The Gospel in 30 Seconds

[There's been some confusion about point #7. See Matthew 20:1-16 to understand the sense in which I meant "earn". - Funky]

Adrian Warnock posted his version of the gospel in 10 points. While I understand his desire to boil it down for "on the go" evangelism, I don't entirely agree his formulation. Here's mine, for what it's worth.

  1. God created man to love Him.
  2. God knows what is best for us and gives us commandments to follow
  3. has the eternal consequence of wounding man's relationship with God and separating man from eternity with God.
  4. has the temporal consequence of wounding man's relationships with his neighbors and in the form of broken and/or disordered relationships
  5. damages man's capacity to love himself, his neighbors, and God
  6. Jesus Christ's salvific act healed man's relationship with God and restored man's privilege to enter heaven
  7. We must be baptized by water and the Spirit and accept Christ to earn that eternal privilege
  8. We must make amends for our sins to repair temporal damage.
  9. If we knowingly commit grave , we endanger our salvation.
  10. We must confess our mortal sins to God and make penance

Funky Dung

Print | Email

Popularity: 2% [?]

Social bookmarking:
  • del.icio.us
  • Fark
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • YahooMyWeb
  • Digg
  • Netscape
  • Slashdot
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • Facebook
  • Furl
  • Google
  • TwitThis
  • Pownce

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Possibly Related Posts:

Comments 3

  1. Sven wrote:

    Very interesting 10 point summary, always interesting to see other summaries of the Gospel.

    I could only manage an 11-point one but somehow not as to the point as yours and Adrian's.

     Add karma Subtract karma  +0

    Posted 09 Feb 2005 at 4:34 am
  2. Adrian wrote:

    I have blogged on this and I am sorry I disagree with you. It might be nice to interact some more on this.

     Add karma Subtract karma  +0

    Posted 10 Feb 2005 at 6:02 pm
  3. Funky Dung wrote:

    I hope it doesn't sound like I think you're way off base. Like Sven, I somehow missed the 4-7 yr-olds bit. I also noticed that you hinted at some flack you'd gotten for your list. Consider this a flack-less response. I just saw things differently than what I thought you saw (because I missed the bit about target audience).

    I'd be happy to discuss this and any issue you like. :)

     Add karma Subtract karma  +0

    Posted 10 Feb 2005 at 6:23 pm

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *


Note: This post is over 3 years old. You may want to check later in this blog to see if there is new information relevant to your comment.

By submitting a comment here you grant this site a perpetual license to reproduce your words and name/web site in attribution.