Is Your Gospel a "Chopper"?

There's a type of bike known as a "chopper". It's a highly customized motorcycle that features bold modifications to the original design. Wikipedia says: "To be considered a chopper a motorcycle frame must be cut and welded at some point." Needless to say, the "chopper" is very popular among a certain segment of biker enthusiasts! My point in this article is to draw some parallels and make some comparisons between what is done to modify a motorcycle and turn it into a "chopper" and what some people have done to the gospel. What do I mean by this? Let's consider the motorcycle first: What is a "chopper"? Three characteristics that immediately come to mind are: 

(1) A "chopper" is a motorcycle that has been modified from its original design; pieces have been cut off. Parts are missing. Redesigned "replacement parts" have been attached or welded on. Of course it looks good: it's a very sleek design and it's appealing in a certain type of way. But how does all this relate to the gospel? The apostle Paul viewed himself as a steward or a custodian of the gospel (1 Thess. 2:1-4); he did not change it or modify it in any way! Instead he says, "What I received, I passed on to you" (1 Cor. 15:3). 

(2) Another characteristic of a "chopper" is that it is very popular among a certain group of people. In and of itself, this is not necessarily wrong. But popularity is obviously not the basis by which we judge whether or not a motorcycle has been modified from its original design; whether it's an original or not. Popularity is a completely different discussion and consideration, and we should never confuse the two things. In other words, we should never confuse popularity with identity or authenticity. As one pastor has said (and this is in regards to the gospel): the Word of God is not based on a popularity contest. In fact, in regards to the gospel, the apostle Paul says: "Am I now seeking to please men? If I were still trying to please men, I would not be a servant of Christ" (Gal. 1:10). In other words, we don't determine the gospel based on popularity.

(3) Another characteristic of a "chopper" is that it has LOTS of shiny chrome parts! It's appealing to the human eye. But it's also missing some original parts! In regards to the gospel, it reminds me of how in Genesis chapter 3, Eve was deceived by the serpent when he directed her attention to the glistening fruit which God had forbidden her to eat. (See Genesis 3:1-6.) In 2 Cor 11:3-4, the Apostle Paul says, "But I fear, lest somehow, as the serpent deceived Eve by his craftiness, so your minds may be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he who comes preaches another Jesus whom we have not preached, or if you receive a different spirit which you have not received, or a different gospel which you have not accepted—you may well put up with it!" (2 Cor. 11:3-4, NKJV, cf. 11:13-14).

Now I'd like to summarize and make application to how this relates more specifically to the gospel. Is your gospel a "chopper"? In other words, are you preaching the gospel clearly and completely, or are you leaving out parts of it? Are you preaching the biblical gospel, or perhaps something else: something less than it? Because when we look in the Bible, when the Apostle Paul preached the gospel (and he specifically tells us what he preached: in fact, he specifically defines the gospel in great detail in 1st Corinthians 15:3-5), what did the Apostle Paul say it is? What is the Apostle Paul's definition of the gospel? Some Free Grace folks say that Christ's burial is not part of the gospel, but what does the Bible say? In 1 Corinthians 15:4, the apostle Paul specifically includes Christ burial in the gospel. This is the prima facie ("face value") or plain reading of the text. A famous rule of Bible interpretation says: "If the plain reading makes sense, seek no other sense." In 2 Corinthians 4:2, Paul states that he was always "setting forth the truth plainly" -- and so should we! So to say that Christ's burial (for example) is NOT part of the gospel is to not take God's Word at face value! And in fact even when we look at the Greek it's even more clear that Christ's burial is part of the gospel. What do I mean? Well, besides the fact that in 1 Corinthians 15:3-5 the Apostle Paul is giving us "direct discourse" or basically the quotation of the exact gospel that he preached (this is made clear by the hoti or kai hoti content clauses in verses 3 through 5: "that Christ died," "and that He was buried," "and that He was raised," "and that He was seen"), the little Greek word hoti (translated "that" in English) is a "content conjunction" and signifies a "content clause". In other words, the Apostle Paul is making it clear that these four clauses, these four phrases, are the content of his gospel. This is the gospel he preached. This is clear from the Greek and also in plain English if we take the Bible at face value and not try to twist it to say something that it doesn't. I'm making a point about Christ's burial because there is a Free Grace author who, a number of years ago now, had the audacity to remove Christ burial from the gospel! (I've written about this before so I won't go into any more detail here.) Of course, he wouldn't say that he "removed" it; he would say it was never part of the gospel in the first place. (It's the same difference either way: he's teaching that Christ's burial is not part of the gospel.) But the Apostle Paul says otherwise. The Bible says otherwise. The Greek says otherwise. And also you can tell that the groundless gospel proponent is wrong because he's not clearly preaching it unashamedly, but rather it's oftentimes something that is very subtle and deceptive. In other words, he's ashamed of his groundless gospel. And that's a clue that it's false teaching. Because if it were clearly what the Bible says he would be shouting it from the house tops (which thankfully he isn't), but that also makes it all the more dangerous because he's subtly deceiving people: he's coming across as orthodox when in fact he's not. Years ago, Pastor John Ashbrook wrote a little booklet about biblical separation and one of the things he said was: "The most dangerous deviation is the one closest to your own position." This relates to what I've labeled "the groundless gospel" because in many ways it's very similar to the true gospel and it can be hard to detect the difference if one is not looking for it or if it's not explicitly stated as such. And so the groundless gospel teaching is deceptive and therefore all the more dangerous. But getting back to my comparison between the "chopper" and the gospel, and how people have cut parts from the gospel and modified it and altered the original, and there are parts missing; there are original parts that are missing from it: I've mentioned Christ's burial as one example, but there are also other parts that are missing from the groundless gospel. Proponents of the groundless gospel don't include any mention of "the third day" (1 Cor. 15:4); or if they do mention it, they don't view it as part of the gospel. Proponents of the groundless gospel say it's not really part of the gospel. They also say that the phrases "according to scriptures" (1 Cor. 15:3, 4) are (according to them) technically not parts of the gospel. And similarly, the resurrection appearances of Christ described in 1 Corinthians 15:5 they say are also not part of the gospel. And so their "gospel" has a lot of missing parts! And that's why I say that their gospel is a "chopper". 

Dear reader, is your gospel a "chopper"? I hope and pray that it isn't! D. L. Moody was right when he said, "The closer we stay to the apostles way of presenting the gospel, the more success we will have." Let's make sure that we include all the original parts in the gospel when we present it to a lost and dying world, for it is "the gospel" that is the power of God unto salvation (Rom. 1:16), not merely part of it.