Preaching KJV to “avoid stumbling”?

A preacher was recently discussing with a radio personality the application of Paul’s teaching in 1 Corinthians about not causing others to stumble.

The preacher explained that he much prefers, both for his own use and for preaching preparation, the ESV or (gasp!) even The Message, which he is always quick to explain is merely “commentary” (you may anticipate another post about that later).

The preacher also explained that many people in his congregation have grown up with the KJV, memorized verses in KJV, and enjoy the literary vibrancy and meter of the KJV. Therefore, due to Paul’s admonition not to cause others to stumble, the preacher uses the KJV whenever he is in the pulpit.

Several questions come to mind.

1. Is this proper interpretation? That is, is a congregant’s dislike of a version of Scripture equate to the “weaker brother” in Paul’s admonition, such that using an unpopular version from the pulpit equates to “causing them to stumble”?

2. Similarly, who is to be kept from stumbling? That is, in any given congregation there will be more than one favored version of Scripture. If the preacher uses KJV to keep KJV-lovers from stumbling, what about those who prefer the NIV, the NLT, the RSV? Do we presume that they do not stumble, or that their stumbling is less problematic than that of the KJVers?

3. Is this appropriate pulpit stewardship? That is, even if the preacher’s use of a particular version of Scripture does not call into play issues of stumbling, should he use a version that he does not like in order to satisfy some who like it?

Comments and insights (and insightful comments) are welcome.

Apostolic Preaching

“Truly apostolic preaching is not ethical imperative ungrounded in theological indicative. It is not psychological manipulation, moralistic harangue based on guilt, or pragmatic life coaching, untethered to the truth of Christ’s redemptive accomplishment on behalf of his believers.

“When the apostolic preacher directs his hearers in God’s name as to their way of life, that direction flows naturally and inevitably out of Christ’s redeeming work on their behalf. Apostolic preaching is profoundly practical because it is profoundly theological. Transformed convictions transform attitudes and behavior.”

Dennis E. Johnson, Him We Proclaim

Packer on Preaching

>”Doctrinal preaching certainly bores the hypocrites; but it is only doctrinal preaching that will save Christ’s sheep. The preacher’s job is to proclaim the faith, not to provide entertainment for unbelievers — in other words, to feed the sheep rather than amuse the goats.”

— J.I. Packer, in A Quest for Godliness: the Puritan Vision of the Christian Life.

Doriani on Boring Preaching

>”In too many churches, people hear the same applications, in much the same words, week after week. Week by week they hear that they should pray more, evangelize more, serve more; be more holy, more faithful, more committed. Contaminated by traces of legalism, such messages grow dull and predictable. If the preacher’s ultimate crime is to promote heresy, the penultimate crime is to make the faith seem boring.”

— Daniel M. Doriani, Putting the Truth to Work

A Sermon is Not a Music Video

In Part 1 I began a discussion for those called upon to listen to sermons. Here we will review some basics to distinguish sermons from other contemporary forms of communication.

A SERMON IS NOT A MUSIC VIDEO

I know. This comparison may be lost on those to whom music video is just as anachronistic as “butter churn” or Vitalis. But the medium of communication inaugurated by the music video shaped entertainment and limited the collective attention span in a mighty way. We should not expect a sermon to last only 3 ½ to 5 minutes or have great special effects, heavy make-up, pyrotechnics, or teased hair. The preacher should not enter the pulpit through the mist and smoke created by a fog machine.

Some say that the modern audience is no longer able to focus on an average-length sermon. But the content of a proper sermon is infinitely more valuable than a music video, an episode of Law & Order, or even the three-hour finale of The Apprentice. If we can sit through those, we can pay attention to a 30-, 45-, or (whoa!) even hour-long sermon about matters of eternal consequence.

A SERMON IS NOT A BLOG POST

In the world of constant, rapid change, blogging is old news. It’s also sort of like navels: everybody’s got one. They can also be anonymous, untrue, and vicious. Not the sort of thing with which to compare sermons.

But sometimes our temptation is to treat sermons the same way. The preacher might use the (anonymous) material of another preacher or throw assertions out without foundation or let the proverbial comment stream go wild until – after 732 posts – the thread is finally exhausted because the people are, too, and no one remembers what set the whole thing off.

A SERMON IS NOT A TEXT MESSAGE

A prchr cnt rdc t msg 2 its strppd cmpnts & xpct 2 b bff 4vr w/ t cngrtn.

A SERMON IS NOT A TWEET

But, if it were:
10:17 a.m. – Walking to the pulpit.
10:18 a.m. – opening the Bible. Turn to James 1:16-18.
10:19 a.m. – What good is God?
10:24 a.m. – Sorry, been in the bathroom (swine flu).
10:26 a.m. – Walking stage left and gesticulating: Stand firm in trials.
10:45 a.m. – Battery went dead; had to recharge
10:52 a.m. – Out of cell range for a while…
11:04 a.m. – Genuflecting: Pray with me.

A sermon is not a book, an owner’s manual, or a “Idiot’s Guide” to whatever. It is the proclamation of the word of God to the people of God through the man of God whom He has called and equipped for that purpose.

So, dmnd gd srmns that prclm Gd’s wrd. BFF, lol, CU ltr.

Don’t Preach for Content (use visuals)

Sermon time is not a time for a pastor to call attention to himself through style or content. It is time to help worshipers experience God through faith in the risen Lord Jesus.”

And, by the way, it is a time to use lots of visual aids.

So says Bob Terry, editor of The Alabama Baptist in the September 17, 2009 issue. At first blush, Terry’s statement about preaching seems to meet biblical muster. It denies that pastors should call attention to themselves. It affirms that worshipers should experience God. It speaks of faith in Jesus. What could possibly be wrong with such things?

Or content”, that’s what.

In his editorial, Terry covers much ground, including smart-sounding research about the attention spans of adults, impressive data regarding how people learn better when additional senses are employed, and how dynamic speaking styles might actually detract from a gospel message. In short, people are dumb, preachers must use lots of pictures, and preachers themselves must be dull.

I must admit that I am probably confirmation of at least one of Terry’s assertions: I have a short attention span for dull, shallow preaching. But that is not the point.

What is significant is that Terry believes it wrong for a pastor to call attention “to content,” and that he further sets up a false choice between that “content” and helping “worshipers experience God through faith in the risen Lord Jesus.”

How, precisely, can a preacher – or anyone else – help people worship, help them experience God, or facilitate the operation of faith in Jesus without content? And, if a preacher is prohibited from calling attention to 1) himself, and 2) content, what is left to call attention to?

What Terry is opposing here is not the failure to help people worship. It is not a lack of focus on Jesus. It is not omitting an emphasis on experiencing God. What Terry opposes is biblical preaching that actually proclaims something; preaching that fills listeners with the word of God, challenging them to employ their will, emotions, and yes, even their minds, in worshiping God and in serving him.

Most people have no attention-span problem in the classroom, in the courtroom, or in the conference room. People have no problem focusing when they set up their Twitter account, follow their Facebook postings, or monitor their blog threads. What people have a problem following is dull preaching.

And dull preaching is dull even if there are lots of pictures.

At the Fulcrum or End of the Lever

>”No matter how good they [pastors] are at listening, hand-holding, and personal encouragement, if they cannot teach the word of God they are disqualified from the office/role of pastor/elder/overseer. …

“Conversely, however, preachers who are nothing more than pulpiteers, who display few Christian graces that enable them to love people, work with people, listen humbly, exhort patiently, encourage graciously, and rebuke engagingly, are simply disqualified.”

D.A. Carson, in Preach the Word: Essays on Expository Preaching (ed. Ryken & Wilson, Crossway, 2007, p 175).