Replies

Read what the Bible ACTUALLY SAYS, not what you THINK IT SAYS.

I have provided you with what the Bible ACTUALLY SAYS. You have provided the readers here with a theory of what SOMEONE other than the apostles preached. I provided you with the slam shut passage from 1 Corinthians 15 from Paul himself. He clearly said no difference. If one heard it from Cephas or any other apostle, then they heard the same gospel he preached.

You have skirted an important question I posed. It was the very first one I posed. Where do you see the Church beginning historically? Obviously you do not believe this happened on Pentecost. So where in your estimation did the church start in the book of Acts? Before Acts 28? After Acts 28? Middle of Acts? Where can you point to this transition from the kingdom gospel to the gospel of grace? We should start there as we did about a year ago, when the question went unanswered by many and a few changed their position as scriptures were presented. I also promise not to use capital letters if you do not.

Oh, this is rich. PLEASE show me the exact verse in 1 Cor. Chapter 15 that you are talking about. Show me where Paul says that the gospel he preached is the same as the gospel that Peter preached. While your comparing Scriptures, go from 1Cor. 15 to Romans 16:25,26. Notice that something was HID IN Scripture until it was revealed to Paul. He calls it "my gospel", and "the preaching of Jesus Christ according to the revelation of the mystery, which was KEPT SECRET SINCE THE WORLD BEGAN< BUT NOW IS MADE MANIFEST,..." If the gospel that Paul preached was that Christ died FOR OUR SINS, was buried and rose again the third day, and he called it MY GOSPEL, and said that it was KEPT SECRET SINCE THE WORLD BEGAN, it could not have been the same gospel that Peter preached. Either that, or Paul was taking credit for something that was NOT HIS GOSPEL. And that would make him a liar and a con man.

I won't put any more on this post until this has been read.

I have provided you with what the Bible ACTUALLY SAYS. You have provided the readers here with a theory of what SOMEONE other than the apostles preached.

We went the length on this versus some HD's some time ago (here is one post which summarizes and responds to much, by God's grace) and it became apparent that certain advocates, one in particular IIRC, unreasonably zealously contended for this despite the evidence against it, like as RCs so often do.

Thus extended attempts at reasonably debate. The hyper doctrine seems to attract a certain exclusive mentality.