Preaching from Exile

I spoke today at the Festival of Preaching at College Wesleyan Church today. I think the video will be available eventually. The topic I was given is, "Finding Themes of Exile in the Word." Here is my basic outline and thesis:

1. Introduction
I started by noting that pretty much every Christian in America has felt like they were in exile over the last five years:

• We should be mindful that there are some Christians who have never felt in power. All their lives they have felt marginalized, not just as Christians but as people.
• American evangelicals have increasingly felt exiled from their Christian nation since Roe v. Wade in the 70s. But Obergefell especially gave a profound and sudden sense of alienation and disorientation.
• For another group, especially a lot of younger Christians, felt oriented by the 2016 election. To them, the forces of hatred seemed to prevail. To them, not only the electorate but evangelical Christianity itself vote the opposite. They have felt not only alienated from their country, which in any case they never thought of as Christian, but from denominations and the church itself.
• Point 1: While we may have felt especially alienated in these recent days, we have always been exiles.

Christians are always in exile because Sin reigns over this world. We have been in exile since the day Adam and Eve sinned in the Garden, and we will be in exile until Jesus returns and brings his kingdom to this earth as it is in heaven.

Hebrews 11:9-16
The exile that Hebrews mentions here is more profound that a mere situation behind this sermon. Hebrews considers this created realm itself to be in need of shaking (12:26-27). I gave my sense of the situation of Hebrews as it related to a context of marginalization and alienation.

The implications here are striking:

• It implies that even when Israel was in control of its land, there was an Israel within Israel. It was not the political Israel that was the exiled people of God, but some subset within Israel.
• Is this not what Jesus said: "Narrow is the gate and few there be that find it" (Matt. 7:14)?
• Ed Stetzer has a striking position here. The amount of true Christians in America probably hasn't changed. We are simply seeing the true number better and better.

2. Models of Exile
If we are always in exile, what are some of the modes of believers in exile? I expanded H. Reinhold Niebuhr's categories to suggest some modes of being in the world in exile and thus some modes of preaching while in exile in the world.

Point 2: God has inspired Scripture in such a way that different texts in Scripture speak more directly and more powerfully at different specific times and places. The Bible is a library of words, some of which jump out today, here. Others jump out tomorrow, there.

a. Taking over the culture (Christ above culture)
I called this mode of exile, "temporary assertion." It is for Joshua days. I think these are rare. After all, the conquest is a unique biblical event, never again repeated. There may be times when God calls us to disobey the government (e.g., the underground railroad). But most of the time, this is not the mode.

When religions try to take over the state (e.g., sharia law), bad things tend to happen. This is not a primary biblical mode of exile. In fact, the conquest of Canaan in Joshua was only done in order to create a context where Israel could withdraw from its surrounding world (option five below).

b. Desperate assimilation (Christ and culture in paradox)
I tweaked this one a little. This is the compartmentalizing of faith. I say I believe in church. It doesn't affect the way I live. I again suggested that this is not a primary mode of exile. Maybe it is never an appropriate mode. Certainly it is not a mode in any normal times. In normal times it is an indicator that someone is not truly part of the people of God.

But there are possible times when this has happened in exile. The movie Silence is about a Roman Catholic missionary who recanted his faith, not to save his own life, but to save the lives of other believers. Did the declaration of loyalty by the Russian Orthodox patriarch to the Soviet revolution save the church in Russia or ensure that it would only continue to exist in a corrupted form?

I can only think of one text in the Bible that might fall in this category in some way and that is the book of Esther. This is not a recommended mode of exile.

c. Principled assimilation (Christ in culture)
Again, I've tweaked this one a little. Here I looked to 1 Peter and echoed Scot McKnight's sense that it embodies a defensive strategy.

• Babylon - This reference suggests that Rome was breathing down the neck of the audience.
• "exiles and aliens" - not literal but this is how they're feeling
• "judgment has begun" - the church feels like it is experiencing the end times
• "Live good lives" - don't let them have any real reason to punish you.
• Blend in - slaves be good slaves, wives be good wives

d. Separation (Christ versus culture)
Paul largely sees the church as living in a separate world than the Roman world around him. He doesn't stop sharing the good news, both in synagogue and church, but he largely sees the world as something that is God's concern, not the church's.

• 1 Corinthians 5:9-13
• This is similar to Jesus on taxes. "Render to Caesar what is Caesar's and to God what is God's."

e. Withdrawal (Christ really versus culture)
The people have done this from time to time. Monks, Shakers. Israel may be the best illustration. In Egypt, probably in Babylon, the very nature of the Law itself was to provide a hedge around God's people to keep them from serving other gods. I used 2 Corinthians 6:14-17.

f. Influence (Christ transforming culture)
We all say we favor this, but God's mode is one of wooing, not forcing the world to follow God. In Romans 1, God "gives them up." I end with Philippians 3:18-20.

• Philippi was a Roman colony. Citizens of this city were citizens of Rome. It was largely settled by Roman soldiers who were rewarded for their service with land here.
• Paul calls these Christians "citizens of heaven" nonetheless. They might have reason to boast in their earthly citizen, as American Christians. But Paul reminds them they are really in exile.

Preachers and Presidents...

It was announced yesterday that IWU has a new president.  Provost David Wright has become President David Wright.  Dr. Wright is well known far and wide for his innovation, his burden for global witness (he's an MK by heritage), his academic-institutional prowess, and his wisdom in general. I think we will be truly amazed at the creative things that will come out of his presidency.

As an example of his wisdom, Steve Deneff quoted him at the Emerging Preachers Conference this week, which was a cooperative between College Wesleyan Church and Wesley Seminary.  Deneff remembers David telling him that there were three basic kinds of preachers: 1) those who are gifted with words, 2) those who are gifted with people, and 3) those who are gifted with organization.

I thought the preaching conference went great, with Lenny Luchetti being the main force behind it.  Some of the emerging preachers preached and coach teams gave them valuable feedback.  Great insights were doled out by the likes of Steve Deneff, Keith Drury, Wayne Schmidt, Lenny Luchetti, and Safiyah Fosua.  I find conferences rare where insights are as common as they were at this conference.

Great experience!

I'm off to Turkey for a few days, so my posts may become sporadic... or maybe they won't. :-)

Preaching the Narratives of the Bible

One of the challenges of theological education in Spanish right now is that resources are not as readily available. To service our Spanish MDIV, we have sought out as much as is available in Spanish (a lot of it goes out of print quickly or comes from hard to access presses).  We have translated or summarized some English resources.  We will eventually try to create some Spanish resources.

One topic on which we have not found ready materials in Spanish is that of Thomas Long's Preaching and the Literary Forms of the Bible. Thus far we have no plans to get permission to translate it.  We might summarize parts of it and translate them.  Since I have significant interest in this topic, I thought I would sketch this weekend what I consider to be the most important points on this topic, starting with preaching from the narratives of the Bible. Here is an outline:

What Is a Narrative?
A piece on preaching from biblical narratives should first identify what a narrative is.  The three core components are events, characters, and settings, which together constitute plot.  A plot has a beginning, a middle, and an end that involves some tension trying to move toward resolution.  This plot is told from a certain point of view, sometimes through the voice of a narrator.  Meanwhile, the author of a narrative arranges the story in a certain order, and the time spent on certain aspects (narrative time) can differ dramatically from the temporal proportions of real time (story time).

Biblical Narratives
Scholarship on the biblical narratives has raised unique issues relating both to the process by which various biblical narratives were created as well as the parameters of ancient narratives. While different Christians take different positions on these issues, it does a preacher well to be aware of them.

• unintended meanings created by the juxtaposition of diverse source material
• assumptions that biblical stories are straightforward history
• filling in narrative gaps with modern psychological or socio-cultural assumptions

The soundest preaching will be aware of these potential dynamics.

Evaluative Point of View
Key to appropriating a narrative is to ascertain its "evaluative point of view."  This is inevitably God's point of view.  More than anything else, including history, God's point of view in a biblical narrative is the main take-away from a narrative.  Job is an excellent case in point, where the points of view of Job's comforters is less correct than Job's which is less correct than God's.  Then within the canon as a whole, it must be recognized that Job itself represents a point in a developing understanding of God that culminates in the New Testament.  With this in mind, the evaluative point of view of a narrative will preach.

Identifying with Events
The way a narrative flows usually involves significant meaning that will preach.  Narratives often have turning points which by their very nature involve contrast between what is before and what is after.  Narratives often climax, which implies significance.  We can identify with the unfolding of events, which often mirror the unfolding of events today and are full of lessons.  There are lessons of wisdom and foolishness, choices to avoid and choices to emulate.

Identifying with Characters
Similarly, we often see ourselves in the characters of a narrative.  Once we know God's point of view on those characters, we see what is virtuous and what is full of vice.  We adjust ourselves accordingly. We find ourselves in the story and look around, then return to our own lives and move.

Identifying with Settings
We can also find situations analogous to ours in a narrative.  There are settings in space, time, and ideology.  These "places" may be analogous to ours and our attention is piqued.

Scripture necessary for sermons?

It occurred to me that Paul uses no Scripture in the Acts 17 sermon to the Athenians.  He does, however, quote a Stoic poet.  Similarly, 1 Thessalonians, which probably was read as a sermon, quotes no Scripture either.

What are some possible reactions to these instances?
1. Paul and the author of Acts were inspired, you're not.
Fair enough.  You can probably hammer a nail with a crowbar, but why not use a hammer?

2. This shows that the word of God is more than just the written text.
I don't see how anyone can even question this.  The truths contained in Scripture can surely be presented in a different form than they appear in the biblical text.

3. It's dangerous to preach too much from what you think the truth is without referencing Scripture.
In other words, is repeated "topical" preaching without recourse to Scripture just begging for trouble at some point?  Do you almost doom yourself at some point to substitute your thoughts for God's? Of course, I would say we substitute our own thoughts for God's even when we're using the text.

But what are your thoughts?

Coming Clean on Hermeneutics

For years I have been arguing that Paul and the NT authors read the OT like a charismatic rather than a scholar, evangelical or fundamentalist. I've done this to legitimate the "reader-response" approach that most people use when reading Scripture.  I've called it other things: a "spiritual" reading, a "devotional" reading.

I've not changed my mind, that the Spirit is not and has never been limited by the original meaning of the biblical text.  God can speak truth to you through the words of Scripture even if you are completely mistaken about what those words really meant.  Accordingly, I believe the vast numbers of sermons every Sunday morning that proclaim truths that aren't really what the biblical text was about are still the word of God when God is speaking through the speaker.

But I'm going to come clean.  This is second best for me.  The best of all possible worlds is actually to understand the biblical text and to feel the freedom of the Spirit in preaching. 

The best of all possible worlds is actually to know what you're talking about rather than simply relying on the possibility that the Spirit can speak truth despite our ignorance.  The best of all possible words is to be relevant and knowledgeable.  

Mind you, I think true relevance is more important than true understanding.  I'd rather a pastor speak relevant truth to a congregation than for a pastor to know the biblical languages and say nothing of any import at all.  I don't even consider that preaching.  I agree with Craddock--a sermon without an address is not really a sermon.

But that's not an endorsement of ignorance.  I would rather a preacher both know the real biblical text (the Greek and Hebrew one) and speak with relevance to a congregation.

There, I've come clean...

What makes the church the church (Lenny Luchetti)

I thought someone might be interested in this piece by Lenny Luchetti, proclamation professor at Wesley Seminary@ IWU, up today on the seminary blog.

The Bible and Preaching

My post on the seminary blog for the week: The Bible and Preaching: Four Tips

A Fundamentalist Taking a Stand!

Here's why Wesleyans aren't fundamentalists :-)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDxcyqeRc-4

Monday Thoughts: What Makes for Good Preaching?

Steve deNeff gave a great sermon again yesterday. The text was David and Goliath. Here are a few of the more striking thoughts I took from the sermon:

• We all tend to identify with David, but most of us operate with an orientation to Goliath's standard of strength.


• We often think we are David fighting in the kingdom of Saul when we fight like Goliath in the kingdom of David.


• Goliath was not fighting David. He was fighting God.


• Saul wanted David to fight with Goliath's type armor. David fought with God's type of armor.


• What's in your armory? What are your rules of engagement?

Now here is the meta-question I want to ask. Did deNeff get this wisdom from the biblical text or did the Holy Spirit bring it to him as a wise person as he read the biblical text?

I think it is clearly the latter. No doubt thousands of sermons have been preached on this text and hundreds of them have been sound. Yet I wonder how many of them drew out what deNeff brought this morning.

The Bible is a divinely appointed meeting place for us to hear God speaking. It is a sacrament of revelation. But it takes more than the words and stories of the Bible alone for the word of God to be preached and heard in Scripture.

1. It takes the Holy Spirit.
We used to call this God's anointing. The inspiration of the text will not reach the congregation unless the preacher and/or audience also receives inspiration from the Spirit. The Spirit can anoint anyone, and the Spirit can anoint the ears of anyone to hear a word from the most foolish of speakers.

However, I would argue that most of the time the Holy Spirit works closely with the natural gifts and wisdom of the human speaker. The Holy Spirit can speak through a donkey, yes, but usually He speaks through people like Paul who could speak even before they believed.

2. It takes wisdom on the part of the preacher.
God has simply blessed deNeff with great wisdom above so many of his contemporaries. Every Sunday morning God sanctifies those gifts and brings forth a word from the LORD. Certainly "out of the mouths of infants God perfects truth," but most of the time preachers are born rather than made (so also Augustine).

Most pastors will never be great preachers. They can improve to be sure. They can deliver God's word to be sure. But God has simply blessed some individuals with more wisdom than others. Without wisdom in the preacher, the Bible usually does not become Scripture in the mouth of the speaker.

If the preacher does not have wisdom by God's gracious gift, then the preacher must seek it out from others. God did not give us Scripture as an end in itself but as a sacrament in which we might hear God's voice through the Holy Spirit and His anointing of those to whom He has granted the gift of wisdom.

But the words of the Bible alone ensure that God's word is heard no more than if you were simply to read the words and sit down. Often doing so would not be too shabby in itself! But wisdom is a crucial thing--seek wisdom.