Menu Content/Inhalt
william macdonald Here's the Difference - A Study of Important Biblical Distinctions including the Dispensations, Two Comings of Christ, the Church and Israel, Judicial and Parental Forgiveness, Double Fulfillments of Prophecy, Relationship and Fellowship.
Was Peter's gospel different than Paul's? Print E-mail

THE GOSPEL
Is it true to say that there are two Gospels, Paul’s and Peter’s, each with a different aspect of the Lord’s Return in view; the former described in 1 Thessalonians 4:17, the latter, in Acts 1: Acts 2: and Acts 3:20?

Certainly Paul’s Apostolate was chiefly to the Gentiles, and Peter’s to the Jews, and no doubt the presentation of the Gospel would vary accordingly. Compare Paul’s address at Antioch in Acts I 3 and that on Mars’ Hill to an Athenian audience. The former is full of Jewish history and of Old Testament quotations, the latter contains neither the one nor the other. Such references would have had no special weight with Gentiles, but the Gospel in both is centred on the same Person— the Lord Jesus, and on the same work—His death and resurrection. It was the same Gospel in a different setting. Naturally things in the Acts were in a transition state, especially in the earlier chapters. An offer was still being made to the nation of Israel on the ground of resurrection, in which certainly Paul had no part, not being yet an apostle. Had they repented and been converted, no doubt the Lord would have been sent back to them (see chap. 3. 20), but the nation did not repent and so was set on one side, and God’s greater purpose “from before the foundation of the world,” was gradually unfolded. Paul did become the special minister of this—the mystery of Christ—but he in no way claimed the monopoly of it, which some would attribute to him, as his words in Ephesians 3:5 with reference to that mystery, show: “Which in other ages was not made known to the sons of men. AS IT IS NOW REVEALED UNTO HIS HOLY APOSTLES AND PROPHETS BY THE SPIRIT.” It was revealed to them, as well as to Paul, but he became the spokesman. To say that Peter continued to the end to limit his hope to the return of Christ to the earth, is both arbitrary and unscriptural. He certainly does deal with that aspect of the Lords’ return in his second epistle, but in his first epistle he speaks of “a living hope . . . to an inheritance reserved in heaven for you.” This is not an earthly hope any more than the “revelation of Jesus Christ” in chap. 1. 23, or the appearance of the Chief Shepherd in chap. 5. 4. In both these it will be the revelation of Christ to the Church.

W.H.


Other pages in this section
No one has commented on this article.
Please keep your comments brief and on topic, and remember that this is not a discussion thread.
Name :
Title :
     
Comment(s) :
Verify :
Please clear the small textbox to show that you are human.
 
< Prev   Next >
[ Back ]