What happened to expository preaching

Thanks! Not many want to hear more of them...

Go to this link: http://www.esnips.com/web/PastorGarysMessages

 

Buck, you hit the nail on the head.

 

Sister Ann wrote, in response to may statement:

Colossians 3:1-3 says so.

"If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God" (Colossians 3:1-3).

Verse 1 says the believer is - right now - risen with Christ. That connects with the idea that the believer is a new creature - the old things are over, and all things have become new (see II Cor. 5:17).

The natural (old) man can be offended. The new man cannot.

Verse 2 says that, since we're risen with Christ, and are, therefore, new creations in Him, we're to set our minds on heavenly things, not earthly things. Folks who are focused on heavenly things do not take up offenses against others.

Verse 3 says that we are dead to the old life, and, therefore, anything that goes with it, including taking up offenses towards others.

When we take up offenses, it's because we're too alive to our old nature, rather than being dead to it. When we're Spirit-filled, we're totally dead to the old life, the old nature, the old man, and, therefore, it is impossible to offend us.

Verse 5, 8, & 9 continue the idea, culminating in verse 10, where we're reminded that, as believers, we - "...have put on the new [man], which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him" (Col. 3:10).

Jesus was not offended like we are - he became our offense (sin), but he never took up a offense against anyone.

Hope this helps...

 

Can anyone tell me why a textual sermon is not expository? Can anyone tell me why a topical sermon is not expository?

Different syle, maybe, but can be quite expository.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Sister Ann,

OK - let's look at it again.

1. I must apologize - it appears that I haven't made myself clear. You misunderstand my position - I did NOT say it is impossible for a believer to be offended. I said it is impossible to offend a Spirit-filled believer.

There's big difference there. I'm not sure why you might have thought I said differently - I thought I made that clear. If not, please forgive my mistake.

A believer can take up an offense against another person, but he can't do so and be Spirit-filled at the same time. Why else would Paul warn Christians against the danger of it, and specifically warn them/us by saying "Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice" (Ephesians 4:31)? All of these are ways in which we can take up an offense against another.

2. The Apostle Paul wrote with reference to the eating of meat sacrificed to idols being a stumbling block to certain fellow Christians. Writing to and about fellow Christians, he makes it clear that a Christian CAN take up an offense against another person:

"Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend" (I Cor. 8:13).

3. Even Jesus even says it is possible for a believer to take up an offense against another, and gives instruction as to what we're to do when we know someone has done so toward us:

"Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee; Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift" (Matt. 5:23-24).

4. Further, Jesus says, in Mark 11:25-26, that it IS possible for us to have "ught" (ie, an offense) against another, and what we're to do about it:

"And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have ought against any: that your Father also which is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses. But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses."

5. The Apostle Paul warns the Hebrew Christians of bitterness, which is a result of taking up an offense against another person, and that it actually defiles us, spiritually:

"Looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble [you], and thereby many be defiled (Hebrews 12:15). Apparently, this was a common problem among the Hebrew believers.

So -

1. It IS possible for a believer to take up an offense towards another person.

and

2. It is not possible for us to be right with God when we do (ie, Spirit-filled - see I Corinthians Chapter 13).

and

3. When we do take up an offense against another, we can't be right with God until we forgive that person and make things rights.

I hope this helps...raying:

 

Sister Ann,

You said -

I'm sorry - there is a vast difference between the filling of the Holy Spirit and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

You need to do some serious study on the Doctrine of the Holy Spirit - He comes to indwell every believer at the point of salvation: "Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and [that] the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?" (I Corinthians 3:16)

However, the Holy Spirit does not always fill (ie, control) us at all times, else why would the Apostle Paul, writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, command us to be filled in Ephesians 5:1: "...but be filled with the Spirit"???

 

Sister Ann,

You state -

Are you saying that the filling of the Holy Spirit and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit are the same thing?

 

Back to the topic:

Can anyone tell me why a textual sermon is not expository? Can anyone tell me why a topical sermon is not expository?

Different syle, maybe, but can be quite expository.

Cheers,

Jim

 

I think both can be expository - I just prefer going verse-by-verse through books and do my exposition that way, rather than doing an exposition based on a topic.

For example, an expositional message could be made on, say, the difference between the filling of the Holy Spirit and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. :smilewinkgrin:

 

You've not offended me, you've confused me. If you've tried to offend me, you've failed.

I've made it very clear that there is a difference between the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, which is a one-time vent that God does when we get saved, and the infilling of the Holy Spirit, which is a repeated even that occurs when we confess and repent of known sin, then ask God to re-fill us (ie, take control) again of our lives.

You've made it sound like the two are one and the same, and that confuses me.

Answer my question, and I'll answer yours, for on your answer hinges anything else I might say on the subject.

I repeat: Are you saying that the filling of the Holy Spirit and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit are the same thing?

 

I guess it depends on which definitions you use for textual and topical. If I preach on a topic, it generally deal with one passage in particular and develop it in an expository manner.

There are some many definitions flying around out there about what is expository and what is not that it sometimes creates confusion.

 

According to the definition given here, Mr. Spurgeon was not an expository preacher. His sermons were filled with anecdotes, stories and even jokes,,yes, our pure Mr. Spurgeon told jokes from the pulpit.

Stories help to relate the message and do not diminish the expository portion of the sermon. Illustrations are the windows to the preaching of the word.

My point is that some are critical of other preachers because they don't waste a whole year trying to teach through a book of scripture. I can't imagine spending much sermon time on a series of begats!

Cheers,

Jim

 

Spurgeon was unique for sure. Yet no one questions the power of his sermons. I agree with you about stories and illustrations. I good book on the effective use of illustration is "Using Illustrations to Preach with Power" by Bryan Chapell.

I have never seen preaching through a book or portion of a book as a waste of time. I find that it helps keep the congregation focused on the main idea of the whole book and how all the different arguments relate together. For example 1 Peter is primarily about Christian suffering. And it is wonderful to see how all of the topics he covers relate to that theme.

 

You are right. Mr. Spurgeon said that he could not preach through a book.