Preaching [and living] Like This Is Dangerous

May God grant me the same commitments and convictions not just now, but 30 years from now!

The Big Red Tractor

File under "Chan is the man"

The Big Red Tractor from Jacob Lewis on Vimeo.

(And in Darke County, I feel it is my responsibility to point out that Chan has probably never heard of Massey Ferguson, so this is not a slam on Deere. You can pretend the tractor is green and yellow if you want to.)

Book Reflection

Two weeks ago I finished a 700-page book on the Association. That's right...700 pages. Hours spent reading about the career of Dolph Shayes, Elgin Baylor, Tracy McGrady and about a hundred others. Obviously, this was just reading for entertainment, but I also tried to tell myself it could have gospel impact. Perhaps the style of writing, or an anecdote or just the relaxation will enhance my ministry, I told myself. By page 35 or so, I realized that was simply entertainment, and there was no reason to attempt to whitewash it.

For a 700-page book, it read relatively easy. I finished the book thinking, Well, that was fun, but did not seek to bring any real meaning out of it. After all, it's a book about a game I love to play (but am lousy), and enjoy watching (but since we don't have cable I rarely ever see). Surprisingly though, I started mulling over various thoughts, which I think were remotely related to the book.

Foul language is overrated. One reason I am not specifically referencing the book is because I know the language would be offensive to many who read my blog (It was to me, as well). I guess offensive is not the right word, I would not expect an unbeliever to act any different. The greater issue I saw was just how completely unnecessary the language was. There is a temptation, especially around men my age, to justify crude language as authenticity. It just simply isn't the case. Foul language does not display authenticity unless you're wanting to declare to people you are authentically immature. Often times, the author conveyed his emotions far more clearly and robustly in sections where he did not see the need to swear, than in some where he did. It didn't enhance his writing, nor did it make his point. Sadly, some ministers today want to advocate coarse language as a means of engaging the culture...it just doesn't have to be.

Writing about others is tricky. It is no secret that the author of the book respects Isiah Thomas the player, but not Isiah Thomas the GM/coach/front office guy. In fact, he has spoken so critically of Thomas that at one point--while Thomas was coaching/GM of the New York Knicks--Thomas told a radio host he would physically harm the author if they ever met face tot face. Well, early in the book he recounts the time he was introduced to Thomas by another member of the media. While still holding to his opinions, he also (obviously) softened his stance somewhat, and became a bit more empathetic. Certainly a humbling and awkward situation. (You can read about my crow-eating-humbling-lesson here.) However, the author continues to write about people in such a way that I couldn't help but think of athletes and coaches who may read it. As I read, I kept thinking He could have a lot of awkward occasions in his future! The author regularly critiqued in a such a blunt form, that I am sure would have to be softened when would meet an athlete. Then I thought about myself. How often can I critique apart from considering motive? This does not mean something becomes right simply because someone had good intentions...poor theology and practice remains poor theology and practice. But, it did cause me to ask, Can I point error out in such a way that the person would be willing to converse with me without having to diffuse the situation? Sometimes, this is out of our control; a person will be offended either way. But I could do a better job of not contributing to the raised emotions.

Facts/stats do not necessarily reduce subjectivity. I enjoy this author because he is a fan of specific teams and does not try to cloak his views. He hates certain teams simply because he loves others. I enjoy this style far more than the starched collar professional journalist view who treats games with the same gravity and seriousness as terrorism. I want to read from a guy who jumps off his couch at the end of a game because he's thrilled, not a guy who simply reports the game as an event. However, this book was different for the author tried to be objective. At times, he acknowledges that he is not being objective, yet he still underestimates how often subjectivity permeates his work. He attempts to buoy his views with statistics. However, numbers may not lie but the same numbers can be used to make opposing points. It convicted me to remember that "facts" do not always get to the heart...for they can be spun however a person desires. If a person wants to toy with the facts, there is no reasoning with them. At times, this can even happen with Scripture, a person will distort and twist a Text to say the opposite of what is intended. I was reminded: a) to call out to God that He would protect me from myself and my fleshly tendency to distort Texts to my gain; and b) to not join a person in the game when they choose to defiantly distort a Text just to keep from doing what they know they need to do. Sure, an undershepherd is to teach and help show people error. However, when a person is clearly willing to sacrifice the integrity of the Scripture to defend their actions (rather than sacrificing their actions to defend the integrity of Scripture), there is no reasoning with them.

I enjoy books that feed my soul. Reading this book also made me realize how much I cherish reading books that not only feed my mind, but my soul as well. Nearly every book I read is ministry related, and some could see that as reading for work, rather than reading for pleasure. However, when you enjoy your "work reading" then it really is reading for pleasure too! Time is short. I'm not making a commitment that I'll never again read something just for the sake of entertainment (such a commitment would be a foolish endeavor), but for now I'm content to just get back to the pile of books I've been thinking I need to read. And I'll thank God for the grace that it isn't just work, but I enjoy it.

I am not advocating an "all truth is God's truth" sort of view that would claim Christian thinking is revealed in a book even when it wasn't the author's intention. No, there is no Christian agenda to this book. Sanctification does not come from reading anything, but ultimately from reading Scripture. I'm thankful to God for His Word and was also reminded that just as I had to be in the Word to truly grow while reading an NBA book, I better be in the Word to grow even while reading Christian words from a ministry-minded book. Sanctification comes from the Truth, and His Word is Truth. Whatever you may be reading, make sure it doesn't supplant your time in the Word!

The Holy Spirit in Preaching

But I tell you the truth, it is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I go, I will send Him to you. "And He, when He comes, will convict the world concerning sin and righteousness and judgment; concerning sin, because they do not believe in Me; and concerning righteousness, because I go to the Father and you no longer see Me; and concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world has been judged. "I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. "But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come. "He will glorify Me, for He will take of Mine and will disclose it to you. "All things that the Father has are Mine; therefore I said that He takes of Mine and will disclose it to you.--John 16:7-15

Notice:

It is to our advantage that the Helper come. Don't miss the audience here. Jesus is standing in front of the disciples who have spent the last three years with Him. Imagine the joy and the growth that would come from traveling with Jesus for three years and observing His service and ministry. However, Jesus says it is better that He leave and send the Holy Spirit.

The Spirit is commissioned by the Son. The Spirit does not descend to fill a vacuum. He is sent by Jesus and His instructions to the disciples help us see how the Spirit's commissioning is connected to the disciples' commissioning.

and He said to them, "Thus it is written, that the Christ would suffer and rise again from the dead the third day, and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem. "You are witnesses of these things. "And behold, I am sending forth the promise of My Father upon you; but you are to stay in the city until you are clothed with power from on high."--Luke 24:46-49

The gospel was to be proclaimed to all nations, as recorded throughout the Old Testament. Jesus is going to use His disciples to accomplish this task. However, before their commission begins, they are to wait for the Holy Spirit to come.

Conviction comes from the Spirit. Though the preacher is to share the Word of God, the conviction itself flows from the work of the Holy Spirit.

The Spirit will teach His saints. Jesus stood before the disciples and did not find it profitable to teach them all things, not because they didn't need to know, but because He did not believe there would be benefit unless the Spirit come and disclose it!

The Spirit does not have a private unique agenda. His ministry is not born out of His own initiative, but He desires to fulfill that which He has heard Christ speak.

His desire is the glory of Christ! He is not aiming to exalt Himself, but is seeking the glory of Christ.

Clearly, the preacher must humble himself and realize that the power of the preaching will lie in the working of God. He must see his need for the Holy Spirit's active work!

This will lead to his petition for the working of the Holy Spirit. The preacher will call upon the Spirit to actively work through the Word to the purpose of the glory of Christ.

Finally, the preacher needs to preach Christ. Rather than focussing on the "shock and awe" factors that are often associated with the Holy Spirit's work in preaching, one should think about the work of the Spirit. When you preach from the Bible, you are using the book the Spirit wrote. When you exalt Christ from any portion of Scripture, you seek to glorify the One to Whom the Spirit directs glory. When you preach the gospel in the midst of exalting Christ from the Text, you proclaim the message by which the Spirit loves to create life.

Exult Christ by celebrating the gospel on every page of Scripture. In so doing, the Spirit is delighted to work, and without His working, your preaching is in vain.

Preaching to the Whole Man

Within any congregation, there will be some people who are inclined toward information, others who want you to connect with their emotions and still some who would like to receive their "marching orders." Not only is the pastor aware of these different types (and he is aware, for he is often told about their preference), but the pastor is also aware of that each individual congregant has intellectual, emotional and volitional capacities.

Often, pastors are tempted to accomplish all three in one sermon. Give the people some specific application while also firing off some information/data. In between, you tell a great joke or heart warming story to connect with some. But multiple targets will dilute or dull the blade of God's Word. So how can the message be kept sharp yet effect the entire man?



It is not a problem if a sermon is informational, emotional or motivational. In fact, it could actually be argued that an attribute of a good sermon is that it contains all three. But their is an order in which these things must rightly be taught. First off, if the sermon is based on the text (and is it a sermon if it is not based upon the Word?), then their is information which must be shared and applied to the mind. However, gaining information is not the end. His prayer should be that his listener is effected by the information they have heard, so that they view God differently. His vision of himself should be altered so that he seeks God's perspective rather than our own. And if the person is truly effected and changed, his actions will look different.

The above diagram should not grant the preacher peace. His response should not be to look at the picture and think, "Oh, well I can do that!" Instead, he should feel completely broken and undone. There is no way possible that he can direct the path of his preached words once the words have left his mouth.

No, instead, the pastor should see that he has been called to an impossible task. This should call the pastor to see his utter dependance upon the Holy Spirit. He alone is the only One capable of giving the sermon this kind of power.

But how do we ensure the work of the Holy Spirit in our preaching?

Flaw of Motivational Preaching

As we've looked, intellectually aimed preaching will often lead to information but a lack of action. Emotionally aimed preaching can create some action, but it is often short-lived. The obvious move--to some--is to aim for actions. Why not simply preach right to application and action. Consider these two texts:

"Many will say to Me on that day, `Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' "And then I will declare to them, `I never knew you; DEPART FROM ME, YOU WHO PRACTICE LAWLESSNESS.'--Matthew 7:22-23

"To the angel of the church in Sardis write: He who has the seven Spirits of God and the seven stars, says this: `I know your deeds, that you have a name that you are alive, but you are dead. `Wake up, and strengthen the things that remain, which were about to die; for I have not found your deeds completed in the sight of My God. `So remember what you have received and heard; and keep it, and repent. Therefore if you do not wake up, I will come like a thief, and you will not know at what hour I will come to you. `But you have a few people in Sardis who have not soiled their garments; and they will walk with Me in white, for they are worthy.`He who overcomes will thus be clothed in white garments; and I will not erase his name from the book of life, and I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels.`He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.'--Revelation 3:1-6

It is possible for us to call people to "good works," for them to obediently participate in the application, and yet for them to not be pleasing to God (Romans 14:23/Hebrews 11:6) The pastor must remember that sanctification is not the same thing as moral application. While a person who is being sanctified will do good works (Ephesians 2:10), it is not necessarily the case that good works are a result of sanctification. (This argument is of course speaking from a human perspective. If I saw a person preaching, healing and exercising demons, I would assume those to be good works. However, Jesus--with a divine perspective--understands that their actions are not good--but due to their lack of faith--are actually deeds of lawlessness.

It's tempting to think that spiritual growth is happening when you see a congregation join the pastor in corporate responses or sign up for challenges. Motivational preaching can be more encouraging, for it is more tangible and easier to assess. Are people signing up for the challenge? Have they done what you told them to do? Have they quit doing what you told them to quite doing?

It's sad enough when a preacher may think sanctification is happening when it isn't. It's even more tragic when you consider that the non-believer may join you in the application (for if it is not dependent upon the Holy Spirit, it isn't sanctification), and because of their works consider himself that much more in God's good favor. To the unbelieving--who is inclined to self-righteousness already--such preaching can actually fan the flame of his works righteousness. And when the man perceives that the church is applauding his works, it will be even more difficult for the man to see his lack of righteousness and his need for Christ.

Flaw of Emotional Preaching

Seeing the flaw of intellectually targeted preaching, many preachers aim for the emotions. Just filling people with information may seem destructive, but changing the way people feel, that has to make a difference, right?

For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.--Hebrews 4:12

While some will see this verse as their commissioning to aim at the emotions only, a closer look at the text will reveal much. A) This is a highly theological passage explaining how the Sabbath is really found in faith in Jesus, B) The text calls for the thoughts and intentions, things which are not strictly emotional.

Emotional preaching will get some results. I remember talking to some performers who attended a workshop to generate revenue. They were instructed in how to get an audience to laugh, cry and connect with you. Once that had been done, the crowd was much more likely to buy your merchandise. Clearly, connecting with a person's emotions is quite powerful.

However, any good performer will also tell you, you better have your merchandise available right away. You see, it is not enough to connect with the person and then send them on their way, trusting they will forever be loyal to your performance. No, you have to "strike while the iron is hot," for emotions are temporal and subject to change.

Now when he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Feast, many believed in his name when they saw the signs that he was doing. But Jesus on his part did not entrust himself to them, because he knew all people and needed no one to bear witness about man, for he himself knew what was in man.--John 2:23-25

Jesus knew far too well that an emotional connection is short lived. Circumstances change, people change and a different voice will attract their attention. Sure people loved Him now, but would they continue to? There would be a day that they would cry out "Hosanna!" and later cry out, "Crucify Him!"

Preaching at the emotions can be powerful, but if it is the only place we aim, it's bound to be short lived.

Flaw of Intellectual Preaching

Some consider the goal of preaching to be growing the intellect; as long as people learned something, surely they grew. Others fear any kind of information transfer; for "knowledge puffs up," right?

Consider the two following passages [emphasis added]:

Therefore I urge you, brethren, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies a living and holy sacrifice, acceptable to God, which is your spiritual service of worship. And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.--Romans 12:1-2

That, in reference to your former manner of life, you lay aside the old self, which is being corrupted in accordance with the lusts of deceit, and that you be renewed in the spirit of your mind, and put on the new self, which in the likeness of God has been created in righteousness and holiness of the truth.--Ephesians 4:22-24

Clearly, preaching is to engage the mind, for you are speaking of the oracles of God. Despite some weak protests by some postmodern advocates, words do have meaning and those meanings combine to make fact statements. Good preaching will engage the mind, however, preaching that just rests in the mind will be ineffective and will seem ethereal.

Preaching that rests in the mind will either tempt the listener to self-righteousness (thinking that knowledge equals sanctification) or will overwhelm the listener with yet more information, details and requirements. Others, who wish to live in their sin, will prefer informational preaching, for who really gets convicted studying the dates of the Jewish deportation?

So, the mind is necessary in sanctification, but the mind is not where the preacher should exclusively land.

Where should he aim?

Preaching Diagrams

As our "sermoneutics" class is winding down, I presented the following illustrations to instruct about preaching.

The Frustration of Preaching

Many people falsely use the Shema as a tool to dissect man into three compartments.* Then, after severing the man into pieces, the preacher is left to figure out "where" he is to aim. Does he aim for the mind and preach intellectually? Does he aim for the heart and preach emotionally? Does he aim for action and preach motivationally?

And that's just thinking about one member of the audience! Consider also that within any congregation, you're going to have people who also say these three things:

"I come to church to learn. I want to be fed."
"I come to church for worship. I want to feel."
"I come to church to change. I want to be told what to do."

So, what is the preacher to do? Simply preach according to his own giftedness? If you're more intellectual, emotional or motivational, simply preach in that way. Do you evaluate the audience? Figure out which demographic you have and preach accordingly. Does the text determine it? Perhaps the passage determines where you aim.

Or, is the preacher called to try to do all three at once, every time? Yet, clearly this can effect how crisp and sharp the message truly is.

______________________________________________________
* Many assume that Moses (and Jesus here was breaking man into three parts. However, this formula--which most people are familiar--is not based upon these words, but upon Greek philosophy. One can quickly see that these words do not mean three separate parts when one considers Jesus occasionally added a fourth dimension. A quick scan of Scripture will also show that God speaks of the mind and the heart in much the same way throughout the Bible.

Giving Basketball a Shot

If people have been listening closely to our elder interviews during Sunday School, there have been several consistent themes. One theme that I did not expect to come out, however, is my lack of basketball skill. But I actually think it may serve to get to the bottom of some of these things. I've shared this illustration several times, but never on my blog, so I'll give it a shot.

How critical is a Christ-centered, gospel-saturated, Bible-driven ministry pattern to my desire to partner with others?

Here's the illustration:

I'm not a good shooter. At a very early age, I learned that my job is to set picks, irritate the opposition and go for rebounds. One reason I love basketball is that hustle can really make up for a lack of skill (as opposed to golf). But I know my place. If given the choice to shoot an open shot or pass to set up another guy for a shot, I will choose the assist every time.

Therefore, I never get on a guy's case for shooting. He can be 0-10 and if I pass him the ball and he is open, I'm fine with him shooting again. Even at 0-15, I always think the guy has a better shot of scoring than I do. I'll keep passing him the ball and will even keep encouraging him to take good shots.

However, what if the guys shoots at the wrong rim? Now I'll say something. Yet, I'm willing to accept the guy may not believe me at first. He clearly wouldn't shoot at the wrong rim intentionally, so you have to expect some confusion. He's probably going to assume I'm the one who is wrong. Added to the fact that he is mistaken, he is also going to have to deal with wounded pride when he suddenly realizes he's been shooting at the wrong goal. This may take more effort than a quick rebuke. I'm going to have to appeal to other evidence. Ask a referee. Notice that no one on the other team is guarding you. Point out that we get the ball back even though he just "scored." These things all serve as evidence he is shooting at the wrong rim.

But at some point, he's got to quit shooting at that rim. While I am willing to patiently encourage the guy to change goals, I can not keep feeding him the ball if the opposition is going to score every time he gets it. We run into a problem if his reply is, "Well, I make more shots at this rim so I'm going to keep shooting here," or "Can't you just accept that my motive is pure, why do you have to be so picky?" or "Hey, you shoot at the basket you want and let me shoot at the basket I want. I'm not telling you where to shoot," or "I've been playing a lot longer than you pal. Don't you tell me where to aim." At some point, I'm not going to want that guy on my team anymore. And if he is on my team, I'm going to quit getting him the ball; even if that means I'm going to have to start shooting (wince).

What does this have to do with preaching?

I have literally shot at the wrong basket in an organized game (Eighth grade versus Eaton Junior High). Fortunately, my lack of shooting skill meant I missed and did not actually score for the other team. But in all my embarrassing basketball history (and there is much to be humiliated by), that by far was the worst.

As a preacher, years of my ministry were spent shooting at the wrong goal. And even today, when I have a different aim with my preaching, I still throw up bricks and airballs from time to time. I'm never satisfied with my participation in the sermon on a given week. I care deeply about preaching (my own and others) and I believe some have misunderstood that concern. I do not listen to sermons with a fine tooth comb, just looking for an infraction. I listen for where the preacher is aiming. From time to time, their touch may be so off that you can't tell where they are aiming, but typically the next sermon can help clear that up. I don't think I have ever approached another pastor about a sermon of his (or posted my thoughts on a blog) on the basis of one sermon. In one particular incident, I think I listened to 8-10 sermons from a pastor before approaching him about his target.

I regularly sit down after the sermon and think about how I could have done it better. Part of this is healthy (it leads to refinement) and part of it is pride (it's an evidence that I far too often think I am responsible for the outcome). As one who graciously feels like God works in spite of my failures, I don't hold other pastors to a standard of perfection. Mercy triumphs over judgment and I certainly don't want my sermons judged in an unmerciful way. I know I'm not perfect and have never preached a perfect sermon, so I'm not going to demand that from anyone else.

Preaching matters. And preaching with the wrong aim can be disastrous. Since I've shot at the wrong rim before, I'm also aware that I need others to help refine me and remind me where my aim should be. I desire to enter these conversations with other pastors. But when you suggest that the Word of God requires a different aim and you are met with silence, defiance or tolerance for any aim, I'm not sure what to do.

I can partner with the guy who tries but fails in his pursuit to see Christ glorified by celebrating the gospel on every page of Scripture, for I too am that guy. I can talk with the guy who struggles to understand what I mean or doesn't necessarily see how that is our calling. I have no idea what to do when a guy refuses to talk or refuses to consider his aim.

If you don't understand what I mean by "Christ glorified by celebrating the gospel on every page of Scripture," please ask. I believe aim matters and I'm not asking you to set yourself up for the Inquisition. If you're willing to aim at the right rim, you'll find me not only feeding you the ball, but cheering you on each time you shoot.

A Vision for Heart Change

If you have died with Christ to the elementary principles of the world, why, as if you were living in the world, do you submit yourself to decrees, such as, "Do not handle, do not taste, do not touch!" (which all {refer} {to} things destined to perish with use)--in accordance with the commandments and teachings of men? These are matters which have, to be sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, {but are} of no value against fleshly indulgence.--Colossians 3:20-23



The above picture shows eye glasses issued by a zoo in the UK. Apparently, a woman was attacked when a gorilla jumped the moat and grabbed her because she had stared in his eyes and smiled (acts of aggression to primates). Rather than trying to convince people not to stare into the eyes of a gorilla, they thought these glasses were a better option.

My favorite comment which was made:

Of course, if you have your head tilted down and angled just right while rummaging in your backpack, you might find the specs are inadvertently staring at the angry gorilla by themselves - with the extra hassle that you won't be able to see him coming.

"Killer Illustrations" E

This post (and a lot of silliness that has gone on recently) got me thinking about warning and best results labels for sermon illustrations. [Other Warning Labels: 1, 2, 3, 4.]

WARNING: You don't want to illustrate like Jesus.

No doubt, some will react to this series as if I oppose illustrations. I have never stated such and if one were to listen to my preaching, he would certainly notice I do not object to using illustrations. It should go without saying that they are a necessary part of unpacking the texts. However, they are not intended to be the center and core of a sermon.

But Jesus used illustrations all the time, they argue, what about the parables? They're entire messages built around illustrations!

For Best Results: Consider the following when preaching:

Consider the Messiah. Are you really going to assume you can preach like Him? Do you have as good a command of the Scriptures? Were you given His same divine purpose? Do you have first-hand account information on the kingdom of God?

Consider His illustrations. Are you using basic things for examples--things understood worldwide--like dirt, fish and suffering widows?

Consider His mission. Are you trying to fulfill prophecy? Are you intending for your illustration to leave some confused? (see: Matthew 13:1-23)

For Best Results: Consider the following when listening to a sermon:

Consider the Text. Is the pastor illustrating from experience, or from the Scriptures? Is his illustration elaborating on his wisdom or on God's wisdom?

Consider your emotions. Was the illustration so emotionally stirring that you are not motivated to exercise discernment? Did you "enjoy" the illustration so much that it really don't matter to you if it makes a biblically accurate point?

Consider your desire. Would you be pleased with the most basic of illustrations, provided it unpacks the texts? Do you desire sophistication with an illustration?

"Killer Illustrations" D

This post (and a lot of silliness that has gone on recently) got me thinking about warning and best results labels for sermon illustrations. [Other Warning Labels: 1 2 3.]

WARNING: Some illustrations can run counter to sanctification.

The goal of the preaching should be to unpack the Word of God in such a way that sanctification results. The role of the illustration is to assist the explanation of the text. Therefore, the illustrations exists to serve the sermon with the goal of the Word sanctifying. However, many times, an illustration not only fails to adequately serve the Word, but it even runs contrary to the process of sanctification.

A pastor must exercise caution that his illustration does not call people to feed the flesh. If in the process of preaching a pastor causes members of the congregation to sin, surely he will bear this burden.

For Best Results: Consider the following when preaching:

Consider the audience. Could I give this illustration with my grandmother in the room? Could I give this illustration with my grandchildren in the room?

Consider the REAL Audience. Am I comfortable giving this illustration in front of Jesus Christ? Would I alter details of the illustration if I could see Jesus visually sitting before me?

Consider the larger context? If a video clip (or book, for that matter) is being used, are elements beyond the clip I am showing inappropriate? Could this exposure cause a person to be tempted to see more than they should? Am I exposing them to a greater work for which I am not comfortable?

Consider the lost. Is sin presented as sin? Would a lost person hear this illustration and think we are just like them in every way?

Consider your own heart. Am I presenting this illustration with a great deal of cynicism? Am I exhibiting an anger or self-righteousness which could become infectious to the listening audience?

For Best Results: Consider the following when listening to a sermon:

Consider the audience. Would I enjoy this illustration if my grandmother was sitting next to me? My grandson? Am I content with illustrations that are safe for all ages or do I want my pastor to pursue more "edge?"

Consider the REAL Audience. Would my reaction to the illustration be the same if Jesus were sitting right beside me? Am I desiring illustrations that "get away with as much" as we can, or am I willing for the pastor's illustration to pursue holiness as much as possible?

Consider the lost? If they guy behind me is lost, will he see that I grieve over my sin and respond differently than he does to my own sin?

Consider the larger context. Do I automatically consider a form of media "safe" if a portion has been shared in church? Am I willing to do my homework and see if the entire context is beneficial or just this small portion?

Consider your own passions. What emotions/passions/cravings are being stirred up by this illustration? Am I currently being tempted to sin?

Like rinsing a cup in the dirty dish water in the sink, the pastor may believe the Word has sanctified his congregation while his own illustration soiled them up again. We should desire at no point to indulge the flesh, no matter how great we think the illustration may be.

"Killer Illustrations" C

This post (and a lot of silliness that has gone on recently) got me thinking about warning and best results labels for sermon illustrations. [Other Warning Labels: 1 2.]

WARNING: Cultural illustrations have a short shelf life.

When considering an illustration, current events and popular media are an easy place to go. By appealing to that which is "pop culture," we increase our odds that many in the congregation will track with us. These illustrations can also present the pastor in a contemporary light and create some rapport with members of the congregation. In some ways, contemporary illustrations appear like a win-win; the pastor seems hip and the illustration gets maximum coverage.

But, there are downsides. It is possible that such cultural illustrations can alienate some within the congregation. The pastor can actually distract or confuse those who aren't as aware of the cultural issues. In fact, some could be made to feel they have erred or are stupid for not understanding the illustration. Especially in our current climate--where cultural savvy can almost be presented as an evangelistic prerequisite--to not know the latest facts of the culture can be perceived as disdain for the Great Commission.

Less tragically, the pastor will actually set himself up to appear out of synch. Except in extremely rare cases, most pastors are probably not able to devote proper time to study and ministry and also stay on top of the culture. Therefore, they can either become experts of pop culture (and neglect the Scriptures), or will focus on administration of the word (and find himself occasionally out of touch). These dated references to the culture are not a problem, unless the pastor has attempted to show himself to be contemporary. Then, as he appeals to an illustration that isn't quite current, the pastor actually can discredit the persona he is attempting to establish. Though not always the case, this sort of compromise may affect his perceived credibility with the Word. Some may think the pastor is prone to similar errors in his exegesis.

For Best Results: Consider the following when preaching:

Consider the world. Could people of other cultures and nations understand this illustration? Is this illustration only understandable by a select few people? (Anna points this out well in the comments).

Consider recordings. If someone listens to the recording of this message in three years, will they have any clue what I am talking about? Does this sermon only make sense right now?

Consider your intentions. Is the purpose of the illustration to enforce the point of the text, or to enhance your reputation? James Denney stated, "No man can give the impression that he himself is clever and that Christ is mighty to save." Can you at once prove yourself relevant while keeping the focus on Christ? I don't think you can.

For Best Results: Consider the following when listening to a sermon:

Consider your brother. If you understood the illustration or cultural reference, be alert that there may be some who did not. Seek to encourage these people and prevent them from feeling stupid. Likewise, if you do not understand the illustration or didn't catch the cultural reference, relax. Look around the room and understand that others probably did.

Consider your calling. You were bought with a price, you are not your own. Cultural dissonance is not a sign of spiritual depravity. Remember the Bereans. They did not go back after Paul preached to make sure his sermon conformed to the world around them. They went to the Word to make sure his sermon conformed to God's Word. We should focus likewise.

Consider your expectations. Do you expect your pastor to be overly informed on contemporary culture? Do you believe your pastor has failed if he has not watched the shows you watch and doesn't follow the same current events stories you follow? Are you clinging to the modernist picture of the pastor with a Bible in one hand and the newspaper in the other?

[As with previous posts, this is not stating your message cannot make reference to contemporary events. But instead, are sermon series based around movie releases, tv shows or even Y2K profitable when you consider how narrow their focus becomes.]

"Killer Illustrations" B

This post (and a lot of silliness that has gone on recently) got me thinking about warning and best results labels for sermon illustrations. [First Warning Label found here.]

WARNING: Object of your illustration may not be as close as first appeared.

Like falling in love with a house to quickly and losing all objectivity, a pastor can fall in love with an illustration and cloud his judgment too. An idea for an illustration can come and the pastor can get excited about the emotion it will generate, the fun it will be to share or the attention it will grab. A rush comes with a burst of creativity (I'm shocked, but love it, the two or three times a decade it happens to me.). Once the rush comes, it is incredibly difficult to assess if it really serves your sermon.

Take the article from the introductory post. The pastor decides to shoot an arrow at a target to make his point. But what was his point? Was he preaching on sin and used the target to convey the idea of "missing the mark?" No, he says the message was regarding spiritual warfare in evangelism. His purpose was to encourage people that they must shoot the arrow (the gospel) for it to become effective. However, consider the following: Wouldn't the sword of the Spirit better convey the concept of an ineffective weapon when lodged in its sheath? Isn't your feet shod with the gospel a better illustration for evangelism? Scarier yet, who is the one shooting arrows in this passage? Even without the fines from the city (and potential danger to congregants), this illustration really ceased to be a good idea.

What began as an idea from reading the text can easily morph into something that really doesn't connect with the text like you had hoped. Like playing 6 Degrees of Kevin Bacon can have you partnering movies no one would usually associate, sometimes the pastor can be the only one in the room who sees his tie-in between the text and his illustration.

For Best Results: Consider the following when preaching:

Consider the text. Does it provide an illustration? Things like "a house built upon the rock," or the "Word as a double edged sword" or "clouds without rain" already give you an image/illustration. Why not just stick with that?

Consider running it by others. Check your illustration with someone else. Can they see what it has to do with the text? How much time do you have to spend explaining why you chose the illustration.

Consider other texts. Do other passages use your illustration in another way? Will this cause confusion as people bring those connotations into your current illustration? Realize this will distort your illustration.

Consider your original thought. Where did the illustration begin? Has the illustration greatly evolved? Does it look anything like your original idea? Has any morphing brought you in closer fidelity to the text, or driven you farther from it?

Consider your congregation. Can they use this illustration around the water fountain on Monday? Will they be able to use this illustration without distracting too far from the point of the text. If not, you may want to reconsider.

For Best Results: Consider the following when listening to a sermon:

Consider your memory. If you wrote a one word description of the illustration in the column of your Bible, three years from now, would you have any clue what that means? If not, don't get too caught up in the illustration.

Consider the text. Did you pastor explain the illustrations provided by the text? If so, spend your time commenting to him that you appreciate the Biblical illustration being unpacked for clarification. If he did not, gently ask him to unpack the Biblical illustration a little more.

Consider your conversations. If you told someone outside of your church, "Our pastor spoke about [fill in with illustration] today," would you then be able to explain what it has to do with the text? If not, don't bring it up to other people. Just share about the text.

[I think it is necessary to point out that I am not writing these posts because I have mastered the art of illustration. To the contrary, these questions/posts are creating for me a working check list which I have never had before.]

"Killer Illustrations" A

This post (and a lot of silliness that has gone on recently) got me thinking about warning and best results labels for sermon illustrations.

WARNING: Illustrations have been known to swallow entire sermons.

I first discovered this--but didn't see it as a problem--in the twelfth grade. Just after graduation, I had entered a "preaching competition" for our Fellowship. The sermon was [supposedly] on Philippians 3:13-14, and I used an illustration regarding a personal experience with drag racing. At our National Conference, I was given the opportunity to share the message in front of the entire conference. To this day, if I bump into someone who remembers the sermon, it is always called, "The race car sermon." I've never had someone refer to the Philippians passage, and most (if not all) can't even remember why I shared that illustration.

Like a well-fed pitbull puppy, the illustration can be contolled and led on a leash. However, if you are not careful, the illustration will not be led by your sermon but will be dominating over your sermon.

For Best Results: Consider the following when preaching:

Consider the length of your illustration. How much time is it distracting from your exposition?

Consider your title. Is it about your illustration or the text? How will your people remember the sermon?

Consider your motivations. If the illustration must be cut, would you still be interested in preaching the message?

If you're not a preacher, your feedback can still play an influential role.

For Best Results: Consider the following when listening to a sermon:

Consider your attention. What part do you look forward to the most? Do you listen anxiously for the illustrations, or for the text to be explained?

Consider your compliments. Do you assess the pastor's sermons by entertainment value or by how they assist the text?

Consider your summary. How would you describe the sermon to others? Would you focus more on the illustration than the text?

"Killer Illustrations"

So, recently, I read an article about a pastor's illustration for a Sunday sermon. Putting the pieces of the article together, it seems to suggest:

A pastor decided to set up an bow/arrow and target as a sermon illustration.

In the midst of his sermon, he calls upon a man within the congregation to stand up and fire an arrow at a target. The trajectory moved slightly across the congregation, yet moving away from them.

As a congregant stood to fire the arrow, another person in the audience asked the pastor to reconsider. (There is debate whether his tone was belligerent or peaceful.)

The congregant again raised the bow and arrow to which the same person in the audience asked them to reconsider.

The protesting audience member was escorted out of the room and the pastor has said they will seek a restraining order.

The congregant fired the arrow.

The congregant was fined $109 for "using a missile indoors."

The pastor was fined $109 for "aiding and abetting that ordinance violation."

The article ends with the pastor stating:

"If I knew it would cause this kind of problem, I certainly would have reconsidered."

Perhaps it would be most helpful if illustrations came with warnings and "for best results" tags...