Deep Gospel Must be Full Gospel Reflections on Matthews Vision of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

“Deep Gospel” Must be “Full Gospel” – Reflections on Matthew’s Vision of Gospel Reality in the light of Jim Belcher’s Call for “Deep Gospel”

Larry Perkins, Ph.D. Resourcing the Church, February 2011

1

Introductory Comments

• C.S. Lewis – “deep church” / “mere

Christianity”

• “Deep Church” – an alternative brand – a

more complete expression of biblical Christianity expressed in the local church.

• Jim Belcher’s goal.
• Does he achieve it?

2

Introductory Comments

• Does Belcher categorize correctly the

Emerging and the Traditional Sectors?

• Are both guilty of “gospel reductionism”?
• Essential Critique:
• Traditional sector – does not give enough

attention to the Kingdom aspect of gospel

• Emerging sector – does not give enough

attention to the centrality of Jesus’ atoning work.

3

Introductory Comments

• Carl Henry:

“The church approximates [perhaps “anticipates”?+ God’s kingdom in miniature, mirroring to each generation the power and joy of the appropriated realities of divine revelation.” (G.R.A. IV, 542)

• Why has the Evangelical Church missed this

understanding of the gospel during the past thirty years?

4

Introductory Comments

• Belcher – paints in broad strokes.
• Echoes of other debates:
• Jesus as Lord and Jesus as Saviour
• Personal salvation and Social Gospel
• Teaching of Jesus and Teaching of Paul
• Kingdom as present reality and Kingdom as future

expectation.

• Legacy of Dispensationalism?
• Belcher fairly summarizes the respective “gospel

reductionism” found in both sectors.

5

Key Question – Direction of this Paper

• I agree with Belcher’s call of “Deep Gospel”
• I do not think he has outlined its essential

configuration.

• Three minor issues
• Matthew’s Vision of “Deep Gospel”

6

Minor Issue # 1 “Four Commitments” (121)

• “Gospel—Community—Mission—Shalom”
• McLaren’s criticism – Gospel truncated into “an

individualistic theory.”

• When Belcher uses “Gospel” to define the first of

these four commitments, he seems to do precisely what McLaren criticizes.

• Perhaps a better term for the first commitment

would be “initiation” or “conversion”.

7

Minor Issue # 2 “Grace Ethics” vs. “Value Ethics”

• Emerging sector tends to focus on “Value ethics”,

which Belcher fears will slide into a new legalism. Traditionalists focus on “Grace ethics” and struggle with “works.”

• I would argue that a true synthesis is possible
• nly if we pursue “Kingdom ethics”.
• Recapture God’s story of salvation and mission –

Romans 12:1-2– God’s mercy and God’s will.

8

Minor Issue # 3 The Challenge of Reductionism

• Antidotes:
• Commitment to the authority of Scripture

2 Timothy 3:16-17

• Commitment to the whole of Scripture

Matthew 15:1-20

• Commitment to the “deep study” of Scripture and

acquiring the competence – spiritually and

• therwise – to do this well.
• Commitment to support pastoral leadership that has

the time and passion to do this.

9

“Deep Gospel” as Defined by Matthew’s Gospel Narrative

• Jim Belcher properly is concerned about “gospel

reductionism”

• What must a contemporary teaching of “good news”

communicate in order to be faithful to Jesus’ mission?

• Why Matthew’s presentation?
• Most complete and systematic repository of Jesus’ mission

and message

• First place in the NT Canon
• Written 40 – 50 years after Jesus’ ministry and decades of

“good news” communication by the early church to Jews and non-Jews.

10

• 1. Matthew’s use of the term

euaggelion (good news)

• teaching, proclaiming, healing – “good news of the

Kingdom” (4:23; 9:35)

• Defined by the contents of Matthew 4-9
• Jesus’ words and deeds
• “this good news (of the Kingdom [24:14]) shall be

proclaimed” (26:13)

• “good news” in post-resurrection mission
• “good news” as defined by Jesus life, death and resurrection
• Locus in “kingdom theology” – must be proclaimed, must

be taught and must be demonstrated.

• Response of repentance and obedient following
• Response of the wise person

11

• 2. Matthew Locates the Significance of Jesus’

Death in God’s Covenant with Israel

• Salvation-Historical context
• Initial statement of Jesus’ purpose – 1:21
• Jesus’ actions “fulfill all righteousness” – 3:15
• Matthew’s intensive and extensive incorporation of material from

Jewish Scriptures into his narrative – fulfillment theology

• Jesus’ “good news” located in the framework of God’s prior

promises to Israel – Deuteronomy 30-31.

• Initial genealogy – Abraham, David, Exile, Messiah
• Seventh woe – summarizes Israel’s failure – 23:35,38.
• Jesus is ho erchomenos en onomati kuriou – 23:39; Psalm 118:26.
• Parable of the Tenant Farmers – 21:33-43 – “the kingdom of God shall

be taken away from you and given to a nation producing its fruit”

12

• 2. Matthew Locates the Significance of

Jesus’ Death in God’s Covenant with Israel

• Eschatological context
• 8:11 -- peoples from all over the world enjoy the

benefits of God’s new covenant in the Messiah

• 19:28 – paliggenesia – “son of man will sit upon his

glorious throne” assisted by his followers in governing “the twelve tribes of Israel”

• 28:19-20 – there will be “an end of the age” (cf.

13:39,40,49; 24:3) when Jesus reappears in judgment.

• Jesus’ “good news” is thoroughly eschatological. I miss

this dimension in Belcher’s overview.

13

• 3. The Outcome of the “Good News” is

the Messianic Assembly

• Response to Peter’s Confession – “I will build

my ekklēsia” (16:18)

• Personal and corporate elements of Kingdom

theology find coherence in this messianic, missional priority.

• Application of “good news” to the present.

14

• 3. The Outcome of the “Good News” is

the Messianic Assembly

• Two Commissions
• 10:7 – go to the lost sheep of Israel’s house,…going, proclaim – accompanied

by miracles.

• 28:19-20 – going, make disciples, baptizing, teaching -- all nations.
• Differences due to different stages in God’s program and different

audiences.

• Method Jesus uses “to build my assembly”
• A term well-used in the Greek Old Testament
• Deuteronomy 23:1,2,3,8; 31:30 – the assembly of Yahweh (Kurios)
• Psalm 149:1 – the assembly of the devout
• Ecclesiology is central to Jesus program – through this new assembly the

Messiah by means of his resident Spirit implements his Kingdom vision/program within human history. The result will be Revelation 7:9.

• “Deep Gospel” articulates and lives a “Deep Ecclesiology” that is defined

by its role as a seed-bed of Kingdom reality.

• “Deep Gospel” will be characterized by “Deep Eschatology” and “Deep

Ecclesiology.”

15

• 4. The Foundation of the “Good News” is Jesus

himself, especially his sacrificial death and resurrection.

• No divide between Jesus and Paul; no division among

the early church leaders (Galatians 2:1-10); no difference in the good news proclaimed by Peter and Paul (Acts 10; 13; 1 Corinthians 15:1-8).

• Scot McKnight:

“what unifies Jesus and Paul [and Peter] [is] that both witness to Jesus as the center of God’s story.”

• What is Jesus’ personal role in this “Deep Gospel”?

16

• 4. The Foundation of the “Good News” is

Jesus himself, especially his sacrificial death and resurrection.

• Jesus is the primary means through which God is

completing Israel’s mission.

• 11:27 – only Jesus reveals the Father and provides true

“rest”

• 16:18 – Jesus builds “my assembly”
• 21:33-44 – Jesus is the cornerstone
• Jesus defines the significance of his death.
• 26:28 – Jesus’ death forms the basis for “my? covenant which is for

many”. (cf. 20:28 “ransom for many”)

• No explanation of how precisely the ransom works or the sacrifice is

efficacious – but “it saves” (1:21) and “fulfill all righteousness” (3:15), such that a repentant person will receive “righteous status” (dikaiosunē).

17

Concluding Remarks

• Appreciate Belcher’s direction – needs some filling out
• Discern an understanding of ecclesial life that

“approximates *anticipates+ God’s kingdom in miniature”

• Reforming our churches will require both “Deep

Gospel” and “Deep Spirit”

• “Good News of the Kingdom” must communicate the

rich eschatological and ecclesiological framework within which Jesus himself set it and which Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, Peter, James, Jude, and the writer of Hebrews, collectively articulated under the direction the Holy Spirit.

18