Faith is a Condition of Salvation

The text  of Mark 16:15-16 begins, “He that believeth....” Of this believer, our Lord concludes, “shall be saved.” The essential nature of belief for salvation is obvious in the closing words of the verse, “but he that believeth not shall be damned” (Mark 16:16). One of the conditions upon which salvation depends, according to this verse, is faith (belief).

This is a point upon which almost all are agreed throughout the religious world. The New Testament makes it clear that God requires faith, on the part of the sinner, for his salvation. For example, we are told, “But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him” (Hebrews 11:6).

The entire eleventh chapter of Hebrews shows the important role of faith in the lives of those pleasing to God, even in the days of the Old Testament. But, the faith described in that chapter is not faith alone; it is faith that responds in obedience to God. Even here, in verse 6, we have action inferred by the references to coming to God and seeking Him. It is that kind of faith (active, obedient) that justifies (Romans 5:1). Bear in mind that this faith comes from hearing God’s Word (10:17). As noted earlier, in the verse preceding our text, Jesus commissioned the preaching of the Gospel. That is the God-given way for people to hear the Gospel. “For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe” (I Corinthians 1:21).

We will soon note in Mark 16:16, faith is not the only condition of salvation according to the Gospel. James’ words are emphatic on the connection between faith and action. “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only” (Jam. 2:24). This, by the way, is the only Biblical reference to faith only. It is significant that James tells us that justification (another word for salvation) is NOT by faith only in spite of the very popular denominational teaching to the contrary.

James then concludes his discussion of faith and works with these words, “For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also” (2:26). It could not be any clearer! The faith that saves involves more than mental assent; faith must act to save.

There are even New Testament examples of some who believed, but were not saved. Consider those among the chief rulers: “Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue: For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God” (John 12:42-43).

Consider the devils (demons, ASV): “Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble” (James 2:19). Felix believed and “trembled” at the preaching of Paul (Acts 24:25). King Agrippa also believed according to Paul’s own appraisal, “I know that thou believest” (26:27). It is, therefore, clear that man is not and cannot be saved by faith alone; nevertheless, faith is absolutely essential to salvation.

Obedience is also necessary for salvation. Referring to Jesus, the writer of Hebrews notes, “And having been made perfect, he became unto all them that obey him the author of eternal salvation” (Hebrews 5:9). According to this, Jesus is the “author of eternal salvation” to “all them that obey him.” Add to this the statement of Peter, “Seeing ye have purified your souls in your obedience to the truth unto unfeigned love of the brethren, love one another from the heart fervently” (I Peter 1:22). Souls are purified (i.e. cleansed, forgiven of sins, etc.) by “obedience to the truth.”

According to the context of Mark 16:16, that which is to be believed is the preaching of the Gospel of Christ. The historical facts of the Gospel are the death, burial and resurrection of Christ (I Corinthians 15:1-4). Paul wrote that the resurrection was the powerful proof that Jesus was the Son of God, “And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead” (Romans 1:4). Hence, Jesus insisted, “I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins” (John 8:24). Our sins separate us from God (Isaiah 59:1-2), and thereby cause us to be in need of salvation. If sin remains unforgiven in our lives, we will be lost! Therefore, part of the Gospel which must be believed in order to be saved is that Jesus is God’s Son. Recall that when Philip had preached Jesus to the Eunuch on the road between Jerusalem and Gaza and when the eunuch desired baptism, Philip said, “If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest” (Acts 8:37). The Ethiopian then properly confessed his faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God (cf. Matthew 10:32), and was baptized. Paul commented on faith and confession in Romans 10. He wrote, “That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation (Rom. 10:9-10).

Infants And Others Exempt From The Requirements Of This Verse

The necessity of belief to be saved rules out infants and the mentally deficient. Babies cannot believe, nor can those who lack the mental capabilities to learn and make rational decisions for themselves. These are not candidates for baptism since they are incapable of belief which is prerequisite to baptism.

Indeed, these individuals are not in need of salvation for they are safe. The Bible refutes the claim of Calvinism of “inherited total depravity”—that babies are born sinners of the worst sort! Children are born innocent and those who do not mentally progress to the point of making rational decisions based on information given remain in that innocent condition. We are told that we are responsible for our own sins, and not for the sins of our ancestors, “The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him (Ezekiel 18:20).           

Jesus further told us that in order to be saved, we must become like little children, “And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 18:3).

So, we must conclude that children should not be baptized because they cannot be believers, and that children are not in need of salvation until they become sinners.

Lester Kamp

HOW TO BE A CHRISTIAN ONLY

There is no greater plea in the world today than that one which invites people to be “Christians on-ly.” The name Christian includes all that is needed, or should be desired, for spiritual appellation. In-deed, a real, genuine “follower of Christ” should be content in worshipping God as a “Christian only.” Anything less than a Christian is far too short, and anything that goes beyond, transgresses heaven's testimony for humankind. But the important question is: “How may one be a Christian and nothing else?”

OBEY THE DOCTRINE OF CHRIST AND NO MORE

To obey the Gospel as revealed in the New Testament means:

• Believe in Jesus Christ as the crucified, buried and risen Lord (John 8:28; Rom. 10:10).
• Repent of past or alien sins (Acts 2:38; 17:30).
• Confess your faith in Christ (Mat. 10:32; Rom. 10:10; Acts 8:37).
• Be baptized (immersed) for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38; Mark 16:15; Rom. 6:4; Acts 22:16; 1 Peter 3:21).

Upon such obedience, we have the assurance that God will add us to “the church” (Acts 2:47). And we further know that such disciples were called “Christians first in Antioch” (Acts 11:26).

WEAR THE NAME OF CHRIST AND NO OTHER

The fact that God promised a “new name” (Isa. 62:2), and that he gave it “first in Antioch,” should be ample evidence of the all-sufficiency of that name. To add to it, to put a handle on it, to weaken it by adding some human name, is but to mar its beauty, dishonor the head of the church, discredit him who died for us and whose name we are to wear (Acts 4:12).

It is, then, possible to wear the name of Christ and no other. The Holy Spirit even condemned the wearing of names of inspired men in New Testament times. How could it benefit us to wear names of men who are not inspired, or names given by men who are without heaven's authority to give them (1 Cor. 1:10-13)?

ACCEPT AND ABIDE BY THE CREED OF THE NEW TESTAMENT AND NO OTHER

This must necessitate a repudiation of all manmade creeds that have become binding upon so many people. It must do away with human doc-trines for governing worship. It takes the New Testament to make a Christian; it takes something more than the New Testament to make a person more than a Christian. It is possible to make the claim “let us follow the Bible only,” yet in actual practice, preaching and worship, accept along with it the “doctrines and commandments of men” (Mat.15:9). Creeds must be revised each year, but the Word of God never has to be revised. Accept it and nothing else.

BE A MEMBER OF THE CHURCH OF OUR LORD AND NOTHING ELSE

It is possible to obey the Gospel, genuinely be-come a child of God and then go off and “join some-thing” unheard of in the Bible, join an institution not founded by Christ, not wearing his name, nor worshipping according to his divine guidance. To do this is not to be a “Christian only.” God’s book, the Bible, is sufficient. The Lord’s church, the church of Christ, is enough. It is said: “It makes no difference what church one is a member of.” The Bible says that the church is the body of Christ (Col. 1:18; Eph. 1:22-23). Paul says there is only one body; the conclusion is there is only ONE CHURCH.

HAVE A “THUS SAITH THE LORD” FOR ALL THAT WE DO

If followed, this sacred principle would make it impossible for us to have in the public worship anything that is not authorized by our heavenly Father. There is something wrong with the man who is not satisfied to take just what the Bible has said. Our worship is to be one of faith (2 Cor. 5:7). Without faith it is impossible to please God (Heb. 11:6). Faith comes by hearing God's Word (Rom. 10:17). If we practice anything that we did not get from hearing and studying God's Word, it is not of faith. Whatsoever is not of faith is sin (Rom. 14:23). When sin is finished, it brings forth death (Jam. 1:15).

A FINAL THOUGHT

From these Scriptures we see that in order to be pleasing to our Father, we must have a “thus saith the Lord” for all that we do. Let us have no doctrine but that which is of Christ, no name but the name Christian, no creed but the New Testament, be a member of no church but that which belongs to Christ, and have a “thus saith the Lord” for all that we do and say religiously. In this way, all men are privileged to be Christians only!

Foy L. Smith

THEN PEACEABLE

Purity of doctrine and practice on the part of the church is absolutely essential and must be sought after by everyone who loves the Lord. We are charged to “contend earnestly for the faith once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3, ASV). A pure faith may be enjoined only by constant vigilance against every suggestion and semblance of error.

James wrote, “But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable” (James 3:17). To teach that this passage discusses the doctrine of the church is an incorrect exegesis. James’ teaching here applies to the peace in the heart of the individual and was designed to emphasize that peace cannot reign until purity controls the heart.

However, the principle is an eternal one. Peace cannot exist in the church until purity has been obtained. It is the obligation of the church to first attain purity in doctrine and teaching. In the absence of such there can be no peace among brethren.

False teachers constitute a threat to the peace and security of the saints today just as they did nearly two thousand years ago, and they must be resisted and refuted. When Jude wrote his short epistle the welfare of those to whom he wrote was being threatened. Therefore, his purpose was to stir up his readers to resist immediately all false teachers. He sought to impel them to reject the teachers and to repudiate their teaching. They were to defend with all their might the faith which had been delivered to them. To have followed Jude’s instruction would have no doubt caused a stir in the church. But to have failed do so would have been in direct disobedience to God and would have allowed error to have had free course. Which would have been better—to disturb the “peace” of the church and obey God or to keep things “peaceful” and disobey God thus allowing the false teachers to spread their doctrine?

Which is better today? Is there any difference? Is it better to disturb the “peace” of the church, obey God and refute the false teacher and doctrine, or is it better to keep the “peace” and thereby disobey God and allow the false teacher and his doctrine to subvert the church?

We believe Christians have no choice in this matter. If we are to be New Testament Christians then we must obey the commands it contains. We are “sick and tired” of hearing brethren cry for peace at the expense of sound doctrine. Paul said, “I am set for the defense of the gospel” (Phi. 1:16) Are we ready to defend the faith as he was? Paul also said we should:

Preach the word; be urgent in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with all longsuffering and teaching. For the time will come when they will not endure the sound doctrine; but, having itching ears, will heap to themselves teachers after their own lusts; and will turn away their ears from the truth, and turn aside unto fables.

If, at the expense of peace among one another, we fail to follow this divine command, then we have forfeited our right to be called New Testament Christians!

Division is evil. Jesus prayed for unity among Christians. (John 17:20-21) Paul condemned the division at Corinth (1 Cor. 1:10) and commanded them to “speak the same thing” and “be perfected together in the same mind and in the same judgment.” But regardless of the evils of division the banner of truth must wave. And when brethren haul down the flag of truth and place in its stead the flag of peace, they are warming by the devil’s fire.

Division is sad. It involves the loss of precious souls. But as sad and as evil as division is, I would rather stand with tears in my eyes and see the church divide than to see it go into apostasy. Doctrine is that important. Purity is that demanding.

William S. Cline

PREACHING THE GOSPEL . . . WITHOUT MENTIONING BAPTISM

An incident occurred in the Texas country years ago, the story of which I remember. The preachers of a small town proposed a union meeting in which all of the preachers of the town would take alternate turns to preach. There was a certain gospel preacher in the town, who had not been consulted on the arrangement. When he heard about this meeting he called on the other preachers to request his turn to preach, and asked to have a time assigned to him. He was in-formed that an agreement had been made that the subject of baptism would not be mentioned—that they had agreed to preach Christ and say nothing about baptism. To their surprise this preacher promptly accepted the conditions, and agreed to preach without the mention of the word baptism. A night was assigned for his sermon, and he announced in advance the subject: “What Must I Do to Be Saved?”

The people wondered how that kind of preacher could preach on that kind of subject under that kind of agreement to not mention baptism. They came from the necks of the woods and forks of the creeks to hear him preach that kind of a sermon.

He preached with much animation and eloquence on salvation, and the love of God that brought salvation to man through Jesus Christ. Reaching the point of the question—“what must I do to be saved”—he turned to Mark 16:15-16 and read the words of Christ: “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth”—and doeth that thing I promised not to mention—”shall be saved.” He then read Acts 2:38: “Repent, and do that thing I promised not to mention, “for the remission of sins.” And he read every verse in the New Testament on baptism, and called it that thing I promised not to mention!

It is a strange thing that denominational people will detour around such a plain and positive command, so simple to be understood and performed, so easy to accept and obey—and so much emphasized in the New Testament.

When Philip preached Christ, he preached the kingdom of Christ, he preached the all-prevailing name of Christ and he preached baptism into Christ.

“Then Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them…. But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women” (Acts 8:5-12).

Foy E. Wallace, Jr.

WHO IS RADICAL?

Some time ago a friend of mine (though we differ religiously) in conversation about the Bible, said to me: “You take the radical view.” Sometimes the word radical is given a meaning that is uncomplimentary, that the radical one is an extremist, goes to excesses, is immoderate, his judgment is poor, he is eccentric, unduly narrow, etc. That my friend meant none of these things, I’m sure. But let us note a definition of radical: “Proceeding from the root; original; fundamental; reaching to the center of the ultimate source; thoroughgoing.” A radical change is “one that is so thoroughgoing it effects the fundamental character of the thing involved.” In view of these definitions, if the position occupied by the church of Christ affects the character of error, then you might say we “take the radical view,” but as pertaining to the character of truth, no, for we believe in standing squarely on the truth of God’s word, and in the following paragraphs the reader can see why.

SOME EVERYDAY “RADICALS”

1. The Doctor. When the doctor diagnoses our case and prescribes a course for us to follow in order to avoid disease and death, do we look upon him as “radical,” unduly narrow, in insisting upon our following his instructions to the letter? Suppose he shows us that to vary from the prescribed course means death?

2. Medical Examiners. When the medical authorities set up medical standards are they radical? Is the law radical in upholding the standards? Suppose the doctor gives you a prescription; you take it to the pharmacist for filling and he tells you it makes no difference how it is filled; it won’t hurt you if you are honest. What if six different druggists say it makes no difference what ingredients they put into the medicine? What would you say? If the law demands that all prescriptions be filled exactly as they are written by all druggists, is the law radical? Are you radical, eccentric, unduly narrow when you insist the druggist fill the prescription exactly as the doctor has written it?

3. The Merchant. When you go to buy a pound of beans and the grocer gives you six-teen ounces for a pound, is he radical if he re-fuses to give you twenty ounces? If you purchase a piece of goods, and the merchant insists that the correct measure is thirty-six inches to the yard, do you consider him radical if he won't make a yard forty-six inches?

4. The Farmer. Suppose you were to insist that the farmer could raise a good crop of corn in zero weather, in the bleak winter time, would he be radical in saying it is impossible in view of the laws of nature? Suppose you insisted he could raise a crop of crimson clover from alfalfa seed, and he said it could not be done, would you consider him radical? Is he radical if he in-sists there is no variation from the laws of nature, but that every seed brings forth after its own kind?

IS GOD RADICAL?

1. Was God Radical in Old Testament Times? In Genesis 4 we read about Cain’s substituting in his worship to God. Was God radical in rejecting Cain’s worship because he did it not as God had commanded? Nadab and Abihu offered strange fire in burning incense in worship to God. Nowhere had God said “Thou shalt not get fire from another source,” but he had told them where to get fire for this purpose. Was God radical for consuming them when they did not do exactly as God commanded?

When God smote Uzzah for putting his hand on the ark when God’s law was contrary to this, was He radical? Was not Uzzah honest? his heart right? did he intend only good? Yes, but he violated a positive command and suffered for it (2 Sam. 6:6-7).

In 1 Samuel 15 we read that because Saul did not utterly destroy the Amalekites and all that pertained to them, God dethroned him. Was God radical in punishing Saul for saving alive a few cattle and the king of Amalek?

When the young prophet of Judah kept God’s law implicitly, until he listened to the lying lips of the old prophet of Bethel, and being deceived by his lie disobeyed God, was God radical when he allowed the lion to take the young man’s life in punishment for his disobedience (1 Kings 13)?

2. Is Christ Radical in His New Testament Law? The foregoing examples serve as warnings to us. Note a few things in the law of Christ. The promise of salvation is not to those who merely with their lips, or in their minds, call upon Christ, but those who do his will: “Not everyone that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doth the will of my Father which is in heaven” (Mat. 7:21). The Holy Spirit teaches in Revelation 22:14 that those who obey God are the ones who will enter heaven. Paul teaches in Hebrews 5:9 that Christ is the author of salvation to those who obey him.

Christ forbids any changes in His word. This has been God's law always. Deuteronomy 4:2 forbids addition or subtraction. Deuteronomy 5:32 forbad the Jews to turn either to the right or to the left, but to keep God’s commands. In Mark 7:1-7 Christ condemned the traditions and doctrines of the Pharisees. If we may make changes, have any doctrines and organizations we want, why did Christ forbid and condemn them in his day?

In 2 John 9-11 we are told that those who transgress, go beyond, what God has commanded have not God or Christ, therefore lost. In view of the fact that those who take liberties with the word of God are lost, tough they may think otherwise, we have only one motive in op-posing denominations and their error―to save the souls of people in them. Friends, when you wear a name in religion, have a doctrine God does not authorize, you are lost according to John. Revelation 22:18-19 forbids addition or subtraction. Those who do so are lost. No de-nomination can exist without addition or subtraction, hence the Bible says all who partake of them are lost. Do not find fault with me for pointing this out to you; appreciate it and turn to the truth before it is too late.

If we may vary from God’s word, why did God warn us about the doctrines of men (Col. 2:8; Eph. 4:14)? Paul says to preach a different doctrine from what he preached makes one accursed (Gal. 1:6-9). No denomination can exist without preaching a different gospel from what Paul preached. If all religious bodies were to preach and practice what the apostles taught in the New Testament, there would be an immediate removal of denominationalism and unity among us would prevail.

What is the standard? Christ said we would be judged by His word (John 12:47-50). Seeing that we shall be judged by the law of Christ, and that he forbids any variation from His will, we should live as close to His word as we possibly can, for those who will not hear (obey) Christ will he destroyed (Acts 3:22-23).          

ARE WE RADICAL?

Are we radical, or do we take the radical view, when we object to substitution in worship to God? God would not accept the substitutions of Cain, Nadab and Abihu. Why do people think He will accept them now any more than then? Do we take the radical view when we insist upon strict and complete obedience, lest we be rejected like King Saul? Are we radical when we insist upon pure seed instead of adulterated gospel? Luke 8:11 says the seed is the word of God. If one plants wheat seed, will it bring forth anything but wheat? If we want to raise a crop of corn, would we plant cotton seed and expect to grow corn? Neither can we plant the seeds of denomination-al doctrines and expect to raise Christians. It won't work; your commonsense will tell you that. The only way to raise Christians, and be pleasing to God, is to plant nothing but the seed of the kingdom, the unadulterated word of God.

Are we radical in insisting upon strict compliance with God’s word? Note Proverbs 30:6: “Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.”

Suppose a man has cancer of the liver and thinks he is all right? Does that make it so? Like-wise in religion: “There is a way that seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death” (Pro. 14:12).

Roy J. Hearn

With My Whole Heart…

“I will praise thee, O LORD, with my whole heart…” (Psalm 9:1).

Is there any part of man that should be withheld from Him with Whom we have to do? How can we serve Him partially? What should we do to ensure that we are serving Him with our whole heart? These three questions, while they may appear blasé to some, may well determine the destiny of the person sitting nearest you as you read these lines…and they may well determine the destiny of the person sitting nearest them as well. Let us spend a few minutes considering each question in the light of the passage we have selected as our text.

I. Is There Any Part Of Man That Should Be Withheld From Him With Whom We Have To Do?

On the very face of it the answer to this question is pretty simple: no. We might even begin before this question and ask why anyone would wish to withhold anything from Him with Whom we have to do. Without Him we would not be. And not being we certainly would not know the beauty of a mountain sunrise or summer breeze or a quiet sunset. Not being we would never see the look of love on our children’s faces or hear them call our name anytime some little thing frightened them or perhaps when they have fallen and scraped a knee. Now, since He has given us life and all things in it what on earth would move us to want to withhold anything from Him for which He might ask? It flies in the face of logic! Having given us so much, even if He did ask of us that we give Him our very lives it would be no large price to pay. If we have drawn a breath it is His. So what if He wants it back? Is it not Him to want back? Should He turn from us this very minute and withhold from us all blessings henceforth we would cease to exist. We would simply not be. Anything, therefore, that He desires of us we ought to give Him. He is worthy! He alone is worthy! 

 II. How Can We Serve Him Partially? Is it possible to serve Him partially?

I suppose, after a sort, it is. Inasmuch as we can perform some of the tasks commanded by Him and leave others undone we can serve Him partially. That is not, of course, to say that He will acknowledge such, not by any means. But how can we do such a thing? We have noted already that He has given us all, is there any right or just way that we can give back to Him less than He has given to us? Of course, if we give Him our all we still have not given Him as much as He has given us. But in His grace He will accept our all if we give it. I often think of those who “do” many right things only to fall short in so many other areas. Think of the denominations with their charitable endeavors, or the Catholics with their active interest in health care or the many individuals who are so nice and profess so great a love for the Lord. They do many right things, but not enough. “If we keep the whole law and offend in one point…” How sad! But then, whose duty is it to know whether a man is serving fully? Is it not the duty of each man to determine as much from the Word? That being true, it is sad, not because of the consequences to the partially obedient, but sad that they would set an example of partial service — partial obedience -- which is, in essence, but full disobedience!

 III. What should we do to ensure that we are serving Him with our whole heart?

In essence, this question deals with ensuring that we are not guilty of full disobedience by rendering only partial service. Every man will stand and answer before the judgment seat of the Lord for himself. Therefore every man has the duty of preparing for that accounting. How can I make such preparations as to be ready to give account? I would suggest to you first of all that we must study the Bible for ourselves. Never be content to believe “what we have always believed” on any subject. Learn the meaning of words you do not understand. Know that you know that you know what that passage really means. Meditate on the things you study. Mull them over. Consider them from every perspective. Be sure. Having done that, implement into your life what God requires of you. Leave nothing undone. If it means losing sleep, lose sleep. If it means making major changes in every aspect of your life, make major changes in every aspect of your life. Do whatever you must do to comply in every particular with the Word. Then, having studied and obeyed, never quit. You will never reach the age of retirement from Christianity. Retirement from your secular employment may come, but there is no retirement age from being a Christian! When you die nothing more will be required of you. Remain steadfast in all matters at all times and continue to study and to obey and never grow complacent The Lord will reward you accordingly.

Do you see how the answer to these three questions may well determine the destiny awaiting you? Rather, can you see a way wherein the answer to these three questions will not determine your destiny? May God bless you as you study and obey His word.

Tim Smith

Gospel and Doctrine

For some the Gospel of the New Testament is completely different from the doctrine of the New Testament. Because of this supposed difference some have concluded such things as: fellowship is to be based on Gospel but not doctrine; the Gospel is for non-Christians and doctrine is for Christians; preachers are to preach the Gospel, and therefore a preacher cannot be hired by a congregation of the church for him to preach in that place regularly; a preacher is to preach the Gospel and “leave everyone else alone” by staying away from doctrines upon which men differ; withdrawing fellowship should not be done because of doctrinal differences, etc. We have all seen these ideas advocated and practiced. Because of the importance of understanding these terms, I want to briefly consider the legitimacy of this distinction.

Gospel

First, the facts and foundation of the Gospel is the death, burial and resurrection of Christ (I Corinthians 15:1-2). These facts must be believed in order for a person to be saved. Without believing that Jesus died for our sins, was buried, and rose again the third day, man will remain lost because he will die in his sins (John 8:24). But the Gospel is not just those facts. In describing the second coming of Christ (when He comes to judge all humanity), Paul indicated that those who “obey not the gospel” will be lost (II Thessalonians 1:9). The Gospel facts cannot be obeyed, but the commands of the Gospel must be obeyed. The commands to be obeyed in the Gospel are revealed in Romans 6:3-6, “Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life…Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.” The process of a believer repenting of sins (Acts 17:30) and being baptized for the forgiveness of sins portrays the death and burial of Christ. When that person rises from the watery grave of baptism, the resurrection of Christ is portrayed in symbol. Rising to walk in newness of life indicates continued faithful obedience. The Gospel includes facts, but the Gospel is also something which must be obeyed by man in order to be saved!

Doctrine

Secondly, doctrine simply means teaching and is sometimes s translated. We read of the early Christians continuing steadfastly in the “apostles’ doctrine” (Acts 2:42). The apostles’ doctrine would be a reference to what the apostles taught. The apostles were given their message by the Holy Spirit (John 14:26; 16:13).        

During the first century that message (the apostles’ doctrine) was spoken orally; now the New Testament is that same message (the apostles’ doctrine) in written form (Ephesians 3:3-5). Christians today must continue in the apostles’ doctrine. We must teach what they taught. What they taught had to do with the obligations of Christians and non-Christians. The apostles’ doctrine is not just about the responsibilities of Christians in remaining faithful, but also about non-Christians and their obligations in order to be saved. The apostles’ doctrine is the entirety of the New Testament. The New Testament speaks of “sound doctrine” (Titus 2:1). Sound (healthy) doctrine is the New Testament without alterations of any kind.

Gospel and Doctrine

Thirdly, in the New Testament the Gospel is not only directed toward non-Christians and in the New Testament Doctrine is not exclusively for Christians. The Gospel is preached to Christians according to Romans 1:15-16; the Gospel in Mark 16:15-16 is to be taught to non-Christians. The Christian must obey the Gospel or be lost (II Thessalonians 1:8-9); so must non-Christians. In the New Testament Doctrine is directed toward Christians (Titus 1:9) and Doctrine is directed toward non-Christians (Acts 5:25; 13:12). The non-Christian will be lost without obeying the Doctrine (Romans 6:16-17); the Christian who rejects the Doctrine will also be lost (II John 9-11; Titus 1:9-11). Christians will be saved by the Doctrine (II Timothy 3:16-17). Clearly there is no difference in the New Testament between the Gospel of Christ and the Doctrine of Christ! No legitimate distinction can be made. Both terms refer to the same body of teaching. This same body of information is also called the Faith, the Truth, the Way, the Law of Christ, the Word.

It Does Matter

There is only one Gospel that saves (Galatians 1:6-9; Romans 1:16); it is the same as the Doctrine of Christ (II John 9-11). Deviations from that Doctrine (the Gospel) break our fellowship with God. We must not fellowship those who are not in fellowship with God. It does matter what we teach and practice on doctrinal matters! The message of Jesus, the apostles’ doctrine, must be taught to others in its purity (II Timothy 2:2). We will all ultimately give an account to God of our lives based on the standard of the Gospel, the Word (John 12:48). The doctrine that we believe and practice must be the Doctrine of Christ, the Gospel of Christ!

Lester Kamp