A Common Error:

[FHII]

We did address it. You just don't like or maybe don't understand the answer.

Let me put it to you one more way:

1 Cor 15:14. Paul says if Christ is not risen, his preaching and our faith is in vain. This is part of the gospel of grace. Now, why could not Jesus say that? Answer: because when he was preaching it hadn't happened yet. He did say it would happen, but he himself could not preach that or many other things because they (at thr time) were in the future.

Is that really difficult to understand?

So when Jesus talked about the gospel, it was being written out. Paul got to preach it. Understand? Jesus did it; Paul preached it and the grace through faith as a result.

 

[H. Richard]

1 Cor 15:1-5
15 Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received and in which you stand,
2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you — unless you believed in vain.
3 For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures,
4 and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures,
5 and that He was seen by Cephas, then by the twelve.
NKJV

The above is the gospel of grace. In verse 3 we see that He died for our sins. All sins have been paid for. The fact that He was raised from the dead shows that His payment was accepted by God.

The only thing that condemns a person in this age of grace is the sin of unbelief; to not believe Jesus' shed blood on the cross has paid for all sins.

Under the law of Moses a person could be stoned to death for committing a sin. How much more will God do to those that have trodden underfoot the precious blood of His Son.

 

[H. Richard]

Paul tells us that there is only one gospel – the gospel of Christ and that any other gospel is a perversion of the gospel of Christ. Anyone who preaches such another gospel is be accursed. (see Gal 1:6-8).

Neither you nor H Richard addressed this issue.

Neither Paul, not Peter, Nor Jesus, nor any other scripture writer declared there were two gospels.

Paul declared there was only one gospel. He gave no exceptions. The gospel was for Jews and Gentiles alike.

The gospel Paul was talking about was the gospel that he preached. Preaching a gospel where the law has been added to grace is a perversion. For a person to preach a gospel with law attached is a perversion.

Mungo, I gave you the scriptures in Hebrews where one covenant was being replaced but you can't seem to see them. People like you always come up with there can't be two gospels. Well I agree with that when I say that one has replaced the other. Today there is only one gospel and that gospel was first preached by Paul. It is called the gospel of the grace of God. The same gospel that the believing Jews were trying to add works of the Law too.

The believing Jews only believed that Jesus was their Messiah and King. They still believed they had to keep the Law of Moses.

Heb 3:14-19
14 For we have become partakers of Christ if we hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast to the end, (confidence =faith, belief)
15 while it is said: "Today, if you will hear His voice, Do not harden your hearts as in the rebellion." (those that heard God's promise that they could go in to the land and God would drive those in it out and did not believe God)

Failure of the Wilderness Wanderers
16 For who, having heard, rebelled? Indeed, was it not all who came out of Egypt, led by Moses?
17 Now with whom was He angry forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, (the sin of unbelief) whose corpses fell in the wilderness?
18 And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to those who did not obey?
19 So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.
NKJV

When the Jews refused to believe God's promise that He would drive the people living there out, God made them wander in the desert for 40 years. Today if a person refuses to believe that Jesus' shed blood has paid for all the sins of the world they are comiting the same sin of unbelief.


Heb 4:9-11
9 There remains therefore a rest for the people of God.
10 For he who has entered His rest has himself also ceased from his works as God did from His.
11 Let us therefore be diligent to enter that rest, lest anyone fall according to the same example of disobedience. (unbelief)
NKJV

 

[Mungo]

We did address it. You just don't like or maybe don't understand the answer.

Let me put it to you one more way:

1 Cor 15:14. Paul says if Christ is not risen, his preaching and our faith is in vain. This is part of the gospel of grace. Now, why could not Jesus say that? Answer: because when he was preaching it hadn't happened yet. He did say it would happen, but he himself could not preach that or many other things because they (at thr time) were in the future.

Is that really difficult to understand?

So when Jesus talked about the gospel, it was being written out. Paul got to preach it. Understand? Jesus did it; Paul preached it and the grace through faith as a result.

No, you are not getting it.
The gospel of the grace of God’ = 'the gospel' = 'the gospel of peace' = 'the gospel of Christ' = 'the gospel of his [God’s] Son = ‘the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ- = 'the gospel of God’ = ‘Christ’s gospel’ – unless you believe that Paul preached 7 gospels which you clearly do not.

‘the gospel’ that Paul preached is the same as ‘the gospel’ that Peter preached.
‘the gospel of God’ that Paul preached is the same as ‘the gospel of God’ that Peter preached.
‘the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ’ Paul preached is the same as ‘the gospel of Jesus Christ’ that Mark wrote about.
‘the gospel of Christ’ that Paul preached is the same as ‘the gospel of Jesus Christ’ that Mark wrote about.
‘the gospel of his [God’s] Son that Paul preaches is the same as ‘the gospel of ..... the Son of God’ that Mark wrote about.

There is and has only ever been one gospel.

Nowhere does scripture say there are two gospels.

 

[Mungo]

Today there is only one gospel and that gospel was first preached by Paul.


Seriously?

It is reckoned that Paul was in Tarsus for 10 years before Barnabus brought him to Antioch and he started his missionary journeys and preaching..

Are you seriously suggesting that Jesus taught the apostles a false gospel and then they went out preaching that false gospel for 10 years until Paul came along to correct them??

Are you seriously suggesting that the Apostles were filled with the Holy Spirit in a most spectacular way at Pentecost and then went out and preached a false gospel?

Are you seriously suggesting that God sent Peter to teach a false gospel to the Gentiles (Cornelius and his household)?

 

[H. Richard]

‘the gospel’ that Paul preached is the same as ‘the gospel’ that Peter preached.
‘the gospel of God’ that Paul preached is the same as ‘the gospel of God’ that Peter preached.
‘the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ’ Paul preached is the same as ‘the gospel of Jesus Christ’ that Mark wrote about.
‘the gospel of Christ’ that Paul preached is the same as ‘the gospel of Jesus Christ’ that Mark wrote about.
‘the gospel of his [God’s] Son that Paul preaches is the same as ‘the gospel of ..... the Son of God’ that Mark wrote about.

There is and has only ever been one gospel.

Nowhere does scripture say there are two gospels.

Prove it!!!! I am not going to take your words for it, prove it. Both FHII and I have given you proof that the gospel changed from law to grace and you refuse to see it I have told you that your idea is that I qam saying there are two gospels and I told you that I have never said there are two gospel. I have said that one was replaced, Law was replaced by grace. You are so blind that you can not see what I have said. You confirm what Jesus said is so true; there are none so blind as those that refuse to see.

2 Cor 3:7-11 ---- Glory of the New Covenant
7 But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, (the law was written on stones) was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away,
8 how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious?
9 For if the ministry of condemnation had glory, the ministry of righteousness exceeds much more in glory.
10 For even what was made glorious had no glory in this respect, because of the glory that excels.
11 For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorious.
NKJV

You seem to not be able to see these verses above. But they show that the administration of law is being replaced with the administration of grace. Faith plus nothing. I am curious, do you not know what the word ""REPLACED" means?

 

[Mungo]

Prove it!!!! I am not going to take your words for it, prove it. Both FHII and I have given you proof that the gospel changed from law to grace and you refuse to see it I have told you that your idea is that I qam saying there are two gospels and I told you that I have never said there are two gospel. I have said that one was replaced, Law was replaced by grace. You are so blind that you can not see what I have said. You confirm what Jesus said is so true; there are none so blind as those that refuse to see.

2 Cor 3:7-11 ---- Glory of the New Covenant
7 But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, (the law was written on stones) was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away,
8 how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious?
9 For if the ministry of condemnation had glory, the ministry of righteousness exceeds much more in glory.
10 For even what was made glorious had no glory in this respect, because of the glory that excels.
11 For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorious.
NKJV

You seem to not be able to see these verses above. But they show that the administration of law is being replaced with the administration of grace. Faith plus nothing. I am curious, do you not know what the word ""REPLACED" means?

The Covenants changed. I have never denied it.

You say: “I have given you proof that the gospel changed from law to grace”
Then you say: “I have never said there are two gospel”

You have just contradicted yourself.

There is and has been only one gospel. The gospel that Jesus preached is the same as Peter preached is the same as Paul preached and I have proved that.

You ask me to prove that scripture does not say there are two gospels? That is absurd. How can I prove that scripture does not say something? It’s up to you to show that it does.

I have shown you that it only gives evidence of one gospel; that the references to a gospel in Paul, Peter and Mark all refer to the same thing.

Salvation by grace did not come with the New Covenant. Salvation is always by the grace of God. There can be no other way for sinful man.

 

[tom55]

I never got any email from you. However I see you do not care to talk about where Jesus, by His own words, said He did not come except to the House of Israel Why is that?

Lol....."email"!! I meant post. Sorry....but you knew what I meant.

Still dodging the questions. No problem. It shows that you have zero confidence in your own stance.

 

[FHII]

H. Richard,

I don't know about you, but I'm ready to move on from some of these pointless posts. I've read your OP a few times in the last couple of days, and there is one thing that potentially bothers me:

Jesus taught Jews who were under the law, and he taught from that perspective, but I hesitate saying that Jesus taught the law.

He taught from the law and expounded on the law, but it was no more his central issue than it was John the Baptist's. John's message (which was of course, under the law as well) was repent for the the Kingdom is at hand and the Lamb of God is coming.

Jesus' message was that he was the Christ and he was the only way. He also had a message of mercy and forgiveness (from their sins which were present under the law).

Jesus' final message/act was the resurrectuon which set up the ministry of grace which he trusted to Paul.

Interestingly, John's message was true, but we can't stay stagnet it that message. And I dare say the same about what Jesus taught at the time he preached it. We have to move on to his message of grace through faith, which he gave to Paul.

Or as Peter put it, we must be established in the present truth.

Anyway, my overall point is that Jesus' message wasn't one of works or following the law; it was that he was the Christ and we must follow him.

Paul tells us the only way how to do it.

Thoughts?

 

[H. Richard]

H. Richard,

I don't know about you, but I'm ready to move on from some of these pointless posts. I've read your OP a few times in the last couple of days, and there is one thing that potentially bothers me:

Jesus taught Jews who were under the law, and he taught from that perspective, but I hesitate saying that Jesus taught the law.

He taught from the law and expounded on the law, but it was no more his central issue than it was John the Baptist's. John's message (which was of course, under the law as well) was repent for the the Kingdom is at hand and the Lamb of God is coming.

Jesus' message was that he was the Christ and he was the only way. He also had a message of mercy and forgiveness (from their sins which were present under the law).

Jesus' final message/act was the resurrectuon which set up the ministry of grace which he trusted to Paul.

Interestingly, John's message was true, but we can't stay stagnet it that message. And I dare say the same about what Jesus taught at the time he preached it. We have to move on to his message of grace through faith, which he gave to Paul.

Or as Peter put it, we must be established in the present truth.

Anyway, my overall point is that Jesus' message wasn't one of works or following the law; it was that he was the Christ and we must follow him.

Paul tells us the only way how to do it.

Thoughts?

Very good thoughts.

But as I see the law, Jesus taught the law for the purpose of showing that no one could keep the law. The law was given so that the Jews could see their sinful condition. But they didn't see it. Even the pharisees who were teachers of the law were plotting murder and they could not see it as a sin. This is true today.

Matt 19:24-26
24 And again I say to you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
25 When His disciples heard it, they were greatly astonished, saying, "Who then can be saved?"
26 But Jesus looked at them and said to them, "With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible."
NKJV

The law was given so that mankind could see their sinful condition and turn to God to save them from that sinful condition. If a person is not saved from their sinful flesh then there can not be any salvation. However, today, many do not see their sinful condition and try to say their works of doing good will save them. A person can not love another because of a commandment. Nor can a person love God because they are commanded to love Him. Love has to come from the heart of a person.

 

[Mungo]

H. Richard,

I don't know about you, but I'm ready to move on from some of these pointless posts.

Sounds good to me. I'm going on holiday very soon anyway.

 

[FHII]

That was a good post Mungo!

I again say the Law wasn't his primary point, but when he did speak of it, yes that was one of his two points. The other being that even if you can keep the law it is worthless without love, mercy and most importantly, following Him.

The eye of the needle story is interesting. It refers to a young rich man who claimed he followed the law from his youth (i suspect Jesus was humoring him by accepting that point) but would not give it all up and follow him.

To bring this all back around to the original topic, this is why it was a transition period and this is why Paul's message was different. This is what Richard (i believe) was talking about. They were still under the law but it wasn't until Paul preached the message of grace that the full transition had been completed.

I'd still love to hear H. Richard's thoughts.

 

[H. Richard]

That was a good post Mungo!

I again say the Law wasn't his primary point, but when he did speak of it, yes that was one of his two points. The other being that even if you can keep the law it is worthless without love, mercy and most importantly, following Him.

The eye of the needle story is interesting. It refers to a young rich man who claimed he followed the law from his youth (i suspect Jesus was humoring him by accepting that point) but would not give it all up and follow him.

To bring this all back around to the original topic, this is why it was a transition period and this is why Paul's message was different. This is what Richard (i believe) was talking about. They were still under the law but it wasn't until Paul preached the message of grace that the full transition had been completed.

I'd still love to hear H. Richard's thoughts.

A good place to start is in the OP under
"This is my personal walk with God through faith"
on this forum. It shows how I got to this place in my witness. Perhaps you might see the many things we have in common.

 

[H. Richard]

You mean if people don't agree with your interpolation? Jesus went to many places outside of Israel, so why would He do that given your perspective?
Do you believe Jews and the Lost Sheep are one and the same?
Paul letters are far more than keeping the Judeo influence OUT of Christianity, but yes that was one of his tasks for which he ran into much opposition. Your point?

Show me the scriptures that tell us Jesus went outside of Israel.

 

[theefaith]

It is a common error for religious preachers/teachers to assume that the Pauline Gospel of Grace should be blended in with what Jesus and the 11 preached. I feel this is a deadly error that will send many to Hell.
-
Gal 1:8 NKJV
8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed.
-
It is a fact that God has given humankind different requirements down through history. The Pauline Gospel of salvation by faith in what God did on the cross (His shed blood) is without precedence in the scriptures. When a person fails to see this they will always blend the Law of Moses (what Jesus and the 11 taught to the Jews) with grace and destroy both of them. Paul warned about this in Rom. 2:16 and Rom 16:25.
-
Rom 2:16 NKJV
16 in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.
-
Rom 16:25 NKJV
25 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began.
-
It is clear that Jesus Christ, by His own words, did not come to minister to the Gentiles, nor was His message "the kingdom gospel" sent to the Gentiles. He did not offer the promised "kingdom of heaven" to the Gentiles. The following scriptures support this fact.
-
Matt 10:5-7 (NKJ)
5 These twelve Jesus sent out and commanded them, saying: "Do not go into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter a city of the Samaritans.
6 "But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
7 "And as you go, preach, saying, 'The kingdom of heaven is at hand.'
-
Matt 15:23-24 (NKJ)
23 But He answered her not a word. And His disciples came and urged Him, saying, "Send her away, for she cries out after us."
24 But He answered and said, "I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."
-
Paul said: Rom 15:8 (NKJ)
8 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers:
-
Note that in Matt 10:5-7 and Matt 15:23-24 Jesus said He did not come EXCEPT to the house of Israel. Jesus came to confirm/fulfill all the promises God made to the Jews that were written about Him in the O.T. His mission was to the Jews, not to the Gentiles. This is what Paul meant in Rom 15:8 above.
-
IMPORTANT NOTE: -- This is not to say that God did not have another purpose for Jesus' death on the cross. But that purpose was “hidden in God” and revealed to Paul on the road to Damascus by Jesus. (Eph 3:9). The church for this age of grace (the Church of His body) started when Paul preached the gospel of grace that was given to him by Jesus.
-
It is my obligation/burden to try and make people see this terrible error.

It is a common error for religious preachers/teachers to assume that the Pauline Gospel of Grace should be blended in with what Jesus and the 11 preached. I feel this is a deadly error that will send many to Hell.
-
Gal 1:8 NKJV
8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed.
-
It is a fact that God has given humankind different requirements down through history. The Pauline Gospel of salvation by faith in what God did on the cross (His shed blood) is without precedence in the scriptures. When a person fails to see this they will always blend the Law of Moses (what Jesus and the 11 taught to the Jews) with grace and destroy both of them. Paul warned about this in Rom. 2:16 and Rom 16:25.
-
Rom 2:16 NKJV
16 in the day when God will judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my gospel.
-
Rom 16:25 NKJV
25 Now to Him who is able to establish you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery kept secret since the world began.
-
It is clear that Jesus Christ, by His own words, did not come to minister to the Gentiles, nor was His message "the kingdom gospel" sent to the Gentiles. He did not offer the promised "kingdom of heaven" to the Gentiles. The following scriptures support this fact.
-
Matt 10:5-7 (NKJ)
5 These twelve Jesus sent out and commanded them, saying: "Do not go into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter a city of the Samaritans.
6 "But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
7 "And as you go, preach, saying, 'The kingdom of heaven is at hand.'
-
Matt 15:23-24 (NKJ)
23 But He answered her not a word. And His disciples came and urged Him, saying, "Send her away, for she cries out after us."
24 But He answered and said, "I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."
-
Paul said: Rom 15:8 (NKJ)
8 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers:
-
Note that in Matt 10:5-7 and Matt 15:23-24 Jesus said He did not come EXCEPT to the house of Israel. Jesus came to confirm/fulfill all the promises God made to the Jews that were written about Him in the O.T. His mission was to the Jews, not to the Gentiles. This is what Paul meant in Rom 15:8 above.
-
IMPORTANT NOTE: -- This is not to say that God did not have another purpose for Jesus' death on the cross. But that purpose was “hidden in God” and revealed to Paul on the road to Damascus by Jesus. (Eph 3:9). The church for this age of grace (the Church of His body) started when Paul preached the gospel of grace that was given to him by Jesus.
-
It is my obligation/burden to try and make people see this terrible error.

we’re you banned?