| | Some people have accused me of favoring expository preaching because I am gifted in that way—that I prefer it because I can do it well. I had to stop and think about that because I do believe that one area in which I need to grow as a person is finding that balance of strongly affirming what I believe is true while openly accepting those who differ. I don't want to demean, devalue, or discourage people in their search for truth, even if I presently disagree with them. This is especially so because I have not "arrived"—no one does this side of eternity—and so have often been proven wrong.
So I had to seriously consider whether I prefer expository preaching because I am gifted in that way. But after much thought, I have concluded that I do not prefer it because it is in line with my gifting, but rather because it is better than what else passes for preaching in too many of today's pulpits. There are two main reasons for this: (1) the nature of my gifting is more narrow than the category of expository preaching, and (2) the nature of the Bible is most conducive to a form of proclamation that explains its contents and then steps back to allow the content of the Word to do the work—namely, exposition.
First, the nature of my gifting is not primarily in expository preaching. My gifting is broadly in teaching and preaching, but more specifically in exegetical preaching and teaching. Now there is risk here of driving too much of a distinction between exegetical and expositional. At their core, they mean roughly the same thing: to explain the text. In my view, however, the slight nuance to exegetical preaching is that it follows the form of the text in the way that careful and critical students follow the text as the are studying it—"doing exegesis"—perhaps for papers or personal edification, not just preaching. Some preachers are able to do expository preaching—that is, they explain and proclaim the meaning of the biblical text—while having great freedom to vary from the form of the text itself. I was greatly impressed by the speaker who came with Soul Survivor from the UK to speak at Flood years ago. At the end of his sermon, he pulled together various parts of the text in a very compelling way. I think of my friend, Dr. Glen Scorgie, who just this week preached on a single verse! Men like him can preach on two lines of poetry or wisdom literature with ease. Some preachers tell stories as part of the explanation of the text, or pull multiple key texts together to treat a topic. All of that requires a breadth of creativity and a knowledge of the whole Bible that I struggle to find. I do best with texts that are narrative or didactic, because I like to follow the form of the text when I preach. But that is not to say I do not appreciate good expository preaching that varies from the style in which I am most comfortable. In fact, I love it. I love to hear preachers accurately and passionately explain the text of Scripture in new and fresh ways. As I learn more and develop my own gifts, I am beginning to recognize that I am drawn not to a particular preaching style, but to a particular preaching substance. Am I compelled by the preachers accurate and passionate explanation of the Scripture? When I reflect on that, I cannot conclude that I prefer expository preaching primarily because of the nature of my gifting.
Second, the nature of the Bible is most conducive to expository preaching. Expository preaching is the impassioned proclaiming of the text of Scripture for the sake of glorifying God through the saving of souls and the sanctifying of saints. By its very nature, the Word demands nothing less this kind of proclamation: it is God's self-revelation, it is God-breathed, and it is the vocabulary of the Holy Spirit by whom God works in the world and in the lives of men. Any preaching that falls short of or attempts to augment the accurate and passionate explaining of the very words that God has used gets in the way of God's will. Perhaps worse yet are the implications: preaching that falls short of explaining the words of the Bible imply that God's self-revelation is unnecessary for understanding God and for life change; while preaching that attempts to augment the explaining of the words of the Bible imply that God's self-revelation is insufficient. Ultimately, the issue of how to use the Word of God preaching comes down to one of ministry philosophy: Do we believe that the goal is to convict the sinner, comfort the afflicted, and change the world? Then we will preach from the Bible the Christian principles we think will achieve those ends. Or do if we believe the goal is to know God, and that the Bible was given firstly to reveal God? Then we will make every effort to accurately explain the whole counsel of God and get out of the way. John Piper does a better job of explaining this part than I probably will, so let me end my commending to you a few messages (with some fairly provocative titles) that he has given on the topic.The Place of Preaching in Worship - audio | transcript
The Guilt of Giving Part of God's Counsel - audio | transcript
Why Expository Preaching is Particularly Glorifying to God - audio | transcript If you can only listen to or read one, choose the last one. And if you take the time to listen to or read those messages, I would be interested in hearing your thoughts and discussing with you. Please leave me a comment. |
| | Posted 11/28/2007 2:00 PM - 64 Views - 4 eProps - 3 comments
- recommend
  - recs0
- share
- email
 - sent0
|
this is why i love nick. btw, i didn't actually read this entry really yet. i will later perhaps!
