Internet Theologian
Well-Known Member
If today’s gospel seems casual, and certainly it does, one need only to take a look at the message stemming from Free Grace Theology and other easy-believe-ism systems to ascertain as to why this is the case. Within these systems of thought it is found that there need be no real tangible transformation in the life of the so-called believer. This teaching is not merely limited to the initial conception of the new birth, the beginnings, but extends by way of application of the teachings to the entirety of the so-called believers life. By necessity there is no transforming message to be sought in this system, as it is believed and taught by implication that none is necessary.
If one does not believe in a transforming Gospel, a Gospel that affects the person’s life with tangible evidences of new birth, that is, in all those who are truly converted, then there will be no transforming Gospel message preached.
Why should there be? Why contend that the message is transformational when in the end it is not an ascribed belief, and transformation of the believer is not to be expected? A transforming message is then not only unaccounted for, but must be deemed unnecessary, this due to the beliefs concerning what a saved person looks like accordingly. There is expected to be little to no impact on the life unless one makes a decision for it to be so, as by choosing to be a disciple. One can readily determine by this that the power is not in the message itself, contrary to 1 Cor. 1:18, but is instead in the power of personal choice.
Emotionally charged messages, life-coaching, impressive personalities may be status quo but there is no need for a transforming message, and there is then no transforming message given. At the least one who preaches this system should question as to why one would need to believe it to be transformational in the first place. There is little room or need for such a message. Why expect it?
Below are some of the things I’ve learned concerning what the casual gospel teaches persons to believe within the walls of the church:
Belief automatically means one has repented. Yet it is also taught, at the same time, that repentance is unnecessary.
There is no evidence necessary that the person actually has been born again/repented. Tricky and inconsistent? Yes.
This gospel preaches that holiness is unnecessary because it is considered a work, no matter what Hebrews 12:14 says. There are more passages, but the language and context here in Hebrews is solemn and straight forward.
Obeying Christ is considered optional as well. Yes, Jesus said His sheep follow Him and obey His voice; John 10:27, but one does not have to be one of those type of sheep.
Baptism? Optional, don’t worry about that Acts 2:41 thing. (not that there is a such thing as regeneration by water baptism, mind you, it’s just optional)
Mere mental assent to Biblical facts is all that is necessary (or, heart-felt sinc erity) and you are going to heaven when you die. One proponent taught that simply believing John 6:47, written on a piece of paper, not having any knowledge who Jesus is, what he accomplished, and having no knowledge of the cross or the Gospel is instantaneously saved.
Belief that faith is a supernatural gift has been supplanted by ‘innate’ faith. Nothing special here; even a dog has faith. Pay no mind to Romans 12:3; Php. 1:29; Eph. 1:19. One simply chooses to state belief in facts and gets to go to heaven, the other can’t come to believe these facts and so is banished to hell.
Apostatizing from the faith is allowable to the extent that to do so ones salvation is still preached as intact. Therefore 1 John 2:19 is outdated, neutralized.
Living a lifestyle of sin is allowable, accept for that one sin, most still preach against that but ‘regular’adultery is OK, you just won’t get any rewards in heaven. Matthew 7:21 and following shows living lawlessly equates to being in a lost state, yet ‘many’ on that day will feel they were entitled to heaven. This system preaches it is OK. Need anyone wonder who is preaching the truth here?
Belief to the end is considered a work, in spite of 1 Cor. 15:2; Col. 1:23; 1 Cor. 1:8. In fact a person can stop believing as soon as they say the sinner’s prayer; they’re still going to heaven. 2 Timothy 2:13 is taken out of context of the whole of Scripture on this issue, and is then used as a proof text to support this fallacy.
The casual gospel focuses on what happens when a person dies, not on the new creature, sanctification, suffering, maturing, and being transformed, of which all are partakers (2 Cor. 3:18). One gets to skip all that in this truncated version of the gospel, and can go from point A to point B unencumbered by church-going, love for God, desire for God, love of the brethren, sanctification, transformation, or any kind of change whatsoever. Yet, at the same time, and ironically so, the ‘new creature in Christ’ is a popular topic to preach.
Discipleship is for fanatics and one can choose to either be one of those or just a person who holds mental assent to facts. Let’s not really get transformed here, OK?
This gospel teaches you how very valuable and how great a person is, that this person is wonderful to God, (instead of showing the wrath of God abides on them, that they are alienated, ungodly, at enmity with God, etc) therefore, not focusing on ones lost state and unworthiness to be saved. No. In this gospel ones ego is stroked during ‘the gospel presentation’, then the person is led in a prayer. It leaves one feeling wonderful about self and wondering why in the world they even needed to be saved in the first place! Romans 5:6? That Jesus died for the ungodly, this must be speaking of other people.
What Scripture says concerning a genuine believer, and what one looks like (1 John) doesn’t matter, it’s all optional. One can love the world, walk in darkness, not love the brothers, not abide in truth, just skip all that and take 1 John 5:13 out of its intended context. The aforementioned qualifying marks of a genuine conversion are of no matter. Consider that the disciples in Acts, saved at Pentecost had a love for one another immediately, and shared times of fellowship, prayer, breaking bread.
All the above said, there is not one place within all of Scripture that even remotely teaches these things. There is no casual gospel within the pages of the Scriptures. Not one apostle taught this system, the Christ of God never taught this. None were asked if they wanted to be sure they are going to go to heaven when they die.
The above teachings in this casual gospel stem from a manmade system that truncates the true Gospel into another which is not the gospel. It propagates itself via easy-believism and has in fact trivialized the most important message to all mankind . There is no gravity or solemnity to this gospel, it’s all to be taken lightly, tongue-in-cheek. The weighty matters of the Scriptures concerning true conversion and false, of Gospel warnings, and self-examination are all trivialized, and in the end Holy God is seen as some sort of cosmic pushover.
Is it any wonder the world sees the message as some pie in the sky nonsense? The church has left off the true Gospel and traded it for a non-transforming myth, 2 Timothy 4.
If one does not believe in a transforming Gospel, a Gospel that affects the person’s life with tangible evidences of new birth, that is, in all those who are truly converted, then there will be no transforming Gospel message preached.
Why should there be? Why contend that the message is transformational when in the end it is not an ascribed belief, and transformation of the believer is not to be expected? A transforming message is then not only unaccounted for, but must be deemed unnecessary, this due to the beliefs concerning what a saved person looks like accordingly. There is expected to be little to no impact on the life unless one makes a decision for it to be so, as by choosing to be a disciple. One can readily determine by this that the power is not in the message itself, contrary to 1 Cor. 1:18, but is instead in the power of personal choice.
Emotionally charged messages, life-coaching, impressive personalities may be status quo but there is no need for a transforming message, and there is then no transforming message given. At the least one who preaches this system should question as to why one would need to believe it to be transformational in the first place. There is little room or need for such a message. Why expect it?
Below are some of the things I’ve learned concerning what the casual gospel teaches persons to believe within the walls of the church:
Belief automatically means one has repented. Yet it is also taught, at the same time, that repentance is unnecessary.
There is no evidence necessary that the person actually has been born again/repented. Tricky and inconsistent? Yes.
This gospel preaches that holiness is unnecessary because it is considered a work, no matter what Hebrews 12:14 says. There are more passages, but the language and context here in Hebrews is solemn and straight forward.
Obeying Christ is considered optional as well. Yes, Jesus said His sheep follow Him and obey His voice; John 10:27, but one does not have to be one of those type of sheep.
Baptism? Optional, don’t worry about that Acts 2:41 thing. (not that there is a such thing as regeneration by water baptism, mind you, it’s just optional)
Mere mental assent to Biblical facts is all that is necessary (or, heart-felt sinc erity) and you are going to heaven when you die. One proponent taught that simply believing John 6:47, written on a piece of paper, not having any knowledge who Jesus is, what he accomplished, and having no knowledge of the cross or the Gospel is instantaneously saved.
Belief that faith is a supernatural gift has been supplanted by ‘innate’ faith. Nothing special here; even a dog has faith. Pay no mind to Romans 12:3; Php. 1:29; Eph. 1:19. One simply chooses to state belief in facts and gets to go to heaven, the other can’t come to believe these facts and so is banished to hell.
Apostatizing from the faith is allowable to the extent that to do so ones salvation is still preached as intact. Therefore 1 John 2:19 is outdated, neutralized.
Living a lifestyle of sin is allowable, accept for that one sin, most still preach against that but ‘regular’adultery is OK, you just won’t get any rewards in heaven. Matthew 7:21 and following shows living lawlessly equates to being in a lost state, yet ‘many’ on that day will feel they were entitled to heaven. This system preaches it is OK. Need anyone wonder who is preaching the truth here?
Belief to the end is considered a work, in spite of 1 Cor. 15:2; Col. 1:23; 1 Cor. 1:8. In fact a person can stop believing as soon as they say the sinner’s prayer; they’re still going to heaven. 2 Timothy 2:13 is taken out of context of the whole of Scripture on this issue, and is then used as a proof text to support this fallacy.
The casual gospel focuses on what happens when a person dies, not on the new creature, sanctification, suffering, maturing, and being transformed, of which all are partakers (2 Cor. 3:18). One gets to skip all that in this truncated version of the gospel, and can go from point A to point B unencumbered by church-going, love for God, desire for God, love of the brethren, sanctification, transformation, or any kind of change whatsoever. Yet, at the same time, and ironically so, the ‘new creature in Christ’ is a popular topic to preach.
Discipleship is for fanatics and one can choose to either be one of those or just a person who holds mental assent to facts. Let’s not really get transformed here, OK?
This gospel teaches you how very valuable and how great a person is, that this person is wonderful to God, (instead of showing the wrath of God abides on them, that they are alienated, ungodly, at enmity with God, etc) therefore, not focusing on ones lost state and unworthiness to be saved. No. In this gospel ones ego is stroked during ‘the gospel presentation’, then the person is led in a prayer. It leaves one feeling wonderful about self and wondering why in the world they even needed to be saved in the first place! Romans 5:6? That Jesus died for the ungodly, this must be speaking of other people.
What Scripture says concerning a genuine believer, and what one looks like (1 John) doesn’t matter, it’s all optional. One can love the world, walk in darkness, not love the brothers, not abide in truth, just skip all that and take 1 John 5:13 out of its intended context. The aforementioned qualifying marks of a genuine conversion are of no matter. Consider that the disciples in Acts, saved at Pentecost had a love for one another immediately, and shared times of fellowship, prayer, breaking bread.
All the above said, there is not one place within all of Scripture that even remotely teaches these things. There is no casual gospel within the pages of the Scriptures. Not one apostle taught this system, the Christ of God never taught this. None were asked if they wanted to be sure they are going to go to heaven when they die.
The above teachings in this casual gospel stem from a manmade system that truncates the true Gospel into another which is not the gospel. It propagates itself via easy-believism and has in fact trivialized the most important message to all mankind . There is no gravity or solemnity to this gospel, it’s all to be taken lightly, tongue-in-cheek. The weighty matters of the Scriptures concerning true conversion and false, of Gospel warnings, and self-examination are all trivialized, and in the end Holy God is seen as some sort of cosmic pushover.
Is it any wonder the world sees the message as some pie in the sky nonsense? The church has left off the true Gospel and traded it for a non-transforming myth, 2 Timothy 4.
