Derf
Well-known member
Prodigal son? Grace! Woman at the well? Grace! Woman caught in adultery? Grace! He didn't have to preach it, He lived it.
Paul's gospel started late....
- Thread starter Right Divider
- Start date
glorydaz
Well-known member
Amen. Grace walking among us.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Here is the first example of being saved by grace through faith.
Gen. 6:8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord.
Derf
Well-known member
I suppose your point is that Paul had a different gospel because he called it "my gospel". Do you worship Paul's different God?
Romans 1:8 KJV — First, I thank my God through Jesus Christ for you all, that your faith is spoken of throughout the whole world.
1 Corinthians 1:4 KJV — I thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you by Jesus Christ;
2 Corinthians 12:21 KJV — And lest, when I come again, my God will humble me among you, and that I shall bewail many which have sinned already, and have not repented of the uncleanness and fornication and lasciviousness which they have committed.
Philippians 4:19 KJV — But my God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus.
Derf
Well-known member
I'm curious, @JudgeRightly. Why is that funny to you?
glorydaz
Well-known member
Join the club. It seems to be mockery, doesn’t it?
Although, I did laugh about Paul’s use of the word MY In your previous post.
That laugh was not a bit of mockery, but a genuine chuckle at your wit.
Derf
Well-known member
There are certainly funny ways of saying things, and mockery isn't without its place, but I don't understand why it's funny to say Jesus was living out grace.
glorydaz
Well-known member
It robs from Paul’s gospel would be my guess.
Because I find it amazing the number of Christians who do not know the difference between mercy and grace.
Yes, the Bible says "grace and truth came through Jesus Christ."
That's a given. We don't dispute that.
But that has nothing to do with what was stated.
What was stated was:
It's kind of hard to preach something if you never use the word for it.
On the other hand, the Gospels speak of law, commandment, ordinance, regulation, and Moses many dosens of times, frequently by Christ's own words. In fact, the word grace is only mentioned 4 times in the gospels, once in Luke 2:40, which says "the grace of God was upon [Jesus]," and four times in John, once in 1:14, "the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth," twice in 1:16, "and grace for grace," and once in 1:17, "but grace and truth came through Jesus Christ."
Remember, John was not written until later, WELL AFTER Paul came on the scene with his gospel given to him by Christ Himself, and certainly long after the Jerusalem Council (around 47 AD). John was likely written around 60 AD. More than enough time for the understanding of Paul's dispensation of grace to make its way into the minds of the Gospel authors, so it makes sense for John to write about Jesus bringing grace to the world.
Now, specifically regarding the latter two examples you gave:
With the woman at the well, she was a Samaritan woman, and according to the Jews, Samaritans were unclean, according to the law of Moses.
WIth the woman caught in adultery, the Pharisees brought her before Christ for Him to judge her according to the law of Moses.
The context is law.
Grace has no part in the law.
MERCY, on the other hand, has plenty to do with the law.
To make this simple:
Grace is getting something that one does not deserve.
Mercy is NOT getting something that one DOES deserve.
In both of the latter examples, BOTH WOMEN were guilty of violating the law, and at least in the latter example, and arguably in the former, Jesus showed mercy to each of the women. They did not receive the punishment they deserved.
And regarding the parable of the prodigal son, which, while it is specifically teaching a specific lesson, again, the context is the law.
Specifically, the son says to his father, "I have sinned . . . and am no longer worthy to be called your son." He deserved to be cut off. But His father did not cut him off. He showed mercy to his son.
Basically, NONE of the examples you gave were about grace. They were about mercy. Their context was law, not grace.
Bladerunner
Active member
Your words:"To make this simple:
Grace is getting something that one does not deserve.
Mercy is NOT getting something that one DOES deserve."
very good answer!
Derf
Well-known member
But if one gets mercy, something he doesn't deserve, then by your definition, he gets grace. While your distinction is true, it is not something that needs to be argued about, since dispensation of mercy is, by definition, grace--no matter the context.
glorydaz
Well-known member
It is a bit humorous. Grace and truth came through the Lord Jesus Christ. Not Paul.
If you want to get to the bottom of it, you’ll find the blood of Christ is the grace of God. Which also contains His Mercy and His Peace. Three in one. Lumped together. Which of those three are unconnected?
1 Timothy 1:2 Unto Timothy, my own son in the faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God our Father and Jesus Christ our Lord.
The point is that there IS a distinction made. Ignoring that distinction in order to force a certain view upon the text is what causes confusion.
Saying "everything's actually just grace" is oversimplifying things, and makes it harder to rightly divide the word of Truth. The Bible is more nuanced than that for a reason. Words have meaning. Ideas have consequences.
So Paul didn't teach grace and truth?
Derf
Well-known member
Are you listening to yourself? You just did the exact thing you complained about in my post. Of course he taught grace and truth. But grace and truth didn't originate with Paul, and never could...remember how much grace he showed to the Christians before his conversion?
Paul even rejects the idea that grace and truth came from him:
1 Corinthians 3:10-11 KJV — According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.
Right Divider
Body part
You skipped right over a VERY important part of the verses that you quoted.
I HAVE LAID THE FOUNDATION and another buildeth thereon.
PAUL LAID THE FOUNDATION of the gospel of grace that Jesus gave him.
Of course that foundation is Jesus Christ, but NOT the same Jesus as came to His people Israel.
1Cor 12:4-6 (AKJV/PCE)
(12:4) Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. (12:5) And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. (12:6) And there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which worketh all in all.
You guys just cannot see the truth even when it stares you right in the face.
Paul was given a DIFFERENT ADMINISTRATION. This is why Paul emphasizes the DISPENSATION of the gospel given to HIM.
Derf
Well-known member
Yes, of course. He was writing to Corinth, talking about the church in Corinth. Apollos had been there after Paul. The discussion was about who the people should be loyal to, and Paul was quick to point out that it should be Jesus, not Paul or Apollos.
You do know, that the Corinthians first heard the gospel from Paul, and so the phrase you're referring to about laying the foundation was specificly to and about the Corinthian church, don't you?
What do you mean, "not the same Jesus"? Was Paul talking about a person not born of Mary, who was not crucified on Calvary?
You haven't convinced me that what you are preaching is truth. That's hardly my fault now, is it?
Yes, he was ministering to the Gentiles. (That's why he was writing to the Corinthians.) But you are pointing out that the administration of Paul's was not a different means of salvation...just a different "dispensing" of it. That's why Paul speaks of "the same Lord" and "the same Spirit", but compares the different administrations to the different gifts of that Spirit.
And if not a different means of salvation, then not a different gospel. Just a different administration of the same gospel. Else there would be no need to speak of different administrations when there are different gospels.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Did I say that? No, of course not.
Can you give me your definition of grace?
What is that GRACE we are saved by? Perhaps this? Made near by the blood, purchased by the blood, justified by the blood, redemption through the blood, and peace through the blood. God’s grace is shed abroad on the world, and we access it by faith. Surely we can agree on this much, before we go any further.
Eph. 2:13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
Acts 20:28. Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.
Romans 5:9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
Col, 1:14 In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins.
Col. 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.
glorydaz
Well-known member
No, Paul is speaking of the different gifts and ministries within the church. In context….gifts, words of wisdom, etc. There is nothing to do with dispensations, not even close. Paul is speaking of the Spirit’s working in the body, and the ministry being produced.
1 Cor. 12:8-11 For to one is given by the Spirit the word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same Spirit; 9 To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit; 10 To another the working of miracles; to another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues: 11 But all these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man severally as he will.