By now it is old news that we live in a world marked by postmodernity. In such a world, truth is not something that is outside ourselves, but something that is self-determined. Each of us constructs our own private, personal realities. What’s ‘true’ for you is not ‘true’ for me.
So, how do we break into the lives of people who are immersed in this postmodern reality? How do we reach them for the gospel? Do we find ways to show them how the gospel is existentially satisfying? Do we offer therapeutic entertainment to draw them in?
Nope. Instead, we do the unthinkable in our modern age. We preach.
Of course, the first reaction to such an idea is, “Are you kidding?” When faced with the challenges of postmodernity, do we really think the solution is to stick some guy in front of the group and let him talk for 30 minutes? Wouldn’t a video be more effective? Or at least a dialogue or panel discussion?
But, as scandalous as it is, there is something about preaching that is unique and special. Let us consider what those things are.
1. Preaching is Word-Centered (in a world that is people-centered).
Preaching doesn’t ask first, “what works?” nor does it ask “what is personally satisfying?” Rather, preaching asks, most fundamentally, what does God have to say in his Word? Thus, preaching is a decisive challenge to the postmodern world because it takes the attention off of us and onto the Scriptures. It forces us to go outside of ourselves.
This is precisely why preaching that does not focus on the Word is not really preaching. Indeed, such an activity (whatever you want to call it) actually serves to exacerbate the problem of postmodernity rather than remedy it. It reinforces people’s perception that they get to define truth for themselves.
2. Preaching is Authoritative (in a world that is anti-authority).
Our world’s anti-authority posture is so pervasive that even Christians cannot escape its effects. Indeed, it even influences the way we receive God’s word. We prefer Bible studies, personal devotions, or small groups, as the primary means we receive God’s word. It allows us to be in charge. We are the authoritative interpreters and guides.
There is nothing wrong with these activities, but preaching is something wholly other. In the act of preaching, a duly-ordained man comes to us representing God himself and speaks with real authority. So much so, that the Second Helvetic Confession (1566) can declare, “The preaching of the Word of God is the Word of God.”
Of course, our world will find this highly offensive. “Who does this man think he is?” they might ask incredulously. But, they are missing the point. He speaks not for himself, but for another. The preacher is a representative.
Thus, preaching, at its core is a vertical act (between man and God), not a horizontal one (between man and man).
3. Preaching is Proclamation (in a world that wants ‘dialogue’).
What makes preaching so unique is that is intentionally one-directional. It is not designed for discussion, or conversation, or for Q&A. It is designed as a powerful, one-way act of declaration by which we are encouraged, challenged, rebuked, and inspired. Sure, preaching includes information; it does supply us with data. But, at its core it is an act of powerful exhortation. Thus, preaching is the antithesis of Oprah’s couch.
I am reminded of the story of George Whitfield where a man came to ask if he could print his sermons. “Well, I have no inherent objection if you like,” said Whitfield, “but you will never be able to put on the printed page the lightning and the thunder.”
4. Preaching is Corporate (in a world that prefers individualism).
People might prefer to sit at home on a Sunday morning and listen to a sermon on the web. But, that does not capture what preaching is intended to be. Preaching is a corporate enterprise that takes place when the people of God are gathered together. In effect, preaching is the team meeting when the coach gives the big pep talk. Such things cannot happen individually. They must happen as a group.
And when preaching happens as a group, the entire enterprise is (rightly) taken out of our control. We cannot so easily change the channel or shut off the iPod. We are drawn into an event that is larger than ourselves. We are being drawn into the very body of Christ where preaching finds its proper home.
Thus, preaching is anti-individualistic. It directly challenges the postmodern sentiment that all I need is me, my Bible, and Jesus. It forces us to recover a higher ecclesiology.
In sum, preaching is a stunningly simple solution to a complex and daunting problem (postmodernity). But, the solution has been there all along. Paul said it plainly when he laid out our mission, “But we preach Christ crucified” (1 Cor 1:23).
Jon Stallings says
Great post Michael, As someone who is passionate about preaching this has been encouraging. Just the other week and young man who only comes occasionally came up to me after church with teas in his eyes. All he could say was thank you. I stood there a bit confused not really sure why he was thanking me. However, when we faithfully proclaim God’s word, He shows up and transforms lives.
Doug says
Really, really good post Michael. Thank you so much!
Scott Wallace says
Amen! Preach it!
Amplitudo says
I have had Messianic Jews tell me I am in violation of the Law. I have had reformed pastors tell me I am apostate because I do not submit to their specific liturgical or sacramental format. I have had Baptists tell me my salvation is suspect because I have never been baptized by full immersion. I have had Orthodox and Catholic clergy both tell me I live outside the “true” church as long as I remain separate from their institutions. The list goes on and on.
All of these men appealed to the same Scriptures and claimed the same authority. Some had more experience and maturity than others, but all had organizations, history, and education supporting them.
The question of the “post modern” individual then becomes, how does one discern, in a chaotic storm of conflicting messages all claiming the same thing, what God’s Word and will is? The only conclusion can be by the guiding of the Holy Spirit of the individual heart and mind through immersion in holy writ, constant prayer, and fellowship with other truth seekers.
I do not seek to denigrate your institution or ideas about corporate worship, but rather I wish to illuminate that the answer is not so simple as “preaching.” Perhaps if we narrow our focus such that we only see one tree in the forest that answer is sufficient, but let us not be so oblivious to pretend that the rest of the trees we are ignoring don’t exist.
Daveine Larkey says
1Cr 1:21
For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe
Amplitudo says
So which preacher do you listen to? The one you like the best, or the most popular, or the one who makes wonderful promises, or the one that claims to be the most qualified and experienced?
1 John 4:1 Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.
Saying that the answer to postmodernism is simply “preaching” and that the proper response is to submit to it is terribly narrow minded.
Lisa says
Greetings! What scriptures did the Bereans use when they heard Paul preach?
Amplitudo says
John Gill on Acts 17:11
“And searched the Scriptures daily whether those things were so:
they did not dispute with, and cavil at the apostle, as the Thessalonian Jews first did, ( Acts 17:2 ) nor did they receive the word, right or wrong, or with an implicit faith; but they immediately betook themselves to reading and searching the writings of the Old Testament, to see whether the things which the apostle preached, concerning the Messiah, his incarnation, obedience, sufferings, death, and resurrection from the dead, were agreeable to them, or no; determining, if they were not, to reject them, but if they were, to embrace them, as they did; see ( John 5:39 ) and this they did continually day after day. They were neither backward to hear and receive the word, nor slothful to examine it.”
JEFF says
Michael what did Martin luther have when he discovered the doctrine of faith alone.His bible and jesus right.What bible believing church could martin luther go to when he was looking for peace with GOD?Also does not presbyterian,baptist,lutheran,reformed etc…all claim to be preaching GODS word?Yet they would not fellowship with one another every sunday and YOU know it.With all the different beliefs among christians,the church is one of the reasons why people in the church and out of the church don’t believe in truth.YOU are going against scripture alone.GOD BLESS. JEFF
anaquaduck says
The churches you mention would be of one belief…the Christian faith but doctrinally there are some differences as each holds out the Word of truth, the Bible.
Postmodernity as a belief on the other hand does not know the peace of God as it goes here & there & measures things by human values that cannot ultimately save & redeem.
The Bible/Jesus teaches/taught about Satan being of influence also in all of this(the parable of the sower)
Martin Luther held the Bible in high esteem, so much so that he formed(reformed) another church. So for all his hardship & experience, the church & preaching was still the way to go. Many of God’s rich blessings come through the preaching of His Word, turning hearts & heads & saving souls for eternity. Luther learnt that only in Christ alone are we truly set free from sin to begin a life of faith.
Keith Cox (@dr_keithcox) says
Very nice post I like where you’re going but I think you don’t go far enough because you don’t start in the right place. Post-modernism is much more complex than you suggest here. It *is* about truth, but it’s more than just personal truth. In order to understand “post” modernism we have to start with modernism.
Historically, we can define the “modern” period as somewhere between ~1500 and sometime after WWII. What characterizes the modern period intellectually is the so-called “Enlightenment” outlook, sometimes called by scholars the “Enlightenment” or the “Modern” meta narrative. It is enormously complex but I think it can be grossly represented by the assertion that humans can create a man-made paradise without any need for divine intervention. It is, in essence, a rejection of original sin and the consequences of the Fall. It asserts instead that through the application of reason: education, science, and technology, humans can overcome the ills of the world. It is an inherently anti-Christian worldview, developed as a rejection of the ecclesiastically oriented culture of the “Middle” ages, sometimes called the “Christian” era, and by adherents to Enlightenment thinking, the “Dark” ages.
The Enlightenment philosophes sought, in essence, to redefine God: from the God who reveals himself in the Bible and can be experienced by faith to a god who reveals himself in nature and can be understood by the application of reason (science). The important thing about all of this is that the Enlightenment meta narrative is a *story* that proposes that mankind can achieve enlightenment, liberation, and ultimate fulfillment through reason: education, science, and technology.
This story is what Europeans told themselves about themselves and taught to the colonial subjects they sought to “enlighten” (when they bothered to try). This is the story that drove many in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries to predict the death of religion. But the story collapsed on itself in the twentieth century. At a time when humans were the best educated and the most scientifically and technologically advanced, far from producing a man-made utopia, Europeans (the most “enlightened” humans) created staggering atrocities: the Western Front, the Holocaust, the atomic bomb. So after WWII people rightly called the whole meta narrative into question. Hence, “post” modernism.
The problem for the Church is that it wrongly, because of nationalism and the ubiquity of the Enlightenment paradigm, identified itself too closely with the wrong narrative. “Modern” churches reflect “modern” culture, leading to churches exhibiting the very attributes (self-centered, anti-authority, individualistic) you hope preaching will correct. Far from being the Body of Christ, the church in the modern culture is one (of many) places where individual consumers can go to transact for “wellness.” That’s why we see so many churches abandon preaching the gospel in favor of pseudo-therapeutic topics (“Five ways to be a better parent”). That’s the product the customers are looking for. Give the people what they want.
But I digress. Postmodernism is that intellectual and cultural condition of being without a story. One of the reasons it is to hard to define is because it is not something it is lack of something. The modern story has been found wanting, what is there to replace it? That is why we Christians are wrong to continue to embrace modernism and reject “post” modernism, because the modern story, inherently anti-Christian, has been proven false. But the gospel is a story that is true. So-called postmoderns don’t reject truth. They reject the modern meta-narrative, but they are hungry for truth. They are hungry for the gospel.
The story has to be more than a heard story, it has to be a lived one. It has to be a story that people can enter that gives their life meaning. So, while preaching the gospel is indeed part of the solution, preaching the gospel is useless if the preaching falls on empty pews, or on collections of individuals transacting for wellness. Preaching must motivate action (Eph. 4:11-16). Jesus didn’t command his church to tell his story, he told them to live the story; making disciples by loving as he loved. That is how you reach postmoderns: by embodying the gospel, by being a story that people can enter into that gives meaning to their lives. The way to reach postmoderns doesn’t need to be discovered, it needs to be re-discovered. And for the Church, post-modernism is not a crisis, it’s an opportunity.
Eric Verby says
This hit the nail on the head. I am blessed to be at a church where the Gospel is preached twice every Sunday.
anaquaduck says
I am not saying the church is perfect or that I have agreed to each & every sermon I have heard over the years yet I can say “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!” Romans 10:15 Even before post modern times people wanted to do it their own way, not to mention the false teachers that were leading people astray.
All in all God calls us to be faithful & obedient to Him, despite the hardship, despite the opposition as the church teaches & admonishes. Colossians 3:16.
David says
Really preaching is exactly the telling of The Meta-Narrative of all time. It is The Story of humanity and the more we get to know its author, as you say, in the vertical dimension and retell his story as he meant it to be told – through preaching – than the horizontal problems of relating to the modern or postmodern mind will take place. Great article.
Jeff says
The roman catholic church accused martin luther of doing it his own way.They had history on their side.Who’s feet was bringing good news before martin luthers discovery of faith alone?Luther was called a false teacher by”the CHURCH” was he not?The church in the first century was overseen by the apostles who spoke the truth.We do not have that today,but what we do have is the scriptures.We must always be able to prove our doctrine from them.I do not see churches doing this.GOD BLESS Jeff
PNG says
How will preaching change the world if the world won’t come to church? It happened that the same day this post went up I received a newsletter from a small ministry that I support. They talk with small groups in living rooms about the gospel. My friend on their staff said in the letter, “if church is a restaurant, we are home delivery.” Preaching in the church on the corner by itself isn’t enough.
Jonathan says
I honor and need preaching. I sit for my pastor’s sermons on Sunday, listen to podcasts during the week and when I’m traveling on business. Active listening, for me, involves note taking during and pondering application after.
But, the “preaching is central” argument (with the assumption that preaching is what happens in a church/congregational setting where dozens/hundreds/thousands gather to hear the prepared remarks of 30-50 minutes by a seminary trained man who spends the majority of his working time during the week preparing and delivering sermons – if the preacher is full time and has the requisite staff, of course) only fits in our comfortable Western paradigm.
I travel extensively in Asia and spend time with missionaries (when I can) and am involved in numerous gospel focused conversations with people during the week…people who not only do not have access to a church (of any stripe) but if they did, would be at great risk to attempt to attend one. In this area of the world, it is the house church, underground church, small group that is the community of faith. In these groups, there is no preaching the way that we, in North America, understand preaching. There is clear proclamation of the Word but it is in a dialogue/teaching environment (either one to one or one to few). What happens in these groups is discipleship, not monologue.
Again, it is my preference and tradition to hear live preaching but it is my experience that a majority of the globe’s population exists outside of the reach of the comfortable structures that we’ve enjoyed since the Reformation. Reaching these unreached is going to take a significant outside the box thinking.
Michael Karpf says
Expository preaching has been replaced with “feel good” preaching. People do not want to listen to a pastor preach through a book of the Bible. I live in Bangkok and there is very little solid expository preaching here. The word of faith/prosperity gospel is rampant.
I am very thankful I went to a seminary that taught me to “Preach the Word.” 2 Tim 4:2
JEFF says
Lisa,the bereans used the old testament{acts 17:11.The bereans are complemented by luke for not just accepting what paul said about Jesus.But making sure his preaching about Jesus was in line with the old testament{acts 17:2-3}However if you believe the BIBLE as the word of GOD then you have to believe what it says about the apostles.They wrote the LORDS command{1COR.14:36-38}They could only preach the truth[2COR 13:8]They had authority [2COR 10:8]They taught the same doctrines in every church[1COR 44:17],2PETER 3:1-2]Mr.Kruger is saying you have attend [also join i think]a church every sunday.Would he attend a church every sunday that preaches the gospel [1COR 15:1-4]yet goes against some of his reformed beliefs?If he would than his reformed doctrine means nothing to him at all.GOD BLESS.JEFF
Jeremiah says
Thanks for the encouragement
Harold Krause says
Excellent word! I was beginning to wonder if I was in this all by myself. I had a pastor come to me after preaching and say to me … “Nobody don’t want to here your expository preaching”. So I left and never looked back. I was taught one way and it was the right way.