The logic is sound—one well-driven nail is often better than one hundred staples. So every preacher longs to drive the truth of the preached Word deep into the hearts of his hearers. In fact, some homiletics experts would argue that the lack of this kind of focus and clarity may be one of the greatest weaknesses in evangelical expository preaching (McDill, 12 Essential Steps of Expository Preaching, 73). Why then do we struggle to drive the nail deep? How do we explain our struggle to clearly get the point across?
Conventional wisdom traces the blame back to the pulpit, claiming, "A mist in the pulpit means a fog in the pew." This is true enough; but, expositors would be wise to consider what weather conditions existed in the first place to create such a mist in the pulpit. Our struggle with clarity is often deeper than our exposition, our homiletical style, our illustrations, or even our outline. Our struggle with clarity must go back to something deeper than the pulpit. Why are things so unclear in the pulpit in the first place? More than likely, things were already fuzzy in the study. Thus, clarity in the study—not just the sermon—is essential for faithful and effective expository preaching.
So, how can we ensure such clarity, especially when our desks and hard drives abound with so many details and data from our exegetical labor? The solution is simpler than you may think. Allow me to offer two time-tested strategies that will produce greater clarity in the study. First, do the clarifying work. Second, check your clarifying work.
No one tries to be unclear. Fuzziness, in other words, is the default. Thus, we must intentionally work for clarity. Too often, I think preachers just assume that quantity of study time increases probability of clarity. Yet, this is similar to the old practice makes perfect strategy. Any accomplished athlete or musician knows better. Practice does not make perfect; rather, it makes permanent. Poor practice solidifies poor performance.
Similarly, study does not equal clarity; I would argue that intensity and intentionality equals clarity. How often do we exert focused effort on clarifying the main point of the text? This exercise requires strenuous mental exertion.
H. Jowett, who Warren Wiersbe said had "the greatest preaching in the English-speaking world," argues, "I have the conviction that no sermon is ready for preaching, not ready for writing out, until we can express its theme in a short, pregnant sentence as clear as crystal. I find the getting of that sentence the hardest, the most exacting, and the most fruitful labor in my study. . . I do not think any sermon should be preached, or even written, until that sentence has emerged, clear and lucid as a cloudless moon" (The Preacher: His Life and Work, 133).
As unfamiliar as it may seem to some, many expositors have benefited from completing the following practical exercise for getting to the point. Though a couple of these are mentioned in another blog post here at MCEP (see Clint Archer), this more exhaustive list may be helpful:
One caveat here will help. Expositors should be clear that they are first trying to think of how the original audience would have understood the message, not necessarily how they will preach it. Being clear on the text and clear on the sermon are two related but separate considerations (for the differences between the two, see Engaging Exposition by Aiken, Curtis, and Rummage, chapters 10 and 11). To use the language of one popular hermeneutics book, we must understand the text in "their town" before we cross the "principalizing bridge" back into "our town" (Duvall and Hayes, Grasping God's Word). Nevertheless, no preacher should develop a manuscript or an expositional outline until he first clarifies what the text originally meant.
Having discerned the main point of the text, we should also humbly check our clarifying work. As high school math students do their own work and then check their answers by referencing the back of the book, preachers should check their understanding of the main idea with other scholars and pastors who have wrestled through the same passage. This step doesn’t require much time, but the payoff is substantial. So how do we check our answers? I will list a few helpful sources below and attempt to make it even more practical by giving an OT and NT example:
◦ Psalm 15 — "Description of a Citizen of Zion" (NASB), "Who Shall Dwell on Your Holy Hill?" (ESV), "A Description of the Godly" (CSB)
◦ Ephesians 2:11–22 — "One in Christ" (NIV), " "New Life Corporately" (NET), "Brought Near By His Blood" (NKJV)
◦ Psalm 15 — "Lord, Who May Dwell in Your Sacred Tent" (NIVBTSB), "the way of the righteous" (MSB)
◦ Ephesians 2:11–22 — "Unity in Christ" (MSB), "Jew and Gentile Reconciled through Christ" (NIVBTSB)
◦ Psalm 15 — "Qualifications for Staying with God" (Goldingay), "Preparation for Worship" (Craigie)
◦ Ephesians 2:11–22 — "The Inclusion of the Gentiles into One Body" (O'Brien), "The Unity of the Body" (MacArthur)
To be clear, the helpful resources just mentioned should only be consulted after we have articulated our own understanding of the original meaning of the text. If we begin with what the commentary or study Bible says, we have subtly outsourced one of the most significant responsibilities entrusted to us, namely, the interpretation of the text (1 Tim 2:15). The perpetually relevant Charles Bridges adds to this with the following from a lesser known homiletical work of his own day: "When commencing the study of Divine truth, amid all the jarring opinions of human authors, it is of inexpressible moment to begin with studying the pure word of God, and to go regularly through the whole of that word before we prepossess our minds with human opinions. . . . [Such] will be the only effectual preservative against the taint and deterioration, which the mind might otherwise receive from reading human authors" (The Christian Ministry, 51). So, dear brothers, burn the mist away in the study by clarifying the textual idea and then checking your work on the textual idea so that the divine point will be bright in the pulpit and blaze forth clearly to the hearts of the people in the pew.
