Rosenritter
New member
The gospel is more than a few of its descriptive elements. If you understand what the gospel actually is, why would you be arguing like this?
Jews And Gentiles Same Goal
- Thread starter Squeaky
- Start date
The gospel is more than a few of its descriptive elements. If you understand what the gospel actually is, why would you be arguing like this?
Rosenritter
New member
Each and every element there leads to and eventually encompasses the others. If I show you a ball you will only see one side of it, half at best. When you receive the ball, you can see all sides, feel its textures and patterns, and discern its weight. If you truly received the first elements you cannot reject the others once they are revealed. The elements that you perceived are not the gospel, they describe the gospel, just like "White" is not the ball, it is an element of the ball.
Right Divider
Body part
That was a completely LAME attempt to justify your false idea.
How could they PREACH the "one true gospel" WITHOUT knowledge of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ?
These are CENTRAL to the gospel of the grace of God and CANNOT be left out!
Rosenritter
New member
The death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ is but one element that leads to the fulfillment of the gospel. It is a means to bring us to faith in Jesus Christ, and as He himself stated, the goal is to draw all men. Did Jesus only draw men after he was lifted up?
Joh 12:32-33 KJV
(32) And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.
(33) This he said, signifying what death he should die.
Moses did not witness the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, yet he is spoken of as a saint with faith in Christ. According to your multiple gospel view, this passage in Hebrews shouldn't exist and would be an anachronism.
Heb 11:26 KJV
(26) Esteeming the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompence of the reward.
Or was God always our atonement for our sins, being quick to mercy and the rewarder of those who diligently seek him, the source of our salvation unto eternal life? The culmination of the gospel is the Kingdom of God and eternal life through our God. Our God is the same whether he called himself God Almighty, Jehovah, or Jesus. We are to know God as he reveals himself to us and accept him as He is.
Today it would be impossible to preach the gospel and omit such elements. But in the few years before Jesus was put on the cross the gospel was still preached even those that element and fulfillment of prophecy was in shadow, seen through a glass darkly, even not yet understood by those to whom it was told. Yet this was already preached through Moses: the Passover lamb with its blood on the doorstep, the brazen serpent lifted high so that they who looked upon it might live. I am even so bold to say that this was already preached from the foundation of the world for anyone who traced their descent to Adam. This was already preached.
There are people here today, even perhaps reading this message, that do not understand the gospel. Paul lays out the gospel message in some detail describing how the resurrection is central to our hope and faith, emphasizing that we shall not receive eternal life without first being made perfect in resurrection, and only then has death lost its sting. Do I say that those who fail to understand the resurrection of the dead were preached a different gospel? The gospel isn't limited to a few tiny words, and I allow that someone may believe in faith without perfect understanding.
Right Divider
Body part
So? The TWELVE did NOT preach this WHILE they were preaching the gospel of the kingdom.
The gospel of the kingdom is NOT identical to the gospel of the grace of God.
The GOOD NEWS of the kingdom is NOT identical to the GOOD NEWS of the grace of God.
There are MANY gospels throughout the Bible and they are NOT all identical.
You can dance the dance if you like, but it does not change the facts.
Rosenritter
New member
The gospel of the Kingdom of God is that Christ shall reign over all the earth, that there is redemption from sin unto eternal life by his grace.
The gospel of the Grace of God is that Christ shall reign over all the earth, that there is redemption from sin unto eternal life by his grace.
Sounds identical to me. This is the gospel of Christ.
Yes, there is another gospel, and any other gospel is false. Paul is clear that there is one true gospel.
Gal 1:7-8 KJV
(7) Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
(8) But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
I feel like someone is arguing with me that thinks the elephant is three different creatures.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
So you assert that there is only one gospel and a person can be saved by believing only one aspect of it.
Again, the word "gospel" means "good news."
Do you deny that it was "good news"to the Jews when it was revealed that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God?
Do you deny that it is "good news" to the Gentiles that the Lord Jesus died for our sins and was raised from the dead?
Anyone with the slightest degree of spiritual discernment can recognize that both "good news" are indeed "good news" but not the same "good news" (gospel).
But the truth remains hidden from you.
Rosenritter
New member
No. As usual, you haven't been listening very carefully as you attempt to pigeonhole. There is one gospel, and a person may be saved by believing that gospel of salvation in Jesus Christ, in every aspect of which it is revealed to him.
That is a simple meaning of the word. It is also where we get our word evangelize. The Greek word itself contains the word "angel" and thus its translation to gospel, "Gott Spiel" for God's Word. It is the message delivered to us from above.
This would be good news regardless of whether one was Jew or Gentile. Christ was prophesied as a light to lighten the Gentiles, and as the glory of the people of Israel (Isaiah 42:6, Luke 2:32).
This would be good news regardless of whether one was Jew or Gentile. Jesus died for the sins of the whole world.(John 3:16, 1 John 2:2)
Ah, the obligatory slander. It would look less foolish if you could confirm your point before rushing ahead on a mistaken premise.
Right Divider
Body part
That's because you just made that up. Stacking the deck is NOT the same thing as telling the truth.
The gospel of the kingdom contains other elements, like:
- Israel above the nations.
- The nations being blessed by blessing and serving Israel.
- Christ reigning over the twelve tribes and in turn the whole world.
- The twelve apostles sitting on twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
False accusations are the norm against those that tell the truth.
Read Gal 1 more carefully and maybe you''ll come to understand what Paul is actually saying: http://theologyonline.com/entry.php?3469-Another-gospel-in-Galatians-1
Rosenritter
New member
When have I ever indicated that the gospel excluded elements of scripture? Some elements may naturally carry more concise summary and vitality than others, but every word of God is given by inspiration and righteousness.
I have been the one arguing for inclusion, whereas you and Jerry have argued for exclusion, which is a necessary and required component to maintain that there are different and distinct gospels.
So Paul was falsely accusing those who would teach any other gospel? There was no other accusation in that message except that conveyed by Paul, and he was the one who said that. Maybe you should chastise Paul for not realizing that there were multiple gospels to be preached. He clearly needs to be taught the finer points of Mad Sensationalism.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
It's not slander but the truth. Do you deny that it was "good news"to the Jews when it was revealed that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God?
Do you deny that it is "good news" to the Gentiles that the Lord Jesus died for our sins and was raised from the dead?
Anyone with the slightest degree of spiritual discernment can recognize that both of these instances of "good news" are indeed "good news" but not the same "good news" (gospel).
Please answer my questions and then we can all see if this truth is hidden from you are not.
Right Divider
Body part
Indeed, your story is that "the gospel" is Genesis - Revelation all mashed together without any distinctions anywhere.
Oh. the vague platitudes.
These are all GOOD NEWS.... they are just not the IDENTICAL good news. It's just that simple.
No, it is YOU that is falsely accusing me.
Paul clearly understood the multiple gospels. It is you that is confused.
Rosenritter
New member
Please demonstrate your ability to read the answers that were already given. Above. With your eyes. Use the blue "arrow" link.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
All I am asking is a simple "yes"or "no" in regard to the following questions:
Do you deny that it was "good news"to the Jews when it was revealed that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God?
Do you deny that it is "good news" to the Gentiles that the Lord Jesus died for our sins and was raised from the dead?
These are simple questions but if they are too difficult for you to answer then just let us know.
Rosenritter
New member
The gospel is embedded and woven throughout the scripture. It becomes especially apparent when seeking proofs as the identity of Christ, but the "lamb slain from the foundation of the world" embedded the gospel message in places such as Genesis and Chronicles, where the careless reader might easily pass over
... so you respond with platitudes and more "because I said so" statements? The good news is identical, it is salvation unto eternal life for those who believe in Jesus Christ. He who does not believe is condemned already. You know this passage. This is not Jew specific or Jew exclusive, Gentile specific or Gentile exclusive.
Joh 3:16-18 KJV
(16) For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
(17) For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
(18) He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
Right Divider
Body part
It's so easy for you to make these vague and ambiguous statements. The Bible clearly speaks of many gospels. I'll just go ahead and believe the Bible.
Eternal life is just one of the MANY good news' in the Bible.
Nothing their about His death for sin nor His resurrection. You rewrite history to try to support your "understanding".
Rosenritter
New member
The everlasting gospel can be referred to in many ways, just as the everlasting LORD can be referred to in many ways. Have you ever counted how many "Gods" or "Lords" there would be if you were to use each different form of reference as a separate being? Ten, twenty? More? Your argument is inconsistent in this point.
Rosenritter
New member
John 3:16 only has a very finite few words. Do you claim this is "only for the Jews" or "only for the Gentiles?" Because it's awfully hard to hold you still when your response is to always claim the passage is inapplicable.
Joh 12:32-33 KJV
(32) And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me.
(33) This he said, signifying what death he should die.
Nothing about his death in the gospel to the Jews? Want to double down your audacious challenge to the resurrection?
Joh 2:18-22 KJV
(18) Then answered the Jews and said unto him, What sign shewest thou unto us, seeing that thou doest these things?
(19) Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.
(20) Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days?
(21) But he spake of the temple of his body.
(22) When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.
Seems your bet would lose there as well.
Luk 24:44-47 KJV
(44) And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
(45) Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
(46) And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
(47) And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
How do you miss that part, of "Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day?"
And how do you miss that part, that "repentance and remission of sins should be preached ... among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem?" Jerusalem is the beginning of all nations, Judah is not a special case. Gentiles are also preached that same gospel of repentance and remission of sins.
Right Divider
Body part
We can quote from all over the scripture. That does not change the fact that the twelve were NOT preaching His death and resurrection as part of the gospel of the kingdom.
The gospel of the kingdom is based on the fulfillment of prophecy about the promises of God to Israel about the kingdom that He will establish on earth with Israel as His favored nation.
Here is one of many such:
Isa 60:9-16 KJV Surely the isles shall wait for me, and the ships of Tarshish first, to bring thy sons from far, their silver and their gold with them, unto the name of the LORD thy God, and to the Holy One of Israel, because he hath glorified thee. (10) And the sons of strangers shall build up thy walls, and their kings shall minister unto thee: for in my wrath I smote thee, but in my favour have I had mercy on thee. (11) Therefore thy gates shall be open continually; they shall not be shut day nor night; that men may bring unto thee the forces of the Gentiles, and that their kings may be brought. (12) For the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish; yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted. (13) The glory of Lebanon shall come unto thee, the fir tree, the pine tree, and the box together, to beautify the place of my sanctuary; and I will make the place of my feet glorious. (14) The sons also of them that afflicted thee shall come bending unto thee; and all they that despised thee shall bow themselves down at the soles of thy feet; and they shall call thee, The city of the LORD, The Zion of the Holy One of Israel. (15) Whereas thou hast been forsaken and hated, so that no man went through thee, I will make thee an eternal excellency, a joy of many generations. (16) Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast of kings: and thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob.
Compare Isaiah 60-66 with Revelation 21-22 and you will find a perfect match.
Rosenritter
New member
I don't think you understand what it is that each of us are required to prove. As you declare that gospels are separate and not mixed, I only need to demonstrate that the Jews are preached the same gospels as the Gentiles or vice versa. This I have done but you declined to answer, saying that we could "quote scripture all over." I only need to show that your argument is inconsistent.
In contrast, you would need to defend against every inconsistency as your understanding does not allow these to be mixed. Jesus said that repentance and remission of sins was to be preached to all nations, starting with Jerusalem. That contradicts the MAD Sensationalism that says that repentance and remission of sins is for one group only. That "two gospels" gospel is spiritually racist.