Those taking this advice do not have salvation then.
2 John 1:9
Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR ETERNAL LIFE ACCORDING TO JESUS
- Thread starter vassal
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Those taking this advice do not have salvation then.
2 John 1:9
Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son.
In Matthew 4:15-23, Christ began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Law of Moses was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel of the Kingdom/Grace, which Paul also taught based on the Mosaic Law (Acts 14:21-22, 20:24-25, 28:23). Christ also set a sinless example for us to follow of of how to walk in obedience to the Law of Moses and we are told to follow his example, that those who are in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way that he walked (1 John 2:6), and to be imitators of Paul as he is Christ (1 Corinthians 11:1). So both Christ and Paul taught to follow the Mosaic Law by word and by example and I see no justification for thinking that the Law of Christ is not in complete accordance with everything that Christ taught. Likewise, in Matthew 4:4, Christ said that man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that comes from the mouth of God, so I see no justification for thinking that the Law of Christ is not in complete accordance with every word that comes form the mouth of God. In Deuteronomy 5:31-33, Moses wrote down everything that God spoke to him without departing from it, which is why the Law of Moses is called the Law of God in verses like Nehemiah 8:1-8, Ezra 7:6-12, and Luke 2:22-23, and in 1 Corinthians 9:21. Paul used a parallel statement to equate not being outside the Law of God with being under the Law of Christ, so again the Law of Christ is the Law of Moses. God is not in disagreement with Himself about which laws we should follow, so the Law of Christ is the same as the Law of the Spirit and the Law of the Father, which was given to Moses.
Paul was a servant of God, so it is there incorrect to interpret Galatians as speaking against living by any word that has come from the mouth of God. Moreover it incorrect to interpret Galatians as speaking against following what Christ and Paul taught by word and by example. Paul's problem in Galatians was not with those who were teaching Gentiles how to follow what Christ taught but with those who were wanting to require Gentiles to become circumcised (become Jews) in order to become saved. In Romans 3:27, Paul contrasted a law of works with a law of faith, in Galatians 3:10-12, he contrasted the Book of the Law with "works of the law", and in Romans 3:31, he said that our faith upholds the Law of God in contrast with saying that "works of the law" are not of faith, so that phase does not refer to the Law of God, but rather Paul used it to refer to the positions hat Gentiles are required to become circumcised in order to become saved.
In Galatians 5:16-23, Paul contrasted the desires of the Spirit with the desires of the flesh, and everything that he listed as works of the flesh that are against the Spirit are also against the Mosaic Law while all of the fruits of the Spirit are aspects of God's character that the Law of Moses was given in order to teach us how to embody. The desire of the flesh causing us not to do the good that we want to do is how Paul described his struggle with the law of sin in Romans 7, and it is the law of sin that the Law of the Spirit has freed us from (Romans 8:2), so that is the law that we are not under when we are led by the Spirit. The Law of Moses was given by God and the Spirit is God, so it would be contradictory to interpret Galatians 5:18 as referring to the Law of Moses as if we are not led by God when we are led by God.
The Hebrew word used is "Torah", which refers to the Mosaic Law. In Deuteronomy 30, it forms the basis for the New Covenant by prophesying about. a time when the Israelites would return from exile, God would circumcise their hearts, and they would return to obedience to the Mosaic Law, which is what Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Ezekiel 36:26-27 are in regard to.
In Deuteronomy 13, the way that God instructed to determine that someone is a false prophet who is not speaking for Him is if they speak against obeying what God has commanded, so it is either incorrect for you to interpret Jesus and the Apostles as doing that or they were false prophets, but either way followers of Christ should follow his example of obedience to the Mosaic Law.
Everything that Jesus taught was rooted in the OT. In Matthew 4, Jesus consistently preceded a quote from what was written by saying "it is written...", but in Matthew 5, he preceded a quote from what the people had heard being said by saying "you have heard that it was said...", so his emphasis on the different form of communication is important. Jesus was not sinning in violation of Deuteronomy 4:2 making changes to what was written, but rather he was fulfilling the law by correcting what the people had heard being said and by teaching how to correctly obey it at it was originally intended.
In Mark 7 and Matthew 15, Jesus was having a conversation in regard to the traditions of the elders about whether someone could become common by eating bread with unwashed hands, so he was not even speaking about eating animals. Jesus was criticizing Pharisees as being hypocrites for setting aside the commands of God in order to establish their own traditions, so he should not be interpreted as turning around and setting aside the commands of God instead of continuing to speak in regard to the traditions of the elders.
The reason that Jesus established the New Covenant was not in order to nullify anything that he spent his ministry teaching or so that we could continue to have the same lawlessness that caused the New Covenant to be needed in the first place, but rather the New Covenant still involves following the Mosaic Law (Jeremiah 31:33, Ezekiel 36:26-27). If Paul had through that Jesus had taught brand new laws, then he would not have considered Jesus to have been our Savior.
God wanted His children to repent and to return to obedience to His law all throughout the Bible, and even Jesus began his ministry with that Gospel message, so it would be absurd to interpret that verse as Paul warning against obeying God and warning that we will be cut off from Christ if we repent and believe the Gospel of Christ. In Psalm 119:29-30, he wanted to put false ways far from him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey the Mosaic Law, and he chose the way of faith by setting it before him, so this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith, and it would again be absurd to interpret this as him wanting God to be gracious to him by teaching him how to fall from grace.
The Mosaic Law was how his audience knew what sin is, so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel, which includes repenting from our disobedience to the Levitical law.
In Deuteronomy 4:2, it is a sin to add to or subtract from the Mosaic Law but even if Jesus could have raised the bar without sinning and disqualifying himself as being our Savior, then that the very leas that would mean that we should obey the Mosaic Law plus whatever else he raised the bar to.
God's character traits are eternal, so any instructions that He has given for how to embody His character traits are also eternal and cumulatively valid. For example, God's righteousness is eternal (Psalm 119:142), therefore all of God's righteous laws are also eternal (Psalm 119:160). Being a doer of charity was a way to embody God's righteousness before God made any covenant with man, so that is an eternally valid way to know God regardless of which covenant someone is under if any. Sin is what is contrary to God's character traits and sin was in the world before the law was given (Romans 5:13), so there were no actions that became righteous or sinful when the law was given, but rather the law revealed what has always been and will always be the way to do that. So Hebrews 7:12 could not be referring to a change of the law in regard to its content, such as with it becoming righteous to commit adultery or sinful to do charity, but rather the context is referring to a change of the priesthood, which would require a change of the law in regard to its administration. A priesthood that is led by God's Word made flesh does not involve setting aside God's Word.
Jesus said how to keep the Sabbath holy through his interactions with Pharisees on the topic, but even if he hadn't repeated any commands, then he would have still taught full obedience to the Mosaic Law by example, including keeping the Sabbath holy, and we are told to follow his example (1 Peter 2:21-22) and that those who abide in Christ are obligated to walk in the same way that he walked (1 John 2:6). Moreover, Jesus said that man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that comes from the mouth of God (Matthew 4:4), so he affirmed God as being an authoritative source and we have no need for the NT to specifically repeat every word that God has spoken in order for us to know that we should still live by every word that God has spoken.
In Matthew 11:28-30, Jesus was inviting people to come to him for rest and to learn from him, not inviting people to come to him for rest instead of learning from his example. Moreover, by Jesus saying that we would find rest for our souls he was referencing Jeremiah 6:16-19 where the Mosaic Law is described as the good way where we will find rest for our souls, but they did not want to walk in it. In Hebrews 3:18, they did not enter into God's rest because of their disobedience, and in Ezekiel 20:13, it specifically mentions that they greatly profaned God's Sabbaths, so you should not think that you can enter into God's rest while having the same disobedience that prevented the Israelites from entering into God's rest. In Hebrews 4:9-11, there remains a Sabbath rest for the people of God, we should rest from our works as God rested form His work, and we should be careful to enter into that rest so that no one might fall away by the same sort of disobedience, so we should continue to follow Christ's example of keeping the 7th day holy.
What God has done for us is to graciously teach us to obey His law. The Hebrew word “yada” refers to intimate relationships/knowledge gained by experience, such as with Genesis 4:1 where Adam knew (yada) Eve, she conceived, and gave birth to Cain. God’s way is the way to know (yada) Him and Jesus by experiencing being in His likeness through embodying His character traits, which is the narrow way to eternal life (John 17:3). For example, in Genesis 18:19, God knew (yada) Abraham that he would teach his children and those of His household to walk in His way by being doers of righteousness and justice that the Lord might bring to him all that He has promised. In Exodus 33:13, Moses wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him to walk in His way that he and Israel might know (yada) Him, and in Matthew 7:23, Jesus said that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him because he never knew them, so the goal of the law is to graciously teach us how to have an intimate relationship with God and Jesus by walking in His way, which is His gift of eternal life.
I agree that Romans 7 was not referring to a born again believer, but in any case it is still important to understand the distinction between between the Law of God and the law of sin.
Neither Jesus nor John came with the message to stop repenting because the Law of Moses has ended now that they have come and we are now free to become doers of what it reveals to be wickedness, but just the opposite, the Gospel of the Kingdom that Jesus said was being proclaimed since John calls for us to repent from our disobedience to the Law of Moses (Matthew 4:15-23). Im Luke 16:17, Jesus said that it would be easier for heaven and. earth to pass away than for the least part to pass away from the law, so he was not speaking about something that he thought has already passed away. Moreover, in Luke 16:18, Jesus continued to teach obedience to the Law of Moses.
In Matthew 4:4, Jesus said that man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that comes from the mouth of God, so we have no need for him to have specifically reiterated everything that God has spoken. Jesus is God's Word made flesh, so we can't follow him instead of following his example of embodying God's Word.
The Mosaic Law is perfect (Psalm 19:7), it is of liberty (Psalm 119:45), and it blesses those who obey it (Psalms 119:1-3), so James 1:25 speaking about the perfect law of liberty that blesses those who obey is not saying anything about the Mosaic Law that wasn't already said in the Psalms.
New covenants do not nullify the promises of covenants that have already been ratified, so God's covenants are eternal and cumulatively valid. One thing can only make another thing obsolete to the extent that it has cumulative functionality, so a computer makes a typewriter obsolete, but does not make a plow obsolete, which means that if the New Covenant involved doing something different that was not cumulative with the Mosaic Covenant, then it could not make it obsolete. The Mosaic Covenant is eternal (Exodus 31:14-17, Leviticus 24:8), so the only way that it can be replaced by the New Covenant is if it is cumulative with it. So the New Covenant still involves following the Mosaic Law (Hebrews 8:10) plus it is cumulatively based on better promises and has a superior mediator (Hebrews 8:6). The problem that God found with the Mosaic Covenant was not with His law but with the people for not continuing in their covenant (Hebrews 8:7-9), so the salutation to the problem was not for God to do away with His law but to do away with what was hindering us from obeying it. This is why the New Covenant involves God sending His Son to free us from sin so that we might be free to meet the righteous requirement of the Mosaic Law (Romans 8:3-4) and God taking away our hearts of stone, giving us hearts of flesh, and sending His Spirit to lead us in obedience to the Mosaic Law (Ezekiel 36:26-27).
I'm advocating for following the Doctrine of Christ which is the teachings of Jesus and what Jesus taught thru Paul and the other Apostles.
The Galatians actually turned away from following the teachings of Jesus and went back to trying to be justified under the old covenant law. This is why the Lord was leading Paul to correct them
Galatians 5:4
Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
Galatians 5:4
Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
Go ahead, try living under the OT law and see where you spend eternity.
Christians are not living under the old covenant.
You really should learn what the Gospel of Jesus Christ actually is and cease trying to live under the law of Moses.
Hebrews 3:5,6
And Moses verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant, for a testimony of those things which were to be spoken after; But Christ as a Son over His own house; whose house are we, IF we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.
Now, there is a new house, the Body of Jesus Christ! Under the New Covenant that the Lord said would come forth, we see Jesus Christ as the High Priest. The old covenant with it’s laws and regulations have been taken away because thru Jesus Christ a new and better covenant has come in to place.
Hebrews 10:9
Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.(God said He would make a New Covenant - see Jeremiah 31:31-34)
Hebrews 8:6
But now hath Jesus obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also Jesus is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
And with the changing of the priesthood, God’s Word tells us there is also a change of the law.
Hebrews 7:12
For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.
Guys, it's time to get born again and follow Jesus Christ.
It's not possible to be saved and go to Heaven following Moses.
The Hebrew word “yada” refers to intimate relationships/knowledge gained by experience, such as with Genesis 4:1 where Adam knew (yada) Eve, she conceived, and gave birth to Cain. God’s way is the way to know (yada) Him and Jesus by experiencing being in His likeness through embodying His character traits, which is the narrow way to eternal life (John 17:3). For example, in Genesis 18:19, God knew (yada) Abraham that he would teach his children and those of His household to walk in His way by being doers of righteousness and justice that the Lord might bring to him all that He has promised. In Exodus 33:13, Moses wanted God to be gracious to him by teaching him to walk in His way that he and Israel might know (yada) Him, and in Matthew 7:23, Jesus said that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him because he never knew them, so the goal of the law is to graciously teach us how to have an intimate relationship with God and Jesus by walking in His way, which is His gift of eternal life.
Galatians 3:21
if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
The old covenant cannot bring life, so those following the old covenant are still dead in their sins.
OK so when you sin, what kind of animal do you sacrifice to atone for your sin?
Sadly the devil has done a number of some of those amongst us. Got them deceived real bad.
Here's what the Lord Jesus said thru Paul about those that don't follow the Doctrine of Christ - what Jesus teaches in the New Covenant
1 Timothy 6:3-5
If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;
He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings,
Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.
Here's what the Lord Jesus said thru Paul about those that don't follow the Doctrine of Christ - what Jesus teaches in the New Covenant
1 Timothy 6:3-5
If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;
He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings,
Perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness: from such withdraw thyself.
Christ spent his ministry teaching his followers to obey the Mosaic Law by word and by example, so while it is possible for someone to interpret Acts 15 as ruling that followers of Christ shouldn't follow over 99% of what he taught, I don't think that it is correct to do that. The topic that they were discussing was not whether followers of Christ should follow Christ but whether salvation is by circumcision (Acts 15:1) or by grace (Acts 15:11).
In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, and the Law of Moses was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel message, which Peter argued in Acts 15:6-7 that Gentiles had heard and believed, so he was siding with the Pharisees from among the believers (Acts 15:5) against the men from Judea (Acts 15:1). In Ezekiel 36:26-27, God will take away our hearts of stone, give us hearts of flesh, and send His spirit to lead us in obedience to the Mosaic Law, which is in accordance with Peter arguing in Acts 15:8-9 that Gentiles had received the Spirit and had their hearts cleansed, so again he was agreeing with the Pharisees. In Psalm 119:29-30, he wanted to put false ways far form him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey the Mosaic Law, and he chose the way of faith by setting it before him, so this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith, which is in accordance with Peter arguing in Acts 15:10-11 that Gentiles are saved by grace just as we are, so again he came firmly down on the side of the Pharisees.
Either Acts 15:19-21 contains an exhaustive list for mature believers or it does not, so it would be contradictory for someone to treat it as being an exhaustive list in order to limit which laws Gentiles should follow while also treating it as being a non-exhaustive list by taking the position that there are obviously other laws that Gentiles should follow. It was not given as an exhaustive list for mature believers but as a list intended to avoid making things too difficult for new believers coming to faith, which they exceed by saying that Gentiles would continue to learn about how to obey Moses by hearing him taught every Sabbath in the synagogues.
So the heavy burden that no one could bear does not refer to the Mosaic Law, but to a means of salvation that is an alternative to salvation by grace, namely salvation by circumcision. In Romans 10:5-8, Paul referred to Deuteronomy 30:11-20 as the word of faith hat we proclaim in regard to proclaiming that the Law of Moses is not too difficult for us to obey and that obedience to it brings life and a blessing while disobedience brings death and a curse, so choose life! So Acts 15:10 has been referring to the Mosaic Law, then they would have been dying the word of faith that we proclaim, they would have been in direct disagreement with God, and they would have been ruling that Gentiles should choose death and a curse instead of life and a blessing. In 1 John 5:3, to love God is to obey His commandments, which are not burdensome, so if Acts 15:10 has been referring the the Mosaic Law, then they would have been ruling that Gentiles should not love God and denying that His commandments are not burdensome. The Psalms also express an extremely positive view of obeying the Mosaic Law such as with David repeatedly saying that he loved it and delighted in obeying it, so if Acts 15:10 had been referring to the Mosaic Law, then they would have been expressing a view of obeying it that is incompatible with the view that the Psalms are Scripture.
God's character traits are eternal, so the way to know God through embody His character traits has existed from the beginning regardless of when God gave instructions for how to do that, which means that all of the Mosaic Law has existed from the beginning, not just the Ten Commandments. In Jeremiah 31:33, it uses the Hebrew word "Torah", which refers to the Mosaic Law, not to just the Ten Commandments. The New Covenant is made with the same God with the same character traits and therefore the same eternal and cumulatively valid instructions for how to know Him by embodying His character traits. If anyone has the goal of knowing God, then they will follow the instructions that God have given for how to do that regardless of which covenant they are under, if any.
Everything in the Law of Moses is either in regard to how to love God or how to love our neighbor, which is why Jesus said in Matthew 22:36-40 that those are the greatest two commandments and that all of the other commandments hang on them, so the position that we should obey the greatest two commandments is also the position that we should obey the commandments that hang on them. For example, if we love God and our neighbor, then we won't commit idolatry, murder, adultery, or theft, but we also won't commit favoritism, rape, kidnapping, and so forth for the rest of the Mosaic Law. The purpose of the Mosaic Law is to teach us how to draw closer to God through embodying His character traits, so while I agree that we should start off slow in order to avoid overwhelming new believers, we should also not neglect to teach them the fullness of how to know, love, glory, believe in, and testify about about God by embodying His character traits.
I showed that both Christ and Paul taught to obey the Law of Moses by word and by example, so you are interpreting Galatians as Paul warning them against following the Doctrine of Christ which is the teachings of Jesus and what Jesus taught thru Paul and the other Apostles. Christ said that man shall not live by bread alone but by every word that comes from the mouth of God and this is the position that I am advocating, which is the Doctrine of Christ that you are advocating against.
God wanted His children to repent and to return to obedience to the Mosaic Law all throughout the Bible and even Christ began his ministry with that Gospel message, so it would be absurd to interpret Galatians 5:4 as Paul warning against obeying God and warning that we will be cut off from Christ if we repent and believe the Gospel of Christ. In Psalm 119:29-30, he wanted to put false ways far from him, for God to be gracious to him by teaching him to obey the Mosaic Law, and he chose the way of faith by setting it before him, so this has always been the one and only way of salvation by grace through faith, and it would again be absurd to interpret this as him wanting God to be gracious to him by teaching him how to fall from grace. It is also absurd to think that the positions that followers of Christ should follow his example of obedience to what God has commanded puts where I will spent eternity in question. In Matthew 19:17, Jesus affirmed that the way to inherit eternal life is by obeying the greatest two commandments of the Mosaic Law.
I agree and have not suggested otherwise, but rather I have been speaking about how to live under the New Covenant, which involves God putting the Mosaic Law in our minds and writing it on our hearts (Jeremiah 31:33)
In Matthew 4:15-23, Jesus began his ministry with the Gospel message to repent for the Kingdom of God is at hand, which was a light to the Gentiles, the Law of Moses was how his audience knew what sin is (Romans 3:20), so repenting from our disobedience to it is a central part of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
New covenants do not nullify the promises of covenants that have already been ratified, so God's covenants are eternal and cumulatively valid. One thing can only make another thing obsolete to the extent that it has cumulative functionality, so a computer makes a typewriter obsolete, but does not make a plow obsolete, which means that if the New Covenant involved doing something different that was not cumulative with the Mosaic Covenant, then it could not make it obsolete. The Mosaic Covenant is eternal (Exodus 31:14-17, Leviticus 24:8), so the only way that it can be replaced by the New Covenant is if it is cumulative with it. So the New Covenant still involves following the Mosaic Law (Hebrews 8:10) plus it is cumulatively based on better promises and has a superior mediator (Hebrews 8:6). The problem that God found with the Mosaic Covenant was not with His law but with the people for not continuing in their covenant (Hebrews 8:7-9), so the salutation to the problem was not for God to do away with His law but to do away with what was hindering us from obeying it. This is why the New Covenant involves God sending His Son to free us from sin so that we might be free to meet the righteous requirement of the Mosaic Law (Romans 8:3-4) and God taking away our hearts of stone, giving us hearts of flesh, and sending His Spirit to lead us in obedience to the Mosaic Law (Ezekiel 36:26-27).
God's character traits are eternal, so any instructions that He has given for how to embody His character traits are also eternal and cumulatively valid. For example, God's righteousness is eternal (Psalm 119:142), therefore all of God's righteous laws are also eternal (Psalm 119:160). Being a doer of charity was a way to embody God's righteousness before God made any covenant with man, so that is an eternally valid way to know God regardless of which covenant someone is under if any. Sin is what is contrary to God's character traits and sin was in the world before the law was given (Romans 5:13), so there were no actions that became righteous or sinful when the law was given, but rather the law revealed what has always been and will always be the way to do that. So Hebrews 7:12 could not be referring to a change of the law in regard to its content, such as with it becoming righteous to commit adultery or sinful to do charity, but rather the context is referring to a change of the priesthood, which would require a change of the law in regard to its administration. A priesthood that is led by God's Word made flesh does not involve setting aside God's Word.
In Matthew 7:23, Jesus said that only those who do the will of the Father will enter the Kingdom of Heaven in contrast with saying that he would tell those who are workers of lawlessness to depart from him, so the reason why the our entrance into the Kingdom of Heaven requires us to do the will of the Father by being doers of the Law of Moses is not in order to be good enough to earn our way there but because that is the way to know Jesus.
It is contradictory to think that our salvation is in God's Word made flesh, but not in following His example of embodying God's Word, but rather following his example of embodying God's Word through faith is the way that we have salvation through him alone.
We can't earn eternal life even as the result of having perfect obedience to the Law of Moses, but that does not mean that the Mosaic Covenant is not the way of life. In Romans 10:5-8, Paul referred to Deuteronomy 30 as the word of faith that we proclaim in regard to the righteousness that is by faith proclaiming that the Mosaic Law is not too difficult for us to obey and that obedience to it brings life and a blessing while disobedience brings death and a curse, so choose life! In Deuteronomy 32:46-47, the Law of Moses is our very life. In Proverbs 3:18, it is a Tree of Life for all who take hold of it. In Proverbs 6:23 for the commandment is a lamp and the teaching a light, and the reproofs of discipline are the way of life. In Luke 10:25-28, Jesus affirmed that the way to inherit eternal life is by obeying the greatest two commandments. In Matthew 19:17, Jesus said that that the way to have eternal life is by obeying God's commandments. In Hebrews 5:9, Jesus has become a source of eternal life for those who obey Him. In Revelation 22:14, those who obeyed God's commandment are given the right to eat from the Tree of Life. In Romans 2:6-7, those who persist in doing good will be given eternal life. In Romans 6:19-23, we are no longer to present ourselves as slaves to impurity, lawlessness, and sin but are now to present ourselves as slaves to God and to righteousness leading to sanctification and the goal of sanctification is eternal life in Christ, which is the gift of God, so being a doer of the Mosaic Law is His gift of eternal life.
Laws in regard to Temple practice should only be practiced when there is the Temple.
'
It is absurd to think that the devil does has the role of deceiving people into following Christ's example of what God has commanded or to think that by taking the position hat followers of Christ should follow what he taught by word and by example that I am teaching against the words of our Lord Jesus Christ. In Matthew 4:4, Jesus said that man shall not live by bread alone by every word that comes from the the mouth of God, so do think that we should follow these words or refuse to follow them?
Moreover, in 1 Timothy 6:3-5, it says that they are destitute of the truth, and in Psalm 119:142, it says that the Law of Moses is truth, so do you think that we should follow what that verse says is truth or that we should be destitute of what it says is truth?
The Bible gives guidelines for how to determine that someone is a false prophet, so if your position is that someone violated those guidelines, then why is in un accurate to say that they are a false prophet according to your position? How is this me trying to control the narrative at the expense of context and how is this trying to silence people by calling or suggesting that they are false prophets? You are the one who is taking that position, not me.
In Romans 2:13-14, only the doers of the Law of Moses will be justified and Gentiles will be nature be doers of it. Someone having a circumcised heart only refers to them being doers of the Law of Moses (Deuteronomy 10:12-16) while someone having an uncircumcised heart only refers to them not being doers of the Law of Moses (Jeremiah 9:25). In Romans 2:25-29, the way to recognize that a Gentile has a circumcised heart is by observing their obedience to the Law of Moses and circumcision of the heart is a matter of the Spirit, which is in contrast with Acts 7:51-53 where those who have uncircumcised hearts resist the Spirit and do not obey the Law of Moses. While Paul said that circumcision has no value and what matters is obeying the commands of God (1 Corinthians 7:19), he also said that circumcision has much value in every way (Romans 3:1-2) and that circumcision conditionally has value if we obey the Law of Moses (Romans 2:25), so the issue is that circumcnision has no inherent value and that its value is entirely derived from whether we obey the Law of Moses. Physical circumcision is a sign of having a circumcised heart, which is evident by our obedience to the Law of Moses, so it only has value insofar as what it is a sign of is true. We should not become circumcised for the purpose of becoming justified, so Paul was speaking against circumcision for an incorrect reason, but he was a servant of God, so he therefore was not speaking against circumcision for the purposes that God commanded it.
No one has been required to follow them all and not even Jesus followed the ones in regard to giving birth or to having a period.
"No one has been required to follow them all and not even Jesus followed the ones in regard to giving birth or to having a period."
This is profane language, to speak about the Lord Jesus in such away. What kind of buffoonery would use such words in context to the law and the Lord Jesus "not even Jesus followed the ones in regard to giving birth or to having a period."
You come to this site start a Thread
"THE REQUIREMENTS FOR ETERNAL LIFE ACCORDING TO JESUS."
And about how we are to follow the law ,then make concessions for yourself what ASKED:"Do you follow all the Laws and keep them."
Instead of saying NO.
YOU try to justify your inability by saying our Lord did not keep all the laws to giving birth or having a Period. What a liar!
Jesus followed, kept, and Fulfilled all LAWS.
To say other wises means Jesus was not Perfect and without sin.
YOU made the biggest Biblical Graft I have seen on here yet.
Do not post to me, pm me, and speak to me in this form. After using such Perverted twisted Doctrine. And speaking profanely of our Lord. Shame on you.
Anyone who thinks or teaches that Jesus did not follow the law in any way, is a false Teacher and in error.
If you can't follow all the laws, when asked if you do and keep them all; then try to justify yourself by saying not even Jesus kept all the law.
That person run from and do not listen too.
They're so hell bent on winning a debate, that they reduce the Lord Jesus to a common person (which is to profane) who sinned. IF Jesus sinned which is NOT to KEEP the LAW, he is not our Savior. This proves one thing. Pride and the objective of winning a debate at the expense of truth.
If you can't follow all the laws, when asked if you do and keep them all; then try to justify yourself by saying not even Jesus kept all the law.
That person run from and do not listen too.
They're so hell bent on winning a debate, that they reduce the Lord Jesus to a common person (which is to profane) who sinned. IF Jesus sinned which is NOT to KEEP the LAW, he is not our Savior. This proves one thing. Pride and the objective of winning a debate at the expense of truth.
How is it profane language or buffoonery to think that Jesus didn't give birth or have a period?
Some of the laws were only for the King, the High Priest, priests, judges, men, women, children, those who are married, those who are widowed, those who have servants, those who have animals, those who have crops, those who have tzaraat, those who are living in the land, and those who are strangers living among them, while others were given to everyone, so again no one was required to keep all of the laws. Jesus was not a Levite, so he also did not obey the laws that governed the conduct of Levitical priesthood.
No, Jesus was not required to keep the laws that don't have their conditions men, so there was no sin in him not obeying those laws. I have not made any personal attacks, but you sure like to make them instead of addressing what I've said.