Two evangels circumcision and uncircumcision

[AllThingsReconciled]

Paul tells us to rightly divide or “correctly partition” the word of God.

From my simple understanding that pertains to the two evangels.
Galatians 2:7-8 states

“But, on the contrary, preceiving that I have been entrusted with the evangel of the Uncircumcision,according as Peter of the Circumcision”

The genitive of the greek is used here. playing music TO the spanish is different than playing music OF the spanish.

I would argue Paul makes it clear that the “secrets” obtained by Him by the risen Christ is NOT the same evangel that is being preached to the circumcision and its proselytes.

Many thing differ between the two. So much that even peter says “they are hard to understand” 2 peter 3:16.
Why would they be “hard to understand” if it was the exact same message He was preaching.

When commissioned to preach the coming kingdom even Christ told His circumcision apostles “do not go on the road to the nations” and during His circumcision earthly ministry said “I have not come but for the lost sheep of israel” (a verse I have hardly yet heard a good explaination for from modern one evangel preachers). Thats because the kingdom message was never given to the gentiles. It was a promise, and a covenant, made to Israel.

In short, Im not the smartest person to talk about this but Im smart enough to see the differences between Paul and the circumcision apostles. Some of which differences outright contradict one another UNLESS they are two different messages dealing with two different people.

From what I understand in laymans terms.

Circumcision=The bride of Christ,Faith+works+plus forgiveness+being many called few chosen,israel must be born again, put on hold till the compliment of the nations come in,chosen left behind upon Christs return,entrance to the 1000 year kingdom.

Uncircumcision=The body of Christ,belief in Christ complete and finished work on the cross,all who were chosen will be called, justified by faith and grace alone, crucified with Christ and is a new creation (prolepsis),is the "compliment of the nations, works for reward of reigning among the celestials but not for eonian salvation itself, chosen snatched away to meet Christ in the air upon His return.

Here are some more,but not all, of the differences between the two:

http://weltmanager.de/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/TheTwoEvangels.html
^THIS IS SUPER IMPORTANT IN MY OPINION. If one says theres only one evangel then what we have is nothing but a book full of contradictions.

I believe mixing the two is the “anathema evangel” which was “not another (circumcision)”

If you wanna get into the nitty gritty

A Study on the Two Evangels (Part 1)

[LLC]

ATR, to me, there is only one word of God. It does not change. It was, is and always will be the same word which was made known in the beginning and applies to all men. We are cautioned not to add to it, and are warned of the many false prophets who preach according to another word. The Jewish/Levitical law was one of many “other words”.

[AllThingsReconciled]

It does not change.

If you mean what was written is never changed Id argue to look at the original hebrew and greek against the terrible translation of the kjv.

Pauls “secrets kept before time eonian” throws a whole wrench into the idea that “things always are and will be the same message”. As Paul was given divine revelation from the risen and glorified Christ that was not yet known.

also If you mean how it applies never changes then thats demonstrably false by temple sacrifice being done away with, for the time being, alone…

The words do not change, minus crummy translations like the kjv and others, but the way God deals with people do. Otherwise you dont think anything significantly different was revealed or changed in Christ Crucifixion and He was just another temple sacrifice.

applies to all men

Then why does Paul make it clear the nations were without covenant and not given law? And if that once was but now has changed then you defeated your own argument that “it never changes”.

We are cautioned not to add to it

Not that i disagree but first of all you are ripping that out of context. That was said about revelations book “anyone who adds or takes away to THIS (revelations) book will be accursed” paraphrased. Scripture is a series of books. The overarching theme is te same but they were individually authored, and at the time writing, separate. Thus when the author of revelations says “do not add or take away from this book” he couldnt have meant the bible as a whole because it wasnt yet whole.

Much less theres plenty of people here who “add” words to twist a verse to what they want it to mean ( like adding the word “natural” to isaiah 45:7 when its not there in the hebrew) and people who want to take away things they dont like (such as the war commands being given by God. i mean hell I know people here who have advocated not to take the book of Job seriously).
I am not one of them so I think, if its being implied Im taking away from anything, its a wrongful accusation. From what Ive seen Im one of the very few infallibilists, as it is written and translated concordantly, here.

Also if its all just “one word” or “one message” then you have a LOT of explaining to do with all the contradictions between the circumcision and uncircumcision.
If you think thats so id like an explanation, from your point of view from the link, showing how the contrary difference being reconcilable under one evangel. Granted not all of them are contradictory but some blatantly are.

[http://weltmanager.de/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/TheTwoEvangels.html ]

The irreverent are condemned (2 Pet. 2:5-6)
The irreverent are justified (Rom. 4:5)

Glory of the terrestrial (1 Cor. 15:40; Jn. 3:12)
Glory of the celestial (1 Cor. 15:40; Jn. 3:12)

Will go through day of indignation (Rev. 7:1-17)
Not appointed to indignation (1 Thess. t:10; 5:9)

Those three contradictions should be a good start if you wish to try to harmonize them all under one evangel.

All and all I hardly see any refutation of what Ive presented. Your argument has basically been “its always been that way and it always will be”

Galatians 2:7 makes clear there is a evangel OF (not “to”) the circumcision and uncircumcision. And mixing the two is no evangel at all.

[LLC]

That was said about revelations book “anyone who adds or takes away to THIS (revelations) book will be accursed” paraphrased.

ATR, this was not just said about the book of revelation, it was said about the word of God.

Deut. 4:2 “You shall not add to the word which I command you, nor take away anything from it that you may keep the commandments of the Lord your god which I command you today”
Isaiah 8:20 To the Law and to the Testimony, if they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them."

As Paul was given divine revelation from the risen and glorified Christ that was not yet known.

There was nothing that Paul or Jesus said that had not been spoken before by many that came before them. God does not hide the word.

Much less theres plenty of people here who “add” words to twist a verse to what they want it to mean ( like adding the word “natural” to isaiah 45:7 when its not there in the hebrew) and people who want to take away things they dont like (such as the war commands being given by God. i mean hell I know people here who have advocated not to take the book of Job seriously).

Yes, I agree. Men have been doing so since the beginning( the serpent in the Garden of Eden).

From what Ive seen Im one of the very few infallibilists,

To me,this is a stumbling block in thinking that the Bible or the translators and interpreters of it are infallible. As Jesus said, “You study the Scriptures because in them you think you have eternal life.”

From what I understand, God gave Moses the Law - The Ten Commandments- that’s all.
Exodus 24:12 " Come up to Me on the mountain and be there and I will give you tablets of stone and the Law and commandments which I have written that you may teach them."

Exodus 34:29 “Now it was when Moses came down from Mt. Sinai and the two tablets of the Testimony were in Moses’ hand when he came down from the mountain that Moses did not know that the skin of his face shone while He talked with him”

Exodus 32:16 “Now the tablets were the work of God and the writing was the writing of God engraved on the tablets.”

Exodus 34:28 "And He wrote on the tablets the words of the covenant, the Ten Commandments."

Deut. 10:4-5 “And He wrote on the tablets according to the first writing, the Ten Commandments which the Lord had spoken to you in the mountain from the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly. Then I turned and came down from the mountain and put them in the ark which I made and there they are just as the Lord commanded me.”

Deut. 4:10-13 'especially concerning the day you stood before the Lord your God in Horeb when the lord said to me, “Gather the people to Me, and I will let them hear my words that they may learn to fear me… So He declared to you His covenant which He commanded you to perform, that is the Ten Commandments, and He wrote them on two tablets of stone.”

Deut. 5:22 'These words the Lord spoke to all your assembly in the mountain from the midst of the fire, the cloud and the thick darkness, with a loud voice and He added no more. And He wrote them on two tablets of stone and gave them to me."

In Deut.10:12-22 Moses explains the essence of the Law and gives the Golden Rule.

In fact the Ten Commandments and Golden Rule were in practice long before Moses.

Galatians 5:4 says this: “For the whole Law is fulfilled in one word: Love your neighbor as yourself.”

As Isaiah 28:13 says "But the word of the Lord was to them, precept upon precept, precept upon precept, line upon line, line upon line , here a little, there a little, that they might go and fall backward, and be broken and snared and caught.