As a pastor's group we are reading: Communication Theory for Christian Witness, by Charles Kraft. It's been heady, but really good. Here's what he has to say about preaching:
"It is simply a damaging myth that supports our tradition of preaching. It is based on the one hand on the historical fallacy that this is the way the early church did it and on the other by inadequate translation that gives the impression that monologue preaching is God's intended way of getting his message out. There is no magic in this (or any other) method. Jesus himself much preferred personal, interactional communication that encourages immediate feedback and, if necessary, adjustment of the message to assure greater relevance." Pgs. 28-29
&
"In what follows I will argue that Christians should use a multiplicity of forms of communication (as Jesus did), chosen according to their appropriateness in each given situation. A monologue approach is thoroughly appropriate if one wants to present a body of cognitive information in a short period of time...But a monologue approach is very poorly suited to either changing people's opinions or leading them to make significant changes in their lives." Pg. 31
He says quite a bit more & really demonstrates that what we believe "preaching" is really isn't what the NT means when it uses the words; or rather what the Bible translators thought of the words they translated. Too, given "preaching" is the preferred method of communication by the vast majority of churches, Dr. Kraft goes on to show how monologue (that's what our preaching is) is one of the least effective means of transformation for anyone. Yet, as Evangelicals monologue/preaching IS the main method of communication. This is challenging to me; especially as I find myself coming into closer proximity with a group of people who worship their gods in almost every way other than the way we do.
No comments:
Post a Comment