First of all, thanks for your post. I heartily agree with everything that you and Dr. Mohler have said regarding expository preaching, but I have a question.

When someone asks “what do you mean by ‘expository preaching?’”, the typical response is something along the lines of “well, it simply means systematically explaining the text”. Obviously there is more that could be said, but for the sake of this discussion, I will leave it at that.

Could you enumerate on what it means to “explain”. I know that sounds silly, but throughout Christian history, it seems that have been various ‘versions’ or ‘types’ of expository preaching.

Allow me to illustrate my question with this example. These are not criticisms, just the observations that have led me to this question:

1. Dr. Macarthur is well known for his technical exposition of the literal text. It is very hermeneutic-oriented. When listening Dr. Macarthur, one can expect to hear much of the source texts to be give their literal interpretation. Also, his exposition is a contextually exegetical one. He is very good at setting up the historical context in which the text was written. In short, simply explaining what the text actually says, as it was written.

2. I read a sermon by Jonathan Edwards the other day on Genesis 39:12 “And he left his garment in her hand, and fled, and got him out”. Edwards briefly the gives the narrative of Joseph’s situation, and then spends the next 20 pages explaining Sin, Temptation, and Deliverance. He does occasionally give reference to the original language, but for the most part, he just takes something that is thematically represented in the text, and exhausts the subject. I think it must also be observed, that many of these older puritan sermons, were absolutely super-saturated with rich doctrinal content (or at least it seems that way today, looking back). After Edwards preached this sermon, his congregation may not have known all of the historical and grammatical context of Genesis 39:12, but they absolutely walked away have a better understanding of the doctrine of Sin, Temptation, and Deliverance, and from a sound Calvinistic perspective, no less.

It just seems that, in the second case, there are not many of the qualities or traits present that, we would use today to characterize faithful “expository” preaching. Yet at the same time, if one were to preach on Genesis 39:12, and give technical exposition (like Dr. Macarthur), without explaining to your congregation in great detail the nature of Sin and Temptation (as Edwards did), they would be remiss. The danger in the latter approach, is that one would be more prone to take liberty with the text. There is more of a chance that one will say something that the text is simply not saying.

In first case, the exposition is textually driven by a systematic, literal, hermeneutical, exegetical interpretation. In the second case, the exposition is faithfully constrained to a specific text, but it is more of a doctrinal exposition, drawn from the text.

I find this to be quite common in many older, puritan sermons. Jeremiah Burroughs preached on Isaiah 66:2 “For all those things hath mine hand made, and all those things have been, saith the LORD: but to this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word.” He goes on the exposit what it means for the believer to fear the Word, but without any real exegesis. Its almost like an NIV version of expository preaching. But again, if one preached on that passage, and set up the historical context, and explained the meaning of Hebrew, but didn’t spend time on what it means for God’s people to fear His Word, you would have missed a large part of the “point” of the passage (or so it seems).

Anyways, I know your at Shepherd’s right now, so it won’t hurt my feelings if you don’t get back to me, but I would love to hear your thoughts on this.

The above message on the call for expository preaching from the pulpit is right on target. People need to hear what God has to say to us through His Word.

The idea that most people don’t expect to hear exposition
from the Bible in evangelical churches is sad but true.
God has called us to preach the Word in season and out of season. Dr. John MacArthur wrote in his book, Ashamed of
the Gospel, “The only hope is a return to Scripture and
sound doctrine.”

Thank you for posting this synopsis of Dr. Mohler’s message. I honestly don’t know how you are able to take such good notes and summarize a powerful message in the way you did. Your service to us is much appreciated!

I sure hope your ministry along Nate B. continues for a long time so that many more preachers can benefit from your work.

Also, if you ever have a chance, I would love it if you could email me some tips on taking notes on a sermon like you are able to do. I could use all the help you have to offer…

My heart was moved to desire more obedience to our God who speaks to us NOW in His Word as He did in ages past.