People ARE Mixing the Gospels Together!

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: newnature1

most today mix the gospel of the grace of God with the gospel of the kingdom and the Everlasting gospel

What a marvelous plan God had for us! God has kept the fingerprints of the guilt-worthy off of the righteousness he designed for the guilt-worthy.

People need change their mind and agree with God and with Paul that it is totally impossible for them to do enough good. Galatians 5:17, is not something to overcome, but it is a reality to be understood, they will never escape. They are locked into the idea that when it comes to performance base righteousness for a right standing before God, THEY WILL NEVER EARN IT! 


Religion, of course, views Romans 7:23 and Galatians 5:17 as obstacles to be overcome, not truths to be understood. LISTEN, if you do not understand the entrapment Paul’s talking about here, being locked away from an ability to merit righteousness before God through your performance, if you do not understand the entrapment he has in mind here when he stated, “so that you can not do the things you would,” you do not understand the incapacity of the flesh to please God.

originally posted by: newnature1
Is it possible to differentiate in your Bible between scripture about the nation Israel, God’s program with her and the earth, and scripture written about the Body of Christ? 


I have already drawn attention to Paul's distinction between Israel "according to the flesh" (that is, by right of physical descent), and Israel "according to the Spirit" (that is, by right of belonging to Christ).
But the New Testament only offers one way of salvation- that is, through Christ.

Even those belonging to the nation of Israel are saved, if at all, by their faith.
Abraham was saved by his faith.
Paul was saved by his faith.
Peter was saved by his faith.
Barnabas was saved by his faith.
Those last three were all circumcised Jews, but they were saved in Christ through faith.

There are no two ways of salvation in the new Testament, one for Jews and one for Gentiles. Just the one way.
I must urge you to be wary of the neo-legalistic teachers introducing artificial and unnecessary distinctions, which is exactly how legalism behaves. And in this case, attempting to reintroduce legalism proper by the back door.

Paul tells us that nobody can come to God through the works of the Law.
I ask you again; do you believe him or not?

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: newnature1
Is it possible to differentiate in your Bible between scripture about the nation Israel, God’s program with her and the earth, and scripture written about the Body of Christ? 


I have already drawn attention to Paul's distinction between Israel "according to the flesh" (that is, by right of physical descent), and Israel "according to the Spirit" (that is, by right of belonging to Christ).
But the New Testament only offers one way of salvation- that is, through Christ.

Even those belonging to the nation of Israel are saved, if at all, by their faith.
Abraham was saved by his faith.
Paul was saved by his faith.
Peter was saved by his faith.
Barnabas was saved by his faith.
Those last three were all circumcised Jews, but they were saved in Christ through faith.

There are no two ways of salvation in the new Testament, one for Jews and one for Gentiles. Just the one way.
I must urge you to be wary of the neo-legalistic teachers introducing artificial and unnecessary distinctions, which is exactly how legalism behaves. And in this case, attempting to reintroduce legalism proper by the back door.

Paul tells us that nobody can come to God through the works of the Law.
I ask you again; do you believe him or not?

This is what Jesus meant when he said he gave Peter the “keys” to the Kingdom. Peter had the ability to “unlock” and “open the door” to the Kingdom, he proclaimed the message they had to believe. Jesus gave himself a ransom for MANY. Who are the “many” spoken of? Israel!

But a ransom for all - was not testified until Paul proclaimed it, the revelation of the secret, which was kept secret since the world began.

a reply to: newnature1
The gospel preached by Peter was the gospel preached by Paul.
That is why Peter and Paul thought of themselves as belonging to the same Christian community.

I must warn you again, beware "false brethren" in the form of neo-legalists devising artificial and unneecssary distinctions.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: newnature1
The gospel preached by Peter was the gospel preached by Paul.
That is why Peter and Paul thought of themselves as belonging to the same Christian community.

I must warn you again, beware "false brethren" in the form of neo-legalists devising artificial and unnecssary distinctions.

You are mixing the Gospels, because the earth was the only realm of which Yahweh’s earthly nation Israel had been given inheritance. Heaven was not the issue for the nation Israel. They were never promised Heaven.

In fact, Paul tells us that the resurrection is the greatest display of God’s power ever to be demonstrated, nor can it ever be surpassed. Our decree of judicial perfection in the eyes of God comes not through Jesus’ death for our sins, but through our union with Jesus’ resurrection life.

Paul wanted to be found clothed in the righteousness that comes from being placed INTO Jesus Christ rather than to be found wearing the righteousness that came from his performance. Paul knew that the righteousness related to his performance would never measure up to the level of God’s righteousness.

a reply to: newnature1
I can only say again, with minor variations in wording they are the same gospel.
Because there is only ONE true gospel, there are no "gospels" in the plural to be mixed.
The only distinction which Paul makes is between the true gospel and the false "gospel" which claims that name illegitimately.

Be wary of false brethren devising artificial and unnecessary distinctions in order to create a new form of legalism.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: newnature1
I can only say again, with minor variations in wording they are the same gospel.
Because there is only ONE true gospel, there are no "gospels" in the plural to be mixed.
The only distinction which Paul makes is between the true gospel and the false "gospel" which claims that name illegitimately.

Be wary of false brethren devising artificial and unnecessary distinctions in order to create a new form of legalism.

BUT NOW, no longer does the human race have to strive to attain and maintain God’s acceptance on the basis of who they are and what they can do. Our decree of judicial perfection in the eyes of God comes not through Christ’s death for our sins, but through our union with Christ’s resurrection life. If a person believes Christ died for their sins, but does not believe that God’s justice was satisfied, when Christ died for those sins, that person has not believed Christ died for their sins. 


God purchased the human race out of sins dominion, never to be returned to the market place of sin again. By removing the sin issue from the table of God’s justice, God effectively canceled Satan’s ownership of all the human race. Satan can lay claim to no person based on that persons sinfulness.

Do we need to change our minds about the seriousness of sin and God’s answer to that serious dilemma we find ourselves in? Yes, we do. God has been long-suffering in holding back his wrath because he hopes that we will consider his goodness through his son, his goodness on our behalf and flee to his grace. God wants us to change our mind about who we are from fleshly perspective apart from Christ. God is not patiently waiting for us to change our mind about what we do; many have done that, thinking it gains salvation.

a reply to: newnature1
Yes, I agree with all that.
I disagree only with the suggestion that other people are going to be treated on different terms.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: newnature1
Yes, I agree with all that.
I disagree only with the suggestion that other people are going to be treated on different terms.

Satan wants to blind people’s eyes to the truth of Paul’s good news, he is very clever in using ministers of righteousness in accomplishing that blinding. Satan is offering people a way to become righteous, to achieve a righteous standing before God and he always attaches people’s performance, people’s fingerprints are found on Satan’s method of becoming righteous. 


God justifies freely, not by way of people’s performance or promise, but as a gift. God justifies those who take him at his word, concerning what his son accomplished for them. Something for nothing!


Satan would say, “Why, that cannot be right! God can not be just and call a person righteous, when it is obvious that person falls short of the standard God himself set, when he gave Israel the law contract.” 


Do you know the really sad thing about that, is that Satan is not the only one who would raise such an objection! Those steeped in religianity, and it is not confined to those in religianity, but those steeped in religianity raise the same objection every Sunday, if not every day! 


We have to admit, that’s difficult for people imbued with the pride of life to imagine. It is difficult to accept, because it does not seem fair to the human mind, especially to the religiously minded. 


It does not seem quite right that God could consider someone righteous, especially if that person is not expending the same amount of effort or attention that we are to become righteous by way of our practice!

a reply to: DISRAELI

Compare Paul's words with the words of Christ. It's pretty simple that they are teaching two very separate things. Why people fall for Paul is beyond me.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: newnature1

most today mix the gospel of the grace of God with the gospel of the kingdom and the Everlasting gospel

How right you are. What are your thoughts on this Galatian teaching being taught here, what does Galatians have to do with the land in this covenant Yahweh made to Abraham?

After Yahweh Gave up on the nations, Yahweh experiments with a single individual of believing; Abraham’s believing withstands many a trial. Yahweh is the owner of the land, Abraham was called to. Yahweh is empowered to set conditions or residency requirements for those who would reside in it, like a landlord. Yahweh is seeking replacement tenants who are going to follow the moral rules of residence that Yahweh has established for his land. 


Yahweh’s promise to Abraham is formalized in a ritual ceremony called a suzerainty covenant. The patriarchical covenant, which is a covenant in which a superior party, a suzerain dictates the terms of a political treaty usually, and an inferior party obeys them. The arrangement primarily serves the interest of the suzerain, and not the vassal or the subject. So Yahweh is making a land grant to a favored subject, and there’s an ancient ritual that ratifies the oath. In this kind of covenant, the parties to the oath would pass between the split carcass of a sacrificial animal, as if to say, that they agree they will suffer the same fate as this animal, if they violate the covenant. 


Abraham cuts sacrificial animals in two, and Yahweh, but only Yahweh, passes between the two halves. Only Yahweh seems to be obligated by the covenant, obligated to fulfill the promise that he’s made. Abraham doesn’t appear to have any obligation in return. In this case, it is the subject, Abraham, and not the suzerain, Yahweh, who is benefited by this covenant, and that’s a complete reversal of this ritual ceremony.

a reply to: newnature1

I think the law was always meant to lead you in the spirit anyways, so there is no real difference.

Even though they may not have recognized it, most of the old testament stories is of Israel being lead in the spirit, is it not?

To me, apart from the fulfillment of the law, and the graphing in of gentiles, the new testament is mostly a clarification of the old testament.

Think about it: If Jews are really bound to the letter of the law, rather than the spirit of the law, and everyone sins, then all Jews would be condemned - there are no more atonements being made. It doesn't add up.

originally posted by: Bleeeeep
a reply to: newnature1

I think the law was always meant to lead you in the spirit anyways, so there is no real difference.

Even though they may not have recognized it, most of the old testament stories is of Israel being lead in the spirit, is it not?

To me, apart from the fulfillment of the law, and the graphing in of gentiles, the new testament is mostly a clarification of the old testament.

Think about it: If Jews are really bound to the letter of the law, rather than the spirit of the law, and everyone sins, then all Jews would be condemned - there are no more atonements being made. It doesn't add up.

But nothing in the law can stake its claim on us, the believer ever again. Being joined to the perfectly righteous Savior means that the law can never again point to our lack of righteousness. Victory over the law, victory over sin and victory over death are ours to enjoy right this very moment.

a reply to: Joecanada11
I am doing that by way of two separate series of threads.
I am currently doing one on Galatians, which will be followed in the near future by threads on the words of Jesus.
A comparison of the two will be interesting.

originally posted by: DISRAELI
a reply to: Joecanada11
I am doing that by way of two separate series of threads.
I am currently doing one on Galatians, which will be followed in the near future by threads on the words of Jesus.
A comparison of the two will be interesting.

But God alters our identity be removing us judicially in God’s mind from an identification with Adam, and now we are judicially identified with Jesus Christ. God places us into Christ, we have been made part of Jesus Christ’s body, part of his flesh, and part of his bones according to Paul.

a reply to: newnature1

I agree

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: newnature1

I agree[/quote

Paul has made it abundantly clear that God does not measure our goodness in relation to the goodness of others; he compares our goodness with his own perfect righteousness. That would be the criteria for dwelling with God and when our human righteousness is held up alongside the perfect righteousness of God, every member of the human race comes out on the short end of the stick. 


It is a SON issue today, not a SIN issue. The issue is not forgiveness of sin. The issue is believing what Christ accomplished in your behalf, in order to be identified with and joined to Christ himself. Christ believed that God’s justice has been satisfied where the sins he came to sacrifice himself for are concerned, Christ’s faith was and remains in God, and indeed we can believe God’s justice has been satisfied. 


Christ does not have a wishy-washy faith, it is Christ’s faith who has never, nor will ever waver in faith. It is Christ’s faith that is freely credited to the account of the one who believes the good news given to the apostle Paul to proclaim to us in this age of grace. It is Christ’s faith that righteousifies those who take their stand with God when it comes to what God has stated his son accomplished for them.

a reply to: newnature1

Again I fully agree

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: newnature1

Again I fully agree

Abraham was not considered righteous in accordance with any law-keeping system whatsoever, because God declared Abraham to be righteous approximately 25 years before he was circumcised and at least 400 years before the Law of Moses was ever instituted. 


In other words, throughout the ages, God has declared to be righteous those who believed the message he was giving them at the time. When a person believed the good news that God was dispensing, God credited that person’s account with righteousness.

a reply to: newnature1

and once again I agree with you.