Better Sermons
The art of a sermon is a wonderful talent. There are those who stick to a three points and a poem format. This is called the university structure. There is the Calvin structure of explaining the text, pulling out the doctrine of the text, and applying the doctrine to the world. These are both the common structures that some preachers employ. A sermon is better if there is flow to the narrative. Often preachers force a structure onto the text instead of allowing the text to determine structure. A lot of times a preacher will begin the sermon with a joke, a tactic to trick the members into listening. This is weak at best. The best beginning is one that uses tension. You are creating a reason to listen. After the joke is over, the sermon is over for some of the members. Also, the shifts in a sermon are highly important. A good story does not make for a good story in a sermon. All the elements of the sermon must flow well. There must be consistency with the message. Also, the conclusion must be the climax. I have heard too many preachers explain the conclusion, going over the conclusion too many times at the end of the lesson. Stick the conclusion and let the sermon speak for itself. It does not have to have this huge, powerful conclusion, the cumulative work of preaching will address this. One sermon is not going to do all the work that must be done.
Here are the keys to a better sermon:
1. Tension in the sermon.
2. Proper transitions through the sermon.
3. A climax conclusion.
Related posts:
- The Problems with Structure in Sermons
- The Mega Story in Sermons
- Three Shifts in Sermons
- How to Use Commentaries in Sermons
- Movement In Sermons
About The Author
Agree 100%. Learning to preach in inductive and narrative modes was not an easy process. Have you ever heard David Fleer preach (Fleer teaches Homiletics at Lipscomb U.)? One of the best sermons I have ever heard was preached by David Fleer on Micah 6.1-8.
Grace and peace,
Rex
No, but I hope to soon.
Interesting stuff. As I have begun preaching twice a week, I have given this a lot of thought. I agree with Rex, the transition to a narrative approach can be difficult, especially for a deductive guy like me.
Let me begin by saying it take constant work for me not to use my deductive default mode for every sermon. While the 3 point structure is not a grid that should be forced on every text, it is actually alot older than the tradition most of us think of. You can go back to the Rhetoric of Plato and see those same elements. I don’t know if we should totally discount that kind of approach, if used wisely and effectively. I recently heard Charles Swindoll deliver a lesson that was almost completely deductive, and he held thousands captive by it. So, it can be done effectively, if used correctly (and maybe even sparingly).
Here are a couple of thoughts – it is challenging to let the text shape the sermon. A narrative text naturally lends itself to a narrative preaching style, but what about the wisdom literature like Proverbs? It takes careful thought to deliver a message in the shape of the text.
You’re right about tension – like a dissonant note, it can keep people waiting for the resolution. It also shows the importance of a conclusion, which you point to. I might also add that the conclusion also needs to be clear. This is not to say that every sermon offers easy answers or solves every problem (which would be impossible), but that everyone is left with a clear call to action. If we create the dissonance every week and leave without fully addressing it each week, we are not serving a healthy spiritual diet. While we need to avoid acting like Christianity is all about getting all the answers on this side of eternity, we must give clear guidance.
Here’s the good news – God’s Word is what changes people, and no matter how many times I mess up trying to communicate it, He still works through it. Not an excuse to stop trying to improve, just an encouragement.
I had a preacher ask me one time if the invitation portion of his lesson was good. I found this strange since his entire sermon was a call to repentance; a sort of invitation in itself. There was no need, as some preachers do, to have a sermon and then “extend the invitation.” I think this shift is one of the most awkward / point killing tactics used. Your preaching on something and then all of a sudden, “oh yeah, if you want to walk with God, come on down.” This turns the person’s brain off as it says, “I’m done talking about that, now you can get the song book.” Every time we preach, it should, on some level, be a call for a person to change or at least consider his/her life from beginning to end.
I agree with Dale on the awkwardness of tacking on a stock invitation.
Also, for anyone interested in a good book that teaches an easy approach to narrative preaching, check out “The Four Pages of a Sermon” by Paul Scott Wilson. This is the book that helped turn on the light bulb for me, along with my Homiletics professor Dr. Dave Bland.
Grace and peace,
Rex
I am a Andy Stanley disciple so I love his book “Communicating for Change”. I think his thoughts of connecting with the audience, producing tension, answering the tension, and casting a vision for what would happen if you follow God’s word are great.
Just added the The Four Pages of a Sermon to my wish list on Amazon, thanks for the suggestion.
I also think one of the best things is to listen to several guys and when you find on that is good listen to several of his lessons and figure out what are they doing and how are they doing this. Most guys have a formula if you listen closely enough.
Rusty – I love Andy Stanley! I get a steady diet of him on my iPod.
What Matthew failed to point out is that everything he knows about preaching a good sermon he learned from me!
Actually, when Matthew and I were both working at Waynesboro I feel like we both made great strides in our design and delivery. It wasn’t a competition kind of thing, just a mutual desire to be better. Unfortunately, not many ministers are in that kind of situation.
Thank you for the comments everyone. Andrew, doing the deed twice a week, is hard, especially just starting out. I did series, and one lesson a week was a three pointer. All of my sermons are more narrative now and are manuscripts.
Dale, Not all sermons should have a “invitation” in the traditional sense, and some are the invitation. I hate the bridge too, it was always weak.
Rex, Four pages of an sermon is excellent, read it a while back.
Rusty, I loved Comm. for change too. Used that model a lot.
Mitchell, no you did teach me everything I know. Serious, working with you was the best. You were always a partner in the Gospel, not all ministers feel that with their co workers. I miss you.
Right now I am reading a book on all the major structures or forms of a sermon. I will share the review when I am done.