Tuesday, 24 February 2009

What is the Gospel?

Many authors and evangelical theologians have remarked in recent times on how the church in the West is undergoing a process of remarkable fragmentation. This fragmentation extends to our understanding of the Gospel itself.

For some Christians, firstly, ‘the gospel’ is a narrow set of teachings about Jesus’ death and resurrection which rightly believed one is tipped in to the kingdom and then after that all the real life transformation and discipleship and maturity take place. This is a far cry from the emphases in the Bible which understands the gospel to be the embracing category that holds much of the Bible together and takes people from lost-ness, condemnation, alienation from God all the way through conversion and discipleship - to consummation, resurrection bodies, to the new heaven and new earth!

Secondly, other voices identify the gospel with the first and second commandments - 'to love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength and your neighbor as yourself.' These commandments are so central that Jesus himself says that all the law and prophets hang on them - but they’re not 'the gospel!'

A third option today is to attempt to treat the ethical teaching of Jesus found in the canonical gospels as 'the gospel'. Yet it is often the ethical teaching of Jesus removed from His passion and resurrection. This approach is dependent on two disastrous mistakes;

(1) First, it overlooks the fact that in the first century there was no gospel of Matthew, or gospel of Mark, or gospel of Luke - NO ONE used that terminology in the first century. In the first century it was the gospel according to Matthew, ...according to Mark, ... according to Luke - that is - it was just one gospel - according to these various witnesses. And then when you see what is common in the canonical books today - in the gospels we have - you run from the beginning of Jesus, right through his teaching and miraculous power, the shutting down of the powers of darkness, through to his death and resurrection - including his commission - that constitutes THE GOSPEL. The ONE gospel according to Matthew, Mark , Luke and John. These elements are not independent pearls on a string that constitute the life and times of Jesus, the Messiah. Accounts of Jesus’ teaching cannot be rightly understood unless they are alongside the flow of and point forward to Jesus’ death and resurrection. To study Jesus without simultaneously considering his passion and resurrection is far worse that reflecting on Hitler’s Mein Kamf without thinking of WW2.

(2) Second we can see that to focus on Jesus’ teaching while making the Cross peripheral reduces the glorious good news of the gospel to mere pious religion. The joy of forgiveness to mere ethical conformity. Jesus' call to obedience to mere duty. The result is disastrous, it is catastrophic!

However, perhaps the more common event today, is the tendency to simply assume 'the gospel '- whatever that is! Whilst devoting our time, passion and energy to other issues - marriage, happiness, children, prosperity, the poor, wrestling with Islam, bioethics, secularization, politics - the list is endless! But this overlooks the fact that inevitably our hearers are drawn to that which we are most passionate. If the gospel is merely assumed whilst relatively peripheral issues ignite our passion we will train a new generation to downplay the gospel and focus on secondary issues. For 'the main thing is that the main thing remain the main thing' (Martin Marty) - keep the gospel at the very center. If only we understood the gospel better then we’d be equipped to deal with that list of issues I mentioned just before.

There are many biblical texts and themes that we could explore to think more clearly about the gospel but can I urge you now to read and think hard about 1 Corinthians 15:1-19. Read it. Read it again. Read it slowly. Read it quickly. Think about it.

1 Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2 By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.

3 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. 6 After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8 and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.

9 For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of them—yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me. 11 Whether, then, it is I or they, this is what we preach, and this is what you believed.

12 But if it is preached that Christ has been raised from the dead, how can some of you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15 More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19 If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are to be pitied more than all others. (1 Cor. 15:1-19, TNIV)

Let us be a generation and train the next generation to be people that know the true gospel and seek to win some to Christ by proclaiming it. May the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ - suffered, dead and risen again be our central passion - may in God's mercy he allow deaf ears to hear and blind eyes to be opened.

6 comments:

Matty Ho said...

Hi Jacko,

Thanks for the post...

Can you elaborate on what are some other areas of fragmentation that have been remarked on and who has done the remarking? :-)

Also, can you please clarify further what you/others mean by a narrow set of teachings... Can you give some examples?

I can think of a person out there who it seems travels the world with a cross and the goal seems to be to get people to "pray a prayer"...not 100% sure on that though...


The important question we all need to answer is Jesus' question... Who do you say I am?

The disciple(s) gave the correct answer but didn't get 'it' fully until they received the promised Holy Spirit who would guide them in to all truth. (Jn 16)

Not that we can know 100% how much the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8) knew of the rest of the OT scriptures, but enough from Isaiah and Philip connecting them to the recent [their time] events of Jesus' death/resurrection/ascension for Philip to see his faith in Jesus and agree to baptise him.

--
“This is eternal life,” Jesus said, “that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.”

Linda said...

Matty Ho's wife here....

For me the real question is, what is necessary for salvation? And currently what I'm thinking through is how do we present this to cultures so different to our own....

For example, the Masai people in Tanzania have no word for person, creation, grace, freedom, spirit or immortality.... no future tense.

The gospel is a gospel for all nations - not a gospel only available to those who westernise. So how do we present Jesus Christ to them (unreached nations) within their own culture.... without necessarily impressing our culture on them?

From the guy who first brought the gospel to the Masai (on how he felt before doing so):

"Everything I prepared to teach them had to be revised once I had presented it to them. Just what was the essential message of CHristianity? What did philosophical reasoning (which we call theology) have to do with it? Had any of the Roma or European theologians, who had given us that theology, ever met a pagan? How much of what we know as morality was involved in that message? What was the church?

.....The incarnation of the gospel, the flesh and blood which must grow on the gospel, is up to the people of a culture.

.....The way the people might celebrate the central truths of Christianity; the way they might distribute the goods of the earth and live out their daily lives; their spiritual, ascetical expression of CHristianity if they should accept it; their way of working out the Christian responsibility of the social implications of the gospel - all these things, that is liturgy, morality, dogmatic theology, spirituality, and social action would be a cultural response to a central, unchanging, supracultural, uninterpreted gospel.

The gospel is, after all, not a philosophy or a set of doctinres or laws. That is what a culture is. The gospel is essentially a history, at those centre is the God-man born in Bethlehem."

I guess the area I've been thinking about it this idea of an "uninterpreted gospel" - and how much of what we present to others is INTERPRETED.... and Westernised even.

I don't know the answer, just something going round in my head. :-) (Sorry about typos)

SamR said...

sounds to me like you've been listening to some talks by a certain Canadian scholar at the gospel coalition conference in 07. yes?

Simon (aka: 'Jacko') said...

hey sam!

yeah ... i just heard the beginning .... got distracted but the Don got me thinking.

Sam C said...

Keller has a talk here on precisely this topic: http://www.acts29network.org/sermon/dwelling-in-the-gospel/

Basically, he argues there is the 'gospel', and then there are different forms (or angles?) of it. For example, I think he would suggest that 2WTL is not "the gospel" per se, but one presentation of it. He looks to the different emphases Paul gives in his various speeches for illustration of this.

disa said...

花鄉,愛情海,百威,為楓精典,比佛利,新阿里山,儷京,御花園,風華,溫莎堡,晴海冷泉,紐芬堡,歐悅,名湖水岸,歐悅,萬里仙境,北極星,皇居,禾楓.湯泉,香緹,湯野,水漾,金色河畔,戀愛,新阿里山,皇家花園,山櫻花,名家,風華,美麗殿,艾蔓,薇星,皇城,泰皇,風雅頌,欣歡,名爵,竹田驛站,薇星,風雅頌,愛摩兒,墾丁,雅柏,天母,威斯堡,嘉賓閣,伊都,衣蝶旅店,樹林月圓,萬里仙境,北極星,華都飯店,馥嘉商務,唐城,雙橡園,百老匯,紫園,夏卡爾,竹林雅緻,好來屋,馬德里,湖山度假,蔚藍海岸,約客頂級,儷灣,真善美,歐香,愛莉園,人客