Every church wants to help people grow spiritually, and every leader wants to teach the Bible faithfully. That’s why some groups push back against using a publisher’s curriculum. You’ve heard the objections: “We don’t need curriculum because we have the Bible,” or “It’s not deep enough,” or “It costs too much.” These concerns come from a desire to honor Scripture and steward resources well—but they miss the real value of using a trusted, well‑designed curriculum. When churches choose resources like the ones my company, Lifeway, produces, they’re not replacing the Bible. They’re strengthening their ability to teach it.

Here are the top three objections I continue to hear from well-meaning church and Bible study group leaders when it comes to the use of a publisher’s curriculum in groups.

1. “We don’t need curriculum because we have the Bible.”

This objection sounds noble, but it misunderstands what curriculum actually does. Curriculum is not a substitute for Scripture; it’s a framework that helps teachers guide people through Scripture with clarity, accuracy, intentionality, balance, and purpose. The Bible is inspired—curriculum is not. But curriculum helps teachers handle the inspired text responsibly.

In my experience, when teachers use the Bible alone, they tend to camp out in certain books, or major on their favorite theological tenets. Bible study should be about balance – teaching people the entire counsel of God, not just the subjects that appeal to me as a teacher.

A good curriculum provides:

• A systematic plan for teaching the whole counsel of God, not just favorite passages.
• Contextual background that keeps teachers from misinterpreting or misapplying Scripture.
• Age‑appropriate guidance so every group—from preschoolers to adults—engages the Bible at the right level.

Most churches don’t struggle with access to the Bible. They struggle with alignment around the Bible. Curriculum gives your church a shared discipleship pathway so groups aren’t scattered across dozens of topics with no unified direction.

2. “Curriculum isn’t deep enough.”

Depth is important—but depth isn’t the same as complexity. A lesson can be complicated and still not be spiritually deep. Depth comes from helping people understand Scripture, apply it, and live it out in community.

Here’s my biggest beef with the “it’s not deep enough” proponents: an ongoing curriculum series is not designed to be “deep.” A strong curriculum series for ongoing groups (those that meet on most Sundays, or on a consistent day of the week) takes into consideration that there should be lost and saved people in those groups. If the curriculum is too “deep” for an unbeliever to grasp, or too challenging (like days of homework and required study between meetings), it can discourage, not encourage, attendance.

A good ongoing curriculum will assume that it must be simple enough for an unbeliever to grasp and apply, but at the same time deliver enough “meat” that it feeds a growing believer. A good curriculum walks this tightrope every week.

There are plenty of other opportunities to take people deep into God’s Word – mid-week intensive studies that do require homework, or D-groups (discipleship groups) where three to five same-sex people get together for study and a higher level of accountability. But that kind of depth is not supposed to be a part of ongoing groups – and that’s the issue that some group leaders try to address when they say the curriculum “isn’t deep enough” – it’s not supposed to be!

Strong curriculum offers depth in several ways:

• Biblical accuracy. Publishers employ theologians, editors, and researchers who ensure lessons are faithful to the text.
• Layered content. Leader guides, commentary, word studies, and teaching helps allow teachers to go deeper as needed.
• Application‑driven design. Deep teaching doesn’t stop at interpretation; it leads people toward transformation.

If a teacher wants to go deeper, curriculum doesn’t limit them—it launches them. It provides the scaffolding on which deeper study can be built. In fact, many churches discover that curriculum actually raises the level of teaching because it gives leaders confidence, structure, and solid biblical support.

3. “Curriculum is too expensive.”

Cost matters, especially for small churches. But curriculum isn’t an expense—it’s an investment in discipleship. When churches rely solely on volunteer‑created lessons, they often underestimate the hidden costs:

• Time. Preparing biblically sound lessons takes hours each week. Curriculum gives that time back to leaders.
• Quality. Without trained editors and theologians, lesson quality varies widely from group to group.
• Consistency. Curriculum ensures every group receives trustworthy, aligned teaching.

When you consider the value—doctrinal integrity, leader support, unified discipleship, and time saved—the cost becomes far more reasonable. And for many churches, curriculum prevents costly mistakes: doctrinal confusion, teacher burnout, and fragmented ministry direction.

My Conclusion

Using curriculum doesn’t diminish your commitment to Scripture—it strengthens it. It equips teachers, unifies your groups, protects your doctrine, and ensures your people are being discipled intentionally rather than randomly. The Bible is the foundation. Curriculum is the scaffolding that helps your church build on that foundation with wisdom, clarity, and purpose.

If your church wants to grow deeper, stay aligned, and disciple people well, a trusted curriculum isn’t a luxury. It’s a strategic tool for spiritual formation.