BTW, I really can’t stand Blogger and the way it does comments. I can’t wait till I graduate to a better server and a different setup. Still a couple of months away, I am afraid.

Regards,
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

I just see the centrality of the text as a non-negotiable. Illustrate it? Sure. But don’t tie anecdote to anecdote & call it preaching. I think that happens a lot, regardless of the movement one is considering. So I’m not saying that the grass is greener anywhere else; I’m just saying ours should be greener than it is.

Not everyone will be a Minnick. But everyone should be conscientious about explaining the text and making the main point of the passage the main point of the message.

I think that the standards some are trying to set today are impossibly high. The fact is that only a few sermons are stellar. How many sermons will you remember thirty years from now? How many sermons of your own will you ever remember?

That is the nature of preaching. And I am not against story telling as a methodology. I think that many are overly critical of this as well. The reason is this: if a man is faithful and his themes and teachings are biblical, the preaching will produce disciples. It always does.

The way it does it is line upon line and here a little, there a little.

The standard of judgement for God’s servants is not exceptional exposition or stellar sermons but faithfulness. I think that is what folks miss.

But besides that, I just don’t buy the argument that there is a dearth of expository preaching and that is what is wrong with the fundamentalist world. The emphasis has been there for many years. Some guys get it better than others, granted. But I reject the notion that we are lacking in preaching.

I can remember sitting in chapel and being smarter than the preachers. I could tell which ones were great and which ones were knaves. Then I got into the ministry. The hyper-critical spirit in the pew is a bigger problem than the men who are labouring in the ministry.

Regards,
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

I agree that there are a number of strong exegetes in the ranks of fundamentalism. And I agree that it’s not a new thing. However, I do believe that the criticisms of the preaching of fundamentalists (esp. in chapel services, etc.) are not all baseless. For instance, I’ve heard a number of messages from prominent fundamentalists in the last several months–some in person, some via mp3’s dating “WayBack” to Bible Conferences from 30+ years ago. Often, I’m underwhelmed by the content or lack thereof. Often.

Now, I think the criticism is unjust in this sense: poor preaching is not a “fundamentalist” problem. What I mean by that is, comparing a hack of a preacher with JMac–as if either were representative of any movement–is inaccurate. Poor preaching transcends movements. However, that doesn’t mean that it’s not a problem we should address. Thankfully, I think we are. But I still hear too much story telling & meandering. Sometimes I want to should, “Teach us the text, Man!”

Disclaimer: the author of this rant only wishes he could claim that he has mastered the ideals he puts forth.