preaching – Page 3 – Christ the Truth

Luther’s Theology of the Word – 3 Sessions 1

GlenOctober 21, 2013October 21, 20131 Comment

“Christ is completely wrapped in the Scriptures, just as the babe is wrapped in swaddling clothes. Preaching is the manger in which he lies and is apprehended, and from which we take our food.” -- Luther's Sermon on Luke 2

“Even if Christ were given for us and crucified a thousand times it would all be vain if the Word of God were absent and were not distributed and given to me with the bidding, this is for you, take what is yours.” (LW 40, 213)

I believe a return to Luther's theology of the Word might be the most powerful catalyst for change our churches could experience. Luther would have us proclaim Christ with a confidence and liberty which would be utterly transformative.

I ran these seminars for the Staff Team of UCCF Wales. I discuss issues like...

Luther's three-fold understanding of God's Word

The Ministry of the Keys

The Real Presence of Jesus in Proclamation

Law-Gospel preaching

Christ-focused proclamation

I also recommended this paper by David Lotz as preparatory reading

Luther’s Theology of the Word – 3 Sessions

GlenOctober 18, 2013October 21, 2013Leave a comment

“Christ is completely wrapped in the Scriptures, just as the babe is wrapped in swaddling clothes. Preaching is the manger in which he lies and is apprehended, and from which we take our food.” -- Luther's Sermon on Luke 2

“Even if Christ were given for us and crucified a thousand times it would all be vain if the Word of God were absent and were not distributed and given to me with the bidding, this is for you, take what is yours.” (LW 40, 213)

I ran these seminars for the Staff Team of UCCF Wales. I discuss issues like...

Luther's three-fold understanding of God's Word

The Ministry of the Keys

The Real Presence of Jesus in Proclamation

Law-Gospel preaching

Christ-focused proclamation

I also recommended this paper by David Lotz as preparatory reading

Mission and Vulnerability 2

GlenOctober 8, 20132 Comments

Last week Emma and I spoke at a mission weekend for Christ Church, Fetcham. Emma's talk on the Saturday night was wonderful, then on Sunday I preached on Who is Jesus (Matthew 3) and How to get free without getting lost (Luke 15). In the morning sermon I asked people to receive Jesus and, if they did, to grab me afterwards so I could give them a book and a word of encouragement.

At the end of the service everyone moved out to coffee and I stayed behind, follow-up books in hand. I guess I looked a bit exposed, just waiting. I certainly felt exposed.

After not too long the pastor of the church came over and stood with me saying "You look a bit lonely there, let me keep you company for a bit." A perfectly natural response. We don't like to see vulnerability and we certainly don't like feeling vulnerability. But actually, there's something inherent in evangelism that means exposure and weakness. When we avoid it we can find ourselves avoiding the very essence of evangelism: offering Christ.

Like seeds - tiny, pathetic looking, seemingly ineffectual - the word goes out and it appears like an exercise in futility. What good could be done by foolish words about a foolish-looking Lord? An arms-wide Saviour is, by definition, vulnerable - and the word of the cross shares in that vulnerability. No wonder Paul was fearful and trembling as he went about his preaching (1 Corinthians 2:1-5). Actually evangelism should be a vulnerable activity.

But it occurs to me that much of evangelism can be an attempt to cover over that exposure. We try to cover it with intellectual credibility (Clever people are Christians, it's the clever option). We try to cover it with cool (Cool people are Christians, it's the cool option). We try to cover it with processes (I won't ask you simply to receive Jesus, I'll ask you into a programme where conversion can be broken down step-by-step).

And I wonder how much of what we do is A) a refusal to share the vulnerability of our arms-wide Saviour and B) unbelief in the power of this weak-looking gospel to save people. Perhaps that's why we hope that The Next Evangelistic Resource will be the break-through the church needs. Or why we mistakenly believe that 'the evangelist' - with all their fool-proof methods and giftings - will solve all our missionary ills. Or why we can preach without invitation or offer. Or why, in everyday life we fail to speak up for Jesus when the opportunities arise. We don't want to appear as foolish as our crucified Lord. And we don't actually believe in the power of this foolish-sounding message.

Or at least I don't. And I need to repent of such thinking constantly.

By the way, after the service I stuck around much longer than I was comfortable with. But someone did come up to say he had trusted Christ. God had been speaking to him powerfully through the weekend. Please pray for him as he takes his first steps.

Some Luther Gems on Preaching 1

GlenSeptember 25, 2013September 12, 20231 Comment

The Threefold Word

“Christ is completely wrapped in the Scriptures, just as the babe is wrapped in swaddling clothes. Preaching is the manger in which he lies and is apprehended, and from which we take our food.” (Sermon on Luke 2)

Preaching as God's own Word

“Tis a right excellent thing, that every honest pastor’s and preacher’s mouth is Christ’s mouth, and his word and forgiveness is Christ’s word and forgiveness… For the office is not the pastor’s or preacher’s but God’s; and the Word which he preacheth is likewise not the pastor’s and preacher’s but God’s." (Quoted in Church Dogmatics I/1, p107)

“[God] condescends to enter the mouth of every Christian who professes the faith.” [Therefore preaching must be] “believed as though God’s own voice were resounding from heaven” (LW24, 66)

"We both - pastor and listener - are only pupils; there is only this difference, that God is speaking to you through me. That is the glorious power of the divine Word, through which God Himself deals with us and speaks to us, and in which we hear God Himself." (LW 23, 97)

Therefore Preachers Inherit the Ministry of the Keys (Matthew 16:19)

[Jesus says,] “Peter’s mouth is my mouth, and his tongue is my key case. His office is my office, his binding and loosing are my binding and loosing. His keys are my keys, and I have no others, nor do I know of any others.” (LW40, 365)

“God has no other way to forgive sins than through the spoken Word, as he commanded us. [For] if you do not look for forgiveness through the Word, you will gape toward heaven in vain for grace, or (as they say), for a sense of inner forgiveness.” (LW40, 366]

Preaching Law and Gospel

“The law uncovers sin; it makes the sinner guilty and sick; indeed, it proves him to be under condemnation... The gospel offers grace and forgives sin; it cures the sickness and leads to salvation." (Romans Commentary)

Preaching the Gospels

"I believe that it has now become clear that it is not enough or in any sense Christian to preach the works, life, and words of Christ as historical facts, as if the knowledge of these would suffice for the conduct of life; yet this is the fashion among those who must today be regarded as our best preachers. Far less is it sufficient or Christian to say nothing at all about Christ and to teach instead the laws of men and the decrees of the fathers....Rather ought Christ to be preached to the end that faith in him may be established, that he may not only be Christ, but be Christ for you and me, and that what is said of him and is denoted in his name may be effectual in us. Such faith is produced and preserved in us by preaching why Christ came, what he brought and bestowed, what benefit it is to us to accept him." (The Freedom of the Christian, LW 31.357)

“The chief article and foundation of the gospel is that before you take Christ as an example, you accept and recognize him as a gift, as a present that God has given you and that is your own. This means that when you see or hear of Christ doing or suffering something, you do not doubt that Christ himself, with his deeds and suffering, belongs to you. On this you may depend as surely as if you had done it yourself; indeed as if you were Christ himself." (What to Look for and Expect in the Gospels)

The Nature of Preaching

"Preaching is naught other but an offering and presentation of Christ." Luther (LW39, 183)

“The preaching of the gospel is nothing else than Christ coming to us, or we being brought to him” (LW 35.121).

The Necessity of Preaching

“Even if Christ were given for us and crucified a thousand times it would all be vain if the Word of God were absent and were not distributed and given to me with the bidding, this is for you, take what is yours.” (LW 40, 213)

"To preach Christ means to feed the soul, make it righteous, set it free, and save it, provided it believes the preaching" (Freedom of the Christian)

The written Word (the Bible) "is not as fruitful and powerful as it is through a public preacher whom God has ordained to say and preach this.” (Sermon, 21 July 1532)

A Sample of Luther's Preaching

It would be spectacular and amazing, prompting all the world to open its ears and eyes, mouth and nose in uncomprehending wonderment, if some king’s son were to appear in a beggar’s home to nurse him in his illness, wash off his filth, and do everything else the beggar would have to do. Would this not be profound humility? Any spectator or any beneficiary of this honor would feel impelled to admit that he had seen or experienced something unusual and extraordinary, something magnificent.

But what is a king or an emperor compared with the Son of God? Furthermore, what is a beggar’s filth or stench compared with the filth of sin which is ours by nature, stinking a hundred times worse and looking infinitely more repulsive to God than any foul matter found in a hospital?

And yet the love of the Son of God for us is of such magnitude that the greater the filth and stench of our sins, the more He befriends us.

For how amazing it is that the Son of God becomes my servant, that He humbles Himself so, that He cumbers Himself with my misery and sin. . . . He says to me: “You are no longer a sinner, but I am. I am your substitute. You have not sinned, but I have. The entire world is in sin. However, you are not in sin; but I am. All your sins are to rest on Me and not on you.” No one can comprehend this. In yonder life our eyes will feast forever on this love of God. (Sermon on John 1:29)

And here's the lowdown on Luther and Preaching from David Lotz: HIGHLY RECOMMENDED

All About Us 9

GlenSeptember 24, 2013September 24, 20139 Comments

When we hear a preacher talk about "our Jesus-shaped hole" we're sensitive to the dangers. It sounds instantly "me-centred" doesn't it? If a preacher goes on about our felt needs and how Jesus meets them, Jesus seems only as big as the hole that's in us. That can't be right.

Yet, while we may be able to spot that error, another kind of me-centredness can beset the soundest of pulpits. Let me pick on perhaps the three most popular topics preached on in the churches I visit. These days the Trendy Trifecta is Trinity, grace and idols. Everything now is Trinity, grace and idols. Thinking back to last Sunday, I touched on all three, and if you're a preacher I hope you covered at least two of those!

But here's the danger, we are so self-obsessed, we can even make these truths all about us. We psychologize them and turn them into anthropology not theology. So,

We're interested in "Trinity" because it resonates with our need for love.

We love love, we think it's lovely. So we love that God is love. And we preach the Trinity because it accords with our prior proclivities. We don't preach Trinity as the nature of God, we preach it as wish-fulfillment.

We're interested in "Grace" to the degree that it's a motivator in our lives.

It's all about which regime produces the better Christian life - carrot or stick. Well, because we're "grace" people, we say CARROT. Loudly! But what we mean is "we believe in a certain shape to the Christian life" - not "we believe in a certain shape to God's life." Again, we don't preach grace as God's very nature (quite apart from how we feel about it), we preach it as wish-fulfillment.

We're interested in "Idols" as a psychological explanation for our patterns of addiction.

Idols-speak provides us with a window onto our own desires and we need little encouragement to think about ourselves. Idols-speak can become like the online personality test to discover the real me: delicious! But in preaching there's a real danger that we don't consider idols theologically. I find it rare for a preacher to define idols (as Scripture does) as false conceptions of God. Instead we consider over-investment in the world and the flesh and how we can solve our idolatry problem by determining to worship the right thing. In all this, God Himself is quite dormant, waiting for us to switch our allegiances. We are centre-stage. (More on idolising idols here).

It might sound "God-centred" to talk about Trinity and grace and idols, but so easily we make it all about us.

The Stick is the Law. And so is the Carrot 6

GlenSeptember 17, 2013September 17, 20136 Comments

Recently I taught on Luther's theology of the word. I spoke of the movement God's word makes with us - to kill and to make alive; to uproot and to plant; to tear down and to build.

Consider Genesis 1 - first darkness then light; first the seed then the fruit; first forming then filling.

Consider Genesis 2 - first the man goes into death-sleep then he's raised to unite with his bride.

Consider Genesis 3 - first Adam takes us into curse, then the promised Seed will bring deliverance.

Consider Abraham - first barrenness according to the flesh then life according to the promise.

Consider Moses - even before Israel enters the land he tells them of their inevitable exile and then the LORD will bring them home with an almighty atonement.

Consider Isaiah - he must proclaim the hacking down of Israel's tree until only the Holy Seed is left (Isaiah 6).

Consider Jeremiah - his word to the nation is first judgement then salvation (Jeremiah 1:4-10; cf Jeremiah 31)

Luther did not invent an arbitrary distinction with law and gospel. Rather, he named the pattern of the Word in evidence on every page. This patterns goes through death and, only in going through death, we then enter resurrection. (You'll notice how law-gospel preaching goes hand in hand with a theology of the cross).

Therefore our proclamation should take the same shape. We preach the inability of the flesh, of the will, of human effort when it comes to establishing the wondrously good life of God's kingdom. The law is good - really, fantastically good. But it reveals that we are bad - stinkingly, horrifyingly bad. We preach the reality of our own spiritual death and then we declare the life that comes from outside ourselves. We point to the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. You could call that law-gospel preaching if you like, but Luther has no trademark on it. It's the kind of thing you have to preach if you believe salvation comes only from Christ and never from us.

Anyway... I was teaching these kinds of things recently and two people asked questions in quick succession. The first asked: "What about Leviticus 26-27 - that takes the pattern of blessings then curses." The second asked about Luke 6 - Jesus proclaims blessings then woes. If the shape of the word is law then gospel, why are these significant portions of Scripture proclaiming a 'positive message' and then a 'negative message'?

The answer is fairly straightforward - both blessings and curses are law! In fact they are the quintessence of law.

Law is: "If you... Then He'll..."

Gospel is "Since He... You are..."

Notice therefore that "If you... Then He'll..." is a message that could include curses or blessings. If you obey then He'll bless you. If you disobey, then He'll curse you. Whether the carrot is being dangled or the stick is being threatened the real issue is the phrase "If you...". What makes these messages law is not the curses or the carrots, it's the conditionality.

Both carrot and stick are law. And notice how Moses uses them. In Leviticus 26-27 (and in Deuteronomy) he outlines the potential blessings from Mount Gerazim and then the curses from Mount Ebal (of course he spends much longer on the curses!) By the time you get to Deuteronomy it becomes very obvious (see Deut 4 and Deut 30-34) that Israel will go into the curses of exile and only then attain to the blessings. Curses and blessings are not so much alternative possibilities but consecutive stages in their history.

Think how Jesus uses the blessings and woes in Luke 6. Blessed are those who have absolutely nothing. Cursed are those who think they have it made. Both sides of the coin uphold the one truth - we've got nothing, everything must come from heaven. In other words, it's all about the good law describing the good life that is entirely beyond us. Both the "positive message" of the blessings and the "negative message" of the woes are proclaiming our inability and God's all-sufficiency.

So let me draw a couple of points of application. First, there really is a shape to God's word. We know this supremely because God's Word is Jesus. And there's a shape to Jesus' life - down into the curses then rising into blessing. Certainly the little slice of Scripture we're reading might start with a "nice bit" and end with a "hard bit", but that slice of Scripture exists within a larger context. And if we're preaching, we're called to preach the larger context. We don't proclaim Luke 6:20-26, we proclaim Jesus from Luke 6:20-26. We never want to make the mistake of the Pharisees in John 5 - seeking life in the passage rather than the Person. If we preach the Person then we have to preach the pattern of that Person - a pattern that will be evidenced in the passage too, if we would only do our homework. But that pattern is down and then up, cross then resurrection, law then gospel.

Second, legalistic preaching (preaching law without gospel) is not always harsh-sounding preaching. It could be all about blessings, all about carrots, all about your best life now - if you.... If you only do this, or think that, or be the other - then you'll be blessed. Such a message might sound incredibly positive, but ultimately it's crushing because it's all about you.

Third, law-gospel preaching is not about balancing carrots and sticks. It's not about ensuring we play off the 'nice Scriptures' with the 'harsh ones' so that we're properly rounded. Some might be adept at sugar-coating some hard truths with some sweet verses. Others might temper their lovely promises with fearful warnings. But that is not law-gospel preaching - that is law-law preaching. "Christ is the end of the law that there may be righteousness for everyone who simply believes." (Romans 10:4)

Let's not leave our hearers in between Mount Gerazim and Mount Ebal. Let's take them on the journey that Scripture takes... through the curses into the blessings, through Golgotha and up to Zion. And let's make sure we preach Christ as the One who makes it happen.

Offer the offer? 51

GlenAugust 13, 2013August 13, 201351 Comments

I hadn't heard the phrase until this year, now I've heard it a few times. Some preachers are uncomfortable 'offering Christ' in an evangelistic setting. They are uncertain whether Christ and His atonement holds true for their hearers. So instead of offering Christ (and going beyond what they feel God may be offering), they "offer the offer." That is, they tell their hearers that there is an offer of new life in Jesus. They are not so bold as to say that Jesus is "for you." But instead they are thinking that Jesus is "for some" and there's a potential that Jesus is "for you." And if an unbeliever truly repents and believes (and perseveres to the end) then that offer will prove to be for them after all.

I'm imagining that such an evangelist is uncomfortable with saying: "Christ is for you, He's truly offered to you, now through God's word, as surely as He was offered then, on the cross to the world. He is given to you as your sacrificial lamb, His blood is your atonement, have Him."

I'm imagining they wouldn't say that kind of thing, but I haven't heard enough practical examples to know how exactly they phrase things. It's quite possible that they end up saying things very similar to that.

My point here isn't about the words used so much as the theology behind it. And my one reservation is this: offering the offer doesn't sound Calvinistic enough. I know, I know - you were thinking that 'offering the offer' was straight out of 5 point Calvinism. Well the irony is, I reckon to 'offer the offer' fails to appreciate the Total Depravity that heads the 5 points of TULIP.

I'll put it this way:

If we offer Christ, we are treating unbelievers as those who are dead but here is the Resurrection and the Life for you.

If we offer the offer, we are treating unbelievers as decision making individuals who need to exercise their choice for Christ.

See the difference? Maybe it's a slight one. Maybe it doesn't matter. Maybe it doesn't lead to any real difference in evangelistic practice. But to my mind, offering the offer treats people as Hercules at the cross-roads. Offering Christ treats them as Lazarus in the tomb. I reckon Calvinists (and all who believe in the helplessness of humanity to save itself) ought to favour the latter.

If we've truly understood the plight of the unbeliever we can't offer them anything less than Jesus Himself.

Sermons Updated 4

GlenAugust 7, 2013August 9, 20134 Comments

I've updated my sermons page to include my latest preaching, aaaaand - far more excitingly - I've updated my other sermons page to include lots of great preachers you should really listen to.

Preachers like...

Paul Blackham

Declarative in tone, doctrinal in content, devotional in aim, Paul preaches Jesus from all the Scriptures. (More on why Paul's one of my favourite preachers).

Some Classics:

Why isn’t good, good enough (Philippians 3) - video audio.

Jesus Christ: Hope of the Ages (Genesis 3) – video audio.

What of those who have never heard? (Colossians 1) audio.

To A City That Repented (Jonah) audio.

Preaching at the party (Luke 7) audio

Romansfest – 15 talks on Romans with Tom Parson audio

Fear (Psalm 34) audio

All Sermons from All Souls, Langham Place

All Sermons from Tarleton Farm Fellowship

Mike Reeves

Christ-centred, Trinitarian, affective preaching that shows off the beauty of the Lord.
(More on why Mike is one of my favourite preachers).

Some classics:

Introduction to the Psalms (Psalm 1) audio

The book of Job (Job 42:7-17) audio

The temptations of Christ (Luke 4:1-11) audio

Christ has indeed been raised from the dead (1 Cor 15:12-34) audio

Out of the depths (Psalm 130) audio

The two cups (Matthew 26:36-46) audio

The book of Philippians (Phil 3:1-11) audio

Trinity part 1, 2, 3, 4

The Loving Father, The Beautiful Son, The Heart-Melting Spirit

"The Sacraments"

Enjoying the Cross

All 12 of Mike Reeves’ “Great Theologians”

All Sermons from All Souls, Langham Place

All Talks from theologynetwork.org

Steve Levy

Christ-obsessed, church-loving, passionate preacher of a raw gospel.
(More on why Steve is one of my favourite preachers)

Classic Sermons:

Hell (Genesis 3; John 3; Romans 1)

Preaching and Prayer (Ephesians 6:19-20; Ezekiel 37)

Mission Strategy i.e. go to work 6 days a week!

All Sermons from Mount Pleasant Baptist Church, Swansea

Rich Owen

Genesis 27 Wonderful sermon on election

Romans 8:18-25

Four Thoughts on Mission

Manasseh’s conversion (2 Chronicles 33)

1 Corinthians 2

All Sermons from CEC Leeds

Dev Menon

Dev's Ascension Sermon is out of this world

2 Corinthians 4

2 Timothy 2

Sermons from Zion Bishan Bible Presbyterian Church

...continue reading "Sermons Updated"

“I offered them Christ” [repost] 4

glenscrivAugust 1, 2013August 8, 20134 Comments

That was how Wesley and Whitfield would describe their evangelistic efforts. Sounds so simple: just offer them Christ.

And it's so joyous too. Nothing brings home to me the graciousness of my Lord as much as offering Him to others. The availability of Jesus is so tangible when you just lift Him up before people and say "Want Him? He's yours."

But it's so easy to fall short of it.

Here's how:

* We offer them "cool" not Christ

We spend our time reassuring people that they don't have to be a geek to be a Christian. Christians can be trendy too.

* We offer them "credibility" not Christ

We spend all our time reassuring people that they don't need to be brainless to be a Christian. Christians can be clever too.

* We offer them a creed not Christ.

Creeds are essential, I'm not suggesting we can divorce the personal from the propositional. But teaching people 6 doctrines is not offering them Christ.

* We offer them a course not Christ.

Courses are brilliant, I've seen many people become Christians on things like Christianity Explored. But offering a course is not offering them Christ.

Now, good evangelism might have all sorts of apt cultural references and thoughtful critiques of modern assumptions. It will certainly convey creedal truths and if it's followed by courses where Christ is also offered - that is an excellent thing.

But whatever else happens, it ought to offer Christ, oughtn't it? Shouldn't it placard the Person and work of Jesus and ask "Will you receive Him?"

Here's some reasons I think we don't. (And I genuinely say "we" - I fail at this all the time.)

1. We think cool, credibility, creeds and courses are more attractive than Jesus. Of course we'd never say that. We'd rarely dare to articulate the thought. But I wonder whether it's there.

2. We imagine that the gospel is a process rather than a Person. Again, if cornered we'd swear black and blue that faith is an event and the gospel a revelation. But if our evangelism is all processes perhaps we've begun to think of the evangel itself as a process.

3. We don't honestly think people will become Christians. Allied to point number 2, we've bought into some social science view of conversion and reckon that "people are much further back these days" and "we just need to bring them on a few steps towards faith."

4. We don't believe in the Holy Spirit. We don't actually think the power of Almighty God is unleashed when the Word is preached. So instead we trust to the resources of the flesh.

5. We refuse to be as vulnerable as the Lord we proclaim. Paul knew that a foolish message (1 Cor 1:18-25) meant a foolish people (v26-31) and a foolish messenger (2:1-5). But we don't want to be cruciform evangelists, opening our arms to a world who will despise and belittle the word of the cross. We want to show the world how wise and strong we are.

What do you think?

Anything to add?

Daniel Block’s Doubts About Christ-Centred Hermeneutics 2

glenscrivJune 18, 20132 Comments

At Ed Stetzer's Blog he's about to host a series of posts on Christ-centred preaching. The contributors are

Dr. Daniel Block (Wheaton College)
Dr. David Murray (Puritan Reformed Theological Seminary)
Dr. Walt Kaiser (Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary)
Dr. Bryan Chapell (Grace Presbyterian in Peoria, IL)

I'm looking forward to David Murray's contribution but first up to bat is Daniel Block who's posted the first half of his contribution here.

Block begins by saying that not enough people wrestle with this issue since they basically neglect the OT. "Because they preach primarily, if not exclusively, from the New Testament their preaching is almost by definition Christ-centered."

I'm not convinced. Why should preaching from the NT be "by definition" Christ-centred? I've certainly heard my fair share of Christless sermon on the fruit of the Spirit, the Jerusalem council, the pastoral epistles, even the sermon on the mount. No-one should have to endure such things, but many of us have. A sermon is not rendered Christ-centred because it's derived from the Greek, rather than Hebrew Scriptures. (Read here for more on Christ in the New Testament).

Block goes on to list some benefits of 'Christ-centred preaching', the first of which is:

Christ-centered preaching has a long history, beginning with the apostles, the church fathers, the reformers (especially Luther), and extending to more a recent revival Christ-centered preaching in some circles

This is a heck of a concession for Block to make! How will he out-argue this hermeneutical tradition that traces back to reformers, fathers and apostles!?

He doesn't say. Not in this post. Instead Block moves to his own misgivings about Christ-centred hermeneutics:

Christo-centric preaching often morphs into a Christo-centric hermeneutic, which demands that we find Christ in every text.

Notice how Christ is being spoken of here? An item of knowledge located in some texts (and not in others).

Instead Block wants us to have a grander vision of the sweep of God's revelation. He writes: "The Scriptures consist of many different genres and address many different concerns. Not all speak of Christ." Again - how is Christ being considered here? One concern among many. I'm sure Block would say that He's the ultimate concern (he wants a christotelic hermeneutic - one that ends up with Christ). But I can't help feeling that the vision we need to expand here is our vision of Christ Himself.

Block's second misgiving about Christ-centred hermeneutics is this:

Christ-centered preaching may obscure the intent of the original author and in so doing may actually reflect a low view of Scripture.

Well there might be folks with a low view of Scripture snipping out of their OT's everything that they can't squeeze into some narrow Christocentric hermeneutic. I'm sure things like that happen. But let's be honest, preachers pull that kind of fast one with both testaments don't they? And isn't it also possible that those who take Block's protests to heart end up reflecting a low view of Christ. After all He is called the Image of the invisible God, the Word of the Father, the Radiance of God's glory, the Exact Representation of His Being, the Way, the Truth, the Life, the One Moses wrote about. If we don't reflect that Christ-centredness in our handling of God's revelation then can we be said to be properly handling God's revelation?

But of course, there's a way of doing both. There's a way of having the highest regard for Scripture and for Christ. It means reading the Scriptures as already and intentionally Christian. If you do so you can honour both Christ and Scripture and you are never asked to trade one off against the other. But, of course, to do so is to concede that the OT Scriptures just are Christ-centred in all their historical particularity.

Block says that Luke 24 is misunderstood to mean that all the Scriptures do concern Jesus. It's just that, on the road to Emmaus, Jesus ran through the particular verses that did actually refer to Him. Presumably then the vast majority of the Old Testament does not "concern Him" in the Luke 24 sense. I suppose that kind of reading is possible but it doesn't deal with any of those solus Christus verses above.

Block then says "Few proverbs in the book of Proverbs speak of Jesus." Well the proverbs themselves only come after 9 chapters of deep theology in which the royal son is introduced to Wisdom. And, emphatically, Wisdom is not introduced as the accumulation of pithy aphorisms but the personal co-Creator of the universe in Whom is life and grace. The royal son is invited to feast with Wisdom and then out come the pithy sayings.

This example from Proverbs might help to clarify what I mean by Christocentric hermeneutics. I'm not talking about allegorizing from an isolated verse and making an improbable leap to the cross. I'm taking the proverbs very much in context, seeing their source in Christ and also expecting to see a certain cruciformity to them as I read them individually (e.g. Why does a gentle answer turn away wrath? I will wonder aloud, Prov 15:1). All of them flow from Christ and are shaped by Him - the Righteous Royal Son in whom all the treasures of Wisdom reside (Colossians 2:3)

Finally (for this initial post), Block contests:

Rather than clarifying many First Testament texts, Christ-centered preaching may rob them of both their literary quality and their spiritual force.

I grant that this is indeed a danger. But it's a danger inherent in all preaching, no matter what the preacher's hermeneutical grid. We've all got a grid and therefore we're all in danger of missing what's there in order to preach our system.

But is there a grid that is given by the Scriptures themselves? Surely the answer is Yes, and the fact Block lists 'the apostles' as teachers of the christocentric hermeneutic gives the game away.

If we follow them then our conviction will be that the OT Scriptures in all their concrete details and historical particularity are already Messianic through and through. Isn't that the grid that's going to make you delve deepest into the OT and herald Christ from every passage?

Let me finish by pointing again to Nathan Pitchford's brilliant short article on the Reformer's Hermeneutic. He shows how, for the reformers, the literal meaning was the Christ-centred meaning. Today, however, the "literal" meaning has come to mean "the naturalistic" meaning which is kept separate from any centre in Christ. He finishes by showing 6 ways the naturalistic reading fails:

1. A naturalistic hermeneutic effectively denies God’s ultimate authorship of the bible, by giving practical precedence to human authorial intent.

2. A naturalistic hermeneutic undercuts the typological significance which often inheres in the one story that God is telling in the bible (see Galatians 4:21-31, for example).

3. A naturalistic hermeneutic does not allow for Paul’s assertion that a natural man cannot know the spiritual things which the Holy Spirit teaches in the bible – that is, the things about Jesus Christ and him crucified (I Corinthians 2).

4. A naturalistic hermeneutic is at odds with the clear example of the New Testament authors and apostles as they interpret the Old Testament (cf. Peter’s sermon in Acts 2, Paul’s interpretations in Romans 4 and Galatians 4, James’ citing of Amos 9 during the Jerusalem council of Acts 15, the various Old Testament usages in Hebrews, etc.).

5. A naturalistic hermeneutic disallows a full-orbed operation of the analogy of faith principle of the Reformation, by its insistence that every text demands a reading “on its own terms”.

6. A naturalistic hermeneutic does not allow for everything to have its ultimate reference point in Christ, and is in direct opposition to Ephesians 1:10, Colossians 1:16-18, and Christ’s own teachings in John 5:39, Luke 24:25-27.

Read the whole thing