Boy-Preachers and What Is Preaching?

[Jim1999]

We cannot presume upon the Holy Spirit to mystically fill an empty head with sudden knowledge. Every indication in the word says we are to "study to show ourselves....."

It is not a question age. Some mature sooner than others. Some are educated beyond their schooling. So long as a person remains true to the word, let him so preach. The Lord will use His word to convince and convert. This pertains to preaching the gospel.

When it comes to teaching, it is another matter and obviously more is required of that man.

Spurgeon may have started at 17, but he had strong deacons for support and he inherited a substantial library from his grandfather; the Puritans. He was given to study for hours and not merely memorizing a message for the event.

Spurgeon did not preach in a vacuum. A study of the men who had no formal schooling and went to be great preachers and teachers, proved themselves in so many ways we cannot fathom it.

Would to God we had a few more to-day.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[Rev. Joshua]

James,

I've been a baptist all my life - just not an IFB one. I was an SBC fundamentalist for a while, but I outgrew it

. Thre are plenty of women who are baptist clergy, but very few left among SBC-only churches. I doubt there ever were many in IFB ones.

Joshua

 

[Abiyah]

Okay, but perhaps I am unaware of the general
Baptist definition of preach. What is it? What is
expected from a preacher's sermon? How does
preaching differ from teaching, as it apparently
does in some circles?

I do not have any way to hear preaching over the
internet, so please avoid giving me Internet
addresses. Thank you!

A definition. A complete description.

 

[Jim1999]

If I may address this question by using two world situations concerning England. It is not by accident that during two world wars, England had two great prime ministers. Both of whom were great orators, strong leaders and principled men. They spoke with authority, and believed they were right.

We need this also in the pulpit. Men who can command the language at hand, and speak with authority (the Word). He cannot just limp along. This leads the impression that we can take it or leave it, but here is the truth......Well, we do not need to pound the pulpit and shout, but we do need to speak with authority. This is an essential part of preaching. Then, we need a subject to preach about. If we preach not the Lord Jesus then what have we but silver tongues and the theatrics of the stage.

There are examples of this in history among the preachers: Henry Ward Beecher was fancy with words and he could control the emotions of the crowd, but Spurgeon had a Saviour and lifted Him high; G. Campbell Morgan could hold an audience spellbound, but His Saviour was the dominant theme; the same for D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones...all master preachers, but also masters in the pulpit.

It appears to me, preaching is a balance of silver-tongue and authority in presenting the Lord......when we deviate, we fall apart. That to me is preaching.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[Abiyah]

So is preaching seen as convincing? I am trying
to understand why convincing is necessary when
backed by the Word: are the Word and the Holy
Spirit not enough to convince? (And I ask in
complete sincerety, not to criticize.) Why is it
necessary to have a "silver tongue"?

I had forgotten that, as a child, when my parents
took me to what they called a "revival," preached
by a traveling Baptist evangelist, I certainly had
an inclination, although not strong enough to
convince me at that time, to reach out to our Lord.
I do not recall the preacher having convinced me
of anything, for my habit was to so completely
occupy myself that I never heard the preachers
then. Although I resisted, it was not the preacher.

Later, I recall being in another "revival." The
preacher spoke passionately, having that "silver
tongue "you wrote of, but I was more impressed
by how cute he was than by his words. No, I was
not convinced then either.

But my point is of what REAL use is a human
"silver tongue"? Wwould a preacher not be better
off studying and convincing by knowing the Word?
I want a preacher who can answer questions, who
knows more than I do; a preacher whom I trust to
have studied and to know his subject. This is
convincing. How can an emotional response to
"silver tongues" be of greater value than this?

 

[Jim1999]

I said a balance between the two. How long will you listen to a speaker who employs a dull monotone? Not long, I assure you.

We do not deny it is all of the Spirit, or none at all. At the same time, we are to employ all means that we might be used to reach some.

It is fine to understand theology, but a right understanding knows there is a divine aspect and there is a human aspect. God employs both.

When I can no longer command the English language and be "attractive" as a preacher, then I shall quit altogether. I am the metal the Lord has attracted the two poles and made me a magnet to attract men (generic). Blessed be the Lord.

As Churchill drew a nation by his oratory and solid foundations, I ask my God to use me in the pulpit to also draw a people unto the Lord of glory, by the talents He gave and my desire to point people to the Saviour.

God has chosen to use men,,,,,,as He used Peter, Paul and Timothy. To this end, we preach.........and we teach.....and we witness.......and we walk in His ways.

Cheers,

Jim

 

[Rev. Joshua]

Preaching is the moment in worship when the an ancient text from our Scriptures meets the present situation of the congregation (Barth described it as the moment when the Bible becomes the Word of God through the action of the Holy Spirit). It is a focused presentation of a particular pericope from Scripture (drawn from the lectionary in most Christian churches). A good sermon says what the text says and does what the text does in a way that makes its message real and applicable to the listeners.

Joshua

 

[Abiyah]

Well, perhaps to understand, I just need to hear
some of you guys preach. In my old church, there
was a man who fancied himself an evangelist, and
others there thought he was also. He was often
called out of town to preach, but to me, his
preaching was mere raving, without substance.
He was very passionate, though. But I knew his
life, and this made me turn him off as soon as he
stood to preach.

Yesterday, I talked to a friend in another town,
where he is often called to preach. I told told her I
had heard he'd changed and that he was better.
Her response was, "Really. Well, I still can't stand
to listen to him." Well, I don't know. I have not had
to listen to him since I left that church.

One can preach with all the passion in the world,
use all the gestures, turn red in the face from the
effort and wipe the sweat with a dripping
handkerchief, but if the Lord is not in it, of what
use is it? I would really prefer to listen to a
monotone with substance than watch some of
the antics I have seen. 8o)

To get an idea of REAL preaching, as you are
familiar with, is there someone I could watch on
the tube? --Like on Sunday morning?

 

[Bro. James Reed]

Well, I can't give you a formal definition, but I can explain, try to, what I believe.

A preacher is to feed the flock. If you are getting nothing out of a preacher, then there is one of three things wrong. Either the man is not depending on God for the message, the man is not a God-called minister, or the person listening is not in the right frame of mind to be listening.

A good example comes to mind. Our former Pastor was an excellent speaker and a great teacher, but he should not, in my opinion, have been a preacher. He would delve so deep into the scriptures that he would lose the congregation. If the congregants, all of them, can't follow what is being said, then the preacher should change his style. The flock is not being fed, therefore the preacher is not living up to his obligation.

He knew a lot about the Bible, and we had some great studies together, but he simply could not hold us while in the pulpit.

If the spirit is not in the man, then he is not preaching. Does that make sense? I'm sure, if you think about it, you can remember times that this has happened in your church.(synagogue )

Another good example, women are told in the Bible to teach the younger women, they are not told to preach. That is a good difference. Just like there are good teachers in schools, but how many of those would you call to be an expert in their field? Maybe that's a better illustration.

Let me know if I've cleared things up any, or just muddied the waters.

God Bless. Bro. James

 

[Bro. James Reed]

Are you serious? There are no real preachers on the TV.

 

[Abiyah]

Originally posted by Bro. James Reed:
Are you serious? There are no real preachers on the TV.

Welllll ! ? ! ? ! ? 8o)

Not even one?

What about on the radio? A preacher, now, not a
teacher, since there seems to be a difference in
churches.

You said something like "If the spirit is not in the
man, then he is not preaching." It has not
happened at my synagogue yet, but we only have
two pastors, and on extremely rare occasion,
one other person preaches (far less regularly than
a blue moon!). Also, I have only been going there
since @ '96, and not regularly during the first
years. These two guys hold my attention so
well that when I first started going, my brain
would go into overload! 8oD

But I know what you are talking about--it would
happen at my old church. A lot of them did not
know how to study.

Let me ask you this: I used to listen to Swindol.
Would you consider him a preacher? Billy
Graham was a preacher, wasn't he?

 

[Scott J]

Are we talking about preachers or pastors?

 

[Abiyah]

I am trying to understand not only why boys are
allowed to preach but also what preaching is in
such churches which allow them to preach.
Basically:
</font>

• What is preaching?</font>
• What makes a boy ready to be in the
  pulpit, preaching?</font>
• What scriptures back children in the
  pulpit?</font>

I think I am starting to see that preaching is an
emotional plea with the object of convincing. I
do not, however, have answers for hte last two
questions.

[ January 22, 2003, 03:53 PM: Message edited by: Abiyah ]

 

[Bro. James Reed]

I really can't tell you whether Billy Graham is a "preacher" or not. You know, I've never actually listened to him before. Hmmm, that's weird, considering how famous he is.

Anyway, I do know that he has made many, many statements that he recants andd apologizes for.
Look at his statements after 9/11. He said that our sinfulness caused the disaster. I AGREE. But, he got some flack for syaing that, so, in a true politician's stance, he apologized. Urrggghhh!

As far as his preaching, I don't know.

To answer your other question, I think we need to pick apart what I am saying. First of all, there is a difference between being a preacher and being ordained. I, myself, am exercising, but I am not ordained. I do preach, I hope you could call it that, though.

All Primitive Baptist Preachers are "licensed" by their church to begin speaking. That is, when the church and other Elders have recognized a gift, they allow that person to go around and try that gift at different churches of our faith and order.

Now, that said, I don't know of any ordained preacher that is still a boy. The youngest one I can think of personally is around 25 yrs. old.

Anyway, to my point, I wouldn't feel comfortable ordaining someone really young, but, if God is giving that boy a gift to preach His word, then by all means he should use it. Again, being an ordained Elder and being a preacher are two different things.

Did that help? God Bless. Bro. James

P.S. Pray for all of the unborn babies as we mourn on this sad day.

Roe v. Wade 01/22/1973 - 01/22/2003
30 years of Murder

 

[Abiyah]

Yes, it helps. When I think about it, however, even
with 53.6 years of attendance, I have so little
experience. I think it more apropriate to ask you if
I have the following right:

I think it comes down to this: at my synagogue,
there are no preachers, but my two pastors can
and do preach occasionally; mainly, though, they
teach. At the old church, there were pastors and
preachers: the pastors, however, preached but
could not successfully teach; the preachers only
preached.

Preaching is an emotional plea and an attempt to
convince. Teaching is to expound, based upon
study, the Scriptures.

If the above is correct, by what ratio, how much
preaching to teaching are needed? 1 : 2? 1 : 4?
Ii think that the preaching to teaching ratio at my
synagogue is probably more like 1 : 12.

But back to boys in the pulpit, I see Scriptures I
could use against the practice; what Scriptures
can be used to support it? Are people serious
to listen to these boys? Perhaps, I just thought,
they are used merely for children's services? I
could understand that better.

 

[Bro. James Reed]

Well, if you look at the qualifications for a bishop/elder, it doesn't say anything about age.

But, again, I don't think I'm quite getting my point across about what preaching is. Preaching should entail both preaching and teaching. I don't think it is merely to convince.

I also believe that preaching is solely the gift of God, and no one can truly preach unless that is true. That said, there are many, many people who can teach. Any good deacon should also be a teacher. The older women in the church should be teachers to the younger women.

If you find what a preacher is supposed to do, it is to feed the flock. How do they accomplish this, through preaching the Word as God gives it to them. Personally, if I can't feel the Spirit in the preaching, I don't think it is preaching. It should not just be emotional, however. It should also be biblical truths and from the heart. If all of these are not met, then, whether an ordained minister or not, I would not call it preaching.

Have you ever been in church and the preacher had to sit down? Not because he ran out of time, but because he just did not have anything to say. I have seen this a few times.

I think most true preachers can recognize when they are not being blessed to preach, so rather than just stand up and ramble on about who knows what, they sit down.

So, basically, I believe that all in the church have a resposibility to know the scriptures and be able to teach, but only a select few of those are called of God to preach as well as teach.

Maybe a good way to say it is, if you feel in your heart that he is preaching to you, emotionally and biblically, then it probably is preaching.

I can sit here and type to people about my beliefs, and that may be teaching them something, but would you call it preaching? Why? Probably because you have no idea what I am feeling emotionally. Words are just words without the Spirit in the matter.

Does that make any sense? I am sorry that I don't know how to explain it any better. I think it boils down to what the congregant is feeling in their heart.

God Bless. Bro. James

 

[Bro. James Reed]

One more quick comment. I think that a man/boy can preach without being in the pulpit. Or, for that matter, even being asked to preach by the church.

I don't know if it was on this thread that I talked about a preacher that I know that began preaching to people at 5 yrs. old. He wasn't in the pulpit, but he stood on top of tree stumps and preached to anyone that would listen. He had a real burden to preach, even at that age.

I don't believe someone at that age would feel the need like he did unless they were truly being called by God to preach His Word.

That said, I doubt that I would agree to letting someone any younger than about 15-16 get up in the pulpit during services.

On requirement of a bishop/elder is that they not be a novice and I don't believe that someone that young is old enough in their own study of the scripture to fill the stand. Also, I would not agree to ordaining someone at that age.

At that age, we still have some, if not all, of our childish ways, and an elder should not be like that. Although, I do know some older ones that act like children; especially when they don't get their way.

Maybe that's more of a human trait than just a childish trait. Hmmm.

God Bless. Bro. James

 

[Bible Believing Bill]

Originally posted by Abiyah I think it comes down to this: at my synagogue,
there are no preachers, but my two pastors can
and do preach occasionally; mainly, though, they
teach. At the old church, there were pastors and
preachers: the pastors, however, preached but
could not successfully teach; the preachers only
preached.

Preaching is an emotional plea and an attempt to
convince. Teaching is to expound, based upon
study, the Scriptures.

I think you have it paritally right Abiyah. In my limited experience of about 20 months of listening to Baptist preachers I have found a few different styles of preachers. There are preachers that deliver very emotional messages that seemed mainly designed to bring conviction upon the lost or backslidden. Then there are preachers that seem to be feeding the flock in that their message shows us just what it means to be a child of God, or possible just how we can be a better Christian.

Now a true man of God should be able to do both. The message sould evoke conviction when that is what God wants, and it should teach us when that is what God wants. The truly amazing thing is that the same message can do both, because it will do what God wants it to do for each individual. If a preacher plans his sermons down to the last comma and never lets the Holy Spirit lead him, then in my mind he is simply a speaker not a preacher. A preacher will spend much time in study and prayer so that he can deliver the Word of God. However, he will let the Holy Spirit direct him and if he is led to do so may even change the message at the last moment. I once had a preacher friend tell me that the best message he ever gave was one where he changed his topic durring the opening hymn.

Bill

 

[NateT]

If you ask me, preaching takes on different forms for different people. The more I preach, the more I feel convicted that a sermon should take a passage and explain what that writter meant and how that applies today. I'll be the first to admit I don't do that nearly as much as I should.

However, we are w/o a pastor now, and some of the sermons I've heard I wouldn't classify as a good sermon. They usualy take 1 verse and then spend 30-40 minutes telling stories that this verse reminds them of. If you're lucky they'll use another verse, but very seldom do you walk away with a better understanding of God's word.

I would think that MOST (not all) boy preachers would probably fall into this second category. Its easy to string "catch phrases" and cliches into a sermon. All the points might be true (God loves a cheerful giver, God loves us like the father loved the prodigal) but have no real help in understanding what they're talking about.

I read one political activist (Sharpton maybe?) was ordained at 6 or 9 and was actively preaching then. I was saved before I was 6, but I think if you were to ask me to preach a congregation and help them grow as a result, you'd be barking up the wrong tree.

I think too often we allow good speakers to be called good preachers and I have no doubt that a boy could be a good speaker (there are 8 year olds that can sing 100X better than me, why can't there be ones that can speak better?)

 

[Abiyah]

Okay. So perhaps I am getting closer to
understanding. A preacher's sermon must both
teach and convict, all at the same time, and the
hearer's condition, attitude, etc., decides how the
preaching is received. One preacher, one sermon,
many jobs, many ways of receiving. So, then, my
pastors both preach and teach at the same time;
how I perceive it depends upon my condition,
attitude, etc.

If the above is correct, how, again, can a boy fill
the place of both teaching and convicting?