Subscribe!

In case you missed the article in the print edition of Leadership journal, Skye Jethani's "Glimpses of Glory" is now an abbreviated post on Out of Ur. I'd love for you to take a look at what he has to say and then make your way back to the PT Blog to leave a comment or two in reflection. Does Skye have a point about the difference between preaching and teaching? How does this challenge the dichotomy we've often created between visionary preaching and "regular" expository preaching? Is this something you've been wrestling with as a preacher? If not, how would you contest Skye's thoughts? If you have been, how has this challenged and even changed you as a preacher?

Hopefully you've been able to check out the Preaching Today interview with Kent Carlson and Mike Lueken on preaching for spiritual formation. Mark your calendars: the second part comes out this Friday. In the meantime here's something from the cutting room floor...

How did the topic of spiritual formation in preaching become important to you?

Kent: Our interest in preaching for spiritual formation is directly related to the story of our church. We were a seeker-targeted church that had experienced rather rapid growth in our area. We were having great fun and, in terms of attendance and decisions for Christ, were experiencing great success. By 2000, we were finally in our first permanent, large building, so we no longer had facility demands. This gave us flexibility to evaluate where we were and listen more carefully to what God was saying.

In his workshop "The Three Questions of Preaching," Colin Smith examines three questions that guide the preacher toward Christian expository preaching. One of the key questions he lists is, "Does the sermon say what the text says?" Smith argues that if the preacher's answer is an honest "yes," the sermon is more than likely an expository one. He then offers a personal illustration about his coming close to abusing a text from the Book of Micah. In the original recording, he goes a step further to offer another personal illustration that includes a fascinating word about the dangers of topical preaching. I'd love to hear your thoughts about the concern he raises in the quote below:

FaithVisuals has just posted a provocative interview with Shane Hipps (author of The Hidden Power of Electronic Culture: How Media Shapes Faith, the Gospel, and Church). The conversation is guided by this centering question: "Is video technology in church manipulative?" At the midway point, Hipps – who has a history in the world of marketing and advertising – makes this observation about the use of media:

Visual multimedia are probably the favorite medium of the greatest manipulators in world history: advertisers. And I know because I was one! One of the things we discovered was that the absolute best way to move people against their better judgment was through emotion, not reason. Everything we did was to try and give emotional experiences, evoke emotional impressions, and basically ignore the nuts and bolts of the superiority of our product.

As I write about my current preaching, I find myself feeling defensive, defensive because my current series is topical and I am committed to biblical preaching, as are the Preaching Today family of resources. But as someone has said, biblical preaching is true to Scripture and true to life. Topical preaching can be solidly biblical and expositional, but topical preaching is a label that is often used with disdain because topical preaching has been abused.

Actually one practical reason I try to avoid topical preaching is, I don't have time to do it well (I'm a bivocational pastor).