“What’s good news to us now isn’t just that He died for us, though that is good news. It isn’t just that He’s with us, though that is good news. It isn’t just that He’s in us, helping us, though that is good news. The really good news is that He is in us, living His life as us. He has joined His Spirit with our spirit. In the unseen and eternal, there’s Deity inside us. We are not that Deity, but we are containers of that Deity.”â€” The Rest of the Gospel: When the partial Gospel has worn you out, page 62
That is good news, isn’t it!
Of course, everything mentioned in that post is part of the gospel – the good news of Jesus Christ. And, that’s not all. The gospel includes much, much more than that.
Of course, to put together a picture of the gospel that includes all of the aspects mentioned in James’ post, you would have to put together several passages of Scripture. In other words, there is not one passage of Scripture that describes the gospel in minute detail. In fact, the authors of Scripture usually only present that aspect of the gospel that furthers their argument or that would encourage their readers in that particular context.
So, what does that say about us? When we talk about the gospel, it’s important that we know what we’re talking about, right? But, is it always important for us to spell out every aspect – every facet – every detail of the gospel?
I’ve seen some people criticize authors or bloggers or speakers because the gospel presented in their book, or blog post, or speech was not complete enough for the critic. Is this a valid criticism? Would the authors of Scripture live up to this same criticism? I don’t think so.
So, why do we require others to present the gospel in such a way that the authors of Scripture did not?