Another Gospel
W. Carl Ketcherside
[Page 188] |
Recently, while driving home at night I was listening to one of the brethren on my car radio. His theme was based upon Paul's concern for the Galatians who had so quickly turned away from the one who called them by grace, unto a different gospel. The brother labeled every concept which differed with the unwritten creed of his particular brand of Church of Christism as "another gospel." It was apparent that the faction to which he belonged constituted the only group left on this planet who had not perverted the gospel.
In a distant state where I was conducting an open forum three men showed up recently to try and create a little havoc. They accused everyone else who was present for the occasion of preaching another gospel. Those who used instrumental music in conjunction with their public expressions of praise were preaching another gospel. Those who interpreted Revelation 20 to imply that Jesus would return before the millennium were preaching another gospel. Those who testified that they had received some special gift of the Spirit were preaching another gospel.
I am getting quite used to that. When I was in California not too long ago a good old soul came to see me and plead with me to use my influence to rescue those who used individual containers in conjunction with the Lord's Supper from thereby advocating another gospel. I have a letter here now from a brother in Oklahoma affirming that I aught to come out from among those who have Sunday Schools, and touch not the unclean thing, because the Sunday School is another gospel.
All of these brethren, regardless of their sincerity, demonstrate a special kind of ignorance not exhibited in any other part of the religious realm known to me. They are ignorant of the nature and content of the gospel of Christ. They are ignorant of the situation in Galatia to which Paul addressed himself, and they are ignorant of what he meant by the term "another gospel." When I use the term ignorant I am not trying to be especially critical or recriminatory. I state it merely as a fact, in passing.
The gospel is good news. The good news announced to the Galatians by the apostle was that "the blessing of Abraham should in Christ Jesus be extended to the Gentiles, so that we might receive the promised Spirit through faith" (3:14). It was this which delivered them from the written code of the law and set them free from the galling yoke of slavery. When Paul speaks of "the truth of the gospel" in this letter he is not referring to the veracity or integrity of the message. The truth means the basic, elemental, foundational principle upon which the gospel is predicated. It is the core, the center, the kernel of the gospel. It is what makes the message gospel. The context shows that the truth of the gospel is justification by faith.
Justification, as Paul uses the term, is not by faith and something else. It is by faith in Christ and nothing else! But there were "sham-Christians, interlopers
[Page 189] |
The gospel is a definitive message. It is the good news of what God has done in reconciling and redeeming us, proclaimed to an alien world to bring men into a rich relationship with God through the Spirit. Certainly the Galatian letter was not part of the gospel message. By the time it was written the Galatians had already accepted the gospel and turned from it. They had received the Spirit by believing the gospel message (3:2). The letter was written not to bring them into relationship with the Spirit but to encourage them to continue to walk in the Spirit "If the Spirit is the source of our life, let the Spirit also direct our course" (5:25). Acceptance of the gospel brings the Spirit as God's gift to dwell in our bodies, guidance by epistles such as the letter to the Galatians enables the Spirit to direct our course.
Being circumcised was of no consequence, and not being circumcised was of no consequence. "Circumcision is nothing; uncircumcision is nothing; the only thing that counts is new creation" (6:15). That is not all that counts with a lot of brethren. With some being a new creation doesn't count at all. The question is not "What think you of Christ?" but how do you stand on Pat Boone? One did not hold another gospel merely because he was circumcised. He advocated another gospel only when he affirmed that circumcision was necessary for justification, that is, to assume a right relationship with God. "Now certain persons who had come down from Judea began to teach the brotherhood that those who were not circumcised in accordance with Mosaic practice could not be saved" (Acts 15:1). That was another gospel. It predicated salvation upon another principle than absolute trust in Jesus Christ.
One can be mistaken about a lot of things without perverting the gospel. Faulty understanding of some point of doctrine, a warped view of interpretation of an apostolic passage--these in no sense constitute another gospel. One does not preach another gospel by expressing an opinion in favor of the use of instrumental music unless he hinges salvation or justification upon its use. The same thing holds true for an opinion relative to charismatic gifts or the millennium. Whatever view you hold about cups, classes, or colleges, has nothing to do with the gospel. Those who are not free in Christ to make mistakes are not free at all.
Men upon both sides of all these issues we have mentioned have obeyed the same gospel. They all proclaim the same gospel. To accuse one of advocating another gospel because he disagrees with your position upon one of these items, or all of them, speaks much more forcibly about your ignorance than about his. The one who is in danger of projecting another gospel is the one who makes fellowship dependent, not upon our relationship to God through the Spirit, but upon agreement with his faction upon some point of theological deduction. The gospel of "an anti-instrument position" as the hope of righteousness is as dangerous as a gospel of circumcision for the same reason.
We have all kinds of modern "circumcision parties" which say, "Except ye do this" or "Except ye do that" you cannot be saved. It is the binding of such exceptions which creates a perverted gospel. My position was best enunciated by a former president of Harding College. "I am resolved to make nothing a test of fellowship which God has not made a condition of salvation." I want to be with all who are saved, and I expect to be. I care not one thing for any partisan flag waving over an exclusivistic rampart. My hope is in Christ Jesus. I began in
[Page 190] |
Many of my brothers in the Lord Jesus are mistaken in some of their deductions and opinions. They obviously feel that I am also. But we are not proclaiming another gospel. We proclaim faith in Christ Jesus who is the power of God and the wisdom of God. It is time that we all outgrew our petty childishness based upon traditions received from our fathers. The world has no place for bickering sects and fighting factions. It is time to close ranks and get on with the real job for which the new creation was created!