Homiletics

Undermining Popular Fallacies

/ Peter Mead / 5 Comments

A couple of years ago we had the relatively short-lived hype of The Da Vinci Code movie.  While the hype soon dissipated, the effects of Dan Brown’s book and then the film have surely continued below the surface for many uninformed readers.  How many in our churches are under the impression that Jesus’ deity was a decision made by a vote three centuries after He was on earth, or that the New Testament canon was formed in a smoke-filled room by leaders with a hidden agenda?  The absolute historical fallacies promulgated by The Da Vinci Code called many of us to address them directly at the time (special Da Vinci Code messages).  However, the effect of such teaching is longer lasting and perhaps we need to think through whether we need to subtly address underlying false assumptions about the Bible, Christ and history?

In a recent seminar I used a video clip wherein members of the public were giving their personal views of the Bible.  Most of them saw very little value in the Bible and so didn’t read it for themselves.  Several times the same fallacy came through.  “So much has been lost in translation,” and “it is poorly translated” and my favorite of all – a mini-beard stroking “intellectual” who stated, as if every informed person would know this information, that “the Bible has been translated over five million times!”  This kind of misunderstanding is common in the streets and even the universities of our towns.  The so-called “New Atheists” love to take pot-shots at the Bible, as do other major world religions that do not advocate the translation of their “holy book.”

While the Bible has been at least partially translated into over 2000 languages, we need to make it clear that the Bible people are looking at as  they listen on a Sunday morning has been translated once.  From the original language text into English – direct, by highly competent linguists, once.  We do not have the end result of a two-thousand year game of Chinese Whispers.  We do not have the last link in a chain of translation and mis-translation.  Once.  We have very accurate translations of original language texts based on overwhelming manuscript evidence, the likes of which no other historical work can even come close.  Just once.

In a culture where peoples’ understanding of the authenticity and authority of the Bible cannot in any way be presumed, we as preachers need to think about how to establish the trustworthy nature of the text that we preach.  A great message is so easily undermined if there is no confidence in the text from which it comes.

Final Reflections on the European Leadership Forum (ELF)

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Yesterday I was really reflecting on a couple of specific messages given.  But here are two very important overall reflections on this great event:

6. Remember that the Bible is not second class to apologetics/theology/counselling, etc. Several speakers really stood out in their emphasis on the Bible (not just in the Bible Teachers Network).  It is easy to fall into thinking that the Bible is somehow intellectually second class to top level apologetics or systematic theology or even a discipline like counselling.  In reality the Bible is at the core and these other “disciplines” should be around the edge seeking to reflect the teaching of the Bible accurately.  When they fail to do so, they surely fail, period.  Are we robustly biblical, or have we fallen for the lie that something else is superior in power and value?

7. Expository preaching feeds the soul in ways other presentations of truth do not. I was reassured to both experience and hear from others that expository preaching does a work in peoples’ lives in a way that non-expository approaches do not.  Those who were present will probably reflect on the same contrast, although perhaps in different words.  By this point I do not mean that preaching has to be done in a particular form or way.  What I do mean is that the Bible text needs to be boss of the content, rather than hand-maid; communication has to be effectively engaging, rather than agonizing; relevance to listeners needs to be demonstrated and emphasized, rather than assumed; and everything needs to be very much done in reliance on the Spirit, rather than on personal “authority” (academic, professional or experiential).

A great week, a great event, a great vision.  I’ve come home physically tired and spiritually energised.  I’m thankful for the forum and hope it goes from strength to strength.  And, on reflection, I’m thankful for expository preaching and hope it also gets stronger and stronger across Europe and the globe.  We need it, both at the forum, and in our countries.

More Reflections on the European Leadership Forum (ELF)

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

On Saturday I shared a couple of reflections on the ELF in Hungary as related to preaching.  Here are a few more to ponder together:

3. Watch your language for second language listeners. In some ways I’d expect this to be obvious, but obviously it wasn’t for one or two speakers.  When there are people in the audience that are listening in their second language, watch yours. While they may understand the words, they may not be familiar with local figures of speech.  What does it mean that “the apostles made a killing on the God-fearers!”?  Always be aware of who is listening when you speak.

4. Affirm as well as rebuke. Along the same lines, actually reflecting on the same message, it is important not to simply generalise and rebuke without some affirmation too.  Perhaps the majority of your congregation never witness to anyone, but be sure to recognize that some do, whether or not they feel effective in doing so.  It is much easier to blast, it stirs and maximises effect.  But with any group, and especially an international group, be sure to affirm the good that is happening today.

5. Delivery matters. You cannot turn good content into a good talk without good delivery.  (At the same time good delivery will not sanctify weak content.)

I was going to complete the list today, but actually I’ll save the last thoughts for tomorrow.  As ever, feel free to comment.  I’d love to hear the reflections of those present at the ELF too.

Reflections on the European Leadership Forum (ELF)

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

This week I had the privilege of attending the European Leadership Forum in Hungary.  This is an outstanding event that seeks to connect ministries and leaders across the continent via various “networks” that meet during the forum, then stay in touch in between.  The event was exceptionally well run.  A few random thoughts as far as preaching is concerned:

1. Evangelical Christianity is intellectually very robust. This is certainly not the only thing that we can or should say about the faith, but often we feel bullied into not believing this.  With strident new atheism on the march, as well as other belief systems, it is easy to slip into a fluffy Christianity that fails to stand for truth or present the evidence for the reliability of the Bible, the reality of the resurrection and so on.  I don’t want to shift this blog into an apologetic debate center (there are other sites with that focus), but as preachers it is helpful to be reminded of the robust core of the faith.

2. Leaders need to be reading at a higher level. In the busy schedule of life and ministry it is easy to slip into a low level of personal intake.  As a preacher you are an influencer, and therefore a leader, irrespective of title or position.  As a leader you need to be feeding on that which is deeply nutritious for your soul.  As a leader you need to be, wherever possible, pushing yourself beyond the level of those you influence: perhaps through your choice of reading materials, your level of sacred familiarity with the Word of God, your level of intimacy with the Lord, among other things.

I’ll keep this post short and save some other reflections on the forum for next time.  If you were there this week, please comment and share your reflections too.

Keep Looking

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Observation does not work in haste.  It takes time to keep looking at something and really see it.  I’m told that you cannot get the best out of an art gallery by rushing around and taking mental snapshots (my default approach).  I know that neither can you get the best out of a Bible passage from a quick glance.  The problem is that we find triggers to move on.

One trigger that often gets us, and therefore undermines our observation, is that we “find a message.”  We look at the passage, see a superficial outline, and then move on to forming the message.  In reality we would do well to continue observing the passage.

For example, Colossians 4:2-6.  When I first looked at that a few weeks ago, the structure was fairly obvious.  Paul is asking the Colossians to keep on praying (verse 2), for Paul to have opportunities to speak the gospel (verses 3-4).  Then Paul moves on to describe how their conduct should be toward outsiders (verses 5-6).  The structure is simple and it preaches: pray for ministers, and interact well yourselves.

It works, it preaches, but further observation helps to unite the passage further.  As it stands, my outline so far is really two almost distinct ideas.  However, the passage flows as one thought.  For instance, Paul urges them to pray for God to open doors for the gospel (v3), so that he may speak as he “ought to speak.” (v4).  Likewise, perhaps the action of the readers described in verse 5 implies the opening of a door, so that they will have opportunity to speak “as they ought” to speak (v6).  The passage is asking for prayer for “ministers” as well as for themselves, but it is not so distinct as “pray for ministers, but simply interact well yourselves with outsiders.”  No, the prayer (and the action) is for the opening of doors and then the appropriate speech to follow.  If the language of “minister” is used for verses 3-4, then it must also be used of verses 5-6.  There is a unity to the passage that a superficial outline may miss.

Often it is easy to see something that will preach, and then stop looking.  Let’s be diligent to wrestle more with the text, to believe there is greater unity to the thought than may at first appear.  The writer had a clear thought, let’s honour that by pursuing the thought as we study.

Review: Explosive Preaching, by Ron Boyd-MacMillan

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Subtitle: Letters on Detonating the Gospel in the 21st Century.

explosivepreaching

Published in 2006 by Paternoster.

I partially reviewed this book several weeks ago.  Please take a look at that “pre-review” (click here).  My opinion of the book has not changed as I’ve finished it.  It is creative, insightful, humorous, challenging and helpful.  There are small moments where you may find it annoying, but better to provoke reaction than to leave no mark at all!

To be honest the third section, on the history of preaching, was decent and helpful, but perhaps not quite as good as I’d hoped for.  Nevertheless, it is worth reading.  The final section, on the life of the preacher, is excellent.  Although somewhat scattered with a feel of “mopping up” the bits that were left over, these chapters were nevertheless worth the price of the book.

I have heard that this book is hard to get hold of in the USA.  If that is the case, then it is a real shame.  Even if you need to order the book from a UK seller on Amazon marketplace, I would encourage you to do so (I order books from the US this way at times, and have never had a problem).

A lot of book about preaching tend to say the same thing again.  This one doesn’t.

Preaching Curriculum

/ Peter Mead / 31 Comments

We all have our unique interests.  One of mine is curricula.  I love looking at the curricula of Bible schools, or helping to think through new possibilities for Bible schools (perhaps adding a second year to a one year program, etc.)  So perhaps it is only me that would enjoy the last of the chapters in Explosive Preaching, where the author describes the one-year curriculum he helped to design for a house-church movement in China.  The radical design is worth sharing, not only for those who share my fascination with things academic, but for all of us as a good nudge in our level of preparation for preaching.  Here’s the 66:33:1 curriculum:

66 – Each student, by the end of the year, has to be ready to preach (without notes) a one-hour sermon on each of the 66 books of the Bible.  This sermon is to include an outline of the content of the book, and contemporary application to the individual, the church and the nation of China.  At the end of the year, 3 books would be selected at random, then the student has five seconds to launch into their message.

33 – Each student had to prepare 33 one-hour sermons on the life and work of Christ, each based on a single verse (only 10 allowed from outside the gospels).  His whole ministry must be covered, from pre-existence to second coming (although I’d suggest His ministry extends beyond the second coming!)  Interestingly, students are allowed one page of notes per sermon in this category!

1 – Each student has to prepare an “end-of time” sermon – any length (since time constraints are irrelevant in eternity).  The goal is to help the student consider the whole salvation story from God’s point of view.  Perhaps at the great feast we will get to enjoy such a sermon looking back over it all . . . but would we be ready to give the sermon?

So there it is.  A creative and probably very effective curriculum.  If you had one year to train a preacher, what would you include?

Preaching and Pace

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

The title today is surely misleading.  A few weeks ago I asked “What font do you preach in?” and received comments with suggestions on the best font to use for powerpoint.  Oops, it is a good idea to read the post before sharing your timely tips!  Nevertheless, I leave today’s title as it is.

I’m going to keep this post short.  Again, it is prompted by one of the last chapters in Explosive Preaching. It is prompted by the importance of preaching out of fellowship with God.  In the book a fantastic conversation is recounted, a conversation between the author and a Chinese pastor kept in solitary confinement for many years.  So much to benefit from that brief conversation – the notion of simplifying life (building a cell), in order to enjoy fellowship with God (the cell becomes a garden, and God becomes a friend).  But here’s the simple quote I want to share, a quote that may touch a nerve for many of us:

Fellowship pace is a lot slower than service pace.

Have we allowed ourselves to grow accustomed to “service pace” – cantering along and expecting God to jog along next to us?  Perhaps we need to make the necessary moves in order to free up the space and slow down to “fellowship pace.”  God walked in the garden with Adam, I suspect many of us are subconsciously wondering why He doesn’t jog in the busy city with us.  Pace and preaching.  Important to get this one figured out.

Is It Wrong to Desire Influence?

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Most chapters in Explosive Preaching prompt me to think of several posts.  Hopefully Boyd-MacMillan will forgive my leaning on his book for ideas so often in recent weeks in exchange for my encouragement to others to buy it for themselves.  Chapter 28 in the book is a chapter that stands out as unlike anything I’ve come across in other preaching books (I appreciate that, as I also get feedback that this blog contains things not found in preaching books too!)

Success.

Is it wrong to desire it?  This chapter focuses on three very diverse preachers – Billy Graham, Martin Luther-King Jr and Robert Schuller.  The author writes, “They all became influential preachers.  But they all wanted to become influential preachers.  They were not modest in their desire for influence, nor bashful in the way that they sought to extend their influence.” (p237)

He goes on to write under several headings: the sermon, the person, the wave, the moment, the movement, the network, the event.  His conclusion, the lesson he learns from these men is “if you want to be an influential preacher, then don’t just preach a great sermon!” He sees their concern with reception and reverberation.  Reception refers to their making sure that their words were heard optimally.  Reverberation meant ensuring that their words would be heard long after delivery.

I suppose this is a matter of prayerful balance.  We desire to influence others as good stewards of the ministry that God gives us.  Yet we feel very uncomfortable at the suggestion that we should pursue influence (or “success” in any human measurement).  I know this post could prompt a strong reaction.  I suspect it may get a reaction that is unfair to the book that prompted the post.  I would encourage you to read the book.  I would encourage you to prayerfully wrestle with the issues raised in this post.  Fleshly or spiritual, a desire for influence is very real in most of us – let’s not ignore that, but rather prayerfully wrestle with the issue.

How Would Jesus Preach?

/ Peter Mead / 3 Comments

I have been impressed and helped by Explosive Preaching (written by Ron Boyd-MacMillan).  I’ll share a couple more highlights and then finish with a final review of the book.

Near the end of the book, MacMillan shares some tips for effective preaching from the example of Jesus.  I won’t go into detail in my words or his, but here is the list (to get the detail, buy the book!)

1.    Great preaching starts with great praying.
2.    Be the word you preach
3.    Mint punch lines and master the two-minute story.
4.    Try the open air
5.    To communicate the gospel, don’t just preach
6.    Remember to be revolutionary
7.    Get over crowds
8.    It’s OK to shock
9.    Preach by dying

Some of these are self-explanatory, others are probably only tantalizing if you’ve not read the book.  However, the concept is important – what can we learn from the preaching of Jesus?  Would you add to the list?  What have you learned about preaching from observing Him preach in the gospels?