What Does It Mean “to Me”?
June 2nd, 2008
(By John MacArthur)
That’s a fashionable concern, judging from the trends in devotional booklets, home Bible study discussions, Sunday-school literature, and most popular preaching.
The question of what Scripture means has taken a back seat to the issue of what it means “to me.”
The difference may seem insignificant at first. Nevertheless, our obsession with the Scripture’s applicability reflects a fundamental weakness. We have adopted practicality as the ultimate judge of the worth of God’s Word. We bury ourselves in passages that overtly relate to daily living, and ignore those that don’t.
Early in my ministry, I made a conscious commitment to biblical preaching. My first priority has always been to answer the question, “What does this passage mean?” After I’ve explained as clearly and accurately as possible the meaning of God’s Word, then I exhort people to obey and apply it to their own lives.
The Bible speaks for itself to the human heart; it is not my role as a preacher to try to tailor the message. That’s why I preach my way through entire books of the Bible, dealing carefully with each verse and phrase–even though that occasionally means spending time in passages that don’t readily lend themselves to anecdotal or motivational messages.
I am grateful to the Lord for the way He has used this expository approach in our church and in the lives of our radio listeners.
But now and then someone tells me frankly that my preaching needs to be less doctrinal and more practical.
Practical application is vital. I don’t want to minimize its importance. But the distinction between doctrinal and practical truth is artificial; doctrine is practical! In fact, nothing is more practical than sound doctrine.
Too many Christians view doctrine as heady and theoretical. They have dismissed doctrinal passages as unimportant, divisive, threatening, or simply impractical. A best-selling Christian book I just read warns readers to be on guard against preachers whose emphasis is on interpreting Scripture rather than applying it.
Wait a minute. Is that wise counsel? No it is not.
There is no danger of irrelevant doctrine; the real threat is an undoctrinal attempt at relevance. Application not based on solid interpretation has led Christians into all kinds of confusion.
No discipline is more sorely needed in the contemporary church than expositional biblical teaching. Too many have bought the lie that doctrine is something abstract and threatening, unrelated to daily life.
It is in vogue to substitute psychology and spoon-fed application for doctrinal substance, while demeaning theological and expositional ministry.
But the pastor who turns away from preaching sound doctrine abdicates the primary responsibility of an elder: “holding fast the faithful word which is in accordance with the teaching, that he may be able both to exhort in sound doctrine and to refute those who contradict” (Titus 1:9).
Practical insights, gimmicks, and illustrations mean little if they’re not attached to divine principles. There’s no basis for godly behavior apart from the truth of God’s Word.
There are only three options: We teach truth, error, or nothing at all.
Before the preacher asks anyone to perform a certain duty, he must first deal with doctrine. He must develop his message around theological themes and draw out the principles of the texts. Then the truth can be applied.
Romans provides the clearest biblical example. Paul didn’t give any exhortation until he had given eleven chapters of theology.
He scaled incredible heights of truth, culminating in 11:33-36: “Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who became His counselor? Or who has first given Him that it might be paid back to Him again? For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever. Amen.”
Then in chapter 12, he turned immediately to the practical consequences of the doctrine of the first 11 chapters. No passage in Scripture captures the Christian’s responsibility to the truth more clearly than Romans 12:1-2. There, building on eleven chapters of profound doctrine, Paul calls each believer to a supreme act of spiritual worship–giving oneself as a living sacrifice. Doctrine gives rise to dedication to Christ, the greatest practical act. And the remainder of the book of Romans goes on to explain the many practical outworkings of one’s dedication to Christ.
Paul followed the same pattern in Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, and 1 Thessalonians. The doctrinal message came first. Upon that foundation he built the practical application, making the logical connection with the word therefore (Rom. 12:1; Gal. 5:1; Eph. 4:1; Phil. 2:1) or then (Col. 3:1; 1 Thess. 4:1).
True doctrine transforms behavior as it is woven into the fabric of everyday life. But it must be understood if it is to have its impact. The real challenge of the ministry is to dispense the truth clearly and accurately. Practical application comes easily by comparison.
No believer can apply truth he doesn’t know. Those who don’t understand what the Bible really says about marriage, divorce, family, child-rearing, discipline, money, debt, work, service to Christ, eternal rewards, helping the poor, caring for widows, respecting government, and other teachings won’t be able to apply it.
Those who don’t know what the Bible teaches about salvation cannot be saved. Those who don’t know what the Bible teaches about holiness are incapable of dealing with sin. Thus they are unable to live fully to their own blessedness and God’s glory.
The nucleus of all that is truly practical is sown up in the teaching of Scripture. We don’t make the Bible relevant; it is inherently so, simply because it is God’s Word. And after all, how can anything God says be irrelevant?
I’m not as concerned with the people that add “to me” to the meaning of Scripture because they’re simply adding their own red flag. I’m more concerned with people who throw out their own personal idea and add, “thus saith the Lord.”
As for doctrine being theoretical as opposed to practical, it isn’t. You’re right, sound doctrine is ultimately practical. The problem, I believe, is not with the doctrine, it’s with the one presenting the doctrine. Doctrine needs to be applied by the preacher and teacher. The doctrine of the Trinity, for example, can be applied to a wide array of real world examples. Give me a preacher that can do this, anyday.
We recently had two expositional sermons preached at our church and the reactions were dramatic. I loved it and found my thoughts racing in many different directions, my middle son, 16, listened to the sermon for the first time in years. Several others were blessed by it. On the other hand, one lady in the nursery was glad that this preacher wasn’t preaching anymore because he preached for almost an hour compared to the usual 35-40 minutes. Another complained about a little preaching desribing sodomy. Still others were upset about the preaching on the Biblical role of women. We’re used to having sermons of a length of 30-40 minutes and up to 75% of it being application. Many in our church do not know the word at all even though they have been there many years. Our pastor considers himself an expositor and he does generally preach through a particular book. However, he is much like J. Vernon McGee and while he preaches book by book he does not dig much beyond the surface and his illustrations usually have nothing to do with the Bible. He is a Godly man and I love him but my heart aches for a true expositor.
“We don’t make the Bible relevant; it is inherently so, simply because it is God’s Word.”
AMEN!
At 17, I should be prone to asking such a question, however the more one looks at it, the more absurd it shows itself to be. If this is a word of an inerrant God, then why should the meaning of that text be derived devoid of that God?
Just some food for thought…
I find tdhat so many “women’s” bible studies focus more on the “practical” without uncovering the larger doctrinal foundation. The proliferation of psychology as opposed to doctrine in the pages of literature directed to women is truly alarming.
The more my doctrinal foundations are secure, the more content I become in the will of God.
I like the way MacArthur puts it: “Practical insights, gimmicks, and illustrations don’t mean much if they’re not attached to divine principles (doctrine).” I am much more apt to apply a Christian perspective and resist temptation and fall prey to sin if, when I’m tempted, I think about the doctrinal reasons why my behavior should be godly as compared to un-godly. This, in short-order, is how I best am able to actually apply Scripture in a way that works itself out.
As long as the Holy Spirit is in you and your desire is the sincere knowledge of the truth of God’s word so you can live a life pleasing to God, you will never be led astray by mere mortals. The Holy Spirit is the one who convicted us of our sins and caused us to turn to Christ. This same Holy Spirit is the one who will keep us unto the day of redemption–the eminent return of Jesus Christ. The Holy Spirit is the one who teaches, leads, and guides us into all truth. 1 Co 2:1-16 explains:
[1] And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God.
[2] For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.
[3] And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling.
[4] And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power:
[5] That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.
[6] Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:
[7] But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:
[8] Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.
[9] But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
[10] But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
[11] For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
[12] Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
[13] Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
[14] But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
[15] But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
[16] For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.