A TEXTUALLY-ARRANGED, GENRE-SENSITIVE, RHETORICALLY-INFORMED HOMILETICAL APPROACH Michael Douglas Williams, Ph.D. The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, 2015 Chair: Dr. Robert A. Vogel Chapter 1 introduces the subject of this dissertation, which deals with the relationship between a biblical text’s substance and structure to that of a sermon’s substance and structure from that text. After stating the thesis of this dissertation—that expository preaching considers the arrangement of the text, is sensitive to the genre of the text and aware of the rhetorical impact of the text in order to faithfully and effectively communicate the Word of God—the introduction outlines the approach that this work follows. Chapter 2 begins by exploring the origin of inspiration as that of both divine and human. B. B. Warfield refers to this divine-human cooperation as the Spirit of God working confluently through the work of men. The chapter emphasizes how this divine-human cooperation came through a verbal-plenary view of inspiration. If inspiration extends to not only the writer’s thoughts but also his words, then the literary forms in the Bible are equally inspired. Therefore, the extent of the doctrine of inspiration to that of genre is of great importance to this dissertation. Chapter 3 describes the importance of hermeneutics and genre. I state my presupposition for authorial intent and single meaning of the text. Upon this authorial intent and single meaning foundation, I discuss principles for hermeneutics in general. More specifically, I establish the crucial role of literary sensitivity in the hermeneutical task. Essential in understanding the genre is an awareness of surface and notional structures, as well as what the author is doing (speech act) through that particular genre (structure). In short, to ignore literary form, as D. A. Carson insists, is to fall prey of two dangers: to insist that Scripture is saying what in fact it is not saying or to indeed miss what Scripture is actually saying. The chapter provides interpretative guidelines for genre sensitivity by exploring five primary genres found in the Bible. Chapter 4 discusses the aim of rhetoric and, in particular, the significance of the canon of arrangement on a given discourse. After discussing the aim of rhetoric and homiletics as that of persuasion for maximum impact, this chapter focuses upon the canon of arrangement and, thus, the reality that structure argues. The chapter then offers similarities and differences of the canon of arrangement with that of expository homiletics. Chapter 5 synthesizes a textually-arranged, genre-sensitive, rhetorical-informed homiletic. The chapter explores two areas of relevance for preaching: the need for head and heart and the need for textual sermonic structure. In particular, the first section deals with the primacy of preaching holistically. The second section addresses the necessary importance of textual sermonic structure around the consideration of biblical genre. The section offers sermonic examples from five genres, considering generic structures and rhetorical aim. The section concludes with a structural analysis of two sermons. In conclusion, chapter 6 presents a restatement of the thesis and summary of my arguments. The chapter urges expositors to faithfully and effectively preach the Bible by considering the structure of the text, being sensitive to its genre, and being aware of its rhetorical impact.

Chapter 1 introduces the thesis, methodology, and outline of the dissertation. It also includes a brief historical survey of the doctrine of inerrancy and a study of the factors that led to the formation of the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy (hereafter, ICBI) and original writing of the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (hereafter, CSBI). The final section of this chapter examines the initial usefulness of the CSBI among evangelicals. Chapter 2 traces the developments that occurred within evangelicalism with regard to the doctrine of inerrancy immediately after the formation of the ICBI and the writing of the CSBI. This study is followed by an examination of major contemporary developments concerning the doctrine of inerrancy. In this latter section, the works of several important evangelical scholars who have recently attempted to reframe the inerrancy debate are examined and assessed in order to demonstrate the resilience of the CSBI and note the areas that require reformulation. Chapter 3 begins a three-part reassessment and reformulation section in which the CSBI's nineteen articles of affirmation and denial are studied in their original context and in light of the contemporary challenges examined in chapter 2. Chapter 3 examines specifically Articles I-V. These articles deal chiefly with matters related to the doctrine of revelation. Chapter 3 offers several modifications to these existing articles as well as proposing two new articles. Chapter 4 is the second part of the reassessment and reformulation section. This section comprises and examination of Articles VI-XII. These articles deal primarily with matters related to the doctrines of inspiration and inerrancy. This chapter examines these articles in their original context, offers several modifications to the existing articles, and proposes the addition of two new articles. Chapter 5 is the final part of the reassessment and reformulation section. This section examines Articles XII-XIX. These articles deal mainly with miscellaneous issues related to the doctrine of inerrancy. Chapter 5 examines these articles in their original context, offers several modifications to these existing articles, and proposes the addition of two new articles. Chapter 6 is the concluding chapter in which I summarize my research and offer suggestions for future studies in this vital area. I recommend that a new group of evangelicals gather together to reconsider the CSBI as it currently stands and use the work provided in this dissertation to begin a conversation toward a revised statement.

Evangelicals have been characterized as a people committed to the Bible with historical roots to the fundamentalists who were engaged in controversy with liberals in North America at the beginning of the twentieth century. Harold Lindsell's book, The Battle For The Bible (1976), led to a great deal of discussion about inerrancy among evangelicals which resulted in major conferences and the publication of a number of books and articles discussing inerrancy in the subsequent decade. The principal doctrinal statement of the Evangelical Theological Society (ETS) has been from its inception a statement on inerrancy. The inerrancy debate among evangelicals took a new direction with the publication of R H Gundry's commentary on Matthew (1982). This sparked a debate concerning redaction criticism and the compatibility of using the historical-critical methodology while maintaining a commitment to the doctrine of inerrancy. Just when the debate appeared to be dying down the publication of the results of the Jesus Seminar (1993) led to several responses from evangelicals. The most controversial publication was The Jesus Crisis (1998) which accused evangelicals and some within the ETS of embracing the same methodology as those of the Jesus Seminar, refueling the debate again. Consequently this debate amongst evangelicals, particularly those associated with the ETS has continued for almost two decades. The debate has ranged over a variety of issues related to historical criticism and the study of the Gospels, including presuppositions, the Synoptic Problem, the role of harmonization, and whether the Gospels provide a strict chronology of the life of Jesus. The role of form and tradition criticism and the criteria of authenticity and whether the Gospel writers were faithful historians or creative theologians have also been points of contention in the debate. The languages that Jesus spoke and whether the Gospels preserve the ipsissima verba or vox have highlighted the differing views about the requirements of inerrancy. The redaction criticism debate has proven to have a significant role in exposing differences in methodology, definitions, presuppositions, and boundaries among evangelicals and members of the ETS. / New Testament / D.Th. (New Testament)

One of the distinguishing marks of American Evangelicalism is a commitment to the Bible as the only authority for faith and practice. A question often debated is whether the Bible should be viewed as inerrant, and if so, how the concept of inerrancy should be understood. This study suggests that the concept of inerrancy should be maintained, but that the concept must be understood in accordance with the way in which the biblical materials present the concepts of truth and its opposite. The value of the doctrine of inerrancy must be found in a better understanding not only of the didactic portions but also of the phenomena ofthe biblical materials. The first chapter of this study looks at nature American Evangelicalism and considers the historical development of the doctrine of the inerrancy of the Bible. The next three chapters consider in turn each of three divisions within American Evangelicalism about the understanding and usage of the doctrine of inerrancy: Complete Inerrancy, Conditional Inerrancy, and Limited Inerrancy. Complete Inerrancy is the most rigid of the three, maintaining that in the original writings of the Bible there were no errors, neither in spiritual nor in secular matters. Conditional Inerrancy conditions the understanding of inerrancy by the intent and purpose for the Bible as understood from the phenomena ofthe texts. The focus is shifted from the autographs of the Scripture to the texts which the contemporary person has to read and study. Limited Inerrancy limits the usage both of the term and of the concept inerrant in relation to the Bible, preferring the descriptor infallible, arguing that neither in the original writings nor in the present texts of the Bible is inerrancy to be found. There are errors in the texts, but they do not take away from the ability of the Bible to accomplish its divine purpose ofbringing people into contact with the Redeemer God. The last chapter draws from the analysis of the arguments within American Evangelicalism material needed to construct a redefined concept of inerrancy which maintains its importance. / Philosophy, Practical & Systematic Theology / D. Th. (Systematic Theology)

Evangelicals have been characterized as a people committed to the Bible with historical roots to the fundamentalists who were engaged in controversy with liberals in North America at the beginning of the twentieth century. Harold Lindsell's book, The Battle For The Bible (1976), led to a great deal of discussion about inerrancy among evangelicals which resulted in major conferences and the publication of a number of books and articles discussing inerrancy in the subsequent decade. The principal doctrinal statement of the Evangelical Theological Society (ETS) has been from its inception a statement on inerrancy. The inerrancy debate among evangelicals took a new direction with the publication of R H Gundry's commentary on Matthew (1982). This sparked a debate concerning redaction criticism and the compatibility of using the historical-critical methodology while maintaining a commitment to the doctrine of inerrancy. Just when the debate appeared to be dying down the publication of the results of the Jesus Seminar (1993) led to several responses from evangelicals. The most controversial publication was The Jesus Crisis (1998) which accused evangelicals and some within the ETS of embracing the same methodology as those of the Jesus Seminar, refueling the debate again. Consequently this debate amongst evangelicals, particularly those associated with the ETS has continued for almost two decades. The debate has ranged over a variety of issues related to historical criticism and the study of the Gospels, including presuppositions, the Synoptic Problem, the role of harmonization, and whether the Gospels provide a strict chronology of the life of Jesus. The role of form and tradition criticism and the criteria of authenticity and whether the Gospel writers were faithful historians or creative theologians have also been points of contention in the debate. The languages that Jesus spoke and whether the Gospels preserve the ipsissima verba or vox have highlighted the differing views about the requirements of inerrancy. The redaction criticism debate has proven to have a significant role in exposing differences in methodology, definitions, presuppositions, and boundaries among evangelicals and members of the ETS. / New Testament / D.Th. (New Testament)

One of the distinguishing marks of American Evangelicalism is a commitment to the Bible as the only authority for faith and practice. A question often debated is whether the Bible should be viewed as inerrant, and if so, how the concept of inerrancy should be understood. This study suggests that the concept of inerrancy should be maintained, but that the concept must be understood in accordance with the way in which the biblical materials present the concepts of truth and its opposite. The value of the doctrine of inerrancy must be found in a better understanding not only of the didactic portions but also of the phenomena ofthe biblical materials. The first chapter of this study looks at nature American Evangelicalism and considers the historical development of the doctrine of the inerrancy of the Bible. The next three chapters consider in turn each of three divisions within American Evangelicalism about the understanding and usage of the doctrine of inerrancy: Complete Inerrancy, Conditional Inerrancy, and Limited Inerrancy. Complete Inerrancy is the most rigid of the three, maintaining that in the original writings of the Bible there were no errors, neither in spiritual nor in secular matters. Conditional Inerrancy conditions the understanding of inerrancy by the intent and purpose for the Bible as understood from the phenomena ofthe texts. The focus is shifted from the autographs of the Scripture to the texts which the contemporary person has to read and study. Limited Inerrancy limits the usage both of the term and of the concept inerrant in relation to the Bible, preferring the descriptor infallible, arguing that neither in the original writings nor in the present texts of the Bible is inerrancy to be found. There are errors in the texts, but they do not take away from the ability of the Bible to accomplish its divine purpose ofbringing people into contact with the Redeemer God. The last chapter draws from the analysis of the arguments within American Evangelicalism material needed to construct a redefined concept of inerrancy which maintains its importance. / Philosophy, Practical and Systematic Theology / D. Th. (Systematic Theology)