The Essential Gospel
19 May 2006
I like to talk about the Incarnation at Christmas. I suspect that most pastors do. We’re suckers for the gospel, particularly the gospel that starts in the womb of an impoverished, unwed, teenage girl. Of all the different gospels being preached today, the one initiated in Mary seems to be the genuine article, impervious to improvisation and immediately distinguishable from the life-enhancing gospels that are currently in vogue.
The essential gospel—the one that grew in Mary—refuses to be reduced to an add-on, a way to improve an already overcrowded life. In my opinion, any gospel that talks more about getting me into heaven than about getting heaven into me is a reduction, a spiritualized sales pitch that misses the point of the Incarnation. The gospel of my youth was reduced. As a result, we feverishly presented the “get-of-hell-and-into-heaven†gospel to anyone who would listen. There were thousands of “conversions,†and we painstakingly counted each one. Strangely, of the thousands who became followers of the Way during those years, very few exhibited any long-term interest in Christ or his church. I often wondered what went wrong, not realizing that a diminished gospel produces diminished converts and a diminished church.
Don’t get me wrong. I have given my life to spreading the message that Jesus is right about and relevant to everything. I long to see the missing sons and daughters of God come home. But I’ve been trained to use the gospel rather than allowing the gospel to use me. That’s a hard habit to break, a frustrating and intrusive inclination that resurfaces every now and then. However, my passion for purple will no longer allow me to dilute the gospel for the sake of statistical growth. Salvation isn’t another cheap, mass-produced commodity that gets offered to our culture in hopes that they’ll buy. It’s a person. His name is Jesus. And Christmas is the gospel’s first act.
Tagged: Christmas, Gospel, Jesus, Mary, purple
13 comments
Trackback
Pingback by believeitornot.org.uk » Rethinking the message
5.28 pm on 19 May 2006
[...] I found this in a post on Jason’s blog by ‘Tom’Â - there’s a lot of thought-provoking stuff going up there at the moment. In my opinion, any gospel that talks more about getting me into heaven than about getting heaven into me is a reduction, a spiritualized sales pitch that misses the point of the Incarnation. [...]
Comment by dh
7.44 pm on 19 May 2006
I think the difference is the semantics. I tend to seperate Gospel from discipleship. A Gospel that doesn’t focus on heaven andhell and a Gospel that focuses only on heaven and hell are both wrong.
For example, Jesus answered the question from person who asked “what must I do to inherit eternal life?” Many Christians don’t or have a desire to answer those questions by unbelievers because of the concern: “…feverishly presented the “get-of-hell-and-into-heaven†gospel to anyone who would listen.” When in my opinion that leaves people “…in their trespass of sins.” I do agree with the recognition of the problems addressed in the post but how the problems are solved I don’t agree with or at least disagree with the semantics used in solving the problem. When people don’t realize the fact that without Christ you are hell bound and that with Christ you are heaven boundyou are left with people who don’t understand the consequences vs. Grace andjoy dichotemy and hense lead to a degration to be equivilent with current culture which is a relativistic, universalistic, “i’m okay your okay” so-called Gospel which isn’t a Gospel at all.
Comment by dh
10.04 pm on 19 May 2006
Jason, here is something humorous, serious and interesting. Could we say the Gospel didn’t begin “…in the womb of an impoverished, unwed, teenage girl.” In light of the passage “He indeed was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you 21 who through Him believe in God, who raised Him from the dead and gave Him glory, so that your faith and hope are in God.” Before the foundation of the world Christ died for us, fulfilled 2006 years ago, but still before the foundation of the world.
Comment by Theway2k
2.57 am on 22 May 2006
I agree that too many conversions for conversion sake was more like a two steps forward one step back. Meaning, conversions on emotion tend to evaporate with the heat of life’s circumstances.
On the other hand the failure was not the mass conversions; rather it was not having a plan to continually put Heaven into the babe in Christ. It still happens today! As Christianity becomes the object of secular attack more and more, Christians need to become aware of the Christ in them on a personal level. If not, that Christian will part of the falling away.
Comment by Tom
4.41 pm on 22 May 2006
dh, my perspective on the gospel, what it is and what it means, has shifted in the last few years. I understand how this post can be unsettling to those of us who have come to think of the gospel in predominantly propositional terms. But I’m just not sure that the gospel is at its best when it is “summed up” propostitionally. In my estimation, that approach misses the real heart of the story God is inviting people to enter into.
And I don’t think it is just a semantical difference either. Narrative and proposition are worlds apart and therefore invoke different reactions when heard or read. We should always be aware of the “power of story” when trying to convey truth. God certainly was.
Lastly, please understand that I am quite ready to say that “Jesus is the gospel.” If you read Luke 2, the angels thought so; Anna and Simeon were not far behind. I think it’s time to reclaim the ancient notion that Jesus is good news and start telling the story, as it were, in all its fullness.
I think it’s entirely appropriate for me to admit that there’s so much of the gospel I have yet to grasp, and I think that’s good. Trying to put the gospel in a nutshell, as so many formal evangelistic presentations and tracts tend to do, is, in my opinion, not wise because it extracts so much of the story, thus diluting and truncating the message for all who would hear it.
Comment by Tom
5.33 pm on 22 May 2006
Theway2k,
Great thoughts, especially regarding the failure to have “a plan to continually put Heaven into the babe in Christ.”
I do think that mass conversions are usually indicative of the reception of a false or partial gospel, whichever you prefer. Certainly this is not true in every case (Pentecost is a good example). However, it is becoming increasingly clear that mass conversions are having a neglible impact on the communities in which they take place. Perhaps that’s the new norm or maybe we have diluted the gospel message to such a degree that conversion looks a lot like a “get-out-of-Hell-free card,” a fire insurance policy for the soul. It just seems that the dominant evangelical gospel is failing in its essential purpose and that troubles me.
Comment by dh
7.14 pm on 22 May 2006
Tom, I wasn’t focusing on tracts. I believe the Gospel is what leads people into a personal relationship with Christ. Much of what I read from Emergents that they call Gospel isactually discipleship. That was the context of what I was saying. I personally believe that Evangelistic,etc. DO state the power of thestory in that they specifically state “without Faith in Christ we are dead inour trespass of sins” (from the Apostle Paul) THe story is much more powerful than Emergents state in that not only people are called to live for Him but also receive Eternal Life and also escape Eternal death. However, I will agree that foscusing on Eternal life/death, etc. and not on living for Him is just as wrong but for me that is under a different category of discipleship as compared with Gospel. Hense the semantical problem I mentioned earlier.
Comment by dh
7.19 pm on 22 May 2006
Tom I also know the opposite of mass conversions where no answering the question “What must I do to be saved?” is given. Many people have never heard the Gospel or go to a church where no conversions or even Baptisms havetaken place in years.
For me the dominant Emergent Gospel is failing as well in that the answers to the above question aren’t given or are given inaccurately (not Jase) dependent on which Emergent group you talk to. Your “fire insurance” thing is just as bad as “not answering the questions” of unbelievers who truly want to know “What must I do to inherit Eternal Life.” This troubles me as well.
Pingback by PurplePastor.com » Guest Blogging at Jason Clark’s
7.35 pm on 1 Jun 2006
[...] A while back Jason Clark invited me—much to my surprise—to become a guest author on his blog. You can check out a few of my recent posts here, here, and here. [...]
Comment by Winn
9.11 pm on 3 Jun 2006
dh,
Why separate gospel and discipleship. Eternal Life is not something that begins later, it begins now. We now live in the presence of the future. Dualism is a form of Greek thinking assimilated by most Western believers. What it usually produces is wrongheaded theology, and wrong headed theology is a cruel taskmaster.
Comment by Tom
12.53 pm on 4 Jun 2006
Winn, that’s a great point! One that should have been made a few comments back. Separating evangelism (gospel) and discipleship is a false distinction, certainly not one the early followers of Jesus made. Thanks for the input.
Comment by dh
8.49 pm on 5 Jun 2006
Paul made the distinction in the Epistles. Gospel leads to people becoming Believers. Dispipleship helps people once they are Believers to live for Christ. It isn’t wrongheaded theology but true theology of what is important. Helping people accept Christ and then live for Him. It doesn’t make sense that we help people to live for Christ when they haven’t even become Believers. The apostle Paul makes this very clear andeven Jesus “Except a man be Born Again he cannot seethe Kingdom of God.” True we live in the pressense of the future but the future will be the fulfillment of what we received when we accepted Christ of what He done on the cross. It begins now but is fulfilled fully in the future. That isn’t dualism at all but a proper understanding of what is truly has taken, istaking and will take place.
Comments are now closed.