But wait a minute\u2026 is that how the New Testament presents the preaching of John? As a model for Christian<\/em> preaching? Was John a Christian? What about the preaching in the book of Acts? Wouldn\u2019t that be more likely to be called the models of Christian preaching, if any part of the New Testament presents any such \u2018model\u2019 at all?<\/p>\n It is true that many who followed Jesus were following for the wrong reasons. The end of John 6 mentions some of them. But\u2026 for all that ministry, all the Lord and John had to show for it was the 120? What about the \u201c500 brethren at once\u201d to whom the Lord showed himself (1 Cor 15.6)? I guess 380 of them were false professors? Or died between this incident and Pentecost? Or what about the disciples of John who Paul came across in Ephesus (Ac 19.1-5)?<\/p>\n This statement is just a basic error \u2013 a statement that was repeatedly made throughout the four messages of the series.<\/p>\n Is that the Biblical teaching concerning John? Well, Matthew quotes the Lord this way: \u201cAmong them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.\u201d (Mt 11.11) We could quibble here and say, \u2018See, John is just the greatest up till that time\u2026\u2019 But let\u2019s not quibble. Let\u2019s look at the whole story. Here is Luke’s version: \u201cAmong those that are born of women there is not a greater prophet<\/strong> than John the Baptist: but he that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.\u201d (Lk 7.28)<\/p>\n Luke makes the reference clear. (And it is the same gospel the series is based in!) So\u2026 is the expositor right? Was John the greatest man who ever lived?<\/p>\n You might accuse me of just picking at trifling points. Well, they are minor points of the messages to be sure. They aren\u2019t huge details in the overall scheme of the messages or the series.<\/p>\n But\u2026 they weren\u2019t just \u2018slips of the tongue\u2019. They were statements repeatedly made. The preacher obviously has these details in his head this way, even though they aren\u2019t exactly accurate.<\/p>\n And the points may be relatively minor, but they were stated in such a way as to be \u2018supporting evidence\u2019 to bolster the main point of the messages and the sermon series.<\/p>\n So\u2026 I wonder how good this expositor really is.<\/p>\n This really bothered me. In the bit where John says that Jesus will \u201cbaptize with the Holy Ghost and fire\u201d (Lk 3.16), the preacher changed the text: he made it say \u201cHoly Ghost OR<\/em><\/strong> fire\u201d. Now\u2026 there are some respected men who do take it that way. But does it bother you the same way it bothers me? In order to take it that John is saying the One to come will offer two alternatives: Spirit OR fire (\u201cturn or burn\u201d), you have to change one of the inspired words. The word kai<\/em> is never translated or<\/em> \u2013 it can be translated \u2018even\u2019 or \u2018also\u2019, but never \u2018or\u2019: mostly it is \u2018and\u2019.<\/p>\n Since some commentators do take it as presenting alternatives, I can\u2019t be too hard on this expositor on this point. But still\u2026<\/p>\n Some have described this preacher as one of the great expositors of our time. After him and one other, \u201ccrickets\u201d, some have said (meaning there is no one else after them).<\/p>\n If this is true, and if my examples of these expositional errors are accurate \u2013 maybe the reason we hear crickets after these guys is that everybody else is way ahead of them on the parade line. Maybe there is literally<\/em> no one else after them!<\/p>\n I am purposely not naming the preacher involved here. You can guess away in the comments. There is no prize if you get it right, but I will acknowledge it if the preacher and the series can be identified.<\/p>\n Expository preaching is all the rage. I remember reading one blogger in ancient internet history proclaiming that his generation would be kept from the errors of the current and preceding generations of fundamentalists by expository preaching. Well, that remains to be seen. In the meantime, certain figures are seen by many to be the paragons […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false,"jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true},"categories":[68,42],"tags":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p2fYWj-qE","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1652"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1652"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1652\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1652"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1652"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1652"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}\n
\n
Just quibbles?<\/h4>\n
One last quibble<\/h4>\n
Conclusion<\/h4>\n
![\"don_sig2\"](\"http:\/\/oxgoad.ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2010\/04\/don_sig23.png\" "\\"don_sig2\\"")
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"