GALATIANS 1:8 WHO IS ACCURSED ?

[Doug]

Galatians 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
1:7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.
1:9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

There were some that were preaching a gospel to the Galatians that perverted Paul's gospel. To be another gospel it had to be other than that preached by Paul.

Another gospel could only be preached to those who had heard and received the gospel preached by Paul. To be another gospel it could only be preached "unto you" (Galatians 1:8-9); only those who had Paul's gospel preached unto them and had been "received" by them (Galatians 1:9).

Galatians 2:7 But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;
2:8 (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles: )

Peter and Paul were not preaching the same gospel. Peter was preaching that Jesus was Christ, the Son of God and the gospel of the Davidic kingdom on earth to Israel. Paul was preaching that all were freely justified by the redemption of Christ.

Peter and Paul had separate ministries; Peter was sent to the circumcision (the Jews), and Paul was sent to the uncircumcision (the Gentiles).

Peter was not accursed for preaching another gospel because he was not preaching it to those who had received Paul's gospel.

Romans 15:20 Yea, so have I strived to preach the gospel, not where Christ was named, lest I should build upon another man's foundation:
15:21 But as it is written, To whom he was not spoken of, they shall see: and they that have not heard shall understand.

Paul is citing Isaiah 52:15 in Romans 15:21. Paul never went to those who heard and received Christ by believing the gospel preached by Peter and the apostles.

[Rev 14:6 KJV] 6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,

Here is an angel preaching a gospel which Paul said should be accursed in Galatians 1:8. We must conclude that Paul's gospel was no longer being preached for if it was than that angel would be accursed; this would mean this dispensation of grace is over.

 

[Verily]

Wouldn't the gospel Paul said he preached be what is basically outlined for us in 1 Cr 15:1?

John had also said similarly

2 John 1:10-11 If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed. For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

There can be no mistaking that Paul could be bidding any such a one God speed when he just comes right out with it and says "let him be accursed" when he says,

Gal 1:8-9 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

He is speaking of the gospel of the grace of Christ versus one perverting the gospel of Christ here

Gal 1:6-7 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel, Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

The same some that "trouble you" is also found here in Acts 15:24

Acts 15:24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment

Acts 15:25-26 It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.

And that was about these here doing that who they reprimanded

Acts 15:10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

And then it was directed right back into the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ again

Acts 15:11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

So as they just stated that they believe through the grace of the Lord Jesus both would be saved, there were some there that "troubleth them with words" (Acts 15:24) even as Paul is speaking of them being so soon removed from gospel of the grace of Christ (Gal 1:6) to another gospel (which is not another) but who also brings in the same, there be "some that trouble you" (Gal 1:7)

This other angel picture has always been interesting to me, and the verses speaking of the creature and new creature between them. I cannot say I am totally getting it, although I have rolled them around with various other verses I have been considering, I would really prefer to refrain from doing that because they would be too speculatory yet.

Following this course

Mark 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

Whereas Paul says the gospel was preached (as in past tense) to every creature under heaven here

Col 1:23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven;

whereof I Paul am made a minister

Paul being a minister of the Gentiles, and then here of "another angel"

Rev 14:6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people

I dont know how we could say it is "another gospel" even though anyone preaching another he calls accursed, and even though this angel is shown as having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people Col 1:23 This gospel (if it be the same gospel) Paul did say, it was (already) preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister

This part has always interested me as to what this might be implying (maybe)

Edit: corrected sentence

 

[Doug]

Wouldn't the gospel Paul said he preached be what is basically outlined for us in 1 Cr 15:1?

Yes that is our gospel.....Hus epistles manifest it fully

 

[Doug]

Acts 15:10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

And then it was directed right back into the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ again

Acts 15:11 But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they.

God has always dealt with mankind with grace
Peter in verse 11 was not speaking of grace as Paul......Peter was still under the law
Peter was saying not to put the Gentiles under the law because in verse 10 he says even the Jews could not keep it and were only saved by his grace

 

[Verily]

God has always dealt with mankind with grace
Peter in verse 11 was not speaking of grace as Paul......Peter was still under the law
Peter was saying not to put the Gentiles under the law because in verse 10 he says even the Jews could not keep it and were only saved by his grace

Peter was led by the Spirit so why would he be under the law?

Wouldnt this apply to him too?

Gal 5:18 But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.

Because didn't Paul say to Peter the following

Gal 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

But Paul also said to Peter earlier in Gal 2

Gal 2:14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?

Ignoring the last line and just looking at what Paul said to Peter

"If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews...

How would Peter be living after the manner of the Gentiles and not as do the Jews is he was living as one under the law?

Paul does say here

1 Cr 9:19 For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more.

And follows it up with this here

1 Cr 9:20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;

What do you suppose would be the difference (since both are mentioned) if any between becoming as a Jew or becoming as them that are under the law.

And then he continues

1 Cr 9:21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.

1 Cr 9:22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.

All of which is done for the sake of the gospel

1 Cr 9:23 And this I do for the gospel's sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you.

I think I read something from you concerning two gospels once, but all the above are for the one true gospels sake correct? Or do you differ with that?

 

[Doug]

Peter was led by the Spirit so why would he be under the law?

Jesus taught the law to the twelve
The new covenant made with Israel enables Israel to keep the law
when Peter went to Cornelius he cited the law in Acts 10:28

 

[Doug]

How would Peter be living after the manner of the Gentiles and not as do the Jews is he was living as one under the law?

[Gal 2:12 KJV] 12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.

Under the law Peter shouldnt have been eating with Gentiles.....thats why Peter said they needed grace because they couldnt keep it

 

[Doug]

1 Cr 9:19 For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more.

And follows it up with this here

1 Cr 9:20 And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law;

What do you suppose would be the difference (since both are mentioned) if any between becoming as a Jew or becoming as them that are under the law.

I never really thought about this
Maybe to the Jews means those who thought they were righteous just being a Jew
[Mat 3:9 KJV] 9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to [our] father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

Maybe some Jews just followed certain customs like circumcision
[Phl 3:5 KJV] 5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, [of] the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
See how Paul emphasizes being circumcised, of Israel, of Benjamin, a Hebrew

 

[Doug]

And then he continues

1 Cr 9:21 To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law.

Paul was a Jew so therefore he became as a Gentile
Gentiles were not given the law

 

[Doug]

1 Cr 9:22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.

The weak were believers who still thought you had to keep the law....as an example they couldnt eat meats offered to idols
They could be Jews saved under Peter's and the apostles preaching and were being integrated with the body of Christ or they could be Jews saved under Paul

 

[Doug]

1 Cr 9:23 And this I do for the gospel's sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you.

I think I read something from you concerning two gospels once, but all the above are for the one true gospels sake correct? Or do you differ with that?

I agree the gospel in this dispensation is found in Paul

Here is a couple links from my posts on the gospels

BIBLE GOSPELS​

THE APOSTLES DID NOT ALL PREACH THE SAME GOSPEL

SUMMARY OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PETER AND PAUL

 

[Verily]

Jesus taught the law to the twelve
The new covenant made with Israel enables Israel to keep the law
when Peter went to Cornelius he cited the law in Acts 10:28

Peter did cite that it was unlawful to keep company or come unto another nation here

Acts 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

What part of the law is Peter referencing that he is no longer under? Because Paul also speaks of not keeping certain company here

1 Cr 5:11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

Something apparently happened with Peter in respects to these things (or in respects to what God had shown him as he shared it with Cornelius in Acts 10:28) that Paul said,

Gal 2:11 But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.

Gal 2:12-13 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation.

Paul points out that Peter (being a Jew) livest after the manner of the Gentiles (and not as do the Jews) himself

Gal 2:14 But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?

And so if Peter was citing that it was an unlawful for a Jew to keep company with one of another nation, is it important to know which law that was? Given Paul still said to Peter

Gal 2:19 For I through the law am dead to the law, that I might live unto God.

And again Paul said to Peter

Gal 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

So if it was unlawful for Peter (a Jew) to keep company or come unto one of another nation using the example in Acts 10:28 how was Peter enabled to keep the one he cites when God teaches him otherwise here

"... but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean"

See what I mean?

Because you say,

The new covenant made with Israel enables Israel to keep the law
when Peter went to Cornelius he cited the law in Acts 10:28

Which would make no sense here because Peter says,

"... but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean"

And he also says,

Acts 10:29 Therefore came I unto you without gainsaying, as soon as I was sent for: I ask therefore for what intent ye have sent for me?

So how did he keep it (as far as your understanding goes concerning it)?

 

[Verily]

[Gal 2:12 KJV] 12 For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision.

Under the law Peter shouldnt have been eating with Gentiles.....thats why Peter said they needed grace because they couldnt keep it

See my above post so I do not repeat anything.

Curious as to which law was he was citing and how Peter would actually keep it when he told Cornelius, "... but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean".

I was always curious how one can you even preach the gospel unto all nations without coming unto anyone of another nation.

 

[Verily]

I never really thought about this
Maybe to the Jews means those who thought they were righteous just being a Jew
[Mat 3:9 KJV] 9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to [our] father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

Maybe some Jews just followed certain customs like circumcision
[Phl 3:5 KJV] 5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, [of] the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
See how Paul emphasizes being circumcised, of Israel, of Benjamin, a Hebrew

Abraham is shown circumcising both of his children didnt he?

There is Abraham's seed after the flesh (born of the bondwoman /Ishmeal) Gal 4:25 who would be called in Isaac (the seed to whom the promised were made) which is Christ, so when he says,

John 8:31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;

John 8:32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

John 8:33 They answered him,

We be Abraham's seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?

Jesus was not speaking of being in bondage to any man, but sin

John 8:34 Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.

John 8:35 And the servant abideth not in the house for ever: but the Son abideth ever.

John 8:36 If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.

They are the children of the flesh

John 8:37 I know that YE ARE Abraham's seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you.

And Paul said,

Romans 9:7 Neither, because THEY ARE the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.

And so children can be raised up unto Abraham according to the promise (which was also to make him a father of many nations) and as we know the promise was to him and to his seed (which is Christ, Gal 3:16) and so children of the promise (even as the the Spirit is so called) comes by the faith of Jesus Christ and so Gal 3:7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham. Even as Romans 8:9 says," Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."

--

You said,

Maybe some Jews just followed certain customs like circumcision
[Phl 3:5 KJV] 5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, [of] the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;
See how Paul emphasizes being circumcised, of Israel, of Benjamin, a Hebrew


Sure, Paul also was speaking of havng confidence in the flesh here (according to all these things here)

Phil 3:4 Though I might also have confidence in the flesh. If any other man thinketh that he hath whereof he might trust in the flesh, I more:

Phil 3:5 Circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee;

Phil 3:6 Concerning zeal, persecuting the church; touching the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.

Phil 3:7 But what things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ.

Phil 3:8 Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung, that I may win Christ,

Phil 3:9 And be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith

Phil 3:10 That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death;

Edit corrected verse reference

Phil 3:11 If by any means I might attain unto the resurrection of the dead.

 

[Verily]

I agree the gospel in this dispensation is found in Paul

Here is a couple links from my posts on the gospels

BIBLE GOSPELS​

THE APOSTLES DID NOT ALL PREACH THE SAME GOSPEL

SUMMARY OF DIFFERENCES BETWEEN PETER AND PAUL

The last three of your responses was providing a portion of the context and not necessarily to any question I might have so I will leave off of responding back to them.

I have to be honest, I am not sure what any of the arguments are over "dispensations" I never really followed the back and forths of the arguments, so I am ignorant of them, I just see the dispensation of grace mentioned in 1Cr 9:17, Eph 1:10, Ephs 3:2 & Col 1:25

 

[Doug]

Acts 10:28 And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.

What part of the law is Peter referencing that he is no longer under? Because Paul also speaks of not keeping certain company here

sorry I dont know

 

[Doug]

Gal 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

So if it was unlawful for Peter (a Jew) to keep company or come unto one of another nation using the example in Acts 10:28 how was Peter enabled to keep the one he cites when God teaches him otherwise here

"... but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean"

See what I mean?

Because you say,

The new covenant made with Israel enables Israel to keep the law
when Peter went to Cornelius he cited the law in Acts 10:28

Which would make no sense here because Peter says,

"... but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean"

And he also says,

Acts 10:29 Therefore came I unto you without gainsaying, as soon as I was sent for: I ask therefore for what intent ye have sent for me?

So how did he keep it (as far as your understanding goes concerning it)?

I dont know
Maybe God was showing he would start turning to the Gentiles......the Gentiles would be justified by faith and not the works of the law

 

[Verily]

I dont know
Maybe God was showing he would start turning to the Gentiles......the Gentiles would be justified by faith and not the works of the law

That was what was foreseen in the scripture itself, for example here

Gal 3:38 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify THE HEATHEN through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall ALL NATIONS be blessed.
In Psalm 2:7 that had to be fulfilled

Psalm 2:7-8 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; (( this day)) have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall give thee THE HEATHEN for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.

The promise that comes by Christ upon the Gentiles

Gal 3:14 That the blessing of Abraham might come on THE GENTILES through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

Abraham and His seed (as shown us in Isaac) which is Christ not Abraham (and his seed after the flesh as shown us in Ishmael). Still Abrahams seed (after the flesh) but the children of the flesh are not counted as the seed (to whom the promise were made) but to Abraham (and his seed, meaning one, to Christ).

All nations being blessed

 

[Doug]

The last three of your responses was providing a portion of the context and not necessarily to any question I might have so I will leave off of responding back to them.

I have to be honest, I am not sure what any of the arguments are over "dispensations" I never really followed the back and forths of the arguments, so I am ignorant of them, I just see the dispensation of grace mentioned in 1Cr 9:17, Eph 1:10, Ephs 3:2 & Col 1:25

The last three of your responses was providing a portion of the context and not necessarily to any question I might have so I will leave off of responding back to them.

I am not sure what you mean here....if you have unanswered questions please ask.....maybe I missed them

As far as dispensations ....briefly it is how deals with mankind in time........dispensations aren't a time period since they can overlap........at certain periods in time there are revelations from God of knowledge and instructions for our response....dispensations are simply divided into times past but now times to come we can learn our place and know our response and purpose

 

[Doug]

That was what was foreseen in the scripture itself, for example here

Gal 3:38 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify THE HEATHEN through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall ALL NATIONS be blessed.
In Psalm 2:7 that had to be fulfilled

Psalm 2:7-8 I will declare the decree: the LORD hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; (( this day)) have I begotten thee. Ask of me, and I shall give thee THE HEATHEN for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession.

Yes good verses....God started to turn to the Gentiles which was manifested by Paul as well.......................[Act 13:46 KJV] 46 Then Paul and Barnabas waxed bold, and said, It was necessary that the word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles.............................and here in the next verse.......................[Act 13:47 KJV] 47 For so hath the Lord commanded us, [saying], I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.............................I find it interesting that Paul would be the one to set Jesus as a light to the Gentiles and not Israel.........Israel will fulfill this in the kingdom however by making the Lord known to Gentile nations