[quoting >>” nothing]

Hello again Pastor Roger:

Thank you again for writing.

Pastor Roger >>  You were right when you said the word "reveal" . . .

If you are going to continue “quoting >>” nothing from the Opening Post, then we have nothing to Debate.  My ‘two gospels’ hypothesis and Scriptural support remains standing in the Opening Post of this thread for any registered member to simply “quote >>” and refute using Scripture.  OR you can build your own ‘one gospel’ case using similar methods to prop up your own ‘one gospel’ hypothesis, which I will in turn take apart line by line using Scripture.  The remainder of your post might apply to something, but nothing there applies to one thing presented in the OP of ‘this’ thread.  Do you see a 'one gospel' outline by anyone?  No?  Me neither.  GL in the Debate and thank you again for writing,

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

[revelation]

Hi Sower:

Thank you again for writing on the Gospels Debate Thread. 

Sower >>  We should also be aware that there is a false teaching known as Ultra- or Hyper-Dispensationalism which goes far beyond the legitimate bounds of the various dispensations, and seeks to dispense with water baptism for believers.

I have debated Scripture with every kind of Dispensationalist under the sun and none of them count Terral among them.  Do you see any quotes from any Dispensationalists in the OP of this thread?  No.  Everything in my ‘two gospels’ hypothesis is supported by Scripture.  If you wish to try and prove that something is taken out of context, then simply “quote that >>” and prove your case using Scripture.  Using these name calling tactics is a cheap trick for someone who has no ‘one gospel’ case.  Do you see errors in my Opening Post or are you here for something else?

Sower >>  Most damagingly, it seeks to put a wedge between "Paul's Gospel" and the Gospel preached by the other apostles (even though Scripture teaches that they were all in full agreement and total fellowship regarding Gospel truths).

This is your case to prove using Scripture and not by voicing your opinions.  Do you see any opinions in my two gospel outlines in the OP?  No.  Have you completed your own ‘one gospel’ outline, so the readers can begin to understand ‘your’ one gospel theory?  Paul was sent through a ‘revelation’ (Galatians 2:2) to submit the ‘gospel I preach among the Gentiles,’ which he received through a ‘revelation of Jesus Christ’ (Galatians 1:11-12).  If everyone preached the same ‘one gospel,’ then Paul had nothing to present.  Please check Galatians 2:2 again to see if Paul is indeed submitting his gospel to the same Peter and John (Galatians 2:9) who have been preaching the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ for decades prior to this meeting. 

Sower >>  Perhaps you are trying to introduce Ultra-Dispensationalism, Terral, but it is opposed to NT Bible truth. It is indeed "another gospel".

No sir.  Please look at the Opening Post again to see if any Ultra Dispy authors quoted.  Paul's Gospel is Gospel #2 of the OP, which includes salvation and justification by faith apart from works.  Perhaps your side of this Debate is lazy and not prepared to present your ‘one gospel’ case??  If you are right, then your outline will be very easy to complete and present in your next reply.  If everything is dead wrong in my OP, then your work of “quoting me >>” and showing errors will be easy also.  This side does not need to use any cheap tactics, because every word in the OP is ‘the truth.’ 

Thank you again for writing,

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

[if]

Hi DreamWeaver:

Thank you for writing on the Gospels Debate Thread.

Dream >>  I'm sorry I have to disagree with you Terral. There is only one Gospel, in the Bible. (snip; sending verses apart from solid commentary does not mean anything, as everyone ‘interprets’ those verses using their own preconceived notions).

There is nothing to be sorry about, if you can prove your ‘one gospel’ theory using Scripture.  I noticed that you failed to quote anything from the Opening Post to offer any kind of rebuttal testimony.  All of your quotes are from the Pauline Epistles, which describe Gospel #2 from the OP.  You failed to address anything that Christ Himself preached and the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matthew 4:23, etc.) from the Four Gospels.  Do you recognize the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ as a true gospel message preached in the New Testament OR is that part not included in your Bible?  Scripture says,

“Now after John had been taken into custody, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the GOSPEL OF GOD, and saying, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel."  Mark 1:14-15.

How do you define the “GOSPEL OF GOD” right here in Mark 1, which is three years before Christ died for anyone?  How are you going to prove using your Bible that Christ is ‘preaching’ salvation by God’s ‘grace’ through ‘faith’ in His Own ‘blood’ sacrifice, when that event takes place three years down the road?  Good Luck in the Debate.

Thank you again for writing,

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

Hi Sower:

Thank you for writing on the Gospels Debate Thread and for actually quoting something from the Opening Post.

Terral Original >>  7. Justified by ‘works and NOT by faith alone.’ James 2:20-24.

Sower’s Reply >>  Your inclusion of the above in order to put forward a theory of "two Gospels" shows that you have a fundamental misunderstanding about the Word of God, i.e. that it is meant to confuse instead of clarify and confirm the truth.

We disagree.  First of all there is no reason to ‘quote >>’ doctrinal component #7 from Gospel #1, if you intend on talking about something else.  Your statement above is your unsupported opinion, which belongs at the bottom of this post IF and WHEN you ever present a case for something else.  Everyone’s interpretation of Scripture is clearer to himself than to his debating ‘opponents,’ which you represent on this thread.  Please save ‘judgment’ for the third party readers and try to concentrate on proving your own ‘one gospel’ theory using Scripture.

Sower >>  What you are suggesting is that there was one Gospel for the Jews, and another for the Gentlies, which is totally false.

No sir.  That is your characterization of my position and your attempt to change my interpretation into something else.  Please “quote me >>” and prove something errant that I did say . . .

Sower >>  What does James really teach in James 2? James is asking every believer to examine his faith and to determine whether it is genuine, by the good works it produces. The key to understanding what James is teaching is not that salvation is based upon works but that "faith without works is dead".

We disagree.  James is teaching the ‘twelve tribes dispersed abroad’ (James 1:1) that the kingdom ‘bride’ (John 3:29) is justified by works and NOT by faith alone (James 2:24), just like your Bible says.  If you wish to make a case for the ‘twelve tribes’ being ‘Gentiles’ (Romans 11:13, Ephesians 3:1-3) of the Pauline Epistles, then please help yourself.  However, your supposition would have to bend or even break Scripture.

Sower >>  There can be only one Gospel, just as there can only be one Savior.

 

We disagree and your opinions counter nothing presented in the Opening Post.  Christ is preaching the ‘gospel of God’ (Mark 1:14) right from the beginning and He would not die for anyone for another three years.  Paul’s gospel had to remain hidden in God, or Satan would have found out and never crucified Christ (1Corinthians 2:6-8).  Your supposition is contrary to what is written in God’s Word.

Sower >>  This is not a matter for debate, but for belief. Therefore Paul lays it all out very plainly (Eph.4:4-6): (snip)

No sir.  You are quoting Paul’s words TO GENTILES (Eph. 3:1-3) about the gospel he received through a ‘revelation of Jesus Christ’ (Galatians 1:11-12) thirty years after Christ is preaching the ‘gospel of God’ (Mark 1:14-15 = Gospel of the Kingdom =  Matthew 4:23).  If you wish to try and prove that Christ is preaching Himself crucified for the forgiveness of sins in Mark 1, then this is your opportunity to do so using Scripture.  GL.

Thank you again for writing on the Gospels Debate Thread,

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

[gospel of the kingdom]

Hi Pastor Roger:

Thank you for writing on the Gospels Debate Thread. 

Pastor Roger >>  First of all what 2T said is true. The word Gospel means "good news" so what was the "good news" that was being preached by both Jesus and all of the Apostles? Jesus preached that the Kingdom of God was at hand. He also taught that this preaching of the Kingdom of God would continue until He returned again.

We disagree.  Christ said that this ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matthew 24:14) would be preached to those living at the ‘end of the age’ (Matthew 24:3+).  The topic of this ‘dispensation of God’s grace’ (Ephesians 3:2) given to Paul is outside the context of anything within Christ’s Olivet Discourse.  Christ gave instructions to the Twelve as if Paul would never be raised and ‘the mystery’ (Ephesians 3:3) would never be revealed to anyone.  The key here is that Paul’s ‘my gospel’ is indeed ‘according to the revelation of the mystery’ (Romans 16:25), which means the good news that our sins would be forgiven through Christ’s shed blood remained “hidden in God” (Ephesians 3:9).  If Paul’s Gospel became known to anyone in the Four Gospels, then Satan would have known also and never crucified the Lord of Glory (1Corinthians 2:6-8).  Therefore, Christ’s commands concerning the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ were given as though this current ‘dispensation’ would never be.

Pastor Roger >>  Jesus knew from the start that He would go to the cross and that He would raise again on the third day.

What Christ knew is beyond the scope of this thread on the two gospels of the New Testament.  Christ told the Twelve that He would die and be raised on the third day not once (Matthew 16:21) and not twice (Matthew 17:23), but three times in Matthew’s account alone (Matthew 20:19).  How many of Christ’s Elect were standing outside the tomb on the third day? ZERO.  How many believed when Mary found and told them?  ZERO.  Mark 16:10-11.  Let’s not confuse Christ’s prophesying about events with ‘good news’ messages being heralded for the ‘forgiveness of sins.’ 

Pastor Roger >>  He told them that the cross would change some things. Many did not understand what He was saying though until later as they did not have their understanding opened to this as of yet. (See Acts 15)

Many did not understand?  Please . . . Even the women showed up to the tomb bearing spices to anoint His body (Mark 16:1, Luke 24:1, etc.).  Why carry spices to anoint the living?  The very objects the women carried to care for Christ’s body symbolized their lack of faith.  NONE of Christ’s followers in the Four Gospels understood that we would be ‘saved’ by God’s ‘grace’ through ‘faith’ in the ‘blood’ sacrifice of Jesus Christ.  Can you find just one person saved by Paul’s Gospel (1Corinthians 15:1-4) anywhere in the Four Gospels?  No you cannot.  And yet, Christ Himself is preaching the ‘gospel of God’ in Mark 1:14-15, which tells you that the “gospel of the kingdom” (Matthew 4:23, etc.) is most certainly something else . . .

Pastor Roger >>  Yes Paul did mention several times "my Gospel". What was Paul's Gospel? It was the Gospel of Jesus Christ just as Paul had also said numerous times.

This is no reply to my ‘two gospel’ hypothesis of the Opening Post.  Paul’s gospel has Christ’s shed blood for forgiveness (Ephesians 1:7), which was preached for the salvation of NOBODY in the Four Gospels.  If you wish to try and prove that Christ is preaching Himself crucified (1Corinthians 2:2) in Mark 1:14-15, then please help yourself . . .

Pastor Roger >>  What Jesus and Paul taught was not a "different" Gospel but a different stage of the Gospel.

Any gospel message is taught using doctrinal precepts like you see in the Opening Post of this thread.  You must realize that gospel messages with ‘directly opposing’ doctrinal precepts cannot possibly be the ‘same thing.’  If my two gospel outlines in the OP are indeed wrong, then you will have very little difficulty in “quoting me >>” and showing the errors using Scripture.  Your ‘different stage’ interpretation has some basis in Biblical fact, but only for the ‘gospel of the kingdom.’  John the Baptist could not preach the laying of hands for the Holy Spirit three to four years before Acts 2 and nobody knew to baptize in the name of Jesus Christ.  Those two precepts were added for Peter’s preaching on the Day of Pentecost, which marks a transition in the ‘gospel of the kingdom.’  However, do we see Peter preaching Christ’s shed blood for forgiveness in Acts 2:38?  No.  Peter is still preaching the same repentance and water baptism for the forgiveness of sins, just like John the Baptist (Acts 1:5) from day one (Mark 1:4-5).  Paul would not go up and submit the ‘gospel I preach among the Gentiles’ (Galatians 2:2) for another twenty years (Acts 15 /  Galatians 2) and ‘in fear of failure.’ 

Pastor Roger >>  Jesus was teaching of things that have come and will be coming in the fullfillment of the cross. Paul taught of the things that had already come, the fullfillment of the cross and of yet more things to come. This is the same Gospel that was foretold of in the Old Testament.

No sir.  Paul’s gospel is according to the revelation of the Mystery.  Romans 16:25.  Perhaps you are unaware that anything connected to the ‘musterion’ (#3466) remained hidden in God to be revealed ONLY through the Apostle Paul through his Epistles.  How many times do Hebrews, Peter, John and James use this term (mystery) in all their combined letters bearing their names?  ZERO.  Common Biblical sense should tell you that anything connected to “the mystery” (Ephesians 3:3) remained “hidden in God” (Ephesians 3:9).  How can the OT Prophets write about things God Himself concealed from everyone?  What you are saying is quite impossible . . .

Pastor Roger  >>  According to your assessment of the verses displayed, there is not just two Gopels but many, for there are many verses that say "Gospel of the Kingdom", "Gospel of God", "Gospel of Jesus", "my Gospel". When in reality each of these are all one and the same Gospel.

No sir.  That is your characterization of my position, which is meaningless to this discussion.  My two gospels hypothesis is clearly presented in the OP and you are encouraged to “quote me >>” and show any errors you can find using Scripture.

Pastor Roger  >>  The difference here is that of before the cross and after the cross, not a different Gospel but of a fullfilling of it.

Anything connected to ‘the mystery’ is ‘revealed.’  Anything connected to ‘prophecy’ is 'fulfilled,' but your theology is not making the distinction. 

Pastor Roger >>  People take sections of the Bible and formulate their own doctrines on separate portions (single verses) instead of taking the teachings as a whole.

Again, your characterizations of what people do are irrelevant to this discussion.  This side is quoting your every word and providing Scripture where applicable to the Debate.  Please do the same for me. 

Pastor Roger >>  That is what you are doing in separating this into "different Gospels".

No sir.  My two gospels hypothesis is presented in the OP using a minimum of doctrinal components, but each is supported by Scripture.  Nobody could preach forgiveness through Christ’s shed blood (Ephesians 1:7) in Mark 1, but we clearly see the ‘gospel of God’ plain as day.  Please present your ‘one gospel’ doctrinal outline and perhaps we will have something to debate.

Pastor >>  This is the sort of thing that causes more confusion amongst the unlearned and creates so many different doctrines, the lack of understanding the Gospel and the difference of before and after the cross.

Please . . .  The two gospel messages of the New Testament are clearly outlined in the OP of this thread.  Your position that there is ‘one gospel’ creates the confusion, because now you are forced to prove that Christ is preaching Himself crucified in Mark 1:14-15.  Good Luck . . . My position is that Christ is preaching the “gospel of the kingdom” (Matthew 4:23, etc.), just like your Bible says.  How are sins forgiven through your one gospel? Are your believers under Mosaic Law or not?  How are they justified?  All of those questions have answers in the OP of this thread, but the readers are no more aware of the doctrinal content of your 'one gospel' than when you first started writing.  Please help clear up the confusion surrounding your own theories, because mine are presented clear as day.

Pastor >>  Even the Apostles had a difficult time understanding this at first. (again Read Acts 15) (snip; quoting Scripture apart from your commentary is to confuse activity with accomplishment)

If you have something to teach from Acts 15, then present that in your next reply.  Peter had difficulty understanding this ‘wisdom given him’ (2Peter 3:14-16) to the very end, which is why Paul had to correct him concerning the “truth of the gospel” (Galatians 2:14) in the first place.  If your ‘one gospel’ theory is correct, then what did Paul submit to him at that meeting?  Galatians 2:2???  Please head back up to the OP and “quote >>” anything errant and provide us with your thoughtful reply.  Otherwise every word there shall continue to stand now and forever.

Thank you again for writing,

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

[quote me >>]

Hi Joshua:

Thank you for writing on the Gospels Debate Thread.

Joshua >>  just for the sake of argument, do not "both gospels" imply two messages. If I remember correctly they are but one in the same message.

Our opinions over potential implications are irrelevant to this Debate.  Please “quote me >>” from the Opening Post (OP) and offer rebuttal testimony using Scripture, OR present a similar doctrinal outline teaching your ‘one gospel’ theory.   

Joshua >>  The word for Gospel of course as you know is known as the good news. However different words were used concerning the usage and the way that these words were given in the local congregation and everywhere during ancient palestine.

Please note that each doctrinal component for the ‘two gospels’ of the OP contain directly opposing precepts.  Sins are forgiven for the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Gospel #1) by repentance, confession and water baptism, but we have Christ’s shed blood for our forgiveness today through Paul’s “my gospel” (Gospel #2).  Those saved through Paul’s Gospel are justified by faith apart from works (Gospel #2, precept #7), but kingdom disciples are justified by works and not by faith alone (Gospel #1, precept #7).  The simple fact that these two sets of doctrinal precepts even exist is evidence that the ‘two gospel’ hypothesis is correct.  You see Christ preaching the “gospel of God” (Mark 1:14) straight out of the gate to BEGIN the Four Gospels and He would not die for anyone for another three years.  If you wish to try and prove that He preached Himself crucified (1Corinthians 2:2) in Mark 1 using Scripture, then please be my guest.

Joshua >>  What we need to remember is that God is the Author and the Finisher of our Salvation. Any "news" about Him is good news. Hence, I will conjecture to state that there is but only ONE Gospel.

Jumping up and down to say there is “One Gospel!” a thousand times does prove your ‘one gospel’ theory.  Sins are being forgiven in Mark 1:4-5 by WATER BAPTISM and Christ has died for NOBODY.  Do the math . . .  Paul’s ‘my gospel’ (Romans 2:16, 16:25, etc.) is called the “gospel to the UNCIRCUMCISED” (Galatians 2:7).  If you wish to prove that Christ is preaching that to Israel ONLY (Matthew 15:24) in the Four Gospels, then please take this opportunity to make your case using Scripture.  GL.

Joshua >>  Does Paul not warn us against vain deceit and another gospel?

Yes.  However, Paul is concerned about “some of our number” (Acts 15:24) adding circumcision to Gospel #2 of the OP, which has nothing to do with the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matthew 4:23, etc.) that Israel rejected.  Can you prove that the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ preached by Christ Himself in the Four Gospels is Paul’s “word of the cross” (1Corinthians 1:18) gospel message using your Bible?  How can Israel accept Jesus Christ as the King of Kings and Lord of Lords AND crucify Him for their own salvation at the same time?  Your supposition is that Christ preached “Crucify Me for your salvation!”  Again, if you wish to try and prove that using Scripture, then please do so at your earliest convenience. 

Joshua >>  True there was news about the Kingdom, however, we must keep in mind that the Kingdom has not been completely ushered in at this moment in time.

No sir.  Scriptures says that the time was FULL and that Christ was preaching the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ (Matthew 4:23) from the beginning, saying,

“Now after John had been taken into custody, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of God, and saying, "The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel."  Mark 1:14-15.

Israel was to repent and believe the good news that the Kingdom of God was indeed ‘at hand,’ just like your Bible says.  John the Baptist referred to those saved through obedience to the ‘gospel of the kingdom,’ as the kingdom ‘bride’ (John 3:29) of the Bridegroom.  Can you find one person ‘saved’ by God’s ‘grace’ through ‘faith’ in the ‘blood’ sacrifice of Jesus Christ anywhere in the Four Gospels?  I challenge you and everyone here to find just one.  GL, because that is quite impossible.  Even Christ’s Elect did not believe the woman when Christ sent her to testify that “He has risen!”  Mark 16:10-11.  Christ’s disciples did not even believe God raised His Son from the dead, when two of their brethren also testified to the same thing.  Mark 16:12-13.  How are you going to prove that one person was saved by Paul’s ‘my gospel’ in the Four Gospels, when Peter and the Twelve did not believe it themselves?  The essence of Paul’s gospel is that Christ died for our sins and that God raised Him from the dead on the third day (1Corinthians 15:3-4).  Your job is to prove that ‘good news’ = the “gospel of the kingdom” (Matthew 4:23, 9:35, 24:14, Acts 8:12).  GL.

Joshua >>  What we must realize is that GOD Himself is the gospel.

Wooo horsy.  Your own definition of the term ‘euaggelion’ (#2098) just changed from ‘good news’ to “God Himself.”  Good Luck proving that using Scripture also. 

Joshua >>  I encourage you to check out a book by John Piper called "God is the Gospel" In it you will find that Piper explains in great detail what exactly the Gospel is.

No sir.  I encourage you to crack open your Bible and present your ‘one gospel’ doctrinal outline, or start another thread using your “John Piper” information.  The only gospel with power today is Gospel #2 from the OP, as nobody has been saved through obedience to the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ for almost 2000 years.  What Mr. Piper thinks about this topic is irrelevant. 

Joshua >>  I wish I could continue to elaborate, but I must head to church then i'm back off to North Greenville University  God Bless

Elaborate?  Your post is high on opinion and lacks even one verse of Scriptural support for anything.  Please try again when you have time to prove your ‘one gospel’ theory.

Thank you again for writing,

In Christ Jesus through obedience to Gospel #2 of the OP,

Terral

[bride]

Greetings:

This thread is dedicated to Debate over the differences between the ‘gospel of the kingdom’ and Paul’s ‘word of the cross’ gospel messages.

My hypothesis is that God gathered members to the prophetic kingdom ‘bride’ (John 3:29) through the first gospel described below and members to the mystery ‘body of Christ’ (Ephesians 4:12) through Paul’s Gospel #2. My conclusion is that men have been mixing the doctrinal components of these two messages together in order to create many false gospels that God sent to NOBODY.

-----------------
No one has been saved by this gospel message for almost 2000 years. Our gospel for today is #2 below:
-----------------

#1. Gospel of the Kingdom (Matthew 4:23 , 9:35, 24:14, Acts 8:12). Gospel to the Circumcised. Gal. 2:7.

1. The good news that the ‘kingdom of heaven’ is ‘at hand’ (Matthew 3:2, 4:17, 10:7). i.e., ‘preaching the kingdom.’ Acts 20:25.
2. According to Prophecy; seen by the OT Prophets. Isaiah 40:3, Malachi 3:1.
3. Repentance with the confession of sins. Mark 1:4
4. Water baptism (during confession) for the ‘forgiveness of sins.’ Mark 1:4, Acts 2:38. (John’s Baptism; Acts 19:3; name of the Father; John 1:6, 33, Matthew 28:19.)
5. Baptism in the ‘name of the Lord Jesus’ (Acts 8:16, 19:5), ‘name of the Son’ (Matthew 28:19).
6. Receive the Spirit through the baptism in the ‘name of the Holy Spirit’ (Matthew 28:19) through the laying of hands (Acts 8:17, Acts 19:6).
7. Justified by ‘works and NOT by faith alone.’ James 2:20-24.
8. Kingdom disciples are under Mosaic Law (Matthew 5:18, James 2:10).

----------------
This is our “word of the cross” (1Corinthians 1:18) gospel for today, apart from borrowing any works from Gospel #1 above.  Paul's Gospel is veiled to those who are perishing.  2Corinthians 4:3-4.
----------------

#2. Paul’s “my gospel” (Romans 2:16, 16:25, etc.). Gospel to the Uncircumcised. Galatians 2:7.

1. The gospel of the grace of God. Acts 20:24. (Christ and Him crucified; 1Corinthians 2:2)
2. According to the revelation of the Mystery (Ephesians 6:19); NOT seen by the OT prophets ( Romans 16:25); according to the 'wisdom given him' (2Peter 3:14-16).
3. Saved by God’s grace through faith apart from works. Ephesians 2:8+9.
4. Sins forgiven through the redemption IN Christ (Romans 3:24) and His shed blood (Ephesians 1:7).
5. Our ‘one baptism’ (Ephesians 4:5) is done by the ‘one Spirit’ (Ephesians 4:4) into the ‘one body’ (1Corinthians 12:13), which is into “Christ’s body.” 1Corinthians 12:27.
6. We receive the Spirit when hearing (Romans 10:17) and believing (Ephesians 1:13+14) Paul’s Gospel by ‘hearing with faith.’ Galatians 3:2.
7. We are justified by faith apart from works. Romans 4:4-6.
8. We are under grace and not under law. Romans 6:14.
--------------

Do these ‘two gospel messages’ truly exist in our New Testament, or is there truly only ‘one gospel?’

GL in the Debate,

In Christ Jesus,

Terral