Sorry about the delay, but thanks for being so gracious in conversation!

You’re right, the implications of our justification is very wide indeed, affecting relationships, systems, and environment, but the gospel is primarily the antidote for a single thing: sin. My fear is that if we muddy the waters of the gospel, we will fall into trap of viewing Christ’s work as essentially ethical, not salvific in nature. Jesus becomes the best model of how to do things, rather than a Lord to whom we bow in worship.

Creation groans for its newbirth, only in as much as the sons of God are revealed (Rom 8:19), which means our adoption as son and the redemption of our bodies (v. 23). In other words, the full realization of the kingdom and all its fruits will all be a matter of course as disciples are made of all nations and we are resurrected in the end. I think what may be going on is your postmillenial view of the eschaton – that the works of the redeemed have a large part to play in the arrival of the kingdom of God. (is this accurate?). I have more of the view that our plans and strategies for the world have very little resemblance to what the new creation is going to look like.

On the matter of Zacchaeus, Jesus could not have been saying that Zach earned his salvation through his generous gesture, but rather that his generosity was evidence of a saved and transformed heart. Zacchaeus got saved in the fig tree, not in his house.

You’ve got me thinking though … I’ll have to consider more deeply the relationship between our faith and our works in the coming kingdom.

blessings!

Thanks for being gracious in your response, and I always appreciate thoughtful feedback, so this conversation is a delight.

And I agree that the gospel is about salvation. And in the original biblical languages, this word also means “healing” or “deliverance,” and is often used not only from eternal judgment but from earthly situations as well.

But to say that this is the same as a liberal social gospel feels extremely unfair. For in that project, the uniqueness of Jesus and his work on the cross and his subsequent resurrection lost their centrality. This way of presenting the gospel in no way seeks to undermine Jesus’ centrality in the history of redemption, but affirms it and expands the range of his work.

I don’t see it as an either/or, but a both/and. A gospel that isn’t merely concerned with souls — though that’s important — but one also concerned with the new creation — the Kingdom of God. The path of redemptive history is a new heaven and a new earth: one where all is made right. It has social and individual implications, all which is explained better in the book.

Jesus did call for “repentance” of individuals, but he also made clear the implications for our relationships and the world around us. As you, no doubt, agree. Doesn’t Jesus claim that salvation came to Zacchaeus’ after he said he would give away half of his possessions and repay anything he’s cheated (Luke 19.8-9)?

That’s why I asked if you saw Part 2 or read the book, because it does talk about the need for repentance and forgiveness to restore our relationship with God. But the Christian message is also a restoration of all things (Col 1.15-20), not just souls. And when all things are restored — people, relationships, systems — then it does bring great glory to God, because that’s the way it was supposed to be. God is making all things right, and isn’t that where everything is heading?

What do you think?

thanks for being to interact. Please don’t take anything I’m saying as some sort of attack on you, brother.

http://www.jameschoung.net/2008/01/31/the-big-story-part-2/

If so, then I’ll write more. I just want to know what you’re responding to before I write back.

Yes, the gospel has implications on the pain and suffering that we see in the world. Yes, the gospel, when lived out, will make an impact on relationships, poverty, politics, and the environment. BUT, the gospel does not primarily exist for these things. It is the power of God for the SALVATION of everyone who believes. It is about how sinners can be reckoned righteous with a holy God. We are not sent to heal, we are sent to make disciples.

Brother, I understand what you’re trying to say, there’s lots that this world needs, and lots for Christians to do. But your diagram hints at a gospel that is NO different from the liberal social gospel of decades past that sought to strip Jesus and the gospel from the singular aim of calling sinners to repentance.