Religion

Making Truth Understood

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

So we’ve thought about making biblical truth memorable, and making it known, but what about making it understood.  Is that what preaching is?  Yes.  And no.

1. Contemporary listeners need help understanding the Bible.

There is a significant distance between today’s world and the world of the Bible.  As the preacher, you have a key role in helping to bridge that divide.  This means overcoming differences in culture, in language, in politics, in religion, in worldview, in geography, in customs, in perspectives, etc.  When you preach the Bible you need to help make sense of a very different world for the sake of those in yours.

This means we can’t just read the text and then apply it.  We have to make sense of what is going on.  This means plumbing not only the historical setting and context, but also the literary setting and context.  We have to help people make sense of not only a strangely different world, but also an unusual collection of texts.  People need to understand the canonical structure, the development of thought, the informing theology feeding into a passage, the shape of the story beyond the passage, the nature of the genre of the passage, the forms of literary design within the passage, etc.

And all this means that as preachers we have to make value judgments.  We can’t just dump all the information we know and learn into a message.  This would make it overwhelming and too long.  So we must decide what needs to be said, this time, to make sense of this passage.

2. Your listeners need more than just understanding, but not less.

Just to make matters worse, understanding is not the only goal.  It is the foundational step.  That is, without understanding, then we cannot build effective application, and we cannot expect genuine transformation.  It is no shortcut to bypass understanding and go straight to application, pressing for compliance or hoping for transformation.  Application and transformation must be built squarely on clear understanding of the text.  God is not into radically new revelation.  He has given us His Word to transform lives. He invites us to engage Him there, and as we do so, He also encounters us to change us now.  God hasn’t appointed us to simply explain the truth of His Word, nor to simply seek transformed lives by means of pointed application.  He has appointed us to put it all together – explain, apply, pursue transformation.

Making Truth Known

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Yesterday I critiqued the old idea that homiletics is about making truth memorable.  I’d like to ponder a similar issue with both affirmation and critique.  Can we say that preaching is about making truth known?  Yes.  But not only.

Preaching is certainly about declaring and proclaiming truth.  We live in a world of lies and confusion.  Whether we are focusing on evangelism or building up believers, there is a massive need for the proclamation of biblical truth.  Here are some pointers:

1. We cannot assume that people have knowledge of truth.  We live in an age of increasing biblical illiteracy.  Actually, we also live in an age of increasing access to information, but increased shallowness in engaging with available information.  People are not well-read.  Thus it is not wise to assume that people have a certain level of knowledge of the Bible, or philosophy, or history, etc.  Assuming knowledge can lead people to either disengage from presentations, or to take that information and wrongly integrate it with their own perceived insight.

2. We must demonstrate the authority for our authoritative statements.  We do not live in an age where a person’s perceived authority can be assumed based on position or title.  Simply because you are the speaker does not mean much anymore.  Thus we have to demonstrate and prove authority for what is said.  Obviously we must be well-read and accurate in our handling of information.  More than that, we need to help people see for themselves that what we are saying from the Bible is what the Bible actually says.  They may or may not accept that the Bible is inspired by God, but we must show that we are not simply giving our own personal take on what it says.

3. We must recognize that truth statements alone will not suffice.  We should be declaring truth, but let’s be sure to proclaim a person.  People are trained to hold any truth statements at a distance, but we are wired to engage with other persons.  Thus we don’t just state truth, we proclaim Him.  We have to have an authentic personal relationship with the One we then seek to offer to others.  We need to speak from a life of authentic integrity, not performing, but sharing genuinely.  And we need to recognize that we are not simply addressing a brain in a body, but a person whose heart determines the value system of their life.

 

Making Truth Memorable

/ Peter Mead / 3 Comments

“Homiletics is all about making truth memorable.”  That’s what I was told recently.  It was explicitly focused on the issue of sermonic outlines.  While I can see some merit in the statement, I ultimately have to disagree.

I think this is an old way of thinking that is rooted in a limited understanding of both the Bible and the listener.  It assumes the Bible is a repository of truth statements muddled by different genre.  It assumes the listener is a mind-centred creature that will live well if well informed.  It assumes preaching is primarily about the orderly transfer of information.

There may be some value in memorable preaching outlines for the listener.  I suspect they are overrated.  Do people really review passages and ponder the outlines they have heard preached?  Perhaps.  A few thoughts:

1. Transferring an outline to the listeners is not the goal of preaching.  In fact, it might even distract preacher and listener from what is more important…understanding the passage, encountering God in His Word, feeling the force of its application, etc.

2. Overly crafted outlines might have some negative side effects.  For instance, the listener may equate crafting alliterated outlines with accurate interpretation of Scripture and then either copy the method, or feel inadequate to handle the Bible for themselves.  In this generation, perhaps more than before, the listener may find the preacher with clever outlines to be inauthentic and perceive him to be something of a performer.  We need to be wary of over crafting.  It would be better to understand the passage more, especially since many passages are not written as equally weighted paralleled points.

3. There are some things to make memorable.  The main idea of the message, the application of the passage, perhaps the sense of encounter with the Lord, the sense that the passage was helpful (better for them to go back to the text, instead of  relying on a simplified outline).

4. There is more to preaching than making something memorable.  The human is created as a more complex creature than a computer.  We don’t simply live from coding placed in our memory.  We are heart-driven responders and relaters.  We need to be informed, but in that informing process we ultimately need to encounter the Lord who reveals himself to us in His Word.

Tomorrow I will ponder another overly simplistic explanation of preaching, hopefully with some value for us as preachers.

Preaching and the Bible Neighbourhood 4

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

This week I have written about ways to help listeners get to know the Bible neighbourhood.  As we preach we need to point out key landmarks.  We need to help them join the dots to know how it fits together.  We might want to take them on a formal and planned tour for a few weeks.

Before we finish the series of posts, though, there’s one more than needs to be overtly stated.

4. Be sure they are getting experience for themselves.  There is simply nothing to beat personal experience of a place.  When we were first married we lived in England.  This was my wife’s first time living here.  We would have visits from friends and family, and sometimes we’d take them on official tours of places like London and Bath.  The open-top bus tours weren’t cheap, but they were a great way to get a taste of all the key sites.

One day Melanie went out with our neighbour for a tour of the city where we were living.  The neighbour wasn’t a uniformed bus based tour guide.  But did she ever know her stuff!  Simply by being in the city her whole life, she was in a position to give my wife a tour that no professional company could match.  Back doors from one little place to take a short-cut to another key location.  My wife came home tired but amazed at all she had seen.

Our neighbour was not a professional tour guide, but she had gained years of experience.  Here’s the point – we need to do whatever we can to motivate, encourage, invite and help people to be in the Bible for themselves.  Even the best tours on Sunday mornings won’t create local experts, unless they are spending time exploring and learning on their own.

Too many churches have an inconsistent culture – the effort may go in to the Bible teaching on a Sunday, but personal Bible experience is assumed during the week.  Don’t assume.  Train, equip, guide and even more importantly: expect and infect.  Expect folks to be Bible readers, and infect them with a passion for the God that they can meet there.  He is so good that Sunday just can’t be enough!

Preaching and the Bible Neighbourhood 3

/ Peter Mead / 5 Comments

When you move to a new city it takes a while to know your way around.  The process seems to begin with finding landmarks, and then it becomes a quest to join the dots.  We need to help people do the same in their Bibles.  They need to know the high points.  Then they need to see how they fit together and connect.  Now for my third suggestion:

3. Give them a tour.  Why not take a series of sermons and be more overt.  Instead of just making passing references to landmarks and connections, make that the goal of the series.  I’m toying with just such a series.  But I’m not sure which way to go.  Here are some ideas “off the top” . . .

A. Ten key passages.  My friend preached a series this way last year.  I can’t remember his ten passages, but how about something like: Genesis 1, Genesis 3, Genesis 12.  Perhaps Exodus 19, 2Samuel 7, Isaiah 42.  Why not Jeremiah 31, John 3, Ephesians 2 and Revelation 21?

B. Eight key events.  How about: creation, fall, promise, Sinai, exile, incarnation, passion, return of Christ?  That could work.  I’d want to stick to one or two key passages for each (perhaps the main one and then a commentary on it from elsewhere?)

C. Seven people you need to know.  Perhaps Adam, Abram, Moses, David, Jeremiah, Jesus and Paul.

D. Seven chunks of Bible text.  The books of Moses, the history books of Israel, the wisdom books, the prophet’s books, the books of Jesus’ passion, the history book of the early church, and the books of the apostles.

Other approaches that would give an effective introductory tour of the Bible?  Feel free to make your suggestions…

Preaching and the Bible Neighbourhood 2

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday I suggested we need to help listeners know the key landmarks.  This takes repetition and emphasis.  We can’t assume that one time over anything will make it stick.  So as we preach, let’s look for ways to flag up key locations in the canon.  This can be done by character, by key event (giving of a covenant, exile, etc.), or by passage (people should know that Genesis 12 is critical, and Exodus 19, and 2Samuel 7, and Jeremiah 31, etc.)

But we also need to …

2. Help them join the dots.  This is like learning to get from the grocery store to the office.  I could go from home to both, but I needed to figure out how to go from one to the other.  Learning your way around a city is often about joining the dots without home being the starting point.  The same is true in the Bible.

I am not suggesting that we should be preaching chains of references and safari hunts of cross-texts.  This doesn’t help do much but numb listeners.  But when appropriate, we should help people see why putting Moses in the context of Abraham is important.  Or why the New Covenant promised in the midst of the failure of Israel under the Old Covenant matters.  Or why Ruth being in the time of the Judges makes a difference.

And then, of course, what about the thematic development of Old Testament promises and ideas right the way through to the New Testament?  While there are some bizarre links being made from Old Testament to Jesus, we must not miss the intended ones.  The Bible has a unity and so it is not illegitimate to pursue the genuine connections that are present.

This is not a free ticket to speculative connections of common terms, etc.  This is an encouragement to know the Bible well, and to help others become familiar with it.  They don’t need to be instant experts (you and I are still learning too), but it is good for them to have confidence that they can open it, read it, and have a decent sense of what is going on and why it matters to the bigger story.

Tomorrow, I’ll add another suggestion . . .

Preaching and the Bible Neighbourhood

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Eight years ago we moved to south London.  I well remember the early weeks of driving (pre-GPS) with the 250-page map book open on the passenger seat next to me.  I knew one way to get to the office.  I found a way to get to the grocery store.  I found a different way from the grocery store to the route for the office.  I discovered how to get to our church.  Bit by bit I put the pieces together.

It was completely overwhelming at the start.  How could you ever find your way around a city like this?  Winding roads, town after town swallowed up by the sprawling claws of greater London.  But it wasn’t too long before the map sat on the back seat and I could find my way around without much concentration.

As preachers we need to recognize that our congregation may not be super-familiar with the biblical landscape.  It can feel like a confusing mess of history, geography, long names and absent timelines.  And if we aren’t careful, our preaching can only reinforce that sense.

So what can we do to help?  I’d like to share some thoughts today and in the subsequent days.  Here’s the first one:

1. Repeatedly offer them the critical landmarks.  Depending on where they are at, the landmarks may be as basic as Old Testament versus New Testament, or they might be a bit of specific.  But don’t assume too much.  While many will have a sense of Jesus’ life and ministry being in the Gospels, and then the subsequent action being in Acts, I suspect more than we realize are profoundly foggy on Old Testament landmarks.

Abraham and God’s promises to him – critical marker that people need to know is important.  Where does Moses come (and why does he matter?)  What about David (are these all covenant recipients?)  And what about the exile.  All the prophets relate in some way to the exile, so we can’t let it remain a mystery for folk!  There are other landmarks, but it would be good to make sure people are hearing of the significance of these as a starter.

Tomorrow I’ll go to the second point . . . we need to help people join the dots.

Interactive Bible Observation Preaching 2

/ Peter Mead / 7 Comments

Yesterday I shared some reflections on the advantages of the approach I took to preaching through Ruth last month.  The evening meeting allowed a different approach to the morning meeting, so I had folks marking up the passage on a handout, and then interacting together about observations along the way.

Here are some of the disadvantages, limitations or challenges in this approach.

1. It takes longer.  If the church is very strict on end time, then you have to begin it earlier in the meeting.  What might take 30 minutes to preach, can take 45-50 minutes with this approach.  Having said that, people should feel fully engaged if it is done well.  It may also take longer in preparation. That is, even though the homiletical crafting may be less, the exegetical awareness needs to be maximal.

2. It requires a certain relational comfort level.  Maybe requires is too strong a word.  I appreciated knowing the people and feeling a sense of mutual trust.  Having said that, I have seen someone do the same thing with a group of people he’d never met before and it worked very well.  But he had to win trust very quickly.  Too big of a group and it would lose the relational connection potential.

3. It requires care in interaction management.  When people participate, you have to handle what is said graciously.  Even when they are wrong.  This is where knowing the congregation really helps.  A comment shouldn’t be crushed, or too overtly corrected, etc.  I see this as common courtesy, but I am used to it in more “classroom” environments.  Some preachers seem unable to handle interaction without offending people.  I was talking with someone recently and we mentioned a speaker who might be invited to something.  The comment was telling: “yes we could invite him, but don’t let him have any Q&A time!”

4. It requires lots of preacher thinking.  When people participate, there is less control for the preacher.  You don’t know where they will go.  Your questions will influence that, but you really have to know your stuff, and know your plan.  How will you create and sustain tension with this approach?  When will you preach, and when will you interact?  How can the conclusion have impact?

5. You may have to overcome other messages and ideas.  Perhaps it wouldn’t work so well in a very familiar New Testament passage.  Or perhaps it is just what is needed.  But you would need to help people see the text itself, rather than their preconceived ideas and favourite points from other preachers.

Overall, none of these issues disqualify the approach and I will used it again, modifying continually.  Print the text, let them mark it up and lead as you all enjoy the adventure together.

Interactive Bible Observation Preaching

/ Peter Mead / 6 Comments

Last month I decided to try something a little different in our church.  I used the Sunday evening service (we have two services on a Sunday), for a study through the book of Ruth.  Each person attending was given a handout with the plain text of the passage for the evening with headings removed, but plenty of margin space allowed.  At various points I had them marking the text and then interacted with them as we observed the passage together.  I still preached, but it wasn’t a tightly controlled sermon.  I determined when there would be interaction, and overall I think it worked well.

Upon reflection, here are some of the advantages of this approach (not saying it should replace normal preaching, but I think it has a place).

1. It shows people that they can read and think about the passage, they don’t need to be spoon fed.  It is easy to get into the habit of only getting Bible input from “experts” – either at church, or for some, on MP3 downloads during the week.  But this approach subtly reminds people that they can look at and think about the text themselves.

2. It shows some people that they don’t automatically know everything.  This is in contrast to number 1, I suppose.  Some people are over confident in their view on everything.  This approach allows them to discover that they missed something and should look closer.  “I never saw that before” isn’t such a scary phrase from the preacher’s perspective, when they are actually observing the text with other people and it is plainly before them (rather than a homiletical invention).

3. It gives people experience of observing, then interpreting, then applying.  Some never really observe, some skip straight to application, etc.  This is a good group exposure to inductive Bible study.

4. It slows the pace of experiencing the text.  In this instance, it was Ruth, a narrative.  Good preaching can also slow the pace of experiencing the text, but this approach certainly did.  People felt the tension and it built nicely, both during the message and over the weeks.

5. The preaching element is proven.  That is, if done well, the preaching element should not get the “I wouldn’t have seen that in the text” kind of response.  They are seeing it, the preacher is just building and reinforcing what has already come through.  I found the more traditional preaching element in this series felt very gritty and real: it was the explanation and reinforcement of the main theme in each passage, tied into the bigger picture of the book.

There are other advantages, so feel free to add by comment…