Review: The King Jesus Gospel
by tim on Sep.20, 2011, under Book, Review
The observation of the Teacher, that ‘Of making many books there is no end’ (Eccl 12:12), is undoubtedly true. Yet when it comes to thoughtful expositions of the gospel, this is to be considered a blessing rather than a curse. Such an exposition is Scot McKnight’s The King Jesus Gospel.1 Thus, I am glad of the opportunity afforded me by Zondervan to review this book.
Summary
McKnight opens his book by relating his initial experiences in evangelism, noting that many churches and programs focus on decisions rather than discipleship. But decisions don’t necessarily lead to discipleship! In fact, the ‘conversion rate’ (no pun) is < 50%. So... what makes faith stick?
In chapter 1, McKnight contends that the gospel has been incorrectly equated with personal salvation. He offers three symptoms of this: (1) a Christian who cannot comprehend how the Messiahship of Jesus is ‘good news'; (2) that John Piper feels the need to defend the notion that Jesus taught justification, even though there are only a few references to justification in the Gospels; (3) one pastor believes that Jesus could not have taught the ‘gospel’, as it can only be understood this side of the Cross, Resurrection and Pentecost.
McKnight develops this in chapter 2, drawing a distinction between a salvation (or ‘soterian’) culture and a gospel culture. The salvation culture is framed around questions of “in or out?” Such a culture is an advance on nominalism, requiring personal profession of faith; yet it does not intrinsically lead to discipleship. McKnight equates much of modern evangelicalism with this kind of salvation culture.
Chapter 3 distinguishes four different things commonly associated with ‘gospel': (1) the story of Israel; (2) the story of Jesus; (3) the plan of salvation; and (4) the method of persuasion. He suggests that these items should build on each other in this order; but that we typically reverse the order. Finally, he signals his intention to argue that only sense (2) should be equated with ‘gospel’.
McKnight moves to considering the ‘apostolic gospel’ in chapter 4. The starting point for understanding the gospel, he argues, is 1 Cor. 15. When we do so we find that the apostolic gospel centers on the story of Jesus. He then interacts with N. T. Wright’s What Saint Paul Really Said and Greg Gilbert’s What Is The Gospel?, before issuing a final warning that a plan of salvation divorced from the story becomes ‘abstract, propositional, logical, rational, and philosophical and, most importantly, de-storified and unbiblical’ (62).
In chapter 5, McKnight argues that the Reformation doctrine of justification by faith alone – though right and good in and of itself – has had the effect of transforming a gospel culture into a salvation culture. In support of this, he traces several of the early church creeds, then compares them with the Reformation Creeds, finding that the emphasis has shifted from the story of Christ to the story of an individual’s salvation. He then borrows from Dallas Willard to characterise this kind of focus on personal salvation as a “gospel of sin management”.
McKnight makes the (somewhat obvious) point in chapter 6 that the Gospels declared ‘the Story of Israel as resolved in the story of Jesus’ (79). Thus, they fit McKnight’s definition of ‘gospel’ without having to proclaim personal salvation or justification by faith.
In the next chapter, McKnight traces a number of passages in the Gospels where Jesus preaches the kingdom of God, and himself the king of it. Jesus, says McKnight, makes a number of points about the Kingdom: (1) that it was breaking into history; (2) that it brought a new society in the land; (3) a new citizenship; (4) that it is the kingdom of God; and (5) that Jesus himself is at the centre of this kingdom. McKnight follows this up by considering the interplay between Jesus and his cousin John, and how they each viewed their own and the other’s roles in scriptural terms. Finally, he canvasses several ‘look at me’ passages, where Jesus calls attention to his own role in the Kingdom.
Surveying the apostolic preaching in the book of Acts (chapter 8), McKnight finds that the gospel is repeatedly framed in terms of the story of Israel, rather than the story of salvation.
McKnight then draws six points of comparison between apostolic and contemporary ‘gospeling’. Apostolic gospeling thus: (1) summons people to submit to the lordship of Christ, rather than to a personal salvation; (2) is framed by the Story of Israel, rather than the salvation/atonement story; (3) contains a message of wrath and judgment, even though this is not the focus; (4) addresses the problem of lordship, rather than that of justification; (5) was not intentionally or consciously subversive of the Roman Empire; (6) talked first and always about Jesus.
In the final chapter, McKnight concludes his book by presenting his summary of the content of the gospel. He then argues that a gospel culture will flow out of this gospel only if we immerse ourselves in the biblical story and, more specifically, the story of Jesus and the story of the church. In addition, we need to develop counter stories that will oppose the stories of our culture – the many ‘-isms’ of contemporary society – for which McKnight offers Eucharist and Baptism as examples. Finally we must embrace the story, making it our own and being thoroughly transformed and converted by it. If we do these things we will promote a gospel culture.
Analysis
McKnight has in this work made a number of insightful observations concerning the state of the evangelical church and its presentation of the gospel. In particular his fourfold distinction of different senses in which the word ‘gospel’ is used – the story of Israel, the story of Jesus, the plan of salvation and the method of persuasion – is a very useful framework for discussing the nature and content of the gospel. Using this framework, McKnight also brings a much-needed reminder that the gospel is not merely the culmination of the story of the individual (the plan of salvation) but is also the culmination of the story of Israel. Though few within evangelical circles would wish to deny this, McKnight’s work reminds us that this has (or should have) implications for the way we promote and proclaim the gospel.
Yet McKnight’s exposition of precisely what these implications are is not entirely convincing. He is at great pains to show that the gospel cannot, ultimately, be divided from the story of Israel, and this is true. But McKnight goes further, claiming that the ‘apostolic gospel’ is framed ‘not so much salvation as the Story of Israel coming to completion in the Story of Jesus’ (131), and that therefore our gospel presentations (in particular our ‘method of persuasion’) should not be separated from this story. So,
When the plan gets separated from the story, the plan almost always becomes abstract, propositional, logical, rational, and philosophical and, most importantly, de-storified and unbiblical. When we separate the Plan of Salvation from the story, we cut ourselves off the story that identifies us and tells our past and tells our future. We separate ourselves from Jesus and turn the Christian faith into a System of Salvation. (62)
It is here that McKnight’s analysis needs refinement; in particular, the content and method of the Apostle Paul’s teaching is under-represented.
McKnight takes 1 Corinthians 15 to be ‘the apostolic gospel tradition’ (46), that is, a summary of the earliest apostolic teaching about the gospel. His reasoning is that verses 3-8 of this passage have the appearance of being a pre-formed tradition that predates Paul himself (a theory to which a majority of NT scholars would likely subscribe), and that Paul declares this to be ‘the gospel I gospeled’ (1 Cor 15:1; τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ὃ εὐηγγελισάμην ὑμῖν). Further, the repeated phrase ‘according to the Scriptures’ (κατὰ τὰς γραφὰς) is taken to be a reference to the larger Story of Israel. Yet to define this passage as coterminous with Paul’s gospel is to neglect the possibility that Paul is speaking only of that strand of his teaching related to the resurrection, the subject of his larger discourse in this chapter. Further, one searches the rest of the chapter in vain for specific scriptural references, save those that speak of Adam (45ff.). Where, then, is the Story of Israel, of Abraham’s progeny, in this gospel?
Some other Pauline texts referenced by McKnight are found in Appendix 1, notably Romans 1:1-4; 3:21-26; Phil 2:5-11; Col 1:15-20; 1 Tim 3:16; 2 Tim 2:8. Of these, the first and last refer to the Jewish ancestry of Jesus (‘descendant of David’ / ‘descended from David’), whilst the others make general comments about the life of Jesus without attempting to root them in the overall Story of Israel. Is Paul, then, guilty of making the gospel, ‘abstract, propositional, logical, rational, and philosophical and, most importantly, de-storified and unbiblical’?
Perhaps most striking of all is Paul’s Areopagus address (Acts 17:16-34), which McKnight refers to in chapter 8. He claims: ‘From Peter’s world-transforming sermon in Acts 2 to Paul’s sermon on the Areopagus in Acts 17, it was the Story of Israel that shaped how they gospeled.’ Yet it is difficult to see how this address is ‘shaped’ by the Story of Israel. Yes, Paul refers to God’s creation of the earth, but there is little else that may be said to be specifically Jewish. Indeed, McKnight himself acknowledges this a little later on: ‘Paul’s audience surely didn’t know enough of Israel’s Story to know what to make of this Jewish Jesus. So Paul starts where they are.’ (126) Paul, then, feels free to present the gospel without framing it in terms of the Story of Israel. In fact, where Paul does refer to the specifics of the Israelite narrative (e.g. Gal 3-4) it often seems to be in response to some initiative on the part of his addressees (e.g. interaction with Judaisers in Galatia).
Thus, caution is required in considering McKnight’s conclusions as applied to gospeling. There is still a place for presenting the gospel in terms of the Plan of Salvation, much in the same way that physics teachers first teach Bohr’s model of the atom rather than starting with the complexities of quantum mechanics. The latter is a more complete picture, it is true, but it is too large a jump in knowledge to start there. So with the gospel: the Plan of Salvation is graspable with minimal background knowledge, where attaining knowledge of the Story of Israel takes longer to grasp. Yet we may be grateful to McKnight for the reminder that it is not the entire Story.