Are there two gospels or ONE?

Dr. Ice, iirc, advocated multiple resurrections. Someone posted this on another site, but I can not find it.

They preached what they thought they understood. Just like you.

But they didn't understand. No one did. Until after the Resurrection. Then some of them did.

They preached what Jesus told them to preach and that was the gospel of the kingdom. And that message was the kingdom of heaven was at hand. See Matthew 10. Signs and miracles accompanied this message. Israel’s promised kingdom was going to be restored and the King is here.

Flip over to Mark. Where the kingdom of God is at hand.

Yep, the spiritual kingdom was at hand too. If the nation of Israel would have received Jesus as their Savior, the Savior would have ushered in their physical kingdom where He will sit on the throne of David. Israel rejected Jesus as their Savior, therefore the kingdom was postponed. The spiritual kingdom would be introduced to the Gentiles. They would hear and believe In the resurrected Jesus.

Both aspects of the kingdom will be realized at the Lord’s second coming.

Keep it up John! Let all who read learn!

Obviously it is! For example: Jesus told his disciples to obey the scribes and Pharisees, whereas Paul said we are not under the Law.

It is hard for traditional denominations to acknowledge the differences between Jesus and Paul, because they have been teaching for ages that both the Lord and the apostle always preached the exact same thing. They would have to dump millions of books on the subject.

We have to remember, Jesus lived under the old covenant, so if the scribes and Pharisees preached from that covenant what they said should be followed. However, Jesus also said: Do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach.
But Jesus, looking forward to the new covenant said:
Unless I go away, the Advocate will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you. 8 When he comes, he will prove the world to be in the wrong about sin and righteousness and judgment: 9 about sin, because people do not believe in me; 10 about righteousness, because I am going to the Father, where you can see me no longer; 11 and about judgment, because the prince of this world now stands condemned. John 16:8-11

Jesus did not say, about sin if you transgress the law, but rather, about sin because people do not believe in him. And they would have righteousness as he was going to the Father. So believers righteousness would not be the old way of obeying the law, but believing/faith in Christ. When Paul wrote of not being under the law, he meant having no righteousness of obeying the law, the believers righteousness was faith/believing in Christ. So Paul was expounding on what Jesus had said regarding the work of the Holy Spirit under the new covenant.

So, why didn't the Lord Jesus himself teach this during his earthly ministry?

I have much more to say to you, more than you can now bear. 13 But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth John16:12&13

He did. Just no one really understood.

People still seem to have a hard time understanding.

Matthew 11:28 Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.

John 15:4-5
4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me.
5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.

So, why did the Lord Jesus say to the young rich man: "sell all you have and give the money to the poor"?

Because he wasn't abiding in Christ.

He was abiding in money. Can't be saved by money.

I'm not sure what that has to do with what we were discussing, but OK, here are my thoughts. When the rich young man asked Jesus what he must do to inherit eternal life, why did Jesus not respond with John3:16? Safe to assume Jesus knew the young mans heart before he asked the question. So instead, Jesus gave him a list of commandments. To which the young man confidently replied he obeyed them all since his youth. Jesus replied there was still one thing he lacked, as is always the case when you claim to obey the Ten Commandments. In this case, Jesus showed him he obviously did not want to obey the first one. So he walked away.
Incidentally, some are asked to sell all their possessions and some are not. I wonder how many who claim to obey the Ten Commandments would be prepared to make that kind of sacrifice

This is what my own denomination says, but it can't be true. The young rich man had that weakness and telling him to sell all he had would be like sending him to hell. So, you mean that if the young man were more detached from wealth Jesus wouldn't have told him to give away all his property?

What we are discussing is: Are there two gospels or ONE?

The Gospel of Jesus says: "sell that ye have and give alms" while Paul said he could live in plenty or in want. In Acts we see the disciples selling their properties and distributing the proceeds among the poor. They were then still living under the law because the Jerusalem Council place some 15 years later. So, sell-all-you-have is an advanced version of the law of giving alms.

When Zaccheus offered to give half his wealth(not all) to the poor Jesus said salvation had come to his house that day. Jesus did not tell him that was not enough did he.
You think the Jerusalem church of Acts ch15 lived under a law of righteousness?
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.’ Acts15:10&11

Don't forget, Jesus said under the New Covenant, in regard to sin, not believing in him. He did not say: In regard to sin transgression of the law

Zaccheus had never seen Jesus before and knew nothing about His commandments. The tax collector's willingness to give away half of his wealth came from his own heart and received approval from the Lord.

We all have our certain weaknesses. They can become idols that we worship in place of God.

God obviously pulls those idols down. Whether it is like the hell you describe or not.

It wasn't a matter of detachment. It was a matter of idolatry.

But that commandment was not given exclusively to the young rich man. See Luke 12:33: Sell that ye have and give alms.

In Acts 12:33 we see the disciples obeying Jesus' commandment: 44 All the believers were together and had everything in common. 45 They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need.

We Christians don't do that today, do we? Why? Because that commandment was given exclusively to the Jews and was not meant for Gentiles.