Search results

This is were I take exception. Once the lines are drawn, one can make assertions and chose which is truth for them. Why would God want to confuse people? What purpose would that serve?

But why use a Jewish Zealot? Since most Gentiles knew nothing of the God of Israel, why not use one of their own? That way there would be a clear distinction.

I agree he is right about how Jesus spoke of the Kingdom of God to the Jews and Paul Grace to the Gentiles. I think the application of those two are the issue. Once the claim is made they are totally different, that allows one to pick and choose which scripture to adhere to which ones to dismiss.

Let’s ponder this, why would Jesus choose a Pharisee to give this new Gospel? Why pour new wine into an old wine skin? Would it make more sense to use a Gentile for this?

So because Jewish scripture had to be fulfilled, that was proof of a different Gospel? What you’re really saying is there two truths.

While I agree the RCC was the entrenched power, even they didn’t say there are two different Gospels. Like I said, it’s never been part of Christian theism as a whole.

Most of the conversations have been cordial. There are exceptions. For instance the poster the pretty much said that I was in league with Satan.

So a Jew wouldn’t be with Christ?

And? We already established that Jesus spoke to Jews. Scripture had to fulfilled. Again you’re stating the obviously but coming to an incorrect conclusion.

Has it occurred to you by and large most Christians reject this doctrine? Wouldn’t that give you pause to the think maybe its not true?

So what is the salvation for the Jews? What is salvation for the Gentiles? If a Jew dies believing Jesus is Lord does he go to Heaven or does he go to Sheol and await the physical Kingdom?

It’s essentially preaching two different Gospels. It’s like saying Jesus is two different Saviors. It’s totally erroneous and very easily debunked.

Jesus had not died yet. You keep stating the obvious.

Oh stop. That whole “Your belief” drivel has exited the building. You’re essentially denying the heart of Christian theism which has stood for nearly 2000 years. It’s bordering on Hersey.

Very well could be. Also, it could be a case of mixing Biblical scripture with external sources.

I’m truly astounded at all the pseudo doctrine that is presented on a Christian forum. It’s actually quite sad.

Seriously, where do you come with this nonsense?

Boring.

Off OP topic, if you feel the need to personally attack me, please don’t do via a long winded rambling post. You need to learn to conduct yourself in a mature and decent way my friend.

Ha ha