The Apostolic Gospel: Core Content

What is popular is not always accurate or true. This maxim holds for the church as well as for human society at large. Consequently, it is helpful and even necessary at times to reexamine one's knowledge and beliefs, particularly in regard to foundational matters. In terms of the Christian faith, popularly held understandings of the gospel are not always consistent with the biblical witness.

As mentioned earlier, this inquiry into the apostolic gospel was precipitated by a disappointing and troubling television presentation by an enormously popular American preacher that was enthusiastically billed as the preaching of the gospel. Since others can be observed to sincerely hold to erroneous notions of the fundamental Christian message, I thought it best to reexamine the Scriptures themselves in order to reevaluate my own understanding.

One of the primary questions that drove my inquiry was, "What was the core content of the gospel proclaimed by the apostles in the divinely inspired record of the Book of Acts?" In surveying Acts, I identified twelve accounts which especially presented information specifically relevant to my inquiry. These are as follows: 2:14-41; 3:12-4:2; 4:8-12; 5:29-32; 7:1-60; 10:34-43; 13:16-41; 14:8-18; 17:2-3; 17:16-31; 26:1-29; 28:17-31. The answer to the question regarding the core content of the apostolic gospel can be summed up in a single name: Jesus.

With one exception, all of the accounts of apostolic preaching center explicitly upon Jesus. An analysis of the various texts reveals five primary categories of information regarding or related to Jesus that comprised the core content of the message proclaimed. These concern: (1) the identity of Jesus, (2) the historical reality and ministry of Jesus' first coming, (3) the promise of Jesus' second coming, (4) Jesus' fulfillment of ancient Israelite prophecies, and finally, (5) a call for a radical response to Jesus. Imbued throughout all of these categories is the critically important theme (sometimes explicit, often implicit) of the kingdom of God.

Perhaps it should be said that Jesus is not merely central to the apostolic message, but that he is the gospel; that is, the good news. Given Luke's framing of the material found in his Gospel and in Acts, this is of course not surprising. After presenting Jesus as the savior of humanity, the friend of sinners who offers salvation to all, even to the socially marginalized, he closes with the following quotation from Jesus about himself: "This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things" (Lk 24:46-48).

This charge to the disciples to carry on a global apostolic witness centers on himself, the Messiah. Luke quotes him in the opening of Acts, reiterating this same charge: "(Y)ou will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth" (Ac 1:8). The disciples are to be his witnesses, which means they are to serve him by giving witness to him. Peter understood this as evidenced in the criteria he laid out for the selection of an apostolic replacement for Jesus' traitor, Judas. Luke quotes him as follows: "(I)t is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from John's baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection" (Ac 1:21-22).

All of this makes clear that Jesus as witnessed to in the biblical record must be central to any contemporary proclamation of the gospel. If he is not, we may indeed be elucidating or proclaiming various biblical truths and principles, but we should not make the mistake of thinking we are proclaiming the apostolic gospel. The problem with too much contemporary preaching, especially American, is that it has lost sight of the apostolic gospel and replaced it with a focus on producing and/or receiving the positive fruit or benefits of the gospel. In some cases Jesus becomes a talisman to ward off physical and material evil and to acquire our definition of blessedness in this life. In other cases, he becomes a functional elucidator of spiritual principles, which when faithfully believed and diligently applied produce success as we would have it. While there is a kernel of truth in each of these misconstrued understandings of Jesus, they are nevertheless corruptions of the apostolic gospel.

If we wish to know and experience God in similar fashion to that of the early church as described in Acts, we must encounter through repentance and faith the Jesus known and proclaimed by the apostles. The charge given by Jesus to his first disciples to be his witnesses throughout this world has passed from generation to generation, and now rests with great solemnity and responsibility upon us, even those who believe. It is our duty and privilege to know accurately the original good news, to live by his grace in response to it, and to communicate it to all who live in this world. If we are to please the Holy Spirit, we must become faithful witnesses of this gospel. Therefore, to a study of the elements of its core content we shall turn next.

The Apostolic Gospel: Narrative (2)

Having determined that narrative was the primary communicative form employed by the apostles for the proclamation of the gospel as evidenced in the Book of Acts (see "The Apostolic Gospel: Narrative (1)"), a few more comments regarding the importance of narrative are worth consideration. 

Narrative is the most natural way by which to communicate history. The fact that the Bible anchors God's revelation in historical persons and events, with the apex of revelation being an historical person (Jesus Christ) experiencing an historical event (the crucifixion and resurrection), automatically necessitates the communication of divinely interpreted history in order to properly understand God's revelation. Indeed, a basic understanding and belief in the divinely interpreted story concerning Jesus constitutes the basis for the reception of God's gracious salvation in its inceptive stage. Thus, it is no surprise that the apostles employed narrative in the communication of the good news.

Too often the Bible itself is inadequately understood in terms of its narrative coherence. Creation, the Fall, the providential formation and history of Israel, the incarnation, crucifixion, and ascension of the Son of God, the outpouring of God's Spirit, the expansion of the church, Jesus' promised return, the resurrection, the renewal of creation, and the final judgment--all of these together constitute the major elements of a coherent metanarrative. The various particulars of scripture are not a random collection of disparate revelations. Rather, they individually and collectively fit into the grand story of God's purposes vis-a-vis humanity and the cosmos in which we live. This is significant and underscores the importance of presenting the good news of reconciliation with God into its broader storied context.

Furthermore, from a sociological perspective narrative is fundamental to the formation of worldview, which is "the overall perspective from which one sees and interprets the world." Joel B. Green's comments in his article, "Narrative Theology," in the Dictionary for Theological Interpretation of the Bible (2005), are helpful.

• (N)arrative is central to identity formation; indeed recent work in neurobiology emphasizes the capacity for and drive toward making storied sense of our experienced world as a distinguishing characteristic of the human family. We typically explain our behaviors through the historical narratives by which we collaborate to create a sense of ourselves as persons and as a people. The story we embrace serves as an interpretive scheme that is at once conceptual (a way of seeing things), conative (a set of beliefs and values to which a group and its members are deeply attached), and action-guiding (we seek to live according to its terms)...

A proper presentation of the apostolic gospel with its salvific aim should challenge the worldview of its recipients and call for a decision. If the overall story of Jesus Christ is true, it demands not merely the abandonment of personal sin and the embrace of faith in a "personal" savior, but also implicitly the abandonment (or perhaps radical modification) of one's worldview and the embrace of the divinely revealed metanarrative found in scripture and embodied in Jesus. In other words, Christian conversion should involve the supplanting of a person's former worldview with the biblical metanarrative of creation, fall, and redemption, whose apex is the Lord Jesus Christ. Of course, this change of worldview occurs as a process.
 
Popular gospel presentations which focus on propositional truths devoid of narrative typically contain the following vital biblical truths: (1) God is loving, yet holy and just. (2) Humanity is sinful, guilty, and unable to extricate itself from its sinfulness. Consequently, humanity is subject to death and eternal separation from God. (3) Jesus, God's Son incarnate, died for our sins and rose again. Consequently, we can be forgiven and reconciled to God, and receive eternal life. (4) To benefit from what Jesus has done, we must receive him as Lord and Savior by faith.

All of these truths are necessary and sufficient for inceptive salvation; that is, to initially experience reconciliation with God. But apart from their storied context, they fail to convey an adequate understanding of God's grand purposes for humanity in this world. On the other hand, the conveyance of these truths in storied form begs the important existential question, "Where do I fit in this story?" Story embedded with propositional truths begets richer meaning than merely the truths themselves.

This completes a preliminary consideration of the mood and form of the apostolic gospel, along with the presuppositions of monotheism and human sinfulness. The core content of that gospel will be considered next.

The Apostolic Gospel: Narrative (1)

Thus far the following has been reviewed: the mood or tenor of the gospel preached by the apostles, along with two of its key presuppositions, monotheism and human sinfulness. Before moving on to the study of the core content of the apostolic gospel, there remains one further preliminary consideration. This concerns the communicative form which the apostles employed in their gospel proclamations as recorded in the Book of Acts. A survey of twelve identifiable gospel presentation accounts (2:14-41; 3:12-4:2; 4:8-12; 5:29-32; 7:1-60; 10:34-43; 13:16-41; 14:8-18; 17:2-3; 17:16-31; 26:1-29; 28:17-31) clearly reveals that there was one primary form of verbal communication. This form was simply historical and prophetic narrative.

Fundamentally, the apostolic gospel concerned an historical figure who was alive, dead, and was now alive again. The message centered on Jesus and what God had done, is doing, and will do through him. In addition, this Jesus was often demonstrated to lie in continuity with what God had done in the past, whether in relation to Israel or in relation to humanity as a whole. Furthermore, the apostles also spoke of what God was yet going to accomplish through him in the future, particularly in terms of his return and God's eschatological judgment through him. This they derived both from Jesus' own teaching concerning himself as well as from the ancient enscripturated Israelite prophecies concerning the Messiah. Consequently, it is no surprise that historical and prophetic narrative was employed by the apostles as the natural communicative form for proclaiming the good news. God had acted decisively in the person of Jesus, and the apostles were commissioned to tell his story in relation to humanity's past, present, and future.

With one partial exception, the apostles did not lay out an impersonal systematized "set of propositional truths that referred directly to objective transcendent realities" (T. Harvey). Rather, they resorted to the telling of God's story as revealed in Jesus. This is not to say that the story they told was ambiguously open to multiple interpretations and meanings, as though narrative was intrinsically diametrically juxtaposed to propositional truth. On the contrary, the apostolic gospel in its narrative form was imbued with propositional truth.

The explanation is simple. God had acted and spoken, and had also explained his actions. The entire record of scripture up to the time of the apostles underscored this maxim. The God of the Hebrews chose to reveal himself above all by acting and speaking historically in the life of various individuals and families, and in the life of Israel. This revelation was not comprised merely of the divine acts themselves, but also included the divine interpretation of the meaning and significance of the acts. Consequently, propositional truth was embedded in God's actions and was made known through the interpretation of God's acts by means of the inspiration of God's Spirit given to the prophets of ancient Israel. This, together with God's direct speech, formed the historical basis of God's enscripturated revelation.

The coming of Jesus brought greater clarification to the divine overarching narrative (metanarrative) which comprised all that God had done and said in and through Israel, and that which he was yet to do in regard to humanity as a whole. Jesus' teaching claimed that he himself was the culmination of all God's actions and words, and that the future of God's eternal purpose vis-a-vis humanity and this creation centered on him. God has a mission and its revelation is to be found not merely in the identity of Jesus, but also in Jesus' words and actions in this world, for his words and actions were declared to be God's words and actions.

Consequently, it is the telling of the story of Jesus given in its broader context of past and future, together with its divinely interpreted meaning that constitutes the gospel. Or again, the gospel is presented as God acting and speaking with coherent purpose in and through Jesus. Even though it is not presented as an abstract set of propositional truths referring directly to transcendent realities, these truths are inherent in the telling of the story since the story is given its meaning by its divinely inspired interpretation given us by the Holy Spirit through the apostles.

Nevertheless, we do have one example of the overt preaching of abstract propositional truth: the apostle Paul's address to the Areopagus (Acts 17:22-31). But this appears to have been necessary to lay the presupposition of monotheism as a foundation upon which he could proclaim the good news of God's story concerning Jesus. Two contextual items are significant, however. First, the circumstances which precipitated Paul's summons to address the Areopagus were his "preaching the good news about Jesus and the resurrection" (Acts 17:18), which, given the rest of Luke's accounts of Paul's preaching, indicates Paul was communicating about Jesus by means of narrative. Second, Paul actually wove the overt communication of abstract propositional truth with narrative in his Areopagus address, particularly as he recounted God's general actions in human history and proclaimed God's eschatological judgment through Jesus, whom God had raised from the dead.

Having determined that narrative was the primary communicative form employed by the apostles for the proclamation of the gospel, we will next consider some additional reasons for communicating the apostolic gospel in a narrative form.

The Apostolic Gospel: Sinfulness

To review, the mood of the apostolic gospel as recorded in the Book of Acts consists of the Creator's goodness in calling sinful humans to gracious reconciliation with himself. Underlying this message are two fundamental presuppositions: monotheism and human sinfulness. The latter shall now be considered.

In harmony and continuity with the Jewish prophets of antiquity, Jesus and his apostles after him assumed the moral accountability of humanity to the one and only holy, almighty Creator, and the universal sinfulness of humanity. The Book of Acts explicitly includes the sin problem in nearly all of the gospel proclamations by means of various kinds of calls to repentance, warnings of judgment, and promises of forgiveness. Of the twelve instances I have identified in Acts which specifically record the content of the gospel proclaimed by the apostles, only two have no overt reference to human sinfulness as indicated by the aforementioned calls, warnings, and promises.

Nevertheless, I am persuaded that sinfulness was also addressed in each of these two instances. In the case of Paul's meeting with the local Roman Jewish leaders (Acts 28:17-28), several items raised by Paul clearly suggest that human sinfulness was an underlying theme in his communication of the gospel. These items include the kingdom of God, the law of Moses, and the concept of salvation. In the instance of Paul's proclamation in Thessalonica (Acts 17:2-3), the absence of an overt reference to human sinfulness is surely due to the brevity of the account given by Luke. Given that Paul was "explaining and proving that the Messiah had to suffer and rise from the dead," it is to my mind inconceivable that this would not include the implicit subject of human sinfulness, especially in light of the evidence given in the other accounts of his gospel proclamations.

In addition, it's worthwhile to consider the cultural-religious milieu in which the apostles communicated the gospel. In their first century context two types of “guilt” and corresponding “sin” consciousness were generally prevalent among the people to whom the gospel was preached. The Jews of course were well aware of the concepts of personal and corporate sin against a holy God and the corollary of human guilt. Since the gospel arose among the Jewish people in the first place, there was no major breach of categorical thought to be surmounted concerning these issues when the gospel was communicated to them.

It’s the Greco-Roman peoples however that generally had a different kind of “guilt” and "sin" consciousness. Their polytheistic worldview held to a pantheon of capricious gods whose intermittent displeasure with humans resulted in various kinds of human suffering. But such divine displeasure was not necessarily tied to human violations of some moral code or of some human failure to conform their inner character and/or external conduct to some form of divine righteousness. The challenge for the Greco-Roman peoples from their point of view was to discover how to avoid the displeasure and curry the favor of such unpredictable gods. Thus, they had a concept of “guilt” and "sin," but in a typically different sense from that of the Jews.

Exactly how the apostles breached this gulf in understanding of human sinfulness is not entirely apparent, yet there are clues. Luke’s summaries of Paul’s preaching in the various Greco-Roman cities focus more on the failure of the peoples to honor God in terms of true monotheistic worship and the general concept of doing what pleases him, rather than their failure to conform to specific elements of the Mosaic code. This is especially true in the two instances where it appears that the entire audiences were comprised of Greco-Romans to the exclusion of Jews (Ac 14:8-18; 17:16-34). Although Paul did enumerate behavioral "sin lists" in his epistles, these are directed to those who already believe the gospel as he seeks to help them understand what pleasing God looks like.

It appears that Paul, and quite likely the other apostles, focused more on the forgiveness that was readily available through Jesus to a people who regularly lived in fear of displeasing the gods, than on elucidating a litany of specific Mosaic laws which the people were breaking. This is not surprising given that Greco-Roman peoples lived with the pervasive belief that they were regularly in some way potentially guilty of offending some deity and that such offenses were typically tied up with a failure to render proper worship to the deity.

Human sinfulness was an essential element of the apostolic gospel, but in terms of its articulation in first century preaching to the Gentiles it may have been a bit more nuanced than its typical current Evangelical formulation. To a contemporary biblically literate audience or one that is at least still strongly imbued with a Judeo-Christian worldview and corresponding concepts of guilt and sin, an understanding of sinfulness can be assumed and addressed in a similar manner as the apostles did when addressing the Jews. But to a people who are ignorant of an accurate understanding of such concepts, careful thought must be given to how to address human sinfulness when the gospel is proclaimed. Exegeting the recipient's moral-ethical-religious worldview, assessing how receptive it is to the implicit gospel concepts of sin and guilt, and determining how to breach any significant gap in understanding is essential to effective gospel communication. This is certainly becoming more of a critical issue in the Western world, which is to varying degrees becoming more and more post-modern and post-Christian in its worldview.

Next to be considered will be the communicative form by which the apostolic gospel was proclaimed.

The Apostolic Gospel: Monotheism

As previously mentioned, the mood of the apostolic gospel as recorded in the Book of Acts consists of the Creator's goodness in calling sinful humans to gracious reconciliation with himself. Implicit throughout these presentations of good news are two fundamental presuppositions. The first is that there is one and only one almighty creator. The second is that humanity is morally accountable to God and is universally and individually sinful. Monotheism will be addressed below.

It is interesting to note that in the two instances recorded in Acts where monotheism is explicitly raised, it is simply proclaimed and not philosophically debated. The first of these is recorded in Acts 14:8-18, when Paul sought to dissuade the people of Lystra from offering sacrifices to Barnabas and himself because they had presumed them to be Zeus and Hermes due to a miraculous healing performed by Paul. Paul took the same approach when he spoke to the Areopagus in Athens, having been summoned there by a number of philosophers who wished a formal inquiry into the message Paul had been publicly proclaiming concerning Jesus and the resurrection (Acts 17:16-34). Once again Paul simply proclaims monotheism. There is no record of his having entered into a philosophical debate regarding this presuppositional truth to the gospel.

All of the other explicit presentations of the gospel recorded in Acts merely presume the reality of monotheism. This is most likely due to the collective knowledge base of the various recipients involved. I have identified ten such instances, all of which involved either Jews, who of course would have been raised in a monotheistic ethos, or Gentiles who were closely associated with Jews, either by way of geographic residence or by association with a local synagogue. Consequently, there was no need to directly address the issue of monotheism to these recipients.

Since the majority of the Roman empire's inhabitants were polytheistic, and often syncretistic, it is reasonable to assume that much of the apostolic preaching conducted throughout the first century, but not recorded in Acts, did involve explicit proclamation of the truth of monotheism. This would have been a necessary backdrop to the communication of the core content of the gospel, which centers on Jesus. However, as I will argue later on, the record of the apostolic preaching makes clear that the apostles never deviated from the core content, but remained focused on communicating it to any and all audiences. Thus, monotheism was explicitly raised for the specific purpose of facilitating the recipients' understanding of the gospel.

This then provides us with a helpful lesson for contemporary communication of the gospel, which is elucidated by the following list of pertinent points.

1. It is necessary to identify the core content of the gospel.
2. It is necessary to assess the religious worldview and knowledge base of the intended recipients.
3. It is necessary to discern the intended recipients' ability to understand the core content of the gospel in light of their religious worldview and knowledge base.
4. If necessary, presuppositional truths relevant to the gospel and necessary for it to be understood must be included in the proclamation to the intended recipients.

Next to be considered will be the second fundamental presupposition to the good news; namely, that humanity is morally accountable to God and is universally and individually sinful.