PDA

View Full Version : Pauline Dispensationalism


Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 [41] 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93

God's Trombone
August 21st, 2007, 03:54 PM
A SOLEMN AGREEMENT
by Cornelius R. Stam

The Apostle Paul, referring to his journey to Jerusalem to tell the apostles and elders there about the good news that had been committed to him, says:

"And I went up by revelation and COMMUNICATED UNTO THEM THAT GOSPEL WHICH I PREACH AMONG THE GENTILES, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain... And when James, Cephas [Peter] and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, THEY GAVE TO ME AND BARNABAS THE RIGHT HANDS OF FELLOWSHIP, that we should go unto the heathen [Gentiles, nations], and they unto the Circumcision [Israel]" (Gal. 2:2-9).

Here, by solemn agreement, Peter, James and John promised publicly to confine their ministry to Israel while Paul went to the Gentiles with his "gospel of the grace of God." This is striking in view of the fact that the twelve, not Paul, had originally been sent into all the world.

Were they all out of the will of God in making this agreement? By no means! Subsequent revelation proves that they were all very much in the will of God and that with the rejection of Christ God had ushered in a new program.

In the light of these Scriptures it is difficult to understand how anyone can argue that Paul’s ministry was merely a perpetuation of that of the twelve, or that "the gospel of the kingdom" and "the gospel of the grace of God" are identical.

If the above passage teaches anything clearly, it teaches the unique character of Paul’s apostleship and message. The Apostle devotes almost two chapters of his letter to the Galatians to the fact that he had not received his message from the twelve, but rather had communicated to the twelve.

He stresses the fact that those who had first been sent to all nations, "beginning at Jerusalem," had now, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, agreed to turn over their Gentile ministry to him that he might proclaim far and wide "the gospel of the grace of God," as found in Eph. 2:8,9 and Rom. 3:24.

Berean Bible Society

Harley
August 21st, 2007, 04:08 PM
Granted, this passage adequately shows that different men had different callings to different audience, but it adds no difficulty whatsoever to the argument that they taught the same Gospel.

God's Trombone
August 22nd, 2007, 07:54 AM
Granted, this passage adequately shows that different men had different callings to different audience, but it adds no difficulty whatsoever to the argument that they taught the same Gospel.

Harley,
Stam clarified:

In the light of these Scriptures it is difficult to understand how anyone can argue that Paul’s ministry was merely a perpetuation of that of the twelve, or that "the gospel of the kingdom" and "the gospel of the grace of God" are identical.
If the above passage teaches anything clearly, it teaches the unique character of Paul’s apostleship and message. The Apostle devotes almost two chapters of his letter to the Galatians to the fact that he had not received his message from the twelve, but rather had communicated to the twelve.

He stresses the fact that those who had first been sent to all nations (with the kingdom/circumcision Gospel), "beginning at Jerusalem," had now, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, agreed to turn over their Gentile ministry (which was not the Gospel of the Grace of God) to him that he might proclaim far and wide "the gospel of the grace of God," as found in Eph. 2:8,9 and Rom. 3:24.

Can this be any clearer?

.

HeIsEnough
August 22nd, 2007, 05:04 PM
In the light of these Scriptures it is difficult to understand how anyone can argue that Paul’s ministry was merely a perpetuation of that of the twelve, or that "the gospel of the kingdom" and "the gospel of the grace of God" are identical.

It's a good thing no one is arguing that...

Mechaberean
August 22nd, 2007, 07:17 PM
Our gospel is how that Christ died,was buried and arose again. Lets see if they were preaching the same thing in the gospels. Matthew16:21 From that time forth(not before) to show unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day. (Here's roof it wasn't before)Matthew16:22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. So too say that it was always what they preached is err. But they did preach in Matthew 10:5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
7 And as ye go, preach(HERE), saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand. It just wasn't for any, but Jews, Before our age/dispensation/economy. Here is where it began to be for us Acts10:45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. Why are they astonished if Gentiles are always given the same? But remember from my earlier paragraph the Kingdom of Heaven is not for any but Jews when they are the focus and right with God as a nation. We are given the kingdom of God for more questions I have a blog here http://www.twochurches.blogspot.com

Harley
August 22nd, 2007, 08:45 PM
Harley,
Stam clarified:



Can this be any clearer?

.

Yes.

God's Trombone
August 23rd, 2007, 07:59 AM
It's a good thing no one is arguing that...

I'm :scratch

Those who say there is only one Gospel in the Bibleare arguing that. Are they not?

HeIsEnough
August 23rd, 2007, 08:14 AM
I'm :scratch

Those who say there is only one Gospel in the Bibleare arguing that. Are they not?

Words still mean something GT, and specific words are needed to show the true intentions. The characterizations by Stam are not accurate. You have not understood my intentions and characterizations of the scriptural record all along. Adding more pages will not be sufficient, I'm afraid.

What would be sufficient, as far as I can tell, would be to quote Christ's own words to someone. If they are somewhat perplexed, consult Paul's words to clarify the meaning. If you cannot understand that, I don't have anything else to offer.

Harley
August 23rd, 2007, 11:08 AM
I'm :scratch

Those who say there is only one Gospel in the Bibleare arguing that. Are they not?

Maybe I missed his point, but I took the comment from HeIsEnough as ironic sarcasm. Stram said it's difficult to understand how anyone can argue... - yet there are all sorts of understandable reasons to argue the so-called two Gospel interpretation.

You also asked if it could be any clearer. If it were so clear it would be a issue that was settled and accepted by historic orthodox theology.

Harley
August 23rd, 2007, 11:10 AM
In just a couple lines, what is the difference between the two Gospels?