Over the weekend i was at a conference where the speakers spoke reguarly for an hour straight. One of the speakers held your attention much better than the other and it got me thinking about how long i aim to preach for (especially since i'll be doing it again in a fortnight and am already thinking about it).
I once read (i think by John Maxwell) that to hold an audience for an hour you must be a phenominal communicator. At the conferences case, the first one was. To hold an audience for 45 minutes you must be very good. 30 minutes... you gotta be good.
But determining how long you can hold someones attention goes beyond how well you can get your point across.
You also need to consider how well you know your content and how relevant or useful will be to your listeners.
With these in mind i usually aim to limit myself to around half an hour or less. Firstly, i'm not convinced i can hold anyones attention beyond with meaningful results. Secondly, i'm less than convinced that i can mine a passage for adequate content to fill half an hour.
So... why does it matter?
It matters, baceause if you're going to communicate the gospel most effectivly, i think you should be realistic of whatyour limits are. If you are aware that your audience can't stand a 45-60 minute diatribe, then don't give them one. Furthermore, if you can give a better message in 30 minutes, then why wouldn't you?
25 minutes of quality has gotta be better than 45+ minutes where you lose those you are trying to serve.
No comments:
Post a Comment