Paul describes his gospel as being different from what the apostles of Jesus were preaching:
2:2And I went up by revelation; and I laid before them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles but privately before them who were of repute, lest by any means I should be running, or had run, in vain.
...when they saw that I had been intrusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision, even as Peter with the gospel of the circumcision 2:8(for he that wrought for Peter unto the apostleship of the circumcision wrought for me also unto the Gentiles)
2:9James and Cephas and John, they who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision;
From Paul's description there were two gospels in circulation only after Paul's appearance on the screen.
So what was the gospel to the Jews? How was it different from the gospel to the gentiles?
The description of James, Peter and John going onto the Jews, and Paul and his followers to the gentiles indicates there were two theologies being preached. One based in the teachings of Jesus and focussed on the Jews, and one created by Paul based in the conversion of gentiles.
Jesus had two dads, and he turned out alright.~ Andy Gussert
“Feminism has fought no wars. It has killed no opponents. It has set up no concentration camps, starved no enemies, practiced no cruelties. Its battles have been for education, for the vote, for better working conditions…for safety on the streets…for child care, for social welfare…for rape crisis centers, women’s refuges, reforms in the law.
If someone says, “Oh, I’m not a feminist,” I ask, “Why, what’s your problem?”
Since historical records by the Ebionites are scarce, fragmentary and disputed, much of what is known or conjectured about the Ebionites derives from the Church Fathers, who wrote polemics against the Ebionites, whom they deemed hereticalJudaizers.[5][6] Consequently, very little about the Ebionite sect or sects is known with certainty, and most, if not all, statements about them are conjectural.
Many scholars distinguish the Ebionites from other Jewish Christian groups, e.g., the Nazarenes[7]; others consider them identical with the Nazarenes.[8]
Paul describes his gospel as being different from what the apostles of Jesus were preaching:
2:2And I went up by revelation; and I laid before them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles but privately before them who were of repute, lest by any means I should be running, or had run, in vain.
...when they saw that I had been intrusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision, even as Peter with the gospel of the circumcision 2:8(for he that wrought for Peter unto the apostleship of the circumcision wrought for me also unto the Gentiles)
2:9James and Cephas and John, they who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision;
From Paul's description there were two gospels in circulation only after Paul's appearance on the screen.
So what was the gospel to the Jews? How was it different from the gospel to the gentiles?
The description of James, Peter and John going onto the Jews, and Paul and his followers to the gentiles indicates there were two theologies being preached. One based in the teachings of Jesus and focussed on the Jews, and one created by Paul based in the conversion of gentiles.
The only difference is that Jews remained Jews and Gentiles remained Gentiles; neither were required to convert to the other
Paul describes his gospel as being different from what the apostles of Jesus were preaching:
2:2And I went up by revelation; and I laid before them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles but privately before them who were of repute, lest by any means I should be running, or had run, in vain.
...when they saw that I had been intrusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision, even as Peter with the gospel of the circumcision 2:8(for he that wrought for Peter unto the apostleship of the circumcision wrought for me also unto the Gentiles)
2:9James and Cephas and John, they who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision;
From Paul's description there were two gospels in circulation only after Paul's appearance on the screen.
So what was the gospel to the Jews? How was it different from the gospel to the gentiles?
The description of James, Peter and John going onto the Jews, and Paul and his followers to the gentiles indicates there were two theologies being preached. One based in the teachings of Jesus and focussed on the Jews, and one created by Paul based in the conversion of gentiles.
The only difference is that Jews remained Jews and Gentiles remained Gentiles; neither were required to convert to the other
Except practicing Jews had atonement practices within Judaism, and therefore no need of the salvation Paul preached to the gentiles.
So what was Jesus in the Jewish gospel preached by Peter, Jonn and James?
Jesus had two dads, and he turned out alright.~ Andy Gussert
“Feminism has fought no wars. It has killed no opponents. It has set up no concentration camps, starved no enemies, practiced no cruelties. Its battles have been for education, for the vote, for better working conditions…for safety on the streets…for child care, for social welfare…for rape crisis centers, women’s refuges, reforms in the law.
If someone says, “Oh, I’m not a feminist,” I ask, “Why, what’s your problem?”
Other logical conclusions exist, such as the conclusion that there were two different emic approaches for preaching the gospel. If that is the true conclusion then there is no appreciable difference – other than delivery.
Victim of this, victim of that, your mama’s too thin and your daddy’s too fat, get over it! - the Eagles
What was the role Jesus in the Jewish gospel preached by Peter, Jonn and James?
God ---> Law -----> Messiah heralding in and ruling the coming KoG?
Jesus had two dads, and he turned out alright.~ Andy Gussert
“Feminism has fought no wars. It has killed no opponents. It has set up no concentration camps, starved no enemies, practiced no cruelties. Its battles have been for education, for the vote, for better working conditions…for safety on the streets…for child care, for social welfare…for rape crisis centers, women’s refuges, reforms in the law.
If someone says, “Oh, I’m not a feminist,” I ask, “Why, what’s your problem?”
Acts 15:16 “After these things I will return and I will rebuild the Tabernacle of David which has fallen and I will rebuild its ruins and I will restore it.”
It appears James taught Christ would return and rebuild the Temple.
This was classic Jewish thought going back to Amos who James referenced as the prophet here.
Amos 9:11 "That day I will re-erect the tottering hut of David, make good the gaps in it, restore its ruins, and rebuild it as it was in the days of old."
5 Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses.”
6 The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7 After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: “Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8 God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9 He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? 11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”
Paul describes his gospel as being different from what the apostles of Jesus were preaching:
2:2And I went up by revelation; and I laid before them the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles but privately before them who were of repute, lest by any means I should be running, or had run, in vain.
...when they saw that I had been intrusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision, even as Peter with the gospel of the circumcision 2:8(for he that wrought for Peter unto the apostleship of the circumcision wrought for me also unto the Gentiles)
2:9James and Cephas and John, they who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision;
From Paul's description there were two gospels in circulation only after Paul's appearance on the screen.
So what was the gospel to the Jews? How was it different from the gospel to the gentiles?
The description of James, Peter and John going onto the Jews, and Paul and his followers to the gentiles indicates there were two theologies being preached. One based in the teachings of Jesus and focussed on the Jews, and one created by Paul based in the conversion of gentiles.
Of course, the whole flaw in this little psuedo-arugument skreed, is that Peter preached the Gospel to the uncircumcised as well as the circumcised, while Paul also preached the same Gospel to the circumcised as well as the uncircumcised...
No... not two different gospels. Not in the slightest. There were two different approaches regarding how to live so as not to offend, and to find common ground for such a radical coming together of what had been distinctly separate, Jew and Gentile. The Gospel was recognized to be the same, the good news was the very same for both... salvation of sins through the blood of Jesus Christ, by God's grace, for ALL who believe.
James preached it, Peter preached it, Paul preached it... they lived in agreement on the gospel, while parcing out what to do in regard to obedient living before their God. They agreed theologically. They also agreed to offer the best way of bringing unity to peoples once divided while not deliberately causing offense to either side. It was the beginning... it was the merging of the two... a it was the first steps of losing the net of obedience-to-law-for-salvation below and walking anew in grace.
Acts 15, the Jerusalem Council brought an end to "false brothers" in the church who were proclaiming Gentiles must be circumsized. James had a heart not to offend those steeped in obedience to the law, all the while proclaiming the grace ushered in of Jesus Christ the Messiah. Paul was on fire for the newfound freedom this meant and the miracle of how God completed what He set out to complete... unity among nations in those who believe. Blessing to peoples of all nations promised from before Israel even existed. Paul was the most steeped in legalism, and the dramatic conversion to grace God granted him brought about the fuel needed to send him out to complete the works God had set up for Paul from before the foundation of the world.
James saw 3 issues of offense that must be avoided in those early days of merger, but he never proclaimed them to be the avenue of salvation. Often one outside Christianity tries to point to the 3 items James advised... all the while overlooking the removal of over 600 other points of the law that were set aside and no longer required. James understood it was now by grace... but James had an affinity for those he was called to, the Jews, and how difficult a transition it would be to become a slave of Jesus Christ (see His self description at the opening of his letter to the Jews) rather than remain a slave of the law which would forever mean failure. James, just as did Paul, marveled at and loved the fulfillment of OT prophets Amos and Jeremiah as they had hundreds of years proclaimed the Gentiles would be brought into the people of God. James demonstrated this as he quoted Amos at the Jerusalem Council, also the place where he embraced and publicly acknowledge his blessing to Paul in their joint ministry of proclaiming the gospel. One gospel... two different assignments to two different people groups. Both bring the same gospel of grace in the best way it could be received by the respective groups.
I think it best, Kw, if you are going to assert there were two different gospels, that you spell out what the two differing gospels were so we can see them. What were the two different ways of salvation you speak of and where are scriptures that back these two things you see?
