Reasonable Question #1 & 2

We get letters. I have received the first reasonable question today from a long-time reader, and it goes like this:
I'm re-reading your Jonah series, and I'm very confused. I don't know what it's about really. Are you saying that some people who disagree with you about the Francis Chan video are not delivering the Gospel, or are slack in evangelism?
The answer, in one word, is "no". I have said over and over in many different forums at this point that we cannot question the evangelism credentials of the men who are currently advancing opinions against the Francis Chan video. Not only is that frankly slanderous, but it is also not an argument: it's an accusation which doesn't do anything but polarize.

To be clear, the point of the Jonah series is, and was, to point out that God has enough love for all sinners to make a free offer of repentance to them. Whether we want to agree with that or not, the motive behind the call to repentance is the willingness to forgive -- and for the Calvinist, the reformed guy, the willingness to forgive is founded on the work of Christ.

Christ's work is done in love. That is a legitimate and theologically-sound view of the work of God in Christ -- and the Gospel offer is founded on that love. See: the standard texts we would go to in order to talk about evangelism, without a doubt, are about the penal aspects of substitionary atonement. And that method, without any question, is sound.

The question is if positioning the Gospel as an expression of God's love, and as an expression that man lacks something that only God can give, and God wants to give it to him, is a valid expression of the Gospel. My position is that the story of Jonah tells us that God wants to forgive out of steadfast love. You are welcome to disprove that, if you have that kind of time.

Another question:
I go to a church where the Gospel is barely preached at all, and they never mention sin. They never bring up repentance. They are more worried about having a smile on their faces at all times. I watched the Chan video and it reminded me of what's going on at my church, and it made me sad. I think it's the same kind of junk.
I sympathize with this person who is hungry for discipleship in the Gospel. I have been one of those. However, I think it is a mistake to translate a certain media smoothness with shallow theology.

The video makes some unfortunate mistakes, right? How many times does that have to be said? But the questions of whether men are sinful, and whether God will judge, and whether Christ has atoned, and whether God now offers, and whether man can accept, are all answered in this video. That's the Gospel. If it's not the whole narrative, the whole story, the Bible is over 2000 pages long in two columns and single-spaced type. You can't get the whole story in at one pass.

Thanks for asking reasonable questions.