Choosing to Preach Discussion

re: #17 - The Limits of Argument

Posted by Kallie Hutton on Aug. 25, 2010 at 15:58

The postmodern mindset isn’t is much against argument as it is accepting of contradictions. The postmodern generation still values a good argument and seeks out knowledge and truth. The difference lies in the fact that know people are more at peace with the things that logical argument cannot explain- and in faith there are many! You cannot logically explain the Trinity or the omnipresence of God or other mysteries of the faith. The postmodern generation accepts these things as just that: mysteries of the faith; they do not need logical arguments to accept them as true. Perhaps the post modern mindset can be an asset rather than a hindrance to preachers.

re: #17 - The Limits of Argument

Posted by Jeffery Chan on Mar. 10, 2009 at 15:47

The only limit to any type of preaching, whether with a logical, step by step type of argument or not, is the work of the Holy Spirit in the lives of the listener. Of course, this also presupposes that the preacher is preaching out of a heart sensitive to the Spirit and sensitive to the hearts of her or his listeners.

Any time a preacher gets up to preach, s/he is presenting an argument. It is an argument calling everyone to hear the Word of God and to walk closer with Him. Sometimes the use of logic is helpful, especially for those whose minds are more wired to think in step by step logical pathways. Personally, I believe that regardless of the these ‘postmodern’ times, everyone responds to a solid argument. However, what may turn them away can be the attitude of the preacher.

At the same time, if the majority of the listeners do not respond well to step by step logical proofs, it may be wise for the preacher to choose another way to present the argument, the point, in another way: perhaps by painting a picture of the future.

In the end, it is the Spirit that works. Preachers must be sensitive to the Spirit in order to preach the Word of God, to present the argument, the plea, the call of the Lord to come closer to Him. I would hazard to say that it probably isn’t the exact way that the message is delivered (ie: argument, vision, deductive, inductive, etc), but rather the attitude, heart and spirit of the preacher that would limit the work of the Spirit in the lives of the listeners.

re: #17 - The Limits of Argument

Posted by HeeJin Kim on Feb. 01, 2007 at 00:48

Even though those metaphors are not entirely appropriate, comparing lawyers to preachers and judges to listeners can be very suggestive to those who preach. All preachers should keep in mind that the sermon is dialogical, to which people will argue back in their hearts. Indeed, postmoderners believe that reality or truth is always subjective, in contrast to moderns’ belief of discernable and knowable absolute truth and objective reality. However, postmoderns’ peculiarity, such as the emotional and intellectual openness to truth, might rather be a merit to make them have a desire for ‘black’ or ‘white’ truth than a ‘gray’ compromise.

re: #17 - The Limits of Argument

Posted by Melissa Lane on Jan. 16, 2007 at 15:04

I wonder if the so-called postmodern phenomenon is as pervasive as people often argue. While there is less room for absolutes and people are more comfortable with contradiction, people still want to know why something is true. Argumentation and debate are still highly valued, but there needs to be room for conversation. If someone simply proclaims a truth, follows it with a line of argumentation and then refuses to engage in conversation on that line of argumentation, the person can be dismissed as being high and mighty, or a self-appointed know-it-all. Is there room for arguments in sermons? Yes, but they need to be approached in a manner that is appropriate manner, taking into account different points of view. This will open lines for further conversation, rather than closing them down.