Apostle to the Gentiles

[Musicmaster]

Looking upon Westernized Christianity, I'm floored as to how blind I was for so many years of my life concerning the ministry focus of each apostle.

A prime example of this follows:

Romans 4:2, 6
2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath [whereof] to glory; but not before God. ...
6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,

James 1:1, 2:17-18, 20-22, 24
1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. ...
20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? ...
24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

We see Paul saying one thing to the Church, and James saying the absolute opposite unto Israel in these passages. See that? This shows not only the Paul alone was the apostle to the Gentiles and James being one of twelve apostles to Israel, the messages to both are vastly different.

Those who try to harmonize Paul's ministry teachings with James, John and Peter, it all falls flat under its own weight because the counsel of 12 were commanded by Christ to minister ONLY unto Israel, and not one verse anywhere shows us that Christ ever rescinded that command. Jesus chose Paul, and ONLY Paul as the apostle to the Gentiles. I could show multitudes of examples in the differences between the instructions to Israel and those given to the Church.

So, given that James clearly and succinctly identifies his audience as being Israel, not the Church, the attempts at harmonizing the messages to both are seen for the falsehoods they are, because the people in the tribulation will then be under the Gospel of the Kingdom, not the Gospel of Grace.

Let's look once again at what each said:

James - by works a man is justified
Paul - if Abraham were justified by works, he hath [whereof] to glory; but not before God
The Jewish believers in Israel were zealous for the Law:

Acts 21:20 And when they heard [it], they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:

Not one chastisement was ever spoken to the Israelite believers for their being zealous of the Law. However, when one begins to try and harmonize the messages given to Israel verses what was handed to the Church by the ONLY apostle (Paul) sent to the Gentiles, THAT is when the sparks began to fly. The Judaizers spoke the Kingdom message to the Gentiles, which caused them all manner of confusions and strife, with Paul having to go back and try to effect damage control, and even going to Jerusalem himself in Acts 15 to ensure that the Judaizers were not speaking to the Gentiles on behalf of the apostles who were tasked with ministering to Israel ONLY.

Thoughts?

MM

 

[bobinfaith]

Looking upon Westernized Christianity, I'm floored as to how blind I was for so many years of my life concerning the ministry focus of each apostle. We see Paul saying one thing to the Church, and James saying the absolute opposite unto Israel in these passages. See that? This shows not only the Paul alone was the apostle to the Gentiles and James being one of twelve apostles to Israel, the messages to both are vastly different. Those who try to harmonize Paul's ministry teachings with James, John and Peter, it all falls flat under its own weight because the counsel of 12 were commanded by Christ to minister ONLY unto Israel, and not one verse anywhere shows us that Christ ever rescinded that command. Jesus chose Paul, and ONLY Paul as the apostle to the Gentiles. I could show multitudes of examples in the differences between the instructions to Israel and those given to the Church. So, given that James clearly and succinctly identifies his audience as being Israel, not the Church, the attempts at harmonizing the messages to both are seen for the falsehoods they are, because the people in the tribulation will then be under the Gospel of the Kingdom, not the Gospel of Grace.

Let's look once again at what each said:

James - by works a man is justified
Paul - if Abraham were justified by works, he hath [whereof] to glory; but not before God
The Jewish believers in Israel were zealous for the Law:

Acts 21:20 And when they heard [it], they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:

Not one chastisement was ever spoken to the Israelite believers for their being zealous of the Law. However, when one begins to try and harmonize the messages given to Israel verses what was handed to the Church by the ONLY apostle (Paul) sent to the Gentiles, THAT is when the sparks began to fly. The Judaizers spoke the Kingdom message to the Gentiles, which caused them all manner of confusions and strife, with Paul having to go back and try to effect damage control, and even going to Jerusalem himself in Acts 15 to ensure that the Judaizers were not speaking to the Gentiles on behalf of the apostles who were tasked with ministering to Israel ONLY.

Thoughts?

MM

Hello Musicmaster;

After reading your thread raises my thoughts, brother, but I have questions first so I can understand what you are sharing with us.

When you are taken aback regarding Westernized Christianity, please explain why this leaves you blind, so to speak. Are you referring to Westernized Christianity in the New Testament, Westernized Christianity during these times, or both?

Are you feeling objective to the Scriptures regarding James and Paul which is attempting to harmonize the revelation between Israel and the Church?

I feel you are being constructive in your thoughts and this is good. So how do you reconcile this with God's Word? Or do you want to stimulate teaching and give food for thought, first?

Otherwise, what is the solution you feel in your message that we need to pray for, going forward in our study, discipleship and application?

It's all good, MM, peace be with you, brother.

 

[Musicmaster]

Hello Musicmaster;

After reading your thread raises my thoughts, brother, but I have questions first so I can understand what you are sharing with us.

When you are taken aback regarding Westernized Christianity, please explain why this leaves you blind, so to speak. Are you referring to Westernized Christianity in the New Testament, Westernized Christianity during these times, or both?

Good questions, Bob.

It wasn't total blindness on my part, for there were some things that bothered me for decades when trying to harmonize those things with Westernized Christian thought and traditional, denominational teachings. The error on my part was to not ask Holy Spirit for understanding; to open my eyes. Instead, I took the lazy path of shrugging my shoulders and moving on with the false sense of my having ENOUGH understanding to just get me by. So, I blame only myself on that count rather than those who unknowingly taught falsehoods by not rightly dividing the word of truth.

An example of what was always in the back of my mind that spoke a different understanding to the reading mind...or, at least MY reading mind...are the following:

2 Timothy 3:1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.

Hebrews 1:2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by [his] Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

Acts 3:19, 21
19 Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord; ...
21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

Ephesians 1:10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; [even] in him:

1 Peter 1:20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you,

Throughout the NT, the unmistakable tone of imminence seeps through the words they spoke in their letters to Israel and to the Church. Many through the years have tried to harmonize that sense of imminence with the 2000 years since those writings by claiming that those statements rested under the understanding that a day unto the Lord is a thousand years here. You get the picture.

That simply didn't make sense. Many other ministers with whom this also did not set right as a legitimate explanation have said that the ending was indeed upon them at that time, but that they were being tested (Israel, that is) as to if the ending would indeed commence at that time, immanent, or if the interlude of 2000 more years called the times of the Gentiles would commence upon Israel's rejection of Christ one last time in the stoning of Stephen.

So, that, among other things, has led me to dig deeper into what it means to rightly divide the word of truth.

One of the things I've learned since is that when one "rightly divides the the word of truth," you don't end up with truth on one hand and falsehoods on the other, for falsehoods cannot rise up out of truth. What one has is two sets of truths, and when one tries to harmonize together what should be rightly divided, chaos ensues, such as the horrible effects of the message from the Judaizers.

They actively attempted to harmonize two different systems of truth in the lives of the Gentiles; Law and Grace. The Judaizers taught the Gentile believers the falsehood that to continue in their faith, they had to get circumcized and observe the Sabbath and all the rest of the Law of Moses. Paul had to write reams of things to the Churches to try and effect damage control, which drove him to journey into Jerusalem in Acts 15 to get it right from the council of apostles that those Judaizers were wrong, and that's exactly what Paul accomplished...as you know.

Are you feeling objective to the Scriptures regarding James and Paul which is attempting to harmonize the revelation between Israel and the Church?

I feel you are being constructive in your thoughts and this is good. So how do you reconcile this with God's Word? Or do you want to stimulate teaching and give food for thought, first?

Yes, I'm looking to build this form the ground up, although I will not be as exhaustive as writing a book, but rather parsing it out in bits and pieces as best I can in such a condensed manner.

Otherwise, what is the solution you feel in your message that we need to pray for, going forward in our study, discipleship and application?

It's all good, MM, peace be with you, brother.

As I am learning how to rightly divide the word of truth [SPOILER ALERT], the grace we have in Christ Jesus is so greatly magnified that it drove me to my knees with the realizations. It was more than a WOW moment, it was a level of awe never before realized within the small scope of my life in the vastness that is in the Lord.

I fully expect that some here are already in this level of understanding and will simply smile that knowing smile, and wonder what took me so long to look at the scriptures in the light of the division that exists, with examples of the resulting catastrophe when anyone tries to harmonize together what doesn't belong together. There is water truth, and there is oil truth. They don't mix, but work better when kept in the veins of the purpose for each.

MM

 

[Prim90]

Looking upon Westernized Christianity, I'm floored as to how blind I was for so many years of my life concerning the ministry focus of each apostle.

A prime example of this follows:

Romans 4:2, 6
2 For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath [whereof] to glory; but not before God. ...
6 Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,

James 1:1, 2:17-18, 20-22, 24
1 James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting.
17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.
18 Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. ...
20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar?
22 Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? ...
24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.

We see Paul saying one thing to the Church, and James saying the absolute opposite unto Israel in these passages. See that? This shows not only the Paul alone was the apostle to the Gentiles and James being one of twelve apostles to Israel, the messages to both are vastly different.

Those who try to harmonize Paul's ministry teachings with James, John and Peter, it all falls flat under its own weight because the counsel of 12 were commanded by Christ to minister ONLY unto Israel, and not one verse anywhere shows us that Christ ever rescinded that command. Jesus chose Paul, and ONLY Paul as the apostle to the Gentiles. I could show multitudes of examples in the differences between the instructions to Israel and those given to the Church.

So, given that James clearly and succinctly identifies his audience as being Israel, not the Church, the attempts at harmonizing the messages to both are seen for the falsehoods they are, because the people in the tribulation will then be under the Gospel of the Kingdom, not the Gospel of Grace.

Let's look once again at what each said:

James - by works a man is justified
Paul - if Abraham were justified by works, he hath [whereof] to glory; but not before God
The Jewish believers in Israel were zealous for the Law:

Acts 21:20 And when they heard [it], they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:

Not one chastisement was ever spoken to the Israelite believers for their being zealous of the Law. However, when one begins to try and harmonize the messages given to Israel verses what was handed to the Church by the ONLY apostle (Paul) sent to the Gentiles, THAT is when the sparks began to fly. The Judaizers spoke the Kingdom message to the Gentiles, which caused them all manner of confusions and strife, with Paul having to go back and try to effect damage control, and even going to Jerusalem himself in Acts 15 to ensure that the Judaizers were not speaking to the Gentiles on behalf of the apostles who were tasked with ministering to Israel ONLY.

Thoughts?

MM

James speaks wisely when he says faith without works is dead simply because good works are an extension of faith and expression of love. MM As to the law. The law was never replaced. Christ for-filled the law something Fallen humanity could never do. You say that namely only Paul an apostle to the gentiles than what of the apostle Peter and the apostle John they preached openly to the gentiles. The reality is that the gospel was first preached to the Jew and very shortly after transitioned to include the entire world. It’s what become known as the Church or the Israel of God. You continue to try and divide the Church of God into two different peoples when there has ever been one people the Israel of God. You previously questioned the church as being the bride Christ in a previous post also and now this. The more I read your posts on this subject the more I’m coming to the conclusion the church is only a side kick for physical Israel when you evaluate. Even if your heritage be Jewish and you do claim to be part of the Church. But It seems your thoughts be contrary and heavily favour physical Israel over the Holy Church. What you teach is bordering on heresy. You did mention the Judaizers. Yes MM they are mentioned all throughout the New Testament. They were known for trying to corrupt the early church the book of Galatians and you could probably add the book of Hebrews as well for a further rebuke. Those Judaizers used to hunt Christian's down like mongrol dogs all through the book of Acts. Something to think upon anyway. Why would you even consider this. One faith one baptism one people and one God over all.

 

[forgiven61]

we have the Bible unlimited resources how could anyone be blind other than by choice. being a Christian comes through jesus we have been give every thing we need, yet man seems to want to add to the word

 

[Musicmaster]

James speaks wisely when he says faith without works is dead simply because good works are an extension of faith and expression of love.

As I said in the previous post of mine, I stated that there are two sets of truth, and those two systems of truth apply to different groups. Both are good and true, but we must rightly divide them, as scripture commands.

MM As to the law. The law was never replaced. Christ for-filled the law something Fallen humanity could never do.

I did not ever say the Law was replaced. The Israelites were promised that the Law would be written in their hearts in the Kingdom to come.

You say that namely only Paul an apostle to the gentiles than what of the apostle Peter and the apostle John they preached openly to the gentiles.

Paul clearly said that he is the apostle to the Gentiles. Peter visited one more of the Gentile churches, but they were NOT the apostles to the Gentiles. If you can show otherwise, then I welcome such. What we DO know from what Christ commanded of His disciples that He never did withdraw, again, unless you can show it to me, THIS is what our Lord commanded of them:

Matthew 10:5-7
5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into [any] city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
7 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.

That was His command to the twelve. Paul, on the other hand, said this:

Romans 11:13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:

1 Timothy 2:7 Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, [and] lie not, a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.

2 Timothy 1:11 Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles.

If you disagree with Paul, and if you disagree with the fact that no other apostle laid claim to being an apostle to the Gentiles, nor did they teach the Gentiles, then please provide the scriptures, with explanation, as backing to your contention. I would very much appreciate that so that I can see and understand your thinking on this.

We must rightly divide the word of truth. That is the subject of this thread, so I hope you don't mind my holding you to that. The teaching authority to the Gentiles is a practice in dividing the word of truth, so I thank you in advance for sticking strictly to scripture rather than writing down an opinion. We need to back it all up with quotes from scripture.

The reality is that the gospel was first preached to the Jew and very shortly after transitioned to include the entire world.

Yes, that is true. Salvation is of the Jews. The Gospel first went to Israel, but, again, we must rightly divide the word, and in so doing recognize the differences in the Gospels, for one pertains to Israel, and another to Gentiles. The original twelve were restricted to preaching ONLY to Israel..."the lost sheep of the house of house of Israel."

Granted, once an Israeli is born again through Holy Spirit in Christ Jesus, they too are a part of the Church as being in Christ, there is no Jew nor Gentile, etc., but Israel is still under the Law in this dispensation so long as they remain opposed to, and continue to reject Christ Jesus.

It’s what become known as the Church or the Israel of God. You continue to try and divide the Church of God into two different peoples when there has ever been one people the Israel of God.

I believe my explanation above clarifies my meaning in all this.

You previously questioned the church as being the bride Christ in a previous post also and now this.

Yes, and I still challenge the replacement theology element of the Church having replaced Israel as the bride of Christ. I posted copious amounts of scripture in support for the fact that Israel was already married unto the Lord, divorced because of her adulteries, but also promised to be brought back into marriage unto the Lord Jesus if only she will turn her heart back to Him, which will happen at the end of the tribulation, as stated in Revelation 19.

The more I read your posts on this subject the more I’m coming to the conclusion the church is only a side kick for physical Israel when you evaluate.

Then please give me a chance to deal with this topic in more depth before you write me off as saying something that I am not at all stating anywhere. Do not analyze this until you have seen the entire presentation.

Even if your heritage be Jewish and you do claim to be part of the Church. But It seems your thoughts be contrary and heavily favour physical Israel over the Holy Church. What you teach is bordering on heresy. You did mention the Judaizers. Yes MM they are mentioned all throughout the New Testament. They were known for trying to corrupt the early church the book of Galatians and you could probably add the book of Hebrews as well for a further rebuke. Those Judaizers used to hunt Christian's down like mongrol dogs all through the book of Acts. Something to think upon anyway. Why would you even consider this. One faith one baptism one people and one God over all.

Again, you are assuming far too much into this. I'm not saying that you will become convinced. You alone are responsible for what you choose to believe, as is true of us all. All I ask is the opportunity to present what will magnify and bring greater glory to the Lord in the hearts of those who are open to the word of God for what it says. Those who are mired in the ruts of their pet doctrines, and others who have simply not gone on a journey of this topic, they can all benefit, and discuss as they see fit.

Here's the crux of it all...if we can't all come to agreement, and we are all claiming to be seeking Holy Spirit for His truth, and still do not agree, then someone is wrong, and we can all be wrong, but at least a collective seeking of Holy Spirit can and will bring forth agreement upon all the truths as they exist in Him, with only those who are not seeking Holy Spirit contending for things that are not true. If I end up being corrected on some things, then praise belongs unto the Lord.

2 Timothy 2:14-16
14 Of these things put [them] in remembrance, charging [them] before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, [but] to the subverting of the hearers.
15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
16 But shun profane [and] vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

MM

 

[forgiven61]

16 But shun profane [and] vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

what is wrong with Christianity as we know it ibn the states? who is right who is wrong the pentecostals the baptist ? the non denom

 

[Prim90]

As I said in the previous post of mine, I stated that there are two sets of truth, and those two systems of truth apply to different groups. Both are good and true, but we must rightly divide them, as scripture commands.



I did not ever say the Law was replaced. The Israelites were promised that the Law would be written in their hearts in the Kingdom to come.



Paul clearly said that he is the apostle to the Gentiles. Peter visited one more of the Gentile churches, but they were NOT the apostles to the Gentiles. If you can show otherwise, then I welcome such. What we DO know from what Christ commanded of His disciples that He never did withdraw, again, unless you can show it to me, THIS is what our Lord commanded of them:

Matthew 10:5-7
5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into [any] city of the Samaritans enter ye not:
6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
7 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.

That was His command to the twelve. Paul, on the other hand, said this:

Romans 11:13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:

1 Timothy 2:7 Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, [and] lie not, a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.

2 Timothy 1:11 Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles.

If you disagree with Paul, and if you disagree with the fact that no other apostle laid claim to being an apostle to the Gentiles, nor did they teach the Gentiles, then please provide the scriptures, with explanation, as backing to your contention. I would very much appreciate that so that I can see and understand your thinking on this.

We must rightly divide the word of truth. That is the subject of this thread, so I hope you don't mind my holding you to that. The teaching authority to the Gentiles is a practice in dividing the word of truth, so I thank you in advance for sticking strictly to scripture rather than writing down an opinion. We need to back it all up with quotes from scripture.



Yes, that is true. Salvation is of the Jews. The Gospel first went to Israel, but, again, we must rightly divide the word, and in so doing recognize the differences in the Gospels, for one pertains to Israel, and another to Gentiles. The original twelve were restricted to preaching ONLY to Israel..."the lost sheep of the house of house of Israel."

Granted, once an Israeli is born again through Holy Spirit in Christ Jesus, they too are a part of the Church as being in Christ, there is no Jew nor Gentile, etc., but Israel is still under the Law in this dispensation so long as they remain opposed to, and continue to reject Christ Jesus.



I believe my explanation above clarifies my meaning in all this.



Yes, and I still challenge the replacement theology element of the Church having replaced Israel as the bride of Christ. I posted copious amounts of scripture in support for the fact that Israel was already married unto the Lord, divorced because of her adulteries, but also promised to be brought back into marriage unto the Lord Jesus if only she will turn her heart back to Him, which will happen at the end of the tribulation, as stated in Revelation 19.



Then please give me a chance to deal with this topic in more depth before you write me off as saying something that I am not at all stating anywhere. Do not analyze this until you have seen the entire presentation.



Again, you are assuming far too much into this. I'm not saying that you will become convinced. You alone are responsible for what you choose to believe, as is true of us all. All I ask is the opportunity to present what will magnify and bring greater glory to the Lord in the hearts of those who are open to the word of God for what it says. Those who are mired in the ruts of their pet doctrines, and others who have simply not gone on a journey of this topic, they can all benefit, and discuss as they see fit.

Here's the crux of it all...if we can't all come to agreement, and we are all claiming to be seeking Holy Spirit for His truth, and still do not agree, then someone is wrong, and we can all be wrong, but at least a collective seeking of Holy Spirit can and will bring forth agreement upon all the truths as they exist in Him, with only those who are not seeking Holy Spirit contending for things that are not true. If I end up being corrected on some things, then praise belongs unto the Lord.

2 Timothy 2:14-16
14 Of these things put [them] in remembrance, charging [them] before the Lord that they strive not about words to no profit, [but] to the subverting of the hearers.
15 Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
16 But shun profane [and] vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

MM

MM no one disputes that the apostle Paul was the chief apostle to the gentiles but when you say that the other apostles were solely meant for the purpose of Israel only. That would fly in the face of Mark 16:14-20 when admonishing all the apostles after the the Lords resurrection . Jesus did say Go ye into into all the world and preach the gospel to all nations. Here are some journeys of the apostles m. We also add the apostle John who ended up at Ephesus modern day Turkey. Whilst it is true that the gospel went to the Jew first it was never going to remain that way. Israel as a nation had served its purpose. You must realise many of Christs statements were prior to the crucifixion and resurrection but it becomes clear after Pentecost that Jew and gentile alike are to be incorporated into the Israel of God or the church. We see glimpses of that even prior to the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. We only have to go to Matthew chapter 15 with the Canaanite lady. We only have to look at the Roman centurions faith in Luke 7:10 along with Christs journey through a Samaritan city . Jew and gentle alike were never far from our Lords mind. Now as to the law you mention it not only be embellished in the Jewish heart but also in the entirety of Christian civilisation or the Israel of God. I don’t discern between the two peoples we have always been one body past present and future the Church or the Israel of God. Adam & Eve , Methuselah and Noah never knew of such terms but they are included long before Israel became a nation or before the Israel of God or the church were ever known

 

[Musicmaster]

MM no one disputes that the apostle Paul was the chief apostle to the gentiles but when say that the other apostles were solely meant only for the purpose of Israel only. That would fly in the face of Mark 16:14-20 when admonishing all the apostles after the the Lords resurrection .

No. I disagree with your reference to Mark 16. The Church did not even exist as of yet, and I would appreciate it if you would show me where the scriptures say that Paul was the "chief" apostle to the Gentiles in the sense that the original 12 were also sent to the Gentiles. I have quoted for you what Jesus said, so I can't help but to wonder at what appears to be an injection you've made into the scriptures what I cannot find anywhere. Please help me out with this, if you would.

MM

 

[Prim90]

No. I disagree with your reference to Mark 16. The Church did not even exist as of yet, and I would appreciate it if you would show me where the scriptures say that Paul was the "chief" apostle to the Gentiles in the sense that the original 12 were also sent to the Gentiles. I have quoted for you what Jesus said, so I can't help but to wonder at what appears to be an injection you've made into the scriptures what I cannot find anywhere. Please help me out with this, if you would.

MM

MM I think your missing the point it certainly wasn’t long in coming that the church came into being like a few months later or maybe a year at the most. No injection into the scriptures required. It was what would become a future reality for all the apostles . As shown. In all their journeys. What can’t you find Dear : ) Now much late . Me must sleep God bless from down under

 

[Musicmaster]

Matthew 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.

There's the difference. See that? The Church is under the Gospel of Grace, not the Kingdom Gospel. The Kingdom to come is not for the Church, but rather for Israel.

MM

 

[bobinfaith]

Good morning, Musicmaster;

My response to "both sides" (lack of a better word) of your thread and Scriptures is you do have objectives with God's Word whether the Old, New Testaments and the Torah (Hebrew Bible.)

In my apologetics there are no errors as the scholars and theologians have been attempting to challenge the Christian and Jewish faith since the early readings back in Nehemiah 8 (I chose this Book because I feel goes back far enough in time for sake of point.)

I don't find objectives in God's Word. Do I find contradictions in my thinking between James and Paul, for example? Yes I do, but it's my interpretation of contradiction as a student of the Bible, minister and teacher of God. I believe if there are two separate accounts of an event does not make it mutually exclusive and this is why it's an opportunity to study to get past the difficulty I'm having.

But there are no errors and as we all know God doesn't make mistakes, especially with the most important Book in history. Instead, there are difficulties understanding on our part why one segment of the Old (reference to) Testament and New Testaments differ. The difficulties in God's Revelation is not the same as my difficulty understanding it.

What understanding I have gained is during the times you mentioned in Romans, James, Acts 14, 15, 21, etc...is the Way, the Early Church, the sustenance of the Jewish faith and the conversion of disciples was much persecution, scattering, division, it was all out of whack. There was no clean process.

In Acts 14 is a good example. Paul and Barnabas preached the Gospel to the Gentiles but the Jews misled the people which resulted in stoning Paul. One of the Keys to this chapter was how easy it was to stimulate division.

Division has been ongoing with both the Jewish and Christian teachings from the Books, the early Church Fathers to where we are today. But the Good News is there will indeed be a harmony between the Beginning, Intertestamental Period, to the Revelation.

Whether Jew or Gentile, men, women and children came to Christ Jesus. That is the bigger picture. As to how or who presented it to them is the difficulty that I feel needs further study.

Nobody has to prove anything to validate their point and align with yours. Perhaps what others are posting is the way they are receiving your argument and we should take that into consideration.

 

[Musicmaster]

MM I think your missing the point it certainly wasn’t long in coming that the church came into being like a few months later or maybe a year at the most. No injection into the scriptures required. It was what would become a future reality for all the apostles . As shown. In all their journeys. What can’t you find Dear : ) Now much late . Me must sleep God bless from down under

Actually, Paul's ministry to the Gentiles did not begin until about, upwards of about three years after Paul's conversion. He was not trained by the other 12, but by Christ Himself. R. C. Sproul made some interesting observations since he studied, in great detail, the timeframes within the scriptures that are not so readily apparent:

"Paul begins Galatians by saying that he was sent by Christ and the Father, and that the other church leaders agreed with him. In Galatians 1:11–2:10, he expands on these two points.

He begins in verses 11 and 12 by saying that the Gospel he preached was not devised by human wisdom, nor had he received it from the other apostles; rather, he was taught it directly by Jesus Christ Himself. He continues by reminding them that he had been trained in and was fanatically devoted to the erroneous traditions of Judaism. When God called Paul on the Damascus road, he was commissioned to preach the Gospel of Christ.

Paul said that when Christ called him, he did not go to Jerusalem to receive instruction from the apostles. Rather, he retired into Arabia for a time and not until three years later did he go to Jerusalem. Even then, the only apostle he met was Peter, and the only other leader he met was James, the presiding elder of the Jerusalem church." (https://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotionals/the-preparation-of-paul)

If your understanding of Jesus' command for them to go to all the world and preach the Gospel, and that the preaching mentioned was them preaching to Gentiles, then your understanding doesn't seem to match that of the reality that Peter, James and the others were still in Jerusalem years after the ascension of Christ.

Thoughts?

MM

 

[Musicmaster]

Good morning, Musicmaster;

My response to "both sides" (lack of a better word) of your thread and Scriptures is you do have objectives with God's Word whether the Old, New Testaments and the Torah (Hebrew Bible.)

In my apologetics there are no errors as the scholars and theologians have been attempting to challenge the Christian and Jewish faith since the early readings back in Nehemiah 8 (I chose this Book because I feel goes back far enough in time for sake of point.)

I don't find objectives in God's Word. Do I find contradictions in my thinking between James and Paul, for example? Yes I do, but it's my interpretation of contradiction as a student of the Bible, minister and teacher of God. I believe if there are two separate accounts of an event does not make it mutually exclusive and this is why it's an opportunity to study to get past the difficulty I'm having.

But there are no errors and as we all know God doesn't make mistakes, especially with the most important Book in history. Instead, there are difficulties understanding on our part why one segment of the Old (reference to) Testament and New Testaments differ. The difficulties in God's Revelation is not the same as my difficulty understanding it.

If I'm understanding you correctly, then no, I agree with you. There are no errors, and I was not saying or even implying that this is an error or contradiction when I pointed out:

James - by works a man is justified
Paul - if Abraham were justified by works, he hath [whereof] to glory; but not before God

Both are true, and they are not recounts of the same event. What's different are the target audiences. James clearly points out in James 1:1 that his audience is Israel, the twelve tribes scattered abroad. Paul is speaking to the believing Church.

Does that help to clarify further?

MM

 

[bobinfaith]

If I'm understanding your correctly, then no, I agree with you. There are no errors, and I was not saying or even implying that this is an error or contradiction when I pointed out:

James - by works a man is justified
Paul - if Abraham were justified by works, he hath [whereof] to glory; but not before God

Both are true, and they are not recounts of the same event. What's different are the target audiences. James clearly points out in James 1:1 that his audience is Israel, the twelve tribes scattered abroad. Paul is speaking to the believing Church.

Does that help to clarify further?

MM

Hello Musicmaster;

Then lets get on the same team. If all you've been posting and disagreeing with others narrows down to James and Paul, then to me it's ok that you ask clarity for sake of understanding the Scriptures between these two servants of God.

James and Paul were definitely two different servants of God whose aim was to bring others to Christ, which they did. How and who is not the bigger picture. If you don't feel they aren't recounts of the same event, then study the Scripture as we all should and give the benefit of other's apologetics. But don't ask them to prove it to reveal their wrong or align with your understanding.

But to go around in circles is not beneficial in our fellowship and learning in this topic, Musicmaster.

 

[LearningToLetGo]

Good observation.

 

[Musicmaster]

When I sought the Lord for His wisdom about WHY James spoke such a different message to Israel as opposed to Paul's message to the Church in Romans compared to the book of James, what came to me is this:

The Jews were very introverted. The example Jesus told of the Jews who left the man laying in the roadway, injured, who had been robbed, compared to the Samaritan who helped the man, that is the image that came to mind. James had to not only point to the Law, but also to instruct in good works toward others who were not necessarily Jews.

Upon reflection, I was forced to admit the introvertedness Jews tended toward in their outreaches. It's sad, although interesting, that James had to scold them by teaching them that their faith, if it's real, must also include benevolence toward others who were not Jews.

Gentiles, on the other hand, generally had no such proclivities of self-centeredness.

Also of not are the differences between the Gospel of Grace and the Gospel of the Kingdom. The Kingdom is yet to come in the Millennium, and will be populated by the Jews in fulfillment of the promises made to Abraham and to David.

When we of the Church try to adopt all of the NT into our theologies, the result is what we see all around us through the centuries, with denominations and cults springing up all throughout, each one with it s distinctives of focus.

MM

 

[bobinfaith]

When I sought the Lord for His wisdom about WHY James spoke such a different message to Israel as opposed to Paul's message to the Church in Romans compared to the book of James, what came to me is this:

The Jews were very introverted. The example Jesus told of the Jews who left the man laying in the roadway, injured, who had been robbed, compared to the Samaritan who helped the man, that is the image that came to mind. James had to not only point to the Law, but also to instruct in good works toward others who were not necessarily Jews.

Upon reflection, I was forced to admit the introvertedness Jews tended toward in their outreaches. It's sad, although interesting, that James had to scold them by teaching them that their faith, if it's real, must also include benevolence toward others who were not Jews.

Gentiles, on the other hand, generally had no such proclivities of self-centeredness.

Also of not are the differences between the Gospel of Grace and the Gospel of the Kingdom. The Kingdom is yet to come in the Millennium, and will be populated by the Jews in fulfillment of the promises made to Abraham and to David.

When we of the Church try to adopt all of the NT into our theologies, the result is what we see all around us through the centuries, with denominations and cults springing up all throughout, each one with it s distinctives of focus.

MM

Hello Musicmaster;

The Jews were introverted and we can have all kinds of reasons for that. In my understanding the Jews got a headstart in God's teaching whereas the Gentiles were a mixed bag of world philosophies, prejudices, belief in many other gods so much and so far away from Christ.

Sharing the Gospel to the Gentiles was a heavy challenge and so were the Jews reference the book of Matthew. But the Good News is many from both sides came pointing to Christ and serving Him.

Both James and Paul were Jewish and came to Christ as Jews. But they encountered different circumstances in their mission and were led to speak different messages. God knew this and would turn this around for His good as well as honoring His faithful servants.

 

[Musicmaster]

Hello Musicmaster;

The Jews were introverted and we can have all kinds of reasons for that. In my understanding the Jews got a headstart in God's teaching whereas the Gentiles were a mixed bag of worldly philosophies, prejudices, belief in many other gods and so much and so far away from Christ.

Sharing the Gospel to the Gentiles was a heavy challenge and so were the Jews reference the book of Matthew. But the Good News is many from both sides came pointing to Christ and serving Him.

Both James and Paul were Jewish and came to Christ as Jews. But they encountered different circumstances in their mission and were led to speak different messages. God knew this and would turn this around for His good as well as honoring His faithful servants.

That's an interesting way of putting it. I'll have to chew some on it, but will also move onward on this topic rather than for it to lay in a rut of just one element.

Thanks for participating and giving your thoughts.

MM

 

[bobinfaith]

Hello Musicmaster;

I don't see a rut and whether one element or many can be a blessing if we keep an open heart.

Yes, lets see if can arrive at a common ground of learning and good fellowship.

God bless you, MM.