Genetic inbreeding

This weekend I listened to an excellent message by Mark Driscoll of Mars Hill Church in Seattle.  This is a movement of the Spirit of God that is seeing Gospel transformation and church planting in the avant garde culture. Mars Hill WEb where you can download.

Mark's title: Limited Unlimited Atonement.  In it he rings all the right bells on the singular authority of Scripture.  Deep into the message he points out that theology develops as the first generation studies the text and reaches certain conclusions -- but the second generation studies the first generation and adds to them -- and so on.  Scripture fades into the background and soon we are studying our conclusions and ultimately end up weird. It is the old problem of genetic inbreeding -- after a few generations the end product is "not right."  He then presents that the elders of his church believe that they must go with what Scripture says in their entirety and not try to fit their theology into a system.  Thus, he shows all the Scriptures on both sides of the issue and says they are all correct. This is so right!!

One of the helpful points Driscoll makes is that Calvin was not at all a later Calvinist -- if you read his commentaries on specific passages you would find conclusions that his later followers denied.

As I think about what should drive us in ministry, it is very simple -- the text of Scripture and nothing else.  Where Scripture speaks, we speak -- where Scripture is silent, we are silent -- what Scripture emphasizes, we emphasize.

As I observe my own thought or read others, I find that we quickly set aside the Word of God and start theologizing and moralizing.  Or we pick something in the passage we want to emphasize even if it is not what the author brings to a focus.  Recently I was preaching John 7 and so desperately wanted to end with the great promise of the Holy Spirit in 7:37-39 -- but I had a problem -- that is not where John ends the story!  Was I going to focus on what I thought best (we need to be reminded of the work of the Spirit) or was I going to submit to the inspired wisdom of God through John?  I must submit to God.  I will speak on the Holy Spirit in John 14-16!

Morally, there are too many examples to count -- we develop rules that cannot be found in any text -- about what we can eat or drink, what we can wear, what men/women can and cannot do in the home, what a spiritual gift looks like, what kind of music is good or bad, what proper courtship looks like, ad nauseum.  After we create these rules which may be our own outworking of the faith, we turn them into absolutes and measure everyone else by them.  We construct a house of conclusions out of one two-by-four of Scripture.  Exactly the opposite of what Paul says to do in Romans 14.

Theologically, there are also many examples.  Cessationism would be one such example -- there is no exegetical base for this conclusion.  There are many others -- among Reformed folks who love to force texts into their Reformed mold -- or among people who believe we can lose our regeneration and fit texts into that conclusion (Jesus says no one can pluck us out of his hand but that does not mean we cannot jump out!).

Jesus faced this.  It is of note that well meaning godly Jews developed a system of law-observance for the Jews in the centuries following the captivity.  They studied their conclusions and exegeted them.  The end result is Jesus noting that they developed traditions that actually contradicted Scripture and taught as their doctrine the traditions of men. (Matthew 15).  They were sincere; they were exegetically based at the start and they got way off base.

I am in danger of the same -- I can take the GospelDriven grid and find it everytwhere even if it is not in the text.  The text rules.

So shall we get rid of theology?  Certainly not -- it serves us as a guide but it is a servant to the text.  Beware preachers of reading a text and then speaking without ever referring to the text again.  Take people to the Word and show them its plain meaning -- then they can take it home with them.  Preach large enough sections that they can see the flow of thought. 

How effective is this way of doing things?  Let me answer with a story of a young Christian who was taught to read the Bible well.  They had a knock on their door one day and 2 men stood at the door with the Watchtower magazine in hand.  She invited them in and they began their schtick.  As they would make a point and quote a verse, she asked them to open their Bibles and read the entire paragraph around that verse.  Then she simply noted, "Hmmm, that is not what that verse says."  This she repeated many times until they arose and departed!

Scripture is clear -- it is not merely supreme -- it has no equals.  "It is written" is the last word.  "Take and read" is God's word to us about Scripture.

Comments

[Penn]

I just realized I posted a response to a year old topic. All I saw was Dec. 5. Maybe this could become a new topic again. At least, I will be discussing it with people I know. I thank the LORD for these words Mark.

Grace and peace.

[Penn]

This is a very good, thought-out way of explaining the problem that we can easily find ourselves in when we dive into theological study. It is much more humbling to let the Bible text stand alone than it is to read our own opinions out of it. We really need the humility that flows from that spring of living water.

To Michael A:
How good it is to do such in-depth searching of the biblical meaning of obedience! If you are interested, I would like to recommend John Piper's sermon called "Thank God for an Inspired Bible." If you haven't already read/listened to it, then I just want to say, it really helped me understand what Jesus' view of the Bible was, as well as the apostle's.

[Michael A]

I like most of your post, but I have a comment and a question for you.

The comment: I don't like the phrase "driven" even if it is "Gospel Driven". I am reminded that cattle are driven (and are also easy to stampede) but sheep are led by a shepherd. I would like the "biblical" term "Spirit Led" better than Gospel Driven.

The Question: [pretext first] When I was a young Christian (30 years ago) and really committed to obeying the Lord, I searched all the Bible (pre-computer days) for every occurence of the word "Obey" and its derivative forms (Obeyed, Obedience) because I wanted to know what God's word said about what and whom I should obey. I found over 300 verses. Most all of them referenced not the law, not the Scripture, but obedience of "God's Voice". Now if you are thinking like I was, there is a difference between written word and spoken voice. What I found was that the same is true for a Christian Walk with God, one has to get to know the "Voice" of Jesus Christ, not just His written word.

A "Voice" requires "breath" to bring forth the word which comes up from a persons heart, to communicate his will to another person. Interesing, eh?

I also really liked your phrase about "ringing the right bells!" So True!

Editors comments:

"Driven" is the word deliberately chosen and it conveys the same idea as constrained or compelled.