The following excerpt is from the late author-teacher William Barclay. It has inspired a tremendous amount of rethinking in me about some profound ways to improve the modern church. – CTH

Author: Barclay, William. 

Book Title: MEDITATIONS ON COMMUNICATING THE GOSPEL.  

Published: Stirling, Scotland, 1968.

pp.33-37:

Before we look at the general content of the apostolic message there are two points of method which we must notice.  We are well supplied with material from which we can reconstruct both the content and the method of the apostolic preaching.  We have Peter’s sermon in Jerusalem in Acts 2; we have Paul’s three sermons, the first in Antioch in Pisidia in Acts 13, the second in Lystra in Acts 14, and the third in Athens in Acts 17.  The interesting and important fact is that, when we look at all the three Pauline sermons, they are totally different.  And they are different because each of them is specially and particularly designed for the audience to which it was addressed.  As a preacher Paul had an amazing gift for starting from where his audience was.  His basic message is the same, but he had an astonishing gift of technique which enabled him to adapt that message to the audience which he was addressing.

In Antioch in Pisidia he was addressing Jews in a Jewish Synagogue, and the only Gentiles present would be either full proselytes or at least God-fearers who were interested in Judaism.  When Paul spoke to this audience, he began in the Old Testament; he continued in the Old Testament; and he ended in the life of Jesus as fulfillment of the Old Testament.  He knew that to his audience the Old Testament was sacred and holy Scripture, and he knew that they both knew it and accepted its authority; so he therefore made it the basis of what he had to say.

In Athens, Paul’s method was quite different.  There he was not speaking to a Jewish Synagogue but in the open air.  He was not speaking to a Jewish audience, but to a Greek audience.  He therefore began with quotations from the Greek poets and philosophers.  Paul was well aware that there is no good in saying, “The Bible says,” to a man who neither knows nor accepts the Bible.  The wise preacher begins where his audience is and with what they know to lead them on to where he wants them to be and what he wants them to learn.  So, as Paul was a Jew to the Jews, so he became a Greek to the Greek.

In Lystra once again Paul’s method was quite different. In Lystra he was out in the wilds.  There was no Synagogue there and there was no Greek culture there.  It would have been futile to quote the Old Testament, and it would have been equally pointless to quote the Greek poets and philosophers; so there Paul starts from the sun and the wind and the rain and from growing things—things which all men know... The true preacher starts where the people are—even if he has to learn things he never in his life heard about before.  The sermon which is above a congregation’s heads is not a good sermon; it is a bad sermon.  It is simply the sign of a marksman who cannot hit the target.  Be it noted that the preacher does not wish to leave his people where they are—far from that.  But he begins from where they are to lead them to where he would wish them to be.

The second notable thing was something which emerged from the pattern of the Synagogue service.   The brief outline of the Synagogue service was this:

i. It began with the Shema, which is the basic Jewish creed.  Shema is the imperative of the Hebrew verb “to hear”, and means “Hear!”   It is the first word of that verse which is the fundamental creed of Judaism, “Hear, O Israel; the Lord our God is one Lord” (Deuteronomy 6:4).  Before the Shema there came one set prayer and after it one or two prayers.  Following the Shema there came the Eighteen Benedictions, eighteen prayers which bless God for his goodness and his graciousness.  Inset into this there is the time for free and topical prayers which bring the need of the immediate moment to God.  This first worship part of the service finishes with the blessing, “The Lord bless you and keep you; the Lord make his face to shine upon you, and be gracious to you: the Lord lift up his countenance upon you, and give you peace” (Numbers 6:25-26). 

ii.  The second part of the service consisted of the reading of the Scripture: one lesson from the Law, and one from the Prophets.  The Law was read from a lectionary, in which it was read completely through in three years; the prophetic lesson was chosen by the reader.  The lesson from the Law was read one verse at a time, and, since by New Testament times the Jews had forgotten their classical Hebrew, it was translated by an official called the Targumist, also one verse at a time.  The lesson from the prophets was read and translated in the same way, but three verses at a time. 

iii. Lastly, there came the preaching [teaching rather], which was always in the nature of the exposition of Scripture. 

Such was the outline of the service, but simply to state the outline is to omit the most significant thing about the whole service.  The most significant thing is that there was no one officially to do any of these things, with the single exception of the blessing which was always pronounced by a priest, if there was a priest present.  There was no professional ministry at all.  There was an official known as the Ruler, or the Head, of the Synagogue, but he was purely and administrative official.  He had to do with the finance and the organization of the care of the buildings; and he had to do with the service to the extent that a chairman or president has to do with a meeting.   He did not himself do any of the items; he saw that they were correctly done.  What then happened?

Everything in the service was done by members of the congregation.  A man called the Ambassador of the Congregation was detailed to take the prayer part of the service; seven people, a priest, a Levite, (if present), and five ordinary members of the congregation, from the congregation were called up to read the passage from the Law, so many verses each; one man was told to choose and read the lesson from the prophets.  Anyone who felt he had an address to give could give it.  It was precisely here that in the early days the Christian preachers got their chance; it was here that Paul got his chance.  Under modern conditions they would never have been allowed to utter a word.  But in the Synagogue, when it came time for the sermon, anyone who had a message to give could, subject to the approval of the Head of the Synagogue, give it.  And until the breach between the Church and the Synagogue was final, here was a magnificent chance which the Christian preachers seized with both hands.

But we have still not come to the most important feature of the service for the communication of the Christian message.  The sermon was always followed by general discussion, and it was exactly here that the Christian preacher got the greatest chance of all to communicate the Christian message.  The word that we come on again and again in regard to the preaching of the Christian preachers in the Synagogue is the word “dispute” or “argue.”  The Jews disputed with Stephen but could not meet his arguments (Acts 6:9-10).  Paul argued in the Synagogue at Thessalonica (Acts 17:2); he argued in the Synagogue at Corinth (Acts 18:2); he argued in the Synagogue at Ephesus (Acts 18:19).  Here is the great basic fact of early preaching: Early preaching was not a monologue but a dialogue.   It was not a question of one man telling a crowd of men; it was a case of a group of people talking it over together.  Of course, there should be services of worship and certainty in which the atmosphere of debate would be out of place; but there ought also be a place for the contact of mind with mind.  For, if there is not, how is the preacher to know that he is asking and answering the right questions at all?   If he does not give to those to whom he speaks an opportunity to speak to him, then he may be completely missing their problems, and he may be quite unaware of their doubts and difficulties.  We shall always need the monologue, but the rediscovery of the dialogue within the Church is long overdue.  It was just that dialogue which gave the apostolic preachers their supreme opportunity.  It could still be so today.

After reading Barclay’s insights, do these two New Testament passages take on new meaning?

Paul and his companions. . . entered the synagogue and sat down. After the reading from the Law and the Prophets, the synagogue rulers sent word to them, saying, "Brothers, if you have a message of encouragement for the people, please speak." Standing up, Paul motioned with his hand and said: "Men of Israel and you Gentiles who worship God, listen to me! ... We tell you the good news...” As Paul and Barnabas were leaving the synagogue, the people invited them to speak further about these things on the next Sabbath. When the congregation was dismissed, many of the Jews and devout converts to Judaism followed Paul and Barnabas, who talked with them and urged them to continue in the grace of God. (Acts 13)

“When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue or an interpretation… for the strengthening of the church… Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said.” (Paul to the Corinthians Church)

When they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a Jewish synagogue. As his custom was, Paul went into the synagogue, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, 3explaining and proving that the Christ had to suffer and rise from the dead. "This Jesus I am proclaiming to you is the Christ," he said. Some of the Jews were persuaded and joined Paul and Silas, as did a large number of God-fearing Greeks and not a few prominent women… As soon as it was night, the brothers sent Paul and Silas away to Berea. On arriving there, they went to the Jewish synagogue. Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. (Acts 17)