Current Non-Cal Expository Pastors

...then you can supply the OT passage where the parables were gleaned from? You do know what expository preaching is, right?

Would it kill you to admit Jesus' preaching style was primarily topical?

 

I know that you are responding to Luke2427 here, but you are partially correct. The parables of Christ were not particularly expository. They may not have been "sermons" either, but that may be another discussion.

We do not have all the sermons that Jesus preached recorded in Scripture, but we DO have more than one example. For instance, His teaching on the Emmaus Road:

25 And he [Jesus] said to them, “O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Was it not necessary that the Christ should suffer these things and enter into his glory?” 27 And beginning with Moses and all the Prophets, he interpreted to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself. Luke 24:25-27 (ESV)

We might rightly assume that some of this "expository" teaching of Jesus -- literally a sermon for two -- was the basis for the knowledge that the disciples carried into the new Christian church world to come.

Then, there is the Sermon on the Mount:

21 “You have heard that it was said to those of old..." Matt 5:21 (ESV)

Virtually every line of this sermon was crafted in response to some OT Scripture, and Jesus bounced a new revelation (or clarification of an old revelation) off of the known OT scriptures.

So, while Jesus was not limited to expository preaching, neither did He avoid it, and perhaps, He was the one who showed us how it is done, properly, with illustration (parable and allegory) to punctuate key points.

I'm not sure exactly what is the beef with expository preaching, except that it is perhaps not well understood.

I've heard many a pastor (and we recently left a church for this reason) preach what "God has laid on my heart today..." and what has actually been preached is what the pastor thought that he needed to say to the congregation. In the case of the church we left, the pastor was very fond of preaching his own thoughts (which were biblical, but not driven by the text!) then saying something along the lines of, "See, God agrees with me." The more texts he invoked, the more we knew that he was just trying to make a point by "proof-texting" with key words driven by the use of a concordance, for many of the verses had nothing to do with his main point, save that they had a key word in common (something that we see on this board also).

Ought we not let the text drive the sermon -- at least some of the time? There is always room for topical preaching, that is fine and good, but God gave us His Word, and He asked us to know and teach IT -- not our ideas or beliefs.

A good expository sermon will diagram the text to know what is being said to whom, what is the context, both in the immediate passage, the surrounding pericope, and the book or epistle from which that passage is derived. Very clearly, the subject, action, and any modifying statements will be detailed, then from that outline a sermon crafted that "expounds" on the actual Word of God as presented in the Scriptures. Included in this exposition are apt illustrations, implications, and something that is missing from many a sermon -- a VERB -- an action, a "so what" that drives action in the listener.

In this manner, preaching through an entire Bible book, or in an overview of many Bible books, the congregation is fed the Word instead of the thoughts and beliefs of the pastor.

Did you have a chance to review the Piper video clip I posted above? Just wondering. What, if anything is wrong with what Piper says in that clip?

 

No it would not kill me- it would just be wrong. I, unlike you, am not in the habit of saying wrong things.

 

For those who have not turned it into some kind of juggernaut and can bear to read a circumspect evaluation of the genre, take a look at Reformation 21-The Online Magazine of the Alliance of Confessing Evangelicals:

Iain D. Campbell, Free Church of Scotland pastor and Westminster Seminary professor:

 

Maybe not a habit...but you do say wrong things once in a while.

 

This is one of the most inaccurate and hilarious posting you have made! :laugh::laugh:

 

I humbly submit: variety keeps things interesting.

What do you think about Narrative?

 

I would suggest that EVERY different preaching style has a place in God's church. Because we have so many different styles illustrated for us in the text of Scripture, we should probably take heed and use all of them at one time or another.

For instance, I am apt to preach a topical sermon or two several times a year for some event, or special occasion. When doing so, I am careful to exegete the Scripture(s) that inform that topic and present what it is that the Bible presents.

I have also preached "narrative" sermons. One in particular was quite effective at causing the people of my church to view Easter Sunday through a completely new (yet biblical) lens. I dressed the role of the Centurion, and told the story of the Passion and Resurrection through the eyes of one who was there (based on the biblical texts that spoke of some action of a centurion in the gospel accounts). The emotions I expressed while performing that role were real, as I too saw the passion of Christ through the eyes of one observer, and like it changed his life, it too changed mine and ours.

But, at the end of the day, my preferred style is to "exposit" the Scriptures and in so doing, I let God dictate the order, the content, and the direction of the sermons given to His people.

It is interesting, that in preaching through a book such as Ephesians, one will touch on almost every biblical topic, from grace, to election, to sin, to redemption, to atonement, to marriage, to spiritual warfare, to God's ultimate glory. Nothing boring at all in that sort of preaching.


Finally... I am shocked that, so far, no one has watched the John Piper video and reported back. Are some of you THAT afraid of what might be said by a Calvinistic expositor of Scripture? Really? :BangHead:

 

You cannot have an expository message on one verse, Squire. That is not expository preaching. Taking one verse and expounding on it is topical preaching as the context is not taken into consideration. It's systematically going through a portion of text or a book of the Bible in context expounding on it.

 

Uh, no. There is a such thing as one verse exposition.

 

Well, for one it was not an expository sermon :laugh:

I agree with much of what he said, particularly that the sermon IS worship, it shouldn't follow. I also agree that it is not a lecture.

I do think he was too broad in his definition of defining it, though. He claims it is to expound on, explain and apply the meaning of the Bible, but not in an opinionated way. That can really mean anything including "pop" and topical sermons... and it is not the true definition of what expository preaching is all about and what it should be. Like Squire stated above, he has an expository sermon on one verse. That is not expository, and while the sermon may be explaining and applying truths from the Bible (what Piper calls expository), it is actually more along the lines of topical. This form of preaching can be quite opinionated, too.

 

...not without the context. One verse can also be topical or textual.

I found this to be pretty accurate http://www.gotquestions.org/expository-preaching.html

 

One verse can also be expository.

I happen to believe Squire. I've also done so myself. :smilewinkgrin:

Here's a link to prove it, it's right on the money and accurate:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1627829&posted=1#post1627829

See #752.

:thumbsup:

 

A former pastor of mine, years ago, taught homiletics at nearby Mid-Continent Baptist Bible College (now Mid-Continent University).

He instructed his students to prepare an expository sermon to preach to the class. One student, already involved in evangelism, preached a topical sermon when his turn came. My pastor gave him an F.

When he got his grade, he stormed into the pastor's office at the school. "God told me to preach that sermon", he said angrily.

My pastor replied. "God told me to give you an F."

Now, back to our regularly scheduled discussion.

 

Now that there is hilarious!!!!!

 

We can go around and around with "can too", "can not", but it doesn't really accomplish anything

Without the context how would you prepare an expository sermon on "Jesus wept"? Did He stub a toe? Miss Joseph? Sand in the eye?

 

In other words, true expository preaching is other than what you thought it was...

 

How did you arrive at that conclusion? Are you saying Piper is the authority on how it is defined?