ECT The Gospel Preached at Pentecost

[dodge]

That does not answer anything from my post which you quoted. And speaking of Apollos we can see exactly what he preached to the Jews:

"For he mightily convinced the Jews, and that publicly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus is Christ" (Acts 18:28).​

I will stay with what Paul taught, and as you know Paul mentioned cephas also. Seems many are relishing in their carnality.

1Co 1:12
Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

1Co 3:4
For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?

1Co 3:21
Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are yours;

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I will stay with what Paul taught, and as you know Paul mentioned cephas also. Seems many are relishing in their carnality.

I know that you have some point in mind but you have not been clear on what that point is. Nothing you have said has answered anything which I said.

 

[dodge]

Taught to the Jews or to the Gentiles?

There you go Jerry dividing the word of God and I would suggest to stay in carnality.

Did Paul NAME an audience ? NO ! It is for everyone that names the name of Jesus ,Jerry.

My mistake Jerry Paul did name his audience !

1Co 3:1
¶
And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.

 

[dodge]

I know that you have some point in mind but you have not been clear on what that point is. Nothing you have said has answered anything which I said.

2Co 10:17
But he that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.

As Paul described it babes,those still on milk, argue about which Apostle they followed , and Paul rightfully so tried to stop that nonsense, because all the Apostles preached the one true Gospel as Paul indicated.

1Co 3:1

And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.

If Peter or Apollos had not been teaching grace trough faith do you believe for a second that Paul would not have called them out ?

This debate is not new it has been around since and probably before Paul's time.

It is pretty clear when Paul said if any man glorieth let him glory in the Lord He was teaching how to move to higher more solid ground, and that is meat and not milk.

 

[Interplanner]

"Is Christ divided?" I Cor 1.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

There you go Jerry dividing the word of God and I would suggest to stay in carnality.

All you do is to IGNORE the passages which I quoted that proves that two different gospels were being preached during the Acts period. Since you consider yourself an expert of the "good news" of Christ then tell me what was being preached in the "gospel" at Luke 9:6 since at that time the Apostles did not even know that the Lord Jesus was going to die (Lk.18:33-34).

Then we will see if you still insist that only one gospel was preached.

 

[Interplanner]

All you do is to IGNORE the passages which I quoted that proves that two different gospels were being preached during the Acts period. Since you consider yourself an expert of the "good news" of Christ then tell me what was being preached in the "gospel" at Luke 9:6 since at that time the Apostles did not even know that the Lord Jesus was going to die (Lk.18:33-34).

Then we will see if you still insist that only one gospel was preached.

Jerry, you don't get denial. In fact, you may be 'in denial' of denial!

Peter knew exactly who Christ was. He DENIED him 3 times.

The disciples knew Christ was to die, but their heads were full of Judaism and they did not WANT to know about a dying Messiah, when they thought the Messiah would rule forever (Jn 12:34) and the 12 would be tribal chieftains and liberate Israel from Rome. That is what DENIAL does to people.

You are always an epoch or age off in your theology.

Your treatment of early Acts teaching is just gymnastics. You might as well chop out Lk 24 from your Bible, which is the lead-in. The crucifixion and the enthronement on David's throne as a vision were mentioned intentionally by Peter. So was forgiveness. so was the exaltation of Christ that Israel was expecting. Israel needed to repent and become missionaries. That is how early Acts reads. Not your tripe.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Jerry, you don't get denial. In fact, you may be 'in denial' of denial!

Don't expect others to believe your tripe. According to your silly idea the Apostles went out to the towns of Israel preaching that the Lord Jesus died for our sins and healing every where. Then all of a sudden the Lord Jesus told them that He was going to die and then all of them just forgot what they had been preaching!

You expect us to believe that they forgot the gospel of their salvation!

 

[Cross Reference]

Of course since interplanner had no answer for the fact that the Jews were being saved by a gospel which is different from the "gospel of grace" he must attack my OP on a minor issue. He just hopes no one will notice that he had nothing of substance to say.

Even more interesting is there is no mentioning being saved from what and unto what?

 

[Cross Reference]

All you do is to IGNORE the passages which I quoted that proves that two different gospels were being preached during the Acts period. Since you consider yourself an expert of the "good news" of Christ then tell me what was being preached in the "gospel" at Luke 9:6 since at that time the Apostles did not even know that the Lord Jesus was going to die (Lk.18:33-34).

Then we will see if you still insist that only one gospel was preached.

There was only ONE Jesus Christ. Ergo, since He was the Author of salvation may I suggest there is only ONE salvation and ONE way for a person to accomplish it in his life for it is LIFE. That message was the ONE the Jesus preached:

"And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent". John 17:3 (KJV) . . .followed by the rest of the text in that chapter. Jesus Preached it as well as Peter, John and Paul. . . and all the other Apostles.

 

[intojoy]

Why did you not comment on what is found in the epistle to the Galatians in the first chapter? Not long after Paul was converted on the Damascus road he preached the following message to the Jews:

"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).​

At that time Paul had not yet received the gospel which he was to preach among the Gentiles. He wrote the following which is found in the first chapter of Galatians:

"But when God, who set me apart from birth and called me by his grace, was pleased to reveal his Son in me so that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not consult any man, nor did I go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went immediately into Arabia and later returned to Damascus" (Gal.1:15-17).

When Paul received a gospel from the Lord Jesus on the Damascus road he immediately went to Damascus (Acts 9:6-8). But when he received the gospel which he preached among the Gentiles he went immediately into Arabia. That can only mean that two different gospels were preached during the Acts period.



It is you who is kookoo because according to your ideas even though the gospel which Paul preached to the Gentiles was kept secret since the world began it was revealed to the OT prophets:

"Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, even the preaching of Jesus Christ according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began, But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith" (Ro.16:25-26).​

One flew over the cuckoo's nest and it was you and not me!

So you're doubling down on this: "Jesus was talking about the New Testament prophets in Luke 24"
Hahaha Jerry bro, admitting you were wrong is a sign of strength.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[Jerry Shugart]

There was only ONE Jesus Christ. Ergo, since He was the Author of salvation may I suggest there is only ONE salvation and ONE way for a person to accomplish it in his life for it is LIFE. That message was the ONE the Jesus preached:

"And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent". John 17:3 (KJV) . . .followed by the rest of the text in that chapter. Jesus Preached it as well as Peter, John and Paul. . . and all the other Apostles.

I see nothing in that chapter about the Lord Jesus dying for anyone's sin. Is that not a part of the gospel of grace?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

So you're doubling down on this: "Jesus was talking about the New Testament prophets in Luke 24"
Hahaha Jerry bro, admitting you were wrong is a sign of strength.

According to your strange ideas something which was "hidden" was something which was revealed by the OT prophets:

"But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory" (1 Cor.2:7-8).​

The princes of the world would never have crucified the Lord Jesus if they would have known that it would be His death which would bring salvation to the lost.

But according to you there was nothing hidden about this gospel because the OT prophets had made it plain that men would be saved as a result of His death.

 

[dodge]

All you do is to IGNORE the passages which I quoted that proves that two different gospels were being preached during the Acts period. Since you consider yourself an expert of the "good news" of Christ then tell me what was being preached in the "gospel" at Luke 9:6 since at that time the Apostles did not even know that the Lord Jesus was going to die (Lk.18:33-34).

Then we will see if you still insist that only one gospel was preached.

I Can't help but notice no comments from you on what Paul said was carnal like claiming Paul, Cephas, Aopllos etc. The silence speaks volumes.

Jerry after the resurrection of Jesus when ALL the Apostles knew that the Lord had resurrected they ALL preached the same Gospel.

Here is a question for you. If Paul had a different Gospel why did he go to Peter after his experience on the Damascus road.

The word of God is a series of events that are ALL related ,and if you continue to ignore the teachings of Jesus as pertaining to the BOC by driving wedges , which Paul called carnality, between the Apostles you do everyone including yourself a great disservice.

If you are not careful you will find yourself opposing Jesus and the other Apostles.

The harm I see that MAD has already done is teaching that the Lord's supper and baptism is not for the BOC, which is flat out wrong.

I will stay with what Paul taught where Paul said if there be any that glorieth let him glory in the Lord.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

I Can't help but notice no comments from you on what Paul said was carnal like claiming Paul, Cephas, Aopllos etc. The silence speaks volumes.

That has nothing to do with the fact that two different gospels were preached during the Acts period.

Of course you did not even attempt to answer what I said to you here:

Since you consider yourself an expert of the "good news" of Christ then tell me what was being preached in the "gospel" at Luke 9:6 since at that time the Apostles did not even know that the Lord Jesus was going to die (Lk.18:33-34).​

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Jerry, you don't get denial. In fact, you may be 'in denial' of denial!

Peter knew exactly who Christ was. He DENIED him 3 times.

The disciples knew Christ was to die, but their heads were full of Judaism and they did not WANT to know about a dying Messiah,

Made up, as usual.

 

[dodge]

That has nothing to do with the fact that two different gospels were preached during the Acts period.

Of course you did not even attempt to answer what I said to you here:

Since you consider yourself an expert of the "good news" of Christ then tell me what was being preached in the "gospel" at Luke 9:6 since at that time the Apostles did not even know that the Lord Jesus was going to die (Lk.18:33-34).​

It has EVERYTHING to do with what you claim, and Paul said it is CARNAL to claim an Apostle exactly as MAD does. So when convenient I see YOU ignore the teachings of Paul. Obviously Paul saw no problem with the Gospel as others were preaching it, and that is exactly the point Paul made when he said some claim Cephas , and other Apollos and others Paul. Notice Paul did not claim any special revelation that the others supposedly did not have.

 

[Interplanner]

Don't expect others to believe your tripe. According to your silly idea the Apostles went out to the towns of Israel preaching that the Lord Jesus died for our sins and healing every where. Then all of a sudden the Lord Jesus told them that He was going to die and then all of them just forgot what they had been preaching!

You expect us to believe that they forgot the gospel of their salvation!

No, but that when the actual death was going to happen, they didn't want to talk about it. I can't believe how such a regular feature of human contradiction has no part in your thinking. You treat them in a doctrinaire way, no feelings, no humanity, just theologs, robotics.

 

[Interplanner]

That has nothing to do with the fact that two different gospels were preached during the Acts period.

Of course you did not even attempt to answer what I said to you here:

Since you consider yourself an expert of the "good news" of Christ then tell me what was being preached in the "gospel" at Luke 9:6 since at that time the Apostles did not even know that the Lord Jesus was going to die (Lk.18:33-34).​

That is not accurate about not knowing. IT is not wanting to know or talk about.

Peter knew exactly who Christ was Mt 16 and denied it three times in public. It is one of the paradoxes of human nature.

Remember, the disciples had seen a forgiveness miracle in Mk 2. Perhaps several later on. But that doesn't mean they connected it with Christ's sacrifice.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

No, but that when the actual death was going to happen, they didn't want to talk about it. I can't believe how such a regular feature of human contradiction has no part in your thinking. You treat them in a doctrinaire way, no feelings, no humanity, just theologs, robotics.

Rationalization, humanism, unbelief.