Over at TGC-Australia, there has been a great discussion about sermon length with Rory Shiner arguing for shorter but better-prepared sermons, and then with Mikey Lynch arguing for slightly longer sermons.
I have always preached 25–30-minute sermons aimed at exploring the key word of the passage with a balance of biblical background, exegesis, and life application. My homiletics professor, Dr. Perry, from TEDS artfully fleshed out the difference between expository teaching and expository preaching. By the gracious empowering, illuminating filling of the Spirit my parishioners were nearly always asking for more. Perhaps that was better than their snoozing through an hour-long message. I did tell them that if they slept, they were to nod in agreement. I find your discussion, Dr. Bird, very interesting. Balancing the needs of more emotion driven, surface thinking congregates with the need for a deeper exploration of the text is always a challenge.
Stanton, yes, I think it depends on the congregation and context when it comes to sermon length. Some places expect way more others want something neat and tidy.
I find a 20-30 min sermon at church on a bible passage (read before the sermon) gives me just enough pointers to whet my appetite to go home and look into it more myself. I don’t want to preacher to be the guru who tells me all there is to know. Just a knowledgeable person who points out that there is more to know than what the passage first appears to say.
I don't think we need sermons with lists of application points. Instead, we need sermons that teach us how to better understand the Bible, which should transform us as images of God.
This is what I love about the Story of God Bible Commentary. I’m going through Romans right now. The first part of every section is detailed exegesis of the passage, and the second part application on all the details hitherto described. I find having both is better.
Mary, yes, it's a good series, but it was hard to write. Scot McKnight was strict, 60% exegesis and 40% application. Often the exegesis was easier compared to thinking through the application. Romans 5 was hard, the application was, don't be "in Adam."
I’ve taken 3 months to get to the end of Ch 4 of Romans so have Rom 5 to look forward to next month. I read a short section, look up Bible references, including footnotes, and write my thoughts and prayers based on it. Some sections I do over and over for a week, looking up every reference. So by the time I get to your application, I’ve already done all my applications of the exegesis part. Im amazed at how much more you manage to get out of it then.
By the way, I talked to my husband so much about my findings in it that he went and bought his own copy and is now working through it too. Sharing would not have worked as mine is so notated.
I have always preached 25–30-minute sermons aimed at exploring the key word of the passage with a balance of biblical background, exegesis, and life application. My homiletics professor, Dr. Perry, from TEDS artfully fleshed out the difference between expository teaching and expository preaching. By the gracious empowering, illuminating filling of the Spirit my parishioners were nearly always asking for more. Perhaps that was better than their snoozing through an hour-long message. I did tell them that if they slept, they were to nod in agreement. I find your discussion, Dr. Bird, very interesting. Balancing the needs of more emotion driven, surface thinking congregates with the need for a deeper exploration of the text is always a challenge.
Stanton, yes, I think it depends on the congregation and context when it comes to sermon length. Some places expect way more others want something neat and tidy.
20 minutes of quality is more than enough!
I find a 20-30 min sermon at church on a bible passage (read before the sermon) gives me just enough pointers to whet my appetite to go home and look into it more myself. I don’t want to preacher to be the guru who tells me all there is to know. Just a knowledgeable person who points out that there is more to know than what the passage first appears to say.
As a BOP chaplain it was easy to preach a 20-30 minutes sermon. But for the life of me, I can’t do that at church (45-60 minutes)!
I don't think we need sermons with lists of application points. Instead, we need sermons that teach us how to better understand the Bible, which should transform us as images of God.
But if there's no application, is it more of a lecture than a sermon?
I once read a book where the author said that you should make the application the main points of your sermon.
This is what I love about the Story of God Bible Commentary. I’m going through Romans right now. The first part of every section is detailed exegesis of the passage, and the second part application on all the details hitherto described. I find having both is better.
Mary, yes, it's a good series, but it was hard to write. Scot McKnight was strict, 60% exegesis and 40% application. Often the exegesis was easier compared to thinking through the application. Romans 5 was hard, the application was, don't be "in Adam."
I’ve taken 3 months to get to the end of Ch 4 of Romans so have Rom 5 to look forward to next month. I read a short section, look up Bible references, including footnotes, and write my thoughts and prayers based on it. Some sections I do over and over for a week, looking up every reference. So by the time I get to your application, I’ve already done all my applications of the exegesis part. Im amazed at how much more you manage to get out of it then.
By the way, I talked to my husband so much about my findings in it that he went and bought his own copy and is now working through it too. Sharing would not have worked as mine is so notated.
Great!