The gospel is a story about Christ, God’s and David’s Son, who died and was raised and is established as Lord. This is the gospel in a nutshell ... And I assure you, if a person fails to grasp this understanding of the gospel, he will never be able to be illuminated in the Scripture nor will he receive the right foundation. [1]
What the word ‘evangelical’ will objectively designate is that theology which speaks of the God of the Gospel. [2]
A renewed theology will be evangelical, that is, centered on the gospel of reconciliation and redemption as attested in Holy Scripture. [3]
Evangelical Theology should be a Theology of the Gospel. [4]
To be ‘evangelical’ is to read Scripture in the light of the euangelion that lies at its heart. [5]
Revelation does not merely bring the gospel: the gospel is revelation. [6]
The gospel stands at the beginning of the story that explains why there are Christians at all, on the boundary between belief and unbelief – often, for the hearer, prior to a knowledge of the Bible itself. For the person entering from the outside, the gospel is the introduction to the faith, the starting-point for understanding. It then rightly becomes the touchstone of the faith. Since this is where faith begins, it is essential that faith continues to conform to it. [7]
Introduction
Harry Emerson Fosdick once said: ‘He who chooses the beginning of the road chooses the place it leads to. It is the means that determines the end.’ This is why the beginning point of theology is so crucial – where one starts will determine where one ends up. The science of constructing a prolegomena to theology (something akin to a cover note or preface to the theological venture) was once undertaken in order to justify the theological enterprise and the chosen method in order to avoid the critiques of Modernity that regarded theology as a pseudo-science. Before we do theology then do we need to advance apologetic arguments to show, as Francis Schaeffer once said, that God is? Some have argued that we should begin theological exploration with a natural theology (Thomas Aquinas), a study of the Triune God (Karl Barth), the resurrection of Jesus Christ (Wolfhart Pannenberg), or even the Bible (Wayne Grudem). The other problem is how does one hold the entire theological paradigm together or what theme constitutes the integrating point for theological discourse? Is it the magnificence of God (Millard Erickson) or something like the transcendence of God (Karl Barth)? In contrast, I intend to argue that an evangelical prolegomena will make the gospel the starting-point and the integrating-point for both biblical and systematic theology.
Prolegomena: Setting out the Gospel
The word ‘prolegomena’ means literally ‘that which is said before’ and is kind of like clearing one’s throat or laying the cards on the table before one gets down to business. The science of prolegomena was bred largely out of the need to justify the pursuit of theology at a time when theology was met with suspicion: is there a God to speak of, how can we know that there even is a God, and how could one conceivably go about studying God? More recently the need for a prolegomena has been questioned in light of two things: (1) Karl Barth argued that one should start doing theology with God as he has revealed himself and not begin with a methodology about how God is knowable. Barth is probably correct here since theologians have allowed Modernist epistemology and rationalistic philosophy to set the rules and agenda for Christian theology. (2) The postmodern turn has also questioned the utility of constructing a prolegomena since theology is simply part of the narrative grammar of Christian communities. You either speak the lingo or you do not – so there’s no point in constructing an elaborate prolegomena to justify why you are doing theology since you are only preaching to the converted anyway and they already know why they are doing it: to learn more about God. I must say that I am not a fan of trying to justify the theological enterprise in light of the critique of supernatural religion made by Modernity and in the process using the epistemological tools of Modernity to do it. Who cares what the Modernists or Postmodernist think, theology is for God’s people, not the deists, atheists or pluralists. The postmodern theologians are correct that Christian theology has its own grammar but they regard that grammar as an insiders’ word-game and they deny that the language of Christian theology has an external referent. But on the other hand, theology is much like a cinemagraphic story, and this story needs some opening credits in order to introduce the lead actors, director, and producers of the film. A good theological prolegomena ought to do the same. For this reason I think that we should have a prolegomena and that prolegomena includes a setting out of the gospel. [8] This anchors the genesis of doctrine in God’s revelation of himself in history as testified by the gospel and so provides Christian theology with a referent beyond its own socio-linguistic location. I define the gospel here as follows:
‘The gospel is the good news that God's Kingdom has come in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth, the Lord and Messiah, in fulfillment of Israel's Scriptures. The gospel evokes faith, repentance and discipleship – its accompanying effects include the forgiveness of sins, justification, reconciliation, adoption, and the gift of the Holy Spirit.’
We need to set out the gospel at the beginning of theology because (1) our reception of the gospel is the point where we first experience the soteriological benefits of being in a redemptive relationship with God; (2) it brackets out perversions of the gospel caused by either a liberalism (a truncated social gospel) or a fundamentalism (gospel + works) which might otherwise infiltrate our theological thinking; (3) setting out the gospel insulates our further theological reflection from either a pietistic reductionism (e.g. God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life) or from an equating the gospel with one particular doctrine (e.g. the gospel of justification, the gospel of the pre-tribulation rapture, the gospel of egalitarianism, etc); and (4) Paul’s epistle to the Romans (although most definitely not a systematic theology, it is still the most ‘systematic’ of Paul’s letters) itself starts with a statement of the gospel in Rom. 1.3-4. In this light, Romans sets us a ‘template’ to follow in doing theology, a theology that is rooted in and originates with the gospel itself.
The Gospel in Biblical Theology
The link between the Old and New Testaments and that which is simultaneously the hub of a New Testament Theology is the gospel of Jesus Christ. This is evident at both the canonical and narrative level. In the New Testament canon we are presented with four Gospels, four Jesus-Books, or four biographies which are much like stained glass windows as all present a portrait of Jesus with their own distinctive colouring and artistic display. But it is one and the same person who recognizable in each. The canonical Gospels show that the story of Jesus is a continuation of the story of Israel and is also the beginning of the story of the church. The Acts of the Apostles gives us the earliest record of the preaching of the gospel as it spread from Jerusalem to the ‘ends of the earth’ (Acts 1.8). The epistles (Pauline and Catholic) exposit the deeper significance of who is Jesus and what has Jesus achieved. They exposit the theological depth of the gospel by focusing our attention on the person and work of Christ as he is made known in the gospel. Lastly, Revelation focuses on the future of Jesus Christ and draws our attention to the meaning of the ‘eternal gospel’ (Rev. 14.6) as it relates to God’s plan of salvation in the past, present and future. It might be possible also, as Andreas Köstenberger has argued, to see in the gospel the unifying thread to the diverse array of witnesses in the New Testament. [9] By elevating the gospel to supra-canonical status there is a genuine danger associated with postulating a ‘canon within the canon’ since it tends to needlessly elevate one portion of Scripture over all the rest. While much caution must be exercised in going down this path it seems that the gospel was the normifying norm within the early Christian communities and the gospel was standard by which truth and conduct were measured (e.g. Gal. 2.11-14; 1 Cor. 15.11; Phil. 1.27). The gospel connects the Christian proclamation to the history of Israel. Paul declares in 1 Cor. 15.3 that Christ was handed over and raised ‘according to the Scriptures’. The Old Testament Scriptures provided the ‘script’ that Jesus followed in his ministry but they also constitute, to use C.H. Dodd’s term ‘the narrative substructure of Christian theology’. Indeed, the rich number of quotations that Paul uses especially those drawn from Hab. 2.4 and Gen. 15.6 are cited for express purpose of showing the conformity of Paul’s gospel to the Jewish Scriptures. The author of Hebrews detects in Jesus the culmination and fulfilment of Israel’s covenants, law, priesthood, and sacrifices. From a rhetorical point of view this indicates that the Christian message of salvation has a degree of antiquity as it is prefigured in the sacred writings of the Jewish people, and the gospel is also authoritative since those Scriptures were regarded as being inspired by God. Yet, and here is the crucial point, the connection of the gospel to the Jewish Scriptures is not logical but it is narratological, i.e. the gospel is not the publication of the final premise of a syllogism to the effect that ‘mankind needs a saviour’; rather, the gospel shows that the story of Jesus is the fulfilment of the story of Israel, and the story of Israel is the story of God’s plan to renew and rescue creation from the mire of sin, death and alienation from himself.
The Gospel as the Integrating-Point of Systematic Theology
The centrality of the gospel is evident from the very grammar of the New Testament that points to the gospel as being integral to Christian belief. Theology proper seeks to understand the ‘God of the gospel’ (Rom. 1.1; 15.16; 2 Cor. 11.7; 1 Thess. 2.8-9). John Webster states: ‘The matter to which Christian theology is commanded to attend, and by which it is directed in all its operations, is the presence of the perfect God as it is announced in the gospel’. [10] Christology is outlining the ‘Gospel of Jesus Christ’ (i.e. the life and ministry of Christ [Mk. 1.1]) and the ‘gospel of Christ’ (i.e. the person and work of Christ [Rom. 15.19; 1 Cor. 9.12; 2 Cor. 2.12; 9.13; 10.14; Gal. 1.7; Phil. 1.27; 1 Thess. 3.2]). Christian ethics means living a life ‘worthy of the gospel’ (Phil. 1.27) and exercising obedience that accompanies ‘confession of the gospel’ (2 Cor. 9.13). The field of pneumatology focuses on new birth as the promise of the gospel (Acts 2.38; Rom 5.5), while soteriology seeks to unpack the polyphonic richness of the gospel of salvation (Rom. 1.16; Eph. 1.13). Apologetics is the ‘defence of the gospel’ (Phil. 1.16). Ecclesiology is the doctrine of the gospelized while Missiology is the science of gospelizing.
The Gospel and Discipleship, Evangelism, and Ministry Formation
The place of the gospel in theology is no mere academic exercise but has real outcomes in terms of Christian life and ministry. The process of discipleship is largely the process of gospelization that is beginning to reflect in one’s life the realities which the gospel endeavours to create. [11] Paul had intended to come in persons to Rome so as to impart some spiritual gift to the saints in Rome, but in lieu of that he decides to encourage them and put them in his debt by explicating his gospel to them in hope for transforming their potentially fractious cosmopolitan community to one where Christian Jews and Gentiles were united in a common worship and by a common gospel (Rom. 1.11-12). Paul aspires to gospelize the Romans so that the truth and ramifications of the gospel works itself out in relations among the community. Discipleship is the process of gospelizing our brothers and sisters so that they attain the full measure of maturity in Christ and walk in the footsteps of Christ in their own lives.
There is a sense in which the Christian community will have within its ranks men and women with the ministry and gift of Evangelist (e.g. Acts 21.8; Eph. 4.11; 2 Tim. 4.5). Both individuals and the Christian community as a whole are to replicate the apostolic proclamation of the gospel to outsiders by both centripetal means (attracting unbelievers like a moth to a flame) and by centrifugal means (finding creative ways to share the good news of Christ with others in local, national and international locations). Christ, through his gospel, creates, constitutes and commissions believers to be his ambassadors of the gospel from now until his parousia or return (e.g. Mark 3.14; 13.10). We might also reflect on the significance of the gospel as embodying a storied theology for evangelism. If we do not locate the gospel of Jesus Christ as the culmination of God’s story of creation and the fulfilment of God’s story of his covenant with Israel, then we are emptying the gospel of its redemptive-historical framework. We will end up back with quirky aphorisms and dry logical syllogisms. Thirty years ago you could go up to an atheist and start with John 3.16 because, despite his or her apparent unbelief, s/he was a ‘Christian atheist’ in that the God that this atheist did not believe in was the Christian God. So the words ‘God’, ‘love’ and ‘only begotten Son’ made sense and were understood even if they were not fully comprehended or believed in. But now, given our post-Christian, postmodern, secular, and pluralistic climate in the UK, Europe and Australia, you cannot simply go up to some non-Christian friend and start rattling off John 3.16 since the words ‘God’, ‘love’ and ‘Son’ will have a completely different frame of reference and evoke all manner of alternative connotations. One must wonder then if our presentation of the gospel needs to have some tentative remarks about creation and covenant so as to provide a redemptive historical context in which the gospel story is told.
On the subject of ministry formation, it has long been tradition in my own denomination to say that ministry, pastoral ministry in particular, is a ministry of the gospel. Ministry, pastoral or para-church, is fundamentally about being a servant of Christ for the sake of the gospel (Rom. 1.1; Eph. 3.7; Col. 1.23). Australian Anglican Bishop and New Testament scholar Paul Barnett has Eph. 6.19 as the theme of his ministry and it is one that all Christian ministers, leaders, and workers should consider making the controlling motif for their own labours: ‘Pray also for me, that whenever I open my mouth, words may be given me so that I will fearlessly make known the mystery of the gospel.’
Conclusion
I have heard it told that Charlie Chaplin once entered a Charlie Chaplin look-a-like contest and came second. Sadly, many Christians cannot recognize a counterfeit gospel when they encounter it. Christians in the West these days are unlikely to be duped by the gospel of Old Liberalism about the love of God and the brotherhood of man, but other encroachments can occur more subtly through the guise of pietistic one-liners masquerading as good evangelical proclamation. Aphorisms like: ‘God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life’ or ‘Jesus wants you to let him into your heart’ are all true at some level but they remain a poor and inadequate substitute for the New Testament gospel of Jesus the Christ. It is not only the importance of the gospel to the Church’s witness that should lead us to be vigilant and uncompromizing about the integrity of the gospel, but the entire task of being theological communities rests on our capacity to construe, imbibe, digest, and apply with greater effect the gospel in our theological and ministerial formation. For the gospel is the beginning point for theological investigation, it is the link between the Old and New Testaments, the integrating theme for theological discourse, and proclamation of the gospel is the goal of theological instruction. In the end the scarlet thread running evangelical theology is a theologia evangelii, a theology of the gospel. [12]
ENDNOTES
[1] Martin Luther, ‘A brief instruction on what to look for and expect in the Gospels,’ in Luther’s Works, ed. Helmut T. Lehmann (Fortress: Philadelphia, 1960), 35.118-19.
[2] Karl Barth, Evangelical Theology: An Introduction (trans. Grover Foley; Great Britain: Collins, 1963), 11.
[3] Donald G. Bloesch, A Theology of Word and Spirit: Authority and Method in Theology (Downers Grove: IVP, 1992), 124.
[4] Kevin J. Vanhoozer, ‘The Voice and the Actor: A Dramatic Proposal about the Ministry and Minstrelsy of Theology,’ in Evangelical Futures: A Conversation on Theological Method, ed. John G. Stackhouse (Regent: Regent College Publishing, 2000), 61.
[5] Francis Watson, ‘An Evangelical Response,’ in The Trustworthiness of God: Perspectives on the Nature of Scripture, Carl Trueman and Paul Helm (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2002), 287.
[6] Klyne Snodgrass, ‘The Gospel in Romans: A Theology of Revelation,’ in Gospel in Paul, eds. L. Ann Jervis and Peter Richardson (JSNTSup 108; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994), 108.
[7] Peter Jenson, The Revelation of God (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2002), 32.
[8] James Gibson and Michael Bird, ‘The Quest for an Authentically Evangelical Prolegomena to Theology,’ in Proclaiming Truth, Pastoring Hearts: Essays in Honour of Deane J. Woods, eds. R. Todd Stanton and Leslie Crawford (Adelaide: ACM Press, 2004), 95-106.
[9] Andreas Köstenberger, ‘Diversity and Unity in the New Testament,’ in Biblical Theology: Retrospect and Prospect, ed. Scot J. Hafemann (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 2002), 144-58.
[10] John Webster, Confessing God: Essays in Christian Dogmatics II (London: T&T Clark, 2005), 1.
[11] I owe this term ‘gospelization’ to my former theological lecturer Rev. Jim Gibson of Malyon College in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
[12] See further Peter Jensen, The Revelation of God (Leicester, IVP, 2002).