Two things I find vital to the preaching that comes from our pulpits (of which I must include when I preach) are clear telling of what the text means and how it relates to the gospel. Certainly there is a range of meaning in some texts and our interpretation should diligently match what the author intended but there seems to be some wiggle room here. Relating a text to the gospel though, this is where you actually talk about Jesus and how his work on the cross fits the story, is a must for those that claim to be Christian (you can go along way with me by even a mention of his name!)
But what about sharing “unformed” thoughts from the pulpit (and I say “sharing” because I think it is hard to preach ambiguity.) Recently I heard a sermon from a person I respect and appreciate but he declared that he was publicly working through ideas he wasn’t sure about. I felt like the sermon fell short of the call to response we expect to hear when the gospel is shared and was more appropriate for the class room setting.
Is that okay? Should we “waste” time in the pulpit with ideas we admit could be wrong? Are we confusing people more or drawing them closer to Christ?
As I think of preaching and the great opportunity a preacher has to reveal Christ to those in a place of unbelief or nominal belief I just can’t rally around the idea that we can have a message with a main point that is unformed. Thoughts?