Expository Preaching in the Crosshairs

My good friend and co-pastor Scott Hill has kept me up to date with the questions that David Carlson is asking about expository preaching. I have read through David's posts and believe that his problem with EP is that he really doesn't understand the problem the church is facing. David, if you read this post, I want you to know that I am not trying to belittle your concerns or twist your words. So, if you feel that I have misrepresented you in any way please feel free to set the record straight.

Now as for my review of his posts, I was struck by David's propositional statements and questions like these:

• The argument for accurately handling the Word of God (an excellent argument) instead bogs down into arguments about methods.
• So why do the EP Cultists hate drama and visuals and all that is something other than Expository Preaching?
• If the bible uses metaphors and images to teach, why should not our preaching?
• If the bible uses a narrative format to teach about the journey, why is that forbidden in our preaching?
• Now, I like EP, but perhaps we should use the bible as an example of what good teaching can be, and not lump drama, dance and everything but EP into the heresy pile.

But as a card-carrying member of David's so-called Cult of EP, I find that his interpretation of our positions on worship, EP, music, visuals, and drama to be a thousand miles away from the truth.

Seemingly, David reads statements like Article IV of T4G or a quote from Pulpit Live and practices a little eisegesis of his own. Let me illustrate.

David implies that Article IV of the T4G statement condemns methods of communication other than EP within the church. But in reality the article says nothing about about methods. Nothing. It simply says that expository preaching should not be marginalized or neglected. Here read it for yourself:
We affirm the centrality of expository preaching in the church and the urgent need for a recovery of biblical exposition and the public reading of Scripture in worship. We deny that God-honoring worship can marginalize or neglect the ministry of the Word as manifested through exposition and public reading. We further deny that a church devoid of true biblical preaching can survive as a Gospel church.

David then quotes this from Dr. MacArthur: I have often spoken out against all the pragmatic and "seeker-sensitive" approaches to contemporary worship because they tend to diminish the proper place of preaching and replace it with quasi-spiritual forms of sheer entertainment (music, comedy, drama, and whatnot). Any trend that threatens the centrality of God's Word in our corporate worship is a dangerous trend. (from Pulpit Live)

For some reason David calls Dr. MacArthur's wisdom nonsense. He actually used the words "bunk" and "balderdash." I say, "Yikes!" Notice that Dr. MacArthur's concern is with EP being deminshed or replaced. His problem is not primarily with other methods of communication or worship; His concern is churches marginalize or cease from using expository preaching.

David also quoted a paragraph from 9Marks. David then says that the paragraph says that visuals are unbiblical. Really? Here, read the paragraph for yourself:"Why don't we just quit preaching? Considering the widespread popularity of engaging anecdotes and vivid vignettes, wouldn't it be more effective to simply tell a few captivating stories on Sunday Morning? And why think specifically about expositional preaching - that brand so often associated with excruciating boredom and half-empty pews? In our fast paced society of sports tickers and sound bite infotainment, can we really expect anyone to have the patience for a serious exposition of an ancient text? In an age that has developed a pungent distaste for the exclusivity of religious truth, how can the authoritative tone of expositional preaching hold any promise at all? In a voyeuristic culture inundated with glossy magazines and risqué sitcoms, maybe pastors would be wise to modernize - quit the text-centered approach and accommodate to our culture's predilection for the visual. So… what do you think? Why preach?"

Would someone please show me where this paragraph claims that "the use of visuals in some way makes the sermon unbiblical"? Of course it doesn't. The paragraph is concerned with pastors who would "quit the text-centered approach." Again the problem is not what is being done (the use of visuals and drama and such) but what is not being done -- Expository Preaching.

Maybe David is not aware of the mass evacuation of expositors from the pulpits. David was not in chapel with me ten years ago at NOBTS when a seminary student said from the podium, "We need to replace the pulpit with the couch." Yes, the student was a pyschology major. And that philosophy of ministry has overcome thousands of churches now. In fact, many pulpit search committees are more concerned with a preachers marketing skills, counseling skills, and buisness skills than his theology.

And, one last quote for now, one that just ticked me off a little was when David said, "Method does not equal Message. But in the Cult of EP, it does." Really? David, do you really believe that the men like these one's you have alluded to and quoted believe that EP is the message of the gospel? Do you believe MacArthur, Dever, Piper, Sproul, Mohler, and others are more concerned about EP than about the gospel? Do you really believe that they think that visual aids and music and drama are unbiblical, heretical practices? Have you ever read MacArthur's book on expository preaching?

I know that you have not. I don't think you are the kind of person to so boldly misrepresent these men of God. I think you just simply don't know what you are talking about when it concerns the issue of EP and the attack upon it in this generation. I am glad indeed that you are asking questions, but I hope you will take a friendly rebuke when I say that you have grossly misinterpreted the quotes you have given in your posts. You have put words into people's mouths who have said more, written more, and even taught more on this subject than you ever will. I would recommend that you set the record straight, apologize to these men, and join what you call the Cult of EP. We will welcome you and count it a blessing to have another man who believes that the greatest thing we can ever do is communicate what God has said through the method that He has ordained as His primary vehicle of delivering the Gospel - the preaching of His Word. (Romans 10:14)

BTW, read more from the 9Marks article. Notice the question at the bottom that I put in red.

What are the different kinds of preaching?
The Definitions

• Anecdotal – a sermon in which the preacher primarily tells engaging stories with amoral lesson.
• Biographical – a sermon in which the preacher traces the life of a biblical character and draws contemporary moral implications.
• Topical – a sermon that has a topic in mind prior to consulting the text, and then searches for one or more biblical texts that address the topic chosen beforehand.
• Textual – a sermon that refers often to a particular biblical text, but does not take the main point of the text as its own.
• Expositional – a sermon which takes the point of the text as the point of the sermon.

The Details

• The content of expositional preaching is the true Word of God. An exposition of Scripture simply seeks to uncover, explain, and apply the divinely intended meaning of the text.

• The context of expositional preaching is the pure church of God. The local church is God’s primary receptacle for His preached Word. This kind of preaching will prove itself relevant when the local community of believers backs it up with lifestyles marked by holiness, joy, and selfless service.
  

• The goal of expositional preaching is for the people of God to hear and heed the Word of God.In this sense, expositional preachers are modern day prophets, servingmerely as conduits through which the Word of God may flow into the peopleof God in order to do the work of God in them.
  

The Dangers

• Topical Preaching

• The preacher is never surprised or thereby challenged by the text, but simply ends up studying and preaching on his own favorite topics. For I have not hesitated to proclaim to you the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:27).
  

• Therefore, the congregation never grows past the knowledge or maturity level of the preacher. The unfolding of your Word gives light; it gives understanding to the simple (Ps 119:130).
  

• Anecdoctal Preaching

• The congregation may go away entertained, but will they go away having been fed from the Word of God? Man does not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God (Matt 4:4).
  

• Large numbers may be attracted and entranced, but do the anecdotes have the sanctifying, transforming power that people need for growth in their personal discipleship? Sanctify them by your truth; your Word is truth (John 17:17).

The Difference

• Pastoral authority is directly related to authorial intent. The preacher only has authority from God to speak as His ambassador as long as he remains faithful to convey the divine Author’s intentions.
  

• This means that the further the preacher strays from preaching the intention of the text, the further his divine blessing and God-given authority are eroded in the pulpit.
  

• Expositional preaching is the only kind of preaching that, by definition, ensures the agenda of the sermon is determined by the agenda of the text.
  

• Therefore, a long-term commitment to expositional preaching is the most helpful way for a preacher to discipline himself to remain faithful to God’s Word over a lifetime ofministry.
  

Does a commitment to expositional preaching mean that I should never preach other kinds of sermons?
No. Topical and biographical sermons still have value. It is sometimes helpful to address a certain topic by culling and presenting biblical information. Additionally, it is sometimes instructive to study the life of a biblical character and draw practical implications for Christians today. The point is that as a consistent diet expositional preaching is most healthy for both the preacher and the congregation.

!!!!The previous is not even the whole article from the 9Marks website... good stuff, is it not!!!!

Whoa! David, I think you better stop your posting, click here and read this entire article from 9Marks and then rethink the attacks you have made on Biblical preachers.

P.S. I am absolutely shocked at a guy named "Pastor Rod" who said, "Expository preaching actually robs the Bible of its authority." What is up with these guys? Where do they come up with this stuff?