ECT Which Gospel?

john w

New member
Hall of Fame
He's a proven liar on this site.

I've caught him, for years, in lie, after lie, and he knows it, and has never objected to the posts, where I showed his exact words, exposing his deceit.

Craigie's "ministry," due to his "dispie" obsession, is habitual lying, deceit, hypocrisy, and sophistry.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
The more the errors of Dispensationalism are brought to light, the more nasty the Darby followers get.
 

achduke

Active member
Read this three page pdf and get to debate-in it, lol

http://www.biblicaladvancedbasics.com/pdf/Galatians 2 7.pdf

If anyone knows how to copy and paste it [given its Greek fonts] and post the actual article on here, that it'd be great.

I ask this that this important article remain available in the event that site should one day no longer be accessible. Thanks.

Back to the topic on hand. There is only one gospel. We do not want to confuse how to be saved versus the process on how we are saved. Once we have the Holy Spirit he teaches us everything else.
 

Danoh

New member
There have been numerous errors in different printings of the KJV.

See the following:



The Blasphemous Comma: Several editions: Luke 23:32 reads "And there were also two other malefactors [crucified with Jesus]." It should have read "And there were also two others, malefactors."

"Judas Bible", from 1611: This Bible has Judas, not Jesus, saying "Sit ye here while I go yonder and pray." (Matthew 26:36)

"Printers Bible", from 1612: In some copies Psalm 119:161 reads "Printers have persecuted me without a cause" rather than "Princes have persecuted me..."

"Wicked Bible", "Adulterous Bible" or "Sinner's Bible", from 1631: Barker and Lucas: Omits an important "not" from Exodus 20:14, making the seventh commandment read "Thou shalt commit adultery." The printers were fined £300 and most of the copies were recalled immediately. Only 11 copies are known to exist today.

"More Sea Bible", from 1641: "...the first heaven and the first earth were passed away and there was more sea" rather than "...the first heaven and the first earth were passed away and there was no more sea." (Revelation 21:1)

"Unrighteous Bible" or "Wicked Bible", from 1653: Cambridge Press: Another edition carrying this title omits a "not" before the word "inherit", making I Corinthians 6:9 read "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall inherit the kingdom of God?..." In addition, Romans 6:13 reads "Neither yield ye your members as instruments of righteousness into sin..." where it should read "unrighteousness".
"Sin On Bible", from 1716: Jeremiah 31:34[10] reads "sin on more" rather than "sin no more".

"Vinegar Bible", from 1717: J. Baskett, Clarendon Press: The chapter heading for Luke 20 reads "The Parable of the Vinegar" instead of "The Parable of the Vineyard." One reviewer called this particular edition "a Baskett full of errors," what with its being replete with numerous other specimens of typographical errata throughout. One copy sold for $5,000 in 2008.

"The Fools Bible", from 1763: Psalm 14:1 reads "the fool hath said in his heart there is a God", rather than "...there is no God". The printers were fined £3,000 and all copies ordered destroyed.
"Denial Bible", from 1792: The name Philip is substituted for Peter as the apostle who would deny Jesus in Luke 22:34.

"Murderer's Bible", from 1801: "Murmurers" is printed as "murderers", making Jude 16 read: "These are murderers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men's persons in admiration because of advantage."

"Lions Bible", from 1804: 1 Kings 8:19 reads "thy son that shall come forth out of thy lions", rather than "loins". This edition had another error in Numbers 35:18 which read: "The murderer shall surely be put together" rather than "...put to death".

"To-remain Bible", from 1805: In Galatians 4:29 a proof-reader had written in "to remain" in the margin, as an answer to whether a comma should be deleted. The note inadvertently became part of the text, making the edition read "But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit to remain, even so it is now."

"Discharge Bible", from 1806: "Discharge" replaces "charge" making I Timothy 5:21 read "I discharge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality."
"Standing Fishes Bible", from 1806: "Fishes" replaced "fishers" making Ezekiel 47:10 read "And it shall come to pass, that the fishes shall stand upon it from Engedi even unto Eneglaim; they shall be a place to spread forth nets; their fish shall be according to their kinds, as the fish of the great sea, exceeding many."

"Idle Shepherd", from 1809: Zechariah 11:17 reads "the idle shepherd" rather than "idol shepherd".

"Ears To Ear Bible", from 1810: Edition which makes Matthew 13:43 read: "...Who has ears to ear, let him hear." The correct phrase should be "ears to hear". In the same edition, Hebrews 9:14 comes out as "How much more shall the blood of Christ ... purge your conscience from good works [should be "dead works"] to serve the living God."

"Wife-hater Bible", from 1810: "Wife" replaces "life" in this edition, making Luke 14:26 redundantly read "If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own wife also, he cannot be my disciple."

"The Large Family Bible", from 1820: Isaiah 66:9 reads: "Shall I bring to birth and not cease to bring forth?" rather than "Shall I bring to birth and not cause to bring forth?".

"Rebecca's Camels Bible", from 1823: "Camels" replaces "damsels" in one instance, making Genesis 24:61 read "And Rebecca arose, and her camels, and they rode upon the camels, and followed the man: and the servant took Rebecca and went his way."

"Affinity Bible", from 1927: Contains a table of family affinities that includes the line "A man may not marry his grandmother's wife."

"Owl Bible", from 1944: "Owl" replaces "own", making 1 Peter 3:5 read, "For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted God, adorned themselves, being in subjection to their owl husbands." The error was caused by a printing plate with a damaged letter n.

Obviously, you have yet to have heard of, let alone, studied out; the process those problems point to, that is addressed in Scripture itself.

The writers of Scripture, for example, relate how their audience might identify what writings were of those "holy men of God" and what writings were not.

And that is just one of the various principles related in Scripture as to these issues, that you and yours - your minds ever buried in the parroted writings of parrots parroting those external writers who have been parroting an approach to these issues other than "Nevertheless, what saith the Scripture?" - are never able to solve for.

All this is taught in Scripture - this process of Inspiration; Preservation; Refinement.

Further, although the Scripture teaches that men are fallible, Proverbs 3:5, it also teaches that, nevertheless; God's will is Matthew 4:4.

"... for...every man's work, shall be revealed, of what sort it is," 1 Cor. 3:10.
 

Danoh

New member
Back to the topic on hand. There is only one gospel. We do not want to confuse how to be saved versus the process on how we are saved. Once we have the Holy Spirit he teaches us everything else.

Not true. The lost do not have the Spirit of God. Doesn't stop them from coming to know the Truth simply by reading the Scripture and believing in it.

1 Thessalonians 2:

13. For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of
God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

Romans 10:

So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Thing is, 1 Corinthians 2:

14. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Is often misunderstood. For Paul is saying that to Believers.

1 Corinthians 3:

1. And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.

The issue some have with the assertion that there were two gospels is this same kind of an issue - its truths "are spiritually discerned."

Opposition to it is due to approaching whether or not Scriptures asserts it as true, not from Scripture, rather; from the traditions of men the natural man's resulting carnal mind attempts to discern spiritual things through.

This, because the new Believer's need for the "renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God," Romans 12:2, away from the natural man's carnal mind he was used to looking at things from when he was lost, has remained his general approach, applied now, to "the Bible."

Right off, he begins to be indoctrinated in a combination of his own ideas - the "what this passage means to me" school of "the Bible" - on one hand - "the traditions of men... wise in their own conceits through the ignorance in them" on the other.

And this is handed down from generation to generation.

Or, as Isaiah had lamented - in chapter 29:

13. Wherefore [for this reason] the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Today, its "oh how I love Jesus; oh how I love the Word."

After which, they open their mouths and all one hears is the notions of men.

And, "boy, oh boy, you need to read this book by Dr such and so!"

Worse, when someone comes along who has actually put in the time in the Word ALONE - those whose minds were long ago clouded over by the endless books of men supposedly about "the Bible" - conclude such an individual is the one actually following some man.

Of course, now the book based experts will go to town with this post.

In short, you wanna get back to my OP, get in His, first.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
CrossR,
what would be the difference between how we get saved and the process of how we get saved?

Are you talking about justification or about a changed life?
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Danoh,
hard to know what to do with that post, when you brought out a very long man's word instead of or in spite of the singular passages of Gal 1, I Cor 15, Rom 1, etc.
 

achduke

Active member
Not true. The lost do not have the Spirit of God. Doesn't stop them from coming to know the Truth simply by reading the Scripture and believing in it.

1 Thessalonians 2:

13. For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of
God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

Romans 10:

So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Thing is, 1 Corinthians 2:

14. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Is often misunderstood. For Paul is saying that to Believers.

1 Corinthians 3:

1. And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.

The issue some have with the assertion that there were two gospels is this same kind of an issue - its truths "are spiritually discerned."

Opposition to it is due to approaching whether or not Scriptures asserts it as true, not from Scripture, rather; from the traditions of men the natural man's resulting carnal mind attempts to discern spiritual things through.

This, because the new Believer's need for the "renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God," Romans 12:2, away from the natural man's carnal mind he was used to looking at things from when he was lost, has remained his general approach, applied now, to "the Bible."

Right off, he begins to be indoctrinated in a combination of his own ideas - the "what this passage means to me" school of "the Bible" - on one hand - "the traditions of men... wise in their own conceits through the ignorance in them" on the other.

And this is handed down from generation to generation.

Or, as Isaiah had lamented - in chapter 29:

13. Wherefore [for this reason] the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Today, its "oh how I love Jesus; oh how I love the Word."

After which, they open their mouths and all one hears is the notions of men.

And, "boy, oh boy, you need to read this book by Dr such and so!"

Worse, when someone comes along who has actually put in the time in the Word ALONE - those whose minds were long ago clouded over by the endless books of men supposedly about "the Bible" - conclude such an individual is the one actually following some man.

Of course, now the book based experts will go to town with this post.

In short, you wanna get back to my OP, get in His, first.

I do not see how any of this refutes that there is only one gospel. Perhaps take it slower and break it up for us.

1Th 5:4 But you, brethren, are not in darkness, so that this Day should overtake you as a thief.

The Thessalonians Paul was addressing were already believing. They were not lost.
 

achduke

Active member
Not true. The lost do not have the Spirit of God. Doesn't stop them from coming to know the Truth simply by reading the Scripture and believing in it.

1 Thessalonians 2:

13. For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of
God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

Romans 10:

So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Thing is, 1 Corinthians 2:

14. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Is often misunderstood. For Paul is saying that to Believers.

1 Corinthians 3:

1. And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.

The issue some have with the assertion that there were two gospels is this same kind of an issue - its truths "are spiritually discerned."

Opposition to it is due to approaching whether or not Scriptures asserts it as true, not from Scripture, rather; from the traditions of men the natural man's resulting carnal mind attempts to discern spiritual things through.

This, because the new Believer's need for the "renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God," Romans 12:2, away from the natural man's carnal mind he was used to looking at things from when he was lost, has remained his general approach, applied now, to "the Bible."

Right off, he begins to be indoctrinated in a combination of his own ideas - the "what this passage means to me" school of "the Bible" - on one hand - "the traditions of men... wise in their own conceits through the ignorance in them" on the other.

And this is handed down from generation to generation.

Or, as Isaiah had lamented - in chapter 29:

13. Wherefore [for this reason] the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Today, its "oh how I love Jesus; oh how I love the Word."

After which, they open their mouths and all one hears is the notions of men.

And, "boy, oh boy, you need to read this book by Dr such and so!"

Worse, when someone comes along who has actually put in the time in the Word ALONE - those whose minds were long ago clouded over by the endless books of men supposedly about "the Bible" - conclude such an individual is the one actually following some man.

Of course, now the book based experts will go to town with this post.

In short, you wanna get back to my OP, get in His, first.

I purposefully try to stay away from the books and thoughts of man. I have not read Darby, Calvin or any others but it is hard to avoid their teachings when talking with people who have read their teachings.
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
Back to the topic on hand. There is only one gospel.

There were two different gospels preached during the Acts period and we will look at this verse which describes the "good news" of the Christ:

"for I am not ashamed of the good news of the Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation to every one who is believing, both to Jew first, and to Greek" (Jn.1:16; YLT)​

There is more than one instance of the "good news" which is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth.

For instance, one thing which is the "good news" of Christ is the fact that He died for our sins. And believing that good news brings salvation (1 Cor.15:1-3).

Another thing which is the "good news" of Christ is the fact that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. And belief of that good news also brings life to all who believe it:

"But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name" (Jn.20:31).​

Those who believe that truth receive life by being born of God:

"Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God...For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith. Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?" (1 Jn.5:1-5).​

Tell me which of those is not a good news (gospel) which saves.
 

achduke

Active member
There were two different gospels preached during the Acts period and we will look at this verse which describes the "good news" of the Christ:

"for I am not ashamed of the good news of the Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation to every one who is believing, both to Jew first, and to Greek" (Jn.1:16; YLT)​

There is more than one instance of the "good news" which is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth.

For instance, one thing which is the "good news" of Christ is the fact that He died for our sins. And believing that good news brings salvation (1 Cor.15:1-3).

Another thing which is the "good news" of Christ is the fact that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. And belief of that good news also brings life to all who believe it:

"But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name" (Jn.20:31).​

Those who believe that truth receive life by being born of God:

"Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God...For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith. Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?" (1 Jn.5:1-5).​

Tell me which of those is not a good news (gospel) which saves.

The Good News is revealed more and more throughout the bible. Can you show the difference in how people are saved throughout the bible and not the reason by which they are saved?
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
The Good News is revealed more and more throughout the bible. Can you show the difference in how people are saved throughout the bible and not the reason by which they are saved?

So you agree that two different gospels were preached during the Acts period?

If not, then look at my last post and then answer my question:

Tell me which of those is not a good news (gospel) which saves.

To answer your question, through out history man has been saved by only one way--by grace through faith.

However, the content of the faith has been different in some instances.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
The council of Acts 15 was not over two gospels. It was about how much or how little torah had to be observed to honor Christ. What if a person ate meat used in a pagan ritual? What about sex?

To use a modern phrase, the council gave the Gentiles the benefit of the doubt.
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
The council of Acts 15 was not over two gospels. It was about how much or how little torah had to be observed to honor Christ. What if a person ate meat used in a pagan ritual? What about sex?

To use a modern phrase, the council gave the Gentiles the benefit of the doubt.

No, it was in regard to whether or not the Gentile believers must be circumcised and keep the law in order to be saved:

"And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved... But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses" (Acts 15:1,5).​
 

Danoh

New member
The council of Acts 15 was not over two gospels. It was about how much or how little torah had to be observed to honor Christ. What if a person ate meat used in a pagan ritual? What about sex?

To use a modern phrase, the council gave the Gentiles the benefit of the doubt.

What part of the following is not clear - Acts 15:

1. And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.

5. But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.

What do you think they'd been observing all along that it became an issue only later, when they asserted to Paul that the Gentiles had to do likewise?

And what of how their movement had continued to grow such that during one of Paul's later visits, James related "Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:" Acts 21:20?
 
Top