There is no single mold into which all sermons should be poured. Good habits of preaching do not develop like a good golf swing, in which the instructor says, " Do it this way every time! " Nevertheless all sermons should follow basic guidelines for the sake of clear and relevant communication.

I write from the perspective of the " the big idea. " That is, every sermon has one central thesis, homiletical proposition, or " big idea. " This grows out of a long-standing tradition of rhetorical theory and practice as well as a sound hermeneutic that attempts to represent the biblical author's intent for the sermon's passage.

One of the definite advantages of the " big idea " is that the sermon has a single thesis. The sermon moves down one road toward one destination. Thus, listeners need to grasp only one imperative, one principle or one truth, rather than seek to filter out a few helpful ideas amidst disarray. Yet, too often, I listen to sermons designed to have one " big idea " that actually have several " big ideas " or that wander off the main road without returning to the main road. As listeners, we do not hear those sermons as a single thesis. We hear them as " a few comments from the tour guide. " But nobody steps back to say, " So, that's our beautiful Truth National Park. We hope you enjoyed the trees and the peaks and the valleys, but most of all we hope you enjoyed the big picture of the park. "

The guidelines in this series of articles are basic, not designed to give the sermon flash or flare. They purpose to give the message clarity and relevance.

First guideline: Every sermon has three main parts: the introduction, body, and conclusion. These take different shapes, but there is some common ground. As we look at the purposes for each part, we will see why an introduction, body, and conclusion are essential in nearly every sermon.

Sermon Introductions

Sermon introductions aim to:

1. Capture the attention of the audience almost immediately.
2. Show the audience why they should listen.
3. Introduce the narrowed subject (or the entire big idea) and the sermon.
4. Build rapport with the audience and whet an appetite for God's Word.

In aiming for these purposes, the introduction will develop a need for the message. Hopefully, the introduction will create an appetite for God's Word. As listeners gain a sense of the applicational promise or what's at stake for their lives, they should want to hear from God's Word.

The Sermon's Body

The purpose of the body is to explain and apply the truth of the biblical passage. The body of the message is what some might call the meat or substance of the message. Here is the explanation of the biblical text and its implications for belief and practice.

In terms of the strategic communication of the sermon, the body supplies the answer to the focus question raised in the introduction, the solution to the problem raised in the introduction, or God's perspective on an issue. If the introduction whetted an appetite for God's Word, the body aims to supply the nourishment.

Sermon Conclusions

The purpose of the conclusion is to prepare people to respond to the truth of God's Word.

Though the sermon should not save the application for the conclusion, the conclusion must point the way to a concrete response or application.

Application takes various shapes, depending on the text and the purpose of the sermon. Typically, application comes as change or affirmation of belief, values, attitudes, or behavior. If the entire sermon preaches toward a change in values, don't specify a change in behavior. Sometimes behavioral change follows value change, but the two are not the same. So the conclusion wraps a ribbon around the entire sermon to give it unity and to specify a response.

Second law: Determine whether to use deductive reasoning or inductive reasoning.

Deductive reasoning argues from general to specific. In the sermon, the preacher states the Big Idea (the general) early in the message. The structure (specifics) of the message then develops to support or " prove true " the Big Idea.

In the conclusion of the message, the preacher returns to the big idea with the rhetorical delight of implying, " I told you so. " The following deductive model may prove helpful.

Introduction

1. Raise the subject.
2. Develop the need.
3. Offer promise of application.
4. State the Big Idea

(Insert a transition that recreates tension and a need for the biblical text.)

Body

I. This statement is the primary evidence to support the Big Idea (from the text, illustration, application, etc.).
II. Following points are further evidence to support the Big Idea (from the text, illustration, application, etc.).

Conclusion

1. Review briefly.
2. Specify the desired application.
3. Drive home the Big Idea

The advantage of deductive structure is clarity. The preacher gives the Big Idea right up front, probably in the sermon's introduction. The specifics of the sermon body buttress the Big Idea. In the conclusion, the preacher puts the whole idea back together (repeating the Big Idea), with a sense of accomplishment that communicates, " See, that's just what I said in the beginning. "

The potential disadvantage of deductive arrangement is the loss of tension early in the message. If hearers know the Big Idea, why should they continue to listen?

Notice that in the deductive model I have included a transition that rebuilds tension. This tension question focuses on, " Is this Big Idea true or valid? " The specifics of the message then answer that question, arguing from general to specific (and back to general).

On the other hand, inductive reasoning argues from specifics to general. It asks the question " What conclusion is this evidence leading up to? "

The introduction of an inductive sermon raises a narrowed subject as defined by the biblical text. It is not a broad theme, such as prayer; it is a narrowed theme, such as " how to pray through a crisis. "

The remainder of the message then seeks to answer a focus question that aims at the complement to the subject. The sermon then follows a structure of specifics that arrive at (add up to) the Big Idea. That is, we move from the specifics to the general. For instance, examining Paul's attitudes and behaviors of prayer in a crisis would lead up to the answer to the previous narrowed theme " how to pray through a crisis. "

Here is an inductive model that may be helpful.

Introduction

1. Raise the subject.
2. Develop the need.
3. Offer promise of application.
4. Ask a focus question that can be answered only by the Big Idea.

Body

I. This statement is the first piece of the answer to the focus question. (Support from the text, illustration, application, etc.)
(Insert a review/preview transition between each main point of the body.)
II. Following statements are further pieces of the answer to the focus question. (Support from the text, illustration, application, etc.)

Conclusion

1. Review briefly.
2. State the entire Big Idea.
3. Specify the desired application.
4. Drive home the Big Idea.

The advantage of inductive structure is tension. The sermon begs for resolution to the question raised in the introduction until enough of the specifics have been developed to arrive at the Big Idea.

One critical ingredient in the inductive arrangement is the inclusion of review-preview transitions between main movements. These transitions say, in few words, where we've been and where we're going, while reminding us of the focus question. These transitions retain the tension, yet insure clarity as they provide the roadmap for everyone to arrive at the Big Idea in the same way. For example, between main points (or moves) number one and two, I may say something like, "

Whether you choose classic deduction or induction, maintaining clear and proper organization is essential to a logically sound and understandable sermon.

In forming any sermon there are dozens of questions to ask about content: How do we choose supporting material? How much explanation of the text is enough? How much explanation is too much? How do we craft the specifics of the sermon so our listeners will understand the meaning of the passage, affirm the big idea, and apply the sermon's truth in their lives?

When we ask ourselves these questions, we're really asking, " What evidence will help my listeners accept the claim of this message? " This question quickly reveals that every sermon is, essentially, an argument, an attempt to convince others to believe or behave as the Word directs.

The third guideline for basic homiletical structure is to get into a good argument.

We must ask ourselves, " What will function as convincing evidence for my listeners? "

An argument seeks to advance a claim by supporting that claim with evidence. But what kind of evidence? Statistics? Stories? Facts and figures?

In seeing the sermon as an argument, we must go beyond thinking only in terms of logic. Most people do not accept claims based simply on the logical progression of argument. Most people accept claims based on anecdotal evidence or testimonials from credible sources. We must ask ourselves, " What will function as convincing evidence for my listeners? "

I may have some listeners who need a biblical illustration, others who need an applicable " success story, " and still others who will not accept the claim until I give evidence of how it works in my own life. I'd like to think that presenting the biblical data will suffice, but many people do not see the Bible as the authority it really is.

I need little else beyond the Word to convince me of the truth because I have a high view of Scripture. Often, however, when I listen to a sermon, I'm still wondering, " How does this show up in my life? " Thus, to help me translate the claim into obedience I want the preacher to supply an applicable " success story " that tells me about a real person (perhaps even the preacher) who has applied this truth in his or her life. The success story tells me, " Oh, so that's what the preacher means, " as well as, " Well, if he can do that, I can do that. "

Other people are far more cognitive. They demand facts and figures. By carefully developing relationships with our hearers and by thoughtful analysis we will be able to determine what types of proofs are necessary to convince our listeners.

Sermons make claims on our lives. The thoughtful preacher's preparation will include attention to what will help listeners " buy " the big idea.

The late Keith Willhite served as chairman and professor of pastoral ministries at Dallas Theological Seminary, and is author of Preaching with Relevance Without Dumbing-Down (Kregel).