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, 2 by which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain. 3 For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 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 Kingdom | Gospel 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 the 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 the 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, 2 “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” 3 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 Lord, Make His paths straight!’” 4 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. 5 Then Jerusalem was going out to him, and all Judea and all the district around the Jordan; 6 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 Naphtali, By the way of the sea, beyond the Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles—16 “The people who were sitting in darkness saw a great Light, And those who were sitting in the land and shadow of death, Upon 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:
4 John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. 5 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 as 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, the gospel of the kingdom was added to the Law and the Prophets. 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).
5 Then Jerusalem was going out to him, and all Judea and all the district around the Jordan; 6 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. 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. (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).
When Jesus first began His ministry, He encountered Nathaniel. John recorded the event:
43 The following day Jesus wanted to go to Galilee, and He found Philip and said to him, “Follow Me.” 44 Now Philip was from Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter. 45 Philip found Nathanael and said to him, “We have found Him of whom Moses in the law, and also the prophets, wrote—Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.” 46 And Nathanael said to him, “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?” Philip said to him, “Come and see.” 47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward Him, and said of him, “Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom is no deceit!” 48 Nathanael said to Him, “How do You know me?” Jesus answered and said to him, “Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.” 49 Nathanael answered and said to Him, “Rabbi, You are the Son of God! You are the King of Israel!” 50 Jesus answered and said to him, “Because I said to you, ‘I saw you under the fig tree,’ do you believe? You will see greater things than these.” 51 And He said to him, “Most assuredly, I say to you, hereafter you shall see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man” (John 1.43-51).
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.”]1 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 Judas 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 on 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 following passage Luke made the same point. However, this passage has been so misunderstood and abused by theologians and preachers that its normal sense has become almost unintelligible. The result is 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 begin to teach in parables? He changed from straightforward 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!
8 Whatever city you enter and they receive you, eat what is set before you; 9 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 the gospel of the kingdom was that God was about to establish His kingdom earth. In this kingdom, the Messiah would reign as David’s greater Son. Israel’s covenants–Abrahamic, 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.
Conclusion
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 (John 10.16) 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).
1 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.
2 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).
3 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
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.
Chris,
Thanks for the kind words and encouragement. I know Les and he’s a great teacher.
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).
Don,
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.
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.
Thank you.
You claim that Paul revealed it to the rest of the Apostles…. But what about Peter’s vision of the “unclean” animals?
Derek,
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.
so did the original remaining 11 + Matthias preach a different gospel to the jews than Paul (#13) preached to the nations (Gentiles)? Or…better asked…When Paul shook the dust off his feet as a testimony against the Jews and went to the Gentiles…did he preach to different gospels? I THINK NOT!
Tim,
What did the Twelve believe for salvation, what was the good news?
I’m curious about “original remaining 11, + Matthias (chosen by 11), and Saul who Jesus did call and some say #13“. I’ve read of 12 gates but wonder if you could help out wth how the before mentioned does or doesn’t fit? No 13th floor on an elevator going up or down or is there?
Baine,
Matthias was the legitimate twelfth apostle. Paul’s apostleship was unique. Through him the Lord founded the Church, the body of Christ, and gave all Church doctrine. The twelve were apostles of Israel and never had anything to do with the Church, the body of Christ. One must keep Israel and the Church separate, God’s prophetic program separate from His new, secret program of the Church. Unless one does, confusion reigns (the state of Christendom today).
Tim,
Galatian 2:7 in the KJV sure makes it sound like separate gospels. Besides in Luke 18 down around vs. 30 the apostles didn’t know about the death, burial and resurrection while Paul in 1 Cor. 15: 1-4 makes the resurrection the center piece for our salvation. Then of course there is John 20 where John basically says, “Resurrection? Resurrection? We don’t know anything about a resurrection.”
Joe,
Tim is an example of one who maintains there is only one gospel but won’t say what it is. Can one be saved and not know the gospel? I have found those who criticize, those who claim I teach falsely, when asked what is the gospel, do not respond.
If indeed the first epistle of Peter was written for the Jews, how come that Peter said this regarding his audience, “9 But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. 10 Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.” 1 Peter 2:9-10 New International Version (NIV)
Were the Jews not God’s people once? Did they previously not receive God’s mercy? Did they once live in darkness?
Justo,
The promise of priesthood was a Jewish promise. God made no such promise for members of the Church, the body of Christ. The Church has NO priests (except the Lord Himself) and “priest” is a term absent in Christianity. Peter wrote to Jews who had come to believe in Jesus as the Messiah. Before that, they lived in darkness. According to Exodus 19.4-6, God will make every Jew a priest (not Church member). This is what Peter was telling his readers.
At the outset let me say that I appreciate your emphasis on WHO the writer or character is speaking to.
As to your above point that the Acts 15 controversy was happening because they had a different gospel. It appears to me that it happened because, “CERTAIN MEN which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.” “But there rose up CERTAIN OF THE SECT of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses. (Acts 15:1, 5 KJV)
To restate, the Acts 15 controversy could have still happened had they had the same gospel (full disclosure, I believe they did) because a group within their church was causing the trouble (not unlike what we see today in churches).
Thank you for your time.
Chris,
These men operated under the authority of the apostles in Jerusalem. They were not some rogue faction. See my articles, The Great Hinge and Faith vs. Works in James: Resolving the Problem. They may help answer your questions. Grace and peace.
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.
Paul,
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.
I wonder if you still don’t know who Tim Keller is.
DCL,
I do not know who Tim Keller is other than what was reported in the comment and my reply.
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?
Sue,
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).
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
Thanks, William.
Yes, wow!
One more thing. My eyes welled up when I read what you said, that the twelve knew the plan and refused to leave Jerusalem even in the face of persecution.
Yes, they were great and godly men who loved their Lord and their nation. Peter learned a hard, hard lesson with his denial of the Lord. He was going to do his best to remain faithful.
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
Joe,
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.
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.)
Andy,
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.
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.)
Andy,
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?
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.
Andy,
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.
Doctrine,
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.
AJ,
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.
Hi doc,
This discussion really stretches my understanding. It reminds me of
1 John 4 (ESV)
4 Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world. 2 By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, 3 and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God.
So that no one misunderstands, I am not saying anyone here in this discussion that I have read is anti-Christ. So far I am seeing people that are diligently searching for accurate understanding. I believe that I am correct in saying that the fullness of the Gospel is not given to any one person. That is why we search out the mysteries of Christ. And that is why it is said that we see through a glass darkly.
“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?” I believe that is answered here.
The Gospel
1 Peter 2:21-25 (NIV)
21 To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.
22 “He committed no sin,
and no deceit was found in his mouth.”
23 When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly. 24 “He himself bore our sins” in his body on the cross, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; “by his wounds you have been healed.” 25 For “you were like sheep going astray,” but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.
1 Peter 3:18-22 (NIV)
18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive in the Spirit. 19 After being made alive, he went and made proclamation to the imprisoned spirits— 20 to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, 21 and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22 who has gone into heaven and is at God’s right hand—with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him.
Maybe you will say that this does not mention taking on our punishment. In fact you might say it only says that Jesus took on the sin of the Jews killing him to set an example to the Jews. Okay. But in all this discussion I have not seen talked about the Gentiles being grafted onto the vine.
My understanding is that there is a linear view. I also understand that there is also an eternal view.
Ephesians 1:3-4 (NASB)
3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ, 4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we would be holy and blameless before Him.
Ephesians 2:4-6 (NASB)
4 But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,
Maybe this gets away from the discussion. However we are all of the same Kingdom, regardless if Paul teaches it or one of the Twelve teaches.
1 Corinthians 12:13 (NASB)
13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.
I am not near as learned as some who write here. This submission is done so with fear and trembling. :)
Tom
Tom,
Major differences exist between Jesus and the Twelve’s ministry to the Jews and Paul’s ministry. Mixing these two distinct programs has created massive confusion in Christendom and has resulted in many perceived contradictions. Please see my article, Jesus vs. Paul.
doctrine,
Am stuck for a minute. So we’re the 12 saved under Paul’s gospel? Have been working on this aspect awhile. And then did they preach Paul’s gospel after they knew? And what became of all the churches of jews that converted to Christ under the Kingdom gospel?
Also was researching Polycarp. He was a, gentile I think but was taught by John. He preached the feasts and all that. So was he a proselyte then?
Bobbi,
I do not know. Already by the 2nd century century, heresy and confusion had corrupted the churches. Many had already abandoned Paul.
Bobbi,
The 12 were saved by the gospel of the kingdom. They believed Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God. They did not preach Paul’s gospel until after the Council of Jerusalem, in 51 A.D. (Galatians 1.6-9). See my article, the Great Hinge. Jewish belief diminished as time went on and churches became primarily Gentile. Pauline doctrine became compromised and churches became a syncretistic mixture of Jewish/Pauline doctrine (1 Timothy 1.15).
doctrine, thank you for your fast response! So when Peter said in Acts 15:11, that they believed they were saved by the grace of Jesus, that sounds like grace to me. I will go back and read the great hinge again. I will say, there is a lot of Jewish doctrine mixed in with Christianity , as per historians . This has been quite a study. The other thing is although it was a mystery, Jesus said a few things that could be taken as foresight. Like in John 10:16. Trying to see how all of it fits together. Thank you for your kind remarks and for helping.
Bobbi,
The 12 were saved by believing in the identify of Christ. They also had to keep the Law and be baptized. Peter is now saying that salvation is only possible by believing Paul’s gospel. That is why Paul wrote such strong words in Galatians 1.6-9. John 10.16 refers to the generation of Jews who will believe in Him in the Tribulation. Sheep always refer to Jews, not Gentiles.
Don so were the other sheep not of this fold in John 10:16 the northern kingdom?
I know God wanted to restore Judah and Ephraim. I do understand the only way they could be remarried back to the Lord under jewish law was if the husband (God) died. Thanks for your site, it’s been a real blessing.
Jasen,
Thank you. These sheep will be the repentant remnant at the end of the Tribulation (cf. Matthew 23.37-39). They are part of the “all Israel” in Romans 11.
No one can be saved by keeping the law. Only Jesus perfectly kept the law in our place. The only Gospel is the Gospel of Grace. If people (Jews or Gentiles) could keep the law there would have been no need for a savior to die for our sins,
A Kingdom gospel that requires keeping the Law is works righteousness. All the false religions of the world teach you must do something. Only Christianity teaches God does it all. After Jesus’ resurrection he met two disciples on the Road to Emmaus.
Jesus opened the scriptures (OT) showing the everything was about Him. Which means He came to die for sinners; to redeem a fallen world. Our Hope is the resurrection and living in the new heavens and new earth. This is the Hope of all people who put their trust in Jesus. People in the OT were saved by believing God’s promise of the savior to come. They will be resurrected and receive immortality along with all those throughout history. All believers of all times will live in God’s Eternal Kingdom on the restored paradise on earth that was lost by Adam and Eve.
What was lost under the Covenant of Works will be restored by the Covenant of Grace.
God has one people and one plan of redemption first revealed in Genesis 3:15 and fully consummated with Jesus’s second coming (Revelation 21) Covenant Theology and amillennialism better interprets (“rightly divide” is an old English expression which means rightly interpreting) the Bible. There is only one way of salvation; thus only one Gospel of Grace.
Patricia,
There is no “covenant of works” or “covenant of grace.” These are theological constructs, not in the Bible. Biblical covenants are the Abrahamic, Mosaic, Sabbatic, Davidic, and New. If you are right, how do you explain Jesus’s statement to the man in Mark 10.17-27, to the disciples in Matthew 6.9-15 and Mark 16.16, John the Baptist’ ministry, Mark 1.4, and Peter’s statement to the Jews in Acts 2.36-38? Are you right and they are wrong?
Sometimes I really wonder, … why all these confusion? Can we not just have one simple and straightforward theology or understanding of Him?
Are we (faith people) confusing ourselves or these is part of the divine plan too?
I am researching Kingdom Theology and surprised that Jesus sent some to preach the kingdom and obviously they did and their converts had kingdom message. Few years later he sent another messenger with another message, there’s a confusion already if this is the case.
Or could it be that Paul emphasis “grace” than the kingdom due to his encounter with the Lord. If this is so I will struggle to accept it because as a man full of the Spirit (many miracles etc) I expect that the Spirit will minister this truth to him clearly.
Lord please teach me your word.
Sam,
We have straightforward theology. It is from Paul. Paul is the apostle of the Gentiles, the founder of the Church, the body of Christ. Before Paul God dealt with Israel and the nations. Understand this and everything is clear. Confusion only occurs when one mixes God’s program with Israel with that of the Church.
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) http://av1611studyblog.blogspot.com/p/gospel-of-kingdom-requires-signs.html
Keep up the great studies!
Thank you!
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.
Thanks
Sue,
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?”
Read please pastors it good to know the gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of grace
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.
John,
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.
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…..
Jack
Meridian, ID
Jack,
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.
Doctrine, I can’t tell you how happy I was to “stumble” across your ministry! My mom, sister, and I have been holding a grace doctrinal Bible Study in the Boise area going on 17 yrs. We have been teaching right division to a group of ladies for a few years, now. We use various resources, and now, we definitely will be relying upon your excellent ministry to help us introduce right division to more and more ladies! As you can imagine, it is greatly frustrating to have this wonderful knowledge, and to not be able to share it, except with great difficulty and resistance in the churches! Our greatest prayer and hope has been for a brother, or brothers in the Lord, to pick up and run with right division in this area! I would love to contact Jack to find out if there is a RD congregation in this area! How could I go about that? Again, thank you so very much for your ministry!
Amy J
Eagle, Idaho
Amy,
Thank you for your kind words. Sorry for the delay but just heard back from Jack. You should hear from him soon. May to Lord continue to bless your faithfulness and Bible study.
I moved 18 months ago and also can’t find a church that rightly divides the Word. Is there a website listing a directory of home Bible studies or churches per State?
Donna,
Please see https://gracechurches.wordpress.com/
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.
Sue,
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.
Doc,
Really I do not want to be a thorn.
John 1:14-17 (NASB)
The Word Made Flesh
14 And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15 John *testified about Him and cried out, saying, “This was He of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me has a higher rank than I, for He existed before me.’” 16 For of His fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace. 17 For the Law was given through Moses; grace and truth were realized through Jesus Christ.
If “Ananias and Sapphira were under the kingdom program” were they not under grace?
Tom
Tom,
No, the kingdom program is under Law, not grace. The Mosaic Law was still operating. Jesus operated under the Law. Temple worship was continuing, etc. When we speak of Law and Grace we’re speaking about administrative systems, not instances of God’s favor. See my article, Paul and the Law.
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.
Thanks
Josh
Josh,
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.
I thought the kingdom of God was righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Ghost
Theresa,
Jesus said, “Thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth, as it is in heaven.”
Theresa, sin dealt with immediately is the definition of righteous rule and the very reason people will live in peace and joy——Think about it. . .Consequences, severe and immediate, carried out by a system led by judges who can discern unspoken thoughts!!! (Peter knew what Ananias had done though no man told him!) What a deterrent to crime and what a security to everyone!
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?
George,
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.
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?
George,
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?
Sir,
If you propose that the gospel of grace (taught by Paul) is different than the gospel of the Kingdom then several questions arise .
(1) Why is it stated that Paul in Acts 28:31 ‘was preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ ….?’ (as Michael pointed out )
(2) (a) Also why does Acts 8:12 state that Philip who was an apostle , when preaching to the Samaritans (who were not Jewish but people of mixed Gentile and Jewish ancestry) was *preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God* . The verse reads , “But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and they were baptized both men and women’ (KJV) .
(b) If those were Samaritans who Philip preached the gospel to then , why would NON- Jews like the Samaritans have to have to follow a gospel that still included elements of Mosaic Law , and purportedly no content having to do with the atonement of Jesus on the cross ?
(3) If the dispensationalist claim that there were two gospels that were different even at the onset of what they call the dispensation of grace (one being a gospel of the Kingdom that was offered to the Jews and even remained in effect purportedly after the resurrection of Jesus —a gospel that allegedly did *not* include a belief in the salvation of the believer through faith in the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross ) and the gospel of grace which was allegedly strictly for the Gentiles , then why did Peter who is a Jew (referring both to his fellow Jews AND to the Gentiles) state ‘But we believe that through the *grace* of Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they? in ACTS 15:11 ?
The above verse presents a major problem for the dispensationalist claim that alleges that there was a separate content of faith required for the Jews and Gentiles, for notice how Peter states of he and *fellow Jews* that though the grace of Jesus we shall be saved (NOT that he and his fellow Jews would be saved by some combination of works and grace ).
Also, notice how Acts 15: 11 uses the phrase ‘even as they’ in Acts 15: 11 apparently indicating that the process of salvation would be the same in both cases of Jew and Gentile .
(3) The interpretation you give ,sir, with regard to the Great Commission verses in MATTHEW 28 : 14-20 is quite weird . You propose that when Jesus appeared to his 11 remaining disciples and told them to , ‘Go ye and teach all nations …..and teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you ‘ that he was “not really” giving them instructions on what they should do , but those words (which given the interpretation you propose) were instructions that were really meant for Jewish believers in Jesus in a future tribulation to carry out in some future period !
Yet notice that Jesus uses the phrase, ‘ go ye therefore’ when he tells his 11 original apostles to teach all nations; if the instructions were “not really ” meant for the 11 apostles to carry out teaching the gentiles all the teachings Jesus had commanded them , then why, oh why , would Jesus use the imperative word *go* WHEN SPEAKING DIRECTLY TO THE 11 disciples , IF those instructions were meant for ‘Tribulation era’ Jews to carry out, and not the 11 disciples he was speaking to ???????
(4) (a) If the church is NOT addressed by the epistles such as John , James and Jude , but only in the letters of Paul, then why does the letter of James state in James 5:14 state , ‘Is any sick among you ? let him call for the elders of the CHURCH’ … (KJV)???? Notice how the author of James tells the readers addressed for any sick among them to call for the elders of the CHURCH ) .
(b) If the church is NOT the intended readership of James (and Jewish believers in Jesus and Gentile Christians are to be governed by faith in different gospels) then why would James recommend that allegedly Jewish believers have the church pray for their sick and anoint them with oil in James 5:14 ?
(5)(a) If Isreal and the Church remain separate throughout all eternity with “two separate programs” , then why does Paul in Ephesians 2:14 , (when referring to the gentile Christians in reference to the relationship with Israel) state ,
‘For he is our peace , who hath made BOTH ONE , and hath *broken down the middle wall of partition* between us’ ?
(5) (b) What specifically is ‘the middle wall of partition’ that Paul indicates that Jesus had broken down between Gentile and Jewish believers in Jesus .
(6) What specifically is the difference between
(A) preaching the gospel of the Kingdom
and
(Z) Paul in Acts 28:30 ‘preaching the kingdom’ ?
.
(7) Is the teaching of Jesus in Luke 16:13 ‘that ye cannot serve both God and mammon'(money) a teaching that is applicable to Christian believers in the current age ?
Nobody,
1. Paul used the phrase, “kingdom of God” for the whole realm of God’s rule. Acts is a transitional book, written to explain to the Jews why the kingdom of God did not come upon the earth. We do not go to Acts for Church doctrine, we go to Paul’s letters. To interpret Scripture accurately, you have to ask who said it, to whom was it said, what were the circumstances, etc. It is clear from many passages that Paul’s gospel was different. Read Acts 2.36-38. Peter does not tell the Jews to believe Christ died for their sins and rose from the dead to be saved.
2. The Samaritans were considered Jews. They were just looked down upon for they had intermarried with Gentiles. Jesus spoke to the Samaritan woman at the well (John 4).
3. See my article, The Great Hinge, to explain Acts 15.11.
4. The audience to whom James wrote was Jews as seen in James 1.1. The word translated “church” is ἐκκλησία and means a group of people. In Acts 19.32, 39, 41, it means mob, court, crowd.
5. Paul was speaking of the barrier between Jew and Gentile being broken down. In the Church, there is no difference between Jew and Gentile. But the Church does not replace Israel. Israel remains throughout eternity. Paul wrote that “all Israel wil be saved” (Romans 11.26).
6. The kingdom spoken of in the prophets and gospels is the earthly kingdom God promised the Jews. See Matthew 6.10.
7. Yes.
Hello, Mr. Doctrine.
It has taken awhile for me to respond to the follow up comment . Wanted to respond sooner .
I see that there was a typo in number three of the comments above inasmuch as I had intended to ask about the Great Commission given by Jesus to the 11 Apostles in Matthew 28:14-20 in a separate itemized question from number three (in the comment post I posted above) , *separate from* the question about Acts 15:10.
I read the hyperlinked article on ‘The Great Hinge’ , and it was interesting .
However, a question remains in regard to the Great Commission Jesus gives the 11 Apostles in Matthew 28:14-20 : did the 11 apostles of Jesus, when Jesus told them to go and ‘teach all nations ….teaching them to observe all the things I have commanded you’
, think ,
“well, it looks like and sounds like that he is talking to us and giving instructions to us, but he is really not; instead he is giving instructions to people who will be born thousands of years from now during some 7 year tribulation period, so we don’t have to try to carry out the instructions to ‘go and teach all nations, since Jesus isn’t really talking to us, though he seems to be”.????
Or , do you, sir, take the position that Jesus had initially hoped that the instructions he gave in Matthew 28 to the 11 apostles to ‘Go, teach all nations…teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you…’was instructions which Jesus hoped that the 11 apostles would have carried out IF first the leaders of Israel had come to believe in Jesus as messiah in the years immediately following his resurrection ?
In one of the long series of follow up comments in the vertical series of comments below you stated in reference to the Great Commission of Matthew 28:14-20 you stated the following :
‘The GC of Matthew 28 was to begin with Jews and extend to Gentiles. It was based on the assumption Israel would accept Jesus as the Messiah. ‘
So is it correct to understand the position that Jesus had a plan A to have his 11 Apostles go and eventually teach the Gentile nations the teachings of Jesus , provided that the nation of Israel had accepted him as Messiah, but since the nation of Israel as a whole did not accept him back then as Messiah, Jesus then had later to bring about a plan B , where the Great Commission would be *transferred* to believing Jews some *thousands of years later* in a 7 year Tribulation period ?
Nobody,
Jesus came to fulfill God’s covenant promises to Israel and the nations (Romans 15.8). Had Israel responded the prophetic plan would have been fulfilled. Israel would have fulfilled its destiny as a light to the Gentiles. I do not like the idea of plan A, plan B, particularly for God’s knows all but if one must think in those terms, plan A was unfallen Adam, plan B, Gentiles, plan C, call of Abraham and creation of the Jews, etc. Had Israel responded, the Church, the body of Christ, would not exist. God works with and within human volition and in His grace Israel will fulfill its role as the light of the Gentiles during the Tribulation and throughout the Kingdom.
So , just to make the clarification above more specific , the instruction given by Jesus to the 11 Apostles in Matthew 28:14-20 to ‘go and teach all nations’ would have been fulfilled by them IF the leadership of Israel had repented and became believers in Jesus during the transitional period after Jesus was Resurrected and before Paul became an apostle , but that instruction by Jesus in Matthew 28:14-20 to the 11 Apostles was then *rescinded* due to Israel rejecting the gospel of the kingdom (rescinded as far as the 11 original apostles being the ones to apply it) ?
Nobody,
According to God’s prophetic plan, Israel was to be the light of the Gentiles. That was the purpose of the Great Commission. When the nation rejected their Messiah, they could not fulfill that role. Peter, on the day of Pentecost, told the whole nation it had to repent. Because the Jews refused Christ, Paul declared he had assumed the role of being the light of the Gentiles (Acts 13.47-48).
You are preaching a different gospel than was commanded by the Lord unto his apostles and those who were first to believe. There is only one Lord, Faith (gospel) and Baptism. It was the same for the Jew and the Gentile. Be careful my friend. You are not permitted to add to or take away from the inspired (God breathed) word of God.
Tim,
How do you think one is saved? What is the one baptism?
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?
Joe,
Unlikely.
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.
Bradford,
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).
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?
Bradford,
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
http://av1611studyblog.blogspot.com/2015/01/revelation.html
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
Do you use the k. J. V. I notice some of the verses are different ?
Juanita,
Most of the time the NASB is used.
Don,
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.
Steve,
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.”
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).
Appreciated.
Steve,
Thank you.
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”.
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.
Doctrine:
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?
Bruce,
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.
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?
Joe,
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.
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.
Faith,
Thank you. I am glad my article was helpful. Grace and peace.
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.
Orichards,
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.
I think Orchards is referring to Dominion theology.
Andrew,
Thank you. Dominion theology, theonomy, reconstructionism, etc. is without Biblical basis. It is a man-made system built upon confusion of Israel and the Church.
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?
Thanks,
Vernon.
Vernon,
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.
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?
Thanks,
Vernon.
Vernon,
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.
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.” ???
Thanx.
Vernon,
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.
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,
Vernon.
Vernon,
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).”
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.
Regards,
Jack S. Meridian, ID
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.
Becky,
All Jesus’ parables concerned the Jews and most the kingdom of God on earth. The wheat is believing Israel, the tares, unbelieving Israel.
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.
Becky,
One of these days I’ll probably tackle all the parables.
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.
Bea,
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.
Don,
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.
Thanks,
John
Ralph,
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.
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
Liz,
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).
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.
Jerry,
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.
So simple. A slap to the forehead.
Thanks
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?
Thanks,
Vernon.
Vernon,
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.
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.
Lorna,
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.
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.
Thanx,
Vernon.
Vernon,
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.
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.
Joe,
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.
Don,
Re: Matthew 24:14
Since Peter and the rest of the apostles died in the 1st century. Does the Bible tell us who will proclaim the gospel of the kingdom for a future generation of Jews, who will believe in Jesus as the Messiah (in His identity) and will fulfill the “great commission” to the entire world?
Jacob,
Not specifically. Not to worry, God always provides a way and leaves a witness. It will probably start with 144,000 sealed Jews (Revelation 7). The two witnesses will also. As converts grow, the message will expand. The biggest problem will be martyrdom. This is the reason for the serious warnings by the Lord in Revelation 2-3.
Thank Don for the reply.
I’m still getting the grasps of what will happen in the prophetically future, so in those days in the future any converts as a result of the “great commission” will be under the reinstated “kingdom” program and their realm will be earthly in a kingdom with the Lord as King? While the church program is in the heavenly realm?
Jacob,
It appears from the Scriptures that OT believers will be resurrected at the end of the Tribulation after Christ’s return and will reign with Him. This will include those who have been killed during those 7 years. The Church will already be in resurrection bodies gained at the Rapture. It is not clear what our role will be. Paul wrote we would be joint-heirs of Christ and would rule angels. During the 1,000 years Christ will fulfill all His covenants to Israel. This period is merely a prelude to His eternal rule. The Millennium will be a foretaste of eternity. People will live and die and apparently interact with believers who now have resurrection bodies. It will be a golden age of long life, absence of war, the animal kingdom at peace, etc. This is described in the OT in Isaiah 2 and 11. The next program will the eternity. We cannot imagine what this will be like. It will be a wholly different universe, a different kind of reality. Time will not exist. See my article, The Resurrection.
In terms, of “converts” during the reinstatement of Matthew 24:14 in the future, does this include gentiles? Or will it strictly be for Israel?
Jacob,
Gentiles will certainly be saved. The gospel of the kingdom will be for all. The challenge, given the warnings and events recorded in Revelation, will be question of who is God. Is it the Beast or Christ. This is why the Lord warned the 7 assemblies in Revelation 2-3 about overcoming. The essential nature of the gospel of the kingdom was believing in the identity of Christ. That will be the key question in the Tribulation.
Yes,very good job done here but one question I ask you is as follows,
About what kingdom Jesus speaks in Mathew 11:11 and Luke 7:28 ?
Mathew records it as kingdom of heaven and Luke as kingdom of God.
Please explain it ,whether the kingdom of God or kingdom of heaven it is.
Your answer greatly appreciated.
Cecil,
Matthew was the only writer to use the phrase “kingdom of heaven.” Sometimes “kingdom of heaven” is the same as “kingdom of God” and sometimes it isn’t, depending on who was writing and the context. The “kingdom of heaven” always referred to God’s kingdom on earth (Matthew 6.10). The phrase is a genitive of source, that is, it’s source is heaven. The “kingdom of God” can refer to the earthly kingdom or it can refer to the overall realm of God’s rule. See my article, The Kingdom of God.
AL,
The principle is that all Scripture is FOR us but not all Scripture is TO us. Unless you understand this you have many contradictions in the Bible. Jesus told his disciples not to go to Gentiles. He said if one sinned he should be treated like a Gentile. Do you think this applies to us today?
Don,
A few comments, and then the questions. Note 1 seems to have got eliminated from the Acts 8 text where Phillip and the eunuch were talking, where you bracketed part of the verse… Right after the verses in Acts 8 you begin “After Saul was converted…” Then, “the house of Ananias…” The house where Paul was, was the house of Judas (of Damascus) and Ananias went there to meet Saul (Acts 9:11). On the next page you say, “…the same point as in Luke 10 above.” I can not find Luke 10 in the preceding text. Further down the page you quote Luke 10:8-11, but I can not find it earlier in the article. Can you clarify or correct that?
Okay, now the questions. I have always struggled with: “The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John” (Luke 16:16). I do not see that the observance of the Law stopped at that point, in favor of something else. Jesus lived under the Law of Moses and He told his followers to continue that (show yourself to the high priest, obey those in Moses’ seat, etc). In early Acts, the law was still observed even though the veil in the temple had already been torn in half. I am not seeing that the Law was changed in any way in Jesus’ day from the time of Moses and Aaron. I also believe that ceremonial washings were always done by sprinkling. That started in Exodus 29, and if God changed the method or mode to immersion, He would have told us; but He didn’t. For that reason, I personally reject baptism by immersion as not Scriptural. Immersionists read immersion into verses like Romans 6:3-5, verses that are not even talking about the ceremony of baptism. Also, I believe God intended Israel to be a nation of believer-priests. That would have required, at some point, for ceremonial washing for all Israelites. But I do not see where God implemented this change. Can you help by pointing out what might not be obvious to me?
You say that when John appeared, a new set of rules came into play. Does Luke 16:16 open the door to that? I never believed John was starting something new. The Rulers of Israel did not ask John, What are you doing?, they asked, Who gave you this authority? That suggests, not a change, but a continuation of whatever was going on before that time. So what it seems to me that you are saying is that some aspects of the Law changed when John showed up to introduce Jesus, ceremonial washings now being required for salvation. Again, I don’t see it as John was starting something new, but I welcome your thoughts and comments here.
Next is repentance. In Acts 2-3 Peter condemned his listeners and told them to repent (for having crucified Christ). John and Jesus’ earlier message to the folks was to repent (confessing their sins), be baptized, and believe Christ is the Messiah. How is the “repent” part of that different from a person today believing that they are a sinner, as they trusting in the death and resurrection of Christ for forgiveness of their sin and the hope of eternal life?
On toward the end of the article, quoting from Matt 24, where Jesus says those who endure to the end will be saved – you say it is physical. I like that teaching! It makes sense that He is talking about those who come through the Tribulation and are still alive to go into the Kingdom. Do you see that same application for the churches in Revelation 2-3 where the Apostle John uses similar wording? Thanks for considering my rather long e-mail.
In Christ,
Rob Klein
Rob,
Thanks again for your help in discovering errors. The Law continued. No change there. But what was new was the gospel of the kingdom. Jesus did not say the Law and prophets had ended only that the gospel of the kingdom had been added. See my emended clarification. Regarding repentance, one repents (changes mind) before one believes the gospel (one must recognize his need to seek a solution). Paul’s emphasis was upon faith, not repentance. Only once (Romans 2.4) in his letters did he mention repentance regarding unbelievers. Why? I think it is because his gospel of salvation by faith alone was so new and revolutionary that that is why he kept hammering it home. Repentance had been proclaimed in the gospel of the kingdom. Paul’s gospel was faith alone. The “churches” of Revelation 2-3 are Jewish assemblies. The warning is to endure to the end (overcome) the temptation to worship the Beast and take his mark (see article, Understanding the Book of Revelation.
doctrine,
Regarding Robs question, Wasn’t Johns baptism the next progression for the Jews? Which would have signified the change in their program and also answered to the prophesy of the one who was to come to prepare the Lord’s way. Also. doesn’t the word for baptized mean to dip or immerse?
Bobbi,
Yes. The essential idea of baptism is identification. In John’s baptism, people identified with repentance and the desire to establish the kingdom. In Paul’s baptism, beleivers are identified in Christ’s death and resurrection and made part of the body of Christ. The Jewish priests “washed” βαπτισμός, Hebrews 9.10 in that they identified with the need to be holy in their ministries.
Hi Don,
In today’s world, would a Jewish mindset be to seek to rule over the gentile (even though they don’t accept that the Messiah was who He said He was) ?
Clearly satan has a plan to deceive many.
Many Christians today believe propheses are beginning to unfold in Isreal already ,but it would appear many Jews have no belief at all and are worldly.
There are many men who have a Jewish background that hold prominent positions either politically or have the ear of powerful men and women around the world, but are also not believers.
Also is it likely that the anti christ will be Jewish as we know Satan will try to counterfeit himself as the savour?
Thanks for your time.
Sue,
I do not think so. Some Jews might think this but very few I believe. God has given the promise that Israel will be the head, not the tail (Deuteronomy 28.1, 13) but their role will be one of blessing, not of lording it over other nations. I think the Antichrist will be Jewish. He will betray them just as Judas did.
Hi friend,
Thank you for your love and zeal for Jesus.
I believe you are grievously mistaken in your differentiation between the gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of the grace of God. This is a troubling error to me. It gives license to abandon the gospel that Jesus preached, thereby giving license to abandon the teachings of Christ. Christ was God incarnate. He was and is the great light to us all. And His teachings and His gospel have most certainly never been concluded and made redundant.
Please please reconsider what you have stated about the gospel here publicly. I fear greatly the damage of this doctrine.
I bless you brother
Matthew,
Jesus ministered to Jews. He had no ministry to Gentiles apart from a few exceptions. The gospel of the kingdom encompassed the great hope of the Jewish people, that God would establish His kingdom on earth and Israel would be supreme among the nations of the earth. Luke 1-2 is a great summary of this hope. Jesus told His disciples to pray for this kingdom (Matthew 6.10). The gospel of grace was unknown before the risen Lord gave it to Paul. We do not find the good news that Christ died for our sins and rose from the dead before Paul. That gospel is what saves today. That is what believing Christ means and how one is saved and receives eternal life. Believe God!
Hello:
I would address you by name but I do not know who you are or what ministry or organization you are associated with which disturbs me a little because I do not think someone who is supposedly teaching of the things of God should be hide in anonymity.
Having said that, I would agree with Matthew. Scripture does not support what you teach. Jesus did have a ministry to gentiles although it was not His primary ministry (the gospel is to the Jew first and then to the Gentile). But He did have a gentile ministry. It was called His Gallilean ministry. In fact, more is written in scripture of His time in Gallilee of the Gentiles, as it is called, and ministering there than His ministry in Jerusalem. The gospel of grace was not unknown before Paul. It’s all the same message; the same gospel. That is the gospel that saves now and it was the gospel that saved then and it was the gospel that saved in the Old Testament as well.
Ernie,
1. If you would look at the website, it clearly states who I am.
2. To state Jesus had a ministry to Gentiles reveals you have not read the gospels.
3. Jesus grew up in Galilee. He ministered to Jews there. Scripture explicitly states Jesus did not minister to Gentiles apart from a few exceptions. Read Matthew 10.5-6.
3. If you undersood what the gospel of grace is, you would not state it was known before Paul. Paul had to explain it to the Twelve at the Jerusalem Council, 20 years after Pentecost!
The problem with people such as yourself is you are quick to accuse and make statements, but can’t back them up. Before casting stones and making false claims, read the Bible. To state the same gospel saved people in the Old Testament as now is lunacy. Do you really think Abraham, or Moses, or David, or Daniel knew Jesus would die on a Roman cross and rise from the dead? If so, prove it!
I agree with what you said. Jesus spent much time with Gentiles. God is omniscient. No surprise many rejected Jesus. Jesus said His Kingdom was not of this world. His mission was not to set up an earthly Kingdom and this plan failed. His work was to redeem sinners both Jews and Gentiles. Jesus will come again and all believers of all ages will be resurrected immortal to live with God forever in the the new heavens and new earth. There is only one plan of redemption and it was first mentioned in Genesis 3:15. Dispensationalism is a hermeneutic that complicates Biblical interpretation. Biblical redemption is an historical linear plan of redemption… one people of God composed of all believers saved by faith in Jesus’s payment of our sin debt.
Patricia,
When Jesus said His kingdom was not “of this world” He meant its source was not of this world. Grammatically, “of this world” is a genitive of source, not location. If there is no earthy kingdom throw away the Old Testament, Gospels, and letters of Peter, James, John, and Jude for they contain hundreds of verses that proclaim an earthly kingdom. God’s wrath on earth and His earthly kingdom are the two great themes of prophecy. If there is no earthly kingdom, God has failed to keep His promise. Jesus also lied to the Twelve, e.g., Matthew 19.28. As for “one plan of redemption” how do you think Adam, Abraham, Moses, David, Daniel, the Twelve were saved? What did they believe for salvation? How do you think one is saved today? What must one believe?
If Jesus had a ministry to the Gentiles why did God need Paul to reveal to us the Mystery,why not Jesus. Paul said that he had been commissioned to preach “the word of God in its fullness—the mystery that has been kept hidden for ages and generations, but is now disclosed to the Lord’s people” (Colossians 1:25–26). If Jesus preached to Gentiles what message did he preach, that is so different to Pauls. These are questions I asked myself after coming out of the Charismatic Church. Questions I urge others to do and research.
The message that Paul preached was not a different message from Jesus. Jesus never changed His message, and neither did Paul change Jesus’s message. (30 Paul stayed there two full years in his own rented house, welcoming all who came to visit him. 31 Boldly and freely he proclaimed the kingdom of God and taught about the Lord Jesus Christ. Acts 28:30-31.)
There are two parts in verse 31. First Paul proclaimed (preached) the Kingdom of God (same message Jesus preached), Then he taught about Jesus Christ. Proclaiming and teaching are two different things. Jesus proclaimed the Kingdom of God to the public. Then in private, He taught the kingdom of God to His disciples. Paul did the same thing. What Paul had in teaching was more information ie, Jesus’s death burial and resurrection…Jesus did not preach his death, burial, or resurrection publicly, neither did he preach born again…..
Where people make the mistake at is taking Paul’s teachings on Christ’s crucifixion, and assuming that he preached a different message. Some christians even uses Paul’s teaching to refute the Kingdom of God teachings of others. Is Paul greater than Jesus?
Even the apostle Paul warned that preaching a different gospel brings a curse (Galatians 1:8-9). So, did Paul preach a different gospel, or the gospel he heard directly from Jesus?
There are few accounts “almost nil” in the NT about Paul preaching publicly, Even when he preached to the intellectuals in Athens, Acts 17:30-, he mentions the resurrection once, while the gist of his message is about God calling for man to repent. Jesus also called for man to repent, why? For the Kingdom of heaven is at hand.
Do your own research, start first thing with understanding what a king is and does, because first and foremost, God is a King, Jesus is a King. He calls us kings/priests also. A King has to have a kingdom (king’s domain).
I recommend several books. The lost and forgotten Gospel of the Kingdom by Steven. R. Service Amazon kindle special $2.99 right now.
Rediscovering the Kingdom of God by Dr. Myles Munroe, Also God’s Big Idea, Dr. Myles Munroe. also on Amazon.
Matt,
Acts 15 reveals Peter, the Twelve, and the rest of the believers in Jerusalem understood nothing of Paul’s gospel. They proclaimed the gospel of the kingdom which required faith and works for salvation. Paul proclaimed salvation was by faith alone in the death and resurrection of Christ. Read Acts 2-3. Did Peter tell the Jews to believe Christ died for their sins and rose from the dead for salvation? No. He did not because he did not know this. This was a truth the risen Christ revealed this to Paul alone. Whatever the 12 learned regarding this, they learned from Paul. Paul gave the warning of Galatians 1.6-9 after the Council of Jerusalem had settled the question of the gospel. At the Council, Peter declared they were wrong and Paul was right. The gospel of the kingdom ended on that day. See The Great Hinge. The teaching of Jesus and Paul were vastly different. Jesus’ teaching concerned the earthly kingdom God had promised the Jews. Paul proclaimed doctrines concerning the Church, the body of Christ.
Thanks Matt!!!
Dear brother Matt,
Their are no priests in the body of Christ. There is no “priesthood of all believers. To the Israelites God said, “You shall be unto me a kingdom of priests.” (Ex 19:6) Peter refers to this prophecy in 1 Peter 2:5. As the apostle to the Jews, Peter is, of course, writing to Jews. Jesus explained to Nikodemus that all Israelites needed to be baptized (washed) in preparation for priesthood . “Marvel not that I said unto thee, Nikodemus, “Ye Israelites must be born again.” Jesus was surprised that Nikodemus, a teacher of Israel, was unaware of this.
The day is coming when Exodus 19:6 will be fulfilled. (Zachariah 8:23).
HI,
The gospel was preached to Abraham as Paul states in Galatians. Isaiah proclaimed the gospel most clearly in chapters 52 and 53 especially. David wrote Psalm 22. Abraham was a man of faith. It said nothing of repentance. Abraham believed God and it was credited to him for righteousness. Jesus spoke to the two on the road to Emmaus using the writing of the old testament to reveal himself.
I think the old testament believers had more revelation than you seem to say. Maybe I have completely misunderstood you. Forgive me if I have.
Johns Gospel tells us that grace and truth came through Jesus Christ, the grace being that He would fulfil the law. As regards the kingdom, did paul not say we are now in the Kingdom of His dear son in whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins?
Just some honest questions that came to mind when reading this page.
Stephen,
Read the passage (Galatians 3.8) carefully. What was the gospel preached to Abraham? The verse tells us: In thee shall all nations be blessed. That was the gospel for Abraham. The point Paul was making was that Abraham believed what God told him. Paul’s use of the phrase “kingdom of God” referred to the overall realm of God’s rule, and for members of the Church, His heavenly kingdom of which we are citizens (Philippians 3.20). This is different from the earthly kingdom prophesied which will be on the earth (Matthew 6.10). The Jews never had any idea of dying and going to heaven or living in heaven.
” The Jews never had any idea of dying and going to heaven or living in heaven.”
Say the above to (IMHO) 99% of Christians today and they’ll look at you like you’re crazy. They’ll probably not say anything because they don’t know enough to respond but it goes against most everything they’ve heard in Sunday School and church. I think most equate Paradise before the cross with Heaven in general. My understanding is that Paradise is in Heaven today.
Joe,
Sadly, most of Christendom does not read the Scriptures. They read what others have written. For this reason, these basic truths are unknown. One can hardly turn a page in the OT without finding verses related to God’s coming kingdom on earth. The Jews hope was in resurrection and life in that kingdom. I really do not know what people think when they read/pray, “thy kingdom come, thy will be done, on earth, as it is in heaven.” Do they comprehend this was the earthly kingdom? Not a single verse supports the idea of Jews dying and going to heaven. We learn about going to heaven from Paul. And nowhere else. Paradise was emptied when Christ rose from the dead. Those saints are now in heaven and they will return to populate the earth in resurrection bodies. The Church’s citizenship is heavenly and we have no information as to whether we will be part of the earthly kingdom or not.
Doctrine, thank you so much for your words.
The bible speaks of Christ returning with Saints….who are those saints? I’ve heard either it’s the Body of Christ or Angels.
Joe,
We KNOW all the angels come with him (Matthew 25.31; Revelation 19.4).
Hi Don and brethren:)
I have been learning on the mysteries. I agree with you that we are meant for the heavenly places. In Ephesians. 1:3, 20, 2:6, 3:10 it speaks of “heavenly places”. Also, Ephesians. 3:15 speaks of the whole family in heaven and earth, also Phil. 2:10, 3:20, Col. 1:5, 16, 20. There are several places in these scriptures that speak of “things in heaven” and things in earth. Several contrasting the two which is interesting… we are told to compare spiritual with spiritual, scripture with scripture.
Am finding there are key words and phrases in Paul’s epistles that go together. Like the “times past”, “But now”, and “ages to come”. That sort of thing.
Also in Rev. 12:7-10 where the devil and his angels are cast out, these are positions of government like in Ephesians. 6:12, the things we are fighting ( in Christ however we have help) against in this life. One day the heavens will be clean (Job 15:15) and repopulated perhaps.
It’s interesting what Paul says in 1 Cor. 2:8. In Keith Blades book, “Satan and his plan of evil”, he lays out this plan of evil from Genesis on up. Have not finished the book yet, but really lays out this plan, and God’s as well. It is hard for me to read much at one time of this kind of thing because Satan is an enemy of our God and thinks and tries to steal God’s glory at every turn.
God’s move of Christ Jesus on the cross and rising from the dead, a life giving Spirit, is beautiful for God’s glory! We all praise Him for it!
I know nothing for sure, but just a thought. :)
Peace to all brethren.
Bobbi I have been trying to find a copy of this book (preferably a .pdf file).
Hi John ,
I’ve not seen a pdf on this book. I got mine here:
https://www.forgottentruths.com/satanandhisplanofevil.aspx
Or you might try ebay.
God bless you!
Hi Don,
I have a question regarding Peters epistles; Are they relevant to us christians who are saved by grace, thinking of that these epistles were written far after the council at Jerusalem and when Peter knew about this “saved by grace”-gospel of Paul?
Isaac,
Peter wrote to Jews who had believed the gospel of the kingdom. We can make applications from Peter just as we can from other non-Pauline letters but sound interpretation requires understanding to whom a passage was written.
Thank you taking time to answer. And thank you, and also God so much for this website. It has been really a blessing to read your articles. I was just recently reading all the New Testament together, and it was a huge mess and hard to understand the Scripture. But I noted this scripture in Acts 10:44-48, when these gentiles received the Holy Spirit before they had been baptized in water. And therefore, the spirit in me was uneasy about this, wether baptism in wather should be a christian practice or not, so I started to make research on this topic when I stumbeled on this site.
But may I ask you; these gentiles receiveing the Holy Spirit in Acts 2, was this before the time Paul had received this Gospel from our glorious Lord? For me it`s obvious that the grace was in function at that time, even the 12 didn`t teach about it.
Isaac,
Only Jews received the Holy Spirit in Acts 2. In Acts 10, Cornelius, a Gentile, and those with him received the Holy Spirit, after Paul was saved. We’re not told how much later. We also do not know exactly when Paul received his gospel. We assume it was shortly after he was saved during the 3 years in Arabia and Damascus. God was able to use Peter’s experience to help Paul many years later at the Jerusalem Council. See my article, The Great Hinge.
Hi again,
Pardon me, I did not mean to refer to Acts 2, but Acts 10. But anyways; does this occurring in Acts 10 with Cornelius and the other gentiles, when the Holy Spirit fell on them, show that the Grace was in motion already before Paul revealed his Gospel of Grace?
Isaac,
No. We don’t really know how long after Paul was saved this event occurred or exactly when Paul received his gospel. One would think he received it fairly soon after he was saved. 2. Peter did not understand what had happened. He only understood it had. We have no record he ever went to another Gentile. The whole reason for the event (other than the obvious salvation of Cornelius and those with him) was so Peter would have a basis to support Paul 14 years later.
Updated post.
Ok, so in Acts 11:19-26 we can read about the community in Antioch, which consisted of scattered jews saved under kingdom plan. One of them was Barnabas who traveled a lot with Paulus in gentile areas. This Barnabas was sent to this community by the twelve, which probably means that he was at that current time supporting the kingdom gospel. That community also consisted of gentile believers from Cyprus and Cyrene.
So my questions are:
1. If Barnabas had known of Pauls gospel of Grace at that time, he would probably not been sent from other than God, as Paul writes it, instead of the twelve? Was he presenting the kingdom gospel there?
2. Why would the gentile followers be included in this Antioch community, if the kingdom gospel was presented here, which is probably was, basing on that Paul had not presented his gospel at this period? Are were they saved and included because of the blessings of Israel?
3. Do we know anything about Acts and if its chapters are presented chronologically correctly after period of time?
Isaac,
Luke does not provide us with a precise timeline of what happened when. The big picture is that Acts is a transitional book, moving from the gospel of the kingdom to the gospel of grace, from God’s program with Israel to the new program, the Church, the body of Christ. The gospel of the kingdom officially ended at the Council of Jerusalem. Paul presumably came to Antioch after his three years in Arabia and Damascus. During this time God probably revealed to him the gospel of grace and other new revelations. Barnabas went to get Paul because it was recognized that God had commissioned Paul to work with Gentiles. The year Paul spent at Antioch he taught them the new doctrines the resurrected Lord had revealed to him.
JOHN THE BAPTIST, JESUS AND THE APOSTLES PREACHED THE KINGDOM OF GOD. What happened? Israel rejected Jesus committed the unpardonable sin, and crucified him. They were all still living under the Old Covenant, under the law still circumcision, sacrificing animals and so forth, how were the proselytes allowed to enter into Judism ? 1) circumcision 2) water baptism 3) offer a sacrifice, offer two turtle doves. What did this represent? a new birth, what did Jesus parents offer at the temple for Jesus birth? 2 Turtle doves???
so we see that Jesus baptism, we see he got baptized as the pharisees said Jesus was a Samaritan, there fore Jesus got baptized. If one was in Judaism the people would not listen to them, Jesus needed them to listen to them. Cornelius and the Eunuch both were gentiles and needed to get baptized to come int Judaism.
Now amazing that Paul got a “secret” message from Jesus himself. Paul did not preach the kingdom of heaven, he preached a new Gospel, the Gospel of grace. The 11, john the Baptist and Jesus did not preach the gospel of grace, they preached the kingdom of God.
Now we see that Jesus would have reigned in the earthly kingdom if Israel had not rejected him. Through their rejection, the kingdom was postponed to a later date.
the Gospel of Paul, the grace message was to believe in Jesus the son of God by faith, his death and resurrection. No water baptism, no rituals, but during this transmission period, the apostles stilled preached the kingdom of heaven, and did all the rituals, till 70 AD the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed and they could no longer do sacrifices and they were all scattered over the world.
Question : Is water baptisn required for salvation?
Mario,
Water baptism was required for salvation under the gospel of the kingdom (Mark 1.4, 16.16; Acts 2.38). Water baptism has now ended (1 Corinthians 1.17; Ephesians 4.5). Also, the eunuch was a Jew.
Hi bro Don, seeing that the Corinthians spoke in tongues, do you think they all got saved like the Jewish kingdom church in Acts 2 ?
George,
No, Paul founded the Corinthian church and this was about 52 A.D. That was far after he proclaimed the gospel of the kingdom when he was first saved. Speaking in tongues operated in for a time in both the Jewish assemblies and in the Christian churches. The Corinthian church was the only church in which tongues is mentioned and ceased by the time Paul completed 2 Timothy.
Hi bro Don, what about Cornelius, some gracers say that he believed, did not repent and did not get baptized according to the kingdom commission, so that makes him a member of the body of Christ, even though he and Peter did not know this yet but in acts 15, would like to know what you think, thanks for everything :)
George,
This is one we have to leave with God. I don’t know.
Don how are we to think of those that were saved under the kingdom gospel but weren’t water baptized or repented of sins etc. like the thief on the cross for instance and I think the good samaritan, woman at the well and a few other instances I think. Many thanks.
Jasen,
God can make exceptions. The thief on the cross obviously couldn’t be baptized.
I am trying to get a book published concerning the Gospel of the Kingdom vs the Gospel of the Grace of God. Much of your material is included. The following is a response from a publisher. The author is well known for over forty years.
Jerry, I am not sure what you mean by the gospel of the kingdom being different from the gospel of grace. There is one gospel which is the gospel Jesus proclaimed. John 1:17 says, “For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. Jesus’ life was a perfect balance of God’s grace and truth. We are called to be examples of Jesus, exhibiting that same balance of grace and truth in our lives, which means loving God by not compromising with the world and loving others–the two greatest commandments.
I’m sorry that we are not able to recommend a particular publisher that emphasizes what you are seeking. Josh’s books are published by a variety of publishers–Tyndale, Thomas Nelson/Harper Collins, Harvest House, Barbour and others.
Penny
Josh McDowell Ministry
Jerry,
I recommend self-publishing. I have a book in the works which I am publishing with Blurb. It’s done and I’ve just got to look at the proofs. Penny is reciting tradition. If you were to ask Penny what the gospel is, she probably wouldn’t know and if you were to ask her how people were saved during Jesus’ ministry, she couldn’t say. As you know, Paul’s gospel is 1 Corinthians 15.1-4. We KNOW John the Baptist, Jesus, and Peter on the day of Pentecost and afterwards did not proclaim this gospel. The issue of the ONE gospel was only settled at the Council of Jerusalem. Sadly, Penny doesn’t understand this and is in lockstep with 99% of Christendom. The idea there has only been one gospel is one of the greatest errors. It is complete nonsense to anyone who believes the Bible.
Jerry, here’s the way I approach the question of 2 gospels…..Look at Luke 9:6. The 12 were preaching the gospel. Now, look at Luke 18:33-34. The Disciples knew nothing of the Lord’s approaching death……How could the Disciples be teaching Paul’s gospel of grace– the death, burial and resurrection (I Corinthians 15:1-4) if they didn’t know about the death, burial and resurrection? The 12 were teaching the Gospel of the Kingdom. The 12 were not wrong. They were doing what they had been told to do. Paul is not wrong. But look at the warning Paul gives in the first Chapter of Galatians if we teach a gospel other than his (Paul’s). Galatians 1:8-9. Doctrine, if I’m wrong please correct me.
Joe, You are exactly right.
Good morning Don and all brethren :)
Vanessa and I are studying on the gospel during the 70th week, and the 1000 year reign.
We know Jesus said the gospel of the kingdom would be preached to the whole world. Matt. 24:14
Question1. In Jesus earthly ministry we know he preached to Israel, and even told his disciples, apostles to go to none other than Israel.
Matt. 10:5, …etc. would this be the same as the gospel of the circumcision?
Thank you.
Bobbi,
The gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of the circumcision are the same. This will be the gospel during the Tribulation but it will go to the entire world, primarily through the agency of the 144,000. It will be the message to combat the message of the Beast who will claim he is the Messiah and God. It will go to all the world since the Beast will make his claim to all the world.
Thank you Don. That’s what I thought. So when Jesus says in Matt. 24:14, “…for a witness unto all nations…” this word witness means testimony. Does this bear the teaching of some that state millions of Gentiles will be saved in this time? I don’t think it does. I could be wrong. I hope I am wrong.
The Jews have been scattered since Acts 8:1,4, then we see them in Acts 11:19. Also James writes to the 12 tribes scattered abroad in James 1:1, and Peter as well in 1 Pet. 1:1. The Jews have been scattered “all over the world” for 2 thousand years. I’m wondering if the gospel of kingdom was to Jews only, I don’t see a scripture that states it will be different in the 70th week.
Then in Rom. 11:21-26, I’ve been studying these verses as of late. Paul is speaking to Gentiles as a whole. Keeping in mind that their are no distinctions as to race, creed etc in the body of Christ, so he is not addressing the body here. He is I think speaking to the Gentiles which in this dispensation include Jews! All nations are just nations today. Rom. 3:12. I’m thinking these verses speak to a time when our gospel is no longer desired or accepted as truth. I’m wondering if this is when the fulness of the Gentiles be come in. I don’t think he’s speaking of a “number” to reach fulness but that when it is no longer effective. Man I could just cry about this. This is what I’m seeing here. So I do wonder if when the Grace dispensation is over, how many Gentiles will be saved. If folks are saved under the gospel of the kingdom, won’t this require the law and converting? Am unclear as to whether baptism and keeping the law will be mandatory but I think so until they are fully saved under the new covenant. I know Hebrews is bringing Jews toward the new covenant. But they according to Peter they do not see salvation until Christ comes, which I think means they are still under the old. 1 Pet. 1:5,7,9,10,13. So I’m thinking this gospel is still to Jews. Though It will be a testimony to all nations.
What do you think of this.
Bobbi,
We’re not told how many Gentiles will be saved but I suspect it will be a large number (Revelation 7.14). The reason the gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed is because the gospel of grace is particular to the Church and the Church is no longer on the earth–it has been completed. The essence of the gospel of the kingdom is that Jesus is the Christ. During the Tribulation, the Beast will proclaim he is the Messiah. Those who accept him are doomed and almost all who reject him and believe Jesus is the Christ will be killed.
Truly Don, I’m thinking these are Jews.
Rev. 7:15. They are said to be serving in God’s temple.
Also 1 Pet. 2:5,9,10.
It strikes me that the gospel of the kingdom was only to Jews who had been scattered everywhere.
Maybe some prosecutes?…
Bobbi,
The gospel of the kingdom will be fulfilled in the Tribulation (Matthew 28.18-20).
There is only one gospel and that is the gospel of Jesus Christ. In Him we have grace and truth. Grace being a favour and an enablement given you freely by Jesus based on your acceptance of him as Lord and personal savior and truth being your testimony of abiding in Him as your Lord and Personnal savior. You are saved by God’s grace in his sonJesus Christ which forms the foundation of your faith to your being saved. However you are saved for a purpose for you are created for a purpose of the creator, hence you need to be made perfect to be restored to inherit and to be found in your purpose.
Thus the truth of the gospel unveils all these to your understanding and for you to seek for it. The truth unveils the kingdom in you, with you and for you. Paul has to dwell on grace for that is the beginning of the God’s programme to the Gentiles whiles Jesus came first to fulfill the old programme for the Israelites and to usher in the new programme for all both Jews and Gentiles. Thus Jesus began with the kingdom message to the Jews first.
Let us not divide Him but ensure that all received the gospel of grace and truth. The Kingdom gospel builds the kingdom in you, with you and for you. Seek for it and you will find it for it is a hidden treasure.
John,
What is your definition of the gospel? What must one believe to be saved?
Gospel simply means good news but Jesus did not give us a gospel but his gospel, the Word gospel which all of us including Paul preaches. This gospel is complete in Him. It is dynamic and originated as the mind of God revealed in His will unto the creation of all things. It is received by man as God news, identified as his voice containing his word unto man. Accepted to become a message, tool, equipment, power, and eaten as food of the inward unto his salvation and restoration. Established in the man as the truth and light of creation and his position and authority over all creations on earth. To finally become the life of the man a likeness of the creator and sonship of man and God. Paul preached this gospel but stressed the beginning, the grace that is available to all as a result of the sacrificial lamb he is.The kingdom gospel becomes important at our age and is going to be preached all over the world for the end of this age. It will be a witness unto his return.
We must believe in Jesus period. In his nature, personality, life, word, actions, works and message.
John,
Since you did not answer my question, I can only assume you do not know the gospel, what one must believe to be saved. See 1 Corinthians 15.1-4. Then ask yourself if Jesus proclaimed this. Did Peter?
It is not what you believe but whom you believe. What you believe leads to religion and doctrine but who you believe leads to Christianity. John 3; 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life. Refer John 5; 37-40 John 6 28,29. Believing in him will reveal all the what of the gospel, but believing on what will not reveal the who. I believe I have answered your question as was revealed unto me.
John,
God has revealed how to know Him. Faith always has and object and always has content. The Jews in the OT who were true believers believed what God said. The same is true in the Gospels. Believing Jews believed Jesus was the Messiah, the Son of God. Read the testimonies of Nathaniel, Peter, and Martha. So it is with true believer who are members of the Church, the body of Christ. Saving faith is believing Christ died for our sins, was buried, and rose from the dead (1 Corinthians 15.1-4). This is the gospel. This is what believing God and believing in Christ means. To reject this is to reject Christ.
Believing Who Christ is (God’s son, the [promised Messiah, the King of the Jews) seems to me nearly inseparable from believing in His death and resurrection. Those who believe in His death and resurrection invariably will believe that He was the promised Messiah and King of the Jews as well. Merry Christmas, everyone!
Paul,
The point is the risen Christ revealed to Paul that salvation would be based on trusting in Christ’s death for our sins and rising from the dead. This was what Paul called “my gospel.” This gospel was not known before Paul. Salvation before Paul, the gospel of John the Baptist and the Twelve, was to believe Christ was the Messiah, the Son of God. Today, one cannot be saved by believing Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. One must be saved by believing in Christ’s death and resurrection. See my article, The Great Hinge.
I meant to say that belief in the identities of our Lord would almost inevitively follow belief in His death and resurrection. Looking forward to receiving the book I ordered!
Paul,
Yes. Thank you.
Brother Don,
Could you please shed some light on the “Last Day”? In John 6:44, Jesus says “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them, and I will raise them up at the last day.”
What is the last day and to whom does it refer, Israel or the Church?
Neal,
Jesus was speaking to Jews so Israel is primarily in view. The “last day” will be a time in which OT believers and believers killed in the Tribulation will be resurrected to populate the Kingdom. See my article, The Resurrection, for a specific order of the resurrections.
Have seen a number of comments where statements are made regarding repopulation of the earth by resurrected human beings. The earth will be repopulated by the Believers who are still alive at Christ’s return, both Jews and Gentiles, and there will be many. The Unbelievers will be gathered by the Angels and thrown into the fire. During the Millennium, the descendants of the Believers will have to chose Christ’s Lordship during the Millennial Kingdom in order to be saved. They still have an unborn, sin nature. Satan will cause most of them to rebel against Christ at the end of the Millennium, just before we go into the eternal state. This all happens for too many reason to name and far too many scriptures to quote.
Thank you for all your work on Doctrine. Was keeping the mosaic law, or at least attempting to , required for salvation under the kingdom gospel.
Mike,
The subject of what precisely was required for salvation is not clear. What is clear is that before Paul, faith and works were necessary. Jesus told the young ruler to have eternal life required keeping the Law. The gospels also indicate water baptism and forgiving others in addition to believing Jesus was the Christ was required.
The believing Jews who represented Jerusalem church were telling Paul’s converts they weren’t saved because they did not follow the law. I assume this means this was part of their salvation. I am having a debate with a fellow brother over the fact that there are two separate gospels discussed at the Jerusalem counsel. He says that since no one can follow the law none of the early church would have been saved. What are your thoughts?
Mike,
Please see my article, Faith vs. Works in James: Resolving the Problem. How does your friend think men and women were saved in the OT, the gospels? How does he think one is saved today? Usually, when I ask someone who disagrees with me these questions I get silence.
Dear Doctrine,
At what age of the children can one present the gospel and expect them to believe and get saved?
Bahati
Bahati,
It depends on the child. Some children can understand the gospel very early.
Pingback: There Can Only Be One « lenzblog
Great website! Keep up God’s work. Since we are saved by the Gospel of the Grace of God , can amillennialists and preterists totally reject Jesus’s Gospel of the Kingdom of God for Israel and still be considered Christians ? Revelation 22:18-19 says ” I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the Tree of Life and in the holy city,which are described in this book”. Amillennialists and preterists allegorize the entire book of Revelation and much of the Old Testament. Does this constitute the adding and subtracting of Revelation? Daniel 12:9 says that none of the wicked can understand the book of Daniel. Does this include amillennialists and preterists who believe Daniel is all past tense? Matthew 25:31-46 declares that antisemitisim when Christ returns , is evidence of a lost soul. Does that apply to today as well? Since amillennialists and preterists deny the Abrahamic covenant still exists and that the church has replaced Israel, does that constitute as antisemitisim ? Thank you.
Thaddeus,
Thank you. While Amillenialists and Preterists have woefully misinterpreted the Scriptures, if they believe Paul’s gospel, they are saved. I do think there is a danger of Antisemitism in believing the Church has replaced Israel and that God is finished with national Israel. Most of these people see all blessings to Jews coming through the Church. What they do not see is that the Church will one day be complete and God will return to His program with Israel.
If these people ” woefully misinterpret ” scripture and deny Christ his earthly kingdom and are considered Christians, does that mean that false teachers can be Christians ? Revelation 22:18-19 doesn’t seem to give a pass to people who misinterpret scripture. Roman Catholics misinterpret scripture and add works to salvation. Does that constitute as woefull misinterpretation? Hebrews 10:25 says to encourage each other all the more as you see the Day approaching. These people can’t encourage anyone, because they think the Day is already here spiritually. John Gershner and R.C. Sprout have even called dispensationalists, heretics. Are they the real heretics ? Do you think antisemitisim is evidence of being lost? Thank you again or your time.
Thaddeus,
As I wrote earlier, if one believes Paul’s gospel, one is saved. And yes, Christians can be false teachers. Revelation was written TO Jews and nothing in Revelation concerns the Church. It is FOR us but not TO us. Anyone who teaches God is through with Israel, the Church is the “new” Israel, etc. teaches error. But that does not mean they are lost. They are just poor students of the Scriptures and blind.
Fascinating! This explains so many questions I’ve had. Isn’t it wonderful how God made it so easy for us Gentiles to gain salvation, i.e., no extra burdens as like those that were put on the Jews both before and after Christ until Paul, as you explained – burdens that God knew Gentiles couldn’t handle, never having been people of the Law and the Prophets, or having the capacity to understand any of the truths about God that were revealed by them, let alone obey them! These burdens are what Paul so adamantly preached against in the Book of Galations and seems to be creeping back into the Church today in the form of legalism and the “holiness” movement, perhaps not harmful in themselves, but are certainly not prerequisites for salvation or maintaining our salvation. Faith alone, faith alone, keep preaching it, Brother! Walking in and being led by the Holy Spirit trumps it all. Thank you for this exceptional teaching. It also brought to mind the number 12 in the gospel of the Kingdom (Jesus and the 12 disciples), and as it begins again after the Rapture with the 144,000 from the 12 tribes of Israel. Jesus had a sense of humor and, as you said, was only cryptic when things were obvious. Great teaching, Don, thanks again. -Sister Pam
Dear Brother: Am i right in my understanding that the twelve apostles too did not belong to the body of Christ; were saved members of the bride of Christ? Also, am I right in my understanding that in the future, at the marriage of the Lamb, the bride of Christ will get united to the body of Christ, and the two will become one?
Philemon,
The 12 were not part of the Church, the body of Christ. They were apostles of Israel. It appears that Israel, God’s earthly inheritance, are kept separate from His Church, His heavenly inheritance, just as heaven and earth are kept separate throughout eternity.
Thanks! What then is the marriage of the Lamb all about?
Philemon,
Please see the excellent article by Pastor Sadler: https://www.bereanbiblesociety.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/searchlight89.pdf.
Thank you for this teaching.
I want to ask, does it mean that the Israelites (who are saved) are not part of the body of Christ?
Or
Is there going to be a time when the Israelites and the body of Christ be united?
(Ephesians 215 Having abolished in his
flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace; )
Tobi,
All who believe Paul’s gospel (1 Corinthians 15.1-4) become members of the Church, the body of Christ. Israel and Church remain separate throughout eternity as two separate programs but both are part of God’s kingdom, God’s temple and habitation (Ephesians 2.19-22).
WOW, Im so glad GOD sent Paul to save me… I only wish I had not Wasted All that time studying the Whole Word of GOD seeking Him… As well as the Wasted time reading the Gospel’s. Are the Lost tribes part of Israel… Or Just Judah an Benjamin? So I assume the Lord’s prayer is strictly for the Jew’s as well… Apparently the Church will be separated from Christ for the 1,000 year reign, as they will be dwelling with GOD in Heaven, while Christ reigns on the earth. An we must disregard All of Rev. 21 particularly vs. 3 I heard a loud voice out of heaven saying, “Behold, God’s dwelling is with people, and he will dwell with them, and they will be his people, and God himself will be with them as their God. Since We will already dwell with Him… One other question if I may, I was under the impression that futurism was put forward by Jesuit priest’s to combat the reformation… Any thought’s on that? Well I have so much more to say, but I won’t. If You can’t reply in the comments I understand. But if You could in an email it would be greatly appreciated. I do appreciate Your dedicated efforts though.
Shawn d Matthews,
If you were saved, you would it is the work of Christ on the cross and His resurrection that saves. You would understand that the risen Christ gave Paul this gospel to bring salvation to mankind. I do not know how you have gotten the idea that reading the Gospels is a waste of time. You certainly did not get it from doctrine.org. I do not know where you get the idea there are any “lost tribes of Israel.” No one who has any Biblical or historical knowledge believes there are “lost tribes of Israel.” I invite you to come to know Christ: Believe Paul’s gospel, that Christ died for your sins and rose from the dead (1 Corinthians 15.1-4). That is the beginning of understanding.
You use the term ‘kingdom gospel” that Jesus and the 12 preached. But, you fail to differentiate between the two examples given in scripture. In the KJV, we find the terms ‘kingdom of God” and the term “kingdom of heaven”. Close examination clearly shows the Kingdom of God is a spiritual kingdom not a physical one Rom 14:17 and Luke 17:21 as examples. While the kingdom of heaven refers to what we now see as the millennium kingdom. Or what you refer to as the kingdom promise made to Israel not the church. In Matt 6:33 Jesus, Himself says ‘seek first the Kingdom of God’. Referring to a correct spiritual relationship with God. Having grasped this … then and only then … had the Jews believed … would the kingdom of Heaven come.
I feel things may have been clearer to some folks had you used the term ‘kingdom of heaven’ correctly to speak of the promises given to Israel. With a prior explanation of how it is different from the term ‘kingdom of God’ as the two are distinctly different. What Peter preached on Pentecost to Jews, when they believed, they were ‘born again’, thus within the Kingdom of God. If the Jewish leaders had believed Jesus could have returned to establish the kingdom of heaven.
When Jesus, came to the Apostel Paul, with the gospel of grace. It was / is the only way to salvation, but by believing 1 Cor 15:1-4, we are within the Kingdom of God, in a ‘right spiritual’ relationship with God.
At the end of the church age … when Revelation comes to pass… Jews must become within the Kingdom of God. In a correct spiritual relationship, only then shall they cry out, then Jesus shall come to establish the Kingdom of Heaven, to fulfill all the OT promises given only to Israel.
Simply .. the kingdom of God … involves OT believers, the early Jewish believers & the 12. Then the gentile church, finally those saved in the Trib. One single spiritually focused Kingdom of God that places us in a right relationship with God, by believing the requirements necessary within the various dispensations found in scripture. Separate and totally distinct from the Kingdom of Heaven those promises given only to Israel.
Pete,
In the gospels, the phrases, “kingdom of God” and “kingdom of heaven” mean the same. The Jews only knew of one kingdom: the kingdom God promised them on the earth. The Luke 17 passage has suffered more abuse and misinterpretation from preachers than probably any other passage in the Bible. Jesus was mocking His enemies that they could not see that the King who will rule in the earthly kingdom was standing in their midst. Luke 17 is no different from anything else said in the gospels regarding the kingdom. The kingdom in Luke 17 is earthly. Paul spoke to an entirely different audience with an entirely different message. When Paul used the term “kingdom of God” he meant the whole realm of God’s rule and he taught that members of the Church, the body of Christ, will inherit a heavenly kingdom. The Jews had no such promise.
Is it not a fact that the Gospel of the Kingdom is identical with preaching the Gospel of the grace of God? (Acts 20:24, 25). You did not mention v 25 I think.
Anthony,
Paul used the phrase, “kingdom of God” for the whole realm of God’s rule, not just for the earthly kingdom. We have no evidence that Paul proclaimed the same gospel as John the Baptist, Jesus, and Peter. Paul had one gospel: Christ died for our sins, was buried, and rose from the dead. The Twelve did not proclaim this gospel until after the Council of Jerusalem. See my article, The Great Hinge.
FF Bruce on Acts 20: 24, 25 Commentary on the Greek of Acts, p. 185
“The Gospel of the grace of God was not a different Gospel from that which our Lord and his Apostles preached before the cross… It was the same Gospel as our Lord foretold would be preached among all the nations, and which before his ascension he charged his disciples to make known (Matt 24:14, 28:19ff.). This Gospel of the Kingdom is identical with the gospel of grace”
We cant divide the Gospel of Gd and the Gospel of the Kingdom of Gd and the Gospel of Christ and the Gospel of Grace. There is ONLY ONE Gospel and that Gospel Jesus said WOULD BE PREACHED to all the Nations. This includes what Jesus says and what he accomplished according to the NT! which was what he taught and going to the cross.
One must adhere to Jesus words and obey and believe the entire Gospel the same Gospel in which Paul heard and stated about he Coming Kingdom of Gd. Acts 28:28-31 28 Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it.
29 And when he had said these words, the Jews departed, and had great reasoning among themselves.
30 And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, and received all that came in unto him,
31 Preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence, no man forbidding him.
Michael,
If the gospel of gospel of the kingdom was the same as the gospel of grace, why did Peter not address Gentiles at Pentecost? Why did he not tell his audience to believe Christ died for their sins and rose from the dead for their justification? The gospel of the kingdom required works (Matthew 6.14-15, 9.16-21; Mark 1.4, 16.16; Luke 3.3; Acts 2.36-38) as well as faith. The gospel of the grace of God, defined in 1 Corinthians 15.1-4 which Paul proclaimed, requires faith alone. If these gospels were the same, why did they argue about salvation at the Council of Jerusalem? Why did Paul say he had to explain his gospel to them if they knew it and preached it (Galatians 2.2)? Church doctrine comes from Paul’s letters and no where else. The gospels, writings of Peter, James, John, Jude concern Israel. Acts and Hebrews are transitional books—transitioning from God’s program to Israel to His program, the Church, the body of Christ. I encourage you to believe the Scriptures.
Don, I had read that Mark wrote to Gentiles. In fact, if you do a google search, that’s what you will find. This can’t be correct is it?
Craig,
No. I really do not understand how people can such ideas. But then again I do for they do not understand that Paul is the apostle to the Gentiles.
Yo Don, sup?
I really appreciate all your work to present this material as clear and understandable as possible.
Quick question,
Is 2 corinthians 3:6 saying that they are still ministering the new covenant? Just wanted to get that cleared up.
Brandon,
We enjoy the benefits of the new covenant—the indwelling Holy Spirit and forgiveness of sins through Paul’s apostleship. Paul is the only writer outside the gospels who mentions the new covenant. This in itself should tell us something concerning God’s program and how He has temporarily set Israel aside. The new covenant is part of Paul’s “proxy Israel” ministry to the Church. He was proxy Israel, via the Abrahamic Covenant as 1) the minister of the new covenant, 2) priest (Romans 15.16), and 3) light of the Gentiles (Acts 13.47).
Don,
What is the message being revealed, specifically, in Jesus’ encounter with the rich young man who asked how to obtain eternal life? Mark 10:17-31. The man went away (as opposed to following Him) and dismayed (as opposed to delighted to have his answer).
Keith,
Matthew’s account is the most detailed of the 3 accounts. Keeping the commandments, works, was required for Israel for salvation. This is why Jesus answered the rich young man as He did. The man was good. He kept the commandments. Then he asked what more he lacked. Jesus responded if he wished to be “perfect” to sell his possessions, give to the poor, and follow Him. The word “perfect” is τέλειος which means to be complete, to reach an intended goal. This was the questioned Jesus answered which made the man unhappy. He was unwilling to trust Jesus, to forfeit earthly possessions for heavenly ones—we would say rewards.
When did the apostles stop preaching the gospel of the kingdom?
John,
After the Council of Jerusalem. See The Great Hinge.
Im having trouble figuring out where William Newell stands on dispensationalism. Much he writes is good but much suggests he is Acts 2.
He writes:
“The object of HEBREWS is to set forth CHRIST, above angels–their Creator, indeed; above Moses–as Son, not servant; above Abraham–who paid tithes to Melchizedek; Christ, not connected with Aaron; of wholly different order, for earthly tabernacle, priesthood, sacrifices are done away in HEBREWS; not priest on earth, but Christ our Great Priest at God’s right hand in Heaven itself–who ever liveth to make intercession for us.”
Have you heard of him? Comments?
John,
I have read Newell. Sometimes he’s on target and sometimes not. He seems unsure of some of his positions.
Don, how do I respond to a guy who wrote this?
“He (Jesus) said sent to Israel, not came for. Israel was still in their “lost” estate when Jesus was born. So yes, he was sent to Israel which was in sin because of unbelief.
Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.
All men before Jacob was surnamed Israel, were Gentiles, and all men other that Jacob and his biological offspring are Gentiles.
Before Jesys was prophesied to be sent to Israel, he was told to the Gentiles that he would be sent to them. The Israel Only cult is as bad as Calvinism.” Unquote
Craig,
Technically, Israel is Jacob but God began separating the human race with His call of Abraham with the Abrahamic covenant. The covenant line would be the source of blessing to Gentiles. This culminated with Jacob and his sons. Jesus came to fulfill God’s prophetic program (Romans 15.8). But after the nation rejected Him, God commissioned Paul as the apostle of the Gentiles to assume Israel’s role, which they had rejected.
Don, concerning Acts 2:38, a guy wrote this to me in a forum:
“λήμψεσθε – translated as “you will receive” in verse 38 is in the Future tense, Indicative mood, Middle voice. Without question, the term Paul wrote establishes the sequence of events between repenting and receiving the Holy Ghost (regeneration). This is an excellent observation, David.
Greek tenses are not like English. They are not concerned with time but rather type of action. The future tense denotes action that is yet to happen, but will. Of necessity, that involves time but that is incidental to the purpose. Here the future indicative middle is establishing sequence of action. When employed with the Aorist tense (“Repent” is in the Aorist Imperative Active), the Future tense verb comes after the Aorist tense action. It cannot come before.
It’s also interesting to note the middle voice in “you will receive.” It’s not a passive receiving. If it was, the Passive voice would have been used denoted something done to you by an outside actor. The Middle voice, however, denotes action done by the one receiving the action (example: “I washed my hands”). The use of the Middle voice here denotes that the action of “receiving” is under your control. The action that controls that is … repenting. By repenting, you will control for yourself the receiving of the Holy Ghost to yourself.”
Is what he wrote correct?
Craig,
Yes. I think it is too strong to say Greek tenses are not concerned with time but agree type of action is more important. The main point is accurate. Receipt of the Holy Spirit depended upon repentance and water baptism for the Jews addressed. I think he meant Peter, not Paul. Paul would never say such a thing (and never did). Peter proclaimed the gospel of the kingdom, not Paul’s gospel of grace.
Don, forgive me if this question has been answered but why does Paul say in Rom 10:9 confession comes before faith for salvation?
Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
Kaitmo,
Paul used chiasm in Romans 10.9-11. Confession is agreement. One must mentally agree or acknowledge something (believe it) before one speaks it. Mind is before mouth. Verse 10 explains verse 9 and verse 11 sums the matter. Belief is the parent of the child, confession.
V. 9 A confess
B believe
V.10 B’ believe
A’ confess
V.11 B believe
Don is the promise here in Act 2:39 For the promise is unto you …
The promise the Lord gave His disciples in Jon 14;16-17 of sending the Holy Spirit to indwell His disciples rather that just abiding with them?
Joh 14:16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;
Joh 14:17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.
Kaitmo,
Yes. The promise of the indwelling Holy Spirit was God promise to Israel in the New Covenant (Jeremiah 31; Ezekiel 36; Joel 2).
Dear Doctrine,
In the scenario of Acts 17:5-7 where unbelieving Jews brought Jason to the rulers of the city (Thessalonica), to bring charges against him for giving Paul a platform to preach that Jesus was King of the Jews; was Paul, at that time, preaching the gospel of the Kingdom, or of Grace?
God bless you in your service to Him.
A. Serrao
Anthony,
Thank you. Paul received the gospel of the grace of God shortly after his salvation, likely during the time he went to Arabia. The only explicit statement of Paul preaching the gospel of the kingdom is Acts 9.20. And there, all Luke wrote was that Paul said Christ was the Son of God. We do not find the language of the gospel of the kingdom with Paul like we find in the Gospels or the content Peter proclaimed.
Don,
I would like to be assured why Jesus (according to my observation) did not preach repentance (if He did, may be very minimal) and never did He teach water baptism let alone baptize anyone?….
I have been convinced that Jesus had not come to Israel to prepare them in any way before He led them into the kingdom he had come to establish. Rather, the work of John the Baptist was enough for all it had to take for Israel to be ushered in the kingdom to be introduced soon by Jesus.
It is my further conviction that all Jesus had to begin doing was to right away introduce the kingdom by teaching right away the actual atmosphere of the kingdom life. Consequently, according to my observation, after John the Baptist had done all the preparatory work required, (ie preaching repentance and water baptism etc), Jesus’s duty was to usher in the kingdom.
I want to be enlightened there about.
Bahati
Bahati,
Repentance was inherent in the gospel of the kingdom and Jesus proclaimed it. See Matthew 4.17; Luke 13.3, 5, 17.3-4. Jesus’ ministry focused on proving He was the Messiah. Water baptism was also inherent for the gospel of the kingdom and Jesus taught it (Matthew 28.19; Mark 16.16) but He did not practice it for His baptism was of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 3.11).
Don, do we know when John wrote his letters? There are some now claiming that because John outlived the other apostles, that he eventually taught faith alone. How do I respond to these folks who believe this?
Craig,
From the language and theology contained in his letters, I think John wrote in the 50s. The main thrust of his letters is to love one another, keep Christ’s commands, and endure to the end. John thought the Lord would return soon. It is certain all he wrote was before 70 A.D. for there is no mention of the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem. Furthermore, Paul wrote that he completed the Scriptures (Colossians 1.25). John probably lived to be old but everything he wrote was much earlier. Ask the folks where they find John teaching faith alone in Jesus death and resurrection.
Don, while being wary of the early Church fathers, I find it interesting that one of John’s disciples, Polycarp, quoted heavily from John and Paul. In his letter to the Philippians, Polycarp emphasised John’s teaching on loving one another while also invoking Pauline doctrine on justification/grace etc. Maybe Polycarp was an anomaly among the early Church fathers.
Don, I have friends who are RD. Yet they deny Paul ever taught the kingdom Gospel even though I have shown them Acts 9:20. Is there anything else I can show them from the Bible?
Craig,
Can’t think of anything. Acts 9.20 seems clear to me.
I have to say that this teaching is so full of holes that it is already sunk! It’s framers have selectively extracted proof-text after proof text and ignored all the OBVIOUS contradictions. The REASON that Protestantism has so many denominations is an instruction clearly lost on them. No normal human being, opening the scriptures for the first time and reading, would EVER come to such a conclusion. I am embarrassed for you. I am fully willing to say, “We’ll just have to wait and see” but then, it will be too late for its adherents, much like the five foolish virgins.
William,
Evidently, you know so little of the Bible and theology that you cannot state what is wrong. I am happy to respond to ignorance but have little patience with stupidity.
William,
Please be fair. Please list a few of “the OBVIOUS contradictions”.
Thank you,
Joe
Don
You have been both a God send and a pain! My theology is a mess after God began to open my eyes to the two gospels. Then led me to you about four years ago. I still have a lot of holes, but no worry I had a lot of holes in my mixed gospel. But one I wrestle with is this. What are the results of believing the kingdom gospel? All those saved before Paul and those Jews saved by Paul’s early preaching. Also the Jews saved after Acts 15. My understanding is that prior to Acts 15 they would be resurrected the last day to return to earth (kingdom reign). And later after Acts 15 the Jews saved under grace and Paul’s ministry will be part of the rapture and heavenly group. One other question. The Jews that were being saved at the end of Peter and the 11 Apostles life; did they receive the kingdom or rapture? Alright one more! What about a pure bred Jew today saved under a mixed gospel sermon? Bless you.
David T,
Thanks for the compliment! Salvation is always based on what God has revealed at a particular time. Paul proclaimed his gospel after he received it (Galatians 1.11-12) so all who believed it are members of the Church. All who believed before this are part of God’s prophetic program and have an earthly destiny. After Acts 15.11 there was only one valid gospel (Galatians 1.6-9) so all who were saved after this became members of the Church. See my article, The Great Hinge. Those who had believed the gospel of the kingdom continued to live under the Law according to that gospel. Today there is only one gospel, 1 Corinthians 15.1-4, by which one, Jew or Gentile, is saved. Those who believe it become Church, neither Jew or Gentile, outside of God’s prophetic program. This is one reason the Church cannot go through the Tribulation as some teach. The Church is outside God’s prophetic program; the Church has no prophecy; God’s prophetic program concerns Jews and Gentiles. I am finishing a new book on these question that explains these things in detail. God bless your continued understanding.
Don
Thanks for your quick response. I have been all the above when believing the rapture, pre, mid, post and pan! But I love your response about why it has to happen first. The Church is not prophetic! It has no prophecy! I would have rejected this thought seven years ago. But now it makes perfect sense. Thanks for that simple answer.
Just a quick (hopefully) question. The term ‘born again’ gets thrown around a lot. This is kingdom gospel correct? Jesus said unless a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God. In my understanding, born again refers to a person who met Jesus, believed he was the son of God and it was accounted to him as righteousness. Like Abraham. And when the world ends and the dead in Christ are raised, this is the born again part? The second birth? Now, because we in this time are in the age of grace. We too will be born again according to our faith in the shed blood of Jesus (grace). So many times I’ve been asked if I’m ‘born again’ and I cringe. Even as a baby Christian this never felt correct. I understood, but didn’t know I understood. If I am in fact correct. Not a salvation issue, but would love some feedback. Thank You!
JP,
The term “born again” in context is the gospel of the kingdom. Paul does not use this term. The gospel of salvation today is so simple and has been made so complicated. The clearest expression is found in 1 Corinthians 15.1-4, which is rarely used to communicate the gospel. One is saved by trusting in the death and resurrection of Christ. That’s it. Simple. Easy. We trust in the work of Christ. The gospel of the kingdom was salvation by trusting in the identity of Christ, who He was. Two separate messages.
I am studying this morning in the book of acts and read in your foot notes about Simon the sorcerer being a true Christian please help me understand how you get to this understanding. Thank you much for your insight.
Bren,
What does Acts 8.13 say? Simon believed and was baptized.
Don, thank you for bringing clarity and organization to my understanding. I hope these two questions are clear because my thinking on these 2 points are not.
1. I am assuming from OT that the Jews are God’s children and part of Gods household (Acts 2:19), if yes then when they recieved the Holy Spirit in Acts 2:4, is not Holy Spirit a sign/seal of adoption per Ephesians 1:4-5 Or is Holy Spirit just a seal of adoption to Gentiles? If yes then is the Holy Spirit they recieved in Acts 2 the fulfillment of the New Covenant promised to them in Jer. 31:31 and canot be a sign of adoption?
2. The last supper in Matt. 26-29, specifically vs 28, “my blood of the Covenant ” what Covenant is He referring to? The one yet to be revealed to Paul or the new Covenant promised to them in Jer. 31:31 in the recieving of the Holy Spirit in them in acts 2?
A. Is their recieving of Holy Spirit different from our recieving of Him or one in the same but under 2 different programs? And although 2 different programs, the work on the cross and resurrection made us all one family, brethren via Holy Spirit?
B. After the Trib. when the Jews will resume the animal sacrifices for 1000 yrs, then they will all take the communion (matt. 26:29) because then they will believe He is Messiah and His work on the cross. If so then why keep doing animal sacrifices? As a memorial? Bummer for them! How exhausting.
C, Also after the 1000 years, I hope they can then experience heaven….as the chosen people, it seems like they are getting short end of stick then those saved under Pauls gospel. Please remove the tares in my thinking from the wheat!
Donna,
Thank you.
1. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit is part of the New covenant (Ezekiel 11, 36; Jeremiah 31). It promised the forgiveness of sins and the indwelling Spirit. Adoption is something else.
2. The New covenant. Same Spirit, different programs. The. Church was new revelation, a secret (Ephesians 3.1-13). God’s prophetic program concerns Jews and Gentiles. God’s secret program, the Church, concerns members of the Church, neither Jew or Gentile. According to the Abrahamic covenant, all divine blessing was to come through Israel. The Jews of Jesus’ generation failed so God could not bless Gentiles. God saved Paul as His agent to be that blessing and revealed to him the Church. Paul became proxy Israel, light of the Gentiles (Acts 13), minister of the New covenant (2 Corinthians 3), priest (Romans 15.16). Israel was to fulfill these roles but stumbled. Hence, Paul. They will fulfill them in the kingdom. From Matthew 26, it seems Jews will celebrate communion but also practice animal sacrifices. The role of the latter is unclear, most view them as memorial. So, have to wait and see. After the 1,000 years, God creates a new heaven and new earth. New Jerusalem will be 1,400 miles high, wide, and long. It descends from heaven onto earth. Is 1,400 miles on earth or in heaven? God gave Israel the land grant as an eternal possession. Lots of questions here, answers, unknown. Rest assured, none will be disappointed.
Don:
Here is a seldom heard noun: The Oxford English Dictionary includes “interregnum” on both
page 417 of the 20 vol., and page 1468 of the 2 vol. editions. It’s that period of time between
two kingdoms, or as an American Presidential Election where one political party is replaced at
the newly elected’s swearing in ceremony. One interregnum has been extant for almost two
thousand years. Those enlightened by doctrine.org learn adulators of the Kingdom Gospel
have used that period to abase the Grace Gospel and the Apostle Paul. In referring to page
1029 of Black’s Law Dictionary c. 1891, the reader will find an entry of: Res Ipsa Loquitor”
which includes this translation from Latin: “The thing speaks for itself.” Although sins are
absent in eternity, will something timeless replace remembrance?
I am sorry but you are a follower of men. Jesus is the Son of God. God the Father commanded that we listen to Him. John 12.44-50. Martin Luther did NOT comprehend the scriptures. He did not understand the words of the Son of God. He claimed that he was saved by reading Galatians. This is sheer foolishness! None of us will stand before either the great apostle Paul, nor will we stand before Martin Luther or John Calvin. Take heed to the plain words of Jesus; “Whoever is ashamed of me and my words, the Son of Man will be ashamed of them when he comes in his glory and in the glory of the Father and of the holy angels.” Does that not put the brakes on your love of all things Reformed? Jesus said in Matthew 24; “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away.”
William Sterling,
What you are maintaining is that only what Jesus taught in His earthly ministry is valid. You reject what He taught in His risen, heavenly ministry. It would appear that you also reject what He taught from Genesis through Malachi. Everything Paul wrote, He received directly from the risen Lord. Do you not see that? How is one saved? What did Jesus teach in His earthly ministry? To whom did Jesus minister in His earthly ministry? Did He minister to Gentiles?
Hi brother simple question , If Works don’t save anyone in the bible – like the book of Roman’s says , for saints of today, then why does God require certain works along with faith – in ot, nt, hebrews to revelation , to maintain or to complete salvation for the kingdom on earth people- isn’t this a contradiction?
A die,
When do we learn about salvation by faith alone?
In this dispensation of Pauline grace we r saved by only trusting and believing that Jesus took our place on the cross and that he ressurected for us, faith that requires no works – by grace ye are saved NOT of works – it is a gift of God.
But in it nt and Hebrews to revelation you must maintain and keep your standing until Jesus returns at his second coming or you die in him .
The faith without works – Roman’s
And faith with works – book of James
However my point is in Roman’s Paul says all men will be judged by his gospel of grace alone – however for example God requires the trib saints to have faith Coupled
With works to be saved – please if u can shed some light on what I am trying to say thanks
Andie,
If the Tribulation had come, then one must endure to the end to be saved. But it did not. It remains future. So the situation never occurred. What Paul meant in Romans 2.16 is that God’s ultimate judgment is based on Christ’s death and resurrection. Before Paul, faith and works were needed for salvation. This began with the shedding of blood of an animal sacrifice. Such “works” were “works of faith” but works nevertheless. We have no such works. We simply believe. At the Council of Jerusalem, Peter ended the gospel of the kingdom and declared from that point that everyone must be saved by Paul’s gospel. See The Great Hinge. Had God removed the Church and the Tribulation come, the gospel of the kingdom would have returned (Matthew 24.13-14) and one would have to endure to the end to be saved.
Paul preaching that Jesus was the Son of God in Acts 9:20 is not the same as preaching the kingdom gospel. Paul never preached a message offering Israel her kingdom.
Craig,
The central message of the gospel of the kingdom was the identity of Jesus, who He was. This is revealed in the salvation responses by Peter in Matthew 16, Nathaniel in John 1, Martha, John 11, etc.
If Paul preached something else, what does Acts 28:31 mean?
Nathaniel,
See Paul’s letters. When he used the term kingdom of God, he usually meant the overall rule and realm of God, not the kingdom of God in the context of the gospel of the kingdom that concerned Jews. That the gospel of the kingdom had been supplanted is clear from Acts 15.11. Paul likely revealed to the Jews in Jerusalem that Jesus was the Christ but salvation had to be by Paul’s gospel.
Don, Jesus told the apostles not to go to Gentiles or by way of the Samaritans, but to go only to the lost sheep of Israel. So why did He witness to the Samaritan woman at the well?
Craig,
God can make exceptions. He knew His witness to the woman would lead to the salvation of many of the Samaritans in the city. God is good.
What is John referring to in 1john 3:2
Is he referring to the rapture (I doubt anyway) or the second coming of Jesus?
If is the later (I strongly believe it is), what did he mean by we shall be like him when we see him? Would the believer alive at the second coming recieve a resurrection body or he meant something else
Thank you
Gideon,
John is referring to future resurrection. According to Daniel 12.12-13, Old Testament believers who have died will be resurrected before entering the earthly kingdom. As for those alive at Christ’s 2nd advent, it only seems possible they enter the kingdom as mortal for they will have children. It does not appear immortals have children. There are many things about the future state of the kingdom and eternity God has not revealed. Whatever will be, it will be wonderful, beyond comprehension.
I am wondering why Jesus started His ministry in Galilee of the Gentiles: allowing them to see a great light: if His ministry was supposed to be to the Jew only. So then also: who was He addressing when He preached: “Repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand”? A casual reading would answer: ‘to the Gentiles’. But based on this article, I am wrong about this. Please explain. Thank you.
Francis,
Many Gentiles lived in Galilee, but also many Jews. Jesus was from Galilee, as was Peter, Andrew, James, John, Nathaniel, and Philip. Jesus addressed Jews. See my article, The Gentile Exceptions.
“A future generation of Jews…”
What about the Ashkenazi Jews who are not technically of Israel, they are not of the lineage of Abraham?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/archaeology/scientists-reveal-jewish-history-s-forgotten-turkish-roots-a6992076.html
Also, I heard that after 70 AD the genealogy of the Jews was eradicated. In the Diaspora over almost 2000 years, the Jews don’t know who they are related to. Therefore Scripture and prophecy cannot be followed because the Jewish messiah cannot link himself to the line of David. Is this a problem for them and the 3rd temple?
Lastly, Under Julian the Apostate they tried to build the 3rd temple but God stopped it. Don’t Christians believe there will never be a 3rd temple? It’s not necessary. Thanks again.
DJ,
I am not sure where you are getting this information but it is inaccurate. The Ashkenazi Jews are Jews of the diaspora. While genealogical records were lost with the sack of Jerusalem and Jews cannot trace their ancestry, their specific tribe, God did not forget the ancestry. In Revelation 7, God will identify 12,000 Jews from each of the 12 tribes. Jesus hasn’t forgotten His tribe. He will construct the Temple in the millennial kingdom.
My question though is Why is Paul talking about the kingdom of God in Gal 5:21 if he was preaching the gospel of grace? Saying those who live in the flesh will not inherit the kingdom of God
Cigmd,
Please see the article, The Kingdom of God.
2 Timothy 2:12 ESV
[12] if we endure, we will also reign with him; if we deny him, he also will deny us;
How is Paul’s message to endure different than the of the 12?
Cigmd,
Paul never wrote to believers to endure in order to be saved. That message was to Jesus who experience the Tribulation.
Wasn’t sure where to ask this: regarding 1 Cor 11: 6,10,13, 16
Why aren’t we advocating for women to wear head coverings in the church? Verse 13 makes it seem like it’s something to be considered but 16 seems to be emphatic that this must be observed.
I’m reading your version on NT stdy Bible and in the comment you say it was their culture and not ours but it was ours until the recent past.
And how does it affect the angels today? Did they change with the times?
Cigmd,
Paul was addressing a specific problem in the Corinthian church due to cultural and societal norms. It was something understood throughout society, not just in church. God provided a covering for women, hair. Throughout history, a woman having her head shaved signified shame. In Paul’s day, a head covering showed a woman’s creative position under a man. This has not been a cultural norm since the ancient world. I can remember women used to wear head coverings in church and in society (stores used to have whole millenary departments) but I cannot recall anyone commenting that wearing hats showed submission to her husband or that she was observing the creative order for the benefit of angels. The angels observe how we observe cultural norms, what they signify, which change over time. The basic point Paul made was hair is God’s natural sign of the relationship of man and woman. Women should have longer hair than men.
There is another angle to the hair covering. Seems far fetched but here goes. Sorry for the length of this.
From Michael Heiser’s book, “Reversing Hermon”:
There may be some other spiritual issues that Paul was addressing as well as Dr. Michael Heiser points out in his book, Reversing Hermon. There is historical evidence that the ancient Greek medical experts associated a woman’s hair with her genitalia and her ability to conceive children, and that her hair was viewed as the counterpart to a man’s testicles. At the same time, the Bible is very clear that genitalia is to be covered while one is ministering to Elohim (Exod 20:26; 28:42–43 cp. Isa 6:2), and bodily discharges that proceeded from that area of the human anatomy was considered unclean thus making one unacceptable to YHVH (Lev 15:2, 19; Ibid. page 133). Modesty and cleanliness were the operative issues here when coming into the presence of Elohim. As such, a woman wearing a head covering while engaged in ministry (praying and prophesying or preaching) in the congregation was an issue of modesty and propriety (Ibid. p 135). Heiser goes on to address the meaning of Paul’s curious statement in 1 Cor 11:10, that a woman’s head needs to be covered “because of the angels.” What on earth is Paul talking about here? What piece of information are we missing to help us to understand this enigmatic statement? Heiser explains,
Paul wanted women to have their heads covered as a sign that they were sexually taken, that they belonged to a man, their husbands. Why? Because of the angels. Apparently, Paul was concerned that if women didn’t show this sign of sexual fidelity and “ownership,” a woman could be at risk of sexual violation by angels. After all, it happened before (Gen 6:1–4). Paul didn’t want to see such a violation of cosmic order happen again (Ibid. page 135).
Biblical author, Gary Wayne, in his book The Genesis 6 Conspiracy, approaches the issue of woman and head coverings from a slightly different angle, while at the same time keeping Heiser’s view in mind. He suggests that since in the context of women’s head coverings, Paul makes the point that the woman came from man and not man from woman (1 Cor 11:8–9), for this reason and because of the angels women need to have a sign of authority on her head (v. 10). “The New Testament is recognizing that without a seal of authority, women are fair game for angels, at least for the misguided fallen angels [or demons].” This was the opinion of the early church father Tertullianus (A.D. 160–230) who instructed women to wear veils not to entice the dark angels who loved women because of their beautiful hair (Ibid. p. 18). If this is correct, then a woman who wears a head covering will be less likely to suffer from spiritual demonic attacks that one who doesn’t.
Now it is clear that there are different gospels in the Bible. But now we are under the grace gospel as preached by Apostle Paul.