Like a good plane ride

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Norman just added a comment to the post “Focus on the basics” – I read a good quote “A good sermon is like a good plane ride. It must have a smooth take-off and a smooth landing…”

Calvin Miller recently taught the analogy of preaching being like a plane ride at the International Congress on Preaching. He spoke of how passengers have three expectations – to take off, to go somewhere and to land. For take-off and landing he spoke of the critical first three and last three minutes. For going somewhere he spoke of the importance of the flight plan. While going somewhere it is important to consider the length of the flight is not too long, making sure the intellectual weather is not too heavy, and that the in-flight entertainment is not boring. He even got into the physics of flight – the right combination of the downward weight of content with the forward thrust of passion. I wonder how much farther this analogy could be pushed?

Focus on the basics

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Great preaching always involves the “effective execution of elementary ideas.” (Attributed to Eugene Emerson Jennings)

It is tempting to give attention in preaching to the clever and intricate subtleties of the art and craft of preaching, but subtleties work best when built on a foundation of good solid basics. A clearly derived and cleanly defined Biblical idea. A definite and specific purpose. A logical and orderly structure. Good pastoral relevance. Effective introduction. A clean finish. Most, if not all preachers would preach their next sermon more effectively if they would focus on the basics.

Sermon Purpose: Is There a Default Goal?

/ Peter Mead / 3 Comments

I recently wrote these words, “For an effective sermon, you need a clearly defined purpose – the specific response you prayerfully expect to occur in the life of the listeners.”

Does this mean the response has to be some kind of action? What if your purpose is to stir affection, bolster belief or improve cognition? These can all be very legitimate types of objectives for a sermon. Yet our default should be to preach for a response that includes, but goes beyond the heart and the head. Consider James 1:22 – “Be doers of the Word, and not hearers only, deceiving yourselves.”

As a preacher we should usually consider how to legitimately apply the Biblical idea to ourselves and our listeners for transformed affection, belief, and conduct. We wouldn’t want to assist anyone in “deceiving” themselves!

Question: Is “creating need” the same as preaching for felt-needs?

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Tim asked the following question in reference to “Introductions: The Essential Ingredients” –

I’m interested in this ‘create or surface need’ idea. Is there not a danger that this tends towards sermons being man-centred and self-help focussed? Like ‘what felt need (not even necessarily true need) does this text provide the solution for?’ Does this encourage a sense that God and His Word are merely felt-need-meeters?

I’m not being negative – I like the idea of ‘create or surface need’. It just raises questions in my mind.

Peter Mead responds: This is an important question. When people speak of preaching for “felt needs” the concern is with preaching that is primarily “how to” in nature. For example, how to raise teenagers, how to have a happy marriage, etc. There is a concern that preaching these kinds of messages do please listeners, but fail to address their real needs, fail to be God-centered, and often fail to honor the intention of the Biblical texts. These are important concerns!

The reason that “need” is included in the introduction to a message is not to determine the nature of the whole message (man-centered rather than God-centered), but to create an opportunity for the Word of God to get into good soil. Using the parable of the four soils for a moment, the key issue there is a “listening heart.” I believe it is naive to assume that people are always eagerly listening when they sit through a sermon. Let me quote Haddon Robinson in Biblical Preaching, “When you start, the people listen because they ought to, but before long, you must motivate them to listen because they can’t help but listen.” (p.168)

The core conviction here is this – do we believe the Bible should be applied to life? Or to put it another way, do we believe not only that all Scripture is God-breathed, but also that it is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work? (2Tim.3:16-17) Of course we do, which is why most preachers at least make some effort at application at the end of a message. If application is acceptable at the end of a message, then why would it not be acceptable in some form at the start? The reality is that many listeners may be long gone by the end of a message that shows no clear connection to their lives (maybe they will be asleep, or drifting to thoughts of pressing concerns – their upcoming confrontation at work, resolving the increasing tension in the family, how they can improve their golf swing, etc.) Some concerns and distractions may be frivolous, some are very understandable. So what to do? Serve up some relevance early on in the message, thereby helping hearts to be listening to the Word of God as it is preached.

Consider how Peter began his sermon on Pentecost – by promising to clarify the concern of the listeners regarding what was taking place before them. In fact, consider also Acts 3 and 17 for two more examples. The truth of God’s Word does not need to be watered down or changed in response to itching ears. The Word of God is highly relevant to life, our preaching should reflect that early on as well as at the end (and throughout).

I am not advocating God-less or Bible-weak self-help motivational speeches with seven steps to successful living. I am suggesting we preach theocentric, God-honoring, Biblical messages that by His grace, and by the power of the Holy Spirit, can change lives and conform people to the image of Christ in all areas of life. Being Biblical and relevant are not mutually exclusive options in preaching, they are both vital. It just helps listeners to listen if some of that relevance is strategically placed at the beginning, instead of all at the end.

More thoughts on this?

Introductions: Introducing What?

/ Mike Roth / 4 Comments

Tim, you ask a very God-honoring question when it comes to homiletical introduction. Creating or surfacing need is certainly part of what an introduction must do. In fact, as Peter states in his 5/11/2007 entry, an introduction must do four things. It must get attention, create rapport, establish authority and create or surface need. Yet, for these four components to be God-honoring and not man-honoring (which I believe gets at the heart of your question), David Buttrick, in Homiletic Moves and Structures makes a very important point. He states that an introduction must do two things. First, it must give focus to consciousness. Second, it must provide some sort of hermeneutical orientation.

Buttrick is not contradicting the points that Peter makes. In fact, within his chapter on introductions, he makes some of the very same points. Rather, Buttrick establishes an overarching principle that is to contour and influence the direction of the points that Peter makes. In other words, while doing all that Peter has encouraged us to do in an introduction, focus and orientation to the text must occur. This can be difficult. It is much easier get attention, create rapport, establish authority and surface need autonomous from the text that is supposed to be introduced. This happens all the time in preaching and it is a colossal error.

It is all too easy to imagine isn’t it? The preacher stands, opens his Bible, takes out his notes and begins. He starts by catching attention and building rapport through funny or shocking stories. The audience laughs or gasps – sometimes both simultaneously (it is a weird sort of convulsion). The room emits an ethos of warmth and openness and then, the preacher begins to preach. The problem is that the first five minutes had nothing to do with the sermon. The congregation is now enthralled with the preacher not the passage. So, after “warming-up” and “catching the attention” of the congregation, the preacher has to spend another five minutes on a second introduction – this time, focusing on the Word of God. This is a terrible waste of time.

To be clear, the four points that Peter makes need to happen in an introduction. However, they must happen in a way that focuses consciousness and provides some sort of hermeneutical orientation to the passage that is going to be preached. This will take more preparation time, and a lot more effort, but it is worth it. We must capture the attention of our audience while concurrently directing them toward God and His Word. Any other result is not an introduction.

Question: First person preaching from an epistle?

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Tim wrote the following:

Preaching in the first person – do you think this could ever be used for epistolary texts? I realise people use it to good effect on narrative texts. But what about a section of epistle?

What I’m thinking is, say, first part of Galatians 5. If you were first-person Paul then it might:
a) add variety (if you’ve been working through the book)
b) enable you to communicate the historical setting well
c) perhaps enable you to strongly communicate the passion Paul had for the Galatians and the sense of exasperation he felt.

What do you reckon?

Peter responds – Absolutely! First-person preaching is usually thought of as being ideal for narrative texts, but epistles are set up for this approach as well. Although epistles are didactic in form, they are also “story” or at least part of a story. You have characters (Paul and recipients, plus false teachers and other influences), in a specific setting, there is a “plot” (Paul preached, others came in, the locals shifted, now Paul is addressing the problem), which has its own tension (unresolved – we don’t know what happened in response to the letter). Paul wrote the letter, every letter, in response to specific circumstances. So I feel it is set up for a first-person sermon. This would definitely add variety to a series. It is often seen as a good option for overviewing a whole epistle either as an introduction or conclusion to a series (I know Mike has used first-person very effectively to conclude a series in James). But there is no reason why it cannot be used for a shorter section within an epistle. Jeffrey Arthurs, in Preaching with Variety, suggests the approach of dictating to a secretary, which allows for elaboration in a verse-by-verse manner.

First-person sermons allow you to, and often require you to include more background and historical information. And as you wrote, Tim, they allow you to communicate the passion of Paul in a section like this in a less threatening manner to your listeners. They will tolerate more passion and strong wording since “it isn’t really you” and the delivery is more intriguing than threatening. This approach will not be a short-cut though. You have to do all the normal exegetical work in studying the passage, then probably extra on culture and historical context, then think through various aspects of first-person presentation as well. You will need to practice, even if you don’t normally “practice” a sermon.

You will need to decide on preaching situation and viewpoint. Are you letting the audience secretly view Paul as he writes, or does he invite the group in as he is working on it and explain what he’s doing, or has Paul been transported through time to explain the passage to the congregation today. Or, perhaps, are they sitting in a Galatian church, with Paul giving them his perspective on the text as it is read, as he would if he had been there (this would be tricky, but possible) – perhaps using someone else to read the text out a verse at a time and Paul urging the listeners to get it and respond. You can be creative! Another option is to preach part of the message in first-person. You could set it up, then go back to Paul as he dictates and thinks out loud, then return to Tim for an explanation of how that text should influence us in our context.

You will need to decide on costumes and props (subtle is usually plenty!) You will need to think through the area you are to preach from and possible use of the space as an actor would a stage. Unless you transport Paul to today, you will need to think through how to make sure your congregation gets the point for their lives. Your ultimate goal is not just for them to understand the author’s idea in his historical context, you also still need applicational purpose for the present day. But you can’t put in direct references that are inconsistent with the historical situation of the “speaker.” So unless you revert to being Tim for some element of conclusion with contemporary application, you need to carefully plan subtle but effective points of contact between his intention for the Galatians and your intention for your congregation. I have found in bringing a Bible character through time to address my congregation that “clear but subtle” is usually effective. Somehow it strains the consistency of the presentation if an Old Testament prophet (or an NT apostle) has travelled through time and suddenly has full knowledge of contemporary life, culture, current affairs, recent history, etc.

So there is a lot to think about, but I think preaching first person on the first section of Galatians 5 could work very effectively! There are a couple of books available on the subject if you have time to read them before you have to preach this sermon – Haddon Robinson and his son Torrey have written It’s All in How You Tell It: Preaching First Person Expository Messages, and J.Kent Edwards wrote Effective First-Person Biblical Preaching. Tim, if you do this, please come back and comment on this post with your experiences, evaluation, lessons learned, etc.

When reading a text during the sermon

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Donald Sunukjian, professor of preaching at Talbot School of Theology, writes and teaches concerning “oral clarity.” One of the things he teaches relates to the reading of a text during a sermon. Many preachers will introduce a text with a question, perhaps asking people to find the answer as the text is read. Sunukjian feels that this practice is not helpful. For many listeners this leads to a struggle to spot the thing the preacher expects them to see, then when they fail, they are discouraged at their inability to glean such things from the text. Once the text has been read, the preacher will then highlight the point he was looking for and the listeners will have one fact underlined in their minds – they missed it. So the solution? Sunukjian encourages preachers to introduce a passage by telling people the point that the writer is making, clearly stating and restating the truth that will be noticed as the passage is read. Then as the passage is read, the listeners hear the point, it is reinforced as being truly biblical, and they feel more confident in their ability to read the Bible for themselves!

Sunukjian’s new book, Invitation to Biblical Preaching: Proclaiming Truth with Clarity and Relevance, will be reviewed on this site soon. If you have read it, feel free to submit your feedback in response to this post.

Review: Preaching Words: 144 Key Terms in Homiletics, by John S. McClure

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

144KeyTerms

This is not a dictionary, although the similarities are clear. 144 terms are stated and defined succinctly. Then explanation with quotes from key figures in the area follow in anything from one paragraph to four page explanations of the definition, and then a brief bibliography.

For the author, these terms make up the “building blocks of homiletics” (p.xii) However, the extent to which you resonate with his confidence will depend on your theological stance. The words chosen reflect the diversity of ‘key’ concerns in the broader realm of homiletics – from feminist preaching and gender, via deconstruction or Nommo, to kinesics and embodiment.

There is a good amount of helpful content mixed in to this volume, including some helpful summaries of various writer’s works. If your preaching library already includes several good texts on expository preaching, Biblical interpretation/hermeneutics and so on, then this book would offer a helpful introduction to homiletics beyond the more evangelical sphere. If you want an introduction to preaching, despite McClure’s confident introduction, this is not the book for you.

A collection of building blocks for preaching? No. When key blocks like “hermeneutics” do not even include the possibility of interpreting the Bible as we would affirm, a building constructed with this block would be at risk of crumbling under any weight. These are not building blocks, but windows – helpful and easy to see through, some of which open into areas of homiletical study many of us seldom consider, or even know exist.

This succinct book is very helpful, if you are looking for an introduction to homiletics in its broader forms. There is real benefit here, but look carefully, you would not want to fall through some of these windows.

After you preach, then what happens?

/ Peter Mead / 12 Comments

In his book The Seven Laws of the Teacher, Howard Hendricks refers to an English bishop who said, “You know, wherever the apostle Paul went, they had a riot or a revival. Wherever I go, they serve tea.” (p165.)

While it would be wrong to try to stir response, either riot or revival, in our own strength, we should be preaching for response. This is why it is so important to have a clearly defined purpose for a message. We often hear about the importance of the main idea of the sermon. But for an effective sermon, you also need a clearly defined purpose – the specific response you prayerfully expect to occur in the life of the listeners.

(Peter has responded to a comment on this post)

Review: Preaching with Variety, by Jeffrey Arthurs

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

Sub-title – How to Re-Create the Dynamics of Biblical Genres.

Arthurs Variety

I hope this book gets the recognition it deserves. This is a power-packed paperback that seeks to stimulate Biblical preachers in developing variety in their preaching through awareness of how the various Biblical genres function. Arthurs offers not only understanding of how the genres do what they do, but also many suggestions on how to reflect their diversity as we preach them.

Arthurs states, “I believe that a sermon’s content should explain and apply the Word of God as it is found in a biblical text, and a sermon’s form should unleash the impact of that text.” (p.13)

Arthurs is not arguing that the form of a text dictate the form of a sermon, even if that were possible. Rather he argues that genre sensitive preaching seeks to replicate the impact of the text. He affirms the great freedom in form available to preachers, and encourages that freedom by presenting the great variety found within the six major Biblical genres.

The first two chapters argue in favor of variety in preaching, firstly because God the master communicator uses such great variety in all His communication – not least in the diverse forms of literature used in His Word, and secondly because our listeners value variety.

The rest of the book deals with six Biblical literary forms: Psalms, Narrative, Parables, Proverbs, Epistles and Apocalyptic. In each case presenting an introduction to the genre, a helpful explanation of the rhetorical devices used to create their impact and numerous helpful suggestions on how to preach the different types of text. The result of these suggestions, if heeded, will be real variety in Biblical preaching.

Arthurs is as much concerned with rightly handling the Biblical forms as he is with prompting variety in preaching. He is urging effective understanding of the rhetorical function of Biblical genre, so that one’s preaching might also fizz with Biblical variety. This is not the definitive book on creative preaching, for there are others that suggest many exciting and bizarre possibilities. However this may well become a model book on interpreting Biblical genre (and in that divinely designed diversity is the shove we all need to vary our preaching!)

So I hope this book gets the recognition it deserves. Thomas Long’s brief paperback on literary forms has been rightly praised as a helpful introduction to the subject of genre studies with some help for the preacher. Arthur’s work may well replace Long’s, for it is a more complete introduction to more Biblical genres from a more definite evangelical stance, with much more in the way of practical suggestion for the preacher.

This book will help you say what the text says, and do what the text does!

(Peter has responded to a comment on this review)