It wasn't a trap pls lol. Take note that i said, there were different gospels preached in sequence, to come to one Gospel which is the gospel of our salvation.
Hey heavenly_bound,
I sortof agree with your statement above but I think I would tweak it a little bit. Instead of saying that there were "different gospels.....to come to one Gospel"....I think we could say that there are different
focus points of the one Gospel....but only one Gospel.
i pointed out the different gospel messages bc many tend to use them all as one gospel for salvation.
It looks to me like there is one Gospel message....with different parts to it.
for instance you cannot use the gospel of the kingdom of God that the Lord Jesus preached during His earthly ministry, to introduce someone to Salvation.
First of all, the idea that the "gospel of the kingdom of God" is something different from what the Apostles taught is a theory.
Second, Jesus'
main message is that of
salvation. I showed that in some scriptures in an earlier post. So of course we can introduce someone to Salvation through the words that Jesus preached. I don't see why we couldn't.
Here's what Jesus said to Zacchaeus after he showed repentance (by repaying anyone he defrauded) and faith: "
And Jesus said unto him, This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham.For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost."
why? Bc for one to be saved, he must believed in his heart and confess with his mouth that God RAISED Jesus Christ from the death(Rom 10:9).
Agreed. But this isn't a
different Gospel, it is a different aspect of
the Gospel.
Therefore the gospel of the kingdom of God that Christ preached is not the gospel of our salvation bc He had not yet gone to the cross.
Ok. I think when we read about the Gospel in the bible there are about nine different ways of referring to it.
But they explain one of three ideas about the Gospel.
They explain either:
1. The origin or cause of the Gospel
2. The subject or content of the Gospel
3. The effects or consequences of the Gospel
Depending on what verses we actually look at (I think that there are about 100 verses that refer to the Gospel), the verses may be speaking of any of the three parts mentioned above.
Some passages, such as some of Jesus' words that speak of the "gospel of the kingdom", refer to the subject/content of the Gospel. And that subject is the King. To the Jews they would think "Ooh, Messiah" (or King). So some of what Jesus spoke of refers to that part of the Gospel. But it isn't a
different Gospel. It is just a focus on
that part of the Gospel message. And that focus is that He is the King.
In Romans 10:9 which you mentioned above, Paul is referring to both the subject/content AND to the effects/consequences of the Gospel. Basically, he is saying this is the effects/consequences of believing in the subject of the Gospel. In other words, this is what
happens if you believe the
content.
Those are not two different gospels. They are two aspects of
the same Gospel.
In fact Jesus Christ during His early ministry,was a minister of the circumcision (Rom 15:8), to confirm the promised of the messiah made to Israel.
Jesus didn't minister exclusively to the Jews. This passage is just saying that He primarily did so...but He didn't do that exclusively.
But that makes sense. The "good news" is that the King has come. The Anointed One of Israel. The Messiah. He could not have taken that to the Gentiles first or primarily or not one single Jewish person would have believed He was who He said He was. In that sense, He had to preach primarily to the Jews. Then, not only do the Jews have an opportunity to believe in Him...but later the Gentiles could as well.
Peace.
