These are NOT the same gospel

[Tambora]

How do you think that answers my questions?

Read it again.
The "we" in verse 15 & 16 are the same "we" (Peter & Paul).
Both Peter & Paul know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.

Galatians 2:14-16 ESV
(14) But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel,
I [that would be Paul] said to Cephas [that would be Peter] before them all, If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?
(15) We ourselves are Jews by birth [that would be Peter & Paul] and not Gentile sinners;
(16) yet we [that would be Peter & Paul] know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.

 

[Derf]

Read it again.
The "we" in verse 15 & 16 are the same "we" (Peter & Paul).
Both Peter & Paul know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.

Galatians 2:14-16 ESV
(14) But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel,
I [that would be Paul] said to Cephas [that would be Peter] before them all, “If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?”
(15) We ourselves are Jews by birth [that would be Peter & Paul] and not Gentile sinners;
(16) yet we [that would be Peter & Paul] know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.

The great thing about the passage is that it's the exact passage the two-gospel advocates want to use to show two gospels, but as you've pointed out, it shows exactly the opposite.

 

[Tambora]

The great thing about the passage is that it's the exact passage the two-gospel advocates want to use to show two gospels, but as you've pointed out, it shows exactly the opposite.

Right.
Verse 15 & 16 are all the same sentence, and Paul is speaking to Peter.

 

[glorydaz]

Read it again.
The "we" in verse 15 & 16 are the same "we" (Peter & Paul).
Both Peter & Paul know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.

Galatians 2:14-16 ESV
(14) But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel,
I [that would be Paul] said to Cephas [that would be Peter] before them all, If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?
(15) We ourselves are Jews by birth [that would be Peter & Paul] and not Gentile sinners;
(16) yet we [that would be Peter & Paul] know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.

Don't get too excited, guys. You're getting way ahead of yourselves in an attempt to prove something that is blatantly false.
Your claim that justification by faith was known to Peter before Paul explained his gospel is error.

The Lord sent Paul by revelation with the purpose of explaining his gospel to the Apostles.
Paul spent a chunk of time in conversation with the Apostles about his gospel. Communicating it to them.

Gal. 2:2 And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain.

He refers to them being Jews by birth (and not gentiles SINNERS) is clearly speaking of their knowledge of the law. Specifically, the bondage of the law.

Paul is speaking of the law....not that the message of justification of faith was known to Peter prior to Paul sharing his gospel with them.

Gal. 2:4-5 And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage: 5 To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.

 

[glorydaz]

Paul on the kingdom:
Colossians 1:13 (KJV)
Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated [us] into the kingdom of his dear Son:

1 Thessalonians 2:12 (KJV)
That ye would walk worthy of God, who hath called you unto his kingdom and glory.

2 Thessalonians 1:5 (KJV)
[Which is] a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer:

2 Timothy 4:1 (KJV)
I charge [thee] therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom;

My goodness. So you really have no inkling of a kingdom on earth and a kingdom in heaven?

The kingdom of God is heavenly. Paul speaks of that.....not the Kingdom on earth where Jesus will sit on the throne.

Peter on DBR:
Acts 2:24 (KJV)
Whom God hath raised up, having loosed the pains of death: because it was not possible that he should be holden of it.

Acts 3:15 (KJV)
And killed the Prince of life, whom God hath raised from the dead; whereof we are witnesses.

Acts 4:10 (KJV)
Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, [even] by him doth this man stand here before you whole.

Acts 10:42 (KJV) And he commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is he which was ordained of God [to be] the Judge of quick and dead.

The fact that Jesus had been crucified and was risen isn't the same as preaching the dbr for salvation.

I should add that there are no occurrences of the phrase "kingdom of Israel" in the whole New Testament, at least in the kjv.

Acts 1:6
When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?

 

[Tambora]

Don't get too excited, guys. You're getting way ahead of yourselves in an attempt to prove something that is blatantly false.
Your claim that justification by faith was known to Peter before Paul explained his gospel is error.

The Lord sent Paul by revelation with the purpose of explaining his gospel to the Apostles.
Paul spent a chunk of time in conversation with the Apostles about his gospel. Communicating it to them.

Gal. 2:2 And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain.

He refers to them being Jews by birth (and not gentiles SINNERS) is clearly speaking of their knowledge of the law. Specifically, the bondage of the law.

Paul is speaking of the law....not that the message of justification of faith was known to Peter prior to Paul sharing his gospel with them.

Gal. 2:4-5 And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage: 5 To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.

Sorry, but the "we" in verse 15 & 16 is Paul & Peter.

Galatians 2:14-16 ESV
(14) But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel,
I [Paul] said to Cephas [Peter] before them all, If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?
(15) We [Peter & Paul] ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners;
(16) yet we [Peter & Paul] know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.

 

[glorydaz]

Sorry, but the "we" in verse 15 & 16 is Paul & Peter.

Galatians 2:14-16 ESV
(14) But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel,
I [Paul] said to Cephas [Peter] before them all, If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?
(15) We [Peter & Paul] ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners;
(16) yet we [Peter & Paul] know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.

Repeating it doesn't make it say what you want it to, Tam. It only makes you look desperate.

So you didn't read how Paul just explained his gospel of grace ....communicating it to them, which would have to have included justification by faith? The primary part of Paul's gospel is justification by faith. You seem to think Peter knew about justification by faith without the law before Paul preached it to him.

Your claim is that Jews by birth already knew about justification by faith. You can't prove it, but you're sure trying, aren't you?
Sorry, but hanging your hat on that "we" is kindergarten reasoning.

Show me anywhere with scripture, and I'll certainly listen.

 

[Tambora]

Repeating it doesn't make it say what you want it to, Tam. It only makes you look desperate.

It is the text.

You seem to think Peter knew about justification by faith without the law before Paul preached it to him.

I don't think Jesus told Peter to teach that works must be added to the sufficiency of the cross and resurrection.
Do you?

Your claim is that Jews by birth already knew about justification by faith.

Not every single Jew!!!
Paul was speaking of himself and Peter being Jews by birth.
That's what the "we" is ---- Paul and Peter.
And that same "we" (ie. Paul and Peter) knew that that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ.

You can't prove it, but you're sure trying, aren't you?
Sorry, but hanging your hat on that "we" is kindergarten reasoning.

It is the text.

Show me anywhere with scripture, and I'll certainly listen.

Galatians 2:14-16 is scripture.

 

[Idolater]

I don't know who wrote Hebrews and so I don't know if he or she learned justification by faith from Paul or not, but he or she certainly knew justification by faith and knew that it is taught in the Old Testament because the OT scripture is quoted in Hebrews just as surely as it's quoted by Paul: Hebrews 10:38 " Now the just shall live by faith"

 

[Derf]

My goodness. So you really have no inkling of a kingdom on earth and a kingdom in heaven?

The kingdom of God is heavenly. Paul speaks of that.....not the Kingdom on earth where Jesus will sit on the throne.

The fact that Jesus had been crucified and was risen isn't the same as preaching the dbr for salvation.



Acts 1:6
When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?

And I hope you noticed how the phrase "kingdom of Israel" is not used in the example you gave?

The fact that Jesus had risen from the dead says "there is a resurrection, Jesus has shown us the way!"

I'll be happy to consider the difference between Paul's version of the unearthly kingdom and Jesus's version, if you'd like to suggest one.

 

[Tambora]

I don't know who wrote Hebrews and so I don't know if he or she learned justification by faith from Paul or not, but he or she certainly knew justification by faith and knew that it is taught in the Old Testament because the OT scripture is quoted in Hebrews just as surely as it's quoted by Paul: Hebrews 10:38 " Now the just shall live by faith"

Amen.

 

[Tambora]

And I hope you noticed how the phrase "kingdom of Israel" is not used in the example you gave?

The fact that Jesus had risen from the dead says "there is a resurrection, Jesus has shown us the way!"

I'll be happy to consider the difference between Paul's version of the unearthly kingdom and Jesus's version, if you'd like to suggest one.

That would be a good study.

Presently I am doing a self study on Paul's use of the old testament when he teaches.
The amount of old testament he uses to preach the gospel is astounding.

 

[glorydaz]

It is the text.

Yes, and what you're reading into the text.

I don't think Jesus told Peter to teach that works must be added to the sufficiency of the cross and resurrection.
Do you?

We know what Jesus told Peter, and He didn't say anything about the sufficiency of the cross, that I can recall.

Not every single Jew!!!
Paul was speaking of himself and Peter being Jews by birth.
That's what the "we" is ---- Paul and Peter.

Actually, there was quite a crowd of Jews there with Peter doing exactly what Peter was doing....compelling the gentiles to get circumcised or stay separate. Peter by his silence, perhaps, but, nevertheless putting pressure on the gentiles to keep the law in order to be saved.

And that same "we" (ie. Paul and Peter) knew that that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ.




It is the text.


Galatians 2:14-16 is scripture.

Paul had already expounded his gospel to Peter, so, of course he knew.

 

[glorydaz]

And I hope you noticed how the phrase "kingdom of Israel" is not used in the example you gave?

The fact that Jesus had risen from the dead says "there is a resurrection, Jesus has shown us the way!"

I'll be happy to consider the difference between Paul's version of the unearthly kingdom and Jesus's version, if you'd like to suggest one.

Oh dear. I used a term that hadn't been used in that exact fashion, and I confused you. Let's look at the Kingdom that was being preached while Jesus walked the earth.....and the Gospel of the Kingdom which required a King to sit on David's throne. The Messiah.

All the Jews knew that was the Kingdom that was being preached. The kingdom of heaven ON EARTH is that Kingdom of Israel. You can claim the Kingdom of heaven is referring to a heavenly kingdom if you want to, but the Jews would scoff at your ignorance.

1 Samuel 13:13

And Samuel said to Saul, Thou hast done foolishly: thou hast not kept the commandment of the Lord thy God, which he commanded thee: for now would the Lord have established thy kingdom upon Israel for ever.

1 Samuel 24:20

And now, behold, I know well that thou shalt surely be king, and that the kingdom of Israel shall be established in thine hand.

1 Kings 9:5
Then I will establish the throne of thy kingdom upon Israel for ever, as I promised to David thy father, saying, There shall not fail thee a man upon the throne of Israel.

 

[Idolater]

Yes, and what you're reading into the text.


We know what Jesus told Peter, and He didn't say anything about the sufficiency of the cross, that I can recall.

But He did say to Peter (Peter was definitely there when this happened) after He Luke 22:19 "took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them," said, "This is my body which is given for you".

This Jesus says in the context of that Peter is right there and that Jesus had already been preaching to Peter----bluntly----His looming 'DBR' (death burial and Resurrection).

In this context, "20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, 'This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.'"

Jesus was not just preaching the (then future) events of the 'DBR' to His (then future) Apostles, but also at the Last Supper, the meaning and the eternal significance of "Paul's Gospel to the Uncircumcision." Communion is a remembrance of the one Gospel's, New and eternal Covenant's, eternal implications. "My body which is given for you"

Paul's Gospel 1st Corinthians 15:3 " For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;"

That's literally Paul telling the Corinthians what Communion means; when He said "This is My body", He was talking about the 'DBR'; and all of the other Apostles knew the same thing too, it just took Paul to do part of the last bit of persuasion in order to completely reveal to them all exactly what Jesus Christ had been trying to teach them all along.

Actually, there was quite a crowd of Jews there with Peter doing exactly what Peter was doing....compelling the gentiles to get circumcised or stay separate. Peter by his silence, perhaps, but,

That's an argument from silence then. So that idea that Peter was teaching circumcision, doesn't have any support from the Scripture.

nevertheless putting pressure on the gentiles to keep the law in order to be saved.

Yeah, perhaps. Not impossible. But also, doesn't necessarily require that MAD is right, even if it definitely is true.

Paul had already expounded his gospel to Peter, so, of course he knew.

I believe that's basically why the other Apostles knew that Paul was the legit replacement for Judas, the "chosen vessel" not the man who won a dice-throw. Paul expounded the 'DBR' to them; Matthias didn't do that.

 

[Tambora]

Yes, and what you're reading into the text.

I'm not reading into it.
It specifically says Paul was speaking to Peter.

We know what Jesus told Peter, and He didn't say anything about the sufficiency of the cross, that I can recall.

Peter was filled with the Holy Spirit.
Do you really believe the Spirit would lead Peter to say that the cross and resurrection were not sufficient but needed man's works of the law to make it sufficient????

Actually, there was quite a crowd of Jews there with Peter doing exactly what Peter was doing....compelling the gentiles to get circumcised or stay separate. Peter by his silence, perhaps, but, nevertheless putting pressure on the gentiles to keep the law in order to be saved.

We know Peter had several weak moments.
Paul had weak moments too.
Didn't stop Jesus from continuing to use both of them to reach the world of the good news.

Paul had already expounded his gospel to Peter, so, of course he knew.

And Peter embraced it, he did not oppose it.
Nor did Peter say "That's for Gentiles, not us".

 

[Derf]

That would be a good study.

Presently I am doing a self study on Paul's use of the old testament when he teaches.
The amount of old testament he uses to preach the gospel is astounding.

Especially since most was directed at those who knew nothing of the Hebrew scriptures.

 

[Derf]

Oh dear. I used a term that hadn't been used in that exact fashion, and I confused you. Let's look at the Kingdom that was being preached while Jesus walked the earth.....and the Gospel of the Kingdom which required a King to sit on David's throne. The Messiah.

All the Jews knew that was the Kingdom that was being preached. The kingdom of heaven ON EARTH is that Kingdom of Israel. You can claim the Kingdom of heaven is referring to a heavenly kingdom if you want to, but the Jews would scoff at your ignorance.

1 Samuel 13:13

And Samuel said to Saul, Thou hast done foolishly: thou hast not kept the commandment of the Lord thy God, which he commanded thee: for now would the Lord have established thy kingdom upon Israel for ever.

1 Samuel 24:20

And now, behold, I know well that thou shalt surely be king, and that the kingdom of Israel shall be established in thine hand.

1 Kings 9:5
Then I will establish the throne of thy kingdom upon Israel for ever, as I promised to David thy father, saying, There shall not fail thee a man upon the throne of Israel.

I don't have much problem with any of that except calling it a "gospel" on par with the saving grace of Jesus Christ.

 

[glorydaz]

That's an argument from silence then. So that idea that Peter was teaching circumcision, doesn't have any support from the Scripture.

I'd like to address this specifically first. You can replace the word circumcision with any other portion of the law and it would be the same.
Peter preached keeping the law from the beginning. He was a Jew...not even eating anything "unclean" until the Lord sent down the sheet and made Peter acknowledge it three times. Then we see when Peter was playing the hypocrite, James stepped forward and it was decided the gentiles would at least have to keep this portion of the law. Peter said nothing.

Acts 15:19 Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
20 But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.

 

[glorydaz]

Especially since most was directed at those who knew nothing of the Hebrew scriptures.

Who did know the Hebrew scriptures? Not the fishermen. The Scribes and Pharisees, maybe, and they had added so much it was impossible to keep the over 600 rules alone....just the rules were keeping those learned men busy.