Stage 4 – Passage Idea

Tool of Inestimable Value

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

There’s a tool in preparation that should not be overlooked.  Of course there are many aspects of preparation that matter, not least the preparation of the life of the preacher, plus the various aspects of Bible study skills, pastoral awareness and involvement, etc.  But there is one tool that many preachers neglect far too much.

Most of us were trained to prepare our messages on paper – study notes, outlines, manuscripts, preaching notes, etc.  All of this is good, but don’t miss the obvious.  The goal in preaching is not to write a good outline, or write a good manuscript.  The goal is to speak a message.  So don’t neglect the value of talking through the message.

There is nothing unspiritual about good preparation.  But there is something very sensible about it.  When you speak through a message you will find that some parts don’t flow as they seemed to on paper.  You’ll find that some transitions are clunky, while others are practically absent to the half-listening ear.  You’ll find that some sentences are too long, some thoughts are too convoluted, some thought processes are unclear.  Every negative discovered in pre-preaching speaking is a good thing for you can strengthen your message.

But then there’ll be positives too.  A different way of stating a key point, or phrasing a transition, or even a helpful image or support material that comes to mind as you are listening to yourself speak through the message.  Speaking through a message is a great way to break a log jam.  Recently I was wrestling with a passage, or actually, with a message.  I understood the passage to a certain extent, but was struggling to form the message in any way other than straight information (i.e. tedious sermon alert!)  I decided to preach it through, and in doing so was able to reformulate the main idea to be more engaging and memorable.  I also came up with another illustrative image that conveyed the sense of the passage much better than what I’d written in my outline.

It may sound simple, but sometimes the best thing you can do is leave your desk and preach through the message as it stands.  It will usually improve your message and motivate you to press on in your preparation.  Simple?  Yes.  But definitely a tool of inestimable value.

Pseudo-Expository Preaching

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

If you have a commitment to expository Biblical preaching as it is understood on this site, then some versions of preaching obviously stand out as poor.  The anecdotal platitudinal rambling with a verse attached won’t fool many of us.  The non-expository topical sermon where verses aren’t handled with care and the Bible isn’t in authority over the message, we can usually spot those too (note that it is possible to preach an expository-topical message, so not all topical is bad!)  But the category I label as pseudo-expository can be much harder to spot.

Pseudo-Expository Preaching defined – Pseudo-exp preaching is where the preacher appears to be preaching the text, but falls short of any of the four elements in an expository preaching definition.  The four elements are (1) the work of the Holy Spirit in preparation and delivery, (2) the true meaning of the passage understood, (3) then effectively communicated through the preacher, (4) emphasizing the relevance of the passage to the listeners present.

1 – The Holy Spirit. True preaching cannot be simply the application of a mechanistic preparation process, or simply the fruit of good learning.  True preaching has to be a work of God.  This is very difficult to genuinely discern in others.  Sometimes you can tell from a preacher’s attitude or lifestyle.  But these can be faked.  Yet if we turn the focus onto ourselves, it becomes a searching question – is your preaching done in your own power, or in prayerful and humble reliance on the empowering of the Spirit of God?

2 – The Bible text rightly understood. Some people will be fooled by preaching that bounces off words in a text to say whatever the preacher wants to say.  But true preaching reflects genuine study and understanding of the text. Genuine study and understanding will not be equally profound in every preacher.  If you feel inadequate in this area, don’t be intimidated and give up.  Keep growing in your study skills and your Bible knowledge.  In respect to the next message, try to stick in your passage and grasp it as effectively as you can.  The basics done well will be a blessing to all.  But if you short-cut by bouncing off words, or using the text to give your own message, then that’s pseudo-expository.

Tomorrow I’ll deal with the other two elements and note how they can be missed to create a pseudo-exp sermon.

U.O.P. – Onus On Us

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Unity.  Order.  Progress.  Three essentials in effective communication of a message.  Yet it strikes me that we can sometimes take these for granted when we are preaching on a single passage.  Unity?  One passage.  Order?  Moving through the passage.  Progress?  Getting closer to the end.  If this is all we have, then I suspect our preaching may be bordering on boring, among other things.

Unity.  It takes more than simply having a single preaching text. After all, the content of a message “united” by a single passage can be totally random in examples, references, illustrations, etc.  If we work at grasping the distilled single sentence main idea of the passage, then there is hope of unity in the preaching.  But if we simply bounce off the text and go where our thoughts lead us, then there is no limit to the disunity that can result in our preaching.  How often do we hear preachers supposedly preaching from one passage that seem to feel compelled to refer to fifteen others?

Order.  It takes more than simply having a single preaching text. For example, if you are preaching a ten-verse chunk of text, simply moving from the first to the last does not guarantee a sense of order.  If we fail to wrestle with the text and grasp the essential flow of thought in the passage, then we may simply jump off apparently disconnected thoughts in each successive mini-chunk, resulting in an apparently disordered collection of thoughts.  Surely the biblical writers were not presenting disconnected mini-thoughts?  Yet how often do we hear preachers supposedly preaching from one passage, yet at the end we as listeners have little grasp on the flow of thought in the text, little sense that the passage itself actually makes sense?

Progress.  It takes more than simply having a single preaching text. As we preach, listeners should be moving with us through the combined explanation and application of the text in the experience we call a sermon.  There should be a start.  Then there should be the sense that we’re heading toward a finish.  If we fail to wrestle with the text enough to grasp the movement and purpose of the passage, if we fail to craft the message into a plot or journey that goes somewhere, then what happens?  We end up with a pedantic and plodding presentation.  How often do we hear preachers supposedly preaching from one passage, yet all around we sense that others are looking at the text, as we are, to see how much more of the message there is still to come?  These things ought not to be!

Unity, order and progress.  These are evident in each unit of biblical text.  But the onus is on us as preachers to make sure they are clearly present in our message on that text – the text alone will not guarantee it!

Keep Looking

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Observation does not work in haste.  It takes time to keep looking at something and really see it.  I’m told that you cannot get the best out of an art gallery by rushing around and taking mental snapshots (my default approach).  I know that neither can you get the best out of a Bible passage from a quick glance.  The problem is that we find triggers to move on.

One trigger that often gets us, and therefore undermines our observation, is that we “find a message.”  We look at the passage, see a superficial outline, and then move on to forming the message.  In reality we would do well to continue observing the passage.

For example, Colossians 4:2-6.  When I first looked at that a few weeks ago, the structure was fairly obvious.  Paul is asking the Colossians to keep on praying (verse 2), for Paul to have opportunities to speak the gospel (verses 3-4).  Then Paul moves on to describe how their conduct should be toward outsiders (verses 5-6).  The structure is simple and it preaches: pray for ministers, and interact well yourselves.

It works, it preaches, but further observation helps to unite the passage further.  As it stands, my outline so far is really two almost distinct ideas.  However, the passage flows as one thought.  For instance, Paul urges them to pray for God to open doors for the gospel (v3), so that he may speak as he “ought to speak.” (v4).  Likewise, perhaps the action of the readers described in verse 5 implies the opening of a door, so that they will have opportunity to speak “as they ought” to speak (v6).  The passage is asking for prayer for “ministers” as well as for themselves, but it is not so distinct as “pray for ministers, but simply interact well yourselves with outsiders.”  No, the prayer (and the action) is for the opening of doors and then the appropriate speech to follow.  If the language of “minister” is used for verses 3-4, then it must also be used of verses 5-6.  There is a unity to the passage that a superficial outline may miss.

Often it is easy to see something that will preach, and then stop looking.  Let’s be diligent to wrestle more with the text, to believe there is greater unity to the thought than may at first appear.  The writer had a clear thought, let’s honour that by pursuing the thought as we study.

Balancing the Balancing

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Every text says something.  No text says everything.  Our task is to preach the text’s something in a way that is faithful to the Bible’s “everything”.  Our task is not to preach everything from this text’s something.

Balance – you don’t want to preach something that on its own is faithful to the preaching text, but distorts the message of the Bible.  So we have to think about balancing it. For example, Psalm 1. This passage is saying that lasting blessing comes to those who live according to the Word of God, rather than the words of the wicked.  However, this does not mean that simply obeying the Bible’s ethical instruction leads to eternal life.  Psalm 1 may need balance to avoid misunderstanding or misapplication.

Balance the balance – we need to be careful though.  It is easy to be so excessive in balancing that we end up blunting the force of the passage at hand.  It is possible to always preach a vague biblical message without ever allowing the text through in its power.  So how to know how much to balance?

1. Remember your goal in this message is to preach this text, not the whole canon in one shot.

2. Consider your listeners (preaching Psalm 1 to a group with non-Christians will require more balancing from beyond the passage than preaching Psalm 1 to a group of Christians at a conference).

3. Consider if this is a one-shot, or part of a process?  People at an evangelistic event may only come once, but people in a church get more messages to balance each other.  However, even with evangelism we don’t have to give them the whole deal every time we get them in (but that’s an evangelistic issue).

4. Decide the extent of balance needed (is the message slightly incomplete, or significantly risky?)  Is the main thought of this message biblically true, or is it heretical if misunderstood (especially if easily misunderstood).

There is not a one-size fits all solution.  But I offer these thoughts as a prompt to consider carefully the balancing we do in our messages – not too little, but not too much either.

What If You’re Not Ready?

/ Peter Mead / 4 Comments

It is so important to understand the text before you preach it!  I don’t mean just knowing what the big words mean.  I don’t mean just having a collection of exegetical insights to share.  I don’t mean even having a sermon vaguely based on certain parts of the text.  I mean really understanding what the text is saying – understanding it’s unity, it’s message, it’s point, it’s purpose, it’s role in the broader flow of thought in the book.  What if you’re not ready though?

Suggestion with several caveats to follow: If you’re not ready, don’t preach it.  Instead preach an old message again that you are confident is biblically sound.

Just think what an example that might be for the congregation!  “We were scheduled to be in Epistle XYZ 4:15-22, but I’ve been studying it over several weeks and still am not there yet – some passages take real work to really grasp!  So I’ll keep on studying, but for today, let’s look again at . . . ”

Caveats a coming!

1. Chances are, they won’t remember a message you re-preach.  But it would be honest to tell them it’s worth a second look at this old message rather than trying to “slip it through.”

2. Recognize that as a Bible student we never fully plumb the depths of any passage and as a preacher we shouldn’t really present all the plumbs either!  It takes wisdom to know the difference between “I’ll never fully plumb this passage” and “I haven’t grasped the fundamental unity and flow of thought in this passage.

3. It is in no way a good example if you simply started too late.

4. Whether you are a paid pastor preaching weekly, or an unpaid preacher preaching periodically, there is an element of commitment involved.  It will undermine your credibility if you follow the above suggestion more than very rarely!  (In fact, if you are only doing one section in a series from the same book, you can’t simply make the subsequent weeks shift by missing your section.  Get help earlier in the process and make sure you grasp the passage before you preach it, for surely you must preach it!)

5. It is probably better to take this post as a strong prod to really be prepared, rather than actually trying what I suggest!  (I’d be interested to hear if anyone has ever publically announced their need for more time to study a certain passage!)

Short Cuts to Nowhere Good

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

There are a couple of short-cuts taken by many preachers that need to be highlighted for the sake of Biblical Preaching.  Please be sure to read the explanation as well as the heading (it’s amazing how people miss the point of what’s written sometimes!)

1. Prayer. Prayer is not a short-cut.  It is a necessity.  It is critical.  However, it is not a short-cut.  In fact, praying in preparation will probably make the preparation take longer, but it is worth the longer journey.  Many preachers think that all they need to do is pray and then preach their impressions.  This is neither pleasing to the Lord nor helpful for the listeners.  Why do some preachers think God is so pleased when they essentially dismiss the Bible by skirting around the study process in preparation?  I suspect that if we pray “Lord, please show me what I should say from this text!” that His answer would include “I want you to say what the text says.” God takes His Word very seriously, so should we, and prayer is not short-cut around the blessing of spending significant time and effort wrestling with the true and exact meaning of the passage.

Tomorrow I will add another short-cut that is not worth taking if we are to be Biblical Preachers!

Main Idea – Another Easy Mistake

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday I mentioned an easy mistake to make – finding the biggest detail and losing sight of the rest.  Here’s another easy mistake to make:

Encompassing everything via a statement that is so vague it could come from any number of passages. I suppose it is an overreaction to the fear of missing the point of the passage.  I suppose it gives the preacher comfort that no-one could argue with what the main idea actually says.  The danger though, comes precisely because it is so vague.  What are the possible results of a “We should trust God” kind of main idea?

1. Lack of authority. If it obviously does not represent the preaching text effectively, then the listeners are left with a sense of inadequate preparation on the part of the preacher.  Our authority is really God’s authority demonstrated by the fact that the Bible is boss of the message.  Vague and loose use of the text can only undermine authority.

2. Insipid application. If the main idea derived from the text is vague, the result will typically be vague application also.  Lack of diligence in explaining the text will not set up diligent application of that specific text.  The personality of the preacher may incline them to detailed applications, but without the biblical foundation, such application is likely to be more along the lines of personal suggestions to the listeners.

3. Limited life change. Of course God is able to work despite and around our poor preaching.  But our aim should never be to need a “despite us” kind of grace.  While life change can only ever come from the work of God through His ministry in His people by His Spirit and His grace, He calls us to handle His Word well and preach as effectively as we can.  Vague main ideas come from inadequate biblical study, lead to insipid application and typically result in limited life change.

So what do I suggest?  I suggest the “Hypothetical Bible Expert” test.  Presuming somebody knew their Bible really well, would they be able to identify the passage from just the statement of the preaching idea?  “We should trust God” could come from any number of passages.  A distinct and carefully written main idea will point to one (or a very limited number of passages).  Aim for a unique main idea for each unique passage.

Main Idea – Easy Mistake

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

I suppose there are several easy mistakes to make when it comes to getting the main idea of a passage.  I’d like to point out one today.

Do not look for the biggest detail of the passage and then omit the rest of the passage. It may be tempting to look for the weightiest element in a passage and make that the main idea.  Equally, it may be a misunderstanding of the process to search for the biggest point and then miss the rest.

What we should be doing is distilling the whole passage, allowing every detail (big or small), to influence the statement of the main idea.  Some details may not be visible in the wording of the main idea.  Perhaps they influence the tone or the feel of the idea.  Some details are developments of the main idea (perhaps explaining, or proving, or applying it) and consequently may not show in the statement.  However, it is important to approach getting the main idea in the right way:

The right way: every detail feeds into our understanding of the whole, which is then summarized or distilled into one sentence.

The wrong way: only the most significant detail (or even the most attractive or preachable detail) is used to define the main idea, all other details are skipped or omitted.