I am saddened by the way that many professing believers present the gospel.  It usually falls into two categories: unclear or sloppy.  An example of the former is this, ‘I knew I was far from God and I needed him.’  While the latter sounds something like this, ‘God died for me.’  Both are true in a respect, but, they do not present the gospel. (Please refer back to my earlier posts on Greg Gilbert’s book What is the Gospel? for a clear explanation of the gospel).

Imagine my surprise when I realized that I was guilty of sloppiness in my articulation of the doctrine of the incarnation.  This morning I read this paragraph from D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones and was convicted of my lack of precision and the error that this can propagate.

But to me it seems always to be wise not to say that God became man.  That is a loose statement which we had better not use.  We often do say that, but believing as we do in the Persons of the Trinity, what we should say is that the second Person of the Trinity was made flesh and appeared as man.  If we merely say, ‘God became man’, then we may be saying something that is quite wrong, and if people believe something wrong as the result of our statement, we cannot really blame them. We must be particular and we must be specific and we should always be careful what we say…Jesus Christ has not been changed into a man; it is this eternal Person who has come in the flesh.  That is the right way to put it.

D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, God the Father, God the Son, 256-57.

The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.  We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

John 1:14