A different Gospel? or not?

What you are proposing is a hyper-dispensational theological artifact created by your own theological presuppositions rather than a clear understanding of Scripture.

What do you do with the following:
Galatians 3:8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.

Paul is obviously speaking of the Gospel in the context of his own proclamation of the Gospel, yet this record of the Gospel being preached to Abraham, who was the patriarch of the nation Israel, predates any of the other supposed forms you have mentioned.

Has it ever occurred to you that it is the same gospel identified by different descriptive terms without fully delineating all rudiments and dealing with the points relevant to the time, audience, and occasion? </font>[/QUOTE]VERSES of scripture are not "hyperdispensational artifacts". They are PROOFTEXTS which demonstrate the FALSE TEACHINGS of others who state otherwise.

Why answer YOUR QUESTIONS when you can't even respond to the verses which demonstrate your "futile and foolish" statements?

The blessing of the Gentiles through Abraham is CERTAINLY good news and glad tidings. Hopefully you're not so foolish as to think that ABRAHAM was preached the gospel of the grace of God BEFORE THE NT was even revealed or administered.

Paul speaks of Abraham for he is speaking of the PROMISE OF THE SPIRIT, which came on the Gentiles. That's the DIRECT CONTEXT, not the gospel.

Your "fulness" theory is a grave error, as has been demonstrated by previous posts. They are all different, preached at different times, to different peoples, under different ministries. AN ANGEL preaches one, while MEN preach the others.

Right division will certainly help you.

 

If you finish the quotation, you'll FIND OUT. Paul's MINISTRY agreed basically with the OT scriptures, but his EXPLICIT doctrinal ministry and teaching contained WAY MORE than what was IN the OT scriptures.

Moses NOR any other OT writer could give you a verse on the last trump. That's PAULINE REVELATION, along with many other teachings of his.

 

Carl,

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree - because I simply cannot swallow the Pauline dispy stuff.

Why would Paul have not pointed out that he was preaching differently than Jesus?

What about Jn 3:16?

What about Jn 14:6?

These verses seem to parallel what Paul says pretty well.

And about "prooftexts"... No such things exist. To say that there is a "prooftext" which proves something is to misunderstand the Bible. Doctrines must reflect all of scripture and not be based on a single verse.

Really. Think about it. You declare that a good portion of what Jesus said (and unfortunately we don't have that much) is NOT TO US? That alone should be a read flag! Why is it not TO US? Because the man-made "Pauline dispensationalist" scheme (predetermined) necessitates it be so. So sciprure is twisted.

The reason I make a fuss about it is that you have the potential to seriously mislead some people with these doctrines.

 

Exactly HankD. The Gospel message has always been the same. As more light was shed on it man's understanding increased. </font>[/QUOTE]Ya'll boys have got your own little soteriological system going, but the VERSES get in the way.

Salvation of the BODY OF CHRIST was an "UNKNOWN" whisper of a promise from the Father to the Son BEFORE THE WORLD ever began. (2 Tim.1, Titus 1) It didn't show up UNTIL Paul revealed it. (Rom.16, Eph.3,6, Col.1)

 

charles,

You're something else, brother. You want to agree to disagree then tell me that I'm a false teacher. (Nicely of course.) That won't work. I'll have to continue to point out the SCRIPTURE VERSES which you reject, which will identify the falsity of your teaching. You know that, and I'm supposed to do that.

You didn't ANSWER THE FACTS OF PROOFTEXT that the 12 didn't KNOW about the DBR. They COULD NOT preach Paul's gospel, which INCLUDES IT. They didn't LEARN the gospel of God until AFTER THE RESURRECTION.

When you boys start dealing with verses of PROOFTEXT, (and they are prooftexts of the facts that I stated) then we can discuss. You avoid them. They will not go away.

As to your questions. Paul DID point out that he was preaching a NEW MESSAGE. (Gal.1)

Of course, they parallel Pauline teaching. Who doesn't know that? John 3 and 4 DO NOT CONTAIN the Pauline revelation of doctrinal truth as presented in his epistles. They are GENERAL STATEMENTS OF TRUTH concerning the Lord Jesus.

The Lord would disagree with you about prooftexts. He USED THEM. See him dealing with the Sadducces and in his own synagogue.

Your doctrine must reflect ALL VERSES statement is being a little naive. You DIVIDE just like I do SOMEWHERE.

Pauline dispensationalism is not manmade. It is biblical and scriptural FROM PAUL. Now, if you reject that, that's your business, which would make it mine to IDENTIFY you as Paul did others who withstood his words. Got that?

The Lord Jesus DID NOT teach on "the body of Christ". He GAVE THAT to Paul historically AFTER he had ascended back to heaven. His minstry concerned the Jews. Paul was HIS MINISTER (Rom.15, 11) that went to the Gentiles.

In Christ Jesus,
Carl

 

There were some pretty strong hints in the OT:

Isaiah 53 for instance.

10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.


HankD

 

Carl,

I don't call you a "false teacher" - that has some pretty nasty implications... Maybe a "mixed up teacher"!

What DID Paul say in Gal 1?

"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. 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."

Now just which "other gospel" are you talking about? According to Paul there is none - but you say there are "four forms?"

Rightly dividing the word?

 

Paul revealed what was already there. Don't you get it?

Care to answer my Dan 9 and Matt 24 response?

 

rjprince is advocating the classic dispensationalist position regarding Israel and the millenium.

I am one dispy who rejects any priority Israel has in the kingdom.

Israel will be grafted into the New Covenant, which is already enjoyed by jews and gentiles alike RIGHT NOW.

 

grasshopper, your exegesis of Daniel 9 is pathetic, but you are a preterist so I expect nothing else.

The Messiah was cut off after the 69th week.

The prince to come doesn't do away with sacrifices until the middle of the 70th week.

I have said it before, non premills just need to learn basic math to cure their weak theology.

 

What comes after 69 DD? You might have to take your socks off to get the math right.

Did I say different? Who is the prince in context?

 

There were some pretty strong hints in the OT:

Isaiah 53 for instance.

10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.
11 He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied: by his knowledge shall my righteous servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.


HankD </font>[/QUOTE]Isaiah 53 does not speak SPECIFICALLY OR PROPHETICALLY of the body of Christ. It speaks of Israel AS RECORDED in Matt.1.

 

Mixed up teachers teach FALSE DOCTRINE. See 2 Tim.2.

You should have read further. He SAID he got HIS GOSPEL by revelation of Jesus Christ.

The "other" gospel is a PERVERSION of his advocating the KEEPING of the law. Read the book of Galatians.

Paul is SPEAKING HISTORICALLY of one gospel, HIS. He's not delineating OTHER GOSPELS as contained in the Bible. Please don't try to be cute, brother.

 

It arrived. What Kingdom does Daniel 2 speak of?

Acts 2:30For two whole years Paul stayed there in his own rented house and welcomed all who came to see him. 31Boldly and without hindrance he preached the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ.

Might want to re-evaluate Daniel 9. Context of verse 26 is Messiah.

As far as Matt 24, I assume you speak of this verse:

Matt 24:14And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.

You have a problem, this was fulfilled according to scripture. Notice the greek:

Matt.24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world ( oiÎkoumeÑnh )for a testimony unto all the nations ( eáqnov ); and then shall the end come.

Mark 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world ( ko/smov ), and preach the gospel to the whole creation .(ktiðsiv)

Matt.28:19 Go ye therefore, and make disciples of all the nations (eáqnov ), baptizing them into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit:


Acts 1:8 But ye shall receive power, when the Holy Spirit is come upon you: and ye shall be my witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth ( gh=),

All fulfilled in the 1st century:

Col.1:6 which is come unto you; even as it is also in all the world ( ko/smov ) bearing fruit and increasing, as it doth in you also, since the day ye heard and knew the grace of God in truth;

Col 1:23 if so be that ye continue in the faith, grounded and stedfast, and not moved away from the hope of the gospel which ye heard, which was preached in all creation ( ktiðsiv )under heaven; whereof I Paul was made a minister

Romans 16:26 but now is manifested, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the eternal God, is made known unto all the nations ( eáqnov) unto obedience of faith:

Romans 10:18 But I say, Did they not hear? Yea, verily, Their sound went out into all the earth ( gh=), And their words unto the ends of the world ( oiÎkoumeÑnh ).

Lunacy? </font>[/QUOTE]The kingdom of heaven arrived? That's silly foolishness. See Dan.2 and 7 for confirmation of WHEN it arrives. It is AFTER the little horn PERSECUTES the people of the saints of the most High. That is AFTER the future time of which Jesus PROPHESIED and CORROBORATED Daniel concerning, which BEGINS at the MIDST of Daniel's week. (You messed that one up also.) That's WHY it's not over.

The kingdom of Dan.2-7 is a literal, visible, DAVIDIC, Jewish kingdom with Christ ON THE THRONE OF DAVID which is found in Jerusalem by every prooftext.

The kingdom of God CONCERNS a "moral, righteous, spiritual" kingdom ENTERED by the Holy Spirit of God. (Rom.14, Col.1, 1 Cor.12) Natural people can "WALK" into the kingdom of heaven, but you have to be BORN into the kingdom of God. (Matt.25, John 3)

No, friend. You just CROSSED the gospels. The gospel of the kingdom WAS NOT PREACHED after the resurrection of Christ. IT WAS NEVER PROCLAIMED AS BEING AT HAND AGAIN! (Prooftext?)

Paul's GOSPEL was preached throughout the world.

You mistook one for the other when the BIBLE states that Paul's was a REVELATION which was connected to the MYSTERY OF THE BODY OF CHRIST. (Eph.3, 6)

 

Paul revealed what was already there. Don't you get it?

Care to answer my Dan 9 and Matt 24 response? </font>[/QUOTE]It appears that you don't get it. Paul's doctrinal teachings concerned a MYSTERY which were UNKNOWN. They are "not" contained IN THE OT SCRIPTURES. They are contained IN HIS WRITINGS which are scriptures. (2 Peter 3, Rom.16)

I answered your others previously. You were mistaken.

 

Then perhaps you will explain why the Apostle Philip expounded Isa. 53 for the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 9. Congratulations, you have exactly contradicted the explicit teaching of the apostles themselves with regard to Isaiah 53. If Isa.53 does not refer to the death of Christ for us, then how is it that this was the text for Philip's own exposition?

 

He SAID he got HIS GOSPEL by revelation of Jesus Christ.

Oh that's right - Jesus - the guy who walked around without uttering a word for 3 years of ministry. No wait he did speak - and we have it!

What it boils down to is that we must realize that Paul's epistles must be interpreted in light of the gospels and vice versa.

But this makes the Pauline dispy scheme go POOF! Oh Well!

 

Grasshopper, the prince to come doesn't put away sacrifices until the middle of the 70th week.

The Messiah was cut off after the 69th week, prior to the 70th week.

Here is a little hint:

The number after 69 is 70.

 

Isaiah 53 A wishper huh? I don't have time to read 6 chapters every time you make a statement like "unknown whisper" do you think you could brake that down a bit?

Do you think they were suppost to hear this?


Isaiah 7:13 (KJV)
13And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David; Is it a small thing for you to weary men, but will ye weary my God also?
Isaiah 7:14 (KJV)
14Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

Take this last part back and meditate on it for a while.

15ButterH2529 and honeyH1706 shall he eatH398, that he may knowH3045 to refuseH3988 the evilH7451, and chooseH977 the goodH2896.

 

Then perhaps you will explain why the Apostle Philip expounded Isa. 53 for the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 9. Congratulations, you have exactly contradicted the explicit teaching of the apostles themselves with regard to Isaiah 53. If Isa.53 does not refer to the death of Christ for us, then how is it that this was the text for Philip's own exposition? </font>[/QUOTE]Why wouldn't he expound it? The ENUCH was included "among" Israel. He was RETURNING FROM JERUSALEM where he had been worshipping.

No, I didn't contradict anything. You couldn't and didn't GET MY STATEMENT. The OT does NOT speak PROPHETICALLY of the body of Christ. It was a MYSTERY REVEALED to Paul. He wrote of it, NOT THE APOSTLES, who you say expounded the text for the body of Christ. NO THEY DIDN'T. They didn't KNOW ABOUT THE BODY until Paul's salvation who REVEALED it. Got it? You erred and spake of which you didn't know, understand, or could document.

Who in the world doesn't know that Isaiah 53 applies to the body of Christ? That's being silly.

Paul was the one who declared IN DUE TIME, that Christ died as a RANSOM for all. (1 Tim.2) It concerned HIS GOSPEL. See the context.