# What would you preach?



## ClayPot (Jul 13, 2009)

If you were invited to guest preach at a non-Reformed church, what would you preach? How would you decide? And yes, I am asking because I have been asked to preach at a non-Reformed church, and no, I am not looking to cause trouble.


----------



## awretchsavedbygrace (Jul 13, 2009)

John 3:16

It never fails.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jul 13, 2009)

I preached at a PC(USA) church that was decidedly not Reformed and I preached on Romans 3:9-12. You need to start with the basic foundational building blocks.


----------



## awretchsavedbygrace (Jul 13, 2009)

All jokes aside..Preach The Gospel. On what The Gospel is, and what it is not.


----------



## rbcbob (Jul 13, 2009)

Preach on the glory and majesty of God and His Son. Avoid theological terminology. Stick to Scriptural phrases and concepts. Lord willing they will be edified and won't have any reason to be offended.


----------



## awretchsavedbygrace (Jul 13, 2009)

rbcbob said:


> Preach on the glory and majesty of God and His Son. Avoid theological terminology. Stick to Scriptural phrases and concepts. Lord willing they will be edified and won't have any reason to be offended.



Why avoid theological terminology?


----------



## rbcbob (Jul 13, 2009)

XBlackWaterX said:


> rbcbob said:
> 
> 
> > Preach on the glory and majesty of God and His Son. Avoid theological terminology. Stick to Scriptural phrases and concepts. Lord willing they will be edified and won't have any reason to be offended.
> ...



Seeking to do good to souls, glorify God, and provide no cause for stumbling. As I understand it this seems like a one-time opportunity. Assuming that the congregation is theologically untaught or misinformed I would not introduce theological terms that will not be comprehended or needlessly provoke the flock and have their minds tuning out the good Word of God.


----------



## John Weathersby (Jul 13, 2009)

Jonah 1:15 in comparison with Jonah 2:3; and how the reconciliation of that scripture applies to our lives DAILY! What a sweet truth is providence!


----------



## awretchsavedbygrace (Jul 13, 2009)

rbcbob said:


> XBlackWaterX said:
> 
> 
> > rbcbob said:
> ...



O. okay. Wont the theolgical terms (as long as there is a explanation of these terms) be a good thing? To me, it just seems, that using these terms or encouraging believers to read theology is a great thing. We need a knowledge of God, and avoiding theology is one of the reasons our churches dont know God...


----------



## BobVigneault (Jul 13, 2009)

I have preached in many non-reformed churches. I preached on suffering and the sovereignty of God, the authority of Scripture and finding Christ in the Old Testament.


----------



## charliejunfan (Jul 13, 2009)

preach on Romans 9


----------



## Ivan (Jul 13, 2009)

BobVigneault said:


> I have preached in many non-reformed churches. I preached on suffering and the sovereignty of God, the authority of Scripture and finding Christ in the Old Testament.



Listen to the voice of experience.


----------



## charliejunfan (Jul 13, 2009)

No wait! Ephesians 1 or 2


----------



## Ivan (Jul 13, 2009)

charliejunfan said:


> No wait! Ephesians 1 or 2



Two CHAPTERS! That would take a while to unpack!


----------



## John Weathersby (Jul 13, 2009)

Ivan said:


> charliejunfan said:
> 
> 
> > No wait! Ephesians 1 or 2
> ...



humm... what about Ephesians 2:5 in light of Romans 9:16


----------



## rbcbob (Jul 13, 2009)

XBlackWaterX said:


> rbcbob said:
> 
> 
> > XBlackWaterX said:
> ...



Joshua asked


> If you were invited to *guest preach* at a non-Reformed church, what would you preach? *How would you decide?* And yes, I am asking because I have been asked to preach at a non-Reformed church, and no, *I am not looking to cause trouble*.



In a single sermon it is not to be expected that unfamiliar terms will be made clear to a congregation unfamiliar with strong meat.

2 Timothy 2:24 And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient,


----------



## Ivan (Jul 13, 2009)

rbcbob said:


> XBlackWaterX said:
> 
> 
> > rbcbob said:
> ...



Amen, Bob!


----------



## Reformed Thomist (Jul 13, 2009)

Original Sin.


----------



## awretchsavedbygrace (Jul 13, 2009)

rbcbob said:


> XBlackWaterX said:
> 
> 
> > rbcbob said:
> ...



I disagree, but you are the elder...You know better than I do.


----------



## christianyouth (Jul 13, 2009)

Since most non-Reformed churches today believe a false Gospel(one that does not include repentance) I would preach the historic, biblical doctrine of repentance for the remission of sins.


----------



## Herald (Jul 13, 2009)

Just preach the Word. You don't need a special "I'm preaching in a non-Reformed church" message. Choose a text and preach it.


----------



## John Weathersby (Jul 13, 2009)

christianyouth said:


> Since most non-Reformed churches today believe a false Gospel(one that does not include repentance) I would preach the historic, biblical doctrine of repentance for the remission of sins.



Wow. That's a rather sweeping statement!


----------



## Herald (Jul 13, 2009)

christianyouth said:


> Since most non-Reformed churches today believe a false Gospel(one that does not include repentance) I would preach the historic, biblical doctrine of repentance for the remission of sins.



Andrew, I'm going to dispute your assertion that "most non-Reformed churches today believe a false Gospel." They may be incorrect inasmuch as Reformed soteriology goes, but I am not going to cast the "heretic" label on them. Beware of fulfilling the Reformed stereotype. To us does not belong all the known truth of scripture. Terms like Arminian are thrown around so casually that little to no thought is given to the ramifications of such labels.


----------



## toddpedlar (Jul 13, 2009)

Herald said:


> Just preach the Word. You don't need a special "I'm preaching in a non-Reformed church" message. Choose a text and preach it.



Exactly, Bill. 

Look, you have one shot, one message. Pick a text and be faithful to it. Do not go looking for some particular text that will somehow win the whole congregation over to the Reformed cause. It ain't gonna happen. Simply do the job that a preacher must do, and set the Word before the people. Let God do the rest. One guest sermon is not the time to be choosing the juiciest most Calvinistic passage and shoving it in their faces.


----------



## John Weathersby (Jul 13, 2009)

Herald said:


> christianyouth said:
> 
> 
> > Since most non-Reformed churches today believe a false Gospel(one that does not include repentance) I would preach the historic, biblical doctrine of repentance for the remission of sins.
> ...



I agree. Essential and non essentials as named as such because the division is over issues non-essential to salvation. Repentance and Sin, are essential (depending upon the issue) to salvation. This said, it very much depends upon what you mean when you use the term 'reformed'. However, there should not be, of necessity, a conflict between a reformed and non reformed over issues of salvation, repentance, and the gospel


----------



## christianyouth (Jul 13, 2009)

Herald said:


> christianyouth said:
> 
> 
> > Since most non-Reformed churches today believe a false Gospel(one that does not include repentance) I would preach the historic, biblical doctrine of repentance for the remission of sins.
> ...



Hmmm... I don't want to fulfill the Reformed stereotype. I've only encountered a small portion of the non-Reformed community in real life, that being the IFB community. But from poking around on a Baptist message board and listening to the popular non-Calvinist teachers and their idea of salvation, I don't know if I'm way off in saying that most non-Reformed don't preach the true Gospel(in the sense of preaching repentance and faith). But I've already changed so many of my views since being here on the PB, I admit I could be very wrong on this. Thanks for pointing that out.


----------



## John Weathersby (Jul 13, 2009)

christianyouth said:


> Herald said:
> 
> 
> > christianyouth said:
> ...



Andrew,

I think so often we get into a defensive mode/posture and are unwilling to accept correction. I just wanted to stop and point out that you did so humbly; Praise God. (Matt 5:6)

Looking forward to dinner, Rev 19:9

John


----------



## Herald (Jul 13, 2009)

christianyouth said:


> Herald said:
> 
> 
> > christianyouth said:
> ...



Andrew,

When I first became a Calvinist I had a cage stage period. I couldn't talk to anyone about spiritual matters without Calvinism somehow getting into the conversation. As time has gone by I realize how myopic (and annoying) I was. 

Not every non-Reformed church is teaching a false gospel. Piper's church isn't Reformed, nor is MacArthur's, and I wouldn't label them as preaching a false gospel. 

I appreciate your humility in responding to my post.


----------



## ClayPot (Jul 13, 2009)

Joshua said:


> Preach on the Covenant of Works, the Covenant of Grace, and the Imputed Righteousness of Christ as our only hope.



I don't know Josh. I'm trying to stay away from the usual guest preacher, "light theology" sermons.


----------



## Reformed Thomist (Jul 13, 2009)

Herald said:


> To us does not belong all the known truth of scripture.



No, but we have the Gospel right at least. 

What's the Arminian 'good news' again? That God became Man, died on the Cross, descended into Hell, rose again, and ascended into Heaven... so that every sinner in the world now has an _opportunity_ to _choose_ salvation?

-----Added 7/13/2009 at 07:58:56 EST-----



Herald said:


> Not every non-Reformed church is teaching a false gospel. Piper's church isn't Reformed, nor is MacArthur's, and I wouldn't label them as preaching a false gospel.



Piper and MacArthur's churches are Reformed where it counts.


----------



## ClayPot (Jul 13, 2009)

Joshua said:


> jpfrench81 said:
> 
> 
> > Joshua said:
> ...



Do most Arminians believe in the imputed righteousness of Christ?


----------



## rbcbob (Jul 13, 2009)

Joshua said:


> jpfrench81 said:
> 
> 
> > Joshua said:
> ...



Yes, and these pivotal points can be preached faithfully and even searchingly without losing the attention of an unfamiliar congregation who themselves might need something put on the lower shelf where they can reach it.


----------



## Anton Bruckner (Jul 13, 2009)

Preach on your best life now. How Biblical principles can make you rich and healthy. Also have your books and cds at the back ready to sell. 

anyway seriously speaking, whatever you preach make sure it is sound. And do not even begin to compose your sermon without prayer. Don't assume that you have to fill up all the theological deficit. Prayer + a sound sermon.


----------



## Herald (Jul 13, 2009)

jpfrench81 said:


> Joshua said:
> 
> 
> > jpfrench81 said:
> ...



Joshua,

First, you need to stop defaulting to the term "Arminian." Many broad evangelical churches are not Arminian by strict definition. The vernacular of the broad evangelical church is steeped in late 19th and early 20th century revivalism. Many pastors have been raised in churches that use this vocabulary and they have been trained to continue using it in their ministry. It is as much a cultural norm as it is a theological distinctive. But not every church that uses this language is Arminian. I know pastors who you would probably call Arminian but who are quiet Calvinists. If you sit down and talk to them about the doctrines of sovereign grace they will agree with them. But place them in the fishbowl of fundamentalism and they talk the talk.

I brought this up in another post. Would you call John Piper's church Arminian? John MacArthur? Alistair Begg? These are all Calvinist, but not Reformed, pastors. How about non-Calvinists such as David Jeremiah or Chuck Swindoll; are they Arminian? A strong case can be made that they are not. I don't mean to call your theological understanding into question, but do you know what a true Arminian is? If so, shouldn't you be careful how you throw around that term?


----------



## ClayPot (Jul 13, 2009)

Joshua said:


> Hopefully you're not going in order to preach what they believe, but preach what they _need_ to believe. The _end_ of your preaching is not according to what they might/might not believe, but the proclamation of the truth, that they might be saved, turned from error, confronted with truth, rebuked with power, comforted with Scripture, convicted of sin, etc.



Of course not. But it is helpful in getting an idea of what people know or believe in order to best know how to present that topic.


----------



## Grimmson (Jul 14, 2009)

Seriously I would focus on 1 Corinthians 15:1-11, with the theme on the historical fact of the Christ's death for sins, his burial, his resurrection, and the fact there are many witnesses to that fact. And the importance of this fact in history for all man kind by God's grace.


----------



## DonP (Jul 14, 2009)

Yes a lot of modern churches today have many people who are not really even clear on the whole gospel. They have no understanding of covenants and the law. 

So as important as it would be to get them into Romans 9 I would prefer to start with the law, sin, Rom 1-2 including total depravity and man's inability, none seek God, none do good, Therefore our only hope is in God choosing to have mercy on us and giving us a new birth by the Spirit so we can be willing and understand spiritual things, believe and repent. This gets us into eternal life which we can't lose. It is all of God all of Grace and this is why John Newton called it amazing grace. 

then say ask me back for the rest of the story.

And though you can gt them to say sovereignty, they do not mean sovereign in salvation. Maybe most or all else but not that. 
Free Will reigns. Mac Arthur used to detest Election when I went to his church. He was Arminain absolutely. 
A 1 point calvinist is not a calvinist. 

And most are 1/2 point since they don't understand perseverance, only preservation. 
Their total depravity is partial, their call is resistible, their atonement is unlimited to universal, and they are not sure if people who never heard might be saved, 

They are more Arminian than Calvinist. Their gospel is make a decision, maybe even only to receive a savior and later you can make him Lord if you want. 

There are few like Lewis Sperry Chafer of Dallas Theol who was a nearly 4 pointer, left. 

But is Josh wrong to call them Armnian even if they are 2 point Arminian? 

They are still Arminian. The GARB are supposed to be 4 pointers, but my mothers pastor who rejects limited atonement also rejects Lordship salvation. 
Still preaches a decisional gospel and has altar class to come get saved. 

I call this Arminian. I don't see a problem calling them Arminian. Or Arminiain dispensational. Whatever term, modern evangelicals ?

So the fact a few like Mac Arthur have finally accepted all 5 points doesn't mean we shouldn't call the rest of them Arminian. 

I would say Mac Arthur isn't Arminian so not included when I speak of Arminians. But this is rare in modern evangelical, lutheran, methodist, episcopal, independents, charismatics, Vineyards etc. and how ever you want to designate all but the reformed churches. I don't see any other term that applies to most of them if not all of them. 
Other than saying, a non-reformed church. But that would include Mac Arthur and I would not preach the same there as I would in the other churches. 

They all could benefit from covenantal explanations from scripture, and a true gospel.


----------



## Herald (Jul 14, 2009)

PeaceMaker said:


> Yes a lot of modern churches today have many people who are not really even clear on the whole gospel. They have no understanding of covenants and the law.
> 
> So as important as it would be to get them into Romans 9 I would prefer to start with the law, sin, Rom 1-2 including total depravity and man's inability, none seek God, none do good, Therefore our only hope is in God choosing to have mercy on us and giving us a new birth by the Spirit so we can be willing and understand spiritual things, believe and repent. This gets us into eternal life which we can't lose. It is all of God all of Grace and this is why John Newton called it amazing grace.
> 
> ...



Don, do you know what a historical Arminian is?


----------



## rpavich (Jul 14, 2009)

> One guest sermon is not the time to be choosing the juiciest most Calvinistic passage and shoving it in their faces.



Thank you. I realize this is about guest preaching a sermon and I'm no Pastor, and not going to preach a sermon, but I just learned a valuable lesson.


Thank you brother.


----------



## christiana (Jul 14, 2009)

Acts 13:48


----------



## rpavich (Jul 14, 2009)

christiana said:


> Acts 13:48



Boy, I second that one....there's a lot goin' on in that passage...


----------



## BobVigneault (Jul 14, 2009)

I've already mentioned that I preach primarily on three topics in non-reformed churches (I have never preached in a Reformed church, they won't let me.)

The people respond to a message of God's transcendence. They have heard so much about themselves and how to help themselves that they have lost sight of the fact that there is a God who is majestic and sovereign and transcends our finite lives. I see their eyes get wide as they begin to realize that there is One who controls everything down to the finest detail.

Older folks have come to me after church with tears in their eyes because it had been so LONG since they heard of the Glory of God. I've seen the same response as I've set the Word above all other literature and spoke of it's ultimate authority.

Don't underestimate the HUNGER for the Word of God that is in our churches today. You don't have to be clever, you only need to be faithful to the Word.

My blog page is primarily made up of sermons that I have given in non-reformed churches. They are not dense with doctrine, though I pray the doctrine is solid, and I don't use any of the buzz words associated with reformed teaching. They are more devotional than academic. Feel free to browse through them.


----------



## LawrenceU (Jul 14, 2009)

I'm a bit surprised and saddened at some of the responses to this question. Immaturity tries to prove ones position. Maturity trusts the Lord to work in the hearts of his people.

In such a situation it is not the time to throw down the doctrinal gauntlet. That will serve no one in any fashion other than the one speaking. Bob's counsel is very wise. I've been in this situation very often. I've also seen God begin to reform a church and people. It has never happened by a minister/preacher/speaker throwing out theological jargon, propositions, or focusing on 'hot' reformed passages. This does nothing but build a wall between you and the hearers. I have seen it happen when men focus on the holiness and glory of God Almighty, the sufficiency of the atonement, and the gift of his Scriptures.

Don't burn the bridge before anyone even knows it's there.


----------



## SolaScriptura (Jul 14, 2009)

I'm a little nervous about trying to advise someone I've never met on what he should preach to a congregation I know nothing about.

That said, my suggestion - if you still haven't selected something - is to preach an evangelistic sermon. 

There are several reasons for my suggestion:

1. The Gospel is absolutely essential. You must never stray from it. It is good for your own soul to prepare that type of message and to deliver it.

2. As already noted, in many American churches, the Gospel is in short supply. Christians need to be continually reminded that their only hope in life and in death is in the finished work of Jesus Christ on their behalf.

3. In many churches, unregenerate folks fill the pews. They need the Gospel preached to them.

4. Christians need to be taught how to share the Gospel... as you exposit your text and present the Gospel, you are teaching them how to do the same. 

5. Lastly, and to be honest, somewhat self-servingly, what is the #1 complaint against/caricaturization of, Calvinism? That we don't evangelize. An evangelistic sermon kills that charge and may open doors for future conversations with some of your hearers.

Incidentally, for my ordination exam I preached an evangelistic sermon to my presbytery. Believe it or not, they loved it - they loved the fact that I did not come in there and try to "wow" them with some amazing exposition of some notoriously difficult passage. 

In sum, I think you have everything to gain and nothing to lose by preaching an evangelistic message to this congregation.


----------



## rpavich (Jul 14, 2009)

> Lastly, and to be honest, somewhat self-servingly, what is the #1 complaint against/caricaturization of, Calvinism? That we don't evangelize. An evangelistic sermon kills that charge and may open doors for future conversations with some of your hearers.
> 
> Incidentally, for my ordination exam I preached an evangelistic sermon to my presbytery. Believe it or not, they loved it - they loved the fact that I did not come in there and try to "wow" them with some amazing exposition of some notoriously difficult passage.



And again...though I'm not a pastor I learned a valuable lesson....

thanks Sola


----------



## awretchsavedbygrace (Jul 14, 2009)

LawrenceU said:


> I'm a bit surprised and saddened at some of the responses to this question. Immaturity tries to prove ones position. Maturity trusts the Lord to work in the hearts of his people.
> 
> In such a situation it is not the time to throw down the doctrinal gauntlet. That will serve no one in any fashion other than the one speaking. Bob's counsel is very wise. I've been in this situation very often. I've also seen God begin to reform a church and people. It has never happened by a minister/preacher/speaker throwing out theological jargon, propositions, or focusing on 'hot' reformed passages. This does nothing but build a wall between you and the hearers. I have seen it happen when men focus on the holiness and glory of God Almighty, the sufficiency of the atonement, and the gift of his Scriptures.
> 
> Don't burn the bridge before anyone even knows it's there.



I hope my response wasn't one them that has been placed under the category of " sad and immature". Regardless, as I stated, I disagree, but I believe that you all are better prepared to answer this question. Be it that you are elders and pastors.


----------



## Jesus is my friend (Jul 14, 2009)

Just a question:Have you talked with the Pastor of that church and asked him what he would want you to preach on? if you have not yet wouldn't that be the proper way to approach this,you would be a guest in this church and showing humility in this blessing that you're being given would go a long way.


----------



## Ask Mr. Religion (Jul 14, 2009)

When I have filled in at pulpits I have two or three sermons I draw upon. Most often I preach from Matthew 26:36-46. The evangelistic theme is that we tend to get so close to the physical Jesus (e.g., sitting in church, the "sanctuary", keeping the lights burning, singing about Mamas favorite rocking chair, etc.) that we forget about the spiritual, commanding, Jesus, who told us to be out there concerned about the souls of mankind. The disciples familiarity with the physical Jesus led them to contempt such that they could not even remain awake during that awful time in Gethsemane. Then we hear those awful words (v. 45) to those that misunderstood the spiritual, commanding Jesus, _Sleep on now, and take your rest: behold, the hour is at hand, and the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners_. 

The general message is that the world is going to hell in a hand basket while all around there are churches full of people so full of spiritual stagnation that they are about to pop like a toad. 

My other favorite sermon is a rendition of _Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God_, which I memorized many years ago. This one, however, requires careful discussion with the leadership given the responses that it often generates from the congregation. Not all congregations are ready for Edwards' message.

Given my approach, I usually only accept a fill in if the church agrees that I will be exhorting the faithful to snap out of their complacencies. As such, I usually speak at the start of some revival-like or renewal kickoff the church is having.

Both messages work well with many denominations.

AMR


----------



## ClayPot (Jul 15, 2009)

Jesus is my friend said:


> Just a question:Have you talked with the Pastor of that church and asked him what he would want you to preach on? if you have not yet wouldn't that be the proper way to approach this,you would be a guest in this church and showing humility in this blessing that you're being given would go a long way.



I had another opportunity to preach for this church, and I was able to preach on what I wanted. I will be meeting with him tomorrow to discuss the opportunity in more detail. I'm assuming that I will have the same freedom as before, but if there is a specific topic he would like me to preach, that would obviously be a big factor.


----------



## Jesus is my friend (Jul 15, 2009)

jpfrench81 said:


> Jesus is my friend said:
> 
> 
> > Just a question:Have you talked with the Pastor of that church and asked him what he would want you to preach on? if you have not yet wouldn't that be the proper way to approach this,you would be a guest in this church and showing humility in this blessing that you're being given would go a long way.
> ...



Good Job!,Please keep us posted as to how this unfolds!


----------

