October 25, 2026 · 22th Sunday after Pentecost (Proper 25) · No sign-in needed
October 25 Sunday Sermon Passages — 22nd Sunday after Pentecost: six ways in
This Sunday's readings pull in different directions: one names the whole law in a single command, one watches a leader die without reaching the goal, and two mark Reformation Sunday if your church keeps it. Each option below sketches a different sermon, not a ranking. Skim the pitch and fit for each, then read the one that actually matches your people this week.
Which passage will you preach this Sunday?
These are passages a sermon can take on this Sunday. The order is not a ranking — read the introductions, then tap the one that draws you and it opens below.
Passages follow the Revised Common Lectionary (RCL); “Occasion” passages are options we add for the season. If your church follows its own calendar or preaches through a book, carry on as you were.
Gospel
Matthew 22:34-46 Two Commandments, One Life
If you choose this passage, the sermon becomes a sermon about what actually holds a whole life with God together once every rule gets reduced to one word: love.
The passage at a glance
- A legal expert tests Jesus with the biggest question in Jewish law: which command matters most.
- Jesus names two that cannot be separated — love God with everything, love neighbor as yourself — and says the rest of Scripture hangs on them.
- Then Jesus turns the question back on the Pharisees, asking how the Messiah can be both David's son and David's lord, and no one can answer.
Ways the sermon can go
The weight of 'all'
Preach the three-fold 'all' — heart, soul, mind — as a summons to an undivided life, not a checklist; it costs the comfort of compartmentalized faith.
Love as the hinge, not an addition
Show how neighbor-love flows out of God-love rather than standing beside it as a second, separate rule; the risk is flattening the distinction between the two.
The unanswerable question
Preach the David's son and David's lord riddle as a question about who Jesus is, not about ethics; it costs losing the more obviously usable first half of the passage.
Where sermons commonly slip
Turning love into sentiment
Preaching love as a feeling instead of a committed direction of the will drains the command of the force Jesus gives it.
Skipping the second half
Dropping verses 41 to 46 because they are harder leaves the question the passage itself raises about Jesus unanswered.
Three things to check on the recording afterwards
- Did the sermon name one concrete neighbor the congregation could love this week, or did 'neighbor' stay abstract?
- How many times did the sermon use the word 'all' describing the first commandment, and did it ever unpack what 'all' costs?
- Did the sermon address verses 41 to 46 at all, or stop at verse 40?
One application for this week
Call one person you've been avoiding this week and ask how they're doing — not to fix anything, just to listen.
Recent research on this passage
Kordin Sagala, Ayub Rusmanto (2023). Kualitas Kehidupan Religiusitas Kristen di Tengah Masyarakat Pluralitas Berdasarkan Kajian Teologis Matius 22:34-40. Philoxenia Jurnal Teologi dan Pendidikan Kristiani. Read the article
According to the abstract, the article argues that the command to love God and neighbor in Matthew 22:34-40 gives Christians their calling inside a religiously plural society, and that separating love for God from love for others misses the point of the text.
What would it look like for this congregation to love neighbors who hold a different faith, without diluting devotion to God?
Epistle
1 Thessalonians 2:1-8 A Minister's Open Hands
If you choose this passage, the sermon becomes a sermon about what it costs to speak for God with no hidden agenda.
The passage at a glance
- Paul reminds the Thessalonians that his visit was not wasted despite the suffering and opposition that preceded it.
- He insists his motives were never flattery, greed, or a search for praise, but simply the approval of God who tests hearts.
- He compares his care for them to a nursing mother, gentle enough to hand over not just a message but his own life.
Ways the sermon can go
Integrity under pressure
Preach the contrast between speaking to please people and speaking to please God who tests hearts; it costs naming manipulative patterns some listeners may recognize in themselves.
The nursing-mother image
Explore gentleness as a form of strength using the maternal image Paul reaches for; it risks sentimentality if you drop the boldness named earlier in the passage.
Giving your own self, not just your message
Preach what it costs to be present to people, not just correct about them; it costs time most leaders assume they don't have.
Where sermons commonly slip
Making it only about clergy
If the sermon only addresses pastors, every parent, teacher, and friend who speaks into someone else's life misses themselves in the text.
Turning self-defense into self-congratulation
Paul is answering real accusations; preaching this as simple praise for good motives ignores the conflict underneath it.
Three things to check on the recording afterwards
- Did the sermon name any listener besides the pastor who 'speaks for God' to someone else — a parent, a teacher, a friend?
- How many times did the sermon use the nursing-mother image, and did it explain what the image is doing in the argument?
- Did the sermon address the accusation Paul is answering, or only the positive description of his ministry?
One application for this week
Write down one relationship where you've been speaking to be approved of rather than to tell the truth, and have one honest conversation this week.
Recent research on this passage
H.J. Prinsloo (2023). A text-centred rhetorical analysis of 1 Thessalonians 2:1–12. Stellenbosch Theological Journal. Read the article
According to the abstract, the article argues that Paul's defense of his motives in 1 Thessalonians 2:1-12 works because he already has a trusting relationship with the church, so he is answering outside accusations rather than proving himself from scratch.
Does this congregation already trust you enough that defending your motives would sound like reassurance rather than special pleading?
Old Testament
Deuteronomy 34:1-12 Seeing the Land You Won't Enter
If you choose this passage, the sermon becomes a sermon about finishing well when the goal you worked for your whole life is given to someone else.
The passage at a glance
- Moses climbs Mount Nebo and God shows him the whole land he will never enter.
- Moses dies there, buried by God in a place no one has ever found, and Israel mourns him for thirty days.
- Joshua, already filled with the spirit of wisdom, takes up the leadership, though the text insists no prophet like Moses ever rose again.
Ways the sermon can go
The unfinished life
Preach the ache of seeing the goal without reaching it, staying honest about grief rather than rushing to resolution; it costs sitting in lament longer than feels comfortable.
Succession and letting go
Focus on how leadership passes to Joshua while Moses is still alive to see it start; it costs naming what it feels like to hand off work you still want to do.
A grave no one can find
Explore why God alone buries Moses and hides the site; it risks speculative answers the text itself does not give.
Where sermons commonly slip
Making Moses a tragic figure
Treating his death as pure defeat ignores that the text frames it as God's act, not an unresolved punishment.
Jumping straight to Jesus as the greater Moses
Typology has a place, but reaching for it immediately can skip past what this passage says about ordinary endings and succession.
Three things to check on the recording afterwards
- Did the sermon name an actual transition happening in this church or in a listener's life, or stay general about 'endings'?
- Did the sermon address why Moses was kept out of the land, or leave that question hanging?
- How did the sermon handle verse 10's claim that no prophet like Moses arose again — explained or skipped?
One application for this week
Ask someone older than you in the congregation what they hope the church becomes after they're no longer leading it, and just listen.
Old Testament · alternate
Leviticus 19:1-2,15-18 Holiness Measured in the Courtroom and the Heart
If you choose this passage, the sermon becomes a sermon about what holiness actually requires in ordinary dealings with neighbors — fair judgment, no grudges, no secret hatred.
The passage at a glance
- God tells Israel to be holy because God is holy, then immediately defines holiness in terms of neighbor relations.
- Judges must not favor the poor or defer to the powerful, and everyone must judge fairly.
- The chapter forbids slander, forbids silent hatred, forbids revenge, and ends by commanding love of neighbor as the alternative to all of it.
Ways the sermon can go
Holiness as social practice
Preach holiness as something enacted in disputes and daily fairness rather than private devotion alone; it costs confronting specific unfairness in the room.
The hidden sin of silent hatred
Focus on verse 17's command not to hate in your heart, naming grudge-holding as a holiness issue; it risks moralizing without offering a way out.
Impartial justice toward both poor and powerful
Preach verse 15's double warning against favoring either side, relevant to any community with visible wealth gaps; it costs naming actual favoritism patterns.
Where sermons commonly slip
Treating holiness as only about purity rules
Skipping straight to ritual holiness ignores that this passage defines holiness almost entirely in terms of justice and relationships.
Quoting verse 18 without verses 15-17
Preaching 'love your neighbor' in isolation loses the specific legal and relational failures the command is answering.
Three things to check on the recording afterwards
- Did the sermon connect holiness explicitly to fairness or justice, or default to personal purity language?
- Did the sermon name both forms of favoritism in verse 15 — toward the poor and toward the powerful — or only one?
- Did the sermon treat the command against silent hatred in verse 17 as its own point, or fold it into the love command without comment?
One application for this week
Think of one person you've quietly held a grudge against, and have one honest conversation with them this week instead of staying silent.
Recent research on this passage
Peter Olanrewaju Awojobi (2024). A HERMENEUTICAL STUDY OF LEVITICUS 19: 15 AND ITS IMPLICATIONS FOR JUDGES IN NIGERIAN DEMOCRATIC CONTEXT. Global Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. Read the article
According to the abstract, the article uses Leviticus 19:15's command for impartial justice to evaluate the failures of judges in ancient Israel and applies that standard to judicial conduct in a modern democratic context.
Where in this community's institutions does impartial judgment actually get tested, the way verse 15 assumes it will be?
Kyungmin Cha (2025). Social Ethics in the Holiness Code — “Your Fellow Citizen (עמיתך)” and “Your Neighbor (רעך)” in Leviticus 19:11–18. 신학연구. Read the article
According to the abstract, the article traces how verses 11 through 18 alternate between the terms 'your fellow citizen' and 'your neighbor' to build one argument joining justice in daily life and in the courtroom to the inner discipline of not hating, so the final command to love your neighbor completes rather than replaces the legal demands before it.
Does the sermon show how the courtroom commands in verses 15-16 and the heart command in verse 17 are one argument, not two separate topics?
Occasion · if your church observes Reformation Sunday (last Sunday of October)
Romans 3:19-28 No One Boasts, Everyone Is Justified the Same Way
If you choose this passage, the sermon becomes a sermon about what changes when no human effort can put anyone ahead of anyone else before God.
The passage at a glance
- Paul argues that the law's job is to silence every excuse, not to make anyone righteous.
- Because all alike have fallen short, God's righteousness comes a different way — a gift received through faith in Christ, not earned by keeping rules.
- That gift removes the ground for boasting, since Jew and Gentile stand on the same footing before God.
Ways the sermon can go
The end of comparison
Preach how justification by faith removes ranking people by religious performance, naming comparison habits in the room; it costs admitting your own scorekeeping.
Grace and law held together, not opposed
Address the fork many churches disagree on — whether this passage retires the law or redefines its purpose; it costs disappointing anyone wanting a clean answer.
A gift that still requires faith
Preach the tension between 'gift' and 'through faith,' showing faith as reception rather than achievement; it risks sounding like faith becomes a new work if phrased carelessly.
Where sermons commonly slip
Turning justification into an abstract transaction
Explaining the doctrine only in legal or financial metaphors can lose the relief Paul is actually describing for anxious people.
Overstating the law's abolition
Paul says the law's purpose is exposed, not that the law is worthless; preaching its disappearance goes further than the passage allows.
Three things to check on the recording afterwards
- Did the sermon name a specific way people here try to earn approval, or stay in doctrinal language throughout?
- Did the sermon explain what 'boasting' meant in Paul's context, or leave the word unexplained?
- Did the sermon address how the law still functions after this passage, or only how it stopped functioning?
One application for this week
Write down one thing you've been quietly relying on to feel acceptable to God or to others, and tell one trusted person about it this week.
Recent research on this passage
Mestriyati Boangmanalu, Warseto Freddy Sihombing, Hanna Dewi Aritonang, Robert Juni Tua Sitio 외 (2024). Kajian Teologis Tentang Konsep Keselamatan Karena Anugerah Menurut Roma 3:23-26 dan Relevansinya Terhadap Pemahaman Jemaat GKPPD Masa Kini.. Tri Tunggal. Read the article
According to the abstract, the article argues that salvation by grace in Romans 3:23-26 remains the core of Christian teaching, and that congregations who still try to earn salvation through law-keeping are missing what the passage actually says.
Where does this specific congregation still act as if obedience earns what grace already gave?
Roy Haries Ifraldo Tambun (2025). Dibenarkan oleh Iman, Bukan Perbuatan: Refleksi Pembenaran Menurut Roma 3:21-31. KHARISMATA Jurnal Teologi Pantekosta. Read the article
According to the abstract, the article argues that justification in Romans 3:21-31 comes entirely from God's righteousness rather than human deeds, which removes any basis for feeling superior to someone else over religious performance.
What would change in how this church talks about other Christians or other traditions if performance-based superiority were actually off the table?
Occasion · if your church observes Reformation Sunday (last Sunday of October)
John 8:31-36 Freedom That Comes From Staying, Not Striving
If you choose this passage, the sermon becomes a sermon about what real freedom is, against the assumption that freedom means no restraint at all.
The passage at a glance
- Jesus tells people who have just believed that staying in his word is what makes them real disciples.
- The crowd objects that as Abraham's children they have never been enslaved, but Jesus answers that sin itself is a kind of slavery no bloodline escapes.
- Freedom, he says, comes from the Son, and it lasts because the Son has a permanent place in the household, not because of ancestry or achievement.
Ways the sermon can go
Freedom as belonging, not autonomy
Preach freedom as a secure place in a household rather than the absence of restraint; it costs challenging a culture that equates freedom with no obligations.
Abiding as the mark of a real disciple
Address the condition in verse 31 — discipleship proven over time by staying, not by a one-time decision; it costs naming comfortable believers who never continued.
Slavery to sin as a diagnosis, not an insult
Preach the slave and son contrast as describing a shared condition before it changes; it risks sounding harsh unless paired with the offer of freedom that follows.
Where sermons commonly slip
Making freedom mean independence
If freedom here gets preached as self-determination, it contradicts the passage's own picture of freedom as belonging to the Son's household.
Skipping the conflict with 'the Jews'
The sharp exchange in this passage needs careful handling; ignoring it or reading it without context both distort the text.
Three things to check on the recording afterwards
- Did the sermon define freedom the way the passage does — through belonging to the Son's household — or slide into a generic definition?
- Did the sermon address verse 31's condition of 'abiding,' including what it means to not abide?
- How did the sermon handle the exchange with 'the Jews' in this passage — named, explained, or passed over?
One application for this week
Name one commitment you've quietly stopped abiding in — a practice, a relationship, a promise — and recommit to it concretely this week.
Recent research on this passage
Christopher C. Burns (2026). ‘The Truth Will Set You Free’ in Context: John 8:31–36 Reconsidered. The Expository Times. Read the article
According to the abstract, the article argues that the grammar of this passage builds one coherent picture: discipleship proven by staying rather than by an initial decision, knowledge gained through ongoing participation, and freedom as deliverance by the Son rather than self-achieved independence.
Does the sermon's definition of freedom match the passage's grammar, where freedom is granted and belongs to someone, rather than simply the absence of constraint?
Hymelong Douanla Josine (2024). Ethnic Reading of ‘The Jews’ in John 8:31–59 Through Durkheimian and Barthian Sociological Lenses. The Expository Times. Read the article
According to the abstract, the article argues that the term 'the Jews' in this section functions as a social and rhetorical boundary marker in the narrative, not a simple ethnic label, shaping how the conflict in the passage should be read.
How will the sermon describe the group John calls 'the Jews' in a way that doesn't flatten them into a timeless stereotype?
From recent (2023 onward) scholarly articles we chose only those likely to help a preacher read this passage. Citations come from OpenAlex and Crossref and each DOI was checked; summaries paraphrase the abstract alone. A paraphrased abstract cannot stand in for the argument. Read the article itself before you use it in a sermon. We did not check journal rank or the rigor of peer review — articles were chosen only for relevance to the passage.
Get a report on your recording of this sermonWhat is Preaching Lab?