What "Style" of preaching do you prefer?

[Craig Laughlin]

Because my first church was an urban church in a multicultural community this white boy from the backwaters of Washington State had to learn a completely different way of communicating. My preaching "style" needed to be leavened by the communications styles common to the folks I was trying to reach. As a result, over time, I adopted some of the characteristics of black preaching. I even got so I could manage a bit of the "rhythmic" movement between preacher and congregation with things like Amen, preach it brother, come on, that's right... etc. My best sermons, the ones people tell me they liked the most were ones that involved a lot of congregational response during the sermon.

After 13 years of learning how to communicate in that environment I moved to the pretty vanilla suburbs. My congregation is filled with scientific/engineering types who live in their heads and except when I prompt them don't make a sound, and like it that way.

This meant that I had to do some major gear grinding to change up my style of preaching. Much more "teaching" with more overt exegetical work and even a fair amount of teaching people how to interpret the Bible. My best sermons, the ones I get the most response (after the service) are ones in which the congregation gets very, very quiet.

Still preaching the word but the style has radically changed to fit my congregation. One of the things I say when I teach preaching is "The Word determines What you say, the Audience determines how you say it."

So what is your preaching style and why, if you are a preacher. If you are a lay person what is your preferred style?

Note - talking about us normal preachers. The "star" preachers are so good they are kind of in a category by themselves.

[Nelson Bradford]

after 78 years of listening/taking notes, etc, I have got to say my FAV preaching style is a) being told what's going to be said/taught b) being taught what the Word says about living today, hopefully, via verse by verse exposition c) being reminded what has been said/taught.

And thankfully, we HAVE that style preaching week-after-week.

I always look forward to hearing our pastor bring the Word and pray for him daily that the LORD will use him to teach me...to bring me/us insight/understanding never revealed nor thought about before.

I want to have something to not just think about but to change me.

Thank you for asking this vital question.

-neb

[Hans Deventer]

I preach rather short sermons, 15-20 mins. I love to take on issues that made me think, that put things in a different light, that make me wrestle with a text. I generally feel that it is within the tension of the paradoxes in the Scriptures that we find truth.
I'm not the type of preacher that tells the people what he's going to say, then says it, and then tells them what he told them. Treat others like you want to be treated is a Biblical principle, right? (I'm sorry Nelson, just read that this is exactly what you like. Be grateful you don't have to listen to me! )
A lot of what I preach about boils down to our image of God.

[Craig Laughlin]

Just to be clear, I don't think there is a "right" style. I think, especially because I have lived in such different communities, I have come to really appreciate the differences and how those are impactful. It's all good. Just preach the word what ever the style.

[Ryan Scott]

Any style that pulls people from their comfort zone and exposes them to God's actions in the world in ways they weren't expecting.

[John Reilly]

Just to be clear I'm don't think there is a "right" style. I think, especially because I have lived in such different communities, I have come to really appreciate the differences and how those are impactful. It's all good. Just preach the word what ever the style.

Yes. This is an interesting point. And everyone has a favorite style ... preachers and listeners. I have taken preaching classes with Dr. Haddon Robinson, who teaches a specific style. I also took a Narrative preaching class with Dr. Darius Salter that says "narrative preaching is the only way!" I also took a preaching class t=with Dr. Stve Estep, who is a compassionate, loving pastoral type and preaches in a Pastoral style. I think we all adjust to the audience and we also adjust to the contemprary issues of our day. Dealing with my own grief over my lost "Youth" (feeling old having lost my inlaws and helping my parents deal with issues being 88 years old) ... I am preaching compassionately to the elderly who are dealing with end of life issues.

[Mike Schutz]

On Monday morning, after I listen to the previous day's sermon, the style I prefer is any style but mine.

[Wilson Deaton]

At ONU I was taught the style Nelson referenced. My own description is: Tell them what you're going to tell them, tell them, tell them what you told them. (That description comes off a bit "belittling" of that style which gives a hint as to my own opinion of that style.)

At NTS I took a class called, "Inductive Preaching." For the most part, I never looked back. While I don't always preach that way, that remains the style I prefer!

Wilson

[Jean Johnson]

My personal preference is expository preaching although I really haven't sat under this style of preaching in decades. Back in the '70s I sat under the ministry of Rev. Christopher Lyons of the Wheaton Bible Church in Wheaton, IL who was a great expositor. I remember him stating that he would rather preach than eat. I was well-fed under his ministry.

[Larry Parsons]

I preach rather short sermons, 15-20 mins. I love to take on issues that made me think, that put things in a different light, that make me wrestle with a text. I generally feel that it is within the tension of the paradoxes in the Scriptures that we find truth.
I'm not the type of preacher that tells the people what he's going to say, then says it, and then tells them what he told them. Treat others like you want to be treated is a Biblical principle, right? (I'm sorry Nelson, just read that this is exactly what you like. Be grateful you don't have to listen to me! )
A lot of what I preach about boils down to our image of God.

Preaching 15 minutre sermon are hard to do at time. We had preacher on our district i don't think he ever preach over 15 min. When some spend 30 hour prepare a sermon and making 15-20minute sermon on Sunday that take work.
Thanks
Larry

[Nate Pruitt]

On Monday morning, after I listen to the previous day's sermon, the style I prefer is any style but mine.

Laughing through the tears- there have been times where this hasn't been a joke for me.


I vary my preaching style to the text and emphasis of the message. Generally speaking I will do my typical awkward opening. There is a lot of activity at our church when I begin (typically the praise team is still finding their seats, for instance) so I will take a few seconds to just be the goofball that I am. Everyone accepts this, and it seems to actually be appreciated because it buys the praise team a few seconds to settle in. At that time I always open with prayer, either after an incredibly brief introduction to our subject or immediately when the congregation can participate. I then share the text, unpack it, and bring forth application. However, on occasions where the text seems particularly complex I will walk through it in an expository style before providing application.

One thing that changed most drastically over the years is that I almost never use personal anecdotes anymore. There was a considerable amount of conviction about this and I've stopped trying to force my life into the sermon as I'm not sure there is a single time it did anything more than distract from the message and stifle the impact.

[John Kennedy]

Abbreviated!

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

Anointed!

[John O Comstock]

My style varied but what I found was what I needed most was to simply hear from God in preparation and then I needed God to annoint me when preaching and annoint the hearer to hear his truth. After most sermens I thought surely I can never preach another message but God would always come again and give me truth that I know was not my own. It was always amazing to me how God would use me to speak to situations in peoples lives I knew nothing about yet they would testify later how it helped them find truth about there need.

[John Kennedy]

Anointed!

How about 'annointedly abbreviated'?

[Craig Laughlin]

How about 'annointedly abbreviated'?

Much better than a sermon that has an abbreviated anointing.

[Larry Parsons]

I think R.T. Kendal has a interesting thought concerning sermons. Sermon should get people talking about the Bible. R.T. was raise up in the Nazarene church even got AB degree from TNU but some how he end up being the pastor of the westminister chapel of London. Yet I read somewhere year ago he was the first pastor at Westminister Chapell to give altar call like old fashion Nazarene use to do. He claim to be a pentecostal Calvinist.
Thanks
Larry

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

Anointed!

Obviously, I'm trying to one up John with the abbreviated response right after his response of "Abbreviated."

However, I do think that. "Style" takes the back seat to anointing. I've heard anointed preaching that had all the content of a seminary theology class and I've heard anointed preaching that was filled with funny or tear jerking stories.

Now, changing gears - I think a pastor, in particular, needs to be comfortable with more than one style of delivery. A special speaker can pretty much do the same thing sermon after sermon - but a pastor can't.

I personally tend to expository preaching. I think logically, I like checking out the "weeds" of a passage, and I believe the Bible is my only source of authority. So, my approach is basically, "what does the Bible say?"

For a change of pace, I move to sermons that are built around the great stories of the Bible (generally, I do that in the summer). I take a story (generally O.T.) and tell it - throwing in a few applications along the way.

This Sunday I'm telling the story of Micaiah the prophet.

[Rich Schmidt]

So what is your preaching style and why, if you are a preacher.

I describe myself as conversational. I'm not a shouter. I don't have a "preacher voice." I'm not much of a storyteller, and I have to work sometimes to convey personal passion. Some have said it's more of a "teaching" style.

I'm really not sure. Maybe someone can listen to a sermon or two of mine and tell me? http://livinghope.info/listen

[Nate Pruitt]

Abbreviated!

A retired minister that served as an unofficial associate at my home church during my youth once told me, "I've learned that the mind can only absorb what the seat can endure."

Hilarious, and yet an insight I've always tried to remember.

[Gina Stevenson]

A retired minister that served as an unofficial associate at my home church during my youth once told me, "I've learned that the mind can only absorb what the seat can endure."

Hilarious, and yet an insight I've always tried to remember.

True, verrry true! So, what was the purpose of notoriously uncomfortable wooden benches that some may even have yet? Economics were apparently more important than the absorption of what was heard by those in the pew. Probably actually tho't people could concentrate when very uncomfortable, tho' cannot say I am masochistic enough to endure such things.

[Ken Tidwell]

Craig, love the question...just for my own clarification, I tend to think that type/genre of preaching is different than style. I think of type as the categories of structure of sermon such as expository (preaching from a paragraph or unit of thought), textual (from one verse but may use supporting verses as sub-points), topical (begins with topic or subject and different verses are the main points), narrative (plot driving - exposition, crisis, climax, denouncement).

Whereas style refers to the character of the preacher's persona during the sermon moment, does one stay behind the pulpit or move around the platform, does one have a style of speaking (slow drawl, intense pace, does the pitch stay the same, does it move all over the place), does the preacher prefer an instructional voice or more of a conversational voice, what about non-verbal communications and the such, personal appearance: robe, suit and tie, or "cool" pastor jeans and button up shirt.

You mentioned you developed a style that was more urban, Black preaching-type voice so if I assume correctly, you're question is about the stuff in my second paragraph? As far as style, I think you are correct that delivery is congregation dependent. My last church responded to a style that was very conversational and casual. No pulpit, lots of movement on the stage, had a very "Mr. Rogers" won't you come inside and we can be neighbors feel. Never wore a suit - style.

In my current church, the congregation rarely responds to that style. The preacher is expected to speak as an authority. Good to be familiar, but not too friendly. Don't move around the stage much. Much more directive in word choice. The congregation doesn't respond too well "discover" the text as much as "give it to me straight with as little fluff as possible." Don't always wear a suit, but more often than not.

I don't know if this was where you were going, but like I said, love the question.

[Susan Unger]

A retired minister that served as an unofficial associate at my home church during my youth once told me, "I've learned that the mind can only absorb what the seat can endure."

Hilarious, and yet an insight I've always tried to remember.

My parents would agree

[Nate Pruitt]

Oh, Ken, you bring up the "style" questions that have most plagued me. Stylistically I used to speak so quietly most of the congregation struggled to hear me with the assistance of a sound system, but that was okay because any time I tried to slide in humor, or make my most important theological points, I would then lower my voice in volume and register. I know that doesn't sound great, but I soothed the inability to hear me preach with a generous monotone most of the time. Likewise, I also had this tendency to get a lot of nervous energy when I would preach early on in my ministerial career. The end result was a rocking forward and backwards on my feet to such an extent that I actually awoke one Sunday night with cramps in my calves. For quite a while I moved around, right to left, rather generously. Stepping forward to the congregation as I made my most important points, but recently we started doing some video recording so I can't move much as the camera is actually quite close and unmanned so movement means I go out of frame.

My favorite moments, stylistically, are when my kids make their way up front. We don't have a platform in our current space and the kids run free. I have had plenty of Sundays were my 5 year old daughter and 2 year old son have both spent some time in daddy's arms while he was preaching. There may be a better lesson in that than in plenty of what I say.

[Susan Unger]

I am the type that lives in my head, doesn't want to feel made to respond in any particular way and I like it that way. Although, with my pastor's dry sense of humor, I tend to laugh like a nut at some point in the service. I've told Andy that that makes it an offiicial sermon. I prefer sermons that have

much more "teaching" with more overt exegetical work and even a fair amount of teaching people how to interpret the Bible. My best sermons, the ones I get the most response (after the service) are ones in which the congregation gets very, very quiet.

I also prefer sermons that create a sense of what the bible culture and history were like at the time.

I haven't done enough preaching to have a style just yet. But, I do agree with the concept of having the preaching be anointed. And I aim for sermons that explain the bible culture/history and the Greek/Hebrew meanings of a key word or passage and show how it is applicable for today.

[Craig Laughlin]

Craig, love the question...just for my own clarification, I tend to think that type/genre of preaching is different than style. I think of type as the categories of structure of sermon such as expository (preaching from a paragraph or unit of thought), textual (from one verse but may use supporting verses as sub-points), topical (begins with topic or subject and different verses are the main points), narrative (plot driving - exposition, crisis, climax, denouncement).

Whereas style refers to the character of the preacher's persona during the sermon moment, does one stay behind the pulpit or move around the platform, does one have a style of speaking (slow drawl, intense pace, does the pitch stay the same, does it move all over the place), does the preacher prefer an instructional voice or more of a conversational voice, what about non-verbal communications and the such, personal appearance: robe, suit and tie, or "cool" pastor jeans and button up shirt.

You mentioned you developed a style that was more urban, Black preaching-type voice so if I assume correctly, you're question is about the stuff in my second paragraph? As far as style, I think you are correct that delivery is congregation dependent. My last church responded to a style that was very conversational and casual. No pulpit, lots of movement on the stage, had a very "Mr. Rogers" won't you come inside and we can be neighbors feel. Never wore a suit - style.

In my current church, the congregation rarely responds to that style. The preacher is expected to speak as an authority. Good to be familiar, but not too friendly. Don't move around the stage much. Much more directive in word choice. The congregation doesn't respond too well "discover" the text as much as "give it to me straight with as little fluff as possible." Don't always wear a suit, but more often than not.

I don't know if this was where you were going, but like I said, love the question.

Great post. Let me think about this a little more.

Your distinction between type and style is a good one but I'm having a hard time getting the change I made neatly into them. (I made a larger change than most) Traditionally I would use expository to describe all preaching in which the message is driven by the text whether the preacher uses one verse or the whole pericope. I understand topical sermons to be driven my the topic rather than the text itself although these can be done in such a way that the texts which are pulled together are adequately exegeted.

I would describe my preaching/teaching as expository in the sense that the message was/is always driven by the text but the difference was still deeper than what you describe as style. The structure of the preaching was different. I once heard a black preacher of a multicultural church say "Black preaching is for inspiration and white preaching is for information" Both of these styles should be true to the text but the way in which it "lands" in the congregation is different and so the way the sermon is delivered (structure as well as style) is different. My urban preaching more overtly sought out an emotional/demonstrative response from the congregation.

My preaching style now is much more overtly exegetical. I regularly direct them to original word meanings, cultural influences, and literary techniques. I did all of this homework before but I would take the conclusions and "inspire" people to engage the truth rather than presenting the particulars to them. In this church they want to wrestle with the particulars. (A part of this is a difference between oral and written cultures)

Good thoughts... still processing. I think the fact that your "style" changed to fit the community in which you minister is spot on.

[Craig Laughlin]

I am the type that lives in my head, doesn't want to feel made to respond in any particular way and I like it that way. Although, with my pastor's dry sense of humor, I tend to laugh like a nut at some point in the service. I've told Andy that that makes it an offiicial sermon. I prefer sermons that have I also prefer sermons that create a sense of what the bible culture and history were like at the time.

I haven't done enough preaching to have a style just yet. But, I do agree with the concept of having the preaching be anointed. And I aim for sermons that explain the bible culture/history and the Greek/Hebrew meanings of a key word or passage and show how it is applicable for today.

You would probably like my preaching in this church and not so much when I was in in KC.

[Susan Unger]

You would probably like my preaching in this church and not so much when I was in in KC.

Oh yeah... I can the religious TV channel in which some of the local urban/black preachers are shown. I will watch sometimes for just a few minutesjust to see how other churches in the area do church. One thing I've noticed is that they all seem to involve yelling. I can't handle the yelling at all. And then sometimes, there will be more content than others.

The ultimate though was the guy who just repeated the same statement over and over in a loud voice while the audience got up and walked around moaning "Amen" over and over waving their hankies. I just stared in fascinated horror for a few moments until I couldn't take it anymore.

Refering to your original point, I am coming to realize just how much style and approach matters. There will be times in which I am completely turned off by a sermon. I've come to realize that some preachers, though not fully an urban preacher, are like one in that they view the sermon as a chance to inspire while I crave a sermon to inform. And some preachers are more pastoral theologians or practical theologians, etc, while I am more a biblical/historical/systematic one. [This is why I started the thread on that a few weeks ago.] Once I can understand where the preacher is coming from, I can try to give more grace to the preacher and try not to be so turned off.

[Hans Deventer]

Forgot to answer from a listener's perspective. I like sermons that make me think. That have a clear, single message. And apart from those rare gifted preachers that can keep talking till midnight and still have your full attention, are short. I'm not a fool. You don't have to repeat stuff, I'm listening. Just tell me what you want to say and cut the ***. And please, have a clear direction. With too many sermons I'm wondering for the largest part where the preacher is going to and what on earth (s)he's is actually trying to say.

[Ken Tidwell]

Craig, maybe the difference is that together, type and style, make up the preaching "voice." That would account for some variance in how your "change" is "deeper" than either category by itself. For the change is a combination of both to varying degrees. For example, the change you describe in your current assignment is really a change of some degree of both type and style as you have changed along with the changes of a new congregation. I remember one of my mentors stating, "It can take years to finally land on your preaching voice." I know the Lord still hasn't landed me just yet in these areas. To be sure there is always growth in our ability to communicate as well (and maybe more important) our own personal walk with Christ, but at some point it appears from those who have preaching much longer than I, that there does come a point were they are confident in how God has gifted and graced them in their unique personality and in their congregational family. Still more to ponder and more to seek.

[Craig Laughlin]

Craig, maybe the difference is that together, type and style, make up the preaching "voice." That would account for some variance in how your "change" is "deeper" than either category by itself. For the change is a combination of both to varying degrees. For example, the change you describe in your current assignment is really a change of some degree of both type and style as you have changed along with the changes of a new congregation. I remember one of my mentors stating, "It can take years to finally land on your preaching voice." I know the Lord still hasn't landed me just yet in these areas. To be sure there is always growth in our ability to communicate as well (and maybe more important) our own personal walk with Christ, but at some point it appears from those who have preaching much longer than I, that there does come a point were they are confident in how God has gifted and graced them in their unique personality and in their congregational family. Still more to ponder and more to seek.

Yeah, I think "voice" is probably a good word to describe what we are talking about.

[Billy Cox]

Any style that pulls people from their comfort zone and exposes them to God's actions in the world in ways they weren't expecting.

Seems like that would be hard to sustain that upwards of 50 weeks per year. Maybe you are called to be an itinerant evangelist so you can have 8-10 homerun sermons and not bother with week to week treadmill of foul tips and infield pop-ups.

[Pete Vecchi]

So what is your preaching style and why, if you are a preacher. If you are a lay person what is your preferred style?

Note - talking about us normal preachers. The "star" preachers are so good they are kind of in a category by themselves.

I tend to be more along the lines of the "teaching preacher." That is almost definitely the style I prefer to hear when I am not doing the preaching.

[Marsha Lynn]

I describe myself as conversational. I'm not a shouter. I don't have a "preacher voice." I'm not much of a storyteller, and I have to work sometimes to convey personal passion. Some have said it's more of a "teaching" style.

I'm really not sure. Maybe someone can listen to a sermon or two of mine and tell me? http://livinghope.info/listen

Whatever it is, this is the style I like. Thanks for the link, Rich.

[Eric Frey]

Tom Long, in Preaching and the Literary Forms of the Bible argues that the "style" of the text ought to shape the "style" of the sermon. I like that idea. The gospels I tend to preach narratively, Paul I tend to preach expositionally. At least that is my goal. Mix it up. Be consistent with the voice of the author...

[Rich Schmidt]

Tom Long, in Preaching and the Literary Forms of the Bible argues that the "style" of the text ought to shape the "style" of the sermon. I like that idea. The gospels I tend to preach narratively, Paul I tend to preach expositionally. At least that is my goal. Mix it up. Be consistent with the voice of the author...

I've always liked that idea, too... but I don't think I've ever done it. I take comfort from the fact that the folks speaking & writing in the New Testament didn't seem to follow that advice, either.

[Susan Unger]

One that I am enjoying this morning is from Jon Twitchell.

[Eric Frey]

I've always liked that idea, too... but I don't think I've ever done it. I take comfort from the fact that the folks speaking & writing in the New Testament didn't seem to follow that advice, either.

Didn't say I'm very good at it.

I just like the idea and find it a helpful starting place, knowing that my sermons seldom come out the way I started them...

[Craig Laughlin]

Tom Long, in Preaching and the Literary Forms of the Bible argues that the "style" of the text ought to shape the "style" of the sermon. I like that idea. The gospels I tend to preach narratively, Paul I tend to preach expositionally. At least that is my goal. Mix it up. Be consistent with the voice of the author...

I think Tom has a good point but I've seen many carry it to far. Sometimes the particular literary/cultural idiom in which the author wrote gets sanctified into the message itself. We do well to remember that if we preach in such a way that our listeners are lost we have failed at the preaching task. I absolutely agree that the style of the text should influence, inform maybe even shape in some way the preaching but not at the expense of communication.

[Ryan Scott]

Seems like that would be hard to sustain that upwards of 50 weeks per year. Maybe you are called to be an itinerant evangelist so you can have 8-10 homerun sermons and not bother with week to week treadmill of foul tips and infield pop-ups.

I don't find it that hard. I'll admit not every sermon has the emotional impact of the "home run," but I've not ever preached where someone didn't come up to me and say "I never thought about it that way before," which is as much success as I'd ever want.