> General Discussions

Peter to the circumcision/ Paul to the uncircumcised

(1/2) > >>

octoberose:
I was visiting my daughters family for two weeks and didn't join in on the discussion of Adam and Eve. I'll hold that for a while and if it's ok I'd like to comment on that later.
 For now I was listening to someone who believes in the salvation of all as we do, but advocates the 'two gospels" theory.  Of course he uses this  "they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, and the gospel of the circumcision unto Peter” (Gal. 2:7).
 I'm pretty sure that Ray speaks about this is the secret rapture paper. Is there somewhere else?  I don't see how anyone can read Ephesians and come away with two gospels.  I know Ray did not think so. But my question is, what do you believe that Galatians 2 is talking about ?

ML:
Gal 1:8  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 accursedG331. 
Gal 1:9  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 accursedG331. 

I guess Jesus Christ is accursed because He taught a different Gospel, huh?

G331
ἀνάθεμα
anathema
an-ath'-em-ah
From G394; a (religious) ban or (concretely) excommunicated (thing or person): - accursed, anathema, curse, X great.
Total KJV occurrences: 6

It looks like it is in this one too, I have heard:

https://bible-truths.com/forums/index.php/topic,9742.msg82513.html#msg82513

Dave in Tenn:
Yes, the clearest stuff from Ray on the subject is in the "rapture" paper. 

Here's some related passages. 

Gal_1:16; Act_13:46-48, Act_18:6, Act_28:28; Rom_1:5, Rom_11:13; 1Th_2:4; 1Ti_2:7; 2Ti_1:11

If nothing else can be gotten from these, they should at least make it clear that "of the" is not in the text.  That translation was made with the intent to create an English sentence.  There is no "of" in that verse.  In other words, no Gospel OF circumcision and no gospel OF uncircumcision.

All of these speak about the two "audiences", not two "messages".  And that's what Galatians 2:7 is doing as well, else why the information that the Jews (in large measure) rejected the message while the nations (in a relative sense) embraced it.

Gal 2:7  ButG235 contrariwise,G5121 when they sawG1492 thatG3754 theG3588 gospelG2098 of theG3588 uncircumcisionG203 was committedG4100 unto me, asG2531 the gospel of theG3588 circumcisionG4061 was unto Peter;G4074
Gal 2:8  (ForG1063 he that wrought effectuallyG1754 in PeterG4074 toG1519 the apostleshipG651 of theG3588 circumcision,G4061 the same was mightyG1754 in(G2532) meG1698 towardG1519 theG3588 Gentiles:)G1484
Gal 2:9  AndG2532 when James,G2385(G2532) Cephas,G2786 andG2532 John,G2491 who seemedG1380 to beG1511 pillars,G4769 perceivedG1097 theG3588 graceG5485 that was givenG1325 unto me,G3427 they gaveG1325 to meG1698 andG2532 BarnabasG921 the right handsG1188 of fellowship;G2842 thatG2443 weG2249 should go untoG1519 theG3588 heathen,G1484 andG1161 theyG846 untoG1519 theG3588 circumcision.G4061

You won't convince this person, however.  It seems apparent that he has built an entire doctrinal structure around a word inserted for clarity.  These things don't fall easy, especially when your reputation is tied up in them.  If a word must be inserted for English clarity, the word "to" works far better and matches the clear message of those related verses (and more).

Beyond that, there is a new Circumcised/Uncircumcised in the New Covenant and it matters nothing whether or not he or she has a foreskin.  For many are called, few chosen.




 

Dave in Tenn:
Also, it's OK to respond to the "first man" thread in a new thread.

indianabob:
Hi folks,

I'm going to stick my neck out here just a little. Please be kind.

Is it correct or not that the Jews, both priests and regular people were under the so called Old covenant and that Jesus, toward the end of his ministry told a few that he had come to bring a New and better covenant AND that they didn't believe him?

Didn't the Jews continue the whole Temple worship thing from the time Jesus ascended until 40 years later when God arranged for the Temple to be destroyed and eliminated the Jewish priesthood and scattered the Jews?

And then didn't Paul and his helpers teach a new covenant of Grace to replace the covenant of works?

Maybe I'm not seeing clearly, so would someone help me with a few scriptures.

Indiana Bob

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page