toldailytopic: Did the apostle Peter and the apostle Paul preach the same message?

[Paulos]

Paul wrote the book of Galatians before he wrote 1 Corinthians. For those of you who think that Paul preached a separate gospel from that of Peter, don't you think he would have mentioned something about that to the Corinthians? But he does not! Instead, this is what he says:

1 Cor 1:10-13, 3:1-4, 11, 21-23, 4:6
Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all agree and that there be no divisions among you. What I mean is that each one of you says "I follow Paul" or "I follow Peter". Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? But I, brethren, could not address you as spiritual men, but as men of the flesh, as infants in Christ. For when one says, "I follow Paul", or "I follow Apollos", are you not mere men? For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ, so let no one boast of men. For all things are yours, whether Paul or Apollos or Peter. And you are Christ's, and Christ is God's. This is how one should regard us: as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God, that none of you may be puffed up in favor of one against another.​

Again, Paul wrote all of that after he wrote Galatians 2:11-21, which is proof that they cleared that issue up with each other before Paul wrote 1 Corinthians. It can clearly be seen from the above passages that Paul viewed himself and Peter as fellow "servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God". Furthermore, Paul said that those who do draw a dividing line between himself and Peter are immature, carnal and unspiritual.

 

[sky.]

Yes, they both had the Holy Spirit.

 

[john w]

Man you are wound up tight. You're right on the edge.

As to the OP....pretty much what most people have been saying. There's one faith, one hope, one gospel that saves. I see why people would think it's two....the Jew's were a unique group of people. And that's why even today it's understood when we refer to Jew and Gentile as a description of all people.

I don't agree that Peter and Paul preached a different message. I do agree that the disagreement with Peter and Paul was over Peter's hypocrisy in withdrawing from the gentile brothers. I do think that Paul saw the truth about the gentiles more clearly and earlier than Peter did though.

"one gospel that saves."-McGuyver

You mean that gospel Judas was told to preach in Mt. 10 ff, and Luke 9 ff? Was Peter saved prior to the death, burial, and resurrection? Can one deny the resurrection, and be saved?

 

[Totton Linnet]

No, but after a while, Peter accepted what Paul was preaching. Like after Acts 10, and the rebuke from Paul as told in Galatians.

*
Paul's rebuke to Peter was that Peter was trying [or rather was abashed into] once again to set up a difference between the Jews and the Gentiles when both he and Paul knew there was no difference.....that is 180 degrees opposite to your understanding, as I might add is a great deal of scripture truth.

"Adam...where are you?"

 

[Lighthouse]

No.

Col 1:13 He has delivered us from the power of darkness and conveyed us into the kingdom of the Son of His love, 14in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins.

2 Peter 1:9 For he who lacks these things is shortsighted, even to blindness, and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins.
10Therefore, brethren, be even more diligent to make your call and election sure, for if you do these things you will never stumble; 11for so an entrance will be supplied to you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

This.

 

[Paulos]

This.

How is 2 Peter 1:9 any different from:

2 Cor 13:5
Examine yourselves as to whether you are in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?—unless indeed you are disqualified.​

How is 2 Peter 1:10 any different from:

1 Corinthians 9:27
But I discipline my body and bring it into subjection, lest, when I have preached to others, I myself should become disqualified.​

 

[godrulz]

There is absolutely no indication in the book of Acts or in their respective epistles that Peter and Paul preached different gospels. Peter faltered only when he withdrew from eating with Gentiles, but that was not a matter of preaching a different gospel, that was a matter of Peter not being straightforward with regard to the same gospel that he was already preaching (Gal 2:14).

Yes, Peter was hypocritical, compromised, corrected. He was not preaching a different true gospel than Paul fundamentally apart from his typical wavering at times. The Bible does not condone Peter's hypocrisy as a true gospel replaced by another true gospel from Paul.

Gal. 1 contrasts the one true gospel with false gospels. It does not teach two true gospels post-cross. Gal. 2 is a demarcation of ministry, not two true gospels or a false gospel (though Peter needed correcting on some things).

 

[Paulos]

Yes, Peter was hypocritical, compromised, corrected.

The men who "came from James" in Gal 2:12 were of the same sort that James told Paul about in Acts 21:20. James advised Paul to placate this group by letting them see him take part in a vow. Paul agreed, and there was nothing wrong in doing this as Paul himself wrote in 1 Corinthians 9:20, because all involved were Jewish.

The problem with this tactic came in when Gentiles got caught up in the mix. Peter thought he should not offend this group of Jews by letting them see him eat with Gentiles. But Peter's withdrawal from the Gentiles had the effect of making the Gentiles think that they should start observing the Law (Gal 2:14). Not only was this contrary to the teaching of Paul (Gal 3:2-3), it was also contrary to the teaching of James (Acts 21:25). Paul corrected Peter and Peter agreed (1 Cor 3:22, 2 Pet 3:15). So those who say that Paul and James and/or Peter taught different gospels are greatly mistaken.

 

[Totton Linnet]

James confirmed in a letter which he commanded Paul to read to the Gentiles that ALL the apostles were united.

 

[Paulos]

Here's another quote that blows the two/multiple gospel theory out of the water:

The gospel Paul preached was identical with that proclaimed by the primitive church at Jerusalem. Just as the leaders of that community recognized him and his unique role in the spread of the gospel, so too he elsewhere associated himself with them as a witness to the resurrection and gave thanks to God for how he had worked mightily through all of his apostolic colleagues: "Whether, then, it was I or they, this is what we preached, and this is what you believed" (1 Cor. 15:11).​

Paul said "this is what we preached"—and Paul had mentioned Peter, the 12 disciples, and other witnesses. What was it that "we" preached? That "Christ died for our sins" and the resurrection (1Corinthians 15:3, 4)...In 1Corinthians 15, Paul was obviously unaware that his gospel was different than Peter's!​

Source: http://cicministry.org/commentary/issue108.htm

 

[Lazy afternoon]

The TheologyOnline.com TOPIC OF THE DAY for January 25th, 2012 09:44 AM

toldailytopic: Did the apostle Peter and the apostle Paul preach the same message?

Take the topic above and run with it! Slice it, dice it, give us your general thoughts about it. Everyday there will be a new TOL Topic of the Day.
If you want to make suggestions for the Topic of the Day send a Tweet to @toldailytopic or @theologyonline or send it to us via Facebook.

A loaded question.

They both preached salvation the same and only way.

However Paul wrote mainly to all the saved of this age.

LA

 

[Lighthouse]

Here's another quote that blows the two/multiple gospel theory out of the water:

The gospel Paul preached was identical with that proclaimed by the primitive church at Jerusalem. Just as the leaders of that community recognized him and his unique role in the spread of the gospel, so too he elsewhere associated himself with them as a witness to the resurrection and gave thanks to God for how he had worked mightily through all of his apostolic colleagues: "Whether, then, it was I or they, this is what we preached, and this is what you believed" (1 Cor. 15:11).​

Paul said "this is what we preached"—and Paul had mentioned Peter, the 12 disciples, and other witnesses. What was it that "we" preached? That "Christ died for our sins" and the resurrection (1Corinthians 15:3, 4)...In 1Corinthians 15, Paul was obviously unaware that his gospel was different than Peter's!​

Source: http://cicministry.org/commentary/issue108.htm

You do realize that not every thing has to be different for their messages to be different, don't you? Of course they agreed on certain things.:dunce::duh:

 

[Paulos]

You do realize that not every thing has to be different for their messages to be different, don't you? Of course they agreed on certain things.

What did they agree on? What did they disagree on?

:dunce::duh:

 

[Lighthouse]

What did they agree on? What did they disagree on?

You've already shown one thing upon which they agreed.

They disagreed on the subject of justification by works, though. Peter was with James on that one.

And Acts 15 clearly shows that Peter had been teaching those who converted through his message to keep the law.

 

[godrulz]

You've already shown one thing upon which they agreed.

They disagreed on the subject of justification by works, though. Peter was with James on that one.

And Acts 15 clearly shows that Peter had been teaching those who converted through his message to keep the law.

:bang: Peter, James, John, Paul all taught justification by grace through faith apart from works. It was false, not true, teachers who added works as a salvific issue. Paul stood with the Jerusalem leadership in agreement, but non-salvific concessions were made in light of the weaker brothers or opposers of faith alone.

 

[john w]

:bang: Peter, James, John, Paul all taught justification by grace through faith apart from works. It was false, not true, teachers who added works as a salvific issue. Paul stood with the Jerusalem leadership in agreement, but non-salvific concessions were made in light of the weaker brothers or opposers of faith alone.

Peter denied the resurrection, clown.

 

[Lighthouse]

:bang: Peter, James, John, Paul all taught justification by grace through faith apart from works. It was false, not true, teachers who added works as a salvific issue. Paul stood with the Jerusalem leadership in agreement, but non-salvific concessions were made in light of the weaker brothers or opposers of faith alone.

It never ceases to amaze me how oblivious to Scripture you are.

 

[godrulz]

Peter denied the resurrection, clown.

The resurrection had not happened. He did not deny it, but had a wrong view of the Messiah (like most Jews). This is not evidence that he preached a different gospel than Paul post-cross/resurrection.:bang:

 

[godrulz]

It never ceases to amaze me how oblivious to Scripture you are.

You must be using the LH version. I think you are misreading the passage (MAD filter) and not considering the historical background.

 

[john w]

You must be using the LH version. I think you are misreading the passage (MAD filter) and not considering the historical background.

Spam copy'npaste.