Wednesday 11 August 2010

***Please Note these not my thoughts and words but an excerpt from Embracing Grace: A Gospel for All of Us by Scot McKnight, 2005 Paraclete Press, pages xi & xii:

I really like what Scot McKnight says here and how he puts it. It addresses an ongoing conversation that I have been having with a friend.


“Introduction: The Gospels Among Us –


If you ask Christian folk, something I occasionally do just to get a conversation started, “What is the gospel?” you are more than likely to get one of three answers. If you ask the question in a spirit of non-defensive curiosity, you are more than likely to get people to say what they really think. There are typical answers to the question “What is the gospel?

First, some say this: ‘The gospel is that Jesus came to earth to die for my sins so I could b forgiven and go to heaven to be with God for eternity.” Most of the time those who give this answer to the question also provide a quotation from the Gospel of John or from Paul’s letter to the Roman Christians.


Second, others say this: “The gospel is the Good News that Jesus came to liberate us from oppression, from systemic evil, from slavery, so there would be justice and peace.” I also hear this one quite often, and these people tend to quote a line or two from Jesus’ well-known inaugural sermon in Luke chapter four or from the prophet Micah.

Third, another group says something like this: “The gospel is being part of the Church.” Again, this group will sometimes quote a Bible verse, but they are just as likely to quote their pastor or priest and say that they grew up in the Church and that this is what they were taught.

There is no reason here to figure “which group is giving which answer?” or to start pointing fingers at one another. And there is no reason to start claiming that “my gospel is better than your gospel.” Instead, there is every reason for us to ask how we got ourselves into this muddle: how, we can be asking, could we have such different approaches to what is so basic? If the gospel is for all of us, how did it come to pass that each group thinks it alone have the gospel figured out? One group emphasizes forgiveness of sins, another the transformation of persons and society, and the other our inclusion in the community of faith. Is there a right and a wrong with these answers?

The most important thing I have to say in Embracing Grace is this: each of these groups is trying to say the same thing, each of these groups is right in what they do say about the gospel, and each of these groups needs the definition of the other. But first we need to define the gospel groups.”

Scot McKnight goes on to give this definition of gospel: The gospel is the work of God to restore humans to union with God and community with others, in the context of a community, for the good of others and the world. This is what he calls the gospel of “embracing grace.”



My thoughts: I really appreciate McKnight’s introduction here. I confess the preface and introduction is all I have read of his book so far. I read it on Amazon’s preview of the book so that I why I don’t feel bad putting such a lengthy quote here, you can find it for yourself at: http://www.amazon.com/Embracing-Grace-Gospel-All-Us/dp/B001OMIBOK/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1281544109&sr=8-1#reader_B001OMIBOK


I appreciate his view that all 3 of these views are parts of the “Gospel.” Often I have been guilty of being do centered on the salvation of Heaven like Jamey was talking about that I miss the other aspects of “Gospel.” I like how clearly McKnight quickly discusses these 3 views of gospel and says, No it does not have to be only one, rather all 3 are gospel. So the challenge it leaves me with is this; Am I going to communicate to others that “Gospel” is a rich word full of salvation, justice and community or am I unintentionally communicating too much emphasis on one of those aspects?