My pastor Tope Koleoso now has a Twitter page which has some fantastic things on it, including some quotes about preaching from my Liam Goligher interview.

During the rest of my blog break keep an eye on Tope's Twitter page. You may also want to follow the new Jubilee Church news/blog page and the Jubilee Church Vimeo Channel, or if you prefer the Youtube Jubilee Church page.

I just couldn't resist another interuption to my break to share with you the following article Tope recently wrote:

“Do it from the heart, or don’t do it at all”
Tope Koleoso
As I preached on Easter Sunday, about the resurrection, a 10 year old boy (Jake Bennett) who was in the congregation, whispered to his grandfather – “why does Tope have to shout when he is preaching”. It is a good question.

I don’t ever shout for effect, for preaching is not acting. I shout because I mount the pulpit to preach with three overriding emotions bubbling up in my soul – Anger, Joy and Love. These three however, have an effect on how I preach.

When I have prepared well, I know the text and the structure of my sermon, but it doesn’t mean that I am ready to preach. It just means that I have a mental understanding of what the text says. Good preaching however, is not just about the science of exegesis. That is too easy and cheap and even a non Christian can probably do a good job of that.

No. Good preaching happens when the Holy Spirit moves the heart of the preacher by the text, the preachers experience, and the “now” Word of God to his soul. All of these move me at an emotional and spiritual level. Emotional because my heart is involved. Spiritual because the Holy Spirit is involved.

This means that during the sermon, any one of the mentioned emotions, (Anger, Joy or Love), spill out without warning or apology. This is because when I am preaching, I am angry at satan and sin, I am joyful about salvation and hope, and I am eager to show the Love of God to the lost.

Therefore, I shout, I laugh, I cry, and I dance. Therefore, I use my voice, my hands, my legs and my eyes. Therefore, I will do it with utter conviction and passion for if I will not do it from the heart, I will not do it at all. Therefore, I engage the crowd, the best I can for I will not be ignored seeing that I carry the greatest message the world has ever heard . . .

READ MORE from Why I Shout When I Preach

Interview With Liam Goligher from Adrian Warnock on Vimeo.

One of my favorite memories from this year's New Word Alive is meeting Liam Goligher. If you only want to watch one video from the event, watch this one. I am thrilled that this is the post I am sharing with you on my sixth blog anniversary (it was the 16th April 2003 when this journey began!)

Liam and I have spoken on the phone before, and from the first call I immediately knew that he was a real defender of the gospel. I heard him preach at NWA, and I was blown away. He has the full package: a thoughtful intelligent approach to the text, relevance, humor with biting illustrations, passion, and a big dose of that hard to measure thing called "anointing." His preaching brought the tangible presence of God and conviction. To be honest, and this is not an exaggeration, I think he is something of a British John Piper.

But it was only in meeting him face-to-face that I realized how much fun he is. We laughed a lot, as well as speaking about many important subjects. This included the need for preachers to let their sermon grip them personally and to pray for the work of the Holy Spirit, which must empower preaching. We also spoke about aspects of the gospel which are under attack and must be vigorously defended.

Liam also spoke about the need to remember to emphasize important aspects like the resurrection, which might not be under attack in the same way. We spoke about my book, and at one point he ribbed me mercilessly, but then was very kind about his own reaction to reading it.

Liam Goligher is the senior pastor of Duke Street Church, Richmond London, which is growing rapidly and currently has around 600 people who attend on a Sunday. Liam is on the committee which organizes New Word Alive, as well as being a regular conference speaker at other events. His preaching is available to listen to free online or to purchase on CD. He is currently preaching on Isaiah in the mornings and Revelation in the evenings.

May God grant us a revival of the kind of Christianity the Doctor is talking about here:

“It is one thing to believe the truth, it is a very different thing to apply it. We did listen, and apply the truth, initially, otherwise we would not be Christians at all. But it is possible for us … to go on, content with just listening to, or reading the truth, and never applying it to ourselves, or examining ourselves in the light of it. Is this not one of the most alarming possibilities in the Christian life?

… read the life of any man who has ever been used of God … in connection with revival, and you will always find that he was a man who had examined himself, and had become alarmed about himself. It has always been the thing that has led him to God and to prayer — his astonishment at himself. But if we do not examine ourselves we will never truly pray, and our lives will be lived entirely on the surface. Now, how little we hear about self-examination! Oh, we believe in having a quiet time, a short reading of Scripture, a hurried prayer, and we have done everything. But where is self-examination? How much talk is there about mortification of the flesh? (Colossians 3:5, Romans 8:13)

… allow the truth to search you … apply it to yourself … preach to yourself … talk to yourself … meditate about these things … bring yourself under conviction …[do] not let yourself escape. But …do not stop at that … allow the Scriptures to lead you to the Lord Jesus Christ, and to the cleansing of His blood. In other words, any Christian who is depressed and morbid and introspective is really failing to apply the doctrine of justification by faith only. If you stop in your sins, if you stop in the dust and the ashes and in the sackcloth, I say, you are not scriptural. You must go on from that and look to Him, and apply again the truth to yourself. You must be certain that you end in a condition of thanksgiving and praise, with a realisation that your sins are covered and blotted out, and that you are renewed, and that you are able to go forward.”

David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Revival (Westchester, Illinois, Crossway Books, 1987), pp. 80-83.

Video of this talk is now available to watch here:

Tim Keller - Preaching the Gospel from Newfrontiers on Vimeo.

Earlier in the week, Tim Keller spoke at a Newfrontiers event. He gave three posts, and I was there taking notes but I am really sorry that this is the first chance I have had to tidy them up for publication. There were over 800 people there to hear him. As usual these notes are colored a bit by my own perceptions, and so do not necessarily reflect exactly what he said.



Perhaps because he was standing just beneath where the Doctor actually preached, he appropriately started by talking about Lloyd-Jones. He told us thaat The Doctor had said it was the fact that no one personality type became a christian that led him to believe. Tim made the point that he himself is really different than Mark Driscoll and they are both different from Terry. There is not one kind of person that evangelical Christianity always appeals to. Keller confessed to being a a cynical person, and said that there are not too many charismatic cynics!



He explained that he was not wanting to build a new foundation for us in our consideration of preaching, just to tweak us with four principles:



1. Preaching must be gospel centered



Tim explained that he had reservations about the popular way we tell the gospel as “two ways to live”. He argued that in Western culture we must make sure people know there are in fact three ways to live.

“God's way” vs “Mans Way” is commonly what we say. But it is more clarifying to show people that we can live in either morality, immorality or the gospel. Or put another way, we can live in religion, irreligion or by grace. He drew this out of the story of the Prodigal son. One son was clearly alienated. The other is compliant and obedient trying to please his father but they were both alienated from the father. Both are lost. You can be lost by obeying God as well as by disobeying God.

We try to be our own savior and lord by running off and doing our own thing or by coming to church and praying, and studying the Bible. If you do that believing that God is now going to have to save you and answer your prayers because of how good you are then Jesus is an example, helper, model but he is not your savior. If you are trying to be your own savior and lord you will say "How dare you let bad things happen to me". If you simply say "come to Jesus and follow him" you are inviting people to become the elder brother.



Tim explained that Romans 1 is about pagans and sex, drugs and rock and roll. But Romans 2 is turned on the people passing judgment on them all. Chapter 1 is the younger brother, 2-3 are the older brother. In the sermon on the mount Jesus says "there are two ways to live" - house on rock or on sand. In the sermon it’s people who pray and people who think they will be heard for their many words who are on the sand. It’s people who give for reward vs. those who do it for no reward. In the sermon the two ways are the "good life" and the way of the gospel. i.e. the sermon is against legalism and religion. I obey therefore I am accepted vs. I am accepted because of the work of Jesus on the cross wholly and completely by grace and so I obey out of that.

Religion brings fear - I have to do this or God will get me. Gospel brings gratitude. There is poise to a gospel person who suffers. If you are religious and suffer then you will be angry at God since you think you have “earnt” his blessing. The gopsel tells us “I am more wicked than I ever dared imagine but I am also more loved than I ever could have imagined.” This brings a bold humility. A religious person is always either smug or despondent.



Some people fear that preaching against legalism won’t help the younger brother. Unless the secular person hears you deconstructing legalism they won’t understand the difference. There is a gracious way to live that doesn't turn you into a Pharisee. This has to be in everything you preach.




2. Preaching must be Christ centered


In order to be gospel centered no matter what the text is about you have to bring people to Jesus. If we are just preaching about how to live your life we are preaching synagogue sermons. We must show people the way to Jesus’ salvation. Our default mode is to go back to self-justification.



Tim then joked, "I'm a Presbyterian so I don't hear God as often as you do"! But went on to tell us how years ago he was reading Romans 1:16 and suddenly a thought came: "He who through preaching is righteous will die a thousand deaths every Saturday night" Tim said “even Presbyterians know where that came from!”

He then explained that we have to bang the gospel into peoples heads continually as Luther said. We must get to Jesus. There is a tendency to think that you give them great information and then they are going to go out into the world and use what you taught them to change their life. BUT instead, he believes sermons should be:




3. Life changing on the spot


Its there in their seats that they will be changed. When Jesus came back from the dead and did a biblical seminar, we are told in Luke 24 that he showed them they didn't know how to read the scripture because the bible is all about him. The theme of covenant, Kingdom, exile, all those themes find their climax in Jesus. E.g. Jesus was exiled for us. When Paul says give, he says "because of what Jesus did for us". His generosity is where our wealth and security is.

I have to see Jesus to change me. When you see Jesus in a new way or sense his salvation this will change you on the spot.




4. Culturally transforming


Christians don't do a good job of this. People who are not believers who hear you need to be persuaded. We say to unbelievers "you're wrong". We believe this and that, you in the world don't, we are right and you are nowhere near right now, let us pray! We are negative and combative and blunt. There is another way to go.

Every culture has some things they hate. In the Middle east they love what the gospel says about sex and hate what it says about forgiveness. Here in London, they hate what we say about sex and love what we says about forgiveness and reconciliation. Some doctrines are found appealing (called “a”), others are seen as offensive (called “b”). If you want to preach “b” doctrines that are disarming, you have to float them on a boat of “a” doctrines. We must preach to win people. A lot of people hate the idea of God as judge and punisher.

Keller cited a Croat theologian who would say something like “Many think of you believe that belief in a God of vengeance and wrath leads to violence. This shows you have never suffered yourself. If you had seen your village ravaged and friends and relatives raped, and males murdered, then if you don't believe in a God who is going to put all things right the only alternative is to pick up the sword yourself and smite the people that did that. The only way to live in peace with enemies is to know that God will be just. If you don't understand that you have lived a very sheltered life.”

Here peacemaking is the “a” doctrine that he floated the “b” doctrine of judgement and justice on.

Tim gave another example of a missionary in Korea who found that when she spoke of sovereignty and predestination in that culture that it was easily acceptable and enabled her to build a bridge to grace which on its own was incomprehensible. Tell them that aspects of what they believe is good and right, but then win them and lead them to Christ.



In personal relationships he said we should have a strong bias towards listening. Say “I really need to know what your biggest problems with Christianity are.” You have to be in heavy listening mode till they say "you are articulating my objections better than I can!" When you have connected with their disagreement then you can begin to answer it. They need to be saying “You really do understand where I am coming from...”



He gave an example of how to float predestination to a Christian. “Why are you a Christian and your friend isn't” “because I repented” “why?” then eventually, "Are you saying there is something better about you?" If not, then you believe in predestination.... GRACE requires predestination. In the west, grace is the front door. Don't bring them in the back door!



Keller then alluded to a section on preaching from Jonathan Edwards “Thoughts on Revival”. He said that preaching is about bringing Christ to bear on the heart. In the sermon there is an act of worship. God takes the word of the preacher and gives a person a vision of Jesus that shapes the heart on the spot. We are looking for a divine supernatural light. You can know honey is sweet without tasting it. But we need the sense of the sweetness - give them a taste of Jesus and you will see them change on the spot. I have not been able to identify that quote, despite the wonderful http://edwards.yale.edu If YOU can help us, send me an email.



UPDATE- Dave Bish responded in less than an hour, and said that the honey quote can be found online. In fact Edwards said something similar about honey many times, so it would seem there was another place where it is more related to preaching during revivals.



UPDATE - Joe Rigney has posted some more information about this piece on Edwards.

Keller also mentioned that the Doctor made a comment on that Edwards sermon and as a result he was ambivalent about people taking notes. He asks if it is just information or an act of worship? We should be seeing Jesus. I couldn't find the Doctor's quote either but this one has a similar sentiment:



The life of Christ is in us! It is not theory, it is a life-giving teaching, it is a life-imparting teaching. If I am preaching in the Spirit, as I pray God I am, I am not only uttering words to you, I am imparting life to you, I am being used of God as the channel of the Spirit and my words bring life and not merely knowledge. Do you accept that distinction? I am almost afraid sometimes for those of you who take notes, that you may just be getting the words and not the Spirit. I am not saying that you should not take notes, but I do warn you to be careful. Much more important than the words is the Spirit, the life; in Christ we are being taught, and built up in Him. So that in a sense, though you may forget the words, you will have received the life, and you go out aware of the life of God, as it were, pulsating within you. David Martyn. Lloyd-Jones, Christian Unity (Studies in Ephesians, Chapter 4, Verses 1 Through 16) (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1972), 114.

UPDATE I then got another email from the Bish telling me that I had already linked twice to the Edwards quote in question (!) I should clearly have searched my own site...Anyway, here it is with a URL you can visit:



"The first and primary object of preaching is not only to give information. It is, as Edwards says, to produce an impression. It is the impression at the time that matters, even more than what you can remember subsequently. In this respect Edwards is, in a sense, critical of what was a prominent Puritan custom and practice. The Puritan father would catechize and question the children as to what the preacher had said. Edwards, in my opinion, has the true notion of preaching. It is not primarily to impart information; and while you are writing your notes you may be missing something of the impact of the Spirit. As preachers we must not forget this. We are not merely imparters of information" Jonathan Edwards and the Crucial Importance of Revival by Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones.



Keller recommended a couple of books - Christ Centered Peaching by Brian Chapel, and Graham Goldsworthy Preaching the Whole Bible.

He also suggested his own Christianity Today article on the gospel in all its forms

This post represents the last of my republished series on preaching, and first appeared on my blog back in March 2007. I  still will be only blogging monday-wednesday-friday the next few weeks as my book deadline approaches.  I appreciate your prayers.  Here are 10 conclusions about preaching:

1. Expository preaching should be defined as preaching that seeks to explain the main point of the portion of the Scripture selected.
   
   
2. Expository preaching does not always have to take place as part of a long series working slowly through a book. Series can be helpful, but they need not last a decade. One-off sermons on specific verses, a chapter, or even a whole book can also be expository.
   
   
3. We must not have an overly-narrow definition of expository preaching — thinking that there is only one way to preach. Instead we must encompass the many different styles of preaching which are helpful and biblically directed. We must also understand that whilst the message of a specific verse is, of course, unified rather than divided or contradictory, its meaning is usually rich and many faceted. Because of this, different themes may be drawn out of the same passage, giving rise to very different sermons from the very same portion of the Bible.
   
   
4. Any definition of expository preaching which is too narrow and excludes the style of such men as C. H. Spurgeon, who was probably the greatest ever preacher — just has to be wrong. To criticize CHS on these grounds and fail to hold his preaching up as a model worthy of emulation today is, in my view, inexcusable. (See for example this post on Pyromaniacs.)
   
   
5. Expository preaching is not without its dangers, one of the chief of which is sounding too much like a Bible commentary read aloud.
   
   
6. Preaching needs to skillfully draw modern people into the Bible, explain the text, induce wonder, then drive the point home with a clear sense of how the people need to think, feel, believe, and act differently here in the 21st century.
   
   
7. Preaching is entirely dependent on the supernatural and sovereign activity of the Spirit, who equips both preacher and hearers for what is an impossible task and makes the words of the Bible live in its hearers hearts. Preaching needs to be passionate, emotive (though not necessarily emotional), and bring about a holy moment of experiencing the presence and voice of God through His Word.
   
   
8. Preaching God's Word is the primary way He has ordained for people to be saved, taught, equipped, matured, and encounter God. It is the hope of the church, and a restoration of true preaching has always accompanied true revival.
   
   
9. Our preaching should be targeted at and have something relevant for each of our different audiences — the unbelieving visitor, the backslidden, the new Christian, the mature Christian, and other church leaders in the congregation. But, ultimately we are accountable to an audience of One before whom we must give an account.
   
   
10. Given the impossibility of this task, is it any wonder we need to be devoted to the study of the Word and to prayer, expressing our utter uselessness and unworthiness to proclaim God's Word? Surely we do well to conclude that we need the help of God in our preparation, personal lives, and delivery to make us instruments that He can use. When I read about preaching I do feel that we have barely scratched the surface, and that sadly a generation exists today that has mostly never heard preaching as it should be.

". . . expositional preachers are modern day prophets, serving merely as conduits through which the Word of God may flow into the people of God in order to do the work of God in them." Mark Dever

The following is an old but very important blog post on preaching that you should read carefully and prayerfully.

“Black preaching” is stereotypically thought to be emotional, even cathartic, rhythmic, centered on suffering and celebration, and ultimately doctrinally shallow. “White preaching” is thought to be (stereotypically) largely the reverse: doctrinal, cold, intellectual, etc. . . At least that's what you'd believe if you believe the cultural stereotypes.

And nothing, in my mind, has quite done as much damage to the people of God needing to live the culture of God like the false ways of viewing preaching. Too often we think of “black preaching” and “white preaching,” and by that we mean some standard or style of preaching that is acceptable in those human cultures. And attached to these general views of culture and preaching are certain norms for what we think is “good” preaching in each context. “Good” black preaching produces a whoop and a shout. “Good” white preaching produces . . . what? Knowledge? Emotional stiffness?

What does this do to our notion of preaching? It severs two essential aspects to good preaching: truth and passion. Good preaching, black or white or brown or yellow, is preaching the truth of the Scriptures with godly zeal . . . preaching the weighty doctrines of God with the weighty movements of the heart that accompany those doctrines. Now any individual preacher may have a different “emotional range” or “doctrinal range” to work with, but both those things go together in good preaching.

The practical effect of maintaining this human cultural distinctive where preaching is concerned is that large segments of the family of God are cut off from significant aspects to good preaching. Some are shaped into emotionally boisterous and doctrinally shallow Christians, while others are doctrinally heady and emotionally paralyzed. In the culture of God, we need truth set on fire so that we might be both rooted and grounded in the truth and stirred to compassion, love, and zeal . . .

Here's a place for great exchange among the people of God for the glory of God. Perhaps some African-American preachers could learn a great deal from some of their white brothers in making their preaching more doctrinally rich and in adopting an expository discipline in the pulpit. And perhaps some white preachers could learn a great deal from some of their African-American brothers about preaching with passion and urgency and seeing and celebrating the application of truth to the real human struggles sitting in their congregations.” - Thabiti Anyabwile

You can call this what you will, but I would call it a prophecy. Certainly it seems like a communication from the Holy Spirit today. It might be enough to have got the Doctor thrown out of some churches...

"..one morning while dressing, quite suddenly and in an overwhelming manner, it seemed to me that the spirit of God was urging me to preach a series of sermons on 'spiritual depression'.

Quite literally while I was dressing the series took order in my mind, and all I had to do was to rush as quickly as possible to jot down on paper the various texts, and the order in which they had come to me, in that way. I had never thought about preaching a series of sermons on spiritual depression; it had never occurred to me to do so; but it came just like that. I always pay great attention to such happenings. It is a very wonderful and glorious experience apart from anything else; and I would not dare to disobey what I regard as a very definite injunction coming in that manner. I am quite confident that the preaching of that series of sermons was dictated to me by Spirit Himself." Martyn Lloyd-Jones Preaching and Preachers, pp. 188-190. READ MORE

John Stott was a master of preaching. Here is what he believes on preaching for a response. You can read more here.

"The conclusion should not merely recapitulate your sermon—it should apply it. Obviously, you should be applying all along, but you should keep something for the end which will prevail upon your people to take action. “No summons, no sermon.” Preach through the head to the heart (i.e. the will). The goal of the sermon should be to “storm the citadel of the will and capture it for Jesus Christ. What do you want them to do? Employ a variety of methods to do this:

1. Argument—anticipate objections and refute them.
   
   
2. Admonition— warn of the consequences of disobedience.
   
   
3. Indirect Conviction—arouse moral indignation and then turn it on them (Nathan with David).
   
   
4. Pleading—apply the gentle pressure of God’s love, concern for their well-being, and the needs of others.
   
   
5. Vision—paint a picture of what is possible through obedience to God in this area."
   

This quote is from Steve Lawson:

"Two deadly dangers face the church as it advances into the 21st century.The first threat is the wholesale devaluing of preaching itself. In this paradigm shift, biblical preaching is being displaced by other things. Exposition is being replaced by entertainment; theology for theatrics; [the] unfolding drama of redemption is being replaced by just plain drama. Preaching is out, dialogue is in. Straightforward exposition is being demoted to secondary status. As bad as this is, of even greater concern is another error. It is an error that befalls even those who are able preachers. The error is that their preaching is little more than a data dump. Preaching has become clinical, cold, sterile, and stagnant. It is precision without power or light without heat."

Read more . . .

"The most urgent need in the Christian Church today is true preaching; and as it is the greatest and most urgent need in the Church, it is obviously the greatest need of the world also."

Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Preaching and Preachers, p. 9

Read more . . .

This from John Piper:

"God exists to be worshipped—to be admired and treasured and desired and praised. Therefore, the Word of God is written primarily to produce worship. This means that if that Word is handled like a hot-dish recipe or a repair manual, it is mishandled. And the people will suffer. The Truth of God begs to be handled with exultation. And our hearts yearn for this and need it. Something in us starts to die when precious and infinitely valuable realities are handled without feelings and words of wonder and exultation. That is, a church starts to die without preaching.

But, of course, this assumes something massive. To treasure the Truth, and to love the Truth, and be impassioned about the Truth, and to exult in the Truth, you have to know the Truth. So it's not enough to say that preaching is exultation. We must also say it is "expository exultation." It is exultation in the Truth of God's Word. And the exultation is in proportion to the Truth delivered."

Read more . . .

As a scientist, I have been raised with the idea that there is, indeed, such a thing as absolute truth. Either something has mass or it doesn’t. Either I will fall down because of gravity or float because I am in space. How can theology be any different? Give me someone who absolutely rejects the message of the Bible and the existence of its God any day over someone who tries to blur boundaries and talk about the “spiritual meaning” of events that they believe are basically lies.

Quite simply, it is not possible to have a Bible that is full of error and yet also the word of God. God is no liar. I cannot see how we can compromise with post-modern ideas of truth and have any Gospel left. For either God is too weak or disinterested to make sure we have a Bible that we can trust, or He is a deceiver.

It simply will not do to say that the Bible contains God's words and we have to discern them. For, even with a Bible that we have all agreed is trustworthy, evangelicals have succeeded in coming up with differing interpretations. Imagine what we would be like if the anchor of our faith is severed and we are cast adrift . . .

Read more from original post . . .

I should say up front that this is an illusion. I may seem to be back from my blogging break over Christmas and the New Year, but the truth is, I am not. I need all my spare time at the moment to work on my book. So I'm planning to share some extracts from a series of posts I wrote previously on preaching. I have set up my blog to do this entirely automatically every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday for the next few weeks. I hope you enjoy this series. Please, also, remember to pray for me as I am writing.

This extract comes from a post in which I was exploring whether expository preaching has to always be a part of a very long series working slowly verse by verse through a book of the Bible. Part of the post was to share the following potential dangers found in these types of slower series, which sometimes have gone on for a decade for a single book.

1. Preaching through a book can introduce the very imbalance that it is designed to remove.
   
   Spending a decade in certain biblical books will inevitably mean that the congregation is not going to get the balanced diet we all agree they need. Yes, preaching through books forces preachers to focus on the issues that the book addresses. But there is surely a danger that the preacher will choose a book that is not sufficiently broad enough to give a good diet to the congregation. It might also be a book that reflects his own pet subject; for example, the charismatic might choose 1 Corinthians, the Calvinist Ephesians or Romans, and the eschatology fanatic would head straight for Revelation. So, a very slow preach through a book is not necessarily going to provide a good diet for every church.
   
   
2. Preaching slowly through a book requires a highly skilled preacher in order to remain interesting.
   
   Death by exposition is a real risk when the average preacher tries to emulate a Lloyd-Jones, Boice, or other gifted expositor. Sermons that are nothing more than recycled commentaries are surely boring. It is, of course, possible to preach this way and impart life, if God has gifted you in that way. But as one preacher admitted to me recently, spending even just a few months in one book can—even for the preacher—begin to feel a bit repetitive. Not everyone has the skill-set to be Martyn Lloyd-Jones.
   
   
3. Insistence on a long series may hinder our aim of making visitors feel welcome.
   
   In this era of floating church populations and weekend breaks, we may not have the same people listening each week. In addition, surely we want our visitors to feel welcome. Imagine discovering on visiting a church for the first time that you have some 50 or 60 (or more!) sermons to catch up on to understand where the church is in their series. This is avoidable by making each sermon in the series stand alone and be more or less self-explanatory. But if we do this, then how is that different from a sermon which exposits a verse or paragraph seeking to put it in its context, but outside of a series?
   
   
4. Long series bind the preacher and could quench the Spirit.
   
   Whether we do have long series of sermons or not, I do feel the Doctor is definitely right when he says we must build into them the flexibility to respond to the needs of the congregation and the leading of the Holy Spirit.

Read more . . .

I wonder—when was the last time you heard another Christian preach or speak about conviction of sin? When was the last time you saw someone on the brink of salvation in tears of anxiety and burden because of a distinct awareness of their sinfulness? It seems to me that true conviction is not present as much as it should be today. If Spurgeon is right, if anyone has not experienced it, we should be very concerned about the validity of their salvation.

"First, regeneration will be shown in conviction of sin. This we believe to be an indispensable mark of the Spirit's work; the new life as it enters the heart causes intense inward pain as one of its first effects. Though nowadays we hear of persons being healed before they have been wounded, and brought into a certainty of justification without ever having lamented their condemnation, we are very dubious as to the value of such healings and justifyings. This style of things is not according to the truth. God never clothes men until He has first stripped them, nor does He quicken them by the gospel till first they are slain by the law.

When you meet with persons in whom there is no trace of conviction of sin, you may be quite sure that they have not been wrought upon by the Holy Spirit; for "when He is come, He will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment." When the Spirit of the Lord breathes on us, He withers all the glory of man, which is but as the flower of grass, and then He reveals a higher and abiding glory. Do not be astonished if you find this conviction of sin to be very acute and alarming; but, on the other hand, do not condemn those in whom it is less intense, for so long as sin is mourned over, confessed, forsaken, and abhorred, you have an evident fruit of the Spirit. Much of the horror and unbelief which goes with conviction is not of the Spirit of God, but comes of Satan or corrupt nature; yet there must be true and deep conviction of sin, and this the preacher must labour to produce, for where this is not felt the new birth has not taken place."

— C. H. Spurgeon

I've been sharing a number of quotes from Spurgeon's The Soul Winner. Today I thought I'd share one which is quite striking. It argues that since conversion is a miracle, it is by a trail of such miracles we can know if someone is called to preach.

"A new and heavenly mind must be created by omnipotence, or the man must abide in death. You see, then, that we have before us a mighty work, for which we are of ourselves totally incapable. No minister living can save a soul; nor can all of us together, nor all the saints on earth or in heaven, work regeneration in a single person. The whole business on our part is the height of absurdity unless we regard ourselves as used by the Holy Ghost, and filled with His power. On the other hand, the marvels of regeneration which attend our ministry are the best seals and witnesses of our commission. Whereas the apostles could appeal to the miracles of Christ, and to those which they wrought in His name, we appeal to the miracles of the Holy Ghost, which are as divine and as real as those of our Lord Himself. These miracles are the creation of a new life in the human bosom, and the total change of the whole being of those upon whom the Spirit descends."

— C.H. Spurgeon

One of the interesting controversies of theology is the nature of man. Many assume we are tripartate — body, soul, and spirit. Others argue strongly that Scripture suggests we only have two parts — body and soul/spirit. In today's quote from Spurgeon, he seems to suggest we have two parts before salvation and three parts after. I would be interested in your thoughts on this. Do you think he was right? Have you heard anyone else teach this? You can discuss this over at this blog's Facebook group.

"Regeneration, or the new birth, works a change in the whole nature of man, and, so far as we can judge, its essence lies in the implantation and creation of a new principle within the man. The Holy Ghost creates in us a new, heavenly, and immortal nature, which is known in Scripture as "the spirit," by way of distinction from the soul. Our theory of regeneration is that man in his fallen nature consists only of body and soul, and that when he is regenerated there is created in him a new and higher nature—"the spirit"—which is a spark from the everlasting fire of God's life and love; this falls into the heart, and abides there, and makes its receiver a partaker of the divine nature." Thenceforward, the man consists of three parts, body, soul, and spirit, and the spirit is the reigning power of the three."

C. H. Spurgeon

I have been quoting from Spurgeon's The Soul Winner a fair bit lately. He is like a breath of fresh air. O for God to raise an army of preachers who truly understand the point he makes in the following quote:

"... to win a soul, it is necessary, not only to instruct our hearer, and make him know the truth, but to impress him so that he may feel it. A purely didactic ministry, which should always appeal to the understanding, and should leave the emotions untouched, would certainly be a limping ministry. "The legs of the lame are not equal," says Solomon; and the unequal legs of some ministries cripple them. We have seen such an one limping about with a long doctrinal leg, but a very short emotional leg. It is a horrible thing for a man to be so doctrinal that he can speak coolly of the doom of the wicked, so that, if he does not actually praise God for it, it costs him no anguish of heart to think of the ruin of millions of our race. This is horrible!

I hate to hear the terrors of the Lord proclaimed by men whose hard visages, harsh tones, and unfeeling spirit betray a sort of doctrinal desiccation: all the milk of human kindness is dried out of them. Having no feeling himself, such a preacher creates none, and the people sit and listen while he keeps to dry, lifeless statements, until they come to value him for being "sound", and they themselves come to be sound, too; and I need not add, sound asleep also, or what life they have is spent in sniffing out heresy, and making earnest men offenders for a word. Into this spirit may we never be baptized!

Whatever I believe, or do not believe, the command to love my neighbour as myself still retains its claim upon me, and God forbid that any views or opinions should so contract my soul, and harden my heart as to make me forget this law of love! The love of God is first, but this by no means lessens the obligation of love to man; in fact, the first command includes the second.

We are to seek our neighbour's conversion because we love him, and we are to speak to him in loving terms God's loving gospel, because our heart desires his eternal good.

A sinner has a heart as well as a head; a sinner has emotions as well as thoughts; and we must appeal to both. A sinner will never be converted until his emotions are stirred. Unless he feels sorrow for sin, and unless he has some measure of joy in the reception of the Word, you cannot have much hope of him. The Truth must soak into the soul, and dye it with its own colour. The Word must be like a strong wind sweeping through the whole heart, and swaying the whole man, even as a field of ripening corn waves in the summer breeze. Religion without emotion is religion without life."

— C. H. Spurgeon

Tim Keller will be speaking in the UK twice in the next few months. I received the following information from Oak Hill College which will be hosting him. I understand that he will also speak for Newfrontiers on the second trip.

To book, click here.


Two conferences with Tim Keller, pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church, New York City, will take place at Oak Hill in November 2008 and May 2009.

The first, Preaching to the Heart, is on 19 Nov 2008. Jonathan Edwards believed that the ultimate purpose of preaching is not only to make the truth clear, but also to make it real — affecting and life-changing. This is usually covered under the topic of "application," although framing the subject in that way often results in a "tack-on" of practical advice after a dry, academic exposition.

How can we preach the text from first to last in a way that exalts Christ, changes heart motivations, produces wisdom and wonder, and persuades the sceptical and results in real life change?

In two lectures, Tim Keller explores these challenges to the preacher. The conference will run between 10.00 a.m. and 12.30 p.m. in Lecture Room 1 of the Academic Centre at Oak Hill (cost: £5).

The second conference, on Urban Church Planting, takes place on 13 May 2009.

Tim Keller is the author of the recently published book, The Reason for God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism.

Spurgeon's book, The Soul Winner, is the kind of book you really need to read several times over the course of your life. I decided to dip into it once more over the summer, and read just the first chapter. It's a book I have recommended previously. I found the following quote which is interesting. He is speaking about how church growth statistics are indicative of something. I wonder how many Spurgeon lovers today would agree with his assessment of churches which are not growing by conversion?

"I am not among those who decry statistics, nor do I consider that they are productive of all manner of evil; for they do much good if they are accurate, and if men use them lawfully. It is a good thing for people to see the nakedness of the land through statistics of decrease, that they may be driven on their knees before the Lord to seek prosperity; and, on the other hand, it is by no means an evil thing for workers to be encouraged by having some account of results set before them. I should be very sorry if the practice of adding up, and deducting, and giving in the net result were to be abandoned, for it must be right to know our numerical condition. It has been noticed that those who object to the process are often brethren whose unsatisfactory reports should somewhat humiliate them: this is not always so, but it is suspiciously frequent.

I heard of the report of a church, the other day, in which the minister, who was well known to have reduced his congregation to nothing, somewhat cleverly wrote, "Our church is looking up." When he was questioned with regard to this statement, he replied, "Everybody knows that the church is on its back, and it cannot do anything else but look up." When churches are looking up in that way, their pastors generally say that statistics are very delusive things, and that you cannot tabulate the work of the Spirit, and calculate the prosperity of a church by figures.

The fact is, you can reckon very correctly if the figures are honest, and if all circumstances are taken into consideration if there is no increase, you may calculate with considerable accuracy that there is not much being done; and if there is a clear decrease among a growing population, you may reckon that the prayers of the people and the preaching of the minister are not of the most powerful kind."

— C. H.Spurgeon

UPDATE An friend of mine just emailed me the following, which we both agreed to keep anonymous.

On Spurgeon, firstly he was a man of his times. In those days active churches grew - churchgoing was a national habit, not a bizarre minority practice - that is one reason why CHS wanted to see conversions, not endless transfers to sit under his ministry.

I do believe that we can say today with confidence, however, that active churches don't decline unless something is wrong. We might struggle to grow - but note that he says that the keys are good preaching and good prayer, and if a church declines then something is deficient. He doesn't say that a church has to grow hugely - of course that is what we seek because we want to see people saved. My own small church has maintained and even gained a little in the last two years I have been there.

In my constituency (reformed evangelical (cessationist although I hate the term)) some churches grow. Prime example being Spurgeon's own Met Tab. Why? I say CHS's formula is correct - sound and inspiring ministry with strong evangelistic content, and prayer - those Tabernacle church prayer meetings are what I miss the most. People falling over themselves to call upon the name of the Lord, it was like a seige on the Throne of heaven. If I am ever in London on a monday night and free, that is where I'll be! Other churches grow too, and again the formula holds.

You might be interested to know that Spurgeon also preached that it was a glorious thing to hold to a losing cause. He cited Noah as an example. A minority of one. That is in an unpublished sermon due out from Day One in January 09. . . As a friend of my quipped recently 'How many converts did Jeremiah have?'

And all this said it is DOUBTLESS true that those of a high calvinist (hyper) tendency will always decry any numbers game as unspiritual. I count my congregations every week and keep records. I may become aware of personal spiritual declines but I must be aware of trends in the numbers. If they fall, even more prayer is needed!

Ultimately I have never visited a shrinking church . . .where I could not SEE why the church was diminishing. It may be hard for those 'faithful' ones there to accept that they need to change things - but facts don't lie. One of the greatest scourges of our independent churches today is a crying failure to raise up godly men, for ministers to spot and train more ministers, so that pulpits are not empty. It is so chronic one might almost call it a judgement.

In 14th place on the list of most read posts here on the blog during the first half of 2008 is my series on the Together On A Mission 2008 conference.

In the 13th most read post, I asked about favorite preachers. I gave my own answers back in 2005. There are no prizes for guessing who might be added to that list if I were to answer that question again today.

Thanks to my friends at Acts 29 I'm able to share some sessions with you from the Dwell London conference. This is a talk Mark Driscoll gave on how to preach Christ from the entire Bible. You can download the audio, read my notes below, or watch the video right here:




No one has a worse life than a church planter’s wife. Her husband is flat broke. He won’t stop working, but makes no money. And he wants to grow his church by getting her pregnant!

The big idea is this—“It’s about Jesus!” There is always something that churches use to keep people motivated. The only way you will maintain something is if it’s about Jesus. Everything has to be about Jesus, whether it’s counseling or groups or classes or preaching.

Six framing questions to help you in your preparation of sermons:

1. What does Scripture say?
   Does the Greek work? What exactly does it say?
   
   
2. What does this mean, i.e. to the original audience and to us?
   
   
3. How can I make it memorable?
   It can’t just be true—it also has to be easy for people to remember, to stay in their minds. How does one do that? Use doctrine—e.g. providence with Ruth. God orders her affairs. Big theological issues can sometimes be your hook. Or just a word, like grace—e.g. fifteen aspects of grace. Or an emotion. Naomi said, “Call me ‘Mara’ for God has made me bitterness.” If you’re in the book of Psalms you will have to explain "lament"—worshipfully grieving out pain. Or an image, like the throne. Spurgeon was best at taking images and captivating people with the images of the Bible. He said, “Some men preach heaven. I try to take them there!” Or a person,—sometimes the hook can be a character. Hang your sermon on the hook.
   
   
4. The apologetic question—How are people going to resist this?
   Assume they are going to fight it. Anticipate the probable objections and answer them. If you do this, you can’t preach for twenty-five minutes. The longer you preach, the younger the crowd if you are any good at it. Forty-five minutes to an hour plus is what many growing churches do. Classic Puritan preaching included this approach to any possible objections: “Some of you are thinking this . . .” It’s not that you are reading minds, just that there will be objections. Hell, sex, pornography, homosexuality, etc. will all raise objections in people’s minds. This is where you will see an angry response. If you say, “This is just my perspective,” it’s fine, but if you say “This is wrong!” there will be conflict. If they have a good reason you did not consider, then it is easy for them to walk out ignoring you.
   
   
5. The missional application—What does this mean for our community?
   What about our church, our families, our friendships, our city, our town, etc. Live in such a way that the rest of the city sees there is a different way of life—birth, work, sex, death, etc. For example, take sexual sin. It’s not just that you are disobeying, you are hurting the church and you are hurting the mission God has called you to—i.e. you are preaching a false gospel.
   
   
6. The Christological Question—How is Jesus the hero?
   Every single sermon needs to talk about Jesus as the hero. This will train the people to look for Jesus in the Bible. Also, if they don't hear Jesus they will make note of that. It will also quietly train people to be evangelistic. People will naturally bring their friends to church because they know you will always be talking about Jesus.

Jesus said to the Pharisees that they did not love the Word of God because they didn't love him. He is the fulfillment of the Bible. How you can find Jesus? Foreshadowing christophanies in the Old Testament, and the messenger of the Lord who is worshipped. Prefiguring types—e.g. Adam, the priesthood, David, the prophets, sacrifices, shepherds, judges, bread, wine, etc. Also, “Unlike the first Adam, Jesus passed his test in the garden” etc. Do not merely preach moralistically, i.e. there’s good guys and bad guys—do what the good guys do. Teach that in this Book they prefigure Jesus and he is the hero.

We tend to turn Old Testament heroes into super-heroes. They are people saved by grace and are not the heroes. God is the hero. The key is to make sure that it is solely about Jesus. Very few people do this consistently in their preaching.

Titles for God—“Son of man” from Daniel.

The big idea is this. Please tell people about Jesus. Too often people try and get them excited about being missional, etc. But to be honest, the only way to really get them excited is to tell them it is all about Jesus. If it’s about Jesus, it works. Even if you don't have the best building or the best band or the best preacher. The Holy Spirit likes to show up when much is made of Jesus. In some churches the people sing as if they had just been captured by Al Quaida, but the church is growing. Why? Because it’s about Jesus. The Jesus of the Bible.

A lot of things can be done wrong. But you have to do this one thing right. If you do it, it will make up for a lot of things that aren’t done so well. If your family and your church family will love Jesus, everything else will follow. GO AWAY AND LOVE JESUS.

Today I wrap up my interview with John Piper in this last segment. It is based on the video version of the interview, which can be viewed here. John talks about preachers he listens to and describes the circumtances which led him to the pastorate of Bethlehem Baptist Church. The three previous parts to the interview can be read at the following pages:

• John Piper on New Word Alive
  
  
• John Piper on Passionate Preaching
  
  
• John Piper on Prayer and Bible Study

Adrian
We have just been talking about studying the Word, and obviously books, but I guess for most preachers, they like to listen to other preachers as well. I guess you’re probably no exception to that. So who have you got on your iPOD that you’re actually listening to?

John
I do have an iPOD. It happens to sit in my speaker base in my bedroom as kind of an alarm clock. But my computer is in my study, and my treadmill is in my study. That’s the only time I ever listen to preaching—when I’m running. So three times a week, for thirty minutes or so, I’m listening to other people speak. So I download them from the Web, usually. Who are the last ones I listened to? I listened to [Don] Carson. I listened to R. C. Sproul. I listened to Martyn Lloyd-Jones. Somebody gave me the whole series of MLJ on Romans. I listen to C. J. Mahaney. I listen to John Sailhammer on the Old Testament. I listen to Carl Trueman on, what’s the topic? I can’t remember. A little while back. Basically, I’m looking for two things—one, contemporary relevant issues that I might want to dig into, or model preaching. So, whoever at that point, and they’re not always the same people, the model preachers and the ones who are talking about the things I feel like I need to get to know about.

Adrian
Okay. You’re obviously deeply committed to preaching and to pastoring, and you’ve been at Bethlehem an awful long time. I wonder, first of all, how did you make that decision to join Bethlehem, and was it a lifetime commitment at that moment, or was that something that evolved? How did it then develop into a long-term thing?

John
I was teaching Bible and Greek for six years at Bethel College from 1974 to 1980. I had a sabbatical and I was working on Romans 9—the book on justification of God—the odyssey basically, Romans 9. And while I was doing that, the Lord, I believe, just kept saying through the words of that chapter, “I will be proclaimed and not just analyzed.” And I couldn’t resist it after awhile. Finally, I began to ask those who knew me best, “What would you think if I left academia and took the pastorate as a preaching pastor?” And they all said, “Do it.” So, in December of 1979, I gave my resignation and started looking for a church. I said, “I’d like to spend ten years here.” Well, they said, “Ten years would be good.” And ten years went by like that. And now it’s twenty-eight. And I have no intention of going anywhere else until I’m done.

Adrian
Do you think that kind of longevity is important for a pastor?

John
It’s important, at least in volatile urban settings. In other words, where there’s a lot of change in the people, there needs to be less change in the pastoral ministry. Where the people are stable, say in a small town that has very little coming and going, the stability lies very much in the people. In an urban setting of growth, with a lot of people in and a lot of people out, there’s no stability in the people. And if it isn’t in the staff and elders, then it’s not going to be anywhere. So the degree to which there is movement among the people, it seems to me to be good. And I think it’s healthy for the pastor himself to press on in preaching in a way that doesn’t redo the same stuff over and over again. I mean, after the first five years I thought to myself, “I would not want to do this anywhere again.” I mean, those first five years are hard. You’re figuring out everything; you’re rebuilding everything. You’re trying to make some changes. And to start all that over again instead of building on it would have felt very discouraging to me.

Adrian
So for you the pull of the church was a stronger pull than the pull of Bible college or seminary?

John
Yes, oh yes. And the reason in that day was because, in the college, I felt like, year in and year out, I had the same age group (18-22). They were culturally basically the same. Their questions were, every year, the same. They always revolved around Calvinism and free will and sovereignty, and whatever. And in the church you’ve got cradle to the grave. You’ve got ethnic and cultural differences. You’ve got people all over the spiritual map on their questions. You’ve got dying and birth. You’ve got weddings and funerals. The reality of the totality of life—what that said to me was — “If this is real, if this Book is real, it will relate to all of that instead of this little slice of humanity that comes to college.” And I just wanted to see the Word of God take root in a people.

Adrian
That’s really interesting. Would you say, then, that part of your development as a pastor and as preacher is just being there in the long-term and seeing that kind of development?

John
Absolutely. I had probably preached fifteen times in my life when I came to this church. I was 34 years old and I was a teacher. I taught Sunday School. I didn’t preach around. Most of my colleagues preached on the weekend in addition to teaching. I said, “I’m not going to do that. I’m going to be with my family in church, sitting with my children at my side and my wife, listening to the Word of God every weekend, and I’ll teach a Sunday School class.” So I had done a few weddings, and I had done a few little sermons here and there. But I was an absolute green preacher when I came to Bethlehem. So all of my development as a preacher has been through these 28 years in the same pulpit.

Adrian
Okay. So, you’re a busy guy because you’re a preacher there, you preach regularly. You go to all these conferences. And I’ve noticed you almost always bring, if not a completely brand new message, at least a newly reworked version of it, perhaps slightly different . . . How do you manage to find all that time? Or is it just that you prioritize that and don’t watch too much TV?

John
I don’t watch any television. I don’t have a television.

Adrian
That’s what it is probably.

John
That certainly helps. And I have a wonderful wife who tolerates a very absent husband, even when I’m home. I ask her—I’m always taking her temperature as we do our dates on Mondays and go out. “How we doing, Noel? Do you want to make any changes?” She’s just so incredibly flexible that I married the right woman. And ever since we’ve been married, I’ve always worked, both in the day and in the evening. I’ve raised four sons, and now I’m working on one daughter. And they’re all married, and they have sons, and they’re following the Lord. So I feel some deep, deep gratification about that. But I always took from 5:30 to 7:00, and that was their time. I ate with them and then we had play time. We were kicking the ball around in the backyard or we were building towers and knocking ‘em down — this is your time. And I went to all their ballgames. A pastor has his own time. He can do whatever he wants. So 3:30 in the afternoon, while other guys are working, I’m banging my fists at the soccer match, or you’d call it football, to make my son, Benjamin, run faster . . .

Adrian
You played soccer?

John
I didn’t — I watched it.

Adrian
But, no, still, I mean . . .

John
Oh, I love it. We try, we try! (Laughing.)

Adrian
You have David Beckham now, of course.

John
Well, he did score a goal the other day. I think it was headlines. One goal out of this billion dollar deal. So . . . where were we?

Adrian
We were talking about football playing . . . you were just talking about all the time . . . .

John
Oh, the time to do things, yeah. The point was that even though I work in the evenings (at 7:00 I’m back in my study or with a book in my hand or at some meeting) and Noel is doing her handwork, or working on her projects, and I’m working away. But, really, the key is — I’ve been in the church long enough that they let me do what I want to do. And we’ve got such diversification staffing, that I’m the preacher guy. They want me to feed this flock on the weekend, and they want me to provide vision for the staff. That’s my title — Pastor of Preaching and Vision. I’m here in Wales, and I’ll be back to preach next Sunday, and most of them won’t even know I was gone.

Adrian
Yeah, sure. You write books. What would be the three books that you’ve written that would be your most important books, in your opinion? Three most important books you’ve written, or three significant . . .

John
I will be interested to watch from heaven to see what the answer to that question will prove to be, because I don’t think my answer really has any authority. I don’t know. Don Carson told me he thought Pleasures of God was the most important thing I’ve done, so I think I would put that in the top three. I’m going to put Desiring God there just because it’s the seminal book from which everything else flowed. And after those two, God’s Passion for His Glory maybe. That’s my [Jonathan] Edwards—Edwards is half of that and I’m half of that. And because Edwards is so important, and that essay, The End for Which God Created the World, is so absolutely foundational to everything I do and what I think, that may be the other one.

Adrian
Great. Well look, thanks very much for joining us, John. It’s just been wonderful to have a few moments here just to pick your brains . . .

John
Yeah. I wish we had more time. Thank you very much!

Adrian
God bless.

Yesterday we began sharing the transcript of my interview with John Piper at New Word Alive. Today we continue with John Piper talking about passionate preaching. The video of today's segment can be seen here.

Adrian
People do talk about you, John, as having a real sort of passion about you. It’s almost like a zeal, I guess. In fact, particularly when you’re preaching, I certainly experience that, having actually only heard you for the first time in the flesh last night, and so many people afterwards were saying the same thing. I was just blown away by the passion, and also by a sense of the presence of God that you brought when you were preaching. I guess that’s probably the best way of describing it. Is that something that you’re aware of in some way for yourself? Is that something you can explain a bit as to why you feel that other people experience that? Is it something you feel yourself when you’re preaching as well? How did that come about? Because I know, for example, that Lig Duncan said that when he heard you preach at Together for the Gospel, he felt, “Boy, I’ve never preached before. I’ve never done it.” So what is it about you? Is there something special about you? Do you have some kind of secret you can share with the rest of us?

John
I don’t usually feel that way when I’m done preaching, okay? I talked to Don Carson one time, and I regard Don as a very effective communicator and a brilliant person. He mentioned to me that he regularly walks away from his events feeling that he’s blown it, which made me feel better, because I don’t think you can ever quite know what God’s doing. At the times that I have felt bleakest about the way I did what I was supposed to do, others have testified to being helped. And the times I felt liberated, free, engaged — Did anything happen in them rather than just in me? So, I’m very suspicious about the way I feel about my preaching. I doubt myself regularly that my assessment of what just happened is accurate. Which helps me and hurts me. It means I never feel very excited about what I’ve just done, and it means I don’t fall out the bottom because I say, “Well, God can do what he wants to do. You know, Balaam’s ass can accomplish what he wants, so he might use that, even though I felt terrible about it. So I’m a lousy judge when it comes to saying, “Was there a presence of God, or was there an anointing, or was there an effect?”

I just know that what I want is the gift of self-forgetfulness in what I would call a full engagement, a full passion, a full zeal with what’s there in the text, and the reality of God in and through the text. I want to see him, and know him, be engaged by him, be thrilled by him, say it with whatever effectiveness I can, and let the chips fall where they will. And that, as far as my own subjective awareness goes, that rises and falls. One Sunday I feel thrilled. I feel met. I feel carried. I feel helped. And others I don’t. But that doesn’t correlate necessarily with what God is doing in the people out there. So, to me, an effective, experienced sermon would be when I forget myself. I’m not thinking, “Oh, I’m doing well here,” or “I’m doing badly here,” or “That was an effective comment,” — anything like that ruins it for me. The gift is when you’re not outside yourself watching yourself. You’re so here—you’re so here that you’re not at all conscious—there’s no two of you, there’s just one of you, and God and the people, and a transaction is happening that’s a miracle. Because you can’t choose to forget yourself. The act of choosing to forget yourself is self-awareness. So it’s a gift. It’s a phenomenal precious gift in the moment. You pray for it ahead of time, and it may come for twenty minutes and then you lose it for ten, and you’re thinking about your hands, and you’re thinking about your notes, and you’re thinking about the faces out there, and it’s all discombobulated, and then it may be taken away in the moment, and you’re free to . . . you go, and you wake up ten minutes later and — What was THAT? You know? That was free!! So that’s what I’m after.

I think there are ways to cultivate what I’m talking about. It basically is cultivating God-centeredness. It’s cultivating prayer. It’s cultivating a serious engagement with the Word. It’s cultivating asking certain kinds of God-centered, Christ-exalting questions. There’s a focus and a preoccupation. And then my root Christian hedonism, I mean, my root philosophy of life — whether you are satisfied in God really does make a difference as to whether you can glorify God! That’s a huge thing! It’s a theoretical construct that I think is in the Bible, but it has a practical effect because I really believe that if you’re not passionate about God, you won’t glorify him as much. If you’re more passionate about football than God, you glorify football. If you’re more passionate about food or cooking or sex or money or work or the stock market than you are about God, then that’s what gets glorified. God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in him. That construct of reality has an effect on how you pray about your life and how you live you life.

Continued in part 3 . . .

In this section of our interview I begin by asking Ed if he thinks there is a particular type of preaching that is missional.

UPDATE
The Dwell Conference talks are now online, and you can download them.

I love the people at Resurgence. They keep sharing more and more video and audio—all for free. After my pastor, Tope, reported his experience in New York I wanted to watch some Tim Keller as, bizarrely, I hadn't yet listened to him or read anything by him. The Dwell talks are not online yet, so I watched Tim Keller's Gospel Coalition talk. I was totally blown away by it! Here are a few of the highlights I picked up.

Early on Keller explained that the gospel-bringer is not like an adviser coming to tell us a set of how-to’s, telling us to fight for our souls. Rather they are a messenger telling us what God has already done. The result of both models might look similar. In both cases you would want to do something in response. But, if the gospel is merely a how-to, you will obey out of fear. If the gospel is a declaration of what has already happened, you obey out of joy. Because it is a message (not a method!) words are critical.

Keller quoted Luther's Larger Catechism in which he claimed that the first commandment comes first because the other commandments are only broken if you have already broken the command to put God first and have your satisfaction in him. Therefore, sin stems from idolatry, making something more important than God. The only way we change is through honoring God, and we learn to do this in worship. This challenged me. We must keep coming back to God in adoration and gratitude to him. If you are not being generous, it is because your heart is not given over to God.

The purpose of preaching is not just to make the truth understandable, but to make it real. It is important that it is crystal clear, but that its is vivid. He quoted MLJ on Edwards’ view of the purpose of preaching. He commented that he doesn't mind if people are taking notes at the beginning of his message, but that if they are still do so by the end he feels he has missed the mark.

Keller also argued strongly that every sermon must be about Jesus. Christ needs to be taught every Sunday. The difference between a lecture and a sermon is that in a sermon Jesus shows up. If a sermon is just about what I should do or believe, people will just feel more guilty. Instead, if you say this is what you must do, but, by the way, you probably can't do it, but there is one who did it on our behalf—if you understand what he did for us—then you will begin to be able to do it, too.

Jesus is our true wealth, giving status, security, and stability. The Bible is basically about Jesus and what he has done, and not me and what I have to do. Tim spoke about how each of the main OT characters are examples of Jesus. For example, Jesus is the true Esther who didn’t just say, “If I perish, I perish” but “When I perish, I perish.”

Even becoming a Christian is not something we do. We are instead converted, something happens to us. We are born again from outside. We must have God reveal to us the state of our hearts. Keller repeatedly quoted Doctor Martyn Lloyd-Jones, and said that he learned how to preach by listening to tapes of the Doctor's evangelistic sermons. He gave the following example, which so impacted me I found myself sobbing real tears alone in my room.

The Doctor apparently said that if he was to come home and someone was to say, “O, while you were out a bill came, so I just paid it for you,” he would not know how to respond. He would not know how happy to be. He would not know whether—if it had been some extra postage, just a few pence—to simply say “thank you,” or whether—if it was hundreds of thousands of pounds—to fall on his hands and knees and kiss the person's feet. We have to appreciate that Jesus has paid a MASSIVE debt for us, and when we do so, gratitude will well up in our hearts. Our problem is that we have become immune to the size of the debt by over-familiarity.

Tim also spoke about the need for us to avoid the twin dangers of (1) isolating ourselves from the world around us through cultural withdrawal, and its opposite (2) cultural assimilation and accommodation. We need to be countercultural, but engaged and caring. Tim explained that in New York people love what the gospel has to say about forgiveness and hate what it has to say about sex, while in some other countries they love what it says about sex and hate the concept of forgiveness.

He also explained in closing that the gospel is not simple. It is not boring. It is infinitely deep and complex and stimulating and thrilling. As Peter says, even angels long to look into it. We therefore need our preaching to reflect the richness of this wonderful truth that saved us.

UPDATE
The written transcript of this segment of my interview with John Piper is now available. It can be read here.

This is the fourth and final segment of my interview with John Piper. You can also watch these preceding segments:

• John Piper on New Word Alive and Spring Harvest
  
  
• John Piper on Passionate Preaching
  
  
• John Piper on Prayer and Bible Study

I began this section by asking John which preachers he listens to on his iPOD. He mentioned a number of names, and if you have the e-mail address for any of them, why not drop them a line and tell them you heard Piper has been listening to them! I doubt many things will bring more encouragement to them than knowing that John Piper has found their work helpful.

When I asked about why he chose to leave the seminary setting and become a pastor, he explained that after a period of time studying the Bible, he felt God was saying to him, “I will be proclaimed and not just analyzed.”

He also spoke about the need for long-term stability in a church’s leadership team. He spoke about how his wife supports his ministry. “She's just so incredibly flexible that I married the right woman.” He spoke about what the Piper family home looks like. We even spoke about soccer.

UPDATE
The written transcript of this segment of my interview with John Piper is now available. You can read it here.

Yesterday I began speaking with John Piper about New Word Alive and why he comes to the UK. In this segment, I began by putting before John the notion that he has an unusual degree of passion and anointing when preaching. I even quoted Lig Duncan, who said that he wondered if he had ever really preached after hearing Piper's talk at the first Together for the Gospel conference. I asked him whether he was conscious of this, and if he had any explanation for it.

Piper began his answer by honestly stating, “I don’t usually feel that way when I am done preaching.” He spoke about how the sermons he is most unhappy with are sometimes the ones people feel most helped by. He spoke about the need for a ”self-forgetfulness in a full engagement with what is there in the text . . . and the reality of God in the text.”

He did say that there are ways to cultivate this. “It is cultivating God-centeredness, prayer, a serious engagement with the Word, and asking certain kinds of God-centered, Christ-exalting questions. There's a focus and a preoccupation. And then my root Christian hedonism, my root philosophy—whether you are satisfied in God really makes a difference about whether you can glorify God . . . If you are not passionate about God you won’t glorify him as much. If you are more passionate about football than God, you will glorify football.”

This whole segment is tantalizing, as is much of Piper's unusual ministry. It made me want to spend about three hours with Piper probing him further about all this. Sadly we did not have three hours, but we did have longer, and I continued my conversation in a video I will share tomorrow.

My grandfather, Edwin Warnock, was an evangelistic tent preacher. He was from Scotland, but came down to England, where he married a Londoner but lived in Suffolk. He had six children—five boys and one girl. Sadly, one boy died young. Each of the other boys married and had two boys. In my father's and one other case, they also had a girl. My auntie also married and had two girls and one boy. Many of those thirteen Warnock cousins of mine are now married themselves and have begun their own families. The vast majority of this extended family continue to go to church and love the Lord. Many of the men have also preached, at least to some extent.

It was a real delight to meet with a significant portion of the surviving descendants of Edwin Warnock and their wives this past Monday—a national holiday in the UK. I was thrilled also to receive a precious gift from one of my uncles. As far as I know, this is the last surviving tape of my grandfather preaching. His passion is clear, even amidst the English politeness of communication that was still common in churches back in 1968. The gospel message is strong and clearly identifiable. I could have preached this message. May God prosper the cause of my grandfather's gospel, which is now mine, and is, of course, also faithfully preached by many millions throughout the world.

You can download the message or listen to it right here:



The following photos are of Edwin and include his marriage to Muriel Driver, a river baptism, his children's camps and the tent he used for evangelism.

In a variation on the “Ask a Blogger” theme, I received this e-mail, which was effectively asking Doctor Martyn Lloyd-Jones a question.

“I have been doing some research lately on the revivals in Wales and the ministry of Christmas Evans and have come across an emphasis in the Welsh Revivals and in Lloyd-Jones on unction in preaching. Even C. J. Mahaney referenced this in a recent post on his blog: Recommended Chapters on Preaching. Long question, short: Is there anything that you’ve posted on unction in Lloyd-Jones or could you do that on an upcoming Lloyd-Jones day? I would be greatly served by it.”

You ask a great question. I don't think I have posted on the doctor's view of unction in preaching. I would commend his book, Preaching and Preachers, and a book about his preaching called The Sacred Anointing for more on this subject. Thanks to the wonders of my Logos Bible Software, I was able to quickly find a couple of great examples of the Doctor's teaching on unction which I will share shortly. In essence, for Lloyd-Jones, true preaching was much more than a mere intellectual explanation of words in the Bible. His views on this matter were closely related to his views on the baptism with the Spirit, which I have blogged about previously here.

I love these two quotes from E. M. Bounds which I have also shared once before, and which help to explain what lies at the heart of the Doctor's view of unction in preaching:

“This divine unction is the one distinguishing feature that separates true gospel preaching from all other methods of presenting truth. It backs and interpenetrates the revealed truth with all the force of God. It illumines the Word and broadens and enrichens [sic] the intellect and empowers it to grasp and apprehend the Word. It qualifies the preacher’s heart, and brings it to that condition of tenderness, of purity, of force and light that are necessary to secure the highest results. This unction gives to the preacher liberty and enlargement of thought and soul—a freedom, fullness, and directness of utterance that can be secured by no other process.”

— E. M. Bounds, Power Through Prayer
“Preaching is not the performance of an hour. It is the outflow of a life. It takes twenty years to make a sermon, because it takes twenty years to make the man. The true sermon is a thing of life. The sermon grows because the man grows. The sermon is forceful because the man is forceful. The sermon is holy because the man is holy. The sermon is full of the divine unction because the man is full of the divine unction.”

— E. M. Bounds, Preaching and Prayer

Here's how the Doctor explains it:

“When the Holy Spirit comes in revival there is a great anointing, and it shows itself in many ways. You read of men who had believed the truth, and who were preaching faithfully and regularly, but who were ineffective and lacking in power. Suddenly they are filled with power. They speak with boldness and with power and with great authority. That is the anointing of the Spirit . . .

But this anointing is not confined to revival. I use that simply as an illustration. Thank God it is given at other times. Any man who has ever preached should be able to testify to this. There are times when, entirely outside his own control, he is given a special authority, special power, an unction which is unusual. And there are good reasons for its bestowal. There are circumstances which he himself is not always aware of, which he only discovers afterwards. Somebody may have come to the congregation who needed a particular message or word, and the preacher, without knowledge on his part, is guided to say something which is just appropriate to that particular state and condition. There is, therefore, this special enduement of power which is called ‘the anointing’. It is something that one should seek and covet, it is something for which one should be constantly praying . . .

Our Lord was setting out on His public ministry. As the Son of God, He was always full of the Spirit. But in order to do His work He needed a special anointing and He received it at His baptism in the river Jordan by John the Baptist. The Holy Spirit then descended upon Him, He was given this special power. He was God; but as man He needed this ‘baptism’, this ‘anointing’ with the Holy Spirit.”

— David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, The Christian Soldier: An Exposition of Ephesians 6:10 to 20, Banner of Truth Trust, Edinburgh; Carlisle, PA, 1977, p.115.

“The Holy Spirit enables Christians by giving them what is called in the New Testament “unction”; He gives “anointing,” understanding, freedom, and clarity of speech, an authority. Many terms can be used with respect to this God-given ability to preach. One quotation seems to me to sum it all up very well. Probably the first letter that Paul ever wrote was to the church at Thessalonica, and in the first chapter of the first epistle, he reminds the believers of how the Gospel had come to them: “Our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance” (1 Thessalonians 1:5). Paul was saying: “I did the speaking, but it was not I. I was used.” As he was speaking, he knew that he was merely the vehicle, the channel, the instrument that the Holy Spirit was using. He was taken up; he was out of himself; he was, as it were, possessed by the Spirit, and he knew that he was preaching with “much assurance.” Everything was against him. Thessalonica was a pagan city, part of Macedonia. The people did not have a Jewish background or the Old Testament Scriptures; they did not know the prophets; they knew nothing. They were living a life of sin and degradation in utter ignorance, and yet when the apostle appeared among them, he was able to speak with assurance. Why? Because it was not his word only, but he spoke “in power, and in the Holy Ghost.” . . .

The Holy Spirit takes people and helps them to speak in a clear manner . . . That is the way the Holy Spirit works, but there is another—His action upon the listeners. If the Holy Spirit only acted on the preacher, there would be no conversions. The supreme example of the Spirit’s action on the hearers is what happened when Peter was preaching in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost. In Acts 2 we read that halfway through his sermon, as he was expounding the Scriptures, the people “were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” (v. 37). The Holy Spirit did the pricking. It was not Peter’s sermon, which was a straightforward exposition of Scripture. The power, the convicting power of the Holy Spirit, was there working in the listeners. On that day three thousand were added to the church. The beginning of chapter 4 tells us that in the next day or so another two thousand were added.

This, then, is the dual action of the Spirit. He takes the preacher, the speaker, whether in a pulpit or in private, and gives this enabling. Then the Holy Spirit acts upon the ones who are listening and deals with their minds and hearts and wills. Both things happen at the same time.”

— David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Courageous Christianity, 1st U. S. edition, Crossway Books, Wheaton, IL, 2001, p. 190.

For more information on Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones see this summary post or the MLJ Recording Trust.

More than once I have been accused of appropriating Lloyd-Jones to my charismatic cause. Today I want to restart my MLJ Monday tradition by sharing a quote which comes from a context where the Doctor is strongly disagreeing with one of my positions. He is talking about the so-called Ephesians 4 ministries. The Doctor divides these into two groups, believing that all but pastors and teachers are temporary. I believe that they all continue, although I think of modern-day apostles as being, in some important ways, different to the original. Anyway, the Doctor then goes on to speak into what is perhaps a less interesting discussion, but one that is worth opening up nonetheless. Does Paul have in mind two distinct groups, the pastors and the teachers, or one group of people who are both pastors and teachers? Let's see what he has to say:

The permanent offices are described as those of ‘pastors and teachers.’ This group is much simpler to understand, although there has been much dispute as to whether pastors and teachers are two different offices. I agree with those who say that they are one. Were they two separate offices we would expect to read, ‘He gave some, apostles; some, prophets; some, evangelists; some, pastors; some, teachers’; but the apostle writes, ‘some, pastors and teachers,’ linking the two together; and generally speaking, these two offices are found in the same man. They apply to a more settled state of the Church, and have persisted throughout the centuries. The office of a pastor is generally concerned about government and instruction and rule and direction. It is borrowed, of course, from the picture of a shepherd. The shepherd shepherds his flock, keeps the sheep in order, directs them where to go and where to feed, brings them back to the fold, looks after their safety and guards them against enemies liable to attack them. It is a great office, but unfortunately it is a term which has become debased. A pastor is a man who is given charge of souls. He is not merely a nice, pleasant man who visits people and has an afternoon cup of tea with them, or passes the time of day with them. He is the guardian, the custodian, the protector, the organizer, the director, the ruler of the flock. The teacher gives instruction in doctrine, in truth. The Apostle proceeds to elaborate this, showing that we need to be built up, and that we must not remain ‘babes.’ We must be protected against ‘every wind of doctrine,’ and the way to do so is to give instruction and teaching.

Although I say that these two offices generally go together and have done so throughout the long history of the Church, sometimes one man has had more of a pastoral gift than a teaching or preaching gift; at other times a man has more of a teaching and preaching gift than a pastoral gift. This is a matter of individual variation according to the gift of the Spirit. But in the Church you have these offices, these men who teach and preach and care for the souls of the members of the church."

— David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Christian Unity, Studies in Ephesians (Chapter 4, verses 1 through 16), Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1972, p. 192.

For more information on Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, see this summary post or the MLJ Recording Trust.

UPDATE
I have had an e-mail from a correspondent who strongly believes that Lloyd-Jones was wrong about pastors and teachers being one office. My correspondent cited the grammatical work of Dan Wallace (see p. 284 of his Greek Grammar—Beyond the Basics) and an article on the evangelist, which discusses this point (p. 30ff).

I also have had another e-mail on the subject which said, "We actually had to study a full-length technical paper on this verse by Dan Wallace as part of our second-year Greek course. He does not argue that they must be two separate offices—he does not go that far. What he says is that the Greek language does not demand that they be one office. We should determine the answer from the context. Personally I go with theoretically separate giftings which are very commonly held by the same person. (Apostles can also be teachers, etc.)"

This is the first post in several I'll be doing in what I call “remote blogging.” A few times when Tim Challies and others have been at conferences, I've shared extracts from their posts here on my blog. This time Tim is not at the Resurgence Conference on Preaching, but the Resurgence folks are offering live videocasts of their sessions.

Here, then, are my thoughts on Mark Driscoll's talk, which is taking place right now as I'm listening to it sitting in my room here in London. (Incidentally ... No! I'm not in my pajamas!) The usual "rules" apply—these are my notes taken in real time, and I may well have missed important bits or imported a few of my own ideas as I go along! This was posted within seconds of Driscoll ending his sermon. I'm trying to decide whether to stay up another hour or so to cover Mahaney. I know I won't be able to do all of them! Whether I do CJ's will depend on if they have worship or start straight with him at 4 p.m. Seattle time.

In the first session Driscoll began with a rallying call to put preachers in their rightful place. The world came into existence with a sermon preached by God. The Bible is full of “God said ...” God's Word does what it is intended to do and brings life. We preachers are following God's example. God is not the only preacher. In Genesis 3, the serpent preached a false message. Satan tells us we need not preach because he would like his voice to be the only one heard. Our forefathers listened to the wrong sermon, but even after that, God preached another sermon which promised the coming of Jesus.

Proclamation is crucial—Jesus was announced by John the Baptist's preaching. Jesus' own ministry began with preaching, and so should ours! Jesus was a proclamation preacher; he didn't say, "Let's discuss it in groups"! It infuriates Driscoll that ANYONE can call into question the validity of preaching when God does it, then comes to earth and preaches! Yes, Jesus did other things, but he was a preacher first and foremost. He drew crowds. Jesus had thousands come to hear him.

The first thing that must be proclaimed is the cross of Jesus for our sins and in our place. Liars who work for the devil will tell you that you don't need to proclaim the cross centrally as it is offensive. But if you don't preach it you will offend God. Seeker insensitivity is “hot.” Preaching needs to be anointed by the Spirit. When the Spirit came at Pentecost, they immediately went out and preached! And the Church was born! The preached word brought forth the Church, just as God's original preached Word brought forth creation.

We should connect the ground war with the air war, that is, connect the small groups to the Sunday sermon and apply them there. The Apostles were devoted to prayer and the ministry of the Word. Driscoll went through Acts showing the emphasis that was placed on proclamation preaching.

We must keep on preaching in spite of persecution. Some of us are too cowardly. After one lousy e-mail, we're in the fetal position and our wives are rubbing our backs. We need courage. People will react. When people say we need to do things in the way the early Church did them, Driscoll agrees. “Let's yell at people!” We have to protect our people from the wolves! The world is full of wolves—they're publishing books, making videos, etc. There is so much preaching in Acts. Don't let your people dishonor the pulpit. Some of us, in an effort to be humble, allow others to be proud.

The reformers defined the Church. The Church is both universal and local. The Church is both visible and invisible. They discussed what constituted a rightly gathered Church. They said it was about preaching the gospel and the administration of the sacraments. The Church is led by Jesus. He is not just our example. He is no longer merely a humble marginalized peasant. If we could see Jesus today we would see him like Isaiah saw him—glorified! We must teach Jesus' exaltation, not only his incarnation.

The Church needs qualified leaders. These need to be male. This issue is a "border issue." If you don't teach male elders, then you are in a different country! Everything will be seen differently. The gospel must be preached by those men. The sacraments must be administrated—baptism and communion, and Church discipline must be carried out. In preaching, the Word is heard, in sacraments the Word is seen, and in Church discipline the Word is protected.

Driscoll challenged us. When was the last time you called your people to repentance and brought them to the Lord's table? When was the last time your church disciplined someone who persistently lived an unrepentant life while claiming to be a Christian? The authority comes from the head of the Church. Elders must be godly. Their life styles need to be worthy of imitation. Preaching is not all that we must do in churches—but it is the FIRST THING WE MUST DO! It is the air war. Everything else comes after it—the ground war. Everyone is looking at the effects, no one is asking about the cause!

Driscoll was very clear about the invalidity of many groups today who function as "house churches," but have no authority and no preaching. God's grace is one-way, and so is preaching. Many emerging churches try to build communities without leadership, and without a declaration of God's Word. How can such a group be a church if no one is preaching the Bible?

The devil tried to have a debate—did God really say? Why should anyone tell you what you have done wrong?

Preachers—you must preach FOR your church. You must preach knowing what a church is. Leaders must build, defend, protect, and shepherd their church. "Internet churches" are not churches as there are no sacraments, no authority, no relationships, and no church discipline. Multi-campus churches need a bit more than just a screen for the preaching to be displayed. Although Driscoll's church does have many campuses, each campus has its own pastor who performs the sacraments, disciplines, and pastors.

Driscoll ended with the last sermon preached—that in Revelation 14. It was preached by an angel. God was the first preacher. An angel is the last preacher. In-between, we are to preach. What an awesome responsibility!

No. 16 on the list of most-read posts on this blog appeared on July 20, 2005. In this post I simply asked my readers to identify their favorite preachers, and I listed my own personal favorites. I have retained all of the comments from this post and have now added them to the end. To see my list and some of my readers' lists, click here.

If you are interested in letting me know who are YOUR favorite well-known living preachers, please e-mail adrian.warnock@gmail.com and place BLOG PREACHERS SURVEY in the subject line. We will then add your comments to the list.

John Piper: - "God exists to be worshipped—to be admired and treasured and desired and praised. Therefore, the Word of God is written primarily to produce worship. This means that if that Word is handled like a hot-dish recipe or a repair manual, it is mishandled. And the people will suffer. The Truth of God begs to be handled with exultation. And our hearts yearn for this and need it. Something in us starts to die when precious and infinitely valuable realities are handled without feelings and words of wonder and exultation. That is, a church starts to die without preaching.

But, of course, this assumes something massive. To treasure the Truth, and to love the Truth, and be impassioned about the Truth, and to exult in the Truth, you have to know the Truth. So it's not enough to say that preaching is exultation. We must also say it is "expository exultation." It is exultation in the Truth of God's Word. And the exultation is in proportion to the Truth delivered..." READ MORE

It's time once again to review another year's worth of blogging here at my place. I have made it something of a tradition to look back and reflect on the year that has passed. I have done this previously in December 2006, 2005, and 2004. The format is simple: I highlight some of the posts that I remember most, or enjoyed writing the most over the year. This time I will break it down into a series of posts.

This year I began January's blogging—after extending my customary Christmas break slightly longer than previously—by taking up my autobiographical story with a post entitled My Story Part Five—Learning to Value Being, Not Doing. I did not return to my story again this year, so this remains surely the longest running, as yet unfinished, series on my blog. I am sure that I will eventually return to this and catch up to the current day. In that post I talked about the value of silence and reflection.

In one of the shortest, but most personally challenging posts of the year, in the second post of 2007 I shared some Reflections of a Returning Blogger, citing Scripture that said few words were wiser than many. I suspect this contributed to a trend this year on my blog to shorter posts and, hopefully, to more careful consideration of what I say.

I also spent a few days in January on an interview with Wendy Alsup, a deacon in the Mars Hill Church—Seattle, where Mark Driscoll is pastor.

In February I began what would be an extended series on preaching with two posts that quoted the Together for the Gospel Statement Article 4, John Piper, and Martyn Lloyd-Jones on Expository Preaching.

I also mentioned that I had just heard a new book on the atonement would soon be released—Pierced for Our Transgressions. Little did I know then just how much I would be focused on that subject this year. I shared the audio of a talk I had given late in 2006 for Jubilee entitled What is the Bible?

I remember being stirred to ask Should We be Optimistic or Pessimistic About the Future? and challenging my readers to find a quote I was sure I had once read from Spurgeon. That readers' challenge remains open and can be answered via e-mail on reading Spurgeon's Prediction of a Future Revival. I did manage to find one quote where Spurgeon asks the question Will More Be Saved Than Lost?

It was also great to publish the news that I was able to play a small part in restoring the works of Charles Simeon to a larger audience.

I seem to have been somewhat distracted from my posts about preaching, and only quoted C. S. Lewis on the Need for Plain English Preaching all month. I did quote one of my greatest living hero's impressions of one of my greatest preaching heroes of the past—I am speaking, of course, about John Piper on Martyn Lloyd-Jones.

In March I returned to the subject of preaching, and there were a significant number of posts which culminated in Ten Conclusions About Expository Preaching. In the middle of this I wrote about The Risks and Rewards of Using Technology in Sermon Preparation.

I posted about the T4G Articles 5-6—The Attributes of God and the Trinity, which included the audio of another talk I had given at Jubilee late in 2006.

One of the traditions of this blog is that every now and then I engage in a gloves-off debate with the Pyromaniacs. In March, one of these was summarized in a post I entitled Am I a Thrill Seeker?

If I remember correctly, that debate with the Pyros was, at least in part, sparked by possibly the most controversial post of the year anywhere in the Christian blogosphere. It was published over on Desiring God, and my reflections on it were entitled John Piper Hears The Voice Of God. I also remember the call that went out that month for Prayer for an Exhausted Mark Driscoll.

March was a hectic blogging month, but nothing would prepare me for what was to come in April, especially as I had written many of my forthcoming posts on atonement in a single sitting and thought I would have a quiet time as my editor faithfully published them all for me. That, however, must wait for the next installment of this year in review series.

For me, once I have prioritized my own personal inner life and relationship with God, then my dear family, a clear third place in my affections is given without a moment's doubt to my local church. Family does come before the church, but of course our church is like an extension of my family and we all love being a part of it. It is hard to believe that it was as long ago as 1995 that we first joined our current church.

This past year has been another amazing one for all of us at Jubilee London. Serving as part of the core team and a regular preacher in this vibrant, multicultural, growing church is one of the biggest privileges of my life. It is no wonder that so many of our leaders and people are saying things like, "I have no intention of leaving." I know, for us as a family, we currently believe that we will be here for at least twenty more years, and are thrilled at the prospect. Why would we want to go anywhere else?

Who could forget our international giving day or the day we turned our main service into church in the park, or for that matter, the day the whole church got an invitation to a wedding? (Sadly I missed both the last two of these events, with the latter happening while George was being born.) The memorable events went on—Alpha, new small groups, clusters of small groups meeting together, men's and women's days, and of course, lots of different kinds of food from all over the world. People becoming Christians, getting healed, and yes, a couple of them dying very well, still full of faith in the Jesus that has now welcomed them into heaven. These wonderful memories will go on and on, but they just keep growing as more keep getting added!

Over the course of the last year we were also thrilled to have a number of well-known preachers visit us. I am humbled that I am still asked to share God's Word with the congregation. I preached ten times this past year, and all the audio and notes are available on the pages of this blog as follows:

• How to Define Revival and be Revived Personally


• Reviving Prayer (1 Kings 17:1 to 2 Kings 2:14)


• The Reviving Power of God's Word (Psalm 119)


• Resurrection Hope—An Easter Sermon (1 Corinthians 15)


• Missional Bible Study (Psalm 119)


• Abraham—The First Missional Believer


• Jacob—The Missional Rebel


• Alive Together With Christ (Ephesians 2:1-10)


• The Christian's Warfare (Ephesians 6)


• The Risen Jesus (Revelation 1)

Many of you will never get to visit our church, although, of course, we would be happy to welcome any of you! But you can visit with us by listening to our messages available as a podcast or at Jubilee Church's website.

You can help choose nine topics for Mark Driscoll to preach on in January. In a novel idea, he is allowing the whole Internet to vote on a set of questions he will answer in a series of sermons. You have until the 14th to vote and you have ten votes a day. Voting is surprisingly close, though it does drop off after about the tenth question, so I suspect the final list will look similar to what is there now.

Regular readers of my blog will remember that, together with my pastor, Tope Koleoso, we had the joy of being able to chat with Mark Driscoll when we went to Edinburgh to hear him preach live. We were deeply impressed with his graciousness and kindness to us. In this, he reminded me of a man who is one of my other living Christian heroes—Terry Virgo.

I know that many people were disappointed not to be able to make it to Scotland to hear Mark. So I am delighted to relay an announcement from Terry Virgo's blog today. Mark Driscoll has agreed to speak next July at the Newfrontiers Leaders Conference in Brighton, UK. Here is how Terry begins his post:

"The last time I checked, the Pope was still a Catholic, the death rate was still hovering at around 100%, and the chances of getting Mark Driscoll to speak at a conference in the UK in 2008 were averaging at zero.

It is therefore with great delight that I can announce that we have, with the aid of certain friends (for an inspired guess see Adrian Warnock’s blog), arranged for him to be our main visiting speaker at Together on a Mission in Brighton next year, 8-11 July 2008.

In recent months I have found myself listening to downloads of Mark Driscoll’s preaching, probably more than anybody else’s. I find him completely arresting, relevant, Biblical, funny, aggressive, and packing a real punch. I believe he will do us a lot of good.

I love his value system and I am impressed by what has been accomplished by God through his ministry based in Seattle, where a church of several thousand has been built in a few years, starting from almost nothing and largely not through church swapping, but conversion.

He is theologically reformed, Biblically orthodox, and culturally relevant, and particularly addresses the post-modern world with remarkable insight. I have just read his chapter in the Crossway publication, The Supremacy of Christ in a Post-Modern World. I found myself underlining sentence after sentence, and simply wrote ‘Wow!’ in the margin at the conclusion of the chapter. I am deeply grateful to God that he will be with us." Read more . . .

This is a fantastic piece of news. Terry and Mark are both pastors of pastors. Church planting is a major need of our world today. Leaders themselves need to be trained.

As an example of Terry's gifting in operation, he has recently finished a series of posts on the vital role of the pastor in the life of a church. He re-examines the biblical teaching. I will finish this post by giving you a taste of each post in the series, but do go and read them all; they are worthy of careful study.

Church Leaders

As a movement, Newfrontiers has tended to emphasise the role of apostles and prophets. The church was originally built on the foundation of apostles and prophets (Ephesians 2:20) so they gave the people of God their fundamental identity. I have argued that we were not built on a pastoral foundation.

My argument has often been expressed by noting that pastors are called to care for and feed the flock and meet the flock’s needs. An over-emphasis, therefore, on the pastoral role can result in pre-occupation with needs. We could become need-centred instead of apostolic and prophetic, thereby missing God’s intention and forgetting the bigger picture, building churches that gradually become foreign to the atmosphere of the New Testament.

I have been alarmed at the possible danger of a church becoming introverted, developing a culture where personal preference dominates and shepherds major on discerning and serving people’s so-called ‘felt needs’. However, in taking this stance, we may have failed to bring adequate positive Biblical teaching about the vital role of pastors and teachers. They are, of course, the most visible ministers in the local church. They have the most ‘hands on’ role among the flock. Read more . . .

Shepherds of the Flock

Jesus didn’t say, ‘I am the good apostle,’ or ‘the good prophet,’ or even ‘the good evangelist,’ but happily claimed to be the Good Shepherd. . .

Although the Lord was their ultimate shepherd, it is clear that God actually enlisted men to fulfil the shepherding role on His behalf. . .

As the apostles go, their intuitive strategy in obeying the command was to plant churches, establish flocks and appoint shepherds to care for them. Read more . . .

Other Sheep I Must Bring

When Billy Graham came to the UK in the 1950's and ‘60s, the call to return to God would have been generally comprehended by that generation. Today we live in a different era and though people can be born again through encountering the simplest message, we must not assume that initial conversion will result in inevitable Christian maturity, or even basic understanding of Christian living.

Deconstructing people’s world view
The role of the modern shepherd includes a call to deconstruct people’s previous world view. Nothing can be taken for granted. Lives need to be re-formed. Coming from a fragmented and aimless society devoid of any trace of Christian values, people need to be re-socialised and taught how to relate in godly ways.

Raised on self-indulgence, consumerism and rampant individualism, the new convert won’t automatically be transformed into a mature Christian who knows how to conduct himself in the household of God (1 Timothy 3:15).

God has promised to give His people shepherds after His own heart who will feed them with knowledge and understanding (Jeremiah 3:15). This feeding requires a radical approach. We are not called to build on a false foundation with teachings that imply merely personal fulfilment or the grasping of the individual’s full potential, or how to love oneself. The shelves of many a Christian bookshop are filled with titles which appeal to personal fulfilment as the goal of the Christian life. Coming from a culture where demanding your personal rights seems to be the bottom line, new Christians hardly need that diet. Read more . . .

Spirit-inspired Preaching

. . . Holy Spirit-inspired preaching brings about an encounter with God that demands a verdict and produces a changed life based on revelation, faith and love, not cold obedience to external rules.

God’s flock will intuitively hear His voice and respond as truth is fed to them by called and anointed pastor/teachers. Gradually a culture of God-centredness will emerge characterised by worship, faith, grace, mercy, respect, service and the awareness of being an alien people whose fundamental citizenship lies elsewhere (Philippians 3:20) . . .

The shepherd’s ability to feed and be a channel of God’s grace will result in the gathering of a flock. The sheep gather to the gifted anointing of shepherding and thus a flock forms.

The responsibility of the shepherds is not simply to expound truth but to develop relationships of love and trust, and in some cases to ‘parent’ a flock often made up of those who have never been parented before. Read more . . .

A few months ago it was my privilege to interview Rob Rufus. The audio version of that interview is available online, but thanks to two readers (Dan Bowden and a friend of Andrew Fountain) who both sent me transcripts of the MP3 lately, I am now able to publish the text version. It has only been lightly edited, so please do forgive us any grammatical errors that come from this being a conversation rather than careful writing. If you want to listen to the interview, the MP3 is available to download on the original post.

Adrian
The Together on a Mission conference has just ended, but I’m here, together with my pastor, Tope, and we’re here with Rob Rufus. Rob is going to talk to us a little bit about how the conference has been for him, and tell us a little bit more about his own church and his own family of churches, and just really share with us about that. So he’s kindly agreed to sit down—he’s probably a bit tired—but we’re going to have a good time, hopefully, this afternoon. So, Rob, first of all, how has this conference been for you?

Rob Rufus
I think it’s been very staggering and astonishing in a delightful way because what I experienced here was almost like the reward of the fruit of a number of years of New Frontiers preparing themselves, building a good wineskin. And by “wineskin” I mean the kind of authority structures we build the church with—biblical values and biblical vision. We are now positioned to really see God come in an amazing way. So I felt there was such a liberty and an openness to God’s visitation, to the supernatural of God, and I think a lot of that’s got to do with the understanding that the churches have on the theology of grace—the understanding of grace—and the security that we have in Christ. So, it’s been an incredibly enlarging time here; just the spirit of faith among the people, the sense of a global vision, and yet doing it together as a team, doing it together in a sense of partnership. So, for me, the overall sense of the ethos and the atmosphere was one of a group of people very zealous, very passionate, full of vision, yet who haven’t kissed their brains goodbye, well-grounded in good theology, sound doctrine, open to the power of the Holy Spirit, and real people who are really friendly with one another and enjoy one another’s company, and that’s been a delight.

Adrian
Excellent! Yeah, and it’s been great. Obviously, one of the features of this conference has been your own preaching, Rob. I just wonder for those who have not been at the conference, and perhaps have been following the blogs—how would you summarize your key message, just in a couple of sentences, of this conference—what you’d like people to take away, because, to be honest, taking notes hasn’t been that easy! (Loud laughter) Well, you could say that!

Rob Rufus
Yes, absolutely! I mean, I’m the worst person for writing notes myself, and then, of course, for people to be able to pick up notes, because I tend to be more spontaneous and impromptu. Probably what I’d like people to primarily take away in a few sentences is that, of course, God is turning up the supernatural—the volume of the demonstration of his power—not just for the sake of sensationalism for us to find ourselves popular or famous because of that, but because he wants to be glorified in the world, he wants to get the world’s attention. The primary essence I would like people to take away is that we don’t seek primarily the power of God, but we seek the person of God. We seek who he is, his glory. Because his power is what he does, but his glory and his presence is who he is, and that’s the only thing that will fulfill people—to know him personally. That sense of intimacy is such a delight; it gives us that fulfillment. Out of that he hides his power within his presence so you can live a supernatural life in a natural way because you’re not having to fast forty days to get the power—you can just walk with the person of God in intimacy and he releases his power out of that relationship with himself.

Adrian
Yes. I guess that some Christians sitting at home listening to this—I mean, I get readers on my blog from all kinds of different backgrounds—they’re going to listen to that and think, “What is this guy talking about? A relationship with God? I thought we just had a relationship with a Book!” What would you say to those kinds of people?

Rob Rufus
Well, it’s like—when I met my wife for the first time I was at university so I couldn’t spend time with her because the university was in a different city. So during the first six months, I could only see her every second or third weekend. We corresponded in those days—it was a long enough time ago it was by letters, not e-mails!—(loud laughter) and although her letters were perfumed and I loved reading her letters, I didn’t have a love relationship primarily with her letters, but with the author of the letters. So I longed to get to see the person who was writing the letter and meet her. So the Bible is, in a sense, perfumed with the presence of God—it’s God-breathed; it’s really his love letter to us. It’s an introduction for us to get to know the Author of the Book. That’s the delight!

Adrian
Yes, very good! So you are not one of those “charismaniacs” who want to throw out the Bible then, Rob?

Rob Rufus
Absolutely not, Adrian! That, I think, is the tragedy. Sadly the charismatics or Pentecostals (to some degree, not all!) have been known as a people who are kind of going on a binge of subjectivity. It’s all self-indulgent. You have got to have theological references to make sure that the supernatural experiences you are having are authentic because we do have the counterfeit in the world today; we do have deception in the world today. The Bible is the foundation that authenticates that we are having legitimate miraculous encounters with God.

Continued in part 2 . . .

The Urban Reformation shares this great quote from the 20th century's greatest English-speaking preacher. We need to listen to this as he explains what is wrong with so much of our preaching. It reminds me of some of my ten conclusions on preaching, and some of the posts in the series of which that post was the summary.

Page 93 from the book “Preaching & Preachers” states—

“. . . Modern sophisticated man may laugh at this, but it is only when we begin to know something of this melting quality that we shall be real preachers. Of course a man who tries to produce an effect becomes an actor, and is an abominable impostor. But the fact is that when ‘the love of God is shed abroad’ in a man’s heart as it was in Whitefield’s pathos is inevitable.

This element of pathos and of emotion is, to me, a very vital one. It has been so seriously lacking in the present century, and perhaps especially among Reformed people. We tend to lose our balance and to become over-intellectual, indeed almost to despise the element of feeling and emotion. We are such learned men, we have such a great grasp of the truth, that we tend to despise feeling. The common herd, we feel, are emotional and sentimental, but they have no understanding!

Is not this the danger, is not this the tendency, to despise feeling which is an essential part of man put there by God? We do not know what it is to be carried away, we no longer know what it is to be moved profoundly. . . .”

He goes on to say on page 95—

“. . . Can a man see himself as a damned sinner without emotion? Can a man look into hell without emotion? Can a man listen to the thunderings of the Law and feel nothing? Or conversely, can a man really contemplate the love of God in Christ Jesus and feel no emotion? The whole position is utterly ridiculous. I fear that many people today in their reaction against excesses and emotionalism put themselves into a position in which, in the end, they are virtually denying the Truth. The Gospel of Jesus Christ takes up the whole man, and if what purports to be the Gospel does not do so it is not the Gospel. The Gospel is meant to do that, and it does that. The whole man is involved because the Gospel leads to regeneration; and so I say that this element of pathos and emotion, this element of being moved, should always be prominent in preaching.”

In the context of my ongoing debate with the fire-lovers about the best way to critique those from other churches, the following clip is most illuminating. Mark Driscoll is not known for being a weak feminist man. In this video he gives us a fantastic example of how to call out the errors of the "health, wealth, and prosperity" movement, and specifically Joel Osteen. He does so with clarity, and is very firm. But he does so with grace.

I am willing to bet that this is a recent clip from Driscoll, and am very impressed at the way God seems to be working on his heart. He drips humility, graciousness, and yet a passionate love for the truth. What irony that I should find myself pointing to the man who has often been called the 'cussing pastor' as a model of gracious rebuke. I love the look on Driscoll's face when he says, "Just so you know . . . that's not right!" Watch this clip in its entirety—it includes a section of a sermon from Joel Osteen, along with Driscoll's response to it. He then goes on to speak about that culturally irrelevant word 'sin.' (HT: Reformation Nation)



For more information, see my interview with Mark Driscoll, his blog, the Acts 29 network and Mars Hill Church.

Over at Unashamed Workmen, there are a number of great quotes on the vital place of prayer in preaching. The one that really stood out was in the comments section. I think this quote expresses perfectly why we need to plead with the resurrected Jesus to pour out his Spirit on us before we dare think of preaching:

“This divine unction is the one distinguishing feature that separates true gospel preaching from all other methods of presenting truth. It backs and interpenetrates the revealed truth with all the force of God. It illumines the Word and broadens and enrichens [sic] the intellect and empowers it to grasp and apprehend the Word. It qualifies the preacher’s heart, and brings it to that condition of tenderness, of purity, of force and light that are necessary to secure the highest results. This unction gives to the preacher liberty and enlargement of thought and soul—a freedom, fullness, and directness of utterance that can be secured by no other process.”

—Power Through Prayer by E. M. Bounds

I want to mention today a man who both John Owen and Charles Spurgeon held in high regard. Most know of John Bunyan as a writer, but he was also one of the most famous preachers of his era. Here is what one of the Pyromaniacs said of Bunyan, his preaching, and and his book, Pilgrim's Progress:

"It may be the most popular book ever written in English. It was a favorite of Charles Spurgeon's, who read it at least once-a-year, and said before he died that he had probably read it more than a hundred times.

Spurgeon wasn't the only important admirer of Bunyan. John Owen, probably the most prominent and respected academic leader of Bunyan's own era, once went to hear Bunyan preach. Charles II, hearing of it, asked the learned doctor of divinity why someone as thoroughly educated as he would want to hear a mere tinker preach. Owen replied, "May it please your Majesty, if I could possess the tinker's abilities to grip men's hearts, I would gladly give in exchange all my learning."

Today I continue with part three of my interview with Greg Haslam. In part one, Greg told us a little about himself, and in part two he discussed his relationship to Newfrontiers and his move to Westminster Chapel.

Adrian
If Westminster Chapel has stood for anything over the years it is surely the primacy of preaching. Can you tell us a bit more about your own view of preaching and its importance?

Greg
I've said it all in the collection of fifty-two addresses from our Preachers' Conference, now published as Preach the Word! (Sovereign World 2006). Preaching is primary because, along with dependence on the work of the Holy Spirit, just about everything else that's good in the Church and in individual lives flows from it. Done well, through accurate explanation and application of the Scriptures in Spirit-empowered preaching, God's voice is heard, God's people obey him, and incredible life in the Spirit is the certain result. We live at a time of increasing Biblical illiteracy among even lively evangelical Christians. Sick churches are all too numerous. Christians are ignorant of their faith and often too cowardly to defend and share it with others. Preaching goes a long way to remedy these things.

I believe we need to see restored to the Church every “flavor” of word-ministry listed in Ephesians 4:11ff—apostolic, prophetic, evangelistic, pastoral, and didactic—so that our people are theologically well-informed, compassionate, skilled, missional, cutting edge, and truly well-grounded. When we pray for revival we are primarily praying for preachers and a new visitation of the Holy Spirit. Preaching should disturb the comfortable and comfort the disturbed! It's not “any old style of preaching” we need; it is the living voice of Christ speaking his “now word” to his Church. This is why the prophetic dimension to good preaching is essential, whether the preacher is an evangelist, a pastor, a teacher, an apostle, or a prophet, and I believe in the present-day ministry of all five (see my chapter “Ephesians 4 ministries and Church Unity” in Preach the Word!).

Adrian
What do you feel about the state of preaching in the Church as a whole today? Are you encouraged or discouraged?

Greg
Mostly discouraged. Sermons seem to represent some form or expression of “Christianity Lite.” They are short, trendy, adrift from the serious handling of Scripture, apologetic, flirting with post-modernism, fearful of any note of authority, caught up with the “spirit of the age,” often “politically correct,” and mostly ineffective. We tend to sound like the “Court prophets” of Israel in the pay of the king, rather than those who have “been in the counsel of the Most High” and then dare to speak what we have seen and heard! Preaching should convey a sense of awe and fear in the presence of a transcendent God — not just God all-matey but God Almighty!

It was due to my growing perception of the perilous state of preaching in the UK that I gathered nineteen of the best preachers this country has to offer in order to speak at the eight-month conference Preach the Word! in 2003-2004. The result more than met my expectations, and the 650 delegates who enthusiastically attended seemed to share my opinion!

I took less than an hour to plan the contents. I wrote over fifty themes we should address and then picked about twenty top guys to address them. All but two accepted, and what a brilliant job they did! We had outstanding pastors, evangelists, prophets, teachers, and apostles. I basically urged them not to go to their graves along with all of their best secrets! They came up with the goods and shared brilliantly their best insights into preaching and how to do it well. The speakers included many personal heroes like John Stott, Terry Virgo, David Pawson, and Jeff Lucas. In fact, most of them are my much admired friends. I receive testimonies regularly, from home and overseas, as to just how effective this material has proved to be. The event was a true Word and Spirit gathering, and all of our lives were changed by it.

Adrian
How did you manage to bring together such a wide variety of preachers for this conference and book? Did you find that you all agreed about preaching, or did you have a wide range of differing perspectives to discuss?

Greg
They were nearly all extremely enthusiastic and willing to do this. They ranged from fairly conservative evangelicals, through radical charismatics. There were Anglicans, Free Churches, Charismatics, and Restorationists. Some were Arminian, others Calvinistic in theology, and all points in-between. Between them all, there was an accumulation of hundreds of years of experience in leading and preaching ministry (perhaps thousands of years!). They all got on well together, and the atmosphere of each day was terrific. They had differing emphases, but all honored God and the Bible, and all were convinced about the importance and centrality of preaching. The wide range of perspectives present was what made this conference somewhat unique and so invaluable. It fostered the kind of unity I believe in. And some people changed their prejudices, and their minds, on some controversial issues as a result.

Adrian
Can you tell us a bit more about the main message of your book and why my readers should go out and buy it?

Greg
The main message is this: “We need better preaching, biblical preaching, Holy Spirit anointed preaching, effective preaching, with signs following. And here are some big clues as to how this can happen.” What more could you ask?

Continued in part four, "Greg Haslam On Unity Versus Doctrinal Integrity."

To find out more about Greg Haslam, visit Westminster Chapel’s website, or download mp3s of conference messages by Greg Haslam.

It is a pleasure to welcome to my blog, Greg Haslam, who is the current successor to Martyn Lloyd-Jones at Westminster Chapel in London.

Adrian
To begin with Greg, can you tell us a bit about yourself?

Greg
I am a 'scouser,' born in Liverpool in 1953, who lived in a rough area of the city called Bootle (where the kids played 'tic' with hatchets). I came from a broken home, with much sadness due to my parents' marital breakdown and eventual divorce when we children were still very young. It was persistent school friends who later told me fully about Christ. I attended a Billy Graham big-screen Gospel crusade relay to Liverpool on June 30, 1967, and after a big emotional struggle with doubt and many fears that Christ would not have me (the scars of rejection were still there from the break-up of my parents’ marriage and the lack of a father's love), I came to faith in Christ that night. That was 40 years ago! My whole world and life-direction dramatically changed, and interest in theology was stirred soon after with input from my new Baptist church radical youth leaders. Two years later, at the Keswick Convention, listening to a fairly young John Stott on II Timothy (four hours of amazing teaching), I felt the call to become a preacher. This started, remarkably, within twelve months of that Keswick convention in that I was invited to preach at an independent Methodist church and became a regular on their circuit as a ‘the boy preacher’ on a Honda 50!

Not long after, I met and married my wife, Ruth, and we now have three amazing adult sons who are all serving Christ. The eldest two, James and Andrew, are marred (a doctor and a pastor) and the third, Joshua, is studying Philosophy at UCL. We have one gorgeous granddaughter from James and Emily. Andrew has just started work at the Chapel leading our 18’s to 30's ministry.

I studied Theology and History at Durham and the London Theological Seminary (Dr. Lloyd-Jones' new venture in ministerial training), and I became pastor of Winchester Family Church (later to be part of Newfrontiers) at age 27. I stayed there for twenty-one years until my move to Westminster Chapel in 2002. My interests include all kinds of books (of course!), movies (especially gritty westerns, war movies, and thrillers), good food, good music, philosophy and culture, apologetics, writing, speaking, and motorcycling.

Adrian
How did you come to be preaching in one of the world’s most famous pulpits? What was the journey like? What is it like to be the successor to men like Dr. Martyn Lloyd Jones and Dr. R. T. Kendall?

Greg
My journey as a pastor in Winchester (1980—2002) was a hard learning curve which included making the transition from hard-line Reformed theology that either ignored the Holy Spirit to a criminal degree or resisted him; through my own experience of baptism in the Spirit, desperation for change in the church I pastored, a fresh vision of what church can and ought to be; to the embrace of a full-blown Word and Spirit theology and ecclesiology, along with an optimistic post-millennial eschatology and a restorationist/revivalist view of the Gospel of God's kingdom with its total world and life view.

Westminster Chapel's fame worldwide is deservedly based upon its ministers' loyalty to Scripture and faithful declaration of it, an influence that has spanned the world throughout the 20th century. My predecessor, Dr. R. T. Kendall, wrote to me in late 2000. He was looking for a successor who was 'a preacher, Reformed, open to the Spirit, and pastoral in heart' (PROP for short!). He was convinced I was the man. I was very happy where I was in Winchester, but I dared not ignore the 'call' that was coming to me to consider a move. I instantly felt that God's hand was upon this. Unfortunately, key figures in the Chapel were not all convinced! There was resistance to having a Newfrontiers man there. The exploration process took a whole year. That year, God gave me over fifty personal prophecies that made it clear I would be going there, mostly from men who knew nothing about what was afoot. I also experienced some very special days 'preaching with a view' at the Chapel. I guessed God knew that I would need this level of divine affirmation! I was eventually called. This meant that with great sadness for both myself and my wife, we had to leave Newfrontiers to do this as the Lord had told me that this was ‘For the sake of my wider kingdom purposes in London and beyond.' It's been an amazing five or so years since!

I've always worked hard, but this job has taken over my life! I preach more than ever, write, travel significantly, and have faced the challenge of trying to build a New Testament style church in what has historically been known as a 'preaching center'. Building a true Gospel-centered community of Word and Spirit authenticity has never been easy in commuter-congregation, metropolitan churches, but the task is God's will for this church. We have seen many new people join us and great changes in the feel, direction, joy, and sense of Holy Spirit-filled community among us. People have been saved and lives transformed. Many young people have joined us, bringing the average down by perhaps 25-30 years less.

Adrian
Most people still associate the pulpit of your church with men like R. T. Kendall and Martyn Lloyd-Jones, who preceded you. What does it feel like to try and fill their shoes?

Greg
I've never tried! I believe they wore different sized shoes to me! My shoes are the only ones I'm called to wear. I have to avoid imitation and be true to the man God made me to be. The advice of a black preacher to trainee preachers comes to mind: "Be who you is, ‘cos if you ain't who you is, then you is who you ain't!" I abhor artificial imitation of others in their style and content. God doesn't clone preachers, and each of us is a unique creation with a unique voice. So I try to remain secure in the style and approach I take. I am second to none in my love for and admiration of my predecessors, and I am discovering just how great Dr. George Campbell-Morgan was, too! I have read nearly all of Lloyd-Jones and Kendall's books and owe them a huge debt, but I know they would be the first to advise me to 'Just be yourself!'—and that's what I intend to be. I am presently hearing much from God about his vision for the Chapel's future. I think both the Doctor and RT would be very pleased, because I'm convinced that something like it is what they both wanted, but never saw.

Continued in part two, "Greg Haslam On Leaving Newfrontiers for Westminster Chapel."

To find out more about Greg Haslam, visit Westminster Chapel’s website, or download mp3s of conference messages by Greg Haslam.

To be quite honest, when reading the publicity, this talk was the one that most inspired me to attend the Theology for All conference. Mark is somewhat of an expert on Church history, and in particular the Puritans. As a pastor, he is concerned not merely with transferring knowledge to his congregation, but also in showing them the lessons to be learned from what has happened in the past.

Mark underlined the old maxim, “What one generation knows and teaches, the second generation assumes, and the third generation loses.” Our study of Church history is to insure that we don't fall into the same trap.

He explained that some people have mocked his interest in the Puritans. He has heard all the old jibes: “The Puritans hated bear bating, not because it gave pain to the bear, but because it caused pleasure to the viewers.” Or, “The Puritans went to America because they were hoping to find more restrictions than were permissible under English law.” They are often characterized as those who were afraid that somebody somewhere might be having a good time! Dever does not believe those descriptions to be accurate.

Dever spent time focusing on Richard Sibbes. He began by explaining that Sibbes argued that the killing sin that many religious people lay under is a dead formality. Sibbes was eager to underline that the Spirit is the one who quickens, not mere words and structure. Spirit-less Christianity is no Christianity at all. He was no mere formalist himself.

Sibbes was a great success. He was able to preach the Gospel faithfully throughout his life. Sadly, many he influenced to become preachers did not find the same ease in the established faith.

Sibbes had a great optimism in the progress of the Gospel. He was even optimistic when godly people endured trials. His view of the Church was typical of the “magisterial reformers” (e.g. Calvin, etc.). The common thread was that the preaching of the Word was the heart of the Church.

Sibbes and his Puritan brethren had an evangelical vision of the Church. They wanted to see freedom in order that the Gospel could be preached. He firmly believed in the centrality of the right sort of preaching for the health of the Church.

“Death came in by the ear . . . so life comes in by the ear.” What happened to Adam? He heard a voice he should not have heard. In the same way, the Gospel is heard.

Sibbes did not worship preaching, however. He argued that “unless the Spirit of Christ quicken them,” preaching and the Word were useless. It is the preaching of the Gospel rightly anointed that will reveal Jesus to us. The Spirit flows with the doctrine that we hear according to Sibbes. Sibbes expressed himself fully, with passionate emotion.

What lessons can we learn for today? Sibbes challenges us with the centrality of preaching. Preaching is more fundamental than Church authority structure. Sibbes had friends who were Congregationalists and Presbyterians. He wanted the Gospel to go forth in all churches. Denominations are secondary pragmatic creations. In fact, denominations are parachurch organizations. It is the local church that is entrusted with the preaching.

Preaching is generative—it creates new life. It is by the Holy Spirit taking the preaching of the Gospel and bringing life that people are saved. The solution to our problem is neither making our churches as 'pure' as possible (i.e. a rigorous application of church discipline). Nor is it making our churches as nonthreatening to visitors as possible. Rather we must allow God's Word to take center place. Preaching is more important than whatever else happens in the church's meetings. The Spirit restores the ability of the soul to appreciate God, and enables man to desire him.

Our social action is not as important as preaching the Gospel! Preaching is more central to the health of your church than anything else you can think of. The great trunk of the Puritan view of the Church is that the Gospel preached is the hope of the Church.

This Piper Friday, I would like to share an extract with you from an old sermon by John Piper. It rightly entwines three themes that were flowing through my head (and hence this blog!) earlier this year: The study of God’s Word, prayer, and the activity of the Holy Spirit. I am increasingly convinced that we need these three things more than anything else! Oh, God . . . make us preachers to be men like this!

“The minister of the Word must not choose between study and prayer. Study without prayer is the work of pride. Prayer without study is presumption. This is what the Proverbs teach: "If you cry out for insight and raise your voice for understanding (that's prayer), and if you seek it like silver and search for it as for hidden treasures (that's study), then you will understand the fear of the Lord and find the knowledge of God" (Proverbs 2:3–5).

Prayer humbles the heart and gives it the tone of Christ and makes it ready and open and sensitive to the truth of Scripture. But it is study that brings in the truth and fills the heart with joy and power.

Meeting the Almighty God
The ministry of the Word is a ministry of prayer because in prayer the minister meets God and has real living dealings with the Almighty so that his preaching and teaching have the aroma of God about them. The ministry of the Word must be a ministry of earnestness and intensity, and where are these to be found if not in our private meetings with God where you learn to know if you are real or just playing games?

One great Baptist pastor, Hezekiah Harvey, put it like this in 1879: "Moral earnestness can never be assumed; it is the attribute only of a soul profoundly feeling the power and reality of divine truth. The man, therefore, who would speak God's Word with the pungency and fervor of a Bunyan, a Baxter, a Flavel, or a Payson must, like them, be constant and fervent in prayer. The springs of spiritual life opened in the closet will pour forth never-failing streams of life in the pulpit."

Without much prayer all the study in the world will leave us shallow and lean. Without prayer there creeps in what Richard Cecil called the "low, managing, contriving, maneuvering temper of mind among us."

E.M. Bounds is right when he says, "What the Church needs today is not more machinery or more novel methods, but men whom the Holy Ghost can use — men of prayer, men mighty in prayer. The Holy Ghost does not flow through methods, but through men. He does not come on machinery, but on men. He does not anoint plans, but men — men of prayer."

Today we draw to a close our series on the attributes of God—which has been inspired by the T4G Statement—by publishing an article which, in an abridged form, has already been published in the online Comment magazine.

The article addresses the nature of God, but focuses on the fact that we need to learn to love this God—which is surely a good way for us to round off this series.

For more posts on the T4G Statement, Articles 1-4 see Ten Conclusions About Expository Preaching, and for more on Articles 5 and 6, see the following posts:

• Book Review on How Much Does God Foreknow?
  

• T4G Articles 5-6 — Martyn Lloyd-Jones on the Trinity and Attributes of God
  

• International Federation of Pentecostal and Charismatic Churches Issue Warning — Do Not Jump in Church This Weekend
  

• T4G Articles 5-6 — The Attributes of God and the Trinity
  

In the light of eternity, we are all beginners in the task of learning to love God. It is the most significant challenge faced by the Christian. When asked what is the greatest commandment, Jesus said, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind” It is a measure of our spiritual weakness that we see this challenge as somehow less critical than the challenge to live morally.

How can I love someone I have never seen? We may experience a form of “love” for a character we read about in a book or see in a movie, but is that anything like the love we feel for someone we actually know? Is our love for God just a form of admiration that we might feel for a hero in a novel or the long-deceased subject of a biography. God is not the long-dead subject of a book. He is a living, breathing Person. How then can we learn to love Him as a real person?

I am convinced that the way we learn how to love God is to think of our relationship with Him in the same way we do with people we can physically see. God wants us to be His friends and to enjoy loving the One who is the most worthy of our love. We grow in our love for God in the same way we grow in our love for anyone else. In this article I will show you ways in which we build our relationships with other people and then apply them to how we can learn to love God Himself.


Love Goes Beyond Mere Feelings
The first thing to consider is, what does love actually mean? Many people think that love is simply an emotional feeling — like the way you feel when your knees go weak when you meet that someone of the opposite sex for the first time. Too often songs and sermons tell Christians to relate to God as if He were their heavenly boyfriend. Not surprisingly, that picture is frequently not very appealing to men. As Mark Driscoll says, “It's hard to worship someone you can beat up.” We must learn to love the real Jesus—not a weak imitation.

The contemporary concept of love is far from the biblical one. It is dangerous to think of love in merely emotional terms: Love is a “doing word,” a word full of action. It requires choices—hard choices sometimes. Love is about sacrifice, about faithfulness. It requires commitment. It doesn't always feel so good, and sometimes may even be very painful. As Daniel Bedingfield sings, “Nothing hurts like love, nothing causes your heart so much pain.” Loving God is no different. It, too, will at times be painful.

The first step toward learning to love God is to respond to His love for us. We do this because of what He has done for us: “We love because He first loved us” (1 John 4:19). Like any other covenant relationship, we decide to love irrespective of how we feel or, indeed, how it appears to us another person is treating us. The extent of true love for someone else is not measured by how we feel about him when everything is going well. Satan's words could as easily have read, “Does Job love God for nothing?” (Job 1). Our challenge is to love even when we feel things are not going well — to love from the core of ourselves even when we feel despair attempting to take hold.

What is love? Love is a deep-seated orientation of your life towards someone else. It involves your whole being. It usually involves deciding to put the needs of another person before your own. Just ask any parent. Our relationship with God is no different, except that He doesn't have any needs—we are needy. We come to God determined to centre our lives around Him, and to put ourselves in the position of needy recipients of His grace. He calls us to serve Him and worship Him, but it is not because He is deficient in any way. We come to God as receivers, not givers. We love God as little children love their parents, and serve Him in the same way a good mother will ask her child to help her in the kitchen so the child will learn and so they can be together.


Love Requires Spending Time Together
There are no shortcuts to loving someone. Love demands interaction and communication, and these require an investment of time. Imagine a friend who comes to you complaining about his girlfriend. He explains that their relationship just doesn't seem to be going anywhere. You ask him how long they have been going out, and what their conversations are like. Your friend replies, “Oh, we don't actually go out and talk with each other!” Many Christians spend little or no time with God and then wonder why they are not growing in their relationship with Him.

What does spending time with God look like? Clearly one of the most important ways we spend time with God is in prayer. But how do we pray in such a way that we actually feel that we are in the presence of God — that we are in a real conversation with Him? Prayer must not be merely reciting a shopping list to God. Instead of rushing to ask Him to do things for us, we start by praising Him for who He is and thanking Him for what He has done for us. As we do this and experience clear answers to prayer, just as in any relationship, more of a sense of a shared history with God will emerge and love will deepen. The longer we know Him and the more we remember how He has helped us and answered our prayers, the more we will love Him. But prayer is not only about setting aside special periods of time to be with God. It's that sense of continually communing with Him in our daily routine. It is critical that we also spend time with God in repentance and receiving forgiveness. Jesus said that those who are forgiven much will love much (Luke 7:49).


Love Requires a Deep Knowledge and Understanding of the Other Person
There is no substitute for getting to know and understand God by reading the Bible. We must grow in the biblical knowledge of who God is and what He is like. Many Christians have only a vague idea of the character of God and are unable to identify where the Bible teaches what we assume about Him. To grow in our love for God, the Bible must shape our beliefs about God. I believe it is important that we know why we believe what we do, and that we do not merely parrot theories taught by others.

Do we merely “assume” certain truths about God? Unfortunately, not all of these can be assumed these days. Where C. S. Lewis was able to say, for example, “Everyone who believes in God at all believes that He knows what you and I are going to do tomorrow” (Mere Christianity), we can no longer assert it as something generally understood by our culture. If we compromise on these truths and we end up with a God who doesn't know everything or who isn't all-powerful, our ability to love such a weakened God is severely diminished.

As we learn more about God—His glory, His perfection, and His existence as the Trinity—I believe our love for Him will grow. We can trace throughout the Bible the unique characteristics of God, and see how Jesus shares every one of these. It is said of Jesus that "in Him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily" (Colossians 2:9). He is the revelation of God to us. The more we learn of Him, the more we love Him.

We must understand God in all his transcendence and immanence. As the book of Exodus describes God: “The Lord, the Lord, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, but who will by no means clear the guilty” (Exodus 34:6-7). Many Christians emphasize one or the other of these aspects. It is only as we understand that God is both loving and holy, near to us yet separate from us, that we will learn to love Him for who He is. The following table will help you to allow the Scriptures to shape your understanding of God and the way that Jesus shares all of His attributes:

GOD EXISTS ETERNALLY
God: Psalm 90:2; Revelation 1:8
Jesus: John 1:1-5; John 17:5; Revelation 22:13

GOD IS LOVE
God: 1 John 4:8
Jesus: John 17:24

GOD IS THE CREATOR
God: Romans 11:36; Psalm 104:24; Acts 17:24-25; Ephesians 3:10
Jesus: Colossians 1:15-17

GOD IS OMNISCIENT - HE KNOWS EVERYTHING
God: 1 John 3:20; Hebrews 4:13; Psalm 139
Jesus: John 2:24-25; John 16:30

GOD KNOWS THE FUTURE
God: Isaiah 46:9-11
Jesus: John 13:19

GOD IS NOT BOUND BY TIME
God: 2 Peter 3:8; Psalm 90:4; Exodus 3:14
Jesus: John 8:58-59

GOD IS UNCHANGEABLE
God: Malachi 3:6
Jesus: Hebrews 13:8

GOD IS WISE
God: Romans 16:27; Psalm 147:5
Jesus: 1 Corinthians 1:24

GOD IS TRUTH
God: Numbers 23:19; Titus 1:2
Jesus: John 14:6

GOD IS OMNIPRESENT - HE IS EVERYWHERE
God: Psalms 139:7-10; Jeremiah 23:24
Jesus: Matthew 18:20

GOD IS OMNIPOTENT - HE IS ALL POWERFUL
God: Jeremiah 32:17; Ephesians 3:20
Jesus: Mark 4:41

GOD IS UNCONTAINABLE
God: 1 Kings 8:27
Jesus: Matthew 17:2-6

GOD IS LIGHT
God: 1 John 1:5
Jesus: John 8:12

GOD IS SPIRIT
God: John 4:24
Jesus: John 1:14

GOD IS HOLY
God: Psalm 99:9
Jesus: Luke 4:34

GOD IS RIGHTEOUS AND JUST
God: Luke 18:19; Matthew 5:48
Jesus: 2 Corinthians 5:21

GOD IS JEALOUS AND FULL OF WRATH
God: Nahum 1:2
Jesus: John 2:17

GOD'S WILL ALWAYS ULTIMATELY COMES TO PASS
God: Ephesians 1:11; Job 42:2; Proverbs 19:21; Psalm 115:3
Jesus: Matthew 28:18

The Spirit Helps Us to Love God
It is sad that the arguments over charismatic gifts of the last century have led so many of us to forget that for hundreds of years many Christians understood that our birthright is an experience of God mediated by the Holy Spirit.

Christian leaders of the past spoke of a pouring out of the Holy Spirit that would help us to experience God's love. That is rarely spoken about today—even charismatic Christians sometimes have a tendency to over-emphasize the gifts instead of the Holy Spirit’s work in promoting the intimate knowledge of God that we are intended to have. The Bible describes the Spirit as follows: “For the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God. For who knows a person's thoughts except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God” (1 Corinthians 2:10-11). Clearly it is not an option to ignore the Third Person of the Trinity if we want to grow in our love for God.

Jesus is very clear about how we demonstrate our love for Him, and what the results are. He links obedience with love, and then He promises that those who obey Him will know the presence of God by way of the Spirit’s presence in the world: “Whoever has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me. And he who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and manifest myself to him . . . my Father will love him, and we will come to him and make our home with him” (John 14:21).

The Apostle Paul describes it this way: “God's love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us” (Romans 5:5) He also writes, “Because you are sons, God has sent the Spirit of his Son into our hearts, crying, 'Abba! Father!” (Galatians 4:6). If we need help in loving God, we should ask His Spirit to aid us in our weakness and teach us how to love Him.

Jesus says an incredible thing: “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” (John 16:7). I am increasingly provoked that few Christians would say that their experience of the Spirit was preferable to Jesus’ living in the world bodily. But Christians should seek a deeper experience of God's Spirit — not for experience's sake, but that we might love God more.


We Learn to Love Others by Spending Time With Their Friends
How often do Christians effectively say to Jesus,, "I love you, but I don’t really like your bride," by their indifference and their lack of commitment to a local expression of the Church? For all of us who are beginners at loving God, playing active roles in local congregations will help us learn to love God in all of the way I have mentioned so far. But more than that, by giving and receiving love from other members of the family of God, we will be exposed to the many facets reflecting the glory of God. The church is intended to demonstrate the multicolored wisdom and glory of God (Ephesians 3:10). We cannot love God properly without loving His Church. As we learn to give ourselves sacrificially in love to our spiritual family in the same way we love our natural family, our love for God increases. This is of such vital importance that Jesus said, “By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another” (John 13:35).

I believe God has put the Church on earth to love God, to love each other, and to love the world. I pray that God will give us the desire and ability to do each of these better.

Read more about loving God on Adrian's blog:

• What is Love?


• What is God Like?

Well, here it is. I finally draw to an end a series that could have run and run. Almost all my posts for the last month or so have been inspired by Article 4 of the T4G Statement, which is quoted in my post John Piper on Expository Preaching. As I have said, I am sure I will return frequently to this topic as it is, of course, never far from my mind — and in a way preaching is the over-arching theme of this blog.

In this final post, I will list ten personal conclusions I have made, having spent the last month thinking about preaching. I will also link to all the posts so you can find them in one place here. I have included some posts — such as the ones on John Piper's article — which although not strictly part of the series, are certainly closely related to the theme. For links to posts on Articles 1-3, see Blogging the Together for the Gospel Statement - The Place of Truth.

Ten Conclusions About Preaching

1. Expository preaching should be defined as preaching that seeks to explain the main point of the portion of the Scripture selected.
   
   
2. Expository preaching does not always have to take place as part of a long series working slowly through a book. Series can be helpful, but they need not last a decade. One-off sermons on specific verses, a chapter, or even a whole book can also be expository.
   
   
3. We must not have an overly-narrow definition of expository preaching — thinking that there is only one way to preach. Instead we must encompass the many different styles of preaching which are helpful and biblically directed. We must also understand that whilst the message of a specific verse is, of course, unified rather than divided or contradictory, its meaning is usually rich and many faceted. Because of this, different themes may be drawn out of the same passage, giving rise to very different sermons from the very same portion of the Bible.
   
   
4. Any definition of expository preaching which is too narrow and excludes the style of such men as C. H. Spurgeon, who was probably the greatest ever preacher — just has to be wrong. To criticize CHS on these grounds and fail to hold his preaching up as a model worthy of emulation today is, in my view, inexcusable. (See for example this post on Pyromaniacs.)
   
   
5. Expository preaching is not without its dangers, one of the chief of which is sounding too much like a Bible commentary read aloud.
   
   
6. Preaching needs to skillfully draw modern people into the Bible, explain the text, induce wonder, then drive the point home with a clear sense of how the people need to think, feel, believe, and act differently here in the 21st century.
   
   
7. Preaching is entirely dependent on the supernatural and sovereign activity of the Spirit, who equips both preacher and hearers for what is an impossible task and makes the words of the Bible live in its hearers hearts. Preaching needs to be passionate, emotive (though not necessarily emotional), and bring about a holy moment of experiencing the presence and voice of God through His Word.
   
   
8. Preaching God's Word is the primary way He has ordained for people to be saved, taught, equipped, matured, and encounter God. It is the hope of the church, and a restoration of true preaching has always accompanied true revival.
   
   
9. Our preaching should be targeted at and have something relevant for each of our different audiences — the unbelieving visitor, the backslidden, the new Christian, the mature Christian, and church leaders in the congregation. But, ultimately we are accountable to an audience of One before whom we must give an account.
   
   
10. Given the impossibility of this task, is it any wonder we need to be devoted to the study of the Word and to prayer, expressing our utter uselessness and unworthiness to proclaim God's Word? Surely we do well to conclude that we need the help of God in our preparation, personal lives, and delivery to make us instruments that He can use. When I read about preaching I do feel that we have barely scratched the surface, and that sadly a generation exists today that has mostly never heard preaching as it should be.

My Posts on Preaching

• Books to Help You Study the Bible
• Mark Dever on Expositional Preaching - The 1st of 9 Marks of a Healthy Church
• Steve Camp Challenges Us to Embrace the Spirit
• Am I a Thrill Seeker?
• What Changes Us In Preaching - Application or Wonder or Both?
• T4G Article 4 – Steve Weaver on Expository Preaching
• How Stories Change Our Worldview
• T4G Article 4 - Lloyd-Jones on Applying Biblical Truth
• John Piper Hears The Voice Of God
• T4G Article 4 - Rick Warren on the Point of Preaching
• T4G Article 4 - Multicolored Preaching
• T4G Article 4 - The Dangers of Expository Preaching
• T4G Article 4 - Sermon Preparation by John Stott
• Spurgeon's Challenge to Preachers
• Lloyd-Jones Monday - Dead Orthodoxy or an Encounter With God?
• T4G Article 4 - Alistair Begg on Sermon Preparation
• SERMON - The Reviving Power of God's Word
• The Risks and Rewards of Using Technology in Sermon Preparation
• Lloyd-Jones Monday - The Doctor, Spurgeon, and Plagiarism
• Shepherds Conference II - Steve Lawson on Passionate Preaching
• T4G Article 4 - Must Expository Preaching Always be a Series Preaching Through a Book?
• T4G Article 4 - Are There Three Types of Expository Preaching?
• John Calvin on the Inerrancy of Scripture and the Witness of the Spirit
• T4G Article 4 - Lloyd-Jones on Spurgeon: Are Sermon Series Compulsory?
• T4G Article 4 - Martyn Lloyd-Jones on Expository Preaching
• T4G Article 4 - John Piper on Expository Preaching
• AUDIO - What is the Bible?

I will also share here some more links on preaching

Sam Storms
An Appeal to All Pastors: Why and How Should We Preach - Part I
An Appeal to All Pastors: Why and How Should We Preach - Part II
An Appeal to All Pastors: Why and How Should We Preach - Part III

I am drawing close to the end of my longstanding series on preaching based on the Together For The Gospel Statement, Article 4. This does not mean, of course, that the subject of preaching will disappear from this blog—far from it. Since this is a blog by a preacher, and many of my readers are preachers, this topic is never far away and will keep returning. Indeed, in many ways the whole blog is relevant to the subject of preaching and living the Bible's message.

As we get close to the end of this series, I could think of no better place to turn than the website of one of the four friends that make up the Together For the Gospel team. Mark Dever has written extensively on this subject under the heading, Mark One of a Healthy Church.

Everything you will find linked on that page is a resource that will help you learn more about preaching. I have read most of the books he recommends and listened to some of the audio, and I'm sure I will listen to more in the future.

I will share just a few quotes below, but encourage you to go over there and read the whole thing.

"Expositional—a sermon which takes the point of the text as the point of the sermon . . . an exposition of Scripture simply seeks to uncover, explain, and apply the divinely intended meaning of the text."

". . . expositional preachers are modern day prophets, serving merely as conduits through which the Word of God may flow into the people of God in order to do the work of God in them."

"Pastoral authority is directly related to Authorial intent. The preacher only has authority from God to speak as His ambassador as long as he remains faithful to convey the Divine Author’s intentions. This means that the further the preacher strays from preaching the intention of the text, the further his divine blessing and God-given authority are eroded in the pulpit."

"Does a commitment to expositional preaching mean that I should never preach other kinds of sermons? No. Topical and biographical sermons still have value. It is sometimes helpful to address a certain topic by culling and presenting Biblical information. And it is sometimes instructive to study the life of a Biblical character and draw practical implications for today. The point is that, as a consistent diet, expositional preaching is most healthy for both the preacher and the congregation."

"There are more ways to preach expositionally than plodding through one phrase or sentence at a time. The length of the text is immaterial to the question of whether or not the sermon is an exposition. As long as the point of the passage is used as the point of the message, a sermon qualifies as expositional—length notwithstanding."

"The point of any Biblical text is to accomplish God's purposes in the hearts and minds of God's people. So if the sermon amounts to no more than a wordy commentary devoid of application, it has missed the bull's eye at which true exposition always takes aim."

". . . we may legitimately preach a single expositional sermon on the whole Bible, a whole testament, a whole book, a whole narrative or parable, one paragraph, one phrase, or a single word—as long as we are preaching the intended point of the selected meaning unit."

John Piper has an interesting aside that several people have pointed out to me in connection with the quotes I have shared from Warren and Lloyd-Jones on the vital place of application.

In it Piper argues that, rather than application, it is the inducing of "wonder" in the hearer that leads to transformation. I ask: Why does it have to be one or the other? I know that a state of wonder that is not then driven home by the preacher can definitely leave me wondering how to apply the truth and how to live in response to it. Actually, Piper himself cannot mean that application has no place as in the context he is speaking of the following weeks' sermon which will be given over entirely to application! The clip is short, and well worth a quick viewing.

At the beginning of this year, Steve Weaver posted a multi-part series on expository preaching. I thought I would share a few quotes from this series for you — it is well worth a read if you haven’t already found it.

"What role does prayer play in the preparation of an expository sermon? Prayer should both precede and permeate your study time. Whenever I open God's Word I almost always pray, "Open my eyes that I may see wondrous things from your law" (Psalm 119:18). But prayer is not just something I do to get started, it is a vital part of the ongoing communication between God and me during my sermon preparation. God is speaking to me through His Word, I am speaking back to Him in prayer. During the course of a day of study, I ask God for wisdom to understand difficult texts, thank God for letting me see the meaning of a text, praise God for what has been revealed about Him and His gracious purposes in the text, and confess my sins that have been exposed by the text. All of these spontaneous exclamations are types of the kind of prayerful spirit which permeates my study of God's Word . . . .

One of my goals from the earliest point in my preparation is to see how the text unfolds into its component parts. The process of continual reading, meditation, and prayer is the means to discovering the seams in the text. At this point, I am like a man chopping wood, and the text is the log of wood. Sometimes the log splits the first time that the man swings the axe, but it usually takes repeated blows before the log splits. Sometimes, the log is so hard that it is struck all week to no avail until it finally opens up late on Saturday evening. A couple of times in my experience the text never split and I was forced to roll the whole log into the sanctuary! This is less than ideal, but for the preacher there is an unmovable deadline each Sunday, and one must go to the pulpit with what you have . . . .

I strongly believe in the empowerment of the Holy Spirit in preaching. After all my studying is complete and the manuscript is written, there still remains a desperate need for the anointing of the Holy Spirit. Only the Holy Spirit can cause the message to go forth in power and accomplish its God intended purpose. I pray for the empowerment of the Holy Spirit each time I preach. The more aware I am of my need for this work of the Spirit, the more powerful my preaching seems to be. If I go in my own strength, trusting in my preparation and not the empowerment, illumination, and convicting power of the Holy Spirit, I will crash and burn. Sometimes God graciously allows me to crash and burn when I go in my own strength in order to increase my dependence upon Him. On the other hand, some of my best moments preaching have been when I have been weak in body and therefore utterly dependent upon the aid of the Holy Spirit. God always seems to bless when I acknowledge my weakness before Him.

Because the act of preaching is one in which the Holy Spirit is at work, I never know for sure exactly how the sermon will go. I believe that the Holy Spirit is at work in my preparation, as well as in my preaching, but sometimes I say things that I did not plan to say and omit things which I had planned to say. This is the freedom in preaching that comes as the result of preparation, not as many believe, in spite of preparation. My observation is that the more one prepares, the more variety there will be in ones preaching because the Spirit has more material from which to choose from the preacher's mind. Those who do not prepare well to insure their spontaneity or "being led by the Spirit" usually end up saying the exact same things in the exact same ways. I wouldn't want to blame the messages that result from being ill-prepared on the Holy Spirit!"

— Steve Weaver

Andrew Fountain has a great article today on the vital place of stories in shaping the way we see the world. Go and read the whole thing or listen to his sermon which was informed by this approach:

There are four levels at which we operate:

• Behaviour
  
• Teachings
  
• Attitudes
  
• Worldview

Behaviour can be altered to some extent by external pressure (although ultimately it flows from the underlying layers). Teachings can be taught. Attitudes are far more difficult and need to be taught by example, as Paul and Jesus did. Worldview, however, and this was the interesting part for me, is changed by telling stories.

That is why so much of the Bible is story, and when Paul lays out the Gospel, he does in terms of the new story (not in Adam, but in Christ/new creation/died with Christ/raised with Him). The theological term for this is a "redemptive-historical" presentation of the Gospel.

That is why the declining Biblical knowledge among Christians is so serious. It is not just that it is "good for us" to know all the Old Testament stories, and the story of the New Covenant. It is foundational to a new worldview (mindset of the Spirit in Romans 8:5-6).

Christians who do not know their Bible (and I am not just talking about remembering a few stories told in Sunday School) are seriously weakened in their walk. What is needed is a grasp of the big story. Christians need to know biblical theology and the grand plan of redemption. Cultures are fundamentally shaped by their "big stories," yet so much of Christianity today is a set of Christian teachings built on the shaky foundation of today's culture: a melange of postmodernism and humanism. No wonder the church is "blown around by every wind of doctrine."

This continues our series on preaching, which is based on the fourth article of the Together for the Gospel Statement. The previous post in this series described some of the stereotyped differences in preaching between black and white preachers and what each can learn from the other.

In the article I wrote for SermonCentral on technology and preaching, I ended by making the point that we must be careful not to fall into the trap of thinking the preacher’s task is over when we have unpacked a Bible verse to our congregation. Rick Warren agrees, and I thought I would share his thoughts here, even though I know I risking getting into all kinds of hot water for quoting him approvingly:

"Many preachers believe the purpose of preaching is to explain the Bible, or to interpret the text, or to help people understand God’s Word. But these all fall short of what it really is."

Warren then states what he believes is the purpose of preaching:

"To help people become like Jesus. How does this happen? Through application! The only way lives are changed is through the application of God’s Word. The lack of application in preaching and teaching is, I believe, the number one problem with preaching in the United States. Too many sermons are nothing more than lectures on biblical backgrounds or obscure Greek and Hebrew words. As a result, people walk into a church and walk out, but their lives remain unchanged."

Warren goes on to explain why he believes we fail to apply our sermons:

1. We assume that people will make the necessary connection.
   

2. We leave it to the Holy Spirit.
   

3. Personal application is convicting and it makes people feel uncomfortable.
   

4. We haven’t applied it in our own lives.
   

5. It takes more time and effort and preparation.
   

6. We’re afraid of being simplistic.
   

7. We don’t apply the Scripture because we’ve never been taught how to do it.
   

8. We haven’t realized the importance of application.

Warren believes that:

"Application is not something that you tack on to the end of the message. It is the message if you’re preaching to change lives and to make people like Christ."

Warren ends by explaining that, in his view, the application of a sermon should aim to answer two questions:

• So what?
  

• What now?

He provocatively ends the article by saying, "If your preaching doesn’t ever answer these two questions, you haven’t applied the Bible to the lives of your listeners."

This continues our series on preaching, which is based on the fourth article of the Together for the Gospel Statement. The previous post in this series warned of some of the dangers of expository preaching.

I found this fantastic quote from the pen of Thabiti Anyabwile over at Pure Church describing what preachers who are stereotypically black and those who are stereotypically white MUST learn from each other:

“Black preaching” is stereotypically thought to be emotional, even cathartic, rhythmic, centered on suffering and celebration, and ultimately doctrinally shallow. “White preaching” is thought to be (stereotypically) largely the reverse: doctrinal, cold, intellectual, etc. . . At least that's what you'd believe if you believe the cultural stereotypes.

And nothing, in my mind, has quite done as much damage to the people of God needing to live the culture of God like the false ways of viewing preaching. Too often we think of “black preaching” and “white preaching,” and by that we mean some standard or style of preaching that is acceptable in those human cultures. And attached to these general views of culture and preaching are certain norms for what we think is “good” preaching in each context. “Good” black preaching produces a whoop and a shout. “Good” white preaching produces . . . what? Knowledge? Emotional stiffness?

What does this do to our notion of preaching? It severs two essential aspects to good preaching: truth and passion. Good preaching, black or white or brown or yellow, is preaching the truth of the Scriptures with godly zeal . . . preaching the weighty doctrines of God with the weighty movements of the heart that accompany those doctrines. Now any individual preacher may have a different “emotional range” or “doctrinal range” to work with, but both those things go together in good preaching.

The practical effect of maintaining this human cultural distinctive where preaching is concerned is that large segments of the family of God are cut off from significant aspects to good preaching. Some are shaped into emotionally boisterous and doctrinally shallow Christians, while others are doctrinally heady and emotionally paralyzed. In the culture of God, we need truth set on fire so that we might be both rooted and grounded in the truth and stirred to compassion, love, and zeal . . .

Here's a place for great exchange among the people of God for the glory of God. Perhaps some African-American preachers could learn a great deal from some of their white brothers in making their preaching more doctrinally rich and in adopting an expository discipline in the pulpit. And perhaps some white preachers could learn a great deal from some of their African-American brothers about preaching with passion and urgency and seeing and celebrating the application of truth to the real human struggles sitting in their congregations.”

This continues our series on preaching, which is based on the fourth article of the Together for the Gospel Statement. The previous two posts in this series provided outlines for good sermon preparation from John Stott and Alistair Begg.

While Expository Thoughts is certainly committed to preaching that is well prepared, they have a great post which points out a trap we can all too easily fall into — even those of us who haven't been to seminary!

“. . . It is easy for us as preachers to slip into ‘seminary mode’ and preach with the shotgun of exegetical insight rather than articulating the Word with pastoral care. There will even be times where you go to great lengths to be pastoral and folks will still complain that the message is too heady. The solution is to strive for balance where the grind of hard exegesis is hidden from sight, yet the fruit is laid bare for all to see. One exercise helps me tremendously in this area: fellowship. The more I intertwine my life with those in the congregation the more I see opportunities for the Word of God to be richly applied in their lives. A pastor must spend an appropriate amount of time understanding the Word and preparing for Sunday, but he should never use that as an excuse to ignore God's people. Every pastor needs to find that balance in his life. This is at least part of what Peter meant when he said, ‘Shepherd the flock of God among you’ (1 Peter 5:2).”

(Emphasis mine.)

I cannot independently confirm the source of this, but I found the following over at Unashamed Workman, described as John Stott’s advice on sermon preparation. If anyone can verify the source I will, of course, acknowledge it.

Alistair Begg provides additional thoughts on this subject in my previous post, which can be found here.

I. Choose Your Text

A. It is best to rely on expository book studies for the steady diet of your people, because this ensures they will get “the whole counsel of God.”

B. However, the following may be occasions for special sermons:

1. Special calendar occasions: Christmas, Easter, etc.

2. Special external circumstances which are in the public mind

3. Special needs discerned by the preacher or others.

4. Truths which have specially inspired the preacher.

C. Keep a notebook to scribble down ideas for sermons, insights, burdens, illustrations, etc. Record them immediately, wherever they come to mind, because you will usually forget them later.

II. Meditate on the Text

A. Whenever possible, plan out texts weeks or months in advance. This gives the benefit of “subconscious incubation.”

B. Concentrated “incubation” should begin at least one week before preaching. It should involve the following:

1. Read, re-read, and re-re-read the text.

2. Be sure you understand what it means. Do your own interpretive work. Don’t use commentaries until you have formulated specific interpretive questions which you have been unable to answer, or until you have completed your interpretive work.

3. Brood longer over how it applies to your people, to the culture, to you, etc.

4. Pray for God to illuminate the text, especially its application.

5. Scribble down notes of thoughts, ideas, etc.

6. Solicit the insights of others through tapes, talking with other preachers, etc.

III. Isolate the Dominant Thought

(This is the purpose of section II.)

A. Your sermon should convey only one major message. All of the details of your sermon should be marshaled to help your people grasp that message and feel its power.

B. You should be able to express the dominant thought in one short, clear, vivid sentence.

IV. Arrange Your Material to Serve the Dominant Thought

A. Chisel and shape your material. Ruthlessly discard all material which is irrelevant to the dominant thought. Subordinate the remaining material to the dominant thought by using that material to illuminate and reinforce the dominant thought.

B. Your sermon structure should be suited to the text, not artificially imposed. Avoid structure which is too clever, prominent or complex.

C. Decide on your method of preaching for this text: argumentation, faceting, categorizing, analogy, etc.

D. Carefully choose words that are precise, simple, clear, vivid, and honest. Write out the key sections, phrases, and sentences to help you in your word choice. Stick to short declarative and interrogative sentences with few, if any, subordinate clauses.

E. Come up with illustrations and examples which will explain and convict. Employ a wide variety: figures of speech, images, retelling biblical stories in contemporary language, inventing fresh parables, retelling true historical and/or biographical events, etc. Keep a file of these, especially if they do not come easily to you. Avoid making illustrations and examples so prominent that they detract from the dominant thought. Also, avoid applying them inappropriately or overusing them.

V. Add the Introduction and Conclusion

A. The introduction should not be elaborate, but enough to arouse their curiosity, wet their appetites, and introduce the dominant thought. This can be done by a variety of means: explaining the setting of the passage, story, current event or issue, etc.

B. The conclusion should not merely recapitulate your sermon—it should apply it. Obviously, you should be applying all along, but you should keep something for the end which will prevail upon your people to take action. “No summons, no sermon.” Preach though the head to the heart (i.e. the will). The goal of the sermon should be to “storm the citadel of the will and capture it for Jesus Christ.” What do you want them to do? Employ a variety of methods to do this:

1. Argument: anticipate objections and refute them.

2. Admonition: warn of the consequences of disobedience.

3. Indirect Conviction: arouse moral indignation and then turn it on them (Nathan with David).

4. Pleading: apply the gentle pressure of God’s love, concern for their well-being, and the needs of others.

5. Vision: paint a picture of what is possible through obedience to God in this area.

VI. Write Down and Pray Over Your Message

A. Writing out your sermon forces you to think straight and sufficiently. It exposes lazy thinking and cures it. After you are thoroughly familiar with your outline, reduce it to small notes.

B. Pray that God will enable you to “so possess the message that the message possesses you.”

Note: Please keep Pastor Begg in your prayers as he has recently been diagnosed with prostate cancer and is scheduled for surgery on April 23rd.

In a booklet entitled, "Preaching for God’s Glory," written for the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals, Alistair Begg shares some practical points about his own method of sermon preparation, which he learned from an older minister while he was still a theological student:

• THINK YOURSELF EMPTY
  It is all right and often beneficial to avoid the proud assumption that we know initially what everything means . . . it is always good to train our minds to expect the unexpected . . . The point is, if we do not become thinking pastors, we are unlikely to have thinking congregations.


• READ YOURSELF FULL
  There are certain books we should return to routinely. Baxter’s The Reformed Pastor, Augustine’s Confessions, and as daunting as we may find it, Calvin’s Institutes. I also find great profit in reading biographies. The two volumes on Lloyd-Jones should be a prerequisite for all pastors, as well as at least the first volume on Whitefield by Arnold Dallimore.


• WRITE YOURSELF CLEAR
  Aside from the essential empowering of the Holy Spirit, if there is one single aspect of sermon preparation that is most closely tied to fluency of speech and impact in delivery, it is this: freedom of delivery in the pulpit depends upon careful organization in the study.


• PRAY YOURSELF HOT
  There is no chance of fire in the pews if there is an iceberg in the pulpit; and without personal prayer and communion with God during the preparation stages, the pulpit will be cold . . . We dare not divorce our preaching from our praying.



• BE YOURSELF, BUT DON’T PREACH YOURSELF
  There is nothing quite so ridiculous as . . . the preacher who wishes he was someone else . . . James Stewart used to say, "Be yourself, but also, forget yourself!" ... If people leave worship saying, "What an amazing preacher!" we have failed. Instead we must long for them to say, "What a great God, and what a privilege it is to meet him in his Word, as we have just done."
  
  

  Alistair Begg, Preaching for God’s Glory, Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals Series "Today’s Issues", Crossway Books, Wheaton, Illinois, 1999, pp.40-45.

I particularly like the way this reflects our dependence on the Holy Spirit - as Begg puts it, we need "the essential empowering of the Holy Spirit" to take our preparation and set it ablaze.

The next post in this series on preaching (T4G Statement, Article 4) continues with John Stott's thoughts concerning sermon preparation. It can be found here.

This story retold by Chuck Colson brought a little bit of warmth to my day. In all the horrors of the ongoing war in Iraq — and let's not forget U.S. soldiers are also at times the ones firing on their enemies — a bit of humanity, or rather the image of God, shines through from time to time:

"I have never seen a more dramatic example of worldviews in contrast, nor have I been prouder of an American G.I. On one hand, we have the horrors of a civilization that values death — even the death of its own children — if by killing them they can hurt the infidels. On the other side, we have a story that makes us realize just how deeply embedded within American life is our Judeo-Christian heritage. This heritage teaches that human life is sacred—even the life of an enemy who falls into our hands."

— Chuck Colson, "Thirty Pints of Blood," Townhall.com

Over at Challies' second live-blogging post on the Shepherds' Conference, following John MacArthur's dismissal of amillenialism, Steve Lawson struck a blow for the kind of preaching I have been talking about in my series on the T4G Statement Article 4. The last post in that series was entitled Must Expository Preaching Always be a Series? I have also posted often in the past about the vital point that Steve Lawson made:

"Two deadly dangers face the church as it advances into the 21st century.The first threat is the wholesale devaluing of preaching itself. In this paradigm shift, biblical preaching is being displaced by other things. Exposition is being replaced by entertainment; theology for theatrics; [the] unfolding drama of redemption is being replaced by just plain drama. Preaching is out, dialogue is in. Straightforward exposition is being demoted to secondary status. As bad as this is, of even greater concern is another error. It is an error that befalls even those who are able preachers. The error is that their preaching is little more than a data dump. Preaching has become clinical, cold, sterile, and stagnant. It is precision without power or light without heat.

Dispassionate preaching is a lie. If the preacher is not consumed with [the] passage for the message, how can those who hear it believe it? This is what must be recaptured by the men at this conference who are not in danger of giving up the pulpit to entertainment, but who can become listless and lifeless in expositing the Scriptures. The kind of preaching [that] burst onto the scene in the first century. It was powerful and passionate. Acts is full of sermons, and when they are all added up, twenty-five percent of the text of the book is dedicated to recording the words of these sermons. This underscores how important apostolic preaching is. It suggests to us the kind of preaching we are to emulate. It is not just expository preaching we need, but expository preaching of a certain tone and thrust. We need apostolic expository preaching. We need to preach not just what they preached, but as they preached."

Tim's report is very helpful and detailed, and goes on to explain Steve's view of what apostolic preaching should look like. I especially liked this section, in which he claims that Peter's sermon in Acts 2 is the model we should use for our expository preaching:

1. Read the text. Beginning in verse 16 he reads the text. This is where expository preaching begins for it makes God the real preacher.

2. Explain the text. This is what the word "expository" means — simply explain the text. There is an inseparable connection between verse 21 and verse 22. In this verse he now begins to explain the text of the former verse.

3. Support the text. What Peter will now do, having explained the text, [is to] undergird it with other cross-references. He supports the central theme and traces it through the course of Scripture. He will now give four strategic cross-references that bolster his explanation. He will show that the full counsel of God speaks with unity and clarity on this truth. These serve as pillars to undergird the message.

4. Synthesize the text. In verse 36 he summarizes the text, bringing it down to the bottom line. He gives the bottom line conclusion that the whole sermon has been leading to.

5. Apply the text. This cannot be an expository sermon without this step. Now comes the crescendo of the sermon. Here is the action point, the imperative voice. This sermon is so powerful that the listeners give the invitation. "What must we do?" The authority of the Word of God has been pressed to their heart, their conscience has been awakened and the Spirit has stirred their hearts. Now Peter gives the application. Here is what you must do. Expository sermons must get to the "you." In this case: "Repent and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

It starts with the text, stays with the text, and drives home the text.

Continued at Shepherds' Conference III - C. J. Mahaney Asked to Preach by John MacArthur

This continues our series on preaching, which is based on the fourth article of the Together for the Gospel Statement. The previous post in this series was entitled "Are There Three Types of Expository Preaching?"

Tim Challies defines expository preaching as “preaching that takes the point of the text as the point of the sermon.” In my view, he wisely differentiates it from his definition of textual preaching — not by whether it is part of a longer series working through a book, but because textual preaching “refers to a passage of Scripture, but does not use the main point of the text as the main point of the sermon."

However, later in the article Tim does seem to assume that expository preaching inevitably means that preachers will be working systematically through a book. Whilst I do value preaching through a book and think it definitely has its place, I will argue below why I feel that expository preaching is not limited simply to a verse-by-verse exegesis, which itself is not without disadvantages.

I think there are a number of real dangers and drawbacks to preaching through a book which we need to consider — this is not to say that these drawbacks cannot be overcome, and I do believe that preaching through a book can, at times, be very helpful.

1. Preaching through a book can introduce the very imbalance that it is designed to remove.

   Spending a decade in certain biblical books will inevitably mean that the congregation is not going to get the balanced diet we all agree they need. Yes, preaching through books forces preachers to focus on the issues that the book addresses. But there is surely a danger that the preacher will choose a book that is not sufficiently broad enough to give a good diet to the congregation. It might also be a book that reflects his own pet subject; for example, the charismatic might choose 1 Corinthians, the Calvinist Ephesians or Romans, and the eschatology fanatic would head straight for Revelation. So, a very slow preach through a book is not necessarily going to provide a good diet for every church.

2. Preaching slowly through a book requires a highly skilled preacher in order to remain interesting.

   Death by exposition is a real risk when the average preacher tries to emulate a Lloyd-Jones, Boice, or other gifted expositor. Sermons that are nothing more than recycled commentaries are surely boring. It is, of course, possible to preach this way and impart life, if God has gifted you in that way. But as one preacher admitted to me recently, spending even just a few months in one book can — even for the preacher — begin to feel a bit repetitive. Not everyone has the skill-set to be Martyn Lloyd-Jones.

3. Insistence on long series may hinder our aim of making visitors feel welcome.

   In this era of floating church populations and weekend breaks, we may not have the same people listening each week. In addition, surely we want our visitors to feel welcome. Imagine discovering on visiting a church for the first time that you have some 50 or 60 (or more!) sermons to catch up on to understand where the church is in their series. This is avoidable by making each sermon in the series stand alone and be more or less self-explanatory. But if we do this, then how is that different from a sermon which exposits a verse or paragraph seeking to put it in its context, but outside of a series?

4. Long series bind the preacher and could quench the Spirit.

   Whether we do have long series of sermons or not, I do feel the Doctor is definitely right when he says we must build into them the flexibility to respond to the needs of the congregation and the leading of the Holy Spirit.

In addressing some of these issues, here are some of my thoughts:

• Who says that the unit of a sermon has to be one verse?

• Why can't an expositional sermon be based on a large unit — even up to a whole book? Mark Dever by taking this method has preached through the entire bible, and is therefore the only preacher in the world that I am aware of that can trully say he has preached the whole counsel of God.

• Why do we assume that it should take years to get through certain books — can't some preachers who decide to do a shorter series exposit books from a slightly more “birds eye” view, thereby increasing the range of the Bible that can be covered in a given church?

• If we are agreed that expositional preaching is simply preaching that allows a portion of the Bible to speak, why must that always be part of a longer series? Surely there is room within the concept of expository preaching for one-off sermons, short series, and longer series, depending on the gifting of the preacher, the needs of the congregation, and the guiding of the Spirit?

See also my post regarding Steve Lawson on passionate preaching, delivered at the 2007 Shepherds Conference.

One thing I've noticed as I've been thinking and reading about preaching recently is that we can't seem to agree on what "expository preaching" actually is. This is critical for our understanding of Article 4 of the Together for the Gospel Statement, which has prompted this series on preaching. Some seem to feel that true expository preaching only occurs when a book is dissected verse-by-verse, week-after-week.

The folks over at Expository Thoughts have a clear preference for preaching through a book, and, indeed, list in the same post what they feel are the advantages of this preference. They are, I think, quite correct when they suggest that there are three different types of expository preaching:

"First, [a preacher] can select a different passage every week, with each passage having little or no relationship to the previous one. In this way, each passage would be handled in an expository fashion, but there would be no deliberate flow or cohesiveness from one week to the next. For example, he might preach Ephesians 5:22-24 the first week, Psalm 119:9-16 the second week, Mark 10:13-16 the third week, and so on. You might call this random exposition.

Second, he can select a group of passages, each of which deal with the same topic or theme, and then preach them week after week until the series is completed. For example, he could do a series on having a biblical view of God's Word by preaching Psalm 19:7-11 the first week, 2 Timothy 3:16-17 the second week, 1 Peter 2:1-3 the third week, etc., until he is ready to move on to the next series. You could call this thematic exposition.

There is a third approach, however, which I believe is the best option for the preacher who is in the pulpit on a regular basis, and that is consecutive exposition. Put simply, consecutive exposition consists of preaching verse-by-verse through entire books of the Bible."

The series on the Together for the Gospel Statement continues with "Must Expository Preaching Always be a Series Preaching Through a Book?"

In today’s Martyn Lloyd-Jones Monday, I come to one of the most fascinating questions about preaching. I am not sure exactly what was in the minds of the people who crafted the T4G statement which highlighted the importance of expository preaching. As we shall see in later posts, people differ on whether to define expository preaching as, by necessity, part of a longer series on a book of the Bible.

Spurgeon held somewhat different views to many today on the necessity of a preacher having a set series he is following, as the Doctor explained:

". . . one of the greatest preachers of the last century, if not the greatest of all, Charles Haddon Spurgeon, took a very strong line on this. He did not believe in preaching a series of sermons; indeed he opposed doing so very strongly. He said that there was a sense in which it was impertinent for a man to decide to preach a series of sermons. He held that the texts should be given to the preacher, that he should seek the Lord in this matter and ask for guidance. He held that the preacher should not decide but pray for the guidance and the leading of the-Holy Spirit, and then submit himself to this. He will thus be led to particular texts and statements which he will then expound in sermonic form. That was the view held by Spurgeon and by many others . . ."

The Doctor explains that he himself had been brought up in churches that held that view, but had dramatically changed his own mind. So you see, on this issue we have a divergence of opinion between two of my historical heroes. This in and of itself should make us want to tread carefully as we consider this question together on my blog over the coming days.

In the Doctor’s corner we have many of modern Reformed preachers, as well as the Puritans. The Doctor is intrigued by the fact that “though Spurgeon was such a great reader of the Puritans, and such a great admirer of them, at this point he disagreed with them entirely.”

So, what does the Doctor himself say about this issue? He has some very interesting things to say – especially considering his reputation as one of the foremost sequential expositors of scripture ever known.

“. . . it seems to me to be quite wrong to be rigid in this matter, and to lay down any hard and fast rule. I cannot see why the Spirit should not guide a man to preach a series of sermons on a passage or a book of the Bible as well as lead him to one text only. Why not? What is important—and here I am with Spurgeon whole-heartedly—is that we must preserve and Safeguard 'the freedom of the Spirit.'

. . . I have known men who . . . would actually hand out a list of their texts for many months ahead . . . I reprobate that entirely and completely . . . speaking generally, I feel that . . . is surely to put certain limits upon the sovereignty and the leading of the Spirit in this matter.

So, having asserted that we are subject to the Spirit, and that we must be careful to make sure that we really are subject to Him, I argue that He may lead us at one time to preach on odd texts and at another time to preach a series of sermons. I would humbly claim that I have known this many times in my experience.

There is a volume of sermons preached by me published under the title, Spiritual Depression. The story of how I came to preach that series may help to illustrate this matter. I had actually determined—it seemed to me that I was being led in that way, but undoubtedly it was my own determination—to start a series of sermons on the Epistle to the Ephesians. However, one morning while dressing, quite suddenly and in an overwhelming manner, it seemed to me that the spirit of God was urging me to preach a series of sermons on 'spiritual depression'.

Quite literally while I was dressing the series took order in my mind, and all I had to do was to rush as quickly as possible to jot down on paper the various texts, and the order in which they had come to me, in that way. I had never thought about preaching a series of sermons on spiritual depression; it had never occurred to me to do so; but it came just like that. I always pay great attention to such happenings. It is a very wonderful and glorious experience apart from anything else; and I would not dare to disobey what I regard as a very definite injunction coming in that manner. I am quite confident that the preaching of that series of sermons was dictated to me by Spirit Himself.

I would add a further word to justify my attitude that we should avoid an over-rigidity in this matter. I am suggesting that it right both to preach on odd texts and a series; and, in any case, a series can always be broken into. Indeed a series should always be broken into if you feel a particular pressure on your spirit urging you to do so. That is why I would never print a programme of what I proposed to preach, even for the next three months. You cannot tell what you should do—at least I could never tell. Circumstances may arise which demand attention and provide a wonderful opportunity for preaching.

Indeed I could never give a guarantee that I would finish the sermon I had prepared on any one occasion. Many and many a time I have found myself in the position that the usual amount of time for the sermon had gone and I had only preached half my sermon! How can you tell what may happen? You are not in control, at least you should not be. The Spirit is using you, and dealing with you, as you are preaching, quite as much as He was at the time of preparation.

Do not misunderstand this; I am not advocating or excusing slovenliness. I have gone out of my way to emphasise the opposite. But, still, with all your preparation and forethought you have to maintain 'the freedom of the Spirit', and try to keep yourself open and sensitive to His every movement.”

D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Preaching and Preachers, pp. 188-190.

This series on the Together for the Gospel Statement continues with "Are There Three Types of Expository Preaching?"

Most Mondays I take the time to raid my electronic version of Dr. Martyn Lloyd-Jones' materials, which is produced by Logos Bible Software. Today's quote comes from a biography of the Doctor and includes several quotes from his writings that build a clear picture of the Doctor's view of expository preaching. The passage begins with a well-known statement from the Doctor’s book, Preaching and Preachers, about the critical importance of preaching.

This post follows on from the quote I shared from John Piper on Expository Preaching last Friday. Earlier posts in this series on the Together for the Gospel Statement can be found in my post on The Place of Truth.

"The most urgent need in the Christian Church today is true preaching; and as it is the greatest and most urgent need in the Church it is obviously the greatest need of the world also." (p.9)

The key phrase in this forthright statement is, of course, 'true preaching.' To him this was expository preaching, which he defines in his volume on 2 Peter as "preaching which is concerned to expound the Word of God and not merely to express the ideas of the preacher, preaching which is not merely topical and intended to suit the popular palate and conditions prevailing at the moment." In his preface to volume one of Studies in the Sermon on the Mount, he says this:

A sermon is not an essay and is not meant, primarily, for publication, but to be heard and to have an immediate impact upon the listeners. This implies, of necessity, that it will have certain characteristics which are not found and are not desirable in written studies. To prune it of these, if it should be subsequently published, seems to me to be quite wrong, for it then ceases to be a sermon and becomes something quite nondescript. I have a suspicion that what accounts for the dearth of preaching at the present time is the fact that the majority of printed books of sermons have clearly been prepared for a reading rather than a listening public. Their flavour and form are literary rather than sermonic.

He had equally decisive views concerning the form of his sermons:

These are expository sermons which apart from minor corrections and adjustments were delivered as printed here. They are not lectures nor a running commentary on verses or passages. They are expositions which take the form of a sermon.

It has always been my view that this is how Scripture should be handled. Commentaries are of great value in arriving at an accurate understanding of the text, yet at their best they are only of value as scaffolding in the erection of a building. Moreover, it is vital that we should understand that an epistle such as this is only a summary of what the Apostle Paul preached. He explains that in chapter 1, verses 11-15. He wrote the Epistle because he was not able to visit them in Rome. Had he been with them he would not merely have given them what he says in this Letter, for this is but a synopsis. He would have preached an endless series of sermons as he did daily in the school of Tyrannus (Acts 19:9) and probably have often gone on until midnight (Acts 20:7). The business of the preacher and teacher is to open out and expand what is given here by the Apostle in summary form.

But perhaps the best-and crispest-definition he gave of preaching is this sentence from Preaching and Preachers: "Preaching is theology coming through a man who is on fire." He saw the chief end of preaching as giving men and women "a sense of God and His presence." He adds this personal postscript:

As I have said already, during this last year I have been ill, and so have had the opportunity and the privilege of listening to others instead of preaching myself.As I have listened in physical weakness this is the thing I have looked for and longed for and desired. I can forgive a man for a bad sermon, I can forgive the preacher almost anything if he gives me a sense of God, if he gives me something for my soul, if he gives me the sense that, though he is inadequate himself, he is handling something which is very great and very glorious, if he gives me some dim glimpse of the majesty and the glory of God, the love of Christ my Saviour, and the magnificence of the Gospel. If he does that I am his debtor, and I am profoundly grateful to him.

He frequently returned to the theme of "true" preaching. Here is another succinct comment: "The true preacher does not seek for truth in the pulpit; he is there because he has found it." It all seems so simple, so obvious, so profound . . . .

^{JOHN PETERS, The Preacher - Biography of D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, 1986 (Joseph Kreifels).}

The biographer ends this section by quoting the doctor’s own description of his particular approach to expository preaching:

"My training in medicine and surgery are always with me. I look at a text, diagnose the condition and decide where I am to make the first incision. I cut deep through the layers of the tissue until I reach the heart of the problem. I deal with it and then rebuild and sew up."

The T4G Statement series continues with Lloyd Jones on Spurgeon: Are Sermon Series Compulsory?

This post is part of a series on the Together for the Gospel Statement. Links to previous posts on Articles 1-3 can be found in the introduction to my post, "The Place of Truth."

Article 4

We affirm the centrality of expository preaching in the church and the urgent need for a recovery of biblical exposition and the public reading of Scripture in worship.

We deny that God-honoring worship can marginalize or neglect the ministry of the Word as manifested through exposition and public reading. We further deny that a church devoid of true biblical preaching can survive as a Gospel church.

Today I want to share a quote from John Piper on Expository Preaching. Here Piper is keen to explain that it is not just "expository" preaching that we need to recover, but a certain type of expository preaching. I will speak more about this when I post on this article myself. Let's just say that there is a kind of expository preaching that can bring death and not life. This quote is surely an antidote for that.

"God exists to be worshipped—to be admired and treasured and desired and praised. Therefore, the Word of God is written primarily to produce worship. This means that if that Word is handled like a hot-dish recipe or a repair manual, it is mishandled. And the people will suffer. The Truth of God begs to be handled with exultation. And our hearts yearn for this and need it. Something in us starts to die when precious and infinitely valuable realities are handled without feelings and words of wonder and exultation. That is, a church starts to die without preaching.

But, of course, this assumes something massive. To treasure the Truth, and to love the Truth, and be impassioned about the Truth, and to exult in the Truth, you have to know the Truth. So it's not enough to say that preaching is exultation. We must also say it is "expository exultation." It is exultation in the Truth of God's Word. And the exultation is in proportion to the Truth delivered.

In 2 Timothy 2:15 Paul tells Timothy, "Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, handling accurately the word of truth." This, too, is part of preaching. Preaching is handling accurately the word of truth. In other words, you can never twist or exploit the Word in order to increase the emotional response of the people. Preaching is not exultation without exposition of the Word. Nor is preaching exposition of the Word without exultation. One error cuts off the head. The other rips out the heart. In both cases the victim dies. No heart. Or, no head. You're dead. And so is preaching. And not too long after, the church.

So the command of the Lord is—preach the Word. Keep your head on (exposition) and keep your heart alive (exultation). Handle the precious living Word of God accurately. And come to this pulpit week after week and do expository exultation. Don't out-exult the Word. And don't under-exult the Word. There is enough glory in the Word that you need add nothing artificial. Just eat it until your heart is deeply and truly satisfied and then serve the same banquet for your people.

Martin Luther was one of the great preachers of all time. He explained the need for preaching like this:

Because heresies threatened the living apostolic message, it had to be recorded in a book to protect it from falsification. Preaching reverses this process of conservation again, allowing the Scriptures of the past to become the tidings of the present . . . The Gospel has been committed to lifeless paper; fresh words can transform it into glad tidings again.

Scripture turned into glad tidings—that is what happens in expository exultation. [Pastor], if the Lord wills, there are many years in front of you and many trials. You will be tempted in many ways to give up preaching. Satan will lie to you that it is not a great thing. Or that you could devote yourself to something more significant. But when that happens go back to 2 Timothy 4:1-2 and listen to the apostle. "I solemnly charge you in the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who is to judge the living and the dead, and by His appearing and His kingdom: preach the word."

Then you will rise up and say with Martin Luther, "If I could today become king or emperor, I would not give up my office as preacher."

---

By John Piper © Desiring God.
Website: www.desiringGod.org.
Email: mail@desiringGod.org.
Toll Free: 1.888.346.4700.

The series on the T4G Statement continues with Martyn Lloyd-Jones on Expository Preaching . . .

It's been awhile since I last did this, but I intend to revive the series now. For more information about Together for the Gospel, please see my Conference Round Up Post. If you haven't already done so, I would encourage you to read the statement in full — it is available as either a pdf file or as Google's html version. There is also an ongoing Blogger's Challenge which I have set to encourage us all to blog about this Statement — thanks to Crossway for donating five copies of God is the Gospel to encourage your participation! The first two books have been awarded to Mathew Sims (who has already finished blogging through each of the articles in a 25-part series!) and Dave Warnock. It is not too late for you to win one of the remaining three by writing on your own blog or in the comments section about this important statement. Don’t feel you have to cover the whole Statement — why not just pick an article that particularly interests you?

I have posted myself on the Introduction, as well as a combined post on Articles 1 and 2. I have also shared a John Piper quote, and have posted from the Doctor's writings on the Introduction, Articles 1 and 2, and Article 3, part 1 and part 2.

T4G Article 3

We affirm that truth ever remains a central issue for the Church, and that the church must resist the allure of pragmatism and postmodern conceptions of truth as substitutes for obedience to the comprehensive truth claims of Scripture.

We deny that truth is merely a product of social construction or that the truth of the Gospel can be expressed or grounded in anything less than total confidence in the veracity of the Bible, the historicity of biblical events, and the ability of language to convey understandable truth in sentence form. We further deny that the church can establish its ministry on a foundation of pragmatism, current marketing techniques, or contemporary cultural fashions.

Before Christmas I spoke at Jubilee Church, London, about the doctrine of the Scripture and addressed some of these issues. I thought that sharing my notes and the audio of this talk would be appropriate in light of this declaration, which I wholeheartedly endorse.

During my talk I mention that the Bible shows that God communicates and He is very good at doing it. God communication is a true message that comes through as the author intends it. I believe that God has done everything necessary to achieve just that.

The audio is available to download (you may need to right click and save the file onto your PC), as are my PowerPoint slides (which should open in your browser), as well as a handout which has some blank points for you to fill in.

Article 3 of the the Together for Gospel Statement focuses on truth. Much has been written about the post-modern conception of truth. It is perhaps almost trite to talk about the fallacy of an absolute statement that “there is no such thing as absolute truth”. But, over-used phrases sometimes express things well. The notion of blurring the concept of truth is so vacuous as to be impossible to build a life on.

As a scientist, I have been raised with the idea that there is, indeed, such a thing as absolute truth. Either something has mass or it doesn’t. Either I will fall down because of gravity or float because I am in space. How can theology be any different? Give me someone who absolutely rejects the message of the Bible and the existence of its God any day over someone who tries to blur boundaries and talk about the “spiritual meaning” of events that they believe are basically lies.

I note that once more in this article of their Statement the subject of the Bible is again core. Quite simply, it is not possible to have a Bible that is full of error and yet also the word of God. God is no liar. I cannot see how we can compromise with post-modern ideas of truth and have any Gospel left. For either God is too weak or disinterested to make sure we have a Bible that we can trust, or He is a deceiver.

It simply will not do to say that the Bible contains God's words and we have to discern them. For, even with a Bible that we have all agreed is trustworthy, evangelicals have succeeded in coming up with differing interpretations. Imagine what we will be like if the anchor of our faith is severed and we are cast adrift.

I honestly believe that this Statement, issued at the Together for the Gospel 2006 conference, comes from men who are given to the whole church in the way described in Ephesians 4.

The series on the T4G Statement continues with John Piper on Expository Preaching . . .

Here it is! The full story from Logos of how my e-mail to them led to one of the most exciting pre-pub offers they have had for a long time.

Don't say I didn't warn you - you definitely have to move fast to get these at the low price!

This is an e-mail from a regular news e-mail Logos sent out. To sign up for more Logos e-mails, see www.logos.com/newswire.

Charles Simeon's Horae Homileticae Commentary (21 Volumes)

Suggested Retail Price: $699.95
Logos Sale Price: $489.95
Pre-Publication Special: $299.95

Charles Simeon's Horae Homileticae: or Discourses Digested into One Continuous Series and Forming a Commentary Upon Every Book of the Old and New Testament is a 12,000 page commentary which is becoming more and more respected and referenced every day. Think of it as owning Simeon's sermon outlines from fifty-four years of preaching designed to "humble the sinner, exalt the Saviour and promote holiness".

"What Simeon experienced in the Word was remarkable. And it is so utterly different from the counsel that we rec