Are there two gospels or ONE?

^ EDIT to add: 1Cor2:9-10,16b ; Col1:25b-26 "to complete" [revealed to His apostles and recorded in the remainder of Scripture, as we now have it]

I do not believe it was flawed...it just hasn’t happened yet, not until the rapture of the church

ONE Gospel for all. Always has been,always will be. Anyone who says different doesn't understand Scripture.

So when you share the gospel with people, you merely say, "Messiah is come," and make NO mention of the fact that He "died, was buried, and He rose again, and was exalted"? Nothing at all about that? Just that He is [has] come?

[again, refer to 1Cor15's POINT of saying that (now) His "RESURRECTION" is ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY to believe (THAT ASPECT, AS WELL) for salvation--else, "ye are yet in your sins" 1Cor15:14-17]

Can you define the gospel unto salvation with words/Scripture please?

I'm not understanding where this two gospel idea is coming from. The Gospel is simple, Christ came,died and rose again. He died once for all. There is no other Gospel but this. Christ crucified. Any other Gospel is false.

The disciples were told to preach the gospel of the kingdom during Christ's earthly reign. They were to take this message only to lost sheep of Israel. Did they teach Jesus' death, burial and resurrection for sin when they themselves had no clue or understanding of it?

^ [to kaylagrl] Well, I think some [here and elsewhere] have a different idea of what they mean when mentioning "two gospels," but my own explanation is in Post #6 (and other posts) of this thread, and has to do with "sequence" and "timing" (they are not all proclaimed in the same period of time ["this present age [singular]"... versus... "the end [singular] of the age [singular], [that they were standing in and speaking out from, before His death, at that time]," for example)


[I see someone else beat me to it! ]

Should I even mention the "everlasting gospel" preached by angels during the tribulation?

I agree, I see them asking in Matt.24:3 as in them not understanding anything about his dbr and as asking about his sign as the Messiah whom they saw as ruling from the temple he just said would be destroyed because they couldn't see him being who they believed he was and the temple being destroyed both.

And so they as Jewish thinking men would have then ask him about the end and beginning of an age because they saw an age as a day(yowm/yom) or one of the generations of the heavens and the earth in the Genesis 2:4 "toledot". And so Jesus knowing that they were asking about his coming as Messiah(not 2nd coming) answers them in Matthew 24:34 https://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/24-34.htm (see #1074).

In Daniel 8:26 it is referred to as the vision of "evening(s) and the morning(s)" as from Genesis 1:1 thru Genesis 2:4 of the toledot of the generations(age's) and as Jewish in thinking both what they ask in Matt.24:3 and Daniel 8:26 are from that and so in Acts 1:6 they ask again about the same and then in Acts 3:21(after the comforter) point to it again. https://biblehub.com/interlinear/daniel/8-26.htm

I've been meaning to hop on over to the other thread where you mentioned this (page 7 of that thread, I think)… but have focused on other things since then, and time has gotten away from me... My apologies.

In view of what you wrote over there, it sounds as though you and I are on the same [/similar] page, in that regard (in many of my posts I list Hosea 5:15-6:3 as part of my points ["after two days"... "in the third day"]), however, I disagree that it is presently the [Hebrew] year 5779, but that that calendar is more like [something like] as must as 256 years "off" (being even later than the present calendar reflects): see this article (with which I pretty much agree): http://christinprophecy.org/articles/the-jewish-calendar/ [and no, that wasn't really my (essential) point regarding Job 1 & 2 ] ).


But, yes, in the present discussion of this thread, I agree. They (at the time) only understood regarding the [what WE call] earthly MK (just not its TIMING)

^ EDIT: "as MUCH as" (need a few more mins edit time! LOL)

It is not so much a matter of understanding, but a matter of indoctrination

2 Timothy 3:16 King James Version (KJV)
16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

That may be the most respectful response, on an opposing view that I have seen yet!

Your asking for trouble John lol

The Lord Jesus Christ preached the hidden gospel.

John 16:12-14
12 I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now.
13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
14 He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall shew it unto you.

After His Resurrection;

Luke 24:25-27
25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken:
26 Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory?
27 And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself.


Paul expounds for us what the Lord Jesus Christ showed him as well. Paul just wrote it down whereas these first ones who the Lord expounded to must not have or it must not have been Gods Will for them to be the ones to do it.


One gospel. Before the Death, burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ it was hidden. After His DBR it was revealed.

^ Yes, but we should read that portion very carefully for what it says (and note what it does not say).


This portion of an article by Dr Paul Martin Henebury covers this a bit, when he says:

["Forty Reasons for Not Reinterpreting the OT by the NT: The Second Twenty"]

[quoting]

"33. It ignores the life-setting of the disciples’ question in Acts 1:6 in the context of their already having had forty days teaching about the very thing they asked about (“the kingdom” – see Acts 1:3). This reflects badly on the clarity of the Risen Lord’s teaching about the kingdom. But the tenacity with which these disciples still clung to literal fulfillments would also prove the validity of #’s 23, 26, 27, 28 & 32 above.

"34. This resistance to the clear expectation of the disciples also ignores the question of the disciples, which was about the timing of the restoration of the kingdom to Israel, not its nature."

[end quoting; bold and underline mine]

https://sharperiron.org/article/forty-reasons-for-not-reinterpreting-ot-nt-last-twenty


[the "SUFFERING" aspect is what Peter is pointing out in Acts 3, which they (Israel) were not expecting (in their thinking)... ; "His Servant Jesus" vv.13,26, the chpt covering TWO aspects of "raise"--one BEFORE His death (in His earthly ministry ['raise up to a position of prominence BEFORE His death']), the other AFTER]

Dallas Theological Seminary. Lot's of heresy has come through there via Lewis Sperry Chafer, Zane Hodges and more. Chafer began it with his false dichotomy of a believer/disciple and his false gospel of no repentance.

Well, let me just say that not distinguishing certain things (as we are called to do) leads us [many people] to wrong conclusions (false doctrines), such as the following (to name just a few):

[the following ideas are false, but based on blurring things together]


--the Millennial Exclusion Theory (that any member of "the Church which is His body" may be excluded from the MK time period)

--Dominionism/Reconstructionism/Theonomy (that Jesus CANNOT return until the Church dominates and subdues everyone else... )

--that only certain people have been "invited to salvation," while the rest have been damned from eternity past

--that the Olive Tree is: [either] Israel, or Jesus Himself, or eternal salvation, etc (resulting in a "lose-your-salvation" [false] doctrine/theology), whereas it actually respresents "God's governmental ways upon the earth"

--replacement theology (any notion that says God has no further place in His scheme of things [plans], for Israel [nation])

--that there is no "promised and prophesied earthly Millennial Kingdom" (variously called) which will commence upon His "return" (to the earth)

--that Jesus, even in His exaltation, still does not "know" (pertaining to that subject of Matt24:36)

--that since Jesus is [supposedly] slated to "marry" TEN virgins, then its perfectly fine for them to do (or intend to do) the same (polygamy, etc)

--many more...


_______

Keep in mind that no one is saying that [during the future specific time period] the "gospel of bozo the clown" will be preached, so that "TWO [wholly UNrelated] gospels" are met, or something. No. (Read again my post #6, not to mention #135, #156, #157... and others, for clarification)

Okay, so keep this in mind when viewing my posts. (perhaps that will help you comprehend my points--the ones I am making)