PreachingToday.com: We want to learn from excellent communicators how to improve our introductions, one of the most important elements of a sermon. Let's begin with Max Lucado, who is the pulpit minister of Oak Hills Church of Christ in San Antonio, Texas. Here is the introduction of the sermon " The Touch of Christ, " which comes from PreachingToday issue 197:

Some years ago when I had been in the ministry only a few months, I went to visit the wife of a man who had just passed away. They were an older couple. He was a Bible teacher in our Sunday school class, and I really liked him. He was a gracious fellow, and it was a sad day for all of us when he passed away. I went to their house, and as his wife was walking me down the hallway to a room where we were going to plan the funeral, we passed a row of family portraits hanging along the walls.

I noticed something familiar out of the corner of my eye. Tacked on the wall were notes I had written. I stopped my friend in the hallway and said, " I don't understand this. Someone tacked on the wall all these notes I wrote him. " She said, " John did that. It meant so much to him that the minister wrote him a note. "

I was 33 years old; he was 74. I was brand new in the ministry; he had been in the church and had forgotten more than I'd ever learned. He had served as an elder in several congregations on two different continents, but still something from the hand of the minister meant a great deal to him.

The power of a hand — to touch and encourage. When surrendered to God, our hands belong no longer to us, but become the very hands of God.

Were we to see a documentary about the hands of Christ, we wouldn't see abuse, greedy clutching, or self-centered yanking. We would see one occasion after another of the kind hand of Christ on people as their lives were changed — infants being brought to Christ, parents coming to him for encouragement. Each one is touched; each one is changed.

None were touched or changed more than the unnamed leper in Matthew 8: " When Jesus came down from the hill, great crowds followed him, and then a man with a skin disease came to Jesus. And the man bowed before him and said, 'Lord, you can heal me if you will.' And Jesus reached out his hand and touched the man and said, 'I will! Be healed.' And immediately the man was healed from his disease. "

Mark and Luke also chose to tell this story, but with apologies to all three writers, I don't think any of them tell us enough. The fellow appears and disappears, and we don't know his name. We know his disease, and we know his decision, but we're left with questions. Sometimes my curiosity gets the best of me, and I begin to wonder.

I wonder what it's like to receive the touch of Christ — to feel his hand on my shoulder, to feel his hand on my disease?

Eric, talk about some of the things you liked about this introduction.

Eric Reed: He accomplished a lot in a relatively small amount of time. The flow of his introduction was important. He moved through six distinct elements, things that had to be dealt with, but he got through them quickly and moved the listener from a personal story to personally entering the biblical story. He did that well.

He started with a personal story that offered many entry points. You could identify with the wife who was grieving or the man who appreciated a note from the minister or the young minister or an old person.

Then he had a " nut 'graph " — a thesis statement, more or less. It establishes why he is preaching this sermon. He tells the story, and then he gives us the nut 'graph.

Then he gives us a point and counterpoint, positive and negative definitions of what he's talking about — the hand — and moves seamlessly into and out of Scripture. I think his personal statement of dissatisfaction with the biblical account is a positive thing, because it gives the listener room for questions, which they're going to need, because he's going to start answering a lot of questions and bringing color into this story. And it foreshadows that he's going to tell the story with more detail than is in Scripture.

Finally, the question at the end — " I wonder what it's like to receive the touch of Christ, to feel his hand on my shoulder? " — it's a restatement of the nut 'graph, that we are the hands and we're going to be doing the touching. But he poses it in the form of a question, so we're eager to find out what the answer is.

You used an interesting phrase: entry points. What do you mean by that?

If you're reading a sermon or story or article, entry points are the places where you tune in, where you identify with a person in the story and start thinking, If I were in this account, who would I be? What would I be doing? What do I have in common with this person? Or if your attention has wandered, those places are where you can come back and not have lost too much. So entry points get you back into the story.

Another strength?

Another strength is, again, this personal story at the beginning. The text is about healing a man with leprosy. This has few contemporary equivalents. Some people might think, He can't preach about leprosy. We don't have much of that anymore. Maybe he can talk about cancer or AIDS or homelessness. But he doesn't do that. By setting it up with this personal story about the thank-you notes on the wall, he establishes that the sermon will take some unexpected turns and make some achievable applications. He's going to be looking for ways in everyday life to bring this principle he's going to explain through the story to our lives.

One of the things I liked about the introduction was the tone. All introductions create expectations. One of the expectations he creates in me as I hear this is that there's going to be a sense of compassion and tenderness, and my heart is going to be warmed. And he fulfills that promise, because throughout the sermon there is a tremendous sense of tenderness. I also like the way that instead of talking about the abstract concept of compassion, he gave us the hand and focused on something concrete that symbolized the idea of compassion. That's especially important in the introduction, because that's where we've got to get people with us. Anything that's concrete in the introduction helps people to connect with us.

We often think the concrete part is the application. Sometimes it's along the way or it's gathered together at the end, but you're saying you have to do something concrete in the beginning too.

Especially in the beginning, in the introduction. Application begins in the introduction. It's got to start there, and concreteness needs to begin there as well. We've got to take people from where they are in this world, the way they daily live, and begin to move them into bigger ideas.

He didn't start talking about leprosy or healing. He started with something we can actually do and feel at this point in our lives.

Any other strengths?

He had a clear purpose for his introduction. He intentionally moved through the phases, these elements I mentioned earlier. And in giving us a point of personal contact, he prepares the listeners to hear the story. We know he's a storyteller. That's what Max does. But along the way he's preparing us to enter into a story that's not contemporary and that's beyond what's on the page in the Bible. He's preparing us in a good way to wonder, to have a sanctified imagination.

One of the most helpful ideas I've heard regarding preaching is that it's a series of tasks. There are communication tasks you have to do in order to help people understand Scripture and so on. The introduction especially is a series of tasks: connecting with people, getting them interested, raising curiosity, seeing the relevance, and so on. You've pointed that out in his introduction here. He moves through a series of tasks, and by the time the introduction is done we're ready to hear.

Let's move on to our second example by Mark Labberton, who is the senior pastor of First Presbyterian Church in Berkley, California. This sermon is titled "Combining Conviction and Compassion" and appeared in Preaching Today issue 191. He addresses the subject of homosexuality.

What does the Bible teach about homosexuality? Since I have been at this church, I have had to answer this question as well as a number of related questions multiple times. There have been dozens of people, both men and women, both heterosexuals and those who are conflicted about their own homosexual orientation, who have come to see me and expressed their dilemmas about this issue.

Some have come to see me as married people involved in secret homosexual relationships outside the bounds of their marriage. Some have come to see me as single people who have committed themselves to a pattern of celibacy. Some are single people who are sexually active as homosexuals. Others are people who are in committed homosexual relationships. In every case, each person asked questions regarding their faith and understanding of the Bible in relation to homosexuality.

In this sense this question is not just for " them " but a question for believers.

To ground my sermon, I want to first consider some assumptions and experiences that I bring to the topic of homosexuality, and then I want us to look closely at what the Bible teaches.

Eric, what did you like about that introduction?

He establishes the boundaries for his sermon right up front. It's a controversial issue, and most people in the congregation are going to come with their minds made up already. He establishes from the beginning what this sermon is and is not about, and that is extremely helpful. He sets up the fact that many people deal with this issue, people we know. He establishes that believers and heterosexuals have a reason to listen to this sermon. And he says he is approaching a difficult issue from a biblical perspective. I appreciate that. But because he's used these examples of people he has counseled, he's establishing also that he has a great concern for the people and the personal nature of their problem; so he's bringing the Bible to bear on that.

I like the word you use: boundaries.

If you're bringing up a controversial subject like homosexuality, you need to let people know from the beginning you're going to deal with it in a certain way, and there are some things they're thinking about that you're not going to deal with at this point and maybe some things they're not considering that they need to know. In his case, they need to know he is dealing with this from a biblical perspective. That's an important thing, because he's not dealing with homosexuality in society, and he's not dealing with church politics. So the boundaries are important.

I like the way the sermon began: " What does the Bible teach about homosexuality? " He lays it right out there.

Yes, there are no nice little stories to get started with on this one. You just dive in.

And you don't need anything else. The interest is already there.

I appreciated the way he used examples from his counseling experiences. He cited specific ways people are dealing with the issue of homosexuality. He said several times: some people have come to see me, and some are single, some are married, et cetera. It's helpful to let people know that he as a pastor is dealing with these issues, and for people who might think, That's their issue out there, it lets them know it's our issue here too. That was a good thing. But that also leads me to a caution.

What's the caution?

He said he had been there two years. For a pastor who hasn't been in his church long or who is in a smaller church, to use examples borne out of one's counseling experience can be a dangerous thing. If a pastor in a smaller congregation said, " I've met with dozens of people who are dealing with a controversial sexual issue, " heads are going to turn and everybody is going to say, Whose problem is that? We have to be careful. He phrased it tactfully, and certainly there were no examples that could be traced. But even in a smaller setting using these same words, people would begin to wonder who he's talking about.

One of the tasks he needed to accomplish was to signal his compassion and sympathy and experience and understanding, and I thought he accomplished that well. If someone was sitting in the congregation and struggling with that, I think they would feel at the end of that introduction, I can trust him. He's going to try to approach this fairly. He's going to be looking at what the Bible says. He's not going to be wielding it like a hammer. He's going to be wielding it in a compassionate manner.

He established himself as someone who is going to be true to Scripture and concerned about the people at the same time.

Let's move to Rick Warren, our final example, pastor of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, California. The sermon " What Difference Does Easter Make? " appeared in PreachingToday issue 223.

One of my favorite magazines is U.S. News & World Report. I like it because there's a section called " News You Can Use. " I don't want to waste my time or your time, so we're going to talk about news you can use.

I want to ask two questions: Easter — what does it mean, and why does it matter?

A lot of people say, " I believe in the resurrection; I just don't understand it. " George Gallup said even 84 percent of people who never go to church believe Jesus rose from the dead. It is historical fact; it wasn't done in secret. The whole city of Jerusalem and the whole Roman Empire knew about it. It was news. If CNN had been there, they would have had it live. There are at least 15 historical references to Jesus meeting people, touching people, and talking with people after he had been crucified. One time he cooked breakfast for some people. One time he talked to about 500 people — after he had risen from the dead. A lot of people saw him.

But what does his resurrection mean? It means three things: (1) Jesus is who he claimed to be; (2) Jesus has the power he claimed to have; and (3) Jesus did what he promised to do.

Eric, what worked well in that introduction?

It's hard to introduce something like an Easter sermon, something you have to deal with regularly. You're steeped in it. Most of the congregation are steeped in it. We all know about the resurrection. He does a good job of letting people know there is value and application, something fresh and meaningful there for them. He promises here that a doctrinal sermon will have meaning for everyday life. He tells believers they're going to hear a new angle or something they can take away from it, and he gives people who don't believe or are unsure a reason to stay tuned.

Warren's lens is the " yes, but how? " question. He takes something that could be a fairly dry doctrine — the value and meaning of the resurrection — and approaches it like this.

When I think about the expectations this introduction created for me, first of all, I knew this is not going to be an artistic sermon, an experience-oriented sermon like Max gave. It's not a story that's going to elicit a lot of emotion. This is about information. This is about explaining and proving what he's going to say.

My other expectation is that he wants this message to be relevant, as you mentioned. He does that by mentioning contemporary culture — U.S. News & World Report, CNN, the George Gallop survey statistics. He wants us to know this happened 2,000 years ago, but it's going to be relevant for today, right now, where we live. So there's going to be a strong takeaway.

I especially liked that he contemporized the eyewitness accounts by saying, " If CNN had been there, they would have covered it live " and " He cooked breakfast. " Those are things we can relate to.

Eric Reed is a pastor, consultant for church health and evangelism, and journalist living in the Chicago area. He served as managing editor of Leadership Journal for 10 years and continues as news editor and writer.