Applicational Preaching

The Best Place to Hide in Evil Times

/ Peter Mead / 2 Comments

This world can be a sinister place.  I was recently on a missions team serving abroad, and we heard testimonies from several local believers.  One told of his times in prison – a place ordered more by the structure of the dangerous mafia than by any attempt at protecting human rights from the authorities.  Another told of his religious family – a home where this eleven-year-old boy was beaten up by his older brother every time he dared to go back to church, and that at the instruction of his parents.  Another told of his time in the military, where he discovered just how evil a totalitarian communist ideology can be in reality.

Whether it is by crime, religion, or ideology, the evil of this world is evident all around us.  If we scratch the surface of society, we will find all of this lurking today.  No country is free of crime, and the level of organization often goes way beyond what we can imagine.  Billions live under the threat of their religion, a threat that uses family members to beat any hint of turning, and ideologies that require everyone to think the same replace God with government and treat people as collateral damage in an ideological march towards utopia.  Well, they did not die out in 1990 – the same old ideas keep coming back dressed in new garb.

In Psalm 17, we find three cries to God from David’s mouth (see v1, v6, v13).  His cry was essentially: I am innocent, they are attacking me, but I am confident in God (see v1-5, v6-12, v13-15).  Let’s look at these three sections and see if this Psalm might stir us to cry out similarly.  After all, the same God is still the best refuge from wherever the threat comes!

Introduction (v1-5).  In the first verses of the Psalm, David’s cry is based on asserting his innocence.  We know from many other places that he knew of his guilt.  His cry was not for protection because he deserved it.  No, his vindication came from God’s presence, not from his own perfection.  Nevertheless, there is a place for recognizing that we may be innocent with respect to a specific threat, and it is right to cry out to God in the face of injustice.  Whether that be criminal activity, religious persecution, or ideological threats, we can and should cry out to God for his protection.

God protect me from the evil people (v6-12).  The description of the malicious threat is very vivid.  David doesn’t just say they are violent and threatening (v9); he goes on to give four descriptions.  Three descriptions use human body references; the fourth is from the animal kingdom.  Their heart lacks compassion, their mouth speaks with pride (v10), and their eyes are set on sinister plans (v11).  These verses could describe the mafia bosses running a prison, the religious family members intent on guarding family reputation, or a totalitarian regime marching towards its ideological utopia.  Whatever way evil dresses up, underneath lurks the same sinister roar – the lion.  David described his chief antagonist as a lion eager to tear.  Peter used the same imagery of Satan in 1 Peter 5:8.  There is great evil in this world, so we need a great God in whom to find refuge.

In Psalm 17, David described God in the preceding three verses.  He also uses three human body descriptions, followed by one from the animal kingdom.  Notice the description: your ear, right hand, and eye (v6-8).  As we draw near to our great God on the throne, we find him to be a wonderfully good God.  His ear inclines to hear even the weakest of whimpers.  His loving right hand has all the authority needed to protect us from every evil this world offers.  His eye is on us.  The phrase “apple of your eye” is an English figure of speech, but the original language refers to “the little person of your eye” – that tiny reflection in the pupil that reveals the whole focus of the eye.  What a gloriously intimate description – an inclined ear, the loving and full authority of the right hand, the attentive and affectionate eye.  Then the animal image?  We are hidden in the shadow of his wings!

Conclusion (v13-15).  David finishes the Psalm with one last call for God to act.  He desires deliverance.  Those who are against him are living for this world.  They want to gain power and wealth, to have something to pass on to the next generation.

In contrast, what matters to David?  His ultimate goal is not just victory but God’s visage (face).  It is not just about getting a response but about enjoying a relationship with God.  It is not about protecting his inheritance but about having intimacy with God.

God’s goodness can be celebrated in each of the three situations mentioned at the start of this article.  The prisoner may have lost the protection of the mafia leader he was close to. Still, he met a church pastor who came into the prison and told him about Jesus.  Today, he follows Jesus and visits two prisons he once occupied to tell others about Jesus too. 

The eleven-year-old boy never saw most of his family follow Jesus as he does.  Still, he pastors a church that reaches out to the marginalized of society.  He also enjoys telling others that the brother who beat him up for attending church is a believer and a missionary in a foreign land. 

The soldier serving in a communist military realized after three years just how evil the totalitarian regime was in reality.  But God allowed him to be tasked with listening to foreign radio stations to discover any plans to invade his country.  Instead, he heard the good news of Jesus broadcast in his language.  Today, he pastors a church and delights in telling others about the goodness of God!

Whatever evil is evident in your context or working away behind the scenes, seek refuge next to our good God’s throne.  When we see how good he is, we will want nothing else!

Applicational Preaching

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

So many people seem to want to listen to preaching that is “applicational.” I understand the impulse. After all, who would want to listen to non-applicational preaching? That sounds like preaching that is not relevant to my life and will not make a difference.

Actually, if we are talking about preaching that is relevant to life and genuinely transformative, then I am completely on board with that desire. The problem is that when we talk about “applicational preaching” it can fall short of what we really need. Here are some of the potential weaknesses:

1. Applicational preaching can place emphasis on action points and to-do lists. Now, there is certainly a place for knowing what is expected of us at the end of a sermon. If a passage gives an instruction that applies to us, then we should certainly note it and look to obey it. However, is the Bible primarily an instruction list for life? Some sermons give that impression, but perhaps that is missing something of the richness and purposefulness of God’s revelation.

2. Applicational preaching can point the listener in the wrong direction. When our preaching emphasizes what we must do, then the focus will tend to move toward our own willpower. Sermons that point the listener to their own discipline, their own choices, their own efforts, etc., are not the best sermons. And I don’t just mean they are not the most theologically impressive sermons. I also mean they are not the most effective sermons. Lives are not transformed by to-do lists. They can help, but they remain mostly on the surface. God is in the business of transforming lives from the inside out.

In order to see the full potential of any preaching or teaching ministry, I would encourage you to think about the ABCs of Application. Here is a brief explanation:

Biggest Mistakes Preachers Make

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment
Slip2This week I want to share some of the biggest mistakes preachers make.  Actually, these are the biggest mistakes I have probably made.  Perhaps this can help others pondering the wonderful privilege of preaching the Bible!
Mistake 1 – Simply Harvesting Imperatives
It feels easy, and it feels right, to turn proclamation into imperative presentation.  All you have to do is present the text and then make sure people know the imperatives: the “must do” or “should do” or “best do” of the passage.  Whether or not there is technically an imperative in the text, we so easily turn a passage into mere instruction and press for change as we preach.
Sidebar: Introducing the Imperative
The mood is one of several features of a verb.  In Greek, for instance, there are four moods: indicative, subjunctive, optative and imperative.  The mood presents the verbal action or state with regards to the verb’s actuality or potentiality.  The imperative mood is concerned with intention.  Thus the most common use of the imperative is to express a command.  However, it would be wrong to collapse imperative into commands (or assume all commands are imperative).  An imperative can be used to forbid an action (prohibition), to express a request (such as in prayer), a sense of resignation, a pronouncement, a condition, or even just a greeting.  So? Simply identifying and harvesting imperatives is not a shortcut to an instructional/applied sermon!

Remember the Context – Typically the epistles will offer lists of instructions, but never in isolation.  The chapter breaks and section headings may segregate a set of instructions or commands, but the letters were written as a coherent whole.  We are to present our bodies as living sacrifices . . . in view of God’s mercies.  We are to walk in a manner worthy . . . of the calling we have received.  We are to set our hearts on things above, where Christ is . . . the Christ presented in the first half of Colossians!

Remember the Mechanism – As long as we think lives are transformed by the pressure we can apply in our preaching, our ministry will be desperately restricted.  Lives are transformed by pointing the gaze of listeners’ hearts toward Christ.  In Christ, in Christ, in Christ . . . so walk worthy.  The captivating truth of what God has done in Christ is preached, the Spirit works in the heart, an appetite to please God comes forth like sap in a fruit tree, and the instructions are there to guide the growth.

Forget the Short-Cut – It feels like a short-cut: just find imperatives, or turn some content into imperative, and then pressure people.  You will even get encouraging feedback (the flesh loves this stuff!)  But you won’t see much true, genuine, abundant growth.  Forget the short-cut and preach the text, in context, pointing to the God it reveals, and the growth may be imperceptible (good fruit growth isn’t instant), but it will be definite, genuine, multiplying, healthy, Christ-honoring, loving, joyful, peaceful, etc., fruitful growth!

 

Preparing to Preach OT Narrative – 3

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

I am preparing to preach a series from the book of Ruth.  This week I’ve been thinking out loud about aspects I need to keep in mind as I head into the preparations.  I’ve thought about the unfamiliarity of the context for the listeners, as well as their perception of the irrelevance of something so far removed from today.

Today I’m pondering a temptation I know I’ll face in preaching the narrative genre.

It is always tempting to multiply applications.  I suppose this is a response to yesterday’s concern with apparent irrelevance.  The preacher can fall into the trap of turning every detail of the text into a point of application.  “Look, Ruth isn’t an irrelevant book, we are only five verses in and here are four principles for keeping your family together!”  Oops.

As a preacher with a desire to be relevant to the listeners, I have to guard against illegitimate application of details in the narrative.  Just because a character demonstrates it, doesn’t make it an instruction for the reader.  Just because it happened, doesn’t mean it should.

As a general approach, perhaps I should put it this way – (1) my effort in preparation should go into grasping the thrust of the whole passage, and then seeking to clearly apply that main thrust.  And there will be ways to multiply the applications of that main thrust.  This will be better than multiplied mini-thrusts based on particular details plucked out of their unique role in the passage as a whole.

That is, all the details matter, but not all the details need to be applied.  Every detail in a narrative is working together to make the whole plot work.  But not every detail is there as a teaching point.  The plot as a whole (either the whole plot, or the plot of a scene if I preach it section by section), the plot as a whole carries a certain thrust that we would do well to open our hearts to and be changed by.

Tomorrow I’ll add a couple more thoughts on applying the narrative.

Application Is Not Always Pragmatic – 2

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Yesterday I suggested that preaching with applicational goals is entirely appropriate.  Furthermore, if done appropriately and sensitively (not to mention specifically), application that is very pragmatic certainly has a place in our preaching.  But we have to see the rest of the list too:

2 – Belief (the head) – It is important to recognize that behaviour is driven by belief.  If we only ever seek to fix behaviour, we will be frustrated because of the influence of underlying belief.  If a message calls for thinking a certain way about God, about life, about salvation, about conflict, about ministry, about whatever . . . then don’t feel bad about applying accordingly.  Sometimes a message transforms lives without a call to action, but with a call to respond in belief, in changing perspective, in thinking well about something.

1 – Affection (the heart) – If behaviour and conduct is driven by belief and thought processes, then it is important to recognize what drives our thinking and belief . . . the affections of the heart.  It is the heart that supplies values which function like software in the mind.  It is the hardening of the heart that stood at the root of the wrong thinking and bad behaviour of “the Gentiles” Paul wrote of in Ephesians 4.  And it is a new heart that is so transformative in the new covenant.  How easily we try to live new covenant Christianity as if we still have hearts of stone!  Applicational preaching needs to reach deep into the hearts of listeners and not settle for pragmatics or information transfer alone.

I know it is the work of God’s Spirit to change hearts.  But isn’t it only the Spirit who can truly influence thinking and action too?  Apart from me you can do nothing, Jesus said . . . so we must lean fully on the Lord as we preach His Word, but part of our task is to emphasize the relevance of the preaching text; the relevance to our conduct, to our beliefs, to our affections.

Five Major Failings – Part 2

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Carrying on from yesterday’s two failings, here are the rest:

“3. Vague Phrasing – Preachers seem hardwired to eschew all vivid verbs and concrete nouns, with the result that they sound vague and uninteresting.”

A lack of energy in delivery, a lack of facial engagement, a lack of passion, a lack of effective sensory description and so on are all factors adding to the vague and uninteresting nature of much preaching.

“4. Sub-Christian Resolutions – There is not enough gospel-insight.”

This is a good observation.  If our application and resolution of the message is that we should try harder, do better, be “good-er” or whatever, then we are falling short of Christian preaching.  In my opinion we need not always force a jump to Calvary and Christ, there are times when a theocentric message need not move to the first Easter, but every message should be theocentric.  A try harder message is really anthropocentric (it’s all about us, our needs and our response).

“5. Trivial Applications – The gospel is shrunk down to an individualistic technique that we can use on a Monday, all in the name of relevance, but the grand scope of the gospel as a message that speaks for all time, to nations and tribes as well as individuals, gets lost.  I actually heard someone starting a sermon: ‘The toothpaste squirted out all over my jacket, my alarm failed to go off, and in the shower I used rubbing alcohol as shampoo.  I was having a bad day.’  This was to introduce a biblical twosome who were having a similar bad day – the Emmaus pair.  Come on!”

We do need to differentiate between trivial Monday morning applications and genuine Monday morning applications.  Too much preaching resists the trivial and replaces it with the spiritual-sounding vague applications that all affirm, but none grasp for their own lives.  I agree, let’s cut out the trivial applications, but let’s do so in a way that retains genuine relevance.

Do We Get It Backwards?

/ Peter Mead / Leave a comment

Here’s a provocative quote from Charles Kraft:

The amount of crucial information involved in Christianity is, I believe, quite small.  The amount of Christian behavior demanded in response to all that information is, however, quite large.  We have, however, given ourselves over to a methodology that emphasizes the lesser of the two ingredients. (Jesus Model for Contemporary Communication, 123)

I essentially concur with this and want to make a couple of comments.  Obviously Kraft is not saying that Christianity is simplistic or lacking in content.  I’m sure he’d agree that we will never exhaust the riches of God’s Word.  However, for each truth in that Word, there are numerous necessary applications to real life behavior.  As preachers we tend to explain, explain, explain some more and then finally squeeze in a couple of minutes of application.  Perhaps we would do well to follow the advice of Don Sunukjian along the same lines, when he says we should explain as much as necessary, then apply, apply, apply.

In reality I find a lot of preaching is lacking in application, but not really because the text is being over-explained.  I would suggest, perhaps provocatively, that I rarely find a text even decently explained.  What many preachers tend to do is fill time with talk.  Random details in the text, other texts, illustrations lacking in defined purpose, filler words and noise.  I find it so refreshing when a preacher actually explains a text, and it is time to celebrate when there is specific and substantial application added to the mix.  I know there are still some exegetically heavy lecturers getting into pulpits, but probably far less than in the past.  However, it would be wrong to flatter many preachers who lack in application by suggesting they explain too much.  In reality many preachers neither explain nor apply well.

Many preachers tend to feel they have not done their job if they only preach one text, one main idea, one truth and then apply it well.  They perhaps feel that such preaching might be too lightweight or thin on content.  So they try to pack in more information, more texts, more truths, etc.  What could have been a powerful, penetrative, convicting, focused, applicational and memorable sermon becomes an overwhelming speedboat charge through the jungle of the catechism, or through systematic theology, or through all things Bible (complete with the resulting spray in the face that makes you do that squinting, blinking thing with your eyes!)

If it means actually seeing lives changed, let’s preach lightweight.  Actually, I don’t believe that.  Let’s preach one text well.  Well focused, not going anywhere else without good reason.  Well explained, but not an information dump.  Well applied, specific and with the appropriate grandeur for such a biblical truth.

Stowell’s 4 Power Dynamics

/ Peter Mead / 1 Comment

Joe Stowell, in a session on preaching, listed four power dynamics that are critical for preaching transformationally, that is, preaching for changed lives.  Nothing new here, but a helpful reminder for us all:

1. The Preacher’s Life – This is number one for a reason.  Consider the true value of our integrity, our walk with Christ, our willingness to apologize when necessary (and periodically it is for we all fail).

2. The Text – Do we need any comment here?  After all, this site is about Biblical preaching!

3. The Context – Not the hermeneutical overarching principle for Bible study, but the context in which you preach.  Stowell pointed out that no church would continue to finance a missionary who refused to consider issues of culture, language, etc.  Yet many preachers allow themselves the same nonsensical freedom when it comes to the ministry in the pulpit!

4. Clarity – If the feedback stated is “Wow, that was deep!” then the message should be translated as “I didn’t get what you were talking about!”  Be clear.

Simple stuff, but I’m sure I’m not the only one who needs these reminders.