I was able to catch this segment on 60 minutes last night featuring Joel Osteen. Wow. Just Wow.
Browsing Posts in Preaching
I’m excessively hard on preachers. I nit-pick and can be extremely unkind in my analysis of others. Volunteer preachers, not so much. But paid guys I can be merciless.
I repent of that.
But I still hold to the notion that to preach well you must be theologically responsible.
As a preacher I rely heavily on the use of illustrations. I believe strongly in the power of story to make and emphasize a point. One of my Master’s papers was on the power of illustration.
Because of my reliance on story as a preaching tool I tend to look at life based upon its narrative possibilities. I’m am able to use a lot of what I come up with in my preaching and teaching.
Conversely, there are a lot of illustrations that pop in my head that are just plain awful. For every illustration worth using there are several that never need to be voiced.
Here is an example of a sermon illustration I came up with that is just too bad to ever use:
If you visit a restaurant, gas station or some similar establishment you will be given an opportunity to choose your particular beverage of choice. What you will notice at these establishments is that your selection will usually be either Coke products or Pepsi products. But rarely will you have the option for both. That is because Coke and Pepsi are bitter rivals. Most places will not enter into a contract with both companies.
Yet at each of these locations you will most likely have the additional choice of Dr. Pepper. Dr. Pepper is equally disbursed among Coke and Pepsi locations. And in the instances where Coke and Pepsi are on the same drink station? Yep, Dr. Pepper is there.
The folks at Dr. Pepper haven’t entered into the brutal cola wars that have consumed Coke and Pepsi.
We need to be Dr. Pepper Christians. We need to be people who are equally comfortable with all the beverage choices out there. Uniters, not dividers.
If you are preaching a sermon or devotional talk and this fits in with your theme feel free to use it. But do not, I repeat DO NOT, feel that you have to give me credit for it.
Any bad sermon illustrations you have used or heard?
Today’s sermon was from Acts 2. You can access it here.
Older sermons are in the player below.
In September 2005 I began an ambitious teaching and preaching curriculum. My goal was to preach and teach through the entire bible taking one week for each individual book. The congregation would be encouraged to read a book each week beginning in Genesis and working all the way through to Revelation.
The weekly schedule looked like this:
Wednesday Night–A devotional thought borne out of that week’s book.
Sunday Morning Class–An overview of that particular text
Sunday Sermon–How Jesus figured into that text (Hebrew Scriptures focused on “The Scarlet Thread” or how the Messiah was prophesied in each book. The NT focused on what Jesus calls us to be in each book.)
Sunday Night Class–A discussion on issues pertaining to that week’s book and clarifying other issues.
Last night we finished with the Song of Solomon. (We took the wisdom section out of the study of Hebrew Scriptures and placed it at the end of the NT study. This gave us 34 and 32 books to study, respectively, each school year).
Without fail we have worked through each and every book of the Bible and I can now say I have preached through the entire canon. (Note: I was sick the week of Obadiah and had to summarize my planned sermon the following Wed night. In addition we combined 2 and 3 John).
I had no clue how difficult this process would be. I had no clue how much study would be involved in become semi-conversant with a new book each and every week.
But now, I feel that I can somewhat hold my own in a discussion on any book of the Bible.
I can argue how interpreting Song of Solomon as having anything to do with God, the church and/or Israel is faulty exegesis.
I can even make a fairly reasoned argument for who I think might possibly have written Hebrews.
I can line out the many variations in the differing accounts of each of the four gospels.
I can explain why I find Paul to be so incredibly frustrating in so many instances.
But, to me, the best part of this study was the directions that it took me that I did not fully expect. I have a greater appreciation of the entire canon of Scripture.
–However, my study has led me into a greater desire for a handle on textual criticism. This study led me into greater wrestling with issues of inspiration, inerrancy and canonicity. And, for better or worse, my position on those issues are much more tenuous than they once were.
–I’ve long believed that you cannot understand the NT without a proper understanding of the Hebrew Scriptures. I was able to refine that into a position that you cannot understand the NT without a proper understanding of Second Temple Judaism AND the Hebrew Scriptures.
Ultimately, Biblical scholarship is not citing book, chapter and verse and constructing an argument. Nor is it simply arguing tradition, command, example or necessary inference.
It is understanding each and every book based upon genre, location, author, audience, time, date, place, situation and intent. To approach the Bible as a document written for the benefit of 21st century Westerners is to rob the Bible of its intent, purpose, meaning and mystery.
And that is what I have attempted to delineate over the last two years. Scripture is a powerful tool that illuminates and tells a rich narrative of flawed people seeking purpose, meaning and redemption. That story does not end there.
I understand Scripture better now but I have more questions.
I have greater faith after this study but more doubts.
But, ultimately, as I end this study and place all of the resources, materials, commentaries and word studies back on the shelf I come away with some strong, unshakable conclusions:
1. It’s all about Jesus
2. Jesus came to teach us about being in relationship
3. That relationship is bound up in loving God and loving God’s people
4. All else is commentary
Now, what am I going to preach on Sunday?
I preach. It’s what I do. I’m “gifted” at it, I believe.
It’s one of those jobs, however, where most people think they can do it a lot better than the person getting paid for it.
I’m doing a good job whenever I say something that people would agree with. But if not, katy bar the door. I imagine it is a lot like coaching in that regard.
There has been a lot of talk recently about the purpose behind going to church. What does it exist for? Part of this is the realization that Hebrews 10:25 has been woefully proof-texted through the years to mean something that it doesn’t say and that Acts 20:7 cannot be a normative example coming from a group of believers who met together daily.
The discussion is a good one. Many of the reasons for assembling together can be done in other settings.
But what really interests me is the slagging on preachers. I went to a renewal this past week with a number of other ministers–7 couples in all. It was a great time of actually being with people who “get me.”
But two important things I learned:
–Preachers should not be the ones to make the first contact with a visitor, sorry “guest.” In fact, if the preacher makes the first contact then the likelihood that they will return to a second worship service drops by more than half than if a lay member made the first contact.
–Preachers make crummy small group leaders as a rule. Of course there are exceptions but it is generally better that someone else facilitates the discussion.
Combine these thoughts with the discussion that seeks to move corporate worship assemblies, sorry “gatherings,” from pyramid shaped, top-down affairs to a more concentric egalitarian format and I’m beginning to feel fairly anachronistic.
Now, I don’t believe the need for and position of the preacher is any danger of going away any time soon. There will always be a need for proclamation.
But the devaluation is a healthy thing. To move away from the pyramidal concept of church participation is one that each of us need to consider and discuss. I have things to share and impart to a church because I spend all of my work week studying. But it cannot continue to be done at the expense of the corporate body being able to express themselves.
What is the purpose of assembling together? Where do you see our corporate worship service, sorry “gatherings” heading in the future?
(Subtitled: Where I Get Myself in a Good Amount of Trouble)
One good thing about job security is that I don’t have to go through the rigmarole of interviewing for a ministry job. I’ve done way too many of those and would prefer to never have to do it again.
For those of you who haven’t been through the laborious, excruciating and mind-numbing torture of interviewing at a church, let me tell you now: don’t ever try it. It’s horrifying and rarely, if ever, deals with matters of importance. I’ll have more to say about that later.
But in that vein there is a culture, or protocols, around the Church of Christ ministry search that is antiquated and formulaic. In our broader culture there are a series of phrases that I would prefer to never hear again. They are:
10. Any phrase that incorporates the word “Brotherhood.” Aside from it’s immediate exclusion of half of those who affiliate themselves with the COC, it eliminates 99% of the broader world of Christianity. You can toss in with that the use of the phrase “the Church” in sole reference to our tine on the fork of the American Restoration Movement.
9. Guide, Guard and Direct Besides the redundancy, it is the older equivalent of the prominent use of the word “just” in many prayers.
8. Ready Recollection. I appreciate the gesture, but it’s really not necessary. For one, maybe I need to forget something I prepared. Just cause I write it down on Tuesday, doesn’t mean I need to say it out loud on Sunday (This blog post is quickly becoming a good example of that.) Secondly, I haven’t memorized my sermon. It’s all written down in front of me. 14 point, Times New Roman font. Oh, and the important points are on overhead and I control the clicker.
And we probably need to move away from such a dependency on what I say and more of a focus on what God needs to tell us. But the consumerist mentality of modernist worship services is another post altogether.
7. Decent and in Order. In all my years of interacting within the “brotherhood” I have never heard anybody advocate for the inclusion of anything that is indecent. And I even lived in Tennessee. And what order? We all know that if you do communion after the sermon then your entire service is invalidated. I mean, who does that?
6. Rightly Divide the Word of Truth. Yeah, I know it’s from 2 Timothy. But I still don’t know what it means other than I have a hyper-literal interpretation of the passages that agree with the power-brokers.
5. Doctrinally Sound A large number of churches looking for ministers are interested in only “grounded” preachers who are “sound in the Word.” Again, do you think an “unsound” minister is going to see that qualification and think “oh, I guess that leaves me out.” However, it’s typically a sign to stay away.
4. Mechanical Instruments. What is that? How long will we continue to mire ourselves in this pointless debate? And do “mechanical” instruments include all instruments of a mechanical nature including rolling mills and specimen peeling tools? What about barrel organs?
3. Change Agent. Seriously, I’m so fed up with this (Important note: my wife took our middle daughter to a birthday party last week where she was handed the latest Spiritual Dagger blasting Richland Hills, after she was confirmed as a member of a “sound brotherhood” church).
It’s not change agents that bring division in the church. It is the unwillingness to lovingly walk alongside one another as we “work out our salvation.” It is the refusal to bear with one another, giving love and understanding to those who might reach a different conclusion than we do. It is the propensity we have in the church to draw rigid lines in the sand that demands uniformity of belief.
In a setting where I could lose my job by having the “wrong” position on instruments or the role of women in worship but remain relatively secure in my position at the same time I subjugate, dominate, abuse and mistreat my wife it is obvious that something is wrong. And it’s not the “change agents.” It’s the atmosphere where the belief that God elevated something other than love of Him and love of neighbor as the two greatest commandments.
2. “Evangelist.” Another sign that we have things seriously wrong is the idea that the role of evangelist becomes a singular paid position and not the role of a broad cross-section of the Church.
1. “Add to or take away.” First off, I have never added anything to the book of Revelation. That’s Lahaye’s and Jenkin’s job. Secondly, we all add our interpretations and conclusions. Interpreting scripture is not adding to. Imposing a rigid test of inclusion and fellowship is.
Uhh, didn’t mean to say all that. Oh well. Any thoughts or additions?
There are days this just seems to much. Sunday is over and all the preparation that I have invested in the subject of the day is placed behind me and I have to start all over.
Monday morning I walk into my office a complete blank slate. I don’t know what is going to happen. I’m not sure how my study is going to take shape and I have no clue what I am going to preach in just 6 short days.
Some weeks that terrifies me. How do I get from this point to a well-reasoned, properly exegeted masterpiece between now and Thursday? What in the world do I have to say about this text. And why does anybody care what I have to say?
It’s been especially difficult the past two years. In the fall of 2005 I embarked on a two year preaching cycle that would tackle one book each week. My goal was to present the Bible as narrative, to show the Messiah predicted in the Hebrew Scriptures and the fulfillment in the New Testament. It’s been a great process as we’ve been able to see one story emerge: the story of God’s love for and redemption of mankind.
But it’s been daunting as each week I have to become fully conversant on an entire book. As a part of the process each week I introduce the coming week’s book on Wednesday night in a devotional thought. In my Sunday morning class I give an overview of the book. In my sermon time I pull out a thought based upon the thread of Christ that weaves throughout Scripture. And then, on Sunday night I entertain questions and discussion that has arisen from that week’s reading.
Simply put, I have to know my stuff. As we’ve progressed I’ve eschewed the doctrinal discussions and moved more toward the historical, cultural and contextual understandings that are crucial to true biblical scholarship. I’ve talked a lot about canonicity and reliablity, inspiration and inerrancy.
So, I walk into my office each Monday morning a little overwhelmed with what lies before me (this week is 1 John). I get stressed as the week goes on and aspects of scripture remain elusive to me. I bear the scars of wrestling with texts that I find troublesome and complex. I get overwhelmed with understanding the background, setting, author, date, audience, historical themes and theological significance of each and every book in 6 days time.
But this I know: I will stand up on Sunday and proclaim that the God of Scripture is the God who loves us all. And He is the God who did not stop writing the story when John laid down his pen but is still penning the narrative of redemption in our hearts and lives to this day.
But right now I’m stumbling.
I have a strange question. I have an incredible abhorrence of self-promotion or being in any way presumptuous.
I won’t go to anyone’s home uninvited.
I can’t make myself home at anyone’s home other than mine or my parents.
I tend to avoid any in-depth discussions on other people’s blogs unless I’ve known them for awhile (and I would never make my first comment on someone’s blog one of disagreement.)
I have a great hesitance to intrude or impose my way of doing things on anyone else.
So here is my question. When I was a youth minister in Albuquerque I was responsible for putting on a youth rally each summer. While making the schedule I would not even consider making myself a keynote speaker or even teach a class. My approach was that it was not a venue for me to be on display.
Is that too extreme? When I consider going to seminars and conferences I sometimes bristle when the same people give themselves the marquee time each year. And I will consider going somewhere else.
I seriously want to know if that is just me. Is my reluctance to be presumptuous dictating the way I think others should be? I need some feedback. I have people tell me regularly that we should hold a “gospel meeting” so more people can hear me speak. That idea is just unfathomable to me (on several levels). I need to know if I should just lighten up.
Thanks.
I usually don’t get nervous before I preach. That’s reserved for Saturday and for an annoying ritual I usually have to through when I wake up on Sunday morning. But that’s another story.
Yesterday, however, I was nervous. Maybe is was because of me proclaiming MLK as a personal hero or use of such terms as “state-sanctioned execution and of the prison industrial complex.” Maybe it was because of my reference to fighting the terrorism in our own hearts.
Whatever the case, I was nervous. Whenever I get too close to laying everything on the table I get the heebie-jeebies.
Very rarely do I get complaints about my sermons. I’m not sure why that is: maybe people aren’t listening or they are largely forgettable. Or maybe I’m too diplomatic. Or that people think I’m talking to someone else.
But today, I had a dear member express concern that I would laud someone like MLK whose moral failures were so pronounced and visible. My response was that if moral perfection is what we expect of our heroes than we are being unfair to them.
Which brings me to this story: when we were making the transition from youth ministry to the pulpit, Tracy asked me what my biggest fear was. My answer was quick.
I was afraid that I would be found out to be a fraud. That the disconnect between the message and the messenger would be so great that people would fail to listen.
Because, let’s face it: my moral imperfections are many. I look back on the stupid things I have done, the idiot I was in college and wonder how I ever got to this place.
–I fight with my wife.
–I snap at my kids.
–I suffer bouts of insecurity.
–Every week I question my ability as a minister and communicator.
–I can be stand-offish and unapproachable.
–I can be grouch and curmudgeonly.
–I’ve cussed, lusted and broken a whole handful of commandments.
–I hate, rage and profane.
–I stand silent against injustice and rail against petty slights.
–I laugh at inappropriate jokes and bathroom humor.
–I feel jealous of others far too often.
Simply put, I preach Jesus but I don’t look like Him very often. I am a fraud, hypocrite, liar, huckster and charlatan.
I feign knowledge when I’m filled with doubts.
I offer counsel when I don’t know how to work out my own life.
I extol service and labor for the kingdom when I’m so incredibly lazy.
So, what does all this mean? It means that in five years I’ve learned that I would rather be real and genuine than fake moral superiority.
I’ve learned that I gravitate toward those who are broken, flawed and imperfect. MLK is one of my heroes because he continued to strive for faithfulness even when he was so very human.
I’ve learned that I don’t ever want to appear that I have it all together. I’d rather be honest with my failings because it takes the focus off of me and puts it on Christ.
I’ve learned that true, effective ministry and preaching must come from a place of humility and a profound sense of unworthiness. That no matter how hard I try, no matter how much human effort I place into the craft, I will always be found wanting.
So, if you are looking for a preacher who has it all together with all the dotted I’s and crossed T’s then I’m not your guy.
If you are looking for a preacher who falls short time and again, whose feet are made of clay and often wakes up face-deep in the mud, then I’m your guy.
