For myself, as I am ashamed of my dull and careless heart, and of my slow and unprofitable course of life, so, the Lord knows, I am ashamed of every sermon I preach; when I think what I have been speaking of, and who sent me, and that men’s salvation or damnation is so much concerned in it, I am ready to tremble lest God should judge me as a slighter of His truths and the souls of men, and lest in the best sermon I should be guilty of their blood.

Me thinks we should not speak a word to men in matters of such consequence without tears, or the greatest earnestness that possibly we can; were not we too much guilty of the sin which we reprove, it would be so.

(By Martin Luther) 

For any who might suppose that Martin Luther’s 16th-century “harsh language” justifies 21st-century frivolity or filthy talk (especially from the pulpit), we offer these thoughts from Luther himself. The following comes from his sermon on Ephesians 5:3-4. 

. . .

“Filthiness”—scandalous talk—is unchaste language suggestive of fornication, uncleanness and carnal sins. It is common in taverns and generally found as accompaniment of gluttony, drunkenness and gambling. Especially were the Greeks frivolous and adepts in this respect, as their poets and other writers attest.

What Paul refers to in particular is the lewd conversation uttered in public without fear and self-restraint. This will excite wicked thoughts and give rise to serious offenses, especially with the young. As he states elsewhere (1 Cor 15, 33), “Evil companionships [communications] corrupt good morals.”

Should there be any Christians forgetful enough to so transgress, the offense must be reproved; otherwise it will become general and give the congregation an ill repute, as if Christians taught and tolerated it the same as the heathen. 

. . .

“Jesting” has reference to those conversational expedients which pander to gaiety in the form of scandal; they are called among us banter and badinage. Laughter, mirth and gaiety is their purpose, and we meet with them generally in society and high life. Among the heathen, jesting was counted a virtue, and therefore received the title “eutrapelia” by Aristotle.

But Paul calls it a vice among Christians, who certainly may find conversational expedients of a different kind, such as will inspire a cheerful and joyous spirit in Christ. True, Christians are not all so pure but that some may err in this matter; but the Christian Church does not command jesting, nor suffer any member to abandon himself to the practice. It reproves and prohibits it, particularly in religious assemblies, and in teaching and preaching. For Christ says (Mt 12, 36) that at the last day men must give account of every idle, unprofitable word they have spoken.

Christians should be a very firm, though courteous, people. Courtesy should be coupled with seriousness, and seriousness with courtesy, according to the pattern of the life of Christ supplied in the Gospel.

Online Source

(By Charles Spurgeon)

Today’s post comes from an 1884 sermon by Spurgeon. Though over a century old, its point is as relevant today as when it was first preached.

You [as preachers] have nothing else to employ as the means of good, except the salvation of Jesus, and there is nothing else worth telling.

I heard of a congregation the other day that was so very small that hardly any one came to listen to the preacher. Instead of blaming himself, and preaching better, the minister said he thought he was not doing much good by sermons and prayer-meetings, and therefore he would found a club, and if the fellows came in, and played draughts, that might do them good. What a lot of that sort of thing is now being tried! We are going to convert souls on a new system,—are we? Are we also to have a substitute for bread?—and healthier drink than pure water? . . .

[T]o hope ever to bring sinners to holiness and heaven by any teaching but that which begins and ends in Jesus Christ is a sheer delusion. None other name is given among men whereby they can be saved. If you have to deal with highly learned and educated people, nothing is so good for them as preaching Jesus Christ; and if the people be ignorant and degraded, nothing is better for them than the preaching of Jesus.

A young man said to another the other day, “I am going down to preach at So-and-so, what sort of people are they there? What kind of doctrine will suit them?” Having heard of the question, I gave this advice,—”You preach Jesus Christ, and that will suit them, I am sure, if they are learned people it will suit them; if they are ignorant it will suit them—God blessing it.”

When the great Biblical critic, Bengel, was dying, he sent for a young theological student, to whom he said, “I am low in spirit; say something good to cheer me.” “My dear Sir,” said the student, “I am so insignificant a person, what can I say to a great man like yourself?” “But if you are a student of theology,” said Bengel, “you ought to have a good word to say to a dying man; pray say it without fear.” “Well, Sir,” said he, “What can I say to you, but that the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth from all sin?” Bengel said, “Give me your hand, young man; that is the very word I wanted.”

A simple gospel text is the word which every man needs who is in fear of divine wrath, and he may be sitting next to you at this moment, or he is in the same house of business with you, and needs that you should tell him about Christ. Do that, and bless his soul. May you all understand the Scriptures in this way, and may God make you a great blessing to those around you.

Perhaps Doug Wilson said it best last week when, in a comment on his own blog, he wrote:

Just for the record, I draw a distinction between what is appropriate in the pulpit and elsewhere . . . . [T]he voltage of words varies, not just according to century, but also according to the medium available to conduct it. And I also draw a distinction between prophetic polemical language and pomo bad boy usage. A right use of this kind of talk will be more likely to make everyone furious with you; a wrong use will get you book deals.

The distinctions Wilson draws are critical, and the second one in particular is something I should have clarified better in my post last Wednesday.

Hence today’s follow-up post.

- – - 

Regarding the Confrontation of Sin and the Condemnation of Error

There is a legitimate form of “harsh language” that Christians can and should use. Such language encompasses the courageous confrontation of sin and hypocrisy along with the clear denunciation of false religion and doctrinal error. It does not involve profanity, silliness, or reckless vulgarity, yet it might be rightly regarded as “harsh” because it is tenaciously intolerant of error. It speaks the truth directly and without apology—saying what needs to be said, even if doing so results in being unpopular or unliked.

It means refuting those who contradict (Titus 1:9, 13); reproving the worldly deeds of darkness (Eph. 5:11); shunning false teachers (2 John 10–11); casting down false arguments (2 Cor. 10:5); exposing the doctrines of demons (1 Tim. 4:1, 6); calling dissenters to repentance (2 Tim. 2:25; Titus 3:10); and warning apostates of the sure and terrible judgment that awaits them (cf. Matt. 23; Hebrews 6:4–8; Jude 8–13). Such speech was not only modeled by Christ, but by every Old Testament prophet and every New Testament writer. It is speech that contends earnestly for the faith (Jude 3–4), and as a result denounces every form of deception.

Insofar as Mark Driscoll limits his definition of “harsh language” to this kind of speech (as in this video), we gladly agree with him.

- – - 

Regarding Flippancy, Frivolity, and Filthy Talk

But there is another kind of “harsh language” far different than the above. It is, as Wilson calls it, “pomo bad boy usage.” Such language encompasses sensuality, silly talk, and coarse jesting, and includes things like laughing at sin or jolting an audience with risqué images. It is unwholesome, distracting, degrading, and inappropriate. This kind of “harsh language” is explicitly prohibited by the New Testament in places like Ephesians 4:29; 5:3–4; Philippians 4:8; and Colossians 3:8. Charles Spurgeon included this kind of “lewd speaking” in his definition of “profane language,” about which he said: “I am unable to frame an excuse for profane language: it is needless willful wickedness.”

Insofar as Driscoll models this kind of “harsh language” (as in this video on humor or this video on birth control [warning: explicit content], both from Sunday services earlier this year), we sharply disagree with him. A third more recent example can be found here.

(Also, for a couple other more well-known examples, this time from his books, see here and here.)

In the video on humor, after discussing Aaron’s excuse for making the Golden Calf, Driscoll illustrates his point by laughingly drawing a parallel with fornication . . . after which he openly embraces his own use of “poopy comedy.” He says:

It’s like a dad walking in on his high school daughter with her boyfriend and they’ve got no clothes on and they’re like, “We don’t know what happened. We were talking and all our clothes fell off. I’ve got no idea. We’re victims. The belt’s defective.” I mean, it’s just, it’s funny.

The Bible also includes something that The Dictionary of Biblical Imagery calls “scatological humor.” I’ve been accused of this and it’s biblical. “Scatological humor” for those of you who are in public school, scat-a-lo-gi-cal – poopy comedy. That’s what it is, scatological humor.

Driscoll continues by defending scatological humor from supposed Old Testament examples. In so doing, he attempts to make the case that this type of ”harsh language” is a legitimate form of pastoral communication.

We are not convinced. Hence our article last week.

(As a side note, those interested in more discussion on this issue will enjoy Al Mohler’s radio show from last Friday.)

- – - 

A Final Thought

As a young man myself, I understand why Mark Driscoll’s ministry is attractive to many within the next generation of evangelicalism. He is energetic, articulate, and bold. He has a zeal for impacting his community, and he’s willing to do so in ways that are creative and cutting-edge. (My wife is from Seattle, so I know the area well.) There is no question that he is a gifted and clever communicator which when joined with his evangelical theology makes for a compelling combination.

Yet there is one major asterisk that hovers over his ministry. And it is primarily seen in the “pomo bad boy usage” of the harsh language he sometimes employs.

Cultural contextualization is often cited as a justification for this kind of language, but contextualization is never justifiable if it takes us beyond the bounds of New Testament propriety. Moreover, the true power of any ministry is found not in clever speech (1 Cor. 1:17: 2:1–5), but in the faithful proclamation of the gospel (cf. Rom. 1:16).

As heralds of that gospel, we must watch our words carefully (cf. James 3). They represent not only us, but our holy Savior as well. Thus, we are called to conduct ourselves in a way that is honorable and above reproach. This includes modeling godly speech (cf. 1 Tim. 4:12; 2 Tim. 2:16). As Paul told Titus:

In all things show yourself to be an example of good deeds, with purity in doctrine, dignified, sound in speech which is beyond reproach, so that the opponent will be put to shame, having nothing bad to say about us. (Titus 2:7–8)

- – -

(By John MacArthur)

Today’s post adapted from the Q&A section of Rediscovering Expository Preaching (Nelson, 1997).

How long should a sermon be?

As long as it takes to cover the passage adequately! I do not think the length of the sermon is as important as its content. At times I have preached fifty minutes and it has been ten minutes too long. Other times, I have preached an hour and twenty-five minutes and it has been just right. The important thing is to cover the main point so that people are convinced of its truth and comprehend its requirements. If you have nothing worthwhile to say, even twenty minutes will seem like an eternity to your people. If you are interesting, they will stay with you. Do not mistake persuasion for long-windedness, however. If you preach longer than you should, you will sacrifice persuasiveness.

I am convinced that biblical exposition requires at least forty minutes. Less than this just is not sufficient to probe the text deeply. If it takes fifteen to twenty minutes to give the setting, ten to fifteen minutes to draw out the principles, five to ten minutes to cross-reference them, and five to ten minutes for a conclusion, you already have about fifty minutes. Rarely does a man preaching twenty-five to thirty minutes do doctrinal exposition.

That is why developing the logical flow of a sermon is crucial. If your message is clearly outlined and you lead your people through the process of discovery, you will hold their attention. Your sermon must be going somewhere. You cannot merely give a number of assorted truths unrelated to each other. If your sermon lacks interest because it is disjointed, your people will lose interest.

If you are going to be a Bible expositor, forget the twenty- and thirty-minute sermons. You are looking at forty or fifty minutes. In any less than that, you can’t exposit the Scripture. The purpose of a sermon is not to get it over, but rather to explain the Word of God. My goal is not accomplished because I am brief. My goal is accomplished when I am clear and I have exposited the Word of God.

Won’t people get bored if you preach too long in the same book?

I think people will be bored if you are boring. It is not related to how much time you spend in a book. As long as you are saying things that capture their interest and challenge their lives, they will not care what book you are in or for how long.

I think, however, that a balance is desirable. If you are preaching through a heavily doctrinal book like Romans or Hebrews, it is good to give your people a break from that periodically. If you are preaching through one of the Gospels, such may not be necessary. When I preached through Matthew over an eight-year period, I rarely felt the need to take a break. Matthew contains such a mixture of doctrinal passages, parables, and narrative passages that it changes pace frequently on its own.

At times, too, you will need to deal with a specific topic. You may find that people in your church are being influenced by an unbiblical teaching that you must combat. Or they may be confused over a Bible passage or a theological issue. Also, you may occasionally see a need to preach about the biblical view of a significant world event. In general, though, preaching through a book will not bore people if you are an interesting preacher. This is the purest form of expository preaching.

This is the second part of an interview with John MacArthur on the subject of expository preaching in a postmodern world.

QUESTION: In a lot of today’s literature on preaching, the idea exists that preaching should impact culture and culture should shape the style of preaching. How does that land with you?

I don’t think either of those things is true. I don’t think preaching is going to impact culture—I think preaching is going to impact people. And indirectly, if the Lord determines to save a mass of people, it’s going to have some social impact on the country or the nation or the world. You have the Great Awakening in America having some short-term—and maybe even some long-term—cultural impact, but unbelievers are always going to behave like unbelievers. The culture may be more or less influenced by Christianity, but I don’t think the objective should be impacting culture, if by that you mean anything less than conversion.

As far as the culture shaping preaching, I would say it shapes preaching only in the sense that you address the issues. If you want to define what’s wrong with a society, you need to know something about the society. In different cultures there are different dominant sins or kinds of behavior or belief systems that need to be addressed. If you are preaching the gospel in a third-world country, for example, the things that dominate their lives would be different than ours. They might not include materialism and the kinds of things that are unique to an affluent Western society. So when you’re talking about the sins of the age or the dominant influences in the culture, they vary from place to place, and it is helpful to know what they are. But that doesn’t say anything about what style of preaching you use. That only says how you enter into the dialogue with the culture.

Paul says, if I speak to Jews I speak a certain way, and if I speak to Gentiles I speak a certain way. But that’s only at the point of entry. That has nothing to say about the style. In other words, people today are used to watching sitcoms on TV, but that doesn’t demand that you preach in a narrative style. I would say you ought to avoid that style, because people are so used to it. People are used to plays and theatrics and movies, and so avoid all of that in your preaching, and your message will come in a very unfamiliar package. There will be a starkness to it, and it will be distinct and contrary to what they are used to hearing. That’s one reason I prefer the expository and authoritative sermon—it’s so contrary to what people are used to that it’s riveting and compelling.

QUESTION: Apart from the gifting of God and His unique work through you, what have been the keys to the effectiveness of your preaching ministry over the years?

The first thing is interest. I think it’s interesting. I don’t know why it’s interesting. I’ve tried to understand and assess that, but I really don’t know. People are not going to come Sunday after Sunday, year after year, and listen to me for an hour in the morning and another hour at night if they’re not interested in what I’m saying. And that has nothing to do with outlines or illustrations. Outlines serve a purpose and some illustrations capture the moment, but over the long haul in order for people to listen to expository preaching week-in week-out, there has to be a compelling interest to it.

Some of it has to do with the element of surprise. Preachers who are interesting say things that people don’t expect them to say. As a preacher, you cannot simply say those things that are obvious to everyone and expect to create interest. There must be an element of surprise. It may not be that you’re introducing a surprising doctrine, but you’re saying it in a captivating way.

If you’re boring in a personal conversation, you’re probably going to be boring in a sermon. Some people are just interesting people—and interesting to talk to—because they have interesting insights and an interesting way to express things. Some of that is innate, but you can also become interesting if you can get interesting material. So I think the challenge is to be interesting, and the way to be more interesting than you would normally be is to have interesting information. And that demands that you be an extensive reader.

In addition to being interesting, a preacher must also be profound. And when I talk about profound, I’m not talking about being thick and heavy and obscure—I’m talking about being deep. In other words, there’s something underneath the surface, something under the popular radar that’s in the text and that you’re able to give to the people. You’re able to go down into the passage and pull up the treasure that they—no matter how many times they go over it on their own—are not going to get. And it’s not just for the sake of interest—it comes with some weight, because it deals with the question, “What is God really saying here?”

On the surface there are certain things that people can see, but by the time I get done with a passage, there is a depth of understanding of what God is communicating in the text that is surprising to them because they couldn’t see it. And it’s weighty to them, because it brings the force of truth to bear on their lives.

Another thing that makes preaching effective is creating the original setting of the text so it becomes a living event. Whether it’s Paul writing to a church or Jesus with the Pharisees, you want to bring your people there, so that they are in the environment, living it and seeing it unfold. And that means you have to do a lot of background and context work—you’ve got to create the context as a living context.

Rather than trying to take the Bible and bring it into the modern day, I try to take the modern day and bring it back to the Bible. And that’s a distinction you want to make. This stuff about culture shaping preaching is taking the Bible and redefining it in modern terms. My goal is to take modern culture and the people of that culture and redefine them in biblical terms so that they are living back in the Scriptures.

Along with living a life of integrity and being prayerful and dependent on the Lord, those are the keys to effective preaching.

A couple years ago, one of our staff pastors at Grace Church interviewed John MacArthur about expository preaching in a postmodern world. The following is a transcript of that interview.

QUESTION: Over the course of your ministry, why have you remained committed to expository preaching over other preaching paradigms?

Well first, because it is a biblical mandate. It doesn’t fluctuate with culture, with expectations, with times or seasons. Expository preaching is the best way to preach the Bible. If every word of God is pure, if every word of God is true, then every word needs to be dealt with. And expository preaching is only way you actually come to grips with every word in the Scriptures.

Secondly, expository preaching familiarizes people with the Scripture itself instead of simply giving them a speech, as true and as reflective of biblical teaching as that speech may be. With expository preaching, people become familiar with the Scripture. They can go back to the passages that have been addressed, and they can be reminded by the text itself of what it means. So you give people the Word of God in a way that has long-term impact, because it makes them familiar with Scripture.

Thirdly, it makes the authority unequivocal, and that authority is the Scripture. That’s very clear no matter how powerful or gifted the preacher might be. In consistent, expository preaching, the people always know what the authority is. It’s not about homiletics. It’s not about personal viewpoints and insights. It’s about relentlessly affirming the true authority of Scripture, which is the most critical thing that anybody can ever learn. It isn’t about, “Wasn’t that a great sermon?” It isn’t about, “Wasn’t that a great outline? Wasn’t that clever?” It’s always about, “What did the Word of God say?” And that makes it truly authoritative, because the Word is from God. No other preaching paradigm does this.

QUESTION: What are the unique challenges or difficulties of preaching to a postmodern culture?

First of all, you have to understand that when you talk about a postmodern culture, that’s an academic assessment of the culture. The average Joe doesn’t have any idea what that means. All he knows is he’s pretty much free to think and do whatever he wants. That’s how postmodernism filters down to the guy in the pew. It’s not a philosophy—it’s a lifestyle. The average guy just knows that the culture doesn’t care what he does. The movies he sees don’t make a moral judgment on anything except racism or somebody’s intolerance. So he’s free to do whatever he wants in the society, and nobody can tell him what to be or what to do, and the bottom line is that he should feel good about himself. That’s what filters down.

But all this goes completely against the grain of his conscience and his reason, and ultimately what he knows to be true. The unbeliever’s conscience is a reality, and even reason tells him that there have to be some absolutes.

The bottom line is that expository preaching confronts the amorality of postmodernism with an authoritative message of absolute truth. It’s not a question of debating. It’s not a question of trying to find some way to sneak that in. It’s an issue of confronting this kind of thinking with the absolute authority of Scripture and then letting the Spirit of God make the application to the heart.

QUESTION: What are the advantages of expository preaching in a postmodern culture?

Expository preaching is the only thing that is going to change anything. There isn’t any other way to affect people positively aside from hitting them with that kind of authority. In my own preaching, my objective is not to court the postmodern mind. My objective is to confront it—to hit it stone cold in the face with truth. It’s irrelevant to me how the person thinks. It’s only relevant to me how they need to think. So I’m not going to play around with their sensitivities to postmodernism.

At a recent Bible conference, I spoke on the exclusivity of the gospel, and I set forth the distinctiveness of Christianity. And afterward some guys who were seminary students and philosophy majors came up to me and said, “What’s really interesting about your message is that you gave us a philosophy of thinking, a worldview. But we’ve never heard anyone give that kind of worldview without a very intricate philosophical defense.” And I said I didn’t need to give an intricate philosophical defense, because this is exactly what Scripture says, and there is no need to defend it. You just proclaim it. See these guys were struck by the fact that what they heard was an absolute authoritative statement of a worldview that takes on postmodernism, without having to fuddle around and make all kinds of philosophical and rational arguments, and without having to answer every objection that arises.

So the advantages of preaching expositionally and authoritatively in a postmodern culture are the same as they are in any environment where there is error—you bring an authoritative word to bear upon how people think.

(Part 2 of this interview will be posted tomorrow.)

(By John MacArthur)

That’s a fashionable concern, judging from the trends in devotional booklets, home Bible study discussions, Sunday-school literature, and most popular preaching.

The question of what Scripture means has taken a back seat to the issue of what it means “to me.”

The difference may seem insignificant at first. Nevertheless, our obsession with the Scripture’s applicability reflects a fundamental weakness. We have adopted practicality as the ultimate judge of the worth of God’s Word. We bury ourselves in passages that overtly relate to daily living, and ignore those that don’t.

Early in my ministry, I made a conscious commitment to biblical preaching. My first priority has always been to answer the question, “What does this passage mean?” After I’ve explained as clearly and accurately as possible the meaning of God’s Word, then I exhort people to obey and apply it to their own lives.

The Bible speaks for itself to the human heart; it is not my role as a preacher to try to tailor the message. That’s why I preach my way through entire books of the Bible, dealing carefully with each verse and phrase–even though that occasionally means spending time in passages that don’t readily lend themselves to anecdotal or motivational messages.

I am grateful to the Lord for the way He has used this expository approach in our church and in the lives of our radio listeners.

But now and then someone tells me frankly that my preaching needs to be less doctrinal and more practical.

Practical application is vital. I don’t want to minimize its importance. But the distinction between doctrinal and practical truth is artificial; doctrine is practical! In fact, nothing is more practical than sound doctrine.

Too many Christians view doctrine as heady and theoretical. They have dismissed doctrinal passages as unimportant, divisive, threatening, or simply impractical. A best-selling Christian book I just read warns readers to be on guard against preachers whose emphasis is on interpreting Scripture rather than applying it.

Wait a minute. Is that wise counsel? No it is not.

There is no danger of irrelevant doctrine; the real threat is an undoctrinal attempt at relevance. Application not based on solid interpretation has led Christians into all kinds of confusion.

No discipline is more sorely needed in the contemporary church than expositional biblical teaching. Too many have bought the lie that doctrine is something abstract and threatening, unrelated to daily life.

It is in vogue to substitute psychology and spoon-fed application for doctrinal substance, while demeaning theological and expositional ministry.

But the pastor who turns away from preaching sound doctrine abdicates the primary responsibility of an elder: “holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, that he may be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict” (Titus 1:9).

Practical insights, gimmicks, and illustrations mean little if they’re not attached to divine principles. There’s no basis for godly behavior apart from the truth of God’s Word.

There are only three options: We teach truth, error, or nothing at all.

Before the preacher asks anyone to perform a certain duty, he must first deal with doctrine. He must develop his message around theological themes and draw out the principles of the texts. Then the truth can be applied.

Romans provides the clearest biblical example. Paul didn’t give any exhortation until he had given eleven chapters of theology.

He scaled incredible heights of truth, culminating in 11:33-36: “Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who became His counselor? Or who has first given Him that it might be paid back to Him again? For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever. Amen.”

Then in chapter 12, he turned immediately to the practical consequences of the doctrine of the first 11 chapters. No passage in Scripture captures the Christian’s responsibility to the truth more clearly than Romans 12:1-2. There, building on eleven chapters of profound doctrine, Paul calls each believer to a supreme act of spiritual worship–giving oneself as a living sacrifice. Doctrine gives rise to dedication to Christ, the greatest practical act. And the remainder of the book of Romans goes on to explain the many practical outworkings of one’s dedication to Christ.

Paul followed the same pattern in Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and 1 Thessalonians. The doctrinal message came first. Upon that foundation he built the practical application, making the logical connection with the word therefore (Rom. 12:1; Gal. 5:1; Eph. 4:1; Phil. 2:1) or then (Col. 3:1; 1 Thess. 4:1).

True doctrine transforms behavior as it is woven into the fabric of everyday life. But it must be understood if it is to have its impact. The real challenge of the ministry is to dispense the truth clearly and accurately. Practical application comes easily by comparison.

No believer can apply truth he doesn’t know. Those who don’t understand what the Bible really says about marriage, divorce, family, child-rearing, discipline, money, debt, work, service to Christ, eternal rewards, helping the poor, caring for widows, respecting government, and other teachings won’t be able to apply it.

Those who don’t know what the Bible teaches about salvation cannot be saved. Those who don’t know what the Bible teaches about holiness are incapable of dealing with sin. Thus they are unable to live fully to their own blessedness and God’s glory.

The nucleus of all that is truly practical is sown up in the teaching of Scripture. We don’t make the Bible relevant; it is inherently so, simply because it is God’s Word. And after all, how can anything God says be irrelevant?

(Review by Nathan Williams) 

We should always strive to maintain balance in every area of life. The area of preaching is no different. Most men fall into one of two extremes when it comes to preaching the Word of God. Many men communicate clearly and powerfully, but they fail when it comes to the hard study of the Word. They are able speakers, but often have little from the mind of God to give to the mind of man. This group has been challenged by numerous writers to study hard and be sure that they are preaching the Word and not their own opinions or stories.

The other extreme has been dealt with far less frequently. These men understand what expositional preaching entails and seek to study hard to understand the text. They are able students of theology and the original languages. They are able to mine the depths of the Word and grasp the authorial intent of any passage, no matter how difficult it may seem at first glance. The problem for these men comes when they must step behind a pulpit and communicate the message they have received through the intense study of the Scriptures. It is for this second group of men that Preaching with Passion was written. The author, Alex Montoya, describes the problem in these terms; “The problem is with neither the content of the sermon nor our methodology; rather, the problem lies with our delivery of the sermon. The problem is not what we say; it is how we say it. Our sermons lack passion” (p. 10).

Montoya believes that anyone who has been called to preach by God can learn to preach passionately. His desire is that through this book men will learn what it means to preach passionately and be motivated to proclaim the glories of Christ in a compelling manner to the people of God.

Preaching with Passion consists of eight chapters. Each chapter explains one aspect of what is needed to preach passionately: (1) spiritual power, (2) conviction, (3) compassion, (4) authority, (5) urgency, (6) brokenness, (7) preaching with the whole body, and (8) imagination. At the beginning of each chapter Montoya provides a definition of the targeted aspect of preaching with passion. Then he goes on to explain how one can attain the given characteristic. For example, in the chapter on spiritual power, he explains that there are several things that are needed before one can preach with spiritual power. These include but are not limited to; contrition of the soul, confession of sin, and communion with the Savior. Montoya’s explanation’s are filled with Scripture passages and are immensely practical. This book clearly was written over a lifetime of ministry and is the fruit of years of preaching with passion.

If we could boil the book down to one principle that stands out above the rest, I believe it would be this; The Word of God must do its work in your own heart before it can do its work through you in the hearts of your people. Throughout many of the chapters, Montoya stressed the importance of meditation and personal application of the Word. Passion in preaching will remain elusive to the pastor who does not allow the word to penetrate his own heart and life. No matter what your personality, you can learn to preach with passion that will be contagious. This book provides a wonderful tool to guide us to the proper balance of passionate exposition in the pulpit.

A few quotes from this tremendous little book will be helpful:

“Such preachers [passionless preachers] usually do not even realize the damage they do to the cause of truth. They man truly love the Word of God and have a high regard for sound doctrine, but what their dispassionate delivery actually communicates is apathy and indifference.” (p. 7)

“The conservative, biblical preacher has to be most aware of the balance between solid exposition and the passionate delivery of that exposition.” (p. 11)

“Truly intellectual preaching makes truth simple.” (p. 16)

“Everyone is passionate, only some of us have restrained that passion for various reasons.” (p. 17)

“The secret to passionate preaching is spiritual power.” (p. 21)

“If we would shake the hearts of men, we must be channels through which God can address the hearts of men.” (p. 22)

“Spiritual power comes when we realize our utter unworthiness to preach and our total dependence on God for everything.” (p. 24)

“Passionate preaching almost always comes from a man who holds the truth he proclaims with deep personal convictions.” (p. 41)

“Conviction about some biblical truth begins with our exegesis, with the tedious spadework of seeking to understand what the Bible means by what it says.” (p. 50)

“A text that has not benefited us in some way will not be communicated with any sense of excitement or urgency.” (p. 50)

“The mistake made by many young preachers is that they attempt to mimic the style of great, older preachers, but they fail to mimic their lives as well.” (p. 81)

“If a preacher knows his subject well, if he has mastered it, if he has become an authority on it, then we will speak confidently about it, even passionately.” (p. 83)

“I am passionate because God’s Word makes me so and because man’s condition demands it. Ultimately, the nature of preaching deserves it.” (p. 151)

* Preaching with Passion can be purchased through Grace Books International by clicking here.