I know that the monologue sermon form (sometimes with a preacher's chosen pattern such as three points) is a common model but when you sample the rich variety of New Testament words for preaching there is little evidence that early preaching resembles what has become the norm for us today No one can be dogmatic about what a sermon should look like. There are no uniform packages or pigeonholes in the New Testament. I once wrote: 'In the twenty-first century no one can authoritatively declare that one size fits all or that there is one biblical pattern. There has never been one ordained pattern, and in our age of turbulent change, we should expect just as much diversity as we find in the New Testament'. (360degree preaching)
The two voices of dualoguing can bring many advantages:
- Freshness in preparation - when two people pray and exegete Scripture together it takes more time and much more listening to each other and to God. When people really immerse in Scripture together with preaching in mind it both concentrates and expands the preparation process.
- Wideness in expression - two people brings different voices, experiences, and styles into one sermon. For listeners, the relevance likely reaches wider.
- Deepening of experience. On Sunday I was working with a young person with very little preaching experience. Her willingness to share with me in preparation and to participate in prehearsal where we preached our notes to each other provided a good model of two-way team learning. At one point I was too complicated and she agreed. With gifted would-be preachers I wonder whether this might prove an effective resource - teaming them up with experienced preachers?