Why I Teach Interactively
Interactive teaching, part 2
Scripture doesn’t call pastors to preach, in the sense of delivering sermons. We saw this last week. But there is a repeated call for pastors to teach the church. Teaching has different priorities than preaching, a different focus and different expectations. So to understand how leaders today should teach in the church, we need to see what Scripture has to tell us about teaching. We know Jesus and Paul both taught. But how did they teach? And what can we learn from their examples?
I want to focus on a particular aspect of their teaching, one that isn’t discussed very often. If we read the text carefully, we begin to see references to the interactive nature of both Jesus’ and Paul’s teaching. We know the format in the synagogues of the first century was interactive. They even arranged their seating in the round to facilitate this interaction. (We see evidence of this interaction in the synagogues in such passages as Mark 3:1-5; John 6:25-59; Acts 17:1-4; 17:17; 18:4-6; 18:19; 18:28; 19:8-9.)
Read through the Gospels and see how many times Jesus asked questions and answered questions as part of his teaching. Here’s a familiar example from Luke 10:25-28:
One day an expert in religious law stood up to test Jesus by asking him this question: “Teacher, what should I do to inherit eternal life?”
Jesus replied, “What does the law of Moses say? How do you read it?”
The man answered, “‘You must love the LORD your God with all your heart, all your soul, all your strength, and all your mind.’ And, ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’”
“Right!” Jesus told him. “Do this and you will live!”
Do you see how Jesus even answers a question with another question? He was drawing knowledge and insight from this man the man didn’t know he had. This is a classic sign of a dedicated teacher! The man went on to question Jesus further: “And who is my neighbor?” Jesus responded with the now familiar story of the good Samaritan. When he was done, he questioned the man again:
“Now which of these three would you say was a neighbor to the man who was attacked by bandits?” Jesus asked.
The man replied, “The one who showed him mercy.”
Then Jesus said, “Yes, now go and do the same.”
We know these stories so well, we can fail to see how common it was for Jesus to teach interactively. Here’s another example (from Matthew 21:23-27):
When Jesus returned to the Temple and began teaching, the leading priests and elders came up to him. They demanded, “By what authority are you doing all these things? Who gave you the right?”
“I’ll tell you by what authority I do these things if you answer one question,” Jesus replied. “Did John’s authority to baptize come from heaven, or was it merely human?”
They talked it over among themselves. “If we say it was from heaven, he will ask us why we didn’t believe John. But if we say it was merely human, we’ll be mobbed because the people believe John was a prophet.” So they finally replied, “We don’t know.”
And Jesus responded, “Then I won’t tell you by what authority I do these things.”
Jesus goes on to tell them a story about a father and two sons. He then questions the people by asking, “Which of the two obeyed his father?” And notice this isn’t merely a rhetorical question, he waits for an actual response: “The first.” He explains the meaning of the story, tells the people another story, and—once again—draws them to understand the meaning of the story by asking them a question:
“When the owner of the vineyard returns,” Jesus asked, “what do you think he will do to those farmers?”
The religious leaders replied, “He will put the wicked men to a horrible death and lease the vineyard to others who will give him his share of the crop after each harvest.”
Then Jesus asked them, “Didn’t you ever read this in the Scriptures? . . .”
And he continues his lesson.
This is the way we see Jesus teaching in Scripture. He asked questions, he answered questions, and he even answered questions with questions! We see him doing this in one-on-one conversation, in small groups and, yes, in large group settings. He did most of the talking, to be sure; these were discussions, but they weren’t unstructured free-for-alls. Jesus was definitely teaching, but he was teaching them interactively.
If you look through the passages above from the book of Acts, you’ll notice how often the text says Paul “reasoned” with the people in the synagogues (or “trying to convince” them). Here are some examples:
As was Paul’s custom, he went to the synagogue service, and for three Sabbaths in a row he used the Scriptures to reason with the people.
Acts 17:2
He went to the synagogue to reason with the Jews and the God-fearing Gentiles . . .
Acts 17:17
Each Sabbath found Paul at the synagogue, trying to convince the Jews and Greeks alike.
Acts 18:4
. . . While he was there, he went to the synagogue to reason with the Jews.
Acts 18:19
And he entered the synagogue and continued speaking out boldly for three months, having discussions and persuading them about the kingdom of God. But when some were becoming hardened and disobedient, speaking evil of the Way before the people, he withdrew from them and took the disciples away with him, and had discussions daily in the school of Tyrannus.
Acts 19:8-9 (NASB)
The Greek word used in each of these passages is dialegomai. From this we get our English word “dialogue,” and it had the same kind of meaning in the first century. It meant “to discuss,” as we see clearly in the NASB reading of Acts 19:8-9 above. So what Paul was doing in the synagogues in these passages was very interactive.
We see Paul teaching interactively in the church, as well, in Acts 20:7-12. We often joke about this being the favorite verse of long-winded preachers because—it’s thought—it shows Paul preaching all night long! But that’s not quite accurate. The same Greek word, dialegomai, is used here (plus another word with a similar meaning). What Paul was doing in this account wasn’t preaching to the people, he was dialoguing with the people. He didn’t preach all night long, but he did talk with the people all night long, teaching and answering their questions. (If I knew the apostle Paul was leaving in the morning, I’d have a lot of questions, too!)
God’s Word Translation shows this meaning well:
On Sunday we met to break bread. Paul was discussing ⌞Scripture⌟ with the people. Since he intended to leave the next day, he kept talking until midnight. (Many lamps were lit in the upstairs room where we were meeting.)
A young man named Eutychus was sitting in a window. As Paul was talking on and on, Eutychus was gradually falling asleep. Finally, overcome by sleep, he fell from the third story and was dead when they picked him up. Paul went to him, took him into his arms, and said, “Don’t worry! He’s alive!” Then Eutychus went upstairs again, broke the bread, and ate. Paul talked with the people for a long time, until sunrise, and then left.
The people took the boy home. They were greatly relieved that he was alive.
This interactive way of teaching seems to have been the common experience of all the earliest churches.
So what happened? How did preaching—a monologue-style speech—come to be a weekly practice in the early churches? Over time, leaders in the churches began adopting more of a Greco-Roman emphasis on eloquent rhetoric. This became even more widespread after Christianity was legalized and the churches became more and more socially predominate. Huge numbers of people joined “the Church” without necessarily becoming truly Christian, and brought with them their cultural expectations. Churches began building large cathedrals, the bishop had already become the preeminent person in church life, and now eloquent sermons with all the desired rhetorical flourishes took the place of simple, interactive teaching.
Centuries later, the Reformed churches, with all their intellectual strengths, retained and even intensified this focus on monologic preaching. For them, preaching sermons was proclaiming the gospel and teaching the Word. The “ministry of the word” (Acts 6:4) became synonymous with weekly monologue sermons. But all through church history, there have been groups of believers who followed a more biblical, interactive teaching model, and the past few decades we’ve seen signs of renewed interest in interactive teaching.
But why teach interactively? What are the benefits of interactive teaching? Here are a few:
It’s a much more effective way of learning.
Studies have consistently shown the more we’re actively involved in the learning process (rather than just passively listening), the more we retain and apply what we’ve learned. People remain engaged at a much higher level when they can ask questions. Even if they don’t ask a question themselves, they’re still keenly interested in hearing the questions of others, and what the response will be. And when they realize the teacher may ask them questions—and expect an answer (as Jesus did)—that keeps them even more alert!
It also helps avoid the problem of people not understanding something, having no opportunity to clarify what’s confusing them, feeling lost, then growing frustrated and just zoning out because they’re no longer able to follow the sermon. Imagine the difference if you were confused by something in a sermon, and could immediately raise your hand and say: “Wait a minute, I didn’t quite get that.” I guarantee you, if one person is confused about something, others are, as well. Is it about finishing my sermon uninterrupted and undisturbed? Or is it about people really understanding and learning?
The truth of Scripture just has greater weight to a person when they’re part of the discovery process. Rather than telling everyone, “. . . and this verse shows again that Jesus is God,” it makes much more of a lasting impact for someone to respond to a question from the teacher with, “Wow, this is saying Jesus is God!” Rather than truth being something they’re told in a lecture, they’re now apprehending the truth in a deeply personal way. They now own it . . . and are responsible for doing something with it.
A monologue is just about the least effective way to teach anyone anything. But strangely it’s the most common model we find in the church. Remember, God has given the pastoral leaders of the church the sacred duty of teaching the people. Last week, I quoted Howard Hendricks: “If they’re not learning, I’m not teaching.” We need to be very aware of how people learn most effectively—that is, if we want to effectively fulfill the ministry God has given us. The more people actively participate in the learning process, the more they truly learn, the more they retain, and the more they apply what they’ve learned in their lives.
It keeps the focus on the text of Scripture.
This is true even in the preparation process. Rather than putting a great deal of time and effort into crafting a beautiful speech, I need to understand as thoroughly as possible the whole passage we’re studying because I can get questions on anything in the passage. Rather than being immersed in my message, I have to be immersed in the text itself.
The focus during the study time is not on my rhetorical skills, on how funny or moving I can be, but on how clearly they understand the Scriptures. Everything serves the purpose of teaching people the Bible. Should I tell a really funny story? Only if it helps people better understand the passage. Should I use a heart-wrenching account that’s sure to move people to tears? Only if it helps people better understand the passage! Interactive teaching enables the teacher to become more invisible, and it draws the people’s attention to where it should be: the scriptural text, the Word of God.
A focused teacher will even sacrifice good public speaking for the sake of effective teaching. That’s a hard adjustment for many who are used to preaching! For example, I often repeat illustrations, even though the people have heard them before. Actually, I intentionally do this knowing the people have heard them before. That’s not very good public speaking. So why do I do it? It’s not because I’m forgetful! No, I repeat these illustrations because they’re excellent at helping people understand certain biblical principles, and I want the people to remember and be able to use the illustrations themselves. I don’t use the illustrations to enhance my delivery; I use them to equip the people with tools they can readily use in their own lives and in discussion with others. I don’t want them to remember an illustration as a great story I told; I want them to remember it, and use it, because it helps them understand the Scriptures—and helps them help someone else understand the Scriptures.
It can inspire people to study the Scriptures on their own.
Rather than saying to themselves, “I don’t know how the teacher got those points from this passage, but that’s really impressive,” interactive study of the Bible can cause people to say, “Oh, wow, I’m seeing for myself how the text is making this point! I’m following the flow of this, and actually understanding it! This is amazing!” To borrow from the old saying, instead of giving them fish, this helps them learn how to fish for themselves. [And here’s a helpful tip: using a translation in our teaching that people can actually understand—without the need for the teacher to translate the translation(!)—helps greatly with this. It’s been wonderful to hear people tell me they’re understanding what they read in Scripture on their own for the first time in their lives.]
It can encourage more people to become teachers.
The unpleasant truth is there just aren’t that many really good preachers. Many churches endure preaching every week that is painfully subpar. This reality is even more evident today when we can watch the best preachers online anytime we like. The pressure is real and somewhat understandable; after all, if you’re doing all the talking, you should be really good at it! But the encouraging thing is there are a whole lot more people who can be effective teachers than can be excellent preachers! And seeing good quality teaching will often excite people that they can do this, too, instead of concluding they could never do what the preacher does.
It seems much more authentic to a lot of people.
To many—especially those without a church background—a typical church sermon can feel canned and artificial. At best, it’s still a presentation, and they’re constantly bombarded with presentations already. But if a church is studying the Scriptures together, and allowing people to ask any questions or even make any challenges about the text they’re studying—that feels real. I can’t tell you how many people have said to me something like, “Wow, you really take the Bible seriously. You’re okay with us checking everything out and asking you hard questions.”
For the reasons above (and I’m sure there are more I could have included), this kind of teaching can be a more effective tool for helping people be genuine disciples of Jesus Christ. But here are some potentially uncomfortable questions: Do we really want active participants . . . or would we prefer a passive audience? Do I want them to be moved by my message, or by the Scriptures themselves? Am I more invested in people appreciating my opening and my closing, laughing and crying and being excited in all the right places? Or is it more important to me they’re actually learning and understanding the Word of God? Do I want them leaving being impressed with me and my preaching—or excited, challenged and motivated by the truth of God we’ve studied together in Scripture? If I’m being honest with myself, what’s really most important to me?
Please understand, I’m not at all suggesting those who preach traditional sermons have wrong motives! There are so many wonderful servants of God who seek to faithfully serve through preaching week after week. I thank God for them. But we still should strive to be as biblical and as effective as we can be, and not be tied to traditional models, no matter how well-intended they are. I’m not saying those who preach traditional sermons have wrong motives—but I am saying interactive teaching is much more conducive to right motives. It helps get the focus off of us, and it becomes more about helping the people of God to better understand and live out the Word of God. Rather than training people to be a passive audience—dependent on me—this gives them an expectation of being active participants, and active disciples of Christ.
So why wouldn’t we teach interactively? Next week, we’ll look at some of the challenges of interactive teaching. If you’re thinking of benefits of interactive teaching I didn’t include, or if you have questions about any of this, please add a comment and share them with us!
Related posts:
Challenges of Interactive Teaching
Thanks, Lori!
Thanks, Kathy!