The Privilege, Promise, Power & Peril of Doctrinal Preaching

by Thomas J. Nettles

The work of the apostles in preaching, however, under the new covenant ministry of the Holy Spirit, would bring thousands to faith because the working of the Spirit in gospel preaching to bring about belief is a greater work than the work of the Spirit in the performance of miracles.

One’s preaching should be a conscious reflection of theology. What you say, how you say it, to whom you say it, and how you conceive its usefulness will arise from your personal systematic theology.

Greatness in the things of God is proportionate to what one knows, believes, loves, and announces concerning the person and work of Christ.

But greater than John is he who is least in the kingdom of heaven. In other words, those who are not offended in Christ (Matt. 11:6), those to whom the Son has revealed the Father, who have come to Christ to find rest, who see and believe the fulfillment of the sign of the prophet Jonah (Matt. 12:39), who recognize that a greater than Jonah and a greater than Solomon is here (Matt. 12:41, 42), and who are able to point to the crucified and risen One as the sole way of salvation are greater than John the Baptist. Their greatness is measured in terms of their knowledge of Christ’s completed work, their submission to it, and their clarity, faithfulness, and persistence in proclaiming it.

While all the parables, at an abstract level, may bear close scrutiny in developing theories of education and communication, Jesus did not give them as a model of how we are to preach. They were specially adapted means to provide a temporary check to the possibility of ignorant enthusiasm toward his status as Messiah or preemptive destruction for blasphemous claims.

Any exposition which draws to a close before opening the window to allow christological light to brighten its dusk must bear John’s judgment: “He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him” (John 1:11).

Some ministers spend time giving friendly advice and succor to those who are distressed and depressed in the manner of Ahab, when Naboth refused him his vineyard, or who are upset like Haman at the exaltation of Mordecai.

The truth to which the heart is opened by the Spirit must be set forth boldly and with careful attention to the integrity of its content. This work is done with the joyful confidence of knowing that the Spirit is even more earnest than we about this and infinitely more competent. In addition, he is eternally and constitutionally more solicitous for the glory of Christ as the means of uniting sinners with each other and with God through the redemptive love of the triune God.

John Broadus took account of this when he said, “In regard to preaching unpopular doctrines, such as Election before some audiences, Future Punishment, Depravity, and even Missions before others; one comprehensive rule may be given, Be faithful and fearless, but skilful and affectionate.”

Broadus remarked that doctrine is “the preacher’s chief business. Truth is the lifeblood of piety, without which we cannot maintain its vitality or support its activity.” And preaching doctrine, “the entire body of Scripture teaching upon any particular subject, when collected and systematically arranged,” is the preacher’s “chief means of doing good.”

Edwards studied simplicity in style in order that the power of the message would be in the assertions, and reassertion, of the truth. Each sermon consisted, generally, of a text, a doctrine, and a set of applications. The text was usually short but explained in a brief expository manner within a canonical context. From this was derived a doctrine, usually a single sentence of the leading truth of the passage which he would then expand with several propositions. Third, Edwards would reiterate the doctrine in an intense manner as he applied every aspect of it with its several implications to the congregation.

Edwards begins part III, section IV of Religious Affections: “Holy affections are not heat without light; but evermore arise from some information of the understanding, some spiritual instruction that the mind receives, some light or actual knowledge.” Any affection not arising from “light in the understanding” most certainly is not spiritual (Works, 281–82).

Spiritual understanding of Scripture involves having “the eyes of the mind opened to behold the wonderful, spiritual excellency of the glorious things contained in the true meaning of it” (Works, 1:285). These truths always were in the Scripture, but the eyes were blind to their excellency.

and evangelical faith always exhibited the same character. Man’s duty has always been to love God with a benevolent love because of the infinity of God’s being and his unique self-existence, and with complacent love because of his infinite loveliness and perfection. Since

For Edwards, therefore, the whole of Scripture comes to bear on every individual text. Seemingly “harmless” texts are given an ineffable awesomeness. To see this clearly, one need only remind himself that “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God” arose out of the text in Deuteronomy 32:35, “Their foot shall slide in due time.”

Given this understanding, we observe that even in his most extended discussions from reason, his guiding premises are derived from biblical texts. Edwards’s “A Dissertation Concerning the end for which God created the World” is an example of conscious and extended application of reason parallel to scriptural exegesis.

“The best reasoner in the world,” Edwards asserts, “endeavouring to find out the causes of things, by the things themselves, might be led into the grossest errors and contradictions, and find himself, at the end, in extreme want of an instructor.” Reason, uninstructed by revelation, affords not a single historical example of any person or people that “emerged from atheism or idolatry, into the knowledge or adoration of the one true God” (Works, 2:476).

You all have by you a large treasure of divine knowledge, in that you have the Bible in your hands; therefore be not contented in possessing but little of this treasure. God hath spoken much to you in the Scriptures; labour to understand as much of what he saith as you can. God hath made you reasonable creatures; therefore let not the noble faculty of reason or understanding lie neglected. (Works, 2:161)

To those under a sense of misery Edwards would offer no false comfort. “I am not afraid to tell sinners who are most sensible of their misery, that their case is indeed as miserable as they think it to be, and a thousand times more so; for this is the truth” (Works,

By being such an holy and excellent Saviour, he is contrary to your lusts and corruptions. If there were a Saviour offered to you that was agreeable to your corrupt nature, such a Saviour you would accept. But Christ being a Saviour of such purity, holiness, and divine perfection, this is the cause why you have no inclination to him, but are offended in him. (Works, 2:62–63)

Conversion manifests a “new sense of things” which consists of a “glimpse of the moral and spiritual glory of God” along with “supreme amiableness” of Jesus Christ and salvation by him.

Therefore it is manifest, from my text and doctrine, that no degree of speculative knowledge of religion is any certain sign of true piety. Whatever clear notions a man may have of the attributes of God, the doctrine of the Trinity, the nature of the two covenants, the economy of the persons of the Trinity, and the part which each person has in the affair of man’s redemption; if he can discourse never so excellently of the offices of Christ, and the way of salvation by him, and the admirable methods of divine wisdom, and the harmony of the various attributes of God in that way; if he can talk never so clearly and exactly of the method of the justification of a sinner, and of the nature of conversion, and the operations of the Spirit of God, in applying the redemption of Christ; giving good distinctions, happily solving difficulties, and answering objections, in a manner tending greatly to enlighten the ignorant, to the edification of the church of God, and the conviction of gainsayers, and the great increase of light in the world; if he has more knowledge of this sort than hundreds of true saints of an ordinary education, and most divines; yet all is no certain evidence of any degree of saving grace in the heart. (Works, 2:43)

Robert Dabney (1820–98) likened this to “feeding the flock inside the fold with the bristling missiles which should have been hurled at the wolves without.”[xxix]

When God takes away the heart of stone and gives an heart of flesh— then God grants repentance. A new heart is a penitent heart. Regeneration is necessary because sinners have hard, impenitent hearts. And this is the glorious effect of the power of God in the act of regeneration. It reduces the rebel into submission. It melts the stubborn heart into repentance. When God regenerates and grants repentance, he does it by one decisive act. (Repentance, 63)

Billy Graham showed an ability to bring together wildly different viewpoints through that very purpose— concentration on the personal experience of a decision for Christ. For the conservative, this vindicated a style of transactional evangelism. For the moderate, it vindicated the personal quest for existential significance and the sanctity of individual conscience. For non-evangelicals and even people of other religions, it represented a nonintrusive, uncoercive, respectful attempt to offer a better life for everyone. Jesus will give you purpose, and Jesus will take you to heaven.

He would accept the Bible by faith, sustain his pulpit propositions with “the Bible says,” and not commit to any deeply detailed defenses of every assertion of the Bible as long as he could maintain the most obvious purposes of Scripture with clarity. While this resolution kept him from the agnosticism of Templeton, at times it allowed him to skip over some specific challenges to historical confessional orthodoxy.

But we need no other proof than the Word of Almighty God. That’s all the proof we need. I don't care what the scientists has to say. I’m not dependent on what the scientists tells me to believe about this Book. Every time some big shot scientist comes along and makes a statement complimentary to the Word of God we rush out and say, “Boy, look what so and so said— Look what Dr. so and so, a Ph. D. from Oxford, had to say.” I don’t care what any scientist says. The Word of God is enough. We don't need to depend on the world to tell us whether this is God’s Word or not! God said so and we accept it by faith and believe it from cover to cover as God’s inspired, holy Word and when God says that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, rose from the dead, bless the Lord, I believe it— every bit of it. But it can be proved from history. (Revival, 144)

“I’m absolutely convinced if someone would come and give me a great deal of proof that the Bible was not true and Christ never lived,” so Graham stated the hypothetical case, “as some people say He didn’t and so forth, this wouldn’t disturb my faith at all because my faith is grounded in a personal encounter with Christ and a daily experience with Him.”

None of this garnering of evidence, however, in a highly successful method of demonstrating the compelling credibility of the Bible and the central Christian doctrines in any way diminishes the necessity of the work of the Spirit in bringing a person to an indestructible experience of faith. Christian faith involves both Word and Spirit. Graham did not, however, take the time or the opportunity to answer in that way, but found the appeal to personal experience more satisfactory, and perhaps compelling, in the situation.

Historically, varieties of liberalism functioned experientially as did Graham— theology rests in personal experience, and faith is a matter of the assertion of the human will.

The doctrines that constituted the power of preaching from colonial Puritanism, from Edwards to Nettleton, had been cut in half. The objective affirmations of the person of Christ, the necessity of the cross and resurrection, and the call to repentance and faith though suffering through various nuances of explanation had remained clear. Yet the subjective doctrines of the character of the human will and consequent discussions of the work of the Holy Spirit in regeneration and conversion and the nature of repentance, faith, and assurance all had been redefined.

While earlier views that highlighted evidences of a changed life sometimes produced an absorption with introspection, modern views produced an untested confidence in the power of the human transaction of decision.

Olson’s solution would be death to evangelicals and the world. His position is impossible to argue biblically. Were he to present an exegetical and doctrinal defense of his call for minimizing the importance of truth, then he must contradict his purported conclusion. He would seek to argue that doctrinal correctness contradicts true spirituality while wanting to establish it on an unassailable doctrinal foundation. Thus, he can have no coherent scriptural support for his assertion. He has cut himself off from even trying.

This representation of prophetic utterance is hardly consistent with the admonition of Peter concerning the exercise of the gift of prophecy in the congregation: “Whoever speaks, as one who speaks oracles of God . . . in order that in everything God may be glorified through Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 4:11). The person speaking does not begin a prophetic word with “It seems that God might be saying,” or “I have a strong inner impression that I believe is from the Lord” (Storms, 129).

Given the context and the discussion time of seven days, we have a tidily concentrated expression in an elliptical sentence, which if expanded, would read, “They kept telling Paul, on the basis of the Spirit’s revelation of what awaited him in Jerusalem, not to set foot in Jerusalem.”

The prophets of the New Testament received revelation that was of the same quality and truthfulness as that received by the apostles. They did not have the same historical qualifications as apostles and were under the authority of the apostles. Nevertheless, their messages to and in the churches were accepted as revelatory. Since they must respond to direct apostolic authority, their function and their viability ceased with the end of the apostolic stewardship (1 Cor. 4:1; 14:37-40; 2 Cor. 3:6). In Ephesians, Paul stated that God’s household was “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone” (2:20). That he referred to the prophets of the New Testament church is verified just a few verses down when he reminded the Ephesian Christians that both his speaking and writing arose from a single stream of revelation and that the prophets who functioned in their churches received revelation also: Assuming that you have heard of the stewardship of God’s grace that was given to me for you, how the mystery was made known to me by revelation, as I have written briefly. When you read this, you can perceive my insight into the mystery of Christ, which was not made known to the sons of men in other generations as it has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit. (Eph. 3:2-5)

New covenant communities needed a constant inflow of revealed truth; on that account, God gave prophets to receive that revelation until the apostolic message reached its final maturity and so ceased. With the completion of the message, the need for the revelatory gifts was also complete. (See Eph. 2:20; 3:5; 4:11; 1 Cor. 12:10, 28; 14:1, 3, 6, 22, 24, 25, 29-32).

The angel uses the word prophesy, therefore, to indicate the inerrant inscripturation of John’s visions. In Revelation 22:7 the angel refers to John’s faithful writing when he says, “Blessed is the one who keeps the words of the prophecy of this book.” John is not operating with a changed definition of the concept of prophecy.

Conscience is human affection operating in conformity to received information.

Conscience serves as that element of personality by which one raises to the level of consciousness the interrelated system that drives the moral life. The pure heart finds expression in the unrestrained approval of God’s verdict of condemnation against sin—the conscious operation of a good conscience— producing repentance. At the same time and in accord with the same moral reality, the pure heart gives loving and joyful approval— the conscious operation of a good conscience— to the unblemished righteousness of Christ.

Since God has taken the initiative in appealing both in the reconciling work and in its proclamation, nothing can be of more transcendent importance than laying out the case that the sinner must run to God seeking a removal of all offenses that he has committed with every breath and thought of his life.

To his doctrine he must take heed, that it be the truth of God; not the fancies of his own mind, nor the traditions, or commandments of men; but the word of God: “For what is the chaff to the wheat? Saith the Lord.” Here again he must distinguish between the law and Gospel; and between the characters of men, as saints or sinners: Must point out the ruined and guilty state of all, by nature, under the curse of a broken law; sound, as it were, Mount Sinai’s thunder in the sinners ear; present the flaming mountain to his eye; and thus produce the awful evidence, to that momentous truth, “that by the deeds of the law, shall no flesh living be justified.” To the humbled sinner, and believing soul, he must describe Jesus, as “the lamb of God, who taketh away the sins of the world:” As the only, the almighty, and willing savior. He must describe him, in his person, his offices, his works of love and grace, his bleeding passion, and triumphant state. He must open as it were Immanuel’s heart, in the description of divine compassion and publish the gracious invitation of the Gospel, to perishing and heavy laden souls; must shew the abundant grace contained in the promises, and the foundation on which faith may rest, in the faithfulness, infinite goodness, sovereign mercy, and unchangeable purpose of the promiser. To him, belongs the important work of drawing aside the veil of time, and opening the awful scenes of eternity, on his hearers minds; of describing the joys of paradise; an...