This is a public health warning for the attention of all those involved in the cure of souls (here’s a representative list). A particularly insidious threat to spiritual wellbeing has been identified, and we need your help in eradicating it. The phenomenon has been dubbed ‘Bible Resistance’. The group in society most at risk from Bible Resistance are Christians who identify themselves as members of ‘good’, ‘faithful’ or ‘Bible-believing’ congregations.
Bible Resistance has a number of parallels to the medical phenomenon of antibiotic resistance. In simplified terms, antibiotic resistance can occur when a course of antibiotics is prescribed for the treatment of certain bacterial infections. The patient begins to take the antibiotic course, which eliminates a large proportion of the bacteria with the first few doses. However, as soon as the patient begins to feel better, he or she stops taking them and fails to complete the course. The result is that the bacteria that are left (bacteria which are naturally less susceptible to the antibiotics) multiply to form a population of bacteria that is more resistant to the antibiotics. This lessens the effectiveness of the antiobiotics in the future. To mitigate against this phenomenon, patients are strongly urged to finish their course of antibiotics, even if they start to feel better before the course is finished.
Bible Resistance develops in an analogous manner. Christians are subjected to accurate Bible teaching that helps them in their understanding of God immensely. They are able to comprehend the big picture of God’s work through the proper application of biblical theology; they learn to read the Bible for themselves through careful exegesis and exposition; and they gain an awareness of God’s grace and power through the judicious introduction of important doctrines. However, Bible resistance can develop when the Bible teaching frequently fails to ‘finish the course’ in that it fails to devote sufficient time and energy to helping people see the relevance of the subject matter for their own behaviour. That is, the application of the Bible teaching to the individual (i.e. “How should I respond to this?”) is inadequate; it is abbreviated, absent, irrelevant, impossible, assumed, unconnected to the exegesis of the passage, clichéd, just a hobbyhorse of the teacher, delivered impersonally, hypocritical or un-thought-through. The result is that the person’s life remains unchanged, and he or she becomes used to hearing ‘good’ Bible teaching without feeling the need to really respond. This lessens the effectiveness of any Bible teaching in the future. To mitigate against this phenomenon, Bible teachers are strongly urged to devote adequate time and attention to providing incisive and relevant application in their teaching. They must also be in the habit of applying the Bible to themselves frequently before they apply it to others.
The author of this article has himself been guilty of many of the aforementioned omissions, and urges all Bible teachers to be on their guard.
To help you identify individuals at risk of Bible Resistance, the following warning signs may help (the list is not exhaustive):
- A disposition to respond to Bible teaching predominantly by providing ‘feedback’ on how well the exegesis was performed, or how closely it fit with certain predefined doctrinal standards
- A lack of any reference to one’s own personal repentance (in thought, word and deed) in an individual’s conversation
- A preoccupation with the failings of others
- (Related to the previous point) a preoccupation with church or denominational politics
- A lack of observable Christian growth over a period of years
The seriousness of Bible resistance cannot be underestimated. Bible resistance is known to be a contributing factor to a fatal condition known as “hardness of heart”. See, for example, Psalm 95, Mark 3:1-5, Mark 10:1-9, Romans 2 and Hebrews 3, for the devastating effects of this condition. Please be on your guard, and pay particular attention to your application in your Bible teaching. The following suggestions may help (again, the list is not exhaustive):
- Devote adequate time in your teaching to applying the Bible passage to the listeners. Get rid of other material if you need to.
- Ensure that the application flows from the Bible passage itself, rather than from your own predispositions.
- Choose specific examples rather than just dealing in generalities.
- Check that the application is relevant and possible for your listeners.
- Consider applications that relate to the understanding, the will, the affections and the conscience.
God-willing, after receiving healthy doses of this, your congregation will be guarded against infection!
Lionel,
This is insightful and challenging. But I’m wondering if you can tease out what you mean by ‘application’.
The advocates of ‘more application’ in sermons often mean more ‘things you should do’—and the trouble with this is that the more detailed and specific the exhortations become, the less likely they are to a) spring from God’s Word; or b) really apply to the whole congregation; or c) be anything other than an expression of the preacher’s particular agenda, predilections and personal commitments. For example, I find it wholly deflating and ‘unconvicting’ (if there’s such a word), when the ‘application’ of the sermon is to sign up for the latest activity/event/programme that the church is running.
I’m not suggesting that this is what you mean, Lionel!
I like the way Phillip Jensen puts it. He says that the preached word must get past the ‘ear’ and penetrate the heart. Good exegesis is necessary but not sufficient for this task. And getting past the ear may mean clearing away the obstacles to clear understanding (dealing with apologetic issues, showing the negative alternative, etc.).
The response that is then called for is always some facet of repentance and faith, but that will vary considerably depending on the passage.
So preaching that really changes the heart and the life is not necessarily preaching that has a practical ‘application’. It may penetrate and convict without telling us to ‘do’ anything.
Any thoughts?
TP
Hi Tony – thanks for your comments! Here are my brief thoughts.
I’m certainly not using the word “application” to only mean “things you should do”. I do believe that it is far more wide-ranging: to quote from my post, application can be summarised as asking the question: “How should I respond to this?”
I have been greatly helped by Murray Capill’s study of the Puritans and their efforts at “application” to the heart. That last point in my post:
is a summary of the kinds of applications I have in mind. Sometimes (but not always), the application will address people’s understanding – e.g. their worldview needs to change. Sometimes (but not always), the application is to the will – this is where “things you should do” comes into play (and perhaps is the most common use of the word “application” w.r.t. Bible teaching). Sometimes it’s the affections – the “feelings”, the overall motivations, etc. And sometimes it’s the conscience – people need to realise that something they thought was right is actually wrong, or vice versa.
About specificity – it’s not always a bad thing. A well-placed, detailed and very specific application may not necessarily apply directly to the whole congregation (or Bible study group, etc.). However, its specificity helps the whole congregation to see that there are real connections between this teaching and real life, and it will help them make analagous connections with specific circumstances in their own life.
A few scattered thoughts and one question….
o Perhaps ‘application’ should best be understood as calling for our response to what God has spoken rather than the preacher telling how we are to respond in detailed external behaviours.
o Application often becomes a form of ‘legalism’. Sermon application simply creates new rules for us to live by eg we should/shouldn’t. Detailed application can obscure the intent of the word eg it is right for some to sell all they have and not for others to do the same.
o I suggest that it is a common error to preach for external behaviour change without the cross/grace of Christ being central in the understanding.
o Where is ‘application’ in the Bible? I think the emphasis is on UNDERSTAND and KNOW the mind of God and respond in repentance and faith (this includes the obedience from faith). Sound doctrine will lead to sound behaviour. Understanding wrath, judgement and the mercy and grace of God doesn’t leave us with much doubt about our rebellion, what Christ has done and therefore what we now need to do.
o Because the word of God is living and active, I suggest it is simply the task of the preacher/teacher to help listeners understand it and call for response. It is the Spirit who convicts.
o I wonder whether to keep “making the Scriptures relevant” is partly due to the following. Expository preaching (taken by some to mean one chapter a week) with a ‘how to behave instructions tacked on’ can lead to a distortion of what God reveals about himself. It is not because the distortion is in the scriptures but because those scriptures have not been understood/explained when preached.
o Rather than the focus being on changing our ‘world view’, I prefer to think of changing our ‘God-view’.
Lionel,
how do you reckon Jesus and the apostles ‘applied’ scripture?
Thanks for the thought provoking post
cheers Di
Hi Di – some very good and helpful points there. I particularly liked your last point. I absolutely abhor the phrase “making the Scriptures relevant”, because the Scriptures are already relevant. I do believe, however, that teachers are called upon to demonstrate their relevance in many and varied ways.
To answer your question, “application” (by which I mean an encouragement to have a specific response to the truth proclaimed) is found everywhere in Scripture (in the gospels and apostles) in many and varied forms. Sometimes it comes in large blocks, such as Matthew 23, Galatians 5-6, Ephesians 4-6, Romans 12, etc. At other times, it’s scattered throughout the exegetical teaching.
As Tony pointed out, the word “application” may be distracting because many people use it in a reductionistic or moralising way. If so, I’m happy to abandon the term, particularly if anyone can suggest a better one.
Fantastic work, Lionel! This has been precisely my problem for the last 3 years. I’ve also noticed that when people come out of issues related to brokenness (like addiction) they start to exhibit early signs of healing and ‘mending’ and become sloppy or proud. Then they go back to old habits and the cycle starts again because they get despondent at ‘no growth’. It’s quite frustrating.
Do you think that the common use of the idea of application often leads to prescription and goes beyond the intent of scripture?
When I read the passages of ‘application’ in the New Testament that you mentioned Lionel, I see them more as explanations of the intent of the law in the context of the gospel. We are being given understanding. I see love of God and others (in response to the gospel) is to drive my decision-making and that my heart is the big problem. However, the Bible never seems to spell out generalised detailed behaviour such as what kind of horse or car, model of car for all Christians. It does tell me to be loving in all my decisions. The guilt is to be related to my attitude to God. My attitude to God will influence the car I drive but it will not lead to the same end result for each person.
Yet ‘sermon application’ easily heads in this direction eg don’t have the latest model whatever, don’t choose this style of education, rent, don’t mortgage, don’t go over seas for you holiday, but an Australian holiday is ok, …… The problem is usually far more difficult to determine for each person. Eg one man may choose to buy a newer car out of love for the family because of less break downs, more safety for a household of learner, young drivers on country roads. Another man may choose to drive a Kombi and use the good public transport available!! What is important is that we understand the intent (love). Sermon can lead to adoption of specific behaviours in response to the sermon ‘application’ and still leave my mind not renewed because I have not understood the mind of God on the matter.
It is very easy to remove the gospel from the driving seat and we drift back to rules and judging and sermon application can contribute to this.
How are the principles for avoiding this outcome?
Please feel free to criticise my comments.
Di
Dianne, I think the problem you’re talking about with application points could possibly be because preachers at times can misunderstand their listeners by having a poor understanding of their problems and misdiagnosing solutions. When it comes to sermons on money, for instance, I find that preachers always miss the boat. I’m not sure about others but wasteful, slothful spending of money is not really my problem and compared to others I don’t worship it. I could always spend it better but it’s not a heart issue for me; I know because I’ve though a lot about my position on it… I have other idols to repent of but when I hear sermons on money they typically miss the mark.
A preacher who’s aware of his flock’s problems in big detail is more likely to understand them better and give more salient advice.
Sorry to enter the discussion a bit late, but I was really trying to understand my own feelings on the subject.
Dianne, I really like the way you see our response to what God has done for why we live the life we live as Christians – ‘We love because God first loved us” (1 JOhn 4:19).
I guess I see the problem being that too much is expected from the Bible. Please understand that I see the Bible as the written word of God and useful for teaching, rebuking etc. At the same time, I think the Bible’s ability to change who we are is limited, in fact this is something that only happens through the living Word made flesh – Jesus. So, once again, we love because God (in Jesus) first loved us. Personally, I think that when the Gospel impacts a persons life, then the application that is relevant to that person will flow out (1 John 4:7), especially if they are encouraged by their brothers and sisters within the context of relationship (Heb 10:24-25).
What makes me uncomfortable about your post Lionel, is that the expectation (from my understanding) is that the Bible is the answer. We just need to apply it correctly. I could have read you wrong, I certainly like some of the stuff Murray Capill says, so perhaps I have!
Dave
Hi Lionel
(Sorry for the slow response—bit distracted this time of year!)
Thanks for the clarification and further explanation, which I can see is what you were saying in your post in the first place (isn’t it annoying when commenters don’t read the original post carefully enough?).
It’s an excellent and important point you’ve made, and I wouldn’t wish my caveats about the dangers of ‘application’ to detract from it.
Thanks for all your excellent posts at sola panel over the past six months.
TP
Hi Di,
Wow – I’ve never really experienced that kind of detailed prescriptive “application” in sermons (sometimes I’ve seen it work well in 1-1 situations, but that’s a different kettle of fish). I can see why you might react against it. I’m actually reacting against something quite different – the failure of teachers (especially myself) to come down into the day-to-day reality people’s lives at all!
Off the top of my head, there are various ways to avoid the kind of woodenly prescriptive “application” you mentioned, e.g. about holidays, here’s a way of doing it that might be better: “Of course, if this is the truth about (e.g. the new creation), then this will affect the way we spend our time and money, won’t it? Have you considered how it might affect your choice of holiday destination? We’ll have everlasting life to enjoy the new creation – so how much do you really need that overseas trip you’re planning?” Etc.
Lionel
PS this will be my last comment on this topic before we go into our Christmas recess. However – STOP PRESS – I’ve just seen this positive review of a book that I’ve been given but haven’t yet read – it looks like it may be a helpful read on this topic though!
Lionel, it’s precisely your patience with your audience and humble love of people that makes your posts so enjoyable and worthy of being read
Good work.
Thanks for the post Lionel. A really important topic. In addition to what you’ve written, I like David Cook’s three levels of application:
Necessary – always necessary for all people.
Possible – sometimes possible for some people.
Impossible – how the passage cannot be applied.
Taken from ‘How to prepare a Bible talk’
These make the writing of application simple while avoiding the trap of legalism.
Lionel
Thanks for your response. Don’t feel you have to answer if you think I am wasting your time.
The ‘do you need…’ emphasis leads me to abstinence and due to the hardness of my heart, envy and judgement on others.
Do you think it is more on the money to ask: what is loving towards God and my neighbour in response to the amazing generosity of God?
That is, I am wondering if the question is not ‘do I need it?’ but rather ‘do others need it?’
Di
Thank you, Lionel!
You and the others may be glad to know your blog is read (and appreciated) by non-Australians too. Good expository teaching is uncommon in Singapore, but we are blessed to have it at our church, so it’s been perplexing that relatively few hearers seem to grow in maturity. Of course there *is* the hardness of heart issue, but we think you put your finger on a very important and helpful point (one that my husband Yuk Yee and I had been discussing but that you’ve articulated far better than we had)—that at the teaching level we’d do well to work at application. In the groups we know, expository teaching without adequate attention to application may have produced people who go away excited that they know so much more, but not really challenged to change inner attitudes or values.
I think the other extreme, the problem highlighted by Dianne, happens when people fail to understand the principle motivating the application—then, application is in danger of falling into legalism. This is also a problem in Singapore (where, perhaps much more so than in Australia!, people often love being told exactly what to do; it saves them the trouble of thinking for themselves—there, I said it).
So we really need to work harder at application while making sure the original principle is clearly taught and understood.
Anyway, this is just to say: we get what you mean, every last word down to “application”! It’s actually pretty incredible how you’ve summarised the problem facing evangelical churches in Singapore. Maybe you should come out here more often to teach us! And tag on to the trip a holiday!