Page 71 - A Dissertation for Doctor of Philosophy

The result is that the “only concern [is] with how the preacher conveys his or her knowledge to

the listeners.” What results is ignorance of the listener’s interest. 163

Some preachers understand this model as running commentary, causing a serious lack of

the unity of a sermon. One result is that it tends to present too much contents in a sermon.

People become bored and indifferent. 164 Expository preaching in the Korean church needs to be

redefined and incorporate new methods of presenting the message more in line with Korean

epistemology. Both topical, deductive preaching and expository, deductive preaching are

characterized by their deductive structure and propositional, points-making outlines. Both

models of preaching belong to a heritage of preaching learned from and influenced by Western

missionaries and Western homiletics. As such, it requires a serious re-assessment in light of the

epistemological and cognitive differences between the two cultures. 165

163 Ibid., 55.

164 Gi Kim, “Analysis of Korean Preaching,” 113. He criticizes the running commentary
type of expository preaching as not a sermon. He asserts that “[u]nless the expository sermon
has unity, it is nothing other than a running commentary. A commentary is not a sermon.”

165
For example, see David J. Hesselgrave, Communicating Christ Cross-Culturally: An
Introduction to Missionary Communication, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids, MI.: Zondervan Publishing
House, 1991), 297-304. Hesselgrave introduces the model of F.H. Smith understanding of three
cognitive approaches to reality: “(1) the conceptual, (2) the intuitional or psychical, and (3) the
concrete relational.