McDill believes that “preachers can significantly improve their preaching by strengthening twelve specific skills used in the preparation of sermons” (2).  McDill does not accept that effective preaching is an endeavor which only the most gifted can pursue.  Rather, he believes that “anyone can learn the methods used in the preparation of good sermons” (13). McDill does not often use the term expository preaching preferring instead to discuss biblical preaching; however, it is clear by his definition that expository preaching is what he has in mind. He defines biblical sermons as those “in which the text shapes the sermon.  The purpose, the theme, the structure, and the development of the sermon are to reflect the text” (14).  Unlike many preaching texts this book seeks to deal with this single approach to preaching alone.

Following the introductory chapter, McDill works out his thesis through twelve chapters that each develop one of the skills for great preaching.  Each chapter contains exercises which are designed for self study so that the reader can improve this skill in preaching on his own.  The books seems to be directed toward the beginning preacher or the bi-vocational preacher who desires to engage in a directed self study.

The first three chapters deal with the skills necessary for inductive Bible study.  McDill posits that “a growing number of preachers are finding that the best approach to their text study is inductive” (21).  The first skill necessary for inductive study of the text is learning to see the structural relationship within the text.  In order to accomplish this skill, McDill introduces the reader to an exercise in developing structural diagrams.  His approach rests on the assumption that main points will be those with the most supporting ideas.  He also discusses the importance of discerning the connectives used by the author in assisting to determine his original intention.  In the next two chapters McDill provides guidelines for making observations about the text and asking the questions of the text which assist in discovering the  meaning of the author.

The next three chapters explain how one should contextualize the ideas of the biblical text and place them into the contemporary world of the audience.  McDill suggests the best way to determine the idea being put forward in a biblical text is to ask and answer the question, “What is the writer talking about?” (89), and that one should seek to obtain a one-word answer.  This subject should then be limited by identifying how the biblical writer limits the scope of the subject within the text itself.  According to McDill, this exercise will assist one in clarifying his thinking so that he will not become guilty of “the great fault of preaching is fuzzy thinking” (94).  McDill realizes that the biblical text must be understood on an emotional and personal level.  He offers that, by identifying the symptoms, assumptions, consequences and feelings of those in need of the text’s message, one can apply the biblical truths to the congregation.  McDill concludes this section by leading the reader across the application bridge.  He assists the reader in developing the textual and sermon ideas and relating these to the audience by means of an interrogative that is answered by means of the predicates which will serve as the divisions of the sermon.

The next two chapters are concerned with properly organizing one’s thought for the sermon.  McDill offers an exercise for clarifying the transition statements which will serve to bind the sermon together while also moving its argument along.  McDill suggests that the form of the sermon should consider the text’s form but not necessarily be constrained by it.  Instead he suggests that Alan Monroe’s motivated sequence outline be used as a template for insuring the communication value of sermons.

The next three chapters deal with finishing the sermon so that its thought will be easily understood by the audience.  McDill proposes that each division of the sermon undergo careful development of its “explanation, illustration,  argumentation, and application” (197), and that natural analogies be brought out that will enable the listener to understand that the truth of Scripture is like some particular from his own life experience which he both understands and to which he can relate.  This section is closed with a discussion of how the preacher can use figurative language and stories to drive his point home in the heart of his audience.

The last chapter reminds the preacher that he is preaching for the purpose of eliciting a faith response from the listener. Particularly helpful in this chapter is McDill’s reminder that the preacher must not use words like ought or should, but must boldly proclaim, “Because of all we have said about God, ‘You can’” (255).  The entire process will fail if the preacher faithfully prepares the sermon but does not seek to cause those who listen to him to be convinced of the rightness of God’s cause and the need of everyone to place their own lives before Him.   The principle strength of this book is the practical step-by-step approach employed by McDill.  He does not loose his reader in discussion of Greek tenses or hermeneutical minutia but instead supplies a simple, clear approach to preaching.  For example, his discussion of the distinction between biblical hermeneutics and other interpretative exercises is wonderfully simple.  He states that three reasons that distinguish biblical interpretation from that of other things are: “the Bible is old . . .the Bible is fixed and stable as a written document . . . [and] the Bible . . . is about God and his dealings with mankind” (60-61).

Another strength is the clarity with which McDill presents his discussion of the textual and sermon ideas.  His treatment is simple and effective. He shows his reader how to bridge the gap between the author’s intended meaning and the sermon idea by way of an example based on the story of the fall of man in the garden of Eden (126).  In this example he shows how other Scripture can be used to limit the author’s idea and that the goal of the sermon is to present the timeless principle to a contemporary audience.

A weakness is the false distinction which McDill raises between inductive and deductive study.  His claim is that those who practice deductive study bring their own or another’s ideas to the text while those who study the text inductively are guilty of bringing presuppositions to the text. He states, “If [one] examines the text inductively . . . [one] suspends [one’s] own conclusions to let it speak, opening the way for the Spirit to disclose its meaning” (24).  This is an overstatement of his argument because the inductive method cannot in and of itself prevent one from bringing presuppositions to the text, nor can it be stated that the deductive method necessitates one bring presuppositions to the text.  Taken to its extreme this line of reasoning could be used to justify all manner of eiseigesis.  Many well-meaning Christians read the texts of Scripture and, waiting for the Spirit to tell them what it means, are lead astray by false teaching.  J. I. Packer points out that one danger of inductive study is “that [it] tells you to ‘observe’ without giving you any theological orientation to help you do it.”

Another weakness is McDill’s incorrect assumption that delivery of the sermon is not a “critical factor in what we recognize as great preaching” (10).  Many well-reasoned, clear arguments have been lost by the lack of pathos of the speaker.  Preaching involves persuasion, and if one will be successful in causing his audience to accept his position, one must prepare and concentrate both on the logic of his argument and on the methods of the delivery of his argument.

Yet another weakness is McDill’s proposition that Alan Monroe’s motivated sequence be utilized as the rubric through which all sermon forms must pass.  While McDill’s premise is sound in preaching from didactic texts and communicating truths to an audience, he has not engaged those who propose a narrative style of preaching.  To be fair, however, to engage the narrative preaching movement would be beyond the stated scope of this book (15).

The simple but thorough process described by McDill will assist anyone who reads this text.  In particular, this book would be excellent for bi-vocational preachers who will be unable to attend seminary or for those whose preaching has become dull and lifeless.  With so many books on preaching being written as surveys of various sermonic forms McDill has performed a service for those who seek to learn how to simply write a clear and effective sermon.

End Notes

1. Mcdill Wayne, The 12 Essential Skills For Great Preaching. Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994.

We all need to be twice born.  Once “from above,” or a supernatural rebirth.

Christianity at its very core, is about our each having a supernatural rebirth. This rebirth can only be accomplished through a genuine work of God.  God alone can make it happen. This second birth can only be received by faith, and if God does not make it happen after you receive it by faith then it will never happen. Why? Because you and I do not have the ability within ourselves to make it happen. This makes us feel helpless, but the truth is only God can make it happen. All you can do is throw yourself upon His mercy and cry out for His grace.

But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.     John 1:12-13

In Greek, the word translated “right,”is  (εξουσίαν) exousia. It means the right or freedom of choice, authority, and ability or power.  It means all three of those things. You and I have the God given right or freedom to choose to receive Him.  We have His authority to choose to receive Him for ourselves, and He has given us the ability to make the choice to receive Him. God has given us the right, the authority, and the power to become children of God.  He gives this right, authority and power to everyone who will believe in His name.

We are not born into God’s kingdom through any natural process.  Our blood does not qualify us, nor our ancestry, only God can initiate this second birth.  People tell me very often that their parents were great Christians, and they somehow assume that their parents faith passed to them genetically.

Unfortunately this is not the case.  Mom and Dad passed down to you a sinful nature known as depravity. They needed to be born again just as you I need to be born again.  God has to work the miracle of salvation deep within you through His Spirit or it will not happen.

A true spiritual rebirth will not occur through religion. It will only happen through a life changing encounter.  You need to know this because you need to tell others that only a life changing encounter with Jesus Christ can forgive sin.  Not only does He forgive your sins, but a genuine rebirth will alter your nature.  Deep within your spirit God will change your inclination to agree with His will forever. You can still sin, but inside your core you will grieve.  You will feel terrible, because God the Holy Spirit will convict you and condemn your sin.

This second birth is a spiritual birth.

5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.    John 3:5–6 (ESV)

Someone recently asked me what being born of the water meant in this text.  The best answer will fit the context of the passage.  This text is an example of Hebrew thought being translated into Greek.  Hebrew often uses parallelism to expand and complete a thought.  Being born of water is to be understood as the parallel for being born of the flesh.  Being born of water or of the flesh parallels being born of the Spirit.  When our mothers water breaks we are born of water, when we exit her womb we are born of the flesh.

The point of this text is to explain the necessity of our being born of the Spirit.  God the Holy Spirit must be the midwife of our being reborn or we will not be truly born again.  While I have the right to choose, God’s Spirit must also be involved.  Many people have walked an aisle, shook hands with their pastor and joined the church, but were not born again.  If God’s Spirit is not involved your nature will not change and sooner or later you will claim that Christianity did not work for you.  The reason for this is that you tried to be born again by your own will in your own power and God’s Spirit was not involved.

This second birth is a spiritual birth or it becomes only an empty religious ritual that has no saving power.

We all “must” be born again or we cannot enter the kingdom of God.

Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘you must be born again,’    John 3:7

In Greek the word translate “must” is dei.  It means a divine necessity. In other words a spiritual rebirth is a divine necessity.  It is nonnegotiable.  You, me and everyone else who has ever or will ever walk the face of this earth must be born again, there are no exceptions.  Jesus did not say:

• Nicodemus, it’s important for you to be born again, or
• Nicodemus it will help you to be born again, or
• Nicodemus you will achieve your spiritual ambition if you add this component of rebirth to you religion.

He said, Nicodemus You Must Be Born Again!  If you are NOT born again you, the CEO of religion in Jerusalem, will not see the kingdom of God.  This concept is at the very heart of Christianity. There is no substitute. You cannot substitute church for this rebirth.  You cannot substitute your parents relationship with Christ for your own.  You will not get a pass because of your denominations understanding of salvation.  You, each and everyone must be born again!

As a professor of the History of Modern Christianity at the University of Chicago and the author of numerous books, Martin Marty is very qualified to write on the subject of religion in America. He views the population of the United States to be on a continuous religious pilgrimage, in which potential religious choices increase with the arrival of each new immigrant. Although Marty seems to conclude that these religious choices will continuously increase, he offers four broad categories under which the history of most religious expression in America may be placed. While these four categories are by no means exhaustive, they provide the necessary handles one requires in order to grasp the rich tapestry of America’s religious identity. These four categories are Protestantism, Catholicism, Judaism, and secular humanism.

The major player in the religious history of America is Protestantism. The profound and lasting influence the Puritans have had on all those who have followed is difficult to overstate. While American Protestants have all acknowledged a regard for the Holy Scriptures, they have differed widely in practice and their allowance for diversity of viewpoints. This has caused many new sects to form as new opinions have advanced and new practices have gained credence. This fragmentation is exemplified by the Disciples of Christ who, in their search for primitive Christianity, effectively divided the church more by providing yet another choice from which religious pilgrims might choose. There were others who initially sought to return to the primitive roots of Christianity but founded whole new faiths instead which were unrecognizable to orthodox Christians. Among those claiming revelations equal or superior to the Christian scriptures were the Mormons, Adventists, and Christian Scientists. Also, Transcendentalists like Thoreau and Emerson who sought to simplify religion created their own (262).

Throughout his book Marty conveys two themes regarding American Protestantism. First, he shows how Protestantism has been dominant in shaping religious thought since the beginning of the United States. Second, he reveals how American Protestantism has constantly been required to reevaluate itself as it has been forced to deal with the new notions of immigrants from without and innovators from within American society. According to Marty, America has said, in effect, to immigrants, “Well, we guess you are going to stay and we guess you are more or less welcome — but you have to change” (271).

While continual fragmentation of American Protestantism has made it hard to follow each variant, three general trends can be discerned. First, American Evangelical beliefs have remained remarkably close to their Puritan forefathers. Second, liberal theologies within mainline Protestantism have produced a type of religious expression that, from time to time, is not only different from its ancestor but openly hostile to it. Third, American Protestantism has produced a wide panoply of cults whose claims have led many away from Christian faith and practice.

The second broad category of American religious history is Catholicism. Catholicism was the first form of Christianity to be introduced on American soil. After Columbus and the Conquistadores came Jesuits who were genuinely interested in the salvation of the native Americans. Due to political differences and competition between the Spanish and French Catholics, an adequate window of opportunity was created which English Protestants seized. Because of these events, with the exception of pockets of missionary activity in the American southwest Catholic influences had to await the immigrants of the eighteenth century to gain a significant foothold in American religious thought. This foothold grew, and by the twentieth century Catholicism could boast of having elected one of their own as President of the United States. From after, Vatican II relations with the old established sects of Protestantism continued to improve. In 1958 Jacques Martian offered a revealing look at the religious landscape of America which apparently significantly affected the author giving him one of his major themes. Martian wrote “Americans seem to be in their own land as pilgrims, prodded by a dream. They are always on the move . . . , not settled, installed” (431).

The third broad category of American religious history is Judaism. Having been practiced in America since colonial times, American Jews have enjoyed a tolerance previously unknown among the nations of the world. With one exception in 1658 America, Marty records that no Jewish believer has had to stand trial for blasphemy (84). In fact, America’s tolerance fostered the atmosphere in which Isaac Mayer Wise and his Reform party of Judaism could speak of “the American way” (288), stifling for some time visions of Jewish Zionism among American Jews. Wise’s message, nurtured by his optimism in America was that “Reform Judaism was not just a faith for Jews but was the faith for moderns, the fulfillment for Americans” (290).

The fourth broad category of American religious history is secular humanism. The beginnings of secular humanism can be traced to the founding father’s desire to create a religion from the state. Prior to the constitution’s ratification, “Benjamin Franklin called for a ‘public religion,’” (154). This religion denied the divinity of Christ while agreeing with the moral code that Jesus advanced (157). George Washington, through his ambiguous statements about religion, also further advanced the idea of a secular religion (158). This public religion became rooted in America’s legal, educational, and political systems. This new secular, or public religion, had “Its creed in the Declaration (of Independence), its prophecies in the most compelling lines of presidential addresses, its psalms in some American poetry” (165). Marty writes that by eighteen hundred this secular religion was strong enough that it was a rival to the traditional church (169). Prior to the War Between the States in 1838, Abraham Lincoln was able to clearly articulate what Franklin had earlier voiced. Lincoln said that “reverence for laws must produce ‘the political religion of the nation,’ and this religion . . . should call forth unceasing sacrifice on its altar” (222). This strain of secularism found a strong advocate in the theories of Darwin which, when combined with the shift away from biblical Christianity within the academy, provided another secular voice with which the churches must vie.

Several apparent biases appear throughout this book. As Marty attempts to explain Queen Isabella’s of Spain inner war, he lists revulsion for the “cocksureness, even fanaticism with which believers felt that God chartered their version of faith as being alone the pure and true one” (16).

Another example of bias is evident in Marty’s discussion of the Great Awakening. Marty is not certain that there was a significant declension preceding the revivals (108). Furthermore, he engages in the historians’ fallacy of insinuating motivation to the revivalists during this awakening. He writes that “to get the revival off the ground, the pioneers . . . had to demonstrate a need in the colonies. Never trust a revivalist preacher for a fully accurate picture of how bad the times were spiritually” (109). Not only does Marty have a bias against the revivalists’ trustworthiness in accurately portraying the times preceding the revival, he also implies that there possibly were problems with Edwards’ motivation in four areas of this revival. First, Marty implies that Edwards studied crowd psychology in the conversions occurring in other towns (114), possibly suggesting causation in the revival of Northampton. Second, he attributes an impure motive to Edwards’ in rewriting history with Northampton as its climax for the purpose of increasing the peoples’ reaction to the revival. Third, Marty states that Edwards placed the “Made in America” stamp on the revival even though he knew there were similar revivals breaking out on the European continent (115). Fourth, Marty’s bias against Edwards is further revealed in his description of Edwards’ book on the revival as “six quaint pages in a book rarely read about an awakening most Americans never heard of” (116).

Again evidence of an anti-evangelical bias by Marty is revealed when he writes that George Whitfield, following his conversion, engaged in “spreading the charge revivalists like to make: that one may go to church and say prayers but still not be a Christian without a specific experience” (118).

Yet another example of bias on Marty’s part is apparent when, in his discussion of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary professor Crawford H. Toy, he writes that “Toy unfortunately had to test his ideas . . . in the Southern Baptist Convention”(304). Toy agreed with the new theory which German scholars taught: that when studying the Scripture, “the kernel of truth” must be separated “from its outer covering of myth” (305). These views were discussed within the Southern Baptist Convention leading Toy to resign.

A more remarkable occurrence of bias is Marty’s statement that Mary Baker Eddy’s Christian Science movement “was one of the most impressive visions and achievements on the American spiritual landscape” (331). Once more Marty shows his liberal bias over and against current conservative views when he counts as one of the most vital signs of mainline church strengthening “the efforts to break two-thousand-year-old patterns of male dominance in religion” (438).

Overall, this is a helpful edition which provides a thorough treatment of the diverse religious background of America’s people. Marty’s treatment is, in the main, as balanced as modern evangelicals may expect from any but their own writers. There is a rich collection of historic information contained in this volume which makes it profitable for anyone seeking to begin to gain an understanding of America’s religious heritage.

End Notes

1. Marty, Martin. Pilgrims in Their Own Land. New York: Penguin Books, 1984. 488 pp.