Are there two gospels or ONE?

I appreciate a simple response, I think at the core of it is something that relates to a message given while the law was in practice, to the lost sheep of Israel, which is the 4 gospels, Matthew etc....so labeling the time period of Christ’s earthly ministry, as “the dispensation of the law, would seem accurate..right? The law was still in practice? So we see in scripture, lessons that Jesus spoke of, that seem to only apply to those under the law.....if a reader cannot distinguish that very thing.....would the readers inadvertently apply the law unto themselves? vs a message that was given through Paul, that beyond this chat room, many across the world see a major difference in Paul’s epistles that focus on Grace, without the law, without such emphasis on works/repentance...we all know that Jesus preached veiled message as the mystery of the gentiles had not been preached yet....all words are the inspired word of God, as so is Pauls. Paul took the baton to preach the message to the gentiles in whole...This is easily found in scripture.....why? Because this is the dispensation of Grace....a different dispensation than Christ’s earthly ministry which was in the dispensation of the Law.....that does not mean that Christ did not have a message for us.....everything in the Bible is written for you, but everything in the Bible was not written about you.....

I wish we could all speak of this without everyone getting upset.....it is important to try the spirit, so gat we may all come to the truth, with our egos set aside.

This is one scripture I would like to have closure on, as Paul says: I have not come to Baptize.....compare this to Matthew 28, The great commission....if a delema is found, please acknowledge and discuss it as children of God.

1 Corinthians 1:17 King James Version (KJV)
17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

Here is Jesus speaking to the 12, and notice they still did not all believe in previous scripture....not that I’m making a point with that...but it was amazing that even then...those that saw him were doubting....

Matthew 28:19-20 King James Version (KJV)
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Honestly, am I missing something?? Or is this a delema? Or easily explained?

“Pauline emphasizers”.....wow, could you display your resentment of Paul any better? I think you conveniently forget....Paul spoke the INSPIRED word of God, and was visited by CHRIST in order that his message WAS emphasized....so when you feel like taking Paul’s words “down a knotch” remember, PAUL spoke exactly what Jesus told him....Pauls epistles are Jesus’s words LITERALLY!

First, please let me say that I get how oversimplified my response is. I also realize I am repeating myself here, but the story of God and the bible should bring us to Him, regardless who is reading it or living it. I believe the message, the good news, of the Bible is this, no one gets to the Father but through Jesus Christ, that the Son of God died to bring Himself and His Father who are One to us. I believe when we focus on who He was talking to, we lose sight of Him and what His message is. We, the Gentiles, are grafted into Isreal. God has been establishing the temple of Himself so He can be with us. Isn't that the point of it all, regardless who He is addressing. God is with us. In the big scheme of things the audience addressed is to His children, the ones to Him we belong.

Yes,this is the main problem.

We have a pauline adherant in our mens bible study.
Very disruptive and paranoid over the law.
In james the opening sentance " to the 12 tribes..."
So ANYTHING from James he rejects.
Same with 1 peter,revelation,the ot,and the gospels.
They ERRONEOUSLY place the gospels in the ot.
Very very off and poorly thought out.

Uh,no

I prefer the epistles to the rest of the bible.
So,no you didn't hear me.
It is in fact the pauline adherants that MINIMIZE the other books.
I do not do that. I embrace them.
Paul had no exclusive corner on grace.
Jesus preached and lived it,as did peter.

Ok.....so you have Matthew, Mark, Luke, John.....all during Christ’s earthly ministry...all given the Great Commision......why enter Paul? If there is no significance to him, (as you say, same as the others, same message etc) Why magnify his office? why send Paul to the gentiles? He was not present at the ascension, he was not a witness to the life of Jesus in his earthly ministry...why?

James and Peter agreed with Paul's message, as shown by their endorsement of Paul at the council of Jerusalem in Acts ch15. And Peter, in his second letter likened Pauls letters to the scriptures, so I doubt they believed Paul preached a different gospel as it were, but he explained it in a way they did not.
You have to remember, Paul had been an ardent Pharisee who fully understood the laws demands. He knew no one could be righteous by obeying the law. Her wasn't against righteous living, or adherence to what was actually written in the moral law, for he earnestly preached righteousness, but how he believed righteous living was to be achieved was certainly new for the time.
Some today will stress you must obey the Ten Commandments for instance. They may tell you, you must obey that law to prove you love Jesus, or, you must obey it because it is moral law and no one can expect to be in a saved state if they ignore the moral law/moral living. It sounds great, but how many who state that have the understanding Paul had as to what such obedience entails? Paul knew that to covet/lust/dwell on impure thoughts in your mind broke the tenth commandment. You can break the ten commandments in thought, without anyone but God knowing you are doing that. How many who insist you must obey the ten commandments understand that? Therefore to obey the ten commandments, with stipulation they must be obeyed to be in a saved state, is to demand something that is impossible for man to fully achieve. For Paul knew, the letter of that law killed(2Cor3:6-9)

Paul was vehemently against righteousness of obeying the law. For he knew such true righteousness was unobtainable, for it required perfect obedience of it. But he was for what was written in the moral law being reflected in a believers life:
Do we then nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather we uphold the law Rom3:31

I think many find it hard to understand Paul's central message, Peter said some things Paul wrote were hard to understand.

Good stuff.

The how of Christ’s death is revealed in the four Gospels, but the whys and wherefores of His death where not completely revealed until after His death. Only then, did the world find out that Christ died specifically for our sins, became sin for us, and we must trust in Him for forgiveness of sins.

One has to rightly divide the word of truth. We have to make sure we are following ou God given spokesman for the church, the body of Christ which is the Apostle Paul and the directions the Lord gave him for us to follow.

For example, the Lord gave Abraham directions to follow. If Abraham ignored thos directions and instead followed the directions the Lord gave Noah, he would have been obeying God’s directions, just not the right directions for him specifically. Abraham would have been in error. It’s called progressive revelation. As human history developed, God gave man exactly what he needed.

After the resurrection and the rejection of Israel of their Messiah, God would choose Paul to reveal more truth to establish the body of Christ made up of mostly Gentiles. Paul received an abundance of revelation of truth that had not yet been revealed to anyone else. As we follow Paul, we follow Christ and His direction for His body.

Oh.....sooooo Christ whom picked each deciple in his earthly ministry, did not figure in each deciples ability? Man had to figure out that the Great commission was not without its flaws? Hmm.....I find it hard to believe that GOD, was insufficient with whom he originally selected to preach the Great Commision, suddenly felt like they were incapable.....as you say, Paul understood better right? I have a better one, Paul had a specific message, not known from ages before, Paul unveiled the mystery to the Gentile as Christ told him to do....

Ok.....so you have Matthew, Mark, Luke, John.....all during Christ’s earthly ministry...all given the Great Commision......why enter Paul? If there is no significance to him, (as you say, same as the others, same message etc) Why magnify his office? why send Paul to the gentiles? He was not present at the ascension, he was not a witness to the life of Jesus in his earthly ministry...why?

, Paul understood better right? ....

Did the same Holy Spirit that wrote Galations through a man,write 1 Peter through a man?
Is the gospel of grace in 1 peter in conflict with "Paul's gospel"?
Is Jesus declaration of "born again" a false idea of works and the law, making "born again"totally foreign to Paul's gospel?

The reaction of the disciples and the apostles to Jesus being arrested and beaten and hung on a crucifix and killed is the answer to understanding the Olivet Discourse. Pardon me for saying this bluntly but until it is understood why the disciples reacted(their acts) the way they did after Jesus was was crucified the question the disciples ask Jesus will not make any sense at all because they were not asking about his second coming.

When the term " followers of Paul" is invoked,am i the only one that gets a red flag?

You really have to assume the word is in conflict with itself.
You don't see a line upon line building of truth.
You see a conflict