Search results

I think that’s a distinction without a difference. What you’re saying is that Paul will have to, in every city he visits, segregate all the believing Jews from the unbelieving Jews to keep from giving them the wrong gospel. Which is unbelievable from anyone, and there’s absolutely no scriptural...

So we see that Peter wrote both his epistles to the same people, right? Did anyone else of some significance also write to those same people? Yes, in fact, Paul did. How does it work for Paul and Peter to be writing to the exact same people? 2 Peter 3:15 (KJV) And account [that] the...

Why did Paul consistently break the agreement? Maybe you don’t understand very well what the agreement actually was. It wasn’t a contest to see who could push the different gospels the farthest, it was a division of territory for the same gospel. I know you don’t agree with that, but it makes...

That doesn’t mean it wasn’t the same gospel. It just means the 12 were woefully stuck in their old ways, which wasn’t a detriment at first, since they were doing the Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria part of their commission. They had trouble moving on to the “ends of the earth” part. And that would...

This may be a much simpler answer than is needed, but we can start with it. Since much of your 123 John argument rests in the above, let’s consider it. Here are a few instances Paul wrote to his children in the faith, which shows the phrase isn’t only to be used of Israel. 2 Corinthians...

That was my point—“as far as we can tell”. But that applies not just to whether Paul fits Peter’s standards, but also to whether the twelve thrones or twelve foundations are filled according to Peter’s or someone else’s standard.

And Jesus was numbered with the transgressors, but that didn’t make him a transgressor. Mark 15:28 (KJV) And the scripture was fulfilled, which saith, And he was numbered with the transgressors. If the 12 in the kingdom are the ones specifically selected by Jesus, then Matthias doesn’t qualify...

Would you like to offer a few for discussion? And I would prefer you start with john’s letters, but I’m ok doing others.

I guess the jury’s still out on whether Paul took Judas’ bishopric. I tend to agree with you that he did, but it’s hard to say whether Matthias is cut off from the office completely. I don’t think there’s evidence that Peter called Paul one of the twelve.

That’s good news for Peter, but isn’t necessarily good news for his audience. Why would the gospel consist of such statements as “I’m going to judge you.”? Which then proves my point—God was accepting of anybody willing to do righteously, even if they had never done so before. It’s a concept...

Interesting theory, but sounds like some of the Catholic mumbo-jumbo, that wants to use miracles, only, for authentication, when other methods are available. Such a focus tends to prepare people to fall away when presented with false signs and wonders.

Sure, but to then say that you know it was written to Jews is purely without any evidence at all.

You say Paul WAS handed a book? Sounds rather Mormonish to me.

You mean about how to reach the Gentiles? I agree. Peter was definitely deficient in that area. Who’s the “we” talking about in your sentence? Of course “we” are accepted, because we already repented and came to believe in Christ. Peter was referring to those that hadn’t yet heard the...

Do you think Mark and Luke were telling a different good news? I agree that it’s right to acknowledge that Peter and Paul used different words to tell the same story, just like Mark and Luke did—and for the same reason, that they had different audiences. But both Mark and Luke were telling the...

Peter also said Acts 15:11 (KJV) But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they. I’m not understanding why, when I point out that Paul said we should fear God and walk righteously, you try to point out that Peter didn’t say that, then say that he...

Any of the three uses still require consistency. If you say “the gospels” it’s clear you’re talking about more than one. If you say “the gospel”, it’s equally clear you’re talking about only one. No scripture ever says “the gospels” as far as I know, but Gal 2:7 definitely uses a single instance...

No—it has to be in a single sentence with only a single instance of “the good news”. But nice try.

I don’t usually copy stuff like that just for fun, but I’m hoping to learn. Just so you know, “the” is a definite article. Used before singular or plural nouns and noun phrases that denote particular, specified persons or things. Used before a noun, and generally stressed, to emphasize one...

Yes, I agree— though I would put that point of conscious fearlessness after the resurrection.