I regularly teach Bible class. Almost every Sunday. And it’s the rare Sunday that I don’t preach, even though I’m not officially a preacher. I’m expected to take the Word of God and make the message plain for others.
Too many times, however, I get in the way. Especially when dealing with narratives in the Bible. I don’t see them as sufficient (if you’ll allow me to be honest about it). The story isn’t enough; I’ve got to add some lessons to it. In a wonderful essay on biblical authority, N.T. Wright says:
In the church and in the world, then, we have to tell the story. It is not enough to translate scripture into timeless truths. How easy it has been for theologians and preachers to translate the gospels (for instance) into something more like epistles!
Guilty as charged. I don’t find enough power in the stories in the gospels; I’ve got to bring out my own lessons, based on those stories.
So many of the narratives in the Bible have no moralizing to them. The narrator doesn’t tell us if what the person did was good or bad, if it was right or wrong. That’s not easy for us to live with.
Maybe that’s why so many of the stories in the Bible get relegated to Bible hour, never making it onto the big stage in the main assembly. They’re kids’ stories, not material for adults. (Though a lot of those kids’ stories would get an R rating if they were made into movies!)
Wright also writes:
And as we tell the story—the story of Israel, the story of Jesus, the story of the early church—that itself is an act of worship. That is why, within my tradition, the reading of scripture is not merely ancillary to worship—something to prepare for the sermon—but it is actually, itself, part of the rhythm of worship itself. The church in reading publicly the story of God is praising God for his mighty acts, and is celebrating them, and is celebrating the fact that she is part of that continuous story. And, that story as we use it in worship reforms our God-view our world-view—reconstitutes us as the church. The story has to be told as the new covenant story.
How can we do better about letting God’s story be told? How can preachers and teachers get out of the way so that the story can be heard? Or is there enough value in the stories alone? Do they need our “three points, a poem and a prayer” to make them worthwhile?
In Hebrews and Acts there are stories that are weaved into bigger sermons. I think that can be done well but if we find that we are distracting people from the story then it becomes a problem. I wonder if some people like hearing themselves over hearing the text.
Great thoughts Archer!
I believe preaching/teaching on narrative portions of Scripture is needed for two reasons:
1) To explain the specific story in terms of the larger biblical metanarrative
2) For listeners to find their place in that metanarrative (become part of the story, or have it become part of how they see their lives
And yes, it’s messy.
I think there are times this will work. However, when looking at the teaching methods of Jesus, the Apostles and others in the New Testament, we see that they not only read passages of Scripture but also explained the meanings. (Notice how Paul’s preaching throughout Acts involves both narrative and prooftexting.) Teaching was one of the miraculous gifts (1 Cor. 12), and is different from reading in that it allows the person to teach applications from either a single or multiple passages. Then there’s Romans 10:14 – “How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching?” And of course, 2 Tim. 4:2, where Paul tells Timothy to “Preach the word.” Sometimes the story is what the story is, nothing more than a narrative to deliver the reader from one point to the next, much like the book of Acts is not a complete history of the early church, but just a series of snapshots recorded, both for narrative purposes and also for our learning on doctrinal issues and other information of value. Our role in this is to rightly divide, and that’s where it gets tricky.
I did not know that the Bible stories are no longer told in the pulpit. No one sent me the memo!
Somehow this post came across more anti-preaching than I meant it too. I commented the following to one of my friends on my Facebook page:
I’m not against some explanation. But it’s one thing to provide background, related texts, etc. Quite another to say, “Now you’ve heard the story; let me make my points based on that story.” (And I don’t know that I’ll stop doing that; I just want to learn how to let the stories speak louder than I do)
As the writer over at the Ruthless Monk said in one post, we too often read the story of David and Goliath and make lessons about faith in the face of big challenges. It’s a nice lesson, but the story of David and Goliath is included to tell us about the Davidic dynasty replacing Saul’s house. I think that by wanting to pull bullet points out of every text, we often trivialize the biblical stories.
I’ve also seen too often that the biblical text plays the same “supporting role” that other stories and illustrations do in our sermons. Instead of coming away feeling that they know the text better, people come away thinking how clever the speaker is.
John,
I find many congregations that feel that Bible stories are milk, not providing the doctrinal meat that adults need. I’ve had friends meet with resistance when wanting to preach through Genesis. “We’ve heard those stories before.”
Maybe it’s different where you live. Maybe it’s different BECAUSE you live there. :-)
Tim
“I’ve also seen too often that the biblical text plays the same “supporting role” that other stories and illustrations do in our sermons. Instead of coming away feeling that they know the text better, people come away thinking how clever the speaker is.”
Tim – totally agree! We approach it backwards sometimes. “Here’s the point I want to make, now where can I find some verses to support it — and to heck with context!” We need to start with the text and let God speak. A preacher can use other texts to support a theme, provide additional context, or pull out other passages that may appear to be in conflict, then “teach” in a way to show the harmony. But sometimes it’s not a doctrinal issue as much as it is a faith-building issue or an example of principle that we should emulate, or sometimes just to recognize how great God is.
Without the big story, the snapshot stories are not as meaningful. As you pointed out, the story of David and Goliath is part of the larger story of David and Saul – which is a part of the still larger story of David as the ancestor of Jesus who introduced us to a kingdom where the Sauls of the world have no place, but the Davids do!
The story is one of faith vs. timidity, as well as submission to God vs. power for one’s self. Even more, it is the story of God’s leading through men (in this case, a boy) of faith rather than through the rich and powerful.
Put the stories in the context of the entire Bible, and they will preach!
One grandmother recently told me, “my grandchildren are listening so intently as you retell these Bible stories!” That is complimentary – but I’m not a great story teller – I mix up details and forget some things that need to be in the story. But I do think to neglect the stories is to make a big mistake.
I also think there are many many many lessons that can be learned from the various stories of the Bible…. but the danger I see being noted here is to avoid using the stories rather than letting the stories use you.
Before I preach I usually pray something like, “God, this is your time, your word … please make it more than I am able to do.”
Appreciate you Tim!