On 8/4/08, taphouse@sbcglobal.net <taphouse@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
You have stated that Peter did not preach to the
Gentiles and did not address them in one of his letters and that is
contradictory to scripture but you don't care. You just ignore the
scriptures that say the opposite of your position.
Dear Ron,
We're not saying Peter never preached to Gentiles. We're trying to point
out that Peter was a minister to the Jew first-and-foremost and the gospel
Peter preached to Cornelius was "[t]he word which God sent unto the
children of Israel" and was/is therefore different than Paul's
gospel. Just for example, faithful to Jesus' command, Peter commanded
water baptism and taught it was necessary for salvation. Paul's gospel does
not include water baptism. In fact, Paul writes, "Christ sent me
not to baptize, but to preach the gospel"; he wrote also, "I
thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius". By this we can
logically conclude that Paul's gospel - the only authorized gospel for our
dispensation of grace, the only gospel with the power "unto salvation" -
does not include water baptism. The power of
Paul's gospel is that Christ died for our sins; "the
cross of Christ". The "one
baptism" Paul teaches is that one which is "by
one Spirit...into...one body". (1 Cor.
12:13) Yes, after the resurrection Jesus told the 12 to go and teach
"all nations, baptizing them..." etc., but...this was
evidently based-on the expectation Israel as a whole would receive the good
news of that gospel and thereby perpetuate the evangelization of the
Gentiles. However, Israel as a whole remained obstinate and rejected that
peculiar gospel. "[T]hrough [Israel's] fall salvation is
come unto the Gentiles". (Rom. 11:11) "Be it known therefore unto you, that
the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles [by Paul], and
that they will hear it." (Acts 28:28). God is certainly preparing to restore
and save Israel but today Israel is still "Loammi",
not God's people. (Hos. 1:9) Cornelius and his
house were saved in like manner as the believing Jews in Acts 2 were saved by
Peter's peculiar gospel before Israel was cut off; ref. Acts
28:28. But Paul was sent to the Gentiles with a unique gospel based on
the pattern of his own conversion (1 Tim. 1:16); a
conversion which had no connection to Peter's unique message (i.e. that "word
which God sent unto the children of Israel"). Yes, Paul's gospel was
centered on the death, burial and resurrection of Christ but it was/is
different in perspective and call. Peter's message was a murder indictment
against his countrymen for killing "the Prince of life", for which he called
them to "repent". Moreover, Peter's gospel evidently had the Lord's
second coming in view as integral to Israel (i.e.
Peter's audience) ultimately receiving the atonement (i.e. the practical
benefit of Christ's work on the cross), and this - according to his
gospel - following repentance and water
baptism. (ref. Acts 3:14-20; ref. also Hebrews 9:28)
I do not believe I or Mike ever said Peter did not preach to Gentiles. We
are simply trying to point out the differences in message based on different
dispensations, different pattersn, and different audiences.
"[T]hrough [Israel's] fall salvation is come unto
the Gentiles". Hence, because of Israel's fall (i.e.
their fall in relation to Peter's gospel) the unique gospel of Paul then
became the newly authorized gospel. And therefore Paul writes, "If any man
preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received - than that which
we have preached unto you - let him be accursed." (Gal. 1:8,9). (Note:
Paul did not get his gospel from Peter or any man. ref. (Gal.1:12)
In Christ,
Robert