Preaching - Lesson 7

Dr. Bryan Chapell
Preaching
pr600-07
Workshop on Homiletical Outlines
Lesson Transcript

[00:00:00] This recording is provided courtesy of Covenant Theological Seminary. With you again. And let's begin our time together, where we always need to begin, which is with our Lord. Let's pray together. Father, we thank you for your mercy toward each one of us for the profound way that you. Our patient each day. Persevering, preserving, meeting with us in dark and joyful places. We give you praise and Thanksgiving for the strong love that you demonstrate for us for the powerful holiness. For the abiding grace. We give you praise, Lord. Thank you. We do ask that you would continue to open our hearts and minds to what you would teach us throughout each of our classes and through the day. And we ask, Lord, right now that you would continue to help us to grow in the skill of communicating your word well. We depend upon you for that, and thank you for the provision of your spirit. In Jesus name, Amen. Dr. Chappell is traveling today and encouraging, if you think of it, say a prayer for him and ask the Lord to give him strength and wisdom and protect him on his travels. Our focus this morning is to look at the outlines that you were to work on for today. Proposition and main points that you'll be turning in at the end of class today. So you still have a little time if you need it. And our goal together will be simply to practice today. We're going to look at several sample outlines and walk through them together. You're going to tell me what's wrong with them and what's right with them. And then you'll have an opportunity to share your outline with a neighbor and they'll look through it. You also have the opportunity to look at your outline again and actually make some changes with your pen.

[00:02:01] And in all of this, we're just trying to practice today. The goal is the goal is this By the time you turn your outline in today, it is as best as you can get it. It's nearly right if it isn't right. And that's our goal. So where we want to begin is just by looking at a series of sample outlines. And what I'd like for you to do is to point out to me what you see. That's right. And what you see that's wrong. Three primary questions we're going to ask are, one, is this outline the conditional or a consequential outline? Conditional or consequential? Consequential usually is labeled by a because we must because something we must. It's a cause and an effect. A conditional outline normally is a sense or an if statement. It's not a referring to a logical connection, because in other words, because this happens, it logically follows that this next thing must happen. But a conditional outline usually is referring to some kind of condition. And in light of that condition or situation, what must the believer do? And before the Lord? So we'll ask that question. The second question we'll ask is, is this an application or a principal consistent outline? And then we'll ask, what's the nature of this outlines progression? And then we'll just look at all of the components and see if they're all where they need to be. Okay, so you should have a handout. Does anyone not have a handout for today? Are there any extra handouts anywhere? Okay. Would someone mind grabbing those handouts or just passing them this way or that way, wherever they're needed and we'll send them down through. Great. Okay. Our first first outline you see there is taken from first Thessalonians 413 through 18.

[00:04:10] Because Jesus brought the power of death. We must live as people of hope. And you see each pain point there because Jesus broke the power of death. We must not grieve as people without hope. Because Jesus broke the power of death. We must rejoice as people with hope because Jesus broke the power of death. We must encourage others with the hope. So the first question is this a conditional or a consequential outline? I have several consequentials Is that. Is that what we think? Consequential good. Yeah, it is consequential outline because Jesus broke the power of death. We must live as a people of hope, but necessarily follows that because death has been broken by him. Hope is the is what originates with his people. Is this an application or a principle consistent outline? Anyone want to say application? Anyone want to say application? Consistent. Are you sure where to go? It's principle consistent. Good job. Way to hold your ground. Hold your conviction. Steady. Steady. You know what is the way to do it? And what? Is there a good progression happening here? No. What's the nature of the progression? Yeah. Okay. We need to take out the knots. Somebody said that. That's. That's very good. Uh, so at first sentence there, we must not grieve as people would have hope. You know, we're. We're working on right now, taking out those knots. And what else you see there, that that could use some strengthening. So point number one and point number two, it's suggested that they're saying the same thing twice. Does anybody know what that What that's called? What's that? Yeah. I mean, coexist. Yeah. It looks like it's very likely that point number one and point number two are coexist. And I.

[00:06:16] Can you tell me why? Yes. Rejoice. You know, not grieve as people without hope is the same thing as saying rejoice as people with hope. It is possible that as you develop it, you could take those points a different direction, but it would take some skill to do that. And at this point, as we look at it, it looks like we're on a road to co-existence. One other one other thing going on in the passage at least that we'll want to look at in this outline. Yes. The proposition overlaps with the main points as well. The. Are you referring to the first clause that's underlined? Yeah. And that's actually, if I'm understanding you correctly, it's actually good the way it's written right here. Yes. Oh, I see what you're saying. It's possible that if we say live as a people of hope, rejoicing, as a people of hope is intended to be one aspect of living. It's intended to be one aspect of living. But depending on how you explained it, it could it could overlap and be consistent. I see what you're saying. Yes. Yes. Yeah. Yeah, we could. We could find a way to maintain the parallel language of people running down through there. Do notice the verses, verse 13, verse 13, verse 18. We probably need to take a look and make sure we're covering the passage, too. Right? Because it looks like we're supposed to cover verses 13 through 18, but so far we're only highlighting two of those verses will want to cover and cover, make sure we're covering the whole passage at this point and what the passage is saying. So somewhere along the line we need to have verses 14 and 15 and 16 and 17 covered. All right.

[00:08:55] Let's move to our our next next passage. Second Corinthians 614 through seven one. Because we are believers in Christ, we must avoid partnerships with unbelievers. And then you see the main points there. Is this conditional or consequential? Yes, it would be a consequential relationship, by the way. Dr. Chapple always reminds us not to be too concerned about getting near the terms. Just so here is this consequential or conditional, and then you just stress out. You have to take aspirin and stuff like that. So don't worry about that as the way he'll say it. Is this deal with what your ear thinks is best. Whichever sounds best to you in terms of its connection is probably what's going to be best for the here. But at any rate, we are asking this morning if we can tell the difference. And you're right, this is a consequential connection. Second question, is this application consistent or principle consistent? Yeah. Application consistent and that's right. Because we see the application being rained down. We must avoid partnerships, we must avoid partnerships, we must avoid partnerships. So the what is consistent is application throughout. What what else do you see now as you look you look at this outline, what needs work, what needs strengthening? Okay. Two propositions out of one verse. Perhaps you're referring to a possibly extensive. Yes. Okay, great. Oh, that's good. So possibly extensive. When we look at God's temple and God's people, that's a good, good point. The clue for us is we see verse 16 twice. It doesn't necessarily mean anything, but it causes us to look at it again and make sure that it's very possible that saying that we're God's temple and we're God's people is saying the same thing depending on what we mean by those statements.

[00:11:23] Good point. What else do you see? Yeah. Yeah. I mean, you know, it it doesn't show up on here, but it secretly shows up on your paper and. That's true. Chapter six. Where is 189? That's. There's a lot more to cover because we only got you know, we're missing a lot of verses there, so. That's right. Good point. What else do you say? Yeah, go ahead. Yeah. Okay. And number three, we have because we are his sons and daughters. Anybody know what that term is called? What we have happening here? Branching. Branching. Um, it's. This is called branching. And branching is when, you know, like a tree, the branches coming out. And it's when you have two ideas. Now, in. In the West, this is for Western hearers. Because if you say we're accustomed to a kind of progression in an outline, which leads us to say this, if we if we say because we are his sons and daughters, the ear assumes to say, oh, he's just introduced two things, sons and daughters. And so the ear is expected to think. So it's not it's not necessarily wrong. It's just that if you if you branch if you have a statement that has two branches on it, then you need to follow through. So your your sub points here would have to be sons and daughters or if in your if this was your proposition and you have two statements, we are to be faithful and just and that's in your proposition. Well, your two main points have to be faithful and just okay, so it's not necessarily wrong, but it does get us into problems if we don't follow through. What else do you see in this this outline? Notice. Notice that point number two and point number three might be called Stenson.

[00:13:37] They might be saying that to say that we are his people and then to say we are his sons and daughters. Depending on how you take that right. It could be that you're saying the same thing with two points. And so we want to look at that. What else do you see? Yes. Yes, that's right. What's underlined is not the magnet clause. Now, Dr. Chappell will say that he's not requiring underlining at this point, but people do underline. And that's right. The magnet clause is being underlined. The the you see, look at pronouns. Yeah. Point number one, because we are God's temple, we must avoid partnership. Well, there is the way. So most likely you would need to say something like this because Christians are God's temple. We must avoid partnership. Or it would be because believers are God's temple. We must avoid partnership. Or it would be because we are gods. Temple believers must avoid partnership, or because we are gods. Temple Christians must avoid partnership. You see, the we has no referent, and so we need to supply that reference. That makes sense. Also notice that the versus this is a technical at this point, but important for later. The verses are in each main point need to be moved to the end user says Verstappen six for 16 underneath main point one. And they've put those that verse in parentheses immediately following the phrase because we are God's temple, see the move, the verse references out to the end of the sentence of each main point. Yeah, that's correct. That's correct. Yeah. There's a you wouldn't have a verse reference necessarily in the proposition. Because ideally the proposition is covering the whole tax is the main idea, the big idea from the whole tax.

[00:16:08] It is certainly possible that in your as you're doing your preparation, that you're wanting to anchor your writing down for yourself, key verses and such. But you're right in terms of the outline. You won't have a specific verse right there in the middle of your proposition. The big question. The question is, if it seems like the passage could go either way in terms of an outline. What makes you what factors help you choose which kind of outline that you go with application consistent outline or principal consistent outline, and generally say pastoral prudence. If the text itself doesn't emphasize one aspect over another, then you're simply prayerfully considering who your audience is. Who are the people you're speaking to in a pastoral setting or a chaplaincy or a campus ministry setting. You know, you're going to know people and you'll know you'll have a sense from each individual passage what they most need to hear at this point in time. And so pastoral prudence would be, yes. Yes. Yeah, that's that's a very good point. This particular outline doesn't seem to have much progress. Does that term sound familiar to you? A progression in the outline so that each point is building on the other so that by the time we get to main point three, it is built on what's already been said and then your conclusion. And in this particular case, you don't see that happening. Um, how do you build progression in an outline? It depends on each individual outline, but in essence, you're either moving from, uh, you're moving from a specific to a general conclusion, you're moving from general to specific you're moving from, or you may see building block steps. This point leads to this point, which leads to this point.

[00:18:19] Yes. We'll do that for you. Yes. Well, sometimes attacks give us clues to help us do that. Certainly. And sometimes in the text itself, there is a progression of thought which will help us in our outlines. Yeah. Good. All right. Let's look at our next one from first Thessalonians 413 through 18, because Christ defeated death and rose victoriously, we must look to the future with complete assurance of our resurrection. What do you see there in the end here? Yeah. Yes. I think that bit. Yes, absolutely. We would say it this way, the 3 a.m. test. That sound familiar to you? 3 a.m. test. Wake up three in the morning, someone said, okay, well, you stick it on and you could give it to them very quickly. Well, we probably have need some work here. We're still a little wordy. That's a good point. We also have some branching, and I you see that in your first in the proposition because Christ defeated there and rose Victoria victoriously. We must look to the future with complete assurance of our resurrection. Well, a Westerner at least, will will hear that proposition and assume the two main points are Christ defeated, death and Christ rose victoriously. And so if you have that branching in that proposition, you have to follow through. Those would be those would have to be your main points. And since those aren't the two main points, we would need to find a way to say that he defeated death and rose victoriously. Frankly, you could simply say because Christ rose victoriously. Why could just. Why could you just say that? Because if he rose, he had to have died. That's right. So it implies that. Yes, it. Yes, although that's right. Well, what what what you're saying is that it doesn't seem in this particular case that the branching impacts the outline because he maintains the branching as his principle consistent posture.

[00:20:43] That's right. But a Western ear, when you say the proposition, I'll throw them off a bit because they're expecting a particular that particular aspect. But you make a good point. It would be less of a hindrance in this case. But still, we want to we want to try to root that out if we can. Yeah. Yes. Will there still be if there's a principal consistent outline? Will there be explanation of the principle at some point in the sermon? Yes. Yes. Where that explanation will come is it's the it's the introduction bonding to the text, moving into the proposition. And then at times right after the proposition or just before it. You may have a brief amount of explanation, but it's your introductory part of the sermon which is anchoring a principle consistent consistency or or an application consistency. And the rest of the sermon fleshes out the opposite one. Yes. So you're saying that's a good thing or no? Okay. Okay. So what you're suggesting is perhaps this was a this would be better as a two point outline, because the third point seems to have already been covered by. Okay. Yeah, that may be the case that you could do this at a to point out line. What what gives you a clue that this could perhaps be a two point outline? A two point outline normally has to have at least four Western areas, has to have some type of tension between them, some type of tension between them. It's possible that this would have that because the first point has to do with our deceased loved ones, those who have died. The second point has to do with those who are alive. So there's some type of comparison contrast going on there.

[00:22:48] Yeah, that's that's possible. Yes. Oh, Rose. Yeah. Yeah. We need to check spelling there, don't we? So again, c mysteriously, mysteriously on the projector here we see it has been changed, our air said, but on the paper tell you there's something strange going on in the home electrics department. We'll have to get right on that. Find out what's going on. Yes. Yes. Yeah, that's very wordy here. And this could go either way, a two or three point sermon, and be pastoral prudence on your part. And and as you approach the text with who you're speaking to. Mm hmm. Okay, let's look at our next one. Second. Timothy four one through five. Ready or not, here he comes. So, proposition. We must prepare for Christ will return. Then you see the three main points. Is this conditional or consequential? Conditional or consequential. Yeah, this is tough. This is tough to tell because the proposition is in trouble, right? Uh, uh, the the the proposition, first of all, is we must prepare for Christ will return. So we're. We're missing the, you know, because. Because Christ will return. We must prepare. Or since Christ is coming back, we must prepare something like this. Right. And then notice that the, the terms are switched around. Uh, and the length the terms used are, are different. So, for example, we must prepare for Christ will return after we've changed that proposition and brought it into the form that we're practicing. You notice that we ought to use the same term in each main point, let the same turn rain down. And so if we use the word return, let's use the word return in the first three main points. You see how he's switched the terms between return and coming back.

[00:25:23] So just choose one of those and stay consistent with that term throughout. Um, so right now we have parallelism is reversed and the proposition is not fully developed to where we need to be. What else do you see here? Is this an application or a principle consistent outline? It's principle consistent, isn't it? Uh, you remember when we when we look at a proposition, we have two main elements, right? One is, uh. What is true. What's the second second part? What to do. What is true and what to do. What is true is the principle. What to do is the application. So in this case, the what is true statement is the one raining down help consistent? So it's a principle consistent outline. What do you what do you notice about progression here? Is there. What's the nature of the progression here in the outline? How is the progression? Yeah, we can't really see a progression, can we? We're not we're not sure. As we look at it, that there is an apparent progression taking place and notice notice that the verses are missing. Did you notice that? So we're not sure where from the text. He's gotten his main point. So we want to make sure we have our verses there reminding us, telling us, pointing us to where we get our passage. Yes. You're asking about the pronouns and which pronouns. We must prepare by having God's view of the world. Yes. Yeah. There's a difficulty there. There's a difficulty there because, uh, we has no reference. It goes back to the proposition. We must prepare for a crisis where we turn because quite Christ will return turn you. You're right. You probably need to say believers or the church or Christians. Uh, must prepare.

[00:27:51] Otherwise, we have no stated referent. For we. Yeah. Good. Yes. Yes. The question is, is the is okay here in this anchor clause and it like it's likely that it is. Okay. The reason is because it is a what is true statement and what's being fleshed out is the application consistency. So in so our auditory mode, our imperatives come and what's being fleshed out. I think it's possible We still could consider, though, if there's another way to say that. Okay, let's look at one more. First. This one is. Yes. Yes. Okay. Yes. Good. Thank you. The previous. Which one? Right here? I think so. Question has to do with the previous outline from second Timothy four one through five that it looks like there could be a potential progression there. Yet we critiqued it as not having a progression. I think what I said was an apparent progression just by looking at it. It's not clear for us. We want to strengthen that clarity. So it might be there, progression might be there. It's just not as apparent to us as we might hope at this stage. The second question has to do with that. Can are we trying to seek and have an outline in such a way that a person could pick up our outline and they could and they could have a good indication about what we're speaking about that? Yeah, I think that is a point. That is a a goal of ours that were we're able to be that clear. I remember at this point we are working on particular skills and setting them under a microscope so that we can give ourselves to learning those skills and take the way you've probably heard this described as we're learning scales right now on a piano.

[00:30:16] Right. And we're going to move on to blues and jazz later on in the curriculum. So right now, we're we're being a little picky, but it is so that we can learn to practice these skills. And then as you go along in each complex class, these skills become more and more like tools that you use. But for prep and now and for elementary hemolytic, it is much like a box that we're place in UN and forcing us to look at particular scales and to try to practice them as best we can. And then as you go along in the curriculum, it'll gradually that that tightness will gradually loosen and you'll have much more freedom. Yes. Todd outlined. However we say that. They back? I'd give it some thought and see if there's another way to say it. And Right. But if you can't find another way to say it, just vote. Just put what you have. Yeah, we are. Yeah. And see what people see what kind of feedback you get on that. Yeah. The basic rule is that our guide, I should say the guide, is that we're trying to avoid knots and BS. So we're really referring to this kind of fun play on words, isn't it? Knots and vs knots. So the word not a negative. And we're trying to avoid, if we can, in an imperative statement, especially to be a verb. Yes. And in the what is true statement, the principle statement, A, B, a being a verb is much more allowable there. And so that's why I said, see if there's another way to say it. If you can't come up with it, just just go with what you have there. And we still want to avoid a negative statement, even in the principal.

[00:32:46] Even in the principal. See if we can stay that in the positive. Mm hmm. Okay. Let's take a look at this last one. For this section. First assignments for 13 through 18. Conditional or consequential. But some might say both. Yeah. Yeah. It's hard to tell, isn't it? It can go either way because there is a. A condition of having a particular kind of hope, which leads us to grief. But it also seems consequential in that it is a logical step that eternal hope leads us to grieve differently. What do you see in the proposition is that needs to be strengthened? Yes. That's what. Yes. So. So we have a not there. Right. Let's not grieve like others. What? How can you say that? Positively. I can do. Rephrase that. Sure. Yeah, that's greed with something, right? Or. Let's, uh. Let's, uh. We grieve differently than others. We can grieve differently than others. Yes. Right. We we don't have a reference for others. They're doing. Leaves it vague. Yes. Yes. Good point. I think the. I apologize. All the way. One of the. So different, different folks are going to look at that passage and and in light of their circumstance and skill, they're going to see different emphases in the passage, right? Well, I think. I be. Yes, I can appreciate that different, different pastors are going to have a different take on individual passage. Yes. Yes, that's right. It's the same point about others there. We don't we we we are lacking a reference. So since we have the eternal hope, let's not grieve like others. Who is the we? So you would need to say what? Since believers have eternal hope, or since Christians have eternal hope, or since the church has eternal hope.

[00:36:14] Yes. Oh, is it all right to have a contraction? It's not ideal. It's not ideal. Let's not grieve. But depending on your audience. Right, it's going to be okay. Yes. Yes. Yeah. Yeah, you could say. That's right. Yeah. In light of what the text would lead us, we would find another way to say not grieve. Right? Yes. Yeah. Thank you. Yeah. He uses the word sense in the proposition, but then uses the word because in each of the other three points. That's right. We've already noted that the the verses are missing, and, uh. The AC and versed in point number three. This branching because in that day we shall be caught up with them and live forever with the Lord. Being caught up with Him and living forever with him. Oh, those are two huge points at his place there now. That can be okay. But he's. He must follow through now. So the sub points has to be. Have two to concern what is described in point number three. Yes. Yeah. It seems like the points are coexistence, doesn't it? Uh, point number one, the dead will rise again, as Jesus did. Point number two, Jesus will come again from heaven to raise the dead. And him. Seems to be saying the same thing. So it's likely we have coexistence there. That's right. Yes. Yeah. Point number three. That same issue that started the proposition has has rained down through. It's infiltrated the whole outline which says that we don't have a referent. We don't know who the we are. We one. We. Mm. We. You know. Sure. I was just. I wouldn't want to limit our audience. I was just giving an example. So if you are speaking in your context that you have in mind, what how might you say it? Because Jesus is coming back.

[00:39:46] There you go. People. Yeah. Yeah, Well, that's a good point. We don't want to limit that. It's just giving examples of trying to put a reference. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Mm. That's the problem. The question is, if you use the word because in the proposition, it's a good question to use the word because in the proposition and it is an application consists an outline. Do you still need to use the word Because in each main point, the answer is yes. At this point you do? Yes. But. Yeah. The question is we have two outlines from the same passage on on your hand up. The first one is the one we just looked at where he's saying, let's not grieve, as others do. And then up in the first burst when we looked at there is the we must not grieve. And the question is, is one of those better than the other? We must not grieve or less not grieve. And the answer would be pastoral prudence. It would be pastorally. Who are you speaking to? What's their context and what what is appropriate for that, for that hearer? MM Yes. Does. But you do that. So. 753. One of the wise kids. Come again and do it that way? Not at this point. Some points will be like that. You will ask me, step back. The question is could you? And instead of raining down the application statement, let's not grieve like others. Could you instead ask a question? And then three main points answer that question. Not at this point. What you're doing is you're asking a question of the proposition. And each main point fleshes out what the proposition means. And so if you say. But let's say we don't grieve like others, then you're going to have a principle consistent outline, which means you're going to explain grieving differently because we have Christ.

[00:43:15] Okay, Then you're going to then your sermon is going to flesh out or explain that phrase. So you will ask a question. We don't grieve like others. You know why, how, where, when? What does it mean? But the question asked leads to a main point statement. And the main point statement still needs to be a parallel parallel phrasing connected to the proposition as we've been we've been looking at. So the instinct to ask questions is a good one. We're going to work on that. But the questions lead us from one point to another. We interrogate the proposition, which leads us to our main points in answering those questions about the proposition. Yes. It was not his question. But your question is, can the proposition ever be a question? No, not at this point. Yeah, you'll you'll ask questions particularly. You'll learn a scripture introduction and you'll probably ask a question at that point in the sermon. But the proposition won't be a question at this point. It'll be a statement. You're. Said. Yes. Yes. That's right. Yep. That's what we're doing. Uh, what what you. What you will say is you might have a question which leads to your proposition. So the question might be, you know, you've bonded to the text in light of a fallen condition. Focus. Then you say. So how do. How do we deal with death? There's there's a question and proposition answers. Well, because Jesus broke the power of death. We can grieve with hope. So a better way to do that. Well, we have and we do have an intentional way where we're working. And so you will ask questions, questions will fill in all around these these statements. Yeah. Questions will lead you from one statement to the next.

[00:45:43] But we are maintaining a parallel language from one point to the other. Yes. Mm hmm. Mm. There is. Not. Yes. The question is, what's the relationship between the foreign condition focus and the proposition? Foreign condition focus will be hinted at in the scripture introduction, and it will be exposed in the introduction, which will bind you to the text, which probably lead you to ask a question about that fallen condition. And you answer that question by stating your proposition. Yeah, yeah, yes, I'm using the word. Not at least not at this point. I mean, in general. Sure. But at this point, stay with because or since. Okay. What I'd like you to do now is take the opportunity to look at your outline that you're going to turn in in a few minutes and take your pen and change anything you need to. It doesn't have to be neat. It can be messy. All right. Take your pen and change anything you need to. I'll give you a couple of minutes to do that and we'll look at some more examples, okay? Okay. You'll get one more shot at it. So let's look at some more examples. Okay. Proposition here is because of Jesus's resurrection, we should not worry about the spiritual welfare of our eternal home before his second coming. Okay, so the 3 a.m. test is lacking here so that 3 a.m. test would strengthen this little worry. And all of us know what this is like. Uh, trying to trying to boil down our proposition. Look at the main points. Because of the first point, because of Jesus is resurrection. Our salvation in Christ is sealed completely. Second main point because of Jesus's resurrection, the salvation of the dead in Christ is sealed completely.

[00:48:30] Do you notice there there are no what to do statements? Know what to do statements. So the main point one, it's a what is true because of Jesus resurrection, our salvation crisis field completely and all the way down through the the the phrase that's being rained down is a principle. Right. Salvation in Christ is sealed completely. That's the what is true statement that is raining down. So he's trying to do a principle consistent outline, which means that the main points should be. Should be further what to do in light of that? And you notice that the application isn't there. That makes sense. He's trying to have what is true a principle consistent outline, and his application statements are missing. Proposition because God promised to live and walk among us and to be our God, we must purify ourselves and seek holiness. What's happening there in the proposition? Branching? Yeah. Again. What? What's the guide about branching? What would you tell me about? Yeah, it's okay. But if you. If you put yourself in that spot, you have to flesh out what you've said. We must purify ourselves and. And seek. Holiness. Proposition. Because we have righteousness in Christ, we should also be holy as He is holy. Point number one, because we are God's temple, we should be holy as He is holy. But number two, because we are God's children, we should be holy as He is holy. What's happening here? What's that? Proposition is like a main point. Because we have righteousness in Christ. We should be holy as He is holy. Yeah, we can't. We can't. It's not a parent yet. How being God's temple of God's children and having God's promises directly explained our righteousness in Christ. It's not readily apparent.

[00:51:06] Also, notice that in your application clauses, remember what we said in the principal clauses you're going to have a being a verb. We'll see if we can say another way. But if we can't, that's all right. But in our in our application statement, we should be Holy, See us holy. That being a verb, we should be holy. We're going to we're going to try to say that a different way. Yes. Mm. Mhm. But what he has there are the words of the Bible that's not necessarily the same as saying what those words say in the Bible. So at this point, at this point, I understand your question and I feel your tension. But at this point, we're going to try to say that in a different way. Yeah, yeah, yeah. That's a good question. That's a pastoral prudence question. In light of your situation, how would people hear that word? Should or must some people hear the word should and it is a command to them. So it's a, it's a good, good question. Um. One other. Yes. Yeah, it's a good point that you're making. The the be holy as he is holy is and from this passage he's pulled it in from somewhere else. That's a that's a dangerous thing to do. I should say we have to be very careful if we do that to make sure we're not reading in to the passage where supposedly preaching from. Yes. Yeah. Right. It sounds like what he's trying to do is to say, because the Lord has made us holy, He's given us his righteousness, that we're to live in accordance with. That sounds like the way he's trying to do it. But you're right, it's a bit confusing because of of pulling in a verse from another spot.

[00:53:01] And we should also be holy. Makes it sound like there's something extra going on. I do. I do. And we do understand the tension about well, but this is a Bible verse, but quoting the words of that text does not necessarily tell us what Second Corinthians six is trying to say. That's why at this point we're working on we're working on avoiding the B verbs, if we can, in our application statements. Proposition. We are charged by God to preach his word because it is necessary for our lives. Point one We are charged by God to preach His Word because it is necessary to correct our lives. Point two We are charged by God to preach His Word because it is necessary to contradict false teaching. Point three We are charged by God to preach His Word because it is necessary to complete our ministries. Application statements are using the being firms, right? We are charged by God to preach his word. I think that is what is true statement because it is necessary. To correct our lives. We need an auditory statement there for the what is to do and what to do is supposed to be that we're meant to be corrected. But. He has a being a verb. There it is necessary. Anything else you see going on there? Yes. Yeah. Where? Where is that? Oh, in the proposition, we are charged by God to preach His word because it's necessary for our lives. Right? We don't know who the we and our are. Yeah, it is necessary. Well, it won't work for us at this point. What? What we're going to seek to do is put the what to do statement in laudatory mode, which means to an exhortation it is necessary.

[00:55:27] Puts it in a passive. A passive sort of mode. Yes. Yeah, it's always a it's always something. We have to be careful. That's a good point. If, if, if we try to use alliteration. Uh, one of the difficulties is, is we could use a word and sort of force it to fit, and we'd have to be careful about that. That's right. Better to use a different word and not have the alliteration at that point than to force the word to fit. Yes. The question is, how would you condense all this? Well, I would take a little and take a few minutes, I think, to give some thought to that. At this point, you would you would have to say because God. Because it would be something about because God charges. His people know something along this line. We must preach the word. It would be something in there. That's not where it needs to be yet, but it would be something like that. Uh. So what is true, the statement he's saying, we are charged by God to preach his word. So you'd say because God has charged believers, you know. But because God has commanded believers, something along these lines. And then the following statement, we must preach the word at this point necessary for our lives. I'm not sure yet. I'd have to give some thought to that if you wanted to rein that down. I'm not sure yet how you would strengthen that at this point. Okay. Well, I think you're getting you're getting the idea. Remember, we are right now learning, uh, if you will, skill scales, uh, learning piano while we're shooting free throws, uh, practice and skills, and therefore, we're setting them under a microscope and forcing us to try to really work at it and see if we can get some of these things together.

[00:57:50] So you have about six or 7 minutes. What I'd like you to do is to hand your outline to the person next to you, and that person next to you can point out to you anything else that you might want to change. And when, when, after you when you're ready, you can just bring it forward and turn it in. And then you're free to go. Okay.