Your homiletics preferences and peeves?

[ALAYMAN]

We’ve discussed preaching methods at length on the FFF over the years. Some people like the yelling stuff, others prefer the methodological plodding exegesis of Piper types. Some prefer the camp meeting’ histrionics and love the Tennessee Windsuckers or comedic value of Tony Hutson and bombast of Larry Brown. Some like personal anecdotes while others only want illustrations that are derived from Scriptural narratives. So
two (or 3) questions….

1) What are your musts AND preferences in the crafting and presentation of a sermon?

2) How do you feel about the idea of reading other sermons, commentaries, devotional, etc during a sermon?

 

[subllibrm]

We’ve discussed preaching methods at length on the FFF over the years. Some people like the yelling stuff, others prefer the methodological plodding exegesis of Piper types. Some prefer the camp meeting’ histrionics and love the Tennessee Windsuckers or comedic value of Tony Hutson and bombast of Larry Brown. Some like personal anecdotes while others only want illustrations that are derived from Scriptural narratives. So
two (or 3) questions….

1) What are your musts AND preferences in the crafting and presentation of a sermon?

2) How do you feel about the idea of reading other sermons, commentaries, devotional, etc during a sermon?

1. In general, exposition yes, topical no. I prefer a revelatory teaching style over a loud preaching style. Passion incorporated in the former is welcome but often seems manufactured in the latter.

2. Any and all are welcome if they help to properly explain and apply the principles of the subject matter. All preaching is derivative IMO so I would rather have the original source credited when possible.

 

[Ekklesian]

No theatrics.