10 Ways to Half Preach a Text – Part ii

November 30, 2011November 23, 2011 / Peter Mead / 12 Comments

In this series of posts I am offering ten ways that I see preachers half-using a preaching text. The goal isn’t to critique, but to nudge us all to a higher view of the inspired text, a higher level of diligence in studying the text, and therefore a higher level of impact in our preaching of the text. So we’ve already considered using the text as an intro to another message, or failing to see how the details cohere, or preaching a message only nominally tied to the text itself.

4. Use the content, but ignore the context.

I use the term use deliberately. Sometimes the content of a passage could feel used because it isn’t understood in light of its context. This could be a certain term or phrase that is plucked out of its setting in a sentence and used to make a point. It could be the whole paragraph or section that is presented without awareness of how it fits in the flow of thought in the book.

I remember a conversation I had with a street preacher years ago. There are some street preachers that do a tremendous work of communicating the gospel to a busy and distracted world. This was not one of them. We got into a discussion about the Bible and I asked him what his view of the Bible was. “Oh, the Bible is like a treasure chest filled with jewels and treasures that we pick up and show to the world!” Problem was, he was plucking phrases without context and shouting random references to washing in blood and becoming white as snow, etc. It didn’t communicate. It regularly offended (in the wrong way).

That street shouter was an extreme example, but let’s not be lesser examples of the same error. Let’s be careful to always present a whole text in its context, rather than plucking the “useful” preaching bits and using, or abusing, them.

5. Use the context, but ignore the content.

I suppose this is a less common error, in my experience. But it is possible. I guess this happens more in the gospels. The preacher preaches about the ministry of Jesus in general, but doesn’t present the unique details conveyed by the gospel writer in this particular instance. (Or the preacher may preach the event accurately through harmonizing the gospels, but fail to preach the inspired text of the gospel in question.) Contextually it is possible to say Jesus was doing such and such, but if you’re preaching a particular healing narrative, preach it with good awareness of the detail the writer chose to include.

The list will build tomorrow, but feel free to comment on these or other things that come to mind at any point.

Preaching’s Second Five Letter Word

November 24, 2011November 22, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

What is preaching’s five letter word? Jesus? Ok, yes, of course. And another? This one is also really important. This is one that seems to be strangely absent with some preachers. It’s absence can be as significant as the absence of the preacher’s arm, maybe more so. What’s the word? It is S-M-I-L-E.

Ask someone who listens to you preach if you smile much when you preach. If the answer is “constantly,” then maybe you need to vary things a bit. But if the answer is “not really” or “not that I’ve seen” or “never once in twenty-three years of preaching” then maybe it is time to consider the following factors:

1. If you are a Christian you have reason to smile. Yes we live in difficult times and the gospel is serious business and lives are messy and many are lost. But if a Christian doesn’t have reason to smile, nobody does. The fruit of the Spirit is joy. This may be evident in you at other times, but perhaps the weight of the ministry burden or a hint of public speaking fear is hiding it?

2. If you have good news you have reason to smile. The gospel isn’t just called good news. It actually is good news! We would be wary of someone offering us lesser good news without any hint of a smile.

3. If you are enthusiastic about your message you have reason to smile. Your smile is part of the whole package of communication that includes the words, the tone of voice, the body language and the facial expression. I remember that dear elderly brother who used to stand on a Sunday morning and droan great content in the dullest voice and with the saddest face, “we are overjoyed to be here this morning to worship the Lord.” Really?

4. If you love the people you are talking to you have reason to smile. In normal life we don’t have to consciously try to smile when we meet relatives or friends that we love. Many of the smile-free preachers I’ve met in recent years are quite amiable in conversation.

5. If you are representing Christ you have reason to smile. This is the biggest one in my mind. As a preacher of the gospel you are representing Christ, not only in your words, but also in your demeanour. Please let people know that Christ is winsome and warm and loving and kind and has the most beautiful character qualities.

Love to hear your thoughts on smile-less preaching. Anyone like to defend it?

Christmas Preaching 3: Connecting to Our World

November 23, 2011November 17, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

To finish off this week’s three-part pre-Christmas special, here are a few more thoughts to prompt your thinking and praying as you prepare to preach during advent this year.

1. Ancient story always relevant. It is easy to settle into an ancient storytelling mode and fail to make crystal clear connections to the messy world of today. Christmas is massively relevant because the Incarnation changes everything (that and the Resurrection . . . two massive moments in history!) Let’s think and pray long and hard about how the messages are going to engage the listeners with a sense of compelling relevance to today. Our world. Our culture. Our lives. Our struggles. Not that the focus is us, but because the incarnation is massively relevant always.

2. Ancient story was not a painting. One of the most effective ways to communicate contemporary relevance for listeners today is to take them beyond a Christmas card view of the first Christmas. What were the realities facing Mary and Joseph? What kind of a culture did they live in? How would that pregnancy shape their lives? Helping people to get beyond stained glass window views of the first Christmas can resonate deeply with the situations and struggles we face today.

3. Offer a contemporary relevance, not just the ancient one. The reason Jesus came into the world was to go to the cross, back then. It was a once and for all mission. But the incarnation has burning relevance to our world today. Think and pray through how to convey the fact that Christmas matters now, and not just as a moment to look back on an ancient mission, albeit an important one.

4. Tap into the various emotions of Christmas. I suppose it is easy to slide into nostalgia at Christmas. Chestnuts roasting on an open fire, sleigh bells ringing, snow glistening, logs on the fire, gifts by the tree, etc. etc. But what about other related emotions? Missing family members through bereavement or separation. Seasonally affected discouragement disorders that make for a depressing time of year. Difficult childhood memories only exacerbated by the overt nostalgia nudges all around. Christmas is a good time to offer a sensitivity in your preaching that shows you aren’t part of the hyped up marketing machine.

5. Don’t miss the opportunity Christmas preaching offers. The reason Jesus came into the world was to go to the cross, once for all. It wouldn’t be good to make some sort of contemporary emphasis that loses sight of why Christmas really occurred. Remember that some people will only come to church at Christmas – don’t miss the opportunity to make sense of the season for them.

Saturday Short Thought – Preaching to Listeners

November 19, 2011November 16, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

This week I have blogged about listeners. I was preaching at a Christian Union gathering again this week, this time in Northampton. I preached from Matthew’s gospel to a gathering of missions agency reps and students. Since numbers were down on last week, it was more tempting to try and please the reps, rather than speak specifically to the students. I hope I managed to keep the message on target for the listeners that were the focus of the message.

I’m reminded of John Stott’s great book on preaching – Between Two Worlds. In it he introduces the metaphor of the preacher as bridge-builder. I often come back to his thought that we have to land the message on both sides.

Some preachers start in the Bible text and build straight up to heaven, without landing the world of the listener.

Other preachers start in the world of the listener and never make any real connection in the world of the Bible text.

True biblical preachers have to be at home in both worlds and make sure their messages are firmly planted in the text, and land solidly in the realm of the listener.

Simple thought, but so important. As you preach tomorrow, are you well-rooted in the text? Good, but don’t forget to land very clearly and relevantly in the experience of the listeners too.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

Next week – Preparing to Preach Christmas Messages

Listeners and Pulpit Integrity

November 18, 2011November 15, 2011 / Peter Mead / 7 Comments

Listeners can sense a lack of integrity like dogs can sense when someone isn’t a canine fan. People long for the preacher to have a deep sense of consistency about them. And it isn’t just the big and obvious issues like consistency in the preacher’s private life or relational issues. Integrity comes into play in smaller things too.

For example –

1. Do you read Hebrew, young man? That’s what I wrote in my notes after hearing a younger preacher say, “A careful reading would say this . . .” It’s interesting how many of the preachers with no training in biblical languages seem so quick to make reference to them. “This is a present continuous tense . . . Paul used a genitive so that means . . . the original word here is better translated . . . “ I could go on. There is almost no good reason to make references to the original languages. And if you aren’t trained, there are even more reasons not to try. Take onboard what the commentaries say, but don’t imply knowledge you don’t have. (An even bigger concern here is how credulous many listeners are . . . many actually don’t spot it.)

2. If you read this book every week for twenty-five years, you would begin to see . . . I still find myself wondering if the preacher who said that had really read John’s gospel over 1300 times when he made that remark. It certainly undermined his credibility because it didn’t feel real. That’s the issue when integrity comes into question by what we say. Don’t imply that you have a shortcut to special knowledge (the same could be said of claims of direct revelation during preparation).

3. Is that really your angst that is firing now? Every now and then you will hear a preacher that seems to get worked up about something, but somehow it feels fake. It’s like a smile that doesn’t wrinkle around the eyes. It feels forced. Some preachers seem to convey a conviction about things that perhaps aren’t really convictions yet. That’s ok, just don’t pretend they are. It really undermines perceived integrity when your angst feels hollow and learned.

4. Personalised illustrations. Using someone else’s illustration is common fare in preaching. Pretending that actually happened to you, when it didn’t, is a lie.

5. Lifted sermons. Using someone else’s illustration is common fare in preaching. Being influenced by another preacher’s explanation of a text is good. Having your wording marked by theirs is unavoidable at times. But preaching a lifted sermon as if it were your own, well, what do you think that says about integrity?

Other ways we can undermine our integrity while preaching?

When Non-Christians Listen

November 17, 2011November 15, 2011 / Peter Mead / 7 Comments

Yesterday we pondered issues of sensitivity in light of the presence of children. Here’s another area where we should always show sensitivity – how do we come across when non-Christians are listening?

Here are some areas to ponder –

1. How do we refer to them? I imagine a non-christian listening in to our preaching might be easily turned off if we aren’t careful how we refer to them. It seems like terminology such as pagan, heathen, outsiders, the spiritually dead and enemies of God might feel a bit harsh without some careful context setting. I tend to prefer terms like those who are not sure they are in God’s family, or just looking in from the outside, or visitors, or guests. Non–christians seems safe enough, but not if it is misunderstood. Understanding your context and your audience is vital here. How do you refer to the lost in your congregation?

2. How do we refer to us? Just as coming across with derogatory labels is not a good idea, nor is it wise to refer to believers in a way that might unnecessarily offend. For instance, you know that we are righteous by the declaration of God based entirely on the person and atoning work of Christ. But calling believers righteous, or saints, is more likely to insinuate that others present are evil and that we think we are better than them. What I am saying is that we need to be careful since visitors will almost certainly misunderstand careless references.

3. How do we speak to Christians? We tend to think in terms of how to target the unsaved with our preaching, but what about when a message, or part of a message, is really aimed at believers? Probably not a good idea to tell the “outsiders” to stop listening. I tend to say who I am addressing, and encourage visitors to listen in since we have nothing to hide.

How do you handle these things?

When Children Listen

November 16, 2011November 15, 2011 / Peter Mead / 6 Comments

Some churches seem to ban children from the main service. Others make the main service all about the children. The rest of us are somewhere in between. As a preacher I am conscious when people are drawn away from the message by a distressed or distracting child. And as a parent I am also very aware when a preacher doesn’t seem to be aware that children are present and listening.

Children are great recorders, but they aren’t great processors. They won’t fill in background context and think through why something the preacher said actually isn’t supposed to bother them, or scare them, or intrigue them. They’ll hear and then they’ll remember. And maybe they will ask about it later. But often they won’t.

So what kind of things do preachers say that parents may not appreciate?

1. Direct references to sex. The Bible is full of euphemisms for marital or extramarital intimacy. When children are present, don’t preach like you’re talking to prisoners, or sailors, or whatever. Yes, David did commit adultery, and yes Adam did know Eve, and yes, the Samaritan women had had five husbands and was living with a man. But no, there’s no need to be sensational for the sake of it. Show concern for the children, and other sensitive listeners.

2. Unnecessarily gruesome description. The Bible is not as prudish as some people make it out to be. Beware of description that may lodge in tender minds and prove unhelpful. Yes, there is a lot of death, the cross is an agonizing way to die by suffocation, a tent peg can be a quick way to leave this mortal tent, etc. But no, there’s no need to be so detailed that tender listeners feel traumatised and distracted from the real message of the sermon. Be careful.

3. Unhelpfully glorifying things parents may be keeping from their children. The Bible is not a simple list of forbidden and allowed, there are numerous grey areas. Beware of glorifying things that some parents might consider harmful to their children. Yes, Saul did visit a witch, Samson was both sensual and violent, and fishermen probably did have colourful language. But what if some families don’t want their children interacting with Harry Potter, or watching highly rated films, or listening to swearing, etc. Be sensitive to the more sensitive listeners. It’s not that we should allow Pharisees to control the church, but we certainly should honour parents as they carry the primary discipleship burden for their children. This isn’t a call for absolute avoidance of everything anyone might disagree with, it’s a plea for wisdom in order to avoid “glorifying” things which may not be wise and edifying for others.

Parents, how else should preachers be sensitive when your children are present?

Saturday Short Thought – Preaching Good News

November 12, 2011November 11, 2011 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

This week I have been blogging on here about preaching the gospel, the Good News. Thursday night I had the opportunity to preach to a gathering of Christian students in Birmingham about what really matters to our God. It would be easy to make that kind of message into a guilt trip, a pressure message. Sort of like preaching about the good news, but dressing it up in the garb of bad news. But I tried to show how really it is all about Christ, and Christ is so careful with fragile ones like us.

I tried to show that while we have a mission to participate in here on earth, we are invited into that by a very sensitive Christ who doesn’t snap a bruised reed, or snuff out a smoldering wick. We all have reasons to hold back from joining in Christ’s mission to reach this world – financial reasons, guilt reasons, fear reasons. But the issue really isn’t those obstacles, the issue is Christ. And my aim, in preaching the passage I preached, was to bring the listeners face to face with the Christ who loves them and gave Himself for them.

So here’s a quick thought to end the week – if you are preaching tomorrow, and the core of what you are preaching is the gospel, will the message feel like good news? That is, will your presentation of Christ and the written Word smell of the grace of God? Or will your manner, your applications, your tone, your demeanour, your presentation somehow dress it up as something other than Christlike? Let’s preach good news.

Wear the Right Strait Jacket

November 11, 2011November 11, 2011 / Peter Mead / 5 Comments

This week I had the joy of leading a group in consideration of what it takes to be growing as preachers. I told them we need to wear the right strait-jacket. I also told them that most preachers wear the wrong one.

Actually, when it comes to biblical preaching there aren’t as many rules as people tend to think. The preacher has all sorts of freedom that should be instructed through experience of what works effectively, what achieves communication goals, etc. But there are not as many rules as people tend to think. As I wrote on here some time back:

Some like to impose significant amounts of structure on the preaching event, but in reality there are few limits involved. There may be some limits imposed by the culture and heritage of a church – congregational traditions – and it is wise to think carefully before smashing through those expectations in an attempt to be creative. However, these limits vary from place to place and it is possible, once trust is established, to carefully adjust such expectations.

So is there any constraint, or is it all freedom? And how is it people (in this age of freedom!) tend to choose to wear a strait jacket? And the one they choose to wear is the one that could well be cast aside? Here are the two strait jackets:

Wear This One – “To have integrity as a biblical preacher, I must be constrained by the true meaning of the passage I am preaching.” Each passage is saying something. When we preach, we need to say the something the passage is saying. We cannot say anything from anywhere in the Bible. While we can tailor and target and re-order and re-emphasize, we cannot say whatever we want from a passage. Some people, in the pursuit of “interesting” and “relevant” and especially “original,” will undermine the exegetical integrity of their preaching by saying what the text simply isn’t saying. Be constrained by the text you preach.

Don’t Wear This One – “To be considered a preacher, I must preach in a certain manner, using a certain form that qualifies as a real sermon.” While the first strait jacket guarantees our integrity as Bible handlers, this second jacket can sometimes undermine our effectiveness as biblical preachers. What shape should a sermon take? What style of delivery should be used? Matters of form are matters of freedom for the preacher to evaluate strategically. Different texts, different circumstances, different occasions, different strengths as a preacher, different personalities, different listeners, can all prompt different sermon shape and delivery style. At this level our goal is effectiveness in communication. We do not need unnecessary limits in place to hinder our effectiveness.

Sadly too many preachers settle into a predictable pattern where actually there could be considerable freedom – in matters of form and delivery. And too many show a wild freedom where there is a limit – in the meaning of the text. Let’s be sure to wear the right strait jacket, but throw away the other!

Hearing the Text

November 4, 2011October 31, 2011 / Peter Mead / 4 Comments

This post is not about amplification, nor about the place and role of the Bible reading. Both issues would be worth considering, but not today. I’m talking about the message itself. It is troubling when you hear a sermon and can’t quite seem to hear the text coming through.

This is where the big idea approach to preaching is so on target. If the big idea of the text is the control mechanism during message formation, then the text should be coming through. Sadly though, too many preach generic messages that essentially disconnect from the text itself.

I suppose preaching is essentially very easy for some folks. A thirty-five minute message is really only a couple of minutes of “worked material” that builds tenuous links between the text and the message. Once the text is tied in somehow, the standard message content can flow freely without hindrance. Easy.

Some people do this by leaving the text behind. It is read, a couple of comments are made, and then the message moves on from the text into generic sermon zone.

Others do this by pulling from the text the three things they want to find there. Perhaps something pointing to human sin, and something to do with God, and maybe something along the lines of consequences, or perhaps a vague segue to Calvary, or whatever. Thus the narrative is plundered for intro links to the message the preacher intended to preach.

Let me encourage you to make the preaching text more than an introduction for the message, or an introduction for the points. Allow the text to be master over the sermon.

Seek to preach so that God’s Word is communicated and God’s voice is heard. Seek to preach so that listeners can clearly hear the text and its influence on the entire message. Seek to genuinely preach the Word.