The Highway Forums General Discussion Theology Discussion Forum Gospel truth

Paul is stating that the gospel is not what he has produced, but that which he received from the Lord (Gal. 1:12). As a steward of the mysteries of God, an apostle, teacher, preacher, et. al., he was obliged to preach to both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 20:21). Paul’s summary is founded upon Scripture, i.e. the OT (Isa 53:5-9; cf. Psa 22:16; 1 Pet. 3:18). Kistemaker summarizes, “for him, the elementary teachings of this gospel are these four redemptive facts”:

You must consider their prior learning, their theological depth, their language, their capacities, et. al. Though the Gospel remains the same, it is preached, and that not all at once, in different forms and even with different emphasis, depending on the audience, the Holy Spirit, et. al.

Here are your notes for next week's sermon. Enjoy.

Sorry, but the sermon for next week has been canceled due to a lack of interest!

Exactly.... and this has been my point, at least that is the point I have been trying to make. One of the most pernicious errors of our day is that people assume too much about those outside of Christ (and even those united to Christ). Thus to speak of Christ as if the person you are speaking with has any idea whatsoever who the Lord Christ is a major faux pas. Most people today don't have a clue as to the who the true Living God is. To be sure, everyone has their own ideas (aka: misconceptions) about God, but they are 99% of the time far from having an resemblance to the true God. And isn't this exactly what we are to expect from those we meet according to Romans 1? Although human beings "know" God, i.e., they are exposed to His eternal deity and Godhead, they reject all the testimony around them in the natural creation. And even more so, the truth of God revealed in them, yet they totally reject that knowledge and substitute an idol of their own corrupt hearts and minds, being haters of God by nature.

So, to ask someone to "believe in Jesus" is truly foolishness; Jesus WHO? which Jesus are YOU speaking about? And what do you mean by "believe"? Do you believe such a person existed? exists? was He God incarnate? or is to believe on the Lord Christ unto justification an entirely different thing which involves one's entire being (fiducia).

It is one thing to preach a sermon from a pulpit to an unknown audience where you MUST assume that there are unbelievers in the congregation who have a knowledge of God without having been regenerated and who have repented of their sins and embraced Christ with a whole and living faith. And it is another matter to preach to your own congregation where you know there are true believers sitting there and who need comfort, rebuke, instruction, correction and training in righteousness. Thus Paul's sound words of wisdom to his young protégé Timothy:

And here are your notes for next month's sermon!

In His grace,

well I can`t argue with that . There will be times when we can begin from a certain observable point. Your example with mars hill , paul observed there superstitous, and proceeded from there, but nevertheless, again the key elements of the gospel were set forth as in 17: 26 Gods sovereignty 26And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation; vs 29 The trinity 29Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device. The deity of christ and his lordship vs 31 31Because he hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead. Yes, there will be those in different advancements of the truth and God will send that preacher of the gospel to fill that which is lacking in their faith.

you still did not answer my question sir, no disrespect intended but could you tell me who was paul refering to when he said that christ died for our sins ?

With all due respect why do you need my answer when the text answers this? .... please re-read 1 Cor 15:1 again, ... "Now I make known unto you brethren,"

You still evade my question sir ! Who do you say is paul refering to, when he said christ died for our sins according to scripture. Is paul preaching limited atonement ? In your opinion, yes or no please..

No sir, you are avoiding what the text says! You appear to want to view all preaching with a TULIP approach. The unscriptural sixth sola: Sola Quinque Pedal Declamatio … (Five Pedal Sermons Alone).

As previously posted, Paul was addressing the “brethren” (adelphos). Paul’s statement is not to all the elect (notice that Paul uses the term “if” in verse two, “which also you are saved, if you hold fast the word which I preached to you, unless you believed in vain”). Paul is speaking to the Corinthian Church in a general way, calling them brothers, however, knowing that all are not elect (i.e. the visible church, not the invisible church). Had Paul desired to address only the elect he would have used the term elect.

In 1 Cor 15:3, Paul’s major emphasis is not on Limited Atonement—he does that elsewhere—but rather belief in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (only the elect can truly believe, but that is not Paul’s emphasis “here”). Paul is saying “here” that it is a historical fact—supported by witnesses—that Christ raised from the dead. Notice he is saying this is the “Gospel” however, it is only part and parcel of the Gospel. Notice verse 3: “For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures.” [in other words there are "other" important things, but he is not bringing them out "here"]. Paul’s empahsis “here” is on belief, not election, in the death and resurrection of Christ according to the “scriptures.” Look at the context of these verses in reference to the remainder of the chapter.

Though the preacher would know that his audience is not all elect and that everyone he is preaching to will not, and cannot believe, in preaching this text he should not concentrate (primary point) on Limited Atonement, but on belief in the death and resurrection of Christ. The text is the message of the sermon and not one’s presuppositions that he desires to read upon the text.

You are absolutely wrong on this, Paul clearly states in those verses that christ died for the elect according to the scriptures, what scriptures? The old test scriptures, the old test scriptures shows forth all the way through that the death of christ is limited. Gen 3: 15...when he called abraham, the formation of the people of israel, the sacrifices and what they symbolized..All of old test scripture points to the elect of God as being the ones for whom christ died. Is 53, old test scripture, is referring to the elect, my people is talking about the elct the sheep.
Yes I do espouse that part of the Gospel message that paul preached is limited atonement and election , you can call it points of calvinism if you like but it is the word of God. As far as all the audience being the elect, well listen. This was a group of professed believers at corinth, now can we be sure that all confessed believers are genuine believers ? No. Thats why he said IF. If there would be some that apostacized from the truth, then 1jn applys 2: 19They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.

Paul is charitable in addressing all who came together as brethern , for they profess to believe the gospel, but he was aware of some may have been stoney heart believers matt 13: 20 , 21 The one who received the seed that fell on rocky places is the man who hears the word and at once receives it with joy. 21But since he has no root, he lasts only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, he quickly falls away.

You cannot get away from it, the gospel paul preached contained the truth of limited atonement, if you deny it, you deny scripture..period ! <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/bif.gif" alt="" />

Sir, first Paul NEVER says literally in 1 Cor 15:1-4 (“here”) that “christ died for the elect according to the scriptures,” as the term elect is not even used. Is "according to the Scriptures" referring to Isa 53, YES. Is Christ's dying for the elect referred to in Isa 53, YES, but that is not Paul's empahsis in 1 Cor 15. Is it implied here as secondary, yes, but it is not the primary emphasis of this group of verses.

Second, in my previous post, I was very careful to use the term “here,” not “there” (Isa 53, etc.). Paul’s empahsis “here” is on belief, not election, in the death and resurrection of Christ according to the “scriptures.” Though Isa 53 speaks of Limited Atonement, Isa 53 also speaks of the death and resurrection of Christ and belief (Isa 53:1) and this is Paul’s point in 1 Cor 15. Paul is emphasizing a particular part of the Gospel the belief “that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures” (1 Cor 15:1). Now, does "according to the Scripture", include Limited Atonement, of course, but it also includes a whole lot more ... the major emphasis here is faith, death, and resurrection though, not election--look at the reminder of the chapter ..


I am glad you are a Calvinist, so am I. However, TULIP is not the only sermon in the Bible. This was my point—reread the post.

Yes, Paul did preach Limited Atonement, but that is not his emphasis in 1 Cor 15:1-4. You are presupposing too much upon the text using your methodology (Isogesis). Its like a Charismatic seeing a demon behind every bush, you are empasizing a TULIP, to the exclusion of other doctrines (i.e. faith), in every verse.

Now, now..... let's be nice, shall we? The truth here is that you are doing what is infamously called, "eisogesis", i.e., reading into the text. As J_Edwards rightly responded to you, IN THIS SPECIFIC TEXT, Paul is making a general statement concerning the death and resurrection of Christ, i.e., He died for our [sic. sinners] sins according to the Scriptures. This would be similar to me stating, "Christ died for sinners, just like you and me." I would not be making a definitive statement concerning the death of Christ for you in particular, but only that Christ died for a group of individuals who are sinners. Whether you are elect or not is not even implied. It is true that Paul taught "Definite Atonement"; but not in this text.

In a similar fashion, I have seen preachers spend more time making an "apology" for a passage of Scripture that taught man's responsibility than preaching on the text by stressing God's sovereignty. If you are going to preach/teach the Scriptures, then let the Scripture's speak as the Holy Spirit moved those holy men to write it. If one is worried about such things, then preach the next time on the complimentary doctrine. And this is what Paul did. He preached the whole counsel of God. But he didn't cram everything into one sermon or teaching session. If the text speaks about the love of God, then preach on the love of God. Don't diminish the depth of that love by constantly interjecting the fact that God is One Who also hates, etc., etc... ad nauseam.

One of the crucial things we must do in our teaching, preaching and informal speaking with others from the Scriptures is to be faithful to the CONTEXT. If I may repeat an oft used phrase, "A text out of context is nothing more than pretext!" That the Bible teaches what we call Calvinism or more specifically, the "Five Points of Calvinism" is indisputable, at least among the great majority of those who are members here. But not every text in Scripture teaches them in particular. Handling the Word of God rightly is something we all need to strive for. And from what you have written on this subject so far, it seems that you need to carefully consider this with perhaps a bit more effort.
In His grace,

Sir, Theres no way around it, you also may deny it, but paul in 1cor 15, yes in the context he is going to speak on the resurrection, I see that plainly, but in getting to that point he plainly lays out that which he recieved as the Gospel. You are being dishonest to scripture if you deny that the phrase( our sins) is generalized ,that can never be and you know it. Paul draws reference to according to scripture , thats very important in determining for whom sins he refers to. You may deny Limited atonement in that verse, but its there and you can`t change it. Don`t mean to mean but truth is truth, don`t twist it...

No one denied that Limited Atonement may be alluded to in the verse (for it is for whom Christ died), only that it is not the major emphasis of the verse, or group of verses, or that matter the chapter,--belief in the death and resurrection is the major emphasis. Paul goes on from here and describes faith and the final resurrection ... not election.

Alluded to, its proclaimed paul said I declared. And not only that, he says that is of first importance! Look at the niv rendering of vs 3,4 For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance[a]: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures,

And yes in this verse, it is the major emphasis, now grant it the emphsasis begins to merge into the subject of the resurrection, I see that. But in the mean time , the verses preceeding set forth the true gospel that paul received from heaven and that which he was accustmed to preach.

Again i understand what the overall emphasis was leading up to, as it pertained to the resurrection of the body, nevertheless, paul clearly and plainly referred back to the gospel that he had proclaimed to them previously and what it was ! You guys don`t have to agree with me, but it is as plain as day, thank you for responding though..

What is plain as day is ALL you desire to see in the “gospel” is election and Limited Atonement and desire to leave out the rest …. You say LOOK, LOOK, LOOK at Isaiah 53 – SEE, SEE, SEE and all you point out is limited atonement. However, even a brief overview, and very brief at that, reveals that Isaiah 53 is about A LOT MORE than just Limited Atonement:

Thus my problem is when you say “according to the Scriptures,” and ONLY SEE – Limited Atonement. One wonders why you are willing to “overlook” the rest of Isaiah and just concentrate on one issue?

In 1 Cor 15, Paul looked at Isaiah and warns us what he is about to do. He said he is going to tell us about the gospel, but not all the gospel (1 Cor 15:3). Paul’s intent is not to preach the whole of chapter 53 here, but to emphasize Christ’s death and resurrection. He does this because he is preparing to explain and make a parallel with the final resurrection (1 Cor 15:35f). Again, as Pilgrim already stated, you need to learn to study scripture within the context of what the author of it intends and not what you desire to “always” read upon it (i.e. Sola Quinque Pedal Declamatio … Five Pedal Sermons Alone). <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/coffee2.gif" alt="" />