Blended Gospel

[mjrhealth]

Now - if you don't have any documented evidence for your erroneous title of "RCC" or "Roman Catholic Church" - just admit it and move on

read

Catholic Church in Australia

1. You are here:

Lutheran Church - Roman Catholic Church


Dialogue Statements

• Agreed Statement on Baptism
• Sacrament and Sacrifice
• Pastor and Priest
• Communion and Mission
• Justification: A Common Statement of the Australian Lutheran-Roman Catholic Dialogue
• The Ministry of Oversight

History

The Beginnings

The General Church Council of the Lutheran Church in Australia and the Australian Episcopal Conference of the Roman Catholic Church authorized discussions between these two churches. A dialogue committee met together for the first time in April 1975. The committee chose Adelaide, being the home of the only Lutheran seminary in Australia, as the venue for conversations.

The first members of the dialogue were:

Roman Catholic
Lutheran
Archbishop James Gleeson
Rev John O’Rourke CM
Rev Kevin Condon CM
Rev Brian Jackson CM
Rev Brian Jordan CM
Rev James O’Loughlin PP
Dr L.B. Grope, President LCA
Dr H Sasse
Dr J.T.E. Renner
Dr M. Schild
Pastor D.C. Overduin

 

[Guestman]

The KJV has it correct. The idea of dissecting is involved too, because of the Greek word tomoteros (to cut). Rightly divide means to dissect God's Word according to subject and object, because the subject can change very quickly, and one must understand enough events from Scripture to discern the timings they belong to, whether past, present, or future. The OT prophets especially do this.

No, the King James Bible is inaccurate in its rendering of 2 Timothy 2:15, for the Bible is NOT divided into two parts as the churches of Christendom have done, making into an "Old Testament" and a "New Testament", for the Bible one complete book that our Maker, Jehovah God inspired to be written down over the course of some 1,600 years.

The Hebrew Scriptures being classified as the "Old Testament" is from the mistranslation of 2 Corinthians 2:14 by the King James Bible which renders it as: "But their minds (the nation of fleshly Israel) were blinded: for until the this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which veil is done away in Christ".

The apostle Paul uses the Greek word diatheke that means "a compact, covenant", not "testament" in this case, for Paul said that the "veil" of the nation of Israel was "untaken away in the reading" of the Mosaic law covenant, not "old testament".

To show the inconsistency of the King James Bible, at Matthew 26:28 (as well as at Mark 14:24) when Jesus was instituting the Lord's Evening meal and its "new covenant", it reads there: "For this is my blood of new testament (Greek diatheke), which is shed for many for the remission of sins".

Yet at Jeremiah 31:31, from which this is taken, the King James Bible reads: "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:" Thus, the King James Bible properly renders the Hebrew berith as "covenant" here but inaccurately renders its counterpart Greek word diatheke as "testament".

The Greek Septuagint consistently rendered the Hebrew word berith, that means "covenant or agreement" and never as "will or testament", by the Greek word diatheke, while the King James Bible has not, producing confusion or outright distortion.

At Acts 3:25 (and Heb 8:6 , 9:4 and 10:29), the King James Bible renders diatheke accurately as "covenant" instead of "testament" that is referencing the Mosaic Law covenant, but at 2 Corinthians 3:6 (and Heb 7:22, 9:20 and Rev 11:19), it goes back to its habit of rendering diatheke as "testament" (as at 2 Cor 3:14) instead of accurately as "new covenant", which points back to Jeremiah 31:33 and in which the King James Bible accurately uses the word "covenant" (Heb berith) and not "testament".

How would a person like someone who flip-flops, one day this way and the next day that way, never consistent, being unstable ? Would you trust that person ? The Bible book of Proverbs gives some insight into this: "Like someone who cripples his own feet and harms himself is the one who entrusts matter to someone stupid".(Prov 26:6)

A person should want a Bible that is accurate, that properly renders Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek words as precise as can be into a designated language, and not one that consistently displays inaccuracies. How would a person like a map that is full of the imprecise information, causing them to constantly get lost ?

 

[BreadOfLife]

unfortunately that does not allow for other perspectives of "Catholic" that might be more relevant, as you might see if say the Pentecostal church were to start insisting that they are the "Catholic" church.

Iow the definition of "catholic" has at least arguably been appropriated by Strong Men, regardless of anyone's personal beliefs in the matter, and many cannot in good conscience perceive the Roman Catholic church, headquartered in Rome after all, right, that's where the pope is, etc, as the "catholic" church.

so you are basically just insisting that everyone accept your definitions there wadr,
and make an institution of men into a spiritual concept, when this is condemned in the Book.

And that's just too bad. The Catholic Church has been in existence from the beginning.
If a Protestant wants to use this title to fit their situation - they are wrong.

Just as a Catholic is not a Presbyterian or a Baptist or a non-denominational Evangelical - none of them are Catholic.
To claim to be something you are not just because you want to hijack the name is nothing short of relativism . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

read
Catholic Church in Australia

1. You are here:

Lutheran Church - Roman Catholic Church
Dialogue Statements

• Agreed Statement on Baptism
• Sacrament and Sacrifice
• Pastor and Priest
• Communion and Mission
• Justification: A Common Statement of the Australian Lutheran-Roman Catholic Dialogue
• The Ministry of Oversight

History
The Beginnings
The General Church Council of the Lutheran Church in Australia and the Australian Episcopal Conference of the Roman Catholic Church authorized discussions between these two churches. A dialogue committee met together for the first time in April 1975. The committee chose Adelaide, being the home of the only Lutheran seminary in Australia, as the venue for conversations.
The first members of the dialogue were:
Roman Catholic
Lutheran
Archbishop James Gleeson
Rev John O’Rourke CM
Rev Kevin Condon CM
Rev Brian Jackson CM
Rev Brian Jordan CM
Rev James O’Loughlin PP
Dr L.B. Grope, President LCA
Dr H Sasse
Dr J.T.E. Renner
Dr M. Schild
Pastor D.C. Overduin

And this ALL pertains to the RITE (Roman) - not the title of the Church.
You really need to do your homework . . .

 

[bbyrd009]

To claim to be something you are not just because you want to hijack the name is nothing short of relativism . . .

so at least you understand the argument against the Roman Catholic church, i guess

 

[BreadOfLife]

so at least you understand the argument against the Roman Catholic church, i guess

No - I understand that a lot of non-Catholics want to hijack the title of "Catholic" when they are not.

 

[bbyrd009]

No - I understand that a lot of non-Catholics want to hijack the title of "Catholic" when they are not.

ah. i'm not fam with any of these types, so i should not comment there i guess

 

[mjrhealth]

And this ALL pertains to the RITE (Roman) - not the title of the Church.
You really need to do your homework . . .

They have teh RITE to be called roman catholics and you do not have teh RITE to tell them they are not. Grow up. liek a spoiled child.

 

[Ac28]

God pays a man according to his work Job 34:11

Job is not written TO us, but Ephesians is definitely written TO us, by Paul. our only apostle, in one of his last 7 books, which contain the only truth for us Gentiles today, as far as our hope, our calling, our rules and our directions, are concerned.
Eph 2:8-9
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

In James 2:24, it says that works are necessary for our justification. Of course, by obeying the rules of right division in 2Tim 2:15, we can exclude James, because in James 1:1, he says that he is writing to the 12 tribes, and since I not a member of the 12 tribes,I know that James does not apply directly to me

If you're not using right division, you are not approved unto God - see 2 Timothy 2:15.

A question: Is there any way to get rid of the ASV in those scripture hovers and substitute a real Bible, in which only the KJV qualifies. The ASV on 2Tim 2:15 is absolutely terrible. The Campbellites use the ASV. They're the ones who falsely believe that Faith + water baptism are necessary for salvation.

 

[bbyrd009]

A question: Is there any way to get rid of the ASV

ah, i usually post only Lex, sorry, i must have been on the fly
2 Timothy 2:15 Lexicon: Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth.

but "God repays a man according to his works" has plenty of Support anyway

 

[H. Richard]

Insisting that a child of God must earn salvation by adding works in RELIGIONS is what the religious Jews were trying to do to Paul. But Satan keeps this fact hidden from their eyes.

This new plan of salvation instituted by Jesus through Paul’s gospel of grace (GOD’S LOVE) is based exclusively on the work of Jesus on the cross. This work is said that it saves the ungodly. God’s love poured out on the cross is much more powerful than all the sins of the world but mankind just can’t wrap their heads around it.

Rom 4:3-4 NKJV
3 For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness."
4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.

Rom 5:6 NKJV
6 For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.

 

[Davy]

No, the King James Bible is inaccurate in its rendering of 2 Timothy 2:15, for the Bible is NOT divided into two parts as the churches of Christendom have done, making into an "Old Testament" and a "New Testament", for the Bible one complete book that our Maker, Jehovah God inspired to be written down over the course of some 1,600 years.

I'm not talking about differences between how the Books of The Bible were selected and their order in written volume. I'm talking about rightly dividing per Paul meaning to right divide the SUBJECT AND OBJECT line upon line, chapter by chapter, regardless of the Book, and regardless of whether it's in the OT or NT.

But is there a difference between the OT Books and NT Books? Yes, definitely! It's easy to know too, since The Four Gospel Books are specifically about Jesus' coming to die on the cross that was prophesied by the OT prophets. And Paul's Epistles serve especially for Christ's Church and not for unbelievers.

The Hebrew Scriptures being classified as the "Old Testament" is from the mistranslation of 2 Corinthians 2:14 by the King James Bible which renders it as: "But their minds (the nation of fleshly Israel) were blinded: for until the this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which veil is done away in Christ".

The apostle Paul uses the Greek word diatheke that means "a compact, covenant", not "testament" in this case, for Paul said that the "veil" of the nation of Israel was "untaken away in the reading" of the Mosaic law covenant, not "old testament".

Greek palaios (old, or worn out), diatheke (contract or covenant or testament of a testator) is just as accurate translated as "old testament", for the idea of the old covenant was indeed about the law of Moses. So the KJV is not really making a mistake with that, because the Jews misinterpreted the OT prophets also.

To show the inconsistency of the King James Bible, at Matthew 26:28 (as well as at Mark 14:24) when Jesus was instituting the Lord's Evening meal and its "new covenant", it reads there: "For this is my blood of new testament (Greek diatheke), which is shed for many for the remission of sins".

Yet at Jeremiah 31:31, from which this is taken, the King James Bible reads: "Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:" Thus, the King James Bible properly renders the Hebrew berith as "covenant" here but inaccurately renders its counterpart Greek word diatheke as "testament".

Your argument is really quite meaningless, because the idea of the word 'testament' (Greek diatheke) involves a testator, which is a term in the law for one who has written and executed a last will. That's exactly what Jesus did with offering the Lord's Supper. In Hebrews 8, from Jeremiah 31, it's about God making the New Covenant with those who have agreed, i.e., the idea of two parties agreeing to a contract (covenant). So the KJV translators were correct in how they interpreted and translated it.

The Greek Septuagint consistently rendered the Hebrew word berith, that means "covenant or agreement" and never as "will or testament", by the Greek word diatheke, while the King James Bible has not, producing confusion or outright distortion.

Your argument is baseless, as I showed above.

At Acts 3:25 (and Heb 8:6 , 9:4 and 10:29), the King James Bible renders diatheke accurately as "covenant" instead of "testament" that is referencing the Mosaic Law covenant, but at 2 Corinthians 3:6 (and Heb 7:22, 9:20 and Rev 11:19), it goes back to its habit of rendering diatheke as "testament" (as at 2 Cor 3:14) instead of accurately as "new covenant", which points back to Jeremiah 31:33 and in which the King James Bible accurately uses the word "covenant" (Heb berith) and not "testament".

How would a person like someone who flip-flops, one day this way and the next day that way, never consistent, being unstable ? Would you trust that person ? The Bible book of Proverbs gives some insight into this: "Like someone who cripples his own feet and harms himself is the one who entrusts matter to someone stupid".(Prov 26:6)

A person should want a Bible that is accurate, that properly renders Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek words as precise as can be into a designated language, and not one that consistently displays inaccuracies. How would a person like a map that is full of the imprecise information, causing them to constantly get lost ?

Good luck if you think you can find any... English translation that is 100% accurate with no translation errors. The word Easter is not really in Acts 12:4 though the translators added it, so will you get all upset about that too and say the KJV should be thrown away because of that? The 1611 KJV Bible is still... the BEST English translation to date!

 

[verzanumi24]

The religious Christian Church is (and has been since the RCC came into existence) teaching a blended, harmonized gospel that takes what Jesus and His Apostles preached to the Jews which included the Law and what Paul preached for the grace Church that excluded the Law and mixes them together. These teachings were never meant to be blended, harmonized together. When you do it you destroy both messages. The scriptures teach we are to “rightly divide the word of truth,” not blend it together.

Galatians 2:3-5
3 Yet not even Titus who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised.
4 And this occurred because of false brethren secretly brought in (who came in by stealth to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage),
5 to whom we did not yield submission even for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.
NKJV note: “bring us into bondage.”


Let me make it clear that all the scriptures are written FOR US, but not all are written TO US. --- Jesus’ message was to the Jews and under the law, not under grace. Paul’s message was to the grace Church.

I get depressed when I hear the blended gospel being taught. It is a gospel fostered by the devil. I have opposed it on forums for years and have been asked to leave because of my objections to it. Let me make it clear that Jesus Christ did not come to minister to the Gentiles, nor was His message "the kingdom gospel" sent to the Gentiles. He did not offer the "kingdom of heaven" to the Gentiles because the Gentiles were never promised a kingdom on this earth. The following scriptures support my view.

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."

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 that was written of Him in the O.T. His mission was to the Jews, not to the Gentiles. This is what Paul meant in Rom 15:8.

HOWEVER; 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 not revealed until it was revealed to Paul on the road to Damascus by Jesus. The grace gospel was not in existence until Paul taught it. See Eph. 3:9 and Col. 1:26.

The Parable of the Wedding Feast; (Matt. 22: 1-10)

1 And Jesus answered and spoke to them again by parables and said:
2 "The kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who arranged a marriage for his son,
3 and sent out his servants to call those who were invited to the wedding; and they were not willing to come.
4 Again, he sent out other servants, saying, 'Tell those who are invited, "See, I have prepared my dinner; my oxen and fatted cattle are killed, and all things are ready. Come to the wedding."'
5 But they made light of it and went their ways, one to his own farm, another to his business.
6 And the rest seized his servants, treated them spitefully, and killed them.
7 But when the king heard about it, he was furious. And he sent out his armies, destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.
8 Then he said to his servants, 'The wedding is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy.
9 Therefore go into the highways, and as many as you find, invite to the wedding.'
10 So those servants went out into the highways and gathered together all whom they found, both bad and good. And the wedding hall was filled with guests.
NKJV

We, today, are only invited because the Jews rejected Jesus as their king. God will not let what His Son did on the cross go without results.

This is what I believe.

I have a question for you in light of what you wrote, and it is this, what is the gospel? What does the scriptures in the New Testament say is the gospel Jesus preached or Paul as another example preached?

 

[Grams]

THIS IS FROM OUR CHURCH!
Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth

'Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the world of truth."(2 Tim. 2.15)

· Have you ever wondered why today's Christians can eat pork even though in the Old Testament men were forbidden to do so?

· Or, do you know people (or, perhaps yourself) who shun Christianity because Christians can't seem to agree on anything?

· And what about all those contractions in the Bible?



These are all valid concerns, but when a person begins to "rightly divide" the word of truth, as admonished by Paul to Timothy, these seeming difficulties and disputations are resolved. To "rightly divide" means that God has dealt with mankind at different times with different expectations from him. Although it is profitable for us to read the entire Bible (2Tim.3:16), it is imperative that we understand which part of the Bible is intended primarily for us in this time of Grace. The following excerpt from the book "Things That Differ" by C.R. Stam explains:

"If I should step inside a modern United States Post Office all would doubtless seem very confusing to me. But it would be a mistake to suggest piling all the mail neatly into one corner and handing it out promiscuously to all comers as some would do with the Bible. The postal employees must rightly divide the mail so that each person receives what is addressed to him. What seems like confusion to the novice is really a simplification of the work to be done in getting each person's private mail
to him.

It is granted that in the Bible even that which was addressed to those of other dispensations is given to us for our learning and profit, but we must not confuse this with our own private mail or make the mistake of carrying out instructions meant particularly for others.

While I am reading mail addressed personally to me, a friend may hand me, for my interest or information, mail addressed to him. His mail and mine may all prove informative and profitable, but I must still be careful not to confuse the two, expecting to receive things promised to him or carrying out instructions addressed to him.

Thus, all the Bible is for us, but it is not all addressed to us or written about us, and if we would really understand and enjoy it; if we would really know how to use it effectively in service for Christ, we must be careful always to note who is addressing whom, about what and when and why" (p.20).



In every dispensation, righteousness before God has always been achieved by believing what God has said and acting upon it. For example, the law required every male child to be circumcised, but that is not God's requirement today.

The LAW says: And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant. Gen. 17:14.

But GRACE says: And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power: In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands...Col. 2:10,11.



There were also many dietary laws, and one in particular many people remember is the prohibition not to eat pork. But under the dispensation of Grace, we are not under those prohibitions.

The LAW says: And the swine, because it divideth the hoof, yet cheweth not the cud, it is unclean unto you: Ye shall not eat of their flesh, nor touch their dead carcass. Deut. 14:8

But GRACE says: For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving: For it is sanctified by the word of God and prayer. 1Tim: 4:4



And the Sabbath day. In our day of grace, one day is like unto another. All are to be lived to the glory of God.

The Law says: Remember the sabbath day to keep it holy. But the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy God...Ex. 20:8,10.

But GRACE says: Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days... Col.2:16,17


And because of the finished work of Jesus Christ at the Cross, we are no longer under any provision of the law for the forgiveness of sin.

The Law says: And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors. (Matt. 6:12) For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. Matt. 6:14,15.

But GRACE says: And ye be kind one to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ’s sake hath forgiven you. Eph. 4.32.


The ultimate example of the difference between law and grace is the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the Cross. The law required annual blood sacrifices for the forgiveness of sins, which we now understand were but a foreshadow of the ultimate sacrifice Christ Jesus would make for the complete payment for all of our sins.

The Law says: The blood of bulls and goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifiethto the purifying of the flesh. Heb. 9:13

But GRACE says: Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. Heb. 9:12


For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. (Romans 10:4)

For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. (Eph. 2:8,9)


Where the dispensation of the law was entrusted to Moses (John 1:17), the dispensation of the grace of God was entrusted to Paul. Why is understanding this so important? Because it is by this message of grace, dispensed by Paul, that God will judge us. Remember, righteousness comes by believing what God says (i.e., what God is saying to us in this age of Grace) and acting on it. That is what faith is: believing God; trusting Him and His Word. Paul says in Romans 2:16:

In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to MY Gospel.


Paul tells us that he was appointed by God to be the Apostle to the Gentiles, "For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the Apostle of the Gentiles,..." (Ro. 11:13) and that his message was revealed to him directly by Jesus Christ:

But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached to of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by revelation of Jesus Christ. (Gal.1:11,12)


How then does Paul's gospel differ? Pastor Thomas Brusha, in his booklet "Dictionary of the Gospel" gives a clear explanation:

God promised in the Old Testament to set up a Kingdom here on earth through the nation Israel, in which Christ would reign as King! Christ was here; and the good news proclaimed was that the Kingdom was at hand. In Matthew 10:7 we find this to be the same gospel the Twelve Apostles were sent to preach. Also, in Matthew 10:5,6 we learn that this gospel was good news for the Nation of Israel. It is amazing, yet true, that after the Twelve Apostles had been preaching this gospel now, for some time, they still did not know about Christ's purpose to go to the Cross and die for their sins. We know this is true because when Christ began later to tell his Apostles that he was going to Jerusalem to die, they didn't believe him, nor did they understand what he was talking about. The reason being, they were preaching the good news about the Kingdom. They expected Christ to establish Israel's Kingdom and to take the throne as their King - see Matthew 16:21,22; Luke 18:31-34: and Luke 19:11.


How then, could the twelve Apostles have preached the same gospel the Apostle Paul later preached, when they did not know or understand anything about the Cross at that time? Paul preached :

"THE CROSS" and "CHRIST CRUCIFIED (1 Corinthians 1:18,23)

The point is this. The gospel that the Twelve Apostles preached during the earthly ministry of Christ is not the same gospel the Apostle Paul was sent to preach later. According to 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 the gospel Paul preached was the GOOD NEWS of the DEATH, BURIAL, and RESURRECTION of Christ FOR OUR SINS.

Paul tells us in Galatians 1:11,12 where his gospel originated. It was after the resurrection and ascension that the Lord Jesus Christ revealed to the Apostle Paul all that was accomplished on the Cross. In acts 20:24 Paul calls this message "THE GOSPEL OF THE GRACE OF GOD." In Galatians 2:1,2 we see that this gospel is intended for the Gentiles as well as the Jews; and in Galatians 2:6-10 we find that the Twelve Apostles learned of this gospel from Paul.

In this present age of "GRACE", God has set Israel as a nation aside, and the Kingdom promised to them has been postponed until a future time. Therefore the "GOSPEL OF THE KINGDOM" is NOT God's message of good news for today, but rather the good news of how the Cross saves Sinners of all nationalities. This is God's message for today! (pp6-8).


The following books are recommended:

"Dictionary of the Gospel" by Thomas Bruscha
"Things That Differ" by C. R. Stam
"The Dispensations" by Hazel I. Brown

 

[H. Richard]

I have a question for you in light of what you wrote, and it is this, what is the gospel? What does the scriptures in the New Testament say is the gospel Jesus preached or Paul as another example preached?

***

When Jesus came the first time it was to offer the promised kingdom on this earth. It could not be setup if the Jews rejected it, which they did. The 12 were to try and get the Jews to accept Jesus as their Messiah and King. Nothing is preached about grace. Since the Jews never accepted Jesus God did not go out and try to get the Gentiles to go under the Jewish religion with it's laws.

The Gospel under grace is not a gospel under law. It is a gospel set up by God to save all who will place their faith in HIS work on the cross. You can't mix grace with law. The Gospel under grace is that Jesus paid for our sins on the cross. Only those that place their faith in His work on the cross will be saved. Placing faith in a religion is not the same as placing it in the work of God on the cross.

You have asked what the gospel is and I have just told you. It is faith in Jesus' work on the cross where He paid for all your sins.

Rom 4:3-4 NKJV
3 For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness."
4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.

Rom 5:6 NKJV
6 For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.

 

[Davy]

THIS IS FROM OUR CHURCH!
Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth

'Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the world of truth."(2 Tim. 2.15)

· Have you ever wondered why today's Christians can eat pork even though in the Old Testament men were forbidden to do so?

· Or, do you know people (or, perhaps yourself) who shun Christianity because Christians can't seem to agree on anything?

· And what about all those contractions in the Bible?



These are all valid concerns, but when a person begins to "rightly divide" the word of truth, as admonished by Paul to Timothy, these seeming difficulties and disputations are resolved. To "rightly divide" means that God has dealt with mankind at different times with different expectations from him. Although it is profitable for us to read the entire Bible (2Tim.3:16), it is imperative that we understand which part of the Bible is intended primarily for us in this time of Grace. The following excerpt from the book "Things That Differ" by C.R. Stam explains:
....

Just more junk by the Ultra-Dispensationalist crowd. C.R. Stam was one of their primary movers of the Paul only dual gospel Dispensationalism theories.

There is only ONE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST, and it is for BOTH believing Israelite and believing Gentile, as one body in Christ Jesus. THAT... is what Apostle Paul taught, which makes those Ultra-Dispensatiionalists LIARS because they are actually teaching AGAINST what Apostle Paul taught:

Rom 3:22-23
22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
KJV

Rom 10:11-13
11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on Him shall not be ashamed.
12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon Him.
13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
KJV

Gal 3:28
28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
KJV

 

[verzanumi24]

***

When Jesus came the first time it was to offer the promised kingdom on this earth. It could not be setup if the Jews rejected it, which they did. The 12 were to try and get the Jews to accept Jesus as their Messiah and King. Nothing is preached about grace. Since the Jews never accepted Jesus God did not go out and try to get the Gentiles to go under the Jewish religion with it's laws.

The Gospel under grace is not a gospel under law. It is a gospel set up by God to save all who will place their faith in HIS work on the cross. You can't mix grace with law. The Gospel under grace is that Jesus paid for our sins on the cross. Only those that place their faith in His work on the cross will be saved. Placing faith in a religion is not the same as placing it in the work of God on the cross.

You have asked what the gospel is and I have just told you. It is faith in Jesus' work on the cross where He paid for all your sins.

Rom 4:3-4 NKJV
3 For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness."
4 Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt.

Rom 5:6 NKJV
6 For when we were still without strength, in due time Christ died for the ungodly.

Nope. That's not the gospel Jesus preached. There's no scripture in that say the gospel of grace. Jesus never preached it and neither did Paul.


The Bible say that Jesus went about preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God

Luke 4:43 (KJV)
43 And he said unto them, I must preach the kingdom of God to other cities also: for therefore am I sent.

Matthew 4:23 (ASV)
23 And Jesus went about in all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of disease and all manner of sickness among the people.

Matthew 9:35 (KJV)
35 And Jesus went about all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every sickness and every disease among the people.

Mark 1:14 (KJV)
14 Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,

Jesus commanded His disciples to preach the kingdom of God

Luke 9:60 (CSBBible)
60 But he told him, "Let the dead bury their own dead, but you go and spread the news of the kingdom of God."

Jesus said the end will come when the gospel of the kingdom is preached to all Nations

Matthew 24:14 (ASV)
14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world for a testimony unto all the nations; and then shall the end come.


Paul also said he preached the gospel of the kingdom of God

Acts 20:25 (ASV)
25 And now, behold, I know that ye all, among whom I went about preaching the kingdom, shall see my face no more.

Acts 28:30-31 (ASV)
30 And he abode two whole years in his own hired dwelling, and received all that went in unto him,
31 preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching the things concerning the Lord Jesus Christ with all boldness, none forbidding him.

Paul even said, even if they or an angel preached a different gospel let him be a curse, meaning, let that person be put out

Galatians 1:8 (KJV)
8 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.

Jesus said, when the gospel of the kingdom is preached to all Nations then the end will come

Matthew 24:14 (KJV)
14 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.

Jesus prophesied that the that the kingdom of God will be taken away from the Jews who rejected Him but the gentiles will be more receptive of the gospel of the kingdom

Matthew 21:43 (KJV)
43 Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.

Paul and those with him preached to the gentiles the kingdom of God, because the Jews as a whole rejected the message

Acts 13:46 (ASV)
46 And Paul and Barnabas spake out boldly, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first be spoken to you. Seeing ye thrust it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.

Jesus Himself even told the Jews who rejected Him and the message said people from around the world will sit down in the kingdom, but they will not be in it

Matthew 8:11-12 (ASV)
11 And I say unto you, that many shall come from the east and the west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven:
12 but the sons of the kingdom shall be cast forth into the outer darkness: there shall be the weeping and the gnashing of teeth.

Daniel 7:18 (ASV)
18 But the saints of the Most High shall receive the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever.

So the idea that the kingdom of God was for only the Jews is false.

The scripture say God is no respecter of persons

Acts 10:34-35 (ASV)
34 And Peter opened his mouth and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
35 but in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is acceptable to him.

There are many many more scriptures that I could show you that kingdom of God was not just for the Jews, nor was Jesus trying to set up the kingdom of God among the Jews then and there.

 

[BreadOfLife]

They have teh RITE to be called roman catholics and you do not have teh RITE to tell them they are not. Grow up. liek a spoiled child.

As with all of your typo-laden rants - you missed the point completely.

"Roman" simply refers to one of TWENTY Rites.
When you refer to the entire Catholic Church as "Roman" Catholic you are broadcasting to everybody just how ignorant you are . . .

 

[H. Richard]

Grow up people. This thread is not about what to cal a Catholic. In case you are brain dead it is about blending the gospel of grace in with the gospel of the kingdom. It seems that most just want to ignore that fact.

 

[bbyrd009]

not sure how they got separated to begin with, HR, what is the argument for that? ty