What Gospel Do You Preach?

"But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed". (Galatians 1:8-9)

"For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ". (Galatians 1:12)

Do you preach the gospel that was given to Paul by the revelation of Jesus Christ? Let me ask you, would Paul have left out the mentioning of the cross of Christ when he presented the lost the gospel? Was Paul's message to the lost, "He that believeth on Him hath everlasting life" apart from the preaching of the cross to them? Can such a message of "He that believeth" be presented to a sinner without telling him of a Savior that died for him? I'm not asking whether you believe in the cross of Christ or teach it, but whether or not the lost can be saved apart from any knowledge of the cross that Paul preached?

Do we not have verses that say to simply believe without mentioning the cross? Yes, and here is the problem of isolating verses. If I was asked to read John 6:47 that says, "Verily, verily, He that believeth on Him hath everlasting life" and is not allowed to look at the totality of the gospel, then I must conclude that the cross does not need to be preached, even though the death of Christ was preached in verses 51-56. The problem of isolating verses is that if I were approached by another man who asked me to read Mark 16:16: "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." and was not allowed to look at Scripture as a whole, then I must conclude that baptism saves. He might even go further and read Acts 2:38 that says: "Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" to further his argument.

There are many so-called gospels circulating today that quote a verse to substantiate their beliefs and many are deceived thereby. I believe it is crucial that we study the totality of the gospel message to the lost and not verses scattered all over. It is important to study the verses in light of its context. If Paul declared there is a gospel that he preached and that any other gospel falls under anathema, then let us make absolutely certain that the message we believe and teach to the lost is the gospel that Paul said he received by direct revelation of Jesus Christ.

We should focus on what Paul teaches concerning the gospel of the grace of God. Paul warned against those that preach any other gospel than the one he was given by direct revelation of Jesus Christ. To preach any other gospel was to be considered an anathema. Shouldn't such a statement concern you? Are you preaching any other gospel than what Paul taught to the lost? This is the deciding factor because if your gospel does not match that of the apostle Paul, then you are to be anathema. Paul has but one message to the lost. Paul stated in 1Corinthians 1:17 that, "Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. Verse 18 makes it very clear what he was preaching:

"For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God."

Look at verse 1Corinthians 1:21:

"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."

What did Paul just claim in verse 18 to be preaching? The cross! To whom was the message of the cross preached? It was "to them" that perish or those that get saved. With what message pleases God? The cross is in the context. It was the cross that some perish foolishness, but it was also God that was pleased by this foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. The cross continues to be in the context. Let's read verses 1Corinthians 1:23-25:

"But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling block, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men."

It is clear that this message is not being preached to the saved, but to the lost. What message did Paul say he preaches to the lost? Christ crucified! Paul said that "we" preach Christ crucified, and who was the 'we' he was referring to? It is clear that the preaching of the crucified Christ was not committed to Paul alone. He wrote in 1st Corinthians 15:11: "Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed." This extends to the other apostles. When someone quotes a verse from John that says, "He that believeth" as proof that the lost do not need to hear about the cross, then they must realize that Paul said that this was the message that not only he preached, but the other apostles and that message was Christ crucified! How can I say that John and others did not preach the cross when Paul specifically said they did?

Look now at 1Corinthians 2:2:

"For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified".

If I were to show you the above verses, would you conclude that one must preach Christ crucified to the lost? Is this the message that pleases God? Is this the message that is the power of God? Is this the message that caused Christ to send Paul according to 1Corinthians 1:17? Is it safe to assume that the gospel of Christ, that is the power of God unto salvation is the preaching of the cross by Paul? (Romans 1:16)

How does Paul define the gospel? Look at 1Corinthians 15:3-4:

"For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"

It is sad to say that those who claim to believe in free grace are attacking this very passage. We have those that will change the meaning of this chapter from the gospel of our salvation to the gospel of sanctification. Do you see this chapter as a gospel of sanctification as some teach?

How does someone attempt to arrive at the so-called 'good news of sanctification'? Verse 2 uses the word 'saved' in the present tense. When saved is used in the present tense, then it refers to our progressive sanctification. However, to make verse 2 as defining, verses 3 and 4 as a sanctification gospel, then you have problems. 1Corinthians 15:1 says:

"Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand."

Paul is talking about the gospel that he preached unto them and they received. Paul said, this message was what he, too, received and this is the same message that he now delivered unto them "first" or you can say of "first importance" according to verses 3 and 4. Did Paul first give them the so-called good news of progressive sanctification? Verse 1 is not a reference to a sanctification gospel, but the gospel by which they now stand and that we all stand, if we have trusted in Jesus Christ for salvation and then Paul proceeds to remind them of that gospel they believed of first importance. Verse one if not pointing to progressive sanctification, but our perfect standing because of the gospel. The gospel has given us a standing as Romans 5:2 states:

"By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God."

1Peter 5:12 says:

"By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I suppose, I have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand."

Our stand is a positional truth that takes place upon receiving the gospel that saved us. The word "stand" is not in the present tense, but in the perfect tense. This is a fixed position that we have before God in Christ. The perfect tense in Greek is used to describe an action that was brought to completion and its effects carry on to the present. This is not the case with progressive sanctification. Progressive sanctification refers to our Christian experience, or daily walk, and our position refers to who we are in Christ. Your walk right now does not match your true standing in Christ. Are you perfect in Christ? Yes, you are, but are you perfect in your walk? No! Are you as righteous as Jesus Christ? Yes. Are you as righteous as Jesus Christ in your daily walk? No! Did you get a perfect standing in Christ from the good news of sanctification or from the gospel message that you believed and were saved by?

The so-called grace teachers that now attack this gospel as a gospel of sanctification try to further their proof by saying that Paul did not teach justification by faith here. Of course, Paul was not teaching justification by faith alone because some of the Corinthians were denying the resurrection and Paul now needed to correct them. Paul was arguing that if this gospel he preached didn’t happen, then they were still in their sins and not that their spiritual growth would be stunted. Paul was reminding them and clearly argued this gospel he first preached to them that some now were denying the resurrection. He told them that if Christ did not rise then their faith would have been in vain and they would be still in their sins and those that have died in Christ have all perished. It is clear that Paul meant the gospel that saved them from their sins. To argue that, then this cannot be the gospel we preach simply on the basis of verse 2 and the fact that justification is not mentioned is utterly foolish. It is as foolish as the Universalist that claims that Paul never preached on hell once so therefore hell cannot exist. Paul even stated in verse 11:

“Therefore whether it were I or they (the other apostles), so we preached, and so ye believed.”

So ye believed? What? The good news of sanctification? Or the gospel that saved them as taught in verses 3 and 4 that Paul said he delivered unto them “first” and that they now stand positionally? Paul summed it up that this crucified Savior that he preached to them was also the resurrected Christ. Will you also make this a sanctification gospel? If you are a believer and have strayed from these truths, then clearly you will not be experiencing growth and that cannot be denied. However, reading the entire chapter should prove to you beyond a shadow of a doubt that Paul was clearly arguing the gospel that they believed and were saved and that they now stand. Paul was referring to the gospel that saved them and what would have been the case if the resurrection never happened at all. Praise God for verses 20-21 that says:

“But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. For since by one man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam, all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.”

So what was the gospel Paul preached according to 1st Corinthians 15:3-4, from the ‘first’ or as of “first importance”? What was the message the Corinthians believed and were saved? You should now be able to see in two different chapters in 1st Corinthians, the gospel that Paul preached and that it contained the death of Christ for salvation. This was the message he preached to those that perish and also to those that get saved and it was this message he preached unto the Corinthians from the ‘first’. What gospel do you preach?

Look at Romans 5:6-11:

“For when we were yet without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. But God commandeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. Much more then, being now justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of His Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement.”

Why would we leave this out of our message? Again, what was the message that pleased God according to 1st Corinthians 1:18,21? What was the message that saved them according to 1st Corinthians 15:3-4? We have Jesus death and resurrection here in Romans 5 being preached. Clearly, here in Romans 5, Paul was not preaching the good news of sanctification as that was a term I never heard used until recently. He was teaching the good news that saved us and gives us eternal security!

Romans 5 contains the gospel. You have sinners that have no hope or strength of ever saving themselves. You have the love of God for sinners where He sent Christ to die for us. We have the basis for our justification and that is through His shed blood at Calvary. We see how God was reconciled to us sinners. We can see the resurrection as the verse says that we are saved by His life.

The gospel gives us believers a wonderful hope in 1st Thessalonians 4:14 that says:

“For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even to them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with Him.”

I see during the Acts period where special gifts were being distributed to God’s people where certain individuals did not know who the Holy Spirit was as written in Acts 19:2:

“He said unto them; Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.”

However, I have never heard anyone be asked, “Have ye believed in the cross since ye have been saved?” It should be increasingly clear that nobody was ignorant about the cross of Christ for salvation. It also should be increasingly clear that Paul’s gospel never contained anything less than the cross of Christ for salvation. It should be obvious that Paul did not teach to believe upon a Jesus that gives eternal life apart from the cross.

According to Galatians 1:8-9, what was the gospel Paul preached? If you say the death, burial and resurrection, then what conclusion do we have when it comes to those that deny the cross has to be preached? According to 1Corinthians 1:18,21, are they preaching the same message? Are they preaching the message that Paul claims that pleases God? Are they preaching the gospel of 1Corinthians 15:3-4? Would Paul include them under the pronouncement of anathema for denying that the cross has to be preached to the lost?

Question! Did Paul preach Christ crucified to the Galatians? You bet! Look at Galatians 3:1:

“O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you.”

Evidently, set forth is Paul’s way of saying that this crucified Christ was proclaimed to them in graphic detail. Evidently literally means, "put up as a public notice." It means that it was clearly portrayed or announced. However, Paul presented the crucified Christ, so we can be sure that it was a powerful presentation by words he chose here. This was the message that Paul was surprised as to how soon they were moved from it (1:6). Was Paul teaching here this so-called good news of sanctification? No. You even have Paul talking about justification by faith alone as well in this passage. Paul challenges their foolish thinking:

“This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of the faith?” (Galatians 3:2)

Paul teaches them again about faith and the substitution death by Christ and how we are free from the law:

“Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Curse is every one that hangeth on a tree.”

Verse 13 is telling us that the curse of the law is death. In order for Christ to redeem us that were under this curse, then He, Himself, had to experience death. He has taken our curse upon Himself and died the death the law demanded.

Hebrews 2:9 says:

“But we see Jesus who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that He by the grace of God should taste death for every man”

Is your heart in the same place as Paul when he said in Galatians 6:14:

“But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world”??

Do you boast about the cross that saved you? Does Galatians 2:20 describe you?

"I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me"??

Question, if you take the cross out of the equation, then does the offense cease? (Galatians 5:11). Let me prove that not preaching the cross removes the offense. Look again at 1Corinthians 1:23:

“But we preach Christ crucified, unto to the Jews a stumbling-block, and unto the Greeks foolishness.”

Do you agree that if you do not preach Christ crucified, then you are not preaching a “stumbling-block” as used in 1Corinthians 1:23. The Greek word is skandalon and is translated both as offense and stumbling block. Do you believe that Paul thought it possible to leave out the cross when presenting the lost with the gospel? The stumbling-block to the Jews was not the law, but the cross. If Paul taught the keeping of the law, then there would be no need for the cross:

“I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.” (Galatians 2:21)

Would leaving out the cross end persecution according to Galatians 6:12?

Would the threat of anathema be upon those that teach a cross-less gospel? If you do not know, are you possibly under such a threat? If you do not know, then it would be wise to examine the gospel you have been presenting to others or have believed. If you have believed a message that did not contain the cross, then you are still in your sins. You have yet to believe the testimony that God gave concerning His only begotten Son. Without the cross of Christ, then there is no gospel by which man can be saved.

“And that He might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby.” (Ephesians 2:16)

“And being found in fashion as a man, He humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.” (Philippians 2:8)

“And, having made peach through the blood of this cross, by Him to reconcile all things unto Himself: by Him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.” (Colossians 1:20)

“Blotting out the handwriting of Ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to His cross.” (Colossians 2:14).

How important was the cross to Paul?

“But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.” (Galatians 6:14)

Do you glory in the cross? Do you proclaim it? Do you evidently set it before others? Do you preach the same gospel that Paul did or are you under the curse he pronounced? Do you make an exception that allows for a gospel that does not contain the cross? Has the offense ceased with you?

Philippians 3:18 says:

“For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ…)”

Are you the enemy of the cross? Do you believe that one can be saved without the message of the cross? If so, then Paul said that you are anathema. I hope you do not support any that make it even remotely possible to be saved apart from the cross as a gospel with no cross is another gospel that Paul never preached. We are to treat those that teach any other gospel as being in a cursed position according to Paul.


Paul talked everywhere about the substitutionary death of Christ. It should be clear that when Paul preached to the lost that he always preached the cross. I have already shown that Paul preached the cross to the Corinthians (1:18, 23; 15:3-4). I have already shown that Paul preached the cross to the Galatians (3:1). Paul preached everywhere the cross. Are we willing to accept anything less as being remotely possible as being the gospel Paul preached or would have allowed?

I already proved that Paul preached nothing less than the Christ to the lost. I now like to show the importance of the substitutionary death in the New Testament:

2Corinthians 5:20-21 says:

“Not then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us; we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God. For He hath made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him.”

“Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give His life a ransom for many.” (Matthew 20:28).

“Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.” (Luke 22:20).

“I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.” (John 6:51).

“I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth His life for the sheep” (John 10:11).

“As the Father knoweth Me, even so I know the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep” (John 10:15).

“And walk in love, as Christ also loved us, and hath given Himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling savour.” (Ephesians 5:2).

“Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave Himself for it.” (Ephesians 5:25)

“Who gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us from this present evil world, according to the will of God and our Father” (Galatians 1:4).

"And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven." (Colossians 1:20).

"Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time" (1st Timothy 2:6).

“Who gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto Himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works.” (Titus 2:14)

"And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance" (Hebrews 9:15).

"But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God" (Hebrews 10:12).

“Who His own self bare our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed.” (1 Peter 2:24)

“For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit.” (1 Peter 3:18)

“Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for He that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin.” (1 Peter 4:1)

Let’s compare a couple of verses side-by-side:

“The next day, John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.” (John 1:29)

Compare to 1 Peter 1:19 that says:

“But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot.”

Christ was God’s Lamb that was without blemish or spot to be offered for our sins:

“So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for Him shall appear the second time without sin unto salvation.” (Hebrews 9:28)

Compare Revelation 5:9 to 1 Peter 1:18-19:

“And they sung a new song saying, Thou are worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by the blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation.”

"Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot.”

As the hymn writer said, “Redeemed how I love to proclaim it, redeemed by the blood of the lamb.”

Can you not see the absolute importance the New Testament and Paul places upon the cross of Christ? Are you willing to support those that would dare to preach anything less to the lost? If the lost do not care to hear about the cross then would the apostles have accommodated them by preaching a "believe in a Jesus for eternal life" only with no mention of the cross that Paul boasted so much about? Are you willing to support someone that Paul had said, “let him be accursed”? To be anathema is in the imperative mood that can be literally translated, “doomed to an accursed position” or “one devoted to destruction.” Our modern versions will read, “let him be damned of God.” Paul said, "any other gospel" so what do we conclude with those that will allow for a gospel that does not have to contain the cross?

I have been asked by someone that does not believe the cross has to be preached to the lost, whether I believe the verse in 1 John that says, “Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God” is sufficient enough to be saved?? As I stated in the beginning, I cannot isolate verses. I already know that Paul preached the gospel in 1 Corinthians 15: 3-4, and said that this was the message that not only he preached, but the other apostles (verse 11). This message was what he said he preached from the first. When I see 1st John, then I am reminded of 1st John 2:2:

“And He is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world."

Propitiation is another aspect of the cross. Man has always tried to propitiate the god they serve. The Baal worshippers 1Kings 18 tried doing just that. Only our God, who loves us infinitely, sent Christ to die to satisfy His wrath, His holiness, His justice so as to remove any barrier that would keep God from acting on our behalf. This is entirely a work of God because man cannot do anything to make himself acceptable before Him. God has now been reconciled to mankind and those that have yet come to trust in the total saviorhood of Christ needs only to be reconciled now to God.

Look at Romans 3:24-26:

“Being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in His blood, to declare His righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time His righteousness: that He might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.”

Here in Romans 3, Paul said that God set forth Christ to be propitiation through faith in His blood that again points to the cross. This is the same terminology found in Romans 5:9, that states we are justified by His blood. Question, can God be the justifier here of those that believe in Jesus without “faith in His blood”? No, you better look again because God can declare us righteous today because of that shed blood at Calvary and our faith in that blood as verse 25 clearly speaks. This is not a blind faith or a faith that some Jesus out there gives life apart from a knowledge of the cross. This is a knowledge of a God who loved us, a God who demanded that sin be punished, a God who left His throne in heaven to take upon Him the likeness of man and said, “Let the punishment fall upon me.” (my own words).

Not only is our justification tied to the cross but so is our positional sanctification.

Hebrews 10:10,14 say:

“By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. For by one offering He hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.”

Also, Hebrews 13:12 says:

“Wherefore Jesus also, that He might sanctify the people with His own blood, suffered without the gate.”

Look at 1 Corinthians 1:30:

“But of Him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption.“

No wonder Paul wanted to boast only in the cross, because Galatians 6:14 says, ….by whom (Jesus Christ) the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world”
Paul literally was sanctified by the cross of Christ. He was set apart from the world and the world from him. We that are sanctified have been crucified to the world and the world to us. We have been set apart unto God. We are now called saints. May our daily lives confirm to who we really are in Christ, who made it all possible by His death upon the cross.

What else did the death of Christ do? Look at the following:

Ephesians 1:7: “In whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of His grace.”

Colossians 1:20: “And, having made peace through the blood of His cross, by Him to reconcile all things unto Himself; by Him. I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven.”

Colossians 1:14: “In whom we have redemption through His blood, even the forgiveness of sins.”

Ephesians 2:13: “But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.”

And now we know that this faith is in His blood, according to Romans 3:25. I could spend hours on all that becomes true of us that have placed our trust in Him because of that shed blood.

Do you preach a stumbling-block or has the offense of the cross ceased with you? Did Paul ever allow for a gospel to be preached to the lost that did not need to mention the cross? We need to stand with Jude 1:3 that says:

“…that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.”

Can a gospel that leaves out the cross save? I didn’t ask you if it was unlikely or almost impossible. I asked you if we can separate the cross from the gospel Paul preached? If you remove the cross from which Paul preached, then can it be a gospel that saves? Can it be the gospel that Paul said he gave in Galatians 1:8-9? What was Paul’s pronouncement upon those that preached “any” other gospel? Contend for the faith and do not stand with those that advocate that leaving out the cross to the lost is permissible in certain circumstances. A person does not have to understand the cross perfectly, but they do need to understand the basics. If they cannot understand the gospel, then it most likely is no fault of your own, but due to the blindness that is in them. The cross is either a stumbling-block or it is foolishness to them.

Galatians 1:8-9: “But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed."

"For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ". (Galatians 1:12)

What gospel do you preach? Foolishness? Stumblingblock? An offense? Or did you remove the cross from the gospel to sinners simply because they do not want to hear about that message of the cross that he or she finds offensive? Let's be faithful to preach the only message that God is pleased with in sharing to a world that is dying. If one preaches any other gospel to the lost than what Paul preached and the others then "let him be accursed."