Religion

John Stott’s Paradoxes of Preaching

/ Peter Mead / 4 Comments

I’ve seen this list in various forms, but just in case you haven’t seen it before, here’s John Stott’s list of the five paradoxes of preaching:

1.    Authentic Christian preaching is both biblical and contemporary
2.    Authentic Christian preaching is both authoritative and tentative
3.    Authentic Christian preaching is both prophetic and pastoral
4.    Authentic Christian preaching is both gifted and studied
5.    Authentic Christian preaching is both thoughtful and passionate

Stott concludes his article with this important observation:

Our adversary, the devil, is the enemy of moderation and balance.  One of his favourite hobbies, I’m persuaded, is tipping evangelical Christians off balance.  If he cannot get us to dny Christ, then he will be happy if we distort Christ.  Instead I want to encourage the read to develop what I call B.B.C. – Balanced Biblical Christianity.  Let us seek to combine these truths that complement one another, and let’s not separate what God has united.  For it is in these paradoxes that authentic Christian preaching is to be found.

As we look over these five paradoxes, where do we see the balance missing today?  Too much tentative preaching?  Too much reliance on gifting alone?  Too thoughtful without passion, or too passionate without thought?  I suppose it is different in each culture, each denomination, each church.  But it is worth the effort to think through where we might be becoming unbalanced.

Essential Ingredients of the Best Preachers

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Yesterday I listed Greg Haslam’s five ingredients for good preaching.  Today I’ll finish the chapter (11 in Preach the Word), by sharing his list of key ingredients in a good preacher.  Again, I present these for your thoughts, not to agree or disagree with his list.

1.    A compelling call from God. “In my view the number one reason why there is so much bad preaching today is because our pulpits are often occupied by preachers who do not have a divine mandate to be there.”  (p.155)  He urges every preacher to ask himself three questions – who put you there?  Who keeps you there?  Who can get rid of you?

2.    A growing, varied and fresh life with God. “We can think of preaching as the run-off or surplus of all that wells up in the life of the preacher.  But, sadly, many preachers are running on empty much of the time.  They have allowed other things to crowd their time with God.” (p.156)

3.    Happy with their own identity, both as a person and as a preacher. “My plea to all preachers is: be the genuine article. . . . We do not need clones of great preachers like Dr Lloyd-Jones or Billy Graham.  Since preaching is, as Brooks defines it, ‘truth coming through human personality,’ God surely wants us to be free to be ourselves.” (p.157)

4.    Increasingly liberated from the fear of man. “In order to be faithful to God, we have to become relatively indifferent to men’s resistance, criticism or opposition to us, as well as to their flattery or ridicule.”  (p.157)

5.    A genuine love for the people. “If it is true that fear drives out love, thank God it is also true that love will drive out fear.”  (p.158)

6.    A conscious dependence on the Holy Spirit. “As preachers we always need to be aware of our true source of power and we need to tell God how much we depend upon His Holy Spirit.” (p.158)

7.    Infectious in zeal and enthusiasm. “Absorbed in what they have to say, they will absorb the attention of others.  Often, even the most casual and indifferent hearer realizes something important is taking place.  If the truth of the message does not grab you, how can it be expected to grab anyone else?”  (p.159)

Again, points to ponder, but to keep the post from becoming too long, I won’t add comments.  Would your list of seven ingredients be the same?  Longer?  Different?

Essential Ingredients of the Best Preaching

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

According to Greg Haslam, there are five ingredients common to good preaching.  He lists and expands these in chapter 11 of Preach the Word, the hefty book he edited in 2006.

1.    Therapeutic – “All preaching that is God-centred and leads to encounter with God will inevitably be therapeutic, or healing in its effects.” (p151)

2.    Unconventional – “Within good preaching there is an element of surprise, so that it often startles and, dare I say, even shocks the hearer.” (p152)  Haslam urges the preacher to take some risks in preaching, becoming bolder in application of the Word.  He points to Jesus for several examples of unconventional, but powerful, preaching.

3.    Lucid – “A sermon is both a spiritual and an intellectual exercise.  It will make demands on the intellect and should engage it completely.” (p.153)  Haslam goes on to describe the need for prepared preaching, with purposeful planning, memorable points, etc.

4.    Illustrated – “I would go so far as to say that without illustration it is probably not possible to teach or preach from the Bible very well.”  (p.154)

5.    Passionate – “Our preaching must contain emotion and also evoke emotion in our hearers.  It should be full of pathos, energy and enthusiasm.  In the West we urgently need to reconnect the broken circuits between our heads and our hearts.”  (p.154)

The discerning reader might notice the alternative use of a famous acrostic in this.  Nevertheless, these are points to ponder.  Would you add to the list?  What if you could only have five ingredients?

Easter Laughter

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Helmut Thielicke described Spurgeon’s humour as “Easter laughter,” that which comes as a “mode of redemption because it is sanctified – because it grows out of an overcoming of the world.”  (See Mohler, He is Not Silent, p165.)

We recently enjoyed a CD of Chuck Swindoll funny stories.  Some were funnier than others, but his laughter was a real blessing to us all.  As he stated on that CD, one person wrote in and told him, “Chuck, you can stop preaching, but never stop laughing.  Your’s is the only laughter that ever comes into our home.”

A leader that frets and stresses under pressure is not a leader that followers will find reassuring.  There is a need for a certain calmness that comes from confident faith in God’s purposes.  Likewise, there is a benefit in a certain laughter.  Not drunken laughter.  Not distracting myself from reality laughter.  Not immature laughter.  But confident in God, all is in control, Easter laughter.

Don’t force it, but don’t be afraid of it either.  Appropriate humor and laughter in a message may be more than therapy for listeners – it may be the conveying of a deep personal faith conviction.

Spurgeon-like Evangelistic Expectation

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Mohler cites an interaction (p165 of He is Not Silent) between Spurgeon and a student at his pastor’s college:

A student . . . once asked how he could focus more clearly on bringing believers into the faith.  “Do you expect converts every time you preach?” Spurgeon asked.  The student quickly retorted, “Of course not.”  And the reply came back: “That is why you have none.”

Selah.

Preaching to a Postmodern Culture

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

In his book, He is Not Silent, Al Mohler offers a no-holds barred chapter on postmodernity and preaching.  After listing a series of negative observations of the postmodern “mood” (and probably failing to recognize the positive opportunities now presented to us as preachers), he presents a series of principles for proper proclamation in a postmodern culture.  He earths his thoughts in Acts 17:

1. Christian proclamation in a postmodern culture begins in a provoked spirit (v16)
2. Christian proclamation in a postmodern culture is focused on Gospel proclamation (v17)
3. Christian proclamation in a postmodern culture assumes a context of spiritual confusion (vv18-21)
4. Christian proclamation in a postmodern cultureis directed to a spiritual hunger. (vv22-23)
5. Christian proclamation in a postmodern culture begins with the fundamental issue of God’s nature, character, power, and authority. (vv24-28)
6. Christian proclamation in a postmodern culture confronts error. (v29)
7. Christian proclamation in a postmodern culture affirms the totality of God’s saving purpose. (vv30-31)

Principles worth pondering.

What Convictions Do You Convey?

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Over time, listeners catch things from the preachers they hear.  Its not just the content of each particular sermon, but also the personal convictions of the preacher that will mark listeners over time.

What do listeners catch from hearing you?  Do they catch a conviction that God’s Word can be trusted?  That it is enjoyable to read and study?  That God is knowable?  That God is in control?  That Christianity is firmly founded on fact?  That we are deeply loved?  That . . .

These kinds of convictions don’t fully come through because you preach a single message on the subject.  They come through and mark lives when they have already come through and marked your life.  We are not mere transmitters of information.  We are not neutral entities in God’s ministry that somehow hopefully will disappear in the course of our preaching.  No, we are lives that continually convey the convictions and affections that have captured our hearts.  Our passion forged in personal study and close walk with Christ over time will shape the convictions with which we infect others.

What convictions do we convey?

Preachers are Theologians not Therapists

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Following on from yesterday’s post, I found the following quote quite insightful:

The rise of therapeutic concerns within the culture means that many pastors, and many of heir church members, believe that the pastoral calling is best understood as a “helping profession.”  As such, the pastor is seen as someone who functions in a therapeutic role in which theology is often seen as more of a problem than a solution.

This is from Al Mohler’s book, He is Not Silent, p108.  This is a helpful distinction.  Have we fallen into thinking of our function as primarily therapeutic?  Cambridge Dictionary defines therapeutic as “causing someone to feel happier and more relaxed or to be more healthy.”  Yes, in the final element our task does involve promoting spiritual health.  However, not every sermon will make listeners feel happier or relaxed.  Sometimes our task is a discomforting one.

I notice particularly Mohler’s observation about theology.  If preaching and pastoral work is about therapy, then theology is often seen as more problem than solution.  Is this why so many churches promote unity at all costs, avoiding key biblical and theological areas in order to keep everyone happy?  If you were to take the theological pulse of your congregation, what teaching of Scripture would be deficient?  If that were less than comfortable to address, would you still do it?  Later Mohler states that “when truth is denied, therapy remains.” (p121)  May it never be true of us that we pander to the yearnings of our age and only offer therapy to a self-centric people.

Preachers are Theologians

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

The health of any church depends, in part, on its leaders functioning faithfully as theologians.  It’s part of the package for any elder (pastor, minister, leader, whatever term you are used to).  Leading, feeding, caring and protecting.  How are we to lead others on God’s behalf if we’re unclear on the nature of the church, it’s mission, God’s character and plan?  How are we to feed the saints if we’re not wrestling with the great doctrines of the faith and setting them forth?  How are we to care effectively for souls if we never consider what a human consists of and how they function in relation to salvation and walking in the Spirit?  How are we to protect the flock if we’re unaware of theological trends and errors in the general atmosphere of the contemporary church at large?

The pastoral functions of any church leader require that theological reflection and processing be involved in the ministry.  It is a dangerous error to presume that theology is a function of the academy or the research university.  It is worrying to find many preachers and leaders who think that their task is not that of theology.

If you preach, then you influence.  If you influence, then you lead.  If you lead, don’t make the grave error of divorcing your ministry from that of theology.  If you do, then both your ministry and theology will suffer.  You will suffer.  And so will they.

The Bible, Expository & Consecutive Preaching – Part 5

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Daniel Goepfrich wrote a substantial interaction with this blog over on his site – here – this post is responding to the issue of relevant preaching from paragraph 12 to the end.

———————

You then progress to the issue of contemporary relevance.  I agree with you that the Bible is full of God’s spokesmen addressing contemporary issues (prophets, Jesus, apostles, etc.)  As I have already mentioned, my understanding of expository preaching is not about form of preaching, but a commitment to understanding and communicating the biblical text with emphasis on its relevance now.  I quoted Wiersbe’s comment on Ironside to prompt thought, not to suggest that we should only preach straight through books, and I appreciate you noticing that early on and changing your post accordingly.

However, there is an issue worth thinking through here.  Do we “make the text relevant” or do we show “how the text is relevant?”  To use Stott’s approach in Between Two Worlds, is the text boss of the message, or is the preacher?  This is where expository preaching is separated from other approaches (again, not a form issue, an authority issue).  Does the biblical narrative speak with authority in reference to God and humanity, or is it merely a recounting of what happened?  Does the message of the prophets, or Jesus, or Paul, or James, speak with authority today, or is it merely an example to follow in that we too should speak relevantly?  I don’t think you are suggesting that, but I gently push your words toward a perhaps logical conclusion?  No, you are right when you say that we preach the Bible because it is relevant today.  I heartily agree.

In fact, what you suggest is that we use the Bible texts to speak to today’s situations, but we need not feel constrained to the form of writing in which they were recorded.  I do not advocate strict adherence to the form so that every sermon has to be a verse-by-verse re-presentation.  I would suggest that is a good default place to start though.  Why?  Because form is not merely a type of cultural baggage that we can dispose of and lose nothing.  No, the writers were deliberate communicators and we will not fully understand them if we do not seek to understand what they wrote in the way that they wrote it.  So I would urge the preacher to study a passage both in context, and with awareness of the genre and form it is in.

Do we have to preach according to that form?  Not necessarily.  However, if we want our listeners to know how to understand the Bible, then we do them a major disservice if we don’t show how form influences meaning.  Hence my position – the form of the text is a good default for the form of the sermon, but there may be good reasons to adjust the form of the sermon away from the form of the text.

I have really appreciated your post and interaction with my site.  I hope my response has been helpful in clarifying where I’m coming from?  Thanks for recognizing that I’m not dogmatic about form as some are (i.e. the “consecutive only” preaching proponents).  I hope this post has helped to clarify that while I see real benefits to consecutive preaching, my real commitment is to a true understanding of “expository preaching.”

I agree that we need to keep preaching what people need to hear, rather than just what they want to hear. That argument could be used by both sides on the consecutive versus topical debate.  The fact is, people need to hear what God is saying, and for that we must be committed to expository preaching – whether we choose to use a consecutive approach (as you will with Philippians) or a topical approach.  Not everything is expository, though, and I am concerned about preaching that uses the text to say what the preacher wants to say (which could happen in both consecutive and topical preaching!)  For that reason we need to be continually growing as students of the Word of God.

Every blessing in your ministry, Daniel, and thank you again for reading biblicalpreaching.net