Galatian Conundrums

[calibob]

You believe God has nothing left to say?.

Not for now. And the word will come from the Lord. There are no further scriptures remaining to be written. What you posted is post Armageddon is it not?

Revelation 22:18-19 18For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
King James Bible

 

[RickStudies]

Not for now. And the word will come from the Lord. There are no further scriptures remaining to be written. What you posted is post Armageddon is it not?

Revelation 22:18-19 18For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 19And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
King James Bible

I hope it doesn`t sound like Armageddon to you. I think it would be great to go to class and have God for a teacher. The prophecy is from the book of Michah. It a picture of the next age.

 

[calibob]

@RickStudies We may be very, very close but the final war hasn't started yet. The wheat still needs to be sepperated from the chaff.

 

[calibob]

The beast must first try and take over the world and sit in Gods place. The abomination that causes desolation is yet to come befor the Lord returns.

 

[tourist]

I guess that explains why you cannot flesh out whatever it is you are trying to 'teach' us

I mean, no offense, but I don't think you actually understand whatever it is you are trying to pass on from wherever it is you picked it up

in regard to the bold type above, that is nonsense. that does not exist. people may say they are following the gospel but they are not following the gospel if the follow the law as well

as for this:



this is non-factual. period. I attended a Messianic congregation for a few years and no one kept the law

I have known other Messianic believers and they did not keep the law

seriously, please stop posting so called facts. if you are going to post facts, or what you think are facts, you NEED to source your material otherwise it sounds like you are making things up...

now as far as your response to me in post 45....you cannot possibly be trying to state that if someone in the NT has quoted OT scripture that means they are following law? do you actually know why the book of Galatians was written?



there was no New Testament. again, do you know the actual reason Paul wrote to the Galatians?

hint: start reading at v. 6 chapter 1

you are stating things as though they were facts and they are NOT facts...such as what you state about Messianic Jews. if 23,000 Messianics try to follow the law, it would be still be inaccurate to state they all follow the law and the gospel

SMH

It is my understanding that Messianic Jews follow the teachings of Jesus and consider Him to be their Lord and Savior. They sure aren't about keeping the law of Moses. They believe that Jesus is the Messiah and that is why that they are considered to be Messianic Jews.

 

[Guojing]

How does John 3:16 not reflect the gospel message?

Some would say it succinctly encapsulates it...

To believe in Jesus under John 3:16 was to believe in, as what John would explain in John 20:31 31 But these are written that you may believe[b] that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

That is the Gospel of the Kingdom, to believe in the identity of Jesus. That was for the Jews to believe only.

But Paul preaches the central message of his gospel, as believing in the finished work of Jesus, which is his death burial and resurrection, stated in 1 Cor 15. This was for both Jews and Gentiles to believe in, after the Jerusalem Council. (Acts 15:11). Incidentally, when Paul wrote about the double curse if anyone preached a different gospel, it was after the events in Acts 15.

Thus, these 2 Gospels have fundamentally different messages.

But if you don't want to accept that distinction, that is fine. It is not essential to do so, in order to be a Christian.

 

[RickStudies]

It is my understanding that Messianic Jews follow the teachings of Jesus and consider Him to be their Lord and Savior. They sure aren't about keeping the law of Moses. They believe that Jesus is the Messiah and that is why that they are considered to be Messianic Jews.

Ok, I don`t know what the rules are on posting links but I`m gonna do it.

https://www.jewishvoice.org/learn/messianic-jews

 

[RickStudies]

To believe in Jesus under John 3:16 was to believe in, as what John would explain in John 20:31 31 But these are written that you may believe[b] that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

That is the Gospel of the Kingdom, to believe in the identity of Jesus. That was for the Jews to believe only.

But Paul preaches the central message of his gospel, as believing in the finished work of Jesus, which is his death burial and resurrection, stated in 1 Cor 15. This was for both Jews and Gentiles to believe in, after the Jerusalem Council. (Acts 15:11). Incidentally, when Paul wrote about the double curse if anyone preached a different gospel, it was after the events in Acts 15.

Thus, these 2 Gospels have fundamentally different messages.

But if you don't want to accept that distinction, that is fine. It is not essential to do so, in order to be a Christian.

The Gospel of the Kingdom was also going to convert the Jews into the earthly kingdom of Messiah. All the unfulfilled prophecies of the Old Testament would have been fulfilled but they blew it with the persecution in Acts 8. This resulted in the conversion of Paul and the unveiling of God`s real plan.

 

[posthuman]

what the rules are on posting links

the 'insert link' button in the post formatting menu is not there simply to tempt you to incriminate yourself.

 

[Guojing]

The Gospel of the Kingdom was also going to convert the Jews into the earthly kingdom of Messiah. All the unfulfilled prophecies of the Old Testament would have been fulfilled but they blew it with the persecution in Acts 8. This resulted in the conversion of Paul and the unveiling of God`s real plan.

I agree with you, but I find it hard to believe you learnt this from a Baptist Church. But if you rather not share where you learn it from, I understand.

 

[RickStudies]

I agree with you, but I find it hard to believe you learnt this from a Baptist Church. But if you rather not share where you learn it from, I understand.

My background is Baptist and I came to Christ because of some fine Baptist Christians. Being Baptist means I can`t know the truth?

 

[Absolutely]

To believe in Jesus under John 3:16 was to believe in, as what John would explain in John 20:31 31 But these are written that you may believe[b] that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

That is the Gospel of the Kingdom, to believe in the identity of Jesus. That was for the Jews to believe only.

But Paul preaches the central message of his gospel, as believing in the finished work of Jesus, which is his death burial and resurrection, stated in 1 Cor 15. This was for both Jews and Gentiles to believe in, after the Jerusalem Council. (Acts 15:11). Incidentally, when Paul wrote about the double curse if anyone preached a different gospel, it was after the events in Acts 15.

Thus, these 2 Gospels have fundamentally different messages.

But if you don't want to accept that distinction, that is fine. It is not essential to do so, in order to be a Christian.

Ok,i am going to tell you what is going on.
The Pauline (Two gospel adherents) TOTALLY DISMISS THE GOSPELS AS HAVING APPLICATION TO US TODAY.
They say Jesus preached the gospel of the "kingdom" and the law.
Then it was through Paul's revelation that we now have the gospel of grace.
I am very familiar with their doctrine.

Very problematic in that that doctrine ends up defending that the entire NT is basically a mistake unless it is written by Paul.

Now peter had the revelation of the gospel to the gentiles BEFORE PAUL. And PETER FULLY UNDERSTOOD THAT GOSPEL,AND NONE OF THEM WERE OUTSIDE THE UNDERSTANDING OF GRACE. SALVATION BY GRACE AND EVEN SAW THE DEATH AND RESURRECTION OF JESUS.

As far as Christ incarnate. He EMBODIED grace. He was grace in the flesh. He,under grace sacrificed his life. There is his message. He came to die,to lay down his life. He was Grace . He embodied Grace.
To think his testimony is some exclusive Jewish only message is to er in the understanding of the fall in the garden and the remedy.

Then right in their lap is Paul's declaration "if anyone preaches a gospel different that the Gospel We have preached , Let him be accursed...."

They,the two gospel Paulines,will tell you openly "JESUS PREACHED A DIFFERENT GOSPEL THAN PAUL"

Blatant error.
Serious blatant error.

That is the Gospel of the Kingdom, to believe in the identity of Jesus. That was for the Jews to believe only.

But Paul preaches the central message of his gospel, as believing in the finished work of Jesus,

No sir.
Jesus himself preached the death burial and resurrection of himself. (the gospel)

 

[Absolutely]

Paul preached Jesus but he didn`t preach the message Christ did. Like the others you dunno what the gospel Christ preached was all about.

Jesus preached his own death burial and resurrection.
Even peter and the others understood it.
Jesus himself said he was given (in death) to save the world. JN 3;16

It is 1 gospel. not exclusive to Paul.
You have been duped friend.

 

[Absolutely]

Cop out. Has nothing to do with the issue I would have presented.

No,it goes directly to your position.
That Jesus understood his mission was grace. And preached his own DBR.
...and that GRACE was offered to the world (jew & gentile)

 

[RickStudies]

Jesus preached his own death burial and resurrection.
Even peter and the others understood it.
Jesus himself said he was given (in death) to save the world. JN 3;16

It is 1 gospel. not exclusive to Paul.
You have been duped friend.

The world was going to be saved by the rise of Israel in fulfillment of God`s covenant promises. This was the expectation of the Apostles and the followers of Christ.

See Peters sermon in Acts 2

You have been duped because like most Protestants you are tainted by Catholic doctrine.

 

[RickStudies]

No,it goes directly to your position.
That Jesus understood his mission was grace. And preached his own DBR.
...and that GRACE was offered to the world (jew & gentile)

Jesus said His mission was to fulfill the law and the prophets. That`s Biblical. Your remarks are beliefs you have been indoctrinated with.

 

[Guojing]

Ok,i am going to tell you what is going on.
The Pauline (Two gospel adherents) TOTALLY DISMISS THE GOSPELS AS HAVING APPLICATION TO US TODAY.
They say Jesus preached the gospel of the "kingdom" and the law.
Then it was through Paul's revelation that we now have the gospel of grace.
I am very familiar with their doctrine.

Very problematic in that that doctrine ends up defending that the entire NT is basically a mistake unless it is written by Paul.

Now peter had the revelation of the gospel to the gentiles BEFORE PAUL. And PETER FULLY UNDERSTOOD THAT GOSPEL,AND NONE OF THEM WERE OUTSIDE THE UNDERSTANDING OF GRACE. SALVATION BY GRACE AND EVEN SAW THE DEATH AND RESURRECTION OF JESUS.

As far as Christ incarnate. He EMBODIED grace. He was grace in the flesh. He,under grace sacrificed his life. There is his message. He came to die,to lay down his life. He was Grace . He embodied Grace.
To think his testimony is some exclusive Jewish only message is to er in the understanding of the fall in the garden and the remedy.

Then right in their lap is Paul's declaration "if anyone preaches a gospel different that the Gospel We have preached , Let him be accursed...."

They,the two gospel Paulines,will tell you openly "JESUS PREACHED A DIFFERENT GOSPEL THAN PAUL"

Blatant error.
Serious blatant error.




No sir.
Jesus himself preached the death burial and resurrection of himself. (the gospel)

If you read the 4 Gospels properly, Jesus only hinted about his DBR to the general public thru extremely vague hints.

Privately to his disciples, he mentioned it openly but they could not understand it at all and resisted it.

You are correct in explaining why you also reject this. I find many Christians are very hostile towards this revelation because they take their church doctrine primarily from the 4 Gospels.

Many churches preach almost exclusively from Matt-John and when they hear someone saying that Jesus was only preaching to the Jews then and had no direct ministry to the Gentiles, they will naturally resist that.

That is understandable, as I have said, you don't need to recognize this distinction to be a Christian. To each his own.

 

[Whispered]

This passage must be understood in view of the fact that (a) Saul of Tarsus was originally a strict Pharisee who persecuted Christians, (b) he was never a disciple of Christ when the Lord was on earth, and (c) he received His Gospel and many other revelations directly from the Risen Lord.

However, after Saul was converted to Paul and began preaching Christ, the other apostles began to see that he was indeed the 12th apostle, and the replacement for Judas Iscariot.

Furthermore, they also noted that Peter was given the Gospel to the Jews (called the circumcision) while Paul was given the Gospel to the Gentiles (the uncircumcision). While the Gospel is identical, the apostolic commission was not identical. Each and every apostle was given his own mission field. At the same time both Peter and Paul preached to both Jews and Gentiles.

Indeed, Paul made it a point in his missionary journeys to always attend the synagogue in each city of the Roman empire, and preach Christ to the Jews first, and then to the Gentiles. Eventually -- because of Jewish unbelief -- he turned away from the Jews and ministered only to Gentiles.

So this passage is telling us that all the apostles were in agreement as to which ministry was given to which apostle, and there was no conflict. We see here that Paul was now fully accepted by all the other apostles, and later on Peter would call him "our beloved brother Paul" and confirm that ALL his epistles were in fact Scripture -- the Word of God.

Just a small correction here if you will. My corrections are addressed to that which I underlined in your post and excerpted below.
"
However, after Saul was converted to Paul and began preaching Christ, the other apostles began to see that he was indeed the 12th apostle, and the replacement for Judas Iscariot."

Corrections in order.
Saul was not converted to Paul. Saul was referred to as Saul after the Damascus road encounter.
The Book of Acts chapter 13 and verse 2 As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them.


Saul was not chosen nor accepted by the Apostles as the 12th Apostle. Matthias replaced Judas.
The Book of Acs chapter 1 and 23 And they appointed two, Joseph called Barsabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias.
24 And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen,25 That he may take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell, that he might go to his own place.26 And they gave forth their lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the eleven apostles.

There is no scripture wherein it is stated the Lord converted Saul's name to Paul.

 

[Guojing]

Jesus preached his own death burial and resurrection.
Even peter and the others understood it.
Jesus himself said he was given (in death) to save the world. JN 3;16

It is 1 gospel. not exclusive to Paul.
You have been duped friend.

To show from scripture why this above view is faulty.

Ignorant of Jesus’ Death, burial, and resurrection

1. Matthew 16:21-22 – Jesus first began to tell them of his death and yet Peter tried to prevent it.
2. Mark 8:31-32 – Another account of Peter rebuking the Lord for speaking about his death.
3. Mark 9:31-32 – After hearing about the death and resurrection of Jesus the disciples “understood not and were afraid to ask him”
4. Luke 9:44-45 – “But they understood not this saying, and it was hid from them, that they perceived it not: and they feared to ask him of that saying.”
5. Luke 18:31-34 – “And they understood none of these things: and this saying was hid from them, neither knew they the things which were spoken.”
6. John 2:21-22 – They did not understand the resurrection until after it happened.

Disbelief in the Resurrection
7. Mark 16:5-14 – The ladies were afraid when they found the tomb empty. The disciples did not believe after two witnesses testified of the resurrection.
8. Luke 24:1-4 – The ladies were perplexed about what had happened to Jesus.
9. Luke 24:8-12 – The stories of Jesus’ “disappearance” were idle tales. Peter wondered what happened.
10. John 20:2 – Mary Magdalene thought someone had stolen Jesus after he had resurrected.
11. John 20:7-9 – The disciples after seeing the empty tomb believed Mary that someone had stolen Jesus. They did not know about the resurrection yet.

Did not understand the cross for salvation
12. John 20:21-23 – Even after the resurrection, the disciples did not understand what it accomplished. Here they are given the authority to remit sins.
13. Acts 3:14-15 – The crucifixion was presented as a murder indictment to Israel at Pentecost. The resurrection as a warning that he would return to seek vengeance.
14. Acts 5:28 – Instead of the blood being payment for sins it was presented as the evidence of guilty murderers.
15. Acts 7:52 – Stephen accuses the rulers of betrayal and murder of the Just One.
16. Acts 10:39 – According to Paul’s gospel Christ died willingly in the place of sinners. According to Peter he died because he was slain by certain Jews. Could it be that Peter does not yet understand the mystery of the cross?

Conclusions:
This list does not prove that the Twelve were disobedient to the gospel that was presented to them. Contrarily, they were some of the first believers in the gospel of the kingdom. They were among the faithful remnant of Israel who trusted that Jesus was the Son of God and promised Messiah.

However, these verses show that the gospel they knew and trusted was not the preaching of the cross that Paul taught. Whereas they knew Jesus Christ as Messiah to Israel, Paul would later teach Jesus Christ on the cross as payment for sins to Gentiles.
The preaching of the cross was offered for salvation first through the Apostle Paul as the Lord revealed the meaning of the death, burial, and resurrection. The Twelve apostles were ignorant of this message.

"...to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery..." Ephesians 3:9

 

[Guojing]

My background is Baptist and I came to Christ because of some fine Baptist Christians. Being Baptist means I can`t know the truth?

You can of course, and I am glad you are seeing this too. I am just asking you, "Where did you learn this from"? I am fairly sure Baptist churches do not preach this, unless they have really changed.