What is the "good news"

[joshuabgood]

It feels to me that sometimes we speak a different language around what "the gospel" is. This significant question I think drives a lot of the things we discuss and disagree about. I'd like for you to give a short description of what you were 1) taught as the gospel as a child and 2) how you might now summarize "the gospel" (if you see it differently).

For me, I was taught something like this...the gospel is that, even though we are all sinners, thanks to the sin of Adam and Eve, who deserve eternal damnation, Jesus took the wrath of God (who as perfectly righteous was angry at our sin) and died in our stead. Therefore if we accept him in our heart and confess our sins, and repent, we can be forgiven and avoid this punishment and instead go to heaven when we die and live forever. And that any person that really does this will see the fruit of Christ in their life. They may backslide, and if they do, they will lose their place in heaven when they die (if they don't come back before it is too late). Any who die, having not heard of Jesus, are left in the hands of God to judge. Those who are saved should do their best to get others to accept Jesus in their hearts so those folks can avoid hell and enjoy heaven.

Now if I were to answer that question I would say most simply the gospel is that "Jesus is King." A more complete view of salvation I would outline something like this...When God created the world it was good and perfect. He ruled and reigned supreme on earth as also in heaven. He walked and talked in wholeness, in perfect relationship, with humanity. However, when sin entered the world, the rule and reign of God was interrupted. A great darkness covered the earth. For a couple of thousand years, sin, death, and the prince of darkness ruled the earth. Isaiah prophesied a King would come as a prince of peace. A Savior who would rule the world. He would found a country where the government would be upon his shoulders and his reign (or we might say term) would know no end. Further, he prophesied that this king would raise the valleys, lower the mountains, make the rough places plain. This King would restore justice and restore the rule and reign of God in perfect righteousness on earth as also in heaven. Jesus was that King. He preached repentance because his Kingdom was at hand. He taught the laws of that Kingdom in his manifesto the Sermon on the Mount. He prayed that this Kingdom would come on earth as also in heaven. It is a global Kingdom (not a geopolitical state) that uses the suffering love of the cross as its premise and lever for salvation. Jesus modeled it as our forerunner. He laid down his life on the cross, bearing our sins in an act of suffering love, and in so doing, defeating sin and death and founding his new kingdom. And then achieving the resurrection of the dead. When we follow him, repenting and confessing our sins, taking up our cross, also laying down our lives in suffering love, we can likewise participate in his victory over sin and death, being joint-heirs with him in his immortality. He is our King. He rules. His Kingdom is growing and will, one day, be fully come and we will win. We are currently working to build his Kingdom as citizens and to establish it as Isaiah prophesied and as Jesus lived and taught - on earth as also in heaven. We build his kingdom not with the tools of the worldly kingdom, but by being the hands and feet of Jesus. By the way of the cross and suffering love.

[silentreader]

Seems to me Paul defines it somewhat here:
! Corinthians 15:1-11

Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, 2 and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.

3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8 Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. 9 For I am the least of the apostles, unworthy 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 toward me was not in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me. 11 Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.

and following....

[steve-in-kville]

I often hear the term "the Gospel Truth." I take that to mean what is actually spelled out in scripture. Anything beyond that is opinion and/or preference.

[MaxPC]

Seems to me Paul defines it somewhat here:
! Corinthians 15:1-11

Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, 2 and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain.

3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, 4 that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, 5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 8 Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me. 9 For I am the least of the apostles, unworthy 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 toward me was not in vain. On the contrary, I worked harder than any of them, though it was not I, but the grace of God that is with me. 11 Whether then it was I or they, so we preach and so you believed.

and following....

This too reflects my thoughts on the matter.

[Sudsy]

It feels to me that sometimes we speak a different language around what "the gospel" is. This significant question I think drives a lot of the things we discuss and disagree about. I'd like for you to give a short description of what you were 1) taught as the gospel as a child and 2) how you might now summarize "the gospel" (if you see it differently).

For me, I was taught something like this...the gospel is that, even though we are all sinners, thanks to the sin of Adam and Eve, who deserve eternal damnation, Jesus took the wrath of God (who as perfectly righteous was angry at our sin) and died in our stead. Therefore if we accept him in our heart and confess our sins, and repent, we can be forgiven and avoid this punishment and instead go to heaven when we die and live forever. And that any person that really does this will see the fruit of Christ in their life. They may backslide, and if they do, they will lose their place in heaven when they die (if they don't come back before it is too late). Any who die, having not heard of Jesus, are left in the hands of God to judge. Those who are saved should do their best to get others to accept Jesus in their hearts so those folks can avoid hell and enjoy heaven.

I had a lengthy post made up covering both an had a computer glitch so for now, I will respond to your 'before' teaching.

Mine was some what similar and, with a few alterations, what my father preached in 'open air' evangelism settings. There certainly was radical changes expected in being born again. Our church, at that time, was called the 'Full Gospel Tabernacle ' as it was believed the full Gospel message was to include a baptism in the Holy Spirit with initial evidence of the speaking in tongues. The initial belief as Paul stated of 'first importance' in 1 Cor 15 was what was necessary to be saved but the belief that to be able to live a fruitful Christian life was through the enabling power of the Spirit. I still agree that the continuous filling or being controlled by the Spirit is paramount to Kingdom living but the evidence is more related to the fruit of the Spirit as described in the NT. I don't believe, as my father preached, of a hell of unending conscious torment. I rather believe in conditional immortality.

Anyway, got to go but plan to post more later.

[PetrChelcicky]

Personally I am more on the individualist side of the Christian spectrum (individual salvation with the hope for an individual afterlife). But in principle I agree with joshuabgood that we may try to harmonize an individualist and a collective hope and faith. I also agree that the Christian collective hope is distinguished from other collective hopes by promoting "the way of the cross" (Guy F. Hershberger's book is my frame of reference here).

One small, perhaps really small, stumbling block is for me the use of "king" and "kingdom". In the case of Americans I suppose they can use the word rather freely because they haven't had any real kings for centuries. (But what's with the early Mennonites?) I simply cannot visualize a life in which men can live peacefully beneath each other without the rather difficult and stressful "arguments" and "dealings" which at best form a "deliberative democracy". Am I too skeptical and pessimist here?

Or perhaps "being cross" in an argument is part of the "way of the cross"?

[Sudsy]

Personally I am more on the individualist side of the Christian spectrum (individual salvation with the hope for an individual afterlife). But in principle I agree with joshuabgood that we may try to harmonize an individualist and a collective hope and faith. I also agree that the Christian collective hope is distinguished from other collective hopes by promoting "the way of the cross" (Guy F. Hershberger's book is my frame of reference here).

One small, perhaps really small, stumbling block is for me the use of "king" and "kingdom". In the case of Americans I suppose they can use the word rather freely because they haven't had any real kings for centuries. (But what's with the early Mennonites?) I simply cannot visualize a life in which men can live peacefully beneath each other without the rather difficult and stressful "arguments" and "dealings" which at best form a "deliberative democracy". Am I too skeptical and pessimist here?

Or perhaps "being cross" in an argument is part of the "way of the cross"?

Some rambling thoughts.

Perhaps because those of us who do not live under a king who 'calls the shots on everything', we have trouble with Jesus being referred to as King, Lord or Master if it means we lose our freedom to chose something other than what the king requires of us. We may call Him our Lord but in reality He is thought of more as our Saviour than He is our Lord. In our society we view someone with absolute authority as a dictator and resist anyone that appears to be acting that way. In Jesus era where He lived, a king ruling a kingdom was, I think, quite acceptable. So, I think He talked to them more in that language but He did challenge them on their obedience to what He said they should do and be like.

However, I do believe becoming a citizen of the Kingdom of God does require accepting Jesus both as Lord and Saviour. He is to be a King that rules in our lives. What is different from worldly kings is that His manner of being king is much more about a personal relationship where He is always working out good in our lives regardless of what we perceive is happening for any moment(s) in time. A loving, benevolent King. And He rules in our lives via the power and guidance of the Holy Spirit without which, we are in control.

Well, better stop here before I have another computer glitch.

[MaxPC]

Personally I am more on the individualist side of the Christian spectrum (individual salvation with the hope for an individual afterlife). But in principle I agree with joshuabgood that we may try to harmonize an individualist and a collective hope and faith. I also agree that the Christian collective hope is distinguished from other collective hopes by promoting "the way of the cross" (Guy F. Hershberger's book is my frame of reference here).

One small, perhaps really small, stumbling block is for me the use of "king" and "kingdom". In the case of Americans I suppose they can use the word rather freely because they haven't had any real kings for centuries. (But what's with the early Mennonites?) I simply cannot visualize a life in which men can live peacefully beneath each other without the rather difficult and stressful "arguments" and "dealings" which at best form a "deliberative democracy". Am I too skeptical and pessimist here?

Or perhaps "being cross" in an argument is part of the "way of the cross"?

Some rambling thoughts.

Perhaps because those of us who do not live under a king who 'calls the shots on everything', we have trouble with Jesus being referred to as King, Lord or Master if it means we lose our freedom to chose something other than what the king requires of us. We may call Him our Lord but in reality He is thought of more as our Saviour than He is our Lord. In our society we view someone with absolute authority as a dictator and resist anyone that appears to be acting that way. In Jesus era where He lived, a king ruling a kingdom was, I think, quite acceptable. So, I think He talked to them more in that language but He did challenge them on their obedience to what He said they should do and be like.

However, I do believe becoming a citizen of the Kingdom of God does require accepting Jesus both as Lord and Saviour. He is to be a King that rules in our lives. What is different from worldly kings is that His manner of being king is much more about a personal relationship where He is always working out good in our lives regardless of what we perceive is happening for any moment(s) in time. A loving, benevolent King. And He rules in our lives via the power and guidance of the Holy Spirit without which, we are in control.

Amen and well said, Sudsy.

[Wayne in Maine]

It feels to me that sometimes we speak a different language around what "the gospel" is. This significant question I think drives a lot of the things we discuss and disagree about. I'd like for you to give a short description of what you were 1) taught as the gospel as a child and 2) how you might now summarize "the gospel" (if you see it differently).

For me, I was taught something like this...the gospel is that, even though we are all sinners, thanks to the sin of Adam and Eve, who deserve eternal damnation, Jesus took the wrath of God (who as perfectly righteous was angry at our sin) and died in our stead. Therefore if we accept him in our heart and confess our sins, and repent, we can be forgiven and avoid this punishment and instead go to heaven when we die and live forever. And that any person that really does this will see the fruit of Christ in their life. They may backslide, and if they do, they will lose their place in heaven when they die (if they don't come back before it is too late). Any who die, having not heard of Jesus, are left in the hands of God to judge. Those who are saved should do their best to get others to accept Jesus in their hearts so those folks can avoid hell and enjoy heaven.

Now if I were to answer that question I would say most simply the gospel is that "Jesus is King." A more complete view of salvation I would outline something like this...When God created the world it was good and perfect. He ruled and reigned supreme on earth as also in heaven. He walked and talked in wholeness, in perfect relationship, with humanity. However, when sin entered the world, the rule and reign of God was interrupted. A great darkness covered the earth. For a couple of thousand years, sin, death, and the prince of darkness ruled the earth. Isaiah prophesied a King would come as a prince of peace. A Savior who would rule the world. He would found a country where the government would be upon his shoulders and his reign (or we might say term) would know no end. Further, he prophesied that this king would raise the valleys, lower the mountains, make the rough places plain. This King would restore justice and restore the rule and reign of God in perfect righteousness on earth as also in heaven. Jesus was that King. He preached repentance because his Kingdom was at hand. He taught the laws of that Kingdom in his manifesto the Sermon on the Mount. He prayed that this Kingdom would come on earth as also in heaven. It is a global Kingdom (not a geopolitical state) that uses the suffering love of the cross as its premise and lever for salvation. Jesus modeled it as our forerunner. He laid down his life on the cross, bearing our sins in an act of suffering love, and in so doing, defeating sin and death and founding his new kingdom. And then achieving the resurrection of the dead. When we follow him, repenting and confessing our sins, taking up our cross, also laying down our lives in suffering love, we can likewise participate in his victory over sin and death, being joint-heirs with him in his immortality. He is our King. He rules. His Kingdom is growing and will, one day, be fully come and we will win. We are currently working to build his Kingdom as citizens and to establish it as Isaiah prophesied and as Jesus lived and taught - on earth as also in heaven. We build his kingdom not with the tools of the worldly kingdom, but by being the hands and feet of Jesus. By the way of the cross and suffering love.

I like much of your summary, it's not much different from what I would 'preach" except I strive mightily to avoiding language that has become merely religious in meaning or is archaic. The very words "gospel", "salvation" and "repentance" are so burdened by religious tradition and theology that their use is far from their original meaning and pre-loads our message with meanings not intended by the authors of the scriptures that used these terms.

My favorite parable is the parable of the sower. One important lesson I take from it (one which I think we usually miss) concerns the seed that is sown, which Jesus in Matthew’s record describes as “the word of the kingdom”. What is this “word of the Kingdom” that will grow and be fruitful in those with an “honest and good heart”? What is this “kingdom” that Jesus described as a treasure in a field and pearl of great price that when one discovers it, he is willing to sell all that he has in order to possess it? We seldom hear it preached about – it is not much presented in the “Common Liturgy”. Let me ask this: did Jesus ever describe the Kingdom as “salvation”, particularly as we use the term in our “gospel” preaching: “to save oneself from eternal damnation in hell fire”? Or did Jesus deliver a message such that those who hunger and thirst after righteousness are assured that they shall be filled?

And while I appreciate the emphasis on the sermon on the mount, this alone is not the single narrative of the values of Kingdom nor does adherence to some interpretation the ethical mandates of Jesus and the Prophets actualize the reign of God on earth or in our personal lives. There is an actualization of the individual into the spiritual realm such that one’s mind is changed and even giving up all you possess, abandoning family and facing scorn and abuse is worth the price of being under the rulership of God in the community of His people. As Jesus put it, one must be born of the Spirit in order to even see this kingdom of God.

The word of the kingdom is scattered throughout the record of Jesus’ teachings – sometimes expressed in much harder and challenging terms that what Matthew presents. It is interpreted and expounded upon by Paul and James and Peter and others in the rest of the New Testament – it is expressed in the hopes and warnings of the Old Testament prophets. But we must indeed begin always with “the good news of the actualization of the realm of God” that Jesus preached "is within your grasp". The word of the kingdom is the only seed that will bear the right fruit when it reaches the fertile ground that is hungry for it; where it is seen, like a treasure in a field, by those who actually are actually born again of the Spirit.

[Sudsy]

I thought this was an interesting article on the Gospel that includes both the Kingdom message and how it is meaningful to our lives- https://www.ligonier.org/blog/what-does ... testament/

In preaching the gospel we preach about Jesus, and we preach about how we are brought into a saving relationship with him.