Expository Preaching—The New Golden Calf: A Response to Ryan Denton

I've known Ryan Denton for some time now, having had the privilege of preaching alongside him in Scotland. We shared the open air, proclaiming the gospel to hardened hearts, and in those moments, I saw his zeal for the lost firsthand.

Ryan’s passion for street preaching is something I greatly admired, and he has undoubtedly impacted my own approach to public evangelism. In fact, before I ever even met Ryan in person, I used to watch his YouTube videos of him open-air preaching to hone in my own skills and methods. He was certainly a man worth imitating in that realm.

But, as iron sharpens iron, sometimes friends must also speak plainly to one another when one of us has taken a wrong turn.

Ryan recently wrote an article titled 'Expository Preaching—The New Golden Calf,' and frankly, I’m stunned. There’s no easy way to say this, but he’s dead wrong. Not just a little off—dead wrong. To suggest that expository preaching has become an idol is not only historically myopic but spiritually reckless.

The very idea that faithful exposition of God’s Word is some kind of cold, golden calf of the Reformed world is like claiming that breathing oxygen is an unnecessary luxury—absurd and patently false.

Let’s start with the premise: that expository preaching, as practiced today, has been elevated to an idolatrous status. Ryan claims that Reformed churches have become so obsessed with verse-by-verse exposition that they’ve neglected experiential preaching. He paints a picture of sermons that are more lecture than lifeline, where the heart remains untouched while the intellect is merely fed. While I can appreciate his call for passion in the pulpit, his proposal to essentially demote expository preaching in favor of what he calls “experiential preaching” is deeply flawed.

There’s a glaring problem with his argument. He has conflated poor preaching with expository preaching. The issue is not that expository preaching inherently lacks warmth or urgency—it’s that some men simply fail to preach it well.

To say that exposition has become an idol because some men lack the fire to deliver it with conviction is like saying the problem with literature is that some authors are boring. It’s not the method, it’s the execution.

Furthermore, Ryan’s push for what he calls experiential preaching sounds suspiciously like the emotionalistic drivel that plagued much of evangelicalism during the seeker-sensitive movement. Have we forgotten so soon the hollowed-out theology of the 90s, where feel-good sermons replaced doctrinal depth?

Ryan rightly criticizes the theatrical, light-hearted approach of modern evangelicalism, but his proposed solution is to make preaching more like a spontaneous pep rally—90% application, 10% exegesis. That’s not just overcorrecting, it’s steering into a theological ditch.

Expository preaching is not just a method of delivering God’s Word, it’s a conviction that God’s Word should be heard as it was given. It’s the belief that Scripture, in its God-breathed entirety, is sufficient to equip the saints.

When we stand in the pulpit, we are not self-help gurus or motivational speakers, we are heralds of divine truth. The very nature of preaching demands that the text be explained, expounded, and applied—not through a lens of human enthusiasm but through the authority of the text itself.

Ryan also suggests that old-time preachers—Spurgeon, Edwards, the Puritans—didn’t preach expositionally. But this is historically and theologically naive. Did Spurgeon preach with passion? Absolutely. Did he apply the text powerfully? Without question.

But he never did so at the expense of faithful exposition.

Spurgeon’s sermons were filled with biblical substance, grounded in robust theological truth. The passion wasn’t an alternative to exposition, it was born from it.

So to be clear, I’m certainly not defending dry, lifeless sermons that merely recite facts. Nobody wants that. But to suggest that the solution is to minimize exposition in favor of emotional appeal is to swap one error for another. Preaching is not merely emoting, especially manipulatively emoting. It’s proclaiming the powerful Word of God, the Word that never returns void…ever.

It’s the forceful, Spirit-filled delivery of divine truth. When exposition lacks power, the problem isn’t the exposition—it’s the preacher’s heart, his prayer life, his lack of reliance on the Holy Spirit. Fix that, and you’ll fix the preaching.

Ryan and I have both seen the error of sermons that entertain but don’t edify. We’ve seen crowds stirred to excitement only to walk away unchanged. This is a rot that plagues charismatic churches. And I’m not saying Reformed circles are immune to the same cancer. But the cure is not to abandon the very method that God has used for centuries to strengthen His church. Instead, we must reignite the pulpit with conviction, urgency, and biblical fidelity.

We must preach like dying men to dying men, letting the text fuel our fervor.

Expository preaching is not the golden calf—it’s the golden standard. When properly wielded, it’s not a dusty academic exercise but a blazing torch that lights up the human soul.

Let’s not abandon it just because some men do it poorly. Instead, let’s challenge ourselves to preach it rightly, with passion, clarity, and uncompromising faithfulness. And let’s certainly not abandon the old paths just because the modern mind finds them tedious. We are not here to please men or stroke egos, we are here to proclaim the unsearchable riches of Christ.

God’s Word is sufficient. Let’s do it right.