Preaching--Topical or Expository?

[joelkaki]

I wasn't sure which forum this is supposed to be in, but I figured this would probably be the best one.

Should preaching be topical (preaching on a topic and simply finding verses to go along with your topic) or expository (preaching on a section of Scripture, so that the topic would essentially be controlled by the text)? I guess the first question, when mentioning expository, means more topical expository (as opposed to consecutive expository). So should it be on a topic with verses to support it, or can it be just finding a particular passage, and preaching from that passage?

So the second question should be, Should all preaching be done consecutively through a book of the Bible, or can preaching be done on different passages every week?

Now for some more questions about preaching along a different line:

1. Should preachers have main points (or at least a one sentence theme statement--homiletical idea) to provide organization to the sermon, or is it OK to just preach through a passage as it is, without coming up with any type of outline to organize the material?

2. Depending on answer to question 1, this question may or may not have any validity. Should preachers who have main points announce them to the congregation? (i.e., point 1 today is...., point two is ....)


Now to yet another differently-oriented question on preaching:

Should only men who have been ordained to the ministry be allowed to preach?

And yet another:
(those who are actually pastors may be able to better answer this question, but others feel free to give input)

Should notes be used in preaching? If so, how extensive? Bare-bones outline? (Merely main points, with a few sub maybe) Filled in outline? (Main points, sub points, subsub points, and possibly introduction, conclusion, and any specially worded illustrations) Written manuscript? (Every word written out beforehand) Memorization of every word of sermon? What is the best, most effective method?

I guess that is enough in the way of questions at the moment. Please don't hesitate to give answers, and I understand that views may vary on every point here.

Joel

[adam.naranjo]

Pure expository preaching.

In end it kills two birds with one giant stone.
The deep fries um'...mmmmm

[Blake Reas]

Today @ 04:30 AM
adam.naranjo:

Pure expository preaching.

In end it kills two birds with one giant stone.
The deep fries um'...mmmmm

I hear ya Adam! I am straighy up Expository preaching! There is nothing better than to hear the word of God in that way!
By His Grace For His Glory
Blake
:spam: ( I need spam points)

[PuritanD]

Today @ 11:08 PM
joelkaki:

Should preaching be topical (preaching on a topic and simply finding verses to go along with your topic) or expository (preaching on a section of Scripture, so that the topic would essentially be controlled by the text)? I guess the first question, when mentioning expository, means more topical expository (as opposed to consecutive expository). So should it be on a topic with verses to support it, or can it be just finding a particular passage, and preaching from that passage?

Joel, you have several great questions here. I believe that both are of necessity. I strongly favored preaching expository from a passage, and there will be times that topical will be necessary.

If you do not have or use topical, it will be more difficult to address critical and sometimes immediate needs in light of events in the community or the country (i.e. 9/11 you would not necessary want to preach from Lev, or Judges but allow the topic of 9/11 to shape the sermon) or different seasons of the church calander like Easter or Christmas. Though, exegesis should be done on each verse or passage to make sure that they do pertain to the actual topic a preacher desires to speak on and not use a verse as a spring board into one's own desires.

Should all preaching be done consecutively through a book of the Bible, or can preaching be done on different passages every week?

If topical, you would want to preach different passages. Expository teaching would be easier through a book due to its inherent continuity.

1. Should preachers have main points (or at least a one sentence theme statement--homiletical idea) to provide organization to the sermon, or is it OK to just preach through a passage as it is, without coming up with any type of outline to organize the material?

2. Depending on answer to question 1, this question may or may not have any validity. Should preachers who have main points announce them to the congregation? (i.e., point 1 today is...., point two is ....)

It depends on a person's personality and communication style. Also, the congregation needs to be taken into account. What is the easiest way for the congregation to retain the information, and what are the ways in which I feel comfortable in presenting the information? Both questions need to be answered but emphasis on the former.

Now to yet another differently-oriented question on preaching:

Should only men who have been ordained to the ministry be allowed to preach?

Depends on the audience. Being a complimentarian the only time a woman would be allowed behind a pulpit would be when the audience is women.


Should notes be used in preaching? If so, how extensive? Bare-bones outline? (Merely main points, with a few sub maybe) Filled in outline? (Main points, sub points, subsub points, and possibly introduction, conclusion, and any specially worded illustrations) Written manuscript? (Every word written out beforehand) Memorization of every word of sermon? What is the best, most effective method?

Again, it depends on personal taste and style. I admit that I am very limited in my preaching experience. I have found out that the more eye contact you have with the congregation the better it is. I also realize that if I allow the text to dictate the sermon, the easier it is to have minimal outline or memorization. However, when I have an important point or illustration, I always have them written. My goal is to go to memorization but due to increase anxiety when speaking (go figure) I tend to use an extensive outline and if have time write out a manuscript though use it for personal benefit.

PuritanD

[joelkaki]

“ Today @ 11:08 PM
joelkaki:

Should preaching be topical (preaching on a topic and simply finding verses to go along with your topic) or expository (preaching on a section of Scripture, so that the topic would essentially be controlled by the text)? I guess the first question, when mentioning expository, means more topical expository (as opposed to consecutive expository). So should it be on a topic with verses to support it, or can it be just finding a particular passage, and preaching from that passage? ”



Joel, you have several great questions here. I believe that both are of necessity. I strongly favored preaching expository from a passage, and there will be times that topical will be necessary.

When I said topical I meant more this sort of thing:

Point 1 today is .... and turn to (Reference 1)
Point 2 today is .... and turn to (Reference 2)
Point 3 today is .... and turn to (Reference 3)
etc. Or if not using points, some other way.

But it is finding particular verses to back up the points you want to make.


If you do not have or use topical, it will be more difficult to address critical and sometimes immediate needs in light of events in the community or the country (i.e. 9/11 you would not necessary want to preach from Lev, or Judges but allow the topic of 9/11 to shape the sermon) or different seasons of the church calander like Easter or Christmas. Though, exegesis should be done on each verse or passage to make sure that they do pertain to the actual topic a preacher desires to speak on and not use a verse as a spring board into one's own desires.

Yes, see, I was asking if it could be topical as I just demonstrated, or topical expository, such as what you speak of. You do not need to use topical to address 9/11 etc--you can use topical expository.


“ Should all preaching be done consecutively through a book of the Bible, or can preaching be done on different passages every week? ”



If topical, you would want to preach different passages. Expository teaching would be easier through a book due to its inherent continuity.

True yes, I believe preaching consecutively "teaches the whole counsel of God."



“ 1. Should preachers have main points (or at least a one sentence theme statement--homiletical idea) to provide organization to the sermon, or is it OK to just preach through a passage as it is, without coming up with any type of outline to organize the material?

2. Depending on answer to question 1, this question may or may not have any validity. Should preachers who have main points announce them to the congregation? (i.e., point 1 today is...., point two is ....) ”



It depends on a person's personality and communication style. Also, the congregation needs to be taken into account. What is the easiest way for the congregation to retain the information, and what are the ways in which I feel comfortable in presenting the information? Both questions need to be answered but emphasis on the former.

I understand what you are saying, and those are important, but I may differ somewhat here. I think that most people no matter what congregation will retain the information better if there is an outline that seems to organize all the material. (Not to mention it helps in taking notes) The way I see it, without some sort of outline, you may have the greatest content in the world, but it won't seem like a whole because no organization can be seen. Now let me qualify that a bit. I have heard preachers who do not use outlines, and who were very effective and powerful preachers. But I have also heard numerous preachers who had no outline, and I could never get what their point was for their sermon, and could see no organizational unity in their sermon.
I believe that if a pastor does use main points, then he should anounce them to the congregation. It helps the congregation to see the thought pattern in his sermon, and for those taking notes, helps them to see that organization there too. And if the points are easily memorable, then it makes it much easier to recall the pastor's purpose in the sermon later, and I believe, helps them to apply his sermon to their lives.


“ Now to yet another differently-oriented question on preaching:

Should only men who have been ordained to the ministry be allowed to preach? ”

Depends on the audience. Being a complimentarian the only time a woman would be allowed behind a pulpit would be when the audience is women.

Sorry, my question was misleading. I was not asking whether women should be allowed to preach. I was asking whether men must be ordained before being allowed to preach.


“ Should notes be used in preaching? If so, how extensive? Bare-bones outline? (Merely main points, with a few sub maybe) Filled in outline? (Main points, sub points, subsub points, and possibly introduction, conclusion, and any specially worded illustrations) Written manuscript? (Every word written out beforehand) Memorization of every word of sermon? What is the best, most effective method? ”

Again, it depends on personal taste and style. I admit that I am very limited in my preaching experience. I have found out that the more eye contact you have with the congregation the better it is. I also realize that if I allow the text to dictate the sermon, the easier it is to have minimal outline or memorization. However, when I have an important point or illustration, I always have them written. My goal is to go to memorization but due to increase anxiety when speaking (go figure) I tend to use an extensive outline and if have time write out a manuscript though use it for personal benefit.

PuritanD

This kind of ties up with the earlier question of should you use an outline with main points or not. If you don't use outlines, then it would be rather hard to use one in your preaching. You would almost be stuck with writing it all out. I think that if you can use a bare-bones outline, then that is great, because it allows freedom of expression and eye contact. (With the same amount of preparation beforehand of course; I am not condoning just getting some main points beforehand and then jumping up hoping the rest will come.) More extensive outlines though, I think, may be the best for most people. They too promote eye contact and freedom of expression, but help with memory failures, for you can look down and at least see that basic point you are trying to make in your outline. Manuscripts seem to limit eye contact and freedom of expression. It can also seem to make the speaking sound "written" if you know what I mean. R.C. Sproul, in a book on preaching, said that a young pastor once asked him to listen to and watch him preach, and give critique later. Sproul consented, and counted the number of times the young pastor broke eye contact with the congregation because he looked down at his manuscript. It amounted to like 140 times or something like that. But manuscripts do ensure that you get the points across that you want to get across.

Joel

[joelkaki]

Here is a quote from John MacArthur that pretty much sums up my point (no pun intended) about having main points and such:

"That is why developing the logical flow of a sermon is crucial. If your message is clearly outlined and you lead your people through the process of discovery, you will hold their attention. Your sermon must be going somewhere. You cannot merely give a number of assorted truths unrelated to each other. If your sermon lacks interest because it is disjointed, your people will lose interest."

The sermon must be going somewhere.

Joel

[Solly]

Today @ 04:08 AM
joelkaki:

Should preaching be topical (preaching on a topic and simply finding verses to go along with your topic) or expository (preaching on a section of Scripture, so that the topic would essentially be controlled by the text)?

--For myself, all my preaching is expository. I think there is a mistake made in some quarters that equates consecutive preaching with expository preaching. I seek to open up the meaning of the verse/passage, rather than just proof text my ideas.

I guess the first question, when mentioning expository, means more topical expository (as opposed to consecutive expository). So should it be on a topic with verses to support it, or can it be just finding a particular passage, and preaching from that passage?

--My main preaching is either through a book, or a given text. I do give studies on various subjects, so that is topical I suppose. Some people use topical to mean, look at the morning paper and start with that. You won't find me doing that. While contemporary events may come in to it, I preach a much more contemporary message, and allow the Spirit and the hearer to make the application.

So the second question should be, Should all preaching be done consecutively through a book of the Bible, or can preaching be done on different passages every week?

--There is no rule for it. As long as it is the scriptures that are being preached (as opposed to catechisms and confessions, pace my Reformed brethren). When doing consecutive, or textual, I always seek the Lord for my next sermon matter. I know some use the lectionary approach, and can give justifications for doing so, but the lectionary does not contain all scripture.

Now for some more questions about preaching along a different line:

1. Should preachers have main points (or at least a one sentence theme statement--homiletical idea) to provide organization to the sermon, or is it OK to just preach through a passage as it is, without coming up with any type of outline to organize the material?

--I take it as it comes. Having read some books on "How to preach/construct a sermon" I eventually threw them from me, and let God show me how to do it. It leaves me much more adaptable.
Some passages/texts give their own points. Others present the listeners with a conundrum: what is being said here; so I exposit that. There is a difference between preaching a verse or two of Paul, or a passage out of 1 Samuel, or Ezekiel

2. Depending on answer to question 1, this question may or may not have any validity. Should preachers who have main points announce them to the congregation? (i.e., point 1 today is...., point two is ....)

--I don't personally announce any points except what I think the main thrust of the passage is, and sometimes the heads under which we shall look into it. But I am not a slave to the habit either way.

Should only men who have been ordained to the ministry be allowed to preach?

--Describe ordination? Ordination is only a man made custom enabling the church to recognise the call of God on a man to preach the word. How will they do that if they haven't heard him?

And yet another:
(those who are actually pastors may be able to better answer this question, but others feel free to give input)

Should notes be used in preaching?

--I have no problem with that. There are some hard liners in my denomination who oppose it, and it shows in their preaching.

If so, how extensive? Bare-bones outline? (Merely main points, with a few sub maybe) Filled in outline? (Main points, sub points, subsub points, and possibly introduction, conclusion, and any specially worded illustrations) Written manuscript? (Every word written out beforehand) Memorization of every word of sermon? What is the best, most effective method?

--Each must find his own way I think. William Huntington preached for up to two hours without notes, and quoted scripture after scripture accurately. Jonathan Edwards wrote his out longhand, and read them word for word. My memory is pretty bad, so I use a "post it" note with my headings and important cross references, important subdivision, and quotes.

[Zakath]

Hi Joe,

Though I am not currently a theist and am no longer preaching, I'd like to take a friendly stab at your questions. But as with everything, consider the source! :brow:

Yesterday @ 11:08 PM
joelkaki:
Should preaching be topical (preaching on a topic and simply finding verses to go along with your topic) or expository (preaching on a section of Scripture, so that the topic would essentially be controlled by the text)?IMO, the preacher should choose the method that most effectively communicates what s/he has to say to the listeners. Some people respond better to one form than the other.

I guess the first question, when mentioning expository, means more topical expository (as opposed to consecutive expository). So should it be on a topic with verses to support it, or can it be just finding a particular passage, and preaching from that passage? I used to do both. The topic with verses format was good for teaching underlying principles while the other was usefull if a particularly good example was found in the text.

So the second question should be, Should all preaching be done consecutively through a book of the Bible, or can preaching be done on different passages every week? This, again, should be dependent on your listeners. What do they need to help the grow? To use a gardening metaphor: some days you water, some days you fertilize, some days you prune. The conscientious gardner need not all three every day.

1. Should preachers have main points (or at least a one sentence theme statement--homiletical idea) to provide organization to the sermon, or is it OK to just preach through a passage as it is, without coming up with any type of outline to organize the material?For a tyro I'd suggest the outline. Discipline is important to good preaching. It's too easy to wander way off topic. Once you've got experience you can use both methods.

Should only men who have been ordained to the ministry be allowed to preach?That varies from denomination to denomination...

Should notes be used in preaching? If so, how extensive? ... What is the best, most effective method?Use what works for you. Many people start out with more complete (or even verbatim) sermons and move to less detailed notes as they gain experience. I've heard very good preachers who memorized their sermons verbatim (Peter Marshall comes to mind) and those who use minimal notes. I started out writing them out verbatim but as time progressed, I tended to use more minimal notes as time went on. I might drop back to a more formal note or even verbatim if my topic was less familiar.

Notes are a means to an end, not an end in themselves.

[Jaltus]

Should preaching be topical (preaching on a topic and simply finding verses to go along with your topic) or expository (preaching on a section of Scripture, so that the topic would essentially be controlled by the text)? I guess the first question, when mentioning expository, means more topical expository (as opposed to consecutive expository). So should it be on a topic with verses to support it, or can it be just finding a particular passage, and preaching from that passage?

So the second question should be, Should all preaching be done consecutively through a book of the Bible, or can preaching be done on different passages every week? I would always tend toward expository preaching consecutively, and I will give you a few reasons why:

1) Your congregation will learn themes of an entire book if you preach through that entire book.

2) Less time will be spent on introductory material if you stay in the same book, also context will be obvious.

3) You the preacher will be unable to avoid the difficult topics if you go through a book. The same is true for picking a specific passage. topical preaching is often a way of prooftexting instead of actually teaching a passage.

4) Topical preaching often shows the preachers lack of understanding of a particular passage, for he will tend to use a text he thinks says one thing when, read in context, it means something quite different.
Now for some more questions about preaching along a different line:

1. Should preachers have main points (or at least a one sentence theme statement--homiletical idea) to provide organization to the sermon, or is it OK to just preach through a passage as it is, without coming up with any type of outline to organize the material?You should always have your own outline, but you do not need to make it overly obvious to your congregation where you are going. I preached on Psalm 1 and left my "thesis statement" (called a proposition) until the very end of my sermon, just before my conclusion. It is called preaching inductively, and you do that by building to the climax which is the main point of the sermon. At the same time, you need to let your congregation know where you are going to some extent so that they not be totally confused.

2. Depending on answer to question 1, this question may or may not have any validity. Should preachers who have main points announce them to the congregation? (i.e., point 1 today is...., point two is ....)Depends on the sermon they are preaching. For difficult concepts I think it makes sense.

Should only men who have been ordained to the ministry be allowed to preach?Well, I believe only men should preach, but ordinance (as Solly said) is just something made up by humans. Frankly, I think anyone could preach, but I would only allow the mature Christians to preach, or else a solid youth if it is youth night (my first preaching experience was the "senior address" at my church when I was in youth group).

Should notes be used in preaching? If so, how extensive? Bare-bones outline? (Merely main points, with a few sub maybe) Filled in outline? (Main points, sub points, subsub points, and possibly introduction, conclusion, and any specially worded illustrations) Written manuscript? (Every word written out beforehand) Memorization of every word of sermon? What is the best, most effective method? i think Zak gave a good answer to this. I think at first you really need to have it written out (at least I did and still do, though I am still quite inexperienced). I think it is especially important to make sure your main points are crafted well, but you should have those memorized anyway since your entire sermon relates to them.

Key theological issues I makes sure I have them well worded and in BOLD ALL CAPS to make sure I read it correctly.

Memorization is probably the most effective method, for you can work on your delivery much more. However, there are not that many people who can write and memorize a 45 minute sermon every week. I doubt I could ever memorize 45 minutes of anything in a week.

[Solly]

Today @ 04:36 PM
Jaltus:
Memorization is probably the most effective method, for you can work on your delivery much more. However, there are not that many people who can write and memorize a 45 minute sermon every week. I doubt I could ever memorize 45 minutes of anything in a week.

I find that if I am really "into" my material, that helps a lot. It is not a matter of memorising words, but where the text is going. Sometimes I take a tangent, even in the pulpit. I have worked on two sermons, one for am one for pm, and only in the evening seen the link between them, and so have gone down that road.

[joelkaki]

Thanks for all of your responses. It would seemt that we are mostly of the same mind.

Solly:
Should preaching be topical (preaching on a topic and simply finding verses to go along with your topic) or expository (preaching on a section of Scripture, so that the topic would essentially be controlled by the text)?

--For myself, all my preaching is expository. I think there is a mistake made in some quarters that equates consecutive preaching with expository preaching. I seek to open up the meaning of the verse/passage, rather than just proof text my ideas.

Yes, simply going through a text consecutively is not expositing it. Preaching the word is what is needed, not preaching men's ideas.


I guess the first question, when mentioning expository, means more topical expository (as opposed to consecutive expository). So should it be on a topic with verses to support it, or can it be just finding a particular passage, and preaching from that passage?

--My main preaching is either through a book, or a given text. I do give studies on various subjects, so that is topical I suppose. Some people use topical to mean, look at the morning paper and start with that. You won't find me doing that. While contemporary events may come in to it, I preach a much more contemporary message, and allow the Spirit and the hearer to make the application.

Now let me make some sort of a distinction here. When I am talking about preaching, I mean the pastor in the pulpit actually preaching to the people. I believe that should mainly be expository. But teaching on the other hand, such as Sunday School, or Wednesday night services (depending on how your church runs them) I believe can, and often should be topical. Such as, "Today, we are going to study the topic of the Atonement (or whatever else)" And then through the course of the Sunday School lesson, or whatever it is, then you can turn to numerous passages, simply trying to teach what is true about the atonement, etc. People need to understand different doctrines. I think going through the catechisms or confession is OK for a SS lesson as well. But preaching should be based on Scripture, in my opinion.


So the second question should be, Should all preaching be done consecutively through a book of the Bible, or can preaching be done on different passages every week?

--There is no rule for it. As long as it is the scriptures that are being preached (as opposed to catechisms and confessions, pace my Reformed brethren). When doing consecutive, or textual, I always seek the Lord for my next sermon matter. I know some use the lectionary approach, and can give justifications for doing so, but the lectionary does not contain all scripture.

That basically sums up what I think as well. However, I believe consecutive preaching should be the general rule, but that doesn't mean preaching on David and Goliath on Easter just because that happens to be the text. At that point, textual should be done.


Now for some more questions about preaching along a different line:

1. Should preachers have main points (or at least a one sentence theme statement--homiletical idea) to provide organization to the sermon, or is it OK to just preach through a passage as it is, without coming up with any type of outline to organize the material?

--I take it as it comes. Having read some books on "How to preach/construct a sermon" I eventually threw them from me, and let God show me how to do it. It leaves me much more adaptable.

True, I don't think there is one set method that works better than anything else every time, but I, as a general rule, prefer main points.


Some passages/texts give their own points. Others present the listeners with a conundrum: what is being said here; so I exposit that. There is a difference between preaching a verse or two of Paul, or a passage out of 1 Samuel, or Ezekiel

Much difference.


2. Depending on answer to question 1, this question may or may not have any validity. Should preachers who have main points announce them to the congregation? (i.e., point 1 today is...., point two is ....)

--I don't personally announce any points except what I think the main thrust of the passage is, and sometimes the heads under which we shall look into it. But I am not a slave to the habit either way.

Many prominent preachers would agree (Jay Adams condones about the exact same in Preaching with Purpose). I certainly don't think one way is "wrong" the other being "right." I like to hear points anounced, simply because it helps me keep the flow of the sermon in mind, but that is my preference. I have loved some preachers that did not do that.


Should only men who have been ordained to the ministry be allowed to preach?

--Describe ordination? Ordination is only a man made custom enabling the church to recognise the call of God on a man to preach the word. How will they do that if they haven't heard him?

Yes, I see your point. I guess my point is not so much ordination. But say your pastor is out of town, or sick, or is otherwise unable to preach, or you are currently without a pastor. And you have no one to preach that morning. What do you do? Should someone in the congregation, with no seminary training (I say seminary, but I am also including being taken under care by another pastor in place of seminary) who volunteers to preach, be allowed to? Is preaching something that any believer should be allowed to do?


And yet another:
(those who are actually pastors may be able to better answer this question, but others feel free to give input)

Should notes be used in preaching?

--I have no problem with that. There are some hard liners in my denomination who oppose it, and it shows in their preaching.

I have heard some guys who are extremely good who use no notes.


If so, how extensive? Bare-bones outline? (Merely main points, with a few sub maybe) Filled in outline? (Main points, sub points, subsub points, and possibly introduction, conclusion, and any specially worded illustrations) Written manuscript? (Every word written out beforehand) Memorization of every word of sermon? What is the best, most effective method?

--Each must find his own way I think. William Huntington preached for up to two hours without notes, and quoted scripture after scripture accurately. Jonathan Edwards wrote his out longhand, and read them word for word. My memory is pretty bad, so I use a "post it" note with my headings and important cross references, important subdivision, and quotes.

Yes, but Jonathan Edwards also read his in a monotone, which I do not believe is the most effective way to preach today, though certainly his sermon was effective then. I think pretty much, that as long as there has been adequate preparation, using less notes is probably better. Just a post it note? that doesn't seem like a bad memory to me.

Joel

[joelkaki]

Hi Joe,

Though I am not currently a theist and am no longer preaching, I'd like to take a friendly stab at your questions. But as with everything, consider the source!

Thank you for your comments anyway. So you were a preacher, but then became an atheist?


“ Yesterday @ 11:08 PM
joelkaki:
Should preaching be topical (preaching on a topic and simply finding verses to go along with your topic) or expository (preaching on a section of Scripture, so that the topic would essentially be controlled by the text)? ”

IMO, the preacher should choose the method that most effectively communicates what s/he has to say to the listeners. Some people respond better to one form than the other.

Very good point.


“ I guess the first question, when mentioning expository, means more topical expository (as opposed to consecutive expository). So should it be on a topic with verses to support it, or can it be just finding a particular passage, and preaching from that passage? ”

I used to do both. The topic with verses format was good for teaching underlying principles while the other was usefull if a particularly good example was found in the text.

True, but I feel that expository is really what should be done, for then you are preaching the word rather than your own ideas backed by the word. Jaltus summarized the pros and cons very well.


“So the second question should be, Should all preaching be done consecutively through a book of the Bible, or can preaching be done on different passages every week? ”

This, again, should be dependent on your listeners. What do they need to help the grow? To use a gardening metaphor: some days you water, some days you fertilize, some days you prune. The conscientious gardner need not all three every day.

Hmm, haven't quite thought of it like that before, but a good point.


“ 1. Should preachers have main points (or at least a one sentence theme statement--homiletical idea) to provide organization to the sermon, or is it OK to just preach through a passage as it is, without coming up with any type of outline to organize the material? ”

For a tyro I'd suggest the outline. Discipline is important to good preaching. It's too easy to wander way off topic. Once you've got experience you can use both methods.

I have heard some guys who could preach the "same" sermon bunches of times, and it would turn out different every time, because there is no organization.


“ Should only men who have been ordained to the ministry be allowed to preach? ”

That varies from denomination to denomination...

“ Should notes be used in preaching? If so, how extensive? ... What is the best, most effective method? ”

Use what works for you. Many people start out with more complete (or even verbatim) sermons and move to less detailed notes as they gain experience. I've heard very good preachers who memorized their sermons verbatim (Peter Marshall comes to mind) and those who use minimal notes. I started out writing them out verbatim but as time progressed, I tended to use more minimal notes as time went on. I might drop back to a more formal note or even verbatim if my topic was less familiar.

Notes are a means to an end, not an end in themselves.

I agree, but again, I feel that reading verbatim and memorizing verbatim tends to limit freedom of expression and eye contact.

Joel

[Solly]

Today @ 05:05 PM
joelkaki:
Yes, I see your point. I guess my point is not so much ordination. But say your pastor is out of town, or sick, or is otherwise unable to preach, or you are currently without a pastor. And you have no one to preach that morning. What do you do? Should someone in the congregation, with no seminary training (I say seminary, but I am also including being taken under care by another pastor in place of seminary) who volunteers to preach, be allowed to? Is preaching something that any believer should be allowed to do?


We are not in a position to call upon someone just like that, although it did happen to me. If we did have someone in the congregtion who was known to have a gift, then he would speak from the desk, not the pulpit. if there was no one, we would have a read sermon, perhaps of spurgeon or someone like that.

[joelkaki]

“ Should preaching be topical (preaching on a topic and simply finding verses to go along with your topic) or expository (preaching on a section of Scripture, so that the topic would essentially be controlled by the text)? I guess the first question, when mentioning expository, means more topical expository (as opposed to consecutive expository). So should it be on a topic with verses to support it, or can it be just finding a particular passage, and preaching from that passage?

So the second question should be, Should all preaching be done consecutively through a book of the Bible, or can preaching be done on different passages every week? ”

I would always tend toward expository preaching consecutively, and I will give you a few reasons why:

1) Your congregation will learn themes of an entire book if you preach through that entire book.

2) Less time will be spent on introductory material if you stay in the same book, also context will be obvious.

3) You the preacher will be unable to avoid the difficult topics if you go through a book. The same is true for picking a specific passage. topical preaching is often a way of prooftexting instead of actually teaching a passage.

4) Topical preaching often shows the preachers lack of understanding of a particular passage, for he will tend to use a text he thinks says one thing when, read in context, it means something quite different.

All extremely good points that I would agree with. Sadly, though, so many people don't do that at all.


“ Now for some more questions about preaching along a different line:

1. Should preachers have main points (or at least a one sentence theme statement--homiletical idea) to provide organization to the sermon, or is it OK to just preach through a passage as it is, without coming up with any type of outline to organize the material? ”

You should always have your own outline, but you do not need to make it overly obvious to your congregation where you are going. I preached on Psalm 1 and left my "thesis statement" (called a proposition) until the very end of my sermon, just before my conclusion. It is called preaching inductively, and you do that by building to the climax which is the main point of the sermon. At the same time, you need to let your congregation know where you are going to some extent so that they not be totally confused.

Yes, I am aware of the inductive approach/deductive approach. I too think there should be an outline, and I prefer it to be announced, but that is a preference. There can be great content, but if no organization is seen, it is harder to get anything out of it.


“ 2. Depending on answer to question 1, this question may or may not have any validity. Should preachers who have main points announce them to the congregation? (i.e., point 1 today is...., point two is ....) ”

Depends on the sermon they are preaching. For difficult concepts I think it makes sense.

True, though I prefer it all the time.


“ Should only men who have been ordained to the ministry be allowed to preach? ”

Well, I believe only men should preach, but ordinance (as Solly said) is just something made up by humans. Frankly, I think anyone could preach, but I would only allow the mature Christians to preach, or else a solid youth if it is youth night (my first preaching experience was the "senior address" at my church when I was in youth group).

See, I don't think in an actual worship service, just anyone should be allowed to preach.
I hope this part doesn't upset anyone, or make anyone not wish to discuss with me anymore, but I am only in high school now. And I certainly hope that I have not been disrespectful at any point. I had the opportunity to "preach", but it was not in an actual worship service, and thus I thought it OK to do so. Had it been an actual worship service, I would not have done so.


“ Should notes be used in preaching? If so, how extensive? Bare-bones outline? (Merely main points, with a few sub maybe) Filled in outline? (Main points, sub points, subsub points, and possibly introduction, conclusion, and any specially worded illustrations) Written manuscript? (Every word written out beforehand) Memorization of every word of sermon? What is the best, most effective method? ”

i think Zak gave a good answer to this. I think at first you really need to have it written out (at least I did and still do, though I am still quite inexperienced). I think it is especially important to make sure your main points are crafted well, but you should have those memorized anyway since your entire sermon relates to them.

Key theological issues I makes sure I have them well worded and in BOLD ALL CAPS to make sure I read it correctly.

Memorization is probably the most effective method, for you can work on your delivery much more. However, there are not that many people who can write and memorize a 45 minute sermon every week. I doubt I could ever memorize 45 minutes of anything in a week.

The way I kind of think of it is to memorize ideas. Rather than memorizing verbatim (which a lot of people can't do, not to mention a lot of prep time), I think memorizing your basic points and ideas is the way to go. For then the actual words are not tied down, and results in freedom of expression.

Joel

[joelkaki]

We are not in a position to call upon someone just like that, although it did happen to me. If we did have someone in the congregtion who was known to have a gift, then he would speak from the desk, not the pulpit. if there was no one, we would have a read sermon, perhaps of spurgeon or someone like that.

That's about how I think of it too.

Joel

[Zakath]

Today @ 12:12 PM
joelkaki:
So you were a preacher, but then became an atheist?

Yes.

[Jaltus]

I think all elders should be able to preach as well. After all, elders and pastors are no different in the NT.

My question about youth is this: why would it be wrong for someone young to preach if he was in all other ways qualified? I and II Timthoy seem to speak out that youth should not be a hinderance.

I Timothy 4:
12 Don't let anyone look down on you because you are young, but set an example for the believers in speech, in life, in love, in faith and in purity.
13 Until I come, devote yourself to the public reading of Scripture, to preaching and to teaching.
14 Do not neglect your gift, which was given you through a prophetic message when the body of elders laid their hands on you.
15 Be diligent in these matters; give yourself wholly to them, so that everyone may see your progress.
16 Watch your life and doctrine closely. Persevere in them, because if you do, you will save both yourself and your hearers.

[Pilgrim]

Well said Jaltus.

And I might add as an answer to the original question...Either one as long as the sermon is first and foremost exegetical in nature.

[joelkaki]

Jaltus, I have heard that Timothy was 30 years old at the time of that being written. Of course, I am not going to debate that point, but I believe people should have training before getting up and preaching the Word of God. Not to mention I don't believe it is a very good thing for a teenager to get up and "teach" those who are much older than him. I don't feel that is my place at my age, nor any other teen's.


Joel

[Pilgrim]

That goes back to the point about exegesis for debate. If you don't have the training, don't try to use it.

[Ishmael]

Preaching should be doctrinal and theological; and yet, expository.

[Solly]

I started another thread on preaching here (http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2129) a day or two before this one.

[PuritanD]

I agree that all elders should have the ability or at least apt to teach. Truly, some training needs to be done but we must not quench the power of the H.S. from the process.

It would not be far fetched that He could mightly use someone who does not have "proper" training but has been gifted to preach.

PuritanD

[Solly]

PuritanD, I have to say that that is my case.

I have had no further education, having left school at 16. I discovered and read philosophy soon after that and spent 10 years reading it, until I was converted in 1990. When I joined the Church I am now at, they asked me to help in the sunday School to start with. Then we moved on to an Adult Bible Class. After that, they asked me to fill in during Pastor's summer holiday. Then they gave me some extra dates after some of our usual visitors couldn't come any more. Then in 2000 it became obvious that the Lord had opened my mouth to speak in his name and they gave me my own dates. Our Pastor announced his intention to leave in the following year, and it seemed to all that I had "come to the kingdom at such a time", and they asked me to consider filling his place. Through God's grace I have now preached through nearly a year and a half, and it is probable they will call me to the pastorate next year.
This all happened in spite of opposition from some quarters. Those who supported me knew nothing would happen unless that opposition was dealt with, and eventually the people in question upped and left for other reasons.
It seems to us all that God has been fitting the tool to the job, in this case. No other church has asked me to preach for them at this time, and my ministry follows on from the level we enjoyed under our pastor, which was also expository.
At no time was it suggested that I seek formal education; at all times it was believed that the Holy Spirit would equip me for the task. I do sometimes wish I had a previous formal education - one that taught me how to learn - but there you go.

[PuritanD]

Solly,

You have a great story. I would though recommend that you do seek out some form of formal education in your area, if there are any.

Yes, the HS empowers especially when there are none of the necessities to train. He also though provides us with access to training and if we have such access we need to take advantage of that.

So, I would encourage you to seek it out whether by mail or actual attendance at a seminary or college. You may be surprised by how much credit you could receive just based on your experience alone. It would help you and benefit the flock as well.

[joelkaki]

That is very encouraging, Solly. Coming from my denomination, it isn't exactly a common thing, but I don't think anyone can prove it wrong from Scripture. And it seems to me that whether you had formal training or not, you've got immense knowledge of Scripture.

Joel

[Solly]

Solly,

You have a great story. I would though recommend that you do seek out some form of formal education in your area, if there are any.

Yes, the HS empowers especially when there are none of the necessities to train. He also though provides us with access to training and if we have such access we need to take advantage of that.

So, I would encourage you to seek it out whether by mail or actual attendance at a seminary or college. You may be surprised by how much credit you could receive just based on your experience alone. It would help you and benefit the flock as well.

Thanks PuritanD, but time and money is against me on that one. Having three 45 min sermons to produce each week, and a young family does not provide much spare time.

That is very encouraging, Solly. Coming from my denomination, it isn't exactly a common thing, but I don't think anyone can prove it wrong from Scripture. And it seems to me that whether you had formal training or not, you've got immense knowledge of Scripture.

Joel

Thanks Joel. One of our denominational "heroes" is William Huntington, nicknamed the "Immortal Coalheaver". Unlettered at first, he ended up with an immense knowledge of scripture. Just like another "hero" John Bunyan, the Immortal Tinker.
I wish I did have an immense knowledge myself, but at least I have a decent library, past and present, to help.

[Jaltus]

Solly,

Does your church provide a sabbatical for you? I would highly recommend taking a summer off and taking some classes or some such.

Your schedule seems to point toward burn-out.

[Solly]

Jaltus. Thanks for the concern. I get eight sundays off during the year.

"Ministerial burn out" is a phrase that has arisen out of modern evangelicalism, and which has not raised it's head in our circles. I have just been to an anniversary service for a man who has now been pastor to the church he is at for 40 years. 50+ years ministries are not unusual, and sabbaticals are practically unknown. Most of our men die in harness, in old age. Our former pastor not only preached to us three times a week, but preached elsewhere twice a week too. he had his two week summer vacation, and that was all he needed.
Remeber the Puritans and their ministerial load? My desire is to give up secular work someday and devote the extra time to the ministry.