A Conversation

We invite you to join our conversation about inductive preaching. The conversation first started in a graduate preaching class on Genesis and Exodus at Oklahoma Christian University  when the instructor, Dr. Harold Shank, required the students to do only inductive preaching in the sermons preached in class. Grant Sullivan, Associate minister at the North Heights Church of Christ in Bixby, Oklahoma, was part of that class. Listen to how things unfolded.
Harold Shank: Most of Genesis and Exodus is narrative. Yet it is a story told with a theological purpose. Seldom in these 90 chapters do we get a list of doctrines or conclusions about what to believe. For that reason, I asked the students in the class to do only inductive preaching.

Grant Sullivan: In this class I embarked on a difficult and yet exciting journey of learning. This journey has only begun, but I am beginning to see the fruit of my labor. This journey is to learn inductive preaching. Upon introduction to inductive preaching, brought to my attention by Dr. Harold Shank, I determined to read several books looking for a greater understanding of the inductive approach to preaching and teaching the word of God. Having read three books at the time of this writing certainly shows I am in no way an expert on the matter. However, this process is something that is certainly fresh on my mind.
Harold Shank: When I asked the students to do inductive preaching, I was not prepared for the response. They were resistant. But they were also confused. Despite the fact that the class was on Genesis and Exodus, we had to take a detour into the question of “what is inductive preaching?” I called my preaching expert friend, Dr. Chris Altrock, and he provided me with a list of the most helpful books on inductive preaching.

Grant Sullivan: All my life I have been surrounded by information and examples of deductive preaching, but had never knowingly encountered this other approach. At first the more I read the more confused I became. In fact several times along the way it crossed my mind that this journey might not be worth the effort. It seemed like I was learning a foreign language, and my deductive habits were not going to leave without a fight. Yet after making the initial effort I have found the rewards to outweigh all the difficulties of this process.

Harold Shank: In our class I called for students to do expository preaching that was inductive. Expository preaching means taking the biblical material paragraph by paragraph and allowing the themes, topics and points of the biblical material to direct the themes, topics and points of the sermon. I found that explaining inductive preaching to people who had only heard and practiced deductive preaching was more difficult.

Grant Sullivan: The first major obstacle, and one admittedly I am still trying to overcome, was finding a clear definition of “inductive preaching.” Some writers on the subject will refer to narrative style under the umbrella of inductive, while others suggest them to be similar but distinct styles. I would read page after page looking for a clear definition of terms only to be disappointed. Then through guidance from Dr. Shank I started realizing I was not dealing with an exact science. I now believe that “inductive preaching” cannot be placed inside a labeled box.

Here is my attempt to help the reader gain insight into the difference between inductive and deductive preaching. Imagine that it is Christmas morning and you are longing to open your gifts. The anticipation has been building inside of you for days now and you simply cannot wait any longer to find out what you are getting. Finally the moment comes and you begin ripping the wrapping paper off your present. You can hardly stand the excitement as you take the lid off the box and found within is the greatest gift you have ever received. Now imagine the same scenario, but this time your older brother who knows what you are getting spoils the surprise. There is something about the experience that has been taken away and can never be regained. You may still love the gift, but to a degree you have been cheated.

*How many times have you recorded a ball game not wanting to know the outcome, and someone walks by and tells you the final score?

How many times have you wanted to see a movie only to have a spoiler in your midst?

I use these examples to help define inductive and deductive preaching.

Harold Shank: It”s fascinating to me that Grant is now using an inductive method to help us understand inductive preaching. As he told his Christmas story, I could see the conclusion coming. He did not really have to even state it. I drew it myself. That”s the inductive method.

Grant Sullivan: Deductive preaching is that which begins with the conclusion and works backwards to provide the evidence for how this conclusion was reached. Therefore in deductive preaching the listener is told the ending at the beginning of the sermon, and the remainder of the sermon is spent providing the reasons why this is “correct”. The inductive approach put simply is the opposite of the deductive approach. Inductive preaching takes the listeners along the journey toward the conclusion. Inductive preaching begins with ambiguity and leads the listener toward the answer. As Eugene L. Lowry puts it in his book, The Homiletical Plot, we begin with an “itch” in search of the “scratch”.

Harold Shank: In Grant”s last entry, he becomes more deductive, telling us the conclusion and then supporting his point. There is nothing wrong with deductive reasoning. It has been used with profit for ages, but inductive preaching has advantages. But changing is hard.
Grant Sullivan: In this blog post I”ve tried to whet your appetite to consider inductive preaching. I would also challenge you to never be satisfied, but always look for ways to improve your delivery of the most important message ever told. Often people are not willing to change until they realize that there is a need for change. I have been guilty in the past of believing that if I preach the truth powerfully and with enthusiasm that people who refuse to listen are the ones at fault entirely. Although I would not dare remove all the responsibility from the listener I have come to believe that a good self assessment was needed in my preaching. I would like to share with you some things that I have noticed since beginning this series of personal assessment and growth.

Harold Shank: Most of us multi-task. We do more than one thing at a time. That becomes a problem on Sunday. If most of the audience is multi-tasking as I preach, I wonder how much of God’s word is actually getting through. Inductive preaching demands more attention from the listener. Instead of every conclusion being clearly stated and supported, the listener has to participate. That leads to a higher level of interest.

Grant Sullivan: This process has not been easy. Old habits are hard to break. So why did I go through with the process? It is partly because I am stubborn, but after trying the inductive approach I have a new and better reason to continue on this journey. The results are speaking for themselves. I have noticed that people are not shifting in their seats and getting up to take restroom breaks nearly as often. I have had several people who have walked up discussing various parts of the sermon instead of the usual “great sermon” followed by “so what did you think of that ballgame yesterday?” This is just a few examples of the results I am noticing. The real excitement for me is when I realize how much I need to improve with my inductive delivery. It is my hope that as I improve the results will become even greater.

Harold Shank: Once a person becomes aware of these two ways of thinking/preaching, it is easy to become critical. But there is no right or wrong here. For me, it is more a means of making the preaching method fit the text. Genesis and Exodus force us to take the story and draw conclusions. Preaching from Genesis and Exodus might do the same.

Grant Sullivan: The latest problem I am having is what might be described as a “superiority complex”. I now have a hard time listening to others preaching deductively. You might say that I am overly critical. Much like a child with a new toy, I am enamored with something new, and imagine my criticalness of deductive preaching will fade with time. Admittedly there is a place for both inductive and deductive preaching. It might be that the inductive approach would even lose some of its freshness if there was a total abandonment of deductive preaching. For now I will simply say that the inductive approach is a breath of fresh air.

Harold Shank: We’ve simply shared a bit of our experience. Tell us yours. How can we sharpen our definitions? Join the discussion.