Just One Gospel?

[drbrumley]

Originally posted by elected4ever

Nether did Stephen

I guess your going to say the Church which is the Body of Christ started at Pentecost right?

 

[drbrumley]

Originally posted by Sozo

Then why did they stay with writing letters tainted by the old gospel message?

:help:

Good question. Peter had all sorts of trouble with that. I guess old habits die hard.

 

[elected4ever]

Originally posted by drbrumley

Agreed. No one can be perfect outside of Jesus. But did not Jesus say follow the law right above what you posted? He listed the commandments. Those look like requirements to me that a person being a Jew had to do. Jesus doesn't say thru me you can keep the commandments. The young man had to keep em, right?

The law never saved Israel. The law condemned Israel. Only those who keep the law are saved. The only way to keep the law was to believe God in faith. Ritualism and works do not save. Jesus was received by those who were of faith in God and not of their works and ritualism.

Evidently he did not keep the law except for those portions he chose. No the young man did not keep the law. If you fail in one part you fail in all parts.

 

[drbrumley]

Originally posted by elected4ever

The law never saved Israel. The law condemned Israel. Only those who keep the law are saved. The only way to keep the law was to believe God in faith. Ritualism and works do not save. Jesus was received by those who were of faith in God and not of their works and ritualism.

Evidently he did not keep the law except for those portions he chose. No the young man did not keep the law. If you fail in one part you fail in all parts.

What you are forgetting E4E is Isreal was, by virtue of the Abrahamic Covenant, the Passover, and the Covenant sacrifices were on redemption ground and were considered to be God's chosen nation and the people of God before ever a law was imposed on them.

Paul makes it plain that the law, which was given 430 years after the promose to Abraham, could not disannul the promise.

Galatians 3:17 (New King James Version)

And this I say, that the law, which was four hundred and thirty years later, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before by God in Christ, that it should make the promise of no effect.

So it should be clear that salvation under the Dispensation of Law was on the basis of the promise, and that while breaking of the law might bring physical death, as it did in many cases, the law could not disannul the promise.

 

[elected4ever]

drbrumley

What you are forgetting E4E is Isreal was, by virtue of the Abrahamic Covenant, the Passover, and the Covenant sacrifices were on redemption ground and were considered to be God's chosen nation and the people of God before ever a law was imposed on them.

Wrong. Just because God chose to reveal the law and establish Israel as caretaker of the law did not guarantee the salvation of Israel.

 

[Sold Out]

Agreed. Noone can be perfect outside of Jesus. But did not Jesus say follow the law right above what you posted? He listed the commandments. Those look like requirements to me that a person being a Jew had to do. Jesus doesnt say thru me you can keep the commandments. The young man had to keep em, right?

Jesus was showing the rich man that he could NOT keep all the commandments, which is why he needed Christ. Remember, he walked away sad when Jesus told him to go sell all he had, give it to the poor, then follow Jesus. He had broken the 1st and 2nd commandments - his money was his god and his idol.

There are two ways to enter heaven - keep all the commandments and never break a SINGLE one your entire life or trust Jesus as Savior because you HAVE broken the commandments and need forgiveness. Since the bible says ALL have sinned, the only option is to trust Jesus for salvation..

 

[Clete]

Then why did they stay with writing letters tainted by the old gospel message?

:help:

OUTSTANDING QUESTION!!!! :BRAVO:

Because "the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable! (Rom 11:29). The twelve were saved under the previous dispensation and so remained under that dispensation until their death, as did their converts whom they agree with Paul that they would minister to while he ministered to the Gentiles.
So for a while there were two groups coexisting, one under the dispensation of law, the other under the dispensation of the mystery; the former with twelve apostles, the latter with only one. The twelve ministered and wrote too, for, and about the Circumcision, while Paul ministered and wrote too, for, and about the Body of Christ, and never the twine shall meet.
It is interesting to note that nearly all the various issues that divide the church has to do with this very topic. Everything from water baptism to eternal security and tithing are touched by this single question. One of the most powerful arguments in support of this whole idea is the fact that such a simple and straight forward idea as this can allow one to resolve countless theological debates while leaving the simple surface meaning of the text in tact and leaving one with no problem texts!
When you see the distinct nature of Paul's ministry and message, you can read the Bible and take it for what it seems to be saying and understand that it means what it says and it causes no confusion or difficulty whatsoever. I can read Rom. 4:5 and James 2:17 and take them both totally at face value and there is no contradiction whatsoever. I don't have to have one or the other saying something more or different that what it simply seems to be saying at all. They both mean exactly what they say, and yet do not contradict! This is only possible if you understand that when Saul was on his way to Damascus, God decided because of Israel's unbelief to do something completely different and new which had been kept secret since the world began (Rom. 16:25).

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[elected4ever]

OUTSTANDING QUESTION!!!! :BRAVO:

Because "the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable! (Rom 11:29). The twelve were saved under the previous dispensation and so remained under that dispensation until their death, as did their converts whom they agree with Paul that they would minister to while he ministered to the Gentiles.
So for a while there were two groups coexisting, one under the dispensation of law, the other under the dispensation of the mystery; the former with twelve apostles, the latter with only one. The twelve ministered and wrote too, for, and about the Circumcision, while Paul ministered and wrote too, for, and about the Body of Christ, and never the twine shall meet.
It is interesting to note that nearly all the various issues that divide the church has to do with this very topic. Everything from water baptism to eternal security and tithing are touched by this single question. One of the most powerful arguments in support of this whole idea is the fact that such a simple and straight forward idea as this can allow one to resolve countless theological debates while leaving the simple surface meaning of the text in tact and leaving one with no problem texts!
When you see the distinct nature of Paul's ministry and message, you can read the Bible and take it for what it seems to be saying and understand that it means what it says and it causes no confusion or difficulty whatsoever. I can read Rom. 4:5 and James 2:17 and take them both totally at face value and there is no contradiction whatsoever. I don't have to have one or the other saying something more or different that what it simply seems to be saying at all. They both mean exactly what they say, and yet do not contradict! This is only possible if you understand that when Saul was on his way to Damascus, God decided because of Israel's unbelief to do something completely different and new which had been kept secret since the world began (Rom. 16:25).

Resting in Him,
Clete

Are you saying that the twelve were obligated to contenue in the ceramoneal law that was also fulfilled along with the rest of the law. Are you saying that Jesus was not the fulfillment of the law for them?

 

[Sozo]

Wow Clete, now I am really confused!

You guys seem to be telling me that the 12 are presenting a message different than Paul proclaimed and that message was rejected. However, Paul's message is preached to those who, having accepted it, are saved by grace thorugh faith, and they have been given the gift of eternal life. After hearing Pauls' message, the 12, continue to preach a message that is rejected, even though, they themselves, accepted Paul's message and are saved, they are commissioned to keep those whom they are preaching to in the dark. Is that correct?

 

[elected4ever]

Wow Clete, now I am really confused!

You guys seem to be telling me that the 12 are presenting a message different than Paul proclaimed and that message was rejected. However, Paul's message is preached to those who, having accepted it, are saved by grace thorugh faith, and they have been given the gift of eternal life. After hearing Pauls' message, the 12, continue to preach a message that is rejected, even though, they themselves, accepted Paul's message and are saved, they are commissioned to keep those whom they are preaching to in the dark. Is that correct?

That is a good question, Sozo

 

[Clete]

Wow Clete, now I am really confused!

You guys seem to be telling me that the 12 are presenting a message different than Paul proclaimed and that message was rejected.

It was rejected by Israel as a nation but not rejected by every single individual. Those who believed what the twelve were preaching were saved, they were saved under the dispensation of law and remained under that dispensation until their death despite the fact that God cut off Israel on the whole. In other words, God did not cut off ALL of Israel; there was a remnant. Namely, the twelve and their converts who were dispersed because of the persecution they suffered at the hands of the authorities in Jerusalem. These "dispersed" Jewish believers were the very one's whom James address his epistle too.

However, Paul's message is preached to those who, having accepted it, are saved by grace through faith, and they have been given the gift of eternal life. After hearing Paul's' message, the 12, continue to preach a message that is rejected, even though, they themselves, accepted Paul's message and are saved, they are commissioned to keep those whom they are preaching to in the dark. Is that correct?

No, that is not correct.
The Twelve were not saved because they believed Paul's message, they were already saved long before Paul came on the seen. They did acknowledge the validity of Paul message (which, incidentally, would not have been necessary had it been the same message) but were not saved by it, and neither were any of their converts. James said, in fact, that his converts were all zealous for the law, and well they should have been. They were saved under a dispensation of law and so followed the law just as they should have done and just as Peter, James and John (i.e the twelve) continued to do and to teach through their epistles.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[drbrumley]

Good job Clete!

And may I also mention Acts 15.

6Now the apostles and elders came together to consider this matter. 7And when there had been much dispute, Peter rose up and said to them: "Men and brethren, you know that a good while ago God chose among us, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. 8So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, 9and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. 10Now therefore, why do you test God by putting a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? 11But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ[a] we shall be saved in the same manner as they."

With this, I want to solidify Clete's post that when he says

They did acknowledge the validity of Paul message (which, incidentally, would not have been necessary had it been the same message)

Fact 1. They disputed what Paul was saying. If Paul was preaching the same thing, then there should be no dispute.

Fact 2. Please notice verse 11. "But we (Peter and the 11) believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we (Peter and the 11) shall be saved in the same manner as they (Gentiles)."

So Sozo and E4E, it is plainly evident by the plain language of Gods Holy Word that Peter himself made the distinction.

 

[Sozo]

It was rejected by Israel as a nation but not rejected by every single individual. Those who believed what the twelve were preaching were saved, they were saved under the dispensation of law and remained under that dispensation until their death despite the fact that God cut off Israel on the whole.

How were those individuals saved? What evidence did they have that they were saved? When Paul says... "For those who are circumcised do not even keep the Law themselves" is he mislead?

The Gentiles never had the Law, so what does Paul mean, and of whom is he speaking when he declares...

"For as many as are of the works of the Law are under a curse; for it is written, "Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all things written in the book of the law, to perform them." Now that no one is justified by the Law before God is evident; for, "The righteous man shall live by faith."

How is that no one is justified by the Law, and yet the 12 are preaching salvation through the Law?

The Twelve were not saved because they believed Paul's message, they were already saved long before Paul came on the seen.

Saved how?

They were saved under a dispensation of law and so followed the law just as they should have done and just as Peter, James and John (i.e the twelve) continued to do and to teach through their epistles.

Then Paul is lying when he says that...

"Now that no one is justified by the Law before God is evident"

 

[Lighthouse]

e4e, Clete, Turbo, whoever... What kinds of things do you think that the disciples were saying when they preached the gospel of the kingdom?

I'm glad you asked.

The disciples still taught the Mosaic Law, as has been said. Acts 15 shows this.

 

[Sozo]

I'm glad you asked.

The disciples still taught the Mosaic Law, as has been said. Acts 15 shows this.

That doesn't explain anything! What does the Law have to do with the gospel of the kingdom?

 

[Lighthouse]

I thought that your whole argument was that the 12 were preaching a different gospel and that they were in the dark about Christ's death and resurrection.

No. Not at all. The reference to the disciples not preaching Christ's death and resurrection was before his death. They didn't preach his death and resurrection until after they occured. But Christ still told them to preach the gospel. At that time the gospel was merely who Christ was. They also preached the law. After His death and resurrection those were added to it. But Israel continued to reject it, and were cut off, like the fig tree in the parable Jesus spoke in Luke 13. They didn't bear any fruit. So God changed His mind, and called Paul to go to the Gentiles. And the gospel He gave Paul was without the law. I believe the reasons for this difference [the law in the circumcision gospel, and not in the uncircumcision gospel] is because Israel grew up with the law, and the Gentiles did not. Well, at least one fo the reasons. There are more, and I hope to be able to discuss this with you so that you may understand it.

 

[Lighthouse]

This must also include the 12, because they did not receive the gospel that Paul proclaimed, correct?

No. The 12 did not reject Christ. But Israel did, as a whole [in general] and was cut off. Then it was about individual salvation, instead of corporate, which is what Israel had before Christ. And the reason Peter, and the rest continued to write letters containing the law was because for a time, both gospels worked, depending on who was preaching, and to whom.

 

[Lighthouse]

OUTSTANDING QUESTION!!!! :BRAVO:

Because "the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable! (Rom 11:29). The twelve were saved under the previous dispensation and so remained under that dispensation until their death, as did their converts whom they agree with Paul that they would minister to while he ministered to the Gentiles.
So for a while there were two groups coexisting, one under the dispensation of law, the other under the dispensation of the mystery; the former with twelve apostles, the latter with only one. The twelve ministered and wrote too, for, and about the Circumcision, while Paul ministered and wrote too, for, and about the Body of Christ, and never the twine shall meet.
It is interesting to note that nearly all the various issues that divide the church has to do with this very topic. Everything from water baptism to eternal security and tithing are touched by this single question. One of the most powerful arguments in support of this whole idea is the fact that such a simple and straight forward idea as this can allow one to resolve countless theological debates while leaving the simple surface meaning of the text in tact and leaving one with no problem texts!
When you see the distinct nature of Paul's ministry and message, you can read the Bible and take it for what it seems to be saying and understand that it means what it says and it causes no confusion or difficulty whatsoever. I can read Rom. 4:5 and James 2:17 and take them both totally at face value and there is no contradiction whatsoever. I don't have to have one or the other saying something more or different that what it simply seems to be saying at all. They both mean exactly what they say, and yet do not contradict! This is only possible if you understand that when Saul was on his way to Damascus, God decided because of Israel's unbelief to do something completely different and new which had been kept secret since the world began (Rom. 16:25).

Resting in Him,
Clete

:noway:

Amazing post, Clete!

 

[Lighthouse]

That doesn't explain anything! What does the Law have to do with the gospel of the kingdom?

Everything. The gospel of the Kingdom was for Israel, who was under the law.

 

[Sozo]

You guys are making absolutely no sense.

Let's do it this way.

I'm a Jew living in Jerusalem at the time of Jesus' earthly ministry. His disciples (who are preaching the gospel of the kingdom) walk up to me and say...?