WHAT GOSPEL DID THE APOSTLE PAUL PREACH ?

[Guojing]

It is easy to see that it was good news about the same Person- Jesus Christ.
That's what I want to talk about.

I see, so you are using the broad definition of the term gospel:

Any good news about Christ is THE gospel.

If so, then I can understand your thinking:

whether Paul or the 12, everyone preached Christ,
therefore, by that broad definition about gospel,

it follows everyone preached the same gospel.

 

[timothyu]

But that was only a part of Jesus' gospel as He taught the good news about the Father and His coming Kingdom, His will being done, not ours... finally. A complete change in being.

 

[Rose_bud]

The gospel is the good news of the unparalleled, comprehensive, all-inclusive reign of King Jesus, first to Jew, then to Gentile. The breaking in of a kingdom that includes everybody that would believe that He (Jesus) is God, that he died and rose again. He was the sacrifice provided not just for sins as we define it, but for everything that hinders shalom (He came to restore his creation) all that has been corrupted because of the rebellion against his rule.

The Jews thought this good news was for them only, (Peter and Cornelius) but it also included the gentiles.. Paul would be the one entrusted to carry this message further.

The message is the same the audience was different.

 

[timothyu]

The Jews thought this good news was for them only, (Peter and Cornelius) but it also included the gentiles..

Consider that God had His own chosen people while the rebellious elohim had all the rest of man in this world. Wars and infighting shattered that original family of 12 tribes of the House of Israel until there were only the Jews and Levites left. Do you not think when Jesus originally said for the apostles to go out to all nations He wasn't talking about the world but rather the other 10 tribes/nations of that original family whom the Jews now called gentiles, God's original chosen among all the rebellious nations of man? When those final two tribes ofthe land of Judah failed the Father then yes it was logical God would pluck His own from the entire world of man rather than the original band of brothers. Those deserving who understood His will was superior to the rebellious self serving will of man and the adversarial elohim. That continues today as His own are chosen from within all human establishments including within Christianity where the grain will be separated from the tares.

 

[Marilyn C]

The 12 apostles of the Lamb, preached the foundational message -

`Therefore let the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.` (Acts 2: 36)

`For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.` (1 Cor. 3: 11)

Paul and the other apostles of the ascended Christ preached further good news that Jesus is the Head of the Body. Paul was given the revelation in detail. (Eph. 1: 22, 3: 3 - 6)

 

[oikonomia]

I see, so you are using the broad definition of the term gospel:

Any good news about Christ is THE gospel.

If so, then I can understand your thinking:

whether Paul or the 12, everyone preached Christ,
therefore, by that broad definition about gospel,

it follows everyone preached the same gospel.

A formal creedal or doctrinal "definition" of the Gospel is not really my point.
The essential contents of the Gospel that Paul and the other faithful apostles preached was the Person of Christ.
He is living and He is available. He before crucifixion and after resurrection was so VERY rich.

Notice that John closes his Gospel with such a word.

And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which, if they were written one by one, I suppose that not even the world itself could contain the books written. (John 21:25)

And Paul echoes such a sentiment as well in saying he preached the unsearchable riches of Christ as the gospel.

To me, less than the least of all saints, was this grace given to announce to the Gentiles
the unsearchable riches of Christ as the gospel (Eph. 3:8)

 

[Guojing]

A formal creedal or doctrinal "definition" of the Gospel is not really my point.
The essential contents of the Gospel that Paul and the other faithful apostles preached was the Person of Christ.
He is living and He is available. He before crucifixion and after resurrection was so VERY rich.

You are actually defining the gospel in exactly same way as that clarification, so yes, that is the main point.

 

[Guojing]

The gospel is the good news of the unparalleled, comprehensive, all-inclusive reign of King Jesus, first to Jew, then to Gentile. The breaking in of a kingdom that includes everybody that would believe that He (Jesus) is God, that he died and rose again. He was the sacrifice provided not just for sins as we define it, but for everything that hinders shalom (He came to restore his creation) all that has been corrupted because of the rebellion against his rule.

The Jews thought this good news was for them only, (Peter and Cornelius) but it also included the gentiles.. Paul would be the one entrusted to carry this message further.

The message is the same the audience was different.

There is no difference between James 2:24 and Romans 4:5 to you?

 

[Guojing]

The 12 apostles of the Lamb, preached the foundational message -

`Therefore let the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.` (Acts 2: 36)

`For no other foundation can anyone lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ.` (1 Cor. 3: 11)

Paul and the other apostles of the ascended Christ preached further good news that Jesus is the Head of the Body. Paul was given the revelation in detail. (Eph. 1: 22, 3: 3 - 6)

In the Body of Christ, Jews and gentiles are equal (Galatians 3:28).

We know that cannot be the foundation of what Peter preached to Israel in Acts 2. If it was, his response to Cornelius, years later in Acts 10, would be contradictory.

 

[Rose_bud]

There is no difference between James 2:24 and Romans 4:5 to you?

I don't pit Paul against James.

But I may not understand what you are asking by quoting these two Scriptures. Please elaborate.

 

[Rose_bud]

Consider that God had His own chosen people while the rebellious elohim had all the rest of man in this world. Wars and infighting shattered that original family of 12 tribes of the House of Israel until there were only the Jews and Levites left. Do you not think when Jesus originally said for the apostles to go out to all nations He wasn't talking about the world but rather the other 10 tribes/nations of that original family whom the Jews now called gentiles, God's original chosen among all the rebellious nations of man? When those final two tribes ofthe land of Judah failed the Father then yes it was logical God would pluck His own from the entire world of man rather than the original band of brothers. Those deserving who understood His will was superior to the rebellious self serving will of man and the adversarial elohim. That continues today as His own are chosen from within all human establishments including within Christianity where the grain will be separated from the tares.

I must admit I haven't done a thorough study on the "lost tribes".

But an initial response would be that I don't believe they are the Gentiles.

 

[Guojing]

I don't pit Paul against James.

But I may not understand what you are asking by quoting these two Scriptures. Please elaborate.

Contradictory messages cannot be the same, without contradiction

 

[Rose_bud]

Contradictory messages cannot be the same, without contradiction

Hey there,
The two letters do not contradict each other, the scriptures read in isolation may appear contradictory. But I understand the two authors to be saying the same thing just in a different format and possibly to a different audience James writing to a more Jewish audience whereas the audience for the book of Romans in my opinion is both.

 

[oikonomia]

In the Body of Christ, Jews and gentiles are equal (Galatians 3:28).

We know that cannot be the foundation of what Peter preached to Israel in Acts 2. If it was, his response to Cornelius, years later in Acts 10, would be contradictory.

Why cannot Jews and Gentilesin one Body be a part of what Peter preached in Acts chapter 2?

We often preach the truth which the total experience of which we have not yet entered into.
It was the same for the twelve apostles.

They laid a foundation for the Gospel, some of which aspects they had not yet experienced.
For example in explaining the outpouring of the Holy Spirit upon those whom the crowd
though were drunk Peter said -

For these men are not drunk, as you suppose, for it is the third hour of the day;
But this is what is spoken through the prophet Joel:
“And it shall be in the last days, says God, that I will pour out of My Spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream things in dreams;

And indeed upon My slaves, both men and women, I will pour out of My Spirit in those days, and they shall prophesy.
And I will show wonders in heaven above and signs on the earth below, blood and fire and vapor of smoke.
The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and notable day of the Lord comes.

And it shall be that everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.” (Acts 2:15-22)

Though Peter included certain matters of Joel's prophecy into the laying of the foundation for the Gospel,
some aspects they had not been expriencially brought in yet. The signs in heaven of blood and fire and vapor of smoke.

We should not say because they AWAITED these matters in the future that cosmic judgment upon nature was
not a part of the foundation of Peter's first Gospel message after Christ's resurretion and ascension.

Joel had said from God "I will pour out of My Spirit upon all flesh."
He did not limit this divine pouring out of His Spirit "upon all [Jewish] flesh" did He?

When Joel said from God "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved” He did not say
everyone [of israel only] would be saved" did He?

In the house of (Acts 10) Cornelius Peter (after receiving a threefold confirming vision) learned that God
wouldpour out of His Spirit upon the Gentiles also.

 

[timothyu]

But an initial response would be that I don't believe they are the Gentiles.

"The word "Gentile" corresponds to the late Hebrew "goi," a synonym for "nokri," signifying "stranger," "non-Jew." In the Hebrew of the Bible "goi" and its plural "goyyim" originally meant "nation," and were applied both to Israelites and to non-Israelites "... Jewish Encyclopedia

 

[Rose_bud]

"The word "Gentile" corresponds to the late Hebrew "goi," a synonym for "nokri," signifying "stranger," "non-Jew." In the Hebrew of the Bible "goi" and its plural "goyyim" originally meant "nation," and were applied both to Israelites and to non-Israelites "... Jewish Encyclopedia

Thanks for the post, I'll check it out when I have some time.

 

[Guojing]

Why cannot Jews and Gentiles in one Body be a part of what Peter preached in Acts chapter 2?

Firstly, Peter did not preach that in Acts 2.

Secondly, as I said, if Peter was thinking about that in Acts 2, he will not need a threefold vision from God in Acts 10, to visit Cornelius.

 

[Guojing]

Hey there,
The two letters do not contradict each other, the scriptures read in isolation may appear contradictory. But I understand the two authors to be saying the same thing just in a different format and possibly to a different audience James writing to a more Jewish audience whereas the audience for the book of Romans in my opinion is both.

You don't like to understand scripture literally?

 

[timothyu]

James writing to a more Jewish audience whereas the audience for the book of Romans in my opinion is both.

James says man in life (world) must walk the walk not just talk the talk. Romans refers to the Kingdom.

 

[Dan Perez]

The gospel is the good news of the unparalleled, comprehensive, all-inclusive reign of King Jesus, first to Jew, then to Gentile. The breaking in of a kingdom that includes everybody that would believe that He (Jesus) is God, that he died and rose again. He was the sacrifice provided not just for sins as we define it, but for everything that hinders shalom (He came to restore his creation) all that has been corrupted because of the rebellion against his rule.

The Jews thought this good news was for them only, (Peter and Cornelius) but it also included the gentiles.. Paul would be the one entrusted to carry this message further.

The message is the same the audience was different.

Will you write me a verse , where the message was the same ??

And when did the GENTILES you wrote about , were ??

#1 Were they all Jews ?

#2 Were they all Gentiles ?

#3 When , and when they all become ONE ??

#4 Were they under the Law of Moses ?

#5 Or were they under the New Covenant ?

#6 Or is it all saved by Grace , today ?

Your thoughts ??

dan p