Expository sermons consist of ideas drawn from the Scriptures, but the ideas of Scripture must be related to life. To preach effectively, therefore, expositors must be involved in three different worlds:
The world of the Bible
The modern world
The particular world in which we are called to preach.
Up to now, in our study we have entered the world of the Bible. We must first try to understand what the revelation of God meant for the men and women to whom it was originally given.
A second world we must consider is the modern world. We must be aware of the currents swirling across our own times. Each generation develops out of its own history and culture and speaks its own language. We may stand before a congregation and deliver exegetically accurate sermons that are scholarly and organized, but they are dead and powerless because they ignore the life-wrenching problems and questions of our hearers. Men or women who speak effectively for God must first struggle with the questions of their age and then speak to those questions from the eternal truth of God.
A third world in which we must participate is our own particular world. The profound issues of the Bible and the ethical, philosophical questions of our times assume different shapes in rural villages, in middle-class communities, or in the ghettos of crowded cities. Ultimately we do not address everyone; we speak to a particular people and call them by name. The Bible speaks of the gift of pastor-teacher (Eph. 4:11). This implies the two functions should be joined, or else an irrelevant exposition may emerge that reflects negatively on God.
To expound the Scriptures so the contemporary God confronts us where we live requires that we study our audience as well as our Bible. It also means that some very nuts-and-bolts questions must be asked and answered to discover how the exegetical idea and its development can expand into a sermon.
Stage 4: Submit your exegetical idea to three developmental questions.#
When we make any declarative statement, we can do only four things with it: we can restate it, explain it, prove it, or apply it. Nothing else. To recognize this simple fact opens the way to understanding the dynamic of thought.
By the use of restatement, an author or speaker merely states an idea “in other words” to clarify it or to impress it on the reader or hearer. Restatement is used in every kind of discourse, but it occupies a major place in the parallelism of Hebrew poetry. The apostle Paul, infuriated by false teachers who substitute legalism for evangelism, uses restatement to emphasize their condemnation.
Restatement takes up a great deal of space in written and especially oral communication, but restatement does not develop thought. It simply says the same thing in other words. To develop a thought, however, we must do one or more of three things. We must explain it, prove it, or apply it. To do this, we can use three developmental questions.
WE EXPLAIN IT: “WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?”#
The question, “What does this mean?” can be pointed at different targets.
First, it can be directed toward the Bible#
When the Apostle Paul wrote to his young associate Titus, he wanted him to appoint elders in Crete. In Titus 1:5-9 Paul explained to Titus what he was to look for in appointing overseers in the churches.
Paul’s subject is: “What are the qualifications for a leader in the church?”
His complement is: “The candidate must be ‘blameless.’”
Paul states that twice. The apostle explains what “blameless” means in three concrete frameworks: the candidate’s family life, his personal life, and his ministry. A sermon based on this passage will do a great deal of explaining of the particulars that Paul lays down.
Second, the developmental question may also probe the audience#
It takes several forms. If I simply stated my exegetical idea, would my audience respond, “What does he mean by that?”
When Paul advised the Corinthians in 1 Corinthians 8 about meat offered to idols, idolatry and sacrifices were as familiar to his readers as shopping centers are to modern audiences. On the other hand, people today are as bewildered about the practices of idolatry as a Corinthian would be in a supermarket. Therefore, when we talk about “food sacrificed to idols,” we must do some explaining. The passage may be misunderstood or, more damaging, misapplied unless our listeners understand the background out of which the problem developed. They must enter into the psychological, emotional, and spiritual tensions posed by eating meat previously offered in sacrifice to heathen gods.
As a case in point, when Paul speaks of a “weak brother,” he does not necessarily mean someone who is easily tempted to sin. Instead, he has in mind an over-scrupulous Christian who has not applied theology to experience. The weak Christian does not fully appreciate that “no idol is anything in the world,” but is only a creation of superstition. In modern churches, therefore, many over-scrupulous people who consider themselves “strong” would, in Paul’s mind, be “weak.” In a treatment of this passage, therefore, what Paul took for granted with his readers requires extensive explanation today.
Theological jargon, abstract thinking, or scholars’ questions become part of the intellectual baggage that hinders preachers from speaking clearly to ordinary men and women. No one is an outsider to religion. Everyone must understand what God says. In fact, it is a life-and-death matter. Therefore we must anticipate what our hearers may not know and, by our explanations, help them understand.
The developmental question “What does that mean?” then, deals with both the passage and the people.
WE PROVE IT: “IS IT TRUE?”#
Our second developmental question centers on validity. After we understand (or think we understand) what a statement means, we often ask, “Is that true? Can I really believe it?” We demand proof.
We assume that an idea should be accepted as true because it comes from the Bible. That is not necessarily a valid assumption. We may need to gain psychological acceptance in our hearers through reasoning, proofs, or illustrations. Even the inspired writers of the New Testament (all of whom believed that the Old Testament was a God-breathed witness) sometimes established the validity of their statements, not only by quoting the Old Testament but by referring to common life as well.
When Paul wanted to prove to the Corinthian congregation that he had a right to receive financial support for his ministry, for example, he argued not only from the Mosaic Law, but from the experience of farmers, shepherds, and soldiers. In a series of rhetorical questions, he laid out his case (1 Corinthians 9:6-12)
Paul appealed for proof first to the logic of experience. After all, if soldiers, grape growers, shepherds, and farmers receive wages for their work, why not an apostle or teacher? Then Paul reasoned from an all-embracing principle found in the law against muzzling oxen when they tread out corn. A worker—be it animal or human—should be rewarded for working. In using this developmental question, therefore, we should note how the biblical writers validated what they had to say.
While competence requires that we understand how the biblical writers established validity, it also demands that we wrestle with listeners’ questions such as, “Is that true?“ and ”Can I really believe that?”
We do well to adopt the attitude that a statement is not true because it is in the Bible; it is in the Bible because it is true. The fact that an assertion is in the pages of a leather-covered book does not necessarily make it valid. Instead, the Bible states reality as it exists in the universe, as God has made it and as He governs it. We would expect, therefore, the affirmations of Scripture to be demonstrated in the world around us. That is not to say that we establish biblical truth by studying sociology, astronomy, or archaeology, but the valid data from these sciences second the truth taught in Scripture.
Work your way through the ideas in the exegetical outline and deal honestly with the question, “Would my audience accept that statement as true? If not, why not?” Write down the specific questions that come and, if possible, the direction of some of the answers. Before long you will discover much that you and your hearers have to think about as the sermon develops.
WE APPLY IT: “WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE?”#
The third developmental question relates to application. While it is essential that you explain the truth of a passage, your task is not finished until you relate that passage to the experience of your hearers. Ultimately the man or woman in the pew hopes that you will answer the questions, “So what? What difference does it make?” All Christians have a responsibility to ask these questions because they are called to live under God in the light of biblical revelation.
Basic to perceptive application is accurate exegesis. We cannot decide what a passage means to us unless first we have determined what the passage meant when the Bible was written. To do this we must sit down before the biblical writer and try to understand what he wanted to convey to his original readers. Only after we comprehend what he meant in his own terms and to his own times can we clarify what difference that should make in life today.
In order to apply a passage accurately, we must define the situation into which the revelation was originally given and then decide what a modern man or woman shares, or does not share, with the original readers. The closer the relationship between people now and people then, the more direct the application.
An expositor must give special attention not only to what modern men and women have in common with those who received the original revelation but also to the differences between them. For instance, Paul’s many exhortations to slaves had direct application to Christian slaves in the first century and those throughout history. Many of the principles touched on in the master-slave relationship can also govern employer-employee relationships today, but to ignore the fact that modern employees are not slaves to their employers would lead to gross misapplication of these passages.
The problems multiply when we apply texts from the Old Testament to contemporary audiences. Indeed, misapplication of the Old Testament has had an embarrassing history. One unsatisfying approach lies in using these passages like a sanctified Rorschach test. Interpreters allegorized Old Testament stories to find in them hidden meanings that were not buried in the text, but in their own minds.
Another inadequate method of handling the Old Testament uses it only as an example or illustration of New Testament doctrine. Here the authority for what is preached comes neither from the theology of the Old Testament nor from the intent of the Old Testament writer, but entirely from the reader’s theology read back into the passage. Should those who do this be challenged about their interpretation or application, they appeal not to the passage before them, but to some passage in the New Testament or to a theology that they assume they share with their audience.
How then can we proceed as we answer the third developmental question, “So what? What difference does it make?” Application must come from the theological purpose of the biblical writer. We cannot understand or apply an individual passage, whether in the Old Testament or in the New, until we have studied its context. Only after mastering the larger passage do we find the clues for understanding what the smaller texts mean and why they were written.
Here are some questions that help us discover the author’s theological purpose:
Are there in the text any indications of purpose, editorial comments, or interpretive statements made about events?
Are there any theological judgments made in the text?
Is this story given as an example or warning? If so, in exactly what way? Is this incident a norm or an exception? What limitations should be placed on it?
What message was intended for those to whom the revelation was originally given and also for subsequent generations the writer knew would read it?
Why would the Holy Spirit have included this account in Scripture?
There are other questions we must ask in order to apply God’s Word to a contemporary audience living in a situation different from that of the people to whom the revelation was originally given.
What was the setting in which God’s Word first came? What traits do modern men and women share in common with that original audience?
How can we identify with biblical men and women as they heard God’s Word and responded—or failed to respond in their situation?
What further insights have we acquired about God’s dealings with His people through additional revelation?
When I understand an eternal truth or guiding principle, what specific, practical applications does this have for me and my congregation? What ideas, feelings, attitudes, or actions should it affect? Do I myself live in obedience to this truth? Do I intend to? What obstacles keep my audience from responding as they should? What suggestions might help them respond as God wants them to respond?
Ordinarily you begin your study with a single passage of Scripture, and your application comes directly or by necessary implication from that passage. If you begin with a specific need in your congregation and turn to the Bible for solutions, then you must decide first what passages address the questions being raised. Through your exegesis of those separate passages, then, you explore the subject. When the Bible speaks directly to those questions in a variety of texts, application and authority still come directly from Scripture.
Several questions help us test the accuracy of our application:
Have I correctly understood the facts and properly formulated the questions involved in the issue? Can those questions be stated another way so that other issues emerge? Would those who disagree with me state the issue another way?
Have I determined all the theological principles that must be considered? Do I give the same weight to each principle? Are there other principles that I have chosen to ignore?
Is the theology I espouse truly biblical, derived from disciplined exegesis and accurate interpretation of biblical passages?
God reveals Himself in the Scriptures. The Bible, therefore, isn’t a textbook about ethics or a manual on how to solve personal problems. The Bible is a book about God. As you study, then, there are at least four questions you want to ask of a passage.
First, what is the vision of God in this particular text?
Second, where precisely do I find that in the passage? (The vision of God is always in the specific words and the life situation of the writer or the readers.)
Third, what is the function of this vision of God? What implications for belief or behavior did the author draw from the image?
Fourth, what is the significance of that picture of God for me and for others?
Not only is it important to look for the vision of God in a passage, but you will also want to look at the human factor. This human factor is the condition that men and women today have in common with the characters in the Bible. The human factor may show up in sins such as rebellion, unbelief, adultery, greed, laziness, selfishness, or gossip. It may also show up in people puzzling about the human condition as a result of sickness, grief, anxiety, doubt, trials, or the sense that God has misplaced their names and addresses. It is this human factor that usually prompted the prophets and apostles to speak or write what they did.
To apply a passage, therefore, you need to see what your passage reveals about God and the way people responded and lived before God. Look for those same factors in contemporary life. Think about specific ways this biblical truth about God and people would actually work out in experience. To do that, ask yourself questions like:
Where do the dynamics of the biblical situation show up today?
So what? What real difference does this truth about God make to me or to others? What difference should it make? What difference could it make? Why doesn’t it make a difference?
Can I picture for my listeners in specific terms how this vision of God might be one they need in a particular situation? Would there ever be an occasion when someone might come to me with a problem or need and I would point them to this passage and this truth? Listeners feel that a sermon is relevant when they can say, “I can see how that would apply to my life.
To be effective, sermons must relate biblical truth to life. The most effective sermons are those that do this in a specific, not a general, way. If you do not apply the Scriptures to people’s life experience, you cannot expect that they will do it. Our hearers need both truth to believe and specific, life-shaping ways to apply it.
These three developmental questions, then, prod our thinking and help us decide what must be said about our passage. Take these questions and direct them toward the details of your text, and then direct them toward your audience.
Note that the questions build on each other. Only when we think we understand a statement do we question its validity. And only when we understand and believe a statement will it make a positive difference in our lives. While you may deal with all three questions in the development of your sermon, one of the three predominates and determines the form your message will take.