thistle93
Puritan Board Freshman
Hi! In passages of Scripture that have many different interpretations do you think a preacher should (1) solely preach his interpretation of the text he is preaching on or should (2) he mention all or most of the most plausible interpretations and let the congregation decide for themselves given the doctrine of the priesthood of the saints or should (3) he give the different interpretations and then say where he falls and give reasons why?
If just give your interpretation, the positive is that this is less confusing for congregation but negative is there is a danger of congregation just blindly following pastors interpretation and not searching the Scriptures for themselves, which reminds me of Roman Catholicism.
If give many of the interpretations, the positive is that people cannot accuse you of preaching a theological agenda but the negative is that some in congregation may come up with some zany interpretations.
An example would be when preaching Rev 20 and touching on the topic of the millennium. Should the preacher just give their own interpretation or should he list the various views and say that genuine Christians can disagree on this issue and for each to decide for themselves given what they see in Scripture.
Now while still of a secondary nature and one where genuine Christians can disagree, I am a little less hesitant to preach the equal worth of interpretations of Calvinism vs. Arminianism because I think there is more at stake there then say ones millennial views.
Do not know if it is an either/or thing.
Now obviously I am not talking about essential doctrines like divinity of Jesus, Trinity, substantiationary atonement, ect... These I think the pastor is to give a clear interpretation of and not get side tracked on different heresies. Maybe that is more appropriate for studies rather than sermons.
Thoughts?
Any resources (book, articles, audio) you know that touch on topic? Thank you!
For His Glory-
Matthew Wilson
If just give your interpretation, the positive is that this is less confusing for congregation but negative is there is a danger of congregation just blindly following pastors interpretation and not searching the Scriptures for themselves, which reminds me of Roman Catholicism.
If give many of the interpretations, the positive is that people cannot accuse you of preaching a theological agenda but the negative is that some in congregation may come up with some zany interpretations.
An example would be when preaching Rev 20 and touching on the topic of the millennium. Should the preacher just give their own interpretation or should he list the various views and say that genuine Christians can disagree on this issue and for each to decide for themselves given what they see in Scripture.
Now while still of a secondary nature and one where genuine Christians can disagree, I am a little less hesitant to preach the equal worth of interpretations of Calvinism vs. Arminianism because I think there is more at stake there then say ones millennial views.
Do not know if it is an either/or thing.
Now obviously I am not talking about essential doctrines like divinity of Jesus, Trinity, substantiationary atonement, ect... These I think the pastor is to give a clear interpretation of and not get side tracked on different heresies. Maybe that is more appropriate for studies rather than sermons.
Thoughts?
Any resources (book, articles, audio) you know that touch on topic? Thank you!
For His Glory-
Matthew Wilson