What would you preach?

[ClayPot]

Preach on the Covenant of Works, the Covenant of Grace, and the Imputed Righteousness of Christ as our only hope.

I don't know Josh. I'm trying to stay away from the usual guest preacher, "light theology" sermons.

My point being that sinners and Arminians (and even Calvinists in need of reminding) need to understand that God requires perfection to have eternal life (i.e. the Covenant of Works), that we, by virtue of our conception and the fall of our father Adam, have broken the Covenant of Works (Bad News). However, there's a Covenant of Grace, and a Second Adam, Who was not tainted by Adam's fall, who procured redemption for all who would believe by keeping that Covenant of Works (Good News), and that none who believe may boast, for it is all the work of Christ and His imputed righteousness that has afforded those who believe said redemption.

Do most Arminians believe in the imputed righteousness of Christ?

 

[rbcbob]

Preach on the Covenant of Works, the Covenant of Grace, and the Imputed Righteousness of Christ as our only hope.

I don't know Josh. I'm trying to stay away from the usual guest preacher, "light theology" sermons.

My point being that sinners and Arminians (and even Calvinists in need of reminding) need to understand that God requires perfection to have eternal life (i.e. the Covenant of Works), that we, by virtue of our conception and the fall of our father Adam, have broken the Covenant of Works (Bad News). However, there's a Covenant of Grace, and a Second Adam, Who was not tainted by Adam's fall, who procured redemption for all who would believe by keeping that Covenant of Works (Good News), and that none who believe may boast, for it is all the work of Christ and His imputed righteousness that has afforded those who believe said redemption.

Yes, and these pivotal points can be preached faithfully and even searchingly without losing the attention of an unfamiliar congregation who themselves might need something put on the lower shelf where they can reach it.

 

[Anton Bruckner]

Preach on your best life now. How Biblical principles can make you rich and healthy. Also have your books and cds at the back ready to sell.

anyway seriously speaking, whatever you preach make sure it is sound. And do not even begin to compose your sermon without prayer. Don't assume that you have to fill up all the theological deficit. Prayer + a sound sermon.

 

[Herald]

I don't know Josh. I'm trying to stay away from the usual guest preacher, "light theology" sermons.

My point being that sinners and Arminians (and even Calvinists in need of reminding) need to understand that God requires perfection to have eternal life (i.e. the Covenant of Works), that we, by virtue of our conception and the fall of our father Adam, have broken the Covenant of Works (Bad News). However, there's a Covenant of Grace, and a Second Adam, Who was not tainted by Adam's fall, who procured redemption for all who would believe by keeping that Covenant of Works (Good News), and that none who believe may boast, for it is all the work of Christ and His imputed righteousness that has afforded those who believe said redemption.

Do most Arminians believe in the imputed righteousness of Christ?

Joshua,

First, you need to stop defaulting to the term "Arminian." Many broad evangelical churches are not Arminian by strict definition. The vernacular of the broad evangelical church is steeped in late 19th and early 20th century revivalism. Many pastors have been raised in churches that use this vocabulary and they have been trained to continue using it in their ministry. It is as much a cultural norm as it is a theological distinctive. But not every church that uses this language is Arminian. I know pastors who you would probably call Arminian but who are quiet Calvinists. If you sit down and talk to them about the doctrines of sovereign grace they will agree with them. But place them in the fishbowl of fundamentalism and they talk the talk.

I brought this up in another post. Would you call John Piper's church Arminian? John MacArthur? Alistair Begg? These are all Calvinist, but not Reformed, pastors. How about non-Calvinists such as David Jeremiah or Chuck Swindoll; are they Arminian? A strong case can be made that they are not. I don't mean to call your theological understanding into question, but do you know what a true Arminian is? If so, shouldn't you be careful how you throw around that term?

 

[ClayPot]

Hopefully you're not going in order to preach what they believe, but preach what they need to believe. The end of your preaching is not according to what they might/might not believe, but the proclamation of the truth, that they might be saved, turned from error, confronted with truth, rebuked with power, comforted with Scripture, convicted of sin, etc.

Of course not. But it is helpful in getting an idea of what people know or believe in order to best know how to present that topic.

 

[Grimmson]

Seriously I would focus on 1 Corinthians 15:1-11, with the theme on the historical fact of the Christ's death for sins, his burial, his resurrection, and the fact there are many witnesses to that fact. And the importance of this fact in history for all man kind by God's grace.

 

[DonP]

Yes a lot of modern churches today have many people who are not really even clear on the whole gospel. They have no understanding of covenants and the law.

So as important as it would be to get them into Romans 9 I would prefer to start with the law, sin, Rom 1-2 including total depravity and man's inability, none seek God, none do good, Therefore our only hope is in God choosing to have mercy on us and giving us a new birth by the Spirit so we can be willing and understand spiritual things, believe and repent. This gets us into eternal life which we can't lose. It is all of God all of Grace and this is why John Newton called it amazing grace.

then say ask me back for the rest of the story.

And though you can gt them to say sovereignty, they do not mean sovereign in salvation. Maybe most or all else but not that.
Free Will reigns. Mac Arthur used to detest Election when I went to his church. He was Arminain absolutely.
A 1 point calvinist is not a calvinist.

And most are 1/2 point since they don't understand perseverance, only preservation.
Their total depravity is partial, their call is resistible, their atonement is unlimited to universal, and they are not sure if people who never heard might be saved,

They are more Arminian than Calvinist. Their gospel is make a decision, maybe even only to receive a savior and later you can make him Lord if you want.

There are few like Lewis Sperry Chafer of Dallas Theol who was a nearly 4 pointer, left.

But is Josh wrong to call them Armnian even if they are 2 point Arminian?

They are still Arminian. The GARB are supposed to be 4 pointers, but my mothers pastor who rejects limited atonement also rejects Lordship salvation.
Still preaches a decisional gospel and has altar class to come get saved.

I call this Arminian. I don't see a problem calling them Arminian. Or Arminiain dispensational. Whatever term, modern evangelicals ?

So the fact a few like Mac Arthur have finally accepted all 5 points doesn't mean we shouldn't call the rest of them Arminian.

I would say Mac Arthur isn't Arminian so not included when I speak of Arminians. But this is rare in modern evangelical, lutheran, methodist, episcopal, independents, charismatics, Vineyards etc. and how ever you want to designate all but the reformed churches. I don't see any other term that applies to most of them if not all of them.
Other than saying, a non-reformed church. But that would include Mac Arthur and I would not preach the same there as I would in the other churches.

They all could benefit from covenantal explanations from scripture, and a true gospel.

 

[Herald]

Yes a lot of modern churches today have many people who are not really even clear on the whole gospel. They have no understanding of covenants and the law.

So as important as it would be to get them into Romans 9 I would prefer to start with the law, sin, Rom 1-2 including total depravity and man's inability, none seek God, none do good, Therefore our only hope is in God choosing to have mercy on us and giving us a new birth by the Spirit so we can be willing and understand spiritual things, believe and repent. This gets us into eternal life which we can't lose. It is all of God all of Grace and this is why John Newton called it amazing grace.

then say ask me back for the rest of the story.

And though you can gt them to say sovereignty, they do not mean sovereign in salvation. Maybe most or all else but not that.
Free Will reigns. Mac Arthur used to detest Election when I went to his church. He was Arminain absolutely.
A 1 point calvinist is not a calvinist.

And most are 1/2 point since they don't understand perseverance, only preservation.
Their total depravity is partial, their call is resistible, their atonement is unlimited to universal, and they are not sure if people who never heard might be saved,

They are more Arminian than Calvinist. Their gospel is make a decision, maybe even only to receive a savior and later you can make him Lord if you want.

There are few like Lewis Sperry Chafer of Dallas Theol who was a nearly 4 pointer, left.

But is Josh wrong to call them Armnian even if they are 2 point Arminian?

They are still Arminian. The GARB are supposed to be 4 pointers, but my mothers pastor who rejects limited atonement also rejects Lordship salvation.
Still preaches a decisional gospel and has altar class to come get saved.

I call this Arminian. I don't see a problem calling them Arminian. Or Arminiain dispensational. Whatever term, modern evangelicals ?

So the fact a few like Mac Arthur have finally accepted all 5 points doesn't mean we shouldn't call the rest of them Arminian.

I would say Mac Arthur isn't Arminian so not included when I speak of Arminians. But this is rare in modern evangelical, lutheran, methodist, episcopal, independents, charismatics, Vineyards etc. and how ever you want to designate all but the reformed churches. I don't see any other term that applies to most of them if not all of them.
Other than saying, a non-reformed church. But that would include Mac Arthur and I would not preach the same there as I would in the other churches.

They all could benefit from covenantal explanations from scripture, and a true gospel.

Don, do you know what a historical Arminian is?

 

[rpavich]

One guest sermon is not the time to be choosing the juiciest most Calvinistic passage and shoving it in their faces.

Thank you. I realize this is about guest preaching a sermon and I'm no Pastor, and not going to preach a sermon, but I just learned a valuable lesson.


Thank you brother.

 

[christiana]

Acts 13:48

 

[rpavich]

Acts 13:48

Boy, I second that one....there's a lot goin' on in that passage...

 

[BobVigneault]

I've already mentioned that I preach primarily on three topics in non-reformed churches (I have never preached in a Reformed church, they won't let me.)

The people respond to a message of God's transcendence. They have heard so much about themselves and how to help themselves that they have lost sight of the fact that there is a God who is majestic and sovereign and transcends our finite lives. I see their eyes get wide as they begin to realize that there is One who controls everything down to the finest detail.

Older folks have come to me after church with tears in their eyes because it had been so LONG since they heard of the Glory of God. I've seen the same response as I've set the Word above all other literature and spoke of it's ultimate authority.

Don't underestimate the HUNGER for the Word of God that is in our churches today. You don't have to be clever, you only need to be faithful to the Word.

My blog page is primarily made up of sermons that I have given in non-reformed churches. They are not dense with doctrine, though I pray the doctrine is solid, and I don't use any of the buzz words associated with reformed teaching. They are more devotional than academic. Feel free to browse through them.

 

[LawrenceU]

I'm a bit surprised and saddened at some of the responses to this question. Immaturity tries to prove ones position. Maturity trusts the Lord to work in the hearts of his people.

In such a situation it is not the time to throw down the doctrinal gauntlet. That will serve no one in any fashion other than the one speaking. Bob's counsel is very wise. I've been in this situation very often. I've also seen God begin to reform a church and people. It has never happened by a minister/preacher/speaker throwing out theological jargon, propositions, or focusing on 'hot' reformed passages. This does nothing but build a wall between you and the hearers. I have seen it happen when men focus on the holiness and glory of God Almighty, the sufficiency of the atonement, and the gift of his Scriptures.

Don't burn the bridge before anyone even knows it's there.

 

[SolaScriptura]

I'm a little nervous about trying to advise someone I've never met on what he should preach to a congregation I know nothing about.

That said, my suggestion - if you still haven't selected something - is to preach an evangelistic sermon.

There are several reasons for my suggestion:

1. The Gospel is absolutely essential. You must never stray from it. It is good for your own soul to prepare that type of message and to deliver it.

2. As already noted, in many American churches, the Gospel is in short supply. Christians need to be continually reminded that their only hope in life and in death is in the finished work of Jesus Christ on their behalf.

3. In many churches, unregenerate folks fill the pews. They need the Gospel preached to them.

4. Christians need to be taught how to share the Gospel... as you exposit your text and present the Gospel, you are teaching them how to do the same.

5. Lastly, and to be honest, somewhat self-servingly, what is the #1 complaint against/caricaturization of, Calvinism? That we don't evangelize. An evangelistic sermon kills that charge and may open doors for future conversations with some of your hearers.

Incidentally, for my ordination exam I preached an evangelistic sermon to my presbytery. Believe it or not, they loved it - they loved the fact that I did not come in there and try to "wow" them with some amazing exposition of some notoriously difficult passage.

In sum, I think you have everything to gain and nothing to lose by preaching an evangelistic message to this congregation.

 

[rpavich]

Lastly, and to be honest, somewhat self-servingly, what is the #1 complaint against/caricaturization of, Calvinism? That we don't evangelize. An evangelistic sermon kills that charge and may open doors for future conversations with some of your hearers.

Incidentally, for my ordination exam I preached an evangelistic sermon to my presbytery. Believe it or not, they loved it - they loved the fact that I did not come in there and try to "wow" them with some amazing exposition of some notoriously difficult passage.

And again...though I'm not a pastor I learned a valuable lesson....

thanks Sola

 

[awretchsavedbygrace]

I'm a bit surprised and saddened at some of the responses to this question. Immaturity tries to prove ones position. Maturity trusts the Lord to work in the hearts of his people.

In such a situation it is not the time to throw down the doctrinal gauntlet. That will serve no one in any fashion other than the one speaking. Bob's counsel is very wise. I've been in this situation very often. I've also seen God begin to reform a church and people. It has never happened by a minister/preacher/speaker throwing out theological jargon, propositions, or focusing on 'hot' reformed passages. This does nothing but build a wall between you and the hearers. I have seen it happen when men focus on the holiness and glory of God Almighty, the sufficiency of the atonement, and the gift of his Scriptures.

Don't burn the bridge before anyone even knows it's there.

I hope my response wasn't one them that has been placed under the category of " sad and immature". Regardless, as I stated, I disagree, but I believe that you all are better prepared to answer this question. Be it that you are elders and pastors.

 

[Jesus is my friend]

Just a question:Have you talked with the Pastor of that church and asked him what he would want you to preach on? if you have not yet wouldn't that be the proper way to approach this,you would be a guest in this church and showing humility in this blessing that you're being given would go a long way.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

When I have filled in at pulpits I have two or three sermons I draw upon. Most often I preach from Matthew 26:36-46. The evangelistic theme is that we tend to get so close to the physical Jesus (e.g., sitting in church, the "sanctuary", keeping the lights burning, singing about Mamas favorite rocking chair, etc.) that we forget about the spiritual, commanding, Jesus, who told us to be out there concerned about the souls of mankind. The disciples familiarity with the physical Jesus led them to contempt such that they could not even remain awake during that awful time in Gethsemane. Then we hear those awful words (v. 45) to those that misunderstood the spiritual, commanding Jesus, Sleep on now, and take your rest: behold, the hour is at hand, and the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners.

The general message is that the world is going to hell in a hand basket while all around there are churches full of people so full of spiritual stagnation that they are about to pop like a toad.

My other favorite sermon is a rendition of Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God, which I memorized many years ago. This one, however, requires careful discussion with the leadership given the responses that it often generates from the congregation. Not all congregations are ready for Edwards' message.

Given my approach, I usually only accept a fill in if the church agrees that I will be exhorting the faithful to snap out of their complacencies. As such, I usually speak at the start of some revival-like or renewal kickoff the church is having.

Both messages work well with many denominations.

AMR

 

[ClayPot]

Just a question:Have you talked with the Pastor of that church and asked him what he would want you to preach on? if you have not yet wouldn't that be the proper way to approach this,you would be a guest in this church and showing humility in this blessing that you're being given would go a long way.

I had another opportunity to preach for this church, and I was able to preach on what I wanted. I will be meeting with him tomorrow to discuss the opportunity in more detail. I'm assuming that I will have the same freedom as before, but if there is a specific topic he would like me to preach, that would obviously be a big factor.

 

[Jesus is my friend]

Just a question:Have you talked with the Pastor of that church and asked him what he would want you to preach on? if you have not yet wouldn't that be the proper way to approach this,you would be a guest in this church and showing humility in this blessing that you're being given would go a long way.

I had another opportunity to preach for this church, and I was able to preach on what I wanted. I will be meeting with him tomorrow to discuss the opportunity in more detail. I'm assuming that I will have the same freedom as before, but if there is a specific topic he would like me to preach, that would obviously be a big factor.

Good Job!,Please keep us posted as to how this unfolds!