When I read a book such as this one, I am reminded of the
real diversity that exists in American evangelicalism at both the theological
and at the practical level. Dr. Overstreet writes to an evangelical context in
which the invitation, which used to be the standard close to the worship service,
is disappearing. Overstreet laments this loss, attributing it to the loss of
the view of preaching as intended to persuade. According to him, that view has
been replaced by the view that preaching is merely to inform. If there is no
persuasion, there is no need for commitment.
Overstreet aims to correct this “informing” view of
preaching by demonstrating that the biblical view is that preaching lies between
manipulating and informing in the region of persuading. Overstreet devotes the
bulk of the book (Part 2) to demonstrating this. His approach is what I would
call “word study exegesis”—that is, the point is proved by studying every word
that is relevant to the issue in its every occurrence. The result is, perhaps,
convincing, but it is also repetitious and tedious. It strikes me that he would
have been better advised to select two or three key passages and deal carefully
with them, rather than to heap up verses.
He devotes Part 3 of the book to presenting different ways
of structuring a persuasive message.
Again, it seems to me that these suggestions are particularly aimed at a
distinct evangelical subculture, with its own distinct view of preaching.
Certainly the material is helpful, but it is available in almost any
introductory book on preaching.
Before reaching his conclusion, Overstreet does have a
helpful chapter on the Holy Spirit in preaching. The conclusion brings us back
to the invitation. Apparently Overstreet thinks that persuasive reaching will
be ineffective without a concluding invitation to seal the deal. Here, I
fundamentally disagree.
This is not a bad book. Nor is it a good book. It aims in
part to restore a practice that the church is better off without. The more
helpful material in the book has been said innumerable times elsewhere, so it’s
not clear to me why the book was necessary. But maybe that’s just because I don’t
share Overstreet’s evangelical subculture.
No comments:
Post a Comment