Proof that Paul didn't preach a different gospel than Peter

[God's Truth]

yep, Peter had a few things goin' on - a 3 time Jesus rejecter, tried to rebuke Jesus but Jesus rebuked him, referring to satan, Paul clearly rebuked him. i was using conjecture about jealousy, like Teta-lie & GUT.(god's un truth)

I truly believe that Peter didn't fully understand Paul's teachings, and if he did, it was later than sooner - it's just the sense i get; my take on it

i also don't agree with all the catholic doctrines that came in later. i defend Paul whose message is from Jesus Christ. especially against GT: Who OBEYS ALL Jesus' commands and teachings and was only SAVED AFTER she believed, then OBEYED. GT repents daily and doesn't think Jesus did enough; kinda like purgatory -


then there's the Tet Offensive - a man that says Christ's return and Revelation already happened. Tet is a Preterist and preaches that all was fulfilled in A.D. 70. Tet says if it wasn't, then Jesus Lied ! and he enjoys the company of ANY person that disputes Paul's gospel -

You make up things that are not in the Bible. Since you feel you can do that, no wonder you make up things about me.

 

[God's Truth]

As many translations are translated from one Denominational bias or another; relying on them is a good way to gradually end up off base in one's manner of approach and its resulting impact on one's beliefs, values, sense of intended sense, and so on.

Christ had to deal with that in His enemies overeliance on their many traditions as to what their Law and the Prophets had supposedly really meant.

So much so, that by the time He showed up on Earth, their reaction to Him was much like the traditions of men are against the Mid-Acts Perspective - "reject it; it doesn't match the traditions."

And His enemies then too would go on and on about their supposed knowing what He actually meant or who He really was.

Only the names have changed; your "game" is the same...

I have the Holy Spirit to teach me.

 

[Danoh]

As usual, teltelestai, you are relying on the traditions of men that men read into the passages.

It was against the Law to deal with Gentiles in certain issues without Gentiles participating first in certain rituals called for under the Law.

This was why Peter had not wanted to go to Cornelius, why he was clueless when he got there, in Acts 10, why he had found himself having to answer to the other Apostles afterwards, in Acts 11, why the ruckus in Acts 15, why he had feared those of James in Galatians 2, given the Law James and his followed in Acts 21.

Put down your books supposedly based on the Bible; pick up your Bible, and trace out recurrent patterns - both their contrasts and their similarities.

 

[God's Truth]

As usual, teltelestai, you are relying on the traditions of men that men read into the passages.

It was against the Law to deal with Gentiles in certain issues without Gentiles participating first in certain rituals called for under the Law.

This was why Peter had not wanted to go to Cornelius, why he was clueless when he got there, in Acts 10, why he had found himself having to answer to the other Apostles afterwards, in Acts 11, why the ruckus in Acts 15, why he had feared those of James in Galatians 2, given the Law James and his followed in Acts 21.

Put down your books supposedly based on the Bible; pick up your Bible, and trace out recurrent patterns - both their contrasts and their similarities.

You have no understanding.

 

[God's Truth]

Joshua 23:6"Be very firm, then, to keep and do all that is written in the book of the law of Moses, so that you may not turn aside from it to the right hand or to the left, 7so that you will not associate with these nations, these which remain among you, or mention the name of their gods, or make anyone swear by them, or serve them, or bow down to them. 8"But you are to cling to the LORD your God, as you have done to this day.…

 

[Danoh]

I have the Holy Spirit to teach me.

That belief right there is your stumbling stone.

Reminds me of that aquiantance I some times mention.

The guy uses specific mnemonic techniques taught in various memory retention improvement books - uses them incorrectly, of course - but then asserts the Spirit guides him because the John 14 passage mentions "remembrance."

The guy is a moron. When he is not misquoting a passage the Spirit supposedly brought to his remembrance, he is misinterpreting it. And always, he refuses to see he himself is the one leading himself down his black hole.

Just recently, he tells me Ezekiel 19 teaches God hates homosexuals becuase of two lesbians - he is just an idiot who needs to show he knows it all.

The fool actually believed what ol Zeke is relating about Samaria was about lesbians, lol

So, you go right ahead and belief the Spirit is the one leading you down your dark hole.

 

[Shasta]

Very good post.






exactly. Paul says no other gospel but the one he received FROM CHRIST/GOD, His gospel of grace and DBR - -

Very good post.

You are missing the point. If there was not another gospel then there was only one. This is evidence against the two-gospel paradigm.

 

[God's Truth]

That belief right there is your stumbling stone.

Reminds me of that aquiantance I some times mention.

The guy uses specific mnemonic techniques taught in various memory retention improvement books - uses them incorrectly, of course - but then asserts the Spirit guides him because the John 14 passage mentions "remembrance."

The guy is a moron. When he is not misquoting a passage the Spirit supposedly brought to his remembrance, he is misinterpreting it. And always, he refuses to see he himself is the one leading himself down his black hole.

Just recently, he tells me Ezekiel 19 teaches God hates homosexuals becuase of two lesbians - he is just an idiot who needs to show he knows it all.

The fool actually believed what ol Zeke is relating about Samaria was about lesbians, lol

So, you go right ahead and belief the Spirit is the one leading you down your dark hole.

You do not even know that there is one gospel and that we are to do what Jesus says to do to be saved.

 

[Danoh]

Joshua 23:6"Be very firm, then, to keep and do all that is written in the book of the law of Moses, so that you may not turn aside from it to the right hand or to the left, 7so that you will not associate with these nations, these which remain among you, or mention the name of their gods, or make anyone swear by them, or serve them, or bow down to them. 8"But you are to cling to the LORD your God, as you have done to this day.…

Yeah, I have no understanding - you just quoted a passage that proves exactly what I said about why Peter had doubted going to Cornelius, etc.

You traced the recurrent patterns I was talking while clueless that is what you did.

Fact is - whenever - you and your false brethren are right, that is why - you accidently followed a sound, recurrent pattern.

The rest of the time, you bump your heads in the dark and conclude the seeming light of your concussion is actual light.

Well, now you all know our key - use it consciously - true recurrent light awaits.

 

[God's Truth]

Yeah, I have no understanding - you just quoted a passage that proves exactly what I said about why Peter had doubted going to Cornelius, etc.

You traced the recurrent patterns I was talking while cluess that is what you did.

Fact is - whenever - you and your false brethren are right, that is why - you accidently followed a sound, recurrent pattern.

The rest of the time, you bump your heads in the dark and conclude the seeming light of your concussion is actual light.

Well, now you all know our key - use it consciously - true recurrent light awaits.

You are badly mistaken.

 

[john w]

Some people who were in ministry with Paul also turned back to the world also (e.g., Alexander the Coppersmith in 2 Timothy 4:14). Was Paul's gospel, or Paul himself somehow deficient because of the choices of his disciples? Many throughout history begin well, some even preaching and ministering but for one reason or another they turn aside from their mission and abandon Christ. Are you claiming that those who take up their cross to follow Christ will always do so?

Jesus hand picked Judas and sent him out with the others to do whatever they did. Judas loved money and in the end those thorns choked the word and destroyed the life within him. Doesn't this sound like a modern story? Modern day textual scholar Bart Eerman was originally a believer. Now he tries to use his knowledge to refute the scriptures. What's your point? Is it just the shock value of getting to say "St. Judas" as if one could call an apostate "holy" AFTER his apostasy

As I have read your posts it seems to me that you want every part of the synoptics to be a full statement of the Truth when Jesus' death. burial, Resurrection and Ascension do not occur until the very end. Altogether the events of Jesus life, Who He was, What He said, What He did comprise are the Story of Redemption which is the seed bed of all truth but the revelation was not complete until the last chapter.His final work on the cross could not be revealed before the hour for "if the devil had known what Jesus was going to do he would no have crucified Him"

BTW it is the almost unanimous opinion among scholars, conservative and otherwise, that 1 Cor. 15:1-4 is an early creed that was in existence before Paul's conversion and was passed down to him orally. It verifies that the earliest beliefs of the Church included the resurrection (among other things). So what you say is Pauline was actually taught to him

I don't know what you believe about the Kingdom so you will have to explain

Did our hero answer his own "argument?" Nope.

"Another group did too - the heretical Marcionites of the Second Century. They believed that God had revealed to Paul through visions another gospel different from the one proclaimed by the Twelve.....As you say, if Paul had received some new revelation they disciples would have been in no position to judge it since the only gospel they knew was the one taught to them by Jesus."-you


Show us where the 12, prior to the death, burial, resurrection, ever preached this "the only gospel they knew taught to them by Jesus," preaching:

"Christ is going to die for your sins....be buried.....rise again......Believe this good news to be saved............"

= 1 Cor. 15:1-4 KJV.


Go ahead and assert, on record, that Judas, one of "the Twelve," preached this "gospel," as Paul identified in 1 Cor. 15:1-4 KJV. And tell us the content of "the gospel of the kingdom," tying it to 1 Cor. 15:1-4 KJV.


"Jesus hand picked Judas and sent him out with the others to do whatever they did. Judas loved money and in the end those thorns choked the word and destroyed the life within him. Doesn't this sound like a modern story? Modern day textual scholar Bart Eerman was originally a believer. Now he tries to use his knowledge to refute the scriptures. What's your point?"-you


If you knew your own "argument," you'd know the point. You "argue" that the 12 preached the 1 Cor. 15:1-4 KJV good news/gospel. Thus, you "argue" that Judas also preached:



"Christ is going to die for your sins....be buried.....rise again......Believe this good news to be saved............"

-That is satanic
-No scripture says the 12, or the Lord Jesus Christ, preached 1 Cor. 15:1-4 KJV prior to the dbr. And yet, the Lord Jesus Christ, and the 12, including Judas, preached "the gospel of the kingdom."


Thus, the good news of 15:1-4 KJV, is not equivalent to "the gospel of the kingdom."

If you cannot see that "point," have a seat, until I call on you again.

Dig? Good.

 

[Danoh]

You are missing the point. If there was not another gospel then there was only one. This is evidence against the two-gospel paradigm.

The Galatians had ended up mixing two equally valid systems - each in their due season - Law and Grace - into another, which was not another at all, in that it was another of a different kind altogether - a hybrid of both.

One could call this hybrid "the gospel of GT" for hers is a hybrid of both, making both of none effect, by her tradition.

 

[john w]

(Matt 24:14 KJV) And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

"shall be preached" is future tense.

As we see above, Jesus made it clear that the Gospel of the Kingdom would only be preached until 70AD.

If you disagree the end was in 70AD, then the Gospel of the Kingdom should still be preached today according to Matt 24:14

The good news of 1 Cor. 15:1-4, is not equivalent to the good news/gospel of the kingdom.

" this gospel"

Read it, stupid-"this."

Having reading comprehension/grammar problems, sweetie?

You taught us that.

How did you get so stupid, asserting that Judas preached 1 Cor. 15:1-4 KJV?


Craigie:


Not a peep.

 

[Danoh]

Give em his well deserved hell, John...

 

[john w]

I'm here to learn.

Unlike you.

You are only here to parrot the false teachings of John Nelson Darby.

Spam.


Another lie, from Craigie, the habitual liar:


"I am not here to teach, instruct, evangelize, or advise anyone."-stupid Tet.

No, you're here to satisfy your MAD obsession, since you were kicked out of your "church," and now, no one's listening to you on the circuit, so this is your outlet, to satisfy your addiction.

Pretty sad, pathetic, Craigie.

 

[john w]

The "renewing of the Holy Ghost" part.

Think about this, Craigie:

"I do not sin...."

Guess who?


“Tet., what is the gospel?..............There is a chance that Tet. has been taught wrong about how we are saved. I hope he knows that Paul did not mean faith and no obey; however, I believe that at least Tet. knows that we have to obey to stay saved. HE KNOWS we have to listen to Jesus and obey. He knows there is only one gospel.”-“god”’suntruth

Still waiting, Craigie. Think on the above? What's your answer, spineless one?

 

[john w]

Whatever you're doing, you should start doing something different, because you have chosen to be a follower of John Nelson Darby.

Spam. Eventually, Craigie resorts to his "Hail Mary," as he is getting picked apart, being the good closet Catholic that he is.

 

[john w]

I don't think he did simply because the events had not happened yet. However just because I might agree with Tet on this point does not mean I agree on ANY other point. I like to stay focused for the sake of clarity.

Yes he does, and so do you=one piece of good news in the book.

That is satanic.

 

[john w]

You are badly mistaken.

And TOL is mesmerized by that shut down close....

 

[john w]

I don't think he did simply because the events had not happened yet. However just because I might agree with Tet on this point does not mean I agree on ANY other point. I like to stay focused for the sake of clarity.

http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=110472&page=14

Post #198.

"It's not that complicated."-Mayor STP