John Stott Sermon Pack

John Stott Sermon Pack
langham.org
CONTENTS
3 The Paradoxes of Preaching
15 The Privilege of Preaching
25 Call to Christian Maturity
langham.org
THE PARADOXES
OF PREACHING
THE PARADOXES OF PREACHING
By John Stott
Introduction
1. Authentic Christian Preaching is both biblical and contemporary.
a) All Christian preaching is biblical preaching.
b) All Christian preaching also resonates with the modern world.
Conservative and liberal preaching. The call to study.
2. Authentic Christian Preaching is both authoritative and tentative.
a) The need to recover the voice of authority.
b) But God has not revealed everything (Deut. 29:29).
No gurus in the Christian community!
3. Authentic Christian Preaching is both prophetic and pastoral.
a) A faithful prophetic witness.
b) Gentle pastoral care.
Preaching is to disturb the comfortable and comfort the disturbed. (Chad Walsh)
4. Authentic Christian Preaching is both gifted and studied.
a) Called equipped and anointed by God.
b) Nurturing the gift of study.
5. Authentic Christian Preaching is both thoughtful and passionate.
a) Some are thoroughly orthodox but dry as dust.
b) Others are all fire and no light.
See 2 Corin. 5:14,18
Conclusion
THE PARADOXES OF PREACHING 4

Copyright 2005, John RW Stott. Used by permission of his literary estate. All rights reserved.
THE PARADOXES OF PREACHING
Weve said that the modern world is unfriendly to preaching. Words have largely been eclipsed by
images, and the book by the screen. And so preaching is regarded by many people as an echo from an
abandoned past. George Target, who is maybe known to some of you, has written, The sermon is now a
sacred relic, a dubious thing of withered skin and dried bones. The sermon is an anachronism, probably
the major barrier between Jesus Christ and the world.
Well, I dont think any of us regard the sermon as being the chief barrier between Jesus Christ and
the world, but that is the considered opinion of a critic of the situation today. So in consequence of
this unfriendliness to preaching, there are some preachers who lose their morale and give up. Either
they dont have the heart to persevere, or they transmogrify the sermon into a sermonette, into a little
homily, into a dialogue, or something else equally unsatisfactory.
Now I want to invite you to consider with me that authentic Christian preaching has a number of
indispensable characteristics. They appear at first sight to contradict one another, but I think we
will see that they complement one another in the tension of a paradox. Hence, my title, The Paradoxes
of Preaching.
Authentic Christian preaching is both biblical and contemporary. On the one hand, I hope we agree that
Christian preaching is biblical preaching. We do not occupy the pulpit in order to preach ourselves, in
order to broadcast our own views, or ventilate our own opinions. No, our understanding of preaching
is that it is essentially an exposition of the Word of God.
So in that sense, all Christian preaching is expository preaching, not in the rather narrow sense of that
term, namely, that it is a running commentary of a long passage of Scripture, but in the broader sense
that the sermon is intended, as we saw last night, to open up the Word of God, to expound it, to explain
it because we are trustees of Gods revelation and we are determined above all else to be faithful in our
stewardship of it.
The name of Donald Coggan will, I think, be familiar to many of you. He was Archbishop of Canterbury
some decades ago and died about a year ago. He was a great believer in preaching. He wrote, I think,
three books on the subject of preaching, and I want to quote from one, which is called, Stewards of
Grace, published in 1958. He wrote this. The Christian preacher has a boundary set for him. Or her.
Forgive the sexist language, but Archbishop Coggan lived before the sensitivities about inclusive
language arose. So I wont correct him. Ill read to you what he actually wrote. The Christian preacher
has a boundary set for him. When he enters the pulpit, he is not an entirely free man. There is a very real
sense in which it may be said of him that the Almighty has set him in his bounds that he shall not pass.
He is not at liberty to invent or choose his message. It has been committed to him, and it is for him to
declare, expound, and commend it to his hearers. And a little later he has the phrase, It is a great thing
to come under the magnificent tyranny of the Gospel because the Gospel sets us our bounds, beyond
which we may not go.

So on the one hand, true, authentic Christian preaching is biblical preaching. But at the same time, it is
intended to be contemporary. It resonates, or it should resonate, with the modern world. It wrestles with
realities of our hearers situation. And in our resolve to be biblical, we refuse to lapse into irrelevance.
Instead, we seek to relate the ancient text, as weve been seeing, to the modern context. The true
biblical exposition goes beyond exegesis, which is explaining the meaning of the text, to application,
granting the message of the text.
Bishop Stephen Neill, a well-known Anglican missiologist and scholar who died a few years ago, in one
of his early books on the ministry wrote this. Its rather suggestive, I think. He says, Preaching is like
weaving. There are the two factors of the warp and the woof. There is a fixed, unalterable element, which
for us is the Word of God, and there is a variable element, which enables the weaver to change and vary
the pattern at his will. For us, that variable element is the constantly changing pattern of people and
of situations.
So our preaching is to be both biblical and contemporary. I like to imagine a flat territory. I dont have a
white or black board to draw it, but I can draw it in the air. I like to think of a flat territory that is deeply
divided or cut by a ravine, or a canyon, or a gulf, or whatever you like to call it. On the one side of the
canyon is the biblical world. On the other side of the canyon is the modern world. And between the
biblical and the modern world is this deep canyon of 2,000 years, at least, of changing culture.
Now weI dont know what you like to call us. Conservatives, shall I say, orthodox, evangelical, New
Testament Christians? Ill say conservatives. We conservatives live in the biblical world. I think its true
to say thats where we feel comfortable. We believe the Bible. We love the Bible. We meditate in the
Bible. And when it comes to preaching, our preaching all comes out of the Bible. We wouldnt dream of
preaching from anywhere else. But somehow it goes up in the air and never quite lands on the other
side. Our preaching is biblical, but often not contemporary, not earthed in contemporary reality.
So because were comfortable in the biblical world, we dont feel so comfortable in the modern world.
The modern world threatens many of us. At least those of us like me who are senescent, if not actually
senile. We feel threatened by the modern world. We read a book like Alvin Tofflers Future Shock and we
go into a profound state of shock from which it seems we never again emerge. So I dont think its unfair
to describe our average conservative sermon as being biblical, but not contemporary.
Now those who are and like to be called liberals make the opposite mistake. They live in the modern
world. They dont feel threatened by it. Theyre moving with the moving times. They read modern
philosophy, modern novels, modern poetry. They read Alvin Tofflers Future Shock and it doesnt shock
them. They have their built-in shock absorbers.
So how shall I draw their preaching? Well, its all earthed in reality. Thats why people listen to them,
because they resonate with the modern world. But where it comes from, Heaven alone knows. It does
not come out of the Bible because the tragedy of the self-confessed liberal is that he or she does not
accept the authority of the Bible.
So in that drawing, that simple drawing, I think we see one of the major tragedies of the Church today:
that conservatives are biblical, but not contemporary; liberals are contemporary but not biblical, and
almost nobody is building bridges. But I see authentic Christian preaching as essentially a bridge-
building exercise, relating the ancient Word to the modern world. And it is our responsibility to be
faithful to the biblical text and sensitive to the modern context, as we saw last night.

So we must never sacrifice either to the other, biblical and contemporary equally. But in order to do this,
we have to study on both sides of the canyon. If the bridge is to be firm and immovable, then of course
it has to be deeply rooted on both sides of the canyon. So we have to study the Bible. We have to study
the modern world; otherwise, we cannot relate the one to the other.
To take biblical studyof course all of us are readers of the Biblebut I wonder if we take seriously our
responsibility to grasp the whole message of Scripture, not just read our favorite passages. Many of us
like Psalm 23 and bits of Romans 8, but we are called to know the Bible. The Bible is our textbook.
The Bible reading method that I have found most helpful, although there are many, like Scripture Union,
for example, which I also recommend, but the one that has helped me most is the one produced by
Robert Murray McCheyne, a Scottish minister in Dundee, Scotland in the middle of the 19th Century. In
1842, Robert Murray McCheyne worked out a Bible reading calendar that will enable his people to read
the New Testament twice, and the Old Testament once every year.
I should say its rather exacting, because it does involve reading four chapters a day. My own practice is
to read three in the morning, and if Im still awake in the evening, I manage the fourth then. But Murray
McCheynes purpose was that we should read the whole Bible through every year, New Testament twice,
Old Testament once.
But whats fascinating is that on January 1st of every year, we dont begin with Genesis 1 to 4, and on
January 2nd, Genesis 5 to 8. Instead, we begin with the four great beginnings of Scripture: Genesis 1,
Ezra 1, Matthew 1, Acts 1. And when you think about it, each of those beginnings is a new birth. Genesis
1 is the birth of the universe. Ezra 1 is the rebirth of the nation after Babylonian exile. Matthew 1 is the
birth of Christ. And Acts 1 and 2 is the birth of the body of Christ.
So here are four major beginnings in the biblical story, and as we read, were following them through.
And I found it such a help. You grasp onto themes, biblical themes, that appear, and disappear, and
reappear, til you get a kind of overview of the message and story of the Bible itself.
So we need to study the Bible. Then we need to study the modern world. What has helped me most
here is that I brought into being in 1972 a reading group in London. I invited about a dozen young
graduates in our congregation, a couple of doctors, an architect, an employee of the BBC, a couple of
teachers and so on, to join me in this reading group. They were all Christians, committed Christians, and
anxious to relate the Gospel to the modern world.
What we didand we met about every month or every other monthwas to agree on the book that
were going to read before we meet. Then when we meet, we will go around the circle and everybody
would be given about one minute only to pinpoint the major question which the book raises for
Christian people. And then out of that we establish an agenda for the evening and go hammer and
tongs in discussion, until in the final half hour we ask, now how does the Gospel relate to people who
think like this?
I should explain that the books we choose are not Christian books. We reckon we read enough theology.
What we do need to do is to persuade ourselves and each other to read more from the modern world
in order to understand it. And so at the end of each evening, we decide what book to read before we
meet again, or it might be to go to a movie. I dare say some of you think Christians ought not to go to
movies. But it seems to me that if you go for your education, I sit on the edge of my seat and study what
Im seeing. And I never go alone. I dont want to be sucked into the worldliness of it. I want to go with
friends so that after it, again, we can discuss it.

So I can only say that these young men and women dragged me screaming into the modern world,
and that this discipline of reading, particularly the cult books in the university, the books that students
are reading. I mentioned Alvin Tofflers Future Shock. We read that once, I remember, and were greatly
struck by it.
So on the one hand were reading the Bible, trying to understand the totality of its story, and on the
other hand were studying the modern world. I sometimes call this double listening, listening to the
Word of God and listening to the voices of the modern world, its cries of pain, its cries of anger, of
despair. We need to listen to both voices.
Of course, we dont listen to them in the same way. We listen to the Word of God in order to believe
and obey Him. We dont listen to the modern world in order to believe and obey it. But we listen to the
modern world in order to understand its cries of pain and so on. So in this double study, we will make it
increasingly possible for ourselves to relate the ancient Word to the modern world.
Well, I spent a long time on that. Its the first of our five paradoxes, that authentic preaching is both
biblical and contemporary at the same time.
Two. Authentic Christian preaching is both authoritative and tentative. The 20th Century was an
epoch of doubt. Im sure as we look back, we will agree with that. It began with the first ten years of
the century in the decade of Edwardian triumphalism. While Edward VII reigned in Britain, everything
throughout the world seemed stable, fixed, and immovable. But the sinking of the unsinkable Titanic
in April 1912 was an omen of worse disasters to come, for the social stability of the Edwardian era was
shattered by the two World Wars. And then in the 20th Century, all the old landmarks, symbols of
stability, were destroyed.
And now at the beginning of the 21st Century, people are floundering in the swamps of relativism and
doubt and uncertainty. Even the Church in many parts seems to be as blushingly uncertain of itself as an
adolescent child. I dont think thats unfair. The Church often doesnt know what its message is or ought to
be for the world. So many preachers seem to conceive their task nowadays as sharing their doubts instead
of sharing their faith. The parading of personal doubt belongs to the very essence of post-modernity.
So there on the one hand is the need for authority. There is a great need to recover the voice of
authority in the pulpits. Bishop JC Ryle, the first evangelical bishop of Liverpool at the end of the 19th
Century, was very disturbed about this same thing, the lack of authority in the pulpit. And he wrote, Old
and experienced Christians complain that a vast quantity of modern preaching is so foggy, and hazy,
and dim, and indistinct, and hesitating, and timid, and cautious, and fenced with doubtshow many is
that? Seven, eight, is it, epithets? That the preacher does not seem to know what he believes, himself.
Not that we should ever presume to use the formula, thus says the Lord. It isnt that kind of authority
that we presume to use. Or the Word of the Lord came to me saying. That was the language of the
prophets, who were organs of direct revelation. But preachers are not prophets in that sense. We are not
recipients of a direct revelation from God, nor are sermons divine oracles.
No, our formula is rather, the Bible says, or we find in the Word of God this, that, or the other, provided
weve done our hermeneutical homework, and that were conscientious in applying to the Scripture
adequate hermeneutical principles so that we can say to the congregation, this means this and not
that. Because we, as it were, take them into our confidence as to the principles that were working by.
And then we can indicate what these are to the congregation. And then we can say with Paul in

1 Thessalonians 1:5, our gospel came to you, not in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy
Spirit, and with full conviction
I long to see preachers in the pulpits of the world today who proclaim with full conviction. Conviction
and courage are essential requisites of authentic Christian preaching. Bishop Phillips Brooks gave one of
the earliest Yale lectures in preaching in the year 1877 and its still in print. I recommend the book if you
want to read books about preaching. And I would like to quote something he says in his book. Courage
is the indispensable requisite of any true ministry. If you are afraid of men and a slave to their opinion,
go and do something else. Go and make shoes to fit them. Go, even, and paint pictures which you know
are bad, but which suit their bad taste. But do not keep on all your life preaching sermons which will say
not what God sent you to declare, but what men hire you to say. Be courageous. Be independent.
Wouldnt it be great if we could learn the need, the necessity of this confidence and courage?
At the same time, alongside authority, it is often right to be tentative because God has not revealed
everything, and he has not revealed all of what he has revealed with great simplicity and clarity. So Chris
Wright mentioned this morning a verse that Im very fond of, too, and that I think we all ought to know
by heart, namely, Deuteronomy 29:29. The secret things belong unto the Lord our God. The things that
are revealed belong to us and to our children forever that we may do all the words of this law.
Now that important text divides truth into two categories, the revealed things on the one hand, and the
secret things on the other. The revealed things belong to us; the secret things belong to God. And that is
why Christians are a strange combination of dogmatism and agnosticism. There are some things about
which we are able to say I know because it is plainly revealed. But there are other things in which we
should have the courage to say I dont know because it hasnt yet been revealed. And the great apostles
admitted this. John says, We do not know what we shall be. We know that were the children of God
now, but what we shall be has not yet been revealed. Paul says, We know in part and we prophesy in
part. Its only later that we shall know as we are known.
So you see, the Scripture itself recognizes that not everything has been clearly revealed. So many of our
troubles arise when our dogmatism trespasses into the secret things or our agnosticism trespasses into
the revealed things. Keep the revealed things and the secret things apart, and be confident about the
one and tentative about the other.
I would like to see in the pulpit throughout the worldalongside the authority that belongs to Gods
infallible revelation, I would like to see the due humility and diffidence which belong to its fallible
human interpreters.
Even the great Calvinforgive me if I quote him again, but he really has been one of the greatest
teachers that has ever been given the Church. And you think of him probably as being a very
dogmatic person, but as a matter of fact, he wasnt. Listen to this quotation from one of his
commentaries. He wrote, I shall state my own view of what this means freely. But each of you must
form his own judgment.
So there is a recognition that in the pulpit we mustnt claim to be infallible. Its the Word that may be
infallible, but we are fallible interpreters of it, and we have to be willing to say to the congregation, now,
I believe this means this, for this and that reasons, but you must make up your own mind as to whether
it means this or not.

Besidesone other thought here. If we serve everything up to the congregation on a plate, pre-cooked
and ready to eat, we condemn them to perpetual immaturity. Isnt this the reason why Jesus forbade us,
his disciples, to call anybody their father or their teacher on earth? In other words, we must not adopt
towards anybody, or require other people to adopt towards us, the dependent relationship of children
to their parents or disciples to their guru.
There are to be no gurus in the Christian community. Only pastors who seek to open up the Word of
God. Because how do pastors feed the sheep? How do shepherds feed their sheep? Have you ever
asked yourself that question? Because the answer is, they dont. Of course if a baby, newborn lamb is
sick, a shepherd will take the lamb into his arms and feed it with cod liver oil or something, but spoon
feeding is only given to the little baby lambs that are sick. The normal way that the shepherd feeds the
flock is to lead it to the pastures where it feeds itself. And that is exactly what we are to do. We lead the
congregation into the pasture of the Word of God and teach them to feed there themselves. We help
them to feed themselves.
So its not easy to strike this balance between the authoritative on the one hand and the tentative on
the other, between the dogmatic and the agnostic, between the infallible Word and the fallible human
interpreter. But although its difficult, we have to struggle with this second paradox.
So authentic Christian preaching is both biblical and contemporary, and it is both authoritative and
tentative. Thirdly, authentic Christian preaching is both prophetic, in a sense Ill explain in a moment,
and pastoral.
Indeed, the whole Church is called to this double ministry, prophetic on the one hand, and pastoral on
the other. Prophetic in the sense that we bear witness without fear or favor to the doctrinal truths and
ethical standards which God has revealed. But we are pastoral in the sense that we deal gently with
those who are slow to believe and fail to attain to the ethical standards of God.
So some preachers have a very faithful prophetic ministry. They show great courage in declaring
Gods Word. They refuse to compromise it or to accommodate to the secular world outside. No, they
remember that it is false prophets who say peace, peace when there is no peace, and that the true
prophet is one who includes warnings of judgment within his message.
But these prophetic witnesses, who are very faithful and courageous, are sometimes also pastorally
insensitive. They seem to enjoy seeing the congregation squirm under their whip. They exhibit little of
the meekness and gentleness of Jesus. And they even do what Scripture says He would never do, and
that is, break bruised reeds and snuff out smoldering wicks. But they do that very thing. If faced with
Pauls dilemma, shall I come to you with a whip or in the spirit of gentleness; they opt for the whip. There
are. There are preachers like that, are there not? I hope not here. But there are some pastors who are
prophetically bold, but pastorally insensitive.
Then on the other hand, other preachers excel in pastoral care and love. Their favorite words are
tolerance and compassion. They are well-acquainted with the frailty and the vulnerability of fallen
human beings. They remember that Jesus said he did not condemn the woman taken in adultery, and
so they also seek to be nonjudgmental in everything. They are pastorally very gentle and loving, but
they forget that Jesus also told the woman go and sin no more, and He also told the Samaritan woman,
go and fetch your husband, because He insisted that they face their sin before He was in a position
to slake their thirst with the Water of Life. And by forgetting the holiness of Gods love and his call to
repentance, their prophetic witness is blunted and their trumpet gives an uncertain sound.

Once again, its not easy to combine these two things, prophetic witness and pastoral care, firmness
and gentleness, discipline and compassion. It was Chad Walsh, an American Episcopal layman, a good
many years ago, who I think first defined preaching as disturbing the comfortable and comforting the
disturbed. But there are many preachers who are so busy disturbing the comfortable, they never go on
to comfort the disturbed, and vice versa.
So authentic Christian preaching is both biblical and contemporary, both authoritative and tentative,
both prophetic and pastoral, and now, fourthly, both gifted and studied. Under this heading we face
the question: who and what makes a preacher? How do preachers become preachers? What are the
factors which equip a person to preach? Does God create preachers, or do they have a share in the
creative process themselves? Well, I believe the only possible answer, again, is both, and well look at
each separately.
On the one hand, every authentic preacher has been called equipped and anointed by God. Now the
very concept of a self-made, self-appointed preacher is grotesque. No, those who are called to proclaim
the Word of God, to preach the Word of God, have been called by God to do so. We hope they have.
Notice that the five lists of charismata, of spiritual gifts in the New Testament, and there are five, include
pastors and teachers, and the gift of exhortation and encouragement. And its highly significant that
when the Apostle Paul lists 10 conditions of eligibility for the presbyterate in order to become an elder
or presbyter in the church, there are ten conditions he gives in 1 Timothy 3. Nine of them are moral and
spiritual: hospitality, self-control, no drunkard, not greedy for gain. Nine of them are moral and spiritual,
and only one of them could be called a professional gift, a gift that is necessary for the profession of
being a pastor, and that is the word didactics, having a gift for teaching.
So the reason why a person who is hoping to be ordained into the pastoral and preaching ministry
needs to have a teaching gift, it shows quite clearly that the pastorate is a teaching office primarily, and
therefore those who enter it need to be didactikos.
So the Church has no liberty to ordain those whom God has not called and equipped or gifted. On
the contrary. What is ordination? Now of course we come from different church backgrounds. A
majority here are Anglican, but there are other who belong to independent churches, who Im sure are
Methodists, Presbyterian, Baptists. And so we probably have a somewhat different understanding of
the meaning of ordination. But I hope very much that what I am going to say is something that will be
acceptable to all of us. And that is this: Ordination includes at least a public acknowledgement by the
Church that God has called those who are to be ordained. And further, a public commissioning of them
to exercise the ministry for which God has gifted them and to which God has called them.
So the call and the gift go together as a basis for ordination. And in particular, the gift for teaching is an
indispensable qualification. Without this gift and its accompanying call, nobody can be a preacher.
So thats on the one hand, the need for the call and the gift. But on the other hand, the divine gift, call,
and anointing are not enough in themselves. The gift has to be nurtured by and developed by the
people who have received the gift. So Timothy was exhorted not to neglect his gift, 1 Timothy 4:14, but
rather to fan it into flame, 2 Timothy 1:6. How he was to do this, he was not told in those passages, in the
pastoral epistles, but presumably he would do it by disciplined study, by the conscientious exercise of
his gift.
Now I still meet preachers from time to time who are suspicious of the exhortation to study. They think
its incompatible with the anointing of the Holy Spirit. And if they only are anointed by the Spirit, they

really dont need to study and study will be superfluous. Sometimes they even quote Jesus, or misquote
Jesus, who said, Dont be anxious what you shall say because it will be given to you what to say,
because it is not you who speak, but the Holy Spirit. And they dont seem to recognize that the context
for which, of this valuable promise, is the law court, not the church. And its a promise that is applied to
prisoners in the dark and not to preachers in the pulpit.
So we still need to study. More appropriate is 2 Timothy 2:7. Do you know this wonderfully
balanced verse? Consider what I say. Ponder what I say. Study what I say. And the Lord will give you
understanding in all things. He gives the understanding, but we have to do the studying. And he doesnt
give us understanding without study.
So we must accept the call to be students and to ponder and study the Word of God. It has long been
recognized by church leaders. Here is Spurgeon. He who no longer sows in the study will no more
reap in the pulpit. Phillips Brooks again, Learn to study for the sake of truth. Then your sermons will be
like the leaping of a fountain and not like the pumping of a pump. Martin Lloyd-Jones, You will always
find that the men whom God has used signally have been those who have studied most, known their
Scriptures best, and given time to preparation.
Billy Graham, I heard him speak some years ago to about 600 clergy in London, and he said that if he
had his ministry all over again, hed make two changes. The atmosphere was electric. People were saying
to themselves, what? The greatest evangelist in the world needing to change his ministry, if he had it all
over again? Yes, he said. I would make two changes. I would study three times as much as I have done.
Ive preached too much and studied too little. And secondly, I would give more time to prayer.
Study and prayer, the two priorities which were given to the apostles of Jesus, who said that they would
give themselves to the ministry of the Word and prayer.
So authentic Christian preaching is both biblical and contemporary, both authoritative and tentative,
both prophetic and pastoral, both gifted and studied. And fifthly, it is both thoughtful and passionate.
In all authentic preaching, the mind and the emotions are together involved. Clear thinking and
deep feeling are combined in authentic Christian preaching. Now some preachers are extremely
thoughtful. Their desk is piled high with commentaries and concordances and all the rest. And their
biblical orthodoxy is impeccable. They not only study, they bring the fruits of their study with them
into the pulpit. Every sermon is the product of painstaking exegesis and application. Wonderful. Most
commendable. But their sermons are as dry as dust and as dull as dishwater. They would never dream
of leaning over the pulpit with tears in their eyes begging people to come to Christ and be reconciled
to God. There is no feeling, no heart, no heat, no passion in their preaching. They never provoke the
little child, whom Charles Simeon of Cambridge provoked, who turned to her mother while he was
preaching and said, Mama, what is the preacher in a passion about? And we should be.
Yet how can anybody preach the gospel of Christ crucified and not be moved by this Gospel? So there
are some preachers who are marvelously studious, but somehow it doesnt reach their feelings, their
emotions. But then on the other hand, there are preachers who are all fire and no light. They rant and
rave in the pulpit. They work themselves up into a frenzy as if they were prophets of Baal, and every
sermon is one long, fervent, interminable appeal. But the people are confused what theyre being
appealed to to do because there was no exposition before the appeal. And it is a safe rule to say, no
appeal without an exposition and no exposition without an appeal.

And this is very clear in the Apostle Paul. He is a great example of this combination. 2 Corinthians 5:14,
The love of Christ constrains us, but the word really means it tightens its grip upon us, because we
are convinced that One died for all. You notice the conviction and the love of Christ tighten its grip.
Its again both the mind and the emotions brought together. And then he goes on, all is of God
who has reconciled us to himself through Jesus Christ, and as Christs ambassadors we beg you to be
reconciled to God. That is an exposition of reconciliation, followed by a begging that people will be
reconciled to God.
One or two examples before I conclude. Richard Baxter, the great Puritan, British Puritan, wrote a book
called, The Reformed Pastor that was published in 1656. Its still in print, and if you havent read it, I
urge you to read it. Its a very moving book. And Baxter, one of his favorite axioms was, First light, then
heat, and not the one without the other. Spurgeon said the same thing. There must be light as well as
fire. Some preachers are all light and no fire, while others are all fire and no light. What we want is both
fire and light. And here is Dr. Lloyd-Jones in his great book, Preaching and Preachers. He writes, What
is preaching? Do you know his reply to his own question? It is logic on fire. Eloquent reason. Are these
contradictions? Of course they are not. Reason concerning this truth or to be mightily eloquent as you
see it in the case of the Apostle Paul and others, its theology on fire. And I maintain that a theology that
does not take fire is a defective theology, or at least the mans understanding of it is defective. Preaching
is theology coming through a man who is on fire.
My last example is from Will E. Sangster, the Methodist leader during the Second World War. He was once
interviewing with a panel a number of young men who were applying for the pastorate. And there was
one rather shy young man who was extremely nervous while being interviewed. So he took the bull by the
horn and he said to the panel of selectors, he said, Gentlemen, I think I need to explain to you that Im not
the kind of man who would ever set the River Thames on fire. Thats a phrase we have in England. Setting
the Thames on fire is creating a sensation in the town. So he said, I am not that kind of person. Sangster,
with consummate wisdom, responded, My dear young brother, Im not interested whether you can set the
River Thames on fire. What I want to know is this: If I picked you up by the scruff of your neck and dropped
you into the River Thames, would it sizzle? In other words, are you on fire?
So here are five paradoxes of authentic Christian preaching: biblical and contemporary, relating the
ancient text to the modern context; authoritative and tentative, distinguishing between the infallible
Word and the fallible interpreter; prophetic and pastoral, combining faithfulness and gentleness; gifted
and studied, necessitating a divine gift with human self-discipline; and thoughtful and passionate,
letting the heart burn when Christ opens the Scriptures.
Well I dont claim any strong or close personal knowledge of the Devil, and it occurs to me that some
of you may know him better than I do. But I do know this, that hes an enemy of all balance. One of his
favorite hobbies is tipping Christians off balance. And if he cant get us to deny Christ, he will be happy if
we distort Christ.
So instead, I want to urge you to develop what I like to call BBCstanding now not for the British
Broadcasting Corporation, nor for Beautiful British Columbia, nor for the Bethlehem Bible Collegebut
for Balanced Biblical Christianity. Lets combine truths that complement one another. Lets not separate
what God has united. Its in these unresolved paradoxes that authentic Christian preaching is to be
found. God make us preachers like that.
So shall we pray together? And in the silence, take up one or other of these paradoxes. Pray that it may
be true in your life, and in the life of your brothers and sisters. Lets pray.

Our Heavenly Father, we recognize that preaching is a high and holy ministry and a great privilege. But
we also have recognized tonight that there are difficulties in having a balanced understanding of what
authentic Christian preaching involves. Deliver us from imbalance, we humbly pray. Help us to help one
another to become effective preachers and expositors of Your Word. We ask these things of the glory of
your great and worthy Name. Amen.

THE PRIVILEGE OF
PREACHING
THE PRIVILEGE OF PREACHING
By John Stott
Introduction
Personal.
Social or cultural.
Pastoral.
A Definition of Preaching: To preach is to open up the inspired text with such

faithfulness and sensitivity that Gods voice is heard and Gods people obey Him.
1. Two convictions about the Biblical text.
a) The biblical text is an inspired text.
Revelation.
Inspiration.
Providence.
b) The inspired text is also a partly closed text (the perspecuity of Scripture).
2. Two obligations in expounding the text.
a) Faithfulness to the ancient word.
b) Sensitivity to the contemporary world.
What does it mean? (E.D. Hirsch)
What does it say?
3. 3. Two expectations in consequence.
a) That Gods voice will be heard.
b) That Gods people will obey Him.
Prayer

THE PRIVILEGE OF PREACHING
Our topic is the Privilege of Preaching. And I think it is a good place to begin to remind one another
what a glorious ministry the ministry of preaching Gods Word is. But I have three introductory points to
make that you will see on your outline.
The first is a personal one. And that is that in speaking to you on the topic of preaching, neither Chris
nor I are assuming that we are experts and that you are novices. There is always something rather
inappropriate about one preacher preaching to other preachers about preaching. And I feel that
anomaly as I address you tonight. I can honestly say that when Im in the pulpit, I am often seized with
what I can only describe as a communication frustration, longing to communicate, but recognizing the
difficulty of doing so. When I come down from the pulpit, I nearly always feel the need to cry to God
for grace to do better next time. So I hope this puts us on a level. Its not experts talking to novices. It is
people who are called to the ministry of preaching who want to help and encourage one another. Thats
just a little personal word to begin with.
Secondly, a social or cultural point, and that is, that on the whole, contemporary society is unfriendly to
preaching. It seems to many people an outmoded medium of communication. Who wants to listen to
sermons nowadays, people ask. They are drugged by television and hostile to authority, and they are
weary of words and tainted by postmodernism so that they quickly become impatient and bored when
the sermon begins. Anthony Trollope, a well-known British novelist from the 19th Century, through a
rather unpleasant character, the Rev. Obadiah Slope, said that nobody but a preaching clergyman has
the power of compelling an audience to sit silent and be tormented. And if that was so in the 19th
Century, how much more is it so in the 21st Century? So I recognize that.
But now thirdly, I make a pastoral point. And that is, that in spite of all the problems we face in our
preaching ministry, we must persevere because the health of the church depends very largely on it. If it
is true of individuals, as Jesus said, quoting Deuteronomy, that a human being doesnt live by bread only,
but by every word that proceeds out of the mouth of God, it is equally true of churches. Churches live
and grow and flourish and mature by the Word of God, and they languish and even perish without it.
That is our conviction. We share it with you in these days. We hope that everybody will come to share it
by the end of the seminar.
So this is the lesson of history. Namely, that churches flourish by the Word of God. I quote from Dr.
Martyn Lloyd-Jones whose name will be familiar to most of you. He writes, The decadent eras and
periods of the churchs life have always been those in which preaching has declined. Thats the lesson
of history. I think he is right. So although we rejoice in the growth of the church in many parts of the
world, as Chris writes and I often say, it is growth without depth. And its the superficiality of Christian
discipleship that disturbs us very much indeed. We believe that the low level of Christian living is due
more than anything else to the low level of Christian preaching.
Well, there are three introductory points that I felt I wanted to make in order to set the scene for the
rest of what I have to say. Let me offer you now, as youll see on your outline, a definition of preaching.
THE PRIVILEGE OF PREACHING 17

If we have time, it will be very interesting to sit down alongside one another and develop our own
definition of preaching. This is mine in, I think, 21 words, and it will form the basis of the rest of our time
this evening. To preach is to open up the inspired text with such faithfulness and sensitivity that Gods
voice is heard and Gods people obey him. Now this definition contains six implications, two convictions
about the biblical text, two obligations in expounding it, and two expectations as a result.
Firstly then, two convictions about the biblical text. A) The biblical text is an inspired text. I begin here
because a high view of scripture, as being unlike every other text, unique in its origin, its nature, and
its authority, is indispensable to authentic Christian preaching. Nothing undermines preaching more
than skepticism about scripture. Now this is not the place for me to develop a sustained defense of this
conviction, but I hope I carry you with me in regard to the three words I put on the outline. That is, they
all belong to our doctrine of scripture, revelation, inspiration, and providence.
Revelation describes the initiative that God has taken to unveil or disclose Himself to us. Revelation
is a very humbling word because it implies that God in His infinite perfections is altogether beyond
the reach of our little finite minds. Without revelation, we would not be Christians at all. We would
be Athenians like those Athenians Paul discovered outside Athens who inscribed the altar, you may
remember, to an unknown God. And if God had not made himself known in revelation, then all the
altars of the world would be inscribed to an unknown God. But we believe that God has revealed
himself, not only in the ordered loveliness of the created universe, but supremely in Jesus Christ and in
the biblical witness to Christ. Revelation, what a glorious truth it is. I hope were not ashamed of it in any
way because we would know nothing of God if He had not made himself known.
Now I move on to inspiration, and inspiration describes the process which God chose to reveal himself.
Namely, by speaking. Speech is the best means of communication known to human beings. It is by
speaking now that Im seeking to communicate with you as you are seeking to listen. Speech is the best
means of communication that exists. And speech is the model, and it is only a model of course, that God
himself has chosen to indicate how He has communicated with us. Few ever thought that we cannot
read each others minds. As you sit there, I cannot read your mind. Ive no idea what youre thinking;
although, I hope that you may be following something of what Im saying. And if I were to stand here on
the podium silent, you would have no idea what was going on in my mind. Try.
What was I thinking about? Youve no idea. I tell you I was swimming in one of the beautiful beaches
of Jamaica. But you didnt know because you cant read my mind and I cant read yours if we are silent.
And if we cannot read each others minds, how much less can we read Gods mind unless He should
speak? And that is what we believe He has done. This inspiration is not, of course, a dictation process.
God has not demeaned human beings into computers or other machines in order to reveal Himself.
Divine inspiration did not smother the personality of the human authors. God spoke to and through the
human authors in such a way as to respect their own personality. Nevertheless, God did speak through
them in such a way that their words were simultaneously His words and His words were simultaneously
their words. So thats the double authorship of scripture, that God spoke through human authors to
reveal Himself to us.
Then the third word is providence, which is the loving provision by which God has arranged for what He
had spoken to be written down so that scripture is Gods word written. That is the definition of scripture
that is given in Article 20 of the Anglican 39 Articles. Scripture is Gods word written, which now in the
providence of God has been preserved across the centuries so that it is available to all people, in all
places, at all times.

So here is our first conviction, and it is indispensable to preachers. If God had not spoken, we would
not dare to speak, for we would have nothing to say but our own rather threadbare speculations. But
since God has spoken, we too must speak, communicating to others what He has communicated to us.
Indeed, we refuse to be silenced as the prophet, Amos, put it, that the Sovereign Lord has spoken, so
who can but prophesy? Who can, in other words, but pass on what He has spoken to us?
Well I pityif I may be frank with you tonight, I pity those preachers who enter the pulpit with no
Bible in their hands or with a Bible that is more rags and tatters than the Word of God. Such preachers
cannot preach because they have nothing to say. They cannot expound scripture because they have
no scripture to expound. But to enter the pulpit with the confidence that God has spoken, that He has
caused what He has spoken to be written, and that we have this inspired text in our hands and in our
minds, why then our heart begins to beat, and our blood to flow, and our head to swim, and our eyes
to sparkle with the sheer glory of having the Word of God entrusted to us today.
So thats 1A. The biblical text is an inspired text. I hope we are sure about that because it will affect
our preaching.
Now B. The inspired text is also a partially closed text. If to preach, in my definition, is to open up the
inspired text, it must be partially closed or it would not need to be opened up. And at once I think I see
your Protestant hackles beginning to rise. What do you mean, you say to me, that scripture is partially
closed? Is it not altogether an open book? Do you not believe with the 16th Century Reformers in the
perspicuity of scripture, that is that scripture has a see-through or transparent quality? Cannot even the
simple and uneducated read it for themselves? Is not the Holy Spirit our God-given teacher? Yes. Thank
you, for asking those questions. All of five of themmy answers to all five is yes, yes, yes. Thank you, for
asking those questions. And I can say a resounding yes to them all. But what you are rightly saying also
needs to be qualified.
The Reformers insistence on the perspicuity of scripture refer to its central message, namely, the gospel
of salvation in Christ alone, by grace alone, through faith alone. This way of salvation is absolutely plain
in scripture, plain as day. But the Reformers didnt claim that everything in scripture was equally plain
and perspicuous. You will remember, Im sure, that the apostle, Peter, wrote that there were some things
in the Apostle Pauls letters which were hard to understand. So if one apostle didnt always understand
another apostle, it wouldnt be very modest for us to say that we can. Know there are things in scripture
that are difficult to understand, which is one of the reasons we have this preaching seminar, in order to
think about principles of biblical interpretation.
But know the Church needs pastors and teachers to open up this partially closed test, to expound it, to
explain it. And the ascended Christ still gives these gifts to His church as we read in Ephesians 4, the gifts
of pastors and teachers. Im sure youll remember, of course you will, the wonderful story in Acts 8 about
the Ethiopian eunuch. Hed been up to Jerusalem for the feast, probably of the Passover, and he was
now on his way back home to Upper Egypt, or somewhere around there, and as he was jolting south
in his chariot, he had the scroll of the prophet Isaiah open on his lap. The Holy Spirit sent Philip, the
evangelist, to him, and the two men sat down alongside one another in the chariot. And the Ethiopian
was reading from Isaiah 53. Philip said to him, do you understand what you are reading, to which the
Ethiopian replied, why, of course. Dont you believe in the perspicuity of scripture? No, he didnt. That
was not his reply. He said, how can I understand unless somebody teaches me?
There is a need for teachers. We have the text. Now we need teachers of the text. Calvin, in his wonderful
commentary on the Acts, comments on the humility of the Ethiopian in acknowledging that he needed

a teacher. Calvin contrasted his humility with those who are swollen-headed and confident in their own
abilities. Im quoting Calvin: This is also why the reading of scripture bears fruit with such a few people
today, because scarcely one in hundred is to be found who gladly submits himself to teaching.
Here then is the biblical case for biblical exposition or biblical preaching. It consists of these two
fundamental convictions, that God has given us in scripture a text which is both inspired and to some
degree closed, difficult to understand. Therefore in addition to giving us the text, God has given us
teachers to open up the text. I think that is a wonderful truth myself. I hope you do too. Well, all that is
my first major point and Ill be briefer in the others. Weve seen two convictions about the biblical text.
Now secondly, two obligations in expounding the text. Granted that the inspired text needs to be
expounded, how should it be done? And before I try to answer this question, let us address ourselves to
one of the main reasons why the biblical text is partially closed and needs to be opened up. It concerns
the cultural gap, the cultural gulf between the biblical world of 2-4,000 years ago and the modern world
in which you and I are living.
I sometimes like to tell the story of something that happened to me and was extremely influential in my
own development and pilgrimage. I was talking one day to a couple of young men who were students.
One was at Oxford University; the other was at Edinburgh University. And they had been brought up in
a Christian, a nominally Christian home. Theyd drunk in their parents faith with their mothers milk and
obviously uncritically as children and boys, theyd taken onboard their parents faith.
Now they were students at university, one at Oxford, the other at Edinburgh, and they both said to me,
we are repudiating the faith of our parents. One said he was an agnostic. The other said, no, Im actually
an atheist. Oh, I said with some surprise. Then tell me about it. Whats happened to you? Is it that you
do not believe that Christianitys true? To my surprise, they said, no, thats not our problem. And if you
could persuade us that Christianitys true, were not at all sure that we would accept it. Oh, I said with
mounting surprise. Then what is your problem?
Our problem, they say, is not whether Christianitys true, but whether it is relevant. And frankly, they said,
we dont see how it can be relevant. These are their exact words. They said Christianity is an ancient,
primitive, Palestinian religion. So what is your ancient, primitive religion got to say to us? We live in the
exciting modern world. It was the 1970s when they were speaking to me. They said, we have men on
Mars in the 70s. Were going to have men onsorrymen on the moon in the 70s. Were going to have
men on Mars in the 80s. They were a little optimistic. They said we have transplant surgery today. We
shall have genetic engineering tomorrow. They got all turned on with excitement about the modern
world. And then with a sneer, almost a leer on their face, they said to me, what has primitive Palestinian
culture got to say to us? Its irrelevant.
Well, Im not going to tell you how I responded, because I did very badly. But Ive often thanked God for
that experience because it brought home to me more clearly than ever before the task of the Christian
communicator, which is not to make Jesus Christ relevant when we suspect that he isnt. No, no. It is to
demonstrate the contemporary relevance of our Lord Jesus Christ.
So it is, you see, this gulf between the ancient world and the modern world that constitutes the problem
that we are facing. So in preaching, we have two major obligations. A) Is faithfulness to the ancient word.
In wanting to demonstrate its relevance, we must not be unfaithful to what it actually teaches.
We have to accept the discipline of exegesis. That is, of thinking ourselves back into the situation of the
biblical authors, into their history, geography, culture, and language. We must never manipulate the

biblical text into making what we want it to mean or to say. We must not attempt to make it conform to
our opinions and then claim their patronage for our opinions. That is rightly called eisegesis as opposed
to exegesis. Exegesis, you know, is to draw out of the text what is there. Eisegesis is to thrust into the text
what is not there, but what you would like to find there. So since you cant find it, you put it there. Thats
eisegesis. Its the worst blunder that we can commit in interpreting and expounding scripture.
If I may quote Calvin again, because I believe he was the greatest expositor that God has yet given to the
church. He had an amazing mind and clarity of thought. And he saidits almost worth writing down
I think. He said, The first business of an interpreter is to let his author say what he does say. The first
business of an interpreter is to let his author, the biblical author, say what he does say.
Now a second obligation, and that is sensitivity to the contemporary world. Faithfulness to the ancient
word, sensitivity to the modern world. We have to struggle to understand the world in which we are
living in order to speak a word which resonates with our contemporaries. And its this combination of
faithfulness and sensitivity which makes the authentic preacher. In practice, if I may try to be practical
now, when were reading the scripture or preparing a sermon, as we study the text we need to ask
ourself two questions about the text and to ask them in the right order.
First, what did it mean? Or if you like, what does it mean? Because it does mean what it did mean and it
did mean what it does mean. The meaning of a text does not change with the changing years because
it is the author of the text who establishes its meaning. I put down the name of E. D. Hirsch. Professor E.
D. Hirsch of the University of Virginia wrote a book called Validity in Interpretation. And a little phrase
that he wrote quite near the beginning of the book has stayed with me ever since I first read it. He said,
A text means what its author meant. A text means what its author meant. It is the author, the writer of
the text, who establishes its meaning.
Now its there that we part company with Bultmann as a Christian existentialists. Bultmann would say a
text means what it means to me, and what it means to you and you and you and you and you and you
and you, it could be quite different. In some university circles they have a phrase that a text is infinitely
interpretable. We say no. On the contrary, it isnt. It may be infinitely applicable, but its not infinitely
interpretable. It has one meaning and that meaning was established by the author. So thats the first
question we have to ask. What did it mean when the author wrote it? How will the first people who
heard or read it have understood it? We have to go back to the original meaning of the text.
Then, of course, we come to the second question; what does it say? Weve asked what is its meaning.
Now what is its message? What does it say to people in our own generation? If we grasp the original
meaning of the text without going on to its contemporary message, we lapse into antiquarianism. We
live in the past totally unrelated to present reality. But if we make the opposite mistake and we start with
the contemporary message of the text, weve done our homework as to what it says without first having
asked what it originally meant, then we have surrendered to existentialism, unrelated to past revelation.
In other words, the historical revelation of God in Jesus Christ.
Well, I hope you followed that a little bit. Its possible to go to one or another extreme, to be interested
only in the meaning of the text without asking what it says, or only interested in what it could say
without doing the homework as to what it meant. So we have to ask both questions in the right order.
What did it mean and what does it say? And if you do that before you preach while youre preparing
your sermon, I think youll find it a great help, as at least I do, to clarify the meaning and then enforce the
message to the congregation.

Now we come toafter the two convictions and the two obligations, we thirdly have two expectations
in consequence. A) Our expectation is that Gods voice will be heard. But if we believe that God has
spoken through the biblical authors, we also believe that God speaks through what He has spoken. He
speaks with a living voice through the letter of the biblical text.
Now this was the conviction of the apostles of Jesus in relation to Old Testament scripture. You know
how often they quoted from the Old Testament, and when they did so, they introduced their quotations
with one or other of two formulae. Either they said ge graptie gar (ph), which means because it stands
written, or they said legie gar (ph), which means because it says, it speaks, or he speaks. So on the one
hand, its what was written and remains written in the text today. The other is what is a living voice that
speaks today.
Paul also writes in one passage, what does the scripture say? Well, we might say to Paul, now, come on,
Paul, what are you talking about? What does the scripture say? Scriptures an old book, a fusty old book.
Books dont talk. What do you mean what does the scripture say? Paul would have had no difficulty and
answer our question. He says, I know scripture is an old book, but through that old book the Word of
God, the living voice of God can be heard today. And in our private Bible reading and in our preaching,
we should long maybe above all else that through human words in all their frailty the Divine voice will
be heard, that Gods voice will be heard.
Because we read in Hebrews 4 that the Word of God is living and powerful and sharper than any two-
edged sword, piercing to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit and so on, discerning the thoughts of
the heart. Its a wonderful truth, that Gods word, though spoken centuries ago, is a living word today. He
speaks through what He has spoken.
Now such an expectation that as we read and expound the ancient text the voice of God will be heard,
that expectation is not held by many people today. There was an Episcopal rector in the United States
who in one of his books said that: We have devised a way of reading the Word of God from which no
word from God ever comes because were not expecting it. So when the time for the sermon arrives, the
people close their eyes, clasp their hands with feigned piety, and sit back in the pew for their customary
doze. And the preacher encourages it by his sleepy manner and voice.
How different it is when both preacher and people are expecting to hear the voice of God and
theyve come to church in order to hear Gods voice addressing them. Why then the whole situation is
transformed and the atmosphere becomes electric. The people bring their Bible to church, and when
they open it for the lesson or for the sermon, they sit on the edge of their seats or pew hungrily waiting
for the Word of God. And the preacher also prepares in such a way that he is expecting God to speak.
He prays beforehand in his study that God will come and address His people. He prays again before
he enters the pulpit. He prays again, maybe, before he begins to preach. And then when the sermon
is finished, he prays again that God will speak to the congregation, that the Holy Spirit will move from
person to person to person, addressing them with His own still, small voice.
You may recall how, what Cornelius and his family said when the Apostle Peter reached their home in
Acts 10. They saidActs 10:33 it is. They said now, to Peter, Now we are all here in the presence of God
to listen to everything the Lord has commanded you to tell us. Wouldnt it be terrific if our congregations
said that before we preach, if they said to us, now we are all here in the presence of God to listen to
everything which the Lord has commanded you to tell us? Expectation. I pray that during these days our
expectation will rise and we will learn to expect God to speak through His word whenever we have the
privilege of preaching. So thats A), the expectation that Gods voice will be heard.

And B), is the Gods people will obey Him. That hearing His voice, they will then respond in obedience.
Because, as James reminds us, we are not to be forgetful hearers of the word of God, but we are to be
obedient doers of what God says in His word.
Well, how should people respond? What kind of obedience should we expect from the congregation
when we speak? Well, the answer surely is this: that the nature of the response expected varies
according to the content of the word preached. What we do in response to Gods word depends on
what He says to us through it.
So let me give you some examples. If in the text that we have expounded God speaks about himself
and His own glorious greatness, then of course we humble ourselves before Him in worship. If on the
other hand He speaks through the text not about Himself, but about us, about our waywardness, and
fickleness, and sin, and guilt, and rebellion, then of course we respond in penitence and in confession.
Or if the text is about Jesus Christ, who died for our sins and was raised from the dead to prove it, we
respond in faith, laying hold of this Savior, this heaven-sent Savior for ourselves. Or if the text is about
Gods promises, we determine to inherit them. If about Gods commandments, we determine to obey
them. If the text is about the outside world and its colossal spiritual and moral need, then surely we
determine to preach the gospel and to meet these, the material needs of the poor. Or if the text is about
the future, about the coming of Christ and the glory that is to follow, why then we, our hope is kindled
within us and we resolve to be holy and busy until He comes.
So you see, the text may lead us to different responses according to the content of the text. So the
preacher whose penetrated deeply into the biblical text and has isolated or unfolded its dominant
thought or theme, and has himself been stirred by its message, will hammer it home in the conclusion
and give people a chance to respond to it, often in silent prayer. I am a great believer when the sermon
is over, that we pray in silence. We invite the congregation to engage in silent response, and we urge
them to respond to whatever it is that God has spoken to them by the Holy Spirit in the message. Its a
wonderful moment of silence, maybe as long as a minute of silence in which you know the people are
doing business with God and God is speaking to them and He isand they are responding.
So I conclude. Ive tried to open up a definition of preaching. You may not like it, you may have a better
definition yourself, but I have ventured to offer you a definition that contains two convictions, that the
biblical text is an inspired text that is partly closed and needs to be opened up. Two obligations, that
we open the scripture with faithfulness to the text and sensitivity to the context in which we live. And
thirdly, two expectations that through the exposition and application of the written word, God himself
will speak and His people will obey Him.
I dont hesitate to say, dear sisters and brothers, that it is an enormous privilege to be called to be a
preacher today. I know it is all so very exacting. I know that it involves a lot of hard work as we shall be
thinking in these days. But the privilege is even greater of having Gods word in our hands, as we stand
in the pulpit with His word in our hands and minds, Gods spirit in our hearts, Gods people before our
eyes, waiting expectantly for Gods voice to be heard and obey it.
Lets pray together now. And well practice what we preach and have a short time of silence. Maybe we
want to repent that we havent taken our preaching seriously enough, or that we have become stale.
Maybe we want to pray that God will use this seminar to all of us so that we may learn valuable lessons
about our preaching ministry. Lets be silent according to how we want to respond.

Now perhaps you would allow me to lead you in a concluding prayer. Our Heavenly Father, we desire to
thank you together tonight for the privilege of being your children, that you have adopted us into your
family by grace. We thank you that we are members of your worldwide church and that youve called
us to be leaders, pastors, elders, deacons, preachers in your church. And we want together to ask that
it may please you to bless this preaching seminar, to kindle our vision, to renew our determination, to
take our preaching ministry seriously. And grant we pray, Heavenly Father, that you will use us to bring
your word to the people entrusted to our care. We ask these things for ourselves and one another in the
name and for the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

CALL TO CHRISTIAN
MATURITY
CALL TO CHRISTIAN MATURITY
I greet you very warmly and heartily in the name of our common Lord and Master, Jesus Christ. Id like to
have a moment of quiet prayer with you, if I may. Let us pray.
Our Father, we thank you for your Word, this wonderful revelation that you have given us of yourself,
focusing as it does on the Lord Jesus Christ. And we pray that this morning you will enable us to
understand more clearly your calling to us to become mature and seasoned Christians. Grant your
blessing upon us this morning, we humbly pray, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.
Well, let me come immediately to my text. You know the subject is, A Call To Christian Maturity, and my
text is Colossians, Pauls letter to the Colossians, Chapter 1, verses 28 and 29. I hope by the end of this
morning you will have learnt it by heart. Its a magnificent Word of Scripture.
Colossians 1:28-29. Here it is. We proclaim Christ, warning everybody and teaching everybody in all
wisdom, that we may present everybody mature in Christ. And let me read it again or recite it again
because I know it by heart as I hope you will do soon. We proclaim Christ, warning everybody and
teaching everybody in all wisdom, in order that we may present everybody mature in Christ.
You know, when youre studying a verse of Scripture, its often a good thing to put it in the witness box
and probe it with questions. And thats what I propose to do this morning. I have three questions that I
want to address to our text.
Number one, what is Christian maturity? Because when you stop to think about it, there are many
different kinds of maturity. There is physical maturity, having a well-developed and healthy body. There
is intellectual maturity, having developed a consistent worldview. There is psychological maturity, being
able to establish relationships with people and bearing responsibilities. But above all, there is spiritual
maturity, and it is that that we want to delve into. What is spiritual maturity?
Well, the Apostle calls it maturity in Christ. To be in Christ is his commonest expression for what it means
to be a Christian. A Christian is not just somebody who goes to church or has been baptized or reads
the Bible. A Christian is a man or a woman in Christ. That doesnt mean inside Christ, as tools are in a
box or as your clothes are in a closet. To be in Christ means to be united with Christ, as the vine is in the
branches or as the limbs are in the body. To be in Christ is to be organically united to Jesus Christ.
So if to be a Christian is to be in Christ, related to Christ, to be a mature Christian is obviously to have a

mature relationship with Christ, a relationship in which we trust Him, in which we worship Him, obey
Him. Can we conceive a relationship like that, a relationship with Jesus Christ in which this union with
Him has become mature? Its a wonderful prospect before us.
So thats my first question: What is Christian maturity? It is a mature relationship to Jesus Christ.
Now secondly, how do Christians become mature? Well, consider the skeleton of my text. We proclaim
Christ in order that we may present everybody mature in Christ. Youll notice the repetition of Christ.
So thats the skeleton of our text. And its only logical because if Christian maturity is maturity in
CALL TO CHRISTIAN MATURITY 26

relationship to Christ, then the clearer our vision of Christ, the more convinced we become that He is
worthy of our trust, our love, our obedience, our worship, and so on.
I think most of you here will have heard of Dr. J. I. Packer. He is one of our leading evangelical
theologians in the world today, and his best known book, a classic of the 20th Century, is Knowing God.
Hope youve read it. Hope you will read it, if you havent. Its a great book. And what he writes in the
preface is that we are pygmy Christians because we have a pygmy God.
I know Jim Packer very well as a friend, so I think I may take the extreme liberty of slightly altering his
statement, and saying we are pygmy Christians because we have a pygmy Christ. The truth is that
there are many false christs on offer in the worlds religious supermarkets. There are caricatures of the
authentic Jesus. For example, there is Jesus the Clown, of Godspell; there is Jesus Christ Superstar; there
is Jesus the capitalist; and Jesus the socialist; and there is Jesus the founder of modern business. Did you
ever hear of him?
Well, in 1929, an ad man in Madison Avenue wrote a book calledwhat was it called? The Man
Nobody Knows. 1929, The Man Nobody Knows. And the last chapter is entitled, The Founder of
Modern Business. And in the course of that chapter he says, Why, dont you remember that when he
was only 12 years old, he said I must be about my Fathers business. He really did write that. Ive read
the book. But it profited me nothing.
Anyway, there are many more of these false Christs, and theyre all defective. None of them is calculated
to elicit from us our faith and love and obedience and worship and so on. Each is what the apostle in
another place calls, another Jesus. A Jesus different from the Jesus the apostles taught. So if we want
to grow into maturity in Christ, we need a fresh vision of the authentic Jesus. We need to see Him as He
really is, not a caricature, but an authentic Jesus.
In one of the most sublime Christological passages in the whole New Testament comes just a little bit
earlier than my text in verse 15. Just consider this as Pauls portrait of Jesus Christ. He is the visible image
of the invisible God. He is the Lord and heir of creation. For He isfor through Him the universe was
brought into being and holds together. And He is before all things in time and before all things in rank.
Moreover, He is the head of the body, the church. And thus He has a double supremacy. Hes head of the
universe, and Hes head of the Church. He is the Lord of both creations.
Friends, when you begin to meditate on this portrait of Jesus Christ, it blows your mind. Our place is
prostrate on our faces before Him, so great is He. For this is Pauls portrait of Christ. Away, then, with our
petty, puny, pygmy Jesuses. Away with our Jesus clowns and our Jesus pop stars. Away with our political
messiahs and our Christian revolutionaries. For these are caricatures. And if this is how we think of Christ,
no wonder our immaturities persist.
So naturally you ask me, well where, then, shall we find the authentic Jesus? And the answer, naturally, is
in the Scriptures. I would like to give you this definition of Scripture: Scripture is the furthest portrait of
the Son painted by the Holy Spirit. Scripture is the furthest portrait of the Son painted by the Holy Spirit.
The Bible is full of Christ. The Scriptures bear witness to me, He said, and He expounded unto them in all
the Scriptures the things concerning Himself.
Jerome, one of the great church fathers of the 4th Century A.D., wrote in one of his commentaries,
Ignorance of Scripture is ignorance of Christ. And we could state the opposite, that knowledge of
Scripture is knowledge of Christ.

So dear sisters and brothers, if only the veil could be taken from our eyes. If only we could see Jesus as
He is in his full authenticity, in the fullness of His divine human person, and of His saving work. Why then
surely we would see how worthy He is of our faith and love and obedience and worship, and we would
grow into maturity in Christ.
So far, then, weve asked two questions of our text. The first is, what is Christian maturity, and the second
is, how do Christians become mature? Namely, by coming to know the authentic Jesus.
Now thirdly, who can grow into Christian maturity? Well, I think when Ive read my text, which Ive
already done several times, you will have noticed the threefold repetition of the word, everybody.
Listen to it again. We proclaim Christ, warning everybody, teaching everybody, that we may present
everybody mature in Christ.
Well, the background to this threefold repetition is doubtless the so-called Colossian heresy which had
invaded the church. Scholars are still debating the exact form which it took, but almost certainly it was
an incipient Gnosticism, which became full grown only in the middle of the 2nd Century A.D. And these
proto-Gnostics seem to have taught that there are two classes of Christian, two categories of Christian.
On the one hand there is hoi polloi, the common herd who are united by faith, and on the other hand
there are hoi teleioi, which is the word he uses here, namely, the elite who have been initiated into
knowledge.
Now Paul was horrified by this Christian elitism, this division of the Church into two categories, and he
set himself resolutely against it. And in his proclamation of Christ he borrowed the Gnostic word, teleios,
meaning mature, and he applies it to everybody. He warns everybody, teaches everybody in all wisdom
that he may present everybody teleios, mature in Christ.
So maturity in Christ is emphatically not open to an eclectic few, a kind of spiritual aristocracy. No, on
the contrary. Maturity is open to everybody and nobody need fail to attain it.
How then shall I conclude? I think in two ways, both of which are concerned with Christian maturity. On
the one hand, we could use our imagination and sit down alongside the Colossian Christians. And we
could determine to listen to the Apostle Paul. And we could determine as we listen to Paul to study the
Scriptures more deeply and more regularly. And we could look for Christ in the Scriptures in order that
we may grow into maturity in Christ.
Thats one thing we could do, use our imagination. There you are sitting alongside the Colossian
Christians, listening to the Apostle Paul. We can often do that when were studying the Bible, putting
ourselves in the position of the readers and listening to their message. But on the other hand, we could
stand alongside the Apostle Paul as he addressed the Colossian church. True, he was an apostle and we
are not. Yet we do have pastoral responsibilities comparable to his.
Now, I dont have the pleasure of knowing more than a very few of you, but I guess that all of you, nearly,
perhaps all of you, in fact, have pastoral responsibilities. Some of you are ordained ministers; some of
you are lay leaders, elders, deacons; some of you are Bible class teachers, Sunday school teachers, and
so on. In other wordsand some of you are parents with responsibilities for your own children. So
whatever it is exactly, all of us have these pastoral responsibilities, responsibilities for other people.
What Im going to say now, I think, is the summary and very important. No higher goal for your ministry
is conceivable than Pauls, and that is to go beyond conversion to discipleship, and to present everybody

for whom he was responsible mature in Christ. To that end, Paul goes on. He bent his energies laboring
with all the energy that God mightily inspired within him.
So I hope as I conclude that all of us have this same double longing. On the one hand we long to be like
the Colossian Christians, learning from Paul in order that we may grow into maturity in Christ. On the
other hand, we could long to imitate Paul in his responsibility, pastoral responsibility for the Colossians
and others. And we can determine that whoever it is for whom we are responsible, our goal is to see
them. We want to grow ourselves, but we want them to grow into maturity in Christ.
May I say our text once again? If you feel youve learnt it by heart, you could even echo it with me.
We proclaim Christ, warning everybody and teaching everybody in all wisdom that we may present
Do you think you could try it once more? Because its such a wonderful text to tuck away in your mind
and memory. Are you ready?
We proclaim Christ, warning everybody and teaching everybody in all wisdom that we may present
Well done.

Langham Partnership USA
P. O. Box 189
Cave Creek, AZ 85327
480-595-5117
usa@langham.org
www.langham.org

John Stott Sermon Pack

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

John Stott Sermon Pack

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

John Stott Sermon Pack

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

John Stott Sermon Pack

15 The Privilege of Preaching

25 Call to Christian Maturity

1. Authentic Christian Preaching is both biblical and contemporary.

a) All Christian preaching is biblical preaching.

b) All Christian preaching also resonates with the modern world.

Conservative and liberal preaching. The call to study.

2. Authentic Christian Preaching is both authoritative and tentative.

a) The need to recover the voice of authority.

b) But God has not revealed everything (Deut. 29:29).

No gurus in the Christian community!

3. Authentic Christian Preaching is both prophetic and pastoral.

a) A faithful prophetic witness.

b) Gentle pastoral care.

4. Authentic Christian Preaching is both gifted and studied.

a) Called equipped and anointed by God.

b) Nurturing the gift of study.

5. Authentic Christian Preaching is both thoughtful and passionate.

a) Some are thoroughly orthodox but dry as dust.

b) Others are all fire and no light.

See 2 Corin. 5:14,18

THE PARADOXES OF PREACHING 4

THE PARADOXES OF PREACHING 5

THE PARADOXES OF PREACHING 6

THE PARADOXES OF PREACHING 7

THE PARADOXES OF PREACHING 8

THE PARADOXES OF PREACHING 9

THE PARADOXES OF PREACHING 10

THE PARADOXES OF PREACHING 11

THE PARADOXES OF PREACHING 12

THE PARADOXES OF PREACHING 13

THE PARADOXES OF PREACHING 14

A Definition of Preaching: To preach is to open up the inspired text with such

1. Two convictions about the Biblical text.

a) The biblical text is an inspired text.

2. Two obligations in expounding the text.

a) Faithfulness to the ancient word.

b) Sensitivity to the contemporary world.

What does it mean? (E.D. Hirsch)

What does it say?

3. 3. Two expectations in consequence.

a) That Gods voice will be heard.

b) That Gods people will obey Him.

THE PARADOXES OF PREACHING 16

THE PRIVILEGE OF PREACHING 17

THE PRIVILEGE OF PREACHING 18

THE PRIVILEGE OF PREACHING 19

THE PRIVILEGE OF PREACHING 20

THE PRIVILEGE OF PREACHING 21

THE PRIVILEGE OF PREACHING 22

THE PRIVILEGE OF PREACHING 23

THE PRIVILEGE OF PREACHING 24

So if to be a Christian is to be in Christ, related to Christ, to be a mature Christian is obviously to have a

CALL TO CHRISTIAN MATURITY 26

CALL TO CHRISTIAN MATURITY 27

CALL TO CHRISTIAN MATURITY 28

CALL TO CHRISTIAN MATURITY 29

You might also like