Author: Mike Roth

Keeping the Main Thing the Main Thing

/ Mike Roth / Leave a comment

Have you ever found in the middle of writing a sermon that you have ten minutes of preaching material that has nothing to do with your main idea? This is easy to do. Some possible factors…an unclear main idea, too much time on one point, an illustration that is over the top in length and detail or too much time explaining what the text is not saying. These are just a few reasons that the main thing ceases to be the main thing in our sermons.

Lately, our church has been working its way through Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount. A recent sermon covered Matthew 6:1-21. In this section, Jesus makes the point that our piety is to be sheltered from the sight of others. The world is to notice our gentle words (5:21-22); that we pursue reconciliation (5:23-26); that our relationships and vows are marked by fidelity (5:27-37); that we are charitable – even toward our enemies (5:38-48). According to Jesus, this is the kind of salt and light the world should taste and see (5:13-16). However, God alone is to taste and see our piety (6:1-21).

To preach this sermon, it could be very easy to slip into preaching what this passage isn’t saying instead of what it is saying. For example, it is not saying don’t pray corporately. It is not saying don’t tithe at church. It is not saying don’t pray with others. The list of what this passage is not saying could go on and on!

While it is important to address questions our congregations are asking when we preach, we must be careful not to lose sight of the main thing. So what do we do? I suggest speaking to the questions we know our listeners are asking. Otherwise, we will lose them as we continue forward while they sit in their questions. However, in our preparation, we must carefully monitor the time we allot to such caveats in our sermons. Otherwise, by the time and emphasis we give, we communicate a thing we do not intend to communicate. In this case, multiple points about what Jesus is not saying. This would be a tragedy.

Jesus is saying so much in this passage (6:1-21)! How are we known by the world? Are we known to go to church, pray at meal-time and tithe but unknown as kind speaking, reconciling acting, fidelity keeping kingdom participants? It is easier to do piety publicly than it is to live out chapter 5. Why… What motivates our hearts to piety? Is it the applause of others? Is it a spiritual checklist? Is it to worship and love our Lord? All of this and more (related to the main idea) is missed when we lose sight of communicating the main thing.

Balance Between Caution and Boldness?

/ Mike Roth / Leave a comment

In an article titled Considering Hearers, Haddon Robinson writes, “But if we focus too hard on not offending, or if we read too many letters from the offended, we can become paralyzed. We start qualifying every sentence. We end up with weasel sermons that are defensive, cautious, and spineless.”

I must admit, these words were much needed exhortation. Preaching on a regular basis to graduate educated, post-moderns, I have received my share of letters! Some letters are encouraging, some are rightfully corrective, but the vast majority are nitpicky. While we must do everything within our ability to preach sermons that carefully and lovingly consider the words we use, the tone we speak with and the illustrations we tell, we must not become overly careful and cautious. If we do, we risk speaking so broadly and generally, that we end up saying nothing at all.

So, how do we balance necessary caution and the proclamation of truth with boldness? Here is one suggestion: imaginary friends. Yes, you read it right – imaginary friends. Robinson calls this, “taking the listeners’ side.” As you write your sermon, imagine yourself surrounded by three, four, even five diverse people. For example, my five friends are named Chris, Victoria, Jeff, Ken and Elsa. Chris is deeply theological and socially oriented. Victoria is a product of the feminist movement, highly educated and politically savvy. Jeff is simple, homeless and wonderfully pragmatic. He loves to say, “so what.” Ken is white-collar, an MBA gradate, highly motivated and helpfully cynical. Elsa is a single mom, with many needs, endless strength and a passion for Jesus. I sit with these friends in my study every week I preach. I ask them questions and think through their answers. I make statements and ponder their responses. Considering these friends as I write sermons, helps me to be appropriately careful. It keeps me lovingly cautious.

A side benefit to this is that it also helps me to be relevant. Of course, I change my friends around every now and then. I add a young single man here and an elderly woman there… The purpose of this is to strike a balance of caution and boldness in the sermons I preach. I have found this to help.

Other suggestions?

Introductions: Introducing What?

/ Mike Roth / 4 Comments

Tim, you ask a very God-honoring question when it comes to homiletical introduction. Creating or surfacing need is certainly part of what an introduction must do. In fact, as Peter states in his 5/11/2007 entry, an introduction must do four things. It must get attention, create rapport, establish authority and create or surface need. Yet, for these four components to be God-honoring and not man-honoring (which I believe gets at the heart of your question), David Buttrick, in Homiletic Moves and Structures makes a very important point. He states that an introduction must do two things. First, it must give focus to consciousness. Second, it must provide some sort of hermeneutical orientation.

Buttrick is not contradicting the points that Peter makes. In fact, within his chapter on introductions, he makes some of the very same points. Rather, Buttrick establishes an overarching principle that is to contour and influence the direction of the points that Peter makes. In other words, while doing all that Peter has encouraged us to do in an introduction, focus and orientation to the text must occur. This can be difficult. It is much easier get attention, create rapport, establish authority and surface need autonomous from the text that is supposed to be introduced. This happens all the time in preaching and it is a colossal error.

It is all too easy to imagine isn’t it? The preacher stands, opens his Bible, takes out his notes and begins. He starts by catching attention and building rapport through funny or shocking stories. The audience laughs or gasps – sometimes both simultaneously (it is a weird sort of convulsion). The room emits an ethos of warmth and openness and then, the preacher begins to preach. The problem is that the first five minutes had nothing to do with the sermon. The congregation is now enthralled with the preacher not the passage. So, after “warming-up” and “catching the attention” of the congregation, the preacher has to spend another five minutes on a second introduction – this time, focusing on the Word of God. This is a terrible waste of time.

To be clear, the four points that Peter makes need to happen in an introduction. However, they must happen in a way that focuses consciousness and provides some sort of hermeneutical orientation to the passage that is going to be preached. This will take more preparation time, and a lot more effort, but it is worth it. We must capture the attention of our audience while concurrently directing them toward God and His Word. Any other result is not an introduction.

Preaching OT – one more tip

/ Mike Roth / 2 Comments

Fantastic jump into a pool of muddy water Peter! It seems as though many preaching practitioners prefer the easy way out when it comes to communicating the Old Testament through homily. Short-cuts of allegorizing, spiritualizing, exhortation to imitate characters, moralizing or, with OT texts, jumping to Jesus is common and simultaneously disastrous. Your tips are a wonderful beginning point. They are helpful in assisting the preacher to think bigger and better!

Here is another tip that relates to preaching OT narrative and other biblical genres as well. Sidney Greidanus gives voice to this tip in his book, The Modern Preacher and The Ancient Text. In it, he introduces a theocentric versus anthropocentric hermeneutic for homiletics. Though this is nothing new, and has certainly been addressed in homiletic/literary circles before by Ryken, Von Rad and the like, the central idea is fundamental to consider when preaching OT narrative.

According to Greidanus, God is the central character and not any other – Saul, David, Elijah, Nehemiah are all secondary. More than this, Greidanus argues that narrative (to be clear, all of Scripture) is making a theocentric point not an anthropocentric point. Now, I am not convinced that this is the case all of the time, in every pericope of Scripture. However, it is fodder for thought.

When considering the point of narrative, it is not enough to simply consider the characters. It is not enough to consider plot – background, inciting incident, rising action, climax and denouement. All of these aspects of narrative are necessary to interpretation, however, without consideration of God, his role, interaction, characterization, etc. narrative becomes nothing more than human-driven moralizing. Certainly, we hold Scripture to a higher standard than this. It is why we refer to Scripture as Revelation, not Humanities 101.

So, enough pontificating in my first post! Here is a summary:

– When working at preaching an OT narrative, do not forget to consider God.
– Ask, what is being said about God?
– Think about how the narrative and its characters depict God.
– Wrestle with how the points being made about God within the narrative contour and give shape to what the secondary characters value and how they live.
– Finally, being that we are all characters similar to Saul, David, Elijah and Nehemiah – a part of the same biblical story, how do we relate to this God?