Some of the issues Horton raises here in the article below, I have thought myself. Thoughts about the In depth, verse by verse exegetical preaching method. Of course my thoughts were not parsed together as well as Mr. Horton presents here, nor as in depth. Although I believe it is the way a pastor should deliver the word as he proclaims biblical truth to his flock, but what, if any, problems could occur from rigid verse by verse preaching. An example is how different it is when one listens to an audio version of books of the bible being read in its entirety, as no doubt was the custom for a letter of Paul to be read aloud to a given congregation. When I began to study the different views of eschatology I was amazed at how I picked up things I ordinarily wouldn't as I heard the scriptures of Revelation being read for a length of time. The way it flowed together as I listened really blew me away. Another thought is how do you verse by verse exegete a parable. Often the whole parable has to be taken in it's entirety and often the meaning of the teaching is summed up at the very end of the parable itself. So, to chop it up and be overly rigid would seem to be problematic. Just sayin... I am not saying Horton is right but I thought it was worth pondering some.
Verse-By-Verse Exposition: By Micheal Horton
Having been raised in churches which painstakingly exegeted a particular passage verse-by-verse, I have profited from the insights this method sometimes offers. Nevertheless, it too falls short of an adequate way of preaching, reading, or interpreting the sacred text.
First, an explanation of how this is done. I remember the pastor going through even rather brief books like Jude over a period of several months and there we would be, pen and paper in hand as though we were in a classroom, following his outline--either printed in the bulletin or on an overhead projector. Words would be taken apart like an auto mechanic taking apart an engine, conducting an extensive study on the root of that word in the Greek language. This is inadvisable, first, because word studies often focus on etymology (i.e., what is the root of the work in the original language?) rather than on the use of the word in ancient literature, for very often the use of a particular word in ancient literature had nothing at all to do with the root meaning of the word itself. It is dangerous to think of biblical words as magical or different somehow from the same words in the secular works of their day.
This approach is also dangerous because it "misses the forest for the trees." In other words, revelation is one long, unfolding drama of redemption and to get wrapped up in a technical analysis of bits and pieces fails to do justice to the larger context of the text. What God intended as one continuous story that is proclaimed each week to remind the faithful of God's promise and our calling is often turned into an arduous and irrelevant search for words. The same tendency is present in Bible study methods or study Bibles that outline, take apart, and put back together the pieces of the Bible in such a way as to get in the way of the Scripture's inherent power and authority.
Another fault of this verse-by-verse method is that it often fails to appreciate the variety of genre in the biblical text and imposes a woodenly literalistic grid on passages that are meant to be preached, read, or interpreted in a different way. The Bible is not a textbook of geometry that can be reductionistically dissected for simple conclusions, but a book in which God himself speaks to us, disclosing his nature, his purpose, and his unfolding plan of redemption through history.
A final danger of this method is that it tends to remove the congregation from the text of Scripture. Even though the hearers may be very involved taking notes, it only serves to reinforce in their experience that they could not simply sit down and read their English Bibles for themselves and discover the deeper meaning of the text apart from those who have the method down and know the original languages.
No comments:
Post a Comment