Is There a Difference Between the Protestant and Catholic Gospels?

Here are two amazing videos presenting the Gospel message.

The first one, “Falling Plates,” is from Campus Crusade for Christ…now known as Cru in the U.S.

The second one, “Life in 6 Words,” is also Protestant. It’s from an organization called Dare2Share Ministries.

I think these are excellent presentations of the Gospel. They’re creative, engaging, and hit all the right points. However, there are some differences that Catholics need to be aware of when using Protestant materials presenting salvation.

1. Good works and salvation

The first is the notion that good works don’t contribute to salvation.

In “Life in 6 Words” he says, “No amount of good deeds will correct your sin problem.” That, in essence is true. There was no way for mankind to atone for the damage of original sin or correct the sin problem without help from God.

It just wasn’t in our power and still isn’t.

However, when it implies that works/good deeds have no bearing on our ultimate salvation, that’s false. Faith requires the response of love to be living and active. Faith working through love is the definition of saving faith.

That love is manifested in actions, not just words. The first action of love is to follow the God’s commandments.

2. Christ’s death and yours

The second involves how Christ died and why.

Double imputation is the view of salvation in most Protestant churches. It comes directly from Luther. Christ was imputed (attributed or given) our sin while we were imputed his righteousness.

It’s also called penal (punishing) substitution. It’s expressed like this: When the Father looked at Christ on the cross, all he could see was our sin, so he threw all the wrath and punishment we deserved on Jesus. And, when he looked at mankind all he could see was Christ’s righteousness so he showered us with his blessings.

The problem lies in the idea that an innocent Christ suffered punishment inflicted by the Father and the idea that he was punished in our place. It means the sin could be attributed to Christ so completely that it was actually his and he really deserved the punishment.

A vengeful God that punishes the innocent instead of the guilty is neither just nor merciful. I mean, with a Father like that, who needs enemies.

Rather, Christ made satisfaction for our sins by freely offering his life in loving obedience to the Father. We call this vicarious satisfaction.

Our sin is not imputed to Christ, nor is he punished for it as if he were guilty. His love atones for our lack of love; his obedience wipes out our disobedience. He doesn’t take our place. He unites himself to us and makes satisfaction for us.

It’s not suffering that atones for sin, it’s love and obedience. It may seem like a small thing, but it has implications in many other areas like the doctrine of redemptive suffering, as well as our own sacrificial offerings of love and obedience.

Evangelization Takeaway

So in “Falling Plates” when it says, “I traded in my life for yours,” that’s not exactly accurate.

In “Life in 6 Words,” it says we’re eternally separated and “the only way to fix it is for someone to die in your place.” Here again we’re running up against this notion of penal substitution.

Does this mean you shouldn’t use these videos? Not necessarily. They’re very good! In the least, they’re useful for understanding the basics of the Gospel message.

However, I think all Catholics should be aware of this distinction because the only time we ever do hear the Gospel like this is from Protestants, which should change by the way. And sadly, these mistaken ideas of penal substitution and double imputation are creeping into our understanding of salvation and coloring it.

Besides, what’s more evangelizing? Someone who’s mistaken for a sinner and killed because a debt needed to be paid to a vengeful God? Or an hero who freely and willingly offers his life in love to make amends for our offense?

I’d go with the latter. What about you? Let me know in the comments.