Preaching for Grateful Response: Connecting the Good News of Grace with the Call to Discipleship
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The homiletical relationship between proclaiming God’s grace and calling for obedience to God’s commands has long been the subject of debate. The result is an overarching sense of tension between these two important aspects of preaching (also described as gospel and law, indicative and imperative, proclamation and application, etc.). Attempts to frame a cooperative relationship between grace and obedience often mention the idea of “grateful response”: that is, Christians obey God because they are thankful for his grace. However, it appears that no one has given sustained attention to this concept or the role of thankfulness in preaching. This thesis argues that gratitude can serve as a homiletical link between grace and obedience, clarifying their relationship, and safeguarding against the traps of antinomianism and legalism. As an exercise in practical theology, it takes a correlative approach, bringing insights from multiple fields into conversation. First, it reviews relevant homiletical literature, with particular focus on the role of application (ethical and moral teaching) in sermons. Then, it establishes a strong biblical and theological foundation by examining: 1) recent New Testament scholarship, particularly the work of John Barclay, which establishes the close link between God’s grace and human response; and 2) the theology of John Calvin, in which gratitude and obedience to the commands of Scripture play key roles. The interdisciplinary field of gratitude studies provides a better understanding of the emotion of gratitude, how it is triggered, and its effectiveness as a motivator. Once this theoretical framework is established, insights are brought together to form a hermeneutic of grateful response. This consists of a basic two-part movement from evoking gratitude to invoking it in calling for obedience, as well as a more detailed eight-part framework that offers practical guidelines for Scriptural interpretation and sermon-crafting.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".