Preacher’s Personal Life

Preaching Sermons on Sermons

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

I don’t mean preaching your sermon based on another contemporary preacher’s sermon.  I mean preaching a sermon based on a Scriptural sermon.  There’s lots of them.  It can be fascinating to wrestle with a sermon in its context since you would expect to find a sense of context, purpose, application, explanation, etc.  If you haven’t given this any thought before, here are some places to go:

The Sermons of Acts – Acts is a book of action, but interestingly, the sermons are not introductory to the action, they are the action!  Obviously the sermons in Acts are summaries of the original message, but studying them in their context and looking for what specifically the preacher was saying can be very satisfying.  Paul has at least three sermons (not counting defense speeches).  Peter also preaches in Acts (very slightly harder to understand and apply directly since things were shifting pretty rapidly in those first months, but still worth studying!)

The Sermons of Jesus – Matthew, for example, alternates between discourse (sermons) and narrative (action).  So you have great blocks of teaching – the sermon on the mount, instructions to the disciples, parables of the kingdom, olivet discourse, etc.  Since some of these are distilled surveys of teaching, it can be hard to define a specific sermon text, but it is so worth the effort.  Who was he preaching to?  Why did he preach it?

The only complete sermon – I see only one complete sermon in the Bible.  It takes about 50-55 minutes, and it is absolute dynamite.  The book of Hebrews is a sermon written down.  The more I study it, the more I see it as a sermon.  So many features of orality, so much application, so careful in its exposition, so powerful in its relevance to the first hearers.

Other sermons – then you’ve also got snippets of sermons throughout the Old Testament prophets.  What a treasure so often neglected.

A case can be made for the oral nature of much of Scripture.  With diligent prayerful study, you will find preaching sermons on the Bible’s sermons is immensely satisfying for you, and powerful in the lives of your listeners.

Do We Preach a Distant God?

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday I made a passing reference to the fact that our God is not the deity of the deists.  That is to say that He didn’t wind things up and then sit back disinterested with His arms folded.  Before we start pointing the finger at famous deists like Thomas Edison, Albert Einstein or even Antony Flew, let’s check our preaching.  Is it possible that we inadvertently preach deism?

We are right to both study and present the author’s meaning in a passage.  The first stage of effective Bible study has to look at the inspired text “back then.”  Once we have understood the author’s idea in the passage, then we can consider how to legitimately apply that idea in our world today.  However, there is a potential danger in solid exegetical methodology.  The danger is that we present God’s work as “back then” but not “today.”  There is a real risk that we imply a God at work in the days of Moses, Matthew or the preacher to the Hebrews, but today we have only the reflected benefit of careful application.

The truth is that God is at work today.  He is as intimately concerned about each life as He ever has been.  Some err by emphasizing the direct revelation of God today to the neglect of His Word which He inspired long ago.  Likewise, some of us may err by emphasizing the act of inspiration long ago to the neglect of His present concern, sovereignty and involvement in the world today.  I appreciate Don Sunukjian’s shorthand definition of preaching for this particular reason.  He states that preaching is “Listen to what God is saying . . . to us!”  An absolute commitment to sound exegesis.  A clear commitment to a divine involvement in the act of preaching.

We must get both the “back then” and the “today” aspects of our preaching on target, otherwise we risk preaching a diminished deity.  An emphasis on “today” at the expense of “back then” leads to a subjectively defined experiential deity.  An emphasis on “back then” at the expense of “today” might lead to a distant deity.  God inspired the Word back then, and His Word still speaks with force today.  We preach an ancient text . . . relevantly.  Let’s beware that we neither preach an overly imminent experiential God, nor an excessively distant historical God.  Let’s be sure to preach the God who inspired the Bible, the God who still speaks through His Word today!

How Will You Touch the Heart?

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

We have probably all heard people attempting to distinguish preaching from teaching, or even preaching from lecturing.  Typically there is some reference to preaching being more impassioned, touching the emotions, etc.  To be fair to the teaching and lecturing professions, the good ones know that to be effective they should do more than merely transmit information.  Nevertheless, today is Sunday, so let’s keep the focus on preaching.

When we preach we do not merely transmit information gleaned in our study time.  We speak from the heart – a heart touched by God’s Word, moved by God’s Spirit, a heart shaped by the personal experience of God working the passage truth into our lives.  We speak from the heart – the heart of God, for He did not inspire the canon to merely give us a repository of truth statements from which to inform ourselves.  We speak to the heart – the heart of listeners desperate for a word from God’s heart.  They may be interested in information, they may not.  But we speak to hurting hearts, empty hearts, longing hearts.  We speak to the hearts of people whose real need is probably not the need they feel and are distracted by, but whose real need can only be met by God Himself.

Preaching should be truthful, accurate, informed, solidly Scriptural, etc.  But it must do more than merely inform.  We preach as persuaders, influencers, spokespersons for the living God who is not a deistic disconnected deity, but a passionately concerned and involved holy lover of souls.  So today, what is the plan?  How will you preach not only from the head to the head, but from the heart and to the heart?

Apologetics for Homiletics – Part 4

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

This week I’ve been considering the importance of homiletics training.  My focus has not been on expository preaching versus other approaches to preaching.  It has been on training, instruction and sermon preparation methodology, as opposed to no training, instruction and no guidance in the preparation process.

But doesn’t homiletics promote “professional” ministry? I’ve touched on this before, but it is worth considering again.  The terms “professional” and “amateur” need to be defined carefully when it comes to preaching.  Are they referring to the skill involved or the motivation?

1. Our motivation in preaching should probably be described in “amateur” terms rather than “professional.” That is to say, we should pursue preaching out of a deep passion for God, His people, His Word and His ministry.  Whether we are paid or not, we should not be motivated by material gain.  Preaching should not become “just our job.”  In this respect, I don’t want to be professional.

2. Our skill in preaching should probably be described in “professional” terms rather than “amateurish.” That is to say, we should be good stewards of every opportunity to “fan into flame” our gifting, improve our skill, grow in our ministry, etc.  Surely we do not honor God by just treating preaching like a little hobby that is a minor interest in our life.

We should preach as professionals in the sense of “to the best of our ability” and as amateurs in the sense of “with the passion of a captured heart.”  We should not preach as professionals in the sense of “relying on our own ability,” nor as amateurs in the sense of “to a poor standard.”  Homiletics doesn’t promote “professional” ministry in a negative sense, but our flesh may twist it that way if we become self-reliant and self-confident along the way.

Good stewardship demands learning from the best homiletics training and input available.  The danger of self-reliance must keep us on our knees the whole way (which is true even if we refuse good homiletic input!)

Apologetics for Homiletics – Part 3 continued

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

So does homiletical methodology impose a strait jacket on the preacher?  Yesterday we noted that methodology recognizes the progression from text to sermon, it does not rigidly enforce it.  Description of logical order, as opposed to prescription of illogical order.  But there is more to be added:

2. Good methodology only feels like a structure initially. It is like riding a bicycle.  At first there is a lot to remember and try to keep straight, but once it becomes natural, it is natural.  A person first learning to ride a bicycle needs to learn all the necessary elements, even if it feels overwhelming.  It doesn’t help to ignore the handlebars initially and simply let the arms hang limp.  The initial “structured” feel soon fades with practice.

3. Good methodology is a guide, not a machine that “guarantees” results. You cannot feed a text into a machine and produce a good message.  The methodology found in homiletics books and courses is a guide, not a machine.  Any promise to guarantee a great message is a false promise – whether that be a sermon methodology, a published collection of outlines, a website, or whatever.

4. Good methodology does not force the text into a sermon shape. There are methodologies that do this.  This is a strait jacket.  As I’ve written before – sermon form is a choice for the preacher to make in light of the text, the listeners, the occasion and the preacher’s own strengths and skill.  Good sermon preparation methodology is a guide, not a shoe-horn that will squeeze any text into a specific sermon mold.

So homiletics instruction in book or course form is not intended to be a strait jacket, but a guide.  Many testify to the freedom that comes from a sense of structure in the preparation process.  For many, it is the absence of any guidance at all that brings on feelings of insanity, not the “strait jacket” of a sensible thought-through methodology.

Apologetics for Homiletics – Part 2 continued

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Does homiletics quench the Spirit? Yesterday I sounded a warning note concerning “false positive” feedback.  We’ve got to be careful not to assume the Spirit is at work in great ways merely because our listeners are excessively polite to us as they shake our hands and head for the door.  Obviously that is only a minor side-point. Here are some more important points:

2. The Holy Spirit does work during delivery, but also during preparation. Preparation is not unspiritual.  The Holy Spirit is not hindered by careful and prayerful preparation.  The Bible does not promise that we will be given what to say when we preach (only when brought to witness before authorities under persecution – Matt.10:17-20).  In fact, the Holy Spirit inspired the Bible and cares more than we do that it is understood properly and applied appropriately.  How can shooting from the hip be more spiritual than a prayer-soaked preparation?  We should be careful how we define what is spiritual and what is not.

3. Just because the Spirit can work despite us, why would we want to limit Him to that? The best study of the Scriptures that we can manage, the best structuring and development of messages that we can achieve, the best communication skill that we can use . . . it’s all a matter of good stewardship, is it not?  God is not limited to our strengths, He specializes in using us in our weakness, for He gives grace to those who humbly recognize their need.  But shall we deliberately go on preaching poorly that grace may increase?  Not if we are being a good steward.

4. If homiletical instruction causes us to preach in our own strength, then we have a problem, Houston! Having said everything that I have in the first three points, there is a concern that we must all face.  In our good stewardship, we must not end up self-reliant or flesh-powered.  God opposes the proud.  We must allow any training or instruction we receive to humble us (good homiletics training is like opening a window shutter and discovering how vast and intricate the task of preaching really is!)

So that’s a start.  More thoughts tomorrow on this issue of defending the teaching of preaching!

Apologetics for Homiletics

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Homiletics is an interesting subject to teach.  On the one hand there are those that are exceedingly grateful for a guiding structure for the preparation process.  They express appreciation for the increased confidence that can come from actually studying a passage, understanding it, and having some guidelines on how to then communicate the truth of the passage.  On the other hand there are some who resist homiletics as something that will quench the Spirit, professionalize the ministry and become a strait jacket on the preacher.

Perhaps we need an apolgetic for good homiletics.  In some cases the resistance springs from disappointing motivations, but not always.  For instance, some may resist because of laziness or unwillingness to put in the necessary work to actually understand a passage, preach it clearly or communicate with pastoral applicational.  Others may resist out of pride based on past years of ministry (“don’t challenge what I’ve always done!”)  But some concerns are genuine, and for these we may need a basic homiletic apologetic.  In the next few days I will give some thoughts on this matter, but for today it would do us all good to check our own hearts on this issue – is there any resistance to improving my preaching ministry based on laziness, pride, arrogance or other forms of fleshly motivation?

There are legitimate reasons to resist homiletics instruction and methodologies.  Today we can ask God to purge any impure motivations, then tomorrow we’ll dive in to the potentially legitimate concerns!

Happy Birthday Billy Graham

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Today is a great day in America.  I’m not referring to the election (every other blog on earth is writing about that, but I’ll keep my views in my prayers).  I’m referring to the 90th birthday of Billy Graham.  What a man of God he is!

I heard him live on two occasions in England when I was just eight.  Five years later they had the follow-up “crusade” with live satellite links around the country.  I remember sitting there as a whole family in our church party responded to the call and went forward.  In my short life I’ve seen leaders fall into disrepute, but not Billy Graham.  I have heard the criticisms coming from some quarters, but I have also enjoyed the benefit of being influenced by people saved under Billy Graham’s preaching.

His eyesight is failing, his hearing too, his body is growing weak, but he claims that although the body grows weaker, the spirit doesn’t have to as well.  He is writing another book.  He is still a man of prayer.  Perhaps in Billy Graham we see a great example of a man of God who has lived out an Acts 6:4 life – prioritizing prayer and the Word.  As his spokesman Larry Ross said, “The lion still has a roar!”

Let’s praise God for the privilege we have of seeing Billy Graham press on to the finish line.  Let’s pray that we will each be as faithful, as humble, and as prayerful as Billy Graham.  We may not preach the gospel live to 215million people, but let us give everything we can in the ministry God gives to us and try to finish as well as Billy Graham.

Acts 6 4 2 Priorities

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Everyone involved in ministry understands the challenge of keeping priorities straight.  Life seems to be busier than ever for all of us.  If you have a job description for your ministry, I suspect it lists numerous tasks and fails to list many more.  If your ministry is not formalized on paper, you could probably create your own list of many roles that you are called on to fulfill.  There is crisis counseling, career advisor, family therapist, event manager, numerous pieces of administrative work, social network facilitator, hopefully missions mobilizer, periodically pre-marital counselor, sometimes music selector, youth leader, catering supervisor, perhaps fund raiser, maybe author, and on it goes.

We all need to be drawn back by Acts 6:4.  I know we are not apostles.  I know the historical situation has shifted.  I know the realities of ministry in “small church,” or for that matter, “big church.”  I know the added pressures of instant telecommunications, modern church organizational structures and so on.  But we need to remember Acts 6:4.

We must devote ourselves to prayer.  We must devote ourselves to the ministry of the Word.  Time for some honest and prayerful schedule evaluation?

The Discouraged Preacher – Conclusion

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

We have considered a lot of possible causes of discouragement over the past week.  David Wilson commented on some of these posts and also sent me some notes from a message he gave on discouragement.  To conclude this series I would like to quote the three simple but critical pieces of advice with which he concluded that message, and then a quote to finish.

How can we avoid discouragement in ministry?

1. Determine to please God alone. We can easily be tempted to pursue the applause of others, or even from ourselves, but the central issue has to be pleasing God only.  Our audience of One.  (See John 8:29, 2Cor.5:9 and Gal.1:10)

2. Spend time alone with God. Just as Jesus spent time alone with the Father, so must we.  Intimacy with Him must come before ministry for Him.

3. Set realistic goals. Some goals are out of our hands, and so can be a source of real discouragement.  Evaluate goals in ministry and make sure they are achievable as we lean on Him for strength and help.

Here’s a closing quote from Warren Wiersbe’s Walking With Giants (p268):

Discouragement is an enemy we must learn to expect, face honestly, and fight with all our strength. No man can preach the good news effectively if he himself is discouraged. We must try to understand the causes of our despair and, above all else, never yield to the expensive luxury of self-pity. The “I-only-am-left” complex can only lead to defeat. There are yet seven thousand who have not bowed the knee to Baal. It would be nice if one of them would step out and stand by our side, but until then, let us dare to believe God’s Word and keep on going.