Shotguns and Sniper Bullets

May 24, 2011May 9, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Generally speaking I urge preachers to stay in their preaching text as they prepare, and as they preach. It is too easy to drift into another passage (or ten) and dissipate the impact of the passage we said we would preach. However one of the exceptions that I do tend to mention is when the passage you are preaching quotes or alludes to or relies in some way on another Bible passage. What then?

Actually, the more we know our Bibles, the more we see by way of allusion as we look at the text. I did an exercise with a group of pastors where we worked through Ephesians 2 and thought about Old Testament passages that might have been in Paul’s thinking as he wrote, or even specific wording that he used. We were coming up with Old Testament passages for almost every verse in the chapter! What to do?

1. In preparation, go to OT passages that may be helpful, but don’t lose your focus on your preaching text. It can be a rich exercise to go back and see the text and context of the fall in Genesis 3, the possible wording from Genesis 6, the session of Christ in Psalm 110, the far and near reference in Isaiah 57, the background of circumcision language in Genesis 17 and elsewhere, etc. But remember that you need to be able to preach Ephesians 2! I may feel like a sawn off shotgun has scattered marks all over the canon, but that is my blessing, not my listener’s burden!

2. In preaching, only go to one or two OT passages if they are genuinely helpful, but don’t lose your focus on your preaching text. Listeners simply cannot handle masses of other references. It turns a sharp and pointed message into an annoying multi-point prodding. If one, or maybe two, are particularly helpful, then use them carefully. In Ephesians 2:1-10, for instance, I’d be inclined to go to Genesis 3 in the early verses, but I wouldn’t chase multiple other references. Perhaps Psalm 110:1 in reference to being seated with Christ. Probably no more. Better to hit home specifically than to scatter shot everywhere.

My personal goal includes getting to know the Word of God as much as possible (not as an end in itself, but since through the Word I can know God). My goal in preaching is not to show that off, but to help people be impacted by this particular text.

Images Right Before Your Eyes

April 27, 2011April 22, 2011 / Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Most preachers don’t aspire to being dull and lifeless, bland and black and white. We want to preach vivid, full-colour, living messages from a truly living Word of God. So why are we so quick to look beyond the Bible for every image and illustration in a sermon? Sometimes it seems as if we have been preconditioned to believe the Bible itself is boring and dull, so part of our work is to find lively little pithy anecdotal marshmallows to make the Bible palatable. Before we look outside the Bible (which is a legitimate option, of course), let’s be sure to check our passage carefully:

When preaching from biblical poetry – such as a psalm, the writer will usually give us some very helpful images. Why go hunting for new images when the psalm provides a resting child, restless hours fretting in bed, God lifting His face toward us, climbing the mountain toward Jerusalem, entering the city gates in procession, etc. We need to work on relevance and be sure to handle the imagery appropriately, but handle it, it is right in the passage. It would be a shame to waste the head-start we are given right on the page.

When preaching a biblical narrative – such as a parable or event, then the passage itself is an image! Too often I’ve heard preachers at pains to explain the story, but the preaching lacks zing because they forget to actually tell the story. Don’t dissect a story to death, allow it to live in front of people and let them observe its power. Be sure to explain and apply, of course, but don’t let the vivid imagery of the story itself get lost in your study. Bring the story to the people.

When preaching biblical discourse – such as an epistolary paragraph, then you may have extra work on your hands. Often the passage will be very effective and logical explanation, or even direct application. But it may be so direct that it lacks imagery. This will not be the case in most of James, but is true in parts of Paul. Just because it is prose and perhaps plain in presentation, do not fail to look for images that will help the truth stick in the hearts and minds of your listeners. Sometimes alertness to word-study will help, other times simply reading the text carefully will do the job. Be a shame to preach a “put off, put on” passage and not utilize the visual impact of that imagery, or to preach a “love one another” and not paint the picture of what that looks like in vivid terms. Abstractions don’t do the same work as concrete descriptions, so be sure to preach what it is saying in specifics so listeners can “see” what you mean.

Lessons on God from Biblical Genre: Narrative, Apocalyptic, More…

February 28, 2011February 18, 2011 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Springing off D A Carson’s recent lecture on this subject, let’s look at a couple more genres, and add a few more for good measure (he was limited to just over an hour).

Narrative – Carson suggested that narrative is a very nuanced genre, allowing for significant fine tuning for the complexities of life. As a preaching implication I would suggest that every narrative should be entered into fully, rather than touched on en route to a more generic sermon proposition. Allow the full colour and vivid richness of human identification to work its way with power into the thoughts and hearts of the listeners. Their lives are also full colour and vividly rich (often in complexity, challenge, doubts and struggles).

Apocalyptic – Carson suggested that apocalyptic literature reminds us that it is already known who wins in the end. To be fair his time was running out and he gave no indication that he was avoiding this part of the potential content. Many do, though. Thus it is either neglected, or any reference to it quickly becomes an excessive lesson in apocalyptic genre explanations that can leave the listener wondering if there is anything that can be understood from this genre. I suggest we need to think more carefully about how to honour God’s self-revelation through this genre.

Prophecy – Carson made no mention to this, but his time was gone. It is important to understand both the overlap and the distinctions between apocalyptic and prophetic writing. Prophecy speaks of God’s intimate involvement in the present (His concern, His responsiveness, His interest in the present) and His ultimate sovereignty in the future (His plans, His purposes, His right to rule in this world, in time and eternity). Again, as preachers, we should not fear or avoid prophecy. We should preach it. Surely it is one of the richest biblical genres in so many ways.

Poetry – Carson spoke of wisdom literature. I would want to ponder the particular features of poetry too, both within the wisdom corpus, and beyond it in places like Miriam’s song, or Hannah’s song, etc. Doesn’t the volume of poetry in the Bible tell us something of God’s love for artistic forms of communication, and his awareness of the needs of the human heart (not proposition-free, but more than “merely propositional”).

Final comment from Carson: “The problem is that we live in a culture that loves moral ambiguity for it’s own sake. At the end of Job, God wins, and don’t ever forget it. If we only had the narrative of David’s life we might have excuse for immorality. If you only had Psalm 1 you’d be encouraged or crushed, no subtlety, no recognition of the complex nature of each of us. But in God’s perfect wisdom He has given us apocalyptic and wisdom to tell us he doesn’t bend or grade on a curve. But he also gives narratives to show us how complex we are.”

As humans we need all the genre. As preachers we must give what is needed.

Lessons on God from Biblical Genre: Wisdom

February 25, 2011March 1, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

In the past two days I have shared D A Carson’s suggested lessons from the epistolary and history genres of Scripture. What does the design of wisdom literature suggest about God, and are there implications for us as preachers?

Carson suggested the following: While there are many kinds of wisdom literature in the Bible, it is interesting how much of it thinks in polarities. Either you follow Dame Wisdom or your follow Lady Folly. The righteous and the wicked. Jesus followed in this line as a wisdom preacher. With Jesus there was no middle-sized gate, no alternative ‘cheaper than rock but stronger than sand’ foundation.

While there is potency in such polarity preaching, Carson suggested that if you only ever preach Psalm 1 to your congregation you will end up with a congregation of legalists or hypocrites (for who can truly apply the avoidance of all godless counsel?)

Implications for our preaching? I would suggest:

1. We live in a time when most people don’t seem willing to stand for anything, including many preachers. Let us have the courage to present reality in the bold relief of wisdom literature polarities.

2. I think that the “two ladies” undergirding theme in Proverbs is a much under-utilized piece of preaching power-fuel. That was also a strange sentence, but I’ll let it stand.

3. We need to preach wisdom literature. Some preachers never do.
We mustn’t always preach wisdom literature. A few preachers might.

4. We should use the opportunity to train listeners how to handle this significant part of the canon (this would apply to all my posts in this series).

Lessons on God from Biblical Genre: History

February 24, 2011February 18, 2011 / Peter Mead / 6 Comments

Yesterday we pondered what the epistolary genre might teach us about God, and the implications for our preaching. Continuing with some springboarding off D A Carson’s recent Laing Lecture at LST, let’s think about biblical history.

Carson suggested the following: God discloses himself not only in words, but also in space-time history. We have access to that through witnesses, the standard mode of communicating historical veracity. Thus there is so much emphasis placed on the importance of witnesses.

In fact, Christianity is unique among religions in that if we were to take Jesus out of history, there would be no Christianity (not true of other religions). If Jesus didn’t actually rise from the dead, then witnesses are liars and we are still in our sins, our faith is futile. For the Christian, one of the tests of our faith is the truthfulness of the faith’s object. So no matter how strong and precious your faith may be, if that faith is not in something that is true, then you have nothing.

Biblically, a personal and precious faith without truth does not make a person spiritual, it makes them a joke. So Biblical faith is not the same as the contemporary view – that it is either a synonym for religion, or a personal subjective religious choice. This final definition makes it a faux pas to introduce the truth question (since we are talking about something both personal and subjective). But the truth question is absolutely paramount. While there are many elements of Christianity where we are to take God at His word, there are also critical elements, foundations, that require a test in history – notably the resurrection of Christ.

Implications for our preaching? I would suggest:

1. We must overtly overcome the “Bible story as fairy tale” perception. It is not enough to assume people understand the historicity of the biblical record, we need to be overt on this matter.

2. We should seek to overcome the notion that the Bible is a religious book, but good history books are published by other printing presses. The Bible is not only history, but it is phenomenally trustworthy historical source material.

3. We must train believers to know that their faith is resting on reality and fact, rather than the “leap in the dark” nonsense coming from both critics and ill-advised testimonies of people feeling public-presentation fright.

4. We should recognize how unaware Christians tend to be in respect to the differences between biblical Christianity and other religions. This leaves people very vulnerable when other religions are so proactively on the march.

Compare and Contrast

February 17, 2011February 6, 2011 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

I’ve had to do one or two exams over the years. Exams tend to imprint certain phrases in your subconscious – “You may begin,” or “stop writing, please.” And then there are the questions. Perhaps it was just a fad in the mid-nineties, but I seemed to always read “compare and contrast…” somewhere on the exam paper. Well, it’s back! Compare and contrast … Leviticus and Hebrews!

Offerings and sacrifices, altars and sanctuaries, priests and high priests. They have so much in common. But they were written at different times, and something so significant had occurred in the interim. So as we see what God expected of the Israelites in the wilderness, we can also rejoice in what we see of Christ in Hebrews. A better priestly order, a better covenant, a better sacrifice in a better sanctuary!

For many people Leviticus is not a highlight in the Bible (although the more you get into it the more fascinating and helpful it is). But Hebrews…what can I say? Perhaps it is no coincidence that Hebrews and highlight begin with the same letter! Ok, actually that is a complete coincidence. But if you engage your imagination as you read Leviticus and imagine living in those times, then compare and contrast with the joy, confidence, hope and privilege of living the life Hebrews offers. Compare and contrast…and enjoy!

As a preacher, part of your privilege is to engage not only your imagination, but also everybody else’s. Engage their imaginations and help them to see the wonder of all that we have in Christ. I can almost guarantee that there are some in your church for whom the Bible feels flat. Not only emotionally as they respond (or don’t) to it, but from cover to cover, they are unmoved by the massive move that happened when Christ came. As a preacher you may be preaching a single passage, but help people to compare and contrast so they know what a wonderful blessing this new covenant is!

Preaching in the Presence of Lists

February 9, 2011February 6, 2011 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

At various times you will be preaching in the presence of lists. Not the to-do lists that are manically collected by some church-goers, bursting out of their Bibles’ strained clasps. The lists that God inspired.

It may be tempting to just skip them or dismiss them (easy to make disparaging remarks that we don’t really mean). But if you aren’t preaching the list, and it is in sight, what to do?

Help people, even in passing, to know why it is there. It isn’t there to put off Bible readers in their cyclical reading aspirations. It isn’t there to tempt people to put a new spin on received pronunciations. It is there for a reason.

Let’s take the descendants of Esau in Genesis 36 as an example.

Why is it there? It’s good to remember when these books were written and for whom. Whether Genesis was written or compiled by Moses, it was part of the five books which were for the Israelites as they entered into the promised land. It was important for them to know where they had come from, their history, God’s promises and so on.

One of Moses’ (and God’s) concerns was that they not mingle with the inhabitants of the land or near neighbours, in such a way as to become disloyal to the one true God. This chapter, with all its people and connected place names, would be a helpful reminder to them of where some of these other people came from. Certainly the chapter keeps pointing out that Edom was from the “unchosen” line of Esau – and Israel would often have issues with Edom later on!

It probably seems obvious to you, the studied preacher, to consider when the list was written and for whom. I suspect that might never enter the minds of some of your listeners. Unless you point it out, of course.

(And then encourage people that they don’t have to pronounce every name if they are on a fast read through – it’s amazing how people appreciate permission to press on in their Bible reading!)

Preaching Proverbs

December 21, 2010 / Peter Mead / 2 Comments

I’m pondering the possibility of preaching a few messages from Proverbs (very early days, it won’t be until the summer at the earliest). Since this is a very unique genre and even sub-genre, I need to start thinking well ahead. Here are some very early incomplete thoughts:

1. It is important to understand them in their historical context. These were sayings written in the context of a covenant that tied direct results to obedience or disobedience. While we continue to reap what we sow, we don’t live under the same conditions as ancient Israel. Somehow the preacher has to navigate this without making the text feel irrelevant.

2. There is more structure to the book than people tend to think. I have been impressed to see some explanations of structure in the apparently random sequences of proverbs (yet unless it really adds something, I don’t want my listeners to get bogged down in my inadequate explanation of that). I also think it is vital to understand the book as a whole and the role of personified wisdom and folly. I can’t just jump in and preach a verse here or there without taking time to consider the whole book properly.

3. Wisdom is a rare commodity today. The Proverbs call to pursue wisdom seems as necessary as ever. There is an amazing level of spiritual lethargy and applicational dumbness in the church today. Somehow I need to preach in such a way as to motivate the listeners to pursue the God of wisdom and to live out the wise teaching of His Word. Yet at the same time I mustn’t simply pile rules on rules and create a gospel-less sense of adding burdens to guilt-prone fleshly spirituality.

4. The pithy nature of the genre is powerful. So as a preacher who may often preach much longer chunks of text, I must resist the urge to pack information into the sermon, flatten the point and dissipate the punch. As a convinced believer in big idea preaching (a spoken communication commitment, as well as a recognition of the nature of inspired revelation), what more could I ask for than a powerful and memorable main idea already packaged and perhaps ready to preach? Yet it is so tempting to pack in information rather than pursue application and transformation. One truth driven deeper is better than multiplied truth scattered liberally.

That’s my thinking for now . . . gradually over the next months I will return to Proverbs and build toward a series.

Some Messages Need More Careful Intros

December 8, 2010December 8, 2010 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

When a message stands on its own rather than being part of a series, or when a message is from a less obvious part of the Bible (i.e. from the Old Testament, or from an unexpected passage for the season), then it is worth giving extra attention to the context that is set up at the start of the message.

To put it another way, will the listeners, after ten or fifteen minutes, be asking themselves, “why are we in this part of the Bible?” If they ask that subconsciously, then you didn’t create a sense of the need for the message during the introduction. Sometimes all this takes is a deliberate answering of the question, “so why are we looking at this passage?” If you can’t be more subtle, at least be that clear. It is part of the work of the introduction to make listeners feel motivated to listen to the message, which includes helping them know why the passage is being preached.

So for an example. Let’s say you’re preaching from somewhere like Judges. It may feel adequate to make some introductory references to the problem of sin in the world today and then launch into historical explanations of Philistine oppression. But the listener will probably have the sense that the message feels distant and irrelevant. Much better to plan the introduction so that it not only makes some reference to a contemporary phenomena that was also true back then, but to make the link really overt. Perhaps in the intro you talk about some aspect of sin in society today, but before you head back into Bible world, think through the transition. This is off the top of my head and not for any passage in particular. But perhaps it gives a sense of a slightly more deliberate link between introductory remarks and the Bible text:

“[Contemporary and engaging examples of sin and its consequences] . . . So we probably all agree that our society is shot through with sin, and that it’s creaking with the natural consequences of that sin. But how are we to respond to it? What should we be looking for, or hoping for, or aiming for, as we live in this sin-stained society today? Let’s look at a Bible text that is over three thousand years old. You might think anything that old would be irrelevant to today, but actually it does have something very helpful for us. This passage was written at a time when the society of Israel faced some of the same problems we face today. Let’s look at it to see not only what was going on then, but how God worked to bring about the change that was needed. Let’s look and see what this ancient text might say to us today as we live in a similar situation. Turn with me to . . . “

Thermometer Reading

December 7, 2010 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday I wrote using the notion of a thermal imaging view of the Scriptures. At the risk of overuse, I’d like to turn that thermal camera in another direction. What would people see if they saw a thermal image of you preaching?

1. Warmth of the Person. I sat through a message recently where I got the distinct impression that the preacher was cold. He wasn’t shivering. But he never smiled, not once in an hour long service. He didn’t seem warm toward us the listeners, or toward the message he preached (and consequently, even if it is uncomfortable to say it, he didn’t seem warm toward God). I recognize that different preachers have different temperaments and styles of presentation, but I suspect that subconsciously others felt the same cool temperature from the pulpit. I doubt anyone would have ever said that of Jesus’ preaching, and it is Him that we preach and represent.

2. Warmth of the Message. The content of the message says a lot about the focus of the preacher. For instance, what about the preacher I heard a while back who seemed passionate about declaring the sins of certain people in Bible times (and by implicit association, of us too). The strange thing is that the passage being preached was not pure judgment, but judgment that led into the saving work of God’s Redeemer. What was strange about that? Well, the fact that the good news climax of the passage felt like a passing reference in the conclusion of the message. Why would a preacher focus so heavily on judgment and almost miss the glorious climax of the passage? The content decisions of the preacher say a lot about the preacher . . . and go a long way to determining the temperature radiating from the front as we preach.

As you prepare to preach your next message, is your message radiating the glow of a loving and living God? As you step up to preach your next message, is your heart prayerfully prayed full so that you yourself radiate that same glow?