How to Preach the One True God – Part Two

October 1, 2011September 30, 2011 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

So do we have to thoroughly define terms every time we mention God? That is, will every sermon be thwarted by a systematics lecture within moments of setting sail from the introduction? Not at all. Here are four suggestions that I think will have cumulative power without disrupting every sermon completely. Remember the first suggestion from yesterday though . . . you need to know the difference between the God defined by philosophy and the one true God who has revealed Himself in the Son and through the Spirit.

2. Repetition of “which God” question – by repeatedly pointing out that not every assumed description of the “one true God” is biblically true of the “one true God.” Some assumptions are true of Him, but not primary in His self-revelation. Just as it can be powerful in an evangelistic setting to ask someone who doesn’t believe in God which God they don’t believe in, so it can be powerful to open the subject up to Christians and ask which God they do believe in. It is a dangerous assumption that all who refer to God mean the same being, or even are clear on who He is. Sadly too many end up assuming a sort of impersonal ultimate force rather than the feeling, thinking, personal, loving creator God of the Bible. Let’s chip away at the naive assumption that everyone basically knows who God is.

3. Emphasis of particular text in light of its context – just as we can overlay a certain set of divine assumptions on the Bible as a whole, so we can easily do that with particular texts. Try to be more nuanced in making clear what a text is offering us as it reveals God. For example, Yahweh high and lifted up in Isaiah 6, holy holy holy . . . needs to be preached in light of Isaiah 1-5, where His heart for the whoring faithless nation who don’t draw near in loving devotion is made clear. Sovereign and holy? Absolutely. Distant, cold, rule-obsessed and uninvolved? Never! Without seeing how God reveals Himself and His heart in chapters 1-5, the sixth chapter can be preached with wrong emphasis, and the last five verses can really end up preaching that other philosophically-driven view of God.

4. Emphasis of particular text in light of complete revelation – that is to say, don’t give the impression that “God” in the Old Testament is just “Father” in New Testament terms. How easy it is to give the mistaken impression that God becomes a trinity when the Son is incarnated. The God of the Old Testament is trinity, even if each particular instance doesn’t make that clear. Was it the Father than spoke face to face with Abraham, that wrestled with Jacob, that spoke to the elders of Israel, etc.? What about the Spirit in the Old Testament? Any time we see “God” referenced in the Bible, we must be sensitive to the content and the informing theology at that point in the progress of revelation, but we shouldn’t forget what we now know more clearly about the one true God being trinity!

5. Since God is trinity, repetition of trinitarian hints are worthwhile – just to reinforce the previous point, don’t feel you have to fully explain the Trinity every time you mention it. Why not intrigue people with a sense of the beautiful attractive wonder of who God really and personally is through trinitarian hints as you preach the Bible. Don’t wait for the overt trinitarian formula to refer to trinity. Don’t miss the Father/Son language and turn that into a generic one-size-fits-all “God” reference as some preachers and authors do (almost giving the impression that the Son is somehow less than God). Don’t ignore the trinity in the Old Testament where there is a hint, and even where there isn’t. After all, we want to preach the one true trinitarian God of the Bible!

Ok, two posts over the daily limit . . . I need to stop, but feel free to comment.

Ministry Checkup: Loving Giver or Glory Seeker?

September 26, 2011September 27, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

What kind of ministry do you have? Are you a loving giver or a glory seeker?

Paul addresses his own motivations in 1Thessalonians 2 – a passage every preacher should meditate on periodically.

Don’t Minister as a Glory Seeker (2:1-6)

What did Paul do? He ministered boldly despite the suffering and conflict he faced. He was not after glory from man, but accepted shameful treatment. Why did he do this? His goal was to please God and not man. He knew God tests the hearts of those who serve Him, so Paul didn’t flatter, or greedily pursue gain. He was not after glory from people.

How are we doing? Chances are, if we are serving in a local church setting in the world today, that many of us are facing some level of discomfort and conflict in our ministry. Shameful treatment may be a bit of an overstatement for many, but it often isn’t completely off target either. Let’s not pursue glory from people, but serve with hearts pointed in the right direction – to please God.

Minister as a Loving Mother (2:7-8)

What did Paul do? He cared gently and tenderly like a good mother. Why did he do this? He loved them.

And us? When we minister to others we give of ourselves. When we preach the Word, we often feel spent. When serving a church, we will regularly find ourselves caring for broken and hurting individuals. They don’t tend to put it on the advertising, but it is often true, “Come as our minister and be a Mum to us!”

Minister as a Loving Father (2:9-12)

What did Paul do? He worked hard in their midst, setting a strong example, like a good father. Why did he do this? He was moved to motivate them for the end result that their lives would bring glory to God.

And us? Ministering in a church, whether full-time, part-time or whatever time, is hard work. Yet some do struggle with laziness. I read the other day a comment from Bill Hybels – if you want to improve your preaching, find a way to give an extra hour to the preparation. What level is your perspiration indicator showing as you labour in your ministry?

In the subsequent verses we see that Paul did have both glory and joy, but it was the Thessalonians in their response to the ministry. He didn’t pursue his own glory, but lovingly gave himself for their sakes through his ministry.

Preach the Passage

April 21, 2011April 18, 2011 / Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Easter Sunday offers us all a temptation as preachers. Whatever the passage being preached, we’re all tempted to actually preach something else. For example, let’s say your passage is in Luke’s gospel. Will you preach the pairs of witnesses that Luke scatters liberally throughout the passage from the death of Christ on? Or will you just read that and preach 1Cor.15?

What if you are preaching Mark, as I am this weekend (short ending). Will you preach Mark with his brief message of the resurrection, pointer back to Galilee where the ministry all began in 1:14-15, and the fear of the first followers? Or will you read it and flee to 1Cor.15?

What if you are preaching John? Will you preach the questions of Thomas and Jesus’ response to Thomas, and the uniquely Johannine commissioning of the disciples and the climactic statement of Thomas? Or will you read it and essentially preach 1Cor.15?

Actually I have no problem with 1Cor.15. It is familiar territory and that is why many of us easily end up there whatever text we think we are preaching. If we are preaching 1Cor.15, then please let’s preach it in all its power. But if we are preaching something else, let’s not miss what God inspired the writer to include.

Obviously there are other passages too, many in fact, from which to preach the risen Christ (obviously Matthew, but also Acts, numerous other epistles, earlier predictions of Christ, etc.) Let’s be sure to let people benefit from whichever passage we are preaching this Sunday. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful!

Easter Thoughts

April 18, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

No post on here today, just a link to the Cor Deo blog where I have offered some thoughts on the importance of Easter. Click here to see the post.

Lessons on God from Biblical Genre: Epistle

February 23, 2011February 18, 2011 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

In the past two days I have shared D A Carson’s five points on the diversity of biblical genre. Now to some specific genre and what their design might suggest about God.

Carson suggested the following: There are lessons to be learned about God from the occasional nature of the epistles. Paul never gave his summary of doctrine. He is always found to be, in some way, responding to a felt need of some kind.

Carson suggested that differences in Paul’s letters reflect differences in occasion, rather than maturation of Paul. (His support for this suggestion is the timing of the letters. Paul had about 16 years post-conversion before he wrote any of the epistles, then in the latter part of his “career” he wrote his letters. We would expect significant maturation if he began as a naïve new believer, but he didn’t.)

So God address particular churches with particular needs, carefully applying the message of the gospel to each. He gave the example of Paul’s different approaches to circumcision in respect to Timothy in Acts 16 and Titus in Galatians 2. The difference here was a different occasion/circumstance. In one the exclusive sufficiency of Jesus was at stake. In the other it was about avoiding an unnecessary obstacle to ministry. Occasionality is important and it is in the multiplicity of books that we find the full picture.

Implications for our preaching? I would suggest four for now:

1. We should seek to preach specific gospel presentation to specific audiences, rather than generic gospel presentations to undefined audiences.

2. We should seek to help listeners grasp the occasional/situational context for an epistolary passage, rather than treating the epistle as some other form of writing (the systematic treatise comes to mind).

3. Since there is no “gospel in a vacuum” presentations in the New Testament, we should try to avoid this all too common phenomena in our preaching. Be sure to concretely apply the gospel to the lives of those listening.

4. We should be very careful to preach a single passage with the full force of its own message, but always being sensitive to the fuller picture of the teaching of the other epistles and books.

Planning a Selective Series

January 27, 2010 / Peter Mead / 1 Comment

What criteria can you use when planning a series in a longer book that you don’t want to last for years? Obviously we’re not obligated to cover complete books in a series, but how might you do that selectively rather than comprehensively? Here are some pointers:

Foundation – Know the message, flow and structure of the book. In order to plan a series that selectively represents the whole, you need a good awareness of the whole. Without this you are likely to end up with a plan that doesn’t represent the book, or you’ll start into the series and end up preaching every passage (which might be appreciated . . . but only “might be” – your church may not want you to try to be Martyn Lloyd-Jones!)

1. Select key moments in the book. In every book there are key moments of transition or anchor points for the flow of the book. For example, a selective series in Mark’s gospel would need to be touching heavily on the transition that occurs at 8:27-30 and the following couple of paragraphs. Equally, Mark 10:45 is fairly critical, perhaps with the following story which is somewhat transitional as the final step before Jerusalem.

2. Select key examples in the book. There are some passages that may not be at a transition point, but are just very typical of the style and message of the book. For instance, Mark 4:35-41 as an example of Mark’s pattern of following teaching with testing.

3. Select an example in a sequence, but show the whole progression. Often a book will string together a series of stories making a similar point, such as in Mark 2-3. So you might select an example in the sequence demonstrating Jesus’ authority, but also show briefly how many such stories there are in the section. This covers a lot of ground, but can make quite an impression as people feel the weight of the authority demonstrated by the whole sequence.

4. Select passages you want to preach. As long as you have the other three types of message included, there is nothing wrong with selecting based on personal motivation – the fruit will probably show in your preaching if you are motivated!

5. Keep the big idea of the book clear throughout. Consistently, even if subtly, reinforce the big idea of the whole book to cohere the series.

Connecting With Story

December 9, 2009December 9, 2009 / Peter Mead / 2 Comments

There are many stories in the Bible, and this is one season in the year when most of us are preaching stories. In some ways Bible stories give the preacher an advantage. For example, stories offer a flow, a plot, a progression, that can be replicated in the message (although it amazes me how many preachers try to preach a story without telling the story!) Also, stories offer vivid images and allow for effective description. But how do we forge the connection between “back then” and “today”? A few thoughts, I’m sure you could add more:

Don’t just historically lecture, but preach to today. It is easy to fall into the trap of presenting what happened back then, but not recognizing the enduring theological significance for today. People appreciate hearing about what happened, but they deeply appreciate it when the preacher can emphasize the relevance of that happening to us today.

Don’t caricature characters, but encourage identification with their humanness. Again, it is easy to pick on one aspect of a character’s action in a story, but miss the other side of the coin. For example, Zechariah doubted the message of the angel, but he was also a faithful pray-er over the long-term. Don’t beat up your listeners with a sense of identification with the negative only – “How often do we doubt God’s goodness to us? How easily we resist what God is doing!” Stories function through resolution of tension in a plot and through identification with characters . . . be careful not to mis-emphasize a character portrayal if the biblical account is more balanced.

Don’t identify without theocentrizing. It is also possible to present the characters effectively so that listeners can identify with them, but miss the point that God is at the center of biblical narrative. It’s not just Joseph’s kindness and personal character quality that is significant in Matthew 1, it is also very much focused on God’s revelation of His plan to both save His people from their sins and His presence with His people. Joseph is a great example of a “fine, young man.” But the passage presents this fine, young man responding to the revelation of God’s purposes. Jesus, Immanuel. That is the information that Joseph acted upon. The amazing thing about Christmas narratives is that the theocentric truth is bundled up in a tiny human infant.

Christmas preached as just peace and happiness and quaint idyllic scenes is a travesty – Christmas is set up for theocentric preaching (but don’t lose the humanness of the other characters too).

Narrative Breaking Series

November 3, 2009October 30, 2009 / Peter Mead / 3 Comments

A story is a story. It should be studied as a story and understood as a story. But what about when you are preaching part of a story? For instance, take the book of Ruth. I had to preach just part of that story on Sunday. It’s not easy to break into a story and preach part of it, but leave the rest for the following weeks. Some thoughts:

1. You have to study the whole story. A narrative is incomplete until it has been completed. Profound, but a necessary comment. Even if you are only preaching one part of a longer story, you need to be significantly aware of the whole in order to handle your part well.

2. Build on previous elements, but don’t give away the tensions of subsequent development. If I am preaching from Ruth 1, then I need to preach Ruth 1 without preaching Ruth 2-4. This means that although I really like Boaz and want to preach about Boaz, he’s not in my text yet. If someone else is preaching in subsequent weeks and I have given away all the tension, that is unfair (even if people know the story, build the tension of the whole story and allow each scene to have its day).

3. If you only have one scene in a longer narrative, preach the plot of that scene. Recognize the mini-play nature of a single scene. Look for the tension. See how it resolves, even if only partially. Preach the scene you are preaching. Often readers and listeners think they know a story but really only know certain elements. How many people really understand Jonah 2 or even Jonah 4? How many people have really soaked in Ruth 1? While it may be difficult to preach only part of a narrative, there are advantages too.

4. Make sure you preach a message, not just an introduction. It may be tempting to simply set up the following weeks where the greater tension is resolved, but don’t fail to preach a message this week. Simply setting up what follows is not enough. People have come to church this week and should be fed this week.

Much more could be said . . . you say it.

Preaching As Invitation

October 9, 2009 / Peter Mead / Leave a comment

In our zeal to do our best, sometimes we might over deliver in a sermon. For example, we might over deliver on the content of the passage so that listeners get the sense that they have no exhausted that passage and so have no need to return to it. We might over deliver on the application of the passage so that listeners get the sense that the work of the passage has been done and they have no need to ponder further how they might live in light of it. We might over deliver on the “experience” of the passage so that listeners get the sense taht heir encounter with God in that passage is now done and they have no real invitation for further engagement with Him.

Let’s be sure to prepare and preach a passage to the best of our ability. The process may be exhausting at times, as well as a delightful privilege. However, the sermon must not exhaust the listener’s sense of invitation. Let’s present the passage in such a way that we invite people into the passage and the Scriptures more. Let’s present the message in such a way that we invite people into the delight of relationship with Christ more.

One example. This Sunday I am preaching the Mary and Martha incident in Luke 10. What a tragedy it would be if I thoroughly satisfied listeners with the key distinction of the priority of relationship with Christ and service for Christ. If people left that sermon happy that they had seen the difference and know what the passage is saying, but do not feel the implicit invitation to join Mary at Jesus’ feet and enjoy that relationship for themselves . . . if that happens, then I may have over-preached.

Preaching is an invitation into the text, more than that, an invitation into the delighted relationship offered to us as God offers His heart in the Word by His Spirit.

Preaching to a Postmodern Culture

August 15, 2009August 6, 2009 / 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.