"Thus we cannot claim to have preached a Christian sermon if it does not call sinners to depend entirely upon the penal substitutionary atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ."

I wonder, then, whether any of the sermons recorded in Acts qualify as "Christian" sermons. Or, whether Paul's summary of the Gospel in Rom 1:3-4 is satisfactory to you. Or whether you agree with Matthew (4:23; 9:35) that Jesus went everywhere preaching the "Gospel of the Kingdom of God" even though Jesus is never said to preach a theory of the atonement.

"I fear that I have preached several sermons which were Christian in what they said, but failed to get to the heart of Christianity in failing to articulate the gospel."

This is a convicting statement. I always try to get the gospel in somewhere, but it usually relates to non-Christians. What about how the gospel affects believers.

I have been convicted that we can not preach law without gospel to the believer any more than we can to the unbeliever. If we do, it is nothing more than "moral reform" and is certainly less than Christian.

After searching high and low for a Christ centered church, it is still fresh on my mind that sadly the gospel and even Christ is absent from most “Christian” services. My husband and I only looked for churches in a solid denomination, but were nearly hopeless until we at last recently found our church home. Honestly, this is not a shameless plug, but I recently wrote a post on this subject that might interest pastors... from a lay-women's point of view. http://mousenaround.wordpress.com/2007/06/06/christless-christianity/

Blessings to you all for thinking and talking about this crucial subject.

Pouestinipas (Dan Streett) asks some fairly common questions. I don't know if they are meant to be rhetorical, and thus assuming on the face of it that these questions undo the force of this excellent post, but I think there are clear answers. (I will answer in three posts to keep them brief.)

First, Paul's sermons. Luke only records for us sample sermons, of course. So, looking at his sermon in Acts 13, his first recorded missionary sermon, what do we read?

"Let it be known to you therefore, brothers, that through this man (Jesus), forgiveness of sins is proclaimed to you and by him everyone who believes is justified from everything which you could not be freed justified by the law of Moses" (Acts 13:39).

Clearly atonement-centered.

Acts 17 (Mars Hill) is of course a special apologetic case, but even here, note how Paul ends the sermon: "... now God commands all people everywhere to repent, because he has fixed a day on which he will judge the world..." (17:30).

And then, there are Paul's various defenses in his four trials, and even though these are not sermons, per se, he still works the Gospel of forgiveness in.

So, yes Paul preaches the Gospel, according to this post's definition.

Chris Hutchinson
Sr. Pastor
Grace Covenant Presbyterian
Blacksburg, VA

As for Jesus, and his preaching, first, it is certainly fitting for us to acknowledge that none of us are Christ, and so we should use caution in asking WWJP?

For instance, He taught in parables in part to confuse/blind/judge his insincere listeners. We should not imitate Him in that.

That said, Jesus clearly taught the necessity of His atonement for sin, and of casting oneself on Him to gain everlasting life. Is this really doubted? Let me know if it is, so we can bring forth the passages.

Therefore, when Matthew wrote that Jesus preached the "kingdom of God," since He loved people enough for them to learn how to gain everlasting life and not just temporary healing or political relief, we must certainly suppose He preached the Gospel of the forgiveness of sins, even if it was not in the same systematic manner as the later epistles.

Chris H.

Finally, as for Romans 1:3-4, I will just say that many of us reading this think that it makes no sense to make these two verses the sole summary of the Gospel, apart from the context, especially the next use of euengelion in the text, which is Rom. 1:16-17: "For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation for everyone who believes, to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith, as it is written, 'The righteous shall live by faith.'"

The center of the Gospel is the atonement of Christ, and not just His Lordship.

The proclamation that "Jesus is Lord," as a summary of the Gospel is at best, mere religious sloganeering, and at worst, actually, bad news for those who don't know Him first as Savior from THEIR OWN SINS.

If we lose this focus, we are not preaching the Gospel, no matter how much societal or moral reform we accomplish.

Chris H.

After reading the reviews by 9marks of Derek Webb, Erwin McManus and others, I feel the need to repent myself for all the times I have slandered my fellow brethren in "the name of truth". While we must be passionate about truth, the blatant disrespect and pompous attitude of the reviewers on this website are shocking as believers.

Instead of correcting the thought, all these reviews attack the man who said them because it's not the whole gospel. As if what was recorded in Acts would be considered in the same category as "whole gospel" when the apostles preached.

I am embarrassed as a believer, "they will know us by our love" and our love for one another is horrendous if this is what it looks like.

Amen, Logan.

I know this is quite old, but...you don't sound very loving Logan :^)

and don't feel bad, everyone has some family members who they are embarrassed of. I'm sure some in the family are embarrassed of you too.