A Blended Gospel

[NIGHTMARE]

Ok I believe your saying that its ok to eat any kind of food,,,is this correct??????????

Yes. I am saying that Jesus is telling us that no food defiles you. Obviously, I am not saying that Jesus thinks its ok for a diabetic to eat a gallon of jelly beans. I am talking about the Torah prescriptions against eating certain foods. These prescriptions are ended by Jesus.

Ok im sure I no where your headed seeing how many christians believe this (even though its not true) ,,,so what scriptures are you using to determine this??????

 

[Drew]

Ok I believe your saying that its ok to eat any kind of food,,,is this correct??????????

Yes. I am saying that Jesus is telling us that no food defiles you. Obviously, I am not saying that Jesus thinks its ok for a diabetic to eat a gallon of jelly beans. I am talking about the Torah prescriptions against eating certain foods. These prescriptions are ended by Jesus.

Ok im sure I no where your headed seeing how many christians believe this (even though its not true) ,,,so what scriptures are you using to determine this??????

There are so many scriptures that show that the Torah has come to an end, as a written code, including, of course, the food laws, I could be posting for days. Let me start as follows:

Consider this from Galatians 3:

Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith. 25But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.

Just in case there is any doubt that “law†here refers specifically to the Torah, note the meaning that Paul ascribes to the word “law†a few sentences back:

What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise.

Clearly, Paul is here using “law†to denote the set of command and prescriptions that were delivered to the Jews at Sinai – he is not talking about a “law†that is for Gentiles.

Paul would have to be a very incompetent writer if he didn't intend to suggest that the Torah has now "expired". The word "tutor" here is the well-known Greek word "paidagogos". And, as per the Net Bible definition, a paidagogos is .

"a tutor i.e. a guardian and guide of boys. Among the Greeks and the Romans the name was applied to trustworthy slaves who were charged with the duty of supervising the life and morals of boys belonging to the better class. The boys were not allowed so much as to step out of the house without them before arriving at the age of manhood

By the very nature of the task of the paidagogos, his job comes to an end at some point in time - when the child becomes a man. Paul would have to be very incompetent to characterise the Law as a paidagogos (to his Greek readers who knew what the term meant), and yet not expect the reader to understand that, like the real tutor, the Law "loses its job" at some point in time.

Yet we have every reason to believe that Paul is using the term "paidagogos" in the proper sense - the sense where the tutor's job comes to an end at a certain point. Just as the tutor's job ends when the boy becomes a man, the Law's job comes to an end once "faith has come" as Paul explicitly states.

And consider what Paul goes on to say:

26For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28(There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Note the inclusivity. If Paul has just written something whereby the Torah has been affirmed as still applicable, then the Jew and the Gentile are still two distinct groups within the body - we have Torah following Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians who do not follow the Torah. But the whole spirit of what Paul says here (and elsewhere) is that there are no sub-groups" within the people of God.

How would verses 26-28 make sense specifically as a "for" (effectively a "because") conclusion to what Paul has just said about being no longer under the tutorship of the Torah? It would hardly make sense if the Torah were still active precisely because the Torah served the purpose of demarcating the Jew as distinct from the Gentile. Many do not think of Torah as serving that function, but I suggest that Paul clearly does – and that is what matters. The relevant text for that argument is from the beginning of Romans 10.

Instead, these verses only make sense if the boundary marker between Jew and Gentile - the Torah - has been retired.

I am going to politely suggest that the only reason such texts can be read as not indicating the expiry of Torah is to make the implicit assumption that Paul is a bad writer not in command of his argument and its terms. Thus, to believe that Torah is still in force, we need to believe the following:

1. Paul's choice of the paidagogos metaphor is misleading, since proper use of the metaphor would imply that the Torah, like the tutor's job, expires.

2. Paul has been doubly incompetent in his choice of the metaphor, since his "now that faith has come" statement would be naturally seen as corresponding to the condition of the boy reaching manhood, triggering the release of the paidagogos.

3. Paul writes a very weak and contradictory conclusion in 26 - 28, since he argues that the Jew and Gentile are indistinguishable from each other in the family, yet the Jew retains this massive set of rules, festivals, and practices that they alone are to follow. This is hardly being "non-distinct" from the Gentile.

 

[GodspromisesRyes]

i see that this thread has gone way out into left field here over foods and laws but that isnt the purpose here.
richard you are in serious error and the doctrine you are giving is so off course that i think that this mid acts dispie thing is maybe the worst heresy i have ever heard. There is only ONE gospel, not two or more, the same thing was preached for salvation to the jews as to the gentiles, the same thing that paul preached was preached by Jesus to the disciples but the full revelation of the mysteries(which did did tell them they just were not given to understand it yet) were given through paul, that did not change the way of salvation or the gospel of salvation to all people. Peter preached to both jews and gentiles the same message as did paul to jews and gentiles the same message, one was just sent more often to jews the other more often to gentiles that was their specific callings not differnt gospels.

Both Jesus and Paul taught that you had to be born again from above by the Spirit, to become new creations born from heaven.

Both taught to depart from sin by faith in Jesus, to be perfect and holy.

Both taught that Christ would be IN US and would be manifest IN US making us LIKE HIM.

Both taught that we must BELIEVE and REPENT and CONFESS and be baptised.

Both taught the gospel and showed it with POWER to confirm the word they spoke.

Both taught the new covenant in His blood.

Both taught the end of works of flesh and a life of walking by faith keeping our eyes on the kingdomof God.

Both taught that in Christ all believers,jews and gentiles would be made ONE fold with ONE shepard.

Both taught no other way of salvation but in faith in Christ crucified and risen.

And it goes on and on.

The problem with this whole false doctrine being put out here, well one of the many problems is that there is only ONE covenant by which men can have eternal life and that is the NEW COVENANT in HIS BLOOD. There is only one way to enter this covenant and that is by FAITH in God by which we have access into grace, this has nothing to do with the law as it was the promise given to abraham before the law existed and is a faith covenant for everyone. This new covenant is ONLY made with ISRAEL and JUDAH. So to be part of this covenant with His promises one must be grafted in BY FAITH into ISRAEL to partake of this covenant which happens by gentiles being brought nigh by the blood of Christ so that now we partake of the same covenant and promises and are fellow citizend and heirs and there is absolutly no differnce between jews and geniles in Christ, and outside of faith in Christ everyone who does not come to faith before they die is counted all condemned no matter their flesh. A covenant does not have one message and way of salvation to one people and another way and message to a differnt group of people. Everyone on earth is either in the new covenant saved by the same faith in the same gospel in the same Lord with the same commandments or they are condemned and lost and wicked until they come to faith. Yes a remnant of physical jews will come to faith and be grafted back in, but they then will be united with us and every believer of any flesh who has ever lived by faith in Christ, they will not be a seperate rule book or gospel or fold or kingdom for them.

the kingdom of God is within us, the kingdom comes in us and we are born again from above being filled with the Spirit of God becomming a new creation in Christ. We are come to heavenly jerusalem, to mt zion, to the city of the living God to the spirits of just men made perfect to the assembly of the first born and of the saints.

This doctrine along with all forms of dispie doctrine seeks to rebuild the very walls that Jesus died and tore down, seeks to replace the emnity that Christ died and tore away seeks to divide up the body that He died to make HIS FLESH AND BONES

 

[NIGHTMARE]

Consider this from Galatians 3:

Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith. 25But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor.

Just in case there is any doubt that “law†here refers specifically to the Torah, note the meaning that Paul ascribes to the word “law†a few sentences back:

What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise.

Clearly, Paul is here using “law†to denote the set of command and prescriptions that were delivered to the Jews at Sinai – he is not talking about a “law†that is for Gentiles.

Paul would have to be a very incompetent writer if he didn't intend to suggest that the Torah has now "expired". The word "tutor" here is the well-known Greek word "paidagogos". And, as per the Net Bible definition, a paidagogos is .

"a tutor i.e. a guardian and guide of boys. Among the Greeks and the Romans the name was applied to trustworthy slaves who were charged with the duty of supervising the life and morals of boys belonging to the better class. The boys were not allowed so much as to step out of the house without them before arriving at the age of manhood

By the very nature of the task of the paidagogos, his job comes to an end at some point in time - when the child becomes a man. Paul would have to be very incompetent to characterise the Law as a paidagogos (to his Greek readers who knew what the term meant), and yet not expect the reader to understand that, like the real tutor, the Law "loses its job" at some point in time.

Yet we have every reason to believe that Paul is using the term "paidagogos" in the proper sense - the sense where the tutor's job comes to an end at a certain point. Just as the tutor's job ends when the boy becomes a man, the Law's job comes to an end once "faith has come" as Paul explicitly states.

And consider what Paul goes on to say:

26For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28(There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Note the inclusivity. If Paul has just written something whereby the Torah has been affirmed as still applicable, then the Jew and the Gentile are still two distinct groups within the body - we have Torah following Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians who do not follow the Torah. But the whole spirit of what Paul says here (and elsewhere) is that there are no sub-groups" within the people of God.

How would verses 26-28 make sense specifically as a "for" (effectively a "because") conclusion to what Paul has just said about being no longer under the tutorship of the Torah? It would hardly make sense if the Torah were still active precisely because the Torah served the purpose of demarcating the Jew as distinct from the Gentile. Many do not think of Torah as serving that function, but I suggest that Paul clearly does – and that is what matters. The relevant text for that argument is from the beginning of Romans 10.

Instead, these verses only make sense if the boundary marker between Jew and Gentile - the Torah - has been retired.

I am going to politely suggest that the only reason such texts can be read as not indicating the expiry of Torah is to make the implicit assumption that Paul is a bad writer not in command of his argument and its terms. Thus, to believe that Torah is still in force, we need to believe the following:

1. Paul's choice of the paidagogos metaphor is misleading, since proper use of the metaphor would imply that the Torah, like the tutor's job, expires.

2. Paul has been doubly incompetent in his choice of the metaphor, since his "now that faith has come" statement would be naturally seen as corresponding to the condition of the boy reaching manhood, triggering the release of the paidagogos.

3. Paul writes a very weak and contradictory conclusion in 26 - 28, since he argues that the Jew and Gentile are indistinguishable from each other in the family, yet the Jew retains this massive set of rules, festivals, and practices that they alone are to follow. This is hardly being "non-distinct" from the Gentile.[/quote]

OK,,,I will address the first scripture you left,,,and the rest as time permits......

Galatians 3:24 "Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster. to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith."

What is a schoolmaster?????? It is the law,,,,and it is simply there to teach people right from wrong....
What else does the the schoolmaster do ???????? It brings us to Christ......So this schoolmaster that you have deemed of no need,,,,actual brings us to Christ that we may be justified by faith,,,,,sure you wanna throw the law (schoolmaster) out the window????

Galatians 3:25 "But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster."

Indeed we are not under the schoolmaster becasue of faith in Christ,,,but that doesnt change or abolish the schoolmaster.....When you sin you are breaking the law (your going againt the schoolmaster) but because of Christ,,,we can now repent and go directly to the Father,,,,instead of killing and burning animals on a alter.........

Paul would have to be a very incompetent writer if he didn't intend to suggest that the Torah has now "expired". The word "tutor" here is the well-known Greek word "paidagogos". And, as per the Net Bible definition, a paidagogos is .

"a tutor i.e. a guardian and guide of boys. Among the Greeks and the Romans the name was applied to trustworthy slaves who were charged with the duty of supervising the life and morals of boys belonging to the better class. The boys were not allowed so much as to step out of the house without them before arriving at the age of manhood

You probably noticed my bible says "schoolmaster" not tutor......... But we can get into that later.....


Galatians 3:26 "For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus."

----We are all children of God (ummmm maybe a future discussion) God created all the races and loved them all.....

Galatians 3:27 "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ."

----Being baptized into the death burial and ressurection of Christ retires the law (schoolmaster) how?????It doesnt,,,,,,,it gives us a different route to the kingdom,,,,but does not take anything from the way God would have us live.....

Galatians 3:28 "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus."

No commentary needed......

Note the inclusivity. If Paul has just written something whereby the Torah has been affirmed as still applicable, then the Jew and the Gentile are still two distinct groups within the body - we have Torah following Jewish Christians and Gentile Christians who do not follow the Torah. But the whole spirit of what Paul says here (and elsewhere) is that there are no sub-groups" within the people of God.

How would verses 26-28 make sense specifically as a "for" (effectively a "because") conclusion to what Paul has just said about being no longer under the tutorship of the Torah? It would hardly make sense if the Torah were still active precisely because the Torah served the purpose of demarcating the Jew as distinct from the Gentile. Many do not think of Torah as serving that function, but I suggest that Paul clearly does – and that is what matters. The relevant text for that argument is from the beginning of Romans 10.

Instead, these verses only make sense if the boundary marker between Jew and Gentile - the Torah - has been retired.

Dualy noted,,,,,your missing it bro,,,,,all Paul is saying is that the route to the kingdom has changed,,,,,, Jew and Gentile are to believe upon Christ,,,,Jews had the law,,,,,Gentiles didnt,,,,so really only the Jews and Israel had way to the kingdom,,,,,,but now we all have a way,,, the same way my friend,,,which is Christ......BUT,,,,THE LAWS MUST BE FOLLOWED,,,,,but after one has sinned (broken the law) we have different steps with clearing the issue up......That simple......

I am going to politely suggest that the only reason such texts can be read as not indicating the expiry of Torah is to make the implicit assumption that Paul is a bad writer not in command of his argument and its terms. Thus, to believe that Torah is still in force, we need to believe the following:

1. Paul's choice of the paidagogos metaphor is misleading, since proper use of the metaphor would imply that the Torah, like the tutor's job, expires.

2. Paul has been doubly incompetent in his choice of the metaphor, since his "now that faith has come" statement would be naturally seen as corresponding to the condition of the boy reaching manhood, triggering the release of the paidagogos.

3. Paul writes a very weak and contradictory conclusion in 26 - 28, since he argues that the Jew and Gentile are indistinguishable from each other in the family, yet the Jew retains this massive set of rules, festivals, and practices that they alone are to follow. This is hardly being "non-distinct" from the Gentile.

1--- Not misleading at all,,,it actually makes it very clear that Christ as taken the law and fulfilled it.....

2---"Is the law ten against the promises of God? God forbid:

3----Well to respond I would have to know that you understand that a jew is,,,,you might just believe those sponken of in revelation 2:9 and 3:9 are jews,,,,,which would be very dangerous.....

Ok from this I dont see the law (schoolmaster being retired) quite the opposite,,,we have 1 (Christ) who would not change the law but follow every part of it thus making us able to go through Him to the Father and being apart of that fulfillment..........

Ok pure gray matter here for a moment,,,,,Does america follow the healt laws???? heeeeeeeeeeck NO...

And then we wonder why we have diabetes running a muck....(even on children) also im a athlete so I can feel the difference in my body,,,,,eating the things of God and things He as not allowed......

has anyone ever told you,,,that you overthink the word?????,,,,,,dont get me wrong God gave us brains to use,,,,but there is a sutleness and smoothness in truth,,,, and you seem to let thinking,, rethinking and overthinking cloud that,,,just let the spirit do its thing..........

 

[Drew]

What is a schoolmaster?????? It is the law,,,,and it is simply there to teach people right from wrong....What else does the the schoolmaster do ???????? It brings us to Christ......So this schoolmaster that you have deemed of no need,,,,actual brings us to Christ that we may be justified by faith,,,,,sure you wanna throw the law (schoolmaster) out the window????

Well that's what Paul says, so you need to take it up with him. The statements are clear - Paul sees the Torah as retired = just like a paidagogos is when the child reaches maturity. This cannot be emphasied enough: when a child reaches maturity, the paidagogos is out of a job.

You seem to suggest that it is sensible to keep the paidagogos employed after the child has reached maturity.

Your whole position here seems to ignore that it is entirely sensible to "retire" a good thing after its job is done. Let's say that I hire a tutor to teach me French. Once I achieve proficicency, do I keep the tutor? Of course not.

Galatians 3:25 "But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster."

Indeed we are not under the schoolmaster becasue of faith in Christ,,,but that doesnt change or abolish the schoolmaster.....When you sin you are breaking the law (your going againt the schoolmaster) but because of Christ,,,we can now repent and go directly to the Father,,,,instead of killing and burning animals on a alter.........

Do you realize what you have just dones. You have just argued my point for me. It is the Torah that mandated animal sacrifice. You agree that such sacrifices are no longer needed. So, you are effectively agreeing that the time of the Torah has come to an end.

 

[NIGHTMARE]

What is a schoolmaster?????? It is the law,,,,and it is simply there to teach people right from wrong....What else does the the schoolmaster do ???????? It brings us to Christ......So this schoolmaster that you have deemed of no need,,,,actual brings us to Christ that we may be justified by faith,,,,,sure you wanna throw the law (schoolmaster) out the window????

Well that's what Paul says, so you need to take it up with him. The statements are clear - Paul sees the Torah as retired = just like a paidagogos is when the child reaches maturity. This cannot be emphasied enough: when a child reaches maturity, the paidagogos is out of a job.

You seem to suggest that it is sensible to keep the paidagogos employed after the child has reached maturity.

Your whole position here seems to ignore that it is entirely sensible to "retire" a good thing after its job is done. Let's say that I hire a tutor to teach me French. Once I achieve proficicency, do I keep the tutor? Of course not.

Galatians 3:25 "But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster."

Indeed we are not under the schoolmaster becasue of faith in Christ,,,but that doesnt change or abolish the schoolmaster.....When you sin you are breaking the law (your going againt the schoolmaster) but because of Christ,,,we can now repent and go directly to the Father,,,,instead of killing and burning animals on a alter.........

Do you realize what you have just dones. You have just argued my point for me. It is the Torah that mandated animal sacrifice. You agree that such sacrifices are no longer needed. So, you are effectively agreeing that the time of the Torah has come to an end.

what im saying is that Christ died a blood sacrifice so we do not need to kill animals on alters and burn them for the remission of sins......But the law is still there,,,,if you break it you must atone....But now we have a easier way to get right,,,,repent.....

DO you understand the difference in ordinances and statutes and sacrificesand the law itself???????

Again the word is clear,,,,we must keep the law,,, but when we break it we go to God/Father in prayer/repentence........

DO you understand the difference in ordinances and statutes and sacrifices and the law itself???????

 

[RichardBurger]

GodspromisesRyes wrote the following:

“richard you are in serious error and the doctrine you are giving is so off course that i think that this mid acts dispie thing is maybe the worst heresy i have ever heard. There is only ONE gospel, not two or more, the same thing was preached for salvation to the jews as to the gentiles, the same thing that paul preached was preached by Jesus to the disciples but the full revelation of the mysteries(which did did tell them they just were not given to understand it yet) were given through paul, that did not change the way of salvation or the gospel of salvation to all people. Peter preached to both jews and gentiles the same message as did paul to jews and gentiles the same message, one was just sent more often to jews the other more often to gentiles that was their specific callings not differnt gospels.â€Â

My reply:
--- First, I do not appreciate your words “you are in serious error and the doctrine you are giving is so off course that i think that this mid acts dispie thing is maybe the worst heresy i have ever heard.†--- You can have your own opinion and state it and I will not disparage you for having it. Seems that you are not disposed to give me that same right. Do you really think the words you write about me, personally makes you right and me wrong?

--- Second, you don’t seem to remember that Jesus said the drink symbolized His to be the blood of a NEW covenant. If there is to be a NEW then there must have been an OLD. Seems to me that to believe otherwise is foolishness.

Matt 26:28
28 For this is My blood of the new covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.
NKJV

2 Cor 3:6
6 who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.
NKJV

Not until Paul was the blood shown to be sufficient to give life on it’s own.

2 Cor 3:7-11
7 But if the ministry of death, written and engraved on stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not look steadily at the face of Moses because of the glory of his countenance, which glory was passing away,
8 how will the ministry of the Spirit not be more glorious?
9 For if the ministry of condemnation had glory, the ministry of righteousness exceeds much more in glory.
10 For even what was made glorious had no glory in this respect, because of the glory that excels.
11 For if what is passing away was glorious, what remains is much more glorious.
NKJV

You seem to want to ignore that one has passed away and another taken it’s place.

Heb 8:13
13 In that He says, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. Now what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.
NKJV

How can anyone ignore the fact that one was made obsolete and was to vanish away

Heb 9:15
15 And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.
NKJV

What you seem to believe is a blended gospel of the old and the new which will not save anyone in this age of grace.

 

[Cornelius]

Blended Gospel:

The religious Christian Church is (and has been since the RCC came into existence) teaching a blended, harmonized gospel that takes what Jesus and His Apostles preached to the Jews which included the Law and what Paul preached for the grace Church that excluded the Law and mixes them together. These teachings were never meant to be blended, harmonized together. When you do it you destroy both messages. The scriptures teach we are to “rightly divide the word of truth,†not blend it together.

Let me make it clear that all the scriptures are written FOR US, but not all are written TO US. --- Jesus’ message was to the Jews, not the grace Church. Paul’s message was to the grace Church.

I get depressed when I hear the blended gospel being taught. It is a gospel fostered by the devil. I have opposed it on forums for years and have been asked to leave because of my objections to it. Let me make it clear that Jesus Christ did not come to minister to the Gentiles, nor was His message "the kingdom gospel" sent to the Gentiles. He did not offer the "kingdom of heaven" to the Gentiles because the Gentiles were never promised a kingdom on this earth. The following scriptures support my view.

Matt 10:5-7 (NKJ)
5 These twelve Jesus sent out and commanded them, saying: "Do not go into the way of the Gentiles, and do not enter a city of the Samaritans.
6 "But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
7 "And as you go, preach, saying, 'The kingdom of heaven is at hand.'

Matt 15:23-24 (NKJ)
23 But He answered her not a word. And His disciples came and urged Him, saying, "Send her away, for she cries out after us."
24 But He answered and said, "I was not sent except to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

Rom 15:8 (NKJ)
8 Now I say that Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made unto the fathers:

Note that in Matt 10:5-7 and Matt 15:23-24 Jesus said He did not come EXCEPT to the house of Israel. Jesus came to confirm/fulfill all that was written of Him in the O.T. His mission was to the Jews, not to the Gentiles. This is what Paul meant in Rom 15:8.

HOWEVER; This is not to say that God did not have another purpose for Jesus' death on the cross.

But that purpose was “hidden in God†and not revealed until it was revealed to Paul on the road to Damascus by Jesus. The grace gospel was not in existence until Paul taught it. See Eph. 3:9 and Col. 1:26.

The Parable of the Wedding Feast; (Matt. 22: 1-10)

1 And Jesus answered and spoke to them again by parables and said:
2 "The kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who arranged a marriage for his son,
3 and sent out his servants to call those who were invited to the wedding; and they were not willing to come.
4 Again, he sent out other servants, saying, 'Tell those who are invited, "See, I have prepared my dinner; my oxen and fatted cattle are killed, and all things are ready. Come to the wedding."'
5 But they made light of it and went their ways, one to his own farm, another to his business.
6 And the rest seized his servants, treated them spitefully, and killed them.
7 But when the king heard about it, he was furious. And he sent out his armies, destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.
8 Then he said to his servants, 'The wedding is ready, but those who were invited were not worthy.
9 Therefore go into the highways, and as many as you find, invite to the wedding.'
10 So those servants went out into the highways and gathered together all whom they found, both bad and good. And the wedding hall was filled with guests.
NKJV

We, today, are only invited because the Jews rejected Jesus as their king. God will not let what His Son did on the cross go without results.

This is what I believe.

Praise God we do not have what was offered to the Jews .Heb 8:6 But now hath he obtained a ministry the more excellent, by so much as he is also the mediator of a better covenant, which hath been enacted upon better promises.

God knew from the beginning that the Jews would reject Jesus. The church is not "Plan B" the church has always been "Plan A" God does not fail when He starts out to do something.

 

[RichardBurger]

From Acts 1 until Acts 7 (or perhaps 70 AD) the Jewish nation could have repented and accepted Jesus as their savior. He would have returned for His second coming and set up His kingdom rule from Jerusalem and all Gentile nations would be blessed through Israel. Read Luke 13:6-9 and realize that Jesus told this story as an indication of what would happen if Israel (the fig tree) rejected Jesus. The Jews had a time period in which they could have repented. (Acts 2:37-38)

Luke 13:6-9 (The Parable of the Barren Fig Tree)
6 He also spoke this parable: "A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard, and he came seeking fruit on it and found none.
7 Then he said to the keeper of his vineyard, 'Look, for three years I have come seeking fruit on this fig tree and find none. Cut it down; why does it use up the ground?'
8 But he answered and said to him, 'Sir, let it alone this year also, until I dig around it and fertilize it.
9 And if it bears fruit, well. But if not, after that you can cut it down.'"
NKJV

However, just as the nation of Israel rejected God when they said they wanted a human king to rule over them, (1 Samuel 8:19 and 10:19) they also rejected the Son of God when they said they "had no king but Caesar," (John 19:15) and, finally, they rejected the Holy Spirit when they stoned Stephens, Acts 7. They had rejected all three in the Trinity, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, who was speaking through Stephens, and their doom was sealed. The "kingdom of heaven" on this earth was put on hold until the time of the Gentiles be fulfilled, Luke 21:24.

IMPORTANT NOTE: -- This is not to say that God did not have another purpose for Jesus' death on the cross. But that purpose was “hidden in God†and revealed to Paul on the road to Damascus by Jesus. (Eph 3:9)


As said above, God had a hidden secondary purpose for the death of Jesus on the cross. From Jesus, and the preaching of the "Kingdom of Heaven," to this time in which we now live is a new dispensation and it was not mentioned in the O.T. it was not mentioned in the first 4 books of the N.T. nor was it mentioned in the Jewish writings of the 12. This new gospel was ""hidden in God"" and revealed to Paul by Jesus Christ on the road to Damascus, Acts 9:3-6 and Eph 3:8-9.

All that was written "to the Jews" in the O.T. and the N.T. was written "to the Jews," not to the Gentiles. Is it necessary for us to understand them? YES. If we don't then we are missing the foundation for understanding who Jesus is and the shift to the gospel of God's grace. The message of salvation by God's grace, "alone," given to Paul, was without precedence. It was not in the Jewish relationship with God. The Jewish relationship was a religious one of "faith + works to show that faith" (James 2:24). However, the gospel of God's grace requires no works whatsoever. God has done all the works that are necessary on the cross. As Paul said;

Rom 4:5-6 (NKJ)
5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness,
6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:

Only Paul penned the words "in Christ" for he understood that God places those that believe in Him "in Christ" by the operation of the Holy Spirit (new birth). Man cannot accomplish this new birth. This idea of being "in Christ" was totally new. Up to this time it was all in a religious relationship of works, rituals and ceremonies.

 

[GodspromisesRyes]

This is completely untrue. i will have more time in the morning i think to answer this but the jews could not have repented and believed before acts 7 changed how things were, God made it clear especially through paul that it was GOD who blinded the rest of the jews except the elect to save us. There was tons of old testament prophecy about the gentiles coming to Christ and about Him being glory in us and God dwelling in the midst(that is within) His people. To say that the jews could have done it differntly is to say that if they would have God would have been willing to not fulfill tons of prophecy he had already given.
Also I never denied that there was an old covenant but the old covenant was not in the blood of Christ, only the new covenant is in His blood and that covenant began with him, not with paul years later. The mysteries given to paul were hidden true, but they still existed before and Jesus did speak about them to the disciples the meaning of what he said was hidden from them and not revealed but he still told them. John also speaks of how He is in us and we are in him as well as Jesus did.
Jesus plan in God was never to come in that century and be accepted by the jews and set up an earthly kingdom. To say that acts 2:36-37 was the jews time to repent so Jesus could return for the second coming in their day is not at all scriptural nothing suggests anything like that. Peter preached to the jews in acts and told them the truth and many not all believed. No one mentions o jesus isnt gonna return before of what you are doing till later.
Rom 11:7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded


Rom 11:8 (According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.


Rom 11:9 And David saith, Let their table be made a snare, and a trap, and a stumblingblock, and a recompence unto them:


Rom 11:10 Let their eyes be darkened, that they may not see, and bow down their back alway.


Rom 11:11 ¶ I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but [rather] through their fall salvation [is come] unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.


Rom 11:12 Now if the fall of them [be] the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?


Rom 11:13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:


Rom 11:14 If by any means I may provoke to emulation [them which are] my flesh, and might save some of them.


Rom 11:15 For if the casting away of them [be] the reconciling of the world, what [shall] the receiving [of them be], but life from the dead?


Rom 11:16 For if the firstfruit [be] holy, the lump [is] also [holy]: and if the root [be] holy, so [are] the branches.


Rom 11:17 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree;


Rom 11:18 Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.


Rom 11:19 Thou wilt say then, The branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in.


Rom 11:20 Well; because of unbelief they were broken off, and thou standest by faith. Be not highminded, but fear:


Rom 11:21 For if God spared not the natural branches, [take heed] lest he also spare not thee.


Rom 11:22 Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in [his] goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.


Rom 11:23 And they also, if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in: for God is able to graff them in again.


Rom 11:24 For if thou wert cut out of the olive tree which is wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural [branches], be graffed into their own olive tree?


Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.


Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:


Rom 11:27 For this [is] my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins.


Rom 11:28 As concerning the gospel, [they are] enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, [they are] beloved for the fathers' sakes.
Rom 11:30 For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief:


Rom 11:31 Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy.


Rom 11:32 For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.


Rom 11:33 O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable [are] his judgments, and his ways past finding out!


Clearly paul is showing that this was always Gods plan! The jews could have not done anything differntly this was always what God was going to do. To further prove that paul, peter, john show us that there are gententiles who are ELECT - chosen by God before the foundation of the world to be saved to be conformed into the iamge of CHrist and even their good works were ordained by God before creation! This was always His plan, this is not a plan b. There will never be a time again when the jews who believe are seperate from the gentiles who believe and there will never be a time when eanyone is saved outside of faith in Christ Jesus by grace through faith.

 

[RichardBurger]

Luke 13:6-9 (The Parable of the Barren Fig Tree)
6 He also spoke this parable: "A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard, and he came seeking fruit on it and found none.
7 Then he said to the keeper of his vineyard, 'Look, for three years I have come seeking fruit on this fig tree and find none. Cut it down; why does it use up the ground?'
8 But he answered and said to him, 'Sir, let it alone this year also, until I dig around it and fertilize it.
9 And if it bears fruit, well. But if not, after that you can cut it down.'"
NKJV

It was said: “This is completely untrue. i will have more time in the morning i think to answer this but the jews could not have repented and believed before acts 7 changed how things were, God made it clear especially through paul that it was GOD who blinded the rest of the jews except the elect to save us.â€Â

My reply: In the O.T. the Gentiles were always to be blessed “THROUGH THE JEWS†but never on equal footing. If the Apostles were not to try and make the Jews accept Jesus as their king then what is the purpose of verses 8 and 9 above? Are they there just to make the story more elaborate?

It was said: “Also I never denied that there was an old covenant but the old covenant was not in the blood of Christ, only the new covenant is in His blood and that covenant began with him, not with paul years later.â€Â

My reply: you said there was only one gospel from the beginning to the end. That means there could never have been an old and a new, it must have all been the same. All the verbiage you gave cannot make NEW = OLD.

Look, I am not here to change your mind, or to argue with you. You believe what you will and I will do the same. I am not going to spend endless time replying to someone that tells me that what I write is untrue. No one can change the mind of those that refuse to see anything other than what is in they believe. Let the facts determine what is true.

You believe there was never any other gospel than the gospel of grace and I have shown that there was. There was an OLD and now there is a NEW. Believe what you will.

 

[GodspromisesRyes]

There was an old covenant and there is a new covenant but there has always been only one gospel!

Hbr 4:1 ¶ Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left [us] of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.


Hbr 4:2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard [it].

We see in context he is saying the same gospel was preached in the wilderness as is preached to us but they did not have faith to mix with the promise they were preached.

Hbr 3:17 But with whom was he grieved forty years? [was it] not with them that had sinned, whose carcases fell in the wilderness?
Hbr 3:18 And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not?
Hbr 3:19 So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.

The old covenant was not a gospel it was not " good news" it came to bind people under sins and was added because of transgressions. Moses told them that if they would have believed God he would not have even given them the law! IF they couldhave(which was not Gods plan ultimatly anyways) believed in God after the first passover, the law would not have even come, they would have went right into the promised land and lived by faith in the gospel and entered into His rest.

Recieving the old covenant was not a good news. Getting a law that no one can keep that is made to bind all men under sin so that they would be led to faith in a savior is no gospel Certianly not a gospel of salvation. All the believers of all time were saved by FAITH not by law- the law saved no one. They just could not before Christ ascended be crucified of self and be born aain from above because the Spirit had not yet come to live inside of people and make them a cretion new born from above.

 

[Cornelius]

There was an old covenant and there is a new covenant but there has always been only one gospel!

Hbr 4:1 ¶ Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left [us] of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.


Hbr 4:2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard [it].

We see in context he is saying the same gospel was preached in the wilderness as is preached to us but they did not have faith to mix with the promise they were preached.

Hbr 3:17 But with whom was he grieved forty years? [was it] not with them that had sinned, whose carcases fell in the wilderness?
Hbr 3:18 And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that believed not?
Hbr 3:19 So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief.

The old covenant was not a gospel it was not " good news" it came to bind people under sins and was added because of transgressions. Moses told them that if they would have believed God he would not have even given them the law! IF they couldhave(which was not Gods plan ultimatly anyways) believed in God after the first passover, the law would not have even come, they would have went right into the promised land and lived by faith in the gospel and entered into His rest.

Recieving the old covenant was not a good news. Getting a law that no one can keep that is made to bind all men under sin so that they would be led to faith in a savior is no gospel Certianly not a gospel of salvation. All the believers of all time were saved by FAITH not by law- the law saved no one. They just could not before Christ ascended be crucified of self and be born aain from above because the Spirit had not yet come to live inside of people and make them a cretion new born from above.

Amen. As I said before, the New Testament church has always been "Plan A" . The Jews were never meant to be "it" , because as you pointed out, God blinded them. He blinded them for a reason: The church, His Bride needed to come into being. Jew and Gentile together was "Plan A"

 

[Cornelius]

No one can change the mind of those that refuse to see anything other than what is in they believe

You do realize that this applies to you too ?

You believe there was never any other gospel than the gospel of grace and I have shown that there was. There was an OLD and now there is a NEW. Believe what you will.

GPR did in fact prove from Scripture that the Jews had the same gospel preached to them.


Heb 4:2 For indeed we have had good tidings preached unto us, even as also they:but the word of hearing did not profit them, because it was not united by faith with them that heard.
The difference being, they did not believe what they heard. Same as with many Christians today, that still do not believe the promises are true.

 

[Adullam]

Luke 13:6-9 (The Parable of the Barren Fig Tree)
6 He also spoke this parable: "A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard, and he came seeking fruit on it and found none.
7 Then he said to the keeper of his vineyard, 'Look, for three years I have come seeking fruit on this fig tree and find none. Cut it down; why does it use up the ground?'
8 But he answered and said to him, 'Sir, let it alone this year also, until I dig around it and fertilize it.
9 And if it bears fruit, well. But if not, after that you can cut it down.'"
NKJV

It is a common error to take a verse or parable and apply it away from our own reality. As Jesus warned, unless we bear good fruit we will likewise be rejected. There are no favourites with God. If we truly love the Lord, we will show it.

 

[Drew]

Galatians 3:27 "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ."

----Being baptized into the death burial and ressurection of Christ retires the law (schoolmaster) how?????It doesnt,,,,,,,it gives us a different route to the kingdom,,,,but does not take anything from the way God would have us live.....

This is not what Paul is thinking - I am not sure how what he says here can be misunderstood:

1. The Law is a paidagogos;

2. A paidagogos is, by definition a tutor of small children, and such a tutor loses his job when the child comes of age.

3. Paul clearly identifies the arrival of faith as being the event equivalent to the child coming of age.

4. Therefore, the law, just like the paidagogos is "out of a job"

You seem to be arguing with Paul here - telling him that the Torah is to be retired since "we need to be told how to live.

Well, Paul has answer - the Spirit is given to us.

But there is really no way Paul can be misunderstood - he is declaring that the Torah - the Law - has been retired.

 

[Drew]

....im saying is that Christ died a blood sacrifice so we do not need to kill animals on alters and burn them for the remission of sins......But the law is still there,,,,

The stuff about sacrifices is part of the Law - check out the book of Exodus. You seem to think that the sacrifices are not part of "the Law". That is not correct -they are part of the Law.

if you break it you must atone....But now we have a easier way to get right,,,,repent.....

....DO you understand the difference in ordinances and statutes and sacrificesand the law itself???????

There is no difference - all the "ordnances and statutes are a part of the Law.

The sacrificial rules are part of the Law given to Moses;

The kosher food laws are part of the Law given to Moses.

The "Law" - the Torah - is declared "retired" by both Jesus and Paul.

 

[NIGHTMARE]

....im saying is that Christ died a blood sacrifice so we do not need to kill animals on alters and burn them for the remission of sins......But the law is still there,,,,

The stuff about sacrifices is part of the Law - check out the book of Exodus. You seem to think that the sacrifices are not part of "the Law". That is not correct -they are part of the Law.

if you break it you must atone....But now we have a easier way to get right,,,,repent.....

....DO you understand the difference in ordinances and statutes and sacrificesand the law itself???????

There is no difference - all the "ordnances and statutes are a part of the Law.

The sacrificial rules are part of the Law given to Moses;

The kosher food laws are part of the Law given to Moses.

The "Law" - the Torah - is declared "retired" by both Jesus and Paul.

Dude if the law is retired that means its ok to murder,,,its ok to steal,,,its ok to covit,,,its ok to comit adultery right?????? after all the Law is retired from you view.......

There is no difference - all the "ordnances and statutes are a part of the Law.

Drew you cant be serious,,,,,,Christ didnt retire the law He fulfilled,,,,why are you taking the word fulfilled and changing it retired???????

 

[Drew]

Dude if the law is retired that means its ok to murder,,,its ok to steal,,,its ok to covit,,,its ok to comit adultery right?????? after all the Law is retired from you view.......

I would have thought that I would not merit the attribution of such an inane view to me. Ah well.

Paul and Jesus are clear - the Torah is retired.

Paul declares it explicitly at several places - Ephesians 2, Galatians 3, Colossians somewhere. Jesus declares it in a variety of ways - challenging the Sabbath law, overturning the kosher purity laws, etc.

Please note carefully – the “Law†for Paul and Jesus was the Torah – the written code of 613 items given to Moses at Mount Sinai and as elaborated in the Pentateuch. Many of these “rules†served the function of setting the Jew apart as a “special†people. That time comes to an end at the cross. Therefore, it makes perfect sense for both Jesus and Paul to teach the Jews that they no longer need to observe festivals, purity laws, etc. If such things were to continue, this would undermine the larger point that “there is no longer Jew nor Gentile†in the true family of God.

I politely suggest that you are overlooking the role of Torah as ethnic boundary marker. Retiring the Torah is an appropriate thing to do since, at the cross, the Gentiles are brought into the family of God (this largely what Romans 9 to 11 is about).

No one – least of all Jesus or Paul – are saying “now that the written code of the Torah has lapsed you can do whatever you want". Consider this analogy. As a child you are given “rules†– clean your room, do not kill your brother, etc. When you become “of age†– say 16 – your parents say that the rules are abolished. Does this mean that you can now kill your brother? Think, man, think!! The answer is clearly “no†– the intent of the “law†(in this example) is to direct your actions until you have internalized the necessary moral behaviours and no longer need the law.

There is a rough analogy to the situation with the Torah. We have all sorts of statement about how, with the gift of the Spirit, the “law has been written on the heart†of the believer. Yet another reason why a prescriptive code is no longer needed.

We have to respect Paul and Jesus – they are both unambiguously clear that the written code of Torah has been retired. This does not mean people can do whatever they want, though.

Drew, you cant be serious,,,,,,Christ didnt retire the law He fulfilled,,,,why are you taking the word fulfilled and changing it retired???????

I have repeatedly addressed this. You seem to assume to “fulfill†the Law is inconsistent with “retiring†it. Obviously not. Let’s consider the “law†of cramming for exams at University. The purpose of this “la¢â‚¬Â is for you to pass the exams and get a degree. When that purpose is fulfilled – that is, when you are awarded a degree – do you continue to study? Of course not. The “law†of studying has achieved its purpose and can be retired.

 

[follower of Christ]

Pauls gospel is Christs gospel
Wm Tipton

Assertions/Conclusions of this Article
To show that the gospel that Paul taught is Christs gospel.

Supporting Evidence

Co 9:17 For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.
1Co 9:18 What is my reward then? Verily that, when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the gospel.

2Co 2:12 Furthermore, when I came to Troas to preach Christ's gospel, and a door was opened unto me of the Lord,

For God is my witness, whom I serve with my spirit in the gospel of his Son, that without ceasing I make mention of you always in my prayers;
(Rom 1:9 KJV)

For we stretch not ourselves beyond our measure, as though we reached not unto you: for we are come as far as to you also in preaching the gospel of Christ:
(2Co 10:14 KJV)

Rom 15:19 Through mighty signs and wonders, by the power of the Spirit of God; so that from Jerusalem, and round about unto Illyricum, I have fully preached the gospel of Christ.

For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
(Rom 1:16 KJV)

Rom 15:16 That I should be the minister of Jesus Christ to the Gentiles, ministering the gospel of God, that the offering up of the Gentiles might be acceptable, being sanctified by the Holy Ghost.

Rom 15:29 And I am sure that, when I come unto you, I shall come in the fulness of the blessing of the gospel of Christ.

2Co 11:7 Have I committed an offence in abasing myself that ye might be exalted, because I have preached to you the gospel of God freely?

you readers see what Paul himself says about ANY gospel other than Christs

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. 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 accursed.
(Gal 1:6-9 KJV)

Paul CLEARLY shows that it is the gospel of CHRIST and if ANYONE, even an angel of heaven, brings ANY other gospel then let him be cursed...
If Paul brought ANOTHER gospel not Christs, then PAUL himself is to be accursed !

http://assembly-ministries.org/studies/ ... =1&t_id=40