The Other Gospel of Gal 1 and the 2P2Ps

I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Of course there was another gospel propagated by Judaism; it said christ was great but you're not a real Christian unless you do x, y, z of the law. Paul campaigned against it, and said it had the powers of witchcraft over some of his hard-earned followers.

The 2P2P clowns have come along and said that 'yes there is a 2nd gospel, even though Paul cursed another -- any other gospels.' They think there are more than one in the church, that the church has another one after Acts 9 or so, etc. But they mean another one that would have been OPPOSED to Judaism, not part of it. THERE IS NO SUCH THING. They think this is in Gal 2, one for circs and one for uncircs.

We did not need them to come along and tell us that there was a gospel according to Judaism that Paul fought against. And we do not need their help with the grammar of Gal 2 where one gospel was preached to two targets.

2P2P collapses your ability to think and organize and is a crock from Gal 1 forward when it comes to handling NT doctrine.
 
Nick M

Nick M

Black Rifles Matter
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Interplanner said:
2P2P collapses your ability to think and organize and is a crock from Gal 1 forward when it comes to handling NT doctrine.
Click to expand...

Like Galatians 2?

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

A gospel for the Jews, and a gospel for the gentiles, right there in late modern English for you.
 
L

Lazy afternoon

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Nick M said:
Like Galatians 2?

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

A gospel for the Jews, and a gospel for the gentiles, right there in late modern English for you.
Click to expand...

Gal 1:23 But they had heard only, That he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed.

Rom 4:7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.
Rom 4:8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.
Rom 4:9 Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.
Rom 4:10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.
Rom 4:11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:
Rom 4:12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised.
Rom 4:13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.
 
steko

steko

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Lazy afternoon said:
Gal 1:23 But they had heard only, That he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed.

Rom 4:7 Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.
Rom 4:8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.
Rom 4:9 Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.
Rom 4:10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.
Rom 4:11 And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:
Rom 4:12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised.
Rom 4:13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.
Click to expand...

Nope, Ro 4 was not the faith which Paul once destroyed.
It was this faith:


Act 9:21 But all that heard him were amazed, and said; Is not this he that destroyed them which called on this name in Jerusalem, and came hither for that intent, that he might bring them bound unto the chief priests?
Act 9:22 But Saul increased the more in strength, and confounded the Jews which dwelt at Damascus, proving that this is very Christ.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Nick M said:
Like Galatians 2?

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

A gospel for the Jews, and a gospel for the gentiles, right there in late modern English for you.
Click to expand...



Nick, check any commentary where the person knows Greek grammar, and you'll see the error here.

The subject is Paul/Peter.
The verb is to preach the gospel. There is only one. The direct object is built in.
The indirect object is the two targets. An indirect object for 'preach' cannot be the content preached. it can only be the target.

We're done. This is folly. and do you want to know the really stupid thing? The really dumb thing here is the 2P2Ps chose this proof text 10, 15 verses from Paul declaring anathema on a 2nd gospel. There is no way to prove an alternate Judaic gospel from this situation.
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
IP the Great Genius,

Acts 16
6 Now when they had gone throughout Phrygia and the region of Galatia, and were forbidden of the Holy Ghost to preach the word in Asia,


Why?
 
john w

john w

New member
Hall of Fame
Interplanner said:
Of course there was another gospel propagated by Judaism; it said christ
Click to expand...

vs. "greek grammar"

Interplanner said:
The 2P2P clowns have come along and said that 'yes there is a 2nd gospel,
Click to expand...

Tell us what your Luke 9:6 KJV saint Judas thinks the definition of "gospel" is. Please teach us.


Interplanner said:

even though Paul cursed another -- any other gospels.'
Click to expand...

Tell us what your Luke 9:6 KJV saint Judas thinks the definition of "gospel" is. Please teach us.

Interplanner said:
We did not need them to come along and tell us that there was a gospel according to Judaism that Paul fought against. And we do not need their help with the grammar of Gal 2 where one gospel was preached to two targets.
Click to expand...

Tell us what your Luke 9:6 KJV saint Judas thinks the definition of "gospel" is. Please teach us.
 
D

DAN P

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
Of course there was another gospel propagated by Judaism; it said christ was great but you're not a real Christian unless you do x, y, z of the law. Paul campaigned against it, and said it had the powers of witchcraft over some of his hard-earned followers.

The 2P2P clowns have come along and said that 'yes there is a 2nd gospel, even though Paul cursed another -- any other gospels.' They think there are more than one in the church, that the church has another one after Acts 9 or so, etc. But they mean another one that would have been OPPOSED to Judaism, not part of it. THERE IS NO SUCH THING. They think this is in Gal 2, one for circs and one for uncircs.

We did not need them to come along and tell us that there was a gospel according to Judaism that Paul fought against. And we do not need their help with the grammar of Gal 2 where one gospel was preached to two targets.

2P2P collapses your ability to think and organize and is a crock from Gal 1 forward when it comes to handling NT doctrine.
Click to expand...
HOW anyone can be saved under that GOSPEL and if you have to ask why , THEN you can not say HOW , can you ??

dan p

Hi and IF you believe in only one GOSPEL , then say what that one GOSPEL is found and say
 
L

Lazy afternoon

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
steko said:
Nope, Ro 4 was not the faith which Paul once destroyed.
It was this faith:


Act 9:21 But all that heard him were amazed, and said; Is not this he that destroyed them which called on this name in Jerusalem, and came hither for that intent, that he might bring them bound unto the chief priests?
Act 9:22 But Saul increased the more in strength, and confounded the Jews which dwelt at Damascus, proving that this is very Christ.
Click to expand...


The text clearly says Paul now preached the faith he once destroyed.

What ever he once destroyed he now preached.

Do not try to change the Bible text to suit yourself.

Gal 1:23 But they had heard only, That he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed.

and the Apostles agreed with Pauls gospel which Peter first preached--


Gal 1:24 And they glorified God in me.

LA
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
SaulToPaul said:
1P1P forces you into unbelief of God's word and his promises, turning your mind into satanic mush. Hath God said?
Click to expand...


yes god hath said: all the promises are fulfilled in the resurrection, Acts 13. Or, 2 Cor 1: whatever God has promised is Yes and Amen in Christ.

Like many of the Psalms, they always were about Christ!
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
"What God promised to our fathers, He has fulfilled for us their children, by raising Jesus from the dead." 13:33.

Why would this be true? Because the resurrection is Christ enthroned for having succeeded in providing justification for our sins. These two things are explained, tersely, in v34 (re David's promises) and 38 (justification = forgiveness). This enthronement and victory over the debt of sin were the things promised in the OT. The apostles were concerned with explaining why the resurrection happened, and these are the reasons.

YOUR NT however, is totally made up. Glommed onto the text, everywhere you turn.

God did have the theocratic purpose during David's generation, says 36, but that is no longer a purpose; it was also only a shadow and copy of the reality that was coming in Christ.

When you want to start sounding like the NT, I'd be glad to hear it.
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Acts 13
23 Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus:


Acts 13
32 And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers,

33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.




Don't let this Bible mangler, IP, lead you away from the truth.
It was a singular promise that the resurrection fulfilled, it was NOT all of the promises of God.
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
SaulToPaul said:
Acts 13
23 Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Saviour, Jesus:


Acts 13
32 And we declare unto you glad tidings, how that the promise which was made unto the fathers,

33 God hath fulfilled the same unto us their children, in that he hath raised up Jesus again; as it is also written in the second psalm, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.




Don't let this Bible mangler, IP, lead you away from the truth.
It was a singular promise that the resurrection fulfilled, it was NOT all of the promises of God.
Click to expand...

:idunno:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top