The Bible, Expository & Consecutive Preaching – Part 1

Daniel Goepfrich wrote a substantial interaction with this blog over on his site – click here to see it. His post raises some important issues, so I’ve decided to respond with a series of posts here. I’ll have to indicate which paragraphs I’m responding to each day, but I would encourage you to read his entire post first and get a feel for his ministry heart as well as his point in the post.

———————

Dear Daniel,

Thanks for giving such a lengthy interaction with the brief post I offered. And thank you for your kind words about my site. You obviously have a much appreciated ministry and I praise God for that and for your work there at Oak Tree Community Church.

I will follow your lead and reply with a post on my blog. Actually, I like to limit the length of each post and also appreciate having several days worth of writing done, so I will divide my response into several posts.

The first thing I would like to suggest is that your post doesn’t fully recognize the emphasis of my blog. Being a proponent of expository preaching does not mean always preaching straight through a Bible book. You are right that I don’t affirm skipping around hitting various topics, although I do see the value of periodic intentional “expository-topical” preaching. The issue, though, is how we define expository preaching.

I strongly resist attempts to define expository preaching as a form of preaching (as you seem to imply by the “straight through a Bible book” definition). My definition of expository preaching has no reference to form in it, only commitments regarding accurately understanding the meaning of the text, effectively communicating it with an emphasis on its relevance to the listeners and a commitment to reliance on the Holy Spirit in the process. Perhaps we’re not so far apart as you think!

Tomorrow I will continue my response to Daniel’s helpful post. (The definition of expository preaching for this site is presented here and here, as well as numerous other posts.)

2 thoughts on “The Bible, Expository & Consecutive Preaching – Part 1”

Hi Peter,

Thanks for being willing to discuss this in an open forum. I love the conversations we’re already having in the comments section on my post.

I hope that you found my post respectful (one of the commentors thought it wasn’t so much). I really do like your posts.

I’ve read your thoughts on expository preaching, and you and I are very close. My post was based more on Weirsbe’s comment that you quoted, rather than on your particular stance.

BUT, I did inaccurately tie you in with Weirsbe’s quote without double-checking myself. I have corrected my post on that sentence near the top.

I’m still looking forward to your posts and the discussion.

Hey Daniel,

Thanks for the comment. No problem at all with your post. I appreciated you commenting here to alert me to it. I prefer open and graciously robust interaction, as opposed to sniping behind peoples’ backs.

I agree that your post was more in response to the consecutive preaching proponents than to my position, but if it’s ok with you, I’d like to leave my follow-up interactions to come each day. Let me know if anything doesn’t seem respectful to you and I will change it. I think you raise some important issues and I’d like to continue the interaction over the next few days if that’s okay with you.

Thank you for making the correction to your post – much appreciated. I hope people will read your site as well as mine over the next few days and engage with these issues.

Warmly,

Peter

Daniel

August 6, 2009 at 4:10 pm

Hi Peter,

Thanks for being willing to discuss this in an open forum. I love the conversations we’re already having in the comments section on my post.

I hope that you found my post respectful (one of the commentors thought it wasn’t so much). I really do like your posts.

I’ve read your thoughts on expository preaching, and you and I are very close. My post was based more on Weirsbe’s comment that you quoted, rather than on your particular stance.

BUT, I did inaccurately tie you in with Weirsbe’s quote without double-checking myself. I have corrected my post on that sentence near the top.

I’m still looking forward to your posts and the discussion.

Peter Mead

August 6, 2009 at 6:12 pm

Hey Daniel,

Thanks for the comment. No problem at all with your post. I appreciated you commenting here to alert me to it. I prefer open and graciously robust interaction, as opposed to sniping behind peoples’ backs.

I agree that your post was more in response to the consecutive preaching proponents than to my position, but if it’s ok with you, I’d like to leave my follow-up interactions to come each day. Let me know if anything doesn’t seem respectful to you and I will change it. I think you raise some important issues and I’d like to continue the interaction over the next few days if that’s okay with you.

Thank you for making the correction to your post – much appreciated. I hope people will read your site as well as mine over the next few days and engage with these issues.

Warmly,

Peter