Stage 5 – Message Purpose

Creating Conceptual Categories vs Contextualizing

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

John Piper wrote on his blog this week about the danger of over-zealous contextualizing.  What he means by this is the reaching for points of connection so that the message of the Bible can fit into the thinking of the listener.  We sometimes have to create conceptual categories that may be missing from the mental frameworks of our listeners.

He raises an important point.  I would suggest that we have to think through whether we are preaching concepts that are driven by the Bible text, or preaching Bible texts to support concepts driven by our system of theology.  When we preach a Bible passage, our task is to communicate the concept conveyed by that text.  According to Robinson’s definition, expository preaching is the communication of a biblical concept … applied to the listeners.

Certainly, preaching is more than communicating a helpful principle or tip for life.  Preaching involves communicating concepts that may actually reframe the way our listeners perceive reality.  For instance, if you are preaching on the armor of God in Ephesians 6, don’t present it as a helpful tip for times of testing (that may prove helpful if people happen to remember the message).  Rather preach that we live in a constant Ephesians 6 reality and people are either appropriately dressed or vulnerably naked.  People often don’t perceive reality as a constant spiritual battle, so we should help to shift that wrong perception.

Steps To Faith

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Coming to faith is a process.  I’ve been studying the early chapters of Daniel and the early chapters of John.  It’s not uncommon to find, in the Bible, that there is a process involved in understanding God for who He is and accepting His role and self-presentation.  Whether or not Nebuchadnezzar is truly “converted” in chapter 4, there are key incidents in the previous two chapters.  What might this all mean for us as preachers?

1. View each message as an opportunity to move people forward one step. It takes repeated exposure to the gospel for people to gradually be drawn closer to that point of heart-level understanding and response.  Even once people are saved, the process continues.  So let’s not have the mentality that says, “I’ve already told them this, they should get it now!”  Our listeners, just like us, are notoriously slow and gradual in responding to God.

2. Remember that the process happens apart from preaching too. While that visitor may be a first-time listener to your preaching, they may have already been through many steps on the journey (listening to preachers on the radio, reading books, interacting with believers, etc.)  So while we should view each message as an opportunity to prompt the next step, we should not underestimate the opportunity and fail to present an opportunity to fully respond.  Somehow we need a real sensitivity to God and to people in this aspect of ministry.

Drop Down the Ladder

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Many great sermons turn out to be good sermons.  Sermons looking set to be good often end up average.  How is it that the last few minutes of a sermon can change it from powerful to pleasant?  One key element is the final descent of the preacher down the ladder of abstraction.

The text must be understood in its original setting for the detail to make sense.  Then the process of theological abstraction moves the preacher toward relevance for the contemporary listeners.  But this is not enough.  It is easy to stop at this stage of the process, and a natural place to let off the preparation pressure (after all, surely listeners can take the abstract and apply it specifically in their own situation?)  Actually no, listeners do not generally apply abstracts to their own lives.  Don’t stop with “trust God!” or “love God more!” or “love one another!” or “be faithful in your relationships!”  These are all abstracts.

To really cement the message as a great, not for the sake of your reputation, but for the sake of lives changed to the glory of God, push through for specific application.  This means re-contextualizing the application for the sake of your listeners.  What will it look like to trust God for some of them this week?  How would greater love for God show up in their daily lives?  What specifically might one do to demonstrate genuine love for another believer in the church this week?  Where is faithfulness tested and proven day by day?

Don’t finish a great message in mid-air and thereby transform the great into the good.  Be sure to earth the message through specifics, stepping down the ladder of abstraction so that the rubber can meet the road of real life.  Listeners generally struggle to take hold of an abstract and apply it specifically, but they are very adept at hearing a specific that fits the life of another in the same pew, and translating that specific into a specific that relates to their version of real life. The Bible is relevant, just be sure to demonstrate that reality for some of your listeners.  The rest will gladly translate for themselves!

Discourse: The Danger of Spiritualization

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

We’ve noted that there are discourse passages in almost every section of Scripture – history, wisdom, prophet, gospel, etc.  Awareness of the broader plot within which discourse is placed is helpful both in understanding the passage meaning and purpose, and also for preaching the passage with contextual understanding and tension.

So if we decide to preach a discourse in a typical analytical manner – for instance a deductive sermon – what should we be wary of?  Be wary of direct transference of relevance to a different audience.  Joshua 1 does not give direct promises to contemporary readers that wherever we place our feet, we can claim for God.  Equally it does not mandate military action on our part.  Yet the passage yields much that can be so relevant to us.

Be careful to work through the process of exegetical analysis (in that context), drawing out the abiding theological implications (in any context), and recontextualizing the principles (in this context).  Be careful not to then re-attach original phrasing in a careless manner that might imply direct transference of details by a spiritualization process (i.e. let it show that you are not simply reading the text and then telling people to “claim land” as God instructs us to “march” over what we should “conquer”).  By showing some process in our preaching, we can protect our people from bad practice in their own Bible study.  By showing awareness of audience (original and contemporary) and passage purpose (original and preached), we guard our people from inappropriate application.

When Discourse Sits in Narrative

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Discourse text often sits within a narrative.  Consider the teaching sections of the Gospels, how a Jesus sermon is set in the context of the story of His ministry or passion.  Consider the speeches in Acts as they move the story forward time and again.  Consider the direct communication of God to Joshua at the key transition point in Israel’s leadership, or the direct communication of the prophets as they address a specific issue at a specific point in Israel’s history.  Whatever form the book may take generally, these specific instances are essentially discourse Scripture.

When a discourse text sits in the midst of a broader narrative, what do we do?  We should analyze the broader plot to see the function of the discourse within it.  The narrative plot then serves as context for the details of the discourse.  Of course we could choose to preach the text in some kind of narrative form, but equally we can choose to keep that plot-work at the level of context and purpose analysis.  A discourse type text can yield clear and effective outlines through careful analysis.  By giving time in our study to the plot within which the discourse sits, we can add tension and interest to the preaching of the discourse.

This applies to epistles too, incidentally.  Just because an epistle may consist entirely of discourse, we should not lose sight of the broader narrative of history in which it sits.  An epistle is a point in time, a point on the plot line of the story of that particular church or individual.  At a key juncture in the story of the church at Rome, or in Colossae, Paul wrote to them.  We have his discourse, but we can also trace the tension of the church’s history to that point, and be left with the tension of how they would respond to his instruction in the letter.  Awareness of the broader narrative can always add tension and interest to the preaching of a discourse.

Discourse usually sits within a broader narrative framework.  Awareness of that helps our interpretation of the passage. It can also help our preaching by adding more life to the living words!

Getting to Grips with the Genres: Poetry (2)

/ Mike Roth / Leave a comment

Yesterday’s post was concerned with how poetry works.  Now let’s consider the implications for our preaching.

Implications for Preaching Poetry

-If preaching narrative connects listeners to plot and discourse connects listeners to ideas, then poetry connects listeners to feelings attached to ideas.

-This means that preaching poetry is slow. It’s less like going on a run than it is like sitting before a painting in an art gallery. The preacher is to draw out colors, themes, nuance, and ideas, line by line, in a way that gives time and space for listeners to connect not just cognitively but affectively to the poem.

-Consider using music, paintings, pictures, movie clips, etc., to draw-out an idea.

-Consider allowing for testimony that affirms the points in poetry. Consider attaching biblical narrative to the points too.

-Poetry speaks to truths and feelings that we have felt, will feel, and need to feel. They are not fiction but fact. We need to be shaped by them. Allow your preaching of poetry the time, space, tone, posture, and space to accomplish this. It’s worth it!

Preaching Easter (Pt4): Resurrection Implications

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

NT Wright made an interesting comment this week. He suggested that the New Testament presents many implications that come from the resurrection. However, the one that most preachers tend to emphasize is not really presented in the New Testament. Namely, “Because Jesus rose from the dead, we can go to heaven when we die.” I mention this not to affirm the comment, but to prompt our thinking and Bible study.

Before preaching the resurrection this Sunday, check your text for the implications that are present. For instance, in 1st Corinthians 15 we read that His resurrection gives us hope of our own (v16-20), the fear of death is removed (v26, 54-57), there are ethical implications (v32-34), motivation for ministry (v58), and even prompting to practical help for the poor (16:1, note Galatians 2:7-10).

Let’s preach the truth of the resurrection, let’s even allow our excitement to show, but let’s also try to be specifically clear in presenting the implications. It is easy in our excitement about the event to fall short in our relevance and application. Truly, everything is changed because Jesus rose from the dead. Part of our task is to help people see how that is true.

Preaching Easter (Pt3): Harmonization and the Gospels

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Whenever we preach from the gospels we need to be aware that there may be up to four accounts of the story before us. In the past a great deal of emphasis was placed on harmonizing the gospel accounts. That is to say, placing all four side by side and seeking to combine them in order to have the “full” story. There is certainly a place for this practice, but how much of this should we concern ourselves with as preachers?

There are many elements in the Gospels that only appear in one gospel. In this case the issue of harmonization is largely irrelevant. But then there are events found in all of the gospels. The passion narrative, obviously, is found in all four.

Check all four gospels for accuracy in your preaching. If you are preaching from, say, Luke’s account, then it is helpful to check the other three. You wouldn’t want to undermine your preaching by telling the story in such a way that you make errors because you forgot to check the other gospels.

Preach the text rather than the event. Having checked the other gospels to make sure you are not presenting an error in your sermon, be sure to actually preach Luke’s account (or whichever you have as your preaching text). The gospel writers did not simply recount a transcript of a video taken the first Easter. They selectively chose the details to include in order to write an historically accurate theological presentation. Seek to preach the emphasis of the text you are in.

Preaching Easter (Pt2): Shock and Awe

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

I expect we would agree that the typical crucifixion image that comes to mind is probably a little too “hygienic.” The traditional pictures seen in old churches with the Lord serene and clean, hanging on the cross with a minimal element of humiliation are so far from the brutal reality of the event. Those pictures, combined with the regularity with which we refer to the cross, lead many believers to have an unrealistic mental picture of Calvary.

As we preach the Easter story in the next days, we have the opportunity to tell the story well. We can give enough description, and take enough time, so that the image is able to form in peoples’ minds. We can give enough description so that the image forming is more accurate, less “clean” and closer to what actually happened. Historical and biblical accuracy should permeate our preaching of this great event.

However, this does not mean we should automatically “go all out.” It may be that overly graphic detail is unhelpful to some. I’ve heard some very effective presentations of the crucifixion that went into the medical details and the sickening truth of the event. I’ve also heard some where the “shock and awe” tactic backfired significantly. We must be aware of who will be listening and what will be most effective for them. Our goal is to present the biblical truth and call for response, not to repulse people with images that obscure the message. Remember that people will be drawn and convicted by the Holy Spirit, not by our skill in story telling that can stir the emotions into a frenzy.

Let’s try to find the right balance for our listeners this Easter. We need to tell the story well, we need to help people see and feel the reality of Calvary. But we also need to be careful to allow the Holy Spirit to stir the heart, rather than merely stirring the stomach by excessive shock and awe tactics.

Preaching Easter (Pt1): Back to Basics

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

In some ways Easter is not like Christmas.  The Christmas story tends to remain largely unmentioned for eleven months of the year.  So when the advent season comes round again people expect to hear the basic Christmas story.  But the events of the first Easter get mentioned and preached on throughout the year.  So there is a temptation for us as preachers to try and get clever with our Easter messages – perhaps hyper-creative, or super-subtle, or whatever.

Our regular listeners need to hear the basic Easter story.  Jesus told his followers to share bread and wine, “in remembrance” of Him.  In a sense the Easter story never grows old for Christ’s followers – it means too much to us.  So as a preacher don’t feel pressure from somewhere to say something that is somehow clever or different.  There are plenty of biblical passages that can be used, and people will appreciate a clear preaching of any of them.

Remember that irregular listeners need to hear the basic Easter story.  At Easter time there is a higher likelihood of visitors.  Maybe they feel they should go to church at Christmas and again at Easter.  Maybe they are visiting family who go to your church and politely join their hosts.  These people don’t need some kind of creatively opaque and nuanced message.  They need the message of the text clearly presented and applied.

As a preacher you may be feeling the pressure to do something different this year.  I’m not suggesting we should be boring or predictable.  I’m not saying that creativity is inappropriate.  Let us be as effective as possible in our communication of the biblical message of Easter.  However, let’s remember that sometimes it is very effective to simply preach the basics – the story from the text, the implications for us today.