MARK 1:1 THE SON OF GOD

[DougE]

Mark 1:1 The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;

Mark wrote of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Mark identifies his deity as the Son of God, and that he is Christ, the Messiah.

Mark 1:4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

Mark goes on in regard to John's baptism as being the beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ. John's baptism was for the remission of sins, to cleanse Israel as priests in the coming Davidic kingdom, in which, Israel would reign with Christ on earth.

Mark 1:7 And preached, saying, There cometh one mightier than I after me, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose.

John also came to identify Jesus as the Christ to Israel.

1:14 Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God,

1:15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.

Jesus preached the gospel of the prophetic Davidic kingdom on earth to Israel.

During the earthly ministry of Christ, Israel was to believe that Jesus is Christ, the Son of God for eternal life. Israel would by faith, have eternal life by believing in the name of Jesus.

John 20:31 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.

Israel had to believe on the name of Jesus for eternal life, but to enter the kingdom on earth they had to be baptized. Israel had to obey the commandments to be physically saved to enter the kingdom.

Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

This clearly shows that there is not just one gospel in the Bible. The gospel of the kingdom is not the gospel of Christ that Paul preached. According to Paul's gospel we are to believe more than the name of Jesus; we are to believe Christ died for our sins and rose again for our justification unto eternal life.

Paul, after his conversion, preached Jesus is Christ, the Son of God.

Acts 9:20 And straightway he preached Christ in the synagogues, that he is the Son of God.

Paul was not at odds with God's purpose for Israel. Paul preached Jesus out of the law and prophets.

Acts 28:23 And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening.

Paul preached Jesus Christ according to the mystery and the scriptures of the prophets. The mystery, that God would reveal by Paul, was the salvation of the cross to all who believe, apart from Israel and it's covenants. Revealed was the church, a new creature, the Body of Christ. Revealed was all blessings in heavenly places in Christ.

Romans 16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

16:26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:

 

[csuguy]

This is not the gospel of Christ that Paul preached.

How so? You just provided scripture from Paul stating that he preached Jesus is the Son of God

 

[Jacob]

A different gospel? The same gospel? Have you ever heard of using different words to say the same thing? It may be something like that though not exactly the same thing.

 

[DougE]

How so? You just provided scripture from Paul stating that he preached Jesus is the Son of God

Hi

Paul was not at odds with the other Apostles or their preaching.

Paul was not at odds with the dispensation of God toward Israel in which they will receive the Davidic kingdom on earth and reign with Christ.

Paul taught from the law and the prophets, not just the mystery.

Paul preached Jesus.

Paul preached Jesus as the Son of God. This is part of the Gospel of God.

 

[Right Divider]

Hi

Paul was not at odds with the other Apostles or their preaching.

Paul was not at odds with the dispensation of God toward Israel in which they will receive the Davidic kingdom on earth and reign with Christ.

Paul taught from the law and the prophets, not just the mystery.

Paul preached Jesus.

Paul preached Jesus as the Son of God. This is part of the Gospel of God.

Yep... no conflict, just further revelation.

 

[JudgeRightly]

Yep... no conflict, just further revelation.

No conflict?

What?

Did you forget what Paul wrote in Galatians?

Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and also took Titus with me.And I went up by revelation, and communicated to them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to those who were of reputation, lest by any means I might run, or had run, in vain.Yet not even Titus who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised.And this occurred because of false brethren secretly brought in (who came in by stealth to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage),to whom we did not yield submission even for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.But from those who seemed to be something—whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man—for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me.But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter(for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles),and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.They desired only that we should remember the poor, the very thing which I also was eager to do.Now when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed;for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision.And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy.But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, “If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews?We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.“But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is Christ therefore a minister of sin? Certainly not!For if I build again those things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor.For I through the law died to the law that I might live to God.I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me.I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain.” - Galatians 2:1-21 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians2:1-21&version=NKJV

If there was no conflict:

1) why did Paul "privately to those who were of reputation, lest by any means I might run, or had run, in vain" communicate to them "that gospel which [he] preach[ed] among the Gentiles"?

2) why did Paul, when Peter visited antioch, get up in Peter's face ("I withstood him to his face") about him being a hypocrite?

 

[Right Divider]

No conflict?

What?

Did you forget what Paul wrote in Galatians?

Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and also took Titus with me.And I went up by revelation, and communicated to them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to those who were of reputation, lest by any means I might run, or had run, in vain.Yet not even Titus who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised.And this occurred because of false brethren secretly brought in (who came in by stealth to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage),to whom we did not yield submission even for an hour, that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.But from those who seemed to be something—whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; God shows personal favoritism to no man—for those who seemed to be something added nothing to me.But on the contrary, when they saw that the gospel for the uncircumcised had been committed to me, as the gospel for the circumcised was to Peter(for He who worked effectively in Peter for the apostleship to the circumcised also worked effectively in me toward the Gentiles),and when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that had been given to me, they gave me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised.They desired only that we should remember the poor, the very thing which I also was eager to do.Now when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed;for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision.And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy.But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, “If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews?We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles,knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.“But if, while we seek to be justified by Christ, we ourselves also are found sinners, is Christ therefore a minister of sin? Certainly not!For if I build again those things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor.For I through the law died to the law that I might live to God.I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me.I do not set aside the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the law, then Christ died in vain.” - Galatians 2:1-21 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians2:1-21&version=NKJV

If there was no conflict:

1) why did Paul "privately to those who were of reputation, lest by any means I might run, or had run, in vain" communicate to them "that gospel which [he] preach[ed] among the Gentiles"?

2) why did Paul, when Peter visited antioch, get up in Peter's face ("I withstood him to his face") about him being a hypocrite?

No conflict with any of God's revelations. Yep.

 

[csuguy]

Hi

Paul was not at odds with the other Apostles or their preaching.

Paul was not at odds with the dispensation of God toward Israel in which they will receive the Davidic kingdom on earth and reign with Christ.

Paul taught from the law and the prophets, not just the mystery.

Paul preached Jesus.

Paul preached Jesus as the Son of God. This is part of the Gospel of God.

If Paul had a different Gospel then there had to be differences in what he taught. If he taught the exact same things, then no - he didn't have a different Gospel.

 

[DougE]

Yep... no conflict, just further revelation.

Right

Paul gave them the right hand of fellowship. They would preach to Israel and Paul to the Gentiles.

Paul was not denying that God had a purpose for Israel and the Apostles preached the gospel of the kingdom to reconcile the earth.

Paul had the gospel of Christ revealed to him to reconcile heavenly places.

 

[DougE]

If Paul had a different Gospel then there had to be differences in what he taught. If he taught the exact same things, then no - he didn't have a different Gospel.

Hi

Paul preached Christ from the law and the prophets, but not the gospel of the kingdom. Paul preaching that Jesus is the Son of God, and Christ from the prophets does not negate his mystery preaching, nor his gospel.

 

[DougE]

No conflict with any of God's revelations. Yep.

Hello

If I may, Paul went to those of reputation, out of courtesy, to inform them of the content of his preaching. Paul was also conveying that he received his gospel by revelation from Christ. Paul was not antagonistic to their preaching the gospel of the kingdom, nor God's purpose for Israel in the kingdom.

Paul did rebuke Peter for reverting back to the law and causing contention among the believers.

 

[csuguy]

Hi

Paul preached Christ from the law and the prophets, but not the gospel of the kingdom. Paul preaching that Jesus is the Son of God, and Christ from the prophets does not negate his mystery preaching, nor his gospel.

Define from scripture what the Gospel of the Kingdom is and show from scripture how this is different from the Gospel of the Son, the Gospel of Christ, the Gospel of God, etc.

 

[Right Divider]

Define from scripture what the Gospel of the Kingdom is and show from scripture how this is different from the Gospel of the Son, the Gospel of Christ, the Gospel of God, etc.

The kingdom of which the gospel of the kingdom refers is documented through the law and the prophets.

The disciples clearly understood this kingdom, having been trained for FORTY days by the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 1:3). This is why they asked the logical and consistent question about its restoration in Acts 1:6.

Peter looked forward to this kingdom:

2Pe 1:10-11 KJV Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall: (11) For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.​

Isaiah wrote about it:

Isa 9:6-7 KJV For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. (7) Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.​

Jesus talked about it:

Mat 25:31-33 KJV When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory: (32) And before him shall be gathered all nations: and he shall separate them one from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats: (33) And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.​

etc. etc. etc.

 

[Right Divider]

Hello

If I may, Paul went to those of reputation, out of courtesy, to inform them of the content of his preaching. Paul was also conveying that he received his gospel by revelation from Christ. Paul was not antagonistic to their preaching the gospel of the kingdom, nor God's purpose for Israel in the kingdom.

Paul did rebuke Peter for reverting back to the law and causing contention among the believers.

Yes, but concerning the differences in the revelation given to them there is no conflict.

 

[JudgeRightly]

If Paul had a different Gospel then there had to be differences in what he taught. If he taught the exact same things, then no - he didn't have a different Gospel.

But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, - Romans 4:5 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans4:5&version=NKJV

is the antithesis of

You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only. - James 2:24 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James2:24&version=NKJV

----------

And be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God in Christ forgave you. - Ephesians 4:32 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians4:32&version=NKJV

is the opposite of

“For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.But if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses. - Matthew 6:14-15 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew6:14-15&version=NKJV

----------

For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, “Cursed is everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.” - Galatians 3:10 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians3:10&version=NKJV

is contradictory to

For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome. - 1 John 5:3 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1John5:3&version=NKJV

============

Things that differ are not the same.

Paul clearly had a different Gospel.

 

[DougE]

If Paul had a different Gospel then there had to be differences in what he taught. If he taught the exact same things, then no - he didn't have a different Gospel.

Paul taught the glory of the cross

Paul taught Jesus died for the sins of all

Paul taught Jesus rose again for our justification and was declared to be the Son of God

Paul taught the complete salvation of the cross to all that believe

Paul taught salvation to Gentiles apart from Israel and the covenants

Paul taught we are in Christ seated in heavenly places

Paul taught a new creature

 

[DougE]

Define from scripture what the Gospel of the Kingdom is and show from scripture how this is different from the Gospel of the Son, the Gospel of Christ, the Gospel of God, etc.

Hello

Matthew 4:23 And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.

Here is one verse.

Revelation 5:10 And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth

The kingdom is the prophetic Davidic kingdom on earth, in which, believing Israel will reign with Christ.

The gospel of the kingdom says nothing of the cross.

 

[DougE]

Yes, but concerning the differences in the revelation given to them there is no conflict.

Hi

I don't agree

Peter preached the gospel of the kingdom

Paul the gospel of Christ

 

[Right Divider]

Hi

I don't agree

Peter preached the gospel of the kingdom

Paul the gospel of Christ

And why do you think that those are in conflict?

 

[DougE]

And why do you think that those are in conflict?

Hi

Did I say they were in conflict? I don't remember did I ?

They are gospels to be received by faith in there own times or dispensations