Exposition During Scripture Reading

[Theognome]

Here's a 'pet peeve' of mine...

Some preachers, while reading the Scripture text before the sermon, will interrupt at various points to explain things. While I have no problem with doing such explanations before or after the Scripture reading, interspersing comments throughout the reading irks me something terrible.

I see it as being very disrespectful of the Word. When a preacher announces that he is going to read from the bible, doesn't adding additional comments violate Revelation 22:18 in some fashion? Does such a practice suggest that the preacher is much better at expressing the Word on the page than the Holy Spirit who authored it? Are Christians so simple and dense that they cannot simply hear the Word without commercial interruptions?

Note that I am specifically referring to a time in worship set aside for scripture reading (usually right before the sermon, but not always) and not the sermon itself. I expect such 'tearing down' of Scripture during the sermon.

Theognome

 

[BJClark]

it would distract and irritate me as well.

Just as music being played during a time someone is praying..

 

[nicnap]

Here's a 'pet peeve' of mine...

When a preacher announces that he is going to read from the bible, doesn't adding additional comments violate Revelation 22:18 in some fashion?
Theognome

If it is quite obvious that it is an aside, no. As for the rest, I'll let those more astute answer. (I don't do it, but it is not adding to the Word.)

 

[Prufrock]

The Directory for Publick Worship spoke to this:

When the minister who readeth shall judge it necessary to expound any part of what is read, let it not be done until the whole chapter or psalm be ended; and regard is always to be had unto the time, that neither preaching, nor other ordinances be straitened, or rendered tedious. Which rule is to be observed in all other publick performances.

Though it hardly seems that such is a "violation" of the admonition in Revelation 22.

 

[Theognome]

Perhaps an RP issue then?

Theognome

 

[he beholds]

Perhaps an RP issue then?

Theognome

I agree that it would be annoying/distracting, but I bet it is not an issue of RPW.
I think it is more along the lines of form or style.

And I agree that it is not a violation of Rev. 22, because we accept extrapolations immediately following the scripture.

 

[Edward]

Here's a 'pet peeve' of mine...

Some preachers, while reading the Scripture text before the sermon, will interrupt at various points to explain things.

My reaction would depend on what they are explaining. If it has to do with a translation difficulty, or or clarifying an English word whose meaning is now ambiguous, I see no problem with it. If it is tangential, however, I might also be less than pleased.

But without more information, I'd join in disagreeing with the extent of your concerns.

 

[reformedminister]

Spurgeon used to do this too. When reading the Scriptures during worship, I do this very minimal. If I do it, it is to briefly explain something about the location or an action. I read and preach out of the KJV, so sometimes it may be to clarify an archaic word. I keep all of this to a minimum. I would also find it distracting as a listener if the reader kept making comments all the way through. As mentioned above, it was prescribed in the Directory for Public Worship, probably for the reasons I mentioned, except of course the archaic language of the KJV. I know someone will probably say something like, "why not use a different translation" so I will answer now. I don't have to explain words that often, because the KJV is not that hard to understand. Also, I like the faithfulness of the translation as well as the beauty of the language. It just sounds like the Bible!

 

[Knoxienne]

Joe Morecraft has an excellent series on preaching which he's posted on SA recently. And in one of the messages he tackles this very thing. He very adamantly tells the young men he's exhorting to not add comments as they read the text.

Exegesis of the passages is what the sermon is for. It's very distracting to be reading the verses along with the preacher's recitation of them and then hear his commentary. I always want to say, "You only have 10 verses left to read. Can't it wait?"

 

[Wannabee]

This is obviously an issue of preference. Is the reading of an entire chapter dictated? The reading of one verse? Who put those verse breakdowns in Scripture anyway? Chapter breaks? Now THAT's an imposition that annoys me.

If the reader is right, what he says is helpful and he isn't simply attempting to show others how much he knows then it sounds like a blessing to me. But, sometimes we're frustrated at what blesses others.

 

[Sven]

My pastor gives a bit of an explanation before he reads the text. He does it so he can give a sort of "what to expect" in the reading. His reasons for giving a brief explanation before reading is to help those who are possibly new Christians or children understand what is being read. It is not his practice, though, to interject during the reading. I am of the opinion that ministers should not assume that everyone in the congregation is going to understand what is being read. An explanation before or after can be quite helpful to new believers or to children in the congregation.

 

[sotzo]

The pastor should only break in to the reading of the text in instances where the Word is giving a call to go green http://greenletterbible.com...in this way, the congregants can be reminded of the central theme of the bible, which is to save the glaciers...I mean, how much more clear could God have made Himself in the text?

 

[Semper Fidelis]

I've heard it done in a way that is not irksome but, as a general rule, I don't think it wise. People might get confused where the text ends and commentary begins. The hearing of the Word ought to be the Word.

 

[Kevin]

Bill, find it a bit annoying if it is the sermon text. But I consider it just another style of preaching, not the best or most clear in my opinion.

However I get very annoyed if the scripture lesson, or the gospel reading is interupted for a "helpful" word of explanation.

My reading of the DPW is that the scriptures are to be read & expounded, and in an other part of the service, not the sermon, read without exposition.

My preference is that scripture reading always start with an admonition to "hear the words of God", and that it be ended with a clear break, i.e. "here endith the lesson", or "thus far God's word", or "Amen", etc.

 

[bookslover]

Who put those verse breakdowns in Scripture anyway? Chapter breaks? Now THAT's an imposition that annoys me.

Pastors should feel free to ignore the chapter divisions (and the verse divisions, at times, too) and begin to read or expound where a chapter really begins, or ends. After all, the verse and chapter divisions are not inspired.