In a recent article for Evangelicals Now, Bill James (principal of London Seminary) said preaching today was “like hot food on a cold plate”
I’m not keen on such broad generalisations. But I know the kind of preaching he means.
Generally, I think such preaching over-emphasises the use of commentaries. The thing is commentaries aren’t good models for sermons.
There are 8 important difference between commentaries and sermons, and if you don’t know them it will hinder your preaching.
1. Different Purpose
A commentator writes to explain the meaning of the text.
That is not the chief goal of preaching. The chief goal of preaching is worship.
It involves explanation. But it goes deeper.
A sermon should draw the hearer to love Christ more. If it stops at explanation (like a commentary), it will fall short.
2. Different Audience
The audience of a preacher is varied. In his congregation there will be:
Non-Christians and Christians
Children and adults
Uneducated and educated
The audience of a commentary is very specific. It is written for people with theological degrees.
That means many of the issues which interest commentary readers are of no relevance to your hearers.
For example, many Romans commentaries devote pages to engaging with the New Perspective on Paul. I’d be impressed if your congregation even know what that is.
3. Different Medium
Writing is a different medium to spoken word.
Some differences:
Repetition is important to spoken word. Because you can’t go back and read again, words and phrases need to be repeated to be remembered
Language should be informal in spoken word, otherwise it sounds strange to those who know the preacher.
Non-verbal communication (eye-contact, gestures, pauses) plays a huge role in preaching and is non-existent in writing.
4. Different Evangelistic Method
Evangelical commentaries are evangelistic. They often tackle intellectual objections to the Bible, showing the rigour of the biblical faith.
But it is a different method than the pulpit calls for.
There is some dealing with objections. But there is also to be urging, calling to repentance, clear revelation of sin.
None of these will be found in a commentary.
5. Different genre
A poem is different to a play. A mystery novel is different to a fantasy novel.
Genre is important.
Sermons are a different genre to commentaries. For example, some key elements missing are:
Illustrations
Easily memorable points.
Application
Commentaries also have some features that would be inappropriate in the pulpit
Presenting every possible interpretation
Exhaustive cross-references
Assuming original languages
6. Different skillset
Most commentators aren't great preachers. And why would they be? They aren't practiced.
Many pastors will preach twice a week. They aren’t in one book of the Bible. They preach a range of texts, needs and hearers.
As a result their skills for their art are superior.
If you want to grow as a painter, you study painters not sculptors. Similarly, to become a better preacher you need to study preachers.
7. Different approach to Christ
Old Testament commentaries are nervous about Christ-centred interpretation (although this is changing due to the influence of Biblical Theology).
A pastor MUST find Christ in the passage. Sadly commentaries can often be a hindrance rather than a help.
8. Different promise
God never promises the Spirit to empower commentary writing. Of course, to some extent he can work through a commentary.
But you have a very low view of preaching if you think there isn't a difference here. There is a promise set on preaching no other teaching has.
Every preacher has had heare tell them how a sermon struck in ways that you never imagined. The Spirit preaches a hundred different sermons via your single sermon.
But What About Preaching Commentaries?
An objection someone might raise is, “What about preaching commentaries?” Some commentaries like the “Preaching the Word” series are based on sermons.
Have you ever listened to the sermons that were the source of a preaching commentary? I often have. It's interesting to hear the difference...
Frequently the preached version will have
Longer time on application
More specific application
Fewer sermons in the series
Less technical detail
More informal language
You can certainly gain something from preaching commentaries. But don't be fooled into thinking that it has remained the same when it's moved to the page.
Conclusion
Am I saying commentaries are evil?
No
Am I saying commentaries can't be helpful?
No
Am I anti-expositional preaching?
Goodness no!
But I am saying preachers need more than commentaries. A sermon is not just a spoken commentary.
If it is, something is wrong.
Where to turn to improve our preaching then?
Well I've got some ideas, but you'll have to wait for another day…