ECT How is Paul's message different?

turbosixx

New member
We have an uninterrupted sermon preached by Peter on the day of Pentecost beginning at Acts 2:14 and ending at Acts 2:36.
The reason it ended in verse 36 was because of an interruption. They were pierced and asked Peter what they should do.
After he answers their question he continues:
40 And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation.”


in that sermon there is not a word about God's "grace"
In Acts 13 Paul preaches the gospel and it's the same gospel Peter preached on Pentecost, 13:16-41 and he doesn't mention a word about God’s “grace”. I'm afraid you're biased.

On that day those who believed Peter's message were being saved. That means that Peter did preach a gospel that day and that gospel was not the "gospel of grace."

They believed and were saved, then by what were they saved if it's not by grace??
 

Jerry Shugart

Well-known member
They believed and were saved, then by what were they saved if it's not by grace??

Yes, they were saved by grace but the gospel of grace was not preached to them. They were saved when they believed the gospel that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. That is not the gospel which Paul preached to the Gentiles, the gospel of grace.
 

turbosixx

New member
This is my fault really. I should never have allowed this discussion to turn into a debate about specific doctrines. When asking the question, "Why Paul?" had no effect on you, I should have stopped there.
The reason the question has no effect on me is because I really can’t see an answer coming from any place besides speculation. My answer would be the same reason he chose Moses. Right man for the job. Besides that, I fail to see how it proves he was given a different gospel. I see he was given a different audience but not a different gospel.

Most people and I mean nearly everyone simply believes what they were taught as a child. If they're a Christian, it's because their parents where Christian. If they're a Baptist it's because they grew up going to a Baptist church, etc I, on the other hand, am weird. I've never settled for what someone taught me. I'm not at all satisfied with knowing the facts. I want to know WHY something is the way it is. A pastor tells me that his doctrine is more correct than that of the church next door (like literally in the very next lot on the street) and, for him and most of the congregation, that's good enough. I, on the other hand, instantly think to myself, "The pastor next door probably just finished saying the exact same sentence. What makes one right and the other wrong?" .
I see the same thing and that is exactly why I strive to challenge what I understand to be truth. I don’t want to blindly follow what I was taught from youth. That’s why I have joined in the discussion on this site. If mad is truth, I want to know it but as you have figured out, I have since come to the conclusion mad is not truth. It creates too many problems that can't be answered.

At this point I stick around mostly to challenge those who are willing but I still and always will continuing to challenge what I believe. I gotsta know.


There's just no way to do the topic justice on a web forum.
It really does require a methodical, step by step, analysis of the biblical material where one can see each premise, understand each argument, follow each conclusion that leads to the next argument. It is the only way paradigms are ever changed.
It is difficult if not impossible. That’s why I wanted to start at the beginning and keep it simple before moving on.

WHY PAUL? What's Paul got that the Twelve didn't?
A different audience.
 

turbosixx

New member
Yes, they were saved by grace but the gospel of grace was not preached to them. They were saved when they believed the gospel that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. That is not the gospel which Paul preached to the Gentiles, the gospel of grace.

How can they hear a gospel, believe and be saved by grace and it not be the gospel of grace? Compare the two, Acts 2 & 13, and prove they are different. Neither mentions grace.

Addressing Israel
Peter: 22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words;
Paul: 16 Then Paul stood up, and beckoning with his hand said, Men of Israel,

Christ descended from David
Peter: 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
Paul: 23 Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Savior, Jesus:

Christ died
Peter: 23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
Paul: 28 And though they found no cause of death in him, yet desired they Pilate that he should be slain.

David saw decay
Peter: 29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.
Paul: 36 For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption:

Christ did not see decay
Peter: 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.
Paul: 37 But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption.

Jesus resurrected
Peter: 32 This Jesus hath God raised up,
Paul: 30 But God raised him from the dead:

People witnessed the resurrection
Peter: 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
Paul: 31 And he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people.

Forgiveness of sins through Jesus
Peter: 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Paul: 38 Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins:

Jesus is Israel’s savior
Peter: 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
Paul: 23 Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Savior, Jesus:
 

DAN P

Well-known member
"As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God" (1 Pet.2:16).​

"Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage" (Gal.5:1).​

In both instances the subject is "liberty" and that can only mean liberty from the law or being set free from the law. I did not mean that they are actually the same but instead to point out that they both speak of the same thing, freedom from the law.

Dan, what do you think that Peter was referring to when he used the words "free" and 'liberty"?


Hi Jerry and in 1 Peter 2:16 all should start reading in verse 2:9-15 to understand what verse 16 means !!

#1 A royal Priesthood

#2 , Have a good witness among the Gentiles , verse 12

#3 , And to glorify God in the day of visitation , so what does that mean Jerry ??

#4, Submit to the ordinances of man

#5 Also for the Jew to obey verse 14

$6 , And verse 15 leads all into verse 16 as FREE as they are free to worship and be a witness among the Gentiles and obey all the Laws where the Jews are scattered !!

Hebrew through Revelation is all Jewish , an in-escapable FACT !~

dan p
 

musterion

Well-known member
You're actually the one that convinced me mad is false.

The key to Mid Acts Disp'ism, in my opinion, is recognition and study of the previously secret revelation FIRST given to Paul. There are two major facts involved in it:

1. The Gospel of the Kingdom was preached during the period covered in the four Gospel accounts. All Israel heard about it.

2. Paul says what he called "my gospel" was a secret hidden from man, revealed to himself before anyone else learned of it through him.

You understand this. You know these two points are Bible facts and so cannot be refuted or ignored.

You just don't like MAD for pointing it out, because it contradicts your Baptist tradition.
 

turbosixx

New member
The key to Mid Acts Disp'ism, in my opinion, is recognition and study of the previously secret revelation FIRST given to Paul. There are two major facts involved in it:

1. The Gospel of the Kingdom was preached during the period covered in the four Gospel accounts. All Israel heard about it.
Agreed

2. Paul says what he called "my gospel" was a secret hidden from man, revealed to himself before anyone else learned of it through him.
This is what I disagree with.
Paul tells Christians (those in Christ) of the mystery/my gospel. What did he preach to them that made them Christians? The same thing Peter did on Pentecost. No one has yet to prove otherwise. He also baptized the believers just as Peter did. Since he received the gospel from Jesus and not man, where did he get water baptism?


You just don't like MAD for pointing it out, because it contradicts your Baptist tradition.

I'm not a Baptist.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Quote Originally Posted by musterion View Post
2. Paul says what he called "my gospel" was a secret hidden from man, revealed to himself before anyone else learned of it through him.






There are some fine points to address here:
1, the expression from man meant from the rabbinic schools at that time. That does not mean it did not exist or was not known other ways. It is just a comment on Judaism.
2, I don't know where the 'before anyone else' part comes from. The emphasis should be on the fact that it was the SAME message through a DIFFERENT channel. Instead of 3 years on the ground with Paul, Christ intercepted him while he was doing a roundup. Then he taught him while rehabilitating out in Arabia, what ever that means. Obviously the good report of Gal 1:23 was enough to pre-empt the need to go back to Jerusalem directly; he was in Damascus for 3 years. The same, single Gospel. Once actually meeting with those people who accepted the good report, they added nothing to his message, 2:6.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Quote Originally Posted by Right Divider View Post
The fact that Peter is clearly the leader of the acts and events of Acts 1-8 could not be more clear.... AND the fact that Peter completely disappears from the book of Acts after chapter 15 SHOULD be a clear indication that something has changed. But it is ignored instead.





Luke had no other reports about Peter after he took on with Paul on those trips. They didn't have internet. Anyway the purpose of the document is material for legal representation of Paul to show he was not party to the zealot rebellion in Judea.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
In Acts 13 Paul preaches the gospel and it's the same gospel Peter preached on Pentecost, 13:16-41 and he doesn't mention a word about God’s “grace”. I'm afraid you're biased.




They both have grace in it. Not the word but another one of the manifold expressions of it.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
How can they hear a gospel, believe and be saved by grace and it not be the gospel of grace? Compare the two, Acts 2 & 13, and prove they are different. Neither mentions grace.

Addressing Israel
Peter: 22 Ye men of Israel, hear these words;
Paul: 16 Then Paul stood up, and beckoning with his hand said, Men of Israel,

Christ descended from David
Peter: 30 Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne;
Paul: 23 Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Savior, Jesus:

Christ died
Peter: 23 Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain:
Paul: 28 And though they found no cause of death in him, yet desired they Pilate that he should be slain.

David saw decay
Peter: 29 Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulchre is with us unto this day.
Paul: 36 For David, after he had served his own generation by the will of God, fell on sleep, and was laid unto his fathers, and saw corruption:

Christ did not see decay
Peter: 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.
Paul: 37 But he, whom God raised again, saw no corruption.

Jesus resurrected
Peter: 32 This Jesus hath God raised up,
Paul: 30 But God raised him from the dead:

People witnessed the resurrection
Peter: 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.
Paul: 31 And he was seen many days of them which came up with him from Galilee to Jerusalem, who are his witnesses unto the people.

Forgiveness of sins through Jesus
Peter: 38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Paul: 38 Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins:

Jesus is Israel’s savior
Peter: 36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
Paul: 23 Of this man's seed hath God according to his promise raised unto Israel a Savior, Jesus:





Don't forget he was made Lord and Christ in the resurrection. That's why it the completion of Ps 2.
 

Danoh

New member
Agreed


This is what I disagree with.
Paul tells Christians (those in Christ) of the mystery/my gospel. What did he preach to them that made them Christians? The same thing Peter did on Pentecost. No one has yet to prove otherwise. He also baptized the believers just as Peter did. Since he received the gospel from Jesus and not man, where did he get water baptism?




I'm not a Baptist.

If memory serves, slick, you have admitted on here in the past that you hold with the "Church of Christ" - which in Protestantism, is actually considered a cult.

Rom. 5:6-8.
 

whitestone

Well-known member
the approach of the apostles is given in Acts 15:19: it was a matter of not making it difficult for Gentiles by reducing things to four lines. Jews were still welcome to practice what they wanted, but they couldn't help but realize it was fading away.


This is like an itch that won't go away these four things that you say are being reduced "what are they being reduced from (in your mind)?" Theres the old law,Leviticus 17 and 18,,theres the Noahide laws, the new covenant,ect, maybe more but this you see them being reduced from...
 

turbosixx

New member
If memory serves, slick, you have admitted on here in the past that you hold with the "Church of Christ" - which in Protestantism, is actually considered a cult.

Rom. 5:6-8.

Rom. 16:16 Greet one another with a holy kiss. All the churches of Christ greet you.

Is the name on your building in the bible?
 

Danoh

New member
Rom. 16:16 Greet one another with a holy kiss. All the churches of Christ greet you.

Is the name on your building in the bible?

Rom 16: 16 is one of their ("Church of Christ" cult's) pet passages.

You're worse off then you know.

Rom. 5: 6-8.
 
Top