My Gospel by Paul

[Guojing]

I don't want a chart - the result of someone else s studies. I want answers to my points.
Jesus preached the kingdom of God, so did Paul. Jesus talked about his saving death and resurrection - so did Paul.

Yet you claim there are 2 Gospels.

In the first place, your reasoning is illogical.

Your argument is:

Since Paul preached the Kingdom of God
and Jesus also preached the Kingdom of God

Therefore Jesus and Paul must be preaching the same gospel

That makes as much logical sense as me saying the following:

I preached that my wife had long hair and wearing dresses.
Someone else also preached his wife had long hair and wearing dresses.

Therefore we must be talking about/married to the same woman.

 

[Guojing]

You simply can not see and understand what 1 Corinthians 15 is saying because of your preconceived theological mind set. You think every time you read the word saved, that the writer is addressing Eternal Life salvation from the lake of fire (hell). But you fail to understand that there are in The Bible, other uses and meanings used of the word saved and that the word saved does not always mean in The Bible saved (salvation) from the lake of fire (hell). Many times saved is addressing the physical saving of believers from harm or God's discipline.

Is There a Difference Between Being Saved and Being Born Again? – Grace Evangelical Society

So do not come off with this innocent attitude that i am just doing so and so. When you are really cherry picking out verses to form your theology

I don't spiritualize verses like you. If you see that as a shortcoming, I am fine.

 

[Strong in Him]

In the first place, your reasoning is illogical.

Your argument is:

Since Paul preached the Kingdom of God
and Jesus also preached the Kingdom of God

Therefore Jesus and Paul must be preaching the same gospel

I also said that Jesus and Paul both preached Jesus' death and resurrection, forgiveness, eternal life, the Holy Spirit and Jesus' return.
Sounds pretty similar to me.

 

[d taylor]

I don't spiritualize verses like you. If you see that as a shortcoming, I am fine.

You do not understand what spiritualizing a text means.

 

[Der Alte]

You do not understand what spiritualizing a text means.

PMFBI but how would the former pagan gentile Christians in the far-off places e.g. Rome, Samaria, Corith, Thessalonica etc. the NT was sent to know how to properly "spiritualize" texts in what for many was a second language?

 

[d taylor]

PMFBI but how would the former pagan gentile Christians in the far-off places e.g. Rome, Samaria, Corith, Thessalonica etc. the NT was sent to know how to properly "spiritualize" texts in what for many was a second language?

I have no idea what PMFBI is so i have on idea what point you are trying to make

 

[Strong in Him]

I have no idea what PMFBI is so i have on idea what point you are trying to make

I think it stands for Pardon Me For Butting In.

 

[Der Alte]

I have no idea what PMFBI is so i have on idea what point you are trying to make.

As Strong in Him said PMFBI is shorthand for "pardon me for butting in."

 

[d taylor]

PMFBI but how would the former pagan gentile Christians in the far-off places e.g. Rome, Samaria, Corith, Thessalonica etc. the NT was sent to know how to properly "spiritualize" texts in what for many was a second language?

Not quite sure how this ties into the poster Guojing, saying i was spiritualizing The Bible. And my reply to him, that i think he does not know what spiritualizing actually means.

 

[Guojing]

I also said that Jesus and Paul both preached Jesus' death and resurrection, forgiveness, eternal life, the Holy Spirit and Jesus' return.
Sounds pretty similar to me.

If you conclude that therefore, they are preaching the same gospel, that is as equally illogical as in my analogy

 

[Guojing]

You do not understand what spiritualizing a text means.

To me, it simply means a non-literal interpretation of scripture, taking context into account.

When you spiritualize a scripture passage, you interpret it to mean whatever you want, to fit your pre-existing doctrine.

A perfect example here is what you have done to Luke 10:25-28. My Gospel by Paul

And of course the sheep and goat judgement we have discussed before.

 

[d taylor]

To me, it simply means a non-literal interpretation of scripture, taking context into account.

When you spiritualize a scripture passage, you interpret it to mean whatever you want, to fit your pre-existing doctrine.

A perfect example here is what you have done to Luke 10:25-28. My Gospel by Paul

And of course the sheep and goat judgement we have discussed before.

The example you use, in Luke about inherit. I am the one who used the word correctly as inherit means

inherit: to receive from an ancestor as a right or title descendible by law at the ancestor's death

 

[Jipsah]

This is our Gospel, of Grace by Faith, that we have had for the last 2000yrs. No one has been saved by the 1st Gospel of the Kingdom, found in Matt, Mark, Luke and John, since all those years ago.
This was because it was for the Jews only, as a Gospel of works, where by they have to endure to the end to be saved.

Balderdash.

 

[Jipsah]

The point of the OP is that there is a gospel for the Jews and one for the Gentiles. There is only 1 gospel to the gentiles, the one taught by Paul as it was given to him by Jesus Christ. It is a different Gospel (not radically different but nevertheless different) to that taught by Jesus to the Jews in the 4 gospels and taught by the other apostles, who were the apostles to the Jews.

Simplest terms- No.

 

[Jipsah]

Shame you are not open to growing further in the understanding of the scriptures. It is a video well worth watching and its all from the bible.

Every heresy ever perperated was"all from the Bible". This one's no different.

 

[Jipsah]

Its a shame you turn to sarcasm instead of having a mind willing to learn more about the word of God

The word of God is found in the Bible, far less so on Youtube.

To this end you should watch the video.

Most prolific source of egregious pseudo-Christian rubbish is Youtube.

If you prefer, BrotherJJ put it well when in his post above he said "One Gospel Several Dispensational Administrations". This is another way to see it. However, each of the several 'administrations' has a different instruction to follow.

Different verbiage, same nonsense.

Currently we are under the gospel or administration of Grace but in time (the rapture) it will end & a new one will be in operation then.

Nonsense.

 

[Jipsah]

Wow, what part of that don't you understand!? I guessing that English is your 3rd or 4th language and you have a poor grasp of it. Good thing Google Translate is a thing, you should use it.

This is a defence of you the specious doctrine that's the subject of this thread, I take it. No surprise there.

In any case to help you understand the Paul went to cities OUTSIDE of Israel

Which is right up with with the revelation that water is wet

 

[Guojing]

The example you use, in Luke about inherit. I am the one who used the word correctly as inherit means

inherit: to receive from an ancestor as a right or title descendible by law at the ancestor's death

That post is not about the meaning of inherit

 

[ViaCrucis]

In the first place, your reasoning is illogical.

Your argument is:

Since Paul preached the Kingdom of God
and Jesus also preached the Kingdom of God

Therefore Jesus and Paul must be preaching the same gospel

That makes as much logical sense as me saying the following:

I preached that my wife had long hair and wearing dresses.
Someone else also preached his wife had long hair and wearing dresses.

Therefore we must be talking about/married to the same woman.

Pretty bad analogy. In fact, if we deconstruct your argument we can actually just as easily say that Paul preached a different Jesus Christ than the one in the Four Gospels.

Because if we take ever point in which Paul and the Gospels seem to agree as being nothing more than though we were talking about two different women who have long hair and likes to wear dresses; then we can just as easily have two different Jesus Christs.

I mean, Paul never mentions Mary, or the Virgin Birth. Paul never mentions the Sermon on the Mount.

So perhaps there are two Jesus Christs, and each has their own gospel. There's the Jesus of the Gospels, this is the Jewish Messiah. And then there is a different Jesus Christ, the one that was revealed to Paul, and this is the Gentile Messiah.

So not only two different gospels, but two different Jesus'es. Both died on a cross and rose again, both are the Son of God. But there's two. After all, in the Gospels that Jesus said He came only for the lost sheep of Israel. But in Paul's letters that Jesus accepts Gentiles as well. See, two different Jesus Christs. Two Jesus'es, two Messiahs, two gospels.

Making up heresy is easy.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Guojing]

Pretty bad analogy. In fact, if we deconstruct your argument we can actually just as easily say that Paul preached a different Jesus Christ than the one in the Four Gospels.

Because if we take ever point in which Paul and the Gospels seem to agree as being nothing more than though we were talking about two different women who have long hair and likes to wear dresses; then we can just as easily have two different Jesus Christs.

I mean, Paul never mentions Mary, or the Virgin Birth. Paul never mentions the Sermon on the Mount.

So perhaps there are two Jesus Christs, and each has their own gospel. There's the Jesus of the Gospels, this is the Jewish Messiah. And then there is a different Jesus Christ, the one that was revealed to Paul, and this is the Gentile Messiah.

So not only two different gospels, but two different Jesus'es. Both died on a cross and rose again, both are the Son of God. But there's two. After all, in the Gospels that Jesus said He came only for the lost sheep of Israel. But in Paul's letters that Jesus accepts Gentiles as well. See, two different Jesus Christs. Two Jesus'es, two Messiahs, two gospels.

Making up heresy is easy.

-CryptoLutheran

One is Christ according to prophecy, the other is Christ according to the mystery.

Nothing heretical about that statement. Prophecy vs mystery: Since the world began