"And all of us, with unveiled faces, seeing the glory of the Lord as though reflected in a mirror, are being transformed into the same image from one degree of glory to another; for this comes from the Lord, the Spirit." (2 Corinthians 3:18, NRSV)
And I've thought and said on more than one occasion that we have focused too exclusively on the OT and Paul. I've been pretty at times that some preachers wouldn't have to change their preaching ministry at all if we completely removed the gospels from our Bibles! When we do read and preach the gospels, we often preach them to show how Paul's theology is revealed in Mark (or Matt, etc). Thus, we start with the gospel text and at the end of the sermon we have spent as much or more time in some Pauline text (or at least dealing with Pauline themes). This has immensely frustrated me in recent years.
On the occasions that we do make it to the gospels, we most often find ourselves in John because we can again confine ourselves to theological themes. There is so little room in our pulpits for the enigmatics of Mark, the new righteousness of Matthew, or the mercy of Luke. Each of those make us too uncomfortable. I think these three Gospels lauch the most effective challenge upon our *lives* in the entire Bible, NT or OT. But because we have tried to make Christianity something we mentally ascent to, "We recognize that Christ did this and there is nothing we could or can do about it..." there has been no cry for truly transformed living. And important strains of biblical tradition have been effectively sidelined for about the last 100 years. Since just before the turn of the century, you have seen more and more of a push to see the gospels read and practiced. But there is still a whole lot of resistence. I hear "salvation by works" more often when I say the Gospel requires me to live in light of it after I'm saved than I do when people talk about people having to believe (personally ascent) to certain doctrines before they are saved. I don't get that.
The church is people. People "be." People aren't "done." There is only one answer to the article's question.
Wednesday Night: The Jesus I Never Knew by Philip Yancey from now until Christmas
Sunday Morning Sermons are from Luke this fall.
I heard a local preacher (Charlotte, NC) on TV do a sermon series through the book of Genesis on Sunday Mornings. Can you imagine a whole year of Genesis? Not that it's bad, but going a whole year without Jesus?
Chris, you are correct that preaching Jesus makes us uncomfortable (try preparing the sermons). Listening makes us uncomfortable. We can do theology with Paul or tell stories simply for the "moral" (the OT). But Jesus challenges us in a way that makes us rethink everything about life, including faith.
I was reading Joel Green's Commentary on Luke 10:1-20 for Sunday's message, and it was interesting how the message of the Kingdom of God was good news to embrace for some, and judgment to avoid for others. Jesus evokes an either/or response with no room for middle ground.
In my first paragraph that should be, "I've been pretty convinced..." That was by no means intended to be a statement of grooming or appearance.
It sounds like your church is in for a treat. And I know what you mean about preparing the sermons. I've never been in the position of writing them week in and week out, but 2/3 of what I have written comes from Gospels. I'm working on a six-part series through the Sermon on the Mount right now. I'm seeing where it may become seven weeks. That has been challenging stuff. I'll pray that your church hears the challenge of the Kingdom as good news.
One year in Genesis sounds excruciating. It's a great book, but seriously!? In preaching class tonight we discussed the wisdom of D. Martin Lloyd-Jones and his spending two years in Romans (a true Protestant). I don't know 1) how he did it as a preacher and 2) how his congregation could stand going that long without hearing any other biblical counsel on Sunday mornings.
I am doing well. Just buried in the books. You are doing well, I hope?
3 comments:
A very honest article.
And I've thought and said on more than one occasion that we have focused too exclusively on the OT and Paul. I've been pretty at times that some preachers wouldn't have to change their preaching ministry at all if we completely removed the gospels from our Bibles! When we do read and preach the gospels, we often preach them to show how Paul's theology is revealed in Mark (or Matt, etc). Thus, we start with the gospel text and at the end of the sermon we have spent as much or more time in some Pauline text (or at least dealing with Pauline themes). This has immensely frustrated me in recent years.
On the occasions that we do make it to the gospels, we most often find ourselves in John because we can again confine ourselves to theological themes. There is so little room in our pulpits for the enigmatics of Mark, the new righteousness of Matthew, or the mercy of Luke. Each of those make us too uncomfortable. I think these three Gospels lauch the most effective challenge upon our *lives* in the entire Bible, NT or OT. But because we have tried to make Christianity something we mentally ascent to, "We recognize that Christ did this and there is nothing we could or can do about it..." there has been no cry for truly transformed living. And important strains of biblical tradition have been effectively sidelined for about the last 100 years. Since just before the turn of the century, you have seen more and more of a push to see the gospels read and practiced. But there is still a whole lot of resistence. I hear "salvation by works" more often when I say the Gospel requires me to live in light of it after I'm saved than I do when people talk about people having to believe (personally ascent) to certain doctrines before they are saved. I don't get that.
The church is people. People "be." People aren't "done." There is only one answer to the article's question.
Our church is about to be Jesus saturated.
Wednesday Night: The Jesus I Never Knew by Philip Yancey from now until Christmas
Sunday Morning Sermons are from Luke this fall.
I heard a local preacher (Charlotte, NC) on TV do a sermon series through the book of Genesis on Sunday Mornings. Can you imagine a whole year of Genesis? Not that it's bad, but going a whole year without Jesus?
Chris, you are correct that preaching Jesus makes us uncomfortable (try preparing the sermons). Listening makes us uncomfortable. We can do theology with Paul or tell stories simply for the "moral" (the OT). But Jesus challenges us in a way that makes us rethink everything about life, including faith.
I was reading Joel Green's Commentary on Luke 10:1-20 for Sunday's message, and it was interesting how the message of the Kingdom of God was good news to embrace for some, and judgment to avoid for others. Jesus evokes an either/or response with no room for middle ground.
I hope that you are doing well. Blessings!
In my first paragraph that should be, "I've been pretty convinced..." That was by no means intended to be a statement of grooming or appearance.
It sounds like your church is in for a treat. And I know what you mean about preparing the sermons. I've never been in the position of writing them week in and week out, but 2/3 of what I have written comes from Gospels. I'm working on a six-part series through the Sermon on the Mount right now. I'm seeing where it may become seven weeks. That has been challenging stuff. I'll pray that your church hears the challenge of the Kingdom as good news.
One year in Genesis sounds excruciating. It's a great book, but seriously!? In preaching class tonight we discussed the wisdom of D. Martin Lloyd-Jones and his spending two years in Romans (a true Protestant). I don't know 1) how he did it as a preacher and 2) how his congregation could stand going that long without hearing any other biblical counsel on Sunday mornings.
I am doing well. Just buried in the books. You are doing well, I hope?
Post a Comment