A Response to “Pagan Christianity?”
3.5 Chapter 4 Review – The Sermon: Protestantism’s Most Sacred Cow
Viola and Barna next direct their vitriol toward the “modern sermon”, which they rightly recognise to be the central element of the Protestant worship service. They write: “…today’s sermon has no root in Scripture. Rather, it was borrowed from pagan culture, nursed and adopted into the Christian faith.” Of course, we can immediately show from Scripture this is not true.
Even in the Old Testament, Scripture was to be regularly read and expounded publicly. In Deuteronomy, Moses commands the public reading of the Law before the gathered people during the Feast of Booths (Deuteronomy 31:10-13). In a more general way, the Levites were tasked with teaching the Law to the people, in addition to enacting the sacrificial system (Deuteronomy 33:10). We see this in action much later, when Ezra the priest read the law[1] before the assembled people returned from exile. In Nehemiah 8:7-8, we read that the Levites, “…helped the people to understand the Law, while the people remained in their places. They read from the book, from the Law of God, clearly, and they gave the sense, so that the people understood the reading.” Between the Testaments, the reading and exposition of Scripture would become a regular part of the synagogue service on the Sabbath.[2] Our Lord, of course, gave many public teachings throughout his earthly ministry (e.g., Matthew 5:2, 13:52; Mark 10:1, 12:35). Multiple public sermons are recorded in Acts, including from Peter (Acts 2:14-40, 3:12-26), Stephen (Acts 7:2-53), and Paul (Acts 13:16-41, 17:22-31). In the Epistles, we find preaching and teaching to be central to the activities of the church. Paul writes to the Ephesian church, “And he gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the shepherds and teachers, to equip the saints for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ” (Ephesians 4:11-2). Paul writes to Timothy, saying “I charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom: preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching.” James makes clear that not everyone in the congregation should teach, given that it comes with stricter judgement (James 3:1). Teaching, especially in a formal and public sense, should be reserved to those equipped and called by God to do so. Indeed, one of the qualifications for elders or overseers of the church is that is they are “able to teach” (1 Timothy 3:2) or “able to give instruction in sound doctrine” (Titus 1:9), indicating that teaching is an essential duty for the pastor. The fact that this requirement is absent from the qualifications for deacons (1 Timothy 3:8-13) demonstrates that teaching was not an expectation for everyone in the church but was a function belonging primarily to the pastors. 1 Timothy 5:17 speaks of elders “who labour in preaching and teaching”. The word “labour” is indicative of hard work, which Paul considers worthy of “double honour”.
So, what possible grounds do Viola and Barna have for claiming that the sermon “has no root in Scripture”? Well, yet again, their actual claims don’t live up to their irresponsible rhetoric. It turns out they don’t object to teaching in the church per se, but only structured, non-interactive, sermons delivered regularly by a pastor. Once again, they base these objections on their understanding of how teaching was done in the early church. They claim that teaching the Word in first-century church gatherings came from the “entire church”, apparently forgetting James 3:1. The passages they cite do not support this claim. Romans 12:6-8 only teaches that those gifted to teach should serve the church by teaching. Given that Paul in verse 4 of the same passage insists that not all members of the church have the same function, the passage actually refutes the claim that the entire church should be involved in teaching.[3] In Romans 15:14 Paul is only affirming that the Romans are knowledgeable, and “able to instruct one another”. There is no indication that this is referring to public preaching by everyone in the congregation. We do not deny that Christians can give each other counsel. Personal rather than public instruction is much more likely what is in view here. Similarly, Colossians 3:16 does not refer to public preaching, but to teaching and admonishing with “psalms and hymns and spiritual songs”. That is, Christians admonish one another through singing, not public preaching.
In the end, Viola and Barna fail to establish that there is anything wrong with pastors delivering a regular Sunday sermon. Scripture, in plainest language, tells us otherwise. Moreover, their alternative vision for teaching in the church is highly problematic. To permit unqualified[4] persons to preach to the gathered church is to place in immediate spiritual peril both the preacher (who is liable to the stricter judgement mentioned in James 3:1) and those receiving the preaching (who may be led astray by poor teaching). Such a practice is highly irresponsible, not to mention actually unbiblical. Certainly, there is much to be concerned about regarding the style and content of many modern sermons, but the call should be to reform the sermon, not to do away with it altogether.
[1] And indeed, he reads from a raised wooden platform (Nehemiah 8:4): one could say, a pulpit! No doubt Viola and Barna would not approve.
[2] Graves, M. (2007). The Public Reading of Scripture in Early Judaism. Journal of The Evangelical Theological Society, 50(3), 467-487. https://www.etsjets.org/files/JETS-PDFs/50/50-3/JETS_50-3_467-487_Graves.pdf
[3] Paul’s prohibition on women speaking in church (1 Corinthians 14:34, 1 Timothy 2:12) would also argue against the “entire church” participating in preaching. But, of course, Viola and Barna are egalitarians and would presumably dispute the applicability of those verses. This error alone should disqualify these men from any claim to being reliable interpreters of Scripture.
[4] I do not mean formal academic qualifications. What qualifies one to teach the church is a knowledge of the Scriptures and an ability to teach by the gifting of God, recognised and accepted by a local body of believers.
Next Section: 3.6 Chapter 5 Review – The Pastor: Obstacle to Every-Member Functioning
0 Comments