The gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of grace, is there a difference

[dirtfarmer]

dirtfarmer here

There is division between believers, most say that the gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of the grace of God are one in the same. What do you believe concerning this, is the gospel of the kingdom different from the gospel of the grace of God?

 

[reba]

there is one gospel the Gospel of Jesus the Christ

 

[dirtfarmer]

there is one gospel the Gospel of Jesus the Christ

hello reba, dirtfarmer here

Would it be correct to say that the gospel of the kingdom is centered on Jesus, the person and the gospel of Grace confirms that Jesus was God manifest in the flesh but is centered on his cross work? Where do we find in the gospel of the kingdom that Christ was going to die or that his death would accomplish our redemption? In Acts 1:6 they even asked if he was going to restore "again" the kingdom to Israel.

 

[reba]

lost me dirtfarmer here

 

[dirtfarmer]

lost me dirtfarmer here

hello reba, dirtfarmer here

The main theme of the gospel of the kingdom is Jesus, the messiah of the Jews, In Matthew 7:22 we find that the gospel of the kingdom is a gospel of works. We are told in scripture that we, the body of Christ, are not saved by works but by faith in Christ.

Ephesians 3:4, " Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ." What was this "mystery of Christ"? Colossians 1:26-27, " Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but is made manifest to his saints. To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory." Jesus Christ could not be in people before his death, burial, and resurrection. So, while he was alive and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, Jesus Christ, the hope of glory, in the believer, was impossible. This is one thing that is different between the gospel of the kingdom, no indwelling savior and the gospel of grace, the savior indwelling the believer by the Spirit.

 

[Nathan]

dirtfarmer
Do you believe 'both Gospels' are from Christ?

 

[dirtfarmer]

dirtfarmer
Do you believe 'both Gospels' are from Christ?

hello Nathan, dirtfarmer here

The word Greek euaggelion means good news, is translated gospel. The gospel, good news, of the kingdom was that the messiah would come and restore again the kingdom to Israel( Acts 1:6). Jesus did offer the kingdom to Israel upon his triumphal entry into Jerusalem on the fold of an ass, a young donkey. The Jews refused his offer, crucified him on a cross.

The work of Christ on the cross confirms the person of Christ. The offer of "whosoever will believe" shall receive salvation to mankind is the gospel of the grace of God.

Therein is the main difference between the kingdom gospel and the gospel of grace.

 

[Nathan]

hello Nathan, dirtfarmer here

The word Greek euaggelion means good news, is translated gospel. The gospel, good news, of the kingdom was that the messiah would come and restore again the kingdom to Israel( Acts 1:6). Jesus did offer the kingdom to Israel upon his triumphal entry into Jerusalem on the fold of an ass, a young donkey. The Jews refused his offer, crucified him on a cross.

The work of Christ on the cross confirms the person of Christ. The offer of "whosoever will believe" shall receive salvation to mankind is the gospel of the grace of God.

Therein is the main difference between the kingdom gospel and the gospel of grace.

Ok, but do you believe 'both Gospels' are from Christ?

 

[dirtfarmer]

Ok, but do you believe 'both Gospels' are from Christ?

hello Nathan, dirtfarmer here

Christ preached the gospel of the kingdom, if Israel had accepted him as their messiah, the earthly kingdom would have been established and there would have been no gospel of the grace of God to be preached. You and I would have never been born, the new heaven and new earth would have already come, the devil would have already been cast into the lake of fire, and time would exist no more and eternity would "time" as we know it.

As to "both gospels" being from Christ, if that is a reference to God the Son, then my answer would be yes. I know you are going to say that Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever and changes not. But how is it that the gospel of the kingdom, which is earthly and the gospel of the grace, which is heavenly is evidence that Christ changed?

 

[Nathan]

hello Nathan, dirtfarmer here

Christ preached the gospel of the kingdom, if Israel had accepted him as their messiah, the earthly kingdom would have been established and there would have been no gospel of the grace of God to be preached. You and I would have never been born, the new heaven and new earth would have already come, the devil would have already been cast into the lake of fire, and time would exist no more and eternity would "time" as we know it.

As to "both gospels" being from Christ, if that is a reference to God the Son, then my answer would be yes. I know you are going to say that Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever and changes not. But how is it that the gospel of the kingdom, which is earthly and the gospel of the grace, which is heavenly is evidence that Christ changed?

You should not assume Well, maybe its ok, I'm not saying you must not. But your wrong in that I was going to say that - except now that you bring it up....... Just messing with you.

However, what I was going to bring up after I confirmed that you believed they are both from Christ, is this;

Gal 1:6-8
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—
not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.
But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.

There is only one Gospel of Christ. Singular. There is no getting around this. People were preaching that there was different 'good news' that came from Christ.

On the outside this looks fine. I mean, good news is good news, right? But on the inside, it distorts the truth. Truth can only be singular. If you add anything to truth then it is no longer truth.

The idea that they would have accepted Christ as their Messiah, when He came, is not a good idea. God had no intentions of them accepting Christ as their Messiah. If, there was any possibility, of the Nation of Israel to accept Him and the Kingdom be set up at that time - then the prophets of the OT would have been false, and nothing would have been been able to be true.

Christ was crucified before the world was made. Before - not after. Christ had to die, therefore there is only one Gospel - and that is His sacrifice for us.

I want to say, in as most loving way as possible, that this is where dispensationalism can really mess up a persons theology. All it does is add confusion to the simple truth of God.

 

[dirtfarmer]

You should not assume Well, maybe its ok, I'm not saying you must not. But your wrong in that I was going to say that - except now that you bring it up....... Just messing with you.

However, what I was going to bring up after I confirmed that you believed they are both from Christ, is this;

Gal 1:6-8
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel—
not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ.
But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.

There is only one Gospel of Christ. Singular. There is no getting around this. People were preaching that there was different 'good news' that came from Christ.

On the outside this looks fine. I mean, good news is good news, right? But on the inside, it distorts the truth. Truth can only be singular. If you add anything to truth then it is no longer truth.

The idea that they would have accepted Christ as their Messiah, when He came, is not a good idea. God had no intentions of them accepting Christ as their Messiah. If, there was any possibility, of the Nation of Israel to accept Him and the Kingdom be set up at that time - then the prophets of the OT would have been false, and nothing would have been been able to be true.

Christ was crucified before the world was made. Before - not after. Christ had to die, therefore there is only one Gospel - and that is His sacrifice for us.

I want to say, in as most loving way as possible, that this is where dispensationalism can really mess up a persons theology. All it does is add confusion to the simple truth of God.

hello Nathan, dirtfarmer here

I understand that that in the mind of God Christ was crucified before the world(ages) was framed. That is the reason the God could provide coats of skin to cover Adam and Eve and re-establish communication with them.

If there is only one gospel, then please show me where in the gospel of the kingdom the death, burial, and resurrection of the messiah is taught as a means of redemption.

 

[Nathan]

hello Nathan, dirtfarmer here

I understand that that in the mind of God Christ was crucified before the world(ages) was framed. That is the reason the God could provide coats of skin to cover Adam and Eve and re-establish communication with them.

If there is only one gospel, then please show me where in the gospel of the kingdom the death, burial, and resurrection of the messiah is taught as a means of redemption.

I'm not sure I can do what you ask. Maybe if you word you question differently?

I believe there is only one Gospel, so I would not know how to separate it into two different ones, and then show where one talks about the other?

If you could word it different maybe I could understand better what you mean.

 

[dirtfarmer]

I'm not sure I can do what you ask. Maybe if you word you question differently?

I believe there is only one Gospel, so I would not know how to separate it into two different ones, and then show where one talks about the other?

If you could word it different maybe I could understand better what you mean.

hello Nathan, dirtfarmer here

That is the problem with the doctrine of only one gospel. Matthew 24:13 "But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved." Matthew 10:22, " And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that edureth until the end shall be saved." This is the gospel of the kingdom. Is our salvation dependent on our last breathe, or are we now the children of God? According to Galatians 3:26-29, at this present time, not only are we children of God but also heirs. This is another difference between the gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of grace.

 

[reba]

The main theme of the gospel of the kingdom is Jesus, the messiah of the Jews, In Matthew 7:22 we find that the gospel of the kingdom is a gospel of works. We are told in scripture that we, the body of Christ, are not saved by works but by faith in Christ.

He is the messiah to the all not just the Jews..

 

[reba]

There is one gospel .. folks may see a bit of this or a bit of that differently but there is one gospel...

 

[reba]

If there is only one gospel, then please show me where in the gospel of the kingdom the death, burial, and resurrection of the messiah is taught as a means of redemption.

Front the Garden to the Cross

His sacrifice was laid out in temple worship.. in Abe and Isaac ... in the story of Joseph/egypt... over and over He is there.. there is one Gospel one Story of Good News .. One redemption one saviour .. One people of God.. We are all one in Christ

 

[Nathan]

hello Nathan, dirtfarmer here

That is the problem with the doctrine of only one gospel. Matthew 24:13 "But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved." Matthew 10:22, " And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that edureth until the end shall be saved." This is the gospel of the kingdom. Is our salvation dependent on our last breathe, or are we now the children of God? According to Galatians 3:26-29, at this present time, not only are we children of God but also heirs. This is another difference between the gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of grace.

So now, we don't have to endure to the end?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

There is one gospel .. folks may see a bit of this or a bit of that differently but there is one gospel...

The two gospel doctrine was created to explain what seems to some to be a difference between the gospel of works that Jesus supposedly taught and the gospel of grace that Paul taught. But there is no reason to invent such a doctrine because it's very easy to understand that Jesus' emphasis on works in salvation is still very much the gospel of faith.

Here in Acts 20, Paul speaks to the Ephesians and demonstrates for us how the gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of grace/faith are one and the same. He makes no distinction between them.

17From Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called to him the elders of the church. 18And when they had come to him, he said to them,
“You yourselves know, from the first day that I set foot in Asia, how I was with you the whole time, 19serving the Lord with all humility and with tears and with trials which came upon me through the plots of the Jews; 20how I did not shrink from declaring to you anything that was profitable, and teaching you publicly and from house to house, 21solemnly testifying to both Jews and Greeks of repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. 22“And now, behold, bound by the Spirit, I am on my way to Jerusalem, not knowing what will happen to me there, 23except that the Holy Spirit solemnly testifies to me in every city, saying that bonds and afflictions await me. 24“But I do not consider my life of any account as dear to myself, so that I may finish my course and the ministry which I received from the Lord Jesus, to testify solemnly of the gospel of the grace of God.

25“And now, behold, I know that all of you, among whom I went about preaching the kingdom, will no longer see my face.
(Acts 20: 17-25 NASB bold mine)

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Front the Garden to the Cross

His sacrifice was laid out in temple worship.. in Abe and Isaac ... in the story of Joseph/egypt... over and over He is there.. there is one Gospel one Story of Good News .. One redemption one saviour .. One people of God.. We are all one in Christ

That's right. Paul takes his audience back to the story of Abraham to show that justification has always been by faith in a/the promise of a son who would inherit the blessing on our behalf. Justification/ salvation has NEVER been on the basis of work completed. It was the Israelites who misunderstood the law to be a way to be made righteous by doing work:

31but Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law. 32Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as though it were by works. (Romans 9:31-32 NASB italics in original)

We can see from the above that it was the Jews who buffoonishly thought the law was a way to be made righteous. God did not send it for that purpose. It got misunderstood to be for that purpose.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Matthew 24:13 "But he that shall endure unto the end, the same shall be saved." Matthew 10:22, " And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that edureth until the end shall be saved." This is the gospel of the kingdom. Is our salvation dependent on our last breathe, or are we now the children of God?

Enduring to the end is the signature of an enduring faith.
The faith that justifies (all by itself) is the faith that endures. The enduring to the end in obedience is how Christ measures the faith that justifies all by itself. Just as Christ condemns unbelievers using their works as the evidence of their unbelief, so Christ saves believers using their works as the evidence of their faith (Matthew 25:31-46 NASB).

There is no reason to create a two gospel doctrine to explain what seems to some to be a difference between Jesus teaching a works gospel and Paul teaching a non-works gospel. Even Paul explains that it is the faith that works that justifies (Galatians 5:6 NASB). That should put to rest any contention that Paul taught a works-less gospel of grace. He taught the same thing Jesus did--justifying faith is seen in what it does. James and John say the same thing. Saving faith is validated by the work it produces. No work, no validation of one's justification by faith alone--off to hell you go.