So how do you distinguish between the two? First, let’s be clear on what are not true differences. The difference between teaching and preaching is not that one appeals to the head versus the other is for the heart. Nor is it simply a matter of talking versus shouting. It is not that one is complex and the other is simple. And again, the two are not mutually exclusive. All preaching has teaching within it and, when you sit under a good teacher, true teaching about Christ will invariably have preaching coming through at points. So what are some valuable distinctions to be made? Let me suggest at least six important ones.

As I instruct students in homiletics, one of the distinctions I try to help them see is that of preaching versus teaching. Clearly, pastors must do both, and there is a great deal of overlap. After the apostles were beaten by the Jewish authorities, they were released and we are told that they “did not cease teaching and preaching that the Christ is Jesus” (Acts 5:42). So they both taught and preached, yet the use of both of these words does denote a difference.

In his book Why Johnny Can’t Preach, David Gordon points out this distinction in his critique of modern, Western preaching. He notes that many ministers in this generation talk about subjects, but do not bring out from the text what amounts to a “convincing, compelling weight on the soul of the hearer.” Men lecture behind pulpits instead of proclaim, sounding more like they are reading a commentary than urging their listeners with heart-felt truth.

So how do you distinguish between the two? First, let’s be clear on what are not true differences. The difference between teaching and preaching is not that one appeals to the head versus the other is for the heart. Nor is it simply a matter of talking versus shouting. It is not that one is complex and the other is simple. And again, the two are not mutually exclusive. All preaching has teaching within it and, when you sit under a good teacher, true teaching about Christ will invariably have preaching coming through at points. So what are some valuable distinctions to be made? Let me suggest at least six important ones.

Heralding versus instructing. Two primary words in the Greek New Testament describing the activity of preaching are high-powered, active words. One word, kerusso, denotes the activity of a king’s messenger proclaiming news in a city. The other, euangelizomai, speaks of announcing the good news of Christ. In contrast, teaching (didasko) denotes the imparting of knowledge and instruction in wisdom.

Certain moral obligation versus possible moral duty. In preaching, the minister is calling the congregation hearing the message to faith and duty. As Lloyd-Jones states, preaching is not just a talk, lecture, or commentary on a text. Rather, it is declarative in nature and lays upon the hearers moral imperative.  Teaching, on the other hand, can imply duty but does not necessarily do so. For example, a sermon on the Gospel of Mark would necessarily obligate the hearers to believe and follow Christ. But a lecture on the historical background of the Gospel of Mark would not be morally binding in the same way.

First or mostly second person in address versus third person. In teaching on a Bible passage, it is fine only to ask and answer the question, “What was the author by the power of the Spirit saying to his original audience in the text?”  Yet in preaching, one must go further. He must both ask and proclaim the answer, “What am I by the power of the Spirit saying to this congregation from this text?” The former question is answered in the third person; the latter question demands the second person in expression or, perhaps some times, the first person. I tell students that, when preaching, they are not to be like a museum curator merely pointing out an interesting historic fact or two about the text. Rather, they must address directly the people before them with the text.

Read More