First of all, I wonder if anyone will read this, since there aren’t many threads going on here…
Let me just jump right in. I don’t know if this is a very original query or not. I kinda doubt that it is. But I personally have never heard or read about it, and so I don’t know what the conclusion is.
One of my biggest fears or doubts concerning spiritual or religious things is this…
What if Christianity, or the gospel message, as many of us heard it growing up, have come to understand and love it, and as we have learned to proclaim it is not actually as unadulterated as we’d like to think? What if the “Jesus plus anything else is not the gospel” version of the gospel, the version Luther and others had to revive a few centuries ago, is not the earliest or only or best version of Christ’s message? What if it really is rather the beautiful and elaborate creation of the apostle Paul more so than the actual gospel message of Christ and God the Eternal Father? What if this is why Paul did not consult flesh before he started preaching? Because his message really was something other than what the other apostles had been preaching?!
This query of mine stems from this thought…
It seems that the proof texts for our explanations of God’s message come primarily from Paul’s writings and not from the actual words of Christ. (Roman Road, 4 Spiritual Laws, whatever)
When we study the epistles, such as Galatians, we see the version of the gospel that we are so familiar and enamored with. But do we see this same understanding of God’s message to humanity when we read the gospels on their own, without our preconceived notions read into them?
Here’s a challenge that I would like to see answered. (I’m not trying to seem confrontational. I am hoping to come up with a rebuttal to my own challenge as well. But I think it would be edifying if others accept the same challenge.)
Write down your understanding of the Gospel. Then, using only the words of Jesus Christ, defend your explanation. In other words, try to design a tract, or gospel presentation, using only verses from the gospels, not verses from the epistles.
One last addition to the challenge, that will, in my mind, make it even a little more challenging. Once you have made an attempt, double-check it to see whether or not this explanation of the gospel could not also be very easily interpreted in a more Thomas Jefferson, universalistic way.
I’m now wondering if I have even articulated my fear/doubt clearly. We’ll see…
First of all, I wonder if anyone will read this, since there aren’t many threads going on here…
Let me just jump right in. I don’t know if this is a very original query or not. I kinda doubt that it is. But I personally have never heard or read about it, and so I don’t know what the conclusion is.
One of my biggest fears or doubts concerning spiritual or religious things is this…
What if Christianity, or the gospel message, as many of us heard it growing up, have come to understand and love it, and as we have learned to proclaim it is not actually as unadulterated as we’d like to think? What if the “Jesus plus anything else is not the gospel” version of the gospel, the version Luther and others had to revive a few centuries ago, is not the earliest or only or best version of Christ’s message? What if it really is rather the beautiful and elaborate creation of the apostle Paul more so than the actual gospel message of Christ and God the Eternal Father? What if this is why Paul did not consult flesh before he started preaching? Because his message really was something other than what the other apostles had been preaching?!
This query of mine stems from this thought…
It seems that the proof texts for our explanations of God’s message come primarily from Paul’s writings and not from the actual words of Christ. (Roman Road, 4 Spiritual Laws, whatever)
When we study the epistles, such as Galatians, we see the version of the gospel that we are so familiar and enamored with. But do we see this same understanding of God’s message to humanity when we read the gospels on their own, without our preconceived notions read into them?
Here’s a challenge that I would like to see answered. (I’m not trying to seem confrontational. I am hoping to come up with a rebuttal to my own challenge as well. But I think it would be edifying if others accept the same challenge.)
Write down your understanding of the Gospel. Then, using only the words of Jesus Christ, defend your explanation. In other words, try to design a tract, or gospel presentation, using only verses from the gospels, not verses from the epistles.
One last addition to the challenge, that will, in my mind, make it even a little more challenging. Once you have made an attempt, double-check it to see whether or not this explanation of the gospel could not also be very easily interpreted in a more Thomas Jefferson, universalistic way.
I’m now wondering if I have even articulated my fear/doubt clearly. We’ll see…
Thanks a lot! I really mean it!
Friend,
Thanks for your thoughts. Read these articles by people much more insightful than I and let me know what you think.
Article #1
Article #2