Monthly Archives: August 2012

Writing the sermon

2 Replies

There are many preachers, and many many ways to teach the Bible. Sunday preaching is still an important way to came face to face with God’s word. I’m dedicated to it!

I am still learning how to preach, and how to prepare for preaching. Recently I realised a few parts of the process that are important for me (therefore not necessarily important for everyone). I want to write them down so I can keep reflecting on what helps. Maybe in a year I will know myself better and come up with a different list.

For me to preach, I need these four things.

1. Be a Christian
That is, practice the regular and everyday Christian disciplines.

If I am not reading the Bible personally (not in order to prepare something), then preaching preparation seems to go down the tubes. If I pray regularly, I also find I pray more about preaching: about the Bible passages I am preparing, for hearers, for church, etc.

Notably, this ‘step’ of preparation has nothing to do with what I traditionally think of as preparation.

2. Text time
Whatever the Bible passage I am going to preach, I need to get into reading it as soon as I can.

In an average week, I like to do some work on reading the text on Monday morning. This might be an hour or so of reading, sketching out the flow of the argument, looking up some of the words … and then shoving the resultant sheet of notes into a folder. It’s not important to have flashes of inspiration. It is important to start.

3. Wasting time
This surprised me. I think I need to do things that look unproductive and wasteful.

It might be doing a Sudoku. Or pulling weeds from around the hibiscus tree. Or splitting and stacking firewood. Or a million other options. Whatever it is, I find myself thinking, ‘Why am I doing this? I should be working’ and I feel guilty. And, almost invariably, it’s while wasting time that I solve problems I’ve been working on. The big problems. This is when the talk structure falls into place (for me, it’s usually an ‘all at once’ moment). This is when I think of applications to our own lives. Sometimes also relevant illustrations will pop into mind.

This also looks unlike preparation. And I always feel bad about time-wasting. But it seems productive. Perhaps I need to re-think my guilt trips.

4. Page time
I hate this bit. It’s when I actually prepare my notes. I already have the outline, and know the larger points. Now it’s time for details, explanation, connections, as well as start and finish.

This step is where I choose what specifically to explain, and how. Sometimes an individual phrase becomes very important: maybe five words receive five minutes’ attention, because they need to be clear and memorable. Note-writing is when I sense if an illustration will help or distract, and when I struggle to express how God’s word changes our lives. In contrast to step three, step four is all about the details of the sermon.

So what? Two of these four steps feel to me like preparation, and two don’t. The two that do (#2, #4) are steps that deal with details: details of the text or details of the talk. The two that feel less like preparation are still important – even essential – and are much more ‘big picture’, or general.

Next questions. I wonder what might be missing. Have I missed some other steps that are on a different scale? (Eg, how often I have a holiday, or how aware I am of current affairs, or how many books I read per year.) Also, is there some way to make these steps work better?

As the 21st century warning states: YMMV (your mileage may vary). This is my take on what I do. Nonetheless, I’m keen to hear any reactions you might have. Or any thoughts about your own preparation for things. What do you do? How have you learnt to do it better? Any comments will be read with great interest and pleasure!

 

 

What will you do? Luke 5-6 (b)

Leave a Reply

As I wrote earlier, I think Luke develops the language of ‘doing’ in an understated but challenging way through Luke 5-6. This second post looks at ‘doing’ language in Jesus’s sermon, which begins in verse 20 of chapter six.

Here are the places Luke uses ‘doing’ in Jesus’ sermon on the plain (so-called):

  • They did these things to the prophets (6:23)
  • They did these things to the false prophets (6:26)
  • Do good to those who hate you (6:27)
  • What you wish people do to you, likewise do for them (6:31)
  • If you do good to those who do you good … (6:33)
  • Even sinners do this (6:33)
  • Do good (6:35)
  • A good tree does not do bad fruit, nor again does a bad tree do good fruit (6:43)
  • Why do you call me, Lord, Lord, & not do that which I say? (6:46)
  • All who come to me & hear my words & do them … (6:47)
  • But hearing and not doing is like … (6:49)

As we hear Jesus’ direct teaching, we find out that he is greatly concerned for what people do. The previous narrative hinted at this – Jesus’ words now confirm it to be true. What Jesus’ sermon adds, concerning actions done, is a stark sense of division. On the one hand those who do good, and on the other those who do evil.

Doing wrongly begins with a ‘woe’ of condemnation from Jesus. Doing wrong is being commended like a false prophet, it’s only loving those who love you back, it’s the outward bad fruit on an inwardly bad tree. In the final analysis, it is hearing Jesus but refusing to do what his teaching requires.

Doing good, in contrast, begins with Jesus’ blessing. Doing good is being ill-treated like the true prophets, it’s treating people well even though they will not return the favour, it’s the outward fruit revealing the inward nature of the tree. In the final analysis, it is listening to Jesus’ words and willingly doing as he commands.

But … we can not lapse into easy moralism. It is never the case that the upright and moral get to be with God – that is not the definition of goodness. Neither is it that the outcast and unlawful are excluded from God – that is not the definition of evil. This sermon of Jesus comes after the narrative has already shown us real life examples of good and evil.

Who were the wrongdoers? Pharisees! There was never such a clean-living bunch of people, devoted (they thought) to things of God. In Jesus’ assessment: wrongdoers.

Those who did well were people like Peter (‘depart from me, I am a sinful man’ 5:8), tax-collector Levi, and Levi’s crowd of guests (‘tax-collectors and sinners’ 5:30). Jesus’ definition of good and bad bypasses usual human judgements. Jesus’ definition is entirely about himself: ‘good’ equals listening to Jesus’ word and doing it.

As we get to the end of Luke chapter six, we are all people who have heard Jesus’ words. The challenge remains: will we do what Jesus says, or will be be evil?

 


 

What will you do? Luke 5-6 (a)

1 Reply

Luke 5-6 has a concentrated attack of ‘doing’. In fact, there are two sections of ‘doing’ (5:29-6:11 and 6:23-49). This post deals with the first section, which narrates events. A future post will pick up from 6:23, which is concentrated teaching from Jesus.

(If interested in Greek, doing refers to words related to ποιεω. If you’re not into Greek but are aware of controversy about drugs in sport, think of the red blood cell booster EPO. EPO increases erythropoiesis, literally ‘red-making’ or ‘red-doing’. Doing is the -poiesis part.)

Luke’s use of doing is hard to capture in good English: that is, in any of our Bible translations. So here it is in bad English:

  • Levi did a great feast (5:29)
  • John’s disciples do prayers (5:33)
  • Can’t make guests do a fast (5:34)
  • Why are you doing …? (6:2)
  • What David did (6:3)
  • To do good (6:9)
  • To do evil (6:9)
  • He did so (6:10)
  • What they might do (6:11)

There’s a whole lot of action as disciples and beneficiaries of Jesus respond to him. As the frenzy of activity increases, so too does the shadow of opposition. In particular, the Pharisees turn up everywhere (5:17, 30, 33; 6:2, 7). As their opposition rises, Jesus asked a very important doing question in 6:9 – is it lawful to do good or to do bad?

That’s not a difficult question! And it succeeds in unmasking Jesus’ opponents. They become furious, and plan what they will do to Jesus (Luke 6:11). Luke reports this plan in a quite open-ended manner, compared with both Matthew and Mark. The other two gospel writers name the plan as ‘destruction’ (Mark 3:6, Matthew 12:14). Luke, in keeping with his developed language of doing, gives a subtle but clear indication of the Pharisees’ misdoing.

Luke’s apparent gentleness is dangerous for us as readers. As Luke raises the matter of ‘what will we do with Jesus?’, we realise it’s also the question for today. What will I do? What am I doing? I could follow, or I could become furious. Reading the gospel is always the right start, but it is never the finish.

What will you do with Jesus? Will you do good, or will you do evil?

 


 

A Christian’s worst enemy

Leave a Reply

A Christian’s worst enemy is usually another Christian.

By this, I don’t mean sinful gossip or slander. Nor have I in mind deliberate violent action. I have in mind the casual put-down, the conversational mockery, the throw-away snub.

Here’s one that’s typical. It’s modified to highlight the standard pattern, and because the original source is irrelevant.

While most Christians stay silent about [real social problem], [cultural identity] doesn’t.

[Real social problem] might be: poverty, mental health, racism, ecology, trade injustice, etc.
[Cultural identity] can be: an author, an NGO, a different religion, schools, etc.

The pattern is all over the place. I’ve seen it in Christian publication, book reviews, blogs, guest speaker introductions, magazines and probably a dozen places I will never remember.

And I hate it.

Why? So many reasons! (Time for that famous blog format – a list.)

  1. It’s smug
    ‘I’m not like all those other Christians – I see the problem.’
  2. It’s slander
    Unless, of course, you have some reason to show that the church was overwhelmingly different from society (different in a bad way). If you are an expert, shoot live rounds. If you really don’t know, then hold fire
  3. It hates what God loves
    If Revelation shows us anything about human organisations, it’s that the church survives while all other forces die. And the church survives with joy and beauty. The wedding supper of the lamb (Revelation 19:6-9) has a guest list to die for – Jesus did and his followers continue to
  4. It lacks faith
    When I search my life – and yours too! – as well as look at churches, I remain unimpressed. Such a mess we make… Yet the bride of Revelation 19 is dressed in white linen for good works. These works are given by and empowered by God. God promises to complete his work of making a holy people. Do we trust our sight or his promise, our own power or his Spirit?
  5. It’s such casual hatred
    If you hate Christians, at least be honest. Rant and rave and express the outrage at whatever sins we’ve committed. Or be fair dinkum like some of the atheist opponents of all things ‘god.’ Please don’t fall for the casual, ‘Yeah, Christians are mostly losers’

Who knows the effect of such regular casual put-downs? This way of speaking of fellow Christians surely cannot spur us to Christ-imitating self-sacrificial love for God’s children. I can’t see it moving us to lay down our lives for the brothers (1 John 3:16).

So, the testing question for author and reader: how do you speak of God’s people?

 


 

Empty tomb ethics

Leave a Reply

The centre of Christianity is Jesus: his life, death, resurrection and present rule. But this is not the only thing Christians speak about – far from it.

It’s probably true that Christians spend more time speaking about ethics than anything else. (I’m using ‘ethics’ broadly to cover any thoughts about how to live.) This is true in the public arena, as well as privately over coffee after church. Public examples range from well-known Christians (denominational leaders, say) to specific lobby groups like the Australian Christian Lobby (http://www.acl.org.au/).

In this post, I am not going to critique how well Christians do at public ethics-talk. I have a different aim: to claim that all our ethical talk must include the empty tomb of Jesus, otherwise it’s not Christian at all.

The empty tomb of Jesus is the powerful demonstration the Jesus really is the Son of God (Romans 1:4). Despite the shameful cursedness of Jesus’ cross – even through this curse – Jesus greatness remains: Jesus is Lord. The empty tomb changes everything, including the shape of life.

Empty tomb ethics
I think there are (at least) two factors that link ethics and the empty tomb.

  1. To crush evil, God had to defeat death itself
    God had to do this personally, in the person of Jesus the Son. No one else was capable of facing sin’s deadly sting with purity sufficient to remove the poison of that sting.
  2. In defeating death itself, God overwhelmingly crushed evil
    What’s the worst that could have happened to Jesus? The worst was to be handed over to evil men and condemned to an unjust death. That worst thing happened, yet God prevailed.

The first of these points makes it crystal clear: evil and sin are a big deal. The evil act of any person is death. No evil is ever trivial or can be shrugged off as of no account. If God went to that extent to crush evil, we have no permission to be blasé about our wrongs (or anyone else’s).

In other words, Christians must speak about ethics, including placing a spotlight on wrong. If we go soft, we do a disservice to the empty tomb and the astounding completed work of Jesus.

The second of these points is the wonderful glimmer of hope defeating the blackness of sin. God won the victory, therefore sin will not have the victory. More than that, since God won the victory, sin cannot triumph.

In consequence, all Christian talk of ethics must also include hope. Sin-talk that functions as a blunt-instrument attack is not consistent with the empty tomb. Sin-talk is serious, but always looks to the transformation God promises to those who have been raised with Christ.

For instance
To take one sin for an example, consider the greed for ‘stuff’ so prevalent in affluent Australia.

The empty tomb shows how useless is possession of the latest gadget, or fastest car, or shiniest house. The pursuit of these is a pathetic effort at self-definition. It spurns Jesus’ victory over sin by pushing it aside. ‘I’d much rather get a flat-screen TV than have union Christ who rose as the Son of God.’ We should name greed for the sin it is.

Yet there is hope. Once convicted of this failing, the greedy one can be sure: if s/he stops the pursuit of stuff, life will not end. There will be no loss of identity, but possession of true identity in Jesus! Change and transformation and resurrection life are real today. The sinner, therefore, is not left downcast but is lifted up to where Christ is seated in the heavenly realms. Life changes – and that is empty tomb ethics.