Over the history of Christianity, the vast majority of Christians have believed that there is only one Gospel in scripture, or one “good news” by which people are saved. This position has led them to believe that the modern church, the body of Christ, began at the Pentecost following Jesus’ ascension due to the miraculous events recorded in Acts 2 (known as “Acts 2 dispensationalism”), and that all the teachings and commandments of the New Testament - from Jesus’ earthly ministry to Revelation - are binding on the body of Christ today.
However, more recently (since the nineteenth century), a minority of Christians have believed that there are actually two Gospels in the New Testament: the gospel heralded by Paul to the Gentiles, and the gospel to the Israelites heralded by Jesus (in His earthly ministry) and the twelve apostles. This position is known as “hyper-dispensationalism”, “mid-Acts dispensationalism”, or “Pauline dispensationalism” [1].
Although I was initially very skeptical of Pauline dispensationalism, as I began to test this idea (1 Thess. 5:21) and study the New Testament in more detail, I came to the conclusion that there are very certainly two separate gospels that were heralded to the Gentiles and to the Israelites. In this article, I will explain why Pauline dispensationalism is a necessary conclusion from the disparate teachings of Paul and the other apostles, and how scripture absolutely refutes the idea that there is only one gospel to both the Gentiles and Israelites alike.
Two gospels?
but, on the contrary, having seen that I have been entrusted with the gospel of the uncircumcision, as Peter with [that] of the circumcision, for He who did work with Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, did work also in me in regard to the nations, and having known the grace that was given to me, James, and Cephas, and John, who were esteemed to be pillars, a right hand of fellowship they did give to me, and to Barnabas, that we to the nations, and they to the circumcision may go (Galatians 2:7-9)
This was the first passage that truly indicated to me that there may be two gospels in the New Testament, one to the Gentiles (the “uncircumcision”) and one to the Israelites (the “circumcision”). Most Christians believe that this passage is saying that the same gospel was being heralded to two different groups by the different apostles.
However, the Greek here is absolutely clear. Rather than being in the dative case, which would mean that the same gospel is to the two different groups, the nouns “uncircumcision” and “circumcision” are in the genitive case, which means that they are referring to the character of the gospels in question. Therefore, this passage shows that there is a difference in character between the gospel being heralded by James, Peter, and John to the Israelites, and the gospel being heralded by Paul and Barnabas to the Gentiles.
Obviously, it is dangerous to establish such an important doctrine on the basis of a single verse. But this idea that Paul preached his own, personal gospel to the nations appears repeatedly throughout his writings:
in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men, according to my gospel, through Jesus Christ. (Rom. 2:16)
And to Him who is able to establish you, according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the secret, in the times of the ages having been kept silent (Rom. 16:25)
According to the grace of God that was given to me, as a wise master-builder, a foundation I have laid, and another doth build on it (1 Cor. 3:10)
For this cause, I Paul, the prisoner of Christ Jesus for you the nations, if, indeed, ye did hear of the dispensation of the grace of God that was given to me in regard to you, that by revelation He made known to me the secret, according as I wrote before in few [words] (Eph. 3:1-3)
I did become a ministrant according to the dispensation of God, that was given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God, the secret that hath been hid from the ages and from the generations, but now was manifested to his saints (Col. 1:25-26)
Remember Jesus Christ, raised out of the dead, of the seed of David, according to my gospel (2 Tim. 2:8)
Before I came to understand Pauline dispensationalism, I thought that Paul was being sacrilegious and presumptuous, by making “the gospel of Jesus Christ” (Mk. 1:1) out to be his own! But if the gospel that Paul preached was a revelation made solely to him, then suddenly his insistence on calling it “my gospel” makes perfect sense. He called it “my gospel” in order to distinguish it from the separate gospel to the Israelites that was preached by the James and the twelve apostles.
Furthermore, as shown above, Paul repeatedly states that the gospel he preached was a secret that had not been revealed before his time (Rom. 16:25; Eph. 3:3; Col. 1:26). And yet, Peter said that the gospel was revealed by the prophets hundreds of years before Christ (Acts 3:24; 10:43). Is this an irreconcilable contradiction that shows the Bible to be false? Not if Paul and Peter were preaching different gospels, one of which was revealed long ago, and the other of which was revealed first to Paul. In fact, Paul explicitly says that his gospel was revealed to him by the glorified Christ, in a vision:
And I make known to you, brethren, the gospel that were proclaimed by me, that it is not according to man, for neither did I from man receive it, nor was I taught [it], but through a revelation of Jesus Christ (Gal. 1:11-12)
Could Paul have been any clearer that the gospel he preached was not the same one heralded by the apostles before him?
Two gospel messages
And I make known to you, brethren, the gospel that I proclaimed to you, which also ye did receive, in which also ye have stood, through which also ye are being saved, in what words I proclaimed good news to you, if ye hold fast, except ye did believe in vain, for I delivered to you first, what also I did receive, that Christ died for our sins, according to the scriptures, and that he was buried, and that he hath risen on the third day, according to the scriptures (1 Cor. 15:1-4)
Many indeed, therefore, other signs also did Jesus before his disciples, that are not written in this book; and these have been written that ye may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing ye may have life in his name. (John 20:31 cf. 1 John 2:22, 5:1)
Further proof that Paul preached a different gospel than Jesus (in His earthly ministry) and the twelve apostles is the fact that the messages preached by these two groups were entirely different. Paul’s gospel - the message by which the Corinthian church was saved - is that Jesus died for our sins, was buried, and rose on the third day. In contrast, the gospel message by which John hopes his audience will be saved is simply that “Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God”. The existence of two gospel messages, different messages that people need to believe to be saved, necessitates the existence of two different gospels.
The fact that the messages preached by Paul and the other apostles was different is confirmed in the book of Acts, where Peter repeatedly exhorts his Jewish listeners to believe that Jesus is the Messiah. Peter never preaches that Jesus’ death “for our sins” is a necessary belief to be saved, and only ever uses His death and resurrection as evidence that He was the Messiah (not as the foundation of salvation). In fact, rather than preaching Christ’s crucifixion as something glorious, as Paul did (1 Cor. 1:18), he acted as though it were a shameful event that his audience needed to repent of!
“Men, Israelites! hear these words, Jesus the Nazarene, a man approved of God among you by mighty works, and wonders, and signs, that God did through him in the midst of you, according as also ye yourselves have known; this one, by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, being given out, having taken by lawless hands, having crucified — ye did slay... assuredly, therefore, let all the house of Israel know, that both Lord and Christ did God make him — this Jesus whom ye did crucify... Repent [i.e., of the crucifixion], and be baptized each of you on the name of Jesus Christ, to remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:22-23, 36, 38)
“Men, Israelites! why wonder ye at this? or on us why look ye so earnestly, as if by our own power or piety we have made him to walk? The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, did glorify His child Jesus, whom ye delivered up, and denied him in the presence of Pilate, he having given judgment to release [him], and ye the Holy and Righteous One did deny, and desired a man — a murderer — to be granted to you, and the Prince of the life ye did kill, whom God did raise out of the dead, of which we are witnesses... and God, what things before He had declared through the mouth of all His prophets, that the Christ should suffer, He did thus fulfil; repent ye [i.e., of the crucifixion], therefore, and turn back, for your sins being blotted out, that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord” (Acts 3:13-15, 18-19)
“Ye stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and in ears! ye do always the Holy Spirit resist; as your fathers — also ye; which of the prophets did not your fathers persecute? and they killed those who declared before about the coming of the Righteous One, of whom now ye betrayers and murderers have become“ (Acts 7:51-52)
Finally, Jesus’ disciples during His earthly ministry did not understand that He was going to die (and certainly not that His death would be “for our sins”), but were still saved through their belief that He was the Christ (Matt. 16:15-22). This is incontrovertible evidence that Israelites were saved at that time not by belief in Christ’s death for our sins and resurrection, but by belief that Jesus was the Messiah.
The fact that the Gentiles (under Paul’s gospel) were saved by their belief in Jesus’s death for our sins and resurrection, whereas Israelites (under Jesus and the twelve apostles) were saved by their belief that Jesus is the Messiah (while not fully understanding that Christ’s death was for our sins), demonstrates absolutely that Paul preached a different gospel than did the twelve apostles, or even Jesus during His earthly ministry.
Two methods of salvation
Furthermore, throughout the New Testament, there are two entirely different methods of salvation being preached. Jesus, during His earthly ministry, along with James and the twelve apostles, actually preached that water baptism and the keeping of the Mosaic Law was necessary along with faith to be saved. See the following passages:
“Whoever therefore may loose one of these commands [of the Law] — the least — and may teach men so, least he shall be called in the kingdom of the heavens, but whoever may do and may teach [them], he shall be called great in the kingdom of the heavens.” (Matt. 5:19)
Then Jesus spake to the multitudes, and to his disciples, saying, “On the seat of Moses sat down the scribes and the Pharisees; all, then, as much as they may say to you to observe, observe and do, but according to their works do not, for they say, and do not” (Matt. 23:1-3)
Then said Jesus to his disciples, “If any one doth will to come after me, let him disown himself, and take up his cross, and follow me, for whoever may will to save his life, shall lose it, and whoever may lose his life for my sake shall find it, for what is a man profited if he may gain the whole world, but of his life suffer loss? or what shall a man give as an exchange for his life? For, the Son of Man is about to come in the glory of his Father, with his messengers, and then he will reward each, according to his work.” (Matt. 16:24-27)
Peter said unto them, “Reform, and be baptized each of you on the name of Jesus Christ, to remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38)
For whoever the whole law shall keep, and shall stumble in one [point], he hath become guilty of all; for He who is saying, “Thou mayest not commit adultery,” said also, “Thou mayest do no murder;” and if thou shalt not commit adultery, and shalt commit murder, thou hast become a transgressor of law; so speak ye and so do, as about by a law of liberty to be judged, for the judgment without kindness [is] to him not having done kindness, and exult doth kindness over judgment. What [is] the profit, my brethren, if faith, any one may speak of having, and works he may not have? is that faith able to save him? (Jas. 2:10-14)
And dost thou wish to know, O vain man, that the faith apart from the works is dead?... Ye see, then, that out of works is man declared righteous, and not out of faith only (Jas. 2:20, 24)
wherefore, the rather, brethren, be diligent to make stedfast your calling and choice, for these things doing, ye may never stumble, for so, richly shall be superadded to you the entrance into the age-during kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. (2 Pet. 1:10-11)
And in this we know that we have known [Jesus], if his commands we may keep; he who is saying, “I have known him,” and his command is not keeping, a liar he is, and in him the truth is not; and whoever may keep his word, truly in him the love of God hath been perfected; in this we know that in [Christ] we are. He who is saying in him he doth remain, ought according as he walked also himself so to walk. (1 John 2:3-6)
As should be obvious, Jesus (in His earthly ministry), James, and the twelve apostles did not teach works as the ‘natural result’ of a saving faith (as most Christians would argue), but they taught that works of the Law were necessary to be saved. Jesus preached that those who fail to keep and teach the Law will be least in the Messianic kingdom, and most interestingly, He commanded to do everything the Pharisees say to do (i.e., the entire Mosaic Law).
James writes that a man is justified by works along with faith (and the context shows “works” to mean “keeping the Mosaic Law in all points”). Peter says that only those who “never stumble” may enter into Christ’s kingdom, which is necessarily a salvation by works. John says that only those who “overcome”, which means keeping God’s commands (1 John 5:1-4), will receive eschatological rewards (Rev. 2-3).
In contrast, Paul preaches that we are justified by faith alone, even if we do not have works of law. Indeed, he says that doing works of law in addition to faith is reckoned not as righteousness, but as a debt or a curse!
Where then [is] the boasting? it was excluded; by what law? of works? no, but by a law of faith: therefore do we reckon a man to be declared righteous by faith, apart from works of law. (Rom. 3:27-28)
For if Abraham by works was declared righteous, he hath to boast — but not before god; for what doth the scripture say? “And Abraham did believe God, and it was reckoned to him — to righteousness;” and to him who is working, the reward is not reckoned of grace, but of debt; and to him who is not working, and is believing upon Him who is declaring righteous the impious, his faith is reckoned to righteousness (Rom. 4:2-5)
I do not make void the grace of God, for if righteousness [be] through law — then Christ died in vain. (Gal. 2:21)
For as many as are of works of law are under a curse, for it hath been written, “Cursed [is] every one who is not remaining in all things that have been written in the Book of the Law — to do them,” and that in law no one is declared righteous with God, is evident, because “The righteous by faith shall live;” and the law is not by faith, but — “The man who did them shall live in them.” (Gal. 3:9-12)
For by grace ye are having been saved, through faith, and this not of you — of God the gift, not of works, that no one may boast (Eph. 2:8-9)
not having my righteousness, which [is] of law, but that which [is] through faith of Christ — the righteousness that is of God by the faith (Php. 3:9)
The first set of passages is logically contradictory to the second set of passages. James says, “a man is declared righteous by works of law” (Jas. 2:24). Paul says, “a man is not declared righteous by works of law” (Gal. 2:16), and actually preaches against works of law. Although many Christians would argue that Jesus and the apostles were merely saying that works are the result of true faith, it should be obvious from both the passages themselves and the context that they meant works were a necessary condition of salvation (as I showed above).
How can these massive discrepancies between Paul and the other apostles be reconciled? Paul recognized the apostolic authority of James, Peter, and John (Gal. 2:9) as they did him (1 Pet. 3:15-16), so it cannot be that any of them were “false teachers” as some have suggested. Instead, the only possible solution is that they actually did preach two different gospels. The Gentiles, whose gospel Paul heralded, were to be saved by faith alone apart from the Mosaic Law, whereas the Israelites, whose gospel the apostles (and Jesus, while on earth) heralded, were to be saved by faith and the Law combined.
Conclusion
I wasn’t able to get to everything I wanted to write in this post, and there is actually even more evidence for Pauline dispensationalism than I wrote above. However, the above should by itself suffice to show that there must have been two distinct gospels being heralded during the New Testament. Not only does Paul explicitly recognize the existence of two separate gospels, one being heralded by himself to the Gentiles and the other by the apostles to the Jews, but there are also two distinct gospel messages and two different methods of salvation being preached, between Paul’s epistles and the rest of the New Testament writings. There can really be no other solution to these contradictions than the fact that two separate gospels were being preached at this time.
______________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment