Question: Is it wrong to want application in a talk?
Let's put the question in context. I was speaking from Luke 18:9-14 which is the story about the Pharisee and the Tax Collector. They are two very different approaches to God - one comes on his own merits and the other throws himself at the mercy of God. As I have mentioned previously our hearts tend towards wanting to be seen good by God on our own merits not of those of Jesus Christ.
So, how does this get to application?
A common complaint, a criticism of Sydney Anglican preaching is that it lacks solid, practical application. (I personally having spent the last 18 years have never really found this to be true.) And when I surveyed the evening congregation at Norwest one of the responses was people wanted clearer and more specific application. My comment in my talk was that sometimes our strong desire for application or perhaps the bottom line, what it is that the Scriptures want people to do is driven out of legalism.
That is sometimes our desire for the good of application and the 'practical part' feeds into our faulty thinking that we are saved by what we do.
So, is wanting application wrong?
NO!
But it is when you walk away thinking you are saved by what you do.
But it is when you walk away thinking you are saved by your own efforts
But it is when you walk away thinking the Christian life is all about you
But it is when you walk away without the gospel of grace as the framework for ALL application
As I was preparing this talk I read a great article by Phillip Jensen, here is a snippet:
Let's put the question in context. I was speaking from Luke 18:9-14 which is the story about the Pharisee and the Tax Collector. They are two very different approaches to God - one comes on his own merits and the other throws himself at the mercy of God. As I have mentioned previously our hearts tend towards wanting to be seen good by God on our own merits not of those of Jesus Christ.
So, how does this get to application?
A common complaint, a criticism of Sydney Anglican preaching is that it lacks solid, practical application. (I personally having spent the last 18 years have never really found this to be true.) And when I surveyed the evening congregation at Norwest one of the responses was people wanted clearer and more specific application. My comment in my talk was that sometimes our strong desire for application or perhaps the bottom line, what it is that the Scriptures want people to do is driven out of legalism.
That is sometimes our desire for the good of application and the 'practical part' feeds into our faulty thinking that we are saved by what we do.
So, is wanting application wrong?
NO!
But it is when you walk away thinking you are saved by what you do.
But it is when you walk away thinking you are saved by your own efforts
But it is when you walk away thinking the Christian life is all about you
But it is when you walk away without the gospel of grace as the framework for ALL application
As I was preparing this talk I read a great article by Phillip Jensen, here is a snippet:
People do not need to hear the lie that they are fundamentally good (with a
little sin problem). Nor do we need more teaching that puts us, instead of
Jesus, at the centre of God's world and plans. 'God loves you and has a
wonderful plan for your life' maybe true but places us at the centre of God's
existence instead of God at the centre of ours. Christian preaching must be more
than spiritualised self help. Such sermons promise help but effectively lock us
into our failures and increase our guilt without relief.
What we must proclaim and hear is of our Creator and his wonderful grace
shown to us in his Son Jesus. What the church and world must hear is of the
victory of Christ in his death, resurrection and ascension and heavenly
rule. What we need to know is the love of God in the forgiveness of sins
and the transforming power of the Holy Spirit bringing new birth. We need
to know the grace of God that takes our sin seriously by paying for it while
extending the acceptance of forgiveness. The gospel truths relieve and revive
but more morality and legalism are but the burden of death to us.
I think I get the vibe - application is more about Jesus than it is about us. What do you think?
4 comments:
That's a great quote from PJ!
yes... but a real problem is that by not giving clearer definite applications, we fail to show people how the gospel can transforms their heart and actions. We can be so worried about those bad things that we simply "leave it up to them" to work it out in their own life.
Hey Dave,
Thanks for reading mate. Hope all is going well up Newcastle way? (And if anyone is qualified to comment on Dave's Rave well then it is another Dave!)
I am all for application that is concrete, direct and shows how the gospel hits every area of life. But I also take the quote from the article which reminds me that the gospel comes first and therefore Jesus comes first. Phillip is unpacking Calvinist and Arminian theology into our preaching.
If the concrete application is heard louder than Jesus it is too easy for the application to end up in moralism or legalism.
I guess for your own context you need to decide whether people desire that concrete application out of a desire to please God or a subtle form of wanting to be good enough for heaven?
Also, is there a danger of becoming 'the guru' when we unpack it for them over and over? Or the danger of dependent sermon application (that is the only time someone understands or applies Scripture is when you do it for them)? Just some random thoughts - look forward to your comments.
Hey Dave! Newcastle's plodding along well... check out www.hunterbiblechurch.org ... we have our own "pastor's blog" :)
I agree that all those things are genuine "concerns", but why should we become Arminian when considering sermon applications? We think "Ohh.. if I mention something that a person might actually 'do' inresponse to this God and his saving work, they might not trust in Jesus anymore."
I just don't think that's trusting a sovereign God.
Certainly we need to take those concerns into consideration when we prepare our sermons. But in my experience of many MTC grads - like myself - they "pull-out" of preaching at this very point.
Maybe a better way to describe it is something Dave Cook suggests is the "potential application" where the preacher thinks; "What might this actually mean for some of my hearers? What actual steps might some of my flock need to take in response to this?"
So we need to be aware of the things "concrete application" can do... but that shouldn't hamstring us from offering it wisely and often.
Post a Comment