ONLY ONE GOSPEL ?

[JudgeRightly]

Exactly! The same one and only gospel to the Jews as to the Gentiles.

You apparently don't understand the law of non-contradiction.

The "gospel of the circumcision" cannot be the "gospel of the uncircumcision" because the two are complete opposites of the other.

Paul wasn't sent to the Gentiles because he had another gospel different than the gospel of Peter and the other apostles!

Yes he was.

But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter(for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles),and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. - Galatians 2:7-9 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians2:7-9&version=NKJV

Paul was sent to the Gentiles because the Jews did not trust him.

That's part of the reason God sent him to the Gentiles, but it had nothing to do with Peter, James, and John or the rest of the Twelve.

 

[JudgeRightly]

That scripture doesn't change what Jesus said in Acts.

No one said it did.

It all goes together because it is the truth.

Saying it doesn't make it so.

Jesus told Paul to go far away to the Gentiles because the Jews didn't trust him

Correct.

Again, this had nothing to do with Peter and the other of the Twelve agreeing with Paul that He should go to the Gentiles.

Have you not read the context of this passage?

But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter(for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles),and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. - Galatians 2:7-9 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians2:7-9&version=NKJV

and wanted to kill [Paul]

Cite?

because they thought he was going around trying to trick them so they can be put in prison.

Again, this has nothing to do with the Twelve Apostles.

This is why mashing verses together and saying "See? They fit!" doesn't work, and only makes things more confused for yourself.

 

[JudgeRightly]

I love talking about God’s Truth.
There is nothing I would rather be doing.

Ain't that the truth...

Except in this case, it's not referring to what is actually called "God's Truth," but to the user named "God's Truth."

In other words, you certainly do love talking about yourself.

 

[God's Truth]

Ain't that the truth...

Except in this case, it's not referring to what is actually called "God's Truth," but to the user named "God's Truth."

In other words, you certainly do love talking about yourself.

I rarely ever talk about myself.

 

[God's Truth]

No one said it did.



Saying it doesn't make it so.



Correct.

Again, this had nothing to do with Peter and the other of the Twelve agreeing with Paul that He should go to the Gentiles.

Have you not read the context of this passage?

But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter(for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles),and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. - Galatians 2:7-9 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians2:7-9&version=NKJV



Cite?



Again, this has nothing to do with the Twelve Apostles.

This is why mashing verses together and saying "See? They fit!" doesn't work, and only makes things more confused for yourself.

Of course it has to do with Paul going to the Gentiles and Peter staying to teach the Jews.

It is one gospel that saves and Jesus taught it as did all the apostles.

 

[God's Truth]

You apparently don't understand the law of non-contradiction.

The "gospel of the circumcision" cannot be the "gospel of the uncircumcision" because the two are complete opposites of the other.



Yes he was.

But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter(for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles),and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. - Galatians 2:7-9 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...9&version=NKJV



That's part of the reason God sent him to the Gentiles, but it had nothing to do with Peter, James, and John or the rest of the Twelve.

It is just two different kinds of peoples, not two different kinds of gospels.

How can anyone ever get that what Jesus taught when he walked the earth wasn't the one and only gospel that saves and it is for all.

 

[God's Truth]

Repeating your position over and over and over and over again won't make it come true.




:yawn:





:yawn:



Duh.



Saying it doesn't make it so.

All that back at you, and more.

 

[God's Truth]

There are multiple gospels that save, but they aren't all active simultaneously.

No such thing as different gospels that save.

John says no more of blood relations to Abraham, and Paul says it doesn't matter if one is Jew or Gentile.

God isn't currently in the business of doing miracles.

God still does miracles for some people.

You can't get one scripture that says God stopped doing any miracles.

Not one of these verses supports your position, let alone prove it, especially since you ignored the context of the verses.

Those scriptures were to show that there is no more speaking in tongues and being raised from the dead.

 

[God's Truth]

You reject what was made for you by your Creator and here respond to something which was not...LOL...such fun

That is twisted. You have a problem with my telling someone to engage in a discussion instead of posting some strange post that is hard to figure out?

 

[God's Truth]

What the Sabbath? Sure it is...you make Him a liar? And reject what was made for man...not just jews...

You make yourself a liar when you say you observe the Sabbath just like Paul did.

changing both Times and Law is not a good thing...believing Jewish false witness that Jesus changed the customs Moses delivered is not either...

you are just getting MAD...wanting the Promise established by Law yet denying the Law which establishes the Promise...

Jesus is the promise.

 

[clefty]

It is just two different kinds of peoples, not two different kinds of gospels.

How can anyone ever get that what Jesus taught when he walked the earth wasn't the one and only gospel that saves and it is for all.

maybe cuz you and yours started it with your no seventh day Sabbath gospel

they just more MAD at the Sabbath than you...so they reject even more than you

 

[clefty]

Jesus is the promise.

Yup and as established by Law...which you reject

 

[God's Truth]

Yup and as established by Law...which you reject

No, established to those who have faith and obedience like Abraham.

 

[God's Truth]

maybe cuz you and yours started it with your no seventh day Sabbath gospel

they just more MAD at the Sabbath than you...so they reject even more than you

You reject the Spirit.

 

[clefty]

No, established to those who have faith and obedience like Abraham.

Faith and obedience to ALL His commandments...but you don't...you claim Sabbath was not dispensed to you...you are just as MAD as the rest here...

 

[clefty]

You reject the Spirit.

No...His Spirit helps me understand when I fail to keep seventh day Sabbath Holy...you don't even try...

but again...you like the others here who claim "not dispensed to me"...have made another gospel another christ

with another father who apparently DOES change...and has NOT an IMMUTABLE LAW but as the Catholics claim:

1957

Application of the natural law varies greatly; it can demand reflection that takes account of various conditions of life according to places, times, and circumstances. Nevertheless, in the diversity of cultures, the natural law remains as a rule that binds men among themselves and imposes on them, beyond the inevitable differences, common principles. ​

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_cs...m/p3s1c3a1.htm

and you agreeing with them have applied it to EVERY day...LOL

note also the treatment of law:

1952 There are different expressions of the moral law, all of them interrelated: eternal law - the source, in God, of all law; natural law; revealed law, comprising the Old Law and the New Law, or Law of the Gospel; finally, civil and ecclesiastical laws.

Old Law and the New Law have become Old vs New

And Law of the Gospel has become a lawless gospel as it made people MAD to think we are expected anything for what was done for us...

 

[Wick Stick]

Here is an idea, quote someone and engage them in a discussion.

My response was to the OP, so I don't think a quote is required. I notice that you didn't engage with what I said.

You say that the Old Testament and gospels weren't written to us. I agree. But then you go and commit the same fallacy by applying some part of the New Testament to us. None of it was written to us. None.

Why is it ok to co-opt Paul, but not Jesus, or Ezra, or Moses? Paul wasn't writing to you or for you, any more than the others were.

 

[clefty]

That is twisted.

yes you are rejecting what is for you but responding to a post not to you...lol

You have a problem with my telling someone to engage in a discussion instead of posting some strange post that is hard to figure out?

what is so hard to understand about his suggestion we stop arguing about which part of the Bible was written to any of us as actually none of it was?

you exemplify this struggle by your rejection of Sabbath and yet here you are arguing with me that we are to obey Him but just not the seventh day Sabbath...and then even arguing against those that AGREE with you on the Sabbath “not for us”...

Hey! I know...maybe remind them that in Gal 2:7 the gospel is only used ONCE and is not mentioned to the circumcised...

“On the contrary, they recognized that I had been entrusted with the task of preaching the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been to the circumcised.”

oh and remind them of verse 6

“As for those who were held in high esteem--whatever they were makes no difference to me; God does not show favoritism--they added nothing to my message.”

see?

Two things:

1) nothing was added to Paul’s gospel message and

B) more importantly Yah shows no favoritism...echoing the NO DISTINCTION between Jew and Gentile the Spirit made according to Peter...

So of course some keeping Sabbath and some not would be favoritism and distinct...

 

[Lon]

Do

Don't forget verse 9! Verse 8 is just a parenthetical that doesn't finish the sentence started in verse 7...

But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter(for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles),and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. - Galatians 2:7-9 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/...9&version=NKJV

How is this best stated by MAD?

1) There are two (or more) 'gospels' stated in the scriptures, but there is only one gospel today.
2) There are two (or more) 'gospels' stated in the scriptures, and two (or more) to wade between today ( one caused specifically because of judaizing in churches today and is false).
3) There are two (or more) 'gospels' stated in the scriptures, there is only one gospel at present, but a future gospel for the Jews at a later date.
4) {Different definition that better explains MAD}

Thanks -Lon

 

[God's Truth]

My response was to the OP, so I don't think a quote is required.

Well it would have been good if you quoted the OP then.

After all the work that people have done posting on this thread, your post is an insult to all of us, whether you agree with anyone or not. You didn't even post to agree with anyone.

I notice that you didn't engage with what I said.

I sure did. I tried to get you back to discuss.

You say that the Old Testament and gospels weren't written to us.

I never say that. The Old Testament and the gospels are written to all who would become a child of God through Jesus. Paul quoted Old Testament scriptures to the Gentiles hundreds of times.

I agree. But then you go and commit the same fallacy by applying some part of the New Testament to us. None of it was written to us. None.

Why is it ok to co-opt Paul, but not Jesus, or Ezra, or Moses? Paul wasn't writing to you or for you, any more than the others were.

You are mixing me up with someone else.