What is the Gospel?

Apologetics is the reasonable defense of the faith.  But this raises an immediate question: what is the faith?  That is to say, what are we saying is worth defending?  Thus the necessity of explanation prior to defense.

Faith is more than mere intellectual assent, but at the same time there must be something we are affirming our faith in.  Thus there must be an intellectual assent to some certain propositions as part of our faith.  It is the specific propositions of Christianity that separate the Christian faith from other faiths.  If we are not able to express or explain the tenets of the faith in a logical way, then we are not able to accurately pass on the faith.  However, the assumption of Scripture is that the propositions of Christianity are able to be logically understood and communicated via language.

The fact that Christianity has certain propositions that separate it from other religions also informs us that there are different levels of necessity in our propositions.  There are those propositions which may be affirmed by multiple religions.  For instance, the idea that there is only one God is a proposition that Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and other monotheistic religions would hold to.  But there are also those propositions that define a religion as separate from others.  And there are those propositions within a religion that separate groups within that religion.

Within Christianity we may affirm there are at least three levels of propositions.  There are primary tenets of the faith which define Christianity and which denial of would mean a person is not a Christian.  Then there are the secondary tenets of the faith which separate groups within Christianity.  Disagreement on a secondary position would not mean someone is not a Christian, but would create significant difficulties in communal worship.  After these two groups are the less important tenets-- the tertiary tenets-- where disagreement would not prevent communal worship and would certainly not rise to the point of causing a split from Christianity.

So, what would a tertiary tenet of the faith be?  My favorite example is questions over the millennium.  Whether one is an amillennial or a post-millennial should not affect the ability of two Christians to worship together.  Likewise being a dispensationalist or a historical pre-millennialist.  These positions are all minor disputes on one area of doctrine.  The only time a disagreement over the millennium should affect communal worship would be when one puts too much emphasis on the millennium and makes it a central tenet, which would be an unhealthy understanding of the faith.

An example of a secondary tenet would be questions over who should be baptized.  For instance the Presbyterian church argues that, due to their understanding of the Abrahamic covenant, believers and their children should all be baptized.  However, Baptists argue that only believers should be baptized.  Because of the disagreement over baptism between these two groups, worshiping together would be very problematic.  The Baptists would argue that the Presbyterians have non-Christians as members of the church, and the Presbyterians would argue that Baptists are improperly restricting certain people from participation in the covenant.

So, what's the point of all this?  Having come to the conclusion that there are certain propositions within the Christian faith that must be affirmed, it is also these positions that are worthy of our first consideration when we discuss defending the faith.  It is the necessary propositions of the faith that make up the Gospel of Christ.  Without affirming these propositions one cannot be a Christian, yet merely affirming these positions also does not make one a Christian.  These propositions are the intellectual bedrock of the Christian faith, the foundation upon which the faith is built.

So, what is the Gospel?  At the bare minimum the Gospel is this:  All men commit evil acts (sin) and are thus condemned before a totally perfect and holy God.  Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ, is the only begotten Son of God, who was crucified and died, and was raised to life again.  Anyone who has faith in Christ will have his sins forgiven and will receive eternal life as a gift from God.  In these few sentences we have the six following propositions that separate Christianity from all other faiths (some of these may be held by other faiths, but taken together they are unique to Christianity):

1) God is holy and requires holiness of all those who would come into his presence.
2) All men are sinners, and are thus unholy, and therefore condemned by God.
3) Jesus is the Son of God
4) Jesus died on the cross in order to justify sinners before God.
5) Jesus was raised from the dead in order to provide life to those who believe in him.
6) All those who believe in Jesus are thus made right with God and forgiven their sins, and thus granted eternal life.

Of the above propositions we can demonstrate the following: All men commit evil acts; there was a man named Jesus of Nazareth who was crucified under Pontius Pilate; the same Jesus who was crucified was claimed to be resurrected by his followers.  The arguments for God's holiness, man's condemnation, and the forgiveness of sins are arguments of faith that are made from Scripture.  Thus these are not propositions that can be proven or defended from either history or observation.  This is the limit of apologetics.

What is due

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."  With these words Moses began the greatest story-- in fact the only original story-- in all creation.  The existence and reality of God is assumed from the first sentence of scripture.  Likewise, the editors who arranged the New Testament put the letter to the Romans at the beginning of the epistles.  There we read Paul say, "For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them."  Again, the existence of God is seen as a self-evident reality, one which is plain to all and has been made evident through creation.

So why have we within Christianity spent so much time, so much ink, and so much money, attempting to prove and defend what God says is a self-evident truth?  Why do we invest in the intellectual pursuit of defending what God says about himself if his revelation is indisputable?  First of all, because there are aspects of God's revelation that must be explained, taught, and defended; secondly, because we are commanded to invest ourselves in this great task.  Thus, for the sake of obedience and the joy of logic, these are my apologies.

In accord with Stephen (Acts 7), Paul (Acts 22; 24; 25), and Peter (1 Peter 3), I have decided to here lay out my defense for what I believe.  In Deuteronomy 6 God commanded Moses to pass certain rules on to the Israelites.  In accord with the command of God and following the example of the saints of old, I am placing here my explanation of the statutes that I have received.  And this first post is my first apology, my reason for posting at all.

Many have written before me in words more eloquent than I can muster.  Many have written more convincingly than I am learned to write.  Many have been wiser, smarter, older, more faithful, and of truer character than my own.  Yet, in spite of all that I lack, I have no defense for not laying out a defense.  So please, understand that in all I may lack I hope my earnest conviction will be of use for the faith.

I will not undertake to explain everything, for certainly no man is master of all knowledge and sufficient to the task of explaining all things.  Yet, the example of Paul was that we should become all things to all men in the hopes of winning some.  So that is my hope.  That in laying out my defense, in presenting what I hold to be true, there may be some who will be convinced of the accuracy of that which has been handed to me.  And perhaps there will be some who will be strengthened and so persevere in the midst of doubts and turmoil of their own.

What God may do with what is here is entirely up to him, and at the end of things my hope is only that this may be of some service to my master.  If it is his delight, then it will be so.  But this is written first in obedience to what I hold my faith commands.  It is not written first to anyone person or any group of people.  It must, of necessity, be in conversation with some, for one cannot present an apology without an accusation.  In court there must be a prosecution in order for there to need be a defense.  Yet in all things it will be deemed a success if this has pleased my Lord.

So this is my defense.  A defense laid out in response to the command and joy of presenting such a defense.  A defense laid out of necessity to those who would make an accusation against the faith I hold as true.  A defense written first of all, not to men, but to the honor and glory of God.  A defense written in full recognition of the limits of my ability to present any defense at all.