The Bad News Part 5: Sharing the Whole Gospel with Humility and Love

Here's the last thing I want to share on the topic of the role of sin in evangelism, at least for this little series: If you can't share the consequences of sin and the life-changing news of the Savior with humility and love, please don't share them at all. At least, don't share them until you fully understand and embrace the love and humility of Jesus.

I can't think of a more humbling doctrine than the truth of pervasive, human-shattering sin. Can it really be that all the evil of the war in Afghanistan, the horrible human trafficking in South East Asia, the genocide in Africa, the drug-related gangland killings of South and Central America, and the continuing violence in North American cities is a product of the same evil that makes me struggle to keep my eyes pure, my pride checked, and my money from becoming my idol?

I don't live the life of a drug addict, but I've worked with them. Recovering addicts have been my friends in the past. And perhaps one of the most profound lessons I have learned from those relationships is that those men and I are the same. I could share Jesus with them because they knew I was just as sinful and in need of a Savior as they were.

When you share the problem of sin and the solution of Jesus, please do so as one of the sinners. We weren't saved because we're better than anyone else. We were saved by grace through faith in Jesus. That faith is a gift we did not earn and do not deserve. There is no reason for any sense of pride on our part. The only thing we can boast about is the greatness of Jesus, and when that's our perspective we are sure to share in humility and love.

The Bad News Part 4: The Consequences of a Sinless Gospel--My Thoughts

Ok, I get it. My fault. I posed a question, hoping for some comments, but stated your answer would reflect your knowledge of the Gospel. Who's going to answer that one! Sorry about that. Let me rephrase. How you answer the question will tell you something about how you see the Gospel.

Here's what I'm getting at. Many people would read the accounts of Bob and Don and immediately see Don as very in need of help. Bob, to most of his friends and family, is doing fine. So, if faith in Jesus is designed to bring help in this life, obviously Don needs Jesus far more than Bob.

But that is wrong. Bob and Don both need Jesus desperately. The error is in thinking the Gospel is designed to cure life's difficulties. Jesus does not make your life better; he takes your life, throws it out, and gives you a new one. Sin corrupts our lives to the point of death, but Jesus' death in our place gives us life free from the bondage of sin; freedom to love and glorify God.

If you take sin out of the story of Jesus, then Jesus died for no reason. Many in the church today want to share Jesus, but don't want to tell anyone they are sinners deserving death. So instead, they lead with Jesus as the solver of problems and the healer of wounds. Who wouldn't want that? I'll tell you: Bob. And Don will end up hearing about a God who can solve his problems without hearing about his ultimate problem. We end up with therapeutic deism, a God-solution for those whose lives don't seem very happy.

Can you start sharing Jesus by addressing the felt needs of a person? Of course! Jesus did this all the time: the woman at the well, the blind man, the lame man who came through the roof, just to name a few. But as it was for Jesus, felt needs must be an in-road to contemplating the real issue of sin if your friend is ever to realize his need for new life, not just a happier old life.

The Bad News Part 4: The Consequences of a Sinless Gospel--A Question

Because Kevin DeYoung beat me to the punch and unloaded a haymaker to the "New Gospel," I'm going to illustrate the consequences of a sinless Gospel with a little exercise. We'll see how helpful this is.

Consider Bob. Bob is your average guy with a good job, a wife, and a couple of kids. He works hard, pays his taxes, and is generally known as a great guy. You can catch him on weekends walking the dog, having a little date at the coffee shop with his wife, or throwing the football around in the backyard with his boys. His marriage has all the usual fights, but he and his wife get through them and they are doing better than most of their friends whose marriages are far more rocky. Bob brings home enough money for the family, and they live quite comfortably, though no one would accuse them of living extravagantly. Ask anyone in the family, and they will tell you everything is going just fine.

Consider Don. Don's wife just took the kids and moved in with her parents because Don's online gambling addiction, which started as what he called "harmless fun," has depleted the family savings and burned through the paychecks to the point of ruin. There's not even money for food. Don loves his family and wants them back, but his wife won't return until Don gets the help he needs and breaks this addiction.

Which man is more in need of Jesus, Bob or Don, and why? The way you answer this question will give you some insight into how well you understand the Gospel. What do you think?

The New Gospel

The following article is a must read for any of you following along in my Bad News series. Please read it carefully here.

Now I almost don't even need to write on the consequences of a sinless Gospel, though I will!

The Bad News Part 3: Is it Intolerant to Talk About Sin?

Intolerant is conversation stopper. Today its used to label people who hold views that others find too restrictive, however they define restricitve. The moment you are accused of being intolerant, you have to either back-pedal and choose a different opinion that doesn't really match what you think, or you have to accept the label and be socially ostracized as an unenlightened moron. That's because intolerance has come to mean having a view of truth that excludes other people's views of truth.

But the popular use of the word intolerant today is incorrect. It is not intolerant to have an exclusive view of what is true. Truth, by definition, is exclusive. It excludes all views and propositions to the contrary. Anyone who states an opinion or holds to a view of truth (even the view that there is no truth) does so in distiction from contrary opinions. A person can hold a view and tolerate the views of others, even if he thinks those other views are wrong.

Let me try to clarify. Here's a dictionary definition of tolerance:

A fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward opinions and practices that differ from one's own.

According to this definition, tolerance has nothing to do with your view or what is actually true. It has to do with how you treat the views of other people. I can disagree with someone completely and passionately without becoming intolerant. The beauty of the "permissive attitude" of this definition is that it allows me to be kind and generous, tolerating another person's opinion and practices, permitting them to make their own decisions even if they are, in my opinion, profoundly wrong.

So let's take up our original question: Is it intolerant to talk about sin? Though people who talk about human sin and evil are often labeled intolerant, I hope you can now see that this question has no answer. Tolerance doesn't address a person's view; it addresses the responses to that view. If you share with someone that the Bible calls sinners to repent and turn to Jesus, the only intolerance that could come from that encounter would be from the person who listens and must now choose how to respond. Ironically, some of the most intolerant people in the world are those who insist on ridiculing the views of others by inappropriately labeling them intolerant!

Don't be bullied by the tolerance police. If you share your view lovingly and get labeled intolerant, simply ask the question, "Why are you not willing to thoughtfully, carefully, and lovingly consider my view. Are you intolerant?"

The Bad News Part 2: Speaking of Sin as a Universal Problem

Therefore, just as sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all sinned...
Romans 5:12

One of the reasons it is so hard for us to share the problem of sin with other people is that we aren't broad enough in our discussion of the problem of sin. A very natural response to the statement "You have sin in your life" is either a harsh charge of intolerance (see Part 3), or the more benign, "yeah, but no one is perfect." In fact, most people when faced with their sins will simply turn to the rest of the world and state how comparitively normal they are. Where we see a problem of sin, they see normalcy.

I would contend that they are right. Sin is normal. It may seem like a problem, but it's everyone's problem. It's like the national debt: Yeah, it's there and it stinks, but what can we really do about it.

So how do we help our friend see the weight of his own personal sin debt against God and his need for a Savior? I believe it actually helps to start with talking about sin as a universal problem. The Bible speaks of sin as a disease that entered humanity through the sin of Adam, which has resulted in our own disobedience. This means that every human is born into a sinful state as an enemy of God. The result is a world full of every kind of evil, which is evident today. This is the doctrine of original sin, a teaching of the Bible that needs to be reclaimed and understood by the church.

Talking about the universality of original sin does a few things.

First, it puts all of us in the same boat. No one is holier than anyone else. Finally the pope and I have something in common!

Second, it shows how the evil we see out there in the world is a result of the evil I see right here in my own life and heart. The damage done by termites to the destroyed foundation of a house is the result of thousands of tiny creatures taking tiny bites of wood. The result of evil in the world is enormous, but it's the result of the evil of individuals.

Third, it gives the proper persepctive for assessing sin responsibility. If you start with individual sin and compare outward, individual sin seems small and inconsequential. When you start with the evil world and the disobedience of all humanity, it's easier to see your own part in it.

Fourth, salvation is seen not as a personal choice for living morally, but a freedom from the world's slavery to sin.

And finally, focusing my friend's attention on the universal problem of sin will allow me to humbly share Jesus and his Good News. You now approach the topic as sinner saved by grace, not a religious zealot.

For further reading, look over Romans 5, where Paul discusses the universality of sin through Adam as compared to the grace that comes to all people through Jesus.

The Bad News Part 1: The Truth that Makes the Good News Good

The good news that Jesus died on the cross for me makes no sense outside the context of my sin. Sin gives the cross its purpose. Human sin and rebellion against God, with its impending and deserved punishment, is bad news that makes the good news about Jesus good. Consider this summary of sin and the gracious gift of Jesus from Will Metzger in his excellent book Tell the Truth.

Grace only functions as grace when it comes to people who have absolutely nothing to recommend them as a candidate for God's favor. People deserve the very opposite--his disfavor in this life and for eternity. Grace is magnified when I see myself as undeserving. I have no right to and no claim on God's mercy. God is not obligated to love me. He does not exist just to make me happy. Grace is highlighted by my inability to keep from sinning. Salvation by my efforts is unattainable, no matter how hard I try to improve myself.

This may seem obvious to anyone who follows Christ, but I believe it is a point of vital importance for the believer as it pertains to how we think about our own faith in Christ and how we share that faith with other people. For many who talk about Jesus with others, the reality of sin, the bad news, is never shared as part of the good news.

Why? If the good news is that we can be saved from the punishment of our sins by the God who created us and took the punishment himself in our place, why wouldn't we share that?

Over the next several posts, I am going to try to unpack this question under the following titles:

The Bad News Part 2: Speaking of Sin as a Universal Problem
The Bad News Part 3: Is it Intolerant to Talk About Sin?
The Bad News Part 4: The Consequences of a Sinless Gospel
The Bad News Part 5: Sharing the Whole Gospel with Humility and Love

I'm excited about the discussions this will raise. Please post your thoughts in the comments section and feel free to interact with me and each other on these topics.