Two Ways Not to Read the Bible
How Me-ology Has Become Standard
It is one of the most common ways the Scripture is taught in mainstream Christianity. Usually it makes the hearer feel good, connected to the characters and stories in the Bible, and gives a sense of purpose and hope for their life. We smile and nod and feel as though God is speaking to us right off the page.
Sometimes the stories are presented as though they are a prescription for life, prayer, godliness, or are even prophetic in nature and we should apply them directly. Other times, the Scriptures are presented as mirrors to hold up to ourselves and check to see if we are living up to the mark like the major players of the text did.
You might be thinking that this is just a fine way to present the text. Should it not be about us? Should we not watch and learn and try to emulate the things we read? Are we not to discover gems of insight from the text and apply them? Can we not become students of the ancients?
We can, and I would even argue we should, but there is a difference between watching and learning, and applying principles and practices that are not taught in the text. Let me give you two examples of what I am talking about. One of forced application, and one of misrepresentation.
Forced Application
Imagine your pastor has come on stage and wants you to open your Bible to the story of David and Goliath. Well, maybe you do not even have to open your Bible, it will be on the screen. Regardless, David is the topic. Your pastor might read the story, describe some detail about David, his stature, the size of the armor, the situation, the enemy, etc. It is a thrilling story! And just at the moment of application, there is a flip that happens. The pastor goes from the exciting story of David who is fighting for God and representing the God of Israel, to how you, the listener, might have some tough times in your life, like your own Goliath that you need to conquer.
This is me-ology.
Another one we all have heard is when Peter comes out on the water to walk to Christ and gets scared and sinks. Amazing story… that is not about our faith. Could it stand sort of as a picture of faith? Sure, we should keep our eyes on Jesus, as the Hebrew author writes in Hebrews 12. However, the “get out of the boat” sermon typically takes a different turn. It might turn into something about how you need to take a step of faith in a venture, or a new thing God is calling you to. Maybe you need to get out of the boat and deal with a relationship.
This is flipping the Biblical script.
The story of Jesus and Peter on the water is, first of all, a fantastic miracle about Jesus! Why do we gloss over the fact he was walking on water and run to ideas about our little faith and getting out of our me-boats? Me-ology skips over the God-Man Jesus and His ability to defy nature itself, and turns the reader to our own navels. What does this have to do with me? I would counter, does it have to have something to do with you? I would also ask, what does this passage have to do, first, with Jesus? Then maybe we can discuss how we should rethink our faith.
Me-ology takes the listener through the Scripture and inevitably turns the text, the ideas, the application, and the “next step” to themselves. I would argue that if pastors just taught the Bible, the more natural reactions of application would be astounding. Elevate Jesus and His Word and there might just be some changes.
Misrepresentation
Another example I recently heard was found in a video regarding prayer. The speaker was teaching on how to hear the voice of God and though he said the Bible has many texts on this, he only took the audience to Numbers 12. He briefly discussed the context where Moses’ sister, Miriam, and his brother Aaron were speaking about the fact that they too heard from God. They grumbled and said that they Lord had also spoken through them, not just Moses (vs. 2). Then the famous verse about Moses’ humility is mentioned in verse 3.
The speaker built his case saying that if you are humble, and not like Miriam and Aaron, you can hear the voice of God in the same manner as Moses, face to face (vs 8). God may have prophets in Israel, but they only have visions and dreams, but with Moses he speaks to him “mouth to mouth” (ESV). The speaker did something I didn’t see coming, he said that he found it interesting that Jesus never had visions or dreams. He pointed out that Paul did, but Paul wasn’t Jesus and said Paul was not “up there” like Jesus who was in a position to have clear communication with God without any “colorful phenomena” attached to it. Jesus just openly communicated with God.
The speaker returned to the ideas of listening to the voice of God in Numbers 12. From here he made the claim that in order to have that kind of open communication with God one must realize that those who do have two features:
God did not have to get their attention [which I would argue he most certainly did with Moses. Anyone remember a burning bush?].
They are totally in tune with what God wants done.
If that sounds like that came right out of Numbers 12, then I do not know what Bible you are reading.
Let me summarize.
This teacher used Numbers 12, the story of Moses, Miriam, and Aaron, to make the claim that if you want to be able to hear the voice of God clearly and without barriers, then you must be someone who is totally aware of God all the time so that he does not have to get your attention, and you must also be totally in tune with what God wants done. Then, you can have clear and open communication with God. Otherwise, you are immature and are relegated to simply visions and dreams.
He did not return to talking about Paul. I guess Paul was not as in tune as Moses was.
The speaker claimed that from Numbers 12 it is plain that “we might have a vision or dream or an angel. That is sometimes how the still, small, voice can come to you, but you see here that the difference in your position in life before the Lord, or with the Lord, determines how the messages come.”
Dear reader, this is not what Numbers 12 teaches. This person put into the text something that is not there and cannot be supported by the full counsel of the Bible. What is more, he mentions 1 Kings 19 where he gets the idea of the “still, small, voice” concept that is also not what the text is teaching in that passage.
This teacher had an idea about how to hear the voice of God, imported it into a story about Moses and his siblings, conflated ideas about Paul and Jesus to make a point the Bible does not make nor teaches.
This kind of me-ology is egregious. In this kind of teaching, not only is the text being flipped to try to make it teach us something it is not teaching, the pastor/teacher is importing ideas into the text that are not there. This did nothing more than place a burden on the believer to try to adjust to the ideas of becoming “in tune” with God so He does not have to get our attention so He can speak to us. Such a burden.
I would like to point out that in the same Numbers 12 passage, the speaker skipped over this,
“And suddenly the Lord said to Moses and to Aaron and Miriam, ‘Come out you three, to the tent of meeting.’ And the three of them came out. And the Lord came down in a pillar of cloud and stood at the entrance of the tent and called Aaron and Miriam, and they both came forward. And he said, ‘Hear my words: if there is a prophet among you, I the Lord make myself known to him in a vision; I speak with him in a dream. Not so with my servant Moses. He is faithful in all my house. With him I speak mouth to mouth, clearly and not in riddles and he beholds the form of the Lord. Why then were you not afraid to speak against my servant Moses?’ And the anger of the Lord was kindled against them, and he departed.” 4-9, emphasis mine.
Then God strikes Miriam with leprosy and she is shut outside the camp for seven days. Bummer.
This passage has nothing to do with prayer or our ability to hear from God. All three of them heard from the Lord loud and clear. This passage is about God. This passage is about His plans for Israel, for Moses, and for His eternal purposes. This passage is about God dealing with Miriam and Aaron in the story of Moses. Willard wants you to believe this is a prescription for how to hear the voice of God.
It is not.
We cannot take descriptive texts and make them prescriptive. We cannot take the story found in Number 12, flip it around and make it about how we are to hear the “still, small voice” of God.
This is the height of me-ology that leads us down a road of faulty Biblical teaching, bad hermeneutics, and man-centric ideas and theology. It relegates God to the sideline and we ignore the original intent of the story to prop ourselves up only to find ourselves left with tiresome burdens of so-called spirituality.
Be aware of anyone who reads a passage of Scripture and imports their ideas about something unrelated to the text into the text. There is a time and place to look at the Scripture and see if there are higher or deeper meanings, but that should be done in light of the full counsel of the Bible and a with the ability to handle the Scripture well and on its terms.
To import ideas into the text is selfish, short-sighted, man-centric, and egregious. Do not think I mean to say we cannot learn from the ancient writings or that we cannot glean wisdom and even compare ourselves in such a way that we take note of how to live and act or not live and act before God. We must be, however, cautious that we are teaching as the text leads, allowing the Bible to interpret the Bible. We should do our due diligence to, first and foremost, try to understand what the text is teaching us about God, and then we may glean from our findings and worship Him. From such study we may have things we must adjust to or repent of.
The Scripture is the revelation of God to man. In it is wisdom, insight, knowledge, relief, happiness, joy, lessons, commands, and on and on. We do not have the privilege of changing its meaning to fit our ideas. We should not approach it with our selves in mind first. It should be viewed as the window into seeing the revelation of God’s character, plans and purposes for Himself and His beloved creation. Our primary objective should always be to seek and savor God, worship Him for what He has done and who He is. In this we are changed by the interaction we have with His Spirit as He teaches us along the way.
We want to practice theology, not me-ology.
Stay discerning.
That’s a great summary phrase, me-ology! Is it coined by you or someone else… I may like to borrow it and credit accordingly?