Biblical preaching needs to be relevant. It can’t simply be a theological lecture or a vaguely devotional time-out. It needs to be relevant. There are some who suggest that every sermon must include a series of action steps in order to be considered relevant. Would you agree with that idea? Are relevance and application close to the same, like twins in the preaching family, or are they more like cousins? What is the connection between relevance and application?
Determine the congregational need for the text to be preached. Perhaps there is a lack of understanding of the meaning and relevance of the text, so the message should inform. Perhaps there is a lack of emotional engagement with the meaning and relevance of the text, so the message should stir. Perhaps there is a lack of practical application of the meaning and relevance of the text, so the message should prompt and motivate action. Perhaps there is actually little lacking and the message should encourage and affirm. Perhaps in most situations it will be a combination of several of these.
Encourage application, but also the process that will lead to application. When the text sets up practical applicational action steps, then by all means communicate those clearly. However, simply giving people a list of application steps may be counterproductive. Too many lists, too little time – the reality felt by some listeners. Perhaps sometimes we should suggest possible areas or directions of application, but primarily encourage further prayerful study of the passage as the next step. Our task as preachers is not to be the only source of spiritual prompting, but to stimulate our listeners in their personal walk with the Lord.
A sermon can be highly relevant, even without the to-do list to close. What do you think?
Biblical Preaching 
“A sermon can be highly relevant, even without the to-do list to close.”
I would concur. I would add that I’ve seen (or heard rather) at least a few sermons in my day that had a lot of application, but it wasn’t really relevant to the audience.
A sermon can be very relevant, touching on areas germane to the audience, but without application. Perhaps the application is implied or left for the audience to figure out or perhaps the preacher was negligent.
For example, giving the Gospel is very relevant for a non-Christian, but the preacher may not actually exhort them to do what they need to do: “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved.”
I’m probably not alone here, but I think it’s good to have application and relevance AND to have relevant application.
😉
Peter,
I’m thinking about this one.
As I read, I was thinking about how important a pastoral relationship is with his congregation. I love having a lot of time on the mountain top to prepare great messages, but if my pastoral care is not on its game, my sermons lack that special relevance. Even when I get busy, God gives extra grace. When I am not busy but want grace, sometimes the grace seems absent.
Relevance/Application? I say cousins, not identical twins. We can be relevant with historical data and not be relevant with our applications. We should make the whole sermon from intro to benediction relevant IMHO.
chip.
I see relevance and application more as marriage partners–in order to have a thriving marriage, both must put in the effort to make it work. Otherwise, the marriage isn’t near what it could and should be.
My situation is a little different than most of yours–I lead a network of micro-churches. I can’t be everywhere at once, so we produce in-house preaching videos. Each church spends time watching the videos, but then spends time discussing the message… much of which is on application. We’ve found that it “sticks” much better than a stand-alone sermon (people forget something like 90+% of what they hear after 72 hours), and our people can hold each other accountable for applying it to their lives. My job with the preaching videos is to show how the text is relevant, and start the application process. The post-sermon discussion continues the application process.
Chances are, most of the readers of this blog preach in a more traditional setting. I would suggest gearing your small group structure (whether it’s Sunday School or groups that meet in homes, coffee shops, etc.) around the message. That way, the entire church is headed in the same direction.
By the way, I dig the blog, Peter. Some great food for thought.
awsaufley,
Just a tad jelous of your preaching style. It would strecth me a bunch but I’m glad your speaking to this ever-changing society.
Blessings to you and your group.
chip.
Through another website that linked this blog entry, I ran across this discussion. I can really appreciate the weight of the problem in always needing to find applications to the message. When you study a passage like Exodus 33:18ff, I think the magnificence of God’s glory is the greatest focus in those verses. While there is a lot to the passage, I think trying to find a cute little application is insulting to what we see of God. I think that personally we need to just be in awe of God as we study through a passage. The application comes from seeing and savoring God even more.