A strange phenomenon has plagued North American evangelicalism. In the history of humankind it is not peculiar to this group. The same crisis overtook the Samaritans on Mt. Gerizim and even the brilliant Greeks in Athens. [2] Evangelicalism today is worshipping an unknown God.
As Paul the Apostle was waiting for Silas and Timothy in Athens he took advantage of the opportunity to do some sightseeing (Acts 17:16). This was not a relaxing tour. The idolatrous worship of the city enraged him; and as he continued, he came across a strange altar dedicated “TO AN UNKNOWN GOD.” What a ridiculous proposal. The idea of worshipping a god one does not know seems incredulous. Or is it? Is this not the same practice of the majority of evangelicalism today?
James Montgomery Boice most poignantly observes the contemporary situation:
Why is the church weak? Why are individual Christians weak?. .. They have forgotten what God is like. .. . Ask an average Christian to talk about God. After getting past the expected answers, you will find that his god is a little god of vacillating statements. [3]The Church today does not know God in an intimate, dynamic way. Why is this?
The thesis of this article is that evangelicalism’s depth of the knowledge of God is directly proportional to the quality of theological preaching the Church receives. The preaching ministry is a vital organ in the growth process of the Church. If the pulpit diet is deficient, the congregation will starve. One need not contemplate this very long before the shallowness of a great deal of preaching becomes evident.
But there may be another problem. Perhaps theology is a regular part of the pulpit diet, but it is served in such a distasteful manner that the congregation clamps shut its jaw and refuses to eat what it needs.
I believe that latter scenario is common. The preacher earnestly desires to communicate theological truth to believers. Unfortunately, it is often conveyed in “textbook language,” perhaps with little practical application. The congregation becomes dissatisfied, the preacher becomes frustrated, and soon theology is no longer heard from the pulpit—the first scenario sets in.
Yet, if the Church is to mature, theological truth must be part of a well-balanced spiritual diet. The baby should not be thrown out with the bath water; that is, theology should not be discarded because of an improper method of communication. The goal of the preacher, as is the goal of this article, should be twofold: first, to change people’s minds as to what theology is, and second, to communicate theology in a manner that is intelligible and applicable to twentieth century Christians.
Redefining Theology: “God does not dwell in textbooks made by human hands”
The general conception of a theologian is that of a cold, regimented, detached person with a great deal of theoretical knowledge, who speaks in an unintelligible language involving many Greek and Latin terms and is not in touch with the realities of life. This conception then casts a shadow on theology itself as cold, boring, and of no relevance to everyday living.
Perhaps this is an accurate description of some theologians and their theology, but these things should not be. One who really understands the dynamic of theology realizes that it produces dynamic Christians. The first goal of the preacher is to redefine what theology is.
What, then, is theology? Consider first the meaning of a word such as geology, which is derived from two Greek words: gē meaning “earth” and logos which has come to mean “a rational discourse concerning” or “the science of.”
Therefore, geology is the science of the earth. Theology is derived from theos meaning “God” and logos. Theology then is “a rational discourse about God,” or the science of god.
In Colossians 1:9–10, Paul prays concerning the believers in Colossae:
For this reason also, since the day we heard of it, we have not ceased to pray for you and to ask that you may be filled with the knowledge of His will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding, so that you may walk in a manner worthy of the Lord, to please Him in all respects, bearing fruit in every good work and increasing in the knowledge of God (NASB).In the Latin Vulgate, “the knowledge of God” is expressed “scientia Dei.” Scientia is the word from which we derive the English word “science.” We may say that Paul prays that Christians increase in the science of God, or theology.
But notice also that they are to be “increasing.” Theology is dynamic, it is a pursuit of the knowledge of God.
In 1977, NASA launched one of several space probes, Voyager 1. These crafts hurtle through the solar system and the universe, probing the depths of unknown space. It has captured never before seen photos of Jupiter and Saturn, exciting even the most placid of scientists. Rick Gore described the anticipation of the mission of Voyager 1: “With worlds yet to reveal, the unmanned Voyager spacecraft have proved themselves instruments of wonder on the frontier that forever recedes.” [4]
The task of theology is to probe the universe of Scripture which will leave the theologian in wonderment as he encounters new revelation of God. The theologian has an ever greater hope than the NASA scientist, for we know that their universe is not endless, but theology probes the depths of an infinite and awesome God.
Recently, a car manufacturer has claimed to be in “relentless pursuit of perfection.” Theology is the relentless pursuit of the knowledge of God. It is a constant, dynamic search; a driving force in the life of the Christian (cf. Phil. 3:8–10).
This dynamic definition of what theology is must be conveyed to evangelicalism. A clearer conception of the essence of theology will aid in motivating Christians to begin this pursuit and be attentive to the preacher who attempts to guide them in their journey.
A second element of redefinition is also required. The tendency of evangelical Christianity is to erect a false dichotomy between “theological” and “practical.” It is thought that theological discourse is the realm of professionals in the Academy, but it is not applicable to “practical Christian living.” It is easy for the preacher to fall into this trap: to think that one’s academic study must be divorced from homiletical study; to think that theology, by and large, is irrelevant to the congregation.
This false dichotomy must be eradicated from our minds for it cuts at the root of New Testament theology. For the New Testament authors, practical appeals had no impact if they were not rooted in the doctrinal reality of the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ (e.g. Phil. 2:1–11; 2 Cor. 8:9; 1 Cor. 15:1–8). Paul’s appeal for the consecration of the believer is in view of the preceding theological discourse on condemnation, justification, and sanctification (Rom. 12:1–2, NIV). “Christian experience,” says Charles Bridges, “is the influence of doctrinal truth upon the affections.” [5]
Theology is rooted in the Scriptures, which are written, not for the Academy, but for the people of God. We, therefore, “cannot choose between popular preaching and theological preaching. The theology given in revelation—the only theology we have any right to hold, let alone proclaim—is theology given for the people of God.” [6] One’s theology will inevitably affect Christian living. Right worship and right service flow from right thoughts about God. One whose theology is impoverished or distorted will be hindered in his relationship with, service to, and worship of the living God. As Warfield observes, “Systematic theology is nothing other than the saving truth of God presented in a systematic form.” [7]
In Colossians 1:10 quoted above, Paul states that “increasing in the knowledge of God” is one way in which we walk “in a manner worthy of the Lord” [8] and is closely related to “bearing fruit.” You shall know one’s theology by their fruits. In this regard, theology is an inextricable element of the Christian life.
The Preacher’s Study: “Seeking Him who is not far from us”
First, a simple principle must be understood: in order for the preacher to proclaim the truth, he must first know the truth. [9] The preacher who sets out to proclaim Christian theology must be acquainted with and understand that theology. In this article we are concerned with “systematic theology,” that is, the collection, classification, and organization of the truths of Scripture in a systematic form. Systematic theology expounds the doctrines of the Bible from the view of completed revelation, drawing on all that Scripture says concerning a doctrine, harmonizing those elements, and presenting them in a concise, intelligible form. [10]
The preacher then must study theology, approaching the task in the dynamic manner presented above. Systematic theology, or “dogmatic theology” as it is sometimes called, [11] should be an integral part of the preacher’s education and growth process. I firmly believe that systematic theology is one of the most inspiring and devotional areas of evangelical literature. (My personal experience of reading W. G. T. Shedd’s Dogmatic Theology has not only been a blessing to my mind, but has drawn me into a deeper knowledge of my Lord.)
Preaching and theology go hand in hand. Their intimate relationship should not be put asunder. Theology, as in the New Testament, should be the core and foundation of preaching. Heinrich Ott draws out the impact of this conclusion:
It may be necessary to affirm that dogmatics is the conscience of preaching and that preaching, again, is the heart and soul of dogmatics. In order to be able to preach at all well, the preacher must engage in dogmatic reflection; while the dogmatic theologian, in order to teach dogma well and truly, must realize that he works with the intention of preaching and must constantly bear in mind the mission of preaching, even though he himself does not mount the pulpit Sunday by Sunday. That preacher who proposed to be nothing other than a preacher would be a bad preacher, a preacher without heart and conscience. And the dogmatist who proposed to be nothing other than a dogmatist and to leave to the pastor the concern with the practical task of church teaching would be a bad church teacher; he again would be a dogmatist without heart and soul and conscience. [12]This is an important point that should not be overlooked. The Church is the custodian of theology, not the university. It is again, theology for the people of God. A discerning test of any theological system is: Does it work? Does it answer the questions of the people of God? “Dogmatics,” Ott states, “is no abstract teaching engaged in for its own sake. The ‘life-situation’ of dogmatics is the church.” [13]
Seeing the importance of theology to preaching (and vice-versa), how does one become educated in theology? Does this require formal education at a theological school? A formal theological education is certainly a viable and extremely beneficial option, but this option is not available to all and is not a prerequisite for understanding theology. It is certainly possible for one to become a “self-educated theologian.” This involves several aspects.
First, one must be disciplined. It requires a great deal of determination and hard work to learn the Scriptures and understand theology. It involves mental energy to comprehend the depths of theology and the truths revealed in Scripture. But, the exercise of discipline in this area will bring with it much fruit and blessing. Never are we so awed by the infinity of God as when we stretch our mind to its limit and still fail to grasp the concept.
Secondly, the study of theology involves reading, reading the Scriptures and reading systematic theology. We in the twentieth century occupy a unique and blessed position. In our study we are able to draw on what the Holy Spirit has taught the church for nearly two thousand years. We are, as Alan Gomes described, “dwarfs standing on the shoulders of giants.” [14] As well, we can benefit from the volume of theological study being published today.
Reading the classic works of the Reformers and the Puritans will aid one in appreciating the importance of theology in preaching. It is in the Puritan preaching of John Owen, Richard Baxter, and Jonathan Edwards (a Puritan untimely born) that we find paradigms for sermons that are theological, expositional, and motivational. [15]
One of the best ways to study theology is to work through a standard evangelical systematic theology. This will be a laborious but rewarding project which gives the preacher an overall understanding of systematic theology. He then can proceed to delve deeper into the individual doctrines. (I have provided a brief bibliography at the end of the article to acquaint the reader with some of the standard works.)
Another helpful way to learn theology is to study under a qualified mentor, perhaps from the local church. This biblical principle (2 Tim. 2:22) provides the student with a personal, one-on-one teacher who can answer questions (something a textbook cannot do). [16]
The first task then of the preacher who desires to preach theology is to study theology. [17] This is not a simple task to be accomplished overnight—it is a lifetime goal.
Preaching Theology: “Proclaiming the unknown God”
It is in preaching theology that the preacher must remember the second objective set forth above: to communicate theology in a manner that is intelligible and applicable to twentieth century Christians. J. I. Packer uses the following example.
In A Preface To Christian Theology, John Mackay illustrated two kinds of interest in Christian things by picturing persons sitting on the high front balcony of a Spanish house watching travellers go by on the road below. The ‘balconeers’ can overhear the travellers’ talk and chat with them; they may comment critically on the way that the travellers walk; or they may discuss questions about the road, how it can exist at all or lead anywhere, what might be seen from different points along it, and so forth; but they are onlookers, and their problems are theoretical only. The travellers, by contrast, face problems which, though they may have their theoretical angle, are essentially practical—problems of the ‘which-way-to-go’ and ‘how-to-make-it’ type; problems which call not merely for comprehension but for decision and action too. Balconeers and travellers may think over the same area, yet their problems differ. [18]The tendency of many preachers, especially those who have graduated from formal theological training, is to approach theology and Christian living from a “balconeer viewpoint.” The most important principle in communication is this: speak to travellers. The congregation is on the journey, wrestling with questions of “Where next?” and “How do I get there?”, “Why did this happen?” and “Why me?” The task of the preacher is to answer these questions and guide the way. A balconeer viewpoint can be helpful, but not if disconnected from the journey. Perhaps we could say that traveler theology is balconeer theology with shoes on, where theology meets the road.
Communication Principles
Stealth Theology
Several guidelines for preaching theology can be noted. The first I will call stealth theology.
When I was younger, a friend invited me over to enjoy dinner with his family. His mother was a marvelous cook and had prepared a delicious chicken dinner, a welcome sight to two energetic young boys. At the end of the meal, I commented on how delicious the chicken was. The corner of Mrs. Leonhardt’s mouth curled and with a grin she said, “By the way, that wasn’t chicken—it was rabbit.” Being an extremely fussy eater, rabbit would not have been on my “attempt to eat” list. Yet, after eating it, without knowing it, I continue to enjoy the meal.
This is what I mean by stealth theology: preach theology in a manner that the hearers don’t know what they are enjoying! One of the quickest ways to lose the attention of the congregation is to mention “theology” in introducing a sermon: eyes roll, mouths yawn, and ears close. Stealth theology preaches theological truth in a way that cannot be detected by “congregational radar.”
This demands creativity, imagination and hard work from the preacher, but the result will be Christians who approach life’s problems and issues in a biblical and theological manner (even if they do not realize it.).
Simple Theology
A second important principle is the K.I.S.S. principle: “Keep it simple, Sir.” [19] The tendency of “balconeers” is to speak in “balconeer jargon.” Theological discourse has its own vocabulary that is usually unfamiliar to the congregation. Thus the preacher should strive to avoid theological terms. Now, the language of the English Bible itself has theological terms such as sanctification, justification, propitiation, etc. These terms, rather than being avoided, should be explained. Difficult or unfamiliar words should be explained and rephrased in concise definitions, intelligible to the twentieth century Christian.
A second element of simplicity is lucidity. The preacher should choose his words wisely, making the most of each sentence so as not to lose the congregation amidst the trees of a large forest. “Any fool,” says Hamish MacKenzie, “can lose himself in a philosophic fog. It takes a first-class mind, great purity of heart, and much labour to achieve simplicity.” [20] Haziness of thought has been the downfall of many sermons; clarity of expression will clear the haze.
Relevant Theology
The third communication principle is relevancy. Theological preaching must speak to the contemporary generation. It is the tendency of the exegete who has labored in the text (perhaps in the original languages) to speak to the original audience and fail to cross the bridge to the present one. On this point, John Stott admonishes:
Unless believers listen attentively to the voices of secular society and struggle to understand people’s misunderstandings of the gospel, unless Christians feel with people in their frustration, alienation and even despair, and weep with those who weep, they will lack authenticity as the disciples of Jesus of Nazareth. They will run the risk. .. of answering questions nobody is asking, scratching where nobody is itching, supplying goods for which there is no demand,. .. of being totally irrelevant. [21]The preacher must understand the times. What is society grappling with? Where is the “point of tension” as Schaeffer calls it? What does the message of the gospel say to this? The truths of Scripture transcend culture and bridge the generation gap; the preacher must therefore bring afresh the good news in a language and manner that is “real” for today.
The preacher must also understand the congregation. Every local body has its own weaknesses, struggles, and questions. The task of theological preaching is to address those needs with biblical answers.
Communication Methods
We have outlined several guiding principles for communicating theology to the twentieth century Christian. These are painted in broad strokes; they are not rules or formulae but concepts that allow flexibility as to method.
The method of communication chosen is the decision of the preacher. This is a most important element in theological preaching, requiring creativity, imagination and a great deal of mental labor. Theological preaching stands or falls on how it is communicated.
There are two basic avenues to choose with regard to content presentation: theology may be preached topically or exegetically.
Topical
In a topical format, a doctrine such as “imputation” is approached by collating the texts which deal with the doctrine and presenting them in a clear outline, taking the congregation through the Scriptures to the relevant passages. While this is a viable option, a couple of weaknesses should be noted:
- In a topical approach, the preacher’s tendency is to attempt to exhaust the subject. This leaves the congregation overwhelmed with a potpourri of texts that appear to have little connection (and often, little application).
- This approach is not the system of the biblical authors. The Scriptures are not presented as a theological textbook. The message of the apostles and prophets is couched in the history and problems of the day, addressing those concerns in a manner relevant to the audience.
It would appear then that a more beneficial and biblical method is a textual, or exegetical approach. Theological preaching then becomes imbedded in the Scriptures and the regular exposition of those passages. An exegetical method commends itself in several ways:
- For the preacher who practices systematic exposition of the Scriptures, theological preaching becomes an integral part of pulpit ministry. What exactly is the difference between exegetical preaching and theological preaching via the text? This should not be viewed as an “either-or” relationship. Theological preaching requires depth exegesis: probing the theological implications of the passage in the light of other Scripture dealing with the doctrine. In preaching the passage, the preacher communicates the theological significance of what is said in light of the whole of Scripture. Yet he remains relevant to the immediate context.
- Also, as the preacher works through the Scriptures in order to proclaim “the whole counsel of God”, he will naturally encounter the doctrines of systematic theology. For example, as one preaches through Romans, the doctrines of total depravity, original sin, justification by faith, imputation, perseverance of the saints, election, and many more will be addressed by systematic exposition.
- Through an exegetical avenue, application of the doctrine is often built into the text. The biblical authors never discoursed on theology for the mere sake of intellectual stimulation; their goal was to motivate the people of God. For example, Donald MacLeod reminds us that “to preach Philippians 2:5–11 is not only to preach Christology but also to plead for an end to all obsessions with our own rights.” [22]
Preaching and theology have been “long-lost cousins” in our generation. The goal of this article has been to encourage preachers to reunite these distanced relatives. It is an imperative mission for it is the life of the Church at stake. Donald MacLeod perhaps sums up the relationship best:
‘Theology without proclamation is empty, proclamation without theology is blind.’ So wrote Gerhard Ebeling, and if what he says is true—and surely it is—then the connection between theology and preaching is an intimate one. The theological process does not exist for itself. It exists only as a preparation for preaching. If it does not issue in proclamation, it is an abortion, or a still-birth. To change the perspective, if our theology (or any detail in it) is not preachable, its claim to being a theology at all is doubtful. James Denney was surely right when he said, ‘I don’t care anything for a theology that doesn’t help a man to preach.’ A true theology will seek articulation, claim a place in the liturgy of the church, and assert its right to walk with the people of God in the valley of the shadow of death. [23]Select Bibliography
The following is a collection of some standard works in evangelical theology which will serve as helpful introductions to the eager student. Volumes which are particularly helpful for those just beginning to study theology are marked with an asterisk (*). I have also included Elwell’s dictionary which is an indispensable aid, providing articles on hundreds of persons, terms, doctrines, and historical events.
- Louis Berkhof. Introduction to Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979.
- Louis Berkhof. Systematic Theology. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1941.
- John Calvin. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Translated by Ford Lewis Battles, John T. McNeill, ed. Philadelphia: Westminster, 1960.
- Walter Elwell, ed. Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1984.
- *Millard J. Erickson. Introducing Christian Doctrine. Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992.
- A. A. Hodge. Outlines of Theology. Reprint edition, Edinburgh: Banner of Truth, 1983 [1879].
- Charles Hodge. Systematic Theology. 3 vols., reprint edition, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989 [1871-73]
- *Charles C. Ryrie. Basic Theology. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1986.
- William G. T. Shedd. Dogmatic Theology. 3 vols., reprint edition, Nashville: Nelson, 1980 [1888].
- Augustus H. Strong. Systematic Theology: A Compendium. 3 vols. in 1, Westwood, N.J.: Revell, 1907.
- *Charles R. Swindoll. Growing Deep: Exploring the Roots of our Faith. Portland: Multnomah, 1986.
- Jamie Smith is an alumnus of Emmaus Bible College.
- John 4:22; Acts 17:23.
- J. M. Boice, Foundations of the Christian Faith, (Downers Grove, Ill. InterVarsity, 1986): 25.
- Rick Gore, “Riddles of the Rings,” National Geographic 160 (July, 1981): 3.
- Quoted by Donald MacLeod, “Preaching and Systematic Theology,” in The Preacher and Preaching, Samuel T. Logan Jr., ed. (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1986), 264.
- Ibid.
- B.B. Warfield, “The Indispensableness of Systematic Theology to the Preacher,” Selected Shorter Writings of Benjamin B. Warfield, 2 vols., John E. Meeter, ed. (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1973), 2:281. On the relation of Systematic theology to evangelism, see MacLeod, 260ff.
- The participle “increasing” (αὐξανόμενοι, auxanomenoi) functions in a modal sense, defining “how” one walks worthily. It may be translated “so that you may walk in a manner worthy of the Lord. .. by increasing in the knowledge of God.”
- Warfield, 280.
- It is not the task of this essay to develop a thorough understanding of systematic theology. For a much more developed concept, see two excellent essays by B.B. Warfield: “The Idea of Systematic Theology” and “The Task and Method of Systematic Theology” in The Works of Benjamin B. Warfield: vol. 9, Studies in Theology (New York: Oxford Univ. Press, 1932; reprint ed., Grand Rapids: Baker, 1981), 9:49–87, 91–105. (This is also available as a separate volume from Banner of Truth Publishers). “The Idea of Systematic Theology” demonstrates the links between other theological disciplines such as biblical and historical theology.
- In a “confessional” situation where one defends a denominational statement or creed, “dogmatic theology” would expound those “dogmas” of the church or creed and thus carry a slightly different connotation.
- Heinrich Ott, Theological Preaching, trans. Harold Knight (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1965), 22.
- Ibid., 18. It is here that evangelicals would do well to listen to Barth. See Church Dogmatics, trans. G. T. Thomson (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1936), Vol. 1, Part 1, 79–97.
- Alan Gomes, “Dwarf on the Shoulders of Giants: The Value of Historical Theology for Today,” EmJ 1 (Fall, 1991): 51-56.
- A very helpful book for an introduction to the Puritans is J. I. Packer, A Quest for Godliness (Wheaton: Crossway Books, 1990).
- I might also add that if the preacher has the opportunity to equip himself with a knowledge of the original languages of Scripture (Hebrew and Greek) it would be very beneficial. A number of “self-teaching methods” are also available.
- On the importance of theological education, see a defense by Robert L. Dabney, “A Thoroughly Educated Ministry,” Discussions: Evangelical and Theological (London: Banner of Truth, 1967), 651–677.
- J. I. Packer, Knowing God (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity, 1973), 5.
- “Sir” is inserted to replace the familiar but somewhat harsh “stupid.”
- Quoted by D. MacLeod, “Preaching and Systematic Theology,” 271.
- “The World’s Challenge to the Church,” Bibliotheca Sacra 145 (April-June, 1988), 124.
- MacLeod, 254.
- Ibid., 246.
No comments:
Post a Comment