FUNDAMENTALISTS PREACH A DIFFERENT GOSPEL TO THE ONE TAUGHT BY CHRIST

"An angel of light preaching a different gospel"?

A problem that the Fundamentalist encounters when told that celestial messengers are dispatched by Christ to minister to mankind, is a phrase by Paul saying that even if an angel of light should appear and preach a different gospel, then that angel is Satanic. What the Pedant needs to consider first of all, is that Paul was trying to protect the first Christians from the contemporary dogmas which were prevalent at the time, and the theories associated with various gods that were being offered to those early Christians to follow. Followers of Paul's teachings need to remember the ignorance, cruelty and heavily superstitious nature of the people of that time.

With regard to angels of Light, the spiritual reality concerning the enemies of Christ, is that very sick souls ("evil" spirits) whose spiritual bodies have devolved and deteriorated, find it extremely unbearable to encounter even subdued spiritual vibrations. When a spirit has evolved so far as to be able to "stand in the presence of God", anything which hurts the Christ becomes abhorrent to them.

However, even assuming that a spirit from the darkness was able to produce the Divine spiritual light which those who have taken the steep hill to God in aeons past have bought for themselves through effort and evolution, what in fact would they have to preach in order for the gospel to be different from the one which Paul taught? We must also consider the things which Paul said which are part of the teaching of the gospel (which is not the one which the Literalists have isolated).

It has already been shown that the Literalist has based his interpretation of spiritual salvation upon a humanly-devised theology concerning a one-time affirmation of faith which is the beginning of sanctification for him and those like him only, but to the exclusion of the human race beyond the radius of his religious belief.

The mistake made by pedants concerning their interpretation of Paul's statement of being saved by faith and not by works, has already been explained i.e. that it is faith in God and by following the way shown by Him through Christ for man to follow (not faith in a metaphysical concept), by which we are saved. It is by faith in the Christ of God and His teachings and His great Example that our thoughts, actions and service enable the process of spiritual evolution. From God we came and to God we return when we have learnt to use our freewill as intended away back in the beginning when we were thought into being by God long before the earth plane came into being.

Yes, faith that He abandoned His power and conditions of Light, peace and joy, and "proceeded forth" from the Father God to live amongst men; yes, faith in Christ, that He lived and died and reappeared to show that He had conquered the death of His physical body; yes, faith that living the path laid down by Christ is certain to produce the ultimate result of spiritual perfection; yes, faith in all these things - but the saving power which is of the greatest potency, is the faith in a loving, caring and understanding Father, Who loves His creatures that much that He would come and live amongst us and even die for us.

All of the types of faith mentioned above are enhanced and edified by the teaching of the Greater World Christian Spiritualist Church. And moreover, the fact that Christ sends His messengers to mankind today encourages a greater faith and love for our Lord, because He has not left us alone with only the Sacred Record and human interpretation to guide and comfort us, but that He guides and comforts us with further revelation of His Truth by those of His servants who took the journey long ago.

As an addendum, a certain point of relevance can be brought in here. Perhaps ironically, this particular objection (Angel of light) by the Fundamentalist Christian actually points us further in the direction of Universalist teachings as opposed to the Fundamentalist's own belief in a limited and elitist salvation. Again, let us look at the aforementioned passages (concerning this angel of Satan 2Cor. Ch.11) which are used by the Literalist to refute the right of the non-Literalist to follow Universalism. Basically, we are told: if Satan can appear as an 'angel of light', then why not his ministers too? Somebody in the Corinthian community was misleading the Corinthians, and Paul was pointing out that their teachers were misguided. So, clearly, Paul wanted to make a point of the true Gospel (the truth concerning Christ and spiritual redemption).

What, then, does Paul say in the verse concerning Satan's ministers being able to take on the likeness of righteousness (2 Cor.11:15)? Plainly, and for no reason to twist the meaning, Paul tells the Corinthians that the ministers of Satan shall receive what they have given. Yes, indeed: "Their end shall be according to their works". Please note, Paul does not say: "The ministers of Satan shall be punished because they have not accepted a certain belief". Paul did not say: "Those preaching a different Gospel to me shall pass into everlasting condemnation because they have failed to believe that they have all of the consequences of their sins removed by accepting a metaphysical concept". No, in Paul's passage on this subject, he wrote clearly that the "end" of those who misguide others concerning the truth of the Christ "shall be according to their works".

This reinforces the truth that perfection "unto the likeness of Christ" comes only through the grace of God - the grace which has made it possible that the individual (or the soul fallen from perfection) can follow in the footsteps of Christ and draw back something of that perfection, thus drawing closer to the goal of perfection which God Almighty has always intended for His children.

The Bible emanates the truth of the evolution of the soul, and the examples of the carrying of the burdens of the Cross are emphasised by Christ. It is the simplest of paths, but the doctrines of man, influenced by those unseen souls who have fallen into darkness, are thrown in front of the Way that Christ laid down for man to follow, and such doctrines of words obscure the clarity and simplicity of that Way - the Christ Way, the way of the Christ Spirit.

They preach their own gospel

But what else did Paul preach in the Name of Christ, thus, by association, indicating that it should not be considered Satanic or the teacher not considered to be Satan (or one of Satan's "ministers")? Let us look at this carefully. Paul said: "Be not deceived, God is not mocked, for whatsoever a man sows that he shall also reap" (Gal.6:7). Also, Paul said: "...work out your own salvation..." (Phil.2:12). Now, it is very obvious to any unindoctrinated person that if Paul is claiming to preach the gospel in his letters, then these statements must also be considered part of that gospel. Is this the "gospel" which the Literalists preach? No.

Indeed, it is they who preach that a soul must believe in the primitive concept that Jesus was an altar-sacrifice*(1) which has the effect of enabling the believer access into the Heaven without any spiritual evolution having to be achieved. They do not teach that salvation comes through "working out your own salvation"; and they distort the true teaching that nobody can escape the consequences of violating Divine Law regardless of what is believed. Indeed, the teaching that Paul taught himself: "be not deceived, God is not mocked, that whatsoever a man sows that he shall also reap" (Gal.6:7).

But let us leave the last word on this matter to Jesus the Christ. When asked by a wealthy man: "Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?", Jesus replied: "if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments" and "if thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me" (Matt. 19:16-21).

Jesus was asked a direct question about eternal life and how to achieve it. Did Jesus then say that the rich man needed to accept that the consequences of his sins shall be removed if he just accepts that He is to be a "blood sacrifice" and that he would then be perfect to enter Heaven? No, far from it! Jesus could have taken this opportunity to say such a thing and make it plain, but instead He said something to the contrary. He said to achieve eternal life the wealthy man not only had to make sure that the most basic laws of love (Commandments) were followed by works, but he had to change himself internally through external works by abandoning materialism so that he was free enough to follow the Way laid down by Himself - the way of service to others without the desire for earthly reward, the way of understanding, the way of sanity, the way of transforming the lesser into the greater; the way of giving and not taking; the way of compassion; the way of forgiving; the way of self-denial of the things which still reflect the earth in their lower sense by keeping the heart and mind fixed on Divine values and the Light of the Cross, and thatmethod was to be used to become suitable purified (Matt. 19: 21)to enter eternal life and not a metaphysical belief.

The Good Master has spoken, may His words be kept and not twisted so as to allow Fundamentalist dogma to draw His children away from the Way laid down by Him into what is merely wishful thinking.

*(1) Altar-sacrifice: The concept that the acceptance of an altar-sacrifice is a means of entering a state of spiritual Perfection - the only alternative being eternal damnation - may be a somewhat naïve concept based upon the combination of superstition and a brush with the Supernatural, but this by no means infers that the blood of Christ that was spilt on the Cross was a pointless exercise or time wasted. But on the contrary, it was necessary for that most gracious Sacrifice to take place in order that the influence that Christ Jesus should leave upon this world should resound throughout the generations, and thereby affect the hearts and minds of mankind from shore to shore, thereby providing both spiritual evolution of the soul of the individual and of man as a whole. Without the Crucifixion, the teachings and Example of Jesus Christ would not have had the deep and everlasting effect that they have had. Indeed, if that Sacrifice had not occurred, then the point of progress to which man has presently evolved on this earth would not have been possible; due to the extreme selfishness and wickedness of the powers which dominated the world, man would today be worse than barbarians through devolution. This does not mean that God Almighty was not guiding mankind before the Crucifixion (this He has done by manifold methods), nor does it mean that He will cease to guide man (anything which raises the heart and mind of man towards that perfect Consciousness is precious in God's sight) - but it simply means that the Crucifixion was absolutely essential for man's progression, indeed, man's salvation.

Tony Bisson