Skip to main content

Captives of Concepts, Captives of Christ

 


What does ‘a different gospel’ look like? Paul, in his letter to the churches in Galatia, is ‘astonished’ that they had turned so readily to a different gospel (Gal.1:6-9) In a letter to Corinth he writes:

If someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it readily enough.’ (2 Cor.11:4)

This different gospel uses the same language, references the same familiar ideas as the genuine. We know that our first task in a discussion is to define terms, find out what someone understands by the language they use. A different Jesus still goes by that name. The Mormon Jesus, however, is not Immanuel, God with us (Mt.1:23) but literally our elder brother from a premortal existence, the brother of Lucifer. The Watchtower Jesus is not our Creator (Col.1:15-19) but another creature, a premortal angel, and ‘the greatest man whoever lived.’

What is this counterfeit Jesus, this different spirit, what are these different gospels Paul writes about, and why do people, ‘put up with it readily enough?’ More to the point, what is the genuine gospel Paul and others preached? If we can answer this we have something with which to make a comparison. People are often ready to accept something different, a counterfeit, simply because they don’t know the real thing.

In Paul’s letter to Galatia he is warning about the dangers of the traditions of the Jews. Here was a system they insisted all must bend to; in order to be a Christian you must first be a Jew. To Corinth Paul warns about those who brought their own private revelation and authority that stood against the plain gospel he had preached. In both instances what was brought was unusual, perhaps seemed exotic and exciting to those being enticed. Both were dangerous because both were false gospels.

Peter, at Pentecost, preached the gospel:

Let all the house of Israel therefore know for certain that God has made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom you crucified.” Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” And Peter said to them, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.”

There it is. The crucified Jesus has been made both Lord and Christ (anointed). The correct response to this is to repent for the forgiveness of sins and receive the Holy Spirit. Ask any true Christian about their faith and they will respond with how Jesus made possible the forgiveness of their sins and put them in right relationship with God.

Ask a Jehovah’s Witness and they will tell you how they come to be in ‘the truth,’ how long they have been in ‘the truth’ and how you can be in ‘the truth’ too. Ask a Mormon and they will tell you about Joseph Smith and the Book of Mormon, how they are convinced their church is ‘the true church.’ Immediately, someone familiar with the gospel will recognise this is not how Christians speak. These people are captives of a concept.

Christians are captives too. Paul wrote:

Do you not know that if you present yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin, which leads to death, or of obedience, which leads to righteousness?

But thanks be to God, that you who were once slaves of sin have become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed,

For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness.

But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves of God, the fruit you get leads to sanctification and its end, eternal life. (Ro.6:16-22)

Christians are captives of God, slaves to righteousness. The cults will claim the same, but you will notice you must first be ‘in the truth,’ belong to ‘the true church.’ In other words, you must be a captive of a concept, of an organisation. Only then can you have access to God, and only through intermediaries who will interpret God’s message for you.

Truth is important to a Christian, however the truth we cherish is not simply conceptual but vital, Jesus Christ, the source of life. The Christian has direct access to hi, and every Christian stands in the same place in relation to God’s throne.

Being church is important to Christians, but church is not simply organisational, it is organic. It is the body of Christ, who is the head, the bride of Christ, who is its groom. Ask a Christian about their faith and they will talk about Jesus, who directs and guides their lives. Ask about the church and they will talk about Jesus, whose arrival for the great wedding banquet we eagerly await.

From the first words in a conversation we can discern whether we are engaging with another Christian believer, or someone captive to a different gospel. If we know the gospel well enough to make that judgement we are in a good place to begin sharing the exciting truth about Jesus, to help them get free from the concept and become captives of Christ. Then they will know true freedom and true peace.

Comments

Anne said…
Thank you for this well written article. It opens up the opportunity for anyone, no matter how young in their faith, to simply give their testimony , without being scared of the complexities of a cult's belief.
Michael Thomas said…
Thank you for your encouragement Anne. The gospel is simple, isn't it? We need to keep it simple and share it simply. I am glad you are encouraged to share it.

Popular posts from this blog

Obama's mother posthumously baptized into LDS Church - Salt Lake Tribune

In the wake of his remarkable success it seemed that the world and his wife wanted to claim President Obama as their own with even an Irish connection being dug up. Now the Mormons have got in on the act by posthumously baptising his mother. They have in the past upset the Jewish community, the Catholic Church and now the American President with this wacky and unbiblical practice but there is no indication that they will review it. And, of course, it is always someone else’s fault and they promise a thorough inquiry to uncover the real culprits. Maybe they should try looking in the mirror. President Barack Obama's mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, who died in 1995, was baptized posthumously into The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints last year during her son's campaign, according to Salt Lake City-based researcher Helen Radkey. The ritual, known as “baptism for the dead,” was done June 4 in the Provo temple, and another LDS temple rite, known as the “endowment,” was...

Mormon Christians? Whats in a Name?

The Mormon Church, disturbed by the continuing identifying of polygamus sects in the news with the name Mormon, recently issued a press statement aimed at "clarifying" issues. It is interesting to note that if you substitute the name "Christian" where they use the name "Mormon" it makes a very good argument for us against the claims of the Mormon Church. The full press release is reproduced below in italics with each paragraph rewritten in ordinary text to present it from a Christian perspective. SALT LAKE CITY 10 July 2008 On 26 June, Newsroom published a package of information featuring profiles of ordinary Latter-day Saints in Texas. With no other intention but to define themselves, these members provided a tangible depiction of what their faith is all about. They serve as the best distinction between the lifestyles and values of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and a Texas-based polygamous group that has recently attracted media attent...

Is atheism an intolerant belief?

The Big Questions , Sunday 2 August 2009, third question. A growing number of Britons say they are certain there is no God - but how do they know? Professor John Adams of the North Yorkshire Humanist Association begins by asking theists what evidence they have for their beliefs. Paul Woolley of Theos continues by pointing out Richard Dawkins description of faith as a 'virus', and the appalling track record of atheism in the 20th Century, as spearheaded by Pol Pot and Stalin. Chloe Clifford-Frith of the Humanist and Secular Students Society contends that Stalin did not do the things he did because he was an atheist, but because he was evil. Paul Woolley rejoins that atheists are trying to have it both ways when they claim that religion is the cause of evil, but refuse to acknowledge the ideological impetus of atheism when it comes to many evil acts. Mao and Stalin both replaced God with the State - a 'religious' manoeuvre. Rev Alistair Rycroft of St Michael Le Belfrey Ch...