Adding to the Gospel heresy : Post 3

3. “You believe in Jesus …. Now you need to give up smoking / lose weight / join XYZ social action cause … etc.”

I have lumped a few disparate things together just to illustrate the sort of thing you may be exhorted to do as part of your new found faith. Don’t fall for it for a moment! Remember what Paul said to the Christians in Galatia!

Any one of them may be harmless in themselves, they may even be good things BUT the moment they become added as something necessary to complete your faith in Jesus they become spiritual poison.

Take smoking. Giving it up is sound medical advice, but it is not a matter of salvation. It may seem harmless to people to just add it in as an article of faith, but the spiritual effect of that is like putting carbon monoxide into the air we breathe.

A number of people I know found that not long after they came to faith the Holy Spirit laid it on them to give up their cigarette habit and the Holy Spirit gave them the strength and encouragement to do it. That is the sort of thing the Holy Spirit does in a believer’s life as much as we will allow. But it is the Holy Spirit who decides what aspects of our life need changing and in what order. The Holy Spirit brings us around to agree to each change in turn and gives us the power to do it. For other humans to try to set the agenda for us is really not helpful.

With things like losing weight it is again a problem of “doing the right thing for the wrong reason. On the personal level you might decide to do it for health reasons: that’s fine. You may decide to do it for aesthetics: that’s fine too (within reason of course). But being overweight is not a sin. (of course gluttony where a person turns food into something they effectively worship IS a sin (Philippians 3.19 “¹⁸ For, as I have often told you before and now tell you again even with tears, many live as enemies of the cross of Christ. ¹⁹ Their destiny is destruction, their god is their stomach, and their glory is in their shame. Their mind is set on earthly things.”) but I am not talking now about the sin of making an idol of our appetites. What I am talking about is the danger of Christians who try to mix in belief in “healthy living” – which is one of the false religions of our age – to faith in Jesus. 

On the subject of telling other people what to do let me illustrate it by “wrong way / right way” examples:

Right way: Suppose you are involved in some way in public health. Through this you have a concern that obesity is a widespread health problem. As a Christian you are even more interested in looking after people so aided by the Holy Spirit you devise (let us say) a really effective anti-obesity program.

Wrong way: Same scenario down to being a Christian – you may or may not be. You are looking for ways of promoting your anti-obesity campaign (which we agree is a good thing) you come to see that bringing in religious sanctions will help motivate people. So your campaign says that not being overweight is necessary in order to be a good Christian.

Why is this wrong? Because you have (perhaps inadvertently) reduced saving faith in Jesus to being just the means to a something you consider a “greater good” (public health in this case): this inevitably results in the greater “good” becoming the greater “god”.

This last example: that of using Christianity as a means to promote XYZ cause; is again a lie that is mostly true (as the most effective lies are).

As you let God have a bigger and bigger say in your life, you find that he has PLANS. But his plans are tailor made for you, and something you will have great fun discovering and following in partnership with God. So you may be an activist changing the world – as William Wilberforce was. Or you may diligently and cheerfully do what people think is “just” an ordinary job: in the process greatly please God, and perhaps spread a little happiness to a lot of people. Or you may stay home and raise children who turn out to love God and be well adjusted adults and in the process please God inordinately. And so I could go on but you get to idea.

To let someone firstly make you think that joining their cause is part of believing in Jesus and secondly possibly de-rail you from following the plans God has for you is a double disaster.

The tragedy is that churches are well populated with people whose devotion to this cause or that cause has eclipsed their devotion to Christ. It is sad because they are now dysfunctional Christians, and may even cease being Christians at all. It is sad because they are turning whole churches aside from serving Christ to serving their merely human political platforms. It is also sad because while they are being driven by their own (or the world’s) agenda rather than God’s plan they will go off-track in trying to fix up this broken world and often end up being part of the problem instead of part of the solution.

They will try to recruit you. Resist! There is nothing more important than Jesus and nothing pleases him as much as walking humbly with him on the path he has chosen for you.

Galatians 3:15-29

DOWNLOAD sermon Galatians 3:15-29 June 23 2013
What about the Law then? Well it was more of a signpost and like a builder's straight edge than a ladder for climbing up to heaven.

Morals Post : How I climbed the rest of the cliff with no difficulty!

Yes Last post I was stuck on a (metaphorical) cliff.

Yes this post is late because I couldn't see a way out of my difficulty.

And yes the problem evaporated like the morning mist.

This is how. I remembered a parable I had heard decades ago when I saw it even better illustrated in a film, then I remembered the germ of an idea I had written in a booklet on ethics back in 1990. I applied those and …. hey presto! Problem solved!

Of course I am going to keep you in suspense a little longer – after all it has been a hard week, so why should you get the answer too easily. In the meantime I am going to tell you about the film.

Our family love watching videos together. Recently we re-watched the 1996 film “The Ghost and the Darkness” which stars Val Kilmer as the hero Colonel George Patterson. After the film we were discussing the probability of various parts being true, so naturally we had to resort to Wikipedia to settle the matter. Indeed it was mostly true – the character played by Michael Douglass was fictitious - but there really was a Colonel George Patterson who went to Kenya in March 1898 to build a railway bridge over the Tsavo River, and he did have this amazing adventure.

When Col. Patterson arrived his job was to build a bridge over the Tsavo River for the Kenya – Mombassa railway. Patterson inherited a large multi-national labour force who were already hard at work on the foundations. It looked like an easy assignment.

However, coinciding with Patterson's arrival, grisly deaths started occurring. Workers were dragged from their tents at night and devoured by lions. Patterson and his staff tried every trick in the book. Fires were lit – but to no avail. Thorn barriers were built round the camp – the lions crawled through them. Traps were set, the lions evaded them. Between March and November Patterson claimed some 135 people (mostly villagers: only 40 or so were his workers) were killed.

The work force called these two lions “the Ghost” and “the Darkness” Many, perhaps most believed that these were no ordinary lions but demons in the shape of lions. Some said that as the attacks started when Patterson arrived perhaps he was the cause of this curse. Believing that the creatures, whatever they were, could not be killed, the workers fled and work on the bridge stopped.

Now, with a little poetic licence, let me set a problem for Col. Patterson. He had hunted lions in India, so had some reason for confidence that bullets would kill them. On the other hand he had to date been singularly unsuccessful. So was his confidence mistaken? The workers thought they were demons, against which no rifle could prevail. They were obviously convinced that their belief was correct. They had (OK this bit is the poetic licence I mentioned earlier) done everything to persuade Patterson that guns would have no effect against this scourge. What should he do?

Should he pack away his rifle and call in a priest or even a local witch-doctor to try an exorcism? Should he admit that he was powerless against these forces, and follow his workers in their flight?

Should he go with his own belief in firearms and hunt them down, rifle in hand.

What he did do was build a scaffold and lure the tigers to attack. Then he used his rifle. It was a near thing, the second lion took nine bullets to kill it and even as it died it was trying to get to Patterson. The lions are are now on display in the Chicago museum. They were indeed huge, and certainly unusually cunning and destructive but still definitely flesh-and- blood.

The moral of the story is of course that he had to overcome the temptation to accept the belief system of those around him and use the weapons he had used successfully in the past. And guess what – they worked this time too.

Tune in next week to see how this solved the problem that had me stumped for so long. See if you can guess the answer before then!

"Adding to the Gospel" Heresy: Pt 2.

My second example of "adding to the Gospel heresy" is usually phrased something like this:. 

"You believe in Jesus, excellent start! Now you need the join the One True Church."          ...   Wrong!

By the “true church” they mean of course their own denomination or church party.

This catch-cry has been taught by the Roman Catholic church. It was taught by the denomination I grew up in (they may have become more broad minded since then). It is said (possibly watered down a teensy bit) by some Pentecostal churches. It is also, I have noticed, implied by some Anglican “flagship” parishes about their own congregation.

It is not true! You are saved by Christ. He saves all those who come to him – not necessarily those who come to any earthly church! If you belong to Christ, then you are a member of his Church – a body of believers stretching through all time and covering all places. The Bible uses very extravagant language for this Church.

In 1 Corinthians it is referred to as the “body of Christ” (1 Corinthians 12.27 “²⁷ Now you are the body of Christ, and each one of you is a part of it.” 1 Peter 2.9 says this about us believers in Jesus: “ ⁹ But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. ¹⁰ Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy. Colossians 1.17 says Jesus is the head of the Church: “ ¹⁷ He is before all things, and in him all things hold together. ¹⁸ And he is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning and the first-born from among the dead, so that in everything he might have the supremacy.” 

Ephesians 5.25 says: “ ²⁵ Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her ²⁶ to make her holy, cleansing^[b] her by the washing with water through the word, ²⁷ and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. ²⁸ In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. ²⁹ After all, people have never hated their own bodies, but they feed and care for them, just as Christ does the church— ³⁰ for we are members of his body. ³¹ “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.”^[c] 32 This is a profound mystery—but I am talking about Christ and the church.”

Seriously, do you think any religious institution on earth can fit this description? Rather should we not take Jesus words (John 18.36) “My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jewish leaders. But now my kingdom is from another place.” As the true description: his glorious church is not of this world.

Some of his people are still in this world, some are not.

The religious institutions, Roman Catholic, Anglican, Uniting, Greek Orthodox, Assemblies of God, and any other Christian denominations, may under God, be of vital assistance to God’s people and the spreading of the Gospel and many other worthwhile functions BUT not one of them and not even all of them together constitute the “one holy catholic and apostolic Church” of the creed. They are all institutions of this world only and sadly all too often they run by the power and ideals of our fallen human nature rather than God’s Holy Spirit.

So while it is almost certainly God’s purpose for you to belong to a congregation of believers and be part of a denomination, remember: you were made a member of God’s Church as soon as you came to believe in his son Jesus. Belonging to a particular earthly congregation and denomination is as nothing compared to that.

Sermon 16 June 2013: Galatians 2.11 to 3.6

 Galatians 2.11 - 3.6  Continuing the Galatians series. Why was Peter "clearly in the wrong" at Antioch? Why freedom from the Law does NOT equal encouragement to break the Law.

Morals Post

The Cliffhanger !

Well, where to from here? I fell like a rock-climber clinging to a cliff face and not quite sue where to find the next hand-hold!

Where I have got to so far is considering two plausible cosmologies – given our state of scientific knowledge.

My conclusion was that if “evolution is our maker” our feelings of right/wrong, justice/injustice, ethical/unethical are just human social constructs. All our philosophical, religious or sociological arguments do define what is good or bad behaviour are pretty much just humbug. They are nothing more than propaganda devices to make people do what we (or our group) want through persuasion or fear.

On the other hand if there really is a Creator God, then there is a basis to ethics. Good, just, right, (even utile), actions could be judged by their conformity to God's character.

So far so good, but there are two chasms yawning in front of me.

A) Which one corresponds to reality? I mean either there is a God or there isn't.

To even talk about “proving” one way or the other is asking the wrong kind of question. On a personal level it is common experience that God does relate to people to such a degree that they would no more doubt God's existence than they would doubt that their spouse or best friend existed.

But outside of a personal relationship, even if you could conceive of a scientific experiment to prove/disprove God's existence, what makes you think God is going consent to take part in your experiment? So people who have joined the long list throughout human history who have entered into a relationship with God. know God exists (see note). Those who believe the other scenario corresponds to reality will continue to do so.

B) I am a Christian, so when I say God exists – I mean the Triune God 'Father, Son and Holy Spirit'. Who created the universe. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Who spoke through the prophets. Who showed through through word and deed as recorded in the scriptures his character. Who was in Christ Jesus reconciling the world to himself. Of whom Jesus said “If you have seen me: you have seen the Father: I and the Father are one.

But … and some will say this is a big but : there is the problem of other religions. Do I really want to lend any legitimacy to say Sharia Law or the (defunct I hope) Hindu practice of Sati – burning the widow alive on her husbands funeral pyre. No, I don't.

So is this a dead end? Is this where the rock climber takes to the ropes and back to the ground. Or like a movie actor can I jump across the chasms and keep climbing on another face of the cliff?

Tune in next week to find out

note: When I say “know (God exists)” I mean by the definition of “to know something” famously devised by Edmund Gettier – namely a) to believe that “something” to be true b) to have reason for that belief and c) for the “something” to actually be true.

Before leaving the topic of knowing things: in the 19^th century, philosophical orthodoxy was that it was impossible to know anything. (Even in the next century a frightening proportion of “Christian” teachers of religion seemed to still believe this – even about God!). However in 1903 one E. G. Moore waved his hands in front of an audience and said “I know these are two hands!” and after that common sense won the day.

Heresy Alert No.!

Over the next half dozen posts I am going to forewarn you about variations of the “adding to the Gospel” heresy that you may well encounter.

Of course depending on what sort of church you go to or Christian fellowship you have and books you read you may may come into contact any one of them, or none at all.

However immunization is better than running the risk of wrecking your faith, so I will go through each one in detail.

This week's topic is …...

“you are not a Spirit filled Christian unless you 'speak in tongues'.” …. Wrong!

Yes, some 'TV evangelists' even some whole churches do say this. They are quite wrong. Many of them are so insistent about it that they fall into the heresy of adding to the Gospel.

I think the best immunity comes from a better understanding of what the Holy Spirit does in a believer's life.

John's Gospel is a good place to start.

Read John 7:37-39. Jesus says that streams of living water will flow from the person who believes in him. John adds that Jesus meant the Holy Spirit “whom those who believed in him were later to receive” So the grounds for receiving the Holy Spirit are believing in Jesus.

Take a moment to read John Ch.14 and 16:5-15. Let me summarise some important things Jesus says:

a) The Holy Spirit will be given to those who love Jesus – this love being shown by obedience

b) The Holy Spirit will teach believers & remind them of Jesus words.

c) The Holy Spirit will convict the world of guilt in regard to sin, righteousness and judgement.

d) The Spirit will guide believers into all truth by taking what belongs to Jesus and making it known to them.

Luke in his Gospel and the book of Acts tells us more:

Luke 24: 48,49 tells us that Jesus told the disciples they would be his witnesses, and the Gospel would be preached to all nations – but they were to wait; “I am going to send you what my Father has promised; but stay in the city until you have been clothed with power from on high.” So, the coming of the Holy Spirit was a) a matter of promise and b) brought the power which was essential to proclaiming the Gospel.

This instruction is repeated in Acts 1:1-5. With the addition that Jesus uses the term “baptism” when he says “in a few days you will be baptised with the Holy Spirit. Reading on through Acts Ch.2 the coming of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost (a Jewish festival) is described. For our present discussion I want to highlight three things that we are told here:

a) the believers all “speak in other tongues” but these are foreign languages, and to their amazement visitors in Jerusalem from many different and distant countries hear the believers telling them the great things God has done in their own native languages. (when people are on about “speaking in tongues” these days they do not mean that, but rather speaking or praying in words that are unintelligible.)

b) One dramatic effect was that Peter got up and boldly and effectively proclaimed that Jesus was God's Messiah – and 2,000 people believed and were baptised that day!

c) Part of the message was : “Repent and be baptised every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins may be forgiven. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit for the promise is to you and your children and to all that are afar off”

What I want to highlight is that the really dramatic work of the Holy Spirit here was to cause people to turn to Jesus in repentance and faith for the forgiveness of their sins. Also that the gift of the Holy Spirit is spoken of as the usual and expected follow on. So in Acts 8 where this does not happen when the Samaritans believe, it is taken to mean that something is wrong. Peter and John go there to pray for them and lay hands on them -with the result that the Samaritans then do receive the Holy Spirit. In a similar vein when Peter tells Cornelius and his gathering – who are all non-Jews about Jesus and the Holy Spirit comes on them while Peter is still speaking that is taken as a convincing sign from God and the Jewish Christians give praise that God has granted life-giving repentance to the gentiles also.

From these texts is clear that God did utilise this 'speaking in tongues' as an instant indication of his Holy Spirit coming into a believer's life. It is also clear that in these cases an instant sign was necessary. So at this stage we should be thinking: “Yes, where necessary to instantly demonstrate his gift of the Holy Spirit, God did use the phenomenon of 'tongues' – so he may do so whenever that need exists, but this does not mean hat he always does so.

Come now to Romans 8. It is a beautiful chapter. Notice as you read through that God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit all work to save us. Even though we are looking especially to find out about what the Holy Spirit does, we must not lose sight of the balanced picture scripture is presenting.

Having done that, notice what is said about how the Holy Spirit helps us. We turned away from our old life as enemies of God, put our trust in Jesus and pledged to obey his teaching. But that is easier said than done! Our old fallen human nature is ever pulling us in the opposite direction. If we cannot prevail against this nature, we will slip back to our old way of life. The Holy Spirit, so long as we actively choose to “live by the Spirit”, works in us to help us cut loose from these chains of the past and of our fallen nature. This is important, big, totally huge!!! A line I heard once goes:

The Law bade me crawl but gave me neither arms nor legs : the Gospel bids me fly and gives me wings.

The Holy Spirit working in and with us to overcome our old nature and change us from the inside out to be ever more like Jesus – that is the being asked to fly and having wings to do it with.

If you are still doubting the importance of this read Galatians 5 from verse 13.

It lists the actions that come naturally to us through our fallen nature: sexual immorality, impurity & debauchery, idolatry & witchcraft, hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions, envy, drunkenness, orgies and the like.

Then it lists what the Holy Spirit wants to and will produce in us: Love. Joy. Peace. Patience. Kindness. Goodness. Faithfulness. Gentleness. Self-control.

So the real evidence of being a “Spirit-filled Christian” is the extent to which our lives resemble the second list rather than the first one!

Last text for this post: read Paul's First letter to the Corinthians Chapters 12 -14. Here he is dealing with the Corinthian Christians problem of thinking that it is all about speaking in tongues. His first shot is that indeed the Holy Spirit works in miraculous ways through believers for the benefit of all God's people. But there is a whole list of different ways the Spirit does this and the Spirit chooses who he works what gift through. Second shot is that the body of believers is indeed like a body – a whole lot of different part are needed for a body to function. If it was just one body-part (ie one spiritual gift) it would not be a functioning body at all. This finishes pointing out that the Holy Spirit works in different ways through different people to build up the body of believers and does everyone speak in tongues? Of course not! (in the original Greek this verse uses is a grammatical construction know as “a question demanding the answer 'No!'.”)

Third Shot Chapter 13 : Love is the most excellent way of all: Love is patient. Love is kind. Love does not envy, it does not boast, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails.”

Fourth shot Chapter 14 : Yes tongues are a real gift – but a very inferior one to prophecy, so don't forbid it, but don't carry on over it like little kids with a new toy. Grow up!

My conclusion is this: If anyone has repented of their old life put their faith in Jesus and set their heart to obey him, then on the promise of God – who cannot lie – their sins are forgiven, they are adopted as children of God and they have received the gift of the Holy Spirit. From then on they must moment by moment to choose to “live by the Spirit” rather than live according to their old fallen nature. The change may be gradual, but it is the real evidence of the Holy Spirit in their lives.

Next Post : “our church is the only true Church” ….. Wrong!

Sermon on Galatians 1:11 - 2:10 9/June/2013

Things start getting exciting: we find out why Paul loses it when people mess with the Gospel.

DOWNLOAD sermon on Galatians 1:11 to 2:10

Our theory on Morals slowly takes shape

My Answer Pt. 2

As I pointed out last week if the state of the universe is that there is no God, morals become just an arbitrary social construct.

On the other hand, if the state of the universe is that there is a God with a moral being, morals are not arbitrary constructs. There is an absolute standard consisting of this God's moral being.

The existence of such a God was my first hypothesis. It may or may not be correct, at the moment I am just exploring what would follow if it were the case. That is what one does with hypotheses.

My second was that we humans had inherited at least some remnant resonance with this nature. Well that would explain why for instance we can be passionately affected by say injustice, even when we are not the victim. Evolution cannot explain that. It also explains why we can quite often discuss moral issues with people of quite different socialisation, culture or world-view.

Modern readers can at least find say Plato or Aristotle intelligible when they deal with ethical issues. More than that, considering the difference in our society to theirs we find a surprising amount agreement with them.

I am a bit more familiar with the Bible, so I will give some examples from there. Abraham going down to Egypt because of a famine expects the people there to kill him to take his beautiful wife. He finds instead a strong ethical abhorrence to such behaviour. (In fact Pharaoh comes out of the story on the high moral ground compared to Abraham!)

Jonah finds the foreign (and heathen) sailors unwilling to throw him into the sea, even after he tells them that he is the cause of the storm that is threatening their lives and that they must throw him overboard to save themselves. Then when he tells the people of Nineveh that they will be destroyed because of their murders, thefts, cruelty and other evil deeds, his words are intelligible. They are a cruel rapacious culture, but there is a shared moral awareness that lets them understand that they have done evil, and to repent of it. (much to Jonah's surprise and chagrin.)

Ruth was a Moabite, a foreigner to Israel's culture and religion. Yet her loyalty to her mother-in-law Naomi touched the hearts of the Israelite people of her day and still to us today.

My point is that we see – brighter in some people and dimmer in others – a sort of shared humanity that makes at least a degree of moral understanding possible across huge cultural, experiential and historical divides.

The instance of this phenomenon that set me off on the above train of thought was this:

I enrolled in a free online “ethics 1.01” course offered by a prestigious overseas university. It had videos of the lecturer interacting with a theatre full of bright eyed youngsters. I didn't keep going with it very long – but long enough to make this observation: The lecturer was a brilliant showman, and to be fair he tried to be even handed dealing with various moral theories. But his whole approach was to throw up difficult moral situations and discuss them back and forth with students who put their hand up to answer. But, and here is the big thing, he relied on their having an innate sense of right and wrong. He then produced these hypothetical situations which seemed carefully designed to bring this innate moral compass into conflict with a “common sense” course of action.

It became apparent to me that it was actually a mental conjuring trick. This strengthened when I was recounting one lecture to my elder son and he replied that his lecturer in ethics at Melbourne university had used the exact same scenario.

A clever conjurer can delight his or her audience with tricks that defy explanation. Indeed some are so obviously impossible under the laws of physics that they “must” be magic. Of course they are not really magic at all.

These scenarios are similarly so cleverly constructed that they seem to show up commonly held moral feelings as “wrong”. Clever, yes: but in no way helpful!

To be fair to the overseas lecturer and his very prestigious university he eventually graduated from these smoke-and-mirrors set pieces to some real cases.

The last lecture I watched involved a real case from the 1800's. The surviving members adrift in a lifeboat killed and ate the cabin boy. The interesting comparison to my mind was how the lecturer teased the innate moral feelings of his students on one hand, and how the English justice system coped with the case on the other.

The students were, understandably, conflicted. Did the cabin boy give informed consent? No? Well then it was wrong of them to kill him. But one died and three were thus kept alive until rescued. One instead of four, the maths are on the side of the cannibals. And so forth.

The case went to court in England so there were official records one could consult (which I did). The jury washed its hands by bringing in a verdict that they were not competent to decide the case. Fair enough. The case then went to be decided by the leading judges of the land. This was interesting. They were not students having an academic discussion. They were the best and most experienced judges in their land, and lives hung in the balance.

Crack lawyers on both sides argued why it should or should not the called “murder”. The moral arguments were thus meticulously teased out.

The judges decided as follows: They had every sympathy for the desperate plight that led the men to kill and eat the cabin boy. They said “Who in that terrible situation might not act as they had”. Nevertheless, they said it was the duty of the court was to apply the law: and where in a specific case there were unusual extenuating circumstances it was the prerogative of the crown to pardon. The actions were indeed murder and the men were convicted. A week or so later they all received a Royal Pardon.

This had a finesse and a depth of understanding that made our lecturer pale by comparison.

I draw two conclusions from this.

First: carefully crafted hypothetical scenarios are basically a conjuring trick. Don't go there!

Secondly: armchair (or podium) ethicists are just kidding themselves. We have a heritage that leaves them back in the stone age. For over a thousand years judges in the British court system have been wrestling not with hypothetical cases, but the real thing! Their judgements have been considered and revised by succeeding generations of judges to get solutions that work for real people in the real world and they are still being honed and revised. Why would one academic or even one generation of academics ever think they can beat that?

NEXT WEEK I hope to pull these threads together! 

Heresy Alert : Adding to the Gospel Pt. 1

Heresy 1: Adding to the Gospel

In this attack on believers in Christ the devil tries to convince them that they need something besides Christ in order to the “true Christians”. It is a lie. There is no “more” than Christ. As Paul said to the Christians in Colossae who were under this attack: (Colossians 2)

⁶ So then, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, continue to live your lives in him, ⁷ rooted and built up in him, strengthened in the faith as you were taught, and overflowing with thankfulness. ⁸ See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces^[a] of this world rather than on Christ.  ⁹ For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, ¹⁰ and in Christ you have been brought to fullness. He is the head over every power and authority.¹¹ In him you were also circumcised with a circumcision not performed by human hands. Your sinful nature^[b] was put off when you were circumcised by^[c] Christ, ¹²having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead.  ¹³ When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature,^[d] God made you^[e] alive with Christ. He forgave us all our sins, ¹⁴having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross. ¹⁵ And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.^[f 

If you have turned away from your old life to Christ determined to live a new life of obedience to him, and if your hope and trust are all in him, then you are a real Christian. You have in Christ all the blessings of the heavenly realms. You have through Jesus new birth as a child of God. You have in Christ an inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade which is kept in heaven for you. Through Jesus Christ you have his Holy Spirit living in you. You may be a baby now, but you are growing into maturity in Christ. There is nothing else besides Christ to desire. There is nothing you can add to your maturing faith in him your daily life with him and your growing obedience to him.

In Paul’s day “philosophy” also covered topics we would call “theology” now. So to re-phrase what he wrote: “let no one take you captive through hollow and deceptive theology which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.”

When people tell you are not a proper Christian, or perhaps even “not saved” until you have this or that in addition to Christ they are trying to take you captive as Paul warned! How is this so insidious? It is because the “this or “that” they want to add to Christ is in Paul’s words “human” and “of this world”. They are going to appeal strongly to our old human nature – a nature that as baby Christians is still used to dominating our lives.

 So the prospect of a “Christianity” which instead of fighting our old nature actually panders to it is going to have a really powerful attraction in our hearts. The “of this world” both has the spiritual power of the devil behind it to try to keep us from fullness in Christ, and also fits into the false vision of “life the universe and everything” that the devil has deceived the world into believing, so once again such a religion has a really powerful appeal. Instead of being on what Jesus called the “narrow road” one in tricked into believing they can stay on the easy “broad road” and still please Christ. It is a lie.

Picture these heresies as spiritual carbon monoxide. In physical life you might say how can a few percent of carbon monoxide added to the air kill when there is still plenty of oxygen to breathe. Yes there is still plenty of oxygen in the air. The trouble is not lack of oxygen. The trouble is that the hemoglobin in our blood (which is the stuff that takes up oxygen) finds carbon monoxide more attractive than oxygen. Something like 250 times more attractive. So a little carbon monoxide added to the air is so well absorbed by the hemoglobin that it soon has no room for oxygen, and we die. These heresies may only seem to add a little harmless bit to the gospel, but they are so attractive to our old human nature, and fit so well the ways of the “world” that soon they displace Christ in our lives, we go into a spiritual coma, and if we are not rescued, we die.

Yes, heresies that add to the Gospel of Christ really are that dangerous!

I quoted Paul’s advice to the people in Colossae (and neighbouring Laodicea and Hierapolis). He also had problems with the people he had converted to Christianity not so far away in the region of Galatia. Again the problem seems to have been “adding” to the gospel he had preached. Perhaps this addition was even more noxious than the one in Colossae, at any rate Paul is more distressed by it. Read the whole letter yourself, I will just quote some instance where he stresses the danger they are in if they accept these “additions”.

Chapter1

⁶ I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— ⁷ which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. ⁸But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let that person be under God’s curse! ⁹ As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let that person be under God’s curse!

Chapter 3

 ¹ You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified. ² I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by observing the law, or by believing what you heard? ³ Are you so foolish? After beginning with the Spirit, are you now trying to finish by human effort? ⁴Have you experienced^[a] so much in vain—if it really was in vain? ⁵ Does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you by your observing the law, or by your believing what you heard? 

Chapter 4

⁸ Formerly, when you did not know God, you were slaves to those who by nature are not gods. ⁹ But now that you know God—or rather are known by God—how is it that you are turning back to those weak and miserable forces^[d]? Do you wish to be enslaved by them all over again? ¹⁰ You are observing special days and months and seasons and years! ¹¹ I fear for you, that somehow I have wasted my efforts on you.

Chapter5

² Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. ³ Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. ⁴ You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace. …  ⁷ You were running a good race. Who cut in on you to keep you from obeying the truth? 

Chapter 6

¹¹ See what large letters I use as I write to you with my own hand!  ¹² Those who want to impress others by means of the flesh are trying to compel you to be circumcised. The only reason they do this is to avoid being persecuted for the cross of Christ. ¹³ Not even those who are circumcised keep the law, yet they want you to be circumcised that they may boast about your circumcision in the flesh. ¹⁴ May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which^[b] the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. ¹⁵ Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is the new creation. 

I don’t think we can be far wrong if we assume the false teachers following Paul into Galatia said something like “Ah, we are so pleased that you believe in Jesus. What a pity Paul didn’t preach to you the full gospel. He should have told you that now you need to be circumcised and obey the Jewish religious traditions (the Law).” That sounds pretty harmless doesn’t it? And yet by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, Paul comes out all guns firing against this teaching. So it cannot have been the least bit a “harmless” addition to the gospel.

Over the next few weeks I will warn about some versions of this heresy that you may encounter