My philosophy of preaching is to approach each sermon in an expository manner. What does that mean? “Expository preaching” is a term that is often misunderstood or misused. Someone once said to me, “I wish you preached expository sermons.” Inwardly, I was channeling Inigo Montoya and thinking of his second most famous line from The Princess Bride. “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”
The person who said this to me misunderstood expository preaching to be preaching verse-by-verse and squeezing every detail out of every word. That is one way to preach, but it is not expository preaching. That is more of what I would call a “running commentary.” It is great for amassing knowledge. It is great to show how much the preacher knows. It is less great for understanding what God is saying in a biblical text.
An expository sermon is a sermon that exposes what is in the biblical text. Said another way, the shape of the sermon should reflect the shape of the passage in content, form, and tone.
Churches that preach in an expository manner go through the Bible book-by-book, chapter-by-chapter, and even verse-by-verse…kind of. Since I preach expository sermons, I do not have to decide what I am going to preach next week. I simply pick up where I left off…kind of.
One of the key steps in developing a sermon (and a series of sermons through a book) is to determine the way the biblical author organized his writing (under the direction of the Holy Spirit). That is why all sermons are not a pre-determined number of verses. Some are multiple chapters. Some are just a few. I am looking for the unit of thought the author intended for his audience.
In some cases that thought unit is easier to decipher. In some, it is much more difficult.
This past week was difficult. One of the key markers in this section of Isaiah is when introducing a new oracle, the key phrase “An oracle concerning…” This is obviously a starting point for a unit of thought. These oracles are helping Judah to see the folly of the different nations surrounding them.
In Isaiah 17-18, which we studied this last week, chapter 18 addresses the nation/region of Cush, but does not start with Isaiah’s standard introductory phrase. Did he forget to include it?
To make matters more complicated, he starts a new oracle “concerning Egypt” in chapter 19, but in chapter 20 comes back and addresses Cush again. Egypt and Cush are neighbors (Cush being roughly equivalent to present-day Ethiopia). So, should the material regarding Cush be included with that concerning Egypt? Or should we understand the structure to follow Isaiah’s use of the key phrase introducing a new oracle? In other words, does the unit of thought start at chapter 17 and extend through chapter 18? Or is chapter 17 its own unit with a new unit starting at chapter 18 and running through chapter 20? Confused? So is everybody. Commentators are split just about evenly on the issue. Even during the week, I waffled back and forth about what I thought the thought unit was. The truth is that Isaiah makes a very smooth transition from chapter 17 to chapter 19 and 20.
If you listened to Sunday’s sermon, you will notice that I decided to include chapter 18 (concerning Cush) with chapter 17 (If you are particularly eagle-eyed, you noticed that I changed my mind from the previous week, when I listed the Scripture to be read in preparation for the next week as Isaiah 17 by itself). I tried to explain why in the sermon without the long-winded explanation included here (reminiscent of another Inigo Montya line: “Let me explain. No, there is too much. Let me sum up.“). If you were to listen to the sermon again, you might hear it differently having read this.
All of this is for the purpose of most clearly hearing from God what His message was to the original readers and how it applies to us today.