bible-truths.com/forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Need Account Help?  Email bibletruths.forum@gmail.com   

Forgotten password reminders does not work. Contact the email above and state what you want your password changed to. (it must be at least 8 characters)

Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: The two gospels theory  (Read 1279 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

octoberose

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 539
The two gospels theory
« on: April 28, 2022, 02:32:42 AM »

Can someone explain to me why some who believe in Reconciliation , believe  that the gospels under Peter and Paul were two different gospels ?  Ray didn’t believe that.  Why are some people so convinced of it ?  I don’t even understand that point of it (  well, if it’s of God then it wouldn’t be the first time I didn’t understand His Ways)  Everything was fulfilled in Christ, so why is that a not complete enough for them ?   
Logged

indianabob

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2026
Re: The two gospels theory
« Reply #1 on: April 28, 2022, 01:09:13 PM »

Can someone explain to me why some who believe in Reconciliation , believe  that the gospels under Peter and Paul were two different gospels ?  Ray didn’t believe that.  Why are some people so convinced of it ?  I don’t even understand that point of it (  well, if it’s of God then it wouldn’t be the first time I didn’t understand His Ways)  Everything was fulfilled in Christ, so why is that a not complete enough for them ?

I'll try to explain a little.

(10) With the New Covenant comes the promise of final forgiveness of sins. “For I will be merciful toward their iniquities, and I will remember their sins no more” (Heb. 8:12).

The forgiveness of sins was not a new idea when Jeremiah recorded this prophecy. The people of Israel were quite familiar with the concept that God graciously wipes us clean of the guilt of our sins and refuses ever again to bring them up or to use them against us. If you have any doubts about this, read Psalm 51 or Psalm 103.

But under the old covenant forgiveness was never final and forever. One had to return year after year after year on the Day of Atonement (Leviticus 16) so that the high priest could continually slaughter an animal and place the blood of the sacrifice on the altar in the Holy of Holies. For an OT believer, it was wonderful to experience forgiveness for sins previously committed. But each person knew that with future sins there was a need for another, future sacrifice. The blood of bulls and goats could never perfectly purge their consciences.

But in the new covenant, established by the shedding of Christ’s blood, our sins are altogether and forever forgiven: past, present, future.
Logged

AwesomeSavior

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 388
Re: The two gospels theory
« Reply #2 on: April 28, 2022, 01:22:35 PM »

Haven't heard of the 2 different gospels of Paul and Peter, but know the Paul (faith alone) vs. James (faith plus works) so-called controversy, even though there is no controversy with P and J.
Logged

ralph

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 136
Re: The two gospels theory
« Reply #3 on: April 29, 2022, 01:27:09 AM »

I have seen a growing number of people talking about this on youtube.  I heard one person put it like this:  there is one gospel, the books of John, Peter, James, etc. that is directed toward Israel and the other, Paul’s teachings, that is directed toward the nations. Whatever that means.

What it boils down to is that they despise the Truth and make up their own by twisting and adding to the word of God.  As an example, they point to apparent contradictions, like the one between Paul and James concerning works and faith, as proof of this two Gospel heresy.  Of course there are no contradictions.  I won’t go into that as Ray covered this. 

You can watch both videos here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EcryObkrBOQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dpnFpde69I4
Logged

arion

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 724
  • Marquette, MI
    • Big Bay Michigan Weather
Re: The two gospels theory
« Reply #4 on: May 01, 2022, 10:16:32 AM »

I've run across this quite often of people that think that Paul was a heretic and that he taught differently than the rest of the disciples.  I point these verses to them from 2 Peter and usually they don't attempt an answer;


2Pe 3:15-16  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.

Peter here calls Paul his 'beloved brother' and admits that some of his teachings are hard to understand but then calls people that try to twist his teaching unlearned and unstable and that they do it to their own destruction.  Peter wrote this at the end of his ministry and not the beginning and was fully aware of most of Paul's epistles and teachings.

There is no disconnect between the gospel according to James, Peter, John vs Paul's.  When I run across people that call Paul a heretic I shudder as they don't know what they are saying.
Logged

octoberose

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 539
Re: The two gospels theory
« Reply #5 on: May 01, 2022, 10:46:15 AM »

Well, these particular people love Paul .  The struggle seems to be with all the verses that promise things to Israel that are not the same as those promised to the bride of Christ - a new Jerusalem or a New Heaven?  Yes, works and faith also.  Anyone interested I’ll PM you a list, but I’m not trying to make their case for them .   But I admit it bothers me. It’s a belief that Israel was never the bride .  I appreciate the link to Ray and will go back to that.

Logged

indianabob

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2026
Re: The two gospels theory
« Reply #6 on: May 02, 2022, 12:21:06 AM »

What if Peter is right and Paul is right?
What if Peter is right for the chosen people of God under the law?
Paul is right for the gentiles who are chosen apart from the law?
bob
Logged

Wendy

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 117
Re: The two gospels theory
« Reply #7 on: May 02, 2022, 04:41:21 AM »

I pray everyone is well.
I'd like to see the list Octoberose I'd like to read it tks
God bless.
Wendy
Logged

Dave in Tenn

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4248
    • FaceBook David Sanderson
Re: The two gospels theory
« Reply #8 on: May 02, 2022, 06:09:19 AM »

For my part, if you give a man a fish, he can eat for a day.  If you give a man a bible, he can find a way to misunderstand it.  I think they ran across a verse or two that they didn't quite understand and fashioned a doctrine to explain instead of letting Scripture and Spirit explain.

Mostly it strikes me as taking the spiritual and interpreting it literally.  They are failing to compare spiritual with spiritual.  Jesus preached the Gospel of the kingdom.  In the kingdom, there is no Jew or Greek.  Physical circumcision is of no benefit, and neither is physical uncircumcision.  If these folks are overly concerned with, essentially, real estate...they have lost the plot. 

Their premise is in error, and it follows that every strand that flows from that error is just more error.  I watched a short video recently that was of this persuasion.  The speaker said, in effect, that to understand the gospel, I had to accept a theological position.  No thank you, and no.  Click.

Nobody disappoints me like believers in "universal reconciliation". Too many of them have not come far enough out of Babylon or have not been out long enough.  And too many of those are teaching.
« Last Edit: May 02, 2022, 07:01:04 AM by Dave in Tenn »
Logged
Heb 10:32  But you must continue to remember those earlier days, how after you were enlightened you endured a hard and painful struggle.

Dave in Tenn

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4248
    • FaceBook David Sanderson
Re: The two gospels theory
« Reply #9 on: May 02, 2022, 07:07:49 AM »

Just to add:. I think most of Ray's well-formed thoughts on this are in the Rapture paper, of all places.
Logged
Heb 10:32  But you must continue to remember those earlier days, how after you were enlightened you endured a hard and painful struggle.

ralph

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 136
Re: The two gospels theory
« Reply #10 on: May 02, 2022, 09:43:16 AM »

For my part, if you give a man a fish, he can eat for a day.  If you give a man a bible, he can find a way to misunderstand it.  I think they ran across a verse or two that they didn't quite understand and fashioned a doctrine to explain instead of letting Scripture and Spirit explain.

Mostly it strikes me as taking the spiritual and interpreting it literally.  They are failing to compare spiritual with spiritual.  Jesus preached the Gospel of the kingdom.  In the kingdom, there is no Jew or Greek.  Physical circumcision is of no benefit, and neither is physical uncircumcision.  If these folks are overly concerned with, essentially, real estate...they have lost the plot. 

Their premise is in error, and it follows that every strand that flows from that error is just more error.  I watched a short video recently that was of this persuasion.  The speaker said, in effect, that to understand the gospel, I had to accept a theological position.  No thank you, and no.  Click.

Nobody disappoints me like believers in "universal reconciliation". Too many of them have not come far enough out of Babylon or have not been out long enough.  And too many of those are teaching.

Well said Dave...
Logged

indianabob

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2026
Re: The two gospels theory
« Reply #11 on: May 02, 2022, 12:00:01 PM »

Haven't heard of the 2 different gospels of Paul and Peter, but know the Paul (faith alone) vs. James (faith plus works) so-called controversy, even though there is no controversy with P and J.

Hi Dean,
In my understanding the difference is based on the definition of the terms "forgiveness" and "justification"
In the old covenant, prior to the sacrifice of Christ, a believer desired forgiveness for their guilt in committing sins.
They were required to repent and make sacrifices on an annual basis according to the "law of Moses" in the HOPE that God would graciously forgive and grant them life at the return of the Messiah..
=
In the new and better covenant under a risen Christ seated at God's throne a believer is "justified" and deemed righteous without performing any human act of repentance. In other words, if they believe that Christ died for them and that they died with Christ and Christ's spirit lives in them then they have no need of repentance for salvation ever.

This gift is hard to accept as the person feels that they should be at least cooperating with God, but Paul says no...just believe and the work of salvation is finished. Christ did all that is necessary for your "justification". No works for salvation. However having been granted salvation as a free gift, you now can show appreciation and work for a reward in the life you will have in the future with God. The reward is extra, over and above the gift of LIFE.
Logged

Dave in Tenn

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4248
    • FaceBook David Sanderson
Re: The two gospels theory
« Reply #12 on: May 02, 2022, 11:37:07 PM »

Then they have failed to understand the "difference" between good works and works of the law.   

It might help some people to pretend that these letters were not in the bible.  Maybe then, theologians would leave them alone.  Of course, they ARE...but they can't be understood theologically.  Words don't have special "bible-meanings", even though those often appear in bible dictionaries. 
Logged
Heb 10:32  But you must continue to remember those earlier days, how after you were enlightened you endured a hard and painful struggle.

octoberose

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 539
Re: The two gospels theory
« Reply #13 on: May 09, 2022, 12:34:03 AM »

That helps a lot Dave- they fail to see the difference between works of the Law and good works.
  I think these verses are hard to refute and I’m thinking it may help to close the door on this for me ( not quite there yet but I’m closer ).
Romans 4:3-5 & 9-12 – Is this blessedness only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We have been saying that Abraham’s faith was credited to him as righteousness. 10 Under what circumstances was it credited? Was it after he was circumcised, or before? It was not after, but before! 11 And he received circumcision as a sign, a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. So then, he is the father of all who believe but have not been circumcised, in order that righteousness might be credited to them. 12 And he is then also the father of the circumcised who not only are circumcised but who also follow in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.
  I do struggle with promises to Abraham and when and to whom they will be fulfilled.  But I’m working on it.
Logged

indianabob

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2026
Re: The two gospels theory
« Reply #14 on: May 09, 2022, 12:57:14 PM »

That helps a lot Dave- they fail to see the difference between works of the Law and good works.
  I think these verses are hard to refute and I’m thinking it may help to close the door on this for me ( not quite there yet but I’m closer ).
Romans 4:3-5 & 9-12 – Is this blessedness only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We have been saying that Abraham’s faith was credited to him as righteousness. 10 Under what circumstances was it credited? Was it after he was circumcised, or before? It was not after, but before! 11 And he received circumcision as a sign, a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. So then, he is the father of all who believe but have not been circumcised, in order that righteousness might be credited to them. 12 And he is then also the father of the circumcised who not only are circumcised but who also follow in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.
  I do struggle with promises to Abraham and when and to whom they will be fulfilled.  But I’m working on it.

2 Tim 2:1-15
-
2Ti 2:15  Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 

=Following is a quote from John Wycliffe or Miles Coverdale, a.d. 1535?

This quote illustrates that understanding requires diligent study with purpose including the indwelling spirit of Christ and a teacher. We today have an advantage in that we possess the written word, but even that can be a mystery without God's spirit to guide us.

"It will greatly help you to understand scripture if you note - not only what is spoken and written,
but of whom and to whom,
with what words,
at what time,
where and to what intent,
with what circumstances,
considering what goes before and what follows"
=
Logged

Dave in Tenn

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4248
    • FaceBook David Sanderson
Re: The two gospels theory
« Reply #15 on: May 10, 2022, 04:37:30 AM »

"Rightly dividing" is another theological booger bear for some teachers of this ilk.  The word is "cutting" or "slicing".  Peter, Paul and especially the Lord Jesus did it.  This true statement lifted from that scripture and combined with another true statement from an entirely different passage, one or both of which may have nothing obviously and directly to do with the grander point being made.  That's what rightly dividing the word of truth means, not arguing over what hunk of scripture belongs to an alleged divided gospel.  Only the Spirit of God can help us "slice" the spiritual word of Truth.  Ray talked about this a bit.  If I wasn't on my phone, I'd attempt a search.

Besides, it is THE Word of Truth.  ONE.

Paul didn't invent grace.  He didn't invent a concept of grace.  He used sound language and spiritual wisdom from the Hebrew scriptures and of his own experience, not human reasoning to understand and explain and preach the gospel.  He wasn't a hobbyist theologian thinking himself wise while becoming a fool.  He knew what words mean, though some things are hard to understand.  They are also hard to explain to the carnal minded.  I think he did just fine, though. 
« Last Edit: May 10, 2022, 05:46:08 AM by Dave in Tenn »
Logged
Heb 10:32  But you must continue to remember those earlier days, how after you were enlightened you endured a hard and painful struggle.

Dennis Vogel

  • Administrator
  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3246
Re: The two gospels theory
« Reply #16 on: May 10, 2022, 10:43:31 AM »

Mat 10:26  Fear them not therefore: for there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known. 

Luke's account confirms this:

Luk 8:17  For nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest; neither any thing hid, that shall not be known and come abroad. 

This does not say "is" made known in the present time but will be made known sometime in the future. Is that future time now? Don't know.

So you can try to "rightly divide" till you're blue in the face. But if it's not time yet it's not going to happen.
Logged

indianabob

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2026
Re: The two gospels theory
« Reply #17 on: May 10, 2022, 12:11:08 PM »

Dear Dave,

Here is what Paul told his disciples about the gospel he was teaching.

Gal 1:1  Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;)

Paul Called by God
Gal 1:11  But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
Gal 1:12  For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
Gal 1:13  For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it:
Gal 1:14  And profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.
Gal 1:15  But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by his grace,
Gal 1:16  To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:
Gal 1:17  Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.
Gal 1:18  Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days.
Gal 1:19  But other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother.
Gal 1:20  Now the things which I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not.
Gal 1:21  Afterwards I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia;
Gal 1:22  And was unknown by face unto the churches of Judaea which were in Christ:
Gal 1:23  But they had heard only, That he which persecuted us in times past now preacheth the faith which once he destroyed.
Gal 1:24  And they glorified God in me.
= =
*
If Paul taught the same gospel as those before him, then why did he call it “my gospel” three times?

Paul uses both phrases “the gospel” and “our gospel” in his epistles, but when Paul mentions “my gospel” it shows that he had a unique message.

My Gospel: to Jew and Gentile

Paul’s gospel made no distinction between Jew or Gentile. All are counted in unbelief as sinners, and are judged by God without respect of persons whether given the law or not.

Therefore, Paul says:

“In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.” – Romans 2:16
During time past, Jesus’ earthly ministry, and up to his encounter with the Roman, Cornelius, there was a distinction between Jew and Gentile in Peter’s ministry preaching. The Jews had a special spiritual standing with the Lord. Gentiles did not.

My Gospel to Stablish

Paul says “my gospel” is how God stablishes the Romans.

“Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began…” – Romans 16:25
To the Corinthians, Paul claims to be the masterbuilder who lays the foundation of the grace of God upon which other men build.

“According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon.” – 1 Corinthians 3:10

Resurrection According to My Gospel

Resurrection was a part of Jewish prophecy, Jesus foretold his own, and Peter preached the resurrection of Christ before Paul was saved. So how could Paul say this?

“Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel:” – 2 Timothy 2:8
The fact of the resurrection was prophesied, and both Paul and the twelve taught it (1 Cor 15:11). However, the resurrection of Christ was preached by Peter as proof of his Messiahship, and assurance of the kingdom come.

Paul preached the resurrection of Christ as the means of salvation and sanctification for all humanity as part of a new creature, the church the Body of Christ.

Unique to Paul

Paul’s gospel message was entirely of Christ, and so Paul stands alone in calling it “the gospel of Christ” and “Christ’s gospel”, but that he also calls it “my gospel” can only be explained by the fact that Christ gave it first to Paul exclusively.

No one else in scripture could claim “my gospel”, nor can we. We learned the gospel from Paul’s writings, and the twelve apostles taught the same gospel as John the Baptist and of which the prophets spoke (Mark 1:4; Mark 1:15; Acts 3:19-21).

Paul repeatedly says that the dispensation of the grace of God was given to him (Eph 3:2; Eph 3:7; Col 1:25; Rom 15:15).

The Lord revealed to Paul a mystery kept secret since the world began (Rom 16:25; Eph 3:3). Paul was the chosen vessel of the Lord, appointed to the office of apostle of the Gentiles (Rom 11:13; 2 Tim 1:11).

A “dispensation of the gospel” was committed unto him (1 Cor 9:17). His gospel was not received by man, nor was it of man, but given to him first by the Lord (Gal 1:1; Gal 1:11). Even Peter had to learn that God had given Paul further information about God’s grace (Gal 2:9).

It was truly his gospel from Christ, and it was his responsibility to preach his gospel wherever he went.

“If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward…to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:” – Ephesian 3:2-9
Logged

Porter

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 223
Re: The two gospels theory
« Reply #18 on: May 10, 2022, 01:38:12 PM »

Hi Bob, who's teaching is this that you replied with?


Joh 1:17  For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.


That teaching talks a lot about the “gospel”, but I can't seem to figure out what he or she thinks the gospel is. Maybe you can spell it out for me?
Logged
Sometimes when I close my eye's, I can't see.

indianabob

  • Bible-Truths Forum Member
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2026
Re: The two gospels theory
« Reply #19 on: May 10, 2022, 04:30:02 PM »

Porter,
I think that I have said enough for now and should not be teaching on this forum.
If one is of a mind to do so one can pursue additional understanding on their own using the power of Christ's spirit and prayer. What you DISCOVER from your own study is of more value than any comments I could offer.
God is patient and will guide you as God sees fit.

Just look up the scriptures mentioned and follow along in a good concordance or in the www.e-Sword.net application that is available free on the web.

For clearer definitions of Greek and Hebrew words, I also recommend use of the Concordant Literal New Testament available free on line.
Kindly offered, Indiana Bob
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
 

Page created in 0.048 seconds with 18 queries.