The Gospel Preached By Jesus

[WeSee]

When Jesus began His ministry he quoted from the Book of Isaiah: 
Luke 4 
16And He came to Nazareth, where He had been brought up; and as was His custom, He entered the synagogue on the Sabbath, and stood up to read. 17And the book of the prophet Isaiah was handed to Him. And He opened the book and found the place where it was written, 
18“THE SPIRIT OF THE LORD IS UPON ME, 
BECAUSE HE ANOINTED ME TO PREACH THE GOSPEL TO THE POOR. 
HE HAS SENT ME TO PROCLAIM RELEASE TO THE CAPTIVES, 
AND RECOVERY OF SIGHT TO THE BLIND, 
TO SET FREE THOSE WHO ARE OPPRESSED, 
19TO PROCLAIM THE FAVORABLE YEAR OF THE LORD.� 
20And He closed the book, gave it back to the attendant and sat down; and the eyes of all in the synagogue were fixed on Him. 21And He began to say to them, “Today this Scripture has been fulfilled in your hearing.�

Jesus clearly stated His purpose. The purpose for which He was anointed. The purpose for which He is the Christ (Christ means "anointed one" for those who are unaware): 
1) To preach His gospel - These are the words He spoke while preaching His gospel during His ministry. 
2) To give sight to the blind - To open the eyes of those blind to the will of God which is contained in His gospel. 
3) To set free the captives - To FREE those who abide in His word from the slavery of committing sin. To FREE those who abide in His gospel (See John 8). 

That's it in a nutshell. During His ministry, Jesus did exactly what He said He was going to do. This is the gospel preached by Jesus. 

There is no "total depravity of man" in the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry. 
There is no "vicarious atonement for the forgiveness of sins" in the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry. 
There is no "if you believe in the redemptive death and resurrection of Christ you will receive eternal life and live in the Kingdom" in the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry. 
There is no "imputed righteousness" in the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry.

Christianity has a different gospel based on the theology of Paul and others as its foundation.
Shouldn't Christianity have the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry as its foundation?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 99 by WeSee]


#2 You claim that the forgiveness Jesus refered to is in fact simply the FREEDOM from blame accorded by the wounded party.

MATTHEW 20:28

Just as the Son of man came, not to be ministered to, but to minister and to give his life as a ransom in exchange for many.�

...but Jesus his action being "EXCHANGE" for lives, so he was not merely releasing someone from blame but exchanging his life for the lives of others

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 101 by JehovahsWitness]

#3 You claim that Matthew 26:28 is not referring to a sacrifice because the Greek word for "sacrifice" is not in the text.

MATTHEW 26:28 - ESV

for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of SINS.

* The forgiveness of sin is more than someone overlooking a personal offense; FREEDOM from accountability for an offense is not the same as removing/atoning for SIN. Only God has authority to forgive SIN (duly delegated to His Son). Since sin is the breaking of GOD'S law, only he has the right to forgive themoffense which he has stated he only does on the basis of a blood sacrifice

Yet it refers to he forgiveness of SINS* which biblically is only possible by means of a blood sacrifice.

LEVITICUS 17:11

For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I myself have given it on the altar for you to make atonement for yourselves, because it is the blood that makes atonement by means of the lifein it.[/b]

RELATED POSTS

Is there a difference between forgiveness and atonement?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 230#906230

Does the ransom sacrifice of Jesus contradict the principle of forgiving others in personal relationships?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 307#827307

What is the legal basis for atonement? (Onewithim)
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 947#869947

Was Christ PUNISHED for our sins? (atonement)
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 639#978639

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 102 by JehovahsWitness]

#4 You claim the Greek language HAS no word for "sacrifice"

BTW ... The Greek has no word for "sacrifice".

The above statement is demonstratively false

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 100 by JehovahsWitness]

You yourself have ignored some key questions that go to the very heart of the significance of Christ's death, namely

• Can any human claim to be entirely free of sin? If not, why not?
• Why were the Israelites required to regularly make animal sacrifices to God?
• Why did Jesus link sin with human sickness?
• Why do humans get sick, grow old and die ?

The answers to the above go a long way in establishing a biblical view of sin and death.




JW



RELATED POSTS

Go to other posts related to

SIN, DEATH and ...THE RANSOM SACRIFICE OF CHRIST

[Elijah John]

Paul did not teach anything different that what Jesus taught. If you want to talk about those points you assume are so, it would be a good idea to open a post about that, so we can see if they are really different, or if it is just that you don't have enought information about the matters and are arriving to a wrong conclusion. .

For starters, Paul went around preaching the blood of Christ, "Christ and him crucified". Jesus didn't go around preaching "Christ and me crucified". Rather, Jesus preached that God favored the oppressed and the excluded ( That was Good News to the downtrodden. Ref.the passage from Luke cited in the OP, and the Beattitudes) repentance, the mercy of the Father, and the Kingdom of God. (Ref the Beattitudes, the Lord's prayer, the Parables, the Sermon on the Mount, etc.)

Also, Paul also preached, "if you confess Jesus with your mouth, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved".

Jesus never preached this. Paul added a condition for salvation. Jesus never preached the necessity of believing in his resurrection as a condition for salvation.

Ironic, Paul is the one who preached "a different Gospel". The very thing he condemned others for.

[JehovahsWitness]

PAUL

Paul also preached, "if you [1] confess Jesus with your mouth, and believe in your heart that God[2] raised him from the dead, you will [3] be saved". Jesus never preached this. Paul added a condition for salvation. Jesus never preached the necessity of believing in his resurrection as a condition for salvation.

Ironic, Paul is the one who preached "a different Gospel". The very thing he condemned others for.

Notation& Emphasis MINE


JESUS

LUKE 24:46-47

...he [Jesus] said to them, “This is what is written: that the Christ would suffer and [2] rise from among the dead on the third day, and on the basis of his name, repentance for [3] forgiveness of sins would be [1] preached in all the nations - starting out from Jerusalem.

[1] preach/declare/witness to Jesus
[2] testify to his resurrection
[3] Jesus is the basis for forgiveness / salvation from sin*

* atonement from sin leads to everlasting life (salvation)

CONCLUSION Jesus sent his disciples out to preach a gospel based on his central role in salvation. Paul simply repeated the gospel Jesus himself initialted.

JEHOVAH'S WITNESS

[Elijah John]

JESUS

LUKE 24:46-47

...he [Jesus] said to them, “This is what is written: that the Christ would suffer and [2] rise from among the dead on the third day, and on the basis of his name, r

I would ask Luke, where were those words he put into Jesus mouth written in the Hebrew Scriptures??

Also, yes Jesus has a central role in the story of salvation. But how often did Jesus go around preaching his blood as a means of salvation? Why didn't he do this in the Lord's Prayer, the Sermon on the Mount, the Beattitudes or in any of his parables?? If the blood is so essential to salvation, why didn't Jesus preach it in any of these places? I'd really like an answer to these questions please. It's not Jesus blood that saves, but his teaching and preaching about the mercy of the Father.

No, Jesus message was more simple. The Father's mercy based on repentance. The merciful Father always eager to welcome and embrace the contrite.

[WeSee]

[Replying to post 104 by JehovahsWitness]

1 # You claim that Jesus' references to BLOOD was speaking about his WORDS. Yet the bible is quite catagoric: blood represents a person's LIFE

As I've explained before, in John 6 Jesus explained His metaphor of "flesh" and "blood" with the following:
"“It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life."
You seem to be pretending that I hadn't.

#2 You claim that the forgiveness Jesus refered to is in fact simply the FREEDOM from blame accorded by the wounded party.

This is not true. What I actually wrote was:

1) The word given as "forgiveness" literally means "freedom".

2) In John 6 Jesus also speaks of "eating", "bread", "body/flesh", "drinking" and "blood". wherein Jesus uses the metaphor of "eating flesh", "drinking blood" to refer to " the words that I have spoken to you". In short, one "eats" and "drinks" His words so that they will abide in Him.

3) In John 15 Jesus explains that "abiding" in Him entails "keep[ing] His commandments" (words).

4) In John 8 Jesus explain that those who "abide in [His] words" will be made "free" from committing sin.

So when Jesus tells them to eat His body (flesh) and drink His blood, He is really speaking of them eating and drinking His words just as He does in John 6.

So what Jesus means in Matthew 26:28 is "for [these are My words] of the covenant, which is poured out for many for [freedom from] sins" which parallels what He said in John 8 about those who abide in His word being freed from committing sin.

Why did you twist what I wrote into something I did not?

#3 You claim that Matthew 26:28 is not referring to a sacrifice because the Greek word for "sacrifice" is not in the text.

Actually what I wrote was:

The point is that in the original Greek, there is no word for sacrifice.

The second point is that of all the translations listed for Matthew 26:28, only the NLT has the word "sacrifice". The NLT is a translation that took extreme liberties.

Why did you twist what I wrote into something I did not?

#4 You claim the Greek language HAS no word for "sacrifice"

WeSee wrote:
BTW ... The Greek has no word for "sacrifice".

Here you've even gone so far as to intentionally omit part of what I wrote so that you could twist into something it doesn't say.

This is what I wrote:

BTW that's an interesting translation of Matthew 26:28. The Greek has no word for "sacrifice"

Which I followed up with the following as an explanation of what I wrote about Matthew 26:28:

The point is that in the original Greek, there is no word for sacrifice.

The second point is that of all the translations listed for Matthew 26:28, only the NLT has the word "sacrifice". The NLT is a translation that took extreme liberties.

You seem to have no reservations about completely misrepresenting what others write. Will there be an apology forthcoming?

[brianbbs67]

Here is a list of Christ's command from the 4 gospels.

viewtopic.php?t=35181&highlight=

No ambiguity here. Just the words attributed to Jesus. Have a read. Just the verses, not the rest of the comments. For now.

I assume this was meant for me. Read it. What do you have in mind?

Its meant for everyone. It is what christ commanded. That's all. As for what I have in mind, people read Paul and ignore Christ. I think Paul is just misunderstood.

Perhaps the most prevalent theme in the gospel preached by Jesus was the importance of His words. Hearing, understanding, believing, following, keeping and abiding in His words. He went on and on about it. Yet they are largely ignored by Christians.

That people read Paul and ignore Jesus underscores the fact that Christianity has Paul's theology as its foundation rather than the gospel preached by Jesus.

In what ways do you see Paul as being misunderstood?

In the same way Peter describes in second Peter 3:14-18. Paul claims only to teach the law and prophets according to Christ(the Way). He states so several times.

So, the choice with Paul is either he is a false prophet speaking contrary to God. Or he carries out Christ's command and we must dig deeper to fully understand him. Context and history are important to consider.

The thing most christians ignore is what Jesus actually taught. If one just goes thru the 4 gospels alone and writes down all he commands, one would find the Torah free of man's traditions is what he teaches. After all , he was a Jew. If we truly wanted to follow his example, we would be Torah following, tradition rejecting, Hebrews.

[WeSee]

[Replying to post 109 by brianbbs67]

If one just goes thru the 4 gospels alone and writes down all he commands, one would find the Torah free of man's traditions is what he teaches. After all , he was a Jew. If we truly wanted to follow his example, we would be Torah following, tradition rejecting, Hebrews.
Jesus defined a new Law and the Prophets with the following:
Matthew 22
37And He said to him, “ ‘YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND.’ 38“This is the great and foremost commandment. 39“The second is like it, ‘YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.’ 40“On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets.�
Matthew 7
12“In everything, therefore, treat people the same way you want them to treat you, for this is the Law and the Prophets.

Jesus delivered the New Covenant in the gospel the He preached during His ministry and defined a new foundation for the Law and the Prophets as above. It isn't about "following His example". It's about "abiding in His word" and becoming one with God as He was one with God.

So, the choice with Paul is either he is a false prophet speaking contrary to God. Or he carries out Christ's command and we must dig deeper to fully understand him.
Anyone who is one with God as He was one with God would echo the underlying concepts defined by the words Jesus spoke while preaching His Gospel. Otherwise they would not be one with God as He was one with God. They would be perfected in unity with Jesus and God. The theology of Paul does not echo the underlying concepts defined by the words Jesus spoke while preaching His Gospel. The theology of Paul is antithetical to the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry.

John 17
20“I do not ask on behalf of these alone, but for those also who believe in Me through their word; 21that they may all be one; even as You, Father, are in Me and I in You, that they also may be in Us, so that the world may believe that You sent Me.
22“The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one, just as We are one; 23I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me, and loved them, even as You have loved Me.
Matthew 10
24“A disciple is not above his teacher, nor a slave above his master. 25“It is enough for the disciple that he become like his teacher, and the slave like his master.
Luke 6
40“A pupil is not above his teacher; but everyone, after he has been fully trained, will be like his teacher.