Stage 5 – Message Purpose

Purposes – There May Be Two!

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

It’s a fairly simple truth, but an important one. Sometimes, perhaps even often, the passage purpose (stage 3 in our model) and the message purpose (stage 5), will differ. While it may sound very orthodox and biblical to suggest that the purpose for preaching any text is the same as the writer’s purpose in penning the text, this is not always the case.

Take 1Corinthians 15 as an example. Paul is addressing a church caught up in an idea of their time. The idea that the church had swallowed from its culture was that bodies are bad, being spiritual means being non-physical and there was essentially nothing more to come in the future, because they had already “arrived” spiritually. So, for example, when Paul tells them that both the living and the dead believers will have their bodies transformed at the coming of Christ, that would have been felt quite forcefully. Today however, our common thinking in the church is often somewhat different. Perhaps a congregation may generally accept the reality of the coming resurrection and not be caught up in an anti-somatic (“anti bodily existence”) philosophy, or perhaps they give no thought whatsoever to our future resurrection. Obviously it depends on the congregation. Just because the need of the people may differ, this does not mean that the text is needed any the less. We just have to be careful to think through the author’s purpose, and our purpose in preaching that text. All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful . . . and part of our responsibility is to know our people enough to know what angle on the passage idea they need to receive!

Be sure to think through the author’s purpose in writing any text, but also think through whether your purpose in preaching it will remain the same (sometimes), or differ (sometimes).

The Elements of Expository Preaching

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

The study of expository preaching can be a lifelong journey. For many of us it should be a lifelong journey. And the complexity of this ministry allows for a lifetime of learning. Consider the complexities of biblical interpretation and the diversity of biblical genre and form. Think about the continual changes in society, not to mention the ever developing experiences and needs of each individual listener. Ponder the numerous variables in effective oral communication, seemingly increasing all the time as advances are made in the fields of communication, rhetoric, education and homiletics. It is clear that there is plenty for us to keep studying and stretching ourselves as preachers: from applied linguistics in discourse analysis to the epistemological paradigms of postmodernity. From family systems dynamics to unintentional perlocutions in the preaching event. There’s plenty to learn for all of us.

But let’s not get caught in a fog of confusion here. The core issues are still the core issues. Preaching must always be concerned with the specific meaning of the biblical author and with the relevant and effective communication of that meaning to contemporary listeners. Preaching remains a spiritual endeavor very much concerned with the work of the Trinitarian God in you and through you. Excellence in Bible study, effectiveness in communication, relevance in presentation, and all of the above in a close reliance on the Spirit of God through prayer. Boil expository preaching down to its elements, and it is not much more than this: God, you, them & Bible study, communication and relevance.

Take stock of the basic elements – where should your learning and passion for growth be focused at this point in the process?

The Smaller Hats Worn in the Pulpit

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

This site is dedicated to stimulating biblical preaching.  The main hat the preacher wears is that of the biblical and relevant communicator.  There are lots of angles on that main role, and they are explored post by post on this site and others.  But I would like to mention some smaller hats worn in the pulpit.  These are typically not your main role in preaching (although in a particular sermon they may be), but these are roles to be aware of.  Areas of strategic influence for the preacher:

Materialism Underminer – Throughout the week the people in our congregation are bombarded by messages of materialism.  It’s everywhere they look – billboards, TV, radio commercials, shop windows, magazine racks, etc.  A constant stream of a very powerful big idea.  When we preach, whatever the text and message might be, we break into that stream of information and give a few moments of spiritual reality again.  Perhaps in passing comments or illustrations we even undermine the message of materialism too!  (The same could be said of society and media obsessions with independence, evolution, humanism, etc.)

Family Support Officer – Many people come from, live in or have come out of broken homes.  The enemy is attacking the family unit at every level.  Yet for those minutes on a Sunday morning, people are allowed to look through the windows into your life.  I’m not saying you should air your private laundry, or show-off your family or children (be sensitive to those who don’t have what you have).  However, glimpses into a healthy home can be powerful antidotes to the stream of failure society parades before us.  I still remember the illustrations given from the home life of one of my profs at seminary.  Bruce Fong is now president at Michigan, but in his Multnomah days the Fong family functioned as an inspiration to single me and others.

Missions Mobilizer – We’re living in a world of desperate needs, yet none as desperate as the 9 people dying every 5 seconds, most of whom step into a lost eternity.  The greatest need in world missions today is still people, followed by finance and other resources.  The only source of people who could go and make a difference is the local church.  That puts us as preachers in a key role.  Let’s be aware of the opportunity and inspire our people to be genuine global Christians!

That’s three more hats to ponder.  Any others that come to mind?

Integrity in Directions You Give

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday morning I set out early to drive across the country to a church where I was scheduled to preach. I’d checked the journey on the internet and knew I needed to allow 2.5 or 3 hours. I got in the car and programmed the GPS (SatNav if you’re British!) with the postal code of my destination. Finally it was ready to navigate and told me I’d arrive at my destination at 7:41pm. That was a little after the 10:30am meeting I was supposed to preach at! So I checked the map and reviewed the turns. It took me to the south coast and along a little ways, but then directed me to catch a ferry over to the island of Guernsey (by France), then to catch another one back to another port. 10 hours at sea to progress half an hour along the same coast! I decided to trust the map on this occasion.

As preachers, at some level or other, people look to us for direction and guidance in life. Our task is to relevantly teach and apply the Bible to our listeners. There are two dangers to avoid, or maybe only one:

1. Don’t make it too complicated, be honest. People are not helped by complicated instructions that are hard to follow. Whether we are explaining how to resolve a conflict, how to pray, how to have personal devotions, how to make big decisions in life, etc. Whatever the “how-to” might be (and this is by no means suggesting every message should be or have a “how-to” element), we should be honest, but not unnecessarily complicated. This is not a time to impress people with overly detailed strategies. However . . .

2. Don’t make it too simple, be honest. I’d love my GPS unit to give me short-cuts, but only if they actually worked. Telling me I could get to somewhere in 10 minutes is no help when it will be a three-hour drive. When preaching it is easy to over-simplify and make unhelpful promises. Just do this and you will deal with all that pain. Just do such and such and it will be taken care of. False promises hurt people. When false promises don’t work, someone will get the blame. Maybe the preacher, maybe the person themselves for their own lack of faith, or maybe God. None of these options help. But really any blame for false promises rest with us.

When it comes to application, direction and instruction. Be honest. Don’t over-complicate and don’t over-promise. Don’t be dishonest. Be honest.

Preaching Inside the Fence – Part 2

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Several days ago I suggested the image of preparing and preaching within a low fence. I’d like to suggest a reason for doing so that may not be immediately obvious. Very simply, you will enjoy the preaching process more. Let me give another example:

Almost four years ago the church I was involved in was working it’s way through Luke. I had Easter Sunday morning. It was tempting to read Luke, but essentially preach Paul. You know how it is, so simple to revert to the terminology, ideas and focus of a passage like 1st Corinthians 15. I resisted the temptation and erected a low fence. I studied within Luke’s writings. I saturated my preparation with Luke and worked to prepare a deliberately Lukan message. I didn’t want to just preach the resurrection, I wanted to preach Luke’s account of the empty tomb and risen Christ. I tried to grasp the significance and focus of the carefully written account in his gospel. I tried to use Luke’s terminology and present his concept of salvation. I wanted to preach in Luke’s language rather than Paul’s or John’s.

The message went well as far as I could tell. One discerning listener commented on the deliberate Luke language. Probably everyone else missed it. That didn’t matter. The big idea was as good as I could get from the text, the relevance was as deliberate and concrete as possible, the big things were what mattered. But for me, as the preacher, the attention to fine detail like choice of terminology made the study both exacting and rewarding. I felt like I’d tasted something of Luke’s great gospel in a way that I could so easily have bypassed.

I got a taste for preaching with a fence that day, and I’ve continued to do so whenever possible. I’d encourage you to try it if you haven’t already. Take the opportunity to push yourself deeper in whatever book you are preaching. It’s easy to revert to default thoughts from elsewhere, but you’ll enjoy it more if you don’t!

Take a Good Thing and Make It Better

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Ideally the passage is studied fully, leading to a strong passage idea.  Then the congregation is taken into account and a message idea is formulated.  Great!  That’s already put the message into a league above many that lack such unity.  But just having a big idea or message idea is one thing, having a good one is another.  Some preachers try so hard to be pithy and clever they’ll sacrifice the idea on the altar of wit.  Don’t do that.  Others have ideas that are almost as long as the message itself.  Maybe more accurate, but they won’t communicate well, they won’t stick.  So how to refine a long idea?  How to take a good thing and make it better:

1. Write out the idea and count the words. I’m not a huge fan of rules in preaching, but several writers have suggested the idea should not be more than 15 or maybe 18 words in length.  I tend to agree, although it’s a flexible guideline rather than a rule.  If you need more, use them, but in reality most ideas could be refined without harming them.

2. Evaluate it phrase by phrase and trim words. Don’t say in six words what could be said in two. Are you using roundabout ways of saying something?  Could you be more direct?

3. Could internal lists be summarized? Within the idea you may have two or three qualifiers for an element, perhaps qualifiers that will be points in the message.  Consider whether these are needed at the level of the idea, or whether a summary term might be more memorable.  If the message is preached well then that summary word will be explained and defined by the message anyway.

4. Is there a more memorable option available?  Some will give up too much to make this step.  Don’t.  But if there is a song title, pithy phrase, play on words, movie line or contemporary proverb that can be adapted to add memorability to the idea, consider it.

Often just getting the idea in any form takes a lot of thinking.  But if you’ve got any energy and time left, consider how it could be leaner, meaner, more precise, more memorable.  None of us get a killer big idea every week.  Even the authors of preaching books only share the strongest few they’ve managed in years of ministry!  But effort invested here is effort well spent.  Work on the idea pays dividends in the message – you’ll be taking a good message and making it even better!

The Balancing Act of Evangelism

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

This Sunday may be it. The only chance you will get. There may be someone there this Sunday who may never come again. So it would be wise to spell out the gospel in detail, wouldn’t it? After all, this may be the only opportunity and so it would make sense to be sure to cover all the bases. This is the approach many of us from time to time. Perhaps aware of visitors or motivated by something we heard, we decide to pack the corners of our message with evangelistic information.

I’m not suggesting this is wrong. But it is certainly not so simple. There are two sides to this issue. On the one side you are preaching the text to people that ultimately need to either respond to the gospel, or continue to apply the reality of the gospel in their lives. It may well be that this is the only opportunity for somebody to hear the important details concerning themselves, their predicament, God’s provision, and so on. I’ve sat through many supposedly evangelistic messages that did a lot of work, but then failed to spell out how to respond. So perhaps we should look to present the gospel as fully as possible in every message?

On the other hand, are we not running the risk of forcing every text into a certain gospel form, rather than honoring the text in a truly expository manner? Are we not running the risk of adding detail to a message that does not support the main idea and thereby complicating the message? People find clear messages easier to follow, ones that are built closely around a single main idea. If they are easy to follow then the experience is more enjoyable and people are more likely to return for more. A message considered confusing and complicated will not motivate people to want more.

Perhaps part of the solution is to present the gospel every Sunday, but if it risks complicating the message in some way, then it could be presented at some other point in the service. This may be the last Sunday someone will be able to hear the gospel. Equally, it may be the last Sunday they will bother coming to church if the communication is overwhelming and complicated. Present the gospel, or motivate them to return for more, or maybe you can do both?

Preach Like It May Their Last

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

If you are preaching today, it is tempting to be caught up in your own world.  Concerned about your presentation, the details of the sermon, even the peripheral details that you didn’t delegate to someone more passionate about them.  But know this – today’s sermon may be the last some of those people ever hear.

The tired teenager who is gaining the freedom to not have to come to church, but has not yet gained a sense of need for church.  Today may be their last.  The person who’s been coming for a while, but only fits in on the outside, by dressing right, yet on the inside is wracked with doubts and is tired of pretending.  Today may be their last.  The couple whose marriage is seconds away from complete train wreck and can’t keep up the show any longer.  Today may be their last.  The guy struggling with significant temptation who feels like he’ll cave in any day, but is currently painfully unaware of the waves of guilt that will follow.  Today may be his last.

Today may be the last time some people in your congregation hear you preach.  It may be their last sermon, their last Sunday morning at church.  We’ve all heard evangelistic messages that point out the urgency of the occasion.  “You may step out of here and be hit by a bus.  Do not delay!”  Let’s turn that urgency on ourselves for a moment.  Some of them may die before next Sunday.  But there are dozens of other reasons why you may not see them again.  The reasons are important, but so is this sermon.  How much more direct should it be?  How much more relevant?  How much more real should you be?  How much more urgent?

This may be their last.  Preach in a way that will make this sermon count.

Urgent Needs in the Pew, Urgent Changes in the Pulpit?

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

As I wrote my post yesterday, a package arrived. Having made a guess at how Andy Stanley views preaching, I received his book on preaching. I will soon post a review of the book. But let me share something from the book today. In fact, let me share one point that underlies his instruction throughout the book. Here it is – since there is such an urgent need in our listeners, will we do anything we can to effectively connect their lives to God’s Word?Let me quote a bit for you:

“Every single person who sits politely and listens to you on Sunday is one decision away from moral, financial, and marital ruin. Every one of ‘em. Many are considering options with consequences that will follow them the remainder of their lives. [He describes several examples] . . . There they sit. Silent. Waiting. Hoping. Doubting. Anticipating. What are we going to do? What are you going to do? What are you going to say?

“This is the world we have been called to address. These are the issues we have been called to confront. There is much at stake. There are many at risk. The great news is the pages of Scripture are filled with principles, narratives, and truth that address each of those needs The question you must answer is, to what extreme are you willing to go to create a delivery system that will connect with the heart of your audience? Are you willing to abandon a style, an approach, a system that was designed in another era for a culture that no longer exists? Are you willing to step out of your comfort zone in order to step into the lives God has placed in your care? . . . Will you communicate for life change?”

Stanley’s urgency is stirring. What is he advocating? What kind of delivery system does he suggest? Should we be making urgent changes in our preaching? I’ll finish the book and give you my thoughts.

Quote from Communicating for a Change, by Andy Stanley and Lane Jones, pp88-89.

Lazy Preaching? – Part 2

/ Peter Mead / 8 Comments

Well yesterday’s post stirred more response than usual!  Andy Stanley stated his point in strong terms, which probably sparked some response.  While as an Englishman I might state the same point in a slightly more understated way, I do urge people who attend my preaching courses to stick in their primary passage most of the time.  Naturally people ask for exceptions to that suggestion.  I have two main exceptions in my own thinking.  Let me share those with you and then ask what other exceptions you might add to the list.  As I wrote yesterday, there are fewer legitimate reasons to use multiple cross-references than we tend to think.

1. When the idea of the primary text does not sound biblical.  If you preach a passage and clarify the point, but people internally react with a metaphorically raised eyebrow.  “Is that biblical?”  In this instance I might run through a series of other passages very quickly that support the same idea.  In this situation I am not developing each cross-reference in detail, or going topical for multiple points, but simply allowing the weight of evidence to underline the biblical nature of what the primary text is saying.

2. When the primary passage leans heavily on another biblical passage.  For example when preaching the middle of 1Peter 3 recently, I was very aware of how much Psalm 34 was influencing Peter’s thought at that point, so I took some time to go back there during the sermon.  Again, not a topical approach, but supportive of the primary passage.

I can imagine one or two other reasons to go to other passages that may be legitimate too, but these are the main two in my thinking.  I’d love to hear more interaction on this subject.

I think we should be wary of anything that sounds like “memory trigger cross referencing” (you won’t find that in any book, I just made up the label!)  So you’re preaching through a passage and a word or phrase triggers your memory of another (perhaps more familiar) passage . . . so you go over there for a moment.  Carrying on you find numerous opportunities to go on a safari through the canon.  Often there is no scriptural reason for doing so, no awareness of what texts influence which writers, no awareness of specific contexts and meaning, and no genuine purpose for the excursions in respect to the specific purpose of the primary text and the sermon.  Memory trigger cross referencing is indeed very easy, all you need is a concordance, or a few favorite passages.  Surely we would agree that is lazy preaching?  But when should we consider going elsewhere in the Bible?  The lines are open  . . .