Discipleship and New Birth - Is order important?

[Sudsy]

Does it matter what order the various components of the good news of Jesus are taught?

What do we make of this text where Paul speaks about the "gospel that saves us" and what is of "first importance" ?

1 Cor 15:1-8 - Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me.

I agree that both Jesus and the apostles preached the good news of God's Kingdom. I also think that sowing seed must include what Paul says is of first importance in the good news that saves us. I agree too that we cannot save anyone by our seed sowing as it is a co-operative work between us and the Holy Spirit that results in belief and repentance. I wish we had more in scripture on just what the apostles preached when preaching the Kingdom and the questions that must have been raised.

The good news of the Kingdom is not good news to most who have not had a change of heart. Kingdom life involves suffering in this life and entering a spiritual war. Preferring others over yourself, etc.

I think the initial point of a heart change (conversion) in the early church period was when one was willing to confess Jesus as Lord in giving up on running their own life. This is the same today. Many want Him as Saviour but not as Lord. That, to me, sounds like another gospel.

Getting back to Ernie's question, I wonder what posters understand to be the "the various components of the good news" to consider an order ?

[Josh]

The question assumes that the "New Birth" is a precisely fixed event and it neglects "repentance" (metanoia, the changing of one's mind).

These are all good points, and the OP title is probably worded wrongly so let me try again.
Does it matter what order the various components of the good news of Jesus are taught?

I would think context matters - are we talking to "children of the church" or someone who has been unchurched. When the New Tribes Mission goes out they insist that you have to tell the good news from the beginning, and they use a chronological approach. It appears that many tribal people respond when they hear the story of creation and the fall and after that they are very open to the actual news of Jesus. It seems that when they grasp Jesus' examples, they will follow His ways intuitively.

When talking with "children of the church", we can start with obedience. I don't think anyone would be foolish enough to start with stressing "horse and buggy" or "conventions of cell phone use" with an "outsider" and hopefully not with their own children. Even when talking with a Jew, we would start at a different place in the conversation than we would with the other two.

In another thread on MennoNet right now, we have advocates for telling a non-Christian woman to put her hair up, with the idea it's good to start living a moral life.

This seems a very odd way to spread the gospel.

[Ernie]

Does it matter what order the various components of the good news of Jesus are taught?

I don't think teaching a specific church's standards and cultural applications should come first.

I wouldn't call this the "good news of Jesus".

[Josh]

Does it matter what order the various components of the good news of Jesus are taught?

I don't think teaching a specific church's standards and cultural applications should come first.

I wouldn't call this the "good news of Jesus".

Then what place does it have at all?

Is it good news or not that you expect women to wear their hair up?

[Wayne in Maine]

The good news of the Kingdom is not good news to most who have not had a change of heart. Kingdom life involves suffering in this life and entering a spiritual war. Preferring others over yourself, etc.

Jesus was perfectly aware that some of the seed would fall on poor soil, or be snatched way by the devil. Not every heart will receive it but the word of the kingdom is what Jesus told us to preach, not some inciting pseudo-gospel that will scare people into saying a sinner's prayer to "get saved"

At the same time the good news of the kingdom and of Jesus is not the same as the ethical teachings of Jesus. In fact Jesus taught many things in a round about way (in parables parable) so that only those capable of understanding Him would learn what He is teaching.

Preach the good news of the kingdom, and make disciples of those who choose to follow Jesus by teaching them all things Jesus commanded.

I think the initial point of a heart change (conversion) in the early church period was when one was willing to confess Jesus as Lord in giving up on running their own life. This is the same today. Many want Him as Saviour but not as Lord. That, to me, sounds like another gospel.

I quite agree, the good news of God's kingdom is bad news to some. Certainly most rich and powerful people found the Kingdom of God, as Jesus presented it, to be undesirable. So today few preach the good news Jesus preached, and instead they preach a "gospel" that will fill the seats of their houses of entertainment on Sunday morning.

[Wayne in Maine]

The good news of the Kingdom is not good news to most who have not had a change of heart. Kingdom life involves suffering in this life and entering a spiritual war. Preferring others over yourself, etc.

I quite agree, the good news of God's kingdom is bad news to some. Certainly most rich and powerful people found the Kingdom of God, as Jesus presented it, to be undesirable. So today few preach the good news Jesus preached, and instead they preach a "gospel" that will fill the seats of their houses of entertainment on Sunday morning.

A good example of "the good news" and what it means to different people can be teased out here: Articles by Asher Witmer

Mary expressed what Good News is for a poor Nazarene maiden, citing the prophet Isaiah:

"He has shown strength with his arm;
he has scattered the proud in the thoughts of their hearts;
he has brought down the mighty from their thrones
and exalted those of humble estate;
he has filled the hungry with good things,
and the rich he has sent away empty."

That's not good news for the proud who are scattered or the rich who sent away empty.

[Ernie]

I don't think teaching a specific church's standards and cultural applications should come first.

I wouldn't call this the "good news of Jesus".

Then what place does it have at all?

Is it good news

"Submitting to others in the fear of the Lord" is good news. If the standard or application in some way helps a person follow Christ, it is good news. If a standard or application is a hindrance to following Christ, then it is not good news. I've experienced lots of the latter in my lifetime. However, what may appear to be a hindrance may not actually be a hindrance. There are some things that I did not see value in at the time, but now see the benefits. But not all standards or cultural applications fall under this category. Some are hindrances and will be hindrances until they are done away with.

or not that you expect women to wear their hair up?

I wrote about this here.
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=413&start=70#p10384

[Sudsy]

A good example of "the good news" and what it means to different people can be teased out here: Articles by Asher Witmer

I hadn't looked at the other thread you mentioned as I did not think my MB church would qualify me to participate according to the restrictions placed on this thread. However, I did just stop and read it.

I mentioned previously that I wish we had a fuller description in the NT of what was preached by the apostles as the "good news" and since then I have reviewed what Peter preached when 3,000 were added to their number that day. Peter basically covered what Paul wrote in 1 Cor 15:1-8. Basically they both said that Jesus is the Christ (OT Messiah) and this gospel was spoken about in the OT ('according to the scriptures') as Peter gave OT scripture to prove that He was to come and die and then be resurrected. Peter spoke of how they had sinned to not believe in Jesus as the Christ and their Lord even though God had accredited Him through signs and wonders. This presentation of the "good news" that the Christ, the Anointed One, had come and they had not received Him as such but had participated in His death caused great anxiety enough that they asked Peter, so now, what must we do ? (A willingness to turn from their unbelief and accept Him as the Christ and their Lord). Peter then said that because of your sins you need to repent and be immersed in water and they would receive the Holy Spirit into their lives as a gift.

Furthermore in Acts 2:40 Peter continued to not only warn them of not doing as he said but he pleaded with them to obey and those who accepted this message followed through with his instruction.

From this and other scriptures I take the 'good news' of first importance is that Jesus is the Saviour of the world who came to save us from our sins. He took upon Himself the sins of the world and what this sin does (causes death) and He overcame sin and death so those who believe in Him could also be victorious over the same.

So, to me, the 'good news' of the Kingdom is that all the kingdoms in this world are under and will remain under the influence of satan for now but there is a Kingdom (a realm of living) that is under the authority of a loving King that we can experience here and now and one that will someday be experienced in fullness. This Kingdom is radically different than all kingdoms of this world. Believers are ambassadors of that Kingdom inviting others (even pleading others) to become citizens of this Kingdom while they live in this world of various other kingdoms.

I agree that some who evangelize today are preaching a gospel that does not explain the Kingdom concept of coming under the authority of the King. Christianity is not a democracy. We are not free to do and believe whatever our old nature is comportable with. Our lives are not our own. There has never been a Christian nation operating under the King.

Yet we shouldn' throw all evangelicals under the bus as there are evangelizing Christians who do teach this view and changed lives are the fruit of their sowing.

[PeterG]

I was glad to see that Wayne identified the new birth as a metaphor in an earlier post. "Discipleship" is also a metaphor, and I think it describes, from a different angle, the same thing that the metaphor of the new birth does. So I don't think there is any absolutely necessary order in which these concepts must be presented or understood.

On the other hand, I believe it is crucial to give Jesus Christ Himself, as Creator, Savior, and Lord, the utmost prominence, regardless of the chronological order in which we present the components of our message. The spiritual experiences and ways of living taught in the New Testament are meaningless—damaging, even—apart from Him.

[Ernie]

On the other hand, I believe it is crucial to give Jesus Christ Himself, as Creator, Savior, and Lord, the utmost prominence, regardless of the chronological order in which we present the components of our message. The spiritual experiences and ways of living taught in the New Testament are meaningless—damaging, even—apart from Him.

I think I mostly agree. However I believe that all good comes from God, and so if the Gentiles do something that corresponds with Jesus' teachings, I think it is to their advantage. I've been interacting with a lot of secular Chinese the last year. Their are things they do and think that is much closer to the New Testament than the deeds and thoughts of my Evangelical neighbors. I think God is blessing them for this.

Also, what does apart from Him mean?
Does it mean "apart from acknowledging the source of the teachings?" If so, then you are saying that these things are meaningless-damaging to my Chinese friends.
Does it mean "apart from having Jesus Spirit dwelling within a believer"? Some Evangelicals would believe this. They believe that anything done prior to Jesus spirit taking up residence in a believer is "filthy rags" and so it is useless to teach the sermon on the mount until a person has the Spirit of God living within.