This week, the lesson looks at the topic of "the gospel in the context of the great commission." (Lesson 12: Mission and Commission.) The big questions for this week are, what is "the gospel," and why should we share it?
The Study Guide (Tuesday) suggests a definition for "gospel" based on Mark 16:15-16: "Believe it [the gospel], and you shall be saved; reject it, and you shall be lost." Um... Do you see a problem with this? It's circular. It assumes that gospel is already understood to mean something. But what is it?
There is a tangential issue here. The lesson bases both Monday and Tuesday's materials primarily on the section in Mark 16:9-20. This is a section of Mark's gospel that isn't considered to be authentic (the Teacher's comments in the lesson notes this). It is considered as later emendation of editors and redactors to create an ending of Mark's gospel that wasn't so abrupt and unsatisfying as it actually was. Or perhaps the actual ending of Mark was lost and this was again, editors' and redactors' attempt to put back a satisfying ending. In any case, the ending appears to take thoughts and materials from Matthew, Luke, and Acts. So although there are no serious theological issues with the ending of Mark, I personally would be reluctant to use it as basis for deriving any definitive conclusions.
With that out of the way, there is still the unanswered question, "What is the gospel?" The Winter 2008 issue of Leadership Journal has as its theme: Is Our Gospel Too Small? In one of the articles, An Efficient Gospel?, by Tim Keel, the author relates being asked at a summer camp where he was one of the counselors, "If someone were to ask you what the gospel is, what would you say?"
One definition is the New Testament books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Another definition is simply, "Good News" and more specifically the good news about Jesus Christ. Tim writes a few paragraphs later:
I learned what the right answer was supposed to be... I discovered that "gospel" was a word that many Christians used as shorthand for the means by which a person could go to heaven after they died. Over time they had perfected the science of explaining "the gospel" in a simple and efficient way.
The gospel was understood to be a series of propositions meant to "save" someone. When these propositions were followed logically and sequentially, and subsequently accepted as truth in faith, the subject was assured of their eternal destiny...
But then Tim asks whether this definition of "the gospel" is sufficient. Is it adequate? Is it too small?
I ask the same question in regards to the definition of gospel that is implied in the Study Guide. (The information that Jesus died and was resurrected in order to show God's love and make forgiveness and reconciliation possible; and believing this information to be true results in salvation.) After spending one day (Sunday) on how disciples interact in practical ways with the world, the lesson returns to discussions about how the gospel must be preached and people brought to a knowledge of salvation (Monday), how the gospel must be understood before it can be preached (Tuesday), and the importance of using Scripture to prove the gospel (Wednesday and Thursday).
Tim observes that Christians are very good at emphasizing the Redeemer and eschatological themes of the gospel, much like I outlined in the previous paragraph. But he suggests that to focus on just these makes for in inadequate gospel. The gospel must have power in the here and now as well. He writes:
A reduced version of the gospel will have little to say to such questions [ethics of technology, gender and sexuality, environment, just economy, etc.] No wonder so many have determined that the church and "the gospel" have very little to contribute to the world...
People are not asking the traditional gospel question much anymore. Asking, "If I died tomorrow, where would I end up?" does not generate much life. But asking people, "If you had just a few years left, what kind of life would you want to live?" generates enormous energy. It is a question of hope, something our balkanized world sorely needs.
I believe the gospel is much broader than just, "Jesus, the Savior, died, rose, and is coming back. If you want to be saved, believe in Jesus." I believe sharing the gospel is much more than simply preaching those words. St. Francis of Assisi is said to have spoken, "Preach the Gospel always, and if necessary, use words."
But if we don't preach the words, won't people be lost? If we think that, I think we are limiting God. There's a lot of emphasis placed upon conversions and baptisms, of getting people moved from the "lost" column into the "saved" column. Organizations make goals out of numbers. But I wonder, when we turn godly desires (seeing more people come to trust in God is, I believe, a good and godly desire) into numerical goals (making conversion a goal to be achieved, I fear, is wrong), do we somehow shove aside God and the Holy Spirit and try to do their work? Do we sometimes believe that a person's eternal destiny is dependent on what we do or don't do? (Does that make us God?) I think that witnessing and evangelism as often performed and advocated employs on both ends fear, guilt, coercion, and perhaps even outright deception at times in order to "achieve the goals."
I wonder what would happen if we stopped counting "decisions" and baptisms? I wonder what would happen if we made getting to know Jesus more important than making more church members? I wonder what would happen if instead of spending so much on lengthy, preaching evangelism, we spent as much or more on showing lives lived trusting in God and serving others? I wonder what would happen if we stopped talking at people and instead listened first and then dialogued? I wonder what would happen if instead of developing people filled with religious knowledge, we turned our attention to building people that know how to both receive and give love?
What is the gospel? I think the answer is tailored to and customized for each person. It is God, through Jesus and the Holy Spirit, coming to meet the unique needs of each person in unique ways. For some, they may need the message of unconditional acceptance first. For others, they may most need the assurance of forgiveness and freedom from guilt. For yet others, it may be that they mostly need to have hope beyond this life. The gospel is any message given at the right time that reveals a true aspect of God that can bring a person closer to Him. The gospel message, for any given person, might change over time. The results of the gospel, however, is ultimately about a person learning to receive God's love and then in turn learning to trust that love. And as a result, they become able to replicate and reproduce this kind of love as they relate to others.
No comments:
Post a Comment