Exegesis - Help!

[Mendalla]

Any advice from those who read their sermons on how to engage with the congregation as one reads?

I used to read mine but found I tended to go off-script rather easily so gave up. So, any advice I give here needs to be taken with a grain or two of salt.

A few thoughts nonetheless (and do even now with my notes):

Know your sermon well enough that you can look away from it without losing your way. Even if you have a full written sermon that you are reading from, you should have at least the outline memorized. Also helps if pages accidentally get out of order of something.

Make sure you format it for easy reading. If you have trouble with closeup reading or use reading glasses, make the font larger and the line/paragraph spacing wider. When you set up in the pulpit/lectern, make sure everything is in order in such a way that you can easily turn each page over and carry on to the next one seemlessly. Again, knowing what's on the next page per above helps with that.

If you are able (some people's memories are better at this than others) read a bit ahead so you can look up, look up to deliver what you just read, then look back for the next bit rather than just reading word for word which forces you to keep looking down at the script

In general, the more prepared and confident you are about the "script", the more you'll be able to look up and out at your audience without losing track.

Also, when engaging, don't always look the same way. Make sure you engage everyone. IOW, don't just look OUT but look AROUND. Don't just look at the front row, but also look back to the back row.

I've often thought here in Wondercafe that differences in theology play too much a part of conflict.

And that's too bad in some ways. We can learn so much from engaging with others' ideas. By rejecting other theologies out of hand, we may miss some bit of wisdom. For instance, I may not be a Calvinist and may never be one, but I have found tremendous value in learning about it from John.

 

[revsdd]

Have you ever been an outsider in a community?

In my early teen years I was an outcast. My school from K-6 was a feeder school to a school that handled 7-8. From K-6 I was a pretty popular kid. I had a lot of friends. The school was a predominantly middle class school, it valued academic achievement and I was pretty successful. The school I passed into in Grade 7-8 served a much wider community, and included kids from tougher backgrounds and neighbourhoods. One of the "toughs" took a dislike to me. I don't need to make a short story long, so let's just say that while I stood up for myself against physical bullying (and by doing that learned a valuable life lesson that I have seen repeated many times - that bullies are generally cowards who talk tough but don't know how to handle people who stand up to them very well and will avoid direct confrontations with anyone who does) being willing to do that did not end my descent into isolation. For the rest of my time at that school (and for the first couple of years at high school) I was verbally and emotionally bullied by the "tough" and his crew. Those who had been my friends abandoned me. I guess they feared they'd become the next targets. I'd be called names walking through the school. I'd be deliberately excluded from social events. My locker would be broken into and stuff in it vandalized. No one - literally no one - would even sit with me for lunch. I reached the point where I wouldn't even bother going into the cafeteria at lunch time. I'd take my sandwich (or whatever I brought) outside even in the middle of winter and just walk around the neighbourhood alone eating it until I had to go back to school. Probably not surprisingly, my marks plummeted, I started to hate school, I started skipping classes. No one - including teachers - seemed to notice or care. This was the most "hellish" four years or so of my life. I was probably in Grade 11 before I started to pull up my socks, so to speak, and be able to make some friends again and start to do well in school again.

If so, did it change how you related to outsiders?

It changed how I related (and still to a degree relate) to people in general. I tend to be very slow to make friends. I'm emotionally cautious around people - I keep my emotions very close to the vest, so to speak. I'm very much an introvert - comfortable in my own skin and happy with my own company. I tend not to care very much about what people think of me. I suspect that's probably the same whether the person is an outsider or an insider. I think of myself as compassionate and I do sympathize with those who are bullied, ostracized, etc. Once I became a person of faith and started reading the Bible, one of the things that stood out and appealed to me was Jesus' treatment of outsiders. The idea of a God who would welcome all attracted me. I regularly encourage kids I know from my congregation or elsewhere to befriend the kid in their school who has no friends. I am very conscious in social situations (especially at church) of people who seem cast aside or on the margins, and despite being an introvert I do tend to gravitate toward such people - probably because I can relate to how they feel.

 

[revjohn]

revjohn, I'm not a Calvinist - so I don't think my sermon will meet with your approval

Unless I am specifically asked to give critical feedback on a sermon I won't.

In order to do that I would need audio and video (unless I could be physically present) because 80% + of our communication is beyond the text of our sermon.

This is where homiletics takes over.

I can appreciate the craft without agreeing with the conclusion.

Also, Calvinists don't get free passes on sermons. The infamous Fred Phelps claimed to be a five point Calvinist.

In Calvinist language the five points are the TULIP formula. Also known as the doctrines of grace.

Phelps might have thought he knew those doctrines cold. Nothing in his public ministry demonstrated any familiarity with the concept of grace or that grace had touched his life.

Speaking personally a good sermon is not one that I agree with because it plays safe with doctrine. A good sermon is one which challenges me and my understanding of scripture or doctrine. The sermon is a teaching tool. When I am listening I am there as student. I expect to learn something.

If the preacher doesn't challenge me in any way I have been deprived an opportunity to grow.

and probably not just because I'm not a Calvinist!

In all fairness you wanted help understanding what exegesis was and seem pretty intent of approaching the text with your own ideas.

Which can end up being a powerful sermon even if it isn't exegesis.

And yes. Exegesis is difficult. It should be since it demands the preacher listen first and respond next.

But that's okay, as it will make a lot of sense to the congregation at our mission church - many of whom have first-hand experience of the life of an outsider.

It is okay. It may not be good exegesis. That doesn't make it not okay. Unless you were to claim that it is what the text is saying.

As revsdd points out there is application. One can take that application from general themes and not specific texts.

From your description of the assignment it seemed like exegesis was rather primary.

Also, we're limited to ten minutes -so I have to make choices

I empathize. Sometimes texts are really rich.

Any advice from those who read their sermons on how to engage with the congregation as one reads?

It is all in the script.

Include stage directions for yourself where the text calls for a thoughtful pause.

Another rhetorical device is to ask a question. The same one repeatedly. The question begs an answer. Hopefully one you address in the sermon. In that regard the question functions as a cheerleader at a pep rally.

"We've got spirit yes, we do . . ." kind of thing.

You have an idea where you want to go. Hopefully you are casting a vision and you want the congregation to join you. The question helps the audience keep up and have an idea of where things are going.

Also take your time. It is a sermon not a race.

If eye contact might throw you off do not look anyone in the eyes. Check out their hair, the space just above their heads anything but their eyes. Since you will likely be 10 ft or more away from the nearest listener they won't know you aren't looking at them directly if you are close.

 

[BetteTheRed]

It occurs to me (and don't laugh too hard, please), that I am far more often critical than praiseful in my interactions with others.

I'd like to take a minute to praise revjohn and revsdd for their careful, thoughtful, helpful comments on this thread.

*You may now resume your regularly-scheduled programming*

Let us know how you make out PP...

 

[revjohn]

revjohn, seems from the example you mentioned - that the perceived differences in theology were part of your insider/outsider scenario?

Ultimately that is what it boiled down to.

What caused me to stand out like a sore thumb at Redeemer was more ethnic diversity.

Plop one kid of Scots heritage into a sea of Dutch kids and he really sticks out. So they knew I was different right away. How different came later.

VST started differently. I looked like I belonged. It wasn't until I didn't affirm what a genius Spong was ( he really isn't) that folk began to think I was odd.

In the end the stereotypes were the biggest issue I had to contend with and I was not an easy fit for either.

I've often thought here in Wondercafe that differences in theology play too much a part of conflict. Seems we all cling to our own particular theology -and criticise the others. (That said, I know Process Theology is the right theology. )

Honestly I don't think theology is our biggest obstacle. I think how we were socialized is.

Chansen more than any other poster is inclined to take issue with doctrine. Those of us who operate on the theist side of the fence will disagree on points of doctrine but it is our behaviours that create the biggest conflict.

It is way to easy to hide bad behaviour behind belief. It is cowardly but that doesn't get noticed so much.

If I can convince you that conflict with me is a result of theological differences rather than my being an ass then the real problem is yours and it is with doctrine not me and my behaviour.

Of course if most of us critically reflected upon our bad behaviour rather than the inability of others to recognize sound doctrine that would force us to change.

The bad behaviour isn't always intentional. Text based communication has always been fraught with peril and the immediate nature of the internet allows us to act in the heat of the moment when we should probably get utside for a minute or two.

 

[PilgrimsProgress]

I used to read mine but found I tended to go off-script rather easily so gave up. So, any advice I give here needs to be taken with a grain or two of salt.

A few thoughts nonetheless (and do even now with my notes):

Know your sermon well enough that you can look away from it without losing your way. Even if you have a full written sermon that you are reading from, you should have at least the outline memorized. Also helps if pages accidentally get out of order of something.

Make sure you format it for easy reading. If you have trouble with closeup reading or use reading glasses, make the font larger and the line/paragraph spacing wider. When you set up in the pulpit/lectern, make sure everything is in order in such a way that you can easily turn each page over and carry on to the next one seemlessly. Again, knowing what's on the next page per above helps with that.

If you are able (some people's memories are better at this than others) read a bit ahead so you can look up, look up to deliver what you just read, then look back for the next bit rather than just reading word for word which forces you to keep looking down at the script

In general, the more prepared and confident you are about the "script", the more you'll be able to look up and out at your audience without losing track.

Also, when engaging, don't always look the same way. Make sure you engage everyone. IOW, don't just look OUT but look AROUND. Don't just look at the front row, but also look back to the back row.



And that's too bad in some ways. We can learn so much from engaging with others' ideas. By rejecting other theologies out of hand, we may miss some bit of wisdom. For instance, I may not be a Calvinist and may never be one, but I have found tremendous value in learning about it from John.

Thank you, Mendalla - some great advice re presentation- I suspect my mirror will get the best workout it's had for years (I don't much like seeing that old lady who seems to have taken over my house!)..........

 

[paradox3]

Thank you, Mendalla - some great advice re presentation- I suspect my mirror will get the best workout it's had for years (I don't much like seeing that old lady who seems to have taken over my house!)..........

I actually don't like practising a speech in front of a mirror. I look outside through the window in the living room.

And yes, I get what you are saying about the old lady who has moved in. She looks remarkably like my mother.

 

[PilgrimsProgress]

In my early teen years I was an outcast. My school from K-6 was a feeder school to a school that handled 7-8. From K-6 I was a pretty popular kid. I had a lot of friends. The school was a predominantly middle class school, it valued academic achievement and I was pretty successful. The school I passed into in Grade 7-8 served a much wider community, and included kids from tougher backgrounds and neighbourhoods. One of the "toughs" took a dislike to me. I don't need to make a short story long, so let's just say that while I stood up for myself against physical bullying (and by doing that learned a valuable life lesson that I have seen repeated many times - that bullies are generally cowards who talk tough but don't know how to handle people who stand up to them very well and will avoid direct confrontations with anyone who does) being willing to do that did not end my descent into isolation. For the rest of my time at that school (and for the first couple of years at high school) I was verbally and emotionally bullied by the "tough" and his crew. Those who had been my friends abandoned me. I guess they feared they'd become the next targets. I'd be called names walking through the school. I'd be deliberately excluded from social events. My locker would be broken into and stuff in it vandalized. No one - literally no one - would even sit with me for lunch. I reached the point where I wouldn't even bother going into the cafeteria at lunch time. I'd take my sandwich (or whatever I brought) outside even in the middle of winter and just walk around the neighbourhood alone eating it until I had to go back to school. Probably not surprisingly, my marks plummeted, I started to hate school, I started skipping classes. No one - including teachers - seemed to notice or care. This was the most "hellish" four years or so of my life. I was probably in Grade 11 before I started to pull up my socks, so to speak, and be able to make some friends again and start to do well in school again.

Thank you for letting me get to know you a little better......

(I almost feel like I should dedicate the sermon to you -as school was a tough time for you for many years).....

I, too, had a tough time at school, if for different reasons...

I've noticed that at times, (like me), you are easily triggered to respond to perceived criticism.
It's interesting that you say your past has made you're emotionally cautious around people. I'm just the opposite - I'm very open about my feelings with just about everyone I encounter. I pay big-time for it sometimes - but I choose to live this way because it enriches my experiences of both life and people.

 

[PilgrimsProgress]

In all fairness you wanted help understanding what exegesis was and seem pretty intent of approaching the text with your own ideas.

Which can end up being a powerful sermon even if it isn't exegesis.

And yes. Exegesis is difficult. It should be since it demands the preacher listen first and respond next.



It is okay. It may not be good exegesis. That doesn't make it not okay. Unless you were to claim that it is what the text is saying.

As revsdd points out there is application. One can take that application from general themes and not specific texts.

From your description of the assignment it seemed like exegesis was rather primary.



I empathize. Sometimes texts are really rich.



It is all in the script.

Include stage directions for yourself where the text calls for a thoughtful pause.

Another rhetorical device is to ask a question. The same one repeatedly. The question begs an answer. Hopefully one you address in the sermon. In that regard the question functions as a cheerleader at a pep rally.

"We've got spirit yes, we do . . ." kind of thing.

You have an idea where you want to go. Hopefully you are casting a vision and you want the congregation to join you. The question helps the audience keep up and have an idea of where things are going.

Also take your time. It is a sermon not a race.

If eye contact might throw you off do not look anyone in the eyes. Check out their hair, the space just above their heads anything but their eyes. Since you will likely be 10 ft or more away from the nearest listener they won't know you aren't looking at them directly if you are close.

My sermon may contain a lot of interpretation - but I'll do my best to base it on exegesis. (As scholars throughout history have not necessarily agreed on ONE exegesis -it probably won't be how you see the exegesis for this text -and I'm okay with that.)

Thank you for the helpful advice re presentation.

(Geez, revjohn, you'd be a hard maker. I'm a beginners preacher -and a lay one at that.
Rest easy, I don't intend to become a moderator!)

 

[PilgrimsProgress]

Honestly I don't think theology is our biggest obstacle. I think how we were socialized is.

.

Yes, I see what you're getting at......

Our personalities are also an issue.
I come across as being a bit cheeky, but that's not a very effective way to hide my crippling lack of confidence. For instance, I know that you are doing your very best to advise me - but often (I think wrongly) you are looking at my posts to criticise me. To use a sporting analogy, I feel like a boxer parrying your blows.

My bad (as Canucks say) - not yours!

 

[PilgrimsProgress]

Oops, I may be offline for a while. I have to take my laptop to the computer shop to get a new virus protector........

 

[revjohn]

My sermon may contain a lot of interpretation - but I'll do my best to base it on exegesis. (As scholars throughout history have not necessarily agreed on ONE exegesis -it probably won't be how you see the exegesis for this text -and I'm okay with that.)

I'm okay with that. Agreeing to disagree is legitimate outcome.

Thank you for the helpful advice re presentation.

You are welcome. Always happy to talk about the craft.

I may not be a big city Dr of Homiletics like revsdd. I am a humble outport preacher.

Apart from that introductory drama classes were really helpful for me in working on delivery stuff.

(Geez, revjohn, you'd be a hard maker. I'm a beginners preacher -and a lay one at that.

My ministry students would disagree.

Did I challenge them? Hell yeah!

Did I make them think? That was my job.

Did they successfully complete their supervised field education? Darn tootin!

Was I exceedingly critical of them in their evaluation? Define exceedingly.

End of story all of them made it through and all of them went on to serve the church and none run from me when we meet at church functions.

They have all also retired since all went into ministry as a second career.

Rest easy, I don't intend to become a moderator!)

It isn't about what we intend so much as it is what God desires.

Ministry was never my intention.

You've heard that the Lord works in mysterious ways right?

All these years later in deep prayer I still ask the question "why me specifically?"

I like to think I am only imagining the laughter.

 

[BetteTheRed]

It occurs to me (and don't laugh too hard, please), that I am far more often critical than praiseful in my interactions with others.

I'd like to take a minute to praise revjohn and revsdd for their careful, thoughtful, helpful comments on this thread.

*You may now resume your regularly-scheduled programming*

Let us know how you make out PP...

And mendalla, too. Except that most of the time, I figure you're just saying what I would have...

PP, technology worries, I get...

 

[revjohn]

often (I think wrongly) you are looking at my posts to criticise me. To use a sporting analogy, I feel like a boxer parrying your blows.

You should have a chat with GeoFee.

We have long been sparring partners.

Iron sharpens iron is the text he repeats often.

What is missing from this place is the non-textual cues that give away my emotional state.

I'm probably read way more severely than is warranted.

Refer to the avatar. Does that look like a grumpy grampa to you?

 

[BetteTheRed]

And I was talking to a friend today about the very issue of text communication. She noted, fairly and correctly, that I answer questions with the utmost of brevity, and never acknowledge questions I don't want to answer. As she says, "I ask two questions, and get one one-word answer in response"...People in real life know me as nice, if a bit abrupt...

 

[revsdd]

I've noticed that at times, (like me), you are easily triggered to respond to perceived criticism.

It depends, I think, on the nature of the criticism. Valid criticism, an exchange of views, a legitimate difference of opinion. These things I enjoy. I love respectful and thoughtful give and take. When someone chooses to respond to me in a way that is less respectful and thoughtful disagreement and more personal attack, then this kicks in:

"...I learned a valuable life lesson that I have seen repeated many times - that bullies are generally cowards who talk tough but don't know how to handle people who stand up to them very well and will avoid direct confrontations with anyone who does."

So I will sometimes (depending on how I interpret the person I'm responding to - admittedly, for example, in my response to our friend Mystic, above) stand up and shoot back. I also will sometimes have that response when I feel that someone has unfairly targeted someone else.

Is it my most admirable quality? Probably not - but we're all the products of our experiences.

 

[Luce NDs]

I read one article forget where that compared fatalism with Calvinism ... a discouragement to ever improve anything or everything? Now that is a trial ... or test for the prodigal child to see what the devil they really can do? Biblically are we told there is a test? That's life ... trying ... then there at the hard walls ... stonewalls? Kind 've like bull headed Ness ...

Is mini Taurus better ...

 

[Luce NDs]

And I was talking to a friend today about the very issue of text communication. She noted, fairly and correctly, that I answer questions with the utmost of brevity, and never acknowledge questions I don't want to answer. As she says, "I ask two questions, and get one one-word answer in response"...People in real life know me as nice, if a bit abrupt...

Two step or avoiding stepping intuit?

 

[Luce NDs]

revjohn, seems from the example you mentioned - that the perceived differences in theology were part of your insider/outsider scenario?

I've often thought here in Wondercafe that differences in theology play too much a part of conflict. Seems we all cling to our own particular theology -and criticise the others. (That said, I know Process Theology is the right theology. )

One must word the devilish wisdom buried there ... some powers don't wish you to ... don't tell 'eM as they probably don't wish to know things that shattered their solid belief systems ... stored in head? Fixation ... can it be fixed too ...

 

[unsafe]

revsdd ----your quote from above post ------

It depends, I think, on the nature of the criticism. Valid criticism, an exchange of views, a legitimate difference of opinion. These things I enjoy. I love respectful and thoughtful give and take. When someone chooses to respond to me in a way that is less respectful and thoughtful disagreement and more personal attack, then this kicks in:

So I will sometimes (depending on how I interpret the person I'm responding to - admittedly, for example, in my response to our friend Mystic, above) stand up and shoot back. I also will sometimes have that response when I feel that someone has unfairly targeted someone else.

Is it my most admirable quality? Probably not - but we're all the products of our experiences.


unsafe says ---Hope you don't mind me responding to this ---This is just my View

With all due respect to you -----is letting someone push your buttons and trick you into a angry emotional response the Christian way to respond ---are we not to try and grow in Christ and learn to have control over our emotions -----if we respond back in anger are we not just as bad as the person who is dishing it out to us ?---

For instance take what Mystic said to you -----You had a perfect opportunity to practice self emotional control over your angry personal response ---the only way to conquer angry responses is through practice ----and this sight is such a great place to practice emotional self control believe me ----There are insults ---trashing --bashing ---ganging up and mocking others etc that goes on here ----Great place to learn self control in my view ---

As Dr Phil would say ---the person is getting some emotional satisfaction out of the bulling and so is the person who is giving back with the angry response otherwise it would be futile -----so each person feels a sense of satisfaction in some way ---the thing then is the real Christian wouldn't feel great about the way they responded ---they should have some feelings of ---why did I let myself get that upset --I don't feel good inside about it -- ----Mystic pushed your button but you can't blame him for your response ----that would be cop out on taking responsibility for your own loss of self emotional control in my view -----


unsafe says ------ God said to Paul ---My Grace is sufficient ---my power is made perfect in weakness 2 Corinthians 12: 9 ----We Christians should heed this more and practice it ----


unsafe says ----I understand there is righteous anger but is allowing someone to push your buttons classify as righteous anger ----that is the question ?


You say -----we're all the products of our experiences.

unsafe says ---My view
I personally believe our response to situations and events all shape our experiences ----when we define ourselves by our experiences are we not handing the power over to the experience and robbing ourselves of the power to choose the way we want to respond to the experience ---We have a choice to respond respectfully or not -----Positive or negative -----angry or friendly etc ----


unsafe says -----and posted Quote ----------Look at this comment from --------PilgrimsProgress said:
often (I think wrongly) you are looking at my posts to criticise me. To use a sporting analogy, I feel like a boxer parrying your blows.


unsafe says
Here we see that the mind has already made the experience a negative one just by someone looking at the post ------so their experience is not a good one ------they are already thinking I'm being criticised and that will likely carry over to the actual reading of the post ------cause their mind is set in that ------

Being a Christian is very hard----- but to me it means this --------It is not about how others treat me or think about me or speak to me -----it is all about how I treat others and react to them when they are not nice in their remarks toward me ------my job is to practice to become a better Christian and mature in my walk with Christ ----- What they do I have no control over -----I only have control over what I do and how I react ---


Great Saying