Gospel Confusion...

Whatever the truth is in this matter, it must be decided by SCRIPTURE, not “feelings”, “ideas” or personal opinions. So, I’m hoping that everyone will respond by giving book, chapter, and verse for their convictions.

Here is my answer: Acts 15 verse 7. Peter reminds them that God chose him to teach “the word of THE GOSPEL to the gentiles.” (Referring to the events in Acts 10) Notice he is talking about THE gospel—one, not two. “THE” is definitive. There is only one. Verse 8- then he says that God “MADE NO DISTINCTION between us ( Jews) and them ( gentiles), Go on to verse 11,

“But we believe, that through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, WE SHALL BE SAVED IN THE SAME MANNER AS THEY.

This seems very clear to me that there are NOT two different gospels. The gentiles we’re taught THE gospel—there is only ONE, and they (which includes US) and the Jews are and will be saved in the same way, by the one gospel of Christ.

For an example, Paul was a JEW How do the SCRIPTURES say that Paul was saved? He BELIEVED on the road to Damascus (Acts 9) and he was BAPTIZED. 3 days later. (Acts 22:16).

The Philippian jailer was a GENTILE. How was HE saved? He BELIEVED when Paul “spoke the word of the Lord to him and he was BAPTIZED. the same hour of the night.

How are their conversions different???
The Samaritans (Jews) “BELIEVED AND WERE BAPTIZED” Acts 8:12
The Corinthians ( gentiles) BELIEVED AND WERE BAPTIZED Acts 18:8
There IS no difference in the gospel they heard and no difference in how they were saved.

As a side note, they ALL, Jew and gentiles alike obeyed What Jesus said to do in Mark 16:16 -“He that believes and is baptized shall be saved.”

We have tried this several times, but the critics of "Rightly Divided Dispensationalism" are more
interested in disposing of our prayerful and careful studies of the matter with "this nonsense started with Darby and [ dreaming ] McDonald in the 1800's, and is not found in" God's Word of Truth, eh?

Should we "keep trying" or just "sit back and keep our mouths shut"?

Amen.

I can see an issue but I believe that Paul is confirming what Yeshua said. But Paul is bringing more clarification and deeper understanding to the words spoken by Yeshua. And then sadly some people will read and believe it's 2 separate doctrines and then create man made beliefs to that incorrect understanding.

Paul, in 1 Cor. 15:1-4 stated faith in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ as the means unto salvation, without any mention whatsoever for the requirement for water baptism.

(1) The LACK of mention of a practice or doctrine in one scripture passage does not provide positive proof of anything. As soon as we assume that we fall into the fallacy of the Argument from Silence and begin making assumption and chasing eisegetical "snipes." Only when all aspects of a Truth are taken as a whole can we understand the teachings of scripture. This is why we must spend time getting to know it.
(2). You can tell when you are getting off when you have to make more and more assumptions to establish a theological system
(3). You seem to assume that if Paul did not mention a truth or practice in one letter that it necessarily means he did not practice or believe it. However, the fact that Paul baptized even a few people shows that he believed in it. Would he practice something if he did NOT BELIEVE it had any effect or, worse, if it were MISLEADING?
(4). It is easy to see that the Apostle did not believe there were TWO Gospels because he said so:
6 I am amazed how quickly you are deserting the One who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—
7 WHICH IS NOT EVEN A GOSPEL. [or "7 which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ].
(Galatians 1:6-7)

(5) The Galatians seemed to assume they could obtain righteousness by following the law. Whether that included ritual immersion or not - I do not know but, whatever the case, I am sure that neither Jesus or the Apostles taught the Law. Those who heard Him said "never has anyone spoke as this man. Had Jesus taught a re-hash of the Mosaic Law, the Rabbis who had studied the law extensively would not have treated Him like a heretic.
(6) Instead, Jesus message concerned the advent of the Kingdom of God which was embodied in Himself its King

How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him who brings GOOD NEWS, who publishes peace, who brings GOOD NEWS of happiness, who publishes SALVATION, who says to Zion, “Your God reigns.” (Isaiah 52:7-10)
Is this not the same Kingdom Paul was alluding to when he told the Ephesians:
14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness; 15And your feet shod with the preparation of the GOSPEL of peace (Ephesians 6:14-15)
Are the scriptures Paul cites not about the very same thing as those Jesus was alluding to when He cited Isaiah? If that is so you cannot then you cannot separate them into two gospels about two kingdoms.
(7) I have heard all of this many times before and as I rejected it in the past so I reject it now. This teaching creates division in that it once more splits Christ's body into two and re-erects the partition between Jew and Gentle members that existed before the cross.
(8) The Baptisms, the bread and wine of the Eucharist tell us emphatically that both peoples have become united by the New Covenant into "one loaf" and, so far, you have never demonstrated that different requirements were established for Jews and Gentiles to become a part of Christ's Church.

34Then Peter began to speak: “I now truly understand that God does not show favoritism, 35but welcomes those from every nation who fear Him and do what is right. 36He has sent this message to the people of Israel, proclaiming the gospel of peace through Jesus Christ, who is Lord of all....44While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard his message. 45All the circumcised believers who had accompanied Peter were astounded that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. 46For they heard them speaking in tongues and exalting God. Then Peter said, 47“Can anyone withhold the water to baptize these people? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have!” 48So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.
(Acts 10:34-48)

.

Hmm. Let's see what scripture really says:

Acts 15:7 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.

Now, given that this was indeed true in the time past that Peter specifically referred to in his speech, let's look at what was said long AFTER Peter said what was true in the long time past in relation to when he stated the above:

Romans 11:13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:

He didn't say we, but rather wrote in the personal pronoun form that excludes the twelve rather than include them.

1 Timothy 2:7 Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not; a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.

2 Timothy 1:11 Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles.

What Paul stated to the Gentile, Roman believers was indeed much more exclusive, the transition is clear from Peter to Paul.

You wanted verses, so now you see some, and more:

Galatians 2:7-8
7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;
8 For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles

Herein we see there was absolutely a transition in the assigned focus as to who was the ministers to the Jews and who to the Gentiles, all without feelings, ideas or personal opinion.

I'm glad you set that standard for discussion.

MM

Paul, in 1 Cor. 15:1-4 stated faith in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ as the means unto salvation, without any mention whatsoever for the requirement for water baptism.

(1) The LACK of mention of a practice or doctrine in one scripture passage does not provide positive proof of anything. As soon as we assume that we fall into the fallacy of the Argument from Silence and begin making assumption and chasing eisegetical "snipes." Only when all aspects of a Truth are taken as a whole can we understand the teachings of scripture. This is why we must spend time getting to know it.
(2). You can always tell when you are getting off when you have to make more and more assumptions to establish and maintain a theological truth.
(3). You seem to assume that if Paul did not MENTION a truth or practice in one letter that it necessarily meant that he never practiced or, worse, no longer believed in it. However, the fact that Paul baptized even a few people shows that he believed in it. Would he practice something if he did NOT BELIEVE it had any effect or, worse, if it were MISLEADING?
(4). Despite these arguments it is easy to see that the Apostle Paul did not believe there were TWO Gospels because he said so:
6 I am amazed how quickly you are deserting the One who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—
7 WHICH IS NOT EVEN A GOSPEL. [or "7 which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ].
(Galatians 1:6-7)
(5) He never explicitly mentions a separate (authentic) gospel. Everything he taught was derived from what Jesus taught and not from the Judaeizers but the thing is Jesus called upon all people to be baptized and He commissioned the Disciples with an order to go out and do the same. You countermand His orders claiming that at some point long before most nations had heard the good news that, for some, this order had been recinded (without it being made clear for whom it had been recinded)
(6) It seems this group of Galatians thought they could obtain righteousness by following the law. Whether that included ritual immersion or not - I do not know but, whatever the case, I am sure that neither Jesus or His Apostles taught the Law. Those who heard Him said "never has anyone spoke as this man." Had Jesus taught a re-hash of the Mosaic Law, the Rabbis who had studied the law extensively would not have treated Him like a heretic.
(7) Jesus message concerned the advent of the Kingdom of God which was embodied in Himself its King

How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him who brings GOOD NEWS, who publishes peace, who brings GOOD NEWS of happiness, who publishes SALVATION, who says to Zion, “Your God reigns.” (Isaiah 52:7-10)
Is this not the same Kingdom Paul was alluding to when he told the Ephesians:
14 Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteousness; 15And your feet shod with the preparation of the GOSPEL of peace (Ephesians 6:14-15)
Are the scriptures Paul cites not about the very same thing as those Jesus was alluding to when He cited Isaiah? If that is so you cannot then you cannot separate them into two gospels about two kingdoms.
(7) I have heard all of this many times before and as I rejected it in the past so I reject it now. This teaching creates division in that it once more splits Christ's body into two and re-erects the partition between Jew and Gentle members that existed before the cross.
(8) The Baptisms, the bread and wine of the Eucharist tell us emphatically that both peoples have become united by the New Covenant into "one loaf" and, so far, you have never demonstrated that different requirements were established for Jews and Gentiles to become a part of Christ's Church.

34Then Peter began to speak: “I now truly understand that God does not show favoritism, 35but welcomes those from every nation who fear Him and do what is right. 36He has sent this message to the people of Israel, proclaiming the gospel of peace through Jesus Christ, who is Lord of all....44While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard his message. 45All the circumcised believers who had accompanied Peter were astounded that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. 46For they heard them speaking in tongues and exalting God. Then Peter said, 47“Can anyone withhold the water to baptize these people? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have!” 48So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.
(Acts 10:34-48)

.My problem with hyperdispensational Bullingerites is that they reject the teachings spoken by Jesus Himself relegating them to an different people in a different time thus making the words of the Lord "of no effect"

I wouldn't say it's two separate doctrines given that the commonality of the two Gospels is Christ. What differentiates the two Gospels is primarily the element of the work of water baptism for the remission of sins. That simply was not a valid requirement within Paul's Gospel. Were water baptism still a requirement for the remission of sins, then Paul's Gospel would have been nullified on the basis of works canceling out grace. Any work added to unmerited favor, and it is no long unmerited. That there are so many out there who can't figure this out because of some stoic indifference to any potential for a change in belief to what is emphatically stated AND what is NOT stated in key places rightly divided.

MM

Where this is true in some cases, it is not always true in all cases. Your broad brush stroke application in this case is an anachronism of sorts. In relation to my statement about Paul's definition of the Gospel of Grace unto salvation not including the necessity for water baptism unto the remission of sins, it begs the question when someone claims it was only a summary.

Furthermore, it makes no sense whatsoever for anyone to assume into that text of 1 Cor. 15: 1-4 the idea of any exclusion of any critical element for salvation given that what Paul stated for posterity.

Paul clearly stated that what he wrote in that context is what was necessary for salvation. The argument from silence that he left anything out that would otherwise be a more complete outline for what is necessary for salvation, that's just plain wrong. Those people weren't walking around with a NT in their satchels in order to allegedly have all the elements encapsulated into one tome they would have to have read through in order to share the Gospel of Grace in totality, as if it also included what was not written by Paul in the above stated reference.

Talk about eisegetical...

MM

Why Exactly do we have to have this in a humble and kind discussion about God's Holy Word?:

I have decided to follow Jesus?

Amen.

“Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.

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;

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.

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.

But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen.”
‭‭2 Peter‬ ‭3:14-18‬ ‭KJV‬‬

it’s a myth that there are different gospels. Paul was an apostle of Jesus who preached the same Gospel of the same kingdom of the same grace of God that Peter and the other apostles preached .

And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭24:14‬ ‭

“And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned….. And they went forth, and preached every where, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following. Amen.”
‭‭Mark‬ ‭16:15-16, 20‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God……

Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed.”
‭‭1 Corinthians‬ ‭15:7-9, 11‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“At Iconium Paul and Barnabas went as usual into the Jewish synagogue. There they spoke so effectively that a great number of Jews and Greeks believed.

But the Jews who refused to believe stirred up the other Gentiles and poisoned their minds against the brothers.

So Paul and Barnabas spent considerable time there, speaking boldly for the Lord, who confirmed the message of his grace by enabling them to perform signs and wonders.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭14:1-3‬ ‭NI

they were all preaching the same gospel of salvation in the same kingdom of the same God tbat Jesus preached first . Its why the miracles and signs happened, it was God witnessing that what they were saying was true

“how shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, ( Jesus )

and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him; ( his apostles including Paul ) God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will?”
‭‭Hebrews‬ ‭2:3-4‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, and received all that came in unto him, preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, ( the gospel ) with all confidence, no man forbidding him.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭28:30-31‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom; preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine. For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; and they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.
‭‭2 Timothy‬ ‭4:1-4

“testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ. But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God.

And now, behold, I know that ye all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, shall see my face no more.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭20:21, 24-25‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

( some Insist Christ Jesus didn’t preach this proper gospel of Christ)

But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.”
‭‭Galatians‬ ‭1:6-9‬ ‭

tbis would on some peoples view here include preaching the actual biblical gospel Jesus was sent into the world to preach . Then sent his apostles to preach to all creation promising salvation to believers .


It’s that ridiculous . to conclude Paul means a different gospel every time he calls it “ the gospel of God “ the gospel of Jesus Christ “ the gospel “ the gospel of peace “ the gospel of grace “ the gospel of Christ “ ect

is just a rabbit hole

“The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;”
Mark‬ ‭1:1‬ ‭KJV‬‬

“Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;”
Romans‬ ‭1:1, 3‬ ‭

“And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace. For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.”
‭‭John‬ ‭1:16-17‬ ‭KJV‬‬

…..so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭20:24‬ ‭

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….

…But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭15:7, 11‬ ‭KJV‬‬

Jesus and his apostles all preached the same gospel

I do see and understand the concerns you have mentioned. I guess typically speaking here is that I immediately side with Jesus because typically we will have 2 to 3 Gospel accounts stating the same thing so that clarifies any differences one might see in the Letters of Paul.

Also, Jesus is God and Paul is human so I don't hold anything against Paul.

But I do hold things against Church Doctrines based upon the differences.

It seems like a no brainer here but we see in several examples of Paul's personal beliefs [in Timothy about his views towards women Preachers and other examples] to know that some thing's Paul writes about is his own beliefs which should automatically make us refer back to what Jesus said about the topic.

Paul ain't my ticket to Heaven like several have made him out to be.
Jesus is my ticket to everything.

Good points. Let's look at the claim that it's all the same Gospel throughout:

John the Baptist begins the first of the Gospel declarations:

Matthew 3:1-2
1 In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judaea,
2 And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

John the Baptist defined the pathway unto repentance in this manner:

Matthew 3:11
I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:

The fire part is for another discussion entirely...

Again, no mention of the death nor resurrection of He who came after John.

THEN comes Jesus:

Matthew 4:17 From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

No mention of His upcoming death nor resurrection, ONLY the Kingdom as the focus.

Continuing into yet another transitional progression:

Matthew 28:19
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

No mention of the shed Blood and the resurrection to come, only water baptism.

NOW we come to the declaration for the baptism with Holy Spirit made by Jesus immediately before His ascention:

Acts 1:5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

Recall that there was never any mention prior to all this of the disciples ever having been water baptized, but here we see that they would soon be baptized by Holy Spirit, but only AFTER Holy Spirit was given.

THEN we have Peter:

Acts 2:38 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.

It's not until Peter, after Pentecost, that we see the addition of something that was not ever introduced before, which is water baptism unto the remission of sins. No command for baptism in the name of the Father or Holy Spirit, only the Son, Jesus. So, for those who don't like the point of there being different Gospels, how about an "evolving" Gospel? Does that seem more palatable? Does that set well with the thinking about Gospel (good news)?

Then there's Paul in 1 Corinthians 15: 1-4 declaring salvation through faith in the death, burial and resurrection on the third day of Christ Jesus. Looking through it all at what IS stated AND what is NOT stated, the glaring differences emerge into one's awareness of the contrasts.

So, this phenomenon of knee-jerk reactions after the experience by some of realizations that contradict their pet doctrines, and the manic demands for there allegedly being no differences among the various preachings throughout, all because of some alleged "summary" here and there, I have to ask...what elements are missing throughout all those narratives, compared one to another, that emerge into one's awareness after a little more critical thought? The shed Blood of Jesus is absolutely missing in the beginning few preachings, not to mention the glaring lack of mention of His death and resurrection. Even Peter, when speaking of the killing of Messiah, that was applied only as an indictment against the nation Israel that pricked the listening, Jewish audience who originated from many different nations and tongues.

Wow. Some of the denials of differences and the injections into the text what isn't there, I see so much similarity played out in this thread the very same tactics employed by Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses in defense of their dogmas, like the one I engaged this morning while my oil was being changed at Midas. That JW had no answers as to how he could possibly confirm the alleged corruptions he was taught are in modern KJV Bible with the Watchtower having no basis of comparison by which to level such a claim apart from the mere claim made by their founder Charles Tazze Russel.

I don't have to defend God's word to anyone. Those who inject what's not there and those who allegorize the scriptures into total subjection to whim and fancy, they will continue to disregard the obvious, even at the expense to personal integrity. It is what it is.

Thanks lrs68. This is some good discussion. Please forgive my traipse into speaking generally to the populace beyond our actual discussion, but it all fit in well with the direction of what we are addressing together here.

MM

GOD is not the author of confusion, how many gospels are there?

Depends on your skin color or where your from? Or what year you were born? Some Gentils get one gospel other Gentiles get a different one?

Sure sounds confusing to me.

Or just ONE? There is ONLY ONE.

He was preaching the same message TO ALL here in Acts 19. As you can see in verse 10, he stayed a prached for 2 years the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks.

Acts 19
King James Version
19 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,

2 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.

3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.

4 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.

5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

7 And all the men were about twelve.

8 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.

9 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.

10 And this continued by the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks.

11 And God wrought special miracles by the hands of Paul:

Yes, which is why it is important for Christians to agree on a creed that summarizes the true gospel (God's requirement for salvation). I have proposed the following:

The normative way of stating the Gospel kerygma/GRFS in the NT is “Accept Christ Jesus as Lord” (as in 2Cor. 4:5 & Col. 2:6). The main points of Christian orthodoxy implicit in this statement can be explained or elaborated as follows:

1. There is a/one all-loving and just Lord or God (Deut. 6:4, John 3:16, 2Thes. 1:6), who is both able (2Tim. 1:12) and willing (1Tim. 2:3-4, Ezek. 33:11) to provide all morally accountable human beings salvation or heaven—a wonderful life full of love, joy and peace forever.
2. Human beings are selfish or sinful (RM 3:23, 2TM 3:2-4, CL 3:5), miserable (GL 5:19-21), and hopeless (EPH 2:12) or hell-bound at the judgment (MT 23:33 & 25:46) when they reject God’s salvation (JN 3:18, RM 2:5-11).
3. Jesus is God’s Messiah/Christ and incarnate Son, the way that God has chosen (JN 3:16, ACTS 16:30-31, PHP 2:9-11) of providing salvation by means of his atoning death on the cross for the payment of the penalty for the sins of humanity (RM 3:22-25 & 5:9-11), followed by his resurrection to reign in heaven (1CR 15:14-28).
4. Thus, every person who hears the NT Gospel needs to repent and accept God’s justification in Jesus as Christ/Messiah the Lord or Supreme Commander (LK 2:11, JN 14:6, ACTS 16:31), which means trying to obey His commandment to love one another (MT 22:37-40, JN 13:35, RM 13:9)—forever (MT 10:22, PS 113:2).
5. Then God’s Holy Spirit will establish a saving relationship with those who freely accept Him (RV 3:20) that will eventually achieve heaven when by means of persevering in learning Truth/God’s Word/sanctification everyone cooperates fully with His will (JN 14:6, 17&26, RM 8:6-17, GL 6:7-9, EPH 1:13-14, HB 10:36, 12:1, JM 1:2-4).

In a manner of speaking, I agree with you. That's why I've recently referred to the Gospel in a singular manner, but with it having evolved, with John the Baptist starting out with, "Repent, for the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand." That speaks a profound message of eminence, not something some 2000 years later down the road. Then Jesus started His preaching of the same message of the Kingdom, not His death and resurrection. Pater then preached an evolved message that then added water baptism unto the remission of sins in Acts 2. Paul later preached only about faith in the death, burial and resurrection on the third day as the means unto salvation in 1 Cor. 15, totally absent the message of water baptism unto remission of sins as a work.

So, where the claim of more than one Gospel seemed to bother some, I can agree with it as an evolving message and means for salvation.

What were the elements of that preaching? We know that it did not include a requirement for water baptism unto the remission of sins placed upon the Gentiles as was the case in Peter's message to Israel in Acts 2. So, when you say Paul was preaching the same Gospel message, he was preaching the Gospel of Grace that evolved from the Kingdom Gospel.

When we read this context, we see the laying on of hands. What are your thoughts about that? Was not Paul dealing with those people in what they knew, thus not violating their sensibilities in faith, and therefore being all things to all people? Is it your thinking that this text now validates the requirement for water baptism today for salvation and receiving of Holy Spirit? There are no apostles today, for Paul was THE apostle to the Gentiles. What about us Jews? Are we left out? Is water baptism still required for remission of sins today?

Thanks for your input.

MM

Thank you, first John was laying the foundation for NT rebirth. Question did he even know?? I do know this when his mission was done he was killed, I also know JESUS said there was no better profet than him.

JESUS him self was baptized for what reason? It was John who made his path straight, he was baptized to fulfill all righteousness.

So what is the difference between Acts 2:38-39 than Acts 19???????

Lets look at Acts 19, why would Paul know to even ask have you receive the Holy Ghost since they have believed?
I really have no idea, but since he knows that receiving it is a part of being reborn he asked!!

Was it JESUS in him that told him to ask? Anyway he did and when they told him they never heard of any Holy Ghost Paul knew the problem and asked HOW WERE YOU BAPTIZED.

So this chapter covers different things, 1. you don't get the Holy Ghost by just believing and 2. being baptized is what removes our sins.

Paul gave them specific instructions, verse 4 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.

They obeyed Paul, Verse 5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

They came out of the water (SINS REMOVED), verse 6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

JUST after that, HE PREACHED the same message to Jews and Greeks, verse 10 And this continued by the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks.

So we see Paul's message was NOT JUST FOR Gentiles. ALSO MORE PROFF, JESUS told Ananias , Acts 9:15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, (((to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel))

Lest look at Acts 2:38-39
King James Version
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.

39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

Same wording as Acts 19, being baptized and receiving the Holy Ghost.

Both cased THEY OBEYED and in Acts 2:41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

We need to rightly dived the word, if you notice in

1 Corinthians 1:1 Paul called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother,

2 (((Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both their's and our's))

look at verse 2, he is speaking to his church NOT THE UNSAVED.

Nowhere after the book of Acts will you find HOW to be reborn, since they are letters to churches they are on the meat and off of the milk. Each church had different problems and he was addressing them.

I FIND it AMAZING that GOD had those letters to churches find there way in HIS rule book for us to learn by and we all have different issues in our walk. There really is a answer in HIS word for everything.

In 1 Corinthians chapter 14, Paul is explaining tongues, in Romans 6 he is explaining baptism. If not necessary why explain them?

AGAIN the same message that Peter preached in Acts 2 and Paul in Acts 19, it ALL fits together.

Isaiah 28:10 For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little:

The same message has not changed, GOD BLESS YOU.

The term Hyperdispensation was not my invention. It came from those who earlier contended for the faith "once for all delivered to the saints" This (ALLEGED) 'second gospel" was not given by Jesus to the disciples but privately to Paul who then passed it on to the others. This is, at least, what Hyperdispensationalists fervently believe and try to convince others of

When Jesus returned after His Resurrection, He revealed the purpose of His death on the cross and and how it had all been previously foretold in scripture: 44Jesus said to them, “These are the words I spoke to you while I was still with you: Everything must be fulfilled that is written about Me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms.” 45Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures.
(Luke 24:44-46)
The Law, the Prophets and Psalms the Jews referred to their whole Bible. It does not sound like He left anything out, does it? Since these scriptures concerned His death burial and resurrection we can say it was about the A GOSPEL which would shortly be sent out to the nations.

46And He told them, “This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, 47and in His name repentance and forgiveness of sins will be proclaimed to ALL NATIONS, beginning in Jerusalem. 48You are witnesses of these things.
(Luke 24:46-48)

Jesus did not say ONLY Jewish converts had to repent of their sins, believe in Jesus and be baptized or that there would be ANOTHER shortened GENTILE version of the "gospel" which did not require any Baptism at all and perhaps not even any repentance (since it is all by "grace alone") I do not remember anyone in the NT explicitly saying that or amending the Great Commission so as to exclude Water Baptism. Still less do I read of God making MORE requirements for Jewish converts to the Faith as opposed to those who were of Gentile decent. Such practices as these - two gospels, two baptisms would serve to divide the Body just when Baptism along with the Eucharist were meant to unite both into one

I myself really like to keep things simple.

If you don't think that being water baptized to get rid of our sins today.
HOW DO WE GET RID OF OUR SINS TODAY?
Are we no longer born in sin?
Is sin permitted in Heaven?
I will add Paul was baptized in JESUS name, why wouldn't he tell others also?

Today HOW DO we get reborn? Keep in mind we have to USE ALL of his word, can't leave out any books or chapters.

The baptism of Jesus was on the basis of the Mosaic Law for the priesthood, which was a purification baptism for all who were 30 years of age and ready to enter the priesthood, but only those of the tribe of Levi. Jesus was of the tribe of Judah, which was not a priestly line, but He was baptized anyway as was prophesied and that fulfilled all righteousness.

Simply stated...the difference is in the evolution from the Kingdom focus upon works over to being saved by Grace through faith.

Jesus instructed Paul on that. The scriptures make that clear.

Paul never taught rebirth. That was taught by Jesus only to Israel.

I don't see anything in that chapter that says Holy Spirit came about for those people at that time except when they had the laying on of hands.

Then we should see all today prophesying and speaking in tongues, but we don't. This transplanting into today what was functional then and not functional today, that is what has led to the false teachings for the alleged lack of faith when people don't exercise Holy Spirit Power in gifts and miracles. Even Paul himself diminished in his ability to bring about healing given that he left Timothy with a stomach problem, and another fella gravely ill, all toward the end of his earthly ministry.

Now you're adding to the word of God what is not stated in that text. Nowhere does it say their baptism was the remission of their sins. You're making the same blunders that so many others have made throughout this thread, believing that there was any work that could be added to faith alone for salvation. It's one thing to be saved, and quite another to exercise the power of Holy Spirit when it was active in the manner described in those early years of Paul's ministry, but that diminished in the latter years.

I never said it was only for Gentiles. Dude, I'm a Jew, and it's for me as well, which is true of ALL Jews and Gentiles. Where do you get this stuff that's so wrong?

Yes, and I as a child of Israel follow his teaching rather than the Messianic Jewish sects of today who have also integrated Judaism into their beliefs and practices. I came out of that because it simply didn't mesh with what scripture teaches.

Wrong! This is so dead wrong! Acts 2 says nothing about the laying on of hands for the receiving of Holy Spirit, and Acts 19 says nothing about baptism unto the remission of sins. The injections you're trying to foist upon the text is highly questionable at the very least.

MM

I don't know about your sins, but mine were washed away by the Blood of Christ Jesus the moment I believed in His death, burial and resurrection. It was also in that moment Holy Spirit filled me. All that charismatic mumbo-jumbo out there is for those who have the stomach for it. It was ALL Him, and none of me or anything I may do as a work.

Ephesians 2:5-9
5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, by grace ye are saved;
6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:
7 That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus.
8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

So, if one chooses to boast of their works of baptism for their salvation, then that's on them, not me. I will not be held responsible for them following after a different Gospel than that preached by Paul.

You have the freedom to add to God's word what is not in the text, and that's on you, not me or anyone else. Systematic study shows to the Bible student that diminishing of some things that, although commonplace during the early stages of God demonstrating His Power through the Gospels, He did change various things through time and events, just like the eventual fall of Israel spoken by Jesus in Luke 13. That was a change that delayed what was supposed to be at hand for them at that time.

MM