Christ's Gospel? Paul's Gospel?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

JGIG

Senior Member
Aug 2, 2013
2,286
162
63
#1
.
Christ's Gospel? Paul's Gospel?






Are they different? Or are they complementary? Is Paul's Gospel 'his', or is it God's Gospel embraced by him? Are Paul's (and the other apostolic writings in the New Covenant Scriptures) what Jesus alluded to in John 16?

I was asked this question in an email recently:

"Another question, some at hrm [Hebrew Roots Movement/Torah pursuant folks] say there is the gospel of Jesus vs the gospel of Paul. Basically they teach that Paul wrote his own gospel even though Jesus clearly stated after his death burial and resurrection there would be more to come(information)."


My response:
That's a great question! In John 16, Jesus says this:

12 “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. 13 When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. 14 He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. 15 All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you.


Jesus is clearly telling His disciples that there is more truth to come that they, on that side of the Cross, could not, would not understand.

The Work of the Cross, the Resurrection, the Ascension, and His Perfect High Priesthood all needed to be in place before the fullness of the Gospel of Grace could be explained.

With the implications to the Law and Israel's relationship with it and God, when you think about it, it kinda had to be Paul to receive that revelation of the Gospel of Grace.

Paul was a Pharisee of the highest reputation, knowing the Law inside and out. For him to embrace the Gospel of Grace, which he proclaimed to be 'his' Gospel, was huge. To address that question real quick, Paul, by the end of his letter to the Romans states that it is 'his' Gospel, not in an 'I thought it up and created it' way, but in an 'I now embrace this as my Good News, applied to my life - the New Covenant, superior to the Old Covenant for which I had such passion' way.

Note that in Romans 1 Paul says this:

16 For I am not ashamed of >>> the <<< gospel, because it is the power of God that brings salvation to everyone who believes: first to the Jew, then to the Gentile. 17 For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed—a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.”


At the beginning of the letter to the Romans it is 'the' Gospel, and the letter to the Romans is a treatise on our

>>> need <<< for the Gospel for Jews and Gentiles alike, the

>>> supply <<< of the Gospel for Jews and Gentiles alike, and the

>>> results <<< of the Gospel for Jews and Gentiles alike.

And Paul expertly weaves the proper use of the Law and the application and superiority of Grace throughout - at the end proclaiming, as a former Pharisee Law-keeper, that this is *his* Gospel - a Gospel that he embraces himself, after having gone through the issues of Law and Grace point by point throughout the letter (and also in his other letters).

Now read Paul's closing comments in Romans 16:

25 Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery that was kept secret for long ages 26 but has now been disclosed and through the prophetic writings has been made known to all nations,

>>> according to the command of the eternal God, to bring about the obedience of faith— <<<

27 to the only wise God be glory forevermore through Jesus Christ! Amen.

So the Gospel that Paul preached was not a gospel apart from Christ's, but Paul's and other apostolic New Covenant writings were the fulfillment of what Christ said in John 16.

Paul minces no words here when establishing the source for what he was teaching to the Galatians:

11 For I would have you know, brothers, that the gospel that was preached by me is not man's gospel. 12 For I did not receive it from any man, nor was I taught it,

>>> but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ. <<<

13 For you have heard of my former life in Judaism, how I persecuted the church of God violently and tried to destroy it. 14 And I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my own age among my people, so extremely zealous was I for the traditions of my fathers. 15 But when he who had set me apart before I was born, and who called me by his grace, 16

>>> was pleased to reveal his Son to me, <<<

in order that I might preach him among the Gentiles, I did not immediately consult with anyone; 17 nor did I go up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I went away into Arabia, and returned again to Damascus.


One thing to note here, as well, is that Jesus said that the Spirit of Truth would point to and glorify Christ - not to point to and glorify the Law, but to Christ, which is what Paul and the other apostles do all throughout the New Covenant Scriptures.

God was no longer relating to mankind - nor was He desiring mankind to relate to Him - through the Law, but through the Work and Person of God in the flesh, Christ Jesus.

So Paul (and the others) were not writing their own 'gospels'; they were carrying out the fulfillment of Jesus' words in John 16 - they were receiving that further information that could be understood on the side of the Cross where they now lived and we do too - revealing what was actually accomplished at the Cross, the Resurrection, the Ascension, and with the High Priesthood of Christ - and writing it down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

(I found the photo at a pro-Islam think tank site, btw. Funny, they use the same arguments that HRMers tend to use!)

Grace and peace to you in our Lord, Jesus Christ!

-JGIG
 

Blain

Senior Member
Aug 28, 2012
14,627
459
83
#2
Pauls so called gospel was the gospel of Christ, Paul was a living testimony and witness of Christ, he was as you could say a vessel of God. All that paul said ans taught were not his own words but the holy spirit speaking through him. there is but one true gospel and that is the gospel of Jesus Christ
 

JGIG

Senior Member
Aug 2, 2013
2,286
162
63
#3
Pauls so called gospel was the gospel of Christ, Paul was a living testimony and witness of Christ, he was as you could say a vessel of God. All that paul said ans taught were not his own words but the holy spirit speaking through him. there is but one true gospel and that is the gospel of Jesus Christ
Understood, Blain, and I agree :).

The point of the post is to show that Paul does not contradict the Gospel of Christ, but by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, explains it:

12 “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. 13 When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth, for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come. 14 He will glorify me, for he will take what is mine and declare it to you. 15 All that the Father has is mine; therefore I said that he will take what is mine and declare it to you. (from John 16)


Paul, in particular, expertly goes back to the Law and the Prophets and shows how the New Covenant Realities fulfill the Old Covenant shadows.


-JGIG
 
Oct 31, 2011
8,200
179
0
#4
Pauls so called gospel was the gospel of Christ, Paul was a living testimony and witness of Christ, he was as you could say a vessel of God. All that paul said ans taught were not his own words but the holy spirit speaking through him. there is but one true gospel and that is the gospel of Jesus Christ
We know this is so, yet many verses in Paul's letters can be read as saying just the opposite.

The problem really is the translation of scripture. The original of scripture makes it clear that what Paul was against was the legalistic interpretation of the law. Even the word "law" itself is not very well done, the word Torah translated as law means to guide, to teach.

We should think of the people and circumstances of the world Paul was speaking to in order to find the eternal principles Paul gives for our living. The Jews had centuries of training in how to use the symbolic blood of Christ for salvation, they had to be trained to use the real blood of Christ for salvation. They used diet eliminating foods from animals who ate garbage to symbolize food for their minds that should be clean, now they could just use the Holy Spirit to guide to that. It affected every aspect of their lives. The gentiles had it just as tough. They had been taught that to accept the one true God they must become Jews and live the Hebrew lifestyle. Paul had to teach them Christ and Torah, but not through such as diet. Paul had to teach everyone not to use legalistic law but to use law in spirit and truth.

To this day, people are not understanding Paul. They say we are under grace not law, so don't listen to law. They say that teachings of the OT are obsolete, not that Christ made a wonderful change. They say the bible is ONLY for salvation, it has nothing to do with guiding us to abundant living here on earth. The misunderstanding goes on and on.
 

crossnote

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2012
26,018
417
83
#5
JGIG writes...''God was no longer relating to mankind - nor was He desiring mankind to relate to Him - through the Law, but through the Work and Person of God in the flesh, Christ Jesus.''

...as stated here...

Romans 7:4, 6 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.
But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter.

and here...

John 4:23-24 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.
God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

So we see Paul and Jesus in agreement.
 
Jul 24, 2014
302
1
0
#6
Matthew 5:17 and Ephesians 2:15. I love these two comparisons.

JESUS fulfilled the law and the prophets in death. Pauline reconfirmed it, stating it was His sacrifice that the laws and the prophets were lifted and no longer forever more. Grace is what took it's place. And by this gift we graciously do works ie: laws out of love for JESUS for His work on the cross.

JESUS is kinda special ain't He!
 
Oct 31, 2011
8,200
179
0
#7
Matthew 5:17 and Ephesians 2:15. I love these two comparisons.

JESUS fulfilled the law and the prophets in death. Pauline reconfirmed it, stating it was His sacrifice that the laws and the prophets were lifted and no longer forever more. Grace is what took it's place. And by this gift we graciously do works ie: laws out of love for JESUS for His work on the cross.

JESUS is kinda special ain't He!
You say Paul teaches Christ fulfilled the law, and Christ said the law stays as written. Paul is reported as saying we are dead to the law, and Christ says He offers forgiveness so we are saved. Also that all the law will never change. I think this proves that your interpretation of Paul is wrong.
 
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
50
0
#8
.
Christ's Gospel? Paul's Gospel?



No, Jesus and Paul did not teach two different gospels. Remember, Jesus essentially said to his disciples to preach the gospel (He taught them) to all the nations. Did they accomplish that task? No. There are many nations that the gospel from which Jesus taught his disciples needs to spread to. For the angel in the end times in Revelation 14:6 says that the gospel is everlasting and that it had to continue to go out to all nations still.

Matthew 5:17 does not conflict with Ephesians 2:15.

There is a difference between abolishing something versus fulfilling something (Whereby the old no longer exists).

For example: If I wanted to abolish (destroy) an apple seed, I would take a hammer and smash it. But if I wanted to fulfill that apple seed, I would plant it in the ground and let it fulfill it's potential in being an apple tree. The apple seed has progressed into becoming a tree. I did not abolish that apple seed, but I fulfilled it. But yet the apple seed technically no longer exists in apple seed form, though. Matthew 5:17 is talking about how the apple seed (the Law of Moses) was fulfilled in Jesus Christ under the New Testament or New Covenant. The New Covenant is Jesus and the Law was a school master that leads a person to Jesus Christ. In the Jews case, the Law of Moses was supposed to convict them of their sins help them recognize Jesus. In our case today, people's sins convict them under God's current New Covenant Laws that they need Jesus Christ. Ephesians 2:15 is saying that the apple seed does not exist in apple seed form anymore. It is no longer an apple seed but an apple tree (i.e. A New Covenant by having faith in Jesus Christ).

Matthew 5:18 does not conflict with Romans 10:4.

Matthew 5:18 is speaking of the "Law" as in reference to the Old Covenant in general. The Law and the prophets is what was referenced in verse 17. Jesus fulfilled the "Law of Moses" upon the cross. But the "Law" in general in reference to the "Law and the prophets" which is the WHOLE of the Old Covenant still has many prophesies that need to be fulfilled. Think about it. There are many Messianic prophecies that have been fulfilled already. Does that mean Jesus has to fulfill them again? No, He doesn't. Anymore then He would have to fulfill the Law of Moses again. In other words, there is still more in the "Law" (Law and the Prophets) or the Old Testament that still needs to come to pass (That is yet future); It's not talking about the "Law" in reference to the "Law of Moses" but to the Old Covenant in general. Romans 10:4 is saying that we are not to be like the outward Jews who tried to justify themselves by keeping the Law. For no one was ever justified by keeping the Law. Salvation was always in repenting of your sins and in accepting the Lord as your Savior. But the Jewish nation had their own ideas about salvation during the time of the writing of Paul. They seeked to be justified by law keeping and not in trusting in God by faith to save them (Just as Abraham trusted in God by faith). For Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him as righteousness. So nothing has changed (As far as how God saves man). It's just that the rules or the laws have changed and we now have details about our Messiah so as to worship Him in Spirit and in truth.

Matthew 19:17 or James 2:17 does not conflict with Romans 3:20.

This is a faith vs. works issue. Salvation is not Antinomianism (i.e. A sin and still be saved type belief) and salvation is not Legalism or in keeping a "To Do List" in order to be justified before God.

Jesus and James is not in conflict with Paul. How so? Well, first, Paul essentially said, if any man teaches contrary to the words of Jesus and the doctrine of Godliness, they are proud and they know nothing (1 Timothy 6:3-4). Paul also said to be not deceived into thinking the unrighteous shall inherit the Kingdom of God and then went on to list sins that would describe unrighteous people. Also, Paul says shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? Paul said, God forbid. Meaning you can't sin while under grace. A believer has to confess their sin so as to be cleansed of all unrighteousness (1 John 2:1) (1 John 1:9).

Paul was saying how we are saved internally when we repent of our sins and accept Jesus Christ as our Savior. Jesus and James are describing what must happen externally. They both tell us what a true saving faith must look like (From an outward view). In other words, they are saying that a person who has truly repented and is born again spiritually will desire in wanting God to do the good work within them because they have the Spirit of God living in them who convicts them (So as to transform their lives). They have God doing the "good work" within their heart and lives. For it is God that ultimately does the "good work" within a believer. For Galatians 5 describes the fruits of the Spirit and not the fruits of the believer. For it's why the elders up in Heaven cast down their crowns before Jesus. For it was Jesus who ultimately did the good work within them. They allowed God to work in their heart and lives. That is why it is not salvation by works. For it is God that does the good work within a believer.
 
Last edited:
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
50
0
#9
Okay, so who does the "good work" in a believer's life? Is it God? Or is it the believer? Well, Scripture tells us that God (Christ) is the One who does the work within a believer.

Philippians 1:6
Philippians 1:11
Philippians 2:13
Philippians 4:13
1 Corinthians 15:10 KJV
Hebrews 12:1, 2
Hebrews 13:21
Isaiah 26:12
1 John 4:12
Galatians 5:22, 23, 24 (cf. Matthew 7:16, 18, Matthew 19:17)
John 15:5
Ezekiel 36:26, 27

For that is why the 24 elders cast their crowns down before Jesus (Revelation 4:10). For the crowns they received for their good work was all the result of Christ working in them.

Yeah, but doesn't a believer do the work, too? Now, yes, it is true; A believer is created unto Christ Jesus for good works (Ephesians 2:10); And a believer is indeed held accountable by their "good works" here upon this Earth at a Judgment. But we must also realize that true believers are not ultimately doing these "good works" alone or of their own power, though. For in 1 Corinthians 15:10 Paul said that he labored more than all of his brethren, yet he said it was not him that labored but it was the grace of God that was within him. So true believer's are just choosing to allow God's "good work" to flow within them or not.
 

JesusIsAll

Senior Member
Aug 27, 2014
5,167
94
0
#10
Pauls so called gospel was the gospel of Christ, Paul was a living testimony and witness of Christ, he was as you could say a vessel of God. All that paul said ans taught were not his own words but the holy spirit speaking through him. there is but one true gospel and that is the gospel of Jesus Christ
One has to wonder, at the outset, what this concept is of Christ's versus Paul's gospel, when scripture is all God-breathed of the Holy Spirit. Really, there is no Paul gospel: it's all the gospel of Jesus Christ.

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.
 
Jul 22, 2014
10,350
50
0
#11
Also, concerning the Faith vs. Works issue (I want to say):

James and Paul go together. Like two sides of the same coin, they don't conflict with each other; they compliment each other. Both teach us something vital. Paul looks at what goes on internally; James talks about the external results. Paul says, "We're saved by faith." James says, "This is what saving faith looks like."

In other words, works (all by their lonesome) is not what is saving you but it is the proof that Christ is living in you who does the actual saving. For he that has the Son has life and He that does not have the Son does not have life (1 John 5:12).

In addition, check out this short video, too.

[video=youtube;ThNDxfvb6EQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ThNDxfvb6EQ[/video]
 

dcontroversal

Senior Member
Dec 12, 2013
30,441
1,440
113
#12
You say Paul teaches Christ fulfilled the law, and Christ said the law stays as written. Paul is reported as saying we are dead to the law, and Christ says He offers forgiveness so we are saved. Also that all the law will never change. I think this proves that your interpretation of Paul is wrong.
Anybody who quotes Paul gets rejected in your book for sure.....maybe your interpretation is a little off......As the two do not contradict and one of these days you will realize the WORDS of PAUL are equally the WORDS of GOD as HE was TAUGHT by direct REVELATION from JESUS HIMSELF...Serious RED....you should quit going to seed on the LAW and come online with GRACE and MERCY which CAME BY JESUS CHRIST HIMSELF!
 
P

psychomom

Guest
#13
JGIG, just stopping by to say i have missed you.

glad to see you again. ♥

~ellie
 
K

Kerry

Guest
#14
The meaning of the cross was revealed to Paul and through him to us. If you read the new testament then most likely you are reading Paul.
 
Oct 31, 2011
8,200
179
0
#15
Matthew 5:18 is speaking of the "Law" as in reference to the Old Covenant in general. The Law and the prophets is what was referenced in verse 17. Jesus fulfilled the "Law of Moses" upon the cross. But the "Law" in general in reference to the "Law and the prophets" which is the WHOLE of the Old Covenant still has many prophesies that need to be fulfilled. Think about it.r.
What a blessing you are to the Christian world that you can say that to fulfill is not to abolish, and even give examples of it! It is a breath of fresh air.

Then you ruin it by saying that the Old Covenant, the contracts we have with God before we had the new covenant all need to be fulfilled. Whatever that means. Paul is simply reporting that the legalistic law need not be followed. Many Jews said that you had to be physically circumcised, that you had to go to the rabbis to be cleared to become a Jew and follow these laws, and Paul said that you did not. The epistle tells why you don't. It had nothing to do with the spiritual laws, they can not be changed all scripture says so. It had nothing to do with the old covenant, whatever you think that covenant was. And we are still expected to live our life by the spiritual law. We can eat pork, but we can't feed our mind garbage. Physical circumcision is not necessary, but we are still to live by the Holy Spirit and not by our flesh.
 
Jul 24, 2014
302
1
0
#16
What a blessing you are to the Christian world that you can say that to fulfill is not to abolish, and even give examples of it! It is a breath of fresh air.

Then you ruin it by saying that the Old Covenant, the contracts we have with God before we had the new covenant all need to be fulfilled. Whatever that means. Paul is simply reporting that the legalistic law need not be followed. Many Jews said that you had to be physically circumcised, that you had to go to the rabbis to be cleared to become a Jew and follow these laws, and Paul said that you did not. The epistle tells why you don't. It had nothing to do with the spiritual laws, they can not be changed all scripture says so. It had nothing to do with the old covenant, whatever you think that covenant was. And we are still expected to live our life by the spiritual law. We can eat pork, but we can't feed our mind garbage. Physical circumcision is not necessary, but we are still to live by the Holy Spirit and not by our flesh.
Say what now? Seriously, what are you on about? Jason0047 has got it right.
 
Jul 24, 2014
302
1
0
#17
One has to wonder, at the outset, what this concept is of Christ's versus Paul's gospel, when scripture is all God-breathed of the Holy Spirit. Really, there is no Paul gospel: it's all the gospel of Jesus Christ.

2 Timothy 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.
Yup! The word of GOD doesn't contradict itself. If it does to Christians then they need their heart to be emotionally opened.
 
Jul 24, 2014
302
1
0
#18
You say Paul teaches Christ fulfilled the law, and Christ said the law stays as written. Paul is reported as saying we are dead to the law, and Christ says He offers forgiveness so we are saved. Also that all the law will never change. I think this proves that your interpretation of Paul is wrong.
I think someone needs Theology lessons.

I hope I don't get another infraction notice!
 

crossnote

Senior Member
Nov 24, 2012
26,018
417
83
#19
Many want to take Paul's teachings and stuff it subservient to Jesus' teachings. If that is so then why have Paul at all?

Again many want to take Paul's teachings and make it the same as Jesus' teachings, again, why have Paul at all?

Paul expounded on living under grace both for the individual and the Church in the light of Christ's death and resurrection, a different ministry than Christ's.
 
Oct 31, 2011
8,200
179
0
#20
Wow!! I am being told from all sides that I am wrong. Yet each of these posts saying I am wrong say they believe in both Paul and Christ, and yet stick to the theory that Paul is speaking against the spiritual law! If that is what Paul is doing (I don't believe that for a minute) then you have to go through all kinds of acrobatics of thought to make it come out the same.

I don't see how you can all go on about how Christ was not one with the Father and with Paul, too, and talk so about how they don't speak with one voice giving the same message. Christ's law and God's law is based on the same principle. The new covenant and the old covenant was given by the same God, one does not contradict the other. We have only ONE God.