The transformative, never-irrelevant, kingdom-focused gospel of Jesus Christ

A few months ago I went through all of the uses of the word "gospel" in the Bible and wrote out a rough summary of what I saw.  This was before I had heard of the "King Jesus Gospel" of Scott McKnight.  I still have not read that book or the several other popular treatments of the subject that are making the rounds right now.  Thus, I don't know to what degree I agree or disagree with those guys.  But here is the summary I wrote after looking at the Bible's uses of the word:

"The gospel begins with the proclamation of the coming of the kingdom of God/heaven.  It will end in the same way, with the redeemed worshiping Christ in his eternal kingdom come to earth.  In the middle, there is the revelation that this kingdom comes by way of the cross of Jesus, his resurrection, and faith in him.  By faith in this Jesus, we are cleansed, and we are transformed into new creations, becoming a part of his kingdom even now as we wait for its full consummation.  Thus, we are constantly seeking greater likeness to Christ and an identity that is more and more becoming of a citizen of the kingdom of heaven.  We are seeking transformation, and that transformation always comes through Jesus, the cross, the resurrection, and faith in his future kingdom.  God has established local churches to be the visible manifestations of that kingdom until Christ returns, so they should be gospel-centered communities of people who are constantly being transformed by the gospel.  The gospel is always relevant and always life changing.  It should permeate all of who we are, what we do, and what we communicate with our words and actions."

In summary of my summary, the gospel is all about the kingdom of Christ, it becomes good news to us through faith in the person and work of Christ, and it is the ongoing central reality of the Christian life.

Ned Flanders in the Fourth Century

Christians get degraded in popular culture all the time.  We see it in movies, TV shows, and just about everywhere else.  Despite what many people might think, this is not a new phenomenon.  Today I was reading a sermon delivered by Gregory Nazianzen in 362 AD, and I ran across this quote:

"We have become a new spectacle . . . to almost all wicked men, and at every time and place, in the public squares, at carousals, at festivities, and times of sorrow. Nay, we have already— I can scarcely speak of it without tears— been represented on the stage, amid the laughter of the most licentious, and the most popular of all dialogues and scenes is the caricature of a Christian."

Christianity has always been a subject of ridicule and laughter, and it will be that way until Christ returns.  If you don't believe me, then just read 1 Corinthians 1:18-25.  Instead of being outraged or seeking to improve our image, we're called to keep preaching (and living out) the message of the cross that the world finds so ridiculous.

The Bible and "Historical" Background Information

There is a ton of false "historical" information about the Bible out there.  Relying on historical factoids instead of digging into the Bible for answers is both lazy and a good way to perpetuate myths.

I want to emphasize this because lately I have been learning that more and more "historical" background information that I've heard is just not true.  Here are some examples of what I mean...

-I used to occasionally repeat the story that in Old Testament times the high priest had a rope tied around his ankle when he entered the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement.  This was because he was afraid of being struck dead in the presence God, in which case the other priests would use the rope to retrieve his corpse.  That's a great story, isn't it?  Unfortunately, it's not true.  There's no mention of this practice anywhere in history until someone made it up in the middle ages.

-I had always heard that Gehenna was a big, burning trash dump outside of Jerusalem.  This story really helps Jesus to illustrate what hell is like, right?  Too bad that this trash dump apparently never existed--it was also an invention of the middle ages.  (It's most likely that Jesus actually used the valley of Gehenna as an illustration of hell because of the horrific child sacrifices that the Old Testament tells us happened there.  In other words, Jesus talked about Gehenna because he knew his Bible.)

-A sailor in the 1800s (or 1970s, or whenever) is said to have been swallowed by a whale and recovered alive, which supposedly proves the historicity of the book of Jonah.  Again, these stories seem not to be true.  They make the news in the same way that stories about people riding in alien spacecraft do.  (And even if they were true, God's use of a sea creature to save Jonah's life was a miracle and therefore doesn't need any modern parallels to prove its historicity.  Neither does the resurrection of Jesus or any other miracle in the Bible.)

Trevin Wax pointed out several of these popular "historical" myths in a great blog post.  As I read it, I wanted to shout, "Preach it, Trevin!" ...

...But then today I was humbled by the truth about yet another myth I had thoughtlessly believed: that in New Testament times, Christians were baptized in the nude.  After this story came up in conversation three times in a single week, I decided to check into whether or not it's true.  Guess what? It's not.  The first historical mention of nude Christian baptism is by Hyppolytus around the beginning of the third century, and it doesn't seem to have become a common practice until the fourth century.  Christians were not baptized in the nude in New Testament times.  In fact, absolutely nothing in the New Testament mentions nude baptism, which should have been my biggest clue to begin with.

The moral of the story is to trust your Bible. If you want to learn interesting things about the Bible and have it opened up to you in a whole new way, then read it.  Pray through it, think hard about it, take notes on it, and notice where it makes references to itself.  It is its own best historical background material.  You can always trust it, even when certain stories you've heard about it turn out not to be true.

The Burden of Living In a Car-Dependent Nation

Most cities in America have now been built in such a way that life without a car is next to impossible.  Why did we start doing things this way?  Here's a quote to chew on from a cutting-edge urban planning book from 1935:

"The cities will be part of the country; I shall live 30 miles from my office in one direction, under a pine tree; my secretary will live 30 miles away from it too, in the other direction, under another pine tree. We shall both have our own car. We shall use up tires, wear out road surfaces and gears, consume oil and gasoline. All of which will necessitate a great deal of work...enough for all."

Hmmm... I guess it seemed like a good idea at the time.

If Rob Bell is Right, Why Bother With Christianity?

I read Rob Bell's new book Love Wins a couple of weeks ago.  I decided to wait to post anything since the internet is not the best place to broadcast initial reactions of profound disagreement.  If you want to hear my specific thoughts about the book, I'd love to talk to you.  For now, I'll limit myself to a question:

If Rob Bell is right, then why would anyone bother to be a Christian?  If God's love will save people apart from faith in Christ, then why should we go to the trouble of burdening ourselves with a time-consuming religion?  Why not just eat, drink, and be merry (and support charities in Africa), for tomorrow love wins?

If you've read the book, please tell me why you think Rob Bell has decided to keep pouring his energy into the Christian religion.  Force of habit? Desire for respect? A sense that Christianity matters more than he's argued?  It's a mystery to me.

The Structure of Zechariah 7-8

I taught on Zechariah 7-8 last week. After reading some commentaries and being especially tipped off by James Hamilton's take on it, it seemed pretty obvious that Zechariah structured these two chapters as a chiasm.  But, I wasn't totally satisfied by the few proposals that I read about which parts of the chapter were intended to match other parts.  Here is the way I think Zechariah intended it to be broken down:

***

A: 7:1-3 – Men from Bethel inquire of God at Jerusalem through priests and prophets

B: 7:4-7 – Former attitudes about fasting were wrong because attitudes about all of life were wrong (their question is answered with two more questions)

C: 7:8-10 – A call to a life of righteousness

D: 7:11-14 – The refusal of forefathers to listen, resulting in destruction

E: 8:1-8 – Restoration of Jerusalem from God’s perspective:  begins with "jealousy and wrath," ends with with "faithfulness and righteousness."

E’: 8:9-13 – Restoration of Jerusalem from human perspective:

begins and ends with “let your hands be strong.”

D’: 8:14-15 – Unlike their forefathers, God will bring good to this people

C’: 8:16-17 – A call to a life of righteousness

B’: 8:18-19 – Fasts will one day be turned to feasts, so the real task is to love truth and peace (the men from Bethel had been asking the wrong question)

A’: 8:20-23 – Men from all nations will one day inquire of God at Jerusalem through average citizens (a kingdom of priests)

Overall message: God is doing a work that is much greater than simply rebuilding the physical temple, so His people should set their hope and faith toward the future rather than mourning the tragedies of the past.

***

I'm posting this for two reasons.  First, I really benefited spiritually from studying this portion of Scripture and hope that others will also benefit.  Second, I am hoping that people who are more knowledgeable than I am about these kinds of things might accidentally read this and offer their thoughts.

Sinful Anger as Described by the Colorado Driver Handbook (the last three bullet points are the best)

"Could I become an Aggressive Driver?

Anyone is capable of becoming an aggressive driver. Some

drivers may be more likely to become aggressive. Here is

a series of questions developed by Leon James PhD., to

determine whether you have a greater potential to become

aggressive behind the wheel. Take a few minutes to ask

yourself these questions, and be honest with yourself.

Do you:

• Mentally condemn other drivers as incompetent or

stupid?

• Make negative comments about other drivers to those

riding with you?

• Close up space to stop other motorists from merging or

changing lanes?

• Prevent another driver from passing?

• Tailgate a driver to get them to speed up or get out of

your way?

• Angrily speed past another driver?

• Run a stop sign, red light or other traffic control device

out of frustration or anger?

• Honk or yell at someone to express your anger or

frustration?

• Make an obscene gesture at another driver?

• Pursue another vehicle to express your anger?

• Deliberately bump or ram another vehicle?

• Exit your vehicle to teach the other driver a lesson through

either a verbal exchange or physical confrontation?

• Fantasize about physically attacking another driver?

If you answered yes to these questions, even a couple

of these questions, you may be at risk to become an

aggressive driver."