A Comparison of Receptivity to the Deductive and Inductive Methods of Preaching in the Pioneer Memorial Church
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Andrews University Digital Commons @ Andrews University Dissertation Projects DMin Graduate Research 1986 A Comparison of Receptivity to the Deductive and Inductive Methods of Preaching in the Pioneer Memorial Church Dwight K. Nelson Andrews University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/dmin Part of the Practical Theology Commons Recommended Citation Nelson, Dwight K., "A Comparison of Receptivity to the Deductive and Inductive Methods of Preaching in the Pioneer Memorial Church" (1986). Dissertation Projects DMin. 208. https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/dmin/208 This Project Report is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Research at Digital Commons @ Andrews University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertation Projects DMin by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Andrews University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Thank you for your interest in the Andrews University Digital Library of Dissertations and Theses. Please honor the copyright of this document by not duplicating or distributing additional copies in any form without the author’s express written permission. Thanks for your cooperation. INFORMATION TO USERS This reproduction was made from a copy of a manuscript sent to us for publication and microfilming. While the most advanced technology has been used to pho tograph and reproduce this manuscript, the quality of the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the quality of the material submitted. Pages in any manuscript may have indistinct print, in all cases the best available copy has been filmed. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help clarify notations which may appear on this reproduction. 1. Manuscripts may not always be complete. When it is not possible to obtain missing pages, a note appears to indicate this. 2. When copyrighted materials are removed from the manuscript, a note ap pears to indicate this. 3. Oversize materials (maps, drawings, and charts) are photographed by sec tioning the original, beginning at the upper left hand comer and continu ing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each oversize page is also filmed as one exposure and is available, for an additional charge, as a standard 35mm slide or in black and white paper format.* 4. Most photographs reproduce acceptably on positive microfilm or micro fiche but lack clarify on xerographic copies made from the microfilm. For an additional charge, all photographs are available in black and white standard 35mm slide format.* •For more information about black and white slides or enlarged paper reproductions, please contact the Dissertations Customer Services Department T TA/f.T Dissertation LJIV11 Information Service University Microfilms International A Bell & Howell Information Company 300 N. Zeeb Road. Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. 8624222 Nelson, Dwight Kirkwood A COMPARISON OF RECEPTIVITY TO THE DEDUCTIVE AND INDUCTIVE METHODS OF PREACHING IN THE PIONEER MEMORIAL CHURCH Andrews University D.Min. 1986 University Microfilms International 300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 43106 Copyright 1986 by Nelson, Dwight Kirkwood All Rights Reserved Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. PLEASE NOTE: in all cases this material has been filmed in the best possible way from the available copy. Problems encountered with this document have been identified here with a check mark V . 1. Glossy photographs or pages_____ 2. Colored illustrations, paper or print______ 3. Photographs with dark background_____ 4. Illustrations are poor copy______ 5. Pages with black marks, not original copy______ 6. Print shows through as there is text on both sides of page______ 7. Indistinct, broken or small print on several pages 8. Print exceeds margin requirements ______ 9. Tightly bound copy with print lost in spine_______ 10. Computer printout pages with indistinct print______ 11. Page(s) ___________ lacking when material received, and not available from school or author. 12. Page(s) ___________ seem to be missing in numbering only as text follows. 13. Two pages numbered . Text follows. 14. Curling and wrinkled pages 15. Dissertation contains pages with print at a slant, filmed as received _________ 16. Other________________________________________________________________________ University Microfilms International Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Andrews University Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary A COMPARISON OF RECEPTIVITY TO THE DEDUCTIVE AND INDUCTIVE METHODS OF PREACHING IN THE PIONEER MEMORIAL CHURCH A Project Report Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Ministry by Dwight K. Nelson May 1986 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. A COMPARISON OF RECEPTIVITY TO THE DEDUCTIVE AND INDUCTIVE METHODS OF PREACHING IN THE PIONEER MEMORIAL CHURCH A Project Report presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Ministry by Dwight K. Nelson APPROVAL BY THE COMMITTEE: Chairman: Steven P. Vitrano an, SDA Theological Seminary Committee Member: Robert Johnston /L> May / Committee Member: Garth/Thompson "Date appp@Ve<y Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Copyright 1986 by Dwight K. Nelson Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ABSTRACT A COMPARISON OF RECEPTIVITY TO THE DEDUCTIVE AND INDUCTIVE METHODS OF PREACHING IN THE PIONEER MEMORIAL CHURCH by Dwight K. Nelson Chairman: Steven P. Vitrano Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ABSTRACT OF GRADUATE STUDENT RESEARCH Project Report Andrews University Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary Title: A COMPARISON OF RECEPTIVITY TO THE DEDUCTIVE AND INDUCTIVE METHODS OF PREACHING IN THE PIONEER MEMORIAL CHURCH. Name of Researcher: Dwight K. Nelson Name and degree of chairman: Steven P. Vitrano, Ph.D. Date completed: May 1986 Problem There are two basic methods into which all preaching falls, deduction and induction. Homiletical literature advocating either method extols the virtues of the one over the other. However, such literature offers little supportive data based upon listener responses and preferences. An historical survey of preaching reveals that the preaching of Jesus and the apostles in the New Testament was dominantly inductive, whereas the preaching of the post-New Testament church has been generally deductive. Therefore, Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. it was the task of this project to seek listener response to deductive and inductive preaching in the Pioneer Memorial Church in order to ascertain listener preference for one or the other of these two sermonic methods. Methods Eight sermons, preached in Pioneer Memorial Church during the fall of 1985, intentionally alternated between the deductive and inductive methods. A group of randomly selected listeners reacted to each sermon through a standard evaluative questionnaire. Based upon their responses, listener preference for deductive and inductive preaching was ascertained. Results The response of the listeners has conformed to the expectations of some of the homiletical literature. On the other hand, it was discovered that in numerous instances the listeners in Pioneer Memorial Church dem onstrated a wide range of responses and preferences that prevents any categorical advocacy of one method over the other. This opportunity to establish a dialogical relationship with certain parishioners of the congre gations has resulted in a growing awareness that pastoral preaching must reflect the inherent diversity and differing preferences within the congre gation. Conclusions The responses of the listeners in this project indicate that the choice of sermonic method alone is not the determinative factor in eliciting a prescribed listener response. While it may be concluded that a slightly greater degree of listeners preferred the inductive method over deduction, it is clear that in fact listeners prefer a combining of deductive and inductive Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. preaching. Any homiletical strategy for the future must incorporate both methods consistently and regularly in order for the Word of God to be effectively communicated in Pioneer Memorial Church. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. IN DEDICATION The preaching of my father and the praying of my mother have indelibly shaped my life and ministry. For that cherished legacy these pages are dedicated to them. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................