@SamR: Yes, I think I really do resonate with that sentiment. Particularly in that the sermon is the preached Word of God! There ought to be an encounter with God during the preaching, and it ought not simply be an ‘explanation of the text’, nor some sort of reductionistic ‘bible teaching’. Whilst it is Bible teaching, it’s much more than that – and I suppose Keller is onto that. I remember in another one of his talks he gave on preaching, he made mention of how Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones disapproved of people taking notes in his sermons, because he wanted people to be listening and to be ready to do business there and then with God! Keller also said however, that DMLJ was a unique character, not able to be simply repeated!

@Luke: That’s a good point about his circumstances etc, which contribute to his structure of church practice. Interestingly, we used Redeemer’s small group notes on Romans a few years ago in our small groups, and they were perfect. Very much setup to work methodically through the text (it took us a year to do!) and kept us very much close to the text. Alongside that, we preached through Galatians (in a year!) which was done fairly topically. This seems to fit our context and bible literacy rate well, and was a very fresh change for the church.

One of the things I would suggest that can be utilised from Keller’s model of preaching is how he combines biblical theology and application in a beautiful way. I might post more on this at another point, but rather than doing biblical theology -> then application, he does application -> then biblical theology.

More specifically, he presents the problem: “You need to do this”, then “But you can’t do this”, and then “When you have Christ, you are free to do this”

I think this is transferrable and is great!

Sorry about my long post too!!

In terms of preacher training, I am finding there is a world of difference between listening to Keller preach and listening to him teach on preaching. The latter is far more transferable (obviously). Often when you hear Keller you are simply gobsmacked at the brilliance of the sermon (which is never the desired reaction of a sermon.)

@SamR -The other thing to note about Keller (which you pick up from the Oak Hill lectures), is that his Church is structured so he can preach the way he does, without necessarily compromising the congregations biblical literacy. Redeemer is a large church with the structures to teach people how to read the bible for themselves, they do this outside the sermon. Now if you’re not part of Redeemer, a heavy diet of Keller sermons might be encouraging for one generation of biblically literate Christians, it may also convert and transform many, but the sermons deliberatly don’t bare the responsibility of teaching people how to read the bible. A crucial task in a changing world.

In Sydney, I think, before we all start preaching like Keller (if that is even possible) we must first reflect on whether the next generation will suffer (in terms of biblial literacy) as a result. I think we’re not in a position to change the function of the sermon to the extent Keller does, until we consider whether our church is set-up to allow such a change.

I’m not at all against Keller’s model of preaching (check my blog for evidence!) but I’m realising how much Keller’s preaching is dependent on the nature of his Church and the kind of city he lives in.

Sorry for the long post!

earngey – we need to be careful that we don’t make our heroes infallible!!!

The other thing I want to think a bit more about was his point about our ‘outlines’. That we make our sermon outline follow the outline of the text, when that in fact may detract from our preaching the ‘big idea’ (though that’s not his term) of the passage. Good food for thought.

It’s good stuff. He challenges a few things which I think we do by habit in our expository preaching.
I thought he was particularly insightful on the point that often we use the sermon as a mechanism to teach people how to read the Bible – a service which he argues is perhaps asking the sermon to bear a weight it is not intended to bear. That can be done in other forums (small groups, classes etc). He still uphold strong exegesis and exposition, but sees the function of the sermon to be more of an encounter (is that the word?) than a lesson. Love to chat more when you’ve had a listen.