The Gospel of the Kingdom

The gospel for our day is the gospel of the grace of God (Acts 20.24). The word “gospel” (εὐαγγέλιον) means “good news”. The ascended, glorified Lord revealed this gospel to the Apostle Paul. The clearest definition of it is from Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians,

1 Now I make known to you, brethren, the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received, in which also you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, (1 Corinthians 15.1-4).

This was Paul’s gospel. Paul repeatedly referred to it as his own (Romans 2.16, 16.25; Galatians 2.2, 7; 2 Timothy 2.8).

John the Baptizer, Jesus, and the Twelve proclaimed the gospel of the kingdom, not the gospel of the grace of God (Acts 20.24). The gospel of the grace of God was not preached until the ascended, glorified Lord revealed it to Paul after He commissioned him to be the apostle of the Gentiles (Romans 11.13). What was this gospel or good news that they proclaimed and how was it different from Paul’s gospel?

The table below compares the Gospel of the Kingdom and the Gospel of the Grace of God.

Gospel of the KingdomGospel of the Grace of God
Proclaimed by John the Baptizer, Jesus, and the Twelve.Proclaimed by Paul.
Preached to Jew only.Preached primarily to Gentiles.
Required repentance, baptism, and faith + works.Requires faith alone, faith + 0.
Content of message was Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God.Content of message is the death and resurrection of Christ.
Began with John the Baptizer and stopped during the Acts period (Acts 15.11). Resumes after the Rapture.Began after Jesus commissioned Paul as apostle of the Gentiles.
Ended in Jewish unbelief. Will resume after the Body of Christ is completed. Ends in Jewish belief and fulfills the “great commission” and prophecy.Ends with completion of the Body of Christ composed of Jews and Gentiles (Rapture).
Gospel during Jesus’ earthly ministry and into Acts. Future “great commission” gospel once the Body of Christ is complete.Our present gospel–until Body of Christ is completed.

The Proclamation of the Gospel of the Kingdom

John the Baptizer acted as the forerunner, the herald, of the Messiah. His ministry and message was to proclaim the good news of the kingdom. Matthew recorded,

1 Now in those days John the Baptist came, preaching in the wilderness of Judea, saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” For this is the one referred to by Isaiah the prophet when he said, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, ‘Make ready the way of the LordMake His paths straight!’” Now John himself had a garment of camel’s hair and a leather belt around his waist; and his food was locusts and wild honey. Then Jerusalem was going out to him, and all Judea and all the district around the Jordan; and they were being baptized by him in the Jordan River, as they confessed their sins.  (Matthew 3.2-6).

After John had been arrested, Jesus himself took up the message of the coming kingdom. Matthew recorded,

12 Now when Jesus heard that John had been taken into custody, He withdrew into Galilee; 13 and leaving Nazareth, He came and settled in Capernaum, which is by the sea, in the region of Zebulun and Naphtali. 14 This was to fulfill what was spoken through Isaiah the prophet: 15 The land of Zebulun and the land of NaphtaliBy the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles16 The people who were sitting in darkness saw a great LightAnd those who were sitting in the land and shadow of deathUpon them a Light dawned.” 17 From that time Jesus began to preach and say, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand (Matthew 4.12-17).

Jesus was going through all the cities and villages, teaching in their synagogues and proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom, and healing every kind of disease and every kind of sickness (Matthew 9:35).

Mark, succinctly recorded John’s message and ministry:

John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. And all the country of Judea was going out to him, and all the people of Jerusalem; and they were being baptized by him in the Jordan River, confessing their sins (Mark 1.4-5).

Until the arrival of John the Baptist, Jewish salvation had been based upon the Mosaic Law and faith in the Levitical sacrifices. Since the time of Moses, the prophets had proclaimed a kingdom in which Israel would be the head and not the tail (Deuteronomy 28.13) among the nations and that God would set them above the nations of the earth (Deuteronomy 28.1). Hundreds of passages in the Scriptures prophesy this kingdom. The essential features of it were that Israel would be supreme among the nations of the earth, the Messiah would rule from Jerusalem as David’s greater Son over the entire earth (Zechariah 14.9), the earth would be restored to Edenic splendor (Jesus referred to this a the “regeneration” (Matthew 19.28), lifespans would be extended vastly, the animal kingdom would be at peace (Isaiah 11.6-8), the earth would be without war (Isaiah 2.4), and this kingdom would be one of unparalleled greatness (Isaiah 2.2). When John appeared, a new set of rules came into play. The fulfillment of the Levitical sacrifices was present. The promised King had arrived. Therefore, Jesus proclaimed,

The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John; since that time the gospel of the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is forcing his way into it (Luke 16:16)

The Provisions of the Gospel of the Kingdom

The gospel of the kingdom required the hearer to repent, be baptized, and believe that Jesus was the foretold Messiah.

14 Now after John had been taken into custody, Jesus came into Galilee,preaching the gospel of God, 15 and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel” (Mark 1.14-15).

Then Jerusalem was going out to him, and all Judea and all the district around the Jordan; and they were being baptized by him in the Jordan River, as they confessed their sins. (Matthew 3.5-6).

1 It happened that while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul passed through the upper country and came to Ephesus, and found some disciples. He said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said to him, “No, we have not even heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.” And he said, “Into what then were you baptized?” And they said, “Into John’s baptism.”Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in Him who was coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking with tongues and prophesying. (Acts 19.1-6).

After Jesus’ resurrection and ascension, the gospel of the kingdom continued to be preached by Peter and the other apostles in which repentance, baptism, and faith were required. Thus, Peter declared in his sermon on Pentecost:

36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ—this Jesus whom you crucified.” 37 Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brethren, what shall we do?” 38 Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2.36-38).

The same operational rules were active in Philip’s ministry in which he witnessed to the Ethiopian eunuch:

34 The eunuch answered Philip and said, “Please tell me, of whom does the prophet say this? Of himself or of someone else?” 35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning from this Scripture he preached Jesus to him. 36 As they went along the road they came to some water; and the eunuch *said, “Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?” 37 [And Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.” And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”] 38 And he ordered the chariot to stop; and they both went down into the water, Philip as well as the eunuch, and he baptized him (Acts 8.34-38).

The Content of the Gospel of the Kingdom

What did the hearers of John and Jesus need to believe? Several scriptures provide the answer.

13 Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, He was asking His disciples, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” 14 And they said, “Some say John the Baptist; and others, Elijah; but still others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets.” 15 He *said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.” 17 And Jesus said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven (Matthew 16.13-17).

Martha expressed this same faith to Jesus upon the death of Lazarus, her brother:

23 Jesus *said to her, “Your brother will rise again.” 24 Martha *said to Him, “I know that he will rise again in the resurrection on the last day.” 25 Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life; he who believes in Me will live even if he dies, 26 and everyone who lives and believes in Me will never die. Do you believe this?” 27 She *said to Him, “Yes, Lord; I have believed that You are the Christ, the Son of God,even He who comes into the world” (John 11.23-27).

What these verses reveal is that the content of faith was the belief that Jesus was the promised Messiah, the King of Israel (hence the kingdom message). That is to say, they believed in the identity of Jesus–that He was the Messiah, the Son of God.

When Phillip encountered the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8, the eunuch was leaving Jerusalem on his way back to Ethiopia. As he traveled, he was reading Isaiah 53. Phillip saw him reading and the Holy Spirit prompted him to approach his chariot. The Ethiopian asked Phillip regarding the passage he was reading if the prophet spoke of himself or another. According to Luke:

35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning from this Scripture he preached Jesus to him. 36 As they went along the road they came to some water; and the eunuch *said, “Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?” 37 [And Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.” And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”] 38 And he ordered the chariot to stop; and they both went down into the water, Philip as well as the eunuch, and he baptized him (Acts 8.35-38).

After Saul was converted on the road to Damascus he went to the house of Ananias where he stayed until he recovered from blindness and the shock of his ordeal. Luke recorded:

18 And immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he regained his sight, and he got up and was baptized; 19 and he took food and was strengthened. Now for several days he was with the disciples who were at Damascus, 20 and immediately he began to proclaim Jesus in the synagogues, saying, “He is the Son of God” (Acts 9.18-20).

Paul was saved under the kingdom gospel. As a result, he preached this gospel–that Jesus was the Son of God (Acts 9.20). Not until later did Paul receive a new gospel (foreign to the Twelve) from the ascended Lord. Paul’s gospel focused upon Christ’s work–that Christ died for our sins and arose from the dead–not upon His identity (1 Corinthians 15.1-4). This is why Paul called this gospel, “my gospel” (Romans 2.16, 16.25; 2 Timothy 2.8).

The Fulfillment of the Gospel of the Kingdom

We have numerous statements from the Scriptures–from the lips of John the Baptizer and Jesus that the kingdom of God was near (Matthew 3.2; Matthew 4.17; Mark 1.15).

28 But if I cast out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. 29 Or how can anyone enter the strong man’s house and carry off his property, unless he first binds the strong man? And then he will plunder his house (Matthew 12.28-29).

In the above passage, Jesus made it clear the kingdom was present because he was casting out demons by the Holy Spirit. Did he mean that the kingdom was present in some sort of spiritual manifestation? Such a view would contradict hundreds of Biblical passages. But God is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14.33). Therefore, Jesus meant something different.

In order to understand Jesus’ words we have to understand Jewish thinking about the kingdom. For hundreds of years God had revealed to the Jewish prophets about a coming kingdom. It was earthly–not heavenly or “spiritual.”2 In that kingdom the Messiah would reign as king over national Israel as well as over the entire world (Luke 1.32 cf. 1.67-79; Zechariah 14.9). Most essentially, the kingdom was where the King was. In the passage above we find this very thing.

In the following passage Luke made the same point as in Luke 10 above. However, this passage has been so misunderstood and abused by theologians and preachers that its normal sense has become almost unintelligible. Because of this abuse we have massive confusion.

20 Now having been questioned by the Pharisees as to when the kingdom of God was coming, He answered them and said, “The kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed; 21 nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or, ‘There it is!’ For behold, the kingdom of God is in your midst.” (Luke 17.20-21).

The question by the Pharisees was straightforward. They wanted to know when the prophesied kingdom was coming. How did Jesus’ respond? The translation above can be improved. The Greek text reads as follows:

Οὐκ ἔρχεται ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ μετὰ παρατηρήσεως,

A better translation is, “the kingdom of God is not coming with close watching.” Did Jesus mean this kingdom could not be seen–that it was invisible? Hardly. Jesus was being purposefully cryptic. These Pharisees did not want the truth. Their interest was to find something they could use to condemn Jesus. He knew it and this explains His response. Why did Jesus began to teach in parables? He changed from straightfoward instruction to parables for one primary reason: to hide the spiritual lesson from those who wished to remain spiritually blind (Matthew 13.10-17). Jesus’s answer to these Pharisees was that one did not need to strain one’s eyes to see the kingdom. It did not require “attentive watching,” “close observation,” or “intense scrutiny.” The next passage supports this meaning.  It reads,

οὐδὲ ἐροῦσιν,Ἰδοὺ ὧδε: ἤ, Ἐκεῖ: ἰδοὺ γὰρ ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ ἐντὸς ὑμῶν ἐστιν.

What did Jesus mean by the phrase ἐντὸς ὑμῶν? Translations that read, “within you” and interpret the phrase as “within one’s heart” miss the point as well as the purpose of Jesus’ ministry and claims. The phrase “within you” does not mean “within your heart” but “within your midst” or “among you.” The central point of the kingdom is it is where the King is. The kingdom of God was certainly not in the heart of these Pharisees. They hated Him and wished to discredit and destroy Him. Most miss Luke’s sarcasm in this passage. Luke was pointing out that the kingdom was in their midst–in the person of the King. No eye strain was required to see the kingdom–He and it was standing right in front of them!

Whatever city you enter and they receive you, eat what is set before you; and heal those in it who are sick, and say to them, ‘The kingdom of God has come near to you.’ 10 But whatever city you enter and they do not receive you, go out into its streets and say, 11 ‘Even the dust of your city which clings to our feet we wipe off in protest against you; yet be sure of this, that the kingdom of God has come near’ (Luke 10.8-11).

The above passage shows once more that the kingdom had come near. But what then? His disciples wondered as much also.  Matthew recorded,

As He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately, saying, “Tell us, when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?” (Matthew 24.3)

In Matthew 24, Jesus gave his great dissertation about end times to his disciples questions. In His reply, Jesus made this statement about the gospel of the kingdom:

This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come (Matthew 24.14).

The central message of gospel of the kingdom was that God was about to be establish His kingdom earth. In this kingdom the Messiah would reign as David’s greater Son. In this kingdom Israel’s covenants–Abrahamic, Palestinian or Land, Sabbatic, Davidic, and New–would be fulfilled. The verses preceding Jesus’ statement about the gospel of the kingdom indicated great turmoil–deceit, false messiahs, wars, persecution, betrayal, and lawlessness. Jesus declared that the one who endured until the end will be saved. This salvation was not only spiritual salvation (salvation from sin) but physical salvation. If one survived this terrible time he would live (be saved) and go into the kingdom.

The gospel of the kingdom is synonymous with what has become known as “the great commission.”3 In Matthew 28.18-20, gave his disciples the below charge. Matthew recorded:

18 And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”

Jesus told his disciples that he would be with them even to the end of the age. Obviously, the “end of the age” has not come. Therefore, Jesus was speaking of Jews who would trust in Him. A future generation of Jews will believe in Jesus as the Messiah (in His identity) and will fulfill the “great commission” by proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom to the entire world. After this occurs the end will come.

The Church’s (the body of Christ) “great commission” is the “gospel of the grace of God” not the “gospel of the kingdom.” We will not complete the “great commission” because we can not. The Church is under different orders. God saved and commissioned Paul to be the “apostle to the Gentiles” (Romans 11.13; Galatians 2.8; 1 Timothy 2.7) and gave him the “gospel of the grace of God” (1 Corinthians 15.1-4). The Church’s “great commission” is not the gospel of the kingdom or  Matthew 28.18-20. The Church’s “great commission” is 2 Corinthians 5.17-21.


The “gospel of the kingdom” was proclaimed by John the Baptizer, Jesus, and the Twelve. It was the “good news” of the coming kingdom and required repentance, baptism, and faith that Jesus was the prophesied Messiah. It was proclaimed by Jews to Jews only (with a couple of exception such as the Canaanite woman (Matthew 15.21-28) and the Roman centurion (Matthew 8.5-13). This gospel failed due to Jewish unbelief. But God will reinstate it after He completes the Church, the body of Christ (at the Rapture). A future generation of Jews will embrace and believe it and fulfill Romans 11.26. In the meantime, our gospel is the “gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20.24; 1 Corinthians 15.1-4).

Most early manuscripts do not contain the verse in brackets (v. 37). While the verse may be an addition, it lines up with the other Scriptures examined in the gospels and what Paul preached following his salvation.
The phrase “kingdom of heaven” is unique to Matthew and used in the following verses: Matthew 3.2, 4.17, 5.3, 10, 19-20, 6.10, 7.21, 8.11, 10.7, 11.11-12, 13.11, 24. The phrase “kingdom of heaven” is a genitive of source which means that the source of the kingdom was from heaven. It is not a locative genitive (i.e., the kingdom is not located in heaven) or a descriptive genitive (“heavenly” as in a state of mind).
See The Great Commission.

©2010 Don Samdahl.  Anyone is free to reproduce this material and distribute it, but it may not be sold.

Updated, October 14, 2010

Save pagePDF pageEmail pagePrint page

101 Responses to The Gospel of the Kingdom

  1. Chris says:

    Just wanted to say good job teaching the difference.

    When you approach the bible by looking at who wrote the passage, at what time, for what people, you will divide the scriptures correctly.
    And avoid any confusion.

    Les Feldick has a bible study called through the bible, and its a big blessing. You teach like this brother.
    You are right on time bro.

    God Bless.

  2. Don says:

    The mysteries given to Paul are a different revelation from that given to Peter and the other Apostles, and only Paul’s writings are directly for the church today? The other epistles, such as Hebrews, James, 1 and 2 Peter, and the epistles of John are not for us today in a direct sense? Yet, Paul himself said that the church is built upon the “apostleS” plural and not merely upon himself (Eph. 2:20) and the mysteries were “revealed unto his holy apostleS and prophetS” (Eph. 3:5) and not to him alone. Peter also referred to the writings of Paul and made no distinction between Paul’s teaching and the teaching of the other apostles (2 Pet. 3:1-2, 15-16). Peter said Paul wrote to the same people and preached the same message. Though we know that Paul was the special apostle of the Gentiles and he was given unique revelations about the church as the body of Christ, his revelations in no way contradict the revelations given in the General Epistles (Hebrews – Jude).

    • doctrine doctrine says:

      In Ephesians 3.5, Paul referred either to apostles who ministered with him or the Twelve. If the latter, they learned of the Church, the body of Christ, from Paul. They knew nothing of Gentile equality in Christ until Paul revealed it. They never wrote of the body of Christ and knew nothing of Paul’s other “secrets.” If they had preached the same gospel then there would have been no controversy in Acts 15. Peter’s wrote only to Jews (1 Peter 1.1; Galatians 2.7-9) and admitted he found the things Paul taught difficult (2 Peter 3.14-16). Nevertheless, he directed his Jewish audience to Paul, not John, James, or Jude. One must be able to distinguish what the Scriptures say, what they do not say, and not read Pauline doctrine into the Gospels or the teachings of the Twelve.

      • Becky says:

        Thanks so much for this study, very enlightening and applicable. I clearly see what you explained to Don. This passage immediately comes to mind:
        1Pe 1:10  Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace (wow!) that should come unto you:
        1Pe 1:11  Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.
        1Pe 1:12  Unto whom it was revealed, that NOT UNTO THEMSELVES, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.
        This passage is an eye opener! First, it confirms that Peter understood the “mystery” of grace (Eph 3:2-6), which he only could have received from Paul, according to Scripture. Second, the prophets prophesied of the grace that would be revealed in the future, searching, studying, trying to understand this thing that was given to them only to give to someone else, yet remaining a mystery to them. Also, there is something else I just saw for the first time. Verse 11 says “The Spirit of Christ in them” and verse 12 says “The Holy Ghost sent down from heaven,” the two different “dispensations” (sorry, I just can’t find the word I’m looking for). Not in any way saying it was two different Spirits, but rather two ways it was provided/dispensed/experienced. I truly hope you can understand what I’m trying to say.

      • Derek says:

        You claim that Paul revealed it to the rest of the Apostles…. But what about Peter’s vision of the “unclean” animals?

        • doctrine doctrine says:

          Peter went to Cornelius’ house because of the vision. This was several years after Pentecost. And it was after Paul was saved. Furthermore, we have no record Peter (or any of the Twelve) ever had a ministry to Gentiles, even after the vision.

  3. Paul Miller says:

    Timothy Keller in his “The Reason For God” Discussion Guide discusses Luke 24:13-32, in which the disciples headed toward Emmaus were chided by Jesus for failing to understand that everything in the Bible is ultimately about Jesus. He (Keller) implies that they were wrong to take the prophecies concerning Jesus and His earthly kingdom literally. I suppose this is another example of reformed theology spiritualizing kingdom promises.

    • doctrine doctrine says:

      I don’t know who Timothy Keller is, but the whole notion that the kingdom is not earthly is mind-boggling. Who are these people? I mean, how does one get around, “Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth as it is in heaven?” They just as well ought to come out and say the Lord had no idea what He was talking about.

  4. Sue says:

    Hi Don,
    Thanks for your great articles!

    I have a question:
    Mark 16:15 says: “And He said to them, ‘Go into all the world and preach the gospel [i.e. of the Kingdom] to all creation’.”

    What does “to all creation” mean here?

    Is the implication that the Jews who believed would subsequently preach to Gentiles? I.e. ‘to the Jew first and then to the Greek’.

    And is this the model that would occur during the Great Tribulation – that the Kingdom Gospel would once again be preached to the Jew who would then preach to the Gentile?

    • doctrine doctrine says:

      Thank you. Yes, the Twelve were to start in Jerusalem and then move out to the rest of Israel and the nations (Luke 24.45-47; Acts 1.8, 8.1). The OT prophetic plan, i.e., the Abrahamic covenant, was that Gentiles would be and could only be blessed by Israel. For this plan to work, however, meant that Israel had to repent and accept her King, the Lord Jesus Christ. If they did not no blessing could come to them (the kingdom) and no blessing to Gentiles. In Acts 8.1 we read that the Twelve refused to leave Jerusalem even in the face of persecution. Why? Because they understood the plan. They could not move out until the Jews in Jerusalem repented. As we know, they did not and instead of initiating the Day of The Lord, the Lord in His mercy saved Saul who then went to Gentiles. This plan will be reinitiated in the Tribulation and continue into the Millennium (Zechariah 8.21-23).

      • William says:

        Wow! What an awesome response to this common misconception of what Jesus instructed them to do. And what they understood had to happen from the O.T. prophets. Thank you

      • Joe says:

        but didn’t they leave Jerusalem eventually? Peter to Rome and John to Ephesus?..John was in prison off of Asia Minor and took care of Mary….(?) the story goes Peter went to Rome but maybe that’s just rumor to support someone’s theology? Do we really know what happened to John and Peter?

        Doctrine, you are doing a good work. thanks

        • doctrine doctrine says:

          Thank you. We have no Biblical evidence the Twelve left Israel with the exception of John being on Patmos. Three great prophetic books–Ezekiel, Daniel, and Revelation were written by Jews outside the borders of Israel.

      • Andy says:

        Peter was immediately in Joppa shortly after the text you cite stating that “they refused to leave Jerusalem.” And Peter received vision and confirmation of Gentile conversion in Acts 10. Paul had nothing to do with this. Peter and the rest of the Twelve understood the gospel of grace as they had time with Christ following the Resurrection and had the indwelling Holy Spirit to clarify His teachings. I’m not sure I understand the relevance of your teaching. (And I feel confident that you know who Tim Keller is.)

        • doctrine doctrine says:

          Acts 10 follows Acts 9. Peter did not go to Cornelius’ house until after Paul’s conversion and commission to become the apostle of the Gentiles. Peter did not want to go and would not have gone except under prodding and command from the Lord. He was criticized for going and had to defend his actions to the believers in Jerusalem. Luke’s record of Acts 15 reveals the Twelve did not understand or practice Paul’s gospel of grace. Paul had to explain it to them (ἀνεθέμην, Galatians 2.2). No Biblical record exists to support the view that the Twelve had a ministry to Gentiles. The Twelve were apostles to Israel; Paul was the apostle to Gentiles. His ministry was a new revelation given to him by the risen Lord (Galatians 1.11-12). The Twelve had no comprehension of it. Their ministry and gospel revolved around fulfilling the covenant promises to Israel; they looked for the Lord to establish His kingdom on earth. I must deflate your confidence; I do not know who Tim Keller is.

          • Andy says:

            Wouldn’t the time shared between Paul and the apostles (through various times in Jerusalem) have brought some comprehension and unity of the gospel being preached (by both Paul and the Twelve?) It seems hard to believe that they walked away from each other “agreeing to disagree” on the essential message of the faith (1 Corinthians 15:3-8). I realize that Galatians 2 speaks of the unique audience(s) of Paul (and His ministry partners) compared to the audience of Peter, James, and John, but I believe they were preaching the same good news of Jesus Christ, simply to different audiences. (I believe there exists a distinction between the belief and ministry of the Twelve from the Judaizers.)

            • doctrine doctrine says:

              What times are you talking about? When was Paul with the Twelve? What evidence do we have that the Twelve preached that Christ’s death paid for our sins? If they had that knowledge, when did they have it? What evidence supports that they preached the same gospel to different audiences?

              • Andy says:

                Galatians 1/2 and Acts 15 give evidence of Paul’s various trips to Jerusalem. He spent time with the apostles during these visits (though its not mentioned he was with ALL twelve as likely he was not.) The evidence that they taught the same message is that the apostles and Paul alike taught repentance, which you omit in your grid comparing the two gospels above. Acts 17, 20, and 26 would confirm this explicitly. (Implicitly, I believe it clear that the apostles’ message of repentance implied faith in Christ and likewise Paul’s message of the gospel of grace by faith alone implied repentance.) Ultimately, the concerning part of your teaching to me is that the gospel preached by Paul and given to the church today does not imply and/or require repentance of sin. Repentance and faith are bound, both in the message of the apostles and the message of Paul. This is the message of the New Testament Gospel.

              • doctrine doctrine says:

                A careful reading of the text reveals Paul did not go to Jerusalem until three years after his salvation and commission. When he did go he only met with Peter and James and stayed just 15 days. He saw none of the other Twelve until 14 years later in Jerusalem. This was in response to the controversy about his gospel. As for repentance, we have it mentioned in Acts 17, 20, 26. But Paul’s letters reveal something different. The reason for the difference is that Luke wrote Acts and his purpose was to reveal why the promised kingdom of God did not come. He showed the fall of Israel. Paul only used repentance for unbelievers once (Romans 2.4). Paul reserved repentance for believers in his letters. Paul’s focus was BELIEVE. The focus of the message of John the Baptist, Jesus, and the Twelve was REPENT. While the two are inseparably bound we must be careful students and teach what the text states. Do a word study on repent and believe in Paul’s writings and this truth will become apparent. Before Paul, Jews had no concept of salvation by faith alone (Abraham was an exception which is why Paul used him as his example). You just won’t find this in your Bible. John the B. didn’t teach it. Jesus didn’t teach it. Peter didn’t teach it. This is why the Jerusalem Council had to be held. The Twelve knew nothing of this truth until Paul revealed it to them. You might find my article, Faith vs. Works in James: Resolving the Problem, helpful in this regard.

              • AJ says:

                Hi, my question is kind of related to this discussion. In Acts 17, Paul is talking at Mars Hill or Areopagus and at the end of his sharing Paul told them in Acts 17:30 “And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:” Will you help clear this up about what Paul meant when he said that God commands all men everywhere to repent? Later in the comments with Andy you said Paul doesn’t use repentance as the John B., Jesus, and the Twelve. Just a note, this was after the Council in Jerusalem in Acts 15. This distinction will help me with discussions with my family. I don’t want to be side swiped with that happening with Paul and the greeks on Mars Hill.

              • doctrine doctrine says:

                Paul’s emphasis on repentance was for believers, not unbelievers. In Paul’s letters, he only used repentance once for unbelievers–Romans 2.4. Paul’s emphasis is faith, not repentance. Repentance is obviously wrapped up in faith but it is not Pauline language. Paul did use it on Mars Hill. The language in Acts and Paul’s letters is different. How do we account for this? The explanation is to understand the purpose of the book. Acts was written to Jews to explain why the kingdom of God did not come and the fall of Israel. Repentance was familiar with them and would have fit in with their thinking. Paul’s emphasis for the unbeliever is faith. Study Paul’s letters for yourself and see how many times and in what context Paul used faith vs. repentance.

  5. Mr. Doctrine,
    Great job on showing the distinctions between the gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of the grace of God! It is sad that so many do not know the distinctions, glad there are those that do teach this.
    Here is a link to an outline of the two major gospels in scripture (gospel of the kingdom and gospel of the grace of God)

    Keep up the great studies!

  6. Sue says:

    Hi Don,

    Could you help me get some clarity on Peter’s ministry in his letters 1 & 2 Peter.

    Was he confused when in 1 Peter 2:9 speaking to saved Jews he told them they were ‘ A chosen Race, a holy nation etc.
    He instructs them they are under Grace which surely means neither Jew nor Gentile and therefore a new creation and a heavenly people.
    He speaks to them with Old Testament prophecy which implies he believes they are an earthly people.
    Also in 5:4 he says ‘ and when the Chief Shepherd appears you will receive the unfading crown of Glory.

    Could you help me with my confusion that thought he understood the ‘secret ministry of Paul’ by this time in his life, but preaches a mixture to his hearers.


    • doctrine doctrine says:

      Compare what Peter wrote in 1 Peter 2.9 with God’s words to Moses in Exodus 19.3-6. Believing Israel was to be a “kingdom of priests,” “a holy nation.” Believing Israel is referred to as “sheep” under a Shepherd. God never described His Church in this way. Would you please provide the Scripture that Peter’s recipients were “under grace?”

  7. Read please pastors it good to know the gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of grace

  8. Thank you very much for this article. I have been sharing links to this website and especially that picture comparing the two gospels. GOD used you by means of your website to reach out to people. I personally had no idea that these two were different, I am also thankful to one respondent in an article about the gospel of the Kingdom of God, who caught my attention because he commented that there were two gospels and were preached to Jews and Gentiles respectively. Honestly, before I have read this article, my belief was that the Gospel of the Kingdom was the gospel to be preached today. Since our local church is preaching the Kingdom message which was mostly based on the Gospel of the Kingdom of God and a big context error when preaching Matthew 6:33.

    Nevertheless, I would like to ask you for the sake of accuracy with the Bible, can we really say that there were only 2 exemptions when the Gospel of the Kingdom of God was preached? Because on the book of Acts, the gospel of the Kingdom of God was preached to an Ethiopian Eunuch, who might be a gentile, God-fearer or a Jew. Furthermore, on Acts 10, Peter preached the Gospel of the Kingdom to Cornelius who was a Gentile.

    • doctrine doctrine says:

      Thank you for you kind words. The vast majority in Christendom do not understand this. I’m glad the article was helpful. The gospel of the kingdom was valid from the time of John the Baptist until the Council of Jerusalem. Paul probably received his gospel from the Lord in Arabia (Acts 9.20 indicates Paul preached the gospel of the kingdom) and will continue until God removes the Church by the Rapture. The gospel of the kingdom will then be reinitiated according to what the Lord said in Matthew 24.14. From Paul to the Council men and women were saved under both gospels. See my article The Great Hinge. After the Council Paul wrote Galatians 1.6-9. He could not have written these words before the Council.

  9. Jack S. says:

    Hi Don,

    In the 4th to the last sentence of your 8/9 reply to John you stated, “From John to the Council men and women were saved under both gospels.” Didn’t you mean to say that “From PAUL to the Council men and women were saved under both gospels?”

    Also, with the exception of the book of James, which was written about 45-48AD, why were the “little Jewish epistles” of Peter, John and Jude ignorant of the church, the Body of Christ that was revealed to them in 51AD? Were they blinded as was Israel?

    Thank you for your wonderful insight, and for the many lives that you are touching by Rightly Dividing the Word.

    Peace and Grace…..
    Meridian, ID

    • doctrine doctrine says:

      Thanks–I’ve made the correction. Chronology of the NT is knotty. One day I’ll tackle it. The best answer I can give to your question at this point is that Peter, John, Jude, James wrote to Jews who were saved under the kingdom gospel. Since Paul was the apostle of the Gentiles, they left revelation of the Church to him. In 2 Peter 3.14-16, Peter’s last words were to look to Paul for instruction. Paul’s doctrines were difficult to absorb. God had dealt exclusively with Israel for nearly 2,000 years and they had been under the Law for 1,500 years. Paul came along and said there was no difference in Jew and Gentile–they were one in Christ. Paul declared Israel was “blinded.” Paul declared the Law was over as a rule of life. Paul taught salvation was by faith alone, not faith + works. These were stunning, shocking revelations.

  10. Sue says:

    Hi Don,

    Have you ever done a study on Ananias and Sapphira in relation to the Gospel of the Kingdom? Are those under the Gospel of Grace under a different outcome if they sin? I understand that we have been forgiven.

    I have found that some Christians fear that they will have the same judgement or similar consequences upon them if they sin.

    What was the purpose of this account of Ananias and Sapphira being told. Clearly by the outcome it was extremely serious.
    What did it mean to the Jew as opposed to those under the Gospel of Grace?

    Thanks for your time it is greatly appreciated.

    • doctrine doctrine says:

      Ananias and Sapphira were under the kingdom program in which God will rule with a rod of iron (Psalm 2.9; Revelation 2.27). Sin was and will be judged immediately. Our position is that of the man in 1 Corinthians 5.1-5. God will judge believers even to the point of death but we are under grace, not law. Ananias and Sapphira lied to the Holy Spirit and God took them out.

  11. Josh says:

    Mr. Doctrine,

    Just stumbled upon this site as I’m doing a study on the Gospel of the Kingdom. Very happy with your outline and helpful teaching. Just a note on the last posting — do you think that Ananias and Sapphira were saved and are in heaven? I know that we cant be the ones to say who is or isn’t saved, but hard to tell your opinion by how your responded.



    • doctrine doctrine says:

      They were believers. Sin was judged immediately as it will be during the Kingdom. This early time with the 12 in charge was a preview of the Kingdom.

  12. Theresa says:

    I thought the kingdom of God was righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Ghost

  13. George says:

    hi brother, can you please tell me to the best of your ability about the differences of the kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven, some have said the kingdom of God now is Paul’s gospel of grace that was instituted at Pentecost when people were baptized by the Holy Spirit into the body of Christ?

    • doctrine doctrine says:

      The gospel of the kingdom was identified by “repent for the kingdom of God is near.” During its proclamation, one was saved by believing Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God (see Matthew 16; John 11)–Peter and Martha’s confessions of faith. The gospel of grace began with Paul. Its focus is upon the work of Christ–believing He died for our sins and rose from the dead (1 Corinthians 15.1-4) not the identity of Christ. Paul’s gospel was not initiated at Pentecost for Paul was not saved until several years after Pentecost. When Paul was saved he preached the gospel of the kingdom (Acts 9.20). After he returned from Arabia he began to preach the gospel of grace. Nothing is said in Acts 2 about people being baptized into the body of Christ. The body of Christ was unknown until the glorified Lord revealed it to Paul. Paul was the only one who taught it.

      • George says:

        dear brother, this you have made clear to me, but what about the kingdom of God as compared to the kingdom of heaven with regards to the parables in Matthew ch 13 and elsewhere in the gospels, are they different and if so was the kingdom of God transferred over to Paul, because in those kingdom of God parables nobody seems to be losing their eternal life?

        • doctrine doctrine says:

          The phrase “kingdom of heaven” is unique to Matthew. The “kingdom of heaven” always refers to the earthly kingdom God promised Israel. The “kingdom of God” can refer to this or to the larger context of God’s rule over everything. The Church, the body of Christ, is part of the kingdom of God. Everything in the Gospels refers to Israel. Consider Romans 15.8. The risen Christ gave Paul the revelation of the Church, the body of Christ. Our destiny is heavenly, not earthly (cf. Philippians 3.20). You might be interested in my new article, Are the Gospels Christian?

  14. Joe says:

    Is it possible that the difference between the Kingdom of Heaven in Matthew and the Kingdom of God elsewhere is because Matthew was presented more to Jews who balked at mentioning or even spelling the word G O D?

  15. Bradford says:

    Yes, God commissioned Paul to preach the good news(gospel) of salvation in Jesus Christ to the Gentiles. God also expanded this understanding to Paul when He gave him the revelation about grace. I have heard several ministers imply that the message of grace(they refer to it separately as the gospel of grace) supersedes Christ’s message and the early teachings of the apostles. John(one of the original 12) outlived Paul by nearly 30 years,and to imply that John did not fully understand grace and preach it(even though Paul received the understanding 1st) is not supported in scripture. Gospel is a term that simply means good news. There were many things that were preached by Jesus, the apostles, and Paul that were good news.All of it was inspired and is important for us today. One idea that is circulating today in many evangelical circles is that the only gospel of importance is the one of grace and is somehow superior to other revelations in scripture.This is something that man has conjured up. The good news(gospel) of the kingdom which Jesus spoke of during His lifetime is just as important. The good news(gospel) of the kingdom points to the event of Christ’s 2nd coming when He returns and sets up his literal kingdom on this earth. Many believers today that have an understanding of grace have never heard(and do not understand) this vital truth.The bible is 2000 pages long and the scriptures declare that all of it is important. To condense 2000 pages that God inspired and desires us to understand down to the single message of grace (important as the message of grace is) and make that one’s only focus of faith, is to limit the revelation God wants us to have about Himself and His plans for mankind. Regards.

    • doctrine doctrine says:

      The gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of grace are two separate programs. It’s not a question of one being superior to another. The gospel of the kingdom was for Israel and focused upon Christ’s identity. It required water baptism and keeping the Law. The gospel of grace (Paul’s gospel) is primarily Gentile and focuses upon the work of Christ. It is faith + 0. This gospel was given to Paul and the 12 knew nothing of it. See my article, The Great Hinge, for more on this. What matters is when John wrote, not how long he lived. He wrote before Paul died for Paul declared he completed the Scriptures (Colossians 1.25).

      • Bradford says:

        Doctrine. John wrote his Epistles and the Book of Revelation 25 years after Paul was beheaded. To imply that he didn’t understand fully about not only salvation thru Jesus Christ but also by extension grace is a teaching that is totally unrealistic. Too much focus on just grace(which is undoubtedly very important) to the exclusion of everything else taught by Christ, the Apostles, the OT Prophets,etc. It’s all important! Why make the distinction that grace is somehow superior to all the other teachings in scripture. If you are implying that the apostles were still focused on a works based salvation, you are incorrect. I am sincerely interested in knowing what your line of thinking is here?

        • doctrine doctrine says:

          While a majority maintain John wrote Revelation in the mid-90s, the evidence to support this view is slender. If one believes Paul, John wrote Revelation much earlier (Colossians 1.25). Read Acts 15. We find no hint of salvation by faith alone before Paul. The Twelve were apostles of Israel, not apostles of the Gentiles. They proclaimed the program God had revealed through the prophets. Jesus ministered to Jews, not Gentiles, with the purpose of presenting Himself to them as their King and Messiah (Romans 15.8). The 12 knew nothing of the Church, the body of Christ, of salvation by faith alone, the Rapture, the blinding of Israel, etc. The resurrected, glorified Lord revealed these doctrines to Paul alone. For more on this subject, see my article, Paul’s “Mystery.”

        • I believe that John wrote Revelation in very early Acts, here are the scriptures and points explaining why

          Keep in mind that church history and tradition are not an authority, you have to look at what the Bible says in order to have an idea of when it was written.

          Hope it helps! –Eli “Hoss” Caldwell

  16. Juanita says:

    Do you use the k. J. V. I notice some of the verses are different ?

  17. Steve H says:


    A question which may have been covered in your piece or in comments [if so could you point me to it as I’ve not picked up on it.]

    Acts was written sometime in the 60’s – after Paul had trekked around preaching salvation through faith & by grace.

    At the end of Acts [28:31] it records him preaching the kingdom of God and teaching the things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ.

    Does the kingdom of God here equate to the Gospel of the Kingdom? If so, why did he continue to preach that message if the Gospel of Grace had kicked in?

    Was he running a duality of messages tailored to his audience of Jews/non Jews? If so, why would he be doing this – other than to use one as a stepping stone to the other?

    I appreciate you may be busy but this bugs me & no other way to ask other than posting on this site.

    Many thanks.

    • doctrine doctrine says:

      The whole focus of the Jews was upon the kingdom. Acts was written to explain why it did not come. According to the record of Acts 15 and what Paul wrote in Galatians 1, only the gospel of grace was being preached. The duality of gospels ended at Acts 15 according to Peter’s statement which Paul confirmed in Galatians 1. Whatever Paul taught the Jews regarding the kingdom of God in Acts 28 it was not the “gospel of the kingdom.”

      • Steve H says:

        Thanks for your response – you covered off the question in your response to Dr BRANDT – The kingdom of God encompassed the whole realm of God which includes Israel’s earthly kingdom and the Church’s realm in the heavens (see my article, The Kingdom of God).

  18. You conveniently left out the most important verse concerning Paul. Acts 28:30-31 “Then Paul dwelt two whole years in his own rented house, and received all who came to him, 31 preaching the kingdom of God and teaching the things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ with all confidence, no one forbidding him.” Paul preached the kingdom of
    God just like Jesus. I used to teach the same ol stuff you teach. Then I received a vision of the kingdom of God. Once experienced, you will sell all you have to buy that field for the treasure of the kingdom of God or the “gospel of the kingdom”.

    • doctrine doctrine says:

      Dr. Brandt,
      Read the verse carefully. It does not say Paul preached the gospel of the kingdom, but the kingdom of God. The kingdom of God encompassed the whole realm of God which includes Israel’s earthly kingdom and the Church’s realm in the heavens (see my article, The Kingdom of God). The purpose of Acts is to explain to the Jews why the kingdom of God did not come. To say that Paul preached the same thing Jesus did in His earthly ministry is to deny the Scriptures.

  19. Bruce W says:


    It seems to me the vast majority of Christianity has No idea what in God’s name they’re preaching. If God is not a God of confusion (and I believe he is not) why hasn’t 1800+ years of Christianity understood the difference between the kingdom message (Israel) & the Gospel of Grace (Gentiles) and why was it abandoned so long ago?

    Now a question of utmost importance is Who is Saved?

    And wouldn’t it be helpful to have a Bible in chronological order with the explanation of what’s the OT, Kingdom message and the Gospel of Grace with explanations of there differences?

    • doctrine doctrine says:

      Sadly, yes. This began when Paul lost Asia (2 Timothy 1.15) and we have never recovered. As you know the truth, spread it. We cannot control what other do–only what we do.

  20. Joe says:

    Doctrine, I’d like to read your ideas on II Corinthians 5:16 (I think) where Paul speaks of a difference between Jesus Christ before and after the cross and how we are to understand him. “….we know him no more.” Have you addressed this in a previous essay?

    • doctrine doctrine says:

      What Paul is talking about is Christ’s earthly ministry as opposed to his heavenly ministry. Christ’s earthly ministry was to Israel. His heavenly ministry is to the Church, the body of Christ. It is the latter Christ that concerns us. All our blessings are heavenly.

  21. Faith says:

    I get it now….. wish I had sooner, but was raised with a “one gospel only” mindset. This has cleared up lots of confusion. This is also why works are intermingled with faith in todays Christianity; it is quite schizophrenic when one mixes the two gospels.
    Thank you for your site — very much so.

  22. Orichards says:

    There is a lot of preaching now days about the kingdom of God. Knowing your identity, who you are in Christ. Your sonship, manifesting your sonship, bringin the kingdom on earth now, which many of these people hold to a mindset that anything else is religious. Therefor their whole teaching etc is to understand that you being on earth is like the USA having and embassy in Iran. We operate according to heavens government, we get our instruction from heaven. Just like the USA embassy operates according to the government in the USA. It also says gives the play/ thought that the only thing that made Jesus special was the anointing he received at his baptism. And according to Isaiah where it says ” for unto us a child is born, and a son is given”. It also implies that as Beleivers before God the Father, there is no difference between us and Jesus because we are sons of aged. What are your thoughts on this. I know in canada it is confusing a lot of believers. It alsmost sound like another gospel Paul was warning the Galatians about. This kind of teaching hold people like Miles Munroe in high esteem the Kingdom message/ mindset.

    • doctrine doctrine says:

      I am not familiar with this group or their teachings. God commissioned Paul as the apostle to the Gentiles and created the Church, the body of Christ through him. If their teachings line up with Paul they are fine. If they do not, they are false.

  23. Vernon says:

    Hi Don,

    If the Jews have an earthly kingdom, can you please explain Matt. 6: 19-21 to me where Jesus instructs the Jews to store up treasures in heaven rather than on the earth?


    • doctrine doctrine says:

      No place of safe-keeping exists on this earth until the Lord returns to rule. The only place of safety is in heaven with the Lord. The Lord’s instruction was to teach the Jews this truth so that when He returned to rule, they could enjoy their treasures.

  24. Vernon says:

    Hi again Don.

    I have another question from Matthew…(Matt. 21:43 “Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.”)
    Who is Jesus referring to here in this passage?



    • doctrine doctrine says:

      The nation Jesus referred to was that generation of Jews who will repent and believe He is the Messiah, the Son of God. That generation will survive the Tribulation and that nation will enter the kingdom.

  25. Vernon says:

    Hi Don,

    Again another question. What did Paul mean by “Baptisms” in Hebrews 6: 1, 2
    “Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
    2) Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.” ???


    • doctrine doctrine says:

      The basic principle to keep in mind is the purpose of Hebrews: to lead them out of Judaism and the Law to Christ. The word βαπτισμός means washings, which is what the priests did in their service in the tabernacle. The hope of the Jew was Christ, not Judaism.

  26. Vernon says:

    Dear Don,

    This also puzzles me…Romans 16:7 “Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.”
    If the “In Christ position” of the believer came into existence with Paul’s revelation, how could Andronicus and Junia be in Christ BEFORE Paul was???

    Thanx again Don,


    • doctrine doctrine says:

      I cannot improve on Pastor Joel Finke’s response to this passage. He wrote, “Two things must be remembered in response to this point. First, being “in Christ” is not necessarily the same as being “in the body of Christ.” While it is true that the phrase, “in Christ” is almost exclusive to Paul, Peter does use it as well (1 Peter 3:16), and it is often used in a redemptive sense rather than the dispensational sense of being in the body of Christ. Secondly, Paul is not saying in Romans 12:5 that every believer living at that time was a member of the body of Christ. Back in Romans chapter two, Paul addresses the Jew (Romans 2:17) and speaks at length what it meant for a Jew to be considered righteous: “For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God” (Romans 2:28,29). It is true that Paul is referring to the circumcision of the heart, but the individual in question is still a Jew, a distinction which is done away in the body of Christ. Yet, as Paul wrote this, there was still a group of believers who were truly Jews in that they were not only from a Jewish heritage, but they had also received spiritual circumcision of the heart by faith in their Messiah. Andronicus and Junia were a part of this group…. There were doubtless many local churches which included people who became believers before the new dispensation began and those who were saved afterward. If they belonged to separate groups and had different hopes (the rapture for body saints versus the second coming for kingdom saints) there would be constant confusion in teaching and preaching. Actually, Paul recognized this situation and tried to avoid it as much as possible. This is why he wrote, “Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man’s foundation” (Romans 15:20).”

  27. Jack S. says:

    Don, Vernon and all,

    I just finished reading Joel Finck’s book The Mystery and it is great. He is thorough yet explains things in a simple fashion, just like one of my other favorite authors, Don Samdahl! The Mystery is the best book on Right Division that I have read.


    Jack S. Meridian, ID

  28. Becky says:

    Hi Don, I was reading the parable of the wheat and tares and wondering if you ever studied that, and if so, could you email your study to me? Everything i have come across relates it to the Church which obviously doesn’t fit at a time when Jesus was speaking to His disciples. I was wondering who the tares were. It does say the children of the wicked but in application was wondering who exactly He was referring to. I just have different questions about the parable in general. thanks so much.

    • doctrine doctrine says:

      All Jesus’ parables concerned the Jews and most the kingdom of God on earth. The wheat is believing Israel, the tares, unbelieving Israel.

  29. Becky says:

    Hi Don, just wondering if you had ever done a study on it. For any of His disciples to have grasped what He was saying, it had to have been a powerful eye opener….thank you just the same.

  30. Bea says:

    Three questions: Why did the people sell their property (Acts 2:45)? Why was Ananias and Sapphira killed (Acts 5:1-10)? Were Paul’s statements that women are not to pray with their head uncovered (1 Cor. 11:3-16); neither are women allowed to teach (men) (1 Tim. 2:11-13). Were these statements relevant to the believers coming out of a pagan culture and on the basis of a culture of temple prostitutes and female goddesses? Some denominations today will not allow women to teach men (Church School and Conferences), and some require women to wear hats or kerchiefs (doilies) in service. Also, many say women should not be pastors.

    • doctrine doctrine says:

      This was a foretaste of the kingdom and they were following Jesus’ commands: Matthew 6.19,25,31-34, 10.9; Luke 12.32-34, 18.22. Ananias and Sapphira were killed according to kingdom justice. God killed them not for lying alone, but for dishonestly keeping back part of their goods, which violated the standards of the kingdom. Verse 3 reads, “But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled thine heart TO LIE TO THE HOLY GHOST, AND TO KEEP BACK PART OF THE PRICE OF THE LAND?” See Revelation 19.15. Head coverings in Paul’s day had social and cultural significance. They do not today. As for teaching, it seems Paul’s main concern was to preserve the divine order. Women are not to usurp man’s authority (1 Corinthians 11.10) and should remain in a more protected place since woman is constitutionally more susceptible to deception than man. Obviously, this is a generalization. I’ve known a lot of gullible men.

  31. John Duryea says:

    I am trying reconcile Paul’s message of faith +0, (which alone pleases the Lord and is all that it needed to be with him for eternity), and the need to have an intimate relationship with him. I interpret intimacy as knowing him.
    For example:
    Jesus said to those who thought they were serving him, “I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers” (Matthew 7:23).
    And in John 17:3, “Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent.”
    And, John 17:23 “I in them and you in me”, etc.

    It seems that an intimate “knowing” relationship is required, expected, and desired by the Lord. So much so that not having this intimacy with the Lord somehow misses the mark.

    I would very much like your take on this, if you would.

    • doctrine doctrine says:

      Justification is by faith + 0. Sanctification is also by faith + 0. Romans 6-8 is the description of how to live the Christian life. It is by faith. God has identified us with Christ in His death and in His resurrection. As we exercise faith “reckon,” “yield” God conforms us to the image of Christ (Romans 8.29). Intimacy with Christ is through faith/obedience. I deal with this subject in Identification With Christ.

  32. Liz says:

    Dear Don, Very helpful, we’ll documented, and we’ll thought out article. I’m having a hard time in church because most posters and leaders are of “mixture.” I have a minute chance of teaching a deacan in our church the “Gospel of Grace.” Do you have any ideas on the most impactful way to jolt a well meaning Christian out of mixture? I was going to let Holy Spirit lead me, but some helpful verses would encourage me. Thank you, liz

    • doctrine doctrine says:

      You might ask him if he thinks one’s sins are forgiven by faith alone (Romans 3.26) or is water baptism required (Acts 2.36-38).

  33. Jerry Shaw says:

    Admire the work and the time you have spent on this site. Rom_2:13
    (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. I am in total agreement with the two Gospels outlined here and a few other sites. Yet, this verse seems to be a contradiction and I know it can not be. Can you add your incite, Appreciate your incredible research.

    • doctrine doctrine says:

      Thank you. Paul’s point in Romans 1-2 is to demonstrate all are guilty before God–Jew or Gentile–with the Law or without the Law. It was not enough to be a hearer of the Law. One must fulfill the Law. But no one did. Hence, no Jew was righteous on the basis of keeping the Law.

  34. Vernon Gray says:

    Hi Don,
    As late as Acts 19: 1-6 Paul was laying hands on disciples and they spoke in tongues.
    “1 It happened that while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul passed through the upper country and came to Ephesus, and found some disciples. 2 He said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said to him, “No, we have not even heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.” 3 And he said, “Into what then were you baptized?” And they said, “Into John’s baptism.”4 Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in Him who was coming after him, that is, in Jesus.” 5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking with tongues and prophesying.”
    Presumably, as they spoke in tongues it was a kind of glosselalia because there is no reference to any foreigners bring present.
    Why did Paul not preach the gospel of grace to these disciples?



    • doctrine doctrine says:

      They had been saved under the gospel of the kingdom. There was no need for Paul to proclaim the gospel of grace to them. Paul respected the kingdom program and understood his own commission.

  35. lorna says:

    Hi, Doctrine

    Just to say thanks for the wonderful teachings of the bible you are doing. I have been studying the bible since I was 13 years old, got involved with a church of God that mixes everything and very pharaisical and the emphasis seems to be on getting money (3 tithes and tithe of the tithe) and oppressing ordinary members. And scaring the daylight out of us. They seem to have a god that is never pleased and very harsh. And when one asks a hard bible question, he is booted you out labelling him as trouble maker and causing division. I used to think Paul was subverting Jesus Christ because sometimes they teach opposite each other. Now I finally enjoy and understand reading Paul (I almost followed Thomas Jefferson and read only Jesus Christ’s words and cut off Paul). Now I ask to whom the book is addressed, what time frame and the circumstances surrounding the writing of the book. Thank you very much. May there be more writers like you.

    • doctrine doctrine says:

      Thank you. Religion enslaves. Christianity is freedom. Paul is the apostle of grace. God began the Church through him and it is through Paul’s revelations from the risen Lord that we learn of His work for us. May the Lord continue his work in you in conforming you into the image of Christ (Romans 8.29). Grace and peace.

  36. Vernon Gray says:

    Hi Don,

    During our study we came across the following Scripture…1Co 5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
    1Co 5:8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

    Now my question is, do we or don’t we follow any of the feasts.
    I know you don’t advocate celebrating Jewish feasts. However the context seems to suggest that we should. Your comments would be appreciated.



    • doctrine doctrine says:

      Paul comment was illustrative. There were probably Jews among the Corinthian church who were knowledgeable about the Passover. Paul’s point was that the Corinthians needed to fix the immorality in their congregation. Paul was not advocating keeping Jewish feasts. Jewish feasts were part of the Mosaic Law and Paul stated believers were not under Law.

  37. Joe says:

    Matthew 11:27b–‘no man knoweth the Son, but the father’.

    Is this applicable today? The above was spoken by Jesus during his incarnation. Did it only apply to the recipients of the letter or to everyone including those of us in the Church Age?

    Thank you.

    • doctrine doctrine says:

      The context is Jesus was speaking to Jews of His generation. Believers today know the Son through salvation, the Scriptures, and the indwelling Holy Spirit. The extent of knowledge is relative. God the Father knows the Son in a way we cannot and the Son knows the Father the same.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *