One Or Two Gospels In The New Testament?

Ringo's Bible is a heavily abridged version. It doesn't include anything that Paul writes and as far as I know he excludes the Gospel of John as well. It took me quite a while to figure this out

I respectfully submit that the frustration you've expressed mainly stems from insufficient technique. Yours.You have failed to fit your method of argumentation to the audience you hope to reach.The Problem with ProoftextingWe debate here. Debate means multiple points of view. Nothing is amiss if you encounter points of view here that differ from yours. This is normal.In debate your chosen method of argumentation, prooftexting, is not very persuasive. I know things work otherwise within your religious community. If you are used to crafting your arguments for consumption inside that circle, you are likely to be a bit spoiled.You may wonder why prooftexting does not travel better. I will show you.Charlie's LocustsA serial killer went on the rampage in the 1960s. His name was Charles Manson.Even as serial killers go Manson was spectacularly psychotic. Yet this did not prevent some people from finding Manson a credible guy. He had disciples. Years after he went to prison one of his followers still believed in her 'Charlie' so much that she tried to kill President Ford.Why did people find Manson's sociopathic ideas credible? For one thing, he could prove everything he believed using the Bible. It was all there--book, chapter, and verse.One thing the Bible told him was that the Beatles were prophets sent to herald the end times. Manson got all his instructions from the messages encoded in their hit records. He recognized these prophets from the description given of them in the Book of Revelation, chapter 9:

quote:

---

In appearance the locusts were like horses equipped for battle. On their heads were what looked like crowns of gold; their faces were like human faces, their hair like women’s hair, and their teeth like lions’ teeth; they had scales like iron breastplates, and the noise of their wings was like the noise of many chariots with horses rushing into battle. They have tails like scorpions, with stings, and in their tails is their power to harm people for five months. They have as king over them the angel of the bottomless pit; his name in Hebrew is Abaddon, and in Greek he is called Apollyon.

---

Locusts and beetles are both insects--check. Crowns of gold would be stage lights--check. Women's hair would be long hair--check. Shiny breastplates would mean electric guitars--check. Noise of their wings would be amplifiers--check. Scorpion tails would be power cords, the sting being electricity--check.Manson could account for every detail. His match of this Bible passage to the Beatles was thorough, self-consistent, vivid, unforgettable.And 100% nuts.Manson took this passage verse by verse, too. Think what he could have done with the latitude of isolated excerpts taken out of context, snipped from dozens of books written centuries apart for different purposes by different authors using a variety of means of expression.One can justify anything by prooftexting. It does not make the ironclad case for a system that you think it does.New TechniqueProoftexting is like playing tennis without a net. It's easy. Yes, it makes a great effect with all the references and page-flipping it entails. Yes, wide-ranging prooftexts can give the impression that someone has made a comprehensive study of the Bible. But the truth is that one does not have to know the Bible well at all. One only has to know the snippets. One can 'outline' any number of beliefs and justify them this way.People here know this.I suggest a different approach... if you intend to persuade. _Edited by Archer Opterix, : HTML.Edited by AdminPD, : Thanks for trying.Edited by Archer Opterix, : Title; touchup.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Hi Archer:

quote:

---

Archer >> I respectfully submit that the frustration you've expressed mainly stems from insufficient technique. Yours.

---

Please note the Topic Title and try to stay focused upon the content of my Opening Post. What my debating opponents feel about debating ”technique’ might very well be the topic of your next thread. My purpose here is to defend the ”two gospels’ thesis from the Opening Post of ”this’ thread. Since my technique is so very insufficient (in your opinion), then you have the upper hand and should have little or no difficulty in out gunning me in this debate.

quote:

---

Archer >> You have failed to fit your method of argumentation to the audience you hope to reach. The Problem with Prooftexting
We debate here. Debate means multiple points of view.

---

Please forgive, but far too many members here write about ”methods of augmentation’ and ”prooftexting,’ rather than simply presenting their own opposing views on the topic at hand. I wish the membership here would stop pretending to know and understand the mindset of future readers yet to even join this fine Board. Just present your ”one gospel’ case using whatever ”method of argumentation’ best suits your own theology and I will respond accordingly. To continue writing along your current “Charles Mansion” storyline is far beyond the boundaries of this topic.GL in the debate, if you actually decide to “quote >>” from my Opening Post and try to build a case for something else using Scripture. BTW, your reply is supposed to be to Post #1 on this thread, but your quote from me is taken from Post #4 to Phat who also appears unable to present his “one gospel” precepts in any outline form.How many pages will my opponents in this debate force us to endure, before one of them lays out their ”one gospel’ theory in a list of precepts teaching that doctrine? We shall see . . .In Christ Jesus,Terral Edited by AdminPD, : Mind Your Manners

---

"For the word of God is Living AND Active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart." Hebrews 4:12.

You ignore my point by continuing to assume that Paul's words are automatically on the same footing as Jesus' words.You agree that there is a difference between Jesus' message and Paul's message, but instead of trying to understand both messages, you try to reconcile them. You assume that a reconciliation is possible (and necessary).Christianity is based on Christ (Jesus). All other writings have to fit on His framework, not demolish it and rebuild it. Again, you are ignoring two thirds of my point. I said that EITHER Paul misunderstood Jesus OR Paul misrepresented Jesus OR you misunderstand Paul.So far, you have just handwaved those possibilites away. If you want to defend your thesis, you have to deal with those possibilities.Edited by Ringo, : Spelling.

---

Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

Por favor (with a courteous nod to Admin): I could use some clarification here about the premises on which the OP is based.Doesn't Christianity teach that the new covenant is simpler than the old? That Christians are made free from burdensome obligations--as you say in Part 2, Item 8?If so, how do you reconcile Jesus' ability to summarize the Law and the Prophets simply--'Love the Lord your God, love your neighbor as yourself'--while your summary of Christian freedom involves two different Gospels, a series of contrasting points, and multiple prooftexts?I'm trying to understand your premise. Is complexity a virtue?___ Edited by Archer Opterix, : Punctuation.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Terral,I realize it takes time to acclimate to a new environment, but I feel your tone and technique need to be addressed. Members have tried to help you and I've brought rules 4 and 10 to your attention in another thread, but you choose to ignore the hints.The tone of your posts do not exude respect. As you have been told before, this is a debate board. In Message 17, Archer very nicely explained the difficulty with your style of presentation.While there are people outside the thread who will read the discussion, your responses should be to the participants of the thread, not presentations created for a third party reader. IOW, talk to your opponents not around them. Address their comments, questions, arguments or rebuttals (if they are on topic of course). At some point in any discussion you need to explain how you feel that the scriptures you provide support your position.Please direct any comments concerning this Admin msg to the Moderation Thread.
Any response in this thread will receive a 24 hour timeout.Thank you Edited by AdminPD, : Typo

Hi Iano:

quote:

---

Iano >> Ringo's Bible is a heavily abridged version. It doesn't include anything that Paul writes and as far as I know he excludes the Gospel of John as well. It took me quite a while to figure this out.

---

Figuring things out appears to be the House Special of the day around this place. What ever happened to simply “quoting >>” someone and offering opposing views using Scripture? 2Tim. 2:15?? Everyone has their own mindset as to how everyone else is to draft their replies to the point that nothing is actually ”debated’ at all. The membership and even the Mods here are looking for one ”cookie cutter’ kind of professing Christian who acts and reacts in a particular kind of way. Honest to God I do not feel that a single member here has the stature in Christ Jesus to actually list the elemental precepts teaching their ”doctrinal of salvation’ in any kind of legible form. The factions here appear to be working diligently to ensure that any serious writer of Bible commentary hits the dusty trail, before someone actually learns something. Please allow me to find my way to the door . . .We now return you to your regularly scheduled program . . .GL to you all,In Christ Jesus,Terral Edited by AdminPD, : Warning

---

"For the word of God is Living AND Active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart." Hebrews 4:12.

Well, I don't mind taking a shot at this.The biggest problem I see with your proposition is that you have to argue that James and Paul preached different Gospels. Since Paul claims that James approved his Gospel--yes, to the Gentiles, but not a different Gospel--and history says that the Jerusalem church and other churches remained in fellowship as followers of one Gospel, then I see a problem with the argument that James & Paul had a different Gospel.In front of James, at a meeting that James seems to have been presiding over, Peter said, "Why tempt ye God, to put a yoke on the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?" Then he added, "But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they" (Acts 15:10,11).Just before that, he had said, "God made choice among us that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel and believe" (Acts 15:7). Notice that he said "THE Gospel." To suggest that James had a different Gospel than Paul doesn't fit with history.The reason that everyone does that is because they don't understand Paul's Gospel. We've had 2,000 years pass, so it's been handed to us so twisted and corrupted by Protestants, starting with Martin Luther, that it's completely unrecognizable.You wrote that Paul's Gospel is "APART from works." You mention that the Gospel of the Kingdom is "justified by works and not by faith alone." It is true, those are both bible quotes, the former from Paul and the latter from James. On the surface, they do seem to be absolute contradictions.But if they are, then why does Paul say we are judged by our works repeatedly (Rom 2:6 & 2 Cor 5:10, for example)? Why does Paul list only works as the reason we enter or are barred from the kingdom (1 Cor 6:9,10; Gal 5:19-21; Eph 5:5-8)? Why does he twice say that it is by continuing to do good that we will receive eternal life (Rom 2:7 & Gal 6:8,9)?Paul put a subtle and helpful twist on the way the Gospel was presented. Entrance into Christ is apart from works. You, being a sinner by nature, will never be able to overcome your sin and be judged righteous by God. Therefore, there's another way. Enter by faith into Christ, and he will transform you.Martin Luther added a subtle and harmful twist to the way that Gospel was presented. He said even the judgment is apart from works. Enter into Christ, and Christ won't necessarily deliver you from your sin and transform you into a righteous man who can be saved at the judgment. Instead, he will make it so that it doesn't matter if you are a righteous man at the judgment. Even the judgment will be apart from works!But that isn't true. Paul says repeatedly that the judgment will be according to works. Nothing has changed about the judgment. What the Gospel offers is a free entrance into Christ, where the Spirit of God will utterly transform you into a righteous man who will pass the judgment rather than fail it.Thus, Peter is willing to tell even the saints, "If you address as Father him who impartially judges according to each man's work, then conduct yourself throughout the time of your sojourning here in fear" (1 Pet 1:17).The problem with the seeming contradiction between James and Paul is their use of the word justified. Paul says faith apart from works, but when he says justified he means entering into Christ and having your past sins forgiven. That is by faith apart from works. (You'll see he's talking about the same thing in Eph 2:8,9). He is not talking about going to heaven, and whenever he does talk about going to heaven, he says works.James, on the other hand, is referring to the whole of our salvation when he says justified. Therefore, he says works and not faith only, because he's talking about the future and going to heaven, not just about having your past sins forgiven when you enter into Christ.With that contradiction out of the way, there's no reason for the dividing up you do. And that's good, because you're dividing up people who said they weren't divided on the Gospel.

Challenging one's own beliefs are healthy, like wrestling with the meaning of a certain passage in prayer. However, if you were to view the Bible as just a general guideline with elements of truth mixed in with some falsehoods, then what would stop any other religious text to contain the exact same thing? I mean, what do you think the Bible is for? How would you have first come to know Jesus without His Word? If He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life and in the beginning was the Word, then what do you base your beliefs off of, if not the Bible? Edited by nemesis_juggernaut, : No reason given.

---

"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt

I've never understood the specious plea that Paul's epistles are somehow tantamount to 'another gospel' or that anything Paul stated somehow differed from Jesus. There is not two gospels, there is only one presented by Jesus through His disciples. I don't know how much more humble Paul could have been or how much harder he could have worked at doing everything to point towards Jesus.The "Pauline doctrine" argument is just a strategy to place a stumbling block in your way and a wedge in between Jesus and Jesus' followers. There is nothing in the gospels and in Paul's epistles to suggest otherwise.

---

"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt

But Paul had a different mission. Thats why he got knocked off his high horse to begin with.Kingdom Gospel:1. It will be set up on earth: (Psa. 2:8). (Isa. 11:9). (Jer. 23:5). (Isa. 42:4).The kingdom which John the Baptist, our Lord and the twelve proclaimed "at hand" was indeed "the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 3:1,2, 4:17, 10:5-7), but it was to be set up on earth. Now, while its establishment is held in abeyance, it is vested in Christ Himself in heaven (Col. 1:13), but the goal of prophecy is the establishment of the kingdom on earth (Rom. 11:25-29).2. It will be a theocracy. God Himself will reign, in the person of Christ: "They shall call His name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us" (Isa. 7:14, Matt. 1:23). "And His name shall be called . . . The mighty God" (Isa. 9:6). "The Lord shall be king over all the earth" (Zech. 14:9). "The King, the Lord of hosts" (Zech. 14:16).3. It will be centered at Jerusalem, Israel's capital city: "Out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem" (Isa. 2:3). "The Lord of hosts shall reign in mount Zion, and in Jerusalem" (Isa. 24:23). "At that time they shall call Jerusalem the throne of the Lord" (Jer. 3:17). Thus He will reign primarily over Israel (Mic. 5:2).
This was confirmed by the angel Gabriel (Luke 1:32,33), by the Magi (Matt. 2:1,2) and by the Lord Himself (Matt. 19:28).4. It will extend to all the earth: "Yea, all kings shall fall down before Him: all nations shall serve Him" (Psa. 72:11). "And there was given Him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve Him" (Dan. 7:14). "Yea, many people and strong nations shall come to seek the Lord of hosts in Jerusalem, and to pray before the Lord" (Zech. 8:22).5. All Israel will then be saved: "They shall all know Me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them" (Jer. 31:34). "I will save them . . . and will cleanse them: so shall they be My people, and I will be their God" (Ezek. 37:23).
This was confirmed by Paul in Romans 11:26, etc.6. Israel's suffering and sorrow will then be over: "Speak ye comfortably [comfortingly] to Jerusalem. . . . that her warfare is accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned" (Isa, 40:2). "Give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness" (Isa. 61:3). "They shall obtain joy and gladness, and sorrow and sighing shall flee away" (Isa. 35:10).7. Israel will then become a blessing to all nations: "And the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising" (Isa. 60:3). "And it shall come to pass, that as ye were a curse among the heathen, O house of Judah, and house of Israel; so will I save you, and ye shall be a blessing" (Zech. 8:13). "In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold, out of all languages of the nations, even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you: for we have heard that God is with you" (Zech. 8:23).
These promises date back to the covenant which God made with Abraham: "I will multiply thy seed . . . and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed" (Gen. 22:17,18).8. Government will be purified: "With righteousness shall He judge the poor, and reprove with equity for the meek of the earth" (Isa. 11:4). "As the earth bringeth forth her bud, and as the garden causeth the things that are sown in it to spring forth; so the Lord God will cause righteousness and praise to spring forth before all the nations" (Isa. 61:11). "A King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth" (Jer. 23:5).9. War and bloodshed will be abolished.3"His name shall be called . . . The Prince of Peace" (Isa. 9:6). "And He shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more" (Isa. 2:4).10. Health and long life will be restored to the human race: "Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. Then shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing" (Isa. 35:5,6). "There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed" (Isa. 65:20).4Mystery Gospel (to the Gentiles):1. Israel set aside, temporarily, along with the Gentiles: "Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for" (Rom. 11:7). "The fall of them" (Rom. 11:12). "The casting away of them" (Rom. 11: 15). "Because of unbelief they were broken off" (Rom. 11:20). "For God hath concluded them all in unbelief" (Rom. 11:32).2. Mercy shown to all alike: "For God hath concluded them all in unbelief THAT HE MIGHT HAVE MERCY UPON ALL (Rom. 11:32). "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. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved" (Rom. 10:12,13). "For there is one God, and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus" (I Tim. 2:5).3. The gospel of the grace of God, through Christ's finished work, proclaimed: Hence Paul's claims concerning "the ministry which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify THE GOSPEL OF THE GRACE OF GOD" and "THE DISPENSATION OF THE GRACE OF GOD which is given me to you-ward" (Acts 20:24, Eph. 3:2).4. Believers reconciled to God by the cross: "God was in Christ, RECONCILING the world unto Himself" (II Cor. 5:19). "That He might RECONCILE both [Jews and Gentiles] unto God . . . BY THE CROSS" (Eph. 2:16). "When we were enemies, we were RECONCILED to God BY THE DEATH OF HIS SON" (Rom. 5:10). "And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies . . . yet now hath He RECONCILED in the body of His flesh THROUGH DEATH" (Col. 1:21,22).5. Jewish and Gentile believers thus baptized into one body: "That He might reconcile both unto God in ONE BODY by the cross" (Eph. 2:16). "That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs [joint heirs], and of THE SAME BODY [of a joint body], and partakers [joint partakers] of His promise in Christ by the gospel" (Eph. 3:6). "There is ONE BODY" (Eph. 4:4). "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into ONE BODY, whether we be Jews or Gentiles" (I Cor. 12:13). "Now ye are THE BODY OF CHRIST, and members in particular" (I Cor. 12:27). "So we, being many, are ONE BODY in Christ, and every one members one of another" (Rom. 12:5). "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek . . . for ye are all one in Christ Jesus" (Gal. 3:27,28).6. This body of believers given a position in Christ in the heavenlies: "And [God] hath raised us up together and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 2:6). "[God] hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ" (Eph. 1:3). "For our conversation [citizenship] is in heaven" (Phil. 3:20). "If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affection on things above . . . for your life is hid with Christ in God" (Col. 3:1-3). Edited by Phat, : added mumbo jumbo

How are those different? Its the same message coming from the same source. Are you suggesting that Paul's epistles are not from God?

---

"There is not in all America a more dangerous trait than the deification of mere smartness unaccompanied by any sense of moral responsibility." -Theodore Roosevelt

They were from Paul. At least some of them were likely from Paul.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Hopefully Phat can be less non-specific than you. "Likely" says as little as "not very likely".

Lets simplify the argument. Do you believe that God spoke through Paul?