There is only One Gospel

[ViaCrucis]

I am asking what does genesis 15 record the good news that Abraham believed God for.

2 And Abram said, O Lord Jehovah, what wilt thou give me, seeing I go childless, and he that shall be possessor of my house is Eliezer of Damascus?

3 And Abram said, Behold, to me thou hast given no seed: and, lo, one born in my house is mine heir.

4 And, behold, the word of Jehovah came unto him, saying, This man shall not be thine heir; But he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.

5 And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and number the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.

6 And he believed in Jehovah; and he reckoned it to him for righteousness.

Is Scripture not clear enough to you what was the content of that good news?

And Who is the fulfillment of that promise?

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Guojing]

I understand that Peter was sent to the Jews and Paul to the gentiles. That wasn't my question. You said it was the SAME gospel. How did you come to THAT conclusion?

Jesus is YHWH said: ↑
Paul says in Galatians 2 its the same gospel Peter preached to the circumsized(jews) as he did to the uncircumsized(gentiles).

I think only the KJV talks about 2 different gospels in Galatians 2:7.

So if you are not into the KJV, you will tend to conclude that both are preaching the same gospel.

 

[Guojing]

And Who is the fulfillment of that promise?

-CryptoLutheran

It was Christ, that is true.

But again, the question is simple, what did Abraham believe in Genesis 15? What does verse 5 says literally?

 

[ViaCrucis]

I think only the KJV talks about 2 different gospels in Galatians 2:7.

So if you are not into the KJV, you will tend to conclude that both are preaching the same gospel.

And the translators of the KJV didn't think they were two gospels, this is an example of not knowing how to read archaic English; and is a perfect example of why blind devotion to archaic language that one does not even understand is a problem.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Guojing]

And the translators of the KJV didn't think they were two gospels, this is an example of not knowing how to read archaic English; and is a perfect example of why blind devotion to archaic language that one does not even understand is a problem.

-CryptoLutheran

You want to quote that verse in the KJV for all of us to read, so that we can know that?

 

[ViaCrucis]

It was Christ, that is true.

But again, the question is simple, what did Abraham believe in Genesis 15? What does verse 5 says literally?

Abraham believed God's promise that He would provide him a son and that through Abraham's lineage all nations would be blessed. And, again, this is fulfilled in Jesus. The Gospel here is the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[ViaCrucis]

You want to quote that verse in the KJV for all of us to read, so that we can know that?

"But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as [the gospel] of the circumcision was unto Peter;"

I've placed the second "the gospel" in square brackets since I've italicized the entire text. Normally the second "the gospel" is italicized in the KJV because the translators have added it here (it's not in the Greek) in order for the flow of the passage to be readable.

ἀλλὰ τοὐναντίον ἰδόντες ὅτι πεπίστευμαι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας καθὼς Πέτρος τῆς περιτομῆς
alla tounantion idontes hoti pepisteumai to euaggelion tes akrobustias kathos Petros tes peritomes

"But on the contrary, when they saw that the Gospel was entrusted to me to the uncircumcised, even [as it had been to] Peter to the circumcised,"

Not two gospels, the same Gospel. Paul was acknowledged as entrusted to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles even as Peter had been preaching the Gospel to the Jews.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Guojing]

Abraham believed God's promise that He would provide him a son and that through Abraham's lineage all nations would be blessed. And, again, this is fulfilled in Jesus. The Gospel here is the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

-CryptoLutheran

Instead of inserting your own interpretation, why not just read Genesis 15:5 and accept it literally?

 

[Guojing]

"But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as [the gospel] of the circumcision was unto Peter;"

I've placed the second "the gospel" in square brackets since I've italicized the entire text. Normally the second "the gospel" is italicized in the KJV because the translators have added it here (it's not in the Greek) in order for the flow of the passage to be readable.

ἀλλὰ τοὐναντίον ἰδόντες ὅτι πεπίστευμαι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας καθὼς Πέτρος τῆς περιτομῆς
alla tounantion idontes hoti pepisteumai to euaggelion tes akrobustias kathos Petros tes peritomes

"But on the contrary, when they saw that the Gospel was entrusted to me to the uncircumcised, even [as it had been to] Peter to the circumcised,"

Not two gospels, the same Gospel. Paul was acknowledged as entrusted to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles even as Peter had been preaching the Gospel to the Jews.

-CryptoLutheran

What do you think Peter was preaching in Acts 2 and 3?

Do you think he told Israel that Christ died for their sins, and rose again on the 3rd day as a sign that all their sins are forever blotted out? (Romans 4:25)

 

[RCrihfield]

Notice in I Cor. 15:1-4 it says they are saved by the Gospel, it does not say that they are saved by receiving the Gospel. In fact, it goes on to say that if one believes the gospel, but does not hold fast, they are not saved. Pretty easy to see, then, that the belief must be produced by God, and the holding fast also, is the work of God, no matter how much the effort of the believer, (and yes, I insist there is considerable effort (will, decision, etc) on the part of the believer, or they are none of his). So it is not in our own purvue whether or not we are of the Elect.

That is a big assumtion that Paul means that God makes us believe or not believe and hold fast or not hold fast. One could just as easily assume that the person believes or not by choice or holds fast or not by choice. So it is not so easy to see.

What a sad state to know that no matter our own will we cannot be saved or lost. Or to think God chooses to have most become lost in the end...that this is His will.

But I say, God is longsuffering to us, not willing that any should perish but that all will come to repentence. Not one person in the history of the world was meant to be lost.

Reformed you call it?

I don't mean to come off as snide. Please don't take the tone of my post that way. But the cavinist doctrine does seem like a different gospel to me.

 

[Saint Steven]

Just a small bow to the LGBTQW movement?

Yes. And I appreciated the clueless genderlessness of the word "itself" in this context.
At this rate they will soon attempt own the whole alphabet.
But for convenience sake they could just cap it at LGBTQWXYZ.

 

[Saint Steven]

Wheat and tares....unbelievers mixed in with believers....in the end they will be separated and 1 group destroyed and the other rewarded.

Are you suggesting all those who claim to be christians will be saved? Read Jude. Matthew 25 (I think) . Or am I not understanding your question.

I would go so far as to prophecy that there are virtually entire denominations that have had their "candlesticks" removed except for a few who have not soiled their robe.

The church in the US is in trouble. If we are not the pillar of truth, who will hold our society together. As the church fails so fails the nation. The church is polluted. Wheat and tares.

Yes, I understand the parable of the wheat and the tares. I had only wondered about your comment that it was about the Jews. I have always thought of it it in the context of the church.

RCrihfield said: ↑
There is a problem with conflicting teachings. Like sour notes in the quartet. But, yes the performance may still be good all in all. I can work with most any christian but there are some exceptions.

The parable of the wheat and tares (which is about the Jews) fits well with the church today. Paul was angered at those who wanted to bind circumcision on gentiles. He called them mutilators. I wish we all saw the scriptures in perfect unity (so long as that unity is also truth) but I accept that some aren't perfect like me.

 

[Saint Steven]

Are you suggesting all those who claim to be christians will be saved?

Not automatically, no.
I believe everyone is going to "hell". (before they can go to heaven)

Mark 9:49
Everyone will be salted with fire.

Malachi 3:2
But who can endure the day of his coming? Who can stand when he appears? For he will be like a refiner’s fire or a launderer’s soap.

1 Corinthians 3:12-15
If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, 13 their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person’s work. 14 If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward. 15 If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved—even though only as one escaping through the flames.

 

[Saint Steven]

Since Paul says if ANYONE preaches any other gospel than the one he teaches let them be ACCURSED.

Galatians 1:8
But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let them be under God’s curse!

So you think Peters gospel was different ?

Yes, I believe there is a fundamental difference in the gospel message if you are a Jew.
Jesus is the Messiah of the Jews; he is NOT our Messiah. A Jewish person has a whole history with the nation of Israel that we don't have. The outcome of the gospel message is essentially the same. But the context and outworks are markedly different. Jews don't really LOSE their Jewishness when coming to Messiah Jesus. In fact they FIND it. For instance, Sabbath observance is optional for gentiles. I think Jews are still under that commandment. (Exodus 31:13; Ezekiel 20:12, 20) A sign between God and Israel for the generations to come.

Saint Steven said: ↑
I understand that Peter was sent to the Jews and Paul to the gentiles. That wasn't my question. You said it was the SAME gospel. How did you come to THAT conclusion?

Jesus is YHWH said: ↑
Paul says in Galatians 2 its the same gospel Peter preached to the circumsized(jews) as he did to the uncircumsized(gentiles).

 

[Saint Steven]

I think only the KJV talks about 2 different gospels in Galatians 2:7.

So if you are not into the KJV, you will tend to conclude that both are preaching the same gospel.

WOW!
That's a great observation. Thanks.
I question whether Paul's declaration was to claim that there was only ONE gospel, or if he was only addressing the fact that the Galatians were disregarding THE gospel message he had PREACHED to THEM. The OTHER gospel being addressed specifically at the end of chapter two and the beginning of chapter three. And also in Acts chapter fifteen. (the Jerusalem Council) @Jesus is YHWH please note.

Galatians 2:7 KJV
But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

Galatians 2:7 ASV
but contrariwise, when they saw that I had been intrusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision, even as Peter with the gospel of the circumcision

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

When you read Luke 9:6 about the 12 going around preaching "the gospel", what were they preaching?

Do you think they preach the death of Jesus for the sins of man, and his resurrection on the 3rd day?

were they born again ?

 

[Jesus is YHWH]

Yes, I believe there is a fundamental difference in the gospel message if you are a Jew.
Jesus is the Messiah of the Jews; he is NOT our Messiah. A Jewish person has a whole history with the nation of Israel that we don't have. The outcome of the gospel message is essentially the same. But the context and outworks are markedly different. Jews don't really LOSE their Jewishness when coming to Messiah Jesus. In fact they FIND it. For instance, Sabbath observance is optional for gentiles. I think Jews are still under that commandment. (Exodus 31:13; Ezekiel 20:12, 20) A sign between God and Israel for the generations to come.

Saint Steven said: ↑
I understand that Peter was sent to the Jews and Paul to the gentiles. That wasn't my question. You said it was the SAME gospel. How did you come to THAT conclusion?

Jesus is YHWH said: ↑
Paul says in Galatians 2 its the same gospel Peter preached to the circumsized(jews) as he did to the uncircumsized(gentiles).

the burden is upon you to prove Peter preached a different gospel.

Paul declared he or an angle is accursed by God for any other gospel than the one he preached. Its black and white. Same Jesus , same message and Paul states any other Jesus or any other gospel they are accursed.

hope this helps !!!

 

[Guojing]

were they born again ?

They believe that Jesus is the promised Son of God. Was that enough?

 

[Guojing]

WOW!
That's a great observation. Thanks.
I question whether Paul's declaration was to claim that there was only ONE gospel, or if he was only addressing the fact that the Galatians were disregarding THE gospel message he had PREACHED to THEM. The OTHER gospel being addressed specifically at the end of chapter two and the beginning of chapter three. And also in Acts chapter fifteen. (the Jerusalem Council) @Jesus is YHWH please note.

Galatians 2:7 KJV
But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

Galatians 2:7 ASV
but contrariwise, when they saw that I had been intrusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision, even as Peter with the gospel of the circumcision

If you read on to Galatians 2:9

And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.

The 3 of them who were the pillars of Jerusalem, James Peter and John agreed to restrict their ministry to the circumcision, while Paul and Barnabas had authority over the gentile believers.

Thus, when Paul talks about the double curse of people preaching another gospel in Galatians 1, he was referring to the correct gospel, the gospel of the Christ according to the mystery (Ephesians 3:9) to be preached to them, those gentile believers.

The three pillars were still preaching the gospel of the kingdom, which is the gospel of Christ according to prophecy, to their Jewish brethren. Paul was not referring to them in that double curse proclamation.

 

[Guojing]

the burden is upon you to prove Peter preached a different gospel.

Paul declared he or an angle is accursed by God for any other gospel than the one he preached. Its black and white. Same Jesus , same message and Paul states any other Jesus or any other gospel they are accursed.

hope this helps !!!

What do you think Peter was preaching in Acts 2 and 3?

Do you think he told Israel that Christ died for their sins, and rose again on the 3rd day as a sign that all their sins are forever blotted out? (Romans 4:25)