ECT Messianic R. Jeslow ID's the other 'gospel' in Galatians

Interplanner

Well-known member
This pastor correctly identified the Judaizer gospel in Galatians today on an NRB TV program. It is when Judaizers add something(s) to Christ, and tell you that you are not really a Christian until you have done it.

Question: what EXACTLY did the other gospel that 2P2P people claim to see in Gal 2 say? Because it can't be what the Judaizers said, even according to this Messianic pastor.
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
This pastor correctly identified the Judaizer gospel in Galatians today on an NRB TV program. It is when Judaizers add something(s) to Christ, and tell you that you are not really a Christian until you have done it.

Question: what EXACTLY did the other gospel that 2P2P people claim to see in Gal 2 say? Because it can't be what the Judaizers said, even according to this Messianic pastor.

If you want to know what the gospel of the circumcision, committed unto Peter, says then why do you not search the scriptures to see what Peter told people to do to be saved?
 

Bradley D

Well-known member
In Acts 10 Peter found out that God included everyone in the Church. That the outward signs of the law in eating and circumcision no longer were a requirement. Peter later was influenced by Jewish visitors to one of Paul's missions. Paul wrote a scathing report on that. However, Peter came to realize as did many of the Jerusalem Christian Jews that Gentiles were included in God's plan of redemption.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
If you want to know what the gospel of the circumcision, committed unto Peter, says then why do you not search the scriptures to see what Peter told people to do to be saved?



There is no gospel about circumcision except for the one that the Judaizers forced on people, which Paul cut down. He also found that Peter was recapitulating from being with Gentiles and had to be corrected about that. Your understanding is flawed because of the 2P2P crap 2nd gospel myth in Gal 2.

There is no separate gospel committed unto Peter. Some things in Acts 2, 3 warned what would happen to Israel in that generation by them not joining the mission of the Gospel, but that is not a separate gospel. That is a one-off application. The forgiveness of God in Christ, EVEN FOR TAKING THE LIFE OF CHRIST, was the Gospel of both Peter and Paul and it was the thing promised to the fathers of Israel now fulfilled.
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
There is no gospel about circumcision except for the one that the Judaizers forced on people, which Paul cut down. He also found that Peter was recapitulating from being with Gentiles and had to be corrected about that. Your understanding is flawed because of the 2P2P crap 2nd gospel myth in Gal 2.

There is no separate gospel committed unto Peter. Some things in Acts 2, 3 warned what would happen to Israel in that generation by them not joining the mission of the Gospel, but that is not a separate gospel. That is a one-off application. The forgiveness of God in Christ, EVEN FOR TAKING THE LIFE OF CHRIST, was the Gospel of both Peter and Paul and it was the thing promised to the fathers of Israel now fulfilled.

Made up.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member


That is a non-answer. To show how united Peter and Paul were, the times of refreshing exists because sins can now be blotted out, Acts 3. That is a bookkeeping term, just like credited, reckoned, imputed, transferred is in Paul.

2P2P is a derailment from truth and actual grammar at Gal 2 and especially 3:8. It just keeps forcing its concepts onto the NT/AAL whether they belong or not.
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
That is a non-answer. To show how united Peter and Paul were, the times of refreshing exists because sins can now be blotted out, Acts 3. That is a bookkeeping term, just like credited, reckoned, imputed, transferred is in Paul.

2P2P is a derailment from truth and actual grammar at Gal 2 and especially 3:8. It just keeps forcing its concepts onto the NT/AAL whether they belong or not.

:chuckle:


Nope, Peter looked to the 2nd coming to have his sins blotted out.
Paul looked back to the cross to see his sins blotted out.

Different programs, different peoples, different churches, different purposes, different inheritances.

Keep mixing them, and you will continue in your mass confusion.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
:chuckle:


Nope, Peter looked to the 2nd coming to have his sins blotted out.
Paul looked back to the cross to see his sins blotted out.

Different programs, different peoples, different churches, different purposes, different inheritances.

Keep mixing them, and you will continue in your mass confusion.



I missed this but I think we can say where there is a serious problem now.

Justification vocabulary in Paul uses bookkeeping as well: the main item being 'righteousness' is 'credited/reckoned/transferred.' It is not actually in the person; they will still sin.

Sins being blotted out is also one of those.

When Paul described the Colossian situation, he said that the believers were being 'dis-justified'--he actually took the term for 'credited' and put a negative prefix on it, 2:4 'paralogizomai'--to discredit. It actually was to remove credit--the credited righteousness of Christ.

There are many other examples. Rom 11's 'take away sins' by the Redeemer who came is the same. It is not a full stop of sin, because one other feature is to turn godlessness away. But to 'take away sins' is to deal with the debt.

This is all because there are two aspects to salvation: the solution to debt and the solution to stain. Justification is for the first; it is not an experience. Finding out about it may be a huge thrill and should be, but not the same thing, no more than the sun's light is also its heat.

Transformation is the 2nd thing and is an experience. It is the change of the person in behavior. We are not justified by the 2nd; but it is there. We are only justified by Christ's perfect righteousness.

To get back to Acts 2, then, we can now see that he is not talking about something in the distant future and why would he? Why would THOSE people repent about gaining something that was going to come in the distant future if he was saying it would benefit them now? Talk about mass confusion.

I'll stop there, because I believe this problem is huge, and always has been huge in my experience with D'ist and futurists and 2P2P.

To put it in simplest language: Jn 3:18: 'who ever believes on him is not condemned.' Not condemned is a great gift but it does not mean the end of day to day sin; it refers to the debt.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
STP:
Different programs, different peoples, different churches, different purposes, different inheritances.



2P2P is the opposite of Epesians 4. Well chs 2-3 too which are the grounding of ch 4.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
It is bad enough that you think this waits til the 2nd coming, but I'm also wondering if you think something other than the sacrifice of Christ is the solution to the debt of sin. It sure sounds like it; it sounds like those in Judaism will finally do 'Judaism' the right way and be justified from sin by doing so!
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
Question: what EXACTLY did the other gospel that 2P2P people claim to see in Gal 2 say? Because it can't be what the Judaizers said, even according to this Messianic pastor.

What do you think was being preached when the Twelve preached this gospel?:

"And they departed, and went through the towns, preaching the gospel, and healing every where"
(Lk.9:6).​

It had nothing to do with the death of the Lord Jesus because when that gospel was being preached the Twelve did not even know the Lord Jesus was going to die (Lk.18:33-34).

Since you consider yourself an expert on gospel truths then certainly you must know what they were preaching.

What was it?

Thanks!
 
Last edited:

Danoh

New member
It is bad enough that you think this waits til the 2nd coming, but I'm also wondering if you think something other than the sacrifice of Christ is the solution to the debt of sin. It sure sounds like it; it sounds like those in Judaism will finally do 'Judaism' the right way and be justified from sin by doing so!

Well, at least you are finally beginning to isolate some of his views for what they are - HIS views and that of VERY FEW who assert a Mid-Acts perspective (aka MAD).

There's hope for you yet, IP :chuckle:
 

Danoh

New member
When did the LORD fulfill the feast of the Day of Atonement?

The individual blotting out of their sins (the election hath obtained it) is not the same as their collective blotting out of their sins as a nation (the rest were blinded in part, or for a season).
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
The individual blotting out of their sins (the election hath obtained it) is not the same as their collective blotting out of their sins as a nation (the rest were blinded in part, or for a season).

If individual atonement was available, why was Peter preaching to individuals to look for the second coming for the blotting out of sins?
 
Top