What is the ‘Only’ Gospel?
Apr 4th, 2008 by Nathan White
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed. - Galatians 1
Have you ever meditated on the fact that there is ONE gospel, and only one gospel? A sobering thought for us all is that the scriptures teach that there is one gospel, and all deviations from that one gospel bring a curse.
Furthermore, if the narrowness of one gospel isn’t sobering enough, what are we to conclude about Paul’s warning to the Galatian church? Consider that it is possible:
- To embrace the scriptures as God’s word and yet hold to another gospel.
- To embrace the God revealed in scripture and yet hold to another gospel.
- To embrace Jesus Christ and yet hold to another gospel.
- To embrace the death of Christ for sins, and the bodily resurrection and ascension of Christ, and yet hold to another gospel.
- To embrace salvation by faith, at least in part, and yet hold to another gospel.
And the list goes on.
My friends, we live in a land where preachers spend too much time talking and not near enough time reading their bibles. For in doing so, they can confess all of the core doctrines listed above, and yet preach another, accursed, gospel message –a message not heretical or obviously in error, but a message that is a departure from the purity of the true gospel, and a message that is silently leading many astray.
Do you have the right gospel, indeed the only one? Does your pastor? Only the objective word of God can confirm or deny this. Go to the book! Listen not to the words of men and what they feel in their heart; let the Word of God settle the score.
Let us strive with all of our might to study and show ourselves approved. Let us, as Jude called for, ‘earnestly contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints’. So many call for us to lay down our swords when the core doctrines like mentioned above are agreed upon, but if we understand even a hint of the seriousness of the Holy Spirit writing through Paul in Galatians 1 above, we will strive with all of our might to defend and protect the one true gospel of Jesus Christ. For we know the serious consequences of even the slightest departure from it.
“Numbers of easy-minded people wink at error so long as it is committed by a clever man and a good-natured brother, who has so many fine points about him…Let each believer judge for himself; but for our part we have put on a few fresh bolts to our door, and we have given orders to keep the chain up; for under colour of begging the friendship of the servant, there are those about who aim at robbing THE MASTER.” - CH Spurgeon on the Down-Grade Controversy
Good thought, Nathan. I’m not trying to sound like a broken record, but the more I read the Scriptures, the more I see that CHRIST–His glory, His person, and His work– is THE Gospel, nothing more and nothing less. I know that sounds like an over simplification or generalization, but it really isn’t. Christ’s righteousness, holiness, justice, glory, exaltation, position, person, and works are the centerpiece of the gospel. Just like the message that you preached a few weeks ago–the person of Christ embodies the New Covenant.
So how does this flesh out practically in our lives? Well, any gospel that fails to utterly and completely emphasize the glory, person, and work of Christ, fails to be the biblical gospel. A preacher can sincerely and earnestly talk about faith, repentance, hell, heaven, peace, freedom from guilt, happiness, a “clean slate,” but all these things are crap if they are tightly woven into the fabric of Christ.
excuse, me…”if they AREN’T tightly woven…”
Davide,
I agree completely with your assessment. The problem with this, and I’m sure you’d agree, is when people re-define Jesus Christ according to their personal preferences and/or traditions. It seems as though everyone does believe that they put Christ as the centerpiece of the gospel –regardless of their methods and or doctrinal beliefs.
I guess the question is: how do we show people from the scriptures when Christ is clearly NOT the centerpiece of their gospel? It’s almost unchristian now days to call any ministry/method into question, and so I think this question is, at times, extremely tough to answer.
Nathan,
I think you are really on to something in this post. I really do ! After reading this post three times I really started to think about what Paul said to the Corinthian believers in 1 Cor 15 .
Let me be clear because I want to bring something up that will ” Raise some heads ” about the one true Gospel. I have a good friend who I love named Bill Lee of the Baptist Standard Bearer where I get my Gill books and Baptist books on the church. Bill is a primitive Baptist who pastors and has the book ministry. I don’t line up with him on all things but we have a love for many things that we agree on. Bill likes to ” Pin me down ” with this major thought on the Gospel in 1 Cor 15 : 2 . He really loves to get me stuck in this corner and in Ephesians 2:8-9.
He says if you notice verse 2 in 1 Cor 15 Paul says that the Corinthian believers were saved by this Gospel. So we all agree that there is only one Gospel that saves. Right ! Yes ! I have answered for us both. Bill truly believes that the five points is the clearest Gospel presentation . He points out that verse 3 in 1 Cor 15 says that Paul is admitting Particular atonement by paying attention to the pronoun ” Our ” .So if Christ died for ” Our ” sins then He could have only been raised for ” Our ” sins which I believe. In otherwords Bill believes that many people today heard an ” Arminian gospel ” which does not save because they didn’t hear the truths of the five points as he puts it which would mean that you and I and many others are not saved because we heard a false gospel and therfore we are not baptized either. I go round and round with him on this but we love each other . He likes to say ” Scott do you believe that Jesus and Paul taught Particular atonement and my answer is yes. Then he says that anyman who teaches that Christ died for all is not preaching the gospel. Is it wrong to say that Christ died for all men and we know the answer to that: YES !
Ephesians 2:8-9 teaches that ” It is not of yourselves” so whoever has not heard this emphasized has not heard the true gospel according to Bill’s view. The gospel is narrow we have no authority to widen it in its meaning as he says. Bill loves to say when depravity is not hammered then Grace is not taught therefore you have no Gospel message.
WHAT SAY YOU ?????
Nathan, I just recently found your blog while looking for responses to Richard Lee’s “Apology”. Scott Morgan knows me and I think you and I may have met somewhere. As Scott knows, my comments are coming from the perspective of a layman with no real theological training.
In answer to Scott’s question, I think it is getting more difficult to find many true converts from today’s preaching. As the “gospel” becomes more about the affirmation of man’s value than God’s glory, we get people “coming to Christ” because they feel God makes much of them, and isn’t that exactly what the sin nature wants? But, as John Piper once said, “When a king dies for his subjects it says more about the king than it does the subjects.”
I shutter at the thought of this now, but when I was younger I once had this thought cross my mind: “Did Christ HAVE to die for me? I mean, if I have such value because I’m created in God’s image, wouldn’t it have been unholy for Him not to die for me?”
Wow. Talk about taking amazing right out of grace. In fact, it’s no longer grace but now God’s “responsibility”. But isn’t that the logical end to the man centered “gospel”?
Having said all of that, I’m wondering if there are any examples in scripture where converts have been made after a gospel presentation that clearly articulated the whole truth of the 5 points? I can’t seem to think of any. It seems to me that if a sinner hears of his awful state before God and understands that he needs to repent and believe, and does so, this is enough. Even if the gospel presentation isn’t quite accurate, could it be that the Holy Spirit only impresses what is truth on the hearts of the elect and the rest falls on deaf ears?
Scott,
From what it sounds like to me, and I could be wrong, but I detest the hyper-calvinism in the questions you asked. You may love others who hold to these doctrines, but let me warn you that they may be preaching no gospel at all. Let me be brief:
-A person can be saved by sitting under an Arminian gospel, a Roman Catholic gospel, or even a completely pure gospel. Why? Because “It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh is no help at all.” God works through His word; not simply through how it is explained by sinful men.
-There is a difference between an intentional error and an inconsistent or ignorant error. You have noticed that true believers pray like Calvinists even if they profess to be Arminians. Again, salvation is not of works, but is granted by the Spirit. Actions speak louder than words. When someone starts praying like an open theist, then maybe you can question whether they have embraced the lie.
- Bill makes an excellent point below when he mentions that we don’t see any conversions in scripture where the 5 points are mentioned. So would you care to rephrase your question using the thief on the cross as a guide to what kind of knowledge is necessary for salvation?
-Paul and the Apostles had no trouble proclaiming that Christ died for all men, and for the sins of the world. Yes, they expounded on that in other places and detailed the extent of the atonement, but they never qualified these broad statements with the narrow ones. They were content with the general proclamation.
Personally, I think your friend needs to spend a little more time trusting God’s sovereignty to save, rather than trusting in his own gospel presentation and the knowledge he hopes comes from it. Salvation is not of works. So stand up with John and say “Behold the lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!” –that in itself enough for the Spirit to grant life.
Bill–
Excellent comments. To add to your words: I believe the Spirit gives life through His word –not simply through His word being explained. That is, when a man of God gets up to speak, his duty is to rightly divide the word of truth. God, through the word being read and divided, then works faith and repentance in the heart. Of course, we want to strive to be as biblically accurate as possible in our preaching, but lets face it, no sermon is absolutely perfect. God works through the WORD that is read –and He loves to draw straight lines with crooked sticks.
Nathan,
Easy brother ! Easy ! First, I’m not a hypercalvinist !!!! Second, I think you missed my point to you by asking: What say you? I was looking to converse about what Bill has said before with you. I also detest hypercalvinism but I do have love for my brother and we have lovingly argued many times over this issue.
I do agree with your points however, when I share the Gospel I do clearly say who Christ died for: His people(Matthew 1:21). I also tell people who Christ was raised for: His people. I do agree with my friend Bill that depravity needs to be hammered to people which we don’t seem to emphasize today in many pulpits are one on one Gospel presentations. 1 Cor 15 clearly states that the Corinthians stand and are saved by the Gospel that Paul preached to them. So, I try and teach what Paul taught and tell people what Christ said ” I lay down my life for the sheep”. I use the language that Christ and Paul modeled for us when presenting the Gospel. I agree with Bill that there is not an example in Scripture in one place where you see the five points taught in a gospel presentation but you see them taught through out and I believe as Spurgeon taught : Calvinism is the Gospel( In its best presentation) because it deals with depravity of the human heart, sin, grace, atonement, and the power of God . Because it deals with atonement then that leads us to talk about His resurrection and His return.
Sorry if I was too rough, Scott, I guess I didn’t understand you properly.
It sounded as if you were asking whether it was even possible to get saved when the 5 points aren’t clearly emphasized.
I agree with this statement you made:
JC Ryle said it best: without a right understanding of sin, there is no true salvation.
And yes, I certainly agree that the Corinthians were saved by ONE gospel, the gospel that Jesus taught, the gospel that Paul taught, and the gospel that the Apostles taught. Even today, men are saved by ONE gospel and ONE gospel alone. But this one gospel is found in the Word of God; that is where it derives its power. So even though man may mess up their presentation of it (and correctness of it), the power lies in the Word, and the Word saves.
Next, in regards to the atonement, I don’t think our emphasis/concern should be in communicating its limited aspect, as much as we should respond to erroneous views of its general aspect. That is, when giving the gospel, I don’t think we should necessarily preach limited atonement, as opposed to correcting erroneous views on the atonement as they come up.
Nathan,
No problem ! Here is something to think about. Why is the Gospel of Christ good news ? Is it because He will save a people ? Is not His atonement most glorious because it accomplishes something ? In otherwords I find myself telling people who need Christ that they need Christ and I use this Scriptural language ” Christ died for sinners “. Some calvinist such as myself is often quick to correct people when we actually use the language of Scripture but I still find myself when presenting the Gospel to tell people why Christ came and that was to glorify God by saving those whom the Father chose to save . I think you need to keep this conversation going on this post. This is something we need to really think about. Great post ! Last thought : Do you believe when we see in the Scripture that Christ died for sinners that the writer believes that Christ laid His life down for the sheep ? This is something I would love to converse with you and others on. How necessary is it for us to tell unconverted people about Particular atonement when presenting the Gospel when you and I know that Christ, Paul, and the apostles believed this ?
Scott,
I believe the writers of scripture were just like us in that they didn’t know *who exactly* Christ died for. And for all we know, Christ could have died for everyone living at this present time and forward. The point is this: We proclaim that He offers forgiveness through His blood, and that offer is extended to all men, because we do not know who He really died for.
Nevertheless, I’m not convinced that Christ’s death has absolutely no effect on the unregenerate. The defeat and binding of Satan, the wrath of the Father appeased for a time, I believe, extend benefits to all men. So we can say that Christ died for all men and stop well short of saying that Christ paid for the sins of all men. You understand?
I don’t know if I totally agree with you Nathan on your last comment. I wouldn’t tell unbelievers that Christ died for all men, just because our present day-cultural-lingual usage of the phrase ‘all men’ has drastically changed over the centuries.
I typically tell unbelievers something like this: “Christ died for everyone who believes in the gospel,” or “The salvation that is found in the cross of Christ is only for those who believe…” etc.
Davide,
You and I use the same language. I told Nathan that this is one of his best post and I would love to converse with others on what you brought up. I appreciate Nathan touching on things that some people don’t want to touch because it could cause some people to not want to communicate anymore. This is one of the better blogs out in the blogworld in my opinion because Nathan touches on things that can aggravate some but we need to discuss these things.
I don’t think that it is a
reality Nate. But, as you said, in the crucifixion there is a binding of sorts that happens. We recently had this conversation at the PCA church that I am attending. There is a reality that we see in the world. Since Calvary, history has changed. The extent and influence of the Gospel has in a sense beaten back the boundaries of the enemies stronghold. In that sense then the enemie has been bound. We tend not to see, at least immediately around us, the kinds of things to which Jesus was accustomed. On the other hand, we are not present everywhere so do not have a real grasp on the unseen battle. Yet, where ever the Gospel has gone it has brought a remarkable change societally, I think everyone would agree. The external application of the Gospel’s effect are widely noted. But, it is not the mediatorial work of Christ through which this benefit comes. It is only the overflow of the abundance of life which is the result of that mediation. Christ is a mediator only for those who have been saved through that Gospel that now goes to all men.
This is another aspect of the “binding”. That is, the Gospel was before restricted in its reach by the national covenant with Israel. With the establishment of Isaiah 42:6 through the great commission it now is to both Jew and Gentile, and not just Judea and the Semitics, but to the uttermost parts of the Earth. The going forth of the Gospel is like a man who lights a light and sets it on the table and all in the house benefit from its light. Or, a man who fuels a camp fire and all in the camp can benefit from its warmth. But the light of the lamp or the warmth of the fire that benfits all is the overflow of the benefit of the one who has lighted them.
The Mediatorial Role of Christ is such that its true everlasting benefit belongs only to those who are in him by the new birth as a granted heritage of the convenant between the Father and the Son. Of this overflow of the benefit Jesus said,
That Judas did indeed share the cup and the bread cannot be denied. But, what benefit was there to this benefit?
John 3:16 states it very well.
So, davide is correct. The free offer of the Gospel goes out to the world that is in darkness and wherever this Gospel goes so does that light. It is such that the unbelieving world now has light but not within themselves:
Now, we have been given as sheep sent to slaughter, and the world is made rich with the fat of lambs. But, the fat belongs to the lambs.
The Gospel the has this effect, though the truth is made available unrighteous men suppress that truth in unrighteousness. For what can be known is made known to them and though they are offered the cup and the bread it does not have the same effective benefit in all. While the fire warms for a while, though the belly is filled for a time, the unbeliever comes to it as one whose desire cannot be satisfied. But the benefit for the believer is that out of them proceeds the benefit, John 7:38; Jeremiah 17:13, for it is in them, not as consumers, but as bearers of the baskets of bread sent from him whose name means the keeper of the bread; Lord.