Jan 19, 2010
Do We Miss the Message When Preachers Use Stories and Illustrations?
The other day I watched a sermon on video by a preacher at a large church. He started with a nugget of scripture, moved into a story, connected the story to the biblical story, made a point of application, and then set off on his next nugget and next story. It was a neat and tidy sermon that left me very unsettled.
Here’s what I’m thinking: I wonder if it’s helpful to compare modern preaching to the kinds of sermons and parables that Jesus told in the Gospels? In one sense, there were times that Jesus spoke very clearly to his followers with some basic truths, but there are points in the Gospels where it is noted that Jesus ALWAYS spoke to the people in parables (see Mark 4 for more on this). And in doing this, can we say that modern sermons that rely on stories and illustrations use such devices as a crutch to the detriment of the message?
In fact, Jesus spoke to the public in parables so as to obscure his message, though after making so striking a statement, he challenged his audience to listen and to understand so that they can grasp his meaning, continue to learn, and eventually bear fruit. However, he spoke plainly to his disciples, putting aside the stories and parables.
It isn’t that Jesus didn’t want the public to understand, but he isn’t exactly spoon-feeding them messages either.
If you take a class on preaching, called homiletics in seminary jargon, you will study communication experts today who teach you memory tricks, push hard for illustrations, and advocate for entertaining stories and anecdotes. Oftentimes I enjoy the anecdotes in sermons more than the messages themselves… which is a problem!
However, there have been times when preachers just dug into the Biblical story, left out the cheesy contemporary comparisons, opted out of the illustrations, and passed on the anecdotes in order to uncover the biblical world and to explain a compelling story. These are the kinds of sermons that draw me in: a sustained focus and explanation on the biblical story about God’s salvation. They aren’t perplexing parables or messages interspersed with illustrations—just a straightforward study and application.
Modern sermons that jump from story to text to illustration to another story to another verse in the text and so forth leave my head spinning like a kid with ADHD.
I don’t want to say that EVERY illustration fails, but I do want to suggest that perhaps such sermons aren’t all they’re cracked up to be. It is very possible that we gain more by simply focusing on entering into the biblical world instead of jumping back and forth through time with Bible stories and illustration stories like a succession of Terminator movies.
Nice illustration, eh? Sorry, I couldn’t resist working that one in…
When we enter the biblical world we are forced to meet God and the biblical characters on their own terms and as we uncover the message we leave ourselves open to the work of the Spirit without cheapening the process by forcing an application through a moving story or bending the biblical message to fit a less than apt illustration. Not every story or illustration distracts from the biblical message, but I find they often hinder myself more than they help.
Based on what I see with Jesus, he reserved his parables and stories for the crowds and those interested, but not necessarily committed. He challenged them to think deeply on his teachings, to make his lessons a priority, and to seek understanding so that they could continue to grow and to learn more. There is an intellectual challenge for those who would seek out Jesus and hopefully one day become committed disciples.
However, when seeking to build up his disciples, Jesus spoke plainly and walked them through his teachings step by step. He told them they needed to leave friends and family behind to follow him, that they would suffer for him, that the temple would be destroyed, and that he would rise from the dead.
I hesitate to say we should follow Jesus strictly in our teaching, but I think the biblical stories are compelling enough to stand on their own without dressing them up with contemporary illustrations throughout. I think there are times when we can draw comparisons with contemporary times, but on the whole we don’t need a neat little story or illustration to flesh out each of our three points in our outlines.
There is power in the narrative of God’s salvation. I pray that the men and women who teach the scriptures can move in freedom to explore these stories, to understand them, and to explain them without feeling pressure to share funny, interesting, or dramatic stories to illustrate every single point. If we can’t make the story of salvation interesting and relevant on its own, then we have a bigger problem than finding some illustrations.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by edcyzewski and Ray Hollenbach, Zach Cross. Zach Cross said: RT @Hollenbach RT @edcyzewski Do We Miss the Message When Preachers Use Stories & Illustrations? http://tinyurl.com/y9st2xp [...]
I think this is an important topic, because it goes to the heart of the entertainment culture in the church. Your point about the strength and power of the inspired scripture is important. Most church-goers need to be feed, not entertained. Sadly, many (most?) illustrations seem to be chosen for comedic or sentimental impact, and frequently bear little to no relationship to the passage or point expounded.
The word “illustration” comes from the Latin for “light.” A good illustration allows the light to come in. Too often the “light” bears a resemblance to the glow of a LED TV screen rather than sunlight through a window.
“Most church goers need to be feed, not entertained.” Really? Most church goers are apathetic, lethargic, and over stuffed. Truth is that if most consistent attenders applied one-tenth of the truth they already know, they would see God change their lives and their communities. Most would agree that an uninspired eater can have an increased appetite when food is flavored to taste. Taste vary. Let’s not assume that your nonillustrative taste is right or wrong – just yours.
Interesting that your condemning remarks were made in the glow of your screen. Is that a speck in the eye or a telephone pole? Sorry – that was another useless illustration!
Great illustration Ray!
I hadn’t thought of the entertainment angle, but you’re absolutely right about that.
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by edcyzewski: New blog post: Do We Miss the Message When Preachers Use Stories and Illustrations? – http://tinyurl.com/y9st2xp…
Ed, really disagree with your article. While it does seem that the point of some messages is getting to use a clever illustration – many times the illustration serves the scripture not vica versa. Comparing an illustration to a parable is not appropriate. The manner Jesus used fishing, a tree, or a father to explain is much more like a modern illustration.
Perhaps you are speaking more from your preference for teaching style than what is good or acceptable. Seems like your are following the Pharisees and laying out new rules and laws instead of operating gratefully with much grace toward those who are following God’s leadership as they prepare and present messages.
Just a thought!
James,
A couple of thoughts here…
For starters, I welcome disagreement. So I appreciate your comment in that regard. However, there are plenty of blogs out there with name-calling and vilifying of one another. This blog is not one of them. Calling me a legalistic Pharisee or one of my friends (in the comment above) a hypocrite is not acceptable in Christian discourse. Even if you’re convinced in your assessment, what does anyone but you gain by pointing fingers here? If I am acting like a modern day Pharisee, then I would hope that a Christian friend would humbly come along my side and help me change rather that shooting and running.
Now, as to your points, I think we’d actually agree with one another more than you suspect. Part of the problem may be a lack of precision on my part. I could have posted a clip to the sermon, but I prefer to keep critiques more general if I can. The sermon style I’m referencing is one in which preachers feel a need to tie in a neat illustration to every single point of their sermon, but the illustrations either don’t fit or don’t add anything.
So, rather than laying rules for “illustration-less” preaching, I’m trying to free preachers from feeling bound to digging up an illustration for every single point. Because when we are bound by this rule, we sometimes end up with illustrations that don’t fit.
I’m sorry if I gave the impression that I’m anti-illustration. I like illustrations, but I would hope we can use them when they’re appropriate. The form that relies on regular illustrations can become a sort of crutch in which we work harder on finding a fun story to insert rather than helping our audiences experience the biblical story. Perhaps some of my other points obscured the main thrust of my post, which, unfortunately is the limitation of the “good first draft” nature of blog posts.
Thanks for commenting. I certainly didn’t intend this post to be restricting, but to rather open up other avenues for preaching (avenues that include illustrations).