False Teaching, Part 2
Summary
John warns his churches, “Don’t believe every spirit—test the spirits” (1 John 2:26–27; 4:1). In this sermon, Dominic Jackson names how half-true “American gospels” can sound biblical yet quietly edit the good news. This week he focuses on two influential versions—Christian nationalism and the liberation/social gospel—asking one simple question of each: Is this the gospel?
Anchoring in 1 Corinthians 15, he re-centers us on the crucified and risen Jesus as the only gospel, inviting self-examination: Where have we added qualifiers, swapped persuasion for power, or confused social outcomes with heart transformation? The call is to remain in Christ, let the gospel stay the gospel, and let everything else be a response to it.
Questions for reflection
When you “test the spirits,” what criteria are you actually using—and where do those criteria come from in Scripture (cf. 1 John 4:1; 1 Cor. 15)?
Where might you have added qualifiers to the gospel (political identity, social causes, prosperity, minimal “fire-insurance” faith, etc.)?
In your civic engagement, do you tend to rely on persuasion or power? What would Christlike persuasion look like?
How can a passion for justice remain a response to the gospel rather than a replacement for it?
Which “American gospel” most tempts you, and why does it feel compelling?
What practices help you “remain in him” (1 John 2:27)—and which practices subtly pull you toward edited gospels?
-
Last week we began a teaching on John's warning against false teaching, and this warning is found all throughout the letter of 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, even, John says over and over and over, almost in every chapter, do not be led astray, remain in Christ and be aware there is many deceiving messages, counterfeit gospels, false teachers out there. So his advice is test the spirits, test the spirit of the message you receive to find out if it is actually from God or not. And last week I shared something I had never really considered before, but the fact that the biggest threat to the early church wasn't coming from an atheist telling the young Christians to abandon their faith. It wasn't coming from a pagan theology or outside theology suggesting that the church worship a different God or a deity. The false teaching that John warns about in the church had in many ways half good theology.
Gnostics believed in the spirituality and heavenly existence they found themselves in. And at times they sounded similar to Jesus as he spoke about the spiritual realm and the earthly realm colliding In many ways, they fully believed in Jesus' spiritual existence. They believed in miracles, they believed in evil. In many ways, their message was it appeared to be rooted in Jesus only. It was just half of Jesus. Because as we've discussed many times, the gnostics didn't believe in the humanity of Jesus, and Christ was more like a spirit or an aberration instead of the being in the spirit. And so though the gnostics pointed to Jesus, the Jesus they pointed to was not the real Jesus. It was a very different Christ. And we see that sometimes half of a truth or sometimes something that sounds mostly true or a belief that contains some truth can often be more dangerous than a complete lie.
Additionally, worth noting instead of the early warnings in a false teaching in the Old Testament, you'll find over and over from the prophets, Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel, instead of the warnings coming from outside in the New Testament, the warning is not for something outside of the church but something inside the community. And recognizing this led me to ask the question if John or Paul or Jude or Jesus himself arrived in Des Moines today and went home and wrote the Church of Des Moines a letter, what false teaching would he be calling us to avoid? And it's my opinion that for the follower of Jesus, what I see as the most dangerous lies aren't a push to replace the gospel or reject it all together. But instead it's either to edit it or take certain parts away or to add to the gospel for the follower of Jesus.
And the problem with both of these is it doesn't just dilute the message, it doesn't just dilute the gospel, it destroys it. Galatians one, six, Paul writes, I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you to live in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel, which is really no gospel at all. And so last week in the spirit of John and also with the reminder from Paul that there is no other gospel, no qualifiers, no separators, no additions, no improvements, no takeaways, anything else is no gospel at all according to Paul. So last week we began looking at what I refer to as the seven American Gospels of today. This list of course is not exhaustive, but these are just things that I have in my opinion have noticed probably as the most popular or prevalent influences.
So last week, we did exactly as John tells us to do, to test the spirit of the message. And for us the question was is this the gospel? That's it, not is this good or is this bad? Because as we'll see, many if not most of the different movements have some good in them, some very good, some not so much, but they are not the good news. That is the point. That is the test, the litmus test that we have, the parameters we're working with, and they aren't what the message of Jesus is rooted in. They may be led by the gospel at times, but they aren't the gospel. And so in a spirit of hopefully humility and gentleness and love, not as a way of picking fights or judging anyone or shaming anyone or any other movements, but simply to allow the gospel to remain the gospel and what comes from that gospel to remain as simply a byproduct or a response, not what we build our faith on.
That's the hope. At least we'll see how it goes. And so this morning I ask for grace, I ask for patience and for all of us to have a spirit, myself included, all of us, to have a spirit of searching for Jesus in this text and of course in our lives. Let's pray and then we'll look at our sermon, Lord, as we hold John's warning against false teaching along with Paul's claim that there is only one gospel, your gospel, I pray for that very message to be clear, to be understood, to be followed, and to be heard this morning, pray this in the name of Jesus. Amen. In so last week we looked at a couple of different American gospels. We started with what I simply refer to as the doomsday gospel. It was fun, the idea that the whole world is basically going to hell in a hand, baskets or whatever the phrase is, and the only hope good news would be for Jesus to rapture us all out of here.
There's debate on the timeline of that. However, in the meantime, this often followers of this gospel, this could often lead to an either aggressive type of moral and spiritual superiority without a heart of grace or empathy with either a guy standing at the street corner yelling and telling you that you're going to hell, nevermind the fact this person knows nothing about you, or this leads to a spiritual apathy and seeing world events of war and destruction not as heartbreaking or evil, but instead as exciting and another box to check before Jesus returns and our hearts no longer break for things happening around the world or even in our own backyards. We also looked at what I refer to as the evangelical gospel, which like most of these is a loaded term could mean 10 different things to 10 different people, but I define this as a gospel rooted in dividing people in two categories, being saved and being not saved, and how this belief can put a major focus on a singular moment like praying a sinner's prayer, maybe raising your hand during an altar call.
However, this can also lead to a life of spiritual atrophy or faith simply serving as fire insurance, even though Jesus very much commissioned, not suggested, commissioned and even commanded his disciples to live a life of discipleship following him, becoming like him. Additionally, I shared how a faith or gospel that begins with a presentation of the minimum requirements and a sort of extreme pendulum swing against a works-based faith, which is also not good, can lead to a shallow or cheap relationship since the New Testament uses the imagery of marriage to describe our relationship with Christ, I pose the hypothetical of imagining if someone were to propose to you or me someone had proposed for marriage, and your initial response to that person would be, what is the minimum requirement I must do to stay married to you? Not a good way to start a relationship, and if this is the answer you get, I would say book a session with your local marriage and family therapist.
I know a couple, but I would call this a red flag if somebody says, what is the minimum thing that I must do to satisfy and still remain in this relationship? However, in many evangelical circles with a focus on a singular moment to become saved, this can easily be communicated as to what it means to follow Jesus transaction over transformation arriving instead of becoming. Once again, the thesis isn't to question whether or not evangelicals or doomsday Christians or anyone else we talk about are saved or not, or whether there is good in some of these beliefs or biblical truth within them. The question is, is this the gospel? You won't find the sinner's prayer in the Bible. I'm not saying it's not a great place to start. It's how I came to faith in the late nineties at a summer camp with every evangelical box and cliche checked, good and bad.
I have no issue with starting here. Please hear that especially if this begins with repentance as Jesus himself tells us to do, it's a fine place to start. It's a terrible place to stay. Additionally, for my friends who grew up in a mainline church or a parish or even some of my Baptist friends who grew up in VBS or Sunday School, faith may have not started with a singular moment for you. Maybe your testimony is that you grew up singing Jesus loves the little children or going through catechism classes and there isn't one moment, but instead a long obedience in the same direction. To quote Eugene Peterson, so last week I talked about also the prosperity gospel, the idea of Jesus dying on the cross so that I might have a land rover or never get the flu again, and though I do believe in a total restoration and reconciliation and of riches, not worldly riches, I don't think that will happen in this life for most of us, at least it didn't with the disciples or Jesus himself, and most importantly, not the gospel of Jesus.
We talked briefly about two other American gospels, the self-help gospel and the sinners in the hands of an angry God where God seems to have more in common with Zeus than the picture we have in the life and ministry and heart of Jesus Christ. I won't rehash those. I've talked a lot about them, but I want to use the rest of our time here this morning to look at the last two because these are the two that I see probably the most today. And so this morning I want to talk about the Christian nationalist gospel and the liberation gospel, and if already one of those is not sitting right with you for being even considered on this list, at least let me give a working definition to share what I am talking about to make sure we're talking about the same thing. And also once again, the question is, is this the gospel, the full gospel?
That is what we are talking about. Does the gospel need this qualifier, this attachment? Some would say yes. We'll take a look. So first, let's talk about the Christian nationalist gospel. This is like many of the other gospels where it can mean many, many different things to many different people. So let's hear from a Christian nationalist voice directly to give us a working definition. This from the book, the Case for Christian Nationalism. Stephen Wolf defines a Christian nation as a nation whose particular earthly way of life has been ordered to heavenly life in Christ. And depending on how you read this, you might think that doesn't sound like such a bad thing. In fact, that's kind of the end plan of Jesus, right? So what's the issue here? Wouldn't this country be a better place if all of our leaders loved and worshiped and followed Jesus?
I hope you would agree with that if you're a follower of Jesus. So again, what's the issue? And under this, I'm going to say it probably 20 more times, is this the gospel that is what we're talking about. So one of the biggest issues with Christian nationalism isn't the dream being proposed a nation following Christ one day, every knee will bow, right? The problem isn't the answer, it's the means and methods used to get there in which wolf and many other Christian nationalists would respond by any means necessary, but first, as we did last week with all of the other gospels, start with the good more followers of Jesus in every field, in every profession is a great thing. I want more Jesus loving police officers and social workers and pro surfers and accountants and teachers, and also, yes, I want more people who love Jesus in the government, which is a big push for Christian nationalists.
And again, this makes sense. Proverbs 29, 2 comes to mind. When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice. But when a wicked man rules, the people groan. Additionally, acts 19 in Romans 16 tells us about a missionary that Paul sends out to share the gospel, and this evangelist is a politician. In fact, he's pretty high up there. He's the city treasurer, and Paul doesn't just say, quit your job and then begin ministry, but it seems like this ministry will happen in accordance and in connection to the role that he has. Also, I like Christian nationalists, believe the scriptures hold power, and I believe in this book, however, unlike followers of this gospel, it is not my mission for the Bible to be displayed in every government building, in every classroom and to force teachers to teach from the Bible even if they aren't followers of Jesus.
Worth noting it's strange that it's often always the 10 commandments and never the beatitudes being argued to hang up in the classroom or the DOT, but we're supposed to be talking about the good. So additionally, there are many verses in the Old Testament that talk about a nation that is rooted in faith will be blessed. I don't read this as Jesus having a special relationship with America because we might happen to put in God, we trust on our money or whether or not our politicians claim to be Christians, but we can agree to disagree. However, again, more faith is a good thing including and especially in our government and our nation. However, the bad first, this gospel contradicts the Christian philosophy of witness Christ's kingdom to be advocated by persuasion, not power. Conversion must be a free choice, not instituted by command, compelled by the spirit rather than instituted by human law.
Laws enforced by the sword or legislation control behavior, they cannot change hearts. Additionally, in this age, we can't institute or codify God's law in totality. It's just not possible. That day will come, but it will be done by Christ himself the true king. Third, this form of Christian nationalism goes against key features of the American experiments, mainly pluralism and religious liberty. The first amendment of the Constitution flashbacks to third grade. For you say Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. Christian nationalism isn't just anti-Christian in its approach, it's also anti-American in its execution. Lastly, if I still have friends in the room, lastly in myth of a Christian nation, Greg Boyd posed these questions which are super helpful for me. Did Jesus ever suggest by word or example that we should aspire to acquire, let alone take over the power of Caesar?
Did Jesus spend any time and energy trying to improve, let alone dominate the reigning government of his day? Did he ever advocate to pass laws against the sinners he hung out with and minister to? Did he worry at all about ensuring that his rights and the religious rights of his followers were protected? Does any author in the New Testament remotely hint that engaging in this sort of activity has anything to do with the kingdom of God? The answer to all these questions is of course, no. So back to the original question is of this, the gospel, did Jesus die so that America or wherever you call home can not only worship freely but also so that you can force your neighbors to do so? Also, is it America's job to quote save America as one politician recently said about the movement? No, that's not the gospel I read in the scriptures.
In fact, it's the complete opposite. The gospel is about God saving and redemptive act of rescuing us. He doesn't need us to save him as individuals or as a nation. Okay, is this the gospel? I don't think so. Next American gospel, we'll call the liberation gospel. Historically, this was connected to or built off the social gospel. Other times it is completely separate and refers to a very specific movement tied to Latin Catholic theologians and revolutions in the late fifties, early sixties. Others will use this as synonymous as progressive theology, sometimes progressive meaning theological, other times meaning simply political. And this is used by folks on the right and the left as a compliment and an insult. Once again, this can mean many different things to many different people. So here's what I mean. What is the liberation gospel? Let's hear from an advocate directly. The theology of liberation or the liberation gospel is a marriage.
His words not mine, of Marxist philosophy With biblical teachings, it argues that we should reconstruct the whole of Christian theology and the story of the Bible by seeing it through the access of the oppressor and the oppressed. Now, in the same way, the guy next to you or three rows behind you heard the definition of Christian nationalism and thought, well, I would've used different language. But what's so wrong with that? Many might hear this definition and feel the same way. Additionally, what many might hear as a critique, even though that's not the initial question, the question is, is this the gospel? Is this the message Jesus lived for and died for and died with and resurrected as or not? While many might hear, an unfavorable depiction might then assume, I am suggesting the opposite is true. And historically, and unfortunately this has not been the case in many places, if the social justice gospel or the Marxist gospel or the liberation gospel is not true and not the whole gospel, then therefore the teachings of Jesus must swing the opposite direction, meaning the Bible doesn't care about injustice or the oppressed or marginalized.
And additionally considering this was part of the definition clearly that this must mean there is not a dualistic system hierarchy or simply there's no such thing as oppressed and oppressor, none of which I am saying, and I don't believe the Bible is either. If so, Moses and Paul and Jesus has entered the chat as the kids like to say. So here, here's what is good based on the definition, the working definition that I provided, the Bible certainly teaches followers of Christ are to care for the poor. Galatians two 10, James 2 15, 16, my paraphrase is, if you remember, he is writing and he says, if somebody is cold, don't just pray that they'll find warmth. Give them your jacket. If someone is hungry and you have plenty of food to spare, help them. You might be the answer to your prayer. God might be using you to help this person who's going without my paraphrase or at first John three 17 we looked at a few weeks ago, and the Bible says, we should also not only care for the poor and those hurting, but also speak out against injustice.
Jesus cares deeply about justice. The prophets of the scriptures care deeply about justice. Just read the Old Testament prophets, read the New Testament authors, but even better, Jesus cares not just about social justice but cosmic universal justice. Jesus wants more than just to repair broken systems and hurting communities. Jesus wants to save the world. He cares not just about the situation or the system or the experience of the person. He cares about the entire person. Jesus doesn't just want the slave to become free or the hungry to eat. He wants them to experience true freedom in him and to eat of the bread of life. Though once again, this does not mean that Jesus doesn't care about earthly injustice. Do not hear that, but we're talking about the good here. I'm getting ahead of myself. So those who follow the liberation gospel according to our working definition have been incredibly vocal and sometimes even proactive in living out their faith.
They see a connection between confessing faith and demonstrating faith. Same conviction as the bullhorn doomsday guy, but very, very different vibes, different methods, maybe a protest or a rally or how they vote. But again, there is a connection between what a person believes and what they do. This is great also to know God is to do justice. Jeremiah 2216. And so there is a doing, not just believing for justice but participating in it. Also another good thing, the language in this gospel often paints a picture of heaven coming down to us in justice and peace and reconciliation versus us trying to earn our way up to heaven. It's proactive. It champions diversity and equity. It's been one of the leading churches and churches who adopt this are some of the leading in multiculturalism champions, diversity, equity, the Bible talks about justice more than almost any other subject.
There are lots of great things that come from this gospel. However, it's not all good news, my humble opinion, and it's definitely not all the good news or the gospel. Here are some issues. Also, I should have said this earlier I did last week. I invite criticism about my reading last week. I invited criticism of my reading of the evangelical gospel, the prosperity gospel, the doomsday gospel, and I said, if I'm wrong, let me know. Seriously. I invite feedback, even critiques, and one person took me up on it and we had a wonderful conversation and ultimately that we actually just discovered that we agreed more than we didn't. It didn't change my mind. I didn't change theirs, but we talked, we listened, we prayed. And so if you disagree, I'm open. This goes with of course, every sermon including this one. So email or text me anytime.
Okay, so issues with the liberation gospel as previously defined. First, if this was Jesus' primary mission, why didn't his life reflect this? Remember that quote that most of us liked from Greg Boyd about Christian nationalism being contrary to the way of Jesus? We can read that same quote and replace Christian nationalism with the social gospel deliberation, gospel, and it is still true. Jesus didn't move his mission, his entire mission to Rome or launch a campaign against Caesar. He went after sin and evil and death. Basically, Jesus' mission was too big to be a social movement or a revolution, which sometimes looked like a social movement or a revolution. But this was the result, not the reason Jesus was born. He was murdered, buried, and resurrected. Also, another issue is, again, in order to pair the gospel with something or someone else, it automatically becomes corrupted.
One liberation advocate writes, the goal of Marx is the mission of Christ. Now to understand the world, but to change it, particularly its goal is not to protect and defend a tradition. The theologian should venture beyond the traditional historical models, making use of sociological analysis to understand the cultures he seeks to change. What the liberation gospel or social justice gospel becomes is what society deems just hence the word social as in societal. If the majority of people on Twitter say that something is good or something else is bad, socially speaking, this is the standard. One of the, I wasn't going to share this, but I think it was helpful for me. That is my only intention. One of the clearest examples of this, of the social and the social gospel being subjective or changing as this advocate was suggesting, it changes with time can be found in a speech from a young politician making a name for himself by pointing towards the social issues of his day.
And he was speaking to who he described as an erased population. He's speaking to an erased population about the social issues of his day. And in his first speech, which lasted nearly two hours, it was interrupted like 60 times to applause and cheers. The young politician touched on a theme he would repeat in speeches over and over and over, stating He did not believe that ever on earth could a state survive with continuing inner health if it were not based on inner social justice. The speech would end with a call to tear down the walls, which separate the classes. Who was this champion of liberation and social justice? Hitler, who clearly, clearly had an unbiblical view of who the oppressed and the oppressor was, what justice looked like and what steps should be taken to achieve it. The problem with adding anything to the gospel, whether that be American or prosperity or self-help or communist or feminist or conservative or social justice, is these terms can change depending on the one who hears and speaks them, which can cause a false dichotomy and inherently deprioritize the gospel itself.
How is it? You can hold up two quotes, one from Martin Luther King Jr. A man who loved Jesus and longed for justice, and a quote that I just shared from Hitler who was antichrist and was one of the most unjust, evil men this world has ever seen. How is it you can hold up two quotes, one from each as we just proved, and they sound similar and mean two entirely different things. And so when someone asks me if I'm patriotic or socialist or conservative or liberal, my first question is, what does that mean to you? Here's what it means to me. What does that term mean to you? Before I agree to anything, however, when someone asks me about the gospel, my definition shouldn't matter. I point to Christ. That's the difference. Words change. Meanings change. Society changes depending on our definitions. Liberation and social justice and the gospel may be miles apart or they may be hear this as close as loving God and obeying his commands.
John 1415, if you love Christ, you will keep his commands. And that is what is fueling so many people seeking justice. And it is a beautiful thing. So the question for disciples of this is, which is your horse and which is your cart? Is your view of justice because of the gospel, great. Or has it become your gospel? Additionally, another issue is this gospel can fall into a workspace. Faith, it can ironically be polarizing. If unchecked, it can elevate secular political voices over and sometimes even in opposition to biblical voices. It can water down or erase parts of the Bible that are uncomfortable, unpopular, or frankly embarrassing by doubling down on justice and justification. If unchecked one can double against sanctity and sanctification it, like all of the other gospels will take the world to better understand the word instead of looking at the word to better understand and minister to the world.
Okay, lecture over. Here's the point. There are some true things in all of these gospels. I believe Jesus cares deeply about justice. He cares about this nation. He cares more about sin than we'll ever know. It literally cost him his life. Jesus does want us to prosper and live life to the fullest and have our best lives. Now, his definition is of course different than the world's, but still, he cares about us deeply. Jesus cares deeply about evangelism, hence his departing words in Matthew 28. And lastly, we believe Jesus will return one day to a world that in many ways is going to get darker in some ways and in desperate need of light. All of these things can be true, and yet they are not the truth, the way and the light. So we talked a lot about false teachings or half truths. We talked about the different American gospels.
So what is the gospel? This might be helpful, probably should have started here, but one Corinthians 15 tells us Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand by this gospel. You are saved if you hold firmly to the word I preached. Otherwise, you have believed in vain for what I received. I passed onto you as the first importance. Here it is, that Christ died for our sins. According to the scriptures that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the scriptures, and that he appeared to Peter and then he appeared to the 12, and that he appeared to many more. Christ was born. He lived, he was murdered, buried, and was resurrected. That is the good news. Anything else, whether it is your God, your salvation, your mission, your qualifier, your qualifications, your allegiance, anything else is not the gospel.
And so my encouragement, some of these I shared last week, but simply to read through one of the gospels this week, Matthew, mark, Luke, or John to read through, read the life and the words of Jesus, to both shape our understanding of Christ and to highlight anything we have assigned or appropriated to him to better understand Jesus, the true Jesus, we look at the story of Jesus directly and ask ourselves, in what ways have we been tempted to add or take away from the true gospel? Lastly, the question we leave with is we can read. We often call them books in the Bible, but the first four contributions to the New Testament are often referred to as the gospels. In fact, most of them will begin with this is the gospel according to Matthew or Mark or Luke or John. And so we simply ask the question, what is the gospel according to me?
What is the gospel according to Dominic? And how is that line up with the gospels we read? And then lastly, how does my life reflect that gospel? Let's pray Spirit of God highlight in us, including me, especially me, any ways we have added to your message, your ministry, your mission. Help us to see any ways we have elevated other things to be equal or even above the gospel while erasing other parts of your truth and your word. Not to say that having passions or convictions is bad, of course not, but help us to see if we have turned these things into God's, into authority, into devotion, and to worship Jesus, you tell us to lay down our burdens and you will give us rest. And most of us hear this as our struggles and our pain. But Lord, this invitation is also to the weights we have strapped on our own backs and the burdens we have taken on that are not ours to bear. So give us eyes to see. Give us a heart like yours and give us the strength to return to the one true gospel. And then everything else that comes remain as a response to that good news to be led by you. Amen.