Our Only Protection

Lately I have been thinking on my own lack of attention to Scripture.  That may seem strange, given I preach the Bible and study it weekly.  But last week, as I was listening to some excellent messages at the Sovereign Grace Small Group Leaders Conference in Gilbert, AZ -- I noticed that a particular passage used in a message was one I had not read in about ten years.  That frightened me. It frightened me because the root of every distortion in the history of the church is a neglect of Scripture.  We begin with the text, reach some conclusions, and then we exegete our conclusions. Then we take our systematic theology and read it back into Scripture.  The classic example of this is the sermon on John 3:16 in which the Reformed preacher spends a great deal of time interpreting the word "world" to see in it the "elect" -- thus upholidng his doctrine of limited atonement.  This is sophistry in the extreme and would be condemned if we saw a Catholic doing it.

I find it very easy to theologize about Gospel centeredness.  Or conplementarianism.  Or the sovereign election of God.  Beginning with some clear texts I derive and build with principle upon principles.  But history tells me that theology can move from a position of submission to a position of control.  We cease to exegete the text and begin to read our own theology into it.  Theology must be submitted to the Word of God alone.  Scripture alone controls. 

It is clear from history that well-intentioned people may actually theologize themselves into positions that add to Scripture or even contradict Scripture.   See Matthew 15 for the NT example.  I have advocated a simple rule -- where Scripture speaks I will speak, what Scripture emphasizes I will emphasize, where Scripture is silent I may not speak!

In the years I have pastored I have found that my greatest challenges have involved undoing the extra-biblical commands that people live by.  Pastors and authors have fel compelled to speak where Scripture is silent or inconclusive.  People come with very strong convictions about certain ethical or theological matters and yet cannot cite one clear text in their own defense.  Rather, their convictions developed with a collection of principles plus considerable logic.  Thus, they become absolutely certain that men should not wear hats in church, that we must dress in nice clothes to serve communion, that women should not be ushers, that alcoholic beverages are evil, that women should never work outside the home, that we should not use birth control, that drums are evil in worship, etc.

One of the greatest gifts to me was a man named Earl Radmacher -- president of the seminary I attended.  Dr R , as we called him, insisted that Scripture alone must rule.  He actually preached a message in Chapel one day and then returned the next to correct his error of interpretation.  The seminary had a changeable doctrinal statement and the faculty were required to review it and restury the Scriptures regulalry to clarify and refine their convictions. 

I am concerned with those of us who love theology, that we have lengthy discussions untethered to Scripture -- that we hold the Magisterial Reformers as infallible interpreters of the text -- that we read our theology into the text and this twist its meaning -- and that we actually add to the Word of God.  I am concerned that we teach our theology and do not show people how to interpret Scripture. Soon, they prattle our theology and have no idea where it may be found in Scripture. Berean-like "testing all things by Scripture" must always be pursued among us.  Theology is excellent -- but the text rules and let our theology submit to the clarity of the text rather than visa verse.  Here alone is safe ground.