My friend, Steve Kneale has written here explaining why as a preacher, he would not set out the various options for interpreting a Biblical text when preaching. Instead, he would prefer to keep such discussions to the lecture hall and apply the text as he best understands it in the pulpit.
In general, I have much sympathy with Steve’s position. I wouldn’t normally be using precious preaching time to set out and discuss options. Time has been tighter for me even than for Steve, whilst I prefer to preach for about 30-40 minutes, we’ve set the target at 20-25 minutes in our current church context. I also think that we can create other space for such discussions. I would personally use blogs or vlogs here on Faithroots. Alternatively, a life group might be a good place to pick up on debate or look at things from a different perspective. For example, not one of theological difference but our preacher last Sunday looked at the book of Ruth and applied it to those who identify with Boaz. You haven’t got time in a one off sermon to treat all the different perspectives. So, at our life group this week, we asked people who they most identified with in the story and what that meant for application to them.
I also agree with Steve that it should go without saying that we are fallible. That’s true when I’m writing too. I don’t seek to give every possibility here on Faithroots because there are plenty of places that you can find other arguments. Consider how Steve has not needed to set out alternatives to his position. He knows that there will be people who disagree with him, he’s not claiming an infallible position on preaching and he may even have expected people to come back at him in the comments or through articles of their own. Dare I say it, there is even something arrogant about assuming from hearing one sermon or reading one blog post that the preacher/author is not aware of all the options that you are.
Having said all that, I think there might be a case for sometimes setting out the options. Here are some reasons why. First, because for some people, that’s the route into a sermon. I recently was talking to a friend over coffee and I highlighted a textual point that affected how I approached a Bible passage. He said that this got his attention and suggested I start my sermons in a similar way. I don’t and won’t, normally. You see, that would put off plenty of other people. However, it might get the attention of some like him and so, sometimes I might take that approach because that will get people who want to star t with “this is interesting” to move to “this is applicable.”
A second reason why I might sometimes set out the options is because one part of preaching is helping people to learn how to approach the Word of God for themselves. So, by modelling how I engage with diverse opinions might help them to learn how to wrestle with tricky texts for themselves.
Thirdly, there is a type of apologetics at work here. If people spot for themselves that there could be more that one option for a text and I don’t acknowledge that or show how I reached my position then that might be a stumbling block to hearing the application. Now, sometimes, the interpretation will matter significantly, it will affect our understanding and application. Sometimes though, it will matter very little. I’m inclined to assume for example that the various views on what “righteousness of God” means in Romans don’t affect the end point too much because in reality, all of the options are part of the interpretation rather than in competition. So, in that case, I might briefly explain that the word could be subjective or objective etc and then say that actually I believe it’s about all of those things.
On other occasions actually the interpretation matters and in fact, part of the benefit is in spending a bit of time wrestling with the text. Considering the different perspectives and reaching the best conclusion may well be a way of helping people to meditate more deeply on God’s Word.
Fourthly, sometimes I might find that I disagree with the other options. If I’m taking a slightly different, minority position, it’s important to be open about this and to show my working out.
The important thing is that whether in the pulpit or at the lecture lectern and even here on the blog, I don’t just want to leave people, thinking “those were some interesting options.” Instead, I want them to be left hearing what God has to say to them and what they should do about it.
Faithroots 