Author: Peter Mead

Review: Explosive Preaching, by Ron Boyd-MacMillan

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Subtitle: Letters on Detonating the Gospel in the 21st Century.

explosivepreaching

Published in 2006 by Paternoster.

I partially reviewed this book several weeks ago.  Please take a look at that “pre-review” (click here).  My opinion of the book has not changed as I’ve finished it.  It is creative, insightful, humorous, challenging and helpful.  There are small moments where you may find it annoying, but better to provoke reaction than to leave no mark at all!

To be honest the third section, on the history of preaching, was decent and helpful, but perhaps not quite as good as I’d hoped for.  Nevertheless, it is worth reading.  The final section, on the life of the preacher, is excellent.  Although somewhat scattered with a feel of “mopping up” the bits that were left over, these chapters were nevertheless worth the price of the book.

I have heard that this book is hard to get hold of in the USA.  If that is the case, then it is a real shame.  Even if you need to order the book from a UK seller on Amazon marketplace, I would encourage you to do so (I order books from the US this way at times, and have never had a problem).

A lot of book about preaching tend to say the same thing again.  This one doesn’t.

Preaching Curriculum

/ Peter Mead / 31 Comments

We all have our unique interests.  One of mine is curricula.  I love looking at the curricula of Bible schools, or helping to think through new possibilities for Bible schools (perhaps adding a second year to a one year program, etc.)  So perhaps it is only me that would enjoy the last of the chapters in Explosive Preaching, where the author describes the one-year curriculum he helped to design for a house-church movement in China.  The radical design is worth sharing, not only for those who share my fascination with things academic, but for all of us as a good nudge in our level of preparation for preaching.  Here’s the 66:33:1 curriculum:

66 – Each student, by the end of the year, has to be ready to preach (without notes) a one-hour sermon on each of the 66 books of the Bible.  This sermon is to include an outline of the content of the book, and contemporary application to the individual, the church and the nation of China.  At the end of the year, 3 books would be selected at random, then the student has five seconds to launch into their message.

33 – Each student had to prepare 33 one-hour sermons on the life and work of Christ, each based on a single verse (only 10 allowed from outside the gospels).  His whole ministry must be covered, from pre-existence to second coming (although I’d suggest His ministry extends beyond the second coming!)  Interestingly, students are allowed one page of notes per sermon in this category!

1 – Each student has to prepare an “end-of time” sermon – any length (since time constraints are irrelevant in eternity).  The goal is to help the student consider the whole salvation story from God’s point of view.  Perhaps at the great feast we will get to enjoy such a sermon looking back over it all . . . but would we be ready to give the sermon?

So there it is.  A creative and probably very effective curriculum.  If you had one year to train a preacher, what would you include?

Preaching and Pace

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

The title today is surely misleading.  A few weeks ago I asked “What font do you preach in?” and received comments with suggestions on the best font to use for powerpoint.  Oops, it is a good idea to read the post before sharing your timely tips!  Nevertheless, I leave today’s title as it is.

I’m going to keep this post short.  Again, it is prompted by one of the last chapters in Explosive Preaching. It is prompted by the importance of preaching out of fellowship with God.  In the book a fantastic conversation is recounted, a conversation between the author and a Chinese pastor kept in solitary confinement for many years.  So much to benefit from that brief conversation – the notion of simplifying life (building a cell), in order to enjoy fellowship with God (the cell becomes a garden, and God becomes a friend).  But here’s the simple quote I want to share, a quote that may touch a nerve for many of us:

Fellowship pace is a lot slower than service pace.

Have we allowed ourselves to grow accustomed to “service pace” – cantering along and expecting God to jog along next to us?  Perhaps we need to make the necessary moves in order to free up the space and slow down to “fellowship pace.”  God walked in the garden with Adam, I suspect many of us are subconsciously wondering why He doesn’t jog in the busy city with us.  Pace and preaching.  Important to get this one figured out.

Is It Wrong to Desire Influence?

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Most chapters in Explosive Preaching prompt me to think of several posts.  Hopefully Boyd-MacMillan will forgive my leaning on his book for ideas so often in recent weeks in exchange for my encouragement to others to buy it for themselves.  Chapter 28 in the book is a chapter that stands out as unlike anything I’ve come across in other preaching books (I appreciate that, as I also get feedback that this blog contains things not found in preaching books too!)

Success.

Is it wrong to desire it?  This chapter focuses on three very diverse preachers – Billy Graham, Martin Luther-King Jr and Robert Schuller.  The author writes, “They all became influential preachers.  But they all wanted to become influential preachers.  They were not modest in their desire for influence, nor bashful in the way that they sought to extend their influence.” (p237)

He goes on to write under several headings: the sermon, the person, the wave, the moment, the movement, the network, the event.  His conclusion, the lesson he learns from these men is “if you want to be an influential preacher, then don’t just preach a great sermon!” He sees their concern with reception and reverberation.  Reception refers to their making sure that their words were heard optimally.  Reverberation meant ensuring that their words would be heard long after delivery.

I suppose this is a matter of prayerful balance.  We desire to influence others as good stewards of the ministry that God gives us.  Yet we feel very uncomfortable at the suggestion that we should pursue influence (or “success” in any human measurement).  I know this post could prompt a strong reaction.  I suspect it may get a reaction that is unfair to the book that prompted the post.  I would encourage you to read the book.  I would encourage you to prayerfully wrestle with the issues raised in this post.  Fleshly or spiritual, a desire for influence is very real in most of us – let’s not ignore that, but rather prayerfully wrestle with the issue.

How Would Jesus Preach?

/ Peter Mead / 3 Comments

I have been impressed and helped by Explosive Preaching (written by Ron Boyd-MacMillan).  I’ll share a couple more highlights and then finish with a final review of the book.

Near the end of the book, MacMillan shares some tips for effective preaching from the example of Jesus.  I won’t go into detail in my words or his, but here is the list (to get the detail, buy the book!)

1.    Great preaching starts with great praying.
2.    Be the word you preach
3.    Mint punch lines and master the two-minute story.
4.    Try the open air
5.    To communicate the gospel, don’t just preach
6.    Remember to be revolutionary
7.    Get over crowds
8.    It’s OK to shock
9.    Preach by dying

Some of these are self-explanatory, others are probably only tantalizing if you’ve not read the book.  However, the concept is important – what can we learn from the preaching of Jesus?  Would you add to the list?  What have you learned about preaching from observing Him preach in the gospels?

Disturbing Feedback

/ Peter Mead / 6 Comments

Yesterday I made a passing comment about “disturbing feedback.”  Let me begin with yesterday’s example and then add some more.  They tend to speak for themselves.  Don’t be too encouraged when you hear these kinds of comments after your preaching:

“Ooo, I never would have seen that in that passage!”

“As ever, such a rich message.  I mean, real steak that, really rich.” (This could be good feedback, but it depends on whether they could chew the steak or not!)

“I’m amazed at the long words you know.”

“I can’t wait to come back next Sunday, I need more Bible in my life!”

“I really enjoyed that story you told about the German sailor in the storm during the war, I’ll never forget that illustration!”

“If only I had gone to seminary, then I’d be able to be as clever as you!”

“Don’t worry about finishing fifteen minutes late, the nursery workers said the kids were really burning up some energy in there!”

“If I knew my Bible like you do, then I wouldn’t need to keep going to the table of contents every thirty seconds to find the passages you were quoting!”

“Phew!  I’m out of breath!  What a journey through the whole Bible you took us on today!”

“You’re right, we do need to try harder to live better.”

“You tell ‘em, preacher, they really need to hear that!”

“I don’t suppose we’ll ever know what Paul meant in that passage, will we?”

“I like Jesus, shame he’s not around today to fix all our problems!”

“I’m with you, let’s be as good as we can and then we’ll all get to heaven!”

And how about this one, simply because I have to stop somewhere:

“I loved that quote – ‘By all means preach the gospel, and if necessary use words.’ – fantastic!  Now I know I don’t need to ever say anything, just live well.  Thanks!”

What would you add?  Not necessarily from personal experience, although if you have any . . .

More Sneaky Landmines

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Last week I shared three sneaky landmines that every preacher faces in the ministry. I appreciated the good comments by Larry and Sudhir, so thought I’d bring their suggestions to the fore in this post. More landmines:

Thinking we need something new to say – Now just because a take on a passage has been the main one offered for generations does not make it right. Sometimes the church does put a spin on the truth or downright miss the point for long periods of time. However, as a preacher, my job is not to continually come up with something new. The ageless truth of the Bible, preached again with clarity and emphasizing the particular relevance for these listeners – that is the goal. And if you have a new view untouched by past generations and the scholars on your shelf of commentaries? Probably delay preaching that message for a few weeks, pray it through more and get into conversation with some trusted advisers . . . then if it is what the Bible teaches, preach it!

Majoring on Distinctive Minors – That’s not a new chord progression for the guitarist, it’s a temptation we all face. It is tempting to major on the minors that make us (my theology, our denomination, etc.) distinctive from others. Preach the dominant thought in each unit of thought, don’t make it your goal to always get this feedback: “Ooo, I never would have seen that in that passage!” (This is disturbing feedback!)

Pointing the Preaching Finger at Someone – You know who is at the forefront of your mind. That face that is constantly there as you prepare your message. Perhaps a critic. Perhaps someone who has angered you. Perhaps someone who has made it their mission to bring you down, so you are tempted to make it your mission to launch applicational mortars from the relative security of the pulpit. Don’t. Preach the Word for the benefit of all. Don’t take aim and fire cheap shots. To do so is a poor strategy on many levels, not least the spiritual level!

Preaching and Biblical Theology – Side 3

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

One last time, the basic definition of “Biblical Theology” that I am leaning on for this series of posts: Biblical theology is the fruit of studying the Bible in such a way as to recognize the individuality of each biblical author, the progress of revelation over time and the unity of the canon resulting from the inspired nature of Scripture. The question is whether our preaching neglects one side of this triangle?  So far we have looked at the issue of authorial individuality (both in style/vocabulary and in content/theology) and the progressive nature of revelation.  Now let’s look at the third “side of the triangle:”

The Unity of the Canon – We have 66 books written by roughly 40 authors.  Yet each was fully inspired and therefore there is an essential unity to the canon, forty authors, but also One Author.  When we preach the Bible as a human-only book, when we preach the Bible as tips from sages past, when we fail to preach the Bible as the theocentric self-revelation that it is, then we neglect the unity of the canon.

Guidelines – Recognize that your preaching passage does not stand separate from the rest of the canon, but carefully consider if and how to demonstrate the consistency of the Bible’s message (this is not necessary in every message, but should be an attitude consistently underlying our preaching, and purposefully demonstrated when considered helpful).

Again, there’s much more that could be said, but I’ll leave it there for you to take up the discussion.  Comments always welcome here!

Preaching and Biblical Theology – Side 2

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Here’s the basic definition of “Biblical Theology” that I am leaning on for this series of posts: Biblical theology is the fruit of studying the Bible in such a way as to recognize the individuality of each biblical author, the progress of revelation over time and the unity of the canon resulting from the inspired nature of Scripture. The question is whether our preaching neglects one side of this triangle?  Yesterday I considered the issue of authorial individuality (both in style/vocabulary and in content/theology).  Now let’s look at the second “side of the triangle:”

The Progress of Revelation – Over time, the revelation from God progressed.  If our Bible’s stopped at Genesis 3, we’d know very little.  If our Bibles stopped at Malachi, we’d be at a loss.  Our Bibles do not stop at Deuteronomy, or Malachi, or 2Timothy, or Jude (contrary to the opinion of some – I recently read a well-known scholar arguing that Revelation doesn’t add anything to the Bible in terms of theology, it just adds imagination!  We could play “spot the theological agenda” with that quote, but that’s going off point for this post!)  God gave us 66 books and each is adding to the revelation.  Thus it is important to recognize where your preaching passage sits in that progress.  We neglect this aspect of understanding the Scriptures when we fail to recognize the meaning of a passage in its context, at that time in the progress of revelation.  We can neglect this aspect when we always read everything through the “lens” of later revelation, without first honoring the fact that it is inspired Scripture even before that “lens” was added.

Guidelines – always seek to recognize the meaning of a passage as intended by the author at that point in the progress, before also recognizing how revelation progressed in the centuries that followed.  Perhaps consider whether more time needs to be spent on helping listeners see what the original recipients would have received from the passage, before jumping to a contemporary application, or even a New Testament filtered interpretation.  Always ask yourself, am I giving the impression that this text was not inspired or was not “useful” (2Tim.3:16) until a later book was written?

Other suggestions?  We’ll deal with the matter of the unity of the canon tomorrow to finish this mini-series.

Preaching and Biblical Theology – Side 1

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Biblical Theology is a very fruitful field for preachers.  Not every fruit is worth eating, of course, but there is real benefit to studying works in this field.  To give a basic definition for the sake of this post: Biblical theology is the fruit of studying the Bible in such a way as to recognize the individuality of each biblical author, the progress of revelation over time and the unity of the canon resulting from the inspired nature of Scripture. My question today is simple, does our preaching honor these three aspects of biblical theology, or do we neglect one “side of the triangle?”  Today we’ll consider the first “side of the triangle,” with the others to follow:

Individuality of each biblical author – The writings of John have a distinctive style, vocabulary and content when compared to the writings of Luke, or Paul, etc.  How do we neglect this reality in our preaching?  We do so by blending everything into the same, flat message.  We do so by excessive cross-referencing to other authors without good reason.  A high view of the Scriptures can easily lead to neglect of the individual styles and content of the human authors.  Obviously we would affirm that John does not contradict Matthew, or Moses, for that matter.  However, we may let our listeners down when we give the impression that the human author’s individuality does not shine through in their writings.  In fact, we may be undermining the high view of Scriptures we affirm if we give the impression they were mere conduits for the dictation of God – a flawed understanding of inspiration!

Guidelines? Wherever possible, recognize and value the individuality of the human author when preaching a passage.  Generally seek to demonstrate the flow of thought within the book, rather than demonstrating the theology of the passage through cross-referencing all over the canon.  Perhaps consider how to preach the content of this passage using the vocabulary and style of this author (eg. I preached the resurrection passage in Luke in deliberately Lukan terms, rather than slipping into Johannine vocabulary or Pauline, 1Cor.15, argumentation.)

These are not hard and fast rules, just suggestions to help if this “side of the triangle” is being neglected in your preaching.  Other suggestions?  (The other two sides are coming, so please don’t get overly concerned that I haven’t emphasized the unity of the canon yet!)