Expository Preaching in the OT

1. None, however I have begun listening to a verse by verse through Genesis.

http://www.emmanuelenid.org/sermons/Genesis/

About the only place to find expositional preaching for me is the internet.

2. OT exposition reguires alot of study. This might be the reason. It is also very historical in nature and preachers might find it to dry for their audience.

3. I think if preachers would start preaching it things would change. When one realizes all of our NT theology has its foundation in the OT, people will began to get interested. Most would be astonished at how much of the OT is quoted by the NT writers. Acts 15:16-17 is a perfect example of how the NT writers interpret the OT passage for us.

 

"3. What needs to change in order for people to have a deeper understanding of the Old Testament and its application for life? "

Personally I'd start with a good (several week) series of survey so they know where you are going and where they are going to end up. Maybe even expand it to an overview of the New Testament so they can start picking up the relationship between the two as you point it out in deeper study.

I'd guess many in the pew could not do a time line of the main characters if asked. Indeed, in many churches I'd guess they wouldn't know the characters unless they remember Sunday school as a child.

Other than that, as has been mentioned, doing it. Many would find it pleasing I'd guess.

Maybe an introduction to how to interpret/apply the Old Testament to today.

 

1. None, however I have begun listening to a verse by verse through Genesis.

http://www.emmanuelenid.org/sermons/Genesis/

About the only place to find expositional preaching for me is the internet.

2. OT exposition reguires alot of study. This might be the reason. It is also very historical in nature and preachers might find it to dry for their audience.

3. I think if preachers would start preaching it things would change. When one realizes all of our NT theology has its foundation in the OT, people will began to get interested. Most would be astonished at how much of the OT is quoted by the NT writers. Acts 15:16-17 is a perfect example of how the NT writers interpret the OT passage for us. </font>[/QUOTE]I would agree with Grasshopper here. I would only add two things here:

1. Because, IMO, preachers don't spend much time studying the historical context of the OT, their congregations, likewise, also knows very little of the historical context of the OT and can't understand much of the message.

2. This second one is the big one here. I think many folks still have that "I am a New Testament Christian" mentality and the OT is irrelevant to us today.

To sum it up, I think we need to change the attitudes about scripture. We need to educate folks that the Old Testament is important for us to understand the New Testament better.

Joseph Botwinick

 

1. Actually, I have heard a good bit. More from NT than OT, though.
2. I think we as Christians (and preachers, too) are ignorant of a broad OT understanding, and we feel that NT is what "really" applies today.
3. Someone knowledgeable to teach us, and willingness on the part of the listener to dedicate ourselves to learn it

 

Our church has gone expositionally through the Psalms on Sunday PMs the last few months. A month or so ago, we wrapped up Eph. and are to Exodus (maybe he's going in alphabetical order? )

I think in part because there is so little expositional preaching period. Also, I think that people are largely ignorant of what to do with the OT.

It needs to be preached. I went to a Bible study at a church other than our own a few years ago that went through the OT in 12 weeks or something like that. It didn't get into anything deep, but there were things like "Judges can be summed up by 4 s's - Sin, Slavery, Supplication, Salvation. It focused more on the general theme of each book (or group of books.) Yet, I learned more about the OT there than any other time in my life... sad isn't it.

 

One of the great challenges of expository preaching of the OT is dealing with Heb. Grk is many times easier. You really have to work in the orig. lang. to do expos. preaching. Yet, many of our seminaries are cutting back on orig lang work, esp. Heb. I would recommend any person considering seminary not to take the easy route. Choose a good seminary that will make you go through a rigorous OT and NT sequence using the orig lang. Work hard on your lang. You will use them each and every week in the pulpit if you mean to be an expositor.
I would suggest that most preachers would benefit from using Owen's four-volume set where he parses virtually every word in the text for you. Yeah, it's cheating but I don't pretend to be a scholar.
Another recomm is to study modern Heb. Yeah, it's not biblical Heb but I found my inability to pronounce words made it almost impossible to read the text, even silently. You can get software to help. Who cares if you pronounce the text the way Isaiah did? I think it's silly to teach students to pronounce the way it is thought Heb was pronounced in OT times.
I'm still like a four-year-old when I try to read my OT but I'm going to stick to it. I hope that eventually I'll be able to read it like an eight-year old.

 

I've been asking this question ever since i strated attending a 'baptist' church.

i would illustrate all the types of Chirst in the OT characters (Isaac, Joseph, and Daniel come to mind) and the types of Chirst in the design, construction and service of the tabernacle.

for example, everyone is familiar with the story of Abraham and Isaac -- the emphasis is always on Abraham's faith. in addition to the 'story' illustrate how Isaac is a type of Christ: both births were announced, miraculous births, both offered as a sacrifice, Isaac disappears from the scene (Jesus ascended), Isaac reappears to meet his bride (Jesus will return to meet his), etc...