# Is the Gospel ALL we need?



## InSlaveryToChrist (Sep 18, 2011)

Does God reveal ALL of His attributes in the Gospel to THE GREATEST degree possible? In other words, Is the Gospel ALL we need to know about God's glory?

OR do other revelations, such as the actual condemnation of the reprobate on the day of judgment, contribute to the glory of God in the Gospel?


----------



## rookie (Sep 18, 2011)

When presenting the gospel, I try to keep it as plain and simple as I can, while still bringing to the point, condemnation to those who don't believe. I don't usually bring up the reprobate, since having to explain that one....oy.

But, I do bring up the sinfulness of man, the holiness of God, and the problem that lies between the 2. And eternal life to those that believe, and eternal punishment to those that don't. I also point out, that no matter the sin, it's not the sin itself that condemns for eternity, it's against whom the sin is that is so eternally damning.


----------



## bshpmark (Sep 18, 2011)

In my humble opinion, the Gospel is not ALL we need to know but it is quite SUFFICIENT. There are many things that take place in the universe that show forth God's glory. In fact, let me correct myself... ALL things somehow show forth his glory although at the time something happens we may not see with any degree of clarity how that could be ( 9/11 for example ). Some things will only be revealed to us in eternity. Yes, even on the Day of Judgment, the casting of those into the Lake of Fire which is the second death will bring glory to God.

But I agree fully with Ray. When presenting the Gospel, keep it plain and simple yet point the sinner to their need for repentance and the holiness of God and the possibility of eternal punishment. The person who is lost is blind to theology anyway and until the Holy Spirit opens his or her eyes you may as well be talking to a softball.


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Sep 18, 2011)

Brothers Ray and Mark,

Neither of your responses directly answer to my questions. Please, first give a yes-or-no answer, then present your argument. Mark, your statement "the Gospel is not ALL we need to know but it is quite SUFFICIENT" seems contradictory to me. The question, "Is the Gospel ALL we need to know," has precisely to do with the _sufficiency_ of the Gospel, i.e., "Do we need any other revelation besides the Gospel, OR is it sufficient in itself?"

The Scriptures are Gospel-centered, the whole of Scripture is designed to expound on the Gospel, so that God's glory might be manifested to the greatest degree possible. As I've pondered on this, I've come to a conclusion: we cannot separate any of God's Word from the Gospel, the Word of God IS the Gospel. The Gospel is sufficient and ALL we need to know, because ALL of Scripture is _necessary_ to the MOST FULL comprehension of the Gospel. And when I say, "The Gospel is sufficient and ALL we need to know," I don't mean the Gospel _as we presently know it_, but as we _ought to_ know it, i.e., _in light of _ALL of Scripture.

But still I must add: We cannot comprehend the Word of God/the Gospel without _experimental_ revelations, such as regeneration, justification, sanctification or seeing the _actual_ condemnation of the reprobate. In other words, we cannot believe ALL of God's Word without _experimental_ revelation, and consequently we cannot comprehend the glory of God in the Gospel for ALL that it is.

I think I've answered my own question. This thread has served its purpose.


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Sep 18, 2011)

Creation declares the glory of God. Do all things glorify God or does God use all things to glorify Himself whether they cognizantly do it or not? Is the Gospel applicable to all things? Is the good news good news to those who refuse to believe it? Maybe we need to define Gospel. Is all truth Gospel Truth? 

Here is a summation of the Gospel as defined by Jeremiah Burroughs based upon the scriptures. 


> Jeremiah Burroughs.... Gospel Conversation.
> 
> The good tidings concerning Christ, for so the word "gospel" in the Greek signifies nothing else but the good tidings.... All mankind was lost in Adam and became the children of wrath, and was put under the sentence of death.... God has thought upon the children of men. He has provided a way of atonement to reconcile them to Himself again.* Namely the Second Person in the Trinity takes man's nature upon him and becomes the Head of a second covenant, standing charged with man's sin, and answering for it by suffering what the Law and Divine Justice required. He made satisfaction and kept the Law perfectly, which satisfaction and righteousness He offered up unto the Father as a sweet savor of rest for the souls of those that are given to Him.*
> 
> ...


----------



## bshpmark (Sep 18, 2011)

Sorry, Samuel, I was focusing on the words "To the greatest degree possible." My apologies for not reading the question properly. If I understand the question as you intended it, yes the Gospel is ALL we need to know. Period. The revelation given to us in the Gospel is all that is necessary for salvation and the glory and attributes of God are revealed fully in Christ.

My stating that it is not all we need to know simply meant that as we mature in Christ, the rest of the Scriptures reveal more and more about God and his attributes so that by knowing the entirety of Scripture I would come to a deeper knowledge and more thorough understanding of the glory of God, his nature, what it means to be made in his image, etc. I did not mean to imply that the Gospel is lacking anything in and of itself.

Again, sorry for misreading.


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Sep 18, 2011)

bshpmark said:


> Sorry, Samuel, I was focusing on the words "To the greatest degree possible." My apologies for not reading the question properly. If I understand the question as you intended it, yes the Gospel is ALL we need to know. Period. The revelation given to us in the Gospel is all that is necessary for salvation and the glory and attributes of God are revealed fully in Christ.
> 
> My stating that it is not all we need to know simply meant that as we mature in Christ, the rest of the Scriptures reveal more and more about God and his attributes so that by knowing the entirety of Scripture I would come to a deeper knowledge and more thorough understanding of the glory of God, his nature, what it means to be made in his image, etc. I did not mean to imply that the Gospel is lacking anything in and of itself.
> 
> Again, sorry for misreading.



No problem, Brother. Thank you for your effort to help!


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Sep 18, 2011)

Samuel,

I believe your first question is what the sticking point is about. 




InSlaveryToChrist said:


> Does God reveal ALL of His attributes in the Gospel to THE GREATEST degree possible?



To the GREATEST degree possible would have to mean that all of God's glory is revealed in my understanding. So to put that question in line with the others is rather confusing. 

BTW, I am growing in my appreciation for John Ball. I wish I had some of his writings.


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Sep 18, 2011)

PuritanCovenanter said:


> Samuel,
> 
> I believe your first question is what the sticking point is about.
> 
> ...



Oh, I see what you're getting at! Let me explain. With the first question I did not mean revelation _as God reveals it_, but revelation _as we grasp it in our understanding_. I apologize for formulating the question so badly. Think of the question in light of our finitude to _completely_ grasp the glory of God. We'll never be able to _completely_ grasp the glory of God. So, by the question, "Does God reveal ALL of His attributes in the Gospel to the GREATEST degree possible," I meant, "Do we grasp ALL of the attributes of God in the Gospel to the GREATEST degree possible?"



> BTW, I am growing in my appreciation for John Ball. I wish I had some of his writings.



I love John Ball, but I haven't read much of his works.


----------



## Tim (Sep 18, 2011)

InSlaveryToChrist said:


> The Scriptures are Gospel-centered, the whole of Scripture is designed to expound on the Gospel



Samuel, I am glad you arrived at this. I had posted a similar comment this morning, but deleted it because I wasn't sure I did a good job communicating it. But you have now said it: the entire scriptures describe a "good news"...a gospel. Thus, the gospel cannot be separated from the rest of God's Word.


----------



## InSlaveryToChrist (Sep 18, 2011)

Tim said:


> InSlaveryToChrist said:
> 
> 
> > The Scriptures are Gospel-centered, the whole of Scripture is designed to expound on the Gospel
> ...



Thanks for affirming this, Tim! Have a blessed day!


----------



## CharlieJ (Sep 18, 2011)

Teleology is key here. Words like "need" and "sufficient" raise the question, "for what?" Is the gospel all I need to deliver a baby, construct a website, or play a cello? May any of those be required of someone during a lifetime? Yes. Therefore, no, the gospel is not all I need.

But perhaps we were speaking more narrowly, referring to spiritual needs. Is the gospel all I need to preach a good sermon on Exodus? No. I need knowledge of the Scripture, of speaking, and of my audience. (But perhaps any sermon with the gospel is good to some degree, but not necessarily as good as it could be.) Is the gospel all I need to pull through a difficult spot in my marriage? No, at least not without an absurdly broad definition of the gospel. I need virtues like patience, humility and perseverance; I need the guidance and support of my church; I need knowledge of my wife. In any case, I don't see how "the gospel is all I need" is compatible with the third use of the law.

Is believing the gospel all I need to be clothed with the righteousness of Christ and made acceptable to the Father? Yes. Is it all I need to silence the assaults of Satan and my own conscience? Yes. Is it all I need to tell those around me who need to be rescued from darkness? Yes. Does the gospel grant us union with Christ, in whom we find all spiritual blessings? Yes.

I think that sometimes a narrow focus on the gospel obscures a robust creation theology. People, insofar as they are rational beings in this world, have fully legitimate spheres of operation (work, family, culture) that are indeed greatly influenced by the gospel, but can't be totally subsumed under it. The gospel is fully sufficient to lead us to a knowledge of salvation. It also empowers our obedience. But, even there, it does not accomplish its work apart from the law, since Paul says that the law is a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ.


----------



## steadfast7 (Sep 18, 2011)

When John writes, "we have beheld his glory, as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth", he seems to be saying that in Christ beheld (for them in the flesh, and for us, in the gospel), we come into contact with the fulness of the deity in human form, which is the only form that we could ever apprehend. The gospel is all we need, because separation from God is our only real problem.


----------



## CharlieJ (Sep 19, 2011)

Humans were created for more than simply beholding God. Even in the garden, Adam and Eve had tasks that went beyond walking with God in the cool of the day. They had to tend animals, etc. These tasks are not entirely separate from their relationship with God, as can be seen by the human inability to fulfill them rightly after the Fall. But they are still there. Adam and Eve didn't just sit on a log and explicitly worship God all day.

Now, I'm taking gospel in the narrow sense of 1 Cor 15 and perhaps related concepts. Obviously, those aren't the only passages in the NT. Why are the rest there? I understand the desire to synthesize; I do not understand the need to absolutize.


----------

