Dear brothers and sisters in metal,

I present to you my attempt at a gospel presentation. I'm planning on producing a series of booklets based on this, which is a draft text. Please check it out for me and let me know if it's good, rubbish, needs some corrections, additions, completely goes over your head, etc. Be brutally honest...

...


Are you saved? If not, why not?

In the beginning, God created this planet and the universe and everything. It was all good, but then went bad when the first human beings - a couple named Adam and Eve - sinned by disobeying a prohibition God gave to them. The human race - their offspring - are now all born sinners by nature. This is why the world is the way it is, why there is evil in the world: we're all born evil by nature, and act accordingly.

What are sins and how can we prove the above concept? God in the Bible introduces all these "laws" such as no murdering, no stealing, no adultery, no idolatry and so on. There's a ton of them but Jesus summed them all up in this way: love God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength, and love your neighbor as yourself. God's Law demands we do this perfectly. However, humans sin by violating this principle to varying degrees because they're born evil. We don't love each other or God as his laws require. That's why the world has racism, wars, idolatry, false gods, bullying in schools, people downplaying 'little sins', homosexuality (yes), terrorism, people chewing each other out on YouTube, etc. All the results of human corruption. While we have police and government to try and contain some of it, we also have police brutality and corrupt government, so the problem goes on.

God hates this sin. In fact he has said that one day he's going to judge people and send sinners to hell on account of their sins: judgment day. Now this is a problem for every human being, if we're born evil and have all sinned... so what's the solution? If there isn't one, we will all go to hell for various sins. Do a little digging with any human, and you'll find at least one sin, which is game over in God's book. Examine yourself: have you always been perfect in your love for God and your fellow man? At home and at work? Have you loved your enemies?

There are two problems humans have: one is this bad nature, the second is a bad record of sins committed. Both these problems have to be fixed, and it has to be in a way that doesn't come at the expense of justice. God won't tolerate or let evil go on; there's going to be divine payback, but the question is who's going to pay?

God's solution involves Jesus, the son of God incarnate, being a divine law keeper on one's behalf and also taking the divine punishment due to you for your violations of God's laws. All sins are like a capital offense in God's system, so Jesus takes the divine penalty on your behalf and you are found innocent as all the sin is paid for. That means, no more hell when you die.

That solves the bad record problem. However God never clears anyone's record without giving them a change of heart, or turning them from a bad person into a new person. All humans are born bad; some get born-again: the born-again Christian. So if Jesus paying the divine death penalty on the cross is going to apply to you so you don't burn in hell, you've also got to be born-again.

How do you get born-again, then? This is something God takes care of and does with some people when they hear about Jesus and the gospel, which is the message about Jesus dying for our sins. Some people, when hearing about Jesus and what he did, have a change of heart and trust in what he did for them, repent and go on to live a Christian life and so on, albeit with failures but still not the same kind of life they came out of.

In light of all this, where do you stand with regards to God and Jesus and so on? Do you want to live a Christian life, do you trust that Jesus died to pay for your sins so you won't go to hell, will you repent, etc? Or not?

If not, why not? Do you need to be saved?


...

What do you think? Do some parts lack emphasis or clarity? Is it too long winded or complicated? Is the theology lacking? If it's out of line with the Bible itself, please show me where.

Thanks in advance.


PS Feel free to edit it and repost it with improvements, or just post your own attempt at a presentation if you like.

I think its very well written. The emphasis and clarity are all there.
I'm glad you're not referencing someone to death with bible verses. That makes this more personal - that's really good.

I think there might be an association issue though.

Mentioning homosexuality (even as a "little sin") is going to stir the pot of emotions in some people. If you believe this, that's fine. I think THAT is better left unsaid though - that's just my opinion.

Well, in my brutally honest opinion, I do understand the point of view you are coming across, but there is to many stuff that I would have to challenge in there to re-edit the post. Rather than give you my version of your' presentation, I shall just question some of what you have written.

I feel that yes, you are showing somewhat the Gospel in terms of we need Christ, but you don't explain the point of needing Christ or the greatness of Christ. It sounds imo, more of one of those turn or burn kind of presentations. I think my big problem is it is lacking in Theology/Philosophy in favor of a more mainstream traditional church propaganda. With that being said, Here is what I will question. Remember I'm not being harsh, I'm just trying to help you bring out the best Gospel you can bring forth!

wiremu.white wrote:

Are you saved? If not, why not?

I think this could use a little more clarity, but overall it is a fine introduction, or even just a title.

wiremu.white wrote:

In the beginning, God created this planet and the universe and everything. It was all good, but then went bad when the first human beings - a couple named Adam and Eve - sinned by disobeying a prohibition God gave to them. The human race - their offspring - are now all born sinners by nature. This is why the world is the way it is, why there is evil in the world: we're all born evil by nature, and act accordingly.

Yes, this is True, but I feel you are rushing this a bit. Why I would complain about it is because what you spoke of here is one of the most essential and crucial parts of the entire Gospel to begin with. Adam and Eve, and God’s plan all lie within that moment that was spoken of in Genesis. I shall add and explain more later.

wiremu.white wrote:

What are sins and how can we prove the above concept? God in the Bible introduces all these "laws" such as no murdering, no stealing, no adultery, no idolatry and so on. There's a ton of them but Jesus summed them all up in this way: love God with all your heart, mind, soul and strength, and love your neighbor as yourself. God's Law demands we do this perfectly. However, humans sin by violating this principle to varying degrees because they're born evil. We don't love each other or God as his laws require. That's why the world has racism, wars, idolatry, false gods, bullying in schools, people downplaying 'little sins', homosexuality (yes), terrorism, people chewing each other out on YouTube, etc. All the results of human corruption. While we have police and government to try and contain some of it, we also have police brutality and corrupt government, so the problem goes on.

I don’t think this would be the best approach for a Gospel, because let us say I wasn’t a Christian. Since I do have at least some biblical knowledge, I know that there were times where God mandated His’ followers to murder and crusade all enemies heartlessly. Basically, I think you should explain how God mandating that I just said in comparison to what we do, otherwise I could just call it hypocrisy. It even says in Genesis that God wanted to wipe out the entire planet via flooding and He did just that, so how is this justified then God turns around and says don’t murder? I hope you see where I’m going with that example.

wiremu.white wrote:

God hates this sin. In fact he has said that one day he's going to judge people and send sinners to hell on account of their sins: judgment day. Now this is a problem for every human being, if we're born evil and have all sinned... so what's the solution? If there isn't one, we will all go to hell for various sins. Do a little digging with any human, and you'll find at least one sin, which is game over in God's book. Examine yourself: have you always been perfect in your love for God and your fellow man? At home and at work? Have you loved your enemies?

Here is where my problems start. To begin, if God truly hated sin, He would have never allowed it to come to fruitation, as it has. There is a purpose for sin and the ability to sin, which is not touched up on.

You know I’m going to ask this: What is Hell? If you are saying what I think you are saying, then Hell is not True. That is a lie. It is life and death, not reward and punishment. God is saving us from death.

wiremu.white wrote:

There are two problems humans have: one is this bad nature, the second is a bad record of sins committed. Both these problems have to be fixed, and it has to be in a way that doesn't come at the expense of justice. God won't tolerate or let evil go on; there's going to be divine payback, but the question is who's going to pay?

I think the 1st 2 sentences work just fine. I would get rid of the 3rd sentence, because I think that contradicts Job a bit.

wiremu.white wrote:

God's solution involves Jesus, the son of God incarnate, being a divine law keeper on one's behalf and also taking the divine punishment due to you for your violations of God's laws. All sins are like a capital offense in God's system, so Jesus takes the divine penalty on your behalf and you are found innocent as all the sin is paid for. That means, no more hell when you die.

I agree here. No problems overall. I know you are posting on the Gospel, but I just think the point of this path God chose is what needs to be clarified. Why did He even bother with this path as opposed to let’s say, making us similar to angels?

wiremu.white wrote:

That solves the bad record problem. However God never clears anyone's record without giving them a change of heart, or turning them from a bad person into a new person. All humans are born bad; some get born-again: the born-again Christian. So if Jesus paying the divine death penalty on the cross is going to apply to you so you don't burn in hell, you've also got to be born-again.

With “burn in Hell” I would say I disagree with that. Otherwise, I would agree.

wiremu.white wrote:

How do you get born-again, then? This is something God takes care of and does with some people when they hear about Jesus and the gospel, which is the message about Jesus dying for our sins. Some people, when hearing about Jesus and what he did, have a change of heart and trust in what he did for them, repent and go on to live a Christian life and so on, albeit with failures but still not the same kind of life they came out of.

Fine with me.

wiremu.white wrote:

In light of all this, where do you stand with regards to God and Jesus and so on? Do you want to live a Christian life, do you trust that Jesus died to pay for your sins so you won't go to hell, will you repent, etc? Or not?

Sounds like a turn or burn kind of message here.

[quote="wiremu.white"]
If not, why not? Do you need to be saved?

I think this shouldn’t be in there, cause I get a rub it in your’ face feeling.

...

wiremu.white wrote:

What do you think? Do some parts lack emphasis or clarity? Is it too long winded or complicated? Is the theology lacking? If it's out of line with the Bible itself, please show me where.

Thanks in advance.


PS Feel free to edit it and repost it with improvements, or just post your own attempt at a presentation if you like.

Overall, I like it and think it’s good. It presents only part of the picture however. The thing is, God had this all planned out from the beginning. I know this isn’t a popular teaching, but the point of the Gospel goes back to where I said I would discuss more.

The point of the Gospel goes back to the Image of God within Man. Why this isn’t a popular teaching is because, in reality, God wanted us to sin, so that way he could have Christ come in and be that Messiah you are referring to. The thing is, yes, Adam and Eve eating that fruit caused sin to come forth, but sin coming also brought along 2 things positive. It brought forth True Free Will, and it brought forth a part of the Image of God into man that would have never been obtained had we not sinned. This is the Knowledge of Good and Evil. God even says it in Genesis 3 after the sin that Man has become like us, to know Good and Evil.

The main thing is, we traded an immortal image for a knowledgeable image. From going to immortal to knowledgeable, we have become temporary instead of permanent. With this, thanks to sin, we are like Gods, but we will perish (and eternal life being burnt is NOT perishing, death is death, not torment), but through Christ, we will regain that immortality that we lost. The difference? Unlike in the beginning where one piece was lost for the other, with Christ, you regain what was lost, but we get to keep our Knowledge of Good and Evil, which we will still have even in Eternity with God (for the ones who choose Christ). Those who reject the immortality that Christ offers, will suffer Death, and the 2nd death will happen in the Lake of Fire, which the unsaved shall be annihilated due to everlasting separation from God.

So, salvation, do you wish to be saved, and have the Image of God be completed, so you will be like a god and live forever? Or do you wish to continue being the god you already are, and perish?

I would incorporate that somehow into the Gospel, as from what I have seen, I have seen a far more loving and caring God, as opposed to an evil tyrant dictator that wants to control you and strip you of your‘ free will, or beat you and torment you for His own sick pleasure. That is my True opinion on the presentation. Thank you for your' gospel presentation and allowing us to critique it! More than honored and priveledged to help! \m/

I think that talking to someone person-to-person is more effective than anything that we can write.

JeffdlS wrote:

I think that talking to someone person-to-person is more effective than anything that we can write.

Maybe, but for mass outreach purposes, written booklets are useful.

wiremu.white wrote:

JeffdlS wrote:

I think that talking to someone person-to-person is more effective than anything that we can write.

Maybe, but for mass outreach purposes, written booklets are useful.

Very true. Was there anything in my critique that helped you or you wanted to challenge?

At the same time though, everything has already been said and written so many times, I don't see the need for another booklet. Then again, may I ask who these booklets will be going to? Is this more of a local thing you wish to do or is this an internet outreach?

Death over Life wrote:

wiremu.white wrote:

JeffdlS wrote:

I think that talking to someone person-to-person is more effective than anything that we can write.

Maybe, but for mass outreach purposes, written booklets are useful.

Very true. Was there anything in my critique that helped you or you wanted to challenge?

At the same time though, everything has already been said and written so many times, I don't see the need for another booklet. Then again, may I ask who these booklets will be going to? Is this more of a local thing you wish to do or is this an internet outreach?

Just a local thing in my own town. However, I have field tested my presentation on the Amazon discussion boards where a lot of @#$% gets said regarding Christianity from all sides. Have had a lot of mockery, which is to be expected with any gospel presentation due to sin. If some of the mockery is due to my own way of explaining things though, I can work on that.


There's a number of points you made that I cannot agree with you on in terms of theology. (I could debate, but maybe later or on another thread.)

I do have mixed feelings about a 'turn or burn' kind of presentation as you point out, especially where hellfire is overemphasized at the expense of other truthes and is used to elicit a favourable response, because I do not believe people should convert just to escape consequences of their sins. That would simply be using Jesus, not loving him, which is not true conversion at all. Rather, people should convert because they hate their sins in light of Jesus' death to atone for them and a new desire to be godly. That takes a miracle though; that's not a response that can be brought about through emotional manipulation, as it has to to do with being born-again where God gives a person a change of heart. I try to just present a short overview of enough of the facts as I understand them and then let the truth speak for itself, leaving it to God to regenerate people as He wills with that supplied information. That means I definitely want 1 Corinthians 15:1-5 in there, as Paul defines the gospel there and states that it is of first importance.

While perhaps not 'turn or burn' then, the gospel is nonetheless given in context of saving a person from perishing or judgment, in the Bible. If you take John 3:16, for example:

John 3:16

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life."

You can see that it does connect believing with not perishing. One description of perishing would seem to be given in Revelation 21:8:

Revelation 21:8

"But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death."

Now I know that there is more to being saved than just being saved from punishment, or justified before God. There is also being made clean or being given new life, a change of heart and so on. But it seems to me that the Bible does nonetheless put a lot of emphasis on justification as it relates to judgment, so I think it would be wrong for me to not do likewise. Jesus himself did do some so-called 'hellfire' preaching, so I believe it would be wrong to leave that out. To quote Jesus as he speaks in parable in Luke 19:27, I believe alluding to himself:

Luke 19:27

"But as for these enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, bring them here and slaughter them before me."

There's a couple of things there that stand out to me. One is obviously the slaughter part (ie., hell, damnation, etc). The other is the "who did not want me" part. Part of salvation is fixing that. God himself fixes that in regeneration. Contrast these two following passages, the first one detailing the human nature problem and the second passage detailing the second half of the justification-regeneration solution:

Ephesians 2:1-5

"And you were dead in the trespasses and sins in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience — among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind."

Titus 3:4-5

"But when the goodness and loving kindness of God our Savior appeared, he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit,"

Now, if God regenerates a person in relation to the presentation of himself as saviour, then it has to be known what God saves from. As John 3:16 says, shall not perish but have eternal life. So I want to get that in there with some context.

I know I've probably oversimplified or gone over some stuff real quick in my presentation. Perhaps I should flesh out the creation part a bit more, as you say. I also completely left out the resurrection - whoops. I'm trying to give enough information that a person can make an informed judgment as to whether they want to go along or know more, or whether they can say, "thanks but no thanks."

Disagree or not with some of my points, I wasn't disagreeing overall about the explanation and context of what you were saying. I felt it was a bit misworded.

In addition to the creation story, the resurrection does need to be in there. I see even I forgot abou that, so I'm just as bad. Paul states that if there was no resurrection, there would be no Gospel.

Just remember though, most of what I have said, were only paraphrases. The whole annihilation thing I have already made a thread about if you wish to discuss that on.

http://www.blabberboard.net/theology-f10/2nd-death-eternal-torment-annihilationism-t6007.htm

The Image of God thing, goes back to the creation story in Genesis.

Quote :

I know I've probably oversimplified or gone over some stuff real quick in my presentation. Perhaps I should flesh out the creation part a bit more, as you say. I also completely left out the resurrection - whoops. I'm trying to give enough information that a person can make an informed judgment as to whether they want to go along or know more, or whether they can say, "thanks but no thanks."

I do understand what you are saying, and I think that is great that you are doing this. Part of why I did my last post is I have grown up hearing that story/Gospel so many times, it is basically engraved within the mind.

With that being said, as I somewhat tried to point out, there were misconceptions about it, seeming paradoxes and contradictions, plot-holes, and questions unanswered that some of the way the Gospel is presented shuns said questions that need answering.

One of the questions I have had about this and with the Gospel, was what was the point of all this? Why not just create us from the start like that? With the way it portrayed everything, it Truly made life on Earth pointless, worthless, and a major waste of time. My question on what is the point of all of this was never answered until a fellow ex-blabberjesus poster posted on here about the Image of God within Man and Christ being the image of Man within God. That subject is almost brushed off into trivia, but after researching and thinking and seeing the Scriptures on this, everything has come to make sense of it. It put the entire Gospel into proper perspective rather than jumbled questions. That is why I hammered on the Image of God. It is almost never talked about, and at best, it is a reference most people try to avoid even mentioning.

(PS: You made some great statements on the Are Christians supposed to hate Satan? thread. Why I say that is there is some stuff I wish to address if I haven't already, and it ties together with this thread. A great question I had with the Gospel was: Why is God only saving Humans? Why not Angels and Humans?)

Death over Life wrote:

My question on what is the point of all of this was never answered until a fellow ex-blabberjesus poster posted on here about the Image of God within Man and Christ being the image of Man within God. That subject is almost brushed off into trivia, but after researching and thinking and seeing the Scriptures on this, everything has come to make sense of it. It put the entire Gospel into proper perspective rather than jumbled questions. That is why I hammered on the Image of God. It is almost never talked about, and at best, it is a reference most people try to avoid even mentioning.

The person you spoke to wasn't Eastern Orthodox, were they? I've heard something along these lines before.

As for what's the point of all this? I have a different take: I'm going to say that the whole point of the fall, sin, redemption and so on - God's master plan if you will, that includes this life - is primarily for God to glorify himself by showing off and demonstrating various attributes of his own character, rather than man to be complete in the image of God. This is tied up in our worship of God; it gives us and the angels something to sing about. Why is there a judgment? So God can demonstrate his attribute of justice, praise God. Why is there redemption? So God can demonstrate his attribute of grace, praise God, etc. Everything exists for the worship of God and his glory.

I was wondering whether I should include that or not.

wiremu.white wrote:

Death over Life wrote:

My question on what is the point of all of this was never answered until a fellow ex-blabberjesus poster posted on here about the Image of God within Man and Christ being the image of Man within God. That subject is almost brushed off into trivia, but after researching and thinking and seeing the Scriptures on this, everything has come to make sense of it. It put the entire Gospel into proper perspective rather than jumbled questions. That is why I hammered on the Image of God. It is almost never talked about, and at best, it is a reference most people try to avoid even mentioning.

The person you spoke to wasn't Eastern Orthodox, were they? I've heard something along these lines before.

As for what's the point of all this? I have a different take: I'm going to say that the whole point of the fall, sin, redemption and so on - God's master plan if you will, that includes this life - is primarily for God to glorify himself by showing off and demonstrating various attributes of his own character, rather than man to be complete in the image of God. This is tied up in our worship of God; it gives us and the angels something to sing about. Why is there a judgment? So God can demonstrate his attribute of justice, praise God. Why is there redemption? So God can demonstrate his attribute of grace, praise God, etc. Everything exists for the worship of God and his glory.

I was wondering whether I should include that or not.

I don't believe He was, but I remembered one time, in one of the blogs, he did say something about that is what the Orthodox teach on the Image of God. I've never been to an Orthodox Church so I wouldn't know. But if it is, then what they teach is what made sense to me and answered my problems and questions with the Gospel.

I think that should be added in personally. I would say I would scrap this one part of the sentence:

rather than man to be complete in the image of God.


From what I have on the Scriptures, God wanted to create something greater than the rest of His creation. Through all of what I am saying, it goes back to what you are saying, but I'm presenting it differently. He wanted to make us like God, and this was how He did so, and it was good and it was perfect. Had the sin of Adam and Eve never happened, we wouldn't be completely in God's Image. How we are able to even talk or thing of this properly is because of that Knowledge of Good and Evil. The thing is, God has this as well, it's a part of His image that wasn't given to us. We got this part of His' image by sinning. In doing that, God being perfect is able to handle the responsibility of it. As you know, we cannot as we constantly sin.

That is what is meant by the Transforming. We, through all of this, will ultimately be God-like and Immortal. This is what is meant by Christ is the Image of Man within God. Christ is what we will become like when the new birth has arrived and we are with God. None of this is for the tranforming of us into God gods (like what Mormon's preach), but rather as gods (man in God's Image, still under God's authority).

By the end of the night, this ties in perfectly with what you are saying, but I feel what I'm trying to do is have it properly explained out, as paraphrasing wasn't the best thing for me at the time. That is the tricky thing of the Gospel. This is the 1 thing of Christianity that MUST be 100% properly explained and 100% Truth, because unlike most teachings (Hell or tithe or what day to Worship etc.) if this is improperly presented, it could create a false Christ and lead others astray. Just know that is why I'm doing what I do, and why I am proud you have given us the opportunity to help you out!

JeffdlS wrote:

I think that talking to someone person-to-person is more effective than anything that we can write.

I agree.