Proof that Paul didn't preach a different gospel than Peter

[Danoh]

The verses you quote do not address the OP.

The OP makes it clear that both Paul and Peter wrote epistles to the Galatians.

Paul told the Galatians that if anyone preaches a different gospel, they are to be accursed.

Peter tells the Galatians that Paul had previously wrote letters to them.

Yet, you want us to believe that after Paul wrote letters to the Galatians, Peter came and preached a different gospel to them.

If what you claim is true (it's not), then the Galatians would have had to accurst Peter based on what Paul told them.

Actually, all the passages we quote address these issues - because the passages are all interrelated.

The problem is that you have been so conditioned by the reasoning your books supposedly about the Bible have turned into a truth, add to this, that you have no actual Bible in you as a result, that yours is reading into the passages, such notions as "Christ returned in 70 AD via the Romans Army," that you are simply unable to see the answers you supposedly want, in the passages we post.

To this you then add the projection that we get this from books.

Yours is the autobiography of your failure projected onto others.

You well know you get your reasoning from books. You and yours all do this.

Your books based reasoning has left you that blind - you cannot see that you are projecting your notion of "learn about the Word from books" as the practice of all who do not agree with you.

Bad enough your notion of "Christ returned in 70AD via the Roman Army" is heresy.

Fact of the matter is that Galatians 1's "another gospel, which is not another" of the same kind, is the issue of a gospel that was neither Peter's nor Paul's.

Rather, it was a fusion of Law with Grace into another gospel, which was not another at all, and this was only part of the issue.

Not sure what your problem is, but it sure does not come across as any kind of an appeal fro the truth of these issues.

It comes across as more just one more example of someone else out there as bad off in his approach towards others where they differ with one's own, no matter what it is they are asserting is the truth.

You and yours in this biting and devouring spirit - regardless of what field and or truth you each assert is the truth of a matter - are all over the net.

Darby is not your issue. We are not your issue. Truth is not your issue.

Issue is your issue, you fool.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

As we see, every time a Dispensationalist makes a post, the Dispensationalists completely ignores 2 Peter 3.

It's very telling how the Dispensationalists keep ignoring what is actually written in 2 Peter 3.

I am a dispensationalist of the Mid Acts variety, and I say that all of those Peter addressed in his epistles were members of the Body of Christ. Here we can see that both Jews and Gentiles are baptized into the Body of Christ:

"For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit" (1 Cor.12:13).​

In this passage Paul uses the pronoun "we" twice and from his introduction in that same epistle we can know that that pronoun is not only referring to those in the church at Corinth but also "all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord":

"Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both their's and our's" (1 Cor.1:2).​

All of the Jewish believers living in the first century did indeed call on the name of Jesus Christ so therefore all of them belonged to the Body of Christ. Therefore, this matches with what Peter said at 2 Peter 3.

However, that does not change the fact that during the Acts period Paul preached two different gospels. When Paul went to the Jews this is the central message he preached:

"And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God...proving that this is the very Christ" (Acts 9:20,22).​

The Jews who believed that message received life the moment they believed that message (Jn.20:31) and they were also "born of God" the moment they believed it (1 Jn.5:1-5).

The message Paul preached to the Gentiles was the "gospel of grace," that the believer is "justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" (Ro.3:24).

Belief in that gospel saved those who believed the moment when they believed.

 

[john w]

As we see, every time a Dispensationalist makes a post, the Dispensationalists completely ignores 2 Peter 3.

It's very telling how the Dispensationalists keep ignoring what is actually written in 2 Peter 3.

One of the punk's spams-"MAD ignores.."


Shut up, Corkie the Clown. Your satanic clown act bores us.

 

[Ben Masada]

As we see, every time a Dispensationalist makes a post, the Dispensationalists completely ignores 2 Peter 3.

It's very telling how the Dispensationalists keep ignoring what is actually written in 2 Peter 3.

Peter never wrote those two Letters attributed to him. If you read I Peter 5:12, you will see the evidence that Paul wrote those letters and not Peter. How is it? We have in that quote that Peter dictated his letters to Silvanus, the scribe of Paul if you read II Cor. 1:19; I Thess. 1:1; and II Thess. 2:1. Paul would never permit his scribe to take dictations from an apostle of the circumcision.

 

[jamie]

Have you ever read the Law aka the Decalogue? The major part of the Decalogue is about the Law for both Jews and Gentiles.

Have you ever read Leviticus 23?

 

[God's Truth]

In a previous thread started by heir, heir closed the thread because she knows that 2 Peter 3 completely destroys her "two gospel" theory.

Here is the post that upset heir so much, that she closed the thread:


Paul said the following to the Galatians:

(Gal 1:8 KJV) 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.

Peter also wrote an epistle to the Galatians:

(1 Peter 1:1 KJV) Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,

According to heir, Peter's epistle to the Galatians is a different gospel than Paul's epistle to the Galatians.

But, Paul tells the Galatians if anyone preaches a different gospel he preached to them, that they are to be accursed.

So, pretend your a Galatian in Galatia circa 55AD. A letter comes to your city from the Apostle Paul, and the letter says that if anyone preaches a different gospel, they are to be accursed. Then a letter comes to your city from Peter (that heir claims is a different gospel).

If what heir claims is true, then Peter, and anyone who preached what Peter sent to the Galatians would be accursed if it was really a different gospel (heir's claim)

So, it's impossible that Peter and Paul preached different gospels to the Galatians. Yet, that is what heir claims.

heir likes to quote 1 Cor 15:1-4, but she apparently doesn't read past verse 4

(1 Cor 15:11 KJV) Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed.

What you say here is excellent. It is much enjoyed reading of the Truth.

 

[Ben Masada]

Have you ever read Leviticus 23?

I am talking about the commandments in the Decalogue and not festivals. I know that the festivals are for the Jews only and not for Gentiles but the whole second part of the Decalogue applies to all, Jews and Gentiles.

 

[God's Truth]

I am a dispensationalist of the Mid Acts variety, and I say that all of those Peter addressed in his epistles were members of the Body of Christ. Here we can see that both Jews and Gentiles are baptized into the Body of Christ:

"For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit" (1 Cor.12:13).​

In this passage Paul uses the pronoun "we" twice and from his introduction in that same epistle we can know that that pronoun is not only referring to those in the church at Corinth but also "all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord":

"Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both their's and our's" (1 Cor.1:2).​

All of the Jewish believers living in the first century did indeed call on the name of Jesus Christ so therefore all of them belonged to the Body of Christ. Therefore, this matches with what Peter said at 2 Peter 3.

However, that does not change the fact that during the Acts period Paul preached two different gospels. When Paul went to the Jews this is the central message he preached:

"And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God...proving that this is the very Christ" (Acts 9:20,22).​

The Jews who believed that message received life the moment they believed that message (Jn.20:31) and they were also "born of God" the moment they believed it (1 Jn.5:1-5).

The message Paul preached to the Gentiles was the "gospel of grace," that the believer is "justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus" (Ro.3:24).

Belief in that gospel saved those who believed the moment when they believed.

Paul only preached one gospel.

Paul would have cursed himself if he preached another.

There is only one gospel, and that is the Sacrificial Lamb died for the sins of the WORLD.

 

[Ben Masada]

1 - Paul only preached one gospel.

2 - Paul would have cursed himself if he preached another.

3 - There is only one gospel, and that is the Sacrificial Lamb died for the sins of the WORLD.

1 - Yes, his gospel.

2 - No, he would curse another who preached a different gospel from his. (Gal. 1:6 -9)

3 - That's the gospel of Paul. There is another one; the gospel of Jesus which was Judaism. You have forgotten that Jesus was a Jew.

 

[God's Truth]

1 - Yes, his gospel.

2 - No, he would curse another who preached a different gospel from his. (Gal. 1:6 -9)

3 - That's the gospel of Paul. There is another one; the gospel of Jesus which was Judaism. You have forgotten that Jesus was a Jew.

If Paul preached a different gospel than the one Jesus preached, then Paul either cursed himself, or Jesus and the other Apostles.

Paul preached the same thing that Jesus preached.

Believe and obey Jesus.

 

[john w]

There is only one gospel, and that is the Sacrificial Lamb died for the sins of the WORLD]

Cousin It once again praises her saint Judas, asserting that Judas preached the good news of 1 Cor. 15:1-4 KJV.

Ssssssssssssssssss........................

 

[jamie]

I am talking about the commandments in the Decalogue and not festivals. I know that the festivals are for the Jews only and not for Gentiles but the whole second part of the Decalogue applies to all, Jews and Gentiles.

What? So you're saying part of the Torah only applies to Israel and part of it applies to Israel and all the other nations? Is that because you believe Moses went to all the nations and explained to them the Law of Moses so that God could hold them accountable?

Actually, there is nothing in the Torah that says God has a double standard. Gentiles could become part of Israel and be regarded as native born, but it doesn't go the other way with Israelites becoming uncircumcised, which is not easily accomplished.

 

[aikido7]

Paul met Jesus' original followers and disciples in Jerusalem (Peter, Jesus' brother James and others).

He scornfully called them "super apostles" and his letters reveal a theological conflict he had with the Jerusalem church. It was ostensibly about sharing meals but it also revolved around circumcision for Gentiles.

Paul appears to me very sensitive about his place in the hierarchy.

 

[Ben Masada]

If Paul preached a different gospel than the one Jesus preached, then Paul either cursed himself, or Jesus and the other Apostles.

Paul preached the same thing that Jesus preached.

Believe and obey Jesus.

Jesus, as a Jew, never preached bodily resurrection or that he was the son of God without a biological father. These thing were fabricated by Paul. (Acts 9:20)

 

[aikido7]

Paul only preached one gospel.

Paul would have cursed himself if he preached another.

There is only one gospel, and that is the Sacrificial Lamb died for the sins of the WORLD.

There are four gospels--five if you count the letters of Paul.

Paul and John are the only writers who contend that Jesus became appointed by God because of his death from crucifixion.

John was so determined to show Jesus as the sacrificial Lamb of God that he even changed the day Jesus died. John's gospel says Jesus was killed one day earlier so it would be on the Day of Preparation when the lambs were killed for the Paschal meal.

Mark, Luke and Matthew have Jesus dying on Passover.

These are separate traditions and theologies. Each gospel writer was inspired to write about the Jesus they knew, and every community of believers was different.

 

[God's Truth]

Jesus, as a Jew, never preached bodily resurrection or that he was the son of God without a biological father. These thing were fabricated by Paul. (Acts 9:20)

Do you really not know the scriptures of the virgin Mary?

 

[Ben Masada]

Paul met Jesus' original followers and disciples in Jerusalem (Peter, Jesus' brother James and others).

He scornfully called them "super apostles" and his letters reveal a theological conflict he had with the Jerusalem church. It was ostensibly about sharing meals but it also revolved around circumcision for Gentiles.

Paul appears to me very sensitive about his place in the hierarchy.

After listening to the gospel preached by the Apostles of Jesus, the impression Paul was left with was that the Apostles were preaching about a different Jesus and, for that matter, he considered them as false apostles. (II Cor. 11:4 -6, 13)

 

[God's Truth]

There are four gospels--five if you count the letters of Paul.

There are not five gospels. There is one gospel and many peoples who preached it.

Paul and John are the only writers who contend that Jesus became appointed by God because of his death from crucifixion.

John was so determine to show Jesus as the sacrificial Lamb of God that he even changed the day Jesus died so it would be on the Day of Preparation when the lambs were killed for the Paschal meal.
Mark, Luke and Matthew have Jesus dying on Passover.

You would rather put yourself above a writer of the scriptures than admit you are wrong.

 

[Ben Masada]

What? So you're saying part of the Torah only applies to Israel and part of it applies to Israel and all the other nations? Is that because you believe Moses went to all the nations and explained to them the Law of Moses so that God could hold them accountable?

Actually, there is nothing in the Torah that says God has a double standard. Gentiles could become part of Israel and be regarded as native born, but it doesn't go the other way with Israelites becoming uncircumcised, which is not easily accomplished.

If you mean to imply that every thing either in the Decalogue but also the festivals, you are in big trouble lady. Haven't you ever heard about the Noahide laws? These are the laws for the Gentiles while the Jews have all the laws. It just happened that the Noahide laws include the greater part of the Decalogue. Yes, if you want to call that "double standard", so be it. You can take it with whoever wrote the Torah.

 

[Ben Masada]

Do you really not know the scriptures of the virgin Mary?

I do. Mary was a virgin in terms of a young woman ready to carry a babe. That's called in Hebrew "Almah". An "Almah" can be married and have babies. She ceases being an "Almah" when she can conceive no more. The Physical virgin is called "Betulah". That was not the case with Mary.

The virgin according to Isa. 7:14 is a reference to Israel which is confirmed by Amos 5:2 and the child called Immanuel was Judah if you read Isa. 7:14, 15, 22 and 8:8.