If I am reading Mark correctly, he agrees that the "gospel of forgivenss" is faithful to scripture but he seems to suggest it is no longer relevant. While "it made sense to most people at one time" today it "seems judgmental, mean-spirited, naive, and narrow-minded to the ever growing number of people who don't understand the basic tenets of Christianity". He suggests that correcting this misunderstanding of the gospel of forgiveness will take "months or years".
The better approach therefore is to proclaim the gospel of freedom, which apparently is more comprehensible to the mind-set, and palatable to the tastes, of the younger postmodern generation. The gospel of freedom emphasizes sins' destructive effect upon ourselves and "God's good creation". It is good news because through Jesus we are liberated from Satan, sin and death.
I enjoyed Mark's analysis of the distorted gospel of fulfillment. He is correct that many churches have bought into the misguided self-esteem movement and have preached a gospel that places man at the center rather than God. I don't think he has overstated the case when he describes this gospel as one where "God exists to worship us". He sums up the problem with the contemporary gospel of fulfillment nicely when he writes, "...it does not call me to God's mission but rather calls God to my mission".
While I agree with some of his insights I see a number of problems. The biggest problem is that his question sets up a false antithesis. It implies that we need to choose between proclaiming a gospel of forgiveness, freedom, OR fulfillment when, in fact, the good news (gospel) that Jesus came to bring is that we can have all three through Him. The gospel is about forgiveness AND freedom AND fulfillment, although fulfillment needs to be defined scripturally.
I also have to disagree with the notion that the we should present the gospel as freedom from Satan, sin, and death RATHER than as the gift of forgiveness from the God we have personally offended. I don't believe those who recoil from the gospel of forgiveness for the reasons stated above will be any more receptive to the true gospel of freedom. To preach the gospel of freedom faithfully means to present it as Paul does: to be free from sin is to be free from the bondage to our own fleshly desires and to be simultaneosly "enslaved to God" (Romans 6). It is not freedom from God's authority, but the freedom to be able to submit to God's authority. Contemporary resistance to the gospel is primarily due to a distaste for all authority outside the self. I don't see how the gospel of freedom, defined properly, is any more palatable to the tastes of people today then the gospel of forgiveness is.
While we must guard against the man-centered gospel that is common today we shouldn't overlook the fact that true fulfillment is an important aspect of the gospel. Jesus told his disciples that he had peace to give them that the world couldn't give. He prayed to the Father that they would have the full measure of His joy within them. He pours out the love of God in our hearts by the Holy Spirit. His will is that our lives would be fruitful. I can't think of a better definition of fulfillment than a life of love, joy, peace, and fruitfulness. Of course, we need to explain that we must abide in Christ to experience these, but it is absolutely appropriate to speak of the gospel of fulfillment. There is only a problem when we distort the true meaning of fulfillment and equate it with material possessions and worldly status and position.
For years I have taught about the "diamond of salvation." There are many facets to salvation just as there are to a diamond. Each facet is a different view of a singular reality, and every view is beautiful. Justification speaks of forgiveness, redemption speaks of freedom, reconciliation speaks of fellowship, adoption speaks of family, and regeneration speaks of the fulfillment of the promise of the indwelling Holy Spirit. The bottom line is that every aspect of the gospel message needs to be proclaimed.
1 comment:
The major problem with this approach (suggested by Driscoll) is that it ignores the role the law is supposed to play in bringing an awareness of sin and the need for forgiveness. Heaven forbid we make people "feel bad" by showing them (and us) how we live our lives in rebellion to God's standards and are in need of forgiveness.
Post a Comment