Fourteenth Saturday after Pentecost
Today's scripture is Acts 4:13-20. Do read it now.
Many years ago I read the results of a survey among mainstream church laity about preaching. One of the questions was, "What to you is the most important thing about preaching." I don't remember the 20 or so answers the participants could choose from, but they were things like, "keeps my attention the whole sermon,""leaves me with something to take home that will inspire me this week," "gets me in closer touch with God," "directs me in the right paths for my life," "enables me to solve my day to day problems," "helps me to understand the Bible better."
There were no bad answers. Those who made the survey, and most readers of the results, were stunned with what came out as the number one answer. It was, "that the preacher sincerely believe what he or she is preaching."
There is nothing to indicate that Peter and John had what it takes to be good preachers. It was readily apparent that the four Temple priests who heard Peter and John realized their lack of qualification for what they were doing. "They realized that [Peter and John] were uneducated and ordinary men." (Acts 4:13). In first century terms this means that they were illiterate. Not unusual--90% of the population was illiterate. They were ordinary fishermen from the tiny lakeshore town of Capernaum. They were not expected to be able to read. What they knew of scripture and what they knew of Jesus, they knew by heart.
What impressed both the priests and the folks in the outer court of the temple was less the Apostolic message and more the healing of the homeless crippled man in Acts 3:1-10. Like Jesus throughout his ministry, the Apostles came to preach, but the people came to be healed. They heard the preaching, but only after they had seen the healing.
Throughout Christian history priestly folks like me have often felt threatened by lay people who don't know much but have a lot to say. We priest types tend to see them as all faith and little knowledge. Sometimes we priest types don't realize that the most important thing about preaching is "that the preacher sincerely believe what he or she is preaching."
Peter and John were definitely not trained in public speaking. In the Gospel's narratives of Peter's denials a man notes that Peter is a Galilean. He can tell by his Galilean, hicksville country boy accent (Luke 22:54-62). Four things are convincing about the Gospel message of Peter and John.
1. They precede it by doing something to help another person badly in need.
2. They sincerely believe what they are preaching.
3. Their preaching of Jesus makes sense to their listeners.
4. They are bold and fearless.
The priests try ineffectively to discourage them from further preaching. Reluctantly the priests let them go and pursue no legal action against them.
Luke adds a touch of Lukan humor in v. 22, "the man on whom this sign of healing had been performed was more than forty years old." Wow! Healing is amazing. But healing a really old guy is truly astonishing.
Faithfully,
Christian
1 comment:
Christian, I hope this is not too much of a deviation from your "Bold" topic. While listening to the sermons on Kindred and UUMC today it refreshed my memory. "Does Science Disprove God" was the sermon title. I have always wondered how science and human knowledge compliments or conflicts with more religious or spiritual disciplines. More clearly, for those whose profession is more concentrated in one or the other, science or religion, how do they reconcile the two? For example, Tobi mentioned her father in her sermon. As you may know he was a science professor at NCSU. He also had a vibrant spiritual life. He found no irreconcilable conflict in the two. They were compatible.
In your considerable spiritual experience over the years through to the present, how do you perceive or how have you experienced religion such as the Holy Spirit? Has the Holy Spirit revealed itself to you in your research or academic efforts? It seems to me the Holy Spirit and religion generally is associated in large part with emotionalism. Is that emotionalism inconsistent with the clarity of thought associated with academic research? Or is it helpful, providing insight into such events like Pentecost? What was your experience?
Post a Comment