Getting the Gospel Right

Ligonier.org ^ | January 1st, 2009 | Tom Ascol

[Gamecock]

Sometimes, what is not said speaks more loudly than actual words. The silence, as we say, is deafening. In the opening verses of his letter to the churches of Galatia, the apostle Paul employs this communication technique to underscore the seriousness of the subject at hand. As he does in all of his letters, Paul begins by identifying himself as the author, naming the intended recipients, and pronouncing a blessing on them (1:1–5).

It is what comes next that is so uncharacteristic for him. Immediately after his introductory comments, and before launching into the body of the letter, Paul writes…nothing. He offers no expression of gratitude to God for them or words of encouragement about their spiritual vitality.

When compared to his other warm greetings (for example, Rom. 1:8; 1 Cor. 1:1–5; Eph. 1:15–23; Phil. 1:3–11), what Paul does not say to the Galatians speaks volumes.

He leaves no doubt about the seriousness and urgency of the topic of his letter. His burden is to explain and defend the true gospel of God’s grace. He launches into the subject early and writes with a fiery tone, employing sarcasm, threats, warnings, and rebukes to get his points across.

Like a soldier rushing into battle with guns blazing, Paul immediately begins contending for the truth of the gospel. His purpose is not simply to win a theological argument. Rather, he is determined to fight for the spiritual lives of the Galatian believers.

Getting the gospel right is crucial. It is a matter of spiritual life and death. If you miss this, it does not matter what you get because you will miss God.

Paul understands this and therefore strongly refutes the false teaching of those who have begun to undermine the Galatians’ confidence in the simple gospel that he had preached to them.

That message is all about the finished work of Jesus Christ “who gave himself for our sins to deliver us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father” (Gal. 1:4). The gospel that Paul preached to them proclaimed salvation by grace alone received through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone.

This message is great news for sinners because it reveals that salvation, from first to last, is God’s work and not dependent on anything in us. It eliminates any basis for pride as well as any cause to despair. Those whom God saves are made right with Him not because of anything they have done or not done, but because they have been “called…in the grace of Christ” (v. 6).

On the one hand, the worst of people are genuine candidates for salvation because the only way that God saves is by grace. On the other hand, if the most respectable people are to be saved, it will not be because of any goodness in them but, again, only by the grace of God.

No wonder Paul was “astonished” to learn that the Galatians were so quickly and easily being led away from the gospel of God’s grace (v. 6). The false teachers insisted that trusting Christ was not enough — to be right with God, a person must also keep certain Old Testament ceremonies. But adding to the gospel is just as disastrous as subtracting from it. Both “distort the gospel of Christ” (v. 7).

Any change in the message of Jesus Christ turns it into “a different gospel” (v. 6) that keeps people from knowing God. This is why Paul writes with such passion, warning the Galatians never to tolerate anyone — not even an apostle or an angel — who would dare to preach as the gospel any other message than salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ alone, plus nothing.

Twice Paul says that any creature who distorts the gospel should be “accursed.” He literally pronounces “anathema” on such a person (v. 9). Those who spread false gospels are worthy of God’s damnation.

Paul intends that his use of such strong language should have a sobering affect on us. Misrepresenting the gospel is serious business. Those who believe false gospels will wind up in hell. Those who teach false gospels deserve nothing less.

The churches of Galatia were very young when Paul sent them this letter. Yet, he expected that they — all of the members and not just the leaders — would be doctrinally alert enough to discern the true gospel from counterfeits.

This is the responsibility of every Christian. Like sheep who will follow only the voice of their shepherd, we must learn to recognize the simplicity and fullness of the gospel of Jesus Christ and refuse to tolerate any teaching that deviates from it.

Our very lives depend on it.

[CynicalBear]

>>I haven't noticed any contradictions yet.<<

Nor have I. There are no contradictions in the New Testament.

[CynicalBear]

Wow! I would surely like to hear which parts he thinks are not “directed by the Holy Spirit”. That’s one slippery slope.

[ravenwolf]

>>I haven’t noticed any contradictions yet.<<

---

Many people who just use the Bible to support their religion don`t pay a lot of attention to anything unless it backs up their belief.

[ravenwolf]

Wow! I would surely like to hear which parts he thinks are not “directed by the Holy Spirit”. That’s one slippery slope.

---

would you admit it if some one showed you?

[Elsie]

duh

[Elsie]

you could try...

[CynicalBear]

>>would you admit it if some one showed you?<<

Go for it. Give it your best shot.

[.45 Long Colt]

I’m not making it personal. I was merely trying to clarify your perspective to get some idea of what you might believe or might have been taught. I readily admit I’m Southern Baptist. More particularly I’m a traditional Baptist in the mold of Charles Spurgeon or John Bunyan or John Gill or William Carey or James Petigru Boyce. I’m a modern Baptist who believes in the Doctrines of Grace like Al Mohler, James White, John Piper, John MacArthur and Paul Washer. I grew up in Tennessee, mostly under the ministry of Dr. Adrian Rogers, and I have a degree from a Southern Baptist University. I come from a long line of Baptist preachers, professors, Sunday School teachers, missionaries, and deacons. One wing of my family was made up of faithful conservative Presbyterians and they influenced me as well. I hold the Bible to be inerrant, infallible and authoritative. That’s who I am and that is my perspective.

It sure seems that Peter considered Paul’s letters Scripture.

“And count the patience of our Lord as salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, as he does in all his letters when he speaks in them of these matters. There are some things in them that are hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other Scriptures.” (2 Peter 3:15-16)

It’s hard to say exactly what Paul believed about his writings. However, he certainly seemed to recognize his authority.

“I do not write these things to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel. I urge you, then, be imitators of me.” (1 Corinthians 4:14-16”

“Be imitators of me, as I am of Christ.” (1 Corinthians 11:1)

In 1 Corinthians 2:9-10 we find that Paul claimed spiritual authority by means of the Holy Spirit.

9 But as it is written, “Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.”

10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.”

I wasn’t trying to beat up on you, but your comment conveyed a dangerous attitude toward the Scriptures. As I explained, I’m a Southern Baptist. I was born in the 60’s and was saved in the mid-70’s. During that era, Southern Baptists were fighting over the Bible and my pastor was a leading figure in the fight on the conservative side. I had seminary professors in my family who were leading the fight on the opposite side. So you might say I had a front row seat to what has been called “The Battle for the Bible.” Some held my high view of Scripture, while others merely believed the Bible contained the word of God and it was up to you to find it. Eventually my denomination split, largely over this issue. My own family split to some degree, too. While I was always a conservative, I had friends, family, and professors on the liberal side. I have watched people I know well slowly drift away from the Christian faith altogether. Time and again their slide started with compromise on the authority of the Bible—the whole Bible. Some left their longtime Baptist churches and joined mainline Protestant denominations and others went the way of Rome.

Now that I’m older I look back and recognize that fight over the Bible, and the fallout from that fight, was one of the defining events in my life. It set the course of my life and by extension my children’s lives. So this isn’t a small matter at all.

I say with Christ, “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.” (John 17:17)

[delchiante]

When did good Friday and easter Sunday, the days in Rome’s gospel message, replace Passover and Feast of First Fruits in the ‘according to scripture’ gospel message Paul preached?

Paul’s gives us the plain gospel in 1 Corinthians 15 and instead of scripture, Rome has changed the date the Savior died and the day He was raised ...

And Christendom, not just catholics, worships from Rome’s story, not according to scripture..

Maybe it is also interesting we can see Paul telling the Corinthians to keep the Feast (Passover) in the same letter while Rome has substituted the biblical days for their own.

fascinating that Christendom today actually follows Rome’s version of the gospel and don’t even realize they are following a ‘different gospel’ than Paul preached.

Now, maybe we can understand a little more why Rome’s December 25, good Friday and easter Sunday are the holy days in christendom and not the biblical holy days the Savior fulfilled literally and spiritually..

Maybe why Paul spoke of Passover Lamb and First Fruits in the same letter he stated the plain gospel. Two feasts replaced in Christendom today for good Friday and easter Sunday..a subtle change but a change..

According to scripture or according to Rome..

Considering most of Israel had Passover on a pope Gregory Monday this year would make easter ‘Sunday’ a pope Gregory Wednesday this year..

Paul’s gospel according to scripture would mess up Rome’s liturgical and the pope gregory-gregorian world calendar..and expose them for the counterfeits they are..

The Messiah did die for our sins... on Passover.. as the Lamb... according to scripture.
Vs.
The Savior did die for our sins.... on Good Friday... according to Rome..

The Messiah was buried, and He rose again, the third day... on Feast of First Fruits. As First Fruits.. according to scripture.
Vs.
The Savior was buried, and He rose again, the third day... on Easter Sunday... according to Rome....

Maybe the enemy is that subtle...and Rome is exactly the vessel the first reformers thought she and her papacy was..

I readily admit I followed Rome’s version... but He led me away from it without me even knowing He was leading me away from it..

Today could be called Saturn’s day according to Rome or His 4th day according to His Word. I chose His way..

It is an eye opening experience but one that cannot be seen without His help..

[ravenwolf]

Go for it. Give it your best shot.

---

I doubt if I need to give it the best shot, just a few facts.

11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.

12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.

13 And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.

14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?

There, was Peter always led by the holy spirit? or did the Holy spirit want him to sin?

Mathew 18
15“If your brother or sister sins, go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. 16 But if they will not listen, take one or two others along,

Was Paul sinless?

We are not to advertise it to the world, which is what Paul did.

The holy spirit does not cause that kind of confusion.

So do you believe what Jesus said, that if some one sins you should go to that person alone or do you believe that Jesus was wrong?

Do you believe that you should do as Paul said he did which is tell the whole congregation?

For before that certain came from James, you can see that Paul was also blaming James.

There were contentions among the apostles and if you have to close your minds to that in order to believe Jesus is lord then I would suggest your faith is in Paul or peter instead of Jesus.

I believe it would be an under statement to say there are contentions in the Church to day, and for that reason I pointed out that Christians should read the gospels.

[CynicalBear]

>>There, was Peter always led by the holy spirit? or did the Holy spirit want him to sin?<<

Dude! Here's your original statement.

>>"But no, I am not convinced every thing they wrote in the epistles was directed by the holy spirit".<<

Now you come with some lame comment about what they did? What Paul wrote was a condemnation of what Peter did. There is no contradiction in what they wrote.

Nothing in your post shows that what they wrote contradicts anything else that they wrote.

[thirst4truth]

This is a great teaching. We have over 33,000 denominations in our world today all teaching "Christ and him crucified."

Why do these churches have Christ dead on the cross at the front of their churches? He is risen, that is the glory of it, why do they continue to depict our risen savior dead on the cross? Because they cannot get beyond Christ and his crucifixion, its the resurrection that causes our salvation.

These are very telling verses, what is Paul teaching?

Gal 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. Gal 1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

He was teaching grace, not works. But our churches today are still "working it out", you cannot be good enough for salvation, the last human that was good enough, got up and got out of here a long time ago.

[thirst4truth]

The four gospels save John are written for the Jews, it is about Jesus coming for them and they rejecting him. Paul's 7 epistles are about a change in dispensation (administration) beginning after Acts 28, read Acts 28 something changed.

Salvation was given to the gentiles when the Jews rejected their savior. The gospels are awesome about Christ's life and the Jews reaction to him, but the church epistles are written for us today. I like to call them "Truth for Today".

[ravenwolf]

Now you come with some lame comment about what they did?

---

No, I showed you by their own words what they did, if you want to close you mind to what you would call Gods own words then it is your choice.

Just go ahead and ignore the fact that the apostles did have contentions and that we have to go to what Jesus said to understand.

There is no contradiction in what they wrote.>>>>>>>>>

Technicalities Huh?

Paul did what Jesus said not to do.

[ravenwolf]

I believe what Jesus said was written for those who were there then and for us today.

[Springfield Reformer]

There, was Peter always led by the holy spirit? or did the Holy spirit want him to sin?

The question presented is whether the Bible contains contradictions in its written teachings, just as CB has stated.  The fact that Peter sinned not only does not contradict the Bible; it confirms one of its most fuundamental teachings, that every one is a sinner, and will remain imperfect and in a struggle with sin until the resurrection.  The fact that Holy Spirit will lead us does not mean we will always follow His leadings perfectly.  That's one of the main reasons God wants us to be in fellowship with each other, for accountability, which is one of the most important ways we have to grow in brotherly love.

As for this:

Matthew 18:15  Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.

... your objection is unfounded.  Peter's offense was against the entire fellowship, a public sin. The Matthew 18 protocol is for individual offenses, "against thee."  Which is in perfect keeping with the equity of love the protocol protects.  Why do you suppose we are supposed to address these private offenses privately?  To protect each other from making things far worse, public accusations of wrongdoing that may be unfounded, or otherwise would be gladly resolved in a spirit of love, but if taken public right away will harden the parties into warring camps.

But a public offense is not like this.  The damage is already well publicized, and just like public defamation, the remedy must also be public in nature. It is basic equity that the parties harmed by the initial offense are those who deserve the redress and resolution.  Paul was well within that godly principle in what he did.  And which only goes to highlight that this was not only good for the fellowship, but good for Peter.  Love does not remain silent in the face of wrongdoing. Peter needed Paul just as we all need each other in the body of Christ.  Accountability is a good thing.

On a technical note, I see your translation is the NIV, which is based on the Nestle Aland text, which omits the "against thee" phrase.  This is one of the reasons to go with the Byzantine text tradition that underlies the KJV, the NKJV, and other translations.  The Sinaiticus and Vaticanus texts (Alexandrian family) have always been problematic, and were nowhere close to being the dominant textform used by Christians throughout the last two millenia. Only in modern times did a handful of German higher critics convince some modern translators to abandon the Byzantine in favor of these out-of-the-mainstream textforms.  The passage above makes a good demonstration of the sort of problem they introduce, in which one can deduce even from principles of natural equity that a private sin merits a private initial effort at reconciliation. 

So you're off to a very weak start if your effort is to show a discrepancy between Jesus and His apostles.  But you should be careful here, because if you discredit the one, you discredit the other, no matter which one you start with.  If the apostles cannot be trusted in their teaching of divine truth, then Jesus cannot be trusted, because they are His appointees. But if Jesus can be trusted, then His apostles can also be trusted, because the assurance of apostolic truth has its foundation in Jesus' own righteousness and power, not in the foibles of the fallible men through whom He chose to give us His word.

Peace,

SR

[Gamecock]

But our churches today are still "working it out"

Our?

Speak for yourself. ;-)

[ravenwolf]

The fact that Peter sinned not only does not contradict the Bible; it confirms one of its most fuundamental teachings, that every one is a sinner,
-——————————————————————————Then you are admitting that Peter was wrong but you are not about to admit Paul was wrong, right?

The fact that Holy Spirit will lead us does not mean we will always follow His leadings perfectly.>>>>>>>>

So you agree with what I said except where it concerns Paul?

But a public offense is not like this. The damage is already well publicized,>>>>>>>>>>

I believe you are way off base, Paul made it personal and he is the one who made it public.

We would not know that peter was such a hypocrite except for Paul.

The question presented is whether the Bible contains contradictions in its written teachings, >>>>>>>>>

You can make it a matter of technicalities if you want, I don`t see any need for that.

[metmom]

Dude, you’re arguing with a LAWYER.

He already left your argument in quivering shreds, which you appear to have not yet noticed.

Take some good advice.

Quit while you’re *ahead*.

If you quit now, you may still be able to save some face.

[caww]

Interesting after I gave my life to the Lord, and I could easily swear up a storm, that was the first thing I noted had changed. And of course you see everything differently. Your desires change...your viewpoints...you can see truth and lies not to mention the tactics of the enemy. In many ways it's like a veil of misunderstanding, or none at all has been lifted.

I think people get confused about law and grace because they don't understand that Jesus living within us by His Spirit simply changes everything and way we view life. We DO become a new creature.

The closer and more we learn of Jesus “through His eyes rather than our own”...the more we enjoy and want to please him. Rather like the relationships within a marriage....you do and don't do certain things because of your love for them and the bond you have nurtured along with them.