See theme

One of the challenges in preaching a narrative text is how to structure the message. In general I do not recommend the way that one might naturally pursue: a chronological retelling of the story. I suggest, rather, that the best way to preach a narrative is to focus on disease (human failing) and remedy (God's provision). With that in mind, let's see how the sermon " No Selective Obedience " fares.

Strengths

1. For the way chosen to approach the shape of the sermon (which I don't think was the best choice), the preacher handles the sermon in a clear, straightforward manner. After raising the main question, " What is one's responsibility when they are on a mission from God? " the preacher relates the story chronologically. The points made at each stop are relevant to that particular section of the story. The main idea comes through clearly and is related to the major thrust of the story.

Suggestions for Improvement

1. Unfortunately the preacher handles the story much like one would handle an extended passage in a New Testament epistle. After each section in the story the preacher stops for explanation, application, and exhortation. Although clear, this is a commentary approach.

2. The shape of the sermon speaks to one's mind and will. There is little if any development to relate to one's emotion or a psychological motivation for positive service. Much of the sermon is a negative illustration of a poor response to fulfilling the responsibilities God might give us. The sermon in essence says: This is the idea of the text; now follow that idea because we are expected to do so.

3. A sermon on a story should normally follow an inductive process. However, the sermon's main question, raised in the introduction, is answered quickly as the preacher deals with verses 4-9 in the passage.The sermon, therefore, is deductive.

What follows is one way to develop inductively the idea of " completely fulfilling the responsibilities God gives us when he sends us on a mission. "

Begin the sermon by raising the need: why Christians sometimes choose the option of incomplete obedience. Argue the case for why Saul felt justified in what he did, particularly in light of the context and his men turning on him in the previous narrative. This would raise the spiritual disease revealed in this narrative in a way that would be understood both emotionally and psychologically. Hearers need to feel for and identify with Saul.

Next, move into the parts of the story that demonstrate the consequences of choosing incomplete obedience.

Then raise the question of God's fairness, saying that God didn't seem to take into account Saul's situation.

After getting the audience to feel that, move to the fact that obedience is more important than sacrifice because it causes us to live out our faith. This is the remedy for the spiritual disease brought out earlier. The more compromising the situation, the greater the faith that will be demonstrated as it is lived out. God was giving Saul a chance to be a spiritual champion, but all Saul could see was personal vindication and acceptance. God gave Saul a chance for a spiritual remedy for the spiritual disease, and he decided not to take it.

This approach makes the sermon more inductive by using the natural inductive elements of the story that were lost in the straightforward, largely deductive manner in which it was presented.

Paul Borden is executive minister of Growing Healthy Churches and author of Direct Hit.