Gospel Preaching – 5

May 26, 2014May 21, 2014 / Peter Mead / 2 Comments

In the debates over the nature of the gospel and life transformation, it seems that there is a missing third option. There is a Car C that actually has a motor, but nobody seems to be mentioning it. There is a Married Approach C that actually has an ongoing dynamic power, but it seems absent.

Let me ask the question in reference to your preaching of the gospel:

Where is the union?

Do you preach a pressure message that constantly urges people to do the work of growth? Do you preach a momentum message that simply looks back to the wonder of their identity change at conversion – a message proclaiming what God has done in Christ that does stir gratitude and does stir life change and doesn’t promote sinfulness, but, maybe, does still lack something?

If the gospel doesn’t transform a life, do you balance grace with effort? Do you preach grace more boldly? Or do you make sure your preaching of the gospel of grace goes beyond gratitude to the dynamic relational and spiritual union of being one with Christ?

The gospel is not that God forgives guilt and then expects us to stir ourselves to obey with newfound ability to behave well. He does forgive guilt, but it goes further than that. Does God simply expect our gratitude to be the engine of transformation over the course of many years and many challenges? Surely that momentum alone will not take us up the hills and mountains that sometimes stand before us in this life.

The gospel is wonderful news. Not only are our sins forgiven so that we can be justified before God, we are also reconciled and made one with Christ by the Spirit (*are we allowed to mention the role of the Spirit in sanctification?) We are united to Christ so that we don’t need to look at a list of expected marital behaviours, and while we certainly do remember and celebrate what he did to win our hearts and pay the price for us, we don’t live purely by remembrance . . . we live in a present relational union with him, we look to him, and we travel with him through all the challenges of life, growing closer and growing to be like him as we keep our eyes on him.

Too much of the sanctification debate seems to be about looking to self versus looking back to conversion. Given the choice between the two I know which way I’d lean, but I know the critiques ring true if that is all we have.

God’s grace does truly transform. God’s grace truly is enough. But God’s grace is not just gratitude for a status change. God’s grace is about the Spirit of the Father and the Son, purchased for us by the Son, so that we can be truly united with him and join him in his present, dynamic, delighted relationship with his/our Father. We don’t just have the status of being married. We are married to someone so wonderful that if you want to encourage me in my Christian life, then don’t bother pressuring me to perform, just do your best to preach Christ to me and you’ll probably be amazed by the “performance” that results, but I won’t even be aware of that, because my eyes will be on him.

Gospel Preaching – 4

May 24, 2014May 21, 2014 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Let’s shift from an analogy about different cars and think about marriage – what is the motor for progress in a marriage?

Marriage Approach A – This approach is to focus on the responsibilities for those who have married. Now you are married you need to look at this list of top tips for successful marriages. You need to be sure to put out the household waste, and mow the lawn, and do your share of the clean-up after meals, and help with tidying the house, and the list goes on. Any critique of this approach draws immediate fire because it is self-evident that the great list of married behaviours are true of great marriages and these chores don’t happen on their own and everyone knows you have to decide to wash the dishes or they won’t get washed. It is obvious.

Marriage Approach B – This has a different motor. Instead of responsibility, the driver is recollection. You are no longer a slovenly single living in a perpetual mess, you now have a new status. You are married! Now you just need to learn to live married. The key? It is not to look at lists of behaviours expected of married people. Those behaviours will come naturally as long as you remember that you are married. So don’t look at the lists, look back to your wedding day. Remember how stunning your spouse looked and how amazed you were that they married you. That stirring of gratitude within will bring about change in behaviours.

Isn’t there a third option here? Something more than looking at the list of household duties and/or looking back to the wedding day? To listen to some debate the issue of the Christian life you might think not. One side will emphasize the expectations of married people and declare the self-evident truth that if you don’t pressure married people to follow the list, then they will obviously slip back into slovenly single behaviours from their past. The other side will claim that the solution to old habits is not new pressure, but better awareness of the privilege of their marriage, combined with gratitude for what happened on their wedding day. Someone gripped by the wonder of who married them will naturally do the things on the list of expectations for married people.

Look at the list, or look at the wedding photos? Isn’t there a really obvious alternative that is missing here?

How about looking at your spouse? I’ve been married for fifteen years. I don’t have a list of instructions for being a good husband, but I do seem to have an engine driving me in my marriage – it isn’t simply an ongoing slog of self-discipline. I still remember the wonder of seeing my bride walk down the aisle toward me. But I don’t live with a permanent image of my wife in a white veil before my eyes. Instead I have a living and dynamic relationship with her. The cumulative effect of years of memories, shared experiences, dynamic interaction and our hearts being united by the Spirit of God at work in our marriage has, and continues, to transform us.

Gospel Preaching – 3

May 23, 2014May 21, 2014 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

In the tension over preaching for sanctification, there seems to be a menu of two options today. One is to call for believers to add obedience to trust in order to engage fully with the privilege of Christian living. The other is to keep the focus on grace and trust the gospel to re-shape lives as people learn to live in their new identity.

Both sides can make a biblical case for their position. The Bible does include a lot of instruction. The Bible does argue strongly that God’s grace is sufficient for life transformation (*and the Bible says more about this issue, but this third element seems to be missing from current debate).

At times it feels like we are on the forecourt deciding between two vehicles. Car A makes a lot of sense. It resonates with life as we know it. It is sleek, polished, attractive and sophisticated. It is weighty and backed by a lot of big names. The other one, car B, is in some ways more attractive. Somehow it seems lighter and sleeker, and it resonates with life as we want it. It has some great names associated with it, albeit less of them in total. It seems to use a new technology that makes for a different driving experience.

If we go with car A, we will get a lot of affirmation. Most people drive car A or respect those that do. But car B seems to promise a more successful journey to our destination. The sales force for car A decry car B. It may sound great and look sleek, but it won’t get you very far. Just down the road you’ll be stuck and reverting to having no car at all. It is a false promise and an incomplete car.

If we go with car B, will we really get very far? Initially we will fly down the road, but will we lose momentum? The sales force for car B are convinced that it will do the job for us. They point to how much heavier car A is, and how technology has moved on. Car A is a bit like not having a car at all, they say.

Tough decision. But what if there is a car C and nobody is offering it to you? What if car C has a motor that cars A & B lack? What if car C doesn’t require a Flintstone-like effort to move forward (car A), or enough initial momentum like the sleek-slider (car B)? What if car C has an engine?

What if the world we lived in were not full of motor-driven vehicles? We might well debate the relative strengths of technologies that resonate with our experience or our dreams, but still lack the essential ingredient for ongoing progress.

Gospel Preaching – 2

May 22, 2014May 21, 2014 / Peter Mead / 2 Comments

So how do we preach the gospel to believers? Or even, do we? I grew up in a church setting where there was a great chasm between the Sunday evening gospel service (an ABC’s presentation of the gospel and how to become a Christian) and the midweek believers Bible study (often a gospel-less teaching of some biblical section). We naturally divide gospel from teaching and consequently end up with a view that the gospel is for newcomers, while a different message is needed for spiritual maturity.

With the different message often comes an apparent contradiction. Now you are saved by grace, here’s the work list for you to do. Your growth is up to you. Work hard now. Get your pen and paper because I have a to do list for you this week. It is different than the gospel, but that is okay because you have now graduated from needing the gospel service to needing training in the believer’s service.

The glorious indicatives of Paul’s letters now give way to the pressure of the imperatives as believers need to buck their ideas up and press on to maturity.

Hence we come to the great debate. Do we grow by obedience to instruction? Or do we grow by learning our new identity? (*And is there a third option that nobody seems to mention?)

The tension over sanctification is not one that started brewing three years ago. It was a debate a generation ago under different labels than it is today. It has been a debate between preachers for generations. It was an issue during key moments in previous centuries, a point of division after the Reformation, a disagreement at the start of the second millennium and a source of disagreement right back in Augustine’s day. Actually, it was an issue as the New Testament was being written.

So which way should we lean in the debate over the nature of our ministry? Do we have to decide between obedience and identity? Is the motor for Christian living self-effort or gratitude (*or is there a third motor that is going unmentioned today?)

Gospel Preaching

May 21, 2014 / Peter Mead / 4 Comments

It might seem obvious, but evangelical ministry is about preaching the gospel. Life transforming good news. Surely everyone agrees at that basic level? Apparently not. There is significant debate swirling about what it means to preach the gospel, not only to unbelievers, but especially to believers.

There is generally a greater degree of consensus about preaching the gospel to unbelievers. The gospel is the good news of God’s grace in Christ. It is focused on Christ’s death and resurrection, and it calls for people not to work for salvation, but to trust. By grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone.

But there is debate, of course. Is the gospel a proclamation of what God has done in Christ, or is the gospel a call to repent and believe? Is it just semantics to argue over whether the call to repent and believe is the gospel, or whether it is the appropriate response to the gospel? I don’t think so. This is important, because it demonstrates the preacher’s underlying assumption about how humans function and how salvation functions.

At Pentecost Peter stood and preached a proclamation of what God had done in Christ and the culpability of those present in their rejection of Christ (*and another ingredient that apparently has now been removed from gospel discussions – more on that later). The repent and believe element came in answer to their question of what they should do.

As you read on through Acts, the preaching of the gospel is repeatedly seen to be a declaration of who God is, what he has done in Christ, that Christ is raised and so on. Repeatedly we read of sinners who turn, or repent, toward God. It is a personal and relational turn from self or from rebellion against God or from idolatrous ignorance. The repentance theme in Acts is not one associated with sinful behaviour and a turn to good behaviour.

Paul makes it clear in his epistles that his preaching ministry was one of heralding Christ and him crucified. As he speaks of his preaching ministry he says a lot about his motives, his methods and his content. He proclaimed Christ and him crucified. He didn’t let his focus shift onto pressuring and controlling responses from his hearers, allowing God to generate the response rather than playing the role of ultimate persuader. As he applied the gospel to the situations in the churches to which he wrote, Paul’s focus was explicitly on Christ (*and another ingredient that seems to have been removed from gospel discussions – more on that later). The imperatives that flow out of the indicatives of gospel proclamation tend to describe what is expected of those “in Christ,” rather than an action list that loses sight of Christ as the focus shifts to self-determined effort and the hard graft of sanctification.

Underlying the way we preach the gospel is our view of how humans work, the nature of sin and the nature of salvation. More tomorrow.

The Missing Dimension – Part 2

May 6, 2014 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday we looked at John 5. What a chapter. Jesus was accused of encouraging Sabbath breaking. He turned that charge into one of apparent blasphemy, then proceeded to defend himself against the accusation. For ten verses he laid out truths about life-giving and judgment in respect to his relationship with his Father. Then from verses 30-47 the defendant turned prosecutor as he went after his accusers with a sequence of witnesses that not only defended his position, but highlighted the culpability of his accusers. It is wonderful legal drama.

At the climactic moment in that sequence, Jesus poked his accusers in the chest in respect to their handling of the Bible. They searched for top tips in order to receive glory for each other, but they were blind to the revelation of God through his Son in the Old Testament. They cared for horizontal glory rather than vertical glory.

This raises an issue we should ponder. When we study a Bible passage, not least when we are preparing to preach. We need to be alert to a couple of realities:

1. Look for God’s self-revelation, not just for life advice (or even for a sermon). Wonderfully, our God wants to be known much more than we naturally want to know him. And we need to recognize that our natural tendency will always be to not see him, but to default back to seeing the Bible content as material for our sake. Some naturally default to intellectual curiosity, others to intellectual skepticism, others to life coaching tips, etc. Whatever the default nuance may be, the default orientation will be toward self rather than toward God. Only as he stirs our hearts and gives us a taste for knowing him will we discover the delight of pursuing the God who first pursued us.

2. As you look at Jesus, he looks at you. Jesus does not remain simply the object of our curiosity. As we study him, he turns that around to study us. As we accuse him, we find ourselves convicted. As we probe his character, we find our own character probed. The shift from defendant to accused found in John 5 is a shift we experience all the time if our eyes are him. This turns Bible study into a glorious conversation, if we are willing to engage in such.

The Missing Dimension in Biblical Interpretation

May 5, 2014 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Interpreting a biblical passage is a critical element of the preacher’s task. Principles of hermeneutics should be readily accessible to the good preacher, second nature really.

Numerous hermeneutics textbooks list the principles – awareness of literary form and the influence of genre; concern for the grammatical choices made the author in his efforts to be understood; the significance of authorial intent; knowledge of the relevant historical background factors influencing the meaning of the text – such as geography, religio-politics, culture, etc.; deep sensitivity to the written context, both immediate and within the flow of the book as a whole; recognition that scripture does not contradict scripture, but does interpret scripture, yet the importance of remaining focused on the particular text, and so on.

But there is one key dimension that tends to be overlooked in hermeneutics texts and yet should be front and centre in our concern as preachers. Perhaps we should call it the moral blindness principle, or the interpreter’s heart principle.

Jesus put his finger on the issue in John 5. As he spoke to the trained religious elite of his day, he turned defense into attack. He had been accused of breaking the Sabbath, to which he made sure they accused him of something more substantial (see v18). Then he laid out some key truths in respect to the Father and Son, around issues of life-giving and judgment (see vv19-29).

From verse 30 he started pointing directly at his accusers and speaking in the first and second person. He called his witness in support of his claim, (acknowledging John the Baptist in passing), who was first and foremost his own Father. Yes, there were the works he did, but the focus is really his Father. But then he made it very personal. He told the Jewish leadership that they had never seen him, didn’t know him and didn’t have his word in them. That is strange, these were the Bible quoting leadership fraternity of Jerusalem. How could they be accused of not having the Bible down?

Jesus threw a hermeneutical failure at them. They were certainly diligent, searching the Scriptures for top life tips, but they missed the person revealed there. How? Because they did not have the love of God in them. How could that be? Because of a mutually exclusive issue that might be one of the greatest dangers we face as preachers . . .

They were concerned about the horizontal reality of what people thought of them, which meant they were not concerned about the vertical reality of what God thought. They loved getting glory from each other, rather than the glory that comes from God.

That is moral blindness. That is the principle of the interpreter’s heart. If my heart is concerned about what people think of me, I may well be blind to the truth of the text I claim to understand and then proclaim to others. If you preach, ponder this principle prayerfully – it is one we cannot afford to miss.

Guest Series: Preaching Wisdom – Part 6

April 15, 2014April 9, 2014 / Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Guest blog: My good friend, Huw Williams, has offered this series on preaching wisdom literature. Huw is the pastor of the International Church in Torino, Italy, where he lives with his wife and daughter. Here is his personal blog. Thanks Huw!

_________________________

And to finish off the list . . .

6. Be aware of who is truly wise. Step back and think of wisdom literature as a whole genre for a moment, consider the dynamic that is going on. In it’s simplest form it is this – a wise person is offering his wisdom to someone who is less wise. Remember this is not the same as knowledge or information, it is personal not abstract, it is applied in the complex situations of life, and we all stand alongside Rehoboam while the offer is made – who will we listen to – wisdom or folly?

The wise person comes to us in the written word, as a person of authority, of greater wisdom, or greater experience of what it means to live in God’s world, and in God’s way. That wisdom runs right through Proverbs, it is what is being searched for in books like Ecclesiastes. Think of the massive climax towards the end of Job when God breaks into the discussion with His wisdom – it’s huge, isn’t it? In wisdom literature, the wise person offers their wisdom for us to benefit from, freely. Can you see where this is going? Wisdom finds its ultimate fulfillment in Jesus Christ. Listen to what Paul says in 1 Cor 1:26-31:-

“Brothers and sisters, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. God chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, so that no one may boast before him. It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God—that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption. Therefore, as it is written: “Let the one who boasts boast in the Lord.””

That’s why I said earlier in the week that when we get into wisdom literature, it can seem as though those big themes of the Bible have been laid aside for a while. They haven’t been, but we might need to work a little harder to see them and we need to need to be very wary of preaching wisdom in a way which is purely focused on temporary benefit for us. Proverbs are too often preached as “super-tips” for a better life now only. Be wary of approaching Song of Solomon in a way which only celebrates human sexuality in this life. Watch out for an understanding of Job that gives answers to suffering in this life without lifting our eyes to eternity. Let’s not preach wisdom in a way which only celebrates His gifts without lifting the eyes of our listeners to the wonder of the giver.

Guest Series: Preaching Wisdom – Part 5

April 14, 2014April 9, 2014 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

_________________________

Continuing the list of areas for special attention, so far we have had beware of self-improvement, beware of making promises out of proverbs, and preach thought units. Last in the list:

4. Consider what it means to preach a reflective genre… reflectively. We have already seen that wisdom literature requires reflection. How might this impact our sermons in this genre? We need to give serious thought as to how we can encourage reflection in our listeners, even if it is only for the time we are standing up there preaching. Two thoughts on this; firstly avoid information overload. This is true for preaching any genre, but nowhere is it more important that in preaching wisdom. Don’t bombard people with dozens of different thoughts or ideas; it doesn’t encourage reflection, it encourages confusion, headaches and people to stop listening altogether.

Conversely then, create space. Create space to work out illustration and application – “You cannot serve both God and money” isn’t a proverb, but it is a good example of a relatively short journey from original context to contemporary application. But wisdom like Proverbs 15:5 “A fool spurns a parent’s discipline, but whoever heeds correction shows prudence.” will take some time to unpack. How does it apply for people who don’t have God-honouring parents? What about people whose parents have died or who no longer under their parents’ authority in the way they once were? Does this proverb no longer apply to them? If so, how? And what are the subtle ways we all try to squirm out of correction – wherever it comes from? Be creative, take time to explore this piece of wisdom from as many angles as you can. Finally, create space to think, respond, pray. Why not give people time to do this at some point in your sermon (and not necessarily just at the end)?

5. Identify the central issue of a book. This is crucial. In a book like Job, it is easy to forget that the central tension of the book is presented very clearly in chapter 1, Satan says to God that Job loves God not for who He is, but for what He gives Job. The accusation is that Job loves God’s stuff more than he loves God. And the tension of the rest of the book is, in many ways, an exploration of that accusation – will Job’s faith stand up to the accusation, or not? It’s important to work out everything which follows in light of this. In Ecclesiastes you have to go to the end of the book to find the central issue – (12:13–14) Keep this conclusion as your focal point as you drive those windy roads of Ecclesiastes!

Guest Series: Preaching Wisdom – Part 4

April 11, 2014April 9, 2014 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

__________________________

4. Areas for special attention

So let’s try and get down to nuts and bolts. What practical steps can we take to try and improve our preaching of wisdom literature?

1. Beware of self-improvement. It is all too easy to focus on the fact that Job ended up with more stuff at the end of the story than he had when it started, or to preach Proverbs 22:4 in such a way that we motivate our listeners with the prospect of material blessings now, rather than the glorious treasure that awaits us when Christ appears. It’s true, wisdom literature seems at times to focus on material blessings in this life, but I think there is more going on here – and more on that later.

2. Beware of making promises out of proverbs. Yesterday, I mentioned the example of Proverbs 22:6 (“Train up a child in the way he should go; even when he is old he will not depart from it.”), we need to teach this in a way which both understands and communicates that proverbs are generally true, they not promises. This proverb is saying that if 100 sets of parents train their children up in the gospel, more will become followers of Christ than won’t, but this is not a promise that 100% will. Wisdom literature often provides us with general truths, not promises to be claimed.

3. Preach thought units. In his excellent book “Preaching With Variety”, Jeffrey Arthurs points out that Proverbs are often grouped together, though the connection between them can be quite subtle and not always obvious. Look hard, reflect, pray to identify those units of thought. And don’t be afraid to use a good commentary. Arthurs also suggests taking a more thematic approach to Proverbs, where you can draw together a few proverbs on the same theme (laziness, alcohol, parenting, old-age and youth) from different parts of the book. Also, there’s nothing wrong with simply preaching a whole sermon on one proverb.

In other wisdom books, the units of thought are often much larger. I’ve heard of someone preaching through Job a verse a week, but I wouldn’t recommend it.

We will complete this list next time . . .