What Was Christ's Gospel?

[Ghoti]

I love this. A lot of the logic here is the same used by the Jehovah’s Witnesses – they put great stock in their claim that they are “the only religion mentioned by name in the Bible.” Iglesia ni Christi in the Philippines tries the same tack. Methinks I’ll found the “Fishers of Men”. Or “The Lambs at His Right Hand”.

Yes, there is One Church, that of Christ, which He founded when He said, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church. The “names” of various denominations did not exist in New Testament times. Sure, there was the Church in Corinth, and the one in Colossus, etc, but all together were “The Church”. And as for a “name”, I don’t think that the Apostles went out and registered any names with any authorities. It was merely “The Church”.

Eventually the adjective “Universal” (Catholic) was appended to distinguish The Church as a whole from the smaller constituent Churches. Through usage, it became part of “the name”. But to us, for 2000 years, the Catholic (Universal) Church is always “The Church”. As was stated at Nicaea,

We believe in One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.

That is, we believe in only One Church, and that it is Divinely Founded (Holy), Universal (Catholic), and bearing the authority of Christ through His Apostles (Apostolic).

“Roman” indicates only the primacy of the Bishop of Rome – in its earliest usages (I wish I could find the citations) “Roman” was only used when the primacy of the Petrine See needed to be emphasised. I can’t remember when it happened exactly, but a kerfuffle arose because after the C of E split from the Church, they apropriated the name “Catholic” – as in “English Catholic” – and foisted the name “Roman Catholic” on the Church, so as to say that they were really the “True Church” too, just a different geographical entity thereof.

Unfortunately, the name “Roman Catholic” appears to stick, and is often used (erroneously at worst, colloquially at best) by Catholics themselves: although it seems to be limited to Latin Rite Catholics – I don’t know that (m)any members of the Eastern Rites identify as “Roman Catholic”.

So, we are members of the Catholic (i.e. Universal) Church, members of which are called “Catholic(s)” by the oft-used expediant in English of converting an adjective to a noun. Like the Orthodox. Or Methodists. Or Presbyterians.

And since we believe the Catholic Church to be the One (Holy Catholic and Apostolic) Church, the meaning “Christian” is subsumed in it – since it was the Church that Christ founded.

 

[swplan76]

I’ve heard it said that Jesus, like all others before Him who spoke God’s message to His people, came to “set the captives free.” At the center of the message is the idea that God liberates the oppressed. The Bible is generally a book that is written from the perspective of the oppressed. Its from a people who were slaves, who were being conquered, who were being occupied. The way this God tends to operate in scripture is that He is on their side always, but God’s people are closest to Him when they are oppressed. In a sense, God is the God of the oppressed. ** Even when we are ok and we begin to get our ‘stuff’ together, we need to keep the reality in mind that we, humanity, tends to turn away from God when we feel like we have things figured out.** If we forget that we tend to wander away from Him, then we are most likely to wander because we won’t be aware of the danger we face - we are idolatrous.

As we find ourselves very privileged, sitting in front of a computer, likely owning, or driving a car, having shelter that we either own or rent, we have to be aware that God is on the side of the oppressed. We are not the oppressed, not really. We are either with Him in liberating the oppressed, or we are passive and in that case, we are aligned with those who are oppressing the poor because we have some resources, but we are doing nothing for the poor (our whole economy is based on importing cheap products from countries with far lower standards than our own), or we are out and out knowingly oppressing those who are poor. Jesus came to Israel in a time in which God’s people were oppressed. Rome was occupying their land and forcing them to pay heavy taxes. Rome was physically abusive to Jews, used them as slaves if laborers were needed and might demand clothing or food from them if Cesar’s army required it. Jesus came into that political climate in order to liberate God’s people from their oppressors. I’ve heard it argued that we are not actually Christians unless we are doing something to ease the pain of the poor. I’m not personally committed to that idea, though I am working it through. Definitely I think Christians are supposed to be opposed to oppression and are meant to be actively connected to the liberating work of the gospel. I’m just not sure I believe the line is as hard as the phrase I’ve bolded above.

 

[EdOsiecki]

And these Christians were later came to been known as members of the Catholic Church.

I’ll have you know, in the most forceful way possible, that Catholics are most certainly “born again believing Christians”, and any claim by you to the contrary can safely be labeled as “bearing false witness”. I strongly suggest that you refrain form doing any more of this.

---

Quote:
Originally Posted by EdOsiecki
Hi davidv this is Ed, Acts 11:26 states, It was at Antioch the born again believers were called “Christians”. To be identified with Christ one should be called a “Christian” To be identified with Roman Catholicism’s teachings it’s proper to be called a “Catholic” . To be identified with Protestant “Baptist” teachings, it’s proper to be called a “Baptist” etc. etc. However; it’s the born again believing Christians who will inherit eternal life. The Bible does not mention any denominations. PTL Ed.

David in reply to your post above FIRST ------- Where in Scripture does it say the “Christians” became known as the members of the Catholic church? SECOND-----------Why are you so upset? I said, “It’s the born again believing Christians who will inherit eternal life”. Aren’t Catholics born again believing Christians too? You just proved my point: You identify yourself with Catholicism and not Christianity otherwise you would have known that I meant born again Catholics too will inherit eternal life. And likewise for the Methodists, Baptists etc.etc. Shouldn’t you be known as a Christian Catholic by giving glory to God in Christ first in Christian, then to the Catholic church? PTL ED

 

[davidv]

---

Quote:
Originally Posted by EdOsiecki
Hi davidv this is Ed, Acts 11:26 states, It was at Antioch the born again believers were called “Christians”. To be identified with Christ one should be called a “Christian” To be identified with Roman Catholicism’s teachings it’s proper to be called a “Catholic” . To be identified with Protestant “Baptist” teachings, it’s proper to be called a “Baptist” etc. etc. However; it’s the born again believing Christians who will inherit eternal life. The Bible does not mention any denominations. PTL Ed.

David in reply to your post above FIRST ------- Where in Scripture does it say the “Christians” became known as the members of the Catholic church?

Why does it have to be stated in Scripture?

SECOND-----------Why are you so upset? I said, “It’s the born again believing Christians who will inherit eternal life”. Aren’t Catholics born again believing Christians too?

I was upset because I took the two statements bolded above as an accusation that I, as a Catholic,am not Christian. I took them this way because many of your prior posts have a decidedly anti-Catholic tone to them.

You just proved my point: You identify yourself with Catholicism and not Christianity otherwise you would have known that I meant born again Catholics too will inherit eternal life. And likewise for the Methodists, Baptists etc.etc. Shouldn’t you be known as a Christian Catholic by giving glory to God in Christ first in Christian, then to the Catholic church? PTL ED

I have proved no such thing. History is clear that Catholicism is the first and truest practice of Christianity. All Catholics are “born again” when baptized. Why should I not associate myself the original Christian Church?

Why do you think I am not giving glory to God by naming myself Catholic?

 

[EdOsiecki]

Why does it have to be stated in Scripture?

I was upset because I took the two statements bolded above as an accusation that I, as a Catholic,am not Christian. I took them this way because many of your prior posts have a decidedly anti-Catholic tone to them.

I have proved no such thing. History is clear that Catholicism is the first and truest practice of Christianity. All Catholics are “born again” when baptized. Why should I not associate myself the original Christian Church?

Why do you think I am not giving glory to God by naming myself Catholic?

IDavid, my response to your first question above, Scripture in Acts 11:27 it specifically states that believers were called Christians. Why then change it? Did God change His mind? My response to your second tirade, If history is so clear that Catholicism is the first and truest practice of Christianity, why then wasn’t the believers in Acts 11:27 called Catholics? There wouldn’t be any further discussion. When you name yourself a Catholic you are saying that you are an Universalist (the meaning of Catholic) Could it be in God’s foreknowledge that this name discussion would arise, that’s why it’s being made clear in Acts 11:27. It makes very much sense to me to be followers of Christ (Christianity) PTL ED

 

[davidv]

IDavid, my response to your first question above, Scripture in Acts 11:27 it specifically states that believers were called Christians. Why then change it?

Nothing changed. Catholics are Christians

Did God change His mind?

No.

My response to your second tirade, If history is so clear that Catholicism is the first and truest practice of Christianity, why then wasn’t the believers in Acts 11:27 called Catholics?

Because they weren’t called that yet. Names of things and institutions develop over time.

There wouldn’t be any further discussion. When you name yourself a Catholic you are saying that you are an Universalist (the meaning of Catholic)

No, it means I’m a member of the Catholic Church.

Could it be in God’s foreknowledge that this name discussion would arise, that’s why it’s being made clear in Acts 11:27. It makes very much sense to me to be followers of Christ (Christianity) PTL ED

I didn’t name myself Catholic. The true Church named herself.
This statement implies to me that Catholics don’t follow Christ. Is that what you mean?

Could it be that you are misinterpreting and misrepresenting Scripture?

 

[swplan76]

The gospel to the poor is the same gospel for all mankind. It is found in 1 Cor. 15:1-4.

Yes, but what if you aren’t poor? What if you don’t feel especially oppressed?

What if God’s heart is for the oppressed and we are not connected with any process that liberates them? - Are we really following the teachings of Jesus if we resemble an occupying army (Rome in Jesus time) than we do Jesus, the healer, feeder, teacher, liberator? The message is the same, but the poor have a different responsibility to it than the liberated - Are the liberated called to join God in liberating those who are in need? Is that the heart of the way God operates? Is that His Way for us - the purpose of His Kingdom, to liberate the poor, so we can be free and so He can reveal Himself to humanity, revealing his glory?

I think the question is why does 1Cor 15:1-4 save us, what does it demand of us, what does it do in us - who do we become as we respond to the realities of the gospel that liberates us? Do we build more barns and store it up for ourselves? or…


SW

 

[EdOsiecki]

Nothing changed. Catholics are Christians

No.
Because they weren’t called that yet. Names of things and institutions develop over time.

No, it means I’m a member of the Catholic Church.

I didn’t name myself Catholic. The true Church named herself.
This statement implies to me that Catholics don’t follow Christ. Is that what you mean?

Could it be that you are misinterpreting and misrepresenting Scripture?/QUOTE NO! NO! NO!

Now David let’s be honest, it’s not that I’m misinterpreting and misrepresenting Scripture, It’s because you have no valid answer to my question as to why change the name per Acts 11;26 from Christian to Catholic so the best you could do was to attack the messenger. All the born again believers in the first church were called Christians. What Scripture am I misinterpreting or misrepresenting? ED

 

[Mailman]

It is written:“This is the time of fulfillment. The kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel.”

The Prophets spoke ; then Jesus manifest their word which was God’s WORD Incarnate.
Is not the GOOD news the fulfillment of prophecy? Is not the Good news the Kingdom of God at hand?

ee

Enjoy peace where ever you find it.

Indeed the Good News is that the Kingdom of God is at hand, that is, it is coming soon or about to be established. And this is a fulfillment of the prophecies of God’s prophets found in the OT Scriptures. Some of these prophecies say:

1) There will come a time when a King from David’s dynasty will rule “in the earth”

“Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.” (Jer. 23:5).

2) This King and world ruler will be the Son of God.

“For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon His shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace” (Isa. 9:6).

3) Like any other king, this King will have a real kingdom – a kingdom having government and laws, and subjects – not a kingdom existing only in the hearts and minds of those who would let God rule their lives.

“And in the days of these kings (speaking about real kings having real kingdoms) shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom (must also be a real kingdom just like those that preceded it) that shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand forever.”

“Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even for ever” (Isa. 9:7).

4) This Kingdom will be headquartered in Jerusalem.

“Yet have I set my King upon my holy hill of Zion” (Psa. 2:6).

5) The King will rule with “a rod of iron.” He will force people of this earth to follow God’s Way.

“Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel” (Ps. 2:9).

6) All people and nations in this world will come to obey and serve this King.

“And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him: his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom, that which shall not be destroyed” (Dan 7:13).

7) People will even want to visit the Kingdom’s headquarters in Jerusalem to be taught God’s ways.

“But in the last days it shall come to pass, that the mountain of the house of the Lord shall be established in the top of the mountains… and people shall flow into it… and many nations shall come, and say, Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord… and he will teach us of his ways… for the law shall go forth of Zion, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem” (Mic. 4:1-2).

8) The reign of this King will usher in a world of unparalleled peace – of real utopia.

“They shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more. But everyone shall sit under his vine and under his fig tree, and no one shall make them afraid…” (Mic. 4:3-4).

Is there better news than that? Christ’s Gospel is indeed GOOD NEWS for a sick world like ours. And Christ commands us to REPENT and BELIEVE in His Gospel of the coming Kingdom: “Repent ye, and believe the gospel” (Mk. 1:15). Why? Because, “he that believeth and is baptized SHALL BE SAVED” – and those who don’t believe? – “but he that believeth not SHALL BE DAMNED” (Mark 16:16).

 

[Mailman]

Why does it have to be stated in Scripture?

Because Catholics appeal to Scripture (Matt. 16:18) to prove their church was the one founded by Christ.

 

[Jerry_Marino]

Hi Jerry, This is ED Jesus states in Mark 16:16-15 “Go into all the world and preach the good news (gospel) to all creation. v16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved (born again), but whoever does not believe will be condemned”. (emphasis added) The question here is believe what? Answer is the good news gospel. What is the good news gospel? Paul in 1Cor 15:2-4 explains it, “By this gospel you are saved,----v3 that Christ died for your sins according to the Scriptures, v4 that He was burried, that He was raised on the third day”. THAT’S THE GOSPEL! The good news about Christ’s gospel is, He saved us just by “believing”. That’s all that is required. Jesus’ shed BLOOD at the cross atoned for ALL of our sins per Rev.1:5, “To Him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by His BLOOD”. Jesus also states to be baptized. Why? It’s our way of repentance per Mat 3:11 an outward sign of an inward reality “by (God’s) grace through faith ( in Jesus) and not by works of righteousness” (emphasis added) By baptism we also symbolically identify with Christ’s dying to our old way of life, when submerged we are buried, later,Jesus will resurrect us per Rom 6:4. That’s exactly what the jailor did in Acts 16:31 He believed in Jesus’ gospel, then v33 he got baptized. PTL Ed.

ok, amen!

 

[geekborj]

During a mass, we hear these words at the end of a Scriptural reading: “A reading from the Holy Gospel according to St. John” – or St. Matthew, or St. Luke, or whoever wrote the particular passage being read.

Now, what about the Gospel according to Jesus? Jesus Himself preached some “gospel.” Once, when in a synagogue in Nazareth, He read from the book of Isaiah and declared that the particular passage He just read (a prophecy) has been fulfilled by His coming. One of the things prophesied there was that He was to be the Anointed One to preach THE Gospel.

“And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written, The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, To preach the acceptable year of the Lord” (Luke 4:17-19).

If Jesus was to “preach the gospel to the poor,” what was this gospel that Jesus was prophesied to preach?

I would like to get your ideas on the subject and see if we are on the same page on this one.

Thanks.

Jesus Christ IS the Gospel! Jesus intended to spread his Revelation through preaching, not reading. Those written account (Gospel according to …) are guides for preaching the Gospel, not THE Gospel itself. The four “authors” cannot take into account the entire details of the Gospel. This are the reasons why there is an “according to…” phrase before every reading.

 

[QuickCat]

It doesn’t matter that the [4] Gospels were written much later than Paul’s epistles. The Gospels record the earthly ministry of our Lord Jesus Christ and He says that He “was sent ONLY to the lost sheep of the house of Israel” Matthew 15:24. Paul confirms this in Romans 15:8 where He states the our Lord was “a minister to the circumcision.” During His early ministry He preached the good news {gospel] of the coming kingdom that is promised to Israel in the Old Testament. In this coming kingdom [on earth] the 12 will sit on 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel, Matthew 19:28. The 12 apostles, who are the apostles to the circumcision, did not know about 1 Cor 15:1-4 during the earthly ministry of the Lord - Luke 18:31-34. Paul is the first one to preach the cross as good news and the gospel revealed to him by the Lord Jesus Christ is the gospel we are to preach today. Upon believing Paul’s gospel [1 Cor 15:1-4] we are sealed by the Holy Spirit, Eph 1:13.

 

[Jerry_Marino]

 

[swplan76]

Christ’s good news was of the coming establishment of the Kingdom of God/heaven. His death and resurrection made possible man’s entrance into that Kingdom. The real liberation of the oppressed will happen only when the Kingdom is finally established, so Christ’s gospel, in a way, includes a message of liberation. All those who will qualify to be in the Kingdom will join God in the work of liberation and in “the restoration of all things.”

…In a way?
The entire message of Jesus is about liberation.

Jesus did what He did so that we might be free. Freedom from sin, freedom from mediocrity, freedom from abuse, freedom from the past, freedom from our own ignorance… “Jesus came so that we might have life and have it to the full…” Then the question is, what do you do with that freedom once you have it? Once the “Kingdom” has ‘landed’ in your life, what are you going to do with the freedom He brings. He desires that we respond to His love for us by becoming more and more like Him… so we bring the freedom He has given into the lives of others, leading them to meet with God.

The Kingdom of Heaven is now and on into eternity. “The real liberation of the poor” begins as you begin to accept who He is and you respond with love for the work He has done in you and is doing in others, so you join. You join and the liberation of others begins. The permanent liberation of the poor will happen when time is finished, but we are meant to begin where we are, joining Him as He is bringing freedom into the lives of others.

But what is the Kingdom of God/heaven? For forty days after His resurrection, Christ spoke about this Kingdom of God whenever He appeared to His disciples (Acts 1:3). According to the Scriptures, that Kingdom is a literal kingdom which will be established on earth. Its establishment will end an age [the age of Satan] and begin a new one (Matt. 24:3). This “new age” will find the world in unparalleled peace (Mic. 4:3-4). It will be at peace even in the realm of nature (Isa. 11:6). In this new age, Mankind will be given a new heart and spirit (Eze. 11:19-20) and nations will learn God’s Way (Mic. 4:2). Jesus Christ will be King (Isa. 9:6-7) and He will rule the nations of the earth “with a rod of iron” (Psa. 2:9; Rev. 12:5; 19:15). But He is not going to do this ruling alone. The saints [the resurrected saved] will rule with Christ (Rev. 2:26-27). It will be the perfect world government because it is the government of God Almighty. It will be the only hope of justice, of peace, of right solutions to all this world’s problems. During this age, sickness and disease will be healed (Isa. 35:5-6). The earth will enjoy agricultural abundance (Amos 9:13-14; Eze. 34:26-27), with wastelands being transformed into tillable lands (Isa. 35:6-7). There will be good health, joy and plenty upon the earth when this “new age” will come (Jer. 30:17; 31:12-14). That is Christ’s wonderful message, His good news – His Gospel – to us: He will set up His Kingdom to usher in a time of utopia for the peoples on this earth!

God bless.

We are not meant to just wait for these things to happen. In the mean time, we need to find our place in His Kingdom - we are meant to get our hands dirty now. He is ushering the Kingdom - as people see what He has done in our lives, they will desire Him, or they will reject Him. We need to be the city on a hill. We need to appear in the world as a glorious radiant bride. As we put on the dress, it may be then that other things begin to unfold.

 

[Jerry_Marino]

NO! Jesus came to pay the price for our sins to save us from God’s wrath so if you have not repented and put your trust in Him for you salvation please do so today.

John 3:17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him.

Condemn: the Greek root means both judgment and condemnation. Jesus’ purpose is to save, but his coming provokes judgment; some condemn themselves by turning from the light.

Again repent and believing in the name of Jesus!

 

[fbl9]

NO! Jesus came to pay the price for our sins to save us from God’s wrath so if you have not repented and put your trust in Him for you salvation please do so today.

John 3:17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him.

Condemn: the Greek root means both judgment and condemnation. Jesus’ purpose is to save, but his coming provokes judgment; some condemn themselves by turning from the light.

Again repent and believing in the name of Jesus!

And be baptised for the forgiveness of sin.
Now that’s a totally different subject

 

[EdOsiecki]

Water can’t forgive sins. John who was sent by God ought to know what’s the purpose of his baptism. He very clearly states, Mat 3:11,“I baptize you in water for repentance”. When we repent, we are asking God for forgiveness of our sins. But it’s His (Jesus’) Blood that atones for the sins. Heb 9:22 states, “Without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins”. Jesus per Mat 26:28, " This is my blood of the new covenant, which is poured out for many for the forginess of sins". Blood atonement for sins started with Adam and Eve when God reclothed them with animals skins. The blood of the animals temporarily (a foreshadow of the cross) atoned for their sin. It continued thoughout the Old T. and continued into the New T. with Jesus our Lamb atoned for our sins.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

During a mass, we hear these words at the end of a Scriptural reading: “A reading from the Holy Gospel according to St. John” – or St. Matthew, or St. Luke, or whoever wrote the particular passage being read.

Usually, it is announced before the particular reading so that people can follow along if they choose.

Mailman:

Now, what about the Gospel according to Jesus? Jesus Himself preached some “gospel.” Once, when in a synagogue in Nazareth, He read from the book of Isaiah and declared that the particular passage He just read (a prophecy) has been fulfilled by His coming. One of the things prophesied there was that He was to be the Anointed One to preach THE Gospel.

The message is the same in each of the four written acounts by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. That is why it is announced as the Gospel… “according to” (as in - written down by) one of the four Gospel writers. The source is the same… Jesus Christ. The story about Jesus reading from the text in the synogauge is also recorded among the inspired written gosepl accounts. So, I’m not sure what your point is. Are you asking why it is that Jesus did not write down his gospel message?

Mailman:

If Jesus was to “preach the gospel to the poor,” what was this gospel that Jesus was prophesied to preach?

I suspect it would be the same gospel message that was written about in the four written accounts of His gospel. It would be a call to repentence, baptism, and keeping the commandments. And it would be a promise of everlasting life to those who love Him and walk in His ways.

Peace,
Robert

 

[Jerry_Marino]

no baptism, why do you all always go back into the water?

God bless