Evangel...dichotomy?

[eaglesway]

I agree about when it started, though I don't see how it can be fully realized until after the return of the King.

I don't think it is realized the same way that you might see it realized. I believe Ezekiel is referring to the new Israel that he would create in Christ. So, when he returns, it will be glorify himself from within the sons of God, and then all the REST of creation will join them. So, I believe the sons of God include both Jews and Gentiles, men and women, etc who are of one new man Jesus Christ, the Jewish man who makes us all Jews by inclusion within his body. I do not believe there will be two separate kingdoms for two separate people on account of the differences in the flesh.

What precisely do you think the wall of separation is, though? I agree that it will be torn down, but to what end? I believe that God will be here for all, but that doesn't mean Israel won't be in a unique position.

It already has been torn down. The wall of separation is the division between Jew and Gentile as separate people according to the flesh. God has already made one out of the two as one man in Christ. There is no division of the kingdom between two parties on account of the flesh, because that dividing wall is down and God considers the two to be one, there is no Jew or Gentile in the body. All are one in Christ.

I suppose I believe that dispensationalism is two evangels, though i wasn't previously acquainted with the word :p

Not really. I would say the bulk of the Protestant Christian church, especially the prominent ones on TV believe in dispensationalism though they would not agree with the two evangels theory.

Excellent repelies I totally agree with.

I occasionally use the word dispensationalism in a negative sense, but usually when I do I call it hyper-dispensationalism. Rather than rightly divide the word and how the one evangel applies to different groups, some people create additional dispensations besides the ones most Protestants believe in and which I agree with, which ar this age, beginning with the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ(or for some, His birth) and the second advent- which is the end of this age completeing this dispensation.

There is an excellent article on the seven dispensations recognized by most Protestand theologians. Most of us would add between one and three more. Some believing that there is a dispensation of judgement afte the millenial age, and then a dispensation where God becomes all in all- the ages of ages. I really have no opinion on it, but I do recognize the seven Protestant dispensations and then the age of the ages is(imo) a bit hazy, seen through a glass darkly.

[ian]

I don't think it is realized the same way that you might see it realized.

Guaranteed

I believe Ezekiel is referring to the new Israel that he would create in Christ. So, when he returns, it will be glorify himself from within the sons of God, and then all the REST of creation will join them. So, I believe the sons of God include both Jews and Gentiles, men and women, etc who are of one new man Jesus Christ, the Jewish man who makes us all Jews by inclusion within his body.

Again, I'm pretty sure I agree, only I think that Israel will still be here, on this planet, among other nations. The world is going to take a mighty beating, but some life will live on, a new earth, a clean slate, one under the rule of a King, and I assume other kings beneath. God willing I'll put together some scripture this weekend to support my perspective appropriately. Likewise, do you have any I can look at for yours? I've heard this before, but not stated clearly.

I do not believe there will be two separate kingdoms for two separate people on account of the differences in the flesh.

I don't think believers will be flesh in the next age. I believe that the sons of God are the kingdom of God, and the kingdom of heaven is distinct and possibly comprised of more than just Israel, meaning multiple political states, all subservient to the King. Kingdom of God being celestial, kingdom of heaven, as terrestrial. The sons of Israel are always distinct in scripture, it seems to me, I realize we're grafted in, but why not refer to them as the sons of God otherwise, at least in Revelation? I bring up Ezekiel because it is so clearly defined, unless it's a very strange, unusually familiar allegory, from the dimensions of the temple to the partitioning of Israel. It's all extremely precise.

Does this make sense at least?

[Seth]

Again, I'm pretty sure I agree, only I think that Israel will still be here, on this planet, among other nations.

Which means that they would necessarily have to be separated, the only criteria for that separation being the flesh.

The world is going to take a mighty beating, but some life will live on, a new earth, a clean slate, one under the rule of a King, and I assume other kings beneath. God willing I'll put together some scripture this weekend to support my perspective appropriately. Likewise, do you have any I can look at for yours? I've heard this before, but not stated clearly.

Sure, here you go: http://mercifultruth.com/links-promisedland.html

I don't think believers will be flesh in the next age. I believe that the sons of God are the kingdom of God, and the kingdom of heaven is distinct and possibly comprised of more than just Israel, meaning multiple political states, all subservient to the King. Kingdom of God being celestial, kingdom of heaven, as terrestrial. The sons of Israel are always distinct in scripture, it seems to me, I realize we're grafted in, but why not refer to them as the sons of God otherwise, at least in Revelation?

1 John 1:2
Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God

This means that we are all one and therefore Jews have a right to be sons of God along with Gentiles.

I bring up Ezekiel because it is so clearly defined, unless it's a very strange, unusually familiar allegory, from the dimensions of the temple to the partitioning of Israel. It's all extremely precise.

Consider, maybe, that it is veiled language and that is the reason when Christ appeared to fulfill the Law and the Prophets, they didn't know what that meant because their scriptures seemed to make sense to them the way they saw it.

[Seth]

Sorry about that last post. Not sure why it is quoting the whole thing.

[ian]

Ah, technological transgression...

Thanks, ever does my reading increase. From what I've read so far, there is the finest of lines between our views. This ought to be interesting

[Tom]

Here is some more information from the Unsearchable Riches magazine that has been published for over a hundred years. This link provides access to the URsearch program http://concordant.org/ur/index.html along with some more recent issues in PDF files.

V36P1 p123

THE GLORIOUS GOSPEL OF GOD'S GRACE

THE DIFFERENT EVANGELS

SALVATION, as seen in God's dealings with the Circumcision, differs radically from that which graces us who believe in the present secret administration. What is needed is an intelligent grasp of the underlying purpose of each, so that we cannot help keeping them distinct. This alone will enable us to enjoy the transcendent grace which is ours in Christ Jesus. Then we will never adulterate it with the greatly inferior ingredients which characterize the evangel of the Circumcision, as is almost universally done in Christendom today. We have already set forth the evangel for today at some length, in The Mystery of the Gospel and other works. Now we will explore still deeper, and also consider the evangel of the Circumcision in order to form a foil, to create a contrast, so that our hearts may grasp the transcendently transcendent grace which we enjoy in Christ Jesus. At the same time we will seek to understand why there are two evangels, and why one is concerned with faith and grace and the other with works and reward.

     Let him be anathema (Gal.1:8,9)! How solemn are these words! We usually ignore them with the thought that they cannot possibly apply to us. Yet the appalling fact is that, with few exceptions, the beloved saints of God both believe and preach a different evangel, which is not another, and do not even realize it. Unlike the Galatians, they have not been transferred swiftly, but very slowly, away from the grace of Christ. Indeed, the most of them have not changed, for they have never known it. Alas! A

p124
Let him be Anathema!

few who once seemed to enjoy His grace have suddenly turned from it, as did the Galatians. May God make His grace abound in their behalf!

     How terrible it seems, when we look about us, and see great and good men, zealous in the work of the Lord, eager to spread the "gospel," or make known God's truth, that we are compelled to acknowledge that they come under this anathema! We dare not tell them that they are included, lest we give offence, and, figuratively, cut off their ears, and they will not even listen to the truth that alone is able to set them free.

     This is probably our last effort to differentiate between these two evangels, so we solicit the prayers of all God's saints, that we may be empowered to reach the hearts of those who are under this solemn adjuration, but have never considered the possibility that it applies to them. We especially pray for those who, like the Galatians, have fallen out of grace (Gal.5:4), after having had a glimpse of the evangel which is ours in Christ Jesus.

     Israel's salvation is a great national demonstration, in which that people as a unit are segregated to show what is in humanity. God deals with them in the flesh, and under law, and under a covenant, with a gradually increasing admixture of grace and faith. The prime object of this prolonged and varied demonstration is not their salvation, but to show beyond question that mankind, even under the most favorable conditions is utterly lost without God. Their testings prove conclusively that there is nothing good in the flesh. Their trial shows that men cannot observe a law. The tryout makes it clear that they are incapable of keeping a covenant. Works are of no avail in salvation. Man's failure in this great demonstration is of the greatest value to the race and the universe. Until we see this, we are inclined to question its worth, and charge God with failure, and to repeat the experiment in our own experience, only to involve our-

p125
Israel's End is Our Beginning

selves in defeat, and in the disillusionment which is bound to follow.

     The salvation we have today begins where Israel's leaves off. The Adamic race is discarded and there is a new humanity. We have no confidence in the flesh; we are dead to the law; we keep no covenant; we are crucified and buried with Christ, and, by faith, are roused and seated with Him in a totally new environment, among the celestials. We profit by the failures of the Circumcision, and need not and should not imitate the distressing experiments which demonstrate, for all who can see, man's inability to save himself or to contribute anything towards his own deliverance. If we persist in repeating these tests, it will only further confirm our inability to our own confusion and discomfiture. The admixture of Circumcision truth, the mingling of Peter's evangel with Paul's, has made a medley which lacks the essential features of both. It is this mixture which has caused most of the confusion among the saints, and has well-nigh eclipsed the evangel of the Uncircumcision.


WORKS AND FAITH

     There are really only two means of salvation in the eons, works and faith. Israel is the chosen example to expose the futility of works, even when flavored with faith. Not knowing God, or acknowledging His deity, Christendom is inevitably drawn away by self-confidence into the sphere of works, and seeks to justify this course by appealing to that part of the Bible which belongs to Israel, where works have a place. The continual confusion and conflict on this subject will never be settled until it is seen that both sides have support "in the Bible," when all of it is applied indiscriminately to all, when it is not correctly cut. But when we realize that God uses works in Israel in order to demonstrate their futility, then we are more than ever satisfied to leave salvation to the Saviour, and to repudiate the false foundation of our own deeds.

p126
Life and Works Reversed

                   DO AND LIVE vs. LIVE AND DO

     The contrast between the gospel of the Circumcision and that of the Uncircumcision may be expressed in the same words if we only change their order. Do and live is the order for the Circumcision and all other religionists. Life as the result of human effort is one of the most illogical and preposterous propositions that can well be expressed. Nowhere, in the course of human history, has a man ever evolved life by his acts. He has succeeded infamously in doing his fellows to death. Why, then, should he be so insufferably conceited as to imagine that he can defeat death or bring about life by his puny and powerless practices? On the other hand, no one can do anything without the loan of life from God. This is evident everywhere, not only in the sphere of the evangel. Nothing but the salvation that gives life can enable us to work. The only salvation worthy of the name begins with the gift of life. With us it is live and do. We work because we are saved, not because we want to save ourselves.

     The same kind of impermanent, transitory salvation will be found throughout the Circumcision writings. In my early life of faith I was troubled by these scriptures and sought a solution. I was deeply impressed by what we called the assurance of salvation, but could never find a satisfactory explanation of the sixth of Hebrews and other texts of like tenor until I began to see the difference between the truth for the nation of Israel and that for the other nations in this administration. Even the great stress laid on "safety, certainty and enjoyment" by my friends failed to explain how some who had actually tasted of the powers of the future eon fell aside and were disqualified for the kingdom (Heb.6:4-8). This clearly refers to those who listened to Peter on the day of Pentecost, who were saved from that crooked generation and added to the rest by the Lord Himself (Acts 2:40,47). The record in Acts runs along the same lines

p127
Works Cannot Save

as the exodus. Many who were saved from Egypt fell in the wilderness, and many who were saved from that crooked generation fell away when the kingdom did not come, in the period of the book of Acts.

     The unbeliever's favorite form of salvation is undiluted works, independent of God. The believer's favorite form of salvation is works with the help of the Lord. Few, indeed, dare to trust Him unreservedly as their Saviour. This sad state is largely due to the use of scriptures which do not apply to us today, but concern the Circumcision and their temporary testings, which are intended to show the uselessness of works as a means of salvation. Even those of us who are profoundly convinced that grace is the prime spring of God's dealings with His saints in this administration are inclined to leave it out of our dealings with one another. We prefer justice because we each feel that we have been just and, in case of a clash, the other has been unjust. We would like to display the justice of our cause before the saints and the world, when we ought rather to consider our fellow saint and hide his injustice, if it is that. Let us not seek to get our rights, to square up accounts now, but rather suffer wrong. The bema of Christ will set all right. It cannot be done before that day.


THE GREAT ENIGMA

     "Enigma" is the divine description of God's earlier revelation to the Circumcision, to whom first were confided the oracles of God (1 Cor.13:12). Our venerable Authorized Version speaks of it as being seen "through a glass, darkly," which is itself difficult to understand in these days of almost invisible glass. Rather, God spoke to them indirectly, and they perceived it as by means of ancient mirrors, or as we see things reflected in an imperfectly polished, uneven surface. Now, however, that we have the later revelation through Paul, all this can be rectified. We can by-pass the mirror and see things as

p128
The Enigma is Past

they actually are, face to face (1 Cor.13:12). In order to look beyond the puzzling revelations before Paul came, we should always consider what he has to say, first, in order to get to the bottom, the solid sub-stratum of actuality.


PAUL'S BASIC REVELATIONS

     In these studies, before we search for the truth in the Circumcision writings on any point we will first see what Paul has to say, for he gives us the result of the experiments which were tried with Israel, and shows that, beneath the superficial and apparent object, there was a different and deeper aim. The surface failure is deceptive because, in reality, it is a success, seeing that the demonstration was intended to expose the inability of man in all his efforts. Nevertheless, when we examine the earlier records more minutely in this light, we will discover, as a rule, that it contains intimations of the truth which can hardly be seen without the later revelations. God knew very well how His experiments would turn out. He does not try them in order to learn the truth for Himself, but in order to demonstrate them to His creatures, and so prepare them for the consummation, when they will not look for aught in themselves, but find their All in Him.


SHADOW AND SUBSTANCE

     One cause of confusion is the fact that Paul uses the same terms as the Circumcision evangel to denote the reality which has displaced the riddle. He goes so far as to flatly contradict himself in the most important difference of all. Although he draws a sharp line between the Circumcision and the Uncircumcision in Ephesians, he actually insists that the Uncircumcision are the Circumcision in Philippians (3:3)! As we have the reality, of which circumcision is only the outward sign, he boldly dubs them the Maimcision, who mutilate the flesh, while we are the true and genuine Circumcision, who cut off the

p129
Circumcision and Baptism

flesh entirely. The figurative use of literal terms concerned with God's dealings with Israel, such as kingdom, pardon, etc., leads many to miss the force of God's latest unfoldings, and to mix it all into one incoherent mess.


BAPTISM

     This highly figurative language has caused much confusion in connection with baptism. Although we are no more baptized than we are circumcised, the mere fact that our baptism is spoken of (Rom.6:4; Eph.4:5; Col.2:12), has led to great confusion of thought between the shadow and the substance. The circumcision evangel demands the shadow, ceremonial cleansing in water, whether the heart is purified, or not. But the evangel of the Uncircumcision insists only on the reality, our cleansing in Christ. An infant may be sprinkled with all the waters of the Jordan river, yet it will not be cleansed from sin. A man may be dipped under all the water in the seven seas, yet his heart will not be pure in God's sight. Baptism in Christ's death, that alone clears us completely from everything that defiles.


WHY THESE TWO EVANGELS

     Why are there two evangels? Were the object of both merely to rescue the sinner from a terrible doom, then one should suffice. But when we see that one evangel is part of God's great demonstration of the futility and failure of the flesh, hence must be based on flesh, and the other acknowledges the result of this demonstration, hence is based on spirit, then we see that they are nearly as wide apart as the poles. With such totally divergent objects in view they cannot help but differ radically, and any mixture is bound to be confusing and contradictory.

     The confusion in Christendom comes from mixing and muddling two evangels with entirely different objects, and the result is a bewildering chaos in which neither one survives in anything like its scriptural form.

p130
Why there are Two Evangels

Our religious leaders draw most of their doctrines from Peter, and have little patience with Paul, who alone has the truth for today, and who is the only one who can clear up the enigma of Peter's evangel as well. A great deal has been done by pointing out the differences which lie on the surface of the Scriptures. These definite statements should be enough. But there is such a tremendous weight of tradition to overcome that few are able to see what is so plainly written. For their sakes, and to establish those who see the truth, we will try to dig deeper, and examine more minutely those passages which deal with the matter. As Abraham's justification by faith is the seed plot of the uncircumcision evangel, his experiences will be considered at length.

     It will be of great interest and profit if we note carefully the striking contrast between Jehovah's dealings with Abram, His friend, before and after his circumcision, the differences between the fifteenth and seventeenth chapters of Genesis. In the former we have faith and righteousness and the star seed. In the latter we have walk and a covenant and the sand seed. These should never be confused, even when they seem to merge in the spiritual members of Abram's physical offspring.
A. E. K.

[Tom]

Here is some more good information from Unsearchable Riches magazine that has to be broken into two post because it exceeds the character limit.  http://concordant.org/ur/index.html

V44P1 p271

THE VARIOUS ECCLESIAS


THE TWO EVANGELS

BOTH OF THE EVANGELS, that for the Circumcision and that for the Uncircumcision, reached some Jews and some "Gentiles." Proselytes, such as Cornelius and the Ethiopian eunuch, were given a subordinate place in the kingdom heralding, to pre-shadow the day when all nations, the sons of Japhet and of Ham as well as the sons of Shem, all the descendants of Noah, will be blessed through Christ, when He reigns over the whole earth. But these proselytes, like the nations in the millennium, will be blessed through Israel and subordinate to the chosen nation. In contrast to this, Paul's later evangel goes to both without distinction, and the believers are all on the same level. Neither Jews nor others are subordinate. All were joined into one body. In order to express this fact it was called a joint body after Israel was cast aside (Eph.3:6).


THE ACTS RECORD

     What Paul did and said, as revealed in the Acts record, is all conformed to the theme of the book, which is the rejection of the kingdom by Israel, by both the nation and the ecclesia. But what Paul wrote in his epistles during that era predicts and presupposes this rejection, for his written instructions go beyond it. The quotation which closes the book of Acts (28:26,27) was anticipated long before in Paul's Roman epistle. In them he reveals several secrets, including the hidden evangel, which could not be fully revealed until the kingdom ecclesia had finally failed. It was covered, so the unbelievers could not apprehend it (2 Cor.4:3).

p272
Grace Commences this Ecclesia

     Saul was not competent to be one of the apostles of the kingdom. They were called because of their qualifications. Even a disciple, as Nathanael, was chosen because he was an Israelite in whom there was no guile (John 1:47). Not only was the office limited to those who were morally suited to the honor, but they had to have a long training first. Matthias was later included because he had been a disciple of Jesus from the baptism of John until the day on which He was taken up, that is during Christ's whole ministry. Judas, indeed, was an exception, but our Lord knew from the beginning that he was an adversary (John 6:70,71). Before Saul was called he was far worse than Judas, so that he should have been barred from the office rather than called to it. Personally, he was not fit for the lowest place in the kingdom. How, then, could he be one of its apostles?

     Saul was made an apostle long before he was qualified for it. Indeed, he actually was active as an adversary, persecuting Jesus, at the time he was appointed to the apostleship. Yet Saul also needed much training before he exercised his office, so he spent three years in Arabia before be began his active career, but it was not a time of probation, but of development of the grace that he already possessed. All of these facts should help us to see, not only that he was absolutely unfit for a place among the twelve, and that the sphere he entered was an entirely new departure, dependent on grace rather than works, but that it was entirely an act of God, predetermined and independent of Saul's conduct or deserts.

     Spiritually, Saul's eyes were opened gradually indeed, because he had a mission to his own people among the nations, as well as one to the other nations. The latter could not be fully revealed until stubbornness, in part, came on Israel. Yet his ministry to his own nation was not primarily to save them, but to provoke them to jealousy (Rom.11:11,25). During this period he had to

p273
Judgment Precedes the Kingdom

herald the kingdom to them, and proclaimed repentance and pardon and forgiveness to the Jews among the nations, outside the land. Not the twelve only were commissioned to go to all the nations, for these are called disciples. Saul was called to be the apostle to the nations after thay had failed to carry out the commission.

     The kingdom will be introduced with judgments, not with grace. Then Messiah will send His messengers to pull out of it the lawless, to cast them into a furnace of fire (Matt.13:41). Indeed, for seven years before Christ comes, He will deal in dire judgment with the earth, in order to sweep up the sinners and prepare it for His reign of righteousness. Saul was, indeed, stricken with blindness, but this was soon healed. Was it not given to him as a token of his spiritual condition? He was blind to the light to which he had been called. Many of the saints never do have their eyes fully opened, in this life, to the glory and the grace which is theirs in Christ Jesus.

     It is hard for us to realize how blind Saul really was spiritually. The very light that was in him was darkness. He knew, as few others, the facts of God's revelation in the Hebrew Scriptures. He must have known much about the Nazarene whom he persecuted. But of the fundamental truths of the present secret administration he knew even less when he was called than the ignorant religionist of today. They have at least heard of a heavenly destiny, although they cover up the grace which came to Saul by means of the rites of Christendom. Therefore the Lord said to him that he was to be a witness, not only of what he had perceived, but of that which he would see later (Acts 26:16). In all his ignorance, however, he, like those to whom he was sent, received an allotment among those who have been hallowed by faith in Christ alone. Of this he did not learn till later.

p274
Acts Records the Failure of the Earthly Kingdom

     For some years, soon after I first believed, I was among a company of saints whose chief aim was to conform to the practice and doctrine of the book of Acts. They reasoned that, what the disciples did, they should do likewise. But we cannot even reason thus from the example of Saul-Paul. I followed their method and was baptized in a pool in the Los Angeles river bed. Yet Paul later, after the truth of today was revealed, protested that he was not sent to baptize (1 Cor.1:17), and later limited us to one baptism into a spiritual unity (Eph.4:5). He circumcised Timothy, yet later denounced it as maimcision (Phil.3:2). He himself carried the decrees of the heavenly kingdom of the one body to those reached by his ministry (Acts 16:4), and he continued them in his later letters (Eph.2:15; Col.2:14).

     So we will now consider His teaching in the book of Acts, not to adopt it or put it into practice, but to note its departures from that of the twelve, and its gradual change toward the truth for today.

     Saul's first heralding in the synagogues of Damascus, was that Jesus is the Son of God (Acts 9:20). Here we have a distinct advance over the words of Peter at Pentecost, who heralded Him as Lord and Christ (Acts 2:36). Peter uses the first three accounts of our Lord's life for the background of his declamation, especially Matthew, who sets forth the Messiah or Christ. But Saul had seen the Saviour in His heavenly glory, so speaks of Him, not as the terrestrial Son of Adam, Abraham or David, but as the celestial Son of God, as He is set forth in John's evangel. Thus he gives us the keynote of his ministry. He begins where the others end. His lowest is their highest (Acts 9:20). Then He goes on and deduces that this One (the Son of God) is the Christ, the Anointed, and for a while he never takes over Israel's priestly but acts as in (Rom.15.16), ministering the evangel of God, in order to provoke His people to jealousy (Rom.11:11).

p275
Acts Records the Failure of the Earthly Kingdom

     When he first went to Jerusalem after his call, he could not even speak to the disciples, for they feared him. Barnabas, however, led him to the apostles. Then he spoke boldly in the name of the Lord Jesus (Acts 9:29). As he had come from Tarsus, a foreign city, he specialized in discussing with those who were Hellenists. This angered them so much that they sought to assassinate him, and he was sent back to his native city. Instead of being given the highest place, above the twelve apostles, and being protected and promoted for preaching the highest truth that had come to Israel and the nations up to that time, he was chased out of the holy city in disgrace.

     Israel, from the days of Jacob to their rejection of Christ, presented a sad spectacle of recurrent and repeated defection. One whole generation was strewn along the wilderness before they even entered the promised land. When the kingdom failed, the ten tribes were driven out. Later Judah and Benjamin were deported for seventy years. Later they were again dispersed, after rejecting the apostolic witness in the book of Acts (8:1; 11:19 etc.). According to the eleventh of Hebrews only those of faith looked forward to something better, and will have a part in the former resurrection (Rev.20:4-6). The great mass of the nation will not live again until the thousand years are finished. Only those who had faith will enjoy the promises.

     When Barnabas was sent to Antioch, he remembered Saul, and brought him from Tarsus to help in teaching the ecclesia there. As we have no record of anything he said at this time, it is not likely that he introduced any new doctrine, such as would help us in our present investigation.

     Paul's announcement of justification by faith to the Jews in Pisidian Antioch (Acts 13:39) laid the cornerstone for the first ecclesia of the nations and, at the same

p276
The Book of Acts sets forth the Kingdom Evangel

time, provided a foundation for his further teaching to the nations, as elaborated in his epistle to the Romans (Rom.4). But it also stirred up much opposition on the part of Pharisaic Jews. At the special convention called to consider this question (Acts 15:2), although Paul spoke at this gathering, there is no record in the book of Acts of what he said (Acts 15:12). But in his later epistle to the Galatians we learn what his attitude was toward circumcision and law keeping for the nations. He calls it a different evangel, which is not another, and pronounces an anathema on those who promulgate it (Gal.1:6-9).

     Among the Circumcision believers, especially the Pharisees, (Acts 15:5), there was a strong tendency to corrupt their own evangel by adding circumcision and law keeping. The true evangel originated with John the Baptist and Christ, and promised an entry into the coming kingdom dependent on repentance and baptism. The Jews of that time already had circumcision and the law. These came from Moses, although circumcision originated with Abraham, after he had been justified by faith. The law was no evangel, rather, it brought a curse. Yet the Pharisees sought to make its observance a condition of salvation for the nations (Acts 15:5). This was the different evangel which was not another (Gal.1:6). It called down Paul's anathema. Yet there are sects even today clinging to some phases of it. This was not one of the two evangels.

     Here we have the beginning of the great controversy as to the place of the law in the salvation of the nations, which occupies such a prominent place in the remainder of this account and in the writings of Paul, especially Galatians and Romans. The first great convention was called to settle it, and justified Paul even from the standpoint of the kingdom ecclesia, though the matter was really outside their jurisdiction.

p277
The Book of Acts sets forth the Kingdom Evangel

     Saul himself was baptized, and bathed off his sins (Acts 9:18; 22:16). He seems to have baptized the household of Lydia (Acts 16:15) and of the Philippian warden (Acts 16:33), and Crispus, chief of the synagogue, and Gaius, and the household of Stephanas, in Corinth. And he did this, notwithstanding his own assertion that Christ did not send him to baptize (1 Cor.1:14-17). We should note that this was not done in the present administration or in conformity to present truth, but as a concession, at a time when there was an evangel which called for baptism in water. There were two baptisms at that time, in water and in spirit. It was not till later, when the present administration was inaugurated, that one of these dropped out, and there was only one baptism (Eph.4:5), that in spirit.


THE PHILIPPIAN JAILOR

     How often does the Philippian warden's question, "What must I be doing that I may be saved?" receive the biblical reply, "Believe on the Lord Jesus, and you shall be saved...!" But how seldom is the sentence completed, "you and your household!" Not he alone was baptized, but all his household. I have great sympathy with the few who "believe in" household salvation and baptism, and who base it on this passage. It is not only "in the Bible," but it is one of the acts of the apostle Paul, who would have us imitate him. But there are echoes of this in his later epistle to the Corinthians. There he acknowledges that he baptized three in Corinth, yet protests that Christ does not commission him to baptize (1 Cor.1:14-17). Such apparent contradictions should help us to see, that the scene was continually changing from the material and tangible to the spiritual and supersensible, and that the example for us does not lie in Paul's intermediate ministry, but in his perfection epistles,

(continued in the next post due to character limit)

[Tom]

p278
The Thessalonians are Graced

     Paul's earliest epistles were probably written to Thessalonica, so his words there, even those recorded in the Acts, which primarily concern the kingdom, are of special interest. In view of the fact that these epistles begin the revelation of the secrets, in this case the "mystery" of the resurrection, it is notable that he starts by "opening up and placing before them that the Christ must suffer and rise from among the dead..." (Acts 17:3). But these secrets of which he later wrote could never be announced in a treatise on the kingdom, such as the book of Acts.

     It is characteristic of the grace which is ours in Christ Jesus, that the less noble Thessalonians received the revelations concerning the prior resurrection, rather than the "more noble" Bereans. They examined the Scriptures given to Israel to see if these records have it so. If they had checked Paul's epistles to Thessalonica, they would not have found any confirmation of the secret of the resurrection. And so with all the "mysteries." These are unsolved secrets to all who depend upon the Hebrew revelation to confirm Paul's later unfoldings. The noble action of the Bereans avails much in the kingdom evangel, but not in Paul's. The more ignoble Corinthians were given special consideration, and received the first unfoldings of the conciliation.

     It is instructive to note that Paul begins his addresses to so-called "heathen," who had no divine revelation, with the book of nature, in which they may see displayed God's invisible attributes, His imperceptible power and divinity (Rom.1:20). The remarkable point in Athens was the fact that they had already gone so far as to recognize their own ignorance, by erecting an altar to an unknown God. Paul most aptly begins where they left off, and gives them the most masterly and eloquent oration on the God of nature that the Athenians, or anyone else, has ever heard.

p279
The Bereans are Rewarded

     Had Paul been a little farther along in his metamorphosis, beyond the crisis noted in Acts 19:21, he would have brought in the conciliation at this point, for he wrote of it only a short time afterward (2 Cor.5:16-21). Instead he approaches it by saying that God condones the times of ignorance. This word is literally OVER-PERCEIVED, which comes close to our overlook. Of course God is far more lenient where there is ignorance than where He has given light. The Jews were much more culpable than the "gentiles." But condoning goes beyond lenience due to extenuating circumstances. Like conciliation, it is in the realm of feeling. It treats an offense as if it had not been committed, but it does not hold out the hand of friendship, or lead to reconciliation.

     Another conciliatory note is struck when Paul, after speaking of righteous judgment by the Man Whom He specifies, adds the phrase, "tendering faith to all." He was not allowed to elaborate this further, for lack of faith was immediately apparent when he spoke of the resurrection, which was altogether outside the realm of the people's limited knowledge. But the mere mention of faith being tendered to all, is most suggestive of the opening chapters of Romans, the letter which anticipates the setting aside of Israel long before it is chronicled at the end of Acts (Acts 28:26; Rom.11:25). At this time it was still a secret, yet the apostle probably knew of it, and could hardly help being influenced by it in his contact with the nations.


PAUL AND REPENTANCE

     Paul preached repentance in Damascus and Jerusalem and Judea at the very beginning of his ministry (Acts 26:20). Although it has no place in the evangel for today, Paul, in his marvelous message to the Athenians, distinctly stated that "God is now charging mankind that all everywhere are to repent..." (Acts 17:30). In

p280
The Place of Repentance

Ephesus, also, he certified to both Jews and Greeks repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 20:21). When he sums up his career before King Agrippa he said, "first to those in Damascus, besides in Jerusalem also, besides to the whole province of Judea, and to the nations, I reported that they are to be repenting and turning back to God, engaging in acts worthy of repentance" (Acts 26:20). From this it is evident that he preached repentance throughout his whole pre-prison ministry, from the very beginning to the end, while the kingdom ecclesia was still in existence.

     Repentance still has a function to fulfill in the saints as is evident from Paul's latest epistles. By gentleness, proper teaching, bearing with evil and meekly training those who are antagonizing, the slave of the Lord may be leading them to repentance, and a realization of the truth to a sobering up out of the trap of the adversary (2 Tim.2:24-26). If we make it a condition of salvation of the sinner, it is apt to dilute the purity of grace, and tends to become penitence, an act meritorious, in place of faith, which has no merit whatever.

     Repentance also has its place in our daily experience. The sorrow of the world produces death, but sorrow according to God produces repentance (2 Cor.7:10). Those in Corinth who did not repent of their grievous sins could expect nothing but severe measures on Paul's part (2 Cor.12:21).

     I was convinced that I should be baptized by the statement that "the Corinthians, hearing, believed and baptized" (Acts 18:8). I had heard and believed, consequently I reasoned that I also must be baptized. No one told me that Paul had later written to this very ecclesia that, "Christ does not commission me to be baptizing..." (1 Cor.1:17). I was not informed that there is "one baptism," or the difference between "once" (in the Acts era) and "now" (Eph.2:11,13; 4:5). But I

p281
The Door of Faith

am sure that it will not be reckoned against me, for I did it ignorantly in unbelief!" (1 Tim.1:13). But this taught me to be sympathetic and forbearing with those who honestly think they are doing God's will when they obey one set of Scripture and ignore others which are withheld from them by the false teachers that abound. More and more I would warn the saints not to follow even Paul in everything in his pre-prison ministry. His example may be most misleading unless checked by his latest revelations.

     The first so-called "council" or convention of the ecclesia of God, in Jerusalem, marked a "decided" step in the downward path of the circumcision, as well as a "decided" severance of the uncircumcision from them, although this was the exact opposite of its aim. The decrees were intended to make it possible for the Jews to have fellowship with the nations. Long before this, Paul had been severed from his mother's womb (Gal.1:15), and for God's evangel (Rom.1:1), and by the holy spirit for a special work (Acts 13:2). Yet, following this, he severs the disciples from the synagogue (Acts 19:9). In stark contrast to this Peter severed himself from the nations. When men seek to unite on unscriptural grounds it generally leads to another split.

     The next occasion, when Paul turned away from Israelites to the nations, was in Corinth. But it will help us to grasp its significance better if we consider some of the intermediate events. The Jews drove Paul out of Pisidian Antioch, pelted him with stones in Iconium, left him for dead in Lystra. When they return to Syrian Antioch, Paul and Barnabas summed up their mission by reporting that God...opens to the nations a door of faith (Acts 14:27). This act of God explains why they turned to the nations. Before this the testimony of Christ had been confined to the Jews, the Hellenists, and the proselytes.

p282
The Severance between the Circumcision and Uncircumcision

     The Jews in Judea, probably realizing that the kingdom had not come, and that the scriptures quoted referred only to the day of the Lord, would not recognize any national blessing at that time, and demanded that they be treated as proselytes, and not as proselytes of the gate merely, who were not obliged to Judaize, but proselytes of righteousness, who were compelled to circumcise and keep the law. This is important here, because it would entirely neutralize Paul's ministry, and, in effect would make them Jews in time. So Paul would be turning from the Jews to turn the nations into Jews! To settle this question the convention was called in Jerusalem.

     At this convention the severance between the circumcision and uncircumcision was confirmed. The kingdom ecclesia would not admit a man of the nations into its fellowship. Hence there were two distinct companies, or "bodies," similar to the situation in the kingdom, when the saints in the nations will be separate and subordinate to the chosen people. As the stem gu of the Hebrew word "nation" gui means BODY (Gen.47:18), both Israel and the other nations may be called "bodies," but the believing Jews and the believing aliens formed distinct bodies within them. It was not yet true that they were united into a joint body (Eph.3:6). The decrees were made to enable them to have fellowship. So far as we know, Paul's party observed them, but not even Peter himself could do so for fear of the Jacobites (Gal.2:12). Believers in Christ were split into two bodies, on the basis of the flesh, because they did not properly cut the word of truth, and tried to put Paul and his converts into the kingdom which is still future.

     Now that there came to be a state of truce between the two sides, it is most interesting to note developments. During the next interval Paul won many converts among the nations and wrote epistles to them, gradually devel-

p283
The Severance between the Circumcision and Uncircumcision

oping the spiritual aspect of truth and rejecting the physical side (2 Cor.5:16). At that time, and in his earlier epistles, matters were in a state of flux, which should be considered carefully in any interpretation. Paul went to many places, including Derbe, Lystra (where Timothy joined him), Iconium, Phrygia, Galatia, Mysia, Troas, Philippi, Thessalonica, Athens, Corinth. There it was that the Jews would not have Paul, and he decided, "From now on I will go to the nations" (Acts 18:6).

     When he came to Ephesus, after arguing in the synagogue three months, the Jews were so stubborn that he withdrew and severed the disciples (Acts 19:9). This cleavage led to another great crisis in Paul's ministry and in the Acts account. Then we read that these things were fulfilled, and Paul ponders in spirit to go to Jerusalem and Rome (Acts 19:21). This leads to a veiled intimation of the present grace by means of the two "ecclesias," illegal and legal, in Ephesus, and later to his full exposition of present truth in his Ephesian epistle, written after the Acts era was closed. Then, in harmony with the spiritual nature of the truth about to be revealed, his flesh is removed from contact with the ecclesias where he had heralded the kingdom (Acts 20:25).

     Before this the relationship of believers of the uncircumcision to the circumcision spiritually were very vague, depending on the spirituality of each Jew. Most of them would not even have eaten with Cornelius, but Peter did (Acts 11:3), and he defended his action. But those dispersed from the affliction of Stephen spoke to orthodox Jews only, not even Hellenists, at first (Acts 11:19,20). Paul was called from Tarsus by Barnabas to speak to these at first (Acts 11:25). It was not until he was severed by the holy spirit for a special work and called by Sergius Paul that he actually spoke to a man

p284
Circumcision Not for Nations

of the nations, in spite of the opposition of Elymas (Acts 13:8), followed by the departure of John Mark, and it was not until he came to Pisidian Antioch that Paul turned to the nations (Acts 13:46). Then Paul reached many of these, and this led to the first church convention in Jerusalem.

     Corinth is important in this meditation because Paul practically repeated the phrase he had used in Pisidian Antioch, where the first ecclesia of the nations was formed, by saying to the Corinthian Jews, "Your blood be on your own head! Clear am I, from now on I will go to the nations." Thenceforth he separated his disciples. He went to the house of Titus Justus, next to the synagogue, and founded the large ecclesia in Corinth (Acts 18:6). In Ephesus, withdrawing, he severs the disciples, arguing in the school of Tyrannus (Acts 19:9), and finally in Rome, he repeats the curse from Isaiah, which our Lord had used to doom Israel, adding the words which close the history of the pentecostal ecclesia: "Let it be known to you, then, that to the nations was dispatched this salvation of God, and they will hear" (Matt.13:14; Rom.11:25; Acts 28:28).

     Once the circumcision apostles had definitely agreed not to go to the nations, the doom of the kingdom ecclesia was sealed. But, even though they would not herald the evangel to them, they insisted on ruling over them. So believing Israel eagerly grasped at the kingly aspect of millennial rule, but left the priestly ministry to Paul. They failed to fulfill their foremost function, but Paul did fulfill it. He wrote to the Roman saints, of "the grace being given to me from God, for me to be the minister of Christ Jesus for the nations, acting as a priest of the evangel of God" (Rom.15:16).

     Further facts concerning his turning to the nations will be presented when we come to consider more closely the teaching of Paul's pre-prison epistles.
A. E. K.

[Tom]

Here is more good information from the Unsearchable Riches magazine. I'm sharing all this information because I think it will clear up the confusion about the two evangels.  http://concordant.org/ur/index.html

V47P1 p159
The Knowledge of Paul's Evangel

PAUL'S EVANGEL

     In the Scriptures there is an evangel mentioned which is set apart from the others by the attachment of Paul's name to it. Paul calls it "my evangel." This was Paul's evangel because it was the one which was entrusted to him to be dispensed. Paul does not put his name upon it so as to set himself up, for that was contrary to the truth which he was bringing, but rather to set it apart from the evangel dispensed by others in the Scriptures. He speaks of it as "my evangel." for it was revealed to him and needed to be distinguished from the revelations made known in the circumcision writings. Paul's name is associated with a certain truth in the Scriptures, set apart from the rest, and to help us to recognize this he has set his name at the beginning of each of his epistles.

     The reason why this knowledge is so important to us is that this evangel, which Paul terms "my evangel," contains the truth which applies to us. Paul was designated as the apostle of the nations.

     The twelve apostles were commissioned to bring an evangel to the circumcision. This was essential, for in God's purpose the circumcision was to be a light to all the people of the earth: therefore, it was essential that they be saved so that they themselves could fill this role and so that the knowledge of the Lord should fill the earth as the waters cover the sea (Isa.11:9). When we come to the apostle Paul though, we find that God has another work in view. His plan for those He called through the ministry of Paul was not that they might be saved and thereupon "save the world," but rather that they might be used by God in completing the universe and bringing it to God—the complement by which all in all is completed.

     With these thoughts in mind, we want to consider what the distinction is, between the two evangels. Though they concern the same Saviour—the same "light"—their relationship to that light is different (2 Cor.5:16). When we think of Paul's evangel we notice that Paul speaks not of Jesus dying as the Lamb for the sins of the people, but rather of Him "crucified." This is a vital point to note. It is thus that we are united with Him. It is through Paul's evangel that we learn the truth that "with Christ have I been crucified, yet I am living; no longer I, but living in me is Christ" (Gal.2:20). In Corinthians he sets it forth as the "cross of Christ." Through this "we die together with Him" and are roused as members of a new creation—members of the body of Christ. Because of this fact we find Paul bringing the truth of justif-

p160
Paul Preaches to the Nations

ication, for only thus could it be. How can a man be justified before God? The children of Israel through the circumcision evangel could obtain a pardon but they never could be justified. Only one who dies is justified from sin. They could not be justified, but we who have believed through Paul's evangel have been justified, for we have died together with Christ so that we are now no longer living as members of the creation descended from Adam, but of the creation of which Christ is the Head.

     This truth could not be preached to the children of Israel for if they died together with Christ they would lose all their national distinctions, upon which all of God's promises to them rested. They would no longer be Jews, but members of the body of Christ. Paul alone was entrusted with this truth which is for us and is in accord with the work which God is doing today.

     Paul deals not with one nation or people, but rather brings all mankind before God, and declares all to be subject to the just verdict of God. All are wanting of the glory of God (Rom.3:23).

     The twelve apostles were concerned with the nation of Israel and later with the nations. Peter says in Acts 15:7, God had chosen that through "my mouth the nations are to hear." Yet what the nations were to hear through Peter's mouth is not the same as what they were to hear through Paul's mouth. To Paul, God gave a special revelation of the evangel he was to dispense. If he was to herald what the twelve apostles had already made known, this would not have been necessary. He had a special revelation, for he was appointed for a special work. He says, "I received it not from a man." He did not get it from Peter or the other apostles. He did not even get his evangel from Jesus when He was on the earth, for he was to proclaim Him not as the "seed of David," but as the Son of God (Rom.1:4). His evangel came from the ascended Christ. This is the vital distinction between the two evangels.

     There is another point of great importance, which is that there is another evangel proclaimed which is "neither" of these two. It is a different evangel but it is not another (Gal.1:6). Only these two mentioned previously were given by God and could be proclaimed with His authority. But each of them were separate evangels. However, there is a different evangel being proclaimed today, which is not genuine, and it is the one which mixes these two evangels together. Paul says in Galatians that this is the evangel which distorts the evangel of Christ. This is very serious. Paul says, "Let him be anathema who is proclaiming another besides what I bring." The circumcision evangel will be proclaimed again and there will be no anathema on that, nor is there any anathema on Paul's evangel. That is the evangel for today—the evangel by which people may be saved.
G.H.

[Tom]

Here is more good information from Unsearchable Riches magazine.  http://concordant.org/ur/index.html

V69P2 p245

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS


LAW AND GRACE

Are believers in Christ Jesus today supposed to keep the laws in the Old Testament?

     There is a good deal said about the law in Paul's epistles, especially in Romans and Galatians. The attitude we should take toward the law is clearly set forth in these epistles and, of course, in some others also, showing that there is a tremendous difference between the evangels of the Circumcision and of the Uncircumcision (Gal.2:7) with regard to the law. Very few seem to grasp the great difference between the two evangels.

     Let us consider the main points of distinction: In the evangel of the Circumcision we have law. It is not abrogated. As a matter of fact, the law continues throughout the millennium. Then Israel will still be under law. There will be a great difference in contrast to what was before, but nevertheless, the main object that God has in view continues right through that whole eon, with regard to the Circumcision. As far as God's actual purpose was concerned, the law was not given to be observed. It was not given that men should obey it and get a recognition from God, but to show them their inability to keep it (Rom.3:19-20; 5:20). That is why we have the long list of failures in Israel. The law given at Sinai was a great success from the viewpoint of God's intention. It showed that man is not capable of conforming to its standards. Jehovah's people had all sorts of special advantages. They are

p246
Truth for today is based on the Failure of the Law

given this law, and they excel only in making a failure of keeping it. That was God's intention, although it was contrary to His expressed will. This continues in the millennium, even though the law is written on their hearts. Perfection is not reached, even in that blessed era.

     There are a few very simple things that most of us do not fully grasp in connection with the law. When I mention them, you will see what I mean. I want particularly to lay upon your hearts that law is not God's way of dealing with humanity. Yet that is the idea you get in Christendom and its publications. They insist that God has given us His law and that we must try to obey it.

     To begin with, God left humanity without law for over two thousand years. He did not even give the law to Israel until they came to Mt. Sinai. Not only that, but He did not give it to humanity at all. The law is a very limited thing. God is using only a very small portion of humanity in this demonstration of the weakness and inability of the flesh. It is not for all mankind. God never intended it for the whole race. In time and scope it was limited. Not only that, but it is a national thing. It was given only to one nation, as such, not merely to individuals in that nation.

     Christendom recognizes to some extent the impossibility of keeping it all, for they divide the law into the moral and the ceremonial, to evade some parts that they know they cannot or will not fulfill, such as going to Jerusalem every once in awhile. There are parts of the law which can only be fulfilled in the land of Israel, and if you are not in the land, you cannot fulfill the law.

     Now I want particularly to point out to you that, when the truth for today is presented to us by Paul in

p247
Truth for today is based on the Failure of the Law

Romans, it is not based on law, but on the failure of law. The point here is that we have come to an end of the law. God has demonstrated that there is nothing in the law by which one may attain salvation or blessing. This is not so with the Circumcision. God still keeps on with the law in the kingdom eon in order to make His demonstration complete. God limited His law to only a small group of people. Later on He actually writes the law upon the hearts of His people, yet even that does not bring in perfection. When we come to the end of the dispensation of law—to the time when Paul begins to write—we have a divine righteousness entirely apart from law.

     The law, instead of doing what a good many theologians think it does (that is, break the ground for the evangel) makes people's hearts callous. God never intended it to do anything else. God did not have to give the law in order to prepare people for salvation, but rather to demonstrate what was in the human heart—to put man in his place so that He, Himself, might be given His exalted position as the Saviour and Justifier of all.


Does not Romans 2:13 contradict your teaching that Christians are not required to observe the Old Testament commands?

     In order to press the point that each passage must be kept in its context, let us consider the following statement in Romans 2:13: "The doers of the law shall be justified." Let us not read the context. In this demonstration we do not want the context. We simply read that the doer of the law will be justified. "But," one could say, "that is altogether different. In Romans 3:20 we have: `...because by works of law no flesh at

p248
No Exceptions to our Need of Christ

all shall be justified in His sight.' Now you see how the Bible contradicts itself!" However, between these two passages, we read: "Not one is just—not even one." Instead of being a contradiction, it is simply a logical result. If there are no doers of the law, then it is very plain no one will be justified—no flesh shall be justified before God.

     That is only one example. Another passage I want to bring before you is like it. In Romans 1:18 to 2:16 we read about those who are not under law. God will be paying each one in accord with his acts: to those, indeed, who by endurance in good acts are seeking glory and honor and incorruption, life eonian (2:6,7). Here we have a great statement of fact. All will acknowledge that it is true and we dare not contradict it. God must do the right thing to all His creatures. He must reward those who fulfill the conditions. But who is going to get this reward? Some claim that there are such people. We might imagine that such a character exists, even if we have never found one. But God has made it plain that not one is even just, let alone good (Rom.3:10). That should settle the matter.

     I have made it clear now that there is no contradiction whatever, but that the argument requires first of all that God will be righteous and treat everybody according to this standard of righteousness. If we will go a little further in Romans, we will see that God does not reckon on anyone justifying himself. In the fifth of Romans we read: "Consequently, then, as it was through one offense for all mankind for condemnation...." Thank God, there are no exceptions! It would nullify the work of Christ if a single soul should be able to work his way into salvation or justification or anything of that kind, either through law or apart from law.

p249
Law transforms Sin into Offense

What is the place of the Law in each of the two evangels?

     As the law is not of faith, but of works, it is only a limited, local and national demonstration, for one nation and one land and one religion, not for all men in every land and every nation. The evangel of the Circumcision retains it; that of the Uncircumcision acknowledges the lesson it has to teach, but never seeks to repeat the demonstration. The law was not given until Israel came to Sinai. Even they did not have it before. It was never given to the nations. Not even Israel can fulfill it, in their dispersion. They must be in the land. It cannot be kept anywhere else, or by any other nation. How absurd it is for Christianity to leave faith, which is for them, and purloin the law, which is not theirs!

     Law is not the foundation of God's dealings with the race. It only came in by the way (Rom.5:20). Its object was not to give men a standard of conduct by which they may walk to please God, but to transform sin into offense. It is only a temporary expedient in God's great demonstration, showing that man not only falls short of the glory of God, but is at enmity with Him. He not only fails, but rebels. The light of the law does not keep him from sin, but leads him on to offense.

     The Circumcision evangel provides power to fulfill the law, but in the evangel of the Uncircumcision God's righteousness is manifested apart from the law (Rom.3:21). The early chapters of Romans review and restate the whole question of man's relation to God in order to clear the ground for a new foundation on which to rest a fresh revelation, quite distinct and different from the Circumcision evangel. It is not confined to the Circumcision and proselytes, but includes all mankind. It is not limited to the land. It does

p250
Just Requirements of the Law

not appeal to God's written revelation, but to the light of nature and conscience, which takes the place of law among the nations.

     Strikingly different is the relation of the believer to the law today from that of the Circumcision. Their evangel is contained in the new covenant. Jehovah will not loose them from the law. Rather He will impart His laws to their comprehension and inscribe them on their hearts. They will be given an inward impulse and a divine power to carry out God's precepts during the thousand years. They will fulfill it in the strength which He provides. It will no longer be a ministration of death.

     The very opposite is our portion, as well as of those of the Jews who, like Paul, received the evangel of the Uncircumcision. To them it does deal out death. They are caused to die to the law through the body of Christ. They are exempted from the law. They serve in newness of spirit and not in oldness of the letter (Rom.7:1-6). Not the literal precepts, but the just requirements of the law are fulfilled in those who do not walk in accord with flesh, but in harmony with spirit (Rom.8:1-4).

     Justification can never come through law-keeping. It came to Abraham long before the law was given. It comes to us who never received it. It comes to those under it only by means of death to it. Yet its righteous requirements are fulfilled only in those who, by having God's righteousness, not their own, are led by His Spirit. Let us praise and glorify our God Who finds in Himself and in His Christ all that is needed to make us just, so that He can reconcile us to Himself and glorify us in His Beloved Son!
A.E.K.

[Tom]

Here is more good information from Unsearchable Riches magazine. http://concordant.org/ur/index.html

V79P1 p31

NO LONGER MINORS


CHRIST'S LORDSHIP
AND OUR MATURITY IN CHRIST

SOME thirty-six years ago God led me into a class of "Truth Seekers" whose sole purpose was to study the Sacred Scriptures and try to glean from them an appreciation of God's real plan of salvation for mankind. Most of us had been brought up in Christian homes rooted in many of the popular denominations, and in many instances we had to lay aside some of the teachings and interpretations of the Bible that had been passed on to us from previous generations.

     The matter that troubled me most was the apparent conflict in the teaching of Peter and the rest of the Twelve versus that of the converted Saul of Tarsus who never even saw Jesus in the flesh. Not until we had studied together for over two years did it occur to me that there were two distinctive evangels: that concerning the Kingdom heralded by Jesus Himself and His Jewish followers, and the Pauline Evangel. The former evangel was based upon salvation through a combination of faith and conformity to law; the latter was channeled through the grace of God alone. This distinction, finally dawning upon me, did then, and does still, represent one of God's greatest gifts to me, and I have endeavored in my small way to pass this realization along to as many others as possible.

     One of the facets of this "new" concept which has particularly kindled my interest was its relationship to the Lordship of Christ. The prevailing concept of

p32
Lordship Not Based on Threats but on Christ's Finished Work

Christ's Lordship differs surprisingly from that presented in Paul's epistles. It is this matter that I would like to discuss in this article.

     It is common knowledge that the Scriptures often speak of God's indignation (wrath) and of divine vengeance. It would seem that this emphasis was carried over into the early Christian religion as a critical factor in its organization. This has continued to the present day.

     Thus the distinctive evangel that Paul announced during his lifetime both to Jew and Gentile (salvation by grace from a kind and loving God) was obscured. In Romans 1:18ff Paul had spoken of God's indignation as a matter exhibiting the great need of the evangel of grace. Yet the church hierarchy related it to the Lordship of Christ and made it a motivating principle for Christian service. Similarly, Paul referred to God's vengeance as evidence that believers should not seek to avenge themselves on their enemies (Rom.12:19), while church tradition has generally presented it as a threat to the believer in order to keep him in line.

     Under the distorted (cf Gal.1:7) evangel of salvation based on fear and works, to become a Christian one had to conform to a ritual, the first step of which was to acknowledge Christ as Lord and Saviour, confessing sins, repenting and being baptized. The second step, to assure one's ultimate deliverance from wrath was to follow in the footsteps of the Saviour, accepting His Lordship in everyday life. For while past sins were washed away at baptism, it was inevitable that a believer would commit more sins during his lifetime, and even though he confessed and repented frequently, there would undoubtedly be some unforgiven sins on the Book of Life which God could use on Judgment Day to condemn him to an eternity in Hell. No one was

p33
Lordship Not Based on Threats but on Christ's Finished Work

ever sure whether he was saved or not until that final day, so everyone lived a life of uncertainty regarding his ultimate destination.

     The Pauline Evangel, however, teaches us to acknowledge Christ as our Saviour, the only begotten Son of God, He Who emptied Himself and took on the form of a human and dwelt among us for thirty-three years, Who was humiliated and suffered an unmerciful death on the cross for all of our sins, Who arose on the third day and now sits at the right hand of the Father, waiting for the time when He will appear in the air and call "the elect" to meet and be with Him always. Our salvation is based solely on this conviction, not by any works that we do or any laws that we conform to.

     These provisions, centered in the accomplished work of Christ, annul the Lordship-precepts prescribed by traditional Christianity. Christ's Lordship is not imposed to enhance one's chances for salvation, but rather it is based on a salvation already graciously gained on our behalf.

     Nevertheless, those who have mixed the two evangels claim that the salvation-by-grace concept encourages believers to accept the philosophy of "eat, drink and be merry" because all is forgiven by the grace of God anyway. This is the conclusion that many might reasonably come to, but I would implore them to read on.

     Paul's letter to the Romans was written to bring the believers of that day as well as us from an immature to a more mature concept of God's plan of salvation. The whole book is priceless in this regard. I had a Jewish convert once say to me, "How could one remain a Jew after having read Romans?"

     There is one section in Romans that has a direct

p34
We Died to Sin

bearing on a mature recognition of Christ's Lordship. It begins with chapter 6, verse 1, where Paul asks, "What, then, shall we declare? That we may be persisting in sin that grace should be increasing?" In other words, we who have finally accepted Christ as our Lord and Saviour, after having lived a life of sin and knowing now that we have been justified in God's sight, should we now persist in our sins knowing that God's grace is unlimited, and knowing that through Christ's sacrifice, we are all justified in the acts we have done or will do in the future? If that is our attitude, we are far from maturity, as Paul explains in Romans 6:2-14. "May it not be coming to that! We, who died to sin, how shall we still be living in it? Or are you ignorant that whoever are baptized into Christ Jesus, are baptized into His death? We, then, were entombed together with Him through baptism into death, that, even as Christ was roused from among the dead through the glory of the Father, thus we also should be walking in newness of life. For if we have become planted together in the likeness of His death, nevertheless we shall be of the resurrection also, knowing this, that our old humanity was crucified together with Him, that the body of Sin may be nullified, for us by no means to be still slaving for Sin, for one who dies has been justified from Sin.

     "Now if we died together with Christ, we believe that we shall be living together with Him also, having perceived that Christ, being roused from among the dead, is no longer dying. Death is lording over Him no longer, for in that He died, He died to Sin once for all time, yet in that He is living, He is living to God. Thus you also, be reckoning yourselves to be dead, indeed, to Sin, yet living to God in Christ Jesus our Lord.
     "Let not Sin, then, be reigning in your mortal body,

p35
Living Unto God

for you to be obeying its lusts. Nor yet be presenting your members, as implements of injustice, to Sin, but present yourselves to God as if alive from among the dead, and your members as implements of righteousness to God. For Sin shall not be lording it over you, for you are not under law but under grace."

     Finding that Christ is our Lord and Saviour means that we desire to walk "worthily of the Lord for all pleasing, bearing fruit in every good work, and growing in the realization of God" (Col.1:10). This is an attitude we most willingly accept because of all the wonderful blessings He has endowed us with. This acceptance of Christ's Lordship does not rise out of fear of His indignation, or of being sentenced to an eternity in Hell. It is the mature attitude that rises from an appreciation of the evangel of grace.

     At the same time, we recognize that we are still subject to human frailties. And even though we are strongly motivated out of our love, affection and appreciation for God's grace, we fail and even yield from time to time to sinful influences. This is the human condition and is true of everyone, no matter what our views may be of the evangel. The question is, What is the mature concept of Christ's Lordship that God has provided for us in dealing with our everyday weakness and sins? Is it a Lordship established by a gracious, accomplished salvation, and is such a concept of His Lordship an effective force in our lives for making progress in dealing with our weaknesses?

     Again, Paul, who says, "Become imitators of me, according as I also am of Christ" (1 Cor.11:1), leads us in the path of maturity. He writes, "Not that I already obtained, or am already perfected. Yet I am pursuing, if I may be grasping also that for which was grasped also by Christ Jesus. Brethren, not as yet am I reckon-

p36
Imitators of Paul as he was of Christ

ing myself to have grasped, yet one thing—forgetting, indeed, those things which are behind, yet stretching out to those in front—toward the goal am I pursuing for the prize of God's calling above in Christ Jesus. Whoever, then, are mature, may be disposed to this, and if in anything you are differently disposed, this also shall God reveal to you. Moreover, in what we outstrip others, there is to be a mutual disposition to be observing the elements by the same rule.
     "Become imitators together of me, brethren, and be noting those who are walking thus, according as you have us for a model, for many are walking, of whom I often told you, yet now am lamenting also as I tell it, who are enemies of the cross of Christ, whose consummation is destruction, whose god is their bowels, and whose glory is in their shame, who to the terrestrial are disposed. For our realm is inherent in the heavens, out of which we are awaiting a Saviour also, the Lord, Jesus Christ, Who will transfigure the body of our humiliation, to conform it to the body of His glory, in accord with the operation which enables Him even to subject all to Himself" (Phil.3:12-21).

     Another helpful passage from Paul on this matter is as follows: "We should all attain to the unity of the faith and of the realization of the Son of God, to a mature man, to the measure of the stature of the complement of the Christ, that we may by no means still be minors, surging hither and thither and being carried about by every wind of teaching, by human caprice, by craftiness with a view to the systematizing of the deception" (Eph.4:13,14).

     As we continue to "grasp" for maturity in Christ, we should not become discouraged by our human weaknesses and assume a guilt complex. Our course in the Lord should be to acknowledge our mistakes, and

p37
Imitators of Paul as he was of Christ

truly regret them, while continuing to praise God all the more for His grace and goodness. The recognition that we serve the Lord Who has dealt with our mistakes on the cross is truly an effective force in dealing with present weaknesses. Our aim comes to be one of glorifying God in everything we think, do or say because we know that in His eyes we are spotless, totally justified, and our destiny is with Him. This is maturity in Christ.
                                                W. W. Bentley, Jr.

[eaglesway]

No one anywhere is under law. Paul called this, the attempt to bring believers(any believers) under the law, another gospel.

[Tom]

Here is more good information from Unsearchable Riches magazine. http://concordant.org/ur/index.html

V79P1 p91The Apostle of the Nations


PAUL

SINCE FIRST I was introduced to the truths of God's Word, more than half a century ago, there has been one concern that has continued to trouble me. That concerns the matter in which the apostle Paul has been and still is treated. It almost seems that he is accorded the position of a second-class apostle. Why is there so little appreciation of his unique and important place as the apostle of the nations?

     In the CV of Romans 11:13, we read that Paul is "the apostle of the nations," but many other translations speak of him here as "an apostle." To be sure, the definite article "the" does not appear in the original Greek of this passage (as is indicated by the use of lightface type in the CV). But the English sublinear in the CONCORDANT GREEK TEXT of this passage brings out a definite stress on this commission given to Paul. Literally, he writes, "...as much as indeed, then, I am, I, of the nations commissioner...." The "I" appears both as part of the verb "am" and as a separate pronoun. There is something truly unique about this apostleship.

     My idea in this article is to gather from the Scriptures themselves an account of Paul's testimony concerning the distinctive features of his call and apostleship.

     Let us begin with Paul's defense given as he stood on the steps of the citadel in Jerusalem:

     "I am a man, a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, yet

p92
Saul's Disqualification

reared in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, trained according to the strictness of the hereditary law, being inherently zealous for God according as all of you are today, I, who persecute this way to death, binding and giving over both men and women to jail, as the chief priest also was testifying to me, and to the entire eldership, from whom, receiving letters also to the brethren, I went into Damascus, to be leading also those being there, bound, to Jerusalem, that they may be punished" (Acts 22:3-5).

     We probably all will agree that this man did not seem to be very well qualified to be an apostle of Christ. Also he did not seem to be very well prepared to bring a message of grace to the nations:

     "If any other one is presuming to have confidence in flesh, I rather: in circumcision the eighth day, of the race of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews, in relation to law a Pharisee, in relation to zeal, persecuting the ecclesia, in relation to the righteousness which is in law, becoming blameless" (Phil.3:4-6).

     And yet he was called: "Now it occurred, at my going and drawing near to Damascus, about midday, suddenly out of heaven a considerable light flashes about me. Besides, I fall flat, and I hear a voice saying to me, `Saul! Saul! Why are you persecuting Me?' Yet I answered and said, `Who art Thou, Lord?' Besides, He said to me, `I am Jesus, the Nazarene, Whom you are persecuting.' Now those who are with me gaze, indeed, at the light, yet they hear not the voice of Him Who is speaking to me. Now I said, `What shall I be doing, Lord?' Now the Lord said to me, `Rise. Go into Damascus, and there you will be spoken to concerning all which has been set before you to do'" (Acts 22:6-10).

     Of this surprising call, Paul later said, "Grateful am

p93
Paul's Surprising Call

I to Him Who invigorates me, Christ Jesus our Lord, for He deems me faithful, assigning me a service, I, who formerly was a calumniator and a persecutor and an outrager: but I was shown mercy, seeing that I do it being ignorant, in unbelief. Yet the grace of our Lord overwhelms with faith and love in Christ Jesus. Faithful is the saying and worthy of all welcome, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, foremost of whom am I. But therefore was I shown mercy, that in me, the foremost, Jesus Christ should be displaying all His patience, for a pattern of those who are about to be believing on Him for life eonian" (1 Tim.1:12-16).

     After Paul's call, a considerable time elapses before we come to his meeting with the other apostles in Jerusalem: "For I am making known to you, brethren, as to the evangel which is being brought by me, that it is not in accord with man. For neither did I accept it from a man, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ. For you hear of my behavior once, in Judaism, that I inordinately persecuted the ecclesia of God and ravaged it. And I progressed in Judaism above many contemporaries in my race, being inherently exceedingly more zealous for the traditions of my fathers.
     "Now when it delights God, Who severs me from my mother's womb and calls me through His grace, to unveil His Son in me that I may be evangelizing Him among the nations, I did not immediately submit it to flesh and blood, neither came I up to Jerusalem to those who were apostles before me, but I came away into Arabia, and I return again to Damascus" (Gal.1:11-17)

     As we see here, Paul went into Arabia and then to Damascus again.

     "Thereupon, after three years, I came up to Jerusa-

p94
Paul and the Twelve

lem to relate my story to Cephas, and I stay with him fifteen days" (Gal.1:18).

     After this visit there is again a lengthy separation of Paul from those who were commissioned before him.

     "Thereupon I came into the regions of Syria and Cilicia. Yet I was unknown by face to the ecclesias of Judea which are in Christ. Yet only they were hearing that `He who once was persecuting us, now is evangelizing the faith which once he ravaged.' And they glorified God in me.
     "Thereupon, after the lapse of fourteen years, I again went up to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. Now I went up in accord with a revelation and submitted to them the evangel which I am heralding among the nations, yet privately to those of repute, lest somehow I should be racing or ran for naught" (Gal.1:21-2:2).

     Surely, if this had been the same evangel that the Twelve proclaimed, there would have been no need for Paul to make it known to them. At all times he acted in conscious independence of the Twelve. He was in no way inferior to them, as he writes in 2 Corinthians, "For I am reckoning to be deficient in nothing pertaining to the paramount apostles. Yet even if I am plain in expression, nevertheless I am not in knowledge, but in everything being made manifest in all for you" (2 Cor.11:5,6).

     Again he wrote, "...for I am not deficient in anything pertaining to the paramount apostles, even if I am nothing" (2 Cor.12:11).

     He does not defend himself or boast in his achievements of learning, but he fearlessly defends his apostleship and the message he was given to proclaim:

     "Now from those reputed to be somewhat—what kind they once were is of no consequence to me (God is

p95
The Two Evangels

not taking up the human aspect)—for to me those of repute submitted nothing. But on the contrary, perceiving that I have been entrusted with the evangel of the Uncircumcision, according as Peter of the Circumcision (for He Who operates in Peter for the apostleship of the Circumcision operates in me also for the nations)...[they] give to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship..." (Gal.2:6-9).

     Nevertheless, this recognition of Paul's distinctive apostleship and its unique emphasis on grace was not always observed: "Now when Cephas came to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, for he was self-censured. For, before the coming of some from James, he ate together with those of the nations. Yet when they came, he shrank back and severed himself, fearing those of the Circumcision. And the rest of the Jews also play the hypocrite with him, so that Barnabas also was led away with their hypocrisy. But when I perceived that they are not correct in their attitude toward the truth of the evangel, I said to Cephas in front of all, `If you, being inherently a Jew, are living as the nations, and not as the Jews, how are you compelling the nations to be judaizing?'" (Gal.2:11-14).

     Paul had mentioned two evangels, the evangel of the Circumcision, which had been assigned to Peter, and the evangel of the Uncircumcision (Gal.2:7). It is important that these expressions be correctly understood. They do not designate the same evangel or gospel being heralded to the Circumcision and to the Uncircumcision, as is most generally believed. The "of" shows us that Paul is speaking of a divergent nature of these messages and a distinct sphere of application.

     To me, these passages (and others as well) show that Paul was and is truly the apostle of the nations. He

p96
Paul as a Pattern

should thus be recognized among all believers. May we, like Timothy, be fully following him in his teaching, motive, purpose, faith, patience, love, endurance, persecutions and sufferings (2 Tim.3:10) and be holding fast to the pattern of sound words which he proclaimed (2 Tim.2:11-13).
Julius S. Shaw

[rosered]

No one anywhere is under law. Paul called this, the attempt to bring believers(any believers) under the law, another gospel.

  Yes,

They all will come to Christ  , the one and only  Jesus Christ  ....HIS NAME ..this same Jesus who brought "  the   gracious good news  ",  the gift of God .


  the  Lord of the dead and living    making Him the  ruler over death and the true good news , the 1 covenant of    death was annulled by the Cross of Jesus Christ
Hebrews 8
The New Covenant
...12"FOR I WILL BE MERCIFUL TO THEIR INIQUITIES, AND I WILL REMEMBER THEIR SINS NO MORE." 13When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear.

Isaiah 28        your covenant of death annulled    A Cornerstone in Zion


We build on Jesus Christ good news and truth in bringing  us  into  the new covenant    of heavens and earth   because of HIS  Life


...17"I will make justice the measuring line And righteousness the level;

Then hail will sweep away the refuge of lies And the waters will overflow the secret place.


18"Your covenant with death will be canceled, And your pact with Sheol will not stand;


When the overwhelming scourge passes through, Then you become its trampling place.


19"As often as it passes through, it will seize you; For morning after morning it will pass through, anytime during the day or night, And it will be sheer terror to understand what it means."...



  https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=romans+11+&version=EXB

[Seth]

No one anywhere is under law. Paul called this, the attempt to bring believers(any believers) under the law, another gospel.

:iagree:

[eaglesway]

22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.

23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.

24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.

26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.

27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.

29 And if ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Galatians 3

[Seth]

Why are there two evangels? Were the object of both merely to rescue the sinner from a terrible doom, then one should suffice. But when we see that one evangel is part of God's great demonstration of the futility and failure of the flesh, hence must be based on flesh, and the other acknowledges the result of this demonstration, hence is based on spirit, then we see that they are nearly as wide apart as the poles. With such totally divergent objects in view they cannot help but differ radically, and any mixture is bound to be confusing and contradictory.

So, is this essentially saying that Jewish people who were told to put their trust in Jesus Christ for salvation, were given the Holy Spirt and brotherhood with Gentiles, were also given an evangel of failure, instructed to do things they instructors knew they couldn't do, so that the Gentile believers could be shown to have a better evangel?

[Tom]

I think we're all playing our assigned parts in the drama of the universe to demonstrate the futility of man trying to save himself by works contrasted by the true salvation in grace through faith. And the climax of the story will be when all on earth and in the heavens are reconciled to God, and God is all in all.

[Seth]

So the Jewish Christians are getting screwed.

[Tom]

I think atheists think that about all Christians, but I also think the Jewish people will eventually get their promised kingdom of the heavens and the believers will be running the show.

[Psalm91:4]

I don't know where I'll end up because my bio dad`s family name is of Hebrew origin....( my maiden name ) but I was raised a gentile.   Then became a believer in Jesus Christ.

Whatdayathink, Tom?   :)

[Tom]

I think you're in the body of Christ, sis, and will get snatched away with the rest of us for our ministry in the celestial realm during the coming eon. Scripture doesn't say where we'll all be after the consummation of the eons when God is all in all, but I trust God that it will be an amazing experience.

[Seth]

How can anyone know where they will be if they don't know what their genes are? and what about half Jewish people? Why doesn't the New Testament address the issue of the destiny of mixed races?

[eaglesway]

Overcomers of all the ages will be in the first ressurection at the unveiling at the end of the age. The dead in Christ will rise first, then we who are alive andvremain will meet them in the air..... First resurection. One new man. Revelation of the children of God. :2c:

[Shev]

The long article above is full of assumptions and bizarre interpretations. It says that Paul's gospel was an immediate improvement on Peter's because Paul's recognized Jesus as the Son of God, whereas Peter's had Him as Lord. But this makes no sense...it was Peter who first confessed Christ as the Son of the Living God, and it was indeed Peter who first preached to the 'Uncircumcision', at the house of Cornelius. I can only imagine what embarrassment Peter had if he came across a Jewish servant of Cornelius and had to take him to one side to explain the other evangel!  :winkgrin:

It also says Paul was not qualified as an apostle of the circumcision because he did not have the moral excellence of someone like Nataniel. What? Has the writer not heard that God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise? Christ did not need to search for those with moral excellence, rather He chose those He would fill with His own moral excellence at Pentecost!

Also, if one of the 'evangels' - remembering that evangel means good message or good news, is about the failure of the Jews, how is that message good news? How does it qualify as an 'evangel'? I suppose one might say that as God is sovereign, even failure and darkness eventually is good news as all will ultimately be summed up in Christ etc, but then there becomes no need to label any news as anything other than 'good', as all things work together for good. So we might as well tell someone that their beloved dying is good news, or that their dog getting run over is good news, because it is all planned to work out in the end.

One sure sign of the 'two evangels' being a faulty premise is the way it takes the focus of the good news away from Jesus Christ, and onto the believer or people group. The reason there is only one evangel, is that there is only One Jesus Christ. There is no good news other than Him, and no good message other than Him. To divide up the news of Christ is to separate His body, and show partiality to the flesh. The gospel is not about people groups - it is about Jesus Christ, and it IS Jesus Christ.