PETER AND PAUL AND THE NAME

[Doug]

Peter and Paul preached different messages on the name of Jesus:

Peter and the twelve preached whosoever believed in the name of Jesus was saved (John 1:12 John 3:16-18 John 20:31 Acts 10:43). There was no mention of reconciliation by the cross (Colossians 1:20), and in fact the understanding of the death and resurrection was hid from the twelve (Luke 18:34).

Paul preached salvation in the name of Jesus (1 Corinthians 1:2 1 Corinthians 6:11 Ephesians 5:20) and by the cross (1 Corinthians 1:18 Colossians 1:20 Galatians 6:14 Ephesians 2:16).

 

[justbyfaith]

Paul my indeed have been given the revelation about the efficacy of forgiveness through the Cross, in order that he might give it to the church. Which is not to say that Peter and the other apostles did not pick up on this sound doctrine in their own preaching later; while this may not have been recorded in the book of Acts.

 

[Philip James]

Peter and Paul preached different messages on the name of Jesus:

Peter and the twelve preached whosoever believed in the name of Jesus was saved (John 1:12 John 3:16-18 John 20:31 Acts 10:43). There was no mention of reconciliation by the cross (Colossians 1:20), and in fact the understanding of the death and resurrection was hid from the twelve (Luke 18:34).

Hello Doug,

This is demonstrably false:

1 Pet1: 18-19

realizing that you were ransomed from your futile conduct, handed on by your ancestors, not with perishable things like silver or gold

but with the precious blood of Christ as of a spotless unblemished lamb.

You too! Are welcome to come to the wedding feast of the Lamb of God!

Peace be with you!

 

[Enoch111]

Peter and Paul preached different messages on the name of Jesus:

Doug, you continue on in the same vein of trying to create two Gospels. Their messages were IDENTICAL although expressed differently. The unique personalities of the apostles must always be kept in view.

 

[quietthinker]

Peter and Paul preached different messages on the name of Jesus:

Peter and the twelve preached whosoever believed in the name of Jesus was saved (John 1:12 John 3:16-18 John 20:31 Acts 10:43). There was no mention of reconciliation by the cross (Colossians 1:20), and in fact the understanding of the death and resurrection was hid from the twelve (Luke 18:34).

Paul preached salvation in the name of Jesus (1 Corinthians 1:2 1 Corinthians 6:11 Ephesians 5:20) and by the cross (1 Corinthians 1:18 Colossians 1:20 Galatians 6:14 Ephesians 2:16).

You are in error Doug. This is nothing less than a divide and conquer strategy by the enemy. Those men who spent their time with Jesus where imbued with a spirit that does not contradict itself.

 

[justbyfaith]

I believe that @Doug is basically trying to set forth what is written in Galatians 2:7 where it appears to teach that there are two gospels: one, a gospel of the uncircumcision, given to Paul; and another, a gospel of the circumcision, given to Peter.

So, if you are going to combat what @Doug is saying, you are going to have to specifically deal with that verse.

Here it is in quotation:

Gal 2:7, But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

 

[quietthinker]

I believe that @Doug is basically trying to set forth what is written in Galatians 2:7 where it appears to teach that there are two gospels: one, a gospel of the uncircumcision, given to Paul; and another, a gospel of the circumcision, given to Peter.

So, if you are going to combat what @Doug is saying, you are going to have to specifically deal with that verse.

Here it is in quotation:

Gal 2:7, But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

Dividing Peter and Paul over this verse is making a mountain out of nothing. It is the exercise folk engage who do not understand. The time spent picking the scriptures apart over irrelevancies is only indicative of being on a religious trip; they not the words of a person inspired by God's Spirit.

 

[justbyfaith]

Even Paul wrote that Jesus was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God; Paul's ministry was to the uncircumcised.

A distinction can be made.

I would say that the gospel of the circumcision has to do with all of the requirements in the New Testament given as virtues to be exemplified and vices to be avoided; it defines the holiness of God in the believer and it is indeed a gospel; for it deals with the problem of sin and shows forth a remedy for it.

Whereas the gospel of the uncircumcision is primarily what Paul preached about forgiveness in Christ dying for our sins. In this gospel, the one who is forgiven much, loves much (Luke 7:36-50) and the motivation for holiness is in the fact that a man is freely forgiven through the Cross.

I believe that the Bible teaches that neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but a new creature, faith which worketh by love, and keeping the commandments of God.

Both the gospel of the uncircumcision and the gospel of the circumcision can therefore come together as being one gospel, if we rightly divide the word of truth.

 

[Doug]

Hello Doug,

This is demonstrably false:

1 Pet1: 18-19

realizing that you were ransomed from your futile conduct, handed on by your ancestors, not with perishable things like silver or gold

but with the precious blood of Christ as of a spotless unblemished lamb.

You too! Are welcome to come to the wedding feast of the Lamb of God!

Peace be with you!

Peter did indeed speak of the sacrifice of Christ. Jesus died for the sins of Israel under the old testament. It was not revealed til Paul that the cross was to justify all freely and form the body of Christ to reconcile the heavenly places.

 

[Doug]

You are in error Doug. This is nothing less than a divide and conquer strategy by the enemy. Those men who spent their time with Jesus where imbued with a spirit that does not contradict itself.

That by the cross all could be justified freely and that the body of Christ would reconcile the heavenly places was hid in God until revealed to Paul.

 

[Doug]

I believe that @Doug is basically trying to set forth what is written in Galatians 2:7 where it appears to teach that there are two gospels: one, a gospel of the uncircumcision, given to Paul; and another, a gospel of the circumcision, given to Peter.

So, if you are going to combat what @Doug is saying, you are going to have to specifically deal with that verse.

Here it is in quotation:

Gal 2:7, But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;

If Paul was preaching the same gospel, why would he have to communicate it to them as seen in Galatians 2:2
That there were two gospels should not be threatening, God was reconciling the earth through Israel, the heavenly places through the body of Christ.

 

[Philip James]

Peter did indeed speak of the sacrifice of Christ. Jesus died for the sins of Israel under the old testament.

Behold, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the whole world

It was not revealed til Paul that the cross was to justify all freely and form the body of Christ to reconcile the heavenly places.

The salvation of the whole world was spoken of by the prophets, recognized by John the Baptist (above), brought about by Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ, the Holy One of God...

And recognized by the Church here:

Acts 11:18

When they heard this, they stopped objecting and glorified God, saying, "God has then granted life-giving repentance to the Gentiles too."

If Paul was preaching the same gospel, why would he have to communicate it to them as seen in Galatians 2:2

To ensure that he was! Else he would have been 'running in vain'.

In seeking to separate Paul from the other apostles, you are doing the very opposite of what Paul is doing here..submitting himself to the Church.

Peace be with you!

 

[BreadOfLife]

Even Paul wrote that Jesus was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God; Paul's ministry was to the uncircumcised.

A distinction can be made.

I would say that the gospel of the circumcision has to do with all of the requirements in the New Testament given as virtues to be exemplified and vices to be avoided; it defines the holiness of God in the believer and it is indeed a gospel; for it deals with the problem of sin and shows forth a remedy for it.

Whereas the gospel of the uncircumcision is primarily what Paul preached about forgiveness in Christ dying for our sins. In this gospel, the one who is forgiven much, loves much (Luke 7:36-50) and the motivation for holiness is in the fact that a man is freely forgiven through the Cross.

I believe that the Bible teaches that neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but a new creature, faith which worketh by love, and keeping the commandments of God.

Both the gospel of the uncircumcision and the gospel of the circumcision can therefore come together as being one gospel, if we rightly divide the word of truth.

The Bible makes it clear that circumcision IS necessary. Not the removal of flesh fro the Body but a renewed heart and a new spirit.
This is what Paul refers to as “circumcision of the heart” and the “circumcision of Christ” (Romans 2:29, Col. 2:12-17) to describe the reality of true circumcision being a spiritually inward act, not merely an outward sign.

The Old Testament type that was circumcision is now Baptism.

 

[justbyfaith]

The Bible makes it clear that circumcision IS necessary. Not the removal of flesh fro the Body but a renewed heart and a new spirit.
This is what Paul refers to as “circumcision of the heart” and the “circumcision of Christ” (Romans 2:29, Col. 2:12-17) to describe the reality of true circumcision being a spiritually inward act, not merely an outward sign.

The Old Testament type that was circumcision is now Baptism.

You are confusing things here.

Circumcision in the Bible is a physical operation taking away the foreskin of the male organ.

1 Corinthians 7:19, Galatians 5:6, and Galatians 6:15 all speak of what I was talking about.

In Romans 4:11, circumcision is not required for a man to have righteousness imputed to him.

You can apply that physically or spiritually as you believe the Holy Spirit is teaching you.

 

[Illuminator]

The Bible makes it clear that circumcision IS necessary. Not the removal of flesh fro the Body but a renewed heart and a new spirit.
This is what Paul refers to as “circumcision of the heart” and the “circumcision of Christ” (Romans 2:29, Col. 2:12-17) to describe the reality of true circumcision being a spiritually inward act, not merely an outward sign.

The Old Testament type that was circumcision is now Baptism.

That's absolutely true. But Paul, even though he had a direct revelation from God, could not resolve the circumcision controversy by himself. He turned to the Jerusalem Council convened by Peter, James and John, with all the Apostles and elders. That is what some of us call "The Magisterium", or Teaching Authority.

 

[Enoch111]

I believe that @Doug is basically trying to set forth what is written in Galatians 2:7 where it appears to teach that there are two gospels: one, a gospel of the uncircumcision, given to Paul; and another, a gospel of the circumcision, given to Peter.

All that meant is that Peter was commissioned to go to the Jews, and Paul was commissioned to go to the Gentiles. But JUST ONE GOSPEL -- Christ, and Him crucified, buried, resurrected, and ascended to the right hand of the Father.

It should also be noted that in all his travels, Paul first went to each synagogue in every city and preached to the Jews. "To the Jew first, and then to the Gentile". So to a large extent, Paul's ministry was also to Jews.

 

[justbyfaith]

All that meant is that Peter was commissioned to go to the Jews, and Paul was commissioned to go to the Gentiles. But JUST ONE GOSPEL -- Christ, and Him crucified, buried, resurrected, and ascended to the right hand of the Father.

It should also be noted that in all his travels, Paul first went to each synagogue in every city and preached to the Jews. "To the Jew first, and then to the Gentile". So to a large extent, Paul's ministry was also to Jews.

Even Paul wrote that Jesus was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God; Paul's ministry was to the uncircumcised.

A distinction can be made.

I would say that the gospel of the circumcision has to do with all of the requirements in the New Testament given as virtues to be exemplified and vices to be avoided; it defines the holiness of God in the believer and it is indeed a gospel; for it deals with the problem of sin and shows forth a remedy for it.

Whereas the gospel of the uncircumcision is primarily what Paul preached about forgiveness in Christ dying for our sins. In this gospel, the one who is forgiven much, loves much (Luke 7:36-50) and the motivation for holiness is in the fact that a man is freely forgiven through the Cross.

I believe that the Bible teaches that neither circumcision nor uncircumcision avails anything, but a new creature, faith which worketh by love, and keeping the commandments of God.

Both the gospel of the uncircumcision and the gospel of the circumcision can therefore come together as being one gospel, if we rightly divide the word of truth.

 

[Enoch111]

"A distinction can be made."

So you wish to promote TWO GOSPELS? That contradicts Scripture.

The same Gospel can be presented differently by two different people, but it always remains the same. There is only ONE Gospel.

 

[Prayer Warrior]

This is the gospel that Peter preached at Pentecost under the unction of the Holy Spirit.

Acts 2:14-40.

But Peter stood up with the Eleven, raised his voice, and proclaimed to them: “Men of Judah and all you residents of Jerusalem, let me explain this to you and pay attention to my words. For these people are not drunk, as you suppose, since it’s only nine in the morning. On the contrary, this is what was spoken through the prophet Joel:

And it will be in the last days, says God,
that I will pour out My Spirit on all humanity;
then your sons and your daughters will prophesy,
your young men will see visions,
and your old men will dream dreams.
I will even pour out My Spirit
on My male and female slaves in those days,
and they will prophesy.
I will display wonders in the heaven above
and signs on the earth below:
blood and fire and a cloud of smoke.
The sun will be turned to darkness
and the moon to blood
before the great and remarkable Day of the Lord comes.
Then everyone who calls
on the name of the Lord will be saved.

“Men of Israel, listen to these words: This Jesus the Nazarene was a man pointed out to you by God with miracles, wonders, and signs that God did among you through Him, just as you yourselves know. Though He was delivered up according to God’s determined plan and foreknowledge, you used lawless people to nail Him to a cross and kill Him. God raised Him up, ending the pains of death, because it was not possible for Him to be held by it. For David says of Him:

I saw the Lord ever before me;
because He is at my right hand,
I will not be shaken.
Therefore my heart was glad,
and my tongue rejoiced.
Moreover, my flesh will rest in hope,
because You will not leave me in Hades
or allow Your Holy One to see decay.
You have revealed the paths of life to me;
You will fill me with gladness
in Your presence.

“Brothers, I can confidently speak to you about the patriarch David: He is both dead and buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. Since he was a prophet, he knew that God had sworn an oath to him to seat one of his descendants on his throne. Seeing this in advance, he spoke concerning the resurrection of the Messiah:

He was not left in Hades,
and His flesh did not experience decay.

“God has resurrected this Jesus. We are all witnesses of this. Therefore, since He has been exalted to the right hand of God and has received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit, He has poured out what you both see and hear. For it was not David who ascended into the heavens, but he himself says:

The Lord declared to my Lord,
‘Sit at My right hand
until I make Your enemies Your footstool.’

“Therefore let all the house of Israel know with certainty that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Messiah!”

When they heard this, they came under deep conviction and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles: “Brothers, what must we do?”
“Repent,” Peter said to them, “and be baptized, each of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is for you and for your children, and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God will call.” And with many other words he testified and strongly urged them, saying, “Be saved from this corrupt generation!”
.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You are confusing things here.

Circumcision in the Bible is a physical operation taking away the foreskin of the male organ.

1 Corinthians 7:19, Galatians 5:6, and Galatians 6:15 all speak of what I was talking about.

In Romans 4:11, circumcision is not required for a man to have righteousness imputed to him.

You can apply that physically or spiritually as you believe the Holy Spirit is teaching you.

Then you simply don’t understand what circumcision is - nor do you understand that there is only ONE Gospel preached by the Apostles – NOT two.

As Paul writes – TRUE circumcision is not a removal of the flesh – but a changed heart and a new spirit (Romans 2:29, Col. 2:12-17).

The circumcision of the flesh which sealed a man in the Covenant with God in the OT was fulfilled by the circumcision of the heart by Baptism which seals us in the New Covenant.