How Can "Jesus is Lord" Be Bad News?
One thing I’ve found very strange in the Reformed circles is the notion that “Jesus is Lord” cannot be the gospel, or even part of the gospel, because the lordship of Jesus is bad news for sinners.
N.T. Wright has championed the notion that the gospel is about the lordship of Jesus so that the gospel implies that Jesus is Lord and, therefore, Caesar is not!
I am a cynical soul, so I wonder if this is just typical knee-jerk anti-Tom Wright-ism.
I often joke that if Wright ever wrote a book on the Trinity that some American evangelical group would immediately hold a conference on “Why the Reformed Faith is Unitarian and Always Has Been” as a direct response!
N.T. Wright defines the gospel like this:
The gospel is the royal announcement that the crucified and risen Jesus, who died for our sins and rose again according to the Scriptures, has been enthroned as the true Lord of the world. When this gospel is preached, God calls people to salvation, out of sheer grace, leading them to repentance and faith in Jesus Christ as the risen Lord.
I like that definition a lot. I might massage it a bit or expand it, but it is biblical, and it works. However, various people, including John Piper and others, have strenuously objected to such a definition on the grounds that the lordship of Jesus is bad news.
I might be wrong here, but I think that is because they associate Jesus’ lordship and kingship with justice and judgment, which admittedly does not bode well for sinners in the hands of a holy God.
To speak up for “Jesus as Lord” being part of the gospel in a good way, let me explain two things to you!