THE SERMON ON THE MOUNT WAS FOR ISRAEL

[David Lamb]

Yep, Foxe did the work of accumulating the church traditions. I don't intend to re-invent that wheel here.

But when you first mentioned Foxe's Book, it was in answer to somebody who had asked you for verses (I assume he meant Bible verses) to support your statement about apostles going to places like India.

What about you, David? Do you think that Thomas, Mark, etc went and were apostles in Gentile nations? Or were all the apostles except Paul sent only to Israel?

I believe that apostles, or Christians sent by the apostles, took the gospel to lands such as India, France, Britain and the rest. I don't know if there is any actual evidence that the apostles you mentioned did so, or whether it is merely tradition. For example, an AI overview says:

"Definitive contemporary historical proof that the Apostle Thomas went to India does not exist, but ancient Christian tradition strongly links his ministry to the region."

I don't agree that Paul was the only apostle to preach the gospel to Gentiles.

 

[PeterAndroz]

But when you first mentioned Foxe's Book, it was in answer to somebody who had asked you for verses (I assume he meant Bible verses) to support your statement about apostles going to places like India.

I believe that apostles, or Christians sent by the apostles, took the gospel to lands such as India, France, Britain and the rest. I don't know if there is any actual evidence that the apostles you mentioned did so, or whether it is merely tradition. For example, an AI overview says:

"Definitive contemporary historical proof that the Apostle Thomas went to India does not exist, but ancient Christian tradition strongly links his ministry to the region."

I don't agree that Paul was the only apostle to preach the gospel to Gentiles.

""I don't agree that Paul was the only apostle to preach the gospel to Gentiles.""
In that case you will be able to supply the verses that THEN challenge Gal 2:7-9.
Today it's a NON-issue since ALL believers are equal and saved by WHICH Gospel verses David ? :)
;

 

[David Lamb]

Correct, yet where does Peter teach that a person is saved & HS sealed by believing & trusting in the death, burial, resurrection of Christ as Paul taught in 1 Cor 15:1-4, Eph 1:13 ?
NOWHERE !!
INSTEAD Peter teaches Acts 2:38 & in some case Acts 8:15-17 was required to receive the HS
After 1 Cor 15:1-4, Paul NEVER teaches anything else but trust/believe the DBR of Christ to be SAVED & HS sealed
Can you see the differences David ?
Read/study the verses

You seem to be saying that Jews were saved without believing in the sacrificial death, burial and resurrection of the Saviour. Yet the Old Testament, which the Jews would have known, included indications that the Messiah would suffer for His people. For example:

NKJV Isa 53:4 Surely He has borne our griefs And carried our sorrows; Yet we esteemed Him stricken, Smitten by God, and afflicted.
Isa 53:5 But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; The chastisement for our peace was upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed.

Peter himself quotes those verses in 1 Peter 2:24.

 

[Armour of God]

So Christ/GOD was not involved in the writing of the WHOLE Bible ?
Hmmm ?
2 Tim 3: All scripture is given by inspiration of God

Jesus never taught animal sacrifice

 

[David Lamb]

So Christ/GOD was not involved in the writing of the WHOLE Bible ?
Hmmm ?
2 Tim 3: All scripture is given by inspiration of God

True, but that whole Bible includes the Epistle to the Hebrews, where we are told that animal sacrifices coud never actually take away sin, and that Jesus Christ was the one perfect, complete, and never-to-be-repeated sacrifice:

NKJV Heb 9:24 For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;
Heb 9:25 not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another—
Heb 9:26 He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

Heb 10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.

Heb 10:11 And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.
Heb 10:12 But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God,

The Old Testament animal sacrifices were but types or shadows, pointing forward to the one perfect and complete sacrifice.

 

[PeterAndroz]

You seem to be saying that Jews were saved without believing in the sacrificial death, burial and resurrection of the Saviour. Yet the Old Testament, which the Jews would have known, included indications that the Messiah would suffer for His people. For example:

NKJV Isa 53:4 Surely He has borne our griefs And carried our sorrows; Yet we esteemed Him stricken, Smitten by God, and afflicted.
Isa 53:5 But He was wounded for our transgressions, He was bruised for our iniquities; The chastisement for our peace was upon Him, And by His stripes we are healed.

Peter himself quotes those verses in 1 Peter 2:24.

The Bible SAYS at the time of Gal 2:7-9, Paul taught the GENTILES/HEATHEN & the 12 taught the others.
So what part of Gal 2:7-9 are you rejecting ?

 

[PeterAndroz]

Jesus never taught animal sacrifice

So you REJECT that Jesus was involved in the writing of the OT.
Is that your claim ?

 

[PeterAndroz]

True, but that whole Bible includes the Epistle to the Hebrews, where we are told that animal sacrifices coud never actually take away sin, and that Jesus Christ was the one perfect, complete, and never-to-be-repeated sacrifice:

NKJV Heb 9:24 For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;
Heb 9:25 not that He should offer Himself often, as the high priest enters the Most Holy Place every year with blood of another—
Heb 9:26 He then would have had to suffer often since the foundation of the world; but now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.

Heb 10:4 For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins.

Heb 10:11 And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins.
Heb 10:12 But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God,

The Old Testament animal sacrifices were but types or shadows, pointing forward to the one perfect and complete sacrifice.

Good, so you too ALSO ACCEPT that NOT the whole Bible applies today.

 

[David Lamb]

The Bible SAYS at the time of Gal 2:7-9, Paul taught the GENTILES/HEATHEN & the 12 taught the others.
So what part of Gal 2:7-9 are you rejecting ?

I am not rejecting it. Those verses say:

NKJV Gal 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
Gal 2:8 (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles),
Gal 2:9 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.

It is not absolute, because God sent Peter to preach to Cornelius, a Gentile, and He told Ananias this concerning Paul:

Act 9:15 But the Lord said to him, "Go, for he is a chosen vessel of Mine to bear My name before Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel.

So I agree that Paul preached mainly to Gentiles I(but not exclusively), and Peter preached mainly to Jews (but not exclusively).

 

[Fred J]

True born again readers,

Am not going to respond in vain to opposition with another gospel and spirit.

But am going to stick by in what i've been given to post all this while.

Acts 1:
21. Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us.
22. Beginning from the baptism of John, unto the same day that He was taken uo from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of His resurrection.

This is addressed by Peter beforehand their Gospel ministry to be, that another is to be selected to be a witness with the 11 of them since the beginning!

To put into context, inclusion of Jesus' death, burial and resurrection in fulfillment, which is the Gospel they're to preach and make disciples of all nations!

Furthermore teach all nations to observe all things whatsoever Jesus have commanded the 12 Apostles, way before Paul's Gospel.

Paul was not saved then and not a witness compared to the 12, to these vital message among messages and teachings of Christ, even beginning from the baptism of John!

And moreover to fulfillment, the resurrection of Christ on the third day conquering death, the Gospel of salvation for the whole world!

On the day of Pentecost and descending of the Holy Ghost, this very Gospel from Jerusalem went to all nations and churches were established.

Way before Paul's conversion which happened in the middle of the book of Acts, and his given Gospel forth to bring law and order in these established churches, between Jew and Gentile believers.

Overall, there's only one Gospel for the Jews and the Gentiles, as from the beginning with the baptism of John to the resurrection of Christ

Which is the Gospel unto salvation and discipleship onto growth for Jews and Gentiles, for unbelievers to believers, from Jerusalem to all nations.

Then later on from Paul is the Gospel unto law and order, and restoration in established churches, and between Jew and Gentile believers.

It's just that Peter's ongoing Gospel ministry of the word is more suited for the Jew's salvation and church from Jerusalem.

While Paul's ongoing Gospel ministry of the word is more suited for the Gentile's salvation and church outside of Jerusalem.

But the teachings and procedures beginning with the baptism of John, with Christ, to the resurrection of Christ, the Gospel unto salvation for Jews and Gentiles, 'remain and intact'.

Compared to Paul's Gospel unto law and order restoration in established churches and between Jew and Gentile believers, 'remain and as follows'.

Only heretics and their followers bring forth heresy causing division and confusion once again by dividing the Gospel, which one for the Jews and which one for the Gentiles.

Shalom in the name of Lord Jesus Christ

 

[PeterAndroz]

I am not rejecting it. Those verses say:

NKJV Gal 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
Gal 2:8 (for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles),
Gal 2:9 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.

It is not absolute, because God sent Peter to preach to Cornelius, a Gentile, and He told Ananias this concerning Paul:

Act 9:15 But the Lord said to him, "Go, for he is a chosen vessel of Mine to bear My name before Gentiles, kings, and the children of Israel.

So I agree that Paul preached mainly to Gentiles I(but not exclusively), and Peter preached mainly to Jews (but not exclusively).

What do you believe are the SAVING GOSPEL verses for today ?