Homiletics

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 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 3: Carefully Communicate Compelling Characters

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Another January 2008 post for you, another day of holiday for me with my family (this is pre-loaded, in case you are wondering). . .

As preachers we always run the risk of preaching in black and white. We read a biblical text, compile the facts and preach them. Biblical writers wrote in a time where detail concerning characters in the narrative was sparse to say the least. We don’t read physical descriptions very often, other details are usually lacking and a character’s character is often only hinted at. Yet today we preach in a world where character detail and description are much more prominent (in advertising images, commercials, dramas, movies, etc.)

Warning! – The danger here is that we preach from the biblical lack of detail in a manner that resembles an abstract or colorless lecture. We can easily preach messages that people don’t relate to, can’t connect with and probably won’t be touched by.

Possibility! – The text often does give us more than we may at first notice. So with a little extra work and care, perhaps we can preach narrative texts in a more compelling and gripping way.

Definitely! – First we must be sure to make the most of whatever the text does give us. Don’t skim over a physical description, or the meaning of a name, or dialogue from their lips, or any other statement regarding the person.

Carefully! – Typically the text will not give enough information to build a full profile of a character. But carefully proceed to build more of a profile if you can. Consider all pertinent biblical, historical and cultural information. In areas where there is no possible certainty, perhaps suggest possibility without being definite. “Perhaps he felt . . . or was . . . or wanted . . .”

Remember that your goal is to preach the idea of the text with relevance to your listeners. Don’t get sidetracked into endless character profiling like an obsessive detective in a crime drama. Of course, facts are critically important. However, remember that lectures can be boring, but characters in dramas are compelling.

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!

Holiday Post 1: Full Meal Deal

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Since I am going on holiday with my family, I am also not writing new material this week.  But here are a few posts from years ago that might be of interest . . .

I still remember the first pulpit advice I received.  I was a teenager and had been asked to lead a meeting.  I wasn’t preaching, but I was chairing the meeting, introducing songs, speaker, doing the reading, praying, etc.  Afterwards my youth leader came to me and encouraged me that I’d done well.  Then he offered this advice; “Don’t ever apologize for what you’re doing.  It doesn’t matter who asked you, or how incapable you may feel, God has allowed you to be there so don’t apologize.”

The ingredients to a pulpit introductory apology tend to include feelings of inadequacy, any lack of preparation, feelings of humility, a desire to appear humble, a lack of planning for opening comments, nervousness, etc.  The ingredients are understandable, but the result is not helpful.  Don’t apologize.  It grossly undermines credibility and can easily transfer your anxiety to your listeners.

If you are humble, it will show.  But if you are nervous, unprepared, unqualified, incapable, etc., people don’t need that pointed out to them.  They may notice, and they will usually be very gracious.  Or more often than you realize, they will not notice at all.  The first time I taught a lecture at seminary I mentioned that time was running low so I had to skip some material.  My prof followed up on that, “Don’t tell them you are cutting stuff out, let them think they’re getting the full meal deal!”

What was the first helpful pulpit advice you received?

Solutions

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

This week I am on holiday with my family.  This means that I am preloading old posts rather than presenting new material.  I suppose if I hadn’t told you then nobody would have noticed, but maybe there are some preachers reading who need the nudge to take a break, get refreshed, be with your family.

Anyway, this post is new.  It is my bi-weekly offering on the Cor Deo site.  It is longer than my normal length on this site, but it might be worth a look.  What happens when we only present one-fifth of the New Covenant?  What happens when we fall back into a default Old Covenant approach to life?  Why does this happen?  Click here, or the picture, to go to the post.

Expository: Why?

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

All week I have been raising concerns about different approaches taken to preaching.  There are others, but I wanted to finish with a reminder of the core requirements for expository preaching.  It isn’t about sermon shape – all four approaches mentioned this week might be used in an expository ministry.  Yet none of them define it.

1. The best preaching will always involve the work of God’s Spirit.  He is the one that searches the depths of the heart and communicates that.  We need to be sure that we are pursuing His heart as we study His Word.  We must prayerfully pursue the whole process of preparation, all the time being open to learning and changing and growing ourselves.  We also need to pursue His heart for the people to whom we preach.  Prayer has to be a critical thread throughout the whole preparation process.

2. The best biblical preaching will always be genuinely biblical.  That is, the text is not being used, but offered.  It isn’t a data source for anecdotes, for launch pads or for proof texting.  It is the inspired Word of God that we seek to offer to others as we preach.  This means that we take the form seriously, we take the meaning seriously, we take the relevance seriously.  The Bible is not something that serves us, it is something that changes us, and it is something we consequently serve to others.  And the more effectively we communicate the Word, the clearer the path for listeners to not only gain information, but to be transformed by encountering the God who gives of Himself in His Word.

3. The best preaching will always take the issue of communication seriously.  So it isn’t enough to pray hard and study well, producing a textually accurate and even a congregation specific relevant message.  If we don’t take our role as communicators seriously, then we can be a real bottleneck.  Communication is more than just a crude explanation of exegesis with some illustrations stapled on to the outline.  Communication is concerned with the mood of the text, the persons to whom we are speaking, the situation, etc.  It is concerned with the words we choose, the way we say them, the body language that reinforces or undermines.  Our communication matters because God places such a high value on communication.

4. The best preaching will always emphasise the relevance to the listeners.  We don’t make the Bible relevant.  We show how it is relevant.  And so we don’t perform a sermon to show off our own knowledge, nor even to simply declare God’s truth.  We preach to communicate to people.  So we care, and we prepare in order to communicate.

God. Bible. Communicator. Listeners.  All critical features of expository preaching.

Topical Preaching: Why Not?

/ Peter Mead / 5 Comments

Titles are intended to provoke interest.  This one is not intended to condemn all topical approaches to preaching.  I suppose I should probably call it “A brief discussion into why a topical approach to preaching should not be our default.”  But that would hardly make you want to read it.

I preached a topical message last Sunday.  I will do so again.  However, I don’t do this as a default approach.  I think the reason that people do is probably tied to the issue of interest or relevance.  Surely a topical approach allows the preaching to be relevant to the listeners?  Not necessarily.

1. The relevance of a message is not determined by sermon shape, but by preacher’s strategy.  That is, you can preach topically and be both dull and irrelevant.  You can preach a single text exposition and be both engaging and highly relevant.  The real issue is the heart of the preacher being in tune with God’s heart for His people, and in tune with the people to whom he preaches – both to know them, and to care for them.  If you care, it will show.

2. Relevance is not something we add, it is something we bring out.  It is something we emphasize.  All Scripture is God-breathed and it is useful, profitable.  Our task is not to add relevance, either by making up disconnected applications, or by piling up application-overt texts.  Our task is to show how whatever we preach makes a difference in the lives of the listeners.  Whether we choose to use multiple texts or not is a different matter, but it is not the key to relevance in our preaching.

3. Topical preaching, if it is to be truly expository, is a lot of work.  This is something I always tell beginning preachers.  It might seem like the only way to “fill time,” or a helpful short-cut, or even a means to relevant preaching.  In reality, good topical preaching is a lot of extra work.  Let’s say you choose four texts to be your four points, with an overarching biblical main idea to guide the message.  That’s four passages that you should study properly and handle properly.  Topical preaching multiplies work for the preacher (and sometimes it multiples work for the listener, just trying to keep it all together, find the passages, etc.).

4. Topical preaching, if it isn’t expository, can lead to dangerous imposition.  That is to say, if you aren’t diligently and carefully understanding passages according to their context, then you could well be imposing meaning that isn’t really there.  And let’s say you somehow manage to handle every text accurately, chances are that listeners will copy your approach to Scripture.  They will parachute in, grab a phrase, apply it according to their own agenda and they will get it wrong (even if you got it right).

I think we should preach topically.  But let’s do so judiciously.  It shouldn’t be our default.  And when we do it, let’s be sure to really let the texts be in charge of the message.