Delivery

Making Truth Memorable

/ Peter Mead / 3 Comments

“Homiletics is all about making truth memorable.”  That’s what I was told recently.  It was explicitly focused on the issue of sermonic outlines.  While I can see some merit in the statement, I ultimately have to disagree.

I think this is an old way of thinking that is rooted in a limited understanding of both the Bible and the listener.  It assumes the Bible is a repository of truth statements muddled by different genre.  It assumes the listener is a mind-centred creature that will live well if well informed.  It assumes preaching is primarily about the orderly transfer of information.

There may be some value in memorable preaching outlines for the listener.  I suspect they are overrated.  Do people really review passages and ponder the outlines they have heard preached?  Perhaps.  A few thoughts:

1. Transferring an outline to the listeners is not the goal of preaching.  In fact, it might even distract preacher and listener from what is more important…understanding the passage, encountering God in His Word, feeling the force of its application, etc.

2. Overly crafted outlines might have some negative side effects.  For instance, the listener may equate crafting alliterated outlines with accurate interpretation of Scripture and then either copy the method, or feel inadequate to handle the Bible for themselves.  In this generation, perhaps more than before, the listener may find the preacher with clever outlines to be inauthentic and perceive him to be something of a performer.  We need to be wary of over crafting.  It would be better to understand the passage more, especially since many passages are not written as equally weighted paralleled points.

3. There are some things to make memorable.  The main idea of the message, the application of the passage, perhaps the sense of encounter with the Lord, the sense that the passage was helpful (better for them to go back to the text, instead of  relying on a simplified outline).

4. There is more to preaching than making something memorable.  The human is created as a more complex creature than a computer.  We don’t simply live from coding placed in our memory.  We are heart-driven responders and relaters.  We need to be informed, but in that informing process we ultimately need to encounter the Lord who reveals himself to us in His Word.

Tomorrow I will ponder another overly simplistic explanation of preaching, hopefully with some value for us as preachers.

Preaching and the Bible Neighbourhood 4

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

This week I have written about ways to help listeners get to know the Bible neighbourhood.  As we preach we need to point out key landmarks.  We need to help them join the dots to know how it fits together.  We might want to take them on a formal and planned tour for a few weeks.

Before we finish the series of posts, though, there’s one more than needs to be overtly stated.

4. Be sure they are getting experience for themselves.  There is simply nothing to beat personal experience of a place.  When we were first married we lived in England.  This was my wife’s first time living here.  We would have visits from friends and family, and sometimes we’d take them on official tours of places like London and Bath.  The open-top bus tours weren’t cheap, but they were a great way to get a taste of all the key sites.

One day Melanie went out with our neighbour for a tour of the city where we were living.  The neighbour wasn’t a uniformed bus based tour guide.  But did she ever know her stuff!  Simply by being in the city her whole life, she was in a position to give my wife a tour that no professional company could match.  Back doors from one little place to take a short-cut to another key location.  My wife came home tired but amazed at all she had seen.

Our neighbour was not a professional tour guide, but she had gained years of experience.  Here’s the point – we need to do whatever we can to motivate, encourage, invite and help people to be in the Bible for themselves.  Even the best tours on Sunday mornings won’t create local experts, unless they are spending time exploring and learning on their own.

Too many churches have an inconsistent culture – the effort may go in to the Bible teaching on a Sunday, but personal Bible experience is assumed during the week.  Don’t assume.  Train, equip, guide and even more importantly: expect and infect.  Expect folks to be Bible readers, and infect them with a passion for the God that they can meet there.  He is so good that Sunday just can’t be enough!

Preaching and the Bible Neighbourhood

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Eight years ago we moved to south London.  I well remember the early weeks of driving (pre-GPS) with the 250-page map book open on the passenger seat next to me.  I knew one way to get to the office.  I found a way to get to the grocery store.  I found a different way from the grocery store to the route for the office.  I discovered how to get to our church.  Bit by bit I put the pieces together.

It was completely overwhelming at the start.  How could you ever find your way around a city like this?  Winding roads, town after town swallowed up by the sprawling claws of greater London.  But it wasn’t too long before the map sat on the back seat and I could find my way around without much concentration.

As preachers we need to recognize that our congregation may not be super-familiar with the biblical landscape.  It can feel like a confusing mess of history, geography, long names and absent timelines.  And if we aren’t careful, our preaching can only reinforce that sense.

So what can we do to help?  I’d like to share some thoughts today and in the subsequent days.  Here’s the first one:

1. Repeatedly offer them the critical landmarks.  Depending on where they are at, the landmarks may be as basic as Old Testament versus New Testament, or they might be a bit of specific.  But don’t assume too much.  While many will have a sense of Jesus’ life and ministry being in the Gospels, and then the subsequent action being in Acts, I suspect more than we realize are profoundly foggy on Old Testament landmarks.

Abraham and God’s promises to him – critical marker that people need to know is important.  Where does Moses come (and why does he matter?)  What about David (are these all covenant recipients?)  And what about the exile.  All the prophets relate in some way to the exile, so we can’t let it remain a mystery for folk!  There are other landmarks, but it would be good to make sure people are hearing of the significance of these as a starter.

Tomorrow I’ll go to the second point . . . we need to help people join the dots.

Interactive Bible Observation Preaching 2

/ Peter Mead / 7 Comments

Yesterday I shared some reflections on the advantages of the approach I took to preaching through Ruth last month.  The evening meeting allowed a different approach to the morning meeting, so I had folks marking up the passage on a handout, and then interacting together about observations along the way.

Here are some of the disadvantages, limitations or challenges in this approach.

1. It takes longer.  If the church is very strict on end time, then you have to begin it earlier in the meeting.  What might take 30 minutes to preach, can take 45-50 minutes with this approach.  Having said that, people should feel fully engaged if it is done well.  It may also take longer in preparation. That is, even though the homiletical crafting may be less, the exegetical awareness needs to be maximal.

2. It requires a certain relational comfort level.  Maybe requires is too strong a word.  I appreciated knowing the people and feeling a sense of mutual trust.  Having said that, I have seen someone do the same thing with a group of people he’d never met before and it worked very well.  But he had to win trust very quickly.  Too big of a group and it would lose the relational connection potential.

3. It requires care in interaction management.  When people participate, you have to handle what is said graciously.  Even when they are wrong.  This is where knowing the congregation really helps.  A comment shouldn’t be crushed, or too overtly corrected, etc.  I see this as common courtesy, but I am used to it in more “classroom” environments.  Some preachers seem unable to handle interaction without offending people.  I was talking with someone recently and we mentioned a speaker who might be invited to something.  The comment was telling: “yes we could invite him, but don’t let him have any Q&A time!”

4. It requires lots of preacher thinking.  When people participate, there is less control for the preacher.  You don’t know where they will go.  Your questions will influence that, but you really have to know your stuff, and know your plan.  How will you create and sustain tension with this approach?  When will you preach, and when will you interact?  How can the conclusion have impact?

5. You may have to overcome other messages and ideas.  Perhaps it wouldn’t work so well in a very familiar New Testament passage.  Or perhaps it is just what is needed.  But you would need to help people see the text itself, rather than their preconceived ideas and favourite points from other preachers.

Overall, none of these issues disqualify the approach and I will used it again, modifying continually.  Print the text, let them mark it up and lead as you all enjoy the adventure together.

Interactive Bible Observation Preaching

/ Peter Mead / 6 Comments

Last month I decided to try something a little different in our church.  I used the Sunday evening service (we have two services on a Sunday), for a study through the book of Ruth.  Each person attending was given a handout with the plain text of the passage for the evening with headings removed, but plenty of margin space allowed.  At various points I had them marking the text and then interacted with them as we observed the passage together.  I still preached, but it wasn’t a tightly controlled sermon.  I determined when there would be interaction, and overall I think it worked well.

Upon reflection, here are some of the advantages of this approach (not saying it should replace normal preaching, but I think it has a place).

1. It shows people that they can read and think about the passage, they don’t need to be spoon fed.  It is easy to get into the habit of only getting Bible input from “experts” – either at church, or for some, on MP3 downloads during the week.  But this approach subtly reminds people that they can look at and think about the text themselves.

2. It shows some people that they don’t automatically know everything.  This is in contrast to number 1, I suppose.  Some people are over confident in their view on everything.  This approach allows them to discover that they missed something and should look closer.  “I never saw that before” isn’t such a scary phrase from the preacher’s perspective, when they are actually observing the text with other people and it is plainly before them (rather than a homiletical invention).

3. It gives people experience of observing, then interpreting, then applying.  Some never really observe, some skip straight to application, etc.  This is a good group exposure to inductive Bible study.

4. It slows the pace of experiencing the text.  In this instance, it was Ruth, a narrative.  Good preaching can also slow the pace of experiencing the text, but this approach certainly did.  People felt the tension and it built nicely, both during the message and over the weeks.

5. The preaching element is proven.  That is, if done well, the preaching element should not get the “I wouldn’t have seen that in the text” kind of response.  They are seeing it, the preacher is just building and reinforcing what has already come through.  I found the more traditional preaching element in this series felt very gritty and real: it was the explanation and reinforcement of the main theme in each passage, tied into the bigger picture of the book.

There are other advantages, so feel free to add by comment…

Who Aren’t You Preaching To?

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday we thought about a potential danger in getting too targeted in our preaching.  Keeping with the issue of our listeners, what about those who aren’t present?

1. It is easy to beat up an absent foe.  I have seen this and maybe even fallen into it.  It is easy to critique someone who is not present.  They could be a liberal biblical commentator, a member of another religion, a published and vocal atheist, or a political figure.  In their absence we can act like the cartoon mouse with chest puffed out and fists swinging, bragging about all that we would do to such and such a cat . . . This kind of bravado doesn’t win friends in an age of recordings taken out of context and aired online, it doesn’t really impress the people listening.  If we are addressing an issue promoted by someone who isn’t present, then we must do our homework, know our stuff, and reflect both biblical truth and grace in how we address it.  Don’t get me wrong, sometimes we have to protect our people from false ideas that are out there, but we also have to be an example in the way we express ourselves.

2. It is easy to offend by association.  It is easy to communicate an “us and them” idea, and then inadvertently offend any members of the “them” who happen to be present.  For instance, as we distinguish Christians from the world, let’s be careful not to give the impression that we think we are better than outsiders.  Always assume “outsiders” might be present and speak in words and tone that fairly reflect the Lord we represent.

3. It is hard to win your congregation’s trust.  What does this have to do with people not present?  Everything.  Who will bring their friends and relatives to church next week?  Certainly not anyone that wouldn’t want their friends and relatives present for what you said this week!  It takes years to build relationships, and if the congregation is resistant to inviting their friends and colleagues to church events, it may well be because you haven’t earned their trust over years of careful and winsome preaching. Maybe I am missing something biblically, but I don’t see why I should invite a friend, and potentially lose a friend, just because an event is happening at church.  If I don’t trust the church and the speaker (and some other factors too), then I won’t bring them.  And nor will they.  So we have to preach as if hoped for visitors were already present.

Thoughts always welcome…

Who Are You Preaching To?

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Preaching is not just about communicating the message of the Bible, it is about communicating that message to people.  Specifically, certain people.  Today I’d like to share some thoughts on preaching to those who are present, then we can move on to those who aren’t!

1. Know your listeners as much as possible.  Seems almost too obvious to state, but it is important.  We have to know who is listening when we preach.  If we are a visiting speaker, then we need to go into overdrive before the meeting to find out what we can.  If it is our home church, then we should be engaged in the lives of those who are listening.  It will influence how we pitch the message, the vocabulary used, the applications chosen, the background information given, etc.  Not to mention the difference it will make if you love the people to whom you preach!

2. Be as relevant as possible.  This is true on so many levels.  We need to be relevant in our vocabulary, in our illustrative material, in our applications of biblical truth, etc.  Relevance is the natural next step on from knowing the listeners.  Our task is not to make the Bible relevant, but to show how relevant it is to these specific people.

3. But beware of unhelpful target practice.  There is a danger that the first two points can lead to an unhealthy third one – target practice.  That is, you know your listeners, including the issues, including the tensions, including the squabbles and the politics and so on.  And then you want to be relevant.  And without thinking you can find yourself preaching a sermon to a congregation that is pointed right at one person, or one situation, or one clique, or one faction, or whatever.  It is so easy to either bare someone’s dirty laundry, or to take political potshots.  You can do it in your vocabulary, in your illustrations, in your applications, etc.  This is both an abuse of the preaching privilege, and a flawed approach to addressing issues.  Whether it is a situation you are seeking to help, or a skirmish you’ve been dragged into, the pulpit is not the place to address it directly.  Certainly the Word will speak to life’s real issues, but don’t be the filter through which the Bible gets redirected.

Tomorrow we’ll ponder the audience issue some more, specifically in reference to people who are not present.

Holiday Post 5: Cousins Not Twins

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Today is the end of my brief break with the family, so one last post from January 2008 and then I should start posting from 2012 again on Monday . . .

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?

Holiday Post 4: Have Times Changed?

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Post coming straight from the golden oldie archive of January 2008.  I’m on holiday with the family.  When is your next break, by the way?  I’m finding I need to schedule them further out to make sure they happen!  So, back to the post . . .

Times have changed.  The New Testament was written in a time when the primary form of public entertainment, at least in the Greek context, was the oratory of the travelling rhetoricians.  Today we live in a time of complex and numerous forms of entertainment, a time when oratory is frowned upon by many.  Times have changed.  In those days the “speaker” was one who spoke with a motivation to look good, to make money and to gain the applause of the audience.  Times have changed, or have they?

If there is a sphere where the potential dangers of oratorical pride persist, it is in the church.  It is so easy to preach in such a way as to look good before others, to pump up your own hype.  It is a constant danger that money becomes a motivating factor in ministry decisions (both individual invitations as a guest speaker, or moving church for a better pay package).  It is a lurking temptation to preach for applause (not typically the theatrical ovation, but the post-sermon feedback, the cloud of affirmation).  These dangers are before us whether we are guest preachers, or local pastors.  But we must fight every temptation to tickle ears, line our pockets or only ever look good.

Here are some basic starting points:

Honor God’s Word – Preach the Word.  If it might make people uncomfortable, preach the Word.  If people’s ears won’t feel tickled, preach the Word.  Obviously be gracious and careful, but don’t preach always living in fear of offending someone.

Honor God’s People – It is tempting to tickle ears and promote good feelings all round, but people need more than that.  Love them enough to communicate the text relevantly, even if somewhat uncomfortably.  Love them enough to challenge errant thinking, dangerous tendencies, etc.  But don’t take this as an excuse for laying on guilt trips all the time – remember that our people need a lot of encouragement too!

Process Personal Pride Promptings – Pride is a temptation for all of us.  It may manifest in different forms, but we must all be aware of it.  Let’s always process any pride promptings before God.  Take the positive comments, the whispering voice of affirmation, the feelings of accomplishment, and bring them back to Calvary.

Times have changed, but not completely.

Holiday Post 2: Preaching Inside the Fence

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Pulling up some posts from January 2008 since I am on holiday with my family this week . . .

Previously I suggested the image of preparing and preaching within a low fence (click here to see part 1). I’d like to suggest a reason for doing so that may not be immediately obvious. Very simply, you will enjoy the preaching process more. Let me give an example:

Almost four years ago the church I was involved in was working it’s way through Luke. I had Easter Sunday morning. It was tempting to read Luke, but essentially preach Paul. You know how it is, so simple to revert to the terminology, ideas and focus of a passage like 1st Corinthians 15. I resisted the temptation and erected a low fence. I studied within Luke’s writings. I saturated my preparation with Luke and worked to prepare a deliberately Lukan message. I didn’t want to just preach the resurrection, I wanted to preach Luke’s account of the empty tomb and risen Christ. I tried to grasp the significance and focus of the carefully written account in his gospel. I tried to use Luke’s terminology and present his concept of salvation. I wanted to preach in Luke’s language rather than Paul’s or John’s.

The message went well as far as I could tell. One discerning listener commented on the deliberate Luke language. Probably everyone else missed it. That didn’t matter. The big idea was as good as I could get from the text, the relevance was as deliberate and concrete as possible, the big things were what mattered. But for me, as the preacher, the attention to fine detail like choice of terminology made the study both exacting and rewarding. I felt like I’d tasted something of Luke’s great gospel in a way that I could so easily have bypassed.

I got a taste for preaching with a fence that day, and I’ve continued to do so whenever possible. I’d encourage you to try it if you haven’t already. Take the opportunity to push yourself deeper in whatever book you are preaching. It’s easy to revert to default thoughts from elsewhere, but you’ll enjoy it more if you don’t!