Much of modern evangelical preaching in North America these days is like the Sabine Lake in Southeast Texas: deceptively shallow. I still remember a former congregant taking me out in his boat, stopping in the middle of the lake, and telling me that if I jumped overboard, my head might still be sticking up out of the water. Sadly, too many contemporary churchgoers seek out preaching that will allow them to plunge deeply into the truths of God’s Word, only to end up disappointed when their feet hit the bottom before their heads have even gone under the water.
Of course, there are portions of Sabine Lake that are much deeper, but that is because they have been heavily dredged to allow the passage of large ships. In the same way, there are segments of North American evangelical preaching that have been deeply dredged, and today I want to advocate for further dredging. There is a popular saying (often falsely attributed to Augustine) that Scripture is “shallow enough for a child not to drown, yet deep enough for an elephant to swim.” The perennial challenge preachers face is crafting sermons that meet that same description.
Faithful preaching finds its depth in Scripture itself. The best way for sermons to “go deep” is to carefully engage the details of the biblical text and the doctrine that the text teaches. I have been preaching regularly (or at least semi-regularly) for more than a decade in various contexts—jail ministry, pulpit supply, full-time pastoral ministry, etc. During this time, I have tried to embrace an approach to preaching that is both robustly exegetical and deeply theological. I strive to pay careful attention to the details of the biblical text in my sermons: vocabulary, grammar, syntax, and historical and cultural backgrounds. I also strive to provide accessible yet substantive reflection on the Christian doctrines that are taught explicitly and/or implicitly in the texts from which I preach.
Of course, this approach to preaching certainly is not unique to me. Great preachers and theologians throughout the history of the Church have championed exegetical and theological preaching. Origen of Alexandria, John Chrysostom, Augustine, Bernard of Clairvaux, Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther, John Calvin, the Puritans, Charles Spurgeon, and countless others have made it a point to dive deeply into the details of the biblical text and mine them for doctrinal insights from the pulpit.
And this approach to preaching has enjoyed a resurgence of popularity during recent decades. Influential preachers such as W.A. Criswell, John MacArthur, David Allen, John Piper, Mark Dever, and more have both advocated and modeled this style of preaching, as have numerous institutions, such as The Gospel Coalition, Simeon Trust, and the various Southern Baptist seminaries. I am but one of many, many preachers today who embrace this approach to the pulpit.
However, this approach to the pulpit has many detractors, even within evangelical churches and seminaries. The single most common refrain I have encountered has been the accusation that exegetical and theological preaching is “impractical” or “irrelevant.”
For example, Andy Stanley has commented, “That isn’t how you grow people… All Scripture is equally inspired, but not all Scripture is equally applicable or relevant to every stage of life. My challenge is to read culture and to read an audience and ask: What is the felt need?”1Scot McKnight, “In Defense Of Andy,” Jesus Creed, last modified May 14, 2015, accessed July 25, 2025, https://www.patheos.com/blogs/jesuscreed/2015/05/14/in-defense-of-andy/.
To be fair to the critics, there are plenty of preachers who neglect application in their preaching and reduce the sermon to merely a doctrinal lecture.
On the other hand, some critics are opposed not only to the absence of application, but also to the presence of what they consider excessive, unnecessary exegetical and theological details. I have personally experienced this sort of criticism against my own preaching on occasion: “We don’t need to know [insert exegetical detail]!” “Who cares about [insert doctrinal point]?”
I am convinced this perspective, which prioritizes application over exegetical and theological detail, robs churchgoers of the riches that they may find in Scripture. King David describes the Word of God as “more desirable than gold—than an abundance of pure gold; and sweeter than honey dripping from a honeycomb” (Psalm 19:10 CSB). How foolish it would be to neglect or even reject the glorious truths God has revealed in Scripture in favor of what contemporary listeners personally find “practical” or “relevant”!
In this essay, I will argue for the importance of exegetical and theological preaching. This piece will not provide a comprehensive theology or practice of preaching, but will focus instead on proving two specific points: (1) Sermons should carefully and substantively address the exegetical details of the biblical text, and (2) Sermons should explain and reflect upon Christian doctrine at length.
Defining Exegesis
The New Testament scholar Michael Gorman, in his widely used seminary textbook Elements of Biblical Exegesis, defines exegesis as “the careful historical, literary, and theological analysis of a text… deliberate, word-by-word and phrase-by-phrase consideration of all the parts of a text in order to understand it as a whole.”2Michael J. Gorman, Elements of Biblical Exegesis: A Basic Guide for Students and Ministers, 2nd edition. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2009), 10.
Exegesis includes examining the historical and cultural backgrounds of a given biblical text; analyzing the text’s vocabulary, grammar, and syntax in the original languages; paying attention to the literary structure of the biblical book which contains a particular text; considering the literary devices used in the text itself; and comparing that text with other biblical texts which address the same or similar subjects. Exegesis is vital for accurately discerning the theological truths contained in the Word of God. (Of course, preachers do not approach the exegetical task as theological blank slates; theology and exegesis mutually inform one another and cannot be neatly separated.)
It is helpful to distinguish between the exegesis, which is part of the sermon preparation process, and the exegetical nature of the sermon itself. One can conduct extensive exegesis during the sermon preparation process while not discussing that exegesis in the sermon proper. Every preacher who carefully studies the biblical text before preaching will almost always have to leave at least some details of that study “on the cutting room floor.” A preacher cannot address every single minute detail from the pulpit, and too much information will simply confuse and overwhelm listeners. For example, the vast majority of listeners do not know the biblical languages, so preachers would be wise to limit how frequently they mention and the level of detail with which they discuss “the original Greek and Hebrew” in their sermons.
Preachers must make sure to know their audiences well and exercise wisdom in determining how much detail listeners can handle in each message. Sermons to children, for example, require much less information than sermons in seminary chapel services. Nevertheless, it is beneficial for preachers to demonstrate the fruits of their exegetical study, at least to a limited extent, in the sermon itself. To put it another way, in each sermon, preachers should make sure to carefully explain the key textual details (but not necessarily every last minute detail) of their biblical passage in a way that is understandable to their audience. Why?
Three Reasons for Exegetical Preaching
First, exegetical sermons reflect an appreciation of Scripture’s inspiration. The Holy Spirit so moved and superintended the human authors of the Bible that their very words in the original languages were written precisely as God intended (Matt 4:4, 5:18; 2 Tim 3:16; 2 Pet 1:20–21). This means that the finer details of the biblical text, particularly details like vocabulary and grammar, reflect not simply humanity’s words, but the very words of God.
The biblical text is inspired; its preachers (at least in the post-apostolic era) are not. A sermon is only authoritative insofar as it accurately presents what is taught in the text of Scripture. Since the text of Scripture is what is inspired, why would a preacher not want to focus the majority of their listeners’ attention on what the text itself says? Suppose a sermon contains only a cursory examination of the biblical text followed by extensive reflections and applications from the preacher. In that case, the focus of the sermon is not really on God’s Word but on a man’s words.
If biblical inspiration, as Christianity has traditionally understood it, is true, then God himself placed even the tiniest details in the biblical text by a special divine act. Why spend time in a sermon explaining the semantic range of a rare Greek noun? Because God chose that specific noun for that place for a reason. Why discuss the structure of a Hebrew sentence from the pulpit? Because God inspired the human author to structure that sentence that way for a reason. Grasping those finer exegetical details is necessary for grasping what God himself is communicating in a given passage.
Careful attention to exegetical details from the pulpit reflects a recognition that even the most seemingly insignificant details in the text of Scripture were inspired by God, and God’s own words are of infinitely superior value than any of our own.
Second, exegetical sermons help provide accountability for preachers. Scripture warns against those who twist and manipulate the words God has said (Gen 3:1-5; Acts 20:30; 2 Pet 3:16). Even Satan himself quotes Scripture to tempt Jesus (Matt 4:1-7). Just because someone cites Scripture does not mean they are using the text properly. And unfortunately, given the heavy workload that most working pastors face, it can be easy to mishandle or misrepresent Scripture unintentionally to craft the sermon under strict time constraints.
Preachers have a responsibility to demonstrate they are handling Scripture properly, and listeners have a responsibility to evaluate whether the preacher is handling Scripture properly. Luke praises the Berean Jews for personally examining the Scriptures to determine whether Paul’s preaching was true (Acts 17:11). If a preacher is going to stand up and claim to explain “what God meant” when he inspired a part of the Bible, that preacher must give evidence from the inspired text itself to support such assertions.
Moreover, Jesus condemns the Pharisees for “teaching as doctrines human commands” (Mark 7:7 CSB). The Pharisees and other religious experts of Jesus’s day imposed all manner of requirements upon the people around them and claimed the authority of God’s Law in doing so. However, many of those requirements were human inventions, not actually taught anywhere in Scripture.
When preachers preach, they are commanding their listeners to believe, speak, and act in certain ways, and preachers invoke the authority of God himself in issuing these commands. Therefore, the preacher has a responsibility to prove that the sermon’s exhortations and rebukes are truly biblical, and not simply the preacher’s own personal ideas. How can preachers demonstrate the legitimacy and authority of their message without carefully addressing the details of the biblical text for their listeners?
Third, exegetical sermons can assist listeners to be better students of Scripture. As mentioned above, Luke praises the Berean Jews because they “examined the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so” (Acts 17:11). How can the people listening to a sermon examine the Scriptures properly if they haven’t been taught how to do so?
Preachers may not have the opportunity to teach a comprehensive class on biblical interpretation to all of their listeners. However, every person who listens to a preacher can learn how to handle Scripture by paying attention to that preacher’s example. A person who listens to the same preacher extensively over time is likely to handle Scripture in a way similar to how the preacher handles It from the pulpit.
This phenomenon can be negative or positive. A person who spends years listening to sermons that barely engage the text of Scripture at all, or which mishandle Scripture, will eventually be conditioned to either ignore Scripture or distort it themselves. By contrast, a person who spends years listening to sermons that carefully engage Scripture will ultimately be conditioned to consult Scripture using the same methods their preachers have modeled from the pulpit.
Preachers should spend a significant amount of time in their sermons exploring and explaining the details of the biblical text because doing so shows reverence for God by honoring how he inspired Scripture, provides accountability for the preacher, and helps teach listeners how to rightly handle holy writ themselves.
The Controversy of Theological Preaching
One danger endemic to the exegetical task described above, particularly in modern times, is the neglect of Scripture’s fundamentally theological dimensions. Many contemporary biblical scholars reduce exegesis to the investigation of the text’s linguistics and history, thereby functionally reducing Scripture to a historical artifact as opposed to the living and active Word of God (Heb 4:12).
By contrast, Scripture presents, both through explicit statements and logically necessary implications, objective truth claims about the nature and identity of God, the nature and identity of humanity, and the relationship between them. The Bible is not simply a historical record of what ancient peoples thought about God; the Bible presents objective claims about God and humanity that we all must face and to which we are all called to submit.
As the Second London Baptist Confession so articulately states, “The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience… The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for His own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down or necessarily contained in the Holy Scripture” (2LBCF 1.1, 6).
Fortunately, outside the modern guild of academic biblical studies, the idea that Scripture is a theological text is relatively uncontroversial. However, the notion that sermons need to be theological is controversial, even within the Church. This is a peculiar controversy; if the Bible is a theological document, as all Christians would agree, then for sermons to be truly biblical, they must be theological. Yet many churchgoers and even preachers object to preaching that contains anything more than the most basic and essential Christian doctrines—if even that.
Preachers can usually get away with preaching about divine attributes like omnipresence and omniscience or soteriological truths like justification sola fide. But to dive into topics like divine simplicity, eternal relations of origin, the hypostatic union, dyothelitism, concurrence, or federal headship is to risk alienating most—if not all—of your listeners. Such a preacher risks being accused of “sounding like a professor,” “preaching over people’s heads,” “talking about stuff that doesn’t really matter,” or (my personal favorite) “teaching instead of preaching.”
The primary objections many Christians have toward doctrinal preaching can be boiled down into two main arguments: (1) Theology really isn’t that important, and even if it is, (2) the purpose of the sermon is not to teach theology, but to encourage us and help us live our lives better.
Refuting the First Objection
The first objection is more fundamental and presents a much greater problem that goes beyond preaching. Western Christianity, by and large, in the wake of the Enlightenment and the growth of pragmatism, has grown progressively more dismissive toward theological depth and precision. Doctrine is seen as potentially divisive and unnecessarily complex. Far too many Christians see their faith as primarily about this vague, largely undefined concept of a “relationship with Jesus.” Theology, particularly in preaching, takes a back seat or gets thrown out of the car altogether.
This attitude is flatly contrary to Scripture. The author of Hebrews sternly chastises his readers in a portion of his letter that is worth quoting at length:
We have a great deal to say about this [the Melchizedekian high priesthood of Christ], and it is difficult to explain, since you have become too lazy to understand. Although by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you the basic principles of God’s revelation again. You need milk, not solid food. Now, everyone who lives on milk is inexperienced with the message about righteousness, because he is an infant. But solid food is for the mature—for those whose senses have been trained to distinguish between good and evil. Therefore, let us leave the elementary teaching about Christ and go on to maturity (5:11–6:1a).
The author of Hebrews excoriates his readers for failing to advance in their doctrinal understanding beyond rudimentary faith and practice. The readers are stuck on basic matters like “repentance from dead works, faith in God… the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment” (6:1–2). But the readers need to advance! The author of Hebrews expects all his readers—not simply church leaders and teachers—to be steadily progressing in their knowledge of God. It is simply not enough to settle for the basic teachings of Christianity, the “bare essentials,” and neglect more complex and difficult aspects of the faith. Just as modern students should not quit school after completing kindergarten, Christians should not leave the study of doctrine after coming to faith in Christ.
When explaining the importance of theology to people, I often use the analogy of a romantic relationship. If you’re romantic partners with someone, you’re going to want to know their favorite color, favorite food, hobbies, interests, quirks, birthday, etc. While truly knowing someone and having a meaningful relationship with them involves more than simply knowing facts about them, it cannot involve less. We want to keep learning more and more about our romantic partners because we love them and they are important to us.
And how much more important is God? If you think it’s important to remember your romantic partner’s favorite color, why would you think it is unimportant to understand the relationship between Jesus Christ’s divine and human natures? If you think it’s important to remember how many siblings your romantic partner has, why would you think it is unimportant to understand the difference between God’s communicable and incommunicable attributes? Such an attitude indicates that you care less about your Lord and Savior than you do about your romantic partner!
There simply is no excuse for not at least trying to continually grow in one’s understanding of what God has revealed about himself in Scripture. The Bible contains far, far more information about God and humanity than simply “the ABCs of Christianity.” And as Paul asserts, “All Scripture is inspired by God and is profitable for teaching, for rebuking, for correcting, for training in righteousness” (2 Tim 3:16). Note that Paul says “all Scripture,” not “some Scripture” or “most Scripture.”
Refuting the Second Objection
Now we turn back to preaching specifically. Some Christians who acknowledge the importance of theology ironically assert the Sunday morning sermon isn’t the place for it. Countless cliches abound: preaching is supposed to be “practical,” “relevant,” and “encouraging.” (And these terms are often poorly defined.) Preachers should “save the theology for a Bible study or something.”
This attitude rests on multiple false dichotomies. The first false dichotomy is that preaching and teaching are fundamentally distinct and separate practices. Rather, preaching and teaching can be distinguished, but not separated. As Paul instructs Timothy, “Preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; correct, rebuke, and encourage with great patience and teaching” (2 Tim 4:2, emphasis added). Notice here that Paul includes “teaching” in his definition of preaching. “Teaching,” which could also be translated as “instruction” or “doctrine,” is a key component of preaching as Paul lays it out in this letter to Timothy. Preaching is more than teaching, but not less.
The second false dichotomy pits theology against encouragement and application. Admittedly, many preachers discuss doctrine at length without addressing their listeners’ hearts or providing concrete steps to respond to God’s revelation. However, this kind of mistake is not necessarily inherent to theological preaching. You can present deep theological truths in ways that grip the heart and drive listeners to change their lives.
That being said, the mere fact that a listener does not personally find a sermon emotionally engaging does not actually indicate anything objective about the sermon. The problem may lie in the listener, not the preaching. Consider that it may be the case that the listener’s heart is hardened and cold toward the truth of God’s Word. Listeners’ subjective responses to a sermon are not a reliable measure of a sermon’s objective quality (2 Timothy 4:3–4).
Moreover, the definition of “practical application” with which many preachers and their listeners operate is questionable. “Practical application” is often framed in a way that presumes the value of a sermon rides on the extent to which the sermon provides listeners with concrete actions they can perform in their everyday lives. By this standard, a sermon that delves deeply into the doctrine of the Trinity may not have much “practical application” at all. A person may ask, “What relevance does the Trinity have for my life at home or at work?”
But why does that matter? Who decided that a greater understanding of the Trinity is not, in and of itself, enough to justify a sermon? For what reason would a listener (or even a preacher!) presume they have the authority to decide what makes a sermon subject “worth preaching about” in the first place? Why does the sermon need to address the circumstances of your home life, your job, or anything else of that sort? Why is the nature and being of God not enough to warrant your careful attention?
To put it bluntly, the accusation that “the sermon lacked practical application” can sometimes simply mean, “the sermon did not address the circumstances of my life that I think are important.” God is more than worthy of our undivided attention, and the opportunity to learn more about God should be enough to warrant our listening. God does not have to make himself “useful” to us.
Make no mistake, profound truths about who God is and what God has done should transform the way we live our lives, and the full breadth of Scriptural teaching touches on virtually every aspect of our lives. Good preaching will highlight that reality. However, preachers can unintentionally undermine the life-altering purpose of God’s Word by letting the “felt needs” and personal circumstances of listeners dictate the content of the sermon. If sermons are focused on what the Lord has revealed in Scripture above all else, then preaching does not have to “make itself useful” to listeners. It will instead highlight the life-changing realities already embedded in the text itself and will let Scripture “set the agenda” for practical application.
Conclusion
Why should preachers engage in exegetical and theological preaching? Why should preachers explore the finer details of the biblical text and discuss the meaning of Christian doctrines in their sermons, rather than simply focus on application?
Exegetical preaching honors the inspiration of Scripture by paying careful attention to the details God inspired within the text, and exegetical preaching provides accountability for preachers while also helping listeners learn how to handle Scripture better. Theological preaching prioritizes Christians’ obligation to continually deepen our understanding of the Christian faith beyond its “elementary principles,” and theological preaching also recognizes that God himself—rather than the lives and felt needs of listeners—deserves to be the primary focus of the sermon.
Robust exegesis and profound theology are not necessarily at odds with emotional engagement or practical application. Church history’s greatest preachers have, for two millennia now, demonstrated as much over and over again in their preaching. Neither I nor any other preacher reading this essay can claim to do it perfectly. Still, exegetical and theological preaching is necessary to properly honor both the Scriptures and the God who inspired them.
