Never Trust “An Old Preacher”

He said unto him, I am a prophet also as thou art; and an angel spake unto me by the word of the Lord, saying, Bring him back with thee into thine house, that he may eat bread and drink water. But he lied unto him.
~ 1 Kings 13:18

I heard an old preacher say …

Illustrations can be fun, illuminating, interesting, inspiring, and memorable. People will remember a really good illustration long after they’ve forgotten the sermon. I guess good illustrations are like grandma’s homemade meatloaf; it’ll stick to your ribs. It’s no wonder preachers love to get a hold of a really good illustration.

But, what about when illustrations go wrong? Or, how can illustrations go wrong? I can think of a few ways I’ve seen illustrations bite the hand that feeds them. It’s a problem when an illustration takes prominence over the exposition. When an illustration becomes the main point of the sermon, the cat is serving its owner. Illustrations are problematic when preachers spend more time searching for illustrations than searching the Scriptures for understanding of what God has actually said. But, I want to focus on perhaps the most crucial way an illustration can go wrong.

Prepare to be Shocked

When a preacher preaches to a congregation, they generally expect him to be telling the truth and take what he says to be the truth. In other words, a preacher usually gets the benefit of the doubt. One of the worst train wrecks of illustrations is when they are not true. I realize illustrations will sometimes come from fictional stories to illustrate a point. Generally, that is fine as long as the preacher is not trying to pass it off as some true account. I’m thinking, here, more along the lines of semi-biographical stories that happened to you or someone you heard about. I am also thinking about illustrations from history. Let me illustrate.

Several years ago I was listening to a sermon online and the sermon crescendoed with an illustration drawn from the 1836 Battle of the Alamo. It was a remarkable story well-delivered. It’s funny that I don’t remember what the sermon was about, but I do remember this illustration. The preacher stressed certain details, as they were important to the point he was making. I listened with great interest, though I must confess it was more historical interest than biblical interest. I was only vaguely familiar with the history of this battle and the story was fascinating.

Whenever I hear a story like this, I immediately wonder if it’s true. As frequently happens to me, I was plunged into a lot of reading about the Alamo to understand the history. The key details and, in fact, the crux of his illustration are unconfirmed historically. There were very, very few survivors from within the Alamo, so establishing exactly what happened there was difficult. Though some of the details he shared were new to me, I discovered they are a part of the common mythos of the battle. So he didn’t just make stuff up, but was likely retelling what he had heard or read somewhere. Even though it was likely unintentional, he repeated a story that was untrue, or at least suspect and unconfirmed.

This may seem a minor point. Some would say it’s no problem since the point he was making with the illustration was true. We have to have a higher standard for the pulpit than that. I would hope preachers would never want to lie intentionally, but I equally hope they do not want to lie unintentionally either. If we play fast and loose with the facts of a historical account, how can we be trusted with the facts of Scripture? You will lose credibility by stretching the truth with illustrations.

Let’s Have Tall Standards Not Tales

I recently listened to another sermon online featuring a powerful illustration. In fact, it became apparent early on that the entire sermon was built around this particular illustration. The illustration was also a historical event, though not as well known as the Alamo. He started the illustration by saying he heard this story from an old preacher.

Like I often do in such situations, I listened to the account with interest and immediately wondered if it was true. I had never heard of it before, so I searched to see what I could find. Immediately, I saw that this illustration had been used by a wide variety of preachers for a number of years. I found it used in articles and devotions online. This fact tells us a couple of things right away. First, if the illustration has been used a lot in sermons, it’s probably best not to use it. At the least, it makes your sermon stale and it could be worse. Second, if the illustration has been used extensively by unorthodox preachers, you will be associating yourself with them in some ways. That would be undesirable.

Not only did a search find numerous retellings of this particular story, but comparing them yielded widely varying details of the story. This is a red flag for the veracity of an account. Searching also revealed that quite a number of people had obviously been trying to verify this story, another bad sign. I searched around for a while and could not find any substantial verification for this story. I didn’t find it on Snopes, but my initial conclusion would be this story is a cultic urban legend. It probably has some kernels of truth it began with, but has been so exaggerated and embellished that it hardly bares any resemblance to the original.

Once again, the preacher has lied to people, though it was probably unintentional. With the technology we have today, there is really no excuse for not verifying your illustrations from history. If you are going to use an illustration from history, at least make sure it is a reliable account. More could be said about this instance, but it teaches us another valuable lesson. Just because you heard an older preacher tell a story, don’t assume it’s true and use it in your own sermon. If it’s a story that’s supposed to be true, you need to verify it before using it or don’t use it. Again, we have to have a higher standard for the pulpit than a motivational speaker who doesn’t much care about the truthfulness of their illustrations. They’re only interested in the effect.

Der Über Prediger

There is no new thing under the sun.
~ Ecclesiastes 1:9

The Superman character first appeared in the early 1930s and went through a number of iterations before coming out of that decade as something recognizable today. While the canonical history of the iconic character is a diverting and fascinating study, accounts of the concept and development of the famous costume are tenuous. You know, the cape and boots and all that.

The cape can be easily accounted for, given that Superman is not gravity-bound, but rather flies through the air. The fittedness of the costume, I suppose, is necessary for good aerodynamics. Bright red boots seem inadvisable, but to each his own and all. The strongly curious choice is the briefs over the leg wear. Why is that?

Again, canonical history doesn’t give us much to go on. I have heard one apocryphal account of it. Lore has it that once upon a time Superman challenged Mr. Chuck Norris to a fight. Allegedly, Norris agreed to the contest on the terms that the loser had to wear his underwear on the outside of his pants. We will have to await critical scholarship to affirm.

In the meantime, something is off in Superman’s wardrobe. We might as easily think that he was in a hurry and got the order of things wrong. I’m unfamiliar with the strictures of wardrobe education on Krypton, but in America we recognize a certain order present in the inherent meanings of the terms underwear and outerwear. I suppose someone from another planet, who is also a fictional character, is allowed certain liberties in the dress code inaccessible to us humans.

Preachers are not Supermen

It wouldn’t make much sense to ask Superman how he runs faster than a speeding bullet, or leaps tall buildings in a single bound. It would be like asking a dog how it barks. It just does. He just does. There is no formula or step-by-step process. He just jumps over the building. You might call it a gift, or an ability, but we would usually call it a superpower.

Preachers are just ordinary Christians and ordinary men. They are to be exemplary ordinary Christians, but still, just ordinary Christians. There are only two requirements in the Bible that distinguish them. They must not be novices (1 Timothy 3:6) and they must have a gift for teaching (1 Timothy 3:2). The word for “novice” means newly come and it isn’t a blanket restriction against being young. It means they cannot be an immature, new convert. They cannot be unknowledgeable in the Scripture.

Being “apt to teach” (1 Timothy 3:2) means being skilled in teaching. It refers to a man’s ability to understand the Word of God and explain and apply it to others in order that they understand it. Paul describes it in Titus 1:9 as holding to faithful teaching, and teaching faithful truth to exhort and convince those who contradict sound teaching. Paul also described aptness to teach in his second letter to Timothy as meekly and patiently giving instruction (2 Timothy 2:24-25).

Is this gifting a skill or a superpower? That may seem a strange question to ask, but let me explain. A skill is an aptitude or an ability that can be used, trained, and grown. A superpower is a supernatural endowment. Superman has superhuman strength. He sees a bus full of passengers teetering on the edge of a cliff and he simply swoops down, picks up the bus, and sets it down on level ground safely. That’s a power not a skill. Let me illustrate it another way. If a person has aptitude in math, that means they have the ability to understand and learn difficult concepts and then apply them. Having honed their skill in math, they could be presented with a complex problem and use their skill to work through it and solve it. Contrast this with a supposed math superpower. The superpower would mean that the problem would be solved instantly just by looking at it.

The difference should be obvious. A teaching gift is not a superpower. A preacher does not just walk up to the pulpit, grab a Bible, and then deliver an excellent sermon. The root of the word for “apt to teach” is related to words that mean orderly, or systematic, instruction. Implicit in the word is the idea of labor in preparation. Paul describes this work in 1 Timothy 4 as requiring all of a man’s energies where he toils to the point of exhaustion. He instructed churches to give double pay to those who especially labored hard in this work (1 Timothy 5:17). Simply put, preaching is hard work, really hard work. Preachers are not supermen.

Plain White Cotton

Why make a point of all this? Though it may seem unnecessary, I have seen much confusion on this issue. Some people have the idea a preacher goes into the study like Moses ascending the mountain, only to emerge in like manner, not with stone tablets but with a three-point alliterated sermon, likewise written by the finger of God and given to the preacher. I’m almost convinced some preachers think that’s what is happening as well.

Sermons are not just handed to preachers for them to deliver. That would not be a teaching gift, but rather a gift of revelation. That is a crucial distinction to realize. If God is simply giving a message to a preacher to deliver, that is not a preaching gift, but it is revelation. The preacher then is a prophet delivering a “Thus saith the Lord” to the people just like Isaiah when he received special revelation to give to Ahaz. Preachers do not receive special revelation (1 Corinthians 13:8-10), but rather are tasked with expounding the complete revelation that has already been given (2 Timothy 3:16-17; 4:1-5).

Preachers perpetuate this confusion when they say things like, “God gave me this message.” If by that you mean that you have received special revelation, then do not speak it because you have immediately contradicted God’s Word. If you do not mean that you have received special revelation, then stop saying that you have. If a preacher says he had a message and only needed to find a text to preach it from, then you better check his trousers to ensure they are thoroughly on the outside. I realize some preachers are kind of like Superman in that they have the power to leap over a text in a single bound without touching it. However, if a preacher unbuttons his shirt, the only thing you should see is plain white cotton.

Was Jesus an Expositor?

And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Isaiah. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written, The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
~ Luke 4:17-19

One of the key expectations for the Messiah when he came, was that he would be a preacher. The prophecy in Isaiah 61:1-2 foretold the anointed Servant of Yahweh would “preach good tidings,” “proclaim liberty,” and “proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD.” When Jesus went to the synagogue in Nazareth in the early part of his Galilean ministry, he read those words from Isaiah (Luke 4:16-19), and then sat down and said, “This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears” (Luke 4:21). He made an open declaration he was the anointed Servant of Yahweh who was sent to preach God’s word to Israel.

Jesus’ ministry clearly focused on preaching. Mark introduced Jesus’ Galilean ministry with, “Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God” (Mark 1:14). Jesus had drawn large crowds early on as people were astounded with the authority of his preaching and words (Mark 1:22, 27). The crowds wanted him to stay in Capernaum, but Jesus told his disciples, “Let us go into the next towns, that I may preach there also: for therefore came I forth” (Mark 1:38). Jesus also performed many miracles, but he said those signs were a confirmation of his preaching (John 10:37-38). Preaching was the centerpiece of Jesus’ ministry throughout. On the eve of his crucifixion he taught his disciples in the upper room. The Upper Room Discourse is recorded in John 13-16, and is one the lengthiest passages of Jesus’ preaching, along with the Sermon on the Mount. He preached to his disciples that night, and would then be arrested, tried, and killed the next day.

There can be no question that Jesus preached, and preached a lot. So, the question we do have is: What type of preacher was Jesus? I have seen various attempts to categorize Jesus’ preaching. Some say he was a storyteller and point to his parables and illustrations. Some say he was a polemical preacher and point to his interactions with, and denunciations of, the Pharisees. Some have even attempted to make the case Jesus was a humorist in his preaching. What kind of preacher was he?

What all kinds of preaching are there?

A. J. Kirkland in his brief little book, Methods in Sermonizing, listed seven different types of sermons: topical expository, persuasive, question, analogy, synthesis, analysis, and commentary. Other homiletic books refer to three types of sermons: expository, textual, and topical. Others have different categories. Categorizing sermons could go on indefinitely, but a study of history reveals the idea of different “types” of sermons as relatively recent.

John Broadus wrote about a text, meaning a passage of Scripture as the material preached, in his book on preaching, A Treatise on the Preparation and Delivery of Sermons.

The history of the word [text], like that of homiletics, points back to the fact, which is also well known otherwise, that preaching was originally expository. The early Christian preachers commonly spoke upon passages of considerable length, and occupied themselves largely with exposition. 1

J. W. Alexander likewise points out preaching historically was the expounding of a passage of Scripture. He notes it was from the thirteenth to the fifteenth century that preaching from shorter, isolated passages developed, and also the practice of preaching on subjects without any text. 2 It is interesting that this development coincided with the dividing of Scripture books into chapters (1227) and verses (1551).

John Broadus went on to explain the meaning of taking a text to preach.

It is manifest that to take a text gives a tone of sacredness to the discourse. But more than this is true. The primary idea is that the discourse is a development of the text, an explanation, illustration, application of its teachings. 3

Broadus wrote that preaching from a text was “a development of the text, an explanation, illustration, application of its teachings.” Writing this, he described expository preaching. This does not mean a subject can’t be preached, but it does mean the subject must be preached from the text in its contextual meaning. Broadus went on to write about preaching subjects.

Our business is to teach God’s word. And although we may often discuss subjects, and aspects of subjects, which are not presented in precisely that form by any passage of Scripture, yet the fundamental conception should be habitually retained, that we are about to set forth what the text contains. When circumstances determine the subject to be treated, and we have to look for a text, one can almost always be found which will have some real, though it be a general relation to the subject. If there be rare cases in which it is otherwise, it will then be better to have no text than one with which the subject has only a fanciful or forced connection. 4

I agree with Broadus’ conclusion that it would be better for a preacher to take no text than to take one and give a talk with only a “fanciful or forced connection” with the text. Broadus described the essence of expository preaching, which was historically the only kind of preaching there was. So, having said that, was Jesus an expositor, or expository preacher?

The preaching of Jesus

I’m tempted to rest my whole case on the road to Emmaus. After Jesus upbraided the two on the road for being slow to believe the prophets, i.e., the Scriptures, he preached to them: “beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself” (Luke 24:27). Jesus expounded the Scriptures. The word for expounded is a form of the Greek word, diermēneuō, which means to clarify something so as to make it understandable, explain, interpret (BDAG). We get our English word hermeneutics from the root of that Greek compound.

Jesus explained the meaning of the Scriptures and did not give a talk based on the Scriptures with “only a fanciful or forced connection.” The two later said Jesus “opened to us the scriptures” (Luke 24:32). The word there is dianoigō, which similarly means to explain, interpret (BDAG). Again, the Scriptures were the matter opened, explained, and interpreted.

Jesus’ manner of preaching on the road to Emmaus was not an isolated incident. He was continually explaining the meaning of Scripture.

  • Seven times he asked, “Have ye not read?”
  • 29 times he made reference to what was “written”
  • twelve times he specifically mentioned “scripture,” or “scriptures”
  • He quoted from 19 different Old Testament books
  • Jesus told Satan in the wilderness that man is to live “by every word that proceedeth from the mouth of God” (Matthew 4:4)
  • The last bodily appearance we have of him is in Revelation 1:17-18 and 3:7, where he quotes from Isaiah 44:6 and 22:22

Some may object: But what about the parables? Parables are one of the forms of prophetic judgment ministry with precedents in the ministry of the prophets. Parables themselves are spoken revelation from God. Jesus described his ministry of parables in these terms: “And when he was alone, they that were about him with the twelve asked of him the parable. And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables: That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them” (Mark 4:10-12). Jesus’ parables were a special revelation from God that simultaneously concealed and revealed new covenant truth concerning the kingdom of God. Furthermore, Jesus spoke the parables without explanation to the general crowd, but “expounded” them privately to his disciples (Mark 4:33-34). So Jesus spoke revelation they did not have and then expounded the revelation to his disciples.

Jesus himself was the incarnate Word of God (John 1:1, 14). Through him was given the final revelation of God to men (Hebrews 1:1-2). Jesus clearly explained the words he spoke were not his own, but his father’s words (John 8:26, 28, 38, 40, 43, 47; 12:49; 14:10, 24). At the end of his ministry, Jesus said he had faithfully given the Father’s words (John 17:8, 14). This is the preacher’s job as well, give the words of God to the people. We do not have new revelation to give, so that means we must take the closed-canon of Scripture and preach that Scripture by developing, explaining, illustrating, and applying its contextual meaning. That is expository preaching.


Given all we have looked at thus far: Was Jesus an expositor? I would have to say, No. No he was not an expositor, he was The Expositor. Jesus is the embodiment of the revealed Word of God. He said to know him and see him was to know and see the Father (John 14:7, 9). Jesus continually explained the meaning of God’s Word and that is the task given to all God-gifted preachers (1 Timothy 3:2; 2 Timothy 2:24; 4:2; Titus 1:9).


  1. Broadus, John. A Treatise on the Preparation and Delivery of Sermons (Kindle Locations 367-369). GLH Publishing. Kindle Edition.
  2. Alexander, J. W. Thoughts on Preaching. pp 228-234.)
  3. Broadus, John. A Treatise on the Preparation and Delivery of Sermons (Kindle Locations 379-380). GLH Publishing. Kindle Edition.
  4. Broadus, John. A Treatise on the Preparation and Delivery of Sermons (Kindle Locations 380-385). GLH Publishing. Kindle Edition.

Just Jerry

Then the LORD said unto me, The prophets prophesy lies in my name: I sent them not, neither have I commanded them, neither spake unto them: they prophesy unto you a false vision and divination, and a thing of nought, and the deceit of their heart.
~ Jeremiah 14:14

And how to not be Just Jerry

Every preacher has heard excuses from people for not coming to church. Some are comical and some are just sad. I recently heard one where a person said they didn’t like coming to church on Sunday because Sunday is supposed to be a day of rest and it’s not very restful if they have to get up and come to church. You know the proper response to that excuse, right? The proper response is, “Purple polka-spotted brontosauricorns,” or some approximation thereof. As long as we are going to be arbitrary and just start making stuff up, my response makes as much sense as your excuse. Though we preachers have heard a lot, we occasionally hear a new one.

A couple of years ago I was reading an article where a writer attempted to answer an objection to attending preaching services. This excuse was a new one on me, so I was interested in it. In some ways, it is a more thoughtful objection than the typical dog-ate-my-homework type excuses we get most of the time. As I thought on it, I realized the objection does have some merit and thinking about it has something instructive for preachers. Let me paraphrase the objection.

Why should I go to church and listen to preaching. That’s just some guy named Jerry up there. He’s nothing special. He got beat up on the playground in elementary school. He couldn’t climb the rope in gym class. He barely passed algebra. He has worked at flipping burgers, selling mattresses, and now he’s doing this. Why should I listen to him?

The Point of Merit

As far as objections go, this one’s not all bad. The objection does raise a valid point. As long as a preacher is Just Jerry, there is no compelling reason to listen him. As long as a preacher is doing anything other than actually preaching the Bible, he is Just Jerry. If all a preacher does is tell stories, jokes, opinions, observations, random musings, give personal advice, helpful tips, or is ranting, airing grievances, grinding axes, riding hobby horses, etc., he is not preaching the Bible and he is Just Jerry. There is no more reason to listen to him than anyone else. If that’s the kind of preaching you’ve been invited to, you are better off not going to hear it.

The Point of Failure

The objection does have some problems and fails when the preacher is not Just Jerry. When a preacher preaches the word of God accurately and faithfully, he preaches with divine authority and all men everywhere should listen to him. Paul instructed Titus concerning the things of truth, the things of sound doctrine, that he was to “speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority” (Titus 2:15). Titus was to command, as indicated by the word for authority, the people in all things in the Word of God. Paul likewise told Timothy to “command and teach” the same things (1 Timothy 4:11). After speaking of the “inspiration” and efficacy of “all scripture,” Paul charged Timothy to “Preach the word” (2 Timothy 3:16-4:2).

Paul commanded these young preachers that they were to preach with authority by preaching the things Paul had written as well as all scripture. When we preach the Bible, we preach with authority. When we don’t preach the Bible, we don’t preach with authority. We are Just Jerry.

Preaching With Authority

How do we preach with divine authority such that the voice of God is heard in our preaching and all men are compelled to listen and will be called to account for what is preached? We might think the key is in boldness, so we must speak with boldness in order to preach with authority. Boldness would factor in our voice and presence as we preach. Boldness makes us think of fearlessness to say things that will be disliked and maybe even anger some. Preaching is to be with boldness (Ephesians 6:19-20), but that still doesn’t account for the authority of our words. I could be bold on a street corner to command people not to cross the street. Maybe some would listen, but I have no authority to give such a command and men are under no obligation to listen to it. They won’t be called before the magistrate to give an account of why they did not heed my command. Authority must go beyond the person of the preacher, or else the preacher is Just Jerry.

There are only two ways to preach with authority. First, to preach with authority we must receive a direct revelation from God and deliver that revelation as it was received. This would be like with the prophets of old who heard the voice of God and were tasked with telling the word received to the people. The prophet would often declare, “Thus saith the Lord.” God does not give us such direct revelation today because he gave us his final revelation in his Son and his apostles have written that down for us. So, we don’t preach with authority today by telling people what God spoke to us or revealed to us in a dream. We have only one way then to preach with authority.

The second way we preach with authority is by accurately explaining and applying the very words of God as they were given in his word, the Bible. As long as we are preaching the Bible, meaning we are explaining the contextual meaning of the word as given, we are preaching with authority. In Numbers 14:1-38, we read of Israel provoking God to anger by their refusal to hear his word through his servant Moses and their rebellion against him by their murmuring and desire to stone Moses, Aaron, Joshua, and Caleb. God promised and later brought his judgment on them because they would not hear his voice.

Centuries later, David referred to this incident in Numbers 14 when he wrote Psalm 95:1-11. He refers to it as an exhortation to Israel in his day and commanded them to hear the voice of God “today” (Psalm 95:7-8). Still many centuries later, the writer of Hebrews refers to the Psalm of David, which refers to Numbers 14, and exhorts those he was writing to to hear God’s voice “today” (Hebrews 3:7-19). To put it bluntly, both David and the writer of Hebrews used the words of Scripture to their contemporary audience and exhorted them to hear God’s voice. That is preaching with authority. That is preaching that must be heard and for which men will have to give account before God.

So, preach with authority. Preach the Bible. Don’t be Just Jerry with something to say.

The Preaching Secret

And the king of Israel said unto Jehoshaphat, There is yet one man, by whom we may enquire of the LORD: but I hate him; for he never prophesied good unto me, but always evil: the same is Micaiah the son of Imla.
~ 2 Chronicles 18:7

How to not lose friends and anger people.

If you set about the preaching task with determined assiduity, it’s going to happen. You are going to say something that upsets someone, and maybe many someones. After this happens, if you still have the ginger to declare, “Thus saith the Lord,” it will happen again. Just to be clear, I’m not referring to times when the preacher goes off script and pours out offenses on the congregation. I’m talking about when you are preaching a hard passage. If you are determined to preach what the Bible says, as the Bible says it, you will run into hard passages.

Preaching Hard Passages

By hard passages, I don’t mean passages hard to understand like Ezekiel’s wheels. I’m referring to passages that are hard to explain publicly for different reasons. Some passages are hard because they deal with delicate or sensitive subject matter, like some of the laws in Leviticus, events in Judges, the strange woman in Proverbs, the entire Song of Solomon, Isaiah’s ministry of nakedness, etc. Some passages are hard because they deal with a widely debated subject that the congregation could be divided over, like marriage and divorce, women in church, etc. Some passages are hard because they tip sacred cows and rebuke cherished traditions. Some passages are hard because they address some recent or historic problem within the congregation. Varying circumstances could make a passage hard to preach in that place and time. Of course, you have to allow for the outliers, like when you’ve preached some genealogy from the Chronicles and Sister Sally stomps out in a huff afterward. Sometimes you won’t know a passage is hard until after you’ve preached it, because it will step right on someone’s pet sin and they might accuse you of spying on them.

We need to know how to preach such passages without upsetting people. That’s the secret, but we will get to that in a moment. First, let’s think about some wrong ways of preaching hard passages that you’ve probably seen before.

  1. Evasive maneuvers
    This strategy simply tries to avoid hard passages. If you’re a random, shotgun preacher, you can pick your way around the Bible and avoid any passages that will cause trouble. The downside to this strategy is that any length of time using it will stunt the growth of the congregation by leaving them malnourished in the Word, and it will also not fulfill the ministry you’ve been called to for preaching all the counsel of God.
  2. Selective hearing
    This strategy relies on parallel passages in the Bible. Sometimes a passage has a parallel passage in another book and sometimes the parallel doesn’t have the troubling word or phrase. The preacher can select the innocuous version and still deal with the general subject while acting like that other passage doesn’t exist. One of the downsides here is that the congregation probably knows that other passage is there and their interest was piqued when they discovered the subject, because they wanted to know how the troubling parts were to be dealt with. The preacher who doesn’t even acknowledge the difficulty loses credibility with the congregation and his argument is weakened.
  3. Bait and switch
    This strategy involves warming up the crowd with strong expressions of how controversial your subject matter is and how hated you will be for daring to utter it publicly. You have to sell it, “Y’all will probably run me out of here after you hear what I have to say.” That’s the bait and the switch comes in when the preacher proceeds to preach something that congregation well knows and believes. Not only will they not be upset, but they will be cheering him on. The biggest downside here is that you’re not being honest. You’ve made it out like you’re playing the man before Bloody Mary, but really you’ve only preached to the choir and might get the fellowship hall named after you.
  4. The revelation
    This strategy involves properly setting up a message likely to offend by lengthy explanation that the preacher has been given a message from God and has no choice but to deliver it. Various phrases are employed: God gave me this message, God told me to preach this, the Lord laid this on my heart, etc. Effort is made to let the preacher off the hook for delivering a hard message because he was only the messenger. There are a few downsides here. The blow is never really softened in these situations and the preacher only sought to cover himself for a message designed to upset. Aside from this, the preacher has purchased cover for himself at the expense of preaching serious error. When he prefaces his message by saying God has given it to him in some way, he has denied the sufficiency of Scripture and the closed canon. He has dared to speak revelation to the people and the looming threats of Revelation 22:18-19 hover near.

What is the Secret?

Now we’ve come to it. How do we preach hard passages without upsetting people? First of all, we must preach hard passages if we are to preach all Scripture, which is the duty of the faithful preacher. We must understand there is no getting out of it. Second, preaching the whole counsel of God will upset people. Have you read the Bible? God’s Word tends to upset people and when people are upset, they tend to lash out. Since there is a great gulf and they’re unable to grab and pillory God himself, they will do the next best thing. They will seize his preacher and do what they will with him. Read the lives of the prophets and apostles. People got upset when those men spoke the Word of God.

We do want to avoid unnecessary offense and we do want to help the people we preach to. What is the secret for preaching hard passages in the most helpful way? The answer is: expository preaching. Expository preaching is preaching the meaning of a passage in its context. Topical exposition is preaching a subject from selected passages that explains those passages in their context. Sequential exposition is going verse-by-verse through a single passage in a sermon, or through a book in a series of messages. Expository preaching seeks to make the meaning of God’s words plain. Expository preaching endeavors to show people what God has said and meant in the words he inspired to be written.

People will still disagree and get upset with the preaching of hard passages. However, when you demonstrate care for God’s Word and care for their souls in carefully expounding the Spirit’s words, you will have credibility and do the congregation good in the long run.

Coffee May Be Hot

For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
~ 1 Corinthians 1:22

At least, I hope so.

Before iced coffee was a thing, there was a spilled cup of coffee and a lawsuit. Aside from millions of dollars, the lawsuit resulted in a more prominent warning label on cups: “Caution: Handle With Care I’m Hot.” The very cup that was spilled had a warning imprinted on it: “Caution: Contents Hot.” That warning was deemed insufficient, so a larger, bolder, more obvious warning had to be used.

I am referring to the 1994 Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants suit, perhaps one of the most famous product liability civil suits. The lawsuit became the darling of politicians stumping for tort reform and decrying frivolous lawsuits. It has been the subject of special reports and the butt of many jokes. The woman in the case was severely burned. She was hospitalized for over a week, followed by two years of treatments for her injuries. Nothing about the burn injuries suffered by a woman in her seventies is funny. It’s awful.

McDonald’s refused all attempts at settlement out of court, resulting in the court case and the large compensatory and punitive damages awarded, which made this case so famous. McDonald’s had not broken any laws that governed their coffee service. The case was about whether the restaurant chain had taken sufficient measures to ensure the safety of their customers and the extent of their liability in personal injuries resulting from the use of their product. That’s where the warning labels come in and warning labels can be funny.

Some labels seem too absurd to be true. Some signs make us wonder about the story behind them. You know somebody tried the ridiculous thing the sign tells you not to do. The packaging for iron-on transfers for t-shirts often includes a warning about not ironing clothes while wearing them. Somebody, somewhere, probably did that.

Not the Problem

Warning signs can be helpful, can be the result of self-protection, and sometimes can be an attempt to fix a problem without dealing with the real problem. The picture with this post is of a hand-written sign taped to the inside of the door of a small pedestrian bathroom in an office building. The author of the sign attempted to give instructions on locking and unlocking the door. The instructions were somehow not sufficiently clear, so trouble was taken to manually revise the verbiage.

I don’t know the story behind this sign, but it amuses me to speculate about it. The door knob has a push-button lock. It is not a safety knob, so a key is required on the outside to unlock it. My three-year-old can operate push-button locks, so why do we need written instructions for adults? Most push-button locks operate only one way. You push the button in to lock the door and twist the knob to unlock the door and open it.

This particular doorknob is a little different. If you push the button straight in, it operates like all normal push-button locks. However, if you push the button in and turn the button to the right, the door will open when you turn the knob from the inside, but will stay locked. You then have to use the key to open it from the outside. I’m sure this happened quite often and is why the sign was made, put on the door, and later revised for clarity. I imagine the author of the sign grew tired of going to the door and finding it locked, though no one was inside. He probably also tired of interruptions when people came to him about the locked door. He wearied of hearing everyone’s complaints about the door, so he made a sign.

That sign, after the edits, may have purchased him some peace, but does it really address the problem. What is the real problem? Office workers complaining? Needing to use the facility and finding the door locked? While those are problems, they are not the real problem. The real problem is that door knob. The additional feature of turning the button to keep it locked is unnecessary and makes the lock confusing to operate, or at least easy to leave locked by mistake. The sign is not a real solution. It’s like covering a hole in the wall with a picture. A real solution to the real problem would be to change the doorknob to one that works the way that is needed.

Churches and Pastors

If some piece of furniture is in the way and people are always bumping into it, you could paint a yellow boundary around it on the floor and hang up signs warning people to be careful. This would reduce the number of bumps and if anyone still bumps into it, you can at least rest easy knowing you’ve warned them about it and it’s their fault if they get a bruise. Or, you could step back and try to get to the root of the problem. Maybe the piece doesn’t need to be there and could be moved out of the way. Maybe the walking traffic could be re-routed some other way away from it.

Problems abound in churches and too often we attempt artificial fixes like signs, and not the kind usually accompanied by wonders. Maybe the spirit of our services is too dull, our evangelism is lagging, our people are apathetic, the attendance is down, participation is down, etc. We are doing nothing more in these cases than tacking up a sign when we just spruce up the service with lively songs, make emotional appeals for more giving, or implement programs. Churches love to hang a program over every hole in the wall.

As pastors, it’s easy to be so wearied that we just want the problems to go away. It’s tempting to find quick fixes or go ahead and grease that squeaky wheel. Pastors need to be able to get to the root of problems and address them appropriately. Maybe evangelism is waning because the church has drifted away from a Gospel focus and centeredness. The answer is not a shiny new evangelism program to get everybody excited, but rather a return to Christ and him crucified. Maybe the church needs a clearer Gospel presentation and permeation of everything the church does.

It would have been easy for the Apostles to just want the complaining to stop in the problem with the widows in the Jerusalem church. Instead, they got to the root of the problem and addressed it at the root in Acts 6:1-6. Rather than just easing their headaches, the Apostles led the church in actions resulting in the growth and better health of the church (Acts 6:7). The real problem was not that widows were being neglected, though that was a problem. The real problem was not that Hellenists were complaining. The real problem was that the Apostles were so overworked with what they were trying to do, the congregation was not being served as it needed to be (Acts 6:1-2). The solution was to appoint other men over that matter and free up the Apostles to focus on the ministry they were called to (Acts 6:3-4).

Just because somebody is complaining about something doesn’t mean that something is a problem. Pastors must not only deal with symptoms and hang up warning signs. Pastors must get to the root of problems and address them in ways most beneficial to the long term health and growth of the church. Pastors must also remember they have been given to the church to mature the saints and equip them for serving (Ephesians 4:11-12). Sometimes we really do need to be careful because the coffee is hot, or the knife is sharp. Sometimes we need to change the doorknob, or rearrange the furniture. We always need to find the real problem and apply the appropriate solution that keeps the church being about what the church is supposed to be about.

« Previous PageNext Page »