Acts 21:31-22:21

Exegetical vs Expository Teaching/Preaching

Hermeneutics joining forces with Homiletics

both Exegetical vs Expository Teaching/Preaching require (should require) proper hermeneutics

Expository Preaching usually adds homiletics to the mix.

• exegetical method focuses on teaching and explaining the text verse by verse, there can be hours of explanation with no point in mind, no goal)
• expository method adds a desired goal or action point to the hearer, the hearer is expected to respond to a truth and repent.

I am

1. attempting to use strengths of exegetical teaching
2. adding expository preaching by using homiletics to identify an principle or concept in the text, 
3. converting it into an action point for contemporary value and 
4. exhorting the hearer to respond to it
5. all while attempting to allow for conversation around the action point

introduce EXEGESIS and it’s purpose in bible study.

ex gesis (lead out of)

result of proper hermeneutics when used to prepare message to speak/teach

(do it first yourself, then repeat the results of process to others)

study	style
single pericope	explain the text
historical, grammatical, literary	collection of exegetical facts with loose connection
	pericope provides flow of delivery
	scripture cross references
	proclaim
seek the truth	at level of the exegete
	deeper, more accurate understanding

Rev 3:20

Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with that person, and they with me.

is written to churches, not individuals (this verse is often used in evangelical context but has nothing to do with an individuals response to the gospel

(Jesus calls individuals to come and follow Him. Jesus tells John to write a letter to the seven churches in Asia to remind them to let Him in to their fellowship and activities).  This misapplication has led to the “invite Jesus into your heart and be saved” doctrine.

Lets look at  Luke 15:11-32 Prodigal Son Story

• read the verses as a historical narrative at first
• establish surrounding facts that give us insight into the meaning of many of the characters, their actions, their words, thoughts, etc
  • who is the writer, who is being written to and for what purpose
  • jewish culture and family structure
  • jewish thinking (especially concerning inheritance and clean/unclean laws)
  • meaning of sin
  • dynamic between father to each son, and son to son
  • scripture cross references that help illuminate the emerging ideas and principals
• look back and re-examine the text in light of the supporting information
  • find lesson on repentance
  • find lesson on jealousy
  • find a lesson on forgiving nature of loving father

Pros and Cons to the Exegetical method

Pros	Cons
high view of scripture	risk of academic delivery
values truth in preaching above opinion	points made can be reliant upon “hair-splitting”
values context of scripture	teacher/preacher centered delivery

introduce expository preaching

exposition = a comprehensive description and explanation of an idea or theory.

result of proper homiletics when used to prepare message to speak/teach

(homily = a religious discourse that is intended primarily for spiritual edification rather than doctrinal instruction; a sermon.)

(collate the presentation/illustrations first yourself, then repeat the results of process to others)

study	style
single pericope	turn text into a topic/sermon
historical, grammatical, literary, homiletic	intro/outline/conclusion with central unifying theme
	anecdotes and quotes
	proclaim, exhort, confront, encourage
seek truth and meaning	at level of hearer
	understanding, & application

Lets look at  Luke 15:11-32 Prodigal Son Story

Theme: the Father forgives

• we are loved
  • insights from jewish family structure
• we rebel
  • insights from jewish food law
• we repent, return, and are received
  • insights from verses, examples, etc

Pros and Cons to expository method

Pros	Cons
high view of scripture	risk of reduction of scripture to concepts, ideas
values truth	risk of manipulation of scripture to support theme
values application of truth in life of hearer	relies on persuasiveness of preacher for effective exhortation

I taken seminary courses in hermeneutics and homiletics and find they dovetail extraordinarily well.
(i would not want one without the other)

while hermeneutics with homiletics is still great,

homiletics without hermeneutics is dangerous.

i.e. proper study method with topic preparation is still beneficial, but topic preparation without proper study method is dancing on the edge of a cliff.

My goal is to pass on the skills of hermeneutics, proper study methods, to everyone here, by modeling and describing it in the discussion, but to take it beyond the scope academia by incorporating a homiletic element … application.

This means:

1. applying all the hermeneutical methods to scripture, with the expected results
2. determining an underlying concept or principle in it’s historical context (i.e. first century action point)
3. pulling the action point forward into our contemporary life and exhorting the hearer to use it.

we will read the verses first, then go back and discuss the process as well as the conclusion of the hermeneutical principle and application 

lets dive in:

31 While they were seeking to kill him, a report came up to the commander of the Roman cohort that all Jerusalem was in confusion.

32 At once he took along some soldiers and centurions and ran down to them; and when they saw the commander and the soldiers, they stopped beating Paul.

over 1000 roman soldiers in the Antonio Fortress build right next to the Temple by Herod the Great.

each centurion taken means 100 soldiers taken as well, plus the extras grabbed along the way

33 Then the commander came up and took hold of him, and ordered him to be bound with two chains; and he began asking who he was and what he had done.

34 But among the crowd some were shouting one thing and some another, and when he could not find out the facts because of the uproar, he ordered him to be brought into the barracks.

too much noise and disagreement to get a clear answer

35 When he got to the stairs, (of the Antonio fortress)  same stairs and platform that Jesus and Pontus Pilate stood on before the mob) he was carried by the soldiers because of the violence of the mob;

36 for the multitude of the people kept following them, shouting, “Away with him!”

jewish mob is violent enough to still be grabbing at Paul through the soldiers so that they had to carry him through the mob)

Away with him (Aire auton). The very words used by the mob to Pilate when they chose Barabbas in preference to Jesus (Luke 23:18, Aire touton). He will hear it again from this same crowd (Acts 22:22). It is the present imperative (aire) as in Luke 23:18, but some may have used the urgent aorist active imperative as also in the case of Jesus John 19:15, āron, āron

37 ¶ As Paul was about to be brought into the barracks, he said to the commander, “May I say something to you?” And he *said, “Do you know Greek?

38 “Then you are not the Egyptian who some time ago stirred up a revolt and led the four thousand men of the Assassins out into the wilderness?”

referring to a rebellion that took place three years earlier, where there was nearly an overthrow of Jerusalem by an Egyptian Jew who claimed to be Messiah.

39 But Paul said, “I am a Jew of Tarsus in Cilicia, a citizen of no insignificant city; and I beg you, allow me to speak to the people.”

what does being a jew of Tarsus have to do with answering the Roman’s question ?

(born in Tarsus, jewish culture, greek city, Roman government = Roman citizenship and privileges)

40 When he had given him permission, Paul, standing on the stairs, motioned to the people with his hand; and when there was a great hush, he spoke to them in the Hebrew dialect, saying,

imagine what the Roman officer is thinking: 

he has a potential riot on his hands

instigator of this riot is now speaking in a language I dont understand 

they stopped yelling for execution, maybe this will work out ?

if I mishandle this, I will be executed 

Acts 22:1 ¶“Brethren and fathers, hear my defense which I now offer to you.”

brothers and fathers was considered a formal and respectful address (same intro we see Stephen use in Acts 7:2, for which Paul, as Saul was present to see him stoned to death)

word translated “defense” here is ἀπολογίας (apologia) from which we get apologize 

is Paul saying “Let me say I’m sorry” ?

no, because the word means “to explain” or “offer a defense”

2 ¶ And when they heard that he was addressing them in the Hebrew dialect, they became even more quiet; and he *said,

3 ¶ “I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city, educated under Gamaliel, strictly according to the law of our fathers, being zealous for God just as you all are today.

trained under the great teacher Gamaliel since I was 12 years old, here in Jerusalem, groomed to be a Pharisee.

4 “I persecuted this Way to the death, binding and putting both men and women into prisons,

persecuted word here means to “hunt down like animals”

what is this “way” he refers to ?

5 as also the high priest and all the Council of the elders can testify. From them I also received letters to the brethren, and started off for Damascus in order to bring even those who were there to Jerusalem as prisoners to be punished.

(punished means killed)

6 ¶ “But it happened that as I was on my way, approaching Damascus about noontime, a very bright light suddenly flashed from heaven all around me,

7 and I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me?’

8 “And I answered, ‘Who are You, Lord?’ And He said to me, ‘I am Jesus the Nazarene, whom you are persecuting.’

9 “And those who were with me saw the light, to be sure, but did not understand the voice of the One who was speaking to me.

10 “And I said, ‘What shall I do, Lord?’ And the Lord said to me, ‘Get up and go on into Damascus, and there you will be told of all that has been appointed for you to do.’

11 “But since I could not see because of the brightness of that light, I was led by the hand by those who were with me and came into Damascus.

12 ¶ “A certain Ananias, a man who was devout by the standard of the Law, and well spoken of by all the Jews who lived there,

13 came to me, and standing near said to me, ‘Brother Saul, receive your sight!’ And at that very time I looked up at him.

14 “And he said, ‘The God of our fathers has appointed you to know His will and to see the Righteous One and to hear an utterance from His mouth.

15 ‘For you will be a witness for Him to all men of what you have seen and heard.

16 ‘Now why do you delay? Get up and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on His name.’

17 ¶ “It happened when I returned to Jerusalem and was praying in the temple, that I fell into a trance,

18 and I saw Him saying to me, ‘Make haste, and get out of Jerusalem quickly, because they will not accept your testimony about Me.’

19 “And I said, ‘Lord, they themselves understand that in one synagogue after another I used to imprison and beat those who believed in You.

20 ‘And when the blood of Your witness Stephen was being shed, I also was standing by approving, and watching out for the coats of those who were slaying him.’

21 “And He said to me, ‘Go! For I will send you far away to the Gentiles.’”

points about his testimony, his witness.

1. does not get into theological issues, he relates his personal experience
2. spends small amount of time with pre-conversion, most time spent on post-conversion
3. his testimony is received right up until he uses a bad word, gentile.  He is still trying to get jews to accept his testimony even after God has told him they will not.
   1. he has a dream to witness to jews
   2. he has been told by God, they will not accept him
   3. he is warned that persecution awaits him if he goes
   4. he goes and is persecuted

Who wrote Acts ?

• Luke

Who was he writing to and for what purpose ?

• Theophilus

Acts 1:1 ¶ The first account I composed, Theophilus, about all that Jesus began to do and teach,

Acts 1:2 until the day when He was taken up to heaven, after He had by the Holy Spirit given orders to the apostles whom He had chosen.

Acts 1:3 To these He also presented Himself alive after His suffering, by many convincing proofs, appearing to them over a period of forty days and speaking of the things concerning the kingdom of God.

Acts 1:4 Gathering them together, He commanded them not to leave Jerusalem, but to wait for what the Father had promised, “Which,” He said, “you heard of from Me;

Acts 1:5 for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.”

Acts 1:6 ¶ So when they had come together, they were asking Him, saying, “Lord, is it at this time You are restoring the kingdom to Israel?”

Acts 1:7 He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority;

Acts 1:8 but you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth.”

What is the main point of this passage?

• passage is about Paul’s testimony in face of persecution
• backdrop of warnings of what awaited him (makes us question “is this consequence for disobedience”)
  1. was he participating in God’s perfect will or permissive will ?
  2. does persecution mean that a believer is outside of God’s will ?
  3. should Paul have stopped his testimony before mentioning gentiles ?

What is the principle (action point) ?

How does it carry forward into our lives ?