ECT The Gospel Proper

[glorydaz]

So, there are other kinds and those are not good news?

So, when God saves Israel from their enemies, that is insignificant dross?

Since it's what the Jews have looked forward to for centuries, I doubt it's "insignificant dross" to them.

 

[glorydaz]

The good news[gospel] of the Kingdom at hand is not the same as the good news[gospel] of the cross.

Yep, it can't be stated often enough. :thumb:

 

[glorydaz]

I propose the following as a bare bones, base minimum version of what one must believe in order to get saved. Call it the Gospel Proper, if you will.

• God exists and is the Creator of all things and He is perfect, holy, and just.
• We, having willfully done evil things and rebelled against God, who gave us life, deserve death.
• Because God loves us, He provided for Himself a propitiation (an atoning sacrifice) by becoming a man whom we call Jesus Christ.
• Jesus, being the Creator God Himself and therefore innocent of any sin, willingly bore the sins of the world and died on our behalf.
• Jesus rose from the dead.
• If you confess with you mouth, the Lord Jesus Christ (i.e. openly acknowledge your need of a savior and that He is that Savior) and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, YOU WILL BE SAVED.

Resting in Him,
Clete

I do have one question, Clete. Is there a reason you don't use the word "sin" in that second point there?

I have found from personal experience that nothing makes a person sit up and take notice like the word "sin" does. Too often people refuse to see they have done "evil" things.

 

[Clete]

I do have one question, Clete. Is there a reason you don't use the word "sin" in that second point there?

I have found from personal experience that nothing makes a person sit up and take notice like the word "sin" does. Too often people refuse to see they have done "evil" things.

No, no reason.

One might think that I preferred to spell it out rather than using a word I might later have to define but there was no intent to actively avoid using the term "sin" nor did I actively choose to not use it. I simply stated it the way I stated it. It didn't occur to me to say it any other way.

 

[Rosenritter]

Yeah, Lk 1:77. I made the mistake of working from memory rather than going back and rereading the verses, which I usually do and should always do.

What I was referring to is this, the national promise:

Luk 1:71 That we should be saved[soteria] from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us;
Luk 1:72 To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant;
Luk 1:73 The oath which he sware to our father Abraham,
Luk 1:74 That he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him without fear,

..which is not the same salvation as Lk 1:77:

Luk 1:77 To give knowledge of salvation[soteria] unto his people by the remission of their sins,

... though Lk 1:71 would not happen without Lk 1:77.

Salvation from the penalty of sin is not the same as salvation from Israel's national enemies.

Luke 1:71 is the same salvation as Luke 1:77. That isn't a mere "salvation from national enemies." Jesus didn't come to save a nation. Look forward just a little bit to verses 72 and 73 for better context:

Luke 1:70-73 KJV
(70) As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began:
(71) That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us;
(72) To perform the mercy promised to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant;
(73) The oath which he sware to our father Abraham,

First, notice that this salvation is spoken of the holy prophets from since the world began. Not from the day of Jacob or the day of Moses but the very beginning of the world.

Second, notice that this is concerning the oath which he swore to Abraham. Paul elaborates on this further, that the seed of Abraham is a spiritual seed (and it is one seed, not two) and that the true seed of Abraham is the seed in Christ. It has nothing to do with physical bloodline.

Galatians 3:16 KJV
(16) Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

My understanding is that 'the gospel proper'(the OP) refers to how one is saved today and involves the facts which must be believed in order to place one's total trust in Christ's finished work on the cross to be justified in the sight of GOD.
That particular content has not always been required knowledge for individuals to be eternally saved.

Salvation is the free gift and grace of God, it is about faith and belief in Him. It isn't about believing facts. When you read the parable of the sheep and the goats, does Jesus separate them based on a test of certain facts? Knowledge can be revealed and imparted. The heart is a different matter.

During Christ's earthly ministry and for sometime in the narrative of Acts, it was only necessary for those to believe that Jesus of Nazareth was Israel's promised Messiah, the Son of GOD.

I am required to believe more than that according to the 'Gospel Proper' for today.

We are required to believe and act upon what God reveals to us, when he reveals it to us, whenever he reveals it to us. That is included in the meaning of "faith" and "trust" and "obedience." That has always been the same and will never change..

The good news[gospel] of the Kingdom at hand is not the same as the good news[gospel] of the cross.

I don't think you understand how the gospel is accomplished, or even what is meant by it. The Kingdom at hand is the return of God on this earth and reconciling mankind to Himself once again, he brings salvation and eternal life, evil shall be no more and we shall dwell with him (and He among us.) That is the gospel of the cross and there is no other gospel.

 

[turbosixx]

Salvation from the penalty of sin is not the same as salvation from Israel's national enemies.

I suggest to you it is.
1 Jn. 5:4 For everyone who has been born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world—our faith. 5 Who is it that overcomes the world except the one who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?

Lk. 1:72 to show the mercy promised to our fathers and to remember his holy covenant, 73 the oath that he swore to our father Abraham, to grant us
The promise to the fathers was about Jesus.

Gal. 3: 16 Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, “And to seeds,” as of many, but as of one, “And to your Seed,” who is Christ.
The promise was to Jesus not the nation of Israel.

Anyone who does not accept Jesus will be destroyed.
Acts 3:22 Moses said, ‘The Lord God will raise up for you a prophet like me from your brothers. You shall listen to him in whatever he tells you. 23 And it shall be that every soul who does not listen to that prophet shall be destroyed from the people.’ 24 And all the prophets who have spoken, from Samuel and those who came after him, also proclaimed these days.

Have you ever considered that those of the nation of Israel that deny Christ are the BOC’s enemy?

Paul uses strong language to describe them.
Phil. 3:2 Look out for the dogs, look out for the evildoers, look out for those who mutilate the flesh.

He says they are enemies of the cross.
Phil. 3: 18 For many, of whom I have often told you and now tell you even with tears, walk as enemies of the cross of Christ.
Rom. 11:28 As regards the gospel, they are enemies for your sake. But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers.

When Jesus returns He’s going to destroy those who persecute Christians and do not obey the gospel, Jew and Gentile alike.
2 Thess. 1:6 since indeed God considers it just to repay with affliction those who afflict you, 7 and to grant relief to you who are afflicted as well as to us, when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels 8 in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus.

God gave them time to believe Jesus, then He destroyed them as a nation in 70AD.

 

[glorydaz]

No, no reason.

One might think that I preferred to spell it out rather than using a word I might later have to define but there was no intent to actively avoid using the term "sin" nor did I actively choose to not use it. I simply stated it the way I stated it. It didn't occur to me to say it any other way.

Thanks Clete. Just making sure I hadn't missed something, and the way you said it was just fine....and descriptive for those who may not have an inkling what sin is.

 

[glorydaz]

I don't think you understand how the gospel is accomplished, or even what is meant by it. The Kingdom at hand is the return of God on this earth and reconciling mankind to Himself once again, he brings salvation and eternal life, evil shall be no more and we shall dwell with him (and He among us.) That is the gospel of the cross and there is no other gospel.

Steko must not realize that Rosenritter is here to teach us dummies all things...."what the Gospel means - how the Gospel is accomplished - how to use quotation marks - how to know leading questions - the merits of rewording and soul sleep".

We should all take note and learn. :chew:

 

[turbosixx]

Thanks Clete. Just making sure I hadn't missed something, and the way you said it was just fine....and descriptive for those who may not have an inkling what sin is.

I would suggest let the bible define sin. Words like "evil things" and "rebelled" against God are subjective. Many who practice sin do not feel they are doing evil things or rebelling against God.

1 Jn. 3:4 Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness.

 

[glorydaz]

I would suggest let the bible define sin. Words like "evil things" and "rebelled" against God are subjective. Many who practice sin do not feel they are doing evil things or rebelling against God.

1 Jn. 3:4 Everyone who makes a practice of sinning also practices lawlessness; sin is lawlessness.

We speak to people in words they understand, so we can use the word sin and still have to explain what sin is, as Clete did. Asking people if they have ever lied will often have the desired result.

 

[steko]

Second, notice that this is concerning the oath which he swore to Abraham. Paul elaborates on this further, that the seed of Abraham is a spiritual seed (and it is one seed, not two) and that the true seed of Abraham is the seed in Christ. It has nothing to do with physical bloodline.

Galatians 3:16 KJV
(16) Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

When GOD made promises to Abram/Abraham, do you think that GOD wanted him to understand what He was saying?

 

[steko]

Lk. 1:72 to show the mercy promised to our fathers and to remember his holy covenant, 73 the oath that he swore to our father Abraham, to grant us
The promise to the fathers was about Jesus.

Gal. 3: 16 Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He does not say, “And to seeds,” as of many, but as of one, “And to your Seed,” who is Christ.
The promise was to Jesus not the nation of Israel.

When GOD made promises to Abram/Abraham, do you think that GOD wanted him to understand what He was saying?

 

[Rosenritter]

When GOD made promises to Abram/Abraham, do you think that GOD wanted him to understand what He was saying?

Not necessarily in fullness. It is the glory of God to conceal a matter and even now we see through a glass darkly (Pro 25:2, 1 Cor 13:12). He certainly didn't understand properly when he sought to fulfill God's prophecy through Sarah's handmaid Hagar.

 

[steko]

Not necessarily in fullness. It is the glory of God to conceal a matter and even now we see through a glass darkly (Pro 25:2, 1 Cor 13:12). He certainly didn't understand properly when he sought to fulfill God's prophecy through Sarah's handmaid Hagar.

So, you think that when GOD made promises concerning Abram/Abraham's seed(plural), He didn't mean what He said?


Do you think that Paul, in Galatians 3, is redacting all of the words 'seed(plural)in Gen 12-22 and changing the meanings to seed(singular)?

If so, what gives Paul the authority to redact GOD's word?

 

[turbosixx]

When GOD made promises to Abram/Abraham, do you think that GOD wanted him to understand what He was saying?

No, I don't believe God needed for him to understand. I believe God gave him all the information he needed.

I don't believe God needed any of the prophets to understand because it wasn't for them but for those who would believe in Jesus.
1 Pt. 1:10 Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, 11 inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories. 12 It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in the things that have now been announced to you through those who preached the good news to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look.

 

[steko]

No, I don't believe God needed for him to understand. I believe God gave him all the information he needed.

I don't believe God needed any of the prophets to understand because it wasn't for them but for those who would believe in Jesus.
1 Pt. 1:10 Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, 11 inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories. 12 It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in the things that have now been announced to you through those who preached the good news to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look.

So, when Abram believed GOD and it was credited to him for righteousness, Abram didn't know what he was believing?

 

[turbosixx]

So, when Abram believed GOD and it was credited to him for righteousness, Abram didn't know what he was believing?

Abraham believed that he would have a son. When that didn't happen for a while, they figured maybe it wasn't through Sarai.

Gen. 16:2 And Sarai said to Abram, “Behold now, the Lord has prevented me from bearing children. Go in to my servant; it may be that I shall obtain children by her.” And Abram listened to the voice of Sarai. 3 So, after Abram had lived ten years in the land of Canaan, Sarai, Abram's wife, took Hagar the Egyptian, her servant, and gave her to Abram her husband as a wife.

That wasn't God's plan and God set him straight.
Gen. 17:17 Then Abraham fell on his face and laughed and said to himself, “Shall a child be born to a man who is a hundred years old? Shall Sarah, who is ninety years old, bear a child?” 18 And Abraham said to God, “Oh that Ishmael might live before you!” 19 God said, “No, but Sarah your wife shall bear you a son, and you shall call his name Isaac. I will establish my covenant with him as an everlasting covenant for his offspring after him.

The promise was to his offspring, singular, which is Christ as Paul tells us.

 

[Rosenritter]

So, you think that when GOD made promises concerning Abram/Abraham's seed(plural), He didn't mean what He said?

Do you think that Paul, in Galatians 3, is redacting all of the words 'seed(plural)in Gen 12-22 and changing the meanings to seed(singular)?

If so, what gives Paul the authority to redact GOD's word?

Before you allege a contradiction, perhaps you could place the passages side by side for display?

 

[Rosenritter]

No, I don't believe God needed for him to understand. I believe God gave him all the information he needed.

I don't believe God needed any of the prophets to understand because it wasn't for them but for those who would believe in Jesus.
1 Pt. 1:10 Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, 11 inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories. 12 It was revealed to them that they were serving not themselves but you, in the things that have now been announced to you through those who preached the good news to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven, things into which angels long to look.

(another example)

Daniel 12:8-9 KJV
(8) And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things?
(9) And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.

 

[steko]

Before you allege a contradiction, perhaps you could place the passages side by side for display?

I'm not alleging a contradiction, but if I were to follow your's and Turbo's reasoning, I'd have to.