, and so on. We know from texts like 1 Corinthians 12:281 Corinthians 14Romans 12:4-8, and 1 Timothy 4:13 that Paul did not treat these speaking ministries as identical. Only one of these types of speaking is restricted to men, the activity of teaching (27).

Part Two. In the ancient world, and specifically for Paul, to teach (didasko) was a technical term for passing on a fixed oral tradition (34, 45). Teaching does not refer to expounding or explaining but to transmitting words intact (33). With the close of the biblical canon, there is not the same need for teaching in this technical sense.

Part Three. In the New Testament, teaching never means explaining or applying a biblical passage (50, 54). A teacher was someone who carefully passed down the fixed traditions or the body of apostolic words from their original source to a new community of faith (57, 59, 61). Some contemporary sermons may contain elements of this transmission, but this is not the typical function of weekly exposition (64). What we think of as the sermon is more aptly called exhortation (65).

Part Four. The apostolic deposit is now found in the pages of the New Testament. No individual is charged with preserving and transmitting the fixed oral traditions about Jesus (72, 74). Our preachers may be analogous to ancient teachers, but we do not preserve and transmit the apostolic deposit to the same degree, in the same manner, or with the same authority (73, 75). The typical sermon where a preacher comments on the teaching of the apostles, exhorts us to follow that teaching, and then applies that teaching is not itself teaching. The modern sermon is, depending on your definition, more like prophesying or exhorting, both of which are open to women (75).

From Yes to No

Dickson includes academic footnotes in making his case, as well as caveats and qualifications along the way. But the gist of his argument is arrestingly simple: Teaching is not what we do when we preach a sermon. Only teaching is forbidden to women. Women, therefore, can preach sermons in our churches.

I find Dickson’s thesis unconvincing for two basic reasons. I believe his view of ancient teaching is overly narrow and his view of contemporary preaching is exceedingly thin. Let me unpack this conclusion by looking at teaching from a variety of angles.

Teaching in the Early Church

The strength of Dickson’s approach is that he rightly points to the different speaking words in the New Testament. True, teaching and exhorting and prophesying and reading are not identical. And yet, his overly technical definition of “teaching” does not fit the evidence, or in some instances even square with basic common sense. If “I do not permit a woman to teach” can mean “I permit a woman to preach because preaching doesn’t involve teaching” we must be employing very restrictive definitions of preaching and teaching.

More to the point, we have to wonder why this highly nuanced reading has been lost on almost every commentator for two millennia. In a revealing endnote on the last page of the book, Dickson acknowledges “I have no doubt that within time the word ‘teaching’ in the early church came to mean explaining and applying the written words of the New Testament (and entire Bible). That would be an interesting line of research, but I am not sure it would overturn the evidence that in 1 Tim. 2:12 Paul had a different meaning of this important term” (104). That is a telling admission. But it invites the question: “If ‘teaching’ in the ancient world clearly had a narrow meaning of repeating oral traditions, why does no one seem to pick up on this exclusively technical definition?” To be sure, the Bible is our final authority, but when an argument relies so heavily on first century context, you would expect the earliest centuries of the church to reinforce the argument, not undermine it.

Take the Didache, for example. This late first century document has a lot to say about teachers. They are supposed  to “teach all these things that have just been mentioned” [in the first ten chapters of the book] (11:1). They are to teach what accords with the church order laid out in the Didache (11:2). Importantly, the Didache assumes the existence of traveling teachers, apostles, and prophets, all of whom are said to teach (didaskon) (11:10-11). It is telling that “teaching” is a broad enough term to include what prophets and other speakers do, not to mention the Didache itself.

While “teach” can certainly include the passing on of oral traditions about Jesus, it cannot be restricted to only this. As Hughes Oliphant Old explains, “the Didache assumes a rather large body of prophets, teachers, bishops, and deacons who devote full time to their preaching and teaching” (The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures, 1:256). With full time teachers and “a daily assembly of the saints, at which the Word was preached” it is hard to imagine these various ministers engaged in “teaching” that steadfastly avoided the explanation of all biblical texts.

Of course, the true teachers were passing on the apostolic deposit, but this does not mean they were simply repeating the sayings of Jesus. In the Didache, parents are told to teach (didaxeis) the fear of the Lord to their children (4:9). The author(s) apparently does not think teaching is restricted to a highly technical definition. Nor does he think preaching is little more than a running commentary plus application. “My child, remember night and day the one who preaches God’s word to you, and honor him as though he were the Lord. For wherever the Lord’s nature is preached, there the Lord is” (4:1). According to the Didache, teaching is broader than transmitting oral traditions and preaching involves more than a few words of exhortation.

Teaching in the Synagogue

One of the key points in Dickson’s argument is that the Pauline conception of teaching is rooted in the practice of the Pharisees who passed on the oral traditions of their fathers (Mark 7:7). Just as the Pharisees might repeat the sayings of Hillel, so might the New Testament teacher repeat the sayings of Jesus. According to Dickson, the closest parallel to New Testament “teaching” is the passing down of the rabbinical traditions that we find repeated and piled up in the Mishnah (39).

This is an important line of reasoning for Dickson, one he repeats several times (39, 73, 100-102). The problem with the argument is twofold.

First, while the Mishnah collects the sayings of first- and second-century rabbis, these rabbis saw themselves explaining and applying the Torah. In other words, even if the Mishnah is our example of “teaching,” there is no bright line between “oral tradition” and “explaining texts.”

Second, the Jewish synagogue service provides a much better parallel to early Christian worship services than the Mishnah. After all, Paul is talking about corporate worship in 1 Timothy 2. For centuries leading up to the Christian era, the Jews had cultivated the art of preaching and gave it a privileged place in synagogue worship. According to Old, “there was a large core of dedicated men who had given their lives to the study of the Scriptures, and who prepared themselves to preach when the leadership of the synagogue invited them to do so” (The Reading and Preaching of the Scriptures, 1:102). It makes more sense to think Paul had in mind the well-developed tradition of men doing exposition in the Jewish worship service, when he prohibits women from teaching in 1 Timothy 2:12, as opposed to the mere repetition of oral traditions.

Teaching in the Old Testament

What’s more, this synagogue teaching ministry had its roots in the Old Testament. Moses taught (didasko, LXX) the people the statutes and rules of God—repeating them yes, but also explaining and applying them (Deut. 4:1-14). The priests, at least some of them, were to be teaching priests (2 Chr. 15:3), going through the cities of Judah teaching (edidaskon, LXX) people the Book of the Law (2 Chr. 17:9). Ezra set his heart to study the Law of the Lord and to teach (didaskein, LXX) his statutes and rules in Israel (Ezra 7:10). Likewise, Ezra and the Levites read from the Law of God and taught (edidasken, LXX) the people so they could understand the reading (Neh. 8:8).

The practices described in Ezra and Nehemiah give every indication of already being well established. There are texts, there are teachers, there is a congregation. We have in miniature the most essential elements of Jewish synagogue services and the Christian services that would use synagogue worship as their starting point. It’s hard to imagine Paul meant to communicate, let alone that his audience would understand, that when he spoke of “teaching” he had in mind nothing of the Old Testament or Jewish tradition and was only thinking of Pharisees passing along oral sayings. In each of the Old Testament instances above, the teacher explains a written text. That doesn’t mean didasko must involve exposition, but the burden of proof rests with those who assert that it most certainly does not mean that.

Teaching in the New Testament

I agree with Dickson that the prohibition against women teaching in 1 Timothy 2:12 should not be taken in the broadest sense possible. Paul does not mean to forbid women from ever transmitting knowledge to someone else. He is addressing propriety in worship, not the sort of teaching we find from women to women in Titus 2 or from Priscilla and Aquila to Apollos in Acts 18. But just because we reject the broadest definition of teaching does not mean the only other option is the narrowest definition. Dickson would have us equate “teaching” with passing on oral tradition. That was certainly part of teaching in the apostolic age, but many of the places in the New Testament that speak of the apostolic tradition never mention didasko (1 Cor. 2:2; 3:10; 11:2; 11:23-26; 15:1-11Gal. 1:6-91 Thess. 4:1-2). The language instead is of receiving, delivering, or passing on.

Crucially, the Sermon on the Mount is labelled as “teaching” (Matt. 7:28-29). According to Dickson, the Sermon on the Mount is “teaching” because Jesus is correcting the tradition of the scribes and handing down his own authoritative traditions. What Jesus is not doing is expositing a text (54). Of course, Dickson is right in what Jesus is doing. He is wrong, however, in asserting what Jesus is not doing. The Sermon on the Mount is filled with Old Testament allusions, parallels, and explanations. One doesn’t have to claim that Jesus is giving a modern sermon as we might. The point is not that “teaching” everywhere in the New Testament means “exposition,” but that the two ideas cannot be neatly separated.

Jesus was recognized by many as “rabbi,” an informal title meaning “teacher.” As a teacher, Jesus frequently quoted from or explained Old Testament Scripture. In fact, Old argues that Jesus’ teaching in the Temple courts at the end of his ministry was meant to show Jesus as the fulfillment of the rabbinical office. In Matthew 21-23 we see the different schools of the time—Herodians, Pharisees, Sadducees—come to Jesus with their questions about the Law and Jesus answers them all (1:106). In solving their riddles and stepping out of their traps, Jesus showed himself to be the master teacher, the rabbi of all rabbis. And in this display, he constantly explained and interpreted Scripture. The first-century Jewish understanding of teaching must not be separated from the judicious interpretation of inspired texts, nor can it be restricted to “passing along oral traditions.”

Teaching in the Pastoral Epistles

But what if—despite the Old Testament background and the synagogue background and the use of “teaching” in the Sermon on the Mount and the broader understanding of teacher in the early Church—Paul choose to use a very narrow definition of teaching in the pastoral epistles? After surveying all the uses of “teaching” in the Pastoral Epistles, Dickson concludes that “teaching,” as a verb and a noun, refer not to Bible exposition but to apostolic words laid down for the churches (59). Simply put, “teach” does not mean exegete and apply; it means repeat and lay down (64-65). Pauline “teaching” was never(Dickson’s word, my emphasis) exposition in the contemporary sense (74). Whatever else teaching may entail in other places, according to Dickson, for Paul it only meant laying down oral tradition.

Dickson is certainly right that “teaching” in the Pastoral Epistles is about passing on the good deposit of apostolic truth about Jesus. Conservative complementarian scholar Bill Mounce, for example, has no problem affirming that 1 Timothy 2:12 has to do with “the authoritative and public transmission of tradition about Christ and the Scriptures” or that it involves “the preservation and transmission of the Christian tradition” (Pastoral Epistles, 126). But notice that Mounce does not reduce the Christian tradition to oral sayings only, to the exclusion of Scriptural explication. Likewise, the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament argues that didaskein “is closely bound to Scripture even in the NT” (146). Later the TDNT affirms that even in the pastoral epistles “the historical connexion between Scripture and didaskein is still intact” (147).

Surely this is right. Are we really to think that when Paul insisted that the elders be apt to teach that this had no reference to handling the Scriptures or rightly dividing the word of truth (2 Tim. 2:15)? Teaching must be broader than passing on oral traditions, for how else could Paul tell the older women “to teach what is good” (kalodidaskalo) to the younger women? Or consider 1 Timothy 4:13 where Paul tells Timothy to devote himself to the public reading of Scripture, to exhortation, and to teaching. Sure, these are not identical tasks, but on Dickon’s interpretation Timothy was to read the Scriptures, exhort from the Scriptures, and then lay down the apostolic deposit without every expounding any of the Scriptures just read.

Similarly, Dickson argues that when Paul says all Scripture is profitable for teaching, he means Timothy would privately read Scripture so that he could be better equipped to publicly pass on the good deposit, but again, without expounding a Bible passage (52-53). If this is correct, then Paul never meant for teachers to explain Bible verses in reproving, correcting, or training either. The Bible may inform these tasks, but it never involves exposition of any kind (57). This strains credulity to the breaking point. Look at the preaching in Acts. There was hardly any handing down of the good deposit that did not also explain the Scriptures. And in 1 Corinthians 15 where Paul is explicitly passing along what he also received the message is not the mere repetition of verbal formulas, but the apostolic tradition that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures and that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures. One does not have to equate didasko with a three-point sermon to see that transmitting the apostolic deposit can scarcely be done apart from biblical references and exposition.

Teaching in Today’s Sermon

If Dickson’s definition of ancient teaching is too narrow, his understanding of contemporary preaching is too impoverished. In Dickson’s telling, the sermon is essentially a running commentary plus application. I confess I have a very different view of what preaching entails, not because preaching is less than exposition and application, but because it is much more. The preacher is a kerux, a herald (2 Tim. 1:11). Of course, we don’t preach with the authority of an apostle, but for those qualified men called to preach they do pass along the apostolic deposit and they ought to preach with authority. Why else would Paul command Timothy—with such dramatic language and with such dire exhortations–to preach the word; to reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching? (2 Tim. 4:1-2)

In the end, I believe Dickson’s approach is not only historically and exegetically unconvincing, it is practically unworkable—at least for complementarians. Egalitarians will affirm women preaching for all sorts of reasons. But complementarians who try to thread the needle and argue that “this message on Sunday morning is a sharing not a sermon” or “this woman preaching is under the authority of the session” will find that their arguments for not letting women preach all the time and in any way look exceedingly arbitrary.

At various points, Dickson admits that some preaching today may involve teaching and that the different kinds of speaking in the New Testament probably overlapped.

  • “I am not suggesting that these three forms of speech (teaching, prophesying, and exhorting) are strictly separate or that there is no significant overlap of content and function” (24).
  • Some contemporary sermons involve something close to authoritatively preserving and laying down the apostolic deposit, but I do not believe this is the typical function of the weekly exposition” (64).
  • “I have no doubt that Timothy added to these apostolic teachings his own appeals, explanations, and applications, but these are not the constitutive or defining elements of teaching. At that point, Timothy would be moving into what is more appropriately called ‘exhortation.’” (65)
  • “I am not creating a hard distinction between teaching and exhorting, but I am observing that, whereas teaching is principally about laying something down in fixed form, exhorting is principally about urging people to obey and apply God’s truth.” (65)
  • “No doubt there was a degree of teaching going on in exhorting and prophesying, just as there was some exhorting (and maybe prophesying) going on in teaching…” (66-67)
  • “I also think that some transmission of the apostolic deposit still goes on in every decent sermon, in some more than others.” (79)

With all these elements of preaching jumbled together, how could Paul have expected Timothy to untangle the ball of yarn and know what he was supposed to not permit women to do? Just as importantly, how are we to discern when a sermon is just exhortation without authority and when it moves into an authoritative transmission of the apostolic deposit? Perhaps it would be better to see “teaching” as more or less what the preacher does on Sunday as opposed to a highly technical term that doesn’t make sense out of the early church, the Jewish synagogue, Jesus’ example, or Paul’s instructions. The heraldic event—no matter the platform provided by the pastor or the covering given by the elders—cannot be separated from exercising authority and teaching, the two things women are not permitted do in the worship service.

Tethered to the Text

Article: The Expositor’s Distinction: Tethered to the Text by Steve Lawson – original source – https://www.tms.edu/blog/the-expositors-distinction-tethered-to-the-text/

Walter Kaiser, a leading evangelical scholar, issued a simple but striking statement in his commencement address at Dallas Theological Seminary in April 2000 – a stirring challenge that should grip the hearts of all who are called to the ministry of biblical preaching and teaching. Those who enter the pulpit to preach, Kaiser admonished, should always be pointing to a text of Scripture.

When a man preaches, he should never remove his finger from the Scriptures, Kaiser charged. If he is gesturing with his right hand, he should keep his left hand’s finger on the text. If he reverses hands for gesturing, then he should also reverse hands for holding his spot in the text.

He should always be pointing to the Scriptures.

This is sound advice. Both literally and figuratively, the preacher should always be pointing to a biblical text. This Word-centered focus in the pulpit is the defining mark of all true expositors. Those who preach and teach the Word are to be so deeply rooted and grounded in the Scriptures that they never depart from them, ever directing themselves as well as their listeners to its truths.

Biblical preaching should be just that – biblical – and all who stand in the pulpit must show an unwavering, even relentless, commitment to the Scripture itself. As a practicing physician knows and prescribes medicine, so every preacher should be ever studying, learning, and dispensing heavy doses of the healing balm of God’s Word to all patients. Whatever the ailment, there is but one cure for the soul – the Word of God applied by the Spirit of God to the human heart.

THE MISSING PRESCRIPTION

But this biblical prescription is an unknown remedy for many preachers today.

In their zeal to lead popular and successful ministries, many are becoming less concerned with pointing to the biblical text. Their use of the Bible is much like the singing of the national anthem before a ball game – something merely heard at the beginning, but never referenced again, a necessary preliminary that becomes an awkward intrusion into the real event. In their attempt to be contemporary and relevant, many pastors talk about the Scriptures, but, sadly, they rarely speak from them. Instead, they rush headlong to the next personal illustration, humorous anecdote, sociological quote, or cultural reference, rarely to return to the biblical text. How can pastors expect dying souls to become spiritually healthy if they never give them the prescribed remedy? How can pastors expect sinners to be converted and Christians to be sanctified if they fail to expound God’s Word (1 Pet. 1:23-25John 17:17)?

Writing almost a half century ago, Merrill Unger saw this dangerous departure from biblical preaching already at hand and threatening the vitality of the church.

Sounding a warning, he wrote,

To an alarming extent the glory is departing from the pulpit of the twentieth century. The basic reason for this gloomy condition is obvious. That which imparts the glory has been taken away from the center of so much of our modern preaching and placed on the periphery. The Word of God has been denied the throne and given a subordinate place.

What Unger saw looming on the horizon – the dearth of expository preaching – is now fully upon the church. ‘Where such exposition and authoritative declaration of the Word of God are abandoned,’ Unger wrote, ‘Ichabod, the glory is departed, must be written over the preacher and over the pulpit from which he preaches.’

At the dawn of the twenty-first century, the renowned expository preacher James Boice reinforced Unger’s words. Writing shortly before his death, Boice warned, ‘These are not good days for the evangelical church, and anyone who takes a moment to evaluate the life and outlook of evangelical churches will understand that.’

Now, more than ever, pastors must come back to the centrality of the Word of God and preach it in the power of the Holy Spirit if the church is to be put back on the right course.