Sermon Effectiveness

I heard a good sermon today at church. No really, it was a good sermon. "What," you may be asking, "is the definition of a good sermon?"

It might seem that what makes a sermon good could be found in the eyes of the beholder. In other words, the defining points could be subjective and vary from person to person.

But I don't really think it's that vague or ambiguous. It's much simpler than that. There are some basic tenets to a good sermon that should always be there. For starters, it should be truth that is being preached. We are to test everything against Scripture and verify that it is truthful. If it is, we are to hold on to it. (1 Thessalonians 5:19-22)

Of course from a practical perspective, a good sermon is delivered well. A monotone preacher who talks on and on or doesn't know how to make a point isn't going to get credit for a good sermon no matter what he has to say. So it's no surprise that people like preachers with charisma and charm. Perhaps a sense of humor and a quick wit are handy tools as well.

After hearing today's sermon, someone near me was talking about how much they enjoyed it and how good they thought it was. Out of curiosity, I asked what they thought made it a good sermon. They rattled off the expected responses. But then this individual said, "And when he speaks, I feel like I matter to him. It's like he cares about me, even though he doesn't know me and I'm one of hundreds in the audience." Wow. Was that a new factor in what makes sermons good?

I've blogged before about the travesty of sermons downloaded off the Internet. But there's a more important twist here that is being revealed. It's actually two simple truths that are really criteria for what makes a good sermon.

The first truth being revealed is that the sheep want to feel loved. It's been said that people don't care how much you know until they know how much you care (about them). My own experiences in both business and ministry have affirmed this reality for me. The Bible tells us about being shepherds when we are preachers or ministry leaders. And truly the sheep want to know that they matter to the shepherd. It helps make whatever the shepherd is telling them sound somehow better.

Jesus said that if we love Him we are to feed His sheep. (John 21:15-17). Perhaps what He meant to say was that if we love Him we are to love His sheep (which would include feeding them).

The second truth being revealed is something that I've not yet heard anyone comment on. But I've noticed it in Scripture. And as I've listened to sermons, I also notice that it seems to be a common characteristic of sermons that I myself label as "good." Ezekiel 3:10-11 tells us that we must take God's words to heart before we can preach those words to others.

It seems that God's message(s) must sink deep into your own heart ... and show in your own life (actions) before you can effectively help others understand and apply the gospel in their lives. So it would seem that good preachers are not just conduits for information. Rather they are vessels that must digest and own the message before they can preach it in a good sermon.

So what's the conclusion here? It would seem that a good sermon has many characteristics. But once we get past the first criteria of truth, maybe the most relevant criteria for a good sermon are that the sheep matter to the shepherd and that the shepherd owns ... and lives the message.

Do you suppose they teach those two things at seminary or Bible colleges?

Do you suppose that people in today's churches listen well enough to discern those two things?

If they did, perhaps all sermons would be as good as the one I heard this morning.

Internet Sermons

I've been working with pastors through the years, and been privileged to hear several of them confess their own sins from time to time. Often the focus is on blatant sins such as pride, lust, greed, etc. But there are other things in a pastor's life that can be wrong in God's eyes, and they need to be dealt with just as much as the blatant wrongs. A good example can be sermons.

How could a sermon be sinful? There are actually several ways. For starters, the sermon could be wrong. Preaching heresy is openly condemned by God in both the Old Testament and New Testament. Oddly, taking sermons of others and preaching them yourself can also be wrong. On the surface, it doesn't look wrong. In fact, it seems as if it should be right. But when pastors have talked about it, they're often ashamed to admit the fact that they preached sermons that they got off the Internet. Their shame proves that they know it's wrong.

You see, a pastor is a modern-day prophet. He is called and anointed by God to speak for God. When he preaches, he should be giving his audience an anointed Word from God Himself. Whatever preaching "style" he tends to needs to be exposing the truth. (And of course Jesus is the truth.) Simply put, a preacher is a conduit through whom God speaks. Our culture doesn't embrace that notion though. We seem not to expect that as listeners either. This may explain why we don't listen very well to the preaching we have!

The book of Jeremiah gives us a view of just one of the times God spoke directly about those whom He has called and anointed as spiritual leaders. Let's take a look at something he had to say that has a very relevant application in our Internet-powered "information age."

In Jeremiah 24:30, God says, "I am against the prophets who steal from one another words supposedly from me. Yes, declares the Lord, I am against the prophets who wag their own tongues and yet declare, 'The Lord declares ...'"

So what is God saying here? Simply put, He doesn't want the prophets whom He's called to use the words that He may (or may not) have given to another prophet. He doesn't want the prophets to speak on their own either.

Who are the prophets? A prophet is one who speaks for God. It is really that simple. So the preacher in the pulpit is a prophet. And God wants to reveal Himself to the audience through that preacher. God wants that man to speak an anointed Word from the Father Himself. It is to be supernaturally inspired - and not borrowed from another through whom God may have also spoken.

Those who preach are to turn to God and ask the simple questions. "Lord, what do You want to say through me? Would you please give me Your words - whatever it is that You want these people to hear?" The preacher should be on his knees before it's time to deliver the sermon, asking God, "Father, please quiet my mind and my heart. Control my tongue and speak through me. Let me speak only words that You want spoken ... words that honor You and fully serve You alone."

It is shocking the number of sermon sites on the Internet. You can subscribe to them, search in them for topic, etc. It would seem that it is becoming quite possible for a preacher to never actually write a sermon. He only has to turn to the Internet to download great sermons and then be a great speaker to deliver them with pizazz.

But let's be clear here. The Internet may be fine as a research tool. It may be fine to even use the sermons of others to research things. But God has been clear - we are not to preach the sermons He has given to others.

Christian Leaders

Christian leaders cannot claim to serve Christ faithfully if we allow believers to remain on the wrong track. It is our responsibility to address their ignorance and their sin. It is our responsibility to lead them to better conclusions about themselves, about God and about the world in general.

This is what I believe, and find to be the most Biblical view of Christian leadership's role.

So why is this noteworthy today? I suppose it's on my mind because I find so few Christian leaders who seem to share the belief. So many of them seem content with one-way broadcasts of information. Churches describe their educational "offerings" and assume it is up to the people to sign for this class or that class.

The leaders of the church don't seem to accept much responsibility for the ignorance and sin of the people in the church. Is that really appropriate? I know - we can't control the attitudes and behaviors of people in our church. But when was the last time someone was disciplined in a church for not living to a certain standard of righteousness? How well do churches confront sin among their people? I think we've swung pretty far below a happy medium here.

People come into churches to seek God. That's what we'd all like to believe. But the fact of the matter is that some of them aren't seeking God at all. They're seeking to feel better about themselves. They're seeking relief from emotional or spiritual pain they may be feeling. They're seeking companionship or fellowship. They're seeking an emotional experience. Some of them are seeking education.

The point is that people who come into our churches probably need to be taught to seek God. It may never have occurred to them that they should "seek Him first." Even if it did, they don't know of a practical way to put that into application in their lives. Perhaps the most frightening thing is that the behavior of the churches could mislead them in this way. I've seen many people who think that taking a class at their church is the way to seek God. It's a tool that can be used of course, but it is not the way.

So how can Christian leaders take more responsibility for the spiritual maturity, world view and sin of the people in their churches, cell groups, etc.? What do church leaders do with the ignorance of the people in their charge? How much of that ignorance does God expect the leaders to own? Can that ignorance be addressed in a Sunday sermon and an occasional class?

I once had a job as pastor of "spiritual formation and ministry development." I found that spiritual formation efforts were the ones I liked the most. Oddly, I found an incredible dichotomy between spiritual formation and ministry development. I wasn't too keen on ministry development ... because I couldn't see where it did much to form the character and nature of Christ in the people (i.e., spiritual formation). How strange.

Let's face it, our people are ignorant because they don't know. Perhaps they are even content with their ignorance - and don't have a desire to know. Are we teaching them the value of knowledge? Are we teaching them how to learn? Are we modeling a teachable spirit for them ourselves?

Our people sin because it is who they are. They won't stop sinning unless they are confronted and led to righteousness; led to a better conclusion. Even if they want to stop sinning, our people often don't know how to repent. They think that repentance is the same as guilt and shame. (It's not.)

You know, I think there is a dirty little secret in American churches. It is that they are not very effective. They don't take irreligious people and turn them into fully-devoted (i.e., obedient) followers of Christ. They may be big, large, financially sound and hip or successful churches. They may be popular churches. They may have a TV show, radio broadcast or other impressive ministries. But let's get honest here ... that's not the definition of an effective church.

So Christian leaders, what can we do to be more effective? How can we do a better job of leading people to fully submitted lives under Christ? And there it is, the million dollar question.

Relevant Truth?

Our pastor is preaching a series on truth. It's pretty dynamic, engaging and sure to elicit some strong support ... as well as some opposition. This week he talked about how to know if your moral compass is slipping. He talked about how we can know truth. For sure, the moral compass of many of us has been slipping. Oddly enough, there don't seem to be nearly enough of us trying though to know truth.

Some people think truth really is relevant. In other words, they think truth depends on circumstances - and will want to look at the circumstances before they decide what's true. A good example might be abortion. There are those who will try to straddle the fence on this issue. They think abortion is generally wrong, but agree that there could be circumstances where it would be okay. I find that fascinating. Not because it's abortion, but because they are willing to allow right or wrong to be held hostage by the circumstances.

I talked recently with a family that is "shopping for a church." I'm not sure why they decided to seek me out, but they did. I suppose they were looking for my tips on how to find a bargain church. You know - that would be the church that offers the most and the best. When I started to ask questions, this young couple quickly moved to their belief in God. They were quite articulate in describing "the God we believe in." Unfortunately, this wasn't a God I'd ever heard about, in any religion.

And therein lies the problem. We want to believe that truth won't ask much of us. We want truth to stand for what's good and right, while not bending any of our ideals or preferences. If we could find a truth that will give us what we want, then we'll embrace that truth. And if we can't ... why then we'll just "keep shopping" around.

I thought of a book penned by former U.S. vice president Al Gore titled, "An Inconvenient Truth." Actually, I considered that it must be a pretty stupid title for a book --- because it has been my experience that all truth is inconvenient. It is the very nature of truth. If it were convenient, could it still be truth? I suspect it may not. You see, truth needs to stand against culture. It must stand against convenience. It never wins any popularity contests. It is peaceable, kind and gentle. But it can also be piercing and fierce, especially when someone violates it. Truth is not a door mat. We cannot walk all over it.

Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth and the light." So Jesus was the truth. That's a pretty clear definition for me. I can look at the character and nature of Jesus. And I can see that the character and nature of truth is very much aligned with that of Jesus. Jesus didn't win any popularity contests. In fact, Jesus has always been quite disturbing - from his birth through his death, resurrection and for centuries thereafter. He is fierce and piercing. At the same time, he is peaceable and kind. And so it goes with truth.

We see and hear people in our daily lives, in the media, who claim to be "searching for truth." Often on the news we'll hear someone say something like, "I just want the truth." Often times they already have the truth, but they don't like it - so they keep "searching." Perhaps they're convinced they'll find a better truth. You know, a truth that doesn't offend them or pierce them. Maybe they'd like a truth that makes sense to them, from their human perspective. Sadly, truth doesn't always cooperate.

Even more sadly, people who claim to be seeking the truth aren't always actually seeking the truth - they're seeking something else. Some seek justification for what they want to believe. They think belief is something they can choose (it isn't) and then they look for the evidence to back up what they've already decided is true.

I'm glad our preacher is doing this sermon series on truth. I wonder how it will impact our church. Will attendance increase - fed by a people who are thirsting for the truth? Or will it wane - because the people are annoyed by truth that proves to be rather inconvenient? Only time will tell.

But I pray that God will open the ears of the listeners so they hear. For we must all understand that truth is not relevant to the circumstances. We must all learn to embrace truth that is absolute in nature, and transcends the circumstances. Real truth isn't elusive, but it is usually not what the world expects. The question then becomes what we will do with real truth.

Sexy Churches

Often we think of sex in church in terms of what not to do. Or we assign it a marketing correlation, as in referring to a church that markets itself well and calling it a sexy church.

Surely the Dallas area has its share of those sexy churches that market themselves well. We have large, influential churches here in the Dallas area. I often wonder though what impact they are having. Two in particular have been on my mind this week.

First Baptist Church in Dallas and its senior pastor, Dr. Robert Jeffress made national headlines when he started a sermon series last week which he titled something like "politically incorrect." He chose to market the sermon series though by posting an inflammatory sermon headline on the church's marquee outside. It read, "Why Gay is not okay."

As you might imagine, this infuriated and offended a wide number of people. (One has to imagine that this was the intent of Dr. Jeffress ... to attract or disturb.) The protesters lined up outside his church and it's been talked about all week. He continued yesterday by preaching on "what to say to those who are gay." The protesters were out in force, of course.

Now I don't agree with the gay protesters. I see that the Bible forbids homosexual relationships. I long ago realized that God's truth on the subject is that many are tempted, but none are defined. God never created anyone to be in a homosexual relationship. So for those who are tempted in that way, God expects them to resist the temptation. So there is no question in my mind about the fact that Dr. Jeffress is preaching God's truth. However --- that's not the end of my view here.

I have to question Dr. Jeffress tactics. Is it really necessary to put inflammatory remarks on the church marquee out front? Could you not just as easily have advertised this sermon series by putting something that read, "God's Truth About Gays." Then if someone who is not already in your church truly cared about God's perspective on the subject, they could make a point to attend or download that sermon on-line. In terms of what we should say to someone who is gay, let's start with "I love you."

It's been known for a long time that human beings never care how much you know about anything until they know how much you care about them. So Mr. Jeffress, leading by telling the gays how wrong you think they are on the marquee outside probably hasn't been such a good idea. But then again, I guess it all depends on what you intended.

Another high-profile church is Fellowship.com, led by its senior pastor, Ed Young, Jr. You may have read about his recent sermon, where he preached sitting on a bed on the stage of his mega-church. He challenged his congregation of about 20,000 people in four locations (from Dallas to Miami) to have sex every day for seven (7) days. He of course qualified this by saying that the challenge is only for people who are married.

But if you are married and in Pastor Young's church, he wants you to have sex every day for seven (7) days in a row. He even went on national news and said that he and his wife would be going to bed early that week to "practice what he preached."

How does this set with you? The Dallas Morning News had taken letters to the Editor commenting for and against this. Some people think it's great. They extol the fact that healthy sex lives are biblical. Others think it's disgusting and makes a mockery of godly sexuality. Some said it's an outrage to cheapen sex like this. As you might guess, I have an opinion about this myself. It's taken me a week to ponder it though. To be honest, I wasn't sure what I thought about it at first. But I was definitely thinking about it.

After considering Mr. Young's challenge to his congregation, I think he is short-sighted. In fact, I'd say that he is every bit as short-sighted and thoughtless as his Baptist colleague, Dr. Jeffress. You see, Ed Young, Jr. seems to be overlooking some important facts about sex inside of marriage.

First, there is a significant difference between having sex and making love. Second, many marriages have very painful areas when it comes to sexuality. Telling married folks to set that pain aside and just mechanically engage in the sexual acts is folly at best. More realistically, it is likely to sharpen the pain. You can't just deny the pain and go through the motions without causing further damage and destruction. Did you know that, Mr. Young?

Finally, sexual intercourse is like worship in that it is a celebration of the marital relationship. If the marriage relationship is not healthy, then sex is not likely to be healthy. There is nothing to celebrate in bad marriage. So having sex just because your pastor told you to is likely to be a frustrating endeavor at best. And it could be much worse.

So what are we to make of these "sexy churches" here in North Texas? I think we can conclude that their pastors are using sex to sensationalize their sermons and draw attention to themselves. Moreover, we can see that their pastors are pretty inconsiderate and thoughtless. Perhaps they could even be considered unloving.

What was that blog recently about "those awful Christians?" Here they are, in action again. God bless 'em. And let us forgive them as they trespass against us!