Passion Sappers 3

October 6, 2011October 3, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

For two days we have been pondering possible problems that might instigate a drain in our passion to preach. We thought about our connection with God in the first post, and our vision for the church and its ministry in the second post.

Let’s not miss one more important possibility . . . maybe the issue is something in our life or ministry that is draining the passion. After all, we seek to connect with God and with the listeners, bridging the gap between the two. But we mustn’t miss the reality that in preaching, the preacher matters too. Maybe it isn’t something spiritually wrong, or a ministry vision issue, maybe it is something else?

Am I physically healthy? I won’t turn this blog into a physical health advice column, but I know myself . . . I am more motivated for everything when I am looking after myself physically – drinking enough water, exercising regularly, eating carefully, watching intake of supplements (a deficiency in a single vitamin or mineral could be wiping you out), avoiding filling my body with low-level poisons and junk fuel, etc. Even apart from the contradictory message that it sends to listeners when we are completely unhealthy, or the poor stewardship of living in such a way as we are likely to die years younger than necessary, I know it is worth looking after ourselves for the sake of energy and motivation levels alone.

Am I getting enough rest? It is easy in the pressure zone of ministry, not to mention family life, other work commitments, etc., to cut corners on rest in order to get more done. Truth is that we are designed to function best with sufficient rest. Burning the candle at both ends will damage our ability to think clearly, to function with energy, to stay healthy, etc. Sometimes we need to remind ourselves of the truth in Psalm 121 and 127 . . . our Lord never slumbers nor sleeps, but He does give to His beloved, even while we are asleep!

Am I engaged in stimulating fellowship? Two of the loneliest places I can think of are the pulpit and the church leadership position. Being involved in ministry leadership creates a certain distance and loneliness. It should not be this way. God has designed us to function best in teams, stimulating one another, sparking dreams and vision, looking out for each others’ hearts, etc. Have you fallen for the pyramid climbing view of leadership hierarchy that means you are keeping others at a distance to maintain your own position of power? It’s time to let others in and experience the unique joy and stimulation of genuine fellowship, of interdependence, of daring each other to dream and pray to a God who can do more than all we ask or even dare to dream.

Other passion sappers? I’m sure I’m missing a few . . .

Passion Sappers 2

October 5, 2011October 3, 2011 / Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Yesterday we pondered a pair of possible reasons for a perished passion to preach. Focusing on God, our abiding in Christ and in His Word, is very important. Yet preaching is about the link forged between God and our world. Perhaps the passion is drained by a loss of vision for the recipients of the ministry?

Passion for the Church – Do you see no hope of change or progress in your church? At its core, biblical preaching in the local church context is about seeing God at work transforming lives and the church community as you speak for Him. When the hope fades due to apparent ecclesial entrenchment, so will your passion to truly preach engagingly and relevantly in the church. Sometimes this is about leadership structures, sometimes about power-figures with personal agenda, sometimes it can feel like church-wide malaise with a commitment to concrete boots when it comes to moving forward (and it can feel like drowning is the only option). The local church environment can be a brutal place to do ministry, but it is God’s primary plan. Perhaps your eyes have shifted from the One who promised to build His church to the ones apparently committed to thwarting that mission in your context. Eyes on the Lord!

Passion for the Community – Have you lost the sense that your church can reach its community? At its core, biblical preaching in the local church context is about seeing God’s spreading goodness reach beyond the gathering of believers to the community in which God has placed you. But in an increasingly hostile environment , where the church seems to be increasingly marginalised by society, it is easy to lose hope of impact. While I would encourage churches to make their evangelistic and caring ministries as connecting and relevant as possible (why offend people with religiosity instead of the gospel?), at the same time we need to remember that God both chooses and uses the weak things in the world to shame the wise. Maybe He will even use your church, in all its weakness. The key is that He is the one to use it . . . so eyes on the Lord, again!

Passion for the World – Have you settled into such a local vision that you’ve lost your global impact dreams? At its core, Christianity has a global agenda. But failure within the church and in the local community means that many churches have all but given up on any sense of global vision. If someone from the church swims upstream with a commitment to global missions, great, but we’ll probably do all we can to slow them down and get in their way first. If they make it to the field, then we will feel satisfied that we have a global ministry. Perhaps we need to dare to dream a bit more, a bit bigger, a bit further . . . which only happens if we are engaged with a global missionary God who Himself has a passion for the whole world.

So we’ve looked at God yesterday, and His passion for ministry today . . . there are many more avenues to pursue in each of these categories (feel free to do so in the comments).

Passion Sappers

October 4, 2011October 3, 2011 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Chatting with a good friend last week we got on to the subject of motivation for preaching. Whether you preach every week or periodically, there is always the possibility of losing your passion to preach. It’s good to be aware of what might cause the passion to drain away, so here are some ideas:

Passion for God – Has your abiding grown stale? At its core, preaching is about representing God as you speak for Him. If the connection grows dull, then the spark to preach will often go with it. Remember Jesus’ words in John 15 – apart from me you can do nothing. Strong stuff. So it is always good to ask ourselves about the state of our abiding . . . am I not only tipping my hat to the Lord, but leaning into Him, more than that, am I pressed up against Him? If not, then my internal motivation tank will easy drain and leave me sapped of passion to preach.

Passion for God’s Word – Have you settled for knowing, rather than being in God’s Word? At its core, biblical preaching is about re-presenting God’s Word as you speak for Him. If the Word isn’t fresh and exciting and personal and relevant to your life, then your passion to preach it to others might fade. Being an “expert” in the Bible doesn’t guarantee a passion to preach it. I could list theological faculties with experts in the Bible who have zero passion to preach it because it is not personally engaging them. Jesus faced Bible experts with no passion for anything but making themselves look good and killing him! Expertise is not the key, present experience of encountering God in the Word is.

We could ponder further issues like prayer, spiritually stimulating fellowship, etc. But for now let’s leave it with a focus on abiding in Christ and in His Word. More tomorrow, with the gaze in a different direction, perhaps…

Eyes to See

October 3, 2011October 3, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Do our motives influence our Bible reading so that we only see some of what is there, and then skew that part too? John 5 says motives influence Bible reading. Today’s post is my bi-weekly offering on the Cor Deo site . . . please click here to go there.

How to Preach the One True God – Part Two

October 1, 2011September 30, 2011 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

So do we have to thoroughly define terms every time we mention God? That is, will every sermon be thwarted by a systematics lecture within moments of setting sail from the introduction? Not at all. Here are four suggestions that I think will have cumulative power without disrupting every sermon completely. Remember the first suggestion from yesterday though . . . you need to know the difference between the God defined by philosophy and the one true God who has revealed Himself in the Son and through the Spirit.

2. Repetition of “which God” question – by repeatedly pointing out that not every assumed description of the “one true God” is biblically true of the “one true God.” Some assumptions are true of Him, but not primary in His self-revelation. Just as it can be powerful in an evangelistic setting to ask someone who doesn’t believe in God which God they don’t believe in, so it can be powerful to open the subject up to Christians and ask which God they do believe in. It is a dangerous assumption that all who refer to God mean the same being, or even are clear on who He is. Sadly too many end up assuming a sort of impersonal ultimate force rather than the feeling, thinking, personal, loving creator God of the Bible. Let’s chip away at the naive assumption that everyone basically knows who God is.

3. Emphasis of particular text in light of its context – just as we can overlay a certain set of divine assumptions on the Bible as a whole, so we can easily do that with particular texts. Try to be more nuanced in making clear what a text is offering us as it reveals God. For example, Yahweh high and lifted up in Isaiah 6, holy holy holy . . . needs to be preached in light of Isaiah 1-5, where His heart for the whoring faithless nation who don’t draw near in loving devotion is made clear. Sovereign and holy? Absolutely. Distant, cold, rule-obsessed and uninvolved? Never! Without seeing how God reveals Himself and His heart in chapters 1-5, the sixth chapter can be preached with wrong emphasis, and the last five verses can really end up preaching that other philosophically-driven view of God.

4. Emphasis of particular text in light of complete revelation – that is to say, don’t give the impression that “God” in the Old Testament is just “Father” in New Testament terms. How easy it is to give the mistaken impression that God becomes a trinity when the Son is incarnated. The God of the Old Testament is trinity, even if each particular instance doesn’t make that clear. Was it the Father than spoke face to face with Abraham, that wrestled with Jacob, that spoke to the elders of Israel, etc.? What about the Spirit in the Old Testament? Any time we see “God” referenced in the Bible, we must be sensitive to the content and the informing theology at that point in the progress of revelation, but we shouldn’t forget what we now know more clearly about the one true God being trinity!

5. Since God is trinity, repetition of trinitarian hints are worthwhile – just to reinforce the previous point, don’t feel you have to fully explain the Trinity every time you mention it. Why not intrigue people with a sense of the beautiful attractive wonder of who God really and personally is through trinitarian hints as you preach the Bible. Don’t wait for the overt trinitarian formula to refer to trinity. Don’t miss the Father/Son language and turn that into a generic one-size-fits-all “God” reference as some preachers and authors do (almost giving the impression that the Son is somehow less than God). Don’t ignore the trinity in the Old Testament where there is a hint, and even where there isn’t. After all, we want to preach the one true trinitarian God of the Bible!

Ok, two posts over the daily limit . . . I need to stop, but feel free to comment.

How to Preach the One True God

September 30, 2011September 30, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday’s post sparked some good comments, which in turn have stirred my heart to follow up with another post. It is true that we need to be clear evangelistically which God we are preaching – a friend of mine used the example of Elijah with the prophets of Baal. He didn’t affirm their zeal and assume they had the same deity in mind, just the wrong label, he absolutely set up and followed through on the competition between two deities – one real and the other not. Nevertheless I am not advocating that we copy everything about Elijah’s methodology!

Actually I am not really referring to evangelism at all. My post was about being clear which God we are preaching to those sitting in our church (even if they are all Christians, albeit unlikely). Are we preaching the monadic lory-grabbing power-God of philosophy who can think only of himself? Or are we preaching the relationally self-giving glory-giving God who exists in Trinity and invites us into the circle of his other-centred loving relationality? To know the true God is eternal life, so we desperately don’t want to get this wrong!

Richard’s comment referred to a conversation with a Muslim, “after two hours it dawned on me that though we both affirmed “God”, be it as supreme or “one” or whatever, the “One God” he was talking about was not the “One Trinitarian God” I was talking about.” I’ve had that sensation while in conversation with Christians!

So how can we preach the one true God? Do we end up in lengthy detailed explanations every time we come to a technical term like “Father” or “Son” or even “God?” I don’t think that’s necessary. Now and then an extended explanation, and even a differentiation, can work wonders. (Remember that if you don’t differentiate, they will overlay their selfish and distant and cold God on your selfless and warm-hearted Immanuel God.) But there is also a cumulative power in preaching that can work wonders. Five brief suggestions:

1. Be sure you know the difference between the God defined by philosophical attributes and the God self-revealed in His relationality in the Bible. While many or most of the attributes listed in our systematic theologies are true, we might be wrong-headed thinking that God can be defined without the Son as our point of entry into the discussion. Remember that Jesus didn’t prove his deity by ticking every box in the philosophical attribute list, but the Jewish leadership easily spotted his claim through references to his relationship the the Father. Be sure you really know the difference and are preaching the one true trinitarian God of the Bible. Don’t be guilty of overlay (and probably assume you are, since you’ll naturally assume you aren’t!)

Ok, I said brief, but the post became more than twice my daily limit. So the other four suggestions will be coming tomorrow (I’ll put up a post on Saturday for a change – it’s too important a subject to wait past another Sunday!)

Preaching’s Biggest Assumption

September 29, 2011September 29, 2011 / Peter Mead / 9 Comments

I think the biggest assumption found in Christian preaching today might be this: that God is God.

Now I don’t mean that God has the right to be God, that is a different matter and a truth worth affirming. I mean that when the preacher says “God,” the listeners know who is meant. That is a big assumption.

It’s true that we live in an age of great religious confusion. After all, there may be Muslims, or Sikhs, or Hindus, or Buddhists, or New Age, or cult members present. There does seem to be an ever widening array of divinity options in our world today. But actually this isn’t my thinking in this post. Even when all present would call themselves Christians, I still think this is a big assumption to make.

Among Christians there are different “versions” of God at large, although they essentially do boil down to two main options. One is the monadic deity of philosophy – a God that tends to be assumed and agreed on in terms of his inherent attributes. This is the God that can be defined and described for chapter after chapter of some systematic theology texts before any reference to the Son or the Spirit or the Trinity are made. So many preachers refer to God, and assume all know what they mean . . . the God who made everything, is everywhere, judges everything, is all powerful, etc.

Somehow this power-God of philosophy is overlaid onto the Bible and assumed to be the same as the God of the Bible who is Father because of the eternal relationality of the Trinity, because of the Son and the Spirit. This God somehow seems to be slightly, and at times, radically different from the God that “everyone knows is God” of philosophy. My mind goes back to Mike Reeves’ talk at the Delighted By God conference in the summer where he contrasted the God of Arius and the God of Athanasius, offering both as the two options present in contemporary Christianity (here’s the link).

It isn’t only the increasing biblical illiteracy of our times that makes identifying the God we preach important. It is also the centuries’ old confusion of monadic and trinitarian understandings of God that makes this important. As we make sure our preaching is theocentric and pointing to God rather than humanity as its goal and focus, let’s be sure we are clear which God we are preaching.

More Help in the Vicinity

September 28, 2011September 25, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday we were thinking about texts that don’t sit up and easily offer engaging and interesting sermon spice. Perhaps they lack illustrative content, or engaging narratival features. The temptation is to relegate the text to a small role in the making of the sermon and break out a couple of humdinger illustrations that you know will stir the listeners. Before you resort to such tactics, I’m encouraging you to poke around in the neighbourhood of the text some more.

Yesterday we thought about the situation of the author and the recipients. Both point to narrative potential, even in the midst of an epistle. Here are a couple more leads to follow before you move on from the desk and get too creative in your sermon preparation:

3. What about a quotation? It’s hard to get through a paragraph in the New Testament without there being a quote or allusion or wording from the Old Testament. A bit of digging here might shine light on the text and offer more angles for the preaching of the text. Of course, good exegesis should have unearthed the quotes, but perhaps another look as a preacher will yield some potential colour for your sermon. Maybe Old Testament story, maybe something in the cross-over from back then to the day of the author.

4. What about the rest of the book? Seems strange to say it, but preachers can sometimes fall into the same trap many commentators seem to meet – atomistic Bible reading. That is, you are preaching from verses 5-11, so you only really focus on verses 5-11 (and in some cases, one verse at a time!) It is part of the flow of the whole, so look around again and see how your section works in the whole of the book. This might yield an angle from which to preach the text with greater engagement and interest.

There is always a danger that our passion to preach well can move us on from understanding the passage to the max. Don’t be in too much of a rush, but instead be sure to diligently dive into every detail in the text, and in the vicinity.

Help in the Vicinity

September 27, 2011September 25, 2011 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Some passages are sitting up and shouting “preach me! preach me!” Others are slightly less helpful. That is, the text is, of course, God-breathed and useful. But perhaps the author didn’t include any illustrations or pictorial language in the passage, or there is neither story in the passage or in the immediate context . . . it just reads like a logical progression of content that needs something to make it sing from the pulpit. Epistles tend to have sections like this.

Be careful! In this situation you are going to be tempted to preach less than biblically. You’ll be tempted to use the text as a springboard and bounce off it to preach your own message, using your own illustrations, etc. The text could become a very minor bit-part player making little more than a cameo appearance in your message. I’m assuming you’ve studied the passage and understand it, but I want to encourage you to search a little more in the vicinity of the text. It may yet yield a more thoroughgoing biblical sermon.

1. What about the author? Does his situation, life experience, background and story shine any light on the passage? If it does, then you have the hint of a narrative now . . . every life is a narrative, and this text might just tap into that in such a way that the message can be preached in an engaging manner with description and empathy and flow.

2. What about the situation? Bible writers didn’t write for a hobby. They were neither drunk nor wasteful. If they put it on papyrus, then it was for a purpose. What was going on with the recipients of the writing that prompted the author to write what he did. Again, you now are poking around in the bushes of a story, and stories will engage, allow description, create tension, offer resolution, empathy and intrigue. People are interested in people (that’s how many TV shows work).

I’ll add two more tomorrow…

Ministry Checkup: Loving Giver or Glory Seeker?

September 26, 2011September 27, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

What kind of ministry do you have? Are you a loving giver or a glory seeker?

Paul addresses his own motivations in 1Thessalonians 2 – a passage every preacher should meditate on periodically.

Don’t Minister as a Glory Seeker (2:1-6)

What did Paul do? He ministered boldly despite the suffering and conflict he faced. He was not after glory from man, but accepted shameful treatment. Why did he do this? His goal was to please God and not man. He knew God tests the hearts of those who serve Him, so Paul didn’t flatter, or greedily pursue gain. He was not after glory from people.

How are we doing? Chances are, if we are serving in a local church setting in the world today, that many of us are facing some level of discomfort and conflict in our ministry. Shameful treatment may be a bit of an overstatement for many, but it often isn’t completely off target either. Let’s not pursue glory from people, but serve with hearts pointed in the right direction – to please God.

Minister as a Loving Mother (2:7-8)

What did Paul do? He cared gently and tenderly like a good mother. Why did he do this? He loved them.

And us? When we minister to others we give of ourselves. When we preach the Word, we often feel spent. When serving a church, we will regularly find ourselves caring for broken and hurting individuals. They don’t tend to put it on the advertising, but it is often true, “Come as our minister and be a Mum to us!”

Minister as a Loving Father (2:9-12)

What did Paul do? He worked hard in their midst, setting a strong example, like a good father. Why did he do this? He was moved to motivate them for the end result that their lives would bring glory to God.

And us? Ministering in a church, whether full-time, part-time or whatever time, is hard work. Yet some do struggle with laziness. I read the other day a comment from Bill Hybels – if you want to improve your preaching, find a way to give an extra hour to the preparation. What level is your perspiration indicator showing as you labour in your ministry?

In the subsequent verses we see that Paul did have both glory and joy, but it was the Thessalonians in their response to the ministry. He didn’t pursue his own glory, but lovingly gave himself for their sakes through his ministry.