But "they" ignore Paul's Gospel, anyway, and make up a "pauline" "gospel" which is not found in Scripture.
Water Baptism passed away in this dispensation
- Thread starter Bob Hill
- Start date
I am not sure we would disagree with the gospel Paul preached. Where we disagree is that there are not two true NT gospels after the cross (one for Jewish Christians and one for Gentile Christians before/after Paul).
Hmmm, we have a problem....
Mar 1:15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
Mat 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
:chew:
Eph 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God:
1Co 1:17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.
Eph 4:5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
That along with dozens of other passages that show THE PROGRAM AND MESSAGE CHANGED with the ushering in of the dispensation of Grace (Mid Acts - Paul)>:thumb:
Daniel50
New member
Mt 3:14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee,
and comest thou to me?
3:15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus
it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.
3:16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the
water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the
Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:
3:17 And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in
whom I am well pleased.
Your first verses are mostly before the cross. I do not disagree with these pre-cross verses (not New Testament yet).
The other verses have never presented a problem for Acts 2 dispensationalism. I have responded to them several times in the past. You are simply proof texting a deductive position and need to properly exegete each passage in context without your filter.
The program changed at the cross, not at Paul's conversion.
Who commissioned Paul to be the apostle to the gentiles?
You can actually answer in two words or less....
If that is true then why did the 12 contunue to keep the Law?
James 2:9-13
Why was it dicussed whether or not the gentiles should keep the Law?
Acts 15:5
Why did the 12 state that works must be performed?
James 2:9-13
I don't think anyone disputes that God/Jesus set apart Paul for his ministry to the Gentiles. Likewise, God set apart Peter, James, John, etc. to take the same gospel to a primarily Jewish audience. This is not proof of two different post-cross NT gospels. He has commissioned us to go into all the world and to preach to all ethnos groups until He returns. Does this mean there are millions of gospels just because we take the gospel to our sphere of influence or different target groups?
Laq will not answer this simple question. I would like to hear it from her.
She claims that MAD doctrine is Anti-Israel.
Acts 15:5 talks about a sect of the Pharisees who had legalistic baggage. The 12 made concessions without compromising the gospel of grace. Paul was on the same page as the 12 and mutually affirmed their respective ministries since they shared the same gospel. Together, they stood against the false Judaizers (not to be confused with Mid-Acts circumcision concept). Paul reported about God's work among the Gentiles. The Jerusalem Church rejoiced at this, even if they were slow due to prejudice or immature understanding of what was happening in the transition period since the cross. They were on the same page, but reinforced some concessions for the sake of unity (not to be confused with a grace vs works gospel) at this time lest it be a stumbling block. They were reasonable requirements, but not salvific issues. Together they rejected legalism. Together they affirmed grace and some thoughts to not offend those of Jewish background (cf. Pauline teaching in Cor. about giving up rights for weaker brothers).
James is talking about the type of faith that saves. It does not contradict Paul's teaching on faith or works (he taught about both, in perspective...Eph. 2:8-10).
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33352
(just read posts 1, 3, 5 It will only take a minute or two)
There is no contradiction between James and Paul, just a different emphasis. Non-Mid-Acts have been able to interpret James and Paul on their own merits, in context, without resorting to a two gospel theory that undermines THE gospel of Christ for all believers after the cross. There is no contradiction and no need to pit Paul against the other leaders.
I would not agree with that, but I can see a slight point if it rejects God's covenant with national Israel that will be fulfilled in the Trib./Millennium. It seems to me that Mid-Acts pre-trib. views allow for future dealings with Jews/Israel, so it would be a stretch to say it is anti-Israel.
Then why did Paul call it "My gospel"? Because what Paul preached to the gentiles and any new believer was something new and unique.
Romans 16:25-27
25 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began 26 but now made manifest, and by the prophetic Scriptures made known to all nations, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, for obedience to the faith— 27 to God, alone wise, be glory through Jesus Christ forever. Amen.
Romans 11:13
13 For I speak to you Gentiles; inasmuch as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I magnify my ministry...
More than a stretch, plain not true, a lie!
Hebrews 6 warns about the possibility of apostasy/falling away. It is an example for those who revert from Christianity back to Judaism in this case. I believe Paul also recognized the possibility of falling away.
Hebrews is about the superiority of the New Covenant over the Old Covenant. It is not about a circumcision gospel that was diametrically opposed to an uncircumcision gospel (Paul?).
Ephesians 1 is about the corporate election of the Church, not individual salvation, per se. Some historical research into the nature of NT seal does not support unconditional eternal security (Robert Shank "Life in the Son" has a chapter on what it is and is not). It is a pledge or promise. Believers are secure in Christ. The passage is for believers, not apostates. The writer of Hebrews would also support our security in Christ.
The entire NT (Paul and otherwise) teaches the security of the believer and the possibility of apostasy (reverting from belief to unbelief). There is no need to proof text one theme and pit it against the other. They are complementary truths.
Your two verses stand on their own merit. One context is a stern warning from the Spirit about the possibility of falling away. It happens to be given in a book with a primary Jewish audience and the example happens to be about reverting back to Judaism. This does not mean it is exclusive to such or that Paul would not have taught about the possibility of a pagan Corinthian becoming a Christian and then reverting back to false gods or no gods and forfeiting their security in Christ (since they are no longer believers by definition).
I affirm all of the Pauline and non-Pauline verses about the security of the believer (one who believes and continues to believe= Greek present, continuous tense).
I must also affirm the possibility of falling away as found in Pauline and non-Pauline texts.
The problem is that you believe conditional eternal security for Jews and unconditional eternal security for Gentiles. In reality, the Bible teaches conditional eternal security for all throughout the Bible. A Mid-Acts explanation is not the only or best way to reconcile all the data.
Any one of us could get up and call the gospel of Christ 'my gospel'. If Billy Graham heralds that 'my gospel will set you free' do you assume he has invented a new gospel exclusive to himself? Why make a big doctrine based on a personal pronoun? I can also tell people that my gospel is the truth and will lead to eternal life. Does that mean my gospel is different than Paul's gospel?
I am not impressed with the proof texting to support your minority view.
Paul preached Christ crucified, risen from the dead, salvation by grace through faith. Guess what? This is what Peter, James, and John preached after the resurrection. Take off your blinders.
Paul had a unique ministry, not a foreign gospel. Just because some apostles had baggage or an imperfect understanding does not mean there are two NT gospels for a limited people and a limited time after the cross.
Just go read the passage in Acts where Paul circumcised Timothy before taking him with him on the trip to encourage the Gentile Churches with the letter from the Jerusalem council elders and Apostles there, after Paul and Barnabas and Silas and the others returned from the Jerusalem council where it was decided that the Gentiles were not to come under circumcision and keep Moses. Paul circumcised Timothy with his own hands, after that council decision, and it was no sin, and with Apostolic authority Paul commanded Jews called into the Name to not become uncircumcised and for Gentiles to not become circumcised -which was decided by the council at Jerusalem, and not by Paul, sir.
The Jews, including Paul the Apostle, “kept Moses”, after coming into the Name by “the call”; not as a manner of perfection -which “perfection” is only received for Jew and Gentile in the “Once”, for “all in Adam”, “Accepted Atonement , which was the final offering for “Sin”, which Atonement made an end of the remembrance of sin and kept us from “perfection” since the fall of our firstborn, until the Day of Atonement.
-and all the redeemed of all the earth’s age since the beginning enter into the perfection of spirit by the second birth, from above, and then of body by the regeneration of it’s elements in the resurrection and or translation at the “laqach” of the entire Church/Congregation [His called out people from the beginning of creation], by that “One Atonement’s” “Final and Forever” “Offering“, and “Acceptance“, which was pre-ordained from the beginning of creation because the Creator saw our fall before we fell, and He made us for His glory to indwell and He planned our redemption in the Second Man‘s Name before He made us -so says His Scriptures.
None of the Apostles of the LORD placed any called Gentiles under Moses, and you cannot find one place in the Word where any of them did do so, and MAD doctrine is false to claim they did do so, for that is what the Jerusalem Council met together to decide the issue of, because of the Judaisers among them who made trouble for the called Gentiles.
And Paul commanded, with Apostolic authority, the Gentiles he wrote to, to do good works much more than James ever spoke of the works of faith. And if you claim to follow Paul the Apostle then, among other things, you should stop your dissembling about his truth of calling for the Believers to maintain “good works” -the works of faith.
Paul outworks “James“, and all the others, in the Faith, so he “claims” -but he did not outwork anyone of the Disciples or Apostles, for all had their call and fulfilled it -which Church history is replete with the stories of the works of the Apostles in the lands they went into in the beginning of the age of the Church, and they all worked hard in the harvest of the LORD“S vineyard and all will receive their own rewards [Paul will have to share some of his rewards for his works of faith with some of those whom he was responsible for the deaths of -that‘s my opinion, only, and I may change it as I see fit].
Paul and works of Faith commanded to be done by the Believers called into the Faith:
1Pe 2:15 For so is the will of God, that with good works ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men:
1Pe 3:17 For [it is] better, if the will of God be so, that ye suffer for good works, than for evil works.
And for the record, Paul is not MAD
"But he said, I am not MAD, most noble Festus; but speak forth the words of truth and soberness".The works of faith:
Mat 5:16 Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.
Mat 26:10 a woman is commended for doing a good work upon Christ Jesus
Mar 13:34
Jesus tells of going away and giving every servant his work to do, and of rewarding the servants who do well when He returns.
Luk 24:19 Jesus was mighty in works and the Word -He told us -who are born again in His name- to do the works He did.
And you have not replied to my post about MAD doctrine being against Israel in the same way the Plantation owners were in the main against the freedom of slaves in the USA....Your doctrince teaches, falsely, that "Israel" is to be kept from heaven, and your "paulinists" will rule earth from heaven: that is anti-Israel bogotry, but the truth is that redeemed Gentiles are grafted into the "Elect Plant of Righteousness", which the natural namesake people are branches in by natural birth, born naturally in "the Name" of the Beloved and only begotten Son of God -even though they each have to personally be born again, as Abraham was promised the Spirit of, which promise is about the adoption in the New Man.
Jews and Gentiles must be born again in the Spirit of promise to receive the spiritual inheritance of the heavenly promises granted only to the Elect Son of God, whose name is "Israel".
You got the Bible answer and you are refusing to acknowledge the Word, but want a MAD doctrine handbook answer, only!
-but MAD is wrong from the beginning, for Saul was not an Apostle "to the Gentiles" until the Church in Antioch commissioned Barnabas and him to go.
That is not what your doctrine understands or knows or will even acknowledge in the Word, and your doctrine is willfully wrong. Paul's doctrine, however, was not his own, but the doctrine of Christ, and his "Gospel" was not his own, but Christ's One, and only One, which was "once" -final and finished forever- delivered to the Saints [as Jude tells you, but you will not hear].
Act 13:1 ¶ Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul.
Act 13:2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.
Act 13:3 And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid [their] hands on them, they sent [them] away.
Act 13:4 ¶ So they, being sent forth by the Holy Ghost, departed unto Seleucia; and from thence they sailed to Cyprus.
Act 13:5 And when they were at Salamis, they preached the word of God in the synagogues of the Jews: and they had also John to [their] minister.
Act 14:7 And there they preached the gospel.
Act 14:14[Which] when the apostles, Barnabas and Paul, heard [of], they rent their clothes, and ran in among the people, crying out,
Act 14:21¶And when they had preached the gospel to that city, and had taught many, they returned again to Lystra, and [to] Iconium, and Antioch,
Act 14:26 And thence sailed to Antioch, from whence they had been recommended to the grace of God for the work which they fulfilled.
Act 14:27 And when they were come, and had gathered the church together, they rehearsed all that God had done with them, and how he had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles.
Act 14:28 And there they abode long time with the disciples.
Your doctrine also misses the mark on Saul's call, for it was the Disciple of the LORD, Ananais, serving as a prophet of the LORD to Saul, who was the “apostle” of Jesus Christ to Saul, and told Saul what was appointed for him to do, by the LORD'S command.
Act 9:17 And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, [even] Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath “apostello” [sent] me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.
Act 22:10 And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said unto me, Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do.
But, the answer to your question is that the “mainly Gentile” Antiochian Fellowship “commissioned Barnabas and Saul” by the “laying on of hands and sending them forth”, as the Holy Spirit gave them the unction to do, and sent them both as “apostles” “to the Work which He had called both of them“, together.
-And Paul only preached the One Gospel of Jesus Christ, not some new secret different strange thing which had no foundation in Scripture, which MAD falsely claims.
Brother John
New member
Thanx, Pet.
Brother John
New member
Laq.
Isnt it the mystery that Paul reveals to us, that your actually talking about? Don't Paul open new revelation, and make change from the old to the new? Isn't Paul the steward of this newly revealed mystery? Don't the old ways pass away, and new are ushered in? Other wise, why mix the two, Law and grace?
Isnt it the mystery that Paul reveals to us, that your actually talking about? Don't Paul open new revelation, and make change from the old to the new? Isn't Paul the steward of this newly revealed mystery? Don't the old ways pass away, and new are ushered in? Other wise, why mix the two, Law and grace?