Did God approve of Paul's Gospel but not Peter's?

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by UZThD, Aug 1, 2005.

  1. UZThD

    UZThD
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    1,238
    Likes Received:
    0
    Did God approve of Paul's Gospel but not Peter's?
    ............................................

    Some have suggested that there were two Gospels being preached. A Gospel of works by Peter and a Gospel of grace by Paul.

    But if Peter were preaching in his apostleship to the Jews the wrong Gospel would God continue to work in Peter's apostleship? I wouldn't think so.

    Yet, it appears that Paul , himself, says that God was at work in Peter's apostleship to the Jews.

    For Paul's unqualifiedly says , "God wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision." (Gal 2:8, KJV)

    Now at the risk of boring most readers with little technicalities , may I point out that the verb energeo (wrought effectually) is regularly used in the sense of God accomplishing HIS OWN will as : "God which worketh all in all" or "(God) worketh in me mightily" or "the power that worketh in us" ( 1 Cor 12:6; Col 1:29; Eph 3:20 and several others too)!!

    This verse, Gal 2:8, therefore, seems to put me in the position of supposing that God was accomplishing HIS OWN will through Peter's apostleship. But I think God would not be doing that IF Peter were preaching a Gospel of which God did not approve.

    I reason in this manner:

    premise: God would only work to achieve His will through Peter's apostleship IF God approved of Peter's Gospel.

    premise: But God DID work through Peter to achieve His will as Paul plainly says.(Gal 2:8).

    conclusion: Therefore, God approved of Peter's Gospel!

    Just another reason to think that Paul and Peter preached the same Gospel.
     
  2. TexasSky

    TexasSky
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    I believe that God used Peter to reach the Jews, and that God used Paul to reach the gentiles. I don't think of Peter's gospel as a gospel of works either.

    I don't believe Peter taught a gospel based on works either, and I do believe that Christ meant it when He said He would build His church upon the rock, when He spoke to Peter. (Though, I don't think Peter was the rock itself. I think Peter's love and faith were the rock.)
     
  3. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree with TS. Two different men preaching to primarily two different audiences. It's no more a preaching of two different gospels than Ezekiel and Daniel preaching two different covanents.
     
  4. UZThD

    UZThD
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    1,238
    Likes Received:
    0
    and I agree with Texas and John.,..but some do not
     
  5. ituttut

    ituttut
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    2,674
    Likes Received:
    0
    Then do we not agree UZThD? They [/b]now[/b] preach the same gospel. We do not see the Apostles of Pentecost any more preaching “repent and be baptized for the remission of sins”. Can you find where John ever comes near That gospel in the gospel that he wrote, or in his Epistles? However we must realize those Apostles and that church continued in the gospel of the circumcision for that is how they were saved, i.e. under the gospel of the “great commission” of the “kingdom was at hand”. Those that were pillars of the Jewish Pentecostal church agreed that their preaching of salvation was not for the Gentiles, and sealed it with a handshake, which at that time was as good as gold.

    I believe That other gospel to the Jew could not die out, until Jerusalem and the Temple were considered dead in AD 70. I believe this is the reason John was allowed to bring out the teachings of Jesus, of which at the time Jesus said them, nobody could understand His sayings, for these are things also for the heathen, of whom He said He did not come.

    It is easier for me to understand by understanding marriage. Should we ever marry again? We should not, not until death comes to whom we are one with. None of the Apostles, if married would have dared to marry again while their spouse was alive. As you know John wrote all of His books near the end of the century, some 35 or so years after the death of Paul, and about 30 years after the destruction came, so John was free of that previous marriage.

    That Old covenant is gone now for the Jew, and today it is salvation for all by the Grace that came through Jesus Christ. God says He will make a New Covenant with His people, and that will come after our rapture and after the tribulation period. That kingdom will come, and we will be in “Christ’s kingdom” in the kingdom of God.

    The Christian cannot hold to the “great commission” that includes Mark 16. We need to separate from that gospel to the “grace commission” and the spreading of that gospel.
    Most Baptist believe that is what we are doing, yet so many continue to say we believe we are spreading the “great commission”. Is this not so? But when we listen to the Baptist message we see the Christian message of “believe on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and immediately turn right around and embrace the “great commission” of which none will agree with. Christian faith, ituttut Galatians 1:11-12
     
  6. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    What you must understand UZThD is that, according to hyper-dispensationalists, until the conversion of Paul and the revelation of the mystery all the Apostles were preaching a flawed Gospel.
     
  7. ituttut

    ituttut
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    2,674
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hello TexasSky. I also believe as you that Peter built upon the foundation of Jesus Christ. The Church is Christ, the Son of the living God. But in that Church also is laid more than one foundation, but until Christianity came, only building could take place on the foundation Peter had laid. Paul tells us he will not build on another mans foundation, so there are two foundations in the Church of Christ, the Son of the living God, for Christ appointed Paul to do so.

    Before, the Gentile could not enter into the Temple (Church) unless they came as the Jew as proselytes, and they were held to the outer Court. That was under the Old Covenant with the seed of the earthly. With the coming of Damascus Road the Spiritual part of the Old Covenant with Abraham kicked in. While we (Gentiles) never made covenant with, agreeing to anything, we were included. We Gentiles were included and now the Jew can come as we, that is after Christianity began, for only then could all be in the Body of Christ, becoming One with Him.

    God is a God of division, bringing together again. Christian faith, ituttut Galatians1:11-12

    [ August 01, 2005, 06:42 PM: Message edited by: ituttut ]
     
  8. ituttut

    ituttut
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2004
    Messages:
    2,674
    Likes Received:
    0
    But only for God's own nation that He created for Himself. Is God addressing His people, or everyone on earth. We are included in the wrath of God with His people, but God is not talking to us. We today are not Israel, and never were. Christian faith, ituttut Galatians 1:11-12
     
  9. Benjamin

    Benjamin
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    4,886
    Likes Received:
    112
    I don’t understand the calling of God’s Gospel flawed; it was a perfect plan executed and fooling the Devil.

    I also don’t see why some would say the Gospel from Paul was not being used to preach to the Jews. Weren’t the Jews being told that this mystery was the stumblingblock that God had put before them mentioned in Isaiah and Ezekiel?
     
  10. Bro Tony

    Bro Tony
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,398
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your explaination and understanding is what I believe also UZThD. We must be careful of the more than one Gospel teachings as well as the duel covenant theologians.


    Bro Tony
     
  11. Bro Tony

    Bro Tony
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,398
    Likes Received:
    0
    From my perspective it was not that they were teaching a flawed Gospel, for there is only one. They were flawed in their understanding as to whom the Gospel was for. They only wanted to share it with the Jews and not the Gentiles. Paul was used of the Lord to clear that up---"...the Gospel is to the Jew first and then the Gentile." Romans 1:16

    Bro Tony
     
  12. Benjamin

    Benjamin
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    4,886
    Likes Received:
    112
    We must also be careful using dispensations to separate the Gospel and calling it something else.

    (Rom 10:11) For the Scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

    (Rom 10:12) For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

    (Rom 10:13) For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

    (Col 3:10) And have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him:

    (Col 3:11) Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.
     
  13. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    From my perspective it was not that they were teaching a flawed Gospel, for there is only one. They were flawed in their understanding as to whom the Gospel was for. They only wanted to share it with the Jews and not the Gentiles. Paul was used of the Lord to clear that up---"...the Gospel is to the Jew first and then the Gentile." Romans 1:16

    Bro Tony
    </font>[/QUOTE]Actually Jesus Christ first brought the Gospel to the Gentile Samaritans [John, Chapter 4]. Next Philip was sent to the Gentile Samaritans [Acts, Chapter 8] and to the Ethopian eunuch [Acts, Chapter 8]. Then Peter was chosen to bring the Gospel to the Gentile Romans [Acts, Chapter 10].
     
  14. UZThD

    UZThD
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    1,238
    Likes Received:
    0
    What you must understand UZThD is that, according to hyper-dispensationalists, until the conversion of Paul and the revelation of the mystery all the Apostles were preaching a flawed Gospel. </font>[/QUOTE]===


    right.

    That's why God worked in in Peter, because He didn't like Peter's Gospel,

    and why Paul and Peter each gave the other the right hand of fellowship in Gal,

    and why Paul is not recorded to have said a thing about their Gospel being flawed in Acts 15,

    and why John puts the Gospel taught by Christ, ie, salvific death and resurr for whomever will believe, just as it is taught by Paul, in historical settings where either John or hyper Dyspies are wrong. ;)

    [ August 02, 2005, 10:03 AM: Message edited by: UZThD ]
     
  15. Bro Tony

    Bro Tony
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,398
    Likes Received:
    0
    Old Regular,

    And your point? Are you disputing that Peter had a problem with taking the Gospel to the Gentiles? Are you disputing that God used Paul to convince the church at Jerusalem that the Gospel was also for the Gentiles? Are you disputing that Paul was inspired when he wrote Romans 1:16?

    Of course it was God's intention all along for the Gospel to be given to the Gentiles, He spoke that thru the prophet Isaiah. I fear that fact that you clearly despise anything that has to do with dispensational theology has cause you to strike without thinking. You dont like dispensationalism, fine, but dont try to make it say what it does not say and dont deny the biblical historical record we have as to the difficulty to get the early church to share the Gospel among all men.

    Bro Tony
     
  16. UZThD

    UZThD
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    1,238
    Likes Received:
    0
    IMO while Christ and Philip and Peter did some evangelism among the Gentiles, it was Paul who most emphatically clarified that the Gospel was meant for Gentiles too.

    I also think that Paul received revelations beyond that of some others and that Paul was taught the Gospel by direct revelation. However, IMO, Paul nowhere says that the elements of his Gospel ,as clearly defined in Gal 1 and 1 Cor 15, are different than that Gospel of the others.

    I understand that some think wat bap is a work taught by Peter as part of the Gospel but not by Paul. In my estimation, wat bap is an expression of faith , not a work, just as is confessing Christ or prayer or the Lord's Supper, and is taught and practiced by Paul--but not as salvific .
     
  17. Bro Tony

    Bro Tony
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,398
    Likes Received:
    0
    [​IMG] [​IMG] Amen to your last post brother UZ.

    Bro Tony
     
  18. yeshua4me2

    yeshua4me2
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2005
    Messages:
    214
    Likes Received:
    0
    do you suppose that God wanted the jewish nation to stop being a jewish nation? i have often wondered about this, because what made the Jewish nation, the jewish nation? their "odd" faith. and if that all ended at the cross, what was left for the Jews to keep themselves jewish, assimilation was out of the question, as that thought would have been repugnant to the first century jew. do you suppose that Cephas preached the same Gospel, but told Jews to remain jewish(circ, festivals,temple,diet), and Gentiles to remain Gentiles (no circumsision, Jewish festivals,diet laws, or temple). just a thought


    good thread

    thankyou and God Bless
     
  19. UZThD

    UZThD
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2004
    Messages:
    1,238
    Likes Received:
    0
    I entered a dispensational school and was there four years (Western Conservative Baptist Seminary in Portland, Or) unconvinced that God yet had a plan for the Jewish nation.

    However, with no prof pressure put upon me, and with a simple reading of the OT Prophets for a course, I became convinced that God yet was committed to a literal fulfilling of the OT promises.

    So, I am a premillenarian ( yet undecided on the rapture as separate from the return though) who thinks that Jesus Christ will come again as Son of David and King of Israel and will establish His throne on earth too.

    Now I may be wrong on that, and still read and evaluate all sides of the question, but I don't want to argue it.
     
  20. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    posted August 02, 2005 11:03 AM

    Originally posted by Bro Tony:

    Are you disputing the fact that Peter preached the Gospel to the Roman Gentiles [Acts, Chapter 10 10]; that Jesus Christ first brought the Gospel to the Gentile Samaritans [John, Chapter 4]; that Philip was sent to the Gentile Samaritans [Acts, Chapter 8] and to the Ethopian eunuch [Acts, Chapter 8]?

    Also Tony before questioning whether I believe that Paul was inspired by God when he wrote Romans 1:16 you might check and see how many times I have posted it on this Forum to show some people that there is only one Gospel and to claim otherwise is heresy!
     

Share This Page

Loading...