John Murray was a theologian who taught at Princeton Theological Seminary and then helped to found Westminster Theological Seminary along with J. Gresham Machen and others.
I saw some comments attributed to John Murray regarding the difference between preaching and lecturing here.
The comments are simple and helpful, so I thought I would pass them on. I feel like I have heard this somewhere else before (perhaps in one of my preaching classes?), but I thought I could not hurt repeating.
So, here is what Murray says distinguishes the two:
A sermon must be Personal.
It must be Passionate.
And it must involve a Plea.
Just someone else's thoughts,
Frank
5 comments:
True if you are John Piper, which is okay. But I prefer John MacArthur's style.
Mr. Whisnant,
Thanks for stopping by. I am always glad to receive feedback.
I was wondering if you could elaborate on your comment a little bit.
I have not really heard either of the men "preach" very much, so I am not that familiar with their actual preaching style. (In other words, most of what I have heard from those two men have been more in the form of lectures and special sessions - e.g. Piper's biographies and some "Questions and Answers" on issues with MacArthur)
While I have read some stuff from these men, I don't know how much of their preaching style comes through in a book, so I was wondering what you would characterize as the key difference and how that relates to the three "P's" mentioned.
As I mentioned, I had come across the comments, but they are not mine.
Is your concern with all three of these or with just one of these three?
Would love to hear your thoughts on this, sir.
Thanks,
Frank
Piper is very passionate in his preaching. While he is very good, his sermons are biblical, he believes the passion needs to be felt too.
MacArthur whom I have followed for 35 years has a style of teaching. Little passion in the sense of delivery, but keep to the facts of the text.
I have heard both preach many times, on radio, tv. YouTube and in person a number of times.
I am far more concern with the message than the style of preaching.
As far as your points you gave, they are all good.
I just saw where you pastor a baptist church. Indep. and Fund. on top of that. So do I, and have for a number of years. I have found out there are many brands of IFB, BBF, WBF, etc. What I have learned in my 60 years of ministry knowing your Bible will change your mind about what you have always heard about the Bible. Learning what the text says has been such a wonderful experience in knowing how to preach the Word of God.
Pastor Whisnant,
Thank you again for stopping by and for elaborating on your earlier comment. I am sorry it has taken me so long to get back to you.
I am glad to hear of your comments regarding the text and the importance of faithfulness to the text - and I agree with you wholeheartedly.
I would agree that the substance is more important than style when it comes to proclaiming the Word. It is sad that far too often "good preaching" has been associated with "it makes me feel good" rather than with clear exposition.
I would also believe, however, that clarity of exposition does not necessarily preclude compelling exposition.
Thanks again for your thoughts here. I definitely appreciate your interactions.
In Christ,
Pastor Frank Sansone
Post a Comment