Back to Online Material

21

The Ministry Of The Mystery

Eph. 3:8b-12

 . . . that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;

And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,

According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord:

In whom we have boldness and access with confidence by the faith of him.

 

 

Having explored the first two divisions of 3:1-12—the Meaning (vs. 2‑6) and the Minister (vs. 1, 7‑8a) of The Mystery, we come now to the third, to which Paul has been building and which is a passion in my own life: the Ministry of the mystery. We often hear the word “ministry” today; we hear it used in every imaginable way and hear it used to describe every conceivable Christian activity. In fact, it seems like there are more “ministries” today than one would think even possible.

 

But God has given one primary ministry of the Church in this age. This ministry is the one that will produce real growth and develop­ment in believers. This ministry is one that must never be replaced. This ministry is called: PREACHING. Let us note three principles: what preaching is, what we are to preach, and why we are to preach.

 

I. What Preaching Is (v. 8b)

that I should preach among the Gentiles

 

Significantly, Paul does not say “that I should share among the Gentiles,” or “that I should have a discussion among the Gentiles,” or “that I should chat about ‘felt needs’ among the Gentiles.” He is very specific in the word he uses: that I should preach among the Gentiles.

 

Preaching is something that has been in recent years totally misunderstood. Many Christians, not to mention preachers, ironically enough, do not know what preaching really is, despite the fact that no ministry is spoken of more in Scripture but emphasized less in the present day than preaching. This fact continues to amaze me after many years of ministry. How can something so evident, so obvious, be so ignored?

 

Further, however, are those who talk about preaching and claim to do it, but in reality have redefined it and as a result it’s no longer true preaching at all.

 

To examine this primary ministry, let us first define preaching and then apply this definition.

 

The Definition

 

One word translated preach in the New Testament is the powerful Greek word kērussō. Paul used this word in his parting challenge to Timothy. He told him that in the face of apostasy (II Tim. 3) there was only one thing to do: Preach the Word (II Tim. 4:2‑4). This verb literally means “to announce or to publicly herald.” The noun form kērux (I Tim. 2:7; II Tim. 1:11; II Pet. 2:5) refers to the Imperial Herald who represented the emperor or king and announced his wishes. This word is formal, grave, serious, and authoritative. It is used of John the Baptist,[1] the Lord Jesus,[2] and the Apostles and teachers.[3] The herald was not like an ambassador who might “negotiate;” he was a represen­tative of the king and would simply announce the king’s decrees. The words of the herald were to be listened to, for to ignore his words would be to ignore the king’s words, and to abuse the herald was to abuse the king. While this word is sometimes used to refer to others besides the full‑time preacher, it is not used of public preaching and teaching by anyone other than the full‑time preacher. As we’ll study in 4:11, this further challenges us that only called, qualified, trained, and ordained preachers should preach.

 

The word in our text, however, is the Greek euangellizō, “To proclaim good or joyful news.” This word—along with the noun form euangellion—is used abundantly to show the proclaim­ing of the Gospel by God’s chosen vessels. And, as one might think, it is never used for anyone other than full‑time preachers and angels.

 

What, then, is preaching? Put simply: Preaching is the exposition (i.e. detailed explanation) and application of God’s Word from the preacher to the people.

 

The expositions that you are now reading were taken right from messages preached on consecutive Sunday mornings. True preaching not only explains God’s word according to: (1) the original language, (2) Scriptural context, and (3) historical setting, but it also (4) applies that truth to Christian living, showing us what God demands from us. To shorten our definition even further, true preaching is the presentation and application of Truth.

 

The Application

 

To better apply our above definition, let me say: There is absolutely nothing more important, or even equal in importance, than preaching. Throughout this study I want to be loving and do not wish to offend, but it must be made clear that there is nothing equal to preaching. Regardless of what nationally famous Christian leader might say to the contrary, the Biblical fact is that preaching is God’s chosen method of proclaiming His Truth.

 

There are countless things today, however, that are being used to replace preaching: films, comedians, dramas and plays, so–called “Bible studies” that consist of people just sharing their feelings and opinions of what a given Bible text says to them, Christian music concerts, crowd pleasing personalities and activities, panel discussions and debates, various church programs, and many others. But the Word of God is plain in showing that preaching must never be replaced, nor does it need man’s ideas and programs to supplement it. J. Sidlow Baxter writes in his excellent book, Rethinking Our Priorities: “Preaching . . . is the gravity center of the Christian pastorate.”[4] By implication, without preaching we shift the weight of ministry and become unbalanced, our whole “center of gravity” has shift to something else.

 

Even more pointed are these words by Martyn Lloyd‑Jones from his monumental work, Preaching and Preachers, which was based on a series of lectures delivered at Westminster Theological Seminary over a six-week period in the Spring of 1969:

. . . The work of preaching is the highest and the greatest and the most glorious calling to which any­one can ever be called . . . I would say without hesi­tation that the most urgent need in the Christian Church today is true preaching. . .preaching must always come first, and it must not be replaced by anything else.[5]

 

But the fact is that preaching has, indeed, been replaced by everything else. In view of the things listed earlier, preaching is called “irrelevant” and “old-fashioned.” No longer is just preaching Truth enough. Church ministry today must be must be slick, current, appealing, crowd-pleasing, and “seeker-sensitive,” and Biblical, expository preaching simply does not fit that bill, it is not appealing.

 

Even more subtle, however, is the astounding way that preaching has been redefined. So that they can say they are preaching, pastors are either watering down the message and/or are appealing to the wrong group.

 

In his short but powerful little book, Preaching for God’s Glory, Scottish preacher Alister Begg, who now pastors here in American, makes this pointed statement:

About fifty years ago W.E. Sangster, a great Methodist preacher in Britain, began a volume on preaching with these words, “Preaching is in the shadows. The world does not believer in it” . . . Today at the beginning of a new millennium, the situation is graver still. Preaching is still in the shadows, but this time much of the church does not believe in it.

Much of what now emanates from contemporary pulpits would not have been recognized by . . . Sangster as being anywhere close to the kind of expository preaching that is Bible-based, Christ-focused, and life-changing—the kind of preaching that is marked by doctrinal clarity, a sense of gravity, and convincing argument. We have instead become far too familiar with preaching that pays scant attention to the Bible, is self-focused, and consequently is capable of only the most superficial impact upon the lives of listeners. Worse still, large sections of the church are oblivious to the fact that they are being administered a placebo rather than the medicine they need . . . In the absence of bread the population grows accustomed to cake! Pulpits are for preachers. We build stages for performers.[6]

 

Well said; that accurately sums up our day. For example, one of the foremost pioneers in new ministry technique has built an enormous church on the foundation of a new definition of preaching that says it and all church ministry must appeal, above all else, to the “unchurched,” that is, the non-christian person. In the 1989 book, Mastering Contemporary Preaching, that pastor wrote:

For the past thirteen years [since 1975], we’ve geared our ministry at Willow Creek to reach non-Christians, and during that time I’ve learned a lot, sometimes the hard way, about what kind of preaching attracts them, keeps them coming back, and most important, leads them to take the momentous step of following Jesus Christ.[7]

 

Now, some will call me unloving and divisive. After all, what could possibly be wrong with such a sincere desire to reach people for Christ?

 

First, while his desire is exemplary, and I in no way whatsoever question his motives or commitment to servicing Christ, his method is the exact opposite of the purpose of the Local Church. There is not one verse of Scripture that even implies that the Local Church is a place for the unchurched. How could Acts 2:42-43 be any clearer?

Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

 

What was the Biblical progression? It was quite simple: people came to Christ first, were then added to the Church, where they in-turn came to worship and to be under the preaching and teaching of doctrine. Contrary to modern thought, the Local Church is not the center of evangelism; it is the place for Christians to gather for worship (as Paul implies in Ephesians 1) and for training Christians for the work of the ministry (as Paul later states in 4:11-14). And what is “the work of the ministry?” Evangelism; sheep are to reproduce sheep. Again, I do not wish to be divisive, but to make the Local Church the place that is supposed to appeal to the unchurched is a totally unscriptural principle. While this practice is very popular and gets huge results in the form of numbers, it is categorically wrong according to God’s Word.

 

Second, especially troubling is the writer’s statement concerning “what kind of preaching attracts” the unchurched “and keeps them coming back.” When I read that, I couldn’t help but say to myself, “Excuse me?” There is something horrifyingly wrong with a church where unsaved people can attend week after week and remain comfortable. Is this unloving? No, it’s the Truth.

 

This is, fact, the exact opposite of the New Testament precedent in Acts 5. As we recall, after they sold their property, they lied about how much they were giving to the church, claiming they gave it all but keeping back some for themselves. The issue wasn’t keeping the money (which they were free to do), rather the issue was lying to the church and God. As a result, when Peter confronted each of them in turn, God killed them where they stood, right in front of the Church. But how did other people, believers and unbelievers, react? Verse 11 declares that “great fear came upon all the church, and upon as many as heard these things.” Even more pointedly, verse 13 tells us that unbelievers had no desire to associate with them. Did the “unchurched” say, “Oh, what a wonderful place to go to church? I want to be a part of that group? There’s a place I can be conformable and live the way I want to live?” Indeed not! Unlike today, there was absolutely nothing in the church that the unbeliever wanted.

 

This pastor elaborates by giving a few details of his methods of preaching. The overriding one is, as is popular today, addressing “needs.” Instead of presenting the Gospel as that which saves us from sin and the Hell that we deserve, it is presented as something that will make your life better, help you prosper, and meet your “felt needs.”

 

Another technique in this philosophy is using sermons, especially the title, to draw the unchurched. This pastor again writes:

 . . . for every sermon we preach, [the unchurched are] asking, Am I interested in that subject or not? If they aren’t, it doesn’t matter how effective our delivery is; their minds will check out.

 

But may we interject—of course, they won’t be interested in doctrine. They’re lost people who first need to come to Christ and then be taught doctrine. He goes on:

A few years ago the book Real Men Don’t Eat Quiche came out and immediately sales took off. Everyone was talking about it. As I was thinking about the amazing success of that book, I decided to preach a series entitled, “What Makes a Man a man? What Makes a Woman a Woman?” Unchurched people heard the titles, and they came; attendance climbed 20 percent in just four weeks.

When that series ended, I began one titled “A Portrait of Jesus.” We lost most of the newcomers. Interestingly, the elders said to me after that series, “Bill, those messages on the person and work of Christ related to unchurched people as well as any messages we’ve heard.” In this case, the problem wasn’t the content; the people who needed to hear this series most didn’t come because of the title.

Since then, I’ve put everything I can into creating effective titles. I’m not particularly clever, so sometimes I’ll work for hours on the title alone. I do it because I know that unchurched people won’t come, or come back, unless they can say, “Now that’s something I want to hear about.” The title can’t be just cute and catchy; it has to touch a genuine need or interest. [emphasis in original]

 

Other titles he lists include “God Has Feelings, Too” and “Fanning the Flames of Marriage.” Words fail to express how grieving that is. Instead of spending hours on one word, or a week on a single verse, drawing from it all the Truth our efforts can discover, this attitude would have us waste countless hours on an appealing title. Here is one of countless examples of how worldly philosophy and methodology have infiltrated the Church. To get outward results, we just do what the world does—we appeal to the secular mind. In fact, the title of the chapter I’ve been quoting from is “Speaking To the Secularized Mind.” Instead of proclaiming Truth in God’s words, men have chosen to use their words. This is precisely what Paul refused to do to the secularized minds of the Corinthian believers:

And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God (I Cor. 2:4-5).

 

Can anyone honestly think that Paul used a clever title for his sermons? A few paragraphs later this pastor writes about the value of preaching a series of sermons to bring people back, but he then adds:

I’ve found I can’t stretch a series longer than four or five weeks, though, before people start saying, “Is there anything else you’re ever thinking about?” And obviously, if I’m going to talk about money or other highly sensitive issues, the series may run only two weeks.

 

Ironically, right before he says that he claims that he preaches the whole counsel of God, as Paul says in (Acts 20:27), but we cannot help but ask how could he possibly do so? If he is shackled by the possibility of unsaved people loosing interest, how could he ever preach a lengthy series or exposition? And, in fact, never does he use the word “exposition” or “expository.” All the preaching he mentions is topically oriented. As one would expect, conspicuously absent also is the word “doctrine” because the unchurched obviously are not going to listen to doctrine. In light of his target audience, it would be impossible for him to preach anything of any depth or absolute truth.

 

Another writer in his 1989 book on preaching says some good things, but he too has been affected by today’s culture and philosophy. In light of the fact that we live in an age where virtually all our communication is highly visual, he writes in an early chapter that preaching has “become too left-hemispheric—too logical, too analytical, too prepositional.” We should, therefore, he argues, communicate more with “the brain’s right hemisphere, which is creative, imaginative, emotive, and pictorial.” Then, even citing a secular source (an article in Reader’s Digest), he concludes that, “We need more whole-brained thinking, not what has been called an ‘unhealthy dictatorship of the left hemisphere.’” He goes on to develop this idea in a later chapter, at one point writing:

Above all, we need to be open to the new idea, the unexplored trail, the risk. It is exciting to see some of my students dedicate themselves to the pursuit of freshness and creativity in ministry and in preaching.[8]

 

Now, call me old fashioned and out of touch with the present day if you wish, but I cannot help my uneasiness when I read such things because they are based not on revealed Truth but on human reason. The bottom line in all this is that the Church is becoming more secularized by the day. With human philosophy as her standard, she is using worldly methods, to appeal to fleshly desires, to achieve earthly goals. Please read that last statement again, for it summarizes modern Church ministry.

 

This new philosophy is nowhere illustrated better than in still another popular book on church ministry, written by the most popular of all the “new breed” of pastor and church builder. Here are just a few statements from it:

Figure out what mood you want your service to project, and then create it [p. 264] . . . We start positive and end positive [p. 271] . . . We use humor in our services . . . it’s not a sin to help people feel good . . . Cultivate an informal, relaxed, and friendly atmosphere [p. 272] . . . We made a strategic decision to stop singing hymns in a our seeker services . . . We have attracted thousands more because of our music [p. 285] . . . [Our church] now has a complete pop/rock orchestra [p. 290] . . . Use more performed music than congregational singing [p. 291] . . . The ground we have in common with unbelievers is not the Bible, but our common needs, hurts, and interests as human beings. You cannot start with a text [p. 295].[9]

 

Here again, as I read that last statement, I asked myself, “Excuse me?” Did he actually say you can’t start with a text? Did he say you can’t start with the Word of God? Did he say that you have to start with what man needs instead of what God says? Yes, that’s what He says, and that is diametrically apposed to Scripture.

 

What is so shocking about this, in fact, is that it is so obviously contrary to what Scripture says that it defies explanation why any evangelical leader would even consider it, much less adopt it. But the fact is that the vast majority of evangelical churches have completely overhauled their entire ministries to conform to a philosophy that appeals to people’s fleshly desires instead of God’s spiritual demands.

 

But as is passionately argued, “It gets people in the door; it gets crowds; it appeals to the masses.” Yes, it certain does, but all you have is a crowd, a mass of people; what you don’t have is a body of believers. You have a crowd because you appealed to their flesh instead of a body because you appealed to their spirit.

 

This should remind us of Jeremiah 5. There aren’t many days that go by in my own labors that I don’t think of Jeremiah. As God sends Jeremiah through the streets of Jerusalem in search of just one righteous person, just one who seeks the truth (v. 1), he finds none, not one person in all of Judah. While the people considered what Jeremiah said to be nothing but “wind” (v. 13), what we might today say “hot air,” verses 30-31 declare that “a horrible thing” occurred “in the land,” that many “prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests bear rule by their means; and my people love to have it so.” Likewise, the masses today love teachers who will “tickle their ears” (II Tim. 4:3), a thought we will return to a little later. But may we never forget that Jeremiah, who for over 40 years preached against Judah’s sin and prophesied of the coming judgment of the Babylonian Captivity if she did not repent, had not one single convert. It didn’t matter if anyone believer or not—Jeremiah preached faithfully anyway. The challenge is obvious: we are to preach the Truth of God’s Word no matter what the results.

 

In stark contrast to today’s so-called preaching, there is the Biblical model. As one theologian observes, in fact, using one Greek word or another, preaching is referred to 250 times in the New Testament alone.[10] Does this leave any doubt that preaching is the primary ministry of the Church?

 

Paul’s Epistles to Timothy are pivotal in understanding this. They are also appropriate in our present context in Ephesians because at the time Timothy was pastoring the church at Ephesus, as mentioned back in our study of “The Minister of the Mystery” (Chapter 20). In his first letter to Timothy, Paul writes, “Till I come, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine” (4:13). Most ministries today are built on entertainment, personality, crowd-gathering events, gimmicks, programs, and many other things that simply appeal to the flesh. But the truly Biblical minister builds only on the Word of God. Paul makes it very clear that until he returned, Timothy was to do one thing only: keep preaching the Truth in which Paul had instructed him (cf. II Tim. 2:2, “And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.”). “Give attendance” translates prosechō, which was a nautical term for holding a ship in a direction, to sail onward. The idea then was to hold on one’s course. And what course was Timothy to hold? Not entertainment or people’s “felt needs.” His course was to be the Word of God alone.

 

Specifically, this course was to be set on “reading,” “exhortation” and “doctrine.” The definite article (”the”) appears before “reading,” which indicates the specific practice of public reading. Because of the scarcity of manuscripts, the practice of reading and explaining Scripture in the synagogue (Acts 15:21 and Luke 4:16f) was carried over into the Church (Col. 4:16; 1 Thess. 5:27).

 

I never think on this historical point without being reminded of the precedent set in Nehemiah 8:1-8, one of my favorite passages. The people gathered and stood for hours listening to the Word of God read and expounded. Verse 8 is pivotal: “So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.” The Hebrew for “gave” (sūm or sīm) means “to set or establish,” and the Hebrew for “sense” (sekhel) expresses such concepts as “intelligence, knowledge, and understanding.” The point was to establish the people in the knowledge of God’s Word. After 70 years of Babylonian captivity, the people no longer spoke Hebrew, rather Aramaic. Ezra, therefore, had to explain the Scripture, “[give] the sense,” exposit in much the same way we must today, since most people do not know Hebrew or Greek. Further, in fact, exposition is even more essential in our day because we are far removed from Bible times in language, culture, and history. There is no doubt that expository preaching is the Biblical precedent and is the type of preaching that should be used the majority of the time. If we are not expositing Scripture, we are handling It rightly.

 

It’s also noteworthy that Nehemiah 8:4 declares that they built “a pulpit” for this purpose. The Hebrew here is migdāl, which actually means “a tower.” It’s used, for example, in Genesis 11:4 for the Tower of Babel, II Chronicles 14:7 for a tower built into a city wall, and in Isaiah 5:2 for the watchtower in a vineyard. I’ve seen old churches that have a high pulpit accessed only by a spiral staircase, which is the idea in the Hebrew.

 

Scotsman Alister Begg, whom I mentioned earlier, recounts a vivid memory from his childhood when he sat in St. George’s Tron Church in Glaskow waiting for morning worship to begin. He writes:

At about three minutes to eleven the beadle (parish official) would climb the pulpit stairs and place a large Bible on the lectern. Having opened it to the appropriate passage, he would descend, and the minister would in turn ascend the stairs and sit in the cone-shaped pulpit. The beadle would complete his duties by climbing the stairs the second time to close the pulpit door and leave the pastor to his task. There was not doubt in my young mind that each part of that procedure was marked with significance. There was clearly no reason for the pastor to be in the pulpit apart from the Bible upon which he looked down as he read. I understood that, in contrast to his physical posture, the pastor was standing under Scripture, not over it. Similarly, we were listening not so much for his message but for its message.[11]

 

Oh, but that is certainly not what many want today. We want everyone to get in a circle and share their ideas, or if the speaker absolutely needs a lectern, at least have him stand it on the same level as the people so he can better identify with them and not imply that he is “above them.” But that is not preaching. Is the preacher better than the people? Is he superior? Should he be elevated above them? Of course not. What we are elevating is the Word of God and the proclamation of It as absolute Truth.

 

Paul also tells Timothy that he is to “exhort” the people. The Greek is paraklēsis, which refers to an “admonition or encouragement for the purpose of strengthening and establishing the believer in the faith (see Rom. 15:4; Phil. 2:1; Heb. 12:5; 13:22).”[12] In short, exhortation is the application of the exposition. It challenges God’s people to obey the Truth of God’s Word and warns them of the consequences of not doing so.

 

Finally, Paul adds that Timothy must also “teach.” The Greek behind “teaching” is didaskalia, which appears sixteen times in the Pastoral Epistles. Is there any doubt, then, what the preacher’s job is? This is precisely why back in 3:2 Paul mentions that one of the required qualifications for the ministry is that a man is “apt to teach,” which is one word in the Greek (didaktikos) that means “skilled in teaching.” As one expositor puts it:

Not merely given to teaching, but able and skilled in it. All might teach to whom the Spirit imparted the gift: but skill in teaching was the especial office of the minister on whom would fall the ordinary duty of instruction of believers and refutation of gainsayers.[13]

 

I’ve heard certain preachers say, “I’m not really much of a teacher, but I sure love my flock,” and have heard certain sheep say, “Well, he’s not a good teacher, but he does have a pastor’s heart.” While loving God’s people is commendable, if a man is not a skilled teacher, he simply is not qualified for that ministry, for he can’t do the number one thing his job requires. This is equivalent to a surgeon who does not know how to make an incision or a carpenter who doesn’t know how to use a tape measure. It’s interesting, in fact, that in that entire list of qualifications, “love” is not even mentioned, while being a skilful teacher is high on the list. Now, of course, the pastor loves the sheep, which is understood in the shepherd/sheep analogy and certainly implied in the word “patient” (v. 3), but Paul particularly says that the candidate must be a good teacher. In fact, the most outstanding facet of this qualification is that it is the only one in the list that relates specifically to a candidate’s giftedness and function, that is, the only qualification that deals specifically with what he is supposed to do. And what does he do? He TEACHES. That is his function! He is not an entertainer, not an administrator, not even primarily a counselor. He is a teacher. Men who are not doing that today betray the office and bring shame to Christ.

 

In light of the redefining of preaching in our day, I am compelled to mention one other qualification in that list, which significantly comes before teaching, and that is he must be “sober.” Before a man can even teach, he must be proven to be sober. The Greek is sophrona, “soberminded, serious, prudent.”  The sober man is serious about spiritual things. That does not mean he is cold and humorless, but neither does it mean that it’s joke time in the pulpit. The sober man knows the seriousness of the ministry and views the world through God’s eyes. What does this say about the “Christian comedians” that characterize “preaching” today? One such man I heard admitted that he went to Bible school to become a minister but turned to comedy. I do not wish to be ungracious, but that is disgraceful and impossible to justify Biblically. May we add,  the argument that says, “Well, if you keep people laughing, you can get your point across” is worldly nonsense. Truly spiritual people will desire spiritual Truth. I certainly don’t mind the occasional humorous comment or illustration, and use them on occasion myself, but “stand up comedy” has no place anywhere near the pulpit. We are dealing with holy, sacred things, and we had better treat them as such. This is God’s demand. So-called “Christian comedy” is one of the most serious errors of our day.

 

As Paul wrote to Titus (2:7-8a): “In all things showing thyself a pattern of good works: in doctrine showing uncorruptness, gravity, sincerity, Sound speech, that cannot be condemned.” The Greek behind “gravity” is semnotēs; in Classical Greek, as one scholar explains, it denotes “that which is sublime, majestic, holy, evoking reverence . . . The [adjective] and the noun often denote the majesty of deity, but sometimes also the solemnity, serious purpose, and grandeur of a man.” Likewise, he goes on to say, in the New Testament it is used to denote “an ethical and aesthetic outlook resulting in decency and orderliness,” so “seriousness both of doctrine and of life is expected of the leaders of the church.”[14] The man is a serious man; he is devoted to a solemn presentation of the Scripture. Does this leave any doubt that so-called “Christian comedians” and other “entertainers” are an absolute disgrace? The pulpit is a place of solemnity, not slapstick. As God declared through Isaiah the prophet, the man who God esteems is “him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word” (Is. 66:2). How many men in pulpits today tremble at the Word of God and teach their people to do the same?

 

Pastor and author Alan Redpath, who joined the Lord in glory in 1989, wrote:

God is trying to tell us that our current popular version of Christianity—comfortable, humorous, superficial, entertaining, worldly-wise—is exposed for the irreverent presentation of the Gospel of Christ that it really is. A preacher is commissioned to give people not what they want but what they need. No man has any business walking into the pulpit to entertain. He is there to present Calvary in all it fullness of hope and glory.[15]

 

How many today skirt this issue by piously proclaiming, “Oh, we don’t want preaching; we want just the comforting, uplifting words of Jesus.” Such statements demonstrate a total ignorance of Jesus ministry, because Jesus Himself mandated preaching. In Matthew 10:7, for example, Jesus sends out His twelve disciples with these words, “As ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.” The Greek here for “preach” is that important word kērussō, “to announce or to publicly herald.” He tells them again in 24:14, “This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.” “Preached” is again from kērussō. He says it still again, as recorded in Mark 16:15-16: “Go ye into all the world, and preach [kērussō] the gospel to every creature.” This truth implies a very special principle. As one author writes:

The commission of Christ implies that the private reading of the Scriptures is not sufficient to lead us to salvation. Had it been otherwise, Christ would have said: “Read the word and that will suffice for you.” But He commands that it be read and preached. Scripture is the revelation, but the revelation must be proclaimed, preached, and put in a present-day context . . . Because of the personal relationships which preaching implies, we depend, according to Christ’s command, more on the word preached than on the word read.[16]

 

That is a most significant statement. It is the preaching (not just reading) of God’s Word that He commands us to do and promises to bless. This is precisely why Paul instructed Timothy, as we noted earlier, “Till I come, give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine” (I Tim. 4:13). Again, it’s not just the reading of Scripture that is important; It must be preached and taught. Paul declared the same principle in Romans 10:14 concerning evangelism: “How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?” Paul doesn’t ask, “How shall they believe on him whom they haven’t read about,” rather, “How shall they believe unless they hear and how shall they hear unless someone preaches?”

 

Those who deny the primacy of preaching simply have not one Biblical leg to stand on. They can only prop up their position by ignoring the clear teaching of Scripture.

 

Another subtle attack on preaching is the claim of some supposed separation of “preaching” from “teaching.” Some say, “Well, I’m not really preaching at this service, rather I’m teaching.” Others maintain that a Wednesday evening service is more of a “teaching time,” rather than a “preaching service.” But at the risk of being accused of dogmatism, that simply is not Scriptural. Again, there is not a single shred of Scripture that teaches such a separation. The contrast is this: “Teaching” is the imparting of knowledge while “preaching” is the applying of knowledge. We must do both every time we handle the Word of God or we fail. J. Sidlow Baxter is again very helpful:

There is a difference between preaching, in the more general sense, and teaching, in the more particular sense. That difference I willingly acknowledge here, and in fact call fresh attention to it; yet at the same time I do not think too keen a cleavage should be made between them. As I have often said, all preaching should be teaching, and all teaching should be preaching, by which I mean all preaching should impart Biblical substance [teaching], while all our more specialized teaching of Bible areas or topics by analysis, synthesis, etc., should be punctuated by admonition, challenge, encouragement, consolation, and other such practical urges with a view to edification [preaching].[17]

 

That excellent comment points out that every time preachers handle the Word they must both TEACH (impart knowledge) and PREACH (apply knowledge). What good is knowledge if it is not applied? I’ve heard some preachers who walk in, unload a mass of information, and then walk away. While we might say, “Wow, that is staggering,” what good has he done if he doesn’t help the listener apply it to living? On the other hand, how can we possibly apply Truth if we don’t first present the Truth? Granted, some preachers will have to work harder at one than the other, but they must do both.

 

II Timothy 4:2 bears out this principle. Paul clearly couples the two together when he writes, “Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine [teaching]”. The following verse proclaims another truth, namely, “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears.” I like William Tyndale’s 1534 translation of this verse: “For the time will come when they will not suffer wholesome doctrine: but after their own lusts, they (whose ears itch) get them an heap of teachers.”

 

If any verse characterizes the present day, it is that one. The Greek for “endure” (anechomai) literally means “to hold one’s self upright.” In modern English, we could say, “They just won’t put up with it,” and, indeed, many today just won’t put up with authoritative preaching. They love their sin and don’t want strong preaching. As a result, they seek out teachers who will tickle them behind the ear, make them “feel good about themselves,” keep them laughing, and tell them what they want to hear instead of what they need to hear. What many want today are anecdotes, comedy, pop-psychology, motivational lectures, positive thinking, devotional thoughts, and small talk, when what they need is Truth.

 

It seems that one of the greatest terrors among preachers today is that something they say might offend someone, so they ignore touchy issues, avoid certain verses, and phrase their sermons to make everyone feel comfortable.

 

Now, I’m not advocating the idea, “Well, if I don’t offend somebody in my sermon this morning, I’ve failed.” Of course not. Our goal is not to offend, but the fact is that if we preach Biblically, we will sometimes offend. Both our Lord and the Apostle Paul offended people everywhere they went. Countless numbers of their spiritual descendants throughout Church History offended the status quo, many of whom died for their offense.

 

One of the key words to a proper understanding of this passage is the word “they” in verse 3. When you look closely, it not only speaks of those outside the church but those inside as well. Even those who profess to be believers will not put up with straightforward, sound, doctrinal preaching. In spite of that, Paul, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, tells Timothy to just preach the Word all the more. “But,” it is argued, “people just aren’t responding to just preaching.” Most Christian periodicals and books on ministry are telling us this. NO, AND THAT IS PRECISELY THE POINT. That is exactly what God said would happen. They want to be entertained and indulged not confronted and challenged. In short, they want their ears tickled and “heap to themselves,” that is, “accumulate” teachers that will do it, and there are plenty of them out there.

 

Paul’s command here also includes a result that is mostly ignored today, namely, that these people “shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.” Most significant is that while “shall turn away” is in the Active Voice, that is, they willfully choose to do this, the words “shall be turned unto fables” is in the Passive Voice, which means that they don’t choose this result; they are being acted upon and have no choice. Because they willfully turned away, they now will unwillingly be deceived by “fables.” This is a staggering truth. The Greek is muthos, where we get the English words “myth” and “mythology” and is always used in the New Testament to denote a cunning fable full of falsehoods and pretenses for the purpose of deceiving others.[18]

 

May we repeat, when we willingly turn from the truth, we will unwillingly be deceived, and how vividly we see this happening. Because most of the church won’t tolerate true preaching, which proclaims Truth and confronts sin, doctrinal error is everywhere: God’s sovereignty has been redefined in the “Open Theism” movement, Christians seek extra-biblical revelation through mysticism and so-called prophecies, hell is denied as a reality, the roles of men and women are blurred or destroyed altogether, homosexuality, fornication, abortion, and other immorality is condoned and even defended, and on it goes. And as we’ll see in our study of Ephesians 4:14, there is virtually zero discernment left in the Church today. Error is rampant because we have turned away from Truth.

 

Further, to preach “against something” today is avoided like the plague; some look at it as the greatest sin of all because it’s “unloving” and divisive.” Everything is relative, everything is up for grabs, nothing is really “wrong,” rather it’s all in how you look at it. An unknown writer penned the following words, which are among the most powerful I have ever read on the subject of preaching:

A man called to the ministry, without a feeling that he is under the compulsion to pit himself against the spirit of his age, will never make a great preacher. Preaching is delivering the soul against something. Heralding is one thing, preaching another. The first is that of announcing; the second, that of contact and attack. A man cannot preach unless he has something to preach against. If a man is driven by God to be a real preacher, it is because he is first driven within his own heart to resist the spirit of the age which violates his own sense of right. He resists, and, in resisting, cries out against that which he sees is not only ruining others, but threatens to wreck himself. Preachers are made by the developing of their power of moral resistance against the spirit of the age.[19]

 

Indeed, a preacher by definition is a guy who, based on Scripture alone, says, “Here is right and here is wrong. There’s no gray area, there’s no argument, there’s no middle ground. Here is Truth and all else is error. I don’t really want to fight you over it, but if I need to defend God’s Truth, then lock and load, for I will not comprise with error.” That is the Biblical precedent. Look at Isaiah, Jeremiah, John the Baptist, the Lord Jesus, Paul, and others, and you will see those who stood for absolutes. Any so-called “preacher” today who is not willing to do that is not a preacher and disgraces the office if he dare call himself one.

 

What is also significant about preaching is that it is the method of ministry that God promises to bless. As Paul told the Corinthians. “It pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe . . . we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness” (I Cor. 1:21-23). Paul uses kerussō for “preach” in verse 23, the formal proclamation of the herald. Jews have to have a sign, while Gentiles (Greeks) seek wisdom (philosophy), but preaching is neither one. Preaching the cross offends the Jew and makes the Gentile scoff, but still it is God’s way. Preaching is ordained of God to bring people to Christ and therefore meet not “felt needs,” but the real need of every person in every age. It’s the power of God’s Word, as it is preached in Truth, that changes the heart, not the “seeker-sensitive” methods or “user-friendly” approach.

 

With all this in mind, it’s significant that when we look at both Biblical and then Church History, we find that one thing that was consistently true was the sober, straight-forward, authoritative preaching and teaching of God’s Word. Besides what we earlier observed in Nehemiah’s day, Scripture is filled with examples of preaching. This is so obvious, in fact, that to argue against preaching is to deny Scripture outright.

 

To name only a few, not counting revelatory utterances (i.e., predictions of the future), the prophets preached constantly. Isaiah, for example, called God’s people to repentance and obedience in 1:2-31 and in chapter 6 explained the vision he saw of the holiness of God. Our Lord Himself “came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God” and His Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5-7) is the greatest of all models of exposition. Added to this is the preaching of Peter (Acts 2:14-36), Stephen (Acts 7:2-63), James (Acts 15:14-21), and of course Paul (Acts 17:16-31). The clear precedent set down in Scripture is preaching. To do anything else, flies in the very face of God’s ordained method.

 

Turning to Church History, while the secularization of the Church that occurred in the first four centuries (and still exists today) caused serious doctrinal errors as well as a departure from Biblical exposition, there were some exceptions. Writing in the middle of the 2nd Century, the apologist Justin Martyr described a typical worship service of his day:

And on the day called Sunday, all who live in cities or in the country gather together to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine and water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying Amen.[20]

 

Mark it down—the reading and explanation of the Word of God was the absolute center of the worship service. Not today. Central today is music, drama, comedy, discussion, or anything else we can think of except preaching.

 

Most notable was John Chrysostom, the 4th Century bishop at Constantinople, who is considered the greatest preacher of those early centuries. He practiced word-for-word, verse-by-verse exposition, something that was rare in his day and still is in our day. In an introduction to several of Chrysostom’s homilies, John Broadus, another great preacher, writes:

John of the Golden Mouth is, upon the whole, our very best example—most richly instructive and fruitfully inspiring,—in respect of expository preaching . . . The preacher took up his passage of Scriptures—usually somewhat extended—in a familiar way, sentence by sentence, with explanations and remarks, as he saw occasion; sometimes we find Chrysostom actually returning to go over the passage again, that it may suggest further remarks. At length, he would be apt to seize upon some topic or doctrine or practice which the text had directly or remotely suggested, and discuss that by way of conclusion, not infrequently wandering far off into the thoughts which one after another occurred.[21]

 

Even more fascinating is this picture of Chrysostom painted by John R. W. Stott:

He is generally and justly regarded as the greatest pulpit orator of the Greek church. Nor has he any superior or equal among the Latin Fathers. He remains to this day a model for preachers in large cities.

Four chief characteristics of his preaching may be mentioned. First, he was biblical. Not only did he preach systematically through several books, but his sermons are full of biblical quotations and allusions. Secondly, his interpretation of the Scriptures was simple and straightforward. He followed the Antiochene school of “literal” exegesis, in contrast to fanciful Alexandrian allegorizations. Thirdly, his moral applications were down to earth. Reading his sermons today, one can imagine without difficulty the pomp of the imperial court, the luxuries of the aristocracy, the wild races of the hippodrome, in fact the whole life of an oriental city at the end of the fourth century. Fourthly, he was fearless in his condemnations. In fact, “he was a martyr of the pulpit, for it was chiefly his faithful preaching that caused his exile.[22]

 

As in Chrysostom’s day, the men today we stand and preach God’s Truth alone are the ones who are criticized the most. Many critics would love to “exile” them if possible, to get rid of them because they are out of step with the times and out of date with their method.

 

John Calvin was so struck by Chrysostom’s exactness that he wrote a preface to an edition of Chrysostom’s sermons in which he praises him for surpassing all the other Church Fathers in seeking the true meaning of the Biblical text.[23] Additionally, so important was he that he was often quoted by preachers up to the Reformation. Some 1,600 years later, we would do well to imitate John Chrysostom in our exposition and application of Scripture.

 

Of all the ages, the Medieval Period (476-1500) was the worst for preaching. Allegorical interpretation ruled, so exposition was virtually non-existent. Near the close of the period some pre-Reformation leaders—such as John Wyclif, William Tyndale, and John Huss—began the return to expository preaching. Tyndale, in fact, made this comment on the accepted method of that day, which is still true today in some circles:

The literal sense [of Scripture] is become nothing at all; for the pope hath taken it clean away, and hath made it his possession. He hath partly locked it up with the false and counterfeited key of his traditions, ceremonies, and feigned lies; and driven men from it with violence of sword: form no man dare abide by the literal sense of the text, but under a protestation, “If it shall please the pope . . .” Thou shalt understand, therefore, that the Scriptures hath but one sense, which is the literal sense. And that literal sense is the root and ground of all, and the anchor that never faileth, whereunto if thou cleave, thou canst never err or go out of the way.[24]

 

What a statement! But tragically, it is still true that literal interpretation is not the rule even among many evangelicals. Just one single example will illustrate. In the popular book, The Prayer of Jabez, one author has taken an obscure prayer in the Old Testament and has built on it his own philosophy of prosperity. That is allegory, spiritualizing a text into something that it does not teach in it’s literal meaning. Tyndale saw the error of such an approach. Why can’t we?

 

It was with the Reformation that Scripture was finally returned to its proper place—Sola Scriptura, the Scripture alone. With that also came a return to Bible exposition. The reformers were certainly not perfect, but they brought back much that had been lost. Luther often preached four times on Sundays and left behind some 2,300 sermons. In direct contrast to the devaluation of preaching in the Roman Church, Luther’s preaching, as well as all Reformation preaching, was instructive, expository, and built on the text alone. “My best craft,” Luther said, “is to give the Scripture with its plain meaning; for the plain meaning is learning and life.”[25]

 

Calvin ministered in Geneva from 1541 until his death in 1564. He preached twice each Sunday, and every weeknight on alternating weeks. His Sunday sermons covered the New Testament, his weeknight sermons the Old Testament. Those sermons were recorded by a stenographer and became, along with his other lectures, the basis of his many commentaries. The pulpit truly was the heart of his ministry, as he moved through the Scriptures verse-by-verse, book-by-book, always seeking the natural meaning of the text followed by its application. He also correctly believed that preaching was the primary task of the pastor and was how God educates His people. Based on Ephesians 4:10-13, which concerns the pastor-teacher perfecting the saints, he wrote in his Institutes:

We see how God, who could in a moment perfect his own, nevertheless desires them to grow up into manhood solely under the education of the church. We see the way set for it: the preaching of the heavenly doctrine has been enjoined upon the pastors. We see that all are brought under the same regulation, that with a gentle and teachable spirit they may allow themselves to be governed by teachers appointed to this function . . . the church is built up solely by outward preaching, and that the saints are held together by one bond only: that with common accord, through learning and advancement, they keep the church order established by God.[26]

 

As I reach that several times, it impressed me more deeply each time. Today we build on entertainment, personality, and pleasing people. But in reality, this is building on nothing but shifting sand.

 

Calvin also added, “The ministry of the Word . . . and how far our reverence for it should go, that it may be to us a perpetual token by which to distinguish the church.”[27] John Calvin would certainly agree with the statement that a “church” that does not have preaching at the core is not a Biblical church. We need to carefully consider that point. There are countless evangelical “churches” today, but if Calvin was right—and according to what the Bible says, he was—then many of those “churches” are not truly churches at all. They are entertaining, they are appealing, they are great social centers, but they are not New Testament churches.

 

Huldrych Zwingli, while not of the statue of Luther and Calvin, valued preaching even more than they and was inexhaustible in the pulpit. He was committed to the Bible as the direct Word of God and practiced the plain, simple exposition of It. It wasn’t popes or councils that should rule the Church in Zwingli’s view, rather the Scripture alone, and maintained that “preaching is the sign of the true pastor.”[28]

 

What would Zwingli, Calvin, and Luther think of our day when countless pastors are anything and everything except preachers?

 

If there is one description that could sum up the Puritans of the 16th and 17th centuries, it would be this: a group of Reformers of the Church of England who believed in the absolute infallibility and authority of Scripture and who practiced the essential primacy of preaching. As one writer observes, they “were unanimous in saying that the pastor’s primary task was preaching.”[29] The Puritans are harshly criticized, and one of the greatest epithets that can be cast at someone is to call them “puritanical,” but such criticisms show a total ignorance of who they were. Why was preaching central in their thinking? As another writer correctly puts it, “Preaching, they said, is the exposition of the Word of God; and therefore it must control everything.” [30] What could be more important than the proclamation of God’s Word? A comedian? A play? A rap singer? A rock group? A movie? The same writer adds that it was the Puritans who also brought back the central position of the pulpit in the church building so that people’s attention would be drawn there not to the altar.

 

We could go on for many pages to illustrate, but if we had to name only one of the Puritans, it would have to be John Owen, whom Spurgeon called “The prince of the Puritans” and advised, “To master his works is to be a profound Theologian.”[31] So important and central was preaching in Owen’s mind that he said:

The principal work of ministers is, “to preach the word in season and out of season;”—by all means to carry on the church in the knowledge of God, and of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ . . . Those who take upon themselves to be pastors, and neglect this work of feeding the flock, may, at as cheap a rate, and with equal modesty, renounce Jesus Christ.[32]

 

What an indictment! Those who fail to preach Biblically should just renounce Christ and be done with it. Owen would probably not be liked much if he were around today. Neither would William Ames, who advocated expository preaching only and castigated a common error of our own day, namely, topical preaching that does not deal solely with the text of Scripture:

Ministers impose upon their hearers and altogether forget themselves when they propound a certain text in the beginning as the start of the sermon and then speak many things about or simply by occasion of the text but for the most part draw nothing our of the text itself.[33]

 

Descending from the Puritans were the great preachers of the 18th Century, such as, among others, Thomas Boston, George Whitefield, Charles Simeon, and John Newton, whose most famous preaching was a series of 50 messages on the Scripture texts that were the basis of Handel’s Messiah. Simeon would be still another preacher who would not be welcomed with open arms today, for his view of preaching was:

My endeavor is to bring out of the Scriptures what is true and not to trust in what I think may be there . . . I love the simplicity of the Scriptures and I seek to receive and inculcate every truth precisely in the way it is set forth in the sacred volume . . . Reading one’s own ideas into Scripture in not preaching God’s truth.[34]

 

Writing over 200 years ago, Charles Simeon perfectly summed up the tragically popular book mentioned earlier, The Prayer of Jabez, for that is exactly what the author did. He came to the Bible with his own preconceived notion of prosperity and then set out to prove it using appalling hermeneutics and warped theology.[35]

 

Another great preacher of that era was the brilliant, Strict Baptist, John Gill, who preached in London over 100 years before Spurgeon (who often quoted Gill). While largely ignored in our day, he was well known in his as a great preacher, theologian, and commentator. His ten million word exposition of Scripture is astounding, but his crowning achievement was his 1,000 page theological work, A Body of Doctrinal and Practical Divinity, which “was his last work, and contains the substance of what he delivered to his people through the space of five or six years.”[36] Think of it! How do most people today react to the preaching of doctrine and practice? On the issue of the work of pastors, here is a brief excerpt:

The chief and principal of their work is to feed the church of God committed to their care . . . it is the business of all under-shepherds to feed their respective flocks. Whom they are to feed: not dogs . . . nor swine . . . nor goats . . . [but Christ’s] sheep and lambs . . . What are they to feed the church or flock of God with? Not with chaff and husks . . . [but with] milk . . . for newborn babes  . . . the more plain and easy truths of the gospel . . . [and] strong meat, the more sublime doctrines of it, fitter for those of full age.

 

Gill was right. The pastor is not to appeal to the “unchurched,” rather to the real flock. Gill goes on to detail the means by which pastors do this:

By the ministry of the word, or by the preaching of the gospel; which is the means appointed of God for the gathering in his elect ones, for the perfecting the number of them in conversion, and for the edification of the body, the church, and all its members; for their growth in grace, and in the knowledge of Christ, and of all divine things: an unpreaching pastor, bishop, or elder is a contradiction in terms.[37]

 

Tragically, and to our shame, there is an appallingly growing number of “contradictions” standing in pulpits today.

 

Then in the 19th Century, there were men such as the “Prince of Expositors” Alexander Maclaren, as well as J. C. Ryle, John Broadus, Robert Dabney, William Taylor, and others. We should appreciate this statement Taylor made at the famous Beecher Lectures on Preaching in 1875-76:

Exposition is the presentation to the people, in an intelligible and forcible manner, of the meaning of the sacred writer which has been first settled by the preacher for himself, by the use of those grammatical and historical instruments with which his preparatory training has furnished him.[38]

 

Finally, and thankfully, the 20th Century saw at least a few preachers who recognized the central nature of preaching, such as Donald Grey Barnhouse, W. H. Griffith Thomas, Harry Ironside, G. Campbell Morgan, and Alexander Whyte, who once said, “The pulpit is a jealous mistress, and will not brook a divided allegiance.”[39] What a way to put it! The pulpit is the pastor’s ministry, and it will not tolerate a loyalty to anything else. In more recent days there has also been a few, such as James Montgomery Boice (d. 2000) and John MacArthur, who have been committed to the pulpit ministry.

 

There is another who stands out in my heart and mind; as John Owen was a formative influence on David Martyn Lloyd-Jones (d. 1981), Lloyd-Jones has been the same in my own ministry. His book Preaching and Preachers, mentioned earlier, helped mold my thinking on the place of preaching in Biblical church ministry. In the opening words of that series of lectures he said:

Ultimately my reason for being very ready to give these lectures is that to me the work of preaching is the highest and the greatest and the most glorious calling to which anyone can ever be called. If you want something in addition to that I would say without any hesitation that the most urgent need in the Christian Church today is true preaching; it is the greatest and most urgent need in the Church, it is obviously the greatest need of the world also.[40]

 

Spoken in 1969, those words are all but lost in our day, when preaching is no longer preaching, when we think we are above such outdated methods, when we redefine it to appeal to the masses. But as another writer rightly concludes, “A study of the history of expository preaching makes it clear that such preaching is deeply rooted in the soil of Scripture. Thus, it is the only kind of preaching that perpetuates biblical preaching in the church.”[41]

 

How we so desperately need men today who, with the Apostle Paul and many who came after him, will commit themselves to the exposition of Scripture and nothing else. As I encouraged the sheep under my care the morning I preached this study, on the prayer list of every Christian today should be Christianity itself. May each one of us be praying for pastors we know, and even those we don’t know, that they will preach the Truth, and nothing but the Truth, no matter what. What so many today either don’t know, or have forgotten, is that they will one day stand before our Lord and answer for what they taught, or didn’t teach (Jas. 3:1).

 

The Monday morning after preaching this study I received the following encouraging note from one couple in our church: “We are most thankful for your dedication to preaching truth! Not a day goes by that we don’t thank the Lord for you and your family and pray for your continued strength, wisdom, and desire to continue preaching and teaching us. Thank you!” I would say to all the believers sitting in all the pews in all the churches out there, “Pray for pastors. We need it.”

 

II. What We Are To Preach (vs. 8b‑9)

the unsearchable riches of Christ;

And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

 

This principle is actually more important than our first one, but without the first one we cannot possibly grasp, much less appreciate, the second. Unless we fully understand that we are to preach Truth, we can’t possible grasp the deep significance of the actual contents of our preaching.

 

Ponder a moment what we should not preach. First, as we’ve already considered, we should not preach what is shallow, trendy, entertaining, popular, pleasing, and so forth. Second, however, neither should we preach about current events. There are many who feel we should deal with the pressing problems of society from the pulpit, but God’s Word gives no such command or even implication. Third, we should not preach patriotism. Many today turn their Sunday worship service into a patriotic rally and their pulpit into a politi­cal platform. Yes, all Christians should be good citizens; in fact, true Christians make the best citizens and the best patriots. But the Church and the pulpit are not for such things. Fourth, we shouldn’t preach moral reform to an ungodly world. This is another common practice today, which has even led to great efforts to unify everyone, regardless of their doctrine, for the purpose of moral improvement of society through political lobbying. But again, the Word of God no­where commands us to do this. The world does not want Biblical morality and will not listen to those who proclaim it. Plus, morality does not save anyone.

 

Notice, therefore, in the light of true Biblical preaching, Paul declares that there are two great truths we are to preach.

 

The Unsearchable Riches Of Christ (v. 8b)

 

the unsearchable riches of Christ;

 

Oh, what glorious words these are! As we’ve seen in Ephesians 3, Paul is revealing his place and responsibility to reveal the mystery of the Church. He now says that his first responsibility was to preach the unsearchable riches of Christ. The Greek for unsearchable (anexichniaston) means “that which cannot be traced out.” The root of this word is a noun that means “a track or a trail.” The verb used in our text is found only one other place in the New Testament: “Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgment and His ways past finding out” (Rom. 11:33). The word is also found in the Septuagint (the Greek Old Testa­ment). It was, for example, one of Job’s favorite words, as he declared of God, “Who doeth great things and unsearchable, marvelous things without number (Job 5:9; 9:10).

 

The word riches is the Greek ploutos, which literally means “wealth.” The meaning here, however, is figurative; it speaks of the whole wealth of salvation and growth in Christ. It is interesting to note that Paul was the only Scripture writer who used the figurative meaning of this ploutos, and that five of those fourteen figurative usages are in Ephesians (1:7, 18; 2:7; 3:8, 16). So, putting all this together we see: The wealth we have in Christ is a pathway we cannot trace; it is unfathomable from human understanding. Instead of the fluff and shallowness of most contemporary preaching, Paul declares that we are to preach unfathomable Truths. Calvin explained this by calling it “the astonishing and boundless treasures of grace.”[42] In his commentary on the Greek text, John Eadie goes even deeper:

The riches of Christ are not simply “riches of grace” — “riches of glory”— “riches of inheritance,” as some are inclined to restrict them, but the treasury of spiritual blessing which is Christ’s—so vast that the comprehension of its limits and the exhaustion of its contents are alike impossible . . . Even the value of the portion already possessed cannot be told by any symbols of numeration, for such riches can have no adequate exponent or representative . . . Their source is in Eternity . . . Their extent is boundless.[43]

 

In other words, even the parts of God’s Truth we do understand, we still don’t fully comprehend.

 

Now, to what riches is Paul specifically referring? Is he implying entertainment, pop-psychology, “felt needs,” or other popular notion? Hardly! He is, of course, referring back to the riches spoken of in Ephesians 1. How can any of us fathom (“trace out”) redemption, forgiveness, acceptance, election, adoption, God’s will, or the ministry of the Holy Spirit? We can’t! From human understanding we cannot understand these truths; we cannot possibly trace out this Truth; it is all a path in a jungle we could never find, much less follow. Rather, it is the Holy Spirit who gives us understanding. Do you see? Paul was to preach all this truth, but it was the Holy Spirit Who would illumine it to men.

 

Consider again how abundant these riches are; they’re everywhere we look! As one commentator points out,[44] extremely precious and valuable items are usually rare, which is why they are so valuable. Only cheap things are abundant. But here is the exception that proves the rule. The most precious, the most valuable realities in the universe—the riches of Christ—are also the most bountiful; they are everywhere we look No Christian is poor! Every single one of us is a spiritual tycoon. Men strive for monetary riches, but no matter how much they acquire, they want more. A reporter once asked oil tycoon J. Paul Getty, “If you retired now, would you say your holdings would be worth a billion dollars?” Pacing up and down the room mentally adding, Getty answered. “I suppose so, but remember, a billion doesn’t go as far as it used to.”[45] What a blessing to know that we can’t get any richer when we posses the unsearchable riches of Christ.

 

So, like Paul, every preacher is to preach the unsearchable riches of Christ. Instead of preaching shallow sermons, delivering motivational talks, having feel-good discussions, and teaching bad theology, we should be preaching the doctrine of the unsearch­able riches of Christ. As we will study in Ephesians 4:11-­12, the “evangelist” (i.e. “church planter”) is the descendant of the Apostle and the “pastor‑teacher” is the descendant of the Prophet. Both of these are to preach doctrine, not drivel.

 

There is something else we are to preach.

 

The Dispensation Of The Mystery (v. 9)

 

And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

 

The Greek behind fellowship is again oikonomia, the same word translated “dispensation” back in verse 2. We recall that the Church was a mystery; before this age the Church was completely hidden. Moreover, though Paul was not the only Apostle to whom the knowledge of the Church was given, the majority of Church truth was given to and through him.

 

In 1799, during Napoleon’s occupation of Egypt, some of his troops found a black basalt slab near the town of Rosetta in Lower Egypt. What came to be known as the Rosetta Stone now resides in the British Museum in London. It was inscribed in 196 BC with a decree praising the Egyptian king Ptolemy V, but what was startling was that the inscription was in three scripts: hieroglyphic, demotic (a simpler hieroglyphic), and Greek. Using the Greek as their key, scholars were able to decipher the never before understood hieroglyphic and demotic.

 

And so it is with the mystery of the Church; in a sense, it is God’s “Rosetta Stone.” As one expositor puts it, the Church is “the key to understanding what He promised in the Old Testament, what Christ did in the Gospels, what the early church did in the Book of Acts, what Paul and the other writers teach in the Epistles, and what God will do as recorded in the Book of Revelation.”[46] As we’ve noted already, without an understanding of the Church—it’s meaning, it’s minister, and its ministry—we are clueless as to what God is doing today.

 

That little word all is also significant. While the Critical Text, and therefore some modern translations (such as the NASB), omit the Greek pantas (all), the evidence for it is overwhelming. Nearly all manuscripts contain it,[47] and for good reason. As the previous verse emphasizes, Paul was to “preach among the Gentiles,” so it follows quite naturally that he was to do this to all men, Jew and Gentile alike.[48]

 

So, the point here is that Paul is saying he was to preach and teach everything concerning the Church and was to teach it to everyone. To Paul the responsibility was given to preach (and write) about the origins, the organization, the officers, th