There is much to be commended in James Choung’s True Story. Caleb (the young man in the narrative) asks important questions that we would do well to consider.
“What if we don’t have the right gospel? I mean, the complete picture,” he asks his youth pastor. Is the gospel only about being saved from something? What are saved for? (45)
These good questions deserve biblical answers. Choung’s “Caleb” is not the only young person asking these questions, and the pastor in the book is not the only church leader that has so simplified the gospel that he has little to offer in response.
I appreciate the emphasis that Choung places on worldview issues. One of the strong points of True Story is that Choung does not assume that the unsaved have a Christian framework. Whereas previous gospel presentations focused on the Christian message for a nominally religious, loosely Christian society (i.e. “God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life), Choung rightly sees that such presentations are no longer as effective when the very identity of “God” is up for grabs!
The emphasis on worldview leads Choung into some good apologetics. When Caleb is conversing with Anna about sinfulness and selfishness, he does so by pointing out the inconsistency of her plea for “justice” in certain areas, while wanting to hold on to a relativistic framework (83). Yet Choung very clearly stresses how important it is for Caleb to remain humble even as he picks apart his friend’s flawed worldview (85).
Choung rightfully insists on the authority and trustworthiness of Scripture. Over and over again, the book’s protagonist goes back to “the sources” (52). When Anna argues against the Bible’s trustworthiness, Choung helpfully responds to the postmodern objection by showing how everything we know about the past is based on trust (53-54).
But Choung does not merely argue for the Bible’s historical trustworthiness; he rightly relies on the Bible’s content. He takes us back to Jesus’ definition of the gospel (124-125). He seeks to recapture the gospel within the framework of the Bible’s meta-narrative (199).
The most helpful aspect of Choung’s new presentation of the gospel is its starting point. Instead of beginning with “something is wrong with you,” Choung begins with the fact that “something is wrong with the world.” (55-56) This truth often served as the opening declaration of many a Billy Graham sermon. C.S. Lewis famously argued that if we sense that something is wrong, it must be true that we were made for something right – a different world, a world of Shalom (58). By beginning with the cosmic picture of a world gone bad, Choung is able to foreshadow the gospel that ends with a world renewed (139).
Choung’s treatment of sin has many problems (which I will address tomorrow), but the one helpful aspect of his proposal is that he sees sin at multiple levels. He avoids the trap of many conservatives, who see sin only at the individual level. And yet he also avoids the trap of liberals who tend to see sin as merely systemic. Choung helpfully navigates through the fundamentalist-liberal impasse by showing how sin manifests itself at multiple levels (106). He also states very clearly that people are slaves to sin (107).
Choung does well to emphasize an inaugurated eschatology – the idea that the Kingdom of God is already present, but not yet in its fullness (130-131). We live in the time between the times, as if we were in the middle of a construction project. The future is assured and has already begun, and yet we are still awaiting its fulfillment (151). Most gospel presentations skip over the kingdom completely. Choung helpfully restores this aspect to his gospel presentation.
Choung defines faith as trust, like walking on someone’s back (136). Faith is not merely head knowledge or mental assent. The gospel includes a call to transformation in the present, in which faith works itself out in a changed life (196). For all his many questions, the protagonist (Caleb) clings desperately to the traditional understanding of the gospel of grace and forgiveness of sins (31).
Choung is also right to point out the missional outlook that accompanies the call to salvation. After all, Jesus gives people a mission right after he calls them (“fishers of men,” for example) (160-162), so that salvation has a decidedly missional direction (198). We are not saved in order to only receive God’s blessing, but in order to spread God’s blessing.
Choung also emphasizes the Church. Christian faith is expressed in community. Accountability and service through the local church is not an option (197). Many gospel presentations fall short at this point. Choung’s doesn’t.
As you can see, Choung’s presentation has many commendable aspects. I hope that readers will incorporate some of the above emphases into their own presentations of the gospel. Choung puts his finger on many of the weak spots in traditional gospel presentations. He is right to seek to capture more fully the biblical portrait, and yet, as we will see tomorrow, I believe his missteps actually make his gospel presentation less complete than the traditional presentations he is critiquing. We’ll take a look at the negative aspects of Choung’s True Story tomorrow.
