ECT Two Gospels Preached During The Acts Period

[Jerry Shugart]

While the First Century Pharisees who believed - the Judaizers - taught that all Christians must obey the Law of Moses and be circumcised, etc - the founders of Separation Theology (Darby, Scofield and Chafer) taught that Old Covenant Israel as God's people by the fleshly descent from Abraham continue on, alongside the Church. This is the two peoples of God teaching.

That is not what the dispensationalists whom you named teach. Instead, they teach that the dispensation when OT Israel was a special people unto the Lord has been interrupted by the "dispensation of the mystery" and that when this dispensation ends at the rapture then the previous dispensation will come into force once again.

And here Paul speaks about the time when that will happen:

"For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins" (Ro.11:25-27).​

When the Lord resumes His program when Israel is a special people unto the Lord then the "gospel of the kingdom" will once again be preached (Mt.24:14).

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Paul stated pretty clearly He preached only one Gospel Gal 1:8-9 and He received it from Christ by revelation 11-12

This is deceptive teaching your introducing here.

Paul never said that he preached only one gospel. Instead, he said:

"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" (Gal.1:8).​

Here Paul was addressing the churches in Galatia which he had founded, churches established by the "gospel of grace". He knew that the "gospel of circumcision" was not going to be preached to them because he had agreed with those who had received the "apostleship of the circumcision" (Gal.2:8) that they would confine their preaching to the Jews:

"And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision" (Gal.2:9).​

Therefore Paul was not saying anything that ruled out the idea that more than one gospel was preached during the Acts period.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Paul ONLY preached the Grace Gospel that the ascended Christ gave him. Your opinion, is just that, your opinion.

When the Gentile philosophers overheard him disputing with the Jews in the marketplace, he went with them to Mars' hill and preached God first.

Acts 17:22
Then Paul stood in the midst of Mars' hill, and said, Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious.

23 For as I passed by, and beheld your devotions, I found an altar with this inscription, TO THE UNKNOWN GOD. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Paul never said that he preached only one gospel. Instead, he said:

"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" (Gal.1:8).​

Here Paul was addressing the churches in Galatia which he had founded, churches established by the "gospel of grace". He knew that the "gospel of circumcision" was not going to be preached to them because he had agreed with those who had received the "apostleship of the circumcision" (Gal.2:8) that they would confine their preaching to the Jews:

"And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision" (Gal.2:9).​

Therefore Paul was not saying anything that ruled out the idea that more than one gospel was preached during the Acts period.

So Paul confined his preaching to Gentiles after the council meeting?

 

[jamie]

I suspect Paul had a real problem when he preached in the synagogues having to segregate the uncircumcised from the circumcised. I guess there was only one way to check, and then he knew in a flash.

Paul surely didn't want to preach the same gospel to both groups, then the circumcised would think they too could be saved by grace through faith and that would never do.

It's a good thing there were at least two gospels and there were probably many more, no sense in stopping at just two.

We have multiple gospels on TOL. Pate has his gospel, Keypurr has a different gospel, the MADites have a different gospel, Squeaky has his gospel and then there is scripture which a few are guided by.

And so it is...

 

[Jerry Shugart]

So Paul confined his preaching to Gentiles after the council meeting?

No, Paul was given a ministry to the Jews and one to the Gentiles. Therefore, since he was going many different places in his journeys he took the opportunity to preach in the synagogues every where he went. And here is what he was preaching:

"Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews: And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ" (Acts 17:1-3).​

That is the same message that Apollos preached to the Jews: "For he mightily convinced the Jews, and that publicly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus is Christ" (Acts 18:28).

 

[beloved57]

Paul never said that he preached only one gospel. Instead, he said:

"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" (Gal.1:8).​

Here Paul was addressing the churches in Galatia which he had founded, churches established by the "gospel of grace". He knew that the "gospel of circumcision" was not going to be preached to them because he had agreed with those who had received the "apostleship of the circumcision" (Gal.2:8) that they would confine their preaching to the Jews:

"And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision" (Gal.2:9).​

Therefore Paul was not saying anything that ruled out the idea that more than one gospel was preached during the Acts period.

Paul never said that he did preach more than one Gospel. So you are arguing from silence and ignorance. Paul indicates that their is but One Gospel Gal 1:8-9 !

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

No, Paul was given a ministry to the Jews and one to the Gentiles. Therefore, since he was going many different places in his journeys he took the opportunity to preach in the synagogues every where he went. And here is what he was preaching:

"Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews: And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead; and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ" (Acts 17:1-3).​

That is the same message that Apollos preached to the Jews: "For he mightily convinced the Jews, and that publicly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus is Christ" (Acts 18:28).

You have now asserted that because Paul was given permission to do both he didn't have to just go to the Gentiles.

The 12 were also told to go to both.

So if Paul could still do both, why would he be so sure the saints at Jerusalem and abroad wouldn't?

Not only that, but why would Paul try to save his fellow Israelites by provoking them to emulate him?

 

[intojoy]

The Greek word translated "gospel" means "glad tidings" or "good news." With that in mind let us look at what is said:

"For I am not ashamed of the good news of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek"(Ro.1:16).​

The "good news" of Christ which was preached to the Jews is that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.

The "good news" preached to the Gentiles is that the Lord Jesus died for our sins.

There is nothing at Romans 1:16 that limits the number of instances of "good news" which was preached.

Fail

 

[DAN P]

Fail

Hi and Paul was to go to GENTILES first !!

Then KINGS !

Then the Sons of Israel !!

In Acts 9:15 !!

How about that !!

dan p

 

[Jerry Shugart]

You have now asserted that because Paul was given permission to do both he didn't have to just go to the Gentiles.

The 12 were also told to go to both.

It was the so-called "Great Commission" that commanded them to go to the Gentiles. But when the disciples were scattered they only went to the Jews:

"Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only" (Acts 11:19).​

Peter was given the same commission but he did not go to the Gentiles until he received a vision and then was told that Cornelius had sent for him so that he could hear Peter preach.

Why did it take a special vision before Peter would go to any Gentile? Why did the scattered disciples just go to the Jews?

They all knew that according to prophecy the outreach to the Gentiles would not happen until the nation of Israel was endowed with splendor:

"Surely you will summon nations you know not, and nations that do not know you will hasten to you, because of the Lord your God, the Holy One of Israel, for he has endowed you with splendor" (Isa.55:3,5).​

As long as that was not happening then they would not go to the Gentiles. Then a new dispensation started with Paul and under this dispensation the Gentiles were not being saved through the agency of Israel but instead because of her fall:

"I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy. Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?" (Ro.11:11-12).​

So Peter and those with him were under a new commission and the new one was not in regard to going to the Gentiles.

Hope this helps.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Fail

If I failed then many of those from Dallas Theological Seminary failed also. They knew that Peter preached a gospel before Paul was converted and they knew that gospel was not the "gospel of grace."

In a Bible tract entitled Paul's Gospel Acts 2 dispensationalist William R. Newell wrote:

"The twelve Apostles (Matthias by Divine appointment taking the place of Judas) were to be the 'witnesses' (Acts 1:22) of Christ's resurrection--that is, of the fact of it. They were not to unfold fully the doctrine of it, as Paul was...But unto none of these twelve Apostles did God reveal 'the great body of doctrine for this age'...The great doctrines that Paul reveals may be outlined as follows...The fact and the Scripturalness of righteousness on the free gift principle--that is, of Divine righteousness, separate from all man's doings, conferred upon man as a free gift from God" (Newell, Paul's Gospel).​

After reading this Bible tract Lewis Sperry Chafer, the founding President of Dallas Theological Seminary, said:

"This is a great tract, a clear treatise on the truth of God for this age. The author was one of America's greatest Bible expositors. It glorifies the Savior as the author desired it to do. It should be distributed by hundreds of thousands" (Editor, Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society, Autumn 1994, Volume 7:12).​

Today Dallas Theological Seminary is considered the leading Acts 2 dispensational seminary in the world, and the founding President of that seminary recognized the fact that the "gospel of grace" was not preached by anyone before Paul. Therefore that gospel was not preached on the Day of Pentecost.

The second President of Dallas Theological Seminary, John F. Walvoord, wrote that "The gospel of Grace was given to Paul as a 'new' revelation" (Walvoord, "The Preincarnate Son of God", Bibliotheca Sacra, Oct.-Dec. 1947, Vol. 104, # 416, p.422).​

So it is evident that they believed that no one preached the gospel of grace before Paul so the gospel which was preached before Paul was another gosprl.

 

[beloved57]

If I failed then many of those from Dallas Theological Seminary failed also. They knew that Peter preached a gospel before Paul was converted and they knew that gospel was not the "gospel of grace."

In a Bible tract entitled Paul's Gospel Acts 2 dispensationalist William R. Newell wrote:

"The twelve Apostles (Matthias by Divine appointment taking the place of Judas) were to be the 'witnesses' (Acts 1:22) of Christ's resurrection--that is, of the fact of it. They were not to unfold fully the doctrine of it, as Paul was...But unto none of these twelve Apostles did God reveal 'the great body of doctrine for this age'...The great doctrines that Paul reveals may be outlined as follows...The fact and the Scripturalness of righteousness on the free gift principle--that is, of Divine righteousness, separate from all man's doings, conferred upon man as a free gift from God" (Newell, Paul's Gospel).​

After reading this Bible tract Lewis Sperry Chafer, the founding President of Dallas Theological Seminary, said:

"This is a great tract, a clear treatise on the truth of God for this age. The author was one of America's greatest Bible expositors. It glorifies the Savior as the author desired it to do. It should be distributed by hundreds of thousands" (Editor, Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society, Autumn 1994, Volume 7:12).​

Today Dallas Theological Seminary is considered the leading Acts 2 dispensational seminary in the world, and the founding President of that seminary recognized the fact that the "gospel of grace" was not preached by anyone before Paul. Therefore that gospel was not preached on the Day of Pentecost.

The second President of Dallas Theological Seminary, John F. Walvoord, wrote that "The gospel of Grace was given to Paul as a 'new' revelation" (Walvoord, "The Preincarnate Son of God", Bibliotheca Sacra, Oct.-Dec. 1947, Vol. 104, # 416, p.422).​

So it is evident that they believed that no one preached the gospel of grace before Paul so the gospel which was preached before Paul was another gosprl.

Gal 1:8-9

[FONT=&quot]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.

[/FONT][FONT=&quot]As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

[/FONT]Gal 1:6-7

[FONT=&quot] I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.[/FONT]

 

[Right Divider]

I cannot believe that there are so many people on this thread who continue to insist that the "good news" that the Lord Jesus died for our sins is the same "good news" that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God.

It boggles my mind that so many are able to stand reason on its head and insist that both instances of "good news" are the same "good news."

It's probably either shear stupidity or spiritual wickedness or both.

 

[jamie]

So it is evident that they believed that no one preached the gospel of grace before Paul so the gospel which was preached before Paul was another gosprl.

Didn't Jesus teach that we must be born again?

 

[Right Divider]

Didn't Jesus teach that we must be born again?

WE?

The minister of the circumcision was speaking to the circumcision.

 

[Interplanner]

It's probably either shear stupidity or spiritual wickedness or both.

The problem is yours. You don't know your OTs or NTs and your heads are full of 2P2P. The Christ and/or the Son of God was sent as a ransom for many, expressed by himself immediately upon entering ministry.

 

[Interplanner]

WE?

The minister of the circumcision was speaking to the circumcision.

NO that is entirely bogus thinking. You reek of 2P2P and have been taught to think you have to find it everywhere possible so that IT lives and the unity of the bible dies. One gospel, one Lord, faith, baptism, body, Spirit, etc.

 

[Right Divider]

The problem is yours. You don't know your OTs or NTs and your heads are full of 2P2P. The Christ and/or the Son of God was sent as a ransom for many, expressed by himself immediately upon entering ministry.

I really enjoy your complete and total hypocrisy.

You are the poster-boy for the pot calling the kettle black.

Paul says that He was a RANSOM FOR ALL.... what do you make of that?

1Tim 2:6 (KJV)
(2:6) Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.​

You are COMPLETELY Biblically illiterate with your "books about" anti-knowledge.

 

[Right Divider]

NO that is entirely bogus thinking. You reek of 2P2P and have been taught to think you have to find it everywhere possible so that IT lives and the unity of the bible dies. One gospel, one Lord, faith, baptism, body, Spirit, etc.

Poster-boy and poser-boy.