I am going to suggest that people everywhere may be using a word in greek as a subject, that normally should be descriptive of the subject under discussion, not as another way of stating the subject.
If I tell you my wife just had a baby, that is gospel.
If I tell you my father just had his cancer miraculously cured, that is gospel.
If I tell you that Jesus Christ died on the cross for your sins and rose again, that is gospel.
If I tell you that simply by believing in him for eternal life, he grants it to you, that also is gospel.
If I tell you Christ is coming again, that is gospel
There are many other things that are gospel and even described as gospel in the New Testament but only ONE thing grants eternal life and that is Belief in Jesus Christ for Eternal life. That is gospel or good news!
The New Testament is "gospel" because it is good news, however thankfully it is not what we must believe to have eternal life. Jesus Christ was clear on that in John thankfully.
Thoughts?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Trent, Welcome back to blogging! ;-)
I think you make a valid point regarding the use of the singular term “gospel” (BTW I thank God for all your wonderful blessings!) but isn’t it the “Gospel of Jesus Christ” in particular that is the power of God unto salvation?
Thank you KC!
Are we speaking of salvation in the eternal life sense, or in one of the more common New Testament usages?
:)
I would say the New Testament has good news relating to many different kinds of salvation, and the words of Jesus Christ in John focus on gaining eternal life. In other books, His words dwell on temporal as well as eternal issues that although not always referencing the gaining of everlasting life, still speak of things in the future kingdom.
Trent I would say that the Gospel of Jesus Christ is the power of God to Salvation in every sense. I would also say that the book of John is primarily a clear presentation of that Gospel.
To be honest I think the only point of your article I might contend with concerns the requirement that belief in Christ *must* be premised on personal gain in order to appropriate eternal life (belief in Christ for vs. belief in Christ because).
how would you respond to someone who accuses us of believing in Jesus for eternal life just so we get a "get out of hell insurance policy"?
Hi KC. I am not sure I understand your point. If you are believing in someone, there is something you are believing in him for. He is the Christ, the provider of Eternal life to all who believe. Am I understanding your point, or did I miss it? :)
Erin, insurance is something you voluntarily pay.
I believe that looking into Christ to avoid hell, or to gain heaven is normal, but since you don't choose to believe something, thats silly.
It does not matter why you are learning of Christ, but if you believe in him, then you have eternal life according to his own promise. The only reason you believe in him is because you are convinced he is able to perform that which he promised. There can be no other reason.
Thanks for the question!
Trent thanks for your time in this. I will try to make my contention more clear.
Please correct me if I’m wrong but as I understand your thoughts then before a person can appropriate eternal life they *must* understand and believe the doctrine. If this is the case then how would you view the Samaritans who believed in Jesus because of the testimony of the woman at the well, “Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?” (John 4:29 KJV) Would you consider these to have appropriated eternal life or was it necessary that they first learn and accept the doctrine to appropriate it? Where I would understand their faith that Jesus is Christ was adequate to enter into eternal life in Him I would understand you to say it was not.
Hi KC. long time no write. I like many others are struggling to make it in this economy. I thank you in advance for your patience.
KC said "Please correct me if I’m wrong but as I understand your thoughts then before a person can appropriate eternal life they *must* understand and believe the doctrine. If this is the case then how would you view the Samaritans who believed in Jesus because of the testimony of the woman at the well, “Come, see a man, which told me all things that ever I did: is not this the Christ?” (John 4:29 KJV) Would you consider these to have appropriated eternal life or was it necessary that they first learn and accept the doctrine to appropriate it? Where I would understand their faith that Jesus is Christ was adequate to enter into eternal life in Him I would understand you to say it was not.
I actually would agree with you. Beleiving in Jesus as the Christ or Messiah is believing in him for eternal life. The Messiah is the Savior, and by believing in him as the Messiah they were believing in him for eternal life. John 11:25-27 I think makes this clear.
Thanks again
Love in Christ!
Trent
Post a Comment