Introduction
Of the four gospels, John’s gospel presents Jesus as God most forcefully. John explicitly declared Jesus to be God (John 1.1) who brought all things into existence (John 1.3). John’s gospel confirmed that Jesus was YHVH of the Jews (John 8.57-58). He is light (John 1.4, 8.12) and life (John 1.4, 5.26, 14.6). As a vehicle to demonstrate that Jesus was the Messiah and Son of God, John crafted his gospel with eight signs–seven pre-resurrection and one post-resurrection and seven “I Ams.” They are the following:
| Chiastic Structure of the Eight Signs of John’s Gospel | |
| A | The Marriage at Cana (John 2.1-11) |
| B | Healing an official’s son (John 4.46-50) |
| C | Healing a paralyzed man (John 5.1-15) |
| D | Feeding 5,000 (John 6.1-14) |
| D’ | Walking on the sea (John 6.15-21) |
| C’ | Healing a man born blind (John 9.1-12) |
| B’ | Raising Lazarus from the dead (John 11.1-44) |
| A’ | The draught of fishes (John 21.1-14) |
Seven signs were prior to Christ’s resurrection. The eighth is after His resurrection. Seven in Scripture is the number of completion or perfection. Eight indicates a new beginning. Note also the relationship between the signs, i.e., the 1st and the 8th, 2nd and 7th, etc.
The Seven “I Ams” in Which Jesus Declared that He is Almighty God
- I am the Bread (John 6.35-51)
- I am the Light (John 8.12, 9.12)
- I am the Door (John 10.7)
- I am the Good Shepherd (John 10.11)
- I am the Resurrection and the Life (John 11.25)
- I am the Way, the Truth and the Life (John 14.6)
- I am the True Vine (John 15.1)
In Revelation, Jesus declared, “I am the Alpha and the Omega” (Revelation 1.8, 21.6) and “I am the root and descendant of David, the bright morning star” (Revelation 22.16). Revelation points to new beginnings: the Millennial Kingdom and Eternity.
The Kingdom Program
The synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), present Jesus as the King of the Jews who proclaimed the kingdom of God (Matthew 4.17, 9.35). John the Baptist and the Twelve also proclaimed this kingdom message. But in John’s gospel, the King and His kingdom are practically absent. Consider the following:
The phrase “kingdom of God” is found in the following passages:
- Matthew 6.33, 12.28, 19.24, 21.31, 43
- Mark 1.14-15, 4.11, 26, 30, 9.1, 47, 10.14-15, 23-25, 12.34, 14.25, 15.43
- Luke 4.43, 6.20, 7.28, 8.1, 10, 9.2, 11, 27, 60, 62, 10.9, 11, 11.20, 12.31, 13.18, 20, 28-29, 14.15, 16.16, 17.20-21, 18.16-17, 24-25, 29, 19.11, 21.31, 22.16, 18, 23.51
- John 3.3, 5
The phrase “kingdom of heaven” is found in the following passages:
Matthew 3.2, 4.17, 5.3, 10, 19-20, 7.21, 8.11, 10.7, 11.11-12, 13.11, 24, 31, 33, 44-45, 47, 52, 16.19, 18.1, 3-4, 23, 19.12, 14, 23, 20.1, 22.2, 23.13, 25.1, 25.14.
This phrase is unique to Matthew. Is there a difference between the “kingdom of God” and the “kingdom of heaven?” There can be. Probably the best analysis of this was by E. W. Bullinger. See Appendix 114, The “Kingdom of Heaven” and the “Kingdom of God” from The Companion Bible.
The phrase “gospel of the kingdom” is found in the following passages:
- Matthew 4.23, 9.35, 24.14
- Mark 1.14
The synoptic gospels provide a much greater emphasis on Jesus’ kingship and kingdom than John. Except for two passages in John 3, the king and His kingdom are not mentioned (except for Jesus’ trial before Pilate, John 18.33-19.22). Why is this? The most logical reason is John wanted to focus his message primarily on Christ’s deity, not on His kingship and kingdom. When he mentioned His kingship, it was to emphasize the fact his own people, the Jews, were the ones primarily guilty of murdering their Messiah and rejecting their King and His kingdom. Peter made this fact abundantly clear in his post-resurrection messages to the Jews (Acts 2.26, 3.10-15, 4.10-11).
The Purpose of John’s Gospel
Why did John write his gospel? John provided the answer to this question in John 20.30-31. He wrote:
30 Therefore many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing you may have life in His name.
The faith necessary for salvation during Jesus’ ministry was to believe Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God. John declared Jesus performed many signs (σημεῖον) that he did not record in his gospel. The eight signs he recorded were to prove that Jesus was the Christ and that his readers might have life through Him. The signs were miracles. All signs are miracles but not all miracles are signs. The signs had special significance in John’s gospel for national Israel: they proclaimed Who He was.
To whom did John write? He wrote to Jews. His gospel was written to prove to Jews that Jesus was the Messiah. The information he provided was that they might “believe that Jesus is the Christ; and that believing you might have life is His name.” What did this mean?
Believing in Jesus’ Name
What did the Jews believe in order to have eternal life during Jesus’ day? We have examples to show what they believed. Below are accounts from John’s gospel, Matthew’s gospel, and Acts:
1. Nathanael’s Faith
49 Nathanael answered 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 that I saw you under the fig tree, do you believe? You will see greater things than these.” 51 And He *said to him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, you will see the heavens opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man” (John 1.49-51).
2. Martha’s Faith
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 11.25-27).
3. Peter’s Faith
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” (Matthew 16.14-16)
4. The Ethiopian Eunuch’s Faith
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.”]1
5. Saul’s Faith
19 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.” 21 All those hearing him continued to be amazed, and were saying, “Is this not he who in Jerusalem destroyed those who called on this name, and who had come here for the purpose of bringing them bound before the chief priests?” 22 But Saul kept increasing in strength and confounding the Jews who lived at Damascus by proving that this Jesus is the Christ (Acts 9.19-22).
The above testimonies have a common thread. What one believed for salvation during Jesus’ earthly ministry and shortly afterwards, what “believing in Christ” meant during this time was believing Jesus was Israel’s Messiah and the Son of God.
When when we read the following passage we must understand what it meant at the time. John wrote:
16 “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. 18 He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God (John 3.16-18).
This passage is probably familiar to more people than any other passage in Scripture. Most misunderstand it, however. The gospels reveal that Jesus ministered to Jews only (Matthew 10.5-6; John 12.20-26) with two exceptions (Matthew 15.21-28; 8.5-13; cf. Luke 7.1-10). In context, this passage has to do with Jewish salvation, the gospel of the kingdom, not Gentile salvation. Interpretatively, John 3.16 has nothing to say for salvation today. It becomes meaningful today in light of Paul’s gospel (1 Corinthians 15.1-4).
In His conversation with the Pharisee Nicodemus Jesus told him that “whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life.” What did Jesus expect Nicodemus to believe? He expected him to believe He was the Christ, the Son of God. On the basis of this faith one obtained salvation.
This was the crux of the objection the chief priests made against Jesus. This was why they arrested Him. They refused to believe He was the Messiah, the Son of God. Thus, John recorded:
6 So when the chief priests and the officers saw Him, they cried out saying, “Crucify, crucify!” Pilate *said to them, “Take Him yourselves and crucify Him, for I find no guilt in Him.” 7 The Jews answered him, “We have a law, and by that law He ought to die because He made Himself out to be the Son of God” (John 19.6-7).
The Cross
What is missing in all of the salvation messages above? The cross. The blood of Christ. The resurrection of Christ. None of these exist. How do we learn about the cross, Jesus’ shed blood, and the resurrection? We learn them from Paul.
Paul was the first to declare the significance and meaning of Christ’s death and resurrection. The first place we read about the significance of Jesus’ death for salvation is in Romans 3. Paul wrote:
21 But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22 even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe; for there is no distinction; 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24 being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; 25 whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith. This was to demonstrate His righteousness, because in the forbearance of God He passed over the sins previously committed; 26 for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, so that He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus (Romans 3.21-26).
No one wrote about the significance of the death of Christ for salvation until Paul. Christ’s death and resurrection was Paul’s gospel. Paul declared:
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, emphasis mine).
No one preached this gospel until Paul. Paul declared it to be “my gospel” (Romans 2.16; 16.25). The gospel before Paul was the “gospel of the kingdom,” believing that Jesus was the promised Messiah, the Son of God. As we have seen above, this was the gospel Paul preached immediately following his own conversion. However, later, probably during the three years Paul recounted that he was in Arabia (Galatians 1.17-18), the glorified Lord revealed the significance of His death and resurrection as a redemptive and propitiatory work for the sins of mankind.
Someone may object that Peter preached Christ’s death and resurrection in Acts 2. Luke recorded Peter’s sermon:
22 “Men of Israel, listen to these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man attested to you by God with miracles and wonders and signs which God performed through Him in your midst, just as you yourselves know— 23 this Man, delivered over by the predetermined plan and foreknowledge of God, you nailed to a cross by the hands of godless men and put Him to death. 24 But God raised Him up again, putting an end to the agony of death, since it was impossible for Him to be held in its power.
I urge the reader to read carefully Peter’s message. Let him ask the question, “What message was Peter conveying?” Was Peter’s message good news? Hardly. Peter accused his audience (all Jews) of murdering their Messiah and declared God had raised Him from the dead. Did Peter tell them Christ had died for their sins and rose from the dead? No. Peter declared:
Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ—this Jesus whom you crucified” (Acts 2.36).
What was their reaction? Did they say, “Praise God! Jesus died for my sins and rose from the dead so I might have eternal life.” No. They were convicted. The death of Christ for them was a sin they had committed. Peter presented Christ’s death, not as a victory, but as a matter of national repentance. Thus, Peter told them to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ (Acts 2.38). Again, this was the gospel of the kingdom, not the gospel of the grace of God (Acts 20.24) the gospel of Paul (Romans 2.15, 16.25, 1 Corinthians 15.1-4). What’s different? Everything!
After God saved Saul of Tarsus, all this changed. God began a new salvific paradigm with Paul. For Paul, the cross was glorious. He preached “Christ crucified.” Read and consider what Paul wrote the Corinthians in light of the gospel message during Jesus’ earthly ministry and the ministry of the Twelve following Jesus’ resurrection:
18 For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written, “I WILL DESTROY THE WISDOM OF THE WISE, AND THE CLEVERNESS OF THE CLEVER I WILL SET ASIDE.” 20 Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not come to know God, God was well-pleased through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. 22 For indeed Jews ask for signs and Greeks search for wisdom; 23 but we preach Christ crucified, to Jews a stumbling block and to Gentiles foolishness, 24 but to those who are the called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
Conclusion
What we find in John, the rest of the gospels, and early Acts is that believing in Jesus meant believing that Jesus was the Christ, Israel’s Messiah, the Son of God. This was a Jewish message. No mention is made of the cross, his shed blood, or glorious resurrection in the gospels or early Acts. Jews were saved during Jesus’ ministry and the ministry of the Twelve by believing in Christ as the Messiah and Son of God. This is what believing in Jesus meant. No one is saved today by believing that Christ is Israel’s Messiah or that He is God.2 A passage such as John 3.16 has nothing to do with the gospel today. The gospel for today is 1 Corinthians 15.1-4. Strictly speaking, John 3.16 is interpretively invalid for us today. However, it can be applicationally valid when conveyed under the context of Paul’s gospel of grace (Acts 20.24).
1 While verse 37 is not in some early manuscripts it is consistent with the other passages.
2 The gospel of the kingdom, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God will be reprised before the Lord returns (see Matthew 24.14).
©2011 Don Samdahl. Anyone is free to reproduce this material and distribute it, but it may not be sold.
Updated, March 1, 2016.
In John 14 we read the following:
“Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father’s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. And where I go you know, and the way you know.” (John 14:1-4 NKJV)
This passage is often used as a proof text for the rapture of the church and is often taught in the context of the Jewish wedding symbolising this event bit us applied to the Church.
Traditionally, the groom would go away for an undisclosed period of time where he would prepare a place his bride. At some point the father of the groom would say it is ready now go get your bride and bring her home to were you are.
What are your thoughts on this given the rapture was a secret revealed to Paul and the Gospel of John is written to Jewish believers?
God Bless
Ron G
Ron,
While this passage has been used for the Rapture, it is an erroneous conclusion. We know it is wrong because the Bible tells us so. Paul wrote that the Rapture was a “secret” (1 Corinthians 15.51). No one knew of it until the ascended Lord revealed it to Paul who revealed it to us (cf. Colossians 1.25). The Rapture is wholly associated with the Church, the body of Christ, which is a Pauline revelation.
Mystery is not “a secret”. Mystery-something strange or unknown which has not yet been explained or understood: Secret-Not known or seen or not meant to be known or seen by others. Jesus revealed the mystery He was not keeping it a secret!
Randall,
I encourage you to read Paul, especially his use of the word μυστήριον. It is clear from such uses that these were secrets, unknown to anyone before Paul. Paul also used the word ἀποκάλυψις, revelation. Paul received numerous revelations of truth God had kept hidden. These secrets and revelations were the doctrines that concern the Church, the body of Christ, which was a secret until the risen Lord revealed it to Paul. All Church doctrine comes from Paul and no one else.
Good work Bro. Doctrine.
(@ Ron G) Here is what John 14 means for the Jews to whom the book was written to, but then I provided an application for us in the body of Christ in this dispensation. Enjoy! -Bro. Hoss
John 14: Doctrinal interpretation and our application.
http://av1611studyblog.blogspot.com/2014/03/john-14-doctrinal-interpretation-and.html
Hi Don,
In John 3:3 Jesus is talking to Nicodemous and tells him he must be born again to see the Kingdom of God.
Is this the same understanding that relates to Paul’s ministry in Ephesians where we have been made alive 2:5 and 2 Cor 5:17 ‘therefore anyone who is in Christ is a new creature.
I have read that Jesus means that Nicodemous should convert to Judaism.
Could you bring some clarity.
Thank you for your time.
Sue,
Two kinds of people exist: those who know God (the saved) and those who don’t (the unsaved). While God is changeless, He has changed how people know Him over time. All salvation is of God. If He told us to do 6 jumping jacks and clap our hands 3 times for salvation that would be the way of salvation. Our response would be to obey. Jesus did not tell Nicodemus to believe He would die for him and be raised from the dead (Paul’s gospel). The saving message of the gospel of the kingdom (Jesus’ gospel) was to believe who He was–the Son of God, the Messiah. So Jesus was telling Nicodemus that to know God was a God-thing. If he would believe He was the Son of God, the Messiah, he would be “born from above.” For us today, we are to believe Paul’s gospel–that He died for us and rose again.
Bro.Don, i have found problems with dispensations, though they appear to be less troublesome than the Christological position. Is it safe to say that from Gen. To Rev. The bible is progressive revelation with covenant theology a corner stone please help. Thank you so much for articles. Courtney king
Courtney,
I do not understand your comment and question. Could you be more specific? Thank you.
Hi Don,
So it occurs to me this morning that it is actually very deceiving to send new believers or even unbelievers to the gospel of John as is widely practiced by modern-day Christendom. I do believe that all the gospels according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are crucial for understanding and proof that Jesus was the Word made flesh, the Son of God, or as Paul would say, “profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” as is all Scripture. John 3:16 is true for all mankind, otherwise we could not be saved, but at this point I have concluded that the way this verse has been “dispensed” has caused great and even dangerous deception, would you agree? As you say, for Gentiles it absolutely must be linked to the gospel according to Paul.
Also, have you ever thought about the names/titles of each “book” in the new testament, especially and specifically the four “gospels”? I read the opening verses of these four, and I just don’t see the “intent” of the writer in these titles. I can’t help but wonder if titling them, “The Gospel According To…..” hasn’t added to the confusion.
Becky,
Once one understands Paul’s unique apostleship these matters fall into their proper place. It is frustrating and sad to see the unnecessary confusion in Christendom. God expects us to be faithful stewards of truth. The task of opening hearts is God’s.
Do you think it is proper, in light of Pauls’ Gospel, to use the term “born again” when presenting the Gospel of grace to a Gentile?
Paul,
I like to keep things simple. Believe Christ died for your sins and rose from the dead is the simplest and clearest salvation message (1 Corinthians 15.1-4).
Hello Doctrine,
What did Jesus mean when he said “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. When Jesus told the Jews to be born again what did he mean. I am from South Africa and have many unaswered questions and have been trying to contact Les Feldick but he is not well at the moment. Thank you.
Vanessa,
Under the gospel of the kingdom salvation required water baptism (Mark 1.4, 16.16; Acts 2.38).
Are you then saying that there were 2 Gospels. Pauls Gospel and the Kingdom Gospel. Which I think you are saying….Does this mean that one could choose between the 2 Gospels? Does this mean that although the 2 Gospels conflicted both lead to Salvation.?
Why did Peter and the Apostles offer the right hand of fellowship to Paul if they knew his Gospel was different to theirs.
Please bear with me as I shall be back with more questions as I am struggling to understand this.
Thank you for your time.
Vanessa,
Yes. For a short period of time two gospels existed–the gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of the grace of God. Read my articles, Jesus vs. Paul, The Gospel of the Kingdom, and The Great Hinge. I think they will answer most of your questions and all this will come together. Grace and peace.
Pingback: Your messiah | You're Not the Only One
Doctrine: in that John wrote these inspired words many years subsequent to Paul’s ministry, why did John not convey the good news of the death and resurrection of Christ?
G
Greg,
Why do you think John wrote after Paul? Paul wrote that he completed the canon (Colossians 1.25)?
My understanding is that many of Paul’s letters were written prior to AD 60. John’s epistles were written subsequent to that date. Notwithstanding the timeline, John would have heard Paul’s gospel.
Greg,
John could have written his gospel quite early, possibly before Paul’s letters. No one knows when John wrote his gospel. John did learn of Paul’s gospel, if not before, by the Council of Jerusalem in 51 A.D. John was an apostle of Israel and the prophetic program. His gospel is wholly Jewish and is Old Testament just like the synoptics. He gave a record of salvation during that program. The faith part of that program was to believe who Jesus was (cf. John 11.23-27), to believe in his “name” as is recorded in early Acts. According to the Greek of Colossians 1.25 the canon of Scripture was completed by Paul, i.e., around 67 A.D. All arguments for John (or anyone else) writing after 67 A.D. are specious.
2 The gospel of the kingdom, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God will be reprised before the Lord returns (see Matthew 24.14).
Doc.
i have been reading your articles for a while and i am realy blessed, my question is this:
how do we know that it is not yet the time to preach this Gospel of Kingdom since we have many evidences telling us that the Lord returns is imminent.
please i’m a little confused, i hope you will response soon.
thanks
Janvion2Jesus,
Thank you. The gospel of the grace of God (Acts 20.24; 1 Corinthians 15.1-4; Galatians 1.6-9) is the gospel until God completes the Church, the body of Christ. The gospel of the kingdom formally ended at Acts 15.11. It will be reinstated at the Rapture (the end of the Church). My articles, The Great Hinge and The Gospel of the Kingdom might be helpful.
thanks for your reply
In John 10:16. Who are the other sheep?
Theresa,
Sheep always refers to Israel. Gentiles or the Church are not designated as sheep. So, the “other sheep” were Jews who would believe in Him in the future, and projecting far in the future, the Jewish remnant who would repent in the Tribulation and believe in Him. Everything in the Gospels is Old Testament and Jesus ministered only to Jews (with a couple exceptions).
Have you ever noticed that John is speaking in the present tense in chapter 5 vs. 2? That would mean the structures were still standing…..before 70 AD? Interesting. I did some research and there is something called the ‘historical present’…something tells me that the historical present here is a stretch but what do I know? Why do some teachers believe only they (experts in Hebrew and Greek) can really know what is meant. Are we to believe the Holy Spirit intended people unversed in the origianal languages of the bible to rely on linguists?…. I believe a simple plow boy would interpret this to mean the structures were still standing. Are there instances of historical present in the New Testament?
Joe,
The historical present is fairly common. See the article for a discussion of historical presents in John. John 5.2 is cited as a debatable historical present (p. 709). Translations render ἔστιν “is” rather than “was.” One can argue John was conveying the pool existed when Jesus went to it in Jerusalem. But one can also argue John was stating it existed at the time he wrote. This would mean the verse provides grammatical support that John wrote his gospel prior to 70 A.D. (which he did). I would argue that a strong case exists for the latter view since John rendered the verb as past (imperfect) elsewhere in the pericope (John 5.1, 5). A clear historical present is λέγει in John 5.6. Dan Wallace wrote an article about John 5.2 in 1990. In it, he stated, “In Hawkins’ Horae Synopticae, the author lays out every historical present in the synoptic gospels and Acts-216 in all. From these raw data certain trends become evident: (1) every historical present in the list is in third person; (2) every historical present is in the indicative mood; and (3) εἰμί is not on the list. Of the thirty or so NT grammatical works I have had occasion to glance at with reference to the historical present, not one identified any example of εἰμί as bearing such a nuance. Furthermore, in my examination of John, I have found no such examples. It is no wonder then that the historical present advocates are a bit clandestine in their descriptions of ἔστιν this verb will simply not fit the mold of the historical present.
Thank you Doctrine…..reading your reply was like me listening to Luciano Pavoratti singing in Italian. It sounded beautiful but I didn’t understand it. Not really, I did grasp the drift. I’ll read it over and over until I fully get it. I really appreciate your full and complete answer. thank you
Joe,
Thank you. I have to say, no one’s every compared my writing to Pavoratti’s singing! And I thank you for asking the question for it made me look further into this issue. This is something that I really appreciate from readers. Questions such as your sharpen us.
If you appreciate deep questions this may be something to sink your teeth into. We all know that Gen 1:1 refers to a long time ago. There seems to be references to time/place before creation (if that’s possible to comprehend). Acts 2 :23, II Tim 1:9. God in Three Persons met and decided the way things would get done. I have read and reread the thoughts on the following….I know they apply to Reformed theology. Does any of this refer to us? If so, which one should we believe applies to us?
Sublapsarianism, infralapsarianism or supralapsarianism…maybe there is another ‘arianism’ out there I’ve never heard of….
Joe,
For more fun, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_order_of_God%27s_decrees. Calvinism has many conflicts with and misunderstandings of Biblical Christianity. Some of these issues I deal with in my articles, Predestination and For Whom Did Christ Die?
Wow! I hope there is no quiz re: Wiki. I’ll rely on your two essays. Thank you.
Wonderful work my brother, the distinction you made clear between the gospel of the kingdom and the gospel of grace is like a revolution in my understanding of sciptures. God bless you and strengthen you.
But don’t you think that the sacrificial death of Christ for the world is implied in John 3:16 in the light of the gospel of grace? 1cor.15 :3,4. Thanks.
Nathaniel,
Thank you for your kind words. I’m glad what I’ve written has been helpful. Yes, clearly embedded in John 3.16 is God’s final revelation of the significance of Christ’s work on the cross. But apart from Paul and especially 1 Corinthians 15.1-4, this would not be understood.
God bless your ministry.I just want to ask if you could explain to me this Luke 16:16. Is John the Baptist the last prophet? I would be very happy to receive a reply from you Sir. Thank you and God Bless….
Ele,
No. Jesus was identified as a prophet as were Judas and Silas (Acts 15.32). Jesus said the law and the prophets were until John. I think Jesus meant the program of prophecy of His coming were until John. Once Jesus arrived, the kingdom program began to be offered. That program will continue after the Church is removed and will culminate with Christ’s second advent.
God bless your ministry Sir: pls. explain. The marriage supper of the Lamb is for the Jews? Not for the gentiles? Thanks a lot Doctrines.
Ele,
The article by Paul Sadler may be helpful: https://www.bereanbiblesociety.org/the-bride-of-christ/.
Hi Don, i keep thinking you mentioned in one of your studies, the order the books of the “New Testament” should more practically be in. It was either you or Les. Thanks
Becky,
Think this came from Les.
I’m assuming the Gospel of John was written many years after the Crucifixion. I’m also assuming that by the time of the writing of his book John had heard of the Gospel of Grace and the means of salvation as expressed by Paul. Why does John write his gospel and not address the Gospel of Grace (the means for salvation in the Church Age). Shouldn’t his readers have been told? I have to imagine some of John’s readers might not have know of Paul’s (“My Gospel”) Gospel even at this later date. What would John have considered more important…the events and activites that transpired during the incarnation and those few days that followed or their eternal state?
Joe,
I suspect John was written much earlier than the vast majority think. I think Revelation was written early, i.e., 50-55, even though John lived long after this. J.A.T. Robinson, a theological liberal, demonstrated in Redating the New Testament, the paucity and fragility of evidence about late dating by scholars. Robinson dated everything before 70 A.D. Most scholars think John was written late because they do not believe John could have developed early the theology found in his gospel.
I think Jesus mentioned about his death on the cross to Nicodemous and that is the way to be born again.
”
Just as Moses lifted up the [bronze] serpent in the desert [on a pole], so must the Son of Man be lifted up [on the cross], so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life [after physical death, and will actually live forever].
JOHN 3:14-15 AMP”
http://bible.com/1588/jhn.3.14-15.AMP
What do you think?
Mina,
Believing in Christ under the gospel of the kingdom meant believing in His identity, that He was the Messiah, the Son of God. God did not reveal the significance of Christ’s death and resurrection, i.e., that His death paid for our sins, until He revealed this to Paul.
I agree, but have wondered what was meant by Jesus being lifted up (John 3)
John,
Jesus knew He was going to be crucified but no one else did. He knew He would die for the sins of the world but no one else did. So His statement to Nicodemus was that even as the Jews of Moses’ day looked upon the bronze snake lifted up and were healed, Jews who looked at Jesus and recognized Him as the Messiah would be healed from their sins.
Thanks
“14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: 15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.”
Q1. Did Jesus being lifted up mean Him being on the cross? Like you said, Jesus knew but they didn’t.
Q2. What was ‘eternal life’ to a Jewish recipient? Their hope was ‘earthly’ but after the Millennium do believing Jew and Gentile live in heaven??
John,
1. Yes.
2. Eternal life for Jews was resurrection on the earth, in the promised land. In eternity, it will be the New Jerusalem.
Hi Don,
As I understand things 1, 2 & 3 John were written to the Christians who accepted the Kingdom Gospel.
What references might we get for such a notion in first John?
Consider the following…
The Body of Christ is considered complete in Christ. A son is someone who is mature enough to inherit from the father. Romans 8:14, 15 “For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God. For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father.”
Colossians 2:10 “And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:”
Individuals in the Body of Christ are complete in Christ. They are “Sons’ who have the standing before God to inherit. Not so with children who need tutors.
Gal 4:1 – 3 “Now I say, That the heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant, though he be lord of all;
2) But is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father.
3) Even so we, when we were children, were in bondage under the elements of the world:”
Consider then what John says to the Kingdom Believers in1 John.
1 John 2:1 “My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:”
1 John 2:12 “I write unto you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his name’s sake.”
I am trying to make a distinction between Paul’s writings and Johns.
God Bless,
Vernon.
Vernon,
We find no Church language in John. He does not mention the Church, the body of Christ, our identification with Christ, not being under Law but under grace, the Rapture, nothing about the cross, salvation by faith alone, etc.
Thanks Don. We tend to miss these facts with casual reading.
Hello Don, I am busy looking at the issue of the “Little Flock” and the “Other Sheep.” “Who are the ‘other sheep’ mentioned in John 10:16?” and who are the “Little Flock” in Luke 12 :32 Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom.
Then was the little flock part of Peters followers as they inherit the Kingdom. Earth dwellers. Are the other sheep the Gentiles. Thank you.
Vanessa,
The “little flock” refers to Jews who had believed the gospel of the kingdom. The “other sheep” refers to Jews who will believe the gospel of the kingdom in the Tribulation, the remnant which is believing Israel (cf. Matthew 23.37-39). Sheep are always Israel. Do a study and see if Gentiles are ever called sheep.
Ok, so there was only 1 group that came to the knowledge of who Jesus was in the flesh and the other group is in the future. I admit we were confused as to why we had 2 groups in the OT called ‘Little flock’ and ‘Other Sheep’. If you dont rightly divide it gets so confusing. Got it. Then can one say the Lord is not our Shepherd.? Tell that to other Christians and they would want to burn you at the stake.
Vanessa,
I’d probably be burned long before I got to Psalm 23. Sad that Christians cannot be satisfied with the great blessings God has given the Church. They also want all the blessings God gave the Jews.
And never mind the curses.!!! We are so very grateful for the truth and find the Word fun to study as rightly dividing makes it so much easier. Take care.
Bro. Don, great piece of work and thank you much for helping us you are truely our brother
Peace & grace
What was Jesus meant by saying: “Whose soever sins you remit, they are remitted to them; and whose soever sins you retain, they are retained” on John 20:23 ? I am disturbed by this verse, because it is clearly read that it seems that the priests have the power to forgive sins
Mikolaj,
Jesus gave the 12 authority to forgive sins based upon a Jew’s believing Jesus was the Christ. The 12 were apostles to Israel. This passage has nothing to do with the Church. The Church has no priests. See my article, Priests in the Church?
So was this authority to forgive sins only based on the preaching of the Gospel? Did the apostles forgive sins also privately and personally like priests?
Mikolaj,
The 12 were Christ’s representatives of the gospel of the kingdom (Matthew 28.16-20). That was their authority to forgive sin based upon the gospel. And, as I wrote earlier, no priests exist in the Church.
Don.what do you mean, What is missing from the gospels, THE CROSS. But don’t they speak of the cross and resurrection. At the end of each gospel.
John,
Yes, but in what sense? Again, read what Peter said in Acts 2-3.
1. Why does John the Baptist call Jesus, the lamb of God in John?
2. John 14 speaks of going to prepare a place. And other references speak of a heaven. Seems like a spiritual relationship not earthly kingdom talk.
Your teaching is great and I think I’m understanding it but obviously, well intended teachers aren’t seeing it the same way. If the Bible is given to all people to read and we should have child like faith, why are there so many varying views. I don’t think it is fair to say that your understanding should simply be ones default position. Although I am hoping to understand more clearly so I can be free.
John,
1. John says Jesus is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. I think John said these words but did not understand them. This was not unusual for prophets. They often said things they did not understand. John understood Jesus was the Messiah and that He would baptize with the Holy Spirit but he did not understand how Jesus would deal with the problem of sin and death. We know the Twelve did not (Luke 18.31-34).
2. Heaven is the place of safe-keeping for rewards (Matthew 6.19-20). For the Jews, they will be enjoyed on earth.
The reason there is such division is that 99.9% of Christendom does not understand Paul’s unique apostleship. They merely see Paul an extension of the Twelve rather than God’s commissioned apostle to found the Church and reveal all its doctrines. If you don’t understand this, everything in the Gospel and Paul’s letters gets mixed. Israel is mixed with the Church, Law is mixed with grace, faith is mixed with works, etc. If you read Paul’s letters he was in a constant fight to correct error and apostasy. This has not changed in 1,900+ years.
Don, I am learning so much on here. It’s like having Bible study. My question is: Are these “mansions” or “rooms” that Jesus speaks of in John 14, on earth only? Will believers not have a “room” in the Father’s house?
Craig,
Paul doesn’t tell us what our habitation will be like. He only tells us we are heirs of God, joint heirs with Christ, and we will rule angels. Since heaven is a physical place, it is not too speculative that we will have habitations.
1 John is it written by John who wrote John’s gospel? Is 1 John written only to Jews too? Or to Christian’s by a different John. IS ANY OF THE BIBLE FOR CHRISTIANS
John,
Peter, James, John, Jude wrote to believing Jews. Paul wrote to the Church, the body of Christ. All Scripture is for us but not all Scripture is to us. Paul’s letters are written to us.
John,
It’s interesting to me that the first place believers were called Christians was Antioch. Antioch was outside the boundaries of Israel. Gentile territory. Paul had his Damascus road vision outside Israel. Gentile territory. In Galatians 1 Paul says anyone believing a gospel other than his is cursed. Paul is the apostle to the gentiles. Paul’s missionary journeys were outside Israel. It would appear to me that Christianity began outside Israel. You ask, “Is any of the bible for Christians?”. I’d say the portions pertaining to the doctrines presented by Paul are the Christian doctrines……this will sound strange but I believe it can be argued that Jesus Christ wasn’t a Christian (strictly speaking). Christ was a follower of the Mosaic Law and gospel of the Kingdom believer/teacher (Romans 15:8)—. If believers today believed what Jesus Christ and the 12 taught in the 4 gospels would they be part of the Body of Christ—Christians— or would they be gospel of the Kingdom believers—-‘another gospel’ as per Galatians 1?
Thanks Joe
What is your answer to your last question? I would think one could become a Chtistian by reading the gospels – many have. I speaks of Him dying for or sins, does it not.
Can you shed light on 1 John. So much language about eternal life. What was eternal life to John’s audience
John, I don’t think ‘dying for sins’ is the complete gospel of grace. Believing in the resurrection is. (IMHO). Paul says (Romans 5:10) ‘we are saved by his life’. Who, besides Paul, presents the gospel as it is presented in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4? Christ’s sacrifice settled everyone’s sin problem…even unbelievers . Does Paul say people go to Hell for their sins? I believe sin is no longer the issue…..Jn 3:16 is not the issue. 1 Jn 1:9 is not the issue. Paul uses the phrase ‘my gospel’ more than once in his epistles. A good place to see this is Romans 16:25. Paul says his gospel is ‘according to the revelation of the mystery’. Paul’s gospel was kept secrete and unknown to anyone ‘since the world began’…..I have to assume it was a secrete unknown to/by the 12 or anyone else including John until it was reveled by Christ to Paul…then to us. ….Gal. 1:11-12. Paul says, ‘be ye followers of me’. I Cor 4:16.
humbly presented
Ok so John and 1 John are to believing Jews. Did the Jewish believers in 1 John not have the indwelling Lord Jesus living in them? When I read 1 John it just seems so obvious it is written to Christian’s. No?
John,
They had the indwelling Holy Spirit. But John’s language is much different from Paul’s. Read 1 John 1.9. Does that sound like Paul? Does 1 John 2.3, 3.23-24?
John,
Who is a Christian? A Christian is a member of the Body of Christ—The Church. The Body of Christ, aka The Church, is one of the mysteries taught first by Paul. Paul came after John. John did not teach the gospel of grace….he did not know it…..John 20:8-9…..”…he saw and believed. (9) For as yet they knew not the scripture that he must rise again from the dead.”
Wow, feel like giving up. All so complicated. So the whole book of 1 john isn’t doctrine for Christian’s? 1 john 5.10-13. And Jewish believers call it eternal life, yes?
John,
Most of the answers to your questions are answered in my book, God’s Programs. You may want to get it as I think it would be helpful for your understanding.
Hi Don.
Your book arrives soon. Thanks for your patience. I have one more question. I’d just love some clarification on all the references in John to eternal life and Jesus telling his disciples he prepares a place in heaven for them. To an average reader it sounds like telling people how to find forgiveness of sins through faith in John the Baptist’s proclamation of Jesus being the Lamb of God. Could you explain. What was eternal life in context. Was it spiritual Heaven or simply knowing Jesus (John 17.3)? It all just doesn’t seem like talk about trusting Jesus to be their King of the earthly kingdom. Maybe an obvious question but if Jesu was their messiah why did He tell them He had to die and rise again. Don, would you spare meaf few more minutes to bring me some solid answers. Much thanks.
John,
Jewish hope was earthly. Godly Jews expected to live forever on earth in resurrection bodies where Israel would be preeminent among the nations ruled by the Messiah. They had no heavenly hope. Matthew’s phrase, “kingdom of heaven” referred to the earthly kingdom. It is a genitive of source, not a genitive of location. In other words, the source of the kingdom was heavenly. This is what Jesus meant when He told Pilate, “My kingdom is not of this world.” He didn’t mean it was not on earth. He meant it would not to come into existence by earthly political power.
John, just had a thought to give an answer to your question about why Jesus had to die and rise again. Jesus had to die and rise again to rejoin the nation of Israel. God divorced Israel. Under jewish law after divorce the only way to marry again is if the husband dies. The only way for Israel to be married back to God is if God died. Gentiles then were to come through Israel but Israel still rejected. God sent Paul.
Jasen,
Yes. Paul made it clear that death abrogates the Law (Romans 7.1-2).
Actually it’s less complicated. Once we understand the ‘differences’ between Paul’s epistles and the other New Testament writers are not contradictions (but a different program) it all fits. Besides Don’s book I’ve found this book to be very helpful. “Things That Differ”, C.R. Stram. Stam separates OT and NT as prophecy vs. mystery. Some would say law vs grace. …but there is a difference whatever the label.
Eternal life….Question: Do all believers from Adam and Eve go to heaven? How many verses can you site from the OT that suggests heaven was a concern for OT believers? (includes the gospels and beginning of Acts). John says, (Lord’s Prayer), “thy Kingdom come on earth”. Paul’s concerns for the Church are heavenly.
1 john 3.10. What’s it doing in 1 John? These Jewish believers believed Paul’s Gospel too. Death, resurrection, forgiveness, through His blood. Acts and John were written years apart so the acts ‘transition’ time where both messages were preached was over.
John,
John’s letters were most likely written in the 50s. John wrote to Jews who had believed the gospel of the kingdom, not Paul’s gospel.
That makes no sense, since John may not be teaching word for word like Paul, he does know Jesus as Savior because he is telling the listeners how Jedus blood was shed for propitiation of sins. Also 3 John 1.9-10 speaks of the Church. All resources I’ve checked have John written 85 – 95 AD time to hear and learn Psuls Godprl.Gospel
John,
The sources are wrong. For a scholarly study of dating NT books, see J.A.T. Robinson’s Redating the New Testament. Paul wrote that he completed the Scriptures (Colossians 1.25). Paul died about 67-68 A.D. Trust Paul, not the “scholars.” Peter, John, etc. certainly came to understand Jesus shed His blood as a propitiation for our sins but they did not know this until after Paul was saved. The significance of Jesus’ death and resurrection was a Pauline revelation. In other words, the Twelve learned it from Paul.
I’m good with that, my who area of confusion was in my thinking that Peter and John’s books were to Jewish believers AND that they only believed in the ‘identity” of Christ as Mesdiah awaiting the earthly Kingdom Rule. I couldnt reconcile that message when I felt John and Peter would have learned from Paul of the ‘work’ of Christ also (by the language and words found in Peter and John and 1 John about the blood propitiation, Lamb of God, bought with a price, etc. So it makes sense that learning from Paul, the gospel of grace, they would teach it to their listeners, Jewish or gentile (although like you said they preached only to Jews primarily) .
When we read of Paul persecuting the ‘Church’ are we to assume the word Church translated assembly, etc referred not to the Church, the Body of Chridt rather to the group of ‘followers of the Way ‘ who trusted Jesus was the Messiah, in which Paul, pre conversion, did not?
John,
Yes.
So because Peter and John certainly came to know jesus shed his blood for the propitiation of sins and John was written after Paul’s conversion, 1 John, at least must of been written to Jewish believers who came to realize the ‘work’ of Christ, correct. Thus, the language through 1 John
John,
Yes. You have to realize all this took time. Paul’s ministry lasted about 30 years and from Pentecost to the destruction of Jerusalem was about 40 years. Paul began receiving his revelations probably about 37-40 A.D.
Just to clarify, 1 John would be to Jews about the Gospel of Grace John would have known from Paul. The letter is just so full of the gospel as we know it. Esp. The propitiation for sin.
John,
John wrote about the blood of Christ, propitiation, keeping the commandments, believing Jesus was the Christ (1 John 5.1). He never mentions the resurrection. That is Paul’s gospel—Christ died for our sins and rose from the dead. Much different.
On another occasion, I asked you about the Gospel of John and you responded that there was no mention of the cross and blood. So, I deduced from that your conclusion that Joh was written to Jewish believers in the Christ and the Kingdom of God and they would continue with the levitical sacrifices. However, when I mentioned that 1 john mentioned the blood and propitiation, making me think 1 John was for jewish believers BUT with the recognition they would NOT continue with their animal sacrifices, you wrote back acknowledging the words of blood, propitiation, but said, their was no mention of the resurrection. In Acts 2 and 3 the Jews knew about the resurrection (Jesus who the murdered, rising so He could still be the Messiah). It’s just not adding up. If your understanding of the doctrine you teach (and I want to believe it, I really do) is right, their ought to be an explanation why both John and 1 John and Peter ALL speak about the blood being a propitiation for sin (purchased with the precious blood of Christ, the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world). IF these Jewish believers were saved on the basis of believing the ‘identity’ of Christ as Messiah, they would not be required to accept Him also for His ‘work’ of atoning for sins would they, since they were Jewish and had their laws to tell them to continue with animal sacrifices. I know John speaks of keeping the commandments, but he also speaks of the blood AND the resurrection all through his gospel letter. So everything is there whether he heard it from Paul or not. Thats why I think John was addressing Jews who were hearing the message they needed to have eternal salvation, their sins forgiven. They would then, receive the Spirit and go to heaven when they die. If you could kindly bring light on this or acknowledge your uncertainty, it could help decrease my future questions. Thank you.
John,
I’m sorry but I cannot keep answering dozens of questions from you. I have already stated more than once that the significance of the resurrection for Peter in Acts 2-3 was that Christ was alive and could return and be King. It had nothing to do with forgiveness of sins. If you will simply read my book 99% of your questions will be answered. My articles answer most of them also. You just have to do a bit of reading.
Thank you for all your communication with me. I will devour the book when it arrives.
Don, I think what is happening here is the result of attending these denominational churches. People are insistent that the apostles and Paul all taught the same thing. It’s hard to unlearn years of wrong teachings.
John,
I’ve read through your posts and most of your questions address the Hebrew epistles, John and Peter. … the 12 are apostles of Israel. Jesus hand picked them John.13:18. They have been given Israel’s Kingdom promise …
Luke 12:32 KJV — Fear not, little flock; for it is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom.
And chosen to sit on 12 thrones in the Lord Jesus Kingdom, judging the 12 tribes of Israel.
Matthew 19:28 KJV — And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
Luke 22:30 KJV — That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
Thus he was teaching the 12 …not us!
Paul is THE ONLY appointed Apostle of the Gentiles. Everyone alive today is a Gentiles in the eyes of God because we live in the dispensation of the grace of God… where God has offered amnesty to all men who will believe in the Gospel. Also, he is the apostle of Christ! The Lord in his glory… appointed by God the Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ!
Romans 11:13 KJV — For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:
1 Timothy 2:7 KJV — Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.
2 Timothy 1:11 KJV — Whereunto I am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of the Gentiles.
The doctrine is wholly different between the two… consider the following doctrine Paul gives to us…
Ephesians.2:1-10… Ephesians.3:1-9
Also Rom.5:10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.
11 And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by WHOM WE HAVE NOW RECEIVED THE ATONEMENT.
WE TODAY ARE SAVED BY BELIEVING THE GOSPEL….
Whereas Peter…who is he writing to?…
1 Pet.1:11 ¶Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to the STRANGERS scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,
These are Jews scattered from…Acts 8:1, 11:19.
Also of note is when Peter says their Grace will come…
1 Peter 1:9 Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.
10 ¶Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:
11Searching 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.
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.
13 ¶Wherefore gird up the loins of your mind, be sober, and HOPE TO THE END FOR THE GRACE THAT IS TO BE BROUGHT UNTO YOU at the revelation of Jesus Christ;
THIS IS THE 2nd Coming!
It’s important to know who these writers are speaking to…Also you need to read Rom. 9-11. Israel’s kingdom was set aside for a time …These 3 chapters will tell you what happened and why Paul was raised up with a gospel to SAVE ALL MEN.
Hebrews to Revelation are written to the “Hebrews or Israel.
You might read “why Paul” and the articles that speak of his unusual ministry and God’s sending him in his Grace.
2 Tim.2:15 says we need to rightly divide the word of truth.
May the Lord bless you with understanding, and help you…
Hi Bobbi, Good post and well said. I wouldn’t be surprised if we return someday to small house churches because of too much erroneous teachings in the christian churches. More and more believers are coming “out of them” and separating themselves.
Craig, you should be pleased I’m trying to understand all this. I’m not in disagreement with most of it. It will always be a challenge to mix graciousness with conveying our convictions. Remember there are a lot of very learned men who have studied and taught in the past. We have to believe their hearts were sincere (many of them). And if God is soverign, you’d wonder why there ARE so many views and intrepretations of things. Anyways. Blessings to you.
Hi Craig:)
I would say so too. Already have come across MANY who have learned the truth!
PRAISE THE LORD!! He is good and so very gracious!
God bless you.
Bobbi
Have I stumped you or you havent had time for a reply. Interesting neither you nor Don gave a good reason for my number one question. Honestly, nothing in me is trying to argue against Paul preaching to the Gentiles, I get that. However, my confusion is in why John speaks of the blood being shed for the propitiation of the sins of his audience, the Jews and gnostic confuses IF John’s letters were only written for those Jews to believe in Christ as the Messiah for the Kingdom (Christs message to the 12). I think John must have know the message of Paul. Do you think? Possibly?
Then there is Peter’s letters.
His audience includes Galatia where Paul would have preached and in 1 Peter1.19 Peter says you have been redeemed by the precious blood of Christ.
We know from 2Peter3.15 Paul also wrote to those Peter was writing to. After the Council in Jerusalem, Peter and Paul believed the SAME gospel, so it makes sense Peter could be speaking Paul’s gospel here in 1 and 2 Peter. I would love simple clarification. If things don’t line up, I may have to conclude there is some serious holes in what I’m learning and seems right but …
John,
Peter and John wrote to Jews who had who had believed in the identity of Christ. By the time they wrote their letters Peter and John had come to understand the significance of Christ’s blood and His propitiation regarding sin. It is clear they did not understand this on the day of Pentecost for Peter never mentioned it. I thought I had answered this question when I wrote that all this took time. Everything did not happen at once. This does not change the fact that the gospel Paul proclaimed was one he received directly from the Lord and that the Twelve did not know it. That was why they had to have a Council in 51 A.D. They did not know Paul’s gospel, that one could be saved solely by believing Christ died for one’s sins and rose from the dead. As I wrote earlier, it is also significant that John did not mention Christ’s resurrection in his letters. But Christ’s resurrection is central in Paul’s letters. As I also wrote, John mentioned keeping the Law’s commandments. They were still under the Law of Moses. One only need read James’s statement to Paul about this in Acts 21. This language is wholly different from Paul. He strongly declared those saved by believing his gospel were not under the Mosaic Law. His whole letter to the Galatians is about this. Whenever Jews spoke of the Law, they meant the whole thing, not just the Decalogue. The conclusion is that there were two programs in place: Jews saved by believing in the identity of Christ and Gentiles and Jews saved by believing in the death and resurrection of Christ. Peter and John’s writing about Christ’s blood and propitiation does not change this.
Thank you. Makes some more sense. Even though John didn’t mention resurrection WITH the message of the blood, the listeners would have to know Jesus returned to life after the Jews murdered Him in order for Him to indeed rule as King. If the NOW heard of the blood for their forgiveness WHY would they not then realize His sacrifice was now enough and therefore not return to their animal sacrifices. Paul’s and John’s understanding AT THIS POINT (John now knowing Paul’s gospel) was all the listeners would need for salvation as we know it. They would have to assume the resurrection had occured. Anyway, if you don’t have time, it’s ok. I HAVE been reading lots of your articles but this part has me stuck. I know Paul’s wording isn’t exactly like John and Peters because of their personalities and the issue they were addressing (some gnostism in 1 John) but Peter and John knew Paul’s message so you would have thought they would address the ‘work’ of Christ rather than just His identity. One day, maybe something small and simple will clear it all up . Hard to Express exactly without a face to face talk. I might have to fly over and see you. You’d like me I know you would. Lol
John,
The more you read Paul, the more you will discover how different his letters were from Peter, James, John, and Jude. The reason they “appear” similar is because we have been influenced by preachers who mix and homogenize the Twelve and Paul. This has been going on for over 1,900 years. But you do not find the exclusion of Law and the emphasis upon grace outside Paul. You do not find “secrets.” You do not find the Church, the body of Christ. You do not find the believer’s identification with Christ. You do not find the emphasis upon the Holy Spirit in living the Christian life. It is wholly different. Christ’s work, His shed blood, His propitiation has to be the same since He died for all–Jew and Gentile. But the other things are entirely different. My article, The Great Hinge, points out the great difference in the gospel of the Twelve from the gospel Paul proclaimed. After you finish my book, you can get my new one on Paul–just published. Hopefully, this will become clear but I’m always willing to talk face to face.
Even though Christs blood had to be shed. Bad news to the Jews (good news that He rose so to prove to be and able to be their Messiah – good news to us.
> If His blood wasn’t necessary for the then Jews (before Paul) why did Christ tell them at Last Supper about the New Covenant in His blood. I guess they were celebrating the traditional Passover Meal with Christ present as their Messiah. Did the New Covenant not mean anything to the followers of Christ.
Btw not planning to visit you but curious what city you live in. My former employer and wife attended 3 years at Dallas Seminary. You attended or taught there?
John,
Jesus inagurated the New Covenant anticipating Israel’s repentance. It cannot be fulfilled for national Israel until the nation repents. This is why Peter, James, John, and Jude do not mention it. But Paul does since the blessings of the New Covenant were spiritual (forgiveness of sins and the indwelling Holy Spirit) and we, members of the Church, the body of Christ, have those blessings mediated through Paul, as proxy Israel. This is yet another vast difference between Paul and the Twelve. I live in Lexington, Virginia and received my Th.M. from DTS.
Don, just wondering, were you taught these things at DTS such as Jesus and the 12 and Paul teaching a different Gospel, Israel being the bride and not the church, etc?
Craig,
No. DTS was a traditional dispensational (Acts 2) school when I attended. They did not understand Paul’s unique apostleship and secrets.
Did the New Covenant mean ‘Spiritual’ to them as it does to us had they repented? And if they repented, that New Covenant would be applicable to the Jews (including the 12) and be Spiritual? Then Jesus would rule as King on the earthly Kingdom and. Their sins forgiven through His blood and them living forever in resurrected bodies. Do I understand it correctly?
John,
Yes. And all this will occur in the future.
1. If National Israel had repented would they have been in the New Covenant?
2. If they had repented would the blood of Christ result in their eternal forgiveness and cease the sacrifice of animals on the day of atonement?
John,
1. As I wrote earlier, yes. The only way national Israel experiences the New Covenant is through national repentance.
2. Yes, but animals sacrifices will continue in the kingdom according to Ezekiel.
Don, what’s the name of your book on Paul? I’ve looked but can’t find it. thanks
Joe,
Paul: Apostle of Secrets. Just go to the New Book page or click the book image on the home page.
Don,
The book I’m currently reading, “Things That Differ”, does not divide the bible between old and new testament, or law and grace or other old traditional phrases but by prophecy and mysteries (secrets). I am ordering your book tonight. I think I’ll find parallels between my current reading and your book.
Thanks for all you work.
Joe,
Yes. Stam looks at the “big picture.” The difference between Law and grace is but one of the major differences in Israel and the Church.
1Pet. 1:17 Since you call on a Father who judges each man’s work impartially, live your lives as strangers here in reverent fear. 18 For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers, 19 but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect. 20 He was chosen before the creation of the world, but was revealed in these last times for your sake. 21 Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God.
1. Had Peter heard from Paul the Gospel of Grace?
2. Was Peter’s audience Jewish Christians?
John,
Paul stated he explained his gospel to the Jewish leaders at the Council of Jerusalem (Galatians 2.2). Peter’s audience were Jewish believers 1 Peter 1.1. Peter wrote his letters probably 65-68 A.D.
Don, how would you explain the idea of abiding in John 15.
John,
John 15 was the human (Jewish) application of what Jesus taught in John 5.18-23 with regard to His relationship to His Father.
Its my prayer that as many people as God wishes, should come to the understanding of His word within which there lies His all will. Don, you will never know how much a task you are covering, until when you will meet Jesus face to face its when you will be able to assess how great a work you had done towards God’s human creatures in presenting a clear word of God. You spend sleepless nights and restless days studying and inquiring from God so that He keeps on enlightening you as regards His word. Of course its God who put that capacity in you, but you had a choice to pursue it or not. You have a choice to drop or carry on fulfilling God’s requirements. I should say, be blessed and carry on.
In Jesus name.
Bahati,
Thank you for your kind comment. When one gains an understanding of God’s programs and purposes one wants to understand more of God and for all believers to have this knowledge. Paul prayer that believers should have such knowledge and understanding. He never got over the grace the Lord had given to him in saving him and giving him revleations and secrets. God bless you in your studies and may the Lord continue to encourage and enlighten you to be a light to others.
Don, in John 10:16 Jesus mentions “other sheep.” Who are these other sheep? Soe say they are Israel, but Stam says that Jesus would never refer to Israel as “other” sheep, but THE sheep and thus Jesus is referring to Gentiles. I thought Gentiles were never called: sheep. Can you clear this up?
Craig,
The “other sheep” are the Jews who repent at the end of the Tribulation. They will become part of the fold in which God will gather and rejoin the nation when God establishes His kingdom (Ezekiel 37.19-28).
What do you think of the view that, because John wrote his version of the gospel after Paul died, hence when he was being led by the Spirit to write the book of John, he had the benefit of reading Paul’s letters already?
Thus John 3:16 when he wrote that God so loved the WORLD, he is referring to both Jews and Gentiles.
Kelvin,
John wrote his letters before Paul. Paul wrote that he completed the Scriptures (Colossians 1.25). 2 Timothy was the last book written, probably about 67-68 A.D.
Don, The shepherd/sheep language was toward the Jewish peopleI and He was trying to convince them He was The Messiah, but why is He speaking of ‘laying His life down’ (dying on the Cross) if it wasn’t His work rather than a His identity He was talking about. “I am the good shepherd.
The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep” John 10:11
Linda,
Jesus knew what He was about to do but the Jews had no clue. What He had revealed to them was that He was the Messiah. That is what Jews with faith believed. Not until Paul was the significance of Christ’s death and resurrection for the payment of our sins revealed. See Luke 18.31-34.
“He came unto his own, and his own received him not. 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name” John 1:12-13
Who received Him not and who received Him.
– Jews NOT / Gentiles YES??
– the Jewish Nation NOT / Jewish individuals YES ??
– other ___________. ??
John,
Jewish individual received Him. The Jewish nation rejected Him.
The OLD Schofield Bible Is that a good one to see things Dispensationally?
John,
It’s better than the new. If you read The Controversy, Stam wrote that he tried to get the committee for the New Scofield Bible to address some of the contradictory notes in the original Scofield Bible and make the notes consistent with the Scriptures. They refused and made it worse.
Yes, I read the end of, “The Controversy” where he does that and that’s why I’d only like to get the OLD. When you say, ‘contradictory notes’, you mean they ‘thought’ they were contradictory, in that they didn’t necessarily ‘fit’ their preconceived idea of interpreting the Scriptures.
1. So the OLD Bible would generally ‘align’ with your teaching (for the most part)?? The Companion Bible (apart from all the appendices) versus The OLD Scofield Bible?
2. I think he leans toward the ‘gap theory’ – what’s your position?? Creation? 6 days or years and years?
Thanks
John,
Stam pointed out inconsistencies in the Scofield notes which he wanted the New committee to address. That’s what I meant by “contradictory notes.” I haven’t looked at the Old Scofield in a while but I do not think it makes it clear that the Church began with Paul and that all Church doctrine comes from Paul. I agree with most of the Companion Bible and the appendices and I agree with most of the Old Scofield. I just like things to be clear with no hedging. The “gap theory” has much to commend it. Without it, I have not read a reasonable explanation for Ezekiel 28 and the rebellion of Satan.
Don. Which of Paul’s letters were written BEFORE prison and which ones DURING OR AFTER
John,
Paul wrote 7 letters before his Roman imprisonment and 7 afterwards:
1 and 2 Thesslonians
Hebrews
Galatians
Romans
1 and 2 Corinthians
—-
Ephesians
Philippians
Colossians
Philemon
1 and 2 Timothy
Titus
What’s the main premise of Acts 9 versus acts 28 ultra dispensationalism?
John,
As I understand it, that the Church, the body of Christ, did not exist until the prison epistles and that Paul preached the gospel of the kingdom before this.
So Paul did pewach the kingdom gospel untill he was imprisoned? If so, why do you think it was like this? I thought the process from kingdom gospel to grace gospel was like a subtile. Did Paul maybe get a new revelation of the raisen lord?
Isaac,
Paul proclaimed the gospel of grace as soon as he received it, which was probably shortly after his salvation when he spent the three years in Arabia and Damascus. Everything Paul taught he received by revelation. That is why he called what he taught secrets.
Don, we were listening to Les Feldick tonight and he took us to 1 John 3:1-2. The way he was talking, it sounded like WE would be like Jesus when He comes (I’m assuming he is referring to the Rapture. Wouldn’t Les believe that 1 John is written to Kingdom saints and not the Body of Christ?? He did say, John was written after Paul. Wonder why he thinks that. didn’t Paul finish the Scriptures
John,
Yes, Les believes 1 John was written to kingdom believers. We will receive an immortal, resurrection body at the Rapture fashioned like Christ’s. I think at this state Les accepted the traditional conservative dating of John’s letters. Later, I believe he changed that to believing everything had been written before 70 A.D.
Yes, and 1 john 3.1-2 would be speaking of being like Him at His second coming for these Kingdom saints, where as, for us, it is at the Rapture
I have learned so much from your articles, thank you. I have always wondered why none of the gospels mention Paul or the gentiles having come into the faith. they also mention nothing of pentecost or the progression of the Church. Even if you go with early dates of the writings it would seem that there should have been some mention of these in the gospels. Thank You,God bless
How should we interpret the “mysteries of the Kingdom of the heavens” parables in the light of two gospels?
Annette,
Jesus began to teach in parables due to the rejection of His teaching in a straightforward manner. He told His disciples they would receive their meaning. The preposition “of heaven” is a genitive of source. That is, the source of the kingdom is from heaven. It is not a genitive of location, which would mean it is located in heaven. Matthew’s expression, “kingdom of heaven” referred exclusively to God’s earthly kingdom promised to Israel.
Thank you very much – that makes sense to me.
If you could spare a moment, I wonder if you could give me a few clues then, as to what you interpret the pearl of great price and the buried treasure might indicate.
I have always thought the buried treasure is Israel, buried for now but restored in the future and that would be consistent with your view of the kingdom.
But what is the pearl of great price? Is it the church?
Many grateful thanks again
Annette
Annette,
The pearl is Christ Himself. Remember what Jesus told the rich young ruler—sell your possessions and follow Me for eternal life. Same for the buried treasure. All the parables Jesus told were about the King and the kingdom.
Thank you again.
I meet with a group who speak strongly against 2 Gospels but you have a powerful persuasive website and the information you present is proving very helpful in my pursuit of the truth.
I had almost finished a paper crafted book which I was making on the Kingdom parables for my family which I now think will need a major revision (groan).
The commitment to pursuing the absolute clearest level of truth is truly tiring and time consuming – but well worth it.
My grateful thanks again for all your effort to respond to enquiries no matter how simplistic they may seem.
warm Christian regards
Annette
Annette,
Thank you. Opposition to the idea that two gospels were in place for a period is almost universal. Most people think Paul preached the same message as Peter and that they proclaimed the same gospel. I have tried to show from the Scriptures that this is false. In fact, if you think this, you have to wrestle with many contradictions. The core problem is that most cannot see that the risen Christ’s choice of Paul began a whole new program—the Church, the body of Christ—and that what Paul wrote was new theology. Paul expressed this over and over by his words, “secrets,” “revelations.” One never hears a sermon on these because preachers do not know what to make of this. They are bound by tradition and the views of their denomination. Keep working! In the end it will be worth it. There is a principle in understanding the Bible: one interpretation, many applications. The whole Bible is for us but not everything is to us. The parables were spoken to the Jews but they are for our learning. Thus, Jesus as the “pearl of great price,” “the hidden treasure,” we can apply. Truly, He is our pearl and treasure for Paul wrote that in Him are the treasures of wisdom and knowledge (Colossians 2.3).
Don, could you direct me to what you’ve written about 1 John 1:9?
Brian,
I do not think I have written about this. But, what we must understand is that confession of sin was part of the gospel of the kingdom which began with John the Baptist (Matthew 3.6; Mark 1.5; James 5.16). It is not part of Paul’s gospel of grace or doctrine.
Awesome as always. thank you for this. I have a question about John 19:31. Well over 90% of Christians have been led to believe that Jesus was crucified on Good Friday and resurrected on Easter Sunday. That is just not supported by scripture. Jesus was crucified on the Jewish feast day of Passover (Nissan 14 of Jewish calendar) and resurrected on the Jewish feast day of First Fruits which falls on the first day of the week following the weekly Sabbath during the feast of Unleavened Bread (Nissan 15-22). The first and last day of the feast of Unleavened Bread is always a Sabbath day no matter what day of the week if falls on. Jews would distinguish these special Sabbath days as High Sabbaths or High Holy Day. See Lev 23. John clearly states that this was a High Day which would distinguish it as different from the normal weekly Sabbath on the 7th day of the week or our Saturdays. Is this clear in the Greek Manuscript? Why does there seem to be so much confusion about this?
William,
Part of a day was considered a day in Jewish accounting but when the Lord said He would be in the earth three days and three nights this means 72 hours. You can’t get this from Friday to Sunday. Also, as you noted the high sabbath was different from the normal sabbath. Most pastors follow tradition rather than the Scriptures.
Don, how should we interpret John 10:34? I’ve heard a variety of explanations. Some sounded ‘reasonable’ and others on the outlandish side.
Brian,
Jesus quoted Psalm 82.6, where God called Israel’s rulers “gods.” Some have argued this is the Divine Council but the Psalm is about humans, not angelic beings. Israel’s “judges” were called “gods,” אֱלֹהִים, (Exodus 21.6, 22.8-9, 28). Jesus’ argument was if God called them “gods” He was far greater. His works proved His identity. Same point as in Matthew 12.38-42.
Don, Michael Heiser would disagree. He’s written a book (his dissertation) dealing with Psalms 82 and uses Psalms 89:5-7 to show the sons of God are heavenly beings. Deuteronomy 32 is used throughout as support.
I appreciate all your work
Joe,
Yes, I’ve read Heiser. While I agree with some of what he has written, on this particular passage, I think he is wrong.
Don, some of the grace mixers who rely on John try to connect John 15:1-6 with 1 Corinthians 3:12-15. They claim it’s about the Bema Seat Judgement. How should we interpret it?
Brian,
To who was Jesus speaking in John 15? Were they members of the Church, the body of Christ? When does the bema set judgment occur? Are OT believers (Jesus’ audience, i.e., the Twelve) resurrected at the Rapture?
Don, is there any evidence that John was exiled at Patmos, since the bible says nothing about being exiled. Or is this merely a tradition oft repeated?
Craig,
No Biblical evidence exists for John’s exile or imprisonment to Patmos. It is unlikely John was exiled or imprisoned there for Patmos was not on the list of “exile” or “prison” islands. The text simple reads, “I came to be in the island of Patmos.” It is similar to Philip’s “found in Azotus” (Acts 8.40). More likely, the Lord transported him there to give him the visions of Revelation. I am convinced this occurred in the 50s, not in the 90s, as most scholars maintain.
Hi Don, Maybe someone has asked this already, pertaining to the statement in your conclusions: “No one is saved today by believing that Christ is Israel’s Messiah or that He is God.” I have wasted decades of preaching if this is true so I must contend with you. What about Romans 10:9, “…if you confess wtih your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God has raised him from the dead, you shall be saved”. What about groups like the Watchtower which do not believe in the Deity of Christ; or any individual for that matter: is there a possibility they can be saved: if they were to simply believe in the propitiation and resurrection?
Frank,
We must distinguish between the gospel of the kingdom that began with John the Baptist and Paul’s gospel, the gospel of the grace of God (Acts 20.24). Paul declared it as “my gospel,” and wrote that this gospel was a secret (Ephesians 6.19). Before Paul, no one understood the significance of Christ’s work on the cross and His resurrection for salvation. This is clear from Acts 2, Pentecost. It is also made clear in Acts 15, when believing Jews declared that Paul’s Gentiles were not saved by believing Christ died and rose but had to be circumcised and keep the Law. The gospel of the kingdom focused on Christ’s identity, who He was. We can see it in action in the salvation of Nathaniel, John 1, Martha, John 11, Peter, Matthew 16, etc. They believed Jesus was the Christ, the Son of God. That was their faith. This was how they were saved. We believe this too but this faith does not save one. What saves one today is believing Paul’s gospel, that Christ died for my sins and rose from the dead (1 Corinthians 15.1-4).
Don,
John 14—-2 In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.
Is this speaking of Heaven? Did Jews/Israel have hopes of going to Heaven after death?
Joe,
Israel’s hope destiny is the earthly kingdom. Jesus is preparing places and keeping rewards in heaven (the only safe place) so they can be enjoyed on earth.