If Paul and the Twelve had preached the same message to the same audience, Paul's apostleship would have been unnecessary. Yet Paul declares his gospel was received "by revelation of Jesus Christ" ( Gal. 1:11-12), not from men. The Twelve were sent to Israel with the kingdom gospel-repentance, baptism, and faith in Jesus as Messiah, looking for the restoration of Israel's promised kingdom ( Acts 2:38; Matt. 19:28). Paul, however, was uniquely commissioned as the apostle to the Gentiles ( Rom. 11:13), entrusted with the mystery previously hidden: salvation by grace through faith alone, apart from the law, with Jew and Gentile united in one Body ( Eph. 3:1-9). This heavenly calling differs from Israel's earthly kingdom hope.
Paul calls himself the "wise masterbuilder" who laid the foundation of this dispensation ( 1 Cor. 3:10-11). His epistles form the cornerstone for the doctrine, order, and identity of the Church, the Body of Christ. Without Paul's ministry, we would not know the sealing of the Spirit, our heavenly inheritance, or justification apart from works. Importantly, recognizing Paul's distinct apostleship does not overlay or distort any scripture; it simply honors the contextual truths God gave separately to Israel and to the Body of Christ. If his message were the same as the Twelve, his role would be redundant. Instead, Paul's ministry reveals the mystery and establishes the cornerstone for the present dispensation of grace, through which we understand who we are in Christ and our eternal destiny.
I realize Lbooth1955 that we have discussed this matter before, but thought to address a few points. Paul was called to share the Gospel with the Gentiles, just as the other apostles to Israel ( Galatians 2:7), but was their Gospel presentation any different where repentance, baptism and faith in Jesus was absolute for all men, without any compromise? I read your distinction between them, particularly that the message to the Jews was based on an earthly kingdom hope and Paul's to the Gentiles was on the revealed mystery of the union of Jew & Gentile in one Body, & Grace through Faith apart from the Law.
We aren't given much details of the apostles' ministries, but at least with Peter (that I can think of), if he hadn't realized it before, he certainly did in his encounter with Cornelius (Acts chap 10). The vision he received truly opened his eyes to the fact that not only the Jews, but that God had called Gentiles to be saved and become one together in Christ. At first Peter doubted the vision ( Acts 10:17); then he understood from it that Gentiles were not to be considered unclean (therefore, being prevented from hearing & receiving the Gospel) ( Acts 10:28,34,35); and finally, he saw the evidence of God's working, His outpouring of His Spirit on Gentiles ( Acts 10:44-46; Acts 11:15-18). This is the first instance as we read, that Peter understood that the Gentiles would also be saved, along with the Jews, incorporated in the one Body.
Regarding salvation by Grace alone, without the observance of the Law, I agree, that this was a problem. The Gentiles, it was decided, would be exempt ( Acts 15:5-20), though it seems ( Acts 21:18-21) that Jewish converts were still embracing the Law. When they matured in faith & knowledge I can't tell, as even today, some still believe in the keeping of the Law. But in the matter of James, in his epistle, I see no problem, as James speaks about 'works' that result from faith ( James 2:14-18), and not faith plus the works of the Law. GBU
James 1:1 opens the letter: "To the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad." This is not the Body of Christ but Israel in dispersion. Dispensationally, James is addressing Israel under their prophetic program, not the mystery revealed to Paul ( Eph. 3:1-9). That sets the framework.
2. Faith and Works in James
James 2:14-18 ties justification to works as a demonstration of faith: "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only" (v.24). For Israel under covenant, faith was expected to be shown by obedience and works of righteousness ( Lev. 18:5; Ezek. 18:9). This aligns with the kingdom program, where enduring faithfulness proved genuine belief ( Matt. 24:13).
3. Contrast with Paul's Gospel
Paul, writing to Gentiles and the Body of Christ, stresses that justification is "without works" ( Rom. 3:28; 4:5; Eph. 2:8-9). Works flow from salvation but never contribute to justification. The moment faith is placed in Christ's finished work ( 1 Cor. 15:1-4), the believer is declared righteous. Any later works are for reward, not for maintaining or proving justification ( 1 Cor. 3:13-15).
4. Why It Cannot Be the Same
If James meant only "works resulting from faith" in the Pauline sense, then his statement in 2:24 directly contradicts Paul. Instead, dispensationalism recognizes they were speaking to different groups under different revelations:
James = Israel's faith proven by works within kingdom promises.
Paul = the Body of Christ justified apart from works, living under grace.
Romans 11:6 settles the distinction: "If by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace." Mixing James' works-based proof with Paul's grace-alone gospel collapses the distinction God revealed.
Thank you once again Lbooth1955 for that very detailed reply. The core of the matter as I see it, is understanding what Gospel was preached by Paul and James to their respective audiences. Even leaving aside (your quote), "James is addressing Israel under their prophetic program, not the mystery revealed to Paul ( Eph. 3:1-9)..That sets the framework", my concern is 'what Gospel did these men refer to that brought the unsaved Jew & Gentile into God's Salvation?' If James' Gospel to the Jew was 'salvation by faith plus works', this is not the Gospel, regardless of whether his readers are under God's prophetic program or not - the Gospel must be the same in every detail or else it is a false Gospel.
You also stated that James 1:1 readership "is not the Body of Christ but Israel in dispersion." Are you saying that they were not believers? As mentioned in another comment, James 2:1 strongly suggests that his readership had "the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ"; and this tells me that these were believers of Jewish heritage. I can't see how a people under their prophetic program, who have received and believed the Gospel could be anything else than true believers saved by faith alone and in the Body of Christ. If they are not true believers, then how can James write what he does in his epistle? Onto Page 2.
I earlier gave the example ( James 2:14-17) where one can say that he has great faith but when a brother or sister is in dire need, he does nothing. And James goes on ( James 2:21-24), citing Abraham's faith. When his faith was tested in the offering up of Isaac on the altar, Abraham came forth shining, for his faith was proven by his works (obedience). How would the genuineness of a Gentile's salvation & faith be proven, if not by his sensitivity and obedience to God's Spirit? If that is not there, then should we not regard him as a phony? And maybe this gives rise to some 'Christians' believing: 'I am saved, so how I live my life (i.e. works from faith) matters not'. Yet, Paul's plea to the Philippians ( Philippians 2:12), "Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling", is worth noting; salvation is not a 'given', unless the new spirit and renewed life produces fruit (works) that must be the evidence of a new birth.
I can understand what you shared, that their respective readerships were different and one was under & guided by God's prophetic program, but when the Gospel is given to anyone, it must be the same or it's not the true Gospel that saves. So this is why, if we are to believe that James was faithful to the Gospel that saves, but his audience was different, then James 2:28 must mean that justification is by faith alone, but where works are absent, then that faith was spurious. But if it doesn't mean that, then James preached a false Gospel, for there can only be one Gospel for all men.
Thank you again brother for this good discussion as I've tried to restrict myself here to only a couple of your points that needed examination. Blessings.
The Gospel of the Kingdom is the message preached during Jesus' earthly ministry, proclaiming the arrival of God's kingdom on earth through His reign as Messiah,
This was to the Jews while they continued faithfulness and righteousness under the Mosaic Law which was appropriate.
In Matthew 3:15 we see Jesus being of age asking John to baptized him.
"And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus IT BECOMETH US TO FULFILL ALL RIGHTEOUSNESS. Then he suffered him.
I believe Jesus was baptized and inaugurated under the Levitical priesthood to fulfill and end that priesthood at the Cross and bring in the new covenant with his death which was necessary.
Hebrews 9:16-17 'For where a testament is, there MUST ALSO OF NECESSITY BE THE DEATH OF THE TESTATOR.
For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
in the beginning the Gospel of the kingdom was to first a gather the lost sheep of Israel who lost their way.
Then offer up the Kingdom.
Matthew 23:37-39.
That has been postponed!
I believe the mystery was to be revealed at that time also, "after the Gathering" and bringing both Jews and Gentiles under the new covenant by the cross.
However as expected, Israel denied their Messiah and all but a remnant was blinded until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
Thanks for that bro S. Spencer, to which I fully agree. Matthew 3:15, as you quoted, is particularly relevant, as what Jesus proclaimed through His Baptism marked a real turning point, not just to His Life & Ministry on Earth, but would affect both Jew & Gentile alike. As you mentioned, His Baptism & into His Death & Resurrection ended the Levitical priesthood where priests were no longer required ( Hebrews 10:11,12), Jesus Himself becoming our Great High Priest and the Lamb of God for the sacrifice of our sins. No earthly priest could ever fill that role - he could only stand before God with the burnt offerings pleading for the forgiveness of Israel's sins. "But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God", and "by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified."
So Christ's Baptism not only reflected the imminent end of the earthly priesthood, but was also in demonstration before His Father that He would obey Him fully, being sent to fulfil His Will through His substitutionary death for mankind & their sins; and this baptism, unlike that of John's, spoke to John that Jesus came not to him for repentance of any sin within him (for He had none), but for the sake of our sins. So, as Jesus looked forward to Calvary in His Baptism, the believer looks back through his baptism at a marvelous undeserved Work accomplished for him at Calvary. And so "the new covenant, an everlasting covenant" was ushered in, which promises that there can never be another Covenant in the future that would or could make it redundant. God offered us His very best - Himself - that only the Blood of His Son could make a full, lasting & acceptable atonement. Thank you brother for your thoughts on this.
Thanks for your reply, I'm thinking we agree on more than disagree, however regarding James there is a difference of opinion and that's ok. I'll share my thoughts on the matter...
You're statement here caught my attention..."James speaks about 'works' that result from faith ( James 2:14-18), and not faith plus the works of the Law."
James writes "to the twelve tribes scattered abroad" ( Jas. 1:1), placing his audience firmly in Israel's covenant program. In James 2:14-18, he insists that "faith without works is dead," concluding, "by works a man is justified, and not by faith only" (2:24). This is consistent with Israel's kingdom hope, where obedience proved living faith (cf. Lev. 18:5; Matt. 24:13). In contrast, Paul reveals the "mystery" gospel for the Body of Christ, declaring "to him that worketh not, but believeth his faith is counted for righteousness" ( Rom. 4:5). Justification is by grace through faith alone, "not of works" ( Eph. 2:8-9). To merge James with Paul is to blur distinct programs. James requires works as evidence in Israel's prophetic dealings; Paul proclaims immediate justification apart from works under grace. Romans 11:6 makes clear that grace and works cannot mix. Different instructions, different audiences, no contradiction when rightly divided.
Something to think about!
If Paul and the Twelve had preached the same message to the same audience, Paul's apostleship would have been unnecessary. Yet Paul declares his gospel was received "by revelation of Jesus Christ" ( Gal. 1:11-12), not from men. The Twelve were sent to Israel with the kingdom gospel-repentance, baptism, and faith in Jesus as Messiah, looking for the restoration of Israel's promised kingdom ( Acts 2:38; Matt. 19:28). Paul, however, was uniquely commissioned as the apostle to the Gentiles ( Rom. 11:13), entrusted with the mystery previously hidden: salvation by grace through faith alone, apart from the law, with Jew and Gentile united in one Body ( Eph. 3:1-9). This heavenly calling differs from Israel's earthly kingdom hope.
Paul calls himself the "wise masterbuilder" who laid the foundation of this dispensation ( 1 Cor. 3:10-11). His epistles form the cornerstone for the doctrine, order, and identity of the Church, the Body of Christ. Without Paul's ministry, we would not know the sealing of the Spirit, our heavenly inheritance, or justification apart from works. Importantly, recognizing Paul's distinct apostleship does not overlay or distort any scripture; it simply honors the contextual truths God gave separately to Israel and to the Body of Christ. If his message were the same as the Twelve, his role would be redundant. Instead, Paul's ministry reveals the mystery and establishes the cornerstone for the present dispensation of grace, through which we understand who we are in Christ and our eternal destiny.
Grace and Peace.
We aren't given much details of the apostles' ministries, but at least with Peter (that I can think of), if he hadn't realized it before, he certainly did in his encounter with Cornelius (Acts chap 10). The vision he received truly opened his eyes to the fact that not only the Jews, but that God had called Gentiles to be saved and become one together in Christ. At first Peter doubted the vision ( Acts 10:17); then he understood from it that Gentiles were not to be considered unclean (therefore, being prevented from hearing & receiving the Gospel) ( Acts 10:28,34,35); and finally, he saw the evidence of God's working, His outpouring of His Spirit on Gentiles ( Acts 10:44-46; Acts 11:15-18). This is the first instance as we read, that Peter understood that the Gentiles would also be saved, along with the Jews, incorporated in the one Body.
Regarding salvation by Grace alone, without the observance of the Law, I agree, that this was a problem. The Gentiles, it was decided, would be exempt ( Acts 15:5-20), though it seems ( Acts 21:18-21) that Jewish converts were still embracing the Law. When they matured in faith & knowledge I can't tell, as even today, some still believe in the keeping of the Law. But in the matter of James, in his epistle, I see no problem, as James speaks about 'works' that result from faith ( James 2:14-18), and not faith plus the works of the Law. GBU
1. Audience and Dispensation
James 1:1 opens the letter: "To the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad." This is not the Body of Christ but Israel in dispersion. Dispensationally, James is addressing Israel under their prophetic program, not the mystery revealed to Paul ( Eph. 3:1-9). That sets the framework.
2. Faith and Works in James
James 2:14-18 ties justification to works as a demonstration of faith: "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only" (v.24). For Israel under covenant, faith was expected to be shown by obedience and works of righteousness ( Lev. 18:5; Ezek. 18:9). This aligns with the kingdom program, where enduring faithfulness proved genuine belief ( Matt. 24:13).
3. Contrast with Paul's Gospel
Paul, writing to Gentiles and the Body of Christ, stresses that justification is "without works" ( Rom. 3:28; 4:5; Eph. 2:8-9). Works flow from salvation but never contribute to justification. The moment faith is placed in Christ's finished work ( 1 Cor. 15:1-4), the believer is declared righteous. Any later works are for reward, not for maintaining or proving justification ( 1 Cor. 3:13-15).
4. Why It Cannot Be the Same
If James meant only "works resulting from faith" in the Pauline sense, then his statement in 2:24 directly contradicts Paul. Instead, dispensationalism recognizes they were speaking to different groups under different revelations:
James = Israel's faith proven by works within kingdom promises.
Paul = the Body of Christ justified apart from works, living under grace.
Romans 11:6 settles the distinction: "If by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace." Mixing James' works-based proof with Paul's grace-alone gospel collapses the distinction God revealed.
Grace and Peace
You also stated that James 1:1 readership "is not the Body of Christ but Israel in dispersion." Are you saying that they were not believers? As mentioned in another comment, James 2:1 strongly suggests that his readership had "the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ"; and this tells me that these were believers of Jewish heritage. I can't see how a people under their prophetic program, who have received and believed the Gospel could be anything else than true believers saved by faith alone and in the Body of Christ. If they are not true believers, then how can James write what he does in his epistle? Onto Page 2.
I earlier gave the example ( James 2:14-17) where one can say that he has great faith but when a brother or sister is in dire need, he does nothing. And James goes on ( James 2:21-24), citing Abraham's faith. When his faith was tested in the offering up of Isaac on the altar, Abraham came forth shining, for his faith was proven by his works (obedience). How would the genuineness of a Gentile's salvation & faith be proven, if not by his sensitivity and obedience to God's Spirit? If that is not there, then should we not regard him as a phony? And maybe this gives rise to some 'Christians' believing: 'I am saved, so how I live my life (i.e. works from faith) matters not'. Yet, Paul's plea to the Philippians ( Philippians 2:12), "Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling", is worth noting; salvation is not a 'given', unless the new spirit and renewed life produces fruit (works) that must be the evidence of a new birth.
I can understand what you shared, that their respective readerships were different and one was under & guided by God's prophetic program, but when the Gospel is given to anyone, it must be the same or it's not the true Gospel that saves. So this is why, if we are to believe that James was faithful to the Gospel that saves, but his audience was different, then James 2:28 must mean that justification is by faith alone, but where works are absent, then that faith was spurious. But if it doesn't mean that, then James preached a false Gospel, for there can only be one Gospel for all men.
Thank you again brother for this good discussion as I've tried to restrict myself here to only a couple of your points that needed examination. Blessings.
Amen Brother Chris.
The Gospel of the Kingdom is the message preached during Jesus' earthly ministry, proclaiming the arrival of God's kingdom on earth through His reign as Messiah,
This was to the Jews while they continued faithfulness and righteousness under the Mosaic Law which was appropriate.
In Matthew 3:15 we see Jesus being of age asking John to baptized him.
"And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus IT BECOMETH US TO FULFILL ALL RIGHTEOUSNESS. Then he suffered him.
I believe Jesus was baptized and inaugurated under the Levitical priesthood to fulfill and end that priesthood at the Cross and bring in the new covenant with his death which was necessary.
Hebrews 9:16-17 'For where a testament is, there MUST ALSO OF NECESSITY BE THE DEATH OF THE TESTATOR.
For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.
in the beginning the Gospel of the kingdom was to first a gather the lost sheep of Israel who lost their way.
Then offer up the Kingdom.
Matthew 23:37-39.
That has been postponed!
I believe the mystery was to be revealed at that time also, "after the Gathering" and bringing both Jews and Gentiles under the new covenant by the cross.
However as expected, Israel denied their Messiah and all but a remnant was blinded until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
The new covenant is an everlasting covenant.
Blessings.
So Christ's Baptism not only reflected the imminent end of the earthly priesthood, but was also in demonstration before His Father that He would obey Him fully, being sent to fulfil His Will through His substitutionary death for mankind & their sins; and this baptism, unlike that of John's, spoke to John that Jesus came not to him for repentance of any sin within him (for He had none), but for the sake of our sins. So, as Jesus looked forward to Calvary in His Baptism, the believer looks back through his baptism at a marvelous undeserved Work accomplished for him at Calvary. And so "the new covenant, an everlasting covenant" was ushered in, which promises that there can never be another Covenant in the future that would or could make it redundant. God offered us His very best - Himself - that only the Blood of His Son could make a full, lasting & acceptable atonement. Thank you brother for your thoughts on this.
[Comment Removed]
Thanks for your reply, I'm thinking we agree on more than disagree, however regarding James there is a difference of opinion and that's ok. I'll share my thoughts on the matter...
You're statement here caught my attention..."James speaks about 'works' that result from faith ( James 2:14-18), and not faith plus the works of the Law."
James writes "to the twelve tribes scattered abroad" ( Jas. 1:1), placing his audience firmly in Israel's covenant program. In James 2:14-18, he insists that "faith without works is dead," concluding, "by works a man is justified, and not by faith only" (2:24). This is consistent with Israel's kingdom hope, where obedience proved living faith (cf. Lev. 18:5; Matt. 24:13). In contrast, Paul reveals the "mystery" gospel for the Body of Christ, declaring "to him that worketh not, but believeth his faith is counted for righteousness" ( Rom. 4:5). Justification is by grace through faith alone, "not of works" ( Eph. 2:8-9). To merge James with Paul is to blur distinct programs. James requires works as evidence in Israel's prophetic dealings; Paul proclaims immediate justification apart from works under grace. Romans 11:6 makes clear that grace and works cannot mix. Different instructions, different audiences, no contradiction when rightly divided.
Grace and Peace
Please see next pg.
This comment thread is locked. Please enter a new comment below to start a new comment thread.
Note: Comment threads older than 2 months are automatically locked.
Do you have a Bible comment or question?
Posting comments is currently unavailable due to high demand on the server.
Please check back in an hour or more. Thank you for your patience!
Report Comment
Which best represents the problem with the comment?