This is a series of articles on how to preach Christ in the Old Testament. Many have mistakenly preached using the Old Testament for moralistic preaching or self-help. Preacher, do you want to learn to preach on the basis of the Old Testament?Series of articles will give you a good introduction.
Greidanus in the book Sola Scriptura presents a series of objections to the use of the exemplary biographical sermon, here the four most striking: its anthropocentric character, the hermeneutic deviation and the banalization of the Scripture that favors and the establishment of false or erroneous parallels.
- The purpose of drawing a direct parallel between the biblical narrative and the present tends to lead the preacher to draw illegitimate parallels and even to make erroneous judgments about biblical characters.
Greidanus presents a well-known example that illustrates the difference between the exemplary approach and the historical-redemptive approach. A preaching on marriage in Cana generally receives the following application: “As the bride and groom invited Jesus to the wedding, we should also invite Jesus to come to us every day, and as Jesus turned the water into wine, so will he make ours common water a delicious wine? . However, Holwerda makes the following application of the same text:
It is impossible for you to invite Jesus as they did because he is no longer on earth in his human nature. Therefore, you cannot be invited to our table as you were to theirs. No this; He is risen. Also, are you not allowed to invite Jesus like them, because until then they knew you only as Jesus, the son of the carpenter from Nazareth? But he was preached to you as Christ. [?] So you are much richer.
So instead of one? So? equals “now” do we have one? so? it is not equal to “now”. A striking contrast must be established to do justice to both the text and the present.
The situation becomes more critical when the exemplary approach is forced to deny its own principle in front of texts such as Samuel cutting Agagé, the suicide of Samson or Jeremiah preaching the desertion, all these elements are good examples, for they were answers to the demands of the word of God. Therefore, they cannot be condemned at the same time, because they cannot be reported as models to be applied to the whole Church. Greidanus draws attention to those who use the exemplary approach:
They simply cannot be strict imitators [of the characters of Scripture] because the reality of historical distance is imposed at their starting point that the people in the text are examples and mirrors for us today: the force of history breaks the exemplary mirror. tension in exemplary preaching. On the one hand, a historical equation framework is applied: “Facts about the people of the past move to our time”; these are our examples. On the other hand, this ideal scheme introduces historical discontinuity: the characters of the text do not exactly adapt to our situation; we can’t literally do the things they’ve done.
Hence the tendency to spiritualize historical texts. Rather than requiring the hard work of identifying the historical circumstances of the text, its place in the history of redemption, and then its application to the contemporary reader, the use of spiritualization offers a much simpler shortcut to seeking spiritual truths behind the facts. Greidanus points out that, in essence, spiritualization is nothing more than alegorization, the search for spiritual truths symbolized in certain passages of the text.
Even those who are attached to the presentation of Christ in historical texts are easily caught up in a similar practice, which is typologization (different from typology). The text looks for a shortcut to Jesus Christ, his humiliation, his ministry, his sacrifice Although typological interpretation is appropriate for some texts, typologization is not a legitimate attempt to discover how the Old Testament text relates to Christ; often it is simply a shortcut that does not take into account the purpose and context in which the text was written. Veer points out that this type of resource to make a Christocentric sermon, contrary to what its user assumes, is based on the fact that the preacher did not perceive the Christological character of a certain historical portion. The historical text is not saved by the discovery of a type. This does not mean that there are no types of Christ in Scripture, but that one should rule, limit ourselves to the types that have been established by the Lord Himself, and not multiply them arbitrarily and indiscriminately.
Thus, one can see the number of problems associated with exemplary biographical preaching. Despite being so widespread and widespread, this approach to the biblical text is incompatible with the Reformed principles of biblical hermeneutics and homiletics. She is essentially anthropocentric in her approach and interpretation of the biblical text. Rather than exposing the acts, thoughts, and purposes of the Triune God, it focuses on the acts, thoughts, and personalities of the characters and relies on the creativity and imagination of the preacher to draw parallels with him. they fit better between biblical and current times. . It trivializes Scripture by turning it into a repository of personal illustrations that can be found in any religious book or historical figure. Therefore, it makes indistinct the value of Scripture as a rule of faith and practice. It also ignores the historical value of texts, as it focuses only on what matters for modern application and seeks to do so through shortcuts such as moralization, spiritualization, and typologization. Above all, exemplary biographical preaching denies the apostolic assumption that the primary purpose of preaching is to present Christ to listeners and that this goal can be achieved in all Old Testament passages, including historical biographical accounts. Therefore, it is necessary to offer a different approach to biographical sermons. This approach can be achieved by the historically redemptive Christocentric method proposed by Greidanus.
[continued]