What happened to expository preaching

I don't think that's the reason.

When I was in seminary during the 1970s, I saw the shift occurring.

There was a change in attitude among the churchgoers, or at least homiletics professors ASSUMED there was a change in attitude. Rather than expositing the Word - explaining what it meant and applying it for the purpose it was written - there was a belief among key homiletics professors that Christians didn't necessarily care so much about what the Bible was actually saying. They were more concerned with how to "live the Christian life." As a result, the key question preachers were answering about a passage was not "what does this mean" but "so what?" - even if it was the type of passage that was more doctrinal than practical.

This lead to a type of exposition which was, in my opinion, somewhat shallow.

Fortunately, not every seminarian pays that much attention to their homiletics professors.

 

It is obvious that you don't get out much. I can assure you that KJV preachers are not the only ones who preach expository. messages.

If I were to follow your example of evidence by anecdote I have found that those who are not KJV are more likely to preach an expository message.

However, I don't accept that evidence by anecdote is valid.

 

The KJVO churches I have known had little to no expository preaching.

I think the dearth of expository preaching is because of the low view of God's word that many pastors have, where the Bible becomes a prop for them to say what they want to say, and each week, they use a concordance to find a verse that has a word that they want to talk about. This was the type of preaching that people like Jack Hyles were famous for. It was an abomination.

I think expository preaching is making a comeback because of hte influence of men like John MacArthur.

 

"Topical preaching is not preaching from the Bible, but it is preaching about the Bible." ~ Dr. David Allen


There was a lie for many years that expository preaching was boring and not very practical. Harry Emerson Fosdick was the father of unbiblical and counseling type preaching. Way to many church members seek to learn how to live a good life without actually being a disciple.

In the convention there has been a very large effort to encourage churches and pastors to be disciples and return to expository preaching.

 

That is a very positive sign. I am a committed expository preaching. I may preach on a topic on a rare occasion and rarely preach a narrative style message, but I agree that the heart of Bible preaching is expository and contrary to the OP it has nothing to do with the version being used.

 

Well I would argue that expository preaching is not an earmark of fundamental churches, that is revisionism. Topical preaching is as much part of fundamental churches as anything else.

And expository preaching and believing the Bible is true, inerrant, infallible, and plenary has nothing to do with the particular translation (not all versions are translations).

 

Rev, we are on the same page here.

 

There is a price to pay for expository preaching. I've lost a few members and have fielded several complaints in the past two years. They cannot grasp the concept of preaching through books of the Bible or dealing with significant portions of scripture. They want a hogepoge type of preaching of jumping here and there. It must be full of love, avoiding the truth, and making people feel good. It's sad.

I'm not one that is going to say that any method of preaching is wrong if a man is doing what God leads him to do. But, I believe that expository preaching better exposes the people to God's word. It allows the Word to set the agenda as opposed to the pastor or worse, the congregation. Situations don't dictate the sermon but I have found that as I preach through a particular book that an uncanny thing happens. Where we are in the Bible suddenly becomes relevant to the situation, whatever that might be.

 

Happens again and again.

 

This thread proves one thing. For some no matter how you slice it, it's always about the KJV.

 

Expository preaching can be so even from a so-called topical sermon, and sometimes so-called topical sermons can be more expository than a so-called expository sermon. Don't lock yourself in or else you may also be missing the problematic areas of one's life.

Over my lifetime, I never took a year to preach through one book. I may preach a series of expository sermons going through a book, and then revert bacl to strictly topical sermons dealing with aspects of theology, spiritual values or community wants and needs and solutions.

Incidentally, I do find the KJV a valuable tool in establishing sermonic points. The language seems to lend itself to First, Secondly, Thirdly and conclusion...the old three-pont sermon.

To each his calling and expertise, and not what others may think is better.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Two famous Reformed,expository preachers, have been James Boice and Walter Chantry.Both used the NIV throughout their preaching ministries.

 

James Boice was a champion expositor indeed.

 

There are a lot of pastors, conservative pastors, who primarily preach expository sermons, who don't use the KJV. Funny, they don't have I Opinions 2:13 where it reads, "English speaking people shalt use the KJV only." Nor II Opinions 4:8 which says "Thou shalt only preach expository sermons." I guess SL must have I and II Opinions in his KJV. But, I can't find these books in my KJV.

 

Stilllearning should be still learning...

 

Stilllearning,

I don't use the KJV - I preach from the NKJV, and I preach expository sermons. Sorry to disappoint you.

 

If a pastor does a great job of topical preaching it can be an incredible task. It not only involves understanding scripture but also understanding the culture in which it is preached.

When is the last time someone heard a pastor preach on issues such as: world hunger, homelessness, genetic engineering, or affluence?

 

Yea I will stay away from the Harry Fosdick stuff and stick to the gospel.