While I was in Seminary, one of our professors required
us to listen to The Master’s Seminary Chapel Lecture Series on Christ-Centered
Preaching. We were asked to take notes however we liked and to turn into him as
an un-credited assignment. Following are the short notes I had taken (23rd September 2016). If you
are a student of preaching, this lecture series will clarify the difference
between Christo-centric preaching and Christo-telic preaching when we seek to
preach a Christ-centered sermon. If you are tempted to stop reading, never
mind, scroll down, at least read the summary.
Lecture 1 Dr. Richard L. Mayhue
He gave an overview of Christ-centered
Preaching (CCP) under 3 headings: 1. An introductory overview of recent CCP. 2.
Overview of Impropriety or Improperness of CCP. 3. Overview of Legitimate
Biblical CCP. His lecture was based on 2 Corinthians 4:5. “Critically
important issues.” “Difficult to address like trying to answer yes/no answer to
a question “Have you stopped beating your wife?”
Marks of CCP: Christ-centered theme
and purpose. OT alone is nothing. Christ in every text - allegorically or
typologically. Redemptive History. Multiple meaning. Explain from OT preaching.
However, there are a variety of emphases in the proponents of CCP.
Proponents are covenantal in their Theology, reformed or Presbyterian
in their denomination.
He argued that they cause an improper view of God,
Scripture, and Hermeneutic. He contended that it should be Christo-telic and
not Christo-centric. The picture of
Father and Spirit is dim in their practices. He gave a good overview of the
times Christ is mentioned in the Scriptures - in each chapter and books of the
NT.
He suggested that we must be a new covenant Preacher
to be a Legitimate Biblical CCP Preacher.
Lecture 2 Dr. Busenitz
He gave a Historical Perspective of
CCP. He compares CCP to Allegorical Preaching. The outline can be noted as
follows - 1. The Church Fathers (Allegorical). 2. The Reformers (Allegorical).
3. The school of Historical-Grammatical Hermeneutic across the century.
Allegory is common in the early
days, even in the times of Jesus to Philo to Origen to Luther. Their intention
was noble, however, the method is not justifiable. Allegory is closely
associated with Typology. The meaning of the Scripture is one - not four or
five as thought by Origen and others. Luther said allegory is empty
speculation.
Historical-Grammatical Hermeneutic is
traced back to Theodore of Tarsus to Chrysostom to Calvin. Calvin is Theoc-entric
preaching.
In the end, he gave three lessons learned
from Church History:
1. Allegory is
dangerous, so we must avoid it.
2. Good motives
do not justify the bad method.
3. There is a
close link between Allegorical Preaching and CCP
He
finished with 2 Tim 2:15-16
Lecture 3 Dr. Chou
He gave the evaluation of CCP’s
Hermeneutics. His lecture is based on 2 Tim 2:15. Three Headings are noted: 1.
Explanation of CCP Hermeneutics. 2. Evaluation of CCP Hermeneutics. 3.
Sufficiency of Historical-Grammatical Hermeneutics. Chou gave lots of helpful
information about many things, apart from his evaluation of CCP.
He defined and explained what
“meaning” and “significance” is. Legitimate implications must be derived
from the meaning of the text, for it is often that there can be lots of
implications. CCP says that the contextual meaning is good, but not enough.
They say, “Christ is the subject topic of every text.” “FCF is the window to
the gospel……. and is brought out by analogy of contrast or comparisons.” [FCF -
Fallen Condition Focus]
In evaluating it, he said the
proponents employed Redemptive theological hermeneutics. He also
evaluated the proof texts of the proponents. He explained those texts in
their contexts and concluded that it establishes Historical-Grammatical
Hermeneutics rather than CCP Hermeneutics.
Finally, He made a case for
Historical-Grammatical Hermeneutics. He proved what it means and the
ramification of both kinds of Hermeneutics. He said Biblical Preaching based
on Historical-Grammatical Hermeneutics is a mandate. Historical-Grammatical
Hermeneutics is more than sufficient to expound the glory of Christ.
He offered three ways how Christ is
observed in OT: Prophecy of Christ, Preparation for Christ, and Christ as
Participant. Historical-Grammatical Hermeneutics lets the text speak and
brings forth the multifaceted of the glory of Christ. He demonstrated that by
NT use of the OT.
He challenged the listener that the
proponents of Historical-Grammatical Hermeneutics must first demonstrate it
before pointing to others. We must be studious and honor Christ, not only on
Pulpit but also in our Preparation. “Not just in the end but the means.” “Are
you willing to do the high and noble task?”
Lecture 4 Dr. Mook
He demonstrated WHERE and HOW is
Christ in the Old Testament. The primary text of his lecture is 2 Timothy 3:16.
He mentioned Christ and Apostle preached Old Testament. Then he talked about
the Messiah from Historical books, Psalms, and the Prophets. Jesus as
Prophet and King and Priest can be understood only from the proper knowledge of
the concept of each role in the OT. CCP without proper regard to that context
can dilute and misinform the role of Christ. He mentioned various Scripture
portions where Messiah is in it.
He criticized Graeme Goldsworthy’s
Interpretation and his hermeneutics. Goldsworthy overrides the Authorial
Intent by his covenant theological approach. He took the example of Psalm 1
and Isaiah 2:1-4.
Lecture 5 Dr. Essex
He gave the evaluation of CCP
Homiletics. The question is not who is against Preaching Christ. Bryan Chapel
has put CCP on the evangelical map in the 1980s. The heritage of CCP is
Allegory or excessive of Typology.
Dr. Essex gave an impression that CCP has gone into the evangelical map
like a storm because of His (Chapel) credentials and skills, and not
necessarily because of Biblical basis.
Christo-telic (points to) and
Christo-centric (about) must be distinguished. For Chapel, the Redemptive
historical model which is the “Fallen Condition Focus” is employed to get a
Christ-centered sermon. The redemptive nature of God. “Find out all
(both regenerate and non-regenerate including the Apostles) failures, and God’s
response to those failures.” “Grace” is big, but is that the central, all
the thrust of all passages?
“Every Expositor should be
textually driven, and audience sensitive,” said Dr. Essex. “We are all
fallen. How do we live out now?” is what CCP wrestles. Homiletics is a study of the preparation
and delivery of the homily. Theo-centric, Spirit-centric in Romans 8. The
proof text of CCP Proponents are not the model of preaching, it must be
understood in its context. Triune-Centric must be done. Salvation is not
done by Christ alone.
FCF is done by a theological
construct (Presbyterian - redemptive-historical hermeneutics and homiletics), a
pre-understanding before coming to the text. “Not as a fallen man, but as a
called man in Eph. 4,” says Dr. Essex. God’s character is not just grace -
but omnipotent, supremacy etc., not just a redemptive aspect. Preach
where Christ is. Chapel is though not monotone, but there is a sameness in
all his sermons. His sermon is almost predictable, thus it is not from the text
but an imposition on the text.
He concluded that it is not a personal
attack, but an argument. Be a discerning Preacher.
Lecture 6 Dr. Murphy
He lectured on the theme of how to
preach an Old Testament text. He maintained that Sidney Greidanus has done lots
but the covenantal based conclusion is not agreeable. “Christ is not
ultimately the point of every text even in the NT,” says Dr. Murphy.
“Spurgeon is a Christ-centered Preacher.” “I do not make Christ every point of
my sermon, however, I do not hesitate to refer Christ in any of my messages,”
says Murphy. If you want to preach Christ, preach from NT.
3 Basic Principles of how to preach OT
for today’s context: 1. Christ is rightly seen in many passages. If He is
the point, make it; such as Gen 3:15, Ps 2, Isaiah 53. 2. Christ is neither
the point, nor even remotely the point in some passages. It is an abuse of
text if you preach Christ there. Such as “our Pastor preaches Calvinism”
would be the symptoms. 3. Christ is not the only truth the Church needs to
know. Acts 20:18-27; 1 Cor. 10:6ff “not just to see Christ but to
learn a spiritual lesson.” Eph. 4:11; 2 Tim 3:16.
Greidanus mentioned 7 ways of
Preaching Christ from OT. Some of them are good. Genesis 1 is a perfect
world and does not have a redemptive aspect. Greidanus finds it difficult to
preach it. The message what the Church needs is not just Christ - Genesis -
creationism is important.
In an evangelistic context, it is
completely appropriate to make Christ the point. Even then, one must handle
the text properly in the context - not with creativity to make Jesus the point.
We must preach the whole counsel of God - week after week.
Summary:
Christ-centered Preaching must be
defined properly before we talk about whether we are for it or against it. If
it means Preaching Christ, every minister of NT Church is given the mandate to
do so. However, the issue is whether one should preach EVERY sermon from ANY
passage of the Bible with Christ as the subject. The answer is “No!”
Also,
one should not preach ONLY Christ, and nothing else even from the New
Testament. Christian needs the whole counsel of God (as Dr. Murphy points
out Acts 20:18-27; 1 Cor. 10:6ff; Eph. 4:11; 2 Tim 3:1).
The legitimate Biblical model of
Christ-centered Preaching is Christo-telic.
Christo-centric is wrong both in homiletic and hermeneutics when you
force into any and every passage of the Bible.
The legitimate way of exalting
Christ is to preach Him where He is. Forcing in where He is not, is abusing
the text, and rips off the richness and God-intent purpose of that passage
which He puts in His wisdom.
We are not supposed to force in
Christ where He is not, however, we do not need to hesitate to refer Christ
when appropriate. Especially, in Evangelistic settings or depending on the
audience, one can make Christ as the subject, provided one handles the text
properly in the context. This is not the norm. In fact, why should one preach
from where He is not there when there are scores of Christological passages
available?
What does it mean to preach Christ? It means to preach Christ where He
is found. It is almost everywhere in the NT. We are NT people, designed and
called out by God. We can give more time and effort there. In the OT, there are
passages where Christ is found explicitly (Messianic, etc.) we preach there
Christ.
Even in other passages, we may have a
Christo-telic-approach (pointing to Christ for the ultimate fulfillment), but
not as the theme or subject of the passage. Do we need to PREACH CHRIST? Yes,
faithful to the text.
Christo-centric Method is on a slippery slope. It has the
heritage of the Allegorical Method. It portrays negligence of Spirit and Father
(we should be Triune-centric, and also preach the whole counsel of God, some
for examples, and so on). It will weaken theology because the other doctrines
are forcefully replaced by the message of Grace. The redemptive-historical
method in every sermon would starve the congregation from other aspects of
God’s Attributes. Also, it will make the sermon predictable and superficial.
