Alright Joel,

I read the "Giving dignity to the dogs" article.
Over all the article was GREAT! I do not have problem with the doctrine it contained AT ALL.  
I have one small point about the article.
Jesus showed a different attitude to that gentile woman than he had shown to any other gentile he encountered.
He did not treat the Gentile centurion that way or the Samaritan leper or the Samaritan woman at the well.  Why? I'm not completely sure - and I don't think it matters too much one way or the other.
But one thing that made her different from the other gentiles is that she was a canaanite.
I'm not sure why that would matter, but it is a fact that she is the only gentile he treated that way. So it can't be ignored all together.

What I STRONGLY disagree with you about is that Paul somehow was the first  (or only one) who Jesus  revealed this to.

From the article - it doesn't appear that you are leading in the direction that I considered when you asked about the rapture. So I won't go into that yet either.

What I agree about is that all men are equal in Jesus.
No person is saved by anything other than grace through faith in Jesus. Not the Jew, and not the Gentile!
I do however think Jesus made this clear, but because of the Jewish understanding of the messiah's role - they commonly misunderstood Jesus.
It is also clear that prior to the resurrection they had no clue who he was or what he was sent for. He did tell them - but they didn't get it.

That changed with the great commission. Still, they were stubborn in their flesh. He told them to start at Jerusalem and they didn't know when to move on.
Even Paul started in Jerusalem. And he pronounced one of the greatest prophecies in the New Testament in Acts 28:28.

The ONLY problem I have with any of your stuff is that you claim Paul taught things that Jesus did not teach. I can not and will not accept that nor should anyone!


cook

The ONLY problem I have with any of your stuff is that you claim Paul taught things that Jesus did not teach. I can not and will not accept that nor should anyone!

Right on, Cook.  I totally agree.  I, like Tony and Joel, was a dispensationalist at one time too, and for many years.  So I understand their argument and why they believe this two gospel thing.

"You can jump up and down and scream and holler all you want. That will not change a thing."

You got that impression from me? Believe me, I won't try those tactics with you.

" I showed you exactly what I said I would show you."

Not quite.  

"Jesus explained his mission to his disciples before Paul. And he told them that Gentiles would be included in the "kingdom of heaven"."

Its easy for us to the the cross and all that we know now in those passages, but cook, there is no way that from those bits a pieces, here and there of the big picture we see that it was known back then. This is obvious from everyones response we see recorded.......SO, Something that has been revealed, would be something that is known would you agree?

The scriptures say that the mystery (which contain the benefits of of the cross) was kept secret otherwise the Lord would not have been crucified.  1.Cor:2:1-10. So I see every reason in the world why this good news was hid from EVERYONE until the crucified and risen Lord revealed it.

"We are not debating what the disciples may or may not have "understood". You said it was revealed only to Paul. And you are wrong! "

Whatever cook. I guess it depends on what your definition of revealed is, and how little real info you need to see a very big picture hid in God since the foundation of the earth.

If Jesus wanted to reveal something cook, don't you think He may just have been the guy to get it pulled off? I mean He could have easily said, Hey guys, pay attention here, I am very serious, this is very important, to get their attention, or done something even more drastic, and just gave them a vision.

"You very quietly ignored the great commission." It is there that the bible explains Jesus opened their understanding."

great commission? Is that where all those who believe are going about performing all those great miracles while supernaturaly protected from poisons and snakebites, basicaly supernaturaly protected?

When Jesus finaly opened their understanding, he opened their understanding as to what the "law of moses and the prophets and psalms wrote about Him"Luke 24:44.............If you take the time to read what they said about Him, it concerned The king of the Jews. The promised and prohesied Messiah. The one who would save His people (the Israelites) from their sin somehow.  The one who would come and put all His and His peoples enemies underfoot. Even tame the animals of the earth to mention a few.

What you won't read about is God in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself through calvarys cross. God in the flesh who would take on the sins of every human being and pay their price. And that through mere faith in His death burial and resurrection one has eternal life,

So yes, He opened their understanding to alot of stuff, but NOT that gentiles are on equal ground. After all, you do have God sending Peter a vision in acts 10. because Peter still thought (correctly) that it was illegal for him to go to a gentile. Gottcha!  
 
"In Acts Peter himself acknowledges that salvation is for the Gentiles equal to the Jews and the council agrees."

Yep, Peter came along way in acts. Thank God for Paul and that vision.

His............Joel

Joel.  Lets discuss this "mystery" that Paul speaks of in more detail.  You are relating this mystery as the gospel to the uncircumcised, right?  Something that is not related to the uncircumcised?  Is this really Pauls point about this mystery?

Hi geegee,

I'm so confused

"Peter's stubbornness does not prove that Jesus did not tell him what he told above about "All Nations"

It wasn't just Peters stubborness, the rest of them believed (correctly) the same thing. Why do you suppose Peter feared the rest of the guys seeing him fellowshiping w/gentiles?

Do you really think that Peter knowing this was God Himself, back from the dead who had killed people instantly just for lying in the past, was someone Peter should be stubborn with? c'mon cook.

"It's sad we are so close and yet so far apart."

I don't think we are that far apart

"I do know exactly what you are talking about concerning the Jews.
I know what they were/are expecting in a messiah. Believe me, if I have had one thing drilled into my head really good - it is that very thing!!"

Well it's good to hear you recognise and know something about Israels prophesied Messiah.  

You do know that He will return to this earth, and after subduing it so to speak He sets up His kingdom and rules and reigns here for 1000 years right?


"Because of that - it is easy for me to look at the gospels and see Jesus saying one thing and the disciple hearing another. "

"For instance when Jesus tells Peter about His coming death and resurrection. Peter rebukes Jesus and Jesus in turn rebukes Peter. This makes no sense unless you understand what Peter had been taught as a Jew. Jews did not/do not believe the messiah will die for ANYONE'S sin."

Their scriptures didn't tell them that. Why would they teach it? Their scriptures told of a mighty conquering King.  

"Well Peter's vision would have been the same even without Paul."

Hmmm. Why would Peter need this vision if his understanding had been opened? Its says opened, his understanding was opened. If he understood as you say, there is not one good reason for him to be stubborn because his understanding had been opened.

"But yes I agree that Paul seemed more willing than the others to take the message full force to the gentiles."

You'd be more willing to if the Lord pulled on you what He pulled on Paul Lol.

He was as purposely called to go to the gentiles as Peter and the 11 were sent to the Israelites.  

"But a few other things you and geegee have said have me a bit confused. I'm not sure where you are all going with this. "

No where special.

"So, I'll answer you now about the rapture issue. I do believe there will be a rapture. I lean to pre-trib but no further than mid-trib.
I admit right up front - it is not something I am the most knowledgeable about though."

I look forward to the rapture as well. Only I KNOW that as an ambassador here on this earth and that since heaven is my residence, my leader will bring me home before He begins hostilities.

"Are you leading up to the two kingdom theory? One on earth for Jews and one in heaven for Gentiles? I have only heard this once briefly."

No, not leading there, but since you brought it up.

 The body of Christ, will be taken off the earth to meet the Lord in the air, (raptured). And thus shall remain with the Lord.

The Lord then comes back to earth, wages war on His enemies, defeats them, then rules and reigns from Jerusalem over the people God promised this land to forever. His chosen people Israel.

WE are changed in the twinkling of an eye and removed from the earth. They are ressurected to life again, and remain on the earth.

His................Joel

"Are you leading up to the two kingdom theory? One on earth for Jews and one in heaven for Gentiles? I have only heard this once briefly."

No, not leading there, but since you brought it up.

The body of Christ, will be taken off the earth to meet the Lord in the air, (raptured). And thus shall remain with the Lord.

The Lord then comes back to earth, wages war on His enemies, defeats them, then rules and reigns from Jerusalem over the people God promised this land to forever. His chosen people Israel.

WE are changed in the twinkling of an eye and removed from the earth. They are ressurected to life again, and remain on the earth.

And I thought I had heard it all  

I think this is along the lines of the "two kingdom" thing. How is your idea different?  

And where do you say Jesus will be after the 1000 years? I don't care about all the other stuff about who gets in or who does not. I just want to be where Jesus is.

I am NOT saying I agree with your view. I like it, it sounds nice - but I haven't given it much thought.

Well it's good to hear you recognise and know something about Israels prophesied Messiah.

My husband's family is Jewish, and I left Christianity a few years ago and almost converted to Orthodox.  So I do know a bit.  


cook

And where do you say Jesus will be after the 1000 years?

Jerusalem. The new Holy city that comes down OUT of Heaven to the earth....... Revelation 21

Actually, I believe He will still be omni-present. .. He will most definatley still be here on the earth too, according to the scriptures.

WE are changed in the twinkling of an eye and removed from the earth. They are ressurected to life again, and remain on the earth.  

"And I thought I had heard it all"

Cook, I will give you a couple passages of scripture to look at and ponder, so you are not just hearing this part of it.

Job 19:23 Oh that my words were now written! oh that they were printed in a book!

 24 That they were graven with an iron pen and lead in the rock for ever!

 25 For I know that my redeemer liveth, and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth:

 26 And though after my skin worms destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God:

 27 Whom I shall see for myself, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another; though my reins be consumed within me.

Doesn't this at least suggest to you that Job expects to see God on the earth after he has been resurrected?

His..........Joel

Have a good nite cook!