The Gospels and the Mystery

[Musicmaster]

Technically, the phrase IN CHRIST is used in th NT only, to those who received the gospel of Christ, Paul's my gospel which is " our gospel", the same gospel Peter received and saved which he attested this in Acts 15:8 ",,,,even as he did unto us". The word 'even' speaks of equality that they were saved by the same grace, the same gospel.

No. Peter's Gospel was not that of what Paul preached, if that was your meaning.

Acts 2:37-38
37 Now when they heard [this], they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men [and] brethren, what shall we do?
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Paul did not ever preach the necessity for water baptism as being an element of his Gospel revealed to him by Jesus. Many were indeed baptized to whom Paul ministered, but it was not a requirement from his Gospel, as it was with Peter and the eleven.

MM

 

[Cameron143]

No. Peter's Gospel was not that of what Paul preached, if that was your meaning.

Acts 2:37-38
37 Now when they heard [this], they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men [and] brethren, what shall we do?
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Paul did not ever preach the necessity for water baptism as being an element of his Gospel revealed to him by Jesus. Many were indeed baptized to whom Paul ministered, but it was not a requirement from his Gospel, as it was with Peter and the eleven.

MM

Acts 2:38 is not part of the gospel Peter preached. The gospel he preached is found in Acts 2:14-36. Verse 37 reveals the work of God in an individual who is saved, and verse 38 is the expected response for those who have been saved.

 

[Musicmaster]

One gospel for all. Get over it.

[2Pe 1:1, 3-4 KJV]
1 Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ: ...
3 According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that [pertain] unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue:
4 Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

[2Pe 3:14-17 KJV]
14 Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.
15 And account [that] the longsuffering of our Lord [is] salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
16 As also in all [his] epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as [they do] also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know [these things] before, beware lest ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own stedfastness.

You are free to believe whatever you want, and so you too can get over it. It is indeed one Gospel for all today, and that is Paul's Gospel, not Peter's Gospel. If you think your sins are remitted on the basis of water baptism, which is what the eleven preached, then go for it and see where it gets you in eternity. As for me, I believe what Paul preached, in that Christ died, was buried and raised from the dead on the third day, and am utterly saved without having to be baptized:

Romans 11:6 And if by grace, then [is it] no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if [it be] of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

I'm not sure what part of that you don't understand, but it speaks loud volumes to us.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

The gospel can't be "over spiritualized" as it is ALL spiritual. You are just unable to recognize it.

[1Co 2:10, 12-14 KJV]

10 But God hath revealed [them] unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. ...
12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.

When I spoke of over-spiritualizing, the meaning was in relation to painting everything with allegory to the extent that spiritualizing it all only leads to some making it say whatever they so desire for the scriptures to say in order to make it conform to their personal beliefs.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

So the mystery is revealed and fulfilled in Christ., the Christ who "is head of the body, the church ((assembly) Col 1:18a))" . Christ being the firstborn, the first born into the new creation as Paul continues in verse 18 :- "He is the begining, the first born from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent Col 1:18b".

Those who are Born again are in Christ, and as such enjoy the benefits of adoption (Rom 8:15-17; Eph 1:5) and every spiritual blessing 'in Christ' (Eph 1:3).

Christ himself being the first born from the dead, by faith raises us up from death to new life (john 3:16; 6:35; Rom 5). Therefore, Peter and all the other apostles and disciple are also part of Christs body (the church) for they are born again into Christ as Peter himself states - "He has caused us to be born again.... Through the resurrection of Jesus Christ (1 Peter 1:3)".

The one true gospel, that gospel itself is Christ Jesus, the one who, not only shows us the way but is the way, not only tells us the truth but is truth itself and not only gives life but is very life itself.

Christ, is tye good news the mystery that has been revealed in the time of fulfiment. Christ looks forward ti his cross in the gopsel, Paul looks back upon it.

The is only one gospel and that is the proclammation of the kingdom of God/heaven, that broke into space and time (history) in the person of our Lord Jesus Christ. So we proclaim him and ask that people repent and believe just like Jesus and Paul ( Acts 17:30;34).

And this brings comfort to all from the first disciples of Jesus in Galilee and Jerusalem to the first Samaritans and Gentiles... Jew and gentile alike are now the 'One new man in Christ', one body, one living temple. And all can say as Jesus did :-

"there is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus (Rom 8:1)". .... Yes Jesus' teaching in Paul's own style of writing. Cf. John 5:24; 3:18.

One Christ, one gospel, one body/people, one kingdom (Gods) and all to the glory of God.


Hyper dispensationalism (paul onlyism) is an unhealthy, unscriptural and untenable theology.

I will agree with you in that Christ Jesus is the One common foundation throughout all dispensations, including that of the Mosaic Law, for it is written that Christ is the all, in all. However, there are differing elements in each dispensation because they were written to different people at different times. Peter preached the requirement for water baptism for the remission of sins, Paul did not. It is THOSE elements of distinction at which I point, not the centrality of Christ, so I would hope that people stop with that focus by recognizing that I do not at all question that.

MM

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

Acts 15:7-11 same grace, same gospel for both the Jew and the Gentile.

7And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
8And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
9And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
10Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
11But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

Yes. Well said. By that time, Paul had been revealing the mystery revealed to Him that no other man knew up until it was revealed by the Lord, for Peter was still preaching the necessity for water baptism in Acts 10.

MM

 

[rogerg]

When I spoke of over-spiritualizing, the meaning was in relation to painting everything with allegory to the extent that spiritualizing it all only leads to some making it say whatever they so desire for the scriptures to say in order to make it conform to their personal beliefs.

MM

In the context of the gospel, the historical events depicted in the Bible serve as allegories representing spiritual truths. Allegory is the means by which spiritual truths are revealed and conveyed by the narrative, yet only the spiritual is the true, and the allegory, reflections, and images of it, have no spiritual efficacy of themselves. If, as we are told in Gal 4:22 - 4:26, that Abraham had two sons, which sons formed as allegory the basis of the entire gospel for the two covenants, how then could anything else in the gospel that was built upon them - which almost everything else in it was - themselves also be anything other than allegory?
Therefore, given that the spiritual is the basis of, and is behind the gospel, it would be impossible to "over-spiritualize it" (whatever that may imply), however, to under-spiritualize it, would definitely be a possibility and a very great danger: biblical truth and sound doctrine are discerned only through the comparison of spiritual with spiritual as we are told in 2 Co 2:13, not by the comparison of the historical/earthly with historical/earthly given that the latter comparison can yield only earthly wisdom, not spiritual wisdom.

[Gal 4:22-26 KJV]
22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.
23 But he [who was] of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman [was] by promise.
24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.
25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.
26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.

[Heb 8:5 KJV]
5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, [that] thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.

[Heb 9:23-24 KJV]
23 [It was] therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.
24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, [which are] the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:

 

[Musicmaster]

Paul was present and made no objection when Peter made the following statement. "... Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles BY MY MOUTH should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
AND PUT NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN US AND THEM, purifying their hearts by faith." (Acts 15:7-9) Peter's comment is a reference to what he preached in both Acts 2:36-41 and 10:43-48. Believe, repent, be baptized in the name of Jesus for the remission of sin (water), and receive the Holy Ghost. The Apostle Paul was tasked with continuing to spread the gospel to Gentiles.

The same gospel was always presented to the Jew first, and then the Gentile. (Rom. 1:16-17) Paul preached the same message years after the gospel was first presented on the Day of Pentecost. Take note of the details revealed in Acts 18:4-8, 19:1-9:

"And he (Paul) reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks.
And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ.
And when they opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he shook his raiment, and said unto them, Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean; from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles.
And he departed thence, and entered into a certain man's house, named Justus, one that worshipped God, whose house joined hard to the synagogue.
And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized." Acts 18:4-8

In your Romans 1 reference above, we don't see water baptism indicated as being what Paul preached to them. It's simply not there. People today inject that into the text, but only on the basis of their own personal whims. Peter, on the other hand, was still preaching the necessity for water baptism in Acts 10.

"And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,
He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.

Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. (NT water baptism)
And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
And all the men were about twelve.

And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God.

But when divers were hardened, and believed not, but spake evil of that way before the multitude, he departed from them, and separated the disciples, disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus. (Acts 19:1-9)

Yes, Paul did indeed speak of baptism in the name of Christ Jesus, speaking against which is something that was not a part of his ministry. In other words, negating the Kingdom Gospel wasn't the aim of his message. 1 Corinthians 15 contains the content of his Gospel, reiterated to the Corinthians who had been theologically assaulted by the Judaisers, causing much confusion among them when reading the scriptural narrative through Acts in its entirety, while also coupling that together with his epistles. Never did Paul teach the requirement for baptism unto the remission of sins.

Additionally, I have already addressed the fact that Paul encountered many who were baptized, and never spoke against the act, but it remains true that he never affirmed, on the basis of the mystery revealed to him, that baptism was ever an element required for salvation nor justification.

MM

MM

 

[posthuman]

Adam didn’t have what we have. He was not saved. The best outcome for Adam is to die and end up in the heart of the earth, safe from hell fire. That is not salvation as we know it today. Adam had no knowledge of the cross, the d,b,r of Jesus for sins.

God proclaimed the gospel to Adam, saying Christ would appear, suffer by the serpent yet live, and destroy sin.

Adam confessed his sin and believed, and God in response shed innocent blood to cover Adam with a new garment made by His own hands, and preserved for him the way to the tree of life, which is a promise of resurrection, and keeping him safe from damnation.

Adam is absolutely saved, by his faith in Christ.

 

[Musicmaster]

Prior to Jesus' ascension, noted in Luke 24, He told His disciples that repentance and remission of sin would be preached in His name beginning in Jerusalem and would spread to all nations. We see this truth unfold through the record of the Acts (actions) of the Apostles.

Peter preached repentance and remission of sin in association with water baptism at Jerusalem. Those who believed and obeyed the command to repent, and be baptized in the name of Jesus for remission of sin were promised they would receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.(Acts 2:37-38)
The same gospel was presented to the Samaritans. (Acts 8:12-18)
Peter presented the same gospel to the Gentiles as well. (Acts 10:43-48)
Paul's message included belief and water baptism in (Acts 18:4-8)
Paul revealed receiving the Holy Ghost does not occur upon belief alone. (Acts 19:2)
The Acts 19 account expresses the same conditions as initially presented by Peter on the Day of Pentecost. (Acts 2:36-38)

So, what are you saying in all that? Was Paul remiss in preaching the entire Gospel that did and does save to this very day, the part about water baptism? Given that he never instructed anyone that it was required after having received revelation of the mystery, how does transplanting from another dispensation into the present find itself rooted in a foundation of credibility?

MM

 

[rogerg]

Yes. Well said. By that time, Paul had been revealing the mystery revealed to Him that no other man knew up until it was revealed by the Lord, for Peter was still preaching the necessity for water baptism in Acts 10.

MM

No, Peter was not preaching water baptism. They had already been baptized by the Holy Ghost - spiritual baptism - and Peter knew that and said so. The water baptism was only symbolic of spiritual baptism - the only baptism of significance - of which, Peter was well aware.

[Act 10:47 KJV]
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

 

[fredoheaven]

No. Peter's Gospel was not that of what Paul preached, if that was your meaning.

Acts 2:37-38
37 Now when they heard [this], they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men [and] brethren, what shall we do?
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Paul did not ever preach the necessity for water baptism as being an element of his Gospel revealed to him by Jesus. Many were indeed baptized to whom Paul ministered, but it was not a requirement from his Gospel, as it was with Peter and the eleven.

MM

You are trying to wrongly divide the word here my dear. Acts 2:38 is not baptismal regeneration you seem to paint at or point out so that Paul’s and Peter’s Gospel differ. I agree water baptism has no place in the gospel. Your reference to Acts 2:38 that water baptism is to get remissions of sins because of the word “for” yet the word “for” means “concerning” or “because of” or “in reference to” or “against the remission of sins” if taken about. Of course, you cannot believe the gospel without repentance. Mark 1:15 And saying . . . repent ye, and believe the gospel . . .
I think this is another HYPE prooftext that Peter’s gospel involves water baptism. It seems to me that your other proof text does no good in trying to differentiate when the plain Bible says it makes no difference. I seem to think of no offense that you are unable to properly divide the word at this time. You are using the sword unskillfully.
Look again, at how Peter described the gospel he preached.
Acts 2: 22 – He told those Jews around him about Jesus' sufferings and his death “… crucified and slain”
Acts 2:24 – He told them of the “ Whom God hath raised up,..”
Acts 2:29 Peter illustrates Christ's death and burial to King David that from his loins according to the flesh God would raise up Christ to sit on his throne.
There they are, the DBR!
In Acts 2:32, Luke wrote, “This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we are all witnesses…”. Witnesses of what? The gospel as per context.
Acts 2:37 says “When they heard this…” What? Is it water baptism? A big NO! but the gospel. Did they receive Peter’s gospel? According to the context, YES! and again what is that Gospel? The DBR!
Acts 2:41 says “Then they that gladly received his word” and when they received or believed the gospel the thing Peter preached “were baptized…”

 

[fredoheaven]

G=ods
O=nly
S=ons
P=urpose
E=ternal
L=ife'

Ok, the personification of the Gospel of Grace is Christ! For Christ is full of Grace and truth.
John 1:14
And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

 

[John146]

Not sure how much OT saints would have understood concerning salvation, but Job knew his Redeemer lived. And that was probably before any scripture was assembled. Whatever God revealed, it was sufficient for salvation. The same was true of every OT saint.

Then that’s another gospel other than the d,b,r for sins. Thanks for proving my point.

 

[John146]

God proclaimed the gospel to Adam, saying Christ would appear, suffer by the serpent yet live, and destroy sin.

Adam confessed his sin and believed, and God in response shed innocent blood to cover Adam with a new garment made by His own hands, and preserved for him the way to the tree of life, which is a promise of resurrection, and keeping him safe from damnation.

Adam is absolutely saved, by his faith in Christ.

The gospel unto salvation is specifically how Christ died, was buried, and resurrected the third day. Adam had no such belief in the cross. To say so is making things up.

 

[Musicmaster]

No, Peter was not preaching water baptism. They had already been baptized by the Holy Ghost - spiritual baptism - and Peter knew that and said so. The water baptism was only symbolic of spiritual baptism - the only baptism of significance - of which, Peter was well aware.

[Act 10:47 KJV]
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

Yes, I've seen all the hyper-spiritualized lingo about it all before, and remain unimpressed by it. The Holy Spirit lit upon them and filled them. There was no "baptism" mentioned in relation to the filling of the Spirit in Acts 2

Acts 2:4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

So, no, Peter still was speaking of water baptism later in that same chapter, just as he commanded in Acts 10:

Acts 10:47-48
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

So pointing at the spiritualized aspect of water baptism doesn't at all take away the fact that Peter still commanded it for the remission of sins, just as he stated in Acts 2.

Paul, on the other hand, issued no such commandment after he had began to preach the Gospel of Grace. If water baptism were required to receive that which is unmerited, then we have created a theology that is a dichotomy...self contradictory.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

You are trying to wrongly divide the word here my dear. Acts 2:38 is not baptismal regeneration you seem to paint at or point out so that Paul’s and Peter’s Gospel differ. I agree water baptism has no place in the gospel. Your reference to Acts 2:38 that water baptism is to get remissions of sins because of the word “for” yet the word “for” means “concerning” or “because of” or “in reference to” or “against the remission of sins” if taken about. Of course, you cannot believe the gospel without repentance. Mark 1:15 And saying . . . repent ye, and believe the gospel . . .
I think this is another HYPE prooftext that Peter’s gospel involves water baptism. It seems to me that your other proof text does no good in trying to differentiate when the plain Bible says it makes no difference. I seem to think of no offense that you are unable to properly divide the word at this time. You are using the sword unskillfully.
Look again, at how Peter described the gospel he preached.
Acts 2: 22 – He told those Jews around him about Jesus' sufferings and his death “… crucified and slain”
Acts 2:24 – He told them of the “ Whom God hath raised up,..”
Acts 2:29 Peter illustrates Christ's death and burial to King David that from his loins according to the flesh God would raise up Christ to sit on his throne.
There they are, the DBR!
In Acts 2:32, Luke wrote, “This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we are all witnesses…”. Witnesses of what? The gospel as per context.
Acts 2:37 says “When they heard this…” What? Is it water baptism? A big NO! but the gospel. Did they receive Peter’s gospel? According to the context, YES! and again what is that Gospel? The DBR!
Acts 2:41 says “Then they that gladly received his word” and when they received or believed the gospel the thing Peter preached “were baptized…”

You continue to miss the point, and I really don't know how else to make it clear to you after having pointed out the differences in content, which are glaringly obvious.

MM

 

[phil36]

I will agree with you in that Christ Jesus is the One common foundation throughout all dispensations, including that of the Mosaic Law, for it is written that Christ is the all, in all. However, there are differing elements in each dispensation because they were written to different people at different times. Peter preached the requirement for water baptism for the remission of sins, Paul did not. It is THOSE elements of distinction at which I point, not the centrality of Christ, so I would hope that people stop with that focus by recognizing that I do not at all question that.

MM

MM

I understand what you have been saying. That is why I asked you a couple if questions before I made a longer post.

I don't think you have understood the point I was making, that is, Peter, John and Paul et al preach the one, the
same and only gospel.

 

[fredoheaven]

Yes. Well said. By that time, Paul had been revealing the mystery revealed to Him that no other man knew up until it was revealed by the Lord, for Peter was still preaching the necessity for water baptism in Acts 10.

MM

Obviously, the “Our” does not mean exclusivity. Peter expresses the true grace of God, wherein the Jewish believers stand (1 Peyer 5:12) as they were the same as the Gentiles. This gospel saved the Jews even the Gentiles as in Acts 15: 11 “Even as they”


In Acts 15: 7-11 Peter said Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel, and that they too would believe and to put no difference and yet you are seeing the difference.
7 And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
8 And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
9 And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

 

[fredoheaven]

You continue to miss the point, and I really don't know how else to make it clear to you after having pointed out the differences in content, which are glaringly obvious.

MM

Umm, you continue to wrongfully divide the word, my friend. You missed the point in Acts 2:38, there is no way Peter preached another gospel and your problem is to conflate baptism being a part of the gospel which is not. It is you who has the problem not me,.