All Things Seen & Unseen

Christians tend not to reflect on the significance of the New Testament scriptures that deal directly with the issue of the 'land of promise'. Moreover, we tend not to think about the nature of the NT's way of dealing with such 'land' issues. John 4 One reference I find highly instructive comes from John's gospel account where, in a well-known example, Jesus a Jew talks with a Samaritan woman at Jacob's well. Jesus progressively reveals himself to her until he describes himself as the Giver of 'life-giving' water (Jn 4.14). But he later provokes her even more when he undercuts both Jewish and Samaritan worship ideas (Jn 4.21-24).  'Neither in this mountain [Gerazim] nor in Jerusalem' is worship to be conducted (Jn 4.21) in the future. Jesus knows that with his death something fundamental is going to change re the temple sacrifices; he also knows that the Romans are going to destroy Jerusalem in AD68-70 (Matt 23.37-39) and finally again in AD...

Of course, I'm wondering with all this whether Scott McKnight has got it right. Certainly a few others think the same way. See here and here for examples.  Not to say that McKnight isn't a writer to be read and listened to. I think he says some valuable things which the evangelical churches and mainline churches need to hear. But just a few points that I noticed that I would need more detail about are: His distinction between gospel and salvation I'm not sure that this distinction can be so easily sustained. I appreciate what McKnight is wanting to say: the message of the gospel is not the same as its effects (salvation); gospel doesn't equal salvation because God is more concerned about gospel than salvation it seems. For a theologian who is a theoretician by training distinctions are always important. However, when one gets into church ministry settings I wonder whether such issues have much moment.