Comments on: Good homiletics does not always lead to good preaching

By: Bob Bliss

Bob Bliss — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 05:00:00 +0000

John, i think you are correct in your assessment. We preachers have given way too much ground to those who study human psychology and behavior. Willimon says something along the lines that preaching today tries to make the Bible relevant to people when we should be making people relevant to the Bible. Instead of trying to fit God and his kingdom into my life, I should be fitting my life into God’s kingdom.

By: John

John — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 05:00:00 +0000

This is my first visit to the site. i appreciate your thoughts, but would like to offer a critique. I have both a bachelors and Master’s in theology/pastoral ministry. In my experience, we have such poor homileticians in the pulpits (and I have visited a wide swath of churches over the last 2-3 years). I would say we need better ones. My critique is that maybe the content of homiletics courses needs to be tweeked, not the courses discarded.
I would be interested to find out (not having read this book), what the correlation is between the authority of scripture/the church in culture with the decline in preaching. If my history is correct, the 30′s and 40′s saw the precursors to the psychological revolution in the post-war era that caused much questioning of the institution of the church. Mix the erosion of the Church’s authority with the introduction of psychology/psychiatry and then we start teaching pastors to relate to the people and our preaching becomes man-centered. I would propose (as in the age-old chicken vs egg question), that homiletics changed to address new cultural trends, not the opposite. I would advocate for a call back to a homiletic that is rooted in orthodox heurmanutics. Ultimately, I would question the definition of “good homiletics” without this.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 25 Aug 2007 05:00:00 +0000

By: Steve

Steve — Thu, 23 Aug 2007 05:00:00 +0000

Thanks. Very insightful.

By: Bob Bliss

Bob Bliss — Tue, 21 Aug 2007 05:00:00 +0000

I wonder if this is similar to the situation Stephen Covey describes in his book 7 Habits of Highly Effective People. He claims that when he studied success literature in America he discovered that the first 150 years success literature focused on character and heart. The last 50 years the focus has been on technique. However, it is also possible that the homiletic techniques of late have been the product of better research. It is true that we are discovering new and exciting things these days. That said, it still doesn’t take away from the fact that Paul told the Corinthians that he didn’t come with persuasive words of wisdom but with the Spirit and power so that their faith would rest in God and not man (1Cor.2:1-5).