What is the Gospel?
Several blogs (Evangel, The Boar’s Head Tavern, and City of God, at least) have been discussing the meaning of the “Gospel” lately, and I thought I would chime in.
In some circles, especially Emergent/ing and mainline liberals, the Gospel seems to essentially be the Social Gospel. In others, especially those known as the “TRs”, it has been defined as the imputation of the active obedience of Christ to sinners for justification.
My perspective is this: most basically, the Gospel is the announcement that God’s eschatological kingdom has come (see Isaiah 52:7 for this). This “coming” is linked to several significant events in the NT:
Incarnation (Luke 2:10 “Good news of great joy”; 1 Timothy 3:16 “manifested in the flesh”)
Ministry of Christ (which consisted of teaching, healing, and exorcism mostly: Matthew 4:17 where “the kingdom … at hand” is Jesus himself, Matthew 4:23)
Death and Resurrection of Christ (1 Corinthians 15:3-4)
Christ’s Ascension to Reign as God (Romans 10:9)
Giving of the Spirit (Galatians 3:1-6 “Let me ask you only this:…” tells us what the main error about the Gospel is)
Commissioning and Ministry of the Apostles (e.g. 1 Corinthians 15:5-9, 1 Timothy 3:16 “seen by messengers”, Luke 10:1-24, 2 Corinthians 5:20-21 where the apostles’ ministry is called “the righteousness of God” which is what the Gospel is all about, Philippians 4:15 where the beginning of Paul’s ministry is “the beginning of the gospel”)
Two aspects of these events are stressed significantly in Paul’s letters, and called “the gospel”: the forgiveness of sins (e.g. 1 Corinthians 15:3 “died for our sins”) and the union of Jew and Gentile (Galatians 3:8) by means of the possession of the Spirit into a new commonwealth.
I also think a good argument could be made that the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70 is part of this larger “gospel”, insofar as it is the definitive vindication of Jesus and his church (Luke 21:28 calls this event the church’s “redemption”) and the destruction of the enemies of the Gospel among the “natural” people of God, the Jews. It is thus a sign of the coming of the new age, where the kingdom will be given to those who will accept it: both Jews and Gentiles equally.
One important thing I think needs to be taken note of is the frequent use of synecdoche in the NT: various writers of scripture will often refer to one aspect of this gospel (say, “the cross”) as the Gospel, despite the fact that elsewhere other events are included in the Gospel (say, “the resurrection of Christ”). If this is not taken into account reductionism could quickly follow.
Two other important points should also be noted here: the Gospel is neither solely the truth that God forgives sinners per se (though the Gospel includes that truth), nor solely that God is acting to make the earthly situation of his people better (though it also incorporates that truth in a qualified way, insofar as it recognizes that improvement will not always occur).
I think this is the most comprehensive understanding of how the NT uses the term “gospel”. But I’m open to persuasion.
Actually, as it frequently noted in Pauline scholarship, Paul pays (uncomfortably?) little attention to notions of ‘forgiveness’ or ‘the forgiveness of sins’.
Also, I’m sort of partial to N.T. Wright’s definition of the Gospel as the embodied proclamation that “Jesus, the crucified and risen Messiah, is Lord”. When unpacked, this says pretty much what most other (far longer) definitions of the Gospel say.
Poser:
As for forgiveness… at the moment I can’t answer satisfactorily, but I’ll just point out the fact that it appears in: a) his summary of the gospel in 1 Cor 15, b) Romans 3, 4, 8, 11, c) 2 Cor 5 (whether you read the second half of 21 in the Lutheran way or not, the first half is obviously about forgiveness), d) Eph 2, all off the top of my head, I don’t know how I could construe forgiveness as not an important element in Paul. As Wright also points out, the covenant itself was designed to deal with sins and God’s wrath against them (among other things), etc.
I agree with Wright’s definition of course; I included all the elements he did, especially the ascension, an element I learned was part of the gospel from reading him. I’m just trying to be more exhaustive than he is.
Just a note: We can add Ed Stetzer to the list of people working on this subject: http://blogs.lifeway.com/blog/edstetzer/2009/11/gospel-definitions.html