Baptism is a work.

[Oneofhope]

For Israel to enter the kingdom of God, under the gospel of the kingdom, faith in Jesus + obeying the Law are required.

Obeying the Law? Even stoning people, like adulterers?

 

[Dan Perez]

Obeying the Law? Even stoning people, like adulterers?

You would be in JAIL if anyone STONED anyone today !!

Because the Law of MOSES has been set aside , as Paul wrote in 2 Cor 3:13-15 , plus there are more passages .

dan p

 

[Guojing]

Obeying the Law? Even stoning people, like adulterers?

Rev 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

 

[Oneofhope]

Rev 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Ahhh . . . Revelation 14:12 laws. That's good because these would be the Laws of the Spirit of Life and not the Mosaic Law.

 

[Guojing]

Ahhh . . . Revelation 14:12 laws. That's good because these would be the Laws of the Spirit of Life and not the Mosaic Law.

Jesus taught obedience to the Law of Moses in his first coming to Israel. He never told them, even after he resurrected that the Law was nailed to the cross.

 

[Oneofhope]

Jesus taught obedience to the Law of Moses in his first coming to Israel. He never told them, even after he resurrected that the Law was nailed to the cross.

Okie doke. I think you're saying that the Laws of Moses are still to be followed. This is when I step away.

 

[rturner76]

For Israel to enter the kingdom of God, under the gospel of the kingdom, faith in Jesus + obeying the Law are required.

At last we agree. So why would the message be "faith only" if obedience IS required. That meaning if one truly has faith there will be evidence of it in their actions. So why throw out obedience. Apologies if I got the wrong impression of your earlier posts. I certainly would not seek to put words in your mouth.

Daniel's prophetic timetable, that the Messiah was cut off/crucified at the end of week 69th, that means Israel has an upcoming 7 years of Tribulation (the 70th week) that can take place anytime starting from Acts 1

Remember Jesus Christ said that no one knows the day or the hour of judgement but the Father. How can we as readers of prophecy put a time table on when God will complete his work for all time? Again, please excuse me if I have misunderstood the content of your post. While I have been taught to believe in what I believe, I openly admit I am no biblical scholar and am open to correction.

In Acts 15, James, who was not even one of the 12, came literally out of nowhere to become in charge of the Jerusalem church and made the final decision at the council instead of Peter.

It begs the question, why would St James be referred to as "the brother of Jesus" if he never knew him and had no understanding of his teachings? I believe it was Peter who was meant to go to Rome and by his work, teachings, and writings convert the Roman Empire which in time would turn out to be the conversion of 3/4 of the known world. Even in this modern godless time, the Roman Church has more followers than any other religion or denomination. I believe that St Peter accomplished what he was sent to accomplish. I don't believe his writings have more truth than Paul even being corrected by Paul in the way that Gentiles should be accepted into The Church. It's just that Peter did the work that would covert most of the known world in time.

 

[Guojing]

At last we agree. So why would the message be "faith only" if obedience IS required. That meaning if one truly has faith there will be evidence of it in their actions. So why throw out obedience. Apologies if I got the wrong impression of your earlier posts. I certainly would not seek to put words in your mouth.

The key is to understand that we gentiles are not the audience of Jesus's first coming. (Romans 15:8, Matthew 10:5, Matthew 15:24)

We were cut off from God ever since Abraham (Ephesians 2:11-12)

So Jesus's words in his first coming are not directly written TO us, but of course, all scripture is FOR our learning.

Remember Jesus Christ said that no one knows the day or the hour of judgement but the Father. How can we as readers of prophecy put a time table on when God will complete his work for all time? Again, please excuse me if I have misunderstood the content of your post. While I have been taught to believe in what I believe, I openly admit I am no biblical scholar and am open to correction.

As I said, if Jews were not aware of Daniel's 70 week timetable, Mary would have reacted with "What? How come I am suddenly the mother of the Messiah?" when Gabriel announced to her, instead of "How is this possible since I am a virgin?".

The 3 kings of Orient would not know to visit Jerusalem at Jesus's birth as well.

And do you know why Peter quoted the Joel prophecy in Acts 2? Remember, the Holy Spirit came upon him, and alerted the nation of Israel that the 70th week can happen anytime, if you recall what he said

20 The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and notable day of the Lord come:

The phrase the great and notable day of the Lord represents Jacob's trouble to the nation of Israel Jeremiah 30:7

It begs the question, why would St James be referred to as "the brother of Jesus" if he never knew him and had no understanding of his teachings? I believe it was Peter who was meant to go to Rome and by his work, teachings, and writings convert the Roman Empire which in time would turn out to be the conversion of 3/4 of the known world. Even in this modern godless time, the Roman Church has more followers than any other religion or denomination. I believe that St Peter accomplished what he was sent to accomplish. I don't believe his writings have more truth than Paul even being corrected by Paul in the way that Gentiles should be accepted into The Church. It's just that Peter did the work that would covert most of the known world in time.

The more interesting question you should ask is why was Peter afraid of the "Men from James" in Galatians 2?

Shouldn't he have reminded them "Hey Jesus called me the rock where your church is built! I should have the right to eat with gentiles whenever I want!"

 

[Guojing]

Okie doke. I think you're saying that the Laws of Moses are still to be followed. This is when I step away.

No worries, none of us are under the gospel of the kingdom today (Matthew 10:5).

We are not spiritual Israel or Israel in any way.

 

[Oneofhope]

The key is to understand that we gentiles are not the audience of Jesus's first coming.

Thank you. This passage, for some reason, got past me. I'm amazed. Thanks for the Scriptural reference.

 

[Oneofhope]

No worries, none of us are under the gospel of the kingdom today (Matthew 10:5).

Interesting concept. What is the "gospel of the kingdom"?

 

[Guojing]

Interesting concept. What is the "gospel of the kingdom"?

1. Jesus was sent to save Israel in his first coming (Romans 15:8, Matthew 1:21, Matthew 15:24, Luke 1:68-75)
2. Like how Moses was recognized by Israel thru signs (Exodus 4:29-31), Israel will likewise recognize Jesus by the signs that he will perform. (Deuteronomy 18:15, Luke 7:20-22, Acts 3:22-23, John 11:45-48).
3. Israel's correct response to those signs is to believe that he is THAT promised Messiah (Deuteronomy 34:10-12, Exodus 34:10, John 6:28-29, John 20:30-31, John 10:37-38).

 

[rturner76]

The key is to understand that we gentiles are not the audience of Jesus's first coming. (Romans 15:8, Matthew 10:5, Matthew 15:24)

We were cut off from God ever since Abraham (Ephesians 2:11-12)

So Jesus's words in his first coming are not directly written TO us, but of course, all scripture is FOR our learning.

By this are saying that we are actually "Pauleans" and not "Christians?" In my belief system Paul's teachings should not eclipse and of Jesus' direct

The 3 kings of Orient would not know to visit Jerusalem at Jesus's birth as well

I thought the 3 wise men (as I was taught) were Zoroastreans and were able to read the stars concerning the birth of Jesus Christ.

The more interesting question you should ask is why was Peter afraid of the "Men from James" in Galatians 2?

Shouldn't he have reminded them "Hey Jesus called me the rock where your church is built! I should have the right to eat with gentiles whenever I want!"

What he actually did was respect the dietary laws and wishes of his guests Paul is the one who would be more likely to eat with the gentiles while they were violating Kosher laws and then brought what the Jewish Christians would consider defiled hands, lips, and appetite to the Kosher table However even Paul wasn't arrogant enough to do that so it just illustrated the commandments of Moses that were disregarded by him Peter, like Jesus Christ respected Mosaic Law.. Even though he ended up agreeing with Paul that keeping Kosher was not a requirement for converted Gentiles, he respected his guests by not defiling their table with non-Kosher food or behavior.

 

[Guojing]

By this are saying that we are actually "Pauleans" and not "Christians?" In my belief system Paul's teachings should not eclipse and of Jesus' direct

What do you think of the 3 passages I have provided for you? (Romans 15:8, Matthew 10:5, Matthew 15:24)

What he actually did was respect the dietary laws and wishes of his guests Paul is the one who would be more likely to eat with the gentiles while they were violating Kosher laws and then brought what the Jewish Christians would consider defiled hands, lips, and appetite to the Kosher table However even Paul wasn't arrogant enough to do that so it just illustrated the commandments of Moses that were disregarded by him Peter, like Jesus Christ respected Mosaic Law.. Even though he ended up agreeing with Paul that keeping Kosher was not a requirement for converted Gentiles, he respected his guests by not defiling their table with non-Kosher food or behavior.

Scripture said he was afraid of the men from James (Galatians 2:12) KJV

If you want to conclude that he "respected his guests" instead, we can agree to disagree then.

 

[Oneofhope]

1. Jesus was sent to save Israel in his first coming (Romans 15:8, Matthew 1:21, Matthew 15:24, Luke 1:68-75)
2. Like how Moses was recognized by Israel thru signs (Exodus 4:29-31), Israel will likewise recognize Jesus by the signs that he will perform. (Deuteronomy 18:15, Luke 7:20-22, Acts 3:22-23, John 11:45-48).
3. Israel's correct response to those signs is to believe that he is THAT promised Messiah (Deuteronomy 34:10-12, Exodus 34:10, John 6:28-29, John 20:30-31, John 10:37-38).

Interesting. I looked at all of those references and don't recall reading the word "kingdom." I don't get it. What do the passages above have to do with the "gospel of the kingdom"?

 

[Guojing]

Interesting. I looked at all of those references and don't recall reading the word "kingdom." I don't get it. What do the passages above have to do with the "gospel of the kingdom"?

2 Samuel 7:12-16, repeated by the Angel Gabriel to Mary in Luke 1:30-33 will have what you need.

 

[Oneofhope]

2 Samuel 7:12-16, repeated by the Angel Gabriel to Mary in Luke 1:30-33 will have what you need.

Oh yes . . . the Davidic Covenant.

 

[Oneofhope]

What he actually did was respect the dietary laws and wishes of his guests Paul is the one who would be more likely to eat with the gentiles while they were violating Kosher laws and then brought what the Jewish Christians would consider defiled hands, lips, and appetite to the Kosher table However even Paul wasn't arrogant enough to do that so it just illustrated the commandments of Moses that were disregarded by him Peter, like Jesus Christ respected Mosaic Law.. Even though he ended up agreeing with Paul that keeping Kosher was not a requirement for converted Gentiles, he respected his guests by not defiling their table with non-Kosher food or behavior.

Say what? This is about food? Are you sure that this circumstance with Peter, Paul, Barnabas, and the many others who were led astray, that this was about physical circumcision? Peter was tired of being harassed by the circumcision group about his eating with the uncircumcised. This has nothing to do with food. This has to do with this massive and dividing issue of physical circumcision. This word, even today, is incredibly divisive. In fact, it may be a Word that divides like a Spiritual Sword.

 

[rturner76]

What do you think of the 3 passages I have provided for you? (Romans 15:8, Matthew 10:5, Matthew 15:24)

Romans 15:8 — The New International Version (NIV)​

8 For I tell you that Christ has become a servant of the Jews on behalf of God’s truth, so that the promises made to the patriarchs might be confirmed

I think this confirms that Jesus was sent to teach the Jews. The Jews being one of the only monotheist religions. What is unique about Jewdaism is that it is both a religion and an ethnicity. That is WHere St Paul's work becomes important in exporting the message also to the Gentiles. The Jews were (and are) the "chosen people" so it was written that the Messiah would be a Jew and the Jews would convert the world to monotheism.

Matthew 10:5 — The New International Version (NIV)​

5 These twelve Jesus sent out with the following instructions: “Do not go among the Gentiles or enter any town of the Samaritans.

Ithink this also illustrated what I said previously. That the Jews were keepers of the Law and were the original fruit of the vine. It wasn't until later when Pagans the the Greeks and Romand and apostates like Paul would be grafted in. I still don't think that the first Gentile Churches didn't believe that faith should bear fruits and it wouldn't be enough to simply proclaim Christ but also follow his teachings. Christ's teachings were based on Jewish Law.

Matthew 15:24 — The New International Version (NIV)​

24 He answered, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”

I think this also illustrates that not only Christ was the messenger to the whole world but the Christian Jews would carry out his work. St Paul did this very effectively however, I still don't believe that St Paul's teachings should be held above any other Apostle's teachings. Only that each Apostle had unique talents, some Apostles' words resonated with one group and some others.

I think this also illustrates that Christianity was based on Jewish Law, not the letter of the Law but the spirit of the Law is what Christ came to say. By making following Jewish Law a non-requirement, it was easier for Paul to convert Gentiles.

But back to the title of the thread......Baptism was a requirement of Jews which Jesus followed. It is only easy to conclude that if Jesus felt he was required to be baptized, and desired to be baptized, washing away the old and agreeing to be obedient to God we should also.

Scripture said he was afraid of the men from James (Galatians 2:12) KJV

If you want to conclude that he "respected his guests" instead, we can agree to disagree then.

I believe it is still the case that Peter did not want to offend the followers of James and wanted to stay relevant to the Jewish Christian movement, he yielded to the Jewish law that he lived all of his life. He was chastised by Paul for his obedience to the law and Peter accepted that Pagans would likely refuse to follow Jewish Law, he also caught to make his teachings available to Gentiles as well. However, in that moment referred to by Galatians, I believe that St Peter firstly wanted to keep the peace as in those violent times apostates were subject to be executed. So I think St Peter very wisely made his appeal to both Jews and Gentiles. The Gentiles, having no dietary restrictions, it seems that he respected and did not want to defile the table of those people who kept Kosher. We also see that after St Peter founded the Roman Church, his students and the students of his students converted the Roman Empire which was Pagan. Not wanting to offend either side (Jew or Gentile), he made his message acceptable to everyone universally, that is why Catholic means (universal) it was and still is the universal church open to everyone, Jew or Gentile.

Apologies for droning on and on, I just wanted to give a detailed explanation of why I interpret the Bible versus you so kindly quoted the way I do.

 

[rturner76]

Say what? This is about food? Are you sure that this circumstance with Peter, Paul, Barnabas, and the many others who were led astray, that this was about physical circumcision? Peter was tired of being harassed by the circumcision group about his eating with the uncircumcised. This has nothing to do with food. This has to do with this massive and dividing issue of physical circumcision. This word, even today, is incredibly divisive. In fact, it may be a Word that divides like a Spiritual Sword.

The food issue has to do with following Jewish Law. It would have been considered unforgivable to come from a non-Kosher Gentile table and profane the Jewish table with his non-Kosher meat-stained hands and lips. It's not just about the food one eats, it's about respecting the culture one belongs to. Profaning the Jewish table after eating unclean food with the Gentiles could get a person killed in those days. Peter was a mediator and bot groups were respected for what they believed.