How to . . . ?

Focus on the basics

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Great preaching always involves the “effective execution of elementary ideas.” (Attributed to Eugene Emerson Jennings)

It is tempting to give attention in preaching to the clever and intricate subtleties of the art and craft of preaching, but subtleties work best when built on a foundation of good solid basics. A clearly derived and cleanly defined Biblical idea. A definite and specific purpose. A logical and orderly structure. Good pastoral relevance. Effective introduction. A clean finish. Most, if not all preachers would preach their next sermon more effectively if they would focus on the basics.

Sermon Purpose: Is There a Default Goal?

/ Peter Mead / 3 Comments

I recently wrote these words, “For an effective sermon, you need a clearly defined purpose – the specific response you prayerfully expect to occur in the life of the listeners.”

Does this mean the response has to be some kind of action? What if your purpose is to stir affection, bolster belief or improve cognition? These can all be very legitimate types of objectives for a sermon. Yet our default should be to preach for a response that includes, but goes beyond the heart and the head. Consider James 1:22 – “Be doers of the Word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves.”

As a preacher we should usually consider how to legitimately apply the Biblical idea to ourselves and our listeners for transformed affection, belief, and conduct. We wouldn’t want to assist anyone in “deceiving” themselves!

Question: Is “creating need” the same as preaching for felt-needs?

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Tim asked the following question in reference to “Introductions: The Essential Ingredients” –

I’m interested in this ‘create or surface need’ idea. Is there not a danger that this tends towards sermons being man-centred and self-help focussed? Like ‘what felt need (not even necessarily true need) does this text provide the solution for?’ Does this encourage a sense that God and His Word are merely felt-need-meeters?

I’m not being negative – I like the idea of ‘create or surface need’. It just raises questions in my mind.

Peter Mead responds: This is an important question. When people speak of preaching for “felt needs” the concern is with preaching that is primarily “how to” in nature. For example, how to raise teenagers, how to have a happy marriage, etc. There is a concern that preaching these kinds of messages do please listeners, but fail to address their real needs, fail to be God-centered, and often fail to honor the intention of the Biblical texts. These are important concerns!

The reason that “need” is included in the introduction to a message is not to determine the nature of the whole message (man-centered rather than God-centered), but to create an opportunity for the Word of God to get into good soil. Using the parable of the four soils for a moment, the key issue there is a “listening heart.” I believe it is naive to assume that people are always eagerly listening when they sit through a sermon. Let me quote Haddon Robinson in Biblical Preaching, “When you start, the people listen because they ought to, but before long, you must motivate them to listen because they can’t help but listen.” (p.168)

The core conviction here is this – do we believe the Bible should be applied to life? Or to put it another way, do we believe not only that all Scripture is God-breathed, but also that it is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work? (2Tim.3:16-17) Of course we do, which is why most preachers at least make some effort at application at the end of a message. If application is acceptable at the end of a message, then why would it not be acceptable in some form at the start? The reality is that many listeners may be long gone by the end of a message that shows no clear connection to their lives (maybe they will be asleep, or drifting to thoughts of pressing concerns – their upcoming confrontation at work, resolving the increasing tension in the family, how they can improve their golf swing, etc.) Some concerns and distractions may be frivolous, some are very understandable. So what to do? Serve up some relevance early on in the message, thereby helping hearts to be listening to the Word of God as it is preached.

Consider how Peter began his sermon on Pentecost – by promising to clarify the concern of the listeners regarding what was taking place before them. In fact, consider also Acts 3 and 17 for two more examples. The truth of God’s Word does not need to be watered down or changed in response to itching ears. The Word of God is highly relevant to life, our preaching should reflect that early on as well as at the end (and throughout).

I am not advocating God-less or Bible-weak self-help motivational speeches with seven steps to successful living. I am suggesting we preach theocentric, God-honoring, Biblical messages that by His grace, and by the power of the Holy Spirit, can change lives and conform people to the image of Christ in all areas of life. Being Biblical and relevant are not mutually exclusive options in preaching, they are both vital. It just helps listeners to listen if some of that relevance is strategically placed at the beginning, instead of all at the end.

More thoughts on this?

Introductions: Introducing What?

/ Mike Roth / 4 Comments

Tim, you ask a very God-honoring question when it comes to homiletical introduction. Creating or surfacing need is certainly part of what an introduction must do. In fact, as Peter states in his 5/11/2007 entry, an introduction must do four things. It must get attention, create rapport, establish authority and create or surface need. Yet, for these four components to be God-honoring and not man-honoring (which I believe gets at the heart of your question), David Buttrick, in Homiletic Moves and Structures makes a very important point. He states that an introduction must do two things. First, it must give focus to consciousness. Second, it must provide some sort of hermeneutical orientation.

Buttrick is not contradicting the points that Peter makes. In fact, within his chapter on introductions, he makes some of the very same points. Rather, Buttrick establishes an overarching principle that is to contour and influence the direction of the points that Peter makes. In other words, while doing all that Peter has encouraged us to do in an introduction, focus and orientation to the text must occur. This can be difficult. It is much easier get attention, create rapport, establish authority and surface need autonomous from the text that is supposed to be introduced. This happens all the time in preaching and it is a colossal error.

It is all too easy to imagine isn’t it? The preacher stands, opens his Bible, takes out his notes and begins. He starts by catching attention and building rapport through funny or shocking stories. The audience laughs or gasps – sometimes both simultaneously (it is a weird sort of convulsion). The room emits an ethos of warmth and openness and then, the preacher begins to preach. The problem is that the first five minutes had nothing to do with the sermon. The congregation is now enthralled with the preacher not the passage. So, after “warming-up” and “catching the attention” of the congregation, the preacher has to spend another five minutes on a second introduction – this time, focusing on the Word of God. This is a terrible waste of time.

To be clear, the four points that Peter makes need to happen in an introduction. However, they must happen in a way that focuses consciousness and provides some sort of hermeneutical orientation to the passage that is going to be preached. This will take more preparation time, and a lot more effort, but it is worth it. We must capture the attention of our audience while concurrently directing them toward God and His Word. Any other result is not an introduction.

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.

When reading a text during the sermon

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Donald Sunukjian, professor of preaching at Talbot School of Theology, writes and teaches concerning “oral clarity.” One of the things he teaches relates to the reading of a text during a sermon. Many preachers will introduce a text with a question, perhaps asking people to find the answer as the text is read. Sunukjian feels that this practice is not helpful. For many listeners this leads to a struggle to spot the thing the preacher expects them to see, then when they fail, they are discouraged at their inability to glean such things from the text. Once the text has been read, the preacher will then highlight the point he was looking for and the listeners will have one fact underlined in their minds – they missed it. So the solution? Sunukjian encourages preachers to introduce a passage by telling people the point that the writer is making, clearly stating and restating the truth that will be noticed as the passage is read. Then as the passage is read, the listeners hear the point, it is reinforced as being truly biblical, and they feel more confident in their ability to read the Bible for themselves!

Sunukjian’s new book, Invitation to Biblical Preaching: Proclaiming Truth with Clarity and Relevance, will be reviewed on this site soon. If you have read it, feel free to submit your feedback in response to this post.

After you preach, then what happens?

/ Peter Mead / 12 Comments

In his book The Seven Laws of the Teacher, Howard Hendricks refers to an English bishop who said, “You know, wherever the apostle Paul went, they had a riot or a revival. Wherever I go, they serve tea.” (p165.)

While it would be wrong to try to stir response, either riot or revival, in our own strength, we should be preaching for response. This is why it is so important to have a clearly defined purpose for a message. We often hear about the importance of the main idea of the sermon. But for an effective sermon, you also need a clearly defined purpose – the specific response you prayerfully expect to occur in the life of the listeners.

(Peter has responded to a comment on this post)

Preaching a Text with a List

/ Peter Mead / 3 Comments

What should you do when your passage includes a long list? For example, I recently preached 2nd Timothy 3:1-9, which includes a list of almost twenty elements in verses 2-4. With a list this length, to preach through it one element at a time would probably border on torture for the listener; “And my sixteenth sub-point is that people will be…treacherous.” Somehow the list needs to summarized effectively:

Firstly, it is important to keep a clear view of the purpose of the list. Don’t get so stuck into the exegesis of the terms that you lose sight of why the author put them there. The purpose will be determined by context. The context of the section, as well as the context of the whole book. A list is not typically dropped into a text without some form of introduction, but notice also what follows its conclusion. What was the author’s purpose? Discern the purpose and keep it clearly in view.

Secondly, within the list, notice the places of emphasis. These are almost always the start and end, as well as the middle on some occasions (especially if the structure is clearly chiastic). Notice any repetition of terms, or clustering of concepts.

Thirdly, seek to summarize the content of the list in a way that is accurate to the content and fitting with the author’s purpose. Using some form of summary or selective emphasis is important because you do not want the sheer volume of content in the list to overwhelm the main idea of the whole passage.

Finally, make sure that your summary and teaching based on that list demonstrates clear connection to the text. It would be both wasteful and dangerous to present summary and teaching on a list that bears no resemblance to the text the listeners are looking at!

So in reference to 2Tim.3:2-4? I decided to preach the list by highlighting the first two and last two elements. In this case they form an inclusio (bookends) that gives shape and meaning to the other elements: “lovers of self, lovers of money . . . lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God.” So the spiritually dangerous characters to avoid are discerned by their character in these first five verses; they are motivated by misdirected affections (vv2-4) and marked by missing authenticity (v5).

Introductions: The Essential Ingredients

/ Peter Mead / 3 Comments

What should go into a good sermon introduction? So much is won or lost in that first minute or two. In fact, so much is won or lost before you even open your mouth – but that might require a different post. So what ingredients should be present in an effective introduction?

1. Get their attention – Speakers often use a story, anecdote, “interesting statistic,” etc. (Note – you can act like a circus clown to get attention, but you then fail to establish your authority as a speaker)

2. Create rapport – Even though preaching is essentially monologue in form (typically), it requires relationship to succeed, so you are trying through demeanour as well as content to build some connection with the audience. This is where humour can be so effective, as long as it is appropriate (to the occasion, the congregation, the preacher’s personality and the subject matter of the sermon – humour should never trivialize the preaching event nor present the preacher as an entertainer).

3. Establish authority – Too much humour, or too unsure a start, will lose any sense of authority. Obviously the ultimate authority is the Word of God, and so you want to get to that fairly quickly, but for people to trust you to preach it to them, you also need to establish that you are worthy of their time and attention. This is accomplished more through a respectable demeanour than through any explicit claims to authority (only in exceptional circumstances is this helpful in the introduction to a message). [See further comment by author in reference to the term “authority.”]

4. Create or surface need for sermon – The one piece that is often missing. People’s lives are full of pressures, burdens, responsibilities, distractions, etc. It is naive to think that simply because they are sitting there in front of you, that they are fully attentive and wanting to hear what you have to say. Some introductions are especially weak if they assume interest in a subject that is not patently relevant to the listeners. For example, after getting attention and starting strongly, to transition to the message with “Ok, let’s turn to Numbers 19, and study the red heifer…” will almost certainly lose whatever has been gained in the introduction. Why does an office worker in the city, or a tired mother of small children, or a management consultant, care about a red cow in ancient Israel? That text, like most Biblical texts, is at first glance “long ago and far away” from our listeners. So it is very important to surface a need for the message within the introduction. Tell the listeners why they should care about this message, make a commitment in regards to the relevance of the message, tap into a need they feel and then promise help, surface a need they were not focused on before, but once you raise it, they do want to know how this text will help them resolve it.

There are many things that can go into an introduction, but these four elements should not be omitted – attention, rapport, authority and need.

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)