Different Gospels

[Musicmaster]

Perhaps you missed my answer as to why I cannot do those things/miracles, here it is again:
Kathryn Khulman received an honourary doctorate. With tears streaming down her cheeks, she said:
''Anyone can see the power in their services I have seen in mine, but it costs everything''
I have never given everything, something I am ashamed of

That doesn't answer anything. She erroneously made it about her personally. Never mind her and her feeble and erroneaous answer in some false humility.

Again, this special pleading fails to answer, from YOUR own words, why YOU can't do those things that Jesus never stipulated as being empowered by anything other than faith in His Gospel of the Kingdom.

Are you saying that it's about something personal? Jesus stated no pre-requisite other than faith in Him. Are you saying that you lack faith in Christ as to why youcan't do ALL those things He promised Israel would be the outflow from, "...those that believe...?"

How did Paul survive the snake wrapped around his wrist?

so that even handkerchiefs and aprons that had touched him were taken to the sick, and their illnesses were cured and the evil spirits left them. Acts19:12

As people were healed during Paul's ministry, I assume you must believe he was part of the kingdom gospel
Anyway, I note you refuse to address the points put to you

I already said that I will answer those questions once you state outright why YOU can't do all those things promised to ALL who believe?

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

It should be noted that the ending or Mark that you quoted is not found in the oldest manuscripts. I quoted verses that demonstrated that Paul also taught the Gospel of the Kingdom.

You quoted nothing that proved your analysis of his words. My OP clearly quotes the differences in the gospels, and that you aren't willing to accept the words of scripture in their context, which only demonstrates an issue with your beliefs.

Discrediting those verses in Mark on the basis of flawed manuscripts...then it's convenient...that's just the usual ploy of liberal theology that should be rejected by all who love truth. The Vaticanus, Siniaticus, Aleph, B and C are all known to be inconsistent and edited numerous times trash adopted by modern translators on the basis of the fallacy of antiquity, all of which is outside the scope of this thread.

MM

 

[GWH]

I see variations on one Gospel.
My favorite is this creed:

The normative way of stating the kerygma/GRFS in the NT is “Accept Christ Jesus as Lord” (as in Acts 16:31, 2Cor. 4:5 & Col. 2:6) or “Love Jesus as Messiah and Lord” (John 8:42). The main points of Christian orthodoxy implicit in these statements can be explained or elaborated as in the following creed:

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 (Rom. 3:23, 2Tim. 3:2-4, Col. 3:5), miserable (Gal. 5:19-21), and hopeless (Eph. 2:12) or hell-bound at the judgment (Matt. 23:33 & 25:46) when they reject God’s salvation (John 3:18, Rom. 2:5-11).
3. Jesus is God’s Messiah/Christ and incarnate Son, the way that God has chosen (John 3:16, Acts 16:30-31, Phil. 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 (Rom. 3:22-25 & 5:9-11), followed by his resurrection to reign in heaven (1Cor. 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 (Luke 2:11, John 14:6, Acts 16:31), which means trying to obey (Phil. 3:12, 1John 1:8) His commandment to love one another (Matt. 22:37-40, John 13:35, Rom. 13:9)—forever (Matt. 10:22, Psa. 113:2).
5. Then God’s Holy Spirit will establish a saving relationship with those who freely accept Him (Rev. 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 (John 14:6, 17&26, Rom. 8:6-17, Gal. 6:7-9, Eph. 1:13-14, Heb. 10:36, 12:1, Jam. 1:2-4).
6. This creed summarizes revelation of the NT Gospel/Truth (Matt. 26:13, John 14:6), which fulfilled the OT revelation (Matt. 5:17, John 19:30, Heb. 7:11-10:10) and culminates the search for salvation by souls who know only general revelation (Rom. 1:20, 2:14-16, Matt. 7:12). Seeking begins when souls love truth/repent of false beliefs (2Thes. 2:10&13, Matt. 4:17, 7:7), which is the Way to eternal life God wills, who is the Lord Jesus (Matt. 7:14, John 1:14, 4:24, 14:6). Lacking this love leads to believing lies and debauchery (Matt. 7:6, Rom. 1:18&25-26, 2Thes. 2:11-12).

One Lord, one faith, one baptism (Eph. 4:5).

Bumped for MM.

 

[Soyeong]

You quoted nothing that proved your analysis of his words. My OP clearly quotes the differences in the gospels, and that you aren't willing to accept the words of scripture in their context, which only demonstrates an issue with your beliefs.

Discrediting those verses in Mark on the basis of flawed manuscripts...then it's convenient...that's just the usual ploy of liberal theology that should be rejected by all who love truth. The Vaticanus, Siniaticus, Aleph, B and C are all known to be inconsistent and edited numerous times trash adopted by modern translators on the basis of the fallacy of antiquity, all of which is outside the scope of this thread.

MM

Acts 14:21-22, 20:24-25, and 28:23 show that Paul taught the Gospel of the Kingdom, so please interact with them.

I have reasons for rejecting the ending of Mark as being inauthentic that have nothing to do with this thread or any sort of ploy or with not accepting the truth, which I can discuss if you would like. Let everything be established by two or three witnesses, so you should be able to find support for your position from other places in the Bible without needly to rely only on a passage with questionable authenticity.

 

[Thaddeus]

That doesn't answer anything. She erroneously made it about her personally. Never mind her and her feeble and erroneaous answer in some false humility.

Again, this special pleading fails to answer, from YOUR own words, why YOU can't do those things that Jesus never stipulated as being empowered by anything other than faith in His Gospel of the Kingdom.

Are you saying that it's about something personal? Jesus stated no pre-requisite other than faith in Him. Are you saying that you lack faith in Christ as to why youcan't do ALL those things He promised Israel would be the outflow from, "...those that believe...?"



I already said that I will answer those questions once you state outright why YOU can't do all those things promised to ALL who believe?

MM

Im afraid you do not seem able to answer questions put to you, going by past experience.
Do you think Jesus meant for example, if you spend your life debating theological differences you will be able to heal people?
What did Paul say:
And God has placed in the church first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, of helping, of guidance, and of different kinds of tongues. 29&nbsp;Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30&nbsp;Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues[<a Do all interpret? 1Cor12:28-30

I presume you believe Paul preached what you refer to as the kingdom gospel to gentiles!
It's OK, you don't have to answer my questions, I did not expect you to.

 

[Musicmaster]

Acts 14:21-22, 20:24-25, and 28:23 show that Paul taught the Gospel of the Kingdom, so please interact with them.

I have reasons for rejecting the ending of Mark as being inauthentic that have nothing to do with this thread or any sort of ploy or with not accepting the truth, which I can discuss if you would like. Let everything be established by two or three witnesses, so you should be able to find support for your position from other places in the Bible without needly to rely only on a passage with questionable authenticity.

Just about everything can be questioned by someone, but here you go:

Matthew 10:5-8
5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
7 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.
8 Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils: freely ye have received, freely give.

Do you see that which the twelve were instructed to preach? Heal the sick cast out devils, heal the lepers, pretty much similar that that stated in Mark 16.

Now, granted, there are those who like to play lingual and punctuational gymnastics by claiming that verse 8 is a shift in focus. They do so at the expense to honesty, for the Lord stated that in conjunction with the preaching the Kingdom of Heaven. Irrespective of the dishonest handling by the nay-sayers, the grammatical construct of the phrasing allows for no differentiation in focus nor direction, for they also were instructed to give freely as they had been given, which is a part of the message they were clearly instructed to preach to Israel.

So, are YOU onboard with the clarity of what's stated, or do you subscribe to the grammatical change games that others play with this?

Matthew 28:19-20
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:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Again, Israel is to be instructed to observe ALL THI|NGS the Lord commanded them through the disciples, which includes healing the sick, casting out demons, etc., and discipling the nations involves...powerlessness of power under the Kingdom Gospel.

It's interesting that you would appeal to questions about the canonized writings, in spite of hundreds of manuscript copies containing the latter verses of Mark 16. That's very convenient to appeal to just five manuscripts that disagree with each other at a far higher percentage than the Textus Receptus manuscripts, and with known edits as many as five times in places.

It seems that you really should do more homework before appealing to such base and inferior arguments vomited by liberal scholars in modern translations. Their appeals to antiquity is a fundamental fallacy many scholars knew to avoid.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

Im afraid you do not seem able to answer questions put to you, going by past experience.

I already stated that I would answer those if only you would answer my initial questions put to you personally, asking that you personally answer from your own personal reasoning rather than someone who isn't even here among us in this thread. Dancing around on the basis of feeble and weak dodges doesn't answer the questions posed. I already promised answers to your questions if only you would stop shucking-n-jiving around with distractions, red herrings, straw man and appeals to special pleadings and goal post moving.

Do you think Jesus meant for example, if you spend your life debating theological differences you will be able to heal people?

Straw man. I never implied this.

What did Paul say:
And God has placed in the church first of all apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then miracles, then gifts of healing, of helping, of guidance, and of different kinds of tongues. 29&nbsp;Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? 30&nbsp;Do all have gifts of healing? Do all speak in tongues[<a Do all interpret? 1Cor12:28-30

I presume you believe Paul preached what you refer to as the kingdom gospel to gentiles!
It's OK, you don't have to answer my questions, I did not expect you to.

You're still playing the games as before. The Lord stated that ALL who believe would be able to do those things. Why not answer that? These dodges fail to answer what you know to have uncomfortable implications about your current beliefs. Why are you avoiding the very words of Christ in this? Do you not have faith? What's the problem here?

MM

 

[Thaddeus]

I already stated that I would answer those if only you would answer my initial questions put to you personally, asking that you personally answer from your own personal reasoning rather than someone who isn't even here among us in this thread. Dancing around on the basis of feeble and weak dodges doesn't answer the questions posed. I already promised answers to your questions if only you would stop shucking-n-jiving around with distractions, red herrings, straw man and appeals to special pleadings and goal post moving.



Straw man. I never implied this.



You're still playing the games as before. The Lord stated that ALL who believe would be able to do those things. Why not answer that? These dodges fail to answer what you know to have uncomfortable implications about your current beliefs. Why are you avoiding the very words of Christ in this? Do you not have faith? What's the problem here?

MM

Well let us leave it to the independant observer as to who has and who has not addressed the others questions

 

[Thaddeus]

For we were all baptized by one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. 1Cor12:13

 

[Thaddeus]

As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them(gentiles) as he had come on us(Jews) at the beginning. 16&nbsp;Then I remembered what the Lord had said: ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ 17&nbsp;So if God gave them(gentiles) the same gift he gave us(jews) who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to think that I could stand in God’s way?” Acts11:15-17

 

[Thaddeus]

“We are witnesses of everything he did in the country of the Jews and in Jerusalem. They killed him by hanging him on a cross, 40&nbsp;but God raised him from the dead on the third day and caused him to be seen. 41&nbsp;He was not seen by all the people, but by witnesses whom God had already chosen—by us who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead. 42&nbsp;He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one whom God appointed as judge of the living and the dead. 43&nbsp;All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.” Acts10:39-43

For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4&nbsp;that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 1Cor15:3&4

What's the difference?

 

[Musicmaster]

As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them(gentiles) as he had come on us(Jews) at the beginning. 16&nbsp;Then I remembered what the Lord had said: ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ 17&nbsp;So if God gave them(gentiles) the same gift he gave us(jews) who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to think that I could stand in God’s way?” Acts11:15-17

Context is king!

Dare read that context and that was Peter reporting his own success in bringing a few Gentiles into the Kingdom Gospel, which is consistent with what I've already said in that Gentiles too were partakers of what Jesus promised to Israel, and Gentiles who joined with Israel became JEWS. So, that context proves nothing in relation to your inability to do as Jesus promised all those people back then.

Next?

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

“We are witnesses of everything he did in the country of the Jews and in Jerusalem. They killed him by hanging him on a cross, 40&nbsp;but God raised him from the dead on the third day and caused him to be seen. 41&nbsp;He was not seen by all the people, but by witnesses whom God had already chosen—by us who ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead. 42&nbsp;He commanded us to preach to the people and to testify that he is the one whom God appointed as judge of the living and the dead. 43&nbsp;All the prophets testify about him that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.” Acts10:39-43

For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4&nbsp;that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 1Cor15:3&4

What's the difference?

Tell me, then, how many people from whom have you cast out devils, healed and/or raised from the dead? Why are Jesus' promises not at all within your capabilities in all this defense of that Gospel still being in effect for today? You REALLY are having problems being consistent with the discussion and the questions asked. Paul still had not yet launched out on his missionary journeys by Acts 10, so your error in missing that fact remains an indictment against your case, not to mention that you are not practicing the promises Jesus made to others in ancient times.

This glaring inconsistency should be driving you to make some admissions about your beliefs, but you're sticking to the guns of inconsistency and glaring error.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

Acts 14:21-22, 20:24-25, and 28:23 show that Paul taught the Gospel of the Kingdom, so please interact with them.

I have reasons for rejecting the ending of Mark as being inauthentic that have nothing to do with this thread or any sort of ploy or with not accepting the truth, which I can discuss if you would like. Let everything be established by two or three witnesses, so you should be able to find support for your position from other places in the Bible without needly to rely only on a passage with questionable authenticity.

With the level of subjective acceptance of what constitutes scripture, coupled with your lack of trust in God for keeping His word consistently pure and unadulterated with the baseless claims for inauthenticity, why do you even read your Bible? How do you know you can trust any of it given the liberal mindset you've adopted into your beliefs about the one book that is stated to be the very word of God? Why would God have waited until recent publications of all those liberal, modern versions, to finally, after centuries, to keep His word credible for mankind? You really need to think this through more carefully because your lack in reasoning this through outside the minimal scope box whereby you accept so easily the trashy claims of liberal scholars...I care too much about you and others here to leave that unsaid.

MM

 

[Thaddeus]

Context is king!

Dare read that context and that was Peter reporting his own success in bringing a few Gentiles into the Kingdom Gospel, which is consistent with what I've already said in that Gentiles too were partakers of what Jesus promised to Israel, and Gentiles who joined with Israel became JEWS. So, that context proves nothing in relation to your inability to do as Jesus promised all those people back then.

Next?

MM

CON-TEXT is best ignored

 

[Thaddeus]

Tell me, then, how many people from whom have you cast out devils, healed and/or raised from the dead? Why are Jesus' promises not at all within your capabilities in all this defense of that Gospel still being in effect for today? You REALLY are having problems being consistent with the discussion and the questions asked. Paul still had not yet launched out on his missionary journeys by Acts 10, so your error in missing that fact remains an indictment against your case, not to mention that you are not practicing the promises Jesus made to others in ancient times.

This glaring inconsistency should be driving you to make some admissions about your beliefs, but you're sticking to the guns of inconsistency and glaring error.

MM

Your inability to discern is staggering.
There is a price to pay, in order to see what you consistently write of. But you can only quote the letter randomly without understanding. When asked to explain Paul's core message you could not do so could you

 

[Thaddeus]

Paul submitted to the authority of the Jerusalem church, in regard to which Jewish laws gentiles be asked to follow. He took the decision, advised by James via letter to the gentile churches.
One could ask why he did that, if the Jerusalem church was preaching a different gospel to different people. However, any answer, however extraordinary, would be given, in order to cling to errant views!

 

[Musicmaster]

CON-TEXT is best ignored

That's indeed the battle cry of liberal theology.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

Your inability to discern is staggering.
There is a price to pay, in order to see what you consistently write of. But you can only quote the letter randomly without understanding. When asked to explain Paul's core message you could not do so could you

Not that I can't, but stated that it will be forthcoming if only you would be forthcoming, and you're not.

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

Paul submitted to the authority of the Jerusalem church, in regard to which Jewish laws gentiles be asked to follow. He took the decision, advised by James via letter to the gentile churches.
One could ask why he did that, if the Jerusalem church was preaching a different gospel to different people. However, any answer, however extraordinary, would be given, in order to cling to errant views!

Red herring. Meaningless in relation to what I have asked of you that you refuse to answer.

MM