The Adventure of Discipleship

We have examined how the gospel message requires a new concept of deity:  The Trinity. Although the word “trinity” is not used in Scripture, the claim that God is a singular plural is undeniable. With the incarnation of Jesus, Scripture presents a person who is totally God and totally man without compromising either. Not understanding it does not make it untrue!

All the initial disciples struggled to replace their preconceived ideas of who Jesus was with the one he was revealing himself to be. John, writing his Gospel some sixty years after Christ’s ascension, presents Jesus as the one and only incarnate God-man.    

In the beginning was the Word (Jesus), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God (John 1:1-2).

In the opening verses, John refers to Christ as the eternal Word. He then records nine other titles given to Jesus in his first chapter.

• The Word. Verse 1: “In the beginning was the Word.”
• God. Verse 1: “And the Word was God.”
• Light. Verse 9: “The true light . . . was coming into the world.”
• Jesus Christ. Verse 17: “Grace and truth came through Jesus Christ.”
• Lamb of God. Verse 29: “Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!”
• Rabbi. Verse 38: “And they said to him, ‘Rabbi’ (which means Teacher), where are you staying?”
• Messiah. Verse 41: “We have found the Messiah” (which means Christ).
• Son of God. Verse 49: “You are the Son of God!”
• King of Israel. Verse 49: “You are the King of Israel!”
• Son of Man. Verse 51: “You will see heaven opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man.”

Jesus preferred to call himself the Son of Man, referring to his humanity and his claim to be the Messiah (Daniel 7). The New Testament authors, however, preferred the Son of God.

The names Messiah (Christ), Anointed One, and Son of Man all referred to the long-expected deliverer and king whom the Jews were looking for. However, the Jewish expectations regarding their Messiah did not include a claim to deity. The title Son of God most embodies Jesus’ claim to deity. To understand this more fully, we need to look at two terms: “Son of God” and “only begotten.”

Son of God

The title “son of God” has multiple meanings throughout Scripture and does not always refer to a deity.

• Humanity as sons/children of God

Looking at Jesus’ genealogy, as given by Luke, Adam is called the son of God, implying that all of humanity can claim to be God’s sons or children since we all came from Adam.

• God’s Covenant People: Israel as God’s Son

When Yahweh threatens to kill Pharaoh’s firstborn, he identifies Israel as his firstborn son (Exodus 4:22-23).

• At various places, angels are called “sons of God” (Job 1:6, 38:7).

The Son of God is God the Son

One of the critical debates in the first centuries following the birth of Christianity was the meaning of Jesus as the Son of God. It took several church councils to work through and codify the meaning as referring to deity. 

The Jews expected their Messiah to be a unique figure like Elijah, but deity was unexpected and even resisted. Jesus’ claim of Messiah was complicated by his additional claim of equality with God the Father. In the familiar John 3:16, Jesus introduces the modifier “only begotten.”  Some translations use “one and only Son” or “only Son” as their description.

Begotten (begat, beget) usually refers to a child who shares the exact nature of his father. By using this term in John 3:16, Jesus says he shares the exact divine nature as the Father, the same substance. When you beget something, it is of the same kind as yourself. However, when you make something, it is of a different substance than yourself. So, we make a bookcase, and we begat children.

In Mere Christianity, C.S. Lewis whimsically illustrates this point: When you beget, you beget something of the same kind as yourself. A man begets human babies, a beaver begets little beavers and a bird begets eggs, which turn into little birds. But when you make, you make something different from yourself.

Modern translations use the word “fathered” for the awkward word begotten, but it carries the same meaning as “the same kind” as opposed to “make” or “create.” God created (made) man in his own image but not from the same “substance” as God himself. Humans were made, not begotten. But ever since God made the first couple, the rest of us are begotten!

And Adam lived a hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth.  (Genesis 5:3 KJV)

Jesus, on the other hand, was begotten, not made. Due to the confusion surrounding the term Son of God, some suggest using God the Son to complement the terms God the Father and God the Spirit, thus clarifying the Trinity.

We should not be indifferent regarding what people believe about the nature of Jesus, the Son of God. The Ligonier survey mentioned in the previous blog should warn that an increasing number of people in our churches, let alone the population at large, have an inadequate understanding of the Jesus of the gospel. Those people are more aligned with Jehovah’s Witnesses, Jews, Muslims, and Hindus than with the Christian faith of the Bible. In the fourth century, the 73% of our church audience that believes Jesus was created by God would have been excommunicated or certainly never baptized. 

A case study

A recent article by Suraj Nepali, a missionary to Hindu students, asks the question, “Why would Hindus become Christians if they already believe in Jesus? He then relates a typical conversation with a Hindu student. ¹

SN: “Do you believe in Jesus?

HS: “Yes, I do.”

SN: “Do you believe in Jesus’ death for the sins of all human beings?

HS: “Yes, I do believe Jesus died for our sins.”

SN: “Do you believe Jesus rose again from the dead?”

HS: “Yes, I do believe that Jesus rose again from the dead. This is what the Bible says.”

Suraj goes on to say, “This man talks as you would expect a person to talk who professes Christ as their Lord and Savior. But he is still a Hindu. He still believes in all the other gods as well. In Hinduism, there is a god for every aspect of life. Jesus is just the god for the forgiveness of sins.”

This Hindu student sounds a lot like many “evangelicals” mentioned earlier who believe in Jesus but not the Jesus revealed in Scripture. Could the lack of discipleship and transformation of people within our churches be somehow connected to this misconception of the nature of Christ? Does the gospel we present contribute to or clarify this caricature of Christ?

In the next blog, we will examine how the gospel reveals the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Trinity.

^1. The Gospel Coalition TGC, Why Would Hindus Become Christians if They Already Believe in Jesus?

16/07/2024, Suraj Nepali

In the previous blog, we looked at the need to guard the treasure (gospel) we have been given. We began to look at Paul’s example of guarding the gospel as he guarded it against additions.  We continue with Paul’s example as he guards it against subtractions and distortions.

• Guarding against subtractions

Meanwhile, a Jew named Apollos, an eloquent speaker who knew the Scriptures well, had arrived in Ephesus from Alexandria in Egypt. He had been taught the way of the Lord, and he taught others about Jesus with an enthusiastic spirit and with accuracy. However, he knew only about John’s baptism (Acts 18:24-25 NLT).

Being eloquent does not make you right! Apollos had embraced and proclaimed a gospel with holes in it. He knew some things correctly and proclaimed them boldly, but he did not know all he needed to know to proclaim the authentic gospel. He was sincere but also sincerely mistaken. Luke then tells us that Priscilla and Aquila came to the rescue. 

And he began to speak out boldly in the synagogue. But when Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately (Acts 18:26). 

Apollos, being teachable, took their instruction and changed his gospel presentation. From Luke’s record of his ministry in Achaia, we learn that “he greatly helped those who had believed through grace, for he powerfully refuted the Jews in public, demonstrating by the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ” (Acts 18:27-28).

When we reduce the gospel to a few points to accommodate an audience that is used to soundbites, we risk redacting it. Since the gospel of Jesus Christ is his narrative, how much of his story can we leave out and still have the gospel? Obviously, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John had different answers to that question. I think Mark, with the shortest gospel, would be shocked to hear that we can now share the gospel with one verse.

• Guarding against distortions 

Paul’s Epistles were letters to young believers explaining and applying the gospel. Paul’s purpose was not to share the gospel in his letters but to draw out gospel implications and applications to life in Christ’s kingdom. In his first letter to the church at Corinth, he deals with several problem issues along with practical implications of the gospel message, such as correctly handling gifts of the Spirit and conducting worship in these new assemblies called churches. In 1 Corinthians 15, Paul deals with misperceptions surrounding the resurrection. We can be grateful for their confusion since it gives Paul a chance to enlighten us all about our resurrected bodies. However, the critical issue at stake is not just the future state of believers but the denial of the resurrection of Christ. Paul argues that denying the resurrection for believers distorts the gospel since it discounts Christ’s resurrection. If there is no believer resurrection, he argues, there is no Christ resurrection, resulting in a distorted, counterfeit gospel.

Now if Christ is preached, that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there is no resurrection of the dead, not even Christ has been raised; and if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is vain, your faith also is vain. (1 Corinthians 15:12-14)

The early Church fought against many heresies that taught incorrect beliefs about the nature of God, specifically of Christ. To protect the gospel against these heresies, the Church convened what historians call the Seven Ecumenical Councils to hammer out the essential gospel message, including Christ’s claims of deity and humanity. Some heresies claimed that Christ was divine but not really human, and others claimed he was human but not actually divine. A quick search of what the early church faced turns up gospel distortions (heresies) called Ebionism, Docetism, Gnosticism, Monarchianism, Arianism, Apollinarianism, and Nestorianism. Whew! 

The first Council of Nicaea, convened by the emperor Constantine I in 325, created the Nicene Creed, the gold standard and the basis for what we now call the Apostles’ Creed. This Creed establishes the doctrine of the Trinity and gives a gospel outline that we can fill in with additional relevant content. We will look more at this Creed when we explore the gospel’s content in a later blog.

A more familiar “Monuments Man” is Martin Luther. Tormented by his guilt over sin, Luther struggled to find peace with God, even as a Catholic monk. After studying the Book of Romans, he discovered that the gospel offered salvation based on grace rather than performance. Initially, Luther did not intend to break from the Catholic Church or start a reformation, but he did want to clean up the gospel message. The Church didn’t initially start out to distort the gospel, but like barnacles on an ocean-going ship, the gospel attracts distortions that we must continually clean up.

Today, when we try to abridge or abbreviate the gospel, we can wind up redacting it, leaving out essential parts. This is easy to do, especially when communicating with a biblically illiterate audience. By leaving out vital chapters of the narrative, we present a distorted gospel, not an abbreviated one. For example, when we say, “All you need to know is that Christ died for your sins and rose again,” we are redacting, not abbreviating the gospel.

We all need to be Monuments Men guarding the treasure in our generation, protecting the gospel from casual additions, subtractions, or distortions. We must not let our culture and traditions determine the gospel we understand and proclaim. It is not an American or an evangelical gospel. It is the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ and his kingdom regardless of the audience.

Later blogs will examine current additions, subtractions, and distortions (which I will refer to as gospel pathogens) that compromise the gospel and diminish its power.

As World War II raged, Hitler’s commanding generals began to steal art en masse. Hitler formed an outfit explicitly tasked with the systematic looting of art and cultural artifacts across Europe. The Parisian Museum, Galerie Nationale du Jeu de Paume, was designated as the central storage unit for all the treasures that the Nazis plundered. But the Nazis also hid their loot in salt mines across Germany and Austria.

Their stolen booty included works by master artists Rembrandt, Picasso, Matisse, Johannes Vermeer, Van Gogh, and countless others. The collection even included famous works like Michelangelo’s Madonna and Child sculpture. They were all pillaged from city museums, public galleries, and private collections.

To protect cultural artifacts from the ravages of the war, the American government formed a special task force called the Monuments, Fine Arts & Archives Section (MFAA) of the Allied Expeditionary Forces.

Nicknamed the “Monuments Men,” the unit was responsible for protecting cultural relics like churches and museums, assessing damaged art inside demolished cities, and initiating restoration projects.

The Monuments Men were not trained soldiers. They were art curators, collectors, academics, and historians committed to protecting and recovering Europe’s artwork — several lost their lives in the process^.1

The Apostle Paul was a Monuments Man! He protected and proclaimed the gospel treasure. Paul was concerned that, over time, the gospel would become distorted and compromised (defaced). In Paul’s letters, we find a constant theme of clarifying and defending the gospel. Knowing it would be a constant battle, he challenged Timothy to take up the same responsibility to guard this gospel treasure in his generation.

Guard, through the Holy Spirit who dwells in us, the treasure which has been entrusted to you. (2 Timothy 1:14; also 1 Timothy 6:20).

As Paul guards the treasure, he reveals three ways we deface the gospel: additions, subtractions, and distortions. Let’s examine each one.

1. Guarding against additions

Paul and Barnabus had just returned to Antioch from their first missionary journey, during which they had spread the gospel to Jews and Greeks. The gospel had taken root and believers were growing in their faith. But now, back in their sending church, they encounter a challenge to the gospel they had been proclaiming.   The issue was not so much the content as it was in the required response – which affected the content.

Believing Jews from Jerusalem had come to Antioch to add circumcision to their faith in the gospel. They claimed that without circumcision, a person could not be saved. Requiring circumcision added works to faith and merit to Christ’s righteousness.

In a typical Bible understatement, Luke says in Acts 15 that Paul and Barnabus

• had no small dissension or disputation (KJV).
• disagreed with them, arguing vehemently (NLT).
• were up on their feet at once in fierce protest (MSG).
• were livid (me).

To clarify and protect the gospel, a delegation of leaders from the Antioch church, including Paul and Barnabus, went to Jerusalem to consult with the apostles and elders. They had to clarify the essential gospel message in order to export it beyond Judaism and out to the nations (Acts 1:8). If the gospel was to cross cultural boundaries with a power, it needed to be free of religious traditions and cultural baggage.

When the Jerusalem leadership convened, Paul reported how the gospel they preached had the power to convert Gentiles and his version of the gospel did not include circumcision. Peter’s conclusion: “But we believe that we(the Jews) are saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they (the Gentiles) also are” (Acts 15:11 ). Verdict:  Circumcision is not essential to the gospel, leave it out.

Armed with a letter from the Jerusalem leaders, the delegation returns to Antioch with clarity on the gospel, with no additions. But Paul did not let down his guard. He knew it would come up again and was looking for it. Sure enough, it did with the church in Galatia.

Jewish believers again attempted to add works of the Jewish law to the gospel. When a group from James in Jerusalem came to visit the church in Galatia, they, along with Peter, created a two-tier faith. The higher level was for those who added works of the law to their justification and the lower level was for those who just had faith. Paul was incensed. 

I am amazed that you are so quickly deserting Him who called you by the grace of Christ, for a different gospel; which is really not another; only there are some who are disturbing you and want to distort the gospel of Christ (Gal 1:6-7).

Peter’s error clarified the gospel and gave us key verses like Galatians 2:20.

I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me.

We, too, must guard against adding our ideas to what it means to embrace the gospel. Over time, we tend to add a little here and there until our cultural baggage compromises the historic gospel. 

A current example could be adding the phrase “Invite Jesus into your heart” as the response to the gospel. It is certainly not at the same level as adding circumcision, but an addition nonetheless. Nowhere in Scripture are we told to say that. It most likely came from an inaccurate understanding of Revelations 3:20, and it became ensconced by the classic painting by Holman Hunt (1853) of Jesus standing alongside a Gothic wooden door. This Light of the World painting was a common picture in hospitals, homes, and churches (we had one in my home growing up). Countless sermons used this picture to show how to respond to the gospel. As we will explore later, the gospel’s invitation is that we join him in his grand story, not that he joins our little story.

The following blog will look at guarding against subtractions and distortions.

¹ For a fuller story, read this article in the Smithsonian Magazine (https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/true-story-monuments-men-180949569/)

In the previous blog, we looked at how the perception of God profoundly influences individual lives and societies. Our understanding often stems from unconscious influences rather than intentional thought. The gospel’s expansion, as recorded in Acts, illustrates how the early apostles adapted their message to varied audiences with differing views of God, emphasizing the necessity of accurately conveying God’s nature.

During the first centuries of kingdom expansion, it became evident that the nature of God, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit (the Trinity) needed to be clarified. The results of this clarification come down to us in the form of creeds. While most of the early creeds focused on Jesus’s nature as both God and man, the early creeds began with a clear statement on the nature of God, implying that if we get it wrong about God the Father, we get the gospel wrong.

“I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible”(Nicene Creed).

The relevant question for us today is: What does our audience believe about God? Recently, our audience for the gospel has been mainly a mix of believers and “God-fearers” with a small percentage of “others.”  That is no longer true.

Pew Research Center studies have shown that the number of Americans who believe in God with absolute certainty has declined in recent years. Conversely, the number of those who have doubts about God’s existence—or do not believe in God at all—has grown. 

The American Worldview Inventory is an annual nationwide survey conducted by the Cultural Research Center. A current survey reveals that only 6% of U.S. adults have a biblical worldview – a way of thinking and behaving predominantly driven by accepting biblical truths, precepts, and commands (including a concept of God).  Worldview Inventory of 2020 showed that:

•     Americans are now more confident about the existence of Satan than they are of God!

•     Only half of the nation accepts the orthodox biblical view of God as one who created and controls the universe; is omnipotent, omniscient, without fault, and just in His decisions.

Project Director George Barna stressed the significance of these new findings. “It’s no wonder that more than nine out of ten Americans lack a biblical worldview given that peoples’ fundamental understanding of the nature and existence of God is flawed.”

These trends raise questions: When people say they don’t believe in God, what are they rejecting? Are they rejecting belief in any higher power or spiritual force in the universe? Or are they rejecting only a traditional Christian idea of God – perhaps recalling images of a bearded man in the sky? Conversely, when respondents say they believe in God, what do they believe in – God as described in the Bible or some other spiritual force or supreme being?

Our picture of God is the starting point for understanding the gospel. If we add the gospel of Jesus to a distorted picture of God, we will get a warped faith.  For example, if our God is a cosmic genie, then the gospel becomes a means of narcissism, not kingdom transfer and a new creation.

Sixty years ago, I learned to share the gospel using “The Bridge” illustration. I would begin by drawing two cliffs on paper, each one representing God and Man. Then, I would ask the person to describe their picture of God, and as they did, I would note it alongside God on the diagram. I would consistently get a description that God was the creator, holy, sovereign, and sometimes judge.  The answers usually fit the standard Catholic/Protestant view of God. What was most often left out, however, was love. This omission gave the opening to suggest that God also loved them personally and that Jesus was the story of God’s love.

Today, we have a different audience. The cultural picture of God is more often that he is loving but not the Creator who is holy, sovereign, and just. “God loves me; that is what he is supposed to do, right?”  The Worldview Inventory found that 71% of Americans “have no doubt God loves them unconditionally” (think Santa Claus).

With an increasingly biblically illiterate culture, we need to ask, “What picture of God is necessary before a person can understand the gospel?” We don’t need to present a course in Old Testament theology, but we do need a starting foundation.  How would you describe the God who is the source and author of the gospel?

Several attributes come to mind when I think through the Old Testament narrative. Each one impacts the gospel of Jesus and his kingdom.

• There is one God (Deut. 6:4; Isa 46:9).
• God is self-caused and has no beginning (Gen. 1:1).
• God is the creator of the cosmos, both seen and unseen, nature and humanity (Gen. 1:1; Isa. 41:12; 45:18).
• God is relational (Gen. 3:8+).
• God is sovereign over all he has created, owner, Lord (Isa. 40:21-26).
• God is holy, totally other than what he has created, morally pure, no evil in him (Isa. 6:1+; 46:5).
• God is just and fair, the judge of righteousness (Isa. 61:8).
• God is loving, kind, and compassionate (Psalm 136; Isa. 63:7-8).

In his book “What’s Gone Wrong with the Harvest,” Dr. James Engel popularized the idea that people are on a journey towards comprehending and responding to the gospel. He divided that journey into eight steps, from -8 to 0. At the -8 stage, people are discovering that there is a God and what he is like. Once a foundation of God is established, the gospel can be introduced and gradually understood until it is accepted.  Engel’s point is that people make a series of decisions along their journey to authentic faith, and it begins with their picture of God.

If God is the beginning of the gospel, one of the most important questions we can ask someone is, “What is your picture of God?” 

The gravest question before the Church is always God Himself.

(AW Tozer)

What comes into our minds when we think about God is the most important thing about us.  The history of mankind will probably show that no people has ever risen above its religion, and man’s spiritual history will positively demonstrate that no religion has ever been greater than its idea of God.  …..   For this reason the gravest question before the Church is always God Himself, and the most portentous fact about any man or woman is not what he or she at a given time may say or do, but what he or she in their deep heart conceives God to be like.  We tend, by a secret law of the soul, to move toward our mental image of God.  (AW Tozer, “The Knowledge of the Holy”)

Each of us has a default picture (more likely a caricature) of God lodged in the cognitive unconscious that affects how we live. That picture was not developed by some rational, intentional process. Instead, it was unconsciously developed as the result of anecdotal evidence, experiences, and the influence of those we admire—parents as well as music stars. Regardless of the source, our view of God will be distorted if not corrected by biblical revelation.  The answer to the question, “What is God like?” plays a critical role in the expansion of the gospel of the risen king.

After the resurrection, Jesus told his disciples to wait until they received the Holy Spirit before launching his kingdom expansion. Then, they were to be his witnesses “both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth” (Acts 1:8). It was to be a systematic expansion from the center of Jerusalem out to the nations in an ever-expanding radius.

The gospel expansion was not just geographically outward but also outward toward people with a different worldview: a different view of God. In Jerusalem, Judea, and Samaria, the people shared the same picture of God as the Yahweh of Hebrew Scripture. That would not be true in the “remotest part of the earth.”

Luke records the implementation of the Acts 1:8 strategy in the Book of Acts. It begins with Peter’s message at Pentecost in Jerusalem, where Jews were gathered from various far-reaching locations. Next, the Apostle Philip expands the Acts 1:8 strategy when he goes to towns in Samaria. Samaritans were part Jewish and believed in the Yahweh of Scripture but had some different cultural and cultic practices.

After Paul was converted (Acts 9), he went to Damascus, about 135 miles north of Jerusalem. His purpose was not to arrest Jewish followers of the Way but to proclaim in the synagogues that Jesus was the Son of God. Although the location was outside Israel’s borders, his audience was still Jewish. 

But Saul kept increasing in strength and confounding the Jews who lived at Damascus by proving that this Jesus is the Christ (Acts 9:22). 

The next expansion of the gospel comes when Peter connects with a centurion named Cornelius, a Roman Gentile living in the coastal town of Caesarea.  This is our first record of the gospel expansion into a non-Jewish culture.  Although Cornelius was a Gentile, we are told that he is “a devout man and one who feared God with all his household, and gave many alms to the Jewish people and prayed to God continually” (Acts 10:2).  He was called a God-fearer or a Jewish proselyte who worshipped Yahweh of Scripture but did not conform to all the Jewish practices.  God-fearers were commonly found in the synagogues throughout the diaspora.

Directed by an angel, Cornelius sent for Peter, but he didn’t know why. Upon Peter’s arrival, Cornelius explained, “I sent for you immediately, and you have been kind enough to come. Now then, we are all here present before God to hear all that you have been commanded by the Lord” (Acts 10:33).

Opening his mouth, Peter said: “I most certainly understand now that God is not one to show partiality, but in every nation, the man who fears Him and does what is right is welcome to Him. “The word which He sent to the sons of Israel, preaching peace through Jesus Christ (He is Lord of all) (Acts 10:34-36).

Peter immediately spoke about the gospel of Jesus Christ the Lord since Cornelius, a Jewish proselyte, shared the Jewish view of Yahweh. However, the further away from Jerusalem the disciples went, the less true that would be.

For example, when Paul went to Athens (Acts 17), he first started in the synagogue with the Jews and God-fearing Gentiles, but he did not remain there. He also went into the marketplace, where he talked to the Stoics, Epicureans, and anyone else interested:  Gentiles with various views of what God was like. 

The Stoics believed in God as the rational order found in nature, and living in harmony with this divine reason would lead to virtue and happiness.  In their understanding, God is not a personal deity but simply the organizing principle of the cosmos.  It is a form of pantheism.  The Epicureans believed the greatest good is to seek modest pleasures to gain a state of tranquility, freedom from fear, and absence from bodily pain. To Epicureans, the gods did exist, but they lived so far away from the affairs of Man that they didn’t interfere with humanity.

Paul’s message aroused the curiosity of people who like to discuss new ideas, so they invited Paul to the Areopagus to hear more. Now, talking to Gentiles without a Jewish concept of God, Paul focuses on their alter to the “Unknown God.”  He said, “What you worship, I proclaim.”  The unknown God is knowable. So, what is this “Unknown God” like?  In this case study, we find that Paul doesn’t begin with the story of Jesus but the story of Yahweh.

(Acts 17:23-31)

Therefore what you worship in ignorance, this I proclaim to you. Therefore what you worship in ignorance, this I proclaim to you.

Having furnished proof to all men by raising Him from the dead (The proof of this Man’s credentials is that God raised him from the dead. God is even sovereign over death.)

The God who made the world and all things in it (Creator of the cosmos, distinct from the cosmos, creator of the visible and invisible).

since He is Lord of heaven and earth (God is sovereign over all He has created, Master, Owner)

does not dwell in temples made with hands (God is an invisible reality, too complex to be confined to a physical space such as a temple, pagan, or Jewish.)

nor is He served by human hands, as though He needed anything (He does not need humans for anything, not a quid pro quo relationship; God is self-sustaining)

since He Himself gives to all people life and breath and all things (He is the source of life to nature and humans; it is a gift from the God who is generous)

and He made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth (He is sovereign over the affairs of men. He started with one person and intentionally developed families, tribes, and nations. He is both transcendent and immanent.)

having determined their appointed times and the boundaries of their habitation (He is sovereign over the affairs of men)

that they would seek God if perhaps they might grope (feel) for Him and find Him (God’s purpose for humanity is to discover God by experience. He wants to be known and has made knowing him possible.)

though He is not far from each one of us  (God is immanent but invisible)

for in Him we live and move and exist, as even some of your own poets have said, ‘For we also are His children.’  (We live because of his providential love)

“Being then the children of God, we ought not to think that the Divine Nature is like gold or silver or stone, an image formed by the art and thought of man (We cannot reduce God to something He has made; he is totally other, holy)

 “Therefore, having overlooked the times of ignorance, God is now declaring to men that all people everywhere should repent (God graciously overlooks our ignorance to offer us a way to turn around and know him. It is an offer, an invitation for everyone, everywhere.)

because He has fixed a day in which He will judge the world in righteousness (God is the judge of the affairs of men. He is also righteous, holy, and just, The ultimate source of morality.)

through a Man whom He has appointed (God has provided a unique Person in time, space, and history who will be this Judge; He is already present.)

 (The proof of this Man’s credentials is that God raised him from the dead. God is even sovereign over death.)

Paul was not presenting the gospel message but describing the God of Jewish Scripture. Paul didn’t refer to the gospel theme until he established the foundation of God’s (Yahweh’s) nature.  Only when he presented God as Judge did he introduce Jesus as the “Man” God will use to bring about judgment, a “Man” God raised from the dead.

The response of the crowd varied: some scoffed; some were curious. The curious listened to Paul explain the gospel of Jesus and his kingdom.  We assume some became believers (Acts 17:32-34).  The point is that Paul started at a different place when his audience lacked a view of God necessary for the gospel.

(To be continued.  The next blog will relate this theme to our current culture.)

Over the past several years, I have used this blog to share my insights and observations on discipleship. Discipleship and making disciples have been the focus of my life and ministry for the past 60 years. The blogs and the trilogy, “Rethinking Discipleship,” emerged from them as a result of a long journey of exploring, learning, teaching, and mentoring. All of the above was based on the conviction that “making disciples” lies at the heart of the Great Commission. Christians need spiritual teachers, parents, and mentors who not only teach them biblical truth but equip them to live the Christian life. I still have that conviction.   

My passion for discipleship and ministry is deeply rooted in the ministry of The Navigators, founded by Dawson Trotman during WWII.  As an avid evangelist, Dawson Trotman had an aha moment one day when he picked up a hitchhiker who began his conversation with a string of profanities.  Dawson eagerly began to share the gospel with the young man when he suddenly realized he had shared the gospel with this same young man a few weeks earlier along this same road.  The young man who had committed his life to Christ earlier now showed no signs of spiritual growth.  Trotman concluded that leading people to faith was insufficient; they needed “follow-up.”

So, when Billy Graham expanded his evangelist crusades in the US in the 1950s, he asked Dawson Trotman and the Navigators to help develop the “follow-up” material for new converts. Graham knew that the thousands of new converts from his crusades needed help and Trotman specialized in helping new Christians grow.  I am a product of that rich heritage.  

Over the last 75 years, the focus on follow-up, or discipleship as we now call it, has birthed numerous organizations and created a plethora of materials to help build on the foundation of the gospel. There is no question of the importance of building people up in the faith.  Paul said, “According to the grace of God which was given to me, like a wise master builder, I laid a foundation, and another is building on it” (1 Corinthians 3:10).

However, recently, a troubling question has been on my mind. With the lack of spiritual fruit still so prevalent in the church today despite all our discipleship efforts, is there more going on than a need for better follow-up, better materials, and better mentors?  Using the title of a book by Dr James Engel in 1975, I want to ask, “What’s Gone Wrong with the Harvest?”

Where is the spiritual maturity and fruitfulness that should be evident from the gospel?   Why is spiritual maturity still the exception rather than the norm among people who identify themselves as Christians? Could it be that fruitlessness is the result not only of insufficient discipleship but of an incomplete understanding of and inadequate response to the historical gospel?

For the past several years, I have been reading, studying, and reflecting on what has become a critical assessment of my understanding of the gospel and how I present it. One of my early conclusions is that the historical “Gospel” is more of a narrative to be told and less of a doctrine to be asserted. I have concluded that the historic gospel is the narrative of the Lord Jesus Christ, which I call the Gospel of the Risen King.

Since that initial conclusion, I have continued exploring this gospel theme, asking myself if my culture has distorted my understanding of the gospel and if I need to take a fresh look at this critical foundation of the Great Commission. The more I researched this gospel theme, the more I discovered I was not alone. Others have been there before me and have voiced similar concerns. My list of mentors in this quest continues to grow.  One of them is AW Tozer.  More than half a century ago, he wrote,

Something is wrong somewhere.  Could it be that the cause behind this undeniable failure of the gospel to effect moral change is a further-back failure of the messenger to grasp the real meaning of the message? Could it be that, in his eagerness to gain one more convert, he makes the Way of Life too easy?  It would seem so.  In other times it was not an uncommon thing to witness the wholesale closing of saloons and brothels as a direct result of the preaching of the gospel of Christ in revival campaigns.  Surely there must have been a difference of emphasis between the message they preached in those days and the ineffective message we preach today.     ( AW Tozer, “The Set of the Sail”)   

 In the following blogs, I will share some of my research, studies, observations, hypotheses, and tentative conclusions. I am on a journey, shaking up and sifting some long-held assumptions. I am reminded of the Bereans in Acts 17:11.

 The people of Berea were more open-minded than those in Thessalonica, and they listened eagerly to Paul’s message. They searched the Scriptures day after day to see if Paul and Silas were teaching the truth. (NLT)

As I share my journey of asking questions and making observations, I invite you to join me by using my writing as a catalyst for your quest and discovery. Someone once told me, “We fail to get good answers because we don’t ask the right questions.”  So, in the journey ahead, I will ask questions that may challenge some long-held concepts. In the process, I want to more clearly understand the foundation of my faith

so that I can build on it and proclaim it with all the power it provides. With that as a preamble, I will use “The Gospel of the Risen King” as my working theme.

Here are a few of my observations that will be the framework for asking questions, making observations, and suggesting applications. One is the self-evident observation that the gospel has always been under attack. Since he could not prevent the gospel, Satan’s strategy is to distort it.   Paul not only had to present the gospel message but also defend it. Realizing that the gospel must be protected in each generation, he charged Timothy to “guard the treasure” entrusted to him.  He would say the same to us.      

Since the term is not used in the same way each time it is used in Scripture, we must first ask, “What is the gospel?”   To define the gospel message that has the power to “save,” we need to recognize the object of the preposition “of” as in the gospel of ____. Once defined, we can then ask whether or not we have added to it, subtracted from it, or distorted it.

The Gospel of the risen King has the power to bear spiritual fruit, create new life, and transform hearts of stone into hearts of flesh. If that is not happening, is something inherently amiss in our understanding and presentation of this gospel? 

Then, I want to explore the possibility that our gospel lacks power because it is under attack from cultural pathogens.  I have identified six current ones that I believe threaten the health of this gospel and rob it of its power. Once identified, each pathogen has a fairly obvious antidote. The hard part will be using it.

In the past, we have framed our gospel presentations on assumptions about our audience that are no longer valid. Therefore, we must look closer at our audience and adapt how we present the gospel to create understanding. With some audiences, the adaptation is minor; for others, it will take a major overhaul. The gospel of Jesus and his kingdom has the power to create new life and transfer people from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of light.  Reconciled and realigned with Christ as King, we then reflect Christ’s image from a transformed heart through the power of the indwelling Holy Spirit.  As followers of the risen King, our mission is to be the vanguard, guarding the treasure of the gospel, telling His story, expanding God’s kingdom one life at a time, and living out the GOSPEL OF THE RISEN KING.