Audience Analysis

The Four Places of Preaching – 2

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

After spending significant time in the study, without company, yet not alone, the preacher needs to move to the second location.  What comes out of the study is a deep awareness of the passage, its meaning, its intent, its contours and details, all summed up in a single sentence summary, and all held as a treasure in the heart because of the work of God during the time in the study.  Now to the next place:

Place 2 – Stop and Pray (The Prayer Closet)

In his very helpful book, Deep Preaching, J. Kent Edwards urges the preacher to take God’s Big Idea into the closet and allow the Spirit to work there for the sake of deeper preaching.  So true.

This place doesn’t need to be a closet (it’s hard to find one humans can fit in in some cultures!)  It does need to be a place without study resources and Bible software and shelves of books, not to mention phones and email and satellite whatevers.  It might be an extended walk in the woods, or a chair in the lounge, or even, one of my favourites, the empty church where the message will be preached.

What is the goal here?  The goal is to spend focused time in fellowship with God concerning the preacher, God, the passage and the listeners, in order to be able to then prepare a targeted message for them from that passage.

Where is the focus?  God was certainly involved in the study, at least, He should have been.  But it is important to recognize that the preacher is not primarily a purveyor of ancient wisdom.  The preacher is, or should be, in fellowship with the Living God.  So the step isn’t from commentary to outline, but from study to focused prayer.

1.  Preaching should involve enthusiasm for the text and what you have discovered, but it should be driven by who, rather than what.  Prayer closet time allows that personal connection and responsiveness to the God who reveals Himself in the Word to develop and drive the preaching.

2. Preaching should involve awareness of the meaning and impact of the text, but it should be sealed on the heart and experience of the preacher, not just held at arms length as new discovery.  Time in prayer allows God’s Word to be driven deep into our hearts.

3. Preaching should involve a message carefully crafted to communicate effectively to a specific audience, but for that to be an act of real love, then God’s heart for the people needs to be our heart for the people.  Bringing the people before God, alongside the passage, is thus critical to forming and delivering a message as an overflow of God’s love for them.

More could be written, but let’s leave it there.  Study.  Then stop and pray.  Then?  Some people will be very excited by the next location!

Are We Jesus’ Plus One?

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

In today’s Cor Deo post I ponder whether our evangelistic analogies might hinder the very relationship they are intended to establish.  Are we Jesus’ plus one, and if not, doesn’t that compromise our presentation of sin and wrath?  To see the post, please click here.

Ultimate Impact

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Is it just me, or was there an ultimate weapon used in cartoons that isn’t used quite so much in real life?  Whether it was a cat chasing a mouse, or a bird fleet of foot, sooner or not much later the arch nemesis would bring them into collision with a great heavy anvil.  Ouch.

I suppose in real life the anvil has its disadvantages as a weapon.  It is probably fairly heavy.  Somewhat cumbersome.  And it is probably fairly avoidable.  What it gains in gravitas it loses in penetrative impact.  To put it another way, I’d rather fight a foe with an anvil than an enemy with a blade.

Which brings me to preaching.  Some sermons feel like the preacher is trying to reproduce the cartoon impact of an anvil.  A massive amount of weighty content delivered as quickly as possible.  Much better to sharpen that sermon and preach a single point, rather than trying to deliver the whole container load of exegetical insights.  The blade may feel lighter to carry, but it will have a great impact in listeners’ lives.

I need to ponder this afresh before tomorrow.  It is so tempting to try to give ’em everything right between the eyes.  In my cartoon-like prayers they will all be stunned and transformed.  In reality they will both see it coming and feel annoyingly pushed by it, but without the message penetrating.  How can I sharpen my main idea.  What can I cut out to make the message do its work in a streamlined way?

The Word of God is sharper than any double-edge anvil.  Obviously.  May our preaching of His Word have the massive weight of the text behind it, but the sharpness of a deft blade in terms of its focus.

5 Reasons Why I Love Preaching Psalms

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

So yesterday I shared some thoughts on preaching the prophets.  How about another list on the Psalms?  Why do I enjoy preaching them?

1. They are self-contained.  A psalm is a complete unit of thought.  It may be part of a short collection, so it is worth looking at those before and after.  It may give a historical clue in its superscription, so it is worth looking at that and chasing the history if there is anything suggested.  But essentially with a Psalm I know what I need to study and prepare . . . the psalm.

2. They are real and messy.  Life isn’t all clean and simple.  Life gets messy.  Emotions soar and plummet.  Situations overwhelm and resolution of tension can utterly delight.  The Psalms don’t pretend we are unfeeling stoical creatures.  We might, but the Psalms remind us to be real.  Not only does this make for preaching that sounds real and not just some sort of religious talk, but it also connects because listeners are also living real rather than merely religious lives.

3. They are emotive and heart-felt.  As a communicator I know the danger of adding emotional thrust to cold sterile content.  It can be very manipulative.  But I also know the danger of sterilizing powerful biblical texts into safe little life lessons.  Oops.  The Psalms are sitting up to be preached with a full heart to those who have a feeling heart – whether that be pain, or joy, sorrow, or delight.

4. They are full of imagery.  I don’t have to look endlessly for imagery to add to a message when I’m preaching from the Psalms.  It is usually right there.  I need to spend that energy on the text and then on effective description and presentation, but then I can have confidence that the imagery choice was made by God’s Spirit rather than me.

5. They are always relevant.  When people have lived the Christian life for a while, they typically end up appreciating the Psalms.  The rugged rawness reflects their own personal experience.  It tends to be the less mature who can’t get into the Psalms.  So as I preach them, I can have confidence that nerves will be touched, hearts will be stirred, lives will be helped.

I haven’t even mentioned the messianic hopes, the glimpses into the godhead, etc.  Ah well, I will stick with the five I put in the title.  Just a nudge in case you’ve forgotten to preach from this great collection.

5 Reasons Why I Love Preaching the Prophets

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

After three days of reflections on a great series from Daniel, here are a few reasons why I personally love to preach from the prophets:

1. They are less familiar.  This isn’t to suggest that sounding novel is a good thing, but it is nice to see people leaning forward once they get the sense that you are going to make clear something they may have avoided in their own personal studies.  Obviously there are the familiar parts – Isaiah 6, 40, 53, the first half of Daniel, Habakkuk, etc.  But there is plenty of relatively untouched ground in both the major and the minor prophets.

2. They are stunning communicators.  The prophets had to get attention.  They couldn’t even be normal, let alone dull.  As a communicator it is a bit of dream to be able to tap into the creativity of the truly shocking, without taking any real flack for the choice of approach.  If we let the genre, the tone, and the creativity of the prophets shape our preaching of them, we should see this as a real head-start!

3. They are robust and direct.  You don’t have to go far in a prophet to get a sense of what God is feeling about things.  In the narrative sections you sometimes have to think and feel your way through multiple chapters for a single narrative.  In the prophets you’ll probably get struck on the nose within a few verses.  The prophets were, by definition, stunning communicators.  They had to be, since the people were so often so dull of hearing.  This leads on to another…
4. There are cultural similarities.  I don’t want to overplay the “Christian nation” ideas that some seem so passionate about, but there is a real sense in which our cultures have slipped from what they once were.  People taking God for granted or treating Him as irrelevant; people living to please themselves; people pursuing dishonest gain, plotting and scheming . . . this is the stuff of the Prophets, and of today.

5. They are hope filled.  There are layers upon layers of hope offered in the prophets.  Not only do they give the messianic predictions, but also the shorter term sense of God’s concern and interest and involvement in their lives . . . and also the longer term sense of ultimate reconciliation and kingdom hopes and guaranteed judgment on the wicked, etc.

I could go on, but I’ll leave it there.  When was the last time you preached from a Prophet?

Reflections on Great Bible Teaching – Part 2

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

In this series of posts I am reflecting on Bible teaching I had the privilege of sitting under last week.  It was some of the most stirring and powerful ministry I have heard in a long time.  I won’t name the speaker, for I suspect he wouldn’t appreciate that, but I hope my reflections on this ministry might be a stir to us.  Yesterday I wrote about his masterful handling of the text … something that reveals hours, even years, of hard work.

Today I am struck by another labour intensive feature of the messages:

Brilliant and On-Target Application.

A. The speaker was sensitive to the specifics of a very mixed crowd.  I heard him speak from Daniel almost twenty years ago.  It was powerful then because it was targeted to a the group of young people of which I was a member.  This time the messages were different.  Part of that was the difference in audience.  This was a mixed group with a variety of ministry roles from across the continent.  Yet the messages were so pertinent to people living as a small minority in difficult anti-Christian cultures.

B. The speaker honoured the intelligence levels of those present.  This was a gathering of people that included a significant number of the highly educated.  The messages were not elitist at all, but the speaker was sensitive to the intelligence levels in the room.  Nobody would have felt patronised, nor would anyone have felt untouched by the ministry.

C. He obviously invested significant time in preparation.  The level of relevance and applicational targeting in these messages would not come from a quick scan of old notes.  The speaker evidenced a real love for the listeners by the level of specificity he managed to achieve in his thoughtful applications to the audience.

Tomorrow I’ll add one more post, on the issue of the speaker’s credibility.

Reflections on Great Bible Teaching – Part 1

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Last week I was at a conference, enjoying it both as a participant and as a presenter.  I was particularly struck by the main Bible teaching.  I have been pondering what made it so effective and will offer my reflections in three posts.  I know the speaker is not a limelight seeker, so I won’t name him, but I trust these reflections will be provocative for us.

Observation 1 – Masterful Handling of the Text

In four messages we were taken through the entire book of Daniel.  Not the easiest book to preach, nor the least controversial.  How was the text handled so effectively in the course of four one-hour presentations?

A. The speaker was sensitive to both the literary and historical context of the book.  He knew his Babylonian and subsequent world empire history and demonstrated a keen awareness of the various disciplines needed for pulling together the complexity of Daniel.

B. He was deeply aware of the literary structure of the book.  Layer upon layer of structure was masterfully woven together as the book was presented, leaving the listeners struck by the artistry of the writer.

C. He showed a remarkable ability to summarise the content of multiple chapters without losing the essence or the core intent of the passages.  The teaching had integrity, even when a chapter was surveyed only briefly.

D. The speaker was as bold as a lion, yet as winsome as a lamb.  In a mixed crowd of people from multiple denominations and disciplines, it would be tempting to try to please everyone with a sort of neutered presentation.  Not here.  There was a stunning level of courage in this presentation.  He knew that many would disagree on various levels, yet he was unashamed in his presentation of the book. I think this kind of courage required both a genuine winsomeness and an authoritative mastery of the book’s contents.

I was challenged by the obvious passion for the Word that showed in this series of talks.  But there was more to it than that, tomorrow I’ll look at the issue of targeted applications…

Jesus, How Should I Preach?

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday I had the joy of leading a morning seminar that overviewed the preaching preparation process.  I guided the participants through the 8-stage path that I advocate on this site and find so useful in my own ministry.  But I think there is another way to look at the process – in effect a view from a greater height, a helicopter view of the preaching process.  Dare I say that this might even reflect Jesus’ approach?

I would love to get the in-depth Jesus preaching seminar.  Surely it would involve issues of speaking with authority unlike the scribes, and how to select compelling images, effective storytelling, memorable motifs, etc.  But I want to suggest a slightly higher level, helicopter (or should I say more heavenly) view of the preaching process.

The gospels don’t give us the answer to how should we preach.  But as well as His example, there is also the consistent pattern of Jesus’ theology.  How should we pray?  He answered with a variation on the theme of what is the greatest commandment?  Since the pattern was so common in his teaching, allow me to speculate on an overview of the preaching preparation process from Jesus’ perspective.  Jesus, how should we preach?

1. Love God.  The first phase of the process is to be loving God by sitting at Christ’s feet.  Stop being manic and busy for God, but instead sit at His feet and allow Him to minister to you.  Don’t search the Scriptures and miss the person that is there, but seek the Lord in His Word and you will find Him.  Treat the Bible as if God is a good communicator and so diligently study and wrestle with the text, allowing it to do a work in you before you even think about offering it to others.  Love God in response to His self-revelation in His Word.

2. Love your neighbour (congregant, listener, audience, etc.).  That is, pray for the people who you will speak to.  Really spend time with God concerning them.  Then as you start planning your message, plan it prayerfully with a deep concern for them to understand, to stay engaged, to be able to follow, to feel the import and impact of the message of the text.  And as you preach it, preach with the winsomeness and grace of God permeating your demeanour, because God is passionately excited about incarnating His grace and truth!

I could be wrong, but I wonder if Jesus might give an answer along those lines.

Saturday Short Thought: Applicational Yet Unengaging?

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

I’ve been thinking about preaching that connects with the congregation.  Part of the issue is the complex consisting of application and relevance.  But this is not the whole issue by any means.  So here is a question: is it possible to be totally applicational in a message, and yet completely unengaging?

I believe it is possible.  If there is no personal warmth between preacher and listener, and if there is no vertical warmth between the preacher and God, then a highly applicational message could easily become an instructional rant based on a text.

This isn’t something any of us should strive for.  Problem is that if we think being relevant and applicational is the whole deal, then we can overlook the fact that communication is best offered in the context of interpersonal warmth.  As preachers our listeners need us to have that reality in both dimensions!

A good friend of mine has a stock of great sayings, one of which goes, when you’re a hammer, everything looks like a nail.  So true in preaching.  A chilling of the temperature in our personal walk with God will show in our communication with others.  Even the most winsome of texts can become an opportunity to hammer on the duty theme again, for example.

Let’s leave it there, that almost qualifies as a short thought!

Add to FacebookAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to TwitterAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Yahoo BuzzAdd to NewsvineLike This!