Preaching - and Acts

It seems odd to me how many pastors seem to have never read the book of the Acts of the Apostles with an eye to how the most successful sermons of the past were constructed. How many would love to have the result that Peter had on the Day of Pentecost or even the impromptu sermon he gave to Cornelius. And how about shutting the mouths of the philosophers as in Athens.

Now I agree it might be a little hard on our hearers if we went on for several hours (as Paul did in Acts 20 - causing Eutychus to fall asleep and drop out the window) but we could do more to make sure our preaching follows the same pattern - if not the same content. While over-long sermons are likely not wise, present day fashions with half-an-hour length sometimes prohibit an adequate treatment of some topics. Acts gives no indication that there were time restriction placed on the length of sermons preached by the Apostles. The only indications that a sermon may have been cut short were always by the response of the unbelievers who interrupted proceedings.

The first thing to note is the sermon was fitted to the occasion. Peter's sermon at Pentecost is quite different from that of Paul's on Mar's Hill. The people addressed were different so the same message would not do. Yet, when we find Paul preaching to Jews the form and content is very similar to that of Peter. A comparison of the content shows that some sermons were fitted for the rebellious Jews, some for the Gentiles (who heard what had been said with joy). Philip's was an informal version fitted to answer a particular question before moving on to speak of Christ's person and work.

Second, each step of the argument was developed from a proper use of Scripture (footnote 1). That was still true of the sermon on Mar's Hill but Scripture was less obvious in its presence. This argues that expository preaching is the style we should use. Though we don't have details about all the sermons which were preached (say in the two year period Paul was in Ephesus) we do know that he prepared them adequately to handle the Bible so they were able to discern false teachers from the true - that implies regular explanations of what the Bible teaches.

Third, the sermons recorded are all to do with the implications of the work of the Messiah. They remind the hearers that God is a just God who punishes evil, that they are in danger of judgment for their personal sins, that Christ paid the price in order to redeem us and that God demonstrated his acceptance of that sacrifice by raising him from the dead. Significantly these sermons are all recorded as the first preached in any particular place.
This is important for two reasons:
a) Paul tells the Corinthians that he determined when he came to them to "... know nothing among them but Jesus Christ and him crucified." This would tend to indicate this was not his usual practice (check the context).
b) Peter also says that his readers ought to have passed on from the "sincere milk of the Gospel" to the mature meat of the word but were not able to take it.

Expository preaching will not always have (as its main focus) the person and work of Christ. In the same way as Paul's letters are related to the Gospel but deal with other topics, preaching the word will be similarly related while fitted to the occasion and the needs of the people at the time. It is to be assumed that the Apostles followed the example of Jesus and that their focus was the kingdom of God.

The initial preaching, then, deals with the inauguration of the kingdom and the importance that the hearers become part of it. This fulfills the first part of the Great Commission. Further preaching would deal with the characteristics of those in the kingdom and the significance of Old Testament teaching to fit us for the roles we are to play in the kingdom. Such foci to our preaching enable us to relate the Bible message to Christ as the Lord and head of the Church while teaching the new disciples (as Christ did the Apostles) to obey all the things he had commanded them.

Paul's letters to the Churches demonstrate that both approaches were used. To take just one example: Writing to the Church in Thessalonica he warns them about the last days as he had "... told them while he was yet with them." Now it is true that Jesus taught about this matter but focusing on his death and resurrection in every sermon would miss the details required to understand this subject. It requires the preacher to provide the hearers with some understanding of the Old Testament. So the sermon needs to be related to Christ's work even though the focus may be on the foundation for that work.

So, to be faithful preachers we need to be sure that we are sensitive to the occasion, faithfully applying Scripture in our sermons and covering both the Old Testament and the New in instructing the people of God. This seems to be some of the implications of Acts for our preaching.


Footnote 1 This can be seen if we do a detailed study of, for example, Peter's Pentecost sermon or Stephen's sermon. back