A comparison of receptivity to the deductive and inductive methods of preaching in the Pioneer Memorial Church

Dwight K Nelson

Etd

A comparison of receptivity to the deductive and inductive methods of preaching in the Pioneer Memorial Church

Public Deposited

MLA citation style (9th ed.)

Dwight K Nelson. A Comparison of Receptivity to the Deductive and Inductive Methods of Preaching In the Pioneer Memorial Church. Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary of Andrews University. rim.ir.atla.com/concern/etds/4606f1c9-f06e-4a1f-a415-3802526993c9.

APA citation style (7th ed.)

D. K. Nelson. A comparison of receptivity to the deductive and inductive methods of preaching in the Pioneer Memorial Church. https://rim.ir.atla.com/concern/etds/4606f1c9-f06e-4a1f-a415-3802526993c9

Chicago citation style (CMOS 17, author-date)

Dwight K Nelson. A Comparison of Receptivity to the Deductive and Inductive Methods of Preaching In the Pioneer Memorial Church. Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary of Andrews University. https://rim.ir.atla.com/concern/etds/4606f1c9-f06e-4a1f-a415-3802526993c9.

Note: These citations are programmatically generated and may be incomplete.

Creator

Dwight K Nelson

Keyword

Rights Statement

In Copyright

Abstract

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, the project sought 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. Eight sermons were preached that 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. It was discovered that in numerous instances the listeners demonstrated a wide range of responses and preferences that prevents any categorical advocacy of one method over the other. Listeners preferred a combining of the two methods of preaching.

Publisher