Chester McCalley


What is the relationship between exegesis and exposition?
       What is Bible exposition or expository preaching?

           This article gives a method for moving from exegesis to ex-
       pository preaching. Think of a tower with several spigots: high,
       medium, and low. Exegesis is at the top; exposition is at the bot-
       tom. The exegete deals with Greek and Hebrew syntax, herme-
       neutics, theological arguments, and so forth. Exegesis (the high
       spigot) discovers the text's meaning. The pulpit is for teaching
       our congregations. A high spigot spills our exegetical work be-
       fore the congregation. The medium or low ones permit teaching
       to flow from a level more comprehensible for the flock. The ob-
       jective is to Communicate, not to drown anyone with our depth.

           A pastor should start with exegesis of the text, before seek-
       ing to communicate and illustrate it. One cannot communicate
       Bible exposition clearly and accurately without first discovering
       what the text means. A pastor must know the passage's exegetical
       truth, but should communicate that in expository words. Exegeti-
       cal study uses the high spigot, exposition opens a lower spigot.
       When pastors do not understand this--I speak as one who has
       made this mistake, and it is a mistake--they make a premature
       assessment: "I taught twenty people for six months, giving them
       good stuff! Now, we are down to two, proving how negative peo-
       ple are to doctrine." Are there people who are negative to Bible
       doctrine? Certainly, but pastors ought to go back to a checklist

1 Editor's note: This article was Chet McCalley's message to the National
       Teaching Pastors' Conference, October 8, 1990.  One week before the May,
       2000, NTPC, the Lord called Chet home. Though he is now at home with the
       Lord, we lost a good friend and an outstanding expositor.  In memory of Chet,
       we replayed the tape of his 1990 message ten years later during the first ses-
       sion of the May, 2000, NTPC. This article comes from a posthumously edited
       transcription. It is our privilege to share it with our readers.

------------------------------[PAGE BREAK]------------------------------

                              Biblical Exegesis and Exposition 3

       and ask, "Does my study move from exegesis down to expository
       teaching?" If not, we pastors certainly bear the blame. The pastor
       is responsible both for teaching the nine-year old and his parents,
       is he not? Yes, indeed, a shephard cares for lambs, not just adult

Exegesis: Exposition's Foundation

Upon what does expository teaching rest? The foundation of
       exposition is
exegesis, but what does that word mean? It is the
process of determining the meaning of a text of Scripture, the
       word of God.

           It is important to understand "determining the meaning."
       Many simply advocate reading the Bible and blindly asking,
       "How does this apply to me?" Application, though essential, is
       the last step. Moreover, one must base it upon the text's meaning
       to the original audience, in the language and the culture in which
       it was spoken. The objective meaning (apart from a reader's sub-
       jective response to it) must be the focus. Exegesis is to lead forth,
       to let the word speak for itself. Imposing a sermon on the Bible
       (not letting it speak) is
eisegesis (reading into God's word). The
       basis of exposition is the meaning that comes
from Scripture.

           The word
exegesis (or exegete) occurs six times in the New
       Testament. No lexicon or Greek dictionary determines the mean-
       ing of
exegesis. When teachers drilled us in using dictionaries, I
       asked, "How does Webster know everything?" No dictionary is
       greater than its contributors' word studies.

           To illustrate, saying "I have a
shibglub" does not many
       clues. Picture something that a pastor might have.
Context can
       eliminate many options. For example, "A
shibglub is in my
       pocket." That narrows the possibilities. A
shibglub must be small
       enough to fit in a pocket. Contextual usage defines words.
is the key! An item larger than a pocket could not be a shibglub
(unless it can come in different sizes).

------------------------------[PAGE BREAK]------------------------------

       4 CTS Journal 6 (October-December 2000)

           Next, "I took the
shibglub out of my pocket to wipe my
       forehead." Contextually it must resemble a handkerchief. These
       three uses of this word eliminate many other possibilities.
always determines meaning. The pastor's best friend is the con-
       cordance (whether on paper or in electronic form).

           His best friend is not the lexicon. Consider the word
(or exegete). Usage of this word-group in Scripture is more
       useful than any definition that a dictionary may offer. Context is
       the key. What is the Biblical concept for the word
(exhgeomai "to exegete")?

Luke 24:35

And they (began) to relate their experiences on the road and how
           He was recognized by them in the breaking of the bread.

Two disciples met Jesus on the road to Emmaus. After walk-
       ing with them, He broke bread and they recognized Him. The
began to relate something to others. The word relate is
exegete (exhgeomai). The New King James Version translates
       the word as
told: And they told about the things that had hap-
       pened on the road. . . .
The disciples began to tell or relate their
       experiences on the road and how they recognized Jesus during a
       meal. Exegesis deals with objective truth, because what they said
       was true. They began to
exegete or tell about their objective ex-
       periences. It refers to explaining objective truth.

John 1:18

No man has seen God at any time, the only begotten God who is
           in the bosom of the Father, He
has explained Him.

2 Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture citations are from the New American
       Standard Bible
(NASB), copyright 1960, 1962, 1963, 1968, 1971, 1972, 1973,
       1975, 1977, 1994 by the Lockman Foundation. Used by permission.
3 New King James Version. (Nashville: Nelson, 1982). Used by permission.

------------------------------[PAGE BREAK]------------------------------

                              Biblical Exegesis and Exposition 5

New American Standard Bible translates the verb as has
. The New King James Version assigns the meaning told
in Luke, but now uses declared in John 1:18, . . . He has declared
Did Christ give a subjective or objective explanation of the
       Father? Again, this is objective truth!

Acts 10:8

. . . and after he had explained everything to them, he sent them
           to Joppa.

An angel explained to Cornelius that he should arrange for
       Peter to meet him. Cornelius gathered like-minded men together
       after the angel
had explained [exegeted] everything to them. . . .

Acts 15:12, 14

And all the multitude kept silent, and they were listening to
           Barnabas and Paul as they
were relating what signs and won-
           ders God had done through them among the Gentiles. . . .
has related how God first concerned Himself about tak-
           ing from among the Gentiles a people for His name.

The New King James Version uses declaring and declared
for relating and related. Paul and Barnabas relate or declare (exe-
) certain facts at the Jerusalem Council (verse 12). Paul
       related objective signs and wonders? Simon Peter does likewise
       in verse 14. Peter
related/exegeted objective facts. Exegeting a
       text explains objective truth or fact.

Acts 21:19

And after he had greeted them, he (began) to relate one by one
           the things which God had done among the Gentiles through his

Again, the New King James Version uses a slightly different
       translation: . . .
he told in detail those things which God had done

------------------------------[PAGE BREAK]------------------------------

       6 CTS Journal 6 (October-December 2000)

among the Gentiles through his ministry. Paul objectively related
or told (exegeted) what God had done among the Gentiles during
       his evangelistic journeys.


Exegesis refers to the explaining, declaring, telling, or relat-
       ing of objective truth.
4 Now, what elements of exegesis are nec-
       essary for an accurate textual meaning?

Elements of Exegesis


Why should a pastor examine the Hebrew Old Testament
       and the Greek New Testament? The strongest claim made by the
       Bible is this:
Thus saith the Lord ("This is God speaking"). The
       Old Testament uses similar expressions about 3800 times. The
       reminder that "This is God's word" appears an average of four
       times per page.
5 The fact that Scripture is His word means, even
       dictates, that we ought to be careful and precise in studying it.
       Exegesis requires examining original languages.

           Helpful tools enable interpreters to know what the gram-
       mars say about biblical passages. Timothy Owings indexed eight

4 If our congregations spoke Greek and Hebrew fluently, we could communi-
       cate exegesis is the original language--as in the above examples. However,
       our congregations speak English. The form of English that they use is not the
       same as the technical vocabulary of the original language tools. Thus, we face
       a problem that is analogous to Nehemiah 8:8, where Ezra
give(s) the sense of
       the Law (written in Hebrew) to returned exiles whose Hebrew had started slip-
       ping. Although one could call the whole process
exegesis, modern parlance
exposition as to give the sense. The modern use of exegesis is narrower
       than the biblical meaning, but is not contrary to it.
5 This assumes an Old Testament with about 950 pages. Page size, print size,
       and the number of notes affect the number of pages required.

------------------------------[PAGE BREAK]------------------------------

                              Biblical Exegesis and Exposition 7

       major grammars.
6 He enables one to consult quickly even major
       grammar's analysis of a passage. For Matthew 1:1, he says,
       "MHT III 167; ROB 780, 793, 795"
7 (Moulton-Howard-Turner,
Grammar, vol. 3, page 167, and Robertson, Grammar, pages 780,
       793, and 795). Only two of the eight grammars directly refer to
       this verse. Saying, "I consulted every major grammar's analysis
       of this passage" is impressive--unless people know that this
       book exists (leaving the aura of scholarly dignity intact). Unfor-
       tunately, lack of interest caused this gem to go out of print. This
       is a tragic commentary on how few pastors now exegete.

           My first Greek class (at age seventeen) motivated me to do
       scholarly work, but to avoid parading it. Students always made it
       a point to be early to that class (a five hour course), not to get on
       the front row, but the last row. Dr. Brunner, the beginning Greek
       teacher, had been an assistant to A. T. Robertson, so no one
       wanted to answer his questions in class. He was too awe-
       inspiring. He did not need to carry a New Testament, because he
       had memorized it. Good texts, grammars, and lexical tools exist
       for the rest of us! Our congregations need teaching that results
       from solid scholarship, but we should not make our abilities seem

6 F. Blass and A. Debrunner, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and
       Other Early Christian Literature
, trans. and rev. Robert W. Funk (Chicago:
       University of Chicago Press, 1961); J. A. Brooks and C. L. Winbery,
Syntax of
       New Testament Greek
(Washington, DC: University Press of America, 1979);
       H. E. Dana and J. R. Mantey,
A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament
(New York. Macmillan, 1927); C. F. D. Moule, An Idiom Book of New Testa-
       ment Greek
(Cambridge: University Press, 1959); J. H. Moulton, A Grammar
       of New Testament Greek
; vol. 1, Prolegomena, 3d ed., by J. H. Moulton (Edin-
       burgh: Clark, 1908); vol. 2,
Accidence, by J. H. Moulton (Edinburgh: Clark,
       1929); vol. 3,
Syntax, by N. Turner (Edinburgh: Clark, 1963); and vol. 4, Style,
       by Nigel Turner (Edinburgh: Clark, 1976); A. T. Robertson,
A Grammar of the
       Greek New Testament in the Light of Historical Research
, 4th ed. (New York:
       Hodder & Stoughton, 1923); A. T. Robertson and W. H. Davis,
A New Short
       Grammar of the Greek Testament
, 10th ed. (New York: Harper, 1931); M.
Biblical Greek Illustrated by Examples, ed. and trans. Joseph Smith
       (Rome: Pontifical Bible Institute, 1963).
7 Timothy Owings, A Cumulative Index to New Testament Greek Grammars
(Grand Rapids: Baker, 1983), 13.

------------------------------[PAGE BREAK]------------------------------

       8 CTS Journal 6 (October-December 2000)

       unapproachable. Rather than intimidating the flock, we should
       challenge and equip them for the work of ministry.

       Expository preaching never implies sacrificing exegesis. For
       those who share our belief in the absolute authority of the Scrip-
       ture, the accuracy of little things argues strongly for careful study.
       The gospel record sometimes focuses on little things. Consider
       Matthew 26:16:
So from that time he (Judas) sought opportunity to
Matthew consistently uses parad@dmm@ (paradid-
, "to betray") to describe the act of Judas in betraying Jesus
       (cf. Matthew 10:4; 26:16, 21, 46; 27:3). The one who betrays (in
       Matthew) is always singular.

           After the death and resurrection of Christ, Peter makes a
       fascinating point (Acts 3:13a). He also uses
paradidwmi, but
       this passage is different. Peter preaches and says,

The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the God of our fathers,
           has glorified his servant Jesus, the one whom you (plural)
           ered up
(paradidwmi) and disowned. . . .

You delivered up is the same word, but it is a second person plural
you!8 Whereas Matthew spoke of betrayal as the singular act of
       Judas, Peter addresses the nation saying, "You (plural)." In one
       sense the act uniquely belongs to Judas, but it is also the whole
       nation's responsibility. A change to the plural reveals this. Pastors
       ought to respect the word of God, painstakingly interpreting its
       words. Many other similar examples exist,
9 so language belongs
       to the elements of exegesis.

8 English no longer distinguishes you (singular) and ye (plural), except in the
y'all. The King James Version used you (singular) and ye (plural).
9 For example, Galatians 3:16 emphasizes a singular versus a plural. Acts 2:29
       makes the point that David did not speak of himself in Psalm 16, since he was
       buried in a well-known tomb. Matthew 22:45 proves that Psalm 110 that
       son of David
is also his Lord, which invalidates a pharisaic argument against
       Christ. Small details can have major implications, because this is God's word.

------------------------------[PAGE BREAK]------------------------------

                              Biblical Exegesis and Exposition 9

Sound Hermeneutics

Although sound hermeneutics is the foundation of accurate
       exegesis, some interpretive systems distort the literal meaning.

           The most common method of destructive hermeneutics is al-
       legorizing (spiritualizing). This makes the literal secondary to the
       supposedly superior allegorical meaning. An example of this dis-
       astrous method is the
Epistle of Barnabas, a veritable loose can-
       non of speculation. He merely uses Moses as a springboard.

           Now, in that Moses said, "Ye shall not eat swine, nor an eagle,
           nor a hawk, nor a crow, nor any fish which has no scales on it-
           self," he included
three doctrines in his understanding. More-
           over he says to them in Deuteronomy, "And I will make a
           covenant of my ordinances with this people (emphasis mine)."

What are those doctrines to which the Epistle of Barnabas
refers? He introduces them with the phrase he means.

           So then the ordinance of God is not abstinence from eating, but
           Moses spoke in the spirit. He mentioned swine for this reason:
           you shall not consort,
he means, with men who are like swine
           [who forget the Lord when they have plenty to eat]. . . . "Neither
           shalt thou eat the eagle, nor the hawk, nor the kite, nor the
           crow." Thou shalt not,
he means, joint thyself to such men [who
           do not work, but steal from others (emphasis mine)]. . . .

His interpretive errors are rife. As a start, he:

           1.    denies that God literally forbade eating certain animals,
           2.    allegorizes "eating" into "associating with,"
           3.    allegorizes various animals into classes of people.

10 The Epistle of Barnabas 10:1-2, in The Apostolic Fathers, trans. Kirsopp
       Lake, LCL (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; London: Heinemann,
       1912), 2:375.
11 Ibid. 10:3-5.

------------------------------[PAGE BREAK]------------------------------

       10 CTS Journal 6 (October-December 2000)

           His approach lacks hermeneutical controls. Not only does he
       speculate about theology, but biology, "For this animal [the wea-
       sel] gives birth with its mouth."
12 We must be more careful than
Epistle of Barnabas in interpretation.

           Allegorizing is not the only type of interpretive problem. It
       is also easy to distort the historical meaning with a parallel-
       passage approach (saying, "Let's go over to this passage"). When
       Dr. Merrill Unger taught the book of Zechariah, he would not al-
       low us to use a typical Hebrew Bible. It seemed crazy to buy
       Zechariah bound separately. He said, "Read Zechariah with refer-
       ence only to Zechariah. Cross-reference is fine, but not now.
       Read it only with reference to Zechariah." This is insightful.
       Other methods try to read Ephesians into Exodus, intra-biblical
       eisegesis: reading Scripture into non-parallel Scriptures.

           Teaching emphatically from the text and emphasizing doc-
       trine eventually causes a congregation to ask, "How do you know
       that this is what it means? What is the proof? Is the whole world
       wrong and you alone are right? What says that this interpretation
       is correct? That is not the way my denomination interprets it! Are
       we not all free to interpret as we wish?" Interpreting as one
       wishes reduces God's word to a subjective, confusing thing. The
       congregation must be able to say, "I can prove what it means."
       The congregation's growth in this area is an important aspect of
       the saints being equipped to do the work of the ministry (Ephe-
       sians 4:12). How one interprets Scripture is a crucial issue.
       Again, sound hermeneutics are essential to proper exegesis.

           Recently, an unbelieving professor in Florida, made an in-
       teresting remark. He said, "I do not agree with what you believe,
       although it is what the Bible says." He is honest in this regard. As
       far as the meaning goes, people who know Greek sometimes may
       not like or believe it, but still know that this is what it says.

12 Ibid. 10:8.

------------------------------[PAGE BREAK]------------------------------

                              Biblical Exegesis and Exposition 11


The structure of Scripture is as inspired as the words of
       Scripture. Hebrew often expresses ideas in parallel lines. Though
       often missed, this structure balances thoughts and ideas against
       their counterparts. When the first line says something and the
       second (using different words) means the same thing, it is syn-
       onymous. If the second line states the opposite (posi-
       tive/negative), it is antithetic. Parallel structure is a good teaching

           Why? These structures show that the Bible has design. The
       architecture of biblical passages is a strong argument against
       various liberal schools of thought that deny its inspiration and
       inerrancy (freedom from error). The various parallel-line struc-
       tures can bolster his congregation's appreciation of biblical truth.
       Genesis 11 illustrates chiasm (sandwich parallelism). Verse 9 re-
       fers to something that verse 1 says. Verse 8 does the same for
       verse 2, and so forth. This structure repeats throughout the first
       nine verses. Is any doctrine inherent in this structure? God's
       awareness about what is happening (verse 5a) is the centerpiece.
       Liberals suggest that this structure is mere chance, as various edi-
       tors cut and paste snippets from this story and that story together.
       Did this chiasm just happen? It is time for those liberals to be-
       come serious about the Bible and to stop playing games.

       Verse 1
             Verse 2
                Verse 3a
                    Verse 3b
                   Verse 4a
                       Verse 4b
Verse 5a
          Verse 5b
                   Verse 5c
                    Verse 7a
                Verse 7b
             Verse 8
       Verse 9

------------------------------[PAGE BREAK]------------------------------

       12 CTS Journal 6 (October-December 2000)

           How could the structure of Genesis 11:1-9 reflect the unity
       of God's word any better?
13 Pastors need to use all of the tools of
       exegesis, so that their congregation's appreciation for Scripture
       will grow. We must not take it for granted. The evidences that the
       Bible is God's supernatural book for man are everywhere.

           Thus, patterns of parallelism also apply to larger contexts.
       Genesis 6:11-8:22 is a prime illustration.

       A. God resolves to destroy (6:11-13),
        B. Noah builds an ark (6:14-22),
               C. God commands men and women to enter (7:1-3),
                   D. The flood begins (7:10-12),
                       E. The flood prevails for 150 days (7:24),
                       E´. The flood recedes for 150 days (8:2-3).
                   D´. The earth dries (8:13-14),
               C´. God commands men and women to exit (8:15-19).
        B´. Noah builds an altar (8:20).
       A´. God resolves not to destroy (8:21-22).

           The centerpiece of this passage is that God remembers
       Noah. This emphasizes God's grace in the midst of judgment.
       Does Scripture teach that truth elsewhere? In the midst of divine
       wrath one regularly finds expressions of grace. Our teaching
       should reflect God's inspired structure. That is good teaching.

13 Allen P. Ross, Creation and Blessing: A Guide to the Study and Exposition
       of Genesis
(Grand Rapids: Baker, 1988). This commentary on Genesis by Al-
       len Ross emphasizes antithetic parallelism. The unity, which this reveals,
       shows that the once popular notions of the Documentary Hypothesis have
       failed. Likewise, it also is evidence against more modern schools of thought
       that also promote destructive criticism of the Bible.

------------------------------[PAGE BREAK]------------------------------

                              Biblical Exegesis and Exposition 13

           Charlie Clough has worked extensively on the structure
       form of the Psalms (lament psalms, praise psalms, and so forth).
One determines a psalm's kind by what predominates. Praise
       psalms emphasize praise. Lament psalms focus on complaint.
       Clough emphasizes, for example, that (national or individual) la-
       ment psalms usually have this order: (1) address to God, (2) la-
       ment, (3) a trust section, (4) petition, (5) praise. That structure
       appears repeatedly.

           Although Psalm 6 is unquestionably a lament of David, its
       sequence is different. This psalm turns the normal order around.
       Notice the petition (verses 4-5):
Return, O Lord, rescue my soul,
       precedes the lament in verse 6:
I am weary with my sighing.

           He placed the petition before the lament. How does one who
       is in trouble pray?
15 When mired in deep trouble, one does not
       pray: "Thou great, almighty, omniscient God, we praise Thee
       for. . . ." The emotion of the need pushes the lament (complaint)
       forward. This structure shows this Psalm's emotion. David is
       emotional; he feels it. Urgency brings it forward. Faithful exposi-
       tion must communicate David's emotion, because that is central.
       If we do not reveal the tone and the structure, we really do not

14 Charles Clough, unpublished sermon notes, Lubbock Bible Church, Lub-
       bock, TX, n.d. Published works on this topic also exist, but unfortunately, they
       tend to stray into abuses of this. Other than Clough's work, one can only make
       qualified bibliographic recommendations here. (This is similar to recommend-
       ing Francis Brown, S. R. Driver, and Charles A. Briggs,
A Hebrew and English
       Lexicon of the Old Testament
[Oxford: Clarendon, 1907]. BDB is an important
       work, but not for the theologically unstable or uninformed).
           With regard to forms in the Psalms, it is possible to give a qualified rec-
       ommendation to a basic introduction: Bernhard W. Anderson,
Out of the
       Depths, the Psalms Speak for Us Today
, rev. ed. (Philadelphia: Westminster,
       1983). He tends to do well in classifying the various Psalms and identifying
       the different sections within each psalm for making outline divisions. He does
       not explain the grammatical basis for making those divisions. Furthermore,
       one cannot recommend Anderson's interpretations of those psalms.
15 The Psalmist thought that he was going to die.

------------------------------[PAGE BREAK]------------------------------

       14 CTS Journal 6 (October-December 2000)

       preach the word; we are preaching our sermon. Sermons do not
       edify believers, but God's word does.

           Likewise the book of Acts has an undeniable structure.
       Seven times in Acts, a narrative of history precedes a summary of
       the period.
16 Each cycle covers about five years. In the beautiful
       and forceful Acts 12:20-24, Luke calmly looks back at a period
       of turmoil. For each summary (verse 24 here), ask, "Why did he
       summarize it that way? What happened that brought him to this
       summary?" Acts 12:20-24 follows:

Now he was very angry with the people of Tyre and Sidon; and
           with one accord they came to him, and having won over Blastus
           the king's chamberlain, they were asking for peace, because their
           country was fed by the king's country. And on an appointed day
           Herod, having put on his royal apparel, took his seat on the ros-
           trum and (began) delivering an address to them. And the people
           kept crying out, "The voice of a god and not of a man!" And im-
           mediately an angel of the Lord struck him because he did not
           give God the glory, and he was eaten by worms and died.
           the word of the Lord continued to grow and to be multiplied.

The word of the Lord continued to grow! Verse 24 is the
       summary, but note verse 23! God removed Agrippa, but the word
       of God continued to progress. These progress reports of Acts
       look back at the events, indicating such things as, King Agrippa
       could not stop the gospel, because the word of God moves on.

           When we miss the structure of God's word, we fail to exe-
       gete. We are preaching sermons on the text, rather than preaching
       the text itself. This ought not to be the case.

16 Acts contains seven narrative sections, each of which ends with a progress
       report. The following lists the seven sections.

       1. 1.1-2.47 3. 6.8-9.31 5. 12.25-16.5 7. 19.21-28.31
       2. 3.1-6.7 4. 9.32-12.24     6. 16.6-19.20

------------------------------[PAGE BREAK]------------------------------

                              Biblical Exegesis and Exposition 15

Determination of Theme

Another tool of exegesis is determination of theme. Every
       preacher, even those of the first century under the inspiration of
       God such as Peter,
17 has a theme. Preachers love to say certain
       things (their themes). It is such a delight to preach them. For ex-
       ample, in Acts 2:23-24, 36; 3:13-15; 4:10; and 5:3, what did Pe-
       ter love to say? "You Israelites killed him! God raised him!"
       Repeatedly, that barb comes through. Peter loves antithesis! This
       is what you did to him. This is what God the Father did. "You
       killed him. God raised him!" "Kill Him," was the verdict of
       man's court. God's court says, "Out!" and He came forth from
       the grave. Moreover, Peter loves to do that repeatedly.

           Missing the theme
of the text leads to imposing our own
onto the text. Then we do not preach the Word, we preach our
       sermons. This does not edify.

Expression or Exposition

A good definition of Bible exposition is: The skill of trans-
       lating careful exegesis into food for sheep. Scholarly work in
       exegesis is necessary, but we are not here to impress scholars. We
       have congregations that come for food. They come to grow and
       to develop. Expositional skill is taking all the technical data and
       presenting it in a form that sheep can understand.

           The pastor who knows how to feed sheep will have sheep. If
       he does not, he ought to look at one of two things. Maybe he is
       not a pastor, or maybe he needs to assume responsibility and say,
       "Perhaps, my thinking about exposition needs to change."

           Just because people come only sporadically on Sundays or
       do not return, should we suppose they are negative to doctrine?

17 This only refers to the apostles, prophets, or their close associates that God
       moved to write Scripture. No one can add books to our
God-breathed Bible.

------------------------------[PAGE BREAK]------------------------------

       16 CTS Journal 6 (October-December 2000)

       They may be, but do not start at that point. It is more responsible
       for a pastor to say, "Perhaps, I am not converting my exegesis
       into food for them. Perhaps, my message uses a spigot that is too
       high on the tower." We cannot ignore this.

           Summarizing, exegesis has to do with determining the truth
       of the text. Exposition follows completing all the homework with
       technical matters. Now, the pastor is ready to present the truth
       determined by exegesis.

Clarity Is Essential to Presentation

Clarity is the collection of everything determined by exege-
       sis then reduced to the simplest sentence that communicates. The
       purpose of teaching is not to confuse or impress. The task is to
       communicate! Returning to the analogy of a tower with a spigot,
       spend as much time in the lower part of the tower (exposition), as
       in the higher part (exegesis). It can be difficult to present exegesis
       as clear and accurate exposition. Spend time on this step.

           Should one preach grammatical terms? They can be mean-
       ingless, even for many people who know them. What is a Hebrew
casus pendens?18 Must every sheep hear, "It is a casus pendens"?
       How edifying! Everyone needs to know that! Take the names of
       the cases, for example, genitive. What does genitive mean to
       most people? Is it not necessary to translate a genitive into some-
       thing people understand? In addition, those good Latin terms,
       such as
accusative of general reference are not part of the sheep's
19 While a good exegete ought to know these things,
       as an expositor, he must focus on making clear what he has exe-
       getically determined from the text.

18 This is a word that is grammatically isolated from its natural function in a
       clause. It usually is the first word in its clause.
19 This is a rare usage of the accusative case that generally makes a broad
       qualification or limitation of a verbal idea.

------------------------------[PAGE BREAK]------------------------------

                              Biblical Exegesis and Exposition 17

           A professor said, "After making a beautiful cabinet, what
       should the carpenter display? His tools or his workmanship?"
       Proper use of the language tools is more important than helping
       people understand those language tools. Similarly, why not use
       the tools to create a good meal, but serve them the meal (not the
       tools)? Who would enjoy a dinner consisting of a raw piece of
       steak, a stick of butter, a pan, some garlic and sliced mushrooms?
       Are those things essential? Absolutely, but despite our imagina-
       tion, they are not a meal until the steak is barbequed and the
       mushrooms sautéed. Likewise, exposition must display the end
       result of careful exegesis in a way that the congregation can rec-
       ognize as food. Otherwise, it cannot edify the flock.

Practical Illustrations

Study does not only occur behind a desk. Why not learn be-
       tween the office and the lunchtime destination? Look out the
       window (after all, it is God's creation!). It just may portray truth.
       Learn to think this way: "This really illustrates that doctrine."

           Consider, for example 1 Corinthians 15:3, starting with exe-
       gesis: Christ died for [
u , huper] our sins. . . . That passage
       requires carefully determining the meaning of the preposition
. What is the case of its object? One might also want to look at
anti, a somewhat related preposition. Christ died huper ("for")
       our sins. The doctrine of the substitutionary death rides on the
       little preposition

A pastor could read explanations of huper from the lexi-
       cons, from the grammars, and so forth to his congregation. More-
       over, the use of this preposition in classical Greek, in Koine

20 Exegetes often become technical on this issue because liberals have attacked
       this doctrine and the use of this preposition. An excellent technical presenta-
       tion of evidence supporting a conservative view comes from Bruce K. Waltke,
       "The Theological Significations of
@ and  in the New Testament,"
       Th.D. dissertation (Dallas Theological Seminary, 1958). Understanding the
       arguments helps pastors protect their flocks.

------------------------------[PAGE BREAK]------------------------------

       18 CTS Journal 6 (October-December 2000)

       Greek, in the New Testament, and in this epistle is vital and of-
       fers amazing insights into this verse. However, teaching this doc-
       trine to children can show whether our message is exposition or
       raw exegesis. The question is not accuracy, for exegesis has al-
       ready given us the meaning of the passage, rather the issue is
       whether we open a spigot that is low enough. Two scenarios
       show the difference.

           In the first, we set children in front and present the gospel.
       In this case, we tell a group of nine year olds that Christ died on
       behalf of them. Paul used the word
huper. Children just love
       Greek! Just imagine their excitement as they anticipate going to
       school and telling their friends, "Christ died
huper our sins."

           In another scenario, imagine using a small cross for illustrat-
       ing that Christ has taken the penalty of our sins upon Himself on
       the children's level. Place a paper ring with the word "SINS" on a
       boy's head. Humor can capture their attention, "We only put it on
       boys because it does not apply to girls. This ring on Kevin's head
       represents the fact that he is a sinner. Now, Kevin, Christ died for
       our sins. Where did Jesus place your sins?" He points to the
       cross. We take "SINS" from his head and put them on the cross.
       Is that useful doctrine? Sure it is, even though Kevin has no un-
       derstanding of the exegetical usage of
huper. The doctrine re-
       mains the same, but choosing the right spigot enables exposition
       that communicates.


Effective exposition may contrast truth with compassion
       against truth that lacks it. For example, in Acts chapter 9, did
       God answer Ananias' wrong thinking with truth alone? Or, do
       verses 11-13 communicate truth with compassion?

So the Lord said to him, "Arise and go to the street called
           Straight, and inquire at the house of Judas for one called Saul of
           Tarsus, for behold, he is praying. "And in a vision he has seen a

------------------------------[PAGE BREAK]------------------------------

                              Biblical Exegesis and Exposition 19

man named Ananias coming in and putting his hand on him, so
           that he might receive his sight." Then Ananias answered, "Lord,
           I have heard from many about this man, how much harm he has
           done to Your saints in Jerusalem. " And here he has authority
           from the chief priests to bind all who call on Your name."

Ananias rejection of divine viewpoint and wisdom clearly
       evidences carnality. In effect, he says: "
Lord, I have heard from
       many about this man, how much harm he did to Your saints in
. . . and (by inference) do You think I will go to his
       house?" That deserves rebuke, does it not? He rebelled against
       divine viewpoint by challenging divine wisdom.

           God says none of those things, but instead gives Ananias a
       little more truth to correct his ignorance.

But the Lord said to him, "Go, for he is a chosen vessel of Mine
           to bear My name before the Gentiles, kings, and the children of
           Israel. " For I will show him how many things he must suffer for
           My name's sake"
(Acts 9:15-16).

           "Go. . . ." repeats truth. "Let Me give you reasons. Let Me
       support why you ought to do this. I am not going to rebuke your
       lack of wisdom, or your resisting My viewpoint. He is a chosen
       vessel, a chosen instrument to Me. He shall bear My name before
       the Gentiles." Ananias went.

           God did not sternly give truth without compassion, saying
       "Ananias, you rebel, you are rejecting truth." Neither did He ex-
       press compassion without truth, saying, "Ananias, I understand
       and would be scared spitless, too. Thank you for listening. Thank
       you for letting Me share this with you, but I will choose someone
       else." The message was both compassionate and truthful. It cor-
       rected him without destroying him.

           God presented truth with compassion. Likewise, it is impor-
       tant that a pastor stand for truth, but have some feeling and some

------------------------------[PAGE BREAK]------------------------------

       20 CTS Journal 6 (October-December 2000)

       compassion for his sheep. What does compassion have to do with
       communication? 1 Corinthians 13:1-3 says that it has everything
       to do with it. When we are not compassionate, it shows. People
       understand this well. We must not only determine what the pas-
       sage teaches (exegesis), but we must communicate it compas-
       sionately and clearly. It is God's part to prepare the hearers to
       receive that meal and (by it) to grow.


Those who hear us may include spiritual giants and those
       who have no background in the Bible. Give the poor soul coming
       for the first time a break! The fact that he found the church door
       may indicate that he has already overcome tremendous barriers.
       After all, sleep is so wonderful on Sunday morning. Give this
       poor fellow credit for hoping, "Maybe they can teach me some-
       thing." He is so ignorant that he thinks John 3:16 is room sixteen
       on the third floor. He is looking to you for some teaching that

           What happens if the pastor's philosophy of the Sunday
       morning message is: "The name of this game is exegesis." The
       newcomer says, "What is that?" Opening a spigot that is too high
       can still bless the spiritual giant. He is impressed because the pas-
       tor digs into the Word. However, that message does not do any-
       thing positive for the newcomer. A balance is necessary.
       Preaching should challenge the spiritual giants without neglecting
       those who are biblically illiterate.

           Do not neglect exegesis. Do not lower the standards, but
       raise them by increasing your ability to exposit. Go deeper, but
       learn how to open the spigot a little bit lower. This is enormously
       helpful in the exposition of the Word of God. It may improve
       your ministry. It may even lead to saying, "Maybe he was not so
       negative to doctrine. Maybe he just did not understand what I was
       trying to say." It is our responsibility to find out exactly what the
       Bible means and to communicate that message clearly and accu-

------------------------------[PAGE BREAK]------------------------------

                              Biblical Exegesis and Exposition 21

       rately. We must both exegete and exposit. Unless we translate
       exegesis into exposition our message is as a sounding brass: We
       alone receive edification. Exposition translates exegesis into the
       language of the sheep and the lambs. Then and only then are the
       sheep fed.


The late Chester McCalley was the pastor of Beth Haven Church
       in Kansas City for 40 years. He was on the National Board of
       Advisors of Chafer Theological Seminary, a frequent Bible con-
       ference speaker, and author of many publications and tapes,
       which are still available. For further information, please contact, or call (800) 326-4414.