Genre

Luke 18:9-14 – Contemporizing a Parable

/ Peter Mead / 5 Comments

Timothy Reynolds commented on my post regarding the preaching of parables. I’d like to elevate that comment to a post, along with my response, so that perhaps others might want to have a go at a modern retelling of Luke 18:9-14. If there is some activity on this, I might also post what I actually preached. I used a contemporary version of the parable as my introduction to the message. My introduction is by no means a great example, but it is an example. Anyway, Timothy wrote:

Interesting idea to retell the parable of the Pharisee and the tax collector in a modern context – I’d be interested to know how you did this in a way that would gain the same reaction or anticipation as Jesus’ audience had. I can’t see how it would work, because congregations don’t have the same sort of expectations of religious leaders as those in Jesus’ day did. Let’s try:

An elder arrived early for the service and sat down on the other side of the chapel from the young lad he’d never seen before. He looked like one of that gang that hung around outside the swimming pool being a nuisance on their skate boards. The elder bowed his head to pray as he always did and said, “Thank you, Lord, that by your grace I have been kept from that sort of life and was a member of the church and had a good job by the time I was this guy’s age.”

The young lad didn’t even bow his head or close his eyes, but just said , “God, I don’t even know why I’m here, but I know I need you. Please forgive me for ignoring you.”

Are we getting any where near with that? I’m not sure – I think most congregations would see it coming!

My response:

Thanks Timothy – perhaps you have started something here. Your story certainly parallels the original in many respects. Like you wrote, I also think most congregations would see it coming! Of course, it’s hard to really surprise people when the reference for the message is in the notice sheet. Having said that, I think it is possible to think through a modern version of a parable, deliberately paralleling key points, but also deliberately obscuring some parallels, so that the tension is not given away too early. The goal is not to totally surprise people, but to have our story “do” what the original story “did.” So, perhaps others will follow your lead and give modern versions of this parable.

Peter has responded to a question on this post – see comments

Old Testament Stories – part 2: Good Illustrations?

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

It is often tempting to use Old Testament stories as illustrations in a sermon, but before doing so, here are five questions to consider:

1 – Do they know the story? Many listeners do not know the stories of the Bible. This means we have to explain our illustration. Does it make sense to have to make something clear, that is given in order to make something else clear? If your listeners need to get to know these stories, why not preach on them?

2 – Is there a better illustration? This may sound heretical, but in a hierarchy of illustrations, most biblical stories actually sit low on the ladder – experienced by none, learned by few. Biblical stories should be preached, but that doesn’t mean they must be our primary pool of illustrations for other biblical texts.

3 – What’s the main idea of the text? A different biblical text will have a different central idea than the one you’re preaching. There is the ever-present danger of misrepresenting a biblical text.

4 – Are you going in the right direction? If people don’t accept your point from one biblical text, offering them another often won’t help. However, if they do accept what you are saying, then why move backwards to the Old Testament instead of forward into their lives with a relevant illustration of personal application?

5 – What example are you giving? To listen to some preachers, some might get the impression that all they need to live the Christian life is the New Testament, and a passing acquaintance with the Old. If the preacher does not model the highest respect for the whole canon, who will?

There may be good reason to use a biblical illustration, but before doing so, consider these questions first.

Old Testament Stories – part 1: Preaching Texts?

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Some people take the view that the texts for preaching should come primarily, or even exclusively, from the New Testament. In order to preach “the whole counsel,” many use the Old Testament as illustrations in their sermons. Should Old Testament stories be illustrations, or preaching texts in their own right?

There are some reasons to hesitate before using an Old Testament story as an illustration in a sermon. Part 2 of this post will give five questions for the preacher to consider before using the Old Testament for an illustration.

Steve Mathewson (The Art of Preaching Old Testament Narrative – review coming soon) lists four reasons many preachers struggle with preaching Old Testament narratives.

  1. Tendency to view stories as fluff.
  2. Minimizing of the role of Old Testament stories in the canon.
  3. Intimidating features of Old Testament language and literature.
  4. Enslavement to a particular style of exposition. That is to say, Old Testament stories usually feel forced when preached using analytical outlines and “impaled on the frame of Aristotelian logic” (to use Fred Craddock’s phrase, As One Without Authority, p45).

It is not easy to preach Old Testament stories well, but “all Scripture is God-breathed and is useful . . .” All of it. Preach it all.

Preaching Parables – Two Thoughts

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Last Sunday I preached from Luke 18, where there are two parables at the start of the chapter. A couple of thoughts about preaching parables:

Jesus told stories that packed a punch, don’t deaden the force – Of course the preacher’s role includes the need to explain the story, but we also need to preach the story in such a way as to achieve a similar effect as Jesus intended. For example, as I preached on the Pharisee and the Tax Collector, how could I help the listeners today to feel the force of that story in the way that Jesus’ listeners felt it? Well, I couldn’t just read the text. Nor could I just tell the story as it stands. As Jesus set the scene in verse 10, “Two men went up to the temple to pray, one a Pharisee, and the other a tax collector,” his listeners would immediately have significant emotional reaction. One was a good guy, the other a very bad guy. But for my churched listeners, their emotional reaction would be muted at best, the exact opposite at worse. For churched folk listening today, one is a bad guy (the one who typically opposed Jesus and ultimately got Him crucified) and the other is probably ok (the one who Jesus would hang out with, the one who might be like the other former tax collector that gave us our favorite Christmas readings in a Gospel). This is the opposite emotional reaction than Jesus intended. So, I chose to tell a contemporary story, in some ways equivalent to the parable, but not a forced equivalency. Having felt the force, we were ready to go back, read the text and have it explained. When it comes to preaching stories it is easy to kill the specimen by dissecting it. Stories are best observed alive, rather than cut up.

Incidentally, I could have chosen to do the same thing with Luke 18:1-8, but chose not to. I felt that story would work with a more straightforward “read a bit and then explain” approach, while maintaining the flow of the story. On another occasion I might use a contemporary version first.

The Gospel writers recorded stories in carefully packaged contexts, don’t rip them out – Whenever I preach from a Gospel passage, I am very aware of the double context. There’s the original historical context when Jesus spoke the words to the people around him. Then there’s the written context when Luke arranged, edited, commented on and put together the Gospel (different audience, different point in time, sometimes with different purpose). So when preaching a parable of Jesus, I am not dealing simply with a story Jesus told, but with a story Jesus told in a context Luke put together. So it is important to recognize the blending of both contexts. In the case of Luke 18, I focused primarily on the stories as Jesus told them (as presented by Luke), but was careful to notice the written contexts stretching back into chapter 17 for 18:1-8, and then on through the next two stories for 18:9-14.

Question: First person preaching from an epistle?

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Tim wrote the following:

Preaching in the first person – do you think this could ever be used for epistolary texts? I realise people use it to good effect on narrative texts. But what about a section of epistle?

What I’m thinking is, say, first part of Galatians 5. If you were first-person Paul then it might:
a) add variety (if you’ve been working through the book)
b) enable you to communicate the historical setting well
c) perhaps enable you to strongly communicate the passion Paul had for the Galatians and the sense of exasperation he felt.

What do you reckon?

Peter responds – Absolutely! First-person preaching is usually thought of as being ideal for narrative texts, but epistles are set up for this approach as well. Although epistles are didactic in form, they are also “story” or at least part of a story. You have characters (Paul and recipients, plus false teachers and other influences), in a specific setting, there is a “plot” (Paul preached, others came in, the locals shifted, now Paul is addressing the problem), which has its own tension (unresolved – we don’t know what happened in response to the letter). Paul wrote the letter, every letter, in response to specific circumstances. So I feel it is set up for a first-person sermon. This would definitely add variety to a series. It is often seen as a good option for overviewing a whole epistle either as an introduction or conclusion to a series (I know Mike has used first-person very effectively to conclude a series in James). But there is no reason why it cannot be used for a shorter section within an epistle. Jeffrey Arthurs, in Preaching with Variety, suggests the approach of dictating to a secretary, which allows for elaboration in a verse-by-verse manner.

First-person sermons allow you to, and often require you to include more background and historical information. And as you wrote, Tim, they allow you to communicate the passion of Paul in a section like this in a less threatening manner to your listeners. They will tolerate more passion and strong wording since “it isn’t really you” and the delivery is more intriguing than threatening. This approach will not be a short-cut though. You have to do all the normal exegetical work in studying the passage, then probably extra on culture and historical context, then think through various aspects of first-person presentation as well. You will need to practice, even if you don’t normally “practice” a sermon.

You will need to decide on preaching situation and viewpoint. Are you letting the audience secretly view Paul as he writes, or does he invite the group in as he is working on it and explain what he’s doing, or has Paul been transported through time to explain the passage to the congregation today. Or, perhaps, are they sitting in a Galatian church, with Paul giving them his perspective on the text as it is read, as he would if he had been there (this would be tricky, but possible) – perhaps using someone else to read the text out a verse at a time and Paul urging the listeners to get it and respond. You can be creative! Another option is to preach part of the message in first-person. You could set it up, then go back to Paul as he dictates and thinks out loud, then return to Tim for an explanation of how that text should influence us in our context.

You will need to decide on costumes and props (subtle is usually plenty!) You will need to think through the area you are to preach from and possible use of the space as an actor would a stage. Unless you transport Paul to today, you will need to think through how to make sure your congregation gets the point for their lives. Your ultimate goal is not just for them to understand the author’s idea in his historical context, you also still need applicational purpose for the present day. But you can’t put in direct references that are inconsistent with the historical situation of the “speaker.” So unless you revert to being Tim for some element of conclusion with contemporary application, you need to carefully plan subtle but effective points of contact between his intention for the Galatians and your intention for your congregation. I have found in bringing a Bible character through time to address my congregation that “clear but subtle” is usually effective. Somehow it strains the consistency of the presentation if an Old Testament prophet (or an NT apostle) has travelled through time and suddenly has full knowledge of contemporary life, culture, current affairs, recent history, etc.

So there is a lot to think about, but I think preaching first person on the first section of Galatians 5 could work very effectively! There are a couple of books available on the subject if you have time to read them before you have to preach this sermon – Haddon Robinson and his son Torrey have written It’s All in How You Tell It: Preaching First Person Expository Messages, and J.Kent Edwards wrote Effective First-Person Biblical Preaching. Tim, if you do this, please come back and comment on this post with your experiences, evaluation, lessons learned, etc.

Preaching Psalms

/ Peter Mead / 10 Comments

The other day I preached a Psalm in a University Bible study. A young lady came up afterwards and said, “I always expect to get something from the Gospels or Epistles, but I don’t expect much from the Psalms, but you brought that to life!” Now obviously I didn’t “bring it to life” since the Word of God is very much alive without needing my medical attention, but it raised an issue in my mind. What are some key points to remember in preaching a psalm?

1. Don’t let the outline kill the sermon – Often the work in the study is brought into the pulpit in the form of an outline which dominates the message. This has a tendency to make an emotive piece of writing (almost all psalms) into a source of intellectual thought and didactic material. With the possible exception of some wisdom psalms, you are not preaching a carefully constructed and tightly argued piece of thought. You are preaching the outpouring of a writer’s heart with all the emotion, reaction to God and circumstances, as well as theological perspective and so on. (This does not deny that Psalms are usually extremely carefully constructed, just that they often go beyond reasoned arguments, cognitive understanding of facts and propositional thought.)

2. If possible, go with the flow – I’m amazed how quickly some preachers resort to rearranging material. There can be good reasons to do this, but the default approach should be to study the flow of thought and preach that flow. Many psalms, when studied with reference to flow, have an almost narrative quality to them. This is where the outline helps you as the preacher move effectively through the text.

3. Take advantage of the great asset of poetic literature…imagery! – Many psalms are full of powerful imagery. With a little clarification, imagination or description, the images built in to a psalm will often add vivid colour to a sermon. Be careful not to just explain imagery so that it remains sitting on the page before your congregation – words understood are not as effective as images felt or experienced. What was it like for Asaph to come to God’s sanctuary again in Psalm 73. The constant pursuit by goodness and mercy is a deeply moving truth in Psalm 23. The barren woman given children goes through intense extremes of emotion in the space of a few words in Psalm 113. It is easy to present analysis of imagery, but develop the skill to tell it so it is both felt and understood.

4. Recreate mood, not just meaning – Since Psalms are poetic or hymnic, they do not merely convey information, but also they stir feelings, they convey a mood. In fact, many Psalms are built around the shift in tone or mood between one section and the next. It is not fair to David to preach the desperation of Psalm 22 without the confident trust of the last dozen verses. Psalm 73 turns completely on one verse. Often we preach both parts of a psalm with the same “mood” or lack of it. Or we turn a psalm of celebratory praise into a serious exhortation to worship. Think about how to enter in to, and recreate in some way for your hearers, the mood inherent in the psalm. A psalm that is felt and understood will make a far deeper impression than a psalm that is merely analysed and understood. In fact, you have to question whether analysis alone can lead to understanding poetic literature.

5. Carefully present relevance continually – The literature is written in a form that is foreign to our understanding of poetry, in a culture that is several millennia away from our own. Be careful to relate the text to our own experience whenever appropriate. A study of David’s experience through a psalm, ending with brief points of application only at the end, is likely to be a flat sermon. It is better to share that experience through the psalm, moving back and forth between 1000BC and 2007AD throughout.

(Peter has also commented on this post)

Preaching OT – one more tip

/ Mike Roth / 2 Comments

Fantastic jump into a pool of muddy water Peter! It seems as though many preaching practitioners prefer the easy way out when it comes to communicating the Old Testament through homily. Short-cuts of allegorizing, spiritualizing, exhortation to imitate characters, moralizing or, with OT texts, jumping to Jesus is common and simultaneously disastrous. Your tips are a wonderful beginning point. They are helpful in assisting the preacher to think bigger and better!

Here is another tip that relates to preaching OT narrative and other biblical genres as well. Sidney Greidanus gives voice to this tip in his book, The Modern Preacher and The Ancient Text. In it, he introduces a theocentric versus anthropocentric hermeneutic for homiletics. Though this is nothing new, and has certainly been addressed in homiletic/literary circles before by Ryken, Von Rad and the like, the central idea is fundamental to consider when preaching OT narrative.

According to Greidanus, God is the central character and not any other – Saul, David, Elijah, Nehemiah are all secondary. More than this, Greidanus argues that narrative (to be clear, all of Scripture) is making a theocentric point not an anthropocentric point. Now, I am not convinced that this is the case all of the time, in every pericope of Scripture. However, it is fodder for thought.

When considering the point of narrative, it is not enough to simply consider the characters. It is not enough to consider plot – background, inciting incident, rising action, climax and denouement. All of these aspects of narrative are necessary to interpretation, however, without consideration of God, his role, interaction, characterization, etc. narrative becomes nothing more than human-driven moralizing. Certainly, we hold Scripture to a higher standard than this. It is why we refer to Scripture as Revelation, not Humanities 101.

So, enough pontificating in my first post! Here is a summary:

– When working at preaching an OT narrative, do not forget to consider God.
– Ask, what is being said about God?
– Think about how the narrative and its characters depict God.
– Wrestle with how the points being made about God within the narrative contour and give shape to what the secondary characters value and how they live.
– Finally, being that we are all characters similar to Saul, David, Elijah and Nehemiah – a part of the same biblical story, how do we relate to this God?

One tip for preaching narrative (ok, two tips!)

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Have been thinking about the issue of preaching narratives (stories) from the Old Testament. Actually, much of this would also apply to preaching from the gospels or Acts as well. It is tempting to take the short-cuts of allegorizing, spiritualizing, exhortation to imitate characters, moralizing or, with OT texts, jumping to Jesus. Maybe each of these terms need to be considered on their own. But here’s a thought that is helpful to me. It is easy when studying a passage to focus entirely on the text itself (the characters, plot, tension, problem, resolution, etc.)

Tip one, study three contexts. To understand the author’s intention in a specific story, it is important to understand it in the context of the section and the context of the whole book. Biblical writers wove stories (and other forms of writing) together for a larger purpose, there is no random collection of narratives. So be sure to think about the writer’s purpose by considering the story itself, the section it’s in, and the whole book.

This leads to tip two, the one I was thinking of when I started this post! When thinking about how your audience relates to the text, don’t compare them primarily with the characters in the story (although that can be fruitful), but rather compare them with the original audience for the text. How much is your audience this Sunday like the original recipients of the biblical text and in need of the same message?

What to do with an Old Testament story?

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Last Sunday I preached in a small church not far from us. I was assigned a passage that I would never choose for myself, at least not as a one-off message. The raising of the Shunammite’s son by Elisha (2Kings 4:8-37). There are always short-cuts when preaching an Old Testament narrative, but I’m not comfortable with them. For example it is easy to tell a story and then jump to Jesus (and preach a New Testament message). But the story stood as inspired long before the New Testament was added. Or it is easy to tell the story, ignore the theological context/content and then draw out some human-level moral principle – “so let’s be like person X.” Again, that usually is not the point of the narrative. The challenge is to avoid the short-cuts and preach the intended truth of the passage in its context with the full theological implication, but to also be sure to apply the message specifically to the listener today. On one hand, it is easy to do a historical lecture, but leave your listeners untouched by the truth of the passage. On the other hand, it is easy to springboard from a story to all sorts of possible applications that do not honor the meaning and purpose of the passage. And if there can be a third hand, then it is also relatively easy to force Jesus and the New Testament back into the Old Testament and end up preaching a different passage. So how to avoid the easy options and instead preach the passage itself?