When was the last time you preached from the section of the Bible called the Prophets? I am not talking about using a verse from the Prophets in passing but rather preaching from a particular passage in the Prophets. We have likely preached from the books of Daniel and Jonah or on familiar passages, such as the
fourth servant song in Isaiah 53 and the vision of the dry bones in Ezekiel 37. But when was the last time your congregation heard a sermon based on
the books of Obadiah, Nahum, Micah, Haggai, or Zephaniah, or on Isaiah 19 or Jeremiah 17?
During the five years I served as a district pastor before coming to the seminary, I never preached on such books or passages, staying instead with familiar ones. Then, two years ago, it dawned on me that, as preachers or teachers, some tend to use only certain portions of the Bible—the parts that are the most comfortable to study and prepare. Could we, as leaders, have an unbalanced biblical diet? And, by using only a small portion of the Bible, do we also feed an unbalanced diet to our congregations?
Why some avoid preaching from the prophets
There are a number of possible reasons why we avoid this area of the Bible:
1. These books seem strange in the sense that they appear to portray God as a harsh God, or at least as One that appears to conduct cruel acts. For example, Isaiah 1:24 states, “The Lord says, the Lord of hosts, the Mighty One of Israel, ‘Ah, I will rid Myself of My adversaries, and take vengeance on My enemies.’”1
In other places, the prophets perform strange acts. For example, Isaiah walked “naked and barefoot” (Isa. 20:2);
2. Prophets are complex to understand and interpret. As preachers and teachers, we tend to prefer passages that are narrative in nature. However, most of the prophets wrote in poetry style, making it harder to understand their messages. The latter prophets wrote in a genre not at all storylike. Furthermore, the prophets do not always write in chronological order. Sometimes in the Prophets we also find apocalyptic prophecy (such as Isaiah 24–26), and this genre requires a different approach from the remainder of Isaiah.
3. Some of us assume that these books seem to talk only about judgment, and there appears to be nothing positive about their message. However, the same prophets who talk about judgment call for repentance, righteousness, social justice, moral uprightness, and salvation.
4. As pastors, we may assume that church members are not interested in prophecy. Or we may let church members dictate what types of preaching they want—to the detriment of their spiritual growth. Richard Mayhue observes this trend: “ ‘What the people want, the church should provide. What the church provides, pastors should be trained to deliver.’ ”2
5. We assume that the prophet’s message was only for people back then and does not apply to us today. Many pastors and theologians think that the Old Testament was meant for a different culture of long ago and is not relevant for today.
6. As a society, we have become well adjusted to injustice; therefore, we cannot identify with the prophets’ outrage over injustice.3
7. Biblical readers often prefer the New Testament over the Old Testament. Bruce Moulton rightly points out: “Unfortunately, much of the Old Testament and many of the Minor Prophets are not being preached and taught. Pastors deem these books too controversial, hard to understand and irrelevant.”4 Walter Kaiser fittingly asks, “Why do so many pastors admit to having a mental block, feelings of inadequacy or plain guilt when it comes to preaching the Old Testament?”5
The preaching or teaching of the New Testament is more appealing for the simple reason that this portion of the Bible is easier to understand and interpret. Furthermore, a perception lives on that the New Testament was written for Christians, while the Old Testament was written for Israel.6
8. Some pastors do not take time to explore the Prophets in great detail. We have busy schedules and often need to quickly put together a sermon or lesson. We may not have time to dig deeply into the Bible; but the busyness of life should not prevent anyone from finding new truth, including that revealed in the Prophets.
The benefits of preaching from the Prophets
There are great benefits, for a balanced spiritual diet, to preaching and teaching from the Prophets:
1. We will have a more balanced view of God’s character by taking into account the prophets’ perspectives.
2. We will deepen our skills of preaching and teaching by spending more rigorous time researching God’s golden truth in challenging passages.
3. We will discover that the Prophets do not have a different message from the rest of the Bible; they just packaged their writing differently. While the theme of judgment practically flows throughout the Prophets, this should not stop us from exploring the reasons why God brings judgment upon His people and the nations of the world (e.g., Isa. 5; 13–23; Jer. 25; Amos 1–3). Although readers will find judgment in these books, the documents also reveal the character of God and humans.
4. We will see that the Prophets’ messages not only present judgment, but they are also saturated with the love of God and His desire to redeem humanity, God’s grace toward humanity, and a restless God who reaches out with incredible patience to bring back those He loves (e.g., Isa. 1:16–20; 6:1–7; 12:1–6; Jer. 3:6–25; 23:1–8; Ezek. 33:10–19; Mic. 7:1–20).
5. As we study the Prophets, we will see how Jesus is the fulfillment of their predictions and promises. The disciples came to know that Jesus was the Messiah by studying the Prophets.
6. We will discover that the Prophets’ messages are as applicable to us today as they were back then. Our society has grown cold toward spiritual things, and the Prophets’ messages were directed to a similarly apathetic and lawless society before the time of Christ.
7. We, and our church members, will see a bigger picture of God’s working in the lives of His people.
8. Pastors who take the extra time to research and preach from the prophetic books will uncover a rich treasure of truth for their own lives and for the church.
Sample sermon based on Micah 6
In the remainder of this article, I will demonstrate the benefit of preaching and teaching from the Prophets with an example. Micah 6 remains somewhat familiar because pastors often quote verse 8, but why not examine a larger portion of this chapter? Remember that after studying a particular passage and extracting as much as you can on your own, you will often find it beneficial to consult commentaries and biblical journals.7
Background study
Genre. This particular section in Micah belongs to the poetry genre; the interpretation will not be based on a story. Thus, key words are needed to guide one’s study; patterns established in other Old Testament books will help determine what is occurring here. In this passage, the word contend (Mic. 6:1, 2) is important. The Hebrew word riv (“contend, strive”) also refers to a lawsuit or conducting a legal case. Thus, we have a covenant lawsuit brought by God against His people (cf. Deut. 32; Ps. 50; Jer. 2; Hos. 4).8
Context. In Micah 6, we observe a definite contrast from what has happened in the previous five chapters because of the first word hear. This word calls for the reader’s special attention; the words that follow reveal that the Lord will speak through the prophet. Chapter 6 can be divided into two parts: verses 1–8, and verses 9–16; the imperative exhortation shema means to “listen, hear” (v. 1 and v. 9 are the clues).
Structure/Literary form. As stated above, this chapter contains a covenant lawsuit, which utilizes the covenant pattern found in Deuteronomy. The exception to the usual covenant pattern in this passage is the witnesses, which are often placed at the end of the passage rather than the beginning. Thus, we have the following structure:
1. List of witnesses; mountains and hills): Micah 6:1, 2a.
2. Preamble (introduction of the suzerain9 and call to judgment): Micah 6:1, 2.
3. Historical prologue (review of the suzerain’s benevolent acts toward the vassal): Micah 6:3–5.
4. Indictments (breach of the covenant stipulations): Micah 6:6–8 (review of general stipulations); 6:9–12 (violation of specific stipulations).
5. Verdict (guilty, “therefore”) and sentence (pronouncement of the curses): Micah 6:13–16.10
A quick review of this structure reveals possibilities for at least one or two sermons drawn from this particular passage. I will now focus briefly only on the first part (Mic. 6:1–8) to suggest a possible message based on these verses.
Sermon outline
Title: God as plaintiff: A covenant lawsuit against Judah (Mic. 6:1–8).
Introduction of the case: This passage reveals the seriousness of the relationship breakdown between God and His people. This lawsuit in Micah specifies a final appeal to the people a wake-up call. The people of God assumed that God’s covenant relationship would continue forever, even when they were not committed to worshiping and serving God. However, as announced by Moses in Deuteronomy (see 4–7; 27, 28; 31:14–21), God’s people—by their actions—could sever this relationship.
The witnesses: In Micah 6:1, 2, the Lord says to His people, “ ‘Arise, plead your case before the mountains and hills.’ ” If the people have something to say, let them ask the mountains and hills, which act as witnesses. The “heavens and earth” also act as witnesses (see Deut. 32:1; Ps. 50:1). The mountains are personified so that they know about the people’s immorality and false worship.
The claim: In verse 2, Micah reveals the purpose of God’s lawsuit. God shows to His people that this covenant lawsuit is against His own people and states the seriousness of the charges against them. The author does not portray the relationship between God and His people as in good shape. We find the same word contend, or riv, used twice here (vv. 1, 2), and God is the One doing the contending. Micah repeats this thought in the last part of verse 2, this time not with the word riv but rather with the related word ykḥ (“reprove, dispute”). This time the verb is hithpa’el, which means “lodging a charge, to argue with,” suggesting that it will be a dialogue, a dispute, between God and the people. The question here: Who is right?
Examination of the plaintiff: In Micah 6:3–5, God does not accuse the people of Judah with a series of failures, as one might expect, but rather He uses a rhetorical approach by asking whether He has done wrong: See what I have done wrong; where I have failed you? Thus, God places Himself on trial before His people. God appears to open up His heart to be searched to see if there is any evidence of unfaithfulness on His part. These verses reveal the love of God toward “My people.” As pointed out by Gary Smith, “These questions will remove the listeners’ defensive posture and open them up to considering God’s failure—that is, their supposed objection to what God has done for them.”11 This leads one to conclude that if listeners find nothing wrong with God, then the breakdown in the relationship is, therefore, found with the people.
God shows that He has not been unfaithful to His people by reminding them of His past actions. He talks about how He brought them out of Egypt; sent Moses, Aaron, and Miriam to lead them, and acted for His people in the incident between Balak and Balaam. The past demonstrates how God cared for His people and fulfilled His promises (e.g., Gen. 12:1–3; Exod. 6:6–8).
The defendants’ response: In Micah 6:6, 7, the Israelites must defend their actions in their turn. These verses are rhetorical statements in the form of questions by which the people try to defend themselves in how faithful they have been to God.12 However, their statements are not humble; they focus on their giving and the amount of their doing rather than on the relationship.
The basis for judgment: Micah 6:8 answers the question about what the Lord really looks for—not the sacrifices and shallow outward appearances. The fact that Micah begins verse 8 with the words “He has shown you” reveals to the people something that God had done in the past but that His people had obviously not learned. God did not jump in with new ideas, principles, or truths, but rather God was consistent with His relationship and what He expected His people to do. Obviously, the people distorted what God proposed to them by simply assuming what God wanted instead of taking Him at His Word.
Summary: Thus, God wants humanity to embrace three basic concepts: (1) to do/act justly; (2) to love faithfulness, mercy, and kindness (ḥsd relates to “steadfast covenant loyalty”); and (3) to walk humbly or to walk circumspectly,13 walking wisely. “By explaining these three principles Micah hopes to correct the misunderstanding of his audience in 6:6–7 and to explain the basis for God’s verdict of this lawsuit in 6:13–16.”14
Conclusion
As demonstrated in this example from Micah 6, speakers will find it possible to preach or teach relevant messages from the Prophets to our congregations. The Prophets reveal God’s character in a different context, and we see how He interacts with His people and how He reveals His love through the covenant of relationship.
References:
1 All Scripture passages, unless otherwise stated, are from the New King James Version.
2 Richard L. Mayhue, “Rediscovering Pastoral Ministry,” Masters Seminary Journal 6, no. 1 (Spring 1995): 50, 51.
3 See Abraham J. Heschel, The Prophets (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2007), 3–5.
4 Bruce Moulton, “Analyzing the Applicability of Preaching the Minor Prophets in the 21st Century” (DMin thesis, Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary, 2011), 1.
5 Walter C. Kaiser, Toward an Exegetical Theology: Biblical Exegesis for Preaching and Teaching (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1981), 201.
6 See Moulton, “Preaching the Minor Prophets,” 52–54.
7 Some good resources include the following: Andreas J. Köstenberger and Richard D. Patterson, Invitation to Biblical Interpretation: Exploring the Hermeneutical Triad of History, Literature, and Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel, 2011); Grenville J. R. Kent, Paul J. Kissling, and Laurence A. Turner, eds., Reclaiming the Old Testament for Christian Preaching (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2010); Ernst Jenni and Claus Westermann, eds., Theological Lexicon of the Old Testament, trans. Mark E. Biddle (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Pub., 1997); G. Johannes Botterweck and Helmer Ringgren, eds., Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2000); The New American Commentary series (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1990–?); New International Commentary on the Old Testament series (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, n.d.). Those who know Hebrew should consult the original language or a computer program, such as Accordance, Logos, or BibleWorks.
8 See Richard M. Davidson, “The Divine Covenant Lawsuit Motif in Canonical Perspective,” Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 21, no. 1 (2010): 45–84; J. Limburg, “The Root רִיב and the Prophetic Lawsuit Speeches,” Journal of Biblical Literature 88, no. 3 (1969): 291–304.
9 A suzerain is an overlord.
10 Davidson, “The Divine Covenant Lawsuit.”
11 Gary V. Smith, Hosea, Amos, Micah, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2001), 550.
12 Ibid., 552.
13 D. W. Thomas, “The Root s.n’ in Hebrew and the Meaning of qdrnyt in Malachi 3:14,” Journal of Jewish Studies 1, no. 4 (1949): 182–88.
14 Smith, Hosea, Amos, Micah, 552.
