Friday, March 14, 2014

Exalted King

There is a huge difference between the gospeling of Acts and our Plan of Salvation approach today, and alongside that difference, the gospel of Acts has almost no similarity to our Method of Persuasion. The difference can be narrowed to this single point: the gospeling of Acts, because it declares the saving significance of Jesus, Messiah and Lord, summons listeners to confess Jesus as Messiah and Lord, while our gospeling seeks to persuade sinners to admit their sin and find Jesus as the Savior.

We are not creating a false alternative here. The latter can be done within the former, but much of the soterian approach to evangelism today fastens on Jesus as (personal) Savior and dodges Jesus as Messiah and Lord. If there is any pervasive heresy today, it’s right here. Anyone who can preach the gospel and not make Jesus’ exalted lordship the focal point simply isn’t preaching the apostolic gospel.— The King Jesus Gospel, pages 133-134

<idle musing>
Amen and amen! A.W. Tozer used to bemoan the "Jesus as savior" approach to salvation. For him, either Jesus was preached as Lord or he couldn't be preached at all—no lordship, no salvation. It's that simple. I agree.

We need the full gospel—from Genesis 3, where God takes the initiative and seeks mankind as they try to hide, all the way through the descent of the bride clothed in white at the end of Revelation. God taking the initiative, humanity responding. Always God, always love, always reaching out to us...
</idle musing>


Anonymous said...

I like this book, James; and I think Scot's spot-on. In the same vein, more academic though, is Kavin Rowe's OUP "World Upside Down" study in Acts. You'd enjoy it. Rowe places Acts deeply in its hisotrical context in a good way. - Jim E.

jps said...

Thanks for the reference, Jim. I'll take a look at it. It looks interesting—although I've only looked at the ToC on the OUP web site so far.