It is rarely noticed how cultural expectations and theological interpretations form a large part of Christian religious teaching.

Consider these 2 things:

1. “Application – application – application” was not used or advised by Jesus. Jesus used parables which touched the listeners in different ways, imposing on them the responsibility to face the implications of the teaching and obey the Spirit in how that would be lived out in the life of the one “who had ears to hear”. Paul, Peter, John taught what Jesus taught (Matthew 28:20), but never said, “Now the application of this teaching of Jesus means this…”
   True, the parable of the Samaritan ends with “Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?”
   “The expert in the law replied, “The one who had mercy on him.”
   Jesus told him, “Go and do like likewise” (Luke 10:37 NIV) which might be considered an application, but the statement does not interpret or add to the story a layer of human insight, but is rather a call to obedience.
   What is a preacher to do, then, in Biblical terms? “So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up” (Ephesians 4:11-12 NIV).
   This idea of advising the congregation to interpret and understand a Bible story or passage in one specific way does not come from the Bible, because a person with the spiritual gift of helps would need to practice a given teaching in a different way than would a teacher or healer. It requires all the body of Christ to apply the Bible because it speaks of heavenly, infinite things to earthly finite people. Consider 1 Corinthians 12, which of course leads into Chapter 13.
   According to John 16:13 the job of leading people into truth is the work of The Spirit, not the preacher.
2. Another common tool used by religious teachers/preachers is to invite listeners to imagine themselves in the situation described in a Bible story, or to put themselves in the place of one or other of the characters in that event. Since Jesus never suggested the disciples should put themselves in the place of Abraham, or Moses, or any other of the spiritual ancestors, this cannot be considered an appropriate teaching technique. People will “feel” they have learned something, but they have imposed on the Bible story their own modern, cultural, biased interpretations of the event, without getting any insight from the Bible itself, trading that for their own emotional thinking or memories.
   This human imagination is not needed to grasp the Bible truths. After all, “the word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12 NIV). The Bible doesn’t need our imperfect imagination to make it “come alive”. Any exercise which calls people to use their imperfect knowledge or finite intelligence or cultural context limits God’s Spirit rather than opening us to the leading of that very Spirit.

In the end, the “word that goes out from [God’s] mouth will not return to [God] empty, but will accomplish what I [God] desire and achieve the purpose for which I [God] sent it” (Isaiah 55:11 NIV). Trust that God will do that without any human editorial additions or imaginations of the flesh.