Does everything have to be the gospel?

[Derf]

Hello all,

Recently as I've learned more theological concepts and ways of thought, I've come to the realization that my church embraces a biblical theology that prioritizes the gospel above all else. Now that's obviously not a bad thing, but what I mean is that everything stems around Jesus saying after his resurrection that everything in the old testament was talking about Him. This results in every single sermon, and every single sermon series having the main point being making a Christ connection. The preacher will spend 40 minutes explaining how any given passage points to Christ. Nothing else will be gleaned from said passage. So take the fall in the garden for instance. Instead of touching on temptation and how to deal with it, or how a marriage structure aught to work, you're only going to see how this passage calls for Christ, and points forward to Him. In fact people in the church tend to dislike pastors or be wary of preaching that isn't like this.

I'm curious what people's reactions are to this. Do you think this is a good thing? Is this healthy?

What I think is going on is that your pastor is an evangelist more than a pastor. I had a pastor like that before he retired. He even said so himself. There was very little exhortation in his sermons.

It usually makes sense in a seeker-friendly church, where there are a lot of unsaved people. The problem is that those who are saved don't grow much in their faith, which is what is happening to you, and is why you are noticing--you are growing and yearning to grow more.

I think a more normal church circumstance would be for an evangelist to reach out to the unsaved outside of the church, and a pastor to minister to their needs when they come into the body (through the evangelist's work). As Paul tells Timothy to "do the work of an evangelist", he's not telling him to forsake the work of a pastor.

So, here's my suggestion(s):
Tell your pastor what you've told us here. Explain that you think you need more growing sermons and less seed planting sermons, but encourage him to evangelize outside the church, and help him to do that by taking up some of the exhorting work in the church (others can help with this, too).

Maybe even send him on missionary journeys to more inner city areas or some such. Do all this with honor toward him.

And let us know how it goes.

 

[timothyu]

Matthew 5: 43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. 44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; 45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? 47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?

Matthew 9: 12 But when Jesus heard that, he said unto them, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick. 13 But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Matthew 5: 46 For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? 47 And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so? 48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

 

[Jipsah]

Hello all,

Recently as I've learned more theological concepts and ways of thought, I've come to the realization that my church embraces a biblical theology that prioritizes the gospel above all else.

One would hope so. The Gospels are our baseline, that's why we're there.

 

[FameBright]

Hello all,

Recently as I've learned more theological concepts and ways of thought, I've come to the realization that my church embraces a biblical theology that prioritizes the gospel above all else. Now that's obviously not a bad thing, but what I mean is that everything stems around Jesus saying after his resurrection that everything in the old testament was talking about Him. This results in every single sermon, and every single sermon series having the main point being making a Christ connection. The preacher will spend 40 minutes explaining how any given passage points to Christ. Nothing else will be gleaned from said passage. So take the fall in the garden for instance. Instead of touching on temptation and how to deal with it, or how a marriage structure aught to work, you're only going to see how this passage calls for Christ, and points forward to Him. In fact people in the church tend to dislike pastors or be wary of preaching that isn't like this.

I'm curious what people's reactions are to this. Do you think this is a good thing? Is this healthy?

Could this have something to do with it?

1. Mark 16:15:
   

   “And He said to them, ‘Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all creation.’”

If I was to start preaching then I would start with the Gospel. Afterall, it is what brings us to salvation.

 

[timothyu]

If I was to start preaching then I would start with the Gospel. Afterall, it is what brings us to salvation.

What was/is Jesus' good news of the Kingdom?

 

[angelsaroundme]

This kind of constant, repetitive messaging every Sunday risks making the Bible appear one dimensional. A person may gradually feel that there are no other lessons in the Bible other than Jesus being Lord, and if they already understand that, why read the Bible?

I've heard people mention this issue before. That many churches became focused on constant evangelization rather than offering the already saved broad spectrum advice and the guidance for greater spiritual growth.

 

[Derf]

This kind of constant, repetitive messaging every Sunday risks making the Bible appear one dimensional. A person may gradually feel that there are no other lessons in the Bible other than Jesus being Lord, and if they already understand that, why read the Bible?

I've heard people mention this issue before. That many churches became focused on constant evangelization rather than offering the already saved broad spectrum advice and the guidance for greater spiritual growth.

Which should be considered part of the gospel. So those churches that don't preach about how to live are not really preaching the whole gospel.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Which should be considered part of the gospel. So those churches that don't preach about how to live are not really preaching the whole gospel.

What may be useful is to do a book-by-book analysis in the New Testament and look at the percentage of time that is allotted by each respective writer (e.g. Paul, Peter, Matthew, Luke, etc, etc.) to the topic of Hell and the contexts in which those references are made ...

My question would be this: If it turns out that, say, the average percentage of space/time that is allotted to the topic of Hell is 27.543% [a loose guess], why do some pastors/preachers spend more than that amount of time accentuating "Hell" as part of the Gospel Package, especially if they do so at the exclusion of the many other, even more positive, points about Life in Christ that are surely at the core of the Christian Message?

It's interesting to me that while Luke makes the expected references to "Hell" in his Gospel account, he doesn't seem to mention very much in references to Hell in the Book of Acts. Surely, if mentioning "Hell" is so important, it'd be mentioned in Acts as a 'standard' doctrinal trope ...

... or am I just committing a 'hasty generalization' here in saying all of this?

 

[timothyu]

Paul was convinced that hasty preparations should be made and others completely avoided, they being irrelevant with the imminent coming of a messiah any day now. He thus laid the temporary foundations of how his gentile churches should behave in the meantime while the NT records little of his writings speaking of Jesus' teaching themselves. Jesus on the other hand told us how the prophecies of the OT were being fulfilled and that God would return to be among man and would take away authority from man over man and from adversarial elohim once and for all. Jesus spoke of His Gospel of the Kingdom while with Paul who also taught it, we see it mentioned it briefly three times without explanation, and his letters led the gentiles to give us the alternate gospel of salvation. I guess it is up to people to decide which better serves their interests, self or others. As we saw, the institutional church eventually abandoned the Kingdom to realign itself with the Kingdom's adversary, the world of man, no doubt later influencing what we should be taught in order to maintain the institution. So it is up to us all to decide which to follow, the Kingdom or its alternative..

 

[FameBright]

What was/is Jesus' good news of the Kingdom?

What I was trying to say is that we are instructed to spread the Gospel. If people learn nothing at all about the Bible, they should at least learn about salvation.

I'm guessing that's why pastors/people focus heavily on the gospel. Jesus was telling this to his disciples but I believe this sense of obligation may extend to all believers.

I'm sure people may want to learn and grow more but Pastors may take in to consideration like any new people or perhaps people from other religions who want to learn about Jesus. I'm not a Pastor so maybe they can tell us more. I'm certainly willing to forego any growth or teachings if it means saving someone.

If you agree/disagree, I'd love to hear about it.

 

[Derf]

What may be useful is to do a book-by-book analysis in the New Testament and look at the percentage of time that is allotted by each respective writer (e.g. Paul, Peter, Matthew, Luke, etc, etc.) to the topic of Hell and the contexts in which those references are made ...

My question would be this: If it turns out that, say, the average percentage of space/time that is allotted to the topic of Hell is 27.543% [a loose guess], why do some pastors/preachers spend more than that amount of time accentuating "Hell" as part of the Gospel Package, especially if they do so at the exclusion of the many other, even more positive, points about Life in Christ that are surely at the core of the Christian Message?

Here's one analysis of Jesus' messages in the gospels.

What Jesus Taught About Most (hint, it's not money)

What did Jesus talk about the most? What did He preach about the most? The Bible topics that Jesus taught about most probably aren't what you think. If you've been to church during a money

www.rethinknow.org

It's interesting to me that while Luke makes the expected references to "Hell" in his Gospel account, he doesn't seem to mention very much in references to Hell in the Book of Acts. Surely, if mentioning "Hell" is so important, it'd be mentioned in Acts as a 'standard' doctrinal trope ...

... or am I just committing a 'hasty generalization' here in saying all of this?

I guess it depends on what one means by "hell". Jesus' resurrection is mentioned early on (by Peter), and it is from "hell" that He rises, as opposed to David, who is still there. Thus, it doesn't appear to be the same place as we most often associate with hell (place of torment).

If we merely associate hell ("hades") with the state of death and burial, the message makes more sense and correlates with both "salvation" (from death) and "resurrection" (from death). And becomes the large majority of the subject matter of the gospels, Acts, and the epistles.

 

[timothyu]

What I was trying to say is that we are instructed to spread the Gospel.

But as I asked, "What was/is Jesus' good news of the Kingdom?"

 

[Strong in Him]

Recently as I've learned more theological concepts and ways of thought, I've come to the realization that my church embraces a biblical theology that prioritizes the gospel above all else. Now that's obviously not a bad thing, but what I mean is that everything stems around Jesus saying after his resurrection that everything in the old testament was talking about Him. This results in every single sermon, and every single sermon series having the main point being making a Christ connection. The preacher will spend 40 minutes explaining how any given passage points to Christ. Nothing else will be gleaned from said passage. So take the fall in the garden for instance. Instead of touching on temptation and how to deal with it, or how a marriage structure aught to work, you're only going to see how this passage calls for Christ, and points forward to Him. In fact people in the church tend to dislike pastors or be wary of preaching that isn't like this.

I'm curious what people's reactions are to this. Do you think this is a good thing? Is this healthy?

OT Scriptures speak of, and point to Jesus; no doubt.
But there are very important and valid things that we can learn through the lives of the OT saints. For example, Noah believed God; the people of his day didn't. Moses was called by God, was initially reluctant to answer that call, but eventually was allowed to see God face to face. David had great faith that God would save him from Goliath and was a man after God's own heart, sinned big time, repented and followed God again. Gideon was called by God - even though he was unsure and needed much reassurance.

There are many other teachings and OT characters to study - Balaam, Deborah, Naaman, Elisha, Micah, Ruth, Abigail etc etc. It would be a great shame if your church did not teach any of these. And what would happen if a non Christian/cult member asked about them or their actions?

 

[Gary K]

But as I asked, "What was/is Jesus' good news of the Kingdom?"

That there is a resurrection of the dead. That He will reward us or punish us according as our work shall be,

Revelation 22:10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is at hand.
11 He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still.
12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

 

[timothyu]

That there is a resurrection of the dead. That He will reward us or punish us according as our work shall be,

Nothing about the removal of the self serving will of man over fellow man or God?

 

[FameBright]

But as I asked, "What was/is Jesus' good news of the Kingdom?"

Is this a trick question? lol.

The "good news" in the Bible refers to messages of salvation, forgiveness, grace, and the establishment of God's kingdom through faith in Jesus Christ but I'd like to have the answer to your own question.

 

[timothyu]

The "good news" in the Bible refers to messages of salvation, forgiveness, grace, and the establishment of God's kingdom through faith in Jesus Christ but I'd like to have the answer to your own question.

What you say is true but it fails to say as is often the case in various churches that we must also give up something as a result of the coming Kingdom. We must give up any allegiance to any other elohim or fellow man and especially, we must give up our own self serving will which causes us to seek what we think is best for us regardless of who else suffers, not only removing our authourity over others but any concept of human authourity over fellow man. The complete opposite to how the world we have made in our own image now operates, our way of life completely obsolete. Any wonder the churches aligned with the governments of man in order to not be seen as traitors? Any wonder this is not taught every week in sermons for fear of losing congregants who fear the systems of man more than they fear the coming Kingdom and the wrath of God?

 

[FameBright]

OT Scriptures speak of, and point to Jesus; no doubt.
But there are very important and valid things that we can learn through the lives of the OT saints. For example, Noah believed God; the people of his day didn't. Moses was called by God, was initially reluctant to answer that call, but eventually was allowed to see God face to face. David had great faith that God would save him from Goliath and was a man after God's own heart, sinned big time, repented and followed God again. Gideon was called by God - even though he was unsure and needed much reassurance.

There are many other teachings and OT characters to study - Balaam, Deborah, Naaman, Elisha, Micah, Ruth, Abigail etc etc. It would be a great shame if your church did not teach any of these. And what would happen if a non Christian/cult member asked about them or their actions?

To me Churches seem to fall short on many things. Where is that sense of community, relationships, and fellowships that you see on TV? I've been to many different churches and I don't feel any of that.

In John 4:19-24 Jesus emphasizes that true worship is not confined to a particular place but is about worshipping the Father in spirit and truth. So, is there even a need to go?

 

[FameBright]

What you say is true but it fails to say as is often the case in various churches that we must also give up something as a result of the coming Kingdom. We must give up any allegiance to any other elohim or fellow man and especially, we must give up our own self serving will which causes us to seek what we think is best for us regardless of who else suffers, not only removing our authourity over others but any concept of human authourity over fellow man. The complete opposite to how the world we have made in our own image now operates, our way of life completely obsolete. Any wonder the churches aligned with the governments of man in order to not be seen as traitors? Any wonder this is not taught every week in sermons for fear of losing congregants who fear the systems of man more than they fear the coming Kingdom and the wrath of God?

Sorry man, this was kind of hard for me to follow. Are there any passages that are related to this that I could read up on?

 

[zippy2006]

My question would be this: If it turns out that, say, the average percentage of space/time that is allotted to the topic of Hell is 27.543% [a loose guess], why do some pastors/preachers spend more than that amount of time accentuating "Hell" as part of the Gospel Package, especially if they do so at the exclusion of the many other, even more positive, points about Life in Christ that are surely at the core of the Christian Message?

Christianity is one of the most historically contingent religions. The NT authors were addressing themselves to a non-Christian world, and were thus concerned primarily with belief and conversion. The early church dealt a lot with "Judaizing," and thus spent a lot of time on the Jew/Christian distinction. The early councils dealt with Christology, the second millennium dealt a lot with schism, our global age wrestles with pluralism, etc. So it strikes me as odd to say that a sermon in 2024 should devote the same percentage of time to each topic that a sermon in 54 would.

The Hell question is pertinent today because we live in an optimistic, progressive age where people no longer believe in Hell. Universalism is the standard post hoc rationalization, the heresy du jour. In the first century the general doctrine of Hell was ubiquitous, both formally and implicitly. So the reason a pastor should spend more time on Hell in 2024 is because there has been a sea change with respect to this question.